Speaker 1: Welcome. It is verdict with Senator Ted Cruz. We've got
Speaker 1: one heck of a show for you today. It deals
Speaker 1: with everything from China and the movie, the Barbie movie
Speaker 1: coming out. Plus we've got another victory we want to
Speaker 1: talk about that deals with censorship. And then there's the
Speaker 1: big story, and that is one that deals with cocaine
Speaker 1: at the White House. Now, Senator, there's other big news
Speaker 1: that we're going to deal with, including a huge court
Speaker 1: victory against government censorship. But everyone is obsessed with the
Speaker 1: cocaine at the White House. So let me get your
Speaker 1: initial take to that one.
Speaker 2: You know, I don't think Saturday Night Live could satirize
Speaker 2: the Biden White House worse than what has actually happened now.
Speaker 2: Of course, for Saturday Night Live to satirize them, they'd
Speaker 2: have to be willing to actually make fun of Democrats.
Speaker 2: But listen, Biden ran promising to bring back dignity to
Speaker 2: the White House when the last couple of weeks we've
Speaker 2: had number one, a biological man who identifies as a
Speaker 2: transgender woman and go topless with his surgically constructed breast
Speaker 2: bouncing around on the South lawn. That happened a couple
Speaker 2: of weeks ago, we had a couple of days ago,
Speaker 2: Hunter Biden standing behind his parents on the balcony of
Speaker 2: the White House, by all appearances, stoned out of his mind.
Speaker 2: And then we now have had a bag of cocaine
Speaker 2: literally found in the West Wing of the frigging White House.
Speaker 2: The West Wing, by the way, is the working office
Speaker 2: of the White House. It's where the Oval office is,
Speaker 2: It's where the Chief of Staff's office is, It's where
Speaker 2: the National Security Advisor's office is, It's where the senior
Speaker 2: White House staff works. And there's just a bag of
Speaker 2: white powder. Like, I don't know at this point, how
Speaker 2: do you even satirize it? With topless transgender people running
Speaker 2: around and bags of cocaine in the White House. This
Speaker 2: is Joe Biden's administration.
Speaker 1: The part that's also extremely shocking to me is the
Speaker 1: fact that the White House wouldn't comment on this at all.
Speaker 1: They wouldn't say if they're going to drug test their
Speaker 1: staffers moving forward, and they wouldn't even say that they
Speaker 1: would hold the person accountable if they find out who
Speaker 1: brought in this cocaine? Is the rule of law and
Speaker 1: order completely gone under this administration? I mean, if someone
Speaker 1: brings cocaine into the White House and you won't publicly
Speaker 1: come out and state immediately we are going to prosecute
Speaker 1: the fullests in the law when we find not if
Speaker 1: when we find with that type of determination.
Speaker 2: Oh look, it's worse than that. It's not only is
Speaker 2: they're a double standard and they won't prosecute people who
Speaker 2: reviolating the law. We know that, I mean Hunter Biden.
Speaker 2: We've got videos of him on crack cocaine and the
Speaker 2: DOJ won't prosecute it. So we know that. But it's
Speaker 2: worse than that because it's a DOJ cover up. It's
Speaker 2: a Biden White House cover up. You know, we had
Speaker 2: the administration put out a statement we probably will never
Speaker 2: know whose cocaine it was. Really, really, are you frigging
Speaker 2: telling me someone can leave a bag of something in
Speaker 2: the West wing of the White House if it were
Speaker 2: a bag of anthrax? Would they be like, well, you know,
Speaker 2: we'll never know who left it. Oh well, and by
Speaker 2: the way, where this was located, so so let me
Speaker 2: give you a little bit of the geography of the
Speaker 2: White House. Where this was located was by the entrance
Speaker 2: to the White House in the west wing. So when
Speaker 2: you come to the west wing for a meeting. You
Speaker 2: come in a door that is down on the ground level,
Speaker 2: and where you come in, off on your right there's
Speaker 2: a dining room. Off on your right is the situation room,
Speaker 2: and it apparently is right somewhere in that entrance foyer
Speaker 2: is where this bag of cocaine was found. And it
Speaker 2: was found in a normal security suite. Now, Kareeine John
Speaker 2: Pierre has said, well, this is a heavily traffic area
Speaker 2: of the White House. I have to say it is
Speaker 2: screamingly funny that she keeps using the word heavily trafficked,
Speaker 2: heavily traffic. Well, when you're trafficking in cocaine, that she
Speaker 2: may be speaking more literally than typical. There's an irony
Speaker 2: that Karine Jean Pierre may have accidentally spoken the truth
Speaker 2: from the podium of the White House. But listen, that
Speaker 2: is the entrance that senators go through. It's the entrance
Speaker 2: that cabinet members go through. It's the entrance that if
Speaker 2: you're going to meet someone senior in the White House,
Speaker 2: typically if you're going to meet the President, that's the
Speaker 2: entrance you go through. I've gone through that entrance probably
Speaker 2: hundreds of times. What is bizarre is they say we
Speaker 2: can't figure out who it is. Now, I will say
Speaker 2: something odd, which is, there's lots of speculation on Twitter. Oh,
Speaker 2: a bag of cocaine in the White House, It's got
Speaker 2: to be Hunters, you know. My guess is it probably
Speaker 2: isn't Hunters. I don't know that obvious. We know that
Speaker 2: Hunter has a drug problem, We know that he has
Speaker 2: used cocaine and used crack cocaine in the past. But
Speaker 2: I doubt Hunter Biden is going in the West wing
Speaker 2: all that often and going in that interest, all that
Speaker 2: entrance all that often. I think it is in all
Speaker 2: likelihood someone who works in the Biden administration, some senior
Speaker 2: Biden official, which makes the cover up all that the
Speaker 2: more astonishing. You're telling me, with the cameras they have there,
Speaker 2: with the secret service they have there, with the marine
Speaker 2: detail they have there, that nobody can figure out, Hey,
Speaker 2: who left the bag of cocaine by the front door
Speaker 2: of the West wing of the White House? I mean
Speaker 2: that is or the side door. That's insane. And the
Speaker 2: only reason they would put out a statement saying we
Speaker 2: will never know who it was is the same reason
Speaker 2: why the DOJ and the FBI is engaged in a
Speaker 2: cover up of Hunter Biden's acts of criminality, of Joe
Speaker 2: Biden's acts of criminality, of the evidence of corruption. Sadly,
Speaker 2: this administration is more than willing to politicize. Look, it
Speaker 2: would be embarrassing if we discover that a senior White
Speaker 2: House aid is bringing cocaine into the West Wing to
Speaker 2: do Schedule one serious drugs in the White House. And
Speaker 2: so their answer instead is, of course, we're not going
Speaker 2: to prosecute it. We're not going to investigate it, and
Speaker 2: you know what, we'll just never know who did it. Whoops.
Speaker 2: Oh well.
Speaker 1: One of the other things the talking point you mentioned
Speaker 1: it was the fact they say this is a heavily
Speaker 1: trafficked area. The White House is not Disney World, It's
Speaker 1: not a Starbucks line at the airport. Okay it this
Speaker 1: is the idea of this is highly trafficked. Makes it
Speaker 1: sound like there's thousands and thousands of people walking through
Speaker 1: this area. You've been there, like you said, hundreds of times.
Speaker 1: I've had a blessed career to be able to go
Speaker 1: to the White House a significant number of times as well.
Speaker 1: I was there last time the day of the State
Speaker 1: of the Union, and I was in the It's the
Speaker 1: exact area where the cobbies are where you put your
Speaker 1: phones before I went in the Oval Office to meet
Speaker 1: with President Trump, and this area. The idea that you
Speaker 1: can't find out who it is is a lie. The
Speaker 1: same way I would argue Senator that the idea that
Speaker 1: we still don't know who leaked, for example, the Roe v.
Speaker 1: Wade of being overturned, is a lie. They know. I
Speaker 1: have no doubt in my mind, and this is my
Speaker 1: opinion that they know exactly who brought this cocaine in.
Speaker 1: And I promise you if it would have been anthrax
Speaker 1: or something like that, we would know who did it.
Speaker 1: They would have found them. There's no way you can
Speaker 1: tell me they can't figure this crime out.
Speaker 2: So I actually don't know if they know who it is.
Speaker 2: I think they don't want to know. I think they
Speaker 2: are being willfully blind. I think they're putting their head
Speaker 2: in the sand like an Ostrich and just saying, let's
Speaker 2: not figure it out. Let's just say, gosh, really difficult
Speaker 2: to figure out, and this is the sort of question
Speaker 2: we don't want an answer to. I also think it
Speaker 2: is a different scenario than the Supreme Court leak. Look,
Speaker 2: I think Chief Justice Roberts wants to know who leaked it.
Speaker 2: We've seen Justice Alito has said he thinks he knows
Speaker 2: who leaked it. But what I suspect happened there, and
Speaker 2: I don't know because the Court has not given definitive answers.
Speaker 2: But what I suspect happened there is that they didn't
Speaker 2: run a very good investigation. I don't think it was
Speaker 2: because they didn't want to know the answer. I just
Speaker 2: think it's because they allowed the Marshal's Office to lead
Speaker 2: that investigation. And the Marshal's Office is not an investigative agency.
Speaker 2: It's not an agency that investigates crimes. It's a part
Speaker 2: of the Marshal's office. You have the police officers of
Speaker 2: the Court that are protecting against acts of violence, but
Speaker 2: they're not typically investing investigating crimes. They're not typically engaged
Speaker 2: in forensic analysis. And what I called for at the
Speaker 2: time is the Supreme Court I believe should called in
Speaker 2: the FBI. The FBI has very extensive forensic capability. The
Speaker 2: reason the Court didn't, I think was because of separation
Speaker 2: of powers concerns, and there's a view within the judiciary
Speaker 2: that we're Article three, we're a separate branch of government
Speaker 2: and asking Article two asking the executive branch to assist
Speaker 2: is intruding in our internal business. I get that, but
Speaker 2: I think the better decision would have been for the
Speaker 2: Chief Justice to instruct the Marshall's Office to work with
Speaker 2: the FBI and get their forensic capability to find out
Speaker 2: who leaked. And so I think the motivation is different.
Speaker 2: I think with the Supreme Court leak, it wasn't an
Speaker 2: effort to cover it up. It was rather putting institutional
Speaker 2: concerns above what I think was the incredibly important need
Speaker 2: to expose and punish the leaker. In the White House,
Speaker 2: on the other hand, I think it is a flat
Speaker 2: out cover up. I think they do not want to
Speaker 2: know because it is exceptionally likely it is I think
Speaker 2: close to one hundred percent that it is someone who
Speaker 2: works in the White House. Look, I suppose, is it
Speaker 2: possible that some random visitor to the White House left
Speaker 2: a bag of cocaine? I guess theoretically, so maybe it's
Speaker 2: not one hundred percent, But what are the odds some
Speaker 2: guy who has a meeting with let's say, the Chief
Speaker 2: of Staff of the White House just happens to bring
Speaker 2: a bag of cocaine with them and happens to leave
Speaker 2: it in the foyer. I mean, just that strikes me
Speaker 2: as very unlikely. I think it is much more likely
Speaker 2: this is someone that comes in and out of that
Speaker 2: building every day, and in that instance, whoever it is,
Speaker 2: is going to be really embarrassing for the Biden White House.
Speaker 2: And so it's much easier from a political damage control
Speaker 2: perspective to say, oh, we can't figure it out. Oh well,
Speaker 2: because boy, we really don't want to know the answer that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, great point. I want to tell you real quick
Speaker 1: about our friends over in augusta precious medals. If you
Speaker 1: have been saving for a long time for retirement, maybe
Speaker 1: you're in retirement, or maybe you're trying to figure out
Speaker 1: a strategy to protect your hard earned dollars. If you
Speaker 1: haven't looked at gold, especially with what's been going on
Speaker 1: with the economy and the incredible ups and downs on
Speaker 1: Wall Street, then now may be the time to see
Speaker 1: if a gold ira can help you protect your hard
Speaker 1: earned dollars. Now, if you are close to retirement and
Speaker 1: in retirement, the number one thing you're thinking about is this,
Speaker 1: there is no time to make up losses and a
Speaker 1: lot of people have had losses in their retirement accounts
Speaker 1: over the last couple of years. That's where gold can
Speaker 1: also come in to protect you. Now, my friends in
Speaker 1: Augusta Precious Medals, they want to sit down with you
Speaker 1: and they want you to understand how you can protect
Speaker 1: your money with a gold IRA. Not only are they
Speaker 1: going to send you the free Investor's Guide on gold,
Speaker 1: but they will do a one on one web conference
Speaker 1: with you as well. They'll give you the economic insights
Speaker 1: and explain to you how gold IRA can work for
Speaker 1: you you and most importantly, give you the peace of mind,
Speaker 1: and that is the most important thing to protect your assets.
Speaker 1: Call Augusta Precious Metals right now and get the free
Speaker 1: Investor's guide and do the one on one with them.
Speaker 1: Eight seven seven the number four gold i r A
Speaker 1: eight seven seven the number four gold IRA or online
Speaker 1: at Augusta Precious Metals dot com. That's Augusta Precious Metals
Speaker 1: dot com. Senator, one more question on this. Do you
Speaker 1: think that we're going to find out or is the
Speaker 1: White House going to have to come clean on this?
Speaker 1: Is there anything Congress will be able to do? I mean,
Speaker 1: they're treating it like a crime scene right now, at
Speaker 1: least acting like, hey, this is a real crime. You've
Speaker 1: got a substance that wasn't supposed to be in the
Speaker 1: White House. It is cocaine and a legal substance of that.
Speaker 1: It's also a national security issue how this could get
Speaker 1: into the White House a white substance in general. Think, goodness,
Speaker 1: it wasn't something like anthrax. But are we going to
Speaker 1: get answers or is this just going to go away?
Speaker 2: Well, if it's up to the Biden White House, it
Speaker 2: will go away. I expect that the House of Representatives
Speaker 2: will try to do some oversight on this. I also
Speaker 2: expect that the Biden White House will will simply erect
Speaker 2: a wall around the White House and will stonewall. And
Speaker 2: we've seen DOJ stonewall, We've seen the FBI stonewall. I
Speaker 2: expect that the Secret Service will stonewall on this. And
Speaker 2: so the chances that Senate Democrats want to get to
Speaker 2: the bottom of this are zero. Why because they know
Speaker 2: that it is very likely a senior official in the
Speaker 2: Biden White House. It could conceivably be Hunter Biden. There
Speaker 2: is at least one known cocaine user who frequents the
Speaker 2: White House, but as I said, generally you would assume
Speaker 2: that Hunter Biden is in the residence of the White
Speaker 2: House rather than entering through the business interests of the
Speaker 2: West Wing. But Senate Democrats do not want to know
Speaker 2: the answer because I think they are much more interested
Speaker 2: in political daydamage control that then actually getting to the bottom.
Speaker 2: You are right, the West wing of the White House
Speaker 2: is a crime scene right now. Anyplace else, if police
Speaker 2: discover a bag of cocaine, the place they discover it,
Speaker 2: they call a crime scene and they investigate whose cocaine
Speaker 2: is this? And you know what, there are thousands of
Speaker 2: people in jail right now for possessing a bag of
Speaker 2: cocaine just like the one found in the West Wing
Speaker 2: of the White House. And so there's a double standard
Speaker 2: of justice. We talked about this with a Hunter Biden investigation,
Speaker 2: that if you're some poor schmoe who did crack cocaine,
Speaker 2: you could serve hard time, But if you're connected to
Speaker 2: Joe Biden and this White House, you get special treatment,
Speaker 2: you get a cover up from this administration.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's sad to see the White House turn into
Speaker 1: this side show, as you described it earlier, with this
Speaker 1: what they've done to this White House is sad. It's
Speaker 1: supposed to be a place of honor and respect. It's
Speaker 1: supposed to be a place of dignity that we're supposed
Speaker 1: to be proud of, and certainly you can't say that
Speaker 1: right now with this administration the way that they're treating it.
Speaker 1: I want to move to also another big.
Speaker 2: I got to say, comparatively. Comparatively, Bill Clinton has got
Speaker 2: to be looking at this going, wow, you guys disrespected? Yeah,
Speaker 2: I mean Bill Clinton's like, boy, I got criticism for
Speaker 2: what I did in the West wing of the White House.
Speaker 2: The bidens are making Bill Clinton look like an amateur.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it only takes one more bigger idiot to make
Speaker 1: you look good. Right, That's all you can say about
Speaker 1: that one. I want to move to another story and center.
Speaker 1: This could have massive implications.
Speaker 2: For the elect By the way, Ben, for the record,
Speaker 2: let's not have that be the slogan of this podcast,
Speaker 2: although our critics would suggest that's already our slogan.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there you go. Fair enough, fair enough. We've got
Speaker 1: a big story that deals. We've got a big story
Speaker 1: that's gonna deal that could have huge ravocations for the
Speaker 1: election coming up. And it's a big court victory. This
Speaker 1: is something that Verdict listeners are going to want to
Speaker 1: know about because it's not being covered. There was a
Speaker 1: huge court victory against government censorship. A federal judge has
Speaker 1: blocked the Biden administration officials from actually communicating directly with
Speaker 1: social media companies to silence and censor people, ideas and stories.
Speaker 1: This judge is not ordered Biden officials to quote limit
Speaker 1: their contact with social media companies. Ruling says that Biden
Speaker 1: administration's policing of social media is likely a violation of
Speaker 1: people's First Amendment. Now, so people understand, the Biden administration
Speaker 1: has been in regular contact, sometimes daily, multiple times a week,
Speaker 1: and if you say something they don't like, whether it
Speaker 1: was during the time of COVID or other issues they
Speaker 1: don't like, they could just connect with them and say, hey,
Speaker 1: silence that person, shut that person's count down, get that
Speaker 1: person kicked off your platform. And this judge has finally
Speaker 1: said you can't do that.
Speaker 2: Well, that's exactly right. And you know, this is a
Speaker 2: topic we're going to do a deep dive into. And
Speaker 2: this is one of the reasons I think people listen
Speaker 2: to Verdict because we cover topics that the corporate media
Speaker 2: won't cover, and they won't cover in any substance. This
Speaker 2: is a very important decision. This is a very important
Speaker 2: victory for free speech, and the corporate media doesn't want
Speaker 2: you to know about it. This is a ruling that
Speaker 2: came down on July fourth, on Independence Day, and it
Speaker 2: came down from Chief Judge Terry Dodie of the Western
Speaker 2: District of Louisiana, who's a federal district judge, and he
Speaker 2: issued a preliminary injunction that restricts the Biden administration from
Speaker 2: communicating with social media platforms in order to ask them
Speaker 2: to remove or suppress content containing protected speech. In other words,
Speaker 2: to stop the Biden administration from collaborating with big tech
Speaker 2: to censor you. Now, this opinion is one hundred and
Speaker 2: fifty five pages long. It is a serious, scholarly opinion.
Speaker 2: It is an incredibly detailed opinion. This is a case
Speaker 2: that was brought against the Biden administration by the State
Speaker 2: of Missouri and the State of Louisiana. And it was
Speaker 2: also brought by two epidemmologists, Jay Badchaira and Martin Kouldorf,
Speaker 2: and four other social media commentators who allege that social
Speaker 2: media firms remove their posts and this injunction focuses on repeatedly.
Speaker 2: It is at the preliminary junction stage. So what the
Speaker 2: court concluded. In order to grant a preliminary injunction, the
Speaker 2: district court has to find that the plaintiffs are likely
Speaker 2: to prevail on the merits of their claim. So that's
Speaker 2: what the district court concluded, that they are likely to
Speaker 2: win to prove in court that the Biden administration violated
Speaker 2: the First Amendment and violated the free speech rights of Americans.
Speaker 2: That's a big deal. And they walk through carefully what
Speaker 2: was going on. It documents instances where White House officials
Speaker 2: explicitly demanded censorship, including in some cases, demanding that social
Speaker 2: media delete the accounts of private Americans, including Tommy larn
Speaker 2: including Tucker Carlson, including Alex Berenson. At one point, a
Speaker 2: White House official expressed frustration with Facebook's lack of censorship
Speaker 2: of what they called vaccine disinformation, writing in an email
Speaker 2: and I'm quoting, are you guys efing serious? And they
Speaker 2: did not abbreviate efing. I want an answer on what
Speaker 2: happened here, and I want it today. Now let's be
Speaker 2: clear that that is not an email of someone saying, Gosh,
Speaker 2: would you mind looking at this, Hey, this is a concern.
Speaker 2: That is the kind of communication we saw Hunter Biden
Speaker 2: give to the Chinese official. I want an answer, and
Speaker 2: I want it by tonight. It's the kind of answer
Speaker 2: you give someone who works for you that you have
Speaker 2: power over. The opinion also documents Facebook's collusion with the
Speaker 2: CDC to censor COVID related claims. This included a scheme
Speaker 2: where Facebook would email an official of the CDC quote
Speaker 2: to determine whether statements made on Facebook were true or false,
Speaker 2: and if the CDC said this statement is false, Facebook
Speaker 2: would remove the quote false statements. So, for example, the
Speaker 2: CDC rated as false the claim that COVID nineteen vaccines
Speaker 2: weaken the immune system. Now, I would say, as we
Speaker 2: sit here right now in twenty twenty three, that claim
Speaker 2: has not one hundred percent been proven true. But there's
Speaker 2: a lot of evidence to think it's true, and at
Speaker 2: a minimum, it is not objectively false, proven to be
Speaker 2: such so that the government can silence you from saying
Speaker 2: to the contrary. Likewise, the opinion discusses the FBI's efforts
Speaker 2: through what it called the Foreign Influenced Text Task Force
Speaker 2: to quote prime technology companies about possible hack and dump
Speaker 2: operations led by foreign state actors. And Joel Roth, who
Speaker 2: was a Twitter executive, testified that during the joint Industry
Speaker 2: FBI meetings, he learned that quote, there were rumors that
Speaker 2: a hack and leak operation would involve Hunter Biden, and
Speaker 2: as we know, social media right before the twenty twenty
Speaker 2: election suppressed the story that broke about Hunter Biden's laptop.
Speaker 2: Now here's the critical thing. The FBI at the time
Speaker 2: knew that Hunter Biden's laptop was not Russian disinformation because
Speaker 2: the agency was in possession of the laptop as of
Speaker 2: December of twenty nineteen, so a year earlier. In addition,
Speaker 2: another office what's called the Global Engagement Center. It's part
Speaker 2: of the State Department. It was an initiative that emerged
Speaker 2: from Executive Order three five eight four issued by Obama,
Speaker 2: which established the State Department's Center for Strategic counter Terrorism Communications. Ultimately,
Speaker 2: another executive order, Executive Order one three seven two one,
Speaker 2: again issued by Obama, transformed the cSCC into the Global
Speaker 2: Engagement Center, and the center is designed to quote, direct, lead, synchronize, integrate,
Speaker 2: and coordinate US efforts to recognize understanding and counter foreign
Speaker 2: state and non state propaganda and disinformation aimed at undermining
Speaker 2: the policy, security, or stability of the United States. But
Speaker 2: you know what they didn't do. They didn't focus on
Speaker 2: foreign actors. They focused on repeatedly Americans whose speech they
Speaker 2: were trying to silence. And so what the District court
Speaker 2: did is it issued an injunction against multiple different parts
Speaker 2: of the Biden administration to stop directing social media to
Speaker 2: censor free speech postings from American citizens. And and let
Speaker 2: me read you a portion of it. Defendants use meetings
Speaker 2: and communications with social media companies to pressure these companies
Speaker 2: to take down, reduce, and suppress the free speech of
Speaker 2: American citizens. They flagged posts and provided information on the
Speaker 2: type of posts they wanted suppressed. They also followed up
Speaker 2: with directives to the social media companies to provide them
Speaker 2: with information as to the action the company had taken
Speaker 2: with regard to the flag post. This seemingly unrelented pressure
Speaker 2: by defendants had the intended result of suppressing millions of
Speaker 2: protected free speech postings by American citizens. If ever, there
Speaker 2: were a case where the quote significant encouragement theory should apply,
Speaker 2: this is it. And that's a theory that explains that
Speaker 2: when the government engages in significant encouragement to private actors
Speaker 2: to censor speech, that the government is liable for violating
Speaker 2: the First Amendment. And here's what the court wrote in conclusion.
Speaker 2: The evidence produced thus far depicts an almost dystopian scenario
Speaker 2: during the COVID nineteen pandemic, a period best categorized by
Speaker 2: widespread doubt and uncertain the United States government seemed to
Speaker 2: have assumed a role similar to an Rwelian ministry of truth. Wow,
Speaker 2: that's a federal court in an order against the Biden administration.
Speaker 2: The Biden administration is freaking out about this.
Speaker 1: You hear the court put it that way. And this
Speaker 1: is where I smile, because this is such a significant
Speaker 1: win for freedom of speech and also not having a
Speaker 1: government like you see that influences and runs media in
Speaker 1: places like Russia and China and Venezuela and Cuba, and
Speaker 1: the idea that you can silence your political opposition, which
Speaker 1: is exactly what the government has been doing clearly under
Speaker 1: the Biden administration. This important day now sooner. This is
Speaker 1: also going to have a big impact, I think on
Speaker 1: this election cycle coming up, because this is what they
Speaker 1: were able to do in the last election cycle, in
Speaker 1: the presidential election cycle, which was to say, Okay, we're
Speaker 1: gonna really start ratcheting up and silencing people and shutting
Speaker 1: down their reach. And Democrats realize their secret weapon was
Speaker 1: just pick up the phone and say I am the government, yes,
Speaker 1: you're the private sector. I need you to shut down
Speaker 1: these people. And even some of the accounts that were
Speaker 1: shutting down were people that had five hundred and eight
Speaker 1: hundred followers and then they said something that went viral,
Speaker 1: and they're like, yeah, we don't like we don't even
Speaker 1: know who this person is, we don't even know what
Speaker 1: they're saying. They had a treat to went viral, we
Speaker 1: don't like it. Therefore shut down their account, and they
Speaker 1: did it well.
Speaker 2: And it's even worse than that. So these big tech
Speaker 2: companies are staffed in significant parts by a lums from
Speaker 2: the federal government, from the Obama administration, from the Biden administration.
Speaker 2: You've got Joel Roth who claimed that the Trump administration
Speaker 2: were quote literal Nazis. So these are hardcore radical leftists.
Speaker 2: They're already eager to use they're mini coopoly power to
Speaker 2: silence speech, but the government is urging them any speech
Speaker 2: they dislike, they were urging them to silence. And I
Speaker 2: want to make an important clarification because to the extent
Speaker 2: you're seeing discussion of this in the corporate media, and
Speaker 2: the discussion is quite limited, but to the extent you
Speaker 2: see it, you're seeing histrionic reaction from democrats and corporate
Speaker 2: media analysts saying, well, how can this be that the
Speaker 2: government is prohibited from communicating this is a danger to
Speaker 2: our country. Let's be clear. The injunction explicitly includes carve
Speaker 2: outs for communication with social media companies that is permissible,
Speaker 2: including notifying companies about criminal activities, notifying social media companies
Speaker 2: about national security threats, and notifying them about threats to
Speaker 2: public safety. And also speech that is not protected by
Speaker 2: the First Amendment is expressly exempted from the injunct. So
Speaker 2: this injunction is narrowed too, Biden administration, you cannot ask
Speaker 2: social media companies to censor political speech because you disagree
Speaker 2: with it and dislike it. That is not how the
Speaker 2: First Amendment operates. And I guarantee you if you are
Speaker 2: watching a democrat or a corporate media analyst talk about this,
Speaker 2: they're going to suggest that the government can no longer
Speaker 2: longer talk to the social media companies at all. That
Speaker 2: is categorically false.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and look, you know some of them are going
Speaker 1: to try to still keep the back channels going and
Speaker 1: they're going to try to get around this, And that's
Speaker 1: the questions. Will there be enforcement from this? And I
Speaker 1: hope that there certainly is. I want to tell you
Speaker 1: about our friends at Chalk. If you're a guy and
Speaker 1: you're sick and tired of feeling like you are losing
Speaker 1: your strength and your vitality and weakness and complacency is
Speaker 1: setting in. You just don't feel like yourself. You're tired,
Speaker 1: you're fatigued. You want to work out, you want to
Speaker 1: be active, but it's just not like it used to be,
Speaker 1: then you need to check out Chalk. Chalk is here
Speaker 1: to help real men just like you take back your
Speaker 1: right to probably maximize your masculinity by boosting testosterum levels
Speaker 1: up to twenty percent over ninety days. Yeah, you heard
Speaker 1: me right, booster you testostrum levels up to twenty percent
Speaker 1: over ninety days. Now. I've been taking chalk choq dot
Speaker 1: com the mal Vitality Stack now for several months. It works.
Speaker 1: It's manufactured right here in the us of a. Chalk's
Speaker 1: natural herbal supplements are clinically proven to have game changing
Speaker 1: effects on your energy, your focus, your mood. So if
Speaker 1: you are tired of weakness and complacency and you're ready
Speaker 1: to get back what you used to feel like with
Speaker 1: strength and vitality, check out Chalk choq dot com. That's
Speaker 1: choq dot com. Use the promo code Ben. You're gonna
Speaker 1: get thirty five percent off any Chalk subscription for life
Speaker 1: choq dot com. Use the promo code Ben thirty five
Speaker 1: percent off and booster your tesostrum levels of twenty over
Speaker 1: ninety days. Center. I want to also ask you about
Speaker 1: another big issue, and this deals with China. This is
Speaker 1: not a normal conversation that you would think you and
Speaker 1: I would be having. There's a movie that's out, the
Speaker 1: Barbie movie, Barbie and Ken. It is now making waves
Speaker 1: for a map in that movie, and it's basically so
Speaker 1: Barbie and the people that made the movie, could it
Speaker 1: make a bunch of money in China by making them
Speaker 1: happy in Beijing? Explain this insane story.
Speaker 2: Well, sure, Barbie is an upcoming summer blockbuster targeting obviously
Speaker 2: young girls, teenage girls who are a huge movie going audience.
Speaker 2: And there's a scene in the movie Barbie where Barbie
Speaker 2: is in front of a map of the world, and
Speaker 2: it's a cartoon map. It's not a very detailed map.
Speaker 2: So for example, it has drawn out one of the
Speaker 2: places on the map is Asia, so it's a map
Speaker 2: of the world and has Asia, but off to the
Speaker 2: east of Asia that they have lines drawn in the
Speaker 2: South China Sea, and it's called the nine dash line.
Speaker 2: And the nine dash line is a line that the
Speaker 2: Communist Party of China is pushing out because they are
Speaker 2: claiming that China has sovereignty over virtually the entirety of
Speaker 2: the South China Sea, and that is contrary to international
Speaker 2: law the South China Sea. The claim is disputed by Vietnam,
Speaker 2: by Malaysia, by Indonesia, by Burnei, by the Philippines in Taiwan,
Speaker 2: and in fact, an international tribunal at the Hague found
Speaker 2: the Chinese Communist Party's map is illegal. In other words,
Speaker 2: that their claims of sovereignty, they're trying to steal control
Speaker 2: over international waters and waters that other nations have sovereignty.
Speaker 2: And it's a power grap And what's bizarre. You have
Speaker 2: this cartoon map with with no specificity. Asia is one
Speaker 2: block on it. And yet there in the sea are
Speaker 2: the nine dashes that are exactly what the CCP wants
Speaker 2: to claim. The South China Sea is theirs. And in
Speaker 2: response to this, the country of Vietnam officially banned the
Speaker 2: movie from Vietnam. They said, this is Chinese Communist propaganda,
Speaker 2: and it is a sad pattern. We've seen an ongoing
Speaker 2: pattern of Hollywood movies cow towing to the Chinese Communists
Speaker 2: and at times censoring their movies, but at times doing
Speaker 2: what they're doing here, which is just happily repeating CCP
Speaker 2: propaganda because they want to sell the movie in China,
Speaker 2: and they recognize that that repeating what makes the Chinese
Speaker 2: Communist Party and the government happy, increases the chances that
Speaker 2: the government will allow the movie to be sold in China.
Speaker 2: But I got to say, it is shameful to see
Speaker 2: Hollywood acting as a mouthpiece for the Chinese Communist You know,
Speaker 2: when I saw this, I tweeted out, I said, well,
Speaker 2: you know, I guess Barbie is made in China, and
Speaker 2: a vast number of the Barbie dolls sold in America
Speaker 2: are in fact manufactured in China. But it is sad
Speaker 2: to see a movie aimed at young girls is acting
Speaker 2: as the mouthpiece for Chinese communist propaganda.
Speaker 1: It's not just that too, there's also problems here in
Speaker 1: the US. There's an amazing movie that you just went
Speaker 1: to that talks about human trafficking and children that are
Speaker 1: being sex trafficked and what a problem it is in
Speaker 1: the world. It actually was the number one movie over
Speaker 1: the July fourth weekend, beating out Indiana Jones, which is incredible,
Speaker 1: and it was actually in half the number of theaters
Speaker 1: apparently as Indiana Jones. And this is what's encouraging to
Speaker 1: me center is the fact that it seems like as
Speaker 1: much as they're trying to force this propaganda, whether it
Speaker 1: be Barbie, whether it be Target, whether it be Disney.
Speaker 1: I mean, they had massive layoffs the other day with
Speaker 1: talent at ESPN. A lot of people believe this is
Speaker 1: because of Disney and ESPN. People just had enough of
Speaker 1: their woke propaganda and their obsession with Black Lives Matter
Speaker 1: propaganda on ESPN day and night for several years and
Speaker 1: people just said, I'm done with you. And now we're
Speaker 1: seeing that the conservatives are starting to fight back with
Speaker 1: their dollars not spending them places. But also this movie
Speaker 1: that just came out that that is dealing with a
Speaker 1: tough issue, an important issue, goes to number one with
Speaker 1: half of the of the distribution in theaters as the
Speaker 1: big Hollywood movie, you know, with Indiana Jones.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's exactly right. And so this movie Sound of Freedom.
Speaker 2: I actually on July third, I took my mom to
Speaker 2: see it. And my mom loves movies, so do I.
Speaker 2: So the two of us went to see It's a
Speaker 2: fantastic movie. Jim Cavizl, who played Jesus in the Passion
Speaker 2: of the Christ, is an incredibly talented actor. He plays
Speaker 2: the lead. He plays Tim Ballard. So this is a
Speaker 2: true story. Tim Ballard was a DHS Department Homeland Security
Speaker 2: agent who was working fighting child trafficking and and and
Speaker 2: he saw the horrific evils of child sex trafficking. There
Speaker 2: is a massive, multi billion dollar business of kidnapping and
Speaker 2: selling children for sex trafficking, and it is horrific, it
Speaker 2: is evil, and and the true story, Tim Ballard ended
Speaker 2: up actually leaving his job and going down to Latin
Speaker 2: America to rescue over a hundred kids who had been
Speaker 2: kidnapped by child sex traffickers and and it's it's a
Speaker 2: true story. And I got to tell you I met
Speaker 2: Tim Ballard, Jim Jim Cavisel came by my office a
Speaker 2: couple of weeks ago. We talked about the movie and
Speaker 2: let me encourage everyone go watch this movie. It's inspiring.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's an amazing true story. So much of
Speaker 2: what comes out of Hollywood as garbage today, it's propaganda.
Speaker 2: This is a true story about fighting. Look, you can
Speaker 2: disagree about all sorts of political issues, but the sick
Speaker 2: predators who engage in in sexual assault of little kids
Speaker 2: and sell little children to pedophiles that I worked a
Speaker 2: lot of years in law enforcement. I dealt with a
Speaker 2: lot of horrible crimes. I dealt with murders, I dealt
Speaker 2: with all sorts of crimes. The ones that always got
Speaker 2: me the most upset, the most angry are the bastards
Speaker 2: that hurt kids. I think there is a special circle
Speaker 2: of hell devoted to people who hurt kids. And the
Speaker 2: corporate media and most of Hollywood they didn't want this
Speaker 2: movie made. They don't want anyone to know about it.
Speaker 2: It gets no press. In fact, when I met with
Speaker 2: Jim Caviezel, the Houston Chronicle wrote a hit piece saying, oh,
Speaker 2: Jim Caveazl is this crazy conspiracy theorist guy without talking
Speaker 2: about the movie, without talking about the horrors of child
Speaker 2: sex trafficking. Instead, they just wanted to paint it as
Speaker 2: a tenfoil hat crazy thing. This is a true story,
Speaker 2: and you are right. On July fourth, Sound of Freedom
Speaker 2: was the number one box office movie in the country.
Speaker 2: It beat Indiana Jones. Sound of Freedom was on just
Speaker 2: over two thousand screens. Indiana Jones was on over four
Speaker 2: thousand screens, and nevertheless, Sound of Freedom was number one.
Speaker 2: I want to encourage everyone to go watch it, but
Speaker 2: it's a sign of just how messed up Hollywood is
Speaker 2: that they don't want.
Speaker 1: You to watch it. Yeah, and they don't want to
Speaker 1: talk about They're hoping that this weekend it dies, which,
Speaker 1: as you know, we've got a lot of vertict listeners
Speaker 1: that want that may not even know this movie exists.
Speaker 1: It's a movie you need to go see, and you
Speaker 1: need to go see it this weekend. And the reason
Speaker 1: why is because after last weekend, there are some theaters
Speaker 1: that will pick up this movie, and if more people
Speaker 1: go this weekend, more theaters will pick it up next
Speaker 1: week because they think they're missing out on profits. That's
Speaker 1: why it's so important. Don't wait for it to come out.
Speaker 1: This is a movie that conservatives and Christians should support.
Speaker 1: This is put your money where your mouth is and
Speaker 1: go out there. Because if we succeed in these movies
Speaker 1: being successful, center more of them are going to be made,
Speaker 1: which is the best part of all.
Speaker 2: Well, and Ben, I'll tell you when we finished watching
Speaker 2: the movie on the afternoon of July third, at the
Speaker 2: end of the movie, the entire theater burst out an applause.
Speaker 2: When's the last time you read a movie where that happened. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I mean it is uplifting. It's horrifying. I mean, the
Speaker 2: evil of it is horrifying, but it also is a
Speaker 2: demonstration that you can go and you can fight against
Speaker 2: this evil and you can prevail. And it's important for
Speaker 2: people to understand peace. People don't like to talk about
Speaker 2: modern day slavery, and sadly, under the Biden administration with
Speaker 2: their open borders at the southern border, human trafficking has
Speaker 2: exploded the results of open borders. I'll give you an
Speaker 2: amazing statistic we've talked about on Verdict before this statistic
Speaker 2: is from the New York Times. In twenty eighteen, the
Speaker 2: Mexican drug cartels made in revenue from human trafficking roughly
Speaker 2: five hundred million dollars. Last year, they made over thirteen
Speaker 2: billion dollars from human trafficking. That is a two six
Speaker 2: hundred percent increase. This is evil and it is modern
Speaker 2: day slavery. Now that being said, as bad as Hollywood is,
Speaker 2: as much as they don't want you to hear and
Speaker 2: watch movies that expose things like this, as much as
Speaker 2: they're willing to cowtow to communist China, we did have
Speaker 2: a significant victory recently, which is the pattern of Hollywood
Speaker 2: censoring for China has been an ongoing pattern, and I've
Speaker 2: been calling it out for a long time. So, for example,
Speaker 2: the movie Top Gun Maverick. You remember the first movie
Speaker 2: Top Gun. Yeah, Maverick had on the back of his
Speaker 2: jacket a series of patches of different flags, and two
Speaker 2: of the flags that were on the back of his
Speaker 2: jacket were the flag of Japan and the flag of Taiwan. Well,
Speaker 2: the Chinese communists don't like Japan and they hate they
Speaker 2: loathe Taiwan, and so the movie Top Gun Maverick the sequel,
Speaker 2: they edited those patches out. They've just made them sort
Speaker 2: of random patterns that didn't correspond to any country because
Speaker 2: they didn't want to offend the Chinese Communist Party by
Speaker 2: referring to Japan or Taiwan. And I called him out,
Speaker 2: I said, really, are you serious? Are you telling me
Speaker 2: that Maverick is afraid of the Chinese Communists? I mean
Speaker 2: it was insane and a bit of good news. Actually,
Speaker 2: the studio ended up putting him back, so when the
Speaker 2: movie was released, they had the patches back, and there
Speaker 2: was enough criticism they got embarrassed. Another example Hollywood the
Speaker 2: movie Bohemian Rhapsody. It's another great movie. It's a biopic
Speaker 2: of Freddie Mercury, the lead singer of Queen. The studio
Speaker 2: that produced it edited out scenes that showed that Freddie
Speaker 2: Mercury was gay because the Chinese Communists didn't want to
Speaker 2: acknowledge that Freddy Mercury was gay. Now, Ben, how the
Speaker 2: hell do you tell Freddie Mercury's story without acknowledging he
Speaker 2: was gay. It was a pretty damn important part of
Speaker 2: his life. And you know, Hollywood is always happy to
Speaker 2: virtue signal about how woke they are. Unless they're trying
Speaker 2: to make millions of dollars from China, in which case
Speaker 2: they're like, nope, edited out. Guess what, Freddy Mercury no
Speaker 2: longer gay, Let's just take it out. It was embarrassing,
Speaker 2: it was wrong, and so I introduced legislation called the
Speaker 2: Script Act. And what the Script Act said is that
Speaker 2: if a Chinese studio, sorry, if an American studio engages
Speaker 2: in censorship at the behest of the Chinese government or
Speaker 2: in order to please the Chinese government, then they are
Speaker 2: not eligible to use US government assets. So there are
Speaker 2: lots of movies where movie studios use assets of the
Speaker 2: US government. Think something like Top Gun, where they're using
Speaker 2: fighter jets, or they're using ships, or they're using tanks,
Speaker 2: or they're using humvies. Or think you know a movie
Speaker 2: where you're down on the border, you're downfighting drugs, and
Speaker 2: you're up in a Blackhawk helicopter. They're all sorts of
Speaker 2: instances where the US government allows Hollywood to use their
Speaker 2: assets to film great action movies. The Script Act says, Okay,
Speaker 2: if you're going to let the Chinese communist government censor
Speaker 2: your films, you can't use US government assets to do
Speaker 2: it and the Script Act. I introduced it, I fought
Speaker 2: for it. I'll tell the Democrats resisted it mightily that
Speaker 2: Hollywood supports the Democrats significantly. We had a huge battle
Speaker 2: back and forth. Ultimately, the full Script Act didn't pass,
Speaker 2: but major portions of the Script Act passed in the
Speaker 2: Fiscal year twenty twenty three National Defense Authorization Bill. And
Speaker 2: in the past week, the Pentagon issued their guidance and
Speaker 2: guidelines pursue it to the legislation that I wrote, making
Speaker 2: clear to studios, if you let the Chinese government censor
Speaker 2: your movies, you're ineligible to use US government assets. And hopefully, awesome,
Speaker 2: it will be a major incentive to stop this garbage,
Speaker 2: to stop Hollywood from cowtowing to the Chinese communisty.
Speaker 1: You mentioned victories, and there's one more that deals with
Speaker 1: a dear friend of ours in a book that's coming out.
Speaker 1: I'm going to tell you about that a second, But
Speaker 1: let me tell you real quick about Patriot Mobile. We
Speaker 1: talk so much about woke corporations that come after your
Speaker 1: values and why do you want why would you give
Speaker 1: them your money? Right, there's one category that you just
Speaker 1: hadn't had an option for years, and that is with
Speaker 1: your cell phone. The big three mobile companies out there,
Speaker 1: they've been dumping millions of dollars into leftist causes year
Speaker 1: after year. Many of the big mobile companies out there
Speaker 1: have actually given massive donations to Planned Parenthood. Well, now
Speaker 1: you've got an option. Patriot Mobile. They are America's only Christian,
Speaker 1: conservative wireless provider offering dependable nationwide coverage on all three
Speaker 1: major networks, so you get the best possible service in
Speaker 1: your area without the woke propaganda push by leftists working
Speaker 1: hard to destroy this country. Now, when you switch to
Speaker 1: Patriot Mobile, every month, a portion of your bill, at
Speaker 1: no extra charge to you, is going to be used
Speaker 1: to support free speech and religious freedom, going to be
Speaker 1: there to use to support the sancty of life and adoptions.
Speaker 1: They're also going to support the Second Amendment, our military,
Speaker 1: our veterans or first responders. This is what they do
Speaker 1: every month when you pay your bill. So, if you
Speaker 1: want to stand with a company that stands with your
Speaker 1: values and you want to fight back every time you
Speaker 1: use your phone, switch to Patriot Mobile. You can keep
Speaker 1: your same cell phone number if you want to, and
Speaker 1: your same cell phone that you have in your hand.
Speaker 1: Call them eight seven eight Patriot. That's eight seven eight
Speaker 1: Patriot eight seven eight Patriot, or online at Patriotmobile dot
Speaker 1: com slash Verdict. Use the promo code of Verdict and
Speaker 1: you'll get the best deals plus free activation of the year.
Speaker 1: That's Patriot Mobile dot Com slash Verdict. There's a one
Speaker 1: more good news story, and this one for me is
Speaker 1: just makes me happy. It's a dear friend of mine
Speaker 1: and a dear friend of yours. Mark Levin has his
Speaker 1: new book that is coming out soon, and it came
Speaker 1: out that Target had said they would not sell Mark
Speaker 1: Levin's new book in stores. They were apparently afraid that
Speaker 1: they were going to offend liberals, so they were not
Speaker 1: going to carry it. Now, Mark Levin pretty much everything
Speaker 1: he touches in the book world becomes a New York
Speaker 1: Times bestseller. This is another example of why I'm not
Speaker 1: going to give a damn dime of my money to Target.
Speaker 1: But there was so much backlash so quickly that Target realized,
Speaker 1: we don't want to step in it again. Right after
Speaker 1: what they just did with all of their activist clothing
Speaker 1: and everything they were doing, binding and tucking outfits with
Speaker 1: their LGBTQ gay pride month that they now have reverse course.
Speaker 1: And this is proof that when we get together and focus,
Speaker 1: we can win some of these battles.
Speaker 2: Well, that's exactly right. This is a big victory again
Speaker 2: for free speech against censorship, in this case censorship from
Speaker 2: big business. Mark Levin, who is a dear friend of mine,
Speaker 2: a dear friend of yours. He is the great one.
Speaker 2: And and that is a title that is fully earned. Uh,
Speaker 2: it is not hyperbole to say I wouldn't be in
Speaker 2: the US Senate without Mark Levin when when I was
Speaker 2: at two percent and was just getting started, Mark had
Speaker 2: me on my show over and over and over again,
Speaker 2: and and and helped me get get my message out
Speaker 2: to millions of Texans, help help me prevail. By the way,
Speaker 2: another guy named Ben Ferguson, who was also hosted a major,
Speaker 2: major show, had me on repeatedly. And so I'm grateful
Speaker 2: to the both of you, and and and I got
Speaker 2: to say, Democrats are still pissed at both of you.
Speaker 2: Uh for impact you did there, badge of honor. But Mark,
Speaker 2: you're right. Every book he writes sells a gazillion copies.
Speaker 2: His books are fantastic. His latest book, Uh, you know,
Speaker 2: you know, Mark is is someone who's very subtle. He
Speaker 2: has difficulty speaking clearly. He has difficulties saying what he
Speaker 2: really believes. So his title with all of the understatement
Speaker 2: that that has made Mark famous. Uh, the title of
Speaker 2: the book is the Democrat Party Hates America. Well that
Speaker 2: you know. I haven't read Mark's book yet, it's coming
Speaker 2: out shortly, but I suspect he makes a compelling case
Speaker 2: for the title. But Mark tweeted out on July fifth,
Speaker 2: Target will not carry the Democrat Party Hates America because
Speaker 2: it might offend Democrats pathetic. You can go to Amazon
Speaker 2: dot com and order directly without going through Democrat Party corporatis.
Speaker 2: And I want to thank Barnes and Nobles Walmartin Books
Speaker 2: a million for carrying the book. Now, a lot of
Speaker 2: conservatives spoke out against this. I spoke out. I retweeted Mark,
Speaker 2: and here's what I said. I said, not to worry.
Speaker 2: Target has built up so much goodwill with conservatives that
Speaker 2: I'm sure they won't mind. And then I said, and
Speaker 2: bias book because I'm sure it's a fantastic book. Well,
Speaker 2: here's the good news. If you feel like all of
Speaker 2: corporate America as a disaster, well, Mark tweeted out on
Speaker 2: July sixth. The day later, Target just informed my publisher
Speaker 2: that is reversed course and will be taking my new
Speaker 2: book in its stores upon its release. You folks are
Speaker 2: an immense force for free speech and market capitalism, and
Speaker 2: conservative authors and audiences everywhere will benefit from your patriotism.
Speaker 2: I could not be more proud of you, not only
Speaker 2: for how this specific case turned out, as there will
Speaker 2: undoubtedly be more of this, but because you've made it
Speaker 2: clear that you've had enough and will exercise your enormous power.
Speaker 2: The silent majority is silent no longer. I'll more fully
Speaker 2: discuss this on radio. God bless and I thank and
Speaker 2: salute you all. That is awesome, and every conservative, everyone
Speaker 2: who believes in free speech, everyone who doesn't want to
Speaker 2: see corporate America silence views they disagree with, should celebrate.
Speaker 2: We started this pod by talking about a victory for
Speaker 2: free speech in the courtroom, and we're ending the pod
Speaker 2: by talking about a victory for free speech against big business.
Speaker 2: In both instance, there is a power to truth. There
Speaker 2: is a power to highlighting what is real and what
Speaker 2: the facts are, and when we do so, that has
Speaker 2: enormous potency.
Speaker 1: Am into that don't forget. You can listen to the
Speaker 1: show Monday, Wednesday and Fridays wherever you get your podcast.
Speaker 1: If you're listening Apple, hit that follow button. You will
Speaker 1: never miss in that episode. Hit that like button or
Speaker 1: subscribe button if you're on other platforms, and please share
Speaker 1: this episode on social media. You can hit that little
Speaker 1: Ford button, that little arrow in the corner up in
Speaker 1: the right, depending on what platform you're on, down at
Speaker 1: the bottom, and you can put it up on social
Speaker 1: media wherever you are on social media and right us
Speaker 1: a five story review. It helps us reach more people
Speaker 1: on the charts, and that's really important. And don't forget.
Speaker 1: We do this every week Monday, Wednesday and Friday, so
Speaker 1: make sure you listen each and every day. It's always
Speaker 1: a pleasure center. And again, don't forget. Go out there
Speaker 1: and see that amazing movie this week and support a
Speaker 1: movie that's important to this country. This is a huge
Speaker 1: victory and it's going to inspire others to make great movies.
Speaker 1: So make sure you're part of it as well. And
Speaker 1: we'll see you back here in a couple of days.