1 00:00:00,440 --> 00:00:03,760 Speaker 1: We have got the latest from the Supreme Court confirmation 2 00:00:03,840 --> 00:00:07,240 Speaker 1: hearings on Capitol Hill with someone who has sat through 3 00:00:07,280 --> 00:00:10,400 Speaker 1: all of it. But before we get to that, let 4 00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:14,560 Speaker 1: us turn to the Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden in 5 00:00:14,680 --> 00:00:18,360 Speaker 1: nineteen eighty three, on a topic very very important to 6 00:00:18,400 --> 00:00:21,880 Speaker 1: the Supreme Court. President Roosevelt clearly had the right to 7 00:00:21,920 --> 00:00:24,320 Speaker 1: send to the United States Senate the United States Congress 8 00:00:24,320 --> 00:00:27,320 Speaker 1: a proposal to pack the Court. It was totally within 9 00:00:27,400 --> 00:00:31,000 Speaker 1: his right to do that. He violated no law. He 10 00:00:31,080 --> 00:00:36,239 Speaker 1: was legalistically absolutely correct, but it was a bone head idea. 11 00:00:36,600 --> 00:00:40,199 Speaker 1: It was a terrible, terrible mistake to make, and it 12 00:00:40,320 --> 00:00:45,839 Speaker 1: put in question for an entire decade the independence of 13 00:00:46,120 --> 00:00:49,920 Speaker 1: the most significant body, including the Congress, in my view, 14 00:00:49,960 --> 00:00:53,040 Speaker 1: the most significant body in this country, the Supreme Court 15 00:00:53,040 --> 00:00:57,040 Speaker 1: of the United States of America. Bone headed. Indeed, this 16 00:00:57,120 --> 00:01:05,280 Speaker 1: is verdict with Ted Cruz. Welcome back to Verdict with 17 00:01:05,319 --> 00:01:08,200 Speaker 1: Ted Cruz. I'm Michael Knowls, Senator. I do want to 18 00:01:08,240 --> 00:01:11,240 Speaker 1: get to the Supreme Court hearings. You've just come from 19 00:01:11,280 --> 00:01:13,560 Speaker 1: Capitol Hill. But I have to ask you, because you 20 00:01:13,840 --> 00:01:16,800 Speaker 1: actually know the guy, You've you've served with the guy, 21 00:01:18,240 --> 00:01:20,399 Speaker 1: what happened to that Joe Biden. I think I find 22 00:01:20,440 --> 00:01:23,759 Speaker 1: myself agreeing with that. Joe Biden in nineteen eighty three, 23 00:01:23,840 --> 00:01:26,520 Speaker 1: then the one today I don't know about. Well, look 24 00:01:26,560 --> 00:01:31,000 Speaker 1: in nineteen eighty three, I mean I was thirteen, and 25 00:01:31,319 --> 00:01:34,760 Speaker 1: were you even a sparkle in your daddy's eyes? Not 26 00:01:34,959 --> 00:01:40,440 Speaker 1: for a number of years after that. Actually that Joe 27 00:01:40,480 --> 00:01:47,240 Speaker 1: Biden is wandering in Iowa cornfield somewhere, you know. I 28 00:01:47,319 --> 00:01:51,280 Speaker 1: like that he gave a clear answer on this, and 29 00:01:51,360 --> 00:01:53,560 Speaker 1: today we're getting a clear answer from the other side 30 00:01:53,560 --> 00:01:56,520 Speaker 1: of the left. I mean, there are people explicitly advocating 31 00:01:56,800 --> 00:02:00,240 Speaker 1: for court packing, and Joe Biden he has said that 32 00:02:00,440 --> 00:02:04,160 Speaker 1: voters don't deserve to have an answer on where he 33 00:02:04,280 --> 00:02:07,440 Speaker 1: stands on the issue. But this is a significant issue. 34 00:02:07,440 --> 00:02:09,760 Speaker 1: I mean, this could radically shift the balance of power 35 00:02:09,800 --> 00:02:12,720 Speaker 1: in the country. Well, look that that's exactly right. It's 36 00:02:12,800 --> 00:02:16,200 Speaker 1: not accidental that Biden won't answer this question. It's not 37 00:02:16,240 --> 00:02:20,720 Speaker 1: accidental that Kamala Harris won't answer this question. I think 38 00:02:20,720 --> 00:02:22,679 Speaker 1: the reason they wan't answer it is their answer is yes, 39 00:02:23,400 --> 00:02:28,480 Speaker 1: their hardcore base wants them to pack the court, and 40 00:02:28,720 --> 00:02:33,120 Speaker 1: I think they recognize that's a really unpopular idea, So 41 00:02:33,240 --> 00:02:35,480 Speaker 1: they're refusing to answer it, and they pretty much assumed 42 00:02:35,480 --> 00:02:38,639 Speaker 1: the press will give them a pass. I mean you mentioned, 43 00:02:38,680 --> 00:02:40,799 Speaker 1: you know, so Biden was asked a couple of days ago, 44 00:02:41,120 --> 00:02:43,440 Speaker 1: do the voters deserve to know the answer on your question? 45 00:02:43,440 --> 00:02:46,160 Speaker 1: And his response was no, the voters don't deserve to 46 00:02:46,200 --> 00:02:50,080 Speaker 1: know that, Like what, what in the have you ever heard? 47 00:02:51,080 --> 00:02:55,360 Speaker 1: I mean, that's a bizarre thing for a candidate for 48 00:02:55,400 --> 00:03:00,120 Speaker 1: president to say, and it's I believe if Biden wins, 49 00:03:00,120 --> 00:03:03,960 Speaker 1: if there's a Democratic majority in both houses, they will 50 00:03:04,000 --> 00:03:06,960 Speaker 1: pack the court. I think that's the path we're on. 51 00:03:07,480 --> 00:03:10,200 Speaker 1: And I actually think so. We finished the hearing today, 52 00:03:10,280 --> 00:03:13,600 Speaker 1: the second round of questioning. It was kind of a 53 00:03:13,600 --> 00:03:19,320 Speaker 1: snooze fest. It went, you know, nine ten hours. It 54 00:03:19,440 --> 00:03:22,320 Speaker 1: was shorter than yesterday. Yesterday it was about twelve hours. 55 00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:26,680 Speaker 1: And the interesting news about today as the Democrats surrendered, 56 00:03:27,200 --> 00:03:32,440 Speaker 1: they just gave up that they have decided. Amy Cony 57 00:03:32,480 --> 00:03:34,960 Speaker 1: Barrett is going to be confirmed. And you know what, 58 00:03:35,040 --> 00:03:37,640 Speaker 1: the American people watching her are really impressed. I mean, 59 00:03:37,640 --> 00:03:41,840 Speaker 1: this is a remarkable woman. She's an impressive woman. I 60 00:03:41,880 --> 00:03:45,280 Speaker 1: think the people turning on the TV see her calm, cool, collected. 61 00:03:45,320 --> 00:03:47,560 Speaker 1: See here sitting there at a table with not a 62 00:03:47,680 --> 00:03:51,120 Speaker 1: single note in front of her answering the questions, and 63 00:03:51,160 --> 00:03:53,760 Speaker 1: I think the Democrats realized, Okay, we're getting the crap 64 00:03:53,800 --> 00:03:57,360 Speaker 1: beat out of us right now, and the word came 65 00:03:57,400 --> 00:04:02,160 Speaker 1: out essentially runaway. It was striking by this afternoon, and 66 00:04:02,520 --> 00:04:07,280 Speaker 1: I guess I had my round of questioning right about lunchtime. 67 00:04:08,120 --> 00:04:10,920 Speaker 1: Hearing room was almost empty, but there were two Democrats 68 00:04:11,000 --> 00:04:13,440 Speaker 1: left in the room that they had fled. And I 69 00:04:13,480 --> 00:04:17,640 Speaker 1: actually started started my questioning by pointing out that they 70 00:04:17,640 --> 00:04:19,760 Speaker 1: had given up. That the good news is we now 71 00:04:19,880 --> 00:04:22,080 Speaker 1: know for a fact Judge Barrett is going to be 72 00:04:22,120 --> 00:04:24,880 Speaker 1: confirmed as Justice Barrett, and I pointed out there were 73 00:04:24,880 --> 00:04:28,600 Speaker 1: only two Democrats in the room and Dick Durban from Illinois, 74 00:04:29,200 --> 00:04:31,839 Speaker 1: he just about lost it. He exploded. He jumped in 75 00:04:31,960 --> 00:04:34,360 Speaker 1: and interrupted me, which rarely happens at hearings. I mean, 76 00:04:34,360 --> 00:04:37,000 Speaker 1: you don't see that very often. And he jumped in 77 00:04:37,080 --> 00:04:41,240 Speaker 1: and he said, well, well there's a pandemic. And I 78 00:04:41,279 --> 00:04:43,920 Speaker 1: couldn't help but responding, well, yeah, that's true, there is 79 00:04:43,920 --> 00:04:46,960 Speaker 1: a pandemic. But yesterday you were all here and you 80 00:04:47,040 --> 00:04:49,479 Speaker 1: had all the Democrats lined up. Pat Lay he didn't 81 00:04:49,480 --> 00:04:51,760 Speaker 1: show up, and Kamala Harris. Those are the only two 82 00:04:51,760 --> 00:04:53,640 Speaker 1: Democrats who didn't show up to the hearing. Everyone else 83 00:04:53,680 --> 00:04:57,160 Speaker 1: was physically present today. They literally they would show up 84 00:04:57,160 --> 00:05:00,960 Speaker 1: for their little round of questioning, but nobody. There were 85 00:05:00,960 --> 00:05:06,880 Speaker 1: really no fireworks, and I think they realize they can't 86 00:05:06,920 --> 00:05:09,479 Speaker 1: stop it. They've got to put on enough of a 87 00:05:09,600 --> 00:05:14,960 Speaker 1: show that their hardcore activists aren't mad at them, but 88 00:05:16,520 --> 00:05:21,040 Speaker 1: it is clear they're dialing it in. Every time they 89 00:05:21,320 --> 00:05:25,120 Speaker 1: try to throw a fastball at her, she just smiles, 90 00:05:25,200 --> 00:05:28,680 Speaker 1: and she she knows the substance a lot better than 91 00:05:28,680 --> 00:05:31,920 Speaker 1: they do, and she's not going down like the traps 92 00:05:31,960 --> 00:05:35,679 Speaker 1: they tried to lay. She's not falling into. But part 93 00:05:35,720 --> 00:05:38,200 Speaker 1: of I think they're objective. At the beginning of the 94 00:05:38,240 --> 00:05:42,599 Speaker 1: hearing was to lay the predicate that the nomination and 95 00:05:42,600 --> 00:05:47,120 Speaker 1: the confirmation itself is fundamentally illegitimate, because that's the predicate. 96 00:05:47,839 --> 00:05:50,279 Speaker 1: Their endgame is court packing in a few months. So 97 00:05:50,320 --> 00:05:53,120 Speaker 1: I think they're willing to say, Okay, we lose now. 98 00:05:53,839 --> 00:05:55,520 Speaker 1: They think they're going to win a couple of weeks. 99 00:05:55,520 --> 00:05:57,280 Speaker 1: Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong. I don't know who 100 00:05:57,279 --> 00:06:00,240 Speaker 1: wins on election day, but they think they're to be 101 00:06:00,279 --> 00:06:04,599 Speaker 1: in power. And I think their answer next year is 102 00:06:04,680 --> 00:06:06,560 Speaker 1: packed the court. I don't know if they plan to 103 00:06:06,560 --> 00:06:11,840 Speaker 1: go to eleven or thirteen. But one of the interesting things, so, 104 00:06:12,320 --> 00:06:15,000 Speaker 1: what does packing the court mean? What does that term mean. 105 00:06:16,120 --> 00:06:19,760 Speaker 1: It's a term that everyone is understood for a hundred years. 106 00:06:20,800 --> 00:06:26,280 Speaker 1: It is expanding the number of justices in order to 107 00:06:26,320 --> 00:06:28,800 Speaker 1: put your political supporters on there. So it's changing the 108 00:06:28,880 --> 00:06:32,000 Speaker 1: number of justices in the court. Yea. So a couple 109 00:06:32,040 --> 00:06:34,520 Speaker 1: interesting things on this number. One, the number of justices 110 00:06:34,520 --> 00:06:36,920 Speaker 1: in the court is not specified the constitution. Well, this 111 00:06:37,000 --> 00:06:39,760 Speaker 1: is something that the left wingers have been bringing up. 112 00:06:39,800 --> 00:06:43,320 Speaker 1: They say, look, there's no constitutional requirement that it be 113 00:06:43,400 --> 00:06:45,680 Speaker 1: nine judges. So come on, we've changed the number of 114 00:06:45,760 --> 00:06:48,839 Speaker 1: judges before. What's the big deal. You're making a mountain 115 00:06:48,839 --> 00:06:52,400 Speaker 1: out of a molehill. And it has varied anywhere from 116 00:06:52,440 --> 00:06:56,479 Speaker 1: five justices to as many as ten. And for the 117 00:06:56,600 --> 00:06:59,000 Speaker 1: first one hundred years or so of our country's history, 118 00:07:00,800 --> 00:07:05,000 Speaker 1: the number of justices largely followed the number of Court 119 00:07:05,040 --> 00:07:08,159 Speaker 1: of appeals circuits there were. The idea was each Supreme 120 00:07:08,200 --> 00:07:12,160 Speaker 1: Court justice was the circuit justice for that particular court 121 00:07:12,160 --> 00:07:15,680 Speaker 1: of appeal. So as Congress added another court of appeals, 122 00:07:16,280 --> 00:07:20,400 Speaker 1: they added another justice. It's been at nine though for 123 00:07:20,400 --> 00:07:24,720 Speaker 1: one hundred and fifty years, so really kind of Civil 124 00:07:24,760 --> 00:07:28,960 Speaker 1: War era forward. It hasn't moved, and nine has been steady. 125 00:07:29,000 --> 00:07:31,440 Speaker 1: Now they're thirteen courts of appeals, but there's still only 126 00:07:31,520 --> 00:07:35,360 Speaker 1: nine justices. It's been steady. And the most famous instance 127 00:07:35,520 --> 00:07:38,160 Speaker 1: of court packing as the one Joe Biden was talking 128 00:07:38,160 --> 00:07:39,880 Speaker 1: about in the clip we played a few minutes ago, 129 00:07:40,480 --> 00:07:47,040 Speaker 1: which is FDR so FDR four termed dominant Democratic President, 130 00:07:48,280 --> 00:07:51,640 Speaker 1: Great Depression, pushing, trying to push through his new deal, 131 00:07:51,680 --> 00:07:53,960 Speaker 1: and he was finding different components of the new deal 132 00:07:54,000 --> 00:07:57,760 Speaker 1: struck down by the Supreme Court, and he was really frustrated. 133 00:07:57,760 --> 00:08:03,160 Speaker 1: He was really angry, and he proposed to pack the court. 134 00:08:03,280 --> 00:08:08,280 Speaker 1: His plan was for each justice over a certain age, 135 00:08:08,320 --> 00:08:10,720 Speaker 1: I forget if it was seventy or seventy five, I 136 00:08:10,760 --> 00:08:13,960 Speaker 1: think it's seventy or thereabout, but that there would be 137 00:08:13,960 --> 00:08:16,000 Speaker 1: a new justice appointed, so you wouldn't kick the old 138 00:08:16,000 --> 00:08:18,520 Speaker 1: ones off. You'd just appoint a new one for all 139 00:08:18,560 --> 00:08:22,720 Speaker 1: the old guys. And that would have immediately taken the 140 00:08:22,760 --> 00:08:27,760 Speaker 1: court up to I think fifteen. And it was interesting. 141 00:08:27,840 --> 00:08:31,760 Speaker 1: Number one, the Democratic Congress, there were big Democratic majorities 142 00:08:31,760 --> 00:08:34,760 Speaker 1: of both houses. They said, this is too much. We're 143 00:08:34,800 --> 00:08:36,520 Speaker 1: not going that far. We're not going to do it 144 00:08:37,679 --> 00:08:41,280 Speaker 1: now history and so they resisted. They said it would 145 00:08:41,280 --> 00:08:43,640 Speaker 1: destroy the independence. They actually agreed with what Joe Biden 146 00:08:43,679 --> 00:08:45,440 Speaker 1: just said, that it would destroy the independence of the court, 147 00:08:45,440 --> 00:08:51,760 Speaker 1: it would politicize the court. One interesting thing about that fight, though, 148 00:08:51,880 --> 00:08:55,200 Speaker 1: is actually history in many ways FDR may have won 149 00:08:55,320 --> 00:08:58,920 Speaker 1: that fight anyway. So at least the good news here 150 00:08:59,000 --> 00:09:02,880 Speaker 1: is though FDR try to stack the courts and pack 151 00:09:02,960 --> 00:09:05,920 Speaker 1: the churts rather, and he loses, So then the issue 152 00:09:05,960 --> 00:09:09,480 Speaker 1: goes away for a while. Right, Well, yes, and no, um, 153 00:09:09,679 --> 00:09:12,400 Speaker 1: he lost the fight to pack the court. But but 154 00:09:12,520 --> 00:09:15,160 Speaker 1: actually history shows in many ways he won the political fight. 155 00:09:16,240 --> 00:09:19,679 Speaker 1: So there had been five justices who were striking down 156 00:09:20,000 --> 00:09:25,240 Speaker 1: multiple New Deal programs, and when he introduced the court 157 00:09:25,320 --> 00:09:32,719 Speaker 1: packing legislation, one of those justices, a justice named Owen Roberts, 158 00:09:32,720 --> 00:09:39,920 Speaker 1: switched his vote and it's it's referred to as the 159 00:09:40,000 --> 00:09:45,920 Speaker 1: switch in time that saved nine because he had Justice 160 00:09:46,000 --> 00:09:50,240 Speaker 1: Roberts had been voting with four other justices. The four 161 00:09:50,240 --> 00:09:53,960 Speaker 1: others were known as the four Horsemen, which was not 162 00:09:54,080 --> 00:09:59,440 Speaker 1: meant to be a compliment, and and Roberts switched his 163 00:09:59,559 --> 00:10:03,920 Speaker 1: vote in nineteen thirty seven in a case that upheld 164 00:10:03,960 --> 00:10:06,959 Speaker 1: the minimum wage laws from the state of Washington State. 165 00:10:07,880 --> 00:10:15,480 Speaker 1: And there's some dispute among historians about whether Robert switched 166 00:10:15,520 --> 00:10:17,880 Speaker 1: his vote because of the court packing plan or not, 167 00:10:19,280 --> 00:10:22,400 Speaker 1: but whether he did or not, before the plan, there 168 00:10:22,400 --> 00:10:27,400 Speaker 1: were five justices ruling regularly against FDR. Once FDR launched 169 00:10:27,440 --> 00:10:30,640 Speaker 1: a full on assault on the court, it switched and 170 00:10:31,360 --> 00:10:34,080 Speaker 1: they began rolling over for a whole lot more so, 171 00:10:34,200 --> 00:10:39,000 Speaker 1: either way, the independence of the Court was I think 172 00:10:39,040 --> 00:10:44,679 Speaker 1: substantially jeopardized even by the proposal of court packing, and 173 00:10:44,720 --> 00:10:49,319 Speaker 1: I think that lesson has a lot of powerful significance 174 00:10:49,840 --> 00:10:52,040 Speaker 1: for where we are today. I think part of the 175 00:10:52,080 --> 00:10:56,400 Speaker 1: reason Democrats are threatening court packing is a. I think 176 00:10:56,440 --> 00:11:00,720 Speaker 1: they mean it and they'll do it, But B I 177 00:11:00,760 --> 00:11:03,520 Speaker 1: think they're also perfectly happy to try to intimidate the 178 00:11:03,520 --> 00:11:08,880 Speaker 1: current justices. You know, we've seen John Roberts flipping his 179 00:11:08,960 --> 00:11:11,640 Speaker 1: votes in a bunch of cases lately in voting with 180 00:11:11,679 --> 00:11:16,120 Speaker 1: the liberals, and and in fact, Sheldon Whitehouse, a colleague 181 00:11:16,120 --> 00:11:20,640 Speaker 1: of mine on the Judiciary Committee, wrote a letter to 182 00:11:20,679 --> 00:11:24,160 Speaker 1: the Supreme Court in in a gun control case, basically 183 00:11:24,200 --> 00:11:26,400 Speaker 1: threatening the Court that if they didn't do what he wanted, 184 00:11:26,840 --> 00:11:28,800 Speaker 1: they would have to. I think the phrase he used 185 00:11:28,840 --> 00:11:33,080 Speaker 1: was restructure the court, but it was a threat of 186 00:11:33,240 --> 00:11:36,760 Speaker 1: court packing. And what's interesting, and part of the reason 187 00:11:36,800 --> 00:11:38,959 Speaker 1: I believe that this threat is real, this is not 188 00:11:39,080 --> 00:11:42,680 Speaker 1: you know, there's some folks in the media, some folks 189 00:11:43,800 --> 00:11:46,240 Speaker 1: who think, gosh, they really wouldn't do that. That seems 190 00:11:46,240 --> 00:11:50,040 Speaker 1: really radical. The biggest indication to me that they really 191 00:11:50,120 --> 00:11:53,560 Speaker 1: mean it is there is a concerted effort among Democrats 192 00:11:53,559 --> 00:11:56,960 Speaker 1: and the media to redefine what it means to pack 193 00:11:57,040 --> 00:12:01,040 Speaker 1: the court, right right. So you know, we've talked about 194 00:12:01,080 --> 00:12:06,080 Speaker 1: before the incredible message discipline that Democrats have. About a 195 00:12:06,080 --> 00:12:08,760 Speaker 1: week ago, the talking point went out that every Democrat 196 00:12:08,800 --> 00:12:11,720 Speaker 1: began repeating, which is, well, the Republicans have been packing 197 00:12:11,720 --> 00:12:15,520 Speaker 1: the court for four years. Well, that's not actually what 198 00:12:15,760 --> 00:12:19,760 Speaker 1: packing the court means. Filling vacancies when there's a vacancy, 199 00:12:19,760 --> 00:12:23,800 Speaker 1: appointing a justice, confirming the justice. That's not packing the court. 200 00:12:24,640 --> 00:12:28,680 Speaker 1: Packing the court is expanding the number of justices to 201 00:12:28,800 --> 00:12:31,040 Speaker 1: put your cronies on there. It's a very different thing, 202 00:12:31,080 --> 00:12:35,320 Speaker 1: and they're trying to You're seeing the media exercise this theme, 203 00:12:35,360 --> 00:12:37,880 Speaker 1: and I think it's all set up to have it 204 00:12:38,000 --> 00:12:41,280 Speaker 1: be the predicate for next year to say, well, judge 205 00:12:41,280 --> 00:12:45,120 Speaker 1: Barrett was illegitimate. Trump packed the court already, so we 206 00:12:45,240 --> 00:12:50,440 Speaker 1: just need to actually ap that. They recently wrote an 207 00:12:50,520 --> 00:12:55,120 Speaker 1: article where they said to depoliticize the court. So so 208 00:12:55,160 --> 00:12:57,880 Speaker 1: you want to talk about an Orwellian term packing the court, 209 00:12:59,000 --> 00:13:02,880 Speaker 1: adding new left injustices and growing it beyond nine to 210 00:13:03,000 --> 00:13:06,680 Speaker 1: I don't know, eleven thirteen. Wherever they go is, according 211 00:13:06,720 --> 00:13:11,440 Speaker 1: to the Associated Press, is depoliticizing the court, the AP 212 00:13:11,600 --> 00:13:15,520 Speaker 1: wrote this week, and it went on to say, which 213 00:13:15,600 --> 00:13:20,520 Speaker 1: some critics have referred to as packing, Well, no, actually 214 00:13:21,040 --> 00:13:25,560 Speaker 1: everybody referred to it as packing. Of course, the term 215 00:13:25,600 --> 00:13:29,360 Speaker 1: court packing is much older than the term depoliticizing. So 216 00:13:29,520 --> 00:13:31,280 Speaker 1: what you're telling me, because I was just about to 217 00:13:31,320 --> 00:13:34,719 Speaker 1: celebrate when you told me there was a Democrat surrender 218 00:13:34,720 --> 00:13:37,319 Speaker 1: on Amy Coney Barrett today, I thought, oh gosh, this 219 00:13:37,360 --> 00:13:39,720 Speaker 1: is good news. We finally got to win here. But 220 00:13:39,760 --> 00:13:43,239 Speaker 1: what you're suggesting is this may have been a tactical surrender. 221 00:13:43,360 --> 00:13:45,480 Speaker 1: They've got no dirt on Barrett. They're not going to 222 00:13:45,559 --> 00:13:48,040 Speaker 1: stop this nomination. It would maybe hurt them if they did, 223 00:13:48,280 --> 00:13:51,360 Speaker 1: but they are going to use the confirmation of Judge 224 00:13:51,360 --> 00:13:55,920 Speaker 1: Barrett as another excuse for court packing, which you know 225 00:13:56,120 --> 00:13:58,680 Speaker 1: we played it earlier. Joe Biden in the nineteen eighties 226 00:13:58,720 --> 00:14:01,120 Speaker 1: may have said that he thought it a bone headed scheme. 227 00:14:01,320 --> 00:14:04,520 Speaker 1: But don't forget Joe Biden has changed his views one 228 00:14:04,559 --> 00:14:07,880 Speaker 1: hundred eighty degrees multiple times over the course of his career. 229 00:14:08,559 --> 00:14:12,359 Speaker 1: You saw this actually during the George HW. Bush administration, 230 00:14:12,640 --> 00:14:15,079 Speaker 1: where he said it would be a terrible idea to 231 00:14:15,120 --> 00:14:17,760 Speaker 1: nominate and confirm a judge, a Supreme Court justice in 232 00:14:17,800 --> 00:14:20,480 Speaker 1: an election year. Then fast forward to twenty sixteen, he said, 233 00:14:20,520 --> 00:14:23,160 Speaker 1: it is absolutely essential that we nominate and confirm a 234 00:14:23,200 --> 00:14:25,320 Speaker 1: Supreme Court justice in an election year. Fast forward to 235 00:14:25,320 --> 00:14:28,240 Speaker 1: twenty twenty. He's flipped on this again. So I see 236 00:14:28,240 --> 00:14:31,080 Speaker 1: there's no reason not to suspect something similar would hold 237 00:14:31,520 --> 00:14:33,880 Speaker 1: for the question of court packing. Well, it's not just 238 00:14:33,960 --> 00:14:38,000 Speaker 1: Joe Biden that's changes views. Practically every Democrat has. I 239 00:14:38,240 --> 00:14:40,400 Speaker 1: read a number of these statements today at the questioning 240 00:14:40,880 --> 00:14:45,320 Speaker 1: Pat Lahey in twenty seventeen. Quote, the Judiciary Committee once 241 00:14:45,360 --> 00:14:48,320 Speaker 1: stood against a court packing scheme that would have eroded 242 00:14:48,680 --> 00:14:53,840 Speaker 1: judicial independence. That was a proud moment. Dick Blumenthal twenty eighteen, 243 00:14:54,520 --> 00:14:57,560 Speaker 1: commenting on the nineteen thirty seven Judiciary Committee statement that 244 00:14:58,040 --> 00:15:00,720 Speaker 1: it is a measure which we should be which should 245 00:15:00,720 --> 00:15:05,760 Speaker 1: be so emphatically rejected that its parallel will never again 246 00:15:05,840 --> 00:15:09,600 Speaker 1: be presented to the free representatives of the free people 247 00:15:09,640 --> 00:15:14,440 Speaker 1: of America. That was two years ago. Dick Durban twenty eighteen. 248 00:15:14,560 --> 00:15:17,440 Speaker 1: Seventy five years ago, we went through this, and I 249 00:15:17,480 --> 00:15:21,640 Speaker 1: think the Congress was correct in stopping this popular president 250 00:15:22,000 --> 00:15:26,280 Speaker 1: named Franklin Roosevelt from that idea. And Ruth Bader Ginsburg 251 00:15:26,720 --> 00:15:29,920 Speaker 1: in twenty nineteen, just last year, here's what Justice Ginsburg said. 252 00:15:30,480 --> 00:15:33,000 Speaker 1: She said, if anything would make the Court look partisan, 253 00:15:33,480 --> 00:15:36,800 Speaker 1: it would be that one side saying we're in power, 254 00:15:37,480 --> 00:15:40,400 Speaker 1: we're going to enlarge the number of judges. Notice she 255 00:15:40,440 --> 00:15:43,280 Speaker 1: knows what packing is, so that we would have more 256 00:15:43,320 --> 00:15:45,240 Speaker 1: people who would vote the way we want them to. 257 00:15:45,400 --> 00:15:48,680 Speaker 1: And she went on to say nine seems to be 258 00:15:48,720 --> 00:15:51,760 Speaker 1: a good number. It's been that way for a long time. 259 00:15:51,800 --> 00:15:54,760 Speaker 1: I think it was a bad idea when President Franklin 260 00:15:54,840 --> 00:15:59,440 Speaker 1: Roosevelt tried to pack the court. They all agreed with 261 00:15:59,480 --> 00:16:06,560 Speaker 1: this until they got very unhappy with the president's judicial 262 00:16:06,600 --> 00:16:10,840 Speaker 1: nominations for the vacancies. That he had, and at this point, 263 00:16:10,880 --> 00:16:13,960 Speaker 1: I think it is all about power, and it's all 264 00:16:14,000 --> 00:16:16,640 Speaker 1: about you know, we talked yesterday in the podcast about 265 00:16:16,720 --> 00:16:20,520 Speaker 1: I went through the litany of constitutional rights that are 266 00:16:20,560 --> 00:16:22,640 Speaker 1: hanging in the balance, that are one vote away, a lot, 267 00:16:23,240 --> 00:16:25,200 Speaker 1: all the different rights that I talk about in my 268 00:16:25,200 --> 00:16:28,440 Speaker 1: book one vote away, religious liberty, free speech, the Second Amendment, 269 00:16:28,720 --> 00:16:31,640 Speaker 1: and I explained in the hearing how every one of 270 00:16:31,680 --> 00:16:35,240 Speaker 1: those rights was hanging in the balance. You know what's amazing, Michael, 271 00:16:35,800 --> 00:16:38,800 Speaker 1: both yesterday and today, not a single Democrat disagreed with me, 272 00:16:39,280 --> 00:16:41,360 Speaker 1: Not a single one of them argued on the merits, 273 00:16:41,640 --> 00:16:43,880 Speaker 1: not a single one of them made the case for 274 00:16:44,000 --> 00:16:48,120 Speaker 1: what their radical justices actually want to do taking away 275 00:16:48,120 --> 00:16:52,680 Speaker 1: those constitutional liberties. Instead, this is about brute power. I 276 00:16:52,720 --> 00:16:56,720 Speaker 1: think they recognize they can't stop it now. So their 277 00:16:56,800 --> 00:16:58,920 Speaker 1: plan and their hope is they win in November and 278 00:16:58,960 --> 00:17:01,040 Speaker 1: then they use brute power to just grow the court 279 00:17:01,280 --> 00:17:06,159 Speaker 1: and force in radicals who will mandate their view of 280 00:17:06,200 --> 00:17:08,919 Speaker 1: policy from the court. Well, I want to ask you 281 00:17:09,000 --> 00:17:12,800 Speaker 1: about one particular example of the exercise of brute power, 282 00:17:13,000 --> 00:17:18,000 Speaker 1: which today frankly completely overshadowed the confirmation hearings. That was 283 00:17:18,320 --> 00:17:21,439 Speaker 1: the matter of big tech censoring. A new report just 284 00:17:21,480 --> 00:17:24,760 Speaker 1: came out from the New York Post. It showed emails 285 00:17:25,520 --> 00:17:29,680 Speaker 1: between Hunter Biden and one of his oligarch pals over 286 00:17:29,720 --> 00:17:33,080 Speaker 1: in Ukraine. We've talked at length on this podcast about 287 00:17:33,200 --> 00:17:36,680 Speaker 1: the shady business connections between Hunter Biden and these Ukraine 288 00:17:36,840 --> 00:17:41,840 Speaker 1: energy companies and oligarchs. An email suggesting that Hunter Biden 289 00:17:41,920 --> 00:17:44,960 Speaker 1: not only discussed this issue with Joe Biden, but actually 290 00:17:45,000 --> 00:17:49,040 Speaker 1: introduced the Ukrainian oligarch to Joe Biden. This is very 291 00:17:49,040 --> 00:17:54,119 Speaker 1: explosive stuff during a presidential campaign. Big tech platforms Facebook 292 00:17:54,160 --> 00:17:59,080 Speaker 1: and Twitter censored the New York Post report. They offered 293 00:17:59,200 --> 00:18:02,679 Speaker 1: no evidence to the contrary, They had no reason to 294 00:18:02,720 --> 00:18:06,200 Speaker 1: suggest that this was not real. They simply said this 295 00:18:06,240 --> 00:18:09,600 Speaker 1: could be damaging information, damaging to whom, damaging of course, 296 00:18:09,760 --> 00:18:12,679 Speaker 1: to the Biden campaign. And the craziest part of it 297 00:18:12,720 --> 00:18:16,639 Speaker 1: all is it worked. It didn't work to stop the conversation, 298 00:18:16,840 --> 00:18:20,879 Speaker 1: but it worked to stop the spread of this particular 299 00:18:20,960 --> 00:18:24,920 Speaker 1: link throughout big tech. I you know, we've criticized big 300 00:18:24,920 --> 00:18:28,200 Speaker 1: tech on this show before. I did not know that 301 00:18:28,240 --> 00:18:32,600 Speaker 1: those companies would take election interference to this kind of 302 00:18:32,600 --> 00:18:35,720 Speaker 1: a dangerous extent. I don't know if this New York 303 00:18:35,760 --> 00:18:37,440 Speaker 1: Post story is true or not, but it was really 304 00:18:37,480 --> 00:18:41,080 Speaker 1: quite stunning. This afternoon. Both Twitter and Facebook just decided 305 00:18:41,880 --> 00:18:44,280 Speaker 1: we're going to block this story. And by the way, 306 00:18:44,560 --> 00:18:46,639 Speaker 1: so they would block it a if you tweeted it, 307 00:18:47,359 --> 00:18:49,119 Speaker 1: if you tweeted it, if I tweeted it, and you 308 00:18:49,160 --> 00:18:51,600 Speaker 1: linked to the story, if you tried to click on 309 00:18:51,640 --> 00:18:54,399 Speaker 1: the link, you'd get a warning on Twitter that that 310 00:18:54,800 --> 00:18:59,480 Speaker 1: this link has content that may be harmful. Well maybe 311 00:18:59,520 --> 00:19:03,560 Speaker 1: harmful to Joe Biden's political prospects, but it's not. And 312 00:19:03,760 --> 00:19:06,480 Speaker 1: not only that they did something which which I don't 313 00:19:06,520 --> 00:19:11,800 Speaker 1: recall seeing them have the cajoness to do before that 314 00:19:11,960 --> 00:19:17,080 Speaker 1: being a Cuban term, I'll look it up, which is 315 00:19:17,119 --> 00:19:19,800 Speaker 1: they banned the New York Post itself, so the New 316 00:19:19,840 --> 00:19:22,920 Speaker 1: York Post published or the Post was, and the Post 317 00:19:22,960 --> 00:19:25,480 Speaker 1: has one of the largest circulations of any newspaper in 318 00:19:25,520 --> 00:19:30,719 Speaker 1: the country. I mean, this is not you know, Bob's newsletter. 319 00:19:30,800 --> 00:19:35,960 Speaker 1: This is the New York frigging Post. And they blocked 320 00:19:36,800 --> 00:19:39,800 Speaker 1: the Post from tweeting out their own story. And mind you, 321 00:19:39,960 --> 00:19:42,600 Speaker 1: neither Twitter or Facebook say it's false. Neither of them have. 322 00:19:42,920 --> 00:19:45,600 Speaker 1: They don't have any evidence that it's inaccurate. They simply 323 00:19:46,600 --> 00:19:52,920 Speaker 1: made the unaccountable decision, the arrogant decision. We will not 324 00:19:53,080 --> 00:19:56,960 Speaker 1: allow this to be shared discussed, and you, the press, 325 00:19:57,560 --> 00:20:00,480 Speaker 1: can't even put out your own stories. And it was 326 00:20:00,560 --> 00:20:06,960 Speaker 1: so brazen Senator staffer in communications at Facebook who made 327 00:20:06,960 --> 00:20:09,320 Speaker 1: this decision to suppress the information. He ended up tweeting 328 00:20:09,320 --> 00:20:11,359 Speaker 1: about it. I looked up his bio. Do you know 329 00:20:11,400 --> 00:20:14,400 Speaker 1: what his jobs were before he started working at Facebook. 330 00:20:14,640 --> 00:20:18,480 Speaker 1: He worked for Democratic political action committees, He worked for 331 00:20:18,680 --> 00:20:22,520 Speaker 1: Democratic elected politicians. He is a Democrat operative at a 332 00:20:22,640 --> 00:20:27,919 Speaker 1: supposedly neutral tech platform, using that neutral tech platform to 333 00:20:28,119 --> 00:20:31,880 Speaker 1: suppress damaging information about Democrats mere weeks to an election. 334 00:20:32,200 --> 00:20:35,640 Speaker 1: How can we permit that to continue? So he has 335 00:20:35,680 --> 00:20:38,919 Speaker 1: on his Twitter bio that he is an alum of 336 00:20:39,200 --> 00:20:44,359 Speaker 1: California Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer's office, So not just any Democrat, 337 00:20:44,400 --> 00:20:46,879 Speaker 1: but one of the most partisan left wing Democrats to 338 00:20:46,920 --> 00:20:49,600 Speaker 1: ever serve. And he's also an alama of the d 339 00:20:49,720 --> 00:20:52,679 Speaker 1: Triple See, which is the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. It 340 00:20:52,760 --> 00:20:56,000 Speaker 1: is literally their political arm who exists for one purpose 341 00:20:56,000 --> 00:21:00,280 Speaker 1: to elect Democratic members of Congress. That's the Facebook spokesperson 342 00:21:01,160 --> 00:21:04,320 Speaker 1: explaining their decision. We're going to silence that nothing to 343 00:21:04,320 --> 00:21:07,720 Speaker 1: see here. So I sent today letters to the CEOs 344 00:21:07,720 --> 00:21:11,520 Speaker 1: of both Facebook and Twitter as chairman of the Constitution 345 00:21:11,560 --> 00:21:15,000 Speaker 1: Subcommittee the Senate Judiciary Committee, setting out a series of 346 00:21:15,080 --> 00:21:18,639 Speaker 1: questions asking them who made the decision, what was the 347 00:21:18,680 --> 00:21:21,880 Speaker 1: basis for it? What other news sites you have you 348 00:21:22,600 --> 00:21:24,760 Speaker 1: blocked and silenced? Have you ever blocked the New York 349 00:21:24,760 --> 00:21:27,000 Speaker 1: Times or even blocked the Washington Post? Have you ever 350 00:21:27,040 --> 00:21:29,719 Speaker 1: blocked anything damaging and Donald Trump? Or is it only 351 00:21:30,359 --> 00:21:32,560 Speaker 1: stories that you think are damaging of Joe Biden that 352 00:21:32,600 --> 00:21:35,800 Speaker 1: you're going to block? And what's interesting about this? You 353 00:21:36,119 --> 00:21:39,280 Speaker 1: said a minute ago, Well, you know they were able 354 00:21:39,280 --> 00:21:41,560 Speaker 1: to succeed in this. I actually think they screwed up. 355 00:21:41,600 --> 00:21:46,280 Speaker 1: I think their arrogance is their pitfall, because this is 356 00:21:46,320 --> 00:21:50,000 Speaker 1: now a ten times bigger story because they blocked it. 357 00:21:50,640 --> 00:21:52,600 Speaker 1: Then if they just ignored it, if they'd let people 358 00:21:52,640 --> 00:21:55,919 Speaker 1: tweet about it. Look, one of the challenges and we 359 00:21:56,000 --> 00:22:00,879 Speaker 1: find this, you know, when we did the podcasts talking 360 00:22:00,920 --> 00:22:06,480 Speaker 1: about James Komi and you know, all the Russia Gate 361 00:22:06,480 --> 00:22:09,080 Speaker 1: and everything, people are tired of it. They're just there, 362 00:22:09,800 --> 00:22:12,640 Speaker 1: all the names and Brennan and Coomy, and it's complicated 363 00:22:12,800 --> 00:22:14,680 Speaker 1: and people want to tune it out and it's noise, 364 00:22:14,680 --> 00:22:17,320 Speaker 1: and I get it. I look, I do this for 365 00:22:17,359 --> 00:22:19,600 Speaker 1: a living, and it's hard to follow all this stuff. 366 00:22:20,960 --> 00:22:24,040 Speaker 1: I think this story could very easily have faded into 367 00:22:24,080 --> 00:22:27,320 Speaker 1: that kind of mist of noise. I'm not sure what 368 00:22:27,400 --> 00:22:30,439 Speaker 1: Bisma is anymore, a Ukraine or Biden whatever, hunter Biden, 369 00:22:32,040 --> 00:22:33,720 Speaker 1: and I'm not sure it would have gotten a whole 370 00:22:33,760 --> 00:22:36,080 Speaker 1: lot of attention beyond right wingers who are already are 371 00:22:36,080 --> 00:22:37,960 Speaker 1: going to vote for Trump. But I'm not sure it 372 00:22:38,000 --> 00:22:41,240 Speaker 1: would have gotten a lot of attention beyond that except 373 00:22:41,240 --> 00:22:44,320 Speaker 1: for Twitter and Facebook. Sensory it where you're sitting there 374 00:22:44,320 --> 00:22:48,960 Speaker 1: going okay. If they can block a major newspaper a 375 00:22:49,000 --> 00:22:53,679 Speaker 1: couple of weeks before presidential election publishing what purports to 376 00:22:53,720 --> 00:22:57,720 Speaker 1: be evidence of corruption at the very highest level of politics, 377 00:22:58,200 --> 00:23:00,399 Speaker 1: that's a big, frigate deal, and I think it actually 378 00:23:00,440 --> 00:23:04,239 Speaker 1: backfired on them. And it's frankly that itself is a 379 00:23:04,240 --> 00:23:09,280 Speaker 1: bigger story, perhaps even than Joe Biden's potentially corrupt dealings 380 00:23:09,280 --> 00:23:12,840 Speaker 1: with Ukraine. The idea that a few oligarchs in Silicon 381 00:23:12,960 --> 00:23:16,280 Speaker 1: Valley are now going to control effectively the public sphere, 382 00:23:16,480 --> 00:23:19,200 Speaker 1: the control of information around the Internet, interfering in an 383 00:23:19,200 --> 00:23:21,280 Speaker 1: election in a way that the Russians could only have 384 00:23:21,400 --> 00:23:23,440 Speaker 1: dreamed of. They would never have been able to interfere 385 00:23:23,560 --> 00:23:27,120 Speaker 1: to that regard. Is there something that we can do? 386 00:23:27,280 --> 00:23:30,760 Speaker 1: I mean, obviously the Democrats control the House, the Republicans 387 00:23:30,760 --> 00:23:32,960 Speaker 1: have the Senate and the White House for now, hopefully 388 00:23:33,000 --> 00:23:35,640 Speaker 1: that continues. Is there anything that we can do or 389 00:23:35,880 --> 00:23:39,000 Speaker 1: are we basically at the whims of these Silicon Valley 390 00:23:39,080 --> 00:23:41,680 Speaker 1: masters of the universe. So there's a lot we can do. 391 00:23:41,720 --> 00:23:43,880 Speaker 1: As you know, I've been leading the charge on this 392 00:23:43,960 --> 00:23:47,239 Speaker 1: for several years. The most of the action that can 393 00:23:47,280 --> 00:23:49,720 Speaker 1: be done on this is in the executive branch. So 394 00:23:49,800 --> 00:23:53,719 Speaker 1: I have met and talked with on this topic, President Trump, 395 00:23:53,840 --> 00:23:56,080 Speaker 1: Vice President Pence, the White House Chief of Staff, the 396 00:23:56,080 --> 00:23:59,440 Speaker 1: White House Council, Attorney General Bill Barr, the Deputy Attorney General, 397 00:24:00,000 --> 00:24:02,439 Speaker 1: Sistant Attorney General for the Anti Trust Division, the chairman 398 00:24:02,440 --> 00:24:04,720 Speaker 1: of the Federal Trade Commission. I've urged all of them 399 00:24:05,240 --> 00:24:09,160 Speaker 1: to use the enforcement power of the executive branch. Look, 400 00:24:09,160 --> 00:24:13,240 Speaker 1: in Congress, we don't have the ability to impanel grand jury. 401 00:24:13,359 --> 00:24:19,720 Speaker 1: We don't have the ability to bring indictments. The authority 402 00:24:19,840 --> 00:24:23,880 Speaker 1: to enforce the law is with the executive branch, and 403 00:24:23,960 --> 00:24:26,479 Speaker 1: so I've shared multiple hearings, I shine a light on it, 404 00:24:26,520 --> 00:24:28,240 Speaker 1: but at the end of the day, the executive has 405 00:24:28,240 --> 00:24:33,280 Speaker 1: to move. And one of the challenges at DJ is 406 00:24:33,640 --> 00:24:36,600 Speaker 1: it tends to be very siloed, where the Antitrust Division 407 00:24:36,640 --> 00:24:39,240 Speaker 1: thinks about anti trust issues, the Civil Division thinks about 408 00:24:39,280 --> 00:24:43,320 Speaker 1: civil issues, and each little silo. This challenge of tech 409 00:24:43,440 --> 00:24:48,560 Speaker 1: censorship is a new creature and it doesn't fit neatly 410 00:24:48,640 --> 00:24:53,160 Speaker 1: into any of those silos. And so I've been I've 411 00:24:53,200 --> 00:24:56,400 Speaker 1: had multiple conversations with bar about it. I hope DOJ 412 00:24:57,480 --> 00:25:00,400 Speaker 1: is willing to press forward, but I'm frustrated. We're four 413 00:25:00,440 --> 00:25:02,480 Speaker 1: years into it, and I know the President's frustrated with it. 414 00:25:02,520 --> 00:25:06,800 Speaker 1: I've had multiple conversations with him. I also think Section 415 00:25:06,840 --> 00:25:10,120 Speaker 1: two thirty, the special immunity from my ability that Congress 416 00:25:10,160 --> 00:25:13,720 Speaker 1: has given big tech, is plainly failing. That that was 417 00:25:13,800 --> 00:25:17,040 Speaker 1: based on the notion that these big tech entities would 418 00:25:17,040 --> 00:25:20,760 Speaker 1: be neutral public flora. They're not anymore. They're not pretending. 419 00:25:20,760 --> 00:25:24,919 Speaker 1: Just today alone, I think obliterated that pretense. There is 420 00:25:25,000 --> 00:25:27,200 Speaker 1: no way that you can argue when you are interfering 421 00:25:27,240 --> 00:25:30,280 Speaker 1: weeks before an election for one political party over another 422 00:25:30,359 --> 00:25:32,520 Speaker 1: there is no way that you can argue that you 423 00:25:32,560 --> 00:25:36,240 Speaker 1: are a neutral tech platform. Yeah, although I will say 424 00:25:36,280 --> 00:25:39,040 Speaker 1: it all comes down to the election, because if if, 425 00:25:39,359 --> 00:25:43,000 Speaker 1: if we start next year with Biden, Schumer, and Pelosi, 426 00:25:43,040 --> 00:25:45,560 Speaker 1: they're not going to do a damn thing about big tech. Huh. 427 00:25:45,640 --> 00:25:48,679 Speaker 1: They want big tech to censor your speech. So not 428 00:25:48,680 --> 00:25:50,960 Speaker 1: only are they going to go after your speech through 429 00:25:50,960 --> 00:25:53,120 Speaker 1: the Supreme Court, but they're also going to go after 430 00:25:53,119 --> 00:25:56,240 Speaker 1: your speech through a big tech You know, we had 431 00:25:56,280 --> 00:25:59,760 Speaker 1: a couple of years ago Mark Zuckerberg testify before Judiciary, 432 00:25:59,760 --> 00:26:03,720 Speaker 1: Can and Commerce Committee, and it was this monstrosity of 433 00:26:03,760 --> 00:26:06,560 Speaker 1: a joint committee meeting where there were forty some odd 434 00:26:06,600 --> 00:26:14,000 Speaker 1: Senators and it was it was striking in that virtually 435 00:26:14,040 --> 00:26:17,800 Speaker 1: every senator, Democrat and Republican was critical of Zuckerberg and 436 00:26:18,280 --> 00:26:20,840 Speaker 1: big tech. And it should have gotten the nervous weight. 437 00:26:20,840 --> 00:26:23,720 Speaker 1: Why is everyone pissed at us? This is dangerous. But 438 00:26:23,840 --> 00:26:26,240 Speaker 1: if you listen to what they were saying, the two 439 00:26:26,280 --> 00:26:31,760 Speaker 1: sides were pissed for very different reasons. Republicans, at least 440 00:26:33,640 --> 00:26:36,640 Speaker 1: some of the Republicans, were upset at the censorship, at 441 00:26:36,640 --> 00:26:39,320 Speaker 1: the abuse of power, at the silencing of dissenting views. 442 00:26:40,320 --> 00:26:44,280 Speaker 1: The Democrats were upset that they didn't censor more. The 443 00:26:44,400 --> 00:26:47,040 Speaker 1: Democrats were upset on the other side. And basically, if 444 00:26:47,040 --> 00:26:49,639 Speaker 1: I were to sum up the democrats argument at that hearing, 445 00:26:50,400 --> 00:26:52,520 Speaker 1: it was, how the hell did you let Donald Trump win? 446 00:26:53,480 --> 00:26:57,000 Speaker 1: How could you possibly let these crazy conservatives communicate on 447 00:26:57,040 --> 00:27:01,360 Speaker 1: your platform? Next time? Censor more? That's what the Democrats want. 448 00:27:01,400 --> 00:27:03,960 Speaker 1: So if they win, there's not going to be any 449 00:27:04,000 --> 00:27:06,440 Speaker 1: DJ enforcement. There's not going to be any enforcement of law. 450 00:27:06,920 --> 00:27:11,479 Speaker 1: If the Democrats win, Big tech is unchecked and it 451 00:27:11,520 --> 00:27:16,400 Speaker 1: is the oligarch's running things until another election changes things. 452 00:27:16,400 --> 00:27:19,639 Speaker 1: And so that's one of many reasons why I hope 453 00:27:20,160 --> 00:27:22,399 Speaker 1: we have a good election and Trump gets reelected, because 454 00:27:22,440 --> 00:27:26,919 Speaker 1: we need to address this is the biggest concentration of 455 00:27:26,960 --> 00:27:30,960 Speaker 1: power in the world of the median communication that the 456 00:27:31,000 --> 00:27:35,640 Speaker 1: world has ever seen. That's right, and it's an important 457 00:27:35,680 --> 00:27:38,640 Speaker 1: point you make that the election is the key here. 458 00:27:38,720 --> 00:27:41,960 Speaker 1: The twenty sixteen election is the impetus for so much 459 00:27:41,960 --> 00:27:44,800 Speaker 1: of this censorship. Now, this new censorship is coming down 460 00:27:44,840 --> 00:27:47,959 Speaker 1: to the twenty twenty election. If we want to control 461 00:27:48,040 --> 00:27:51,040 Speaker 1: our public sphere again, our public square again, we're going 462 00:27:51,080 --> 00:27:53,640 Speaker 1: to have to focus on those elections as well. Before 463 00:27:53,720 --> 00:27:55,880 Speaker 1: I let you go, Senator, I know you've worked now 464 00:27:56,040 --> 00:27:58,000 Speaker 1: what a twelve or fourteen hour day? But before I 465 00:27:58,080 --> 00:27:59,760 Speaker 1: let you go, I have to get to the mail back. 466 00:28:00,080 --> 00:28:02,359 Speaker 1: There's one question in particular that popped up that I 467 00:28:02,440 --> 00:28:04,919 Speaker 1: really want to hear your answer on This question is 468 00:28:04,960 --> 00:28:09,479 Speaker 1: from Steve Senator Cruz, what did you think of Jim 469 00:28:09,560 --> 00:28:16,440 Speaker 1: Carrey's portrait of you as a demon entering hell? It 470 00:28:16,520 --> 00:28:19,800 Speaker 1: was pretty surreal. Um, Look, Jim Carrey is a funny guy. 471 00:28:20,000 --> 00:28:27,119 Speaker 1: I love his movies. You know, Mask was hysterical. What 472 00:28:27,320 --> 00:28:29,680 Speaker 1: is the one where he plays the new newscaster becomes 473 00:28:29,720 --> 00:28:33,840 Speaker 1: god for for a period of Yes, Bruce Almighty, Bruce Almighty, 474 00:28:33,840 --> 00:28:38,400 Speaker 1: I mean Bruce Almighty is side splittingly funny. He's a 475 00:28:38,400 --> 00:28:43,520 Speaker 1: talented guy. He's gone hard, hard lefty, and he's actually 476 00:28:43,560 --> 00:28:48,600 Speaker 1: a pretty talented artist. He paints, but he paints the 477 00:28:48,800 --> 00:28:54,040 Speaker 1: sort of hard lefty, nasty. So he actually, back when 478 00:28:54,040 --> 00:28:56,600 Speaker 1: I was in my reelection campaign against Beto, he did 479 00:28:56,640 --> 00:28:59,680 Speaker 1: a painting of me that was really horrible, attacking. So 480 00:28:59,720 --> 00:29:01,680 Speaker 1: this is the second time he's painted me, which is 481 00:29:01,760 --> 00:29:04,160 Speaker 1: very odd that Jim Carrey is like So this this 482 00:29:04,280 --> 00:29:06,960 Speaker 1: second one, I'm like, bright red and looked like a 483 00:29:07,040 --> 00:29:10,960 Speaker 1: demon out of hell. And actually, I'll tell you I'll 484 00:29:10,960 --> 00:29:13,200 Speaker 1: answer this question by telling you the story as I 485 00:29:13,240 --> 00:29:16,240 Speaker 1: had the conversation with Caroline last night. So Caroline is 486 00:29:16,280 --> 00:29:21,160 Speaker 1: my twelve year old and she is a spirited girl, 487 00:29:23,040 --> 00:29:29,080 Speaker 1: and she was explaining she said, she said, Dad, I'm 488 00:29:29,160 --> 00:29:33,640 Speaker 1: really sarcastic. You wouldn't understand it because you're not sarcastic. Like, wait, 489 00:29:33,680 --> 00:29:35,440 Speaker 1: what do you mean? I'm not sarcastic. I'm a smart 490 00:29:35,480 --> 00:29:39,480 Speaker 1: alec all the time. Like what, like twelve year old, like, 491 00:29:39,520 --> 00:29:42,320 Speaker 1: you're not sarcastic? It actually kind of hurts. And she's 492 00:29:42,320 --> 00:29:44,560 Speaker 1: like when when have you ever been sarcastic? And then 493 00:29:44,600 --> 00:29:48,280 Speaker 1: you're just like, okay, all my like, dad, efforts here 494 00:29:48,080 --> 00:29:51,120 Speaker 1: are not succeeding. And I said, well, all right, I'll 495 00:29:51,120 --> 00:29:53,600 Speaker 1: give you an example. Caroline. I said, you know Jim 496 00:29:53,680 --> 00:29:55,960 Speaker 1: Carrey is. She's like, yeah, everyone knows who Jim Carrey is. 497 00:29:56,000 --> 00:29:58,280 Speaker 1: Of course I do. And I said, well, this week 498 00:29:58,360 --> 00:30:00,760 Speaker 1: he painted a picture of me as a devil and 499 00:30:00,840 --> 00:30:03,240 Speaker 1: a demon. She's like, what why would he do that? 500 00:30:03,320 --> 00:30:06,640 Speaker 1: So I actually texted her the demon devil thing, and 501 00:30:06,640 --> 00:30:09,960 Speaker 1: then what I tweeted the picture out and I said, hey, 502 00:30:10,040 --> 00:30:12,160 Speaker 1: Jim Carrey, can I get a copy this from my office? 503 00:30:13,920 --> 00:30:15,600 Speaker 1: And it was just kind of you know, I figured 504 00:30:15,720 --> 00:30:18,080 Speaker 1: embraced it, half fun and she's like, Dad, that's not sarcastic. 505 00:30:18,200 --> 00:30:23,000 Speaker 1: That's not that's not sarcastic at all. You're she was, 506 00:30:24,600 --> 00:30:26,720 Speaker 1: if you know how to impress the twelve year old, 507 00:30:26,800 --> 00:30:29,640 Speaker 1: please tell me my nine year old I can do 508 00:30:29,760 --> 00:30:31,840 Speaker 1: no wrong. My twelve year old I can do no right. 509 00:30:32,080 --> 00:30:36,959 Speaker 1: So so you know, Senator, everybody is a critic, from 510 00:30:37,120 --> 00:30:39,160 Speaker 1: the twelve year old girls all the way up to 511 00:30:40,360 --> 00:30:43,040 Speaker 1: former comedic actors who I have to tell you, I 512 00:30:43,080 --> 00:30:45,280 Speaker 1: agree with you. Jim Carrey's very funny. Me and Myself 513 00:30:45,280 --> 00:30:47,400 Speaker 1: and Irene is one of my favorite films. I think, 514 00:30:47,440 --> 00:30:50,240 Speaker 1: though these days Jim Carrey is funnier when he's being 515 00:30:50,280 --> 00:30:53,080 Speaker 1: serious than when he's in these comedy films. I don't know, 516 00:30:53,160 --> 00:30:55,320 Speaker 1: that's my view. Look Hiss, Joe Biden and S and 517 00:30:55,440 --> 00:30:58,120 Speaker 1: L's pretty funny. I mean, he's he's a talented actor. 518 00:30:58,160 --> 00:31:00,360 Speaker 1: I just wish he would do a little less politics 519 00:31:00,400 --> 00:31:04,400 Speaker 1: a little more acting. I will tell Verdict listeners something, 520 00:31:04,440 --> 00:31:09,200 Speaker 1: so I'm already planning. Don't tell anyone else this, but 521 00:31:09,200 --> 00:31:11,240 Speaker 1: but on Halloween. I'm going to make his painting my 522 00:31:11,280 --> 00:31:17,640 Speaker 1: avatar on Twitter. Well, luckily this conversation is just between me, 523 00:31:17,880 --> 00:31:19,680 Speaker 1: you and I don't know a million or so people, 524 00:31:19,760 --> 00:31:23,720 Speaker 1: so no one will know. And I look forward to that. 525 00:31:23,720 --> 00:31:27,320 Speaker 1: That's I'm sure. I'm sure Jim Carrey will be very honored. 526 00:31:28,440 --> 00:31:30,680 Speaker 1: We've got a question on court packing that actually we 527 00:31:30,800 --> 00:31:33,200 Speaker 1: didn't touch on. This is a more more of a 528 00:31:33,400 --> 00:31:36,520 Speaker 1: tactical question. I guess for Republicans is from Chris. If 529 00:31:36,560 --> 00:31:39,480 Speaker 1: Democrats win in November and actually do pack the court, 530 00:31:39,800 --> 00:31:43,880 Speaker 1: do Republicans then respond in kind when they return to power? 531 00:31:43,920 --> 00:31:46,000 Speaker 1: You know, Democrats grow the court from nine to twelve 532 00:31:46,160 --> 00:31:48,560 Speaker 1: and then Republicans grow at twelve to fifteen. Who knows? 533 00:31:49,120 --> 00:31:51,479 Speaker 1: I think we do. I think, of course we do. 534 00:31:51,520 --> 00:31:53,360 Speaker 1: I think that'd be terrible for the court and terrible 535 00:31:53,360 --> 00:31:54,760 Speaker 1: for the country. So I don't want to go down 536 00:31:54,800 --> 00:31:57,360 Speaker 1: that road. But I think if they go, I think 537 00:31:57,440 --> 00:31:59,360 Speaker 1: I think whatever happens, it would go to an odd 538 00:31:59,440 --> 00:32:03,000 Speaker 1: number just so that you have you don't have the 539 00:32:03,040 --> 00:32:06,560 Speaker 1: possibility of a tie. But if they go to eleven 540 00:32:06,640 --> 00:32:08,960 Speaker 1: or thirteen, I think we go to fifteen or seventeen, 541 00:32:08,960 --> 00:32:12,160 Speaker 1: and I think it becomes tit for tat and you 542 00:32:12,400 --> 00:32:17,080 Speaker 1: end up having the Court as this super legislature with 543 00:32:17,120 --> 00:32:20,520 Speaker 1: a bunch of politically appointed people, And it's an escalation 544 00:32:21,600 --> 00:32:25,800 Speaker 1: that I think would be a terrible idea. Now, by 545 00:32:25,840 --> 00:32:28,160 Speaker 1: the way, there is a chance that Republicans are too 546 00:32:28,160 --> 00:32:30,080 Speaker 1: wimpy to do it, that we let democrats pack the 547 00:32:30,120 --> 00:32:31,959 Speaker 1: court and then when we take control, we like are 548 00:32:31,960 --> 00:32:35,200 Speaker 1: scared of our own shadow and don't do anything. I'm 549 00:32:35,240 --> 00:32:39,560 Speaker 1: hopeful we wouldn't do that, because, frankly, if we find 550 00:32:39,560 --> 00:32:42,600 Speaker 1: ourselves in that picture next year, even though I think 551 00:32:42,640 --> 00:32:44,000 Speaker 1: they're going to do it, I'm going to fight as 552 00:32:44,040 --> 00:32:45,440 Speaker 1: hard as I can to stop it. And then one 553 00:32:45,480 --> 00:32:47,400 Speaker 1: of the main arguments I planned to do you use 554 00:32:47,560 --> 00:32:52,640 Speaker 1: is if you do it, will respond in kind, and 555 00:32:52,960 --> 00:32:56,320 Speaker 1: if you can't even incredibly respond to that, then you 556 00:32:56,400 --> 00:32:58,920 Speaker 1: might as well just give up, right now, right. It's 557 00:32:58,960 --> 00:33:02,520 Speaker 1: a sort of political version of peace through strength. You know, 558 00:33:02,760 --> 00:33:07,080 Speaker 1: if you have strength, that will hopefully encourage your opponents 559 00:33:07,440 --> 00:33:09,640 Speaker 1: and not to be so aggressive. But I think you're 560 00:33:09,680 --> 00:33:14,080 Speaker 1: absolutely right. The idea of unilateral political disarmament is just 561 00:33:14,200 --> 00:33:17,840 Speaker 1: absolutely mad, and it will only invite more political aggression. 562 00:33:17,920 --> 00:33:22,520 Speaker 1: It's worth noting that Republicans the first two years of Trump, 563 00:33:23,680 --> 00:33:25,840 Speaker 1: we had the presidency, we had the Senate, and we 564 00:33:25,920 --> 00:33:30,240 Speaker 1: had the House. We could have packed the court then. Yeah, 565 00:33:30,280 --> 00:33:33,360 Speaker 1: we could have expanded it from nine to eleven or 566 00:33:33,400 --> 00:33:36,520 Speaker 1: thirteen and just immediately stuck on justice. We didn't do that. 567 00:33:36,800 --> 00:33:38,440 Speaker 1: I mean that, and I would have opposed it. It 568 00:33:38,480 --> 00:33:41,320 Speaker 1: would have been and no one even suggested. It was 569 00:33:41,360 --> 00:33:45,160 Speaker 1: such a bad idea that no one even suggested it. 570 00:33:45,160 --> 00:33:48,320 Speaker 1: And so the level of escalation, the fact that the 571 00:33:48,360 --> 00:33:51,160 Speaker 1: Democrats are going down this road, the fact that Joe 572 00:33:51,160 --> 00:33:54,280 Speaker 1: Biden is saying the voters don't deserve to know his answer. 573 00:33:54,680 --> 00:33:58,280 Speaker 1: I mean, it's a really scary escalation. And and it's 574 00:33:58,360 --> 00:34:00,280 Speaker 1: you don't have to look back to ancient his treaty 575 00:34:00,280 --> 00:34:02,000 Speaker 1: to say Republicans didn't do it. You have to look 576 00:34:02,000 --> 00:34:04,640 Speaker 1: back two years ago. We didn't do it when we 577 00:34:04,680 --> 00:34:07,920 Speaker 1: could have. It was the right thing not to do 578 00:34:07,960 --> 00:34:10,279 Speaker 1: it then. And I hope we don't find find it 579 00:34:10,320 --> 00:34:14,080 Speaker 1: happening a few months from now. And it is scary 580 00:34:14,120 --> 00:34:17,479 Speaker 1: to see even just that redefinition, the normalizing of that idea, 581 00:34:17,480 --> 00:34:20,080 Speaker 1: as you said earlier, of court packing changing the meaning 582 00:34:20,120 --> 00:34:22,160 Speaker 1: of the term. You actually just saw this yesterday, as 583 00:34:22,200 --> 00:34:26,280 Speaker 1: a result of the hearings, Senator Hirono was lambasting Judge 584 00:34:26,320 --> 00:34:29,640 Speaker 1: Barrett for using the term sexual preference. She said this, 585 00:34:30,080 --> 00:34:32,560 Speaker 1: which has been an innocuous term for as long as 586 00:34:32,600 --> 00:34:34,960 Speaker 1: one can remember, she said, this is offensive, and then 587 00:34:35,480 --> 00:34:37,799 Speaker 1: over the course of the day everyone seemed to get 588 00:34:37,800 --> 00:34:42,320 Speaker 1: on board, the media, leftist politicians, even the dictionary online. 589 00:34:42,320 --> 00:34:46,560 Speaker 1: I think Mariam Webster's changed the definition of sexual preference 590 00:34:46,600 --> 00:34:50,200 Speaker 1: to say that it's now an offensive term. That kind 591 00:34:50,239 --> 00:34:55,880 Speaker 1: of power all in one place is obviously a great threat, 592 00:34:55,960 --> 00:34:58,880 Speaker 1: and it just shows you what the normalization of a 593 00:34:58,960 --> 00:35:02,120 Speaker 1: term like court packing could lead us to. So Webster's 594 00:35:02,200 --> 00:35:05,919 Speaker 1: dictionary in one day, when the Democrats criticize the term 595 00:35:05,960 --> 00:35:10,439 Speaker 1: sexual preference, they change the dictionary definition the next day. 596 00:35:10,480 --> 00:35:14,120 Speaker 1: That's a little terrifying. Noah Webster's got to be twirling 597 00:35:14,160 --> 00:35:18,560 Speaker 1: in his grave right. A final point, that's just kind 598 00:35:18,560 --> 00:35:22,839 Speaker 1: of an interesting observation on that sexual preference issue. So 599 00:35:23,040 --> 00:35:27,040 Speaker 1: both Maizie Horrono and Corey Booker lambasted Judge Barrett for 600 00:35:27,640 --> 00:35:30,200 Speaker 1: using the phrase sexual preference, which I don't think Judge 601 00:35:30,239 --> 00:35:34,440 Speaker 1: Barrett meant to convey anything but just an interesting observation. 602 00:35:34,600 --> 00:35:41,600 Speaker 1: Both Herono and Booker insisted that sexual orientation is immutable, 603 00:35:43,280 --> 00:35:46,120 Speaker 1: which I thought was actually a fascinating point. I was 604 00:35:46,200 --> 00:35:48,640 Speaker 1: genuinely not aware that it is a position of the 605 00:35:48,680 --> 00:35:54,080 Speaker 1: far left. Immutable means not capable of changing, always constant, 606 00:35:54,160 --> 00:35:58,120 Speaker 1: never changing. I wasn't aware that the far left maintains 607 00:35:58,120 --> 00:36:01,800 Speaker 1: that sexual orientation never can change, that it is unalterable, 608 00:36:02,600 --> 00:36:06,399 Speaker 1: and it's it's an odd position to have when they 609 00:36:06,440 --> 00:36:12,160 Speaker 1: simultaneously insist that gender is capable of continuously changing. So 610 00:36:12,920 --> 00:36:16,319 Speaker 1: I mean, it's and I don't know that that is 611 00:36:16,320 --> 00:36:18,960 Speaker 1: the position of the left, but both Herono and Booker 612 00:36:19,120 --> 00:36:22,239 Speaker 1: insisted upon it, and I think it's a vestige of 613 00:36:22,280 --> 00:36:25,600 Speaker 1: some of the arguments that used to be common between 614 00:36:25,680 --> 00:36:29,359 Speaker 1: left and right about whether whether sexual orientation, whether being gay, 615 00:36:30,000 --> 00:36:34,839 Speaker 1: is genetics and or a choice. And so when they 616 00:36:34,880 --> 00:36:38,920 Speaker 1: say immutable, what they mean is innate. But innate is 617 00:36:38,960 --> 00:36:41,480 Speaker 1: different from immutable to say you can never, at any 618 00:36:41,520 --> 00:36:45,799 Speaker 1: point change your orientation. I just thought it was a 619 00:36:45,840 --> 00:36:54,680 Speaker 1: fascinating observation about the lack of introspection and the incoherence 620 00:36:54,800 --> 00:36:58,759 Speaker 1: of the left's views on sexuality. More broadly speaking, well, 621 00:36:58,760 --> 00:37:00,640 Speaker 1: of course, I mean, just to put it in very 622 00:37:00,680 --> 00:37:07,319 Speaker 1: simple terms. If a gay man has a homosexual orientation 623 00:37:07,360 --> 00:37:11,359 Speaker 1: that can ever change. If he then transitions and identifies 624 00:37:11,400 --> 00:37:15,520 Speaker 1: as a woman, but his preference or orientation doesn't change, 625 00:37:15,920 --> 00:37:20,560 Speaker 1: then then is he still he's not a gay man anymore? 626 00:37:20,719 --> 00:37:23,879 Speaker 1: He can't. You can't have those two things at once. 627 00:37:24,880 --> 00:37:28,400 Speaker 1: Who knows. It's it's not reasoned, it's it's ideology that 628 00:37:28,719 --> 00:37:32,480 Speaker 1: they stated as a virtue signal. So when they said immutable, 629 00:37:32,480 --> 00:37:34,279 Speaker 1: I don't know that they're actually focused on what that 630 00:37:34,320 --> 00:37:36,840 Speaker 1: word even means. It just was sort of a I 631 00:37:36,880 --> 00:37:39,640 Speaker 1: sent out a tweet yesterday just being like, this is curious, 632 00:37:39,680 --> 00:37:43,400 Speaker 1: this is this is odd. Oh well, I think if 633 00:37:43,400 --> 00:37:45,160 Speaker 1: they don't know what the word means, they might very 634 00:37:45,200 --> 00:37:47,480 Speaker 1: likely redefine it very soon. That does seem to be 635 00:37:48,320 --> 00:37:50,279 Speaker 1: You know, we have much more mail bag to get to. 636 00:37:50,480 --> 00:37:52,879 Speaker 1: But alas Senator, we are out of time. I can't 637 00:37:52,920 --> 00:37:55,319 Speaker 1: make you work a thirteen hour work day to day. 638 00:37:55,480 --> 00:37:57,759 Speaker 1: So we will be back again on verdict. We will 639 00:37:57,760 --> 00:38:01,560 Speaker 1: save questions until next time. Please, to everybody, do send 640 00:38:01,600 --> 00:38:04,279 Speaker 1: your questions in. We love reading them, we like bring 641 00:38:04,280 --> 00:38:06,120 Speaker 1: them up on the show. Thank you, of course to 642 00:38:06,120 --> 00:38:10,240 Speaker 1: everyone for subscribing. If you haven't subscribed yet be sure 643 00:38:10,440 --> 00:38:12,120 Speaker 1: to do it. You can subscribe as you know, on 644 00:38:12,160 --> 00:38:16,000 Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Stitcher, Spotify. You can subscribe on 645 00:38:16,040 --> 00:38:19,840 Speaker 1: YouTube until the big tech overlords shut us down, but 646 00:38:19,960 --> 00:38:22,480 Speaker 1: until then we will be on all of those platforms. 647 00:38:22,880 --> 00:38:24,920 Speaker 1: Thank you as always for listening. Senator, I will see 648 00:38:24,960 --> 00:38:27,280 Speaker 1: you next time. I am Michael Knowles. This is Verdict 649 00:38:27,400 --> 00:38:39,720 Speaker 1: with Ted Cruz. This episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz 650 00:38:39,920 --> 00:38:42,879 Speaker 1: is being brought to you by Jobs, Freedom and Security Pack, 651 00:38:43,040 --> 00:38:47,880 Speaker 1: a political action committee dedicated to supporting conservative causes, organizations, 652 00:38:47,960 --> 00:38:51,520 Speaker 1: and candidates across the country. In twenty twenty two, Jobs 653 00:38:51,560 --> 00:38:55,080 Speaker 1: Freedom and Security Pack plans to donate to conservative candidates 654 00:38:55,120 --> 00:38:58,920 Speaker 1: running for Congress and help the Republican Party across the nation.