Latest / The Ben Ferguson Podcast / Pardon-palooza: Biden Plans to Pardon EVERYBODY, plus Supreme Court hears Challenge to law Prohibiting Sex Transition Surgeries for Kids

Transcript

Pardon-palooza: Biden Plans to Pardon EVERYBODY, plus Supreme Court hears Challenge to law Prohibiting Sex Transition Surgeries for Kids · The Ben Ferguson Podcast

0:01
Speaker 1: Welcome.
0:01
Speaker 2: It is vertical Center, Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you
0:04
Speaker 2: and center. I hate it when I mean, we have
0:06
Speaker 2: to admit so often that we were just absolutely right
0:09
Speaker 2: in predicting something. And sure enough, now the White House
0:12
Speaker 2: is hunkered down going through long lists of pardons and
0:16
Speaker 2: letting the American people know you should expect more pardons
0:21
Speaker 2: before we leave office.
0:24
Speaker 3: Well, this week we were struck with the stunning news
0:26
Speaker 3: that the White House has announced verdict with Ted Cruz.
0:29
Speaker 3: Wednesday pod was exactly entirely, one hundred percent accurate that
0:35
Speaker 3: every word we said. And by the way, if you
0:37
Speaker 3: didn't listen to Wednesday's pod, you should listen to Wednesday's
0:40
Speaker 3: pod because we predicted. We said that the left wing
0:43
Speaker 3: media and Democrats were pressing Joe Biden to issue a
0:46
Speaker 3: ton more pardons, to pardon the rest of his family,
0:49
Speaker 3: to pardon members of his administration and now, and we said, look,
0:54
Speaker 3: that's the direction they're going. And seemingly in response to
0:58
Speaker 3: our podcast, the White House immediately came out and said
1:03
Speaker 3: expect more pardons, and we're seeing a list of people
1:07
Speaker 3: now that they are contemplating pardoning. In addition, we had
1:11
Speaker 3: a major Supreme Court case argued this week a challenge
1:15
Speaker 3: to Tennessee's law that prohibits sex transition treatments for children,
1:21
Speaker 3: and the ACLU has challenged this, arguing that it violates
1:26
Speaker 3: the Constitution, that the Constitution requires that you be able
1:31
Speaker 3: to mutilate and sterilize children. That argument played out in
1:35
Speaker 3: the Supreme Court this week. We're going to lay out
1:37
Speaker 3: how it went.
1:39
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's truly shocking what they were saying in quitting
1:41
Speaker 2: some of the Supreme Court justices, and we have the
1:43
Speaker 2: audio from those arguments that will, I think shock most
1:47
Speaker 2: parents out there. I want to tell you real quick
1:49
Speaker 2: about a cool opportunity for you, a chance to win
1:54
Speaker 2: seventeen hundred hours to buy any self defense gear that
1:57
Speaker 2: you need before it's two eight.
1:59
Speaker 1: Now, how do you win? Right now?
2:00
Speaker 2: You can text the word America to eight seven two
2:05
Speaker 2: two two. Right now, that's sexy word America to eight
2:07
Speaker 2: seven two two two. Now, who's giving it away? Well,
2:11
Speaker 2: the USCCA, and the USCCA is doing incredible work to
2:15
Speaker 2: help protect people just like you when it comes to you,
2:18
Speaker 2: uh exercising your Second Amendment rights. Look, I've had to
2:22
Speaker 2: use a firearm to protect and save my own life.
2:24
Speaker 2: I had to pull the trigger, and I wish I
2:26
Speaker 2: would have been a member and even known back then
2:29
Speaker 2: about the USCCA, because with activist das around the country
2:32
Speaker 2: right now, you never know what's going to happen, even
2:35
Speaker 2: if you're in the right. Many das don't like law
2:38
Speaker 2: abiding citizens carrying firearms and protecting yourself and your family
2:43
Speaker 2: is so important now, not only when you become a
2:46
Speaker 2: member of the USCCA, and they have over eight hundred
2:49
Speaker 2: thousand Americans right now that are already members. Why because
2:53
Speaker 2: they understand how important it is to get access to
2:56
Speaker 2: their Protector Academy where you learn vital skills like precision
2:59
Speaker 2: shooting and how to fortify your home against criminals. You
3:02
Speaker 2: also get access when you remember to the twenty four
3:06
Speaker 2: to seven Critical Response Team. That is the most important thing,
3:10
Speaker 2: and it includes the benefits of self defense liability insurance
3:14
Speaker 2: to make sure that you and your family are prepared
3:17
Speaker 2: for anything. Now, for a limited time, you text the
3:19
Speaker 2: word America to eight seven two two two, and you're
3:23
Speaker 2: going to get the usc CAA's free Life Saving Conceiled
3:26
Speaker 2: Carying Defense Family Defense Guide and that chance to win
3:30
Speaker 2: seventeen hundred dollars to buy any self defense care that
3:33
Speaker 2: you need before it's too late. So text the word
3:35
Speaker 2: America to eight seven to to two right now. So
3:39
Speaker 2: we talked about this two days ago, and as you said,
3:42
Speaker 2: I'll say it again. Go back if you missed that
3:44
Speaker 2: podcast and listen to it, because we talked about this
3:46
Speaker 2: idea that was really coming out of the White House
3:49
Speaker 2: that they wanted to expand the list to people that
3:53
Speaker 2: would be given pardons that could also include the President
3:56
Speaker 2: in theory, pardoning himself. What we are now is the
4:01
Speaker 2: White House has saying, yeah, it's coming, and you should
4:04
Speaker 2: prepare for a lot of people to quite possibly be pardoned.
4:07
Speaker 1: So just get used to it.
4:09
Speaker 2: Your instant reaction in the White House now confirming this story.
4:13
Speaker 3: Well, we put out the podcast Wednesday morning as the
4:16
Speaker 3: sun was coming up, and several hours later, Politico issued
4:20
Speaker 3: a report entitled Biden White House is discussing preemptive pardons
4:24
Speaker 3: for those in Trump's crosshairs. It was written by Jonathan Martin,
4:28
Speaker 3: who's a longtime Washington reporter, and what he reports is
4:33
Speaker 3: that White House officials are debating issuing blanket pardons to
4:40
Speaker 3: multiple people, which is exactly what we predicted. And here's
4:42
Speaker 3: what Politico reports, quote Those who could face exposure include
4:47
Speaker 3: such members of Congress's January sixth committee as Adams Schiff.
4:52
Speaker 3: Liz Cheney also mentioned Anthony Fauci and other as well.
5:02
Speaker 3: And so that's the initial list, Adam Schiff, Liz Cheney,
5:07
Speaker 3: Anthony Fauci. That's who they are discussing. And what is
5:11
Speaker 3: striking is there are now multiple elected Democrats explicitly urging this. So,
5:18
Speaker 3: for example, Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey said in a press
5:24
Speaker 3: interview quote, if it's clear by January nineteenth it revenges
5:28
Speaker 3: his intention, then I would recommend to President Biden that
5:31
Speaker 3: he provide those preemptive pardons to people, because that's really
5:36
Speaker 3: what our country is going to need next year. Another Democrat,
5:39
Speaker 3: Congressman Brendan Boyle from Pennsylvania, likewise called for blanket pardons.
5:46
Speaker 3: He said, quote, this is no hypothetical threat. The time
5:51
Speaker 3: for cautious restraint is over. We must act with urgency
5:55
Speaker 3: to push back against these threats and prevent Trump from
5:58
Speaker 3: abusing his power. I will say to I guess some
6:03
Speaker 3: modicum of his credit. One person pushing on the other
6:06
Speaker 3: side is Adam shift. Now, to be clear, they're talking
6:09
Speaker 3: about giving him a pardon, and Shift was quoted as saying, quote,
6:13
Speaker 3: I would urge the president not to do that. I
6:15
Speaker 3: think it would seem defensive and unnecessary. Well, I got
6:19
Speaker 3: to say, it is stunning, and you're right. The White
6:22
Speaker 3: House is now publicly saying expect more pardons here we come.
6:27
Speaker 3: And it's a question of just how much they're going
6:30
Speaker 3: to abuse power, because it really is at this point
6:33
Speaker 3: stunning and apparently that everyone who may have committed wrongdoing
6:39
Speaker 3: is panicking that there may be some accountability, and so
6:42
Speaker 3: they want to pardon everybody for whatever crimes they might
6:45
Speaker 3: have committed.
6:46
Speaker 2: And you talk about Adam Shift, Let's remind people back
6:50
Speaker 2: in twenty eighteen what Adam Schiff did. Adam Shift introduced
6:55
Speaker 2: a bill to keep Trump from quote abusing pardon powers
6:58
Speaker 2: for his family. This was on CNN on Don Lemon's
7:04
Speaker 2: show back in twenty eighteen.
7:07
Speaker 4: So the president's pardon a Scooter Libby congressman has inspired
7:10
Speaker 4: you to propose new legislation, what exactly would it do.
7:14
Speaker 5: What it would do is say that in the event
7:16
Speaker 5: the president pardons anyone in an investigation in which the
7:19
Speaker 5: president is a witness, a subject, or the target, those
7:24
Speaker 5: investigative files will all be turned over to the Congress.
7:27
Speaker 5: The Congress ought to know whether the president is using
7:29
Speaker 5: the pardon power to obstruct justice. The American people have
7:34
Speaker 5: a right to know. I think it is clearly constitutional.
7:37
Speaker 5: It doesn't prohibit him from granting a pardon, even a
7:40
Speaker 5: pardon he shouldn't grant, But it does say that we
7:43
Speaker 5: will be able to at least find out whether the
7:46
Speaker 5: president is using this power to shield himself from liability.
7:50
Speaker 6: It offers transparency at the very least.
7:53
Speaker 1: Wow, I mean, what a great idea.
7:54
Speaker 2: Now, Adam shiff why aren't you introducing this legislation all
7:58
Speaker 2: over again so we can know all of the peace
8:00
Speaker 2: that are going to be pardon, why they're being pardon,
8:02
Speaker 2: in all the files that show what the information is
8:05
Speaker 2: behind it. I'm waiting for this Adam shift of eighteen
8:08
Speaker 2: to appear again.
8:09
Speaker 3: Senator Well, and I got to say, under that reasoning,
8:12
Speaker 3: that would have the Department of Justice forwarding the investigatory
8:17
Speaker 3: files of Hunter Biden to Congress to the Republican majorities
8:21
Speaker 3: in both Congresses. Under his reasoning, he just argued for that,
8:25
Speaker 3: I'll be curious to see if he thinks it should
8:28
Speaker 3: apply in those circumstances, you know. Spoiler alert, I would
8:32
Speaker 3: not bet on it. No, I wouldn't either.
8:35
Speaker 2: Let's also talk about Politico's Jonathan mart and what he
8:38
Speaker 2: said on TV about this pardon list. This was after
8:42
Speaker 2: the writing in Politico. Take a listen to how he
8:45
Speaker 2: described it earlier.
8:46
Speaker 4: Go titled Biden Whitehouse is discussing preemptive pardons for those
8:50
Speaker 4: in Trump's crosshairs. In it, you write this quote, President
8:54
Speaker 4: Joe Biden's senior aides are conducting a vigorous internal debate
8:57
Speaker 4: of whether he is shoot preemptive pardons to a range
9:00
Speaker 4: of current and former public officials who could be targeted
9:04
Speaker 4: with President elect Donald Trump's return to the White House.
9:06
Speaker 4: It's according to senior Democrats familiar with the discussions, the
9:10
Speaker 4: deliberations touch on pardoning those currently in office, elected and appointed,
9:14
Speaker 4: as well as former officials who've angered Trump and his loyalists.
9:18
Speaker 6: Those who could face exposure.
9:19
Speaker 4: Include such members of Congress's January sixth Committee as Senator
9:24
Speaker 4: elect Adam Schiff and former GOP Representative Liz Cheney. Also
9:28
Speaker 4: mentioned by Biden's aids for a pardon, Anthony Fauci, the
9:32
Speaker 4: former head of the National Institute of allergy and infectious diseases,
9:36
Speaker 4: who became a lightning rod for criticism from the right
9:39
Speaker 4: during the COVID nineteen pandemic. The President himself, Jonathan continues,
9:43
Speaker 4: who was intensely focused on his son's pardon, has not
9:46
Speaker 4: been brought into the broader pardon discussions yet, according to
9:49
Speaker 4: people familiar with deliberations. So, Jonathan, what does this look like.
9:53
Speaker 4: What are you pardoning Anthony Fauci for? What are you
9:55
Speaker 4: pardoning Liz Cheney for who've not been charged or victive crimes?
10:01
Speaker 6: That goes to the heart of this deliberation.
10:04
Speaker 7: William, why this is so delicate because the White House
10:08
Speaker 7: Counsel and a handful of senior White House aides, including
10:12
Speaker 7: Jeff Zionce, the Chief of Staff, are having this debate
10:15
Speaker 7: right now in the West Wing, which is, do we
10:18
Speaker 7: leave these folks out in the cold and potentially expose
10:21
Speaker 7: them to Cash Patel's FBI and Donald Trump's White House
10:25
Speaker 7: for any number of charges or of some kind of
10:29
Speaker 7: you know, the show trial to get a measure of
10:33
Speaker 7: revenge and at the very least make them pay six
10:37
Speaker 7: figures in.
10:38
Speaker 6: Legal bills to avoid such a case.
10:41
Speaker 7: Or do we offer preemptively pardons to people there's no
10:45
Speaker 7: proof they've done anything wrong whatsoever, and really may not
10:49
Speaker 7: want to pardon in the first place. That's a real
10:51
Speaker 7: tough call, because if you don't do it, and Patel
10:55
Speaker 7: and company come after some of these people and you
10:57
Speaker 7: had the chance to give them an oculation.
11:00
Speaker 6: Legally, that's a hell of a thing to regret.
11:02
Speaker 7: At the same time, do you want to pardon somebody
11:05
Speaker 7: like Liz Cheney or Anthony Faalsciet and suggest any kind
11:09
Speaker 7: of impropriety that could only add fuel to the Trump
11:13
Speaker 7: aggressors in the first place.
11:15
Speaker 6: It's a real tough nut.
11:17
Speaker 2: I love the way he describes it the ed. He's like,
11:19
Speaker 2: it's a real tough nut, Like this is a hard one,
11:21
Speaker 2: you know. Should we just admit we broke a hell
11:24
Speaker 2: of a bunch of laws and just hand out the
11:26
Speaker 2: pardons or do we act like we didn't break laws
11:29
Speaker 2: and hope they don't come after all of us.
11:32
Speaker 3: Well, and I will say, even the way he's reporting it,
11:35
Speaker 3: the Trump aggressors look the idea that anyone in and
11:42
Speaker 3: around Joe Biden would be held responsible for laws they
11:46
Speaker 3: have been broken is treated as a pearl clutching horror
11:52
Speaker 3: for the media and for the Democrats, and listen my view,
11:58
Speaker 3: and we've talked about this at length.
12:00
Speaker 8: I don't want to.
12:00
Speaker 3: See a Republican Department of Justice. I don't want to
12:03
Speaker 3: see a republican FBI. I don't want to see a
12:04
Speaker 3: Democrat Department of Justice. I don't want to see a
12:06
Speaker 3: Democrat FBI. I want a Department of Justice and an
12:09
Speaker 3: FBI that enforces the law regardless of party. And that
12:15
Speaker 3: apparently is a terrifying thing to individuals who who previously
12:21
Speaker 3: consider themselves unaccountable and not bound by the ordinary constraints
12:28
Speaker 3: of law.
12:29
Speaker 2: Well, and even look at Bill Clinton, for example. Bill
12:33
Speaker 2: Clinton is now coming out saying he wants to stop
12:36
Speaker 2: the cycle of criminalizing politics. That's pretty rich from the Democrats,
12:41
Speaker 2: after that's all they've done the last four years. Here
12:43
Speaker 2: is Bill Clinton at the Deal Book summit. It's a
12:47
Speaker 2: New York Times event.
12:48
Speaker 6: Listen, you think Biden should be.
12:51
Speaker 7: Pardoning pardoning Trump, And by the way, some people think
12:53
Speaker 7: that Trump should be pardoning Biden.
12:57
Speaker 9: Well, I do think we should stop trying to them
13:00
Speaker 9: in law's politics.
13:02
Speaker 6: But on the other I think we should both.
13:04
Speaker 9: Of them because because obviously and the people don't like it,
13:12
Speaker 9: and they're not going along with it from right to left.
13:17
Speaker 9: On the other hand, you have to ask yourself, if
13:21
Speaker 9: you do this blanket thing, is there anything a president
13:26
Speaker 9: could do that he would or she someday would get
13:30
Speaker 9: in trouble for.
13:31
Speaker 1: I mean, Senator.
13:33
Speaker 2: They weaponized the FBI, the DOJ, the entire apparatus of
13:37
Speaker 2: the White House Executive branch to go after their political
13:40
Speaker 2: enemies for four years, and now all of a sudden
13:42
Speaker 2: they're like, hey, we should not have Republicans doing that.
13:45
Speaker 1: Republicans never did that. The Democrats are the ones that
13:48
Speaker 1: have done it.
13:50
Speaker 3: I'm curious. Did did Bill Clinton say that the first
13:54
Speaker 3: time Trump was indicted? Did he say that the second
13:58
Speaker 3: time Trump was indicted?
14:00
Speaker 9: No?
14:00
Speaker 3: Did he say that the third time Trump was indicted Nope?
14:04
Speaker 3: Did he say that the fourth time Trump was indicted?
14:08
Speaker 9: No?
14:08
Speaker 1: And he didn't say it when they were rating mar
14:10
Speaker 1: Lago either.
14:11
Speaker 8: Yeah.
14:12
Speaker 3: I mean, it is amazing. And by the way, Bill
14:15
Speaker 3: Clinton also didn't say that when the Trump DOJ was
14:18
Speaker 3: prosecuting people for peaceful protest on January sixth, when they
14:23
Speaker 3: were using the violent acts of a limited number of
14:27
Speaker 3: people as an excuse to engage in political persecution. Bill
14:31
Speaker 3: Clinton didn't speak out when the Biden Department of Justice
14:35
Speaker 3: was targeting parents for going to school board meetings and
14:38
Speaker 3: speaking out, sending the FBI to intimidate moms and dads
14:42
Speaker 3: who are exercising their constitutional rights at school board meetings.
14:46
Speaker 3: He didn't speak out when the Biden administration was firing
14:50
Speaker 3: people for declining to take the COVID vaccine. He didn't
14:53
Speaker 3: speak out when the Biden administration was coercing private businesses
14:57
Speaker 3: to fire people for declining to take the COVID vaccine.
15:00
Speaker 3: He didn't speak out when the Biden administration sent over
15:04
Speaker 3: a dozen FBI agents with drawn machine guns to arrest
15:08
Speaker 3: a pro life protester at dawn in front of his children.
15:11
Speaker 3: By the way, that case, the jury threw it out
15:14
Speaker 3: when they tried to put him in jail, and the
15:15
Speaker 3: jury said this is ridiculous and threw it out incredibly quickly.
15:21
Speaker 3: The absolute and brazen hypocrisy of the Democrats that they've
15:25
Speaker 3: suddenly discovered, uh oh, don't use the legal process against us.
15:31
Speaker 3: And I want to be clear, I do not believe
15:35
Speaker 3: the Trump administration should persecute democrats. I do believe they
15:43
Speaker 3: should follow the law and if individuals have violated the law,
15:46
Speaker 3: they should enforce the law. That is very different from
15:50
Speaker 3: targeting and weaponizing DJ You know, I sat down this
15:53
Speaker 3: week with Pam Bondi, the nominee to be Attorney General,
15:56
Speaker 3: and the entire discussion I had with her was about
15:59
Speaker 3: restoring boring integrity to the Department of Justice, not about
16:03
Speaker 3: turning it into a tool just to be used to
16:05
Speaker 3: target the other side, but bringing it back to what
16:08
Speaker 3: it is supposed to be, which is having fidelity to
16:11
Speaker 3: the rule of law.
16:13
Speaker 1: You talk about the fidelity and the rule of law here.
16:16
Speaker 2: So the question now becomes if the President decides to
16:20
Speaker 2: walk out there and say, I'm going to preemptively pardon
16:25
Speaker 2: everyone Fauci Schiff, Liz Cheney, and people all around my family,
16:32
Speaker 2: all of maybe the business associates, for example, around Hunter Biden.
16:36
Speaker 2: Is there anything that Congress will be able to do
16:39
Speaker 2: to stop this or to rein it in. I go
16:41
Speaker 2: back to Adam Shiff when he was like, well, what
16:43
Speaker 2: we should be doing, is ushe have centered all the
16:46
Speaker 2: documents or is this pretty much like he's in charge,
16:49
Speaker 2: he's leaving, he can do whatever the hell he wants.
16:51
Speaker 1: It's the power of the presidency.
16:53
Speaker 2: And even if he wants to abuse a pardon power,
16:55
Speaker 2: he has a right to do it. What mindset should
16:58
Speaker 2: everyone listening have on reality?
16:59
Speaker 3: Now, look under the Constitution, the pardon power is essentially
17:04
Speaker 3: an absolute power. And and so there there is not
17:10
Speaker 3: any limitation in the Constitution that Congress can enforce on
17:14
Speaker 3: the pardon power that is given to the president. The
17:16
Speaker 3: only limitation is is public pressure, public scrutiny.
17:21
Speaker 8: The only thing that constrains.
17:22
Speaker 3: Presidents is they don't want the world to know that
17:25
Speaker 3: they're utterly corrupt hacks. Now, I will say Biden's got
17:29
Speaker 3: a problem in that because he's already done the Hunter Biden.
17:35
Speaker 8: Pardon.
17:35
Speaker 3: And I'll read from from an article in Axios, which
17:39
Speaker 3: which often reports on sort of inside gossip in the
17:42
Speaker 3: White House and Capitol Hill, and and and the story
17:46
Speaker 3: is entitled behind the Curtain Biden's Haunting Twin Sins. Here's
17:54
Speaker 3: what Axios reports. President Biden's post presidency now looks bleak
17:59
Speaker 3: as is brutal final months. Some top Democrats tell us
18:04
Speaker 3: they're so furious about Biden's abrupt, clumsy pardon of his
18:07
Speaker 3: son Hunter that they're threatening to withhold donations from his
18:11
Speaker 3: future Presidential library.
18:15
Speaker 10: And his.
18:17
Speaker 3: Quote twin selfishness. What it says is why it matters.
18:21
Speaker 3: Biden eighty two will limp away from the limelight, widely
18:24
Speaker 3: disliked by the public and now loathed by many Democrats
18:28
Speaker 3: who blame him for twin sins of selfishness running again
18:34
Speaker 3: then pardoning Hunter after repeatedly saying he wouldn't. That's the
18:39
Speaker 3: real constraint, is just public shame and disgrace. And the
18:43
Speaker 3: question is are Democrats capable of of public shame anymore?
18:48
Speaker 3: Or is trump derangement syndrome so bad that their answer
18:51
Speaker 3: to everything is range Man bad.
18:53
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a great point.
18:54
Speaker 2: I want to take a moment and say thank you
18:56
Speaker 2: to so many of you that have been involved with
18:58
Speaker 2: the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. They are wishing
19:02
Speaker 2: you a blessed beginning of the holiday season, and as
19:04
Speaker 2: you gather with your families, grateful for the blessing that
19:07
Speaker 2: God has given us all, let's also remember those who
19:11
Speaker 2: are facing unbelievable hardship, those in Israel that are in
19:15
Speaker 2: the need of food, fellowship, and just hope. That includes
19:19
Speaker 2: the people of Israel who are threatened daily by the
19:22
Speaker 2: attacks from enemies on all sides, and during these hard times,
19:25
Speaker 2: Israelis are thankful for the fellowship, for the food and
19:29
Speaker 2: the basic assistance that they are providing, truly life saving
19:33
Speaker 2: aid when the rest of the world seems to have
19:34
Speaker 2: turned their back on them.
19:36
Speaker 1: Your gift of twenty five dollars.
19:38
Speaker 2: Will help provide a food box to an elderly Jew
19:41
Speaker 2: or a Jewish family who are suffering and in desperate need.
19:45
Speaker 2: A gift of one hundred dollars will help provide four
19:47
Speaker 2: of these life saving food boxes this holiday season. Please
19:51
Speaker 2: consider standing with Israel and the Jewish people.
19:54
Speaker 1: You can go to.
19:54
Speaker 2: Support IFCJ dot org to make a gift now port
20:01
Speaker 2: IFCJ dot org, or you can call them eight eight
20:04
Speaker 2: eight for eight eight IFCJ that's eight eight eight four
20:10
Speaker 2: eight eight four three two five and you can give
20:15
Speaker 2: right now. Senata, I want to move to this other case,
20:18
Speaker 2: and it is a case that has really been interesting
20:21
Speaker 2: to follow the Supreme Court hearing this case on gender
20:25
Speaker 2: transitions for minors.
20:27
Speaker 1: Now.
20:27
Speaker 2: This has all come out of a case in Tennessee
20:30
Speaker 2: where Tennessee was arguing that that you must protect children
20:35
Speaker 2: from harm and body mutilation, especially at very young ages,
20:41
Speaker 2: and the left and the federal government saying, well, hold
20:44
Speaker 2: on a second, we are in favor of this transgender care,
20:50
Speaker 2: arguing that even those that are two, in three and
20:53
Speaker 2: four years old, they know that they're trands, so let
20:56
Speaker 2: them be sterilized and castrate themselves. That is what the
20:59
Speaker 2: eight THELU lawyer said in his own words while he
21:04
Speaker 2: was arguing this on TV on CNN. I want you
21:08
Speaker 2: to listen and get your reaction to that.
21:10
Speaker 11: I would say is nobody has to provide this medication
21:13
Speaker 11: to adolescents. These are not doctors being forced to provide
21:16
Speaker 11: this medication. These are doctors who are wanting to treat
21:20
Speaker 11: their patients in the best way that they know how,
21:22
Speaker 11: based on the best available evidence to us. And these
21:24
Speaker 11: are young people who may have known since they were
21:26
Speaker 11: two years old exactly who they are, who suffered for
21:29
Speaker 11: six seven years before they had any relief. And what's
21:32
Speaker 11: happening here, it's not the kids who are consenting to
21:34
Speaker 11: this treatment. It's the parents who are consenting to the treatment.
21:37
Speaker 11: And as a parent, I would say we when our
21:39
Speaker 11: children are suffering, we are suffering. And these are parents
21:42
Speaker 11: who love their children, who are listening to the advice
21:45
Speaker 11: of their doctors of the mainstream medical community and doing
21:48
Speaker 11: what's right for their kids in the state of Tennessee
21:50
Speaker 11: has displaced their judgment.
21:52
Speaker 2: Now you hear that argument, and that to me is
21:55
Speaker 2: just I'm sorry, child abuse if you're mutilating a child
21:58
Speaker 2: at two and three and four years old.
22:00
Speaker 1: And that's what Tennessee was saying.
22:03
Speaker 3: Well, Tennessee passed I think a very reasonable law that
22:06
Speaker 3: that prohibited puberty blockers and hormones and sterilizing children, sterilizing minors,
22:13
Speaker 3: and and we're seeing multiple state legislatures that are acting
22:17
Speaker 3: to protect children. I think that is a reasonable and
22:19
Speaker 3: common sense step. And and what happened is is, unsurprisingly
22:24
Speaker 3: that that the state got sued and the ACLU argued
22:27
Speaker 3: that that that making it illegal for a small child
22:31
Speaker 3: to be sterilized and made permanently unable to have children,
22:35
Speaker 3: or even to be mutilated, that that prohibiting that violated
22:40
Speaker 3: the fourteenth Amendment, the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
22:45
Speaker 3: That that was the argument. And and this the Court
22:48
Speaker 3: of Appeals upheld the Tennessee law, and the Supreme Court
22:50
Speaker 3: took the case. And and so that that was the
22:52
Speaker 3: argument you heard right there. The ASLU lawyers arguing UH
22:57
Speaker 3: for for being able to sterilize eight year olds using
23:00
Speaker 3: the math the lawyer laid out. The lawyer talked about
23:03
Speaker 3: a child at the age of two might know that
23:07
Speaker 3: he or she is transgender, and they might have had
23:09
Speaker 3: to wait six years. Last I checked, two plus six
23:13
Speaker 3: is eight. And so the legal argument is that eight
23:16
Speaker 3: year old the parent should be able to sterilize that child.
23:21
Speaker 3: And you know what if that child decides that at
23:23
Speaker 3: eighteen he or she wants to be a dad or
23:26
Speaker 3: wants to be a mom, well, too late now, because
23:29
Speaker 3: when you were eight, we went ahead and sterilized you.
23:32
Speaker 3: So there's no going back. And this argument went back
23:35
Speaker 3: and forth. Right, I'm going to make a prediction. My prediction,
23:38
Speaker 3: I think the Supreme Court is going to uphold Tennessee's law,
23:43
Speaker 3: and I think we may see a breakdown that plays
23:46
Speaker 3: out along pretty familiar ideological lines.
23:48
Speaker 8: Now, it was pretty striking.
23:51
Speaker 3: The three liberal justices all were asking questions that I
23:58
Speaker 3: got to say, we're really extreme and showing the modern left.
24:03
Speaker 3: They are all in on mutilating and sterilizing children. This
24:09
Speaker 3: is not a fringe view on the left. Today's elected
24:13
Speaker 3: Democrats and sadly the left wing activists they put on
24:18
Speaker 3: the courts are absolutely committed to this extreme agenda. So
24:23
Speaker 3: I want you to listen to.
24:24
Speaker 1: This side of my org.
24:25
Speaker 2: Justice out of my org downplaying the risk of mutilation
24:28
Speaker 2: of miners in this back and forth, in these oral arguments.
24:32
Speaker 12: This is what she said, cannot eliminate the risk of detransitioners.
24:37
Speaker 12: So it becomes a pure exercise of weighing benefits versus risk,
24:43
Speaker 12: and the question of how many miners have to have
24:45
Speaker 12: their bodies irreparably harmed for unproven benefits is one that
24:50
Speaker 12: is best left.
24:50
Speaker 13: I'm sorry, counselor. Every medical treatment has a risk, even
24:56
Speaker 13: taking astron There is always going to be a percentage
25:02
Speaker 13: of the population under any medical treatment that's going to
25:05
Speaker 13: suffer a harm. So the question in my mind is
25:10
Speaker 13: not do policy makers decide whether one person's life is
25:17
Speaker 13: more valuable than the millions of others who get relief
25:21
Speaker 13: from this treatment. The question is can you stop one
25:26
Speaker 13: sex from the other one?
25:29
Speaker 2: I mean, she's saying, this is not a big deal
25:33
Speaker 2: at all if you're mutilating a child, because even aspirin
25:37
Speaker 2: has risks and effects, So therefore, just put it under
25:40
Speaker 2: the category of everything goes.
25:43
Speaker 8: Well.
25:43
Speaker 3: That sums up today's radical left. In their view, severing
25:50
Speaker 3: a child's genitals is comparable to taking aspirin. She also claimed,
25:57
Speaker 3: quote millions of people are getting relief from this. Now,
26:02
Speaker 3: thankfully we do not currently have millions of children being sterilized.
26:07
Speaker 3: But let's be clear, that's the left's worldview. Is that
26:11
Speaker 3: sterilizing little boys and little girls, mutilating them, making them
26:16
Speaker 3: permanently unable to have children, that should be happening on
26:20
Speaker 3: the scale of millions and millions of little boys and
26:24
Speaker 3: little girls. That is Justice Soda bay Or here to
26:27
Speaker 3: take a listen to Justice Justice k Katanji Brown Jackson.
26:34
Speaker 10: Drawn by the statute that was sort of like the
26:36
Speaker 10: starting point. The question was whether it was discriminatory because
26:40
Speaker 10: it applied to both races and it wasn't necessarily invidious
26:44
Speaker 10: or whatever. But you know, as I read the statute here,
26:47
Speaker 10: excuse me the case here. You know, the court starts
26:50
Speaker 10: off by saying that Virginia is now one of sixteen
26:53
Speaker 10: states which prohibit and punished marriages on the basis of
26:56
Speaker 10: racial classifications. And when you look at the structure of
26:59
Speaker 10: that law, it looks in terms of incontinuing you can't
27:02
Speaker 10: do something that is inconsistent with your own characteristics.
27:05
Speaker 6: It's sort of the same thing.
27:07
Speaker 10: So it's interesting to me that we now have this
27:09
Speaker 10: different argument, and I wonder whether Virginia could have gotten
27:12
Speaker 10: away with what they did here by just making a
27:16
Speaker 10: classification argument the way that Tennessee is in this case.
27:20
Speaker 6: Yes, I think that's exactly right.
27:22
Speaker 10: That there is absolutely a parallel between any law that
27:25
Speaker 10: says you can't act and consistent with a protected characteristic
27:28
Speaker 10: and all other contents.
27:30
Speaker 1: You hear it there.
27:31
Speaker 2: This is another example of just how extreme these and
27:34
Speaker 2: that's one of the elections, by the way, are so
27:36
Speaker 2: important center. I mean, this is why Donald Trump being
27:39
Speaker 2: elected was so important, because when he's not, when you
27:41
Speaker 2: don't have a conservative in the White House, you get
27:44
Speaker 2: these radical activists who are Supreme Court justices, and if
27:48
Speaker 2: they have the majority, this is what they want you
27:50
Speaker 2: to be able to do. This is what they want
27:51
Speaker 2: to happen to your children.
27:53
Speaker 3: Well, and let me break down what that exchange back
27:55
Speaker 3: and forth was. So Katanji Brown Jackson, who Joe Biden
28:00
Speaker 3: put on the Supreme Court, is comparing this Tennessee law
28:04
Speaker 3: to the law in Loving versus Virginia. Now, Loving versus
28:07
Speaker 3: Virginia's a Supreme Court case. It's a landmark case that
28:11
Speaker 3: struck down Virginia's ban decades ago, many many years ago
28:16
Speaker 3: on interracial marriage, on African Americans and Anglos choosing to
28:21
Speaker 3: get married. And she says, quote, it's sort of the
28:25
Speaker 3: same thing. Now, Virginia's law was an abomination. It was
28:30
Speaker 3: restricting adults making the decision to get married. It was
28:35
Speaker 3: deliberately doing so on the basis of race. Which, mind you,
28:40
Speaker 3: we fought a civil war in significant part to end
28:44
Speaker 3: slavery and to vindicate equal rights. And we passed and
28:48
Speaker 3: adopted the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth Amendments to end slavery,
28:52
Speaker 3: to protect equal protection, and to give African Americans the
28:55
Speaker 3: right to vote, to ensure that there's not racial discrimination.
28:59
Speaker 3: But in the less, not sterilizing an eight year old
29:05
Speaker 3: is the same thing. Like that is bizarre. And by
29:08
Speaker 3: the way, the person who responds to Justice Jackson is
29:13
Speaker 3: Joe Biden's Solicitor General, the top lawyer for the Biden
29:17
Speaker 3: administration before the United States Supreme Court. She say, oh, yeah,
29:21
Speaker 3: they're exactly the same thing. In our worldview, you ought
29:24
Speaker 3: to be able to mutilate children. It doesn't matter how young,
29:28
Speaker 3: the Constitution protects your right to mutilate your child. That
29:33
Speaker 3: is a bizarre view, That is an extreme view, and that,
29:39
Speaker 3: sadly is where where today's modern left is.
29:45
Speaker 2: You may be shopping for Christmas and one gift you
29:49
Speaker 2: can give that as incredible as the gift of helping
29:51
Speaker 2: someone be able to protect and defend themselves. And with
29:54
Speaker 2: increase crime and violence around our country, we need to
29:57
Speaker 2: remember that personal safety and security for you and your
29:59
Speaker 2: family is the most important thing in life. And that
30:03
Speaker 2: is exactly why I want you to know about the
30:05
Speaker 2: Berna less lethal pistol launcher. A Berna can save two lives.
30:10
Speaker 2: It is a great compliment to owning firearms, and if
30:13
Speaker 2: you or your family members in a situation where you
30:16
Speaker 2: feel threatened, then you can start with less lethal now
30:20
Speaker 2: Berna and this less launcher is legal in all fifty states.
30:25
Speaker 2: No permits or background checks are needed. I own one
30:29
Speaker 2: myself and I've given them to a lot of my
30:31
Speaker 2: family members because I have some family members that just
30:34
Speaker 2: don't feel comfortable carrying a firearm.
30:36
Speaker 1: Well burna is the answer there as well.
30:38
Speaker 2: It's also designed for easy use by all age groups
30:40
Speaker 2: eighteen or older. So if you have a child that's
30:43
Speaker 2: living an apartment or off campus, maybe they're not twenty one.
30:46
Speaker 2: The Burno launcher is what you need to give them.
30:49
Speaker 2: It has powerful deterrence like tear gas and kinetic rounds
30:53
Speaker 2: with a sixty foot range, meaning you can put serious
30:56
Speaker 2: distance between you and the attacker. One shot can incapacitate
31:01
Speaker 2: attackers for up to forty minutes. It's used by government
31:04
Speaker 2: agencies and law enforcement around the country. Now, I want
31:07
Speaker 2: you to see the videos of this in action, and
31:10
Speaker 2: you can see it by going to their website burna
31:13
Speaker 2: by RNA dot com slash verdict. And when you go there,
31:17
Speaker 2: you're also going to get ten percent off your purchase.
31:19
Speaker 1: So it's going to save you money.
31:21
Speaker 2: That's Burner by r in a dot com slash verdict
31:25
Speaker 2: for ten percent off. That's b Why r in a
31:29
Speaker 2: dot com slash verdict and give the gift of protection?
31:33
Speaker 2: This Christmas final question on this issue with this case
31:38
Speaker 2: coming out of the Supreme Court, and if you look
31:40
Speaker 2: at the way that this was being argued, and I
31:44
Speaker 2: think one of the other things that's just so unhinged
31:46
Speaker 2: about this the argument for medically mutilating minors. Is the
31:50
Speaker 2: fact that the issue really does seem to come down
31:53
Speaker 2: to money. The amount of money that people are now
31:56
Speaker 2: making off these surgeries that's saying it is it is
31:59
Speaker 2: an increase year over year of over fourteen point four
32:02
Speaker 2: percent on average, So the transgender surgery world and then
32:08
Speaker 2: the lifetime of care is expanding at a fourteen point
32:12
Speaker 2: four percent rate year over year. That's why so many
32:17
Speaker 2: medical areas, doctors and hospitals are advocating for this because
32:23
Speaker 2: they make money. Vanderbilt said very clearly to their doctors,
32:27
Speaker 2: either you get on board with this or you get out.
32:30
Speaker 2: We're not going to let you say no to this
32:32
Speaker 2: because there's too much money to be made in quote
32:35
Speaker 2: gender care.
32:37
Speaker 3: Yeah, there are vast amounts of money at stake, and
32:41
Speaker 3: it has become it really is a strange obsession of
32:47
Speaker 3: the radical left. It is it is a virtue signal.
32:51
Speaker 3: Remember we had on on verdict a couple of months ago.
32:58
Speaker 3: Seawan Theory. Shawn Theory was an African American Democratic state
33:03
Speaker 3: rep in Texas. She was an elected Democrat. She had
33:06
Speaker 3: been elected for four terms and on this issue, there
33:10
Speaker 3: was a bill in Texas to prohibit mutilating minors, and
33:15
Speaker 3: she ended up voting for it and the Democrat Party.
33:18
Speaker 3: She described on the podcast, if you didn't listen to
33:20
Speaker 3: that podcast, she ought to go back and listen to
33:22
Speaker 3: it because it's incredibly revealing. She described how her fellow Democrats,
33:27
Speaker 3: African Americans, and the Texas State Legislature would come to
33:30
Speaker 3: her and she said, did you have you study the
33:33
Speaker 3: damage this does to children? That if you give puberty
33:36
Speaker 3: blockers and you sterilize a child, that it does lifelong
33:39
Speaker 3: medical damage to him. It's horrible, And she said the
33:42
Speaker 3: many other Democrats she described said, oh, we know, we agree,
33:46
Speaker 3: it's terrible, but you cannot oppose this in our party.
33:49
Speaker 3: They will end you. Our party will end you.
33:53
Speaker 8: Well.
33:53
Speaker 3: She ended up doing the courageous thing and voting for
33:55
Speaker 3: common sense and voting for kids, and the Democrats recruited
33:59
Speaker 3: a primary challenger to her and beat her in the primary,
34:04
Speaker 3: and they spent over one million dollars in a Democrat
34:09
Speaker 3: primary for a state house seat. That is how radical
34:14
Speaker 3: this issue is. So there is money, There is big
34:17
Speaker 3: money on the other side, and it is enforced.
34:21
Speaker 8: In the US Senate.
34:23
Speaker 3: Every single Democrat has voted in favor of mutilating minors.
34:26
Speaker 3: There is no dissension that is allowed on this. And
34:31
Speaker 3: I got to say, and Joe Biden is enthusiastically in
34:34
Speaker 3: favor of it, you know. I got to say, also,
34:37
Speaker 3: look this Supreme Court case. Part of the reason that
34:42
Speaker 3: there is is such focus on it is there was
34:45
Speaker 3: a previous Supreme Court decision called Bostock and Bostock is
34:49
Speaker 3: a decision that interpreted federal anti discrimination law on employment discrimination.
34:56
Speaker 3: And it is currently illegal under federal law to discribe
35:00
Speaker 3: and employment based on race and other characteristics, including sex.
35:04
Speaker 3: And in Bostock, the Supreme Court took a prohibition on
35:07
Speaker 3: discrimination based on sex and construed sex to mean also
35:12
Speaker 3: being transgender.
35:14
Speaker 8: And that decision that was a six to three decision.
35:17
Speaker 3: That decision was authored by Justice Gorsuch, and it was
35:21
Speaker 3: a fairly shocking decision. A lot of people were shocked
35:24
Speaker 3: that Justice Gorsuch wrote that opinion.
35:26
Speaker 8: It was joined by Chief Justice Roberts.
35:29
Speaker 3: In addition to what were then for liberals who were
35:32
Speaker 3: on the Court at the time, Justice Ginsburg was still
35:34
Speaker 3: on the court. It was before amy Cony Barrett had
35:37
Speaker 3: been nominated and before Justice Ginsburg obviously had passed away.
35:41
Speaker 8: So that was six ' to three.
35:42
Speaker 3: On the other side, I don't think we will see
35:45
Speaker 3: the same outcome. I will say at the oral argument,
35:49
Speaker 3: Justice Gorsuch did not say a word, not a word,
35:52
Speaker 3: so we do not have any indication from him as
35:56
Speaker 3: to how he will vote. But Justice Roberts was quite vocal,
36:01
Speaker 3: and what he laid out is actually the reason why
36:04
Speaker 3: I'm confident the Tennessee law will be upheld, which, as
36:07
Speaker 3: he laid out, the proposition that that the Court should
36:09
Speaker 3: be deferring to state legislatures and and particularly when you're
36:14
Speaker 3: dealing with contested medical evidence, that state legislatures are far
36:18
Speaker 3: better suited to assess contested medical evidence and make it
36:22
Speaker 3: a termination and make a policy decision. That that's that's
36:26
Speaker 3: how our democratic system works. And and and I think
36:30
Speaker 3: Chief Justice Roberts, reasoning that he articulated that the oral
36:33
Speaker 3: argument is going to lead him to vote to uphold
36:36
Speaker 3: the law, I think we will see.
36:39
Speaker 8: I think we will.
36:39
Speaker 3: Certainly see Justice Alito and Justice Thomas, and and Amy Cony,
36:43
Speaker 3: Barrett and Kavanaugh also their arguments at oral arguments suggested
36:49
Speaker 3: that they that they would defer to the Tennessee state
36:52
Speaker 3: legislature as well. I hope Justice Gorsach will as well.
36:57
Speaker 3: I think there's a very good chance that this will
36:59
Speaker 3: be a six three decision upholding the Tennessee law. But
37:05
Speaker 3: the fact that the Court decided Bostock the other way. Now,
37:09
Speaker 3: Bostock was a question of federal statute and interpreting the
37:14
Speaker 3: words Congress had adopted. It was not a constitutional case.
37:19
Speaker 3: It was not interpreting the equal protection clause of the
37:21
Speaker 3: Fourteenth Amendment. And I'll note, by the way, there is
37:25
Speaker 3: a third outcome. So what could the Supreme Court do here?
37:28
Speaker 3: They could do three things. They could do more than
37:30
Speaker 3: three things, but three key things. One they could affirm
37:33
Speaker 3: the Tennessee law. That's what I think they are likely
37:35
Speaker 3: to do. Two, they could strike down the Tennessee law.
37:39
Speaker 3: They could rule that this law violates the Constitution and
37:42
Speaker 3: therefore is null and void. I do not think they're
37:45
Speaker 3: likely to do that, but I think the three Liberals
37:47
Speaker 3: will vote to do exactly that. The third option they
37:50
Speaker 3: could do it is they could reverse the decision and
37:55
Speaker 3: conclude that this law is sex discrimination, and under the Constitution,
38:00
Speaker 3: sex discrimination is subject to what's called intermediate scrutiny. Now
38:06
Speaker 3: the toughest standard constitutionally for legal analysis is what's called
38:11
Speaker 3: strict scrutiny, and racial discrimination under the Constitution by government
38:17
Speaker 3: is subject to strict scrutiny. Sex discrimination is subject to
38:21
Speaker 3: intermediate scrutiny. So the middle ground they could do is
38:24
Speaker 3: they could vacate the decision below and send it back
38:27
Speaker 3: to the lower court to apply intermediate scrutiny. I hope
38:32
Speaker 3: they don't do that, and I don't think they will,
38:35
Speaker 3: but there is a non zero chance they might do that,
38:39
Speaker 3: which is what makes this case. Concerning all of that
38:43
Speaker 3: being said, my prediction is they're going to conclude correctly
38:47
Speaker 3: that the Tennessee law is constitutional, and that is a
38:52
Speaker 3: judgment for the state legislators to make.
38:55
Speaker 2: As I said before, this is why elections are so important.
38:57
Speaker 2: It's why it's so important that conservatives get elected, because
39:00
Speaker 2: these are the people that make unbelievable decisions, and it
39:04
Speaker 2: deals with kids' futures, and this is a perfect example
39:07
Speaker 2: of it. Don't forget We do this show Monday, Wednesday
39:10
Speaker 2: and Friday. Hit that subscribe or auto download button and
39:14
Speaker 2: the Senator and I will make sure if you see this,
39:17
Speaker 2: by the way, please share it on social media because
39:19
Speaker 2: that's how we reach new people write us a five
39:21
Speaker 2: story review if you would take a moment to do
39:23
Speaker 2: that as well. On those in between days, grab my
39:25
Speaker 2: podcast so Ben Ferguson Podcasts, and I'll keep you update
39:28
Speaker 2: on the latest breaking news there and we'll see you
39:30
Speaker 2: back here in a couple of days