Judge Taylor Violated Ethics Rules She Herself Introduced as State Legislator

When the day is over, your bed shouldn't make things harder. Karaloha bed sheets are crafted from organic bamboo to deliver naturally breathable, moisture wicking, and irresistibly soft comfort, helping you stay cooler and comfier throughout the night. It's comfort that's gentle on skin and designed for better rest. Healthier qualities were proud to highlight through our partnership with the National Exema Association. Tonight, discover what Kariloha bamboo comfort feels like. Shop Kariloha now at Kariloha.com. That's C-A-R-I-L-O-H-A dot com, Keraloha. Sleeping Better starts here. It is a very busy broadcast day here on the Dan O'Donnell Show. Welcome to it now less than a week from the Wisconsin Supreme Court election. Hundreds of other candidates on the ballot in county municipal school board races as well. President Trump makes history becoming the very first president, at least in the modern era, to attend oral arguments at the United States Supreme Court. We also have a NASA launch scheduled for later tonight. Let's get right into it. Top stories we are following right now here on the Dan O'Donnell Show. As I said, President Trump personally attended Supreme Court oral arguments today alongside Attorney General Pam Bondi in a major case challenging birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants. The president's presence marks the first time in modern history a sitting president has attended Supreme Court arguments in person. Justices today heard arguments on ending the policy that's allowed automatic citizenship for those born on U.S. soil. Two non-citizen parents. We will have a more detailed discussion of this coming up in the 4 o'clock hour. The president, meanwhile, is set to make a major national address on Operation Epic Fury at 8 o'clock tonight. He says military operations in Iran could conclude within two to three weeks with or without a formal deal. We will have more, of course, coming up in the daily Trump date at 4. And NASA's Artemis 2 mission is set for liftoff tonight from the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Space Center. marking the first crude flight to the moon since 1972 and a major step toward returning Americans to the lunar surface. The four astronauts will test the Orion spacecraft on a nine-day journey around the moon and back. They will actually become the human beings who will travel the farthest distance away from Earth ever. That launch is set for about 5.30 central time. this evening. All right, let's get a quick update on the state's largest early vote drive.

On day six of our vote drive, that is the 24-hour period ending just before this show got underway this afternoon. We had 219 early votes to bring our sixth day total to 2,375 early votes in Wisconsin's largest early vote drive. If you want to take part, it is easy. First, Get on out there and early vote. Go to your city hall. Go to wherever they are conducting in-person absentee balloting. Take your wife, take your husband, boyfriend, girlfriend, kids if they're home from college, parents, friends, whoever. Find people off the street. Bring them in to vote. Heck, it's what Democrats do. And then once you're done voting, let me know about it by texting me on the advent knows.com talk and text line. That's 414-799-1130. We have gotten just literally, well, 2,000 texts, not that many because people are saying, hey, I voted with my wife. That's two votes that we count for the early vote drive. Look, we firmly admit. that this is not a scientific count. Could people be lying to me? Could they be it's April 1st? Could they be doing an April Fool's joke saying, Dan, I brought 576 people to the polls. I would not believe that because I don't have a whole lot of Democrat activists listening to this program. They're the ones who would actually bring hundreds of people, or at least hundreds of ballots, to... By the way, President Trump has signed an executive order attempting to restore some sanity to mail-in balloting. And, of course, that's going to be instantly challenged the issue to the directive to the post office to not deliver ballots to people who cannot prove their citizenship. Obviously big controversy over that, much more coming up throughout the show. And a reminder, if you are heading out to vote in person, please do head to heartlandpost.com. It is our brand new digital web venture. By the way, the numbers are in for the first week of the Heartland Post's existence. Heartland, by the way, spelled like iHeartRadio, H-E-A-R-T, Heartland, not... Heartland, like the city in Wisconsin. Heartland, like America's heartland. I'm not going to give you specific numbers in such a public setting. But suffice it to say, the number of unique visitors to HeartlandPost.com in our first full week of existence just shattered every expectation that I had. I cannot possibly thank you, folks, enough. HeartlandPost.com, we have got a big, big, exclusive investigation that I put together into liberal Supreme Court candidate Chris Taylor. It is on the site right now. We'll get to it in just a second.

First, if you would like to join the Dan O'Donnell Show on today's foray into broadcast excellence or at the very least, and let's face it, far more likely broadcast competence. Shoot me a call. Shoot me a text. Advent knows.com talk and text line is, as I said, 414-7991130. You can also email me, DOD at iHeartMedia.com at Dan O'Donnell's Show on X, on Facebook. on Instagram as well. And please do subscribe to the Dan O'Donnell Show podcast on IHeartRadio or wherever you listen to podcasts. If you miss a single minute of the Dan O'Donnell show, it's entirely likely that you miss a big investigation, you miss an exclusive story, you miss some fun and frivolity such as what the heck is going on with former DHS secretary, Kristi Noem's husband. I'm not even sure I can do this story on a family-friendly radio show. But suffice it to say. He really, really enjoyed the transgender day of visibility yesterday. We will try to get to that if we have time here on the Dan O'Donnell Show. Of course, unhinged Liberal of the Day coming up at the end of this hour. One Democrat congresswoman, boy, she really, really, really did not like President Trump going to the Supreme Court to see oral arguments today. A now deleted very vulgar and... pretty nonsensical post on X that we will highlight coming up at about 350, 355. Right now, though, a Dan O'Donnell show exclusive. Chris Taylor, the liberal candidate for the Wisconsin Supreme Court, has very, very, very deep ideological and financial ties to the radical environmental group, the Sierra Club. But she has refused to commit to recusing herself from any cases involving the group. Making matters worse, as a member of the Wisconsin State Legislature, Taylor actually authored a bill that would have forced judges to recuse themselves from cases involving parties with such close ties to the judge as she has. Now, so as a member of the legislator. She wanted to make sure that anyone who gets significant financial donations from a group like the Sierra Club as a judge needs to recuse herself from any cases involving the Sierra Club. Wouldn't you know it? Once Taylor became a judge, all concerns about judicial ethics just went out the window. What I have been able to find is campaign finance records showing the Wisconsin Sierra Club Education Committee, which is the political arm of the Sierra Club, donated $1,000 to Chris Taylor's first campaign for the Wisconsin Assembly back in 2011. In turn, Taylor contributed $100 to the committee in 2014. Now,

This does not alone make for a hugely significant tie. But as a legislator, Taylor sponsored Assembly Bill 588. That would have required judges to disqualify themselves from cases if either they or their campaigns received $1,000 or more from a party involved. Now, the bill failed. But the fact that Chris Taylor, as a legislator, was so, so hot to trot over $1,000 donations being so influential for a judge or judicial candidate to take that she wanted automatic recusal. You see what's going on here. The bill did not become law. But Taylor still wanted to. She is obviously a hypocrite. And she obviously has chameleon-like, ever-changing standards of personal ethics. But it's irrelevant that the bill didn't pass because Chris Taylor's ties to the Sierra Club go far, far deeper than just a $1,000 donation 15 years ago and her making $100 donation back to the group a couple of years later. In fact, when she was a member of the legislature, she was also a member of the Sierra Club. She joined the Sierra Club in opposing all sorts of legislation that would ease restrictions on power plants. Back when she was in the legislature, there was a big legislative push to try to get nuclear power here in Wisconsin. people still believe that small-scale nuclear energy is really going to be the only way that Wisconsin or any other state is going to be able to power all of the data centers and all of the tech necessary for what everyone just kind of concedes is going to be a massive new need for electricity all around the country, to power AI, to power quantum computing, robotics, electric vehicles. You're going to need insane amounts of data storage. I mean, people are storing every video, every picture that they have ever taken. I think in my I cloud drive, I think I've got 10,000 pictures and videos because it's just so easy. You just pay Apple for storage and you just keep everything. I've got pictures from when the kids were babies. My oldest is 18 years old now. So you can see multiply me by $340 million. And you get a sense of how much data we're going to need. Well, that takes a ton of electricity. So nuclear power is widely seen as potentially the future. Well, the Sierra Club and people like Chris Taylor have been opposing nuclear power forever. She also, throughout the course of her time as a Wisconsin legislator, repeatedly backed measures that the Sierra Club supported.

There was one that would evaluate the social cost of carbon emissions. The Farm Bureau, the Wisconsin Farm Bureau actually came out and blasted her in the other Dems for their support of this, saying they're proposing that Wisconsin just prioritized pie in the sky environmental goals over private property rights and agriculture here in Wisconsin. Now, Taylor has actually distanced herself from her own proposal, that Assembly Bill 58. During her Supreme Court run, she has actually given a number of interviews where she says, you know, I'm no longer a policymaker. I am a judge. Look, I am only going to recuse myself from cases where there's public input, where people can tell me that I need to recuse. She says she is going to recuse herself on a case-by-case basis. Now, this is what every second. We had two years ago, the liberal candidate Janet Protis Saywitz repeatedly made statements on the campaign trail. saying exactly how she was going to rule on critical issues that could come before the court. You might remember. her repeatedly saying that Act 10 needs to be struck down. Wouldn't you know it? There is a case currently making its way to the Supreme Court that would do just that. She said, and I'm not going to, my throat hurts a little bit. I was a little strained from doing the show yesterday. So I'm not going to unfortunately do the Janet voice when she said the maps are rigged. She repeatedly said the state legislative and congressional maps are rigged. indicating that she was going to do exactly what she did almost immediately after she was sworn in as a justice, and that would be to vote to strike down Wisconsin's legislative maps. She would have done the exact same thing except a three-judge panel yesterday. absolutely shocked the world in slapping back against the Wisconsin Supreme Court that appointed them to strike down the congressional maps. And they actually said, we're going to have a little bit, I think maybe later this hour, if I can get into it from the actual ruling. Because it was a smackdown. These were lib judges smacking down the Wisconsin Supreme Court saying, why did you people appoint us? What were we supposed to do here? So we'll try to get to that a little bit later on. So two years ago, you had a massive issue with Janet Protisawicz violating the Code of Judicial Conduct. And clearly, I believe, this new revelation that I found out about the deep ties between Chris Taylor and the Sierra Club, which, by the way, has had multiple cases come before Taylor as an appellate court judge.

This is a direct violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct as well. According to the Code, judges need to avoid even the appearance of bias or impropriety. Now, the Code does explicitly state that lawful campaign contributions. do not require a recusal automatically. That's why Taylor introduced the legislation several years ago that would force, okay, any donation above $1,000 you need to recuse yourself because the Code of Judicial Conduct, she argued, was not strong enough to do that on its own. The Code, however, does say, given the totality of a relationship between a judge and one of the parties before him or her, You need to decide whether or not to recuse. Now, if Chris Taylor took $1,000 from the Sierra Club, a donation that was so big that Chris Taylor herself believed it should have required an automatic recusal, and then actually joined the Sierra Club as a member of the Wisconsin legislature. That alone, if she is hearing cases that involved the Sierra Club and didn't recuse herself, is a violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct. And wouldn't you know it? There was just one such case that she did. Koshkanong Solar Energy Center. She was part of a three-judge panel in 2022 that approved it. Now, it was an administrative decision. But the Sierra Club publicly celebrated it as a major victory, news release championing the ruling right after it. Today's approval of the Khashkanong Solar Energy Center by the PSC and the three-judge panel approved the Public Service Commission ruling is a significant step forward. Taylor was the one who approved that PSC approval. She and two other judges on the Court of Appeals gave final approval to that. Sierra Club celebrates it. It was clear that the Sierra Club's donation to Taylor's first ever legislative campaign was an investment. in what it knew was going to be favorable legislation, favorable votes in the state legislature. That's really nothing new. That's kind of how politics works, right? I'm not going to be so disingenuous as to say that Republicans and conservatives don't take money from conservative organizations, which just sort of maybe there's not an explicit expectation, but there's just sort of an assumption. that if, you know, you're taking money from the Chamber of Commerce, you are probably going to be a legislator who supports commerce. Now, there can't be a quid pro quo. That's rather obviously illegal. But where things get complicated is when you're not just one of 99 members of the Wisconsin Assembly and you have just one vote, when you are a judge, especially at the appellate level, especially at the Supreme Court level,

The ethics requirements must naturally get that much bigger because you are expected to be impartial. You are expected to look at a group that is before you and say, okay, I'm a member of that group. When I was a legislator, I joined that group and I took money from them. I have been partnering with the Sierra Club on all manner of proposed legislation. You can find all the links, by the way, in our exclusive story. It is up at heartlandpost.com right now. You can find it at the Heartland Post social media at Heartland Post, WI, and the Heartland Post on both Facebook and Instagram, Heartland Post, WI on X. If given the totality of that circumstance that you have this prior relationship with this organization, you are a member of the organization, you obviously, given the deep financial and ideological ties, have a duty to recuse. The fact that Taylor herself proposed the law. That would ban exactly what Chris Taylor has been doing for her entire career as a judge just speaks volumes about the type of person that Chris Taylor is. Someone who is just completely devoid of ethics, someone who is just completely devoid of any sort of standard of what is right and wrong, what is good, and what is unethical behavior as a judge. And now she's saying to voters, now she's saying to Wisconsin, I want you to put me on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. So like Janet Pro to say, which I can rule in favor of the Sierra Club and all of its environmental wackiness. I can do everything that Democrats want. And I can do so free from any sort of burden of having to recuse myself because of my obvious conflicts of interest. Once again, big exclusive story up at heartlandpost.com. You are listening to the Dan O'Donnell Show. It is classical conservatism and contemporary style. A tour to force of truth. It is the Dan O'Donnell Show. Welcome back to it. The truth is that liberal Supreme Court candidate, Chris Taylor, has deep, deep conflicts of interest with respect to her membership in and donation money taken from the Sierra Club. It is a big exclusive investigation that we led this show with in the last segment. Also, it is up at the Heartland Park. which is our brand new web initiative. Check it out online, heartlandpost.com. That's heart as in iHeartRadio. While you're there, be sure to check out the ultimate conservative voter guide. So when you're going to early vote, you know who the candidates are who align with your values.

Well, Taylor was serving as a state representative. She was a member of the Sierra Club. This is this radical environmental group. She actually took $1,000 from the Sierra Club when she was first running for the state assembly. As a legislator. Taylor herself introduced Assembly Bill 588, which would have required judges to disqualify themselves from any cases if they or their campaigns received $1,000 or more from a party involved. The bill failed, but Taylor was on the record there saying, okay, if you get a thousand bucks or more from an organization. you have to recuse yourself from any cases involving that organization. As a judge, she's failed to do so. She heard multiple cases in which the Sierra Club had a vested interest or directly was a party to this case. I maintain that she is violating the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct by refusing to recuse herself. Now, of course, she said, oh, well, I'm going to decide on recusal on a case-by-case basis. Lest you liberals in my listening audience think, well, this isn't a big deal. Who cares? This isn't a big. The chief justice, the current sitting chief justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Jill Kuroski, actually blasted Taylor's opponent, Maria Lazzar, last month in an article posted by the Taylor campaign publication slash newspaper of record for Wisconsin Milwaukee Journal set on. Why? Because Maria Lazzar once worked for the Wisconsin Department of Justice under then-Governor Scott Walker. Here's the story. Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Jill Kirovsky slammed the Court of Appeals Judge Maria Lazzar, the conservative candidate, running for a spot on the state's highest court, saying that Lizarre carried the flag of the right-wing interests during her time working at the State Department of Justice. What I have seen of Judge Lazar is that she talks about being independent, and yet the work I saw her do at the Wisconsin Department of Justice was to really, in a couple of very stark examples, be the person who is carrying the flag of the right-wing interests. Horovsky, one of the courts for liberal justices, said in an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Kuroski cited Lazars' work as an attorney general defending controversial laws passed by the GOP control legislature and signed by former Governor Scott Walker. Her work included Republican, representing Republican lawmakers in cases over Act 10, which all but ended collective bargaining for most of the state's public workers and defending the gerrymandered 2011 electoral maps that all but guaranteed years of large Republican majorities in both chambers. Yes, that is an alleged... news article by an alleged news reporter by the name of Mary Spacusa. This is why I call the journal Sentinel the campaign publication of the Chris Taylor campaign. That is about as slanted away of presenting the congressional maps, which by the way, by the way, were just upheld.

by yet another court. If we're talking about the gerrymandered congressional maps, right? The maps are so gerrymandered that three left-wing circuit court judges that were appointed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court to overturn those gerrymandered maps just came back and said, no, we can't do this. We can't overturn a decision by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which already gave those maps a clean bill of health. And also, the attempt to overturn this map right now, the liberal judges themselves said this amounts to partisan gerrymandering in an effort to boost Democrats. Act 10, it all but eliminated collective bargain. This is a controversial dissident. Yeah, if you're a lefty. Yeah, if you're a partisan leftist. The rest of us in this state are glad that Act 10 over the last 15 years has saved an estimated $33 billion, with a B, $33 billion, in money that didn't have to go to paying for pension costs and health care costs of public sector employees who could very easily afford to pay those costs for themselves. The controversial thing here, is Jill Karovsky very likely taking up an appeal from a case that's currently working its way through the Wisconsin court system, seeking to overturn Act 10 even after every single chapter. The Wisconsin Supreme Court said Act 10 is perfectly constitutional. The Federal Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals said Act 10 is perfectly constitutional. Yet Karowski and the liberal justice is on the court, which would include Chris Taylor if she wins the election on Tuesday, they want overturned. That's the controversial thing. So you see, Marie Lazar. doing the work at the Wisconsin Department of Justice that she was hired to do to defend the state legislature in a lawsuit against the state legislature. That is one of the functions of the Department of Justice. She's carrying the banner of right-wing interests. What do you call being a member of the Sierra Club? taking a high dollar donation from the Sierra Club, and then ruling on cases involving the Sierra Club. That, to me, using the Karofsky standard of bad behavior by judges, that to me would be carrying the flag of left-wing special interests here in Wisconsin. Now, of course, she's never going to say that. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is never going to report that. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why we need a publication like The Heartland Post to be able to put this out there on the internet. I'm talking about it. I'm the one who broke the story. I'm the editor-in-chief of the Heartland Post. This is why we need a conservative alternative to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, to the Wisconsin State Journal, to all of the left-wing publications who simply never will report on this stuff. Do you think?

Anyone else in this state would have reported on the obvious conflict of interest, the very likely, very, very likely violation of the Wisconsin Code of Judicial Conduct by Chris Taylor. If this show, if the Heartland Post didn't exist, of course not. They want a monopoly on information. This is why did we ever get around to playing that soundbite from the British MP a couple of days ago? I don't think we did. You know what? We've got this in our archive. This is Alex Wilkinson. This is a member of parliament from Great Britain. And he's talking about, this is going to sound totally unrelated, but it's completely related to what we're talking about here. He was talking about how it's so difficult. It is so difficult now because of X, because of a free speech social media platform to control the narrative about illegal immigration to Great Britain. Take a listen to this. We obviously have social media, which is a massive problem at the moment for engagement. I'm tempted to say, you know, how you make your voice heard as a citizen in 2025 in the UK, sets up an ex-account and start writing some sort of nativist content, and it will go around the world really, really quickly. Your voice will be heard as quickly as you wanted to be, not in a way that I would be comfortable with, and I would suggest probably not in a way that most people on the panel this evening would be comfortable with either. But that is a really easy way to get your voice heard. get some content about, you know, how you think immigration's too high, or immigration is the big thing that's tearing the country apart, et cetera. And that goes around the world because social media run by the world's richest man, X is now making sure that you can have your voice heard in a really easy way that you couldn't in the past. I mean, you talk about, you talk about saying the quiet part out loud. That is saying the quiet part out loud. He is literally laying bare. Look, it sucks for us as lives because we no longer have a monopoly on information. Well, I am pleased to report that just as X has broken up that monopoly, and you can make the very compelling case. I think there's a very good case to be made that Donald Trump does not win the presidency of Elon Musk does not buy X and restore free speech. And just as X has done its part to restore free speech, we are hoping that in a very small way, here in Wisconsin, this show, The Heartland Post, shows like Jason's, shows like Vickies, shows like Ben's, that they are breaking that monopoly. And you will hear the news you need to make you a truly informed electorate. Dan O'Donnell Show coming right back. It is the Dan O'Donnell Show. Conservative thought not just talk. Welcome back to it. The Wisconsin Supreme Court race is now less than a week away. Tomorrow night, of course, is the big debate between Maria Lazzar and Jill Karovsky. That debate, of course, had to be postponed because of the single most convenient kidney stones in the history of Wisconsin politics.

Chris Taylor, who remember didn't actually want to debate at all and wanted to debate as late in the election cycle as humanly possible because she knows she's the heavy favorite in this race and really has been since she got into this race. She's had a massive fundraising advantage, as we outlined on yesterday's show. She's outraised Lazar something like $2.1 million to $450,000. in the latest reporting period that covered the period, I believe, since February 1st, right up until yesterday. The final campaign finance report is due later on this week. So Taylor said that she would only debate Lazar at the latest possible instance that there has ever been a Supreme Court debate when it was the loan debate in the cycle, March 25th ahead of this election on April 7th. This was well into the period of in-person early voting. People were returning their mail-in ballots for about a week before this debate. Days before the debate, people were already voting. And this is a common left-wing strategy. I'll go all the way back to the election of John Fetterman. Now, John Fetterman actually turned out to be a pretty based Democrat, but when he was running, he was a left-wing radically. Unfortunately, suffered a massive stroke right after he won the nomination. And they essentially hid him. Democrats literally hid him from voters. until they agreed to one debate with Dr. Oz, who is his Republican opponent, as late in the election cycle as they possibly could. Well, it became apparent that John Fetterman could not speak. I've never seen a debate performance like that in all my life. Well, except for two years later in the debacle that cost Joe Biden his run for re-election. But John Fetterman, it was clear the stroke had dramatically affected him. And it was an open question back then in 2022 whether he was ever, ever going to be able to recover, whether he was ever going to be ever going to be the same man he was before that stroke. They deliberately tried to hide that from Democrats or from voters, excuse me. Democrats were already voting. Hundreds of thousands of votes in that Pennsylvania Senate election had already been cast. And that was the point. Taylor was engaged in the exact same strategy. Let's get people voting. Let's get our voters out to the polls early. So if I say something stupid or I say something embarrassing or Marie Lazar has a great debate and she really, you know, captures the public's imagination and she just shoots up in the polls, it mutes the impact of that debate. Well, then.

That wasn't close enough to the election, apparently, for Chris Taylor. The morning of the debate, what an incredible bit of timing. Morning of the debate, she comes down with kidney stones. Now, I am not suggesting that she didn't actually have kidney stones. I am not suggesting that she faked this diagnosis. In fact, kidney stones can be insanely painful. I have known a number of people who had them and said, man, it can really be debilitating. But it should be noted that it wasn't the intense pain that her campaign said she wouldn't be able to debate because of that. It was because she was on painkillers. It was because they prescribed her some painkillers and she didn't want to debate well on painkillers. Okay, well, I thought it was this like debilitating awful thing. So the debate is now rescheduled for tomorrow night, which is by far the latest a debate has ever been. I dare say in any statewide election in Wisconsin's history. I mean, I'd have to go back. I don't have the actual data here, but I can't think five days before an election. We are finally going to hear the two candidates debate one another. Five days. Tomorrow night, April 2nd. And it's not going to be a live debate at Marquette University. The logistics just didn't work out because of that last second cancellation. It's just going to be at the WISN TV studios. Of course, WISN TV and radio. We are no longer aligned. We once were, but now we are iHeart Media. I believe they're still owned by the Hearst Corporation. So Channel 12 in Milwaukee and a number of statewide TV stations as part of their network. are going to be carrying this debate. And it's a good thing. I mean, I give credit to Taylor for rescheduling the debate, but come on. Come on. Not only did the kidney stones rear their ugly head immediately before the debate, like the morning of Taylor's campaign said she passed the kidney stones the morning that she was taking off this weekend for a statewide tour to reach out to voters. So let's see. The kidney stones appear the morning of the debate she didn't want to do and disappear the morning of the statewide tour. that she did want to do. Like I said, the most convenient case of kidney stones in Wisconsin history. Coming up next, the unhinged liberal of the day, a Democrat congresswoman from Nevada has some extremely choice words about President Trump attending today's oral arguments at the Supreme Court. Stay tuned.

Welcome back. It is the Dan O'Donnell Show. Coming up in the 4 o'clock hour, of course, it is the daily Trump date, huge day at the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments on the potential repeal of birthright citizenship in the 14th Amendment. President Trump himself was sitting in the front row for those arguments. He became... the very first president in the modern era to ever attend oral arguments at the United States Supreme Court. So lots to get to. We have a ton of soundbites from those oral arguments. It really does seem as though birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants could be overturned. And that brings us to today's unhinged liberal of the day. Trump is Hitler. We are in pre-Nazi Germany. All white people are racist. Trump is dangerous because he's evil. America is over. Today's unhinged liberal of the day is Democratic U.S. rep Susie Lee, who's from Nevada, who posted a now-deleted, extremely profane message on X, responding to a story about President Trump's appearance at the Supreme Court this morning. She wrote, quote, so bleeping bleeped up, I'll pray they bleep him to his face. What does that even mean? They'll bleep him to his face. Those bleeps, by the way, were the F word if you couldn't quite tell. Democratic rep Susie Lee, the profane ranter. on X. Speaking of things being bleeping, bleeped up, was Susie Lee herself bleeped up when she posted that and then deleted it? Or did she think she was posting from a burner account? Maybe a staff member on her campaign thought they were posting from a personal account. They accidentally grabbed the boss's X account. Either way, Susie Lee is your unhinged liberal of the day. They just can't help themselves. They are so angry and so profane. Trump has broken hundreds of thousands, if not millions of liberal brains over the past decade. It is absolutely remarkable to see. We will get you to the Supreme Court oral arguments coming up when the 4 o'clock hour commences in just a second right here on the Dan O'Donnell Show. Welcome back to the Dan O'Donnell Show. Busy, busy, busy day today. Going to be a very busy night tonight, President Trump making a major address. We are scheduled for a NASA launch in about an hour and a half or so. And, of course, we have got a huge exclusive story up at the Heartland Post. Heartlandpost.com. We broke it here on the Dan O'Donnell Show about an hour ago. Liberal Supreme Court Justice.

Chris Taylor has repeatedly violated judicial ethics rules that she herself proposed as a member of the Wisconsin Assembly. It's an almost unbelievable story. I swear it is not an April Fool's joke on this April 1st. You want to check it out, heartlandpost.com. We have got it on my social media at Dan O'Donnell Show on X, on Facebook, on Instagram. By the way, please do follow the show there. If you want to get in touch with us at any point, 4147.9-1130. You can also reach us toll free. 1-800-38-9476. Email me, DOD at iHeartMedia.com. Let's very quickly get an update on the state's largest early vote drive.

Texts are coming in pretty regularly. We are getting dozens and dozens of texts during the show today. Hi, Dan. This is Gene in Greendale. My husband and I both voted today. Not a whole lot of people going to early vote. Good, Gene. Hopefully that means that your votes will count much, much more. We do have 2,375 people just like Gene checking in, texting me at 414-79-11. 30 on our advent nose.com talk and text line letting me know that they early voted. That's how it works. You just go to in-person early vote. I believe a number of communities still have in-person early voting going until 5 p.m. Hill Milwaukee and Madison are keeping their places open until like 2 a.m. No, I'm not just kidding, but they have been notorious for doing as many early voting hours as they possibly can. We actually had to change the law. So that Milwaukee and Madison didn't have such a massive advantage. But in spite of that, in spite of the fact that in person early voting is down significantly, very, very significantly from last year, we had in the early vote drive, I believe we had a total of 10 or 11,000. No real surprise that we are way behind that pace. Last year, it was for control of the entire Wisconsin Supreme Court. It was the most expensive judicial election. in state history by far, in American history, by far, $100 million poured into that race last year, a tiny fraction of that because control ideologically of the court is not up for grabs. But we have 2,375 votes logged in our state's largest early vote drive. Keep them coming. Keep those texts coming. We will be reading them throughout the day today. By the way, do want to clear something up because a very sharp listener by the name of Sean pointed out that I was wrong when I said something yesterday. I said that liberals will be able to get a 7-0 majority on the state Supreme Court before they ever have to defend a seat. If Maria Lazzar loses this election, liberals will take a 5-2 majority on the court because conservatives are defending the seat that Rebecca Bradley, a conservative justice, retired from. She announced back in August she's not going to run for re-election, so conservatives are playing defense on this one. In 27, they will have to defend the seat being vacated by former Chief Justice, Annette Ziegler. Ziegler announced a couple of weeks ago that she's not going to seek re-election in 27. I completely forgot. I admit, and Sean was one of the few people. I did get a number of texts as I'm looking through those. They're sort of buried by all of the people saying that they voted in the state's largest early vote drive. Sean pointed out via email. He said, Dan, you're forgetting about Rebecca Dalit, the liberal on the ballot.

She is going to be on the ballot again in 2028. She was first elected in 2018. I will admit I completely forgot about Rebecca Dalit with most of the insane opinions on the court being written by Jill Karovsky. It is very, very difficult to remember Dalit. She has not had any real dissents or any opinions of note. And I just, I'll admit, I completely forgot. So, okay. Conservatives can pick up a seat. Dalit, I would be shocked if she doesn't run for re-election. I believe she's in her mid to upper 50s, maybe early 60s. I would be shocked if she retires, especially given the environment in which liberals are running the last three state Supreme Court elections, 2025, 2023, and 2020, they won by double digits. And Chris Taylor has got to be considered a big favorite. Marquette Poll shows her up eight. Admittedly, there are 46% of voters who are still undecided. But liberals can lose a seat in 2028 before Brian Haggardorne, the alleged conservative justice, defends his seat in 2029. Liberals can very easily go 70. They just will not. I was wrong when I said they don't have to defend any seats. They do have to defend the Rebecca Dallet seats. So kudos to Sean for pointing that out. He is a loyal, long-time listener. And we do love, folks, we do love the fact that we get so much listener feedback here on the Dan O'Donnell show because, look, I get stuff wrong all the time. When you talk for three hours a day, when you do as much. Sometimes I will just misspeak. Sometimes I will just forget some fact. I'm human. And I really do appreciate you folks serving as sort of like my editors. You're just kind of looking over my shoulder and serving as the official Dan O'Donnell Show fact checkers. That is why we love Dan Nation, our listener army. All right. Time now to get to a big update today from the White House. It's your daily Trump date. We're going to win so much. You may even get tired of winning. Trump just keeps waiting. It is a win for the administration. It's also a big win for the United States. We have to keep winning. We have to win more. We're going to win more. President Trump will deliver a prime time address to the nation tonight at 9 p.m. Eastern 8 o'clock central time. He's going to offer what the White House is describing as a very important update on the ongoing U.S. military campaign against Iran Operation Epic Fury. This speech comes as the president has publicly signaled that American forces could begin withdrawing within two to three weeks. As the primary objective of neutralizing Iran's nuclear program has reportedly been achieved, White House officials today say the address will focus on the current status of the conflict, next steps, including calls for allies to assume greater responsibility for regional security and energy needs, especially as it pertains to security and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. WISN, our great flagship, is going to be carrying.

That speech in its entirety tonight. Our coverage will begin at 8 o'clock p.m. President Trump is scheduled to address the nation. 8 p.m. You can listen to it on WISN, radio news talk 1130 WISN. President Trump today made history. He was the first president in modern history to attend oral arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court in a landmark case that could end birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants right now. That's actually guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. If you are born in America, no matter who your parents are, if they're citizens, if they're here illegally, you, by virtue of being born here are an American citizen. But Solicitor General John Sauer made a compelling case answering a question by Chief Justice John Roberts. Well, starting with that theory, you obviously put a lot of weight on subject to the jurisdiction thereof. But the examples you give to support that strike me as very quirky, you know, children of ambassadors, children of enemies during a hostile invasion, children on warships. And then you expand it to the whole class of illegal aliens are here in the country. I'm not quite sure how you can get to that big group from such tiny and sort of idiosyncratic. examples. There are those sort of narrow exceptions for Ambassador foreign public ships. Tribal Indians is an enormous one that they were very focused on in the debates as well. But what I do is I invite the court to look at the intervening step, which is the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. And there they didn't say subject to the jurisdiction thereof. There it says not subject to any foreign power. Now, if you go back to Blackstone in Calvin's case, they say it does not matter if you are subject to any foreign power. If you are born in the king's domains, you have this indefinite. feasible duty of allegiance to the king at any time. So there's a clear repudiation in the Civil Rights Act. The Civil Rights Act is this breakwater, which makes it very, very clear that they are not thinking about allegiance in the terms of, like, the British common law. They've adopted the Republican conception of allegiance. So it's from not subject to any foreign power, and then the debates just a couple months later make it very clear that they're recodifying this same conception. They were dissatisfied with the potential ambiguity in the phrase Indians not tax, and they adopted subject to the jurisdiction there. up. And one of the strongest statements of this is Senator Trumbull's statement that I quoted at the beginning where he says, he's asked, what does that mean? Sub to the jurisdiction there is. And he says, it means not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means. And this court picked up on that in Elk against Wilkins when it says, you know, completely subject to the political jurisdiction, not merry regulatory jurisdiction. Now, folks, that's just an inquiry. incredibly concise way of summing up the Trump administration's argument. We'll have much more on this coming up in just a second because it would be an absolutely massive ruling if birthright citizenship is struck down. Meanwhile, today at the White House Vice President, JD Vance has sworn in Colin McDonald as the new assistant attorney general for national fraud enforcement. That marks a key step in the Trump administration's push to crack down on government waste, fraud, and abuse in a formal ceremony. JD Vance and Ministry, the oath of office to McDonald, who is going to lead the efforts to root out fraud across federal programs and protect taxpayer dollars. That, ladies and gentlemen, is your daily Trump date. And, hey, speaking of fraud, coming up later this hour, a big update.

on a fraud case that we told you about on Monday. It's an update to an exclusive story here on the Dan O'Donnell Show. Newcap, the embattled and very likely fraudulent nonprofit in the Green Bay area abruptly shut its doors yesterday. It said it was going to shut down at some point this year. Well, it finally did. And the timing is suspicious to say the least because it comes. As you have now a number of state legislators calling for criminal investigation, you had our exclusive report that the treasurer of the board of Newcap is the father of Green Bay's mayor Eric Genrick, Jim Genrick, who happens to be running for a seat on the Alloway Village board. He wants to be a trustee, a trustee. after his organization frittered away untold millions of dollars that were supposed to go to poor people for housing and direct aid and things like that. It is absolutely just disgusting. So we're going to get to that coming up in just a second here on the Dan O'Donnell show. But this birthright citizenship case is absolutely enormous. It would be a fundamental sea change in just how citizenship works in America. President Trump obviously wants to end birthright citizenship because he argues that you have... people who were never contemplated by the framers of the 14th Amendment right now 14th Amendment makes it very very clear if you are born on American soil you are an American citizen Well, back when the amendment was written in the 1860s, rather obviously we didn't have a problem with illegal immigration. We didn't have a problem with birth tourism, which is a thing. People, especially from China, are actually coming to the United States specifically so they can give birth and their children can be dual citizens. It is kind of amazing. We're constantly told that America is this racist hellhole. And it's just a terrible place because of President Trump's leadership. Well, how come everybody in the world wants American citizenship? Clearly there is some value there. It is looking, ladies and gentlemen, I always have to caution. You can never quite tell how a case is going to go from oral arguments. And people try to read the tea leaves. Okay, this justice said this, this justice said this. How are they going to rule? Well, I can tell you. Arch conservative Samuel Alito Samuel Alito, in this exchange with the Solicitor General John Sauer, certainly sounded like he was open to the possibility. He was open to the idea of ending birthright citizenship for precisely the reason that I just outlined because what's going on now with illegal immigration and people who just have no possible tie to the United States.

They're coming here. They're having children. And essentially what this comes down to is the phrase subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Okay. Subject to the jurisdiction thereof. This is going to be the key delineation and the key classification that the justices are going to use to base. their decision. So citizenship is limited to people who are subject to the jurisdiction thereof, the United States. That requires complete political jurisdiction and direct allegiance to a country, not merely physical presence or being subject to ordinary laws, i.e., an illegal alien, yes, okay, can get a traffic ticket, okay? Children of illegal immigrants essentially owe their primary allegiance to their parents' country of origin. They lack a full dominion over them by the United States. And that's consistent, actually, with the 14th Amendment's focus in the Reconstruction era on freed slaves. There was never a contemplation to reward unlawful lectures. So here's Samuel Alito, Supreme Court Justice, and Solicitor General John Sauer talking about justice. ...that they had in mind when they adopted the general rule, or do we say they adopted a general rule, they meant for that to apply to later applications that might come up? Justice Scalia had an example that dealt with this situation. imagined an old theft statute that was enacted well before anybody conceived of a microwave oven, and then afterwards someone is charged with the crime of stealing a microwave oven, and this fellow says, well, I can't be convicted under this because the microwave oven didn't exist at that time. And he dismissed that. There's a general rule there, and you apply it to future applications. And what we're dealing with here is something that was basically unknown at the time when the 14th Amendment was adopted, which is illegal immigration. So how did we deal with that situation when we have a general rule? Yeah, I strongly agree with the way that you framed it, that there is a general principle that's a broad principle that's adopted a phrase subject to the jurisdiction thereof, and we submit that our theory of allegiance and domicile-based allegiance is what explains those specific exceptions that everybody was. aware of, but it is broad enough to sweep in future situations. And as you pointed out, illegal immigration did not exist. Now, the problem of temporary visitors did exist. And it's very interesting that as you look at pages 26 and 28 of our brief, commentators going from... 1881 until 1922 are uniformly saying the children of temporary visitors are not included. Now that logic we say it's naturally extends. It's really an a forciori case. If you have someone who enters illegally by the 1880s, there are restrictions on immigration. If you've entered illegally, it's kind of, you know, a well-established principle of law going back to the Code of Justinian that says you're not allowed to be there. You cannot, you don't have the legal capacity to create domicile. So you see how the interpretation of subject to the jurisdiction there.

of is really the key thing here. When we come back here on the Dan O'Donnell show, we are running way late for a break. And I do want to get to a whole bunch of other stuff this hour. But I also want to get to the constitutional arguments here. There is a controlling precedent case called Wong Kim Ark. Wong Kim Ark. Need to know the name Wong Kim Ark, because that is going to be the critical case. You can make a very good case, and I think John Sauer did today during oral argument. He's a fantastic Solicitor General, just as an aside. He's a really, really bright guy on constitutional, probably why he is representing the United States as Solicitor General, as a great hire by President Trump, John Sauer, as Solicitor General. But when we come back, we are going to get into sort of the constitutional arguments here in favor of the repeal of birthright citizenship and also sour masterfully dismantling the pathetic attempts at argument by the, shall we say, most intellectually inept member of the Supreme Court. Yeah, you know exactly who it is. We'll get to that. Coming up next here on the Dan O'Donnell Show.

It is the Dan O'Donnell Show, conservative thought, not just talk. Welcome back to it, President Trump, making history today as he becomes the first president, at least in the modern era, to attend Supreme Court oral arguments. And it is in a landmark case that could potentially overturn birthright citizenship. as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. 14th Amendment is the textual language of it is very clear that any child born on U.S. soil is automatically an American citizen. Do you realize that the United States is one of only a tiny handful of countries that has this near universal automatic birthright citizenship guarantee? No other countries do this because they realize how ridiculous it is. For example, in a couple of weeks, we are taking a listener trip to Prague. We are going to the Czech Republic. I've increasingly seen it. being called Czechia. It'll always be the Czech Republic to me. But we're going to Prague. Let's say one of our listeners is very pregnant, and she gives birth in Prague. She's an American citizen. She is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. She has no ties to Prague other than the fact that she's going on this Dan O'Donnell trip. And she gives birth. The child is automatically a Czech citizen. Of course not. Nobody thinks that that's a good way to do citizenship. It is completely out of step with the rest of the world, and it incentivizes illegal immigration as well as anchor babies. It's sort of a pejorative term, but it's a great term for what it is that these illegals are doing. They are trying to have children on American soil because of DAPA. You might remember DAPA, which was first proposed by President Obama, the deferred action for the parents of Americans. Now, that was since challenged in court. And what it said was, okay, the children are American citizens because they were the children of illegal aliens who happened across the Rio Grande and get into this country. Their parents, the Obama administration's posture was about a decade or so ago, was we should not deport. We should not take any action against the illegal alien parents because they are the parents of American citizens. What does that do? If you are.

not only going to have your child get a very, very valuable thing in American citizenship, but you yourself are going to be the beneficiary because, well, I've got an American kid. I can't be deported. You might remember that the MPS Milwaukee Public School teacher aide. from last year where she was fighting her deportation. Her central argument was my daughter. She had twin daughters, I believe twin fourth or fifth grade daughters, who are American citizens. She said, well, I can't be deported because what's going to happen to my kids? Well, the kids are probably going to have to go with you, and you're going to have to take that up with the, was it the Honduran government. I forget where it was that she actually was deported back to. But her central argument, was you can't deport me, even though she had a valid deportation order, even though everything was perfectly fine to deport her. Her argument was, you can't do this because of my children, because of my anchor babies. This creates such a powerful magnet. not just for illegal immigration, but also for birth tourism, which was very, very common amongst Chinese nationals. It's since, I believe, been somewhat cracked down on. But 10, 15 years ago, this was a huge, huge thing. Limiting birthright citizenship is absolutely constitutional. The text of the 14th Amendment. limits citizenship only to those subject to the jurisdiction thereof, i.e. the United States. What this is most commonly understood to mean is that it's not just the jurisdiction of the nation's laws. Okay. So using the Czech Republic example, I'm leading this group of listeners to the Czech Republic. I am subject to the jurisdiction of the Czech Republic's laws while I am there. If I steal from a store in Prague, we go to one of the high-end shopping districts, and what would be the funniest thing for me to steal? Like a Gucci purse. I'm subject to the jurisdiction of Prague. Does that mean I have any other tie to the Czech Republic? I'm subject to the laws and local ordinances of Prague and the country that I'm visiting, but I have no other tie. Being subject to the jurisdiction of a country means completely subject to it, not just subjection to ordinary laws, traffic violations, municipal ordinances, criminal laws, that sort of thing. The argument is the children of illegal aliens are, they owe their primary allegiance to whatever the parent's home country is. Because they're not actual American citizens in any real meaningful phrase. They are the children of people who just snuck in across the border.

Now, the controlling case here is Wong Kim Ark, United States v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898. The Supreme Court granted citizenship to a child of Chinese immigrants. And I don't want to bore you with the details of this case. It is actually a fascinating landmark case. It is the controlling precedent in this, but there are huge exceptions here. The Chinese immigrant parents, they were permanently domiciled in the United States. They were lawful long-term settlers. They were not illegal immigrants. Remember back then the concept of illegal immigration to the United States did not exist because we were expanding so rapidly as a country, manifest destiny and so forth, that there was a need, especially Wang Kim Arc was a Chinese. He was an American citizen, but his parents were Chinese citizens. We wanted Chinese to come to the West to help build up, especially they were. huge in working on the railroads. So we wanted to import this labor here. They were long-term settlers. And Wong Kim Arc explicitly tied the ruling. The court there explicitly tied the ruling. to common law just solely, which is the law of the land, basically. It's Latin. And it basically means if you are born on American soil, it's the law of the soil. That's what it literally translates to. But there are narrow exceptions here. diplomats, invading armies, certain tribes of Native Americans, never addressed illegal entrance or people who are just here temporarily who lack domicile. There was another case about 14 years before Wong Kim Arc called Elk v. Wilkins. The Supreme Court held Native Americans who are born on U.S. soil, but owed their allegiance to a sovereign tribe, were not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and thus they were not citizens at birth. That established that birth alone is insufficient without full political subjection, full political allegiance. So what this means is if you had a Native American, I can't remember what tribe was at issue. Let's just say for the sake of arguments, the Cherokee. So you have somebody who is born outside of a reservation, but is on a sovereign Cherokee reservation land. This is considered sovereign land. It is not subject to the jurisdiction fully of the United States.

Because the child in Elk v. Wilkins was not completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, because there was still this allegiance to a foreign land. You could not argue that birthright citizenship attaches. This is the line of cases. So John Sauer, the Solicitor General John Sauer, is arguing that the Supreme Court should take into account, that this, the Elk v. Wilkins decision is actually closer than Wong Kim Ark, which, by the way, did provide an exception. And again, like none of this illegal immigration was never contemplated. So when you do constitutional analysis. You look at first the plain meaning of the statute or the constitutional precept or amendment. The plain meaning here is, okay, all children born in the United States are citizens. But you can then take a step further and look at legislative intent. Would it have been the intent of the framers of the 14th Amendment back in the 1860s to say, okay, we're going to have a whole bunch of... people from Mexico just kind of coming in here, essentially invading, and saying, all right, we're going to set up a little Mexico here within the borders of the United States. They, of course, would have rejected that idea that birthright citizenship applies. So it's not just completely just solely, like the law of the soil. There is also some, it goes a little bit beyond that. And it comes down to what the interpretation is of jurisdiction. What does jurisdiction mean? But in the example that I've been citing, clearly jurisdiction does not simply extend to, okay, if you can be arrested in the United States, you have jurisdiction of the United States has jurisdiction over you. Well, a part of that. would rather obviously include participation in the democratic process, right, which illegal aliens cannot. They are not subject to that jurisdiction. They have no say or no power in the jurisdiction of the United States when it comes to choosing our leaders. Just as I would have no say in the Czech elections, I would not be able to take part of that, even though I could be jailed, I could be imprisoned, I could be, you know, done whatever, whatever they actually want me to do. I am subject to the jurisdiction of common criminal laws or municipal ordinances. All right. As you could imagine, Ketanji Brown Jackson Ketanji Brown Jackson, she wants birthright citizenship to continue rather obviously. John Sauer, the Solicitor General, just gave a master class, responding to her not particularly well-thought-out questions about exactly how this would work out. She tries cornering John Sauer on what we would do when a woman, a female migrant, gives birth in an American hospital, and John Sauer's answer was just spectacular.

Listen to this. There's currently a system where, for example, Social Security numbers are generated based on the birth certificate. They say this can still be for the vast majority of instances completely transparent. You will still get a... No, not transparent. I'm just talking about the particulars, because now you say your rule turns on whether the person intended to stay in the United States, and I think Amy Coney Barrett brought this up. So are we bringing pregnant women in for depositions? What are we doing to figure this out? No, as I pointed out earlier, the executive order turns on lawfulness. status. So if you give birth to a baby in the hospital right now, it gets the birth certificate in the system. There's a computer system. So there's no opportunity, there's apparently no opportunity then for the person to prove or to say that they actually intended to stay in the United States. Absolutely not. The opposite is true. Their opportunity to dispute if they think they were wrongly denied, which would only happen in a tiny minority of cases is directly addressing that guidance. After the fact. After their baby has been denied citizenship, then we can go through the process. And the way that, I mean, I'm summarizing because I'm not an expert computers, but there's a computer program that currently automatically generates a social security number. SSA says, look, a social security number, non-citizens can have them if they work authorizations, who doesn't improve citizenship, will give you a social security number, provided that the system automatically checks the immigration status to the parents, which they're robust databases for, and then it appears no different to the vast majority of birthing parents. Ultimately, folks, I don't know. What is going to happen with birthright citizenship? I am not a believer in reading the tea leaves of oral argument to try to determine how justices are going to vote. Clearly, I can tell that Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor are going to vote to continue birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants. You could just tell because it's something that would benefit the Democrat Party. John Roberts sounds skeptical. I don't know about Amy Coney Barrett. You better believe that Samuel Alito and Thomas are going to vote to end it because of the constitutional analysis I just sort of laid out. Ultimately, I don't know. But I think the policy behind ending birthright citizenship clearly just makes sense. You're listening to The Dan O'Donnell Show. Welcome back to the Dan O'Donnell Show. Just a couple of minutes left in this hour. We've got to take another commercial break and then get to the 5 o'clock news. So we are going to push back that big story about the nonprofit new cap in the Green Bay area, which collapsed yesterday. It announced that it is shutting its doors effective immediately. We are also going to get into in the 5 o'clock hour the sudden rash of teacher-student sex scandals, child sexual assault. cases coming out of Wisconsin schools, it seems like we're getting an average of one every week or so now. And we just had the single biggest sex scandal in Wisconsin school history. The federal lawsuit filed over the Oconto Falls School District. We are going to dive into that as well. A related story to the birthright citizenship oral arguments today. President Trump signing an executive order yesterday afternoon titled Ensuring citizenship verification and integrity in federal elections. What that order does is to direct DHS.

to compile lists of confirmed U.S. citizens of voting age residing in each state using federal databases. The order further instructs the Postal Service to transmit mail-in and absentee ballots only to individuals on each state's approved mail-in and absentee participation list. It also requires ballots to use secure envelopes marked as official election mail. with unique intelligent mail barcodes for tracking. The states under this order also have to provide advanced lists of intended mail-in voters around 60 days before all federal elections. And all this aims to ensure that only verified eligible voters receive and return ballots through the mail system. Now, there have already been promises, as you could imagine, that this is going to be challenged in court. I actually question whether or not this is. I've gone back and forth ever since I was watching the signing ceremony yesterday sort of in between doing this show. The president had that ceremony while we were on the air yesterday. I do believe it is lawful, but I think it's a close call. Obviously, obviously, we all share the same goals, except, of course, for Democrats who know that there are clearly people who are not citizens of the United States, who are voting in federal elections. Why else would they go to this length to try to keep non-citizens voting? If they didn't think non-citizens were... What does it matter if you have to prove your citizenship? What the Trump administration is doing, though, is I could see being challenged as a sort of disenfranchisement. Like the government say, okay, well, you just happen to not be on this list. It could be due to clerical error. It could be due to any number of things, not related to you, not being a citizen. Well, you request a mail-in ballot. It just kind of never comes if you truly are unable to actually get to a polling place. You theoretically could be disenfranchised. You just never get your ballot. You never have an opportunity to vote. That would be a very, very bad thing. Do I think that's going to be a common occurrence? No, but that's the grounds on which it's almost certainly going to be sued by lefties. The broader issue here is verification of citizenship before you vote. The only reason that Democrats don't want this in spite of the fact that well more than 80% of the electorate wants voter IDs and well more than two-thirds of the electorate wants proof of citizenship in order to help secure elections to ensure that only American citizens are voting, Democrats don't want this because, folks, there is no other logical explanation. This idea, well, women who change their names. wouldn't be able to prove that they're sitting. Give me a break. Women change. They have to deal with that on every government document. Oh, your birth certificate's in a different name. Okay. Well, you show that you've gotten married. Oh, well, we can't show the marriage certificate. Most people have passports. If you don't have a passport, get a passport.

Very, very easy. Plus, international travel is fantastic. I cannot possibly recommend it enough. In fact, just a couple of weeks. We're taking a group of listeners, as I said in the last segment to the Czech Republic. We will try to avoid breaking any laws so that we are not subject to the jurisdiction of the Czech Republic's criminal justice system. But obviously the Save America Act needs to pass to take care of all of this stuff. All right, got to step aside for a break. Five o'clock hour coming up next here on the Dan O'Donnell Show. Welcome back to the Dan O'Donnell show. It is conservative thought, not just talk. A reminder, our big exclusive story that we broke right at the top of the show, start of it at the 3 o'clock hour. Chris Taylor, as an appeals court judge, has violated the ethics rules that she herself introduced as a member of the state legislature. It's actually kind of inquiry. Check it out online at heartlandpost.com. That is our brand new digital web venture. And you can check them out, Heartland Post, WI on X, Facebook.com slash the Heartland Post. It is also on Instagram. at The Heartland Post. So check that story out. It's also on my social media at Dan O'Donnell Show across ex-Facebook and Instagram. It is everywhere. And just because Taylor's proposed law did not get signed, it. She proposed that if you have a donation from a group totaling $1,000 or more, as a judge, you need to recuse yourself from any case involving that group. And that actually seems like pretty common sense legislation, believe it or not. Even though it didn't pass, this does not mean that Taylor and her dealings with the Sierra Club. did not amount to a conflict of interest, a severe one that she needed to recuse herself from in multiple cases involving the Sierra Club. In fact, in one where she was actually on a three-judge panel that handed a big win. to the Sierra Club itself. Severe conflict of interest there. It raises significant questions about her integrity, her personal ethics, about all of it. And you can check it out at the Heartland Post. If you missed the 3 o'clock hour when we discuss this, if you missed the 4 o'clock hour.

When we discussed the birthright citizenship oral arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court today, you need to check out the Dan O'Donnell Show podcast. Subscribe to the podcast. Sign up for automatic downloads. So you get every single day downloaded right to your phone automatically so you don't miss a single thing. I'm telling you folks. If you miss a minute of this show, you are probably missing something that you will not hear anywhere else. We break a ton of news stories on this show, big investigations on this show. In fact, one, a couple of days ago, is getting some new attention because of the sudden failure of new cap. We'll get into that in just a second. First, please do like, subscribe, follow. Thumbs up, heart emoji, whatever, the Dan O'Donnell Show podcast on IHeartRadio or wherever you listen to podcasts. If. You would like to join the show at any point this hour. 414-7991130. That's our advent knows.com talk and text line. DoD. at iHeartMedia.com. Best place to submit tips where we get a lot of our exclusive stories here on the show is just from people like you, emailing us. Sources are always fully protected at DOD at iHeartMedia.com. Newcap, the deeply troubled nonprofit organization serving the greater Green Bay area, abruptly shut down yesterday amid growing calls for a criminal investigation in what certainly looks like widespread fraud. 134 low-income households are at risk of losing rent support, this according to the Heartland Post, prompting Republican lawmakers to demand a criminal investigation into suspected mismanagement and potential misuse of public funds. Newcap is a community agency, a nonprofit that served 10 counties, and after months of financial turmoil, it announced suddenly that it's closing immediately. In 2023, the organization reported $19.3 million in revenue against $21.3 million in expenses. An audit of its finances in 2024 flagged substantial doubt about Newcaps' ability to continue operating. Federal spending through Newcap hit $10.9 million in 2024. Another $3 million came from the state of Wisconsin. So about $14 million is flowing through this organization in federal taxpayer funds in 2024 alone.

And it's frittering away all of it. The sudden shutdown, according to the Heartland Post, blindsided employees who were informed they no longer had jobs, as well as clients relying on HUD-funded housing assistance, nearly 100 families in the Green Bay area, including dozens experiencing chronic homelessness, face disruption. State Representative David Stephan, a Republican from the area, is now calling for Attorney General Josh Cole to open a criminal investigation in what folks I'm going to outline in a second. This just looks like massive and widespread fraud. Stefan said there needs to be some accountability. The only way we're going to get to the bottom of it is if we have a comprehensive criminal investigation. Now this comes two days after U.S. representatives Brian Stile. and Tony Weed called for a federal investigation, either by HUD or the Department of Justice, into Newcaps finances. Why do I say this is almost certainly fraud? Former employees told Fox 11 in Green Bay. that leadership reportedly gathered at multiple occasions to just sort of invent service numbers that didn't exist to satisfy grant requirements and continue receiving funds. In other words, what they were doing is inventing case numbers so that they could justify the money that was flowing in. This is a classic sign of fraud. You want the money to come in, but the money is not going out to help people in need. It's not helping with rent assistance. Apparently Newcaf did a lot of work with weatherization of homes for lower income people who might not be able to afford the repairs or upgrades themselves. They were just sort of inventing case numbers, inventing people that were supposedly going to get this money. Well, the money never went out the door. The money instead... was apparently diverted to the now former CEO Cheryl Dietrich, or Detrick. Her salary more than doubled. It hit about $240,000 just in the last couple of years. Other funds were according to these whistleblowers telling both charitywatch.org and Fox 11 online that the funds were used for expensive conferences, team building trips and dinners, lavish dinners at luxury restaurants, and excessive benefits for connected people instead of going to the port. This is again your classic, and I mean your classic example of potential fraud. Not only that, 2025 audit conducted by Baker Tilly, raised serious concerns about Newcaps financial condition. There was very obvious concern that the money was just not going to be, they weren't going to be able to make up for the financial deficit. So when you have.

Employees saying when you have people who are coming forward to tell the local news that they're meeting in secret here to falsify case numbers, well, guess what? That's a pretty good sign that something is not on the up and up. State Senator Jamie Wall, a Democrat of Green Bay told Fox 11, that he's been speaking with new cap officials about a review of the organization's finances. He said they're digging into the books and trying to have an accurate picture of the organization's finances. Then they can make a decision about whether they need to file for bankruptcy. I haven't seen the books, Wall said, but I've talked to people about this situation and it doesn't look good. No, of course, it doesn't. An open records request, Fox 11 May to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, is providing examples of the requirements new cap is supposed to follow. Most call for compliance checks in the form of monthly or quarterly reports. A former New Cap employee with decades of construction experience tells Fox 11 when it was time to provide those reports, leadership would gather in a room and often come up with numbers seemingly out of nowhere. Evan Dudek, who worked in interim housing at Newcap, shared a similar experience. I was being asked to give numbers that just did not exist, he said. I saw other departments. I saw my departments and just at a glance most of it didn't even make sense of what's going out. as to what's coming in, but then all the department heads are being told to make sense of it. Huh. Interesting. Fox 11, which has done just incredible reporting on this. Says, is the government following up on the requirements it lays out when it agrees to give grant money to ensure the money is being utilized properly? Through our open records request to DHS, Fox 11 Investigates looked further into one grant that a former employee told us was concerning. The state provided new cap with $100,000 for suicide prevention. 49-page grant agreement states Newcap was to use the money to implement digital literacy programming for rural men aged 25 and older, as well as install mental health kiosks at its facilities in Marinette, Shawno, Forest, Vilas, and Oneida counties. The grant agreement states Newcap had from between February 1st of 24 and January 15th of 25 to install the kiosks and provide picture proof. Fox 11 asked Dietrich specifically about the kiosks in Marinette and Forest counties. She admitted the one in Marinette was installed in approximately June of 2025, five months after the deadline, and 15 months after Nucap received the state grant money. She says in Forest County, technology was deployed in phases during fall 2025 with updated equipment in place by mid-January, 2026. That's a year after the end of the government's given time frame.

and nearly two years after Newcap received the state grant money. If that's the case, that's a failure, said well, that's a failure of oversight, and it's a failure of service delivery, and we should expect more. Despite what Dietrich told us, Fox 11 continues, our records request shows Newcap told the state in January 2025, it had all five telemental health kiosks installed meeting the state's imposed deadline. In other words, it lied. Another classic example and classic evidence of what appears to be massive fraud. $100,000 comes in. There is no documentation of any sort of delay in getting these kiosks out. Like, say, the kiosks themselves were not able to be manufactured or delivered on time. And it takes a year. for any of this to actually be done. Why? Because the money wasn't actually spent on what it was supposed to be spent on. The money was never spent on the kiosks. It was only well after the time frame that the kiosks were supposed to be installed, that they're going back and say, oh, okay, now we got to put the kiosks in. Meanwhile, they're lying to the state and saying, oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, kiosks totally installed, no problems here. And it's only revealed much later through these open records requests that Fox 11 did that the kiosks were never actually installed at all until it appeared, okay, we can no longer delay this. We have to finally install these kiosks. And they finally get there, you know what, together, and get them out there. Finally, they have to install it because they know the heat is on. Again, this is just classic. And I'm not saying, I don't, I'm not looking at the finances of Newcap. I'm just telling you that based on years and years and years of experience and looking at these things. When you have, especially a government-backed organization, an NGO and nonprofit, something like that, when they shut down the second the heat is on, as it is now, that is a pretty good indicator that not everything is on the up and up. It's a pretty good indicator. that you've got some fraud going on, or in the case of Newcap, probably a lot. The big political angle in all of this and why it is so important to know who is on your local ballot coming up in just three minutes when the Dan O'Donnell Show returns.

Welcome back. It is the Dan O'Donnell Show. It is a tour de force of truth. We provide intelligent discourse and irreverent fun, hopefully both in equal measure. Newcap, the embattled nonprofit, it shut its doors yesterday, very abruptly, yet again showing that there does appear to be widespread fraud in social welfare programs, both at the individual level as well as the institutional organizational level. And this is why it is unconscionable. that Governor Evers is refusing to turn over SNAP benefit data or food stamp program to the federal government. The way that federal benefits typically work, the food share program, SNAP benefits in particular, it's ludicrous in how it works. The federal government just basically writes a check to the states without ever doing any verification as to whether the states are properly paying out benefits. So it's a federally funded program that's administered by the states. Obviously, we said in the Daily Trump date that Vice President JD Vance just swore in an assistant attorney general whose job is going to be specifically finding and rooting out fraud. Well, in order to find that fraud, you have to have the data available. Governor Evers and Attorney General Josh Kualt not only refused to turn over that data, they joined a multi-state lawsuit suing the federal government. over having to release that data. Now, how insane is that? How insane? And what does it tell you? You would think that the state of Wisconsin and the other 20 states involved in this lawsuit would have a vested interest in protecting their residents money. Ultimately, this is money that comes from you and I, John Q, taxpayer. That is going to pay fraudulent claims by people across Wisconsin. And yes, Somali fraudsters in Minneapolis. That's why all of the fraud uncovered by Nick Shirley, it was so eye-opening. It led to obviously the Minneapolis metro surge of ice agents, which, in hindsight, because of how insane liberals reacted to it, was probably a mistake. President Trump should have instead done what he's doing in other states that are sympathetico with actual illegal immigration enforcement.

Memphis, Tennessee. Classic is that that state has been completely, the city has been completely cleaned up by ICE agents and other federal forces coming in to assist local law enforcement because you've got a Republican governor who, unlike Tim Walz, is not inciting people to violence against ICE or other federal agents. But. I digress. The fraud that Nick Shirley found right after Christmas was so eye-opening because it was so in your face. By the way, he's just done a series of reports in California showing that apparently there is a home hospice center on every corner of the streets of Los Angeles. Here in Wisconsin, I think people remember the daycare scam that was prevalent in the 90s and early to mid-2000s. Well, to the state's credit, there was a huge crackdown. I believe it was under Diamond Jim Doyle and then it continued under Governor Walker in the early 2010s. What would happen is women in inner city Milwaukee would claim to open Smiley Time Daycare. And they would even maybe put out a shingle in front of their house claiming that they had a daycare. Well, they didn't actually watch any kids. Or maybe they did. And it would be like, okay, on Monday, all the kids go to, you know, Granny Jenkins's home. on the neighborhood, you know, on the block. And then on Tuesday, all the kids go to Granny Smith's Apple Farm? No, daycare center. That, that this was the scam. It wasn't actually a daycare center. It was just, you know, parents or grandparents babysitting kids if there were any kids. So there's a huge crackdown on that. Now, It seems as though, and Democrats were the ones who said, look, this is, this is stealing from the hardworking people of Wisconsin. We want to crack down on this. We want to make sure this doesn't happen again. Well, in just 10, 15 years. You have Democrats now saying, well, we can't crack down it. We're going to sue to prevent a crackdown on this. And lo and behold, after a couple of high profile examples here in Wisconsin of SNAP benefits fraud, you just had a woman convicted of federal charges in the Eastern District of Wisconsin. It was a benefits fraud. You just had a guy. who was running a mini-mart. I believe he was living in, frankly, he was running a mini-mart in Milwaukee. He was defrauding snap. He was just taking snap, he's filing claims for SNAP benefits that never existed. He was pocketing cash from people who were basically selling him their SNAP benefits. Or he was selling them SNAP.

The bottom line, he was taking in government money and using it to buy like Gucci bags and, you know, luxury travel and all that sort of classic fraud. And that brings us to Newcap, an organization that took in $14 million in 2024 alone. That is just staggering to me. They have revenue of 19 million bucks in 2023. expenses of $21 million, huge deficit, yet they still get $14 million in 2024, most recent year obviously for which full data is available, $11 million from the feds, $3 million from the state of Wisconsin. We have no idea what they actually did with that. As Fox 11 reported, they were pretending to install these telehealth kiosks across the northeastern part of the state. They never did. They pocketed $100,000 and then just never installed the kiosks until well after the deadline all the while telling the state of Wisconsin, oh yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. We got all five of the kiosks we were supposed to put up installed by the state imposed deadlines. There is a big local politics component to this. The chairman of the board of Nucap, as we reported exclusively on the Dan O'Donnell show a couple of days ago, is Jim Genrick. Not only is Jim Genrick, the father of Green Bay's Democrat mayor Eric Genrick, who violated any number of state laws in the way he handled the 2020 presidential election in Green Bay. He very unlawfully usurped authority to administer the election from his own city clerk who resigned and disgust in the middle of the election cycle. Jim Genrick is Eric Genrick's father. He was the treasurer of the board of directors of Newcap. Not only that, he is running to keep his seat on the village board of Alloway. He is a village trustee. The same guy who was the treasurer of the board. By definition, the member of the board who is supposed to be most responsible for understanding the finances of Newcap wants to be reelected as a village trustee. This, by the way, is why we put together the state's ultimate conservative voter guide. So you aren't stuck voting for somebody like Jim Genrick in the village of Alloway, not knowing. how apparently corrupt he is. Again, we don't know. I have not seen the books for Newcap, but all of the evidence, folks, is pointing in one very specific direction that this is a case of massive fraud, that this, in fact, might be one of the biggest cases of non-profit organization fraud swindling of taxpayer dollars in the history of Wisconsin. State Rep. David Stephan calling for a criminal investigation. I don't believe at all that you're going to see a criminal investigation launched by the Wisconsin Department of Justice so long as Josh Call is agey. Eric Tony, he's running again for Attorney General. He wins, and boy, oh boy, he'd better win. You'd better believe that there will be a criminal investigation. I believe the feds need to be involved.

I believe the sheer volume of federal tax dollars that appear to have been misused. Look, we have evidence in the form of whistleblower complaints. We have evidence in the form of the CEO's pay more than doubling to $240,000 at the exact same time. The money appears to not be going to help the homeless or to help weatherization of low-income households houses. She's getting paid double. We have evidence that the higher level staff is treating itself to luxurious travel. They're going to conferences. Now that in and of itself is not evidence of fraud, but if the money that was going for that was supposed to be going towards help the poor is instead going to, this is my favorite, a team building exercise. They did team building exercises. at fancy restaurants. You couldn't have done a mini golf outing for 10 bucks a pop. No, no, no, no, no. We got to get steak and lobsters and moat at one of the nicest restaurants in Green Bay. Again, classic fraud behavior. Leaders of an organization live high on the hog. All the while, they're not accurately reporting what money is coming in from the government, what money is going out to poor people because it's not actually going out to poor people. This is why there needs to be microscopic oversight of you have to look at with a Sherlock Holmes magnifying glass into every one of these organizations. The vast majority are doing great work, I'm sure. But if there's no oversight and the people involved in these organizations know there's no oversight from any level of government, what do you think is going to happen? Human nature says, oh, well, okay, nobody's looking. I can take an extra couple of dollars for myself. Just look at how many times do we see at a very, very small level, your local youth sports team? And you've got Judy, who's been in charge of the finances for years, apparently has been stealing greater and greater and greater amounts until she's finally arrested for embezzlement. That appears to be what's going on here. Only it's not registration fees from the local baseball team. This is your money. This is my money. This is all of our money as hardworking taxpayers of the state of Wisconsin just being taken from us. by people who apparently don't care about oversight, aided by people in government like Josh Cole and like Tony Evers, who would rather sue the Trump administration than get to the bottom of widespread fraud in this country and protect taxpayers like you and me. Folks, this is why it is that local elections are so important because you do have people like Jim Genrick up and down state government. Up and down local government.

You need to vote them out. You need to, when you hear about their alleged misdeeds. And again, I do not know what Genrick or anybody else on the board was aware of when they were aware of it. But boy, oh boy, it seems to defy all reason and logic to suggest that Genrick had no, as the treasurer of the board, had no idea what was going on in the organization that he was hired to oversee. in the position of treasurer, no less. This, folks, is why one of the most important things the Trump administration can do is crack down on fraud across the country because you know Democrat-run states like Wisconsin are not going to do it on behalf of you and me. You're listening to the Dan O'Donnell Show, conservative thought, not just talk. It is the Dan O'Donnell show. Reminder, keep those texts coming as we continue the state's largest early vote drive. Just a quick programming announcement. I am taking Thursday and Friday off. I have got some personal things to attend. Just taking up essentially a long vacation also for Easter. Easter, of course, is this Sunday. Tomorrow, boy, holy Thursday, or if you will, Mondi Thursday already tomorrow. Good Friday, of course, on Friday. Okay, I know the proper term is Mondi Thursday. I never remember it being called that when I went to Catholic school. I went to Marquette University, and before that I went to St. Mary's Hills Corners. I promise, I do not remember. I would have remembered, I think, when I was a kid hearing the word Mondi, because it's just, it's a word you don't hear very often. I always heard it called Holy Thursday. I don't know. So it's Holy Thursday to me, even though most of you call it Monday Thursday. Regardless, it is the celebration of the Last Supper that Jesus had with his disciples. All right. We have a very serious problem, it seems, in Wisconsin's school districts. Schools here have seen a sudden rash of sexual misconduct cases by teachers in the past couple of weeks. There have been, within the last four weeks, two arrests against Madison Metropolitan School District teachers for sexual assault against students. 58-year-old David Fawcett, who is a teacher at Neuastro Mundo Community School. He was arrested back in February on charges of sexual exploitation of a child, three counts of possession of child pornography. Fawcett allegedly sent explicit messages and solicited nude photos and videos from a 15-year-old girl. He's placed on administrative leave by the district. He has now been indicted on federal charges of producing child pornography. Just a couple of weeks later.

Eliov M. Goldman, a music teacher at both Vell Phillips High School and Toki or Taki Middle School, he was arrested on charges of grooming a child, causing mental harm to a child, sexual misconduct by a school staff member. He, of course, also has been placed on administrative leave. Now, the arrest came just, boy, two weeks after the Republican legislature. passed a new law making the grooming of a child a felony. Shockingly, Governor Evers actually signed that bill into law. Its primary author, Amanda Nedewski, did a great job in getting that passed. Then you had the case of Nadia M. Horn, 22 years old, special ed teacher at North High School. She's arrested March 25th, so last Wednesday, on charges of second-degree sexual assault of a child by a school staff person. Police said the district notified them of a potential inappropriate relationship reported to a school resource officer. Investigators identified multiple victims. Horn is in the O'Clair County Jail. Now, this all comes. Amid what just might be the single biggest teacher sex scandal in the history of this state. March 11th, three former students filed a federal lawsuit against the Oconto Falls School District. They claimed a 20-plus year pattern of teacher-student grooming and sexual misconduct and abuse. The suit named eight current or former employees. and that the district's board maintained unwritten policies of just deliberate indifference. Plaintiffs said in a news conference the day the lawsuit was filed that they only learned the full scope of how bad things got last fall. Former students and two former teachers have since come forward. That brings the total number of known victims or alleged victims here. to at least 14 from 2005 to 2025. A total of nine staff members were named a former substitute teacher and volleyball coach by the name of Bryn Larson pleaded no contest five years ago to third degree sexual assault of a student. She served two years in prison. Gail Gander. An English teacher was arrested in December on charges of child enticement, sexual misconduct involving multiple students. She's awaiting trial. The district says it investigated and referred prior complaints to law enforcement. Now, that's not all. Let's go back to December. Former Hudson Elementary teacher Madison Bergman, 26 years old, sentenced to six years in prison. She pleaded guilty to child enticement, sexual misconduct involving an 11-year-old student in her class. The relationship included thousands of text messages sent back about 11-year-old.

Now, last year, you might recall, the Capitol Times published an incredible series on how the Department of Public Instruction systematically swept these sorts of investigations into teacher misconduct, especially sexual misconduct under the rug. It was titled Dismissed, and it found that DPI reviewed more than 200 cases of alleged sexual misconduct or grooming. In just a five-year period, that was 40 plus percent of all teacher license investigations in that random five-year period were for a sexual misconduct. That seems insanely high. Now, the series concluded that DPI's practices... kept the details of these investigations from public view. Teachers and other non-school staff members were allowed to simply quietly surrender their licenses or continue teaching without any clear disclosure to the public of what the investigation found. Now, school districts themselves tried desperately to keep the results of these investigations hidden. They would charge thousands of dollars. The Capitol Times says some of these school districts said, okay, you can have the records into these investigations. It could have cost you $2,000. Come on. How. How to provide a digital record that you can do a search on. Give me a break. It's clearly attempting to cover up the results of these investigations or the fact that these investigations were launched. Rather obviously, what's been going on in the past couple of weeks, and now it seems like we're averaging a teacher sex scandal every single week. It's made it abundantly clear that DPI desperately needs to completely overhaul how it handles these investigations. And just as importantly, how it gets the information out there to the public. Folks, we are, do you remember a generation ago when the priest sex abuse scandal in the Catholic Church just exploded? And the biggest scandal for the church itself was, okay, there are pedophile priests, there are a lot of pedophile priests that were simply being moved around from parish to perish to perish without any actual accountability, any referral to criminal authorities. Well, what the Cap Times investigation found is something pretty similar is going on in Wisconsin's public schools. Making matters even more nauseating is the fact that taxpayer funds are supporting these schools. Now we're seeing, hey, maybe teacher sexual misconduct, given all of the charges, the criminal charges that are coming to light, and this federal lawsuit in Oconto Falls, maybe this is way more widespread than any of us thought. You're listening to the Dan O'Donnell Show. Back to wrap things up in just a second.

Just a couple of minutes left here on the Dan O'Donnell show. Welcome back to it. As I said, I am taking a couple of days off, sort of a long Easter weekend. I've also got some stuff I need to take care of. So I do beg your forgiveness, I believe, is Jessica McBride filling in tomorrow? I'm not entirely sure. They don't share this stuff with me. It's only my show. I don't need to know about it. Someone is going to be... filling in and you should definitely listen because I'm sure they will be doing a fantastic job. We are going to keep the count going in the state's largest early vote drive to try to keep you updated on just how well we're doing and turning out the early vote. Please do over the next two days, folks, the final two weekdays of in-person early voting. For most communities, the final two days of in-person early voting, please absolutely keep the momentum going. Please keep voting early. Please keep letting me know about it. When I am back on Easter Monday, I will bring you the final total, the final tally of how many voters we were able to turn out to the polls so important that you do vote early because while most schools. are on spring break this week. A whole lot of them are on spring break. Next week is a very popular week for vacations. If you are going to be out of town, make sure you get your vote counted. It is so incredibly important that we get as many votes out for Marie Lazar and for conservative candidates across this state. Please do use the ultimate conservative voter guide. It's at heartlandpost.com. consult it. We've got an interactive map. Just click on your county. We have got lists of conservative candidates all across the state. All right. We are out of time. Thank you so much. Have a great, have a joyous and blessed Easter. Ladies and gentlemen, back Monday here on the Dan O'Donnell Show.