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


Summary


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.