1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:03,400
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Buck Sexton Show. Got our friend Josh

2
00:00:03,400 --> 00:00:07,200
Speaker 1: Hammer with us for this episode. He is a Newsweek

3
00:00:07,800 --> 00:00:11,959
Speaker 1: editor at large, he's a lawyer, and he's got a podcast,

4
00:00:12,039 --> 00:00:15,800
Speaker 1: the Josh Hammer Show, which you should catch whenever you

5
00:00:15,840 --> 00:00:19,079
Speaker 1: get a chance. And it is not called hammer Time,

6
00:00:19,239 --> 00:00:24,360
Speaker 1: despite my requests and my reverence for the great nineteen

7
00:00:24,440 --> 00:00:28,120
Speaker 1: eighties era music of mister Ramsey Hammer, but Josh is

8
00:00:28,120 --> 00:00:29,320
Speaker 1: still an excellent podcast.

9
00:00:30,760 --> 00:00:32,560
Speaker 2: Buck. You know, you were one of our first ever guests.

10
00:00:32,560 --> 00:00:35,680
Speaker 2: You were literally like guest number three, four or five,

11
00:00:35,760 --> 00:00:37,879
Speaker 2: something like that. So I appreciate the plug. Brother. It's

12
00:00:37,920 --> 00:00:38,800
Speaker 2: good to see you as always.

13
00:00:38,880 --> 00:00:42,800
Speaker 1: Yeah, man, you too, And obviously if you start out

14
00:00:42,840 --> 00:00:44,760
Speaker 1: so strong on a podcast like that, was such an

15
00:00:44,760 --> 00:00:48,000
Speaker 1: amazing guest, it's going to be the best going forward.

16
00:00:48,479 --> 00:00:50,360
Speaker 1: So I got a bunch of things to ask you

17
00:00:50,400 --> 00:00:54,120
Speaker 1: about because you like to You like to geek out

18
00:00:54,160 --> 00:00:57,000
Speaker 1: about the Constitution and about statutes about law. Right, that's

19
00:00:57,000 --> 00:00:59,280
Speaker 1: fair to say. I think I don't think I'm You're

20
00:00:59,480 --> 00:01:01,840
Speaker 1: fair a man, a man who likes to throw down

21
00:01:01,840 --> 00:01:04,920
Speaker 1: on this stuff. Let's start with the Supreme Court for

22
00:01:04,959 --> 00:01:10,680
Speaker 1: a second. I think that the Democrat media has been

23
00:01:10,760 --> 00:01:13,039
Speaker 1: running I've been seeing it like popping up on CNN

24
00:01:13,080 --> 00:01:17,880
Speaker 1: and they're really going after Justice Thomas, and my sensus,

25
00:01:17,880 --> 00:01:20,440
Speaker 1: people on the right have been pretty like not really

26
00:01:20,480 --> 00:01:22,959
Speaker 1: paying that much attention to this. It just hasn't hasn't

27
00:01:23,000 --> 00:01:25,600
Speaker 1: crossed because we don't see anything that Justice Thomas is

28
00:01:25,600 --> 00:01:28,640
Speaker 1: bad and think it's all exciting. Let's start, because you've

29
00:01:28,680 --> 00:01:31,640
Speaker 1: been running about and pointing out that there's more. There's

30
00:01:31,640 --> 00:01:35,280
Speaker 1: a more full spectrum assault on the court happening right

31
00:01:35,319 --> 00:01:37,440
Speaker 1: now the Supreme Court. But tell us what's going on

32
00:01:37,480 --> 00:01:39,640
Speaker 1: with Justice Thomas first, what they've been trying to do there?

33
00:01:40,600 --> 00:01:43,039
Speaker 2: All right, So it's starting over a month ago, so

34
00:01:43,040 --> 00:01:46,800
Speaker 2: it was early April. The website pro Public, which has

35
00:01:46,840 --> 00:01:50,480
Speaker 2: won Pulitzer Prizes for investigative journalism, for whatever a Pulitzer

36
00:01:50,520 --> 00:01:53,279
Speaker 2: prize in journalism is worth or not worth these days,

37
00:01:53,600 --> 00:01:56,240
Speaker 2: so they start a series of hit pieces. I mean,

38
00:01:56,240 --> 00:01:57,840
Speaker 2: I'm not sure hell to say that these are very

39
00:01:57,880 --> 00:02:01,960
Speaker 2: clearly hit pieces. They are clearly ridden quote unquote investigated

40
00:02:02,000 --> 00:02:05,520
Speaker 2: with the intention of delegitimizing Justice Clarence Thomas, which, by

41
00:02:05,520 --> 00:02:08,560
Speaker 2: the way, is not a particularly new tactic for the left.

42
00:02:08,600 --> 00:02:10,760
Speaker 2: I mean, going back to the early nineteen nineties, of course,

43
00:02:10,760 --> 00:02:12,960
Speaker 2: when Clarence Thomas was first nominated to the Supreme Court

44
00:02:13,000 --> 00:02:15,680
Speaker 2: by then President George H. W. Bush, we had the

45
00:02:15,680 --> 00:02:19,640
Speaker 2: whole Anita Hill workplace harassment delegations that got so bad

46
00:02:20,040 --> 00:02:22,480
Speaker 2: that Clarence Thomas, who was then in his early forties,

47
00:02:22,520 --> 00:02:26,000
Speaker 2: sitting before then Senator Joe Biden st Judiciary Committee hearing,

48
00:02:26,400 --> 00:02:30,800
Speaker 2: accused sat Guiary Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats of trying to

49
00:02:30,840 --> 00:02:33,640
Speaker 2: engage in a quote, high tech lynching. So this is

50
00:02:33,680 --> 00:02:35,640
Speaker 2: nothing new for the left. They've literally been coming after

51
00:02:35,639 --> 00:02:38,760
Speaker 2: Clarence Thomas for over three decades. Now, you know, he

52
00:02:39,200 --> 00:02:40,760
Speaker 2: is the man right now that he was then, He

53
00:02:40,800 --> 00:02:43,240
Speaker 2: doesn't particularly care about these sort of attacks, but pro

54
00:02:43,320 --> 00:02:48,200
Speaker 2: public their first allegation was effectively that Justice Thomas is

55
00:02:48,280 --> 00:02:51,760
Speaker 2: two close friends with Harland Crowe. That literally is the

56
00:02:51,880 --> 00:02:54,639
Speaker 2: nature of the first allegation. So Harland Crowe was a Dallas,

57
00:02:54,639 --> 00:02:58,480
Speaker 2: Texas based billionaire, kind of real estate tycoon. He's a

58
00:02:58,560 --> 00:03:02,600
Speaker 2: well known generous donor and giver to various Conservative and

59
00:03:02,639 --> 00:03:05,919
Speaker 2: Republican Party causes, which, by the way, that itself is

60
00:03:06,120 --> 00:03:08,160
Speaker 2: another thin. The left has been trying to hit Clarence

61
00:03:08,200 --> 00:03:10,600
Speaker 2: Thomas over for decades. His wife Ginny Thomas is a

62
00:03:10,639 --> 00:03:13,000
Speaker 2: well known conservative activist, so they've said for a long

63
00:03:13,040 --> 00:03:15,520
Speaker 2: time he's too cozy with these sort of interests. So

64
00:03:15,760 --> 00:03:18,360
Speaker 2: this first Pro public apiece was that he's traveled with

65
00:03:18,360 --> 00:03:21,160
Speaker 2: Harlan Crow, what he's gone on cruises or the private

66
00:03:21,240 --> 00:03:24,520
Speaker 2: jets whatever, and the alleged that he should have disclosed it.

67
00:03:25,040 --> 00:03:26,920
Speaker 2: You know, James Taranto at the Wall Street Journal has

68
00:03:26,919 --> 00:03:29,079
Speaker 2: done a very good job of showing that no action

69
00:03:29,240 --> 00:03:33,200
Speaker 2: according to the on the books judicial ethics regulatory rules,

70
00:03:33,200 --> 00:03:36,280
Speaker 2: because we actually have laws about this, he was actually

71
00:03:36,280 --> 00:03:39,080
Speaker 2: not required to disclose would they say he should have disclosed?

72
00:03:39,640 --> 00:03:41,400
Speaker 2: And then just a couple of weeks ago, Pro Publica

73
00:03:41,440 --> 00:03:45,240
Speaker 2: had a follow up piece basically saying that Clarence Thomas's

74
00:03:45,360 --> 00:03:49,800
Speaker 2: adopted great nephew was going to get a free ride

75
00:03:49,880 --> 00:03:54,440
Speaker 2: due again to Harland Crowe's generosity, because the Harland Crow indirectly,

76
00:03:54,480 --> 00:03:58,240
Speaker 2: not droughtly, but indirectly paid for his adopted great nephews

77
00:03:58,320 --> 00:04:00,920
Speaker 2: first year of tuition at a nice private school. So

78
00:04:01,280 --> 00:04:04,160
Speaker 2: that's the basic nature of the allegation against Clarence Thomas

79
00:04:04,200 --> 00:04:08,760
Speaker 2: is that he allegedly again allegedly has not properly disclosed

80
00:04:09,040 --> 00:04:13,240
Speaker 2: the financial ties between him and a very well known

81
00:04:13,280 --> 00:04:14,360
Speaker 2: conservative donor, Harlan.

82
00:04:15,680 --> 00:04:19,080
Speaker 1: Now, why do they hate Justice Thomas so much? It

83
00:04:19,160 --> 00:04:26,000
Speaker 1: really does seem like he he gets more ferocious anger

84
00:04:26,200 --> 00:04:29,440
Speaker 1: from the left wing activists out there than any other

85
00:04:29,480 --> 00:04:31,600
Speaker 1: member of the Court, now that Scalia has passed away.

86
00:04:32,600 --> 00:04:34,560
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that's exactly right. I mean it's for

87
00:04:34,680 --> 00:04:37,440
Speaker 2: multiple reasons, right. One is I mean, from a strictly

88
00:04:37,480 --> 00:04:41,680
Speaker 2: kind of legal jurispudential perspective, there is no more doctrinaire

89
00:04:41,720 --> 00:04:43,880
Speaker 2: originalist than Clarence Thomas. I mean, you know, when it

90
00:04:43,880 --> 00:04:46,440
Speaker 2: comes to kind of the original public meaning of the Constitution,

91
00:04:47,000 --> 00:04:49,479
Speaker 2: I think it's fair to say Clarence Thomas is the

92
00:04:49,480 --> 00:04:53,360
Speaker 2: most devout, hardcore originalist on the Court even when Scalia

93
00:04:53,440 --> 00:04:55,400
Speaker 2: was there. I mean, I would argue that Clarence Thomas was,

94
00:04:55,480 --> 00:04:59,000
Speaker 2: you know, more originalist for lack of a better term,

95
00:04:59,000 --> 00:05:03,320
Speaker 2: than Scalia. So he's very very very consistent, and he's

96
00:05:03,480 --> 00:05:08,520
Speaker 2: very very consistent in delivering outcomes that the left invariably hates.

97
00:05:08,600 --> 00:05:10,120
Speaker 2: I mean, whatever the case may be, whether it's same

98
00:05:10,160 --> 00:05:13,120
Speaker 2: sex marriage, whether it's abortion, affirmative action, kind of guns,

99
00:05:13,160 --> 00:05:15,159
Speaker 2: I mean basically all of kind of the hot button

100
00:05:15,200 --> 00:05:18,200
Speaker 2: cultural issues. He has been on the opposite side of

101
00:05:18,240 --> 00:05:21,080
Speaker 2: the left, the mainstream media, the corporate interests, all that

102
00:05:21,120 --> 00:05:23,200
Speaker 2: stuff for literally over thirty years.

103
00:05:23,240 --> 00:05:23,400
Speaker 1: Now.

104
00:05:23,440 --> 00:05:27,120
Speaker 2: The slightly darker thing that's going on with Clarence Thomas

105
00:05:27,160 --> 00:05:29,119
Speaker 2: bu because, as I think you know all too well,

106
00:05:29,760 --> 00:05:31,719
Speaker 2: is we have this situation here where you have a

107
00:05:31,880 --> 00:05:34,840
Speaker 2: very conservative man who also happens to be a very

108
00:05:34,880 --> 00:05:37,679
Speaker 2: black man. Now, Clarence Thomas grew up dirt poor, dirt

109
00:05:37,680 --> 00:05:39,800
Speaker 2: poor in the Jim Crow South. English was not even

110
00:05:39,839 --> 00:05:42,240
Speaker 2: his first language growing up. There was actually a fabulous

111
00:05:42,320 --> 00:05:45,440
Speaker 2: documentary that came out around the time that COVID started

112
00:05:45,480 --> 00:05:48,240
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty. It was called Created Equals from Michael

113
00:05:48,320 --> 00:05:51,400
Speaker 2: Pack and Mark Poletta, a fabulous documentary. They go into

114
00:05:51,440 --> 00:05:55,000
Speaker 2: depth on Clarence Thomas's upbringing there in rural Georgia, and

115
00:05:55,080 --> 00:05:57,320
Speaker 2: you know, he really made it as kind of a

116
00:05:57,360 --> 00:05:59,200
Speaker 2: dirt poor black man who grew up in the Jim

117
00:05:59,240 --> 00:06:03,560
Speaker 2: Crow South and became a very, very very committed conservative.

118
00:06:03,600 --> 00:06:06,719
Speaker 2: And you know, similar to Tomas Sole, similar to Ben Carson,

119
00:06:06,760 --> 00:06:10,280
Speaker 2: similar to some of these other very prominent black conservatives,

120
00:06:10,360 --> 00:06:13,039
Speaker 2: Larry Elder kind of in the radio space. But Clarence

121
00:06:13,040 --> 00:06:15,240
Speaker 2: tom has probably gets it the worst of all of them.

122
00:06:15,320 --> 00:06:17,080
Speaker 2: And you know, I mean, he really has kind of

123
00:06:17,120 --> 00:06:21,280
Speaker 2: had this perpetual kind of Uncle Tom pejoratives throwing his

124
00:06:21,320 --> 00:06:23,880
Speaker 2: way for decades, and it's it's disgusting. I mean, it

125
00:06:23,960 --> 00:06:26,560
Speaker 2: is literally disgusting, but it kind of feeds this narrative

126
00:06:26,640 --> 00:06:28,560
Speaker 2: to kind of paraphrase something that if I recall, Ben

127
00:06:28,600 --> 00:06:31,200
Speaker 2: Carson said back when he ran for president in twenty

128
00:06:31,200 --> 00:06:33,960
Speaker 2: fifteen twenty sixteen, he had some line about, you know,

129
00:06:34,080 --> 00:06:38,040
Speaker 2: uppity white liberals not letting blacks leave the proverbial plantation, right,

130
00:06:38,120 --> 00:06:40,479
Speaker 2: and like that is a slightly darker explanation as to

131
00:06:40,480 --> 00:06:42,160
Speaker 2: what's going on. Here's what I think. It's a combination

132
00:06:42,200 --> 00:06:43,240
Speaker 2: of both of those facts.

133
00:06:43,760 --> 00:06:45,919
Speaker 1: I want to get into more on what's going on

134
00:06:45,960 --> 00:06:49,680
Speaker 1: with the Court and what they're trying to do, I think,

135
00:06:49,720 --> 00:06:52,320
Speaker 1: to undermine it, politicize it, and we'll get to that

136
00:06:52,400 --> 00:06:55,040
Speaker 1: in a seconds. Supreme Court leaker, I want to ask

137
00:06:55,080 --> 00:06:57,120
Speaker 1: you about the Supreme Court leaguer, and do you think

138
00:06:57,160 --> 00:06:59,920
Speaker 1: that they really don't know or do they not I've

139
00:07:00,000 --> 00:07:02,240
Speaker 1: I've been thinking for a while. The theory that I

140
00:07:02,279 --> 00:07:03,680
Speaker 1: have is I don't think they really want to know

141
00:07:04,480 --> 00:07:06,240
Speaker 1: because it just would create such a mess for them,

142
00:07:06,279 --> 00:07:08,040
Speaker 1: But we can get into that in just a second.

143
00:07:08,600 --> 00:07:10,800
Speaker 1: You all have help build My Pillow into an amazing

144
00:07:10,800 --> 00:07:13,160
Speaker 1: company because they have phenomenal products that you love. It's

145
00:07:13,240 --> 00:07:16,920
Speaker 1: very straightforward. Got great pillows, great sheets, great slippers, a

146
00:07:16,960 --> 00:07:18,720
Speaker 1: whole lot of stuff. If you go on the MyPillow

147
00:07:18,720 --> 00:07:21,640
Speaker 1: site you'll see it. But really, for me, the product

148
00:07:21,680 --> 00:07:24,400
Speaker 1: that started at all was the Geeza Dream Sheets. These

149
00:07:24,400 --> 00:07:27,080
Speaker 1: are ultrasoften breathe a little bit, extremely durable at the

150
00:07:27,120 --> 00:07:29,480
Speaker 1: same time. Right now, the Geeza Dream Sheets are the

151
00:07:29,480 --> 00:07:31,520
Speaker 1: lowest price ever, coming in as low as twenty nine

152
00:07:31,520 --> 00:07:34,440
Speaker 1: to ninety eight with promo code buck. Geeze Dream Sheets

153
00:07:34,440 --> 00:07:37,120
Speaker 1: come in multiple color styles and sizes. Now is the

154
00:07:37,160 --> 00:07:39,920
Speaker 1: time to upgrade your betting and enhance your sleep. Remember

155
00:07:39,960 --> 00:07:42,080
Speaker 1: my Pillow products come with a ten year warranty and

156
00:07:42,120 --> 00:07:45,480
Speaker 1: a sixty day money back guarantee. Just go to MyPillow

157
00:07:45,520 --> 00:07:48,520
Speaker 1: dot com click on the Radio Lister special square check

158
00:07:48,560 --> 00:07:51,120
Speaker 1: out this sale on the geez It dream Sheets. When

159
00:07:51,120 --> 00:07:53,120
Speaker 1: you click on this squareal also find deals and other

160
00:07:53,160 --> 00:07:56,040
Speaker 1: Mypillo products only around for a short time. Enter promo

161
00:07:56,120 --> 00:07:59,160
Speaker 1: code buck. That's promo code b uck. When you go

162
00:07:59,200 --> 00:08:02,480
Speaker 1: to MyPillow dot com for these limited time specials like

163
00:08:02,560 --> 00:08:04,320
Speaker 1: Geeze dream sheets. Get yourself a couple of pairs. If

164
00:08:04,320 --> 00:08:06,480
Speaker 1: you already have some, get a new pair. Because sheets

165
00:08:06,480 --> 00:08:08,720
Speaker 1: wear out over time. You want fresh sheets on your bed,

166
00:08:09,200 --> 00:08:12,560
Speaker 1: go to mypilo dot com. He's promo code buck for

167
00:08:12,680 --> 00:08:15,240
Speaker 1: first off. Just on the leak of the Supreme Court

168
00:08:16,000 --> 00:08:21,280
Speaker 1: Dobbs opinion, Josh, that for you. When that came out,

169
00:08:21,800 --> 00:08:24,240
Speaker 1: it seemed to me like we've entered this era now

170
00:08:24,360 --> 00:08:28,240
Speaker 1: where even the rules that we thought both sides agreed

171
00:08:28,240 --> 00:08:30,360
Speaker 1: on when it came to judiciary, or at least that

172
00:08:30,920 --> 00:08:33,719
Speaker 1: was our perception, those rules are being wiped away too.

173
00:08:33,760 --> 00:08:36,040
Speaker 1: Now we're just gonna leak Supreme Court decisions before they

174
00:08:36,040 --> 00:08:37,439
Speaker 1: happen to pressure justices.

175
00:08:38,679 --> 00:08:41,160
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean it kind of underscores one of the

176
00:08:41,200 --> 00:08:44,840
Speaker 2: greater recurring themes of the past six seven years or so,

177
00:08:44,960 --> 00:08:48,200
Speaker 2: which is it is the left who has fried foul

178
00:08:48,360 --> 00:08:52,200
Speaker 2: time and time again about the rights afforded, undermining of

179
00:08:52,240 --> 00:08:55,719
Speaker 2: our norms and our decency. Obviously, former President Trump kind

180
00:08:55,720 --> 00:08:58,560
Speaker 2: of being at the epicenter of that alleged undermining of norms,

181
00:08:58,840 --> 00:09:02,440
Speaker 2: whereas in reality, in reality, you know, all the way

182
00:09:02,480 --> 00:09:04,760
Speaker 2: going back to the Women's March, you know, you know,

183
00:09:04,880 --> 00:09:08,359
Speaker 2: violent protests in twenty seventeen, through the Black Lives Matter Antifa,

184
00:09:08,920 --> 00:09:12,120
Speaker 2: you know, quasi anarchy in the summer of twenty twenty

185
00:09:12,679 --> 00:09:15,040
Speaker 2: very much, including this league. It is time and time

186
00:09:15,080 --> 00:09:17,960
Speaker 2: again the left that is the one undermining these norms

187
00:09:18,000 --> 00:09:20,959
Speaker 2: without which we cannot long sustain a civilization. To be

188
00:09:21,040 --> 00:09:23,439
Speaker 2: quite frank, and when it comes to the judiciary in particular,

189
00:09:24,080 --> 00:09:25,679
Speaker 2: you know, Buck, when I first saw this, I mean

190
00:09:25,720 --> 00:09:28,440
Speaker 2: I remember exactly where I was. It was May third,

191
00:09:28,480 --> 00:09:30,640
Speaker 2: twenty twenty two. I could remember the exact date without

192
00:09:30,640 --> 00:09:32,959
Speaker 2: even looking it up, because I mean it was just

193
00:09:33,040 --> 00:09:35,760
Speaker 2: a shocking, shocking thing. I mean for someone like me

194
00:09:35,800 --> 00:09:37,920
Speaker 2: who went to law school, like clerks on a federal

195
00:09:37,960 --> 00:09:41,120
Speaker 2: Court of Appeals, the Fifth Circuit down in Dallas, Texas,

196
00:09:41,360 --> 00:09:43,440
Speaker 2: I mean, this is unheard of. I mean, there is

197
00:09:43,679 --> 00:09:47,040
Speaker 2: no precedent whatsoever for this, and there's no precedent whatsoever

198
00:09:47,120 --> 00:09:50,760
Speaker 2: for this because the Supreme Court literally cannot function like

199
00:09:50,800 --> 00:09:54,439
Speaker 2: they actually cannot do their job in an environment where

200
00:09:54,480 --> 00:09:58,240
Speaker 2: their private deliberations, their private emails, their drafts. I mean,

201
00:09:58,240 --> 00:10:01,079
Speaker 2: how do these idiots think that a Supreme Court opinion

202
00:10:01,080 --> 00:10:04,040
Speaker 2: gets written? I mean, the justices are constantly trying to

203
00:10:04,120 --> 00:10:07,760
Speaker 2: persuade one another to massage the language. They need secrecy.

204
00:10:07,840 --> 00:10:09,760
Speaker 2: I mean, the clerks need to know and the justices

205
00:10:09,800 --> 00:10:12,880
Speaker 2: need to know that those conversations are not going to

206
00:10:12,880 --> 00:10:15,199
Speaker 2: be leaked. They're not going to be subpoena or subject

207
00:10:15,200 --> 00:10:17,640
Speaker 2: to subpoena or anything like that. So, I mean, this

208
00:10:17,800 --> 00:10:21,120
Speaker 2: was a really, really, really big deal. And by the way,

209
00:10:21,440 --> 00:10:23,920
Speaker 2: I hate to say it, but my prediction about the

210
00:10:23,960 --> 00:10:26,199
Speaker 2: leaker being found, so I remember it was that night

211
00:10:26,240 --> 00:10:28,040
Speaker 2: or the day after I tweeted. I think it happened

212
00:10:28,120 --> 00:10:29,920
Speaker 2: like a Monday night. I tweeted, I bet we know

213
00:10:30,000 --> 00:10:32,240
Speaker 2: the leaker by Friday, and you know, geez, I mean,

214
00:10:32,920 --> 00:10:35,439
Speaker 2: you know, prediction that did not hold up well. But I,

215
00:10:36,440 --> 00:10:39,360
Speaker 2: for the life of me, just cannot believe that we

216
00:10:39,520 --> 00:10:42,040
Speaker 2: purportedly do not know the leaker to this day, and

217
00:10:42,160 --> 00:10:46,319
Speaker 2: I call BS. I just do not believe it. I truly,

218
00:10:46,480 --> 00:10:50,080
Speaker 2: earnestly do believe that at least one justice, and if

219
00:10:50,080 --> 00:10:52,080
Speaker 2: one justice knows, you have to assume all nine of

220
00:10:52,080 --> 00:10:55,720
Speaker 2: them know who the actual leaker was. So the Marshall

221
00:10:55,679 --> 00:10:58,079
Speaker 2: of Supreme Court had that fairly brief. I think it

222
00:10:58,160 --> 00:11:01,280
Speaker 2: was like two or three four page something conclusion back

223
00:11:01,320 --> 00:11:02,880
Speaker 2: in January. I think he was saying, we have not

224
00:11:02,920 --> 00:11:06,040
Speaker 2: identified the leaker. They had this report kind of a

225
00:11:06,080 --> 00:11:09,439
Speaker 2: fixed at the end by Michael Chertoff, the former Republican

226
00:11:09,520 --> 00:11:12,040
Speaker 2: DHS secretary, to try to give it kind of you know,

227
00:11:12,840 --> 00:11:15,080
Speaker 2: basically just trying to do that to kind of, you know,

228
00:11:15,360 --> 00:11:18,920
Speaker 2: hamp down conservative dissent. But I just don't believe it,

229
00:11:18,960 --> 00:11:21,600
Speaker 2: and I doubly don't believe it because Justice sam Alito

230
00:11:21,720 --> 00:11:25,880
Speaker 2: had this very very colorful recent interview with James Taranto

231
00:11:25,920 --> 00:11:29,240
Speaker 2: of the Wall Street Journal where he actually told James Taranto,

232
00:11:29,240 --> 00:11:31,280
Speaker 2: as a sitting Justice the Supreme Court told the Wall

233
00:11:31,320 --> 00:11:34,360
Speaker 2: Street Journal op ed page editor, he told him that

234
00:11:34,440 --> 00:11:37,200
Speaker 2: he thought he knew who the leaker was, he just

235
00:11:37,240 --> 00:11:40,520
Speaker 2: didn't have the evidentiary threshold to go public with it.

236
00:11:40,760 --> 00:11:44,000
Speaker 2: And that is very massage language, even by Justice Alito,

237
00:11:44,080 --> 00:11:46,640
Speaker 2: because he wouldn't even say that. I think if he

238
00:11:46,720 --> 00:11:49,440
Speaker 2: was actually damn sure confidence and again then if he's confident,

239
00:11:49,480 --> 00:11:50,680
Speaker 2: then I think the rest of the court knows. So

240
00:11:50,960 --> 00:11:53,760
Speaker 2: I call bs on the whole thing. And it's one

241
00:11:53,800 --> 00:11:57,120
Speaker 2: thing bug that myself and also our mutual friend Ben

242
00:11:57,160 --> 00:11:59,000
Speaker 2: Winingarn and we talked about this issue. I feel like

243
00:11:59,280 --> 00:12:01,760
Speaker 2: all the time our knock On Squad podcast, which we

244
00:12:01,800 --> 00:12:03,320
Speaker 2: do every week, Ben and I are two of the

245
00:12:03,320 --> 00:12:05,600
Speaker 2: guys who are just beating the drum on this because

246
00:12:05,640 --> 00:12:07,920
Speaker 2: it is so important to get to the bottom of this.

247
00:12:08,000 --> 00:12:12,000
Speaker 2: I mean, this leaker must be publicly identified, publicly shamed,

248
00:12:12,040 --> 00:12:15,000
Speaker 2: and reprimanded. I mean there have to be serious repercussions

249
00:12:15,000 --> 00:12:17,400
Speaker 2: for this.

250
00:12:17,400 --> 00:12:20,559
Speaker 1: This is also a moment in time where I feel

251
00:12:20,559 --> 00:12:24,880
Speaker 1: like I need to just think of all the possibilities here. Jeff, uh,

252
00:12:25,080 --> 00:12:27,880
Speaker 1: do you think it's possible that it could have been

253
00:12:28,000 --> 00:12:30,240
Speaker 1: it would be a lib And that's clear. I mean

254
00:12:30,240 --> 00:12:31,600
Speaker 1: that was clear to me from the beginning. Some people

255
00:12:31,640 --> 00:12:33,600
Speaker 1: were trying to say, we don't know, Yeah, it's someone

256
00:12:33,600 --> 00:12:37,400
Speaker 1: who's a LIB. Is it definitely a staffer in your mind?

257
00:12:37,480 --> 00:12:39,320
Speaker 1: Or do you think that maybe one of the leftist

258
00:12:39,400 --> 00:12:41,760
Speaker 1: judges on the court might have done this?

259
00:12:43,360 --> 00:12:47,040
Speaker 2: So my very first thought when this first happened last May,

260
00:12:47,160 --> 00:12:48,880
Speaker 2: over a year ago now, was that it was probably

261
00:12:48,960 --> 00:12:50,960
Speaker 2: a clerk from a liberal chambers, right, I mean, that's

262
00:12:51,000 --> 00:12:54,720
Speaker 2: kind of standard guests, so Sotomayora Kagan at that time, Brian,

263
00:12:54,800 --> 00:12:57,000
Speaker 2: So I remember at that time, Stephen Bryer was actually

264
00:12:57,000 --> 00:12:59,360
Speaker 2: about to retire, so some people kind of immediately said,

265
00:12:59,360 --> 00:13:01,959
Speaker 2: you know, maybe he going into yolo mode. I never

266
00:13:02,000 --> 00:13:03,760
Speaker 2: really bought that, because you know, Bryan was on the

267
00:13:03,760 --> 00:13:06,000
Speaker 2: Core for thirty plus years, he was in his eighties

268
00:13:06,000 --> 00:13:08,560
Speaker 2: at Clinton appointing me. I mean fundamentally a different era, right,

269
00:13:08,600 --> 00:13:10,280
Speaker 2: I mean, he just like kind of like an older,

270
00:13:10,360 --> 00:13:13,280
Speaker 2: kind of more statesman like liberal, not this kind of

271
00:13:13,360 --> 00:13:15,800
Speaker 2: you know, so too my or like liberal. But here's

272
00:13:15,800 --> 00:13:18,240
Speaker 2: what I will say. If it was a clerk, I

273
00:13:18,280 --> 00:13:20,600
Speaker 2: think there's probably a higher likelihood that they would not

274
00:13:20,640 --> 00:13:23,320
Speaker 2: have gone to these lengths to shield the identity. So

275
00:13:23,480 --> 00:13:28,720
Speaker 2: I actually genuinely do believe, especially after the Marshall's totally

276
00:13:28,800 --> 00:13:32,120
Speaker 2: underwhelming report came out back in January, and I doubly believe.

277
00:13:32,160 --> 00:13:34,960
Speaker 2: I think after this interview that that sam Alito gave

278
00:13:35,040 --> 00:13:37,600
Speaker 2: to James Tranto at the Wall Street Journal, I am,

279
00:13:37,640 --> 00:13:40,000
Speaker 2: I am kind of coming to the conclusion personally that

280
00:13:40,160 --> 00:13:43,080
Speaker 2: I actually think it's it probably is a justice And

281
00:13:43,120 --> 00:13:45,240
Speaker 2: that's not something that I would have said last May.

282
00:13:45,280 --> 00:13:47,800
Speaker 2: But the fact that they're going to such lengths to

283
00:13:47,880 --> 00:13:50,679
Speaker 2: try to bury this story really does kind of make

284
00:13:50,720 --> 00:13:52,679
Speaker 2: me think that it probably is Sonya so to my

285
00:13:52,760 --> 00:13:55,120
Speaker 2: oor and you know, I don't have a smoking gun

286
00:13:55,160 --> 00:13:58,200
Speaker 2: for that. I would be you know, remissified in say that.

287
00:13:58,240 --> 00:14:01,320
Speaker 2: I don't want to sound like, you know, like tinfoil

288
00:14:01,360 --> 00:14:04,199
Speaker 2: hat guy over here, but looking just at where kind

289
00:14:04,240 --> 00:14:06,559
Speaker 2: of the evidence is leading me right now, again, I

290
00:14:07,000 --> 00:14:09,320
Speaker 2: think if it was a clerk, they probably would have

291
00:14:09,400 --> 00:14:12,080
Speaker 2: just publicly identified the clerk, I mean, but the fact

292
00:14:12,120 --> 00:14:15,440
Speaker 2: that they're hiding it, I'm thinking it's so in myr buck.

293
00:14:15,880 --> 00:14:18,079
Speaker 1: My theory alllong has been the don't they don't want

294
00:14:18,080 --> 00:14:21,200
Speaker 1: to know, and what we've seen more recently I think

295
00:14:21,960 --> 00:14:24,160
Speaker 1: goes right along with that. And I appreciate that you're

296
00:14:24,320 --> 00:14:27,480
Speaker 1: willing to even say who you think it is. To me,

297
00:14:27,720 --> 00:14:30,400
Speaker 1: it was it was likely to be a justice all

298
00:14:30,440 --> 00:14:35,680
Speaker 1: along here given this issue, right, this isn't about eminent domain,

299
00:14:35,920 --> 00:14:38,480
Speaker 1: not that that's not important, but that's not you know,

300
00:14:38,480 --> 00:14:41,320
Speaker 1: people generally don't lose their mind over that, right abortion.

301
00:14:43,320 --> 00:14:46,640
Speaker 1: The left thinks that this is really it's really the

302
00:14:46,720 --> 00:14:50,720
Speaker 1: foundation of their immoral ethics. I would argue that this

303
00:14:50,800 --> 00:14:53,560
Speaker 1: is this is like the building block for all of

304
00:14:53,600 --> 00:14:56,840
Speaker 1: their demonic insanity. So in case that is what I

305
00:14:56,920 --> 00:14:58,480
Speaker 1: we I said on all that stuff. I want to

306
00:14:58,480 --> 00:15:01,480
Speaker 1: ask you about the affirmative action case. What Students for

307
00:15:02,040 --> 00:15:05,160
Speaker 1: Fair Admission via North Carolina and Students for Fair Admission v.

308
00:15:05,240 --> 00:15:08,080
Speaker 1: Harvard that's expected to come out next month. Basically, for

309
00:15:08,080 --> 00:15:11,560
Speaker 1: everybody watching this, if you've ever felt like affirmative action,

310
00:15:11,880 --> 00:15:15,680
Speaker 1: this is so obviously unconstitutional. How the hell has this

311
00:15:15,720 --> 00:15:17,360
Speaker 1: been able to go on as long as it has

312
00:15:17,480 --> 00:15:20,360
Speaker 1: in admissions and a whole range of things. It might

313
00:15:20,400 --> 00:15:22,360
Speaker 1: get a big loss, A big l may be coming

314
00:15:22,400 --> 00:15:24,040
Speaker 1: its way here soon. We'll talk to Josh about it

315
00:15:24,040 --> 00:15:27,080
Speaker 1: in just a second. But you know, the economy is

316
00:15:27,600 --> 00:15:29,320
Speaker 1: on the break right now. For a lot of people.

317
00:15:29,720 --> 00:15:32,720
Speaker 1: Bank failures could happen anytime. They've already happened some of them.

318
00:15:33,280 --> 00:15:35,680
Speaker 1: It could be more. And who knows what commercial real

319
00:15:35,800 --> 00:15:38,320
Speaker 1: estate's going to lead to. We're heading into a really

320
00:15:38,400 --> 00:15:39,920
Speaker 1: rough patch here, I think, on the economy.

321
00:15:39,960 --> 00:15:40,600
Speaker 2: So what are you going to do?

322
00:15:41,520 --> 00:15:44,920
Speaker 1: I say, prepare gold? What is the thing that has

323
00:15:45,000 --> 00:15:46,800
Speaker 1: never been worth zero? What is the thing that is

324
00:15:46,800 --> 00:15:49,360
Speaker 1: a store of value in the most turbulent times, not

325
00:15:49,440 --> 00:15:54,120
Speaker 1: just throughout American history, throughout all of history. Gold? Right now,

326
00:15:54,160 --> 00:15:56,280
Speaker 1: you can take action and get some gold and some

327
00:15:56,400 --> 00:16:00,640
Speaker 1: silver also another very precious important precious metal on hand.

328
00:16:00,680 --> 00:16:03,560
Speaker 1: Get actual, real physical gold and silver with the Oxford

329
00:16:03,600 --> 00:16:06,440
Speaker 1: Gold Group. You can also have it in your IRA

330
00:16:06,600 --> 00:16:09,160
Speaker 1: or four oh one K Gold is an easy portfolio

331
00:16:09,200 --> 00:16:11,800
Speaker 1: protection plan to get started with or to add to

332
00:16:11,800 --> 00:16:13,000
Speaker 1: if you've already been doing this for a while. I've

333
00:16:13,000 --> 00:16:14,720
Speaker 1: got gold sitting right here with me in the studio.

334
00:16:15,320 --> 00:16:17,360
Speaker 1: Call the Oxford Gold Group today. Talk to them about

335
00:16:17,360 --> 00:16:19,600
Speaker 1: what you're looking to spend. Talked about your portfolio size.

336
00:16:19,640 --> 00:16:22,680
Speaker 1: They want long term gold buyers. They want people who

337
00:16:22,800 --> 00:16:24,880
Speaker 1: are long term customers, so that means they want you

338
00:16:24,920 --> 00:16:29,000
Speaker 1: to feel good about the position you're building up over time.

339
00:16:29,240 --> 00:16:31,760
Speaker 1: But you want to start now before the economy goes

340
00:16:32,320 --> 00:16:35,000
Speaker 1: really into a bad place. Gold prices are going to

341
00:16:35,040 --> 00:16:38,120
Speaker 1: go only in one direction. Call eight three to three

342
00:16:38,200 --> 00:16:41,480
Speaker 1: four zero four gold the Oxford Gold Group. Ask about

343
00:16:41,480 --> 00:16:44,640
Speaker 1: free bonus opportunities. You may be eligible for a three

344
00:16:44,880 --> 00:16:51,040
Speaker 1: three four zero four g LD students for fair admission, Josh,

345
00:16:51,240 --> 00:16:54,360
Speaker 1: are they going to prevail? What do you think the

346
00:16:54,680 --> 00:16:57,680
Speaker 1: justice count will be at the Supreme Court and what

347
00:16:57,720 --> 00:16:59,880
Speaker 1: will the effect be taken away?

348
00:16:59,880 --> 00:17:04,720
Speaker 2: So yeah, so these are big cases. I mean, you know,

349
00:17:04,760 --> 00:17:08,159
Speaker 2: these affirmative action cases I think are by far the

350
00:17:08,200 --> 00:17:12,000
Speaker 2: most important cases, the juiciest cases, the sexiest cases you

351
00:17:12,080 --> 00:17:14,879
Speaker 2: might say on the Supreme Court's docket this term. You know,

352
00:17:14,920 --> 00:17:16,840
Speaker 2: I would be remiss if I didn't point out buck

353
00:17:17,480 --> 00:17:21,360
Speaker 2: the intellectual godfather of these two cases was someone who

354
00:17:21,680 --> 00:17:24,919
Speaker 2: asked away recently, way way too young, from brain cancer,

355
00:17:24,960 --> 00:17:27,680
Speaker 2: a brilliant former Clarence Thomas Clark by the name of

356
00:17:27,720 --> 00:17:30,400
Speaker 2: Will Consavoy. So you know, first of all, it would

357
00:17:30,400 --> 00:17:34,199
Speaker 2: be wonderful posthumous kind of vindication of Will Consvoy, who

358
00:17:34,240 --> 00:17:36,480
Speaker 2: I knew personally and was just an absolutely brilliant legal

359
00:17:36,520 --> 00:17:40,040
Speaker 2: mind if the Court does finally do away with affirmative action.

360
00:17:40,200 --> 00:17:43,000
Speaker 2: So very brief history of affirmative action of the Supreme Court.

361
00:17:43,080 --> 00:17:44,840
Speaker 2: So there was a case in nineteen seventy eight out

362
00:17:44,840 --> 00:17:47,280
Speaker 2: of California called Baki, which is kind of the first

363
00:17:47,280 --> 00:17:51,600
Speaker 2: time that the Supreme Court basically legitimize the idea that

364
00:17:51,680 --> 00:17:55,160
Speaker 2: despite the very clearly worded statue that is a civil

365
00:17:55,240 --> 00:17:58,840
Speaker 2: rights Act which very clearly forbids discrimination in higher education,

366
00:17:58,960 --> 00:18:01,400
Speaker 2: that's Title six on the base of Ray. So Baki's

367
00:18:01,440 --> 00:18:03,119
Speaker 2: the first time that the Court basically said that no

368
00:18:03,160 --> 00:18:05,040
Speaker 2: you actually kind of sort of can get around this

369
00:18:05,119 --> 00:18:08,000
Speaker 2: with some kind of quota style things. Infamously, in two

370
00:18:08,000 --> 00:18:10,840
Speaker 2: thousand and three, two cases out of the University in Michigan,

371
00:18:10,880 --> 00:18:14,080
Speaker 2: one called Grutder, one called Rats, the Supreme Court basically

372
00:18:14,080 --> 00:18:17,560
Speaker 2: affirmed the basic holding of Baki. They tweaked the formula

373
00:18:17,560 --> 00:18:20,359
Speaker 2: a little bit, but very bad ruling there. And the

374
00:18:20,400 --> 00:18:23,120
Speaker 2: Court has punted multiple times since then, including a case

375
00:18:23,160 --> 00:18:26,480
Speaker 2: out of the University of Texas called Fisher. They declined

376
00:18:26,480 --> 00:18:29,640
Speaker 2: to overturn Grutder and Baki. But I really do think

377
00:18:29,640 --> 00:18:32,119
Speaker 2: this is the time. I actually genuinely think that this

378
00:18:32,240 --> 00:18:35,159
Speaker 2: actually is the time in these cases out of Harvard

379
00:18:35,359 --> 00:18:37,719
Speaker 2: and University North Carolina. And the reason that you have

380
00:18:37,840 --> 00:18:40,240
Speaker 2: both those cases, by the way, so it's one public school,

381
00:18:40,280 --> 00:18:43,639
Speaker 2: one private school. The basic idea here is that the Constitution,

382
00:18:43,840 --> 00:18:47,440
Speaker 2: the fourteenth Amendment, directly applies to a public university because

383
00:18:47,440 --> 00:18:50,159
Speaker 2: of public university is a state actor, whereas the private

384
00:18:50,240 --> 00:18:53,960
Speaker 2: university Harvard. You could make an argument that's a state

385
00:18:53,960 --> 00:18:56,560
Speaker 2: actor because they take federal funds, but it's certainly covered

386
00:18:56,560 --> 00:18:59,680
Speaker 2: by Title six, the statutory hook of the nineteen sixty

387
00:18:59,680 --> 00:19:02,440
Speaker 2: course right sack. So long story short, so the current

388
00:19:02,480 --> 00:19:05,280
Speaker 2: court you have. I mean, you know, people would say

389
00:19:05,280 --> 00:19:07,480
Speaker 2: you have five to six conservative justice depends how you

390
00:19:07,480 --> 00:19:10,439
Speaker 2: want to count John Roberts. It's it's basically a three

391
00:19:10,480 --> 00:19:12,800
Speaker 2: to three three court where you have three solid liberals,

392
00:19:12,840 --> 00:19:17,840
Speaker 2: you have three fairly reliable conservatives Thomas Alito and I'll

393
00:19:17,840 --> 00:19:20,440
Speaker 2: count Gorse that even though that's a more complicated conversation.

394
00:19:20,720 --> 00:19:22,240
Speaker 2: Then you have these kind of three in the middle

395
00:19:22,240 --> 00:19:25,920
Speaker 2: of Barrick, Havanaugh, and Roberts. So if you're starting to

396
00:19:26,000 --> 00:19:27,600
Speaker 2: count votes, which is kind of what you have to

397
00:19:27,600 --> 00:19:30,720
Speaker 2: do to play this kind of parlor game, I count

398
00:19:30,800 --> 00:19:33,359
Speaker 2: six votes, honestly, and I actually think that this is

399
00:19:33,400 --> 00:19:37,320
Speaker 2: one issue. This is a legitimately maybe the only issue,

400
00:19:37,480 --> 00:19:41,000
Speaker 2: literally the only jurisprdential issue that I think John Roberts

401
00:19:41,080 --> 00:19:43,919
Speaker 2: is probably actually solid on, because he's been solid on

402
00:19:43,960 --> 00:19:46,560
Speaker 2: this issue going back to his first years at the Court.

403
00:19:46,640 --> 00:19:49,480
Speaker 2: In fact, John roberts Is most famous line that he

404
00:19:49,600 --> 00:19:52,320
Speaker 2: has ever put into a Supreme Court opinion probably comes

405
00:19:52,359 --> 00:19:55,119
Speaker 2: from a two thousand and seven case that Seattle, Washington

406
00:19:55,160 --> 00:19:58,960
Speaker 2: called Parents Involved, where he famously said, quote, the way

407
00:19:59,000 --> 00:20:01,560
Speaker 2: to stop discriminate on the basis of race is to

408
00:20:01,640 --> 00:20:05,280
Speaker 2: stop discriminating on the basis of race. And you know, look,

409
00:20:05,280 --> 00:20:07,600
Speaker 2: if you have Roberts, then you clearly have the votes there,

410
00:20:07,600 --> 00:20:09,960
Speaker 2: because there's no way that Roberts would take that without

411
00:20:10,000 --> 00:20:13,280
Speaker 2: everyone else falling in line. So I am actually cautiously

412
00:20:13,359 --> 00:20:17,800
Speaker 2: optimistic about the last remaining actual form of systemic racism

413
00:20:17,880 --> 00:20:19,400
Speaker 2: in America going away next month.

414
00:20:19,400 --> 00:20:21,960
Speaker 1: I really am What will it look like if the

415
00:20:22,000 --> 00:20:25,160
Speaker 1: decision comes down. Let's say it's a six y three

416
00:20:25,800 --> 00:20:27,600
Speaker 1: or it doesn't matter right five four six three, But

417
00:20:27,760 --> 00:20:31,040
Speaker 1: if the decision does overturn it, what will the implications

418
00:20:31,080 --> 00:20:33,760
Speaker 1: be for schools? Which school's private public? How do you

419
00:20:33,760 --> 00:20:34,640
Speaker 1: think that breaks down?

420
00:20:36,320 --> 00:20:39,240
Speaker 2: So if you really against UNC and Tarvard, then you're

421
00:20:39,240 --> 00:20:42,320
Speaker 2: gonna end up applying both the Constitution and the Civil

422
00:20:42,400 --> 00:20:44,960
Speaker 2: Rights Acts. So you know, in theory, both those opinions

423
00:20:44,960 --> 00:20:47,080
Speaker 2: come out the right way. And by the way, Katanji

424
00:20:47,080 --> 00:20:49,320
Speaker 2: Brown Jackson the reason that these cases are separate in

425
00:20:49,320 --> 00:20:51,800
Speaker 2: addition to the public private things that Katanji Brown Jackson

426
00:20:51,840 --> 00:20:54,080
Speaker 2: is actually recused from the Harvard case because she was

427
00:20:54,119 --> 00:20:57,560
Speaker 2: on some or ARUs on things. So you know, my guest, formally,

428
00:20:57,600 --> 00:20:59,000
Speaker 2: I guess would be six to three in the UNC

429
00:20:59,119 --> 00:21:02,639
Speaker 2: K six two in the Harvard case with Jackson recused.

430
00:21:03,000 --> 00:21:05,880
Speaker 2: But you know, in theory, the consequences should be pretty drastic.

431
00:21:06,200 --> 00:21:08,560
Speaker 2: But I do, you know, I hate to sound kind

432
00:21:08,600 --> 00:21:10,560
Speaker 2: of black built and pessimistic, but I am saying in

433
00:21:10,640 --> 00:21:13,359
Speaker 2: theory here because you know, I mean, you and I

434
00:21:13,400 --> 00:21:15,320
Speaker 2: know how these universities work, Buck, I mean, there's a

435
00:21:15,320 --> 00:21:17,520
Speaker 2: lot of kind of behind the scenes kind of you know,

436
00:21:17,600 --> 00:21:21,399
Speaker 2: you know, DEI bureaucrats who are still kind of you know,

437
00:21:21,440 --> 00:21:24,399
Speaker 2: the foxes running the henhouse. And you know, I think

438
00:21:24,520 --> 00:21:27,639
Speaker 2: the conventional wisdom, which I generally share, is that a

439
00:21:27,720 --> 00:21:30,440
Speaker 2: lot of these emissions offices will basically find a way

440
00:21:30,520 --> 00:21:33,199
Speaker 2: to do it while trying to hide the ball. So

441
00:21:33,240 --> 00:21:35,320
Speaker 2: it will basically just kind of give out offers people

442
00:21:35,359 --> 00:21:40,480
Speaker 2: who are clearly underqualified while basically making crap up. And

443
00:21:40,640 --> 00:21:42,399
Speaker 2: you know, the question at that point becomes, how do

444
00:21:42,440 --> 00:21:45,840
Speaker 2: you police making crap up thing? And I don't know,

445
00:21:45,920 --> 00:21:48,320
Speaker 2: I don't actually know exactly what that would entail. I mean,

446
00:21:48,520 --> 00:21:49,960
Speaker 2: at that point, though it might be more of a

447
00:21:50,000 --> 00:21:53,000
Speaker 2: state level issue. You know, maybe some more states can

448
00:21:53,080 --> 00:21:55,280
Speaker 2: kind of, you know, you know, more narrowly craft some

449
00:21:55,480 --> 00:21:59,480
Speaker 2: very clever statues to kind of outlaw specific practices, probably

450
00:21:59,520 --> 00:22:01,040
Speaker 2: the kind of thing that here in Florida, A Rond,

451
00:22:01,040 --> 00:22:02,959
Speaker 2: the Santis and the Florida legislature might want to take

452
00:22:03,000 --> 00:22:05,160
Speaker 2: a look at next term if the form anti faction

453
00:22:05,280 --> 00:22:07,840
Speaker 2: cases do indeed go the way that I'm predicting. But

454
00:22:08,520 --> 00:22:12,159
Speaker 2: I totally totally anticipate that universities will do everything they

455
00:22:12,200 --> 00:22:13,000
Speaker 2: can to get around this.

456
00:22:13,880 --> 00:22:16,919
Speaker 1: Yeah, my sense is that they're getting rid of the

457
00:22:17,000 --> 00:22:20,240
Speaker 1: SAT for example, and a lot of supposedly lead schools.

458
00:22:21,359 --> 00:22:24,240
Speaker 1: Some people will still submit their SAT, of course, you know,

459
00:22:24,280 --> 00:22:28,000
Speaker 1: if you're an Asian kid, you know, Asian American kid,

460
00:22:28,520 --> 00:22:30,840
Speaker 1: you're going to submit your sixteen hundred SAT even if

461
00:22:30,840 --> 00:22:33,639
Speaker 1: it's not required. But by not making it required at

462
00:22:33,680 --> 00:22:37,080
Speaker 1: Columbia or Harvard or wherever they can, then it's hard.

463
00:22:37,240 --> 00:22:39,040
Speaker 1: It makes it easier to cover the tracks that the

464
00:22:39,080 --> 00:22:44,080
Speaker 1: continuation of the holistic you know, racial preference system that

465
00:22:44,119 --> 00:22:46,520
Speaker 1: they have, holistic in quotes that they have in place, right,

466
00:22:46,520 --> 00:22:48,600
Speaker 1: I mean, that's that's how I think, because I know

467
00:22:48,680 --> 00:22:51,320
Speaker 1: this because I remember one of these decisions, of the

468
00:22:51,359 --> 00:22:53,040
Speaker 1: earlier ones you mentioned, came down when I was at

469
00:22:53,080 --> 00:22:56,600
Speaker 1: Amherst and studying with your main man Hadley Archists. By

470
00:22:56,640 --> 00:22:59,679
Speaker 1: the way, what's up. Hadley sends high fives to everybody

471
00:22:59,720 --> 00:23:01,919
Speaker 1: out there. For those of you know Hadlee Arcis in

472
00:23:01,960 --> 00:23:05,760
Speaker 1: the house. But I remember the president of Amher's College

473
00:23:05,800 --> 00:23:08,240
Speaker 1: said at some big open forum on this, look, honestly,

474
00:23:08,280 --> 00:23:10,440
Speaker 1: it doesn't matter what the Supreme Court says. We're gonna

475
00:23:10,480 --> 00:23:12,000
Speaker 1: keep taking who we want to take, and we'll get

476
00:23:12,000 --> 00:23:15,640
Speaker 1: around it. And I was I was like, wow, look

477
00:23:15,680 --> 00:23:18,760
Speaker 1: at that. Just imagine imagine the Supreme Court said you

478
00:23:18,800 --> 00:23:22,600
Speaker 1: can't discriminate against black and Latino students in admission, and

479
00:23:22,640 --> 00:23:24,600
Speaker 1: you had a president of a college come forward and say, well,

480
00:23:24,640 --> 00:23:25,960
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't care if the Supreme Court says

481
00:23:25,960 --> 00:23:28,520
Speaker 1: we're still gonna do that. He did that. He just

482
00:23:28,520 --> 00:23:31,720
Speaker 1: did it against other races, not those races. That's exactly

483
00:23:32,440 --> 00:23:34,879
Speaker 1: that was. That was actually, gosh, I can't render the

484
00:23:34,920 --> 00:23:38,320
Speaker 1: guy's name. We had a president Marx aptly named, I

485
00:23:38,400 --> 00:23:40,520
Speaker 1: might add, but then there was the one before him.

486
00:23:40,520 --> 00:23:43,480
Speaker 1: I can't even remember the president's name. Guy was a bureaucrat.

487
00:23:44,000 --> 00:23:46,120
Speaker 1: Let's talk about Trump and his legal woes. We're gonna

488
00:23:46,119 --> 00:23:50,040
Speaker 1: put you in the role of Trump legal advisor, maybe

489
00:23:50,040 --> 00:23:52,560
Speaker 1: even a Trump defense attorney here in a second, based

490
00:23:52,600 --> 00:23:55,399
Speaker 1: on what he's facing, so we'll get to that, but

491
00:23:55,480 --> 00:23:58,480
Speaker 1: first a word from responsor. Tunnel Towers Foundation Tonnents of

492
00:23:58,520 --> 00:24:01,160
Speaker 1: Towers has been honoring a Maria as heroes ever since

493
00:24:01,160 --> 00:24:03,760
Speaker 1: the tragic events of nine to eleven. The foundation honors

494
00:24:03,800 --> 00:24:06,400
Speaker 1: fallen and severely injured heroes and their families with mortgage

495
00:24:06,440 --> 00:24:09,080
Speaker 1: free homes. This year alone, hundreds of gold star and

496
00:24:09,119 --> 00:24:12,080
Speaker 1: fallen first responder families with young children, and our nation's

497
00:24:12,080 --> 00:24:15,280
Speaker 1: most severely injured veterans and first responders are receiving homes.

498
00:24:15,600 --> 00:24:18,280
Speaker 1: More than five hundred homeless veterans received housing and services

499
00:24:18,320 --> 00:24:20,920
Speaker 1: last year, and more than fifteen hundred are receiving housing

500
00:24:20,960 --> 00:24:23,679
Speaker 1: and services this year. And this coming Memorial Day, all

501
00:24:23,720 --> 00:24:25,520
Speaker 1: of the brave men and women lost since nine to

502
00:24:25,560 --> 00:24:27,880
Speaker 1: eleven in the War on Terror are having their names

503
00:24:27,920 --> 00:24:30,760
Speaker 1: read aloud in a Tonented Tower ceremony in our nation's capital.

504
00:24:31,240 --> 00:24:33,199
Speaker 1: Through the Tunnel the Towers nine to eleven Institute, the

505
00:24:33,200 --> 00:24:36,280
Speaker 1: foundation is educating kids in kindergarten through twelfth grade about

506
00:24:36,280 --> 00:24:39,359
Speaker 1: our nation's darkest day. Join Tententha Towers on its mission

507
00:24:39,400 --> 00:24:42,160
Speaker 1: to do good. Please help America to never forget its

508
00:24:42,160 --> 00:24:44,840
Speaker 1: greatest heroes. Join me and donating eleven dollars a month.

509
00:24:44,880 --> 00:24:47,480
Speaker 1: The TNATA towers at T two T dot org. That's

510
00:24:47,560 --> 00:24:52,080
Speaker 1: t the number two T dot org. All right, Josh,

511
00:24:53,160 --> 00:24:56,320
Speaker 1: Which additional, we know that Trump just lost this civil

512
00:24:56,359 --> 00:25:00,520
Speaker 1: case to know Egene Carol in the US. We know

513
00:25:00,560 --> 00:25:06,320
Speaker 1: he's facing this twenty some odd counts of felony like

514
00:25:06,440 --> 00:25:10,359
Speaker 1: misspelling or whatever. Basically that he's paying off the porn

515
00:25:10,400 --> 00:25:14,320
Speaker 1: star with the money that's in Manhattan. There's also Georgia,

516
00:25:14,359 --> 00:25:16,199
Speaker 1: and there's a Special Council, and maybe there's something else

517
00:25:16,240 --> 00:25:18,280
Speaker 1: they're gonna throw at us. We're not even thinking of

518
00:25:18,359 --> 00:25:22,080
Speaker 1: right now. Which of these are you the most certain

519
00:25:22,800 --> 00:25:26,000
Speaker 1: is going to be a problem for him? And do

520
00:25:26,080 --> 00:25:28,359
Speaker 1: you think they're going to go all the way on

521
00:25:28,400 --> 00:25:32,359
Speaker 1: the Special Council with the federal indictment from Jack Jack Smith?

522
00:25:33,960 --> 00:25:36,040
Speaker 2: I mean, they definitely might. So. Look, I mean, I

523
00:25:36,080 --> 00:25:39,520
Speaker 2: think the conventional wisdom, which I probably share, is that

524
00:25:39,640 --> 00:25:43,439
Speaker 2: the classified document stuff, the infamous marl Lago rate last August,

525
00:25:44,200 --> 00:25:48,000
Speaker 2: I think that probably will not amount to anything. I mean,

526
00:25:48,040 --> 00:25:50,639
Speaker 2: it's kind of remarkable how quickly we've forgotten. But I mean,

527
00:25:50,720 --> 00:25:54,320
Speaker 2: Joe Biden literally had his own classified documents retention scandal

528
00:25:54,359 --> 00:25:57,240
Speaker 2: I mean it was just in January is happened to be,

529
00:25:57,480 --> 00:26:00,280
Speaker 2: you know, as many things in Biden world are happened

530
00:26:00,280 --> 00:26:03,040
Speaker 2: to have some implications for the Chinese Communist Party. So

531
00:26:04,080 --> 00:26:07,280
Speaker 2: if I were the FEDS, I personally, you know, if

532
00:26:07,320 --> 00:26:10,720
Speaker 2: I were mister Smith as a special prosecutor, I probably

533
00:26:10,720 --> 00:26:12,760
Speaker 2: would be shying away a little bit from that case,

534
00:26:13,080 --> 00:26:15,919
Speaker 2: a little more towards the January sixth case. But you know,

535
00:26:16,000 --> 00:26:18,119
Speaker 2: here's why. And to be clear, Buck, I think that

536
00:26:18,160 --> 00:26:21,960
Speaker 2: the January six stuff is legally speaking, is beyond frivolous.

537
00:26:22,160 --> 00:26:25,520
Speaker 2: You know, this notion that he incited violence, let alone

538
00:26:25,600 --> 00:26:28,840
Speaker 2: incited insurrection. I mean, there is direct US Supreme Court

539
00:26:29,080 --> 00:26:32,119
Speaker 2: case law on points here from the nineteen sixties. The

540
00:26:32,880 --> 00:26:35,840
Speaker 2: thresholds where you have, where you have speech that is

541
00:26:35,840 --> 00:26:39,640
Speaker 2: not first memen protective that actually results in incitement of violence,

542
00:26:40,000 --> 00:26:43,000
Speaker 2: it is a very very very high threshold. And I've

543
00:26:43,080 --> 00:26:45,600
Speaker 2: read over what Donald Trump said at the Ellipses, and

544
00:26:45,600 --> 00:26:48,359
Speaker 2: that infamous speech on January sixth, twenty twenty one, in

545
00:26:48,359 --> 00:26:51,879
Speaker 2: my estimation, did not come anywhere close to how the

546
00:26:52,000 --> 00:26:56,400
Speaker 2: DC Municipal Code defines incitement to violence. But having said that,

547
00:26:56,760 --> 00:26:58,479
Speaker 2: you know, we're not dealing here with people who are

548
00:26:58,520 --> 00:27:00,639
Speaker 2: following the black letter of the law, dealing with a

549
00:27:00,680 --> 00:27:04,200
Speaker 2: situation where they had this January sixth Special Committee kangaroo

550
00:27:04,280 --> 00:27:07,040
Speaker 2: court with Liz Cheney and Manning kinsingerrem the whole thing,

551
00:27:07,440 --> 00:27:10,359
Speaker 2: you know, I mean, fundamentally, they probably wouldn't have done that.

552
00:27:10,440 --> 00:27:13,120
Speaker 2: They wouldn't have issued their report to DJ the way

553
00:27:13,119 --> 00:27:16,359
Speaker 2: that they did recommending charges if we didn't ultimately know

554
00:27:16,440 --> 00:27:18,600
Speaker 2: that the fix was in there. So I fear that

555
00:27:18,600 --> 00:27:21,240
Speaker 2: the fix probably is in when it comes to the

556
00:27:21,320 --> 00:27:25,159
Speaker 2: January sixth issue. But the other one that if I

557
00:27:25,160 --> 00:27:27,399
Speaker 2: were Trump's lawyer, that I would be most concerned about

558
00:27:27,720 --> 00:27:30,240
Speaker 2: is Georgia. And you know what happened in Georgia. Of course,

559
00:27:30,440 --> 00:27:33,800
Speaker 2: there was the infamous Brad Roethlisberger phone calls. Trump says

560
00:27:33,800 --> 00:27:35,960
Speaker 2: it was the greatest, most perfect phone call of all time,

561
00:27:36,040 --> 00:27:38,520
Speaker 2: kind of similar to his twenty nineteen phone call with

562
00:27:38,600 --> 00:27:41,119
Speaker 2: Vladimir Zelenski, the one that they tried to impeach him

563
00:27:41,119 --> 00:27:44,600
Speaker 2: on frivolous grounds for the first time. But the Raethensburger

564
00:27:44,640 --> 00:27:47,840
Speaker 2: stuff in Georgia, I think if they have the audio

565
00:27:48,080 --> 00:27:50,240
Speaker 2: that we have not heard yet, but that there are

566
00:27:50,280 --> 00:27:54,000
Speaker 2: all these rumblings that they've heard. That's potentially looking very

567
00:27:54,119 --> 00:27:55,920
Speaker 2: very dicey. And I think a lot of people there

568
00:27:55,960 --> 00:27:58,080
Speaker 2: have already kind of agreed to immunity deals. But if

569
00:27:58,080 --> 00:28:01,360
Speaker 2: I'm not mistaken there, that is typically kind of signs

570
00:28:00,880 --> 00:28:04,160
Speaker 2: that the prosecutorial apparatus is about to kick up into

571
00:28:04,280 --> 00:28:07,240
Speaker 2: very high gear. So you know, of those three cases

572
00:28:07,920 --> 00:28:11,040
Speaker 2: J six classify documents in Georgia, I would be least

573
00:28:11,080 --> 00:28:14,639
Speaker 2: concerned about the class by documents, but decently concerned about

574
00:28:14,640 --> 00:28:15,560
Speaker 2: the other two. For sure.

575
00:28:16,480 --> 00:28:18,640
Speaker 1: Do you think that they intend to try to lock

576
00:28:18,680 --> 00:28:19,480
Speaker 1: Donald Trump up?

577
00:28:21,400 --> 00:28:25,440
Speaker 2: Yeah? I do. I mean, I absolutely do think that body.

578
00:28:25,640 --> 00:28:30,480
Speaker 2: I mean yeah, I think that they're probably I hate

579
00:28:30,520 --> 00:28:33,320
Speaker 2: to sound like borderline conspiratorial, but you know, I think

580
00:28:33,320 --> 00:28:35,679
Speaker 2: we're only five ten years away from people like you

581
00:28:35,800 --> 00:28:38,040
Speaker 2: and me being in their crosshairs at being locked up.

582
00:28:38,080 --> 00:28:39,600
Speaker 2: I mean five to ten years. Maybe is being a

583
00:28:39,640 --> 00:28:43,680
Speaker 2: little too generous here, right, I mean, I mean the

584
00:28:43,760 --> 00:28:45,320
Speaker 2: stuff that you say on the radio every day, the

585
00:28:45,360 --> 00:28:47,120
Speaker 2: stuff that like I write and say, I mean, are

586
00:28:47,120 --> 00:28:49,320
Speaker 2: we not kind of inciting, like you know, all sorts

587
00:28:49,320 --> 00:28:51,920
Speaker 2: of fabricate charges. So I mean that basically, I think

588
00:28:52,040 --> 00:28:54,200
Speaker 2: is where we're headed. But Donald Trump is the tip

589
00:28:54,200 --> 00:28:55,960
Speaker 2: of the spear. So look, I mean I have definitely

590
00:28:55,960 --> 00:28:58,920
Speaker 2: been critical of Donald Trump on any number of occasions.

591
00:28:58,960 --> 00:29:01,680
Speaker 2: But one thing where I think he actually is exactly

592
00:29:01,800 --> 00:29:04,240
Speaker 2: right is when he goes on social media and he

593
00:29:04,240 --> 00:29:07,320
Speaker 2: says to his most diehard supporters, they're coming after me

594
00:29:07,360 --> 00:29:09,120
Speaker 2: because they're eventually going to come after you. I think

595
00:29:09,120 --> 00:29:12,120
Speaker 2: that's actually exactly right. I think that that that is

596
00:29:12,200 --> 00:29:13,600
Speaker 2: I you know, I'm not sure if it's sincere or

597
00:29:13,680 --> 00:29:16,000
Speaker 2: cynical when he says it subjectively, but as a matter

598
00:29:16,040 --> 00:29:18,160
Speaker 2: of analysis, I think it happens to be exactly right.

599
00:29:18,240 --> 00:29:20,960
Speaker 2: So yeah, I mean there's nothing that Merrick Garland and

600
00:29:21,040 --> 00:29:23,400
Speaker 2: Joe Biden would ultimately like more if they do when

601
00:29:23,400 --> 00:29:26,960
Speaker 2: reelection twenty twenty four and sending Donald Trump to prison,

602
00:29:27,000 --> 00:29:28,560
Speaker 2: I think that's absolutely the end game.

603
00:29:29,840 --> 00:29:33,920
Speaker 1: What is your what is the most interesting Supreme Court decision?

604
00:29:33,960 --> 00:29:34,240
Speaker 2: To you?

605
00:29:34,520 --> 00:29:36,800
Speaker 1: It's like a trivia question to close us out here.

606
00:29:40,400 --> 00:29:43,960
Speaker 2: The most the most interesting case of all time. Wow,

607
00:29:46,560 --> 00:29:49,160
Speaker 2: that's a tough one to be honest with you.

608
00:29:50,120 --> 00:29:51,760
Speaker 1: Well, we could bring you back. You can tell us

609
00:29:51,800 --> 00:29:54,560
Speaker 1: another time. That's I've never asked any of that question before.

610
00:29:54,600 --> 00:29:56,400
Speaker 2: But yeah, I mean, look, I mean there's like a

611
00:29:56,400 --> 00:29:57,960
Speaker 2: few that come immediately to mine, right, I mean, the

612
00:29:58,080 --> 00:29:59,560
Speaker 2: you know, the term interesting is kind of doing a

613
00:29:59,600 --> 00:30:01,040
Speaker 2: lot of work there sometime I'm trying to like think

614
00:30:01,080 --> 00:30:03,040
Speaker 2: of like interesting fat patterns, whatever looks. I mean, like,

615
00:30:03,040 --> 00:30:04,960
Speaker 2: there's a case out of the late nineteen eighties called

616
00:30:05,000 --> 00:30:11,600
Speaker 2: Morrison versus Olsen pertaining to the constitutionality of an independent council.

617
00:30:11,720 --> 00:30:14,440
Speaker 2: This idea that you can not have a special counsel,

618
00:30:14,560 --> 00:30:17,960
Speaker 2: but an actual independent council, someone who is outside the

619
00:30:18,040 --> 00:30:21,400
Speaker 2: chain of command of the Department of Justice. And you know,

620
00:30:21,440 --> 00:30:24,040
Speaker 2: this became quite relevant ultimately in the nineteen nineties with

621
00:30:24,120 --> 00:30:26,960
Speaker 2: ken Starr and Whitewater and all that good stuff back

622
00:30:26,960 --> 00:30:29,240
Speaker 2: from my childhood before I was paying attention to any

623
00:30:29,280 --> 00:30:32,840
Speaker 2: of this sordid business. And in Morrison versus Olsen, the

624
00:30:32,880 --> 00:30:36,719
Speaker 2: court held eight to one actually that the independent council

625
00:30:36,960 --> 00:30:41,200
Speaker 2: was constitutional. But in a dissent, a solo descent that

626
00:30:41,240 --> 00:30:45,320
Speaker 2: has been completely vindicated Antonin Scalia, the late Great Justice

627
00:30:45,320 --> 00:30:49,600
Speaker 2: Anthony Scalia, said that, no, this actually is totally unconstitutional

628
00:30:50,120 --> 00:30:54,440
Speaker 2: because you know, this is basically what conservative lawyers called

629
00:30:54,520 --> 00:30:58,120
Speaker 2: unitary executive theory, which is a very fancy yally term,

630
00:30:58,320 --> 00:31:02,080
Speaker 2: meaning that the commander in chief, the president has unilateral

631
00:31:02,120 --> 00:31:05,960
Speaker 2: plenary authority over the executive branch, full stop, period, end

632
00:31:06,000 --> 00:31:10,160
Speaker 2: of story. And you know, ultimately the Independent Council phased

633
00:31:10,160 --> 00:31:12,480
Speaker 2: out that law was not renewed, and Scale is descent,

634
00:31:12,880 --> 00:31:15,000
Speaker 2: his solo descent in an eight one case is now

635
00:31:15,040 --> 00:31:19,920
Speaker 2: basically universally viewed as correct across law school, academia, faculty lounges,

636
00:31:20,080 --> 00:31:22,040
Speaker 2: across the country. Now, why is that relevant? Why do

637
00:31:22,080 --> 00:31:25,120
Speaker 2: I say it's interesting because if you take that seriously,

638
00:31:25,240 --> 00:31:28,960
Speaker 2: if you take seriously the basic holding that the president

639
00:31:29,040 --> 00:31:34,000
Speaker 2: has unilateral authority over his entire executive branch, that makes

640
00:31:34,120 --> 00:31:36,480
Speaker 2: all the difference in the world when it comes to

641
00:31:36,560 --> 00:31:38,760
Speaker 2: the administrative state, when it comes to the deep state,

642
00:31:38,800 --> 00:31:40,960
Speaker 2: when it comes to kind of ferreting out all these

643
00:31:41,280 --> 00:31:44,840
Speaker 2: leftists whistleblower hacks deep in the bowels of the intelligence community.

644
00:31:44,880 --> 00:31:47,320
Speaker 2: So I think it's actually it's a very interesting opinion

645
00:31:47,320 --> 00:31:50,000
Speaker 2: because Scale is also just a wonderful writer, but it

646
00:31:50,040 --> 00:31:53,800
Speaker 2: has deep, deep, real world implications in the twenty twenties

647
00:31:54,600 --> 00:31:55,040
Speaker 2: as well.

648
00:31:55,720 --> 00:31:58,040
Speaker 1: I wanted to just let Josh Hammer do a constitutional

649
00:31:58,120 --> 00:32:00,920
Speaker 1: nerd flex there for everybody, and there we go, or

650
00:32:00,960 --> 00:32:05,480
Speaker 1: Supreme Court slash constitutional flex. So well done, sir, impressive.

651
00:32:06,440 --> 00:32:08,120
Speaker 1: Thanks for being with us, man. Go check out the

652
00:32:08,240 --> 00:32:10,720
Speaker 1: Josh Hammer Show podcast where he gets into a lot

653
00:32:10,760 --> 00:32:12,480
Speaker 1: of things we talked about today and a whole lot more,

654
00:32:12,880 --> 00:32:15,520
Speaker 1: and look for his latest at Newsweek, where he's been

655
00:32:15,560 --> 00:32:17,520
Speaker 1: writing lots of good stuff. Josh, thanks so much, man,

656
00:32:18,400 --> 00:32:19,480
Speaker 1: any signed, Bucky Bett