A break down about the ethics hearing on Sen. Nicole Mitchell

[00:00:00] Welcome to The Break Down with Brodkorb and Becky, a weekly podcast that breaks down politics,

[00:00:16] policy and current affairs. I'm Becky Scherr and I'm Michael Brodkorb.

[00:00:20] After a week off, today we are joined by no one. This episode is just the two of us

[00:00:24] where we will break down our thoughts on the biggest news of the past week or so.

[00:00:29] We are going to break down the status of the Senator Mitchell arrest in this week's ethics

[00:00:34] hearing. Next we will get into the controversies surrounding Governor Christie Noem's recent

[00:00:39] oversharing and follow-up from their response that former President Donald Trump will be

[00:00:42] coming to Minnesota on May 17th to headline the Republican Party of Minnesota's

[00:00:47] annual Lincoln Reagan dinner. Thank you for joining us and enjoy the show.

[00:00:53] Becky, did you have a nice week off? Had a great week off. We both had a little

[00:00:56] travels in the last week or so. We did an annual trip with my family to Florida,

[00:01:02] was why at second time on an airplane, he was pretty much a rock star second time through.

[00:01:07] Thank goodness for naps, midday and snacks and iPads and all of the wonderful,

[00:01:12] glorious things that keep a toddler happy. But the trip itself was great. He is fearless

[00:01:19] and wanting to jump in the pool and not have anybody catch him despite his ritual to wear

[00:01:27] a life jacket and not knowing how to swim it under two years old. But aside from a little added

[00:01:33] stress with that, it was awesome. How was the weather? So beautiful. It was 80 degrees the

[00:01:38] entire time. Great. We had a pool in the backyard of Airbnb. Couldn't ask for anything more.

[00:01:43] That's fantastic. You get on there roughly every year.

[00:01:46] Yeah, no. So this is probably our fourth or fifth year. My parents rent an Airbnb.

[00:01:50] So it's my sister, her husband, five-year-old twins, my brother, his girlfriend, me,

[00:01:54] my husband and son, and my parents all in one house. And we have a good time.

[00:01:59] Sounds like the real world. It is like the real world.

[00:02:02] That was a good show. Except for when we're not seven strangers.

[00:02:04] You're not seven strangers. It's a great show. I remember that show. It was fantastic to watch.

[00:02:08] Having a little mic issue here, but we'll get through it.

[00:02:11] We will get through it. You also had some recent travel.

[00:02:14] Yes. I was in our nation's capital for a part of last week.

[00:02:17] Beautiful with your family. Yes. Interest of kind of just explaining this.

[00:02:21] My son was out there for a field trip with his school. And then wife and I and our daughters went

[00:02:28] out there separately. And it was just a wonderful time of being in D.C. Again, whole flaming was

[00:02:34] there, but we were there in separate capacities. And it was just an absolute gas. We were discussing

[00:02:39] this off air that my approach to D.C. Yes. My approach to D.C. is like the little German

[00:02:45] kid in William Hookah in the chocolate factory. Yes. Mr. Augustus. Augustus.

[00:02:49] Augustus. Yes. And so he is the kid that's put his hands in the chocolate river. I love.

[00:02:54] That falls in. I love D.C. I love everything about D.C. Had I, I've not worked out there extensively,

[00:03:00] you had the opportunity to work out there when I was with my wife and daughters in the car.

[00:03:05] And I was explaining to them this was my daughter's first trip to D.C.

[00:03:08] And I explained to them that if I worked in D.C., I would be on my fourth marriage.

[00:03:13] I'd probably be 400 pounds. I would be on my fifth or sixth heart attack.

[00:03:17] And I would probably be in some form of rehab because. And smoke in a pack a day. Those D.C.ers,

[00:03:22] they love that. Because it's just everything about D.C. It's, I'm literally a kid in the candy store.

[00:03:27] I just love everything about D.C. I love the food. I love the buildings, the architecture,

[00:03:32] all of the history, the people, just everything about it. It's just the best way I can describe

[00:03:36] it. I would be like a kid in a candy store. So think of the little fat German kid in

[00:03:39] William Hookah, the chocolate factory who's got his hand in the chocolate river. That's me

[00:03:43] in D.C. I just, I would have a very difficult time focusing. It's just, it's such a beautiful city.

[00:03:49] It's such an amazing city. I'd like to spend a little time for a second just complimenting

[00:03:54] both elected officials in both parties. My son had the opportunity to meet with Senator Tina Smith,

[00:04:01] Senator Amy Klobuchar and Senate and Congresswoman Angie Craig. Just a delightful

[00:04:06] opportunity for my son. And so I want to compliment the offices of Senator Tina Smith,

[00:04:11] Senator Klobuchar and Representative Angie Craig. It was arranged through the school

[00:04:15] that my son went to. It was just a wonderful visit. And my son came back with just a renewed

[00:04:20] sense of appreciation of government. And it was a delight for him to meet elected officials

[00:04:26] and to meet both senators and Congresswoman Craig. We live in the Second Congressional

[00:04:31] District. His school is in the Second Congressional District. So that was the opportunity. So

[00:04:35] it was a little interesting. I worked on Mark Kennedy's race in 2006 when Amy Klobuchar was

[00:04:41] first elected to the United States Senate. I've run into her multiple times. She's been nothing but

[00:04:45] generous and kind to me. It was just interesting to see the picture of my son standing next to

[00:04:51] United States Senator Amy Klobuchar. It was just a delight. And he had such a wonderful

[00:04:56] time. And he was so excited to be in Washington for the experience that he had, and particularly

[00:05:01] the opportunity to meet with the elected officials was just wonderful.

[00:05:04] I think that's one thing that a lot of people don't, often even if you're traveling to D.C.,

[00:05:08] don't take advantage of doing that outreach to the congressional delegation. They are very

[00:05:12] accessible for constituents in particular. But take partisan politics out of it. How

[00:05:18] incredible that your son at such a young age was able to meet with two U.S. senators and

[00:05:24] a U.S. Congresswoman is just incredible regardless of policy opinions and political party

[00:05:30] affiliation and all of that. That's just a really incredible thing for him to be able to say in

[00:05:34] a memory for him to have. It was their life. I checked in. I didn't know until the last minute

[00:05:39] and I didn't speak with Senator Klobuchar's office, but I had pinged with the members of

[00:05:43] Congress's offices directly and then through a source just to let them know my son was going

[00:05:47] to be there and make sure he was on his best behavior because he is 50% of me. But they

[00:05:52] were just so kind. Their offices were just great. The members were wonderful and was

[00:05:57] just a great experience for my son and his classmates to be out there. So tip of the cap to

[00:06:02] the United States senators and Congresswoman Angie Craig's office. My wife and I and my

[00:06:06] daughters had an opportunity through a Congressman Emmer's office to get a kind of a

[00:06:11] lay of the land and an opportunity just to see the trappings of Washington. And it was

[00:06:17] just a wonderful experience. As you pointed out, if you're Democrat or Republican,

[00:06:22] you should take advantage of meeting with reaching out to your member of Congress

[00:06:25] or someone that you know out there to see you can just partake in just the trappings and the beauty

[00:06:31] and the grandeur of Washington, D.C. And Congressman Emmer's office was just delightful

[00:06:36] to my wife and to my family to give us a little bit of a tour. We got some floor passes to

[00:06:40] watch some of the congressional debate that was going on. And here was just some of a

[00:06:46] personal story I'm sorry about it was just remarkable. You would be surprised to learn

[00:06:49] that I'm not much of an athlete. Any athletic ability that my children have come from my

[00:06:53] wife. I have four sisters. All of my sisters are incredibly athletic and I'm was would be a

[00:06:59] really good manager of a sports team. I'm really good at fantasy football as Becky, of course,

[00:07:03] not a March Madness bracket, but now I'm not much madness. And so it was really interesting.

[00:07:09] And I've discussed this before on the podcast that my wife and I's approach

[00:07:12] to government with our kids is just to raise their civic IQ. We're not trying to indoctrinate

[00:07:16] them into a particular we want them to have just a good understanding of how

[00:07:21] government works and let them go through their own journey of where they align on issues. I'm a

[00:07:27] resource to my kids when we talk about it, but we just have a very really try to just raise

[00:07:31] their civic IQ in discussions. It was just a wonderful moment to be in the House chamber

[00:07:37] pointing out to my daughters members of Congress that were there and just see them

[00:07:41] just light up and they're like this is where I want to work. This is where I want to be.

[00:07:45] And it was just really fun to see that kind of creative and their interest in government

[00:07:51] just in seat unfold there was such a treat. And I hope all families that go out there,

[00:07:58] Democrat, Republican partake in that because it was just a wonderful family moment

[00:08:03] and just huge kudos to a Congressman Emmer and his staff for providing that opportunity

[00:08:10] for my family and for all the members of Congress that do that for people.

[00:08:13] I've just heard wonderful stories from my son's classmates and from other people about that.

[00:08:18] And you've shared some wonderful experiences too where people do it. And so get to DC,

[00:08:23] it was just it was the only downside about DC. It's built on a swamp

[00:08:28] and I do not react well good to heat. And so it was really hot was really hot out there. But

[00:08:33] we did just a lot of wonderful stuff. Nighttime tours. We went to Arlington Cemetery just a

[00:08:39] number of just wonderful things that we were able to do. And I can't recommend DC more and

[00:08:43] I cannot wait to go back. What is your favorite along the mall adjacent favorite memorial monument

[00:08:50] thing to look at? I'm a big fan of the EPA building. I'm joking.

[00:08:57] I'm a big fan of the Lincoln Memorial. I like the Lincoln Memorial. I did and I one thing we

[00:09:03] did this time I had not done before I've been on DC multiple times was go at night

[00:09:08] to see them at night was just remarkable. It was also cool. First night I was out there

[00:09:12] the White House correspondent sooner was going out was going on. I did not bring a tuxedo with

[00:09:16] so I couldn't get in but there was a we saw we were doing a tour DC at night and President Biden

[00:09:23] came back to the White House and there was a huge motorcade just all that type of stuff. My son

[00:09:28] was at Mount Vernon. He saw a Marine one and I had explained to my kids without getting into

[00:09:34] a security brief without breaking a security issue like how the helicopters ride into watch

[00:09:38] out for them. So my son was able got a picture of the White Hops over the Potomac by Mount Vernon

[00:09:44] and stuff so it was just great. I just love everything about it but I would say my favorite

[00:09:48] is probably the Lincoln and we went there at night and was just gorgeous. How about you?

[00:09:52] Jefferson's my favorite. It's a little off the beaten path. You got to make the extra

[00:09:57] effort to go over there but now you got the three errors of FDR you got MNKJ over there

[00:10:04] so definitely we're a little off the beaten path and I just have a fun fact here. When I worked on

[00:10:09] the Romney 2012 campaign obviously it's different than a presidential motorcade but we had Paul Ryan

[00:10:16] who at that time was the vice president nominee with Romney that would come in Wisconsin and

[00:10:21] ask staff we had to participate in the motorcade sometimes and I drove a press fan

[00:10:25] in VP candidate Ryan's motorcade one time. That is fantastic. Yeah I got yelled up by

[00:10:30] Secret Service I wasn't keeping up too well. Oh really? Yeah. I could not by the way just

[00:10:36] a reference to the EPA we did walk past the EPA building I had my kids take a picture because

[00:10:41] who founded the EPA? Richard Nixon. So I made a point he said look at Nixon I also

[00:10:47] I thought Republicans hated the environment. Yes that's Nixon started I also made a point to

[00:10:51] you know see the Watergate Hotel which is just a great part of American history

[00:10:56] just everything in DC and that's again if you know me I'm a political junkie it's just

[00:11:01] thinking that little fat German sticking his hand in the Chalker River and that would be me in DC.

[00:11:05] I love it speaking of very powerful scenarios and situations going on right now there was

[00:11:11] a holiday this week did you celebrate? Oh my goodness gracious it's I celebrate this holiday

[00:11:16] religiously tell me about how you celebrated May the Fourth be with you A's which is

[00:11:22] globally known as Star Wars days. Yeah I got nothing you didn't celebrate? I didn't celebrate

[00:11:26] I bet you're a Star Trek person aren't you? Obviously. Gee come on is that right? That's

[00:11:30] yeah she's doing the live long and prosperous box sign right now I will explain something to my kids

[00:11:35] a Star Wars happened a long time ago in a galaxy far away so it's very likely happened

[00:11:40] a Star Wars is in the Star Trek is in the future so it hasn't happened so a couple things

[00:11:44] we've done we've made one Star Wars reference in a show previously yes of whether you were

[00:11:48] breaking the law yes and I'm not right I sent you I give you an article from the New York Times

[00:11:53] you are well within your rights and thank God for you and others for keeping it all going bravo

[00:11:59] I guess I celebrated May the Fourth I watched all the Star Wars films not this not the way

[00:12:05] they were meant to be I watched those and had some blue milk Kems came out with blue milk so

[00:12:10] I had a bunch of blue milk which wasn't as good as I thought it was a vanilla flavor kind of

[00:12:14] thing but it was blue is thick I did that and then I updated my Apple watch with the targeting

[00:12:20] computer of the T-65 X-wing Starfighter that Luke Luke Skywalker flies that's the targeting computer

[00:12:26] when he's going down the shaft to blow up the Death Star not to ruin the movie for you I

[00:12:31] didn't know we had nerd out a little bit more than all of our fascination with Washington DC

[00:12:36] and stuff but um yeah that that you took us over it's a time I think it's a good look

[00:12:41] that's a really good look it does look great so that's the targeting computer and it doesn't

[00:12:45] match up it doesn't move like it did in the movie it looks like from entrapment with Catherine Zita

[00:12:51] Jonas's going over the lasers in that yeah that's what it looks like to me no it was yes it was

[00:12:56] great one other thing I will point out Star Wars related I was in the Smithsonian and I'm in the

[00:13:02] Smithsonian American history portion of the Smithsonian interesting little side note my son there was

[00:13:08] a R2-D2 and C3PO who are in Star Wars are behind glass there my son sent me a picture and said hey

[00:13:15] it's the it's the droids from Star Trek just to get under my skin I'm watching the film that

[00:13:21] they're showing in the national the Smithsonian and it's they show a clip from Star Wars and

[00:13:27] the clip from Star Wars they show damn it is from the George Lucas special edition version

[00:13:34] when the Death Star blows up and it's the added ring and I literally turn to someone because I

[00:13:38] anytime I hear Star Wars sounds or anything I just freeze and turn into a 13 year old

[00:13:43] watch on the screen I'm standing there with all these kids and the explosion of the Death Star

[00:13:48] happens I said that's the wrong one and no one was willing to join me in protest but Star

[00:13:54] Wars is something I just is just a part of my life and I appreciate you allowing me to

[00:13:59] nerd out and I hope over the course of this podcast that your family will start doing your duty

[00:14:05] and supporting Star Wars franchise more I'd be happy if you'd like to invite you over your entire

[00:14:10] family over for nine to twelve hours we can watch all the films and I can do just a brief nine

[00:14:16] to twelve hours I got some blue milk for your son yeah I'll serve some other type of Star Wars

[00:14:21] related food and we'll walk you through all of them we'll make it happen can I nerd out

[00:14:25] one more time though in real quick say fantastic history about the Smithsonian's that Mr. Smith's

[00:14:31] in who gave the money to start that had offered it to the English government and they said no thank

[00:14:36] you and so he had never even been in the United States but was a fan of George Washington and

[00:14:42] acquiesced all this money to the United States to start this free education museums

[00:14:47] for educating the public thank you for bowing out that's great that's right you have shared

[00:14:53] a couple tidbits which I don't want to I don't want to spoil but if we ever do a podcast in DC

[00:15:00] you should be leading that it just like a walking tour because you had some great tidbits

[00:15:04] I've really been lucky I think anytime you can go on a guide and tour I was telling you next

[00:15:10] time you got to do the segue I my mom wanted to do it when my siblings and her came out very

[00:15:15] shortly after I moved to DC and I was like mortified oh my god I just moved here and

[00:15:20] my friends out here and coworkers are going to see me in a freaking segue on Constitution

[00:15:25] it is the best way to find out little random fun facts that you would never find out if you're just

[00:15:30] a beauty of walking go for it just walk it's free that's wonderful but if you have the

[00:15:35] ability to do any of this especially when you can contact your members of Congress and get some

[00:15:39] of these things for free do here's the Pentagon Arlington Congress Library of Congress all of

[00:15:44] that do it the fun facts are galore I have one food related moment from the DC trip I need to disclose

[00:15:52] we someone who is trolled us extensively on social media Melanie Myers with related to our

[00:15:59] food takes she really redeemed herself she has known I think professionally on social media

[00:16:06] as having some of the worst food takes I've ever she loves him we got a lot of just terrible

[00:16:12] so I gave her a redemption opportunity I'm in DC and I sent her a note at DM asking for her if you

[00:16:19] give me her best pizza take and she recommended Manny and Olga's and I got it was just absolutely

[00:16:26] fantastic and I even tell my center DMS that a lot is riding on your pics for pizza this is

[00:16:31] your chance to redeem yourself and after I said you nailed it it was an absolutely wonderful pizza

[00:16:37] this isn't a paid advertisement but it was great pizza if you're in DC I would encourage you to follow

[00:16:43] Melanie for any food related suggestions and then I can give two thumbs up to manning Olga's pizza

[00:16:49] which was a late night delivery could not have been better perfect choice loved it Melanie

[00:16:54] you totally redeemed yourself fantastic a good little recap of why we were away and took a

[00:16:59] little bit of time off but now let's get into it while I was gone y'all did I I just turned

[00:17:08] text it and for a little bit y'all yes I'm covered a little bit of the status update of the Senator

[00:17:14] Mitchell arrest and subsequent follow-up this week was the ethics committee hearing so there's a lot

[00:17:19] of different things at play but I think to try to narrow things down a little bit we're gonna

[00:17:25] we're gonna just focus on this ethics hearing that at the time of this filming was less than

[00:17:28] 24 hours ago and uh ooh it was an interesting thing to watch initial thoughts first of all

[00:17:36] we normally releases we normally re-recept it's those on Tuesdays we delayed the recording of this

[00:17:43] and our intention was to record it after the ethics hearing it went very long into the night and I

[00:17:49] just want to point out something as I was watching and I'm like we got it recorded right away then

[00:17:53] I realized how late it was and I'm like there's no way I can stay awake and I just want to

[00:17:57] compliment you for once again providing a bit of clear direction and just knowing that we're

[00:18:03] where we are in our lives that it would have taken a lot of caffeine for us to stay up late

[00:18:07] I need a post 3 p.m coffee to stay up beyond 9 30 there was no way I could have done it and so

[00:18:12] we're recording this the next day it was I would say so this is Wednesday day after

[00:18:18] the farther I get away from then hearing the more I think historical and ridiculous it was

[00:18:26] and first of all let me just say the onset because I want to always I think that the

[00:18:30] center republicans did an astounding job I think the presentation by senator housley

[00:18:36] senator lucero on the ethics matter related to senator mitchell was precise direct overwhelming

[00:18:46] I think that the cadence that they worked out on the presentation how they presented how they

[00:18:50] discussed it I thought they did a great job I will also I also want to compliment

[00:18:55] senator matthews and senator miller they are two republican members of the ethics committee and

[00:19:01] I'm gonna it may be surprising to some of our listeners I'm going to take a very partisan edge

[00:19:06] but it's I think it's a long not just a partisan edge but also just a sense of right

[00:19:12] and wrong edge in this particular matter as people know I've been highly critical of

[00:19:16] republicans and democrats and and I also want to compliment when there's opportunities I think

[00:19:20] that the center republicans did a remarkable job on terms of being good stewards of defending

[00:19:27] the institution of the senate presenting I think a very credible case of an overwhelmingly

[00:19:33] credible case that senator mitchell had violated the ethics and standings and rules of the

[00:19:39] senate and I think they were met with a level of gamesmanship and BS that I think was just

[00:19:50] very disappointing but I want to get you your take two yeah just at the table a little bit I

[00:19:55] think it's important to remember that this is not addressing whether she was guilty or not guilty

[00:20:02] this is not a trying to get into the criminal complaint at all it is solely looking at the

[00:20:08] ethics and the upholding of what the senate institution stands for and so part of senator

[00:20:15] Eric Lucero's closing statement says it's never easy to stand in judgment of a colleague however

[00:20:20] our responsibility requires us to make difficult decisions we're not asking you to serve as a

[00:20:24] court of law we are asking you to uphold the integrity of this institution and report restore

[00:20:30] public trust and again this is really whether this conduct was becoming a senator whether

[00:20:36] that this is something who folks who are supposed to be held to a higher standard and and be trusted

[00:20:43] in regarded and all of the above as a member as an elected official a member of our minnesota

[00:20:50] legislature and it's just been two weeks of distraction two weeks of chaos two weeks of

[00:20:57] all of this because of her conduct so again guilty or not guilty we've gone through many

[00:21:02] times when there have been here in minnesota when minnesota electeds at all levels have been

[00:21:07] have resigned under allegations true or untrue and we have senator franken we have dan showin we

[00:21:12] have tony cornish we have all of these other examples of this so this is not anything completely

[00:21:19] new to this I agree I think that the republicans I think lucero and house they did a really good

[00:21:24] job of trying to reiterate that despite the defense council and and democrats trying to

[00:21:32] circle back to the criminal case miller and mires did or i'm sorry andrew yeah andrew mathews did a

[00:21:40] really good job in in their um circulate my biggest frustration and maybe if we're ready to get

[00:21:46] into it the chair of the committee senator bobby joe champion I thought was really out of line

[00:21:51] in in in his questioning of this so I had this playing in my house through dinner and the evening

[00:21:57] and so my husband is not politically involved at all and he was questioning I'd explain to him that

[00:22:03] there's two republicans and two democrats and this is supposed to be like the ultimate nonpartisan

[00:22:08] kind of scenario right obviously there's partisanship and everything but it's meant to be that and

[00:22:14] I really was really taken aback with how senator bobby joe champion obviously is a defense

[00:22:20] attorney and he I think had a hard time drawing that line between chair of this committee and

[00:22:26] playing that role I would absolutely agree with you I have not articulated I think enough

[00:22:32] my little history with senator bobby joe champion in the sense that I wrote a I covered a case when

[00:22:37] I was doing surrounding for the star shribune following the case of a couple kids that

[00:22:41] disappeared from lakeville and that involved also involved some issues related to michelle

[00:22:46] mcdonnell and her law license michelle mcdonnell's law license is currently still suspended she was

[00:22:51] a candidate for the minnesota supreme court multiple times but she had engaged in a number of issues

[00:22:56] of ethical violations and rules governing license attorneys the office of lawyers professional

[00:23:00] responsibility filed has filed multiple positions against michelle mcdonnell and in the most in

[00:23:06] one of the most recent disciplinary hearings that were in front of the supreme court bobby

[00:23:10] joe champion defended michelle mcdonnell let me just state unequivocally that people

[00:23:14] are entitled to have a defense they are entitled to have a defense attorney and all the types of

[00:23:18] that doesn't remove my ability to be critical of it I think bobby joe champion presenting himself

[00:23:24] as some as the chair of the ethics committee as the president of the senate I think it is

[00:23:29] absolutely preposterous that at a defense attorney who wanted michelle mcdonnell to keep

[00:23:34] her law license has been elevated to some a leadership position in the minnesota senate

[00:23:40] where he's going to call balls and strikes on matters related to ethics that's a direct and

[00:23:46] fair criticism of bobby joe champion and I think what the public saw last night in I think a

[00:23:51] larger scale was the level of hackery that senator bobby joe champion is absolutely willing to engage

[00:23:58] it and I think he was exposed last night because I've seen some of that hackery I saw

[00:24:04] states and I saw him as a defense attorney in the minnesota supreme court arguing that

[00:24:09] michelle mcdonnell should be able to keep her law license and this is a lawyer who to this day

[00:24:14] is still suspended by the minnesota's who's still unable to practice law and likely will stay that

[00:24:19] way for a very long time again just to say to our listeners one more time google michelle mcdonnell

[00:24:25] and you'll learn a lot but just remember that the person who was chairing the ethics committee

[00:24:30] and who presides as an umpire of the minnesota senate and calls balls and strikes on things

[00:24:36] being fair unfair is bobby joe champion who wanted her to keep her law license and so what I saw last

[00:24:42] night was what I've seen before from bobby joe champion I thought he was out of line I thought he

[00:24:48] was he was not acting in his role as the chair of the ethics committee but he was acting as a

[00:24:54] member of senator michels defense team and he should have been testifying at the table

[00:24:59] not leading the committee I thought it was obnoxious and I do hope and I wrote this and discussed this

[00:25:07] which is I felt I feel that I hope that his role and the the lens in which people have judged him

[00:25:15] certainly changes because I have not had any desire to go out and constantly remind people

[00:25:21] but it's I was what I saw in bobby joe champion last night was stuff I've seen before

[00:25:26] and I've always cringed a little bit when he ever puts on his legal hat and when I see him in the senate

[00:25:33] in that kind of leadership capacity of calling balls and strikes on ethics and what's in bounds and

[00:25:38] what's out I don't consider bobby joe champion to be a credible source I completely agree and it's

[00:25:43] one of those situations where I didn't have a lot of faith that the ethics committee was going

[00:25:49] to take any action against senator Mitchell going into this I think that he could have

[00:25:55] remained a relatively neutral arbitrator of this situation having some questions and not stepped

[00:26:02] into that role and it would have had the same outcome at the end of the hearing of pushing it

[00:26:07] beyond her criminal will which we'll get into but I'm going to chat about some of the

[00:26:11] the notes that I took while listening to this senator millier was going through kind of some

[00:26:16] of the things in the criminal complaint asking when it was time to ask some questions to

[00:26:21] senator Mitchell did not speak herself she was sitting at the table never seen let's come back to

[00:26:26] but her defense attorney answered all questions so senator miller republican was asking questions

[00:26:31] about some of the things in the criminal complaint every time the defense attorney was saying

[00:26:36] senator Mitchell pleads the fifth or is using her fifth amendment rights and at one point

[00:26:42] senator champion stepped in was said something of are you going to go through all

[00:26:46] of are you going to make us stand here and go through all of this while she's pleading

[00:26:49] as a standing blanketed statement about her fifth amendment rights and it was one of those like

[00:26:55] we don't know that it's up to her to invoke the fifth on every question right it yes sure you

[00:27:00] could have a standing fifth amendment but he answered some questions correct so senator miller

[00:27:05] was doing his due diligence of continuing to ask questions understanding that majority of them

[00:27:10] would likely be rebuffed by the defense counsel but some might get answered correct

[00:27:16] and so that was just one that really gave me some pause senator houseley asked a question of

[00:27:22] about the caucus right the caucus has removed you from committees has removed you from

[00:27:26] caucus meetings has anybody asked you to resign and senator champion very strongly stepped in

[00:27:33] at this point and said out of bounds that's not a bounce did you think that was out of bounds

[00:27:38] because my take of that is when we're that she's essentially asking without saying the words

[00:27:47] does the senate dfl caucus think that she violated ethical contact of the senate if they asked you

[00:27:53] to resign that's understanding and they think that you probably were in violation here i didn't

[00:27:58] think it was out of bounds at all it was not a bond and we should note that you did attend

[00:28:02] to your law school and you are the legal analyst you are the legal analyst and advisor

[00:28:07] to the breakdown so yes i'm going to defer to you and all legal questions yes but i think it was

[00:28:12] out of line in its example of where i think senator you think it was out of line or not

[00:28:15] out of line i do not believe it i believe that senator champion stopping those questioning

[00:28:20] was wrong yes and i think he was wrong i think he was trying to do cleanup and i at some point

[00:28:25] i think he should have just sat at the defense table right because he was shielding

[00:28:29] questions and i think he was again i'm not surprised but i guess i am surprised how

[00:28:36] just naked the raw politics was at that hearing the intellectual dishonesty that was occurring in

[00:28:42] that room by particularly and i want to be very clear by the dfl members and i have tried to

[00:28:48] strike a more conciliatory tone and we do particularly on this podcast it was very

[00:28:53] difficult for me to watch that proceeding last night and not come away saying that

[00:28:57] the republicans acted if we're going to sign virtue and vice to some people i think the republicans

[00:29:03] in the ethics committee did a fantastic job of conveying to the public what needed to be done

[00:29:10] it is all of course palace intrigue but i think that they had the intellectually consistent position

[00:29:16] i think they articulated it well i think again senator lucero senator housing i don't know who

[00:29:22] made that choice to have them do it but i think they did a fantastic job they they had well they had

[00:29:28] their remarks prepared they was perfectly timed they were articulate they were clear they were

[00:29:34] precise here's one of the biggest bs moments i want to call out is when senator halsy started

[00:29:40] speaking and bobby jill champion tried to ding her on bring her up related to a matter on

[00:29:46] facebook and some other types of stuff he pounced on he verbally pounced on senator

[00:29:52] halsely very quickly had you never been misquoted by the press and there were a number of times

[00:29:59] in the hearing where bobby jill champion had to i think he was either getting updates

[00:30:05] from someone because pretty clearly a narrative started to develop that he'd taken some swipes

[00:30:12] at the media about being inaccurately quoted a reporter with the star tribune there was an

[00:30:17] allegation i think made i want to be precise that bobby jill senator champion was alluding to the

[00:30:23] fact that someone may have been misquoted or something like that and through the media under

[00:30:28] the bus bobby jill senator champion last night contorted himself and stretched as far as he could

[00:30:36] to throw every conceivable defense for senator mitchell into that arena to cast doubt and then

[00:30:44] simultaneously as his role as a chair impeded senator miller and senator matthews from offering

[00:30:52] positions and i thought it was incredibly inappropriate and i do believe that he acted

[00:30:58] as a defense attorney he was digging into that he commandeered very inappropriately the

[00:31:05] flow of that hearing and i think senator housley senator lucero did a great job of not accepting

[00:31:13] in some instances the premise of what they were trying to do i also have to just say in

[00:31:19] very clear language i don't know how they did it i gotta tell you something the manner in which

[00:31:25] the senator lucero particularly senator housley certainly senator miller and i guarantee a

[00:31:31] senator matthews were spoken to i don't know how they didn't get up and walk out there they are more

[00:31:36] patient and disciplined than i am but every one of them was treated rude and i don't know that i

[00:31:42] can necessarily rank them but i will certainly say that senator housley was treated in an

[00:31:48] incredibly disrespectful manner i thought senator champion talked down to senator miller and to

[00:31:54] senator matthews and let me just be clear there's 67 members they all got the election

[00:31:58] certificates and the level of just i think i have i don't want to cast an entire dispersion

[00:32:05] on the legal profession but bobby joe champion senator bobby joe champion did not act i think as a

[00:32:12] in his capacity as a senator last night i think he acted as a defense attorney more than that

[00:32:17] and i think he was disrespectful to all the members particularly the republican members of the

[00:32:21] committee and i hope that the republicans reexamine how they view senator champion because how he acted

[00:32:32] i think has a real there's a real trajectory issue which we can get in as to how the senate

[00:32:37] goes forward but that's the type of position that you need is someone who can be even keel

[00:32:43] who can call balls and strikes fairly i get it's a partisan environment but there was i think a

[00:32:50] rushed approach that he was taking to just speed through stuff and he wanted to shut it down and i

[00:32:56] think it's unfortunate because uh intellectually and honestly i am not saying this to the degree

[00:33:05] which identifies republican there's no question that the republican position was more sound more

[00:33:11] based on logic reason in fact and what i think prevented that from getting out was the raw

[00:33:18] partisanship of the democrats and someone else that we're going to talk about here soon

[00:33:22] yeah absolutely and a couple of things that i wanted to as a follow-up from what you were saying is

[00:33:29] as senator and chair champion had mentioned had blocked how's these question senator matthews again

[00:33:37] republican side stepped up and said because there was a senator glenn grunhegan had his portion

[00:33:42] of committee hearing prior it was two hours it was long it was drawn out and pretty much everything

[00:33:48] was on the table for that senator matthews when this question was being shot down by senator champion

[00:33:54] yes said basically we just had a committee hearing and nothing was off the table you allowed every

[00:33:59] question regardless of it's not the senate floor where you can call into question of the

[00:34:04] germane-ness and all of that right it's up to the testifier to the defense to senator

[00:34:09] mitchell and her attorney whether they want to answer these questions or or plead the fifth or

[00:34:14] not answer them or however they want to go about that and i thought that senator matthews is my age

[00:34:20] maybe a little younger at the gumption that it takes to stand up to a senior member of the

[00:34:25] majority who's a chair the president and to go about it in that way i thought was very respectful

[00:34:31] it was going to agree to disagree kind of moment but he was pushing back on this

[00:34:35] you don't just get to say what questions are acceptable or not this is just not it

[00:34:40] i really appreciated that one thing i did want to bring up you mentioned the member of the press

[00:34:45] who was in question of some statements and whether they were factual or not so ryan faircloth a

[00:34:51] member of the reporter for the star tribune tweeted last night about this situation which

[00:34:56] it i'm not saying that this obviously is not going to come into play with the ethics hearing

[00:35:00] it was going on it's not like they're gonna be like oh remember the press says we have

[00:35:03] the adio let's play that but like you've done interviews with elected officials most members

[00:35:10] of the press and staffers record these interactions and how they have something to go back on and it

[00:35:15] was the situation in play here was ringstrom who was i believe it was the father of the defense

[00:35:22] attorney so at the same firm senator menschel's firm said immediately after the rest i believe

[00:35:27] she was trying to protect herself from being noticed i am not going to deny that she basically

[00:35:31] wanted to make a check and retrieve a couple of items that she felt were wrongfully withheld from

[00:35:36] from her despite earlier promises so this is the comment that champion was trying to discredit

[00:35:42] and say members of the press get it wrong all the time people are misquoted on all the time

[00:35:47] whereas the republican side was trying to say the own firm that she's defending said she was there

[00:35:53] she broke in she was trying to take things this goes the whole thing was the tip for tatt of

[00:35:58] all of these statements and all of that and this reporter has since said it has been cited

[00:36:03] repeatedly the president has cast a doubt on it i have it on tape and i'm happy to let it listen to

[00:36:09] it stands behind it i just want to throw it out there because it wasn't bs it is what it is

[00:36:15] and a good thing that they were pushing of why she should be removed because she

[00:36:23] made comments contrary to the truth correct and that is the big thing when we're looking at these

[00:36:29] ethics of whether she uphold this whether she was actually doing this and the mockery she's

[00:36:34] basically made of her position and the senate correct and i will say to you um that this what

[00:36:41] you've articulated what you've presented there is just another example of what bobby joe champion

[00:36:44] was doing aside from slowing members and breaking their cadence to ask questions allowing there

[00:36:50] to be the same the consistent rope and latitude that was provided in the first ethics hearing

[00:36:54] senator champion certainly presented a very short very limited amount of window and latitude that

[00:37:00] the republican members of the committee had uh to answer questions and i would say to you the fact

[00:37:05] once again that his one of his first things he did was launch into senator housley i thought

[00:37:10] was incredibly inappropriate in terms of managing the committee and again i i believe that

[00:37:17] partisanship the there's benefits sometimes to partisanship and what i'm just disappointed in

[00:37:22] is and i want to be consistent is i think that the republicans had a very clear and consistent

[00:37:29] articulate position of what had been done and i think the most challenging interruption to

[00:37:37] that hearing was senator mitchell's attorney who i think created fundamentally changed the

[00:37:43] dynamics of the hearing and the only i think the only type of minor criticism i think i have of

[00:37:49] the republicans and this is minor kind of a game day thing is he was doing i don't know if

[00:37:55] something could have been done procedurally to i don't think it was and i don't want a

[00:38:02] money mooring quarterback at too much but his introduction was so disruptive i think to

[00:38:06] the overall proceedings again this is the institution of the senate this is not a court of law

[00:38:12] and i understand that we could dedicate hours of a podcast discussing the interstices

[00:38:17] but the fact that he elevated himself to what he did and his accusatory tone and the manner which

[00:38:23] he's right now i made the point on social media last night that if we're looking at this just

[00:38:27] from the standpoint of senator mitchell he accomplished what he needed to accomplish

[00:38:31] here's what happened last night the ethics committee deadlocked at a very quick pace thanks

[00:38:35] to senator champion they're going to meet in a couple weeks both she is likely i think

[00:38:40] has more of an opportunity now i think to be the 34th vote to get what the democrats agenda that

[00:38:45] they won past and so he was able i think if you're talking about that role of an attorney in your

[00:38:51] job is to zealously advocate for your client he was there in his capacity to zealously advocate

[00:38:57] for senator mitchell he was a shield he blocked her from verbalize that he was blocking her

[00:39:03] from testifying he went i think very in a very disrespectful way spoke down to and tried to

[00:39:11] back should be examined because i can tell you it's not a court of law the senators have

[00:39:16] the senate gets to enforce their rules and i think if his job was to disrupt that proceeding

[00:39:23] he did a good job of disrupting the proceeding the only thing i would say is was there an

[00:39:29] opportunity to do anything to calibrate on that but overall i stand by my position is that the

[00:39:35] senate republicans all members of the committee of the senate committee on the on the mitchell

[00:39:39] complaint did an absolutely fantastic job they presented a very clear argument as to why she

[00:39:45] should leave i understand the argument about the legal proceeding but again

[00:39:51] you can't have it both ways and ultimately what we could have here is we're in this type of

[00:39:57] this could be solved very easily the institution of the senate could examine their rules to allow

[00:40:05] for these types of situations to happen in the future the truth of the matter is this the senate

[00:40:10] democrats are allowing this in part because they need her for the 34th vote but i think is

[00:40:16] likely going to happen is that now that this ethics committee matter is met they're going to

[00:40:22] senator mitchell is going to be the 34th vote they're going to pass the agenda that they want

[00:40:26] and at some point possibly in the near future depending on the outcome of her criminal trial

[00:40:31] she might resign and she might not be a state senator anymore and again i go back to what

[00:40:36] you raised and what senator housley dialed into so perfectly which was this the senate democrats

[00:40:43] have already made a determination in some way that senator mitchell's conduct warrants discipline

[00:40:50] that she war they that warrants discipline so they're not consistent on the discipline front

[00:40:55] they the senate democrats accept the premise in leadership that her conduct of what she's

[00:41:01] just been charged with and what's being discussed warrants her role as an elected official to be

[00:41:08] limited in certain ways what they're not doing is they're not taking away her vote

[00:41:13] for what reason because they need her vote they need her 34th vote and so i think the senate

[00:41:20] republicans did a fantastic job last night i think her lawyer successfully shielded his client in

[00:41:26] an obnoxious flamboyant way and i think it's going to lead at the scenario that i think

[00:41:32] it'd be very curious is what happens in the following weeks and following remaining days of

[00:41:37] session as i said in my post lesson i'll be very curious how the senate republicans react

[00:41:42] to this i just have to say again i don't know how senator lucero senator housley senator miller

[00:41:50] and senator matthews had they should be giving ted talks on patience and turning the other cheek

[00:41:59] because there were multiple incidents where they were just treated in an absolutely condescending

[00:42:05] and disrespectful way and they kept focused on the mission and what they did and they did a

[00:42:12] fantastic i don't know how they did it but they should be applauded for sticking to their roles

[00:42:18] as elected officials honoring the institution of the senate by proceeding with their case

[00:42:24] and not allowing themselves to succumb to i think antagonistic out of line questioning

[00:42:31] and bullying by a lawyer there to defend his client and the chair of the ethics committee who i think

[00:42:37] was acting inappropriately so if you haven't watched i highly encourage you to go watch michael tweeted

[00:42:43] the link out we'll put it in the show notes republican sides starts about an hour 55 in

[00:42:48] defense about 242 in but one of the you you really hit the nail on the head because one of the

[00:42:54] biggest frustrations i had while watching this is the legislature is big and decorum and big on

[00:43:01] the traditions and niceties that kind of go along with it right like you direct your questions to the

[00:43:07] chair all of these different things and the tone and tenor of which the defense attorney was using

[00:43:13] and the way he was questioning and directly questioning how is lee and lucero not going

[00:43:19] through the chair and then it was never stopped in the cross examination it was just too far and

[00:43:23] too much and that was a really big frustration because this is supposed to be the ethics

[00:43:28] hearing where we are really supposed to be minding our p's and q's and having this civil

[00:43:33] conversation about whether the ethics of the senate were violated we're not talking about

[00:43:38] whether she's guilty or not we're not talking about whether she actually stole the laptop and

[00:43:43] actually stole the dead father's ashes and all of these specifics of the case we're talking

[00:43:48] about as a senator is she bringing casting doubt and bringing shame essentially to the senate did

[00:43:55] she violate these rules of what a senator is supposed to be doing and her her defense attorney

[00:44:01] you're right he did exactly what it was higher there to do especially because there was no pushback

[00:44:05] from the chair on this and it was really hard to watch and really unfortunate because i do think

[00:44:09] like you mentioned it could change the trajectory of what this kind of system and how things

[00:44:15] are going about because it was just allowed and it was fine and it was good so why is anybody

[00:44:21] supposed to act any differently in the future correct and i think that there was more deference

[00:44:27] given to senator i think the person in the ethics committee last night that got the most deference

[00:44:34] was senator michel's attorney it was not the members of the it was no one who has an actual

[00:44:39] election election certificate and i mean i think we're both rational and reasonable at this that

[00:44:44] this is this was not a courtroom this was a legislative hearing and this is there is

[00:44:51] 67 this was a legislative hearing a senator champion i think inconsistently and through a lens of

[00:44:59] partisanship showed tremendous deference to senator michel's attorney at the expense of

[00:45:05] his republican colleagues and them exercising their rights as elected members of the senate

[00:45:12] to police and attempt to enforce the rules of the senate and there are just some certain things

[00:45:18] that as senators they get to do that the average person doesn't and that's just the way it is

[00:45:23] they're members of the legislature they have election certificates and i and i do hope that

[00:45:30] that and this is putting on even more of a partisan hat right now i just will say it i think he

[00:45:37] i think senator champions should his role as the ethics chair his role as the president of the

[00:45:44] senate should be completely reexamined as to how it's viewed through that lens because i think that

[00:45:50] there was just raw naked partisanship last night and i get the lawyers out there on twitter are

[00:45:56] saying this but the truth of the matter is this is that this is the senate democrats

[00:46:01] have made a decision to discipline senator michel based on what's in the report what's been discussed

[00:46:10] publicly and to think and so if i'm understanding senator champions position and please again as

[00:46:16] the legal advisor to the podcasts please please don't ever run his position was is that basically

[00:46:23] none of this information can exist we don't know the validity or the veracity of anything

[00:46:28] that's being discussed yet his own caucus has made a determination that senator michel should be

[00:46:35] disciplined in some way and it's such an inconsistent argument and i know it's politics and it's

[00:46:41] gamesmanship and it happens on both sides i'm not naive but i guess i'm just getting a little

[00:46:46] older and i just would i guess i'm more comfortable calling it out and saying can't we do a better

[00:46:52] job and i think that there was a real opportunity for that and i just and those that have listened to

[00:46:58] this podcast know that i'm critical of republicans and sometimes more than democrats i think again

[00:47:04] just to say it one last time senator lisero senator housley senator miller and senator

[00:47:09] matthews did an absolutely fantastic job i am so impressed by their candor their temperament

[00:47:14] their judgment how they articulated their points they were good stewards they were without a doubt

[00:47:20] more responsible members of the ethics committee than anyone else in the room they were the only adults

[00:47:26] and my only hope and i can say this without any hesitation my only hope is that there are

[00:47:32] consequences for how the four of them were treated in that room last night i hope that

[00:47:36] there are consequences for how they were treated because they were treated in a disrespectful condescending

[00:47:42] matter by members of the ethics committee and by a lawyer in the room and i hope there are

[00:47:46] consequences because they deserve better and they reacted in ways that really need to be applauded

[00:47:53] like you mentioned it is just really to be able to take that on the chin and still be respectful

[00:47:59] to the others in the room i respect that they gave back that they were not receiving is truly

[00:48:05] compelling um i want to veer into a tweet message a tweet that you had a tweet message what i sound

[00:48:12] old as chaos you put out one yesterday talking about the potential implications that this hearing

[00:48:20] is going to have on the presidential race it was a great chain that you put out i retweeted it and

[00:48:25] i think we need to chat through a little bit of it but it came into play right away so mitchell's

[00:48:31] defense attorney comes up so your comments here and and i'll let you get into your side of this

[00:48:36] but was essentially talking about how the senate dfl keeping mitchell in i'm going to just read it

[00:48:42] keeping mitchell senator nicole mitchell as their 34th vote it will significantly undermine the moral

[00:48:47] high ground minnesota democrats have built up amongst voters and then senate dfl is essentially

[00:48:52] trading what has been a winning message against former president donald trump and about his criminal

[00:48:56] illegal issues by minnesota democrats to pass their legislative agenda i thought it was a great

[00:49:01] take and i was excited to talk about it even more because in after his ridiculous questioning of lucero

[00:49:09] and housley ringstrom the mitchell's attorney in his opening statement mentioned once about

[00:49:16] the right of due process whether you're downtown manhattan or here in st paul obviously availed

[00:49:22] reference to the legal proceedings going on in manhattan against former senator trump so

[00:49:27] if you want to share a little bit about your take on this because i think it was just spot on and

[00:49:32] will be very telling of how it plays into what the democrats are trying to do here in minnesota

[00:49:37] i appreciate the intro on this and this is what i would say so again what's the argument that

[00:49:42] democrats and a lot of republicans have made including me is that donald trump is somewhat

[00:49:47] compromised because of the legal position that he's in he's going to be a distraction he's

[00:49:51] got these legal cases he's off the campaign trail he's embroiled in a number of these issues

[00:49:57] and democrats have been really particularly minnesota and nationally making the case that

[00:50:02] he's unqualified because of things that he's done and there is an ethical standard that we should

[00:50:08] expect out of leaders okay let's talk about that for a second i completely agree with that message

[00:50:13] i did not support trump in 16 or 20 i didn't vote for him i voted for nikki haley i'm not

[00:50:18] going to be voting for trump this time so let's set that aside now we have a situation where the

[00:50:23] democrats have a member of their caucus who has been credibly accused and i'm using that word

[00:50:29] specifically credibly accused and charged with a felony for burglary and they are turning in essence

[00:50:37] a blind eye and allowing her to participate in the legislative process and be the 34th poet

[00:50:43] agenda that has tremendous ramifications and here's why it has even more ramifications

[00:50:49] than when i originally thought about it guess who's coming to town

[00:50:53] president trump is coming to town he is and i can totally see president trump getting that

[00:51:00] narrative and getting that message and i think it's something that i think it's an absolutely

[00:51:05] fair point because i and i have said this i and i've made this point my concern about donald

[00:51:11] trump is some of these legal issues i do think he's a distraction i do think that there can be a due

[00:51:16] process while simultaneously it's a complication to serving and running an office that's the position

[00:51:21] i stake down i believe that senator michel should be given complete due process but there's a due

[00:51:27] process in the corrupt and there's a due process in the senate correct and what the senate democrats

[00:51:32] let's be clear about something do you know who the first people were to punish senator michel

[00:51:37] the senate democrats yes it wasn't anything that republicans did the first consequences that senator

[00:51:42] michel has was about this particular matter they removed her from committees they apparently in

[00:51:50] some context may have removed her from some caucuses so she has a limited capacity as a senator

[00:51:55] right now because senate democrats let in it but then they're simultaneously allowing her to be

[00:52:00] the 34th vote right and i think that the the truth of the matter is that donald trump is coming

[00:52:05] to minnesota and it's in the internet's on the computer it's conceivable absolutely conceivable

[00:52:11] that president former president trump when he's here ties his legal case to what democrats are doing

[00:52:17] and there's a national target or bull's eye put on minnesota in particularly there's a messaging

[00:52:23] nexus that occurs between the trump campaign and what democrats are doing here the senate

[00:52:29] democrats are doing here minnesota is becoming based on polling and becoming more and more of a

[00:52:35] lease an opportunity where both sides are going to have to invest in some resources here i still think

[00:52:41] that this is a tough state for republicans to win but president trump is coming here and the truth

[00:52:47] of the matter is that he has shown an ability rhetorically to banter and get it and want to

[00:52:55] scrap the stuff up and i think this i think the senate democrats are serving it up to president trump

[00:53:01] in his campaign that message conflicts with what national democrats are saying and minnesota

[00:53:07] democrats are saying and i think the senate dfl i think and i'll say this i think ken martin is

[00:53:14] hands down one of the best party chairman that's ever had on both sides of the aisle

[00:53:19] he has called for senator mitchell that he would if it was her he would consider i think i

[00:53:24] want to be very careful of my remarks he said he would like mitchell senator mitchell to resign

[00:53:29] post session but by june 8th which i believe is filing deadline so her seat could be filled

[00:53:34] by a special election in november okay so he's halfway there in a sense of he still wants the

[00:53:39] 34 vote but here's the issue i think last night was a game changer in that message and i'd put

[00:53:44] that out prior to the hearing but the democrats jumped all in and i can absolutely just to finish

[00:53:50] the point see a situation when the president comes to town that there's a reference point and

[00:53:55] the kind of a messaging nexus where he says and i threw out a little narrative of what he could

[00:54:00] potentially say do you have a good trump impersonation i don't my son has a really good trump

[00:54:04] perspective but no i and my message was basically and this is my best i wrote this in gas hear it

[00:54:11] in your best trump voice they're prosecuting me across the country for made up crimes while

[00:54:16] this woman dressed like a cat burglar broke into her stepmother's bedroom crawled across the floor

[00:54:20] to sneak up on her and minnesota democrats are using her vote to change election laws talk about

[00:54:25] elections being stolen and the media won't report it i mean spot on i could absolutely see him saying

[00:54:30] something along those lines and i tried being valid and i yes and i'm trying to be intellectually

[00:54:36] consistent the person who's saying is i am not voting for trump i didn't vote from in 1620

[00:54:41] there's reams and reams of audio tapes of me about talking about this this is where i think

[00:54:45] the intellectual consistency point and this is where i think this could really blow up for senate

[00:54:50] democrats and it wouldn't be truly be a missed opportunity if trump didn't go there because

[00:54:55] it really does for anybody watching who might think that the senate democrats or democrats in

[00:55:01] this legislature have the moral high ground might tamp that down a little bit because again

[00:55:07] as you mentioned the senate democrats were the first one to take any any action on this

[00:55:12] and my viewing of their action is saying we're embarrassed by you we're stepping aside and what

[00:55:19] is another way of saying you're embarrassed by a fellow senator is saying that they're not upholding

[00:55:24] the legal and integrity or the integrity and moral obligations of a senator correct thus violating

[00:55:32] senate ethics it's just it's mind-boggling here i think tying back to the beginning of our

[00:55:37] conversation senator bobby jill champion did them no good in him going so far in this i think that he

[00:55:43] could have taken a step back two things we did not mention senator kinesh was she there still

[00:55:49] because she i did not hear a single question from her in this it was very minimal and tell the

[00:55:54] motions at the end yes she was active in the first ethics hearing but not as much in the

[00:55:58] second and you had sent me a message on that and i'm like all that's right she's there because

[00:56:03] it was quite interesting even if it was just a camp down what champion was doing and asking

[00:56:07] some generic fact finding mission questions it was surprising to me that we didn't hear anything from

[00:56:12] her oh wait a second i see what you're saying you're saying that she just didn't show yeah i get

[00:56:17] what you're saying right like this wasn't doing her doing anything i did not fuck your standpoint

[00:56:22] she didn't actively assert an oversight roll-in-up and she didn't actively participate she's 25

[00:56:27] percent of this committee she should have somewhere between 12 and 25 percent of the

[00:56:31] question i was told there'd be no math but yes you're spot on about that yeah i see the

[00:56:35] point you're making your point is even better now it just feels like that's how lopsided it was

[00:56:39] and then the last thing i want to comment is watching the hearing and now i it was during

[00:56:45] bedtime and and so i was listening to a lot and watching a chunk of it but based on what i saw

[00:56:50] myself and and saw on twitter we did not see senator michel on camera oh yes if you've

[00:56:56] watched any committee hearing um usually there's a not a wide view but usually you get the testifier

[00:57:02] table not the testifier you get some zoomed in but usually you can see the testifier table some of

[00:57:08] the crowd behind them we saw just the attorney and we don't know motives and we don't know facts of

[00:57:14] the matter but that was a directive right it seems very clearly that they were directed they

[00:57:19] they didn't want republicans or outside groups to be able to have a photo of senator michel

[00:57:25] sitting next door to defense attorney in an ethics committee hearing being able to be plastered on

[00:57:29] mailpieces correct the visuals were astounding and i will note uh i was someone had sent me a note on

[00:57:36] that and then i noticed it and i'm like i couldn't stop seeing it then um and as it the longer it

[00:57:42] went on i wanted and i longer went on and then it was very noticeable so what was just to explain

[00:57:48] again i don't know who i think it's senate media services that had the camera so the picture

[00:57:53] was very tight you did not see for an ethics committee hearing that lasted a couple hours on

[00:57:58] senator michel she barely rarely appeared in like even a pan shot right on tv i was listening to it

[00:58:06] i was at a ball game when it was going on i was listening to it and and watching a little

[00:58:10] in between innings but i went home that last night late last night and watched it again

[00:58:14] and it was even more noticeable then and i would say as someone who is a member of the av club

[00:58:19] in high school that's really a misuse of av equipment there should be some ethics about av

[00:58:24] equipment and how they're used there should have been a pan shot but it was clearly it was too obvious

[00:58:29] to not be orchestrated and and i don't know the rules around how it works at the senate i

[00:58:34] know in congress the majority parties do are the ones that give the directive to c span of

[00:58:39] typically how they handle things newt gingrich was a big pioneer in this have you a nerd yeah

[00:58:45] he was the one who like does the zoomed in shot so a member can sit up there and pontificate and it's

[00:58:50] an empty room but you would never know so you get the videos it's great and so i have to assume again

[00:58:55] it's a directive we don't know um it was just it's too pointed to not be something going on in

[00:59:03] the backgrounds there um and so if you were to see if you were to take all these scenarios that

[00:59:08] we described all of the little points that we raised how do they all balance out they all

[00:59:12] go one way statistically if these were just random circumstances you would think that one of

[00:59:18] these or two of these would break the republicans way so logically it just makes sense i'm not much

[00:59:23] of a conspiracy theorist i think we landed on the moon but it's very clear that the senate

[00:59:27] democrats had that incredibly orchestrated last night and to your point but cunish the other

[00:59:32] senator that was there not being engaged coupled with champions aggressive approach just out of

[00:59:38] the gate going after housley and then the visual framing of it they did every they pulled it's pretty

[00:59:44] clear to me that there was a lot of orchestration that was going on related to the charge i also

[00:59:51] want to discuss this in one way that i haven't before as we close out this topic i am mostly

[00:59:57] known as a political opposition researcher at a past life one of the things that most people

[01:00:03] to know about me is i've somebody know that i wrote a true crime book so i've read a lot of police

[01:00:08] reports i have an extensive library at home of a lot of crime cases crime books true crime

[01:00:15] books i have to say to you that at some point i may delve into just the what the scenarios

[01:00:22] that i think were going on and what was actually going on it is very difficult for me to come

[01:00:27] to the conclusion just based on and again i'm not a lawyer i'm not a licensed investigator

[01:00:33] but just as someone who's written books a written a book about a true crime case and follows this

[01:00:38] stuff closely that i find it is simply defies logic that senator michael was dressed in black

[01:00:48] on the floor of her mother's her stepmother's bedroom or in the house in any way and have

[01:00:54] that be a good intention and i would at a later point if this story develops and we hear more we may

[01:01:00] discuss this from a true crime perspective and you'll allow me to offer a number of scenarios

[01:01:06] and examples that i can give there's just not a lot of examples of people dressed in black

[01:01:11] on the floor of someone's bedroom or breaking into a house where it ends up in a good way

[01:01:16] and a crime is not being committed and again to the point that you raised at the beginning

[01:01:20] of this subject which was raised by senator hosley obviously the senate democrats had concerns

[01:01:25] obviously senate the senate democrats had concerns because the first disciplinary action

[01:01:31] that she encountered for being involved and being charged was by the senate democrats and

[01:01:37] it's so inconsistent i think of the senate democrats to then slow down any progression

[01:01:43] on a path that they've taken i have two things and i don't mean to completely circle back

[01:01:48] but i have to because you just brought this up i saw a tweet by a representative walter hudson

[01:01:52] last night and i want to read that real quick this relates to some line of questioning that

[01:01:56] senator miller was putting out and senator champion again coming to the defense of

[01:02:00] senator michael countering champion isn't this is representative walter hudson's tweet

[01:02:05] champion is now arguing that it might not have been michael in the bedroom because the

[01:02:09] victim initially described the prep burglar as he the implication is that someone else

[01:02:16] may have burglarized the home and michael was coincidentally hanging in the basement wearing

[01:02:20] dirt clothes during an announced 4 30 am welfare check with a bunch of small stolen property this is

[01:02:26] the most embarrassing performance imaginal and you could not write this i totally missed that

[01:02:31] tweet by representative hudson i think we have to have that be the tweet of the week because

[01:02:35] we're going to reintroduce that segment yeah i miss it that's fantastic he's exactly right

[01:02:39] he is exactly right admit champion was trying to discredit use of the 911 transcripts that

[01:02:46] this woman or that there was somebody that burglarized the home that just so happened

[01:02:50] of according to the arrest of senator michael to be senator michael but he's saying whoa this

[01:02:56] victim clearly didn't know it clearly could have been somebody else because they kept saying he

[01:03:01] when she stepped on a person in her room at 4 30 am who fled to the basement it's just bonkers

[01:03:07] but i really appreciated that tweet because it just really hit on the incredulousness of this chaos

[01:03:15] but i want to ask one question before we move on about a little bit and i'm putting you in your

[01:03:19] spot so i apologize if you don't know the answer to this some question came up about the bodycam

[01:03:24] footage and the release of that in your history of some data finding and your writing of the book

[01:03:30] who does get to release that because when asked about this the defense attorney in one of his

[01:03:36] many comments said basically disregarding senator michael's rights and i'm not going to let her

[01:03:41] say this or i don't she doesn't get to i get to make the rules all of this said she doesn't get to

[01:03:46] have she doesn't have any say in this i get to say if i'm going to do this and basically under

[01:03:51] discovery right now we're not releasing bodycam a couple things there is a role for the law

[01:03:57] enforcement to do so too quell kind of misinformation maybe a civil unrest if there's allegations

[01:04:04] related to mistreatment by that law enforcement acted in an inappropriate way they can there

[01:04:10] is discretion by the law enforcement like in the floyd murder yes to release the bodycam footage so it

[01:04:16] is can be shown to the public to give a true accurate portrayal of what occurred a senator michael could

[01:04:23] i do believe if she is the only i do believe that she would have the right to do so as

[01:04:30] herself she could say that i want she could say i want my colleagues in the senate to see

[01:04:35] what occurred and i'm authorizing the release of the body camera footage i think that there would

[01:04:40] be an effort if there were other parties on the camera footage i think there would be attempts

[01:04:45] to blur them out but i think she and this is the confusing little point that they're in

[01:04:50] her attorney shut that down right away now a senator michael is both a state senator and

[01:04:57] she's also a lawyer she's also an individual who's been charged with a crime then the

[01:05:02] confusion that her attorney was creating i believe was he would not allow her to do that because

[01:05:08] her criminal proceeding in his head trumps anything that the senate does at this point and so yes

[01:05:14] senator michael could and has the authority to ask for and grant the release of the body

[01:05:19] camera footage from what occurred at that residence and it would be properly released her attorney

[01:05:25] made it very clear that he would not allow that to happen and that was a great point that

[01:05:30] you brought up because that's where it got to a point in the hearing where i think her defense of

[01:05:35] herself conflicted in such a great way with her role as a senator that i don't think the two are

[01:05:42] compatible and just from my standpoint to close this topic out what i think that the situation

[01:05:48] that the senate is has right now is because the timing of the ethics hearing we can get to a

[01:05:54] situation where a member near the end of session could be involved in something like this

[01:05:59] and the and they'd be allowed to vote for partisan reasons to process bills and legislation

[01:06:05] and it can later come out that they have been there's more information could come out on the case

[01:06:11] and i think it's an administrative conundrum that the senate democrats have created it's

[01:06:17] unfortunate and i think that minnesotans deserve better let me also say as i said on

[01:06:22] in a median review about this last week a republican does anything like this

[01:06:27] or is charged living i'll be the first to say it needs to be examined it needs to be looked at and

[01:06:31] they need to go i have been consistent particularly on matters related to drinking and driving which

[01:06:35] impacts the legislature greatly i as listeners know pleaded guilty to drinking and driving in 2013

[01:06:42] i've been a passionate advocate for safe roles i volunteer i have spoken out immensely about legislators

[01:06:47] misusing or acting inappropriately driving drunk they are allowed their due process but

[01:06:52] there's opportunities for them to accept accountability and responsibility they should

[01:06:56] be afforded that but i'm certainly haven't been quiet on this and i certainly won't be

[01:07:00] if a republican acts this way i think honestly i think my record is probably more consistent of

[01:07:04] speaking out on republicans doing this stuff than it has been democrats but in this particular

[01:07:09] situation i think the the right decision that and the right proper decision was lost to partisanship

[01:07:16] last night and that's unfortunate and the last thing i will say and then i want to move on is

[01:07:20] i guess i do have to give some credit to senator michael i very to sit through what she sat through

[01:07:26] at the senate floor when she returned to voting and the press questions and sit through this hearing

[01:07:32] is not something i could do if this was me wrap it up peace out i'm resigning i'm getting out of

[01:07:37] here going back to my home and not to be heard from again i think it's wild she thinks that

[01:07:43] somebody has the capacity to withstand this sort of thing and i think that is largely due

[01:07:50] to the dfl pushing her because they need her so badly we chatted briefly but i want to get into

[01:07:59] it a little bit more trump is coming to minnesota so he is coming he's going to be keynote speaker

[01:08:04] at the upcoming republican party of minnesota's lincoln reagan dinner quick nod to when i worked

[01:08:10] at the party our last speaker in 2019 while i was there was liz chainy so a little ironic with

[01:08:17] that's a great little piece of uh intrigue i i try but wanted to just chat briefly about

[01:08:24] what this means for minnesota so obviously in 2020 trump had a huge ground game here

[01:08:29] 2016 lost by just 1.5 percent 2020 he did despite his big ground game and efforts here

[01:08:35] to lose by 7 percent in this state but polls are showing it looking pretty close here in the state of

[01:08:41] minnesota and the trump campaign has has added it minnesota and virginia to their kind of top six

[01:08:47] eight battleground states that they are hoping to win in 2024 this was a very surprising

[01:08:53] development i was very surprised and i just retweeted and said while's up because

[01:08:57] there's a number of reasons why this is significant first of all biden's campaign

[01:09:01] is making a substantive effort here in minnesota and let's start the table here democrats republicans

[01:09:07] have not won the republicans didn't have won the race for president in minnesota since 1972 it's the

[01:09:12] longest his longest streak of any states in the union so minnesota is far behind so every every

[01:09:20] couple presidential cycles at least since i've been active there's been this kind of belief

[01:09:24] that could be close and so it's the best way to cut through the noise is to say our candidates

[01:09:30] coming are their investments being put on the ground because campaigns aren't going to spend resources

[01:09:35] and send their principles whether it's the president or the former president to these

[01:09:39] states if they're not an actual target state and i think any fair analysis and record shows that

[01:09:44] the biden campaign is investing in minnesota he's been here multiple times the first lady's

[01:09:49] been first lady's been here multiple times vice president comel harris was here recently

[01:09:53] and the fact that donald trump is coming here for the

[01:09:57] lincoln reagan dinner i think is incredibly significant the fact that the party was able to

[01:10:03] orchestrate that and get that done and get that type of investment shows that

[01:10:08] minnesota republicans are amping up for a very interesting presidential race that's going

[01:10:14] to happen here and i think it's i was very surprised but the only other way i can say it is just

[01:10:19] wiles up because it's such a it's such a fascinating development i can't think of anyone better for

[01:10:25] and again i've said months in this episode that i didn't support trump in 16 or 20 to

[01:10:29] invoke from this year blah blah blah i've said all the time before but my analysis stays the same if

[01:10:33] you're a minnesota republican and you're a supporter of the president and that kind of maga movement

[01:10:38] this is your leader this is who you're going to have come to this state and i think it's

[01:10:42] going to energize minnesota republicans i think it's going to be great for the state party

[01:10:46] operation in terms of energizing them i also think it's going to energize minnesota democrats but

[01:10:50] it should put to bed i think until additional polling comes out that minnesota is clearly a

[01:10:56] targeted state the trump campaign did put out internal polls which take them from what they're

[01:11:00] worth always a little kind of leaning but internal polls have trump and biden at 4040 when you take

[01:11:07] jfk jr out of it trump is up five when you take everybody besides trump and biden out trump

[01:11:12] is still up three obviously within margin of error there but is telling and one of the things i think

[01:11:18] a lot of people don't always consider though sure it's early in the season he's taking a stop here

[01:11:22] wheels down here means it's not wheels down that day somewhere else and so every stop is very

[01:11:28] strategic of what it brings to the battleground state and so anytime they do come to minnesota

[01:11:34] it is because they need to move that needle or are working to move that needle and i think

[01:11:39] you're spot on i think it really is going to be energizing for the republican megabase who right

[01:11:44] now might feel a little complacent might feel a little down out and kicked out and really beaten

[01:11:49] down from the two years of the trifecta in single bm Minnesota is going to turn red for the first

[01:11:54] time in 30 40 years no i find it really tough i'm not there yet but it is really interesting i

[01:12:02] did not expect that trump was going to come back here in fact in 2020 famously indolou said if i lose

[01:12:07] minnesota i'm not coming back here ever so he's already surprised he's changed his tune on that but

[01:12:14] we'll see in this dinner so it's a big fundraising opportunity for the party this is going to be

[01:12:18] a really good opportunity for them to bring in a lot of funds that they need to be able to build

[01:12:22] that party or that grassroots apparatus and wow we'll see i'm struggling to come up with not

[01:12:29] to be debbie downer but i'm struggling to come up with what's the downside for the party and

[01:12:33] there really isn't the part this is the frontrunner the presumptive nominee he's the de facto head of

[01:12:38] the party he's the de facto nominee for president him coming here as you articulated very well wheels

[01:12:42] down he's not somewhere else he's investing in minnesota i think it shows a good relationship

[01:12:47] between the trump and trump campaign and the state party i think it's good for the state party

[01:12:52] in terms of filling their coffers and operation but i think you also spot on and saying if

[01:12:57] for the maggot crowd here which i don't identify with but i can certainly recognize

[01:13:01] that they exist this is going to be a very energizing moment and i think also for the

[01:13:05] democrats i think it's going to be interesting to watch how much play is in minnesota i think it's

[01:13:10] i think there's going to be some aggressive polling and i think it's going to be minnesota

[01:13:15] it just any fair analysis will say that if there's two presidential campaigns that are

[01:13:21] investing in this state based on even the reasonable polling which you were right to

[01:13:26] characterize as internal shows that minnesota is being targeted in some way by both campaigns

[01:13:32] and for minnesota republicans that should be incredibly energizing right now

[01:13:36] and it's something that be very interesting to watch how it plays out will you be attending the

[01:13:41] event and looking for an opportunity to meet the former president i will not i will not i have

[01:13:47] had the pleasure and opportunity to be at a number of events he has spoken at and nope not

[01:13:53] really my scene these days or my cup of tea but more power to anybody who wants to go obviously go

[01:13:58] donate to the republican party in minnesota i do support that and the ripple effect that will

[01:14:02] come from this the news media and all of that for republicans hopefully is i want to have optimism

[01:14:09] that the former president is going to align with his message yes of what republicans down ballot

[01:14:15] need we'll see we'll certainly chat about it so he's here may 17th i will say just one kind

[01:14:20] of future future episode options discussions i remember i've been in with purely with john

[01:14:25] relo who he's done analysis john i think and i'm going to link to some of those back episodes

[01:14:30] one of the questions i've asked him on a few episodes when he was offering analysis and john

[01:14:34] is incredibly knowledgeable about national politics and particularly minnesota with his work

[01:14:38] with the minnesota jobs coalition just understanding the layout john has i think been a good resource

[01:14:43] to help me answer the when i've asked the question does trump help or hurt in minnesota

[01:14:47] and john's analysis on that was good i do think it would be good an interesting show to bring in

[01:14:53] some republicans who are just really passionate about the trump campaign and talk about how

[01:14:59] his arrival is coming here whether we do that before after have how that can impact the race

[01:15:04] because one of things i wanted this discussion i always want to learn is as we've discussed on

[01:15:09] topics of abortion or just on campaigning explain to me how this helps or hurts and

[01:15:15] what's your kind of discussion and i think with republicans being so energized by a visit that

[01:15:20] i was surprised by i think it'd be a great opportunity to invite some of those republicans

[01:15:25] in who are purely identified as republicans who support overwhelmingly support uh donald

[01:15:31] trump and his candidacy i think it'd be a really fascinating conversation absolutely

[01:15:38] one of the donald trump discussions should lead into our next subject

[01:15:41] yes i don't know i actually i don't know if i'm being fair is that fair me to connect

[01:15:45] this in any way to the the former president sure i'll make i'll make the i'll make the tie

[01:15:49] make the tie we are just slowly getting down on the short list of potential vice president nominees

[01:15:56] one name that has been on that list that likely is no more is governor christine ome so we have

[01:16:02] being off for a week we didn't have the chance to wait into this and so let's do it we are

[01:16:07] going to chat about governor christine ome and break down all of the controversy surrounding

[01:16:13] her the blurb in her anticipated now much anticipated book release where she discussed

[01:16:20] that she brought her 14-month-old wire haired pointer named cricket to a gravel pit and shot him

[01:16:27] to death this far away it there's it literally just sucked the air out of the room really does

[01:16:33] you either there's dogs and babies are like an automatic gain half a point in the polls right

[01:16:40] and so when killing a dog a 14-month-old dog regardless of if you're explaining you're losing

[01:16:46] we've talked about that time and time again so it went into a little bit about the issue itself

[01:16:51] but also the pr comms component of this starting out with wow that this is so this is her second

[01:16:59] book her last book two years ago she tried to include this story the team around her at

[01:17:04] the time had the wherewithal to pull that so that was not in the story the last time around

[01:17:09] she somehow this got through it's in her story it's been out there and what's your initial take

[01:17:17] on this story coming out and then let's get into the subsequent media circus following it i am

[01:17:23] struggling even to this moment to come up with a strategy by which this makes sense for

[01:17:29] her to release she killed she describes a shooting a puppy a dog with a name cricket

[01:17:37] a puppy a puppy 14 months old and the fact that this was of this did not come out in

[01:17:42] a deposition behind closed doors this was a voluntary statement that she made

[01:17:47] i cannot begin to understand what she was thinking and i have some concerns about what

[01:17:52] she was thinking but i just have to tell you i don't i i cannot comprehend why she would think

[01:18:00] that there was an upside to this and it haunts me to think that she thinks there was an upside

[01:18:05] to this the most disturbing aspect of this is that we all in she's no different than any politician

[01:18:12] that they are some that they they're very strategic about what they portray what they show

[01:18:17] and this was the decision to show this this was something that she advocated for as you

[01:18:22] pointed out in her first book which was not done but her second book she was insistent on including

[01:18:28] and this is just monstrous and i do not see any i can't begin to comprehend what she thought she

[01:18:37] was thinking number one by doing this number two by advocating for it in first book and then

[01:18:42] getting it in the second book and then advocating for it and trying to portray that it's some type of

[01:18:49] plus or some type of positive that you're murdered a puppy i've always been taught that whenever you

[01:18:55] do anything you need to the goal of an elected or or candidate is to get press votes or money

[01:19:04] i noticed that murdering dogs was not in that list it was not okay press was so she certainly

[01:19:09] has gotten press on this what is she has gone on a complete press junket right she has been

[01:19:15] on meet the press she has been all over the board trying to explain which again i understand that

[01:19:22] a lot of times as individuals elected officials believe that they i truly she truly believes that

[01:19:31] she did not do something wrong that this dog did have a background of attacking some livestock

[01:19:37] being vicious towards children that may be true it still is just so across the board

[01:19:44] bonkers to to say i want to read through some of the reasoning she laid out or excuses of why this is

[01:19:51] again very much highlighting that she does not believe it's in the wrong and this is why

[01:19:55] she shared it but then let's chat about the actual media circus so she said she wanted to

[01:20:00] include the story because it showed a divisive person a decisive person who was unwilling to

[01:20:04] be bound by name be bambi niceties she quote said what is what the point of the story is that most

[01:20:11] politicians they run from the truth they will shy away and hide from making tough decisions i don't

[01:20:16] do either of those she said she had to choose between keeping my small children other people

[01:20:21] safe or dangerous animal and i chose the safety of my children the governor sticking to her

[01:20:26] political brand and go back she described the killing as a kind of tough decision that you

[01:20:30] have to make on a farm in contrast at her decisiveness with joe biden's failure to act

[01:20:34] after his own chronically ill-behaved german shepherd attack secret service which she has

[01:20:39] made jokes now that he needs to go meet cricket aka believes that he should be shot

[01:20:44] and she has defended her decision by saying south dakota law states that dogs who attack

[01:20:49] and kill livestock can be put down now that might all be true but again you're explaining

[01:20:54] you're losing oh south dakota law says i can shoot my dog in the head so i shot my dog in

[01:20:58] the head yes we should have been videotaping right there because you're yourself your your

[01:21:03] impression of christie gnome was just spot on and it's so bad to me i really do actually

[01:21:08] think christie gnome has been a good messenger she's a little further right than i believe

[01:21:12] or that i personally am but i do believe that she has been a good advocate for a republican

[01:21:17] message for strong independent republican women and it just says so not only did she do this

[01:21:24] she put this out but then she went on all of the interviews let me give a piece of advice that i think

[01:21:30] is some of let me be not all press is good press and i take that to heart myself not all press

[01:21:36] is good press there is a belief out there that anytime the press is talking about you it's not

[01:21:40] good trust me i know that yeah and so the fact that this is there's a belief that she would

[01:21:45] willingly participate in this story that she would put it out there it i cannot begin to tell you

[01:21:50] how moronic and what concerns me if i may is that there was what concerns me about this is

[01:21:58] that this was a calculated decision that she made to put this out she made to put this out again

[01:22:03] this wasn't in a deposition this wasn't a part of some data request she paid to put this in a book

[01:22:09] she voiced the audio for this i believe that she did that because she believed that story of her

[01:22:16] murdering a puppy would endear her in some way inside this it would elevate her up that she would

[01:22:22] be tough and i can't for the life of me reconcile how she could think that was a rational thought

[01:22:28] obviously she's former member of congress she's the governor of south dakota you don't get to

[01:22:34] those types of positions by being politically feeble great but she i understand that type of tough

[01:22:43] swagger that type of that she wants to betray but you murdered a dog and i can't for the life of me

[01:22:49] look past that i can't for the life of me look past it it just doesn't i can i have probably never

[01:22:56] struggled more because one of things we're supposed to do when we talk about these subjects

[01:23:00] and this is what i wanted to talk about i can't come up with a good answer right i can't break

[01:23:04] this down other than she shot a dog in a gravel pit 100 agree and and to me a couple things it

[01:23:11] feels as though based on that plethora of excuses and reasoning that she has given throughout all of

[01:23:17] these interviews feels to me as though they were not expecting this reaction because if if they were

[01:23:26] expecting this reaction you have one response right every time you're asked about it you say

[01:23:30] he was a danger to livestock and my children and i did what i had to do and you repeat that

[01:23:37] every single time she's clearly trying to work all of these different angles here

[01:23:42] and and i i i feel like it was really they thought they were going to gloss over this i

[01:23:46] don't think that they for some reason i think they did not expect it to be that big of an issue

[01:23:51] and do you not have a better story of showing how you make the tough decisions better than a

[01:23:57] joe biden or other democrat there there's nothing else in your congressional or gubernatorial

[01:24:03] history that you can point to aside from shooting a dog of you being willing to make tough

[01:24:07] decision i don't understand it it just doesn't make any sense and i also reminds me of how far

[01:24:11] the party has fallen in terms of nixon and his famous checker speech checker was the dog

[01:24:16] that he was not going to return related to the checker speech or the fun speech about

[01:24:21] some this kind of slush fund nixon went on tv and said we're not giving checkers back

[01:24:26] we're not returning the dog she would have shot checkers and she shot cricket in a gravel

[01:24:31] i cannot for the life of me understand and let me just say this to you

[01:24:35] i don't have a ton of experience in farm life my wife's family is from the state of iowa so i've

[01:24:40] spent a lot of time on the farm i have no experience whatsoever in any way i it's always a place that

[01:24:47] is a danger to me because i could i'm the type of person that takes the combine out or gets

[01:24:51] wrapped up in some machinery and it's a problem i will have to say to you that

[01:24:55] having been to the farm in iowa multiple times they've had animals down there

[01:24:59] they just don't go shoot animals they've had pets at the farm and it's been a big deal when

[01:25:04] those pets have been either hit by a car or another and or they've been lost or they passed

[01:25:08] away in some way i cannot identify with taking a dog to a gravel pit which by the way is where

[01:25:16] a lot of true crime stories begin is in gravel pits and she taught she named the dog and put

[01:25:22] it in the book i can't for the life of me understand this and even more i don't like

[01:25:27] you i didn't grow up on a farm i understand that things happen on a farm that we would never

[01:25:32] want to see or hear about so don't tell us it's fine it's not fine that this happened it happened

[01:25:40] don't tell us about it don't share it don't write it in your book leave that up to

[01:25:45] some abo research coming up and figuring it out really ridiculous last comment i have on this

[01:25:51] is that since this story came out of bipartisan group of members of congress did set up a

[01:25:56] congressional dog lovers caucus fantastic a little uh jab there and i think it's fantastic and if i was

[01:26:03] in congress i would join that i look forward to that day as i'm at you be a member of car i bet

[01:26:09] you make sure my family got a good tour yes can i ask just a couple things how much time do you think

[01:26:13] was spent discussing the inclusion of this in the book basically not enough and do you think

[01:26:20] it was calculated decision meaning it was like i do you think do you think she sincerely believed

[01:26:24] that this is going to land really well i think she truly did i and it also goes to tell me about

[01:26:31] some of the people around her my job working for members of congress as communications director

[01:26:37] was two poke holes to say you say this these are the arrows coming back at you and so if her staff

[01:26:46] if they did discuss it they did not do a good enough job because what constituency

[01:26:50] do you win in this who comes over and says i'm a democrat who hates dogs i'm gonna vote for christine

[01:26:57] ohm like i just my goodness we have again it's one of our goals to start recording is beggy that was

[01:27:04] fantastic that's twice today i just don't say i think there are a lot of times that stories are

[01:27:09] told in a way that not widely accepted or very popular do bring in a small constituency right they

[01:27:17] do bring somebody back to the table or open up something i i don't see that opportunity here

[01:27:25] and that's where it is just really lost on me of how those surrounding her allowed this to move

[01:27:32] forward because of that that's your job as staff is to poke those holes and say you're

[01:27:37] gonna lose x amount and you're gonna not gain or gain to do those political especially as

[01:27:44] somebody who has clearly been a rising star in the republican party does she get past this i don't

[01:27:50] think so i think that this i think a couple things i think the lack of i think you've articulated

[01:27:56] very well and laid it out this way first of all it's the decision following your logic it's

[01:28:00] the decision of its decision of including it in the book let me start over it's the decision

[01:28:05] first of all of bringing little cricket 14th moral cricket to a gravel pit and shooting

[01:28:09] number one a number two it's the decision to write it in a book then it's number three

[01:28:14] it's to message on it and try to dig yourself further and to think that's a smart strategy

[01:28:19] on meet the press there were not only do we have the bad decision of murdering cricket

[01:28:24] but then it's to message on it multiple times and that's where i think her standing has gone

[01:28:28] down because she the expectation is again let's say one more time you're not murdering dogs

[01:28:34] but if you are you're murdering a puppy but if you are you're not going to message on it

[01:28:38] and then go on national tv and talk about it have a filter have some common sense nixon

[01:28:43] in 52 when he went out and talked about checkers that was a defining moment and nixon who is a

[01:28:49] caricature to this day in politics at least he had the common sense to go out there and say

[01:28:53] we're not giving checkers back she brought cricket to the gravel pit and shot him

[01:28:58] and she thinks her standing is going to go up i hate to say this nixon was right

[01:29:02] in this particular instance in 52 when he did this and so i cannot understand this and i don't

[01:29:08] understand logic i think again i think i would i'll pose this question you had it just come out

[01:29:15] that she had killed the dog and she had not messaged on it do you still think she would have been

[01:29:20] picked no i don't think that she i don't think so i don't think that i think that she was

[01:29:26] maybe in the bottom half of the list of top 10 prior to this but i think this is certainly

[01:29:31] knocked her off yes and i think it and rightfully i cannot understand this my biggest concern again

[01:29:37] is that this was a aside from the killing of the dog that this was a calculated decision

[01:29:42] that a group of people said this would be really good for you to talk about and i don't understand

[01:29:46] it yeah i am not i don't have i had a dog growing up my dog's name is sandy i miss it to this

[01:29:51] day uh there's a bunch of neighborhood dogs that i just adore and i cannot to the life of me

[01:29:59] relate to this at all i just left my dog for five days when i went to florida and i literally

[01:30:03] cried dropping moth as a daycare at place like it was just yeah oh just so i asked because we asked

[01:30:08] about dumpster diving you've not shot any animals that you're aware i have not and i will in the

[01:30:13] interest of complete and total disclosure note that i did go hunting with my father never shot

[01:30:18] a deer and at one point just took the bullets out and the ammunition out and never hit a deer

[01:30:22] or another shot at a deer i never fired never shot at a deer i might be disarping never

[01:30:27] never shot a deer never fired the never fired a deer rifle uh one point

[01:30:32] book might took the bullets on said this really isn't for me and at one point my dad

[01:30:36] caught me on my cell phone in the deer stand and so it just wasn't it's just not for me same

[01:30:41] it's just it's been wild to watch unfold i would like to think that hopefully her media tour

[01:30:46] on this is done i don't know where she goes from here because the book hasn't even been released

[01:30:50] yet so the book is now to be released i believe either later this week or early next week this

[01:30:55] was just a preview that came out she's mad that everybody's focusing on this one little story

[01:31:00] i'm sure we will come back to some other renovations that came out like her fake meeting with uh

[01:31:07] north korea dictator that did not happen so more to come wow we love dogs we love dogs

[01:31:14] probably one of the most largest unforced error i've seen a candidate make i agree yep thank you

[01:31:21] so much for doing it i missed doing this last week this is a longer episode but we covered a lot

[01:31:26] of topics and uh fantastic work today good to be here we'll be back next week bye we want to thank

[01:31:35] you for listening to the breakdown with broadcore rebecca and before we go show some love for your

[01:31:39] favorite podcast by leaving us a real and apple podcast spotify or on the platform where you

[01:31:44] listen you can leave a review or give us a shout out on our website or across all social media

[01:31:50] platforms at bbbreakpod the breakdown with broadcore rebecca will return next week thank you again for

[01:31:57] listening