Well, Whiskey Coming Fame by Pain Harney the Brain Whiskey Don't You Let Me Go? From Powerline blog dot com and produced by Ricochet dot Com. This is the three Whiskey Happy Hour with your bartenders Steve Hayward, John You and Powerlines International Woman of Mystery Lucresha's gotta give me and let them whiskey blow where you're feeling low down and loan? Well, Well, welcome everybody to the three Whiskey Happy Hour. This is Lucresha the International rooman of Mystery, joined
as always by my co host Steve Hayward and John You. John You is in this really exciting looking u backdrop with lots of old books and smokey lounge sort of things. He's at the University Club. Is that what you said? John? Yes, only a political theory person would think this background denotes excitement. I think has been. I don't want to throw shot on the University Club in San Francisco to this kind of old school. I used to go there a lot for lunch with William Rusher when he lived up there on
NaBiO in his retirement years, and we could still smoke cigars. Then someplace, Oh, I'm sure they do. Here. They have a great balcony that overlooks downtown San Francisco. People have been known to smoke cigars there. You can still smoke indoors back in the twentieth century anyway, Yeah, there's that. I don't think you can smoke outdoors anymore unless it's pot right, Seriously, I'm not making a joke. I'm being dead serious. Yeah,
yeah, okay, So I got a lot. First of all, a loyal listener, a long time listener who's been listening since the beginning, said that they had um for a variety of reason's gone back to listen to some of the original three Whiskey Happy Hour podcasts, and notice that we have actually dropped the format which which birthed the three Whiskey out Happy Hour in the first place, which was we were going to do three whiskeys, and they were
going to be, generally speaking, a nasty peade whiskey to have the nastiest story of the week, a sweet Irish whiskey. So hence, I have my Irish whiskey with me here, an Irish coffee for the sweet story of the week, and then a decent, interesting story that goes with real single malt scotch, single malt bourbon. I happen to have, of course, single malt scotch with me today, and we're going to resurrect that and just see how it goes. But I'm gonna let these guys choose which story goes
with which kind of whiskey. Well, can I just say that I feel just a little bit more for John. Originally I was copying, not exactly, but being the three martini lunch that Jim Gartty does I think is so good. They do that every day, you know, five days a week. It's a very short show, it's but they have their what crazy good and bad martinis, and I thought we could do you know, Pete sweet and three whiskeys and the three topics and and but the show evolved, so
that did. But but this is a this is a legacy show. This is old okay, all right, school three whiskey happy Hour. Well, John and I had a fabulous whiskey together Thursday at the Villa Taverna in San Francisco. What was that, John? Hibeki? How you say that? Hibeky? Yeah, hibeaky Japanese whisky. It was really good. You would I had last week. That's what I had last week, remember in honor
of a glance is Zumi. Oh course it was great, really smooth and very sure, but not too much character, no, Pete, as far as I could tell, that's what you said last week too about it. Actually, John, even have it in front of you. I was drinking
it. Well, we caught up with you last night. So anyway, and by the way, you should tell you boy that Steve did a great interview of Judge Carlos Baya, who stepped down from the ninth one senior status on the ninth Circuit, who Steve said, I think quite rightly so was the most is the most interesting man who is now currently a federal judge. Just an incredible background and life story. Well, listeners you I'm pretty sure
John, I got a good recording of him. Oh good, And so I will turn into a podcast so listeners will get to hear from Judge Bay who was really by the way, I didn't say it's the most interesting man. That was the Los Angeles Daily Journal, the trade journal for the LA legal community. And they're right, he's really fun so and it was a great conversation. So I will produce that and posted up as a standalone podcast sometime the next week or two. Okay, So first I want to the
three of us went back and forth. Actually didn't add anything to it. It was these guys. I was in the middle of doing a million things and texting as I was walking like other students on campus and running into people, you know, that sort of whole thing, while they were going back forth with their their derivatives of woke. So I believe the first one was UM from Amy Wax and what was it, Steve? Oh shoot, I don't remember now. What did I say? Uh darn it? It was
was, wait, wacocracy. I think that was that's mine, Wolca babbel, Woca Babbel. That's it, Malcababel. That was a great one. And that you, John, You said wacocracy And then he said, what about Woca lingo? Yeah, Walca Lingo. I like that babble lingo. Yeah. And I said, it's just a little bit like SNL, like Saturday Live, Woke ameister woke a rama. We were gonna have a woke rama. So anyway, I'm happy to see commenters push put their own ideas
for derivatives of woke. UM that would be great. So, because we have a full agenda for today, we're gonna get jump right into the heavy stuff and we'll figure out. I imagine this one has to go with the Irish whiskey in big part because I'm going to bring Ireland into it, whether these guys wanted or not. But John's going to talk to us just a little or s excuse me, Steve's going to talk to us a little bit about the Clarence Thomas story because he's working on a piece. So Steve take
it away. Yeah, well, that's right. We didn't have time to get into it last week. It broke right as we were getting together last week. And as what's the story, it's these pro Publica people. They just they build themselves as an independent, nonprofit investigative journalism outfit funded they leave
this part out by left wing philanthropist affiliated with the Democratic Party. Their last big story, by the way, a year or so ago, was revealing the great specific details of the tax returns of the four hundred wealthiest people in America that had been leaked to them by someone in the i RSS. And that's someone committed a felony in doing so, because that's supposed to be kept private information. So we still have found that leaker. I think it's the
same person who leaked the Supreme Court Dab's opinion. Probably. Anyway, what's the story about. It turns out that Clarence Thomas has been the beneficiary of a lot of them. And actually the precise term is the hospitality of Harden Crowe, who's a billionaire that John knows some and I've met him several times. I've sat in a bar with him a couple of times, and his hospitality is legendary. He has a lavish private retreat up in the ad Rondocks
in New York and he loves to have lots of people come through. He has a super yacht that he loans out to friends of his to sail all over the world because he wants to keep it. He has a crew, he wants to keep the crew busy. He wants to keep the boat maintained and going. Lots of people have been on his boat all over the place. And he has his own private plane that when he's not to flying himself around, he likes to loan out to his friends. So Thomas was one
of those. And this is a big scandal and the amazing thing about the whole story is, you know, where do you start the double standards involved here? There's no the dog that doesn't bark in the story is there's no even an insinuation. There's no way they can stick together any kind of influence, peddling, any kind of corrupting. In fact, here's what they do say. This isn't the story itself. I'll quote here. Crow and this firm have not had a case before the Supreme Court since Thomas joined it.
And the best they can do, and i'll quote it here, is it is unclear if Crow has had any influence on the Justice's vieus. Now. I mean, if you pay any attention at all the Clarence Thomas, you will know that that statement is laughable. If it weren't so stupid and ludicrous, right, I mean, you know, And part of what's going on here is it marries two things going on. The left hates Thomas, they hate all black conservatives, and they really hate Thomas, and they hate billionaires.
So the first question is what took them so long to come to this angle to attack Thomas? Steve? Do they really hate billionaires? I think that's not true anymore. Only if they're right wing billionaires. But well,
you know that that would depend on the circumstances. They certainly didn't hate Jeffrey Epstein, uh correct, And nor were they upset about Bill Clinton and every other elite in Washington and Hollywood. Going on Epstein's undisclosed wealth source, Lolita expressed to go, right, well, let me let me just say this for the time being, and then and then leave it aside because it's it's uninteresting. Ultimately, I think you're right. That is a contingent matter.
The left loves billionaires these days, starting with George Sorros. On the other hand, there is a popular phrase on certain presdes on the left, and it runs, every billionaire, every billionaire is a policy failure. And Robert Reisch, I think who may have popularized that. He goes further and he says every billionaire's fortune is either the product of crime, fraud, antitrust violations. In other words, every billionaire, he asserts his very nearly the equivalent
of a criminal. And I once tweet it back. So then include Oprah Winfrey, does she uh you know right? I mean, okay, you know, but you see that if there were a chance to confiscate the wealth of all billionaires. I think you'd see the left wheel into place. I'm
not convinced to that, Steve anymore, honestly. I mean, stupid idiots like Robert Wright might feel that way, but I don't think most of the left does, because you know, they've got the money now, they've got the money for the most part, and they've got the new money, which is definitely made um yeah. Yeah. And then and I've got a charge I may put up on power line sometime soon. And it's all four hundred
and thirty five congressional districts. And what you see now is that the highest income districts were overwhelmingly represented by Democrats, and middle income and lower income districts um the very low income districts that would you know, be new Work or something like that, that's still democratic. But middle income and lower middle income districts are now overwhelmingly Republican. This is not news, but it's interesting to
see it displayed on a chart. I have to I have to interrupt here and just say ask John who it doesn't appear to be drinking whiskey at the University club. It appears he's drinking bud light, but because wow, no, No, what I say now is that what you want to do now is you want to have light bud instead of bud light but sorrow. So it looks like a yellow can. It's not a blue can. So it's just diet coke. Trump's for your president's favorite drink can full of chemicals.
Nothing better Thomas. Yeah. Just you know, since I clerked for Thomas and I know Crow, and i've um, you know, been at things with them together at the American Enterprise Institute, Steve said, if there was anybody who's views on jurisprudence is just least likely to be affected by rich people or donors or people hangs around with, it's him. I mean, you could not be clearer and more obvious about how you think the Constitution should be
interpreted. Thomas is the most committed of all the originalists, I think, and the least in favor of precedent. Also, I think, you know the I say that, I think Justice Thomas had no obligation to report any of this stuff, and actually I think it reflects this kind of over legalization of life, this idea that oh, if you're a judge, you should you have to meticulously report everybody you have lunch with, anybody who gives you
a gift, or anybody you give a gift to. And it's this idea that you know, we can write up legal codes and ethics codes to replace simple morality. And the simple moral question is did Thomas every sit on a case that involved his friend? No? No, if he did, that'd be you know, he there'd be a due process problem. But that could be the same for something much much less than going on a yacht or taking
a vacation or doing those sorts of things. I mean, just the fact that you know you're friends with somebody, even if they're poor as a church mouse, you you would be expected to recuse yourself because you could not be fair and balanced or fair and impartial. That's the word I'm looking for, right, And that's the price of the vacation. Yeah, I'm there to
due process clause, right, you you ever? Right? In fact, it be whoever's litigating against the person who allegedly is favorite receiving favoritism from Thomas. You ever, right to a neutral decisions a neutral judge. And so that's the real standard. And so what I find is, so I'm the corrupts you strong I find so pervasive but wrong behind this is this idea,
let's just legislate everybody's ethics. Yeah, let's replace simple judgment about what's fair with reporting requirements and you know, playing gotcha because I think that's what this is. Yeah, but that's only partially true, John, because I'd forget which judge it was in one of the Trump related trials in Washington, DC that you know on record as having given money to Hillary Clinton, having given money to Joe Biden. No need to recuse him or herself, I forget.
I just remember thinking that seems to me to be a bit of a conflict of interest. It's really obvious that you're not fair and impartial under those circumstances. But I was just going to say, you know, poor professors like you and me, we look forward to having rich friends like Steve who will take us places and buy us expensive dinners, and can take us on
his plane and his yacht. You know, it doesn't mean that A proof of the fact that we are we cannot be bought by Steve's largess is that we're still mean to him, all right, Oh man, At every opportunity and one or two more thoughts on all this. Uh so the next so called shoot to drop as well. It turns out Harland Crowe bought parents Thomas's mother's house or from the family or something for a very modest sum and then you re modeled and fixed it up and thought, well this is you know,
corrupt or something. But you know, was it. Clarence Thomas himself was only like a one third ownership of it, so his share was you know something, and it was one hundred and thirty thousand dollars or some you know, pocket chains or somebody like Harland Crowe. I happen to know that Harlan Crowe bought a house, a nice place right next to Charles Murray out in the Maryland countryside. Why do you do that, well, he said,
Charles, you need company. You're out there in rural area, you know, on purpose, and I want to buy a house next to you. And you know what I'm gonna be need is if you'd have somebody you know, people come to stay. And in fact, the first person who went and rented the house I think from Crow was Neil Ferguson when he was working on a book along with and so I'd go out to see Charles for
dinner. This is more than ten years ago, and Neil will come over and and he was then engaged to ion her Clee and and you know, it's been a sort of steady stream of like visiting writers. And Harlan thought that just to be neat, you have this little writer's colonies. He's like that, that's the kind of guy he is. There's you know, this
is just sort of ludicrous if you know the guy at all. The other part of it that is striking is a lot of people have said, oh, this shows you what a phoney Thomas is because he likes to talk about how he really likes to see the heartland of America and traveled as RV.
They didn't say those stories weren't true. They're just trying to, you know, throw a slime on him, because I mean, I do love telling the story about how he likes to drive his RV up to Missouri, where Jenny's family's from, and he used to park in the Walmart parking lots when Walmart allowed RV people to do that. If ended that, I think because
of the homeless problem and other things. But you know, he'd tell the story because he's not widely recognized person because they're not on TV in the Supreme Court. And you know, we have other people parked there, or you know, sometimes we the bus drivers for Taylor Swift or somebody. You know, I have the buses parked there, and they come up and they keep me barbecuing on a little habachi outside, and it said, oh, it's a nice rig. Who do you drive for? And Justice Thomas would say,
oh, miss Jenny, I drive for. Miss Jenny is right, So okay, I'm gonna turn this sweet story into the nasty story here for a minute and say it's just like so much else, not just double standards. Leave the double standards aside. But Clarence Thomas is the what would you call it. There's a good word, and I just can't think of it. Of the left he is. And this brings me to the Hackeen Jeffreys story. Nothing that the left hates more than a strong conservative black of influence.
There's nothing that they hate more in the world. And you know, well everything they've tried, right, well, yeah, that's right. I mean I remember the feminist in the eighties used to say that Jeane Kirkpatrick and Margaret Thatcher were female impersonators, which I'm not sure how you'd even do that today gender confusion. But by the way, I did forget one thing,
but the house business. Somebody dug up that a bank executive, I forget which Delaware bank, but they're all in Delaware, right, bought a house from Joe Biden at a substantial profit to Biden. And by the way, now who knows if Biden would have done it anyway, but Biden was the point man for changing bankruptcy laws in waves that favored Delaware banks around two thousand
and seven. And by the way, all the students who who I think rightly complained that they're not able to discharge their student loans in bankruptcy, that was part of legislation that Biden pushed on. Behalf of the banks that were in those those days still own business. So where's pro publica looking at things
like that? Just to pick one thing that you or just remember when somebody bought to the lat next to the Obama's Yeah, that's right, somebody all in any well, you go back to the Clinton's leaving the White House broke and in debt because Bill's legal bills and how they get that mansion in Chautauqua,
what's his name? The governor Virginia bought it for them because he was super rich, right, Um, you know the guy who lost the governor's race a couple of years of Harry McCall Harry mccullof bought the house for them. Yes, wow, another later, I mean, you know, reimbursed him or something. But still, I mean that there were some people at times to gosh, that's kind of dodgy, isn't it. But there you
go. But so the worst of the worst, Clarence Thomas is the worst of the worst as far as the left is concerned, because not just because he's black, not just because he's smart, not just because he's conservative, but because he also has that terrific story. You know that the actual rags to riches, pull yourself up by your own bootstrap, make you know,
work yourself across different philosophical or ideological perspectives to get to this point. You know, everything that that demonstrates how the falsities of the leftist perspective is demonstrated
by Clarence Thomas's life. That's I think probably the biggest reason. You know, you can't you can't what Jeffries is supposedly called I won't even use the term house you know what to refer to Clarence Thomas and other black conservatives or some of them not so conservative, but anyway, it's just the foulest sort of thing. And of course he'll Jeffries will never be made to pay for it because the media. You have to tell me what he said. So
here's what happened. They dug up was it as dissertation now as probably as
senior college newspaper editorials. And he praised his uncle who was a radical, who was a professor and a radical anti semide and and you know, praised him in this this article and then talked about, um, how horrible black conservatives were mentioned Clarence Thomas, I think, um, Shelby Steele and who is the general, Colin Paul, Colin Powell by name, and called them house you know what, and um that they that they put their own self
interest basically above the um. They allied themselves with the white power structure who were oppressing their people, and they thought it was just awful. Of course he was, he was a kid, but he's never come out because he hasn't had to. He hasn't been asked by a single mainstream media person. Do you disavow this story? Um? Remember that that um Brett Kavanaugh was
asked to uhlinybody wrote in somebody's yearbook right in high school? Right? And I thought his answer was good, Yeah, I did write that I was sixteen, right, Yeah, and he doesn't have to So I guess there's that. All right enough, But well that's going on, Well that is going around. Are you following this? This one of these state legislators in Tennessee who was now acting the whole you know, black radical preacher visage.
But it turns out are you think he went to Bowden? I keep wanting to president and but there he you know, he like a Wall Street banker, right, he was what was it Harry Reid called Obama at one point, um, an articulate black man, A nice, clean, articulate black man. He was a nice Biden said that. Well, so so that was true of what's his name down in Tennessee was a nice, clean, articulate black man. And then he became a lot of posturing going on here.
Okay, yes there is and it makes me sick. But anyway, all right, you mean you're peaty sour whiskey the day right, Yeah, yes, it's too hard. So I sent the guys. I sent the guys a blog post. There's a new brewery opening in my little town, which is a big deal because we don't have a lot of good restaurants, we don't have a brewery. And it's a brewery that started in Tombstone, most of you have heard, which is not far from where I live.
Tombstone, the famous Tombstone from the movie you know, the Okay Corral Wyatt air Ball of that, and the one in Tombstone is just the brewery. You can just drink beer there, you can bring in your own food. But there's also one in Phoenix that has food. And last summer they were going to they'd agreed to open up their brewery to a meeting of the Phoenix Federalist Society, and the left got wind of this and staged a massive boycott, which probably isn't that big of a deal in a place like Phoenix.
You know who's going to pay any attention to that. But this is huge online nonsense about the problem being that the and I'm going to have to get this right. The Federalist Society is responsible for the overturning of Row versus Wade. Yeah, single handedly, you know, single handedly responsible for so they needed to be boycotted for even allowing these people into their restaurant. So what do you think about that, John, since you are infected a Society member,
I find this incredible. What is I actually think? One thing it's interesting is just I do think that as a Federal Society member, I think that people have the right to kick anyone out of their business that they want. And I also think that people could make demands, you know, if they want to that people that businesses don't let certain people in. But the business business owner doesn't have to listen to anybody. He has the right to
serve who he wants. I think the guy who makes the you know, the the wedding cakes in Colorado has the right to sell the cakes to he wants, as the right to put the frosting away he wants to on the
cakes. Um. This it's almost h ironic that these people are trying to force someone if they were in fact sympathetic to the Federal Society, they're trying to force the exact opposite person of who would listen to them, right, someone who And so one thing Lucretia sent us was the website of the brewery which had his long letter, and the brewery owner, who unfortunately turned out to be a lawyer. He spends all of his time now making beer,
a good beer as a matter of fact. So all my own point is, you know, whereas the normal American would have just stuck a middle finger in the window at these people, he actually wrote like looks like a five page single space response. And I you know, I thought he made some good points. He said, Um, and everybody's allowed to come into his business. And it's a bad sign actually of our culture that there are people who run around monitoring who's going in and out of certain restaurants and trying to
get them canceled from restaurants. He said. You know, he called for more understanding and between Americans. I thought it was really quite a great, quite a great statement, and I think it made the protesters look like fools. Yeah, I don't know, they're well, I'll link to it in the show notes. Um, a couple of quick guys. I also, I also would not take the position they do. And Lucretia can tell us all about this in a state where I believe people are allowed to carry a
R fifteens out openly while they walk around in the street. Right, This is not the best civilian population to try to enforce boy illegal boycots on people. I want to get to Steve spot, but I got her address that really quick, Steve. You do often especially it is especially a thing excuse
the expression in Tombstone. So you know, people would come visit me, they've ever been here before, and they'll want to go to Tombstone because it's you know, they have a lot of things that they've kept exactly the same as they were. And you will see people all over Tombstone walking with loaded six shooters on their hips. Well you and you see that. I see it in home depot here in my town, and you know that kind of
thing. You see it all the time. You see sometimes a little bit more sophisticated weapons holstered because constitutional carey means you can have them holstered and obvious or holstered and hidden concealed. Wow. But you don't see people walking around very often with a K forty seven's or with a or fifteens. I will tell you that much. You're usually going to or from the range, if
you're doing that sort of thing. So just in case anybody's worried, well, I was thinking, if you're if the guys at the brewery are being protested by your normal Democratic Socialist of America lodge member, all you have to do is walk out the door with just a picture of an AAR fifteen, and you will spark crying and never spreak downs, and the protest will be over. Those soy boys that make up the left, except some of their girlfriends are a little bit hefty, but or boyfriend anyway, most of the
time a quick punch to the nose will take them out. But anyway, you know, you really don't need a weapon a Glaire, you know though, Well, actually I was gonna give you a transition out one a trivia about Tombstone that you almost never hear about. I believe it was very Goldwater's father or maybe your grandfather. Think father was you know, a saloon keeper in Tombstone or something, and by one account he was not part of the freakas between Doc Holliday and whoever it was. But he handed a rifle to
somebody saying, hey, you need more weapons for this. That's you know that's in some of the deep bold water lord that you can find. Um. Second, I'm also realizing, Huerry, Yeah, there you go. I missed a major opportunity. You know, when I got to West now ten years ago, I went to Boulder, be the first visiting conservative and they have downtown a bohemian beer garden. It's a really terrific beer place, good food. And I decided and I posted on power line, Hey,
I'm coming to Boulder. Let's do a meet up. And I asked them if I could have the back room to have a little meet up with a group of people, and said, oh sure fine, and you know, we'll serve you and all that stuff, and had like thirty five people showed up. It was a nice gathering. But of course my announcement was, what's the right wing conspiracy in a deep blue town? That don't they always
start in the back room wile bohemian beer hall. So we didn't get protested, though I would have later in the year, I think, but it got by the left there unfortunately, or he could have had some fun anyway. Okay, all right, well so anyway we're actually are you you're not coming? Are you to our little Swarry up in Phoenix. UM, in a couple of weeks, John, are you guys, Are you guys having those conferences on envy and jealousy again? No? No, no, we're
meeting up with power Line UM listeners and commenters. Uh. This is organized by Ammo Girl, UM, who does the Friday Ammo Girl UM humor column. Yeah, humor column. And she's hilarious and she's a she's still a comedian. I thought you were. I just thought you were Ammo Girl. Two different people thy time. Because she's retired now to go to the range like every day. God bless her. So Um. Anyway, that's so
she organized this, I guess for the first time last year. And there's a huge, huge interest in people who are power Line fans whatever you want to call it, and they spend their own money to go hang out at a at a Hilton in Phoenix and chat and have sessions and Steve and I are going to try to do a podcast. If you've got nothing better to do, come to Phoenix, visit your person there that you know. And I thought I'd mentioned that Dave's John you had something on, but maybe I
didn't. I don't remember now. It's stay. Why are you bringing this up, Lucretia exactly because they Tombstone Brewery where this oh, where this boycott occurred, was actually the one, the Tombstone Brewery in Phoenix where it happened, right where it happened. Yes, so I think while we're there, we need to um, we need to pay Pima. Yeah, that makes sense, that's my point. Okay, Sorry, enough about that. Let's move on. I want to ask you California guys something. What about your
your your esteemed senior Senator Diane Feinstein. Well, I shouldn't laugh. I mean she's I had shingles once I took a day off work. Well that would be you. Yeah, I'm you know, yeah, if Lucretia got shingles, I sympathize with shingles. Look, I mean she's already borderline senile or beyond, and shingles is pretty rough, I think at any age, but especially her age. And what's interesting to me is well, so, first of all, I did write about this a couple of days ago.
There's been this periodic campaign of clearly planted stories about how terrible Camela Harris is. It's as all the hallmarks of planet story because it's sources close to the White House, three people never named. Always they are always anonymous source stories, and but with verbatim quotes saying, oh, you know it really lost
confidence in Harris. You can't do the job. People are very anxious, and it's pretty clear that what's going on here is a concerted effort, maybe with Biden's approval who knows knowledge or approval, to force her off the ticket next year, in the same way a lot of Republicans thirty years ago wanted to dump Dan Quail from the vice presidency as George H. W. Bush
was heading towards his dismal reelection. Okay, so I've been saying, we take time out from the dump Harris campaign through the dump Feinstein campaign, and
you know, what's going on here is one as one of many. But what Biden doesn't nominate a lot of really radical judges who are you know, We've highlighted how bad some of these people are, and they can only get by on a pure party line vote, maybe even with losing a vote or two with Kamela Harris breaking a tie, and they need Feinstein to get these people out of committee nor them the Senate floor. So Feinstein is resisting retire,
resigning. And the really interesting question to me is, but she has said, oh, why don't you send an understudy to the Judiciary Committee for me, Senator Schumer, Majority Leader Schumer. That requires unanimous consent of the Senate to do. They won't get that, Ted Cruise or somebody will object. And then the question is, is mccaull or whoever his successor might be
that rumors sortling that he's going to step down. He's not back yet, right, Steve No, But it says next week and the Senate's been out for the last before weeks. The point is is will the Republicans hold a filibuster so they can't replace Finstein? Because why should they help Biden approve a whole bunch of or the Senate approve a whole bunch of crazy judges. So
anyway, a lot of wheels turning on this one. Well, so I wanted to ask what you guys think about the possible I mean, the whole point of this, besides the Judiciary Committee, which in and of itself, of course is very important, is to get somebody in there now appointed by Gavin Gruesome too, will then be able to run as the incumbent with all the advantages that brings in a state like California, and so so knowing you guys are there on the ground talking with deep politicos every day. Who is
he going to nominate? And why I'm shifting? Is it going to be? Well? He is? I believe that Gavin Newsom has said that he will appoint a black woman, and so the only one who's running is Barbara Lee. Oh is possibly the only person that Republicans could beat in the general election, right because Barbara Lee, who is stupid, ugly awful, she is the congresswoman for Berkeley. Might expect she's old, and she's she's dumb as a board. I won't even talk about her looks because I'll get myself
kicked off the podcast. Yeah, yeah, forget all that for the moment. It seems to me a bad pick from just raw politics because who's the large I know, But I mean the point is, I think the black vote in California is now down about five percent of the total population the Hispanic vote, which yeah, sorry, I was just gonna say, I don't think the black vote cares if if about that. I think it's the white
elites who care Ah. Yeah, But the problem is the Democrats are losing support among Hispanics and Asians in California, and they're gonna say, hey, wait a minute, because you do have a Hispanic candidate or two. Um, and and you know, look a lot of the white liberals like Adam shift. In other words, if no matter who uh do some picks, he's gonna upset a whole lot of people in Democratic coalition. I think his
best move would be defined a caretaker. So I would say, I'm just going to serve out the term to represent California, and I'm gonna leave a Democratic voters to pick their candidate for next year. You really want to be the second. Who's the other Senator from California right now? Who was appointed to fill Harris Sarah? Right? No, no, he's the uh no,
no, he's helping Human Liabilities Department. Um it's yeah, it's Alex Badilla, right yeah, okay yeah uh And so you know, so by the way you appoint another Hispanic, then you aren't gonna upset the black vote and you know, other groups in California. So you know, it was newsome clever enough to say, let's just have a placeholder if Einstein were to step aside, I don't think so, but that would be the smart play. I think, um and not I think. I think, I think
John right. I think if you appointed Barbara Lee, Republicans might actually beat her next year. Oh god, how could they not? I mean, I probably will have to move somewhere else if California actually were to elect Barbara There is nothing redeeming about that woman, not a thing, not one single
redeeming quality. Well I can remember is in the week after nine to eleven, she was the only person in the House who voted against the resolution to use force in Afghanistan, probably because she thought the nine to eleven attacks were America's fault. Yeah, yeah, but Jewish Americans fault, you know. Yeah, here's the thing. So she also has a reputation for being horrible to her staff. Just a horrible person across the board. Just not a
nice person. Okay, not a nice person. She treats people like scum. You know, she kicks people out of their first class seats on airplanes, and you know, she's just awful. But so is oh what's her name, Katie Porter. The more as she's sort of risen to the top of the list of possibles. Um More and more comes out about how cons I just don't get it. Why if you're if you're fat and ugly, wouldn't you be nice to your husband? Oh yeah, but she scalded his
head with hot mashed potatoes on him. You know. But but and of course you know, all of that's public record. But it's in a restraining order he filed, and then it's in divorce proceedings and so on. I get that those things are always drama queen's stuff, but still you don't make all that up. And she's you know, known for being horrible to herself. Steve and I actually did almost an entire podcast one time, John on why it is that so many more Democratic members of Congress, and you know,
politicians across the board are just horrific people to their staff. You know, Kamala Harris has that reputation. What's that? Amy, Yes from Minnesota? Just how is it that they're just horrible people? What was your reason? I've I've I've observed this in Washington. I think it's true that conservatives tend to be much better to their staff, and liberals are quite you know, at quite badly towards them. What was your What the explanation did you
guys come up with? I've always wondered. My explanation takes us to the end, so I'll make this short. Is that Republicans, actually some of most of them at least, really believe in the idea of I'm going to call it human equality, and that you actually should treat other human beings as you know, according to the Golden rule, whether they're your employees or whether
whoever they are. And and that once you have abandoned the idea that these are human beings just like you and you're not some sort of special elite, there's nothing to stop you from treating them like an overseer, like a you know, a slave master. There's nothing. It's what Jefferson talks about in Notes on the State of Virginia, that it just leads to this sort of tyrannical the master slave relationship he calls it. But it's a it's a mindset
leads to this tyrannical behavior. And that was kind of, you know, being way too oversimplified, and so forth the conclusion we came to, right, Steve, Yeah, my explanation is parallel to that. If I had all the time in the world for trivial pursuits, I'd actually try and do a semi empirical investigation based on categories in social psychology. But what makes me and I do think there's an idiologic fual connection. And I'm trying to remember
who it was. You said it was one of those somebody like It wasn't Arthur Kesler, I don't think, but somebody like him, one of those ex communists too, was also interested in political psychology and who made the observation that people on the left they love the people as a whole as an abstract concept, they hate individuals, right, And I mean, and I can
think of some Republican outliers by the way. You know, John McCain had a bad reputation for being tough, but he wasn't really a very good Republican. Well, I meant, once again, there's the you know, the old I love the old jokes about John McCain of you know what was the worst job in North Vietnam was guarding John McCain, Right, So you know that you can kind him a little bit of slack for his irrascibility and all something. But more Republicans are like Reagan. Yeah, and more Democrats are
like Kamala Harris. Yeah. I don't think there's any doubt about it. And the more liberal Republicans are, the more they're likely to be like Kamala Harris. Yeah. Right, I mean there are to be fair. I mean, everybody who worked for Pat moynihan, they said he could be difficult, he could drink too much, but they all loved him, right because he was just great to be a ransom anyway, it's you don't want to
overstate it, but it used. It just seem to be quite a I'd love to, uh, you know as sometimes reminding me today on the phone that I forget where I heard or read this that Jerry Brown privately thinks that Gavin Newsom is a complete moron. Because that's true. He is a complete true. The point is, there are people around new Newsome who will, if you get him in the right bar sometime serve him some bud light. Maybe I don't know, they'll they'll spill the beans on how he's pretty a
miserable guy. That's just my hunch about him. So yeah, and I imagine you're right, Okay, Uh, we're going to get to now to that before we get to the major topic that John wants to um uh pontificate about today. I do want to say, Steve, I have special exit music that I'm going to insist that you use. Okay um in honor of Katie Porter. Okay, so I will I'm saying that now so that listeners will listen all the way through to the end for um. And he goes
along with our Irish whiskey theme of the sweet Story. So John Sean tell us a little bit about this whole controversy regarding the abortion pill. Yeah. I was waiting for us to get to this case, not just because it's in the news, but it gives us another opportunity to talk about natural law
and Lincoln Okay harder time this time than the last time. So, as I'm sure everybody has been following, there's a big controversy going on about a chemical abortion drug that was approved by the FDA over twenty years ago, and so a district judge in Texas named Camarchick I believe I'm pronouncing it correctly issued an order blocking or not overturning the FDA's approval of this abortion drug, which is the reasoning this is so the merits of it are sort of interesting to
lawyers, which is, when can a judge overrule the scientific judgment of an agency. That's basically the legal question. Does a judge have to give deference to technical and scientific judgments by the executive branch agencies. It's interesting, I think, as far as I know, this is the first time that the federal courts, if this gets upheld on appeal, this will be the first time the federal courts have reversed the FDA in saying some drug is approved for
sale. Usually the cases are the reverse, where the FDA decides not to approve a drug and then the pharmaceutical company sues and says, no, it's safe, you should approved it, and so on. And also generally the courts do differ to scientific judgment by the agencies. So two points just about the merits. One is I think this shows the loss of confidence that everybody
has in the federal government's public health authorities. I think this is almost like a natural follow on from doctor Fauci, doctor Burkes and the just terrible mess they made and their claims to authority during the whole COVID lockdown. I see after that that it's just much more likely that judges are going to be skeptical
what these health science agencies tell us anymore. So that's one. The second thing is part of this bigger fight which we've talked about in the podcast before, about the federal courts starting to reign in the administrative state by questioning decisions like this, by questioning the powers that the agencies have, by questioning the kind of deference that courts used to provide to the agencies. So, just to finish it up, there's another court in Washington State that has issued a
conflicting order saying no, the FDA must keep selling this abortion drug. There's all so a criminal statute involved, the Comstock Act, which makes it illegal to mail drugs that are used for abortions. That's in this case too. But because you have two courts in conflict here Texas, the other one in Washington, unless the appeals courts harmonize them, which I don't think will happen,
you'll have to go to the Supreme Court. That's really the function of the Supreme Court at it's basic level is to make sure that federal laws uniform throughout the country. But here's what I wanted to get to wait, wait, wait, wait, wait before you go on, before I have a question before you go on. So I'm still a little confused. At what how do I say? So this judge in Texas actually claim to have better
scientific evidence for the harm caused by he doesn't have to show that. All ys to do is say that the actual scientific judgments that were made by the agency we're not well grounded, where the legal phrases arbitrary and capricious. So he's not obstituting his own scientific evidence for that. All he has to do is say the agency made a decision without enough scientific proof. Okay, and that's basically what it has said. Stick in before you continue. Just one
break breaking news is late in the day Friday here Alito issued. I guess what a stay it was. The judge had already stated and saying pending the Supreme Court taking it up next Wednesday. I guess not. Now, are they just gonna say it's going to be the state? Are we going to take the case, They're gonna make a ruling. I'm not clear on exactly what's next week. So what happened is these were both trial the Washington and
Texas courts both trild judges. So then you have these appeals courts above them. In fact, Steve, yesterday you interviewed Judge Baya, who's on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees Washington State, famously liberal court. I would be shocked if the Ninth Circuit did not say, yes, you must keep selling the abortion used to be thanks to Trump. Yeah, that's
true, less liberal than they used to be with still liberal court. And the Fifth Circuit, which oversees Texas as a famously conservative court even under our mama, even under Clinton, it's been a conservative court, and it's a very conservative court now after Trump's appointments. And so what the Texas Appeals Court here did it said, we are going to stay the lower court decision as the lower court judge himself did, to give the Supreme Court the time to
decide whether to take it. And so that's what Justice Alito today did. He basically said, yes, we're not going to put this decision overruling the FDA into effect. We're going to just leave the status quntact, which is that the drug is for sale. But the reason we're doing but the Supreme Court will decide whether to take the case I see in this time. So they're not going to issue a decision next week, but they will decide whether
to hear the case. Um, and I gotta think that either this one or the Washington State one, they're going to take one of them, because, uh, you know what we call circuit split. That is the number one predictor and when the Supreme Court will hear cases. But it's not a circuit split yet, is it until it? Yeah, it's not yet, but I think it will become one pretty quickly. Okay, all right, go ahead, Yeah, yeah. So the parts of the case which I
think are prime, prime for the three whiskey happy Hour are one. I don't know if you've noticed, but I saw AOC and other Democrats call for the Biden administration to ignore, to defy the Court's ruling in this case, which and I'm sure she had no idea she was doing this echode, I think President Lincoln's. So that's the first one, and then the second one is I wanted together, I wanted to get your guy's views on what the natural law tell us about abortion. But let's turn to the Lincoln then,
why why why isn't a why isn't AOC. And again I have to say she had no idea. Of course she could cited or quoted Lincoln. Maybe she would never quote Lincoln because she thinks Lincoln was a bad fellow. But are you is her view really that different from Lincoln's saying no and yes dred Scott outside of it was the facts of dred Scott itself hers as much. Ah, well, there you put the qualifier. Look, she's much closer than Andrew Jackson than Lincoln. Um. Lincoln said that the decision that case
must be binding on the parties to that case. That's not even close to the neighborhood of what AOC said. She just said the Biden administration the state should defy the court and continue selling the pill. Uh. I suppose I was AOC's legal advisor. And let me tell you that as I said that,
I felt the sickness in what if? What if she had said, I think that the Biden administration should keep selling abortion pills everywhere throughout the country except in the little part of Texas where this tild judge happens to be sitting. So I'll listen to him in that little part of Texas. But I will continue to interpret the laws and the Constitution, as you know, as I, as President Biden see fit for the rest of the country. But so, first of all, the dread Scott case was not a district court
judge making a ruling. It was a Supreme Court making a ruling for the entire country. Now, I don't know how we get you already pointed out there are two different rulings in this case. She could just say you should listen to the guy to the court in Washington and not the court in Texas.
But that's not what she said. She basically said, whatever the courts decide, if it decides against the way we want it, you should ignore it, just like some people have said they should do about the Dabs decision.
And it's just it's it's the most corrupt kind of judicial politics. We will listen to and celebrate and praise and follow the decisions of the courts that we like, and we will refuse to enforce the decisions that we don't like, which means, of course, there's no there's no judicial decision making that even matters anymore. If that became the standard practice what Lincoln called for,
because he said the decision was wrong. Understand, he said the decision was wrong on a natural law basis, John, And we won't go into all of that right now. The decision was wrong, but he didn't say we
ignore the decision. What he said was when the South claims that there is an absolute constitutional right to take your slaves into wherever you want to go, against positive law, against the Constitution, against you know, really important statutory law passed by Congress, that maybe we should have a discussion about this.
Why should this, why should this apply everywhere when the court is wrong, and if the court can be wrong and make policy for the entire country, Um, aren't we just sort of turning everything over instead of having a republic to a bunch of to a tribunal of tyrants. That was his point. And it's an entree. I mean, I'm giving her more credit than she's due. Of course, yes you are. If she were a deep thinker future president someday, wouldn't she make some of the same arguments you just said
Lincoln made. You know, she could say, look, abortion is this difficult problem, and we have to have a national policy. We can't let this single district judge in the mill Texas. Who oh, you know, and then she could have said, who's you know, part of this you know pro life crowd that he's been part of his whole career, and you know, is put in on the courts by Trump for exactly this purpose. You know, I dissent from his view of the law in fact, because
she could say, I think quite wrongly. You know, the courts have not acted this way towards the FDA before, and he's breaking lots of traditions and precedents in the court. Why should we listen to him at all? All the courts have his judgment, right, they have. I might be
inclined to agree about that for district court judges. But anyway, go on, Steve, Well, uh, if we had more time, I didn't have to go soon, John, If we had more time, I think I might want to revisit your former boss or and Hatch wanting the FDA to have authority to regulate vitamins and supplements, which they didn't. Right, there was that old question believe that sides. I think that that thing actually kind
of comes back in this a little bit. But but your more serious question, which is you just gave AOC way more credit in this sense, she won't make any of those arguments because it has to acknowledge that there is another side of the issue, and the left when it comes to abortion, simply refuses to do so. Right, think about how they talk about this issue.
It's an absolute right of women. They talk about women's healthcare. That's the euphemism they use about it. Right, And so it would evolve too great a concession to say we need to channel Lincoln's arguments, say we need to have extended argument about how this country thinks about abortion. It would have to acknowledge that there's another another current of opinion widely held in America that has some you know, rational or even religious basis. I don't care which basis
you pick, and they won't do that. It's a matter of absolutism. So then that gets to the question that you raised, which will charge into since you've got to go quickly, there is uh somewhere, there's the Venn diagram. Here where the natural law line there? You sorry, go ahead, and I know I wasn't. I mean, there isn't a single natural law perspective on the abortion question. There's there's several that we can grab one
or two of them. But second in intersects with the to my mind, astonishing Republican incompetence about talking about this issue that you've had the flashing yellow lights since the leak of the job's opinion, what well over a year ago, now that this was coming, and so right now the U and I think you wanted to bring us up, John right now. Governor to Santis yesterday signed the essentially feel Heartbeat Bill says no abortions with some exceptions after six weeks.
That's when you detect a heartbeat. And people are saying, oh, that polls badly. It's a political mistake. That may be true and for practical, superficial terms, but I don't know why any Republican thinks they're not going to lose if they have nothing to say about the issue right point. And I think that, you know, I think different adherents of natural law will give you an answer saying, well, six weeks might be acceptable.
It could be you know, the old moment of quickening from you know, ancient Catholic doctrine, or it could be the moment of conception, which Christopher Hitchins, not a religious man, used to say, that's the only logical place that you can say life begins. Okay, so so well, may let me just finish on that and say, uh, you have to least pick one of those, and I don't have to pick one arbitrarily, but the point is you've got to least pick that spectrum and point out that AOC's
position is extreme and it does not reflect majority of public opinion precisely. But unless you compete for that confused middle of public opinion, you are going to lose politically on this. And that's the point that unless you compete for that,
and and Republicans are notoriously howardly for for doing that. Many many years ago, when I still lived in California, a friend of mine was running for Congress and he had a as a Republican, had a chief of staff who was liberal, pretty liberal, and a campaign manager who was very conservative. Passed out some literature with what a baby looks Like aborted at twenty weeks and it caused this huge rucus in his campaign. He ended up losing because
everybody quit. It was this ugly situation. Same thing happened yesterday on my on my at my university, some anti abortion student protesters had very even about the abortion pill, very graphic chart pictures of what abortion actually looks like. You know, what a what a fetus at this period of time looks like, and what happens And I mean it triggered, and I mean that, you know, as the left means it. I mean it was, it
got ugly, the police. I won't even go into all the details, but the point is is that if you actually present to that squishy middle you were talking about, Steve, what abortion really entails and how it really is being promulgated by Planned Parenthood and others. Remember how hard Planned Parenthood worked to
squash the stories about how they were selling baby parts. Yeah, because they know that most people, most people, not all people, but most people are you know, if they knew the full facts of the matter, would be horrified. They get through this because the left has been really good at controlling the terms of the debate that you know, pro choice, what a
euphemism, horrible euphemism, a clump of cells, etc. Etc. Women's health, And they use all those euphemisms to hide the fact that they're killing an unborn child for in many cases, the convenience of the mother or less important than the convenience of the mother. If that's possible. Weller point I wanted to exit unfortunate, I have to go with this question about natural law.
So if natural law is and here's in all of us, because of we're all human, does it mean that natural law should be apparent to everybody? So that's what I wonder about when natural law says ay, and then public polling shows by huge numbers, right, huge numbers, that people generally
support the framework of the timing of restrictions that were upheld by Row. You know, people seem to say by large numbers that abortion should be allowed relatively freely until viability, so until about twenty two weeks twenty three weeks about and then after that point there in favor of you know, stronger state restrictions on
abortion. What if that that my sense from what you guys have said in the past podcasts, that natural law seems to point to somewhere around the time of conception now as the point of when life begins or natural rights adhere to the fetus. How do you reconcile when natural rights say A and then people large number, you know, like a supermajority almost if people believes be does that not undermine the basis for natural right because it's so you shouldn't sort of
arise from the understanding that we all have just as human beings. So with that little tidbit, I'm out of here, dude. Next time, John, we'll take it up. I'll remember, and you can discuss and I'll listen. I'll listen to the podcast. Now we can. We can say at the beginning next podcast, I remain unconvinced. Yeah, Now, we'll convention next week. If if what made right and wrong right and wrong was
consensus, it would be just like anything else in nature. If it was a consensus that there was by ninety seven percent of the scientists that climate change is an existential threat, that doesn't make it true. Natural law does not require your consent. I'm sorry, John, And it doesn't require the majority's consent. This is not like a science question like I'm not saying yes,
it is what if two thirds believed that? No, No, it's a question like what if two thirds I'm not saying, oh if two thirds thought that you know, the earth or flat kind of thing. It's more it's a question of morality, or it's a question of what you think is good and true and right and shouldn't that arise out of human nature? If human if natural law were the foundation, natural law was correct, it does really arise out of human nature. But as we discussed last time, the evolution
of human conscience is necessary to understand that. I mean, we look to Aristotle to know what human nature teaches us about how humans ought to behave, how they should be habituated, what kind of society they should live in. But it's not an absolute answer, no, But it's more like supermajorities of human beings in the United States have this moral sense, not making factual judgment
a moral judgment that abortion is okay until viability. Actually, I think that, I mean, I have gotten way in the surveys on this, and I've never seen an issue with a wider variation of results depending on how depressions is presented and how hard you make people think about it. I think there's a there's a saying. I think there's a squishy middle that's all over the map and therefore susceptible persuasion, which they're not getting right now, at least
from you know, the pro life side very well. So let's return this next week because I'm with appreciate truth does not depend on the number of people it convinces for it to be true. Practice is just like physics. Seriously, John, don't necessarily separate those two for now. We don't. I'll just say this planet is okay. Unfortunately I have to separate myself from you guys. Now we're going to abort the microphone could rest? All right, we will, we will, all right? What do you got to get
us out of here today? Well? Um, I couldn't even decide on a stupid person of the week, Steve m It was there were so many options. I really did want to talk, and I'm gonna do so very briefly about the intelligence leap. I'm going to call the student rapid person of the week the media. Oh well, that's always easy, Shirt, I know, I know, but in this case, I have a very specific
complaint. So they found the leaker of those intelligence documents. Okay, and it's a twenty one year old kid, I said, a gamer who you know? He All he did was he was kind of showing off for his friends. Maybe he's a little bit conservative like me, thinks the whole Ukraine mess is a disaster, et cetera, et cetera. But he wasn't trying to commit treason, and he was probably a dumb kid. He had accesses in this cool blah blah blah, okay whatever, but they have turned him
into the worst kind of monster. But my point is this, if you pay attention to what those intelligence documents that were leaked actually say, it undermines everything that the Biden administration has been saying about their foreign policy, especially with but not only especially with respect to the Ukrainian War. Ukraine is losing badly. Russia, I wish John were still here, has not had two hundred thousand casualties. They've had approximately, as of about a month ago, seventy
one thousand, which is about equal to what Ukraine has lost. Ukraine has no more ability without massive influx from the United States to even carry on this fight. All of that is from documents that came out clearly in in these
League documents. The first thing the Biden ministration did, by the way, it was say that, oh, well, yeah, this is all leak But it's really the Russians who have gone in there and changed what they say to commit a disinformation campaign that was earlier this week Monday, Tuesday of this
week. Now of course that story's gone because they've identified the leaker. But all of the focus is on the leaker, and you've got not one media person, mainstream media person, asking why why Lloyd Austin isn't in jail for lying to Congress? Why we are not impeaching Biden? Is an entire administration for the lies they've been telling us about Ukraine, not one person, they're all. I mean, I turned on the radio, you know, I try to get up with the news when I'm driving get ready for our podcast.
I had to turn it off because it made me sick. It was the parents of this guy to share a and what they thought, and everything is going to be concentrated on this poor twenty one year old kid, who is certainly no more guilty than Biden is for having classified documents unsecured abouts, right, I mean Hillary Clinton? Whatever? Yeah, I mean foolish, I can't. Well, actually, let's get right to the central matter you bring up, which is why is this not more of a scandal that assuming
the documents are all accurate, which I looked increasingly like they are. I was very skeptical at first because who knows, but the parallel case kind of it's bigger. But it's the Pentagon papers. The Pentagon papers completely upended our understanding of the Vietnam War. Huge embarrassment, big scandal. And of course the media loved it because they had bought in the narrative that this was a terrible, oppressive war and we were horrible, and boy, this just proves
it. And Daniel Elsberg, the leaker, was a hero. So and by the way, during the Iraq War, you remember, the left loved who was Snowden right, the Wiki leagues, all that stuff, and Julie the song there's a hero of the left. And I started, yeah, right, right right, pointing out that our government, yeah, that's right, and now I know that change, but but remember at the time how
good. The point here is is that you know, our media, our elites, are invested in the pro Ukraine narrative, and therefore these documents that say, hey, by the way, I'm going to take this up with our you know, our mutual friend we talked to every week or two, who was you know, telling us here three four or five weeks ago, Oh, Ukraine, they're gonna push the Russians out. And I kept saying, what if they I'm not sure they're gonna do that. What if they
don't, Oh, it's gonna happen. You know who I'm talking about in personally love. But I think you know, we've been buying this narrative that you know, yeah, maybe it's a stalemate. But boy, those plucky Ukrainians and how we're saying, wait, they're short on ammunition. By the way, the contrary case could be made. This shows that we're not giving them enough to actually everything right. You might remember when we had our big messy one about Ukraine, the first one we had with John, and John
took Ukraine's side. I insisted, I insisted that there were special forces. This morning in my official briefing from the Army, three stories about how how special forces have been staged out of the Ukrainian embassy, how special forces have been in Ukraine four months, And that came from the leaked documents. Right,
So we've been lied to. And I don't blame someone like our friend, because why would you not believe Why would you think that the Biden administration would be so bald faced lying about something that could easily be proven to be false. Yeah, why would you think that, except that you know that we just don't have enough I mean on the right, the media sources on
the right. These stories been out there for a long time. It didn't take the intelligence documents to leak this up, but nobody would take them seriously. You know, Douglas mcgreg not Douglas McGregor, is that his first name, Colonel McGregor, who's retired. He's been he's been cataloging all of the movements of special forces and American troops in Ukraine and talking about how Russia is
not being pushed back, talking about what's the place Russia's taken over? There now building apartments for Russians to move into, and in the Crimea, and
it's just on and on and on with with proof. But people don't take those people seriously because the mainstream media denies that any of that's true, and lots of our friends believe it's still they still can't wrap their head around the fact that we're being lied to. Yeah, I mean, look, I think some of the people who ought to be the angriest are the pro Ukraine
people, right, because really this shows this kind of a shambles. The pro Ukraine people is a scam anyway, who how are you pro Ukraine, for God's sakes, Who are the well all right, worse about that?
Well, uh no, what I mean is the people who think that who look, I mean, I'm at least halfway sympathetics is saying I'd rather Ukraine prevailed than the Russians prevail, um without necessarily saying that we'll defending all the problems of the regime that you point out and so forth, and not to mention you know, my heart goes out and we didn't even get to it. I didn't even put on my list because I knew we wouldn't get to
it. But the only people were set prosecuting Christians um right now than our own FBI Justice Department is the Ukraine, which is shutting down Russian Orthodox churches and terrorizing Russian Orthodox Christians all over Ukraine. I mean, it's it's it's all abysmal. And we're just the fact that we're being lied to about COVID, We're being lied to about Hunter, or being lied to about everything.
And instead of the media supposed journalists coming up and saying to Kirby or you know, or um Gene mop Head Pierre, whatever name is, that you know, why why didn't you tell us the truth? Why is Lloyd Austin going before Congress and lying day after day? Oh? What are you going to do about cleaning up the security? Last? Do you expect the media to do its job? Right? Sorry? But how sad is it that that's where we are? Steve? You're a journalist, You are a journalist
for years. Would you have not done a story because it reflected badly upon your political party or your ideological friends? Yeah? No, of course, not especially about something that's important. Yeah, you know, a little bit of integrity would go a long way here, folks. And so do you don't happen to have a camelism since John desserted us? Right? No, no, I don't. I mean she's been she's been muzzling again here lately. So we may have improvised this week on something else. I know.
I've got my I've got a couple of Babylon bees. Um. So the first one is the Pentagon leaker kicking himself for not just leaving classified documents thrown around his garage? Right? And uh, girl too young for tattoo offered irreversible gender surgery. All these are going to be true in six months, right, It's uh as we And then this one's a little bit of a little bit off topic, but I'll throw it out there anyway because it's kind
of funny. Why don't more people use public transit? Ask naked hobo on subway? Okay, so you got to send us out? You haven't done it in a long time, Steve, I haven't. I'm very rusty, all right, How you can do it though? Always drink your whiskey, neat, don't forget to milk the soft power dividend. And what am I leaving out? I don't two words for you. Oh, let's go brand. That's right, okay, by bye everybody. Next week we'll take up.
But we're gonna beat up John for his Hobbes presentation, which we've now both watched and of course it's effective, so we're gonna beat him up next week and do that. Okay, next week, Bye bye bye everyone, Maybe some I don't go back again. Who Ireland and my dear old life only pass away? She nearly has my heart broke with her nag and he's got a mouth as big as goll So you're drinking sixteen points of Pop's blue
ribbon commercial and then she can walk home without a sway. If the sea was beer instead of salty water, she will live and dyeing all living. See here drinking sixteen pints at Pat Joe Murphys. Thembarment says, I think it's time to go. Well, She doesn't way to speak to him, and gaily in a language that the clergy do not. More, on her back she has tattooed the map of Ireland, and when she takes her bathroom
Saturday she rubs the sunlight soaper wrong. By Cladda just to watch the sun's float along by Ricochet joined the conversation