Episode 24 - Defund US Soccer. Stand with Tucker Carlson. Chinese Disinformation Campaigns Flood Twitter.
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
162.01262
Summary
The U.S. Soccer Board of Directors voted yesterday to repeal policy 6401 which required our players to stand during the National Anthem. Congressman Matt Gaetz says that s not enough. Breaking news: China admits it used nearly 200,000 fake accounts to influence politics.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Welcome to Hot Takes. This is Congressman Matt Gaetz.
00:00:19.140
If you enjoy the podcast, leave us a five-star rating, a review, a comment, a criticism.
00:00:24.080
Love your feedback and hot takes, and I hope you enjoy mine.
00:00:27.040
Let's talk about the news. Today, the news has me triggered.
00:00:31.620
The U.S. Soccer Board of Directors voted yesterday to repeal policy 64-01,
00:00:37.860
which required our players to stand during the national anthem.
00:00:45.220
This is the U.S. national soccer team making the decision that the soccer players who play
00:00:51.300
underneath our flag do not have to stand for it as it is being presented.
00:00:56.260
Now, I'll just go ahead and tell you from the outset, I don't like soccer enough for
00:01:02.160
the U.S. to even have a soccer team if that soccer team is going to disrespect our anthem
00:01:07.380
and our flag. It is not like some essential thing that we have to have if lashed to the
00:01:13.780
U.S. soccer team is this sense of such extreme wokeness that we cannot be proud of the United
00:01:21.080
States while wearing the uniform of the United States. And I think this is very distinct from
00:01:27.020
like the NFL player kneeling thing, right? Because as much as I oppose that and don't
00:01:33.040
like it and find it an overgeneralized indictment of the country and wholly unproductive, at least
00:01:39.580
those are private people working for a private company in a private league who absolutely have
00:01:46.260
the First Amendment right to do whatever the heck they want to do so long as it doesn't hurt
00:01:50.260
anyone else. And obviously, kneeling doesn't hurt anyone else. It's offensive speech. But
00:01:54.940
offensive speech is protected by the First Amendment. Remember, the First Amendment doesn't exist
00:01:59.940
to protect us from safe speech. It exists to protect the speech that may make us uncomfortable
00:02:06.620
and particularly political speech. So the kneeling gives the NFL players the right to express that
00:02:13.660
speech, however uncomfortable or unsavory as I may find it. And I have the right, if I don't like it,
00:02:19.000
not to go to an NFL game, not to buy a ticket ever again. But the U.S. national team, I mean,
00:02:24.800
that does actually get support from the U.S. government. Matter of fact, it was Senator Manchin
00:02:30.700
who introduced legislation at the federal level to attempt to leverage and compel equal payment
00:02:37.360
for the female members of the women's soccer team as for the male members of the male soccer team.
00:02:43.660
And so if we can compel equal pay, I certainly think we have the right to compel that our
00:02:50.100
national team stand for the national anthem. And you know what? If those players have a desire to
00:02:56.040
share their concerns about police brutality, make their opinion known, wrap themselves in the
00:03:03.080
woke-topia, declare allegiance to the Capitol Hill zone of Seattle, whatever they want to do,
00:03:09.900
it's unequivocally their right to do that. But while our anthem is playing, while you serve on
00:03:16.560
the team, I think there is an obligation to respect our country. In the coming days, I will be introducing
00:03:22.300
legislation to compel U.S. soccer to reverse the decision they made to repeal policy 604-1.
00:03:30.340
If players are playing for our national team, they should respect the honor that that bestows.
00:03:35.540
They should stand for the anthem. They should respect our flag. If we love America,
00:03:40.700
we would expect and deserve and demand no less.
00:03:45.840
Natalie Winters at the National Pulse again breaking news regarding China. Breaking Twitter
00:03:52.300
admits China used nearly 200,000 fake accounts to influence politics, 150 times more than Russia.
00:03:59.940
So you'll remember when Democrats and their allies in the fake news media were telling you that
00:04:06.080
American democracy just could not withstand 1,200 Russian bots tweeting out nonsense for rallies and
00:04:14.700
get-togethers that like would draw 11 people. But here you've got China with 200,000 bots according
00:04:22.620
to this report that you can go and link to through Natalie's story on the National Pulse.
00:04:27.360
But I mean, my goodness, they're out there spreading conspiracy theories about the coronavirus,
00:04:33.640
trying to run down the Trump administration's response, doing everything they can to elevate
00:04:39.520
the messaging coming out of the Joe Biden campaign. So if, you know, the Democrats were so worried
00:04:47.020
about the 1,200 fake Russian accounts, I hope they'll join in being just as outraged and just as
00:04:53.920
a speaker to get to the bottom of why there are 200,000 Chinese accounts that are trying
00:04:58.600
to influence our democracy potentially to help Joe Biden because they know that Sleepy Joe
00:05:05.000
will not be tough on them the way Donald Trump has. And it's easy to understand why they might
00:05:09.580
have that view of any president other than Donald Trump, because Donald Trump is the first American
00:05:14.480
president in my lifetime to fundamentally understand China and confront China and put our generation
00:05:21.520
in a position to beat China. Too woke for facial recognition success. Two major companies, Amazon and
00:05:31.400
Microsoft, both announcing that they will not engage in facial recognition technology transfers to law
00:05:38.260
enforcement for a period of one year. The Amazon story we find in Axios from Orion Rumler. And Amazon
00:05:46.320
saying that originally they had hoped that this technology would be able to sort of be utilized
00:05:52.060
across all different kind of folks. But there was a federal study that found that facial recognition
00:05:57.400
systems offered by Amazon, Microsoft and IBM largely failed to identify people of color, predominantly Asians
00:06:05.440
and African Americans. Amazon did not submit its algorithm to the study per the Washington Post.
00:06:11.160
So here I think there's a chance in the facial recognition game that the game you're watching may not actually be
00:06:19.040
the game that's being played. If you look at one of the fastest growing companies in America right now, it's
00:06:24.680
Clearview. They have facial recognition software that seems to be an improvement, an advancement over what you've got
00:06:32.340
at Amazon, Microsoft, IBM, and they are deploying it at rapid scale. Now, I think that raises a number of public policy
00:06:39.580
questions about whether or not facial recognition software should be commercial, whether or not it should
00:06:44.620
be law enforcement only. Are there civil rights concerns? Is there a notice requirement that should
00:06:50.060
exist? Should there be some preemption so that you don't have different types of facial recognition
00:06:54.860
systems in every jurisdiction across the country? So these are all very legitimate questions to ask.
00:07:01.360
And I just don't think that like retreating to our wokeness and saying, oh, well, because we think there may be
00:07:07.500
some racial disparity, we're not going to do anything for a year. I don't know that that is really what's
00:07:12.880
best for our country. And I certainly think it's not realistic because in China, they're not taking a year
00:07:19.960
pause. They're not limiting their deployment. Matter of fact, they're utilizing their progress in AI and
00:07:26.020
machine learning to accelerate the pace of their facial recognition software. It's one of the reasons why
00:07:32.200
they're able to keep so many people oppressed is because they've got these technological advancements.
00:07:37.580
Now, you know, we don't want our government to have the ability to do that, but we sure as heck
00:07:42.380
don't want China to be the leading government that then becomes the purveyor of this technology and that
00:07:47.860
then develops the doctrine on its utilization globally among our allies and perhaps even with some
00:07:54.620
partners in the United States. I mean, we've seen how China gets their tech into police stations
00:07:59.460
through drone technology. You know, if we retard the U.S. development of tech, does that mean at some
00:08:06.140
point down the road, there's a greater likelihood that if there is some great need for like pandemic
00:08:11.660
contact tracing or something like that, that then it creates a vacuum filled by China. So if you've got
00:08:17.620
an America first view of tech development, even if you've got concerns about the technology, it's probably
00:08:24.200
better to answer those concerns rather than to kick the can down the road. Remember, I talked on a
00:08:29.120
prior podcast about kicking the can down the road being sort of the Bill Clinton strategy on space,
00:08:34.660
that if we didn't militarize space or engage in that practice, that somehow it would slow that from
00:08:42.100
being an objective of other nations. And the reality was that we are seeing a capability gap
00:08:49.260
close in space because we allowed our adversaries to catch up when it was such a uniquely American
00:08:57.560
achievement to get to space and to be successful in expanding the final frontier. And yet we've
00:09:04.120
allowed that gap to close because we didn't engage in the fight with great vigor. We don't want to see
00:09:09.280
that happen with machine learning, AI, 5G, facial recognition. That's why I think we need to develop
00:09:15.680
the capabilities, develop the doctrine, ensure it's consistent with our values. But just the fact that
00:09:21.720
Amazon and IBM and Microsoft may be pulling out of this space, maybe that doesn't mean that it's some
00:09:27.900
great moral reflection. It may just be that they're getting beat by Clearview and that Clearview is
00:09:33.980
rapidly deploying around the country. So let's have that national conversation. Let's not just concede
00:09:39.660
the game to China. This show is hot takes, but I've got a cold take for you. Ben and Jerry's launches new
00:09:48.660
anti-Trump ice cream called Pecan Resist. This is a story I found in People from Maura Homan. And yeah,
00:09:57.360
the Ben and Jerry's operation is going to continue to keep your ice cream political with the Pecan Resist
00:10:04.040
flavor. Chocolate ice cream with white and dark fudge chunks, pecan walnuts, and fudge covered almonds.
00:10:12.500
A deliberately diverse mix. It will be available at participating scoop shops nationwide and on their
00:10:19.480
website for $6.99. The Pecan Resist from Ben and Jerry's. I stand with Tucker Carlson. That was the
00:10:29.500
hashtag trending last night and early this morning on Twitter. And I stand with Tucker Carlson. No take
00:10:36.160
was hotter than his last night on his show. So much so that six major advertisers are now boycotting
00:10:42.280
Tucker Carlson tonight. One of the greatest shows on television, if not the greatest show on television.
00:10:47.440
Disney, T-Mobile, Smile Direct Club, Papa John's, Jackson Hewitt Tax Service, and Vary have all said
00:10:53.880
they will no longer advertise on Tucker Carlson's show. That is a report from thisweek.com.
00:10:59.500
Soon after this monologue. This may be a lot of things, this moment we're living through, but it
00:11:04.540
is definitely not about black lives. And remember that when they come for you, and at this rate,
00:11:09.960
they will. Anyone who's ever been subjected to the rage of the mob knows the feeling. It's like being
00:11:15.200
swarmed by hornets. You cannot think clearly. And the temptation is to panic, but you can't panic.
00:11:21.120
You've got to keep your head and tell the truth. Tell the truth. If you show weakness of any kind,
00:11:26.360
they will crush you. Ask Drew Brees. By some accounts, poor Drew Brees is on his fourth
00:11:31.560
apology for the crime of defending the American flag. He decided to apologize, another using him
00:11:37.860
as a propaganda organ. Hostage tape after hostage tape. At a moment like this, there is no advantage
00:11:43.720
in cowardice, in being Mitt Romney. You think you're saving yourself. You're just empowering the worst
00:11:49.300
people, people who hate you. Before you know it, you're confessing to crimes you didn't commit.
00:11:53.780
Don't start. Tell the truth. And the truth is, this is a good country, better than any other. Of course,
00:11:59.420
we are flawed, but we are trying, unlike most places, and we have nothing to be ashamed of,
00:12:03.920
none of us. Immigrants know that best of all, that's why they come here. A million new Americans
00:12:08.380
every year. They're not coming because America is a racist country. They're coming because it's not.
00:12:14.060
That's all true. And in our clear moments, we know it's true. Even the people claiming it's not.
00:12:20.440
Truth is a defense, no matter what they're telling you at this moment. This moment will pass. Remember
00:12:25.540
that, all moments do. When it does, we will look back at what we just saw in a horror and disbelief.
00:12:31.980
But if you're honest now, you will keep your dignity, and ultimately, you will be very glad about that.
00:12:38.660
Life is not worth living without it. When it comes to the riots and the destruction of
00:12:43.720
property, and the taking of city blocks to hold in some warlord status, Tucker Carlson is absolutely
00:12:50.520
right. This is not about racial injustice. This is about a permanent criminal element that is
00:12:56.700
utilizing chaos to try to seize power. And it is grotesque, and no element of our government should
00:13:03.760
allow it. This is not the conduct of a great nation. And I appreciate Tucker Carlson's voice on
00:13:09.300
television, and I absolutely stand with Tucker Carlson.
00:13:15.100
One of the interesting elements of the upcoming debate on criminal justice reform and police reform
00:13:22.060
will be the treatment of unions, police unions. And I just want to get into why this is a little bit
00:13:28.640
politically sticky, and why it might actually lead to an opportunity for some bipartisan consensus
00:13:34.480
in a productive way. So police unions traditionally have trended democratic. Republican reform efforts
00:13:41.560
have gone after the way in which unions are funded. That is typically opposed by police unions, teachers
00:13:48.380
unions, public sector employee unions, and they donate to pro-labor Democrat candidates. But with the
00:13:56.780
political realignment really reflected by Donald Trump's election, you have started to see more of these
00:14:02.900
police unions trending Republican. And they've trended Republican at the same time as a lot of Democrat
00:14:09.620
voices have become more shrill against the police. It's not any Republican group out there calling to
00:14:16.480
defund the police right now. Those are left-wing groups. They're funded by people like George Soros,
00:14:22.500
who are the very left-wing funding sources for many of the candidates for public office. And we covered
00:14:28.600
the Soros connection specifically to a tweet about defunding police in an earlier episode that you can check
00:14:34.920
out. So with that as the mantra of the left, police unions who as a consequence of kind of their, their
00:14:41.080
brotherhood and sisterhood with other unions, organized democratically, sometimes donate
00:14:47.400
democratically, but their members are trending more and more Republican. So how will this play out in the context of the
00:14:55.240
debate over police reform? Well, the allegation has been made, and it was the subject of a lot of discussion
00:15:01.320
among the Republicans on judiciary in a lot of our closed door meetings. Police unions do at times protect
00:15:08.520
the incompetent, the abusive, the members of the force that receive the most frequent complaints, maybe
00:15:16.440
not as a consequence of the profile of work that they do, but maybe as a consequence of how they do that
00:15:21.080
work. And if the police unions are too strong, if they never lose, if they always win in the defense
00:15:27.800
of an accused officer, well then that's not really justice for the accuser. Just as if unions and
00:15:35.720
defense for labor and opportunity for labor to come together in some sort of an organizing capacity,
00:15:43.400
if that is not allowed, then you could see whistleblowers really targeted. I mean, there are
00:15:48.440
police and law enforcement entities in the country where a whistleblower will step up and accuse a
00:15:54.600
fellow officer of misconduct, of abuse, of assault, of excessive use of force. And if there's no union
00:16:03.240
to protect some of those, that can also create the perverse dynamic. So how do we strike that balance,
00:16:08.360
where unions are not so strong that it creates this element of the permanent bad cop that gets shuffled
00:16:15.480
from one force to the next, while at the same time, not decimating the ability to have some protection
00:16:22.520
for those who are making a legitimate claim. So very intricate policy issue. It's got a political
00:16:28.280
sensitivities to it. It's one I'm researching and seeking feedback on if you've got any hot takes or
00:16:33.640
good ideas. Thanks for listening. This has been Congressman Matt Gaetz. Be sure to leave us a five-star
00:16:39.960
review and a comment or suggestion or even a criticism. I love your hot takes and I hope you'll be back