A Break Down on July 4th, SCOTUS, and MN Election Tensions

[00:00:11] Welcome to The Break Down with Brodkorb and Becky, a weekly podcast that breaks down politics, policy, and current affairs. I'm Becky Scherer. And I'm Michael Brodkorb. Summer is busy and life doesn't stop, so we took another week off last week. We've been able to spend some time with family, friends, and celebrate America's 250th birthday. This week, we will kick things off by talking about just that, Independence Day.

[00:00:32] We will break down the history of this wonderful holiday and some fun facts, and then we'll go into some of the events that occurred and the controversy surrounding two sparring worlds of celebrations, America 250 and Freedom 250. Then we'll get into some recent Supreme Court opinions. The end of June marked the final week of the 2025-2026 SCOTUS term and brought forth several decisions in some important cases. We will break down the rulings, the votes, and what it all means.

[00:00:55] We will then discuss the news that broke last week that revealed M&GOP-endorsed candidate Kendall Qualls' running mate, Brian Nicholson, was president at U.S. Capitol Grounds on January 6, 2021. We will get into our thoughts on responses and whether this will help or perhaps hurt Kendall Qualls in the primary or general election. And we will close things out by discussing the coordination, or lack thereof, between the federal government and the Minnesota Secretary of State's office in advance of the upcoming elections.

[00:01:22] We will get into how things are different this cycle than previous years, what concerns are, and how both sides view the situation. Thank you for joining us and enjoy the show. So we had 4th of July. Did you grill some hot dogs, have some barbecue and outdoor time? Yes. I think I've discussed this before. First of all, great to be back with you. Yes, you too. Really felt good to be back. When people ask me what my favorite holiday is, I put July 4th, it's like turkey.

[00:01:51] It's set aside in, which by the way, our founding fathers wanted the turkey to be our national bird. That was Benjamin Franklin, one of our most esteemed founding fathers. So I think it's an apt comparison. I think it's an apt comparison, Becky. No, but all seriousness, yes. So when people ask me what my favorite holiday is, I will be like, I'll set aside the 4th of July because it's that big of a deal. And I'll generally go with Halloween and stuff like that.

[00:02:20] 4th of July is just fantastic. I love everything about it. I love the pomp. I love the circumstance. I love everything. The colors, the pageantry. I love everything about it. And fireworks, food, festivities, just everything. The hot dog eating contest, all the kind of watching old patriotic movies, old and new. And so I just love it. How about yourself?

[00:02:49] I, you know, I'm also a big fan. I love that holidays, you know, any holiday that surrounds around eating, drinking and merriment to me, which I guess is most holidays, but like 4th of July, that's you go and have good food out on the grill or it's just, it's just something different about it. So, yes, I love it. We, I convinced my sons to both wear, you know, the older ones a little picky on an attire these days.

[00:03:14] But I got a American flag monster truck with an American flag T-Rex in it waving a flag. I mean, it was so up his alley and the audience or the, you know, the, the, the things you can buy out there know their audience. They know that three, four year old little boys going to love that or girls. It was incredible. Let's just go through it again because I, what you were describing it. I just want to make sure that's preserved for poster. Yeah. You got a American themed monster truck. It has a, it has a what with it?

[00:03:43] It was, it was a monster truck that was American themed with, I believe, the T-Rex inside the back of the. The monster truck was like stripes and stars waving an American flag. It may be some fireworks and stuff, but. That's fantastic. I know. Yeah. It was a big hit. What an all American, what an all American parent and you and your husband are for supplying that type of Americana. I watched a couple of documentaries on the Revolutionary War and I think there was a monster truck just like that. There you go.

[00:04:13] In, in, in Philadelphia and other places in the New England colonies during the time. So that makes sense. That's wonderful. That's Americana. It is. It is. No, we. But yeah, it was good. It was, it was a lovely celebration and great, joyful holiday. And I got to say one of my favorite things. I don't know if you've come across any of the videos of folks in the United States for the first time for the World Cup and being here around 4th of July when they walk into every store.

[00:04:40] And it is just flags and red, white, and blue everywhere. And seeing, they're like, oh my God, this, you know, some of them obviously not putting two and two together that this is a big America, you know, holiday or time. But I'm, I'm loving the joy that everybody is seeing from Americans' patriotism. Is in my production notes for next week to discuss soccer, to talk about the World Cup, which is currently being hosted by the United States of America. Just a little preview.

[00:05:08] Have you watched many of the matches as they're called? Very few. Yes. Very few. Yeah. We can, we can hold my commentary for next week then. That's, that's great. So yeah, it's been an action-packed couple of weeks. I had a grad party. I want, my, my daughters graduated from high school. I had a grad party two weeks ago.

[00:05:28] And so it's been nonstop festivities on and 4th of July carrying over was just wonderful and super excited about celebrating our 250th anniversary, 250th birthday. Yeah. Of our country. So it was great. I don't think I'll be here for 300. You may be. I mean, don't count yourself short. Well, I would be a hundred, you know. I would be a hundred and two. Modern medicine just keeps getting more modern. Modern medicine. Thank you so much.

[00:05:56] I did have, I did have an area dad tell me that he is convinced that we're living in the generation where he knows our kids are, but where we could basically live forever. And I said, I don't know. I don't know if the world is ready for me just to be living forever, but we'll see. So nice. You had a nice time though. What's your, can I get a ruling on fireworks? Yeah. You know, I love, love fireworks myself.

[00:06:22] However, I have a one year and a four, one year old and a four year old that go to bed approximately, you know, 645 for the younger one and 730 for the older one. I wish it was a kid again. Such a good time. So staying, staying up even till eight o'clock is, is pretty rough. So I think next year we're going to try to do it, maybe get an extra nap in and, and figure that out.

[00:06:44] So I haven't really seen fireworks in the last couple of years, other than like some, you know, we go out on the deck and can see some from neighboring suburbs or the neighbors shooting them off. But I love them. I get to get back to enjoying them close up. I love fireworks. I love, I love fireworks, everything. If I could. You set them off? Yeah, we set some off. I'm not going to, look, I don't have to answer questions like that in the United States of America. You do not. In my own home next to a public park. No, I don't have to answer that. Perfect.

[00:07:14] But I will tell you that if I could have had been a, had some, my house draped in bunting the entire week and done, if I could have written a boat, shot off a cannon, I would have done that too. It was a great 4th of July. Perfect. So let's get into a little bit about the 250th and some, you know, apparently celebrating this great United States of America is controversial and always has controversy around everything. But I got some fun facts for you too.

[00:07:43] So, we have, you know, July 2nd is when Congress actually voted to declare independence, but the final wording of the Declaration of Independence was approved on July 4th. So that's where that comes from. And one fun fact that I found when putting this together is John Adams actually thought that Americans would celebrate the January 2nd vote because that's when it was actually declared, but he was wrong.

[00:08:05] And also, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson both died on July 4th, 1826, which was the nation's 50th birthday. And five years later, President James Monroe also died on July 4th. And yeah, that's kind of some of my fun facts. There was one president, Calvin Coolidge, who was born on Independence Day. And then just a couple more I got to rattle through here. Americans spend a lot.

[00:08:30] They consume approximately 150 million hot dogs on July 4th, hundreds of millions of pounds of chicken and millions of pounds of watermelon. And fireworks spending alone reaches into the billions nationally every year. And then a couple more just because it's my favorite thing in the world. The population has grown from 1790 to what was 3.9 million to over 330. That's when the first caucus or census was.

[00:08:57] And we have, the U.S. city that has hosted the most continuous Independence Day celebration is Bristol, Rhode Island. They've celebrated every year since 1785. Bravo. Wow. Bristol. Bristol, Rhode Island. Yes. July 4th, picnic barbecue, hamburger hot dog. Your choice. A hot dog all the way. We like the old-fashioned ones. You can get them in like a four-pound pack from Sam's Club. So we have like 30 in the freezer at any given time. They're so good.

[00:09:26] We have a charcoal grill, which makes them even better. Yeah, definitely favorite. You? I'm a hot dog person generally, but back to the crowd party for a second. We had hamburger hot dogs, brats, and walking tacos. Plus, one of my new favorite ways to drink soda, as in the interest of transparency, I've disclosed before, DWI in 2013. I drink for celebratory purposes. My main drinking problem is, and we've discussed this recently related to some of my health issues,

[00:09:55] which I'm really driving through and I've really got a very restrictive diet and doing a great job, except over the holidays and 4th of July and grad parties, is something called a dirty soda. Have you heard the concept of a dirty soda? I have, but I have not tried it myself. My goodness, are they good. So good. So we had a dirty soda bar at the grad party that was pretty decadent, and we have some remnants left over.

[00:10:25] So I'm not a coffee drinker because I don't need caffeine to get going. I drank coffee for like a week, and coworkers and colleagues said, stop. So dirty soda is not, when I was originally proposed as a menu item, I said, you're not having anything called dirty soda here because I thought it was alcohol-based. It's not. It's where you put some form of cream in the soda and other types of syrups and other things,

[00:10:52] basically making a delicious treat even more delicious. Yeah. And it was, I have had so many dirty sodas in the last couple weeks that I might need professional help. They are so good. And so aside from eating the hamburgers, the hot dogs, I've had a lot of dirty sodas. And I've quite got, quite good at finding recipes for dirty sodas. And I partake in a number of red, white, and blue dirty sodas, which I will share the recipe offline. I love it.

[00:11:22] Before we get into all the controversy around what happened in Washington, D.C., what's most American tradition? What screams America to you? Is it baseball? Is it apple pie? Is it the fireworks? What to you is like the top? I think it is. I think it's really fireworks. I mean, I think that's fireworks Americana. You know, I'm talking to neighbors from a variety of, you know, different ethnic and geographic locations

[00:11:52] across the country coming together. I think, I think of that. I mean, to me, it's, it's fireworks. It's fireworks. It's waving the flag. It's fireworks. I love it. I always think of that classic Reagan quote. You can go to France and become, but you could not become, you can move to France, but you'll never be a Frenchman, become a Frenchman. You can come to America and you can be an American. And I think there is just something, I think there is something amazingly rebellious about the founding of our country.

[00:12:20] And so I love the entire pageantry of the entire day, whether it's fireworks late at night or Joey Chestnut cramming. So I think he had 60 hot dogs this year, 59, 60 hot dogs. Or the day before a guy trying to drink as much lemonade as he can. That's Americana for me. It's staying up late. It's fireworks. It's gluttony. Yes. Talking with your neighbors. It's lawn chairs. It's running across the grass. That's it to me.

[00:12:49] And now I'm going to add, honestly, my new definition is going to be a monster truck that had a monster truck, Americana themed monster truck that's got some type of dinosaur involved and there's a flag. That's got to be on top of it. How about yourself? Yeah. You know, I think it's just, I would say, I mean, come on, this is going to be like the cheesiest thing in the world, but it's kind of like the vibe, right? It's just like such an exciting time where, yes, we're going to get into a little bit of the controversy around it.

[00:13:19] But it just seems like a time where everybody's happy. You get together, you celebrate, you unify, and you put some of that other stuff aside. And it's just, we are here living in the greatest nation in the world. And how lucky are we? No, it doesn't always feel like that. But I think I just love the general exuberance around the 4th of July. Do you think America is the greatest country in the world? I do. Yes, I do.

[00:13:44] And we, over the course of this podcast, have discussed politics. And what I do believe you and I are both grounded in America and our love of it. And I will also say to you, I think our families are separately. You know, I had the pleasure of talking with your husband. He's a football fan. I hear you talking about things you're doing with your family, your kids. I hear about this monster truck, which I want to come play with. You know what I'm going to do?

[00:14:12] I'm going to come over and play with it when I come to the inflatable water park that you have now in your backyard. Perfect. But I think about that. And I think I would say, if I was in court, I don't know if you've ever seen the movie Miracle on 34th Street. Oh, yeah. Both versions. Both versions. That's fantastic. God, you're in there. I, when the guy has to testify in court, his name is Chris Ringel. I would, and we've all seen that. I'm sure you've seen that scene in, what is it?

[00:14:41] The newsroom where he's asked the famous question is, what America is the best country in the world? I would objectively say that it is. And that means I take it in all of its, with all of its marks and blemishes. I think it is a country in and of itself that is still, will always be, in my opinion, the best in the world. And I feel it in my heart, feel it in my mind. And I look forward to reading our comments or our podcast with all the statistics. Your someone says statistically it's not. I don't care.

[00:15:11] Hearing you talk about, you know, a monster truck and then your feelings of it. And then I just love this country. And I'm just glad to, I think of Creed's quote from the office, which was, already won the lottery. I was born in the United States. I was born in the U.S. of A baby. That's really, I'm not calling you baby. That's literally the quote, just so we're clear. The HR department's going to be looking at this episode and the transcript and making sure that I get a little bit of a remedial, another education.

[00:15:40] But no, I truly believe America is the greatest country in the world. I feel it in my heart. I do agree with Creed that I won the lottery when I was born in the U.S. of A baby. And I just love celebrating it. And I think that, I think part of the reason we do this podcast in many ways is because we love this country and because we love this state. And in many ways, we want it to be better through policies, discussions, but we focus a lot about on the good. Yeah, absolutely.

[00:16:09] And I think, you know, one thing that is how we are the greatest country is with our freedoms and liberties. Some of that means you get to talk about when you're pissed off or displeased with things. And that certainly came up, you know, when we look at the celebration that was going on here because of Trump being in the White House. I think you and I have made our stance on the president very blatant. But I think that from my take of it, and I'll get to some questions later, but I believe

[00:16:36] if the rules were reversed and this happened under Biden or Obama, or one side is always going to be upset about who is leading the 250th celebration. I don't think that this is super unique, but I think that there was the bipartisan America 250 commission that was started by Congress that had a big goal. Their biggest goal was 350 by 250, which was to engage all 350 million Americans in some way during this year. Then there was the Trump White House Freedom 250 celebration initiative.

[00:17:06] That kind of became a little bit more of a primary face of things. There were folks, critics saying that they were upset that it was becoming more about Trump than the nation. And I think there is something to that. But I think at the end of the day, despite, you know, we had notable withdrawals from participation, Martina McBride, Brett Michaels, that were thought they were doing America 250 events and were doing Freedom 250s and then pulled out. And so there was controversy around that.

[00:17:31] But all in all, I think, and I'm curious to hear from you, despite a lot of Twitter talk of Washington, D.C., talking about, you know, one of the hottest Fourth of July is in D.C., 102. People were upset about the road closures and the disruption to their everyday life with the big celebrations going on at the mall. But it seemed relatively people were excited and celebrating in D.C. and across the state nation.

[00:17:58] And to see, you know, they had the fireworks off on Friday, July 3rd, coming from Mount Vernon. Alfonso Ribeiro, who, you know, Carlton, was the host of this big national event with all of these incredible concerts of Chicago, Trace Adkins, Patti LaBelle, so many more. And then there was a concert in L.A. with Chris Stapleton smashing pumpkins. I mean, the list of folks invited, included in these celebrations across the nation were just

[00:18:25] wild. And then the fireworks display that came out that, you know, love it or hate it. Trump said it was the largest going to be the largest fireworks display ever was pretty magnificent from my viewing of it. It was magnificent. A couple of things I want to get on the firework front. I do love fireworks and I love the just this way that I always look back at this was if my memory serves me well, I believe you were born in 86. It was?

[00:18:53] So I remember one of the biggest firework displays that I remember seeing was, at the time, was the, would have been the, it was in 1986, it would have been some anniversary related to the Statute of Liberty. Might have been the 100 year. I just, I don't, it might have been the 100 year of the Statute of Liberty. I don't know what it was. But just amazing fireworks.

[00:19:19] And so we had some friends over, family friends over to watch the fireworks on TV and a comparison between the New York and the one in Washington, DC. One in Washington, DC was just off the charts. Amazing. Amazing. And it made me think about, I don't know if you are on Nextdoor, if you follow Nextdoor. So I love, love what, I love reading Nextdoor around this time of year because you get a bunch of people policing about fireworks. I get it. I understand it.

[00:19:48] Like if I lived in your neighborhood, I would be sensitive about your kids. Not so much you or your husband, but certainly the kids. People who have animals. I worry, I get, you know, my neighbor has an animal and they, they explain some of that. So really am sensitive about it, but I also am like, it's America and we have to do it. I can't imagine what Nextdoor was like in the DC metropolitan area, Northern, Northern Virginia, Southern Maryland, Chevy Chase, Alexandria, Old Town.

[00:20:18] What the Nextdoor notifications were like about that fireworks. It was amazing. And there were a lot of them and it was, and New York was, I think, wonderful. It was disappointing a little bit. The weather hit the Twin Cities. And so some of the fireworks got, got missed. I think it was great. And I am sad a little bit going back to specifically your question about the point.

[00:20:41] I do wish there were more times right now where we could just come together. I know it's difficult. I get it. I know it's difficult. And, and I, and I continue to blame social media and kind of the tribalization of things. But I would like to think that there are just times where we could just come together.

[00:21:04] And I would like to see, there was a lot of controversy about acts not participating. And I just, I would just like at some point, if there was one thing, if I won the lottery, there would be signs. And one of the signs that I would truly like to, I would stake a flag on is the coming together of us and putting down kind of the savers at some point where we can just all come together and participate.

[00:21:33] And it's, it's disappointing even on the 4th of July that people can't do that. But I thought the fireworks, I thought the fireworks were great everywhere. New York, all of them were great.

[00:21:49] New York, all of them were great. So unnecessary. It's a great thing. We are so lucky to live here.

[00:22:18] If you don't feel that way, you don't have to live here. But I think that we should all get behind the fact that we are lucky and privileged and so grateful to live in this country and to have the freedoms and liberties that we do have, to have the ability to speak out against our government if you, if that's what you choose to do or different elected officials. That is totally okay. But like, let's, like you said, lay down our arms for one moment, for one day and just

[00:22:44] celebrate that 250 years ago, these incredible, brilliant individuals came together and wanted to do something differently. And that's the wonderful experiment of which we live and exist. And yeah, I just, like I said, I like the vibe around the holidays. I have, I have a sister that's born on the 4th of July. And so I always great for her to celebrate her birthday and happy birthday to her. But yes, I think about, I just think about that day.

[00:23:12] You mentioned the coming together, the people that came together during that time. I watch, I started watching with my son this, this weekend, John Adams on HBO. I'm sure you could pick a copy up from your local library. You seem to be the type of person who would rent something from a library and rent a movie from a library. So you can rent it from your library stream and it's good. I started watching that. But yeah, I miss that a bit. I miss the ability of our country to come together. Even for just a moment.

[00:23:40] And so, and are you muted because Becky might finally be getting arrested again? And so. 17 floors down and still hearing it. It's a fire truck though. Fire truck. I think we'll leave it out in the background. Really just, really just a little memory, a little memory for the podcast. I just wish that we could just all come. I wish they could just, we could just come together. And there's always something, there's always people who it's, it's always, it seems to be to not get myself in trouble with the HR department again. I'll say it this way.

[00:24:10] Everything right now seems to be a hot dog measuring contest of some sort. And you can determine the way I say that. And so I see pictures posting online of this event had more attendance. This person had less attendance. People being in sometimes gleeful about the rain. I just, I just wish we could come together as a country. And I will say to you, part of the reason I feel that, and I mentioned this to my family and others contemporaneously in the moment, because of this podcast.

[00:24:39] It's because one of the things I think we've done a very good job of is carving off a space where people can come together and talk. And I just wish there was more of that around. And even on beautiful days such as the 4th of July. Right there with you. I don't know how this transition works into talking about wanting to be united and then going into SCOTUS updates, which tend to be pretty divisive. But let's get into it. And just a reminder to our listeners, Becky attended some law school.

[00:25:08] One year of law school. She is the legal analyst. Right. She wears many hats on this podcast. She's also the legal analyst for the Breakdown with Brock Corp and Becky. I would represent the criminal element of the Breakdown with Brock Corp and Becky, but Becky is the legal analyst. Take it away. I will do my best. I do the end of June always marks the end of a Supreme Court term.

[00:25:33] The Supreme Court is obviously one of the great pillars of the United States as well. And we had some big rulings this year. And I think some made news, some did not. But I think let's just chat through them a little bit. So we're going to start with the birthright citizenship. This is one that President Trump's executive order attempted to end automatic birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to parents who are undocumented or in the country temporarily. The question is whether that executive order violated the 14th Amendment.

[00:26:03] The court struck down the executive order and reaffirmed that the Constitution guarantees birthright citizenship. This is one that was actually a—it was 6-3, but it was not 6-3 along ideological lines, which is something that I always look at as an interesting fact or interesting piece of these rulings. So Chief Justice Roberts wrote their opinion. Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett joined the liberal judges in the affirmative. Kavanaugh agreed with the outcome, differed with the reasoning.

[00:26:31] And then we had Thomas Alito and Gorsuch dissenting. And this was really a really big immigration ruling. It was probably Trump's biggest legal loss of the week or maybe of this term. And it is going to definitely keep immigration as part of what we are hearing through the campaign trail, through Trump's term here. And with that, Trump called it disappointing, immediately pivoted to Congress being able to take some action, has announced he wants the court to rehear this.

[00:27:00] And, you know, they've already started talking a lot about the birth tourism that occurs. Were you—any initial thoughts on this ruling? I was not exactly sure how it would come out, but I think an interesting group of folks who voted against this—or for—I'm sorry, vote to strike down the executive order. Yeah, I'm not surprised by this ruling. I think it would have been—it would have been difficult had it gone into effect.

[00:27:28] I think it would have—we would have saw—one of the things that you and I discussed quite extensively was in, you know, a couple years ago on the presidential election talking about how Trump was talking extensively about mass deportation. This would have led to incredibly—an incredibly ugly situation in the United States. And so I think the justices got it right.

[00:27:53] And I just want to remind you, I was on mute for a second so you couldn't hear me scolding you. We at the—we on the Breakdown of the Rock like to use proper titles. So it's justices. It was Justice Amy Comey there. You're right. You're right. I will get better. I get your name right. You get my titles right. I get your titles right. Let's—these are Supreme Court justices. And so— You got it. All right. And we'll be sure not to make the same mistake again. How about you? Were you—

[00:28:19] Yeah, I mean, I think it—I think I view the Supreme Court like a lot of people that it—and we can kind of get into that viewing in a little bit of whether it's political or whether it is not. I think that this is a good reminder to the fact that the justices on the Supreme Court, well-appointed or affirmed by a president of a political party, genuinely, from my perspective,

[00:28:45] do have the Constitution as their guidebook when they're making their rulings. And I think this being split, not just along ideological lines, is a tribute to that. And I think it's a wonderful reminder around this great Fourth of July that the Supreme Court, the highest court in the world, in the United States, in the nation, is doing its job according to the principles of what our nation was founded on. And that is what they are meant to do.

[00:29:10] Yes, I think that the—I think that Donald Trump's—I think Donald Trump's legacy in many ways will be his appointments to the Supreme Court. And when I mean legacy, that would be a subcategory if not. Obviously, it'll be his persona, his style, in pros and cons of his style. But I think where I think his mark will be in the number of justices he will have appointed to the Supreme Court.

[00:29:37] And it is a process where the president appoints, the Senate confirms. It is an example of how his nominees, the ones he appointed, I don't believe—and please correct me if I'm wrong—he's had any of his nominees rejected. I feel like there was somebody before Kavanaugh that withdrew themselves, maybe? I might be wrong. So, I think you're right. We'll circle back on that.

[00:30:04] And, you know, presidents who I think will rank higher in kind of how history looks upon them have had some that have been defeated. I think that this will be his most—I think one of his most significant contributions. And so I think it's significant, very significant. And it also goes into the process. He nominates, the Senate confirms, they have advising consent, and this is where we're left. And some days—some days—I view in many ways the Supreme Court like the referee of the country.

[00:30:35] And sometimes you like their rulings and sometimes you don't. And there is—I mean, one of the great things in our nation as well is the separation of powers here is the three branches of government. And so, sure, this does allow Congress to continue to move forward if they—if that's what they choose to do. But as an executive order, this is not—was struck down. And so that is the law of the land at this time. You would have—would you agree that had this gone into effect, it would have been pretty ugly? Absolutely.

[00:31:06] I was—I remember being—either it was right before I moved to DC or right as I was moving there in—and DACA and— Big shot. And, you know, doing all of—you know, some of that under Obama was really big. And I just remember thinking how—how crazy it was that people are talking about sending hundreds of thousands or millions of kids who have been born here and lived here their entire lives back to nations they've never known. They don't speak the language. I mean, it just is—yeah. So, yes.

[00:31:35] I think it would have been wild and tragic if it had not gone this way. My personal viewpoint on it. Moving into West Virginia v. BP. So this was whether states can prohibit transgender women and girls from competing in girls and women's sports. The case involved laws from Idaho and West Virginia. The court upheld the state laws, allowing states to restrict—it allowed states to ban biological males from women's sports regardless of their gender identity.

[00:32:02] And so this is one I think that we've heard a lot about. I think it's definitely one that obviously pulls high on different sides of the aisle and something that we see candidates in this state talking about quite a bit. But this was 6-3 along those ideological lines. Republicans are looking at this as kind of a big culture war win for them heading into the midterms. And Trump celebrated it as a big win. Democrats have criticized it as harmful to transgender youth and erosion of civil

[00:32:32] rights protections. I mean, I feel like we've been talking about this one for years and years. When this announcement came out, this was the one—because I thought we would agree. I was taking some notes at home as I frequently do. I thought we would agree a lot about the birthright citizenship. This one I thought we would agree upon too. But the question I had for you is this. Is I had—I spoke to a couple folks who I would consider to be—who understand—I

[00:33:00] would identify them as Democrats and people that I think who—but they understand the potency of the issue. Their perspective was, is that this takes the debate—this in essence dampers—dampens the debate. I took the opposite approach, which was this gives it agency. This makes it a legitimate state—an issue that states can address. Is my reading of that right? Because I viewed this as, in essence, that this—they bring it back to the states.

[00:33:30] States can have those determinations. That platforms the issue in this state. That makes it relevant for states to deal with. If not—it doesn't damper the debate, I think it adds oxygen to it. Is—is—do you agree with that perspective or what's your take on it? No, I mean, I think that's exactly what it does. I think it's funny when some folks like states' rights and some folks don't like states' rights. And I feel like both sides, we see that when we have case hearing decisions like this,

[00:34:00] where it's saying states can determine that. It's not—yeah, it's not making a federal ruling. It's saying the states can do that. And I think I—you're right. I mean, I think this is something we're going to continue to hear about, especially now in the governor's race here in Minnesota of whether—which side believes what, which I think is pretty—pretty clear which side believes what. But it certainly is going to be something that we continue to hear out and I believe is going to be probably like, I would say, top three, five-ish for sure. This—for the governor's race.

[00:34:30] I'm going to—I'm going to—I'm going to—I'm going to—not push back, but I'm going to offer something on that statement. I think to some people it is a top—a top issue. What I don't know is, is how much—if it's your top issue, like, so let me just say this, if you're a voter and this is your top issue, I can pretty much tell you where I think you're going to be voting that election sector. And so the question is, is if all the issues were treated equal and if we didn't have gas

[00:35:00] at $4 a gallon hovering around that, if we didn't have the other top tier issues, it may be what I would consider to be an 80-20 issue. But is it an 80-20 issue that's broken through? I think the Republicans are going to want to talk about it, but I don't know if based on the other factors, if it will break through to that degree. Is that fair? Yeah, I think that's a good way to put it.

[00:35:25] My take is that it will be a top issue for voters who might otherwise stay home, I think. So I think that it could bring out folks from the far right who may not want to come out in a midterm election. If a Republican candidate is articulating the point that they, you know, believe in and—which I think we have seen from the Republicans in the governor's race—I think that could bring some Republican voters out who would maybe typically stay home if they say, you know,

[00:35:54] Senator Klobuchar is going to allow, you know, whatever their messaging is, right? Or soon-to-be governor, you know, candidate, whatever you want to call her. I think that from the other side, too, I think it could bring out some folks from the left that says, you know, if Kendall Qualls, Mike Lindell, Lisa Damoth, whoever, you know, has potential to attack transgender youth or whatever messaging they're going to use. I can see both of those things bringing out some voters that might stay home otherwise. And so that's where I feel like whether it's from these groups or these candidates or whether

[00:36:24] it might be something from outside groups, I think it is going to be something that I predict that we see and hear a lot of. Unfortunately, I would like it to be other things, but I believe that what we've seen it on mailers in speeches already, I believe there's got to be some polling out there that shows that there is some reason to keep it in the airways. All right, moving on, we have RNC versus Mississippi. This is all about the federal law, about the coordination between political parties directly with candidates.

[00:36:53] Some folks, Republicans, thought this was a violation of the First Amendment rights to have to limit that. They struck down the spending limits, which means this is going to be, I mean, RNC could take—you correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand, the RNC, NRCC, all of these other groups could basically come in and go to Pete Stauber or any of the candidates running. Obviously, it has to align with the regular rules of state to federal and all of that kind of stuff.

[00:37:20] And essentially hand them millions of dollars or work on campaign ads directly with direct transfers that were not possible otherwise. Correct. I mean, this could—when the national parties raise some more money and if—how it could have an impact on Minnesota, this could potentially help Republican candidates. If polling shows that the race is close, this gives—this removes some of the legal barriers

[00:37:46] that could ease the transfer of money from the national parties down to work directly alongside candidates. And so it has—it just removes some of those roadblocks. And so it is significant in that sense. Yeah. And I just think, to me, it's something I always laugh about. You know, we see it on the airways right now with Angie Craig and Peggy Flanagan—Congresswoman Angie Craig and Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan—excuse my skip there—as they're going to add

[00:38:15] at each other about money in politics. So the Democrats always, you know, tend to warn that this is going to increase the influence of money in politics when, in my experience, especially in the state of Minnesota, Democrats spend way more money in elections and have way bigger donors than the Republicans tend to have in a lot of ways. So I always kind of chuckle about that. But yes, I mean, it's blatantly true. Yes, there's going to be more money and probably, possibly lots more money. Because as a reminder, what you can give individually to a candidate as an individual,

[00:38:45] is not insignificant to, you know, $10,000, $11,000. But it's not the millions that people can give to those parties. No, I think spot on. And then we'll just kind of lump the last two together. We have Trump v. Slaughter and the Federal Reserve removal case. These are kind of interesting. President Trump fired Democratic members of the FTC. And the question was whether Congress can protect commissioners from being—from being fired. The court ruled that presidents generally have authority to remove leaders of independent executive

[00:39:14] agencies, overturning nearly 90 years of precedence. Then we kind of come back to the Federal Reserve. Trump sought to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. So these are two different cases here. Unlike the FTC case, the Supreme Court blocked removal and had held that the Federal Reserve structure receives different legal protection. So that is exciting that there, you know, to me this is one where I don't necessarily think that maybe I align with the president on some of this stuff.

[00:39:43] I do think that there is some political independence that deserves to be in there. But I also, if you're the administrator, if you're the top executive of the country, there also should be something to having your people or people supportive of you and your mission in different high-level roles. The Federal Reserve case has potential to come back around at some point, but right now it is saying that the Federal Reserve has different limits when it comes to presidential authority than other agencies.

[00:40:13] It was a very significant week for the Supreme Court and the president. Yes, absolutely. There was some power extended, not without limits. A conservative majority remained influential, but there was, again, some split decisions. The Federal Reserve case also had Roberts and Kavanaugh with the liberals on the court or the more liberal-leaning justices on the court. And so it wasn't straight ideological.

[00:40:41] There's going to be still some other conversations that come, but yeah, it was a great one. And if you haven't ever, go watch videos of the running of the interns that work for these different news stations that, you know, they still physically, you know, hand them some decisions, the decisions and they run them. And whoever can run fastest to their outlet and get it on the news is always a big thing. And it's like one of my favorite, favorite times to watch some of that. It is an interesting little tradition.

[00:41:10] Just to go back to something I said, and I want to kind of reframe it just very quickly. I think the, I think an academic analysis of Trump's presidency, and what I mean by that is, as the, is when his presidency ends and we go back and we get through some of the, some of the, when we get less discussion on kind of the, the crisis du jour and the social media posts and all that other stuff.

[00:41:35] I think there will be, I think historians will dedicate a, should dedicate a significant amount of time to looking at these, his influence on the Supreme Court and some of these decisions. Because this is the Trump court, the Roberts court has been significant, significantly influenced by who Trump has appointed to these.

[00:42:03] And based on some of the age of the justices that are on the court, there is a possibility he could have more appointments before he leaves office in 2028. And so I think it's more likely than not that he could have a further influence on this court, but these rulings are significant. And if, I think if you're looking for a subject area related to the president that you want

[00:42:27] to get into where that is just the bluntness or the kind of non-sexy part of the kind of fine boy nature of this president, it would be looking at the Supreme Court, looking at some of these rulings and how they've come down and what impact they've had on elections and what impact they've had on the country, but also how they have impacted elections in the standpoint of that.

[00:42:55] At least when I was growing up and I first got involved in politics, who a president could appoint to the Supreme Court was not necessarily as much as an influence on campaigns, but with the flow of information, the rise of social media and the sharing of information, we're able to break down and the public is able to break down very detailed analysis of Supreme Court decisions that 20, 30 years ago people didn't do.

[00:43:24] So it's fascinating. And for the historians out there, I'd love to hear some feedback because I do think that's one facet of the Trump administration, the two terms of the Trump administration, but that four-year break, that will be a significant part of history.

[00:43:39] Yeah, absolutely. I think that from my viewing, even over the last like 10, 20 years, I think the amount of people who know who the justices are and how they kind of work within the Supreme Court is the information that people have about the Supreme Court, the justices, how it works is far higher than it used to be.

[00:43:57] And I think, you know, people used to know, you know, different rulings and the outcomes, but couldn't point to, you know, maybe who was on the court at the time or who wrote the dissent or what that might be. And I think it's, there's a lot more knowledge around that now and will continue to be, I mean, you're right. It will be very interesting to see if he gets another appointment here soon. Absolutely.

[00:44:21] Moving on, we have, coming back to Minnesota here. Last week, there was some interesting news that broke that Kendall Qualls, who is the endorsed MNGOP candidate for governor, his running mate, Brian Nicholson, who's running for lieutenant governor, the Star Tribune reported was present on the U.S. Capitol grounds on January 6th. Reporting included photographs and video showing him inside a police perimeter after barricades had been breached.

[00:44:47] There is no evidence that he entered the Capitol building or assaulted law enforcement or anything of that sort. But we got an immediate response reaction from Qualls and Nicholson. Nicholson confirmed he was there. His position is that he traveled to support President Trump. He attended Trump's speech. He emerged to the Capitol. He was on Capitol grounds. He said he left before violence began and that he was never arrested or charged with any crime. And then he said, quote, I was one of the thousands of patriots who went to Washington, D.C.

[00:45:14] I don't apologize for being there. Qualls stood behind him. A hundred percent said he voluntarily disclosed this attendance before being selected as the LGE. It was fully vetted. It was not disqualifying. He accused Star Tribune of publishing another political hit piece and said it wasn't an issue for me now and it is not or it wasn't an issue for me then and it is not an issue for me now. What is your initial take when you heard this?

[00:45:37] Well, when I heard the news, my media reaction was this is not going to hurt him in the Republican primary. That the article and I think, you know, we've had a number of discussions about January 6th what occurred that day.

[00:45:54] There are people who went there who were there to support the president who did not engage in violence and any type of they were there to exercise their first member rights. It did get out of hand. It was a horrific day in American history.

[00:46:11] I think that the people on there are many people on the right who try to be dismissive of the events that occurred that day. I think there are people on the left who rightfully so are enraged by what occurred that day.

[00:46:28] What I will say to you is I think there's an absolute possibility that this story helps out Kendall Qualls and his running mate in the Republican primary because it affirms their stance on a number of issues that I think put them in some ways in the mainstream of the Republican Party but outside the mainstream of the general electorate. I'll have more to say but I want to get your take on it.

[00:46:54] Yeah, I think I think your take is spot on. I think there has a benefit or a positive possibility to help him in the primary and hurt him in the general. You know, there's there's certainly a distraction effort here. The DFL rightfully so jumped all over this called on the other candidates including qualls to disavow Nicholson. And, you know, I think it is.

[00:47:20] It's just, it's just, yeah, to me it was just more of another annoyance of like, why we can't have nice things here. That, why do we need to have just another distraction instead of being able to just point towards candidates who are in the campaign for the right reasons to do good things for our state and nation and who don't have any skeletons that some member of the electorate can jump on other than I disagree with you on policy.

[00:47:49] I mean, like, can we not just, which I know is too much to ask for. I know that is my rose colored glasses trying to take over here.

[00:47:56] Do you, for you, is it to me, I'm not sure which bothers me more. Is it Kendall Qualls knowing ahead of time and not caring? Like, is it better or worse to that? I appreciate that there was like, maybe I don't know if you'll, he said Nicholson told him, but if it was fully vetted and they were aware and they made a decision, I do appreciate that there was all information and it wasn't a skeleton in a closet that was going to come out because they always come out.

[00:48:22] I just don't know if it, like, does that bother me more that he knew about it and chose to proceed with that as his lieutenant governor running mate than finding out after the fact? What, which one do you think is better? I would view it as a skeleton that's come out. I don't think that, he certainly didn't lead with this. He certainly didn't discuss it. And, you know, we've discussed before, and I posted on social media when Nicholson was named that I had some concerns because this is a guy, when they went into the press conference to announce him,

[00:48:52] he didn't have what I think would be considered kind of the standard bio sheet. Here's his background, here's what he does. He misstated his age, which is kind of unusual for someone to themselves. I mean, Nicholson, just so we're, here are our listeners. He misstated his own age in the press conference when he was describing himself. So I do think that there is, I do think that there is a, how do I say this?

[00:49:19] There is a, there is an, I think a naivete about the way politics works. And we're seeing this play out differently. And in two states right now, I mean, we're seeing what's happening in Maine. We're seeing with the U.S. Senate candidate in Maine who got out, Grant Klanter, who got out, I think last, it was last night, got out officially after a number of allegations were made against him.

[00:49:43] Very serious. There's been some, you know, he had the Nazi tattoo. Then there were allegations of some conduct in some relationships. And then there were some very serious allegations named that what would be considered very, would be outside the bounds of women describing sexual assaults.

[00:50:04] Right. And the incredibly inappropriate conduct. And so I just want to try to tell me if this is too wide of a birth that I'm trying to make, but I think the arrival of trauma has created this mindset of, we want people that are outside of the box, that aren't perfect, that are real authentic people.

[00:50:27] And I will tell you that can only go so far. And I think the exercise in Maine has shown that when you don't have traditional vetting, when you don't have an understanding of what a can, what's any candidates pass, campaigns can get ahead of themselves. They can believe their own spin, believe in their own height.

[00:50:46] I will tell you that. I will tell you that. I will tell you that there's more out there about, I would just will tell you, there's probably more out there on Qualls and on Nicholson that hasn't been vetted yet.

[00:50:59] And there's a difference between a campaign knowing what's out there and not accepting it and not knowing. And there has just been, I think, an unprofessional level of care given to, I will just say to you that I am unimpressed with the professionalism of Qualls' campaign, both in how they've handled this race the entire time.

[00:51:23] And I think the rollout of Nicholson was the first indication that they didn't do their homework and the manner in which this came out. I will also say that there is a nomination process. There's a vetting process that the party engages in. And I think this is another example of how the party endorsement process doesn't seem to work because was this known? Was this asked? Who knew it and who knew it when and what did they think was going to happen?

[00:51:50] I don't know. This has a potential to be a liability in some universes. And again, this is, I think, the problem that Republicans have is that they live in a world that I don't think most people, the vast majority of voters live in. I don't know to what degree it'll be a front and center issue in the race if Qualls makes it through the primary.

[00:52:14] But again, I do think it helps him in some ways. The article, the article was wrote, there was an act of defiance in him. But I just, I think Republicans need, I just don't know if they live in the world where, would this be a, would this necessarily be a problem? Would this be a hindrance that you participated that day and what you did?

[00:52:36] I just don't know if, again, I go back to some of the issues that are top in the field and my concern is not with, because I'm, I mean, look, I'm on record talking about January 6th and my concerns. But the kind of cavalier response that they have about it makes me think that they didn't know and that it wasn't handled properly because why wouldn't you have led with it?

[00:53:03] Why wouldn't you have gotten out ahead of it and discussed it, number one? And then I think they're, Republicans are not understanding that this is the way the game is played. And so it's just, the best way I can describe it is just another indication that, at least from the Qualls campaign, has a total lack of professionalism related to how modern campaigns are run. And there's, I wouldn't be surprised if there's more out there.

[00:53:31] Now, in the interest of being relevant and current, Dave Osnick, who supported Qualls, who's now supporting Damath, he filed a campaign finance board complaint yesterday against the Qualls campaign, making a number of allegations that will have to go through the process. But my point is, I just would like to say is, so why Republicans are once again engaging in these small potatoes, what are the Democrats doing? What is Klobuchar doing?

[00:53:57] And they're talking about, in the aftermath of the state convention, Republicans had to deal with an issue of moment of silence for Derek Chauvin. And then, now it's this type of sideshow. And at what point are Republicans going to look at the clock and say, we got to start being serious if we're going to try to win this race?

[00:54:19] And this was just another example of how, I think, unserious the Qualls campaign is in relation to the other campaigns that are running. And also, I think it gets into a larger discussion than we can have down the road about the vetting of candidates, what people look for. And in this kind of day and age where the parties, I think, are becoming, are showing their weaknesses in the terms of the selection of them,

[00:54:47] is this too much of a consultant-driven happy talk rather than realistic discussion on what are these candidates going to win or not? Yeah, I hate anything that, to each their own, of who you want to pick to be on your ticket to campaign for you, all of that is fair. But at this, in this day and age, in this election, we all, but Republicans in particular, cannot afford to have, to alienate any part of the electorate,

[00:55:17] any part of folks that normally would come out and cast a ballot. And so you not caring that he was there and he didn't do anything violent is fine. But there are going to be a group of voters that that is completely disqualifying for, right? There might be just as many, if not more, that say, yay, bravo, I'm going to come out and vote for you in the primary. But when we look at the general, anything by any candidate that is something that is a distraction, that is not about the policy, about how to move our country and our state forward,

[00:55:46] it's not about how to make the next four years better than the last four years, is a distraction and is just completely not worth it, in my opinion. That I just think that, again, regardless of whether you had this conversation, you can say, you know, I'm sorry, that is fine that you were there, that you participated. If that's what your qualsers, whoever's opinion is, it's not my opinion that that is okay. But it's a whole nother thing to then, if that was the case, to then move forward and say, yeah, we're still going to move forward of this, even knowing that if slash when this comes out,

[00:56:15] it's going to be a massive distraction and going to take away, again, the competent adult in the room title that we're kind of vying for under governor this time around. And it's just disappointing. It's frustrating. And I am not very pleased. I want to just make sure I'm clear about something. I don't know that there's more out there. What I believe is that when a campaign brings a running mate to a press conference, they don't have a bio sheet.

[00:56:45] They misstate in the candidate and the running mate misstates his name, that the left hand really doesn't know what the right hand's doing. And so, plus there's been some other stories that have come out about this candidate. And I think that the campaign, that is where I think the campaign is not being credible, running a realistic race, because this is the manner in which they're handling this type of stuff. And again, stories are going to be written in this race. They can be written about policy. They can be written about analysis.

[00:57:14] Or they can be written this way. And the amount of column inches that have been written about these types of controversies shows, in my opinion, just a continued lack of professionalism. Agreed. Well, we'll see more come out from those potential recent filings and keep up of what is going on in all of these races. But turning our attention to a little bit of a different topic, we've had the pleasure of speaking with Secretary of State Steve Simon on this podcast in the past.

[00:57:43] There was a recent Star Tribune article detailing issues surrounding the coordination, or lack thereof, between Secretary of State Steve Simon's office and the federal government. The article details how typically by this time there would have, Secretary of State says, Steve Simon says that he would have been briefed by federal intelligent officials regarding emerging threats to the November election. He says that they typically rehearse responses to worst-case scenarios, which, oh my gosh, to be a fly on the wall when these happen at some point

[00:58:12] is like my Parks and Rec dream of the catastrophe simulation that they do. But they go through those worst-case scenarios, those tabletop exercises from foreign cyberattacks to bomb threats to severe weather and everything to be prepared of. But this year, this cycle, with just four months left, they have not had those briefings or trainings that they typically have. And Simon says that the administration has shifted its focus from assisting states with election security to scrutinizing state election practices. And as quoted in this article as saying,

[00:58:41] quote, the federal government itself is now a potential obstacle or even the instigator. And that's what's different this time. And I think that this is obviously troubling. Regardless of the viewpoint you have, there is some lack of cohesion coordination between leading up to this. And I think that it's very interesting how it all kind of ties together with what we've seen with some Democrats accusing of targeting from the federal government

[00:59:09] with ICE, with some of the statements and actions against walls and things of that sort. And then also, I guess, the larger conversation of what should be the way that this is run? States are kind of supposed to run their election. Should there be that coordination? How are we doing it? So when you read this article, initial take on how things are different this time around and if that's substantial and why. I enjoyed our conversation with Secretary of State's Hugh Simon.

[00:59:38] I consider him to be unimpeachable in terms of his authority on assuring that Minnesota elections are run fairly, objectively, and in accordance to the law. There is a human element of every election that we see opportunities for improvement. I do not in any way believe there is mass voter fraud that is going on.

[01:00:01] And I've consistently said that the discussion of voter denialism, voter fraud, is a cancer that is on the Republican Party. I think that just from the cheap seats where I'm watching this, I think the federal government is attempting to set up the state of Minnesota to fail when it comes to an election this fall so they can swoop in and create some issues. I think if Mike Lindell is the nominee on the Republican side, it will be front and center

[01:00:29] through the entire race, through the entire election, and we will be litigating how we conduct our elections in this state. And so I always appreciate when there is collaboration between the federal government, the state of Minnesota, and local municipalities and governments when it is appropriate. And I would hope that the federal government and the state of Minnesota partner up as they've done in the past

[01:00:54] so there is not confusion, controversy, and unnecessary drama on election day and in the election period opens up. But I think it's setting itself up for there to be a fight. There has been, I want to be very clear in how I say this, there's been discussion about the federal government dispatching some form of observers or other types of what I would call kind of SWAT teams,

[01:01:24] not in the military sense, but in this kind of like coming to the state and observing. And I think there's a lot of concerns that how this could spill out in an election cycle. So I hope that the opportunities for cooperation that can exist between the Secretary of State and the federal government, that those go forward because I have a concern that this could get out of hand. And I think that we need to ensure that our elections are done fairly. And we have a podcast.

[01:01:54] We would, I would welcome anyone who can come on with any sense of documented credibility, not pie in the side to discuss substantive election issues. And because we've had the Secretary of State on. And aside from, aside from refreshing a website on election night, aside from some issues we see in some of these races we've discussed, I think we get, I think we do a pretty good job here in the state.

[01:02:20] And I think that we need to all work together to ensure that election day goes off as best it can. Your take? Yeah, I mean, I think it's pretty similar. I think, you know, it's obviously concerning that things that happened in the past, even happened in the past under Trump, are not occurring. You know, I, obviously I think that we, there's always different threats that are potentially targeting our great nation.

[01:02:48] And our election system is obviously something that we know is, would not be wild to see that somebody would want to target it. So I think that cohesion is important so that states are briefed on what, what federal intelligence agencies are seeing as, you know, might occur, could occur, will occur, whatever level it is. I'd be curious to see, obviously the skeptic in me always wants to know, like, is this a Minnesota thing? Is this a blue state thing?

[01:03:14] Is this a lack of, of any efforts or is just a lack of preparedness by the Trump administration? Like where actually like the ill intent is and stands, but it doesn't sound great. I mean, especially when we, when we look at it in cohesion with the Department of Justice's request about voter rolls and Minnesota's refusal to hand them over. And so like, is this then a tit for tat? Well, you won't give us that. So we're not going to give you this. It kind of seems, I mean, that's certainly how the story, the article is, is showing us.

[01:03:43] You know, I, I believe Pete Stauber was quoted as saying that, you know, we, if you want, you know, that you should cooperate with federal requests, if you want federal cooperation, which I think there is something to that as well. But I don't love, I mean, in any aspect of life, you know, the tit for tat of, if you don't do this for me, I'm not going to do this for you when it's, you know, something that's been done time after time, year after year, cycle after cycle. It certainly feels like a little bit of malfeasance in that.

[01:04:08] So I think that we can hopefully stand, you know, united and confirmed under the fact that Minnesota elections have been traditionally safe and secure and hopefully will continue to be so. It obviously makes me nervous. And I think that whether, you know, I think you kind of have to weigh a little bit too, is the public lack of public. We've talked for how many months now about public's trust and public's lack of trust in the Walls administration, in the Trump administration,

[01:04:37] in ICE, in, you know, all of these different agencies, state and federal and local, and all of just that trust and transparency is something that voters are lacking from our elected officials up and down the ballot here in Minnesota. And, and I think that there is something even to just the threat of that lack of trust being increased because of things like this, that, that is, you know, dangerous and scary to know, you know, we don't want more people to be not trusting the

[01:05:03] election results and election process and how it goes out. So I'm hopeful that it can be a good, nice, competent election like they have been. We did get an office, sorry, a report this week from the Office of the Legislative Auditor, concluding that the registration system is generally secure and effective, that the Secretary of State has largely established adequate procedures for processing and maintaining voter registration, that there are safeguards in place to verify eligibility and maintain voter rolls. There are obviously, I think, typically these,

[01:05:32] these kind of reports do come with recommendations. So there are recommendations to strengthen the system that the report put forth for counties, Secretary of State and the legislature. But again, Office of the Legislative Auditor is a nonpartisan, you know, objective findings and typically are very upheld. We did see a press release come out from Emma, Representative Emma Greenman, who she is a member of the Legislative Audit Commission. She's a voting rights lawyer, applauded this report and then moved into the biggest threat to Minnesota's

[01:06:00] strong track record of election integrity is Donald Trump. And so, you know, I think this is something with this lack of coordination, with what the Democrats are likely going to push and what I feel like has been a successful message of the biggest threat to more democracy is President Trump. I believe that will continue. And I believe that's going to continue to be there even without him on the ballot this time around.

[01:06:23] Well said. I will say, you know, one of the things and when I was a Republican for Harrison Walls and I wrote an op-ed on this and discussed some of them, I talked about some of these concerns that I had about Donald Trump and democracy and his validation and support of the institution. And in some ways, he we've discussed and we've highlighted some of those examples of where, you know, he's gone to the Supreme Court, worked through the court

[01:06:50] process. And so where he's had some of his decisions overturned and like the birthright citizen just this past week. But on the flip side, and so that's where I think he does do a good job of kind of affirming our democratic institution. But on the flip side, this is someone who very frequently says he won the state of Minnesota in an election three times. And I don't and that's just simply not factual. And so what I worry about is this continuing growing of

[01:07:19] election denialism. And I think while I understand the political point that Representative Greenman is making, and I acknowledge the point that she's making, I go back to there are things that we can do right now to damper that down. And I hope once again, not to be naive, but to put the rose colored glasses on or put, I just want to once again, appeal to our better angels who can work on some of these issues,

[01:07:48] some of these election issues and try to make them as bipartisan as they can. And I think it's incumbent upon us as we continue to cover the election cycle to know and lay the groundwork to which of this is, are these substantive political disagreements or is some of this political theater? And is it some of it setting up for a fight down the road? Because I think that would be good to kind of document. Because again, you and I respect our conversations with Secretary Steve Simon

[01:08:17] that we've had on. And generally, I think that we, again, I don't speak for you, but please correct me wrong. Generally speaking, we have aligned ourselves with, we have good, safe elections in the state. There is an element of human error that occurs in every election cycle, but we do not subscribe to the fact that there is widespread fraud that is overturning our elections. And we can, there's

[01:08:42] always room for improvement. Is that fair to say? Yeah, absolutely. Great. That's all I got. A couple of housekeeping items I wanted to discuss. I want to note a few things. Becky and I, we are not paid to do this podcast. This is what I would say, a labor of love, something we enjoy doing. It fits in between our work schedules and light schedules. And every week at the end of a podcast, I say, we'll be back next week. That is always my intention to come back next week. But life

[01:09:11] sometimes has different plans. And over the last couple of weeks, there have been some times where the show that we had planned could not happen. And I want to acknowledge that, but also just say that as much as to the degree which Becky and I are public figures and we operate in this universe, we get to have private lives and we get to deal with stuff. And families say families well, all is good. But I have been dealing with some things over the last couple of weeks that have hindered my

[01:09:39] ability to do a show. But I am committed every time I say we'll be back next week, that we will in fact be back next week. And I just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge that and that I appreciate the communication I have with Becky and updating her as to why we need to pause and do some things. I'm not asking for calls, sympathy, check-ins or anything like that. But just note that life does happen sometimes and things are going on. I also wanted just to, and also invite you in for this

[01:10:08] discussion. Since it does dovetail in very, very slightly. We're not paid to do this podcast and we have outside work that we do. We have done a tremendous job of always disclosing if we have clients or things that we're discussing that may overlap. I don't believe, and I, you know, both of us at one point did do communications jobs for entities. And so we would have to, we would be

[01:10:35] literally paid to spin. I'm not paid to spin for anyone, but I do work and Becky works. We're not trust fund kids. We have to work and put food on the table. I did do a bit of work for a pack that is supporting Adam Schwarzie for the US Senate as we pivot into any future discussions. I just want to make a point to acknowledge that now. Again, when we do stuff in our day jobs, that doesn't mean

[01:11:02] that we are paid to come on and spin. Is that fair to say Becky? Yeah. And so we, and I think what we've tried to do on this podcast is always have a space where we can, you know, make the disclosure, but then be true to who we are and what our spin is and what our takes are and what our analysis is, because we always want to be respectful of this space and what we've created. And so I just wanted to note that. And again, people have questions or concerns. I think we've done

[01:11:28] a good job over the last four years of laying kind of our biases or how we frame things. And I think that this podcast space has generally been a BS free zone where we're giving our take. We're giving like, and I think the catalog of the show says that. Fair? Very fair. I mean, I think that's where, we're not, you know, journalists who have to follow some journalist code of ethics. This is a

[01:11:56] podcast about our opinions on things going on in the world and, and we share as such. And so it's not, I don't think unusual for one of us to be, you know, it's not, it's not wild for me to think of you, which is similar to you disclosed, you know, some of your stuff, efforts with Walls and Harris last time around. I don't think it's wild and crazy to think that you would or would not be involved with some

[01:12:21] sort of campaign or pack or in some capacity. So I think I appreciate you sharing. I think that's helpful and good for our listeners to know, but we have opinions, we have facts and we can have them. And that is the joy of this right now. And I also know, and one of the things that we balance is having a podcast and doing this will also expose us to some level of scrutiny and scorn and attempts

[01:12:48] to do that. And I get that that happens, but it's not going to deter us from, I think, having balanced, thoughtful conversations. And I think one of the things I do applaud us on is we, aside from our individual ability, under individual responsibility to pay the bills, I think we always are interested in putting out a quality product that holds up to scrutiny and

[01:13:13] analysis. I don't know that I've ever gotten, I don't think you have either, but I'm being serious. I don't think I've ever gotten feedback from anyone who's ever said that we're on the take. I think that we do a very good job every episode of laying out who we are, what we believe. And again, if you look at the catalog of the podcast, the evolution and stances are pretty consistent. And if we've changed our positions, we'll say why. So I just wanted to note that. But Becky,

[01:13:43] and I just wanted to close by just saying thank you. You have for reasons which was nobody else's business, but Becky and I's and my family's issues to say thank you, Becky, for your continual patience, and I'm willing to be accommodating and flexible when we do these podcasts because this was a great episode once again of the breakdown with Brock Corbett and Becky. Before you go, show us some luck for your favorite podcast by leaving your review on Apple Podcasts or on the platform where you listen. You can also follow us on our website and across all social media platforms at

[01:14:10] at BBBreakPod. The breakdown with Brock Corbett and Becky will be back next week. Thank you so much for joining us. Have a great week. Bye bye.