LDS Reporter Nick Shirley and More Minnesota Fraud - Liberal vs Conservative Parents

Backlash on LDS reporter Nick Shirley and more Minnesota fraud. Previous indictments and more programs flagged.

A recent study shows liberal men and women ages 25 - 35 are not having kids. Severe drops since 1980.

 Raw Transcript

All right, welcome to Quick Show today. In this episode, we are doing a follow-up on LDS investigative reporter,
young 23-year-old Nick Shirley and his Minnesota daycare investigation, a viral
video that continues to get more and more views on X. Uh, I think we're up
into the 130 millions now of of viewers that have seen this 42-minute documentary that he ran. I want to do
some follow-up on this. Some things have happened in the last 24 hours that I think are important to this situation.
And I do think that this important that this this entire Minnesota fraud issue
is is very important not just for Minnesota or for the Republicans or the
Democrat. You know, it's nothing like that. What this is about is understanding that when you have
trillions of dollars of cash flow, you have people that are going to try and siphon this off. And as we our our
bureaucracy continues to grow, as our country continues to grow, as we tilt toward 400 million people in the United
States, it becomes easier and easier as we become a as as government becomes further and further separated from the
people and from from the ground right from the street so to speak. So I think
that this is an important issue and I think that is systemic or a symptom of a systematic problem within the government
and it needs to be cleaned up. I don't think there's any question that we need to go out and start looking at these areas and having oversight on on
something that has been going on it appears for decades at this point
especially here in Minnesota. Secondly, I want to go over there is a new
survey that has gone out, a new poll, a new study uh that shows a more and more
and this is a trend and it's it's concerning. There is a trend between those that are married and stay single
and those that have kids and those that don't. And that divide is conservative
versus liberal. And and it's it's not surprising I suppose but it is alarming
in the sense that we are getting a greater and greater divide between political uh world views of of
family and anti-family and it does end up becoming anti-f family. I'm going to go over that. But this is a graph that I
have of a recent survey that is that is concerning. I I think and it's not like
I know a lot of people that follow the show are on the conservative side and you'd want to dunk against the libs so
to speak. Fine. But really it is it's a concerning thing because it really is
pulling our it's polarizing us that much more. and and and it appears to me that
religion and family are going to become a very strong dividing line have become
a very strong dividing line between those two political worldviews. Okay, this episode is brought to you by Fathom
the Good. Fathom the Good is a high school home curriculum and an adult
course for people that want to learn how to think critically. It is based on the
good. that is the founding principles of the United States, of America, uh the
founding fathers, the philosophies that led up to this and that solidified uh the the principles that we live by
here in the United States and in religion. It is ultimately the good it is ultimately the doctrine of Christ.
This is great information. It is a great they are great courses. They are
developed by my good friend Ralph Hancock who is a political philosopher and a political science professor at
Brigham Y Young University. Uh I I want to get this out to as many people especially young people as possible. But
there is an adult course as well to find out more about this to get a free sample course. You can go to fathomthegood.com.
Get a free sample course. check it out and see if this isn't something that you as an individual and your kids or
grandkids should not be studying. It's it's great stuff. Very much anti-woke,
so to speak. All right, here we go.
[Music]
Okay, one of the reasons that we follow this is not just because this is a I think a very important story and a very
important point of awareness for all of us as citizens of the United States and
other countries where you know again the the fraud eventually
you get sick right organizations eventually become sick and they need to
be healed And this is one of the ways to do this is you've got to find you've got
to follow the money and make sure that there is oversight in these things. But the the other reason is because this was
a viral video that went out by a Latter-day Saint uh uh a young man that
returned from his mission to Chile just a couple of years ago. Uh he's been to the White House. He has um put out some
very interesting videos that we covered in yesterday's episode of Quick Show today that uh showed him on the border
talking to individuals, who was walking into the into the border, how simple it was to get through the walls and walk
around them, etc. And so it's it's great to have a system now where we can
democratize information and get it out in front of everyone individually. It's not just a matter of ABC, CBS, and CNN
and and NBC, right? Having all of the information or even Fox News, you know,
limiting our knowledge of what is really going on based on their narratives. And
so, it's it's we can go out now. We're going to get a lot of maverick and and
uh frontier type information that a lot of it may not be true at all, but at
least we can go and pick and choose and find what we can believe. Evaluate it for ourselves. Use critical thinking and
decide whether or not this is good information or bad information. If it's biased, if it's not biased, if it's made
up or not made up, we can go out and do all of that. And that's what something like YouTube and social media where
that's a positive. It democratizes news. It democratizes information and knowledge. And it is very disruptive.
And that is a good thing because again this this hierarchal system of knowledge and and and
uh control over information has been very difficult. And even with all of
this, I mean, look at co, look how they were able to uh through the social media companies still put out a narrative,
still control information, but we're still breaking through this the ice, so
to speak, and and and getting a lot of the new information that we would never otherwise have ever seen, right? It
would have been just simply the state and the uh the news media corporations
that are that are spoonfeeding us based on
their narrative. So that's one of the great things about what we have today with YouTube and other social media
platforms. All right. So, I want to go over some of the followup here on what we did yesterday on yesterday's show
with with uh Quick Show today and talk about what has happened even in the last
24 hours. If we go to X, we can now see
where uh Nick Shirley's video has gotten to, right? He's now, as you can see
there, 131.8 million views. Uh, this came out on
December 26th. So, we are 5 days later, not even 5 days later, 4 and a half days
later, and and 131.8 million views of people that have seen this. I think this
is really important. It's very relevant to understanding how we can learn
knowledge. Now, again, is he right? Well, I think he is, but we have to be
able to do to to filter through all of this information to decide whether or not these things
are true or they're not. There are some interesting situations here. He appears to have gone out with this perhaps on
December 23rd, at least on a portion of this, a time where maybe kids would not have been in school. Maybe the timing
that of the issue is off. However, the research to the money that is going to
these schools, uh, looking at where these schools are, these warehouse places, they're very close to each
other. It it does not look good, right? The the closing off of of information
and allowing people to talk and there's no way to sign up a kid in some of these places for uh, daycare, school. It's
there are some real issues here that uh, need to be addressed. So, 131.8 8
million views. And what has happened since then? Well, here's the Wall Street Journal.
We've got the Trump administration freezes childc care funding to Minnesota amid fraud fraud probes. Now, this might
be the right move and it might not be the right move and I want to discuss that just a little bit here. This is the biggest news I think out there. Freezing
the funds going out to Minnesota uh from from from the federal the federal funds
with uh the HHS, right? Couple of things here that that I do not like
at all. Number one, why are federal funds going to Minnesota?
Why are federal funds going to Minnesota? Why is that money that we get taxed on, right? We get taxed on this
money, our income going first to the coffers of the federal government and
then going out to Minnesota. So that means that someone who is uh um you know
from Wisconsin, someone who's from California is paying into federal funds and those federal funds are focusing
directly here onto Minnesota. Now these funds go out to every state. I get that. But but it's it's that's not the way
this should work, right? That's not the way this should work. We should be lowering national
federal taxes and increasing the state taxes if we wanted to keep the same
level of tax so that the taxes in the state could be could be taken care of themselves by
people that vote for their own government in that state.
Right? that that's not not from a nationwide um
political bureaucracy that is even further away from the
street and knowing what needs to be done that this this is too much central
government. It's too much central government. That's the first point I want to make. The second point is
hopefully they did not cease the funds or freeze the funds for the child care funding to
Minnesota simply because of the viral video. That would not be good. You know, if that's
like a political move and you're getting political points, that that's not a good move at all. Now, I don't know if that's
the case, and I'm going to go over that in a minute because it looks to me like
this has been well, first of all, this has been going on for a long time, and there's a lot of other information and fraud that has been going on in
Minnesota. This is this is this Minnesota child care funding is is only a part of
what is going on in Minnesota right now and and perhaps in many other states. As
an example, we look here. This is on ABC7. I'm not sure if this is the local Minneapolis uh station or not, but the
article here comes from the National News Desk from Corey Smith. This is dated December 30th, yesterday at noon.
And we can see here the title is tip of a very large iceberg. That's what the
Fed's surge response to Minnesota fraud investigations is saying. This is the tip of a very large iceberg. So, there's
a lot more going on with fraud in Minnesota. Here, let me just read a few of the uh words here from this article.
Federal agencies are surging personnel to Minneapolis in the wake of a viral video in which YouTube personality Nick
Shirley alleges he visited Somalun child care centers pulling in big bucks from the government without actually serving
children. Okay. However, this is important. FBI director Cash Patel said he surged
personnel and investigative resources to to Minnesota to dismantle largecale
fraud schemes even before Shirley's video was posted late last week. And why would he do that? Well, because already
Patel said the FBI dismantled a $250 million fraud scheme that stole federal food aid, not child care aid, but food
aid meant for vulnerable children during the pandemic. Patel said the case led to
78 indictments and 57 convictions of those 78. So you've got something they
already know that there is mass corruption going on here. They already know that this is happening. So if you
look at the Trump administration and say, "Well, why would you freeze all of the aid?" Again, I I don't know. You
don't know all that they know already about what is happening here. But this potato might already be so hot that
they're like, "No, we are closing down more. This is we are unveiling more and
more corruption and fraud from the federal government
and we are not going to continue to allow these funds to go out there. We we
need to be careful with the funds which would make sense, right? Again,
why are there federal funds going to Minnesota? You know, that's
that that to me is something that needs to change. We need to get back to federalism, I believe, which was the
original intent, where yes, we need a strong central government, but not money
going into the coffers of the federal government for them to distribute back out to the states where they can require
the states to do as they please. That is not the way things are supposed to run.
Quote, "The FBI believes this is just the tip of a very large iceberg," Patel said via X. He continues, quote, "We
will continue to follow the money and protect children, and this investigation very much remains ongoing." Right. Uh
so, and then you've got a copy of the tweet that is here. So, this is something that is is much larger. Uh
there's a lot of push back on Nick Shirley and saying, "Well, you made this up. You went at the wrong times." Look,
there's already smoke everywhere. Not just smoke, there's already fire going on in
Minnesota with the fraud that's happening. So, so adding this in and doing their own research, which they
did, they did go in and do their own research and then putting up the the documentary, the 42-minute documentary,
this is not a stretch. And yet, you're getting this push back calling him MAGA, a MAGA reporter sometimes. Now, you'll
just get conservative reporter. Again, you don't hear people say this is a liberal reporter going over this when
they're they're covering something on the opposite side or a progressive reporter or even a Marxist reporter on
the other side of of of these things. It's always just that's a conservative, a controversial reporter, a MAGA
reporter, right? Anything that they can do to dis dismantle or any credibility
that that individual might have. Now, one more thing from the National News Desk article. It says, and a federal
prosecutor recently said while announcing new charges in the ongoing fraud schemes, there's already new
charges that have been put out there that the state has flagged 14 high-risk
Medicaid programs, suspended payments for those programs, and ordered a third-party audit. Okay,
they're not going to just trust Minnesota to do their own audit. They do have Minnesota doing their own audit, but they're going to have a third party
party audit doing this as well. So you can see what is leading up to all of this. It's not just a big response to
Nick Shirley and his documentary. That is just added fuel to the fire, so to
speak, where there is fire. It's not just smoke. So you can say where there's
smoke, there's fire. That's usually true. But there's already a lot of fire
going on here with this. Additionally here, the first assistant US attorney
Joe Thompson said those 14 programs that have been flagged in Minnesota have cost
$18 billion since 2018, that's the last seven years.
And he said there's no reason to believe that more than half of that amount was fraudulent.
Quote, he says the fraud is not small. It isn't isolated. The magnitude cannot
be overstated. What we see in Minnesota is not a handful of bad actors committing crimes.
It's a staggering industrialcale fraud. It's swamping Minnesota and calling into
question everything we know about our state. Okay. Again, is this just a
Minnesota problem? But I think that at least this now we can look at this in Minnesota, drill down as far as we can,
get the bad actors taken care of, the repercussions, the consequences need to be put into effect here. You've got to
do this and and then you can take that same model, look at the same types of things, look at where the flags might be
in other states and go and do the same thing elsewhere because this is something that has got to be done.
In addition, this here is from the New York Post. Uh, this is from today. You
have a researcher, I believe this is the older man that was with Nick in the video. Researcher in viral video says he
filed criminal complaint against Waltz over daycare fraud allegations. Here's
what this article says. Independent journalist Nick Shirley and his researcher David in quotes returned to
the Quality Learning Center in Minneapolis on Tuesday dressed in a sweatshirt emlazened with 1800 fraud
following the release of his viral video alleging fraud at state funded childcare facilities in Minnesota. At the site,
David also told reporters he had filed a criminal complaint against Minnesota Governor Tim Waltz related to the
alleged widespread fund. Now, as you'll recall out here at the learning quality
learning center, that's the one that was not even it wasn't even spelled correctly. It was Learing Center. The
Liring Center, not the Learning Center. Now, you can imagine, okay, if this is a
legitimate place, okay, why has no one ever said anything about their big sign
out front? Why hasn't any parent come in and said, you know, your sign is incorrect?
It's It's not just, oh, it was misspelled. It's that it was never taken care of. It
was never fixed. They did just fix it because someone who knows and cares
actually said something, which you would have expected from somebody else or a parent.
And here you see a picture of David and Nick Shirley where they have the covers
of their sweatshirts here. It's the quality learing center 1 800 fraud. You can see the sign behind them now if you
can see that closely enough where they have now fixed the sign and
put it in as learning the quality learning center.
Here you can see the two different examples. In the circle you have the Learing Center and on the left you have
a covered you can see how it's covered up there where it says now the learning
center. Now in addition Nick Shirley's mother has gotten into the game. This is Brooke
Shirley probably trying to defend her son from all of the push back and the things that are happening mostly from a
progressive side. Again, look at what you think is true, what you don't think is true here. But, you know,
again, the calling him MAGA, the the attacks that have been put on him, in fact, almost a physical attack that
we're going to go over here shortly. But here from the Independent report, as
reported at AOL, you have Nick Shirley's mom goes on TV to defend son from criticism over his reporting from
Minnesota. And she says, 'Look, the way I think of it is if your house is burning down, are
you going to try to stop the fire or are you just going to let it burn? And again, fire here, I think, is the right
metaphor. Our lawmakers in America have just let our country burn. And I think
that this is true and it's on both sides of the aisle. We have we have allowed
the club members to just be club members and not take real responsibility in
disrupting a machine that has as has been has been called
before a swamp. A machine that has taken our dollars. These are not their that's
not the government's money. This is the taxpayers's money that is given to the
government to run it efficiently and effectively
and and they're taking it and they're they're not they're not good stewards. Most people who are using other people's
money are not good stewards of that money. And so how do we create more
oversight on this? How do we make the changes? And I guarantee you if you are on the right and you're you're
supporting your Republican, I guarantee you there are dollars that are going to fraud, that are going to missspending,
to ridiculous options that have been pork spending, so to speak, from people
that have helped support that person or get them into office or keep them in office. It's a problem. I believe the
the number one I believe that the number one issue today politically is term limits.
It it is to have career politicians that just sit there and run the system and
just you know they they become members of the club and and and and sit on the
fat of the people. This is that that's got to change.
That's not the way it was supposed to be. And and it has turned into a machine
that needs more disruption. And I'm not talking about revolution.
I am talking about term limits. Get the career politicians out. I don't care
care how good they are. I don't care how tied you are to them, how bonded you are
to some individual. Get them out. Go in. Spend your time there. offer it to the
United States as an actual public servant and get the heck out of there
and let somebody else do it. Don't build long-term relationships with corporations and other countries where
the temptation to build in pork and and payoffs is so high. Look at how many
senators and congressmen and women go in at a certain net value and come out
multi- multi-millionaires. Something is wrong with the system.
Well, we'll see where this whole story goes and and and if there is a mass cleansing of Minnesota and hopefully of
of other states as well. But we'll keep you tuned in on progress here with this
story. Now, our second story here, this is fascinating to me and
we do not pay enough attention to this and I know I bring this up often, but
family is breaking down in the United States.
And we've had a little bit of a surge in the last 12 months or so that's been very positive in terms of of of
attendance at religion at least with men of of marriage has ticked up a little
bit over the last 12 months. 2025 has been a good year for that. But I want to
go over a graph here with you that shows you something that I think is very concerning and polarizing
that that I think is not good for America. And I know again if you are conservative, maybe your impulse is to
dunk on the Democrats and dunk on the liberals. It's it's just understand this is bad
for America. That should be your first response. This is bad for America. What I'm going to show you here, it's bad for
civilization. It's bad for religion. It's bad for the church because the
church is following suit to some degree. Not as far. We have better numbers for sure, but but we are inevitably a part
of our own culture and and there I I'm afraid that this
divide is going to further divide membership in the church. But let me
show you something here. This here is a graph uh from the general social survey of
1980 to 2024. Now, let me just scroll up here a little bit and show you what
these numbers and colors mean. The ideology here. All right. So, the red
numbers are conservative. The blue numbers are liberal. It's then split
between men and women and runs from the 1980s to 2024.
So, again, 2025, we had just a little bit of a tick here that that actually helped.
Look at the disparity here going back to the 1980s to 1980 among men. These are
those that have these are these are let me put the basis down here for what this study is. It's men and women ages 25 to
35 with kids. How many men ages 25 to 35 have kids? How many women ages 25 to 35
have kids? So look here at 1980. 59% of all men had kids between the ages
of 25 and 35 years old. 59%. That's that's conservative men. And you
look at liberal men, it's 47%. So you've already got a bit of a distinction here already with men here.
Men that are conservative want kids. Or maybe men that want kids become
conservative. Cause and effect. a 12% discrepancy disparity between
these two. Go over to the right with women. 65% of women ages
25 to 35 in 1980 had kids. Two out of three had kids. If they're conservative,
if they're liberal, then 60%. Still, it's only a 5% difference. It's not
surprising that that is there, but it's only a 5% difference among women. You
have a much larger difference with men. You have men here that are liberal, a lot fewer men here that are likely
married and want to be fathers. Okay. Now, let's move down here all the way to
2024 and see what we find. Conservative men are now down to 47%
between the ages of 25 and 35 that have kids. They have at least one kid. Look
at the drop at men, liberal men in 2024.
Th This is astonishing to me. 22%
one out of five men ages 25 to 35 liberal men have kids.
That is absolutely insane. That is insane.
You have a 25% change here. And and you're dropping obviously even overall
obviously you're dropping for conservative men. You're dropping from 59% down to 47%. You've dropped 12% in
that time frame, right? In since 1980, so 44 years you've gone through there.
below half less than half of all conservative men have kids between ages 25 and 35. But 22%
of liberal men ages 25 to 35 have kids. Now going over to the right and looking
at the women among women who have kids and are conservative. Look at this
change here. You've actually gone up on conservative women. Now again you can
look at the differences here. I mean, how many women are conservative and how many women are liberal? Well, you have more liberal women than conservative
women. Where on the other side, you have more conservative men than you have liberal men. Not a big difference, but
there's a little bit of a difference here. So, that skews a little bit each way based on sex. But women have gone
from 65%, two out of three have children to 71% of conservative women have kids.
Okay, that's that's fantastic. The problem is the number of conservative women is dropping. And look
at the change in the disparity. You get an even broader disparity here among women between conservative and liberal
women that have kids. It is down to 40% from 60 down to 40%. You have cut this
down a third among women here that are are that are having kids between the
ages of 25 and 35. Only 40% of women have kids. Now, why so much more? You
have almost double the amount of liberal women in 2024 having kids than you do
men having kids. Well, of course, you've got you've got fatherless households that have
increased drastically. Fatherless households have have increased drastically because of
promiscuity. You have a lot more hypergamy going on, which is more women sleeping with fewer
men. Uh, which means which is completely against anything to do with marriage,
right? that that that force of hypergamy which is real among women.
It it it feeds alpha males so to speak and and and
those with status and and lowers starves men that are not those those
men, right? And I say starve, I mean it they have fewer dating opportunities. The other men have fewer dating
opportunities. It's not just a matter of sex. So, you've got 40% of liberal women in
2024 have kids uh
as compared to 71% of conservative women.
The 31% gap. What was the gap in in in 1980 among women? 5%.
5%. And now you have a 31%
difference in this. And I'm sorry, but but there are the feminism, the ideology
of feminism has taken a big portion of that and and made that that disparity
even larger. Of course, there are other economic forces that are in play, but feminism and careerism
have had a major effect on this.
And and this is this is an alarming alarming graph. Just looking at this one
more time, take a look at the disparity here that you find here between between
these two of 71 and 40% and the direction that both of those are going.
And and it might very well be that look, it's just a matter of and it's always been this way, but you it's not just
family, it is religion. Religion and family are are tied very strongly together.
And ultimately for Latter-day Saints especially, the doctrine of Christ and family are tied. They are bound
together. You cannot get away from that. That's what the temple is all about. It
is about a relationship with Christ, building covenants and a relationship with Christ
to return you to the father. And the entire process of going through everything is ultimately toward family,
right? And and so it's it's this is the change that's happening.
This is not good for America. This is not good for the West. This is not good for the world. It it is um um it it's
very concerning because the politics that are going to go on here are going to be more for single individuals on the
left, not concerned about family issues and very focused family issues on the other
side reacting to the singles that don't want families or or just choose not to
have families or or are unable to have families, whatever it is, right? and and that is going to create a
larger and larger divide politically on policies, on politicians,
on on spending, on taxation, on everything.
And that's, you know, and and and the problem is, you know, is, and I will say
it bluntly, on the left, the problem is is you're creating a silo and a feedback
loop that says the politicians are wanting more women especially, to be
single and not have kids because they vote on the left.
And for men, the same thing. But women especially. And that is not a good thing. That's not a good thing. If if
you if you are liberal and you're on the left, okay, you know, but it's if you are going if you're if you're pushing
for men and women to not have kids and to not get married, to not create families,
then then you've got a real issue. And and I think that this is going to be a larger and larger problem going forward.
Thanks for listening. Woah. Woah.
Woah. [Music]