Revealing Realities with Jeff Reynolds, Ken LaCorte and Abigail Anthony
01:17:28 Share

The 2022 political field was intense, so don't get left behind in 2024. If you're running for political office, the first thing on your to-do list needs to be securing your name on the web with a yourname.votewebdomain from godaddy.com. Get yours now.

Welcome to another episode of Breaking Battlegrounds with your host, Chuck Warren. I'm Sam Stone. As always, we're going to jump right into it with our first guest today, Jeff Reynolds, Senior Investigative Reporter at Restoration of America and the author of Behind the Curtain, which you can find at one of the great domains online.

on the web. That is whoownsthedems.net, exposing the unbelievable network of Democrat billionaires who are subverting our democracy via dark money. Jeff Reynolds, thank you for joining us. Welcome to the program. Thank you, guys. I really am appreciative. Thanks for having me on. Jeff, I want to ask you a question real quick regarding your book and your research. How much do you believe

that these American leftist billionaires are behind these riots on college campuses or protests, we'll call them protests, protests, or is it from foreign money, do you believe?

Well, I think it's all of the above. In fact, I have a couple of articles out at Restoration News on the subject detailing all of the not not even all. I haven't even scratched the surface of all the money that's gone behind it. You've got the Tides Foundation. You've got the Soros Foundation, you know, the Open Society Foundations.

You've got the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, which is a longtime, very left wing charity group that has been around for decades funding all of these things. Do you know if that's still Kim Elliman running that? Yes, I believe it is. Yeah. I mean, you know, great grandson of Nelson Rockefeller has been the executor of the Rockefeller estate for some years. Billionaire with enormous influence and nobody's ever heard his name.

Yeah, I know there's lots of those guys out there, like John Arnold from Enron and, you know, all these, you know, Tom Steyer ran for president, but a lot of people still don't know who he is. You know, there's a lot of these guys out there, and a lot of them are in my book, and they've been funding the worst of the worst for decades. Yeah.

Give an example for our audience who's unaware of this. Give an example of something they funded that doesn't really have fingerprints unless you're diving into financial records or IRS forms. Give us an example of something they have funded that has really altered a course of America on a particular subject or policy.

Well, Tom Steyer is a great example of somebody that a lot of people don't really realize. He went in and he spent hundreds of millions of dollars of his own fortune through his 501c3 to elect candidates who are green-oriented and Green New Deal candidates. He actually...

donated a million dollars to the DNC in order to get himself on the committee that changes the party platform at the 2016 Democratic National Convention. And he added the Green New Deal to the Democratic platform before it wasn't there, before he spent all that money to buy his way in.

How extensive is this network? Do we have some idea of kind of the parameters of how much they're spending? Because...

People used to talk – one of my kind of pet peeves is with the media, they'll have a crusade. So here in Arizona where we record the show, you have a woman named Lori Roberts for the Arizona Republic who carried on about a decade-long campaign against dark money. The minute it looked like Democrats got ahead and started spending vastly more than Republicans –

that crusade has totally disappeared. You know, she just doesn't care anymore, right? It's shocking when that happens, right? No, in my book, Behind the Curtain, one of the things that made me write the book was that

The Democrats always say that the Republicans are the party of billionaires, but the opposite is certainly true. Democrats are much more beholden to their billionaires than the Republicans are. To the tune of, I mean, they're spending...

probably a couple of billion dollars a year on politics for a permanent ground game and a permanent operation where the Republicans or the conservative donor class has not been able to coordinate itself and get organized the way the Democrats do. One of the things that the Democrat billionaires do and the far left billionaires do

is they come together on an annual basis several times a year, in fact, at different donor conferences and decide among themselves where they're going to spend all their money and what kind of efforts they're going to back for the year or for the next election cycle. That's how you ended up, for instance, in 2004 with the Secretary of State project, excuse me, 2008. After the 2004 election, it was very close between

George Bush and John Kerry, they decided they wanted to take over state secretaries of state offices, which elected several far left secretaries of state to be able to count the votes. And that's, you know, that was the seeds of the election malfeasance that we've seen over the last several years. How much, how much are these? One of the questions I think people have had is, is,

It does not seem possible that Act Blue's fundraising is legitimate. I mean, it just does not. To anybody who's been in politics for any length of time, the amount of money that they're theoretically raising from small donors strikes me as almost impossible. Is there evidence that they are moving that avenue as well?

Well, I have seen people who have done research on this subject. I haven't dug into it deeply myself, but some people have pointed out that there are little ladies in Minnesota and Wisconsin who have given thousands of small-dollar donations individually themselves to

And when contacted, they're like, I have no idea what you're talking about. You know, it's $10 here and $15 there. And because it all comes under the ActBlue umbrella, it doesn't look like an individual – or they bundle all of it together, right, under 501c3 rules. Right.

but it looks like it's coming from an individual when it could be from anybody. I mean, there's no telling if there's foreign funding coming in through that avenue. Right. I've been an advocate for a long time. Ever since I wrote my book and even before that, we need big philanthropy reform because there are so many people taking advantage of the IRS rules around nonprofits. Correct.

It's as stinky and corrupt as organized crime. A couple of points. What would you change about the current nonprofit donation rules? Well, I'd make it totally transparent, first of all. I would make it impossible to hide the identities of the donors who are giving all this money.

That's one thing. And then, you know, once you know who it is, you can kind of figure out what they're trying to accomplish just because, you know, okay, George Soros probably isn't backing any libertarian causes, you know? Right. Yeah, so it's all a matter of more transparency and more freedom of speech. The ability to figure out who's doing what gives you an idea what they're trying to accomplish. It seems to me...

Jeff, Chuck, it seems to me like the Democrats modeled this network of donors who are holding these meetings and coordinating their efforts. They modeled it off the Koch network. But the difference is their version of it, it has a lasting impact. And at this point, the Koch network, which is most of the way to defunct, has had zero lasting impact. The way they went about investing in the process. Different strategies. Right.

Yeah, Sam, I would actually say that this predates the Kochs by a couple of decades. They first started doing these donor-directed funding efforts in the 70s under the Tides Foundation. And the Tides Foundation really set the template for how the left moves its money without the public knowing.

What they do is they've set up a donor network where the original idea was this little old lady who wants to leave her estate to some environmental cause or some charity cause can tell this network, I would like you to take this money and distribute it out to the charities that are going to do the things that I want done with my money after I'm gone.

And they've taken that and expanded it out to this vast universe of foundations all across the professional left where donor-directed funding now is the model that they use.

And like I said, you know, that that predates the Kochs. I mean, the Kochs were billionaires a long time ago, and one of them ran for vice president in 1984 under the libertarian ticket. So they've been around a long time, but they didn't really set up a funding network like this until probably the late 90s or early 2000s, where.

The left has been doing this at least since the 70s. I'll give you another example real quick if we've got time. Yes, please. Yeah, the Ford Foundation was set up by Henry Ford Sr. This was in the 30s when many industrialists hit upon some great innovation in the market and made money hand over fist, more money than they would ever know what to do with. So they set up all these

funds to fund charity and give back to communities and help people who are in genuine need, like the Rockefeller Fund and the Ford Foundation and all of those kinds of things. The Ford Foundation in 1978 received a letter from Henry Ford Jr., who was the final member of the Ford family remaining on the board of directors.

And he sent a resignation letter in disgust saying essentially something to the effect of, you people have changed this charity into something that would be unrecognizable to my father and opposes the very capitalism that created the fund in the first place and drives our economy and our society. That was in 1978. And they've only gotten more left-wing since then. Wow.

We have about a minute and a half left before we take a break. We're with Jeffrey Reynolds. He is the author of the book Behind the Curtain, Inside the Network of Progressive Billionaires and Their Campaign to Undermine Democracy. Tell our listeners, how would they, if they were wanting to be, you know, amateur sleuths, how would they go about trying to find out who's funding these campaigns?

anti-Israel protest. We have one minute left for a segment. Yeah. In fact, there's been a lot of reporting on that, and I've done some reporting on that myself. The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post have done a great job of digging into that stuff, so you can just kind of look it up there. And

but you've got all kinds of shady connections there with foreign governments, the government of Qatar, terrorist groups. I mean, there's a lot going on there. And so it's kind of hard. You kind of have to know...

which groups are organizing them. And then you can go into, there's a great website called USA, USA spending.gov. And it can show you where a lot of these nonprofit groups are getting their money. And then it's, you know, just digging through IRS form nine nineties, the nonprofit tax return forms and figuring out who's doing that.

Yep, fantastic. Jeffrey Reynolds, we're going to be coming back with more from him in just a moment. Get his book at whoownsthedems.net. And we're going to be talking when we come back about Biden's weaponization of the federal government. Stay tuned.

At Overstock, we know home is a pretty important place, and that's why we believe everyone deserves a home that makes them happy. Whether you're furnishing a new house or apartment or simply looking to update and refresh a few rooms, Overstock has everyday free shipping and amazing deals on the beautiful, high-quality furniture and decor you need to transform any home into the home of your dreams. Overstock, making dream homes come true.

Folks, this is Sam Stone for Breaking Battlegrounds. Discover true freedom today with 4Freedom Mobile. Their SIM automatically switches to the best network, guaranteeing no missed calls. You can enjoy browsing social media and the internet without compromising your privacy. Plus, make secure mobile payments worldwide with no fees or monitoring. Visit 4FreedomMobile.com today for top-notch coverage.

digital security, and total freedom. And if you use the code BATTLEGROUND at checkout, you get your first month of service for just $9 and save $10 a month for every month of service after that. Again, that's code BATTLEGROUND at checkout. Visit 4freedommobile.com to learn more.

All right. Welcome back to Breaking Battlegrounds. Folks, you've been hearing us talk about YRefi for a while now. You need to go to their website, invest, the letter Y, then refi.com. Check them out. Learn how you can earn up to a 10.25% fixed rate of return in a secure collateralized portfolio. It's been a crazy week on Wall Street. Lots of economic indicators not looking fantastic, but your investment with YRefi is going to be a big one.

is always looking good. 10.25% fixed rate of return is a fantastic opportunity. And by investing with Y Refi, you're doing well for yourself by doing good for others and helping students pay off their high-interest college loans early. Check them out. Invest the letter Y then refy.com or give them a call at 888-Y-REFI-24.

We're with Jeffrey Reynolds, and he is the author of an article that came out on AmericanGreatness.com. You can find it at amgreatness.com. Biden weaponizes the federal government for his own reelection campaign.

Sam and I have had this theory with our conservative friends about the election 2020. Sam and I feel like what they keep missing and not focusing enough on is, one, how the press suppressed the Biden, you know, 100 Biden laptop story, how they did ballot harvesting, though it's illegal in many states. But more importantly, these Zuckerbucks in these recorder races, I think it was probably worth a percent or two in these key swing states, which gave Biden the victory. Right.

And so I was very encouraged to read your article. We'd like you to go point by point what you found out doing your research for this article and how Biden is using taxpayer dollars to benefit his reelection campaign. To get around the response. To get around the response and stay lost. Because many states banned that activity. Right.

Yeah, no, that's exactly right. The Zuckerbucks thing, actually, I think you're right. It probably swung enough votes to be at least a determining factor. And then there was, you know, all the ballot harvesting and all that stuff.

I used to live in Oregon, so that's where they invented vote-by-mail only, and that's where they – I have a friend who's worked on federal election challenges, and he basically says – he's a lawyer, and he says that vote-by-mail only was invented to codify cheating, to make it legal.

So, yeah, I have nothing good to say about what happened in 2020. Well, the problem is you're not going to get rid of vote by mail. I mean, Republicans are just smoking wacky tobacco if you think people want to get rid of it. It's just not going to happen. Yeah, it's like the 17th Amendment that allowed the direct vote for senators instead of voting for them through the legislature. Once you have that, you're never going to get the voters to give it up, right? Correct.

you might as well work on things you can actually do. So that's why I strongly advocate you don't allow the expansion of vote-by-mail in states and extended voting periods and ballot harvesting, all of that stuff. That's why, you know, now I live in Florida, and we've taken a lot of major steps to curtail all that behavior. And we won't be seeing that here, which I think is great.

It's a couple of points in every election that that that that is. Well, amazingly, too, Florida has their results that night by midnight. They're done. Right. So anyway, heck, we. Yeah, it was by 830. Yeah. I mean, everybody's in bed, right? Watching the sports highlights. So, Jeffrey, tell us about the article. So tell us what Biden's doing using federal taxpayer dollars to circumvent state rules, regulations, things of that nature.

Right. So he's basically following the Zuckerberg model, but using the federal government to do so. He signed a an executive order the first couple of weeks he was in office in 2021, directing all the all the federal agencies to make decisions.

ballot access a priority, to figure out how they could use each agency of the federal government under the executive branch, every cabinet agency, to turn out the vote, to encourage people to vote. So what they're doing is they're like the USDA, for instance, the Department of Agriculture,

They have a ballot harvesting operation now because of this executive order where they're going and putting voter registration in all of the free breakfast and free lunch at school program paperwork, that kind of stuff. So they're weaponizing all of these federal government agencies to register folks who

who happen to skew towards the people who are giving them the welfare benefits. So, you know, it really is just nakedly obvious who they're targeting with all of these efforts. They're not sending out rednecks in pickup trucks with gun racks out to the panhandle attack to register people there, right? So it's pretty obvious who they're targeting.

You know, this is one of those things I'll just say as an aside. And Jeff, I don't need you to necessarily agree or disagree because I know I'm walking on dangerous ice here. But the very concept that we need to increase total voter participation, I disagree with because I'd like to increase informed voter participation. But sheeple...

I don't care if they vote. I'd rather they didn't. Well, you know, and I'll tell you what, I took a while to become a conservative in life. I'm in my 50s now, and I didn't vote until my 30s. And I just sort of had this sense that I didn't...

know enough about the system to really cast an informed vote. My first vote was in 2004. So it's I freely admit that I didn't have enough information myself to confidently cast a vote. Now I do. And now I constantly cast my vote.

I think a lot of folks, you know, we don't have any sort of like compulsory service to the country or military service or anything like that. So you don't have a large swath of the population that knows that that understands what's really important in keeping a nation together. So, yeah, I tend to agree with you on that. Well, how are they using charities to encourage illegal alien votes?

That's a very good question. There was a nongovernmental organization, an NGO down in Mexico that was actually in the northern part of Mexico near the border with the United States where these refugee camps are, where they hold these refugees that migrate all the way up from South America.

And they were handing out flyers that translated from Spanish said, don't forget to vote for President Biden when you get into the United States because we need four more years of his administration to keep these centers open. Wow. Wow. In any normal world where the media was not a complete joke, that would be front page of every news. Is there is there is that online? Can people find that flyer? Has that been posted?

Yeah, that was all over Twitter. That's why I added it to that article that I wrote. That was that was. And no one's denied it. And no one's denied it. No one said no, not we. I looked it up myself and found it. Yeah, it was right there playing today.

Wow. This is incredible. I don't know what to say. This is incredible stuff. I wish we had Jeffrey Reynolds on for a couple more segments. We're coming to the end of this one. But folks, you can check him out. WhoOwnsTheDems.net to find his book Behind the Curtain. Follow him on Twitter at ChargerJeff.

Real quick while we have 30 seconds left is Charger. What's the reference? I'm hoping I've got my fingers crossed for the car right here, man. I was a San Diego Chargers fan since the time I was two years old. That's acceptable to accept that's best uniforms, best uniforms in NFL history. And you and you are long and apparently you're long suffering. That's why you can dig into finances.

That's right. I got plenty of time on my hands when the playoff time rolls around. All right. Thank you so much, Jeffrey Reynolds. We really appreciate having you on the program. We're going to look forward to and we're going to need to get him back on. One hundred percent. I want to I want to do a little more on talking about some of this stuff. Stay tuned, folks. Our next guest up today is going to be Ken LaCourte, friend of the program, talking about how your bank is not your friend. Stay tuned.

Welcome back to Breaking Battlegrounds with your hosts Sam Stone and Chuck Warren. Folks, stop big tech from tracking your every move. Experience true freedom with 4FreedomMobile. Visit 4, that's the number 4, freedommobile.com today for top-notch coverage, digital security, and total freedom. Use the code BATTLEGROUND at checkout to get your first month of service for just $9 and save $10 a month for every month after that. Again, that's code BATTLEGROUND at checkout. Go to 4freedommobile.com today.

So, Ken LaCourte, we have an article you wrote called Your Bank Is Not Your Friend, and GOPAG's Warrant Against E-Banking. This is a personal experience for me. I have half a dozen companies, and about four years ago, Wells Fargo just told us with a letter, form letter, that we're closing all your accounts. We had credit lines. We ran tens of millions of dollars. I mean, it was incredible. We had attorneys on it. They would never give an answer.

They finally just said, you don't fit our banking profile. Because I've worked with you. You were VIP customers at that point. Yeah. Wow. So what was it? What were you doing that you think that set them off? We did an initiative in Ohio.

that the left did not like. And all of a sudden, I mean, it literally calls all banks. It went so down that I was a cosigner on my daughters who were in college at the time, student checking accounts, and they closed those accounts down too. Was that citizen voters at that time?

No, it wasn't CISVO or something for that. I'll have to look it up. But they closed it all down. It was about six, seven years ago. It's a real problem. So they gave us like two or three weeks. We tried to find out what it is. I had a big law firm go into it. They would not give an answer. And finally, just the woman who was our personal – I mean, I had my own personal banker. She just brings my CFO and she says, it's politics. I mean, she just said, I can't put it in writing, but I'm just telling you it's because of what you do.

What was the name of this bank? Wells Fargo. Okay, good. I mean, not some small bank, Wells Fargo. So we have since, we have a ratio of Chase, which is just a pain, but they're not bad. But we've gone to all credit unions, and that is just 10 times easier. I mean, Wells Fargo, on political campaigns, you would get a check, they would hold it for 10 days. Never mind, I'd banked there 20 years and had lines of credit. I mean, it's the craziest thing in the world. So when you wrote this, it just struck a chord with me. So what have you found in your research?

Well, I mean, the biggest thing was that some of the state's attorneys generals are coming out and talking about this as well and actually kind of moving forward on either complaints or and asking specifically Bank of America and a couple of others. Now, Bank of America dumped a handful of religious-based clients, which is even a little trickier.

Right.

and/or I'm not baking your cake or whatever that is. When it gets into the protected class, and that's why religion gets a little hinky, and certainly there's 95 protected classes, and we're just not one of them. So look, I mean, we saw it even in Kanye. Now Kanye is kind of crazy. I mean, he's probably a seriously mentally ill person.

but it's kind of weird when some guy says, you know, hey, the Jews are taking over, and then all of a sudden all of his banks drop him the next day. Right. That's kind of saying something. So, I mean, there are legalities that I think that it's good that the attorney generals are sticking to that and putting some pressure on that to make sure that they don't nudge over that line. And then the second thing is, you know, if...

We as Americans have to decide – look, I live near San Francisco, so when I'm walking in and there, I would never not go to a restaurant because of somebody's political beliefs. But if he hangs that on his front window and there's a BLM sticker on the outside of his restaurant, then I have a tendency to follow with my ideology instead of that. And I think certainly with Bank of America, both from this nonsense –

They make their values clear by who they also donate to. They were a billion-dollar investment as a response to the George Floyd riots, so they helped kind of pay for those. So I think that we as consumers need to be more aware of the politics of our banks.

Yeah, I think that's a great point. And one of the points that I would make is that all these banks are FDIC insured, which I believe should require them to treat every American citizen equally without consideration to anything else, essentially, other than criminal activity.

The problem is with these big banks is that this is where all the activist investors come in. We had earlier a guest on talking about how liberals finance things, liberal billionaires finance things that people don't see. These activist investors, I think, are really pushing a lot of this. Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised at all with that.

But again, I think that 99.2% of people don't understand what their bank might be doing with them. They'll probably never face that. But I tell you, the scariest thing I think that we saw in the last two years was immediate debanking up in Canada. You had those trucker protests, and all of a sudden somebody who gave $50 to the truckers now –

now can't pay their bills. I mean, most people don't have more than 500 bucks of cash in the house, probably less than that. So when that happens, that's scary. And it was scary to see that as another tool of suppression. Absolutely. We're going to be coming back with more in just a moment from Ken LaCourte. Stay tuned.

At Overstock, we know home is a pretty important place, and that's why we believe everyone deserves a home that makes them happy. Whether you're furnishing a new house or apartment or simply looking to update and refresh a few rooms, Overstock has everyday free shipping and amazing deals on the beautiful, high-quality furniture and decor you need to transform any home into the home of your dreams. Overstock, making dream homes come true.

Folks, this is Sam Stone for Breaking Battlegrounds. Discover true freedom today with 4Freedom Mobile. Their SIM automatically switches to the best network, guaranteeing no missed calls. You can enjoy browsing social media and the internet without compromising your privacy. Plus, make secure mobile payments worldwide with no fees or monitoring. Visit 4FreedomMobile.com today for top-notch coverage.

digital security, and total freedom. And if you use the code BATTLEGROUND at checkout, you get your first month of service for just $9 and save $10 a month for every month of service after that. Again, that's code BATTLEGROUND at checkout. Visit 4freedommobile.com to learn more.

Welcome back to Breaking Battlegrounds with your host, Chuck Warren. I'm Sam Stone. Folks, go to investwirefi.com today. Learn how you can earn up to a 10.25% fixed rate of return in a secure collateralized portfolio. The market can go up and down. The Fed can do whatever they want. You still earn a fantastic return. And by investing with Wirefi, you're doing well for yourself by doing good for others and helping college students pay off their high-interest loans early.

So check them out, invest the letter Y, then refy.com or give them a call at 888-Y-REFI-24. We are continuing on now with Ken LaCourte. You can follow him on Twitter, at Ken LaCourte. He has got some fantastic articles out right now. But one of them we wanted to touch on, because this has been in the news, Chuck, is the media say crime is going down. Don't believe it.

it? You know, we all have to start just skewing most of the large media as a mouthpiece for the Democratic administration or the Democratic narrative out there. So that's why so many articles are like, no, the economy is actually great. And the similar thing is happening in crime, where we are told consistently that

that, or certainly in the last year or so, that despite more and more Americans saying, you know, crime seems up. There was a recent Gallup poll late last year that showed 92% of Republicans believe that, almost 60% of Democrats believe that. But the media is saying, well, statistically, it's not. And

As I dig into statistics, there are so many times that I just want to grab a person with a Ph.D. and start to problem. Because, I mean, they just make up, how do I say, they do stupid things even when ideology isn't part of it. Just completely omitting some major facts. They lie when the truth will do. That's the problem. They just lie all the time.

Yes, and lying in the way that's harder to catch. Not saying that red is blue, but by ignoring the other facts or by not explaining something. My example in this with the media is literally if Fox reported that, well, Pete Buttigieg was giving a speech in Phoenix wearing socks and underwear.

and just not mentioning that he was wearing a suit, a tie, a jacket, a shirt. I mean, what they said was not false, but it leads you to a lie. And that's exactly what the media does all the time. I mean, they'll get fired for reporting, for misreporting a fact. They get promoted for

for slipperily putting, that's not a word, but it sounds good, slipperily putting facts into a way that creates an overall lie. And that's what the media has done in this instance. And it's all based on the real thing of what is clearly going on when you look at self-reporting victimization, yet the declining number of police and FBI crime reports is that

people are stopping stopping for for lesser stuff they're they're stopping reporting it to the cops i mean in san francisco if your car window gets broken it's almost an extra insult to have to go to the police station they literally say nothing's going to happen so do you really want to do this so their numbers look better right and and i think there's a there's a lot of that going on along the country the other part of it which which you meant you touch on and which i have seen

is that following first Ferguson and then the George Floyd protests, a lot of the big blue cities stopped reporting to the FBI crime that could be interpreted negatively for the left. 30% plus aren't reporting.

Yeah, it's a big number. Now, to be fair to us on the other point, the FBI did change around a lot of the statistics and the systems that they wanted to get. You had to fill out, you had to use different computer systems and that there was a revision in things.

But yes, when they don't report that, for instance, I can tell you how many, you know, how many Native Americans died in a drunk driving crash in Utah last year. But I can't tell you anywhere by federal statistics what's the crime rate of illegal immigrants. Right.

They just don't keep those numbers. They keep the one number. There's actually a false notion out there that, oh, they're better than average based on an old Cato study and other people just lying to you, as we described. But that's just once in a while you just can't – you're looking for things and you'll just see that they'll drop out ethnic things on certain reporting or they'll do weird little tricks on there not getting the information that might –

One of the things that I saw working with the city of Phoenix and that became a little bit of a behind the scenes discussion with police is because right now the DOJ is investigating the city of Phoenix police department, trying to place them under a DOJ civil rights decree, which means the DOJ takes over their police department.

That means all policing in – I think it's 27 departments that have been taken over by the DOJ is very politicized. And one of the issues that we've seen is if crime stats that are being generated in that city do not match –

hurt the narrative. In other words, if you're seeing, for instance, disproportionate crime from the black community, they will do everything they can to downgrade that crime so a homicide becomes manslaughter, you know, I mean, on and on and on. There is a lot of that going on, and people don't realize that's happening. Well, and you hit the nail on the head there. The biggest...

thing that the left has a problem with with the criminal justice system is that when you look at the numbers and

And even when you do regression analysis and take out poverty and look at every factor, blacks commit a hell of a lot more crimes than whites. I mean – and the best one to look at because then they always say, well, you're just over-policing or you're under-policing or whatnot. So the best one to look at is murders. Murder is tough to cover up because you've got a dead person there.

Yeah, somebody has to get buried. Someone gets buried. Yeah, and cops actually kind of care a little bit more about that than a moving violation. If you're a black – and this is a sad stat, but it's something we need to – and again, it's not just about poverty or where they live. If you are a black person, you have a 600 percent more likely –

to be murdered than the average person in America. It is off the charts. And it's really rough because then you get the liberals that are out there trying to squish the numbers or say it's about poverty so we can buy our way out of this or doing other things. And of course, none of that goes in and helps solve that problem in the long term. It almost creates the opposite.

You know, it's like in these schools when it's like, oh, this group of kids isn't scoring as well. Let's get rid of the test. Right. Correct. That's always a problem. That never helps out the people who they say they want to help out. It just papers over the problem. Let's talk about our protests on college campuses. So do you think DeSantis is handling protesters in Florida like Reagan did in California? I think so.

I think, you know, I haven't really sat and watched a whole lot of things that he was specifically doing. So to be honest, I don't know that. I think that there's, you know, that there are bright lines that are easy to distinguish. And the bright line is,

let them protest their brains out and say all the things that they want to say, whether they're right or wrong or silly or stupid. You're allowed to do that in college. But then there are these things called the law that we've debated over for 250 years. So when it comes to threatening violence, when it comes to spray painting things, when it comes to not letting people in the class, that's...

Then apply the law to it. And that would be a great lesson for students. Go out there, wear your mask, say you're going to starve yourself to help the Palestinians. But don't break any laws, because these are – all of these, even the private ones, are getting so much taxpayer money in. But they're being so – this one I think is –

Much more so than the George Floyd riots. This is hurting the left. And so they're not as all. I mean, look, when the George riots were going on, George Floyd were going on. It made Trump look bad because it was chaos on his watch. Correct. And it all. And you had a president running against him saying, I'll bring back normalcy. All right. He's crazy. Everything got crazy. Got covid. Streets are burning down.

And so it helped them. This one is different. It is exclusive in the college system, which is more tied to them, especially since the president just gave away a whole bunch of loan forgiveness on that. But it's also the left against the left. It's the far left kids and activists against college.

a lot of the Democratic Party, and it's all on Biden's watch, and he's looking more and more feckless. So this is actually why you're starting to see some of the campuses actually cleaning things up. UCLA, not just... Correct. If it was George Floyd all over again, UCLA would have let him stay there for a year. They would have given him classes. They would have done all this stuff that they did under the...

under the what was the one before that years back where it was the occupy i didn't even know what the occupy wall street yeah yeah i mean i i know that on multiple areas in in cities they gave them free office space to to move on correct correct correct so this one is an interesting one and this one i'm just popping popcorn yeah yeah and when you're gonna be able to pop it for a while as well and i'm in chicago is going to be fascinating for the dnc convention i i mean i just um sort of want to pop up my own tent there um

We have a friend of the show who got his, he's from Iran. He's an asylum seeker here. He got his graduate degree from John Hopkins in foreign policy and was talking to him last night. And he said, these protests are a hundred times worse than Charlottesville for one reason. Charlottesville, no one is going to hire those yahoos in any respectable business.

These people are from Ivy League schools. And next thing you know, they're going to be in the New York Times, at NGOs, and in government. That's what makes this so insidious, what they're doing on these campuses. What do you think about that thought?

You know, we certainly, you know, usually when you graduated from college, you know, you were goofy. And then you went and you had to adjust to the corporate world or the job world because there was like, you know, comb your hair, put on a suit, wear this tie and be part of that. There's certainly less of that in that they've had more success breaking into industries. And I would say you notice it the most in the industries that are dominated by young people. Facebook, right?

or any tech. You go into a Facebook or a Twitter or any of that, there are not a whole lot of 50-year-old guys sitting around there coding and doing all that. So that's why we saw this PC stuff first come out in the comic book industry. It started kind of early before any of this did with Gamergate and all of that stuff. In video games, there was huge fights going on, and then it moved to the tech world

all of those industries are radically dominated by, by young people. And I think they overwhelmed any, any of their bosses desires to, to, you know, to, to not be goofy. Um, now that said, I think we've seen it spread like he's right. We've seen it spread further. It's, it's spread into the New York times. It's spread into the, well, it's spread into all of the kind of corporate media. It's spread into a lot of other things, but, um,

You know, we'll see. I'm still a believer in the in the pendulum theory of politics. And I see the pendulum starting to come back on a lot of this chaos. Correct. This is kind of what it is. I mean, San Francisco, the the mayor here who two years ago was literally taking millions of dollars out of the police funds and saying, we're going to give it to the black community. There wasn't there wasn't even any code word. It was just like we're giving it to the blacks.

It's like, OK, that's fine. Well, now she's pounding her fist and she's sounding like like Dirty Harry. She supported she supported a an initiative which passed in San Francisco, giving cops the ability to, you know, use use some high technology that they'd taken away from them before. Because, well, you're arresting too many people who we don't like you to arrest. And and, you know, you're starting to see the.

You're starting to see a nationwide backlash. And look, we saw it in 68. I mean, Reagan campaigning against the craziness on campus has helped him win by a million votes when he first ran for, and he'd never held an office before except on TV or on the movies.

It propelled... Many people don't remember this. There was a... The guy who he put in charge of the school system there was F.I. Hayakawa, who was like a linguistic professor. Well, he got famous when he yanked the cables out of the speakers that the protesters were going on. He eventually became a U.S. senator because it propelled him to that. You know, Nixon ran... He ran a law and order campaign. So...

I'm sensing that the worm is starting to turn a little bit on this. And but, you know, you got to keep the pressure up. Thank you so much, Ken LaCourte. We always, always enjoy having you on the program and look forward to having you back again here in the future.

Folks, stay tuned. Make sure you're downloading our podcast. Go to wherever you get your favorite podcast. You're not going to want to miss Abigail Anthony. She's coming up on the podcast segment. We also have Kylie Kipper in studio. Kylie Campbell, Kipper, Kipper Campbell.

Something like that. She's got her murder and mayhem update. And then Jenna is bringing you the sunshine moment once again, because we really balance. We're all about that. Chuck, I was just feeling balanced like Fox News. Ken, I was feeling weird about interest ending on murder every week. Folks, Breaking Battlegrounds will be back on the air next week.

The 2022 political field was intense, so don't get left behind in 2024. If you're running for political office, the first thing on your to-do list needs to be securing your name on the web with a yourname.votewebdomain from godaddy.com. Get yours now. Welcome to the podcast segment of Breaking Battlegrounds with your host Chuck Warren. I'm Sam Stone. As promised, we are going to have

Campbell's Corner. Kylie's Corner. Yep, Kylie's Corner. Kylie's Corner. Murder and Mayhem update coming up here in just a moment, along with our Sunshine Moment, because we like the night and day contrast there. But first, we are starting with Abigail Anthony, Collegiate Network Fellow, graduated from Princeton University in 2023 as a Berry Scholar studying linguistics at Oxford University.

He's doing a lot of fantastic work for National Review, USA Today, Free Beacon, The Free Press, and Compact, and focusing a lot on what is going on at Princeton in particular right now. Abigail, thank you for joining us. Welcome to the program.

Thank you so much for having me. It's an honor to be here. So first, one of your recent articles, Princeton professors lead chants, hold classes at pro-Palestinian sit-in. I don't know if people out there really understand how much support some of these student protests have been getting from institutional leaders and professors. So tell us about that and what's going on.

Sure. So I can maybe start at the beginning. Last Wednesday, National Review published four documents in full that showed that Princeton students were preparing to establish an encampment. And to your question, one of those documents

explicitly stated that the students didn't expect disciplinary consequences because they knew pro-Palestine faculty were on the disciplinary committee. So part of how they designed these protests and decided to pursue them was because they knew pro-Palestine faculty would insulate them from consequences, at least to an extent.

Nationwide, we've seen over 1,400 academics sign a letter saying they would boycott Columbia unless the university expunged the charges against arrested students. And as you noted, one of my articles focused on Princeton showed that at least three professors held their classes from within the encampment at Princeton.

One of the professors had said, apparently, that if a student didn't attend, then that student wouldn't face any consequences. But, of course, that's a different kind of way of abdicating your responsibility as a professor. Yeah, that's...

That's really crazy. And obviously we're seeing in even where like they have had the crackdowns at UCLA, it turns out they don't even actually arrest the kids. They're just taking them downtown, turning them loose. They gave them lunchboxes when they got down there. Yeah.

Yeah, I don't think people understand how institutionally supportive these folks are. So that disciplinary process you're talking about,

Even if they don't have a majority, do they have the ability, the handful of pro-Palestinian professors on that board, to block punishment or at least to sway their colleagues to make sure that doesn't happen? And are they – do we know if they're communicating with students ahead of time for this like, yes, we'll protect you? Yeah.

So with respect to whether a professor or more than one would be able to fully block the disciplinary charges, I'm not sure. And I believe that would also depend in part on what the charges are. But we do know for certain that at least at Princeton, the professors have been collaborating with the pro-Palestine students. I'll give you one example. The demonstration escalated very dramatically on Monday.

Professor Max Weiss stood outside of this building called Clio Hall, and he told a crowd of about 100 people that 14 students and a professor had occupied Clio Hall in solidarity with the Palestinian people. But then the professor inside the building, she just claimed to be a faculty witness and a faculty observer. However, she was...

speaking with a megaphone to the students outside the building. And she signed plenty of statements in support of Palestine. She was one of the more than 1,400 academics who signed a letter saying she would boycott Colombia. So we do know that there is collaboration. Obviously, the students had spoken with these professors as they were devising the plan to occupy Clio Hall. But we just don't have the communication itself.

How much – do you know if – it's obviously been coming out that there are a ton of pro-Palestinian interests around the globe that have been funding U.S. university departments, paying for various opportunities for professors, that sort of thing. Do you know how much of – if that's been going on at Princeton and how much money the school takes in from Islamic governments each year?

I actually have no idea. I'm sorry. No, that's OK. I mean, that's one of the things I think that maybe is underrated behind this is there's a lot of money in being against Israel.

That's certainly possible. I just don't know to what extent that applies to Princeton. Tell me, let's talk briefly about your Princeton experience. Did you get a sense ever that there was anti-Semitism on campus? Did you see a lot of pro-Palestinian talk? Or is this something that's just all of a sudden popped up? I mean, what was your experience at Princeton? I was a celeb of the day. Yeah. Yeah.

So I graduated in spring 2023. There was one high profile incident on campus that I wasn't in any way involved in. Students had submitted some sort of referendum

to be voted on by the students that was trying to get the university to stop using some sort of Israeli construction equipment and sort of construction materials. It ended up being quite a big deal because there were issues with how the votes

were cast and how they were counted. And it did get some national attention, but I really wasn't involved in any way. And I was involved in many other sort of conservative organizations. Aside from that one instance,

I don't think there was anything that was strikingly anti-Semitic. Of course, there were pro-Palestine advocacy groups, but I wasn't involved in anything related to foreign affairs. And so I honestly very rarely, if ever, interacted with them. So Princeton has announced, which you've tweeted, that Princeton students have launched a hunger strike for Gaza. What's this hunger strike going to be like? Do you know? Is it like I'm skipping two meals and then I need water? I mean, what is it? What are they doing?

They claim that they will abstain entirely from food and drink except for water. It's worth noting, though, that just on Wednesday, an organizer of the pro-Palestine encampment had advertised to students in a group chat that they should join the encampment because there's bagels, hot coffee and doughnuts. So they're definitely switching their tactics up.

this might just be a way to garner more social media attention the reality is that final exams are coming up and so it's unlikely that students have that many days left on campus with the exception of graduate students who would normally have the option at least to stay over the summer so we'll we'll see how they stick to their no eating and no no drinking commitment

We're talking with Abigail Anthony. You can follow her on Twitter at Abigail and Words. She's been covering a lot of the pro-Palestinian protests that have been going on. You also just had some coverage on Twitter about a brouhaha surrounding the Black Student Union at Princeton and a online group chat. Can you tell us what's going on with that? Because that

This is a sort of a perfect left eating its own example of how wild they have gotten. Yes, absolutely. It's a spectacular display of self-cannibalism. So there is a group chat called Black

Black Princeton. It had roughly a thousand members. There was no verification process for joining. A message sent on Wednesday by the student Kennedy Primus, she wrote, urgent need. Please send me videos of protesters looking peaceful. Our lawyer says that these are desperately needed. She also explicitly stated that

If you were going to join the pro-Palestine protests, they have masks, hats and umbrellas available for anyone who's concerned about their identity. And then, of course, she advertised the bagels and doughnuts.

A student whom I don't know actually is a member of the group chat and he took a screenshot of this and sent it to me. I assume he had seen some of my reporting or perhaps we just have mutual friends, but I don't know him. And he sent me the screenshot and I posted it to Twitter. And then of course, almost immediately there was some sort of struggle session in the group chat.

And so one student, or it might be an alumni, I'm not sure. One person wrote, someone's getting their black card revoked. Someone wrote, and I'll quote this because it's really revealing. One student wrote, whoever leaked these messages, please identify yourself. I have evidence to make a reasonable conclusion as to who it is.

And if you don't respond in the next minute, I will kick the person or people out whose social media have been tied to the person on Twitter.

And then this guy, Jordan Johnson, kicked three people out of the group chat. Oh, my gosh. And the great irony is that none of those three people were the ones who had kicked the three chats. So it wasn't exactly great detective work. But the really important thing to note was that people were kicked out.

solely because they had some sort of affiliation to my social media. That might have just been they followed me. So this is really a terrifying display of the groupthink mentality on campuses that is very strictly enforced. You are deemed guilty by association, and there's no trial. I'm glad you referred to...

to that little brouhaha they were having amongst themselves as a struggle session, because that's really what they've gotten down to. For folks who don't know, it's a sort of standard communist during the communist revolutions in Russia and particularly in China. They would pull people in who didn't, you know, hold the exact right views and

and put them up on stage where they would be accosted by an inquisitor and then by the mob and forced into submission. And simply for the crime of following you or perhaps liking one of your tweets, that's what they're doing to these folks. Right. It's really a Stalinist purge. It is crazy to see this happening on our campuses, Chuck. I mean, it is crazy.

Yeah, but it's just, I don't know. Abigail, did you enjoy your Princeton education? Not entirely, although I think that was due in part to the fact that I was part of the COVID undergrad generation. So I spent sort of a year and a half trapped in my room and doing Zoom classes. And by the way, they give you... And I would have had to deal with that anywhere. And you got no tuition discount for that 18 months in your room paying Princeton tuition, correct? Yes.

We did get a small discount, and then we were, of course, exempted from paying certain fees, like student activity fees, things of that nature, because you weren't there to do any of them. Real quick before we let you go, are you hearing from anybody you know? Because obviously Columbia has shifted to hybrid learning again, so a lot of remote learning for the remainder of the semester. Other universities are canceling finals, canceling graduations.

Doing all this stuff. And as you mentioned, you're part of the generation that got hit by the covid lockdowns and had to go through all that nonsense. Are people just fed up with this? I mean, is that is that something that could actually drive a shift on campus against this kind of wackiness?

Yes, absolutely. And I think a lot of people who go to Ivy League schools go in part because they like prestige. And we've seen in the past year or two that prestige really declined, whether that was the plagiarism accusations against bodygay or simply the anti-Semitism hearings. The reality is we're realizing these Ivy League institutions are

aren't nearly as impressive as we maybe previously thought. I have a younger brother, and I know that he's very seriously considering not going to college at all, in part because he doesn't want to deal with this craziness.

but also because it's not obvious that you would get any education at a lot of these institutions, including the very supposedly respectable ones. Whether students who are currently enrolled will actually take the leap and leave these universities, I think is maybe unlikely, especially if you've already put so much money and time and effort into your degree. Right.

But I think we will see a trend in people either not going to college or avoiding some of these supposedly reputable institutions. After all, Harvard back in the fall saw a very notable increase.

in its early application submissions. So we do have to wait a little bit for the data to come out specifically on enrollment, but I would be surprised if the numbers hadn't dropped yet.

Yeah, I think 100%. I think there will be repercussions from this that some of these university administrators have not fully. Well, we ran that poll in the fall before all this happened. Would you hire somebody from Harvard, we asked, or want to work with them? The question is, would you hire somebody from Harvard or want to work with them here in Arizona? And 52% said no. I mean, that number wouldn't even have been possible five years ago, three years ago. It would have been 15%, maybe. I mean, and that's probably gotten worse. Yeah.

Yeah, insane. Abigail, thank you so much for joining us, folks. You can follow Abigail Anthony at Abigail and Words on Twitter. She is currently a Berry Scholar studying linguistics at Oxford University and covering all the craziness going on on campuses, particularly Princeton. Abigail, thank you so much for joining us. Look forward to having you back in the future. Thank you so much for having me. Have a great weekend. Indeed. Thank you.

OK. Kylie's Corner. So I actually feel like this is an appropriate shift for once. We're talking about some, you know, criminal little rants on. Hey, wait a minute. I can say this. This is the podcast. Some criminal miscreant assholes that are taking over all these campuses. So let's talk about what they could become in their future. The kind of murderous criminals that are the well, hopefully material for Kylie. They don't become that right.

You know, like watching these folks in the wild. I like did. Do you see sanity? Do you see I'm not going to kill something someday in those eyes? I don't know. Yeah, I see violence. But OK, so my first story, I know Chuck's going to like this one. So Glenn Sullivan Sr., he's a 54 year old Louisiana man. He pled guilty on April 17th to four counts of second degree rape in connection to assaulting and impregnating a 14 year old girl.

So he pled guilty to this. The teen became pregnant and then the judge ordered a DNA test, which proved that Sullivan had impregnated the teen. Detectives learned that Sullivan groomed the victim and threatened her and her family.

with violence if they disclose this attack to any authorities, which is kind of what took a little bit for them to finally report it. Good grief. But when this happened, the assistant district attorney said that he is going to use every tool the legislature is willing to give us, including physical castration, to seek justice for the children in this community. And that's exactly what they did. On April 22nd, Judge William Dyke sentenced Sullivan to 50 years in prison and physical castration. Wow.

Physical, not not medical. Yes. A lot of them, they require them to take a drug that. Yes. So the. No, no, no. This is the district attorney said that there was three cases where it was chemically done. But this is the first physical one that's being done. Wow. Incredible. Yeah, that's old school. It is. I think we bring it back. I love it. That's old school Palestinian.

It's actually kind of new school Palestinian. But I mean, you know, look, every culture has things that are worthwhile about it. You know, one of the few things about Islam that I agree with is harsh penalties for crime. Well, especially for this. Especially for the crime of a child. I had a friend that was a defense attorney for 23 years, and he was the head of it, one of the largest counties in the country. And I asked him,

about people who abuse children. And, you know, he was conservative going to college, still is, but he's a little bit more, we'll call it thoughtful on justice reform and sentencing and stuff. And he just said, no one's being honest. These people can't be fixed.

It's just their desire. Right. Right. And so I understand the castration and it's the safest thing for those children in the community. And frankly, it's the safest thing for this individual. Well, in in this is at heart. That issue is what makes the certain elements of the transgender movement so deeply wrong.

The access to children and to women's private spaces that they're giving to anybody who just says, I'm a woman today, is freeing predators to engage in behavior they have always wanted to do and to do so without consequence of the law.

Yeah, I think the trans movement's stalled quite a bit. I think you're going to start seeing that reverse quite a bit, especially of what they're doing in England and Europe and so forth. I mean, they're just putting a stop to it. They're holding the line here as best they can. But, you know, I think you and I have talked about this. The answer to that one is lawsuits.

Yeah. No, 100 percent. And it's going to be that while it's the next decade, next decade where kids still use their parents or the school because I did this and I want to reverse. There's going to be a lot of kids who are transitioned medically and and surgically. Matter of fact, you could see this going to the Supreme Court in about 15 years. Oh, yeah. Someone's going to sue and say, you ruined my life. I'm a kid. You should let me, you know, right. Figure this out. No, that absolutely. Those are going to be class action scale lawsuits coming and they're going to be huge money. One hundred percent. Yeah. Yeah.

That's it. That's the gloomy goddess today? No, no, no. Heavens no. Well, there's a second whistleblower for Boeing that is found dead. I mean, Boeing doesn't even, they're not even trying to cover it up. Not even trying to cover it up. They are just straight up murdering everybody right now. It's like that movie Michael Clayton. Did you ever see that George Clooney? No. It was a big agricultural company and their fertilizer was killing people and they just started knocking, started just knocking people off. Yeah. Yeah.

It is. It's probably happened a lot more than people think in the history of this country. Yeah, I just hate to go there. Kylie, continue about the story. No, no, that's the story. I'm not going to spend too much time on it because I don't want to be next. So basically, long story short, what they're saying is he was in perfect health. He's 45 years old. Perfect health. And then he suffered a serious bacterial infection, a stroke and pneumonia and died within two weeks.

And the first one committed suicide? Yeah, to a single gunshot to the head. The most questionable suicide possible. Yes. They both also had the same attorney out of South Carolina. So have they hired KGB consultants for this, Boeing? No.

I think Boeing has long since hired assassins R Us to solve this problem right now. It's apparently a growing industry. It is apparently. Okay, that's all I have on that one because I don't want to be next. Okay, this week, Sam's going to be super excited about this. The Karen Reid trial started. Oh, good. So there's actually more information that's out about it.

So they said it's going to last probably six to eight weeks. So, you know, each week maybe we could just do a little update on... This is our Boston backover. Yeah. So the Karen Reed case is a Boston police officer was found dead in the snow in front of another Boston police officer's house. They say that when she dropped him off at the party, she was apparently reversing and backed into him and then drove off, either knowing or not knowing she backed into him. She's saying she's being framed by Boston police. So...

They opened up with their opening statements. And then the prosecution had brought out John's brother and sister-in-law, which the defense did not cross-examine them. They gave very generic statements about Karen's – their relationship with Karen and that she was always very lovely and they liked her a lot. They would do family vacations with her. They did say the morning at the hospital she was hysterically crying. She was asking, like, is he dead? Is he dead? Like, just trying to keep getting information as –

Someone would act. The brother did say that when he went, he was once they declared John dead, they were like, do you want to come see him in the hospital bed? And he said yes. And it looked like he had two golf ball size. His eyes were so swollen. It looked like golf balls were like behind his eyelids. He also had blood coming from his nose and out of his mouth. That was reported when they found him at the scene because Karen, when she showed up and found him out front, she started CPR. So she had blood on her face and all over her body and such like that.

So where it gets weird, though, is the prosecution brings out the first police officer. You know, it's all friendly, whatever. He gives his statements and then they cross examine him. And he said he was first on the scene. But all of the dispatch logs say that he was second on the scene and he was not the first. And he's saying that that was just an oversight and that he was first on the scene. Interesting. The second thing that they had incorrect is the house address. So on the police report, they had the address as two houses down.

And then when they were using the same police officer when they were doing the grand jury to indict her, he had set a different address, which was actually the neighbor on the other side. And so they never correctly stated the correct address for the Boston police officer's house. So it was incorrectly stated two different times.

From the start, this has been a very smelly case. Yes, definitely. Yeah. Then he had on his police report, he had stated three words only. That was all he said the next day when he wrote his police report. So they're saying like, this is your freshest mind of the scene of what happened. But that is not what he was testifying earlier when the prosecution was talking to him. He said that Karen Reed stated, this is my fault. Is he dead? I hit him. I hit him. Okay.

But he had stated in his police report, she only said, did I hit him? That was the only thing that was ever stated. So they're asking basically like, why are you embellishing the experience, right? You didn't just like two years later figure out this information that she all of a sudden said this. So that was another thing that they were having a little tuffle about, I guess. Yeah.

Something else I want to note is that outside of the house was the sister-in-law of the homeowner, Jennifer McCabe. So she was out front. The officer stated, I maybe spoke with her for a couple seconds. And then that was it. That was my experience with her. They brought out the footage that he was actually speaking to her for

a long time, several minutes. And then they said, did you see her ever go inside or out of the house? And they said no, to which they showed the camera of her going back inside the house, coming back out of the house. And they were like, if you're walking onto a crime scene where someone is dead, why are you not immediately separating all the witnesses and getting all of their statements? You're allowing her to go inside and outside and you're not controlling that situation. And just the, the,

Specificity of the investigation. So like when you're having those kind of details of different addresses and that sort of thing, this is a high profile case. This is a cop. This is a cop's wife. This is other cops. My experience with police is when they understand perfectly well when they're dealing with a potentially very fraught case like this.

And they dot the I's and cross the T's assiduously. Well, and he also reported when he first came on the scene, he checked the pulse and there was no pulse. So you're essentially dealing with.

someone who is already dead. Right. Meaning it is a murder investigation right from the start. Yes. And this sounds suspiciously sloppy, I guess, is the best way to put it. And the only person that both the firefighters and the police reported is the only person that tried to save his life was Karen Reed giving him CPR. So the homeowners that were inside the house, the sister-in-law that's going in and out, none of them tried to attempt anything. Right.

to saving his life. Both police officers admitted that they never saw taillight pieces at the crime scene, which is, they're saying that that's how they know she hit John was because there was taillight pieces at the scene. They both admitted they did not see those or collect them. Then a firefighter came out and they cross-examined him. So he told the prosecution he saw John in a big puffy jacket as if maybe he was just arriving. He was very bundled up.

That's not true. They showed a photo of him to which it looked like he was either in like a light sweater or maybe like a T-shirt or like a long sleeve T-shirt. So then he was like, oh, maybe that was just an oversight then. Maybe I'm getting my thought wrong. So I think he was trying to paint the picture that he had just arrived and that's when he died, not was at the party or whatever happened. Right. Then he also said that he asked Karen Reed the question, what happened here? And she responded with, I hit him. I hit him.

And then, but that is not what he wrote in his initial report. He wrote in his initial report that he overheard Karen Reed being hysterical, asking her friend, did I hit him? Interesting. So that was, again, something that was incorrect. They then pressed the firefighter on, you know, are these injuries something that someone can sustain from being hit by a car? To which he said he didn't know, he didn't know. But then when they kept pressing him, he said, no, typically these injuries come from someone that had been beaten up.

Oh, my goodness. So this is just the first week. This is good stuff. Yeah. Yeah. Very good. Still going on today, Friday. So this, you know, the Friday update will be next week. Next week we'll have more. We'll have an update on it. All right. Well, let's end this with some sunshine.

Awesome. Yeah, I have. Great transition. Yeah, this I have just a brief story of someone in the 43rd running of the London Marathon, which happened last April the 20 or sorry, last Sunday, April 21st.

I got to stop you before you go because, Kylie, you might have seen this since it was tied to the Boston Marathon. Did you see some woman jumped into – some influencer jumped in and recorded herself running the marathon? Yes, I saw that. Without paying the entry and then just got annihilated on social media by everybody, every runner in the world.

Okay, that was totally apropos of nothing, but it was funny as heck. My brother really wants me to start running marathons, and I think that's the only way I would. Why does he want you to run a marathon? He thinks, I mean, it's a great way to achieve and, you know. Does he run them? He runs them. Oh, okay. So he's leading by example. Exactly. When I was my first year out of high school, I was in Boston working for the World Paper, and everyone there was doing a marathon and half marathon, so they talked me into it.

starting to participate. And I was all for it. I was training, doing really well until one of them told me that the, I'm sorry, Jenna, I'm going to do this to you. They said the first time you do a marathon about an hour in,

you will have an uncontrollable urge to take a ship. And so all along the route, you will find like stacks of marathoners behind buildings. Lovely. Pooping their brains out. So what do you have in your future? Yeah. Oh, I'm so excited. Yeah. Well, it's, I mean, it is a really difficult thing to do. And you

You know, people clearly struggle with it. And so that's what makes this person really cool. This is a 19 year old. His name is Lloyd Martin. And he was born with a hole in his heart and he was diagnosed with Down syndrome. Wow. And so he he just ran his first marathon. He crossed the finish line with a time of six hours and 46 minutes. And he was the youngest known person in his disability category to complete a marathon. Wow.

which is just incredible. And yeah, so, so that, that would actually be a surgery equivalent, I think to the very first heart surgery, the blue baby heart surgery from Johns Hopkins. Cause that was the condition they, so does he have intentions to keep running marathons now that he's done one? I think, um, well, I, I know he picked this all up. Um,

in December. He had surgery on both of his knees. He picked it up in December, started running five kilometers at a time. His mother is very motivated. She's been pushing him through all of this. And he's also an accomplished gymnast and soccer player. Oh my goodness. Yeah.

Special Olympics in Britain. He got a gold medal in the gymnastics vault at the British Disabilities Championships last October. So it sounds like he's working really hard and doing so many amazing things. So I can imagine he'll just keep going and doing so well. Jenna, why don't you try to track him down and see if we can get him on the show? Totally. Yeah. That'd be a nice little piece. Yeah, absolutely. Let's do that. That'd be fantastic. Okay. Sounds great.

Well, that's it. Well, that's a nice way to end the show. That is a nice way to end the show. Folks, thanks for visiting us today. Please remember to share the show with your friends and colleagues, and you can find us wherever you find your podcasts, Upstack, Apple, Spotify, whatever. Have a great weekend.