Minnesota Fraud Exposed: Billions Lost, Warnings Ignored, and the Political Fallout
|
Time
Text
This is an iHeart podcast.
Guaranteed human.
Happy New Year, America.
It's Peter Schweitzer.
This is Eric Eggers, and we are filling in for Sean.
Join the conversation 1-800-941-7326, 1-800-941-7326.
Something I did not think I would say on this show, and that is that the nation's eyes are turned to Minnesota.
You've got massive fraud occurring in Minnesota, and I think we're just at the tip of the iceberg.
I think we're at the tip of the iceberg.
The last time we were able to fill in for Sean was actually the Wednesday before Thanksgiving, and we were talking about Minnesota fraud then, and it's insane to think that like two months later, it's still in the news because we're still finding out more details about just how pervasive this is.
Of course, we've been covering this story on the podcast.
We do the drill down, which you can find at thedrilldown.com.
We were telling you about this summer feeding program, which had $250 million potentially stolen, fraudulent.
You got 125 meals that were just fabricated.
100 million meals.
125 million meals.
Insane.
Yeah.
Insane.
And so as people kind of like peek under the hood, they realize it's not just fraudulent feeding programs.
There's Medicaid fraud.
There's autism fraud.
But Peter, the larger point, I think, is how did Minnesota get this bad?
How did it go from a purple state to a state that hasn't had a Republican win statewide election in 20 years?
Yeah.
And well, we're going to bring on the last one who pulled that off, and that is the former governor of Minnesota, Tim Polenti.
Happy New Year to you.
And Tim, what do you make of all of this?
I mean, is this surprising to you?
Well, Peter, Eric, good to be with you, and happy new year to you and to your listeners.
It is really infuriating.
And this is an example over not just weeks or months, but years of world-class government stupidity and incompetence.
And I can walk you through the details.
That's not spin, but there are years worth of auditor reports, nonpartisan, well-respected auditor reports, raising red flags about lack of financial controls, concerns about potential fraud, and a culture in state government that didn't take these concerns seriously.
And it is a travesty.
Well, it seems to me one of the things that's interesting is that there were actually people in state government that were raising questions about this for years.
And it seems as if elected officials kind of turned a blind eye.
And my question for you is you mentioned incompetency, which I think certainly is a term that applies here.
But I guess my question is, is do you think it's more than that?
Do you think that there was a political, they derive political benefits from looking the other way?
So it's not just incompetence.
There's an element of intentionality with at least some of the political leaders we're talking about.
Yeah, there are allegations, and I think they are credible, that the state government, in part, failed to respond in a timely manner or at all in many of these circumstances because the main perpetrators, as alleged, are and were Somalis.
And of course, they didn't want to get, the Democrats didn't want to get accused of being racist.
They didn't want to be politically correct.
And also, there's a 100,000 person voting block in Minnesota, which could decide an election.
And of course, most of those votes go to Democrats.
So there are concerns that part of this go slow or look the other way was because of political correctness concerns around the Somali community.
And they're big supporters of the Democrats.
Well, there's no doubt about it.
And I'm very interested in your perspective, having been the governor of this state and seeing the growth of the Somali community and then obviously the shift towards consistently voting for just Democrats.
But to your point, and to your point about the influence of the Somali community and the fealty with which Democrat elected officials treat some of these people, listen to this audio.
We played this on our podcast a few weeks ago.
This is Attorney General Keith Ellison meeting with a collection of Somali business leaders.
And the Somali business leaders are complaining about the fact that the state government in Minnesota is giving them a hard time.
So the first voice you're going to hear are voices of the Somali business community.
And then you're going to hear Keith Ellison respond to their requests because they're saying, listen, and many of these people, by the way, should be pointed out.
We're literally arrested a month after this meeting for committing fraud.
So the state agencies asking them questions, I think, were legitimate.
But listen to this audio.
I'd love to hear your reaction to this.
What we're talking about here, General Ellison, is we have systemic patterns of abuse, waste, and fraud from the departments claiming the same from minority business owners.
And we've taken it far too long.
Of course, I'm here to help.
And let me tell you, just being able to say, just getting the question, just getting the inquiry from the AG is sometimes enough to make people knock it off.
Yeah, Governor Palenti.
So that is a tape, by the way, I should say it was provided by the Center for American Progress, which is very well-respected.
Not Center for American Progress, Center for the American Experiments in Minneapolis.
And that's Keith Ellison essentially saying, I'm going to put heat on state officials who are raising questions about financial irregularities and fraud.
Your reaction.
That's just one of many examples that we're now aware of where state government officials look the other way, ducked, or worse yet, knowingly didn't go after allegations or concerns of fraud.
I can give you a couple other quick, quick ones.
There was an investigation of a child care center in 2018, and our Bureau of Criminal Apprehension was investigating it, and they didn't bring charges, according to the investigator, in part because a state bureaucrat failed and refused to cooperate, saying they didn't want to, quote unquote, enable or be a tool of law enforcement.
Now, what state bureaucrat gets away with that without being accountable, you know, not cooperating with a fraud investigation?
And then, of course, we have auditors saying when they brought the message to the Walls administration about their concerns about financial controls, they felt the Walls administration had a quote-unquote shoot the messenger mentality about auditors bringing them news about these concerns.
And the list goes on and on.
So it is a mountain of growing evidence that the state government failed and failed miserably and maybe affirmatively so.
Well, and to the point, I believe it's the FBI was even flagging, we've seen in these state audits, the FBI was flagging this feeding program as early as I think 2018, 2019, saying we're getting reports that they're asking for kickbacks from vendors, and those reports were ignored.
And then obviously the program grew to be the fraudulent mountain that it was.
Is this because of like the Somali population, or is it more that, hey, we have these people and we're going to let these, like this, as you noted, it's a voting block.
And so I guess like, is it about we're going to give them money and then they're going to vote for us?
And does that happen organically?
Or to Peter's point, does somebody design this system?
Well, we'll know more about the particular details as these various investigations, federal and state, and now numerous ones unfold.
But I think there's enough to be able to say they definitely looked the other way, ducked, went slow, or didn't pursue claims in part because of the constituency involved politically.
And maybe in terms of the power that that group had, either as a voting block or donors or whatever.
We'll know more about that soon enough.
But the other question is what kind of culture do you have in state government where you'd have this go on this long and be ignored for this long when there was signals being raised, credible signals being raised by lots of people, whistleblowers, auditors, other people.
And so there's a lot of important questions to be answered, and the answers I don't think are going to be very favorable for the, well, I know they're not going to be favorable for this administration.
Well, we're talking to former Minnesota governor Tim Palenti about the ongoing crisis in Minnesota.
I'm sure it's going to spread to California and to other states, probably some red states too, in a sense.
I guess my question for you is looking at this in terms of Minnesota.
What's the scope here?
I mean, we've had the feeding program.
There are now questions being raised about some of the senior assisted living programs.
You now have one in five autism centers in the state are currently under investigation for alleged fraudulent activity.
People who run these centers, by the way, don't need to be licensed.
It seems to me that Minnesota very generously says we want to help people, and you have people that are profiting off of exploiting it.
How convinced are you that we're actually going to see people go to jail?
And how convinced are you that we're actually going to see there's going to be a political consequence for this?
Do the people of Minnesota even care in your mind about this widespread fraud?
Yeah, two things.
One is the U.S. Attorney's Office, of course, headed by an appointee by President Trump, is going after this hard.
So they've already indicted about 90 people or charged about 90 people and more to come.
And that prosecutor, by the way, said his estimate of how much fraud this is, what they know so far, is $9 billion, which I believe would make it the largest fraud or theft of public funds in American history.
And the programs you mentioned and others, including Medicaid, are going to be involved.
And we're just getting started.
Federal agencies are just getting started looking into this.
So the scope is huge.
The amount is huge.
And the fact that my state government was as negligent and incompetent or worse in this circumstances is infuriating.
What do you say to people who now want to look at other systems in Minnesota and raise questions about the integrity there, specifically with the voting system?
Harmee Dillon, who's with, obviously, the Attorney General's office, is now writing a letter to the Secretary of State, Steve Simon, and asking for records relating to same-day voter registration.
And this is a letter that I believe she sent today.
So you obviously have one statewide office in Minnesota.
Minnesota's had a very unique practice known as vouching.
They've had some unique laws related to election integrity.
What do you think about, I mean, if it can happen to welfare programs, is it fair to raise questions about how secure the voting has been in Minnesota as well?
Yes, and there have been some isolated examples of voter fraud in Minnesota, you know, not at scale, but there's also a tussle going on between Secretary of State Steve Simon and the federal government, the Trump administration, over releasing data that would reveal more about potential fraud in Minnesota.
And the fact that Minnesota won't release that data is concerning and maybe suspicious.
But beyond that, one of the hallmarks of preventing fraud is you got to check.
And you can't check everything every day everywhere, but you have to check enough to be able to detect early whether you've got a potential fraud problem.
And we do not check nearly enough in our voting system in Minnesota.
And I think more scrutiny in that area is definitely well deserved.
Well, we've been talking to a former governor of Minnesota, Tim Palenti, about the situation in that state.
I'm going to ask you, I guess, a final question.
And this is where I get a little bit concerned and skeptical.
There was a case recently in Minnesota of a Somali gentleman who was operating a fraudulent, I think it was daycare center, was convicted.
It was three and a half, four million dollars.
A jury unanimously said this guy is guilty, go to jail.
The judge took the unusual step of reversing that and say, no, he's free to go.
And in her explanation, I'm trying to remember the judge's name.
In her explanation, Governor, she said, well, we have to consider cultural factors, which to me is highly insulting because she's basically saying, if you're from Somalia, you really don't know what fraud is.
Is that a concern of yours that people are going to make excuses and you're going to have judges or people in state government figure out ways to get some people off the hook under the guise that this is like a cultural misunderstanding?
Yeah, well, I'm familiar with that ruling, and I think it's ridiculous and preposterous.
You know, we shouldn't stigmatize people because they're in a particular group, but we also shouldn't excuse illegal or inappropriate behavior because somebody's in that group.
And her application of the law in this regard, I think, is, I just don't understand it.
It's very frustrating.
And hopefully, you know, that will not be the pattern with these cases as the rest of them get sentenced.
But we also don't have a lot of data to suggest it won't be.
I mean, that's the problem.
To your point, people don't want to check, but the more they check, the more they find.
And I will say to the Trump administration's credit, they're checking more.
And so I think as a result, they're finding more.
Governor Paulenti, you're great to join us.
You're the last Republican to win statewide election.
We could talk about Minnesota as a case study for, I think, the problems potentially we're facing as a country when you only have one party rule in these areas like Minnesota, like California.
But we appreciate your time today and wish you the best of luck as you continue to try to hold your home state accountable in ways that it has not been for some time.
So thank you for joining us today.
My pleasure.
Thanks for having me.
So I think that there's, you know, just as a final note on that, the person who was in charge of the Democrat Party for 15 years, Ken Martin, is now the head of the Democrat Party for the country.
And whatever systems they allowed and they groomed in place, I mean, I don't think it's a stretch to be like, hey, are they trying to replicate this on a national level?
It's a very important story.
We're going to continue to follow.
He's Peter Schweitzer.
I'm Eric Eggers.
We're filling in for Sean Handy here on the Sean Handy Show.
We'd love to talk to you.
Give us a phone call, 1-800-941-Sean.
We'll be back right after this.
Sean Hannity.
Hey, if you ever thought about upgrading your window treatments but didn't want the hassle, our friends at blinds.com are here to change the game.
They are the only company that lets you shop for custom blinds and shades online.
You just go to blinds.com.
You can skip the stress.
Blinds.com makes it easy to get that designer look without that showroom markup.
Now, you get the same quality, the same service you would at other high-end stores, but you get it at a fraction of the price.
Now, samples, they'll send them to your door directly.
Now, more than just blinds, blinds.com carries everything from bamboo shades to shutters, outdoor shades for your patio, and much, much more.
All blinds.com orders are back with their 100% satisfaction guarantee.
Right now, blinds.com is giving you, my listeners, an exclusive $50 off offer when you spend $500 or more.
Just use the promo code Sean S-E-A-N.
When you check out, it's a limited time offer.
Just go to blinds.com for details.
Rules and restrictions may apply.
Hey, it's Peter Schweitzer and Eric Eggers here on the Sean Handy Radio Show.
Peter, you just heard former Minnesota Governor Tim Paulenti say that they don't really check about the fraud in Minnesota.
Now, if they wanted to check a daycare in Minnesota, they would run into some problems because as this person who runs a daycare, a Somali Daycare in Minnesota just told us, they've had a little bit of a break-in problem.
Unfortunately, we saw that there was important documentation, enrollment of the children, and also employee documentation that was gone.
There were also checkbooks that were ripped from our checkpapers from our books.
So you hear, so if they did want to check and they wanted to look for like payroll records or like any evidence that what you say you do here is actually taking care of children, apparently due to vandals or thieves, that information is now gone.
And not backed up, apparently, right?
It's not in the cloud.
They don't have these records anywhere.
Yeah, I mean, this is the problem.
If you and I tried that with the IRS, yeah, I took those deductions.
Yeah, those were legitimate expenses, but I can't find my records.
IRS is going to say too bad, you owe us the money.
And I think we need to apply the same standard here.
If you can't prove that you are actually servicing kids in a daycare center with these taxpayer dollars, that's fraud and you're going to jail.
But what if the records were stolen, Peter?
Don't you realize how valuable Somali daycare records are on the street?
Forget that blue diamond stuff, bro.
You got them Somali records?
I mean, it's insane.
And the problem is when you've been accused of lying and stealing, it's going to be tough to take your word for it.
It's just a crazy story that just gets crazier.
And it's been crazy in the news for the last several months.
I can't believe we're still talking about it.
We'll talk about it, plus some other insane stories when we get back from this break.
He's Peter Schweitzer on Eric Edgar's.
This is the Sean Hannity Radio Show.
You know, as a consumer, you carry the success or the failure of businesses in the palm of your hand.
Now, their success depends on your decision to spend money with them or with their competitor.
Well, my friends at Pure Talk, they would like to say thank you from the bottom of their hearts for choosing Pure Talk for your wireless needs, like I do.
And because of you, they had a record-breaking year.
And because of your generosity through their Roundup for Charity Program, they have now been able to donate over a half a million dollars to America's Warrior Partnership that stands on the front lines in helping to prevent veteran suicide.
And your patronage has allowed Pure Talk to donate 1,000 hand-sewn, made-in-American flags for your fellow veterans.
And when you choose Pure Talk as your wireless provider, you choose to support American jobs.
And with the money that the big wireless guys throw around on advertising, you are inundated with offers everywhere you look.
So for everyone in the Pure Talk family, thank you for your trust, and God bless America.
News all afternoon.
When you get off work, be sure to check in first for everything you miss during the day.
This is the Sean Hannity Show.
Peter Schweitzer, Eric Eggers, we are filling in for Sean on this, January the 2nd, 2026.
Hard to say that.
2026.
We got here already.
We started the show by talking about some of the radical predictions people had made about 2025, how things were not as terrible as people thought they were.
It was actually a pretty good year.
Looking ahead to 2026, usually people make kind of New Year's resolutions.
Have you made any?
I know a common one is people want to get healthier.
They want to get more fit.
You're a pretty fit guy already.
But, you know, eating healthier, being healthier?
First, let me just say, thank you for noticing.
That means a lot because I do try.
What I predict and what I am optimistic about is the fact that I think that as a country, we're going to get healthier and we're going to get healthier in a way.
You know, we elected Donald Trump.
He appointed RFK Jr.
And it's funny, we had this whole like make America healthy again thing.
And I do think that there are some health trends that are largely positive.
Fewer people seem to be drinking.
There's a lot of like, you know, dry January is the thing.
And just more and more people, I think, are just choosing different lifestyles.
But as a country, we have made an interesting decision, something that you and I, I'm not sure we ever thought this would happen.
Yeah.
Because I remember a long time ago, you and I did a TV special on the Sean Handy television show, and it was about, it was called Profits from Poverty.
It was about how much money the welfare system, how much money people make off of food stamps, including, by the way, at the time, like JP Morgan was making money off of the EBT card swipes.
I mean, it's crazy how much money it is.
But one of the things we tried to do is we were talking, we wanted to have a soda lobbyist on to talk about the fact like soda's big business for EBT.
And I think we've done a podcast on this.
It's something like 2% of Coca-Cola's global earnings would go down if people could stop buying soda with their EBT or with their food stamps.
Well, a number of states as of yesterday have taken that step.
Amazing.
So in Utah, Nebraska, Iowa, Indiana, and West Virginia, you can no longer buy soda or junk food with your food stamps.
Indiana, you're happy because your college football team is doing amazing.
If you're a poor person who likes soda, you're less happy.
Yeah.
Well, and look, if you want to pay for it yourself, you're welcome to.
The question is, should taxpayer dollars in a nutrition program be actually used to buy soft drinks or pork rinds or whatever?
And the answer is no.
The answer is clearly no.
Yeah, remember the N and SNAP states for nutrition.
13 more states are adding to this list by the fall, by the way.
Yeah, no, which is amazing.
And look, there have been studies that have compared the EBT, which is the sort of food stamp program, with the WIC program, which is a separate public assistance program for women and children.
The WIC has always banned using money for junk food or sodas or things like that.
EBT has not.
And studies show that there's a massive difference in the obesity rates, that people that are on EBT have much higher obesity problems than they do in WIC.
And I think one of the reasons is you've got money that you can use to buy this stuff.
And as you pointed out for years, the big companies, the big snack food companies, the big soft drink companies fought this reform.
Their argument was in the name of freedom of choice.
We're Americans, right?
You should be able to choose what you put into your body.
My answer is, yeah, it kind of is, except you're not going to use taxpayer dollars to do it.
So this is a huge, huge win for America to become healthier and stronger.
Yeah, it's an interesting discussion because when Mike Bloomberg outlawed, remember, big sodas in New York City, and we're like, what is this?
Like, that seems an odd choice.
But there's a difference between saying what you, private citizen, with your own money can purchase versus what I, as a taxpayer, I'm going to subsidize for you, especially if what we're subsidizing lends you to be even more of a burden because you're going to have poor health care outcomes and everything else.
I mean, the number one predictor of poor health is income, sadly.
And so, I mean, and part of the reason why is just people, the cheap stuff's not great for you.
Yeah.
Cheap stuff's not great for you, and sometimes it's not accessible.
But again, you shouldn't be using taxpayer dollars to do this.
And by the way, this is going to redound to the benefit not only for the individuals on this program, but it's going to help lower health care costs in America because when you have obesity, that's what creates all that creates problems of diabetes, heart problems, etc.
So this is a win for all the right reasons.
I think there's going to be people squealing about it, saying how terrible it is.
It's unfair.
But I think it's a great choice.
Again, it's a nutrition program, and we're talking about taxpayer dollars.
We're not talking about somebody's personal choice with what they choose to do with their own money.
So that's a positive trend.
And it's one that we didn't think was possible necessarily a decade ago when we started looking at this.
So here's another trend that I also think could be quite positive.
I don't know how possible it is.
But in case you don't know, in Australia, they're about to get not just like physically healthier, but mentally and emotionally healthier because what they have done is they have banned Peter Schweitzer children under the age of 16 from using social media.
And the rest of the world is taking notice.
And now even the New York Times is doing stories about people are saying, listen, if Australia can do it, like, can we do this too?
And so it's interesting to see that there's every study says social media is so bad for the developing brains of children for lots of different reasons.
And as a father myself, I've noticed, you know, we, my wife and I, it was a long discussion and we finally decided to get our daughter's iPads.
And then I find that on these iPads, they're actually even getting, it's like you think it's a video thing and you set the parental controls for under the age of nine, yet there's still things that are basically social media on there.
And it's crazy.
And it is, it's incredibly challenging.
So credit to Australia, but of course, they're not, it's not a done deal.
Reddit of all companies is suing them to say, no, we think the teenagers, they need the social media.
Right, right, right.
They need to read Reddit.
That's going to help them develop.
That's like a soda company suing these states.
Like, no, poor people need us.
No, that's a great analogy.
And look, this one to me, I'm a little bit more conflicted on.
So in Australia, I'm wondering, if a parent says I'm fine with my 13-year-old, parental approval, can a 13-year-old do it?
Or is it an outright ban?
It doesn't matter.
I believe it's an outright ban, but if you're a parent and you want to give your kids scotch, like that's also illegal.
No, exactly.
Or a tattoo, right?
Even if mom and dad are okay with the 11-year-old getting a tat.
No, you can't do that.
I feel like the parents who get their kids tats are also the kids, parents who give their kids scotch.
I think that's a fair assumption.
They want to sing them all.
Well, so yeah, I mean, the libertarian part of me doesn't like the government telling people what to do.
But again, we were talking about children.
Yeah.
We're not talking about adults.
And sometimes you have parents that don't make great choices.
And by the way, this ban, there's a lot of parents that like this ban because they don't have to fight with their kids and say, no, no, no, you can't use it.
It's like, I can't do anything about it, son.
Sorry.
I wish you could watch those programs or do those things online, but you can't because the government says so.
So it kind of helps parents out as well.
Tell me, how's it going with you?
And you've got such sweet children and Katie, your wife, you guys are working on this stuff together and kind of have the same views, right, on iPad usage and all that.
So how's it going?
They've had it since Christmas.
How's it going?
Poorly.
Incredibly poorly.
I instantly regret this decision.
No, I mean, just to say, I mean, it's a real fight.
And there's a whole like wait till eight.
So a lot of parents are trying to wait till eighth grade to get their kids a phone or a social media device because it is.
It just, it's insane.
But I did.
We've been talking about having a contract for our children to have to sign.
Good idea.
So like, here are the rules you'll have to use before you can use this iPad.
And even just drafts of the contract, which my wife ironically used Chat GPT to produce.
But then, so we're talking about, hey, we'll have these contracts.
And then I come home and I see that my daughter has written this thing out, which I hold on.
She's revised the contract.
She's 11 and she has said, I hereby declare that Ashlyn Smith Eggers does not have to sign any form of a contract whatsoever.
She does not have to sign the new iPad contract that's being printed.
You bought the iPad.
Now it's ours.
And by the way, I love this.
You've got this right here in the studio.
It's got nice yellow letters, iPad contract.
I just think it speaks to how much it takes hold in their brains and their hearts.
I mean, it's a real thing.
It's like crack.
It's like a crack addiction.
I mean, you, and look, it's all about dopamines.
I mean, there are all these studies that have been done that shows like when they pick a certain color, you know, for their logo or certain color to frame something, they've done a lot of research on the one that is most likely to draw you in.
And so that's great.
So where are the contract negotiations right now?
Yeah, I mean, I think it's bedtime when I get home is what it is.
I will say this, to your point about like, and this is not just for children, it's for adults too.
And we're talking about New Year's resolutions.
I think we just have to continue to be wiser.
You know, in addition to the food stamp documentary we produced, we also did a documentary on Google and Facebook and technology.
It's called The Creepy Line.
You can see it on Amazon.
But we, you know, in that thing, you talk about how there's always a gap between when a technology is introduced and when regulations develop about the safe use of that technology.
Right.
And, you know, we are now, what, 30 years into the internet, basically.
Yeah.
And we're still kind of figuring out how and why is the best way to use it.
And these technology companies are making so much money.
They don't want any restrictions whatsoever.
Right.
But it's true that, like, I mean, I give you so much credit.
You use the grayscale on your phone, which I can't do because it makes my phone less fun.
But you're so good at it.
Well, I appreciate that.
Yeah.
The grayscale, the theory is, is the colors are part of the addiction, right?
In sense of drawing you back in.
So you can go on your iPhone, put it on grayscale.
So everything's black and white.
Now, if somebody sends you a really cool, colorful picture about flowers, you're kind of out of luck.
But yeah, there are tricks that you can employ.
But to your point, I mean, you think about, I'm old enough to remember when the internet first sort of really in the 1990s started to emerge.
The promise was this is going to be so educational.
People are going to learn languages.
They're going to learn about art history.
They're going to learn about the French Revolution.
They're going to learn about all these different cultures.
Look online.
Yeah, that stuff is there.
But the biggest stuff is basically garbage.
But here's the point.
Where do they use the internet to learn about those things?
And you wrote about this in one of your most recent bestsellers.
They do it in China.
Because they restrict a lot of the stuff like TikTok.
China, Chinese company owns TikTok.
It's in the United States.
The local version, which is called Something Different, they strip out.
There's no blue-haired ladies screaming and dancing.
There's no strange challenges.
It's all science and history and culture, of course, through the eyes of the CCP.
So look, there's a balance there, but I agree with you.
I think we have experimented.
My kids are older.
They're in their 20s.
They were kind of the experimental generation.
And I feel bad because our children were, they were given access to iPhones.
Everybody thought everything was fine.
And then all these problems started to emerge.
You know, the terrible things about stalking and about, you know, the sexual blackmail, you know, pictures and all that kind of stuff.
I think it's high time that we realize the power, the potency, and the damage that this stuff can do.
So I want to applaud you and your wife for doing this contract.
It's very easy to just tune out and say, just take the iPad.
They'll be happy.
It'll be more peaceful at home.
But to say, okay, we're going to expose you to this technology, but it's going to be restricted and it's going to be controlled by us.
You're going to have some arguments on your hands, but I'm glad you're doing it.
Well, I would just say I think that's the conversation that is a country that we need to continue to be willing to have.
And just the example about technology and governance, like 70 years before cars were introduced and we started requiring or even allowing seatbelts.
Right, right.
I mean, you know, and so just, and I think we're still very much in the what does a seatbelt look like for all the technology that we have access to as a society.
And the problem is the companies make so much money off of not allowing any of that stuff.
And so credit to Australia, you know, if states can ban soda off of welfare programs and countries can ban social media for teenagers, it just shows you that's a conversation we need to continue to have.
And so we appreciate the opportunity to talk to you on this program about like where I think we still need to go as a possible New Year's resolution.
So we'll finish up the program here.
He's Peter Schweitzer.
I'm Eric Eggers.
If you've enjoyed what you've heard today, you can listen to more of it at our podcast website, thedrilldown.com.
We'll be right back after this.
The Sean Hannity show.
This has been Peter Schweitzer and Eric Eggers.
We've been filling in for Sean.
We appreciate you taking the time to listen to us.
Last question for you, Mr. Eggers.
I want either a prediction about 2026 or I want a resolution on your part for the year ahead.
Yeah, I think a prediction is, and you heard Tim Paulenti address it briefly, but I think with Harmeet Dylan asking for voting records in Minnesota and the way they're going after, I think, fraud and just like looking, they're just looking for things.
I think you're going to see real improvements in election integrity in this country.
You know, I wrote a book about election integrity that came out in 2018.
I think the Trump administration is refreshing in actually taking it seriously.
And I think that if these welfare programs can be exploited, so too can the elections.
That's very topic that means a lot to them.
And I think you'll see them take meaningful action on that this year.
Yeah, we were told there's very little fraud in social welfare programs and there's very little voter fraud.
We found it in social welfare programs.
We're probably going to find it in voter fraud as well.
Well, this has been great, Eric.
I always appreciate the opportunity to do this with you.
I'm not a professional with this.
You've done this in your career.
We're so thankful for Sean and for producer Linda for allowing us to have access to these microphones.
Jason and Katie, who are on Team Hannity up in New York, thank you again for all of your guidance.
And Grant, Brent, and Lucas, who've helped us here locally.
We appreciate that as well.
And I'm very optimistic about 2026.
I think the economy is going to do a lot of great things.
I think people's lives are going to improve.
And I am very optimistic about the year ahead.
I'm optimistic too.
Very excited about your book, which will come out in 2026.
I think it'll do a lot of good things.
And so just again, echo your statements.
Excited to the opportunity to host this show.
Excited to talk to you, America.
Sean Hannity, we'll be back on this show on Monday.