Speaker 1: This is Dan Caplis and welcome to today's online podcast
Speaker 1: edition of The Dan Caplis Show. Please be sure to
Speaker 1: give us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
Speaker 1: and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
Speaker 1: single day on your favorite podcast platform. Fighting for justice
Speaker 1: and the American Way in the US Supreme Court today,
Speaker 1: let's hope Tennessee wins will do a deep dive on
Speaker 1: that case. We have some pretty stunning audio for you
Speaker 1: as well from the US Supreme Court. Stunningly good on
Speaker 1: the part of Justice Alito and stunningly something on the
Speaker 1: part of some of the other justices today. So glad
Speaker 1: you are here, and you have to hear some of
Speaker 1: the rationale and argument from one of the attorneys who
Speaker 1: argued against the Tennessee band. Tennessee obviously trying to protect
Speaker 1: kids from these various forms of mutilation and distortion of
Speaker 1: their bodies. You know that's occurring right now, Tennessee trying
Speaker 1: to protect the kids. And of course the Biden administration,
Speaker 1: you know, is so wildly into all of this trans
Speaker 1: insanity that it's trying to strike down this Tennessee law.
Speaker 1: But one of the lawyers who argued today against the
Speaker 1: Tennessee ban is the first trans lawyer to ever argue
Speaker 1: before the US Supreme Court. Chase strang Gio is his name.
Speaker 1: Here's a bit of that sound.
Speaker 2: So the case comes at a time when twenty six
Speaker 2: states have passed laws restricting healthcare treatments for transgender youth.
Speaker 2: Thank you, According to a seeing in Anasis of data
Speaker 2: from the nonprofit think tank Movement Advancement Project, So how
Speaker 2: do you plan to argue before the US Supreme Court
Speaker 2: in a case that could have wind ranging implications beyond
Speaker 2: the state of Tennessee.
Speaker 3: Well, thank you for having me, Jake.
Speaker 4: And obviously this is a critical inflection point for transgender
Speaker 4: people across the country.
Speaker 3: We're coming off of.
Speaker 4: An election season where transgender people played an outside role
Speaker 4: in people's consciousness in terms of the way in which
Speaker 4: we were situated as a threat to others. And when
Speaker 4: we look at the map of states that ban this
Speaker 4: type of evidence based healthcare, we went from zero to
Speaker 4: that have these bands in twenty twenty to now more
Speaker 4: than half the country. So before the court tomorrow, the
Speaker 4: question is really a simple one as I see it,
Speaker 4: It's really this is a law that bands medical treatment
Speaker 4: only when it is prescribed inconsistent with an individual sex.
Speaker 4: Our argument is that that treats people differently because of
Speaker 4: their sex, and therefore the court has to treat it
Speaker 4: like all other forms of sex discrimination, and that's why
Speaker 4: it's unconstitutional.
Speaker 1: Well, first of all, it treats them differently because of
Speaker 1: their age. But then we get into these other issues,
Speaker 1: and keep in mind that if the Biden administration wins
Speaker 1: here and the trans lobby wins here, then that precedent might,
Speaker 1: depending upon how the Court worded it's ruling in the case,
Speaker 1: that that precedent might, then it just basically eviscerate, you know,
Speaker 1: any kind of limitations on where a man could go
Speaker 1: simply by saying I identify as a woman. I mean,
Speaker 1: it could have And I doubt very much the US
Speaker 1: Supreme Court is going to do this, since it's controlled
Speaker 1: at this point by a majority of folks who believe
Speaker 1: in interpreting the Constitution rather than making law. I don't think
Speaker 1: the Court's going to go there. But if it did
Speaker 1: what the Biden administration wants it to do, it would
Speaker 1: be potentially just a green light for virtually anything that
Speaker 1: some male.
Speaker 3: Says he believes it is a female.
Speaker 1: Would would want to do in terms of access to
Speaker 1: girls and women's showers and bathrooms and sports and everything else.
Speaker 1: I'm hoping and expecting that, you know, you have to
Speaker 1: be a little hesitant about reading the tea leaves in
Speaker 1: the Q and A in a Supreme Court hearing or
Speaker 1: a argument rather, but I am hopeful at this point
Speaker 1: reading what was said today, that there's going to be
Speaker 1: a majority to uphold this Tennessee ban. Let's go back
Speaker 1: to some more of the again. First transgender lawyer, biological
Speaker 1: female now identifying as male, who argued before the court today,
Speaker 1: seems like a nice person, I think, just just way
Speaker 1: off in the legal approach to this.
Speaker 2: So attorneys representing the state of Tennessee told the US
Speaker 2: Supreme Court, quote, if the government's theory holds, men who
Speaker 2: identify as women could claim constitutionally based access to women's bathrooms,
Speaker 2: women's locker rooms, and women's sports, excepting that theory would
Speaker 2: perversely erode women's rights and jeopardize landmark statutes protecting women's
Speaker 2: equal access to schools, winners, podiums, and beyond.
Speaker 5: What's your response to that.
Speaker 4: Well, I obviously disagree with that premise that allowing transgender
Speaker 4: women into women's sports or women's bathroom is a threat
Speaker 4: to women. But it is also not the question before
Speaker 4: the court in this case, and in fact, it is
Speaker 4: a totally independent question about whether a lot that band's
Speaker 4: medical care for transgender adolescence.
Speaker 6: Discriminates against people.
Speaker 4: Based on sex versus these separate cases that preceded any
Speaker 4: of these healthcare bands will continue.
Speaker 1: No, no, no, no, in my opinion, not and intellectually are honest
Speaker 1: argument he's making, because what the Biden administration is asking
Speaker 1: the court to do is to find that if you
Speaker 1: classify in a law based on trans status, that at
Speaker 1: that point you're classifying based on sex. That's the underlying
Speaker 1: legal foundation of what the Biden administration wants them to do.
Speaker 1: And if a Supreme Court was to go there and say, okay,
Speaker 1: any of these laws having to do with trans stuff,
Speaker 1: these are now classifications based on sex, then guess what
Speaker 1: that Then all of a sudden, you have to have
Speaker 1: the highest form of scrutiny, such as a law that
Speaker 1: would classify based on race. Of course, you should have
Speaker 1: the highest form of scrutiny. You shouldn't be able to
Speaker 1: classify based on race unless you can meet these very
Speaker 1: demanding criteria that are almost never met, these compelling state
Speaker 1: interest criteria. And so that's exactly exactly what the Biden
Speaker 1: administration's trying to do here is get that Supreme Court President.
Speaker 1: So any law addressing trans stuff gets that highest form
Speaker 1: of protected class status, strict scrutiny. That's exactly what they're
Speaker 1: trying to do. I don't believe for one second that
Speaker 1: this US Supreme Court is going to fall for that.
Speaker 1: What we'll do when we come back from the next
Speaker 1: break is we'll get you some sound. Justice Alito, absolutely
Speaker 1: brilliant today, will get you sound as well from Justice
Speaker 1: so to my or Justice Brown, Jackson, et CETERA very
Speaker 1: very interesting, compelling, and obviously very important. Right, there's the
Speaker 1: reason that Trump team spent over one hundred million dollars
Speaker 1: running that devastating ad against Kamala Harris, who is supporting
Speaker 1: trans rights, men playing women's sports and girls' sports, all
Speaker 1: of that sex changes paid for by taxpayers. Yeah, there's
Speaker 1: a reason trump'spent over one hundred million on it. You've
Speaker 1: got a lot of Americans across party lines who say,
Speaker 1: this is madness. How did we ever get this far
Speaker 1: down this road? No disrespect to trans people, no animosity.
Speaker 1: But this is insane. This is anti woman, this is
Speaker 1: anti girl. This craziness has to stop. That's where America's at.
Speaker 1: And I don't believe for one second this US Supreme
Speaker 1: Court is going to get this wrong. So we'll come back,
Speaker 1: we'll dig into that a little deeper before we hit
Speaker 1: the brake, though, I wanted to, you know, talk to
Speaker 1: you a little bit about what everybody's talking about today, right,
Speaker 1: no matter where they work or what they're doing or
Speaker 1: where they're going, which is you know who executed this
Speaker 1: ceo today, the United Healthcare CEO in New York. I'm
Speaker 1: sure you've probably seen that video by now, so I
Speaker 1: think it's one of those things that cuts through the
Speaker 1: noise in America, and it's just it's just unimagine what
Speaker 1: it's like a scene out of a movie.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 1: The guy all dressed in black, and he's got most
Speaker 1: of his face covered but not all of it, and
Speaker 1: and you know, he's got the weapon that appears to
Speaker 1: have a silence or he waits for this CEO victim
Speaker 1: on a New York street to walk past him, he
Speaker 1: steps in behind him, starts shooting at him. Gun appears
Speaker 1: and completely ignores a witness standing a couple of feet
Speaker 1: away from him, gun appears to jam, appears to reload,
Speaker 1: and then complete the murder of the victim, and then
Speaker 1: walk away. Actually started running about halfway across the street
Speaker 1: as a backpack on the whole time, otherwise dressed in blacks.
Speaker 3: So who did it? Why did they do it? So
Speaker 3: we'll keep you up to.
Speaker 1: The minute if there's any breaking news on that, But
Speaker 1: I know it's at this point something being talked.
Speaker 3: About all across America.
Speaker 1: What's interesting to me, Ryan is and I understand why,
Speaker 1: you know, people just look at this and say, Okay,
Speaker 1: that's a professional. And I understand there were some what
Speaker 1: you would consider professional elements to this demonic behavior. But
Speaker 1: wait a second. The guy left the top half of
Speaker 1: his face uncovered. There were obviously cameras all over the place.
Speaker 1: No true professional does that, right unless that person wants
Speaker 1: to get caught.
Speaker 3: So what is really going on there?
Speaker 1: If you have any thoughts eight five to five or
Speaker 1: zero five eight two five five text d A N
Speaker 1: five seven seven three nine. Obviously there are their questions
Speaker 1: implications that arise from this. Before we come back and
Speaker 1: dive in all of that and so much more. Just
Speaker 1: want to say fascinating. The way we ended the show yesterday.
Speaker 1: A lady called up and was griping about the Avs
Speaker 1: being down four zip in the first period last night,
Speaker 1: and I just said to her, don't give up on them.
Speaker 3: They came back and one five to four. Wow.
Speaker 1: And a nice big win by the Nuggets last night
Speaker 1: as well. So this could be the night. This could
Speaker 1: be the night last night when things kind of stabilized and.
Speaker 3: Turned around for the Denver teams. Let's hope. So you're
Speaker 3: on the dan Kapla Show.
Speaker 5: And now back to the Dankaplas Show podcasts. Has I
Speaker 5: suppose it doesn't like to say I wanted to do?
Speaker 5: He said, keep going, keep fighting.
Speaker 7: Mind there in long way?
Speaker 3: Why would I act down? I'm here for yeah boy.
Speaker 1: I really hope Pete hag Seth gets confirmed. I'm not
Speaker 1: saying he would have been my first choice for first secretary,
Speaker 1: but he should be confirmed. President Trump won. He's entitled
Speaker 1: to his picks unless there's something grossly and blatantly disqualifying.
Speaker 1: If perfection is the standard, we can't have anybody fill
Speaker 1: any of those jobs. And we have seen the left
Speaker 1: over and over and over again, you know, starting with
Speaker 1: Clarence Thomas actually before that, just set out to personally
Speaker 1: destroy these conservative nominees just as part of the political
Speaker 1: blood sport. Now I want to see heg Seth confirm,
Speaker 1: just like Justice Kavanaugh. Remember I told you when he
Speaker 1: was nominated that I wasn't certain that Justice Kavanaugh was
Speaker 1: going to be the kind of a true originalist.
Speaker 3: You know, who we need on the court.
Speaker 1: But at a certain point that kind of information process
Speaker 1: became about much more in Justice Kavanaugh. It became about
Speaker 1: whether we were going to have due process in this country,
Speaker 1: whether you're going to be innocent until proven guilty. And
Speaker 1: one of the things I admire most about Trump is
Speaker 1: the way he stood up and fought for Kevanaugh and
Speaker 1: fought for a larger principle in the meantime, and he
Speaker 1: defeated the left on that, you know, political assassination attempt,
Speaker 1: and I'm so glad he did, And so I hope
Speaker 1: he stands by heg Seth as well. I'm not saying
Speaker 1: heg SA's perfect, who is right, but Trump is entitled
Speaker 1: to his picks, and we do not want to feed
Speaker 1: this beast. We don't want to feed this leftist beast
Speaker 1: of just going out and trying to personally destroy you know,
Speaker 1: Trump picks, you know, for the political blood sport. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I hope he gets confirmed. Listen, would I have loved
Speaker 1: to have seen Ron DeSantis initially in that position. Of course,
Speaker 1: now I'm not at all sure that DeSantis.
Speaker 3: Would take it.
Speaker 1: Now you're aware of the stories today that Trump may
Speaker 1: turn to him if he Seth can't get through. I'm
Speaker 1: not at all sure DeSantis would do that because he's
Speaker 1: going to be running for president very soon, right. I mean,
Speaker 1: he's quietly running now, but it's going to be openly
Speaker 1: running in a couple of years, and so all of
Speaker 1: that could become an issue. Eight five for zer five
Speaker 1: A two five five the number.
Speaker 3: Glad you're here.
Speaker 1: We're talking about this enormously important US Supreme Court case
Speaker 1: heard today us fe'st. Gurmeti and whether Tennessee's law protecting
Speaker 1: children from this so called gender affirming care and many
Speaker 1: states now I think it's up to twenty five or
Speaker 1: twenty six have laws like Tennessee's. Whether those laws are
Speaker 1: going to be upheld. I believe this court will uphold Tennessee.
Speaker 1: But you've got this overarching bigger issue, and what the
Speaker 1: Left is trying to do with this Tennessee case is
Speaker 1: trying to set this precedent that any law touching on
Speaker 1: transgender rights is sex based classification. Because if they can
Speaker 1: get that precedent, then the only way that you could,
Speaker 1: you know, over turnal laws say favoring trans rights would
Speaker 1: be defined compelling state interests to do so. And that's
Speaker 1: a very very high, this heightened scrutiny standard, very very
Speaker 1: hard to meet. So that's what you know that the
Speaker 1: Left is really trying to accomplish through this case. I
Speaker 1: think the left has proven over and over again it
Speaker 1: doesn't care at all about the health and welfare of children.
Speaker 1: Quite the opposite children. And it's fascinating to me because
Speaker 1: I know a lot of these people on the left
Speaker 1: is individuals, and I'm sure they're great mothers and fathers
Speaker 1: and everything else, but when it comes to other people's children,
Speaker 1: and it comes to children in general, they're clearly acceptable
Speaker 1: casualties in the eyes of the left. And you just
Speaker 1: look at their various policies and it confirms it to
Speaker 1: the extreme, starting with abortion right, all these where you
Speaker 1: lose what about a million kids a year in America
Speaker 1: killed before birth and you get four or five blecks
Speaker 1: to everyone.
Speaker 3: Killed before birth. Horrific.
Speaker 1: One of the most terrific racist in effect laws imaginable,
Speaker 1: and the Left worships it. Yeah, So no children are
Speaker 1: acceptable casualties to the Left for their bigger, broader policy interest.
Speaker 1: And that's just a sad and sick reality we're dealing
Speaker 1: with in America today. And that includes kids who believe
Speaker 1: they're the other gender, or have been convinced by adults
Speaker 1: they're the other gender, or it's kind of the cool
Speaker 1: thing now to say you're the other gender. Whatever it is,
Speaker 1: each and every one of these kids, my heart breaks warm,
Speaker 1: and they need the proper kind of true gender affirming
Speaker 1: care because what a backwards term. Real gender affirming care
Speaker 1: is care that comforts and aids these children in their
Speaker 1: confusion and in their distress by confirming their true gender
Speaker 1: and then dealing with other issues in the best ways possible.
Speaker 1: So what the left calls gender affirming care is ex
Speaker 1: on the opposite eight five five zero five eight two
Speaker 1: five five text d An five seven seven three nine.
Speaker 1: I don't know if you are a prayer, Ryan, Are
Speaker 1: you a prayer?
Speaker 5: You know I should pray more. Let's put it that way.
Speaker 1: Okay, is it like only during the super Bowl when
Speaker 1: it's like got three and a half points spread?
Speaker 8: And no, but kind of if you think back to
Speaker 8: it's a wonderful life when Jimmy Stewart he's really hit
Speaker 8: dire straits and almost rock bottom and he's never a bridge.
Speaker 5: Hold on, whoa, whoa? You've never seen it's a wonderful light.
Speaker 3: You have seen it. I'm a busy guy. Every time
Speaker 3: I came out in nineteen forty six, I've been busy.
Speaker 1: At first, I wasn't even born, so I was busy
Speaker 1: not being more hopefully being an angel in heaven or something.
Speaker 1: But you no, I've always make it a point to
Speaker 1: go see it and then something comes up, but please
Speaker 1: go ahead.
Speaker 8: Any well, there's a scene he's at a bridge. It's
Speaker 8: a turning point in the least. I won't spoil it
Speaker 8: for you since you haven't seen it, but he's desperate
Speaker 8: and he goes. I'm not a praying man, but I'm
Speaker 8: praying to God right now, show me the answers or
Speaker 8: show me the way. And I think God has mercy
Speaker 8: in those cases. But I would feel I think if
Speaker 8: I prayed more, and not just when I desperately needed
Speaker 8: God's help.
Speaker 3: Well, so you've never been on a flight with turbulence.
Speaker 5: I have prayed in certain like that. Yeah, that's so.
Speaker 5: I'm sure you've gone a.
Speaker 3: Lot of people have started their prayer.
Speaker 5: Life when you lost your parents.
Speaker 3: With major turbulence.
Speaker 5: Oh yeah, and when I lost my mom. I mean,
Speaker 5: you're you're praying at the time, you know.
Speaker 3: Oh, there is no doubt about that.
Speaker 1: And and the only reason I ask is because anybody
Speaker 1: who believes in prayer today, please pray for the acquittal
Speaker 1: of Daniel Penny. Absolutely, New York, pray for the acquittal
Speaker 1: of Daniel Penny. He's obviously innocent, but but way beyond that,
Speaker 1: the ramifications for him as a guy who stepped in
Speaker 1: to protect others start with that, the ramifications for the
Speaker 1: city of New York, the ramifications for the country. I'm
Speaker 1: not saying there be a kind of violence in the streets,
Speaker 1: none of that nonsense. But it will be a real
Speaker 1: another major wound to justice in America and respect for
Speaker 1: the system if Daniel Penny is convicted. Any such conviction
Speaker 1: would be obviously wrongful, never should have been charged. And
Speaker 1: I hope that if he is as he should be acquitted,
Speaker 1: I really hope that that he then goes on to
Speaker 1: great things and many great opportunities are provided for him,
Speaker 1: and he's hailed as the hero that he really is.
Speaker 8: And you work with jury's and I think this is
Speaker 8: an easy one. If you're on that jury, you got
Speaker 8: to be thinking to yourself, if myself and my girlfriend
Speaker 8: were on that subway, would we want Daniel Penny stepping
Speaker 8: in to stop that guy in the answer is yes, yeah.
Speaker 1: And listen, you won't find a guy with more respect
Speaker 1: for juries than me. I start another jury trial Tuesday.
Speaker 1: But the point being that this is New York. Trump
Speaker 1: just got convicted in New York on an obviously politically
Speaker 1: motivated charge. Anything can happen, right, So that's why even
Speaker 1: though it's a small chance of a conviction, it's a
Speaker 1: small chance of something really bad. So that's what gets
Speaker 1: you concerned. But let's pray for an acquittal for Daniel Penny.
Speaker 1: Eight five zero five two five five The number would
Speaker 1: cuveny thoughts on what you think happen there in New
Speaker 1: York with this brutal assassination execution of that CEO right
Speaker 1: out in the open on a New York street with
Speaker 1: people standing around, and are there broader implications broader ramifications
Speaker 1: Pete Hegseth.
Speaker 3: I really want to see him confirmed for the reasons
Speaker 3: I mentioned.
Speaker 1: What do you think about that? And then we'll talk
Speaker 1: about the latest with insurrection.
Speaker 3: Mike in Denver.
Speaker 5: You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast. Well, I've
Speaker 5: just given what one he's on camera.
Speaker 9: If you're too drunk for Fox News, you're very, very drunk, indeed,
Speaker 9: And listen.
Speaker 1: I want to see Pete Hegseath confirmed. And I think
Speaker 1: he's getting kavanat right now. And I'm glad Trump is
Speaker 1: standing up to this tactic from the left. But that
Speaker 1: was one of the great lines ever. Right, If you're
Speaker 1: too drunk for Fox News, you're very drunk indeed. Eight
Speaker 1: five five for zero five eight two five five the
Speaker 1: number I think Hegseth is being smeared. None of us
Speaker 1: are perfect. That shouldn't be the standard or else only
Speaker 1: the good Lord could serve in the cabinet, and it
Speaker 1: certainly hasn't been the Democrats standard. Listen, all these Democrats
Speaker 1: now running around smearing Hegseth is some kind of drawn coe.
Speaker 1: He's impaired by alcohol. Look at what they've been doing
Speaker 1: that they have been actively backing and endorsing and supporting.
Speaker 1: Having an obviously severely impaired person in the White House
Speaker 1: is President of the United States. There can be no
Speaker 1: doubt Joe Biden is impaired. Hey, let's go to the
Speaker 1: VIP line and what an impressive congressional class of conservatives
Speaker 1: Colorado sent to DC and just I think a turning
Speaker 1: point kind of election in Colorado. One of those stars,
Speaker 1: of course, is Jeff Crank from the fifth CD kind
Speaker 1: enough to join us. Jeff, welcome back to the Dan
Speaker 1: KAPLI show.
Speaker 7: Dan, thanks for having me over. It's a pleasure to
Speaker 7: be with you.
Speaker 1: Well, thank you. And I know that you won't be
Speaker 1: voting on the confirmation. But do you think hagg Seth
Speaker 1: should be confirmed?
Speaker 7: Yeah? I do. First of all, I know Pete hag Seth.
Speaker 7: I worked with Pete a little bit at Concerned Veterans.
Speaker 7: He was at Concerned Veterans for America, I was Americans
Speaker 7: for Prosperity. He led that organization for a while and
Speaker 7: it did a great job when I when I knew him,
Speaker 7: I don't know him since he became the big star
Speaker 7: on Fox News and all of that I haven't sort
Speaker 7: of kept up. But the Pete Haig stuff, I know
Speaker 7: was a good man, committed to America and to standing
Speaker 7: up for it. And so look, I mean I don't,
Speaker 7: as you said, I don't have a vote, but I
Speaker 7: think the Democrats are you know, this is their t
Speaker 7: this is their playbook, right. They did it at Kavanaugh,
Speaker 7: They've done it to others. When they don't want someone confirmed,
Speaker 7: they try and take a scalp and look, you got
Speaker 7: to come forward with lots of evidence and proof. I'm
Speaker 7: not willing to just defend someone because they're a Republican.
Speaker 7: There's plenty of times where I've opposed to someone without
Speaker 7: fay for integrity to be confirmed. But the President of
Speaker 7: the United States has the right, just like Joe Biden did,
Speaker 7: to have people serving in their cabinet that they want
Speaker 7: to serve. And you know, there were lots of Republicans
Speaker 7: who voted to confirm all or most of Joe Biden's cabinet,
Speaker 7: and that's the way it should work.
Speaker 3: No, that's right.
Speaker 1: And I think there's, like with Justice kemanaw a bigger
Speaker 1: issue now that's come into play, and that is Wait
Speaker 1: a second. Are we going to have innocent until proven guilty?
Speaker 1: Are we Are we going to have a president presumptively
Speaker 1: gets their picks unless there's some gross disqualifier. Are we
Speaker 1: going to let the Democrats, now, you know, set this
Speaker 1: precedent where if they howl and scream enough, they're able
Speaker 1: to run good people out. And Jeff, one thing I'm
Speaker 1: concerned about, and you know, with the Kamanah example, the
Speaker 1: Hegseth example, is you know, intimidating talented conservatives from getting
Speaker 1: involved in politics and then being willing to step up
Speaker 1: for these positions. I think that's part of the left's
Speaker 1: playbook and I think they try to scare a lot
Speaker 1: of people, a lot of conservatives out of getting involved.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I think that's right. And you know, if we
Speaker 7: didn't learn anything from Judge Kavanaugh, I look at that
Speaker 7: whole thing that happened. I mean, if you go back
Speaker 7: even to Judge Bork, right, yeh, they were successful in
Speaker 7: borking Judge Bork. Thankfully, they were not successful in borking
Speaker 7: Judge Kavanaugh. If those tactics work, they will do it
Speaker 7: every time to try and stop someone that they don't
Speaker 7: that they just don't like, politically, we can't allow that
Speaker 7: to happen because then it's chaos. Then presidents don't get
Speaker 7: the pleasure of serving with the people that they choose
Speaker 7: to serve with, and the whole constitution falls apart, right.
Speaker 1: And I'd extended a step. And when it comes to
Speaker 1: President Trump, one of the I think his finest moments
Speaker 1: was standing behind Justice Kavanaugh and then he won that,
Speaker 1: which I think had benefits far beyond Justice Kevanaugh turning
Speaker 1: out to be great Justice. Conversely, if unless there's something
Speaker 1: way beyond what we've heard so far in heg Seth,
Speaker 1: if he was to back off heg Seth right now,
Speaker 1: I'm afraid that would dent this tremendous kind of superpower
Speaker 1: he has right now, which is that of a fighter.
Speaker 1: Right and you can see, you know, you see it.
Speaker 1: You're back there in DC. You see the peace and
Speaker 1: stability he's already bringing to the world just through deterrence.
Speaker 7: Yeah, yeah, no, I agree, I totally agree. And you know,
Speaker 7: I think the president's got to always be smart. Not
Speaker 7: this I'm not talking specifically about Trump, but any president
Speaker 7: only has so much political capital to burn. I think
Speaker 7: President Trump has a ton of it, right, now, and
Speaker 7: he should be very cautious to not burn that. But look,
Speaker 7: he has to stand up. But I think you're right.
Speaker 7: That was one of his finest moments when he stood
Speaker 7: by Judge Kavanaugh to become Justice Kavanaugh, and it paid off.
Speaker 7: And those tactics didn't work, then we can't let them work. Now.
Speaker 3: Hey, what's it.
Speaker 1: Looking like for your GOP majority? I saw something yes
Speaker 1: to day where it might be for a little while
Speaker 1: a single seat.
Speaker 3: How's that going to work?
Speaker 7: None of us can get a cold. Dare we better
Speaker 7: wash our hands? Yeah, Look, it's going to be tight.
Speaker 7: And you know, the President pulled a few members from
Speaker 7: the House. Of course, the speakers working with President Trump
Speaker 7: to make sure that we keep that majority. As you know,
Speaker 7: being the great constitutional lawyer that you are, that these
Speaker 7: have to be filled by special elections for House seats,
Speaker 7: and so it takes time to do that. It can't
Speaker 7: be just an appointment by the governor like it is
Speaker 7: in the Senate. So it takes time. We've got to
Speaker 7: be really careful. He can't pull more people out of
Speaker 7: the House or we won't have a majority. And so
Speaker 7: it's going to be a balancing act. But I will
Speaker 7: tell you. I was very heartened. I was back for
Speaker 7: a couple of weeks going into orientation. We had a
Speaker 7: had our leadership elections for the House Republican Caucus. There
Speaker 7: was not a fight over who should be the speaker.
Speaker 7: Nice Speaker Johnson was re elected unanimously. There's no one
Speaker 7: that ran against him. And President Trump showed up at
Speaker 7: that caucus meeting and said, Mike is my guy. They
Speaker 7: are working together and that's a great thing. We need
Speaker 7: to carry that as long as we possibly can.
Speaker 3: And I'm glad to see it. I'm really intrigued by it.
Speaker 1: I mean I had the privilege of interviewing that the
Speaker 1: Speaker during Gabe's campaign and came away just really impressed
Speaker 1: with him. But how do you think that friendship became
Speaker 1: so close between the Speaker and President Trump. Great thing
Speaker 1: to see, but you wouldn't think from day one, maybe
Speaker 1: the most obvious couple.
Speaker 10: Yeah.
Speaker 7: I am intrigued by Mike Johnson to the point, like
Speaker 7: I will tell you, I walked away from all of
Speaker 7: my meetings with him thinking this has to be the
Speaker 7: finest man in Washington, d C. I mean, his character,
Speaker 7: He's just a man of character. It's just that simple.
Speaker 7: He is a good Christian man. You know, I don't
Speaker 7: know if I get in trouble for telling these inside stories,
Speaker 7: but I'll tell you. He brought all of the the
Speaker 7: Republican freshman into his office. He pulled out his Bible
Speaker 7: and he said, if you use this as your guide,
Speaker 7: and you treat people fairly, and when you have a
Speaker 7: problem with someone, you know, the Bible teaches us that
Speaker 7: you should go directly to them. You shouldn't go talk
Speaker 7: behind their back. If you follow the principles in here,
Speaker 7: you'll be very successful on Capitol Hill. If you don't,
Speaker 7: you'll have problems. That's the kind of man Mike Johnson is.
Speaker 7: I think he continues to try and sort of witness
Speaker 7: to President Trump. I think, you know, every time I
Speaker 7: talked to him, he talks about well, you know, I
Speaker 7: called him after this, after the assassination attempt and I said,
Speaker 7: mister President, you know you don't you didn't just move
Speaker 7: your head. I mean, this is this is like a
Speaker 7: moment that God, you know, you're they're part of a
Speaker 7: bigger plan. So he's always trying to kind of witness
Speaker 7: to the president on stuff like that. That's who Mike
Speaker 7: Johnson is at his core, he's just a good and
Speaker 7: decent man, and he sees this as our moment right
Speaker 7: to save a union, to save a country from financial
Speaker 7: collapse from the enemies that are that are outside looking
Speaker 7: at us. And so I think he sees this as
Speaker 7: the moment to help President Trump get his agenda through.
Speaker 7: And I'm really heartened by where we are right now.
Speaker 1: Well, if he's going to get in trouble for pulling
Speaker 1: out the Bible, they're going to have to tear down
Speaker 1: the statues of the founders, right, So I think he's
Speaker 1: safe on that count. Jeff Crank, our guests, Hey, I
Speaker 1: hope we can do this often because obviously there's going
Speaker 1: to be a lot of excitement. I think starting early
Speaker 1: in the term. When is the formal.
Speaker 3: Swear name.
Speaker 7: For me? It's January third at noon, okay, And so yeah,
Speaker 7: for the new Congress, we all get sworn in on
Speaker 7: that day, and then of course we have what two
Speaker 7: and a half weeks, and then of course the new
Speaker 7: president gets sworn in, so very exciting times.
Speaker 1: Well, Hey, congratulations and great things ahead. And appreciate the
Speaker 1: time today.
Speaker 7: Dan, anytime. I love again, have great admiration for you,
Speaker 7: and I have for many years and what always welcome
Speaker 7: the opportunity to come on and talk with you.
Speaker 3: Thanks much, sure do appreciate that you take care, Gibett.
Speaker 3: It is Congressman.
Speaker 1: Elect Jeff crank A five five four zero five two
Speaker 1: five to five the number text d A N five
Speaker 1: seven seven three nine. When we come back, When we
Speaker 1: come back. What do you think really happened with that
Speaker 1: execution of the CEO in New York? And I want
Speaker 1: to give you some amazingly compelling sound from this critical
Speaker 1: US Supreme Court or a argument today you're on the Dan.
Speaker 3: Kapla Show.
Speaker 5: And now back to the Dan Kaplas Show podcast.
Speaker 10: Justice Soto my or today, I cannot eliminate the risk
Speaker 10: of detransitioners. So it becomes a pure exercise of weighing
Speaker 10: benefits versus risk, and the question of how many miners
Speaker 10: have to have their bodies irreparably harmed for unproven benefits
Speaker 10: is one that is best left.
Speaker 11: I'm sorry, Counselor. Every medical treatment has a risk, even
Speaker 11: taking aspirin.
Speaker 1: Oh my lord, yeah, I did not see that one
Speaker 1: coming from Justice out of my art today. I mean,
Speaker 1: and obviously the comparison to in this case chemically altering children,
Speaker 1: blocking puberty, now chemically altering children so that boys become
Speaker 1: girls and girls become boys. I don't think that's a
Speaker 1: fair comparison to to taking aspirin. But let the rest
Speaker 1: of that continue.
Speaker 11: There is always going to be a percentage of the
Speaker 11: population under any medical treatment that's going to suffer a harm.
Speaker 11: So the question in my mind is not do policymakers
Speaker 11: decide whether one person's life is more valuable than the
Speaker 11: millions of others who get relief from this treatment. The
Speaker 11: question is can you stop one sex from the other?
Speaker 1: Eight five to five for zero five two five to
Speaker 1: five the number Justice Alito today. I saw a columnist
Speaker 1: today after his another just tremendously inspiring performance on the
Speaker 1: bench today, call him one of the greatest living Americans.
Speaker 1: And now you may have called him the greatest living American.
Speaker 1: He's right up there. I think he's got to be
Speaker 1: in the top five. And here's part of what Justice
Speaker 1: Alito had to say today during this oral argument, a.
Speaker 9: Question about the state of medical evidence at the present time.
Speaker 9: In your petition, you made a sweeping statement which I
Speaker 9: will quote, overwhelming evidence establishes that the appropriate gender affirming
Speaker 9: treatment with puberty blockers and hormones directly and substantially improves
Speaker 9: the physical psychological well being of transgender lessons with gender dysphoria.
Speaker 5: That was in.
Speaker 9: November twenty twenty three. Now, even before then, the Swedish
Speaker 9: National Board of Health and Welfare wrote the following. They
Speaker 9: currently assess quote that the risks of puberty blockers and
Speaker 9: gender affirming treatment are likely to outweigh the expected benefits
Speaker 9: of these treatments, which is directly contrary to the sweeping
Speaker 9: statement in.
Speaker 3: Your petition, Justice Alito continues.
Speaker 9: After the finding of your petition, of course, we saw
Speaker 9: the release of the CAST report in the United Kingdom
Speaker 9: which found a complete lack of high quality evidence showing
Speaker 9: that the benefits of the treatments in question here outweigh
Speaker 9: the risks, and so I wonder if you would like
Speaker 9: to stand by the statement that you made in your petition,
Speaker 9: or if you think it would now be appropriate to
Speaker 9: modify that and withdraw the statement that there is overwhelming
Speaker 9: evidence establishing that these treatments have benefits that greatly outweigh
Speaker 9: the risks from the dangers.
Speaker 6: I of course acknowledged Justice Alito, that there is a
Speaker 6: lot of debate happening here and abroad, about the proper
Speaker 6: model of delivery of this care and exactly when adolescents
Speaker 6: should receive it, and how to identify the adolescence for
Speaker 6: whom it would be helpful.
Speaker 3: Now, it doesn't sound like a lawyer at all, does it.
Speaker 12: And this continues, but on page one ninety five for
Speaker 12: the CAST report, it says there is no evidence that
Speaker 12: gender affirmative treatments reduce suicide.
Speaker 3: What I think that is referring to is there.
Speaker 4: Is no evidence in the studies that this treatment reduces
Speaker 4: completed suicide. And the reason for that is completed suicide. Thankfully,
Speaker 4: and admittedly it is rare, and we're talking about a
Speaker 4: very small pop releation of individuals with studies that don't
Speaker 4: necessarily have completed suicides within them. However, there are multiple studies,
Speaker 4: long term, longitudinal studies that do show that there is
Speaker 4: a reduction in suicidality, which I think is a positive
Speaker 4: outcome to this treatment.
Speaker 1: Justice Alito magnificent today, because no matter where you come
Speaker 1: down on all of this, you got to have the
Speaker 1: truth out there, you got to have the truth on
Speaker 1: the table. And Justice Alito doing a great job of
Speaker 1: interjecting that today. By the way, the last voice you
Speaker 1: heard was the first trans lawyer to argue before the
Speaker 1: US Supreme Court of biological female identifying as male. Chase
Speaker 1: strained you, so we'll play some more of that sound later.
Speaker 1: Promise to keep you up to speed on anything new
Speaker 1: on this horrific assassination on the streets of New York
Speaker 1: today of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson. New York Post
Speaker 1: story just breaking. United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson was facing
Speaker 1: DOJ probe for insider trading when he was killed in
Speaker 1: targeted New York City shooting. United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson
Speaker 1: was one of several senior executives at United Healthcare under
Speaker 1: investigation by the Department of Justice when he was gunned
Speaker 1: down outside of Manhattan hotel on Wednesday. Thompson was killed
Speaker 1: in what police called the targeted shooting outside the Hilton
Speaker 1: Hotel in Midtown. Exercised stock options and sold shares worth
Speaker 1: fifteen point one million on February sixteenth, less than two
Speaker 1: weeks before news of the federal antitrust probe went public.
Speaker 1: The stock price dropped sharply after the revelation that the
Speaker 1: DOJ was investigating whether the company made acquisitions that consolidated
Speaker 1: its market position and violation of antitrust laws.
Speaker 3: So that the latest bit of information there Wow.
Speaker 1: When we come back, Yeah, and if anything new comes
Speaker 1: out on that. The Daniel Penny, please pray for the
Speaker 1: acquittal of hero Daniel Penny in New York that jury,
Speaker 1: that trial goes on right now. There has not been
Speaker 1: a verdict jet. The jury is in the process of
Speaker 1: deliberations when.
Speaker 3: We come back. A lot of ground to cover here.
Speaker 1: I want to get you some more sound from the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court argument and why I think Trump needs to
Speaker 1: stand by Pete Hegseth