Latest / The Ben Ferguson Podcast / BIDEN PICKS A WOMAN for THE Supreme Court & SHE CAN'T DEFINE WHAT A WOMAN IS!

Transcript

BIDEN PICKS A WOMAN for THE Supreme Court & SHE CAN'T DEFINE WHAT A WOMAN IS! · The Ben Ferguson Podcast

0:00
Speaker 1: The President of the United States of America is paying
0:02
Speaker 1: off on that campaign promise to discriminate against all Americans
0:08
Speaker 1: unless you are a black woman. Because he promised on
0:11
Speaker 1: the campaign trail that if he got a chance to
0:13
Speaker 1: nominate somebody the Supreme Court, it would be a black
0:17
Speaker 1: woman only. Even when he was with Justice Pryor at
0:20
Speaker 1: the White House announcing Justice Bror's retirement, he made it
0:24
Speaker 1: very clear he was excited to fulfill that quota promise.
0:30
Speaker 1: I've made no decision except one except one, only one thing,
0:36
Speaker 1: only one decision he had made that day, to discriminate
0:39
Speaker 1: against ninety percent of America. The person I will nominate
0:44
Speaker 1: will be some of the extraordinary qualifications character, experience, and integrity.
0:50
Speaker 1: And that person will be the first black woman ever
0:53
Speaker 1: nominated to the United States Supreme Court. All right, So
0:56
Speaker 1: there it is. It is a black woman. That's how
0:58
Speaker 1: we got to where we are today. Because when he
1:00
Speaker 1: was on the campaign trail, when he was worried he
1:02
Speaker 1: was going to lose and he didn't have a lot
1:04
Speaker 1: of enthusiasm among African American voters, the polls showed he
1:08
Speaker 1: needed to do something to get them to like him.
1:11
Speaker 1: And what was that. It was all right, we will
1:14
Speaker 1: tell you that we're going to discriminate against everybody else,
1:16
Speaker 1: and we will tell you that we are only going
1:18
Speaker 1: to give a chance at the White House for a
1:20
Speaker 1: Supreme Court nominee that fits a quota, not necessarily the
1:23
Speaker 1: best person for the job. Say it again, not necessarily
1:30
Speaker 1: the best person for the job. Now, a quick reminder,
1:34
Speaker 1: if you're listening to this podcast, please make sure you
1:37
Speaker 1: hit the subscriber auto download button and tell your friends
1:41
Speaker 1: about this podcast, share this on social media, and if
1:43
Speaker 1: you would write us a five star review to help us,
1:46
Speaker 1: as Democrats have been attacking our podcasts recently with bad reviews. Now,
1:51
Speaker 1: we're going to pick an African American woman. So let's
1:55
Speaker 1: go to the confirmation of this African American woman. She
1:58
Speaker 1: was asked a question, a question that should have been
2:01
Speaker 1: an easy one, right, because we know that the only
2:03
Speaker 1: reason why she was even eligible for this job is
2:06
Speaker 1: because she was number one a woman. Without being a woman,
2:13
Speaker 1: she could not be eligible for the job. If she
2:16
Speaker 1: was a black man, she was not eligible for the job.
2:23
Speaker 1: She had to be a black woman and woman was
2:28
Speaker 1: without woman, no shot at this. Now, we've had a
2:32
Speaker 1: lot of debate over the last week or so over
2:34
Speaker 1: what is a woman? Right? What is the definition of
2:37
Speaker 1: a woman? Is a dude saying he's a woman? Actually
2:40
Speaker 1: a woman? Of course not, but they're deranged people that
2:44
Speaker 1: actually believe now that, oh, yes, that is a woman.
2:47
Speaker 1: So Marcia Blackburn decided to ask a question. It's not
2:52
Speaker 1: really a trick question. I want to make that very
2:55
Speaker 1: very clear. Marcia Blackburn, Senator was getting her time to
3:00
Speaker 1: question Judge Jackson, and she said, Hey, I want to
3:05
Speaker 1: ask you a question. Can you give me a definition
3:09
Speaker 1: of what a woman is? Now? You would think that
3:11
Speaker 1: Judge Jackson US Supreme Court. Now I mean to be like, well,
3:13
Speaker 1: that that would be me based on even the president's
3:18
Speaker 1: definition of a woman. I clearly fit it, because otherwise
3:21
Speaker 1: I wouldn't have been nominated. This woman who's going to
3:24
Speaker 1: be on the Supreme Court if everything goes well, right,
3:28
Speaker 1: looks like they've got enough votes to pull this off.
3:31
Speaker 1: She can't even define what an actual woman is when
3:33
Speaker 1: the definition of a woman is what actually got her
3:36
Speaker 1: to the point where she could be on the Supreme
3:38
Speaker 1: Court going through this process right now, take a listen.
3:41
Speaker 1: Can you provide a definition for the word woman? Can
3:47
Speaker 1: I provide a definition. Yeah, I can't. You can't not
3:55
Speaker 1: in case context, I'm not a biology of the word
3:58
Speaker 1: woman is so unpleased you're in controversial that you can't
4:02
Speaker 1: give me a definition, Senator. In my work as a judge,
4:07
Speaker 1: what I do is I address disputes. If there's a
4:12
Speaker 1: dispute about a definition, people make arguments, and I look
4:16
Speaker 1: at the law and I decide. So I'm not. The
4:20
Speaker 1: fact that you can't give me a straight answer about
4:24
Speaker 1: something as fundamental as what a woman is underscores the
4:29
Speaker 1: dangers of the kind of progressive education that we are
4:34
Speaker 1: hearing about. Just last week, an entire generation of young
4:40
Speaker 1: girls watched as our taxpayer funded institutions permitted a biological
4:46
Speaker 1: man to compete and beat a biological woman in the
4:51
Speaker 1: NCAA swimming Championships. Now, you may ask yourself why is
4:55
Speaker 1: this important, Because there's a very good chance at some
4:58
Speaker 1: point women thists are going to figure out that men
5:01
Speaker 1: are taking over their sporting and activities and taking over
5:04
Speaker 1: their world and taking away spots from actual women, and
5:07
Speaker 1: they're going to have to probably sue. And there's a
5:09
Speaker 1: good chance this could go to the court system, if
5:11
Speaker 1: not the Supreme Court okay, pretty clear. So answering the
5:20
Speaker 1: question of what is the definition of a woman not
5:24
Speaker 1: exactly a trick question, especially when that qualification is what
5:29
Speaker 1: got you the chance to even sit here and to
5:31
Speaker 1: answer these questions, because without it you wouldn't have been
5:35
Speaker 1: considered for this job. What message do you think this
5:39
Speaker 1: sends to girls who aspire to compete and win in
5:44
Speaker 1: sports at the highest levels, Senator, I'm not sure what
5:50
Speaker 1: message that sends. If you're asking me about the legal
5:53
Speaker 1: issues related to it, those are topics that are being
5:59
Speaker 1: hot discussed, as you say, and I could come to
6:03
Speaker 1: the court, so and I think it tells our girls,
6:07
Speaker 1: by the way she knows it right, could come to
6:09
Speaker 1: the court. So I'm not going to talk about it. Now.
6:12
Speaker 1: You could easily give a definition of what a woman is,
6:15
Speaker 1: but this judge doesn't want too. Now here's the part
6:18
Speaker 1: that makes me laugh. If Joe Biden would have nominated
6:21
Speaker 1: a dude that says he's a chick, would liberal women
6:25
Speaker 1: be okay with it? Of course not. He had to
6:28
Speaker 1: actually get a real woman because his promise was to
6:31
Speaker 1: put a woman, and you can't put a man with
6:32
Speaker 1: tescos and a penis on the Supreme Court. He couldn't
6:34
Speaker 1: call Kitlyn Jenner hypothetically she was an attorney or found
6:37
Speaker 1: the best transgender attorney out there, and said we're going
6:40
Speaker 1: to nominate you to the Supreme Court and justified as
6:42
Speaker 1: a woman. Because everybody knows it's not a woman. They
6:44
Speaker 1: don't know what to do dressed up like a woman,
6:46
Speaker 1: which is not the real definition of a woman. So
6:48
Speaker 1: let's just recap the nominee. Biden's nominee Supreme Court can't
6:54
Speaker 1: define what a woman actually is. Let's move on from that,
6:58
Speaker 1: all right, Let's move on to another issue, which deals
7:04
Speaker 1: with gender, because again, without her gender being a woman,
7:06
Speaker 1: she wouldn't even be eligible for the job based on
7:09
Speaker 1: the litmus test the White House had for their next
7:11
Speaker 1: Supreme Court nominee. So let's ask her another question. Should
7:15
Speaker 1: should schools teach five year olds that they can pick
7:18
Speaker 1: their own gender? Should you be actually teaching a boy
7:22
Speaker 1: with testicles and apps are a girl with a vagina?
7:25
Speaker 1: And I'm using medical terms here, so if you're offended
7:29
Speaker 1: by it, I don't care, because this is how to
7:30
Speaker 1: range the world's gotten. We have to now use medical terms.
7:33
Speaker 1: I can't just say there's everybody knows there's different gown
7:35
Speaker 1: a girl. You've got to now explain it, which is insane.
7:40
Speaker 1: But let's just see if the Biden's nominee and Supreme
7:43
Speaker 1: Court can at least answer the question if it's schools
7:45
Speaker 1: should teach a five year old if they can pick
7:48
Speaker 1: their own gender, which you obviously can't be two. With
7:52
Speaker 1: Georgetown Day School, I found it astounding. By the way,
7:56
Speaker 1: let me give you a little context here. Judge Jackson
8:00
Speaker 1: is on the board at this Georgetown Day School, where
8:04
Speaker 1: our children, I think go. So this woman is on
8:08
Speaker 1: the school board of Georgetown Day School. So at Georgetown
8:12
Speaker 1: Day School, what they're teaching kids is something that's obviously
8:15
Speaker 1: very relevant. Listen with Georgetown Day School, I found it
8:19
Speaker 1: astounding that it teaches kindergarteners, five year old children. And
8:24
Speaker 1: I've got grandchildren, and they teach them that they can
8:29
Speaker 1: choose their gender. So is this what you were praising
8:36
Speaker 1: when you applauded the and I'm quoting you transformative power
8:40
Speaker 1: of Georgetown Day School's progressive education. Do you agree that
8:46
Speaker 1: our schools should teach children that they can choose their gender? Senator,
8:56
Speaker 1: I'm not remembering exactly what quote you're referencing. But Georgetown
9:06
Speaker 1: Day School is It was in a book and you
9:10
Speaker 1: gave the quote Georgetown Day School is a private school.
9:14
Speaker 1: Yes that yeah, I'm asking do you agree that schools
9:20
Speaker 1: should teach children that they can choose their gender? Again,
9:24
Speaker 1: this is not a little question, right, yes or no.
9:27
Speaker 1: You're on the board at the school, Georgetown Day School.
9:29
Speaker 1: You know all about this. You give these quotes of
9:31
Speaker 1: these books about George Town Day School. You should be
9:34
Speaker 1: able to answer this question. Senator, I'm not making comments about,
9:41
Speaker 1: all right, what schools can teach me? Let me ask
9:44
Speaker 1: you again. All right, So let's recap Joe Biden, Supreme
9:48
Speaker 1: Court nominee, not only can't define what a woman is,
9:55
Speaker 1: she can't tell you if she thinks that it's wrong
9:58
Speaker 1: for school to teach five roles they can pick their
10:00
Speaker 1: own gender, when clearly you can't pick your own gender.
10:04
Speaker 1: So let's go on to something else. That's maybe, I
10:06
Speaker 1: don't know, an easier topic, right, Because there's got to
10:08
Speaker 1: be an easier topic than this for her. Why don't
10:12
Speaker 1: we deal with the topic of sexual predators. Maybe that's
10:16
Speaker 1: a maybe that's a good place to start. Should sexual predators?
10:21
Speaker 1: Should the court systems go easy on sexual predators. Not
10:26
Speaker 1: a hard question. Listen to what she had to say,
10:30
Speaker 1: should the United States strengthen or weaken sentences for child pornographers?
10:35
Speaker 1: By the way, I want to be clear about what
10:37
Speaker 1: Senator Cotton just asked, Should we strengthen or weaken? Right? Senator?
10:43
Speaker 1: Should we asking this question? Should we strengthen or should
10:47
Speaker 1: we weaken our laws when it comes to senses for
10:51
Speaker 1: child predators? This is Biden Supreme Court nominee. You're ready, Senator.
10:59
Speaker 1: That's not a simple question. And the reason it's not
11:03
Speaker 1: it's not a simple question. So you can't even simplify
11:06
Speaker 1: the question of whether or not sentence for child predators
11:10
Speaker 1: should be strengthened or weakened. You can't even that's not
11:13
Speaker 1: that's not simple enough for you. So and let's go
11:15
Speaker 1: back through the list now a Biden Supreme Court nominee,
11:18
Speaker 1: because I think it's really important for us to understand
11:20
Speaker 1: the list Biden's nomine and Supreme Court can't define what
11:23
Speaker 1: a woman is, can't decide whether sentencing for child predators
11:30
Speaker 1: should be strengthened or weakened, and cannot decide or give
11:36
Speaker 1: you the definition of insanity when it comes to should
11:39
Speaker 1: a child be taught that they can choose their own
11:41
Speaker 1: sex when they're five years old in school, because at
11:44
Speaker 1: the school where you're on the board, that's what they're teaching.
11:48
Speaker 1: Is because what this country does in terms of penalties
11:54
Speaker 1: is in Congress's province. You all decide. You all decide
11:59
Speaker 1: what the penalties are. You decide what the factors are
12:03
Speaker 1: that judges use to sentence. If you determine that any
12:09
Speaker 1: set of penalties is insufficient, then it is in your
12:13
Speaker 1: purview to make that determination. There are many crimes that
12:19
Speaker 1: Congress has determined warrant mandatory minimum penalties, warrant other kinds
12:26
Speaker 1: of penalties, and that is in your purview to determine.
12:31
Speaker 1: I say, judge, I think whether or not we should
12:33
Speaker 1: strengthen or a weekend sentences for chop pornographers is a
12:36
Speaker 1: pretty simple question, but I'll move on it. It is
12:39
Speaker 1: a simple question, by the way, it's it's a very
12:41
Speaker 1: very very very very simple question. But she doesn't want
12:44
Speaker 1: to answer, and the reason why is also obvious. She
12:49
Speaker 1: doesn't believe that we should strengthen these laws. How do
12:52
Speaker 1: we know this? Because there was another line of questioning
12:55
Speaker 1: on this issue, another line of question by the way
12:58
Speaker 1: which was brought up. People are now trying to get
13:01
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson fired for his commentary that he had on
13:05
Speaker 1: this last night. He was talking about how insane this
13:10
Speaker 1: actually is. He was describing the insanity that we have
13:15
Speaker 1: a Supreme Court nominee that can't answer a very very
13:18
Speaker 1: basic question about sexual predators mandatory minimums. Should we strengthen
13:24
Speaker 1: the laws when it deals with these issues like this
13:27
Speaker 1: is not a very tough question, and I think everybody
13:32
Speaker 1: understands that unless you don't believe, as clearly this judge
13:37
Speaker 1: doesn't believe, that you should actually strengthen these laws. But
13:41
Speaker 1: we're not going to give Judge Jackson the vetting process
13:44
Speaker 1: of a typical score of nominee. Why because we're filling
13:47
Speaker 1: a quota, right, I mean, that's the truth here. We're
13:52
Speaker 1: filling a quota. Everybody knows that's what this is. And
13:56
Speaker 1: the president is the one that declared it. If you
13:58
Speaker 1: will elect me, I will give you a quota. I
14:01
Speaker 1: will give you a black woman, not a transgendered woman,
14:04
Speaker 1: because I even know there's a difference, right, A real
14:07
Speaker 1: black woman, not a fake black woman, not a fake
14:09
Speaker 1: woman who's black, not a white person or an Asian
14:13
Speaker 1: person identifies as black. No, no, no, I'm gonna give
14:15
Speaker 1: you a genuine African American woman. So why is this
14:21
Speaker 1: woman so fixated on defending sexual predators. It's a very
14:29
Speaker 1: fair question. It's not a crazy one. It's one that
14:32
Speaker 1: actually makes sense. Take a listen to this. Sorry not
14:38
Speaker 1: playing along thankfully. In the hearings today, a few centers
14:42
Speaker 1: did manage to ask relevant questions. Here's Josh Holley the
14:46
Speaker 1: United States versus Hawkins. This was a child pornography case
14:49
Speaker 1: where the defendant distributed multiple images of child porn possessed
14:53
Speaker 1: dozens more, including videos. The Federal Senses in guidelines recommended
14:58
Speaker 1: a sentence of ninety seven to one hundred in twenty
15:00
Speaker 1: one months in prison. Prosecutors recommended twenty four months in prison.
15:05
Speaker 1: Judge Jackson gave the defendant three months in prison. Well
15:11
Speaker 1: that's pretty serious. Why did you do that, Judge Jackson? Well,
15:16
Speaker 1: here was the response. The guideline was based originally on
15:21
Speaker 1: a statutory scheme and on directives. Specific directives by Congress
15:26
Speaker 1: at a time in which more serious child pornography offenders
15:34
Speaker 1: were identified based on the volume based on the number
15:39
Speaker 1: of photographs that they received In the mail, and that
15:42
Speaker 1: made totally total sense before when we didn't have the Internet,
15:47
Speaker 1: when we didn't have distribution. But the way that the
15:49
Speaker 1: guideline is now structured based on that set of circumstances
15:55
Speaker 1: is leading to extreme disparities in the system because it's
16:00
Speaker 1: so easy for people to get volumes of this kind
16:04
Speaker 1: of material now by computers. Now, I want to be
16:09
Speaker 1: very clear, this answer was maybe the most jaw dropping
16:12
Speaker 1: answer of all that she has done thus far, and
16:15
Speaker 1: she's had some awe moments like are you kidding me? Moments?
16:19
Speaker 1: What she has just described, what is she What she's
16:23
Speaker 1: saying here is that she believes that you shouldn't go
16:28
Speaker 1: to jail for that long of a period of time
16:30
Speaker 1: if you're getting child pornography over the internet, because it's
16:35
Speaker 1: easier to get large drops of kitty porn over the
16:39
Speaker 1: internet compared if you did it through the mail. So
16:42
Speaker 1: that's why she went easy on a on a individual
16:52
Speaker 1: with kitty porn. She went easy on this person because
16:58
Speaker 1: she said, well, they use the Internet and the minimums
17:01
Speaker 1: are different because it wasn't through the mail, So get
17:03
Speaker 1: more porn through the internet. It's illegal porn. Kitty porn,
17:06
Speaker 1: child pornography, and I'll go easy on you because at
17:09
Speaker 1: least you didn't send it them out. That's her actual
17:12
Speaker 1: defense for going easy on people that possess child pornography.
17:19
Speaker 1: Now we'll just concede a front. We are not world
17:21
Speaker 1: renowned legal minds, okay, or even technically lawyers on this show,
17:26
Speaker 1: but we're going to try to understand what the judge
17:28
Speaker 1: just said. So Congress has passed a law saying possessing
17:32
Speaker 1: a lot of kitty porn is a very serious crime.
17:34
Speaker 1: And then an invention the Internet comes along. It makes
17:36
Speaker 1: it easier to collect a lot more kittie porn. So,
17:39
Speaker 1: according to noted legal mind Kntaji Brown Jackson, that somehow
17:44
Speaker 1: makes the act of possessing a lot of kittie porn
17:46
Speaker 1: less back. In other words, since the Internet makes it simple,
17:49
Speaker 1: we're not going to punish you as much. Maybe we're
17:53
Speaker 1: misinterpreting what she said. That seems to be what she said.
17:55
Speaker 1: Does that make sense? If not, it helps to understand
17:59
Speaker 1: in the clip you just saw, the judge Brown was
18:01
Speaker 1: not articulating some legal principle related to the Constitution that
18:04
Speaker 1: we could generalize across our code. She was instead constructing
18:08
Speaker 1: a carve out for a narrow and specific group of
18:10
Speaker 1: criminals sex offenders, and it's not the first time. It's
18:14
Speaker 1: one of many such carve outs she has argued for
18:17
Speaker 1: during her career. In nineteen ninety six, for example, Kntaji
18:21
Speaker 1: Brown Jackson argued in the Harvard Law Review against sex
18:24
Speaker 1: offender registry laws. Here was her reasoning quote, if a
18:28
Speaker 1: community notification statute deprives the sex offender of his right
18:31
Speaker 1: to mobility or bodily integrity, and if it makes him
18:34
Speaker 1: the target of widespread community reaction and tippy and scorn,
18:38
Speaker 1: then according to Cantadgie Brown Jackson, that would be unconstitutional.
18:45
Speaker 1: Let's go through the list. Now you have a Supreme
18:47
Speaker 1: Court nominee, Judge Jackson, who is lenient on child predators,
18:56
Speaker 1: doesn't believe that she can define the definition of one.
19:00
Speaker 1: And even though the definition woman is what gave her
19:02
Speaker 1: the opportunity to have this job, and she's a woman
19:06
Speaker 1: that doesn't believe that children should be taught that they
19:10
Speaker 1: can choose her in sex stage of five. She thinks
19:12
Speaker 1: that's appropriate. It's fine, you should be able to do that.
19:16
Speaker 1: And then she also believes it's sexual offenders should have
19:19
Speaker 1: rights to mobility to bodily integrity, and that sex registries
19:24
Speaker 1: are wrong because it's a target of widespread community rejection. Well,
19:29
Speaker 1: if you want to know why they're scorn and widespread
19:33
Speaker 1: community rejections, because the person you're describing is a sexual
19:36
Speaker 1: predator who is sexually assaulted a child or an adult,
19:40
Speaker 1: rape somebody, sexually assault somebody against against their will. Obviously,
19:45
Speaker 1: and she says, well, we need to think about the
19:48
Speaker 1: feelings of the sexual predators so that they don't feel
19:50
Speaker 1: like they're a target for widespread community rejection and or scorn.
19:53
Speaker 1: She wrote that in nineteen ninety six. It's not that
19:56
Speaker 1: long ago, folks. Okay, she wrote it in ninety six,
20:01
Speaker 1: look at the look. In nineteen ninety six she wrote
20:04
Speaker 1: this in the Harvard Law Review. Some other random things.
20:11
Speaker 1: She can't define what a woman is, you think, that's all.
20:14
Speaker 1: She doesn't believe gun ownership is a fundamental right. That's
20:17
Speaker 1: the other thing. This is the woman that the Supreme
20:21
Speaker 1: Court has decided. All right, let me rephrase that. This
20:26
Speaker 1: is the woman that Joe Biden believes the best woman. Well,
20:28
Speaker 1: of course within the quota to serve on the Supreme Court. Also,
20:31
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court nominee Jackson did not know that the
20:35
Speaker 1: former ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, Joe Biden, not once,
20:38
Speaker 1: but twice, actually philibustered a black nominee, Janice Rodgers Brown
20:41
Speaker 1: for the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
20:45
Speaker 1: Do realize she was philibuster for two years when she
20:47
Speaker 1: was appointed to the DC Circuit Judge Senator Lindsay Graham
20:50
Speaker 1: ass I didn't know that. Jackson responded, did you know
20:53
Speaker 1: that Joe Biden philibuster James Rodgers Brown? Graham ass I
20:56
Speaker 1: did not know that. Jackson again said, Now that you
20:59
Speaker 1: know that, how do you feel about it? Graham asked,
21:01
Speaker 1: to which Jackson had no response. Senator Graham informed Jackson
21:05
Speaker 1: Biden filibuster Janie Rodgers Brown, who was raised in Alabama
21:09
Speaker 1: under Jim Crowe. Graham explained, despite this adversity, she put
21:13
Speaker 1: herself through law school as a single working mother. That's
21:15
Speaker 1: pretty impressive, isn't it. Graham asked, yes. Senator Jackson responded, well,
21:19
Speaker 1: former Senator Joe Biden. Who's using you now? Is it?
21:21
Speaker 1: Quoted by votes in the last selection voted in OH
21:24
Speaker 1: three and O five to block Republicans from confirming Brown's
21:28
Speaker 1: nomination because she reportedly quoted the Socialist resolution of nineteen thirty.
21:35
Speaker 1: President Joe Biden has since, of course, reversed his opinion
21:37
Speaker 1: of James Rodgers Brown and has nominated her to be
21:40
Speaker 1: a circuit judge because now he has to play the
21:44
Speaker 1: politics of African American women. So this is the best
21:48
Speaker 1: person we found for the job. Maybe if you didn't
21:50
Speaker 1: put a quote out there, we might have gotten a
21:51
Speaker 1: better nominee, a nominee that can actually define what a
21:55
Speaker 1: woman really is. Senator marsh Blackburn joins me. Now, now, Senator,
22:01
Speaker 1: I want to go back in history real quick and
22:04
Speaker 1: please correct me if I am wrong. Didn't the President
22:08
Speaker 1: of the United States of America, when he was a
22:10
Speaker 1: candidate running for office to try to buy the votes
22:14
Speaker 1: of liberal women and of minority African American women specifically,
22:18
Speaker 1: say that he was going to only nominate and discriminate
22:23
Speaker 1: against everyone else that wasn't a woman, and b who
22:28
Speaker 1: anybody that wasn't an African American woman was immediately disqualified
22:32
Speaker 1: from being on the Supreme Court with his first pick.
22:34
Speaker 1: And that true? Is that right? Or did I get
22:36
Speaker 1: that wrong? You know, Ben, he was very explicit and
22:41
Speaker 1: saying that he was going to bring more diversity and
22:46
Speaker 1: that he was going to elevate more women. And of course,
22:52
Speaker 1: we want to see women earned their rightful place in society.
22:58
Speaker 1: And here we have a federal judge who has been
23:03
Speaker 1: on the bench for nearly a decade. She is highly skilled,
23:08
Speaker 1: highly educated, has a very impressive resume, resume, has a
23:13
Speaker 1: wonderful family, has great parents. They open tremendous stores of
23:18
Speaker 1: opportunity to her, and she has taken advantage of all
23:23
Speaker 1: this opportunity. It is the embodiment of the American dream.
23:30
Speaker 1: With all she has accomplished. And she serves on the
23:34
Speaker 1: school board George Town Day School. They are teaching CRT
23:40
Speaker 1: to five year olds. They have a curriculum called Woke Kindergarten.
23:46
Speaker 1: Parents are very concerned about this. About CRT, they won't
23:51
Speaker 1: and they're concerned about the rights for their children. They've
23:54
Speaker 1: seen biological men competing against biological women in sports. They
24:01
Speaker 1: are concerned about this. They want a Supreme Court justice
24:06
Speaker 1: who is going to defend their right as a parent
24:11
Speaker 1: to rear their children as they see fit and as
24:16
Speaker 1: they know best. And it has been of concern that
24:21
Speaker 1: she will not clarify her position on CRT. Like last night,
24:27
Speaker 1: I finally said, well, just define woman for me. She
24:32
Speaker 1: would not give me that definition. People have been very
24:35
Speaker 1: frustrated with her approach on crime and the way she's
24:40
Speaker 1: been soft on child abusers, child predators, pedophiles in her
24:47
Speaker 1: sentencing during her time on the federal bench. All of
24:52
Speaker 1: this has come into play all I don't. I think
24:57
Speaker 1: it's shocking though, that you have a president Night Tents
24:59
Speaker 1: of America who even understands what the definition of woman is,
25:03
Speaker 1: because that's why he picked her, because she is the
25:05
Speaker 1: definition of a woman. And so after she has picked
25:10
Speaker 1: knowing that she's being picked because she is of two
25:13
Speaker 1: qualifications Number one a woman, number two African American, and
25:17
Speaker 1: he had to pay off on that promise and discriminate
25:19
Speaker 1: against everyone else. She can't even define what a woman
25:22
Speaker 1: is when the definition of a woman is what got
25:24
Speaker 1: her in front of you yesterday. Anyway, it just shows
25:29
Speaker 1: you with the progressive lest how far they're going to
25:34
Speaker 1: go to push their agenda. Now, the other thing I
25:36
Speaker 1: brought up to her last night after that exchange was
25:43
Speaker 1: Demand Justice, a far left progressive group who is seeking
25:48
Speaker 1: to pack the court, which, of course going back to
25:51
Speaker 1: when Judge Jackson was before us to go on to
25:54
Speaker 1: the Appellate Court a year ago, she would not answer
25:59
Speaker 1: the question as to where she stood on court packing.
26:03
Speaker 1: She has refused to do that during this confirmation hearing.
26:08
Speaker 1: And I brought to her attention last night that Demand
26:12
Speaker 1: Justice has put out a one million, one million dollar
26:18
Speaker 1: ad by to support her confirmation to the US Supreme Court.
26:24
Speaker 1: And you gotta believe if court packing comes before the
26:29
Speaker 1: US Supreme Court, they're expecting Judge Jackson, as Justice Jackson,
26:37
Speaker 1: to support them in court packing. Why else would they
26:41
Speaker 1: be doing a one million dollar ad. Bye. They are
26:45
Speaker 1: doing rallies in protest all over the country in support
26:49
Speaker 1: of her, and they're pushing hard, pushing Democrats senators very
26:55
Speaker 1: aggressively to get her confirmed to the court. It is
27:00
Speaker 1: shocking to see just how I would say, an activist.
27:04
Speaker 1: She is one of the other things that I think
27:07
Speaker 1: some people that maybe were at work yesterday, and I
27:09
Speaker 1: want you to explain this. She wouldn't say if the
27:13
Speaker 1: US should strengthen child pornographer punishments. Now there have been
27:16
Speaker 1: accusations that she's been lenient on child predators when she
27:21
Speaker 1: has seen cases that involve them explain that a little
27:24
Speaker 1: bit more, because this, to me, I think is one
27:26
Speaker 1: of the most dangerous parts of what she has done
27:30
Speaker 1: as a judge, that we actually have a record of
27:32
Speaker 1: her doing this. Yes, exactly right. In as you know,
27:38
Speaker 1: strengthening protection of children online is something that I have
27:44
Speaker 1: put a tremendous amount of attention on and actually have
27:48
Speaker 1: bipartisan legislation ready to go to the Senate floor that
27:52
Speaker 1: would strengthen some of these provisions. Well, she sat there
27:56
Speaker 1: in these hearings and said, well, you know, Congress hasn't
28:00
Speaker 1: given us enough guidance on this, and we pointed out
28:03
Speaker 1: to her, well, no, that's not exactly right. Congress has
28:07
Speaker 1: given you guidance. But what you did, instead of going
28:11
Speaker 1: within the range of sentences recommended the minimum to the maximum.
28:18
Speaker 1: Her habit was to repeatedly go about five years below
28:25
Speaker 1: the minimum, below the minimum, so she wasn't even meeting
28:31
Speaker 1: the minimum. And we brought forward several cases in the
28:36
Speaker 1: research that we as a committee did, we found ten
28:39
Speaker 1: cases that she had weighed in on and she would
28:44
Speaker 1: repeatedly go below the minimum in these cases. And people
28:50
Speaker 1: can go back and look through the hearing. Senator Cruz
28:53
Speaker 1: did a great job and put them all on a
28:56
Speaker 1: poster board so she could see them and so she
28:59
Speaker 1: would be able to respond. And she went anywhere from
29:03
Speaker 1: fourteen percent to eighty eight percent below the minimum and
29:09
Speaker 1: even further below what the government was recommending in these cases.
29:18
Speaker 1: It is shocking that this is where we are. Unfortunately,
29:21
Speaker 1: and as you just mentioned, Ted Cruz said, if Judge
29:24
Speaker 1: Brown gets on the bench, He said, sexual predators would
29:27
Speaker 1: be released if your law school views prevailed. And this
29:31
Speaker 1: is all the reason why you have these confirmation hearings.
29:34
Speaker 1: And that is the point that he kept saying was Look.
29:36
Speaker 1: He brought up her nine Harvard Law Review note during
29:40
Speaker 1: the second day of her confirmation hearing, talking about this,
29:43
Speaker 1: reading aloud excerpts from her major academic work entitled Prevention
29:47
Speaker 1: Versus Punishment, Punishment Towards a Principal Distinction and the Restraint
29:51
Speaker 1: of Release. Restraint of Release Sex Offenders and Crews argue
29:55
Speaker 1: that Jackson was advocating for the idea that the regulator
29:59
Speaker 1: release of SEC offenders, which can require them to register
30:02
Speaker 1: local law enforcement officials, notify community members of their presence,
30:05
Speaker 1: undergo DNA testing, and submit to civil commitment for an
30:08
Speaker 1: indefinite term quote could be seen as unconstitutional if the
30:13
Speaker 1: regulations are viewed as punishment rather than preventative. This is
30:16
Speaker 1: her thought. She's standing up for not the children of
30:20
Speaker 1: sexual abuse, She's standing up for the sex offenders themselves. Yes,
30:25
Speaker 1: and we pointed this out to her in that writing.
30:30
Speaker 1: In that note one of the things that I pointed
30:33
Speaker 1: out to her was that she made a point of
30:37
Speaker 1: saying she thought that federal judges had personal, hidden agendas.
30:41
Speaker 1: So you know, on the first day I asked her
30:45
Speaker 1: about this, and of course the left goes while the
30:47
Speaker 1: New York Times is beating up on me, Washington Post, MSNBC, CNN,
30:53
Speaker 1: saying I was taking things out of context. No, what
30:56
Speaker 1: I did was reading back to Judge Jackson her on
31:01
Speaker 1: words about releasing hardened criminals, about going soft on child predators,
31:07
Speaker 1: about CRT in the schools, about praising progressive education. Well,
31:14
Speaker 1: you also mentioned you also mentioned something else, and I
31:18
Speaker 1: just want to play this about five year olds. Can
31:20
Speaker 1: they pick their own gender? Here is what you said
31:22
Speaker 1: in your question, so people don't take it out of context,
31:24
Speaker 1: and I want to get your reactions. Tell you too.
31:27
Speaker 1: With Georgetown Day School, I found it astounding that it
31:31
Speaker 1: teaches kindergarteners five year old children, and I've got grandchildren
31:36
Speaker 1: and they teach them that they can choose their gender.
31:42
Speaker 1: So is this what you were praising when you applauded
31:47
Speaker 1: the and I'm quoting you transformative power of Georgetown Day
31:51
Speaker 1: Schools progressive education? Do you agree that our schools should
31:58
Speaker 1: teach children that can choose their gender? Senator, I'm not
32:06
Speaker 1: remembering exactly what quote you're referencing, but Georgetown Day School
32:13
Speaker 1: is it was in a book and you gave the quote.
32:18
Speaker 1: I mean, it's it's you can't get more straightforward than this.
32:21
Speaker 1: This isn't I got you question, which the media said,
32:23
Speaker 1: oh you were This was a grotesque line of questions.
32:26
Speaker 1: She's on the school board, she gave the quote, and
32:28
Speaker 1: then she acts like she can't remember it. Well, it
32:30
Speaker 1: was in their magazine, their annual report magazine, where you
32:35
Speaker 1: have board members and parents bragging about the school. So
32:38
Speaker 1: this I can get more students. And she knows that,
32:42
Speaker 1: she knows she submitted that quote, and she doesn't want
32:46
Speaker 1: to own up to it because of the way it
32:49
Speaker 1: appears now that parents from It doesn't matter if it's
32:54
Speaker 1: Virginia or San Francisco, people are throwing over the school
33:00
Speaker 1: and if you're on the school board, then don't you
33:03
Speaker 1: think you know a little bit about the curriculum? I
33:07
Speaker 1: asked her last night. I said, you know you had senator,
33:10
Speaker 1: please show you all these books and I asked you
33:14
Speaker 1: about teaching five year olds to choose their gender? Has
33:18
Speaker 1: there never been a parent at Georgetown Day that has
33:22
Speaker 1: called you as a board member and said I have
33:26
Speaker 1: a concern And she said no, unbelievable. There's more question
33:30
Speaker 1: coming today. I know you got to go and get
33:33
Speaker 1: back to it all right. Lastly, please make sure you
33:36
Speaker 1: hit that subscribe button or auto download button wherever you
33:40
Speaker 1: were listening to this podcast right now and take a
33:43
Speaker 1: moment to write us a five star review. Many on
33:46
Speaker 1: the left have been attacking our podcast, writing us bad
33:48
Speaker 1: reviews on purpose, So if you would help us fight
33:52
Speaker 1: back by writing us a good review, a five star review,
33:54
Speaker 1: and share this podcast with your family and friends on
33:57
Speaker 1: social media to help us grow. See you back here tomorrow.