Latest / The Ben Ferguson Podcast / Dunking on Newsom, Forbidden Words for Democrats & SCOTUS Victory for Trump Cancelling $783M in DEI Grants

Transcript

Dunking on Newsom, Forbidden Words for Democrats & SCOTUS Victory for Trump Cancelling $783M in DEI Grants · The Ben Ferguson Podcast

• 0:01
  Speaker 1: Welcome. It is Verdicus Centater, Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: you and Senator I got to say every once in
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: a while, you get a little feisty on Twitter. And
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: one of your tweets has now gone to fourteen million
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: people that have seen it, and a follow up tweet
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: is in the million plus range and it dealt with electricity.
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: I did not see this one coming. I'm not gonna lie.
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: Well, Gavin Newsom, it seems, has gotten a new Twitter.
• 0:26
  Speaker 2: He's hired some staff that I'm sure are blue haired
• 0:30
  Speaker 2: transgender freaks, but they've decided that way they're going to
• 0:34
  Speaker 2: make Gavin the hero of the left is to tweet
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: in all caps and try to do everything they can
• 0:39
  Speaker 2: to sound like Donald Trump. And by the way, it
• 0:42
  Speaker 2: is working in that left wing cooks across the country
• 0:45
  Speaker 2: are sending money to Gavin Newsom. It's raising him a
• 0:48
  Speaker 2: whole lot of money. And so he has gone he
• 0:51
  Speaker 2: has gone crazy on Twitter. But he's getting dunked on badly.
• 0:54
  Speaker 2: And we're going to talk about one example where he's
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: trying to blame high electriciy prices on Donald Trump, and well,
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: let's just say the facts are not backing them.
• 1:05
  Speaker 3: Up.
• 1:05
  Speaker 4: We're going to break that down for you.
• 1:07
  Speaker 2: We're also going to talk to you about a remarkable story,
• 1:09
  Speaker 2: which is a major Democrat think tank has put out
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: a list of forbidden words, a list of words. They
• 1:16
  Speaker 2: concluded that when Democrats say them, they sound like out
• 1:19
  Speaker 2: of touch freaks. Now, I got to say, I agree
• 1:22
  Speaker 2: with this think tank, but I don't think Democrats are
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: going to follow this advice. It really is striking, though,
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: to show just how out of touch they are that
• 1:30
  Speaker 2: they have to be told what sort of words make
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: you sound like a scolding schoolmarm or a radical in
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: a university faculty lounge. And finally, we're going to talk
• 1:42
  Speaker 2: about a Supreme Court decision that upheld the Trump administration's
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: canceling of hundreds of millions of dollars of DEI grants.
• 1:49
  Speaker 2: It was a terrific victory for common sense. It was
• 1:52
  Speaker 2: five to four, it was closely divided. We're going to
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: break it down, explain what the court did, what the
• 1:57
  Speaker 2: divide was, and how President Trump is now able to
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: cancel massive amounts of money that we're going to completely
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: woke political ideological projects.
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: All of you know that I am a pro Second
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: Amendment guy. I've shared on numerous occasions how caring my
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: firearms saved my life from a gang related attack. But
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: for those of you out there with family members who
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: may not be comfortable having a gun by their side,
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: you still want them to be able to protect themselves
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: and others in times of danger. And that's where the
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: Burno launcher comes in. Berna is a handheld pistol that
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: fires both kinetic rounds and chemical irritants to separate you
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: from an attacker. And I'm here with Josh Cherrard from
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: Berna to share the true story of how an avid
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: hiker uses Burne to stop an attacking mountain lion. Josh,
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: tell us what happened.
• 2:43
  Speaker 3: Hey, you know, Jason is an avid hiker deciding to
• 2:46
  Speaker 3: take his family out on a hiper he's done several times,
• 2:50
  Speaker 3: super easy, high but super fun, all armed with his Berna.
• 2:54
  Speaker 3: You know, this is one of those things where he
• 2:55
  Speaker 3: didn't expect to see anything, and all of a sudden,
• 2:57
  Speaker 3: on this hike, this mountain lion appears out of no
• 2:59
  Speaker 3: wheay or of course, he sends his family on down
• 3:02
  Speaker 3: the trail, watches the line for a few minutes, realizing
• 3:05
  Speaker 3: it's not going away. So uses his burner, fires a
• 3:08
  Speaker 3: few rounds to scare it off, continues down the trail,
• 3:10
  Speaker 3: but unfortunately this mountain line appears again, at which point
• 3:14
  Speaker 3: he realized he was going to have to up his
• 3:16
  Speaker 3: aggression with that BURNA fire's four rounds was able to
• 3:19
  Speaker 3: strike the mountain lion all four times at chest and torso,
• 3:22
  Speaker 3: at which point that mountain lion airs off, never to
• 3:25
  Speaker 3: be seen again. These guys make it down the trail
• 3:28
  Speaker 3: back to their car and back to home safely. Fortunately,
• 3:31
  Speaker 3: this is all it took to make sure and get
• 3:34
  Speaker 3: this family back home safe off a hike that could
• 3:36
  Speaker 3: have taken an obvious turn for the worst.
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: And I'm going to guess that berner has been used
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: to stop other types of animal attacks as well.
• 3:43
  Speaker 3: Absolutely, we get stories all the time of users with
• 3:48
  Speaker 3: whether it be dogs or other wildlife. We even have
• 3:51
  Speaker 3: an ecological park whose security carries burna four bears out
• 3:56
  Speaker 3: in the smoky mountains out there. That's been effective there
• 3:59
  Speaker 3: as well, So once again, not just a tool for people,
• 4:02
  Speaker 3: but very affective against animals as well.
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: It's really incredible if you want to get more information
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: on how you and your family member can protect themselves
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: with the burner launcher, go to burna dot com. That's
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: by r NA dot com. Again by RNA dot com,
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: burna dot com. All right, Senator, so let's talk about
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: this interesting tweet and Democrats anything that goes up price
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: wise right now, it's automatically Donald Trump's fault. That is
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: the simplistic liberal logic.
• 4:32
  Speaker 4: One oh one.
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: Anything that they can blame Trump for, They're gonna try
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: it every time they put out this tweet. Gavin Newso
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: clearly acting as if he's running against the whole maga world.
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: He's obviously launched his presidential campaign and is just trying
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: to take these easy shots. The problem is you hit
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: him back hard with the fact. So let's talk about
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: what he tweeted at first, and then what you said
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: in response.
• 4:57
  Speaker 2: Well, sure, he sent out a tweet that said electricity
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: p have gone up ten percent since January. Great work,
• 5:04
  Speaker 2: Donald Trump. And so you know, looks as Gavin Newsom
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: is wont to do. He is fact free, he is
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: data free, he is evidence free. He is usually reality free.
• 5:13
  Speaker 2: But he's pretty slick and drives a message. And so
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: I responded, actually actually relying on AI and I'm kind
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: of enjoying doing this online, and so I just asked
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: GROC to chime in, and so I responded, hey, GROC,
• 5:27
  Speaker 2: electricity prices have gone up ten percent since January. In
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: what cities and states are.
• 5:33
  Speaker 4: They the highest?
• 5:35
  Speaker 2: So I had no political content to it. I just asked,
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: where is this the worst? And today we've got fourteen
• 5:41
  Speaker 2: million views on that. Here's what Grok came back with,
• 5:45
  Speaker 2: based on August twenty twenty five data from EIA and
• 5:48
  Speaker 2: other sources, highest state rates number one Hawaii, number two California,
• 5:57
  Speaker 2: number three, Connecticut, on four Massachusetts, number five Rhode Island.
• 6:05
  Speaker 2: And then highest city rates number one Honolulu, Hawaii, number
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: two San Francisco, California, number three New York, New York,
• 6:16
  Speaker 2: number four Boston, Massachusetts, and number five Hartford, Connecticut. And
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: so I looked at that. Just that grock response has
• 6:26
  Speaker 2: one point two million views. My initial querry has fourteen million,
• 6:30
  Speaker 2: And so I responded to that. I said, hey, Grock,
• 6:33
  Speaker 2: what do the five states with the highest electricity rates
• 6:36
  Speaker 2: all have in common? And it wasn't difficult to figure
• 6:39
  Speaker 2: this out. But here's what GROC responded based on EIA data,
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: The top five Hawaii, California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island all
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: have democratic governors and strong renewable energy mandates. Factors include
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: high fuel import costs e g. Hawaii, urban demand and
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: infrastructure investments. Rates vary by policy and geography. So it's
• 7:08
  Speaker 2: an amazing example of how Look I didn't even bother
• 7:11
  Speaker 2: to argue with Gavin. I just simply pointed to facts.
• 7:15
  Speaker 2: And the beauty of it is I didn't need adjectives.
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: I didn't need to make any claims. I just need
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: to ask the simple question, where is it the highest?
• 7:23
  Speaker 2: Now I do the answer, And the thing about it
• 7:26
  Speaker 2: is Gavin knew the answer. Electricity rates are incredibly high
• 7:29
  Speaker 2: in California, the second highest of any state in the country.
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: Why because of the Waco left wing policies Gavin Newsom
• 7:35
  Speaker 2: the legislature put in place. That's true of Democrat legislatures.
• 7:39
  Speaker 2: And yet here's what Gavin Newsom wants to do. He
• 7:41
  Speaker 2: wants to tell Californians, you know, your high electricity rates
• 7:44
  Speaker 2: is because Donald Trump is there, and it's fundamentally dishonest.
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: And look, that's one of the reasons Ben, you and
• 7:51
  Speaker 2: I do this podcast is it's designed to give information
• 7:56
  Speaker 2: the left. You know, if you think about the difference
• 7:58
  Speaker 2: between being a Democrat or Republican. Today, Democrats, their policies
• 8:03
  Speaker 2: don't work. Their policies are a train wreck. Whether it's
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: open borders, whether it is boys and girls sports, whether
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: it is massive spending and high taxes and job killing regulations,
• 8:13
  Speaker 2: whether it is appeasement abroad, whether it is letting terrorists
• 8:17
  Speaker 2: into this country. All of their policies are a mess.
• 8:21
  Speaker 2: So what do they do. They have to spend, they
• 8:23
  Speaker 2: have to obviuskate. And there is a fundamental dynamic in politics,
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: which is Liberals win when they effectively obfuse skate their
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: views because their policy views don't work. Conservatives win when
• 8:38
  Speaker 2: we effectively articulate what it is we believe why, because
• 8:40
  Speaker 2: our policy views work. They are common sense. Most people
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: with any sense, they want secure borders, they want law
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: enforcement protecting their family, they want their constitutional rights protected,
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: they want low prices, low energy prices.
• 8:56
  Speaker 4: And so.
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: That tweet exchange, I think really embodies much of what
• 9:02
  Speaker 2: I'm trying to do speaking out in the public debate,
• 9:06
  Speaker 2: but much of what we're trying to do with this
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: podcast as well.
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: Well. Let's dive into alsos so people understand and they
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: may say them, says, well, hold on a second, why
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: is it that one state has higher prices than another state.
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: Why that you know California is higher. Is it just
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: because quote everything costs more in California? Can you break
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: down explain to people how this is such a state
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: wide issue. This is where your actual state government matters
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: and the policies of your state, and it's going to
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: dictate the pricing you see.
• 9:35
  Speaker 2: Well, it's a whole host of things. One chunk of
• 9:37
  Speaker 2: it is taxes, and you have big blue states they
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: tax everything they see, and so one of the reasons
• 9:43
  Speaker 2: when you fill up your tank in California it costs
• 9:46
  Speaker 2: so much, as you've got massive state and local gasoline taxes.
• 9:50
  Speaker 2: But not only that, when it comes to electricity generation,
• 9:53
  Speaker 2: when you put mandates, as blue states do, when you
• 9:56
  Speaker 2: put massive renewable energy mandates, that drive up the cost
• 10:01
  Speaker 2: of generating electricity, uh consistently, the cheapest form of generating
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: electricity is either coal or natural gas. States like California
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: don't want you to use coal or natural gas, so
• 10:14
  Speaker 2: they mandate instead you use very very expensive forms of
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: electricity generation, and that ends up driving costs. But it's
• 10:22
  Speaker 2: not just the generation it's also getting the fuel. It's
• 10:25
  Speaker 2: also uh building the transmission lines UH, the environmental permitting,
• 10:30
  Speaker 2: the regulator, the regulatory barriers, the lawsuits UH that that
• 10:35
  Speaker 2: that that are entailed in big blue states. Every one
• 10:38
  Speaker 2: of these drives up costs UH and those costs are
• 10:41
  Speaker 2: paid by consumers. On the other hand, when you have
• 10:45
  Speaker 2: red states, red states make it make it easier to
• 10:48
  Speaker 2: build power generation that is more cost effective UH and
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: to build transmission lines UH. And and it's interesting if
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: you you look at the state of Texas and and
• 10:59
  Speaker 2: and I'm not saying renewable energy is necessarily bad. That
• 11:02
  Speaker 2: the number one producer of wind energy in America is
• 11:04
  Speaker 2: the state of Texas. The number one producer of solar
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: energy in the in the country is the state of Texas.
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: But if you look at how it happens in Texas,
• 11:13
  Speaker 2: that's not subject to a mandate. And so we also
• 11:15
  Speaker 2: have quite a bit of energy that is generated via
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: natural gas and some that is generated via coal as well.
• 11:24
  Speaker 4: In California.
• 11:25
  Speaker 2: By driving it overwhelmingly to renewables, especially renewables that if
• 11:30
  Speaker 2: the weather is uncooperative, you know, sometimes the sun is
• 11:33
  Speaker 2: shining and the wind is blowing, and wind and solar
• 11:36
  Speaker 2: works fine. But other times, if it's overcast, you may
• 11:39
  Speaker 2: not have any sunshine. You have days when the wind
• 11:42
  Speaker 2: doesn't blow. And so if you're if you're powering a
• 11:46
  Speaker 2: power grid, you need electricity that can be generated day in,
• 11:50
  Speaker 2: day out, and that typically comes from either natural gas
• 11:55
  Speaker 2: or coal, or the.
• 11:56
  Speaker 4: Alternative is nuclear.
• 11:58
  Speaker 2: And when we have nuclear energy in Texas, but again,
• 12:01
  Speaker 2: blue states make it incredibly difficult to build nuclear as well.
• 12:05
  Speaker 2: Every time you put it additional man, I'll give you
• 12:07
  Speaker 2: another example. Let's take Massachusetts. Massachusetts, the cost of natural
• 12:13
  Speaker 2: gas to heat your home is massively high, and one
• 12:17
  Speaker 2: of the big reasons there's enormous natural gas deposits in Pennsylvania,
• 12:21
  Speaker 2: the Marcella Shale. It would be very simple to bring
• 12:26
  Speaker 2: that natural gas from Pennsylvania to Massachusetts. Well, you know what,
• 12:30
  Speaker 2: the state of New York has decided New Yorkers don't
• 12:33
  Speaker 2: want natural gas, so the costs are very high there,
• 12:35
  Speaker 2: and they've decided no one else in New England wants it,
• 12:37
  Speaker 2: so New York will not let them build a pipe
• 12:40
  Speaker 2: across New York to get the natural gas to New England.
• 12:43
  Speaker 2: And so as a result, what they've been doing is
• 12:46
  Speaker 2: importing their energy from Russia instead. By the way, it's
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: worse for the environment. It pollutes more, it emits more carbon,
• 12:52
  Speaker 2: and it also does things like enrich Vladimir Putin. But
• 12:55
  Speaker 2: that is left wing liberal logic is no, no, no, no,
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: we think oil and ass is bad, so therefore no
• 13:01
  Speaker 2: pipelines whatsoever, and we'll just buy Russian gas and pollute
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: even more.
• 13:06
  Speaker 4: That's where facts matter.
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: Final question on this, have you seen any fact checks
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: yet come out on Gavin Newsom in this tweet? Because
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: I was scouring the internet as you and I were
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: chatting earlier, I can't find a single fact checker that's
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: come out saying, hey, you're not telling all the facts here.
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: This is a misleading tweet, misleading statement, misleading anything. It's
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: like no one's doing it but you.
• 13:27
  Speaker 4: Well.
• 13:27
  Speaker 2: Unfortunately, the so called fact checkers are not in fact objective.
• 13:31
  Speaker 4: They are not checking facts.
• 13:34
  Speaker 2: Things like outfits like PolitiFact are left wing editorial outlets,
• 13:40
  Speaker 2: and they mask their often deceptive editorial views as objective
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: fact checking. It really is. It's amazing the things. Number One,
• 13:52
  Speaker 2: they inevitably fact check conservatives many many more times than liberals.
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: Sometimes they'll fact check liberals on some innocuous statement just
• 13:59
  Speaker 2: to conclude it true, and and the bias with which
• 14:02
  Speaker 2: they have it. You know, one of the funniest fact
• 14:04
  Speaker 2: checks PolitiFact once I said years ago that that that
• 14:08
  Speaker 2: that in Iran they celebrate Death to America Day, and
• 14:11
  Speaker 2: then that they have a holiday that they celebrate Death
• 14:14
  Speaker 2: to America Day. And PolitiFact fact checked me and and
• 14:19
  Speaker 2: they concluded, well, yes, it is true that there is
• 14:21
  Speaker 2: a holiday that's actually on the official calendar uh in
• 14:25
  Speaker 2: in Iran. And and and the holiday is is the
• 14:29
  Speaker 2: date that that the Iranian radicals and revolutionaries took over
• 14:33
  Speaker 2: the American embassy and took Americans hostage. That's on the calendar.
• 14:36
  Speaker 2: And it is true they celebrated every year. And it's
• 14:39
  Speaker 2: true as well that mobs go out in the streets
• 14:41
  Speaker 2: and and and and they chant Death to America on
• 14:45
  Speaker 2: this day every year, and those chants are frequently led
• 14:47
  Speaker 2: by the Ayatollah. All of that political PolitiFact concludes true, true, true, true,
• 14:52
  Speaker 2: They say, but you know, the holiday is not technically
• 14:56
  Speaker 2: called Death to America Day on the calendar, so we
• 14:59
  Speaker 2: rate this flo out false. And I literally doubled over laughing.
• 15:04
  Speaker 2: It was the most absurd I actually retweeted their fact
• 15:07
  Speaker 2: check and said, read this because the facts that they
• 15:10
  Speaker 2: lay out are exactly what I said. They make my
• 15:13
  Speaker 2: case for it, but ideologically because they're leftists. When the
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: Iatola chance death to America, apparently the PolitiFact editors are
• 15:20
  Speaker 2: chatting right along with them, so they see nothing to
• 15:23
  Speaker 2: complain about. So Gavin Newsom's not going to get fact
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: checked on this. He is going to I mentioned that
• 15:30
  Speaker 2: liberals win when they obvious gate. Well, to Gavin Newsom's credit,
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: he is much like Bill Clinton. If you remember years ago,
• 15:38
  Speaker 2: a backhanded complimented Bill Clinton. It was said he's an
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: unusually good liar. Well, Gavin Newsom, like Bill Clinton, is
• 15:47
  Speaker 2: an unusually good liar. And the fact checkers are in
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: the business of lying, so they're not going to be
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: fact checking what Gavin Newsom says.
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: Yeah, great point there. I want to move to something
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: else that's happening, and this is a very interesting Democrats
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: are going back to their wokeness and adding new words
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: and phrases that you shouldn't be able to say. Apparently
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: this is part of their strategy to reach more voters
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: because they're hemorrhaging voters all over the place. Some of
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: the things they want to bring back and with a
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: vengeance center is not breastfeeding of a child, but it's
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: chest feeding of a child. That's just one example of
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: this lunacy. And they're rolling it out like, Hey, this
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: is how we're going to get people to come back
• 16:27
  Speaker 1: to us.
• 16:28
  Speaker 2: Well, it's very amusing. This democrat think tank Third Way
• 16:33
  Speaker 2: has put out a list of forty five words and
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: phrases that they're asking Democrats please stop saying this, because
• 16:39
  Speaker 2: you guys sound like kooks when you say this. And
• 16:42
  Speaker 2: Politico's Playbook reported on it. Here here's what Playbook said
• 16:46
  Speaker 2: the Blue Blacklist. In a new memo, the center left
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: think tank third Way is circulating a list of forty
• 16:53
  Speaker 2: five words and phrases they want Democrats to avoid using,
• 16:56
  Speaker 2: alleging the terms put quote a wall between us and
• 17:00
  Speaker 2: everyday people of all races, religions, and ethnicities. It's a
• 17:04
  Speaker 2: set of words that third Way suggests quote people simply
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: do not say, yet they hear them from democrats. And
• 17:14
  Speaker 2: these manned words they span six categories, from quote therapy
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: speak to quote explaining away crime. And they put in
• 17:25
  Speaker 2: sharp relief a party that the authors say makes democrats
• 17:29
  Speaker 2: quote sound like the extreme, divisive, elitist, and obfuscatory enforcers
• 17:36
  Speaker 2: of wokeness. And the third way argues that quote to
• 17:42
  Speaker 2: please the few, we have alienated the many, especially on
• 17:47
  Speaker 2: culture issues, where our language sounds superior, haughty, and arrogant.
• 17:54
  Speaker 2: All right, so let's let's go through some of the
• 17:56
  Speaker 2: words that Democrats now are supposed to not say.
• 18:00
  Speaker 4: Number one, privilege. Number two, Yeah, that's a bad one.
• 18:06
  Speaker 2: Violence, as in environmental violence, not actual violence like mugging
• 18:10
  Speaker 2: or murder. That violence they don't say, but environmental violence,
• 18:14
  Speaker 2: dialoguing whatever that is triggering, which you and I believe
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: in triggering. But I think we have a very different
• 18:20
  Speaker 2: meaning for that than than leftist when we talk about
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: triggering other othering. One on Earth is othering othering othering, microaggression,
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: holding space, body shaming, subverting norms, systems of oppression, cultural appropriation,
• 18:45
  Speaker 2: overton window, existential threat to the climate, democracy, economy, radical transparency, stakeholders,
• 18:57
  Speaker 2: the unhoused, food insecurity, housing insecurity, person who immigrated, birthing
• 19:08
  Speaker 2: person cis gender dead naming.
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: Can we go back to birthing person real quick? That's
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: the one that, like I think most Yeah, that would
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: be a mom. But they don't want to say that.
• 19:20
  Speaker 1: They don't think it's a woman they can have a child,
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: even though it's only women they can have children, So
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: they want to say it's a birthing person and this
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: is supposed to like bring them more people. It's incredible,
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: isn't it.
• 19:30
  Speaker 4: All Right?
• 19:30
  Speaker 2: I've told this story on Verdict before, but we actually
• 19:33
  Speaker 2: had a hearing in judiciary where where a Democrat senator
• 19:38
  Speaker 2: made multiple references to.
• 19:41
  Speaker 4: Birthing people. And afterwards I came up to him and I.
• 19:44
  Speaker 2: Said, dude, is your party really that whack job crazy
• 19:48
  Speaker 2: that you can't say mom?
• 19:50
  Speaker 4: And he just nodded and said, yeah, like that's who
• 19:53
  Speaker 4: they are. All right.
• 19:54
  Speaker 2: Let me finish this last heteroonormative patriarchy lgbt QIA plus
• 20:03
  Speaker 2: element OP. I added the element op bipock Alley ship
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: or ally.
• 20:10
  Speaker 4: Ship or whatever the heck.
• 20:11
  Speaker 2: It is incarcerated people and involuntary confinement.
• 20:17
  Speaker 4: So these are the knaughty words.
• 20:19
  Speaker 2: Now, look, I'm old enough to remember George Carlin's list
• 20:22
  Speaker 2: of the seven words you can't say on radio, and
• 20:24
  Speaker 2: since you are a radio host, you probably know those
• 20:26
  Speaker 2: seven words. Because this is a family show, I'm not
• 20:29
  Speaker 2: going to repeat the seven words you can't say on radio.
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: But it is a classic bit of stand up comedy.
• 20:34
  Speaker 2: And this is now I guess the inverse of that,
• 20:38
  Speaker 2: this is the words democrats should stop saying because they
• 20:42
  Speaker 2: make them sound like clowns.
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: Okay, you'll love this center So true story. When I
• 20:49
  Speaker 1: was gosh really young in radio, I want to say sixteen, fifteen, sixteen,
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: somewhere in there. Every year you had to do your
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: broadcasting license interview and at the radio station hrs who'd
• 21:02
  Speaker 1: go meet with and you'd have to write down those
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: words you're not allowed to say on their right, like
• 21:06
  Speaker 1: the seven words so that you're not allowed to do.
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: So everyone in the radio station they came to me
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: when it happened. They started laughing. They're like, hey, Ben,
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: make sure you when you do it, tell them that
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: you're dyslexis out of a learning disability, because then you
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: do the tests orally instead of writing it down. So
• 21:23
  Speaker 1: everyone went into the HR department and you said the
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: words out loud. The HR lady who was like seventy
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: five years old, and she would just shake her head,
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: and then she finally looked at me. She's like, you're
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: not dyslexic. I'm like, no, ma'am. They all told me
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: how to do this. She's like, yeah, you're like the
• 21:34
  Speaker 1: seventeenth person a day. So there's your little Back in
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: the day of radio, everybody at the station, no one
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: knew how to write anything. Everyone wanted to go in
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: here and just mess with her, like where the words
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: You're not allowed to send me here? And of course
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: you would enunciate them like perfectly, and she would just
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: be cringing, and she's like, you don't have a learning disability.
• 21:52
  Speaker 1: I'm like, no, ma'am, I don't. They just they put
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: me up to it. She's like, yeah, so did everyone else.
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: It was the best every year.
• 21:58
  Speaker 2: Well, I appreciate your refraining from going through the list
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: right now. But look, here's what Third Way said as
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: to the reason they put out their list. Quote, we're
• 22:08
  Speaker 2: doing our best to get Democrats to talk like normal
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: people and stop talking like they're leading a seminar at Antioch. Look,
• 22:19
  Speaker 2: this is one of the few times when I'm gonna
• 22:21
  Speaker 2: say I agree with Democrats when they say words like
• 22:24
  Speaker 2: that that they sound like freaks.
• 22:25
  Speaker 4: But there's a reason for that, because they are.
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: It's not just the words. Notice the memo doesn't say
• 22:32
  Speaker 2: to stop believing this stuff. The memo doesn't say to stop,
• 22:36
  Speaker 2: you know, destroying jobs. The memo doesn't say, hey, let's
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: actually secure the border. The memo doesn't say, if we
• 22:41
  Speaker 2: find a murderer, let's arrest the murderer and make him
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: what is it, an incarcerated person. No, no, no, They're perfectly
• 22:49
  Speaker 2: fine with letting murders and rapists go. They just don't
• 22:52
  Speaker 2: want you to say it in a way that people
• 22:55
  Speaker 2: realize what they're doing.
• 22:57
  Speaker 1: I want to move to another big story as well,
• 22:59
  Speaker 1: and this is one that is not going to get
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: a lot of media attention. So I hope everyone listening
• 23:03
  Speaker 1: will actually pay attention to this. Because there was a
• 23:05
  Speaker 1: big victory from the Supreme Court allowing Donald Trump to
• 23:09
  Speaker 1: tax millions of dollars center and funding for DEI related grants.
• 23:14
  Speaker 1: This is huge.
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: It is so it was a five to four vote
• 23:19
  Speaker 2: and it allowed the Trump administration to terminate seven hundred
• 23:24
  Speaker 2: and eighty three million dollars worth of grants, their grants
• 23:27
  Speaker 2: from the National Institute of Health, and they were granted
• 23:31
  Speaker 2: that they were canceled because of the administration's policy positions
• 23:36
  Speaker 2: on diversity, equity, and inclusion. And gender ideology. And the
• 23:41
  Speaker 2: Trump administration quite reasonably said we're not going to give
• 23:44
  Speaker 2: away three seven hundred and eighty three million dollars for
• 23:47
  Speaker 2: DEI for And these were awards that were studying all
• 23:52
  Speaker 2: sorts of ideological objectives that and in many instances were
• 23:56
  Speaker 2: these are awards that were granted because of the research race.
• 24:00
  Speaker 2: They made that a criterion. And listen, I got to say,
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: there is an important role for scientific and medical research,
• 24:09
  Speaker 2: and IHDS does good work. And you know, early in
• 24:12
  Speaker 2: the Trump administration, I was flying from DC back to
• 24:15
  Speaker 2: Houston and a woman came up to me on the
• 24:17
  Speaker 2: plane and she said she was a cancer researcher.
• 24:19
  Speaker 4: At m d Anderson. And she said she was very worried.
• 24:23
  Speaker 2: About funding getting cut and and and she wanted to
• 24:26
  Speaker 2: express that to me. And I said, listen, thank you
• 24:28
  Speaker 2: for the work you do. MD Anderson is incredible. They
• 24:30
  Speaker 2: do phenomenal work fighting cancer. And I said, everyone, or
• 24:35
  Speaker 2: at least everyone with any sense, agrees that we ought
• 24:38
  Speaker 2: to be doing cancer research. And part of the reason,
• 24:41
  Speaker 2: a big part of the reason you want to scrutinize
• 24:44
  Speaker 2: and you want to cut out wasteful expenditures, things like
• 24:47
  Speaker 2: funding you know, transgender education in Guatemala, which was one
• 24:51
  Speaker 2: of the was one of the USA I D grants
• 24:54
  Speaker 2: that the administration canceled is so that you can spend
• 24:57
  Speaker 2: the money where it actually should be. And so seven
• 25:00
  Speaker 2: hundred and eighty three million dollars in NIH grants that
• 25:03
  Speaker 2: is not actually going to disease and curing disease and
• 25:08
  Speaker 2: helping people who are suffering, but instead are granted based
• 25:12
  Speaker 2: on ideology. That is an absolute waste and it is wrong.
• 25:15
  Speaker 2: But I got to tell you, the ruling from the
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: court was only five to four. It was very narrow,
• 25:22
  Speaker 2: and it had a bit of a complicated, bit of
• 25:25
  Speaker 2: a complicated lineup. So four justices dissented. The four who
• 25:32
  Speaker 2: dissented were Chief Justice Roberts, Justice sotom Or, Justice Kagan,
• 25:37
  Speaker 2: and Justice Jackson.
• 25:39
  Speaker 4: So you had the Chief Justice plus the four liberals.
• 25:42
  Speaker 2: Now you had four conservatives, Justice Thomas, Justice Ledo, Justice Gorsich,
• 25:48
  Speaker 2: and Justice Kavanaugh, who would have granted the Trump administration's
• 25:53
  Speaker 2: request entirely. And so what happened was plaintiffs had their
• 25:58
  Speaker 2: grants canceled, they went and filed a lawsuit in Massachusetts
• 26:02
  Speaker 2: because of course, in this law fair that they deliberately
• 26:05
  Speaker 2: seek out left wing judges at extreme left wing jurisdictions,
• 26:09
  Speaker 2: and so Massachusetts and San Francisco have been incredibly popular
• 26:12
  Speaker 2: places for left wing attorneys general and radical groups to
• 26:16
  Speaker 2: file lawsuits. And the district judge, with a district judge
• 26:20
  Speaker 2: did is two things. Number One, vacated the guidance that
• 26:24
  Speaker 2: the Trump administration had issued saying they were not going
• 26:27
  Speaker 2: to give funding to DEI. And then secondly, the district
• 26:32
  Speaker 2: court ordered the Trump administration give the seven hundred and
• 26:36
  Speaker 2: eighty three million dollars to these grant recipients. That went
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: up on appeal to the Court of Appeals, and the
• 26:41
  Speaker 2: Court of Appeals agreed with the District Court and again
• 26:45
  Speaker 2: ordered the Trump administration give the money. Now it went
• 26:48
  Speaker 2: to the US Supreme Court and the Supreme Court five
• 26:51
  Speaker 2: to four said no, you do not have to give
• 26:54
  Speaker 2: the money. So the seven hundred and eighty three million
• 26:56
  Speaker 2: dollars the Trump administration is holding on to it. And
• 27:01
  Speaker 2: the deciding vote on this was Justice Amy Coney Barrett,
• 27:05
  Speaker 2: who voted with the liberals on part of the case
• 27:08
  Speaker 2: and the conservatives on part of the case. So she
• 27:12
  Speaker 2: voted with the conservatives on you don't have to give
• 27:15
  Speaker 2: the money. And the basis for it, by the way,
• 27:17
  Speaker 2: is what the five justices said is the lawsuit was
• 27:22
  Speaker 2: filed in the wrong place. That the lawsuit should have
• 27:25
  Speaker 2: been filed in the Court of Federal Claims, which is
• 27:29
  Speaker 2: where if you have a breach of contract case against
• 27:32
  Speaker 2: the federal government, if you have a contract and they
• 27:33
  Speaker 2: broke it under federal law, the place to bring that
• 27:37
  Speaker 2: case is the Court of Federal Claims. It's a specialized
• 27:40
  Speaker 2: court that exists to adjudicate breach of contract cases against
• 27:45
  Speaker 2: the government. They did not bring this in the Court
• 27:46
  Speaker 2: of Federal Claims. They brought it just in an ordinary
• 27:48
  Speaker 2: federal district court. So five to four the court said,
• 27:52
  Speaker 2: wrong court. They don't have jurisdiction to decide this, so
• 27:55
  Speaker 2: they don't have to give the money. Now, Justice bar
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: Bar sided with the liberals in refusing to reverse the
• 28:07
  Speaker 2: district courts vacating the guidance on Dei. So the guidance
• 28:11
  Speaker 2: on Dei is currently blocked, although that lawsuit will continue,
• 28:17
  Speaker 2: so it's not necessarily permanently blocked. And she declined to
• 28:21
  Speaker 2: have the Supreme Court reverse that decision. And so this
• 28:26
  Speaker 2: was at the end of the day, this really should
• 28:29
  Speaker 2: have been nine to ozho, but I'm glad it was
• 28:31
  Speaker 2: at least five to four the right way because that
• 28:33
  Speaker 2: means that this money doesn't have to go out the door.
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's certainly big that didn't have to go out
• 28:38
  Speaker 1: the door. Moving forward, does this also have some sort
• 28:41
  Speaker 1: of pressent that the president will be harassed? Maybe a
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: little bit less or do you think Democrats say will
• 28:47
  Speaker 1: harass no matter what. We'll argue wherever we can, the
• 28:50
  Speaker 1: liberal court we can find, and that will at least
• 28:52
  Speaker 1: slow him down.
• 28:53
  Speaker 4: Yeah.
• 28:53
  Speaker 2: Look, the Democrats are going to keep trying, and the
• 28:56
  Speaker 2: left wing activist groups are going to keep trying. This
• 28:59
  Speaker 2: is their next general of lawfare. Just like what before
• 29:03
  Speaker 2: when they indicted him four times. That was an effort
• 29:05
  Speaker 2: to use the courts, to use law enforcement to stop
• 29:09
  Speaker 2: President Trump, but also to stop the voters from re
• 29:11
  Speaker 2: electing him. They failed in that. This is now their
• 29:14
  Speaker 2: effort and it is relentless. Every day of the Trump presidency.
• 29:17
  Speaker 2: He's going to be sued, the administration is going to
• 29:19
  Speaker 2: be sued. I will say the Supreme Court, we talked
• 29:22
  Speaker 2: about this in an earlier podcast, It has made important
• 29:26
  Speaker 2: steps to rein in the abuse of nationwide or so
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: called universal injunctions. That was important, and this decision is important,
• 29:35
  Speaker 2: and I will say Justice Gorsic, joined by Justice Kavanaugh,
• 29:39
  Speaker 2: wrote a concurring opinion that was significant.
• 29:42
  Speaker 4: Here's what Justice Gorsic said. Quote.
• 29:45
  Speaker 2: Lower court decisions may sometimes disagree with this Court's decision,
• 29:50
  Speaker 2: but they are never free to defy them. In Department
• 29:55
  Speaker 2: of Education versus California, this court granted a stay because
• 29:59
  Speaker 2: it found the government likely to prevail in showing that
• 30:01
  Speaker 2: the district Court lacked jurisdiction to order the government to
• 30:05
  Speaker 2: pay grant obligations. The California decision explained that quote, suits
• 30:12
  Speaker 2: based on any express or implied contract with the United
• 30:15
  Speaker 2: States do not belong in district court under the Administrative
• 30:19
  Speaker 2: Procedure Act, but in the court of Federal claims under
• 30:22
  Speaker 2: the Tucker Act. Rather than follow that direction, the District
• 30:27
  Speaker 2: Court in this case permitted a suit involving materially identical
• 30:32
  Speaker 2: grants to proceed to final judgment under the APA. As
• 30:36
  Speaker 2: support for its course, the District Court invoked the quote
• 30:42
  Speaker 2: persuasive authority of the dissents in California and an earlier
• 30:49
  Speaker 2: Court of Appeals decision that California repudiated that was error
• 30:57
  Speaker 2: in casting California side. The District Court stressed that the
• 31:00
  Speaker 2: court there granted only interim relief pending appeal and a
• 31:04
  Speaker 2: rit oficcear, and did not issue a final judgment on
• 31:07
  Speaker 2: the Merits true enough, But this Court often addresses requests
• 31:12
  Speaker 2: for interim relief, sometimes pending a rit of curcherary, as
• 31:15
  Speaker 2: in California. And either way, when this Court issues a decision,
• 31:20
  Speaker 2: it constitutes a precedent that commands respect in lower courts.
• 31:27
  Speaker 4: He went on to say, quote, if.
• 31:30
  Speaker 2: The District Court's failure to abide by California were a
• 31:33
  Speaker 2: one off, perhaps it would not be worth writing to
• 31:36
  Speaker 2: address it. But two months ago, another district court tried
• 31:41
  Speaker 2: to quote compel compliance with a different order that this
• 31:46
  Speaker 2: Court had stayed. Still, another district court recently diverged from
• 31:51
  Speaker 2: one of this Court's decisions, even though the case at
• 31:55
  Speaker 2: hand did not differ in any pertinent respect from the
• 31:59
  Speaker 2: one this court court had decided. So now this is
• 32:03
  Speaker 2: the third time in a matter of weeks, this Court
• 32:08
  Speaker 2: has had to intercede in a case squarely controlled by
• 32:13
  Speaker 2: one of its precedents. All these interventions should have been unnecessary,
• 32:18
  Speaker 2: but together they underscore a basic tenet of our judicial system.
• 32:24
  Speaker 2: Whatever their own views, judges are duty bound to respect
• 32:28
  Speaker 2: the hierarchy of the federal court system created by the
• 32:31
  Speaker 2: Constitution and Congress. Look, this highlights a pattern we're seeing
• 32:38
  Speaker 2: of lawless district judges.
• 32:40
  Speaker 4: That is, Justice Gorsic.
• 32:41
  Speaker 2: And Kavanaugh lay out three and just three weeks that
• 32:45
  Speaker 2: have defied the Supreme Court of the United States said
• 32:47
  Speaker 2: we don't care what the Court said, and you know
• 32:50
  Speaker 2: it was striking. Look, I'm reading from a Supreme Court
• 32:53
  Speaker 2: opinion and some of that sounds like legal ease. But
• 32:55
  Speaker 2: I'll tell you one of the most amazing things that
• 32:58
  Speaker 2: Justice Gorsich described the disc Court did is it said
• 33:02
  Speaker 2: it found persuasive the descents in the California decision. Well,
• 33:09
  Speaker 2: a descent, by definition, means you lost. You did not
• 33:12
  Speaker 2: get the majority. The majority issues the opinion. A discent
• 33:16
  Speaker 2: is someone who disagrees with the opinion. And the way
• 33:19
  Speaker 2: precedent works, the way our judicial system works, is is
• 33:23
  Speaker 2: a decision that it issues from the Supreme Court is
• 33:26
  Speaker 2: a precedent that all of the district courts and all
• 33:29
  Speaker 2: of the Courts of Appeals are bound to follow. So
• 33:31
  Speaker 2: if you are citing a descent. You are saying right
• 33:35
  Speaker 2: on the front of it, I don't care what the
• 33:37
  Speaker 2: majority held. I agree with the dissenters. No lower court
• 33:41
  Speaker 2: judge has the authority to do that. That is the
• 33:44
  Speaker 2: definition of lawlessness, and it is why these plaintiffs are
• 33:50
  Speaker 2: seeking out radicals on the bench who they know will
• 33:53
  Speaker 2: be lawless.
• 33:54
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: Great point there. Don't forget. We do this show Monday,
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: Wednesday and Friday, said the subscriber auto download button wherever
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: you get your podcasts, so you do not miss a
• 34:02
  Speaker 1: single episode. Make sure again put this up on social
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: media wherever you can, and the center I will see
• 34:08
  Speaker 1: you back here on Wednesday morning.