Porn addiction is rampant in our culture, and it's hard to quit. The Supreme Court is hearing arguments on whether or not to take Donald Trump off the ballot, and the EU wants to ban Tucker Carlson from traveling to the EU because he's on the so-called "Kill List."
00:00:44.460In fact, it has the same kind of problems that heroin has, the effects on the brain.
00:00:50.140It's addicting, and it's very hard to quit.
00:00:53.340You might have experienced it yourself.
00:00:55.500You might have, you know, with somebody you love.
00:00:57.300I want to talk to you about the Victory app by Covenant Eyes.
00:01:01.140It is a powerful tool for Christians who are serious and want to quit porn altogether for good or maybe never start in the first place.
00:01:09.280It combines industry-leading technology with decades of experience and leadership.
00:01:13.240Once you've installed the Victory app on your devices, it'll run silently in the background, notifying a person of your choosing if your online behavior doesn't match your goals.
00:02:41.940Finding Democrats are losing big among black and Hispanic Americans.
00:02:46.360It should be extraordinarily concerning to the Democratic Party.
00:02:50.620We'll tell you about that, which kind of leads me to all of the stories out about Joe Biden and all of his gaffes lately and his mental decline and how it just can't continue and can't be ignored anymore.
00:03:06.220I think this goes into he's not going to be the candidate that actually runs.
00:03:12.340And speaking of candidates, Nikki Haley, after Nevada, said Trump rigged that state.
00:03:21.780Speaking of that, the Supreme Court today is hearing arguments.
00:03:26.360And we're allowed to dip into the audio today and actually hear the Supreme Court arguments online and on the radio today is something that really is very rare.
00:03:38.920But they're talking about whether or not you can take Donald Trump off the ballot.
00:03:43.460All kinds of doors and Pandora's box open up.
00:04:29.280Turns out pretty easy to replace a legitimate QR code with one that will direct you to malicious sites that, you know, exist just to steal your data from your phone.
00:04:38.460If it doesn't sound like a lot of fun, then you should have LifeLock and get protected.
00:04:43.360It's important that you are protected because your personal information gets exposed so often, making it dangerously easy for a cybercriminal to steal your identity.
00:04:52.980But protecting yourself can be easy with LifeLock by Norton.
00:04:57.540LifeLock detects and alerts you to the threats you might not spot on your own.
00:05:01.220Things like loans taken out in your name or cybercriminals pretending to be you.
00:05:06.440If you do become a victim of identity theft, a dedicated U.S.-based restoration specialist is going to work to fix it for you.
00:05:25.480Save 25% at LifeLock.com or 1-800-LIFELOCK.
00:05:32.320So, you know, you gotta love those people that just hate fascism so much that if a reporter goes in and gets the other side, you put them on a kill list.
00:07:44.480Sure, they infiltrate the government, and then they activate the people that are on the streets, grassroots, to cause all kinds of problems,
00:07:55.140until the people in the middle are like, somebody has got to stop this, and that's when the top comes down.
00:08:01.920So there are people that are looking for a dictator just to make all this stop.
00:09:44.940We know how he stops drugs on the streets.
00:09:47.020We know how he treats media members who speak out about him in a negative way.
00:09:50.880They usually fall from their apartment window or they go up to a higher floor and then jump from that or I'm sorry, fall out of that window happens all the time.
00:10:01.000He has to talk about a peace deal, even the drones that have come from Ukraine, from us, NATO, all of that.
00:15:55.220So, Yellen said it could be and it is one of the factors that Dodd-Frank told us to take into account considering designations.
00:16:06.280So, what her point was, why Presley brought this up, was because is racism a problem that the Treasury is looking at?
00:16:15.380The Treasury should not be looking at racism.
00:16:17.700The Treasury should be looking at basic laws for finance.
00:16:21.680So, Presley said there's a drugstore in Walgreens and Walgreens in Roxbury, Massachusetts, they closed and they said it was because of crime.
00:16:36.080But that's life-threatening and it's based on racial discrimination and economic grounds.
00:16:42.920So, what she's saying is Walgreens, even though they said they cannot open their doors because they're robbed every day and no one can have business,
00:17:00.660Presley says the government should consider that racism and therefore tell Walmart or Walgreens exactly what to do.
00:17:11.060I'm sorry, you're not closing down there.
00:37:39.180First, there is an enormous economic upheaval that is headed our way right now.
00:37:44.720And it's like nothing we've ever seen before with conditions this volatile, precious metals can make the difference between protecting your retirement or losing it.
00:39:38.980We're just talking about how tough things are for the little guy in this country, for the average American.
00:39:44.680Uh, it's so bad for the average American.
00:39:48.980We're even being priced out of McDonald's right now.
00:39:53.060McDonald's CEO admitted the burger giant's sales have taken a hit because of their jacked-up menu prices that are turning off their core customers.
00:40:01.820And it signals the chain's plans to focus on affordability this year.
00:40:20.380It's hurt their sales, as you can maybe imagine.
00:40:24.820Um, McDonald's CEO Chris Kambinski said, I think you're going to see, going into, uh, 2024, probably more attention to what I would describe as affordability.
00:40:42.140Because what they've realized is income, uh, low-income customers, people making less than $45,000 is how they define that, have largely stopped ordering from McDonald's.
00:40:54.300Because it's more affordable to eat at home than it is at, at McDonald's.
00:41:00.180Last week, uh, McDonald's Outpost in Connecticut was slammed for its outrageous prices after customers were charged $7.29.
00:41:09.860$7.29 for an Egg McMuffin and almost $6 for a side of hash browns.
00:41:15.880A quarter pounder with cheese and bacon that came with fries and a soda, $19 at McDonald's.
00:44:20.840That's a phrase that, you know, could apply now in the real estate game.
00:44:27.140Buying and selling a home is difficult enough during the normal economic times.
00:44:31.300And I think we can agree these are not normal economic times.
00:44:34.520You need somebody who is solid, who knows the area, who knows the houses and what they're worth in the area you're moving into or out of, knows the best practices.
00:44:44.660That's why I started a company called Real Estate Agents I Trust.
00:44:47.980When you contact us, we find you the best agents in your area and connect you to them.
00:44:52.600If we don't know your area, we're not going to recommend.
00:45:02.620You just tell us what you're looking for, you know, where you're moving from and to, and we'll help connect you with the best in those areas.
00:45:33.380So we're just, I was just talking Pat off the ledge during the break.
00:45:39.960He was, I mean, I thought, I thought, you know, if Putin was behind him, he could push him right out the window right now.
00:45:46.320And Pat would be dead because he was on the ledge and saying there's no hope.
00:45:50.900Well, we were just watching Molly Hemingway speak about the things in her book, Rigged, How the Media, Big Tech, and the Democrats seized our elections.
00:46:07.740Instead of having election administration that is rigorously nonpartisan and impartial under the law, we have allowed the private takeover of government election offices by partisan oligarchs and their armies of activists who use those offices and their authorities to tilt the election toward favored candidates.
00:46:28.460Instead of voters being able to vote for the candidate of their choice, powerful interests backed by wealthy oligarchs are working to remove the most popular candidate and the ruling party's chief opponent from the ballot in a move reminiscent of Soviet Russia.
00:46:46.000And if that weren't enough, instead of the top candidates chosen by the people being able to fully engage in a vigorous campaign heading into an election, we have one side actively attempting to throw its opponent in prison and bankrupt his family.
00:47:59.940The Constitution is no different from a state residency law that requires members of Congress to inhabit the state prior to Election Day when the Constitution requires only that members of Congress inhabit the state that they represent when elected.
00:48:14.660In both situations, a state is accelerating the deadline to meet a constitutionally imposed qualification and is thereby violating the holding of term limits.
00:48:27.260And in this situation, a ruling from this court that affirms the decision below would not only violate term limits, but take away the votes of potentially tens of millions of Americans.
00:48:37.080So this is the president's attorney, President Trump, Clarence Thomas' voice.
00:48:46.960...with respect to whether or not Section 3 is self-executing.
00:48:52.680And in doing that, your argument is that it's not self-executing.
00:49:00.040But then, in that case, what would the role of the state be, or is it entirely up to Congress to implement the disqualification in Section 3?
00:49:13.920It is entirely up to Congress, Justice Thomas.
00:49:16.440And our argument goes beyond actually saying that Section 3 is non-self-executing.
00:49:20.820We need to say something more than that, because a non-self-executing treaty or a non-self-executing constitutional provision normally can still be enforced by a state if it chooses to enact legislation.
00:49:32.000The holding of Griffin's case goes beyond even that by saying that a state is not allowed to implement or enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment unless and until Congress enacts implementing legislation allowing it to do so.
00:49:44.960So under Griffin's case, which we believe is correctly decided, the Anderson litigants disagree with us on that point.
00:49:50.260But if this court were to adhere to the holding of Griffin's case, there would not be any role for the states in enforcing Section 3 unless Congress were to enact a statute that gives them that authority.
00:50:21.520I wasted most of my life, but he took all the bad things that I did and turned them around on me to where it's actually helped me now that I'm on the right track.
00:50:54.920This is the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
00:50:58.260No person shall, uh, shall be a senator, representative of Congress, or elector of president and vice president, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state who has previously taken an oath as a member to Congress, or as an officer in the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial offer of any state, to support the Constitution.
00:51:25.500The Constitution of the United States shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.
00:51:35.000But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each house, remove such a disability.
00:51:40.760So, the Constitution says, if you have given aid and comfort or you've engaged in an insurrection, and they're saying that Donald Trump engaged in an insurrection.
00:51:50.960However, nowhere, nowhere, nowhere, in any law in the United States, are you guilty until proven innocent.
00:52:01.540You have, you can make the charge, but that doesn't make it true.
00:52:06.260And of all of the litigations, everything that is being filed in court, how many of them?
00:52:12.1207,000 different court cases coming against him?
00:52:15.220Not one is charging him with insurrection.
00:52:19.240Not one, or rebellion, or giving aid and comfort.
00:52:26.780Because they know they can't win that.
00:52:29.260So, the argument, one of the arguments is, the state can't say this.
00:52:33.880This, first of all, it has to be charged, and then the Constitution says that if that's who he is, if that's what they did, then he can't serve.
00:52:42.800But Congress can vote to remove that, should they care to.
00:52:49.240This was all because of the Civil War.
00:52:51.640This is an old-timey law that has never applied since the Civil War.
00:53:35.780They're trying to challenge everything to make it impossible to be a supporter of Trump or to be Donald Trump or to ever want to be like Donald Trump and stand against the machine.
00:53:48.140They're trying to make it absolutely impossible and teach everyone, we are going to tie you in court until you're either in jail, dead, or broke.
00:53:59.880That's what the state is trying to do right now.
00:54:03.020And when I say the state, I actually mean the leftist organizations, and Molly had it right, the oligarchs that are part of this cabal to change the way America works.
00:54:18.980And this is going to have far-reaching ramifications.
00:54:41.800So they're arguing now Trump should be removed from the ballot because of his alleged role in recruiting, inciting, and encouraging a violent mob.
00:55:35.900No prosecutor has attempted to charge President Trump with insurrection under the U.S. code in the three years since January 6, 2021.
00:55:46.760They don't think that this is going to be the strongest case.
00:55:50.120I think it is, but I'm not an attorney.
00:55:52.420But they think that it will be on the Section 3, the amendment only prohibits holding office, not running and being on a ballot.
00:56:05.440They think that that's the one that they're going to do because they want to make it very, very narrow so it doesn't affect anything but this case.
00:56:20.920Can we get to the issue, which is, I think, one that I go back to that I started with, and very briefly, what sense does it say that states can't enforce Section 3 against their own officials?
00:56:40.260I mean, I think, logically, those are two separate issues in my mind.
00:56:46.700Can states enforce the insurrection clause against their own officeholders?
00:56:51.940Or can they enforce it against federal officials?
00:56:57.500Or can they enforce it against the president?
00:57:00.700Those are all three different questions in my mind.
00:57:03.940And the answer to all three of those questions turns on whether this court agrees with the holding of Griffin's case.
00:57:10.880If Griffin's case is the proper enunciation of the law, then a state cannot do any of the things, Your Honor, suggested unless Congress gives it authority to do so.
00:57:20.120So a non-precedential decision that relies on policy doesn't look at the language, doesn't look at the history, doesn't analyze anything than the disruption that such a suit would bring, you want us to credit as presidential?
00:57:37.580Because Congress relied on Griffin's case when it enacted the Enforcement Act of 1870 and established...
00:57:44.120So, Mr. Mitchell, if I may interrupt, but just to clarify, I mean, this sounds like your reply brief, where it sounds like you're not making a constitutional argument.
00:57:53.660You're really making a statutory preemption argument.
00:57:59.120You're not saying that the Constitution gives you this rule.
00:58:03.380It's the kind of combination of Griffin's case plus the way Congress acted after Griffin's case that gives you the rule?
00:58:11.260That's exactly right, Justice Kagan, because we have implementing legislation.
00:58:14.880Congress took up the invitation provided by Griffin's case and established rights of co-warnto in the 1870 Enforcement Act, later repealed them.
00:58:22.380The only enforcement legislation that's currently on the books is the insurrection criminal statute, Section 2383.
00:58:28.580And when Congress made all of these decisions, the initial enactment of the Enforcement Act in 1870, the repeal of the co-warnto provisions in 1948, all of those were made with Griffin's case as the backdrop.
00:58:39.680Well, the understanding was that these congressionally established remedies would be exclusive of state court remedies.
00:58:44.660So there's not an express statement of preemption in these statutes, but there didn't need to be because Griffin's case provided the background.
00:58:49.980And if I could just understand the argument a little bit better, suppose that we took all of that away, you know, suppose there were no Griffin's case and there were no subsequent congressional enactment.
00:59:00.520What do you then think the rule would be?
00:59:02.420So in just as a matter of first principles without Griffin's case, it's a much harder argument for us to make because normally, I mean, every other provision of the 14th Amendment has been treated as self-executing.
00:59:12.620What we would argue in that hypothetical that your honor has suggested is that there are practical considerations unique to Section 3 that counsel in favor of a rule similar to what Chief Justice Chase spelled out in Griffin's case.
00:59:24.300And it goes to, I think, the policy concerns he talks about where this was a case, Griffin's case.
00:59:42.120I can't make heads or tails of it quick shorthand.
00:59:46.100But we do have after the court case, which should last year and then end by and in at least probably an hour.
00:59:55.760We have we have Alan Dershowitz on with us just a second.
01:00:02.040And he's going to he's watching it right now and he's going to be giving us his notes on what he thinks it all means coming up in just a little while.
01:00:18.100There are situations when less lethal is the way to go.
01:00:21.880Berna is the best alternative to apply deadly force.
01:00:26.020It fires powerful deterrence like tear gas and kinetic rounds.
01:00:30.780I'll tell you, I had a situation once where my teenager was my son was sneaking around in the middle of the night and Tanya heard something and she freaked out.
01:02:07.900You must have been free from this disqualification at an earlier point in time than Section 3 specifies.
01:02:15.920I think the answer to your question, Justice Alito, depends on how you interpret the word enforce in Section 5.
01:02:21.300And some members of this court, such as Justice Scalia, thought that enforce means you can do nothing more than enact legislation that mirrors the 14th Amendment's self-executing requirements, and you can't go an inch beyond that.
01:02:33.020That's not the current jurisprudence of this court.
01:02:35.340Well, you have to decide whether it's congruent and proportional, and we would get into the question of whether that would be congruent and proportional.
01:02:44.800I don't understand why nobody's talking about the fact that how can you enforce this clause against someone who hasn't been tried, let alone convicted of insurrection?
01:10:03.380So they moved her across state lines and then out of the country to her mother, who, if I'm not mistaken, and please correct me if I'm wrong, there's been some issues with mom as well in the past.
01:10:22.700So there is some documents that we submitted from counselors and whatnot supporting our claims.
01:10:29.540And then also, you know, her birth mom just wasn't really involved in her life in the last seven years, never called her, never visited or anything like that.
01:10:40.540And so we do have some great concerns, that and the fact that I believe Canada, you know, operates on a whole different system as far as transgender care.
01:10:49.160So we have some great concerns about her being there.
01:10:51.320Did you have joint custody or did you did have joint custody?
01:15:04.340If not, he's invited now and our producers will be reaching out again.
01:15:08.680We have been in touch with the governor's office.
01:15:11.360Um, and, uh, you know, there was a, there was something here that I was sent that talks about, uh, that you are, because you guys said no, uh, to sending her to, uh, Wyoming, which I think I would have too.
01:15:29.300Uh, yeah, well, state of Montana is limited in disclosing the specifics of cases involving minor children in its care due to the sensitive nature.
01:15:38.260Broadly speaking, the state does not remove minors from homes to provide gender transition services or to use taxpayer funds to pay for those services while a minor is in the custody of the state.
01:15:48.720But your child's not in the custody of the state, um, child protective services.
01:15:56.520Furthermore, the governor has asked the department of public health and human services to codify a formal policy and develop regulation to clarify and ensure the definition of abuse or neglect does not include a parent's right to refuse to provide gender transition services to his or her minor.
01:16:12.120So he's suggesting policy, but we also have, um, you know, I have seen the department of health, uh, CFSD does not investigate nor remove children based solely on allegations that parents oppose and will not allow their child who has gender dysphoria to transition genders.
01:16:34.080So I think that's very consistent with what they're telling you, but I feel that that's a massive loophole.
01:16:50.860So right from the get go, from day one at the hospital, they immediately had a nurse saying that, talking about getting top surgery in front of our daughter, they immediately started calling her a boy immediately.
01:17:01.880And they started, um, we turned in complaints, but it was immediate.
01:17:05.760And, um, there was, when it, when they said that they were going to have a bed for her in Billings, we knew immediate before that, that that was not going to happen because they kept, um, looking at our daughter with an unspoken language, like almost assuring her it was going to be Wyoming.
01:17:22.160So we knew they were going to pull that card and, and Wyoming allows the transgendering without parental approval on anything where Montana, the Dakotas, um, Idaho, those states do not.
01:17:35.800We were able to stand right there and Google that.
01:17:38.740So let me, uh, cause I've only got a minute left.
01:17:42.520This came from the Valley County attorney.
01:17:45.160Um, had the motion been granted, Todd Colstad's legal rights as a parent would have remained fully intact.
01:17:50.460The state of Montana would have no more involvement in his relationship with his child.
01:17:54.520Mr. Colstad and his wife objected to dismissal and regret, uh, and requested the state remain involved.
01:18:00.460Any statement made otherwise is false and inaccurate.
01:18:04.500Um, well, if we can respond to that, when we were in the courtroom that day, we asked that the birth mother's home be investigated as a safe place for, because they, they said, no matter what, they're going to send her to Canada.
01:18:16.220And so we had asked that they investigate the birth mom and make sure that that was a safe place for a child to go.
01:18:21.560And we, we explained our concerns and we even had documentation supporting those concerns.
01:46:39.880The lawyers were like the lawyers who advised the presidents of colleges, Harvard and MIT.
01:46:49.320And MIT, they were so taken up by kind of legal technicalities that they didn't see the big issues.
01:46:59.340And it's shocking to me that these lawyers, both of whom are relatively experienced, just didn't get it.
01:47:08.720And they had to, both of them, be rescued by the justices themselves.
01:47:11.760So, what did you get from the justices on a lean?
01:47:20.260Any indication of where they're going with this?
01:47:23.640Yeah, I think the leaning is in favor of Trump, despite Trump's lawyer.
01:47:28.140Not on the ground that Trump's lawyer argued, but on other grounds, grounds that I've been arguing for a long time,
01:47:34.520that only Congress, under Section 5 of the 14th Amendment, has the authority to implement Section 3.
01:47:40.700That's the argument the justices seem to be focused on.
01:47:43.900That's the argument that I have written about over and over again.
01:47:46.960But I gather the lawyers didn't read my article.
01:47:49.620So, you know, they just argued the wrong provisions of the Constitution.
01:47:56.380So, let me ask you, Alan, this is the one thing, and, you know, this is just coming to you as a layperson who doesn't know squat about the law.
01:48:03.440But how can he be taken off for insurrection when he's got a billion lawsuits against him and not one has charged him with anything like that?
01:48:16.880How can you be excluded for something nobody's even charged you with officially in court, let alone proven?
01:48:25.680To show you how absurd Jason Murray's argument is, he's the lawyer for Colorado.
01:48:31.520He said on January 6th, the minute the president engaged in the insurrection he did, he was no longer eligible to be president.
01:48:39.300So, for the last 14 days of January, between January 6th and January 20th, we had no president, according to that argument.
01:48:49.820According to that argument, the country was without a president for 14 days.
01:50:24.500But I think that the court will decide in favor of Trump narrowly on a technical issue without getting to the issue of whether or not he is disqualified or whether he committed an insurrection or anything like that.
01:50:41.180But this is a major disappointment from a guy who's been an advocate for 60 years and had heard such good things about these lawyers.
01:50:50.420They were overprepared technically, underprepared emotionally and politically, and in any practical sense of the word.
01:51:00.680Common sense was missing today from the arguments of both of those lawyers.
01:51:04.620That is the theme almost of every show.
01:51:53.220We have to get somebody else on tomorrow, because I wasn't satisfied with that answer, and I knew he was in a hurry, so I didn't push it.
01:51:58.440But I wasn't satisfied with that answer, because there should not be anything that you are charged with, but haven't gone through a system of court to make sure that it's true.
01:52:12.580Otherwise, if you're in power, you can charge everyone with insurrection.
01:52:24.020But apparently, according to the Constitution, maybe, it doesn't seem to matter that much, which that would be something I would correct pretty quickly.
01:52:31.500That's definitely how they're treating it in this Supreme Court hearing.
01:56:55.520How do you protect what's yours for things like retirement or even just living in something where all of the economic laws are just thrown up into the air?
01:57:45.300You know, years and years, over two decades ago, I bought my first goal with Lear Capital because I took the recommendation of Rush Limbaugh.
01:57:54.380Now, $3 billion in trusted transactions, thousands of five-star reviews online, 24-hour risk-free purchase guarantee.
01:58:03.000Lear is the precious metals leader that you can trust.
01:58:06.040Get your free wealth protection guides.
01:58:08.600Lear will also credit your account, $250 towards your purchase.
01:59:31.040If I were there and I would have done that interview, maybe not in Russia, because I don't know if I could have gotten out.
01:59:36.720But here's what I would make sure that I was doing.
01:59:41.880The guy is going to try to appeal to people who are feeling our country is in chaos and wants an American dictator.
01:59:51.280And if Dugan has his way, Putin is going to talk about our immorality, our loss of faith, transgenderism, what's happening on our streets, what's happening with drugs.
02:00:04.440Tucker, I think, could allow him one approach on that.
02:00:09.720And then he's got to say, but this is not about America.
02:00:53.280So Tucker needs to focus on the real issue, which, of course, is Taylor Swift and whether or not she's going to make it to the Super Bowl on time.
02:01:03.160And how many times are we going to show her up in the booth?
02:01:06.620I don't, I'm not sure that's really the real issue.
02:01:10.000But how many fans have come to see her?
02:01:12.160You know, does this increase the attendance and the viewership of the Super Bowl?
02:01:16.960I would love to have Tucker say to Putin, if we sent you Taylor Swift, could that solve this whole dispute?