Speaker 1: We're no longer a sovereign nation. We don't control or borders.
Speaker 1: We are allowing an invasion to take place. God knows
Speaker 1: how many people have illegally entered the United States. We
Speaker 1: have zero idea the overall impact it's had. We know
Speaker 1: we're letting terrorists, cartel members were allowing drugs like fentanyl
Speaker 1: to be trafficked, killing Americans by the droves. And the
Speaker 1: Biden administration doesn't care. They wanted this. You just look
Speaker 1: at the actions, the initial actions done by Joe Biden
Speaker 1: when he took office. He halted deportations for a hundred days.
Speaker 1: He did things like and remain in Mexico when it
Speaker 1: is stopped the building of a wall along the southern border,
Speaker 1: or DHS secretary said that crossing the border illegally was
Speaker 1: not grounds for deportation. They want this lawless environment that
Speaker 1: we live in, and of course it's impacting Americans. You
Speaker 1: look at cities like New York and they're saying it's
Speaker 1: too much there too, burdened by a small amount of
Speaker 1: illegal immigrants coming to their city. And you look at
Speaker 1: states like Texas who are absorbing the brunt of it.
Speaker 1: What do you think the impact is there. We're gonna
Speaker 1: get into all of this with the Attorney General of Texas,
Speaker 1: Ken Paxton, acts about the impact on his state and
Speaker 1: also more specifically, the ending of Title forty two. Now,
Speaker 1: for those that are unfamiliar, Title forty two happened in
Speaker 1: the early days of the coronavirus pandemic. The CDC had
Speaker 1: issued this public health order that you know the name
Speaker 1: of COVID essentially allowed authorities to expel illegal immigrants at
Speaker 1: US borders like the southern border. It's been extended multiple times.
Speaker 1: Joe Biden is going to end Title forty two. So
Speaker 1: you look at what we've seen along the southern border,
Speaker 1: you look at the impact his policies have had already,
Speaker 1: and then now you're going to end this. So we're
Speaker 1: going to talk to Attorney General Kent Paxton about it. Also,
Speaker 1: he has launched an investigation into NGOs they're aiding and
Speaker 1: abetting illegal immigration. We're going to talk talked all about
Speaker 1: that investigation, what he's learned, why he launched it, Also
Speaker 1: get into big tech a little bit, and some other
Speaker 1: issues like what we should learn from the mid term election.
Speaker 1: So I hope you enjoy this conversation with the Attorney
Speaker 1: General of Texas, Kent Paxson, as much as I did
Speaker 1: Attorney General before we get started on the border. Congratulations
Speaker 1: and getting re elected. You all did well in Texas,
Speaker 1: but that didn't seem to be the case throughout the
Speaker 1: rest of the country. Why do you think Republicans fell
Speaker 1: short in the mid terms elsewhere? You know, I don't
Speaker 1: know exactly. I mean, I know that we've done a
Speaker 1: much better job, I think than many other states dealing
Speaker 1: with election fraud. That we've got our own challenges because
Speaker 1: our own Court of Colonel Kills, which is a Republican court,
Speaker 1: struck down a nineteen fifty one statue allowing not allowing
Speaker 1: directing from the legislature the Attorney General to prosey voter fraud.
Speaker 1: So we're gonna have to address that. UM that ruling,
Speaker 1: which I think is absolutely wrong and definitely designed to
Speaker 1: make sure that there's more voter fraud in Texas. UM. So,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I mean, it seems like some of
Speaker 1: these major counties and some of these big states have
Speaker 1: a have a major impact that they don't seem to
Speaker 1: be able to count their votes on time, and so
Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't know if that's it's it's that,
Speaker 1: or there's there's something else going on. But it seems
Speaker 1: odd to me that in a midterm election and an
Speaker 1: off year where historically the party not in power has
Speaker 1: been super well and and and polling seemed to indicate
Speaker 1: that they were going to do well, and then you know,
Speaker 1: in certain states, battleground states, we didn't. We didn't do
Speaker 1: as well as expected. Do you think mail and ballots
Speaker 1: are responsible for that? Mail and ballots are almost impossible
Speaker 1: to know whether people are are defrauding the elections because
Speaker 1: typically in Texas you can only vote million ballots if
Speaker 1: you satisfy certain categories of people and you have to
Speaker 1: actually sign the application. If they're just randomly sending out
Speaker 1: ballots they tried to do in Texas two years ago,
Speaker 1: there's no way to know who's voting if they send
Speaker 1: out millions of ballots like they did in these other states. Um,
Speaker 1: like I know, in Pennsylvania they went from like you know,
Speaker 1: six years ago, they went from two and fifty thousand
Speaker 1: ballots approximately to two point five million million dollars And
Speaker 1: who knows who voted on those? You can't They're right,
Speaker 1: you can't prove voter fraud because there's no there's no verification,
Speaker 1: there's there's there's no signature verification, there's no photo I
Speaker 1: d anybody can fill those ballots out and you you
Speaker 1: wouldn't know. It's pretty troublesome. I mean, they obviously used
Speaker 1: COVID to append the political process and to you know,
Speaker 1: give themselves an advantage. We have the most loose uh
Speaker 1: requirements for voting probably in the world. I mean, for
Speaker 1: a for a country that prides itself on unfair elections
Speaker 1: and and a republic that's controlled by the vote and
Speaker 1: supposed to be controlled by the voters, we have very
Speaker 1: very loose restrictions and very loose requirements for verifying that
Speaker 1: we got the right people voting. So it's it's extremely concerning,
Speaker 1: at least to me and too many people that care
Speaker 1: about the elections. Now, if you're if you're part of
Speaker 1: groups that are less concerned about that, I kind of
Speaker 1: wonder why you don't care about that. And the only
Speaker 1: the only answer I can come up with is you
Speaker 1: like you like that system because it allows for a
Speaker 1: lot of a lot of voting that shouldn't be done.
Speaker 1: I would agree with that. I think that's probably the
Speaker 1: answer you know, I wanted to ask you what's as
Speaker 1: a border state, what's the situation on the ground right
Speaker 1: now along the southern border and in the impact it's
Speaker 1: having on your state. Well, since Biden has been in office,
Speaker 1: it's it's gotten, it's gotten quickly, rapidly to be the
Speaker 1: worst it's ever been. And look when you say in
Speaker 1: your first day in office, which Biden did, I'm not
Speaker 1: going to deport anybody, and then start dismantling federal law,
Speaker 1: which she's not supposed to be able to do as
Speaker 1: as one person. It's supposed to be done through Congress.
Speaker 1: When you start dismantling federal laws or released immigration everything
Speaker 1: that worked under Trump, and you look at it and
Speaker 1: you undo everything that was actually working, and you find
Speaker 1: out that now you have a massive increase in the
Speaker 1: illegal immigration three percent, maybe now it's going to be
Speaker 1: more than that title forty two going away later this month.
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know how to say it in
Speaker 1: a way. This is what they want. They claim that,
Speaker 1: you know, there's nothing they can do about it. But
Speaker 1: how come two years ago we didn't have this problem.
Speaker 1: How come President Trump was able to take advantage of
Speaker 1: the remain in Mexico and Title forty two and stopping
Speaker 1: catching release and building the wall, and they said, no,
Speaker 1: we don't want to do any of that. Oh, isn't
Speaker 1: it weird that it's it's it's form percent more in
Speaker 1: illegal immigration. So it's getting worse and it's devastating border states,
Speaker 1: border cities, and it's coming to a town New Year
Speaker 1: because they these people have to be moved around. They
Speaker 1: can't all stay in one city or two cities or
Speaker 1: five cities. Are gonna be all over the country and
Speaker 1: we're all gonna be paying for it. We're all gonna
Speaker 1: be dealing with it both economically and we're gonna be
Speaker 1: dealing with it from the standpoint of increased crime, increased
Speaker 1: you know, drug trafficking, human trafficking. This is all being
Speaker 1: welcomed and aiding abetting the cartels that this is all
Speaker 1: about the administration wants well and entitled forty two is
Speaker 1: uh in relation to public health? Essentially it was used
Speaker 1: under the Trump administration and then just carry it out
Speaker 1: since But what's confusing, sir, is so in April, the
Speaker 1: CDC announced plans to terminate the order, saying it's no
Speaker 1: longer necessary with public health conditions with vaccines, treatments, etcetera.
Speaker 1: But then a few months later they issued their student
Speaker 1: loan baro bailout under the guise of a pandemic, and
Speaker 1: then the White House in September walked back comments that
Speaker 1: the pandemic was over. So which one is it? You know?
Speaker 1: Is it? It's to ever which whatever they can use
Speaker 1: for political purpose to do what they want. So for
Speaker 1: this purpose, for the purpose of inviting is many illegals,
Speaker 1: whether they're terrorists or criminals, doesn't matter to them. They
Speaker 1: want them all, then the pandemic is over. If it's
Speaker 1: for student loan bailouts and basically buy votes, which is
Speaker 1: what that is, or other purposes where they want to
Speaker 1: control the American people, control the American citizens as opposed
Speaker 1: to illegals, then there is a pandemic. Still we still
Speaker 1: have a problem. So they're using it both ways, and
Speaker 1: they argue in court both ways, and and unfortunately some
Speaker 1: of our judiciary will is not aware or is ignoring
Speaker 1: the fact that they're arguing out of both sides of
Speaker 1: their mouth, because I mean, you would think that would
Speaker 1: weaken their argument if they're not making a consistent one
Speaker 1: in court, you know, one would think, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: is there a way to gauge increased crime in the
Speaker 1: state of Texas. We've essentially opened the floodgates and allowed
Speaker 1: this invasion to take place. Yeah, I don't think you tried.
Speaker 1: It's being tracked every day. It's just you don't always
Speaker 1: get the numbers are not always the media is not
Speaker 1: always uncovering them. The biggest clear that, uh, crime is
Speaker 1: increasing in in almost all of our cities where we
Speaker 1: have more illegal immigration immigrants coming to and it's not
Speaker 1: just in Texas, it's all over the country. And I
Speaker 1: think you can see that. And you know, part of
Speaker 1: that policies related to Democrats defunding police and not prosecuting
Speaker 1: crimes anymore, ignoring you know, state laws, and just nullifying
Speaker 1: what legislatures have passed. But it's also I think attributed
Speaker 1: to some degree to illegal immigration and the fact that
Speaker 1: the bind administration not only lets, I mean they let
Speaker 1: everybody and they encourage we're fighting them right now and
Speaker 1: whether they can release criminals into our country they want to.
Speaker 1: They're they're begging, they're fighting for these criminals to be
Speaker 1: released into our country, and we're saying, you can't. You know,
Speaker 1: you're already violing all these other federal laws on them agration,
Speaker 1: but certainly you have to keep illegal immigrants out who
Speaker 1: have been convicted of crimes. And the Biden administrations are
Speaker 1: saying absolutely not. We want these people to be here
Speaker 1: as many as possible. Well, and they don't care that
Speaker 1: Texas and Arizona are bearing the brunt of this. And
Speaker 1: then we saw what happened when these illegal immigrants were
Speaker 1: shipped off to Martha's Vineyard. They said thank you for
Speaker 1: your short stay, and shipped them off to Cape God.
Speaker 1: Is that what we're What were your thoughts on on that?
Speaker 1: And just sort of the hypocrisy with trying to force
Speaker 1: you guys in Texas to bear the brunt of this,
Speaker 1: and then you know, for New York City, it's just
Speaker 1: too much. For Martha's Vineyard, it's just too much. Well,
Speaker 1: so it's interesting that these the sanctuary cities were created
Speaker 1: during the Trump administration, and they were created because they
Speaker 1: said that Trump was, you know, doing terrible things by
Speaker 1: keeping these people out. Well, it was easy for them
Speaker 1: to do when Trump was protecting them, right, so they
Speaker 1: could say, on one side, hey, this is terrible, but
Speaker 1: it never impacted them. Well, Governor Abbott, I thought it
Speaker 1: was a genius news start sending them, as you know,
Speaker 1: to New York, Chicago, Washington to see Martha's finger, I guess,
Speaker 1: Governor to Santis ascent from Florida. And suddenly you found
Speaker 1: out these these cities that were so opposed to what
Speaker 1: Trump was doing protecting the American people, now that they
Speaker 1: were dealing with the consequences just a small drop compared
Speaker 1: to what we deal with every day. We deal with
Speaker 1: thousands every day, five six, seven thousand they were they
Speaker 1: didn't get that many ever, and we deal with that
Speaker 1: every day. And yet suddenly they wanted help from the
Speaker 1: federal government. They were screaming about how terrible we were
Speaker 1: to share a little tiny bit of our burden with them.
Speaker 1: They couldn't bear the smallest percentage, less than one percent
Speaker 1: of what we're dealing with. That was way too much
Speaker 1: for for for them to be called on to deal with.
Speaker 1: And that was just unconscionable of our governor to say, hey,
Speaker 1: you guys should share some of the burden of this,
Speaker 1: and they said, no, we don't want that burden. You
Speaker 1: guys should let everybody into your state and you deal
Speaker 1: with it, and that's the right way they should be handled.
Speaker 1: That's the appropriate, you know, caring way to deal with it.
Speaker 1: Is Texas and Arizona have to have to deal with this.
Speaker 1: We shouldn't have to deal with this. Yet we still
Speaker 1: think they should come, just not to our place. Let's
Speaker 1: take a quick commercial break back with the Attorney General
Speaker 1: of Texas, Kent Paxton. You know, now you've got Governor
Speaker 1: Gavin Newsom in California saying that California is going to
Speaker 1: break amid the flood of illegal immigrants when titled forty
Speaker 1: two expires. Do you think the Biden administration will start
Speaker 1: doing something now that you've got liberal states like California
Speaker 1: state that he obviously needs to do. You know, he's
Speaker 1: looking at for Do you think that will uh, you know,
Speaker 1: change the Biden administration's policies on this. Yeah, that's a
Speaker 1: great question. I don't know, I haven't seen anything. I mean,
Speaker 1: people dying doesn't affect them, so maybe politics will. But
Speaker 1: you know the fact that immigrants have have died, but
Speaker 1: the hundreds along the border come up, and how dangerous
Speaker 1: that is an house thousands of children been human trafficked.
Speaker 1: How literally hundreds of thousands of people including shouldern have
Speaker 1: died event all over Hooses as a result of their
Speaker 1: their border you know, policies. Maybe politics is the only
Speaker 1: thing that will save the country. And having some Democrats
Speaker 1: like Kevin newsoon finally speak out and it's about time,
Speaker 1: it's uh and maybe it will help. Maybe politics is
Speaker 1: all he cares about. Certainly lives and the impact on
Speaker 1: the American people who are not are not factors that
Speaker 1: play into his his his decision making. Well, yeah, that's
Speaker 1: the thing. I mean, they certainly don't seem to care
Speaker 1: about Americans. The financial tool that increased on crime, the
Speaker 1: fent and all, which is killing people by the droves.
Speaker 1: You know, I wanted to ask you about your investigation
Speaker 1: into NGOs that are aiding and ebetting illegal immigration. Why
Speaker 1: did why did you launch that and what have you
Speaker 1: discovered so far? But we've just started a few months
Speaker 1: ago because we realized, like we were concerned about our
Speaker 1: own state bar foundation aiding ebetting illegal immigration. So we've
Speaker 1: started an investigation them and we're expanding that investigation um
Speaker 1: and so we're actually as also looking at other possible
Speaker 1: non governmental organizations to to make sure that at least
Speaker 1: the ones in Texas because we have a responsibility in
Speaker 1: the AGS office to make sure that corporations and that
Speaker 1: includes nonprofits are following our laws, and if they're not,
Speaker 1: we we have an obligation to go investigate them and potentially,
Speaker 1: uh make them pay the consequences of their of their
Speaker 1: violation of state law. So we're going to continue expanding
Speaker 1: our look as we find out more information about other
Speaker 1: possible non governmental organizations that may be doing what we
Speaker 1: think the State Bar of Texas is doing, and hopefully
Speaker 1: we'll get to the bottom this and we'll certainly going
Speaker 1: to try to stop the ones we know about, which, again,
Speaker 1: the State Bar of Texas is shocking, but even they should,
Speaker 1: of all organizations, be uh following the rule of law,
Speaker 1: and yet they may be the worst offenders. Well, it
Speaker 1: seems like the rule of law has been you know,
Speaker 1: thrown out ever since Trump. Right, there's just this mentality
Speaker 1: now that all is fair and you know, trying to
Speaker 1: destroy Republicans and Trump and let's just throw everything, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, out the out the door. Nothing matters anymore
Speaker 1: in terms of the things that we us to hold
Speaker 1: deer as a country. No, I think that started actually
Speaker 1: under the Obama administration. You know, he he didn't have
Speaker 1: control of Congress after two years because the American public
Speaker 1: throughout the Democrats, because some of the terrible legislation that
Speaker 1: was being passed. And so I think Obama made the
Speaker 1: choice that he was going to start making his own
Speaker 1: laws through agencies, through effective action, and he taught the
Speaker 1: rest of the country, hey, this is an appropriate way
Speaker 1: to forget the Constitution. I'm not who cares about that.
Speaker 1: It was written about guys term fty years ago. Let's
Speaker 1: just do what we want to do, whether we're at
Speaker 1: state level, whether we're at city level. We'll just start
Speaker 1: making our own laws. That's what d a s are
Speaker 1: doing across the country. They're not enforcing state law. They're saying, hey,
Speaker 1: we're just we just don't do that stuff now. And
Speaker 1: that's what President Biden is doing. He's he's stepped ab up.
Speaker 1: He's doing that on steroids. And it's really unfortunate because
Speaker 1: it's totally moving away from the constitutional form of government
Speaker 1: that was that empowers the people instead of individuals like
Speaker 1: Joe Biden. But I think that's probably the intent. You know,
Speaker 1: they want the control. They don't want us to have power,
Speaker 1: you know, that's I feel like that's sort of just
Speaker 1: the objective of the left period is everything they do
Speaker 1: is to erode individual liberty and empower, you know, the elite,
Speaker 1: the regime, the people in charge, which is sad because
Speaker 1: that's the contradictory to what the antithesis of what we're
Speaker 1: supposed to be as a constitutional republic. Well, the founders
Speaker 1: were fearful of this very thing. They were fearful of of,
Speaker 1: you know, big government. They tried to that's why they
Speaker 1: separated powers. And that's why it's so important that these
Speaker 1: lawsuits against the Biden administration are successful because if if
Speaker 1: if we do not keep separation of powers, then we
Speaker 1: end up putting too much power in the hands of
Speaker 1: the president and he's honestly, it's no different than living
Speaker 1: in you know, Benzezuela or China, Russia, you know, Germany
Speaker 1: in the thirties. What's the difference That you have a
Speaker 1: few people making decisions for all of us, who supposed
Speaker 1: they are smarter than us, who basically condemn people that
Speaker 1: disagree with them and try to make them out to
Speaker 1: be bad people, are stupid people. Well that's sort of that.
Speaker 1: You can see that with the Biden administration. Almost every
Speaker 1: Day telling us that certain types of Republicans are bad
Speaker 1: people and that they're they're they're not worthy of being protected,
Speaker 1: they're not worthy of constitutional protections, and they should all
Speaker 1: be you know, silenced, and they're working with big corporations
Speaker 1: and big tech to do that. Well, I got hit
Speaker 1: by the left by saying that, you know, the people
Speaker 1: criticizing tried on there's zero COVID policy, which they should
Speaker 1: be criticized, but like we really weren't that much different,
Speaker 1: and if it wasn't for guns and for some of
Speaker 1: the checks and balances we have, we very well, that's
Speaker 1: the direction the left wanted to take us. You know,
Speaker 1: I wanted to ask you real quick before we go. Uh,
Speaker 1: obviously we're learning a lot with the collusion between government
Speaker 1: and big tech, both with Missouri versus Biden. Then also
Speaker 1: the Twitter files as well as some recently reports by
Speaker 1: publications like the Intercept. What is Texas doing to stand
Speaker 1: up against big tech and to try to fight this
Speaker 1: collusion and really what seems to be a violation of
Speaker 1: the First Amendment. Yeah, it's not just the First Amenments,
Speaker 1: also the second. So we've got we've got investigations, we've
Speaker 1: got lawsuits, against Google. We've got three or four losses
Speaker 1: against Google. We've got a lawsuitains Facebook, we have a
Speaker 1: lawsuit against Twitter. We have investigations of Federal Express and
Speaker 1: UPS and let me just use those two as an example.
Speaker 1: We it's odd but suddenly the two of them, those
Speaker 1: two companies are very same time, have policies that that
Speaker 1: require gun manufacturers to disclose to them separately and then
Speaker 1: transport separately guns parts and other related items so that
Speaker 1: they can supposedly keep track of all of this information.
Speaker 1: And who would want that information other than potentially the
Speaker 1: Biden administration, which of course the Biden administration can't do
Speaker 1: that directly. But it's odd that two corporations at the
Speaker 1: same time, the first time in their history, suddenly want
Speaker 1: to know all this information about guns. So the Biden
Speaker 1: administration is I would call it workarounds of the Constitution.
Speaker 1: And they're doing the same thing with our First Amendment
Speaker 1: by working with big tech to to flag people who
Speaker 1: talk about issues that the government doesn't like, whether it's
Speaker 1: COVID or whether or whatever the top of the elections,
Speaker 1: whatever the topic is that they don't want more information
Speaker 1: out about. Much like China UM, the federal government isn't
Speaker 1: allowed to do that, of course, the United States ender
Speaker 1: the Constitution, but what they're doing is using big tech
Speaker 1: and big corporations to be their stand in, which effectively
Speaker 1: means big government is doing exactly what they do in
Speaker 1: China and what they do in Russia, which is limiting
Speaker 1: free speech, limiting Second Amendment rights. And so they're going
Speaker 1: down the list trying to work around the Constitution to
Speaker 1: eliminate our constitutional rights, and we if we are not vigilant,
Speaker 1: we will end up indirectly like these other countries where
Speaker 1: big government is controlling what we say, what we do,
Speaker 1: and basically eliminating the Bill of Rights. Well, Attorney General
Speaker 1: Kent Paxton, we're grateful for you in your time and
Speaker 1: also just you keeping up the fight. We need people
Speaker 1: like you in office. So I'm so glad that you
Speaker 1: were re elected. And please just taking the fight to
Speaker 1: the Biden administration and standing up for reading in America
Speaker 1: because it is for sure under attack. Well, thank you
Speaker 1: very much. I appreciate and I also appreciate you covering
Speaker 1: these important issues. Thank you, sir. You're welcome back anytime.
Speaker 1: Love to have you. Thank you. Ye, So that was
Speaker 1: the Attorney General of Texas Ken Paxton, interesting conversation. Would
Speaker 1: love to have him back. I want to thank you
Speaker 1: all for listening every Monday and Thursday, but you can
Speaker 1: listen throughout the week. I also want to thank John Cassio,
Speaker 1: my producer, for putting this together. Please leave us a review,
Speaker 1: give us rating on Apple Podcast. I love reading those.
Speaker 1: Until the next time,