Episode Transcript
[00:00:01] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new talk radio Freedom 106.5.
[00:00:08] Speaker B: As I said to you all, special interview at this point in time, gentleman. He's been with us so many occasions. We've spoken about so many different things. This morning he joins us in his capacity as the political leader of the NTA. Welcome back to our show. Former police commissioner Gary Griffith. Good morning to you. Nice to have you with us here this morning.
[00:00:28] Speaker C: Always a pleasure to be on.
[00:00:30] Speaker B: So there seem to be some pretty interesting developments recently when it comes to the NTA and its preparations for the general elections. Moving your headquarters into St.
Joseph, that's quite a move. It sends a lot of signals. I don't know if the average individual would read into it all that is there, but there is a, I think that there's a lot there. Now, we are going to be speaking about some of the talks that may or may not be continuing when it comes to accommodations, alliance, whatever you want to call it, to the NTA strategy and everything else. Tell us about this move to St. Joseph for the headquarters of the NTA. Why?
[00:01:11] Speaker C: Yeah, certainly. Well, I can't, you hear the nail in the head, you know? Exactly. There was a message, not even subtle, that was being sent.
Yeah, just before that. I want to reemphasize and endorse what you just said pertaining to. Sometimes people are so politically, I don't blinded, but their support, as you're speaking about the poll that was being done because there's another station right now that's actually doing a poll. When I said that all political leaders should be polygraphed as well. And do you know, people actually, some people actually said no, that it shouldn't happen. And the reason being is that they're so blinded by their political party, they are afraid that their political leader could be polygraphed. And so exactly what you just said, it endorses exactly why we, in the situation we're in in this country where people would blind, I remember when Donald Trump said he could go in Times Square and shoot someone in cold blood and he would still have his 60, 70 million votes. It's no different here in Trinidad and Tobago. There will always be 100, 150,000 people on either side, regardless of what they do not want to see or hear. Anything that could affect their party and anything that the other does will be seen as negative. So you're quite correct. What we do at the NTA, we are what is known as that bridge constituency. And there's nothing wrong if it is that you blindly support any political party. That is your right and we are not here to condemn that. But there are those persons who are not PNM or UNC till they die. And again, this is nothing to discredit either political party. They've done a lot towards the development of Trinidad and Tobago. They've made mistakes as no political party is perfect. But that bridge constituency started in 1981 under the ONR getting 91,000 votes to then move ten years later to 1991, becoming the NaR of which Kamala Persad besetso was part of getting 127,000 odd votes. 1615 years later the cop was formed and in 2007 the CoP got 147,000 votes. So that bridge constituency is always there. It comprised those individuals who are threshold PNM and UNC supporters who are not blinded. That regardless of what, I will always vote red or yellow. And then there are also those in the middle that will make the decision based on what they see pertaining to the dynamics of the country and what that political party is doing at this time. And the fact is that every single time this bridge constituency works and forms a strategic alliance with the ULF or the UNC, the PNM, they are defeated every time that bridge constituency. And that would have, you would have seen that in 1986 and 2010. Every time that bridge constituency goes alone, the PNM extends their margin of victory as in 1980, 119, 91 and 2007. So it shows that the math is there to the NTA, that bridge constituency. We actually worked alongside the UNC in the local government election and it was a 60,000 excess vote over the PNM. That is badly. That is like for every five votes, three voted for that alliance comprising UNC and NTA. And a lot of the NTA voters voted for the UNC, 110 candidates and vice versa. So what we are actually, myself being the candidate for St. Joseph, that is a very strategic move. It is amazing that we always say that who in St. Joseph wins the election. But none of these major political parties have ever looked to put a proper established foothold in St. Joseph. All they have is the member of parliament's office. So I think that even is that St. Joseph wants to be truly representative. St. Joseph wants to. You want to. You can't use St. Joseph to get in government and not put focus on St. Joseph. And that is what the NTA tends to do. By showing that to St. Joseph, we are putting focus on you, St. Joseph.
[00:04:52] Speaker B: Your actions are very calculated.
There are those who may see it as off the cuff, but there are some, there are some serious messages that you and your party are sending with St. Joseph. Your announcement of you being the candidate for the NTA in St. Joseph, long before anybody even think about screening or anything else, was a political move.
I don't want to say it's a master move, but it is one that has set a couple things in motion. Now, there is in the public domain the possibility, the specter, I don't know what's going on behind the scenes of discussions, just as you had for local government between the NTA and the UNC. Now, the UNC has said they're willing to talk to anybody and all of that kind of thing. But we've not had responses from them to Jatum saying that they're in talks with the UNC. I mean, Jatum saying that the UNC has not said anything. And you've been saying that while you're waiting for the talks on them to resume, because things need to be put in place if there is to have some kind of accommodation in time to fight the general elections, announcing yourself as the candidate for St. Joseph.
Do you think that you have now put these talks in jeopardy? And I'll tell you why I'm asking, because it does not seem as if you are willing to relinquish or the NTA is willing to relinquish St. Joseph. And you have a man right now who telling everybody he won't fight the St. Joseph seat for the UNC, even though they've not had screening. How is that going to work out? Because you, I don't think Gary Griffith or the NTA is going to back down. You all are going to want to keep St. Joseph because you're investing in St. Joseph and to give up all of that and say, well, here, well, because of the accommodation, we go move aside. I don't see that happening. So already, is there a line drawn in the Sandheen that can scuttle any kind of talk when it comes to accommodation?
[00:06:51] Speaker C: Yes and no. I agree with you. I see where you're coming from. And, you know, it's strange when people ask, well, how, why is Gary Griffith being involved in politics? He was a soldier. He was in the military. People are not aware of the close relationship between, between Benin military and politics. Politics is just an art of war without firing a shot. 31 of the 45 us presidents had military service going from George Washington all the way up to, to Bush, the Reagans, the Kennedys and so forth, Abraham Lincoln. So there's a reason for that. When I went to the Royal Military Academy, Sanders, they didn't just train you to fight wars, but also to lead countries. So everything is based on strategy. It's a timeline, it's analytical thinking. And sometimes our politicians here, they don't do something in the military that we do, which is then what? If I make this decision, I looked three steps ahead many times. It's a major comment that is made and then you have to pay the price because you didn't think about the third step. So this is what I do carefully. So it was very carefully analyzed as to when I would have made that announcement when we moved to St. Joseph office. And in contrast, this is not in any way, I don't think it is going to affect it. What it shows is the substance of the NTA, because sometimes maybe other parties would have hoped that way, probably Gary Griffith, and then we'll just stay in Nego Martin and stay in Porter Spade. Then they will come and give us the support in the marginal seats so that we will win. But my point being is that those marginal voters, they are very sensitive lot. They are very careful and they are very analytical. They are going to see for what it is. Anytime they see, when you call it the NT, the onr, the cop, the XYZ, they are going to see, oh, you just want, you're going to put us back in the PNM safe seats. You don't want us in the marginal. So you'll get 21 seats by UNC government. They're not going to buy it. Making is to ensure that I can maximize that 147,000 voters who would have been voted for the cop, who are still alive to come back home, and they are not going to come back home if they believe it is just going to be a marriage of convenience, if it is going to be some type of political domestic violence where you're just going to use the. And that's basically what happened in the local government election. We went up for the 31 hardest PNM seats. Had the NTA won any one of those seats, the UNC would have won probably all of the other seats that they would have contested. That is how hard it was. But I did that to prove a point that we're not here looking for handouts, we're here to prove our worth, which we did. In every one of those 31 PNM seats, we cut that margin by as much as 25% to 70%. There were certain CCP and M one versus the UNC in 2020 local by 1100 votes. And in the end, last year they won by about 200. We cut deep into PNM heartland. So now we have proven our worth. We are not here just to jump on a bandwagon to get free seats from the UNC. Now, having done that, we now need to show. Look, after all of that, we need to put our set certain things in place. And this is not a case of if there's some degree of an alliance, it's going to be, well, you just take the 15 P and M hardest seats and we will take the rest. That is what happened in 2010 when UNC got 21 seats. And because of that they automatically say, well, we have 21 seats, we don't need you. And the cop was totally, I mean, they totally sidelined the cop. So the concept here is a step phase. The next phase, obviously, would be to have some degree of strategic alliance, not the country is not going to accept. Let's all just join together, add the votes and win marginals and get in government. They want to see a proper foundation, which is what you're going to hear shortly.
I am looking at the concept of a proper road back towards good governance.
Those hundred 50,000 floating voters want to know what it is that's going to bind this together. That's not going to cause a repeat of 86 and 2010, because a marriage of convenience just to get in government is going to collapse.
There's a certain institute with about 150 of the best minds in the country, totally independent, and they have set a roadmap for the transformation of Trinidad and Tobago to transform health, education, the economy, sports, national security. And if all the parties agree to this roadmap, it gives substance for us to have something that we can now deliver to the country, give justification to states, work together. So it is not just about allocation, about finding a common, a common denominator that we can all say this is what is going to cause us to work together as a team.
[00:11:16] Speaker B: No, history is.
Is instructive as well in predicting or guessing what could possibly happen in the future. Saint Joseph is, or probably was a marginal. The margin of victory in the last general election was much larger than it had been before, suggesting that St. Joseph, in a two horse race is moving further and further away from becoming or from being still marginal. Let's inject now possible scenarios because the talks with the UNC are at some stage, we don't know where they are. We're not too sure whether they're going to go ahead or whatever. We'll get to that in just a bit. But the scenarios possibly are, number one, there is the accommodation and it's just the PNM and the NTA, you and whoever the PNM puts up and the UNC supporters come together to support you as the candidate, aside and apart from everybody else who would be contesting the election. The other scenario is that that accommodation is not met. And Gary Griffith goes ahead with fighting St. Joseph with a P and M and a UNC candidate. Now, the last time we had that, we had the ILP, we had the ILP, the PNM and the UNC candidate and Terence dial Singh swept into office as a result of that. And he's been there ever since.
And he has. He's not necessarily given the undertaking that he's going back again. But he has not said, well, I ain't going either. So we don't know how that's going to hang, who the candidate is going to be, but we know there's going to be a PNM candidate. And what needs to be ironed out now is whether there is just an NTA candidate or how that is going to work. If it does not work out with the discussions. And whoever say they go in and contest St. Joseph does contest St. Joseph because the UNC said, we are no time with this accommodation team going on our own, what do you expect to happen?
[00:13:13] Speaker C: Well, that would not happen. The UNC is fully aware that they've spent two terms now with opposition. They do not want to have a third term. I think the.
You're correct. The history is there every single time the UNC goes on its own in a three horse race, they lose the election every time. The UNC has never been able to win an election on its own in a three horse race. The UNC has never been able to win an election on its own, full stop other than one period. And that lasted a few months. And as soon as a third horse came in, they only got 180 votes in tuna Puna. And that caused UNC to lose that 19 seat to make it 1818. So the UNC lost government. People are not aware of this political history. UNC lost government in 2001 because one political party broke. Well, three individuals broke away from the UNC, formed a very insignificant party in the scheme of things. When you look at 1.4 million, they got 180 votes into the pool. That caused the UNC to lose to Nepuna. And that 1818 caused a president to somehow decide to hand over the government to the opposition. That is how powerful that bridge constituency is, that marginal those marginal voters. So the UNC, and after 2010, what usually happens sometimes is that they think, oh, look how many voters we have. We don't need anyone else. And that float, those floating voters, they taught those persons or lessons in 2015, they did the same in 2020. To explain that. Listen, most of us, that 50 60,000 threshold PNM, if there's not a third party, we will go back to the PNM. And basically that is what happened in the last by election. You have 2800 voters alone that voted last year, 1400 each, 1420, 1428. And within a few months you do a by election and one party wins by 600 votes. Don't come and say it's because of a period during muslim religion. It won't just UNC. Muslim voters don't say that PNM paid people yet undermining the intelligence of those persons in that area. It is because that bridge constituency wasn't there. We had probably about 300 odd PNM voters that came across to vote for that UNC candidate. Last year. The bridge constituency wasn't there and they went back. So when 300 goes up, 300 goes down, you get 600 voters. So had the NTA taken part in that by election, then we would have probably only applied about 300 votes. But that was the difference. That's the pendulum. The UNC is fully aware of that. They are fully aware that without any alliance, they are going to go back in opposition. And this is not in any way to be seen to all UNC voters as a threat. Not in. I am just speaking reality, the political reality. So they are aware that what happened, and you're correct, what? The last time that there were three parties in St. Joseph would have been in 2007 and it became 4000, 504,000, 507,000. And so one person got 7501 because UNC and the cop got 45 each. The same thing happened in 2013. 2014, sorry. It was just 800 for the ILP with Omlala. And then about probably 6000, 7000 for the UNC, 6000. And the PNM got a little more. If you added votes from the IAP and the UNC, they would have beaten the PNM. So it shows that third party getting into this scheme of things. It is going to most probably cause the PNM to win. The UNC doesn't want that. We certainly do not want that. We have come here to get in government. The UNC wants to get back in government. So the UNC will do what is correct. I am fully aware of the dynamics of St. Joseph. I've lived there for 20, half, more than half of my life.
I was actually a mouth to be the candidate for the UNC. In 2007, in 2005, Jerry Etnick said he had enough. I was the shadow mp, being in the office practically daily basis, meeting with the constituents, until I joined with the cop. And then I went for another seat and then. So I was even airmarked in 2007, had there not been that breakaway in 2014, I was also the person for St. Joseph. But because of the concern that the votes were being split, the hierarchy of the UNC didn't want me to go up for a seat and next day I may have lost and then have to probably be removed as minister of national security. So this is my third rodeo, actually, in St. Joseph. So I'm aware of the dynamics of St Joseph. So the UNC, they are fully aware that what needs to be done, that there needs to be some type of strategic alliance might take on it. It must not be a marriage of convenience, because the floating voters do not want to be fooled. They want to ensure that. What if they put their vote forward as a UNC or NCA candidate, there's going to be something that is going to cement it.
[00:17:53] Speaker B: This bridge constituency, floating voters are a really interesting dynamic in elections because we see where their influence has shaped the outcome of many things.
And this floating vote, this bridge constituency, they've made their voices heard when it comes to specific things like corruption and how things are dealt. And the Congress of the people faced a backlash because their supporters at the time, who make up a lot of this bridge constituency, weren't happy with some of the things that were taking place and wanted the Congress of the people to maintain its integrity for want of a different terminal. And they didn't think that happened. And as a result of that, they shied away with their support.
We all know what happened after that. Today we had the very same discussions taking place, very same discussions taking place this morning. The poll question was on the program based on what the prime minister had to say. You have the prime minister who's courting someone who's facing corruption charges in India, the opposition leader ups and say, well, here now, we owe no part of that, because that man facing corruption allegations, wherever he is, the prime minister said, but you are your chief whip, facing corruption allegations, he out on bail and all that kind of nonsense, asking her to clean up her own shop. The poll result was 60 40 people, people divided as to whether or not they think Kamloops, albeit, should deal with corruption. How do you think this bridge constituency floating vote is going to evaluate any kind of alliance or allegiance or accommodation or I whatever between yourself and a party that they don't subscribe to because of these very same things.
[00:19:36] Speaker C: Yeah, yeah. Good question. Well, the first thing is it shows the incompetence and the ignorance of Keith Rowley as a prime minister. You are in government. The opposition has thrown something at you, and rightly so. And your take back on it is to point fingers at the opposition, at what is going on in the opposition business. You're fast and out of place. You are the prime minister, you are in command. You are making a decision that can give someone on criminal charge, on criminal charges, probably hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars of taxpayers money that he could probably invest or lose or mismanage or whatever. And instead of you trying to explain and justify your decision based on ethics or lack of, is to point fingers at what the UNC is doing. That is the type of politics that discuss that Bridgewood situation. You are the prime minister. Answer the question. Don't point fingers at what the opposition is doing. So that's the first thing. Secondly, as it pertains to what you spoke about with that poll, it goes hand in hand with another station that I was just telling you about where I said all political leaders should be polygraphed. Are you involved in criminal activity? Have you aided in and abetted in a crime? Have you financially benefited being in public office from criminal activity? Have you allowed persons to break the law and be involved in criminal activity? And you have done nothing.
So those are the questions I will ask all political leaders to be polygraphed on. And persons are saying no. You know why? Because they believe that certain individuals, and this is a more of a PNM biasestation, by the way, because they are more. There are two individuals, two PNM, two independent, and they are afraid that the answers will not be conducive to help their political party. So sometimes it's not a matter of right or wrong. Some of you blindly supported persons and I would have seen it for myself. When I was minister of national security, everybody loved Gary. When it is I had the situation and I left as minister, you hate Gary when I came as commissioner, before I was commissioner, the PNM hated Gary. When I became commissioner, they loved Gary when I left. Now they hate Gary. So people sometimes make decisions not based on the data, not on facts, not on ethics, but based on what the political leader says. And I think it is unfortunate it cannot be changed. The 60th 40 that you have, it goes in line with the situation that we have taken place in the UNC in general election, because you're seeing that just about 25% of those persons who they will call the 904, those persons who may not be totally supportive of everything that the UNC may say, and that is a very powerful team that must be respected. You can't trivialize them.
And again, I am not in any way here to pick sides with parry and camera faction. My intention is to work with everyone, respect everyone for what we have seen. But therein lies the concern that that bridge constituency would have been those individuals who will say, look, I don't like what I'm seeing. All I'm asking you is to take check of it. It happened with me as minister of national security. So to those persons who are previous cop voters and NTA voters, now, I give the assurance that I have always stood foreman. Principle. I have been fired twice because of principle. So nothing will change. As the minister of national security, I stood up against my own government because of live sport. There's no part of the minister's incidents were taking place at a lower level that I was able to discover, and I exposed it. And persons in the UNC government, they were banging the table saying, long live life sport. And I'm saying, but look, we have something here to show that it needs to stop. And it was handed over to me as the minister of national security. So I also stood for when someone. We are building a police station, and when I look behind me, the person who's working with us was one of the biggest gang leaders. He built the police station. So there are people probably on that side that may be a little concerned. If Gary comes on board, he's going to stop us from the. From the business that we did last time. It is not going to happen. I give the promise to the country of that. The same way I stood against lives. What? The same way I stood up against senior persons given state contracts to criminals, and the same way as commissioner of police when I stood up against the government trying to interfere and harass me, to give me $45 million to hire foreign attorneys, make them that could arrest political opponents. I stood firm on two prime ministers. So because I remembered my oath in office, I remember my God, my country and the people. That is going to be the. That is what I think the country wants to bring back those 148,000 votes to join with the UNC, to know that there are people there that will make sure there will not be a repeat of 2010 to 2015.
[00:23:56] Speaker B: We need to take a couple messages for those of you who may have joined us midway. We are speaking with former police commissioner, political leader of the NTA, Gary Griffith. After these messages, probably try to squeeze in a quick call or two and then we get back into our interview. Stay with us.
[00:24:11] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new talk radio Freedom 106.5.
[00:24:19] Speaker B: Have with us our guest this morning, NTA political leader, former police commissioner Gary Griffith. Probably get one or two of your calls in quickly on 625-2257 your WhatsApp messages. Feel free to send those to 306-1065 we just have one phone line. So that always is a challenge for our listeners as we continue with our discussion. If we get a call, we include it.
These accommodation talks are of great interest to many people for a number of reasons. And accommodation means, based on these statistics and track record and everything else, enhanced possibilities for victory based on track record and all that has transpired back then. But where are these talks at this point in time?
[00:25:18] Speaker C: Right. I was actually just going to bring that up. So as I said again in 1986 and 2010, which I really am disappointed. The type of individuals that would have been at the threshold in those positions, the Basdio Pande, the Winston Ducharan, the A and R. Robinsons, the indie Camelo Prasad recessors.
You form an alliance and there was not a proper foundation. It was let's just join together to PDP and I. And again, when people complain about coalitions around the world, almost half of the countries around the world had coalitions and presently still do some work, some did not work. Same thing with governments who stand alone, some work. This one definitely is the worst government ever. So the main thing that I am pushing is to make sure that we have a foundation so that it can be cemented, so that we have a common purpose. There's something where there's a direction based on a mission, and that is where it is. That roadmap will be set up. Not a manifesto giving promises to build more police stations and all of that. That's political area fairy promises. We are going to show to the country we have something so set up that is going to transform every ministry. The same way I was able to transform the police service, it was seen as the most corrupt, the most incompetent. 14% public trust, it went up to 59%. We can do the same for every army in public service using this roadmap because it puts a proper structure in the system as it pertains to the talks. I think every single UNC supporter is aware that every time that there's an alliance, we are going to win. And you would have heard it, you would have seen it with Kamala persadices and myself. You saw the blue and the yellow. It was like a carrot bottle. It worked. That blue on yellow annihilated the PNM. It will always happen. All of a sudden, two months later, we started being attacked. Who are you all? What you bring to the table, which has always come about. It happened with Basio Pandey, with the Ulf. We have more supporters than you. Why it is that you must be prime minister. But after you made that decision and then they walked away and the same thing happened in 2010. You bring in the cop. And then after. I really don't need you anymore. I'm in government. My intention is not to point fingers and to criticize. And again, it started again in January and February where we started being attacked. And the floating voters again showed this. Okay, you don't know who we are. You want to know what we bring to the table? Take that in the by election. So this is not to condemn or criticize her statements. My concern is there's one person, one person in the whole country who believes that the UNC should go alone. And again, I'm cut. The same person. The more Cameron will tell me, do not speak about Julene John, the more I will say it. Julian John continues to push the agenda that the UNC must go alone. I ask each and every UNC supporter, member, counselor, member of parliament, NatEx member. Find out what is Julie John's purpose. It can't be. I hope you're not a trojan horse, but you can't be that. Being politically clueless to keep pushing an agenda where you fail in 2015, you fail again in 2020. It cannot work. And this is not in any way to discredit the UNC. The UNC may have more supporters than the PNM. I think they do. But their support base is so structured heavily in south and central. So to boast that we got more votes than the PNM, that does not matter. This is not proportional representation. The first past the post will always cause the UNC to lose against the PNM because of the PNM's appointed EDC officials that will continue to cut areas into these marginal seats. Always they will take parts of St. Antis and put it into St. Joseph. Take parts of St. Joseph that are UNC stronghold and put it into St. Augustine or San Juan Barataria. That is how the ABC works. So the only way you can win is to use the marginal voters who are in those different areas that they shift into the marginal seats to get them to vote. For an alliance. So that is my game plan. That is how I'm going to not sell it. But to explain that to the UNC new year executive.
[00:29:09] Speaker B: They say, you know, you hope for the best, but you prepare for the worst. Let's just say that the talks don't come. There is no accommodation, and the NTA has to go it alone. And the UNC said, they go in it alone. What are your plans? I'm assuming that there must be a plan b in the event that things don't work out. How many constituencies are you going to contest and those kinds of things?
[00:29:34] Speaker C: Well, again, and that's a good thing with that bridge constituency, not saying that we have nothing to lose. We are not here to. And that's why sometimes people feel there are PNM people who I know they are so pleased when Kamala Persia started attacking me with some very weird comments. What did you bring to the table? I work with your candidates in San Fernando and Sandra Grande more than my 31 candidates. And for every five houses I went to, two said, oh, that said they were going to vote for us. Two said, gary, I wasn't coming to vote for the UNC candidate, you know, but because I was a cop member, but as you are here, I will come and vote. And that is what caused San Fernando from being six. Three of five, four and PNM held onto that 50 byte. That is what caused Sandra Grande from being five for UNC to 6th street. It's not that more people like the UNC. If that was the case, you wouldn't get the results of the recent by election. So we know exactly what is going to happen. For me, failure is not an option. So I am convinced that there would be something that will ensure we get in government, but if not, we are not going to sell ourselves by being bullied in any way. That's what happened in 2010. The negotiation was one where they went to the table. The UNC said, this is what we're going to have, take it or leave it. And the cop took it. And I know it's sold out, but this bridge constituency is not desperate at all costs to get in government. That's what happened probably in 86 and 2010. I give the assurance to that bridge constituency. I intend to stand firm to make sure you are going to be represented in government, not to have your fingers stained for the next 72 hours after the election, have to wash it off. And then at the end of the day, it doesn't matter because you don't have a UNC government. What the country wants is to ensure that they are going to be represented in an alliance, including the UNC government, that they don't mind. So if there is a date that is not, I cannot see that Julian John can have such authority over the rest of the natics, over the rest of the UNC rank and file. Everybody in the UNC knows what must take place. But it is not going to be one where we are going to be bullied and we are going to be told, you take the two lavenders, the two porter spains, the stanzas, and we will take the marginals. We are not. Fooled me once, fooled me once, fooled me twice, fool me three times, I'm not a bubbly.
[00:31:44] Speaker B: We're going to have to leave it here this morning. I'm sure that we'll have further conversations moving forward. There's no getting away from that. But this was, as always, very enlightening, thought provoking discussion. Thank you for being with us here this morning.
[00:31:58] Speaker C: My pleasure.
[00:31:58] Speaker B: And as I've dropped the cadence on our interview here this morning, ladies and gentlemen, the former police commissioner, NTA political leader Gary Go.
[00:32:05] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, back accountability. The all new talk radio Freedom 106.5.
