Speaker 1: You're listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
Speaker 1: you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome the Hold On. I'm
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton. Is the left fighting a losing battle on
Speaker 1: many fronts of the culture war Right now, it certainly
Speaker 1: seems like it's moving in that direction, which would be
Speaker 1: the first time in a long time that the Democrat Party,
Speaker 1: the progressives of those who seek to do damage to
Speaker 1: our lasting traditional cultural institutions may find themselves with the
Speaker 1: American people saying enough is enough. But first, the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court decision that we're all waiting for that is expected
Speaker 1: based upon a leak of an earlier draft to overturn
Speaker 1: Row the Wade has not been released as of yet.
Speaker 1: It could come any day now. It is likely to
Speaker 1: come in the next week or so. And that means
Speaker 1: that there are going to be some people who view
Speaker 1: this as a massive, a massive move in the right
Speaker 1: direction when it comes to the rights of unborn babies.
Speaker 1: There will be others, however, the activists of the pro
Speaker 1: abortion movement who are enrage And one thing you notice
Speaker 1: about so many of the people that are the most
Speaker 1: vocal in favor of abortion. They often seem unhinged and
Speaker 1: quite a bit nasty. Here's a pro choice activist, for examples,
Speaker 1: shouting some abscenity, obscenities at students for like what such
Speaker 1: anger and also sadness at the same time from a
Speaker 1: young woman who clearly is bit lost. But there are
Speaker 1: so many of these abortion activists, these people for whom
Speaker 1: abortion is really they find the fundamental freedom of women
Speaker 1: that seem deeply unhappy, unsettled, perhaps even a bit unhinged,
Speaker 1: And that's gonna get a whole lot worse if the
Speaker 1: decision does come down as a five four overturning of
Speaker 1: Row the Wade. Democrats don't have any particular messaging on
Speaker 1: this that holds together makes sense. Vice President Harris, for example,
Speaker 1: has said recently that there's nothing about abortion that will
Speaker 1: require anyone to abandon their faith. Well, if you're a Catholic,
Speaker 1: for example, a believing Catholic who follows the tenets of
Speaker 1: the church, that's not true. Despite the fact that there
Speaker 1: are Democrat activists and Democrat politicians who say otherwise. There
Speaker 1: is in fact a connection or many people of faith
Speaker 1: to the need to protect unborn babies in the womb,
Speaker 1: and this seems like a major a major blow to
Speaker 1: the Left is coming at least in the days ahead
Speaker 1: here from the reversal of Roe v. Wade, And after
Speaker 1: decades of being able to lean on this stake constitutional right,
Speaker 1: now they'll have to actually take this to the States,
Speaker 1: which means making an argument instead of just shouting about
Speaker 1: how it's a right, it's a right. So they may
Speaker 1: lose because of the courts on that one. On the
Speaker 1: issue of the transagenda and transgender athletes specifically, much more
Speaker 1: likely that the Left is going to be losing ground
Speaker 1: as we see it play out going into the midterm elections.
Speaker 1: Megan Rappino is a female soccer player from the US
Speaker 1: national team who is for the end of her career.
Speaker 1: She's almost forty, and she has given some very dismissive
Speaker 1: and snide comments recently about anybody who plays women's sports
Speaker 1: being upset at the fact that there are men, biological males,
Speaker 1: individuals with male genitalia, x Y chromosomes, etc. That anyone
Speaker 1: who's upset about that play about them playing in female
Speaker 1: sports is being childish, being selfish. I mean, here's one
Speaker 1: example of a quote from her show Me the evidence
Speaker 1: that trans women are taking everyone's scholarships, dominating in every sport,
Speaker 1: winning every title. I'm sorry, it's just not happening. So
Speaker 1: we need to start from inclusion, period and as things arise,
Speaker 1: I have confidence that we can figure it out, but
Speaker 1: we can't start from the opposite. It's cool and frankly disgusting,
Speaker 1: she said. So we need to really take a step
Speaker 1: back and get a grip on what we're talking about here,
Speaker 1: because people's lives are at risk. Kid's lives are at
Speaker 1: risk when the rates of suicide, rates of depression, negative
Speaker 1: mental health, and a drug abuse. We're putting everything through
Speaker 1: God forbid a transperson be successful in sports. Get a grip,
Speaker 1: take a step back. And she also said something along
Speaker 1: lines of your daughter's high school volleyball team, isn't that important?
Speaker 1: Get over yourself. She's a fraud and an imbecile. Fraud
Speaker 1: insofar as if men were allowed to play in women's sports,
Speaker 1: nobody would ever heard of her because she would be
Speaker 1: dominated not just by any male professional soccer player, by
Speaker 1: trained fifteen and sixteen year old men. As we know,
Speaker 1: they actually were able to defeat the women's national team
Speaker 1: and a friendly not long ago. I think they are
Speaker 1: actually fourteen and fifteen year old. So fourteen and fifteen
Speaker 1: year old men can beat the best women's soccer team
Speaker 1: in the world. Yeah, so start with that, which I
Speaker 1: think is just interesting because after she was able to
Speaker 1: use sex segregated sports to her advantage for decades, now
Speaker 1: she wants to laugh for the destruction of that. But
Speaker 1: but notice also the way that this is framed as
Speaker 1: you either don't want people to live or you allow,
Speaker 1: you know, a two hundred and fifty pound man to
Speaker 1: play on a women's field hockey team. That's just completely unfair.
Speaker 1: Everyone knows it. Everyone at a very basic common sense
Speaker 1: level understands how absurd this is. But wokeness demands you
Speaker 1: embrace absurdity. Wokeness the left, the Democrat party demand of
Speaker 1: you that you reject what you can see with your
Speaker 1: own eyes, reject what you can observe yourself. And that's why.
Speaker 1: And also, of course there's a lot of virtue signaling here.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I care so much about trans inclusivity and sports,
Speaker 1: so I'm a good person. What about the women men
Speaker 1: who are trying really hard to be the best in
Speaker 1: their sport, just essentially abolishing that for them is somehow
Speaker 1: the dismissiveness, the snide tone Rapino is gross. And then
Speaker 1: there's Olympic swimmer Sharon Davies, who's who revealed recently she
Speaker 1: has received death threat because she spoke out against trans
Speaker 1: women also known as men who think they are women
Speaker 1: in women's sport. Why so it really is, you know,
Speaker 1: everybody is scared because the moment you try to speak out,
Speaker 1: just ask for furnish, you get called names, you get
Speaker 1: death threats, you get the cras wringing up your employers
Speaker 1: trying to get your sack, trying to get your unemployed.
Speaker 1: You know, there's not being respectful debate on both sides
Speaker 1: of this, you know, I it has to be out
Speaker 1: in the open. You know, it's trying to light on
Speaker 1: everything to find solutions for everybody. And that's what this
Speaker 1: has always been about. From my side. It's never been
Speaker 1: about excluding trans people. It's been about promote too fast forward,
Speaker 1: promoting fair sport. Yeah, that is certainly what it's about,
Speaker 1: among other things. And then there's this video the American people,
Speaker 1: I think recognizing that even in the US Navy, the
Speaker 1: pronoun mania and the trans inclusivity doctrine our mandatory. This
Speaker 1: is a US Navy training video. Watch them. Hi, my
Speaker 1: name is Johnny, and I use he him pronouns. Hi.
Speaker 1: And I'm County and I use Chi her pronouns. And
Speaker 1: we're here to talk about pronouns. What is a pronoun?
Speaker 1: A pronoun is how we identify ourselves apart from our name,
Speaker 1: and it's also how people are referred to us in conversations.
Speaker 1: Using the right pronouns is a really simple way to
Speaker 1: affirm someone's identity. It is a signal of acceptance and respect.
Speaker 1: If it's a signal of acceptance and respect, how do
Speaker 1: we go about creating a safe space for everybody? That's
Speaker 1: a good question. A really good way to do that
Speaker 1: is to use inclusive language. Instead of saying something like
Speaker 1: hey guys, you can say hey everyone or hey team yeah.
Speaker 1: And now that you say that, Another way that we
Speaker 1: could show that we're allies and that we accept everybody
Speaker 1: is to maybe include our pronouns in our emails or
Speaker 1: like we just did, introduce ourselves using our pronouns. This
Speaker 1: stuff continues on this wokeness infiltrating all across the military.
Speaker 1: We're gonna end up losing a major ward. At one point, year,
Speaker 1: and everyone's gonna say, why why do we not have
Speaker 1: the a spree accord to fight a battle to the
Speaker 1: very end, because we're worried about pronouns that our friend
Speaker 1: ned Ryan of American majority coming up in Just as
Speaker 1: I can to tell us about the political landscape, as
Speaker 1: there are some elections today and of course the big
Speaker 1: election coming up this fall, stick around, Let's talk about
Speaker 1: protecting your home for a minute. You know that I'm
Speaker 1: skeptical by nature, So when I first heard about home
Speaker 1: tittle theft and the idea that thieves can literally steal
Speaker 1: your home, I was like, really, and some cyber criminal
Speaker 1: really forge my name off the tittle of my home
Speaker 1: and take over as the new owner. Turns out, yeah
Speaker 1: he can. It's not as rare as you'd think. According
Speaker 1: to the FBI, crime is growing faster than credit card fraud,
Speaker 1: and you're not covered by homeowners insurance or comment at
Speaker 1: any theft programs. Home tetlelock earned my trust. Home tetlelock
Speaker 1: puts a virtual barrier around your home's title. The instant
Speaker 1: they detect anyone tampering with their home's title, they mobilize
Speaker 1: to help shut it down. Here's what I urge you
Speaker 1: to do. Number one, go to hometetlelock dot com and
Speaker 1: read the testimonials from FBI agents and government officials. Number two,
Speaker 1: register your home address to see if you're already a
Speaker 1: victim and don't even know it when you protect your
Speaker 1: hometell them buck sex and send you to get my
Speaker 1: listener discount hometetlelock dot com. That's hometetlelock dot com. Support
Speaker 1: from my podcast is brought to you by Manscape, the
Speaker 1: Best and men's below the waste screaming. Their products are
Speaker 1: precision engineered tools. Manscapes Performance Package is the ultimate men's
Speaker 1: hygiene bundle. Join over four million men worldwide who trusts
Speaker 1: Manscape with its exclusive offer for you twenty percent off
Speaker 1: and free worldwide shipping with the code buck at manscape
Speaker 1: dot com. The Performance Package four point includes a ton
Speaker 1: of men's grooming products like the lawnmower four point zero, trimmer,
Speaker 1: the weed Whacker, Era, a nose hair trimmer, performance boxer, briefs,
Speaker 1: and a bunch of other great men's hygiene products you
Speaker 1: never knew you needed, plus a travel bag to hold
Speaker 1: it all. The lawnmower trimmer is the best. It's got
Speaker 1: a cutting edge ceramic blade to reduce grooming accidents, and
Speaker 1: it's waterproof so no more messes on the bathroom floor.
Speaker 1: You'll also get the waterproof weed Whacker, nose and ear
Speaker 1: hair trimmer with proprietary skin safe technology which helps reduce
Speaker 1: nick snags and tugs in all those delicate areas. Get
Speaker 1: twenty percent off and free shipping with the code buck
Speaker 1: at manscape dot com. That's twenty percent off with free
Speaker 1: shipping at manscape dot com and use code buck to
Speaker 1: unlock your confidence and always use the right tools with Manscape.
Speaker 1: There were some primary and special elections underway today in Alabama, Georgia,
Speaker 1: and Virginia. And there was a big election that just
Speaker 1: happened last week that has some indicators of what we
Speaker 1: could be expecting this fall when it comes to Hispanic
Speaker 1: vote in the GOP. Whenever we're talking politics, we want
Speaker 1: a man who has his finger on the pulse, who
Speaker 1: is a prognosticator par excellence, who understands where all this
Speaker 1: stuff is going. We've got to talk to our friend, Ned, Ryan,
Speaker 1: CEO of American Majority. He joins us. Now, my main name,
Speaker 1: my main man, Ned, How are you buddy? Good to
Speaker 1: see you, hey, I'm doing well. Book. Good to be
Speaker 1: back with you. So the victory of Myra Flores in
Speaker 1: Texas's District thirty four last week to you, one district
Speaker 1: tucked down along the US Mexico border, Rio Grande Valley.
Speaker 1: What do you take from that? Within, Well, I'm pretty
Speaker 1: optimistic buck already. I don't want to get overly optimistic
Speaker 1: though looking at these results, but I do think things
Speaker 1: are moving in our favor and a lot of different ways.
Speaker 1: I mean, go back and look at December. There was
Speaker 1: a bolt done of the Hispanic community in which they
Speaker 1: were asked who do you plan on voting for in
Speaker 1: the twenty twenty two mid terms, and it was thirty
Speaker 1: seven percent Republican thirty seven percent Democrats. So they've been
Speaker 1: signed along the way that you get to April, Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's approval rating with the Hispanic community was only at
Speaker 1: twenty six percent. And the thing that the Hispanic community
Speaker 1: has made very clear is their number one issue is inflation. Right.
Speaker 1: What a shocker. Right, for the rest of the country,
Speaker 1: it's inflation. For the Hispanic community, it's inflation. So they're
Speaker 1: looking at this and blaming Joe Biden and the Democratic
Speaker 1: Party for what's taking place rightly. So, so I think
Speaker 1: there's a whole lot of different trends that are pointing
Speaker 1: in our direction that are going to be very beneficial
Speaker 1: to the Republicans with the Hispanic community come this fall.
Speaker 1: I think the Flora's victory is an indication of that.
Speaker 1: I actually, Buck, I gotta tell you, when you're looking
Speaker 1: at some of these approval ratings Joe Biden various demographics.
Speaker 1: Not only is he taking with the Hispanics, he's taken
Speaker 1: with the Asian American community. I think seventy six percent
Speaker 1: of them voted for him in twenty twenty he's down
Speaker 1: at fifty three percent. So it's not only the Hispanic community,
Speaker 1: but there's other demographics that Joe Biden is very very
Speaker 1: badly present. Quinnipiac poll shows that Biden's approval among Hispanic
Speaker 1: voters dropped from May of twenty twenty one, it was
Speaker 1: fifty five percent. I mean, you know, solid numbers there
Speaker 1: for Biden May of twenty twenty two, twenty six percent.
Speaker 1: That is do not pass, go, do not collect two
Speaker 1: hundred dollars kind of approval number. That is rough stuff
Speaker 1: right there. And you're seeing that kind of holding over
Speaker 1: the course of months. It's not like it's bumping up
Speaker 1: and down and going in Biden's bay and then dropping
Speaker 1: back down. No, it's holding pretty steady at that twenty
Speaker 1: six point seven twenty eight percent of bruval rating in
Speaker 1: the Hispanic community. I mean, these are all teletell signs
Speaker 1: that they have real problem. I'm stating the obvious, Buck
Speaker 1: when I say this, Democrats are facing an absolute slacking
Speaker 1: come this fault, in fact so much Buck, I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm here in my home state of Virginia, where it
Speaker 1: was a twelve point flit between twenty twenty and twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one. When you look at Biden versus Junkin, I
Speaker 1: have to tell you I feel very comfortable in saying
Speaker 1: anything that Joe Biden won by twelve or thirteen points
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty is absolutely in play in twenty twenty two.
Speaker 1: In fact, so much so, I'd even go out on
Speaker 1: a limb and say this, Buck, I think anything that's
Speaker 1: twenty points are less that Joe Biden won in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty might absolutely be competitive this fall. So what are
Speaker 1: some of the races than some of the states or
Speaker 1: districts that are high profile that you think could be
Speaker 1: in the indigetable maybe a bit of a reach but
Speaker 1: gettable category going into this fall. The easiest place to
Speaker 1: start is with the statewide with the Senate. You look
Speaker 1: at Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, New Hampshire. I think those are
Speaker 1: absolutely real pickup opportunities for Republicans. Where I think it
Speaker 1: gets very interesting is when you start to look at
Speaker 1: states like Connecticut and Washington in Colorado, where people are thinking, no,
Speaker 1: that there's no way those could be competitive in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two, But those are right at the twenty nineteen
Speaker 1: I think Colorado was fourteen point margin of victory for
Speaker 1: Biden in twenty twenty. I think those three Senate races
Speaker 1: could be highly competitive. I'm not saying we're going to
Speaker 1: win them. I think we might be able to sneak one,
Speaker 1: maybe two of them, though that would be fantastic obviously.
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm certainly hopeful by the way Moe Brooks
Speaker 1: swearing off the day in against what is it britt
Speaker 1: in britt in Alabama? What do you think of? What
Speaker 1: do you think of that race for that Senate seat?
Speaker 1: You know, Brooks got the Trump endorsement, The Trump endorsement
Speaker 1: got went drawn. I mean, I've known Mo Brooks, so
Speaker 1: I knew himhen he was a congressman. He was really
Speaker 1: good on the border, really good on immigration. That's all
Speaker 1: I really remember about his time then, though, So what
Speaker 1: went on here, Well, it really came down to Moe
Speaker 1: Brooks announcing in front of a very large rally that
Speaker 1: he thought we needed to move past the twenty twenty elections,
Speaker 1: which of course is a big issue with Trump. On
Speaker 1: top of that, he was running a rather lackluster campaign
Speaker 1: at the time. I think a combination of factors Trump
Speaker 1: Trump pulled the endorsement. I have to tell you what
Speaker 1: irritated Trump coming down the home stretch in the primary
Speaker 1: was that Mo actually continued to use that endorsement after
Speaker 1: it had been rescinded and sent out a mail or so.
Speaker 1: People I think were a little surprised that Trump endorsed
Speaker 1: britt afterwards in the runoff. I was not actual. How
Speaker 1: do you have any any prediction for us on that one?
Speaker 1: People are voting as we speak. I gotta tell you,
Speaker 1: I would love to see Moe Win being completely honest,
Speaker 1: but I'm giving Brits the nod. I think she's going
Speaker 1: to be able to pull it out because you have
Speaker 1: to understand she's Shelby's former chief of staff, and Shelby
Speaker 1: has a very powerful machine inside of Alabama. Even though
Speaker 1: Trump is very popular and Trump is very popular as well.
Speaker 1: So I think those two combined factors are going to
Speaker 1: make it very hard for Moe to overcome. But hey,
Speaker 1: I would love to see Moe win. I just think
Speaker 1: BRIT's gonna pull it out to night. And uh, you know,
Speaker 1: the the race between herschel Walker, you know, I I
Speaker 1: interviewed herschel earlier today on Radio UM and he showed
Speaker 1: a real grasp of the issues and particular fluency I
Speaker 1: think in connecting to people over the issue of gas prices.
Speaker 1: You know, if if there's one Senate race that you
Speaker 1: are you really you know, what's the biggest one for
Speaker 1: you that you that you think is going to be
Speaker 1: the harbinger of things to come? I mean, is it
Speaker 1: that race between Warnock and herschel Walker or is it
Speaker 1: Laxalt out of Nevada? I mean, which one are you
Speaker 1: gonna be watching most closely? I feel really confident about Georgia,
Speaker 1: Arizona and Nevada. I think the one that's going to
Speaker 1: tell you is going to be a disaster. Is New Hampshire.
Speaker 1: If we take back New Hampshire. I think it's game
Speaker 1: on with those other homes. Verbe at home. Who's in
Speaker 1: that one? And what how's it looking right now? Boy,
Speaker 1: It's one of those things. I have to tell you.
Speaker 1: It's been a little They wanted Sunu, the NSC was
Speaker 1: recruiting Governor Sonounu. We might not get the top quality
Speaker 1: candidate that we want, but I think at this point
Speaker 1: it's twenty twenty two buck and I think any Democrat
Speaker 1: that's on the ballot and a lot of these states,
Speaker 1: you have to look at Biden's approval rating. It's in
Speaker 1: the low thirties. I think he's maybe thirty seven thirty
Speaker 1: eight percent in New Hampshire. And I would remind people
Speaker 1: in the twenty ten shellacking, Obama was at forty four
Speaker 1: point seven percent approval and he got absolutely hosed in
Speaker 1: the House and the Senate races, and Joe Biden is
Speaker 1: well below that mark, not only nationally, but when you
Speaker 1: get to these individual states, he's in the low thirties,
Speaker 1: even in the high twenties, and some of these key
Speaker 1: center races. I think it's gonna be a good fall,
Speaker 1: ned keeper fingers on the prize. Thanks so much for
Speaker 1: being with us, my friend. Good to see you, Thanks Bud.
Speaker 1: All right, coming up, a major decision on religious freedom
Speaker 1: comes down in a sixty three ruling from the Supreme
Speaker 1: What does it mean for people who want to be
Speaker 1: able to use Devout your program to send their kids
Speaker 1: to Catholic, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, any schools out there. We'll
Speaker 1: discuss in just a moment. At first, I want to
Speaker 1: talk you about protecting your online data. A lot of
Speaker 1: companies promise your privacy is guaranteed, but we know that's
Speaker 1: not true. That's why you need a new privacy and
Speaker 1: cybersecurity application tool called Secure. It's spelled SEK. You are.
Speaker 1: Secure is using proprietary encryption and offering secure instant messaging
Speaker 1: and email with secure all of your communications based on
Speaker 1: servers and data centers hosted in Switzerland, without using any
Speaker 1: of the big tech platforms. Privacy is a big issue now.
Speaker 1: Without real security, people can read your emails, your messages,
Speaker 1: even your bank information. Secure will never mind your data,
Speaker 1: never ask your phone number. You can send emails your doctor, banker, lawyer,
Speaker 1: or anyone else with total confidence you're not being spied on.
Speaker 1: Secure is your solution to stop the constant theft of
Speaker 1: your digital identity. Costs only five dollars to the messenger
Speaker 1: only ten dollars to the Messenger and email combination package.
Speaker 1: Go to secure dot com and take back your prize today.
Speaker 1: That's sekuar dot com and use promo code buck for
Speaker 1: twenty five percent off. We'll be right back with more.
Speaker 1: Hold the line. A blow for a religious freedom today,
Speaker 1: struck by the Supreme Court in a six three decision
Speaker 1: that will make it a whole lot easier for our
Speaker 1: parents across the country who want their children to go
Speaker 1: to religious schools to be able to do so. Turns
Speaker 1: out the wall of separation between church and state, which
Speaker 1: doesn't actually exist in the First Permendment or the Constitution,
Speaker 1: isn't quite what a lot of Libs thought it was.
Speaker 1: We're joined now by Bethany Mandel. She's editor of Heroes
Speaker 1: of Liberty and contributing writer at Desirete News. Talk to
Speaker 1: us about all this, Bethany, thanks for being here, Hey,
Speaker 1: thanks much for having me. From first, Gill, what was
Speaker 1: at issue in this six three Supreme Court decision that
Speaker 1: came down today? What are the facts of the case
Speaker 1: that folks need to know. Yeah, So, basically, this Preme
Speaker 1: Court decided that parents in Maine can use their tuition
Speaker 1: vouchers for religious schools, not just you know, any old
Speaker 1: private school, but that they have to be able to
Speaker 1: use those tuition vouchers even at religious schools. So it
Speaker 1: was a pretty big decision for school choice advocates today.
Speaker 1: And so what do you think this means nationwide for
Speaker 1: the trend It seems of school choice and specifically religious
Speaker 1: school of choice. Yeah. Absolutely, So for states that this
Speaker 1: choice is granted, it opens up the door to a
Speaker 1: lot more a lot more religious schools to be able
Speaker 1: to take this money. And so, you know, not just
Speaker 1: Catholic schools, but you know, schools of any religious persuasion
Speaker 1: can take this money from voucher programs and and you know,
Speaker 1: expand their programming into parochial programs that were that were
Speaker 1: just sort of channeled before into private education without any
Speaker 1: sort of religious structure. The basics, as I see here,
Speaker 1: that this could increase school voucher programs, tax credits to
Speaker 1: fund scholarships, and tax exempt educational savings accounts. The Supreme
Speaker 1: Court decision reads, under the new program, parents designate the
Speaker 1: secondary school that would like their child to attend, public
Speaker 1: or private, and the school district transmits payments to that
Speaker 1: school to help defray the cost of tuition. Also, the
Speaker 1: documented states that if a state uses taxpayer money to
Speaker 1: pay for students attending non religious private schools, it must
Speaker 1: also use taxpayer funds to pay for attendance at religious schools. So,
Speaker 1: I mean, do we expect that this will perhaps increase
Speaker 1: enrollment at schools that are a Christian, Jewish, or Muslim
Speaker 1: and anything else that may be involved here or what? What
Speaker 1: What do you think? Yeah? No, absolutely. I mean for
Speaker 1: a lot of parents who wanted to pull their kids
Speaker 1: out of the public school system, money was a huge consideration,
Speaker 1: and so they were sort of, you know, in Maine
Speaker 1: or in similar states, they were deciding, you know, we'll
Speaker 1: send our kids to a private school that's better than
Speaker 1: the publics. But if the money can't go to a
Speaker 1: religious school, then I guess we'll try to send them
Speaker 1: to a different sort of more morally aligned private But
Speaker 1: now they don't have to make that choice. Now they
Speaker 1: can they can have their money follow their student to
Speaker 1: a religious school or to not a religious school, and
Speaker 1: that really opens the door for a lot of religious
Speaker 1: schools that had been hampered by the fact that, you know,
Speaker 1: their competitors down the road, who didn't have a religious
Speaker 1: affiliation were able to take a lot more cash from
Speaker 1: the state, and now they're able to take it too.
Speaker 1: The Chief Justice John Roberts, who joined the majority in
Speaker 1: this sixth three decision, wrote that Maine's non sectarian requirement
Speaker 1: for otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments violates the free
Speaker 1: exercise clause of the First Amendment. What do you think, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, it absolutely does parents have to you know,
Speaker 1: I don't understand why they. I mean, I do understand
Speaker 1: why they limited the use of these funds for religious schools.
Speaker 1: It's because they wanted to handicap them, and it was
Speaker 1: against the religious freedom, the religious rights of these schools
Speaker 1: to be able to take this money just like any
Speaker 1: other private school. And so yeah, I mean it was
Speaker 1: a long time coming. Also in the minority opinion here,
Speaker 1: Justice Soda Mayor shared her thoughts as follows. This Court
Speaker 1: continues to dismantle the wall of separation between church and
Speaker 1: state that the Framers fought to build. The Court has
Speaker 1: upended constitutional doctrine shifting from a rule that permits states
Speaker 1: to decline to fund religious organization the one that requires states,
Speaker 1: in many circumstances to subsidize religious indoctrination with taxpayer dollars.
Speaker 1: I honestly do wonder as I read this if Justice
Speaker 1: Soda Mayor knows that the wall of separation between church
Speaker 1: and state isn't actually a thing. Yeah, I mean, and
Speaker 1: it's also disturbing that she thinks, just sending your kids
Speaker 1: who a Jewish school or Catholic schools religious indoctrination. No,
Speaker 1: it's just education. There is so much wrong with that
Speaker 1: statement that I don't even know where to begin to
Speaker 1: unpack it. Yeah, I mean, she's she's citing this obviously,
Speaker 1: and you could say it's a very common talking point
Speaker 1: among people that are either atheist or believe very strongly
Speaker 1: in and denigrating any kind of public, public exercise of
Speaker 1: religion or anything in the public cheer. Of course, it
Speaker 1: doesn't appear in the first round. It doesn't appear in
Speaker 1: the Constitution anywhere, and they speak of it with reverences
Speaker 1: as though it does. So. I mean, I think that
Speaker 1: this at least shows that on some key issues of
Speaker 1: First Amendment freedom, this Court seems to be unified with
Speaker 1: a sixth three at least a sixth three decision, which
Speaker 1: is a good thing. I also want to ask what
Speaker 1: you think about the big push going on right now
Speaker 1: from the leg separately from this, to push for children
Speaker 1: to be exposed to drag perform which this has become
Speaker 1: a big cultural flashpoint. A lot of people will openly
Speaker 1: say this is a good thing and that drag like
Speaker 1: why does drag queen story our have to be something
Speaker 1: that people get behind? Why not just have adult males
Speaker 1: or adult females dressed as they normally would reading to children?
Speaker 1: Like what what do they get out of this? I
Speaker 1: don't know, I mean, where is justice? Soota my word?
Speaker 1: Right now, let's let's protect children from this religious indoctrination
Speaker 1: of the drag queens. This is this is part of
Speaker 1: their religion. They think that, you know, drag queens have
Speaker 1: to have this access to children, and therefore why didn't
Speaker 1: their horizons. I'm really not sure. What it comes down
Speaker 1: to is just the total sexualization of childhood, which is
Speaker 1: their ultimate goal. And I really I don't understand the
Speaker 1: fervent desire to expose children to gyrating men dressed as women.
Speaker 1: But there's so so much wrong with it, and your
Speaker 1: parents can do whatever they want to do, but we're
Speaker 1: paying for it with our tax dollars in public schools,
Speaker 1: in public school library and when they do these events
Speaker 1: in New York City and also in the public libraries
Speaker 1: as well. Yes, it just seems to me that this
Speaker 1: would be such an easy issue to be dealt with
Speaker 1: by just everyone agreeing. There's no reason for this to
Speaker 1: be happening in the first place. But it's obviously important
Speaker 1: to a segment of the left that young children are
Speaker 1: exposed to people who are men who are dressed as women. Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I really don't understand it. I mean it used to be,
Speaker 1: you know, when Pride Month was around, I don't know,
Speaker 1: five years ago, it was just a celebration and it
Speaker 1: was just, you know, everyone has to accept us. And
Speaker 1: now it's become sort of force fit, not just at us,
Speaker 1: but also our children. And if you don't want your
Speaker 1: taugh oddler being read a book about Swish, go the
Speaker 1: Drag Queen's Hips, which is a real book. Suddenly you're
Speaker 1: a bigott. The line keeps on going farther and farther,
Speaker 1: and we should have drawn it a long time ago,
Speaker 1: and now with the drag Queen Story hour, I think
Speaker 1: finally we're starting to realize that they're just all out
Speaker 1: assault on childhood, on innocence, on all of it. Bethanny,
Speaker 1: thanks for being with us. Thank you. The Twitter Board
Speaker 1: has approved officially Elon must take over bid for that
Speaker 1: social media giant. When we come back, we'll speak to
Speaker 1: Kara Frederick of the Heritage Foundation about just what this
Speaker 1: means and where it's all going to stay with us.
Speaker 1: Each morning, the President of the United States receives a
Speaker 1: highly classified briefing on the most important issues facing the country.
Speaker 1: It's called the President's Daily Brief, or PDB. It's delivered
Speaker 1: by America's spies and analy Well, now you can hear
Speaker 1: your very own PDB in the form of a podcast
Speaker 1: hosted by me Brian Dean Wright, a former CIA operations officer.
Speaker 1: Each morning at six am Eastern, I'll bring you fifteen
Speaker 1: to twenty minutes of the most important issues facing the country,
Speaker 1: giving you the critical intelligence and analysis you need to
Speaker 1: start your morning. Elon Musk, a step closer to his
Speaker 1: actual takeover of Twitter. Board has met of that company
Speaker 1: and they have approved Elon's takeover bid. So what does
Speaker 1: this mean? How do we get to this point? Where
Speaker 1: are we going? What does it mean for free speech?
Speaker 1: All that good stuff we got? Kara Frederick with us,
Speaker 1: now director of the Tech Policy Center at the Heritage Foundation,
Speaker 1: former Facebook employee, She knows how these big tech companies work. Kara,
Speaker 1: thanks for being back with us. Of course, thanks for
Speaker 1: having me Buck. So how much of a milestone is
Speaker 1: this that Elon's actually gotten the approval of the board
Speaker 1: over at Twitter. First of all, are you surprised at all?
Speaker 1: Is this what you were expecting? And where do we
Speaker 1: go from here? Look, I will say I'm a little surprised.
Speaker 1: The last time I was on the program, I was like,
Speaker 1: I'll give it fifty fifty at this point, because they've
Speaker 1: thrown up obstacles in his way again and again and again,
Speaker 1: the Joint SECDJ investigation, allegations of sexual misconduct, the board
Speaker 1: taking the poison pill from the beginning, so I was
Speaker 1: not so sanguine about this actually coming to fruition. So
Speaker 1: I think this is a pretty big milestone. But as
Speaker 1: Elon himself has said today, there's three things that are
Speaker 1: still unresolved that need to be fixed. Basically before this
Speaker 1: goes forward. One the bot issue, right, he wants to
Speaker 1: get it under five percent, the funding that all has
Speaker 1: to come together. And number three, the shareholders still have
Speaker 1: to vote to approve this take over. So three things,
Speaker 1: some little, some not so little, but again, this is
Speaker 1: a This is a massive win I think for the
Speaker 1: people on the side of free speech and for Elon himself.
Speaker 1: So what are the steps down? I mean you mentioned
Speaker 1: so there'll be voter approval, a stock shareholder approval. Do
Speaker 1: we have any idea of what a timeline could be before?
Speaker 1: I mean, basically, people want to know when are all
Speaker 1: the Libs who are crying at their desks at the
Speaker 1: mere prospect of free speech and Twitter? When are the
Speaker 1: tears going to start to flow? Because this is a
Speaker 1: done deal and it's all over for the open censorship
Speaker 1: of conservatives on Twitter. You know, I think they should
Speaker 1: get the tissues out at this point. I'm not quite
Speaker 1: sure exactly when in terms of a timeline, but I
Speaker 1: do think the shareholders would be wise to vote in
Speaker 1: favor of this because right now Twitter is trading considerably
Speaker 1: below what Elon's actually offering per share for the company.
Speaker 1: Stocks are up a little bit. I think one percent
Speaker 1: was the last figure I saw before I came on here,
Speaker 1: But you know it is I think the fiduciary duty
Speaker 1: of the board they did it right, they said yes,
Speaker 1: and for their shareholders to actually let Elon take this
Speaker 1: thing over. So I think that the Libs better get
Speaker 1: their tissues out and again our prague Agerwall and all
Speaker 1: of his lackeys better keep cleaning up the platform because
Speaker 1: at this point, I think Elon's coming. If Twitter becomes
Speaker 1: a true free speech guided platform, right, I mean, Elon's
Speaker 1: always said, illegal stuff will still be illegal. You know,
Speaker 1: you can't operate a digital you know, illegal drug market
Speaker 1: or something on the platform. Obviously there are going to
Speaker 1: be some things that they still don't allow and police.
Speaker 1: But if Twitter does actually allow, you know, important political
Speaker 1: debate from both sides of the aisle as part of
Speaker 1: its mission going forward, do you think that will have
Speaker 1: a meaningful impact on the way some of the other platforms,
Speaker 1: notably your former employer Facebook, maybe even TikTok, approach their
Speaker 1: approach censorship, because you know, then they won't all be
Speaker 1: in it together, right, at least they'll be a break
Speaker 1: in and the chains are breaking in the links of
Speaker 1: the chain of collusion here. You know, Buck, you took
Speaker 1: the words out of my mouth. Number one, I have
Speaker 1: no hope for TikTok. So take that CCP own nonsense
Speaker 1: out of here. Do what you gotta do to get
Speaker 1: the kids off TikTok. Throw it away. Table that for
Speaker 1: a second, Facebook, potentially. But what you said is the
Speaker 1: bigger issue. It's breaking that ideological monopoly. What most people
Speaker 1: don't know is that these tech companies, they move in concerts.
Speaker 1: So Google's going to look to Facebook, Facebook's gonna look
Speaker 1: to Twitter. They're all gonna look at each other and see,
Speaker 1: are you making this decision? Okay, we're gonna follow suit.
Speaker 1: We feel comfortable when one tech company makes a content
Speaker 1: moderation decision, so we can make it too. But Twitter,
Speaker 1: if they are going to be the stalwart, if they're
Speaker 1: gonna you know, poke their head above the press, the
Speaker 1: parapet and basically say no we believe in the first
Speaker 1: I meant within the bounds of the law. Elon's words,
Speaker 1: that is going to break that ideological monopoly. So they
Speaker 1: can't all move in concert and then sort of point
Speaker 1: fingers at each other when something like the Hunter Biden
Speaker 1: laptop story is suppressed so that's what I see, and
Speaker 1: you pointed it out very clearly, is that breaking of
Speaker 1: the ideological monopoly Twitter is going to be a wrench
Speaker 1: in the spokes effectively, and will all be excited as conservatives,
Speaker 1: as freedom minded people for that to happen. I think
Speaker 1: it's an internal chat chat companies Slack. I've never used it.
Speaker 1: I've read a lot of stories about this one. I
Speaker 1: know a lot of corporations use This kind of reminds
Speaker 1: you of what Aol instant messenger was back in the
Speaker 1: day for some people, but Slack has banned it. That
Speaker 1: it was in the news this week the immigration restriction
Speaker 1: group Federation for American Immigration Reform from using any of
Speaker 1: its services for allegedly violating the company's terms of service.
Speaker 1: But they said they wrote a letter to Slack quote,
Speaker 1: you should be advised that fairies well aware there are
Speaker 1: government actors who are actively trying to CeNSE their Americans
Speaker 1: right to freedom of speech and their use of tech platforms,
Speaker 1: including particular individuals the Department of Homeland Security. Evidence that
Speaker 1: there was intervention by government officials in this matter would
Speaker 1: be of supreme interest not only to fair but to
Speaker 1: the general public. Preserve all intern communications in this anticipation
Speaker 1: of probable litigation. You know, my friend Alex Barrinson, I know,
Speaker 1: is in a lawsuit, ongoing lawsuit that has made it
Speaker 1: past the initial phases and is going into discovery against Twitter.
Speaker 1: It seems to me that the Federation for American Immigration
Speaker 1: Reform President he are saying to Slack, Well, if you
Speaker 1: guys were colluding with the government, the sitting Biden administration,
Speaker 1: for example, this is going to be a legal issue. Exactly.
Speaker 1: It's time to start treating these companies as quasi state actors.
Speaker 1: We've seen this happen again and again, Jimsaki telling Facebook
Speaker 1: we're working with them to flag problematic posts, her doing
Speaker 1: it again to Spotify during the Joe Rogan issue when
Speaker 1: he platforming doctor Malone. Where you have Joe Biden saying
Speaker 1: private companies need to do more to police COVID misinformation,
Speaker 1: DHS Secretary Majorca saying that we're working with these private
Speaker 1: companies to ensure legitimate use of the platform, and then
Speaker 1: the leaks from the Disinformation Board saying that we're operationalizing this,
Speaker 1: working with the government, working with the executives a Twitter
Speaker 1: to police American speech. This is indicative of a pattern
Speaker 1: that we've seen again and again and again. And you're right,
Speaker 1: is it a legal issue? Doesn't render these quote unquote
Speaker 1: private companies as potential state actors. I think that's a
Speaker 1: pretty good argument that it does. And I will say
Speaker 1: when the climate change experts come out and who work
Speaker 1: for the government and basically say we're working with platforms
Speaker 1: to take down climate or potentially push them to take
Speaker 1: down climate denialism. YouTube already institute is something like that
Speaker 1: last October, then you have a big problem on your hands.
Speaker 1: This is government and tech company collusion and big tech
Speaker 1: are the new enforcers of what his right speak according
Speaker 1: to the government. Huge problem. Take him to court. Put
Speaker 1: the hammet on on these tech companies for this, because
Speaker 1: they cannot be the mouthpiece of the Biden administration to
Speaker 1: the detriment of the American citizen period. Gara Frederick always illuminating.
Speaker 1: Thanks for being with us, Thanks Bud Biden fell off
Speaker 1: his bike. Trump has some thought that's coming up next
Speaker 1: quick it. Oh, it's time for those stories we throw
Speaker 1: together for you at the end to make sure you
Speaker 1: don't miss them. Some are wacky, some are crazy, some
Speaker 1: are fun, some are oh my gosh, and more quick hits.
Speaker 1: Let's get right to it. We have, as you know,
Speaker 1: bicycle gate, not really just kidding. Joe Biden slipped on
Speaker 1: his bike a little bit. He's fine, didn't hurt himself,
Speaker 1: but it just looked a little goofy for a second.
Speaker 1: And it's funny to watch how you point this out
Speaker 1: and some members of the regimes protectors and the media
Speaker 1: is say, oh, it's you know, it's fine. Everybody falls,
Speaker 1: everybody slips. What's the big deal. Well, you know, it's
Speaker 1: not a big deal until they make it a big deal.
Speaker 1: And at some point you say to yourself, what the
Speaker 1: heck is going on here? But Trump, always able with
Speaker 1: the one liner, is always ready to step into the fray.
Speaker 1: Had this to say about the habit that several previous
Speaker 1: presidents have had about riding bicycles while they're in office.
Speaker 1: Plot one of the greatest travesties of all is to
Speaker 1: see a person in the White House who, even after
Speaker 1: years of political experience, has absolutely no clue how to
Speaker 1: be the president of the United States. And I hope
Speaker 1: he has recovered because, as you know, he fell off
Speaker 1: his bicycle. To them, No, I'm serious, I hope he's Okay,
Speaker 1: fell off a bicycle. I make this pledge to you today.
Speaker 1: I will never ever ride a bicycle. Never ride a bicycle.
Speaker 1: I'm not a big bicycle got to be out. I
Speaker 1: do ride any scooter in to do this show, which
Speaker 1: is a very fun way to get around. You don't
Speaker 1: necessarily look like a badass that's putting it mildly, but
Speaker 1: you do get there quickly and it it's fun and
Speaker 1: just sort of scoot scooting around. Bicycle's not for me,
Speaker 1: not for the former president either, and maybe president again.
Speaker 1: So I believe that we are all fighting a war
Speaker 1: against noise, and there are people who are on the
Speaker 1: side of the inconsiderate and the people who are in
Speaker 1: the side of the considerate. This is a battle between
Speaker 1: evil and good, between those who have some desire to
Speaker 1: protect civilization and those who don't care if it comes
Speaker 1: a part of the themes. And excessive noise is all
Speaker 1: over the place these days, people on their speaker phones
Speaker 1: and restaurants playing their bluetooth speakers. At the beach, I
Speaker 1: don't want to hear whatever the make believe DJ of
Speaker 1: the Moment thinks we all need to hear at the beach.
Speaker 1: I just want to hear the waves and the birds
Speaker 1: and quiet. I don't want to hear their crappy music. Right.
Speaker 1: Everyone understands that this is the civilized response, and those
Speaker 1: who don't aren't very civilized. And you know, if someone's
Speaker 1: having a wedding and they ask you, hey, can you
Speaker 1: maybe just stop with the lawnmower. It's their wedding day,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe you just wait before you have to
Speaker 1: take care of the lawn right away. The lawn is
Speaker 1: not gonna the lawn is not gonna catch on fire
Speaker 1: if you don't cut it right. In that moment, New
Speaker 1: York posted a story about how this a woman continued
Speaker 1: with our lawnmower even during a wedding next door. The
Speaker 1: neighbors are having a wedding in their yard. They couldn't
Speaker 1: even hear the vows because the lawnmower was so loud,
Speaker 1: and couldn't We couldn't get this. They couldn't get this
Speaker 1: neighbor to stop with the lawnmower. So it's got to
Speaker 1: tell you, you know, be considerate. Excess noise unacceptable, and
Speaker 1: excess noise when it's not next Sarah, if you can
Speaker 1: time it out, you know, no reason, no reason for that.
Speaker 1: Here's a poster photograph in New Jersey school that says,
Speaker 1: if your parents aren't accepting of your identity, I'm your
Speaker 1: mom now. Poster includes a bear and bearcubs colored like
Speaker 1: the the Pride flags. I believe that's that's what this
Speaker 1: is all about. Um, there needs to stop being this
Speaker 1: movement among leftists and and some people in the schools
Speaker 1: to try to have kids become trans without their parents knowing,
Speaker 1: because we all know that this is really weird and
Speaker 1: they need to stop, and that there's a social contagion
Speaker 1: going on here. But very they get very tense when
Speaker 1: you bring that stuff up. And then the White House
Speaker 1: Press secretary response to a question about the recession, and
Speaker 1: here's what she said. You got to see it. The
Speaker 1: President said, there's no inevitability around the recession, but there
Speaker 1: is a greater deal of market concern about exactly that.
Speaker 1: And I know the inflation that you're number one concern,
Speaker 1: But can you talk a little bit about if you're
Speaker 1: doing anything at all to prevent a recession or arising unemployment.
Speaker 1: So the way that we see this, and you've heard
Speaker 1: us talk about this, that we're in a moment of transition.
Speaker 1: We have seen. We are in a unique situation with
Speaker 1: our with the historical gains, with our economy the way
Speaker 1: that we see it as unemployment rate has held steady
Speaker 1: at three point six, which is also near historic lows.
Speaker 1: Business and investment remains strong, Household balance sheets remains strong.
Speaker 1: There was an analysis that came out recently that showed
Speaker 1: middle class Americans had an additional ten thousand dollars in
Speaker 1: savings then before the pandemic. All right, not not good
Speaker 1: talking points from the White House. Not a good narrative
Speaker 1: as ever. Tonight's hold the line the no spinos of
Speaker 1: Bill O'Reilly is next Bill Tie. Each morning, the President
Speaker 1: of the United States receives a highly classified briefing on
Speaker 1: the most important issues facing the country. It's called the
Speaker 1: President's Daily Brief or PDB. It's delivered by America's spies
Speaker 1: and analysts. Well, now you can hear your very own
Speaker 1: PDB in the form of a podcast hosted by me
Speaker 1: Brian Dean Wright, a former CIA operations officer. Each morning
Speaker 1: at six am Eastern, I'll bring you fifteen to twenty
Speaker 1: minutes of the most important issues facing the country, giving
Speaker 1: you the critical intelligence and analysis you need to start
Speaker 1: your morning,