Speaker 1: Hi everybody, and welcome to the Kylie Cast. I'm Kylie Griswold,
Managing editor at The Federalist. Please like and subscribe wherever
you get your podcasts. Leave us a five star review.
It's one of the easiest and best ways you can
help out the show. And even better yet, if you're
just listening, go check out the full video version on
my personal YouTube channel or the Federalist channel on Rumble,
and then of course like and subscribe there too. And
you're definitely going to want to do that today because
we have a very special episode for you that was
recorded live at our Federalist Forum in Phoenix, Arizona, with
our editor in chief at The Federalist, Molly Hemingway, as
well as one of my newer colleagues, writer Chris Bray. Molly,
Chris and I dive into some of the biggest news
of the day and you're not going to want to
miss it. Without further ado, please welcome to the show,
Molly and Chris live at the Federalist Forum. Welcome everyone
to a very very special edition of the Kylie Cast.
I am Kylie Griswold, Managing editor at The Federalist. If
we had not had the pleasure of meeting I hope
I get to meet you this afternoon or this evening.
And usually I record this weekly podcast for my sad
little studio all alone with a virtual guest, but today
I have the pleasure of doing it live and in
person and in color with my colleagues, Molly Hemingway, who
you've seen a lot of this weekend, and also Chris Bray,
who is a writer at The Federalist. He might be
a newer face to some of you, he's a newer
face to me, although I have emailed with him quite
a lot. So I would like to kick this off
with an introduction about Chris Bray for those of you
who do not know him yet. But I will just
say there are very few people that I read every
single day. There are a lot of people who I
follow and look too for good news, but there are
very few that are a daily must read. And long
before Chris joined us at the Federalist in an official capacity,
he was one of the few must reads that I had.
Anytime I got his Substack newsletter in my inbox, it
was an automatic click. And then, of course we published
him a lot at the Federalist. Even before he was
on staff, and I was constantly meekly coming to him
in my cute little emails saying, Hi, Chris, could we
please republish this one again because it's great? And that
was me every week with Chris. So we're so excited
to have him on board. But Chris is a Californian.
So Chris, why don't you tell us a little bit
about that journey and how you came to join our
crazy team at the Federalist.
Speaker 2: It's rare to say Chris is California and not hear
someone say out loud, I'm sorry. I've said to people
several times this week, I'm from California. I live in
Los Angeles, and they say, oh, is anyone else here
from California? Where? Okay, there are all the people's republic. Okay,
I live in the People's Republic of South Pasadena, where
our town of twenty seven thousand people has a climate
action plan and a climate administrator. So if you're ever
wondering who's in charge of the climate of planet Earth,
it's me. My town runs that. If you ever find
yourself in South Pasadena and someone is beating you up
or robbing you or breaking into your car. You'll find
that the police, who are actually a really great police
I love our police department who come racing up a
few seconds later show up in Tesla's because they are
not degrading the planet and changing the climate by responding
to crime. So we have an all Tesla, all electric
police fleet, and we're very, very proud of that. And
for some reason we can't ever figure out. This is
the California story why our city government keeps running out
of money? Who is Chris Bray? I'm such a dull person,
and I'm so sorry for that I was writing. I'm
really grateful to the federalists for this, for what I'm
about to say. I was writing twenty twenty five years ago.
I started writing for small local newspapers in California, and
I think this is really, really, really missing in journalism. Now.
There are Michael Barbaros started writing for the New York
Times when he was like twenty four, and he came
out of a prep school and then Yale and then
started writing like covering the White House. There was a
moment when you couldn't build up in a career to
working for the Washington Poster or working for the New
York times without starting covering your local water board and
going to fires. And there was a moment in Claremont, California.
I was working for the Claremont Courier. I once said
to Tucker Carlson, I worked at all of the least
prestigious journalistic organizations in the country, and he said, well,
I worked at CNN, and I think I have you beat.
There was a moment I was working in Claremont and
I heard sirens and I ran outside and someone had
tried to kill a cop and they had him in
a van and he ran into the back of his
van and they thought he had a gun, and they
called the swat team and we had a stand off
in the street. And I went running down the street
and threw myself down behind a wall where the police were,
and the Claremont police officers, who all knew me, looked
at me and said, just keep your head down. And
I think that experience of covering local news and being
part of a community and covering what happens in a community,
and if you get stuff wrong in a small town,
people tear your head off. If you get things right
in a small town, people frequently tear your head off.
But coming from journalism in a small place is sorely
really missing in something we've really badly lost, and we
need to get back to it. And then I started
writing for other people, and I wrote for Reason Magazine
for a while. Everyone at the federals it makes fun
of Reason Magazine. If you saw a Reason Magazine in
the last election making an argument for the libertarian choice
for president, each member of the Reason editorial staff, each writer,
each editor got a paragraph to say who they were
voting for, so they all had a chance to explain
why his Libertarians they were voting for Kamala Harris. I
wrote for a Reason magazine for a while. I stopped
fitting in. I've just maybe hinted why. I wrote for
American Conservative for a while, and I saw twenty ish
years ago my career slide away quietly and just kind
of disappear. And I suddenly wasn't writing for anyone, and
nobody ever told me you're not going to write for
a well, Reason kind of did.
Speaker 3: Not gonna write for us anymore.
Speaker 2: But I just it all went away. So I went
and got a PhD. And I said, academia will be
a refuge for a free thought where I can say
whatever I want, and that was also not true. I
spent some time in the army where I actually I
think the army had you think of the army as
a place where you just have to obey and do
what you're told. And I thought that the army was
much more a much more comfortable place for people speaking
and disagreeing. We used to have like staff sergeant argument
over politics. I thought it was a much freer organization
than like UCLA, where I went to grad school. And
I had a long period in the wilderness where I
left the Army, I left journalism, I left academia, and
I said, I have no current identity. I'm a former soldier,
a former journalist, and a former academic. Maybe one day
I'll be something else again. And then I started writing
for a subtect because I saw that there were people
who were writing for a substack and getting an audience.
And then I began to talk to the Federalist. And
I'm so grateful that there's a place where I can
speak and I can I can say what I see,
and I don't get editors saying that's not something we
really want to say. One of my very last conversations
with an editor twenty years ago ish, maybe fifteen years ago,
was we want a piece from you about how Rampaul
doesn't believe in science, And I said, Rampaul the surgeon.
And that was the last time I ever wrote for
that organization. So I'm so glad to be here.
Speaker 3: I just want to add on that.
Speaker 4: And we were so happy to have Chris with us,
and his writing is just incredible and you should definitely
be reading him. But he had a piece I don't
remember exactly what it was, but he was worried that
it was maybe a.
Speaker 3: Little too mean, And I said, I am.
Speaker 4: So thrilled that I get to tell you one of
our favorite edits that we give to write.
Speaker 3: Not mean enough.
Speaker 1: Yes, Chris embodies this, but make it meaner, which is
a very frequent edit. So, so, Chris, you live in California,
that is, as you made clear. But a lot of
us now feel like we are living in California because
California has exported so many of its policies to the
rest of the country in numerous ways, partly through the
Californication of America, as we like to call it, of
just things getting more and more progressive and out of control.
Partly through the mass exodus that in many ways was
enhanced by COVID and Gavin Newsom's tyranny of people moving
from California but then not realizing that the policies that
they were fleeing from were the same ones that they
were carrying with them and then still voting for in
places like Texas and elsewhere. And now, of course through
Gavin Newsom, the man, the myth of the legend, who
has very clear presidential aspirations and is on the media
circuit constantly promoting his ideas. He is no longer California's governor.
He is America's governor everyone. So you get to see
his face everywhere. In fact, I don't know if you
saw him comparing himself this past week, I believe to
Patrick Bateman, American Psycho, because he said people have long
said that he looks like him. And it was supposed
to be Gavin Newsom's you know, Trumpian gag where he
thinks he's being cute and adorable and you know, like
that he can replicate the Trump effect by being brash.
It never lands, though, and so Trump used to say,
people compare me to Elvis Presley. You know, yeat do
you do? You guys see it? And so Gavin Newsom
did that except with American Psycho, which is just a
little bit different than the King. So anyway, Chris, what
do you think about Gavin Newsom's prospects as a viable
candidate for national office? And Mollie you as well.
Speaker 2: I for years have had readers calling me an idiot
because I only say only in stories about California, say
that California Governor Patrick Bateman spoke this week, and people
say to me, like, you need to do better job
of fact checking. Patrick Bateman isn't the governor of California.
But I've been I was thrilled to death. People emailed
me and said, Gavin Newsom noticed that he's Patrick Bateman.
I've been comparing Gavin Newsom to Patrick Bateman for maybe
ten years at this point. And I don't mean by
that what he said when he said that is people
say I look like Patrick Bateman, people say I'm handsome
like Christian Bale. No, that's not what we're saying. We're
saying you're a dangerous, harmful, destructive psychopath like Patrick Bateman.
We we don't mean it as a compliment and so
of course he took it and said, people are saying
I'm very handsome, and I admit to it. At some point,
look up the name Easy Garden gar Don. That's the
the governor's professionally snarky. Has assembled an entire staff of
communications people who are very proud of how nasty and
bitter and mean and snarky they can be. And if
you if you look up Isy Garden, who does all
of Gavin Newsom's tough talking, you'll see why that's comical.
So so is he Garden. I always respond to Gavin
Newsom's Twitter posts or ex post now by saying, good
good job is he I? Isy Garden is positioning Gavin
Newsom to be the anti Donald Trump and to be
the person who tells us how to really govern with
kindness and decency and strength and to put a stop
to all of Donald Trump's chaos and stabilize as America.
And it's such absolute madness. Any portion of that is
such absolute madness. One of the things that I've been
doing for years in Los Angeles, and my mother always
calls me and yells at me as I go walk
around skid Row or walk around MacArthur Park, and watch
people pointing guns at each other and dying of drug overdoses,
and my mother says, what a great way of life
you've chosen for yourself. There is so much chaos and
destruction and ruin and pain, deep deep pain in California.
There are so many people who are hurting in California,
And for the scumbag, idiot psychopath who governs the state
to present himself as the model that will stabilize America
and return us to decency kind of fills me with rage.
I try not to live that way. I try not
to wake up choking with anger, but I'm so angry
about it that I can barely sit still. And I
don't think it's gonna happen. I don't think. I don't
think Iowa and New Hampshire are going to say, oh,
Gavin Newsom, we need that. I think he's going to fail,
but pray that he fails, because you do not want
him to succeed. You did not want President Kamala Harris.
You didn't want Secretary of Health and Human Services be Sarah.
I'm sorry you didn't want Vice President Harris, and you definitely, definitely,
definitely don't want president Gavin Newsom. And I'll say one
last thing about this. When Gavin Newsom became the governor
of California, the California budget was about one hundred and
forty billion dollars a year. Gavin Newsom did not become
governor of California that long ago one hundred and forty
billion dollars a year. The budget in California is now
almost three hundred and fifty billion dollars a year. We've
radically increased government spending while infrastructure declines, cities get thtier,
police response times decline, wildfires get bigger, and we're not
doing prescribe burns to protect against them. While the state
is falling apart. Government is spending twice, government is spending
double and I think you desperately, desperately and went to
fight against that as a model for the country.
Speaker 1: We also have what will seem like an eternity between
now and the twenty twenty eight election, and of course
a big election between now and then. But you know,
it seems that the heir apparents as of now. Again
huge caveat for the parties is Gavin Newsom, or at
least he wants to be. And Jade Vance and it
is so funny to even look at who they are
as people and where they came from. I recently read
Hillbilly Elegy, and it was just I was way late
to that game, but it was so awesome to just
understand more of JD. Vance the man, and where he
comes from and the way that he so embodies the
maga ethos and has has become so like Trump. But
Trump plays the part and he gives voice to Americans
and you can hell that he really feels their pain.
But JD. Vance feels their pain. He knows it, He's
lived it. Uh, he is an appollation, you know he
gets it. And Gavin Newsom, on the other hand, was
like lab created in a Petrie dish to be a leftist, smarmy,
elitist politician. And you just could not have two more
different different candidates.
Speaker 2: Say one where you've just triggered something in me. Gavin
Newsom's communications staff clearly I talked about recently the Federalists
looking at looking at processes and mistaking them for effects.
Gavin Newsom's communication staff looked at Donald Trump and said
he's rude and he's mean, and you know, and he
speaks without self control and voters like him. So what
we need to do is and if you read Gavin
Newsom's social media accounts, he his communications staff there vicious.
They're insulting, their condescending, They demean people who criticize them.
They make gay jokes a lot. They constantly if somebody
says like, I think Gavin Newsom's wrong about people, his
his communication staff says like, oh, I remember exactly how
they put it, but that their their darkest, most condescending
responses is that you must be gay if you're criticizing
Gavin Newsom. And it's just bizarre. And clearly what they've
done is they think that being mean is what voters like,
because Donald Trump is mean, and voters voted for Donald Trump,
so let's be mean and then voters will like us.
And they have no capacity at all to see that
people like when Donald Trump is aggressive and angry and
nasty to people who who people think deserve it, and
that there's some merit to it, and that there's some
reason that Donald Trump would would insult Jim Acosta. So
they've mistaken all the they've mistaken all the people like
Donald Trump because he insults people who deserve to be insulted,
and they instead just think people like Donald Trump because
he's insulting. Oh, that must be where the culture is.
So Gavin Newsom, if he wants to be president, should
insult people a lot. And if you go look at
Governor Gavin Newsom at x dot com, you will see
him being insulting into meaning and condescending and nasty, horrible
and vicious all the time because it's a clever communication strategy.
Speaker 4: If I can just add to that, you see a
lot of Republicans go after the left wing media because
it's just fertile ground to go after them. Recently, Gavin
Newsom or his communications team, as Chris Bray points out,
viciously attacked.
Speaker 3: An award winning.
Speaker 4: Reporter who covers a lot about California and has covered
a lot about the Secret Service and just said horrible
things about her. And it doesn't work for a left
wing person to attack the media because everybody knows the
media are by and.
Speaker 3: Large their closest friends.
Speaker 4: So it just it it does speak to their inability
to understand the situation.
Speaker 3: But I want to I do want to push back
on a couple of things.
Speaker 4: One, I actually think the Democrat Party is very hateful
right now, and hate kind of can be a good strategy,
and it could be modified for winning the Democrat nomination,
and it could be modified in a better way, and
maybe he's like going to learn better how to capitalize
on this just really negative fervor in the Democrat Party.
And there's winning the Democrat nomination and then there's winning
the general and those really are two different things, and
they're somewhat at odds in that the main Democrat strategy
for presidential nominees seems to be who's the person who
is simultaneously left wing and presents as a moderate. So
you might remember that even like when Barack Obama was running,
he didn't say I'm going to undermine the country in
these ways. He said, you know, there's red America bloom
or no. What was his like, big, here's hope. No,
But he was always talking about hope and moving past partisanship.
Once he was elected, things changed dramatically, but he kind
of presented as more moderate. Joe Biden, who was barely there,
let every left wing policy go through under his watch,
but he he actually spoke to people, to people in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin,
and presented as a moderate. So that's where I actually
think Gavin Newsom would have bigger trouble, almost would be
in the general because he struggles there with again another caveat,
did you ever did you happen to watch the debate
he did with Ronda Santis And a lot of people said, oh,
Ronda Santis won, And they said that because Rond de
Santis on the facts blew him away, like on the
actual arguments blew him away. But in another way, if
you watched, he won because he was willing to do
whatever it took to kind of like get a win
on a particular question. You saw this even recently with
the Charlie Kirk thing, when he sat down with Charlie
Kirk and he praised Charlie Kirk and said that his
son watched Charlie Kirk. But then when he went on CNN,
he was like, my son never watched Charlie Kirk. I
have never seen a politician willing to as brazenly lie.
And they all lie, I mean not all of them,
most of them lie as Gavin Newsom.
Speaker 1: So I want to go back to some of the
things Chris said, specifically gay am vicious insults, because that
gets into my next topic, which is the Pete Bootification,
Pete Buddha gentrification of the Democrat Party. This is a
topic that is near and dear to us at the
Federalists because we don't just cover politics but also religion,
and so you have written about this, Chris, in the
form of James Talerico, but it's also something I know
that Molly as a Christian is something that we cover
a lot, and the Democrat Party clearly has major cognitive
dissonance on this issue. And we saw this back during
the rise of Trump because they couldn't get their stories straight.
Trump is simultaneously a serial rapist, a racist, the most
vile and disgusting creature that has ever walked the planet,
and he was an existential threat to democracy and decency itself.
But at the same time he was going to usher
in an era of Christian nationalism and theocracy. Square that circle.
Speaker 2: I feel like French is with us since.
Speaker 1: There, yes, he shall not be named David French, and
so those things do not square. And now well, and
then we saw Pete Boudhage Edge as sort of you know,
the original James Tallerico, And now we have James Tallerico.
And you have people like David French writing about how
he just he embodies all that is good and decent
and wonderful about Christianity. You know, these nasty, disgusting mega
Christians are are are so awful and hateful. But James
Tallerco Man, that kid's got it, you know. And meanwhile,
James Tillergo is saying ridiculous things about the number of
genders there are and that God is non binary, and
laughing at sexual innuendos about the divine. I mean, just
just crazy, crazy things. And of course we already knew this,
but it really just exposes that Christian nationalism is just
a slur to b to to bully faithful Christians out
of living out their faith in the public square. But
what are the dangers here of James Tallerco figure does
he have a future in the Democrat Party or is
this just a shick that's going to fizzle out like
it kind of did with Pete boot to Jedge. I mean,
what's the play here?
Speaker 4: I want to make sure everybody understands James tall Rico
won the Democrat nomination in Texas and the democraphony Jasmin Crockett,
who is against Jasmine Crockett the Democrat Party. The Democrat
Party worked really hard to make sure Jasmine Crockett would
not be the nominee because they believe James Taller Rico
would have better odds against whoever wins the Republican nomination,
and for the Republican nomination that's still ongoing because of
the runoff that they have in Texas, John Cornyn should
have easily won eighty percent of the vote as the incumbent,
and he spent untold money to make sure that he
got eighty percent of the vote and instead of he
got like thirty seven percent of the vote, but it
was enough that he's in a runoff with Ken Paxton.
And so and Ken Paxton I think is it'll be
you know, it's a race, but I think that a
lot of people who vote in primaries support Paxton, and
so that's like James, It'll be James Taller Taller Rico
against Ken Paxton. And they are now the media are
now saying James tall Rico is the best Christian who
ever walked the earth. I mean, I think that was
like New York Times was treatment of this. This guy
is great and this is a guy who, when he
was in the state legislature said that there were six genders.
I believe he's proudest of his role as as how
much he has pushed to trans children. He says that
not only is abortion good, but God wants.
Speaker 3: You to do it.
Speaker 4: I mean, this guy, in my view, would have trouble
getting elected in San Francisco. Well maybe not given who's
elected in the same but the idea that this is
going to be the guy who turns Texas.
Speaker 3: Blue is really hard for me to stomach.
Speaker 2: Let's link a bunch of themes, because, by the way,
it's really hard. When I said I was coming here
this weekend, my daughter said that my daughter is a teenager,
as will become immediately apparent. I said, you know, I'm
going to a conservative conference where I talk about the politics.
She said, oh, that'll be very exciting for you to
talk about politics all weeknd. So it's very hard for
me to sit in the back of the room and
watch all the other panels.
Speaker 5: Speaker.
Speaker 3: I wanted to speak.
Speaker 2: The topic of information ops. One of the things I
suggest you go look at. Google has a page called
Google Trends, and when you see something when you feel
like there's something that you've never heard about before, and
suddenly everybody's talking about it. I went looking for example,
sitting in the back corner today and one of the
examples I found was illegal orders. Donald Trump is an
illegitimate commander in chief. The orders he gives the military
or illegitimate and illegal, and the military shouldn't obey him.
If you look for Trump illegal orders. There's suddenly a
day if you search the last six months where no
one has ever I've talked about it ever once, and
suddenly it spikes to tens of millions of searches a day.
You see things that nobody is talking about that suddenly,
in a coordinated way, the whole country is obsessed with
and they switch on, and they run for a week
and then they die. You can watch things like it's
someone is pull testing these things and seeing how is
this going, and then they suddenly switch off. When you
see something that you've never seen spoken about, go look
on Google trends and you can see it switch on.
James tall Rico a very few years ago started saying,
you don't want to trans your sons, you don't want
to castright your sons and call them your daughters. How
deeply unfortunate. What if I told you that God wants
you to castrate your sons and call them your daughters.
What if I told you I'm a seminarian in his thirties.
By the way, he signed up for the seminary. He
had never actually shown any interest in religion, and suddenly
is he He's running for Senate. He's a seminarian, although
he's currently I find this fascinating on leave from the seminary.
He's pretending to be a religious scholar. And he suddenly
started saying a few years ago like, well, actually, Jesus
never spoke about abortion because the Bible doesn't impose abortion
transff abortion stuff. God imposes no judgment on homosexuality. But
God judges Ken Paxton for cheating on his wife. If
you look at James tall Rico's campaign speeches, James tall
Rico at YouTube has archived all his campaign speeches in
twenty seventeen, in twenty eighteen, in twenty nineteen, he was
speaking constantly, never using any religious language at all. He
never mentioned being a Christian, he never mentioned this is
my faith. He never said God is telling you to
abort your children. There was clearly suddenly a moment where
he said, what if we tried the gods thing? What
if we tried to sell this with some Jesus stuff
on it? And he started doing that tactically. And the
sudden emergence go look at Google trends, the sudden arrival
of a moment where literally everyone the Wall Street Journal
had a headline that said, you know, Texas enthused by
religious scholar James tell Rico. This sudden moment when everyone
switched on James tell Rico as a Bible scholar is
absolutely a coordinated information off and it's totally ridiculous. And
you can go look at video of James tell Rico
speaking just a few years ago, never mentioned any of it.
Speaker 1: One of the interesting James Tellerco comments that he made
that I forgot about till this moment was on Joe
Rogan and this is one of the older ones when
he first started doing his media circuit, and his take
on the incarnation of Christ was that it's act visually
pro abortion because the angel appears to marry and asks
for her consent before she conceives the Messiah. Just a crazy,
crazy take. But another clip of James Tellerico that I
would like to discuss, which also gets into some more
of your coverage, Chris, and just our broader coverage at
the Federalist, is that he was recently asked who he
loves besides his family, who does he love most, and
his answer was that he loves the trans children. Those
that is, who he loves the most in the whole world, and.
Speaker 4: He shows that love by supporting their permanent sterilization and
cutting off of healthy body parts.
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 1: Yes, but as James tellerco is pushing this direction, the
rest of the country, or at least eighty percent, is
pushing the other direction, including many many people who formerly
identified as transgender and have since blown the whistle on
the destructive, demonic lie that that is, and have desisted
from their transgender identity to an identity that is in
line with who they were created to be that actually
enhances their human flourishing and whatnot. And Chris, you wrote
a piece about the rates of this desistance from transgender ideology.
Can you just speak to the momentum behind this and
kind of what's happening within the transgender movement at large.
Speaker 2: I keep saying, all of these questions are really about
five or six themes at the same time, and this
one is too. And if you're looking at California and
thinking everyone in California is insane, there is a parent
in California named Aaron Friday whose daughter came to her
when she was like thirteen years old and said, I
was born in the wrong body. I'm actually boy. And
Aaron Friday said, no, you're not, You're a girl. And
then they argued about it for years while her daughter
was a teenager. And then her daughter turned eighteen and said, yeah,
I'm a girl. And there is a growing body of
research that says if you just leave trans kids alone,
in a few years, they just stop. What's the world?
Consider doing nothing? Consider doing nothing. I'm actually I was
born in the wrong body. I'm actually a boy. You're
not going to do anything about that. You're not going
to take hormones, we're not going to do surgery. Just
wait a few years. If you just do that, it stops.
And there's been a bunch of studies about that. Somewhere
between seventy five and ninety percent of children just stop.
If you're hopeless about California, and you probably mostly should be,
But if you're hopeless about California. We had a legislative hearing.
The California legislator legislature still every single year bangs through
a bunch of bills about how wonderful it is for
children to transition. And they have a bunch of trans
kids bills this year. And all of the people who
spoke up in opposition, who showed up at this legislative
hearing to speak in opposition were young men and women
who had formally identified as trans children, who talked about
how much pain they are in and how much they're suffering,
and why did you let one of them is the
term barbarian? Why did you let these barbarians do this
to my body? Why did you cut my body? When
I was thirteen years old and I told you I
was born in the wrong body? Why didn't you tell
me no, you weren't. And California has this very strange
legislative process. The Calfrina legislature is a full time legislature
that typically passes between one thousand and twelve hundred bills
every year. If you think about that, like, how does
anyone even comply with twelve hundred new laws every year?
So they have this legislative process where they allow up
to four minutes of testimony on each bill in committee
hearings up to four minutes, and then they have what
are called me twos where they allow groups to come
up and say a name, an organization name, and a position.
John Smith Coalition for the Family opposed. And when they
had the legislative hearing on all the trans Kids bill,
the long line of me toos were Jessica Harris, Black
Lesbians of Los Angeles strongly opposed, the LGB Alliance of
Oakland strongly opposed. All of the opponents for probably forty
or fifty people marching up to the microphone and saying
stop doing this to children were leftists from Los Angeles,
San Francisco, Oakland and most do you know what a
turf is? If I say turfs, trf, trans exclusionary, radical feminists,
the people in California who are opposing the lunatic, crazy, psychopathic?
How many more adjectives can I add? Legislators insane trans
agenda are mostly on the left, mostly from Los Angeles
and San Francisco, and mostly gay and mostly lesbians. There
is a strong, strong, strong opposition to trans madness. Scoring
the LGB is breaking with the t and I actually
think it's one of the ways that California might show
us ways forward where we can find things where there
are people we mostly don't agree with who we could
talk to in ninety five times out of one hundred
we would disagree with them. But there are people who
are radically, radically opposed to most of what you believe.
Who if you say to them, should we be cutting
healthy body parts off thirteen year olds to affirm their gender,
We'll link arms with you and fight against that with
all their heart and go look at the community that
is a rising of left wing They're all democrats of
left wing parent activists in California who we're saying to
the California government, you have to stop this.
Speaker 5: Why is home sales hit the slowest pace in four years?
The watch Dot on Wall Street podcast with Chris Markowski.
Every day Chris helps unpack the connection between politics and
the economy and how it affects your wallet. Sales of
newly built homes dropped seventeen point six percent, even with
building prices coming down. Why are young home buyers so anxious?
Is this another housing market warning sign? Whether it's happening
in DC or Down on Wall Street. It's affecting you financially.
Be informed. Check out the watch Dot on Wall Street
podcast with Chris Markowski on Apple, Spotify or wherever you
get your podcasts.
Speaker 4: You know, I think it's worth pointing out, speaking of
information ops, how much this issue was in many ways
an information op where many years ago some people started
saying that you had to affirm delusional identities. And I
remember when the BLM riots started, the people in my neighborhood,
which is extremely democrat, they wanted to join with BLM,
and so they were talking about ways to do it
on the neighborhood list serve. So I looked up the
BLMS website and on the BLM website they listed what
their goals were, and one of them was to defund
the police, but the other ones actually had nothing to.
Speaker 3: Do with that.
Speaker 4: It was like to support Palestinians in their liberation movement
against Israel. Another was to destroy the Nuclear family, and
another was to help out people, particularly people of color. Well,
what happens after the riots the riots occur, the media
join in corporations, joined in corporations transferred one hundred bill
yon with the B dollars to the BLM movement and
it's approved causes. And one of those, one of the
main recipients of that one hundred billion dollar transfer of
wealth was for transactivists. So when you think, like we
all know men or men and women or women and
mentioned and play in women's sports, we all know it, right, Like,
how does society adopt something so delusional? And partly it's
through highly funded orchestrated, coordinated campaigns. I just want to
make a mention here that after Trump won, a lot
of corporations who had participated in all of the Democrat activism,
we're asking to meet with Sean and me for various things.
So they would and then they'd say, we just want
you to know we're not doing that anymore.
Speaker 3: And the Claremont.
Speaker 4: Institute had put out a database showing precisely which companies
gave which money.
Speaker 3: So you're whoever you're meeting.
Speaker 4: With, Facebook, YouTube, met at whatever, you know, you just
look them up and you see, okay, well you gave ohow, you.
Speaker 3: Gave one hundred and ten million dollars to the left.
Speaker 4: Which groups on the right are going to get that funding?
And they're like, oh no, no, no, we're not we're not.
We're not We're not giving money. We're just not gonna
give any more money to the left. It's like, so
you don't, really, you didn't. Actually, you know, nothing here matters.
But the corporate control of some of these left wing
movements and institutions and funding is serious.
Speaker 1: Yes, well and through.
Speaker 2: Yes, you've just reminded me. This will be really quick.
You've just reminded me of the demands the UTLA, the
United Teachers of Los Angeles, the teachers union in the
LA Unified School District. The demands they issued when the
school board said we should go back to in person
school during the pandemic. Has anyone read those They're still online,
you can find them. They're glorious. They said, we will
return to the classroom when there are no more police
in America, when everyone has a home provided by the government,
when we have single payer healthcare. It went on and
on and on and on the way that organizations hijack.
We're here to represent the interests of our students. For example,
we want no more police department and socialized medicine.
Speaker 1: Well, aside from BLM, another huge player in that was
the Human Rights Campaign. Corporate Equity Index where basically they
would bully corporations into supporting trans trans ideology by giving
them a low score or a high score, depending on
how equitable are you going to be. And this year
or over the past year, we've seen so many corporations
jump ship and they're no longer worried about their Corporate
Equity Index score, which is a good sign also where
things are moving. You mentioned the media as well, the
media just playing a huge role in this through language manipulation,
which is another reason why our language accuracy is so important.
But when all of your coverage of this issue uses
terms like gender affirming care and ironically you know, in
addition to pronouns and such, or referring to transgender medical
interventions as treatment, or you know, just these these euphemisms
for bodily destruction and castration of children. And now you're
seeing the tide turn where you have major establishment medical
organizations like the American Medical Association and others that have
really backtracked. Now where I mean, they haven't gone far enough,
because this hasn't been completely abolished and exposed as the
evil that it is. But to say we no longer
recommend a surgical mutilation of minors. So I mean it's
it's not enough, but the tide is clearly turning in
that direction. And in your peace, Chris, I think you
mentioned was it seventy percent of the people who have
identified as transgender within a certain age group. It was
teenage girls I think desisted within five years. So if
you just let you just let children go through natural puberty,
they will more likely than not, far more likely than
not live in a way that corresponds with their natural sex.
Speaker 2: The a MA just is anybody a doctor or a nurse.
I think the struggle that's happening inside medicine are about
transgender medicine is becoming really interesting and really important, and
I'm trying to watch it as closely as i can.
Last month, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons released a
guidance document that said, there is no evidence to support
the the gender affirmation of children. There's no evidence to
say that this is a good idea, and we recommend
that plastic surgeons stop participating in these procedures. And the
AMA just like this week released his statements saying, oh,
we don't have anything to do with that. So there
is I think there are doctors who've gone along with it.
There if I say the name Aiton Haim, does that
mean anything to anyone? Iiton Ham was a doctor in Texas,
a surgical resident at Texas Children's Hospital who gave a
bunch of documents with patient names redacted to Christopher Rufo
Texas Children's Hospital said Oh, we're not doing these procedures anymore.
We've stopped, and and Ititon Haim gave Christopher Ruffo a
bunch of documents showing that they had not stopped, that
they were implanting surgically implanting hormone devices in children. And
he was prosecuted by the Biden administration.
Speaker 4: And speaking of prosecution, I don't think I think it's
great that so many people are turning away from the
trans insanity and radical gender ideology. That's a wonderful thing.
It is also true that there are monsters out there
who permanently harmed children. And until those people are true
I mean, I mean this, they should be put in
prison for what they did. And so changing the tide
on this is not sufficient. There need to be repercussions
for these people who ever thought that what they were
doing was in any way okay, And anyone who supported them,
so more.
Speaker 1: Yes, more more accountability. One thing I think that has
helped and that will continue to help hopefully with accountability
as well, isative Conservatives have gotten a lot better at
telling the stories of people who have been harmed by this.
You know, Molly talked earlier about the glossy spreads of
and all the human interest stories that just give such
lovely color to these Democrat activists. They always have a
story cued up that will tug on your heart strings
and you know, help push their cause forward. And we
have the facts because we know xx and x y chromosomes,
and you know, we know that men are men and
women are women. But we have so many more stories
now that illustrate the very real human harms. It's one
thing to know biological facts. It's another thing to stare
death and destruction in the face and see what has
actually happened as a result of this. And we've done
a really good job at the Federalists two of promoting
these stories. We had Chloe Cole on the Kylie Cast
a few weeks ago, which was awesome, and she she
got to share her story not only of how she
was preyed upon by the medical establishment and ushered into horrible,
horrible trans interventions that ruined many parts of her life.
But then also how she became a Christian and was
pulled out of that, I mean, just a gloriously redemptive story.
And Vault Higher has been publishing pieces at the Federalist
and ringing the alarm bells on this, I mean, long
before it became the craze that it is today, and
so we just we've done a great job of showing
the human harmss.
Speaker 4: I'm really glad that we have shown those stories, those
human interest stories, and it's also important, i think, for
people to understand that the modern conception of men and
women is just wrong in every way, and so helping
people see how feminism has kind of incepted so many
different parts of our lives in ways that are very
damaging for both men and women is another thing that
I'm really pleased that we've been able to do and explain.
We joke sometimes, Gosh, there's like a publication that says
its motto is standing a thwart History, subtly suggesting that
you slow down or something like that, and we joke
that ours is standing a thwart history, saying men and
women are different. Men and women are different, and that's
a good thing. So much of what you get in
modern media is pitting men against women, making them enemies
of each other, teaching them to be victims, teaching them
to be, you know, just to be just to hate
each other. And instead we try to really highlight how
males and females are beautiful and complimentary and should work
together in great ways, and you know, primarily through marriage,
but also in many other ways as well.
Speaker 2: All right, link taking a bunch of things and linking
them together.
Speaker 3: Yet again, we'll name that. We'll name your next podcast.
Speaker 2: Then, James tell Erico, I think he was doing the
Joe Rogan. No, No, he was talking to the Bulwark.
He's talking to that eddiot, Tim Miller.
Speaker 3: The bulwark.
Speaker 4: I thought you said the borg, and I'm now thinking
I might always called the bulwark the borg.
Speaker 2: And they started talking about the bill that tell Rico
spoke on the floor of the house and he said
that you know, God wants you to stop bullying trans kids.
God wants you to transition to your children and cut
off their healthy body parts. And he said, you know,
people are very upset by that speech. But I gave
that speech because I was standing on the floor of
the Texas House and standing up to the extremists. That
bill passed, the bill he opposed, passed by a substantial majority.
So when James tallerco says extremist, he means mainstream. He
means the majority of the society, the majority of the legislature,
the majority of parents, the majority of the population. When
he talks about the respectable mainstream, the decent people, he's
talking about like twenty percent of the country. Rasmussen did
a poll in California. We have an ongoing battle in
California over parental notification policies that if a child at
a K through twelve school goes to a teacher and says,
I'm not going to use my boy name anymore. I'm
going to use a girl name. I was born in
the wrong body, and I want you to address me
by my girl name and change my pronouns. But I'm
not out to my parents's transgender So if I don't
want you to tell them. The state's policy course was
to protect was to They called it a the prevention
of forced outing. They wanted to prevent the forced outing
of children by keeping secrets from parents and having teachers
and school administrators and school counselors have secret sexually themed
discussions with their twelve year olds on campus without telling parents,
because that's decent and kind and affirming and gentle and loving.
Hiding things from parents is is very kind, and eighty percent,
eighty plus percent of the population in California thinks that's insane.
Eighty plus percent of the population in California that has
voted for a super majority in both houses of the
state legislature thinks that parental notification policy are absolutely necessary
and that the state's policy course the state government they elected,
is completely insane.
Speaker 1: There's a word for what you described, Chris, and it
rhymes with dooming, and we can't use it because we
have been censored for using it at the federalists before.
There's a word for conditioning children to keep sexual secrets
from their parents and to only go to a different
trusted adult. And now that's just happening every day in
our government funded schools, taxpayer funded schools. So we've talked
a bit this weekend already about Kermit Gosnell and his death,
but one thing I would like to sort of draw
out from that because Molly, you mentioned just the differences
between the sexes, and that is something that we have,
so we cover it so much and so well. And
I think one thing that we're seeing now, you know,
you can look at the Kermit Gosnell case, his many
sins and crimes, and see how gruesome and horrible and
harmful they were for both women and children and just
humanity at large. And I forget who referred to it
as the House of Horrors, but I know that.
Speaker 3: The grand jury the report was called.
Speaker 1: That, okay, And I think our modern day house of
horrors is in many ways the big fertility industry that
I think even so many people who identify as part
of the right have sort of bought into this because
it's easy to kid yourself into thinking that being pro
life and pro family means being pro commodifying children and
creating life at all costs, no matter what the drawbacks are.
And our colleague Jordan Boyd, who is not here now,
but she has done such an excellent, excellent job being
at the forefront of pointing out all of the many
ways that big fertility and artificial reproductive technologies have have
been a catastrophe for women and children and families. So, Molly,
can you just speak to some of our coverage of
that and how it's like the Kurmit Godsnel House of horrors.
Speaker 4: Well, I think this is some of the most difficult
stuff that we've had to do, is talk about this
because everybody understands the pain.
Speaker 3: Like, let's say you want to have children and you're
unable to have children.
Speaker 4: That is a deep grievous pain borne by men and women,
and so people want to solve that, and so they
love to learn that there are all these things you
can do so that you can procure children even if
your body is limited in some way.
Speaker 3: Well, there are all sorts of ethical issues in play.
There are all sorts of things that people should also
be considering. At the same time, the technology has.
Speaker 4: Way outpaced our ethical discussions of these things, and so
getting people to think about okay, So, for instance, you
know one of our senior contributors, Katie Faust, who has
a group called Them Before Us, which encourages people to
think about children more than the adults who are trying
to procure children. And one of the things we talked
about recently was someone I can't remember who on staff
was talking about this, but learning from someone who places
children for adoption that someone really wanted to help this
couple get a baby, and the director of the adoption
clinic reminded her, our job is to help find healthy
homes for the children that we're placing. It's the children
who were serving. Just because you want something doesn't mean
you can do whatever it takes to obtain that thing.
And so let's say you decide that you're going to
use a surrogate. So normally the way that that happens
is you pay a woman in another country thirty thousand
dollars or something to gestate a baby who has been
artificially inseminated with unknown, you know, biological content, and that
womanestates the baby, and then you take the baby from
the mother immediately, and then you bring them bring that baby,
you know, into your home. Does that not raise already
some issues you should be thinking about this? Is this
proper to use this woman's body for payment in this way?
Is that really proper?
Speaker 3: Or when I don't know?
Speaker 4: There are all sorts of things that we have published
that I'm proud of, including the children who are the
product of some assisted reproductive technology. It affects children in
ways that. I don't think people always think about not
knowing who the parent, who one or both of your
parents are. Knowing that your parents were willing to pay
money to get you actually kind of changes the relationship
between parents and children. And so we understand these are
difficult issues, and we certainly you know, but we want
to have a conversation about it because they're not getting
that conversation elsewhere.
Speaker 1: Yes, And I think one of the difficult things is
that public opinion on this issue. People have not thought
through these issues much, if at all, and certainly not well.
So a lot of the messaging that you're getting from it,
even on the right, is from baby good.
Speaker 3: So therefore whatever we do to get that baby is good.
Speaker 1: Correct. Correct. So you know, it's not feasible politically or
otherwise to you know, ban surrogacy or to ban IVF
broadly in America. But how do we help the administration
understand what's at stake this with this issue? You know,
how do we move the ball forward on this? And
you know, it's hard. It's a chicken or the egg
thing because we want, we want the law to be this,
but it can't be this because not enough people believe it,
and yet at the same time, the law is what
helps condition people's consciences to understand what is wrong with
this issue. So so is there more that we can
be doing at the federalist and how can we, you know,
really help people understand this issue better?
Speaker 3: Yeah, so I think absolutely.
Speaker 4: It's educating the public about some of the things they
should be thinking about when they use different technologies is
first and foremost.
Speaker 3: You need you need to do that.
Speaker 4: We also publicly apply pressure to the Trump administration to
think about these things as well. The thing I'm thinking
about more than anything right now is that most abortions
actually take place through I always get the pronunciation wrong
MEFI pristone. These like telemedicine, like you can go take
a medicine quote unquote medicine. You can go take a
pill to abort your child. It has horrific consequences for
a lot of the women involved, and there's no medical
supervision of it of any kind. And the Trump administration
is kind of doing a couple things about it, but
not really and they're very slow walking. So we put
a lot of pressure on it. I actually ran into
a high level person at AHHS at the White House
same meeting earlier this week. We had a lovely conversation
and I was commiserating with them about some of the
problems that they're dealing with they're at AHHS, and then
I was like, we are watching you on the mepha pristone,
like we know you're not wanting to do what you
should be doing.
Speaker 3: And I think that's important too.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it definitely feels like a three steps forward, two
steps back type of issue. And I know the Ethics
and Public Policy Center came out with an excellent and
rigorous report this year about these adverse effects. Because you know,
the drug label on mifipristoe will say, oh, fewer than
you know, zero point five percent of women had these
adverse effects or whatever the number is. And this Ethics
and Public Policy Center study, which is like the most
rigorous study that's been done on this, showed that more
than one in ten women who take abortion pills suffer
an adverse event within forty five days of taking these pills,
which is serious things like sepsis, hemorrhaging, you know, very
very serious things. And that that's twenty two times higher
than what the drugs label says. And you talked about
not having restrictions on these. That was thanks to the
Biden administration, which under cover of COVID dramatically reduced the
in person requirements for these things. So if a woman
has an ectopic pregnancy and doesn't know it because she
doesn't see a provider in person, which is the only
way to diagnose whether you have that or not, she
may bleed out if she takes abortion drugs and they
are just dispensing them, even to pro life states that
have outlawed abortion through the mail. It's really a catastrophic issue,
and I don't even think people understand the scale that
this is happening. And it's also enabling abusive partners and
such too. I mean, we've seen multiple instances of men
ordering abortion pills unbeknownst to the woman carrying their child,
and then them essentially poisoning her to abort the mborn child.
It's really crazy. Molly, what we're gonna say?
Speaker 4: No, I wanted to say something happy, because this is
also sad. I noticed you look different, Kylie. Is there
anything you wanted to tell us?
Speaker 1: I have put on a little bit of weight. Yes,
I've also added a Y chromosome. It's so funny because
I'm expecting a child, my first child, which is very
exciting because and you used to have to wait a
long time to find out the sex of the child,
if that was something that you wanted to do. Well, Now,
through blood work, you can find out very early. And
it's detected by whether or not the mother has a
Y chromosome present in her blood because the blood, you know,
kind of mixes with the mother's blood or whatever.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm not a scientist, but so I am anti trans
but I do. I am a woman with a Y
chromosome in my body right now who I'm having a
little boys.
Speaker 2: So, yes, you used to have to wait until your
child was old enough to announce pronouns ah yes, yes
to find out that. Let me just say one thing
about that, which is that I think what's really striking
to me is how much politics doesn't work as a
way of debating things that are important and soci I
was deeply concerned about the war and I Ran I
thought there was a debate that needs to be had
and a discussion that needed to be had about why
are we going to war with Iran? How's it going
to work? So the Senate had a debate, and I
watched like eight hours of it, and at the end
of eight hours of the Senate debating the war, I thought, like,
it would really been great to have a debate about
the war at some point, Like I think the headline
that we ended up with compliments of Joy Pullman was
old men yell at clouds. And I think, over and
over and over again, when you do when you try
to talk about very difficult things like surrogacy, if you
try to manage that through like congressmen talking to each other,
you're doomed and you're not going to get anywhere if
you try to manage that through fair and open debate
in the New York Times, like I watch the trans
the trans kids at the legislative hearing in California talk
about how much pain they're in and how much their
bodies have been hurt, and then if you read the
news coverage of it, it's like far right transphobes take
over legislative hearing. We increasingly the more difficult and the
more important a topic is, the more we just literally
can't talk about it in politics or in media. And
I think the place where these problems are going to
be solved where it's going to matter, because there's no
way we're going to solve them in politics. Is in
homes and communities and families and in culture, long before
we ever get to politics, Because if you get to
politics to debate what is a child and what is
the value of a child's life? If you have the
discussion first in Congress, you're already doomed.
Speaker 1: Yes. Yes, And I want to take that one step
further because I had a couple of awesome conversations with
some of you, and even this morning, one of you
leaned over to me at breakfast and said, how are
you all so positive? How are you all so optimistic?
And you know, because we have been talking about lots
of horrible things that have happened in this country. And
I sat there for a second and immediately knew the
answer is that because most of us on staff are Christians,
and so our hope is not actually in politics, it's
actually not here. And that's another thing that we try
to do with the Kylie Cast is really really pull
religion into the conversation because there are many things that
can marginally help, and we fight the good fight, and
we're gonna call out The New York Times and we're
gonna say what's true, and we're gonna, you know, do
what we are called to do, which is to to
be courageous and to fight lies with truth and whatnot.
But at the end of the day, our hope is
not here, and I think that's why we can be
so optimistic. So it certainly doesn't start in Congress. It
does start in the family, and it also starts and
knowing where your hope is and it's it is not
in politicians.
Speaker 4: I love that you said that kindly is why we
don't despair, but it's also why we understand that our
vocations right now are to try to make the world
a better place, to try to save the country, and
we do what we can and where you know, we
wake up every day and do it and we.
Speaker 3: Are pretty joyful about it.
Speaker 4: I like that we have a good positive attitude as
we as we fight these fights, because if we didn't
have hope, if we didn't have, you know, the hope
that we're talking about that we have in Jesus, it
would be really depressing. I mean, it would be really sad.
So I'm glad that many of us have I mean,
not everyone.
Speaker 1: But yes, I was talking to Carly in this morning too,
and I said that the Lord is working even when
Congress isn't, So that is a great hope to us. Yes,
so we are almost out of time, So I just
I want to get to a couple more things before
we wrap here. One is the Supreme Court, Molly, you
brought up the birthright citizenship case that is being heard.
I would love to know what other cases you're watching,
what you think is most important this term. And then
I want to talk about your new book.
Speaker 3: Well, I really just want to talk about the new book.
Speaker 1: The new book.
Speaker 4: I do want to say on the birthright citizenship case,
I'm super excited about this one because this is an
issue that I don't think people really thought about it all.
They just assumed if you're born in this country, you're
a citizen.
Speaker 3: Case closed.
Speaker 4: And there's never really been any hearing about this before
the Supreme Court, and there's never been any originalist discussion
of the meaning of the fourteenth Amendment. That's never of
that part of the fourteenth Amendment that deals with birthright citizenship.
So for the first time in history, on Wednesday going
to hear we're going to hear arguments about whether because
you were born here, you are even if your parents
are allegiant to a foreign country, whether that makes you
a citizen. And I think that's a big one. There
are so many cases hitting the court this year. They
normally hear about eighty cases a year, so it's actually
been a little bit less than that annually, and so
much of it is about emergency petitions because these lower
courts are.
Speaker 3: Trying to.
Speaker 4: The main strategy of Democrats for the second Trump term
is through law fair and you have a to they
can shop for which judge they want to hear a case,
and that judge can issue a nationwide injunction. Now, there
was the ruling last year that handed down from the
Court that that actually was not appropriate, but it had
loopholes you could kind of drive a truck through. I
will point out that Justice Alito had made that point.
Speaker 3: That the loopholes were large. Seeing that this year at
the loopholes are large, You're.
Speaker 4: Continuing to see these nationwide injunctions and you will continue
to see those coming down. There are a lot of
interesting cases dealing with the Voting Rights Act, and you know,
we've already had some interesting stuff on hiding things from parents.
You know, that have gone well. The court is interesting.
Speaker 3: It's not you know.
Speaker 4: I know, people get frustrated with the Court, but the
rulings by and large are so much.
Speaker 3: Better than they were forty years ago.
Speaker 4: And with the Alito book, I had written a book
with Carrie Savarina on Justice Kavanaugh. And while I was
writing that book, everyone in everyone like I respected who
I was talking to. They would say, you know, Alito
is the best one. And it's funny because you never
hear about Alito. You always heard about Scalia. You definitely
hear about Thomas. We know Kavanaugh from the hearings. We
know Amy Cony Barrett, she's recent. We even know Justice Gorsich,
although he's a Trump. Of the three Trump appointees, he's
probably the least well known. You know Chief Justice John Roberts,
You know Sonya Soda, my Orn, Kaitanji Brown Jackson, and
Alana Kate.
Speaker 1: Trouble understanding.
Speaker 3: I get that joke.
Speaker 4: But you don't hear much from Alito because he is
so shy, so introverted. He does not seek celebrity at all.
But he's this giant on the court. He wrote, for example,
the Hobby Lobby Decision, which was about whether religious family
corporations have the right to have religious rights. He of
course famously did the hard work of the conservative legal
movement's fifty year goal of overturning Robe Wade. That was
a big goal of pro lifers, but it was also
a big goal of just the conservative legal movement because
Robi Wade, even as one pro abortion scholar put it,
it's not constitutional law.
Speaker 3: It doesn't even pretend to be. It was a horrible decision.
Speaker 4: It was like a policy document that had just had
done so much harm to the country and done so
much harm to Supreme Court jurisprudence because everything they did
they had to protect Roe v. Wade, And so he
did the hard work of overturning that. And I had
wanted to write a book about Alitos since the moment
we did the Kavanaugh book. I just thought he was fascinating.
I loved the way the other justices talked about him.
They'd say, he's the smartest one, he's the best questioner,
but you'd never heard anything.
Speaker 3: So I put.
Speaker 4: Out feelers to his people right away and got a
firm no. And then I just kept asking and asking,
and finally was able to do this and interviewed more
than one hundred people, and so it's partially just his story,
which is a really interesting story of growing up in
New Jersey, son of an immigrant, and going to Princeton,
going to Yale, but not getting co opted by those institutions,
just being a solid conservative his whole life. When he
was nominated, he was known to be a conservative. He
continued to be a conservative, and he has also a
So it's partly just about him and his interesting family.
He might have heard about his wife, Martha Ann, who
really enjoys flying flags, and that it's partially about his
jurisprudence and how it differs from other people. He is
an originalist, but he's known as a practical originalist, which
means he thinks more about how that law will be
implemented at lower levels. He was a former prosecutor, he
was on the Third Circuit for many years, and so
he thinks, like, when we make this decision, how will
the lower courts handle this, How does this affect prosecutors,
how does this affect police and so, and then it
also tells the story of Dobbs. I get into the
leak and information known about that. There's some explosive details,
which I can't talk about right now until it comes out,
and it's just I'm really glad I got to write it,
and I'm really glad he's finally getting his due. There's
another book out about Alito, also right, it'll be coming
out next month, but from a left wing journalist. In fact,
it's the editor who edited the story about the leak.
Speaker 3: So he's on the left and I'm on the right.
And then Justice.
Speaker 4: Alito himself will have his first book out in the fall, which.
Speaker 3: Will be a collection of his speeches. So year of Alito.
Speaker 4: It's his twentieth year on the court, and he seems
to be going strong.
Speaker 1: Can you pre order your book now?
Speaker 3: You can pre order the book right now?
Speaker 1: Where can people preorder it now? If I mean don't
want to support Amazon?
Speaker 4: Oh, Barnes and Noble is probably the best way to
do it. But Amazon, Barnes and Noble all that. And
it's called Alito, so at least that part's easy to remember.
Speaker 1: And it officially comes out April. I think it's April
twenty first first, okay, okay, so everybody should go pre
order Molly's book. It's going to be great. I can't
wait to read it. We are going to wrap here
because I do want to leave a few minutes for questions.
Would love to hear from you what's on your mind. So,
do we have a microphone we can pass around? While
Sarah's grabbing the mic, I will just say that we
have three Federalist podcasts. We have The Federalist Radio Hour
that is hosted by Matt Kittle multiple times a week.
He has wonderful guests on that show. Then every Wednesday
you can listen to Your Wrong with Molly Hemingway and
David Harsani. It's an excellent podcast. And if you are
not yet subscribed, please subscribe to the Kylie Cast, which
comes out every Thursday. You can hear it on Spotify
or Apple Podcast subscribe there, or if you want, you
can watch it because it's also a video podcast, so
you can watch it on YouTube, my personal YouTube channel,
or the Federalists channel on Rumble. So please go and
subscribe to that. And this episode will be going live
probably next week, but you all got to hear it
here first. Thank you so much for tuning into this
week's episode of the Kylie Cast. Please like and subscribe
wherever you get your podcasts. We have a channel specifically
designated for the Kylie Cast on Spotify and Apple Podcasts,
So if you are only subscribed to The Federalist Radio Hour,
or you're wrong with Molly Hemingway and David Harsani, two
of our other great Federalist podcasts, subscribe to the Kylie
Cast as well, so you never miss an episode. Leave
us a five star review. It is one of the
easiest and best ways you can help out the show.
As always, I will be back next week with more
so until then, just remember the truth hurts, but it
won't kill you.