JR Afternoon with Chris Renwick
JR Afternoon with Chris Renwick ~ November 25, 2024 ~ Full Show
Oh, welcome in. It's good to have you fired up for a Monday. We got a lot to talk about. And I want to start. We have a couple of big big stories here breaking today and over the last couple of early last hour or so. Let's start with the big news. Jack Smith, the special prosecutor appointed by the DOJ to investigate Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election, the January 6 charges. Jack Smith has moved to drop that case. And this would signal the end of that particular case against Donald Trump. Jack Smith wrote today in a six page filing. The Justice Department's position is at the Constitution requires that this case be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated. The outcome is not based on the merits or strength of the case against the defendant. Now, Donald Trump has said that he would fire Jack Smith as soon as he got in the office. There were reports that Jack Smith's team was a mess and that he wanted to fire everybody on the team. I mean, the situation around this case has been pretty wild, particularly in the weeks following the election. But Smith has maintained that the government's position on the merits of the defendant's prosecution has not changed, meaning that he felt like they had the goods on Donald Trump. Now, it's on Judge Tonya Chutkin in Washington, D.C., to really crumple this thing up and throw it in the trash. And this is again, not groundbreaking, not even totally unexpected. When just a couple of weeks ago, Judge Tonya Chutkin basically threw out all of the dates that were planned for this case, much like the case in Manhattan has done. And you've got legal experts saying that this was kind of seems like was the inevitable outcome. So we'll talk about this a little more as the show goes on. Meanwhile, another big time story, the United States and sources believe that Israel and Hezbollah have reached a ceasefire deal. Now, you've got John Kirby saying that they're close. You've got other U.S. officials saying that this thing's on the goal line. It's not done yet, but they're right there. So what needs to happen? Well, the Israeli security cabinet is expected to approve this deal tomorrow. That's according to U.S. officials telling Axios. And the cabinet would have to convene and, and, and vote on it. And they feel like they're, they're there. So what would this lead to? Well, the ceasefire would include a 60 day transition period where the Israeli military would withdraw from southern Lebanon. The Lebanese army would deploy an area as close to the border and Hezbollah would move their weapons further north. And it does include the United States involved, a U.S. led oversight committee to monitor the implementations of this deal. And if there are violations, the United States will address them. They've agreed they being the United States to give Israel assurances, which includes support for Israeli military actions against threats coming from Lebanon and things that would disrupt this, this ceasefire agreement. Now, it does make you wonder if this can, no, look, the hostilities really have come over the last year between Israel and, and Hezbollah. And that coincides with the hostilities with Israel and Hamas. But if we can get a deal done in Lebanon, why are we still, how are we still so far apart in the situation with Hamas? To me, the situation with Hamas is very much politicized. And there are movements all around the world talking about it. There wasn't nearly the outrage for, for Israeli military action against Hezbollah in Lebanon, that there was in, in the Gaza Strip with, with Hamas. Now, the interesting thing is that was promoted by a mass killing. It was promoted by a terrorist attack. And yet the, the politicization of it is, has reached a fever pitch and continues to this day. So it, a couple of really big headlines that I think is really interesting. Also coming up in the three o'clock hour, we're going to talk about what the perception is on Donald Trump's transition compared to what it was eight years ago. Harry N10 on CNN has done some polling on it and talked to people about it. And I, boy, what a difference. What a difference eight years makes because the sentiment after Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton, I'll tell you, is very different than it is now. And it's not only very different from the American people, but it's radically different among Democrats even. So we'll get to that coming up in the three o'clock hour. Meanwhile, a Warren police officer has been arraigned on four counts, including two counts of manslaughter in connection with a fatal crash in September that left two men dead. The families of those men say that this is not enough. It doesn't go far enough. WJ, our senior news analyst Marie Osborne has the details on that case. Hi, Marie. Hi, Chris. So we'll set this up for you. The Macomb County prosecutor charged 28 year old James Burke on four counts, including two counts of manslaughter. This was in connection to this fatal crash in September that left these two men dead. The crash happened in the early morning of September 30th when both Burke and another Warren police officer were traveling at a high rate of speed on Shainer Road at Prospect. Their vehicle struck a white Dodge Durango killing 34 year old Cedric Hayden and 33 year old Duann Pettis, both Burke and the 34 year old officer sustained injuries. The families of the victims blame the Warren police department for the deaths of their loved ones. Now attorneys representing the victims say they've obtained a video of the crash that confirmed that the Warren police SUV was traveling at an illegal and dangerously high rate of speed. They also said the Warren police cruiser did not have its lights activated. Cedric Hayden, senior of that's Hayden's father, one of the victims said at a press conference this morning. The charges were less than they should have been. He said he wants the officer who was in the passenger seat charged as well. He's also frustrated with the continued lack of answers about his son's death. About two dozen people, family members were at this press conference. They voiced their disappointment with the charges and the lack of communication from police in the prosecutor's office. The families, by the way, filing two $100 million lawsuits against the city of Warren and the Macomb County prosecutor Chris Pete Lucido has not really responded as of today at today's development that the families are not happy with these charges. Yeah, and I think from a family perspective that that was so greatly impacted by this two two families and two groups of friends. I think it's understandable that they feel they feel that this is not enough certainly. Yeah, they just didn't think it was very fair. The father saying, look, if this had been the other way around, my son would be sitting in prison right or sitting in jail right now facing really big charges. It wouldn't be what it, you know, the the officer of course is out on bail and his family and he goes, yeah, it just wouldn't have been the same if this had been the other way around. Yeah, no doubt. Marie Osborne, thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Hey, we've got new plans that have been released. It's a proposal of what would happen to the Renaissance Center. We know that GM has announced that they will move their, their operations to the still under construction Hudson building. But this new plan would keep the tallest tower, that center structure of the Renaissance Center, while two others would be demolished. It would require at least $250 million in public support. And this is all part of the revamping of, of the, of General Motors and their decision to move those operations over to the Hudson building. Well, then those questions around what happens to the Rensen? This is at least a peek into what is being considered. Meanwhile, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are putting together a team. We'll talk about that next here on W. J. So Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, of course, they're heading up Doge, the department of government efficiency. And they're looking to cut federal regulations, cut the spending, cut personnel, any way that they can de-bloat the government in their eyes. Well, now they are interviewing a team. It's not certainly going to just be the two of them. And they're dipping into a familiar area, at least with Elon Musk in Silicon Valley, looking towards a lot of tech leaders, a lot of hedge fund managers, a lot of people that deal with big time amounts of money to help put together this team to lead Doge in their efforts to cut government, the spending funding, the bloat, the bureaucracy, a lot of it. Let's check in with Jacob Bogage. He's the congressional economic policy reporter with the Washington Post. Jacob, it's, it's good to have you. What do you make of them going to Silicon Valley to try to find people to, to help lead this effort? I would say Silicon Valley is probably not the most efficient place in the world. That's a fair assessment, I'd say. But it, you know, look, this is, Elon Musk and Rebecca Rama-Slam, you work with people, you know, right? And these are entrepreneurs with tech companies and who do they know? Who do they like? Who do they trust? It's folks who are in the same industry as them. It's Mark Andreessen, who, you know, has a serial investor, Travis Kalenick, who ran Uber, it's Antonio Gracias, Steve Davis, I mean, these people, Bill Ackman, who's been in the news fighting DEI. I mean, these are people who, you know, they are drawing from the pool of, it's kind of, it's almost a perfect collision of them drawing from people in a pool who they know. And kind of the Trumpian, I saw this person on TV and they look good. Do you know what sticks out to me? Let me throw this out to you because what really sticks out to me is, you know, I think a lot of people, and I want to take it a little bit back to the election because there was this notion that, you know, Kamala Harris has Silicon Valley in the pocket and she's got all of these leaders of big companies that are siding with her. I mean, these are not small, insignificant companies. These are not small, insignificant people. These are people that are leading some of the biggest companies in the world. Does that surprise you that they're coming out of the woodwork in support of this effort? It doesn't necessarily. I mean, I think the pattern we've seen of Silicon Valley is the big founders tend to skew Republican and a lot of the folks who do the work tend to skew Democrats. You know, that's a political problem for Democrats, too, because I think Donald Trump and Republicans successfully painted Democrats as the party of professional workers, as the party of the white collar, not the people who clock in and clock out, not the people who get paid by the hour. And you're Trump successfully won working class voters by significant, significant margins. Who do class voters aspire to? And who makes the products and the systems that make their world and the economy go around? It's these big time Silicon Valley founders, not necessarily the folks who still might be making 100, 200,000 dollars a year who do the work in these companies. You're talking about big tech here. And I think that if we were to just look at this kind of blanket statement, well, go after government efficiency. It seems like such a tall, hill to climb. And even if you're somebody like me that knows that the government has redundancies, that there is money going to things that we just don't need it to, the realities are if you stretch that across the entire federal government, and I know that they've got like an 18 month deadline, whatever it is, but the reality is this is a really big job. Does this signal that they're willing to go into the tech space and utilize different formats to try to identify some of these areas that they're going after? Absolutely, it does. I think they've talked about using AI to audit the Pentagon, which has consistently failed on it. What seven in a row? I think I believe seven a row. Yeah, and they've talked about developing an app so you can file your taxes on your phone, which is something the Biden administration was actually in the midst of developing. So, you know, some of these ideas that are getting floated, I don't want to say they're they're Republican or Democratic ideas. I think the major theme from that list of folks is they're disruptors. Some of them are more successful than others. Some of them have better reputations than others, but they are certainly disruptors in this space. You know, you mentioned one thing about kind of the redundancies in government. I think this is a big hurdle that Musk and Rama Swami run into is there's a reason for redundancies in government. When something breaks, but you need it to work, you have a backup system. And so, a lot of what they're going to be struggling with, I think, from an outsider's perspective, learning about how government functions, learning about how government spending functions is figuring out what redundancies do you need? Because you do need them. And which of these things can you live without? And what constituencies are you harming the political constituencies? And, you know, voters, are you harming when you strip those programs away? Jacob O'Gage, the Congressional Economic Policy Reporter with Washington Post joins me. What are you hearing on the Hill? Because the realities are, I think, if we're being honest, this is probably going to face a lot of pushback, particularly by Democrats and potentially even in the courts. What's the path here for Doge, do you think? Well, the most realistic, like achievable path for Doge is make your recommendations for genuine efficiencies for reducing redundancies that can get done in government agencies and have, you know, your Doge operatives, your Doge true believers walk alongside those cabinet secretaries, those leaders to implement those things. And then send the rest to Congress with an open mind. I think the open mind is going to be really important here because, you know, some of the, like, why do we give corn subsidies, right? We give corn subsidies because, sure, I guess, in the broad scheme of the economy, there's a reason it's worth it. But there's also, like, we lose a lot of money on those. We lose a lot of money on those, but we keep them because there is a political constituency that needs them to support their way of life. Why do we do rural broadband? It's not because it's so profitable for the government and it's so efficient. It's because people in rural areas deserve broadband and there's a political constituency for it. So, you know, there is -- you can't just go out and slash and burn. A, because it's going to disrupt people's lives in really harmful ways. And B, because there's going to be folks on the hill going, no, no, no, you can't take that from my district. I can't vote for that. And there's going to be a lot of Republicans who will have a rude political awakening. If Donald Trump, Elon Musk, in effect, Rama Swami, you know, slap something down on the hill and say, "Vote for this." And they've got to split from their own district. You know, that will die a very quick and violent death if they do. Yeah, well, yeah. I mean, because at the heart of it, I mean, these people want to keep their jobs. They're lucrative jobs. They're high-profile jobs. And if there's something that will do some sort of, at least from an optics perspective, harm to their district, they're not going to be as readily to accept it. When is the deadline? When are they trying to have this team in place so that they can hit the ground running when Donald Trump has sworn in? By January 20th is the first deadline. I mean, it's have people in place right away. And there are things that we expect the Trump administration to do and the Republicans in Congress to do very rapidly. Immigration is one of them. I imagine those will play a role in that. And that's something that I'm actually trying to report out today. You know, there's a tax bill that needs to get renewed or there are massive tax increases that will come for nearly every income bracket at the end of 2025. Republicans have signaled they want to move very quickly on that. Those will play a role in it because you have to pay for tax cuts somehow. There's the debt limit deal. The debt limit expires January 1st, but it can probably be extended until maybe May or June. There will be legislation around that and to pay for our nation's borrowing. I imagine those will get involved there. So there are going to be these tension points where those, you know, based on their original plan will be submitted in these recommendations pretty consistently throughout the first 18 months of President Trump's term. But also these inflection points where, you know, if this thing really wields the kind of clout it appears to in the early days, they'll have a lot to say about how the President responds on power response. Jacob O'Gage with Washington Post. Thank you, my friend. Appreciate you letting us pick your brain. Appreciate your time. Good to be with you. Happy Thanksgiving. Yep. You do you as well. 800-859-0957-800-859-0WJR. It's all about fine tuning now because Donald Trump has officially set his cabinet. They are all set for confirmation. And, and, and I think kind of the crown jewel in what Donald Trump wanted to do is with Doge and now Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy assembling a team. We'll get to your calls, your thoughts, 800-859-0957 and JR afternoon. You know, I think Jacob O'Gage brings up an interesting point. And if you missed my conversation with him about Doge and the team that Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk are putting together, you can head on over to WJR.com and check it out. But he said that, you know, there are, there is something to the redundancies in our government, right? Like, particularly maybe with FEMA. Like, you want to make sure that you've got money on money that, that in the event of a disaster, that you've got the resources available to help people. I guess unless you have a Donald Trump sign in your ear. But there is something to that. And I'm not saying that, that Doge is going to go through with a red pen, like Milton Friedman. Like, I don't think the word just cut in departments. But we'll see. I don't know. I don't know what the plan is. But this idea of them leaning into Silicon Valley, I think is interesting for two reasons. A, they're leaning in heavily into tech. They're leaning heavily into AI and putting all of this information in a system and letting the system figure out where these issues are. It, look, from an efficiency perspective, it's pretty good. That's pretty, that's the way to do it. I don't think you should go, you know, print off every line item of every budget of every department and then just start rolling through paper. I don't think that's the way to do it. And it's 2024. So there's got to be a better way. And I think the second part of that is, you know, Democrats lean in heavily to the elites. They lean in heavily to to the quote, unquote, highly educated. They lean in heavily to, you know, business leaders and celebrities and all of those things. Well, you've got the head of Uber coming in or you've got the head, you know, you've got Bill Ackman coming in hedge fund. These are big people. These aren't nobodies. They're not nobodies. So I just think it's very interesting that you lean into that and they're getting on board with this. Also, Jack Smith is as filed papers to drop Donald Trump's case, the January 6 case, the election interference case, drop it. Judge Tonya Chutkin in DC will have to rule on that. But the realities are it's not much of a surprise. Legal experts have pointed to the fact that this was going to happen after Donald Trump got elected. And so now we're getting to the point where, you know, it gets, it gets crumbled up and it gets thrown into the trash. That's where we're at. So that's there for you, too, if you want it. I also want to throw this into the mix and we'll get your calls 800-859-0957. Political as a piece out today that Kamala Harris and her family will be in Hawaii for the holidays. And there are people close to Kamala Harris telling people, or at least Kamala Harris has told advisors who are talking, that she is going to keep her options open, that she is going to continue to, to, to figure out her political path forward. Now, look, if you ask me, her political career is over, it's over. If, if, if now wasn't the time then when, when you think four years being out of the spotlight is going to help, you think four years of being out of the game is a positive? I just don't, I don't see that. I don't see how that's a good thing. And while I believe the election, and I've told you multiple times, I think it was very much an indictment on the left and their policy stances and their policy, you know, whatever they're throwing out there, I just, I don't think that she is the one to carry that forward. And how, look, I don't know how you reinvent yourself coming back from this election four years later to being a viable candidate. I just don't see it. I don't see it. Now, I think the Democratic Party has some options going forward. You know, you, you've got Gretchen Whitmer, who basically will step out of office as governor in 2026 and start prepping for a presidential run. That's my view, my opinion. You've got Gavin Newsom, same thing. You've got Josh Pirouat in Pennsylvania. Now, they're, they're there. Their options are there. But the realities are, I just, I've, I view Kamala Harris as being, she's done. She's done. And I don't see how you run for governor of California. I don't see how you run for Senate again. I just, I don't see any of that. So I, I just think for her, this is, it's the end of the line. But Politico says that her camp is telling people that she is very much considering her political future. And that, and that there, that she could be a factor in this, in this next presidential election on the Democratic side, 8085 90957, 808590WJ. It's got quite late. Don kicks us off this afternoon. What's up, Donnie? Chris, when you announced that that guest was a Washington Post writer, like a lot of your listeners, I probably thought they thought like me. Well, here we go. And sure enough, they give such an inside the beltway examples of cuts that aren't going to go well. Corn subsidies and quote, cuts that will hurt people, unquote. Are you kidding me? There's only two parts of our society. After the modern age of all kinds of communications and technology that have not been able to achieve any kind of efficiencies, our colleges, universities, and our federal government, both of which can print money. That is an absolutely, I'm surprised you didn't push back at that. There is so much fat in this government. We're paying $9,000 for a bag of both. We've got 80% of our federal real estate sitting empty while we pay to heat and cool it. Are you kidding me? And by the way, I will disagree. And I love your show, by the way. But on this, I absolutely disagree with you with the red pen comment. That's exactly what they need. And I'll tell you why. There are all sorts of protections for career bureaucrats. You cannot just onesie-toozy let people go. The only way that you can get around their protections is by cutting massive amounts across the board, whole department, 5% off the top. I love to get your thoughts. Yeah. No, no, Don, don't go anywhere. Hold on. Stay with me. Okay. So my red pen point is that it seems like Musk and Rama Swami are leaning into tech. They're leaning into Silicon Valley. So which means that they're not going to just print off the budgets of every department and go through paper by paper. They're going to use technology. They're going to use AI. They're going to really dig in. And they're going to let these systems work for them. And it's really the only way that they're going to be able to accomplish their goals in 18 months. Well, yeah, because they won't have the time. Correct. Yeah. That was my point on that. Okay. Okay. I agree. The other part, of course, is, you know, mandates can change very quickly. Sure. And once these cuts start happening, and let's be honest, in a lot of accounts, we're not talking about cuts like a family has to make a decision with a budget. We're talking about limiting the amount of increase in their budget each year. And here's the other thing done. Here's the other thing that people don't really talk about this when it comes to Doge. You know, it's like, okay, well, where do we cut funding? It's not even just cutting funding that they're going to look at. They're going to look at regulations. They're going to look at where that they can cut these regulations that makes government spend less money and run more efficiently, which I think is, is a hugely underrated part of what they would do. And again, I don't know what they're going to do. I don't know what the proposition is. I don't know if they're just going to go in and say, yeah, you know, the IRS, we don't need it. Like, uh, yeah, the part, the Department of Education, nah, scrap it. Like, I don't know if that's what's going to happen. They've said things to that effect, but I don't know if that's what the end up, I don't know if that's what the recommendations will end up being. That's the thing is we just don't know. This is so, you know, to me, it's revolutionary because we just haven't had anybody look into the budget like this. So we, we, it's a lot of speculating. It's a lot of talking about, Hey, what are we going to do? How are they going to do it? But at the end of the day, it's a lot of wait and see Don appreciate you. Let's go to Rod and Plymouth. What's up, Rod? You know, first of all, I heard future co-host on Saturday morning. His name is Jake. Yeah, how about that? Little Jake and Henry? Absolutely. He was great. Anyways, no matter, you know, right now everyone's up in arms thinking they don't know what they don't know. And what the way I see it is this intelligent efficiency by an artificial intelligence and whether the government can stomach and implement this. And by the way, everything will be incremental and in moderation. You don't do anything too radical ever because that can, that can topple any platform because there'll be just too much chaos. But the bigger point of this, I think, is going to be for us as individuals, our own personal finances. When we have that in check, it doesn't matter what the government does anymore. We need to get a grasp on our own personal finances. And I've been preaching that for 40 years. Yeah, there is so much more you can do with your money than allowing the government to do it for you. Yep. And I, you know, Rod, the problem is that's difficult for people. I mean, that's that's hard for a lot of people. A lot of people just work nine to five. They're just trying to get to the next day of trying to feed their families, whatever. And, you know, watch dancing with the stars at night. They're, they're just, they're an autopilot. So, you know, it's, it's difficult for people. But you're right. I mean, putting more of an emphasis on that would do a lot of good. Thank you, Rod. Appreciate you. 808590957, speaking of AI, we'll talk more about AI next to a debisited breakfast covering AI. We'll talk about it here on WJ. Well, coming up next Wednesday, the next installment of D Business's breakfast series will be taking place at the Book Tower. With the focus of how you leverage AI for your business. And there aren't many better people to talk about this than Jason Bresler, the chief technology officer at United Wholesale Mortgage, who will be a panelist at this event. Jason, it's good to have you. It's great to be here. Thanks for having me. You know, I would imagine, you know, you lead, what, the 1700 IT professionals at UWM. And, and if you're a panelist for this particular discussion, my guess is you got to practice what you preach. So how, how does United Wholesale Mortgage utilize AI for, for what you guys do? Well, we're slightly different than a lot of other companies in that all 1700 plus of those people all work in Pontiac, Michigan in the office every single day. And so what we do is we build everything. We don't buy, we don't acquire other companies. We don't use vendors. Really build it all in house. Yeah. So it's very, very unique. Yeah, allows us to move very, very quickly. But we've been able to integrate AI into our existing product suite, but then also what's called Greenfield and build out brand new applications from the ground up just utilizing AI. So what's the messages? What's the message for businesses? Whether they're big, medium, small businesses, how do you encourage them to utilize this technology? Because I think from an outsider's perspective, looking in strictly from a business perspective, it can be incredibly helpful in streamlining efficiency. Right? Maybe you, maybe you don't need the entire workforce that you once did, but the realities are those challenges can be different for every business is depending on which sides they are. Absolutely. They can be different for everybody. But what I would recommend first and foremost is AI, the way that it exists right now, AI has been around for 40 years, but the way that AI has taken this new light means there's all kinds of crazy innovation happening much more rapidly than it ever did before. For businesses, the most important thing is not just to get an AI product out, which for most people is a chat box, something like chat GPT. What really people want to do is use AI to really re-examine their entirety of the workflow of their business, how they get customers, how they process those customers through from beginning to end. There's so many more efficient ways that business can be done right now where you can keep the entire workforce that you have, but not have to hire additional people in order to take on more volume. You've been at this for a long time. How has this space changed in both your time at United wholesale mortgage or even before? How has this evolved and how will this change the way companies do business? Well, I think really for the first time people are really looking at data driven metrics and data driven decisions, and that's never really happened before. Everybody says they want to do that. Everybody says they want to predict the future, but for most of us, we always go off of our gut, especially if we're CEOs, if we're entrepreneurs, if we're sea levels, we always kind of go off of our gut of the things that have worked and what hasn't, but with AI and machine learning and everything that's wrapped around it now and all of these great products that have come into the marketplace, you can really take your data, clean it, scrub it, and then make real predictive decisions based off of that data instead of just kind of going with the flow and really hoping for the best and hoping that market conditions kind of swing into your favor. Well, in acquiring that data, right, when you run a successful business, you get a lot of that data and making sure you know how to use it, right, how to read it, how to apply it, that's a huge step in all of this. Absolutely, and for a lot of, really, I would say all of us, we have tons of data, just a lot of it's junk, you know, we have people that are just entering information in, just keystroke after keystroke, AI and machine learning really allows you to clean that data up and then have real, like what's called a single source of truth, and you have real data that you can start to build off of and start to make real business driven decisions to really start gaining more market share. Now, look, I mean, in terms of the grand scheme of time, right, this is relatively new, but there has been a lot of steps forward at light speed, it feels like over the last five, 10, 15 years, and the realities are, I'm sure there's still a little hesitancy for a lot of people. I think if you're doing what you're doing at United Holdsfield Mortgage, where you're creating these platforms from scratch, you have the ability to control it completely. That might not be the case for other businesses. So if there are people that are a little, if they've got some trepidation about this, how do you assure them that A, there are good models out there that you can utilize, or B, that this really is the future? How do you assure people who might be a little on the fence about that? Well, the first thing that you want to do, especially as a business leader, as a business owner, is talk to other business leaders and business owners to see what other people are doing, especially in your field. So you have a decent idea overall of how people are leveraging AI and machine learning and what that actually means for them. But really what you want to do is you want to go out and start doing some research on companies and partners that are out there that offer a specific kind of service that seems like it may make sense for you. And what you want to do is take just like if you were going to have a generator, for instance, installed at your house, you'd probably get two, three, four different quotes to make sure you were finding somebody that you really jothed with that made a lot of sense into what they were talking about. You want the same thing when you jump into your AI journey. You want to make sure that you're finding somebody who can really come in and assess the overall business workflow, the data that you have, and then say, hey, here's a solution that we could start to build off of. But this isn't just a one stop shop. What we'd want to look at is how do we integrate this into everything that you have to first get you more efficient and then start to make you more of a technology powerhouse using this technology. Have those conversations that you've had with other business leaders? Has that helped the way that you shaped your technology building at UWM? A little bit, you know, overall, I always tell people I'm a unicorn when it comes to what I do and the fact that, you know, I know, I know. And the fact that, you know, I've only been in the mortgage world, and I've only been an IT for my entire career, which is now 27, 28 years. So I understand the business aspect very well, and I understand the technology aspect very well. So I kind of take that Steve Jobs approach of, like, I'm not even going to ask you what you want. I know what you want. I'm going to give it to you, and then I'm going to come after all your feedback. What could I do better? You know, and so that's really the approach that we've taken. And, you know, having 1,700 people working alongside me makes it much easier for us to solution and build and innovate and do all those things, where most people don't have that luxury. Yeah. And you've got a team that all that are very clear on what you're trying to accomplish for the company. And I'm sure that that certainly helps. Well, it sounds like it's going to be a great panel. It's the D Business Breakfast series leveraging AI for business and career success. It's at the Book Tower next Wednesday, December 4th, 830 to 1030. And if you are a business leader and you want to be involved, you want to be there and and hear a lot of this discussion, you can head on over to dbusiness.com for those tickets. Jason Bridesler with United Wholesale Mortgage. Thank you, my friend. Always good to talk. As well as you, thanks so much for having me. Yep, you got it. We'll take a break, get caught up on a couple of pieces of news coming up at 3.15, 3.18. Rather, Todd Flood will join me here on J.R. afternoon. All right, three o'clock hour. It is good to have you. Still a lot to do today. And we'll get to the decision made by Jack Smith to file basically the motion to drop the January 6 case to drop the 2020 election interference case. Coming up at 3.18 with our Todd Flood because, look, I think a lot of legal experts looked at what is going on in these cases, basically wiping away whatever court dates that they had on the docket. Those are gone. You've got motions to dismiss these cases. You've got some weird stuff going on in in Manhattan where Alvin Bragg just wants to shelve the case for four years until Donald Trump gets out of office and then you can sentence them. But the realities are, at this point, Donald Trump's biggest case, the biggest one is likely headed for the trash bin. So we'll talk to Todd Flood coming up here at 3.18. Meanwhile, a couple of big stories, the United States and officials believe that an Israeli and Hezbollah ceasefire has been reached. Now this has not been guaranteed. It's not signed. But US officials say that the Israeli security cabinet will get together tomorrow. They'll approve a deal and that would really be the end of it. And what it means is there'd be a ceasefire which would include a 60-day transition period. The Israeli military would withdraw from southern Lebanon. Hezbollah would move its heavy artillery north further north than they already are. There would be a US-led oversight committee to monitor the implementations of this ceasefire. So it would be pretty comprehensive. Meanwhile, we still have nothing yet on the Hamas and Israel front, which is unfortunate. Also some new news this afternoon. Oakland County prosecutor Karen McDonald, there had been efforts by the parents and the victims of the Oxford school shooting to have an independent outside investigation look into what happened. Where were the breakdowns? Who should be held accountable? And you've got Attorney General Dana Nessel holding up her hand saying, "Well, I'll do it. I've wanted to do it." But we need to have cooperation from the prosecutor's office and the sheriff's department. Well, Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard has been very transparent. He welcomes that investigation and would cooperate with it. Karen McDonald seemingly has drug her feet for the better part of, well, much of this time since the shooting. Where she has said that the Attorney General's office has the ability to go ahead and do an investigation. And Dana Nessel says, "Well, we need approval from the prosecutor the sheriff in this case to move forward." So now Karen McDonald has formally referred the shooting to Attorney General Dana Nessel's office. She wrote a referral on Friday and vowed to fully cooperate with any investigation that Dana Nessel's office conducts and provide access to all the files, the personnel, the information, the evidence that has been gathered by investigators to complete this investigation. So now, seemingly, the ball is in Dana Nessel's court. And what happens here will continue to watch. Also, there were questions after General Motors decided to announce that they were moving their corporate offices from the Renaissance Center to the New Hudson Building. And the questions were, okay, well, what happens to the Renaissance? What happens to these buildings? Because, I mean, at the end of the day, if GM isn't there, is it an obsolete facility? Where does it stand? Well, now there is a new proposal that has been released, which says that the main Renaissance tower would stay. Two others would be demolished. And it would require roughly $250 million in public support to do. So the plans would right size, as they say. It's 5.5 million square foot footprint in the area, according to bedrock Dan Gilbert's company. It would involve removing the 39 story towers closest to the Detroit River. And at the base of the complex and using the remaining space to improve riverfront access from downtown, three towers would be renovated into a mix of hospitality and housing. And so it does provide at least a little bit of an answer into what would happen to the Rentsent when GM officially moves into the Hudson Building when it is finished. So not done just a proposal, nothing set in stone, but that seems to at least tip to kind of where officials were thinking it would, how it would be used, what it would be used for. Meanwhile, Eric and Lyle Menendez virtually appeared in California at a court a short time ago marking their first public appearance since 1996. WJ, our senior news analyst, Maria Osborne, Warren, what happened at that hearing. And in fact, this story is developing right at this moment, as we speak, outside the courtroom in California, the family is going to be at the microphones to talk to reporters along with Mark Garrocos that the attorney involved here and other attorneys following this hearing. Lyle and Eric Menendez appeared via video for this hearing. And it's, what they are wanting is a chance at parole, but it's all been postponed until January. Judge Michael, Jessica said that he needed more time to get up to speed on the case and would not be ready by December 11th, which had been the date for the hearing about whether or not they could get parole. The judge also wants to give Nathan Hochman, who will be sworn in as the Los Angeles District Attorney on December 2nd, a real opportunity to weigh in on all this. And he set the new date of January 30th or 31st. The brothers, of course, serving life sentences without parole for murdering their parents, Jose and Kitty, at their home in 1989, the District Attorney George Gascon asked last month to seek to reduce their sentences to 50 years to life, which would have made them eligible for parole. As you know, Chris, there had been talk that maybe, just maybe they would have been home for Thanksgiving. It's interesting that the Menendez family has lobbied for them to be released, arguing they were victims of sexual abuse within their own home by their father. So this does signal the fact that they won't be home in the next couple days. No, no, no, no, no. The judge saying he wants this new District Attorney to really get up to speed on this case, know exactly what's happening here. So it's going to be a new date of the end of January. I'm hearing different dates. I'm hearing January 25th, January 33rd, so anyway, the end of January, they'll be back in court to determine whether or not they can even be considered for parole. It'll all depend on that DA. Have you seen pictures of their appearance? How did they look? I mean, this is the first time they've been seen. Yeah, this is well, yeah, in in a courtroom situation. Yes. And no, they didn't allow any cameras, any recording equipment within the courtroom today. Interesting. Interesting case that obviously Garner is a ton of a ton of interest. Marie, thank you for that. Appreciate it. Thank you. All right. We'll talk to Todd Flood coming up as special counsel, Jack Smith moves to dismiss Donald Trump's election case, the January 6 case. We'll talk to Todd Flood about it coming up next year and J afternoon. So special counsel, Jack Smith, has dropped the federal election subversion case as it relates to the 2020 and January 6 cases. He said that the department's position is that the Constitution requires that this case be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated. The outcome is not based on the merits or strength of the case against the defendant. So certainly in one breath saying it's it's this is what the Constitution requires, but we had the goods on Donald Trump is what Jack Smith is saying. Is this a surprise? Is this this seems like this is where it was headed? Let's bring in Todd Flood to break this all down. Todd, it's great to have you. What did you make of the news today that broke that Jack Smith is filing to drop these cases? No surprise. It was imminent that that case would go all the case support case would go to the wayside. The fact of the matter is that you can't prosecute a sitting president. You can't unduly burden him or encumber him while he's trying to fulfill the nation's duties, having him sit through a criminal aspect obviously is crazy when you're in that position. So there's no surprise here. And the Supreme Court kind of broke it down for all of us in the immunity case and there basically three buckets. There is bucket one where there is an immunity for someone that's campaigning for president but is not the sitting president. So that's not the case here. Two, there's absolute immunity for a sitting president when he's doing his job is core as they put it in and quotation marks his core duties. So the low-lying fruit for us, Chris, would be like pardoning somebody who are recognizing the foreign power. That's low-lying fruit but that absolute immunity for things you are doing within your office. Then there's immunity, absolute immunity, but there is a for rebuttable presumption. The government can say, well, the decision he made by us prosecuting him is not harming basically the country. That's a very heavy burden to meet. And the Supreme Court said, we really don't need to get there. We're not going to answer that question. Here's where you're at. He has absolute immunity if he's exercising those duties for his first job or his post and his core responsibilities. So in this case, the clock ran out on Jack Smith. The game's over as far as the time. So President Trump won and there is no way on this green earth that he would be prosecuted for a federal case because it goes against all the policies that have been long-standing. So Judge Tonya Chutkin here now with the balls in her court, there's no reason that she would act in a way that would go against what Jack Smith is filing for? We have a separation of powers, right? So she's in the judicial branch that Jack Smith has in his power, the prosecutorial standpoint, she can't intervene on his case. She can't step in because that's his power, his power through the legislature. And obviously, the judge can't step in and say, no, you must prosecute him. No, that's not her role nor her duty. I don't want to throw too much of a curveball at you here, but the Manhattan case is really interesting because Alvin Bragg is treating this case like when I go to Costco to buy Eggo Waffles for my kids and we're not going to eat the entire box at once. They got to be frozen. We got to put them on ice or they go bad. It's the same way with this case in Alvin Bragg's eyes. It seems like he's content on just shelving this thing until four years down the road and then when Donald Trump gets out of office sentencing him, is there any sort of precedent for that? Is that even possible? What do you make of of that case as well? The state case is different. And it's to me, you know, of all the cases that were brought, this is the case that I've said before with you and I and others on our station that I think is the weakest because they made this misdemeanor and combined it with the federal statute to make it a felony. To sentence him, the sentence four years after seems crazy to me. Now, is there precedence? Well, yeah, there's precedence when someone goes on the lamb and what we call capious. So you're about to be sentenced in, you break, you broke off your tether and you went on the run for four years and no one could find you. Then you get caught picked up and that's four or five years later. Yeah, you get sentenced on an underlying felony for what you were convicted. But this is far different. It's crazy. Everybody everybody will know where Donald Trump is every moment of every day for the next four years. Right. Right. This is crazy. Why would you put our country? Why would you put our nation in any kind of peril or jeopardy or thought process of trying to have this way on the president of the United States of America that you want? Dismiss the case. Dismiss it. He's already paid a penalty for having to sit and go through this massive amount of the trial and tribulations of this thing. Enough already. So he has one or three buckets he can do. He can sentence, he can delay attempt or he can dismiss. So I don't see him sentencing unless he wants to say, yeah, I'm going to sentence him to time served and fines and be done with it, attempt to delay it, which is crazy to me. And or dismiss, which seems to me to be the obvious gig. We hate setting aside jury verdicts. We hate doing it. It happens. It happens when there's jury misconduct or there was prosecutorial misconduct or the life we have set aside a jury verdict. But it's rare. We hate to we hate to deserve those things. In this case, it's the exception. Yeah. And is the is the Georgia case the same way? I mean, that never really got off the ground quite like the the Manhattan case did. But is that going, by the way, side two in your mind? It is. Yeah. There's there's more. There's more congestion on that case than there is in many others just from the standpoint of the special assistant prosecutor that came in and had the relationship with the elected official. So the fact of the matter, she was signing the vouchers for him to get paid. There's so much in that case. What a world to. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But the end of the day, I think if we had common sense, like it or not, wherever you sit, the president of the United States of America has to focus in on one major thing. That is being president of the United States of America. That's it. Our nation comes first. Right now, our citizens come first. And that's what he should be focused on. Yeah, no doubt. That is Todd Flood, a flood law. Of course, you can hear him on behind the bench every third Wednesday of the month at seven o'clock here on WJ. Todd, thank you, my friend. Appreciate your insight as always. Appreciate you, Chris. Be well. Thank you. You do the same. Happy Thanksgiving. 8085 90957 8085 9 0 W J R. That's there if you want to weigh in on it. I'd love to hear your thoughts. Meanwhile, coming up at 335. I've got some audio from Harry N 10, one of the pollsters on CNN. Does a really nice job? I got to tell you. And he did. He has some numbers comparing Donald Trump's win in 2008, or excuse me, 2016 to his win in 2024, eight years later. And the tenor, the view, the feeling among the American people back in 2016, compared to what people are feeling now, I'll tell you, they are, I don't know if they're, if we would classify them under surprising, but they are, they're eye opening. I mean, they are pretty stunning numbers. So I've got audio from Harry N 10. We'll play that coming up. And I want to get your thoughts. And my question is, I mean, it's very simple. It's why? Why? How? So we'll do that. I'll play that audio. We'll get to your calls next here on Jay afternoon. So what's really interesting about Donald Trump, in my mind, at least as we sit here today, is we have two distinct sets of data to draw from, because it's not just like winning as an incumbent, right? This only has happened one other time in the 1800s in history where a president doesn't win reelection after their first term and then wins in the next election. And so now we have two different sets of data to look at. Because if you're just an incumbent, things just go on as normal, right? You just continue to serve. And Donald Trump's case, what's interesting is you go back to 2016 and Donald Trump was not expected to win. And he came out of nowhere and wasn't even expected to have the Republican nomination. And, and you know the story. And then of course, when he actually won election, when he won the election and became the president-elect, there was a lot of uncertainty and people weren't really sure how to feel about Donald Trump. And, and so as a result, the numbers reflected that, as Harry Anten points out in Donald Trump's numbers that we're seeing now, compared to what we're seeing in terms of now from 2016 in terms of the support and the numbers of support for Donald Trump. President Trump's transition net approval. You go back to November of 2016. Look at this. It was just at plus one point, just at plus one point. That is well, well, well below the historical norm. Look at where we are today, significantly higher, plus 18 points at 17 points higher on the presidential transition net approval rating. The bottom line is this, if eight years ago, Americans were lukewarm on Donald Trump. At this particular point, they're giving him much more the benefit of the doubt. A lot more Americans are in love with this transition. This much more meets the historical norms where normally presidents get that boost coming out of their victory. And what we're seeing here is Donald Trump's presidential transition is getting a thumbs up. And dare I say two thumbs up from the American people. Very interesting. What about the, the, the, the excitement for the future? People that think that we're headed in the right direction with Donald Trump and this transition team? It's not just that they like what Donald Trump is doing right now. They're optimistic for the future. So again, let's compare ourselves now versus where we were eight years ago. And what you see eight years ago, 53% of Americans were scared or concerned the majority towards the upcoming Trump term. Look at where we are now. The shoe is on the other foot. 53% of Americans are excited or optimistic. It's flip-flop where a majority, a narrow majority eight years ago, we're scared or concerned about the upcoming Trump term. Now what we see is that the majority is excited or optimistic about the Trump term. So what we're just seeing is very different numbers from where we were eight years ago, eight years ago, folks really were not that in love with the Trump transition. Now they are and more than that looking forward to the upcoming Trump term for eight years ago, the majority were scared of concern. Now the majority are excited or optimistic. Now here's the really juicy part is Donald Trump when he got elected in 2016, the opposition was in full force. Democrats accused him of being a Russian spy, a Russian operative, he's a traitor, yada, yada, yada, you know the deal. Well now what's really interesting is support and how Democrats view Donald Trump. Are they going to mount some great offensive against him or are they just going to support him? Just 44% say to oppose Donald Trump, the majority, the 56% either 46%, it doesn't motivate me at all which I think is really the exhaustion pick, right? This is the plurality or 10% say it actually motivates them to support Donald Trump. Together these numbers get 56% far higher than the 44% who say oppose Donald Trump. The bottom line is this, Republicans very motivated by Donald Trump's win and compared to eight years ago, Democrats just really, really tired. Okay, so this is my question because that that is unbelievable. The fact that Donald Trump being elected, there are double digits of Democrats saying that they're happy with it and that there is more than 45% of people saying that they, that Donald Trump being elected doesn't move them. Whereas back in 2016, eight years ago, there was a much stronger push against him to which my question to you at 800-859-0957 is why? Why? What is different now as opposed to eight years ago and why do people have such a strong favorable view of Donald Trump now? I'm really curious. Now, to me, it could be a couple of things. It could be the Democratic platform that they're just not into it. The Democrats don't have a direction. They don't really support the middle class according to the middle class in this last election. And they're completely disenfranchised with the platform or they're legitimately excited about what Donald Trump is offering, meaning deporting people that are here illegally or going after other countries who they feel like are taking advantage of the United States or Donald Trump saying he's going to go ahead and end these wars, there may just be a stronger pull to Donald Trump than there was in 2016, 800-859-0957, 800-859-0WJR. I just want to throw that into the mix because it's very interesting, very interesting as we sit here towards the end of November. All right, it's got to Rod Chester catch up with Democrat David. David, hello. Hey, Chris, some immediate healthkeeping and this latter question. I'm looking at the approval poll, job approval polls, and it was about 50%, 51% when he took office in 2016. So I don't know who that was or where he's getting the data from, but it was at January 2017, inauguration, it was right around 50, 51%. So I don't put any stock into that. Another housekeeping thing, Todd Flod, he thinks this is a Mr. Meener. I would have him Todd Flod Rita, the US versus Michael Cohen, December 7th, 2018 sentencing memorandum. No, that's not what he said. Hold on, Dave, that's not what he said. He said they used a Mr. Meener and tied it into a federal charge. That's what he said. Right, because guess what? The opposite side of the conspiracy for Pinkerton doctrine, if he had knowing involvement, it's the same thing Michael Cohen got from the federal, from Trump's own DOJ, his weaponized DOJ three years, and when he tried to say no, this should be one year, they pointed out to five recent cases where it was between 36 and 56 months as far as a incarceration sentence. Okay, this point about Elon Musk, okay, this is a bunch of nonsense because everyone knows there's tons of efficiency out there, okay? No one's going to do anything about it. That's why we say waste, fraud, and abuse. Every, every politician talks about there's 20% waste for us. Mike Elgore, Elgore had a commission, what became of that? What do you think is going to happen? If our $30 trillion economy is 102 to 103 percent spending, what do you think it's going to do when the related spending goes away, including the initial direct spending, as well as all this wasteful stuff? Politically, it can't get through the appropriation process, okay? It's not, this spending's been appropriated. It's going to be a legislative process. It's going nowhere. Okay, no, I mean, you're right. It very well could be a legislative process. That may well have to happen that way. You're absolutely right. But you do agree that there is, there's a lot of, there's a lot in the budget that probably could go away. I guess I don't know, maybe that's not the right way to put it. There are, there is money in the budget that could probably go away. I don't know to what degree. Rob from Plymouth had it right when he says you got to be very careful and going at this because you know what, that's going to show up as an immediate recession. If it's, in fact, we have the same dilemma with AI. What do you think's going to happen to our economy when it goes for a while? Yes, it will be, it will be, yes, I think it will be detrimental to our economy. Yes, I think there will be a lot of people out of work. The middle class, the lower class, they create a high upper class by spending and fulfilling the job. Okay, you take away their spending and guess what? This is going to reverse snowball, inverse snowball. It could be, yeah, though it very well could be. I think that's one of my concerns about AI. Dave, thank you. It's going to Stephen Commerce. What's up, Stevie? Hello, your question about why we're optimistic about Trump. And I think it is common sense financially and common sense morally versus a woke agenda. That's why he won. Yeah, no, I think there's, I think that that's probably right. And I think the common sense probably spans a number of different areas, right? It probably spans immigration. It probably spans some social issues. It probably spans the economy. It probably spends geopolitical perspectives. I think that's a blanket for a lot of issues that people just said, yeah, none of this makes sense to what you're telling me. And it doesn't make sense to me that you keep telling me the economy is great when it doesn't feel great. And I think a lot of people just said none of that makes sense to me. And whatever this guy's saying sounds right. They aroused the moral majority. They aroused the people that didn't vote and they got them out to vote. And obviously from all the numbers from each election, the the bulge in 2020 only draws one conclusion. And that is that the voters didn't go away. They were made up. All right, Steve, thank you. Appreciate the call. We'll take a break. Come back for more next here on Jay afternoon. Oh, home lions win again. Just nine in a row. Not really a surprise at this point, but I got to tell you, Steve Courtney, it doesn't, it doesn't, it just feels like it's good. It feels good. It feels like this is what should be happening. Chris, good afternoon to you. Hello again, everyone. Let me just say this, our conversation brought to you by the hard working men and women at Bill Brown Ford. You know, my good friend, Matt Garco and of course, his team, they're doing great things for you each and every day. Make sure you drive with the champions at Bill Brown Ford. Shop their Trueview inventory at BillBrownFord.com today. Let's not forget about the performance remodeling sweepstakes, performance remodeling selected Cameron Zakeria as the winner of their first annual $100,000 window of opportunity sweepstakes. Performance remodeling says let's do it again. Log into Windows roofingciting.com to enter to win the next sweepstakes from performance remodeling. Yeah, Chris, it's, it's just kind of becoming the norm, isn't it? The lions just going out and executing to perfection, as a matter of fact, with that win 24/6 over the Indianapolis Colts yesterday, the lions who always seem to be reaching new milestones, right? They are off to their best 11 game record since the franchise's inaugural season, that back in 1934. Now, that being said, the lions also improved to 6 and 0 on the road and who said it best? That would be head coach Dan Campbell. If you can win on the road in the NFL on a regular basis, you are a damn good football team and you call them road warriors. So, there was a little bit of fear in that till yesterday with some injuries along the way, notables going down for the Honolulu blue and silver, Taylor Decker, suffered a right leg injury. He would come back and then he'd go back out. Wide receiver punt retainer, Kaleef Raymond, suffered a foot injury. David Montgomery, injured his shoulder. He was kept out, but as we found out afterwards, Chris, Dan Campbell told him there's bigger fish to fry. He expects to play Thanksgiving Day against the Chicago Bears as does Taylor Decker. So, that's good news. Meanwhile, the news perhaps not is good on Kaleef Raymond. Dan Campbell saying that one might be a bit more serious and Carlton Davis, the fine corner. He also left early in the fourth with what appeared to be a left knee injury. He would know more after some imaging today. So, there you go. And I think we all know by now, injuries in the National Football League, Chris, the X factor. Everybody's injured now. That's what Dan Campbell said. That's just the way it is in the league. So, as much as you hate to say it, it always comes down to the next man up philosophy. Yeah, I mean, you know, the Carlton Davis thing is that one feels like it could be really impactful. I mean, you look at who they've lost defensively. I mean, they've lost Marcus Davenport. They obviously lost Aiden Hutchinson. They've lost Alex Anseloni. They've lost Derek Barnes. I mean, they've, I mean, Terry and Arnold bit and play this week, although I think he'll be back. I mean, the realities are there, their injuries that they've suffered defensively. I mean, amongst most teams in this league would have crippled them, but they've just found a way. And I think Aaron Glenn for as much, you know, you know, Aaron Glenn took a lot of slack early in their tenure here, but he has been a world of a difference in how he's handled that defense and they've stepped up. Well, and it all comes down to that secondary, right? You know, you even go back to the success of last year. Clearly, the defensive secondary was the weak room in the building. Brad Holmes went out and bolstered that particular position during the off season. So now all of a sudden, because of this, there are more and more threads on that there internet saying that, yeah, Aaron Glenn now has put himself in a justifiable position when he goes to interview for these head coaching positions that will indeed open up during the off season. That's just a byproduct of success in the league. And he's been through the process before. And the Lions have been fortunate enough to have he and Ben Johnson as far as that goes back. How much longer that good grace last Lord only knows. But I do know this, Chris, the Lions now getting set for those Chicago Bears. And, you know, I was at a family function yesterday. We put on a basted ball, little touch football with about 20 family members. And, you know, I see creeping in here is a little animosity between the older Lions fans and the younger ones, the older ones are saying, you know what, you haven't paid your dues. They're the grizzled veterans. We've been kicked in the chops time and time again. And now you guys, and it's been nothing but good. And Lions at 10 and one, obviously favored to take care of those bears who went through even more frustration yesterday, falling in overtime to the Minnesota Vikings 30 to 27. Right now the Bears, a very disappointing four and seven. How is Matt Heberflow still employed? I'm not sure. I'm not sure he'll be employed much longer. We do have some breaking news, by the way. Oh, I do. I also just want to say this. You talk about how good fans have it. The younger fans. I tell Jake all the time, you are living through the greatest football ever in this state. You know, Michigan goes out, wins a national title. The Lions are competing for Super Bowls. I mean, you have no idea how good you have it. Hey, here's some breaking news on Jameson Williams. He will not face charges for a gun that was found in his car during a traffic stop, according to prosecutors, that because he was not physically holding the gun and his brother had a valid CPL that Jameson Williams would would not be charged in this case. So Jameson Williams, the legal issues are out of the way. So some good news there. Well, you know what? And I hope you learned from this, right? Yeah, yeah, because the truck record has not been good since getting into the league. And he has said as much that he's got to make better decisions. And that particular outcome couldn't have gone any better for him. And again, I hope you learned from that. Yeah, no doubt. All right, Steve Courtney, thank you, my friend. All right, Chris, good, the rest of the day. Yep, you do. We'll talk to you later. All right, that is going to do it for us. We will see you tomorrow, same time, same place. Have yourself a wonderful Monday. And we will catch you tomorrow right here on WJ.
November 25, 2024 ~ JR Afternoon with Chris Renwick On this episode: Chris learns more about the soon-to-be Department of Government Efficiency; finds out about an AI breakfast panel you can get involved with and then takes your calls.