On this episode of Common Sense Ohio, hosts Steve Palmer and Norm Murdock take listeners on a lively ride through both history and hot-button issues facing Ohio and the nation.

The show kicks off with some fascinating "this day in history" moments, from Elvis Presley's $1,000 down payment on Graceland to George Washington’s strategic triumph over the British in Boston. Steve Palmer and Norm Murdock reflect on simpler times, the complexity of historic figures, and draw surprising connections to today's world.

The conversation shifts to the rapidly changing international climate, with in-depth analysis of current tensions in the Middle East, debates over national defense funding, and the political fallout from controversial decisions in Congress. The hosts don’t shy away from tough questions—whether it’s the justification behind conflict with Iran, national security concerns at the border, or the demands placed on the Department of Homeland Security.

Closer to home, the episode covers the political quagmire around voter ID laws and election reform, pulls back the curtain on Ohio’s JobsOhio controversy, and celebrates a small-town legal victory where civil liberties prevailed in a comedic case involving rapper Afro Man.

Throughout, Steve Palmer and Norm Murdock bring a sharp mix of historical perspective, constitutional insight, and relatable local stories—reminding us all why common sense still matters most in the Buckeye State.

Harper CPA Plus

Moments

00:00 Washington Forces British From Boston

08:24 Straits of Hormuz Tensions

13:44 "Joe Kent's Resignation Fallout"

16:23 "Iran's Hostility Toward America"

26:15 ID Rules and Constitutional Debate

30:03 EPA Climate Rollback Sparks Lawsuit

35:09 "Iran: War, Oppression, and Resistance"

39:48 "Afro Man's Lemon Pound Cake Lawsuit"

46:19 "Probable Cause and Search Warrants"

52:58 "Good Intentions Sustain Governance"

54:14 "Controversy Over JobsOhio Corporation"

59:06 Contract Secrecy Sparks Ohio Backlash

01:05:07 "Tyranny of Moral Busybodies"

Recorded at the 511 Studios, in the Brewery District in downtown Columbus, OH.

info@commonsenseohioshow.com

Copyright 2026 Common Sense Ohio

Stephen Palmer is the Managing Partner for the law firm, Palmer Legal Defense. He has specialized almost exclusively in criminal defense for over 26 years. Steve is also a partner in Criminal Defense Consultants, a firm focused wholly on helping criminal defense attorneys design winning strategies for their clients.

Norm Murdock is an automobile racing driver and owner of a high-performance and restoration car parts company. He earned undergraduate degrees in literature and journalism and graduated with a Juris Doctor from the University of Cincinnati College of Law in 1985. He worked in the IT industry for two years before launching a career in government relations in Columbus, Ohio. Norm has assisted clients in the Transportation, Education, Healthcare, and Public Infrastructure sectors.

All right, here we are. Common Sense Ohio, March 20th. You believe it's March 20th already? I can't believe it's March 20th. Norm's got some books on the table, lots of stuff I'm sure we're going to get to. Anyway, Common Sense Ohio brought to you by HarperPlus Accounting. I have been on the phone with my HarperPlus accountants several times in the last month. Why? Because it is tax season. For those accountants, hats off to you.

It is that time of year where you You don't get to see your families, you don't get to see your friends. And there's been a lot of changes. There's been change. In fact, you know, with Harper Plus, we had this problem where Ohio had form— I mean, they didn't even— they hadn't even approved the forms yet. So we couldn't really file anything.

I believe that.

I mean, just classic governmental nonsense. I mean, it's bad enough that we got to give them so much money, but then when they can't even make it easy for you to give money, that's even more. And then they blame you, of course, when you don't do it correctly. But that's okay. We don't have to worry. We have HarperPlus Accounting. You could too. I promise you, you could too.

Check it out. HarperPlusAccounting.com. Maybe. I don't know. You'll find it. Anyway, this day in history, I've got a fun one. Then Norm's got some stuff. Elvis puts his down payment on Graceland on this day in history.

Guess the year.

Wow. I have no idea.

1957.

Wow.

1957. Uh, Elvis puts a down payment on Graceland, uh, $1,000.

That's incredible. That's a nice stat.

And I know I've been to Graceland a couple of times, and I know in the last couple of years there was that Elvis movie, so it sort of reinvigorated interest in Elvis. Yeah, really incredible story.

A great movie.

Yeah, a great movie. And if you go to Graceland, get the detailed tour. It's worth it. Yeah, it's worth it. And go through all the stuff. You know, there's all those— it's like a museum you walk through and go to the one where he's like— they have this sort of video display of his comeback, you know, his leather-suited comeback show. Really incredible stuff. But anyway, yeah, we digress.

That doesn't— but you know what, though? It was just a better time.

Oh, it was. Yeah. And, you know, Elvis got drafted and he served. I mean, like, he was At the end of the day, he was a Southern Christian boy who learned to sing in church and admired the local— back then you would say Negro— Southern blues music and grew up in that culture, friends with all those people and, you know, Memphis and, and that whole music scene. He was a real person like he He really did serve in the Army. He really did his duty and came back.

Yeah, I mean, look, you know, you're going to get blowback for this, or we're going to get blowback. It was a better time. But well, yeah, but there was still Jim Crow, and there was— that's all true.

That's all true.

All those things are true at once.

But there were good-hearted people living much simpler lives.

Simpler lives, it seems like. Yeah, simpler lives. And I don't know, you know, is it better now? But I don't know, it just seems simpler. Simpler is probably the right word. But Elvis, sort of a conflicted guy, you know, had didn't think he was a drug addict, but he was.

Yeah.

Um, you know, remember Richard Nixon? Yeah, he met with him and gave him a DEA badge.

That's how badly Elvis wanted to fight against drug dealers. Yeah, he was a DEA—

not realizing that he was addicted to drugs, and it ultimately kills him.

Yeah.

But, you know, you see these two sides to him where he's talking smack and doing this other thing, but then you see these others— like, you see these sides to him where he's actually I watched a clip recently. Well, I don't know why, but I stumbled on it where he— I forget what song they were working up. He was singing. You know what it was? I think it was— I can't remember what it was, but he was working with his orchestra.

Okay.

And really musical guy.

Oh, yeah.

Very insightful musically. I've had a little bit of music training myself, and he just blew me.

I mean, he was a pro. I mean, he was no, you know, like fake voice, synthetic music. It was the real thing.

Pure voice. And when you go watch the special, the '60s special or the comeback special, '68, I forget when it was. But anyway, watch that special. It'll blow you away. What he did naturally to walk on that stage, sort of a cappella.

Yeah, right.

He had his guitar, so it wasn't true, but you get what I mean. It was just like him on this pedestal. With people all around, and he freaking nails it. Anyway, we're spending too much time on Elvis.

Well, I loved Elvis.

Uh, yeah, so go see Graceland, it's worth it.

Yeah. And, uh, so also on this date, March 20th, but 250 years ago in 1776, um, future President George Washington, who was commander of the Continental Army at the time, wrote to the Continental Congress that he had defeated, uh, General Howe of the British expeditionary forces and caused them to flee the city of Boston. And it was no small defeat. There were almost 200 ships in Boston Harbor, and Washington's forces took the heights, Dorchester Heights, after an extended battle the heights. Uh, the Continental Army took them from the British, and that had a commanding view over the harbor. And he was setting up his artillery to systematically, uh, destroy— à la, you know, Epic Fury, right, 250 years later— systematically destroy the British Navy if it had stayed in Boston Harbor. So they, they packed up along with the Tory loyalists in Boston They abandoned Boston. There was talk they were going to burn Boston to the ground.

They did not. And Washington didn't shell them. He allowed them to flee and they went to Nova Scotia. They escaped. And John Adams of the Continental Congress, upon receiving the letter, motioned for legislation to give the first Congressional Gold Medal to George Washington. And you'll love this, Steve. It took 14 years to get the medal done, awarded, and Washington didn't get it for another 14 years after that legislation passed. So, you know, even back then it took forever for Congress to get anything done, right?

Well, I guess that's just shocking. Who would have thought?

Who would have thought gambling?

Who would have known? But Washington, really fascinating guy. There's a couple of documentaries you can dive into on him. And in the same vein, or there's these two different guys. He shows up sort of in full costume dress when they're trying to figure out who's going to be in charge of the army. He shows up in his old uniform, taller than everybody else and sort of cutting a huge swath across the room, which sort of rings of an ego, "I want this." But then—

No question.

But then when it's all over and they want him to be king, he's like, "No." And he would've been elected as many times as they would've. He could have served as president/king forever. He didn't want to do it. He stepped down and wanted to go live the simple life. Actually rode the countryside. He was a surveyor in his old life, but rode the countryside. And would go shack up with people. So you, like Washington, you'd be like hanging out in the woods, out in the wilderness in West— or yeah, Western Virginia, and, uh, Washington would— might come riding up on his horse, right, and stay with you for a night or two, right? I mean, crazy stuff, really crazy stuff.

Here in Ohio, there's a little, uh, uh, inn and a restaurant called the Golden Lamb, uh, down in, um, South Lebanon, Ohio. And at any rate, Washington ate and is said to have lodged there. Yeah, just, I mean, just amazing stuff.

So really incredible guy. Well, lots going on.

Yeah. I mean, speaking of epic fury, epic fury, we got a war going on.

So we got defectors in MAGA. We got all sorts of stuff to talk.

So this was, this was fascinating yesterday. You know, Trump has been, I think, baiting the member nations of NATO and SEATO, which is the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization, which is South Korea, Japan, Australia, etc., for help because the Straits of Hormuz are effectively shut down because there's these swarms of drones and missile batteries that are deeply entrenched in the banks of Iran and they're The Straits of Hormuz are only 30 miles wide. So it's like shooting fish in a barrel from a technical point of view. And they also have underwater drones that move at very high speeds. So what Trump has been asking England, Germany, etc., Japan, South Korea is, hey, bring your minesweepers to the Strait of Hormuz since you're the beneficiaries of most of this oil. The U.S. only gets 1 to 2%. Of its special oil, uh, recipe, uh, types of oil from the, um, through the straits.

It's the rest of the world that gets the other 90%. So he's even asked China, communist China, to help. And everybody basically except Finland and I think Estonia and a few others have more or less rebuffed, uh, his earlier efforts. So he had the Japanese prime minister, uh, the first female— this was great. He had her in office and in the Oval Office, and they're having a joint press conference. And he's kind of, you know, saying to her that, you know, no, we don't absolutely need Japan or anybody else, but ethically and, you know, in terms of being a responsible nation, you're getting your oil from this place. You ought to be helping. Like, this is in your own interest.

And, um, and one of the Japanese reporters said to Trump, well, uh, you know, it would have been helpful if you had consulted NATO and see ATO, uh, the Southeast Asia organization, if, if you had said up front what your plans were. And he said, well, then you would have blabbed it, you know, like it would have gotten out to Iran that we were going to do this sneak attack. And, uh, you know decapitate the, you know, in the first 50 seconds Israel took out the 40 of the top leaders. Like that wouldn't have happened if they had noticed. And so Trump said, you know, to the Japanese reporter, you know, you guys didn't tell us about Pearl Harbor.

Yeah. And that'll stop a conversation.

And the poor Japanese prime minister lady looked like she had swallowed her tongue. She just her eyes bulged out and she just— you could tell that she wanted to say something, but there was, there was nothing really to say because truthfully Trump is giving an example of why you don't blurt out your war plans ahead of time. But at the same time, right, they're an ally, been an ally now for what, 80 years? And it's like, you know, maybe—

I mean, look, use your common sense.

What—

because what she was really doing was saying, she's waffling, giving these little sort of backhand, I can't support it because you didn't do this, right? You know, and he just cut right, as Trump has a tendency to do, cut right through the bullshit, just cut right through the nonsense and says, listen, you know exactly what I was doing. You know exactly why we couldn't tell you in advance. And by the way, you did the same thing in 1941.

So shut up. So and the other thing that's really got everybody in a pickle is, you know, they're going to need a supplemental from for the Pentagon because we've been expending our ordnance. We lost a case, you know, Ohio's National Air National Guard we lost 3 of our guardsmen out of the 6 were from the Ohio detachment here in Columbus, and we lost 3 of those people plus the plane. So they're, you know, we're expending people, we're expending less important than the people, of course, is all the ordnance and the equipment is being consumed. So there's a request in for probably $200 billion in extra expenses. And as Victor David Hanson has said, you don't get protection for free. If you want protection, there's a burden to that. And I, as I said in our previous show, to me, you know, it to me, it seems like to stop a rogue nuclear power that was this far from 11 weapons according to their own negotiators, that I think at any price it's a bargain not to have them.

I mean, look what they're doing. They're basically hitting all of their neighbors in the Middle East. And right now with conventional drones, can you imagine if they had nukes?

I mean, well, so let's talk about that. We've got what's his name, Kent, coming out saying it was all nonsense or joking. Yeah. So what? Tell us about that.

Well, Joe Kent, who was the counterterrorism chief for the Director of Intelligence Department of the White House, he resigned suddenly and he said he thought about it. But over the last 3, 4 weeks, knowing the attack was about to happen, he made a statement which is really— you have to want— I mean, he's not a podcaster, right? He's not like us. You know, where we can say anything. He was working for the White House and he comes out with a public statement that says Benjamin Netanyahu misled President Trump into the concept that an attack from Iran was imminent. And the national security people were on Capitol Hill yesterday and the day before saying that Joe Kent's just wrong about that, that in fact, um, the negotiators and our intelligence that have been looking at Iran for a long time did conclude that they had the ability to at least do dirty, uh, nuke ballistic missiles. Some of those missiles can— are said to be able to reach the United States. And so You know, we're in an active war zone. If you think about that, if Iran wanted to reach out and touch us, you know, I don't know how we stop a ballistic missile from hitting us.

We would have to respond in kind. And, you know, personally, I don't want to level Tehran with a nuclear weapon, and I don't want them to hit New York City with one of theirs. So I'm not so sure any of this is correct, but I guess, you know, in years to come, historians will figure this out.

Yeah, we'll see how it all shakes out. And I know now he's on the podcast tour and he's making other statements. A couple of people have sent me texts about it and I haven't had a chance. I've been busy this week to really dig into it. But yeah, you know, it just— there's a— it shows you it's such a weird time right now where we have sort of people on the left and people on— and these are sort of the peripherals of both parties are agreeing. Yeah, that on, on their disdain for Netanyahu and Israel and sort of tying what we're doing here as doing the bidding of Israel. And, you know, it'll be interesting to see how it all shakes out. And in the end, I guess the question is going to be, well, can both things be true? Can this be helpful for Israel and good for the United States at the same time?

I think, I think there's no question this is good for Israel. I mean, obviously that's their conclusion. And, you know, we are the Great Satan to the ayatollahs in Iran. I mean, we— there have been thousands of Americans, both civilians and military, killed as a result of Iran. The— they say somewhere around 80% of the IEDs which were used in Iraq that blew up the Marines, for example, that we've had in here talking about, you know, the Marines that were blown up and the Marines at the compound at Beirut Airport under— when Reagan was president. I mean, going all the way back to Jimmy Carter, they took over our embassy in Tehran. They kidnapped people and held them. They, you know, they killed 30 they say as many as 30, maybe 50, that we're not sure, of their own people just in the last few months who were protesting in the streets.

So they are a brutal, wicked, evil, human rights-violating regime for 47 years. And, and the idea that we're just going to twiddle our thumbs and wait until they become a nuclear power— everybody from Obama to Clinton to Jimmy, everybody said we can't let that happen. We get supposedly just a few weeks away from 11 nuclear weapons being possible and Trump pulls the trigger. And what was he supposed to do, wait until they use one?

Yeah. I mean, look, or the argument would go that they weren't— they didn't have it. So we'll see.

We'll see. Yeah. If there's anybody—

But, you know, but this is all about what your justification is. So if the justification is, is that they have nuclear weapons and that's why we're going in. Well, that is somewhat inconsistent with Trump's comments however many months ago, 4 months ago, 5 months ago, when he apparently busted the bunker and got rid of all the nukes. I don't know when that was.

But on the other hand, he used the word obliterate, obliterated, and I think they did obliterate that target. But they, they had the, the nuclear material stored elsewhere. And we're still not sure where that is.

And, and but even that was their production facility. But even if, isn't it, doesn't it matter? And I'm asking, yeah, doesn't it matter? Would it make any difference if the stated reason is only, look, they are not committing to not have nukes. They are not telling us that they're going to give up their nuclear program. In fact, they say that they want it. And, you know, the fact that they're doing it for energy is nonsense to me.

It is because you don't need anything purified, you know, beyond— yeah, I mean, they were at 60% and they say 60% refinement. There is no peaceful use for that level.

So are they saying, look, we don't care what you want, we're going to continue with this program? I don't know what the— I don't know what the intelligence was.

And I suppose the negotiators actually offered them, Steve, free US-made energy fissionable material that if they really just wanted this for energy, they could, they could eliminate their, their centrifuge program and we would supply at no charge.

Yeah, that will smoke out the intent really fast.

Nuclear fuel. And they turned that down.

And, you know, but on both sides, nobody's really airing this stuff out. Like, the media is not reporting that.

Of course not.

So it's right. I don't know. The whole thing's a mess. Who likes war? Nobody.

And then you like Steve, and then you lay on top of this, this ridiculous budget fight over the department. So we're at war, right? And, and what's Congress do? The Democrats in the Senate are refusing to fund the, the Department of Homeland Security. Which includes the Coast Guard. And you're just—

Yeah, this is the political nonsense that goes along with this. This is stupid.

This is our safety at risk.

It's like at a time when we need it the most.

It's like, guys, have a— like you could do two things at once. You can fund the Department of Homeland Security and hold hearings all you want with the new, you know, Mark Wayne Mullen, who's going to head it up if it gets approved. And they bring in Tom Homan from ICE and do your big hearings and go through the two people who were shot and killed by ICE at these protests. Go through all that, have all the hearings you want, and really change. And, and I, I read a list of all the things that ICE has done. Now they're wearing cameras, they're doing no more roving patrols, they're not arresting American citizens. And well, They're not holding American citizens after they get arrested, etc., etc. So there's all these things that Trump, even under Kristi Noem, had done to address some of the objections over these sweeps in places like Minneapolis.

But, but the Democrats keep moving the goalposts because obviously it's Trump, nothing's good enough, and we're just going to have this fight. And I have to say If, if there is an act of terrorism in this current, in this current context and in the environment that we're in right now, and it's traceable back to Joe Biden letting in 12 or 15 million illegals and that DHS wasn't able to interdict those people because they're saying it takes 12,000 FBI people. This is what Kash Patel said yesterday. In hearings with the House, he will need 12,000 FBI agents to go back and re-vet all of these people who were let in under Biden.

Well, that's right. You can't analyze this problem in a vacuum. You cannot do it.

It's going to take money and people.

You can't do it.

And you defunded them. So we've got 4-hour to 2-hour lines for people to, to take an airplane ride. Because TSA is defunded? You know, at what point does it become so— I mean, it's spring break, you know, you're going to have people in airports flipping out because they're going to miss connecting flights and all of this chaos. And you just wonder how much pressure is it going to take on these politicians to finally relent and go, okay, our hatred, our hatred of Trump is less than our, our hatred of, of mail, of hate mail from our constituents. I mean, at some point it's boiling over.

Yeah.

And they're going to have to do something about it. Then there's the Save America Act, right? And the Republicans— there's 3 or 4 Republicans in the Senate that won't vote for this. Even if it goes to reconciliation.

What's the beef?

And this is so simple. Even Democrats and independents, 80% or so, believe that you should have to show an ID, uh, when you show up to vote, and, and that you need proof of citizenship to register. And that doesn't— like, I don't know why that offends anybody. We just talked about airports, Steve. You need a photo ID to get on a plane, to buy a beer, to get a tattoo, to do all kinds of things, to get married. And the idea that married women or minorities are too dumb or can't work their way through the process of getting an ID is not only insulting to them, it's so, it's so bigoted to say that.

Well, let's, let's, let me take apart the constitutional issue. We may have done this before, but I'll do it again.

Yeah, go ahead, man.

There is a notion out there that so some of these things you can't compare apples to apples. Meaning, if you have to show ID for something like buying alcohol, it's not the same as having to show ID for voting, and constitutionally speaking. Because if you have a constitutional right to vote, showing an ID is— whether we can— anybody should and could and would debate about how much of an impediment it is, but it is something that you would have to do in order to exercise that right. And the difference between buying liquor, of course, is that it's not a constitutional right. We don't have a constitutional right to buy liquor. So showing an ID for that isn't the same. You don't have a constitutional right to drive a car, so having to have a driver's license is not the same. So exercising a constitutional right has an analysis that has to take place.

You have to at least analyze it that way. The better analogy would be I have to go identify myself and go through a background check to buy a firearm. I have a constitutional right to bear arms. So that would be a better analogy. So if you have— if you're going to advocate for one, it's hard not to advocate for the other. Um, and would you say that certain people are not sophisticated enough to buy a gun and can't get IDs or whatever it is? Um, and what, what is the measure of that impediment versus the, the exercise of the constitutional right? So that's the better argument. I, I don't think showing an ID and identifying who you are so you can exercise that constitutional right is going to be deemed an impediment because you may not have that constitutional right, as it turns out. And that's the first thing that has to be established.

Well, I, I would say a couple things. So the, the, the First Amendment includes the right of assembly, meaning, you know, the right of movement, that you can go places uninhibited. So, you know, you do have to show an ID to fly, to get a driver's license. Those are not necessarily constitutional things in and of themselves, but they have constitutional basis for allowing that to happen. And there is that impingement, so to speak, that you have to have these IDs in order to exercise that right, short of getting on a horse and trying to go cross-country. you know, finding a right-of-way where you can ride a horse would be kind of difficult. But, you know, the other thing, the other argument, Steve, I guess, would be whether the impediment is a large impediment. So that's where I would look at non-constitutional analogies, like, you know, for a tattoo or to get a beer or, or these other things that we've talked about.

That it is not a— it is not complicated. It is. And it's even free. Ohio, for example, offers voter ID cards for free. So there's no cost. All you have to do is go to a BMV, get your picture taken, and show some other conclusive evidence that you're an American citizen, like, you know, birth certificate, passport, Social Security ID. Something that says you're an American citizen, and they'll give you an ID at no charge.

Yeah, so that's always been my retort to this. Like, look, just give everybody a voter's ID. So just go— we have to register to vote anyway. Yes, you have to register anyway. So just show up, and if you're registering to vote and you don't have your voter ID yet, or you don't have ID yet, you get to go to this line, have your documentation, and off to the races. I just had to do something. Look, there is a constitutional right in the, quote, penumbra of things to travel amongst the states.

That's right.

And I had to go do this, something very similar to get my Real ID. I had to get rid of my old driver's license. I waited because I just got a new— I just moved.

So you get that star imprinted on your new license.

That's right. So I imagine that would be good enough or something like that would be good enough. Yeah, because you had to show a birth certificate to get that. I needed a Social Security card. A bill with my address on it.

Something conclusive.

I had to show some stuff.

That's right.

And it was a little bit of a headache.

It was a little bit of a headache, right?

I had to go dig up some documents. I had to wait until I got my first bill at my new house. I had to do some things, but it made sense. And I thought about it as I was thinking about the voting. Otherwise, and I wonder how many people do this because you shouldn't. Say I moved. I live in a different county and I'm not going to say where, but I live in a different county now. And where I vote is going to change.

And had I have not monkeyed with all this, I guess I could have driven back up to my old county or my old voting and they would still have that old address and I could have voted right there. But that's not right. You're not supposed to do that. And I ran into that during the 2020 election. I had just moved again. I had moved to a temporary place and they didn't have me yet on this and I hadn't caught up with it yet. It all happened too fast. And I had to vote provisionally.

I had to vote provisionally. But I'll tell you what, they would have let me vote. The woman there, she was saying, oh, you can just vote here. Yeah, we got you right here. I was like, yeah, but I don't live in this. I don't live in this. I was supposed to be at this other school. So, you know, it matters.

It does matter.

It matters. It matters.

So one of the other— I mean, there's so much going on in DC. But one of the other amazing things that happened under Lee Zeldin, who's the head of the EPA, was they, they withdrew the finding that has been, you know, reinforced under Obama. But it goes all the way back really to the '70s that there is a greenhouse gas issue, you know, that the Earth is warming due to mankind's climate contributions and human activity to the point that it's a danger to human life. Well, that's, that's been withdrawn by the US EPA. And this week, 24 states, roughly, you know, almost a perfect half of the states have sued the EPA to try to get that finding, the earlier finding, the one Obama supported, restored. And to have the Trump-Lee Zeldin finding withdrawn. And that would just have a gigantic whipsaw effect on things like Honda, for example, has been building down in Jefferson, West Jeff or Jefferson, where the outlet malls are off of I-71, a $5.4 billion battery plant, which was going to be for pure 100% EVs. Now it's going to— because under Trump, this finding changed Honda's entire EV plan, and now they're going to be building hybrid batteries instead of pure EV batteries.

And so, you know, that's based on this finding. And if these 24 states were to succeed somehow in court, or it's, it's unclear and it doesn't get to the Supreme Court for another 2 years, you've got the whole automotive industry. And that's just one industry. You've got the oil, you know, you've got a lot of industries just teeter-tottering, like, like not knowing what the rulebook is.

Yeah. And this is—

look, this is Congress delegating its power again.

Yeah, this is, this is—

I mean, it's madness.

I, I don't even— get me started on this because I hate this. I hate that. I hate that our government is run by these mysterious departments of whatever, right?

And Congress doesn't undo the previous one. Trump's playing the same game they played. That's right, because that's the rule book.

As I always say, what lever of power is being exercised? He's using the same lever of power that they did to enact it. Now he's just pulling it back.

Exactly.

But here's what's interesting to me. Here's, here's the— I love it when people become hypocritical about this stuff because I'm seeing the posts on Facebook say because of the Iran war, people are now taking pictures of gas prices. And I remember, I'm getting old and my memory is a little shorter these days, but I still remember when a bunch of people on the Republican side took pictures of the gas prices the day Biden got elected. And then again, like 6 months later or a year later, and they had doubled. Right, and inflation had skyrocketed and all this stuff had happened.

And inflation adjusted, Steve, the highest it was under Biden was $5.16 if you adjusted for today's inflation.

Yeah.

And, and it was crickets, and people were happy to pay that.

Apparently it was now when it's tea. And look, I, I'm not happy with any of it.

No.

And look, who is, right? But I think ultimately People don't realize what impacts prices of gas and fuel. And when you have these regulatory burdens on companies that run businesses, then they don't have the incentive, or they are then chilled. We call it a chilling effect in law where they're chilled to go make more investments, to do more things, to extend themselves, to continue their business, to go find more gas or find more oil or to refine more oil to get involved. That's why prices went up, is because the EPA started to put the yoke back on, uh, the regulatory scheme, right? And that's why prices go up. So it's like a lot of stuff goes into this, and Trump is trying to pull it all back, and these people are in the same breath complaining about that, right?

Right.

And taking pictures of gas prices.

It's like, listen, it's a huge thing. You, you know, this is— it's like a 21-day war at this point. And the New York Times is already calling it a quagmire, which, I mean, is hilarious to me.

I mean, we were in Vietnam coming out and saying we're not going to win. It's like, what do you mean we're not going to win? Of course we're going to win.

We were in Vietnam for what, 15, 20 years, and already a 21-day war is a quagmire to the New York Times.

Look, I mean, but it is telling though that get it done. Yeah, let's get in there and get it done.

Which I think, you know, they're prosecuting this thing, uh, to the maximum. It is total war except for the fact that they're trying not to hit civilians and not trying to take out infrastructure that would take a decade to restore. Because the idea is not to— we don't— we're not at war with the Iranian population. We're at war with their masters. The ones that hang them and throw them off of buildings and all of that stuff, you know, should they not wear a burqa or if they're homosexual or if they're an intellectual teaching real history and it's not approved by the ayatollah. So we, you know, you go hang that professor. So, you know, it's interesting to me at the Oscars, for example, you've got this Iranian soccer ladies that got protection from Australia for, you know, because they were— they didn't want to go back home, right, to Iran. So they asked for— 5 of them asked for protection.

And you didn't hear anybody talk about women's rights and how the United States is, in effect, is standing up for the human rights of people After all, 30,000 to 50,000 have been murdered by their own government. And we're doing the human rights thing by, you know, like you could argue it's like America and Russia freeing the concentration camps under the Nazis. We're doing, in effect, we're in the midst of doing, in effect, the same thing in Iran. We're freeing the population from subjugation and torture. And rape, you know, ritualized rape as a punishment for these young women that, that want to live a Western lifestyle. And, and, but you heard nothing from the Hollywood people at the Oscars about any of that, right? It's just about how, you know, Trump is the orange Hitler, or, I mean, it's, it's silly.

It is silly.

The whole thing is, it's, it's not adult at all. It's not It's— we're not talking to each other sensibly. It's like everything's an exaggeration, a caricature.

You're right. It's all just BS.

It's BS.

It's just BS. It's posturing BS, you know, calling things something different than what they are. Not— and, you know, I've said this before on the show, but the one guy who seems really on both sides of the aisle who seems to really be honest about it is Fetterman. I mean, at least—

yes.

I mean, Fetterman's coming out and saying, look, why wouldn't we? We all said— everybody agreed in our party that we didn't want— that Iran was dangerous and we didn't want it. So why wouldn't we celebrate? Look, just because it's Trump— that we don't like Trump, I get that— but why, why is it bad just because he's doing it?

Right, right. I mean, I, I mean, he's turned out— you know, he had a stroke and, and people wondered if about his competence, but it's, it's turned out he's a pretty darn deep thinker and he, and he's very fair-minded and he's got the backbone to say it out loud.

Yeah, that's the difference. That he is not just an ideologue. I subscribe to these sets of values only because they say I have to.

Right.

He's a thinker.

Yeah.

And that's what we need more. And look, I disagree with him probably on lots of stuff.

Oh, sure.

But I respect that he's got the balls to say what he thinks.

That independent streak is admirable. I like that in a politician. I liked it in Joe Manchin. You know, he got fooled by Obama. On, on health care, you know, so he made mistakes just like Fetterman. I think Fetterman should vote for the SAVE Act. He doesn't want to do that. He's going to stick with his party on that.

So I disagree with him on that. But, but I still admire that he is willing to engage in a discussion and holds out the possibility of changing his mind. Yeah, I mean, that's what adults do. They listen to other people. They take it on board. Maybe they don't change their mind. Maybe they do. But if you have your mind made up before you even listen to the evidence, that's not rational.

And that's what we have going on in D.C. right now is irrationality run amok. And it's a shame. It really is. Little Ohio News, Steve, you'll love this story. Steve, Steve, I don't know if you caught this. But I think it was on Wednesday that a local rapper here in Ohio named Afro Man—

oh, I love this guy, right?

He won a jury lawsuit. Now, he was the defendant. So when I say won, they did not find for the 8 deputy sheriffs of Adams County who came in, raided his house. It turned out the search warrant was, was complete crap because they couldn't find anything on the search warrant. They left with a big nada, zero, no weapons, no drugs, no, no illegal anything, right? And he had a home security system videotaping, unbeknownst to the sheriffs, this guy's video system because he's not at home. They're raiding his kitchen and they see this lemon pound cake on the counter. And this one fat deputy is looking at it, kind of licking his lips and kind of thinking, Do I go over there and take a slice out of that? So it was hugely funny, this piece of video. And Afro Man strung this out, puts it out there on the internet, and he's made some pretty good money off that album and off these videos.

So they sued him for $4 million saying he violated their rights, etc., etc. Well, the judge and the jury ruled— the jury found and the judge upheld the verdict. That, uh, in fact, the, the, uh, that they lost, that, that, that Afro Man was within his constitutional First Amendment rights. It's a First Amendment case that he had the right, he owned that video, and, and as public officials, they should expect to be videotaped, what, whatever they're doing, that, that they have no privacy when they're acting in their official role, and he had that tape. It's his tape, it's his house, and he has the right to use it.

Well, what's great is that it was his own surveillance security footage within his house. And like, I, I think I showed this to you a few years ago.

Yes, you did. Yes, you did.

Because it is hilarious.

It's hilarious.

It's hilarious.

Highly recommended. Go find it.

Go find it on YouTube. Find it. But, and look, it did I don't know if Afro Man was engaged in criminal activity. I could— I don't know, and I could care less, frankly. If he is, he is, and if he's not, he's not. But he exercised his constitutional right. It's a parody of the highest order and the kind of exercise of a constitutional right that we should want. The same constitutional right that those are using to complain about Trump and make caricatures of him.

That's right. He was doing with the cops. And you could say, well, look, you're a conservative, Palmer, and you think that, blah, blah. I appreciate, applaud, and support anybody who exercises their constitutional rights within the bounds.

Yeah.

And I'm also a lawyer that is all for suing people to make money because I think that guides the market. But he won and he should have won.

Yeah, he should have won. And, you know, in all seriousness, you know, it I'm, I'm certainly glad that the jury understood the force of the First Amendment. It's a remarkable decision on their part because, you know, they're, they're down there in Adams County. Those are their deputy sheriffs, and, you know, they're in an Adams County courthouse, and they made that decision. Local people. And, you know, that's big, and that's a heck of a statement.

And look, you can say whatever you want about Afro Man or agreeing with him, but he's just sort Flamboyant is probably not the right word. He's a different kind. He's just sort of larger-than-life character. He's got the outfit and everything else. He's a big dude. Yeah, but he's likable. Yeah, he's really likable.

He testified in court, Steve, wearing his outfit, which is kind of Apollo Creed. It was red, white, and blue flags and all this stuff. And he said, you know, he talked about that. I mean, he testified as to what he thought his constitutional rights were. And this was very— this was a high-order trial.

And the other thing I want to tell— the other thing I think we should stress here, and this is worth a little bit of a discussion.

Yeah.

It's a big freaking deal when the police kick in your door and search your house.

Yeah.

And go through your— the boxes in your closet. Yeah. The totes full of stuff, maybe the pictures of you and your wife, whatever it is.

Yeah.

The stuff that— the stuff I'm trying to think of, the most secret stuff that you would have.

Yeah.

The stuff that when you hide it or you put it in the top of your closet so your kids don't see it, that kind of stuff. And the police are going through it, right? Going through your underwear drawer, right? They're going through your wife's underwear drawer. Right. This happened at Mar-a-Lago. You know, that's right. It's a big freaking deal. And I have been representing folks charged with crimes my entire career, 31 years of it. And I respect what police officers go through.

I respect our constitutional rights even more. And I think both can be true at once. We have to hold the police to a very high standard if they're going to kick in our door and if they're going to engage in whatever this behavior is. And part of that is calling it out. And that's what he did here.

And as Steve mentions, you know, having many years ago gotten a law degree, I think I'm right on this. And I'll run this by Steve right now just to make sure. So once they have a search warrant and they go in, say, say the search warrant, you know, reasonable cause that there's drugs or guns, and they name that and the judge approves it, and they go in and they find something else, right? Like, you know, evidence that you buried a corpse under your, your, your house, or, or child pornography or something else. Uh, if it's not on the search warrant but they find it as a result of that legitimate, quote unquote, search, you— I mean, whatever they toss in the process of going through your house and tossing all this stuff, if they find evidence of other crimes, it's usable.

You bet it's usable. So here's how this works. The Fourth Amendment says you can't have any search and seizure— I'm summarizing— but you can't have a search and seizure without a warrant.

Yeah.

Now, the Supreme Court has said something along the lines of this, uh, You have to have a search warrant, but unless the search falls under some narrowly tailored and carefully defined exceptions to the warrant requirement, some of those might include if you see something in plain view, and this is what you're talking about.

Yeah.

So if the police are lawfully looking for a gun in a place and they find something else and they see something in plain view, they are not prohibited or prevented from going to deal with that. and then that can lead to more probable cause. And it's like this chain reaction. But the search warrant itself has to be based upon probable cause, which is then, which is in turn based upon a police sworn statement, either testimony live or an affidavit on paper that they give to a magistrate or a judge who says, I think there's probable cause, a reasonable and articulable belief that there is evidence of a crime in the place to be searched. And the police can then go in and search with a search warrant. And you're right, once they are there, they can look for almost anything. There's some, there's some limits, though.

Yeah.

And I'll use the law school verbiage. This is in law school. We always come up with these little quips just to make it clear. You can't look for an elephant in a shoebox. So if your search warrant is for a car in the garage, you can't go through the jewelry, you can't go through the underwear drawer or the shoebox. Or whatever, because that's what was happening.

Yeah.

The search warrant, they have to stay within the scope of the search of the— of what is permitted in the search warrant.

Okay. But yeah, I mean, that's good stuff. And, you know, there's the old saying, was it Stalin or Lenin? Show me the man and I'll show you the crime.

Yeah.

And I mean, so, okay, child pornography, I mean, we all think that's horrible. But, you know, there's other things like perhaps maybe you have a drug that you got via a prescription, you know, like out of state. And technically that's not legal in Ohio. Just stay with me in theory. And if they're tossing your whole house, just think of all the stuff you have in your house. You may very well have something in there that's technically illegal.

And a very, very good friend of mine and a legal colleague of mine who practices law, shares space with me. He's in a trial right now in a county in Ohio where the, they are very well-known authority. I'm not dropping names yet, but well-known authorities on police video camera, on body cam going through this man's house and safe. Wow. And saying, and they're looking at each other like, should we take this? Yeah, take it and let him prove that it's not stolen. Oh, gosh. And these are, these are people that hold the same degree that I have. Wow.

People that are wearing the badge. So if you think that all that this can't happen to you, it can. I don't care if you're conservative. I don't care if you're liberal. I don't care where you fall. My version of conservative conservatism is to conserve the protection of our liberties that our founders created.

Well, and there's also the possibility we all know that it's a classic thing. For— I mean, most cops are not crooked, right? But if you got a crooked cop in that house and he wants to drop a gun with a serial number filed off—

yeah, he's called the drop gun or whatever.

Yeah. And, and there it is in your living room, and he says, well, this is what we found in your house.

And, and just look, not all cops are bad, not all cops are good, but all cops are human, and you're in jeopardy if they're in your house, man. And it all— all police are human. And if you think that when these police officers go through the Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy or they go through whatever other training they had to go through and they put that badge on there and they wear the gun and they wear the uniform, that somehow that absolves them from all the same human frailties that we all have. You are wrong. In fact, sometimes it makes it worse. As one of my favorite writers is C.S. Lewis, and in a book called Mere Christianity, he's got a whole chapter on it. The most egregious sin of all is pride, which is really ego.

And the more you feed that, the worse we get. And we all have to— and isn't that— that is the point, right? It's like we want to humble ourselves before God because our egos, whether you believe or not, the point is our egos get in the way and we do horrible things in the name of pride and ego.

So true.

And police officers are not immune from this, folks. They are not. That's why our founders created this Fourth Amendment. That's why our founders created these constitutional rights. And that's why in the debate in the Federalist Papers or in the Constitutional Convention, it was decided, no, we're gonna list them. You know, half the founders were saying, look, we don't need to list them because this Constitution says what they can do and anything that we don't list here, they can't do. Then others were saying, no, no, no, no, no. This is such a big deal that we should put it down.

We should actually prohibit these things. Yeah. And I go through this all the time with my clients. I have a juvenile client I'm working with, and I quiz him on the amendments. First Amendment.

Yeah.

Second Amendment.

Yeah.

Fourth Amendment. Sixth Amendment. It's Eighth Amendment.

Essential stuff. And, you know, here's a copy of the Constitution.

He's got this pocket Constitution.

And I'll tell you what, this— it's not that complicated to read. People have made it complicated over the last, you know, 200-plus years. But it was written for farmers and merchantmen and, you know, housewives. It was— this was written for common people to read and understand. So when it says, you know, they can't lodge in your home, you know, the army can't just barge into your house and be quartered in your home. I mean, it's pretty clear. I mean, it says that, right? It's not that complicated. You know, and it says the states can't, you know, put a tariff on other states.

That's right in— I mean, it's easy to read, but, but somehow we have overcomplicated what this stuff says. And, and I— that's why I love the, the, the, the, the, the, the Ten Amendments.

And it is the busybodies, it is the busybodies and do-gooders that C.S. Lewis talks about who are the most dangerous. They are, because they would take this book and say, well, I get it, it says I can't do this, but if you don't give me the power to throw that out and do it, then I won't be able to solve all the world's problems like global hunger, like global warming, like racism, like any income inequality, like blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And if you think the founders didn't think about all that when they wrote this book—

Yeah, that's okay.

When they wrote this book, then you are sorely mistaken. It is not that they didn't think about all these potential existential problems that people can invent in order to grab power, it is that they did think about those things. And that's why this is here.

So like you say many times, Steve, if our country only works really if you want the country to work, if you want it to work, if, if you want to find all of the hidden meanings in between the words and make up stuff, you can overcomplicate legislation or the Constitution, or you can make your, you can make your fellow bureaucrats at any government agency, you know, apoplectic and unable to do their functions because you're raising a million reasons why something can't happen instead of the one or two simple reasons why it can happen. So you have to have a good heart. You have to be a good citizen in order for our country to function. And if you want to bring the country down, you know, people can do that. If people can wreck the government, if they do not intend, if they do not have good intentions, and it's easy to do.

And again, beware of those who would grab power for your own good, right? Beware of those who would limit your freedom for your own good. Those are the ones that our founders wrote this book about.

And I'll give a good example here in Ohio that's becoming very controversial. Uh, I mean, people have found out about this— a quasi-government, uh, private corporation set up under the Kasich administration, John Kasich, who has come out now against his own creature that he created called JobsOhio. This, this entity Dave Yost has formerly as treasurer, now as the attorney general, he or excuse me, auditor. He was auditor, now attorney general. He lost a Supreme Court case, Ohio Supreme Court case, over the right of his office as auditor to audit this private corporation. This corporation gets its funding by having the franchise to run the Department of Liquor Control. So you have a private corporation, JobsOhio, which in its preamble, in its founding documents, was created to, to foster and to encourage investment in Ohio, to create a good climate for job creation. That's the purpose of it, ostensibly.

So Kasich creates this. They fund it through, I think, 2028. And then they come along just last year and extended it for another 25 years to the year 2053. And it can't be audited. It runs a State Department as a private corporation. And the remuneration from running that franchise, Liquor Control, goes back to fund their programs. What are those programs? It's enticements to bring in data centers, to bring in Anduril, the defense contractor, down in Pickaway County, to bring in Intel to Licking County, etc., etc., etc. That we had a whole list of, of, of, of people and companies that were benefiting from these contracts, including this podcaster that the Ohio State president just resigned because he was offering her special terms using OSU studio for her podcast.

And those podcasts were funded by JobsOhio to the tune of $5,000 an episode. I mean, it's crazy, right?

So $5,000—

how much? $15,000 for one episode.

No, it was supposed to be $5,000 episodes. She's going 3. She only did one.

Only did one.

So she got $15 grand total, and it was— I haven't looked at it, but apparently it was not a very good episode.

So yeah, 300 views until this story hit.

What are we making here? But, but here's the, here's the point.

So, so to Steve's point, how out of control the government can get once you create this monster. So now we have this monster in Ohio that's not reportable to anybody, right? The people who are named to the board are appointed by the was the sitting governor, and he, he, he or she handpicks who's on this board. We're not allowed to know what they make. We're not allowed to know— we're allowed to know who they are, and we know we're allowed to know their base salary, but we're not allowed to know all the other terms of their— of, of being on the board. We don't know how many employees. We don't know what the employees of JobsOhio make, and we're not allowed to audit their budget. Even though they run a State Department. So Kasich is complaining that they have had mission creep.

Well, John, no kidding. John Kasich in Congress was a budget hawk, but somehow he became a RINO once he became governor, just like Mike DeWine. Some of the worst governors of all time have been Republicans, and they're, and they're in love with spending this money. And, you know, they, they, they, they can't get enough of this, of this pot that JobsOhio has because it's running liquor, which is an exclusive state of Ohio franchise, right?

And what could possibly go wrong?

What could possibly go wrong? It's like giving Al Capone the right to do liquor in Illinois, except this is a state-run you know, franchise. And, and, uh, Kasich is complaining that JobsOhio is not listening to people, that there are legitimate citizen concerns about, for example, these data centers. And yeah, duh, John, no kidding. Like, what did you think you were creating when you, when you made a non-accountable monster that works outside of the government?

Yeah.

And then, and then they extended their, their contract with, to 2053. I mean, it's, it's, it's inexcusable. So instead of all these contracts, all of the state enticements going to the controlling board and having a public hearing on what kind of enticements we're giving Intel or Meta or Google or Anduril, It's, it's all hidden from us, and it's not at the controlling board where there would be a public hearing and reporters and the citizens get to know this. Instead, it's hidden by Trade Secrets Act and JobsOhio, and it's all manipulation behind the scenes. So we're— I don't know, Vivek Ramaswamy and this Amy Acton, they're going to have a hell of a battle for governor, and it seems like They're both in a contest to figure out how to straddle both the, the idea that citizens are upset about these data centers. Uh, now, now you've got like Sunbury, Ohio and Waterford, Ohio are using Licking County's disaster as an exemplar of what not to do, but yet they feel powerless to stop this. And you're having these very red areas of Ohio, very conservative areas of Ohio, fighting back against the RINOs. And we just may elect a Democrat governor because of it.

I think we will. And she's a radical. Well, I don't know if she is or not.

I mean, well, I mean, her health—

her health care— she was a puppet. I mean, she was doing somebody else's bidding. I don't know if she really— they put her out front in COVID and said basically, here, you deliver the message. And I think it's almost because I thought they were taking her advice.

You think it was the other way around?

I think it was the other way around. I think she was a puppet. But okay, all right, let's do some good and bad.

Well, my winners and losers are in one story. I saw a segment the other day about the 4 biggest, uh, Billionaires in the state of California, 4 out of the 5 biggest have moved from that very blue state to red states altogether. These 4— Larry Page, uh, Sergey Brin, uh, Elon Musk, and Mark Zuckerberg— account for $1.3 trillion in net worth. Those 4 people. Elon Musk alone is $880 billion. Him personally, his worth, they've all moved to either Florida or Texas or Tennessee. And so the state of California clearly, I mean, is a gigantic loser here. And, you know, you've got, you've got, you've got, you know, rapid, you know, fast rail projects that go to nowhere.

You've got Cougar and Butterfly bridge crossings going over highways. $114 million to do one over, over a California interstate that is today not complete. It's over budget by, you know, like 500%. $114 million to do an overpass. And so these people are bailing out on California. So they're— California is a loser. I don't know how Gavin Newsom really runs for president with this.

He's going to run.

He's going to run. I don't know how he is viable, but the losers are California and states like California. Clearly, the winners are the states that either have low tax or no tax on income. $1.3 trillion.

Yeah.

Yeah. If I'm Ron DeSantis, I'm welcoming that.

Well, look, I only— I think I only have good. I mean, I got some bad, but the good is Afro Man.

That is—

check it out, folks. This is awesome.

Hey, quick question, Steve, while this is playing. If during a search they break things, they're not responsible, are they?

Generally, it may depend on how and why things got broken. Okay, but they toss houses, and that's what this video is. They leave them.

They don't repack your, your cabinets. It's, it's all over.

No, you come home to a disaster.

He's looking at the pound cake in the video. Come on, big fat deputy looking at the pound cake. I'll add one more loser. So this is a winner. Fauci. This is— of course it's getting buried, but there is a major child study on myocarditis, and they, they've looked into the health records of a million children, and almost— Steve, this is unbelievable. This when, when this comes, when this really gets into JAMA and the New England, you know, medical journals and this becomes very well known, Fauci and these people have a lot to answer for.

Oh, no, this is this we've lived through. This is one of the biggest scandals ever.

And this is huge. This is so every almost 100%, it's like 99.9% of these children that have myocarditis were also vaxxed.

No.

And the children, of course, were the least at risk in our whole population for getting COVID. So, I mean, and the government gave Big Pharma immunity.

Yep.

And there were no human trials ahead of time. I will— I mean, it's unbelievable.

I will only leave— I've talked about C.S. Lewis. This is my favorite quote. Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good its victims may be the most oppressive, it would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep. His cupidity may at some point— ah, it blocked off on me. Oh yeah, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. That We will handle it.

Yeah. Common Sense Ohio. Check us out at commonsenseohioshow.com. If you got a question, topic, something you want us to cover, or want to hang with Norm at the table, or even on the Zoom or on the airwaves, let us know. Leave us a comment or go right to the website to do it.