Welcome back, everyone to a new episode of You're Wrong with Molly Hemingway and
David Harsani. Just a reminder, if you'd like to email the show,
please do so at radio at the Federalist dot com. We love your mail,
and if you enjoy the work we do here at the Federalist, you
can show your support by visiting our website and joining the Federalist Community for an
ad free website experience and access to exclusive content you don't want to miss.
Exactly, David, it's four dollars a month. It helps us a ton,
and we really appreciate it. And we also really appreciate that mail that
we get. And I thought last week's mail bag was perhaps the best ever.
Hey, Mollie, I don't actually appreciate everything we get, because I'll
tell you something we did get And people keep doing this and I don't like
it. They keep reimagining are the picture that we use for the show,
and in it I am not in it anymore. They just have you and
like my hair on the top. So I don't appreciate that. Yeah,
I think people want the show to be One guy said he wanted the show
to be called You're Wrong. David Harsani with Molly Hemingway. I like the
fan art that we get sometimes on it, and I think it looks great,
So I think some of them could actually replace what we use. But
did you, by chance see the fight that broke out in or nearly broke
out in the Senate this week, David, I did. I was excited
about that. Two Irish dudes ready to drop the gloves and go at it.
Oh you don't like Irish, I'm sorry. Mark Wayne Mullen. I
believe his native American is he Irish. Oh he is? Yeah. Isn'
mullen an Irish name though, because I'll tell you Sean O'Brien is definitely Irish.
I loved that the senator read the fighting words from the union boss and
then he was like, I'm ready anytime, any place. When he stood
up and you saw that he had that like inverted triangle figure and he just
starts to take off the ring off of his hand, and I'm like,
oh wow, this. I would not want to fight this person at all.
And then I learned that he was a former MMA champ. So I
think it would have been great if it would have actually led to fisticuffs.
Me too. I think we need more of that. But can I read
a little bit of the of the interaction? Yes, sir, so this
is mull and sirr, this is the time. This is a place you
want to run your mouth. Can we can be two consenting adults. We
can finish it here of it? Okay, that's perfect, O'Brian says,
Emlin says, you want to do it now, like getting out of their
seats. Actually O'Brien did not get out of his seat, and then that
Cammy Sanders ruined all the fun. So Sean Davis was talking about it,
and he said that in these procedural dramas on television like Law and Order,
there's always this moment where you know, the defense attorney or the prosecuting attorneys
like a little out of out, out of hand, and the judge will
say, I'm going to allow you to continue, but I want you to
watch yourself. And he thought that's what Bernie should have said, like,
I'm allowing you to continue, but I don't want any like dirty stuff,
Senator Mark Wayne Mullin or something. So so after I watched that, I
was reminded that they have these kind of brawls in foreign parliaments all the time,
like Taiwan and in Ukraine and in like recently I think it was Kosovo
or somewhere, and those are really fun to watch. Like first someone will
just throw water at the other person, but then it always, you know,
ratchets up and there's just like fifteen people punching each other, and you
know, I'd like to see that here. I'm not going to lie.
I'm not I you know, I think we could. How can I say
there should be some repercussions for the things you say? This is why I
wrote that column many years ago about bringing back dueling. I think people would
be more polite if they knew they had to actually stand up and you know,
stand behind their words. Highlee Griswold are sweet as anything. Editor wrote
a piece in defense of fist fights in January of this year, which I
think was after fistfights nearly broke out between the Republicans over the speaker battle in
January. Yeah, and my husband is a longtime proponent of fighting versus passive
aggressive caddy fighting. So like in DC, the supposedly grown men are really
catty with each other and really passive aggressive, And he's always like I think
actually a fight would do wonders because he tells me that men are such simple
emotional creatures that they can engage in fighting and then just kind of like move
past it very easily, and he thinks that would be better for our body.
Put I'm an older fella, so I'll just say that, I don't
know if it's still the case. But when you were like in even elementary
school, junior hig school, high school, and you had something to say,
you have to be careful because you might have to, you know,
get into a fight over it, So that that changed the sort of dynamics.
And I don't think I think you lose that as an adult in most
cases. Obviously, I don't want anyone to get really hurt. But anyway,
when I won the Bradley Prize, I began and you get a little
speech that you get to do, and I began my speech by talking about
how much I learned from my brother when a group of bullies were beating up
on him. He was he skipped he was young for his class, and
he skipped a grade, so he was super young for his class and super
smart, and he was kind of getting attacked for it, as boys did
in the nineteen eighties, and he came home and my dad and a neighbor
who was a janitor at this at one of our schools, taught him how
to fight, and he went and took the fight to them and became overnight,
like amazing. In the school, everyone was like so impressed that this
guy, who was much smaller but incredibly smart and scrappy, had taken on
these three bullies. And I thought that was just like a really wonderful thing
that it just inspired me a lot. But one of the other Bradley Prize
winners gave a speech on how Like, and it was a lovely speech and
it was really wonderful, but it began by talking about how immature it is
to fight or something, or like to view in politics in terms of lights.
And I was like, oh, this is uncomfortable because I went right
after her. Anyway, I don't know when I was growing up, Like
one time I was bullied when I was young, and my dad's like,
you don't run away crying. You got to stand up to the bullies,
and he taught me, like some move still got beat up really bad after
that. But I think when bullies realized that they're going to have to actually
fight someone when they bully them. It changes also that dynamic. So it's
a pretty good lesson in life. You're wrong, is a pro violence,
I mean pro dueling profisticuffs, I really am not. I would just say
that sometimes people act like violence is the worst thing in the world, and
there are things that are worse than violence sometimes, or there are competing values
in place. So I'm truly not in favor of physical fighting or anything like
that, but I'm also really not in favor of the passive aggressive silliness.
Yeah, I don't think fighting is the worst thing on earth for young people.
I'm going to be honest. I mean, I just think you learn
a lot of lessons about the world growing up in that kind of environment.
Now, obviously there's the bullying is terrible that happens in the world, and
all these anti bullying efforts are good. But you know, I think we
lost a little something there. I don't know, We're going to get in
trouble for this little segment here playing sun. Let to move on. Let's
talk about our favorite thing, the media, our favorite institution. So I
don't know if you saw this, it's a letter from the where It's like
an email from the Biden White House to the media complaining about the media pulling
their punches on Donald Trump, being too soft on Donald Trump. And here
is one graph I'll read too quote for the political press, especially our friends
at the Gray Lady the New York Times, it's time to meet the moment
and responsibility, oh and responsibly inform the electorate of what their lives might look
like if the leading GOP candidate for the president is allowed back into the White
House. Now, I was this statement says a lot. There's so much
in there. You'll notice that the GOP candidate does not get elected, he
is allowed back into the White House. But typically the White House will send
out a complaint about a factual error. Here in this instance, and they're
complaining about a story on abortion where the story says Donald Trump has sort of
circumvented that problem for himself. They're not even complaining about anything factual. They're
just simply saying, listen, you have to campaign with us. You have
to be on this side in this moment in history. You're part of the
campaign, not an independent media organist. And I don't even know why they
have to say this to the New York Times, but they demand complete subservience
to their cause, which is completely un American, undermines the First Amendment.
If Donald Trump did it, the world would melt down. But yet here
we are. So first of all, I just want to say I actually
agree with the Biden White House that the New York Times should in fact talk
about what life under a Donald Trump presidency would be. Like, I think
that's a great idea for them to compare the policy agendas of the two people.
We have a rare opportunity to compare two people who actually were in office.
Like I was thinking about it, how it relates to other people who
are running for office. You're like, I like this person, but how
would they be in office? How would they handle the pressures in office?
Well, we have a head to head matchup between Donald Trump and Joe Biden.
We know exactly how they handle themselves. And it's not like a it's
not like a perfect like one's perfect and one's horribly imperfect. They both have
strengths and but I think objectively speaking, the Trump presidency is like a dream
scape compared to what we've gone through under the Biden presidency. So it would
be great for the New York Times to be honest about that. That's not
really what your point was, though, No, no, but that's a
good point. I mean, yeah, I mean, if they were honest,
then we would first of all. So the underlying the subtext of this,
of course, is that Donald Trump is you know, Hitler and democrats
save democracy. And when you believe that, if that is your starting point
and you're just you can justify anything you do, right, so that you
know, that's my point here is that I think that this is how you
justify censorship. This is how you justify a media that is in bed with
the state and so on. But yeah, yeah, yeah, there's one
more thing I wanted to say. Last night, I was at this event
and this person was telling me about something that ran in the Wall Street Journal
that was anti Trump, and it was saying, if Donald Trump wins office,
imagine what's going to happen. He will use the Department of Justice to
go after his political opponents, even threatening them with jail, you know,
and like went through all these things and you're thinking, you're going to get
to the point where you realize they're talking about the current administration, which is
actually doing all these things. Right now, and the person apparently was legitimately
writing it as if this was a threat that would be imagined by someone else
taking office, like totally oblivious to what's going on right now. It's funny
because truck They got very mad about this. But Trump was saying in his
own way. He was saying that I'm going to do what we should just
do, or I'm going to do what they do to oz back to them.
But when you say that, they get so upset, Like I'm not
even sure it was him saying it. Wasn't it Like other people were like,
hey, if he gets a second term, here's what we're going to
do on his behalf. But they weren't even actually talking on his behalf.
I think I don't remember the interview, but I think he said something like
you know that we're going to look into this or that and prosecute people or
whatever. But I don't exactly remember who said it. But whoever said it,
don't you think one of the big failures of the Trump administration was that
they never held anyone accountable for the Russia collusion scam that has caused just like
maybe destroyed the country, but caused unbelievable damage to trust and institutions and the
two standards of justice that we have. Don't you think he should have done
something about that? I do. I mean I think within the government people
have participated in that and leaked things and you know, and lied. I
think yes, I mean he can still do that, though, I'm just
saying we had this standard. Well, but at the time he was in
office, the idea was this weird unconstitutional idea that if you are the president
and you have a Department of Justice, you cannot do anything with the Department
of Justice, which is like, well, that's actually not quite right.
The Department of Justice is in the executive branch and constitutionally that's under the leadership
of the president. And then under Biden, I'm just like, oh,
by the way, could you go jail everyone in the Republican Party? And
Merrick Garland is like, sir, yes, sir, I'm right on it.
And the idea that we're going to go back to like oh, and
when Republicans are in office, they have to let the Department of Justice continue
to go to war against them, Like, no, that's not going to
happen in the future. As a listener of Federalist Radio, hour. You've
definitely heard about this digital dollar idea that's being talked about. It's all the
rage here in Washington, DC. It's the one where the government monitors and
could control you're purchasing in your financial activity. Now, visit gold code dot
com slash Federalist to get your free twenty twenty three gold IRA Kit today or
call eight five five six one eight ten thirty. You can get up to
ten thousand dollars in free silver with qualified orders. And unlike a digital dollar
precious medals, we're talking here about physical gold and silver. They can't be
manipulated with the click of a button, so diversify with physical gold or silver
from gold Code. Historically, gold has been a safe haven in times of
high uncertainty, which is definitely right now. So the twenty twenty three gold
IRA Kit shows you how to diversify some of your hard earned money with physical
gold and silver, even if it's still in a retirement account. And as
an American citizen, you could get up to ten thousand dollars in free silver
with qualified orders, so educate yourself about all of these options. You can
go to gold code dot com slash Federalists to get your free twenty twenty three
gold Ira kit today or call eight five five six one eight ten thirty.
Unlike the digital dollar PRESSUS medals cannot be manipulated with the click of a button,
So visit gold code dot com slash Federalist or call eight five five six
one eight one zero three zero. That's gold code dot Com slash Federalist or
call eight five five six ten thirty. This goes to something deeper that you
know every time, or even I remember George Bush fired some prosecutors and it
was like he's politicizing the dojan and stuff like that that that the left ever
see. Yeah, and then Barack Obama does it and everyone's like, good,
that's a very good idea exactly. But it's not even the double standard.
It's that I think that liberals don't see their point of view and the
things they do as political. They see it as just right and normal and
the you know, the default position of decency, and then they get all
upset when others do it. So, I mean, I don't want to
politicize DJ, but you already. Yeah, when Trump like fired that preat
guy up in New York or maybe quit, and everyone was like this guy
is beyond reproach. He's so nonpartisan and impeccable, and like he's out there
wearing a pink hat and you know, destroys. It's like, oh,
was that the guy you really thought that Trump should? I thought of another
one this week. You know how when and Trump says something about a judge,
everyone it melts down. But Chuck Schumer can be on literally on the
steps of the Supreme Court, yelling and saying there's going to be repercussions for
a decision that he doesn't like, and that's just fine with everyone. You
know, this happens all the time. I'm so sick of talking about double
standards because we all know they exist. But I just don't know how to
reconcile this because if Trump means now, yeah, it does get back to
this media issue, so everyone recognizes that it's not even double standards. It's
really about the left controlling all of our institutions and engaging in hierarchical oppression so
you don't get to do things that they get to do because you are a
second class citizen. That's basically you know how it all breaks out. The
media are key to enforcing this false view that in Americans, you can be
first class citizens or second class citizens, and that the left is all first
class and conservatives are the second class. And they're getting more brazen about it,
which is I think what you're saying by bringing up this Joe Biden explicitly
issuing orders to the New York Times, the John Harwood thing, where he
was saying he was openly calling for propaganda. He was like, the problem
is we're not doing enough propaganda. As our corporate media have embraced this role
of propagandists. They're getting frustrated because even though they have unbelievable influence on our
elections through their propaganda and control over where our country's going, they don't have
complete control. And so they think the problem is that they need to somehow
do a better job with their propaganda and encourage other people. They don't want
any glimmer of truth coming out. They want it to be a complete information
state that they control, right. Yeah, I mean the story that they're
complaining about, it's completely within the normal observation about what's going on. So
the whole the stories about Donald Trump in abortion, and they I wish I
had the language in front of you. Oh, it's right here. It
seems they say the reporter that he has effectively neutrals abortion as an issue during
the Republican primary because of the vagueness of his positions and how he is occupying
middle grounds of sorts, like it is the most watered down language, and
it's legitimately and I'm sorry, it's objectively true that he has done this because
Donald Trump's running in a general election right now and his opponents in the primary
aren't. So they are talking to, you know, conservatives. But there
is no factual mistake there. This woman's talking about polls that exists. She's
talking about, you know, reality. And another part of this that I
always laugh at but I can never really articulate, I think, is that
Donald Trump is always portrayed as Hitler, like he's some kind of ideologically you
know, ideological creature that is far right, when it is not true.
Donald Trump is the most is probably the most moderate Republican running for president in
a long long time. Like he has views on abortion that you have to
admit this right are malleable. I mean, he will put judges in but
he's not going to when he runs. He's going to moderate to win the
presidency. He's more than maybe you know, others would have. I mean,
he is not like a hardcore old style conservative. He's more of a
you know, a big government kind of conservative. My point is that they
make him sound like he's Hitler when he's not ideologically Hitler at all. It's
just his disposition they don't like anyway. I'm writing this book right now on
the Supreme Court, and part of it deals with the Dobbs decision. So
I've been reviewing media coverage at the time the league happened, and the media
coverage was straight up propaganda. It was saying that women would be killed by
this Dobbs decision, that it was the worst, that returning the topic of
abortion to the people was an attack on democracy. And I'm not joking.
This is like in every major paper they say, letting the people have a
say an abortion say that they didn't have because of the anti democratic Roe v
Way is somehow it's self anti democratic, so unbelievably inflammatory rhetoric and lies,
just straight up lies, and like this sort of bloodthirstiness to their lies because
of their love of abortion, and so they have they have polluted the country
with their propaganda and they have made it so that people like the Roby Wade
made it impossible to have any protections for onborn life, but they would never
admit that, so they would kind of phrase it as if it were much
more moderate than it was dobbs which is actually a very moderate decision, nowhere
near where you pro lifers might wish in a purely outcome based situation and lets
people make the decision on a state by state basis. They say, it's
like the worst thing in the history of the world. It creates this false
understanding of reality that affects elections, and they did it because they knew it
would affect elections. You can tell the moment that Dobbsley happens that part of
it is about ginning people up for electors gains or possibly passing legislation, and
the media are full participants in that. Donald Trump understands that he has been
speaking in a way that suggests that he understands the reality of the situation.
The facts of the matter is like if people were are being presented with news
and information accurately that Unfortunately, most Americans do believe that there should be some
allowance of abortion. They also believe there should be some protection for unborn children
and their mothers. That's just the fact. It's not people are not where
the extreme pro lifers are, and they are not where the extreme pro abortion
people are. They just aren't. And Donald Trump speaks to that not exactly
where I would like him to be, because I don't think he cares about
this issue in the way that I do. But the media are just trying
to lie about it. I guess that's all I'm saying, Like what he's
doing is unfortunate kind of smart politics. I say unfortunately because I wish there
were much more protections for unmore and children and that our country was not so
much in love with killing their children and using women for sex and making them
deal with the consequences through abortion. I mean, we weren't going to talk
about this, but let's just dive into this for a second. I mean
the very word ban. Using the word ban constantly to explain limitations on abortion.
We're programmed to do that. But a fifteen week limitation is not a
band. But people hear ban, ban ban all the time. I think
the way to think about that is, do you believe that a fifty five
speed limit is a ban on driving, because if you do, you're an
idiot. Right, So any limitation, we have limitations on almost all things.
To have a limitation is not a ban in any other kind of you
know, rhetoric that's used by media. Moreover, just the other side of
this is that if they were honest, the media would be talking about telling
us that the devout Catholic, which I recently looked up is used constantly in
the New York Times. Joe Biden believes that abortion should be unf unfettered right
until a baby hits a crib, you know, at home, even if
then, So what was I saying this last week about Nancy Pelosi believing that
a baby's life begins when the mother takes the baby home from the hospital.
The extremism of Democrats. Every single Democrat exept for like one or two,
voted to allow abortion at any point in pregnancy, for any reason, no
matter how barbaric like. That's extreme. Just objectively speaking, that's extreme.
There are very few Republicans who would have a similar extreme viewpoint on the other
side, and yet the media lie about this. And by the way,
Republicans are awful and stupid. I don't want to keep going on my hatred
of that party, but their idiocy and how to handle this topic or how
to talk about this, or their stupidity of like, I'm scared to talk
about it, so I'm not going to talk about it, and then I'm
going to somehow win. They deserve every loss they have if they don't know
how to talk about this issue in a mildly oherent manner. Yeah, I
mean, I think we touched on that. Last week. I saw tons
of ads about abortion from the left, almost none refuting those points from the
right, and I think that's a problem. But let's just go back to
John Horowood, the tweet you were referring to. He and by the way,
this is the position of left wing pundits, this is the position of
journal so called journalism professors who have destroyed that industry. He says that the
media has a responsibility to better convey two realities. One the US economy is
doing well, not poorly, and two Biden at eighty is handling the job
effectively right now now, I think the latter is objectively false and anyone can
see it. The US economy stuff is highly highly debatable, A real journalist
would say, and this guy wasn't he didn't he wasn't he didn't he work
on one of the debates during the I forget anyway, So he did a
Republican primary debate in four sixteen that was so bad, And I wrote a
piece before that that was like, what in God's name is John Harwood doing
moderating a debate? And that peace aged extremely well because he was the one
who's like, are you a cartoon character? Donald Trump? Oh? I
hate him? Sorry, didn't he He's the one who got questions from the
DNC to ask Jeb one time, or the one the one that we know
one who coordinated with his party. No, I think they all do.
Yes. Yeah, Well, anyway, a real reporter would say, listen,
bring people the truth about this, not you know, telling them what
to think. But anyway, So this is this is how it is.
Let's move on to something connected unless you have something else to talk about here.
So just again, the broader issue that Harwood and Biden and other people
that share those politics are saying is the media need to not just what they've
been saying since twenty fifteen, the media should not cover Donald Trump as if
they were journalists. They need to cover Donald Trump as if he is unacceptable.
That's not journalism. And they say, oh, we have to talk
about the stakes in play, we have to talk about the stakes. Yes,
that's fine, talk about the stakes. The idea that talking about the
stakes means you don't need to be a journalist who understands that there are multiple
points of view on something is propaganda. It's not journalism. So I think
the stakes are really high. That's actually why I'm so upset with the Republican
Party right now. Like I look out at the world and I'm like,
things are very bad. We've got a really bad situation on our college campuses,
we have a really bad situation in our corporations giving aid to Marxist ideology.
We have an embrace on the left of racism. We have no border.
We have like an insane largest in history kind of like invasion of illegal
foreigners into the country. We also have like other issues with immigration that are
kind of destabilizing that reflect all these things. We have a very bad economy.
We have a foreign policy led by people whose only thing you can point
to is like a history of failure. We have it's like very very bad.
We have a broken Congress, we have this administrative state, like everything
is very bad, and the Republican Party is kind of like, ah,
what are you going to do? Oh, I didn't even talk about how
the Department of Justice and every Democrat ag is trying to put political opponents in
prison, like we are Soviet Russia or Venezuela or Cuba, and the Republican
Party doesn't even talk about these things. So that's why I'm so frustrated at
the Republican Party, because the stakes are so high. The idea that because
the quote unquote the stakes are high, you get to ignore like your job
as a journalist, and they're not journalists, and there are very few journalists
who are who actually, you know, do that in any meaningful way is
insane. Yes, the stakes are high. The stakes are really high with
what happens when you elect Democrats, and it's very very bad. And I'm
not a super fan of what happens when you vote Republican either. But nothing
about their approach here suggests that they have learned anything other than support for censorship
and authoritarianism. They are projecting what they are when they attack other people for
being authoritarianism. Yeah, I mean, I have been mad for a long
time, because the Left makes me want to defend Donald Trump all the time,
who I hate because let me tell you something the other day, yesterday,
I believe the Biden administration released another ten billion dollars to the Iranian terror
state. Right, is Donald Trump going to do that? I don't know.
Is Donald Trump going to make me pay someone else's loans through unconstitutional circumvention
of law and just dictating it. No, I don't know that he's going
to do that. Will he tell newspapers what to write, maybe, but
they won't listen. The New York Times is going to listen to Joe Biden.
I guarantee you there's going to be a story in the New York Times
within the next week or two that's going to say something that's going to be
about abortion and is going to like stay, you know, frame it in
the exact argument that they that they want so well, you know, so,
I think I think Democrats are turned authoritarian, especially on speech and other
issues. And you know, I don't think Donald Trump. I think Donald
Trump maybe is poses unique problems in different ways, but not you know,
I don't don't think he's any worse. I mean, they can yell,
they yell at me all the time about this, but I just don't.
I think bind's far worse. It's a far bigger authoritarian and it's far worse
for the United States. I wish I had better choices, but we don't.
These are the choices. One thing that's a challenge, I think is
that because the left, because Democrats really control our media complex and every institution,
there is this information disparity. And one way that that plays out,
I was thinking about it with Joe Biden and Democrats and the media all reinforce
the same message, which is Republicans are an extreme threat to the country.
So they'll always say Donald Trump and extreme maga Republicans. Now, like you
think about what MAGA means, it's make America great again. The idea that
it's an epithet is weird, but it's definitely an epithet on the left,
and that's why they also abbreviate it because it wouldn't sound good if you.
I don't know, but what messaging do Republicans have against the threat posed by
Democrats and the Democrat media complex and all the different Democrat groups that are kind
of running the country into the ground right now? They don't really speak that
way about them. They don't talk about them as if they're a threat,
and there needs to be consistent, unified messaging, particularly given the information warfare
disparity that's in play. You know, you have the Left controlling every single
major media institution, the corporations support these major media institutions. You have an
echo chamber where they're all just like you know, really doing a good job
of just dominating the airspace, which allows them to control the ground game.
And on the anti Democrat party spectrum, you just don't have that. I
mean, partly it's systematic in that there's not the funding or support for the
media organizations. There's a censorship industrial complex that artificially and dramatically suppresses news and
information that pushes back against these people. But also I think there's like a
weakness and timidity, Like if every single Republican, every single day, we're
out there decrying the weaponization of the Department of Justice, it would push through,
and then you could also have advances on the ground game. In terms
of actual oversight of that organization. I don't think Mitch McConnell has ever spoken
a word about it. I don't even know if he's currently truly alive right
now. But that's the leader of the Republic, as a top Republican in
the country, he's actually a messaging failure. Like the only thing, Oh,
this great note we got from a listener, maybe I just got it
was talking about how disheartening it is to vote Republican because of how ineffective they
are, And he was saying that the only time he can see Republicans like
actually be excited about messaging is when there's some new war that needs funding.
Then they're out there and they're pushing it and they're all unified and it's great,
But on any other issue that actually matters to their voters, they're just
a mess I have a lot to say here. I'm just going to say
one thing quickly about the initial point about media and the left. I think
they pathologize every republic position so they don't have to debate, meaning they treat
it as some kind of weird, fascistic thing to say, be pro life,
which has been a long term position of the right long before Donald Trump.
Or they treat, you know, someone not wanting to fund a certain
program as if it's weird so that they don't have to debate, and there's
no debate because of the media, so it creates this. They have an
echo chamber, and they're fine with that because they run the institutions. Okay,
you know, I just disagree a little bit about the report. I
agree with everything you said about breaking through on the Biden administration's abuse of power
and the Justice Department and all that, but I don't know that that's the
Even if you broke through, I don't know that most people or most voters
would care enough about that. Like I don't think that motivates voters as much.
I think we saw in the last election that the most important issue,
in fact, these sorts of issues, even abortion, is not even in
the top ten concerns either as foreign policy. When you look, they care
about ECONO, they care about the economy, They care about themselves in their
lives right now, and Republicans do not have a economic message anymore. It's
completely diluted. It's all over the place. Some people just sound like water
down Democrats. Other people they don't even talk about it. I didn't see
ads running where I live. I didn't even see one about the economy at
all. And I think the issues like crime, which is rising the border which