>>> ELECTORS THEMSELVES SAYING WE WERE JUST GOING ABOUT THIS BECAUSE WE NEEDED TO HAVE CONTINGENCY THE OUT OF STATE PEOPLE NEAR THE PEOPLE WHO WERE THE TRUMP AIDES AND TRUMP ATTORNEYS SAYING LOOK WE WERE JUST GOING AHEAD AND PREPARING SOME CONTINGENCIES, AND THEN OF COURSE RUUD RUUD WHO WASN'T EVEN INDICTED RUNNING IN THERE AND SAYING ALL I DID WAS HAVE A HEARING AT A DOWNTOWN PHOENIX HOTEL ABOUT THE FRAUD AND THE ELECTION, SO EVERYONE HAS AN EXCUSE ABOUT WHY THIS SHOULD BE THROWN OUT.

NOW, OBVIOUSLY, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYING NO POLITICS IN THIS.

VERY SIMPLE, HERE'S WHAT THE LAW SAYS YOU FORGES THE PAPER, YOU SUBMITTED IT TO WASHINGTON, YOU EVEN USED THE STATE SEAL ON THE PAPER, WHICH IS A WHOLE OTHER CRIME THERE, AND YOU INTENDED TO DEFRAUD AND THERE IS NO STATUTE THAT SAYS JUST IN CASE OF X GO WITH Y.

>> WELL, IF THEY WANTED TO I MEAN IT'S SUCH A THING AS AN ALTERNATE ELECTION FOR WE SAW IT LIKE WHAT D EELECTION FOR WE SAW IN IT HAWAII WHEN WE SAW WHO WON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION AGAIN?

>> WELL, MY QUESTION WAS, IT'S ONE THING TO SAY WE'RE HERE AS IN CASE SOMETHING GOES WRONG AND YOU KNOW WE'RE THE ULTIMATE, BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THIS STATE THAT SAYS THAT'S POSSIBLE.

>> THERE ARE SEVERAL STATES WHOSE ELECTORS DID EXACTLY THAT THOUGH, PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW MEXICO BOTH PUT INTO THEIR PROCLAMATION THEY DIDN'T JUST WAY WE'RE DULY ELECTED TO CAST VOTES FOR THE GUY WHO WIN THEY WENT ONTO SAY THAT THIS IS ONLY FOR IN THE CASE THAT RESULTS SHOW THAT THIS PARTICULAR CANDIDATE WON.

SO IT'S VERY CLEAR IN THOSE CASES THAT THEY WERE ALTERNATE ELECTORS.

>> AND REAL QUICKLY WERE YOU SURPRISED THAT THE TRIAL DATE WAS JANUARY OF 2026?

>> YES, I WAS SURPRISED BY THAT AND I DON'T THINK YOU KNOW JUSTICE DELAYED IS WHAT DO THEY SAY ABOUT THAT.

I DO KNOW THAT THIS PARTICULAR JUDGE, I THINK HE PLAYS IT PRETTY CLOSE DOWN THE LINE.

HE'S NOT ONE WHO'S GOING TO PLAY POLITICS, I DON'T THINK, ON EITHER SIDE.

HE IS, I DON'T KNOW WHY IT WAS EVEN REALLY ASSIGNED TO HIM HE'S GETTING READY TO RETIRE.

THERE'S A PRETTY COMPLEX CASE IT'S GOING TO TAKE A WHILE TO DO IT.

SO IT'S A LONG WAY AWAY.

>> THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

>> -- THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WILL BE THERE UNLESS SHE DOES SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

IT COULD BE IN THE PLANS.

>> BUT THE PROBLEM BECOMES HAVING INDICTED EVERYONE IN A SINGLE CHARGE AND NOT HAVING SEPARATED IT OUT INTO LET'S SAY THE ELECTORS VERSUS THE CO-CONSPIRATORS SO YOU KNOW JOHN EASTMAN AND THE REST OF THE TRUMP AIDES YOU HAVE COMPLICATED THE CASE.

I UNDERSTAND WHY SHE DID THAT BECAUSE IT'S ALL PART OF TELLING A STORY TO THE JURY.

BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT YOU ARE GOING AHEAD AND TRYING TO TELL THAT STORY, AND EXPLAIN, FOR EXAMPLE, KELLY WARD WHO'S THE FORMER CHAIR OF THE PARTY AND ONE OF THE DEFENDANTS AS AN ELECTION FOR HAD ELECTOR HAD HAS FILED LITIGATION THAT IN FACT DONALD TRUMP WON SHE LOST THAT BUT AGAIN THAT HAS TO BE PART OF IT.

YOU NEED TO GIVE THE ATTORNEYS TIME TO PREPARE BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T THE ATTORNEYS WILL BE IN THERE SAYING WE WOULD HAVE DONE BETTER WE WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO WIN THE CASE HAD WE BEEN ABLE TO DO DISCOVERY.

HAD WE BEEN ABLE TO ASK THESE QUESTIONS HAD WE HAD THE TIME TO DO THIS.

>> YOU MENTION THE FACT THAT ONE OF THE ARGUMENTS WAS AND CONTINUES TO BE THAT WE'RE A CONTINGENCY IN CASE SOMETHING WENT WRONG WE COULD HAVE DONE THIS.

BUT ISN'T THAT, NOT FOR DISMISSAL ISN'T THAT SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE UP IN THE TRIAL AS OPPOSED TO A REASON TO DISMISS.

>> OH, OF COURSE.

YOU KNOW THOSE ARE QUESTIONS I THINK THAT THE JUDGE WILL SAY THAT'S A MATTER OF FACT.

YOU KNOW, PRESENT THE TESTIMONY THAT SHOWS THE DISCUSSION SAID THIS WILL BE CONTINGENT.

NOW THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS IN THE INDICTMENT SAYS NO IT WASN'T THAT THIS WAS PART OF A MASTER PLAN HATCHED IN WASHINGTON BY TRUMP AND HIS ALLIES TO GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.

SO OBVIOUSLY THEY WOULD LIKE GET RID OF IT BEFORE THE TRIAL BECAUSE WHEN IT COMES TO TRIAL WILL WILL BE TESTIMONY TO THE CONTRARY PARTICULAR WITH TWO PEOPLE ALREADY HAVING ROLLED.

>> 18 AND WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY ARE ON THE WAY.

THE ANTI-SLAP STATUTE THAT HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT HER, WHAT IS THAT ALL ABOUT AND WHY IS THAT A PLAY?

>> IT'S CALLED THE STRATEGIC LAWSUIT AGAINST PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.

AND IT'S BASICALLY A LAW THAT SAYS IF, IF I CAN PROVE THAT I'M EXERCISING MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TOES DO SOMETHING YOU CAN'T THEN -- CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO DO SOMETHING YOU CAN'T THEN SUE ME FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES THAT'S RETALIATION AND A CIVIL SUIT WOULD BE THROWN OUT.

INTERESTINGLY IN 2022, THE LEGISLATURE AMENDED THAT LAW TO INCLUDE CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS AS WELL, WHICH IS WHY IT APPLIES IN THIS CASE.

BASICALLY IT IS A LAW THAT INTENDS TO SAY THE GOVERNMENT CAN'T COME DOWN ON ME AND RETALIATE SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE WHAT I HAVE TO SAY.

IN THIS CASE, THEY'RE SAYING THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT THAT THEY WERE EXERCISING IS THE FIRST AMENDMENTS AS IF THEY HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO FILE.

REMEMBER WHO ELSE BROUGHT THIS UP WAS KARI LAKE WHEN SHE WAS SUED FOR TELLING LIES ABOUT INJECTING FAKE BALLOTS INTO THE SYSTEM AND PURPOSEFULLY MISALIGNING THE MACHINES SO THEY WOULDN'T READ THE BALLOTS SHE SAID I'M JUST BEING PUNISHED, I'M BEING SUED IN THIS CARE, CIVIL, FOR EXERCISING MY POLITICAL RIGHT TO DISAGREE AND THE JUDGE SAID HELL NO, OR JUDGE SAID YOU MADE SOME STATEMENTS OF FACT AND IN FACT, YOU'VE CONFESSED THAT YOU DEFAMED HIM NOW IT'S DOWN ONTO THE DAMAGES.

>> AS FAR AS THE GRAND JURY INFORMATION IS CONCERNED THAT WAS PART OF WHAT THE STATE, THE PROSECUTION BASICALLY SAID.

WE NEED TO KEEP THIS UNDER WRAPS BECAUSE THERE'S A REAL CHANCE JURORS NAMES AND OTHER INFORMATION CAN GET OUT.

LIKE THE NEXT DAY WE FIND OUT.

>> THAT IT HAS BEEN OUT FOR DAYS WE JUST DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS OUT.

>> ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS FOR CHRISTINA BOB HAD APPARENTLY FILED HE WAS MAKING HIS POINT THAT THIS WAS RETALIATION AND FILED A PORTION OF THE GRAND JURY TRANSCRIPT THAT INCLUDED GRAND JURY NAMES WHICH IS A BIG NO-NO HERE.

IT'S LEGAL IN A PLACE LIKE GEORGIA BECAUSE, I DON'T KNOW, THEY MAKE IT LEGAL TO PUT THOSE NAMES OUT THERE.

BUT IT IS ILLEGAL TO DO IT HERE AND THE TUCSON ATTORNEY WHO'S REPRESENTING HER CERTAINLY HAD TO KNOW THAT.

>> INTERESTING.

THE JUDGE KIND OF COMPROMISED AND SAID REDACT IS THAT WHAT IT SAYS.

>> REDACT ESSENTIALLY WHAT THE JUDGE SAID IS LOOK WE DON'T THINK THIS WAS DONE INTENTIONALLY.

MANY OF THESE ATTORNEYS ARE FROM OUT OF STATE JUST REPRESENTING PEOPLE HERE AND IT WAS SORT OF A NO HARM-NO FOUL AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUNISH YOU WE'RE NOT GOING TO PUNISH YOUR CLIENT.

AS I SAY THAT'S ONE.

NOW COME BACK AND DO IT AGAIN, YOU WILL BE SEEING THE INSIDE OF THE MARICOPA MOST BEAUTIFUL JAIL.

>> WERE YOU SURPRISED NO SANCTIONS?

>> NO SANCTIONS.

>> YEAH, AGAINST THE ATTORNEY BOB'S ATTORNEY WHO LET THIS THING OUT?

>> NO, NOT WITH THIS PARTICULAR JUDGE.

HE'S GOING TO PLAY IT DOWN THE LINE AS I SAID.

IF IT HAPPENS AGAIN I BET THEY ARE ALL ON NOTICE.

I DID WANT TO POINT OUT ONE OTHER THING THAT I THOUGHT WAS INTERESTING THIS WEEK IS THAT THE PROSECUTORS IN TRYING TO MAKE THE CASE THAT NO, WE'RE NOT BEING POLITICAL AND RETALIATORY MADE THE POINT THAT IF WE WERE GOING TO BE POLITICAL ABOUT THIS WE WOULD NOT HAVE TRIED TO TALK THE GRAND JURY OUT OF INDICTING DONALD TRUMP.

IF THEY TALKED THE GRAND JURY OUT OF INDICTING REPUBLICAN LEGISLATORS WHO SENT A PROCLAMATION A BOGUS PROCLAMATION TO CONGRESS ASKING CONGRESS TO ACCEPT THESE FAKE ELECTORS AND THEIR CERTIFICATION SO THAT WAS KNEW -- NEW TO ME.

>> THEN WE WOULD HAVE 24 DEFENDANTS OR MAYBE 30 DEFENDANTS OR SOMETHING ELSE.

>> AN HOUR LONG JOURNALISTS ROUNDTABLE TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT.

SO NO SANCTIONS AGAINST THE ATTORNEY THERE NO HARM-NO FOUL I GUESS.

NO SANCTIONS AGAINST THE ATTORNEYS FOR KARI LAKE AND MARK AS WELL STATE BAR PANEL I BELIEVE BASICALLY SAID -- >> YOU KNOW, CAST THOUSANDS OF LAWSUIT THIS WAS THE LAWSUIT THAT THEY FILED WAS WHAT THAT TWO YEARS AGO.

>> OTHER EVEN BEFORE THE -- >> THE MACHINE TABULATION OF VOTES INSTEAD GO TO HAND COUNTING AND THE JUDGE IN THE CASE THE FEDERAL JUDGE THREW OUT THE LAWSUIT WAS PRETTY APPALLED AT THE QUALITY OF THIS LAWSUIT.

[LAUGHTER] HE EVEN AWARDED SANCTIONS AGAINST THEM.

SO SUBSEQUENTLY, THERE WAS A BAR COMPLAINT AND THE STATE BAR AGREED THAT THESE ATTORNEYS HAD RIGHT -- VIOLATED AND FILED A LAWSUIT IN BAD FAITH.

BUT THIS DISCIPLINARY PANEL SAID NAH IT'S NOT REALLY BAD FAITH TO THROW OUT A LAWSUIT THAT'S A LONG SHOT BID.

AND SHE SAID, WHAT WAS IT JUDGE DOWNEY SAID THERE'S NO LAW AGAINST PUFFERY AND ADVOCACY.

>> LONG SHOTS AND PUFFERY.

>> THIS IS PART OF THE OTHER STUFF THAT THE COURT IS DOING IN TERMS OF NOT DOING SANCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS AS FAR AS PAYING LEGAL FEES OR ETHICAL PUNISHMENT.

THEY WANT TO BE BENDING OVER BACKWARDS SO SAY WE'RE NOT CRACKING DOWN ON REPUBLICAN ATTORNEYS WHO FILE ALL THESE LAWSUITS.

THESE REPUBLICAN ATTORNEYS WHO HAVE BEEN CHARGED FOR TRYING TO PULL OUT A THEORY THEY THINK WORKS.

THERE WILL BE HAS TO BE A LINE IN THERE I MEAN, FOR EXAMPLE WE HAVE THE LINE OF CASE THAT WENT BACK TO TRIAL COURT OVER THE LAWSUIT THAT WAS FILED AGAINST CHARMAINE SUPPOSEDLY FOR DEFAMING KERN AND GOSAR FOR SENDING A LETTER TO THE U.S. SAYING THEY WANT TO INVESTIGATE THEIR ACTIVITIES INTO JANUARY 6th.

THE COURT SAID MAYBE THERE WAS A LEGITIMATE REASON, I'M SURE THERE'S A LINE IN THERE THAT IF YOU'RE THROWING SOMETHING OUT FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES YOU OUGHT TO BE SLAPPED.

>> BUT TO POINT OUT I BELIEVE THERE WAS ANOTHER CASE INVOLVING KARI LAKE'S ATTORNEYS BRIAN AND OLSON AGAIN WHERE THEY WERE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR UNETHICAL VIOLATION AS A RESULT OF THEIR LAWSUIT CHALLENGING THE ELECTION.

PROBABLY CASE-BY-CASE BASIS.

>> IS THERE A LINE WHEN IT COMES TO LONG SHOTS AND PUFFERY?

I MEAN, [LAUGHTER] >> IT'S GOOD FAITH VERSUS BAD FAITH.

IF THEY ARE THROWING OUT STUFF AND YOU'RE LYING AND MISREPRESENTING THE FACTS, THAT'S ONE THING.

>> IT COMES BACK TO THE KARI LAKE CASE.

SHE SAID I HONESTLY BELIEVED THAT STEPHEN RICHARD INSERTED 300,000 FAKE BALLOTS EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS -- >> IT EITHER HAPPENED OR IT DIDN'T.

>> BUT SHE SAID I BELIEVED IT.

IT'S SORT OF LIKE DAVID STEPHEN COLBERT AND TRUTHY.

>> AND ON SEINFELD WHERE IT'S NOT A A LIE IF YOU BELIEVE IT.

>> THAT THE JUDGE FOUND THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE FOR THAT SHE WAS ALREADY ON NOTICE SO NO, YOU CAN'T GO THERE.

YOU KNOW YOU DON'T WANT TO BE SO STRICT ON THIS STUFF THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU CAN'T FIND A LAWYER TO TAKE YOUR CASE IF YOU HAVE A TOO LONG SHOT CASE BUT IT'S STILL IN GOOD FAITH.

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR THERE.

>> WHAT'S A LONG SHOT CASE AND WHAT IS I TRULY BELIEVE WE HAVE SEEN WHOLE PILE OF PURE LEGAL CRAP HAS BEEN FILED.

>> PURE LEGAL PUFFERY BAD PUFFERY BY ATTORNEYS WHO SAY THE ELECTION WAS FRAUDULENT, THE RESULTS ARE FRAUDULENT, DONALD TRUMP SHOULD HAVE BEEN ELECTED PRESIDENT, KARI LAKE SHOULD BE GOVERNOR AND CANDIDATES STILL OUT THERE SAYING I'M THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

AT WHAT POINT DO YOU SAY NO, THERE IS NO REASONABLE BASIS TO BELIEVE THIS?

>> ALL RIGHT LET'S MOVE ON HERE.

CONGRESSMAN GALLEGOS GETS THE ENDORSEMENT BY THE ARIZONA POLICE ASSOCIATION WHAT DO YOU KNOW IT COMES WITH A LITTLE BIT OF AN INTEREST IN STRING THERE.

>> OH, YEAH.

>> AS YOU KNOW WHEN TRUMP WAS HERE FOR HIS RALLY THAT SAME ASSOCIATION, WHICH I BELIEVE IS THE LARGEST POLICE ASSOCIATION IN THE STATE, ENDORSED DONALD TRUMP SO YOU WOULD THINK AS NIGHT FOLLOWS DAY THEY WOULD ENDORSE KARI LAKE BUT, NO, ABOUT THREE OR FOUR DAYS LATER MAYBE NOT EVEN THREE OR FOUR DAYS LATER THEY ENDORSED RUBEN GALLEGOS.

>> THEIR POINT WAS HE IS STRONG HE HAS STRONG MILITARY BACKGROUND WE BELIEVE HE CAN BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER.

BUT THEN THE VERY NEXT DAY, HE SEND A LETTER TO DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ASKING THEM TO LAY OFF OF THE CITY OF PHOENIX.

>> YEAH -- PHOENIX POLICE.

>> AS FAR AS GALLEGOS SENDING THAT LETTER OFF.

BASIC, AND AGAIN, INTERESTING THAT HE SAID YOU KNOW IS IT GOING TO COST THE CITY A LOT OF MONEY JUST LAY OFF A LITTLE BIT AFTER GETTING THE ENDORSEMENT.

>> WELL, THE QUESTION OF WHAT PREDATED WHAT WE KNOW WHEN THINGS WERE RELEASED WE DON'T KNOW WHETHER THERE WAS A QUID PROCEED QUO THERE OR -- QUID PROQUO THERE.

>> WOULD YOU HAVE A WAITED A COUPLE DAYS I WOULD HAVE WAITED A COUPLE DAYS SO WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE LIKE US WRITING ABOUT IT.

>> DO IT AHEAD OF TIME.

>> HE HAD SOME POINT THERES HAD BEEN QUESTIONS RAISED ABOUT SOME OF WHAT THE D.O.Y.s FINDINGS AND THE QUESTION OF D.O.J.

WANTS TO PUT THE CITY ESSENTIALLY UNDER CONSERVATIVESHIP FOR THE WAY THEY RUN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

BEFORE WE GO DOWN THAT RABBIT HOLE HERE AND DECIDE THAT MAYBE WE NEED TO TAKE A BETTER LOOK AT THIS CONSIDER THE EFFECTS OF THE CITY IS THERE A SIMPLER WAY OF DOING THIS.

CAN THERE BE SOME SORT OF AN AGREEMENT.

I THINK HIS POINT WAS BEFORE YOU KNOW, PUT DOWN THE HAMMER, LET'S TAKE A CLOSER LOOK.

>> DOZEN THIS HELP EXPLAIN THE POLICE ASSOCIATION'S ENDORSEMENT OF A CANDIDATE SO SOON AFTER ENDORSING DONALD TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, KARI LAKE AND DONALD TRUMP WERE AT ONE TIME ATTACHED AT THE HIP I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT HIP HAS GONE HERE RECENTLY BUT -- >> YOU KNOW IT'S HARD TO KNOW.

YOU HAVE TO KIND OF BELIEVE THERE WAS A BACKROOM DEAL TO SAY IF YOU DO THIS WE'LL DO THAT.

BUT, DON'T UNDERESTIMATE THAT FOR RUBEN GALLEGOS THAT THING COULD COST HIM, TOO.

THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALLEGING THAT THEY'VE BEEN MISTREATED BY THE POLICE ARE HIS PEOPLE, HIS CONSTITUENTS.

>> AND IT'S SOMETHING ELSE, THE POLICE ASSOCIATION PROBABLY WANTS TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH WINNING CANDIDATES SO THEY CAN HAVE SOME INFLUENCE DOWN THE ROAD.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE, YOU KNOW A MATHEMATICIAN TO LOOK AT THE POLLS AND SAY WE CAN ENDORSE KARI LAKE WHO IS DEVELOPED A LOT OF NEGATIVE ATTENTION AROUND HERE WHO BASE ON THE POLLS IS ANYWHERE FROM FIVE TO 11 POINTS DOWN.

WHAT HAVE WE DONE?

ALL WE HAVE DONE IS ALIENATED THE PERSON THAT'S LIKELY TO BE THE U.S.

SENATOR.

>> THESE POLLS THIS FOX NEWS POLL GOODNESS GRACIOUS 15 POINTS DOWN.

THAT'S A LOT.

>> THAT'S A LOT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE CROSS TABS SHE'S DOWN AMONG WOMEN, SHE'S DOWN AMONG INDEPENDENTS, SHE'S DOWN AMONG SUBURBAN PEOPLE, URBAN PEOPLE ALL KIND OF PEOPLE, EVEN 25% OF CONSERVATIVES SAID THAT THEY WERE LEANING TOWARDS RUBEN GALLEGOS.

IT'S A DEVASTATING POLL.

>> SO IT'S GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION AS FAR AS HER CAMP IS CONCERNED.

WHAT HAPPENED?

WHAT HAS SHE DONE AND WHAT HAS SHE NOT DONE.

ARE PEOPLE JUST SOLIDIFYING?

>> THE THING ABOUT KARI LAKE IS THAT THAT 2022 GUBERNATORIAL ELECTION WAS A BRUISER OF AN ELECTION.

EVERYBODY KNOWS WHO KARI LAKE IS SHE DIDN'T HAVE ANY ROOM TO REALLY CHANGE OPINIONS AND I THINK YOU KNOW MAYBE IT'S GHOST OF JOHN McCAIN, I DON'T KNOW, BUT SHE'S NEVER BEEN ABLE TO OR NEVER WANTED TO, I DON'T KNOW WHICH, APPEAL BEYOND HER BASE.

SHE FIGURES IF I GET A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEOPLE AT A RALLY THEN EVERYBODY IS CHEERING ME BUT SHE'S PREACHING TO THE CHOIR.

>> LET'S ALSO LIKE A RUBEN HAS MORE MONEY TO SPEND AND B HE'S SPENDING IT WELL.

LOOK AT THE ADS WITH QUOTES FROM KARI LAKE SAYING ABORTION WILL NEVER BE LEGAL IN ARIZONA IF I'M GOVERNOR.

IT'S EXTERMINATION THINGS LIKE THAT.

IN A STATE WHERE ABORTION IS GOING TO BE ON THE BALLOT, THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF SYMPATHY TOWARD THE ISSUE, YOU KNOW HE HAS PAINTED HER THE WAY SHE WANTS TO PAINT HER SHE HAS HAD A HARDER TIME PAINTING HIM AS A LIBERAL.

HE WANTS SOLUTIONS I'M WALKING WITH THE SHERIFF SAYING I'M NOT HERE FOR PHOTO OP I'M HERE FOR SOLUTIONS.

IT HAS BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE ADVERTISING.

>> REMEMBER AFTER THERE'S THE CHICKEN AND THE EGG BUT WHY DOESN'T KARI LAKE HAVE THE MONEY?

>> BECAUSE SHE'S NOT CONSIDERED BY SOME OF THE DEEP POCKETED PEOPLE ELSEWHERE TO BE A VIABLE CANDIDATE.

>> WAS THERE A CONVENTION BUMP AT PLAY HERE?

I MEAN IS THE KAMALA HARRIS INFLUENCE AT PLAY HERE?

>> YOU KNOW I DON'T KNOW.

I DON'T KNOW IT'S REALLY 15 POINTS.

BUT YOU LOOK AT EVERY SINGLE POLL THAT'S COMING OUT THIS IS BEFORE THE CONVENTION AND AFTER, THEY'RE ALL PLUS FIVE, PLUS SEVEN, PLUS, NINE, PLUS, 12, PLUS, 15.

IT'S NOT A GOOD DIRECTION TO GO.

>> YOU'RE IGNORING THAT SHE SAID BUT LOOK, I HAVE MY OWN POLLS.

>> OH, I NO.

>> I HAVE MY OWN POLLS THEY SHOW WE'RE NECK AND NECK AND EVIL POLLSTERS, FOX NEWS AND YOU WILL AT REST OF IT.

>> DONALD TRUMP I THINK TODAY DONALD TRUMP TODAY SAID THE POLLS ARE RIGGED OF COURSE.

>> THEY ARE.

>> THEY DID THAT IN 2020, TOO, TO SET UP THE BASE FOR THE IDEA THAT IF I DON'T WIN THE ELECTION WILL HAVE BEEN STOLEN.

IT'S ALMOST LIKE YOU'RE SEEING THE SAME THEME GOING ON HERE.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW AND MAYBE A QUESTION IF YOU GET THEM ON A DEBATE STAGE, BECAUSE THEN.

>> WE'RE TRYING, WE'RE TRYING.

>> IF YOU LOSE WILL YOU CONCEDE?

WE'RE STILL WAITING FOR A CONCESSION OF 2022, AND OF COURSE SHE'S IN COURT STILL TRYING TO GET A DO OVER.

>> SHE WILL BE GOVERNOR AND SENATOR, DON'T YOU KNOW?

>> I NOW ONCE THEY WERE TRIED AND SUCCEEDED IN BEING USED FOR DUNE BUGGIES.

>> AND YOUR PROBLEM WITH THIS?

>> LOOK, THIS COMES DOWN TO THIS ONGOING FIGHT OVER EMPOWERMENT SCHOLARSHIP ACCOUNTS VOUCHERS IS REALLY WHAT THEY ARE.

THE PARENTS ARE GIVEN A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY THEY CAN SPEND.

THE BASE OF ABOUT $7300 A YEAR MORE MONEY FOR SPECIAL NEEDS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

AND A LOT OF THE PARENTS USE IT FOR SENDING THEIR KIDS TO PRIVATE PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS, SOME PARENTS USE IT FOR HOME SCHOOLING, SUPPLEMENTAL STUFF LIKE THAT.

THE BOARD OF EDUCATION HAS BEEN LOOSEY GOOSY IN WHAT THEY CONSIDER APPROPRIATE EXPENDITURE.

LIKE A LEGO STAR WARS KIND OF THING.

WELL, THAT'S CONSTRUCTION, OR EVERYTHING ELSE.

I THINK THE ARGUMENT THE PARENTS WAS WELL, IF THE KID HAS BEEN SITTING ALL DAY AND GETTING OUT BEING IN A DUNE BUGGY WILL HELP THEIR LEARNING BETTER THAT WAS PROVERBIAL BRIDGE TOO FAR.

>> SO BUY THE KIDS SOME ROLLER SKATES OUTSIDE OF YOUR OWN POCKET.

YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A CURRICULUM THAT YOU CAN PUT FORTH THAT SAYS THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EXPENSE WILL FURTHER MY CHILD'S EDUCATION IN THE FOLLOWING WAYS IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE IT WAS APPROVED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION BECAUSE THE MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT, MONEY IS GONE THEN ULTIMATELY, D.O.E.

THOUGHT THIS IS A BAD ONE WE'LL TAKE IT AWAY WHICH IS HOW IT ENDED UP BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT.

>> ONE BOARD MEMBER ACTUALLY SAID THIS IS I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS.

>> THERE'S ALSO A BOARD MEMBER WHO IS A BIG ESA ADVOCATE AND ACTUALLY I BELIEVE HAS A BUSINESS TO HELP PEOPLE NAVIGATE THE WHOLE THING.

>> LAURIE'S POINT IS VALID.

HOW DOES IT RELATE TOWARDS EDUCATION?

>> LET'S SAY THE KID WAS LEARNING ENGINE RECONSTRUCTION.

OK, GET HIM A DUNE BUGGY MAKE HIM TAKE APART THE ENGINE AND SHOCKS AND SUSPENSION THAT MAKES SENSE.

JUST TO SAY WELL, THEY RELAX MORE YOU KNOW, I RELAX MORE WITH A LITTLE MEDICAL MARIJUANA THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT AN E.S.A.

EXPENDITURE.

>> NOW THE PARENTS GROSS INCOMPETENCE.

>> SHE'S SAYING THEY APPROVED IT NOW YOU ARE COMING BACK AND RETROACTIVELY TELLING ME THAT I HAVE TO REPAY THE FUNDS?

I GUESS SHE'S GOT A POINT THERE.

WHAT THE HECK IS THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION -- THIS ISN'T EVEN A CLOSE CALL.

THREE DUNE BUGGIES FOR HER THREE KIDS.

>> IF EVER THERE WAS A CASE THAT THE ARIZONA LEGISLATURE WOULD SAY WE HAVE TO TO PUT SOME GUARD RAILS AROUND THIS PROGRAM.

>> THERE WAS ONE BOARD MEMBER WHO NOT ONLY VOTED FOR IT, IT WAS A HARD DECISION.

>> A HARD DECISION.

>> IT WASN'T EVEN A CLOSE CALL.

>>> SPEAKING OF E.S.A.

FOUNTAIN HILLS DECIDING THAT IF YOU'RE AN E.S.A.

STUDENT YOU WANT TO RUN TRACK AND FIELD OR SHOOT SOME HOPES FOR THE LOCAL TEAM GO -- SOME HOOPS FOR A LOCAL TEAM YOU CAN'T PLAY WITH US.

THE ISSUE IS IF THERE IS A CHILD WHO GETS AN E.S.A.

THEY ARE EITHER BEING HOME SCHOOL OR GOING TO ANOTHER SCHOOL THAT DOESN'T HAVE SPORTS TEAM THEY CAN GET ACCESS TO THE LOCAL TEAMS IF THEY LIVE WITHIN THE SCHOOL BOUNDARIES.

SOME DISTRICTS ARE ALLOWING IT.

MESA ALLOWS IT.

FOUNTAIN HILLS VOTED THIS WEEK NOT TO ALLOW IT.

I THINK THERE'S SOME REASONS TO ALLOW IT.

FOR ONE THING IN FOUNTAIN HILLS THERE'S ONLY ONE KID THAT WANTS TO DO.

THIS IT WOULD BE EASY TO RETALIATE AGAINST THE KID AND SAID WELL YOU DIDN'T WANT TO COME TO OUR SCHOOL BUT A THIS IS THE WAY YOU CAN CHARGE THE PARENTS CHARGE THEM $2,000 TO JOIN THE TEAM GET SOME OF THAT E.S.A.

MONEY BACK.

B, THIS IS A CHANCE FOR YOU TO GET THAT KID BACK IN THERE, GET HIS PARENTS BACK IN THERE MAYBE GET HIM TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT OTHER THINGS YOU HAVE TO OFFER AND SEE I CAN ALMOST GUARANTEE YOU THAT THE LEGISLATURE IS GOING COME BACK AND MAKE SOME RULES THAT YOU WON'T LIKE.

>> THAT WAS GOING TO BE ONE OF MY QUESTIONS.

HOW QUICKLY WILL THE LEGISLATURE DEAL WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

>> YOU DO KNOW WHO'S IN THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE WHO WILL PUT A LITTLE RED STAMP ON.

THAT BUT THE ISSUE COMES DOWN TO I'M LOOKING AT IT A LITTLE BIT MORE FROM THE OTHER SIDE.

LET'S SAY HAVE YOU 20 SLOTS ON THE TEAM AND THIS KID COMES IN MAYBE VERY WORTHWHILE KID MAYBE A GREAT TRACK STAR, TAKES UP ONE OF THOSE SLOTS AND MEANS IF SO LOOK YOU WANTS TO PLAY COME TO OUR SCHOOL.

JOIN OUR TEAM, BE PART OF THIS BECAUSE ALSO BEING ON A TEAM IS MORE THAN JUST SHOWING UP AT 3:30 AFTERWARDS IT COMES DOWN TO BEING PART OF THE ATMOSPHERE OF THE SCHOOL.

SO I UNDERSTAND THE REASON YOU KNOW.

IT'S, IT'S E.S.A.

IT'S A HARD CALL ON THE CHILD.

>> YEAH, THAT'S IT.

I CAN AGREE WITH YOU SHOULD BE MAD AT THE LEGISLATURE FOR THE WAY THEY'VE DONE THIS YOU CAN BE MAD AT PARENTS WHO BUY THEIR KIDS DUNE BUGGIES AND THE LIKES BUT WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO CHILDREN IF YOU'RE A SCHOOL BOARD AND YOU ARE ABOUT CHILDREN I DON'T KNOW.

I SAY GIVE THE KID A FAIR CHANCE TO TRY OUT.

>> YOU THINK IT'S ONLY ONE KID.

NOW IT'S ONE KID WHEN IT BECOMES TWO, SIX, AND 20, THEN ONCE HAVE YOU SET THE PRECEDENT YOU CAN'T SAY WELL IT WAS OK FOR ONE BUT NOT THE OTHER 19.

>> HOWIE'S POINT FOUNTAIN HILLS IS SAYING IT'S NOT FAIR TO FOUNTAIN HILLS STUDENTS.

>> I DON'T HEAR THEM CRYING IN MESA SAYING THEY ARE ALLOWING.

>> MAYBE THAT $2,000 PER SEASON.

>> MAYBE THAT'S THE REASON THE HUMAN CRY HAS BEEN LOW.

>> HOWIE, WHAT'S GOING ON AS FAR AS AGENCY HEADS REAL QUICKLY?

>> YOU KNOW THAT THE COURT SAID TO THE GOVERNOR NO, YOU CAN'T PLAY THIS LITTLE GAME OF NAMING THEM EXECUTIVE DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND THE GOVERNOR FINALLY SAID OK I'LL SEND THE NAMES BACK.

TURNS OUT IN AFTERNOON SHE DECIDED THREE OF THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO GO BACK BECAUSE THEY WON'T GET CONFIRMED.

DAVID LUHAN HEADS DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SAFETY WHICH HAS COME INTO A LOT OF SCRUTINY.

THEY SAY THEY ARE LOSING CHILDREN AND WINDING UP IN THE SLAVE TRADE.

KAREN PETERS THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND JAY COPMAN WHO REVIEWS IT HAS SOME REAL SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT RULE OF GOVERNMENT IN TERMS OF THINGS LIKE AIR QUALITY AND BUSES AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

AND DANA ALMOND WHO WAS APPOINTED TO HEAD DEPARTMENT OF VETERAN SERVICES.

NOW THAT WENT TO AN INTERESTING ONE BECAUSE SHE'S A FAILED LEGISLATIVE COMMUNITY.

RHONDA WRIGHT WAS BELOVED IN THE COMMUNITY NOW THEY ARE GIVING A BOOMING CRY TO BE IN THERE WELL YOU LOST THE LEGISLATIVE RACE YOU CAN GO IN THERE AND I THINK THEY MATTERED THEIR VIEWS KNOWN TO THE LAWMAKERS WHO WILL BE DOING THE CONFIRMATION.

>> WRIGHT HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME VERY ENTRENCHED IN THE VETERANS COMMUNITY.

>> LOOK, SHE WAS BREAKING THE LAW.

THE LAW SAYS THAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED -- THAT THE SENATE HAS A ROLE IN ADVISING AND CONSENTING.

HAD THEY WHAT WOULD BE THE WORDS, ABUSED.

>> THAT'S A GOOD WORD,.

>> ABSOLUTELY THEY HAVE.

BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN JUST IGNORE THE LAW AND GO ABOUT YOUR BUSINESS AND SAY WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO APPOINT ANY AGENCY DIRECTORS.

THE QUESTION TO ME IS THE JUDGE WAS SILENT ON THE FACT OF ALL THESE EXECUTIVE ASSISTANTS WHO HAVE BEEN IN OFFICE FOR NOW WHAT ALMOST TWO YEARS?

A YEAR AND A HALF?

WHATEVER IT IS, HAVE THEIR ACTIONS BEEN LEGAL BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT TECHNICALLY THE HEAD OF THE AGENCIES.

>> MORE LAWSUITS TO COME.

>> THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP BEFORE IT WILL BE BROUGHT UP AGAIN BUT NOT ON THIS PARTICULAR SHOW BECAUSE WE ARE OUT OF TIME.

GOOD TO HAVE YOU BOTH HERE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

I'M TED SIMONS.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

YOU HAVE A GREAT HOLIDAY WEEKEND.