00:00:27.320Well, Gavin Newsom, it seems, has gotten a new Twitterer.
00:00:30.920He's hired some staff that I'm sure are blue-haired transgender freaks.
00:00:36.800But they've decided the way they're going to make Gavin the hero of the left is to tweet in all caps and try to do everything they can to sound like Donald Trump.
00:00:45.480And, by the way, it is working in that left-wing kooks across the country are sending money to Gavin Newsom.
00:00:51.900It's raising him a whole lot of money.
00:00:53.140And so he has gone crazy on Twitter, but he's getting dunked on badly.
00:00:59.360And we're going to talk about one example where he's trying to blame high electricity prices on Donald Trump.
00:01:06.900And, well, let's just say the facts are not backing him up.
00:01:09.780We're going to break that down for you.
00:01:10.980We're also going to talk to you about a remarkable story, which is a major Democrat think tank has put out a list of forbidden words, a list of words they concluded that when Democrats say them, they sound like out-of-touch freaks.
00:01:24.420Now, I've got to say, I agree with this think tank, but I don't think Democrats are going to follow this advice.
00:01:31.060It really is striking, though, to show just how out-of-touch they are, that they have to be told what sort of words make you sound like a scolding schoolmarm or a radical in a university faculty lounge.
00:01:44.640And finally, we're going to talk about a Supreme Court decision that upheld the Trump administration's canceling of hundreds of millions of dollars of DEI grants.
00:01:54.240It was a terrific victory for common sense.
00:01:58.460We're going to break it down, explain what the court did, what the divide was, and how President Trump is now able to cancel massive amounts of money that were going to completely woke political ideological projects.
00:02:10.640All of you know that I am a pro-Second Amendment guy.
00:02:15.020I've shared on numerous occasions how carrying my firearms saved my life from a gang-related attack.
00:02:20.520But for those of you out there with family members who may not be comfortable having a gun, by their side, you still want them to be able to protect themselves and others in times of danger.
00:02:29.700And that's where the Berna launcher comes in.
00:02:32.420Berna is a handheld pistol that fires both kinetic rounds and chemical irritants to separate you from an attacker.
00:02:38.560And I'm here with Josh Sherrard from Berna to share the true story of how an avid hiker used his Berna to stop an attacking mountain lion.
00:02:57.040Armed with his Berna, you know, this is one of those things where he didn't expect to see anything.
00:03:00.880And all of a sudden on this hike, this mountain lion appears out of nowhere.
00:03:04.420Of course, he sends his family on down the trail, watches the lion for a few minutes, realizes it's not going away.
00:03:10.940So uses his Berna, fires a few rounds to scare it off, continues down the trail.
00:03:15.120But unfortunately, this mountain lion appears again, at which point he realized he was going to have to up his aggression with that Berna.
00:03:22.680Fires four rounds, was able to strike the mountain lion all four times, the chest and torso, at which point that mountain lion tears off, never to be seen again.
00:03:30.680And these guys make it down the trail, back to their car and back to home safely.
00:03:35.600Fortunately, this is all it took to make sure and get this family back home safe off a hike that could have taken an obvious turn for the worst.
00:03:43.800And I'm going to guess that Berna has been used to stop other types of animal attacks as well.
00:03:48.740We get stories all the time of users, whether it be dogs or other wildlife.
00:03:55.060We even have an ecological park whose security carries Berna for bears out in the Smoky Mountains out there that's been effective there as well.
00:04:04.400So, once again, not just a tool for people, but very effective against animals as well.
00:09:46.580And so one of the reasons when you fill up your tank in California, it costs so much as you've got massive state and local gasoline taxes.
00:09:55.340But not only that, when it comes to electricity generation, when you put mandates, as blue states do,
00:10:00.700when you put massive renewable energy mandates, that drives up the cost of generating electricity.
00:10:07.440Consistently, the cheapest form of generating electricity is either coal or natural gas.
00:10:15.300States like California don't want you to use coal or natural gas, so they mandate instead you use very, very expensive forms of electricity generation.
00:10:29.180It's also building the transmission lines, the environmental permitting, the regulatory barriers, the lawsuits that are entailed in big blue states.
00:11:00.780If you look at the state of Texas, and I'm not saying renewable energy is necessarily bad.
00:11:06.260The number one producer of wind energy in America is the state of Texas.
00:11:10.000The number one producer of solar energy in the country is the state of Texas.
00:11:15.120But if you look at how it happens in Texas, that's not subject to a mandate.
00:11:19.020And so we also have quite a bit of energy that is generated via natural gas and some that is generated via coal as well.
00:11:26.840In California, by driving it overwhelmingly to renewables, especially renewables that, if the weather is uncooperative, you know, sometimes the sun is shining and the wind is blowing and wind and solar works fine.
00:11:41.240But other times, if it's overcast, you may not have any sunshine.
00:11:45.700You have days when the wind doesn't blow.
00:11:47.860And so if you're powering a power grid, you need electricity that can be generated day in, day out.
00:11:56.360And that typically comes from either natural gas or coal.
00:12:34.560The state of New York has decided New Yorkers don't want natural gas, so the costs are very high there.
00:12:39.700And they've decided no one else in New England wants it, so New York will not let them build a pipe across New York to get the natural gas to New England.
00:12:47.860And so as a result, what they've been doing is importing their energy from Russia instead.
00:12:52.380By the way, it's worse for the environment.
00:12:56.520And it also does things like enrich Vladimir Putin.
00:12:58.980But that is left-wing liberal logic, is no, no, no, no, we think oil and gas is bad, so therefore no pipelines whatsoever, and we'll just buy Russian gas and pollute even more.
00:13:38.720Things like, outfits like PolitiFact are left-wing editorial outlets, and they mask their often deceptive editorial views as objective fact-checking.
00:13:51.180It really is, it's amazing the things, number one, they inevitably fact-check conservatives many, many more times than liberals.
00:14:00.820Sometimes they'll fact-check liberals on some innocuous statement just to conclude it's true.
00:14:05.460And the bias with which they have it, you know, one of the funniest fact-checks, PolitiFact once,
00:14:10.120I said years ago that in Iran they celebrate Death to America Day, and then that they have a holiday that they celebrate Death to America Day.
00:19:34.460All right, I've told this story on Verdict before, but we actually had a hearing in Judiciary where a Democrat senator made multiple references to birthing people.
00:19:47.060And afterwards, I came up to him and I said, dude, is your party really that whack job crazy that you can't say mom?
00:21:23.400Because then you do the test orally instead of writing it down.
00:21:27.360So, everyone went into the HR department, and you said the words out loud to the HR lady who was like 75 years old, and she would just shake her head.
00:23:13.620And in this podcast, we interview Canada's most inspiring women.
00:23:17.260Entrepreneurs, artists, athletes, politicians, and newsmakers.
00:23:20.660I want to move to another big story as well.
00:23:34.440And this is one that is not going to get a lot of media attention.
00:23:37.420So I hope everyone listening will actually pay attention to this.
00:23:40.080Because it was a big victory from the Supreme Court, allowing Donald Trump to tax millions of dollars, Senator, in funding for DEI-related grants.
00:23:55.200And it allowed the Trump administration to terminate $783 million worth of grants.
00:24:02.640They're grants from the National Institute of Health.
00:24:04.440And they were granted – they were canceled because of the administration's policy positions on diversity, equity, and inclusion in gender ideology.
00:24:15.320And the Trump administration quite reasonably said, we're not going to give away $783 million for DEI.
00:24:23.500And these were awards that were studying all sorts of ideological objectives.
00:24:29.660And in many instances, these were awards that were granted because of the researchers' race.
00:26:06.260The four who dissented were Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kagan, and Justice Jackson.
00:26:14.180So you had the chief justice plus the four liberals.
00:26:17.120Now, you had four conservatives, Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh,
00:26:24.960who would have granted the Trump administration's request entirely.
00:26:29.820And so what happened was plaintiffs had their grants canceled.
00:26:34.960They went and filed a lawsuit in Massachusetts because, of course, in this lawfare,
00:26:39.780they deliberately seek out left-wing judges at extreme left-wing jurisdictions.
00:26:44.600And so Massachusetts and San Francisco have been incredibly popular places for left-wing attorneys general and radical groups to file lawsuits.
00:26:52.740And the district judge, what the district judge did is two things.
00:26:57.040Number one, vacated the guidance that the Trump administration had issued saying they were not going to give funding to DEI.
00:27:04.560And then secondly, the district court ordered the Trump administration give the $783 million to these grant recipients.
00:27:14.560That went up on appeal to the Court of Appeals, and the Court of Appeals agreed with the district court and, again, ordered the Trump administration give the money.
00:27:22.500Now, it went to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court 5-4 said, no, you do not have to give the money.
00:27:30.520So the $783 million, the Trump administration is holding on to it.
00:27:35.320And the deciding vote on this was Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who voted with the liberals on part of the case and the conservatives on part of the case.
00:27:45.940So she voted with the conservatives on, you don't have to give the money.
00:27:51.360And the basis for it, by the way, is what the five justices said, is the lawsuit was filed in the wrong place.
00:27:59.480That the lawsuit should have been filed in the Court of Federal Claims, which is where if you have a breach of contract case against the federal government,
00:28:08.000if you have a contract and they broke it, under federal law, the place to bring that case is the Court of Federal Claims.
00:28:14.720It's a specialized court that exists to adjudicate breach of contract cases against the government.
00:28:20.900They did not bring this in the Court of Federal Claims.
00:28:22.840They brought it just in an ordinary federal district court.
00:28:25.640So 5-4, the court said, wrong court, they don't have jurisdiction to decide this, so they don't have to give the money.
00:28:32.080Now, Justice Barrett sided with the liberals in refusing to reverse the district courts vacating the guidance on DEI.
00:28:45.660So the guidance on DEI is currently blocked, although that lawsuit will continue, so it's not necessarily permanently blocked.
00:28:54.520And she declined to have the Supreme Court reverse that decision.
00:28:59.580And so this was, at the end of the day, this really should have been 9-0.
00:29:05.940But I'm glad it was at least 5-4 the right way, because that means that this money doesn't have to go out the door.
00:29:12.040Yeah, it's certainly big that it didn't have to go out the door.
00:29:14.160Moving forward, does this also have some sort of precedent that the president will be harassed maybe a little bit less?
00:29:20.900Or do you think Democrats say, we'll harass no matter what, we'll argue wherever we can, a liberal court we can find, and that will at least slow him down?
00:29:28.820Yeah, look, the Democrats are going to keep trying, and the left-wing activist groups are going to keep trying.
00:29:33.820This is their next generation of lawfare.
00:29:36.120Just like before, when they indicted him four times, that was an effort to use the courts, to use law enforcement to stop President Trump, but also to stop the voters from re-electing him.
00:30:19.880In Department of Education v. California, this court granted a stay because it found the government likely to prevail in showing that the district court lacked jurisdiction to order the government to pay grant obligations.
00:30:42.220The California decision explained that, quote, suits based on any express or implied contract with the United States do not belong in district court under the Administrative Procedure Act,
00:30:56.060but in the Court of Federal Claims under the Tucker Act.
00:30:59.520Rather than follow that direction, the district court in this case permitted a suit involving materially identical grants to proceed to final judgment under the APA.
00:31:10.860As support for its course, the district court invoked the, quote, persuasive authority of the dissents in California and an earlier Court of Appeals decision that California repudiated.
00:31:31.060In casting California aside, the district court stressed that the court there granted only interim relief pending appeal and a writ of certiorari and did not issue a final judgment on the merits.
00:32:04.480If the district court's failure to abide by California were a one-off, perhaps it would not be worth writing to address it.
00:32:13.300But two months ago, another district court tried to, quote,
00:32:17.180compel compliance with a different order that this court had stayed.
00:32:22.320Still another district court recently diverged from one of this court's decisions, even though the case at hand did not differ in any pertinent respect from the one this court had decided.
00:32:36.540So now this is the third time in a matter of weeks this court has had to intercede in a case squarely controlled by one of its precedents.
00:32:50.020All these interventions should have been unnecessary.
00:32:53.800But together, they underscore a basic tenet of our judicial system.
00:32:58.400Whatever their own views, judges are duty-bound to respect the hierarchy of the federal court system created by the Constitution and Congress.
00:33:10.400Look, this highlights a pattern we're seeing of lawless district judges.
00:33:15.620That is, Justice Gorsuch and Kavanaugh lay out.
00:33:18.660Three in just three weeks that have defied the Supreme Court of the United States.
00:33:22.840Said, we don't care what the court said.
00:33:26.760Look, I'm reading from a Supreme Court.
00:33:28.300And some of that sounds like legalese.
00:33:30.720But I'll tell you one of the most amazing things that Justice Gorsuch described, the district court did, is it said it found persuasive the dissents in the California decision.
00:33:44.020Well, a dissent, by definition, means you lost.
00:33:51.340A dissent is someone who disagrees with the opinion.
00:33:53.560And the way precedent works, the way our judicial system works, is a decision that it issues from the Supreme Court is a precedent that all of the district courts and all of the courts of appeals are bound to follow.
00:34:06.460So if you are citing a dissent, you are saying right on the front of it, I don't care what the majority held.