Well, whiskey, come and take my pain. Honey, all right,
don't you let me? From power Line blog dot com and produced by Ricochet
dot Com, this is the three Whiskey Happy Hour with your bartenders Steve Hayward,
John You and power Lines International Woman of Mystery Lucretia have gotta giving.
Let that whiskey bloat where you're being in love down in Loon. Welcome everybody,
believe it or not, it is John you join, don't believe whiskey
happy Yeah, So glad you're back. John. I missed you so much.
It's a poster Steve for months it seems like well I've been listening to
the podcast from the jungles of the Amazon, the heights of the and D's
and yes, I agree, it sounded like Steve was on for months and
months. Toolsia, what's happened to you? You've got to control this guy.
Let him talk for more than thirty seconds without interruption. What is going
on here? It probably fell asleep and couldn't help it. Oh man.
Well, I am coming to you from Washington, d C. Where I've
spent the last two days at the Federal Society National Symposium, where I have
to say Lucretia has many, many fans. I have to to At least
ten people have come up to me and said, I love that podcast with
the alcohol and that woman. Okay, well, I'm tending to respond saying
it takes some alcohol to put up with that woman. By the way,
Oh, I've got a balveny twenty one year old tonight from a Caribbean rum
casks. I have something like that. It's very nice. It looks awful.
It's dark. Yeah, well, because the class is dark. It's
it's a fake class. It's a dark lass. It's a smoky glass.
That's it. How about you, Lucretia. What are you drinking? It's
past my drinking hour. I hate to tell you, so I'm drinking sort
of water. Oh yeah, well I've had I've had a knob creek on
the rocks at the Edgar Bar and the Mayflower Hotel, which is currently overflowing
with federal judges, law students, and practicing lawyers, amongst whom is one
Allison Hayward is at the Federal Society convention, where I've been performing the Hayward
husband duties because Steve's not around longer and the cold to make sure she had
a drink to make sure she had dinner. Steve's lounging around in the warmth
of California while it's like forty degrees here in Washington. Well, first of
all, where are you? I'm actually in Seattle. That's a long story
why I was in Portland this morning. Now I'm in Seattle a little later
riving. But by the way, John, all that proofs that you're supplying
my wife with meals and alcohol, is that, in fact you don't believe
in the non delegation doctrine. That's pretty good. Whatever you do. Don't
tell Mike Pence. You know. Of course, all the Federal Society panels
and events are going to be our live stream and will be on YouTube.
I was on a fun panel about reauthorizing the Patriot Act, which expires in
the most important parts. At the end of this year, there was a
great, great lecture in honor of Barbara Olson, who was killed on nine
only Ted Olsen's wife, who by Bari Weiss oh I see okay, who
gave a great, great, I mean really compelling lecture about why the United
States should defend Israel, in part because we would be therefore defending ourselves right
and defending westernsation. I would not say any new arguments that people aren't familiar
with. But she delivered in such a compelling style that she had a five
minute standing ovation from about one thousand people who was really quite Is it likely,
John, that a transcript will be published of that? Is that s
it'll be? I'm sure there will be a video available, you know,
really a great speech. There's all been all kinds of fun there was.
We'll get to this later. There was a good debate about between Will bod
and Michael McConnell about Trump being disqualified under the fourteenth Amendment. Bod is the
one who started all this by writing that Law Review article that argued for disqualification.
Did anybody throw spitballs at him? Verbal only? Verbal only? But
it's been a great conference. And now that here's the other funny thing.
I wasn't here for the dinner last night where Amy Coney Barrett spoke, But
there have been some protests, and in fact, so all the blocks around
the Mayflower Hotel where this is being held have been postered with pictures of Leonard
Leo calling for his investigation. Of course that they're going I bet most Americans
have no idea who he is or why he should be investigated. He holds
no office, he hasn't done anything. But anyway, so that's a little
bit of fun from Washington. But enough about enough about conservative lawyers and their
bleak ideas of fun. Let's talk. I just want to know where you
came down on the Patriot Act really quick, John. Let's see if we
can if we're either going to raise your status with our commenters and listeners or
whether you're going to just make yourself worse. I don't know how to answer
that, But honestly, question is the what's called Section seven two, which
allows for the basically collection of data about e mails, phone calls and then
can be searched. And so my argument was that one, the president constitutionally
is in charge of gathering intelligence on foreign spies, counterintelligence, counter espionage,
counter terrorism. Now, and I think Lucreas is going to like where this
ends up, though I don't. I hope it'll be a surprise how I
end up thoughing. And so I said, that's just part of the president's
function. Congress can't take it away. Congress can choose not to fund it.
But I don't think Congress has the authority to regulate it either. Second,
the Patriot Act therefore is not a great idea because it's this violation of
the separation of powers where Congress creates a fake court the fiz of court was
not a real court, allows it to issue fake warrants they're not real warrants
under the Fourth Amendment, and then allows the President to disperse the accountability to
make it seem like, oh, the Congress and the courts and the President
all agree that you can have warrantless surveillance, when before it was really up
to the president, and then he took all the blame if it went south.
So there have been abuses. There have been us It's been reported several
tens, if not hundreds of thousands of searches which were not authorized, that
were done on this database, all by FBI agents. So I said,
the answer is not to say, in the middle of a war where we're
under threat by Russia and Ukraine, runner thereat by growing China and now around
preussing Israel, I would not say this is the time to cut back on
how much information we can gather. The problem is the FBI, because they're
the ones doing the abuse. Actually turns out from the reports, neither the
CIA nor the NSA has abused these powers. It's all coming from the FBI.
So I said, what we should do is split the FBI in two.
It's too powerful, it's too big. Should have a small age.
See that does the counter espionage, counter intelligence, and the different agency also,
I would say much smaller of it does domestic law enforcement. But it's
the FBI that's the problem in my book. Well, a couple of comments,
I said, yeah, no, a couple of comments. Correct me
if I'm wrong, John, because I remember the general story arc is the
Clinton administration of the nineties wanted a lot of Patriot Act powers and Republicans and
I think liberal civil libertarians said no, no, we don't like this.
This is bad, and so whatever passed, then nine to eleven happens.
Then the aftermath of that anything passed, But now fast forward to today.
And then also an organizational detail. I think NSA, CIA, all those
things got swept up under the Department of Homeland Security and the Director of National
Intelligence, but not the FBI that remains under the Justice Department. Right,
So here's why this is an interesting thing. So are you following what's the
latest on the Eric Adams investigation. So what several days ago they arrested or
tossed or whatever, you know, service on adams campaign fundraiser. Who's a
twenty five year old lady, Which is that's a little weird for the mayor
of New York to have a I think a twenty five year old lady.
Is the Hold on a minute, Lucretia, because the second part is today,
this afternoon, the news came out and that's what you're gonna say,
Lucretia, that they have seized all of Eric adams telephones. They stopped him
in the street, pushed his security forces aside, told him to stand down,
and yeah, it sounds like what they did to John Eastman a couple
of years ago. Right. But here's the question is once again, is
uh, you know, maybe Adams is guilty of, you know, all
these things. On the other hand, is it purely a coincidence that Adams
gets targeted by the FBI after he takes after the Biden administration so hard on
the immigration business. You know, it's a skeptical mind saying something about this
doesn't seem quite whatever. He actually never sat down with the White House like
he fully intended to, because he got that call about the fundraiser and he
left without ever actually having the full on conversation he was supposed to have with
the White House. Oh you're talking about Yeah, I don't know. In
the like he got there and he and you know, ready to have whatever
audience he was supposed to have. I don't know if it was Biden,
I can't remember, or clan or somebody who knows, But before he got
the phone call and he left back to New York. Well, in any
in any case, John, you have indeed dodged the bullet from Lucretia on
your patriot axe stance, so only by the end. I'm sure she'll be
back by the end of the show. I actually had a question, though,
John, not that I want to sound like I'm in favor of it,
but doesn't Congress under it's excuse me, Article three powers have the power
to create courts. Uh? It does. I mean the rest of it
made sense, But when you said that they had no power to create the
FISA court, can't they make any kind of court under Article one or Article
three? You know, the different kinds of courts that they want to Here's
The problem with this kind of court is that it's not deciding cases or controversies.
What the FIZI Court's been doing is saying whenever the FBI or the NSA
gather intelligence, they must follow the following six rules. Right, So they're
they're issuing like management decisions and rules, not deciding cases. Is that different
from a bankruptcy court? Yeah? I think so, okay, and the
bankruptcy court is still resolving, you know, the claims that people have on
a bankrupt company's assets. This is actually what people identify back on nine to
eleven that got the pies a court in so much trouble and why they missed
everything is the phiz of judges were obsessed on managing how our intelligence gathering was
going and not paying attention to, oh, is there actually an individual here
whose writes about, you know, the things that courts are supposed to do.
It makes sense there was a question, a genuine question, not a
criticism. Yeah, yeah, no, No, That's that's my point is
that that's that's the concern. They could create a body and call it a
court, but it's not really doing what courts do. It's just another layer
of management. But by calling a court. They're trying to confuse everybody into
seeing who's really responsible or Now. One interesting thing Linda might like is on
the panel was carter Page's lawyer. So carter Page's lawyer was going off on
all this, and I said, look, carter Page, there was an
error. Is this should never happen. He should be given a lot of
money by the government. That's right, Like, how you those are the
damages you should get for a mistake. But that doesn't necessarily mean should do
away with the surveillance. We just have to figure out a better way to
remedy people who are harmed. So, yeah, you know. The problem
I have with that though, is that as is sort of what I want
to talk about a little bit later, but as we see our country becoming
more bifurcated and divided, and I mean we look at the SISA Cyber Infrastructure
Security Agency. Did I get it right the acronym. I mean it was
created just to, yeah, I know, to want to help us guard
against cyber attacks and you know, our electrical grids, et cetera, et
cetera. And we find come to find out, I mean it's a new
agency. It was created in twenty eighteen, and it's now the probably the
biggest and perpetrator of spying on Americans, censoring Americans, shutting down Americans a
speech they don't like, and you know, it's getting a lot of attention
right now. But I don't know that I trust anybody to do surveillance and
or all of the things that follow that they do after surveillance. Maybe that's
just a crazy idea, but I worry a lot less about what the Russians
might be doing here than what our own government is doing toilets, if you
want to know the truth. Yeah, that's where Oh I'll disagree with you
somehow, John, you know, yeah, well, we will do a
show on this as we get closer to the expiration of the because the thing
expires at the end of December, so there's going to have to be a
big fight in Congress about whether to do this. So actually, the weird
thing is, I said so, in my mind, actually wouldn't be bad
if Congress didn't reauthorize it, and we got back to the PREFISA world where
you know, presidents from Lincoln, Lincoln's the first president who did this.
Actually presidents from Lincoln on authorize this, but then they're on their own right,
they bear full responsibility, and the system I think worked okay until Nixon.
Yeah, that's a good point across the board though, John, I
mean that's really true too. I mean I just taught that to my students
in con law yesterday and trying to make them understand that when when you dissipate
executive power across all these agencies and ultimately to Congress and so on, nobody's
accountable. Remember what a Alma said when some reporter brought up the IRS scandal
to him and his answers, Well, I found out about it when I
read in the newspapers, just like everybody else. It would have as ainine
thing to say, but nobody cared, nobody said people for it. Yeah
yeah, anyway, So yes, I do agree with you on that whole
lack of accountability thing. Yeah. Well, let's let's move on to uh,
who might be the next president? So we had a debate on Wednesday
night, actually hosted by one of the networks, not by Fox News,
not by Fox, by NBC. So, uh, what Suzz Lucretia didn't
watch? Steve, did you watch the debate? And who do you think
did best? Who do you think did worst? What impact do you think
will have on the race? Yeah? So I didn't watch it because I
was traveling. Also, I actually can't stand watching these things. However,
uh, I did take in some clips and read a lot of the now
and so three quick observations. One is with the partial exception of uh,
Haley's Nicki Haley's high heels and calling Vivek rob Aswamy scum, that's kind of
it for the singers. And so apparently it was a very substant debate.
That's just well, I know, but but but you know how that that's
what always gets the attention on Twitter and everyboys. Oh you know, and
uh and and it does sound like they really argue the issues in a sensible
way, which meant it board the audience. Second, everyone's saying that Haley
did really well. And here I can't resist bating everyone. I was just
gonna say, what's uh, I'll just go straight to the point, which
is, Lucretia, what's your problem with Nicki Haley? Yeah? Why don't
they like, maybe you don't have a problem. I don't know, she
definitely doesn't. You can't the people listening and can't see all the terrible faces
of the creatures making every time you mention her name, Why Lucretia? Why
Nikki Haley stumped when debate moderator asks her to list some countries she wouldn't invade.
Yeah, okay, that's the Babylon Bay coverage. I know that's funny.
But she's a warmond. You think she's a war bonger, Well,
yeah, she's she's she's a hack. She's just another rhino. Wait a
minute, set aside this. I no, I really have to I really
have to object. What What in her record makes you say that aside from
her foreign policy views? What's your contentant aside from her foreign policy views?
That's what presidents are supposed to be doing? Well? Right? But what
what? But before this, what would you have been? I mean,
look, I think she was a credible governor of South Carolina. I think
she was pretty good at the UN under Trump? So what's the Trump?
But all right, I don't know some moments, But what makes that?
Why? Why on earth would that make her presidential material? It's got to
be something that's catching on because I don't quite see it. But then again,
I I kind of do see that. It's she's female she's ethnic,
she's not Trump. Well, we Republicans could look like we care about diversity,
inclusion and inequity too, because well, Nikki Hayley, Well now wait
a minute, remember though a minute me, she is not what we well
the whole Lucretia finished. Let Lucretia finish. Oh, there's nothing serious about
her. I mean, she's not she's she's fine, she's not. She
has no deep understanding of things. The fact that she just I can't,
I can't sorry, And I'll just say, wasn't that good what I saw?
I'll just say this. Uh. There's a history now of the Republican
electorate and primary season swooning over some novelty candidate Herman Kane in twenty and eight
or twelve and then nine nine, right, and then he was remember he
was ahead of the polls for a few weeks, and then was the first
yeah right, and then what's his name? Ben Carson had a few moments
until people thought he was on sleeping pills, and you know new it was
the top of the polls for a while and twenty twelve before Romney cut him
down to size. And so the point is is that I'm not surprised that
Nicky Haley is a appeals that same novelty streak Republicans seemed to have had for
the last fifteen twenty years. That doesn't last. And so I'll just play
with musician. What do you think about Lucretious Clean That she's shallow, that's
what she's saying. Yeah, shallow. I don't think she told her in
a podcast with us. Oh yeah, she's definitely not. Definitely not being
invited. I mean, after I listened to you almost placed me with Amy
Wax. I'm happy to be left back. But I felt bad for Steve.
I mean, he's caught between Lucretian and Amy Wax. Oh man,
it's amazing he's still alive. I bet could hold his own. Yeah,
yeah, I don't know. I thought I watched the whole debate. I
didn't think. I think Vivek didn't do so well. I mean, he
he had these kind of pre canned attacks on the media, pre can attacks
about the Russia hoax, but he actually didn't answer any of the debate questions,
and Hailey spent a lot of time attacking him, and I think got
the better of him. Not because I sympathized with her, but I think
he was actually a little bit shocked that she came at him so hard,
and so the polls seemed to show him. I mean, he's fallen actually
quite a bit since the first debate. Well now he is gone. Kay,
he is the He's the Ron Paul of this election socker. You remember
in twenty eight, twenty twelve. Well, the reason I say that is
is that younger voters, younger Republicans love the guy. And my my little
focus group is my son's college Republican group at Clemson University where they all watch
debate, twenty of them this week, and they all love the vic.
And you know, I kept getting texted from my son the Vick is wiping
the form of these people, and I'm saying, really, that's not what
a lot of other people think. But and I think that's the same way
that you know, Ron Famous Rong, not so much Rand Paul. But
that's a different story. But you remember Ron Paul was very popular with the
young Republicans back when he was still making a run in twenty and eight again
in twenty twelve, and partly that's the libertarian vibe, and partly that was
his anti war vibe. Ron Paul and his son Ram let us say we're
ahead of the curve on non interventionist foreign policy. That's now very widely held
in the Republican Party after Trump. So you're right about that. I mean,
yeah, that was always the thing I didn't like about Ran Paul in
his libertarianism. But well, do you remember this is I didn't at the
time. I didn't understand it, but in retrospect I do. I think
it was the very first debate in twenty sixteen at the Reagan Library and you
had what twelve or fifteen candidates up there. Trump's in the middle, and
I forget what the question was, but it was directed to Trump because he
was ahead of the polls gets the first question, and instead of answering a
question, Trump points down at the end of the row where Rand Paul was
at the end and says, why is this guy here? He's a nutbag,
he's a one percent in the poll, he's a libertarian wackle. Why
is this guy even on the stage. I don't deserve to be here.
And I thought that's pretty weird. And it was only afterwards it occurred to
me how shrewd Trump was the one person who competed with Trump for the anti
war Republican vote was Rand Paul. And by the way, Ran Paul was
very popular with the media. You know, Time magazine said, is this
kind of guy you the next Republican hero? Chris Matthews practically anointed him on
MSNBC, which shows you how little those guys know. And I thought,
there's Trump moving right away to take out a person who's a potential rival for
him for a segment of the vote that he perceived was up for grabs.
And again at the time, I thought, he's just being a nut.
This is just Trump being crazy, and no, not so crazy. So
anyway, well, the polls seemed to show maybe things are now a little
different, but the poles seemed to show that Haley and Descantis are now really
the only alternatives Trump the other. I thought, what other came through in
the debate was who's not going to make it? Seems like Tim Scott wasn't
even there. He seems so strangely disengaged. No, he does, now
he does. That was the big news. Well, okay, and then
then Chris Christy, you know, God bless him. His views are just
out of step with the primary voters. And he seemed not to really get
engaged. It seems like it's really up to Haley or discantist to be to
present some kind of alternative or challenge. You mean, Mike pet Oh,
Mike Pen's dropped out. Why was that? M Sorry, sorry, I'll
leave that one alone. Yeah, I think that that. I'm also surprised
by all of the slightly center media that are going after Nikki Haley and that
always you know, that bothers me. It's a little bit like what you
said about rand Paul. She's become the darling of every media outlet these He's
even the damn New York Post. For God's sakes. Hey, I thought
we liked the Post. I do, but when not when they're stupid?
Okay. I was worried John that the lucretia might be tired tonightbe low energy.
You know, we might be able to slip one buyer, but no,
Okay, moving on to issue number two. So issue number two,
we didn't just have a presidential debate this last week. We also had election
results and two big election results. One does seem like Glenn Youngin is going
to be running in twenty twenty four for the presidency. You might remember,
there was all this chatter Glenn Youngkin, the governor of Virginia, was going
to gain Republican control of the State House in these Virginia legislative elections, which
would provide the springboard for him to run for the presidency. But on the
way to the ballot box, what happened. Democrats actually seize control of the
both the Assembly and the Senate in Virginia. Then the other major election result
was Ohio voted on basically whether to add a right to abortion to the state
constitution. And it seems to me yet another example in this long running street.
Now since Doobbs where Democrats and the pro abortion crowd have one, yet
another electoral victory they won in Ohio quite comfortably. I can't think of actually
another case another election Sincetobbs where abortion was on the ballot and Republicans have won.
This is just and so the Democrats was on a streak. Go ahead,
John, because there's a longer answer to that. But I want to
talk for just a moment about the other two, about Virginia and Kentucky.
So coming out in Kentucky that what was the guy's name, not the other
guy, Cameron Cameron, the McConnell. But yeah, he was a McConnell
pee, and I think that that's actually probably the biggest reason why he lost,
because McConnell is so unpopular for all sorts of very valid reasons. We'll
just leave that one alone, I think. But Sheer actually found his way
back, you know, he he became much more popular than it seemed he
was a year or so ago. But I think I think the association with
McConnell did that guy in why would you why would you vote for somebody who's
an acolyte of McConnell's. You know, you've got to be embarrassed that you
ever voted for McConnell in the first place, if you're from Kentucky. So
that's my my commentary in that. But I won't dwell on that. Let
me just say in Virginia, so the chairman of the GOP in Virginia requested
from that twit what's her name, McDaniel Royal, requested some money because this
was a big deal, this Virginia legislature and you know, keeping it in
the hands of the Republicans or getting it and you know, helping out Youngkin
and the rn C turned them down. Meantime, Biden put a million dollars
into those legislative races in Virginia, and here where is million dollars? Sorry,
okay, but but it's a million dollars. These are state legislative races.
They aren't huge, huge spending. This isn't Senate US Senate in California,
and Republicans lost the House in the Senate by twenty four hundred and nineteen
hundred votes respectively in Virginia. Yeah, yeah, no, they're very close
criminal on the part of our ridiculous Republican establishment. If you ask, well,
wait a minute, I'll give a slight counterpoint. I mean, I
totally agree with you about the rottenness of Ronal McDaniel. However, I think
they could have spent five million more dollars on Republicans and it might not have
changed the outcome if they didn't have a message. So, by the way,
Henry Olsen, you know who shoots pretty straight on these things, I
heard him say, actually, Republicans did better than you think in Virginia.
I mean, it's not just sugar coating a bad night. Who's pointing out
that they improved their standing over two years ago. In the twenty twenty one
election. In twenty twenty in a lot of the districts that Biden had won
and they just didn't get over the finish line. But just take one race
as emblematic of this. There was that woman Gibson who had been outed for
doing live porn for money on the internet. They barely beat her well,
it turned out her message was and by the way, this was across the
board in Virginia, the Democrat message was Trump, Trump, Trump, and
above all abortion, abortion abortion. The guy running against Gibson Randy's generic feel
good plain vanilla ads. I want to bring people together and solve the problems
of Virginia. I don't care if you spent five million extra dollars on a
message like that, you're gonna lose. He didn't lose. He managed to
He didn't even have an attack ad on this woman for being a pornographer and
you know, a crazy woman, right, and he barely beat her when
that should have been to lose. Well. But this also connects to the
Ohio question. Is yes, Republicans are still deer in the headlights on abortion,
and you're gonna lose every time if you don't make an argument of some
kind. It's not just that Steve, I agree with you. I actually
agree with everything you just said. It's worse twice in one podcast, John,
I'm gonna because you're not really right. You're only right so far.
Okay, Okay, I'm kidding, I'm kidding. No. But here's the
real point and why I sent you what I sent you. It goes back
to something we talked about I think the last time we actually had John with
us. And what is absolutely the case now is that not only has the
left taken over every single one of our institutions in ways that really matter,
but so call it from K twelve. They don't teach civics. They don't
teach anything to students that would cause them to be able to make even the
slightest critical judgment about an election on their own thinking. So they are dupes
for stupid arguments like abortion, pro abortion and pro Palestine and so on.
You know, start there, but that goes across all of society. The
left has made absolutely sure that most people are idiots about and I really mean
that not so much. They don't care. They're taught not to care.
They're not taught that politics are important. But well then we'll add idiot,
right. I mean, look, idiot and ideologue share the same common root
in the Greek which you know, yes, of course, sorry, But
but then on top of that, what you have is this massive misinformation.
You know, at the same time as people saying, oh, well,
you know the terrible Republicans. You probably saw that guy who went up to
the guy in Virginia and he was some nut job leftist and just screaming obscenities
at him, and you know, they're like that, they're they're so over
the top. That person was a federal employee apparently by yes. But but
like what they said in Ohio that that Republicans wanted women who had abortions to
get the death penalty, and you say that to stupid voters over and over
and over again, and like and what Steve said, you don't counter it
with a real argument. You don't counter it with all of the things we
know about abortion, about how abortion is bad for women, whatever it might
be. There's all sorts of great arguments against abortion on demand, but Republicans
won't make them because they're afraid to. Yeah, well that's what, right,
I mean, that's my point is, Look, I mean, if
they're going to say crazy stuff like that, our team ought to be saying
yeah, and you Democrats, you want abortion to be legal up until the
kid goes off to college. I mean it's some healings, but I mean
there's a more serious version of that, as you know. But the point
is there's not even the instinct to hit back in any way, and it's
it's proving quite favorable. How many times, you know, how many times
have you seen an ad about that famous nurse who watched, you know,
stayed with a baby that had been lived through a part of birth abortion and
watched it die right right? You know how many you play that one night
after night after night, and you're going to have a very different outcome.
And then, don't forget I brought this up to you, guys, I
haven't seen anybody talk about it. But guess what else was on the Ohio
ballot this time? Yeah? Marijuana? Yeah, yeah, that's a lot
of stupid laws were passed in Arizona when recreational marijuana was on the ballot.
Well, let me try to offer a last thought on this, John,
unless you have one, and Lucretia will correct me in any case, because
this is it falls in the category of what she dislikes of my eternal,
infernal optimism, which is look, the the the silver lining here in one
sense is this is going to allow Biden the Democrats into a false sense of
security. And you know, because prior to the election, you had all
these stories and these polls out showing Biden losing the Trump and the Key States,
and you know, there was Axel Rod tweeting gay and Obama gosh,
Biden really ought to drop out the good of the country. Well, that's
all ended with the election result, because they're saying, gee, you know
he's not a If Republicans had run the table in this election, uh,
and you'd connected it to Biden's unpopularity, I guarantee you keeping in a world
hurt right now. Instead, I'll bet all of Biden's people are saying,
Hey, we're good to go. What's all this fussing about and being old
or whatever. Forget it, We're good. I know I disagree with you,
Steve on that one, but there's one more point. I do want
to make no different point. And so we know that there was widespread,
if not fraud, necessarily that they're using electronic voting machines, and that even
the election officials this time around admit that the voting machines in Pennsylvania and Kentucky
or was it Pennsylvania and Ohio forget which I know? Pennsylvania again, John,
your home state. What did it do? Now? The electronic voting
machines, Uh, wouldn't when when you go to vote, when you vote
for this person, it would log somebody else and do all sorts of things
like that. And even though they supposed to really oh yeah, yeah,
there's been massive stories about it, but not in the New York Times of
the Washington Post, John, So you probably didn't see him. Yeah.
Probably Between between the misinformation, between the censorship of social media, between cheating
or you know, making sure that everybody can vote even if they've been dead
for twenty years absentee and all of it. At some point you go back
to what Lincoln said. I wanted to make this point. I wanted to
bring in Lincoln for you, John, ballots are the rightful and peaceful successor
of bullets, and that when ballots are fairly and constitutionally decided, there can
be no successful appeal back to bullets. I agree with that, can we
any longer say that a significant portion of the American people believe that ballots fairly
in constitution will decide anything in this country, because what we know, we
can see it on our friend John Eastman's trial. Everything has been done,
everything possible has been done to make sure not that the election was fair and
fraudulent, and to prove that to the absolute nude, so that there could
never be any doubt whatsoever to intelligent people, rational people, at least,
no anybody who even thinks about bringing up the idea that something about the twenty
twenty election wasn't fair gets their license taken away, They get held off to
court, they get I mean, they've got FBI agents and state troopers in
Maine or somewhere chasing after a guy who walked into the Capitol on January sixth,
why because we can't dare talk about it. And that doesn't help for
people who are already a little bit conspiracy minded to think that there's any chance
this next go round is going to be fair. And then we saw this
last time just the other day, all go figure electronic voting machines actually do
have glitches and they count things wrong or they're you know, whatever, it
might be paper ballots on the day of election that with an ID and you
would probably solve a lot of those problems. But they won't do it.
Why why won't they do it? What's the problem with a paper ballot?
What's the problem with an ID? What's the problem with voting on election day?
Right? I'm looking for an answer? You know, all tell you
yeah. I mean, first, I don't think that most Americans believe there
was fraud in the election. If you go buy the polls, I mean,
there's no I think two thirds of the American people feel that the election
was It's the opposite, John, not that it was fraud. No,
I think two thirds of Americans think the election result was accurate, that Biden
did win. I think the figures are two thirds of Republicans think something funny
happened. But in terms of the entire population, I think it's a clear
majority believe the election was I think so that Biden. Well, yeah,
I think it's still true that sixty percent of Democrats still think the Russians slung
the twenty sixteen election of Trump. I mean, this is part of these
polls are not something to rely on very much. I think and that's all
lot of Well, look, the same point is, you know you referred
to Eastman, and I did testify in his disbarment proceedings. I'm not sure
to any good effect because while I was away, I understand that the bar
judge signaled that she will rule against Eastman, and he tried to litigate all
these facts in the proceedings, which I think was a mistake. I think
he should have focused more on the reasonableness of his league position because I still
don't find any court or any governmental agency finding that there was fraud. Again
we argue this before. I mean, I don't see how you or I
could decide whether there was fraud. We'd have to see the ballots, see
the machines. But there's thousands of jurisdiction in this country and they can conduct
an investigation. None of them have found it. Well, you have John
presenting evidence by you know, people he says are experts, people who says
study these machines. But there's no court, state legislative body, state agency
that has accepted these claims as being true. Most of the time, they
wouldn't even grant standing to people to make those claims. John, But now
you can do it after and we've done. You know, there have been
audits by state legislatures controlled by Republicans. Have I don't know. I think
every politician have been in Arizona. They did an audit in Arizona. You
know what they did. They counted the ballots and said, oh, yeah,
these are the ballots they do look at the exists. You know that
one of the practical problems a vote fraud is once a ballot is in a
box, it's hard to get it back out again if it's a phony ballot.
So even auditing them doesn't really work for you. Well, it's when
you have discrepancies of what the vote county is and the number of ballots you
have on hand or that you can verify or cast. That's one problem.
But I think it is separated into two parts. John. One is is
what did they know at the time and what they had the time? Well,
first of all, a lot of wild rumors. Maybe a few of
them not so wild, but some are crazy and wild. But the second
thing was you had these circumstantial factors. There's so many things. I mean,
I'll just mention one that you know, Republicans game to what twelve or
fourteen seats in the House. It has never happened before in one hundred and
fifty years that a winning presidential candidate in the initial election lost seats in the
House. It's one of the things that doesn't add up on the macro level.
And there's four or five hothers like that. Now I can, as
a political scientist explain those things away, but not at the time. At
the time, you're thinking, wait a minute, something stinks here. So
you make the arguments Eastman made, and so it turns out the fullness of
time, you can't verify these things. These are like correlations. These are
just streams, right, correlations of data, right, which can be explained
by people really hate Trump, yeah, so much that change their voting patterns
for the downbell off. I mean, remember what Trump got what ten or
twelve million more votes in twenty sixty. Turnout was way up on both sides.
It was just up more on the Democratic side, whether fair or foul.
We leave that for other time. Maybe we should talk about I mean,
you go on a long time about this, but John was on sixty
minutes and I heard it's gonna be on sixty twenty and not me. Yeah,
johnnyastan sorry, and I thought this is a and I watched that this
is a bad idea because sixty Minutes always edits to make you look bad,
and I he stuck to his guns like he did in his dispartment procedure.
But here's an interesting thing, a little backstory here. Thirty years ago,
when John and I were classmates and then housemates, we knew a businessman from
Ark and I saw who moved to California. I don't mention his name,
but he had been a subject of a sixty Minutes investigation for some kind of
fraudulent business practices. But he did a clever thing. He had his own
video camera in the room and recorded the whole interview separately from the sixty minutes
crew. And after it was all over and it was clear to him that
they were going out to get him. You may remember this. This was
in the press. We probably know you're probably too young. He leaked to
the press some of the racist things that Mike Wallace had said during the interview,
and it caused a big fuss, and the sixty Minutes people called him
up and said, would you give us that tape? He said, I
don't know I'm not gonna give you that tape. Well, we'll go easier
on you if you give us the tape. There's a big fuss over this,
and so the lesson ever since has been and I'm sure John Eastman Oughtiver
might remember this is if you're going to do a sixty minutes interview these days,
you'd have a little go pro camera something, run your own dang camera,
so you have the entire interview and can correct any omissions, correct any
selective editing. And I'm wondering if John did that. If he didn't,
he not remembering things very well, but I hope he did. And maybe
we'll hear the whole interview at some point, because I thought it they could
have been tough for on him than they were. On the other hand,
I think some of the answers of his they did used maybe not have helped
him that much. So I don't know, we'll see. I watched the
interview too. I'm more Steve is. I don't think it would make a
difference that much. I don't think he changed his answers. I mean,
he was consistent with what he's been saying before, and so in that respect,
I don't think the sixty minutes interview really helped or hurt him, because
you would hear John saying this stuff if you watch the Bar proceedings or watched
him, you know, in his very speaking engagements. Well, one thing
I'm not saying. Six of me has tried to help him. I'm sure
they tried to screw him over, but he just repeated what he's been saying
this whole time. So well, you know, could they hurt him?
One thing he did that may have been very clever and very effective, is
they press him on some specifics, and John would I think he knew that
if he tried to get in too many specifics, it would end up on
the cutting room floor. And he said more than once in different forms.
Look, the real issue here is whether we are still a self governing country
or not. And me and other people we worry that we have lost a
self governing country without election integrity and a few other aspects of this administrative state
argument. But stayed in very plain, direct language. And I'll bet there
were you know, to the extent that many people watch sixty minutes anymore,
I'll bet a lot of them were saying, yeah, that sounds right to
me. By the way. I think this is a related point. You
know, somebody's polls showing Trump running very well with black males. It never
seems to show up on election day as much as the polls show. But
I wonder how much of that is a people's looking at all these legal actions
bought against him and saying, yeah, that's kind of what we feel about
our legal system. That was right, That was a crucial I mean,
they were walking down in different urban areas and there's all these black males walking
around with I don't remember exactly what they said. It was something something urban
about Trump, and I forget it was funny. I would have bought one
if I if I could have found one. But today I saw an article
today that the Black Lives Matter co founder what's his name I can't remember,
of course, said Trump's the only candidate worth voting for. The Black Lives
Matter co founder is supporting Trump. I don't know what to think about that,
honestly. Yeah, that's a psyop of some kind. I don't know.
I have seen people making this argument that Steve's making, that Trump's claims
of persecution by a biased criminal justice system will resonate with you know, some
people live in the inner city. Yeah, and maybe that explains why if
you look at these polls, not only is Trump you know, beating Biden
in all but one of the battleground states, and he's really cut into Biden
support amongst minorities by os and Hispanics in particular. It's incredible. But by
the way, you know, you know who really beats Biden in those battleground
states. Nikki Haley, Nikki I couldn't resist. At what point though,
can we never mind Nicki Haley talking about, but at what point do we
also want to credit the idea that maybe all of these minority voters are not
as dependent and stupid and all of the other things. You know, they
can't get IDs to vote, and at some point they don't want to be
you know, creatures of the state. They you know, there was a
great I think it was when Reagan was president, the largest increase in the
number of black owned new small businesses that have ever happened in history. And
I know something happened with Trump. But the idea that of this sort of
a nanny state that the Democrats want to hand them at some point between that
and you know, being persecuted and being you know, uh, you know,
put in jail by the man. There's a lot to be said for
Trump's appeal over somebody like Biden who says, if you don't vote for me,
you ain't black. I mean, my view is a little different,
which is, I do think that it is possible to bribe people of you
know, lower income people. You offer them government goodies, they're going to
be attracted that. However, I think they don't want to be condescended to.
They want to be treated with respect, and you know, a lot
of our social welfare system doesn't do that. And of course the whole the
whole meaning of intersectionality and all the rest of the social justice crowd is to
deny them agency and self respect. And I think that may be starting to
occur to Aboule. So there's a conflict. There's a conflict there. You
want to vote Democratic as they're going to give you more goodies and your life
is insecure. On the other hand, they treat you like crap. Yeah,
the intersectionality stuff doesn't help either, because what if you're an inner city
young blackmail, what do you have in common with a transgender Well sorry,
sorry, okay, I'll be quiet Okay, let's move on to But that
was my revolution, top John, you missed that entirely, just so you
know, No, I think you got it. Okay, Well, moving
on to one more piece of election news. Was the Supreme Court of Minnesota
denied as lawsuit trying to disqualify President Trump under Section three of the fourteenth Amendment,
which we've discussed on the show earlier decisions interesting because it only really postpones
the lawsuit what the although I do think what the Minnesota Supreme Court said was
interesting and correct. The Minnesota Supreme Court said primaries are just up to political
parties, they're not actually functions of the government. And so if the Republican
Party in Minnesota wants to have a primary election to decide whether they want President
Trump to be their candidate or not, that's not implicated under the fourteenth Amendment
because it's just the political party making the choice. So they kicked the lawsuit
out of court, but they essentially said, but if his name goes on
the general ballot, maybe that's an issue. Although I actually think if you
take their logic to its natural conclusion, you would have to say, actually,
the only time you'd really look at it is if Trump won, like
even putting him on the general suppose he loses, then you don't actually have
a Fourteenth Amendment violation. But the opposite, though, would be the case
that if you didn't allow him on the ballot, and that whole decision was
appealed and they determined it was wrong, which of course any honest judge or
court would have to, then what ye done them harm? Exactly? You
know, I can't believe any court out there, even as corrupt and awful
as most of them are, would actually go that far to say Trump should
not be on the ballot. There's certainly nothing in the fourteenth Amendment that gives
judges the power to do that, right, I mean, we've already discussed
that, Yes, But I think what's interesting is that I think Lukutia's right
on the merits. It should lose anyway. But the Minnesota case gives all
the other courts hearing this an easy way out, that gives them an easy
way to just kick these cases out of court and let the elections proceed.
Yeah. I mean, my political hunch on this is that no state wants
to go first. John, let me ask you a question, a legal
question, A lawyer question, it's very true at the federal level that there
is in fact no constitutional recognition whatsoever for the political parties and so on.
We've got some legal recognition from Congress, but constitutionally not. But isn't there
at the state level constitutional recognition for political parties in different states? Or am
I wrong about that? No? No, So, first, under the
federal constitution, the idea is that your right to speak and petition leads to
the right of political parties because you're effectively associating together and then speaking together.
So the courts have held there is a constitutional right to have these political parties
mean I mean, I mean the regulation of political parties does not happen by
the constitution, because that's a better way to put it, would be the
role of political parties in the electoral process is not built into our federal constitution.
Yes, that's right, you're exactly right. There's no power in Article
one, section eight for Congress to regulate political parties. As we all know,
the Constitution doesn't even mention the word party. So the or presidential nominations
or or yes, and the other interesting thing is, just to make Lucrecia's
point even clearer, is that right? Primaries are pretty recent innovation. Were
there were no primaries one hundred years ago, or maybe there were a few,
like dot doesn't John F. Kennedy only win a few primaries, But
that creates the momentum or the appearance that the people want to But when the
political parties we just get together at the conventions and they would pick the president
there, their nominees there, that makes especially obvious. It seems to me
that this really is a function that the Minnesota courts right, that this is
a function of the political party. It's not the government's actions to which the
fourteenth Amendment really applies. Yet, ask you a further question about that issue,
John, because it came up last week. What's that guy's name,
Hans. What's his name again, Steve Spokowski? Yeah, yes, and
he wrote it. Really did you have him on the show too? I
was. I read his article on John, and I compared it to yours.
And I know Hans pretty well. You probably do too, John,
Yeah, he's been here at the Federal Society well so here. So his
argument was more or less across the board the same as yours, except what
he said was that those two pieces of legislation that happened in the period after
the Civil War, after the passage of the fourteenth men, the first one
that removed the disabilities for some, and then the second one that removed the
disabilities for all. His argument was that there was no time limit on that,
and that those two pieces by Congress was so if you look at the
very last line of section three, it says Congress may buy a two thirds
vote remove this disability. And his argument was basically that that was not specific
to the Civil War or to people engaged in insurrection in the Civil War,
but that in fact, when Congress did remove those disabilities by legislation after the
fact, they removed him forever. What do you think of that, because
you talked about those laws. Yeah, so, I mean, I think
the better argument is that this just doesn't apply to the president because the text
doesn't mention the president. The talks, yeah, talks about officers of the
US who are always discussed differently as the president, and the text actually says
it applies to electors for the president, which makes it obvious they could have
said and it applies to the president, but they chose not to. The
question about these disability statutes that Congress passes really interesting because the question and the
courts haven't really addressed this is whether those actments apply in the future. Could
Congress say, for example, not only are we removing the disability for everyone
who currently participate in insurrection, but we are also moving to disability for everyone
in the future too. So that's the question people are not sure about,
is whether the statute is forward looking, prospective as well as retrospective. Yeah,
Steve, you have anything to add about the Minnesota Supreme Court or the
Nope, not really except speechless ladies. So well, Lucretia has trouble saying
Hans bon Spokowski. I have occasionally, in casual conversation just referred to him
as count Chocolate because it's simpler and he kind of likes that. So if
you want to go with that, you can count Schocula. Okay, Well,
I think for the last issue we should discuss, even though we are
starting to run short in time, is the continuing, in fact rising anti
semitism we are seeing not just on campus but in city streets. Now we've
seen major protests and demonstrations going on at places like Harvard and Yale and Columbia
and Penn but also in the city streets in New York City, in places
like Chicago, and in places like Washington, DC. Let me and having
you know, been out of the country for two weeks, I'm shocked to
see the anti Semitism is on the rise. So Steve, let's start with
you. What explains this? Have there been anti semits all around and we
just didn't know about it and they're just coming to the foe? Or is
this, I mean, is this in some way a legitimate response to what's
happening in Gaza and Israel? What explains this? Or is it they're being
encouraged in some way by faculty and administrative What explains this? Steve? Well,
so, first of all, in reverse order, has this seminism always
been out there? I think the Andrews No, I think there's something different
happening right now. We'll explain that in a moment. But I mean,
you know, you have been out of the country. It gets so I
think maybe you know, cowardly college administrators they hoped, Okay, this is
a spasm of protest, it's going to die down, it's going to go
away. That's not happening. The intensity is building, So you know MIT
has had some really ugly incidents in the last seventy two hours on their campus
of the's pro Palestinian pro hamas demonstrators blocking Jewish students from going to class.
There was a demonstrator. We got a video up on power line of a
demonstrator who walked into some math class and waved the Palestinian flag around and the
instructor was totally clueless about this and didn't stop it. But then there was
a sit in at the University of Chicago, I think Friday, maybe Thursday,
but late in the week. The sit in a bunch of students and
two faculty members and they were all arrested. Chicago, going back to the
Vietnam Mears was actually very tough on sit insdministration buildings and in the sixties expelled
some students and they never had a problem after that. And what I think
now is is if there are any faculty members arrested for sitting in on the
building, they should be instantly fired. I don't care what their tenure rights
are. This is not going to change until there are serious consequences for faculty
and students and also arrest. In the case of MIT, I don't know
if it's a student or not, but if they have people on the campus
agitating who aren't students, they should be arrested for trespassing and prosecuted. The
bigger point is this. The problem here is that administrators, including you know,
our dean, who you know, we kind of like in the number
of ways personally and has been very good on free speech issues. But Dean
Chimerinsky had an article a week ago saying, nothing prepared me for the anti
semitism we're seeing. Here's the problem with that. It's not that he was
naive or not paying attention. He's emblematic of the entire class of the university
leaders today who thought it was costless to indulge Capis radicalism, who never fought
for a moment. You know, we can let them have these land acknowledgment
statements because it's just virtue saying that it doesn't amount to anything, and they
thought it was a free thing to do. It would cost them more to
object to land acknowledgements, cost them more to block expansions and hirings radical faculty,
and now they're seeing that, in fact, it was not costless.
And I think part of the reason for the anti Semitism now is not the
historic Jew hatred that was always the core of it. In fact, Jews
fit the class of oppressors who represent all of the things that work in our
civilization that progresses hate, and I think that's what fuels the ferocity of this
among people who otherwise probably wouldn't care about the subject very much, or don't
actually have much to say about Jews, or think about some of the historic
grievances of Jews as money lenders and all the rest of that. And I
think the final proof of that, and I'll stop because I think Lucrease is
very indulgent of my rant here is the fact that they're using settler colone is
their main ideological hook, not the Jews were you know, a particular avaricious
minority, you prayed on others, or conspiratory some of the stuff that's been
around for centuries. That's not with the rest of the song. It's on
very recent ideological grounds. And this is why nothing's going to change until a
lot of people are fired and a lot of campus departments are closed down completely.
So I'll stop there. So the anti Semitism is really just the highest
stage of wokeism. Yes, yes, exactly, that's that's shorter summary.
Yes, yeah, so awesome college kids. You don't know the difference between
men and women have all be come as experts on the Israeli Palestine conflict,
you know, I mean, yeah, it's it's I think it's that it's
certainly trendy. I don't give the Irwin Timerinskis of the world quite as much
credit as Steve does. I think he's right, But I don't think that
they thought about cost or the lack of a cost one way or the other.
They hired these awful people. They hired dei people. They hired critical
race theorists in English departments instead of people who could actually speak and teach English.
You know, they brought in the students and bragged about it, you
know, the whole affirmative action thing, like you said when you say peak
wokeism. And so is it any surprise that every single college student is now
as stupid and ideologically much as much of a moron as AOC and elan omar.
I mean, this is what they've been pushing this for years, and
now they're surprised. I mean it just it drives me crazy. That's my
problem with it. But the other thing about I do want to say quickly
Steve, is that I really don't disagree with anything you said. But again
I am so times just appalled at forgive this the narrative. Yeah, And
what I mean by that, of course, is that, you know,
occupiers. One of my favorite things I saw on Twitter was isn't it crazy
that Israel has to invade a land they already occupy? You know? Yeah,
And there's no concern whatsoever about is the Palestinians are refugees? What the
hell are they a refugee from? I mean, seriously, what are they
refuge refugee camps? They bond a refugee camp? What in the hell are
the refugee camps in Gaza for anymore? Does anybody understand what's happening there?
Obviously not right? And why you know Egypt when Egypt says no, we're
not going to take them, We're not going to take them, and Jordi
kicked them out thirty five years ago, right yeah, and Lebanon kicked them
out on and on and on, and we're gonna play this game. We're
gonna let I mean, at least they did, in fact censor that ugly,
nasty excuse for a woman. I guess she's a woman. I don't
know. I'm with Katangi on this. I can't tell if she's a woman.
Rashieta to leave. She's so ugly nasty. I'm being lukis them again.
Yeah, yeah, but she's just awful. And you know, it's
just the ugliness of her soul. I think comes out in because I don't
think i'd care otherwise. But they censor during Congress. I guess that's something
in the House of Representatives center censre, not censor. Censure, yeah,
censure. Yeah. Yeah, they didn't censor her. They shut her up.
They should put a gag on her. But anyway, So that's that's
that's all. John, What do you think, I mean, they're lying
about everything. I mean, so you both think that anti Semitism now is
really the product of this kind of Marxist cultural ideology and not this kind of
more primitive, uh you know, hatred of the other, which is,
you know, beset human society for thousands of years. This is something new
and different, as Steve said, which is this is not this is not
something a lot of people are right saying right now. This is a this
is an interesting, provocative new idea. It's it's multifaceted. Of course,
John, what you say, what the what you your example of course is
true also as is you know some what Steve calls a more sophisticated kind of
anti Semitism. You know, the Jews are avaricious, and you know money
lenders, and sure there's a little bit of that, and you know,
there's there's just let's get on the bandwagon with wocism. Let's it's it's it's
it's one of those things that it's a moment where it's all coming together.
Maybe like you say, peak wocism. Yeah, I don't know, it's
it's what do you think should be the next steps? You're saying the arrest
and defrocking, as it were, a faculty expulsion of students you've heard.
In fact, I was getting into arguments with people at the Federal Society convention
because I was making fairly pro strong Israel arguments and I was told, well,
are you engaging in cancel culture too? Then? Oh, are you
are you expelling wanting to expel students or in post consequences on them because of
their deeply held political beliefs and exercising the right to speech. What do you
think, Steve, Well, the point is we're seeing it's clearly going beyond
that. I mean sit ins, you know, actually physically intimidating Jewish students
on some campuses and assaulting them. Right. And again, you know,
we've had these universities all concerned for twenty years now, fit ten, twenty
years on microaggressions and having the campuses be safe for everybody, and we're now
seeing are macroaggressions. These aren't microaggressions. This isn't misgendering somebody in the classroom,
as you know you and I have done, but it is for yourself,
okay. But the point is these are real macro aggressions going on,
and there's a malignancy to it. And you know, I've gone through my
theoretical stuff on this actually action. I've talked about this, and we're going
to do this sometime. I've been rereading Lucretia. I read I dusted off
Frank Canavan's old book, which is mostly about obscenity, is old freedom of
expression book, but it builds on Jack Old right. But and I read
Jaffa's old essay about this, which I think also applies Java's essay John,
which I won't try and do now because we're running over time. It was
all about why it would be right to ban the Communist Party in America.
However, he thought it wasn't necessary to do so, because our democratic culture
is so robust that you can apply prudence to the matter. And Pruden says,
we don't need to do that. We can defeat them with arguments,
but with a malign exactly. That's what I'm saying. Circumstances now are different,
and I'll just stop there. We should take this up sometime soon,
Man, when you and I seize the microphone from John. Next week or
the week after, we'll do that. Yes, I look forward to hearing
what the Jaffies theory of free speech is. It's a subtle argument, John.
It takes a little bit of time to run it through, but we
will. I'm sure that Steve will post a link to it to the Power
to the power Line blog so we can all read in anticipation of the next
episode. There will be a quiz at the end of the show, and
as the listeners no doubt know, Lucretia is not an easy grater. I
think that brings us to the end of our top I have to confess.
I was in Peru and Brazil in this last which I found very encouraging.
I loved both countries and had wonderful food, great hosts, and I really
came away thinking both of them had a kind of spirit of the frontier that
we are kind of losing and America I really felt that. But most important
of all, they were both great countries because to those far reaches of civilization,
no word of Kamala Harris could reach. So I have I have no
coalism because there was no news about Kamala Harris in Peru or Brazil, which
made me a good thing. My line on this is she's being as quiet
right now as a diversity, Equity and Inclusion Dean be very quiet about they're
out ofly silent or radio silence, the DEI people, this anty Semitism stuff.
It's kind of conspicuotd. She's so silent. There's no Camalism, no
Cobalism exactly. There's now. I will say. The only thing I did
see about her with all this was that her staff are deathly worried that actually
some of these anti Israel protests were going to be launched at her because she's
because of Joe Biden's strong support for Israel, but also because she's married to
a Jewish husband. But her her stepdaughter is doing pro Palestine demonstration eight million
dollars she's raised one. Yeah, yeah, So how about you, Lucretia,
do you have some Babylon although you have used up one of the best
ones, are you ready used up the best one? I have more very
relevant to things you talked about, Jonah. To start with the FBI and
your your call, I of course call for it to be abolished, but
I'll go with yours for the moment. But so the the Babylon b says,
here's here's what you how you can judge if you'd actually make a good
FBI agent. So its being an FBI agent is a sweet gig excitement,
carrying a badge and gun, wearing one of those cool FBI windbreakers, spying
on law abiding citizens and cracking down on dangerous terrorists like anti Mabel who voted
for Trump doesn't want to become an FBI agent, right, And so here's
I'm not going to read them all, just a couple. Uh. You
always you always got in trouble at school for being a tattletale. Willingness to
snitch on your fellow citizens is number one. You're absolutely convinced, Lee Harvey
Oswald acted alone. This is non negotiable. You're a sorry. Your favorite
part of watching a movie is the FBI piracy warning. Reading the criminal penalties
for bootlegging movies is always better than the movies themselves. It's actually pretty funny.
But yeah, you could get a leg up on the competition if you
if you can pass all nine all right, Republican Party checks into rehab for
addiction to losing. Oh yeah, ooh yeah, I know it's really bad.
What can we say? Although I lost my page? Oh here we
go. Trump swing state lead expected to hold on till three am on election
night. This one for you, guys. Viveck emerges as front runner of
people who are never going to be president. And then, just just to
tie it all together for you guys, Gavin Newsom quickly bands high capacity assault
high heels. That is great, all right, you guys, it's nice
to see you again, John, I really missed. Yeah, glad to
be back, everybody. So let me send us out with our usual farewells.
So always drink your whiskey meat. Let's go Brandon and Steve. God
save queen Man. All right, next week, Gang bye everyone. Bye.
Least comment, I said, Hey, least comments here, least coming,
I said, hey, least comment hell okay, hell please comment,
Hey hell please come hell LEAs comment? Hey hell lease comments here, least
come in here, least coming here LEAs coment. Mama. I said that
HEAs comment, heyles comment, Hey, hell, lea's comment? This come
in here, this is coming. He's coming in my BASSI He's come in.
He's coming in my boss Holder's coming. Ricochet Join the conversation.