A break down about the prosecution of Ryan Londregan in Hennepin County

[00:00:00] Welcome to The Break Down with Brodkorb and Becky, a weekly podcast that breaks down politics, policy and current affairs. I'm Becky Scherr. And I'm Michael Brodkorb. We are back this week, another day late, this time thanks to Toddler Illness. This week's episode is jam-packed

[00:00:26] and a bit all over the place. We're going to start local by breaking down the recent incidents surrounding Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty. Moriarty is facing calls to resign due to her actions related to an expert witness in the prosecution of Minnesota State Trooper

[00:00:40] Ryan Londregan. To help us break down the situation, we'll be joined by today's guest Stephen Furch, Attorney for the Minnesota Peace and Peace Officers Association and the Legal Defense Fund Administrator, where he and his partners helped defend officers in on-duty critical

[00:00:56] incidents and against off-duty charges. What Stephen will discuss how the recent actions by County Attorney Moriarty is impacting the police community and cases like this going forward. And Stephen will also offer perspective on what he hears from law enforcement officers he

[00:01:12] interacts with. We'll then break down last week's State of the Union, Biden's performance and the interesting reaction by Republican Senator Katie Brett. Next we'll take a step away from politics and discuss our thoughts on the Oscars and we'll end by breaking down

[00:01:27] the big news of the week, losing Kirk Cousins to the Atlanta Falcons. Thanks for joining us today and we hope you enjoy the show. Well, Becky, it's great to be here today recording a new episode.

[00:01:40] I just have a little bit of small talk, a little update from a previous episode. I saw my mom recently and I played some of the audio of our most recent podcast episode where you brought up

[00:01:51] the potential that there had been some nudity that may have been involved when she in college saw John F. Kennedy in 1960 at the St. Paul Hotel when she was a student at St.

[00:02:00] Kate's. Just to clarify, a mom confirmed that she was fully clothed but she also, first of all, got a great laugh out of it. She also said, very fair question. She absolutely understood

[00:02:10] that you were referring to the member of the Kennedy family and not her. She had a great sense of humor, great laugh out of it, thought it was a spot on analysis and very fair question. And she expanded more about the event when she went there in college,

[00:02:23] when she went to the St. Paul Hotel and saw then Senator Kennedy before he was President Kennedy, but she did clarify that everyone in attendance was fully clothed. But she did repeat more than once that your question was very well founded.

[00:02:36] Thank you. I am grateful that she had a good sense of humor about it and that it was confirmed that everybody was clothed and that I was referring to JFK and not her. That's great. All right, let's do this. Thank you.

[00:02:47] We are kicking things off now with our guest, Steven Furch. Steven is an attorney with the Minnesota Peace and Police Officers Association. So thank you for being with us today. Thank you for having me, Becky and Michael. Absolutely. So before we get into the case at

[00:03:04] hand, we'd like you to just tell us a little bit about your background, your work with MPPOA and legal defense and your experience working with cops here and peace officers here in Minnesota.

[00:03:14] Sure. I'm an attorney at a law firm called Bruno Law and our law firm is what we call, or MPPOA calls the legal administrators of the firm or of the legal defense fund panel. And essentially what the legal defense fund is, Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association

[00:03:34] has approximately 10,000 members, maybe more. All of those members pay into a, it's called an ERISA fund, which is a federal law that allows associations to fund certain benefits for their members. This particular ERISA fund provides for the legal defense of officers in

[00:03:52] certain situations. So my role as the administrator and my partner's roles as the administrator, we manage the fund itself. So we manage the money. We manage the attorneys that are on the panel. We have approximately, oh, I think there's 14 or 15 attorneys now

[00:04:08] that we can draw from for these kinds of cases. We work on the financial side of those cases. I am actually the first call that officers make once they're involved in a critical incident. And so that call involves providing some initial legal advice,

[00:04:28] involves talking through the officers what to expect next, and then it involves dispatching an attorney to represent them following those incidents. And we dispatch the attorneys there. We pick the defense team on bigger cases, like the one we're going to talk about here today,

[00:04:44] and generally try to support officers in any way that we can. I'm at the Capitol here today in DC meeting with the Minnesota delegation and talking about issues with that delegation that are important to our members and to law enforcement. Really, at our firm, we've

[00:05:00] carved out a niche where we represent police officers and help them in all kinds of situations. That's fantastic. We're grateful for the work you do with officers here in Minnesota, and your time out there with the delegation. It's important to have good advocates

[00:05:14] meeting with our members of Congress and advocating beyond for behalf of your community. So thank you for that. No, absolutely. Absolutely. So I want to give a little bit background on the case we're going to discuss here

[00:05:24] for our listeners, anybody that might not be up to date. Around 2am, July 31st, a trooper saw a car drive by on 94 without rear lights pulled over the car. It was discovered that the driver, Ricky Cobb was wanted on probable cause for a felony order

[00:05:38] of protection violation in Ramsey County. According to footage, looks like officers approached. There was refusal to step out. So an incident occurred with cops trying to pull the officer or get the driver out of the vehicle. He took off, shots were fired,

[00:05:56] an incident obviously occurred where the handgun was fired, hit the driver, and he was killed. So in this situation, again, July 31st, trooper Ryan Laundragon was charged in this case. And I assume that is when you and your team step in to get involved,

[00:06:14] correct? Our involvement in this particular case would have started that night. So the night of the incident would have been when our involvement started. And what happens is the officers who are involved call a, essentially it's a hotline

[00:06:30] that goes through to this one went to my cell phone. And so our involvement started there talking to the various officers who were on scene and assessing needs for attorneys, whether they fall within the parameters of the plan guidelines and things like that. So

[00:06:48] our involvement initially started talking with trooper Ryan, trooper Sidi, Erickson would have been the night of the incident. And then how do things progress from the night of the incident in July 31st to charges being filed in January? What happens is after the incident we assigned

[00:07:07] we assigned counsel to the various officers that were involved and then those attorneys are there for the trooper in this case to advise, to be a support system, whatever the officer needs during the investigation stage of the case. Of course, this particular case and investigation

[00:07:28] unfortunately led to charges which kind of brings us to where we're at here today. If you can speak to where we're at today, there's been some news and some things that have been uncovered regarding the use of force expert that was initially contacted by

[00:07:43] Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty. Can you speak to those issues and where the status of the case is now and some of the headlines that have been generated? What I can glean from the filings thus far in the case is that once the case is charged

[00:07:59] there's a process called discovery where various things are disclosed to the defendant or in defense counsel. Here within some of those initial disclosures were excerpts or not an expert excerpt but a summary of meetings that the prosecution had

[00:08:21] with this particular expert Jeffrey Noble. What then happened is the defense wanted more information about what Mr. Noble's opinions were based on some of the things that were included in the excerpt which was written by the Hennepin County Attorney's Office.

[00:08:40] Things like the fact that in his opinion if Trooper Ryan was acting to save his partner's life, that his actions were justified, lawful therefore committed no crime. Of course, that's a huge revelation. It's a

[00:08:56] huge piece of evidence in the case. So it looks to me like the defense then subpoenaed Jeffrey Noble, Mr. Noble for his communications, for his notes, for his conclusions, for what he reviewed in the case which makes all the sense in the world as a defense attorney

[00:09:15] to try to get that information. What I think set off some alarm bells is after they filed that subpoena, the county attorney's office filed a motion to quash or stop that particular subpoena.

[00:09:28] They filed a motion to keep the defense from getting that information and I say it raised alarm bells because if you think about it, the defendant has a right to all information

[00:09:41] related to his or her case. Here you have to ask yourself why would they be stopping the defense from getting this information? If it's as inconclusive, if it's as innocuous as they say, why try to stop them from getting that information? So in response to that

[00:10:05] motion to quash, the defense filed, it was a 52 page memorandum, I'm sure you guys have read it, where they not only moved to against that motion to quash but they also moved to compel the state's own information, more information from the state that they had regarding Jeffrey Noble

[00:10:26] and his conclusions. And the defense asked to have a deposition or to depose Mr. Noble to see what information he has, to see what he has to say about the case. I think that particular

[00:10:42] memorandum had within it some bombshells because it was the first time that we as the public were able to see that excerpt that the defense was provided by the Hennepin County Attorney's office regarding some of Mr. Noble's conclusions. The defense also included

[00:11:00] within that memorandum various conversations they had with Mr. Noble, such as Mr. Noble asking the defense, have you seen my report? Which raises huge red flags because no such report was provided by the state. So we're in a situation now where the state's own expert,

[00:11:18] this is a person who the state hired to inform the jury, the judge, whoever, what a reasonable officer is. And that expert essentially said a reasonable officer is Ryan Laundragan and that Trooper Ryan acted within the law to save his partner's life.

[00:11:37] Can we talk for just a second? Becky articulated some of the details of the case very eloquently but one thing I want to just drive some attention to, this was a stop at 1.50 in the morning on an interstate 94. Can you talk for just a second about

[00:11:52] we've unfortunately heard in the last few weeks and months a number of incidents involving law enforcement officers, two police officers and a first responder were recently killed in Burnsville. Just the danger every day that police officers have, this was a stop on an interstate 94.

[00:12:11] They stopped a vehicle that did not have rear lights. Just the general safety issues that law enforcement officers, first responders deal with on a daily basis. This is just such a high pressure situation every day for them. Can you talk about that for a second?

[00:12:27] Just what officers are going through and first responders are going through on a daily basis? I think unfortunately in our community recently we've seen those dangers and we've seen what can happen to every single officer in our state when they leave,

[00:12:45] they leave their families to go on their shifts. We've seen unfortunately that sometimes they don't come home and these are people who have volunteered to do that. They've signed up to put themselves in that danger for us and you're right, it is something that they

[00:13:05] experience every single day. You can ask any patrol officer how dangerous it is to be conducting a traffic stop, high traffic area vehicles going by you at 70 plus miles per hour.

[00:13:20] All the while you have someone in front of you or a citizen and you're trying to do your job. Here they were trying to effectuate a lawful pickup order for this particular individual and

[00:13:34] they're doing that, the three of them, while other cars are zooming by, while also trying to preserve the safety of not only themselves, the other vehicles on the road and really the person that they're talking to in the car. That person's safety is equally as important

[00:13:53] to the officers in that situation. A patrol officer would be someone better to talk to than me about exactly what that is and what those dangers are like. I think even as a civilian myself, anyone with common sense can see how extremely dangerous that

[00:14:11] situation is. Correct. I just appreciate you, since you worked so closely with members of the Law Enforcement Compute, I wanted our listeners to hear just from your perspective what you hear, probably the stories you hear in real time and just probably daily stories of just the number

[00:14:28] of, aside from the incidents that are unfolding in front of them, but just the environment and the circumstances that they're in, particularly on a side of a road late at night. They're just danger all around. I just appreciate you taking a moment because I think it's

[00:14:43] important in these interviews, in these discussions that we're trying to have, just to talk about as much as we can, circumstances that these things are happening and they're not happening in a quiet field on a beautiful afternoon where everything can be seen.

[00:14:57] These are just intensely complex situations and I just wanted to once again touch on that, so I appreciate you answering my question. Yeah, I think case law recognizes that too from a legal perspective. Case law recognizes that these

[00:15:13] situations are rapidly evolving in very tense situations. You and I, we go to work and we sit at a desk, they're doing their job under the threat of bodily harm, even unfortunately death.

[00:15:27] I don't think it's possible to give enough respect to the men and women that do that stuff. We've talked a lot about this kind of issue in the past and lack of prosecution of certain criminals and over prosecution on certain situations. I do want to break down

[00:15:45] a little bit more about this use of force expert. This is somebody that the county has used before, he was used in the trial of Philando Kess and in Mary Moriarty herself in September of 2023

[00:15:58] was quoted as saying we have already identified a use of force expert type of expert who examines evidence in nearly every case where an officer uses force. Their independent review is a critical part of our process and then goes on to obviously in October,

[00:16:12] this is when nobles made the judgment months before the murder charges were filed against the trooper and then we get down to know when Moriarty filed these charges that there was no mention of this

[00:16:25] opinion. And then when asked about it, she said we were able to determine that charges were appropriate without the use of an expert. Now I know this is all relatively new and

[00:16:33] you guys are finding out about this but let's get into a little bit about how, from my understanding and correct me if I'm wrong, but these when a prosecutor or a defense when an expert

[00:16:44] is brought up as a witness they're not supposed to go in with a bias. They're not hiring the person, they're not supposed to be hiring an expert who is going to be just giving them what they want

[00:16:54] to hear. They're supposed to have it like she said an independent review. So in this case, nobles has now said that the prosecutor officer is trying to pressure him into reconsidering. That's wild. Is this surprising and shocking to you? Is this something you've seen before

[00:17:08] and let's chat a little bit about how this can impact future cases? I've talked to a number of prosecutors since the these revelations came out earlier in the week and every single one of them that I've talked to has been really disappointed is a two-week

[00:17:28] word, two-week of a word. They have been shocked that a prosecutor would do exactly what you're talking about, which would be to try to move an expert over to their side of the case.

[00:17:45] Prosecution and prosecutors just to nerd out on you a little bit, their client in any case is justice. Their ethical obligation is to justice and what is the just result in a particular case. Their obligation is not to one side or the other. Their obligation is not to

[00:18:08] find a conviction. Their obligation is not to bring charges no matter what. Their obligation is to look at what is just and when you see prosecution trying to persuade, trying to move

[00:18:22] an expert over to their side of the case, one can't help but see a bias in that, which is really disappointing. It's something that cannot happen in our system, in our justice system.

[00:18:43] So to answer your question, I haven't seen that before. You did see a little bit of that in the Chauvin matter regarding the medical examiner being pressured on their opinions and

[00:18:55] what resulted from that, but something I have never seen it with regard to a use of force expert. Like we talked about, an expert is designed to educate a jury on a topic that the normal

[00:19:13] juror would not understand. So here the idea of an expert is to educate the jury as to what a reasonable officer is. The standard from case law that's now being codified in Minnesota is essentially what would an objectively reasonable officer do in this situation. And that's what

[00:19:33] an expert is hired to tell the state first, then tell the jury, judge, defense counsel. So here, ideally you would have an independent neutral expert take a look at the case, tell the prosecution,

[00:19:51] look I think this was justified. I think he did what he had to do to save this guy and the prosecution would say, okay thank you, thank you for educating us on that and

[00:20:02] then there wouldn't be charges. So it appears from what's been filed publicly that's not how this particular interaction went with Mr. Noble and like I said, it's troubling. So you've spoken a little bit to how defense has worked as chatted with Noble. What happens next?

[00:20:23] What can we expect to see? I would, I guess the motions are currently before Judge Garcia who's has an excellent reputation as a jurist and the judge is going to decide what we do with these

[00:20:38] recent filings. I think there's a hearing coming up on the 21st where the court will hear argument about that and the judge will have a certain period of time to make a decision about the

[00:20:49] motion to quash, about the motion to compel filed by the defense and the motion for a deposition of Mr. Noble. I think from there, I don't have a crystal ball to look at defense strategy but I have heard other legal experts opine that Mr. Noble's testimony

[00:21:09] could be the basis for a dismissal of charges by Judge Garcia. If you could share with us a little bit before we close here, I just want to just talk a little bit more about

[00:21:19] some of the members of law enforcement you serve. What are you hearing from officers right now? People in that you serve in the capacity that you do, what's their perspective right now? What's their feeling during this process? I can, everything seems to be coming

[00:21:38] together here to produce an environment in which our officers are afraid. They're afraid if they do their job, that they'll go to prison. They're afraid that they'll be shot themselves, that they won't go home to their families and in my role talking to officers immediately following

[00:22:02] something like this, I can hear it in their voice that they are terrified. We've had instances where someone wasn't even injured and I can tell that officer is completely shook up and even if no one was hurt they're worried am I going to prison? Is this going?

[00:22:21] And it produces a really problematic environment for them to do their jobs and we of course see ripple effects of that in our communities where if we agree that the police are necessary,

[00:22:38] that we need the police in a civilized society, we have to come together to help them to alleviate some of this fear and I think that starts on this particular case but really any case just making

[00:22:55] sure that they know if they do the right thing, if they do their job, they're going to be okay and I don't feel as though they have that sense right now.

[00:23:10] Thank you for the work that you do. What can we, Becky and I and the general public do to be more helpful and supportive to the work, the hard work that so many good members of law enforcement,

[00:23:22] first responders are doing every day for us out there? I think they need to hear our support. They need to hear from us that we are supporting them. They need to hear public pushback against

[00:23:35] things like this particular prosecution where they need us on their side on this thing so as far as what you guys can do, you're doing it, you're using your platform to spread information,

[00:23:50] average citizens just pay attention, speak out, be a part of a solution, be a part of getting that rhetoric surrounding law enforcement back to where it should be and it's not going to

[00:24:06] happen overnight but I think we need to be persistent about it and the best thing the public can do is let law enforcement know that we support them. Thank you, that's great advice

[00:24:20] and a good reminder for us all. We certainly will continue to do that and we appreciate you coming on to speak about this issue. Unfortunate situation, we obviously have to watch it play

[00:24:30] out and we'll certainly be discussing it as it does. It's just really hard to see the politicization of the county attorney's office in this situation especially when so much is at stake so

[00:24:44] thank you for your time, thank you for all you do, good luck with the rest of your meetings on Capitol Hill, thank you for continuing to be a good advocate again with our members of Congress, with the public and representing our police officers so well. We're really grateful.

[00:24:57] Thank you guys and thank you for having me. Keep up the good work and anytime you want to talk I'm here. Perfect. Becky we just interviewed Stephen Furch with MPPOA, your take on the interview.

[00:25:13] I think it was great obviously it's a really tough situation and I can only imagine being that close and how frustrating it is because it's frustrating to watch from afar. I don't think it's new that some of these offices, a county attorney of Pennippin County,

[00:25:29] use their office for political reasons at times. This is something that's more blatant than I remember seeing in the past. I think it is very clearly they didn't like what the expert had

[00:25:42] to say. They tried to bury it and thankfully it's now coming to light that this force of use expert who again they used previously and used again and it's supposed to be an independent situation,

[00:25:54] it's supposed to be not biased, it's supposed to be somebody who comes in and looks at the facts, looks at the situation and then Stephen said shares that with the jury, with the judge and to see that this individual found that in its case,

[00:26:09] Ryan Trooper, Ryan Landrigan was acting to save his partner's life who was being dragged by a car on I-94 with this person who is supposedly fleeing and hearing Stephen share at the end

[00:26:22] the concern and how afraid these officers are. I just cannot even fathom how tough that situation is that you are supposed to be prosecuting crime, you're supposed to be protecting and serving and

[00:26:35] this is what these officers are out doing. Here's the situation, what is the alternative in this situation? He again was trying to save his partner's life, he fired his handgun. The goal of that

[00:26:47] is not to kill the criminal or the person who was pulled over in this case, again trying to act and as the expert said in a manner that a reasonable officer would act in and then to have that be

[00:27:00] squashed and hidden and said that it wasn't relevant to move forward and charge this officer with murder is just, it's really concerning and it is not just concerning in this situation but what it could mean for the future of these sort of trials that these

[00:27:16] reasonable use of force is dismissed when it's found to be reasonable by police officers and we've seen this targeting of our officers that do fund the police movement and just already struggling to keep officers in their roles and hire new ones. It's really concerning and I'm glad

[00:27:33] Stephen was here to give his insight on the matter. Do you think, where do you think this puts Moriarty's standing right now? I think she's in trouble. I think it's really tough even for Liberals Democrats who may support her. This really undermines the office, it undermines her

[00:27:49] efforts, it undermines everything they've done and do going forward. I think there's going to be a microscope on a magnifying glass looking at every little thing they've done to date and going forward. There is a Republican push to have her resign. I don't think that's

[00:28:05] a push too far. I want to read a little bit about a joint statement from Minnesota GOP representatives. They say Mary Moriarty has coddled criminals and engaged in a way that could only be described as selective and politically motivated prosecution of law enforcement.

[00:28:20] This latest resident revelation is shocking and shows the extent of Moriarty's desperation to prosecute and villainize state patrol trooper who acted in a dangerous situation to save the life of his partner, ignoring and even attempting to persuade use of force expert hired by her

[00:28:35] office to change his expert opinion to fit her predetermined narrative as a disturbing abuse of power and calls her integrity and the integrity of the office into question. I think that is a greatly written statement. I think it hits on the different facts of the matter

[00:28:50] and I think it highlights that she really, she went into this looking to prosecute, looking to convict, looking to put this trooper in jail regardless of the facts of the situation and that's not what a county attorney is meant to do. Correct. And I think this one,

[00:29:07] we have discussed this before that no one on this podcast, if we ever are taking, there's room for improvement in any profession out there. In any profession. I will just say to you

[00:29:18] this one is the more that's come out about this case in terms of how Penn State County Attorney Mary Moriarty has handled it has been concerning to see Republican legislators go up there and

[00:29:29] openly call for her to resign. That is not something that I cannot think of the last time or of any time I've seen elected officials in mass do that with such a, in such a,

[00:29:41] it's, I understand that politics is involved in this such, it was she's DFL endorsed, Republicans spoke up but we've had Democrats on this podcast who have talked and raised concerns about the approach that Mary Moriarty is taking in some of these cases and

[00:29:56] I understand that this is what she campaigned on. I understand that she campaigned on this kind of progressive bent. I just think this is too far. I think that this is and she may say that this is she's fulfilling her campaign promises that she's following through on what

[00:30:13] she said she was going to do, not this stuff because this is I want to be careful. I'm not a lawyer but I've listened to a lot of legal analysis this week about this, about her approach

[00:30:24] to this case. And there's a number of concerns. We're very curious how this case goes. But this you would think that the shooting of two police officers in Bernsville and then a first responder three police, three members of the law enforcement community and first responder

[00:30:38] community were just buried just recently. Then to have this situation there is a discussion that Minnesotans need to have at a policy level at a responsible policy level about how we value law enforcement. And we can have a global discussion on that. This is not balanced.

[00:30:55] This is not balanced. It's very clear that this isn't balanced and this is going to be a number, this is going to have a ripple effect. This is a long term effect that this is going to have on

[00:31:05] the safety of our state in the community. And you laid out in just clear detail as you are articulating the details of this case. This is a 1.50 a.m. in the morning stop on busy

[00:31:18] Interstate 94. And the circumstances of that stop and what went on and how it occurred, it is just difficult. I don't think it's ever easy to be a member of law enforcement. I think that it's never easy. But the environment that law enforcement is engaged in right now

[00:31:36] in Minnesota when there's prosecutors willing, in this particular instance I think, to put their thumb on the scale of justice, to tilt it in a particular advantage against law enforcement, I think is incredibly problematic. And I'm so thankful for you

[00:31:49] for helping arrange and get this guest that we had today to have Stephen on it. And we can continue to be a voice and to use our platform to talk about these issues in a responsible

[00:31:58] way. But we're clearly on the side of wanting law enforcement officers and first responders who want to work within the rules in the system to be able to do that and to protect

[00:32:07] people out there every single day. And this is just a stretch too far and it's gone too far. And I'm just glad that we had this guest, unfortunately for the circumstances though. Absolutely. And I think like you mentioned, there's always room for improvement, right?

[00:32:22] I don't think we're saying that all cops are good. There's not some bad apples out there. There's not more training that can be done. But what we can't be doing is creating these instances, like he said, where people are afraid to do their job. People are afraid to

[00:32:41] pull folks over, use what they need to do to keep the other motorists on that road safe, to keep the driver safe, to keep their officer safe. This is a situation where the facts were pushed aside and the prosecution was

[00:32:57] meant to steamroll. And that's just certainly not what we're looking to do here. Facts need to be looked at. The situation needs to be figured out. Experts need to be listened to if they're hired for a job or we can't cherry pick

[00:33:11] those situations. And Moriarty's office is clearly, she's clearly abusing her position as the county attorney of Hennepin County. And I'm concerned if there are not repercussions for this, if this just is allowed to be washed away, which I don't expect it is certainly troubling for her

[00:33:29] office, I would be concerned about what this would mean for further prosecutions of these incidences down the line. But the other message is, what does this send to the criminal element in this state? My dad always reminded me criminals read the newspapers to Michael.

[00:33:45] And the criminal element that the concern I have is about, I want everyone to be safe out there. I want law enforcement officers to be safe. I want people that are driving to be safe.

[00:33:55] I want people that there are lawful stops that law enforcement officers make every day that don't involve an escalate to the site with circumstances. And 99%, if not more of the stops that law enforcement officers make do not involve shootings. So the circumstances of this case,

[00:34:12] and I'm glad that you laid it out so well, but that it also does send a message on these types of stops, the danger of these stops and how they can be approached. This case is really going to send,

[00:34:24] it's really something that could is really spiraling out of control. I think from a PR standpoint, I think it is from a legal standpoint too, you had some, we should reference some of MPPOA statements that you had there. Yeah, absolutely. General counsel

[00:34:39] of MPPOA, who works with Steven shared as a former prosecutor, what we learned today is simply appalling the Hennepin County attorney is trying to disregard and hide the true and honest opinion of an expert who said an officer's actions were justified. This raises questions about the

[00:34:54] impartiality and objectivity of the prosecution of this case. It is important for prosecutors to consider all available evidence and expert opinions before deciding to charge someone, especially in cases involving the use of force by law enforcement officers.

[00:35:08] These new developments make it clear that the Hennepin County attorney was going to charge a police officer with a crime and no one, even expert secured by her, was going to get in the way.

[00:35:19] That's pretty reason. That's a pretty, one of the things that we do is we analyze and cut through the spin. That's a pretty fair statement. I absolutely agree. I think that impartiality and objectivity, like the credibility, how do they move forward? You're somebody who has

[00:35:34] worked in communications, who's worked in PR. How does if she doesn't resign, how does the Hennepin County attorney's office and Hennepin County, Mary Moriarty, move forward to try to regain some level of trust and credibility within the community

[00:35:55] that she is the best person and is fit to do this job? I don't think she resigned, but I think that, I also think that it's, I think what I think will happen is, I don't think she resigns. I think that she's likely challenged

[00:36:10] by a more mainstream Democrat. I think she gets challenged next time around. I think that let's just set the table for a second. The danger that Mary Moriarty presents, aside from, let's set aside the legal case which we've discussed. Let's just talk about it from

[00:36:27] the political spectrum, from the political perspective for a minute, which is not as significant as the other stuff obviously, but she is a little bit of a liability right now to Democrats. She's DFL endorsed. I think, and correct me if you think I'm wrong, but

[00:36:40] I think instinctively there's some issues that the public generally assigns better to Republicans and Democrats. I think Democrats get assigned maybe education issues better and Republicans sometimes they look to a little bit more crime and criminal justice.

[00:36:54] This, she is going to be a liability thing for Democrats if she's, this continues to happen. On the flip side, she could also, one of the things she also could do is she could make people like Attorney General Keith Ellison look reasonable on crime if he

[00:37:09] moves to the center on some of her stuff. But I think that this could be a real issue for, it could be a real election issue because I don't think she resigns. Recalls,

[00:37:18] the recall standard is incredibly high in the state. So I think she's there and I think that this is a conflict that's not going to go away very soon because we've seen Moriarty come out

[00:37:29] and defend a lot of the criticisms that have come to her office as well. We've had victims families speak out about her approach to the criminal justice system in her role as county attorney. We've had law enforcement members of the law enforcement community speak out

[00:37:44] in terms of her approach. The only side that isn't speaking out against Moriarty, it's the criminals. It's the criminals. Nearly every other facet of the criminal justice system has spoken out against her except the criminals and not trying to be cute or trite. It's just

[00:37:57] it's worth noting that we have law enforcement members, we have victims families speaking out and law enforcement and it's the criminals that are probably the most happy with her being in that office. Before we move on, you just mentioned Keith Ellison. Do you with this?

[00:38:13] Because I agree, I think that public safety has been and will continue to be something Republicans are talking about on the campaign trail as we head towards the election in November. Do you think would we expect a walls or Ellison statement on this? Do you expect they're

[00:38:26] going to speak out or hope that it gets pushed under the rug and move on with some news of the day? I think maybe at some point, I think it's reasonable to ask particularly because Ellison has intervened

[00:38:38] in some of the work of does have a role. If we remember during the 2022 election, the last election cycle, Jim Schultz was running for Attorney General. And I think we just we

[00:38:47] spoke about this on our podcast that he talked about the role of the Attorney General and how he wanted there to be a very active role in terms of what crime criminal justice and being

[00:38:57] Minnesota's moving the office from being the top lawyer to more of the top prosecutor or the top cop. Ellison pushed off on that, but very quickly after the election there was a case where

[00:39:09] his office needed to step in and the governor has also messaged on some of that stuff. I think that Mary Moriarty represents both a political problem for the Democrat, but also an opportunity.

[00:39:21] She can moderate, she can make some of the positions that Ellison and others in the DFL have look more centrist because she's so far to the left. On the downside though, if the overall DFL

[00:39:35] messaging machine or the Democrats on a whole get hooked into her kind of this type of issue, it could be a real problem. I think it was a good principled position that Republicans

[00:39:47] spoke out at the Capitol this past week on calling on Moriarty to resign, but it's also a good political issue. And just because it's a good political issue doesn't mean it's bad policy.

[00:39:56] It's good policy why they spoke out, but there's also a political, I think there's a political opportunity for Republicans on this in an election year. And I don't believe that Democrats want this election cycle to be anything else other than I don't think they wanted to

[00:40:11] be about criminal justice, the criminal justice system in Hannah McConn because Moriarty is not up for reelection. And so she's sitting there and what is she going to do? I don't know. She's not, I have not found, I have not seen Mary Moriarty to be thoughtful and introspective

[00:40:29] about her approach. Anytime she has faced criticism, she has doubled down on her approach to justify it. And some people might find that refreshing. I find it frustrating because I think it's important that elected officials have their core beliefs, but they also can recalibrate in where

[00:40:46] they need to and adjust and dial in their leadership approach. She has not in this case is just another example of it. As Stephen mentioned, it sounds like there's a hearing before the end of the

[00:40:56] month. So I believe we will be watching that discussing any updates as they come by, frustrating, inappropriate, flabbergasted so many different words to describe the situation. But we will discuss more as it comes. Next up, we are going national. Last week was the state of

[00:41:20] the union. Now, we didn't preview this like we have done in the past. I think have we done so? We would have said that President Biden needs to come out energized, forceful, excited,

[00:41:37] and really that it would be the kickoff speech for his 2024 campaign. I think that's what we saw. My take is that's what we saw, that his team did what they needed to do with this speech.

[00:41:52] He delivered it in the way that he needed to. I want to hear your opinions. You had a tweet about his energy and stamina. So share your thoughts on how Biden did. I was impressed. I was impressed because you're right, we have done some preview episodes talking

[00:42:10] about state of the state. This is an election year so there's a lot of great content that we're producing. State of the Union, excuse me, State of the Union speech. Had we done the preview

[00:42:19] episode, I would have said the exact thing. I think that's the measuring stick by which he's going to be measured by and by all accounts he did it. I don't care what he took.

[00:42:29] If they gave him a Red Bull, if they gave him some Jold Cola, it worked. His message delivery. First of all, let's talk about Biden for a second. Biden is 80, he's 81. He is a stutterer so he has

[00:42:43] some verbal, he's had some verbal issues in the past and he deals with that. I got to tell you something as if I'm watching that and this is something that we've talked about before, we would have said that's the stick he would have been measured by and he,

[00:42:56] by all accounts he did it. He came in, he was vibrant. He, as vibrant as an 81-year-old could be, I was impressed as I watched it and I noted on Twitter, I hope to be as vibrant as he is at 81

[00:43:11] and as I noted on Twitter, I hope to be that vibrant as 51. It was 10 o'clock at night when he was given that speech. It's a struggle for me. I don't know how he did it but he did

[00:43:21] it and he nailed it. That's the thing, politics is about expectations. I think he met and exceeded expectations. That is a type of speech. I want to get your take two on this. That's the type

[00:43:32] of speech that has all the trappings of being net positive. It can be positive for his campaign, although it's official actives to do the State of the Union but from a campaign perspective and from just an overall kind of I'm in control here in the government,

[00:43:49] there was that he clearly delivered that. He had a good rapport with the members that were in the House chamber. He was engaged. There was a good balance and so I'd give him an A plus.

[00:44:00] I think he solid A A plus. I don't know what more he could have done. We can't dial back his age but just in terms of the presentation, I think he did a great job and I think mission

[00:44:12] accomplished. If you're the campaign staff or the campaign staff or the official staff that's watching it, I think I would say probably Becky Mission accomplished. Absolutely. They popped their champagne. It was one I think that obviously there have been a lot of concerns about his mental

[00:44:28] capacity, his competency, his stamina and I think anybody who was teetering of can I give him my vote, can he do this? It would have given me more confidence in that situation. Before we get

[00:44:42] into the actual some of the content and issues he had done, Republicans are now complaining that he had too much energy. Former Republican White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, who is somebody who I actually think is a very decent messenger, good voice for the Republicans.

[00:44:58] He's very active on Twitter. He wrote, no one is going to remember a single thing Biden says tonight. Everyone is going to remember how weirdly amped up he is and how bizarrely fast he's

[00:45:07] speaking. You're damned if you do damned if you don't, right? I would not call Biden a fast speaker. He has some uneven tones because of his stutter that he has. I want to be very

[00:45:19] respectful of that, but it was a great presentation. I cannot imagine we both have written speeches and we've both done this type of stuff. I cannot imagine the level of stress that there's always a little bit of normal stress that happens, particularly when you're doing, when you're

[00:45:35] preparing speeches and someone goes out there and has to go in front of the cameras and do that stuff. I can't think of a scenario by which they weren't stressed, but I also think it was a

[00:45:45] home run. If what we're talking about after the speech is that, if there's the criticism is that he was too amped up, at least they're not saying what would have happened if he would

[00:45:55] have stumbled? What would have happened if he would have Governor Dayton with all due respect? He had an incident at a state of the union in Minnesota where he had collapsed a bit

[00:46:05] during a state of the union, state of the state speech in Minnesota. But there had been any type of minuscule thing that would have happened to Joe Biden, a stumble, a misstatement of substance,

[00:46:18] that would have been all over the news and I would have probably would have bet. If we would have taken a bet, obviously we would have wanted, I think it's fair to say we always want the presidents to succeed regardless of their political party because if they succeed,

[00:46:32] the country will succeed. But Biden, it was a home run. If that's what they're complaining about, that it was too much energy, goodness gracious. There's an in some audiences, I think it's fair

[00:46:41] to say Becky, you're not going to win no matter what you do. That's funny. I was, I'm with Mass Talker by Mamaways growing up yelling at me to slow down and so even on this

[00:46:50] podcast I have to work on it sometimes. But can you imagine, even as understanding you're the most powerful person in the free world, you're sitting in a room with the Supreme Court with the entirety or almost entirety of the Congress, all of these really special

[00:47:06] honored guests with millions of folks watching? Are you not going to be maybe speaking a little fast trying to get through? It's also like an hour and a half speech. So if I don't want to go to

[00:47:15] bed regardless of how I am dubbed up because he's working to get through. So it's just wild to me to see that comment. Correct. But I also think, yes, but what I also think he did a very

[00:47:25] good job of was baiting Republicans in to engaging him on some issues. He and that broke up some of the cadence of the speech that allowed for a little bit of more freestyle, that allowed for

[00:47:36] it to be a little less structured and a little bit more ad libbed, which I think is the challenge with Biden. I think that his campaign team and the White House staff probably want

[00:47:47] him to go out and give as any comms people always do. And there's nothing wrong with that, but comms people as we both have been always want the principal to go out there and

[00:47:55] just give the speech and get back in and not dilly-dally. There was some of that there that he engaged with. I thought that him walking down, by the way, I just have to say the job I've

[00:48:04] always wanted, I've wanted a couple jobs in life. I've always wanted to be the commissioner major league baseball, even though I don't know a ton about baseball, but I've always wanted to

[00:48:12] be the clerk of the house or who gets to announce the sergeant at arms of the house who gets to announce Madam Speaker, Mr. Speaker, President of the United States. So I think it's just a great moment and always an American politics. But just imagine again,

[00:48:26] he'd walked down, stumbled, tripped, taken a misstep. Any of the normal things that people do, that's the microscope that he was under. I would also say, of anything, I'm assuming you saw it, but him coming down the aisle and bumping into Marjorie Taylor Greene and her outfit,

[00:48:42] the way he looked has become a little bit of a meme. I think that he played to the crowd, which in this particular instance, playing to the crowd was also good for TV because it had

[00:48:55] a bit of theatrics. He was engaging. It was like he was debating the entire Republican, of the entire House and Republican Senate conferences at one point. And I think it was an absolute home run. Sure, it would be great. I think, again, I don't speak for you,

[00:49:10] but I think it would be great if the president was younger, if we had some candidates that were running or one of the major parties was nominating someone who was a little bit younger. But this

[00:49:20] is what we have. I thought it was a great speech, a great presentation on his speech. And I think your point with some of that back and forth, it did show how nimble and quick-witted

[00:49:30] he still can be. We've seen some missteps with that and some anger and some issues with his interaction with press or other folks in the past. But this was great. Again, as you said,

[00:49:42] sitting behind the member or the elected at times, anytime you have them in a situation giving a speech and there's that situation, you're always crunching wondering what's going to happen. While I don't always agree with what he was saying, he again delivered in that situation.

[00:49:57] I just want to bring this back for a second. So last April, I was hit by a car and I had to take some time off from the podcast to do some speech therapy in the aftermath.

[00:50:06] One of the issues that I had that I discussed in the podcast was my timing was off. I was having a trouble getting my timing and my cadence correct with, I was just off. And I've noticed

[00:50:18] that I've been since I had to overcome that issue. I've noticed that a lot more in just the speech patterns of Biden because again, his speech and his presentation is something that people bring up a lot. I think that he was on message. He synced

[00:50:33] when he was engaging with the crowd, when he was engaging with the members of the House and the Senate and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Supreme Court who just sit there. By the way,

[00:50:40] can we just talk about that for a second? The Supreme Court's there. I can't, if you're a rock star, you want the front rows to just be vibrant and full of life and that's where you're going

[00:50:49] to feed off energy. You got to give a state of the union address and sitting in the front crowd, sitting in the front rows are a bunch of military brass and a bunch of Supreme Court

[00:50:58] Justices who basically do nothing other than just sit there because they're not there, they're there to observe and to be a part of it. They're not there really to participate. Talk about a rough crowd. Talk about a tough way to give a speech, but his dialogue,

[00:51:12] his exchanges with the crowd were well timed and something that I had to deal with earlier this last year where you would say something or Jeff would say something or a guest would

[00:51:21] say something and my cadence was off. He was able to keep up with that. And so I think I don't know how much of that was planned because you can't plan for what the crowd's

[00:51:31] going to do, but I thought he did a great job and I was really looking for that. We had not discussed it, but I remembered our analysis on his last state of the union and we had had that

[00:51:42] kind of same approach, but I thought he did great content aside. I thought his delivery was great. Let's check content real quick. Before we, the specifics, there is some criticism that it was

[00:51:53] two campaign. I would argue in an election year that is the job, right? Aside from saying go to JoeBiden.com and donate. That is what this is for an incumbent president running for re-election.

[00:52:08] We saw it, we've seen it with Trump, we've seen it with Obama, we've seen it with Bush. It's always that way. I think it's a hyper partisan divided time and so there's a little extra criticism

[00:52:18] on some of that and there is just a larger divide in some of that. Your take two campaign ask or... I believe partisanship is good. I think campaigning is good. I don't want to sound like

[00:52:30] too much like Gordon Gekko, but it is. It's good. I don't think there's anything wrong with it. It would be a mistake if it wasn't a part of it. I don't think it was too partisan.

[00:52:40] I don't think it was too campaigning. He made a number of appropriate references and this is the advantages of being the president. The advantages of being the president is you get to do this type

[00:52:49] of stuff. I think it was well balanced and let me just say... To flip it back a second, Marjorie Taylor Greene did have basically a Trump uniform on the House chamber, including a hat.

[00:53:05] You worked on Capitol Hill, which I always like to remind people. Do you wear a lot of ball caps on the floor of the House of Representatives? I don't even know that technically during session or during when they're on the floor voting. I don't know the hats are

[00:53:19] part of the decor. I don't know if that's loud. I heard her make a statement that she had been asked to remove the hat or go to a different part of the chamber, which she did not

[00:53:29] do. Again, I think when you have someone that's literally wearing the uniform of Donald Trump on the campaign floor, on the floor of the House of Representatives, it's difficult to talk about the partisanship. I don't think it was overly partisan. I think there's a time and a place

[00:53:45] for partisanship, but the election is this November as I frequently like to tell people. This is campaign season. For him to not have that type of contrast, I think would have been a missed opportunity. I think maybe we would have been critical if he had not been more.

[00:54:00] I think it was the right balance. Right. A couple of the things he talked about when I hear if anything else stands out to you, started with some topics. Russia, he said my message to President Putin is simple.

[00:54:12] We will not walk away. We will not bow down. I will not bow down. Now, do I think that is contradictory to a lot of things he said over the last 10,

[00:54:22] 15 years? Sure. But if I'm looking at my president who I want to be a strong commander in chief, there you go, man. Yes, I thought it was—I thought the message was spot on.

[00:54:34] January 6th said Trump is trying to bury the truth. I don't disagree on that. I think that is again partisan, sure, but a good reminder to folks out there. Then the Dabba's decision,

[00:54:45] which I think is obviously something that he needed to hit on, said many of you in this chamber and my predecessor are promising to pass a national ban on reproductive freedom. My God, what freedoms would you take away next?

[00:54:58] And again, I have shared my stance on that, my personal views. I think it was a good rhetorical question. I think it was a good way of looking at it. I think it is a reminder

[00:55:08] to voters on this issue, what is at stake? Because I think it is a clear contrast of what Biden stands for and whether it's Trump or whatever Republican unfortunately stands for, especially because the Republicans still haven't freaking figured out. There stands a messaging on

[00:55:25] this. One of the things I also think he did a good job of is in those phrases, it engaged the crowd. Now that has been a change. I watched a fair number of State of the Unions. You would

[00:55:36] be surprised to know that I have been watching them for quite some time. And there has been a change in the decorum of the State of the Union where there has been much more crowd engagement.

[00:55:48] And so we have seen some of that happen before. And I think that Biden took advantage of him pulling in some of those words that he knew would get a reaction from some of the Republican

[00:55:59] members and it worked and it provided some good contrast. I just want to share one other story about the State of the Union, the State of the State and go back to Governor

[00:56:08] Dayton for a second. Governor Dayton, when I worked at the Senate, Governor Dayton gave a state of the State address in 2011 beginning of the 2011 session. And he mentioned in the State of the

[00:56:20] State that he did not want Republicans to shut down the State for a tax cut. It was, I don't know who came up with that phrase, who came up with that idea? It was not a

[00:56:32] discussion point that Republicans wanted to we're going to die on the Hill of tax cuts in that particular session. But when Governor Dayton threw that phrase out, he literally presented

[00:56:44] Republicans with the idea of if Dayton doesn't want it, we don't want, if he doesn't want us to shut down the State for a tax cut, maybe we should do it then. And it was a great reverse psychology

[00:56:55] because once he said it, once he put that measuring stick out there, once he threw that kind of mean that Republicans just dove on it. And I saw, there's a great strategy by Dayton and Biden did somewhat similar thing. He threw out some phrases, literally, I think,

[00:57:10] to just engage the crowd. And if you're watching at home, Becky, and you're hearing the president say, my God, what freedoms will you take away next? He wanted allowed. When he said that,

[00:57:20] he got some point there was some arguments back and we've gotten the classic, I don't know if people yell lie like they've done in the past. But there was some retorts. And of course,

[00:57:30] Speaker Mike Johnson was behind him, rolling his eyes. This wasn't planned to be asked, but what's your take on what would you be doing if at some point, and this is of absolute possibility, you're the Speaker of the House or you're the Vice President? The President is speaking?

[00:57:49] What would you be doing in the background if they made a comment that you didn't approve of? Would you roll your eyes or would you scoff like he did? Probably write Mike Johnson's role

[00:57:59] is to be a leader of the Republican Party. And so when the opposing party's leader is saying something, you disagree it, you can't just sit calmly and clap along. There is some expectation

[00:58:12] in the back, probably why they do it because it makes for good TV implements Nancy Pelosi, Taryn off the script, all of that. I feel like it's expected. I feel like it's you have to

[00:58:22] right? I don't know that you can sit there and not do that. But I loved your story about Biden because I'm sorry about Dayton because I think there is a lot to that in this Dobbs decision

[00:58:34] quote as well. I think it was a good one. It reminded folks in the room of that the abortion issue is still going to be here. The Democrats definitely want it to stay top of folks minds.

[00:58:47] And it also is a reminder to voters, to folks tuning in. Again, what is at stake there and what potentially could go from Republicans trying to police different things in his words or thoughts of that? Do you think you'd be able to stay straight face though sitting behind?

[00:59:07] I don't think I would. I just want to point out one tweet that was maybe one of my favorite tweets of all time, a gentleman tweeted out during the state of the state,

[00:59:15] Speaker Mike Johnson looks like one of the kids in dead poet society who Robin Williams just couldn't reach. And I was almost crying. I was laughing so hard. It was just and it's true.

[00:59:27] Speaker Mike Johnson looks like one of the kids in dead poet society who Robin Williams just couldn't reach. It was just fantastic. My goodness, I love X slash Twitter, particularly during that

[00:59:37] during some of the these live events. And overall, I would give it I would say Biden did a good job. I think Biden did a great job for advancing the ball for the Biden Harris ticket. He did a great job. Now we need to talk about

[00:59:52] Yes, the Republican reaction. I'm laughing already. Hi, yeah. I just rewatched it this morning. So when we talk about it, the com staffer and how you watch your boss deliver something there is I would have applauded. And again, this is not

[01:00:08] about any of the actual words said it's about the tone and demeanor to start out with. So Alabama Senator Katie Brett gave the response. I'm going to let you kick this off. Why? Why? First of all, I was stunned. I stunned. I thought I was watching

[01:00:27] a very slow and painful moving car crash happen in front of me. At one point I walked up to the TV set because I was still I was wearing an eyepatch time. I walked up TV set and I said,

[01:00:40] is she staying? Is she in a kitchen? She's in a kitchen right now. And I just was floored. And then my children were watching it and they're like, what's going on here? My son in particular was

[01:00:51] like, what's going on right now? There was a Saturday Night Live does a lot of great skits. And I think there was a legitimate question as to whether I flip the channel and this was

[01:01:02] actually the GOP response. It was just painful to watch. It was just absolutely painful to watch. When we start with the kitchen because it out. Yes. Yes, please give me your take on the

[01:01:19] kitchen. I'll start with saying I understand what they were trying to attempt to do here. They're trying to make her a real person that can connect with real parents in this world, right?

[01:01:35] Here she is. I'm just a mom. I'm a wife. This is so important. Now, I'm a wife. I'm a mom. I'm not discounting it. It's freaking hard. You were here though as one of the 435 people in the

[01:01:50] one of the 100 senators of the United States of America. This is why you're here today. You are here to talk as your role. Yes, you can relate and that I think is a pertinent

[01:02:01] part of her story and the message Republicans are trying to get across. But you put her in a kitchen and we are instantly telling the left and I would say moderate Republican women or moderate voters.

[01:02:17] This is where Republicans think that women should be. We're just catching her in the middle of making her homemade snacks and granola bars for her kids, right? This is just it's cute. It's too cute and it just doesn't work. And I think again, we go to the

[01:02:30] credibility of it. I think it just takes down a notch. And now I will also say this as I've worked for campaigns. Jason Lewis is one I worked on Senate Second Congressional District. We did ads

[01:02:42] with him sitting in his kitchen. That was a situation where we were trying to take down the fact of being an incumbent member and make him relatable, sitting around a table with members of his community. I think there's a time and a place for that kind of

[01:02:57] visual. I don't think this was it. And I think it really just distracted from the smile distracted more, but I think it really just distracted and it was really frustrating for me to see that.

[01:03:10] Yes, the kitchen was frustrating. I get the thought process and I get the thought process. I also will say on paper it makes sense in terms of okay, who's giving the state of the union? The state of the union is being given by an 81 year old male

[01:03:25] former United States Senator who's been in government life for, as Senator Britt pointed out, longer than she'd been alive. And then so you contrast that with a young female United States Senator. I think they just did not think truly think out or I think in some instances

[01:03:44] may have overcoached both the presentation of her speech and where it was to just fail the connect. I think there's a number of ways that you can show, that you can relate. I just don't think

[01:03:58] forcing or putting a female United States Senator in a kitchen in the dynamics of that speech, I just think it was just off. It just was really off. What about just in her office

[01:04:11] with her kids hand painted or finger painted picture behind her showing I'm a mom here's this. I completely agree. I think a young female top notch needed to be who the response was from.

[01:04:24] Not another old white guy. I think that's great. So let's get into a little bit about her demeanor throughout this. That was just wild too, right? You tweeted a preview tweet that

[01:04:35] she did saying, Hey y'all I'm about to do the response to the state of the union. Be sure to tune in. Great. Normal. Sounded confident. Not smiling too much. Sounded awesome. Now I want to

[01:04:46] first put a put a pin and women smiling too much. I know as a criticism, you should smile more or don't smile a lot. Is that a thing? Yeah. Like number one, I've been told many times you should

[01:04:57] smile more. You look a lot nicer when you smile. It's a demeaning thing that is often said to women. But and again, I don't know if this is overcoached, but when she started, she's talking it just really came off as inauthentic. I understand you want to smile,

[01:05:13] you give a speech, you're supposed to make eye contact and smile. But there were times when she was smiling and saying really horrific things and talking about different anecdotes or whatever it might be. And then she turned serious in a really unbelievable fist pounding almost

[01:05:30] on the table. It was just too much and I think the substance we can crowd on, I think was a little bit more spot on, but the delivery of it was just bonkers, right? How do you think she got from that

[01:05:46] pre-speech? Describe what you think may have happened, how she got from that pre-speech kind of normal tone who she is authentically to what was presented on camera during the GOP response. Two things that I could say. I could see a staffer sitting behind the camera with smile,

[01:06:04] be serious, smile, slow down. They have little things as you're delivering things to coach you along. I think it was obviously she was nervous, that's understandable. But I think she was just

[01:06:15] trying to be someone she's not. I think she was trying to play into this and be big and be... I don't know because I feel like if this was my boss that was giving this,

[01:06:26] we would do practice runs, right? We've seen bombs. We've seen Governor Jindal, I feel like as one of the famous bomb responses. I don't know how this wasn't practiced and got to this point,

[01:06:41] but you've been in that situation. You've been working with members who have to give big important speeches or videos or that sort. How do you think that happened? I think she was over-coached. I think someone over-coached her just too much.

[01:06:54] Ultimately, I think having saw that, I felt bad. I honestly felt bad. I didn't want to pile on, but I honestly felt bad watching that initial video. It takes skill no matter what state you're from

[01:07:04] to get elected to the United States Senate and I applaud anyone that seeks public office and wants to go through that ringer. She has some skills, but I just think it was really over-coached.

[01:07:13] I don't understand... I guess I would really have to understand what the point of over-coaching. I would also say to you, I think there's... I was also challenged a little bit not to go back to the

[01:07:25] kitchen too much, but she was in the kitchen trying to deliver this type of speech on these type of topics. I just... I think it seemed that someone overthought this presentation and it

[01:07:39] just... It was everything... In terms of, I think if we were going to place bats as to who the situation that was more risky, I don't think we would have put it on the Republicans who

[01:07:52] stood their thump, but they really did and it was panned on both sides of the aisle. Rightfully, I think it's going to be a benchmark or an example of what not to do in future GOP

[01:08:03] responses. I also would have to say the effectiveness of doing these is just lost. There's very little reward in doing these and they seem to be high risk and I feel bad for her because of the circumstances that she by all accounts allowed herself to get into.

[01:08:22] She's a United States Senator. I don't think... This was... She obviously had some decisions in how this went and boy, oh boy, that before her speech, that kind of verbalization, how she spoke, her cadence, I thought was just great. It was just normal. But what came out was...

[01:08:40] looked like something out of glee. Some overdramatization of episodes of glee, which I'd... People send me because I didn't really get the reference at first, but it seemed just overly dramatic and again, I think it was a combination of the overly dramatic, the message,

[01:08:55] then the circumstance, then the kind of the setting of it. I think it would have been problematic. She maybe given in her Senate office or some type of flag or pomp and circumstance a little bit behind her, but it just overall was not good.

[01:09:10] Here's the thing I'd point out though, just a couple things. In 1988, there was a young governor who gave the speech at the Democratic National Convention, gave the keynote speech in 1988, the Democratic National Convention. He was booed during his speech. People said that

[01:09:27] his political career was over and how much a mistake it was. That governor of Arkansas later became the president of the United States, Bill Clinton. So there's hope and opportunity for

[01:09:36] her to recover. But boy, oh boy, it was a tough speech. And I also would have said as I was watching like, darn it, I would have liked to do a mystery science cedar 3000, like watching this with you.

[01:09:45] We would have had some great commentary because it was just nails on the chalkboard. It certainly was. You mentioned her tone a little bit. It was very breathy. As I stuck with my fellow parents... You do that very well. Thank you.

[01:09:59] Yeah, it just was a complete mismatch of previous videos and how she actually speaks. I think that she's likely a very smart... She was a chief of staff previously for a member of Congress. She's

[01:10:08] very intelligent, articulate individual, just a misstep. I think there was too much going on. One thing that... And it completely distracted. To be perfectly honest, I barely remember what she talked about in it because I was so distracted with like, why are you smiling

[01:10:23] right now? This is just completely not... I do want to hand on some of the criticism as a story that she's told. She told a tragic story of a woman who was sex trafficked.

[01:10:32] She claims that she met her at the Texas border. Now, the story by all accounts is true that this woman was trafficked at 12 horrifically, tragically. Effect Trickers did find though that it happened in Mexico between 2004 and 2008,

[01:10:50] well over a decade before Biden was president. And then this victim has also testified before... In Congress before, even she came out and said that she didn't think it was fair, basically, that this was used in this scenario. It's just a weird kind of thing to...

[01:11:05] She came off saying she wasn't trying to imply that this happened during Biden's administration. I think that's BS. That's very clearly this is your time, that this is what you were looking to do. So it always again, just taking that credibility down, you just completely refute

[01:11:19] everything that you said and the real issues we have at the border and the real issues there as to public safety and the real issues there are to inflation and families bills that they're paying

[01:11:29] and how much they're spending at the grocery store in a pump. There are a lot of really good things. Like you said, this doesn't have the same effectiveness as it is used to. A lot of

[01:11:37] these members live tweet when I worked in Congress and the Embers office. We live tweeted congress member from his account. We chatted beforehand, you get the speech beforehand and work up some responses to... Again, you go into these state of the unions

[01:11:49] very largely annoying with the president going to talk about it's just a matter of the order and how you're going to respond. And so a lot of members do that with their staff and

[01:11:57] prepare in that way. So there are these kind of live reactions as you go. This was just a complete misstep. Two last comments I have on this. There was a Washington Post op-ed that I

[01:12:08] read that was titled, Katie Brits Big Fail Shows Why GOP Can't Connect with Women. And that is my biggest frustration with this is I think it was a really good opportunity to show suburban mothers, women, mothers, non-mothers, just women in general, how

[01:12:25] some of these issues are impacting our daily lives and why Democrats are not the right choice in November and why you should go I guess in this situation. You can go to Trump or whatever.

[01:12:35] We'll get into that later. But it was an opportunity and it was a missed opportunity, unfortunately. Last comment. You talked about how you thought you switched over to SNL. There was an SNL skin on this. Scarlett Johansson played Katie Bette.

[01:12:48] Her Brit said, auditioning for the part of Scary Mom. One of her lines is, like any mom, I'm going to do a pivot out of nowhere into a shockingly violent story about sex trafficking. Rest assured, every detail about this is real except the year where it took place

[01:13:02] and who was president when it happened. You really can't make this stuff up. You can't. And the one thing I would say is that I don't think Saturday Night Live did

[01:13:11] is good of the actual speech that was done. I think in this situation, they couldn't compete with it. I know they needed to do it. But yes, the matter with the speech and the factual and accuracy

[01:13:22] and how it was presented, I should say, it was clearly meant to convey that story was meant to tie to the Biden administration and the failings that were there. And again, I just don't understand why this seems to be a real failure at a

[01:13:37] number of levels because what we're talking about in the state of the GOP response, which in reality, Becky, let me just ask, when have we ever, in any type of circumstance, I can't think of a circumstance and please tell me if you can think of one where

[01:13:55] the GOP response or the response that was given was something that captivated people in a positive way after it occurred? Yeah. I can't think of a time that it's happened. And so

[01:14:09] there's a lot, I think it's a good, I think it's a fantastic opportunity. Someone pointed out on social media, which I think was, I think Kim Reynolds, the governor of Iowa did one,

[01:14:18] I think it was last year, she did a fantastic job just in terms of presentation and delivery of message and just showing how someone can offer a GOP response. And they're not being

[01:14:31] a lot of problems coming out of it. But this is a situation, I would imagine to think that they're going to read there's going to be, although this is probably left to the office

[01:14:40] to determine how they're going to handle this, I have to believe there's going to be some institutional checks and balances moving forward as to how these are done. One thing I didn't want to ask you, do you think that the criticism that she's, that if this

[01:14:55] would have been a man giving the speech, he would have faced as much criticism? Do you think there's elements of sexism in this? I was, by the way, you got criticized for not smiling enough. It just amazes me what people will criticize people for.

[01:15:10] Yeah, I don't think that is a fair criticism in this situation just because I think that so much of it comes from the situation, like where the scene she was in, her tone and her

[01:15:23] demeanor, it was not if we had, I don't even know a comparable situation where we'd put a man in this skit background. It would be like putting me in a garage or something where I just, yeah.

[01:15:38] By the way, I have no reasons to be in a garage. That would be really weird too. So yeah, I don't know. Do you think that when there's a female politician that's giving a speech, do you

[01:15:49] think that type of stuff matters more, the environment? Do you think it's less significant? I would argue that it's a situation that women are often discounted unrightly, inappropriately discounted for in some folks' eyes, some men's eyes in particular. And so I think

[01:16:09] that this is a situation to counter that. You almost have to go the other way to show that I am a smart, capable, powerful woman that you take it the other way. And I don't know, I have a gun

[01:16:20] behind you on the wall with an elk and a fish and the American flag and your kid's finger painting. That's something that I think you have to counter the other way. So it's just weird to me that this got through however many layers of decision making it did

[01:16:34] to get this to happen because it's not like you're just doing this on her iPhone, right? There's a whole thing that goes into it. Yes, but you had noted when you were working for Jason Lewis that there was a conscious decision to put him in the kitchen.

[01:16:47] The kitchen, the one place in the, I think that there's a lot of political cachet and having someone do a speech from the kitchen. That's just ingrained in it, but this just seemed to be just not calibrated enough.

[01:16:58] We are chatty cafes today. So we're going to move into a couple other things, but before we close out this, we're at in 10 million in the 24 hours after the state of the union. However, unlike a lot of state of the unions, there was no polling bomb.

[01:17:13] His approval actually is falling. Before it was 45 Trump, 44 polls, 44 Biden. It remained relatively tied today. 46 Trump, 44 Biden since state of the union, within the margin of error, both of those. So polling, however, Biden's approval has

[01:17:29] actually fallen to an all-time low since state of the union just slightly fallen, but he is sitting at 37.4. So that was surprising to me on both sides, that they're both the polling and approval that he didn't get at least a bumper, a point or two bombs.

[01:17:42] Interesting. Very interesting. Last comment on the presidential situation. Trump and Biden have both officially clinched the nomination. Obviously there is still, they've, they have received enough delegates necessary to get the nomination. So I don't know if clinching the nomination is technically

[01:18:01] appropriate. They still go to their conventions and have to get actually verbally nominated, but they have the delegates to do that unless who knows what happens. Again, rules, contests or whatever that might be. It's Trump Biden 2024.

[01:18:15] Woo. Yes. Which means for us, we're going to have to be very creative with content. Yes. Such as going non-political. Let's chat Oscars briefly. What was your favorite part of the favorite performance, favorite bit? What, what, what, what was your favorite part?

[01:18:33] First of all, let me just say it from the beginning. I love award shows. I love award shows. I love award shows. I love the Oscars. I love watching them. I did, it was up, now,

[01:18:41] interesting to tie it back to the state of the Uniform Unit. I did fall asleep a little bit during them, so I had to play some catch-up because it was up late, but it was, I love the

[01:18:48] Oscars. I love the red carpet. I love just, because it's everything I'm not. It's pomp, it's circumstances, it's glitz, it's glamour, it's entertainment. It's all the things that I'm not. It's why I like going to Las Vegas, because it's everything that I'm not.

[01:19:02] It was just a blast to watch. A couple of two points I want to bring up. I want to bring up, first of all, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Danny DeVito, dealing with Michael Keaton. Can I just say something? I have not articulated before in this podcast.

[01:19:14] Michael Keaton is an American treasure, and I think he is such a great actor, certainly as Batman. He's just, just, he will always be my Batman, but he's done so many good films.

[01:19:25] Just, I want to give a shout out to a movie called The Other Guys. I still believe, and I retweeted this on Oscar night, Michael Keaton deserves some Oscar for his role in The Other

[01:19:35] Guys as Captain Jean. Just absolutely a fantastic character. I'm a huge fan of Michael Keaton. I loved that, but I also have to say, my goodness. Michael Keaton's 72? Oh boy, he's just great. Just a great persona, great demeanor. I like him. He really soaked

[01:19:53] up that role in that little skit between Danny DeVito and Arnold Schwarzenegger, where he was back in his Batman role. The other thing is the, I'm just Ken. I saw Barbie multiple

[01:20:03] times. I thought the Ryan Gosling performance of I'm Just Ken, I hope everyone in life has the opportunity and feels that confident in themselves because he did such a great job. And if you

[01:20:18] look at that and you get angry about what Ryan Gosling did or frustrated with that performance, I'm sorry. I just don't have space for you. It was just absolutely delightful. I would have wished Margot Robbie and Greta Gerber would have been recognized more for their roles

[01:20:34] in that film, but it was a great film. Oppenheimer did very well overall, just a great production. I just will say, just in closing on this subject, not a big fan of Jimmy Kimmel.

[01:20:44] I've never been a big fan of Jimmy Kimmel. I wouldn't mind if someone else hosted. Your take on the Oscars. Yeah, I agree. He's fine. I don't think he's anything spectacular. I think we can do better.

[01:20:55] I also loved that I am Ken performance. I thought the John Cena bit was hilarious and can you imagine regardless of he just goes on stage in absolutely nothing with the envelope. So there was

[01:21:11] clarification that he was wearing stuff so the FEC couldn't get in trouble or they couldn't get in trouble here. If anybody can pull it off, it's him. Right. He's so funny. I think he's so great. He's great. It was so good. And then one of my favorite

[01:21:25] parts of it was when I think they did it for both supporting actor and actress and me, the best actor and actress, the five previous winners up on stage, it gives me goosebumps. Can you

[01:21:37] imagine being one of the nominees and you have these legends up there saying your name, talking about your work and the work of your fellow nominees. It's just incredible and it's just so great to see these folks on stage being recognized. I think it's a really awesome way

[01:21:55] to include some more folks who have done really great things in the entertainment industry. And I just loved it. I absolutely love seeing those folks do it. And I just can't imagine

[01:22:06] being one of those to see one of your whether mentors or role models or somebody just up high near in your field speaking to you on this most incredible night is just fantastic.

[01:22:18] It's such a fun experience to watch and I love, I just love the before and the after the whole event. It's just great. Just a couple other things. I saw Billy Eilish that's what he's saying.

[01:22:28] Billy Eilish won a second Academy Award. Just want to point out as someone noted on social media, she has more Oscars than Martin Scorsese does. I think he's an absolutely fantastic director. The second thing is another Martin Scorsese story. There is video of him dancing and

[01:22:43] cheering along to Ryan Gosling when he was doing I'm Just Ken. And I just have to say just how wonderful that is. It's just so fun. I saw Barbie at the movie theater twice. I've seen

[01:22:53] it again at home a few times. It's just we get to have nice things sometimes and Ryan Gosling, that movie Margot Robbie, Marika Fira, Greta Greta, all the work that they did in that movie

[01:23:03] was just great. And to see that place just come alive when he was doing that performance was just an absolute gas. And if you can't cheer and get laugh a little bit and just cheer him on

[01:23:15] when he's doing that, there's something wrong with it. You are an absolute Grinch if you don't, but it was a great Oscar night. And I look forward to watching it again next year.

[01:23:22] Yes. And I because you love when I go to depressing, I'm going to be a Debbie Downer here for one second and it has to do with Billie Eilish. So there were these events have often become

[01:23:33] opportunities for actors, actresses, whoever it might be to make political statements. And I am one who I believe if you have a platform and you want to be political with it, that is your

[01:23:43] prerogative to do so. That is absolutely fine. However, there was a number of them that wore red handpins. And I've seen a lot since then about how it goes to the lack of education behind some of these different situations. And this red handpin largely stems from an incident

[01:24:03] decade or two ago, that was the murder of two Israeli individuals who crossed the border were killed in that their murder was celebrated with red bloody hands out the window. And so

[01:24:15] this is something that as I have a pin tweet here, the bloody handpin is a celebration of Jewish death and however unknowingly aligns with aware with jihadist mission to resist by any means necessary. And then this also comments about how Billie Eilish alone has 110 million

[01:24:32] followers on Instagram. And that's 15 times as many Jews that exist in this world. And so there is some weight with this political statement. And it does, I believe that while I disagree that

[01:24:46] Billie Eilish and others who wore this were looking to stand up for Palestine having being a sovereign nation and whatever that might be, whatever they believe, I don't believe they were necessarily

[01:24:58] plotting the death of these two, the murder of these two Israelis and the use of that to murder furthers. But when you have a platform, you need to make sure that you are using that

[01:25:10] correctly. And I think this is a really unfortunate situation where they were trying to stand for one thing and it was totally tied to a really horrific situation. It's really inappropriate and

[01:25:20] really just upsetting. And I can only imagine that on top of the other person who denounced his Jewishness on stage, I think it was probably really hard for watchers who are Jewish and

[01:25:33] to see I it was shocking. So I'm sorry to end on Debbie Downer. I just that was really disappointing. And I was educated about the meaning of that afterwards and wanted to share. No, that's a great point to bring up. And it's unfortunately there's politics at these

[01:25:45] events sometimes and I want to be consistent and say that partisanship and politics sometimes is good. But in these types of circumstances, there's a lot of influence these people have and they should always try to use it responsibly. So that's a good point. We'll take it.

[01:26:00] And then I want to end with a little bit of a lighter topic, but also not a light topic. How are you doing? Because I know you are a long time avid Vikings fan and this week,

[01:26:15] Kurt Cousins is leaving us. He's gone. I went through a series of emotions during the day. First of all, if let me say congratulations to Kurt Cousins and his agent for giving that contract that he got had the Vikings signed Kurt Cousins at the dollar figure that they

[01:26:33] had been signed with Atlanta, I would have been furious. They made a $50 million signing bonus, close to $90 million guaranteed in the first year alone. Massive payday for Kurt Cousins. I have a number of questions as to whether that investment is going to pay off. We'll see,

[01:26:51] but it was tough. But this is the point. As I've noted multiple times, my family has had Viking season tickets since 1961. We are diehard Vikings fans in this house, aside from my wife who was a Green Bay Packers fan. But this is an opportunity. The

[01:27:06] leadership of the Vikings, Quisi and O'Connell, this is their third year together. The entire Viking nation is watching this. And so there was a lot of emotion that day. But once I saw the

[01:27:17] terms of the contract, I'm like, oh, there's no way they could have competed with that. And had the Vikings put that type of money in and invested in Cousins, there would have been

[01:27:26] a lot of complaints. Vikings are in a good position now with the draft coming up. We'll see what they do. They've gotten assigned another quarterback. I think fair to say a bridge quarterback

[01:27:34] who may play some type of role in if the Vikings move up in the draft, which is upcoming. And the Vikings have a lot of salary cap now for 2025 there. So they're in a great spot.

[01:27:43] But it's tough to see him go. But I think this is going to be a good turning point. So I'm doing better. I've gotten better about it. If you want to reach out to me in the immediate

[01:27:51] aftermath, I would have been holed up at my office just trying to figure out where to go. But I've sought some help for over the last few days and I'm much more better comfortable talking about it. But I appreciate you appreciating you allowing me to discuss it

[01:28:03] and approaching it in such a respectful and thoughtful way. You bet. I appreciate your optimism. Time will tell. We'll see. And it's going to be interesting. It's going to make our, it's going to, this might be good for you because for the, for our pick and pull,

[01:28:18] this might, you might be able to, we'll see. As a different element, it might help boost you a bit. We'll see. All right. Thank you. This is a great episode this week. Thank you for your time and we will talk again soon. See ya.

[01:28:34] We want to thank you for listening to the breakdown with Broadcore Rebekah. And before we go, show some love for your favorite podcast by leaving us a real and Apple podcast Spotify or on the platform where you listen.

[01:28:45] You can leave a review or give us a shout out on our website or across all social media platforms at bdbreakpod. The breakdown with Broadcore Rebekah will return next week. Thank you again for listening.