Speaker 1: The voice of one crying out in the desert. Stop
Speaker 1: voting for school bonds. That's what I hope to be
Speaker 1: for this region, the John the Baptist of yelling at
Speaker 1: people to stop voting for school bonds. Stop voting for them.
Speaker 1: It is mindless, it is stupid. It does not seem
Speaker 1: to be based on need. It increases your taxes, and
Speaker 1: it seems like this is a boondoggle for all kinds
Speaker 1: of people. Union, labor, construction, and all this political stuff
Speaker 1: is all tied into this. It's just a vicious cycle
Speaker 1: of just using more and more and more and more
Speaker 1: of your taxpayer dollars to fund more and more and
Speaker 1: more and more construction that I'm not sure we even
Speaker 1: really need within public school and the community college district.
Speaker 1: So here's the summary right now in the San Jauquean Valley,
Speaker 1: we are looking at in the Fresno area, five count them,
Speaker 1: five different local bond measures that will all be on
Speaker 1: the ballot this upcoming November. So pretty much everyone in
Speaker 1: the Fresno area listening to this, and I actually I'm
Speaker 1: betting it's people all up and down the valley listening
Speaker 1: to this. You're probably voting on a bond measure for
Speaker 1: either your local school district and or your community college district.
Speaker 1: Fresno Unified has Measure H A five hundred million dollar
Speaker 1: bond measure, Clovis Unified Measure A A four hundred million
Speaker 1: dollar bond measure, Central Unified Measure X A one hundred
Speaker 1: nine million dollar bond measure, Saying or Unified Measure M
Speaker 1: one hundred and seventy five million dollar bond measure, State
Speaker 1: Center Community College District Measure Q six hundred ninety six million. Now,
Speaker 1: let's remind ourselves that we just voted on a round
Speaker 1: of bond measures four years ago. We just voted on
Speaker 1: around of bond measures four years ago, and now all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, who we need more? We need more
Speaker 1: school bonds, We need more money again. Now, what is
Speaker 1: actually motivating this, Well, the actual thing that's motivating this,
Speaker 1: as I explained, is that there is a statewide education
Speaker 1: bond initiative that we're going to be voting on. I
Speaker 1: believe it's Proposition two Proposition three, one of the propositions
Speaker 1: that will be voting on. I will look it up
Speaker 1: as I'm talking here. Now, Basically, what's happening is you've
Speaker 1: got a statewide ten billion dollar bond measure, ten billion
Speaker 1: dollars for schools K through twelve school districts and also
Speaker 1: for community colleges. So here's a pot of ten billion dollars.
Speaker 1: Why did this ballot initiative come to be Well, basically,
Speaker 1: Gavin Newsom has had to make certain kinds of cuts
Speaker 1: or certain kinds of non increases in funding for education
Speaker 1: over the course of the last budgetary cycle. This ticked
Speaker 1: off the teachers' unions who wanted more money. Oh, basically
Speaker 1: the idea was okay, well, they Knewsome had to negotiate
Speaker 1: this deal with the teachers. The teachers were all mad
Speaker 1: at him. The teachers union is the most powerful force
Speaker 1: in Sacramento. Newsom's tick them off by cutting, by not
Speaker 1: increasing funding to the extent that they want. They wrestle
Speaker 1: together and they come up with this solution. Okay, Newsom,
Speaker 1: you give out this budgetary figure that we can kind
Speaker 1: of live with. But at the same time, we're going
Speaker 1: to go to the voters to vote for a bond initiative,
Speaker 1: a ten billion dollar bond initiative, and in addition to
Speaker 1: ten billion dollars in statewide bond funding, basically local school
Speaker 1: districts can get more with like a match. So if
Speaker 1: your local school district passes a bond measure to raise
Speaker 1: X amount of dollars, you can get state money to
Speaker 1: match it. So that's why all these school districts and
Speaker 1: the community college districts are having bond measures right now.
Speaker 1: It's not actually a response to genuine need. Okay, it's
Speaker 1: not like Clovis Unified is sitting around. Oh dear, you know,
Speaker 1: the coppers are really running low here. Oh geez, we
Speaker 1: have all this need, all these new people moving in.
Speaker 1: We don't have the tax revenue yet to pay for
Speaker 1: all this stuff that we're trying to do. We're trying
Speaker 1: to get a new Clovis South High School. We're trying
Speaker 1: to get it finished. Oh, we just don't have the money. Okay,
Speaker 1: we need to go to the taxpayer's hat in hand
Speaker 1: and ask them for help for this, just this one exigency. No,
Speaker 1: that's not what it is. They just know there's money
Speaker 1: on the table to be had, and they're not gonna
Speaker 1: let it. They're not gonna let it sit there. They're
Speaker 1: gonna go after it. There's ten billion dollars in state funding.
Speaker 1: They get access to more of it if they pass
Speaker 1: a local bond measure, so they can double up their money.
Speaker 1: Now it is in the context, however, of a bond.
Speaker 1: All of this is in the context of a bond.
Speaker 1: So the state wide measure is Proposition two ten billion
Speaker 1: dollars in bonds to fund construction and modernization of public
Speaker 1: education facilities. So we've got ten billion dollars, a ten
Speaker 1: billion dollar bond from the state. And then, as I
Speaker 1: said before, we've got here's again the lineup. Five hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars bond for Fresne Unified, four hundred million dollars
Speaker 1: bond for Close Unified, one oh nine million dollar bond
Speaker 1: for Central Unified, one hundred and seventy five million dollar
Speaker 1: bond for Singer Unified, six hundred and ninety eight million
Speaker 1: dollar bond for State Center Community College District, and State
Speaker 1: Center Community College District. For those who't know, it's think
Speaker 1: of it like a school district. So it's basically like
Speaker 1: a school district, only the schools that it runs are
Speaker 1: a bunch of the local community colleges in the presdenty
Speaker 1: area Readley College, Fresno City College, Closed Community, et cetera.
Speaker 1: These are bonds and what is a bond. Let us
Speaker 1: remember what is a bond. I think sometimes people hear
Speaker 1: the word, they don't exactly know what it means, and
Speaker 1: they just kind of keep talking or reading and don't
Speaker 1: really acknowledge exactly what a bond is. A bond is
Speaker 1: a loan. It is a loan made out to a
Speaker 1: governmental entity like a school district, and like any loan,
Speaker 1: it needs to be paid back over a certain term
Speaker 1: of years with interest. Most educational bonds are thirty year loans.
Speaker 1: For those of you who've been thinking about maybe buying
Speaker 1: a house or something like that over the last year
Speaker 1: or so, you might be aware of the fact that
Speaker 1: interest rates really high right now. So that's also going
Speaker 1: to impact the nature of these bonds. We might be
Speaker 1: paying back in taxes almost double the amount the sticker
Speaker 1: price on these bond measures. So when we're talking about
Speaker 1: voting on Proposition too a quote ten billion dollar bond
Speaker 1: measure statewide for construction, for construction for schools and for
Speaker 1: community college for K through twelve school districts and community colleges.
Speaker 1: When we say ten billion dollars, what we actually mean
Speaker 1: is this is going to cost the taxpayers maybe almost
Speaker 1: twenty billion dollars, because it's not just the principle you
Speaker 1: have to repay, it's the interest over the course of
Speaker 1: thirty years. President Unified's Measure H is not a five
Speaker 1: hundred million dollars bond, and as the price on the
Speaker 1: sticker says, it's really almost a billion dollar bond. Close
Speaker 1: Unified's Measure A is not a four hundred million dollar bond,
Speaker 1: It's almost an eight hundred million dollar bond. Central Unified's
Speaker 1: Measure X is not one hundred and nine million, it's
Speaker 1: about two hundred million. Saying you're unified, it's not one
Speaker 1: hundred and seventy five million, it's almost three hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty million. State Center Community College District. It's not a
Speaker 1: six hundred and ninety eight million dollar bond. It's over
Speaker 1: a billion dollars in property taxes. That's the thing. We
Speaker 1: have to realize that the near inherent immorality almost I mean,
Speaker 1: I genuinely feel there's something almost immoral about this. That
Speaker 1: it's not even the tax directly benefiting from this loan.
Speaker 1: The money goes to the school district. They get to
Speaker 1: build stuff, hire people, do all this great stuff, employ
Speaker 1: more people. I'll note that various public sectors, various of
Speaker 1: the unions that represent employees within some of these school districts.
Speaker 1: For example, the Teachers' union within President Unified As expressed
Speaker 1: their support for measure H. Of course, you know they
Speaker 1: might get to benefit from all this, but it's chiefly
Speaker 1: the district itself that gets to benefit from it. But
Speaker 1: it's the taxpayers who pay it back. And what you're
Speaker 1: effectively saying to the taxpayers is this, Hey, taxpayer, pay
Speaker 1: us almost a billion dollars in property taxes over the
Speaker 1: next thirty years so that we can get about five
Speaker 1: hundred million dollars worth of benefit. That is a bad
Speaker 1: bang for your buck. It just is. Now. The problem
Speaker 1: is that people love voting for school bonds. Now, when
Speaker 1: we return, I want to talk about this sentimentality, this
Speaker 1: sentimental love that people have for voting for school bonds.
Speaker 1: And I just want to break through this mindset that
Speaker 1: you're some kind of community oriented, good governmance person. When
Speaker 1: I and again it would be one thing if this
Speaker 1: was in response to need. I think it is not
Speaker 1: in response to need. That is next on the John
Speaker 1: Girardi Show. People love voting for school bond measures. The
Speaker 1: piece in gv wire has sort of the rundown of
Speaker 1: all of the local school bond measures that voters in
Speaker 1: the Fresno area are going to be paying for or
Speaker 1: voting on, rather voting on and then likely paying for.
Speaker 1: So you've got Fresne Unified with its Measure H five
Speaker 1: hundred million dollars, Clovis Unified with its Measure A four
Speaker 1: hundred million dollar bond, Central Unified with Measure X one
Speaker 1: hundred nine million dollar bond, Saying Unified with Measure M
Speaker 1: one hundred and seventy five million dollar bond, State Center
Speaker 1: Community College District Measure Q six hundred and ninety eight
Speaker 1: million dollars. Again, that's just the sticker price, that's the
Speaker 1: money the school district gets. But again, a bond is
Speaker 1: a loan. It's a loan that you have to repay
Speaker 1: with interests. So Measure H Presne Unified taxpayers are probably
Speaker 1: going to have to pay back in taxes somewhere approaching
Speaker 1: a billion dollars. Clovis Unified will have to pay back,
Speaker 1: not the four hundred million dollars still price on Measure A,
Speaker 1: but something approaching eight hundred million dollars, et cetera. Et cetera,
Speaker 1: et cetera. In spite of all this, in spite of
Speaker 1: the fact that the school districts seem to it's it's
Speaker 1: it's just every four years now almost We're just doing
Speaker 1: another huge nine figure dollar bond for Clovis Unified, for
Speaker 1: President Unified, and taxpayers just keep saying yes. They just
Speaker 1: keep saying yes, in spite of the relatively high electoral
Speaker 1: hurdle that local bond measures like these need to reach.
Speaker 1: You need a fifty five percent majority to approve a
Speaker 1: local bond measure like these. It's a weird thing with
Speaker 1: California elections and California laws it governs bond measures for
Speaker 1: local municipal entities. It's not it doesn't require a simple,
Speaker 1: you know, fifty percent plus one majority. It needs actually
Speaker 1: a bit of a super majority. You need actually fifty
Speaker 1: five percent of voters to approve the passage of a
Speaker 1: bond measure in order for it to come into effect.
Speaker 1: And yet local voters love doing it. So the piece
Speaker 1: in GV wire interviews fres note this guy, he's a
Speaker 1: political campaign manager locally named Jason Carnes. He sees all
Speaker 1: of these local bond measures passing. Again, this November quote,
Speaker 1: you can almost put it on the ballot and do
Speaker 1: some very basic communication and the bond is likely to
Speaker 1: get fifty five percent unless there's some politics going on
Speaker 1: separately that for some reason has upset people. Carnes said,
Speaker 1: even in March of twenty twenty. March of twenty twenty,
Speaker 1: which was this weird election where the bond measures for
Speaker 1: Clovis Unified and Central Unifide both failed, the districts put
Speaker 1: them on the ballot again in nov Member of twenty twenty,
Speaker 1: and both of them passed. So maybe the school districts no, like, Okay, well,
Speaker 1: let's let's not put them on a primary ballot ballot.
Speaker 1: Let you know, let's focus on November. I guess it's
Speaker 1: trying to line up with proposition too. Now, what I
Speaker 1: want to break through here is this kind of good government,
Speaker 1: good citizen bs that I think infects people into thinking
Speaker 1: that voting for these bond measures again and again and
Speaker 1: again and again and again is some kind of almost
Speaker 1: good citizenship deal. I've seen this my whole life, growing
Speaker 1: up in Clovis and seeing this with Clovis Unified, How
Speaker 1: you know, whatever is this the current iteration of the
Speaker 1: Clovis Unified Bond measure. And by the way, my wife
Speaker 1: and I looked at our property taxes, we're still paying
Speaker 1: for a Clovis Unified bond measure that passed in two thousand.
Speaker 1: There's like there's like a backlog of four different Clovis
Speaker 1: Unified bond measures that we as people who live in
Speaker 1: Close Unified that we are still paying for. So this
Speaker 1: is just adding a fifth one. And my whole life
Speaker 1: growing up in Clovis, I saw this that that people
Speaker 1: in Clovis have this sort of you know, this picturesque
Speaker 1: attitude of Clovis Unified, this idea promoted by builders and
Speaker 1: you know real estate builders that oh it's the highly
Speaker 1: acclaimed Clovis Unified School District, the highly acclaimed Clovis Unified
Speaker 1: School District, highly acclaimed Close Unified School District, which was
Speaker 1: in all the ads that I heard on the radio
Speaker 1: growing up for you know, buy a home in this
Speaker 1: new development, buy a home in this new development. It's
Speaker 1: located within the highly claimed Clothes Unified School District. Highly acclaimed,
Speaker 1: which is like well, highly acclaimed by whom by you,
Speaker 1: by the builders who want to sell expensive houses within
Speaker 1: Close Unify. I mean, who care? What do you mean?
Speaker 1: And highly acclaimed what do you mean? The best of
Speaker 1: two school districts in the Fresno area and Clothes Unified.
Speaker 1: People believe often in this mythos around Clovis Unified.
Speaker 2: Ah, that Close Unified is unique. Close Unified is great.
Speaker 2: Cloves Unified doesn't have unionized teachers, it has better teachers. Oh,
Speaker 2: the ghost of Doc Buchanan hovers over Close Unified to
Speaker 2: protect it from all evil, and so voting for a
Speaker 2: bond measure for Clothes Unified, that thus becomes You're.
Speaker 1: Part of the spirit of Clovis. This is who we
Speaker 1: are as a community. And meanwhile, every both this time
Speaker 1: and four years ago when Close Unified passed another simily
Speaker 1: enormous bond measure, the rationale for what are you gonna
Speaker 1: use the money for seems dumb. It doesn't make sense.
Speaker 1: It's stuff like oh we will like both four years
Speaker 1: ago and right now. And I think both of the
Speaker 1: measures were called Measure A if I'm not mistaken, both
Speaker 1: the twenty twenty Measure A and the current Measure A.
Speaker 1: Both of them said that the reason for getting these
Speaker 1: four hundred million dollar bonds was to help pay for oh,
Speaker 1: well for paying for dilapidating classrooms, updating things, bringing things
Speaker 1: up to code. Basic repairs and maintenance, Basic repairs and maintenance.
Speaker 1: Why do you need a special four hundred million dollar
Speaker 1: bond for basic repairs and maintenance? Shouldn't that just be
Speaker 1: part of your normal budgetary a normal budgetary item, ongoing
Speaker 1: repairs and maintenance. Why do we need a special bond
Speaker 1: measure to pay for it? Now? The thing that they're
Speaker 1: trying to pitch from Clovis Unified is, oh, well, Clovis
Speaker 1: South High School is still unfinished. We need this money
Speaker 1: to help pay for it. So one of two things.
Speaker 1: Either you started Clovis South High School without any game
Speaker 1: plan for how you were going to finish it, because
Speaker 1: nobody knew this bond measure was gonna happen a year ago,
Speaker 1: and obviously it took you more than a It was
Speaker 1: more than just last year that you thought of building
Speaker 1: Clovis South High School. So either you started a high
Speaker 1: school with no earthly idea how you were going to
Speaker 1: pay for it, or you actually don't really need this
Speaker 1: money to finish it. Again, you just got a four
Speaker 1: hundred million dollar bond measure passed four years ago. Why
Speaker 1: do you need another one four years later? I mean
Speaker 1: in prior years, Clovis unif goes about eight years or
Speaker 1: ten years in between bond measures. Four years and already
Speaker 1: you need another one. Why again? The reason why they're
Speaker 1: doing this bond measure and what a quinki dink that
Speaker 1: Clovis Unified is doing it the exact same election is
Speaker 1: Presdney Unified and saying are unified and essential unified in
Speaker 1: the states. In our community college district. It has nothing
Speaker 1: to do with existing need. It's not like they're so
Speaker 1: desperately hurting that, oh, we need this infusion of cash.
Speaker 1: Whatever will we do. No, they're doing it because there's
Speaker 1: a statewide bond measure on the table. There's a statewide
Speaker 1: bond measure for ten billion dollars, and your school district
Speaker 1: can get more of that pie if you raise your
Speaker 1: own local bond measures, you can get a match from
Speaker 1: the state. So this isn't President Unified trying to get
Speaker 1: five and a million dollars. It's Fresney Unified trying to
Speaker 1: get a billion dollars. But again, it remains a raw
Speaker 1: deal for the taxpayers. Presde Unified wants a billion dollars
Speaker 1: but the taxpayers have to basically pay double that over
Speaker 1: the course of time. Over the course of time, the
Speaker 1: interest we have to pay via our taxes to pay
Speaker 1: back this loan, which is what a bond is. It's
Speaker 1: a loan to a municipal entity. The taxpayers pay back
Speaker 1: the loan. They have to pay back the principal of
Speaker 1: the loan, the five hundred million dollars sticker price for
Speaker 1: measure H for President unified, the four hundred million dollars
Speaker 1: sticker price for measure A for clothes unified, plus interest,
Speaker 1: and the interest is going to be almost double. So
Speaker 1: what I am telling you all is just stop this cycle.
Speaker 1: Just stop this maddening cycle of every time these school
Speaker 1: districts just want more and more and more money, more
Speaker 1: money that is taken from you in this incredibly inefficient
Speaker 1: way because they just figure you don't look very hard
Speaker 1: at your property tax statement and you just consider it
Speaker 1: money out the door and you don't really notice it.
Speaker 1: If they actually just raised a normal tax for a
Speaker 1: normal tax on everyone, just to pay for four hundred
Speaker 1: million dollars straight up without it being alone, without it
Speaker 1: being alone, that we have to pay double on with
Speaker 1: interest over the course of time, I would actually respect
Speaker 1: it a lot more. It's just a BS system and
Speaker 1: I hate it. I just think it's almost immoral to
Speaker 1: make taxpayers spend you know, X amount for half of
Speaker 1: x of the impact when we return the forced unreality
Speaker 1: of the Harris twenty twenty four campaign. Next on the
Speaker 1: John Girardi Show, I want to talk about the sort
Speaker 1: of bizarre unreality of so many people on the left.
Speaker 1: And I'm trying not to have this be too cliched,
Speaker 1: because Kamala Harris is not good. Okay, you don't need
Speaker 1: to look very far on your radio dial to find
Speaker 1: someone willing to say that Democrats are hypocrites, no kidding.
Speaker 1: I guess my surprise or my despair is the kind
Speaker 1: of unreality that thought leaders on the left have seemingly
Speaker 1: just completely embraced uncritically, and that it's working. It's working
Speaker 1: to such an extent that it looks like Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: and Donald Trump are going to be in a neck
Speaker 1: to neck, you know, absolute blood bath fight to the
Speaker 1: bitter finish for the presidency, as opposed to what I
Speaker 1: kind of think it should be. I kind of think
Speaker 1: it should be. Kamala Harris just losing based on a
Speaker 1: disastrous record. Now Trump brings his own weight of baggage
Speaker 1: that I have to acknowledge. And I think it's fairly
Speaker 1: evident that Trump seems to have a ceiling within the electorate.
Speaker 1: I think it's hard for Trump to get over a majority.
Speaker 1: I think he's sort of hardened opinion about himself. He's
Speaker 1: a known quantity at this point. The guy's been around
Speaker 1: for nine years at this point as a campaigner for
Speaker 1: president slash president slash not president. He's a known quantity.
Speaker 1: And I don't think he's getting over sort of a
Speaker 1: forty eight percent threshold. So that's you know, that just
Speaker 1: is what it is. Harris is the relatively new face
Speaker 1: on the block in spite of the fact that she's
Speaker 1: been vice president for four years. Well, here's an example
Speaker 1: of this of what I'm trying to say, the skepticism
Speaker 1: that I have that just the unreality that even thought
Speaker 1: leaders on the left are suggesting. Now. In March of
Speaker 1: this year, Kathleen Parker, who's a Washington Post columnist has
Speaker 1: won a Pulitzer actually called just in March five months ago,
Speaker 1: called for Vice President Harris to resign. To resign in
Speaker 1: March Here's what she had to say. Harris was known
Speaker 1: then to quote, this is Kathleen Parker, a Washington Post columnist.
Speaker 1: She was known to quote embarrass her boss Biden with
Speaker 1: her sometimes inane rambling remarks and a laugh that erupts
Speaker 1: from nowhere about nothing obvious to others. Harris was, according
Speaker 1: to Parker quote, a colossal failure, as borders are again.
Speaker 1: That was in March, when it was okay to call
Speaker 1: her the borders are Parker thought she would be Biden
Speaker 1: could be Biden's downfall in twenty twenty four. At that time,
Speaker 1: Harris had an approval rating of thirty seven point two percent,
Speaker 1: basement level low. There was, according to Parker quote, no
Speaker 1: reason to think her ranking would spike were she suddenly promoted.
Speaker 1: All right. Michael Brendan Doherty from National Reviews, writing about this,
Speaker 1: Here's what he has to say. Harris is now rebranded
Speaker 1: as the face of a pleasant near term future in
Speaker 1: which all political turmoil of the past decade is simply
Speaker 1: transcended by an assertion of an unexpected, joyful emotion. She
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with the past administration, I either
Speaker 1: the current administration, except to have been so proud of
Speaker 1: its leader's gallantly selfless decision to exercise super superogatory nobility
Speaker 1: and enthusiastically walk away from political power, thereby granting us
Speaker 1: and her this chance at joy. No longer tied to
Speaker 1: Biden politically, she is running as the challenger and making
Speaker 1: the dour, aberrant mood of American politics over the last decade,
Speaker 1: now solely represented by Trump, into the incumbent against which
Speaker 1: she is running. Instead of being the bumbling, screw up
Speaker 1: and colossal failure of five months ago, she is now
Speaker 1: the front runner. The question is do you buy it?
Speaker 1: The polls show that Democrats are buying it. The week's
Speaker 1: long democratic agony after Biden's debate performance and the relief
Speaker 1: when he retired himself from the race, has provided Democrats
Speaker 1: with an occasion to declare themselves euphoric, and if you
Speaker 1: turned into their convention in Chicago this week, you heard
Speaker 1: them announce their quote joy over and over and over again.
Speaker 1: Democrats have decided that any present political dissatisfaction over inflation
Speaker 1: or the chaos at the border can be safely deposited
Speaker 1: onto the same ice flow as the current president of
Speaker 1: the United States. Letting Biden go adrift on an ice flow.
Speaker 1: And I guess this is the stuff that I don't
Speaker 1: get is you have allegedly serious people who do buy it,
Speaker 1: who do buy it, the elite level people on the
Speaker 1: Democrats side, who are buying this notion that Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: is almost somehow a representative of change, and the voters
Speaker 1: seem to be buying it. She's doing way better than Joe.
Speaker 1: She's doing way better than Joe Biden was doing. I mean,
Speaker 1: Joe Biden was clearly facing a catastrophe and Democrat voters
Speaker 1: are looking at her with utter confidence, when like a
Speaker 1: month ago, it was a genuinely live issue. Is Kamala
Speaker 1: Harris actually worse than senile Joe Biden? Like that was
Speaker 1: a genuine conversation people were having five weeks ago. And
Speaker 1: I guess the thing that terrifies me somewhat is the
Speaker 1: level of control that the media still has. I think
Speaker 1: conservatives almost still just can can fathom and cannot break through.
Speaker 1: When the media is clearly united behind some kind of goal,
Speaker 1: they can make a thing happen. And we saw it
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty. We saw that this united media was
Speaker 1: able to push so many things about COVID that were
Speaker 1: just wrong. They were able to push so many things
Speaker 1: about Hunter Biden's laptop not being a thing, They were
Speaker 1: able to push Hunter Biden's laptop possibly being Russian collusion,
Speaker 1: that when they're united, they can still have this massive
Speaker 1: impact and still sway the people who need to be
Speaker 1: swayed to such an extent that Joe Biden won was
Speaker 1: elected president. And you see these like kind of serious
Speaker 1: people on the right, like or maybe formally serious. Maybe
Speaker 1: they're just maybe they were just clowns all along people
Speaker 1: who they're so I understand them disliking Donald Trump. Okay,
Speaker 1: I can understand them disliking Donald Trump. I can understand
Speaker 1: them taking the position of Bill Barr. Okay. So Bill Barr,
Speaker 1: Trump's attorney general, didn't see eye to eye with Trump
Speaker 1: on a lot, was very angry at Trump over January sixth,
Speaker 1: was you know, clearly for the people in Trump world,
Speaker 1: Bill Barr is, you know, persona non grata. I get
Speaker 1: that Bill Barr at the very least is saying he's
Speaker 1: gonna vote for Trump. He's not doing the thing like
Speaker 1: Adam Kinsinger is doing the you know, former GOP congressman
Speaker 1: who's now actively endorsing Kamala Harris because Trump has a
Speaker 1: bandoned conservative principles. Okay, so because Trump abandoned conservative principles,
Speaker 1: you're gonna vote for this, this most radically left wing
Speaker 1: presidential candidate. Practically ever, you have columnists and authors and
Speaker 1: people like David French and Bill Crystal and all these
Speaker 1: people say, oh, yes, we're actively Michael Steele, the former
Speaker 1: head of the RNC, all saying Trump was so bad
Speaker 1: that we're actively voting for Kamala Harris because we're such
Speaker 1: true conservatives. Barr, at the very least is saying, Hey,
Speaker 1: I have problems with both presidential candidates, but I think
Speaker 1: Donald Trump will do less harm. I think he's a
Speaker 1: better option, at least that's intellectually honest. I guess I
Speaker 1: just can't fathom. Well, maybe, I mean it's hard to accept.
Speaker 1: I'll put it that way. It is hard to accept
Speaker 1: that there is this level of dishonesty on the left
Speaker 1: and within the media and that it works, It really
Speaker 1: does work. It's kind of this bitter pill to accept
Speaker 1: that genuinely, the good guys don't always win that genue,
Speaker 1: or maybe better to say that bad guys do win,
Speaker 1: that bad guys do get away with doing bad things.
Speaker 1: That the media is exactly as powerful as they've always been.
Speaker 1: I mean, as much as conservatives like to sort of
Speaker 1: pat themselves on the back and.
Speaker 3: Say, oh, the media is not just so they can't
Speaker 3: get away with this stuff now, not with you know,
Speaker 3: talk radio is so big and the Internet and Elon
Speaker 3: Musk is Twitter now and and oh you can get
Speaker 3: the word.
Speaker 1: Out and people, you know, people are able to preach
Speaker 1: truth to power. Frankly, the persuadable voters still listen to
Speaker 1: mainstream media outlets. They still listen to at mainstream media
Speaker 1: outlets more than they listen to Fox News, more than
Speaker 1: they listen to talk radio. And the reality is, guys,
Speaker 1: that a Republican hasn't won a majority of the post
Speaker 1: popular vote since George W. Bush in two thousand and four,
Speaker 1: and then hadn't won a majority of the popular vote
Speaker 1: before that since George H. W. Bush in nineteen eighty eight.
Speaker 1: Since nineteen eighty eight, Republican has won a majority of
Speaker 1: the popular vote one time. It's not a great it's
Speaker 1: not a great situation. I've honestly, this electoral cycle has
Speaker 1: made me really depressed about I mean, even if Trump wins,
Speaker 1: there's a lot about this cycle that's made me incredibly depressed.
Speaker 1: The way in which the Republican Party has run away
Speaker 1: from the abortion issue because of one bad election cycle
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty two. The way that we are able
Speaker 1: to put like a nationwide hypnotizing of the elector of
Speaker 1: the electorate into genuinely thinking that Kamala Harri is magically
Speaker 1: converted all of a sudden from bumbling, incompetent, cackling dufus,
Speaker 1: that Democrats were so terrified, like they were trying to
Speaker 1: keep Joe by none because they genuinely thought he would
Speaker 1: be better than her, to now all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: she's you know, Mama La, and she's got joy and
Speaker 1: blah blah blah. How the entire law fair campaign collapsed
Speaker 1: and we don't even really care. I just find the
Speaker 1: whole thing incredibly depressing on both sides. And meanwhile, the
Speaker 1: massive injustices that I care about, the most proliferation of
Speaker 1: legal abortion, especially via the abortion pill, none of it
Speaker 1: gets addressed. None of it gets addressed by the National
Speaker 1: Republican Party. Some state Republican parties do the right thing
Speaker 1: and address these issues, but I don't know. I've been
Speaker 1: so depressed this. I've been so bummed at different moments
Speaker 1: of this electoral cycle. Even when things were going great
Speaker 1: for Trump, it was at the same time that we
Speaker 1: were completely running away from the abortion issue. I just
Speaker 1: think it's fundamentally not my country that I am not
Speaker 1: part of whatever is the rising tide here. It's been
Speaker 1: very isolating and weird to see one so many people
Speaker 1: believing such unreality, and even on the conservatives and on
Speaker 1: the conservative side, to see such cowardice in the face
Speaker 1: of one bad electoral cycle. We'll be back with an
Speaker 1: update on the Trump anti Trump Lawfair campaign next on
Speaker 1: John Girardi Show. For all of the bluster, it seems
Speaker 1: like the Lawfair campaign against Donald Trump is going to
Speaker 1: completely fizzle out. And the grand goal of the Lawfair
Speaker 1: campaign was, of course, to get Trump convicted and sentenced
Speaker 1: before the election. Well, he's gonna have one guilty verdict
Speaker 1: against him, and it looks like even his sentencing in
Speaker 1: the Manhattan case, a bunch of developments have happened where
Speaker 1: it looks like the sentencing is going to get pushed
Speaker 1: back until after the election. After the election, meaning they
Speaker 1: can't even honestly call Trump a convicted felon you're not
Speaker 1: actually convicted until the judge imposes the sentence, and the
Speaker 1: sentencing is all screwed up now because of the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court's immunity case, which raises all these issues with Trump's
Speaker 1: Manhattan guilty verdict to possibly have it be thrown out.
Speaker 1: The Washington case is going nowhere, the Florida case has
Speaker 1: been thrown out, and Fanny Willis's Georgia case is sunk. Basically,
Speaker 1: you'll notice Democrats have gotten more mileage out of calling
Speaker 1: Trump weird than out of any of this lawfare stuff.
Speaker 1: What a complete collapse. That'll do it for John Gardy Show.
Speaker 1: See you next time on Power Talk.