Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 304 ｜ RBG and the Fight for SCOTUS

00:00:00.000 Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. Happy Wednesday. Hope everyone has had a great week so far.

00:00:15.400 If you have not listened to Monday's episode, we covered foreign policy. So that means that

00:00:19.960 we talked about those Middle East peace treaties that Donald Trump has recently accomplished.

00:00:27.660 And so if you have been wondering about that, if you've been wondering what those actually mean,

00:00:32.900 the implications, why they are important, go back and listen to that episode. Of course,

00:00:38.300 you guys know if you have been listening to Monday's episodes that we are comparing

00:00:42.360 the Trump ticket versus the Biden ticket on a variety of issues. And so Monday we covered

00:00:48.620 foreign policy. So go back and listen to that if you are interested. Today, we are mostly talking

00:00:53.840 about Ruth Bader Ginsburg, her death, what this all means, why we are anticipating perhaps more chaos

00:01:02.960 and more craziness than we have ever seen in America's political process, at least in recent

00:01:10.220 memory. Certainly in my lifetime, I would say probably in my parents' lifetimes as well.

00:01:16.020 It's going to be crazy, guys. And I will explain a little bit more about why today.

00:01:21.200 She was 87 years old and she died of complications with pancreatic cancer. She has had pancreatic

00:01:29.080 cancer for about 10 years and she has been fighting hard for the past decade, at least the

00:01:34.540 past decade. There were several times over the past few years that she was in the hospital

00:01:40.560 and people thought that she was going to die and she kept pushing through. And that was really

00:01:44.660 her reputation as a fighter, as someone who pressed on. She had a very difficult life in a lot of ways.

00:01:53.100 If you read about her story, how her husband had cancer and she was raising her daughter at the time

00:01:59.540 while also going to school and working. And she just is a great picture of what the American dream

00:02:08.180 looks like and what it looks like to kind of put your mind to something and determined to have

00:02:14.980 have an impact where you want to have it. And she certainly did in the realm of equal rights for

00:02:21.840 women. Of course, I did not agree with her on the issue of abortion and on a variety of issues and

00:02:29.000 actually believe that she made a very negative impact on American culture and American politics

00:02:34.820 through many of the decisions that she made and the positions that she held. Nevertheless,

00:02:39.840 she did have a very notable life. And of course, according to the left, she has been hailed as a

00:02:44.320 hero, which we will talk about a little bit more in just a second. The reality is, is that she has now

00:02:49.720 met her maker, which we all will one day, the true, righteous, all-powerful judge who is Jesus Christ.

00:02:56.360 Unfortunately, there is some theological misunderstanding that Jesus doesn't judge anyone, that he is just kind

00:03:02.920 of this hippie hipster guy who just comes along for the ride of your life and tells you how awesome and

00:03:08.360 beautiful you are. That is a misunderstanding that has eternal implications. Jesus Christ is the judge

00:03:17.680 of the living and the dead, as 2 Timothy 4.1 says. And all of our destiny is to meet him one day,

00:03:24.180 to stand before him one day. He is our only hope of redemption, our only hope of salvation,

00:03:29.480 of being approved and found innocent, is his blood. That's it. John 14.6 says,

00:03:35.920 I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me, Jesus.

00:03:42.260 Acts 4.12 says, And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given

00:03:48.520 among men by which we must be saved. So as we reflect on our own finiteness in light of this incident

00:03:57.180 and our own fragility, let us remember Hebrews 3.15, which says, as it is said today, if you hear his

00:04:04.020 voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion. There is also no reason for us as Christians when

00:04:11.260 someone we like or when someone notable dies to throw our theology out the window. Jen Hatmaker, 0.62

00:04:18.700 who of course I do not agree with on most theology, she posted on Instagram that Ruth Bader Ginsburg

00:04:26.000 has heard the words, well done, good and faithful servant, you may now enter your rest. Well, I don't

00:04:32.460 know that. And I'm sure Jen Hatmaker doesn't know that. I hope that's true. I sincerely do. I hope

00:04:38.080 Christ saved her before she died. I want everyone to be saved. But the fact of the matter is, we don't

00:04:43.280 know. We don't ascribe salvation to people left or right simply because they believe in our politics

00:04:49.880 and we align with them ideologically. Now, again, that doesn't mean that we can't honor and recognize

00:04:55.520 the amazing life that she lived in many ways. She was the first female tenured professor at Columbia

00:05:00.820 University. She fought for, like I said, gender equality, equality in the workplace, anti-discrimination 0.93

00:05:07.520 against women. She also fought for abortion so-called rights. Now, she did actually disagree with the

00:05:15.480 decision of Roe because she believed that it stymied the democratic process of deciding upon

00:05:22.920 abortion law in a legislative way, which I agree with that it should have always been a legislative

00:05:29.920 issue, that it shouldn't have been ruled upon by seven justices who decided that somewhere in the

00:05:37.600 nooks and crannies and the implications and the subliminal messages of the Constitution that there is 0.65

00:05:43.020 some newfound right to kill your unborn child. Now, she would disagree with me on that, but we do agree 1.00

00:05:49.900 on the fact that it shouldn't have been a decision made by the court. It should have always gone to

00:05:56.040 Congress. And that is what would happen, by the way, if Roe v. Wade were overturned. A lot of liberals are

00:06:01.600 very scared about that, that if Trump gets to nominate and the Senate confirms another judicial

00:06:08.180 judicial nominee that Roe v. Wade is going to be overturned and they've talked about it being like

00:06:13.620 the handmaid's tale. Well, abortion is not going to go away if Roe v. Wade is overturned. All that

00:06:19.920 means is that it's going to be up to the states to determine whether or not they want to allow abortion

00:06:25.120 or determine what kind of regulations and restrictions will surround abortion. There will no longer be a

00:06:32.060 recognition of a so-called constitutional right to kill your child, which, of course, I believe 1.00

00:06:36.940 has never actually existed. And so you are still going to be able to go to any moderate or liberal

00:06:43.520 state to get an abortion if Roe v. Wade is overturned. It does not abolish abortion by any means. It just

00:06:49.920 leaves it up to the states, which is how it should have always been. Now, I do want to clarify as well,

00:06:56.100 it seems like a lot of people, a lot of feminists seem to think that RBG was the first female Supreme 1.00

00:07:03.040 Court justice. She was not. Sandra Day O'Connor was the first female Supreme Court justice and she

00:07:09.100 was appointed by Ronald Reagan. By the way, Sandra Day O'Connor is still alive, like 90 years old. You

00:07:15.220 don't hear from her, but 90 years old, still alive, never became a feminist icon because she was a 1.00

00:07:21.760 conservative. RBG, on the other hand, was idolized. She is idolized because she, like all Democratic 1.00

00:07:28.320 appointees, always went with whatever was trending in the Democratic Party. She mostly did not care

00:07:35.220 what the law actually said. She was not concerned with constitutional interpretation. She was going

00:07:40.840 to make the law say whatever she wanted it to say, whatever was popular among the left at the time,

00:07:47.260 according to her ideology. That is the main difference between Democratic appointees and Republican 0.86

00:07:54.220 appointees. Democrats appoint activists. They are not interested in constitutionalism. A lot of

00:07:59.940 Democrats, especially now, see the Constitution and American institutions as actually an impediment

00:08:05.800 to their ideology in accomplishing what they want. Republicans appoint constitutionalists because that

00:08:11.780 is what we want to conserve. We believe in the founding ideals of our country. We believe in the

00:08:17.680 efficacy, effectiveness, the goodness of our founding documents. And so we want justices and judges

00:08:23.840 who are going to interpret the law according to the Constitution, which means that Democrats,

00:08:30.360 on the one hand, are hardly ever, if ever, disappointed by the decisions of liberal judges

00:08:36.300 and justices. But Republicans, conservatives, are disappointed a lot because we actually have

00:08:42.440 a disagreement on the law. We have a disagreement on the interpretation of the Constitution. That is why

00:08:49.740 Justice Gorsuch has disappointed us. That is why Justice Kavanaugh has disappointed us because

00:08:56.640 Republican appointed justice and judges, justices and judges do not simply go along with conservative

00:09:04.400 activism. They actually look at the law. They interpret it. Sometimes, according to the rest of us,

00:09:09.760 they're right. Sometimes, according to the rest of us, they're wrong. But we are constantly

00:09:14.480 disappointed by our judges and justices because of that difference in interpretation, whereas Democrats

00:09:19.940 are not. They are interested in their ideology and what they believe to be right, even if that means

00:09:25.560 creating a right out of thin air, like creating the right out of thin air of abortion, like they did

00:09:32.280 in Roe v. Wade. Constitutionalists are not concerned, mostly, usually they should not be, with what they

00:09:40.360 believe or what they want to be right, but with what the law actually says. So when Democrats panic,

00:09:47.060 which they are right now, over RBG's death and the SCOTUS vacancy, when they say that RBG was holding

00:09:53.420 our democracy together, what they are afraid of is constitutionalism. Like they are actually afraid of

00:09:59.660 someone abiding by our, the law of our land, our founding document. They're afraid of lacking an

00:10:06.980 activist. RBG, in no sense, in no sense whatsoever, was holding our democracy together. She was just

00:10:14.280 ruling in favor of the left. That's what she continually did. This is a big difference between

00:10:21.740 the right and the left, going down to our basic worldview. The reason the left tends to idolize

00:10:27.380 and deify politicians and justices, and the right is continually disappointed by our politicians and

00:10:34.460 our justices is because the right tend to believe that, or we should believe, that politicians work

00:10:41.260 for us rather than the other way around. So we believe what the founders believed about the

00:10:47.600 government, that it is a government of, for, and by the people, that it does not have the power or the

00:10:53.320 authority to create rights or to give us rights, but simply to recognize the rights that were given to

00:10:59.600 us by our creator. That is what our bill of rights does. It doesn't give or create rights. It recognizes

00:11:06.940 rights that pre-exist the formation of any government. So we see the government as below our

00:11:13.600 authority and below God's authority. That means we don't deify justices, although we know they're

00:11:19.460 important. So you're not going to see us have mental breakdowns over someone like Clarence Thomas

00:11:25.160 dying or Antonin Scalia dying when he died a few years ago, the way that we have seen breakdowns

00:11:31.780 over Ruth Bader Ginsburg dying. You're just not going to see it. And it's not just mental breakdowns,

00:11:37.000 like personal mental breakdowns, like you're really disappointed. Okay, that's fine. And pay homage

00:11:41.120 to her if you even cry, you know, whatever. That's fine. She is a historic figure. I have cried

00:11:47.060 because of American historic figures dying, but it is not hysteria because I believe our democracy

00:11:53.580 is falling apart. And that is what we're seeing right now in relation to Ruth Bader Ginsburg's

00:11:58.440 death. Reza Aslan, he is a liberal TV personality. He tweeted this, if they even try to replace RBG,

00:12:07.640 we burn the entire effing thing down. Someone who goes by the name of Charlotte Clymer is a liberal 1.00

00:12:14.820 activist, said we are walking to Mitch McConnell's house to protest. Bo Williamson says this. It's

00:12:25.960 another liberal blue checkmark. We're shutting this country down if Trump and McConnell try to ramp

00:12:30.600 through an appointment before the election. Laura Bassett, another liberal journalist, said if McConnell

00:12:36.200 rams someone through, there will be riots. She clarifies with a second tweet that there will be

00:12:42.540 more and bigger riots because she knows the left has been rioting and looting and burning down

00:12:48.560 buildings and cities for the past three months. And so the rest of us are like, okay, so just like

00:12:52.540 more of the same, right? Just more temper tantrums. And here is AOC saying that Mitch McConnell is playing

00:12:58.580 with fire. And to Mitch McConnell, we need to tell him that he is playing with fire. Richard Blumenthal,

00:13:07.820 Democratic congressman, says if Republicans recklessly and reprehensibly force a SCOTUS vote

00:13:13.880 before the election, nothing is off the table. Nothing's off the table. Okay. That's, you know,

00:13:21.320 an interesting statement to make when you consider the fact that their base has literally been using

00:13:29.180 violence to try to get their way for the past few months. But they know what they're doing. They're

00:13:34.540 not ignorant of the implications of their rhetoric. Nancy Pelosi said to George Stephanopoulos that she

00:13:41.260 has arrows in her quiver. He suggests impeachment of the president and she doesn't deny it. So now

00:13:48.740 we're talking about impeaching the president, not actually because he has done anything wrong,

00:13:53.440 but just because they do not want him to abide by his constitutional duty to appoint a Supreme Court

00:14:01.720 nominee. Listen to this viral TikTok of this girl freaking, freaking out. There are cuss words, 1.00

00:14:09.840 but we will bleep it out. Holy s***, you guys! I'm driving your car, but I just got a notification 0.99

00:14:18.340 that Ruth Bader Ginsburg died! F***! Could this year get any f***ing worse? Ruth, you just had to make 1.00

00:14:31.160 it to 2021! Guys, none of this is healthy. This is not normal. This is not normal behavior. This is

00:14:41.560 not a normal mentality. I'm telling you, I'm not saying that there aren't crazy people who consider

00:14:46.700 themselves on the right. I'm not saying that there aren't people, by the way, who idolize Donald

00:14:51.020 Trump because I think that there are, and I think that is also very unhealthy. I'm telling you, you

00:14:56.700 would not see this kind of reaction if Clarence Thomas, Justice Gorsuch, any of the conservative

00:15:04.180 justices died. You would not see it. You didn't see this reaction when Antonin Scalia died. It was very

00:15:10.780 sad. It did present somewhat of a constitutional crisis, and he was someone that we very much

00:15:16.560 respected, and we agreed as conservatives with the majority of his decisions. But you didn't see

00:15:23.320 this kind of absolute freakout and the threat to tear down American institutions or to burn down the

00:15:31.880 country because we might not get our way. You just didn't see it. You won't see it. It's a divergence

00:15:38.000 of worldviews. We see the world completely differently. We think about politicians,

00:15:42.260 and we think about the government completely differently. I would argue that one is healthy

00:15:47.100 and one is not. They are also worried about Trump nominating and the Senate confirming a new justice

00:15:54.000 because, well, A, they're afraid that it's going to take away their freedom, which it won't. Listen,

00:15:59.720 your life will not change. I promise it will not change for the worse. You will have someone who

00:16:04.300 cares about the Constitution. Like I said, Roe v. Wade is probably not going to be overturned. If it

00:16:09.700 is, your life is not going to change, especially if you live in a liberal state. So you just let the

00:16:16.380 legislative process play out like it should have in the first place. Your life is not going to change,

00:16:22.560 okay? If Trump nominates and or if he appoints a judge and then he or she is confirmed by the Senate.

00:16:31.480 So our democracy is not going to crumble. Our republic is not going to go away. You have nothing to be

00:16:38.340 scared of. Like you have nothing to worry about. That's number one. But they are also saying that

00:16:43.040 this, they're worried about this because this is hypocrisy. They're saying that in 2016, which this is

00:16:51.140 true, which McConnell, the Senate majority leader, said, look, after Antonin Scalia died in 2016,

00:16:58.860 and Barack Obama appointed Merrick Garland, the Republican Senate said, no, we're not going to

00:17:10.660 try to confirm it. We're not even going to entertain this. We're just not. We're not going to do it.

00:17:16.500 And the argument that Mitch McConnell made, I wish he hadn't made because now it does put him in a

00:17:21.560 pickle. He said, you know, you're a lame duck president. We're not going to do this right 0.98

00:17:25.940 before the election, which makes it seem like now he's a huge hypocrite because he is saying and 0.95

00:17:31.980 Republicans are saying now that, look, yeah, we're going to do it. President Trump is still 0.98

00:17:37.760 president. He's president. As RBG said, he is president for four years, not three years. He

00:17:43.240 has the constitutional authority and responsibility to do this. The Senate has the constitutional

00:17:47.440 authority and ability to confirm his nominee. And so we're going to go ahead and do it. That's

00:17:53.380 absolutely true. But they seem like hypocrites for not even entertaining that in 2016, when Barack 0.95

00:17:59.440 Obama was president, because their argument was that, oh, well, he's just a lame duck president. 0.98

00:18:03.320 And it's right before the election. We should allow the new president to decide that, which is

00:18:07.800 the argument that now Democrats are making. Here's the difference. And I wish that they just would

00:18:13.060 have been more upfront about this in 2016. The difference is, is that Republicans controlled the

00:18:18.580 Senate. Democrats controlled the White House. Plain and simple, Republicans did not want to

00:18:23.260 confirm Barack Obama's nominee because they didn't want Barack Obama's nominee. They just didn't want

00:18:29.720 it. Like they didn't want a liberal justice on the Supreme Court. And that's why they decided that they

00:18:35.860 were not going to go through with the confirmation process. And they said, hey, if Hillary Clinton gets 0.93

00:18:40.480 elected and she wants to nominate Merrick Garland, OK, that's fine. We'll confirm. But we want to have the

00:18:46.640 opportunity to not have to confirm another liberal justice. That was that was it. Plain and simple.

00:18:51.400 And now because Republicans have the White House and Republicans have the Senate, they say, yeah,

00:18:56.220 we want to confirm a justice that is nominated by a Republican president because we are going to like

00:19:03.000 that justice. It's just about politics. It's just about nominated and confirming someone that they

00:19:08.600 want to confirm. That's it. Plain and simple. Democrats would do the exact same thing in this position.

00:19:15.560 The only thing that I would change is that Mitch McConnell should have been honest about that back

00:19:21.420 then. Democrats should have said, you know what, we would have done the same thing. They should

00:19:25.280 realize that now everyone should have been a little bit more forthright, a little bit more honest and

00:19:29.660 recognize that the Senate does have the ability, does have the power to make those kinds of decisions.

00:19:38.700 There have only been Ted Cruz said this the other day. There have only been 10 situations in 10

00:19:45.940 similar situations in which the White House and the Senate were controlled by two different parties.

00:19:52.700 And right before an election, the Senate had to confirm the White House's judicial nominee.

00:19:59.480 And only two in two of those 10 situations did they actually move to confirm the justice. And so

00:20:06.980 it's very rare that it happens. It is even more rare. Only two times in American history

00:20:11.780 has the separate party controlled Senate actually confirmed the judicial nominee before the election

00:20:20.320 when the White House is controlled by the opposing party. So it is not unprecedented to do what Mitch

00:20:28.780 McConnell is doing right now. Both sides in some ways are being hypocritical. Here is a montage 0.94

00:20:35.740 of 2016 Democrats saying, look, the Senate run by Mitch McConnell needs to go ahead and confirm

00:20:45.200 Merrick Garland or at least go through the process to possibly confirm Merrick Garland.

00:20:53.340 The American people deserve a fully staffed court of nine. The president nominates and then the Senate

00:21:00.100 advises and consents or not. But they go forward with the process. What we're seeing here, and I hope

00:21:06.740 this is temporary, is a disrespect to the Constitution. The Constitution is 100% clear. The president of the

00:21:14.880 United States has the right to nominate someone to be a justice of the Supreme Court. Senate's function

00:21:21.160 is to hold hearings and to vote. The blockade on filling a naturally occurring vacancy, in my view,

00:21:27.200 is harmful to the independence of the Article III branch. You cannot keep a seat on the Supreme Court

00:21:33.740 which represents all of us. You cannot keep it vacant against the Constitution. Do pretty much

00:21:40.280 everything they can to avoid acknowledging the legitimacy of our democratically elected president.

00:21:47.300 The American people expect the president's nominee to be given a fair hearing and a timely vote in the

00:21:53.280 Senate. Every day that goes by without a ninth justice is another day the American people's

00:21:58.260 business is not getting done. I say to you, do your job. Vote for a Supreme Court nominee.

00:22:06.240 Democrats in 2016 were right. The Senate didn't want to, like I said, because the Senate didn't want

00:22:12.480 Obama's nominee. It really is that simple. They do want Trump's nominee. Like I said, Democrats would do

00:22:21.300 the exact same thing. Senate Majority Leader Democrat Harry Reid in 2013 got rid of the Senate filibuster

00:22:30.500 for judicial nominees, making it easier for senators to confirm judges and justices. And so Democrats got

00:22:36.460 themselves into this mess. That was Harry Reid's rule. He decided to make that change. And so what he has

00:22:44.720 allowed for is Mitch McConnell making sure that Trump has as many judicial nominees confirmed as humanly

00:22:52.160 possible, including the Supreme Court nominee that is going to be confirmed by the Senate. Yes, Democrats

00:23:00.080 might threaten to burn the country down. They might threaten to riot. They might protest outside of Mitch

00:23:05.380 McConnell's and Lindsey Graham's house, which is what they've done. But they are ultimately powerless,

00:23:14.700 I believe, in stopping this from happening. I mean, we already know some of the so-called arrows in their

00:23:20.900 quiver, like Nancy Pelosi has described. By the way, she's in the House. I'm not really sure how many

00:23:26.340 arrows she actually has. This is a Senate process. She thinks she's going to impeach the president. I think 1.00

00:23:31.640 that is absolutely crazy. If I were a Democratic strategist, which thank the Lord I'm not, I would

00:23:38.620 be saying that is an absolutely crazy decision before the election. I think that that is just

00:23:45.920 that would not be effective. That would not be effective to win more votes for Joe Biden,

00:23:51.940 especially those moderate votes that he is trying so hard to get. But we already know some of the other

00:23:58.340 arrows in their quiver because we saw it with Kavanaugh. I mean, they accused this man openly,

00:24:05.060 Kamala Harris being probably the cruelest of them all. They accused this man not just of sexual assault

00:24:11.240 when he was 17 based on no corroboration and no verifiable evidence whatsoever. They accused him of

00:24:17.700 gang rape, gang rape when he was in college. Now, the woman, Julie Swetnick, who came out and accused

00:24:23.660 him of that, actually said, well, I don't think that Kavanaugh was a part of it. I don't, I'm not

00:24:28.820 really sure if he was there. Actually, I don't really remember. So she actually came out and said,

00:24:34.400 oh, the original testimony that I gave was phony. It wasn't real. And yet Democrats ran with that

00:24:39.940 anyway. I mean, they tried to ruin this man's life based on totally unsubstantiated allegations

00:24:47.000 in front of his wife and kids, in front of his family. They tried to humiliate him and drag him

00:24:53.400 through the mud. They did not care one bit how his life ended up, did not care one bit about his

00:25:00.840 reputation. They did not care one bit about the truth. And you know what? I was just reading in

00:25:05.100 Proverbs. This just came to mind. I don't remember. I think it's Proverbs 6 talking about what the Lord

00:25:10.960 hates, the seven things the Lord hates, or I think it's the six things the Lord hates and the seven

00:25:15.320 things that he calls an abomination. And one of them is a false witness. The Lord hates a false

00:25:20.420 witness. He hates slander. He hates deliberate lying. He hates deceit. And Democrats, I think many

00:25:29.180 of them knowingly bared false witness when it came to Kavanaugh. And if there is one event over the past

00:25:35.020 few years that I think radicalized a lot of conservatives, and what I mean by radicalized is

00:25:40.000 simply that we saw that there is a party in the United States that is willing to stop at

00:25:45.120 absolutely nothing to gain power and to get what they want. And we've certainly seen that

00:25:49.760 manifested in violent ways over the past few months. I think that opened the eyes of a lot

00:25:55.040 of conservatives, including me, to see, okay, what we are up against as far as a party. I'm not saying

00:26:02.000 all Democrats are like that at all. I'm not saying everyone on the left is like that. But the people

00:26:07.100 that we saw in power and what they were willing to do to Brett Kavanaugh, based on no evidence 0.56

00:26:12.240 whatsoever, simply because they were afraid that they wouldn't be able to kill enough babies via

00:26:18.440 Roe v. Wade, it just showed me. It showed me that they will stop at nothing. They do not care about 0.88

00:26:25.700 you. They do not care about your family. They don't care about the truth. They don't care about your

00:26:29.660 reputation whatsoever. I will never forget watching. First, I watched Ford's testimony, which I thought

00:26:35.900 was emotionally compelling. And, you know, I don't have anything bad to say about her. But then I

00:26:41.960 watched Brett Kavanaugh's and I will never forget what I felt when I watched him give his testimony.

00:26:48.300 And I knew right there, that was the moment I think that my eyes opened up and I realized, okay,

00:26:54.980 so they're really not, they're not afraid. They're not afraid to ruin a man's life in front of his family

00:27:00.160 for the sake of power. Okay. So that's, that's what we're dealing with. And the fact that there are

00:27:04.140 some conservatives now saying that, okay, so if we don't confirm a nominee, um, maybe if we just

00:27:10.680 play nice and, and we listen to the threats of the Democrats to, they're saying that they're going

00:27:15.500 to burn everything down, that they're going to tear down our institutions, they're going to pack 0.93

00:27:19.320 the courts. Maybe if we just listen to their threats and we say, okay, we won't nominate and

00:27:23.960 we won't confirm anyone, then, then they won't pack the courts and they won't do all of these things.

00:27:28.320 Are you kidding me? Like that is the most naive argument that I have ever heard. If you've ever

00:27:33.380 witnessed the democratic party, like if you saw what they did during the Kavanaugh hearings,

00:27:37.620 do you think that these people care about fairness? Not saying that there aren't any corrupt and evil

00:27:42.860 people in the Republican party, that there aren't any hypocrites in the Republican party because there 0.96

00:27:47.760 are, but let's not pretend like the people in power in the democratic party care one flying flip

00:27:53.340 about fairness. That's not what this is about. This is about power. This is about being able to push

00:28:00.880 their ideology as far as they possibly can. And you know how I know that we, that it's not going to

00:28:06.780 matter whether or not we confirm this nominee. It's not going to make a difference on what the

00:28:15.060 Democrats decide to do because they have been talking about packing the court for a long time.

00:28:20.280 So packing the court would mean that if they get power in the Senate and Joe Biden went to the

00:28:26.580 presidency, that they would try to expand the number of Supreme Court justices to say 13,

00:28:33.460 and they would pack those vacant seats with liberal activist judges, justices, so that they would be

00:28:42.960 able to do more of what they want to do, not according to the constitution, but according to their left

00:28:48.180 wing activism, as far left as they can possibly go to make it impossible for conservatives to have a

00:28:54.700 voice on the Supreme Court. So that, that is what they're threatening. That is what they're talking

00:29:00.180 about. And they're trying to say, Oh, we will do this. If you confirm a nominee and Joe Biden wins,

00:29:06.800 no, no, no. You guys have been talking about this for a long time. You have been talking about packing

00:29:11.580 the courts long before this situation. You've been talking about abolishing the electoral college

00:29:16.020 because they don't like how much power and how much say it gives to the middle of the country

00:29:21.540 states that they just don't like. They've talked about reconfiguring the Senate. They don't like

00:29:25.640 that somewhere like Wyoming has two senators and California has two senators, even though their 0.67

00:29:30.720 population is so disparate. I guess not understanding that that was deliberate, that you have a number of

00:29:38.060 representatives in the House of Representatives in D.C. based on population size, but every state has

00:29:44.180 two senators. It's supposed to be that way to give more weight to the less populous states. They want to 0.99

00:29:50.080 reconfigure the Senate. So that's no longer the case. They've talked about giving statehood to

00:29:54.680 Puerto Rico and Guam to get rid of the filibuster all without the consent of the governed so they can

00:30:00.360 have power and keep power. And there are no longer any systems in place to check their power or to

00:30:05.260 challenge their power. That is what they want. They see American institutions and the American

00:30:11.020 constitution and the will of a large portion of the American people as an impediment to their ideology.

00:30:17.280 And because they believe that government is God, that is the worldview of leftism, not everyone

00:30:22.340 on the left, but that is the worldview of leftism, whether you believe it or not.

00:30:27.440 Because they believe that the government is God, they believe that they have the right to exert that

00:30:32.400 power over the people by whatever means possible. They mean literally burning things down and

00:30:38.420 metaphorically burning things down and building things according to their choosing.

00:30:41.780 And at the same time, they want to call people on the right fascists. Ibram X. Kendi had the audacity

00:30:49.300 to say that the GOP are the fascists and that they will do anything to maintain power. How can you

00:30:56.300 project that much? Like, how is it possible to describe a party like that and actually be exactly

00:31:02.200 describing your own party and your own ideology? Like, have we not seen over the past few months that

00:31:08.740 these people will do absolutely anything for power, including burning down businesses, burning down

00:31:15.780 cities? They are not concerned. They're not concerned with the rule of law. They're not concerned with

00:31:21.820 American institutions. They see these things, as I've said, as an impediment to their ideology,

00:31:28.460 which they believe they should be able to force upon everyone else because they know best,

00:31:32.520 because, again, the government is God. Is it the GOP that's burning down buildings and burning down

00:31:39.460 cities? Is it the GOP that is saying we don't care about the Constitution? We don't want the

00:31:43.940 Electoral College. We don't want certain states to have a say. We don't think that certain states

00:31:49.180 should be evenly represented in the Senate. Is it the GOP that is saying, hey, we're going to pack

00:31:54.940 the courts? Is it the GOP that's harassing random diners in Washington, D.C., making them raise their

00:32:01.140 fist in black power and chant whatever chance they want to? Is it the GOP that's stopping civilian

00:32:07.260 vehicles in the streets, harassing them, assaulting them, trying to make them say the things they want

00:32:12.740 them to say? No. Those are all people on the left. The anarchy, the harassment, the fascism is coming

00:32:20.180 from the left, and it's all projection. It's all a tactic. Accus the other side of that of which you

00:32:26.740 are guilty. President Trump has said that he wants to nominate a woman, and I think that's probably 0.99

00:32:34.600 wise. Now, I wish that we didn't have to play this intersectionality game on the right. I think that we

00:32:40.760 should just nominate the most qualified candidate. That is something that is now foreign on the left. 1.00

00:32:48.680 It is a lot about intersectionality and your different identity groups and things like that.

00:32:56.680 It's unfortunately the idea of just merit has become, has gone out of fashion among a lot of

00:33:04.380 liberal activists, but I think that that's something that we should hold to. Now, that said,

00:33:09.620 the female options for the nominee are all extremely qualified. I just don't think we should pick 1.00

00:33:15.680 someone because they're a woman. At the same time, though, I understand that strategy because

00:33:20.620 we saw what the Democrats did to Kavanaugh, and it's going to be harder to do to someone like Amy

00:33:29.140 Coney Barrett. You're probably not going to be able to find a guy that's going to come out and say,

00:33:36.400 yeah, when I was 17, Amy Coney Barrett assaulted me at a party. You're probably not going to be able

00:33:41.920 to find a bunch of accusers, real or not, toward a woman. It's going to be much harder to do.

00:33:48.420 Amy Coney Barrett seems to be at the top of the list. We know that she visited the White House.

00:33:53.860 She's got a great record as a judge. She is a mom, I believe, of seven. She is a Catholic

00:33:59.840 from New Orleans, and she has a very illustrious career. And she was on the short list a few, 0.96

00:34:06.860 a couple of years ago, when Brett Kavanaugh was nominated. And she already has attacks coming her

00:34:15.540 way. And we have a taste of what those attacks are going to look like. This is from Ron Charles

00:34:20.540 at The Washington Post. He tweeted this. Amy Coney Barrett, the judge at the top of Trump's

00:34:24.940 list to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg, has said we should always remember that a legal career,

00:34:29.420 that a, quote, legal career is but a means to an end. And that end is building the kingdom of God.

00:34:36.460 And of course, they tweeted this as if it was a bad thing. Well, let me break this to you. For

00:34:43.120 people who aren't Christians, all Christians believe this. In every endeavor in life, we believe

00:34:48.560 that that is our goal to advance the kingdom of God. That's our goal in life. Like, that is our aim.

00:34:56.760 And guys, Christians have been running a lot of things in this country for a very long time.

00:35:01.540 Whether you believe it or not, they've done a heck of a good job and a heck of a good job securing your

00:35:09.220 rights and your liberty. That doesn't mean the church has never been wrong. That doesn't mean

00:35:12.620 that the majority of the church or the Roman Catholic Church has never been on the wrong side

00:35:16.940 of issues. Because unfortunately, of course, that has happened. But the idea that this is novel,

00:35:22.360 that all of a sudden we are worried about the Christian faith in regards to someone's ability

00:35:28.300 to be able to judge rightly, that's crazy. Like, Christians have been on the Supreme Court. They 1.00

00:35:34.120 have been federal judges for as long as America has existed, as long as we have had federal judges

00:35:40.600 in the Supreme Court. So the only thing that has changed is the increase in anti-Christian bigotry

00:35:47.680 on the left. The influence of Christianity certainly has not increased over the past few decades. But

00:35:55.540 anti-Christian sentiment certainly has, especially on the left. And so you're going to see these kinds

00:36:01.700 of attacks on her faith. What's interesting is that at the same time that they say, oh, Nancy Pelosi

00:36:07.340 and Joe Biden, they are such good Catholics. They are such devout Catholics. And, you know,

00:36:13.960 that's a really good thing because, look, Donald Trump is so ungodly. But Joe Biden, he is this

00:36:18.840 great Catholic and that's going to help him be a great president. But when Amy Coney Barrett is 0.99

00:36:24.460 actually a devout Catholic, all of a sudden that's an impediment to her being able to discern and judge

00:36:30.560 rightly. So what is it? Is faith a good thing or is it a bad thing? This is from Beth Reinhard at

00:36:37.180 Washington Post. She tweeted, potential Trump's SCOTUS nominee Amy Coney Barrett wrote an influential

00:36:43.600 decision, making it easier for students accused of sexual assault to challenge universities

00:36:48.360 handling of their cases. And of course, again, they're saying that this is a bad thing. What this

00:36:53.360 tells me is that Amy Coney Barrett cares about due process. We should care about due process for 1.00

00:36:58.940 accusers and the accused. I talked about with Monique Dusan a few weeks ago. I did an interview with her

00:37:05.460 that I highly recommend if you haven't listened to it, leaving, I think it was called Critical Race

00:37:09.800 Theory for Biblical Unity. And she talked about her journey from believing in critical theory to

00:37:16.000 understanding scripture rightly and how she had to reconcile with the idea that God actually very

00:37:22.440 much cares about how the accused or the accuser is treated. There is a right and righteous way

00:37:29.020 to treat both the accuser and the accused. The accused also has to be treated fairly. God invented due

00:37:37.860 process. He invented the necessity of two or three witnesses. If you read his laws and how he describes

00:37:48.400 the due process in the court that judged Israel, you will see God's heart and God's definition of

00:37:55.940 justice that still should be binding on our ideas today. And it actually is binding. It was binding for

00:38:01.720 the founders. That is where they got their inspiration for what justice should look like. And so Amy Coney

00:38:07.040 Barrett is simply saying, yeah, there is a fair and right and righteous way to treat both the accused

00:38:12.340 and the accuser. And just because of the Me Too movement and just because of a particular ideology

00:38:18.300 that says that we have to believe all women no matter what, that doesn't mean that we throw due

00:38:22.420 process out the window. So I'm very encouraged by the fact that Amy Coney Barrett cares about due process

00:38:28.500 as a potential justice on the highest court in our land. And I'm very troubled that there apparently are

00:38:36.580 people on the left who would be okay if their justice doesn't care about due process at all.

00:38:43.060 I think that's all I'm going to cover today. There are a few more things. Well, you know,

00:38:47.320 let me say one thing, because so many of you guys have asked about this. This is a completely

00:38:51.360 different subject. And so some of you guys might have seen that there is a story going around that

00:38:55.880 there was a whistleblower out of an immigration center in Georgia about women getting hysterectomies,

00:39:02.680 getting forced hysterectomies. Actually, the headlines were mass forced hysterectomies are

00:39:07.340 happening at this ICE detention center. And it was one whistleblower who came out and said that. And

00:39:13.800 now they are investigating this. I believe that it was announced last week that this is now being

00:39:22.680 investigated, which I think is good. The fact is right now we don't have evidence of this. We have

00:39:28.240 one person's testimony. I think it's great that she came forward and that she said this is happening.

00:39:35.620 If this is something that's actually happening, then I think it's wonderful that this nurse stepped

00:39:40.480 forward and said, hey, this is going on. We should at least look into it. I agree. We should look into

00:39:46.640 this. This should be a nonpartisan issue. If women in these detention centers are being forced 1.00

00:39:52.740 into hysterectomies, then everyone everywhere should be outraged. You should be outraged by that.

00:39:59.880 I will go out and protest with you over that. That is insane. That is communist China stuff. 0.86

00:40:05.840 If that is happening, I don't know that that is happening. And let me clarify some things too.

00:40:11.720 If that is happening, that does not mean that is a Donald Trump policy. Like that does not mean

00:40:17.140 that's a Republican policy by any means. Now, if it is, that would be mind-blowing and that would be

00:40:24.420 enough for me not to vote for Donald Trump. If that was a Donald Trump policy that there should

00:40:29.200 be forced mass hysterectomies in ICE detention centers of immigrant women, then yeah, then that 1.00

00:40:35.940 would be enough for me. We have no evidence whatsoever that this is a Trumpian policy. If this

00:40:41.180 is happening, if these are forced hysterectomies, mass forced hysterectomies, it could be a rogue evil

00:40:48.640 doctor that needs to be put in jail for a very, very long time. There could be a group of evil

00:40:55.820 doctors or an evil medical team there that is doing this without the knowledge of any administration,

00:41:01.460 without the knowledge of any politicians, without the knowledge of their boss. We don't know. So to

00:41:05.960 automatically say that this is a Trumpian policy, that this is coming from the top, that this is

00:41:10.740 somehow the fault of Republicans. If this is truly happening, that is making leaps that we do not

00:41:16.680 have the evidence for whatsoever. It is enough if this is happening for us to be outraged. Like I said,

00:41:21.980 I think everyone across the aisle should absolutely be outraged about this. If this is happening,

00:41:28.380 I don't know if it's happening. I do think that there is enough. One testimony to me is enough to

00:41:33.320 look into something like this. I don't know if they're forced. I don't know if it's a rogue doctor.

00:41:38.040 I don't know if there is a policy. I don't know. And until then, I am going to reserve my judgment

00:41:43.260 on any particular politician. And by the way, how long has this been happening? Was this happening

00:41:49.500 under Obama? Has this been happening for a very long time? Has it only been happening for a few

00:41:54.040 months? Why? So there are a lot of questions that we need to ask before we say, this is Donald Trump's

00:41:59.160 America. And Donald Trump did this. I have a very, very strong feeling that Donald Trump, if this is

00:42:05.260 happening, has no idea that this is happening. That doesn't mean that he shouldn't be held

00:42:08.980 accountable and that politicians shouldn't be held accountable because I believe they should.

00:42:12.760 That doesn't mean that they were knowingly contriving this situation. So again, I don't know

00:42:18.300 what is true there. We're going to dig into it. And there's going to be an official investigation

00:42:23.320 I now read. And so that's a very good thing. And this should absolutely come to an end.

00:42:27.840 And I will reach across the aisle with whoever to try to get this to stop. That is a moral

00:42:32.380 travesty. If I care about that happening in communist China, forced abortions, forced 0.81

00:42:37.200 sterilizations, then you can bet that I care about it happening here in Georgia.

00:42:43.180 Okay, there's so much more we could talk about, but I think I'm going to end right there. On Friday,

00:42:48.300 I am going to talk to Christopher Rufo, which I'm really excited about. He has exposed how these

00:42:55.500 damaging critical race theory ideologies have actually infiltrated our highest federal

00:43:02.060 agencies and how they're wreaking havoc there and what we can do, what the president should do,

00:43:09.380 what politicians should do, and people in these agencies should do to stop it. What are the

00:43:13.960 implications of all of this? And I'm just really excited for him to kind of unveil the goings on

00:43:19.360 there. So make sure you tune into that conversation. I will see you back here on Friday.

00:43:23.920 We'll see you back in openery.

00:43:29.920 We'll see you back in Friday.

00:43:33.460 We'll see you back in Friday.

00:43:35.480 We'll see you back in Friday.

00:43:38.420 We'll see you back in Friday.

00:43:40.480 We'll see you back in Friday.

00:43:45.500 We'll see you back in Friday.

00:43:50.900 We'll see you back in Friday.

00:43:52.000 I'll see you back in Friday.

Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - September 23, 2020

Ep 304 ｜ RBG and the Fight for SCOTUS

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript