Defund the Police?

Listen to this episode

S1: The following program may offend those with delicate constitutions, Baptist’s, FCC commissioners and the former Soviet Republic of Uzbekistan.

S2: It’s Friday, June 5th, 2020, from Slate’s The Gist. I’m Mike Pesca. Almost 3000 Americans have died of Corona virus over the last three days. It was in the five hundreds. Now it’s back up to thousands or mere thousands again. Just thought you should know.

S3: Also, Ben Sasse of Nebraska said this to Judiciary Chair Lindsey Graham about questioning the former FBI official, Rod Rosenstein.

S4: Some of us have other committees. And with all due respect, I don’t think anybody in private ever disagrees with me when I say it’s bullshit the way people grandstand for cameras in here. The reality is, if we didn’t have cameras in this room, the discussion would be different. The Senate doesn’t work. It doesn’t diffuse. The partisan tensions are leading the country toward dissolution, on for transparency and for print reporters being everywhere. I’m for audio transcripts being everywhere. But 90 percent of our committees are about people trolling for soundbites. That’s what actually happens. So some of us have other work to do. People control for sound whenever they want. But can we at least have a sense of when we’re going to take our votes so people can come back?

S3: Quite a soundbite that was preserved thanks to the presence of cameras. Still thought you should know also.

S1: Dateline, Ukraine and I did have thousands of old case files by Ukrainian prosecutors found no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Hunter Biden. The former prosecutor general who had launched the audit told Reuters that, according to Reuters.

S3: Thought you should know. Also, the reason the sound is weird and friendly robot ish is that I couldn’t find an example of this news, which seems important to me actually being broadcast on a network. And I also thought you should know that. But the big thing I think you should know is just one story of excessive policing out of many. One I chose was Dateline Philadelphia, a police commander, baton to protester, a temple student around the head and neck, which is the Philadelphia commissioner noted, could be deadly. The officer has been identified.

S2: Staff Inspector Joseph Polonia has been removed from the street. Police sources have confirmed to CBS three. Polonia is indeed the officer in the video.

S3: Yes, Joseph Polonia, the name ring a bell. And to be fair, if the name were in Joey boloney, it wouldn’t have rung a bell. I mean, Richard Eastman or Thomas Shea, the policing excesses of such a name would have probably escaped my notice over the years, but not a Joseph Polonia. So I reacquainted myself with the Balón. Your record.

S5: In 2010, reporters for the Philadelphia Daily News won the Pulitzer Prize for reporting on a rogue squad of Philadelphia police officers who supervised the rogue corrupt squad. Joseph Polonia, though Polonia escaped penalty. He was on videotape instructing officers that he supervised to disable a security camera during a raid at one bodega. Later, after he was disciplined for failing to oversee an officer who conducted warrantless searches, Boloney was transferred to a new district where, under his leadership, that district received more abuse complaints that all but one of Philadelphia’s 25 other districts, one tactical unit comprised of three cops, received twenty five complaints in a year.

S6: Half of them were for searches that escalated into beatings, vandalism, threats or thefts. That is according to city and state Pennsylvania, which is an excellent public interest blog. There is an entirely closed disciplinary system in Philadelphia, which means no one knows which cops are disciplined and for what, it would seem that in the person of batons, when Joseph Polonia. What we have is somewhat of an embodiment of so much that is wrong with policing and why it is so hard to achieve reform. This is not one bad apple. This is a cop who has been rewarded and promoted and oversees some of the worst rot associated with Philadelphia policing. And the only reason we are in a position to be appalled by it is that someone’s iPhone was rolling when he took a swing at a protester and also that he has a memorable name on the show today, defunct the police, a bankrupt premise. But first, the institution of the Civilian Complaint Review Board was supposed to hold police accountable. So it doesn’t work. It can or can fail pretty badly depending on the political will of those charged with overseeing it. MSNBC commentator and new school professor and vice president Maya Wiley was the chair of New York City’s CCR be the largest independent oversight agency of the biggest police force in the USA. My Whiley joins me next.

S1: Maya Wiley, my guest, served as counsel to the mayor of New York City, Bill de Blasio. She worked for the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund for the ACLU. She is a professor at the new school. Hello. Thanks for coming on, Maya.

S7: Hi, Mike. It’s nice to be with you.

S1: So actually, I want to start with an institution that I didn’t use in your I.D. and your ID, but I’m very interested in it. And it’s the Civilian Complaint Review Board. You served as head of the Civilian Complaint Review Board. From what I understand, you were asked to do so by Mayor de Blasio, who you had been serving as counsel. I just want to know about this institution and how much teeth it has and what it can do. So let’s just start with. Can you give us a little bit of a history? And what power does the Civilian Complaint Review Board actually have?

S7: I absolutely can. And it was a privilege to lead the CCR be the first and most important thing to know. I think about the CCR BS history and this moment is that it was demonstrations and advocates like we’re seeing mobilizing to day who mobilized and demanded the creation of the New York City Civilian Complaints Review Board. In other words, it was a response to concerns about policing, police abuse and a demand for police oversight from residents, from activists, from civil libertarians and civil rights lawyers that created it. It was a hard fought battle to create. It required a coalition that required a lot of hard work. It required battling and in words only and in rhetoric and an argument police unions who did not want to see civilian oversight. It is also not unique to the country, their civilian oversight. At last count I saw was 200. But New York City’s is one of the oldest and is certainly one of the largest. And it does have some powers that are unique to it compared to some other cities. It’s civilian oversight. First of all, what that means is it is essentially run and controlled by a board of directors. It is a city agency. It is a public entity. It serves the public and is funded by the city, but it operates independently. You cannot be on the board unless you are a civilian. That means the mayor has a certain number of point TS. City council members have a certain number of appointees and the police commissioner can appoint three people, usually former police officers, and should rightly. The whole point is to have the voice experience of police officers also participating on the board and to interrupt when you are on the board.

S1: I’m going to assume that they were actually valuable voices at times.

S7: Yes. I mean, one of the things that’s important about how the board operates, it is an investigative body. That means the staff of the agency itself has over 100 investigators.

S8: We have the power under the charter of the city of New York to receive complaints from anyone, whether a resident or a visitor to the to the city who believes they have been a victim of misconduct. That does not include all things like corruption would go to the internal affairs, fear of the police department. We don’t hear corruption cases, but we do hear excessive force being obviously the one in the top of the news, various forms of abuse of power and even disrespect. If a police officer curses out, someone drops the F bomb, which we’ve heard a lot in these. Tests. That’s actually something that can be disciplined. And those complaints as well come to the Civilian Complaint Review Board. We have investigators who then investigate the complaints. We have a relationship with the police department where they’re required to help us find and identify police officers. If the person doesn’t know who they are, which sometimes happens, you have a run in with a police officer, but you don’t have a name or a badge number. And the police department helps track down and try to identify who those police officers might be. But the decision making, the review of the evidence happens at the board level. So investigators investigate. They present the board with their review and recommendation based on the evidence. But the board itself makes the decision about whether or not we can say that there was a violation. And if we find a violation, we send it over to the police commissioner with our recommendation of discipline, and we make public the data about how many complaints, what kinds of complaints and how often the police commissioner agrees with the discipline. Here’s the thing, and here’s what a lot of advocates are concerned about. We can’t require the police commissioner to take disciplinary action. We can only recommend it and make transparent, you know, how often we recommended it and how often the police commissioner complies.

S9: Sometimes a commissioner will discipline and in fact, often will discipline when we say there should be discipline but will not necessarily agree with us on what kind of discipline discipline can be anything from take vacation days, send the person to go get more training. And obviously, in the most serious cases like Eric Garner, which I chaired our review of investigation and the vote to send over charges, the most serious thing we can say to a police commissioner is these require charges. That means it goes to an administrative judge who sits in the police department and there is a trial, an actual trial with attorneys like a court of law that determines that the administrative law judge determines whether charges are appropriate. And there’s sufficient evidence, as in Pantaleo. Officer Pantaleo, who was responsible for the killing of Eric Garner and then sends that up to the police commissioner. And it is a unique power to our civilian oversight that we have prosecutors. We have a prosecutorial unit in our civilian agency. And when it is charges, when there’s going to be a trial, it is civilian prosecutors, meaning not police department staff, because they also have their own lawyers. It is our lawyers who go in and represent the people, represent the complainants in that trial, and that’s what happened in the Eric Garner case. So we have some powers that just expanded. And I think they’re important to note right now. It was just a ballot initiative that expanded the authority of the Civilian Complaint Review Board to now charge police officers with lying, because a significant problem that we found where there were times where we may not have substantiated the case, had enough evidence to say whether or not the police officer did wrong. But there was evidence that the police officer was not telling the truth about what happened. Now there’s right power to make that its own charge of misconduct.

S1: Right. So I want to just convey to the listeners what the actual statistics are, and it’s changed over time. So before you got there, WNYC did an investigation and they found that the CCR B recommended charges and one hundred seventy five cases discipline 70 instructions, which is another level, and 12 of 175 cases in which the CCR B recommended an officer be charged. The NYPD only sought charges in seven and the officers received no discipline in 76. So 100 were disciplined, 76 weren’t. Now, that was from 2012 after you became involved. All of those numbers went up. But still, maybe you remember the exact percentage you’re close to of the recommended charges. How many were actually listened to and carried through?

S10: Yeah, our numbers went up substantially. And I think that was a testament to two things that I want to note in the previous administration with a police commissioner, Ray Kelly, who I will politely say was less than receptive to oversight of misconduct it had. Looking at it from the public perspective, there was no question that there was a breakdown in how it was supposed to work. There was just a lot of tension between the two agencies because there was a commitment to reform. When I became the chair. True, there was obviously a lot of tension for the public with some of the news stories coming out. Before I got there about our previous chair. But the short answer was there was a lot of effort to make the relationship work the way it was supposed to. And to take police misconduct more seriously. So we did see an increase and a pretty dramatic one. And I don’t remember the exact statistics, but I think we got up into the 80 percent agreement that there should be discipline. I think the other issue becomes the extent to which there’s an agreement on what the discipline should be. Now, there was also a new training protocol under the de Blasio administration to train much more intentionally train police officers for de-escalation. To do what I think is very important, which is to say we have to make sure police officers don’t escalate. That’s one of the problems that we’ve been seeing with demonstrations, is we have seen police who have engaged in escalating as opposed to de escalating tensions with people who are protesting that training is very important. And one of the things I think is going to be useful and important moving forward is that there be more transparency about how and to the extent the training is working, because one of the things you’re always trying to to figure out when you’re on the civilian oversight side is what’s really going to change things. And in terms of how the police department operates, in other words, you want police officers to do what is right and how they police. So, you know, getting more transparency into whether the training is working. So that is it appropriate to send officers and recommend training or is it much more important to recommend something that is more disciplinary, like suspension or losing vacation days or all the way up to termination terminations? A little easier for us because that’s usually excessive force cases where, you know, like in Eric Garner, it’s pretty plain to us or was too right.

S1: I mean, it’s easier, but of course, more harrowing because it’s real horrible victims on the other end. So one question I have is when we hear that and this is true, that the officer who killed George Floyd was brought up on 17 different disciplinary cases, which could be civilian, which could be internal and got actual punishment or a letter in his file in one of them. That doesn’t mean much because just looking at the New York Civilian Complaint Board, sometimes depending on who the mayor is and who the police commissioner is, it’s a pretty ineffective mechanism. And other times, with different people who are in charge, ultimately in charge, it can be a much more effective mechanism. You’re not as expert on what the board is like in Minneapolis. But it’s very hard to draw conclusions when you hear statistics like that, isn’t it?

S11: Yes. And, you know, I think the public is right to be extremely upset that you hear a police officer received a large number of complaints, put aside what happens in the individual complaints themselves. But that police officer should be off the streets if there’s that many complaints. You should be putting that officer behind a desk and considering what’s going on with that officer. In other words, there should be a risk management process that says we’ve got a problem here, because one of the things that we have to talk about honestly more and one of the things I heard all the time, both from advocates and from residents and communities, because when I was chair, we took. Board meetings out directly into the community so that we had an opportunity to invite the precinct commander into our meeting and invite community leaders, as well as any resident who wanted to come to get up and tell us what was going on with policing in their community.

S12: So in other words, not just talking about complaints we’d receive, but really asking the question, what’s working here? What’s not? So we had more context for our work and we’re using our ability as civilian oversight and having a relationship with the police department to create more dialogue. The good news was we were hearing that communities, generally speaking, liked the community policing officers, you know, the officers trained and responsible for being the community liaison, that that was something that was working better. That’s a good thing. But that there were a lot of police officers who weren’t part of the community policing unit who were not, and that there were instances in which people were saying, we’re afraid to file complaints. Our neighbors are telling us they’re afraid to file complaints because the police officers know who they are, where they live. They’re concerned about retribution. And when you’re in a low income community, when you’re in a public housing project which has its own has police that are signed specifically with its own command to public housing. Where there’s no question that their crime concerns and residents want police protection from crime, but also feel that they’re treated as if they’re the criminals when they’re the ones asking for protection. And yet don’t feel comfortable complaining because the police officers know who they are because they’re policing their units. They’re policing inside their buildings. They’re policing their playgrounds. That’s a distrust issue. And I am not weighing in on whether they are right or wrong, because it’s not a question of right or wrong. The fact that they feel that distrust, the fact that they feel that they can’t complain means that we know the complaints we receive are not all the complaints we should receive. But that means another thing, that the police also received complaints that the civilian side, we don’t have any data. We don’t know about the complaints they received that we do not unless they send the link to us. That means there are two different bodies of data on who is complaining and what they’re complaining about that we don’t as a city have transparency into in New York. That would tell us. Well, wait, wait, wait. But this is the critical point I think is a transformative demand is that the police departments make publicly available. And one thing Minneapolis does do, and this was a reform after previous police killing that made big news in in Minneapolis, I believe it was in 2016 or 2015, is they created an open data government portal. So you can literally anyone can go in and put in the name of the officer.

S13: You can go and put in the name of Derek Chauvin and it will pull up his disciplinary history back to to when they started making that available, which is not his entire history, because he was on the force for a long time. But at least that’s a level of transparency. Most cities don’t have and we don’t have in New York City.

S1: Quick question, which is in New York City, some police departments have this requirement. Are police officers required to say their name and badge number to anyone who asks?

S13: Absolutely. And one of the things that I was so concerned about was that we are hearing reports from demonstrators, by the way, including my own daughter, who was at a demonstration and said, mom, they’re covering their badges. I’m hearing they’re covering them. It looks to me, as I walk down the street that they’re covering. That’s a violation of police protocol of the rules. And if a police officer refuses to allow their ID name and badge number, which they have publicly available on their uniforms, that in and of itself is a complaint, a bull offense that the civilian complaint review board can receive.

S3: So here’s the broader question I have during these protests. And as people reflect on George Floyd and all the other killings at the hands of the police and examples of brutality, there is a sentiment and maybe it’s informed by rage. It certainly is that we can’t work in any way with the system we have. We have to disassemble this root and branch and start anew. And on the other hand, you have this institution like the CCR, be that when empowered, seems like it can do things, but when not empowered, seems like a cance. When you were running it, did you say to yourself, this can and should be a useful tool in the ultimate solution?

S6: In a perfect world, or did you say A fully empowered CCR? B is the best we can ask for under these circumstances where the police are so funded and where there is a culture of discount ability.

S1: So it’s fine. But if I had to start a new we wouldn’t even need a CCR B or the mechanism of the CCR B would not even exist as it does here.

S13: This is an extremely important conversation that we’re having as a as a nation, as a city. And I deeply embrace this conversation.

S14: I have many thoughts. One is civilian oversight and particularly the expansion of powers of civilian oversight are absolutely an important tool. And there are some things that are unique to our CCAR, be that I think are critically important for for civilian oversight across the country. As I said, the independence of prosecution of charges. By the way, that’s not codified. That’s a memorandum of understanding that could be codified so that a police commissioner can’t just tell you. I know I said you could, but I’m not going to in this case. So there are things that can strengthen the the effectiveness of civilian oversight. Absolutely. As we have seen some expansion of that in our own city. The thing is, there’s never just one solution. I would say that there are critical steps we have to take to.

S15: We assess and we imagine what policing is and what it is for, what we have to do is have policies and leadership, including leadership and police departments that say our job is to solve problems. And this is not something new. And there have been pilots and police departments in different countries and in the U.S. with some very promising data. But we’ve never talked about taking it to scale, and that’s problem oriented policing. So if you take Eric Garner, here’s a guy who is dead because the police say he was selling untaxed cigarettes on the street. So he’s dead because he’s poor. He’s dead because we don’t have a safety net that ensured that he could pay his bills through the end of the month. He is dead because shop owners were complaining who were selling tax cigarettes, that people were selling them untaxed on the street. The police response from a policing perspective is crack down roundup. Arrest for a low level, non-violent, essentially poverty infraction, a tax infraction. And what a problem oriented approach would be. All right. We see a pattern. There’s a pattern because in this particular place, there are a lot of people selling a lot of stuff and they’re not supposed to. And store owners are upset. What is a police response to that which in this instance, in a in a problem oriented policing incidents would be? Is there a different location? Is there a conversation about pulling in other agencies, service agencies, both local and government, non-governmental and governmental, that can provide an actual solution to the problem that is creating selling loose cigarettes on the street?

S13: I think and I’m speaking right now in the immediate term, in the in what we can do right now is transparency. The police department and police leadership should be saying, you know what, public trust is a problem for our ability to do the job. And we must demonstrate that we see that we need to change. And the first step we’re going to do as a down payment on the change that we recognize we need to make. In addition to recognizing it’s good for us when public services and prevention are supported with public dollars, is that we’re going to recognize that we have to show the public where the complaints are, what the complaints are, how we’re handling them. And part of the cone of silence is also about whether police feel that they will get sufficient protection from their colleagues if they speak out. And that requires leadership, the leadership of police departments, whether it’s the head of the precinct, the chief of detectives, all the way up to the police commissioner to say we are going to identify and see problems and we’re going to intervene at leadership level. We’re not going to leave it to rank and file police officers to police their own alone.

S15: One of the third thing I will say, in addition to the peace dividend, in addition to the transparency and accountability, is we have to have police commissioners who will drive the change if we do not have police commissioners who see and hold this vision. It is very hard to change departments, but you have to recognize that you can do it differently. And we need police leadership that says we’re going to do this differently.

S1: Wiley, as a university professor at the new school, she was legal counsel to New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio. She’s a commentator on MSNBC, where you see her all the time. Thanks so much.

S12: Thank you, Mike. It was great to be with you.

S6: And now the spiel. You perhaps have heard calls to defund the police. It’s a hashtag. It’s a movement. And it’s a tactic here described by Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrice Cullors, heard on NPR’s Here and Now.

S16: The demand of defunding law enforcement becomes a central demand and how we actually get real accountability and justice, because it means that we are reducing the ability for law enforcement to have resources that harm our communities.

S3: So how would this work or would it maybe it’s just a slogan or a starting point or a piece of rhetoric or a negotiating stance or an Overton Window tactic.

S6: I have the tendency, by the way, to evaluate such stances as they come, as they claim. So abolish ICE. I say, well, should we abolish ICE or complete carbon neutrality by 2030 or believe all women or Vienneau Jails movement? I assess them at their word. Many of their advocates, by the way, are literally advocating for what the words do seem to be plainly saying. But then what frequently happens is we’re told, well, the absolu claim, the claim that got your attention in the first place, it’s well, maybe it’s more making a point, because by in fact, by no jails, we mean fewer jails. You’ll hear that by defund the police. We mean some version of rethink and decrease funding for the police. So I thought it would be best not to just talk about the idea of no police getting a dollar next year. That does seem kind of crazy, but a proposal that is actually on the table in New York City. It’s not zero going out the NYPD budget, but cutting the budget by a billion dollars. So how would this work? Well, the NYPD has a budget of six billion dollars. It sounds huge, but the school district has a budget of 34 billion dollars still in it. And also the excuse me for my New York focus. But that is the police department. I have the most statistics on that I’m most familiar with. And it’s also generally true of not just New York, but Fresno, Fort Worth, Fargo, everywhere, that the biggest expense that any police department has is paying its police officers. New York, by the way, on a per resident basis, it’s not an exceptionally high amount of money that goes to the police. For instance, neighboring Nassau County has a budget, a police budget of a little more than half the city’s, although the population in Nassau is less than a sixth of the cities. The dominant expense in police budgets, as I said, are salaries, salaries of cops and civilians. New York City has about 50 over 50000 combined civilian employees and sworn officers. And this means that their funding, if averaged among all the employees, one hundred twenty thousand dollars per person. Now, of course, they’re actually a lot of other expenses. They have 10000 patrol cars. They have eight helicopters. They have 55 horses, but mostly the budgets for personnel. Rookie New York City cop makes forty two thousand five hundred. After five years. And why PD officer makes 85000 with 27 paid vacation days and unlimited sick leave. And also with overtime, everyone makes at least one hundred thousand. I would say it’s actually a good middle class salary. The kind of good Middle-Class salary with perks that you would want a society to be able to offer more people. But is it wise? The question is for a society to offer it to fewer cops. In a way, it’s indisputable that having a large police force in times of low crime doesn’t make as much sense as in times of high crime. Right. And we are at a time of low crime generally nationally in New York City, a very low crime. The question, however, is in order to have less crime perpetuated by the police, we’re having fewer police make a difference. Also, to be fair. We shouldn’t just evaluate this on the basis of having fewer crimes committed by the police, which also take into account would the police be preventing future crimes? It’s a very hard calculation to do. I’m here to do the easier calculation because it is true that if we cut salaries, you know, it wouldn’t come from the highest paid. Most experienced officers would probably come from a hiring freeze and a new officer, while that officer could get better training, training, more in line with our values. Today, a new officer less likely to be stuck in the old ways. Perhaps just some progress would be made by the fact that newer, younger officers are drawn from by a more racially tolerant generation. Perhaps that would correlate to less brutal policing. Funding cuts would also likely take the form of thwarting new initiatives as opposed to eliminating ongoing programs. I went through the proposed budget of the NYPD and when you look at the things that they’re asking for more funding for, those seem exactly like the things that a decent society would favor. So in the executive budget for 2020, so this is the one that passed. They asked for 11 and a half million dollars to maintain fiber networks, the data center and the public safety answering center. That seems good. The city council’s budget requested twenty eight million dollars to fund American with Disabilities Act renovations at precincts. A million dollars for sixty four additional school crossing guards, the Special Victims Division. Maybe you heard about it from the TV show, has a budget of 35 million to support two hundred ninety three uniformed personnel as of 2020. That was up. They used to have only two hundred six uniformed personnel that we’re investigating on average 61 cases a year. Rape reports, sexual reports are up in New York City. They need to be investigated by more people. They also want more money to effectively investigate and catch those responsible for fatal and near fatal collisions. They want an increase in funding for the collision investigation squad. Then there’s this. They also want money to train the part of the police. That’s the DHS. That’s not homeland security. That’s homelessness services. They have peace officers. They’re not armed. And in fact, they can only detain someone with a warrant. They’re the combination social workers, police department personnel, but they never got crisis intervention training or at least 850 of the thousand homeless service officers never did. Crisis intervention training helps police officers properly respond to individuals struggling with mental illness or substance abuse. That’s a new form of funding. So these all sound good. And I wasn’t cherry picking. I mean, there’s a huge budgetary expense for overtime and there’s some new initiatives to try to curb overtime. But the new things that the police are asking new money for are mostly good things. Now, it’s a well-known phenomenon that whenever a Cutner city budget is proposed, some aldermen somewhere will cry. Oh, no. This means we’ll have to close down the firehouse, always the firehouse. And there is some of that going on here. All agencies have priorities. And if getting more sexual assault investigators is a priority, then that’ll be done and they can find a way to do that. But in reality, fewer resources means that things like peace officer crisis intervention is a lot more likely to go than, say, eliminating vertical patrols in the stairwells of housing projects. There’s a lot of evidence, in fact, that changing tactics and procedures really do lower police violence. There’s a lot less evidence that lowering funding lowers police violence to give one famous example of an infamous policy stop and frisk. It was pretty much ended and that was a fairly large success. It turns out there wasn’t the need to frisk so many innocent and young black and Latino men. But what did work? What does work is having the same number of police in those areas not interacting in an aggressive way, but just being present. It doesn’t cost more or less to stop and frisk. But if you cut money, you’d have fewer police officers and you could very well go back to the days of higher crime in those exact areas. Of all the reforms that I’ve seen proposed, just spending less money, it actually seems the least potent. That said, it would be good for society to be able to use that money for other things. Also, there are huge budgetary shortfalls in all cities brought on by unemployment, brought on by Corona virus. So it turns out that every department will have to spend less money. Still, efforts to reform should be as smart as they can be. And the phrase and even the reality of hashtag defund the police is not the smartest policy we could champion. And we’ve all seen with horror these past few days the danger of a blunt instrument being wielded indiscriminantly.

S2: And that’s it for Today Show, Margaret Kelly, just associate producer, he’s writing a script for a buddy flick. The pair is Joey Boloney with partner Tommy Salani. They work for Captain on Rye and patrol the Mayo Clinic. Daniel Schrader, just producer, once headed the CCR B board. That was the Cream Corn Review Board. And he’s more of an on the cob man. So nothing got above a C plus the gist. I still support the United States Postal Inspection Service, the law enforcement arm of the United States Postal Service. These brave servants who protect our letters and packages from disruption. Perhaps you’ll be hearing more about them in the upcoming days.

S6: These these proud and bold male escorts. Emperor Adepero Dupré.

S2: And thanks for listening.