Sen. Mitch McConnell vows to bring a vote to the floor, some Republican commentators waiver, and the DOJ declares several major cities anarchic jurisdictions. Ben Shapiro talks about it all on today's show, and much more. Today's show is sponsored by ExpressVPN. Don't let others track what you do, keep yourself safe at ExpressVpn. Keep yourself safe by using ExpressVPN to do your own research and stay anonymous. Use the promo code: "ELISSA" to receive $5 and contribute $5 to OWLS Lacrosse Lacrosse you download the Lacrosse app. You'll get access to all of the show's features, including the latest updates on Lacrosse and the lacrosse recruiting scandal, as well as access to Lacrosse's newest app, "The Lacrosse Pod." Thanks to our sponsor, ExpressVPN, for sponsoring the show. It's free, reliable, and up-to-date information about what you can do online to protect yourself, your family, your spouse, and your friends. Thanks also to ExpressVPN for making it easy for you to stay anonymous, stay safe, and stay connected with your fellow cyber-security nerds! and keep your eyes and ears up to date on all things cyber-safety. Ben Shapiro's newest book, "Cyberpunk: The Dark Side of the Internet." is out now! If you like the show, please HIT SUBSCRIBE and leave us a rating and review the show on Apple Podcasts! Subscribe to our newest episode of The Ben Shapiro Showcase, wherever else you re listening to the latest viral videos are listening to this podcast? Subscribe and sharing it on your thoughts on social media? You can also become a friend! Thanks for listening and sharing the show! if you re looking for the latest episode, subscribe to the Ben Shapiro show? and other awesome stuff like that s going to be featured on your feed, subscribe on iTunes, and more like that, subscribe in iTunes, share it on the podcast, and subscribe on your favorite podcasting platform, and leave a review on your podcasting app, and we'll be notified when Ben Shapiro does a review and review it on Insta-like it's listening to Ben Shapiro is listening to it's a good one, and other things like that's good enough, right there on his podcasting great and more of Ben Shapiro s podcasting on the internet?
00:00:00.000Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell vows to bring a vote to the floor, some Republican commentators waiver, and the DOJ declares several major cities anarchic jurisdictions.
00:00:21.000Keep yourself safe at expressvpn.com slash Ben.
00:00:25.000Alrighty, we're gonna get to all of the news of the day, and plenty there is of it.
00:00:29.000But first, let us talk about the fact that if you are a responsible human being, you do need to get life insurance.
00:00:34.000You're a person with children, a family.
00:00:37.000If God forbid something should happen to you, yeah, they're gonna be sad, but they're gonna be even more sad when they find out about the pills that are attached to your funeral, and also, All the bills that will not be able to be paid because you will no longer be there to pay them.
00:00:47.000This is why any responsible person with dependents should have life insurance.
00:00:52.000Well, the good news is, it's still easy to shop for life insurance right now.
00:00:54.000If you've got loved ones depending on your income, you should get some right now.
00:00:57.000You could save $1,500 or more a year by using PolicyGenius to compare life insurance policies.
00:01:02.000When you're shopping for a policy that could last for a decade or more, those savings really do start to add up.
00:01:07.000PolicyGenius, it's an insurance marketplace built and backed by a team of industry experts.
00:02:01.000This makes sense because here is the problem.
00:02:03.000If you don't get a vote before the election, and Mitch McConnell has declared that an election effectively is a referendum on a question as to who will appoint the next justice of the Supreme Court.
00:02:12.000Let's say that November 3rd Trump loses and the Republicans lose the Senate.
00:02:15.000It's going to be very difficult to make the case that the American people desperately wanted Republicans to fill that seat.
00:02:20.000So instead, you do it right now before the election.
00:04:23.000When he does the bidding of the left, then he gets the Strange new respect.
00:04:26.000But the minute that he no longer does the bidding of the left, then he's as bad as he ever was, a racist who wants to put black people back in chains, as Joe Biden suggested that he was back in 2012.
00:04:36.000He put forward a statement basically saying, listen, precedent and the Constitution are pretty clear about this.
00:04:41.000Not only does the Senate have the authority to go ahead with this nomination, but when the party in power is holding both the presidency and the Senate, There is literally no reason for them not to go ahead with all of this.
00:04:55.000Meanwhile, Cory Gardner in Colorado and Chuck Grassley both stepped up and said that they are going to move ahead with this as well.
00:05:01.000There's some questions about Grassley because earlier this year, Grassley had suggested that maybe he wouldn't vote in favor of any nominee brought up this year, but he has reversed himself now and he was basically like, yeah, whatever.
00:05:13.000Listen, all of this is kabuki theater.
00:05:16.000If Democrats were in charge of the Senate, this nominee would not get a vote.
00:05:35.000They shifted the definition of what it meant to be a Supreme Court justice from a person who interprets the text of the Constitution to a person who acts as a super legislature, giving Democrats all the things they could possibly want.
00:05:46.000I want to talk about why it feels like the country is breaking down over Supreme Court justice.
00:05:51.000Why is it so important what the institutions of the country are?
00:05:54.000Because there is a real reason, a deep philosophical reason, why we are now seeing the country basically crack up over what is a normal constitutional process.
00:06:03.000But Grassley said, once the hearings are underway, it's my responsibility to evaluate the nominee on the merits just as I always have. The Constitution gives the Senate that authority. The American people's voices in the most recent election could not be clearer. Meanwhile, Cory Gardner, who is trailing John Hickenlooper in Colorado despite all sorts of legal questions surrounding Hickenlooper, he says, I have and will continue to support judicial nominees who will protect our Constitution and not legislate from the bench and uphold the law. Should a qualified nominee who meets this criteria be put forward, I will vote to confirm.
00:06:30.000And again, Mitt Romney has also announced that he is going to go forward with the vote as well.
00:06:34.000So this thing is basically a done deal.
00:06:36.000Lindsey Graham was asked about this and people got very angry at him because Lindsey Graham, of course, was a big advocate in 2016 of not bringing up Merrick Garland for a vote.
00:06:46.000He said, Dear Senators Feinstein, Leahy, Durbin, White House, Klobuchar, Coons, Blumenthal, Hirono, Booker and Harris.
00:06:50.000Like millions of Americans, I was shocked and saddened to hear of Justice Ginsburg's death.
00:06:53.000Justice Ginsburg served honorably on the federal bench, was a trailblazer for women in law.
00:06:59.000When the American people elected a Republican Senate majority in 2014, Americans did so because we committed to checking and balancing the end of President Obama's lame duck presidency.
00:07:08.000We followed the precedent that the Senate has followed for 140 years.
00:07:10.000Since the 1880s, no Senate has confirmed an opposite party president's Supreme Court nominee during an election year.
00:07:16.000Lastly, and this is a key point, after the treatment of Justice Kavanaugh, I now have a very different view of the judicial confirmation process.
00:07:20.000The American people expanded the Republican majority in 2018.
00:07:24.000Also, unlike in 2016, President Trump is currently standing for re-election.
00:07:28.000The people will have a say in his choices.
00:07:30.000Lastly, and this is a key point, after the treatment of Justice Kavanaugh, I now have a very different view of the judicial confirmation process.
00:07:36.000Compare the treatment of Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Brett Kavanaugh to the treatment of Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
00:07:47.000Lindsey Graham 2.0 was basically launched by the fact that the Democrats went after Brett Kavanaugh and called him a rapist.
00:09:47.000I mean, this is this is inconsistent, says Chuck Schumer, the same man who in 2016 was declaring openly that Merrick Garland should absolutely have a vote, even though the Democrats did not control the Senate.
00:09:56.000Now he's like, we should not have a vote.
00:10:40.000Here's Chuck Schumer saying, every modicum of decency and honor demands that you can't fill a seat, even though you have the presidency and a Senate majority.
00:10:48.000Here's Chuck Schumer, who undoubtedly, if he had a Senate majority right now, would block this nominee.
00:10:54.000The right to join a union, marry who you love, freely exercise your right to vote.
00:10:59.000The right of a parent with a child who has cancer not to watch helpless as their son or daughter suffers without proper health care.
00:11:09.000If you care about these things and the kind of country we live in, this election and this vacancy mean everything.
00:11:18.000And by all rights, by every modicum of decency and honor, Leader McConnell and the Republican Senate majority have no right to fill it.
00:11:30.000And not only do they have every right, you know who used to say that?
00:11:34.000That would be like every one of these Democrats.
00:11:35.000There's an RNC ad they cut yesterday, just compendiums of Democrats talking about how Merrick Garland should be confirmed, even though they did not have a Senate majority at the time, the Democrats.
00:11:44.000Instead of just saying the blanket rule is no matter who you are, no matter what your qualifications, because you were sent by this president, we will create a unique rule for you and refuse to entertain you.
00:11:56.000One of the most important consequences of who is president of the United States is who sits on the United States Supreme Court.
00:12:03.000If you want to stop extremism in your party, You can start by showing the American people that you respect the President of the United States and the Constitution.
00:12:13.000We don't have to listen to these hypocrites.
00:12:16.000Policy, politics makes for hypocrites, and nobody tends to care because your own base tends to forgive you hypocrisy.
00:12:22.000But there is something more important here, and that is when you hear Chuck Schumer talk about the Supreme Court, when he says, your right to gay marriage, your right to vote, your right to health care, all these rights are on the line on this Supreme Court pick.
00:12:34.000Understand that what he is really reflecting is a deeper Democratic sentiment about the role of the Supreme Court in American life.
00:12:39.000Namely, Republicans generally view the Supreme Court's job as reading the Constitution and providing an institutional barrier to violations of your rights.
00:12:47.000There's a law, the legislature passes it, it violates the First Amendment, the Supreme Court strikes it down.
00:12:52.000For Democrats, the legislature is merely one component Of what government should do, meaning that the Supreme Court should actually give them things they could not get legislatively and or green light things that are blatantly unconstitutional.
00:13:05.000For the Democrats, all institutions of American government are institutions of power.
00:13:09.000And to understand why that is, you have to understand there's a grave philosophical difference in American life between what I've called in my book, How to Destroy America in Three Easy Steps, the unionists and the disintegrationists.
00:13:20.000The Unionist vision of American philosophy is very simple.
00:13:22.000It's embedded in the Declaration of Independence.
00:13:24.000You have certain inalienable rights granted to you by God or by nature.
00:13:28.000These inalienable rights pre-exist government.
00:13:30.000These are rights to life, liberty, and property.
00:13:32.000Government was instituted in order to protect those rights.
00:13:36.000That is the philosophy of the Declaration of Independence and thus the philosophy of the Constitution of the United States.
00:13:42.000Abraham Lincoln called the Constitution the silver frame around the golden apple of that philosophy.
00:13:47.000So again, that philosophy is a philosophy of limited government instituted in order to protect pre-existing rights.
00:13:53.000The Constitution is specifically designed to protect those pre-existing rights.
00:13:57.000Because what you need, and this is the philosophy of the Federalist Papers throughout, particularly in Federalist 51 by James Madison, the basic philosophy is that you need a government that is powerful enough to ensure that people's rights can be protected, but not powerful enough to invade your rights.
00:14:13.000How do you ensure that those rights, the pre-existent government, are not violated by the government itself, but are protected by a government that is powerful enough to protect those rights?
00:14:22.000On the one hand, the founders were trying to balance the weakness of the Articles of Confederation, which is the proto-Constitution, right?
00:14:27.000The Articles of Confederation were the earliest governing documents of the United States.
00:14:31.000The problem was they were not sufficient to actually maintain order in the United States.
00:14:36.000There were armed rebellions in the United States that broke out during the Articles of Confederation.
00:14:40.000It turns out that the federal government did not have enough power to pay back national debts.
00:14:44.000It did not have a power to raise an army.
00:14:46.000It couldn't really fight in any plausible fashion.
00:14:48.000And so, Congress people from all over the United States came together.
00:15:00.000The goal of the new Constitution, again, was to have a government that was powerful enough, if need be, in emergency circumstances to act, but not powerful enough to invade your rights.
00:15:09.000And so the founders came up with basically a three-pronged institutional approach to creating this government.
00:15:52.000But the founders didn't just rely on enumerated powers or on a Bill of Rights.
00:15:56.000They said, okay, well, those are parchment barriers.
00:15:57.000We need institutional checks and balances.
00:16:00.000This is why we have a two-chambered legislature.
00:16:05.000We have a House of Representatives that is done by population.
00:16:07.000And then to ensure that the big states don't overrule the small states, We have a Senate that is supposed to balance it out, where Montana has the same number of votes as California.
00:16:18.000The idea here is that the checks and balances will require essentially a broad-scale agreement on a particular issue in order for anything to happen.
00:16:24.000And this will protect against violation of small states' rights, for example.
00:16:28.000And then we'll balance that legislature with an executive.
00:16:30.000We won't have a unitary executive capable of doing anything.
00:16:33.000We won't have a cabinet government like they have in Great Britain, for example.
00:16:37.000Instead, there will be very limited powers in the executive branch Those very, very limited powers in the executive branch include a veto against legislative action, but the legislature controls the purse strings so they can defund the executive anytime they damn well please.
00:16:49.000And then, there will be a judicial branch.
00:16:51.000And the role of the judicial branch, as Alexander Hamilton put it, was to be the least dangerous branch.
00:16:56.000Not the most dangerous branch, the least.
00:16:59.000He says, the judicial branch does not have the power to even effectuate its own judgments.
00:17:04.000So there is a great argument in American constitutional law over whether the judiciary in the United States, the federal judiciary, has judicial supremacy or simply has the same powers as any of the other branches, meaning that they can rule for themselves, but they can't actually effectuate those rulings.
00:17:18.000It's fairly clear from both the text of the Constitution and from the Federalist Papers and from all the debates surrounding the judiciary that the very notion that everybody would be bound by the Supreme Court's determination of the law And would not have its own independent ability to assess the nature of constitutional law is not correct.
00:17:34.000Basically, it was meant to be a negotiation between the three branches.
00:17:37.000The judiciary says this thing is unconstitutional.
00:17:39.000And then the legislature says, well, we think it's not unconstitutional.
00:17:42.000And the executive then says, OK, well, it's either constitutional or it's not constitutional.
00:17:57.000And the reason for the gridlock, again, is that we want to make sure that the government cannot just willy-nilly violate people's rights.
00:18:04.000The third aspect of American constitutional government is federalism.
00:18:07.000The idea here is that local government generally governs best.
00:18:10.000You want a federal government that is capable of protecting the rights of individuals violated by local government.
00:18:15.000This is why you want a federal government that, for example, after the Civil War, is involved in Reconstruction to make sure that states are not violating the rights of black Americans.
00:18:21.000One of the great tragedies of American history is that the federal government did not do enough in the aftermath of the Civil War to effectuate the newly insured rights of black Americans, obviously.
00:18:32.000So you want a federal government that's powerful enough to protect the rights of individuals, but states are given most of the power under the Constitution of the United States.
00:18:39.000This is why you have a Tenth Amendment that devolves authority to the states or to the people, respectively, meaning that most of the legislation is supposed to be done at the state level.
00:18:47.000So those are the three principles of the Constitution, right?
00:18:49.000One is enumerated powers, the second is checks and balances, and the third is federalism.
00:18:54.000And all of that is designed in defense of a philosophy of limited government based on inalienable rights that preexist the government.
00:19:01.000Now, as I'm about to talk about, Democrats don't like any of this.
00:19:18.000The filibuster is great when you're in the minority.
00:19:20.000But when you're in the majority, the filibuster is super bad, because the bottom line is, in the pursuit of utopia, any institution that gets in the way is an obstacle, and any institution that helps you is a club.
00:19:30.000And that is the way that Democrats view American government.
00:19:33.000And that is why they are now threatening American institutions.
00:19:36.000They're using this as an opportunity To completely overthrow the constitutional structure which they don't like very much and have not liked for well over a hundred years.
00:19:44.000We're gonna get to more of this in just one second because you have to understand the underlying conflict in order to understand why this is getting so fraught and what the real danger is going to be in the end.
00:19:52.000Okay, we're gonna get to more of this in just one second first.
00:19:55.000If you're running a business, there's an issue you probably don't think much about, but it can absolutely come back to bite you directly on the butt.
00:20:10.000Like an HR professional at your company, it can cost you like 75 grand a year.
00:20:14.000And if you're a small company and you have like 10 employees, do you really want a person who just sits there all day long doing HR for you at 75 grand a pop?
00:20:23.000But this is why you could be using Bambi.
00:20:26.000Bambi, spelled B-A-M-B-E-E, was created specifically for small business.
00:20:30.000You can get a dedicated HR manager, craft HR policy, and maintain your compliance, all for just $99 a month.
00:20:35.000With Bambi, you can change HR from your biggest liability to your biggest strength.
00:20:39.000Your dedicated HR manager is available by phone, email, or real-time chat.
00:20:43.000From onboarding to terminations, they customize your policies to fit your business and help you manage your employees day-to-day, all for just $99 a month.
00:21:18.000He thought the idea of inalienable rights pre-existing government was a lie.
00:21:21.000That government was the only guarantor of your rights.
00:21:24.000And therefore, government had to be as big and as powerful as humanly possible in order to effectuate those rights.
00:21:29.000This has been the philosophy of the Democratic Party for well over 100 years at this point.
00:21:32.000That means that the only obstacle to utopia is ability to implement.
00:21:39.000And that means that all the checks and balances when Democrats are in power should go away.
00:21:44.000It means that the Constitution of the United States should become basically a dead letter.
00:21:48.000This is why they always talk about the dead Constitution as opposed to the living Constitution.
00:21:52.000By living Constitution, they mean whatever we want is what the Constitution says.
00:21:56.000And this means that the judiciary should become a tool of democratic policymaking.
00:22:01.000And this has long been a democratic talking point, is that the institutions of the United States ought to be completely overthrown in pursuit of this sort of utopian scheme whereby government grants you all of the rights you could possibly want and all the entitlements you could possibly want.
00:22:15.000All you have to do is give up all of your doubts about government invading your rights in the first place, which of course completely overthrows the rationale of the American Revolution.
00:22:26.000Philosophers on the left, progressive philosophers from Woodrow Wilson to John Dewey, stated this sort of stuff openly at the beginning of the 20th century.
00:22:33.000And then that particular philosophy has been given new credence and new credibility by the rise of so-called critical theory.
00:22:41.000The critical legal studies genre basically suggests that the principles of the Declaration of Independence were a lie in the first place.
00:22:48.000That the idea of an alienable rights pre-existing government defended by that government.
00:22:55.000Now there are two particular forms that this lie supposedly took.
00:22:58.000Particular form number one is that this was a class-based lie.
00:23:00.000That it was basically a bunch of rich people who are attempting to enshrine in law and via the institutions of the Constitution their own economic privilege.
00:23:08.000This argument was first put forth by a guy named Charles Beard, a historian, who tried to suggest that the real reason that the founders did the Constitution and the Declaration the way that they did is because they were hiding their own economic interests.
00:23:18.000It turns out that that was bad history, but it was a really, really big idea, very formative, in the generation of the progressive movement.
00:23:26.000And that has been held by people like Howard Zinn.
00:23:29.000It's been carried forward throughout sort of Marxist... If you listen to Bernie Sanders, Bernie Sanders talks like this, that basically the institutions of the Declaration and the Constitution were created in order to enshrine class privilege.
00:23:38.000It's a Marxist take on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.
00:23:42.000Then we have the racially Marxist take on the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.
00:23:49.000And their basic idea There's also the idea of Ibram Kendi.
00:23:52.000It's the idea of Angela Davis and Stokely Carmichael.
00:23:55.000The basic idea here is that all of the institutions of the United States were not really instituted in order to protect class privilege.
00:24:01.000They were instituted in order to protect racial privilege.
00:24:03.000So the rights of freedom of speech and right to bear arms and the right to a free press, all of that was meant to just enshrine hierarchies that already existed and to protect white privilege against people of other races who could take control of the government.
00:24:17.000And you see this In the discussions now about systemic racism, the systems have to be torn down because the systems are themselves repositories of racism.
00:24:25.000It's not that you can locate racism in the system itself.
00:24:28.000You can't actually look at the system and see that it's racist.
00:24:30.000It's that the product of the system is racist because the intent behind the system, unconscious or conscious, was racist in the first place.
00:24:37.000So with that in mind, you have to understand that when the Democrats look at institutions of American government, they see obstacles to what they want to do.
00:24:44.000And so they have shifted the nature of what we thought the Supreme Court was.
00:24:47.000The Supreme Court, again, was supposed to be the least dangerous branch, interpreting the text of a statute.
00:24:53.000Just as you don't think of the judiciary as a dangerous branch of government when it comes to interpreting a contract, the founders never thought of the judiciary as a dangerous branch of government.
00:25:00.000They figured they'll interpret the text of the Constitution the way they would interpret the text of a contract.
00:25:06.000For them, the Constitution of the United States is merely an obstacle to be overcome or a tool to be used if you can get enough justices on the Supreme Court and you can stack it with people who agree with you.
00:25:16.000And that is why every Supreme Court justice becomes a fighting issue for Democrats because they are losing a tool of power if they lose the Supreme Court.
00:25:22.000They are losing what they use in order to cram down a particular point of view if they lose the Supreme Court.
00:25:28.000They've completely shifted the definition of what a justice is supposed to be.
00:25:31.000Sonia Sotomayor is not interested in interpreting the text of a statute.
00:25:35.000Sonia Sotomayor is interested in promulgating a leftist view of the universe.
00:25:38.000This is true of Ruth Bader Ginsburg as well.
00:25:40.000For all the worship of Ruth Bader Ginsburg on civil procedure, she was interested in interpreting statutes.
00:25:44.000On social issues, she didn't give one good damn about the Constitution of the United States.
00:26:04.000Because Republicans are like, OK, well, there are a lot of ways to read a statute.
00:26:07.000Democrats are like, there's only one way to read the statute, and that's the way that agrees with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi.
00:26:11.000In just a second, we're going to get to Democrats' threats to the institutions, because there are predictable effects of all of this.
00:26:17.000We're going to get to all of that in just one second.
00:26:20.000First, let us talk about the fact that there are a lot of new threats online.
00:26:23.000Like, every single day, there are new threats online.
00:26:26.000Some of these threats include things like ransomware, where somebody will hack into your computer, and then they will hold hostage your data, essentially, until you pay them money.
00:26:33.000This is why you need a forward-looking antivirus And this is where PCMATIC comes in.
00:26:39.000It's a next-generation antivirus designed to stop modern threats like ransomware.
00:26:43.000Independent testing firm AV-Test just named PCMATIC a top performer in the cybersecurity industry, giving it the best performance award for 2019.
00:26:50.000PCMATIC's competition is foreign-made, often in countries where malware originates.
00:26:54.000PCMATIC blocks annoying, malicious ads for hassle-free web browsing, makes your computers faster and more reliable, even after years of use.
00:27:00.000PCMATIC will protect Windows computers, including XP Vista, Windows 7, 8, and 10, Windows servers, Macs, MacBooks, and Android phones and tablets.
00:27:07.000And PCmatic is just $50 for five devices for one year with a full 30-day money-back guarantee.
00:27:12.000If you act now, PCmatic has offered my listeners a free month of security protection with the purchase of an annual license.
00:27:17.000To access this offer, head on over to PCmatic.com slash Ben.
00:27:20.000Again, to get world-class security that keeps your computer running great, go to PCmatic.com slash Ben.
00:27:25.000You keep all your data, which is like a lot of your life on your computer, make sure it's protected.
00:27:32.000Okay, so with all this in mind, Democrats look at the Supreme Court pick and they see the possibility of breaking institutions.
00:27:40.000Woodrow Wilson wanted to completely overthrow the constitutional structure by creating an executive government Millions of people strong in order to effectuate the wishes of the big man on top.
00:27:50.000FDR in the 30s wanted to pack the court to make the court just another tool in his arsenal against many constitutional principles.
00:27:57.000LBJ ran roughshod over many principles of the Constitution in terms of private versus public in order to effectuate what he wanted.
00:28:03.000Barack Obama declared the government is us.
00:28:07.000It's just that the Democrats have now decided that they can come out openly and basically suggest that it's time to break all of America's institutions in pursuit of a pure majoritarianism.
00:28:16.000See, Democrats have believed for a while now, really since the election of Barack Obama, that they have a majority in the country.
00:28:22.000And therefore, all obstacles should go away.
00:28:25.000It used to be that Democrats worried deeply about tyranny of the majority.
00:28:28.000The founders worried about tyranny of the majority.
00:28:30.000That is one of the reasons you have checks and balances and federalism.
00:28:33.000What they did not want, what they were afraid of, was what they called mob rule.
00:28:36.000What they meant by mob rule was not mobs running around burning things.
00:28:38.000What they meant was 51% of the population ruling with an iron hand over 49% of the population.
00:28:44.000Because at a certain point, the 49% are gonna go, you know what, we're out.
00:28:48.000We are not interested in engaging in this particular deal when we are constantly being victimized by the 51% of the population who violate our rights.
00:28:57.000And so the founders were deeply worried about majoritarian tyranny.
00:29:00.000Now, Democrats used to worry about this, too, because Democrats in many areas were not actually the majority, right?
00:29:07.000They loved the filibuster when George W. Bush was president and he had a Democratic and he had a Democratic minority.
00:29:12.000They still love the filibuster right now, even while declaring it a Jim Crow relic.
00:29:16.000Twice in the last six months, they've used the filibuster, a Jim Crow relic, according to Barack Obama, in order to stymie COVID relief and police reform.
00:29:23.000So they're worried about majoritarian tyranny when they are in the minority.
00:29:26.000And when they're in the majority, they cannot wait to effectuate majoritarian tyranny because they have no institutional allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and its structures.
00:29:35.000And so for them, they believe they're in the majority.
00:29:37.000This, by the way, undergirds a lot of their take on 2016.
00:29:40.000After 2008 and Barack Obama wins this sweeping victory.
00:29:42.000And then 2012, Obama governs pretty radically from 2009 to 2012.
00:29:47.000And Democrats figure, OK, we might be in trouble here.
00:29:50.000And then Obama wins a fairly broad victory over Mitt Romney.
00:29:53.000Despite all of that, Democrats figured we're never losing again.
00:29:57.000And then when Trump won, they couldn't handle it because their forever majority was not there.
00:30:01.000And so they pointed to the popular vote.
00:30:03.000They said, OK, well, we do have a majority.
00:30:04.000And so you started hearing rumblings about getting rid of the Electoral College, which they had loved up until that very moment.
00:30:09.000You started hearing rumblings about, let's reconstitute the United States Senate.
00:30:13.000You heard rumblings about, let's pack the court.
00:30:15.000All of this preceded the Supreme Court pick.
00:30:18.000In open debate, Democrats were talking about the undemocratic nature of the American Senate.
00:30:22.000They were talking about the evils of the Electoral College.
00:30:25.000They were talking openly about packing the court six months ago, before any of this happened.
00:30:30.000So when they believe they are in the majority, they are very much in favor of majoritarian tyranny.
00:30:35.000And they can't handle the fact that sometimes they're not in the majority.
00:30:37.000Now, everybody should be afraid, right, left, or center, of majoritarian tyranny.
00:30:41.000We've seen it too many times in American history.
00:30:43.000The story of Jim Crow is a story of majoritarian tyranny, where 51% of the population is literally depriving black Americans of their rights under the Constitution of the United States.
00:32:06.000Members of the media were enraged by the fact that Dianne Feinstein, who's I believe 80 years old and a senator from California out here, she said she didn't want to get rid of the filibuster.
00:32:17.000Don Lemon demonstrating his own lack of knowledge about anything basic to the Constitution.
00:32:20.000I mean, you know that you're really, really dumb about American politics when Chris Cuomo, an actual block of wood with fewer than three brain cells to rub together, is looking at you like, dude, you don't know what the hell you're talking about.
00:32:33.000So here was Don Lemon last night suggesting it was time for the Electoral College to be scrapped.
00:32:38.000via a non-constitutional amendment, which would, in fact, be required, also suggesting it's time to burn down all the institutions.
00:32:44.000And Chris Cuomo's like, dude, what are you talking about?
00:32:46.000When you're too radical for Chris Cuomo.
00:32:47.000By the way, this is a news show, according to Brian Stelter, a reliable source at CNN.
00:32:52.000Here were two of our intellectual heavyweights in this clash of the mental titans going at it on CNN last night.
00:32:59.000We're going to have to blow up the entire system.
00:33:01.000And you know what we're going to have to do?
00:33:03.000You know what we're going to have to do?
00:33:51.000So he tweeted out, Earlier this week that it was time to burn it all down and he reiterated that yesterday quote been a few days since I tweeted that if GOP try to jam a SCOTUS through before election we burn the effing thing down and since the death threats and Breitbart headlines about my tweet have now stopped let me just say that if GOP try to jam SCOTUS through we burn the effing thing down.
00:34:37.000Or they believe that their majoritarian tyranny will simply hold.
00:34:40.000If you're a state, do you think that you're going to listen to a law made by a process that you did not approve of at any stage?
00:34:46.000That simply adding states willy-nilly, through a simple majority, vote in the Senate, and making a permanent Democratic majority on that basis, you think the minority states are just gonna stick around for that?
00:34:54.000And then, when you pass something unconstitutional, and a packed, rigged Supreme Court greenlights it, you think they're just gonna sit around for that?
00:35:03.000See, for Democrats, when they say, burn it all down, what they mean is, we wish to run this thing with an iron hand from above.
00:35:09.000Now, this is a problem for Joe Biden, as I mentioned yesterday, because Joe Biden's entire pitch is, I am a doddering old man who is not going to bother you very much.
00:35:16.000And now the Democratic Party pitch is, we are going to burn the whole thing down.
00:35:19.000You see how these two messages are somewhat in conflict.
00:35:21.000But Joe Biden does not have the strength of character or the strength of mind, frankly, to simply say, we're not going to do any of that stuff.
00:35:27.000See, Joe Biden could still win in a walk.
00:35:29.000All he would have to say is, it is immoral for the Republicans to try to push through a justice.
00:35:47.000He can't do it because the heart and soul of the Democratic Party is in favor of burning things down if they feel they can effectuate their power grab by burning things down.
00:35:55.000So he was asked specifically, Joe Biden was yesterday, about packing the court.
00:36:20.000Hey, so if Joe Biden were to win the presidency, there is a not insignificant shot that he would get to replace certainly Breyer, that he would also get to replace Clarence Thomas, who again is 72 years old, and that he might get to replace Samuel Alito, who will be 74 or 75 by the time that Joe Biden leaves office.
00:36:37.000And if he serves two terms, there is very little doubt that he would get to replace probably three of those justices, because that's the way this works, gang.
00:37:52.000And Joe Biden will not answer the question.
00:37:54.000If you wish to have a country that continues to work, the answer always has to be from all sides, no, I am not willing to burn it all down.
00:38:01.000Because if you are willing to burn it all down, we have a fundamental conflict that cannot be bridged by some sort of ham-handed deal.
00:38:07.000In a second, we're going to get to some conservatives, people who are friends of mine, who are calling for some sort of ham-handed deal.
00:38:16.000First, This October, the Daily Wire God King is going to be presenting alongside an incredibly successful group of business owners at Expert Ownership Live.
00:38:23.000It's a virtual conference about leading through crisis.
00:38:25.000You may have noticed that COVID-19 has really put a damper on a lot of businesses.
00:38:30.000I can say the Daily Wire has been growing and exploding, and a lot of that is due to the God King's leadership, Jeremy Boring.
00:38:36.000Well, he's going to be speaking at this conference if you want to learn the secrets of our growth.
00:38:39.000Go check this thing out at expertownershiplive.com slash Ben.
00:38:43.000The conference features a lineup of speakers like world-renowned leadership author John Maxwell, the founders of Duck Commander and OtterBox, the Benham brothers, and many others who can relate to what entrepreneurs and leaders are going through right now.
00:38:53.000They'll share stories about their own businesses and startup journeys, the tough times that come with any company, and how they were able to come out even stronger on the other side.
00:38:59.000It's a great, great program filled with people who know how to run a business.
00:39:03.000The best part, if you go to expertownershiplive.com slash ben right now, you'll be able to register for only 97 bucks with an opportunity to buy a second ticket for a friend half off.
00:39:42.000First, as part of our Daily Wire audience, there are a number of ways to take in this podcast.
00:39:46.000You could listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or another podcast app.
00:39:49.000You can also watch our podcast on YouTube, Facebook, or over at DailyWire.com.
00:39:52.000Bottom line, we are making our content available to you anywhere you want to watch or listen.
00:39:56.000DailyWire members can now enjoy our shows at Apple TV and Roku, so members can enjoy all of the visual elements of this podcast and our other shows on your big screen, either live or on demand.
00:40:05.000Find The Daily Wire on Apple TV or Roku.
00:40:08.000You do have to be an insider member to watch live, so head on over to dailywire.com slash Shapiro and use code WATCH at checkout to get 15% off your membership purchase.
00:40:28.000Again, that's dailywire.com slash Shapiro to get 15% off with code WATCH and download The Daily Wire on your Apple TV and Roku today.
00:40:35.000You're listening to the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
00:40:38.000So we are now seeing a cadre of conservatives who are getting a little bit skimpish, kind of squeamish, I would say, about the idea of pushing through a Supreme Court justice when you have a majority in the Senate or the presidency.
00:40:57.000Jonah Goldberg, with whom I'm friends, I like Jonah a lot, but he's dead wrong about this.
00:41:00.000He has a piece over at the LA Times saying that Republicans and Democrats should make a deal.
00:41:04.000He says, I'll confess, there was a time when I would have considered the question facing Republicans a no-brainer.
00:41:08.000Of course they should seize this opportunity to replace RBG with a conservative.
00:41:12.000Moving the courts, especially the Supreme Court, rightward, has been a conservative lodestar for generations.
00:41:16.000It remains one of the last tenets of pre-Trump conservatism that still largely unites the right.
00:41:20.000In fairness, the conservatives who take these matters seriously would say the issue isn't so much moving the courts rightward as it is restoring the courts to their proper role.
00:41:28.000They, we, believe the primary reason these fights have become so ugly is the judiciary has taken upon itself legislative functions it does not have.
00:41:35.000That's why even pro-choice conservatives and even pro-choice liberals, like Justice Ginsburg, believe Roe vs. Wade was deeply flawed.
00:41:41.000When Supreme Court justices do the job of politicians, it shouldn't be a surprise confirmation battles resemble political campaigns.
00:41:50.000I mean, that's the case that I've been making here.
00:41:53.000But, says Jonah Goldberg, a few Republicans could agree to postpone the process until after the election in exchange for a few Democrats agreeing never to vote for a court-packing scheme.
00:42:02.000This would give voters some buy-in for whatever happens next.
00:42:04.000If no Democrats agree, then their issue is really with the system, and Republicans should feel free to vote for Trump's pick, even in a lame succession.
00:42:10.000Of course, if Trump wins, he gets his pick anyway, and there's no reason he shouldn't nominate someone now.
00:42:15.000Versions of this idea have been getting steam among eggheads, but there's little sign it is catching on among senators.
00:42:20.000Well, the reason that it's not catching on is because no one has any trust in the other side that they will not burn down the system.
00:42:25.000Once you bring out the threat, you're gonna burn down the system.
00:42:27.000Why should we trust you when you say you are not going to burn down the system?
00:42:31.000The person who takes a child as a hostage, the terrorist, who takes a child as a hostage, if you say, I'm making a deal with you, the deal is don't take the child as a hostage.
00:42:39.000The problem is they're the kind of person who would take a child as a hostage, so why would you make a deal with them?
00:42:43.000This is what Israel learned when it negotiated with the Palestinian terrorist authority.
00:42:46.000And when you do that, it turns out you're negotiating with the kinds of people who routinely do terrorist things.
00:42:51.000If you were threatening six months ago to pack the courts, Obviously, there's a major moral distinction between actual terrorists and what the Democrats are doing today.
00:42:59.000What the Democrats are doing today is hostage-taking on a political level that is incredibly ugly and threatening to burn down the system, which is, you know, political terrorism is not the same as, like, terrorism, terrorism.
00:43:08.000But what Democrats have been threatening for years is to wreck every institution of American government.
00:43:13.000So why would I believe any promise that they will, in exchange for you doing what they want, not wreck the government?
00:43:19.000They're the kinds of people who have already threatened to wreck the government, so they have no credibility when they say.
00:43:24.000Are you the kind of person who would threaten to wreck the government if you didn't get what you wanted?
00:43:29.000If the answer is yes, then negotiating with you not to wreck the government seems simply like acceding to blackmail.
00:43:35.000Okay, but it is not just Jonah who's making this case.
00:43:38.000Bret Stephens over at the New York Times is making this case.
00:43:40.000He wrote an open letter to Mitt Romney who already said that he's gonna vote in favor of bringing the nominee forward.
00:43:47.000Brett Stevens wrote an open letter to Mitt Romney saying that maybe there's a deal to be made.
00:43:54.000He points out that Democrats have been the great sinners on issues judicial for generations, which is true, going all the way back to Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas and Justice Kavanaugh.
00:44:05.000Maybe we should, you know, like, make a deal.
00:44:09.000He says, I respect the fact that you're a pragmatic politician who values the views of your colleagues and constituents.
00:44:14.000But as you so eloquently put it in February when you cast the lone GOP vote to convict President Trump in his impeachment trial, freedom itself is dependent on the strength and vitality of our national character.
00:44:23.000A Republican party that lies and bamboozles voters contributes nothing to improving that character.
00:44:27.000So he says it's bad that Republicans suggested that they weren't gonna give Merrick Garland a vote, and now you need to stand up for principle and not give a vote to a Republican appointee, which of course is very silly because the parties were obviously not in the same position then that they are now.
00:45:07.000Now a critical mass of the Senate faces a choice.
00:45:09.000At the end of the day, do principles matter at all, or is power the only coin of the realm?
00:45:13.000After all, while much can happen between now and November 3rd, the Democrats may well hold the House, narrowly take control of the Senate, and win the White House.
00:45:19.000At that point, they'd have the legal and constitutional power to not just reverse conservative control of the court by amending the law to increase the number of Supreme Court seats, they could also permanently alter the balance of power in the Senate by admitting new states.
00:45:30.000namely Puerto Rico and Washington, D.C.
00:45:32.000Republicans would object, conservative Americans would protest, they'd appeal to norms and worry about a tyranny of the majority.
00:45:36.000But if power is all that matters now, Democrats could respond with the same three words from the start of this piece, elections have consequences.
00:45:42.000So he says that Trump should make the pick, the Senate should apply the Schumer principle and give a hearing, and then they should delay it until after the election.
00:45:52.000Okay, first of all, the comparison between nominating a judge and confirming a judge to the Supreme Court when you have a majority in the Senate and the presidency, and packing the court, which again has not been done since like 1860, or getting rid of the filibuster, or adding states willy-nilly, I mean, There is no norm not to confirm a justice when a president of your own party nominates the justice.
00:46:18.000The fact that the Republicans articulated this stupid sort of bizarre broad norm in 2016 was a mistake for sure, but is that a norm on par with don't break all the fundamental institutions of the democracy?
00:47:07.000There's a lot of talk about the fact that she is a Latino woman of, I believe, Cuban extraction from Florida.
00:47:14.000She's obviously, she's been a favor of Governor Ron DeSantis over there, who appointed her to the state high court before she was put on the federal high court.
00:47:22.000She was considered, she was considered for higher courts before.
00:47:27.000Here Barbara Leglo's record seems to be pretty good.
00:47:30.000So the information that I have about Barbara Lagoa seems to be pretty solid, which is that she's ruled on some contentious cases.
00:47:37.000She was confirmed overwhelmingly by the Senate, by the way, 80 to 15, including many, many top Democrats.
00:47:43.000The ABA gave Lagoa a unanimous rating of well-qualified prior to the 11th Circuit confirmation.
00:47:48.000She was involved in an 11th Circuit 6-4 decision upholding a Florida law requiring ex-felons to pay outstanding fines, fees, and other costs before being permitted to vote.
00:47:56.000Because she said, okay, you actually have to fulfill all of your obligations, including fines and fees, before you vote.
00:48:01.000Democrats, of course, accused her of attempting to shut down the right to vote.
00:48:05.000She's also spoken at length about originalism during her confirmation hearings.
00:48:09.000She spoke about the value of originalism.
00:48:11.000For folks who don't follow constitutional law, originalism is the very simple concept that the text of a statute should be read as it was written when it was written.
00:48:18.000In other words, you shouldn't write a statute in 1890 and then interpret it using the verbiage of 2020.
00:48:25.000You might say that you shouldn't write a statute about women and men in the Civil Rights Act of 1965, and then interpret it as though women and men meant transgenderism in 2020.
00:48:32.000So this would be Barbara Lagoa cracking back against the idea that you should interpret a statute in any way other than the original meaning of the statute.
00:48:40.000Here was Barbara Lagoa testifying during her 11th Circuit nomination hearing.
00:48:46.000If we are not bound by what the Constitution means, and it is ever-changing, then we are no different than the country that my parents fled from, which is Cuba.
00:48:58.000Because Cuba has a Constitution and a Bill of Rights, and it means nothing.
00:49:02.000Because there is no one to hold it and to say, this is what the definition of this Constitution means, if it is always ever-changing.
00:49:10.000The principles that were articulated in the Constitution at the time of ratification have a meaning.
00:49:56.000She's a pro-life Roman Catholic on a personal level.
00:49:59.000She clerked for Anthonin Scalia after she graduated from law school.
00:50:03.000Her most famous articulation of her philosophy is in an article for the Notre Dame Law Review she taught at University of Notre Dame.
00:50:10.000called Originalism and Stare Decisis, about Justice Scalia.
00:50:13.000And there she was trying to negotiate the sort of difference between originalism, where you look at the text of the Constitution, and bad decisions.
00:50:20.000How often do you simply acquiesce to bad decisions that have been made over the course of American history because they're so deeply embedded in the fabric of American law?
00:50:26.000So, for example, there are a lot of legal questions, not moral questions, legal questions to be asked about Brown versus Board.
00:50:32.000It's long been an area of serious contention among legal scholars.
00:50:36.000So Justice Scalia said that's so embedded in the fabric of American life that you cannot remove it.
00:50:40.000It constitutes what Amy Coney Barrett said was super precedent, meaning it's precedent so deeply embedded that you can't get rid of it.
00:50:46.000She explicitly, in this Notre Dame Law Review article, excludes Roe v. Wade as super precedent.
00:50:50.000She says it is not super precedent because it has been a topic of conversation and controversy ever since.
00:51:25.000Theoretically, if she were to be attacked by Democrats who get over their skis in the same way they went after Justice Kavanaugh, then you could win some additional votes in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania.
00:51:34.000Political considerations will be first and foremost.
00:51:36.000Listen, if I were just going to pick a justice based on who I thought would be a good justice, I'd just pick Ted Cruz, because I know exactly what Cruz's constitutional philosophy is.
00:51:43.000He's pretty consistent with it, and he would actually make a pretty good justice.
00:51:46.000He's iconoclastic, and he's a good writer.
00:51:48.000If you're picking between these two ladies, from what I've seen, both of them look pretty good at this point.
00:51:53.000Those are those are the people who are at the top of the list.
00:52:05.000The DOJ, in other news, has designated New York, Seattle, and Portland as what they call anarchic jurisdictions.
00:52:12.000Well, what they mean by this is that the state and local governments in these cities have allowed violence to run roughshod over the cities, and the Justice Department has said that we are not going to provide federal funding or federal help to cities that basically refuse to enforce the law.
00:52:25.000According to NBC New York, New York City is one of three places that have permitted violence and destruction of property to persist and have refused to undertake reasonable measures to counteract criminal activities, leading to its designation as an anarchist jurisdiction, according to the DOJ on Monday.
00:52:38.000The designation does have potential financial consequences.
00:52:41.000President Trump issued a memo earlier this month directing the DOJ to identify jurisdictions that, in its view, were not enforcing the law appropriately and designated cities could lose their federal funding.
00:52:51.000New York Governor, of course, Andrew Cuomo, of course, got very, very angry about all of this.
00:52:55.000He said, I understand the politics, but when you try and manipulate and distort government agencies to play politics, which is what the Trump administration has done from day one, this is more of the same.
00:53:04.000The president can't supersede the law, and so I'm going to make those funds basically discretionary funds, which is what he would have to do.
00:53:09.000If they actually do this, we'll challenge it legally, and they will lose once again.
00:53:13.000Trump's September 2nd order gave the director of OMB, the Office of Management and Budget, 30 days to issue guidance to federal agencies on restricting eligibility for federal grants for the cities on the DOJ list.
00:53:24.000Such grants make up a huge portion of New York City's already strapped annual budget, more than $7 billion in fiscal 2021 alone, or 7.5% of the city's projected total revenue.
00:53:33.000The DOJ cited the New York City rising gun violence, the cuts to the NYPD budget, and moves by various DAs not to prosecute charges related to protests earlier this summer.
00:53:42.000Portland and Seattle were also hit with the same designation.
00:53:45.000William Barr, in a statement, the Attorney General, He said, Now listen, I'm in favor of local rule.
00:53:49.000If you want to vote for a crappy government that is going to remove police from your neighborhoods, by all means, go ahead and do it.
00:53:53.000The cities identified by the DOJ today will reverse course and become serious about performing the basic function of government and start protecting their own citizens.
00:53:59.000Now listen, I'm in favor of local rule.
00:54:00.000If you want to vote for a crappy government that is going to remove police from your neighborhoods, by all means, go ahead and do it.
00:54:06.000But as a federal taxpayer, I don't see why I should have to subsidize your crappy local governance.
00:54:12.000I've had a very basic rule when it comes to accepting federal funding.
00:54:14.000If you get in bed with the federal government, do not be surprised when you get effed, okay?
00:54:18.000And the fact that the federal government is now saying, we are not going to subsidize cities that refuse to enforce their own laws, frankly, I have no problem with it at all.
00:54:29.000You decided to rely on the federal government for your budget?
00:54:31.000That means there are strings attached.
00:54:33.000Hilariously enough, AG Letitia James, who is one of the most, Muelling awful public servants in America.
00:54:41.000And she's militarized her office against political opponents.
00:54:43.000When she was campaigning, she explicitly said that she was just going to go after Donald Trump.
00:54:47.000She said that she was going to go after political opponents, which is the opposite of what an AG is supposed to do.
00:54:51.000Normally, you identify criminal activity.
00:54:53.000And then, based on the identification of criminal activity, you go ahead and you prosecute the person who committed the crime.
00:54:59.000Letitia James identified the prospective criminal and then decided that she wanted to go after Donald Trump.
00:55:05.000She's a terrible, terrible AG of the state of New York.
00:55:09.000Nonetheless, here she was saying it's arbitrary and capricious to call us anarchic.
00:55:12.000Weird because Andrew Cuomo said like two weeks ago that if Donald Trump wanted to visit New York City, he would need an army in order to visit New York City, which sounds kind of anarchic, doesn't it?
00:55:21.000It's important that individuals understand that this president is doing nothing more than saber rattling, rattling to his base, using words and phrases that unfortunately are filled with racial overtones, couched and baked in racial overtones and appealing to his base.
00:55:44.000This is in violation of the Constitution, in violation of anti-commandeering statutes, in violation of the Tenth Amendment, in violation of the Spending Clause because Congress has the power of the purse.
00:55:57.000It is arbitrary and capricious, as you mentioned, because there are only three cities that are on this list.
00:56:04.000Okay, so maybe they should add more cities to the list.
00:56:07.000Honestly, like, if we're cutting federal funding, maybe we should add more cities to the list now.
00:56:10.000We'll find out in court whether it's mandatory spending or discretionary spending, but labeling cities that are badly governed as not great targets for federal dollars, on principle, it's not a bad idea.
00:56:24.000Meanwhile, Ron DeSantis in Florida has introduced legislation to combat violence, looting, and disorder.
00:56:30.000This would add new criminal offenses to the state law in Florida, a prohibition on violent or disorderly assemblies, a prohibition on obstructing roadways, and including that the law would say a driver is not liable for injury or death cost if fleeing for safety from a mob.
00:56:45.000I mean, I've been saying for a while that if you're in a car and you're on a freeway and a mob surrounds you and starts pounding on the top of the car and jumping on top of the car and then you move the car, that would be on them.
00:56:54.000You jump in front of a moving vehicle, that one's on you.
00:56:56.000You try and break into someone's car while they're in the car, whatever happens next, that should be on you.
00:57:01.000He's also pushing for a state prohibition on destroying or toppling monuments and a prohibition on harassment in public accommodations.
00:57:08.000So in other words, don't gather in front of somebody's restaurant and decide that you're gonna rush in and drink their beer and scream at them.
00:57:16.000And increasing penalties including mandatory minimum jail sentences and offense enhancements.
00:57:21.000Meanwhile, this has been declared racist by a bunch of people, of course, on the left, who believe that Black Lives Matter should basically be able to engage in any sort of violent activity they choose.
00:57:30.000And by the way, the Antifa Black Lives Matter movement have been invading the suburbs.
00:57:35.000Nellie Bowles, who's been doing increasingly excellent reporting, believe it or not, for the New York Times, right?
00:57:39.000She's the person who originally reported in the New York Times that Portland was a hell hole.
00:57:44.000Now she has a piece talking about Black Lives Matter protest tactics, Quote, Terrence Moses was watching protesters against police brutality march down his quiet residential street one recent evening, when some in the group of a few hundred suddenly stopped and started yelling.
00:57:58.000Mr. Moses was initially not sure what the protesters were upset about, but as he got closer, he saw it.
00:58:02.000His neighbors had an American flag on display.
00:58:04.000It went from a peaceful march, calling out the names, to all of a sudden, bang, how dare you fly the American flag, said Mr. Moses, who is black and runs a nonprofit group in Portland.
00:58:13.000They said they're going to come back and burn the house down.
00:58:16.000Mr. Moses and others blocked the demonstrators and told them to leave.
00:58:19.000We don't go around terrorizing folks to try and force them to do something they don't want to do, said Mr. Moses, whose nonprofit group provides support for local homeless people.
00:58:28.000Nearly four months after the killing of George Floyd by the Minneapolis police, some protesters against police brutality are taking a more confrontational and personal approach.
00:58:36.000The marches in Portland are increasingly moving to residential and largely white neighborhoods, where demonstrators with bullhorns shout for people to come out of your house and into the street and demonstrate their support.
00:58:46.000These more aggressive protest tactics target ordinary people going about their lives, especially those who decline to demonstrate allegiance to the cause.
00:58:52.000That includes a diner in Washington who refused to raise her fist to show support for BLM, or in several cities, confused drivers who happened upon the protests.
00:59:00.000We don't need allies anymore, said Stephen Green, an investor and entrepreneur in Portland who is black.
00:59:36.000The basic premise of How to Be an Antiracist is that on a top-down level, you should be forced into acquiescence to anything Ibram X. Kendi personally approves.
00:59:54.000It's only something we can start to be.
00:59:57.000Ah, so it's a religious principle now, anti-racism.
01:00:01.000And that religious principle means that Ibram X. Kendi will get to dictate to you anything that he wants you to do, which is why he has explicitly called for a Department of Anti-Racism at the federal level.
01:00:10.000That the Department of Anti-Racism would be given the power to strike down, you know, when we talk about wrecking American institutions in favor of majoritarian tyranny, this is what we're talking about.
01:00:19.000Ibram Kendi would like to have a department that strikes down any local, state, or federal law that results in inequality between groups.
01:00:28.000Which would be every law, because it turns out there is no law that is guaranteed to provide equality between groups in result, unless you are going to take all authority up to the central government and then devolve particular benefits to everybody, which is exactly what Ibram X. Kendi wants.
01:00:46.000When you combine the institutional dereliction and hatred that Democrats have for the Constitution, Unfortunately, on a broad level, a broader and broader level these days, with the Ibram X. Kendi vision of an American government that crams down on everyone, his version of language.
01:01:00.000Ibram X. Kendi is like, I'm anti, anti, he literally wants to rewrite words, right?
01:01:15.000To be anti-racist means you have to tear down systems of power and institutions of power, and you have to be forced into being a quote-unquote accomplice, right?
01:01:24.000This is what you're seeing reflected in these marches.
01:01:29.000The fact that this is now repeated in diversity training at corporations, that people pay Ibram Kendi 20 grand a pop to tell their employees they need to tear down capitalism to fight racism, It's bizarre.
01:01:41.000It is the sign of a society in decline.
01:01:43.000It is the sign of a civilization that hates itself so much it won't even stand up for its fundamental principles, including the principles of the Declaration of Independence.
01:01:48.000And that's the real danger to the country.
01:01:50.000OK, we'll be back later today with two additional hours of content.
01:01:54.000Otherwise, we'll see you here tomorrow.