Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - March 28, 2022


Ep 589 | The Secret Reason DC Republicans Love Ketanji Brown Jackson | Guest: Jon Schweppe


Episode Stats

Length

51 minutes

Words per Minute

181.39769

Word Count

9,373

Sentence Count

531

Misogynist Sentences

23

Hate Speech Sentences

9


Summary

Jon Schwepppp is the Director of Policy and Government Affairs at the American Principles Project and a Lincoln Fellow at the Claremont Institute. In this episode, Jon talks about why conservative groups and individuals are on the right, and why they are supporting Gitanji Brown Jackson.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Hey guys, happy Monday.
00:00:02.080 Welcome to Relatable.
00:00:03.500 This episode, as all episodes,
00:00:05.720 is brought to you by our friends at Good Ranchers.
00:00:08.040 Get American meat delivered right to your front door.
00:00:10.360 Go to goodranchers.com slash Allie.
00:00:12.200 That's goodranchers.com slash Allie.
00:00:23.180 All right, guys, we've got a great episode for you today.
00:00:26.860 We are talking to our new friend, John Schweppe.
00:00:30.360 He is the Director of Policy and Government Affairs
00:00:32.480 at the American Principles Project.
00:00:36.320 He is also a Lincoln Fellow at the Claremont Institute.
00:00:39.160 And I am having him on because he had a really interesting
00:00:43.260 and revealing thread about why there are some groups
00:00:46.540 and individuals who call themselves conservatives,
00:00:49.360 they are on the right,
00:00:50.760 who are supporting the nomination of Gitanji Brown Jackson.
00:00:54.000 And it has to do with something called criminal justice reform,
00:00:58.720 which, as we've talked about,
00:01:00.120 is actually a very destructive set of policies
00:01:03.560 that often leads to higher rates of crime and more victims.
00:01:07.840 So why are there some foundations, organizations,
00:01:11.080 politicians on the right
00:01:12.160 who are supporting so-called criminal justice reform
00:01:15.540 and are supporting Gitanji Brown Jackson,
00:01:18.340 especially with her disturbing record
00:01:20.200 and issuing such light sentences on child predators
00:01:24.320 and child sex abuse consumers.
00:01:27.520 And so I have a couple more things that I want to say
00:01:29.680 before we actually get into that interview.
00:01:31.740 But before we get into the serious stuff,
00:01:34.540 I want to talk about the slap heard around the world.
00:01:38.680 One of the most stunning moments in TV history,
00:01:42.820 I think, and that is when Will Smith at the Oscars last night
00:01:48.680 just slapped the heck out of Chris Rock,
00:01:52.360 who was hosting the Oscars.
00:01:54.280 It was, if you haven't heard of this,
00:01:56.220 heard about this yet,
00:01:57.160 if you haven't watched this yet,
00:01:59.260 you got to watch this.
00:02:00.420 Watch this on YouTube.
00:02:01.240 If you're listening, go back later,
00:02:03.060 watch it on YouTube because you got to see this.
00:02:04.960 All right, here it is.
00:02:06.360 Jada, I love you.
00:02:07.760 G.I. Jane 2, can't wait to see it.
00:02:09.840 All right.
00:02:10.140 I'm out here.
00:02:13.280 Uh-oh.
00:02:14.000 Richard?
00:02:18.260 Oh, wow.
00:02:20.320 Will Smith just smacked the shit out of me.
00:02:24.460 Keep my wife's name out your fucking mouth.
00:02:29.040 Wow, dude.
00:02:30.680 Yes.
00:02:31.160 It was a G.I. Jane joke.
00:02:33.220 Keep my wife's name out your fucking mouth.
00:02:38.180 I'm going to, okay?
00:02:40.140 Okay, just to give some context,
00:02:41.980 in case you weren't on Twitter
00:02:42.820 and you weren't seeing people talk about this,
00:02:45.340 Jada Pinkett Smith, she has alopecia.
00:02:48.160 And so she lost a lot of hair and she looks bald.
00:02:51.740 And so Chris Rock, calling her, you know,
00:02:54.560 in G.I. Jane 2.
00:02:56.080 G.I. Jane was a movie.
00:02:58.600 Demi Moore shaved her head.
00:03:00.460 And that was like a big thing back then.
00:03:02.360 And so he's just making a joke
00:03:03.540 because now she has a shaved head,
00:03:05.380 which by the way, like she looks really beautiful.
00:03:07.000 She can totally rock that look.
00:03:09.540 I don't even know if Chris Rock knew
00:03:12.620 that it was because of alopecia.
00:03:15.180 He might've thought that she just shaved her head.
00:03:17.500 I had no idea that she had alopecia.
00:03:19.240 That's not something that everyone knows.
00:03:20.820 Now, maybe he was,
00:03:21.800 and he was just making a joke at her expense,
00:03:23.960 which by the way, is something that comedians do.
00:03:27.460 Comedians like Chris Rock,
00:03:28.820 I mean, they test the limits of what someone can say.
00:03:32.020 They say offensive stuff.
00:03:33.640 So I have a few thoughts about this whole thing.
00:03:37.520 On the one hand,
00:03:38.800 I think it is completely justified for Will Smith
00:03:41.120 to feel offended on behalf of his wife.
00:03:43.580 Now, I will say when you see the footage,
00:03:46.420 you will see that right after Chris Rock tells the joke,
00:03:49.100 Will Smith was actually laughing.
00:03:51.240 And then he gets up a few seconds later
00:03:53.320 because I guess he saw Jada's face.
00:03:55.600 Jada was not laughing at all.
00:03:57.520 She looked very offended by it.
00:03:59.500 And so I don't know if he looked at her
00:04:01.380 and was like, oh, shoot, my wife is not happy.
00:04:04.960 Like, I don't want to sleep on the couch tonight,
00:04:06.500 whatever it was.
00:04:07.280 And so he decided to get up
00:04:08.600 and then slap Chris Rock to defend his woman.
00:04:11.640 Or if he was doing like a fake laugh,
00:04:14.880 like, ha ha ha, I'm about to kill you kind of laugh,
00:04:17.500 which is a little bit troubling.
00:04:18.880 Or he didn't really hear the joke,
00:04:20.400 but it's a little strange.
00:04:21.540 He looked sincerely jovial.
00:04:23.520 And like, he thought that the joke was funny.
00:04:25.600 And then he literally goes up there
00:04:27.240 and just slaps him.
00:04:28.220 And obviously, Chris Rock, you can tell
00:04:30.640 as he is about to get slapped,
00:04:33.400 he doesn't know what's coming.
00:04:35.060 Like, he thinks it's a joke.
00:04:36.200 And there's uncomfortable laughter
00:04:37.980 from the audience.
00:04:40.040 And then as Will Smith starts yelling
00:04:41.980 from the audience,
00:04:42.700 that's when you see everyone's face
00:04:44.460 kind of go serious.
00:04:46.020 Like, oh, this is real.
00:04:47.640 Like, that wasn't just a bit.
00:04:49.120 And there are these,
00:04:50.600 there are these, like, montages
00:04:54.340 of people's, of celebrities' reactions
00:04:57.480 going around on Twitter,
00:05:00.540 which were kind of funny.
00:05:01.620 Like, I don't actually think that it,
00:05:03.120 I think it was real.
00:05:04.000 I think it's something that really happened.
00:05:06.500 So that's one thought,
00:05:09.380 that maybe he was justified in being offended.
00:05:13.960 Will Smith was justified.
00:05:15.160 And, you know, someone going out
00:05:16.480 and fighting on behalf of your woman
00:05:18.220 or, like, punching a guy
00:05:19.540 on behalf of your girl.
00:05:21.340 Like, that's something,
00:05:22.180 that's a tale as old as time.
00:05:24.660 However, however,
00:05:27.820 it is still a little psychotic, okay?
00:05:32.560 For you to hear a comedian tell a joke,
00:05:36.660 yes, an offensive joke,
00:05:38.440 and then to get up on stage
00:05:40.640 in front of millions of people
00:05:42.740 or hundreds of thousands of people,
00:05:44.300 I don't know how many people watch the Oscars these days,
00:05:47.040 and to slap a comedian
00:05:49.360 for telling an offensive joke.
00:05:50.780 Like, that's a little crazy.
00:05:53.140 That's, I'm sorry.
00:05:53.980 That's a little wild.
00:05:55.940 I understand being offended.
00:05:58.720 Okay, fine, be offended.
00:06:00.220 Talk to him after.
00:06:01.080 Maybe you even take it outside
00:06:02.420 after the show.
00:06:03.740 Or maybe you mention it
00:06:04.900 in your speech
00:06:06.300 because he did end up winning an Oscar
00:06:08.300 and it was weird.
00:06:09.280 His speech was like,
00:06:10.400 are you talking about the character
00:06:12.280 that you played defending his family?
00:06:14.140 Are you talking about the moment
00:06:15.260 that you just had defending your family?
00:06:17.280 It was very confusing.
00:06:18.700 But there were so many different ways
00:06:20.700 that Will Smith could have handled it
00:06:22.800 rather than doing what he did.
00:06:24.760 I felt really bad for Chris Rock.
00:06:27.140 I don't think that the joke was great.
00:06:29.080 Like, I don't like making fun of people
00:06:31.460 for things that they can't control.
00:06:33.020 Maybe that's just because I'm sensitive.
00:06:34.640 I don't like those kinds of jokes either.
00:06:36.260 And if someone did that to my family,
00:06:38.940 like my child or something,
00:06:40.700 maybe I would go up on stage
00:06:42.400 and slap them too.
00:06:44.100 Like, maybe so.
00:06:45.440 There is that part of that,
00:06:46.820 that Will Smith has seen his wife
00:06:48.360 struggle with this thing
00:06:49.520 and it really, you know, hit home
00:06:52.200 and really he took it hard.
00:06:53.560 Like, if my spouse had some kind of special need
00:06:57.140 and someone made fun of it on live TV,
00:06:59.420 who knows?
00:06:59.940 Maybe I would want to go out there
00:07:01.320 and slap them too.
00:07:03.040 However, I don't think
00:07:03.980 that's a really great justification
00:07:05.340 for what he did.
00:07:06.660 And one thing I will say,
00:07:07.780 no matter what your perspective is on it,
00:07:10.360 is that Will Smith,
00:07:12.400 even if you think he was justified in this,
00:07:14.980 like even if you think he was justified
00:07:16.580 in doing what he did,
00:07:18.060 he's not a victim.
00:07:19.420 Like, he just assaulted someone
00:07:20.660 on live television for telling a joke.
00:07:23.660 He's not a victim.
00:07:24.780 And all of the people who were comforting him,
00:07:27.220 like on the side of the stage
00:07:28.680 and afterward,
00:07:29.200 you saw Denzel Washington,
00:07:30.660 whom I love, by the way,
00:07:31.580 and Bradley Cooper
00:07:33.620 and all these people saying,
00:07:34.840 like, it's okay, dude, it's okay.
00:07:36.400 I mean, is this the conclusion
00:07:37.920 of the culture that we've built
00:07:39.240 that words are violence,
00:07:40.580 but actual violence isn't violence?
00:07:43.000 That's kind of what it seems like.
00:07:44.100 I'm not trying to make it political
00:07:45.220 because I'm not saying
00:07:46.160 that this is necessarily
00:07:47.180 a political thing.
00:07:49.220 I'm not trying to make it
00:07:50.000 a culture war issue.
00:07:52.340 It's just a little,
00:07:53.160 but I did see it fall along
00:07:55.140 kind of predictable lines
00:07:56.280 that most people like on the right
00:07:58.100 or center right
00:07:58.940 were saying that was totally uncalled for.
00:08:01.500 Chris Rock is a comedian.
00:08:02.400 And then a lot of people on the left
00:08:04.360 who seem to kind of applaud it
00:08:06.960 and think that,
00:08:08.260 oh yeah, he's just defending his family.
00:08:10.780 And that's weird.
00:08:11.780 Like, what are the politics behind that?
00:08:13.760 Why would the left react that way?
00:08:15.460 Ayanna Pressley,
00:08:16.360 who is a far left congresswoman,
00:08:20.100 she actually tweeted,
00:08:21.600 she has alopecia as well.
00:08:22.900 And so she is bald.
00:08:23.820 And she tweeted,
00:08:24.620 alopecia nation stand up.
00:08:26.680 Thank you, Will Smith.
00:08:27.680 And then she posted a picture of herself
00:08:29.940 and says some other things.
00:08:31.940 Thank you, Will Smith.
00:08:33.960 It's just, it's honestly, it's strange.
00:08:35.920 Again, I don't want to make it political,
00:08:37.680 but why are you defending violence
00:08:39.700 because of someone's words?
00:08:41.200 Is that a good justification for it?
00:08:42.880 It does seem like the left
00:08:44.020 is more and more comfortable
00:08:45.160 with responding to offensive words
00:08:48.320 with violence.
00:08:49.360 I'm not saying that's
00:08:50.380 Will Smith's political motivation,
00:08:52.120 but the reactions to it,
00:08:53.600 how it fell along partisan lines,
00:08:56.060 very strange.
00:08:56.940 I think lots of things
00:08:58.160 are true simultaneously.
00:09:00.420 And so maybe there is
00:09:01.580 some nuance there.
00:09:02.580 At the end of the day, though,
00:09:03.740 Will Smith is not a victim.
00:09:05.300 I don't think that how he reacted
00:09:06.880 to that was justified.
00:09:08.300 And I think some people
00:09:09.460 should have some sympathy
00:09:10.520 for Chris Rock.
00:09:11.780 Like, there seemed to be
00:09:13.080 no sympathy in the crowd
00:09:14.180 for Chris Rock.
00:09:15.040 And there absolutely should be.
00:09:17.520 He probably didn't even know
00:09:18.940 the joke was going to be
00:09:20.060 that offensive.
00:09:20.660 And like, he is a comedian.
00:09:23.000 Crazy times, crazy times.
00:09:24.540 We are going to remember
00:09:25.580 that moment forever.
00:09:28.560 That's going to, like,
00:09:29.620 go down in the TV Hall of Fame.
00:09:33.940 All right.
00:09:34.620 Just want to set this up
00:09:36.220 a little bit
00:09:36.840 before we get into
00:09:38.080 our conversation.
00:09:39.860 So we have already talked
00:09:41.160 about Ketanji Brown Jackson
00:09:42.280 and her record,
00:09:43.740 particularly when it comes
00:09:44.600 to the sentencing
00:09:45.340 of child sex predators
00:09:46.660 and consumers
00:09:48.080 and distributors
00:09:48.940 of child sex abuse material.
00:09:51.120 And we're going to talk about
00:09:53.340 just some of that
00:09:54.660 heinous stuff today,
00:09:56.080 some stuff that I read
00:09:56.900 in the Washington Post
00:09:57.860 that I talked about
00:09:58.880 and added to a highlight
00:10:00.240 on Instagram over the weekend
00:10:01.600 that really is just stunning,
00:10:03.400 especially in light
00:10:04.240 of a lot of professing Christians.
00:10:06.020 Public support
00:10:06.720 of Ketanji Brown Jackson,
00:10:08.060 she does objectively
00:10:09.280 have a record
00:10:10.900 of issuing light sentences
00:10:14.220 for all kinds of criminals.
00:10:16.580 But I think it is
00:10:17.800 particularly disturbing
00:10:18.720 the light sentences
00:10:19.660 that she has issued
00:10:21.080 for child sex predators
00:10:22.420 and the justifications
00:10:23.780 that she has given for that.
00:10:25.400 I know some people
00:10:26.120 have sent me the article
00:10:27.040 from National Review
00:10:27.940 saying,
00:10:28.900 oh, you know,
00:10:29.440 well, it's really hard
00:10:30.480 to sentence
00:10:32.160 child sex predators
00:10:33.320 and, you know,
00:10:34.380 child pornographers
00:10:35.600 and all of that.
00:10:36.680 And so really,
00:10:37.260 we should be looking
00:10:37.980 at some other problems
00:10:39.100 about Ketanji Brown Jackson.
00:10:40.800 I'm not so sure.
00:10:42.060 I'm not so sure
00:10:42.700 that I buy that argument.
00:10:44.060 Yes, there could be
00:10:44.760 other issues with her
00:10:45.660 that she's light
00:10:46.400 on crime in general,
00:10:47.640 but that to me
00:10:48.240 is particularly egregious.
00:10:49.540 I think it's important
00:10:50.260 to focus on that
00:10:51.160 because it gets people's attention
00:10:52.540 that when you are soft on crime,
00:10:54.460 like these are the kinds of people
00:10:55.940 that are being let loose
00:10:56.960 back into the community
00:10:58.020 and are most often reoffending
00:11:00.580 and who are their victims?
00:11:01.820 Children.
00:11:02.660 And so I actually think
00:11:03.640 that it is very good
00:11:05.200 for Josh Hawley
00:11:06.020 and Senator Cruz
00:11:06.920 and for other politicians
00:11:09.580 to highlight this.
00:11:10.960 Now, is it true
00:11:11.820 that these senators
00:11:13.020 should also be trying
00:11:13.960 to pass legislation
00:11:14.860 that gives firmer guidelines
00:11:16.640 on sentencing
00:11:19.380 for these kinds of criminals?
00:11:21.160 Yes, I do think that's true,
00:11:22.360 so I think that's a fair argument,
00:11:23.780 but that doesn't mean
00:11:24.740 that we should turn away
00:11:25.800 from this record
00:11:26.420 when it comes to
00:11:27.040 Ketanji Brown Jackson.
00:11:28.520 Someone that we've had
00:11:29.140 on this podcast
00:11:29.920 once or twice,
00:11:32.900 I think just once,
00:11:33.780 is Rachel Bovard,
00:11:34.900 and she's awesome.
00:11:35.980 She used to work in D.C.
00:11:38.120 in the kind of libertarian movement,
00:11:39.800 and I don't know
00:11:41.860 if she would identify herself
00:11:43.140 as a conservative populist,
00:11:45.260 and so I don't want
00:11:45.760 to put that label on her,
00:11:46.900 but she has been someone,
00:11:48.200 one of the few,
00:11:49.600 or she kind of bucks
00:11:50.400 against a lot of libertarians today
00:11:52.440 who are not willing
00:11:54.540 to kind of break up big tech
00:11:56.060 and talk about big tech censorship,
00:12:00.080 and she also continually,
00:12:02.200 I think, really effectively
00:12:03.540 brings us back
00:12:04.400 to what conservatism actually is.
00:12:05.980 which is not just
00:12:07.160 opposing big government,
00:12:08.400 but opposing all kinds
00:12:10.020 of dangerous
00:12:11.520 and power-hungry bureaucracy,
00:12:14.360 including corporate bureaucracy,
00:12:16.980 and she wrote a good article
00:12:19.260 in The Federalist
00:12:20.460 about why we should care
00:12:22.580 about Ketanji Brown Jackson's
00:12:24.320 leniency towards sex predators,
00:12:26.860 and she argues that the Senate
00:12:28.140 should actually investigate this
00:12:29.700 and that this is
00:12:30.640 the conservative position,
00:12:32.040 and so here's part
00:12:33.140 of what she said.
00:12:35.040 She says that
00:12:35.760 Judge Jackson appears
00:12:36.600 to have a track record
00:12:37.380 of both advocacy
00:12:38.260 and sentencing decisions,
00:12:39.960 demonstrating extreme leniency
00:12:41.320 towards child sex predators.
00:12:43.340 Perhaps more concerningly,
00:12:44.800 her record also demonstrates
00:12:45.980 an attempt to normalize
00:12:47.600 a radical sexual ideology
00:12:49.200 of adults being attracted
00:12:50.400 to minors,
00:12:51.620 categorizing it as
00:12:52.900 not as flatly criminal,
00:12:54.800 but simply as misunderstood.
00:12:57.440 While at the U.S.
00:12:58.820 Sentencing Commission,
00:13:00.140 Judge Jackson advocated
00:13:01.120 for eliminating the existing
00:13:02.400 mandatory minimum sentences
00:13:03.780 for child porn,
00:13:05.240 suggesting that at least
00:13:06.460 some people who possess
00:13:07.340 child porn
00:13:07.880 aren't sexually motivated,
00:13:09.360 but simply in this
00:13:10.700 for the community.
00:13:11.740 That's something
00:13:12.340 that Ketanji Brown Jackson said,
00:13:14.060 and as I will mention
00:13:14.780 in the interview
00:13:15.420 with John
00:13:16.920 that we are about to have,
00:13:18.320 the Washington Post
00:13:19.200 also noted
00:13:19.900 that when she's sentenced
00:13:21.500 an 18-year-old,
00:13:22.840 the 19-year-old,
00:13:23.840 to only three months
00:13:24.680 in prison
00:13:25.180 for possessing
00:13:25.960 child sex abuse material
00:13:27.360 of kids as young
00:13:28.940 as eight getting raped,
00:13:30.420 she said that he was
00:13:31.200 just sexually curious
00:13:32.400 about his peers.
00:13:34.500 His peers.
00:13:35.420 And so she has
00:13:35.980 really, really troubling
00:13:38.040 rhetoric
00:13:38.720 when it comes to this
00:13:39.700 and a really troubling
00:13:41.000 record.
00:13:43.140 So, Rachel Bivard
00:13:44.680 goes on to say,
00:13:45.340 while on the federal bench,
00:13:46.420 Judge Jackson demonstrated
00:13:47.320 a continuous string
00:13:48.140 of departures
00:13:48.820 from sentencing guidelines
00:13:49.800 for sex predators.
00:13:51.060 The Biden administration
00:13:51.820 and its backers
00:13:52.520 have offered
00:13:52.900 no substantive defense
00:13:54.440 of Judge Jackson's record,
00:13:56.200 while the White House
00:13:57.060 has dismissed
00:13:57.620 Hawley's critique
00:13:58.260 as cherry-picking
00:13:58.960 that buckles
00:13:59.580 under the lightest scrutiny.
00:14:01.080 They just say
00:14:01.620 that kind of stuff.
00:14:02.780 They have failed
00:14:03.400 to demonstrate how.
00:14:04.660 They've resorted
00:14:05.220 instead to tossing
00:14:06.080 complete non-sequiturs
00:14:07.040 at Hawley,
00:14:07.480 calling him an insurrectionist,
00:14:08.640 and bizarrely
00:14:09.300 trying to tie him
00:14:10.200 to the candidacy
00:14:10.840 of former Alabama
00:14:11.620 Senate candidate
00:14:12.260 Roy Moore.
00:14:13.740 But the flags
00:14:14.540 in Judge Jackson's record
00:14:15.780 are not cherry-picked,
00:14:17.040 nor are they taken
00:14:17.780 out of context.
00:14:18.980 Rather,
00:14:19.600 they are a pattern.
00:14:21.220 Yes,
00:14:21.560 we have talked about this.
00:14:23.160 There were seven instances
00:14:24.460 that Josh Hawley
00:14:25.280 brought up
00:14:25.800 when he was
00:14:27.360 talking to her
00:14:28.320 about this,
00:14:29.480 and we talked
00:14:30.220 about them last week.
00:14:31.320 I'll just go through
00:14:31.840 a couple of them.
00:14:33.960 Defendant distributed
00:14:35.020 multiple images
00:14:35.880 of child pornography.
00:14:37.140 I say child sex
00:14:38.260 abuse material.
00:14:40.080 Possessed dozens
00:14:40.540 dozens more,
00:14:41.580 including videos.
00:14:42.820 Federal sentencing
00:14:43.520 guidelines said
00:14:44.220 97 to 121 months
00:14:45.980 in prison.
00:14:46.460 Prosecutors recommended
00:14:47.300 24 months in prison.
00:14:48.820 Judge Jackson gave
00:14:49.640 the defendant
00:14:50.000 three months in prison.
00:14:52.280 The defendant
00:14:53.060 distributed 33 graphic images,
00:14:55.060 distributed 33 graphic images
00:14:56.860 and videos of child sexual assault
00:14:58.320 on anonymous messaging app.
00:15:00.140 Federal guidelines
00:15:00.820 said 70 to 87 months
00:15:02.220 in prison.
00:15:02.700 Prosecutor recommended
00:15:03.560 70 months in prison.
00:15:04.920 Judge Jackson
00:15:05.480 sentenced to the lowest
00:15:06.600 sentence permitted by law,
00:15:08.220 which is 60 months.
00:15:09.140 Over and over again,
00:15:10.500 we have seen this
00:15:11.280 by Judge Jackson.
00:15:12.360 This is a fact.
00:15:13.420 This is her record.
00:15:14.620 And the media
00:15:15.080 is just trying
00:15:15.720 to call it QAnon.
00:15:16.800 If you look up,
00:15:18.120 you know,
00:15:19.000 Josh Hawley,
00:15:19.720 child predator hearing,
00:15:20.980 whatever,
00:15:21.640 you will see Variety.
00:15:23.260 You will see Vox.
00:15:24.700 You will see
00:15:25.260 all of these left-wing
00:15:26.640 and even libertarian outlets
00:15:28.180 basically saying
00:15:28.980 that he is just
00:15:29.860 perpetuating
00:15:30.520 some kind of
00:15:31.280 QAnon conspiracy theory,
00:15:32.840 some kind of
00:15:33.760 crazy conspiratorial nonsense
00:15:35.940 to put it
00:15:37.060 in the words
00:15:37.520 of Brene Brown.
00:15:39.120 So, I mean,
00:15:40.220 weigh these facts
00:15:41.340 about her disturbing pattern
00:15:43.020 that is recorded.
00:15:44.700 It is a fact.
00:15:45.760 There is no context
00:15:46.640 that makes it better.
00:15:47.760 There are no contexts
00:15:48.420 that makes her words better,
00:15:49.680 as we will talk about
00:15:50.460 a little bit today.
00:15:51.480 Weigh that against
00:15:52.200 the people that you see
00:15:53.040 defending her.
00:15:54.560 The people who are saying,
00:15:55.420 oh, we should still
00:15:56.240 celebrate her in some way.
00:15:57.860 Guys,
00:15:58.160 she has a pattern
00:15:59.020 of protecting
00:15:59.860 child predators.
00:16:02.160 The most egregious
00:16:03.260 crime that we can think of.
00:16:04.200 People who either
00:16:05.780 get paid for
00:16:06.900 or are consuming
00:16:08.960 the rape of children.
00:16:10.720 And as Ted Cruz pointed out,
00:16:12.280 some of these images
00:16:13.120 and videos include
00:16:14.300 sadomasochistic material
00:16:16.060 of infants.
00:16:18.200 All right?
00:16:19.520 We are talking about people
00:16:20.960 who then very often
00:16:22.160 go out to re-offend.
00:16:23.780 These are not
00:16:24.260 victimless crimes,
00:16:25.380 by the way.
00:16:25.860 You are causing a demand
00:16:27.160 for this kind of material
00:16:28.740 every time someone
00:16:29.620 like this consumes it.
00:16:31.300 Obviously,
00:16:32.120 it's an even bigger issue
00:16:33.780 to distribute it
00:16:34.620 and she is putting them in
00:16:36.040 for the lowest amount
00:16:37.580 of time possible
00:16:38.360 she has since her days
00:16:39.680 in college
00:16:40.100 in the early 90s
00:16:41.120 argued against
00:16:41.880 having any kind
00:16:42.860 of child sex registry.
00:16:44.640 Think about the
00:16:45.400 professing Christians
00:16:46.280 that you know
00:16:47.520 who are advocating
00:16:50.360 for her,
00:16:51.120 who are just saying,
00:16:51.700 oh, I'm just,
00:16:52.240 you know,
00:16:52.460 throwing the baby out
00:16:53.180 with the bath water.
00:16:54.120 Just consider that.
00:16:56.140 Consider that.
00:16:56.900 It probably is coming
00:16:57.960 from a place
00:16:58.540 of ignorance,
00:17:00.200 I would say.
00:17:00.800 But we're talking
00:17:01.660 about real decisions
00:17:03.200 that are affecting
00:17:03.960 real people
00:17:04.900 and real communities
00:17:06.180 and real children.
00:17:07.340 We're not just talking
00:17:08.000 about personality flaws here.
00:17:10.160 Like, we are talking
00:17:11.020 about,
00:17:11.900 we're talking about
00:17:12.700 real stuff here.
00:17:14.300 I mean, this matters.
00:17:15.180 This matters.
00:17:15.720 And so the question
00:17:16.400 that we have,
00:17:17.100 the question that we have
00:17:18.060 that we are going
00:17:18.600 to answer today,
00:17:19.520 why in the world
00:17:21.080 are there some
00:17:22.360 so-called conservative
00:17:24.140 organizations
00:17:24.900 and institutions
00:17:25.660 that are saying,
00:17:26.580 yes,
00:17:26.840 Ketanji Brown Jackson
00:17:27.800 is so awesome
00:17:29.560 and, you know,
00:17:30.980 we should be behind her
00:17:31.900 or who are saying,
00:17:32.900 well, you know,
00:17:33.280 we might disagree,
00:17:34.200 but, you know,
00:17:35.140 we're still going
00:17:36.240 to support her anyway.
00:17:38.340 Why?
00:17:39.000 Why is that?
00:17:40.120 So John Schweppe
00:17:41.360 is going to kind of
00:17:42.520 pull back the curtain
00:17:43.960 for us
00:17:44.440 and he's going to tell us,
00:17:45.740 he's in D.C.,
00:17:46.460 he's going to tell us
00:17:47.440 what goes on
00:17:48.820 at these D.C. cocktail parties
00:17:50.700 that provides the motivation
00:17:52.460 for supporting
00:17:53.440 someone like this.
00:17:56.660 Okay, John,
00:17:57.320 thank you so much
00:17:58.300 for joining us.
00:17:59.140 Can you first tell us
00:17:59.920 who you are
00:18:00.360 and what you do?
00:18:02.300 Well, my name's
00:18:02.900 John Schweppe.
00:18:03.740 I am the Director
00:18:04.920 of Policy
00:18:05.620 and Government Affairs
00:18:06.560 at a conservative group
00:18:08.160 based out of D.C.
00:18:09.320 called American Principles Project.
00:18:11.620 Got it.
00:18:12.200 And I'm so appreciative
00:18:13.340 that you are here
00:18:14.480 to spill the tea
00:18:16.060 as it were.
00:18:17.280 There was a thread
00:18:18.140 that got retweeted
00:18:19.160 many times.
00:18:20.020 I saw a lot of people
00:18:20.740 talking about it
00:18:21.540 and when I saw it,
00:18:22.480 I immediately said,
00:18:23.400 oh, I want to know
00:18:24.140 more about this.
00:18:25.000 This is really interesting.
00:18:26.000 The first tweet
00:18:27.040 of the thread said,
00:18:27.780 I'm tempted to share
00:18:28.440 a dirty little secret
00:18:29.320 about Washington, D.C.
00:18:30.460 that would explain
00:18:31.100 why many on the
00:18:32.000 quote-unquote right
00:18:33.140 are basically cheerleading
00:18:35.000 Ketanji Brown Jackson's
00:18:36.440 nomination,
00:18:37.400 but I really don't know
00:18:39.160 if folks could handle it.
00:18:41.080 So rather than reading
00:18:41.960 the rest of your thread,
00:18:43.220 can you just explain
00:18:44.560 what you mean by that?
00:18:45.960 Why are there some people
00:18:47.080 on the right
00:18:48.260 who are excited
00:18:49.160 about this nomination?
00:18:50.260 Sure.
00:18:52.240 So about a year ago,
00:18:53.700 I started researching
00:18:54.860 funding and how it affects
00:18:57.460 all these different
00:18:58.120 organizations out here.
00:18:59.860 And specifically,
00:19:00.460 I was focused more
00:19:01.760 on big tech companies.
00:19:03.380 So Google, Facebook,
00:19:05.400 Amazon, Apple.
00:19:08.000 And I was trying
00:19:09.100 to figure out,
00:19:09.640 you know,
00:19:09.860 why are some of these
00:19:10.680 conservative groups,
00:19:11.700 for example,
00:19:12.300 advocating for policies
00:19:14.100 that favor the big tech
00:19:15.120 companies when the companies
00:19:16.220 are censoring conservatives?
00:19:17.720 And when I did that research,
00:19:20.600 you know,
00:19:20.740 I found a lot of,
00:19:21.920 you know,
00:19:22.120 Google and all these companies
00:19:23.160 do publicly disclose
00:19:24.340 that information.
00:19:25.580 But I was hearing
00:19:26.420 from people in the know
00:19:27.900 that one wrinkle to it
00:19:29.820 was the Koch Foundation,
00:19:31.500 the Koch brothers,
00:19:33.080 and that they were giving out
00:19:34.140 a lot of tech money as well,
00:19:36.180 but that wasn't publicly available.
00:19:38.260 And so I started doing some-
00:19:39.440 And who are the Koch brothers?
00:19:40.020 What is the Koch Foundation
00:19:41.280 for those who don't know?
00:19:42.400 And we're saying,
00:19:43.480 for people who aren't familiar,
00:19:44.900 K-O-C-H.
00:19:46.800 You may have heard
00:19:48.060 about the Koch brothers
00:19:48.980 or kind of just,
00:19:50.640 they're these people
00:19:51.340 that a lot of people
00:19:51.920 can't really define
00:19:52.860 or point to,
00:19:53.700 at least people
00:19:54.160 who aren't super familiar
00:19:55.300 with them.
00:19:55.900 So can you just quickly
00:19:57.020 tell us who they are?
00:19:59.160 Well,
00:19:59.640 for a long time,
00:20:00.260 they were a boogeyman
00:20:01.060 for the left.
00:20:02.340 But they are a kind
00:20:04.140 of libertarian leaning.
00:20:05.300 They're not socially conservative.
00:20:06.840 They don't want to talk
00:20:07.640 about the social issues
00:20:08.580 like abortion
00:20:09.120 or transgenderism.
00:20:10.880 But they,
00:20:11.680 you know,
00:20:12.080 are wealthy benefactors
00:20:13.240 who have funded
00:20:14.220 a lot of politicians,
00:20:15.500 a lot of,
00:20:16.640 you know,
00:20:17.520 groups out here.
00:20:18.820 And what they try to do,
00:20:19.840 a lot of the business interest
00:20:21.240 stuff that you hear
00:20:22.960 from the Chamber of Commerce,
00:20:24.280 that's kind of where
00:20:25.060 the Koch Foundation
00:20:25.780 has been historically.
00:20:26.980 And so low taxes,
00:20:28.500 low regulations,
00:20:29.320 some things which really
00:20:30.040 aren't that bad,
00:20:31.180 but certainly a de-emphasis
00:20:33.420 on the social issues.
00:20:34.880 Right.
00:20:35.200 Okay.
00:20:35.500 So continue,
00:20:36.740 you kind of found
00:20:37.460 in your research
00:20:38.180 that they were behind
00:20:39.140 some of these things
00:20:41.000 that you were wondering,
00:20:41.960 hey,
00:20:42.080 why would conservatives
00:20:42.940 be funding
00:20:44.240 these organizations
00:20:45.400 or be on the side
00:20:46.420 of these tech companies?
00:20:48.520 Right, right.
00:20:49.060 So it's difficult
00:20:50.400 because unfortunately
00:20:51.380 almost all of this money
00:20:53.000 is,
00:20:53.540 as the Democrats
00:20:54.420 like to say,
00:20:54.900 dark money.
00:20:55.620 It's really hard
00:20:56.480 to kind of find
00:20:57.320 where it went
00:20:58.300 or who actually received it
00:21:00.100 unless the recipients
00:21:01.620 say so themselves.
00:21:03.440 So,
00:21:04.080 for example,
00:21:04.500 on this thread,
00:21:05.120 I had an interaction
00:21:06.040 with Robbie Suave
00:21:07.720 over at Reason Foundation.
00:21:10.120 I didn't know
00:21:10.640 Reason got Koch money.
00:21:11.620 I learned it
00:21:12.360 from that interaction.
00:21:13.600 So,
00:21:14.040 but basically,
00:21:15.440 you know,
00:21:15.640 a lot of this
00:21:16.120 is reliant on
00:21:17.080 my conversations
00:21:18.400 with people out here
00:21:19.400 talking to ex-Coke employees
00:21:21.420 who worked at these foundations
00:21:23.340 or these organizations.
00:21:25.440 But one of their biggest,
00:21:27.360 and this kind of circles back
00:21:28.520 to what the thread was about,
00:21:29.880 one of their biggest focuses,
00:21:31.400 in fact,
00:21:31.760 it's the main issue
00:21:32.720 on their site,
00:21:33.340 is criminal justice reform.
00:21:35.820 And that's an issue
00:21:36.820 that,
00:21:37.580 you know,
00:21:37.900 if you're a conservative
00:21:38.760 out here in D.C.,
00:21:39.960 you hear people talking
00:21:41.220 about all the time.
00:21:42.880 You know,
00:21:43.160 we need to make sure
00:21:44.020 you always hear the story
00:21:45.340 of, you know,
00:21:46.800 we don't want someone
00:21:47.820 who got caught
00:21:48.540 with possession of marijuana
00:21:49.560 to go to jail for 10 years.
00:21:51.580 And, of course,
00:21:52.420 you know,
00:21:52.620 when somebody says a story
00:21:53.580 like that,
00:21:54.000 it's hard to disagree with it.
00:21:55.200 Like, yeah,
00:21:55.640 I don't want, you know,
00:21:57.020 for someone to have
00:21:57.800 an ounce of marijuana
00:21:58.600 to have their life
00:21:59.620 totally ruined.
00:22:00.400 And usually,
00:22:01.340 just so people know,
00:22:02.060 that's not actually
00:22:02.860 what is happening.
00:22:04.060 People aren't typically
00:22:05.020 going to jail
00:22:06.020 for 10 years
00:22:06.540 because of an ounce
00:22:07.180 of marijuana.
00:22:07.800 It's typically something else
00:22:09.240 and that just happens
00:22:10.600 to be what they are
00:22:13.000 able to charge them with
00:22:14.420 or what the police
00:22:15.340 are able to book them on.
00:22:17.400 So that's a little bit
00:22:18.320 of a myth
00:22:19.320 that we hear
00:22:19.800 from the criminal
00:22:20.500 justice reform activists.
00:22:23.540 Absolutely.
00:22:24.420 And really,
00:22:25.460 the effects
00:22:25.920 of criminal justice reform
00:22:26.980 go much further
00:22:28.120 beyond that.
00:22:28.640 So without going down
00:22:30.240 too much of a rabbit hole,
00:22:31.360 and I do apologize
00:22:31.960 and please bring me back
00:22:32.900 if I do.
00:22:33.420 No, you can take us
00:22:34.240 down the rabbit hole.
00:22:34.940 We love rabbit holes.
00:22:36.400 So a couple years ago,
00:22:38.540 my organization
00:22:39.240 authored a report
00:22:40.380 about Black Lives Matter
00:22:41.840 and the BREATHE Act.
00:22:43.420 And this was like
00:22:44.260 the ultimate goal
00:22:45.840 of criminal justice reform
00:22:47.100 from the West perspective.
00:22:48.500 And it is, you know,
00:22:49.900 basically making sure
00:22:50.900 that if you're
00:22:52.060 under the age of 24,
00:22:53.540 you're never incarcerated,
00:22:55.020 that if you're in jail
00:22:56.100 currently for a drug charge
00:22:57.540 that you're released
00:22:58.160 immediately,
00:22:58.940 that there's no life sentences
00:23:00.500 for any crime ever,
00:23:02.280 all these different things.
00:23:04.060 And there's this overlap
00:23:05.480 between the right
00:23:06.380 and the left
00:23:06.940 on this issue.
00:23:07.900 So when we,
00:23:09.280 what brought this up
00:23:09.980 this week
00:23:10.480 was the confirmation hearing
00:23:11.820 of Judge Ketanji Brown-Jackson
00:23:13.940 and Senator Josh Hawley
00:23:15.620 and Senator Ted Cruz's
00:23:16.920 questioning of her
00:23:17.880 over some of her lighter
00:23:19.460 sentencing in the past,
00:23:20.700 some really light sentencing
00:23:21.740 against sex offenders.
00:23:23.160 And a lot of people
00:23:25.240 on the right,
00:23:25.940 National Review,
00:23:26.760 wrote a piece,
00:23:27.800 plenty of people on Twitter
00:23:28.840 were defending this position.
00:23:30.640 And so what I was trying
00:23:31.340 to articulate
00:23:31.880 is that this position
00:23:33.340 is held by people
00:23:34.640 on the left and the right.
00:23:35.940 It's a very, you know,
00:23:36.960 established...
00:23:37.840 Defending the position,
00:23:38.720 defending Ketanji Brown-Jackson's
00:23:40.860 position
00:23:41.220 of issuing light sentences?
00:23:44.200 Yes.
00:23:44.560 Yes.
00:23:45.060 Okay.
00:23:45.220 Even, so, you know,
00:23:46.840 Josh Hawley brought up pedophiles,
00:23:48.880 which obviously
00:23:49.840 is probably
00:23:50.500 the least defensible example.
00:23:52.820 But when you're talking
00:23:53.880 about criminal justice reform,
00:23:55.200 it is a belief,
00:23:56.300 and this is a debate
00:23:56.920 that goes back decades,
00:23:58.440 but it's a belief
00:23:59.260 in rehabilitation
00:23:59.980 over deterrence,
00:24:02.100 over a longer sentence.
00:24:03.600 They call it
00:24:04.020 restorative justice
00:24:05.340 very often.
00:24:07.440 Yeah.
00:24:08.120 But unfortunately,
00:24:08.960 what happens,
00:24:09.900 and Hawley pointed this out,
00:24:11.300 I think Cruz did too,
00:24:12.520 a lot of these offenders
00:24:13.980 are recidivists.
00:24:15.220 And they, you know,
00:24:16.060 go to jail for three months,
00:24:17.500 as one of them did
00:24:18.540 that Hawley quoted,
00:24:20.580 and then they go back out
00:24:21.680 and then they offend again.
00:24:22.860 And so I think
00:24:23.620 the real issue here
00:24:25.420 is that D.C. is a blob.
00:24:27.240 There's a lot of money
00:24:28.480 that goes around
00:24:29.240 to make people out here
00:24:30.540 care about issues like this.
00:24:32.000 But if you talk
00:24:32.540 to anybody back home,
00:24:34.140 criminal justice reform,
00:24:35.200 if you really get into
00:24:36.200 what it is,
00:24:37.100 nobody supports that.
00:24:38.160 And including, you know,
00:24:39.940 people, minorities,
00:24:41.140 all sorts of people.
00:24:42.020 It's not just Republican voters.
00:24:44.200 Right.
00:24:44.760 And the left
00:24:45.820 is really good at this.
00:24:46.720 But as you mentioned,
00:24:47.480 it is some people
00:24:48.080 on the right.
00:24:48.660 But the left
00:24:49.460 is really good
00:24:50.380 at the language game.
00:24:51.620 They're really good
00:24:52.400 at slapping euphemisms
00:24:54.060 on the policy positions
00:24:56.760 that they want
00:24:57.660 so you don't actually
00:24:58.540 have to get into
00:24:59.160 the details
00:24:59.820 of what they are
00:25:00.660 actually supporting.
00:25:01.840 So like reproductive justice.
00:25:03.560 They put all these adjectives
00:25:04.740 in front of justice
00:25:05.480 and because no one
00:25:06.260 wants to be unjust,
00:25:07.480 no one wants to be
00:25:08.080 against justice,
00:25:09.280 you say,
00:25:09.660 yeah,
00:25:09.800 I'm for reproductive justice.
00:25:11.440 Sure, I'm for criminal justice reform.
00:25:14.200 But then, as you said,
00:25:15.100 once you get down
00:25:15.740 into the nitty gritty,
00:25:16.860 not just of what
00:25:17.500 the policies are,
00:25:18.660 which is basically
00:25:19.340 letting people out of jail,
00:25:20.800 them not getting prosecuted,
00:25:22.600 all this,
00:25:23.600 and then you look
00:25:24.440 at the consequences
00:25:25.700 of what those policies are
00:25:27.780 and how they're not
00:25:28.760 making people safe
00:25:29.920 and they're not actually
00:25:30.720 helping the criminals
00:25:31.620 that are committing
00:25:32.260 the crimes,
00:25:33.680 then you realize
00:25:34.840 it's really just
00:25:35.820 a bunch of hogwash.
00:25:37.620 Like,
00:25:38.460 letting people out of jail
00:25:39.580 or having fewer people
00:25:40.560 in jail
00:25:41.020 is not in itself
00:25:42.260 a just end
00:25:43.280 unless we are preventing
00:25:44.780 what people
00:25:46.580 are actually going
00:25:47.520 to jail for.
00:25:49.060 But you mentioned
00:25:50.140 Ketanji Brown Jackson,
00:25:51.380 one of the cases
00:25:52.200 that Josh Hawley
00:25:53.080 brought up
00:25:53.600 and I think was brought up
00:25:54.680 a few times,
00:25:56.060 the Washington Post
00:25:57.600 wrote an article about it
00:25:59.260 and they really wrote,
00:26:00.460 it was so disgusting,
00:26:02.440 a puff piece
00:26:03.340 about this
00:26:04.860 child sex
00:26:06.800 abuse consumer,
00:26:09.200 let's see,
00:26:10.720 Wesley Hawkins,
00:26:12.320 who Brown Jackson
00:26:14.060 had sentenced
00:26:15.260 to only three months
00:26:16.160 in prison,
00:26:16.660 even though prosecutors
00:26:17.560 had recommended
00:26:18.340 two years,
00:26:19.260 I think federal guidelines
00:26:20.460 were up to 10 years.
00:26:22.120 And really,
00:26:22.620 it was amazing
00:26:23.440 her reasoning
00:26:24.620 behind this.
00:26:25.460 First,
00:26:25.680 the author
00:26:26.080 in this Washington Post
00:26:27.680 article
00:26:28.280 tries to make us
00:26:30.240 feel sympathetic
00:26:30.920 towards Hawkins
00:26:32.140 and towards the judge
00:26:33.380 and make us feel
00:26:34.080 very angry
00:26:34.880 at the Republicans
00:26:35.680 who are asking
00:26:36.700 about this
00:26:37.320 and also very angry
00:26:38.760 about Hawkins's family
00:26:40.020 because at the end
00:26:41.060 they tell us
00:26:42.600 that the reason
00:26:43.480 that he looked
00:26:44.160 at child sex abuse
00:26:45.200 material was because
00:26:46.300 his family was homophobic
00:26:47.640 and he didn't know
00:26:48.440 where else to turn.
00:26:49.240 It's just really incredible
00:26:50.200 the journalism
00:26:50.740 these days.
00:26:51.500 But what Ketanji Brown Jackson
00:26:53.160 said was that
00:26:53.940 the reason that she
00:26:54.740 only sentenced him,
00:26:55.700 he was 18 years old,
00:26:56.880 19 when he was sentenced,
00:26:58.400 the reason that she
00:26:59.000 only sentenced him
00:26:59.920 to three months
00:27:01.140 in prison
00:27:01.540 is because
00:27:02.120 he was just looking
00:27:03.460 at images
00:27:03.960 of,
00:27:04.760 quote,
00:27:05.140 his parents,
00:27:05.680 peers
00:27:06.100 and that because
00:27:07.120 he was so young
00:27:07.780 it's not a big deal.
00:27:08.620 Well,
00:27:09.040 the records show
00:27:09.960 that some of the children
00:27:11.000 that he watched
00:27:11.680 being raped
00:27:12.160 were eight years old.
00:27:13.880 And so,
00:27:14.400 I mean,
00:27:14.620 this is really
00:27:15.240 nefarious stuff.
00:27:16.120 This is not
00:27:16.520 some conspiracy theory.
00:27:18.460 A lot of articles
00:27:19.700 are saying
00:27:20.320 that it's conspiracy theory.
00:27:21.660 You mentioned
00:27:21.960 Reason.com.
00:27:23.300 Josh Hawley
00:27:23.780 absurdly suggests
00:27:24.800 that Ketanji Brown Jackson
00:27:25.980 has a soft spot
00:27:26.860 for child predators.
00:27:28.600 Vanity Fair,
00:27:29.520 Vox,
00:27:29.880 they're all calling
00:27:30.440 this QAnon
00:27:31.360 and all this stuff.
00:27:33.520 It's really,
00:27:34.520 really bizarre to me,
00:27:35.540 even if you are
00:27:36.300 on the side
00:27:37.080 of criminal justice reform,
00:27:39.560 why would they go
00:27:40.760 out of their way
00:27:41.960 to try to defend
00:27:43.960 the light sentencing
00:27:45.360 of child predators?
00:27:47.700 Like,
00:27:47.880 what really is behind that?
00:27:49.320 That's totally shameless
00:27:50.480 in my opinion.
00:27:52.820 It is.
00:27:53.940 You know,
00:27:54.320 we talked previously
00:27:55.360 about Trump derangement syndrome
00:27:56.900 and I think Hawley
00:27:57.940 kind of creates
00:27:58.980 the same thing
00:27:59.620 on the left.
00:28:00.220 As soon as he brought this up,
00:28:01.840 they felt like
00:28:02.500 they had to oppose it.
00:28:03.480 But look,
00:28:04.740 I'll tell you,
00:28:05.880 just so your viewers know,
00:28:08.300 you know,
00:28:08.480 our organization
00:28:09.160 has worked on
00:28:09.840 protecting kids,
00:28:11.160 working on some
00:28:11.680 of this trafficking stuff.
00:28:14.380 When someone searches
00:28:15.660 for child pornography,
00:28:16.540 it's not like something
00:28:17.800 that accidentally happens,
00:28:19.340 right?
00:28:19.520 And I think that's something
00:28:20.320 that a lot of these folks
00:28:21.120 are trying to do
00:28:21.780 to gin up sympathy.
00:28:23.540 But on the top layer
00:28:24.540 of the internet,
00:28:25.140 the internet that we all use,
00:28:26.820 you're not going to find
00:28:27.560 child pornography.
00:28:28.560 It is actually removed
00:28:29.680 pretty effectively.
00:28:31.040 To go find it,
00:28:32.200 you have to dig
00:28:32.820 and you have to use
00:28:33.600 all of the,
00:28:34.160 you know,
00:28:34.380 the dark web
00:28:35.080 and all of these
00:28:35.580 different things.
00:28:36.620 And so for somebody
00:28:37.600 like that,
00:28:38.140 you know,
00:28:38.380 and again,
00:28:38.820 this is also just something
00:28:39.860 that we've seen this,
00:28:41.260 there's studies on it.
00:28:42.360 When someone is looking
00:28:43.600 for child pornography
00:28:44.600 for personal use
00:28:45.860 or whatever,
00:28:46.680 that is an indication
00:28:47.660 that they're going
00:28:48.340 to hurt a child.
00:28:49.800 Right.
00:28:50.040 That it's not,
00:28:50.700 it's not one of these things
00:28:51.660 where you can separate
00:28:52.440 the two things.
00:28:53.900 And so I,
00:28:54.800 I think it's despicable,
00:28:55.980 but it does kind of show
00:28:57.320 how,
00:28:58.560 you know,
00:28:59.020 I think morally repugnant
00:29:00.340 our establishment
00:29:01.040 is out here
00:29:01.840 that something like this,
00:29:03.320 which should be easily
00:29:04.240 a slam dunk issue
00:29:05.720 is,
00:29:06.560 is up for debate.
00:29:07.920 It's just,
00:29:08.720 it's very troubling
00:29:09.800 that they would try
00:29:11.180 to say that any criticism
00:29:12.660 of light sentencing
00:29:13.780 of child predators
00:29:14.960 and viewers of child
00:29:16.760 sex abuse material,
00:29:17.960 that that's QAnon.
00:29:19.580 I mean,
00:29:19.880 that's really,
00:29:20.880 really disturbing logic.
00:29:23.240 Now,
00:29:24.240 some logic that I saw
00:29:25.640 in National Review,
00:29:27.720 you mentioned National Review,
00:29:28.700 I think it was by Andrew McCarthy,
00:29:30.520 said basically that
00:29:32.340 Republicans shouldn't be focusing
00:29:34.440 specifically on
00:29:36.700 the child predator stuff,
00:29:38.720 but should maybe highlight
00:29:40.280 the fact that she
00:29:41.460 regularly has bucked
00:29:43.420 sentencing guidelines,
00:29:44.860 that she really is soft
00:29:46.200 on crime in general.
00:29:48.660 And that is why,
00:29:49.940 like the Cato Institute,
00:29:51.320 the Koch brothers
00:29:52.040 would be behind her.
00:29:53.740 Is that right?
00:29:55.600 Yeah,
00:29:56.060 yeah,
00:29:56.240 I think that's accurate.
00:29:57.340 You know,
00:29:57.580 I think McCarthy,
00:29:59.300 unfortunately,
00:30:00.000 this is just a question
00:30:00.800 of politics,
00:30:01.540 but when you,
00:30:02.580 you know,
00:30:03.280 use the inflammatory language
00:30:04.620 he did in National Review
00:30:06.660 to criticize Hawley,
00:30:07.940 everyone's going to run
00:30:08.860 with the top line headline
00:30:10.180 and the top sentence
00:30:11.380 and say National Review
00:30:12.780 debunked Hawley.
00:30:14.060 And I understand it.
00:30:15.200 I understood his piece.
00:30:16.360 And look,
00:30:16.900 I think there's a lot of truth
00:30:17.820 to maybe going
00:30:18.920 with the broad scope of things.
00:30:20.480 But,
00:30:20.980 you know,
00:30:21.160 I think most folks,
00:30:22.320 your viewers probably among them,
00:30:24.080 don't understand
00:30:24.920 or haven't heard
00:30:25.780 about this push
00:30:27.320 for lesser sentences
00:30:28.840 for sex offenders.
00:30:29.760 It seems really bizarre.
00:30:31.780 And so if we're not going
00:30:32.440 to have this debate now
00:30:33.680 during a high profile
00:30:35.040 Supreme Court hearing,
00:30:36.080 when are we supposed
00:30:36.620 to have it?
00:30:37.160 And so I think
00:30:37.500 that's the frustration
00:30:39.080 a lot of us have had
00:30:40.120 with this line of argument
00:30:41.040 is this is an argument
00:30:42.440 we should be having.
00:30:43.240 It's not a,
00:30:43.860 you know,
00:30:44.260 it's not a slur
00:30:45.400 or a smear
00:30:46.160 against Ketanji Brown Jackson.
00:30:48.380 It's a record
00:30:49.160 and we should be discussing it.
00:30:51.340 So you mentioned
00:30:52.500 in your thread,
00:30:54.480 you mentioned,
00:30:55.880 you said this,
00:30:56.620 the Kochs
00:30:57.180 and the movement
00:30:57.660 they cultivated
00:30:58.340 through targeted grants
00:30:59.320 were very successful.
00:31:00.900 Trump was unable
00:31:01.520 to get most of his priorities
00:31:02.720 passed during his term,
00:31:03.900 but the First Step Act
00:31:05.180 became law fairly easily.
00:31:07.660 Few,
00:31:08.120 besides Tom Cotton,
00:31:09.600 publicly opposed.
00:31:11.380 Remind us
00:31:13.740 what the First Step Act was
00:31:15.740 and why Trump
00:31:16.760 and so many Republicans
00:31:18.200 said,
00:31:19.080 yeah,
00:31:19.300 let's definitely do this.
00:31:21.920 Well,
00:31:22.460 the First Step Act
00:31:23.260 is a criminal justice
00:31:24.200 reform bill
00:31:25.040 and,
00:31:25.820 you know,
00:31:25.980 it did seek,
00:31:26.920 again,
00:31:27.180 it's that,
00:31:27.620 it's that example
00:31:28.220 of drugs I gave you
00:31:29.240 at the forefront.
00:31:30.600 That's what everyone
00:31:31.240 was told it was about.
00:31:32.980 But we've seen
00:31:34.180 and Cotton,
00:31:35.060 I think,
00:31:35.280 has documented this
00:31:36.060 pretty well
00:31:36.620 and some other sites
00:31:37.400 as well,
00:31:37.980 that there's been
00:31:38.860 a lot of criminals
00:31:39.800 with different types
00:31:41.280 of offenses,
00:31:42.000 gun offenses,
00:31:42.620 all sorts of things
00:31:43.360 that have been released
00:31:44.540 and,
00:31:45.720 and of course,
00:31:46.480 they're recidivists.
00:31:47.300 They,
00:31:47.420 they,
00:31:47.780 they do it again.
00:31:48.640 So this crime wave,
00:31:50.000 you know,
00:31:50.160 a lot of people
00:31:50.800 are trying to tie
00:31:51.780 and maybe it's fair.
00:31:53.060 I would,
00:31:53.480 I wouldn't know for sure,
00:31:54.420 but it might be fair
00:31:55.560 to tie this crime wave
00:31:56.700 in part to the First Step Act.
00:31:58.080 And so,
00:31:58.680 you know,
00:31:58.860 I think the president
00:31:59.620 and his advisors,
00:32:01.100 I think they were trying
00:32:01.860 to do the right thing.
00:32:03.100 I don't necessarily fault them
00:32:04.700 for signing that bill
00:32:05.760 when there was so little
00:32:06.980 opposition to it.
00:32:08.220 But when you look
00:32:08.820 at the money
00:32:09.320 and you look at,
00:32:10.140 you know,
00:32:10.340 what the Koch brothers,
00:32:11.260 the Koch Foundation
00:32:12.720 and all of them
00:32:13.120 were trying to do
00:32:13.940 as early as 2014,
00:32:15.420 2015 with this issue,
00:32:17.120 it's pretty clear
00:32:18.040 that there was,
00:32:18.900 they,
00:32:19.020 they kind of bought
00:32:20.000 a conservative,
00:32:21.820 unanimous opinion
00:32:22.880 on this out here.
00:32:24.200 And,
00:32:24.700 and that had a huge effect
00:32:25.780 where,
00:32:26.420 you know,
00:32:26.700 if maybe those grants
00:32:27.620 weren't out there,
00:32:28.700 maybe if,
00:32:29.720 you know,
00:32:30.180 things were a little bit different
00:32:31.240 and some groups
00:32:31.780 were opposing it,
00:32:32.920 maybe Trump wouldn't
00:32:33.640 have signed the bill.
00:32:34.980 Wow.
00:32:35.640 And I know this is
00:32:37.220 probably speculation,
00:32:38.420 but why?
00:32:39.460 Like,
00:32:39.640 is there some economic,
00:32:41.100 benefit,
00:32:41.860 like what is the
00:32:43.040 so-called conservative
00:32:44.260 or maybe libertarian
00:32:45.860 argument
00:32:46.620 for the kind of
00:32:48.100 criminal justice reform
00:32:49.260 that we're seeing
00:32:49.860 that very obviously,
00:32:51.140 especially if you look
00:32:51.860 at these progressive cities
00:32:52.960 where these policies
00:32:54.700 are at the forefront
00:32:56.400 and are most consistently
00:32:57.860 applied,
00:32:58.560 I mean,
00:32:58.880 you see a rise
00:33:00.300 in death
00:33:01.000 and destruction
00:33:01.800 almost every time
00:33:03.040 we hear a story
00:33:03.880 of being murdered.
00:33:05.180 The person who murdered them
00:33:06.360 or the person
00:33:06.840 who assaulted them
00:33:07.980 was out
00:33:09.900 because of,
00:33:10.740 you know,
00:33:11.100 a low bail
00:33:12.040 set by some kind
00:33:12.760 of progressive judge
00:33:13.780 or they
00:33:15.100 were just able
00:33:16.660 to,
00:33:17.280 you know,
00:33:17.620 fly through short sentences.
00:33:18.840 They had
00:33:19.540 previous very serious
00:33:21.760 violent
00:33:23.660 crime charges
00:33:25.340 and they were able
00:33:26.960 to go out
00:33:27.880 and re-offend.
00:33:28.740 I think
00:33:29.080 it's a crazy percentage,
00:33:31.020 a crazy high percentage
00:33:31.960 of people
00:33:32.400 who are recidivists
00:33:33.520 who go out
00:33:34.240 and commit
00:33:34.620 a similar
00:33:35.060 or worse crime.
00:33:36.480 Again,
00:33:36.740 so,
00:33:37.280 like,
00:33:37.520 what is the motivation?
00:33:39.380 The progressive motivation,
00:33:40.540 I'm like,
00:33:40.920 okay,
00:33:41.320 I feel like
00:33:41.980 they are just
00:33:42.600 bent on destruction
00:33:43.620 of the United States,
00:33:44.960 whatever.
00:33:45.620 I don't understand
00:33:46.420 the libertarian reasoning
00:33:47.600 behind this.
00:33:49.700 Yeah,
00:33:49.880 the progressive motivation
00:33:50.920 is definitely
00:33:51.540 the equity agenda,
00:33:52.640 right?
00:33:53.020 That,
00:33:53.420 you know,
00:33:54.300 if there's any,
00:33:55.900 you know,
00:33:56.420 if there's more blacks
00:33:57.120 in prison
00:33:57.560 than the general population,
00:33:59.360 that's evidence
00:34:00.420 of systemic racism
00:34:01.560 and so the only way
00:34:02.760 to fix that
00:34:03.320 is to release
00:34:04.060 enough criminals
00:34:05.040 onto the streets.
00:34:06.060 Even if that means,
00:34:07.400 which it does,
00:34:08.240 even if that means
00:34:09.200 that more innocent
00:34:10.520 black Americans die
00:34:11.660 because that's exactly
00:34:12.660 what happens.
00:34:13.360 I mean,
00:34:13.540 it's typically
00:34:14.180 intraracial
00:34:15.200 violent crime
00:34:16.200 of any race,
00:34:17.180 but we know
00:34:17.800 the homicide rate
00:34:19.040 among black Americans,
00:34:20.380 unfortunately,
00:34:20.840 is really high,
00:34:21.420 so you're just creating
00:34:22.340 more black victims
00:34:23.860 of murder
00:34:24.340 when you decide
00:34:25.220 to meet these equity quotas
00:34:26.660 without actually addressing
00:34:27.760 the root cause.
00:34:28.640 But no one seems to care
00:34:29.700 about the victims
00:34:30.340 in criminal justice reform.
00:34:32.660 No,
00:34:33.040 that's right,
00:34:33.380 and it's a tragedy
00:34:34.360 of the policy out here.
00:34:36.120 But I'll tell you,
00:34:37.260 you know,
00:34:37.440 so I think somewhat
00:34:38.420 libertarians probably
00:34:39.400 buy into the equity agenda.
00:34:40.960 They might not say it explicitly,
00:34:42.100 but I also,
00:34:43.460 I'm just going to say this,
00:34:44.420 Ali,
00:34:44.740 and I think this is,
00:34:46.100 you know,
00:34:46.620 just true.
00:34:48.020 You know,
00:34:48.520 I can't back it up,
00:34:49.440 but the reality
00:34:50.700 is that people out here
00:34:51.740 really do want
00:34:52.600 to be liked.
00:34:54.520 They want to be seen,
00:34:56.260 especially on the right,
00:34:57.020 as not racist.
00:34:58.620 And so embracing
00:34:59.700 things like this
00:35:00.600 are a way
00:35:01.160 to not be attacked
00:35:03.640 and to have that.
00:35:05.060 And so I think
00:35:05.860 the motivator
00:35:06.540 for a lot of these folks,
00:35:08.120 you know,
00:35:08.360 some of them probably
00:35:09.140 have some tragic stories
00:35:10.420 where they know somebody
00:35:11.720 who went to jail
00:35:12.320 for drugs
00:35:12.820 or something like that.
00:35:13.620 And look,
00:35:13.920 I'm sympathetic to that,
00:35:15.460 but I think for a lot of them
00:35:16.460 it is about cocktail parties.
00:35:19.060 And I know,
00:35:19.600 you know,
00:35:20.100 people make fun of that,
00:35:21.220 but it is just kind of
00:35:22.200 how DC works
00:35:23.160 and how this ecosystem is.
00:35:24.740 But what about,
00:35:26.020 I mean,
00:35:26.580 what about the Koch brothers?
00:35:28.040 Like,
00:35:28.300 what do you think
00:35:29.160 their motivation is?
00:35:30.420 Surely they,
00:35:31.400 maybe,
00:35:32.200 maybe they don't,
00:35:33.420 but surely they feel like
00:35:34.840 they have some kind
00:35:35.920 of pure motivation.
00:35:36.900 Like,
00:35:37.040 do you think
00:35:37.760 that the Cato Institute
00:35:39.580 and the Koch brothers,
00:35:41.000 like,
00:35:41.140 does it really come down
00:35:42.100 to cocktail parties
00:35:43.140 for them?
00:35:43.760 Or do they have
00:35:44.500 some kind of
00:35:45.520 economic motivation
00:35:47.960 or some kind of
00:35:48.720 power motivation
00:35:49.760 behind backing
00:35:50.900 these kinds
00:35:51.460 of destructive policies?
00:35:52.540 It could be economic
00:35:55.540 in a way
00:35:56.140 that we haven't
00:35:56.720 been able to discern yet,
00:35:58.020 but I'll tell you,
00:35:58.800 you know,
00:35:59.000 the Kochs are very much
00:36:00.760 have been concerned
00:36:01.700 about how they're perceived.
00:36:03.520 Remember,
00:36:04.040 they were very involved
00:36:04.940 in the Tea Party wave
00:36:05.860 back in 2010
00:36:06.640 and then the left
00:36:07.400 demonized them.
00:36:09.040 And,
00:36:09.120 you know,
00:36:09.540 these are corporate tycoons.
00:36:11.280 They don't really like that.
00:36:13.060 They were actually running
00:36:13.960 at their,
00:36:14.500 I remember this,
00:36:15.200 there was an advertising campaign
00:36:16.460 for their company
00:36:17.860 talking about all the great
00:36:19.040 human work they're doing
00:36:20.160 across the country
00:36:21.040 and they ran it
00:36:21.640 for like a year.
00:36:22.940 So I do think in part
00:36:24.300 it is about perception
00:36:26.060 and criminal justice reform
00:36:27.920 is an issue
00:36:28.360 if you poll it
00:36:29.100 the way that they talk about it.
00:36:30.560 It's probably an 80% issue.
00:36:32.360 And so it's an issue
00:36:33.700 where if they put that
00:36:34.560 first and foremost
00:36:35.780 in what they're doing,
00:36:36.700 maybe the left
00:36:37.440 won't hate them as much.
00:36:38.340 And I really do think
00:36:39.300 that's a part of it.
00:36:40.200 I know that seems cheap
00:36:41.460 or political,
00:36:42.660 but,
00:36:43.580 you know,
00:36:44.100 it's hard to discern
00:36:44.900 what else it could possibly be.
00:36:47.020 And what is Our Street?
00:36:49.600 So Our Street
00:36:50.560 is a group out here
00:36:52.100 that used to be seen
00:36:53.180 as on the right,
00:36:54.540 but they take a lot
00:36:56.060 of corporate money,
00:36:57.100 a lot of corporate money,
00:36:58.480 and they're involved
00:36:59.820 in various,
00:37:00.560 you know,
00:37:01.000 kind of right libertarian issues,
00:37:03.300 issues like defending
00:37:04.720 big tech censorship
00:37:05.800 and fighting against
00:37:07.180 the antitrust bills.
00:37:08.340 they often talk about
00:37:10.440 occupational licensing reform.
00:37:12.400 Why, though?
00:37:13.200 Why?
00:37:13.780 Just because they're
00:37:14.460 getting money
00:37:15.120 from these major corporations
00:37:16.520 and so they're just
00:37:17.460 going to be on the side
00:37:18.360 of these major corporations,
00:37:19.480 which is not,
00:37:20.220 by the way,
00:37:21.400 libertarian.
00:37:22.780 Libertarianism
00:37:23.260 does not equal
00:37:24.760 defending big corporations
00:37:27.040 that become
00:37:27.620 almost as powerful
00:37:29.020 and deleterious
00:37:30.300 as big government.
00:37:34.280 Well, that's,
00:37:34.840 so in my thread,
00:37:35.700 I was hinting at this
00:37:36.680 with talking about
00:37:37.840 how the Koch Foundation
00:37:38.880 cultivates support
00:37:40.180 with grants,
00:37:41.040 and this is what
00:37:41.800 corporations do out here.
00:37:42.940 It's a dirty little secret
00:37:44.060 everyone knows about,
00:37:45.480 but all of these,
00:37:46.540 not all,
00:37:47.000 but a good portion
00:37:47.800 of these think tanks
00:37:48.600 are for sale,
00:37:49.840 and if you go in there,
00:37:51.060 if you're oil and gas,
00:37:52.680 if you're, you know,
00:37:53.560 big tech, whatever,
00:37:54.760 and you go in there
00:37:55.540 with a, you know,
00:37:56.380 six-figure grant
00:37:57.480 and say this is what
00:37:58.480 we'd like to see,
00:37:59.920 they do it,
00:38:01.000 and so this is,
00:38:01.960 this is something I think
00:38:02.780 Congress needs to become
00:38:03.700 more aware of.
00:38:04.820 I just think maybe
00:38:05.940 they turned a blind eye
00:38:06.840 to it in the past,
00:38:07.780 but a lot of advocacy
00:38:09.020 out here is pay to play,
00:38:10.920 and, you know,
00:38:11.580 what we're trying to do
00:38:12.400 is to some degree
00:38:13.820 expose that.
00:38:21.060 Okay, talking about exposing,
00:38:22.820 this is a crazy connection,
00:38:24.760 and maybe,
00:38:25.680 maybe you mentioned this
00:38:26.460 and I just didn't see it.
00:38:27.360 So,
00:38:28.000 so what is it?
00:38:30.160 Paul Ryan,
00:38:31.900 so Paul Ryan
00:38:32.740 has a family connection
00:38:33.800 to Ketanji Brown Jackson.
00:38:35.140 It's like Ketanji Brown Jackson's
00:38:37.040 brother-in-law
00:38:38.900 is married to
00:38:40.560 Paul Ryan's sister-in-law.
00:38:42.400 Okay,
00:38:42.700 so there's a connection there.
00:38:44.120 And then Paul Ryan tweeted,
00:38:45.920 Jana and I are incredibly happy
00:38:47.240 for Ketanji and her entire family.
00:38:48.760 Our politics may differ,
00:38:49.720 but my praise for Ketanji's intellect,
00:38:51.420 for her character,
00:38:52.120 and for her integrity
00:38:52.880 is unequivocal.
00:38:55.440 Is there anything there?
00:38:56.660 Is there,
00:38:57.100 I mean,
00:38:57.720 what's going on?
00:38:59.760 Well,
00:39:00.240 I will say,
00:39:00.800 if they're family friends,
00:39:01.740 I'm not necessarily
00:39:03.140 going to fault him
00:39:04.160 for,
00:39:04.680 you know,
00:39:05.480 providing some support.
00:39:06.740 But look,
00:39:08.000 I think something
00:39:09.300 that people need to understand
00:39:10.520 is
00:39:10.980 if you're not really worried
00:39:13.160 about the social issues,
00:39:14.560 is a liberal justice
00:39:16.040 really that big of a deal,
00:39:17.440 right?
00:39:17.740 Like,
00:39:18.060 it's not.
00:39:19.380 And so,
00:39:20.440 if you're,
00:39:20.780 if you're somebody
00:39:21.300 who's motivated
00:39:22.120 by pro-life,
00:39:23.260 by,
00:39:23.740 you know,
00:39:24.040 fighting for women's sports
00:39:25.520 and against the transgender agenda,
00:39:27.740 fighting for guns,
00:39:28.820 all these things,
00:39:29.400 of course,
00:39:29.940 the idea of having
00:39:30.760 a far leftist
00:39:31.460 on the Supreme Court
00:39:32.140 is scary.
00:39:33.140 But I just don't know
00:39:34.180 if Paul Ryan's
00:39:34.840 really motivated
00:39:35.600 by that stuff.
00:39:36.660 It seems like,
00:39:37.440 to me,
00:39:37.760 he's always been
00:39:38.580 motivated much more
00:39:39.960 by the fiscal conservatism,
00:39:42.100 which is fine
00:39:43.100 in its own right,
00:39:44.000 but without the social conservatism,
00:39:45.900 it's bankrupt.
00:39:47.140 Yeah.
00:39:47.860 Wow.
00:39:48.480 Wow.
00:39:48.840 This is,
00:39:49.300 this is really interesting.
00:39:50.920 I mean,
00:39:51.120 I think that we can say,
00:39:52.680 okay,
00:39:52.960 maybe there are some good things
00:39:54.400 about this person.
00:39:55.460 I remember liking
00:39:56.100 her initial speech.
00:39:57.060 Of course,
00:39:57.380 we know that
00:39:57.980 progressive nominees
00:39:59.400 very often try to come across
00:40:00.920 as more moderate
00:40:01.720 and more conservative
00:40:02.760 when they are going
00:40:03.660 through these hearings
00:40:04.460 and then they almost
00:40:05.660 always rule to the left.
00:40:06.840 So I don't think
00:40:07.620 she's going to surprise us
00:40:08.720 with any of her rulings.
00:40:10.000 I think we know,
00:40:11.480 as you've explained,
00:40:12.920 why she is being supported
00:40:14.800 by the entities
00:40:15.500 that she's being supported.
00:40:17.220 I am just a little surprised
00:40:18.920 to see how much
00:40:20.640 the media is trying
00:40:22.260 to cover up
00:40:23.820 the sex offender stuff.
00:40:26.580 That does surprise me.
00:40:27.920 I would think,
00:40:28.520 okay,
00:40:28.660 you just ignore it.
00:40:30.200 They're not ignoring it,
00:40:31.520 but they're also
00:40:32.180 not really debunking it.
00:40:33.440 Like,
00:40:33.640 they'll have headlines
00:40:34.400 saying,
00:40:35.000 this is misleading.
00:40:35.940 This is misinformation.
00:40:37.480 We're going to debunk this.
00:40:39.200 And then they go through it
00:40:40.320 and they don't,
00:40:41.420 they're not actually
00:40:42.400 able to debunk it
00:40:43.380 because,
00:40:44.000 I mean,
00:40:44.360 it's all public record.
00:40:45.500 It's all,
00:40:45.960 it's all there.
00:40:46.700 Everything that Josh Hawley said
00:40:48.100 is,
00:40:49.240 is exactly right.
00:40:50.360 I mean,
00:40:50.620 it's true.
00:40:51.520 And I guess
00:40:52.600 it's not specific
00:40:53.340 to child predators,
00:40:54.380 but we should
00:40:56.380 be worried in general
00:40:57.700 someone who apparently
00:40:58.980 doesn't care
00:41:00.320 quite as much
00:41:01.040 about the rights
00:41:02.600 of the victims.
00:41:05.080 Well,
00:41:05.660 as the left
00:41:06.400 becomes more authoritarian,
00:41:07.560 I think they're getting
00:41:08.640 a little bit more lazy
00:41:09.940 with their argumentation.
00:41:11.400 And so with this,
00:41:12.240 they'd rather
00:41:12.840 just dismiss
00:41:14.140 Josh Hawley
00:41:15.160 as a QAnon sympathizer
00:41:16.600 and,
00:41:17.000 you know,
00:41:17.540 have social media
00:41:18.620 ban anything critical,
00:41:19.860 right?
00:41:20.940 So,
00:41:21.600 you know,
00:41:21.860 but I think
00:41:22.480 the big thing
00:41:24.020 I've seen come across
00:41:25.020 when people do engage
00:41:26.020 in debate on this
00:41:26.740 is,
00:41:27.600 why are you mad
00:41:28.300 at Ketanji Brown Jackson?
00:41:30.080 This is basically
00:41:30.840 what all of us believe.
00:41:32.540 And I don't think
00:41:33.480 that's necessarily
00:41:34.360 encouraging.
00:41:35.240 And it's certainly
00:41:35.880 something that I think
00:41:36.720 is going to require
00:41:37.540 us to keep an eye on
00:41:39.400 and for us to continue
00:41:40.500 to ask judicial nominees
00:41:42.260 going forward.
00:41:43.680 You wrote this
00:41:44.280 in the New York Post,
00:41:45.580 given all the criticism
00:41:46.600 of Jackson's weak record
00:41:47.740 on crime and sentencing,
00:41:48.800 not to mention
00:41:49.400 the White House
00:41:50.000 withholding 48,000
00:41:51.820 pages of documents
00:41:52.680 related to her time
00:41:53.580 on the sentencing commission.
00:41:54.860 I didn't know that.
00:41:57.360 Yeah.
00:41:57.940 And,
00:41:58.400 you know,
00:41:58.520 the crazy thing is
00:41:59.420 they were selectively
00:42:00.520 leaking those documents
00:42:01.680 to friendly media outlets.
00:42:03.200 So as they were
00:42:04.140 trying to rebut
00:42:04.800 Josh Hawley's criticism
00:42:06.120 and Ted Cruz's criticism,
00:42:07.820 the media was fact-checking
00:42:09.580 and they were having
00:42:10.160 help from the White House.
00:42:11.140 But yeah,
00:42:11.440 48,000 documents
00:42:12.820 or pages of documents.
00:42:15.320 And,
00:42:15.560 you know,
00:42:15.900 I think we would have
00:42:16.540 really gotten
00:42:17.120 to understand
00:42:18.400 the judge's
00:42:19.120 judicial philosophy
00:42:20.060 had we seen those documents.
00:42:21.240 How is that possible?
00:42:21.560 How is that allowed
00:42:23.300 that the White House
00:42:24.160 can just withhold
00:42:24.980 that kind of information?
00:42:28.440 In this world,
00:42:29.720 I mean,
00:42:30.080 with a media
00:42:30.840 that's totally
00:42:31.500 on your team,
00:42:32.280 this would never
00:42:32.940 have happened
00:42:33.600 under a Republican.
00:42:35.080 Right, of course.
00:42:35.380 If Trump had tried
00:42:36.000 to withhold documents
00:42:37.100 about Kavanaugh,
00:42:38.240 you would have seen
00:42:39.060 an FBI investigation,
00:42:40.540 you would have seen
00:42:40.900 all sorts of things.
00:42:42.260 But this is just
00:42:43.220 kind of the game
00:42:43.940 they play now.
00:42:45.540 And, you know,
00:42:46.020 we are,
00:42:46.880 I mean,
00:42:47.100 this is why we need
00:42:48.000 Republicans elected
00:42:48.960 because they're going
00:42:50.520 to cheat
00:42:50.900 and they're going
00:42:51.360 to collude
00:42:51.740 with their friends
00:42:52.300 in the media
00:42:52.780 and in the corporate world.
00:42:54.300 Yeah, I just,
00:42:55.060 I think the easiest way
00:42:55.940 to explain why the media
00:42:57.080 is the way it is,
00:42:58.400 why it doesn't speak
00:42:59.540 truth to power,
00:43:00.500 just pretend that it does,
00:43:01.440 why it doesn't hold
00:43:02.240 Democrats and the people
00:43:03.840 on their side accountable
00:43:04.740 is really simple.
00:43:06.860 I mean,
00:43:07.100 I think it's a principle
00:43:07.880 that we can all understand,
00:43:09.140 as unfortunate as it is,
00:43:10.060 is that it's really hard
00:43:11.300 to think objectively
00:43:12.140 and to write objectively
00:43:13.400 about your friends.
00:43:14.360 It's really hard
00:43:15.000 to criticize your friends,
00:43:16.420 people that you're close to,
00:43:18.040 people that maybe
00:43:18.840 you even feel
00:43:19.440 are giving you access
00:43:20.400 or giving you power
00:43:22.240 or insulating you
00:43:23.360 from whatever it is,
00:43:25.220 criticism.
00:43:25.960 It's really hard
00:43:26.800 to write objectively
00:43:27.980 about those people,
00:43:29.120 especially when you share
00:43:30.120 the same ideology.
00:43:31.400 So that is just one reason
00:43:33.060 why the media
00:43:33.740 is so corrupt
00:43:34.560 and why they are able
00:43:37.340 to get away
00:43:37.820 with the things
00:43:38.300 that they are.
00:43:38.980 One thing I want to ask you,
00:43:40.140 you also mentioned
00:43:40.740 in this New York Post article
00:43:42.040 the Breathe Act.
00:43:43.940 What is the Breathe Act?
00:43:46.460 So the Breathe Act
00:43:47.620 is the model legislation
00:43:49.480 that all the,
00:43:51.240 you know,
00:43:51.440 all that Black Lives Matter
00:43:52.520 funding had to go somewhere
00:43:53.980 and we know it went to
00:43:55.160 some of the founders' houses
00:43:56.600 and all that,
00:43:57.580 but part of it went to groups
00:43:59.280 that focus on this
00:44:00.320 and it's basically
00:44:01.720 a total revamp
00:44:03.280 of our criminal justice system,
00:44:05.200 gets rid of,
00:44:05.820 abolishes prisons,
00:44:07.300 the entire,
00:44:08.220 you know,
00:44:08.520 defund the police agendas
00:44:09.700 in there
00:44:10.260 and a lot of Democrats,
00:44:12.480 you know,
00:44:12.760 it came out
00:44:13.200 and endorsed this early.
00:44:14.420 Now they've kind of
00:44:15.080 run away from it.
00:44:16.280 Nancy Pelosi
00:44:16.820 isn't talking about it,
00:44:18.040 but this is,
00:44:19.440 at least from our perspective,
00:44:20.640 what we have to see
00:44:21.420 as the end goal
00:44:22.340 of the Black Lives Matter
00:44:23.860 movement
00:44:24.280 of some of these
00:44:25.440 radical woke folks.
00:44:27.680 And,
00:44:27.960 you know,
00:44:28.960 it's pretty crazy.
00:44:29.880 I mean,
00:44:30.000 when you look at
00:44:30.720 all the individual things
00:44:32.000 it does,
00:44:32.920 I mean,
00:44:33.100 it basically gets rid
00:44:34.020 of drug offenses.
00:44:35.440 Again,
00:44:35.740 like,
00:44:36.000 no more life sentences.
00:44:37.580 You know,
00:44:38.900 people under the age
00:44:39.720 of 24,
00:44:40.200 I could go out there
00:44:41.180 and do a bank robbery
00:44:42.600 with a gun
00:44:43.720 and if I was under
00:44:45.060 the age of 24
00:44:45.900 under the Breathe Act,
00:44:46.900 I wouldn't serve time.
00:44:48.580 So it's a very radical thing.
00:44:50.500 We actually have
00:44:51.200 a report out there.
00:44:54.200 It's called
00:44:54.500 Black Lives Matter
00:44:55.420 and the Breathe Act
00:44:56.520 and authored by myself
00:44:58.340 and some other folks
00:44:59.100 at American Principles Project.
00:45:00.680 But it's pretty crazy
00:45:02.160 and,
00:45:02.740 you know,
00:45:03.720 I think the Democrats
00:45:04.440 were smart
00:45:05.180 to run away from this
00:45:06.720 at least publicly.
00:45:07.960 But if they ever feel
00:45:08.840 like they have the power
00:45:09.580 to impose it,
00:45:10.440 they will do it.
00:45:11.700 Yeah,
00:45:12.020 absolutely they will.
00:45:13.360 Yeah,
00:45:13.520 it seems like
00:45:14.120 they have at least
00:45:14.760 rhetorically
00:45:15.360 kind of backed down
00:45:16.240 from the defund
00:45:17.720 the police language
00:45:19.180 at least temporarily.
00:45:21.160 But I have no doubt
00:45:22.280 if there is
00:45:22.840 another incident
00:45:24.080 like what happened
00:45:25.880 with George Floyd
00:45:26.500 or anything.
00:45:27.040 I mean,
00:45:27.240 it's been kind of
00:45:28.100 strangely quiet
00:45:28.980 on that front
00:45:29.720 talking about things
00:45:30.660 like police brutality
00:45:31.540 in general.
00:45:32.340 I feel like we
00:45:32.820 haven't heard a lot
00:45:34.080 about that
00:45:34.560 in the news recently,
00:45:35.320 but I have no doubt
00:45:36.260 if another crisis occurs
00:45:37.500 that they will use
00:45:39.000 that wave of crisis
00:45:40.320 to push something
00:45:42.480 as radical
00:45:43.160 as that legislation.
00:45:44.440 I mean,
00:45:44.640 I say repeatedly
00:45:46.020 on this show
00:45:46.820 that social justice
00:45:47.940 kills.
00:45:48.920 Social justice
00:45:49.440 is not just.
00:45:50.740 Social justice says
00:45:51.620 how can we try
00:45:53.020 to make outcomes
00:45:53.940 for all different groups
00:45:55.440 equal
00:45:56.160 without actually looking
00:45:57.580 at what is causing
00:45:58.500 the disparity
00:45:59.200 in the first place.
00:46:00.520 As Thomas Sowell says,
00:46:02.060 discrimination
00:46:02.860 or disparities
00:46:04.760 are not inherent
00:46:05.900 proof of discrimination.
00:46:08.020 If there is a disparity
00:46:09.040 in outcome
00:46:10.100 between two groups,
00:46:11.320 whether it's graduation rates,
00:46:12.520 whether it's incarceration rates,
00:46:13.980 that does not automatically
00:46:15.340 mean that discrimination
00:46:16.460 is the cause of that.
00:46:18.040 But the equity
00:46:18.780 social justice agenda
00:46:19.900 just assumes
00:46:20.700 that discrimination
00:46:21.380 is the reason why,
00:46:22.740 for example,
00:46:23.340 maybe there's a higher
00:46:24.360 proportion of Black Americans
00:46:25.800 in jail.
00:46:26.820 And so rather than
00:46:27.900 looking at the root cause
00:46:29.380 and solving the root cause,
00:46:30.820 they just say,
00:46:31.960 as you mentioned earlier,
00:46:33.140 well,
00:46:33.560 we just have to do
00:46:34.460 whatever we can
00:46:35.300 to make these numbers equal
00:46:36.700 if that means
00:46:37.640 releasing violent criminals
00:46:38.840 from jail
00:46:39.520 and creating more victims.
00:46:41.320 Unfortunately,
00:46:41.840 there are no equity quotas
00:46:42.960 for victim numbers.
00:46:44.500 Isn't that interesting?
00:46:45.620 There are only equity quotas
00:46:47.220 for the people
00:46:48.840 that are creating
00:46:49.660 the victims.
00:46:50.560 Huh.
00:46:50.820 It's almost like
00:46:51.420 there's a nefarious,
00:46:52.740 destructive motivation
00:46:53.800 behind all of this.
00:46:55.600 Well,
00:46:56.120 I'm very thankful.
00:46:56.900 I'm very thankful
00:46:57.380 for your perspective
00:46:58.260 in uncovering this.
00:46:59.660 Last question
00:47:00.180 I want to ask you,
00:47:01.000 I notice
00:47:01.500 that you call yourself
00:47:03.260 a populist,
00:47:04.860 and this is something
00:47:05.480 that I've seen
00:47:06.100 more and more
00:47:06.960 from people on the right.
00:47:08.880 I would say
00:47:09.200 my husband and I
00:47:09.940 talk a lot about,
00:47:11.300 talk a lot recently.
00:47:13.420 I think it was
00:47:14.580 Sagar and Jetty
00:47:15.520 that first kind of
00:47:17.320 made us start thinking
00:47:18.260 a little bit differently
00:47:19.040 about our conservatism
00:47:20.980 and our perspectives
00:47:23.100 of the change lab.
00:47:23.700 It's probably
00:47:24.260 the help of Tucker Carlson,
00:47:25.780 too.
00:47:26.680 Can you tell us,
00:47:27.460 though,
00:47:27.580 what is populism,
00:47:29.200 essentially?
00:47:29.700 Why do you call
00:47:30.120 yourself a populist
00:47:30.960 and not necessarily
00:47:31.740 a conservative?
00:47:33.960 So one of the
00:47:34.920 political figures
00:47:35.720 I really learned
00:47:37.080 a lot from
00:47:37.660 while he was alive
00:47:38.420 was Jeff Bell.
00:47:39.580 He worked at
00:47:40.580 American Principles
00:47:41.200 Project previously,
00:47:42.200 but, you know,
00:47:42.880 worked for Reagan,
00:47:44.040 ran for Senate
00:47:44.900 in New Jersey
00:47:45.600 a couple times,
00:47:46.300 and he had a book
00:47:47.700 called Populism
00:47:48.640 and Elitism,
00:47:49.860 and he kind of said
00:47:50.640 that this difference
00:47:51.820 between populist
00:47:52.700 and elitist
00:47:53.260 was kind of
00:47:54.080 the most important
00:47:55.180 political difference.
00:47:56.080 And basically,
00:47:56.560 what it comes down to
00:47:57.560 is elitism
00:47:58.660 is a belief
00:47:59.340 that the people
00:48:00.100 are too stupid
00:48:01.460 or, you know,
00:48:02.680 can't govern themselves
00:48:03.740 and we need
00:48:04.580 an expert class
00:48:05.720 to rule over them.
00:48:07.080 And populists
00:48:07.740 are people
00:48:08.140 who have a general
00:48:09.020 optimism about
00:48:10.000 the American people
00:48:10.940 and their ability
00:48:11.780 not only to govern
00:48:12.820 themselves,
00:48:13.320 but to make decisions.
00:48:14.880 And so I think,
00:48:15.660 especially with COVID,
00:48:16.740 and this is when
00:48:17.240 I started really using
00:48:18.080 that identifier,
00:48:19.620 I think we're on
00:48:20.820 the side of populism here.
00:48:22.200 And so while I'm still
00:48:22.980 a conservative
00:48:23.540 and I think that
00:48:24.860 conservative populism
00:48:26.020 is definitely a thing,
00:48:27.600 I have an optimism
00:48:28.760 in the American people
00:48:29.660 and I think that
00:48:30.260 generally when you
00:48:31.040 talk about populism,
00:48:32.420 Trumpism is definitely
00:48:33.420 a form of populism.
00:48:34.700 I think that's
00:48:35.400 the unique thing
00:48:36.260 that makes it great.
00:48:39.040 I'm curious
00:48:39.840 what you think
00:48:40.420 about our 2024 prospects
00:48:42.880 for President Trump,
00:48:44.960 DeSantis.
00:48:45.420 You don't have to say
00:48:46.140 exactly who you want
00:48:47.460 to be a candidate,
00:48:48.360 but where do you think
00:48:50.000 the country is going?
00:48:51.040 Who do you think
00:48:51.880 most conservatives
00:48:52.680 will get behind?
00:48:54.940 So the one thing
00:48:56.000 I learned from Trump
00:48:57.340 in 2016
00:48:58.460 is that we don't
00:48:59.800 know anything.
00:49:00.400 Yeah, very true.
00:49:01.580 So I think that
00:49:03.120 there's a conventional wisdom
00:49:04.380 that if Trump runs,
00:49:05.860 he will absolutely win
00:49:07.340 and he may.
00:49:08.720 I think he'll beat
00:49:09.460 the Democrat,
00:49:10.580 assuming it's Joe Biden,
00:49:12.020 but even if it was
00:49:12.720 somebody else.
00:49:13.800 But I also just think
00:49:14.960 it's too early
00:49:15.680 to count anyone else out.
00:49:17.140 So DeSantis has shown
00:49:18.440 himself to be
00:49:19.400 very impressive
00:49:20.120 as governor of Florida.
00:49:21.520 And, you know,
00:49:22.200 if there is a primary
00:49:23.020 between Trump and DeSantis,
00:49:25.220 you know,
00:49:25.600 we'll see what happens.
00:49:26.640 I think it would be
00:49:27.280 good for us anyway.
00:49:28.440 Yeah.
00:49:28.800 Yeah, I think so.
00:49:30.380 Do you think
00:49:31.060 that this issue of crime,
00:49:33.060 do you think
00:49:33.780 it will be
00:49:34.700 a key issue
00:49:36.120 in 2024?
00:49:37.400 You linked an article
00:49:38.360 in your thread,
00:49:40.120 Safe Streets
00:49:40.580 Required the Political
00:49:41.580 Will to Punish Crime
00:49:42.860 and American Greatness
00:49:43.780 by Austin Stone.
00:49:44.960 It was published
00:49:45.520 earlier in March,
00:49:47.520 and that's true.
00:49:48.640 I mean,
00:49:48.840 progressives certainly
00:49:49.620 don't have the political will,
00:49:51.140 but as we've already mentioned,
00:49:52.200 there are plenty of Republicans
00:49:53.300 who don't have the political will
00:49:54.540 either,
00:49:55.000 probably because,
00:49:55.960 not because they're
00:49:56.540 ideologically aligned
00:49:57.560 with the equity policies,
00:49:58.540 but because they're scared
00:49:59.600 of losing their backing
00:50:00.500 or seen as racist
00:50:01.400 or whatever.
00:50:02.880 So one,
00:50:03.460 do you think
00:50:03.980 that this will be an issue
00:50:04.900 for people
00:50:05.380 who are tired
00:50:06.060 of the crime
00:50:07.060 and the crime waves
00:50:08.080 and the DA
00:50:08.900 is not doing anything,
00:50:10.100 the judge is not doing anything?
00:50:12.300 And do you think
00:50:13.600 at least Republicans
00:50:14.960 will gain the political will
00:50:16.880 to push back against this
00:50:19.820 and make Safe Streets
00:50:21.340 an issue for their campaigns?
00:50:24.860 Well,
00:50:25.340 as to the Republicans deciding,
00:50:27.060 that's a really good question,
00:50:28.960 but I do think
00:50:29.660 it's going to be an issue.
00:50:31.280 And the reason for that is,
00:50:32.660 look,
00:50:32.840 as we're trying to build
00:50:33.920 this multiracial
00:50:35.600 working class coalition,
00:50:37.360 people are worried about crime.
00:50:39.160 They're worried about,
00:50:39.980 you know,
00:50:40.300 their kids
00:50:41.040 and making sure
00:50:41.920 that they can send them
00:50:43.300 to school
00:50:43.720 and not worry about
00:50:44.520 them getting mugged
00:50:45.260 or hurt.
00:50:46.400 And I think that's something
00:50:47.700 that's going to affect
00:50:48.420 suburban women.
00:50:49.640 It's going to affect Hispanics.
00:50:51.220 It's also going to affect
00:50:52.180 African-Americans.
00:50:53.760 And so,
00:50:54.420 you know,
00:50:54.860 I think Republicans
00:50:56.000 would be wise
00:50:56.660 to focus on this.
00:50:58.520 Unfortunately,
00:50:59.260 it's just kind of a reality.
00:51:00.620 Like as crime goes up,
00:51:01.700 as this stuff
00:51:02.380 continues to happen,
00:51:03.940 we're going to have
00:51:04.960 to talk about it more.
00:51:06.140 There's going to be
00:51:06.560 more tragedies.
00:51:07.820 But I think it would be
00:51:08.840 politically pretty silly
00:51:10.040 not for Republicans
00:51:11.640 to talk about it
00:51:13.660 and to make that
00:51:14.240 a big issue.
00:51:15.200 Yeah,
00:51:15.520 I agree.
00:51:16.060 I agree.
00:51:16.520 Well,
00:51:16.720 thank you so much
00:51:17.480 for giving us
00:51:18.440 your insight today.
00:51:19.320 I really appreciate it.
00:51:20.700 Where can people
00:51:21.580 follow you,
00:51:23.300 support you,
00:51:23.940 all that good stuff?
00:51:25.780 Well,
00:51:26.000 thanks so much
00:51:26.460 for having me.
00:51:27.380 So I'm at
00:51:27.960 Substack
00:51:28.560 at
00:51:29.180 johnschweppe.substack.com
00:51:31.260 and then on Twitter
00:51:32.400 at johnschweppe.
00:51:33.600 Okay,
00:51:33.920 we'll provide those links
00:51:34.840 in the description
00:51:35.340 of this episode.
00:51:36.780 Thank you so much
00:51:37.500 for coming on.
00:51:39.080 Hey,
00:51:39.380 thanks so much
00:51:39.800 for having me.