VIDEO:

1. El Sayed

PROMO: Communism comes to Michigan as radical progressive El Sayed wins the Democrat Senate primary. What does that mean for Republicans? Please talk show legend Peter Boyles joins us live from Sturgis.

Chuck And Julie Show with Chuck Bonniwell and Julie Hayden

Media Trust, Colorado’s Political Crossroads, COVID Accountability, and the Politics of Trust

Chuck Bonniwell and Julie Hayden examine newly discussed Fauci records, RFK Jr.’s exchange with Dana Bash, media and pharmaceutical influence, COVID-response accountability, listener concerns, Colorado politics, election integrity, jungle primaries, and the growing cultural debate around Caitlin Clark and the WNBA.

RFK Jr. destroys CNN “parrot” Dana Bash over the media’s shameful role in the COVID Scam.

Chuck and Julie Open With “Truth Straight Up”

In this episode of The Chuck and Julie Show, Chuck Bonniwell and Julie Hayden open with their trademark “truth straight up” format and immediately focus on newly discussed records connected to Dr. Anthony Fauci. The corrected transcript identifies Chuck and Julie as hosts, Jacob and Johnnie as listener participants, and notes that political, medical, legal, and election-related statements are preserved as speaker statements rather than independently verified claims.

Fauci Records, RFK Jr., and the Dana Bash Interview

Julie and Chuck argue that the records show Fauci knew more than he publicly acknowledged about COVID mortality, vaccines, masks, lockdowns, social distancing, and transmission. They discuss RFK Jr.’s CNN interview with Dana Bash, describing it as a moment where RFK Jr. challenged the media’s COVID-era assumptions and accused the press of failing its duty of skepticism. The hosts frame Dana Bash as unprepared for RFK Jr.’s depth of knowledge and argue that the interview exposed broader media failures around COVID coverage, public-health messaging, censorship, and pharmaceutical influence.

Media Narratives, Pharmaceutical Advertising, and COVID Skepticism

The hosts continue by criticizing how legacy media handled COVID dissent, saying that stories were first ignored, then attacked as “misinformation” when they gained traction. They discuss Denver’s Channel 7/ABC coverage, pharmaceutical advertising, hydroxychloroquine, vaccine messaging, and what they see as shifting public confidence in new shots. Julie shares a personal example from a school physical where her family declined several shots and the doctor said the office no longer carried the COVID shot. Chuck then suggests that pharmaceutical advertising may function less as direct product marketing and more as a way to influence networks and protect preferred narratives.

Listener Participation: Jacob and Johnnie Join the Conversation

After Julie leaves to pick up Rev, Chuck opens the program more fully to listeners. Jacob joins the discussion with his own concerns about COVID shots, pharmaceutical advertising, and vaccine mandates, including a reference to a Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan case involving employees and settlements. Johnnie shares a personal story about medication he says contributed to his blindness and connects that experience to distrust of medical authority and government messaging. Chuck responds by recalling public encounters involving Fauci, Washington, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, and skeptical citizens who challenged official vaccine narratives.

Blackmail, Human Nature, and Political Distrust

Johnnie asks whether powerful people may be pressured by embarrassing information or blackmail, prompting Chuck to discuss the idea that Washington operates through mutual leverage and hidden knowledge. Chuck connects this to declining public trust in government, media, and political institutions. The conversation broadens into a darker reflection on human nature, corruption, and the way people create political myths about their own side being pure. Chuck argues that both parties have serious problems, though he focuses especially on what he sees as the Democratic Party’s weak bench and dependence on anti-Trump messaging rather than an attractive political vision.

Colorado Politics, Republican Turnout, and Jungle Primaries

Jacob then asks about Republican complicity, campaign volunteers, and voter follow-through. Chuck responds by describing Republicans as less reliable in lower-turnout races, while Democrats tend to bank votes early through mail ballots. The conversation shifts into Colorado politics, including jungle primaries, wealthy interests, county-party participation, Victor Marx, Greg Lopez, Kyle Clark, the governor’s race, and Mark Beasley’s low name recognition as a Republican U.S. Senate candidate. Chuck argues that jungle primaries sound inclusive but would reduce real grassroots participation by allowing wealthy interests to shape the candidate field.

Election Integrity, the WNBA, and Closing Caller Roundtable

Near the end of the episode, Chuck says a strong election-integrity law such as the SAVE Act, with voter-eligibility requirements and paper-ballot safeguards, could change Colorado’s political landscape. The show then takes a cultural turn into the WNBA, Sophie Cunningham, Caitlin Clark, and the way fan attention and league politics have made the sport more revealing and more interesting. Chuck thanks Jacob and Johnnie for joining, says the caller-driven format was fun, and closes by inviting a similar open-listener conversation in the future before signing off until Wednesday.

VIDEOS:

1. Fauci Takes 5th

2. Hawley

3. Tuberville

4. Lawyer Kicked Out

PROMO: Corrupt and evil Dr. Fauci takes the 5th more than a hundred times…. But the pressure is growing to hold him accountable for his COVID actions. Plus HD29 candidate Kristine Ireland.

VIDEO: Marco Rubio

PROMO: Once again Colorado’s so called “gold standard” election system turns up tarnished thanks to problems with Griswold’s Sos office.

Guest, Robert Spencer

PROMO: Latest information and options regarding Iran… with international expert Robert Spencer from Jihad Watch. Plus a grassroots victory as the Judge throws out the ruling that gave the keys to the CO GOP bank accounts to former Chair Horn’s personal attorney.

Chuck And Julie Show with Chuck Bonniwell and Julie Hayden

Are DC UniParty forces trying to take over the CO GOP? Vice Chair Eric Grossman joins the show

A Party Struggle Hidden from Public View

Chuck Bonniwell and Julie Hayden open the program by arguing that major developments inside the Colorado Republican Party are receiving little attention from conventional news outlets. They welcome Colorado GOP Vice Chair Eric Grossman to discuss internal leadership disputes, party finances, legal concerns, open primaries, and what they describe as outside influence over the state organization. Throughout the episode, the hosts and Grossman frame the conflict as a struggle between grassroots Republicans and establishment-aligned figures seeking to control candidate selection and party operations. Their comments draw on internal communications Julie says she reviewed, legal filings discussed by Grossman, and party actions the speakers interpret as evidence of outside or establishment control.

Outside Influence and the Open-Primary Divide

Grossman argues that Colorado Republicans are not fully directing their own party and points to the involvement of congressional delegation members in litigation related to Proposition 108. He and the hosts identify the open-primary system as the central philosophical divide within the party, asking whether Republican voters or the much larger bloc of unaffiliated voters should determine Republican nominees. They contend that elected officials and establishment interests may prefer candidates who can succeed under that system, even when those candidates do not strongly represent conservative grassroots priorities. Chuck further suggests that some national Republican organizations may care more about electing nominal Republicans to Congress than about whether those candidates closely reflect Colorado grassroots conservatives.

Leadership Concerns, Bylaws, and Party Communication

The conversation turns to newly elected chair Craig Steiner and the expectations surrounding his leadership. Julie notes that Grossman had appointed a bylaws committee with a majority supportive of the opt-out, and that Steiner later changed its composition so the opposing side held the advantage. Grossman criticizes what he describes as limited communication from the new chair and argues that actions, rather than public statements about unity, reveal the party leadership’s real direction. The hosts also discuss Steiner’s media appearances, his desire to unify competing factions, and their concern that trying to satisfy every side may result in passivity when decisive leadership is needed.

Money, Attorneys, and the Party’s Legal Position

A substantial part of the interview concerns the Colorado GOP’s financial and legal difficulties. Julie refers to internal communications that she says showed congressional representatives pressuring a previous chair to raise $75,000 or risk removal. Grossman and the hosts question why the party would continue directing money to an attorney they believe helped create the very legal and financial problems now confronting the organization. They also criticize the apparent reluctance to pursue legal action against former officials or advisers. Their discussion includes allegations of financial misconduct and possible criminal behavior, but those allegations remain the speakers’ opinions and are not independently established within the transcript.

Rebuilding Grassroots Control from the Ground Up

When Julie asks how grassroots members can respond, Grossman says education, recruitment, attendance, and internal party voting are essential. He emphasizes that the next state leadership contest may be decided by only several hundred voting members, making recruitment, turnout, and proxy organization especially important. Chuck compares proxy voting with a form of ballot collection inside party elections, while Grossman argues that people who accept party positions must either attend meetings or properly assign their proxies. They maintain that grassroots candidates must organize early, build a first-ballot majority, and prevent later rounds from being shaped by private deals or establishment alliances.

Candidate Debates and Wider Political Developments

After Grossman leaves, Chuck and Julie discuss the statewide contest involving Republican Victor Marx and independent candidate Greg Lopez. Both say they would support Marx over Lopez, although they express doubt that Marx can win and suggest that Republican efforts may be more productive in competitive state legislative and local races. They also comment on Darlene Graham Nordam’s temporary appointment to a state Senate seat and speculate about whether the eventual nominee will be a strong conservative or another establishment figure. The hosts then turn to an anticipated speech by President Trump, possible disclosures concerning the 2020 election, and Tulsi Gabbard’s comments about resistance from entrenched federal bureaucrats.

A Caller Connects Colorado Politics to Waco

Caller Jacob closes the episode by drawing a connection between Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser’s earlier service in the Justice Department and Attorney General Janet Reno’s approval of the 1993 operation against the Branch Davidian compound near Waco, Texas. Julie asserts that the gas used in the operation was flammable and caused the fire, while Jacob compares the event with historical acts of persecution. Jacob also raises Weiser’s family history and Holocaust references as part of his criticism, and Chuck responds with strongly negative personal commentary about Weiser. The program ends with Julie thanking Grossman, the caller, and the audience before announcing the next show.

Victor Marx continues to hold his slim lead over RINO Queen Barb Kirkmeyer in the GOP gubernatorial primary. Marx and grassroots candidate Scott Bottoms together received 60 percent of the GOP vote… obvious proof Colorado Republicans are over the UniParty/Establishment trying to tell us how to vote.

Chuck And Julie Show with Chuck Bonniwell and Julie Hayden

Investigations, Activist Judges, and the Nancy Guthrie Disappearance Case

Guest Host, Mark Pfoff and Guest John San Agustin

Guest Hosting With a Law-Enforcement Lens

In this episode of The Chuck and Julie Show, Mark Pfoff guest-hosts while Chuck and Julie are away, bringing his background as a retired detective from the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office and current investigative consultant into the discussion. He opens with political commentary before turning to the main investigative focus of the episode: the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie in the Tucson/Pima County area. Later, he is joined by John San Agustin, and the two discuss law-enforcement process, investigative mistakes, digital evidence, task-force work, and the danger of letting major cases go cold.

Political Commentary, Candidate Controversy, and Public Integrity

Before the investigative segment begins, Pfoff comments on several political and legal stories. He criticizes a Maine political candidate referred to in the transcript as Plattner or Platner, describing allegations against him and arguing that political alignment should never excuse serious misconduct. He also criticizes Jasmine Crockett for remarks about a knife in a Texas stabbing case, using the example to explain the legal definition of a deadly weapon. Pfoff’s broader point is that public officials, candidates, and commentators should be held to standards of truth, integrity, and legal common sense regardless of party or agenda.

Judges, Immunity, and the Limits of Authority

Pfoff then turns to what he calls activist judges and discusses judicial and prosecutorial immunity. He uses the Judge Dugan case as an example of a judge allegedly acting above the law by interfering with law enforcement in a courthouse, then claiming immunity after being charged. Pfoff argues that judges and district attorneys should not be able to misuse authority without consequence. He also discusses Judge Boasberg, immigration-related rulings, and the limits of what courts can compel an administration to do, presenting these examples as part of a larger concern about judges exceeding their proper role.

The Nancy Guthrie Disappearance and Early Investigative Concerns

The core of the episode centers on the disappearance of Nancy Guthrie, described as an elderly woman who was dropped off by her son-in-law on the night of January 31 and reported missing after she failed to appear at church the next morning. Pfoff says the case has gone on for about five months without clear answers, and he compares the initial handling to other high-profile investigations that may have been damaged early. San Agustin emphasizes that the first twenty-four to forty-eight hours are critical and argues that, given Guthrie’s age, limited mobility, and circumstances, investigators should have treated the case as potentially serious from the start rather than as a routine missing-person matter.

Experience, Resources, and the Need for a Task Force

Pfoff and San Agustin focus heavily on the importance of experience and outside resources in major investigations. San Agustin says a detective with only a couple of years of experience should not be placed in charge of a possible kidnapping or homicide without strong leadership and support. They argue that Pima County should have brought in Tucson, Phoenix, state, and federal resources early, especially because the region has experience with kidnappings, cartel-related crime, and complex cases. Pfoff compares this to the response after the Tom Clements homicide, where multiple agencies gathered quickly in a task-force environment to share expertise and leads.

Digital Evidence, Timelines, and the Risk of Lost Leads

The discussion then moves into investigative methods, especially digital evidence and timeline building. San Agustin says investigators should examine geofence data, cell-tower records, Ring video, neighborhood canvassing, forensic evidence, motive, and activity in the days before the disappearance. Both men suggest the case does not appear random and may have involved prior surveillance or planning. They also discuss a reported ransom or kidnapping note, uncertainty about whether it was genuine, the importance of physical evidence from the home, and the danger of revisiting a scene multiple times after releasing it, because defense attorneys can later challenge the integrity of that evidence.

Lifelong Learning, Expert Testimony, and Technology in Court

The final section broadens into a discussion of criminal-justice expertise, teaching, and digital forensics. Pfoff and San Agustin explain that investigators, attorneys, experts, and juries must keep learning because technology changes rapidly. They describe cell phones as a kind of modern DNA because of how much information they can provide, but they also warn that law enforcement sometimes overstates what cell-tower and call-detail records can prove. Pfoff criticizes shortcuts in digital investigations, including searches without warrants and claims that phone records place someone precisely at a location when the technology was not designed for that purpose. The episode closes with Pfoff thanking San Agustin, Chuck and Julie, and the audience, while suggesting future discussions may cover additional federal cases and investigative issues.

Good morning, Comrade! Welcome to socialist Colorado. We break down election results and take a look at the GOP gubernatorial race…. Which is still too close to call…. But should be a wakeup call for the Establishment.

Chuck And Julie Show with Chuck Bonniwell and Julie Hayden

Election Eve, Court Battles, and Colorado’s One-Party Reckoning

Election eve …. We break down the CO GOP gubernatorial race and also the divide within the Democrats.

Grassroots Politics on Election Eve

In this episode of The Chuck and Julie Show, hosts Julie Hayden and Chuck Bonniwell discuss Colorado politics on the eve of the primary election, beginning with the Republican gubernatorial race. Julie opens while Chuck is still arriving from a newspaper-related meeting, then reviews the Republican field and argues that the race has received little serious donor investment because many believe a Republican has only a slim chance of winning the governorship in Colorado. The hosts discuss Scott Bottoms, Barb Kirkmeyer, and Victor Marx, including questions about campaign fundraising, polling, mailers, establishment support, and whether the apparent momentum around Marx is real or overstated.

The Democratic Races Draw More Attention

Julie and Chuck then turn to the Democratic side, which they consider the more consequential and interesting contest. They discuss the possibility that Colorado Democrats could experience an insurgent progressive shift similar to what they describe in New York politics. The hosts focus on races involving Diana DeGette, Michael Bennet, Phil Weiser, and more progressive challengers, suggesting that the Democratic Party is being pushed farther left and that even candidates once considered more moderate may be unable or unwilling to resist the demands of the party’s activist base.

Denver, Crime, and the Progressive Policy Debate

The discussion widens into Denver politics, especially crime, public safety, and progressive approaches to criminal justice. Julie criticizes efforts she says would effectively reduce consequences for municipal offenses, arguing that businesses are already leaving downtown Denver because people feel unsafe. Chuck and Julie frame these policies as part of a larger shift toward progressive governance in Colorado, which they believe will increase poverty, push away businesses, and make the state resemble other heavily progressive states and cities. Their commentary presents this as evidence of Colorado becoming an increasingly one-party Democratic state.

ActBlue, Outside Money, and the Socialist Left

The hosts also discuss national Democratic fundraising networks, especially ActBlue, along with claims involving Chinese-linked influence, NGOs, activist funding, climate journalism, and progressive protest networks. They connect these themes to broader concerns about the Democratic Party’s leftward movement, the influence of billionaire funders, and the role of outside organizations in shaping activism and election outcomes. Chuck argues that if federal investigators pursue ActBlue-related money trails, Democratic politicians who used the platform could face serious legal and political consequences.

Party Fractures and the Battle Inside the Left

Julie and Chuck point to public backlash against figures such as Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden as signs of fracture within the Democratic coalition. They play or reference clips of Schumer being booed at a Pride parade and Biden being heckled, interpreting those moments as evidence that establishment Democrats are increasingly vulnerable to anger from the activist left. Chuck explains that once a state becomes a one-party state, the dominant party often begins to divide internally, with factions fighting each other for control after winning power.

Court Decisions and Election Integrity

The episode also covers several court decisions, including U.S. Supreme Court rulings and a Colorado Supreme Court ruling. Julie and Chuck strongly criticize the Supreme Court’s decision allowing mail-in ballots to be counted after Election Day if postmarked by Election Day, arguing that this undermines trust and invites fraud. They also discuss a ruling allowing the president to remove certain agency heads, the Supreme Court declining to take up Donald Trump’s appeal in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case, and a Colorado Supreme Court decision blocking ballot initiatives that attempted to combine too many issues into one measure related to redistricting and election rules.

Colorado’s Future and Republican Party Turmoil

The closing portion returns to Colorado’s political direction and the state Republican Party’s internal problems. Chuck and Julie discuss Colorado’s shift toward deeper Democratic control, the possibility of jungle primary reforms, redistricting fights, and the struggle between establishment Republicans and grassroots conservatives. They also mention ongoing Republican Party procedural disputes, a frozen party bank account, leadership concerns, and the lack of urgency they perceive from new party leadership. The episode ends with the hosts looking ahead to election results and promising to break down the outcomes on the next show.