This is the story of the one. As a custodial supervisor at a high school, he knows that during cold and flu season, germs spread fast. It's why he partners with Granger to stay fully stocked on the products and supplies he needs, from tissues to disinfectants to floor scrubbers. All so that he can help students, staff, and teachers stay healthy and focused. Call 1-800-GRANGER, clickgranger.com, or just stop by.
Granger for the ones who get it done. It's 5:05, and welcome in to a Thursday edition of the Carolina Journal News Hour, News Talk 1110-993 WBT. I'm Nick Craig. Good morning to you. We've got some pretty big international news this morning.
President Donald Trump, as part of his tour of Asia, Over the last couple of days, he says that he will cut tariffs on Chinese imports after a highly anticipated meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. That meeting took place in South Korea. The president said he was doing this in part, citing some new understandings on fentanyl enforcement, farm trade, and a pause on rare earth export limits. Since returning to the White House in January of this year, President Donald Trump, as we have documented very well here on the show and over on CarolinaJournal.com, has levied major tariffs on Chinese imports, a move that prompted Beijing to tighten its control over exports of its rare earth elements. Both leaders signaled interest in reducing tensions to avoid further shock to the global economy.
We, of course, have talked about a variety of industries here in North Carolina, including the all-important agricultural industry. That have been affected by some of these imports and import restrictions, tariffs, and other various trade deals. Rare earth minerals have become a major point of contention in the trade war as the negotiations between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping took place. In October, Xi Jinping announced a plan to tighten the export controls on this commodity. And, well, the President responded as this was going back and forth by threatening to raise tariffs on Chinese imports to 100%.
Rare earth minerals comprise 17 metallic elements necessary for manufacturing state-of-the-art technology, including semiconductors, smartphones, military equipment, and electric vehicles. Joseph Harris, who is a fiscal policy analyst for the John Locke Foundation, told the Carolina Journal: In April, China first announced export controls on rare earth. Metals requiring government approval before shipments could leave the country. The move unsettled global markets and imports to North Carolina of rare earth metals surged in May as companies worked to secure supplies before the full rule took effect. Through July, year to date, North Carolina's imports of inorganic chemicals, precious and rare earth metals, and radioactive compounds rose sharply from the $364.1 million to a staggering $1.1 billion, an increase of roughly 211%.
As various industries were trying to stockpile as many supplies as possible ahead of some of the ongoing and back and forth between Trump and Xi, that data, according to the Economic Development Partnership of North Carolina, also known as EDPNC, of that $1.1 billion worth of total imports, $366.1 million were imported in May alone, with $119 million worth of May's imports coming directly from China. Import figures come from a broad federal trade category labeled inorganic chemicals, precious rare earth metals, and radioactive compounds. This classification encompasses not only rare earth metals, but some of those other materials as well. Harris continued telling the Carolina Journal, quote, for decades the United States led the world in rare earth metal production through the Mountain Pass rare earth mine in California, which supplied most of the global market from the 1960s through the 1980s.
However, by late 1990s, environmental regulations and permitting rules had driven up the cost of refining. At the exact same time, China lowered costs through heavy subsidies and lax environmental standards, allowing it to dominate the market since that mine in California was shut down in 2002. China now produces more than 90% of the world's processed rare earth metals, a dominance it achieved through subsidizing subsidy substantial rather efforts made by the Chinese government. With such a significant market share, China's April announcement to implement export controls, as you can imagine, raised concerns among firms that rely on rare earth metals to produce modern technology. And of course, one of the complaints you have probably heard maybe from your family members, your friends, your neighbors, is that everything now has a chip in it, whether it's a smart fridge, a smart dishwasher, a car, everything has got some level of technology in it.
All of those devices, whether they have any sort of smarts at all in them, are definitely using some sort of rare earth metals in their production. And that, of course, leaves the door open for China and the 90% of the world's processed rare earth metals that they provide. Trump is also seeking new trade agreements for rare earth minerals with other Asian countries, including Japan, Vietnam, and Thailand. Harris told the Carolina Journal, quote, expanding trade with allies like Japan and Vietnam is precisely the right approach. Competition and cooperation are key to reducing our dependence on China.
But sweeping tariffs rise costs for Americans. If we genuinely want to secure our access to rare earth metals, we need to make it affordable to mine and refine rare earth here at home by cutting red tape and allowing the market to work. For now, trade tensions have cooled with the U.S. postponing a 100% tariff on Chinese imports and China delaying expanded export controls on rare earth minerals. There was some indication that that might be happening, kind of not necessarily a leak, but there was some pretty strong evidence that that could be.
Be the case ahead of President Donald Trump's meeting with the Chinese president yesterday as part of his multi-leg trip in Asia. And that is, well, exactly what has happened. After the talks, Trump said that President Xi had, quote, he and President Xi had, quote, an amazing meeting and that both sides had reached an out. Outstanding group of decisions on key economic and security issues. The president and Trump said that Xi agreed to begin immediate purchase of U.S.
soybean and other farm goods that China would work very hard to block fentanyl from entering the United States. I bring up soybeans in particular. That is one of the largest sectors here in North Carolina. We had a story back just a couple of weeks ago over at CarolinaJournal.com that we covered here on the news hour talking about soybean producers here across the Tar Heel State and some of their very real concern that one of their largest buyers in the market, which was China, of course, as the trade war has continued and those talks for a period of time really Maybe even inaccurate to say deteriorated as there was really no discussion at all. You had pretty much either side just throwing out tariffs and restrictions on each other with seemingly no path to negotiate moving forward.
That was very much causing some pain and struggle among soybean producers here in the state of North Carolina and around the rest of the United States. President Trump said that he would cut the tariff rate on Chinese imports by 10 points from 20% to 10. According to his description, through an aide clarified, that the rates would be closer to 45 to 47 percent in response to Xi's promise to crack down on the flow of fentanyl or fentanyl that have been coming from China. The two sides also reached an understanding on rare earth exports as China agreed to pause planned export controls for a year, the president said. A senior administration.
Official clarified that both leaders agreed to revisit the agreement next year and that that arrangement could be extended at that time.
So, at least for the short term, there's going to be some relief in the rare earth industry as the agreement between China and the U.S. has been paused for right now. President Trump also said he spoke to the Chinese president about chip technology. He said that China would be in discussions with NVIDIA and additional semiconductor purchasers, but that the company's newest generation of advanced processors were not part of the conversation. This was one of many deals that the president was able to secure in his international trip over the last couple of days, hitting a variety of other nations as well, as well as meeting with other officials in South Korea, where he did meet with the Chinese president.
You can get some continued. Coverage of the rare earth metal spike and some of those concerns over on our website this morning, CarolinaJournal.com. That headline story: NC imports of China's rare earth metal spike amid trade worries. Botox Cosmetic, Atobotulinum Toxin A, FDA approved for over 20 years.
So, talk to your specialist to see if Botox Cosmetic is right for you. For full prescribing information, including boxed warning, visit BotoxCosmetic.com or call 877-351-0300. Remember to ask for Botox Cosmetic by name. To see for yourself and learn more, visit BotoxCosmetic.com. That's BotoxCosmetic.com.
The questions start early. And then they start multiplying. Do babies hold grudges? How do I know when he's full? Logging poops, comma, necessary?
Raising kids raises enough questions. That's why we make one formula that feels right right away. One that's intentionally made and clinically proven, with immune supporting benefits in every scoop. One that uses breast milk as its North Star. You'll wonder about everything except this: Biheart, the formula that answers.
Learn more at byheart.com. It's 521. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, News Talk 1110, 993 WBT. Taking a look at some other statewide news this morning, the North Carolina Supreme Court, in a split 5-2 decision on Wednesday, granted a temporary stay in state Attorney General Jeff Jackson's environmental contamination lawsuit against DuPont and Kamors. The stay, rather, from the high court blocks a state business court hearing that was scheduled to take place today in Winston-Salem.
Judge Michael Robinson canceled the hearing after the high court's ruling. The companies had requested the stay while the state's highest court considered whether to take the case on appeal. DuPont and Kamors challenged Democrat Attorney General Jeff Jackson's authority to pursue his own lawsuit beyond litigation that has already been filed and been going through. The courts from the state Department of Environmental Quality. The state's largest business lobbying group filed a brief supporting the companies and opposing Jackson.
Wednesday's order offered no comment from the five Republican justices who supported the stay.
However, the two Democrats on the state's high court dissented, with Justice Anita Earls writing, This stay is not justified by any reasonable standard, and it underscores that this court is committed to an ongoing disservice by failing to articulate and consistently apply objective criteria to our determinations on such motions. Adherence to equal justice and the rule of law principle requires more. She and the other Democrat on the state's highest court dissented and just slammed the Republicans. Nothing new, no surprise there at all. Jeff Jackson filed an October the 16th document with the state Supreme Court defending.
His authority to pursue the five-year-old environmental contamination lawsuit. PFAS chemicals from the company's Fayetteville Works Plant, which is actually in Bladen County on the Cape Fear River, according to lawyers, quote, have contaminated drinking water and groundwater in at least eight of our eastern counties, according to court filings. And that has very well been a long-term issue for those in southeastern North Carolina, as many local municipalities down the Cape Fear River basin between the coast and this Fayetteville works site have dealt with high levels of PFAS contamination in the Cape Fear River. That has caused them, in some cases, to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to try and install either granular activated carbon or RO reverse osmosis filtration systems at their water treatment plants to provide PFAS free drinking water to their customers. That has been a major issue now going on for at least the last five to eight years.
However, the attempt here by Attorney General Jeff Jackson to add an additional suit to this is now being blocked by the state's highest court. You can read some additional details and coverage of this story this morning by visiting our website, CarolinaJournal.com, the story's headline, NC Supreme Court stays AG Jackson's lawsuit against DuPont and Kamors. It's now five twenty four. You're listening to the Carolina Journal News Hour. After watching the North Carolina General Assembly draw a new congressional map, predominantly in the first and third districts here in the state of North Carolina, it was pretty well understood that there would be some legal challenges against those.
While there haven't been any new lawsuits against those maps, there have been some amended lawsuits already ongoing and redistricting efforts here in North Carolina to walk us through where we stand right now. It's my pleasure to welcome Mitch Kokai from the John Locke Foundation back to our airwaves this morning on the Carolina Journal News Hour. Mitch, everybody we talked to, whether it was Dr. Andy Jackson from the John Locke Foundation, yourself, other folks over at Carolina Journal, seemed like there was a pretty good likelihood that some lawfare would play out. What are you tracking through the courts?
Well, as you mentioned, so far, we haven't seen any brand new lawsuits making new allegations against the North Carolina General Assembly and the way that it goes about doing its redistricting. But we have seen Interestingly enough, in two lawsuits that were combined for a trial earlier this year, the trial took place over the course of a couple of weeks in June and July. The plaintiffs in those cases have decided that rather than filing a brand new lawsuit, they would like to amend their existing lawsuits to add the new congressional map. And in terms of getting this thing resolved one way or another, that probably is. Pretty good, and maybe the best outcome for all concerned.
Because what has happened is there are the two lawsuits, one of which combined the congressional map. With state, house, and senate maps. The other lawsuit dealt only with the congressional map. A three-judge federal trial panel. Heard arguments against all of these maps altogether back in June.
It has not yet issued a decision. But as we're waiting for that decision, if they make a decision that throws out a map or upholds a map, That decision could then be called into question because of the new map if there was some new lawsuit. Having the new map now tied to the rest of this litigation will probably make it easier for the case to progress because you'll get a ruling. From this three judge panel, and then whoever doesn't like that ruling is going to appeal rather than having. These appeals and then having other lawsuits that lead to some sort of result that gets appealed, and have try, you know, wonder which appeals court panel is going to deal with this.
Trying to keep all of this litigation together probably makes sense, especially. where we stand in terms of the timeline. Because remember, we're talking about 2026 elections. But that doesn't mean that the process starts in 2026. Candidate filing is scheduled to start on December 1st, and that means that there has to be some resolution before then.
so that elections officials can plan. We're almost to November 1st, so we're getting to only a little bit more than a month between. the time that we're talking about right now and the time the candidates are starting to file.
So trying to streamline this process. Probably makes sense for everyone: the folks who are challenging the maps and the ones who are defending the maps.
Well, Mitch, you do bring up some of the realistic timelines with all of this. And we know that court decisions we've seen in the past where candidate filing was open for a couple of days, then stopped, then delayed, and it kind of shifted everything back.
So it's not completely beyond the pale that something like that could happen. But it would seem realistic that the courts would try not to completely throw off the candidate filing schedule in the March primary. This stuff, as you're noting, comes forward pretty soon. Candidate filing in December, potentially primaries for certain races in certain districts coming up in March. And then, of course, that big gap between March and November.
From an administrative standpoint, the state board of elections says, hey, guys, we need this stuff done so we can get everything together, open candidate filing and disseminate this information out to all 100 county board of elections so that local candidates can file. That's right. And the Board of Elections has not really taken any sides in terms of the maps and whether the maps are good or not. They're basically just telling the courts that are overseeing this, look, this is our time line. We would like to have things resolved by December 1st because that's the timeline that we have in place to get things rolling.
Now, they also say, and they know this from experience, as you alluded to. That Things have been delayed in the past. We've had occasions where people have voted. In a congressional election, knowing that it wouldn't count because the ballot couldn't be changed in time and they had to go back. We've had candidate filing delayed.
We've had congressional elections sometimes split from other elections.
So the Board of Elections will make do with whatever the courts tell them to do. But basically, their argument in this whole process is. Here's our timeline. Here's what we expect to do. We can probably build in a little bit of leeway between December 1st and when we would actually have to take a major.
Action like delaying some sort of delaying the primary or delaying candidate filing or that sort of action. But they're basically saying this is the timeline that we expect to act on. And if your court order comes out any later than that, we may have to make some substantial changes just so that we can comply with the federal law and give people enough time to do the voting. Because remember, we're not just talking about People going out to the polls and voting on a day in March and on a day in November, all of these are preceded by multiple days of early voting and multiple days of people being able to get an absentee ballot by mail and return it.
So if you delay anything, you're going to delay all of those pieces of the process. And that was the argument that the Board of Elections is putting forward, not saying, Court, we want you to do this or do that, just saying. Hey, if we don't get a resolution by December 1st, just know that we might have to make some changes. We'll continue the conversation with Mitch Coke from the John Locke Foundation coming up after this. You're listening to the Carolina Journal News Hour.
At blinds.com, it's not just about window treatments. It's about you, your style, your space, your way. Whether you DIY or want the pros to handle it all, you'll have the confidence of knowing it's done right. From free expert design help to our 100% satisfaction guarantee, everything we do is made to fit your life and your windows. Because at blinds.com, the only thing we treat better than windows is you.
Visit blinds.com now for up to 45% off with minimum purchase plus a professional measure at no cost. Rules and restrictions apply. It's 5:38. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, News Talk 1110-993, WBT. We are talking lawsuits this morning on the Carolina Journal News Hour as they surround a new congressional map drawn by the North Carolina General Assembly.
Mitch Kokai of the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour.
So we already have these two existing lawsuits that have been already playing out through the court systems based on previous maps. As you mentioned, Mitch, those have been amended to add the new congressional map, predominantly the first and third congressional districts. Those are the ones that were changed by the North Carolina General Assembly. Assess the merit of the arguments that are being made in some of these amended court filings based on everything that you've seen in redistricting, which North Carolina has been kind of at the center of in terms of legal challenges over the last couple of decades. What kind of arguments are being made here, and do you think they hold any merit with the court?
They're about the same arguments that were made before. Basically, if you wanted to summarize it, the plaintiffs are saying the General Assembly discriminated based on race. And now it's even worse. Because remember, the main thing that happened with this new congressional map is that one district in the northeastern part of the state that was seen as a toss-up is now redrawn so that it's much more friendly to a Republican candidate. By the same token, the third district, which was a fairly strong Republican district, remains a Republican-leaning district, but a little bit less so.
And so the argument from the plaintiffs is, we already said that this District 1 was drawn in a racially discriminatory way.
Now it's even more so. And the fact that they're targeting Don Davis, a U.S. Representative who is black, shows that there's racial intent. There is a reason behind this because the only way that plaintiffs in a federal redistricting case can win is if they argue, well, there are two arguments. You can argue malapportionment, saying that some districts have too few and some districts too many people.
And that is a little piece of this argument. They're saying that doing a mid-decade redistricting means you have old, outdated census data, and so you're going to be guaranteed to end up with some degree of malapportionment. That's part of the argument. But the main argument is that they say the General Assembly is trying to discriminate based on race. And there are loads of decisions that have come out from the courts in years past that say you can't do that.
The response from the General Assembly has been: we didn't take race into account at all. This is entirely about politics. This is designed entirely To help Republicans win another seat within the U.S. House delegation. And the courts have said in recent years, within the last decade or so, that they're not going to deal with these partisan gerrymandering cases anymore, that that's the type of thing to leave to the political realm, not to the courts.
And so, on one side, you're hearing racial gerrymandering. On the other side, you're hearing partisan gerrymandering, one of which is unconstitutional, the other of which is not. And it'll be interesting to see where the courts go with it.
Well, I'm glad you bring up some of the arguments here from the GA. We've heard from individuals, whether it was Senator Ralph Heist, who was the individual who started the process of the redraw in these districts in the Senate. We heard similar commentary from Representative Brendan Jones out of Columbus County in the House as well. Mitch, they are hell-bent on making the argument that they did not use race in drawing of these maps. There's nobody that's really debating that point, at least saying, oh, well, you actually did and you're hiding it now from the public.
How does the court prove whether they used race or not when they are saying they didn't? Yet some of these lawsuits are saying, no, you are and you did.
Well, the court doesn't have to prove it. The plaintiffs have to prove it, and it's going to be tough. We saw in a A different lawsuit, but similar ideas. That recent decision that came out of the lawsuit challenging the two state Senate districts in northeastern North Carolina, saying they were drawn in a racially discriminatory way. And we saw a lengthy decision.
From the U.S. District Judge James Dever, working on that case, saying, Look, the plaintiffs failed to prove. That there was any racial discrimination. Again, they failed to prove that there's racially polarized voting. Just look at the record in North Carolina.
You have African Americans winning major, powerful positions, including some winning them in areas that have a very low percentage of African Americans in their district. There just is no proof. That North Carolina in 2025 is anywhere near to where it was in 1965 or even 2025 years ago. And so it'll be very interesting to see whether the plaintiffs are able to make any kind of stronger argument about racial discrimination in front of the three-judge panel that's overseeing these two cases.
Now, interestingly enough, All three of these judges who oversaw the case and will be issuing some sort of ruling at some point, they haven't yet. All three were appointed by Republican judges. And you may say, oh, well, this is, you know, some Republican is trying to stack the deck. The interesting part about it is one of the three judges, Judge Schroeder, was initially assigned to the cases. The other two judges who were assigned to this case were assigned by the chief Fourth Circuit.
Judge Albert Diaz, who was appointed by a Democrat.
So Judge Diaz Put two of the three Republican judges on this three Republican judge panel.
So it's not all partisan, and it will be very interesting to see whether this court buys any of the arguments from the plaintiffs about this being racially discriminatory. As you said, the Republican legislative leaders have said, and this has been true for at least the last couple of redistricting processes, that they used race not at all. And the justification for that, they said, was, look, we don't have any evidence now. Of racially polarized voting. If there's no racially polarized voting, then we should not take race into account at all, and we didn't.
Mitch, one final question for you. And again, as we go back to this timeline, there will likely be a decision at some point from one of these two cases, even if it's something more preliminarily. That will come out. It could be before December 1st, could be sometime after. But there, of course, is always the appeal process.
And whatever side loses is likely to appeal. Is there a strong likelihood that we go through with the 2026 midterm elections under these maps? And then as the legal challenges continue to unfold into later next year, we potentially see something where if the General Assembly did do something wrong, we redraw for 2028. These things typically do not happen very fast. There's a very strong likelihood of the scenario that you just mentioned coming to pass.
Remember that these lawsuits that we're still dealing with now were filed in 2023 over maps that were deemed to be used for 2024. And what happened was the judges in those cases would not grant an injunction. Blocking the maps.
So the maps were used last year, and now we're dealing with the aftermath of. Having a trial, getting some decisions. And so, given that the timing that we're in right now, close to the filing for the 2026 election. Unless a court really wants to step in and say it's clear that these maps. Are racially discriminatory, and we have to do something about it.
There would be, at least, I would think, a better than even chance that we see these maps used for 2026, even if. all of the legal issues remain unresolved. Absolutely. It is something that we are going to be keeping a very close eye on in the coming weeks and months. You can get additional coverage and keep up to date with that by visiting our website this morning, CarolinaJournal.com.
We appreciate the insight and analysis. Mitch Kokai from the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. Good morning again. It's 551. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour.
News Talk 1110-993 WBT on October the 28th. Senator Ted Budd, who is one of our two Republican senators here in North Carolina, joined Congressman David Rauser, who represents the 7th Congressional District that covers portions of southeastern North Carolina, including the Wilmington area. Both of them are leading a bipartisan effort in Congress to urge President Donald Trump to prioritize flu-cured tobacco in his upcoming meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. China is the leading international purchaser of American cured tobacco. Farmers were recently notified that China.
Not be buying this flu-cured tobacco from the 2025 crop, a move widely seen as an attempt to gain leverage in the ongoing trade negotiations with the United States. This decision leaves approximately 65 million pounds of tobacco without a buyer, resulting in potentially an estimated $220 million in lost export value. The lawmakers wrote in a joint letter, quote, Chinese buyers have delayed or refused to pay for a purchase 2024 tobacco leaf, including the refusal of shipments from earlier this year. The impact on rural communities will be devastating, forcing growers out of tobacco production and threatening the stability of other crops, which depend on tobacco revenues to keep producers going. Global competitors such as Brazil and India will quickly fill the gap, displacing U.S.
farmers. We urge you to remedy China's trade practices and ensure our growers maintain this important market. The letter uses data to demonstrate how the 2018 tariffs administered by the Trump administration did impact and already has impacted tobacco exports. The lawmakers wrote, quote, in 2017, the U.S. exported more than 62 million pounds of flu-cured tobacco to China.
2019, that number collapsed to just 513,000 pounds with access to foreign markets disappearing. Relief programs became the only lifeline on which farmers could rely on. Lawmakers emphasize the need for fair compensation w with the aid provided to other crops, according to the letter asserting that rural communities lack fair compensation and could be quote left behind without any way to recover. Lawmakers also urged President Trump to coordinate with his administration to guarantee that these tobacco farmers would be eligible for any upcoming trade relief programs. China is the world's leading international buyer of soybeans as well as tobacco.
Tobacco farmers deserve an appropriate consideration in these critical meetings, according to the lawmakers. In the letter, the lawmakers also remind President Trump that rural Americans voters supported him for many reasons, including his commitment to stand with farmers and rural businesses against unfair trade practices. They requested that he provide stability for tobacco farmers by ensuring that those flu-cured tobacco receives fair treatment in trade negotiations with China and any other country that the United States is invested in.
Some of the other co-signers on the letter include Senator Tom Tillis, Lindsey Graham from South. Carolina, as well as almost the entire North Carolina congressional delegation, with some delegates from Virginia as well, all signing, co-signing in on this letter sent to President Donald Trump and his administration on October the 28th. You can read some additional details on that letter this morning by visiting our website, CarolinaJournal.com. And we do have some information out of the meeting, a high-stakes meeting between President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. That meeting took place in South Korea Thursday and learning some information and details on this overnight.
It was Friday, of course, due to the time zone change there. We are learning this morning that tariffs will be cut on Chinese imports after that highly anticipated meeting. Since returning to the White House in January, President Donald Trump has levied major tariffs on Chinese imports, a move that prompted Beijing. To tighten its control over exports of rare earth elements and raise imports on American goods into the Chinese economy.
However, after this meeting in South Korea, both leaders signaled interest in reducing the ongoing tensions to avoid further shocks to the global economy and many important industries like tobacco and soybean here in North Carolina. And that is one of the things that we are learning in the meeting. President Trump said that Xi agreed to begin immediately purchasing U.S.
soybean and other farm goods. Not immediately clear whether tobacco falls into that category. It seemingly would. And that China would work very hard to block fentanyl or fentanyl precursors from entering the United States. With that, we are learning now this morning that some of the tariff rates on Chinese imports will be cut by 10% in response to Xi's promise to.
track down on the flow of fentanyl. We've also learned that as it relates to rare earth minerals and metals, that there's going to be some temporary holds put on some of those import and export controls for at least the next year.
Well, that's going to do it for a Thursday edition of the Carolina Journal News Hour. WBT News is next, followed by Good Morning BT. We're back with you tomorrow morning, 5 to 6, right here on News Talk 1110 and 99.3. WBT.
