BUY CAST BREW COFFEE TO SUPPORT THE SHOW - https://castbrew.com/ Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com Host: Tim Pool @Timcast (everywhere) Guest: Josh Hammer @josh_hammer (X) My Second Channel - https://www.youtube.com/timcastnews Podcast Channel - https://www.youtube.com/TimcastIRL Trump TAKES OVER DC, Police Accused Of FAKING Low Crime Rate / Gay Marriage IS ENDING??
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| And the crime is out of control. | ||
| I mean, D.C. is really one of the only major cities in America. | ||
| I mean, I'll put you this way. | ||
| I mean, is there any reason why just a few blocks from the White House, there should be shots fired in broad daylight? | ||
| I mean, these are kind of things that happen there in the nation's capital. | ||
| A D.C. police commander has been suspended and accused of changing crime stats. | ||
| The union says leadership in D.C. are flubbing the numbers to make it look like crime is going down. | ||
| Despite the fact we experienced this crime search all across the country in these major cities, they're all claiming crime is going down. | ||
| Donald Trump has federalized D.C., or I should say the police, and deployed the National Guard. | ||
| On top of this, as an aside, we'll be getting into the Obergefell issue. | ||
| But the question is, why are we getting these reports that crime is down when it feels like crime is up? | ||
| I'll be joined by Josh Hammer of Newsweek and the Article 3 project. | ||
| Let's bring him in and discuss all of this. | ||
| All right, here we go. | ||
| Loading it up. | ||
| How's it going, Josh? | ||
| Can you hear me? | ||
| Hey, I got you, Tim. | ||
| Hey, how's it going? | ||
| Going great. | ||
| How about you? | ||
| I'm going. | ||
| It's going pretty well over here. | ||
| We've got big news today, a couple of huge stories. | ||
| The first that I want to really get into is Trump's announcement that he's sending in the National Guard. | ||
| He's going to take federal control of the police. | ||
| We've also heard that some federal law enforcement agencies have already begun to patrol D.C. over the crime. | ||
| We've got this crazy story that a D.C. police commander was flubbing the numbers to make it look like crime was going down. | ||
| First, I'll just, you know, your thoughts and opinions. | ||
| Is this the right move? | ||
| Other than that, what's going on in D.C. Yeah, so look, a lot to unpack here. | ||
| I happen to think that this is a brilliant move. | ||
| I am a big, huge opponent, frankly, of this move. | ||
| I lived in D.C. myself for a few years, like many in our circles have. | ||
| Major cities in America. | ||
| I'll put you this way. | ||
| I mean, is there any reason why just a few blocks from the White House, there should be shots fired in broad daylight? | ||
| I mean, these are kind of things that happen there in the nation's capital. | ||
| I mean, I mean, when President Trump says that our beautiful capital with the Lincoln Memorial, the Washington Monument, I mean, this should be a place for tourists not only to flock from around the world, which they already do, but where they feel safe on a day-to-day basis. | ||
| So it's good stuff on the policy. | ||
| It's also a brilliant opportunity, I think, for the Trump administration and for the political right more generally to disprove all sorts of fallacies that have emerged from the past 20 to 30 years from the left when it comes to criminal justice policing. | ||
| The left has been going on and on ever since the Rudy Giuliani era in New York City, Rudy Giuliani, broken windows policing, largely continued to an extent at least by Mayor Bloomberg. | ||
| Ever since then, certainly when I was in law school from 2013, 2016, starting around then and really escalating during the Obama years, the left has just done a total 180 against police, against criminal justice. | ||
| They say that less police means more safety. | ||
| This is just an amazing opportunity, I think, for just a real live experiment, a real-time experiment. | ||
| Let's actually make sure that the feds are going to sick the D.C. police in these areas where they are typically reluctant and hesitant to patrol there. | ||
| And it's a great opportunity for the right, I think, to disprove two to three decades worth of left-wing fallacies and erroneous logic when it comes to proactive policing. | ||
| The politics, I think, are also a total no-brainer. | ||
| It's not just sound policy. | ||
| The politics are also great there. | ||
| Crime is across the board one of the issues where a plurality of American site is one of the most salient issues facing the Republic. | ||
| It was one of the major issues in the 2024 election, frankly, along with immigration, the economy, inflation. | ||
| Everyone cares about crime. | ||
| You know, suburban moms there, we talk about them as a key swing demographic. | ||
| Everyone cares about crime there. | ||
| And, you know, just putting on my legal cap for a second, Tim, this is also directly in line with the constitutional vision. | ||
| You know, D.C. didn't really get any kind of meaningful home rule until a 1973 law passed by Congress called the D.C. Home Rule Act, which really for the first time created the modern D.C. mayor's office, this council. | ||
| To this day, it's kind of a mixed bag, actually. | ||
| Congress actually selects the municipal judges there in Washington, D.C., but moves towards greater federalization of D.C. is actually directly in line with the federal envision. | ||
| You know, the left has long pushed for D.C. statehood and for D.C. voting in Washington and so forth there. | ||
| That's certainly not what the founders thought there. | ||
| So from both a legal perspective, a political perspective, and above all, just a quality of life public policy perspective, I think it's a win-win-win across the board, frankly. | ||
| I think so. | ||
| Do you live there now by chance? | ||
| I live in Florida right now. | ||
| Oh, okay. | ||
| So we're in West Virginia, of course, but a lot of people don't know this. | ||
| The Eastern Panama, we're like an hour and a half from D.C. So all of our big city, like the shows we do, anytime we do an event, we're going to be in the DC Metro or in D.C. itself. | ||
| It's insane. | ||
| It is not an understatement. | ||
| It's crazy to me to hear Democrats claiming crime is going down when literally everybody witnesses it. | ||
| I was just in D.C. the past three weekends. | ||
| We were doing live shows. | ||
| And I happened about a conversation between two government, one guy who was a government contractor and one woman who actually worked for the DOD. | ||
| And guess what? | ||
| The first thing the guy, well, the first thing they ask is like, oh, so you're from around here, right? | ||
| Okay. | ||
| First question after that is, do you feel safe? | ||
| And I started laughing because everyone knows what's true. | ||
| There are shots fired near the White House, not to mention the riding and the chaos. | ||
| But this story about this commander flubbing the numbers is crazy. | ||
| So I'm curious your thoughts on this. | ||
| This is really weird. | ||
| It always turns out that there's some, I hate to do it, but Democrats involved in some kind of surreptitious or nefarious political play where they're manipulating the numbers, lying about the narrative and trying to trick people. | ||
| So the questions I have on this is, do you believe, like, so there are allegations right now, but the police union has said that the higher-ups are flubbing these numbers. | ||
| Do you believe the numbers are being flubbed? | ||
| And if they are, why are they actually doing it? | ||
| So look, I have not done a personal deep dive. | ||
| I have no personal sources within the DC police there that would give me kind of credence one way or the other. | ||
| But what I can say is that it strikes me as entirely plausible. | ||
| And what I can also say, Tim, is that I have heard anecdotally, I haven't spoken with this person, but through secondhand, I know of a source in Mayor Bowser's office and Mayor Muriel Bowser, not exactly a right-winger to put it mildly there, but apparently even she has at times expressed more of an openness to try to ramp up police enforcement there trying to crack down and carjackings. | ||
| And what I've heard is that she gets pushback from a lot of black leaders, basically the Al Sharpton types there, the folks who are trying to, for XYZ reasons, trying to protect gangsters and carjackers and gangbangers there. | ||
| And your mileage may vary as to why you think they would want to do such a thing there, but there are some political, self-serving, cynical interests there when it comes to trying to kind of get your turf and secure your political territory there. | ||
| D.C. is a very corrupt city historically there. | ||
| I mean, there's very little about that there. | ||
| I mean, it kind of shares a lot of resemblance to Chicago and New Orleans in certain respects there. | ||
| So I would not be the least bit surprised if there was outright flubbing on the numbers there. | ||
| But a lot of this, I mean, let's just kind of zoom out a little bit and contextualize within this kind of post-2020, post-George Floyd, Black Lives Matter cultural milieu that we're currently living in. | ||
| You know, these days, Tim, if you just recite basic statistics, you know, if you say that black people in America, I'm totally making up numbers, by the way, but if you say that they're responsible for, you know, 50% of homicides or whatever the actual number may be there, you know, you are immediately called a racist for simply citing statistics there. | ||
| So I have no doubt about it that in a city like Washington, D.C., which is a very, very black city, that it's going to be very powerful, you know, black politicians who are going to try to do things like this, you know, along the lines what you're suggesting. | ||
| That's a good point. | ||
| I actually like, I'll pull that. | ||
| I want to get the raw number on that. | ||
| Over the past decade, what we saw was there were several people who posted FBI crime stats and were banned on Twitter or Facebook or YouTube because it was racist to do so. | ||
| When you see that happen in the private sector with these pressures, what do you think the hires of the police department are going to be doing as well? | ||
| They don't want to be the one who comes out and issues a statement saying, oh, here, by the way, here's the racial breakdown of crime in my city. | ||
| They're going to get called racist. | ||
| The BLM is going to riot. | ||
| They're going to say the police are lying and they're going to say it's all race-based. | ||
| It's crazy, right? | ||
| I mean, it really says a lot about where we're at as a society where like literally just saying statistics, you know, somehow gives you a presumption that you're coming from from a racially nefarious perspective there. | ||
| It's it's it's absolutely nuts there. | ||
| And no one wants to say it because of the fear of being called racist. | ||
| I mean, this is one of the great fears in American society over the past really four to five decades. | ||
| I guess, I guess since the 1960s, right? | ||
| I mean, ever since the civil rights era, Americans have just been utterly petrified of being called racist. | ||
| But when that takes the form of being afraid to actually name statistics, of actually saying, you know what? | ||
| No, actually a city like Washington, D.C. that has a larger minority population, we actually really do need proactive policing there. | ||
| You know, going back to the Giuliani and Bloomberg era of New York City, you know, NYPD policing there to actually say, you know what? | ||
| No, we actually need more NYPD squad patrol cars in certain areas in the Bronx and Queens and whatnot there that have a demographic makeup that is disproportionately prone to crime. | ||
| We have to have these conversations. | ||
| I mean, what is the point of even having a police in the first place there if you're not willing to have these conversations? | ||
| Now, again, what I've heard kind of secondhand is that Mayor Bowser in D.C., who again is a lefty, but even she, I think, is getting sufficient pushback on the crime stuff that she's expressed a willingness there. | ||
| And she herself has gotten pushback from various other folks. | ||
| So it's a total mess there. | ||
| And again, I think Donald Trump's doing the doing totally, frankly, the right thing there, policy, politically, and legally. | ||
| It's a no-brainer. | ||
| So I actually just pulled the data and anyone who gets offended can blame it on chat GPT because maybe it's wrong. | ||
| But it says that white people commit around 60% of violent crime as per the FBI and black people about 38%, Asians about one to two, American Indians about one to two, and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander is between zero and one. | ||
| The argument, of course, that people make is that 38% of the 38% of crime coming from a smaller portion of the population, around 13%, is disproportionate. | ||
| Now, some people want to, that is the data, okay? | ||
| I'm not saying that people are good, bad, or otherwise based on their race. | ||
| Not saying that at all. | ||
| But if you even brought these issues up, you were getting banned. | ||
| So again, D.C. police, Chicago police, all of these, these Democrat-run cities are trying to claim that crime isn't as bad as it is. | ||
| Hillary Clinton even tweeted this out. | ||
| Crime's at a 30-year low in D.C., Trump's unhinged and lying. | ||
| And then Trump says the opposite. | ||
| But now we've got the story of the police union saying they're actually flubbing the numbers. | ||
| I think it makes sense. | ||
| If you're in this politically appointed position, you know that if you're going to go to the mayor and say, we're getting disproportionate crime from the black community, she's going to get pushback from the people you mentioned, like Sharp Denny and these other BLM activists. | ||
| So she's going to say, give me better numbers. | ||
| It's all political. | ||
| So the one thing's really obvious. | ||
| I mean, Trump sending in law enforcement and taking command of law enforcement, I think is a good idea. | ||
| But do you have any concerns? | ||
| Remember when they erected those fences around the Capitol building and it was considered dystopian because it's supposed to be public? | ||
| There are some that are expressing concerns that, yes, there may be violent crime, but Trump sending in the National Guard, federal law enforcement, taking over the police is pushing us towards a police state. | ||
| I personally do not share those concerns. | ||
| I'm sure that some more libertarian-minded folks have some legitimate concerns on those grounds there. | ||
| I am more of a law and order kind of guy, Tim. | ||
| I mean, that's just kind of been my MO really ever since I first started in law school when I was clerking for a federal judge on the Fifth Circuit. | ||
| I mean, I'm a law and order guy. | ||
| From my vantage point, if you don't actually have public safety, if you don't have people who actually feel safe walking the sidewalks, I mean, what is the point of having these beautiful memorials? | ||
| What's the point of having the Smithsonian, the Washington monuments, if you're going to be scared to actually go there with your family, with your young children in the first place there? | ||
| Again, this is the nation's capital. | ||
| I mean, I remember the first time that I went to Washington as a kid. | ||
| I grew up in the New York area originally there, and I was so excited. | ||
| I had read all about this in elementary school and middle school. | ||
| And just to go there and see the sites, you know, I was eyes wide open there. | ||
| I was just so, so happy to see it there. | ||
| And the notion, now that I'm a new father, we had our first child last December, the notion that I could one day take our daughter to see all this there after I do my best as a father to try and instill in her a love for America and civics and government and all there, the notion that I would be scared or reluctant to do so because God forbid there could be a gangbanger, a carjacker, shots fired on a random street there. | ||
| I mean, that's utterly terrifying. | ||
| So to me, it kind of, you know, there's a, there's somewhat of an inversion here of the order of operations that we have to have law and order first in order to appreciate these monuments in the first place there. | ||
| And I think that what Donald Trump is saying probably correctly is that we don't currently have that there. | ||
| Let's establish that. | ||
| And then let's kind of bring it everyone to enjoy all that Washington, D.C. has to offer. | ||
| You know, the crazy thing is, I do a lot of events in D.C. because we live here. | ||
| And the first thing we're doing when we're doing logistics is who's what, how much security do I have to bring with me? | ||
| That when I, where I live in West Virginia, I don't have to worry about it. | ||
| Crime is below average here. | ||
| Everybody's strapped. | ||
| And I go about my business and no issues. | ||
| I go to DC and immediately it's like, okay, we're going to have two guards waiting for you when you arrive. | ||
| When you get out of your car, they'll be there. | ||
| And it's crazy to think that's how we live. | ||
| And it shouldn't be that way. | ||
| But I do want to jump to the next subject for the big news of the day, and that is the challenge to Obergefell, which I don't know if you saw, but Kim Davis, she's the clerk, I believe from Kentucky, who was actually jailed for refusing to issue gay marriage licenses after the ruling on Obergefell. | ||
| Now, I'll give you my thoughts right away. | ||
| So Kim Davis, through her lawyer, she's filed a writ of cert to the Supreme Court. | ||
| There's a possibility of a ruling next year in 2026 that could overturn gay marriage. | ||
| At the time, the ruling was five to four, upholding this argument under the 14th Amendment that states must recognize gay marriage licenses. | ||
| I think based on the current makeup of the Supreme Court, there is no way that they will uphold Obergefell. | ||
| I believe one year's time it will be overturned, but I'm curious what you think. | ||
| Well, Tim, you know, look, cards on the table. | ||
| So I was in law school when Obergefell came down. | ||
| I am a longtime opponent of same-sex marriage as a matter of public policy. | ||
| I think that it is the incorrect definition of marriage. | ||
| And as far as a legal constitutional matter is concerned as well, I genuinely think that Anthony Kenney's majority opinion in Obergefell is probably the single most ludicrous majority opinion in my entire lifetime. | ||
| That thing is not law. | ||
| It is middle school poetry at best. | ||
| Can you say anything specifically that sure? | ||
| So, I mean, he writes his opinion. | ||
| It's 20 to 25 pages, maybe 30 the most give or take there. | ||
| He doesn't actually even make a straightforward legal argument. | ||
| He makes a vague reference to equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. | ||
| He makes a vague reference to the due process clause. | ||
| And then he basically says that if you kind of do a little of this, a little of that there, you know, kind of, you know, it makes sense that marriage has evolved in the understanding of human beings such that this thing is no longer constitutional there. | ||
| But that's just not really how constitutional, how constitutional law works. | ||
| I mean, when the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, I mean, obviously, same-sex marriage was not even a figment of anyone's imagination, but actually, you know, private homosexual acts themselves, sodomy, was prescribed virtually everywhere. | ||
| So, you know, the notion that they could have possibly envisioned this, I think is totally preposterous. | ||
| You know, so for all those reasons, I would love nothing more than to agree with you that this case actually will be overturned. | ||
| Having said that, I don't think it's going to happen. | ||
| In fact, I don't think it's going to get anywhere close to happening, actually, to be honest, to be honest with you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes. | |
| I mean, they said that about Roe v. | ||
| Wade, though. | ||
| And that was stronger, in my opinion. | ||
| Well, here's the thing. | ||
| So there's lots to unpack here. | ||
| So you need four votes, four of the nine, in order to grant a writ of sertuari and actually hear a case straight on there. | ||
| So if I'm just looking at the justice and trying to count votes, I think you can easily count to four justices who agree as a first principles matter that Obergefell is wrong. | ||
| But most of the justice have a somewhat convoluted process for what they call star decisis, which is how much to rely on legal precedent and when to consider trying to overturn a precedent that even they might concede is flawed. | ||
| It's really only Clarence Thomas, to an extent to Neil Gorsuch, but Neil Gorses, let's recall, had that Bostock case in 2020, which is a transgender case. | ||
| So he's a little wobbly on these issues. | ||
| So it's really only Clarence Thomas who takes a truly, truly, truly principled stance on star decisions, where he basically says, if it's wrong, it's wrong, period, full stop, end of story. | ||
| And sure enough, in Thomas's concurrence in the Dobbs case, which overturned Roe versus Wade, he actually did call for the overturning of Obergefell. | ||
| But he's the only justice on record who has actually directly done that. | ||
| So I think probably at most of them, if I'm just being honest here, you probably have two of the nine justices at most, Thomas and Sam Alito, who are the two most conservative, who I think would agree to hear this in the first place. | ||
| I think Neil Gorsuch would probably just prefer to duck this issue. | ||
| Look, Amy Coney Barrett, I have no doubt that she thinks that Obergefell was wrongly decided, but I don't think she wants to get anywhere near this whatsoever. | ||
| John Roberts, who actually, you know, Roberts was the main dissenter in Obergefell, the Chief Justice, very powerful dissent, actually. | ||
| Really, really, really strong stuff from the Chief Justice a decade ago in Obergefell. | ||
| The thing about Roberts, he takes a very, very rigid view of starry decisis there. | ||
| He basically says, if it was decided recently there, I don't want to touch it again. | ||
| That's kind of his MO. | ||
| So I'm just not seeing the votes, to be honest with you. | ||
| You're saying they'll deny cert. | ||
| It won't even go to the Supreme Court. | ||
| That is my guess. | ||
| Now, if they grant CERT, I think it would be limited to a very narrow First Amendment religious freedom question for Kim Davis as to whether she has some sort of dispensation or opt-out. | ||
| I don't think they're going to actually touch the 14th Amendment ruling whatsoever there. | ||
| But if I'm being very honest with you, my somewhat pessimistic guess is they probably don't grant cert in any capacity. | ||
| But if they do, I think it would be very limited to the Kim Davis dispensation question. | ||
| Again, I hope I'm wrong. | ||
| A cars and table here, I used to be of counsel at First Liberty. | ||
| That's a religious liberty law firm there. | ||
| I'm really kind of all in on this issue. | ||
| I genuinely disagree with same-sex marriage, both as a policy and a constitutional matter. | ||
| So I would love nothing more than to be wrong. | ||
| I just don't see it happening. | ||
| I want to be a bit more optimistic, but I defer to, I mean, you know more than I do on the patterns and the law and all these things. | ||
| I'm hoping, I know I'm probably wrong to even hope because I think the Supreme Court, as it's made up right now, time and time again has showed us there are only two justices, justices of real courage and reason, and that's Alito and Thomas. | ||
| And the rest of them, you know, I think if it, I feel like if it comes to the arguments on Obergefell, it wins. | ||
| If they're actually going to go through the idea of marriage licenses, same-sex marriage, how the law should operate, I don't see how this stands. | ||
| I feel like six to three makes the most sense. | ||
| Maybe Amy Coney Barrett, she's squishy and scared inside the liberal sometimes, but it really does feel like on the logic of the law. | ||
| You know, my view largely is this. | ||
| Liberals like to claim whenever you bring up the Supreme Court shouldn't be doing these universal changes to culture and law. | ||
| Like Obergefell, they say, what about the Civil Rights Act? | ||
| What about when they desegregate and did all these things? | ||
| There was a law. | ||
| Congress passes a law and the Supreme Court can then weigh its constitutionality. | ||
| In this regard, there was no law passed. | ||
| Most states today still have bans on same-sex marriage, but only due to that precedent are allowing it to occur. | ||
| So I hear this and you're making me a little pessimistic. | ||
| I am worried because maybe they just dodge the issue like cowards. | ||
| So look, I think you're right that if the question were presented to the justices and they basically said, you know, ignore the fact that this case was decided 10 years ago, ignore what lawyers call reliance interests, ignore all that. | ||
| Just actually rule on the literal 14th Amendment question. | ||
| I think you're totally right. | ||
| I think that there are six votes then to just put in a simple statement: Obergefell was wrongly decided as a matter of law. | ||
| I have no doubt about that. | ||
| My point is only that that's just not necessarily, unfortunately, in my view, that's not necessarily how these decisions are made. | ||
| Yeah, a lot of the justices, you know, Amy Coney Barrett's a very good example. | ||
| So Barrett clerked for Justice Scalia. | ||
| She's very much a Scalia acolyte. | ||
| Scalia in his jurisprudence had this well-established multi-part bouncing test for star decisis, basically when you go in there and when you overturn a flawed precedent. | ||
| And a lot of these lawyers who put a very, you know, a firm emphasis on precedent and star decisis put a high reliance on reliance interest, which basically means if there are people in the here and now that are relying on this ruling there, we're going to be very reluctant to overturn it. | ||
| And I think the number of people here who have same-sex marriage licenses in America in the year 2025. | ||
| I don't know the exact number, but I think it's maybe like around a million, two million, something like that there. | ||
| I mean, that is a non-negligible reliance interest. | ||
| Now, in my view of Star Decisis, that doesn't matter because if it's matter, if it's wrong as a matter of law, it's wrong overturning, period, full stop. | ||
| End of story. | ||
| To me, that's the only principled approach to take, frankly. | ||
| But even for a lot of these right-of-center justices, that's just not necessarily the approach they take. | ||
| Yeah, it's a problem, though, in this country that the legislative branch is supposed to be handling these issues. | ||
| And it's come down to a win the presidency and take the Supreme Court and build the structure you want. | ||
| That seems to be what's happening. | ||
| It's funny. | ||
| The Supreme Court overturning Roe v. | ||
| Wade was sound and principled, albeit some may disagree on certain issues. | ||
| Fine. | ||
| The issue with Obergefell is the Democrats and the liberals in this country could not get the legal power to create same-sex marriage as an institution. | ||
| So they utilized brute force. | ||
| If we do not have a Supreme Court body or a political apparatus on the right that is willing to say you can't do that, and they will allow the use of brute force politics, we lose. | ||
| And this country is, I mean, I'll put it this way. | ||
| Many people describe it as Republicans don't fight back. | ||
| Republicans don't use power. | ||
| Conservatives don't use power. | ||
| If every time the left, liberals, and Democrats use brute force, Republicans just say, well, it's wrong. | ||
| So we won't, the left will win in the end. | ||
| You speak my language. | ||
| I've been preaching this for, you know, for 10, 15 years now. | ||
| I mean, I mean, how many times have we seen Republicans, conservatives fight with one hand tied behind their back? | ||
| I mean, maybe even two hands tied behind their back. | ||
| I mean, this happens time and time and time again. | ||
| One of my pet projects for the past 10, 15 years have been trying to overturn this when it comes specifically to the realm of courts and jurisprudence. | ||
| I have my whole own theory actually on constitutional interpretation. | ||
| I call it common good originalism, trying to kind of give a little more heft to conserve judges to feel a little more emboldened to rule in line with principles of natural law and biblical truth and things like that there. | ||
| So I've really kind of thought this through and done the best that I can in my own capacity there. | ||
| But unfortunately, you know, institutional realities kind of just, they kind of just are what they are, unfortunately, there. | ||
| Now, you know, I don't know, finish your thoughts. | ||
| I don't want to interrupt you. | ||
| No, all I was going to say was the crazy thing is, and you're totally right on this, because they did do it with Dobbs. | ||
| They did do it in overturning Roe versus Wade 49 years after Roe versus Wade there. | ||
| And, you know, going back to Roe versus Wade, you even had a lot of very famously pro-abortion people, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, actually, back when she was an ACLU lawyer, she famously said that Roe versus Wade went too far. | ||
| They didn't allow the Democratic process to play out. | ||
| You know, when O'Bergefeld was decided in 2015, it was around 35 states that had some sort of ban on same-sex marriage in their state. | ||
| So very similar. | ||
| It's very similar to Roe versus Wade. | ||
| The court dramatically oversteps there. | ||
| It's a very similar type thing. | ||
| But, you know, the whole LGBT cause has just achieved such cultural relevance and salience in modern American society and modern American culture there that I think a lot of people have been kind of cowed into obese and submission. | ||
| They're just so afraid to challenge it from either a policy or a legal perspective. | ||
| Maybe. | ||
| I mean, one point I've been making quite a bit. | ||
| South Park comes back with a bang, mocking Donald Trump. | ||
| And liberals came after me because I was upset with how they mocked Trump. | ||
| Now, were they, was I upset that Trump was insulted? | ||
|
unidentified
|
No. | |
| The issue is they didn't make fun of Trump right. | ||
| They should have went harder on him over Epstein. | ||
| They could have challenged the issue of tariffs. | ||
| What did they do? | ||
| They said he was gay. | ||
| They said Donald Trump is a homosexual. | ||
| That's why you should laugh at him. | ||
| And I said, well, you know, okay, I guess. | ||
| If the left is now cheering on South Park, I'm going to refrain from saying the word just for the purpose of, you know, reach, I guess. | ||
| But the slur for homosexuals was used in that show several times as they mocked Trump for being a homosexual and liberals cheered for it. | ||
| So my attitude was: if the play that the Democrat and liberal side is making now, because I'm not saying Matt and Trade did this with South Park, but it's that, haha, Trump's gay, make fun of him for it. | ||
| That is one of the biggest cultural victories the right has gotten in decades. | ||
| If now South Park is telling liberals to say slurs for gay people and that being gay is funny and to be made fun of, culturally, we may be shifting on this one. | ||
| And because the left in the liberal media apparatus has only existed to say whatever the right does is wrong. | ||
| Make fun of it. | ||
| It created the perfect opportunity now. | ||
| When Matt and Trey come out and call Trump gay, the left cheers it on. | ||
| Okay, well, now the culture has shifted. | ||
| Young kids are going to start dropping F-bombs again. | ||
| And I mean the slur for gay people. | ||
| And when Obergefeld does get overturned, it's going to be like, what did you expect? | ||
| Liberals abandoned this because, so I actually, to what you were saying, I think you were right over the past 10 years, the pride stuff. | ||
| I think it's rapidly collapsing, rapidly. | ||
| Bud Light effect, man. | ||
| Bud Light and Target took such a beating over this. | ||
| I think we may see a big shift. | ||
| No, and there's some polling that strongly supports what you're saying, actually. | ||
| So I saw some polls, either Gallup or Pew or some major pollster that showed the Republican support for same-sex marriage was 55% in 2021, around the time that Biden started. | ||
| In the year 2025, it's now down to 41%. | ||
| So it's gone down quite a bit. | ||
| You know, if you look at Gen Z church attendance, one of the most church attending religious generations over the past 100 years, American history. | ||
| So there definitely are some serious signs here. | ||
| Look, I think that O'Bergefeld could be decided at some point. | ||
| I'm just looking at the current six right of center injustices. | ||
| I see Sam Alito, who has tremendous courage, tremendous conviction. | ||
| I see Clarence Thomas, who has tremendous courage, tremendous conviction. | ||
| I see John Roberts, who actually nailed this issue properly in 2015, but takes such a rigid view of star decisions that I see pretty much no chance. | ||
| And then I see Gorsuch, Barrett, and Kavanaugh, who my best guess would be they'd rather just not touch this thing for the 20-foot poll. | ||
| So that's kind of just how I see the breakdown. | ||
| We need people who aren't cowards. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| That's why, you know, my argument is I know that Thomas and Alito probably need to retire very soon because we want to make sure that their replacements are going to be of the same caliber. | ||
| I would say let's just Christians ignore this one time when we start cloning people, but we'll clone Clarence Thomas eight or nine times. | ||
| He can stay on the bench with his eight clones or just have nine fresh clones take over the whole thing. | ||
| He's the best. | ||
| I think he's been absolutely fantastic, but we are at a time. | ||
| So Josh, where can people find you? | ||
| Yeah, I appreciate it, Tim. | ||
| So I'm on X, Josh underscore Hammer, Instagram's Josh B. Hammer, my show, The Josh Hammer Show, and then my book that came out in March is called Israel and Civilization, The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West. | ||
| Right on, man. | ||
| Thanks for hanging out. | ||
| We'll see you next time. | ||
| See you next time. | ||
| Take care. | ||
| That, of course, is Josh Hammer of the Article 3 Project and editor-at-large for Newsweek. | ||
| Oh, man, he's bumming me out. | ||
| He's bumming me out. | ||
| I'm so excited that, okay, listen, I'm a liberal guy. | ||
| And you know what? | ||
| The one thing I want to add before we were going to send you on your way to go hang out with Russell, I don't care that much for gay. | ||
| I don't care for or against gay marriage, right? | ||
| It's like, if you're gay and you want to get gay married or civil union or whatever, okay, fine, whatever. | ||
| It's whatever you do in your home. | ||
| Don't bring it in the schools. | ||
| The argument the left made was, oh, but what if someone's gay, married? | ||
| They need to explain it to their students. | ||
| No, you don't. | ||
| You say, that's a private personal thing. | ||
| It's not in the schools. | ||
| Don't do it. | ||
| But my issue with this is they pass law without the legislative branch. | ||
| It is a violation of the democratic order they claim exists in this country and they purport to want. | ||
| When you say, instead of passing laws and winning votes, we will mandate. | ||
| I say that is authoritarianism. | ||
| It is evil and must be reversed. | ||
| I wish we had a strong SCOTUS that would do it. | ||
| My friend, smash that like button. | ||
| Share the show with everyone you know. | ||
| I believe we've got Russell Brand getting ready to go live. | ||
| He's not. | ||
| Hey, they don't. | ||
| Who do we have coming up? | ||
| Let me see who we got in the old roster here. | ||
| If they don't send me who's live, I don't know who we're supposed to do this raid for. | ||
| I guess nobody? | ||
| Is anybody there? | ||
| What about V? | ||
| I guess nobody. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I don't know. | |
| I don't know who's live. | ||
| Nope. | ||
| No idea. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Smash the like button. | ||
| I guess we'll wrap it up there. | ||
| You can follow me on X and Instagram at Timcast. | ||
| We are going to be back tonight at 8 p.m. with Vince Dow at Timcast IRL. | ||
| You don't want to miss it. | ||
| And guys, join our Discord server. | ||
| Community is everything. | ||
| Our cafe is in the works. | ||
| It is currently being built. | ||
| It's just been, it's so hard to get these things done. | ||
| It's crazy. | ||
| I mean, it's bureaucracy. | ||
| It's regulation. | ||
| We want to make it so that you guys can come together. | ||
| And as automation starts breaking things apart and people start trying to exist in this digital space, we have to be the counterrevolutionaries to the AI trend. | ||
| By all means, AI is coming. | ||
| Automation is coming. | ||
| But we will preserve the bonds and create a culture that keeps humans together. | ||
| All I can say right now is the Discord server exists. | ||
| There are friends. | ||
| People have gotten married. | ||
| They have meetups. | ||
| And that's what we want to create for you guys. | ||
| So check us out at Timcast.com. | ||
| Sign up. | ||
| Thanks for hanging out. |