Charlotte leaders: We're NOT corrupt! (05-08-2025--Hour1)

[00:00:04] What's going on? Thank you so much for listening to this podcast. It is heard live every day from noon to 3 on WBT Radio in Charlotte. And if you want exclusive content like invitations to events, the weekly live stream, my daily show prep with all the links, become a patron, go to thepetekalendershow.com. Make sure you hit the subscribe button, get every episode for free, write to your smartphone or tablet. And again, thank you so much for your support.

[00:00:29] So, Charlotte leaders threw together a news conference yesterday to announce, we're not corrupt. We are not crooks. We are not engaging in immoral or unethical behavior. And no, we are not going to give you any details about a $300,000 payout that we just gave to the police chief because of unspecified reputational harm.

[00:00:57] a.k.a. hurt feelings. It's all above board, obviously. I've watched the press conference. One of the, I will say I have not seen this before. So I don't know if this is standard fair for city government press conferences now. Maybe it is. I don't know. I have seen this kind of a format before, but they all got up and made a statement. So it was a

[00:01:26] It was the mayor surrounded by Ed Driggs. These are council members. Ed Driggs, the only Republican on the body. Dimple Ashmera, Malcolm Graham,

[00:01:42] the mayor pro tem, Dante Anderson. I think Marjorie Molina is her name. I think Marjorie is her first name, but councilwoman Molina was there. Council members Mitchell and Mayfield were not there. James Smudgy Mitchell and Luana Slack Mayfield. They were, they were not there. They were sick. But they sent a long statement saying that we would be here with you, but for us being sick. And so they, they were standing in support also. So that would be.

[00:02:13] One, two, three, four, five, six, seven of the 11 council, well, seven of the 10 council members because Tark Bakari is no longer in his seat. He took a job up in the Trump administration. So there's only 10, um, 10 seats, uh, open or sorry, 10 seats filled. There's one open.

[00:02:35] And there were three council members then that were not present. One would be Renee Johnson. One would be, uh, councilman Brown, I believe. And, um, Victoria Watlington, whose campaign fundraising email that went out after the settlement vote, basically, uh, behind closed doors to pay off the police chief for this unspecified reputation.

[00:03:05] Uncutational harm. She sent out the campaign, uh, uh, uh, uh, fundraising notice on email where she made these allegations that the city and it's, it's, uh, officers and it's, uh, elected officials that like she has witnessed all of this shady behavior, basically corruption. And that's what prompted this press conference yesterday. So they were there to push back on this and, uh, to,

[00:03:36] chastise leakers. I think if you are looking for the breakdown, like into the camps, like which factions exist, I think you can tell by who's not there. Like those are the three. And if I, like I've been watching the city council meetings since I returned to Charlotte and it's something I do on Monday nights and I just have it on and I'm watching the city council meeting.

[00:04:07] And it is very clear that two of the members, particularly they ask questions in a way that make it difficult to understand what exactly they're trying to get at. And they don't get really, they don't get really good responses probably because the way they frame their questions,

[00:04:34] but also I kind of feel like people don't respect them and that's not entirely unearned, but I can see why that would rub them the wrong way. I think that's the breakdown that's, and I have no inside information on this just from my observation of the press conference and the city council meetings. That's the way it looks like that's the way it looks to me. Now, these are very serious allegations that Watlington leveled without any proof. So we'll play some sound bites from the,

[00:05:04] from the news conference yesterday. I am looking here. Hang on. So Bernie is telling me that he has selected a new Pope. Oh, I'm sorry. No, there is a new Pope selected. So, uh, I do not have, where am I glad? Let's put the old spectacles on and white smoke signals that a new Pope has been chosen. That seems kind of quick. Yeah, it is crazy quick.

[00:05:34] Um, let's pull up the NBC feed because when I need news about Catholicism, I go to NBC, um, no, it's the first thing that popped up in my feed here. Cardinals have chosen a new Pope indicated by white smoke rising from the Sistine Chapel's chimney, which did you know the chimney is not permanently affixed? They just put it up there for the conclave. So, uh, the identity of the next pontiff is expected to be revealed shortly when he appears on

[00:06:03] the balcony of St. Peter's Basilica. 133 cardinals, from around the world have cast their ballots in three rounds of voting. So I guess this would have been the fourth round. Um, yesterday evening, after more than three hours, the first inconclusive vote was signaled by black smoke. And this morning's pair of votes was a repeat of that. See, and this is really,

[00:06:30] this is troubling to me because I didn't even get a chance to watch the movie conclave before all of this went down. And so I have no idea what happened. I'm not going to watch that movie. No, I'm not going to watch the movie. We'll give you the updates as they become available, uh, from the Vatican. Um, they are barred, by the way, during the papal conclave, according to NBC, the cardinals are barred from leaving or having any contact with the outside world.

[00:06:58] The electors can vote in up to 34 rounds of voting until they select the next leader of the world's 1.4 billion Catholics. But everybody has been watching the chimney. Black smoke means nothing and, uh, no, no, uh, no Pope selected. And the white smoke means someone has been, uh, elected. And I believe it takes two thirds. Uh, you need two thirds of the cardinals voting, uh,

[00:07:27] for a single candidate. And my understanding also is that they're not doing like, uh, horse trading and like lobbying and stuff while they sit around and, and pray. And they just sit there and, and then they vote. And it's just like, we'll see whose name rises to the surface, channeling the Holy spirit to work through them and arrive at a, uh, at a consensus candidate. And it only took three votes or, well, three, you know,

[00:07:56] three inconclusive votes. And then a fourth one. So people are celebrating. The crowd is, uh, gathering now because obviously they're going to come and announce the new Pope soon. And, uh, we'll let you know who that is, uh, when we know. Here's a great idea. How about making an escape to a really special and secluded getaway in Western North Carolina, just a quick drive up the mountain and cabins of Asheville is your connection. Whether you're celebrating an anniversary, a honeymoon, maybe you want to plan a memorable proposal or get family and friends

[00:08:25] together for a big old reunion. Cabins of Asheville has the ideal spot for you, where you can reconnect with your loved ones and the things that truly matter. Nestled within the breathtaking 14,000 acres of the Pisgah National Forest, their cabins offer a serene escape in the heart of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Centrally located between Asheville and the entrance of the great Smoky Mountain National Park, it's the perfect balance of seclusion and proximity to all the local attractions. With hot tubs, fireplaces, air conditioning,

[00:08:54] smart TVs, Wi-Fi, grills, outdoor tables, and your own private covered porch. Choose from 13 cabins, six cottages, two villas, and a great lodge with 11 king-sized bedrooms. Cabins of Asheville has the ideal spot for you for any occasion. And they have pet-friendly accommodations. Call or text 828-367-7068. Or check out all there is to offer at cabinsofashville.com and make memories that'll last a lifetime.

[00:09:23] We'll let you know. Actually, if there's a feed of this, we may, if you want to try to find a feed, I'm assuming it's going to get widespread coverage. So, we could probably just rip off any old television station and bring you their live feed. Okay, maybe we should probably go with Fox. Okay, yeah, that sounds like, that sounds like Vatican City. Just non-stop cheering.

[00:09:50] All right, so the white smoke billowed and a new pope has been, has been selected, elected, has been picked, and they will announce who that is soon. I have now since got onto the feed of Vatican News, the Vatican News Twitter feed, which I feel like is probably going to be a little bit more,

[00:10:21] you know, credible than NBC. But I, I, I don't know. I mean, I want to believe. Hmm. Do, do, do, do, Okay, yeah, so nothing new yet, but we will, we'll bring you the, we'll bring you the breaking news as it breaks. Even though, I mean, I am here, so, okay, I did tell people, don't break anything while I'm gone, but I am here, so I guess this makes sense. All right, so I can't be mad. Now, because this whole hour was supposed to be, and when I was drawing it up,

[00:10:51] it's supposed to be about how the Charlotte city council and the, and the city leaders are, you know, very upset at Victoria Watlington's allegations about corruption and stuff. So they did a news conference to announce that they are not corrupt, which is what, you know, people who aren't corrupt do, but also, I guess, people who are corrupt would do that. So, okay, it doesn't really tell us anything on that score, but I have some audio. Let's start with the mayor.

[00:11:19] Here's mayor Vi Lyles kicking off the series of statements that were presented yesterday. Oh, and I forgot to mention this, that they, the format was kind of odd in that they all made some statements and then they were like, if you, to the media, if you want to do one-on-one interviews, we'll do that now, rather than allowing the media to just start throwing questions to all of the leaders that are standing up there at the mic. They just broke off and said,

[00:11:48] we'll do one-on-ones, which does occur. Don't get me wrong. One-on-one interviews, especially TV people love the one-on-ones because it makes it look like you got a, a story that nobody else did and you get to, you know, get right up on the person and ask them some questions. And it's a different kind of visual, but there's a benefit when you have the pack of journalists that are there all peppering questions, because you get to hear what other reporters are asking.

[00:12:16] And then you can piggyback off of a question that they asked. And maybe the person that like the mayor didn't answer it, or maybe her answer raises another question. And then everybody can kind of work together in the press pool. But by breaking up the press pool and just doing one-on-ones, it eliminates that function. I don't know if that was the intent. Here's the mayor kicking it off.

[00:12:40] This is always a difficult thing that you have to do that really kind of just strains you in the way that we should behave and act and perform. But I could not let it go with the allegations made by Council Member Watlington against this organization. They are serious, and they damaged the reputation of this organization. To be clear,

[00:13:08] these allegations are unfounded. And if she has any proof, she needs to provide that to the city attorney's office, who is duty-bound to investigate. You know, we have a legal and ethical obligation in this community and this organization to follow the law. And part of my job as mayor is to lead with the facts. To lead with the facts,

[00:13:37] which I cannot tell you because privilege. Okay? After the closed session meetings that paid off the police chief to the tune of reportedly $300,000, Watlington sent out a campaign email that said, I'm extremely concerned with the level of unethical, immoral, and frankly illegal activities occurring within city government. I have seen enough over the last five years, five and a half years,

[00:14:04] I have witnessed the brazen disregard for dissenting opinions and the rule of law. Never, however, have I seen such an egregious example as what has occurred in the last week. It is time for a change. Now, the mayor also yesterday, after she kicked off the statement, she also then apologized to police chief Johnny Jennings. I want to address Chief Jennings. As I've said before,

[00:14:33] and often, I believe Chief Jennings to be the best police chief in this country. He has dedicated more than 30 years of his life to serving this community, and he's led what I believe with dignity, honesty, and integrity. The chief was publicly attacked by a former council member who stated his intent was to damage his reputation and end his career.

[00:15:02] I owe the chief an apology for not publicly supporting him then. Wait, did you know? Did the mayor know that Bakari had texted that he was going to call for his resignation and he was going to apply all sorts of pressure for his campaign to get police officers vests? That's, remember, what this is all about is that he wanted cops to have better protection

[00:15:31] and better vests, and the chief said no because he didn't like the look of them. Aesthetically displeasing to the eye because it presented this image that was too militaristic because the vest was on the outside of the uniform. That's what it came down to. That was literally what he said. So, was the mayor aware that Bakari had said this stuff? I would be surprised if she wasn't, but she didn't say anything at the time. So,

[00:16:01] they let Jennings be the face of the no vests position. And, I suggested this yesterday when we were kind of spitballing different theories of this case here, and this was one of the theories that I threw out, which was, is it possible that the council did not have the money or did not want to allocate money for new vests because the council thought that the vests didn't look good,

[00:16:31] that the council didn't like those vests. Therefore, they let Jennings make the argument and then they all just clammed up and let him take all the heat. and that kind of makes sense now that the mayor makes her comments about how she, you know, regrets that she didn't stand with him on all of this. But also, it kind of makes sense as to when Bakari

[00:17:00] raised the money for the vests privately that Jennings then caved and allowed his officers to voluntarily request the vests and he would allow them to wear them. If it wasn't something Jennings really wanted to do himself, but he was doing it at the behest of council members who did very much want to block the vests. I also support the men and women of CMPD who put their lives on the line every day.

[00:17:29] They too have taken an oath to uphold the law and protect our community. This council has worked with and will continue to support the men and women who protect this community. Here's another question. Was an apology from the mayor part of your settlement? Oh, we don't know that because you won't tell us what the settlement was about. You won't tell us how much. You won't tell us any of the reputational

[00:17:59] harms that he alleges. So was an apology part of the settlement deal? That council had to come out and say they were sorry the mayor specifically had to do this? I don't know and we won't know unless we actually get to see the terms of the settlement. All right, if you're listening to this show, you know I try to keep up with all sorts of current events and I know you do too and you probably heard me say get your news from multiple sources. Why? Well, because it's how you detect media bias, which is why I've been so impressed

[00:18:28] with Ground News. It's an app and it's a website and it combines news from around the world in one place so you can compare coverage and verify information. You can check it out at check.ground.news slash pete. I put the link in the podcast description too. I started using Ground News a few months ago and more recently chose to work with them as an affiliate because it lets me see clearly how stories get covered and by whom. The blind spot feature shows you which stories get

[00:18:58] ignored by the left and the right. See for yourself check.ground.news slash pete. Subscribe through that link and you'll get 15% off any subscription. I use the Vantage plan to get unlimited access to every feature. Your subscription then not only helps my podcast but it also supports Ground News as they make the media landscape more transparent. Let's head over to the phones and chat with Adam. Hey Adam, welcome to the show. Hey, how you doing man? I'm good. What's going on?

[00:19:27] Hey, so I actually, I'm born and raised in Charlotte. I've lived here my whole life and I'm just really disappointed in what has happened now. The settlement has came to a par and I'm actually happy whoever did release the amount, I'm more than happy that they did it because I don't think our city council would have ever even told us. Yeah, and I think I heard a clip during the newscast at the top of the hour and I'm trying to

[00:19:57] remember who it was but it was Brett Jensen from WBT that was asking, I think it may have been the city attorney, Anthony Fox, asking him, you know, when would you have or would you have released any of this information and he's like, I'm not talking about that. So to me, that's a no. I'm with you. I don't think that council would have ever, I don't disclosed any of the information about the settlement or even the existence of such a settlement had it not been for the leaks,

[00:20:26] which is honestly one of the reasons why you would leak if you're on that council and yes there's risk involved, right, but that's why you would leak it. Absolutely, absolutely, and I'm more than happy that they did and I'm just, you know, I'm just more shocked that the mayor came out, I mean, you are a mayor of the city of Charlotte and you are supporting someone suing your council. It's just unheard of. I've never heard of this in, you know, just I feel like there's a failed leadership on the Charlotte council

[00:20:56] and even our mayor, you don't see her, she makes no public appearances, she will only make a public appearance when the cop gets killed or something catering to her own kind. Other than that, you will never see her and I just wanted to say I'm really happy that that information got out and she will not be getting my vote when it comes to re-election and so will the chief, he would not if I have a control limit. Right, and to me this is the odd thing is that if the point was that he has suffered reputational

[00:21:25] damage because of a former city councilman's campaign to get vests for cops, what do you think this does? Like, this is far more damaging to his reputation and his legacy than anything that Tark Bakari said or did during that campaign. most people have already forgotten about it. And I will leave it off with this. I have two or three friends who are in CMPD and I've voiced my frustrations to them and all of them have said my

[00:21:55] friend, more than 98% of the police department agrees with it. They are not in favor of him winning it and I think he should hear from his fellow officers of how they actually feel but I don't think he cares and everyone is in this for personal interest. Yeah, I'm not here. Adam, I appreciate the call, man. No, thank you for taking me. Yes, sir. All right, take care. Got an email from our news director here at WBT, Mark Garrison. He says, the FOP board, the Fraternal Order of Police, the FOP

[00:22:24] board voted no confidence in Johnny Jennings after his council payoff, which really steamed the FOP membership. See, again, like, if the whole point was that you were angry or hurt or you feel like you have suffered reputational harm because you didn't want the vests because they look too militaristic, this has done far

[00:22:54] greater damage. And not only to him, but to all of the city council, the city management, and the city of Charlotte brand. this is bad. It's bad. And I understand that the city council is limited in what they can say because of personnel statutes, personnel privacy statutes. I understand that. But you know who can talk? The chief.

[00:23:24] He can talk. Unless, of course, a non-disclosure agreement was part of the deal, but it wouldn't have to be. And the city could release him if he asked for it. City attorney Anthony Fox, he then spoke briefly at yesterday's press conference and said that the council is obligated to comply with privacy statutes. They can go into closed sessions for specific reasons. I went over this yesterday. Things like real

[00:23:54] estate deals, personnel matters, obviously, and litigation. The law also provides that when you go into closed session, that that information is confidential. It's not to be shared, and it actually imposes criminal sanctions against anybody, any individual that is found to have violated that law. Yeah. So he instructed, he said, he instructed council not to speak about the matter that everybody's talking about.

[00:24:24] You're not allowed to talk about it. But again, Jennings could if he wanted to. they could find a way to disclose what occurred. Note the deflection. There is the core issue of this settlement, of why the city council would pay it. That's the root of this issue. Why would the city council pay an

[00:24:53] employee $300,000, which is like a little bit more than his annual salary? So basically, they're giving him a free year's worth of a salary. And they won't tell us the terms of that, why they're doing it. They won't talk at all about any of it, just that he was attacked. Okay, but what was the harm done? He's claiming some damage. What was the damage? What was the harm? Did he, like,

[00:25:23] he had to go to therapy or something? He got, like, he ran up medical bills? Is that the personnel issue and that's the privacy issue they don't want to have to go into or whatever? Like, you don't have to go into all of that. You can just say he suffered, you know, distress, emotional distress, or whatever. Like, you can word that in a way that explains what the harms he's claiming were. Because they obviously convinced you guys to spend $300,000

[00:25:53] to make him whole, right? But instead now we're getting the because Watlington's campaign email, we are now getting this argument over how dare you call us corrupt? This is damaging to the city, right? So now they're focusing on that and they want you to focus on the leaks. Like, as if these are bigger issues. I understand the branding of the city of Charlotte. That's an important thing. What Watlington

[00:26:21] did jeopardizes what many, many, probably thousands of people have been working for decades to build. And what she did jeopardizes that brand. I get that. Totally understand. But the core issue is still the same thing. It's why are you paying out $300,000 to an employee when he didn't even sue you? He just said he was considering it. He's considering a lawsuit because of unspecified

[00:26:51] harms. And you're like, here, take well, actually take this other person's money. You owe us an explanation. You owe us more detail than you're giving. As a taxpayer, you owe us. All right, so spring is here, a time of renewal and celebrations. You got graduations, weddings, anniversaries, and the special days for mom and dad. Your family's making memories that are going to last a lifetime. But let me ask you, are all of those treasured moments from days gone by,

[00:27:21] are they hidden away on old VCR tapes, 8mm films, photos, slides? Are they preserved? Because over time, these precious memories can fade and deteriorate, losing the magic of yesterday. At Creative Video, they help you protect what matters most. Their expert team digitizes your cherished family moments and transfers them onto a USB drive, freezing them in time so they can be enjoyed for generations to come. I urge you, do not wait until it's too late. This spring, celebrate your past.

[00:27:51] Visit Creative Video today and let them preserve your legacy with the love and care that it deserves. Creative Video, preserving family memories since 1997. Located in Mint Hill, just off 485. Mail orders are accepted too. Get all the details at createavideo.com. If you're just joining us, they have elected a new pope, but we don't know who it is, and we will tell you who it is when we find out. We are monitoring

[00:28:20] the situation from Rome, from the Vatican. There are a lot of people hanging out waiting to see who emerges on that balcony. And I did not, my cardinal trading cards did not arrive from Amazon yet, so I don't actually have all of the stat sheet on all of the potential candidates. So, um, let me read a couple of messages. This is from,

[00:28:51] well, I'll, I'll, I will, I will withhold her name. Uh, she says, I have friends whose child went to high school with Johnny Jennings' child, and they said he and his family were wonderful people, and they were very happy when he was made police chief. They actually said, uh, he was a very reasonable person and not wildly conservative or liberal. It's a shame that this is hurting his reputation so badly. Um, and I would

[00:29:21] submit that the next person he needs to sue is himself because he has caused way more damage to his reputation than his original opposition to the vests. That's, um, Um, I never had any negative opinion of Chief Jennings before all of this. I, I thought he was a perfectly capable, acceptable, I heard his interviews on BT over the years. Brett Jensen has talked with him numerous times, and I, I agree. I found him to be

[00:29:50] reasonable. He didn't seem like an ideologue, seemed like he had the best interests of his, uh, his officers in mind and stuff. He was deeply, uh, saddened and moved at the, uh, you know, last year's homicides of the four law enforcement officers on Galway driving East Charlotte when they were serving a warrant. I mean, I never had any bad opinion of him. That's why this is so surprising. Like, this move is shocking. And then it makes me wonder what was real

[00:30:18] then, right? Was one thing an image, a public persona and, and was something else going on behind the scenes? Yeah, it's, it's disappointing. Um, John says, apparently there is a new Pope, but nobody has called me, so I assume they did not pick me. That is correct. Uh, this has really hurt my feelings and damaged my reputation and possibly advancement in the Catholic hierarchy. Does anybody know who

[00:30:48] Chief Johnny's lawyer was? I think I have a case. Um, well, how close are you to the, to the law? Because you, you might not even need a lawyer. You might just threaten a lawsuit and then get paid. Jay wants to know, is the $300,000 payoff net or gross? Um, I believe it's gross and it's also gross.

[00:31:16] So, yeah, we, but that's, it's part of the problem here is we don't know the details. Terry says, I have no sense of the thoughts and feelings of Charlotte City Council. I do know the council is solid Democrat. My theory is that the council did not want to fund the vests, but did not want to have an on-the-record vote. They used the chief as a front man to oppose the vests, and when he delivered but got dinged by his stance, they thanked him for taking the

[00:31:46] flack by awarding him a juicy bonus for hazardous duty and for not ratting them out. I think it's that simple. It very well could be, Terry. This is one of the theories that we kicked around yesterday. Was he working on behalf of council members who did not want to have that vote? Because that's when it all kind of started getting traction was during the budget process, straw voting last year. Straw voting is when they

[00:32:15] kind of go around the table and they do a show of hands for individual line items and programs and stuff. And they're like, all right, are we keeping this in? Are we taking this out? Are we going to keep it at current funding, increase it, decrease it, whatever? And they do the straw votes. And it's not a binding vote. So you can change your vote later on during the budget workshopping process. And it was during that, was it May 30th straw vote? And that's when Bakari sort of laid

[00:32:45] down the gauntlet. I'm going to be doubling down on this because he didn't have the votes on council, so he pulls it. Right? He pulls it. Rather than force his colleagues to vote on it. So they get to hide behind the lack of a vote. So they can claim that they like the idea, but, you know, Bakari pulled it himself or whatever. That's politics, man. And so did council members or the mayor, did they like, hey, chief, you need to oppose this. You know, you'll be a better

[00:33:15] spokesperson for your officers than any of us could possibly be on council, so you should do this because we don't want to be the one saying we can't afford $500,000 for vests out of a $2 billion budget, right? So you make the case, and I don't know who came up with this argument that they're too militaristic looking, it was a weak argument to say the least. But that's

[00:33:45] what he went with. It wasn't persuasive, and it also sent a message that he was putting style over substance or aesthetics over safety. And his officers saw that. The FOP saw that. And maybe the problem was that they believed him. They took him at face value. When he made those arguments, they believed that those were arguments he himself was making. He believed those to be true, and that's still possible.

[00:34:14] I don't know. But now you have this other element because of all of the settlement and the payoff and all of that. Now it raises this other element of, well, wait a minute, did he actually believe that? Was he simply the front man for this position to oppose the vests? They did not want to give Bakari a win, right? Because he had alienated members of the council. People didn't like him. He had argued with them before and he can be abrasive, obviously. So there's

[00:34:44] that element. There's the element that we don't want to be seen voting against the vests. And so you do it. And then they just let him take all the slings and arrows. And he thought he was going to have their backing. And maybe he reached out to them. I've seen no messages that indicate he did. Maybe they had conversations or something. But hey, I'm getting nailed here. Can I get a little backup? And nobody gave him any backup. But yesterday at the press conference,

[00:35:15] yesterday, there were, I think, two or three different members, including the mayor, who apologized for not standing up stronger for him last year. And that's what makes me think that maybe there's some apology requirement as part of the settlement. Maybe not. Again, I have to keep saying this. I don't know what the terms of the settlement are. Nobody does except the council, Jennings, and the city staffers that worked on it.

[00:35:44] And everybody is like, no, sorry, can't talk about it. Personnel matters. It's private. So it leaves us in this position of having to spin out theories as to what the freak is going on. All right, that'll do it for this episode. Thank you so much for listening.

[00:36:14] Thank you so much for listening. And don't break anything while I'm gone.