Red Terror In China As Biden Is Silent, GOP Caves On Marriage Bill In Senate, & Biden Lied Over Rail Strike

He came out earlier saying something that the President of the United States of America just says that they're still silent. Take a listen. Now, Let's be clear, the so called Golden Era is over, along with a naive idea that trade would automatically lead to social and political reform. That, nor should we rely on simplistic Cold war rhetoric. We recognize China poses a systemic challenge to our values and interests, a challenge that grows more acute as it moves towards

even greater authoritarianism. Instead of listening to their people's protests, the Chinese government has chosen to crack down further, including by assaulting a BBC journalist center. He came out and when you desperately need leaders. Leaders stand up and lead when they see that America is not leading on China. I felt like he probably had no choice but to stand up and to say this. I'm glad he did. But where's America right now? Well, unfortunately, Joe Biden and

the White House are completely a wall now. You know, I will say for the British Prime Minister that was a degree of clarity missing in the United States of America. But that being said, you know, one of the things he said is we should not rely on simplistic cold war rhetoric. I actually think it's a conceit of the so called intelligentsia that simple terms like good and evil

can't be used. You know, I was ten when Reagan became president, and I remember well that at the time, the all of the Democrats, many of the Republicans, all of the media, all of the academy, they all recognize that the smart and nuanced thing to say on the Soviet Union was that we needed to that they they couldn't be beaten, that the best we could hope for was detante, which I've joked is French for surrender, and

that there was nothing we could do about it. And Reagan came in as this California cowboy, and he said a series of things that shocked Washington. He said, for example, he described the Soviet Union as an evil empire. He said, Marxism, Leninism will end up on the ash heap of history. When they asked what's your objective in the Cold War, he said, very simple, we win, they lose. All of the self proclaimed in a lectuals were shocked. They tittered

at him, what an ignorant philistine. Didn't he understand subtlety and nuance. And if you come to my office in DC, you've been there, Ben. The most dominant feature in my office is a gigantic painting. It's about twenty feet wide of Ronald Reagan's standing before the Brandenburg Gate and saying what I think are the most consequential words of any leader in modern times. Mister Gorbachov, tear down this wall with that leadership, With that clarity, Ronald Reagan won the

Cold War. We defeated the Soviet Union. We need that same clarity with regards to Communist China. Communist China is the new evil empire, and the Marxism, Leninism, the Maoism that dominates China. I believe it will also end up on the ash heap of history. But we need absolute clarity.

And it's not simplistic to say that communist China murder its citizens, torturing its citizens, locking down its citizens, engaging in draconian violations of human rights, maintaining concentration camps with over a million people in those concentration camps, employing slave labor, covering up COVID. All of that is evil. It's not gray, it's not subtle. It is evil. And contrast that with

the complete gobbledegook from the Joe Biden White House. I want to read the entirety of the Biden White House statement on the massive protests that are unfolding in China based on the draconian, horrific COVID lockdown policies in China, Senator, before you read that, I want to remind people about our response, our good friends, Patriot Mobile. Patriot Mobile is America's only Christian conservative wireless company who shares your values.

Now more than ever, it's important to band together and support companies that share our conservative values. And Patriot Mobile is the company that can save you money on your cell phone bill. While also making an impact with every call you make. Patriot Mobile donates a portion of every dollar earned to organizations that fight for causes you care about. They also stand up for our first Second Amendment rights and the right to life. They help with adoptions, especially

after the overturning of Rovuwade. Patriot Mobile also saves you money. They have plans that fit any budget, and they use the same exact towers that you're using right now with your cell phone. So if you're worried about coverage, don't be Make the switch and actually stand up for what you believe in with every phone call you make, while also saving money. Nine seven two Patriot is their number. Use the promo code Verdict for free activation and other

special offers. You'll get to keep your same cell phone if you want to or get a new one, You'll get to keep your same cell phone number, and switching is easy. Nine to seven to Patriot. That's nine seven to Patriot. Use the promo code Verdict or online at patriotmobile dot com slash Verdict right center. I want to get back to you reading that statement you just mentioned. A moment ago. Here's what the Biden White House said.

Quote We've said that zero COVID is not a policy we are pursuing here in the United States, and as we've said, we think it's going to be very difficult for the People's Who Republic of China to be able to contain this virus through their zero COVID strategy. For US, we are focused on what works, and that means using the public health tools like continuing to enhanced vaccination rates,

including boosters, and making testing and treatment easily accessible. We've long said that everyone has the right to peacefully protest here in the United States and around the world. This includes in the PRC. That's the total statement. What weak, sniveling Neville Chamberlain problem and one of the biggest reasons the enemies of America are on the rise today is

the Biden Democrats are so weak. They're unwilling to call evil evil, They're unwilling to call murderers murderers, and they're unwilling to stand up to communist China and the enemies of America. I want to get your thoughts about something else that's also happened, and this is about the technology side of things. There has been a lot of people that were shocked by Apple actually taking away some of the devices mechanisms where people were sharing information in China

that we're helping these protests to break out. One of them was a basic thing that you've probably used a thousand times, an air drop. And the Apple literally is aiding China, while at the same time Apple, the same company is threatening to remove Twitter from their apps or because they say it's, you know, too dangerous to society.

When when you see companies like Apple helping the red China the way they are saying, you know, okay, what do you want us to do to make sure we help you squash these protests that are happening, is there a point where there needs to be some sort of oversight. Corporate America has lost its way. I don't think it is accidental that apples are red. Apple is in bed with communist China. Most of big tech is in bed with communist China. An awful lot of big business is

in bed with communist China. Big universities are in bed with communist China. Big Hollywood is in bed with communist China. By the way, that's one of the reasons the Democrats are structurally pro China because all of their major donors, big business, big tech, big universities in big Hollywood are in bed with China. Apple is more than happy to facilitate squashing the protesters. Human rights be damned, is Apple's view. Apparently, as long as they can keep making money in communist China,

it is utterly craven. Look, it's the same policy the NBA has as they grovel because they want to make money in China and never mind the slave labor. It's the same policies the Biden White House has. You know, last year I forced to vote on the Senate floor that the United States should not expend any money purchasing electric vehicles or parts, batteries or other things in electric vehicles made using slave labor in concentration camps. Now, if you think about it, should we be buying things made

with slave labor? That ought to be one hundred to nothing both that ought to be easy. Yeah. We voted on the Senate floor, and every single Democratic sept one except Joe Manchion voted no. Why is that because the Biden White House, Joe Biden is Communist China's customer of the year. They are buying the output of concentration camps and I want you to think back of like the history of concentration camps, the people who facilitate, who fund

human slavery. History is not kind to them. Well, you know what that is Joe Biden, that is Chuck Schumer, that is John Kerry, that is today's Democrat Party that cannot be bothered to care about slavery and misery and depression. And by the way, let's be clear when you talk about the donations, I want everybody listening to verdict. This is the information you need to share with your friends. Ninety seven point five percent of Apple's donations are to

the Democratic Party. If you look at their employee donations in the midterm elections to candidates by party, this is how much money was Apples donations. Ninety seven point five percent of appless wit to Democrats. Big tech has become the financial muscle. Who was the biggest Democrat donor in the country In twenty twenty Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook,

He went in spent what are called zuckbucks. He spent four hundred million dollars, essentially taking over the election machinery, the operation of elections in big blue cities and key swing states. It is not an exaggeration to say Mark Zuckerberg is directly responsible for Joe Biden being President of the United States. By the way, Sam Bankman freed from FTX, who made billions, and it appears now was engaged in a massive Enron style made off style Ponzi scheme, defrauding

investors of billions. We don't know that for sure, but a sure looks like it from what has come out so far. He was the second largest donor in the country to Democrats, behind George Soros. I gotta say, and we talked about this on a pod last week, how many Democrats have given the money back? Or even better, how many Democrats have given the money back to the investors who were defrauded by Sam Bankman freed. I believe the answer is none. Joe Biden certainly hasn't given the

millions of dollars he got from Sam Bankman freedback. And so listen watching big text reaction, watching journalism reaction to Twitter. Elon must took over Twitter, and he said one simple thing. He said, Okay, we're gonna allow free speech. We're gonna allow people to speak. You can't threaten people, you can't make threats of violence. You can't carry out criminal conduct. But if you have a political view, if you're right wing, left wing, if you're arguing a political view, you can

say it. And if people think what you're saying's wrong, they can say what you're saying's wrong. The corporate media world has lost their minds over it. They're freaking out. We talked in a previous pod about how CBS News had a twenty four hour fake boycott where they're like, oh, my goodness, if you're actually listening to people who disagree, we won't be part of it. And then they realize, no,

we can't do that. A huge component of what is happening corporate America, the Fortune one hundred has become the financial enforcement arm of the Democrats. And there have been public reports that Twitter's advertising has dropped in half. Why because major corporate companies are just saying, no, we won't advertise anymore. And by the way, who is the biggest advertiser on Twitter, Apple, Yeah, Apple's cut off its advertising.

Why because Tim Cook and Apple will say, you bastards, you're allowing free speech, and we are the big tech oligarchs. No one is allowed to disagree with us. By the way, do you wonder why big tech is so friendly with China? She says, we are the oligarchs. No one's allowed to disagree with us. Big Tech says, we are the oligarchs. No one's allowed to disagree with us. Dictators of a

feather tend to flock together. Yeah, they do. And if you look at the money, and you can see it, as you were mentioning a moment ago about Apple being one of the top advertisers, but you look at where the money goes from big tech, and many of those

have connections of China. Netflix of their donations nine nine point six percent went to Democrats, Twitter ninety eight point seven before Zuckerberg took over, Airbnb ninety seven point eight, Apple ninety seven point five, Left ninety six point one. These are the Facebook and so on all and the ninety plus percentile. That is part of the reason why you're seeing them all look the other way on this issue of China when it comes to the issue of things like by the way, you know who the single

biggest donors to Hillary Clinton were. If you say China, I'm gonna laugh, well, Google, which is another way of saying China. Yeah, there you go. Google, it's all big tech. They love them all each and every time. They go all in because they know they will not rain them in and they will not ask any questions about them. Look at the NBA totally silent. You're a basketball guy.

It is beyond to me. I think absurd to watch the NBA spend years giving their floor to Black Lives Matter, literally painting it on the floor, putting it in the corners and doing all that they did. We're you know, we're about the national anthem, and then they're immediately silent on what's happening in China right now. Is another example

of the hypocrisy of the people on the left. Well, listen, you look at the Fortune one hundred that is complicit with what's happening in China, and that also wants desperately for Elon Musk's effort to make Twitter a place where free speech is allowed. They want that to fail. Let me read a list of some of the companies that, based on media Matters analysis of pathematics data, have stopped

for a significant period of time advertising on Twitter. Abbott Laboratory is all state corporate ration, AMC Networks, American Express Company, AT and T Bigheart pet Care, Black Rock Incorporated, Blue, Triton Brands Incorporated, Boston Beer Company, California State Lottery, Century Link Channel, Chevrolet, Chipotle, Mexican Grill, Citygroup, CNN, Dell, uh Diago, Direct TV, Discover Financial Services, Fidelity First National, Retail Realty Partners, Ford, Heineken,

Hewlett Packard, Hilton Worldwide, Inspire Brands, Jeep, Kellogg Company, Cole's Department, Scores, Ken, Drill, LinkedIn Corporation, Mail Chimp, Marriott International, Mars pet Care, Mars Incorporated, Mercan Company, Meta Platform, and other words, Facebook, Moneywise, Neslee, Novarda, sag pernod Ricard, play Pass, the Coca Cola Company, the Kraft Heinz Company, tire Rack, Verizon, Wells Fargo, Whole Foods Market,

and Yum Brands. Yeah. I mean, if that's not proof that they're all trying to bankrupt the people that don't do and say and silence the people they want them to silence, aka conservatives, They're just going to say, we'll try to bury you and ruin your company. That's what they're all about. And let's be clear. If Elon must says tomorrow, I will behave like communist China. I will silence anyone who disagrees with the left wing orthodoxy. Those

brands will all come running back. What they want is for him to be the chief censor of the public square. Facebook's perfectly willing to do that. Google is quite willing to do that. YouTube is quite willing to do that. And suddenly Twitter is this outlier. By the way, if the reports from Elan are to believed, more people are using Twitter. But this is a question of power. This is a question of using power to try to force censorship and muzzle free speech, and it is incredibly dangerous.

And my view is of corporate America. If they want to come out and say we hate free speech and we will use our financial power to silence and censor you, they ought to tell us that, they ought to admit that, they ought to let you know when you're buying their products. Hey, your money is going to silence you. But they're trying to do it surreptitiously. They're trying to hide and it is And by the way, the big enchilada that they're trying to set the stage for is the two biggest

gatekeepers at all of tech, or Apple and Google. And if Apple and Google pull Twitter down from their app stores. That is like setting off the atom bomb. Now, by the way, they did that to Parlor, they did that in concert to Parlor. Parlor grew up as a conservative

alternative to Twitter, it was gaining real success. And then simultaneously Google and Apple together said your deep platform by which is such an obvious anti trust violation as a very simple matter, when horizontal competitors cooperate together to block a new entrant to the market, that is on its face and antitrust violation. They didn't care. They're so rich, they have so much power. They said, screw it, will bury you in lawsuits. That's nothing can do about it.

If they try to do it to Twitter, which a bunch of leftists and Democrats are pressuring them to do, it will be a massive escalation. Now, what's interesting They could do it to Parlor because Parlor was a little company with not that much financial resources behind it. Elon Musk is the richest man in the world. He's already tweeted, all right, if you do that, I'm going to go create a new phone. No. I don't know if he'll do that or not. But the guy does make teslas.

He knows how to make cars. It's not like he doesn't know how to make stuff, and so they got to be a little more cautious. And I think they are a little more cautious about straight out bullying him because he's, at a minimum not a ninety eight pound weakling. They can just kick sand at his face and ignore.

And I for one, if they do kick him off, though, if they do kick Twitter off, and I've had so many people ask me this over the last twenty four hours, is Twitter really going to go away from the app store if they do that to try to destroy Twitter instantly by pulling that off? Is there anything that Congress will do in response really with antitrust? No, there's nothing Congress will do in response because Congress the Senate is controlled by the Democrats, and the Democrats want Apple to

kick Twitter off. There's nothing the Biden Department of Justice will do in response. Why because the Biden Department of Justice is profoundly partisan and they want Apple to kick Twitter off. You know, just today Karen John Pierre was asked, I guess yesterday was asked about what Elon Musk and the question from a reporter, I mean it was if

Saturday Night Live were funny anymore. This would make a great Saturday Night Live skit because you had a lefty report who says, are you concerned that so many new people are signing up for Twitter and enjoying free speech? And the White House says, yes, we are very concerned. We are keeping an eye on what Elon Musk is doing. Like, holy crap, they're mad number one that free speech is allowed,

but number two, they're mad that people like it. I mean, this is so that it's successful and that they can't control it. But that's what they're so concerned about. I don't believe Apple and Google will do it. I think it is too big a risk. They're big on beating up people they can beat up. They're big on picking on the puny, wimpy kid. I think they're scared of

someone who can punch back. You know, there was an interesting There was an interesting moment you mentioned that press briefing, and I want to play it for you real quick. There was a reporter the White House that asked one of the weirdest questions I've ever heard, and the question was, what tools do you have to stop Elon Musk from restoring free speech at Twitter. Listen the question about Twitter.

You know, there's a researcher at Stanford who says that this is a critical moment really in terms of ensuring that Twitter does not become a vector for misinformation. I mean, are you concerned about the Elon Musk says there's more and more subscribers coming online. Are you concerned about that? And what tools do you have? Who is it at the White House that is really keeping track of the I mean, there it is, that's what you just mentioned, basically,

Play her answer, Play Karen John Pearre's answer. So this is something that we're certainly keeping an eye on. And look, we you know, we have always been very clear and that when it comes to social media platforms, it is their responsibility to make sure that when it comes to misinformation, when we when we comes to the hate that we're seeing, that they take action, that they continue to take action. Again,

we're all keeping a close eye on this. We're all u monitoring what's what's currently occurring, and we see, you know, we see it with our own eyes of what you all are reporting and just for ourselves what's happening on Twitter. But again, social media companies have a responsibility to prevent their platforms from being used by any user to incite violence, especially violence directed at individual communities as we have been seeing, and the present has been very clear on calling that out.

He'll continue to do that, and we're going to continue a monitor situation. I love, We're going to monitor it. I mean, Senator, if you want to talk about a dog whistle to basically, yes, everybody pull your money from Twitter. Yes, advertisers that love us, the big tech oigarchs and others, make sure you destroy them. Yes. Apple, you have the backing of the White House. If you want to take down Twitter, We've got your back. It's all in that response from her, It is big brother is watching you.

We are watching you. We are going to use all the power we can to crush you. And the amazing thing is all right. So they're buzzwords misinformation, which she means anything that contradicts the left wing narrative. So, for example, one thing they defined as misinformation was saying that the COVID nineteen virus had originated in Wuhunt, China, had originated a Chinese government lab, the Wuhunt Institute for Virology. I now believe the overwhelming majority of evidence indicates that's exactly

where the virus escape from. And I think a significant preponderance of the evidence indicates that the virus was created at that lab through gain a function research. For over a year, Big Tech would censor anyone saying that at the explicit request of doctor Fauci. Doctor Fauci and emails asked Mark Zuckerberg censor anyone saying the Wuhan virus came from the Wuhan Institute for Virology, by the way, without admitting and I, doctor Fauci, funded that research that created

the pandemic. I will note one amazing exception. One of the very few outlets that actually got into that was this podcast. This podcast. Early on in the pandemic, we did two extensive podcasts laying out the evidence that this virus had escaped from the Wuhun Institute for Virology. At the time, you were treated like a tinfoil hat wearing lunatic for saying that. I don't know why Big Tech didn't censor us. Frankly, they censored other people for saying

the same thing. But miraculously they let us out. Now it's clear what we were saying is right. By the way, this is the same big tech the censor the hunter Biden laptop. Again, it was true, it was accurate, but it was politically inconvenient. What they mean by misinformation and is anything that hurts democrats are their preferred narrative. If it's misinformation. I got a crazy idea. If what someone is saying is false, counter it with the truth. Yeah,

eximain why it's false. And you notice that Fauci's coming out on his last days. Just yesterday he did his CNN quote exit interview and what I'm about to play for you, he basically is saying that you're a liar center for doing those two shows and for what you just said. Listen, I can't tell you what's going on

in all of China and in other things. I can tell you for sure that if you look at the viruses that the NIH grant funded to study in a surveillance way, anybody who even has a peripheral understanding of evolutionary virology will tell you these viruses could not possibly turn into Sauce Kobe too. So when you talk about a leak, maybe there's a lab leak, but it's not with the viruses that the h was funding. That's almost certain that that's the case. Okay, so that's affective interview.

Literally now he's saying it still, So it's amazing a couple of things. Number One, he's saying, you talk about a leak from the lab, So he's now implicitly admitting yet leak from the Chinese lab, which, by the way, writing asked Mark Zuckerberg, don't allow anyone to say it leak from the Chinese lab. So what he just said there a couple of years ago, he claimed was misinformation and Big Tech was more more than happy to censor.

But then secondly, he also admitted we were funding the creation of viruses, which he's denied before, so he just admitted that, but he argued the viruses we created were not this virus. You know what, maybe that's possible. I don't know. I'm not a virologist. You know how we're going to figure out by having congressional oversight hearings and examining evidence. And let me say what an indictment of Democrats. They've had a control of both houses for two years.

They don't give a damn about knowing where COVID nineteen came from. They don't give a damn about knowing China's culpability. They don't give a damn about knowing the degree to which doctor Fauci and the federal government funded it. They don't care about any of that. They want to cover it up. They want to blame it all in the Democrat slash corrupt corporate media narrative. Donald Trump created COVID in the Oval Office and released it on America to

cause people to suffer. That's what they want to say. Facts be damned, well, we need to figure it out. Now. Fauci's admitted he was funding the creation of viruses, and there's a very good chance the virus leaked from the Chinese lab. That's a big admission. All right, Let's hear some witness testimony and some expert examination about whether the

viruses Fauci funded were in fact COVID nineteen. I agree that that has not yet been proven, but I think there's considerable evidence to suggest it could be the case. We need more examination. I hope with a Republican majority in the House, we'll finally get that, and hopefully they'll get to actually ask some real questions off out too that he's going to have to defend himself on I want to move Senator to this big vote on marriage in the Senate. We've been talking about this extensively with

your good friend and Senator Mike Lee's amendment. With this bill you were talking about, there need to be pressure put on Senators to have that bill be vote on with the amendment not separated out. Otherwise we were going to have a major problem with religious liberty in this country, quite possibly the government. This was a vote they organized and plan I'm referring to the Democrats right after Thanksgiving. They wanted to ram this through, and you flew back

to Washington just like everybody else. What happened. The twelve Republicans who caved continued cavy and the Democrats passed their bill in bracing gay marriage number one number two. This bill, my words, is going to set the stage for the Biden I RS to target people of faith, and in particular to deny tax exempt status to religious churches, charities, universities,

and k through twelve schools. I stood up today at the Senate lunch and I address the twelve Republicans who are voting with the Democrats, and I said listen, and in fact I made an offer to my colleagues, I said,

I'll tell you what. I will bet any one of you one hundred dollars that in the next two years, the Biden Irs is going to come after a religious institution because of their beliefs on marriage, that they're going to come after and deny tax exempt status to Catholic charities, or to bring them Young University, or to Notre Dame, or to Liberty University. By the way, I think Liberty University is going to be who they target for because they hate the evangelicals. And I will say one of

my colleagues took that bet. So we'll see two years from now whether I'm paying one hundred dollars or collecting one hundred dollars, I will tell you. Subsequently, I also pointed out part of this bill they create a federal cause of action to sue institutions that believe in marriage as the union of one man and one woman. There are going to be hundreds of lawsuits filed all across

this country. And I got to tell you most of those lawsuits, the defendants aren't going to have the money to defend them, so they're going to settle, They're going to cave, and they're going to abandon their religious beliefs to embrace same sex marriage. That's what the Democrats want, and the Republicans, they're twelve Republicans who went along with it. I literally at lunch begged my colleagues if you don't want this to happen. So the Democrats disingenuously claim that

it'd be clear. I want to people to understand when you say you beg your colleagues, is it generic to the room or is it you get to sit down with the twelve people that you were talking about that caved and try to appeal to them personally. How does this work? So every Tuesday and Wednesday, when the Senates in session, the Republicans have lunched together. We meet on Tuesdays and Thursdays in the LBJ room. We meet on

Wednesdays in the Mansfield Room. So the LBJ room is where we met today, and virtually every Republican was there. I think of the fifty of us, they're probably forty seven of us in the room. Of the twelve Republicans who voted with the Democrats, all but one or two were there. And so I'm standing up in the room making a fervent pitch to my colleagues, and a number of the Republicans voted with the Democrats. They're like, well, look,

we got to vote on Mike Lee's amendment, Michaelee. Mike Lee's amendment would have prohibited the IRS from targeting institutions based on their support for traditional marriage. Mike Lee's amendment was voted on. It was voted down. I stood up and said, no, kidding, why do you think the Democrats allowed to vote. They have the votes to beat it, they know they're going to win. So just having a vote and losing it is not actually defending religious liberty.

It's a show vote. And by the way, a lot of the senators think, oh, if we have a show vote and we vote for it, we can say we supported religious liberty, except we were perfectly happy and content to lose on it. And this is where the voters are getting smarter and more savvy. I said, it's very very simple. If you don't want to see the IRS

going after institutions, faith based institutions in your states. Of the twelve Republicans, three of you need to stand up and say we're going to vote no today on culture. Culture is the sixty vote threshold. That we voted on today. Unless the Democrats accept Mike Lee's amendment that prohibits the IRS from targeting those faith based institutions, I believe the Democrats would have caved now. They might not have caved today, but they want this bill to pass, and they would

have caved tomorrow or the next day. And this is not a bill that is in the nomenclature of Washington a must pass bill. This is not like the death sealing or government funding where people like it has to has to pass. You know what, if forty one Republicans stood together and we said no, it would have been killed unless and until the Democrats gave those three Republicans who broke off what they wanted and the revealing thing.

And I made this point to my colleagues. I said, look, all of the Democrats are telling you no, no, no, no, no, this is not about the IRS targeting religious groups. We don't need Mike Lee's amendment because it's superfluous. It's already in there. This is already what the bill does. I said, well, if that's the case, what an easy give at What they're saying is wrong as a legal matter, it's wrong. But I said, if they're right that it's superfluous. If

it does nothing, then holy cow. I mean, you guys are the worst negotiators on earth. If you can't stand up and say, well, give us this protection. If you say, it's already in there, it ought to be easy to give it to us. But the problem was twelve Republicans started with I surrender. And I'll tell you if you watch c SPAN, you can see me. I was standing on the Senate floor arguing with a number of my colleagues. Look, we were arguing respectfully. We weren't yelling at cursing at

each other. But I was arguing with a number of my Republican colleagues and they were like, well, well, the Democrats would never take that. I said, of course they wouldn't take that, because you started by giving them all the votes they needed to pass it without it. What moron concede something additional when they've already gotten to yes. And so I'm sorry to say the Senate is done.

It has past this bill. And as I said, I offered wager to my colleagues of one hundred bucks that in the next two years we're going to see the Biden irs target people of faith based on their views on marriage because Republicans were unwilling to stand and fight for religious liberty. And I gotta tell you, Ben, I'm pissed off. Trying not to be pissed off, but I'm failing.

Why Why are we so weak? I mean, this was not something If you looked at what Mike Lee was doing and this amendment, it was it was not controversial. It just protected religious liberty. How is it so hard? And and maybe you can, you know, give a different word than that that will connect with people to understand why you wouldn't This wouldn't be a no brainer for these twelve Republicans or at least three of them out

of the twelve to stand up. Look, there are a lot of politicians that liked a virtue signal, and there's no doubt public opinion has changed on gay marriage. D stand their Republicans who want to say I'm for gay marriage. I told my colleagues, if you want to say you're for gay marriage, put out a press release saying I'm for gay marriage. I love gay marriage. If you want dress up in a pink bow and dance it again,

damn gay pride parade. I don't care. But don't pass into law legislation that is going to empower the politicized bureaucrats and the Biden administration to target people of faith. That's what these Republicans did. The Democrats know what they're doing. And I was telling a couple of my Republican colleagues. They're like, no, no, no, this is not true. That's not true. I said, listen, I don't believe you actually want this outcome. I don't believe you want people of

faith persecuted. I just think you're naive and that you don't understand how Democrats think. You don't understand the reason they are pushing this is because they want to target people of faith. And by the way, this is not hypothetical. The City of Philadelphia went after Catholic charity and Catholic Charities performed adoption services, and the City of Philadelphia said, well, you will not perform adoption services for gay couples, so

you're out of the adoption businesses. We refuse to do business with you unless you will perform adoptions for gay couples, even though there were lots of other adoption agencies out there that did perform adoptions for gay couples. So it's not like gay couples in Philadelphia couldn't adopt. They just couldn't go to Catholic charities and say, hey, violate your faith and help us adopt. City of Philadelphia tried to ban them. Now thankfully that went to the Supreme Court

and was overturned. This legislation today, I think there's a very real possibility will reverse that outcome. And a number of the Republicans who voted with it. I got in an argument at the lunch with one of the Republican authors.

I won't identify who it was, but I said, one of the outcomes of this is you're going to unleash the trial lords, who are going to be funded by left wing groups suing all of these small charities, small Christian school small Jewish schools, universities, churches, and a bunch of them are not going to be able to defend themselves, not going to have the funds. They're just going to settle. They're just going to give in. It's it's litigation to accomplish a public policy goal from the left. They do

it all the time. And one of my colleagues, who's one of the most vocal sponsors of this bill, said well, they can sue. Now, this doesn't change this at all. I said, well, yes it does. This spill explicitly creates a federal cause of action. What is the federal cause of action? A federal cause of action is it creates a right to file a lawsuit that did not exist. And my colleagues said, well, a burgh Felt, the Supreme Court case did that. I said no, No, A burgh

Felt did not create a federal cause of action. Nothing in a burgh Fell created a federal cause of action. Now a Burgh Fell is the law of the land. A Burgha Fell ruled that gay marriage is required by the constitution. Disagree with that ruling, but that is the law. And the Supreme Court was absolutely unequivocal that it's not going to revisit that decision. But there is no federal

cause of action. Thanks to twelve of my Republican colleagues and all of the Democrats, there is now going to be a federal cause of action, and every lawsuit that is filed you can look to the folks who voted today as why those lawsuits are filed. And it's really sad and shocking that this has actually happened, and it's been the Republican's fault. I want to move lastly, Senator to the rail strike possibility. This is a very complex issue.

You've seen Nancy Pelosi. She came out saying that the White House today the same meeting that Kevin mccartthey apparently was asked to come over for as well. It was a meeting they said was important. Here is what Pelosi had to say in front of the White House after this meeting, trying to avert this rail strike. Take a listen. We must avoid a strike. Jobs will be lost, even union jobs, will be lost, water will not be safe,

product will not be going to market. It is we could lose seven hundred and fifty thousand jobs, some of them union jobs, that must be avoided. So tomorrow morning in the House, we will bring up the legislation. We'll bring it up tomorrow morning, she says in the House. This is a very interesting thing because she mentions multiple times their union jobs, union jobs, union jobs. That's the obsession of many in the Democratic Party on this. What is your take on this rail strike and how do

we get to this point right before the holidays. Well, Joe Biden and the administration screw this up. And screw this up badly. And you know, before the election, Joe Biden announced, oh, we've averted a rail strike. We solved the problem. Turned out that was a lie. It was exactly like what he said to Saudi Arabia, Hey, will you delay restrict oil production until after the election. It

was all about getting past the election. Now that we're past the election, we discovered that Biden has screwed this up. So there have been ongoing negotiations that go back to twenty nineteen between the six Class one freight rail carriers and twelve different rail labor unions, and they've been ongoing and ultimately it went to something that's called the Presidential Emergency Board, which is something that has created pursuant to

a law called the Railway Labor Act. Now, the Presidential Emergency Board made a number of recommendations, including increasing wages for railway workers by twenty four percent over five years. Now, twenty four percent sounds like a lot until you reflect on the fact that under Biden, inflation is over eight percent a year. So just adding up eight percent over five years, that's forty percent, and if you compound it,

you get closer to fifty percent. So essentially this agreement raises rail workers salaries about half of what inflation has increased under Joe Biden the unions. Of the twelve unions, eight of the unions voted to approve the deal, so they wanted the additional money. But four of the rail labor unions voted to reject the deal, and those are the members who voted to reject the deal. And in particularly,

what they're pressing for is sick leave. They want a few more days of sick leave, and they want clear schedules. As I understand it, the way rail workers work is the company has enormous ability to say you will work this day, and we're not going to tell you, and we can change it, and so the workers don't have clarity on when they're working. So this is all headed to a strike. Now, let me start by saying a strike would be a disaster. It would be catastrophic, It

would be really bad. It would impose The projections are about two billion dollars a day of cost on the economy. So I don't want to see a rail strike. No one in the right mind wants to see a rail strike. It shouldn't have happened if Biden and the administration, we're actually doing their job and engaging and not lying to

just before the election. Let's be clear about that. But at this point, what Joe Biden the Democrats are trying to do is they want Congress to step in and force a deal on the railroads and the unions, and they want to force the deal that the railroad companies want. I gotta tell you, I've served in the Senate ten years. We've never done this in the past. There's never been any labor dispute where Congress has stepped in and said,

we're picking the winners, we're picking the losers. And by the way, we've decided the management's the winners and the workers of the losers. That's what Biden is doing. Biden is screwing the union workers right now. Biden is saying while claiming that they're helping them, Like you just heard the Nancy Pelosi quote. Yes, and so my view is this aught be negotiated between the labor unions and the railroads,

and they ought to work it out. And you know, I was talking with with with one of the CEOs of one of the big railroads recently and I asked him, you know. I talked to him at home Sunday night while I was at home over Thanksgiving, and I said, Okay, if Congress does this, what happens next month when there's a strike of airline pilots? Do we step in also and resolve the dispute between management and the unions in

airline pilots? And how about the month after that when there's a strike of auto workers, do we step in there? And is Congress's job now to step in and crush the unions and resolve these issues or should they be worked out in negotiations between management and the workers? And I think Biden is scared of what is going to come, and so what is likely to happen. Biden and Schumer and Pelosi are going to force through a deal that rams a result down on the union workers despite the

fact that they don't want it. And I stood up at lunch today. We actually had a pretty vigorous discussion. This was the other big topic at lunch, and I got up at a couple of other my colleagues got up and I said, look, I get Historically, Republicans have been viewed as reflexively pro management and Democrats as reflexively pro union. I think one of the most consequential political shifts of the last decade is that Republicans have become

a blue collar party. We are the party of working men and women, We are the party of truck drivers and steel workers, and we are the party of the railroad union workers. And not just that. There are a lot of Republicans that are old National Chamber of Commerce, Republicans that just automatically, if the unions want it, we're against it. And here's what Biden's counting on is that some Republicans will come save as Bacon like. My view is, I'm not going to step in and force a deal

that the railroad workers don't want. They ought to negotiate that with management and resolve it. And if the Biden White House hadn't screwed this up, we wouldn't been this mess to begin with. How quickly are we going to see movement you think from Congress? I mean, Pelosi says, hey, we're gonna take this up in the morning, right We're gonna get on this right away. Is there anything left that the union can do to stop Congress from screwing them or is it pretty much the fix is already

in so I don't know. It sounds like Pelosi and Schumer are willing to ram through Biden's deal, screwing the working men. Now, I will say Bernie Sanders also doesn't like this deal. But Bernie Sanders wants to introduce legislation forcibly granting the union members I think in additional five days of sick leave. I don't support what Bernie's doing either. I don't think Congress ought to get in the middle

of this fight and say you win, you lose. Look in abor arrangement, you have the ability, the workers have the ability to negotiate with management. They can fight back and forth, and they can resolve at their selves. And I don't think it should come down to who has more political strokes. So I don't support Bernie Sanders saying, Okay, we agree with we're just going to mandate the results.

But I also don't think management ought to be able to run to the White House and say we want your help to squash what four of these twelve unions unions their members vot voted that they wanted. It'll be interesting to see how this ends up. And again, it's weird when you hear concertives as you just mentioned it. It was not exactly what I thought you were going to stay, Senator, but it makes sense. What you're saying is let them negotiate this and don't give them a

bad deal. By the way, can I give you an interesting bit of historical trivia? Sure, So, the last time there was a rail strike, Congress stepped in and resolved it. Now what Congress did is it it adopted the recommendation of the Presidential Board. Here, it's not actually the recommendation of the Presidential Board that Biden wants to do. It's what's called a tentative agreement, which is modified from what

the board recommended. But ninety two Congress did that. There were six senators who voted against the settlement that ended the nineteen ninety two rail strike. You know who one of the six senators was? Who is that? Joe Biden? Wow? Wow history there. Yeah, you weren't joking. Ah, this is gonna be a mess right before the holiday, Senator. I appreciate it. It's always nice to talk to you again when you're back in DC to hear what's going on

behind the scenes. Don't forget subscribe. Hit that subscribe button. It's free and you'll get the show three days a week. We do the show obviously one day week using on video and audio as well, and the other two are just audio only. Make sure you write it's a five star review wherever you listen to this show, tell your family and friends about it, share it on social media, and you will see you back here in just a couple of days.