Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 10, 2020 - Dennis Prager Show

02:52:11

The Dennis Prager Show LIVE

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello, my friends.
	I'm Dennis Prager, going immediately to my guest.
	With regard to the Texas and 18 other states lawsuit that is being filed before the Supreme Court, a member of the legal team that is bringing this suit is Professor John Eastman, who is a longtime guest on this.
	Dennis Prager Show.
	He's a professor of law at Chapman University.
	John Eastman, where are you right now?
	Well, I'm in the mountain time zone, Dennis.
	I am currently a visiting scholar at the University of Colorado Boulder.
	Really?
	That's sort of a fish out of water.
	Well, they've got a lovely position there.
	It's a visiting scholar in conservative thought and policy.
	At the Benson Center for the Study of Western Civilization, at the University of Colorado Boulder, a mouthful.
	But it's a very important commitment on the part of the university to have ideological diversity at least somewhat on campus.
	It's good I'm sitting.
	That's my reaction.
	Well, if anybody should have it, you should.
	All right, I think most Americans are not...
	Either aware or clear on what the lawsuit is about, so please explain.
	So, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over suits between two states.
	We did this at the time of the founding to, you know, reduce grounds of conflict between the states that would make it hard to govern a nation as large as they anticipated this one might become.
	And so Texas filed this suit against...
	Four states, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, claiming that their violations of their own state election laws produced an illegal certification of electors that are affecting or diluting Texas electoral votes in the choice of president.
	And then I'm representing the president himself, who moved yesterday to intervene in that litigation.
	And, of course, his injury is even more direct than the injuries Texas had claimed.
	But Texas had the grounds for original jurisdiction.
	So I think it's a very powerful suit.
	Let me understand.
	The supposition here is that one state claims that another has violated its own laws.
	Do I have that correct?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	What's significant about it is when you're dealing with elections for presidential electors.
	A state violating its own laws violates the federal constitution.
	The federal constitution, in Article 2, gives plenary power to the state legislatures to decide the manner of choosing electors.
	And when executive officials in those states, on their own, have altered those state statutes, then they are taking upon themselves a constitutional authority that they don't have, which is to choose the manner of selecting electors.
	Couldn't this lawsuit have been brought before the election?
	Well, it wasn't clear that they were going to violate state law or the extent that they were going to violate state law before the election.
	So it likely would have gotten dismissed as not yet right.
	Did each of the states allegedly violate its own laws in the same way?
	Well, different ways.
	So, for example, in Georgia...
	State officials there altered the signature verification process on absentee ballots.
	In Wisconsin, state officials there just unilaterally decided to let everybody in the state claim that they were indefinitely confined, which allowed them to cast absentee ballots without proving their identification.
	Wait, I'm sorry, forgive me.
	I don't know.
	Indefinitely what?
	Indefinitely confined.
	Well, I don't know what that means.
	Well, so if you're hospitalized, if you're in a nursing home and are indefinitely confined, you're allowed to cast an absentee ballot without proving identification.
	And the state statutes allow that in only certain narrow circumstances.
	But the state officials said anybody who has a fear of COVID can claim indefinitely confined, and therefore avoid our voter identification requirements.
	That's preposterous, and it created the potential for massive fraud.
	Do you believe that that created massive fraud, or just the potential?
	I do.
	The statistical analyses that have been done are just irrefutable.
	That in several counties in Wisconsin...
	In four or five counties in Michigan, in half a dozen counties in Pennsylvania, and in Fulton County in Georgia, the statistical anomalies are so profound as to be impossible to explain on grounds other than fraud.
	I know this is not your, so to speak, jurisdiction, but just knowledgeable observer to me, do you believe that these change the results?
	I do.
	I do.
	And what we've done is carefully limit the suit to the states where the hard evidence of violations and the ability to connect that to a certain number of ballots that are greater than the current margins in those states and therefore affects the outcome of the election.
	So what is the status now?
	The Supreme Court has agreed to take the case?
	No, I think they have to.
	Several justices on the court have written that when you have a state-on-state suit, it's mandatory jurisdiction.
	But other members of the court think they still have discretion.
	So Texas has a motion for leave to file the complaint, and we have a motion for permission to intervene.
	And I expect we'll know fairly soon in both of those instances whether the court's going to agree to accept the case.
	I'm sorry, who has permission to intervene?
	I filed on behalf of President Trump yesterday.
	Oh, that's who the we is.
	I see.
	What does the president's involvement do?
	If it's state versus state, what is the relevance of the president?
	Well, state versus state, of course, gives you the ground for jurisdiction.
	Texas' argument about the injury is that if unlawful votes for electors are...
	No, no, forgive me, John.
	I followed that.
	I'm asking about what relevance is the president joining the suit if it's a state-versus-state issue?
	The president is not a state...
	It's a state-versus-state issue about the illegality of the conduct of the election.
	Obviously, the president, as a candidate, has an even more direct interest in ensuring that electors are properly certified in accord with state law.
	A state law that is issued pursuant to constitutional authority.
	So it's not actually about the cheating.
	It's about violating their own state laws to enable voting.
	Violating their own state laws to enable voting.
	And those laws are designed to protect against the risks of fraud.
	And for the state officials to just ignore those state laws creates a huge problem for the conduct of this election.
	Do you have to show that it matters?
	In other words, that it had an effect on the election results?
	Well, practically, the relief that we're seeking is for the court to say, look, these were done in violation of state law, and then to remand to the states.
	To try and determine the scope and extent and take their own remedy.
	And at that point, the state legislature has constitutional and federal statutory authority to deal with the problem.
	So that's what we're asking.
	We're not asking the court to decide the election.
	We're asking the court simply to look at, were there significant violations of state law that may well have affected this election?
	And if there are, we can't tolerate that.
	I mean, we've got to have a rule of law here.
	Let's say that's found to be the case.
	So, let me back up.
	Does the Supreme Court then have to decide, in fact, your state violated your own laws in selecting electors?
	Is that what you're asking?
	That's what we're asking, because even though there are state laws, there are state laws in a federal election implemented under the authority of the federal constitution, in Article 2. And that's what makes it a very significant federal constitutional matter.
	Okay, so let's say the Supreme Court says, yes, that's in fact what happened.
	Then it goes to the state legislature to do what?
	Well, so for example, let's say in Wisconsin, the failure of the states to do voter identification before those ballots were cast, we should now have the ability to review those absentee ballot envelopes and find out where those legal voters are not.
	And if they weren't, not count them.
	And you could then prorate, you know, based on the valid absentee ballots that were received, how many that affected each of the candidates.
	And if at the end of the day, the current margin is altered so that the results of the outcome are different, the state legislature should weigh in.
	We improperly certified the wrong slate of electors.
	All right, we'll be back in a moment if you can stay with me for a few moments, obviously.
	My listeners and I would appreciate Professor John Eastman spending a semester at the University of Colorado Boulder.
	He's a professor of law at Chapman University on the legal team with the Texas Challenge.
	1-8 Prager 776. Why did they have to take you down,
	Mike Flynn?
	Yeah, that's...
	We don't have enough time in your show to talk about the whole...
	We don't probably have enough time in this week.
	Here's what I would just say to synthesize it.
	My whole life in the military, and for those that have worked around me and know me...
	I, you know, I'm one of these guys that comes into an organization and looks at processes, looks at procedures, looks at the leadership, looks at how we train people and really tries to improve and make things, you know, it's not just make things, you know, more efficient, but it's also trying to solve the problems for the people in the field.
	And I was one that came into Washington, D.C. I didn't get to Washington, D.C. until I was a two-star.
	I'd never served.
	I served as a field soldier.
	Served in infantry divisions, in airborne divisions, in special operations, in other tactical and strategic commands, too, and served in the intelligence community.
	All the way up to the director of one of the largest intelligence agencies in the world, the Defense Intelligence Agency, as well as I served as the Assistant Director of National Intelligence for partner engagement under James Clacka for a year.
	So I say all that because what I learned is that the efficiency, the effectiveness, the ability of the intelligence community...
	Does not function well inside of Washington, D.C. Where it functions best is in the field, and that's where our best people are.
	What we find is everybody stares at their navel in Washington, D.C., and it's what we call, you're very familiar with, this is the circular reporting.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	This is Lon Hee Chen of the Hoover Institution for townhall.com.
	California Governor Gavin Newsom has repeatedly called on Californians to come together and make sacrifices to fight COVID-19.
	The request would have been better received if, at the same time, Governor Newsom wasn't off violating his own public health guidance by dining with a group of lobbyists at one of America's most posh restaurants.
	Or sending his kids to a Sacramento private school in person while many California schools remain closed for in-person learning and millions of students slog their way through online classes.
	The problem with Newsom's hypocritical actions is that they undercut the very healthcare professionals and scientists whose advice he is asking Californians to follow.
	It makes those of us who live in California wonder who we can trust and what guidance we should be listening to.
	At a time when we need leadership and clarity, Newsom has given us hypocrisy and confusion.
	California's voters won't soon forget its shortcomings.
	I'm Lon He Chen.
	I'm Lon He Chen.
	Given all of these allegations, far more allegations for this than you ever had for the idea that Bush-lied people died.
	Far more evidence than you ever had that Donald Trump was colluding with Russia, yet there was a two-and-a-half-year investigation.
	How dare you?
	You've got election officials like this woman in Michigan?
	Mixed with clerical errors, but a lot of them are considered fraud.
	I would have referred all of them to the Attorney General if it were me.
	And we got all these other allegations.
	I would like to remind you of a magnificent charity that you should give to this Christmas season.
	Angel Tree has, it's part of Prison Ministries, it has a banner up at my website, and it's the Christmas appeal that I make each year, either Salvation Army or here, and this is here this year.
	They send a gift.
	And a note from a parent in prison to a child of the parent in prison, along with a Bible.
	If that doesn't appeal to you, don't contribute.
	But if it does appeal to you, and I suspect it does to the vast majority, giving something at this time is a very beautiful thing to do.
	The banner for Angel Tree is up at DennisPrager.com.
	All right.
	John Eastman is a professor of law at Chapman University.
	This year he is at the University of Colorado Boulder.
	I'm sorry it worked out that the year you were given this honor at the University of Colorado, I assume there are no in-person classes.
	Well, we had in-person classes, both my wife and I, for about two-thirds of the semester, and then the remainder were remote.
	So that helps, although people had masks on and were spaced, so it makes it hard to conduct seminars.
	And we're hoping in the spring for a greater return to normalcy, particularly now that vaccines are becoming available.
	Anyway, we'll get into that because I don't want to take time from you.
	So John Eastman is a professor of law, and he is part of the lawsuit.
	That is in front of the Supreme Court of the U.S. So for the justices to determine anything, they have to steep themselves in Wisconsin law, Georgia law, Pennsylvania law, and what was the fifth state?
	Michigan?
	Fourth state?
	Michigan.
	Well, you know, except those laws are pursuant to federal constitutional authority, so it's well within their normal...
	They had to steep themselves in Florida law when they looked at Bush v.
	Gore.
	They had to determine that the state Supreme Court was violating the rules for the manner of choosing electors that had been set out by the state legislature.
	So it's exactly the same issue here.
	And there's really no dispute that the laws were altered.
	The dispute is about how big an effect that has.
	That goes to the proof of the harm, not to the...
	The fact that the election was conducted in violation of the state law.
	When you described the number of people in Wisconsin getting absentee ballots on the grounds that they were like hospitalized, like hospitalized people don't have to have an ID to get an absentee ballot, how many people could that realistically have affected?
	No, I forget what we allege and what Texas alleges in the complaint, but I think it was hundreds of thousands.
	Oh, well, that's a big number.
	Yes.
	And that means the state has done what it's supposed to do.
	You know, ever since the Carter Baker Commission, back after the 2000 election, we've known that there's a huge risk of fraud.
	With absentee ballots, because there's no chain of custody, there's no identification verification, or it's significantly weakened.
	And so the state legislatures put in place measures to try and protect against those kind of frauds.
	And those measures were just ignored under the excuse of COVID. But how does COVID affect whether you have to show your ID or not or put a picture of your ID in the ballot when you're returning it in order to verify that the person voting is actually the person that's legally entitled to vote?
	I didn't know that.
	That's what's done in every state on an absentee ballot?
	Every state is different, of course.
	Some states, like Georgia, I think it's Georgia, you have to have the person applying for the ballot has to sign and put their address, and then the ballot itself has to be signed with their address, but also signed with an address by a witness to verify that the person submitting the ballot is the person actually claimed.
	And if the witnesses doesn't sign or doesn't put their address, we had in Pennsylvania orders, for example, for the election clerks to just fill in the addresses on their own.
	And they acknowledged they did it.
	They did it with a different color pen to show that they had done that.
	That was illegal.
	And all of a sudden, ballots that are not legally cast are being counted in large enough numbers to have affected the outcome of the election.
	Let me take a challenge to you.
	You're used to that, so I have no problem.
	Bob in Springfield, Illinois.
	John Eastman and Dennis Prager.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	Thank you very much for taking my call.
	I genuinely appreciate it.
	Thank you.
	I really appreciate the chance to speak to Mr. Eastman.
	If I were to say, someone robbed your house.
	And you said, but there's nothing missing from my house.
	And I said, but I can prove in court that you left your door unlocked.
	Would that prove your house had been robbed?
	No.
	What is the analogy?
	Yeah, but the reason I make the analogy is because...
	I'm sorry, go ahead.
	No, go ahead.
	I have two gentlemen on the line, ladies and gentlemen.
	It's a real problem.
	I salute you both.
	Go ahead.
	Bob, in Illinois.
	Go ahead.
	The reason I make the analogy is because it sounds to me like you begin with not being able to demonstrate any fraud, and you can't demonstrate that any of the ballots that were mailed in were fraudulent.
	So instead you look for a procedural reason to object to the way the states allowed those ballots to be cast as a way of saying, well, they allowed for the possibility that something could have gone wrong.
	That means something went wrong and there was massive fraud.
	It seems illogical to me.
	So let me give the most two clear-cut examples of proof of fraud that counteracts it.
	We know in Pennsylvania, for example, because they were doing a sloppy job in violation of state law, we've got more numbers of ballots that were counted than there were absentee ballots submitted based on the number of envelopes.
	So that's evidence of fraud right there.
	And the reason it was able to happen is because they were violating state laws on the outside certification envelope on these ballots.
	You know, so, yeah, look, I mean, the reason those statutes are there is to prevent the very kind of thing that I just described from happening.
	And it happened.
	The state laws were clearly violated.
	And at least in some significant measure, we know that had an effect on the ballots being illegally put into the hopper and counted.
	Bob?
	Okay, well, I have two questions for you based on that.
	The first one is, does anyone in the state government of Pennsylvania agree with that assessment?
	And number two, are those ballots that you say were invalid enough to change the outcome of the election?
	All right.
	Let me get a response, Rika, back, if that's okay with you.
	Again, if I have to run.
	I'm sorry.
	Oh, you do.
	All right, so answer him in two seconds.
	So, yes and yes.
	There are significant numbers of the state legislature.
	In fact, they, I think, are going to be intervening in this case, or speaking to at least silent amicus.
	And yes, the numbers are large enough.
	I really appreciate your time.
	Thanks so much.
	Thank you, Dennis.
	Thank you.
	This is Lon He Chen of the Hoover Institution for townhall.com.
	California Governor Gavin Newsom has repeatedly called on Californians to come together and make sacrifices to fight COVID-19.
	The request would have been better received if, at the same time, Governor Newsom wasn't off violating his own public health guidance by dining with a group of lobbyists at one of America's most posh restaurants or sending his kids to a Sacramento private school in person.
	While many California schools remain closed for in-person learning and millions of students slog their way through online classes.
	The problem with Newsom's hypocritical actions is that they undercut the very healthcare professionals and scientists whose advice he is asking Californians to follow.
	It makes those of us who live in California wonder who we can trust and what guidance we should be listening to.
	At a time when we need leadership and clarity, Newsom has given us hypocrisy and confusion.
	California's voters won't soon forget his shortcomings.
	I'm Lonnie Chen.
	The Pepperdine Graduate School of Public Policy.
	Impacting policy decisions today.
	Preparing public leaders for tomorrow.
	Learn more at publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu.
	Trending now on the Larry Oller Show.
	The state of Texas filed an election lawsuit with the Supreme Court against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, alleging that the states unconstitutionally changed their election laws, treated voters unequally, triggered voting irregularities by treated voters unequally, triggered voting irregularities by relaxing ballot integrity measures.
	The motion says, and I'm quoting, Plaintiff State respectfully submits the foregoing types of electoral irregularities exceed the hanging Chad saga of the 2000 election in their degree of departure from both state and federal law.
	Moreover, these flaws cumulatively preclude knowing who legitimately won the 2020 election and threatened to cloud all future elections.
	In response to Pennsylvania AG, Josh Shapiro called the lawsuit meritless.
	They are a scheme by the President of the United States and some in the Republican Party to disregard the will of the people and name their own victors.
	This isn't a pick-your-own-novel ending.
	This is democracy, end of quote.
	Referred to it as a publicity stunt.
	The Michigan AG also said the same thing, that it was a publicity stunt.
	Jim Jordan also wants to know why the Georgia governor is not allowing signatures to be checked.
	When you send out all these ballots, we had a staffer, I've said this many times, we had a staffer who works for our office and for the Judiciary Committee, who at her apartment, she got her ballot, four other ballots were mailed to her apartment that were people who didn't live there.
	That is a recipe for disaster, and all we're asking now is, why won't some of these, why won't Governor Kemp in Georgia, for example, let us recheck the signatures and actually find out the rejection rate that Mr. Starr was talking about earlier.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on The Mike Gallagher Show.
	And, you know, I want to go back to Raphael Warnock's really radical rhetoric over the years.
	But before we do that...
	As I know you know, Congressman, all we hear, all I hear from my listeners, not only here in Georgia and the 17 affiliates we have all throughout the state, but all throughout the country, people are almost apoplectic about election integrity and what many believe to be a fraudulent election.
	I have to ask you, as somebody who knows Georgia, you know the lay of the land as well as anybody in the world.
	What do we tell people, what do you tell people who are worried?
	about the legitimacy of the Senate runoffs.
	Is there oversight?
	Is there accountability?
	Are they going to be able to cheat their way into putting a couple of radicals like Ossoff and Warnock into the Senate?
	Well, no.
	There is a war on civilization from the left because it's a force for chaos.
	I'm Dennis Prager.
	Let me give you an example in Los Angeles.
	They have elected the people of Los Angeles in their infinite stupidity because they will be hurt by it.
	Have elected...
	It's not even traditional leftism.
	It's just pure chaos.
	That this man stands for, George Gascon.
	He was the DA in San Francisco, so now he's going to ruin two cities in California.
	Heather McDonald, writing in the New York Post, Los Angeles' newly elected district attorney, George Gascon, has a plan for ensuring compliance with the county's draconian stay-at-home orders.
	Make the city so dangerous that Angelenos will be terrified to step outside.
	So here is the example.
	Gascon's office will no longer prosecute a wide range of misdemeanor offenses.
	Number one, trespass.
	Los Angeles streets in all but its wealthiest neighborhoods are already overrun by squalid encampments.
	Business owners who have managed so far to survive the lockdown Regularly have to sweep vagrants off their property in the morning, along with feces and drug paraphernalia.
	The vagrant won't leave.
	Don't bother calling the police.
	Any arrest an officer makes will simply be dismissed.
	If a homeowner sees a vagrant climbing the fence to his house, he will have to deal with it himself.
	Driving without a license or driving with a suspended license?
	The risk of being, so I guess this will be another example.
	That will be two.
	The first one is, can you imagine that?
	Dropping the laws of trespass?
	I'm speechless.
	Rare for a talk show host.
	Driving without a license or driving with a suspended license?
	The risk of being hit and possibly killed by a drunk driver or by someone who just can't operate a car just went up in a SOP to the illegal immigrant lobby.
	So you won't be prosecuted if you drive without a license.
	So why get a license to begin with?
	Let alone having a suspended license.
	If you have a suspended license, there's a reason for that.
	But L.A., this is considered progressive thought.
	Whenever I show you how despicable the left is, people on the left will go, oh, no, that's not how I think.
	He just takes extreme examples.
	This guy's the district attorney of Los Angeles.
	Is that an extreme example?
	Liberals are naive.
	The left is evil.
	The naivete of liberals is what is causing the decay of the society, because there are a large number of liberals, and they don't have the courage to vote Republican.
	They have been brainwashed into believing conservatives are their enemy, not the left.
	Disturbing the peace.
	Los Angeles has seen a spate of shootings at rowdy, illegal house parties.
	Too bad if such a party breaks out on your block.
	Just hope that no one feels dissed and pulls a gun.
	Interesting.
	So you have a 3 a.m.
	extremely loud party next door or in the apartment next door and you can't call the police.
	People know what they voted for?
	Not done.
	Public intoxication.
	See, they want to destroy civilization.
	The reason for prosecuting public intoxication was in order to keep Civilization intact.
	The left only knows how to destroy it.
	It builds nothing.
	Every day I give you an example.
	Every single day.
	But people are not fighters.
	Even people who hear me.
	Many people are.
	But most people...
	Alright.
	He's exaggerating a little.
	He doesn't...
	You know.
	But my brother-in-law is on the left.
	He's not like that.
	Relieffactor.com 800-583-84 Just the other day, my engineer, Triple G, came over to me, almost in tears, which is very rare.
	I've seen him cry maybe once.
	No, no, a real...
	Why isn't everybody in pain trying Relief Factor?
	And I said to him, you know, you are a good soul.
	And I don't have a good answer because it's only $19.95 to try it for three weeks because they'll tell you if it doesn't work in three weeks, it doesn't work.
	So why don't you just try it for three weeks and get rid of your joint and muscle pain.
	But if you get it, you have to take it as directed, by the way.
	ReliefFactor.com, 800-500-8384.
	before you'll make Sean's day.
	Trending now on the Eric Metaxas show.
	When you talk in your book, the man who killed Kennedy, the case against LBJ, you make the case that he was behind the assassination of the president.
	It seems like you're saying you wouldn't put it past him.
	In other words, that this is the kind of a guy who was, in fact, capable of that sort of thing and probably had trafficked in that kind of thing earlier in his career.
	I'd go much further than that.
	I lay this out in lurid detail.
	Who is the guy who says to JFK, you should come to Dallas?
	Who is the guy who says, instead of taking the much safer freeway, Let's drive through Dealey Plaza, where the car has to come to a complete stop.
	Who is it that after John Kennedy has been murdered, Johnson is in an elevator with the acting press secretary for young JFK. Oswald has not yet been apprehended.
	And the junior aide says, Mr. President, who would do such a horrible thing?
	Who would kill President Kennedy?
	And Johnson says, it was a communist, son.
	And the young guy said, a communist?
	What kind of communist?
	It was a Russian communist, son.
	How did Lyndon Johnson know that?
	I found that in the memoirs of this Kennedy aide.
	When you write a book like this, the original came out in hardcover, immediately people start contacting you or sending things over the transom that you then have to evaluate.
	And in the paperback edition, I wrote three additional chapters with additional information.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on the Charlie Kirk Show.
	So is it possible that so it's Texas v.
	Georgia v.
	Wisconsin v.
	Michigan.
	Is that correct?
	Yeah.
	And I think Pennsylvania's in there, aren't they?
	I don't know if they are or not, for sure.
	But I haven't looked closely at the paper, but I just saw it was filed.
	I saw it was from the Texas Attorney General, and I've heard that others are now joining that effort.
	Jeff Landry from Louisiana, Florida, is expected to join.
	Can the Supreme Court reject this?
	Sure they can.
	Well, I mean, they can do what they want.
	That's the thing.
	There's no really...
	There's not a lot of history to this, to know what they're going to do.
	I mean, this has not really happened before, certainly during the election.
	I mean, if you look at what the campaign filed on Friday, for instance, in Georgia, that is more typical.
	It was solid.
	Cleta Mitchell is an excellent election law attorney.
	But what she filed, just to help people understand, she said in the lawsuit, 64 pages, a bunch of affidavits attached.
	So it's clear, it's not a...
	Pie in the sky type thing.
	It's real clear that they did what she's saying they did.
	For instance, it says 66,437.
	A reminder, everybody, that I will everybody, that I will be taking...
	Many of you to Israel next October.
	You can sign up and you have till May.
	So that's half a year.
	You can cancel with no or change your plans.
	You're afraid of contracting COVID. Whatever prompts you.
	I would go tomorrow, frankly, maskless and enjoy life, which I have been doing in any event for the last seven months, eight months.
	Nine months.
	Wow, nine months.
	Los Angeles has a man...
	The Communist Party of Russia would not have enacted the laws.
	So there's a new type of left in America, and it's specific almost to America, that is avowedly...
	Advocative of chaos.
	It is only destructive.
	The Communist Party of the Soviet Union would never have allowed any of these laws.
	You couldn't be publicly intoxicated as much as there was drinking in the Soviet Union.
	You couldn't disturb the peace unless you were a Communist Party member disturbing people's peace with the Communist rally.
	You couldn't trespass.
	But now you can all of these things, and now you can drive without a license, or a suspended license.
	You won't be prosecuted.
	There's a race in this country between the left's destruction of the country and the normal American liberal and conservative realization of how destructive the left is.
	Which will come first, the destruction of the country or the awareness that the left is destroying the country and the West?
	I don't know the answer.
	I know what I'm contributing to.
	But if you're a liberal who does not find the left an enemy, like Alan Dershowitz does, then you have decided to willfully ignore evil.
	What I'm reading to you is evil.
	This is what is happening in LA, another reason to leave both LA and California.
	So public intoxication will not be disturbed.
	Open season on cops will only get worse in LA with this declaration that officers' authority may be resisted with impunity.
	In other words, resisting arrest is no longer prosecuted, which will increase the number of shootings of civilians.
	If people resist arrest, the cops either let them go or subdue them.
	And sometimes it will end up in a fight and maybe even a firefight.
	It's an astonishing thing.
	She writes, Heather MacDonald, a declaration that strikes at the heart of civilization itself.
	The left loathes civilization.
	I don't know why.
	I don't know what sickness of the soul prompts a person like Gascon.
	I don't know.
	Or Soros.
	These are sick souls.
	They're pathological creatures that somehow get power.
	And the people who they destroy vote for them or support them.
	Tell me where I'm wrong.
	Trespassing, resisting arrest, public intoxication, trespass, no more prosecution, no more.
	More.
	The vast majority of police shootings could be eliminated tomorrow if all suspects complied with the officer's commands.
	Resisting arrest is the biggest predictor of officer use of force.
	Decriminalizing such resistance is a recipe for more police shootings.
	Of blacks as well as of white suspects.
	Los Angeles' new DA is also eliminating cash bail for most crimes.
	So you just walk out.
	You're arrested.
	Why will the police arrest anybody?
	Just walk out.
	And it's ending sentence enhancements for repeat offenders and gang members.
	After California Governor...
	Gavin Newsom eliminated cash bail earlier this year for COVID purposes.
	Carjackings, shootings, and homicides spiked.
	The state abandoned its no bail policy, and Los Angeles County voted.
	Listen to this.
	This is what is so amazing about the left.
	Los Angeles County voted in November, that's just last month, to continue requiring bail.
	Gascon has other ideas.
	As for repeat offenders and gangbangers, they now have little incentive to go clean.
	So, we in Los Angeles voted against the no-cash bail, the no-bail policies.
	And he just reinstated them.
	The Los Angeles City Council recently cut $150 million from the LAPD budget, despite the largest spike in homicides in the city in 10 years and a 32% increase in shooting.
	Getting rid of police is to increase death, violence, and mayhem.
	Period.
	You vote Democrat, that's what you get.
	What exactly do you get bad that if you vote Republican?
	Tell me something comparably bad that you get if you vote Republican.
	I just gave you five examples.
	Give me two.
	By the way, if you don't have a driver's license, obviously you don't have to have car insurance either.
	Licensed drivers better make sure they have uninsured motorist coverage in their policy.
	It's time to leave California.
	The left has destroyed a spectacular place.
	Take your calls.
	Trending now on the Eric Metaxas show.
	Eight or nine years ago, a friend of mine forced me to watch a documentary which proposed that LBJ had been behind the Kennedy assassination.
	Like most people, I began watching it with tremendous skepticism, almost derision, but as it went along, I became more and more convinced that the case For LBJ's involvement in the Kennedy assassination was very, very strong, so much so that I was deeply disturbed by it.
	I'm glad to know that somebody whom I respect, which is to say you, has written a book about it.
	Well, first of all, I think the American people have an endless fascination with the murder of John F. Kennedy because it was televised, in essence, in every aspect.
	I think I used...
	Eyewitness evidence, fingerprint evidence, and a lot of deep Texas politics to demonstrate that Lyndon Johnson had the motive, means, and opportunity to kill John Kennedy.
	I put forward a lot of very, very compelling circumstantial evidence.
	I'm not an attorney, but I dare anybody to read this book and not come away convinced.
	By the way, the book is the first book I've ever wrote.
	And it was a New York Times bestseller.
	Still does quite well.
	Put aside the question of the assassination of John Kennedy for a moment, it's also a profile of Lyndon Johnson, who is essentially a functioning lunatic.
	I mean, he's a psychopath.
	He is a drunk.
	He is a pill popper.
	He is a womanizer.
	He's a sadist.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on The Charlie Kirk Show.
	So I want to get into this Texas news.
	I know that you're just aware of just kind of the process, and it's actually less about the particulars, but more just about the bigger picture.
	You're from Texas.
	You guys are headquartered in Texas, right?
	What was the news today that came out of Texas?
	Well, the news was that an original jurisdiction suit was filed on the election.
	Now, what that means is normally if you file a lawsuit, people think you can just go to the Supreme Court, right?
	No, you don't just go to the Supreme Court.
	The way you get to the Supreme Court is you go through either a state system all the way through the highest court of the state, and then if you feel there's an issue that the Supreme Court can address, you can go from the state Supreme Court to the U.S. Supreme Court, or you can go through the federal courts.
	The lower court, then the Court of Appeals, and then appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
	And they take about 8,000 requests a year take 80 cases.
	So your odds are...
	100%.
	Yeah.
	What happened in Texas is the state in the Constitution, there is a very few things that you can file.
	You go straight to the Supreme Court.
	Wilmington, California.
	Justin.
	Hello, Justin.
	Dennis Prager.
	Hello.
	Hello, Dennis.
	Hey, I'm a frustrated fan.
	I've got to tell you, I've been there from the beginning.
	Religion on the line.
	Also, I was taping every TV show.
	I came to those.
	Carl Sagan, the whole thing.
	I've been there.
	But I'm very frustrated.
	And I wanted to present a challenge to you.
	Because I know you're up for a challenge.
	I know you don't back away.
	But I'm just tired of hearing the left destroys this, the left believes this, the left thinks this.
	Could you possibly consider having somebody from the left on and debate them on the air?
	I know you do that otherwise, but could you do that on the air for the rest of us?
	Have you not heard me almost, I would say, certainly every week, maybe twice a week, I will read about some left-wing author, wrote a piece, and then say...
	I publicly invite them to a debate that I've offered any New York Times columnist $10,000 to $20,000 to their favorite charity or just to them if they would publicly debate me.
	They don't debate.
	You don't understand.
	All right, so now you know.
	Now you're hearing it.
	What you're hearing is now being publicly announced across the country.
	They're afraid to debate any articulate conservative.
	Because they lose.
	They have nothing to stand on.
	They're empty.
	It's all passion.
	They don't debate.
	Do you understand that?
	I find it hard to believe.
	I know you do because you're naive.
	You're a sweet, naive liberal.
	No, I'm not, Dennis.
	Yes, you are.
	You find it hard to believe?
	That Tom Friedman at the New York Times never debates a conservative?
	You find it hard to believe?
	Why do you find it hard to believe?
	That's right.
	Name them.
	Name a prominent.
	It's got to be prominent.
	It can't be a guy who just writes me an email.
	An equally prominent leftist, to my prominence, I will pay money, and I will receive no money.
	I want no money.
	I will give them money to debate me.
	They don't debate.
	Do you understand that?
	You don't, because you're naive.
	Naive doesn't mean evil or bad.
	It means you have decided not to understand bad.
	This is what I have argued my whole life.
	The term that evil is dark is foolish.
	Evil is so bright, people cannot stare at it.
	You don't want to acknowledge that the left is destroying our civilization.
	Just as you won't acknowledge, what?
	A liberal, a leftist won't debate you?
	That's correct.
	They don't.
	They smear.
	They don't debate.
	They don't even debate in print.
	I'm never debated.
	I'm smeared.
	Every other, Larry Elder is smeared.
	He's never debated.
	Ten black leftists couldn't take Larry Elder on.
	Or Candace Owens.
	But hey, where?
	Come on, I can't believe it, Dennis.
	I can't believe it.
	You don't want to believe it.
	They don't debate.
	They smear.
	Thanks a lot.
	Thank you.
	Transcription by CastingWords Forget the lies and the mendacity of the candidate in question.
	Whose name was circled in.
	A man who is incompetent, clinically incompetent, to hold any position of responsibility.
	Would you let this man walk your dog?
	Let alone be in control of the nuclear weapons of the most powerful nation in the world.
	A man who can't string clear sentences together without talking about how...
	His suit, how hairy his legs are, and how little children wanted to pat them down in the swimming pool.
	Good God, man, why aren't you in an asylum?
	It's not the fact that he's been a machine politician for 47 years, hiding in his basement, unable to hold a rally through sheer cowardice.
	Or because he knows nobody would go.
	It's not the fact that all of his co-conspirators who he colluded with, yes, real collusion, utterly and completely deep-sixed the story with all its evidence of his son's corruption facilitated whilst he was vice president.
	Corruption involving the biggest communist nation in the world.
	a nation that has slave labor camps. - Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on the Hugh Hewitt Show. - President-elect Biden will nominate Lloyd Austin to be secretary of defense.
	Now, would you engage with me on it, on whether or not Lloyd Austin will be a good nominee on the Senate Armed Services Committee?
	Well, Hugh, first let me say that I respect and admire Lloyd Austin's service to our nation over 40 years in uniform.
	And I suspect that he might get quickly confirmed to many positions in a...
	Democratic or Republican cabinet, for that matter.
	However, there are serious misgivings in the Senate about having another recently retired general become the Secretary of Defense.
	You'll recall that federal law prohibits any general who's been retired for fewer than seven years to receive a waiver from the Congress to become the Secretary of Defense.
	Before Jim Mattis in 2017, it had only happened once before for George Marshall.
	In the 1950s.
	And one I would just highlight to you is Jack Reed.
	He is the senior Democrat on the Armed Services Committee.
	And when he voted for that waiver in 2017, he expressed a reservation about doing so.
	He said it should be a once-in-a-generation moment and that he would not in the future support another waiver for a recently retired general.
	So if they've already lost the senior Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, it is from liberal Democrats to conservative Republicans.
	And the Senate who share these concerns about civil military relations inside the Pentagon.
	Do you share those concerns, Senator Cotton?
	Yes, I do.
	Thank you.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on The Eric Metaxas Show.
	Eight or nine years ago, a friend of mine forced me to watch a documentary which proposed that LBJ had been behind the Kennedy assassination.
	Like most people, I began watching it with tremendous skepticism, almost derision, but as it went along, I became more and more convinced that the case for LBJ's involvement in the Kennedy assassination was Very, very strong, so much so that I was deeply disturbed by it.
	I'm glad to know that somebody whom I respect, which is to say you, has written a book about it.
	Well, first of all, I think the American people have an endless fascination with the murder of John F. Kennedy because it was televised, in essence, in every aspect.
	I think I used eyewitness evidence, fingerprint evidence.
	And a lot of deep Texas politics to demonstrate that Lyndon Johnson had the motive, means, and opportunity to kill John Kennedy.
	I put forward a lot of very, very compelling circumstantial evidence.
	I'm not an attorney, but I dare anybody to read this book and not come away convinced.
	By the way, the book is the first book I've ever wrote, and it was a New York Times bestseller.
	Still does quite well.
	Put aside the question of the assassination of John Kennedy for a moment.
	It's also a profile of Lyndon Johnson, who is essentially a functioning lunatic.
	I mean, he is a psychopath.
	He is a drunk.
	He is a pill popper.
	He is a womanizer.
	He's a sadist.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on the Charlie Kirk Show.
	So I want to get into this Texas news.
	I know that you're just aware of just kind of the process and it's actually less about the particulars but more just about the bigger picture.
	You're from Texas.
	You guys are headquartered in Texas, right?
	What was the news today that came out of Texas?
	Well, the news was that an original jurisdiction suit was filed on the election.
	Now, what that means is normally if you file a lawsuit, people think you can just go to the Supreme Court, right?
	No, you don't just go to the Supreme Court.
	The way you get to the Supreme Court is you go through either a state system all the way through the highest court of the state, and then if you feel there's an issue that the Supreme Court can address, you can go from the state Supreme Court to the U.S. Supreme Court, or you can go through the federal courts.
	The lower court, then the Court of Appeals, and then appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
	And they take about 8,000 requests a year take 80 cases.
	What happened in Texas is, in the Constitution, there is very few things that you can file and you go straight to the Supreme Court.
	And that is, if one state goes after another state.
	And so what happened is Texas sued a number of these swing states saying, look, you are diluting our vote and hurting our ability to have a fair election when you don't follow the Constitution in your state.
	And what the Constitution says is that each state legislature Hi everybody,
	Dennis Prager here.
	I have a senior editor at Breitbart, one of the most important websites that exists.
	You can tell when something is important when it is smeared a great deal by the left.
	One of the great calls of my life was the last call.
	Can't believe no one on the left would debate you.
	People can't believe it.
	It's like they can't believe that in Los Angeles you're no longer prosecuted for trespassing or having a suspended license.
	Can't believe it.
	Can't believe it.
	As the left destroys people's country.
	They couldn't believe it in the Soviet Union.
	Comrade Stalin?
	He must not know what's happening.
	Why are you torturing me?
	If only Comrade Stalin knew.
	The naivete about evil.
	It's one of the reasons evil succeeds.
	So the smearing of Breitbart is actually a compliment.
	Joel Pollack is a senior editor there, and he has a brand new e-book out, an electronic book.
	You can get it at Amazon.
	And it's called Neither Free Nor Fair.
	The 2020 U.S. presidential election.
	Joel, welcome to the show.
	Thank you, Dennis.
	Great to be with you.
	Really?
	Yes, really.
	I love your show.
	I'm a big listener.
	I listen every day, so it's a great privilege to join you on the air.
	Thank you.
	I'm very touched.
	I was horsing around, and I got a compliment out of it.
	That was very sweet.
	By the way, I don't understand something.
	In your book it says, the characters and events portrayed in this book are fictitious.
	Is that what it says?
	Yes.
	Did you know that?
	No, I didn't know that.
	But, you know, if you ask a lot of Americans, they think we had a fictitious election, so maybe that makes sense.
	I don't know if that's a disclaimer that Amazon puts in, but we have had an election that is called the Democratic election, but did not resemble anything that...
	Any rational person would accept as a democratic election.
	We had political violence.
	We had censorship.
	We had military intervention of a certain kind.
	And we had a debate commission that was stacked against one side in favor of the other.
	And we had the rules change in the middle.
	I mean, vote by mail is probably the biggest factor in this election.
	And it was adopted at the behest of Democrats and over the objections of Republicans.
	That's not fair.
	That's correct.
	So your chapters are fear, Russian collusion, media bias, impeachment, coronavirus, race riots, big tech, vote by mail, political violence, the military, the polls, the debates, Hunter Biden's laptop, the vote, and then legal challenges.
	What you just described, though, even before I read your chapter headings, What you just described is indeed a perfect summary of the unprecedented nature of this election.
	So, I sit here as an American and I think, how do we work our way out of this?
	What do you think?
	The first thing is to tell the truth about what happened.
	And we have to be truthful about the fact that this was not a free and fair election.
	What I do in the book is I zoom out from the question of voter fraud.
	So there's a lot of litigation going on right now in the Supreme Court cases that may come up.
	And that's all very important.
	But voting and the counting of votes, although obviously the most crucial thing that happens in an election, they happen at the end of the election.
	They're part of a process.
	And the process goes on for months.
	And the process has certain standards.
	And I've had the benefit of living.
	I worked in South Africa for seven years and traveled in Southern Africa.
	And I had the benefit of learning about the international standards for a free and fair election.
	And these include things like the absolute right to a secret ballot, the ability to express political opinions without interference.
	They include the right to seek, receive, and impart information.
	And they include security.
	We engage in political activity without violence.
	And when you look at the 2020 election in the United States, we fell short of all of those standards.
	If we were to send an observer mission to a foreign country, we would send them with those standards and say, evaluate whether Zimbabwe is living up to those standards.
	Well, we have failed those standards in our own country, and I think it's important to say that, because we do not want to repeat this experiment in, shall we say, illiberal plebiscites.
	I would say that neighboring Zambia had less intimidation in their elections.
	Zimbabwe was, you know, unfortunately a terrible example, as you know.
	Right.
	But Botswana, I'm not being cute.
	I know Africa somewhat and been there.
	And I believe there was less intimidation and fraud in a fair number of African countries' elections than in ours.
	Well, I was in the region during the 2005 elections in Zimbabwe, and I learned a lot from that because the Zimbabweans became very good at convincing the people they needed to convince that their elections were actually 100% kosher.
	So what they did was they made sure election day was orderly and peaceful, and they made sure that the ballot counting was accurate.
	But what they did in the month leading up to the election Getting poor people out of their homes, arresting and jailing political opponents, drowning out opposition media.
	All of that happened in the build-up.
	And so Human Rights Watch, which is a left-wing organization, they said in that election that you can't look at the election day itself.
	You can't look at the vote itself.
	And election is a process.
	And I really believe that.
	And that's actually the international perspective on this.
	You can't have an election.
	Let's take one of the later chapters in my book, You can't have an election where there's an important piece of information about allegations of corruption and foreign influence for one of the candidates.
	And it simply is censored.
	And people who try to spread that article or that information suffer penalties both personal and professional.
	They lose their access to social media.
	They get their accounts shut down.
	And there are people who are smeared with allegations of Russian disinformation and so forth.
	It's one of the most egregious media cover-ups in American history, and we all watched it happen.
	And now, of course, today we find out Hunter Biden is under investigation for tax violations, but the tax violations have to do with all these foreign business deals that were on the laptop that the New York Post tried to warn us about in October.
	So we saw this happen in real time where we could not have a real open discussion about a very, very important news story.
	This affects the national security of the United States, but we somehow weren't allowed to talk about it.
	We're not allowed to talk about it now.
	Who was it, Facebook or Google, that announced anything put up on the Internet to challenge the results of this election will be called misinformation and deleted?
	It'll be your old nemesis.
	YouTube did that.
	It was YouTube that said any videos that allege that there was fraud and that the fraud affected the election were going to...
	We're going to take them down, and we're going to take down those channels.
	And it's already had an effect, because there are news channels that have had to change their coverage in order to stay on YouTube, because they are afraid they're going to lose their accounts.
	And, of course, this is in the middle of a Supreme Court appeal.
	This is in the middle of ongoing legal disputes about the elections.
	So it's really crazy that you can't have an open public debate about some I just want people to understand,
	imagine if YouTube were run by people on the right who had an equal desire to suppress free speech.
	Then real lies, like America was founded in 1619, those would be deleted.
	That would not be allowed.
	That's misinformation.
	It's misinformation that the Russians colluded with the Trump campaign.
	Anything about that, no longer available.
	But if we ran YouTube, we would allow that.
	If you want to lie on behalf of the left, we will allow you to lie on behalf of the left.
	It is not our business to shut down what we consider lies.
	That's right.
	And the First Amendment is there as a remedy for lies.
	That's right.
	Yes.
	It is there to protect speech, not just that you agree with and that you can verify, but that you might disagree with vehemently.
	And there are so many debates we've had in this country that have been settled finally in the right direction because we allow people to find their way to the truth themselves.
	And in fact, during an election is precisely when you want the broadest freedom of speech, the broadest freedom of assembly.
	That's the last time when you want to restrict or suppress freedom.
	We'll be back in a moment.
	His book is a new e-book, Neither Free Nor Fear.
	Or Fair, not Fear.
	Neither three nor fair.
	Trending now on the Larry Alder Show.
	State of Texas filed an election lawsuit with the Supreme Court against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, alleging that the states unconstitutionally changed their election laws, treated voters alleging that the states unconstitutionally changed their election laws, treated voters triggered voting irregularities by relaxing ballot integrity measures.
	The motion says, and I'm quoting, The hanging Chad saga of the 2000 election in their degree of departure from both state and federal law.
	Moreover, these flaws cumulatively preclude knowing who legitimately won the 2020 election and threaten to cloud all future elections, end of quote.
	In response to Pennsylvania AG, Josh Shapiro called the lawsuit meritless.
	Quote, they are a scheme by the President of the United States and some in the Republican Party to disregard the will of the people and name their own victors.
	This isn't a pick-your-own-novel ending.
	This is democracy, end of quote.
	Referred to it as a publicity stunt.
	The Michigan AG also said the same thing, that it was a publicity stunt.
	Jim Jordan also wants to know why the Georgia governor is not allowing signatures to be checked.
	When you send out all these ballots, we had a staffer, I've said this many times, we had a staffer who works for our office and for the Judiciary Committee, who at her apartment, she got her ballot, four other ballots were mailed to her apartment that were people who didn't live there.
	That is a recipe for disaster, and all we're asking now is, why won't some of these, why won't Governor Kemp in Georgia, for example, let us recheck the signatures and actually find out the rejection rate that Mr. Starr was talking about earlier.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on The Mike Gallagher Show.
	And, you know, I want to go back to Raphael Warnock's really radical rhetoric over the years.
	But before we do that, as I know you know, Congressman, all we hear, all I hear from my listeners, not only here in Georgia and the 17 affiliates we have all throughout the state, but all throughout the country, people are almost apoplectic about election integrity and what many believe to be a fraudulent election.
	I have to ask you, as somebody who knows Georgia, you know the lay of the land as well as anybody in the world.
	What do we tell people, what do you tell people who are worried about the legitimacy of the Senate runoffs?
	Is there oversight?
	Is there accountability?
	Are they going to be able to cheat their way into putting a couple of radicals like Ossoff and Warnock into the Senate?
	Well, number one, no, not if our conservatives show up.
	But I also will say this.
	Look, I've been fighting folks in this for the president at his request, looking at the, you know, the original pan recount, which we asked for.
	And look, we found over 10,000, almost 10,000 ballots, I believe it was.
	There's 3,000 votes for the president that were never even counted.
	We found places in which there was no oversight.
	There was no observers.
	These are things that now, as I've been telling folks over and over, we're in the middle of this cycle.
	We've got to get this stuff fixed.
	I would love to see the signature verification.
	The Secretary of State decided he don't want to do that.
	For whatever reason, Lieutenant Governor, Governor won't pressure.
	You know, they've talked about it, but they don't do anything about that side.
	So the signature verification is something that is important.
	But let me remind people, before November 3rd, we were talking about it, we were watching it, but now since then, for the January 5th election, I believe Sunshine is the greatest disinfectant.
	And I've been talking about it.
	Others have been talking about it.
	The president himself the other night said, look, we're going to have...
	People watching this, I think the governor could actually appropriate some funds, make sure that they're more ballot observers watching these drop boxes and do things like that.
	that, but also these county election officials have been put on notice.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on America First with Sebastian Bercat.
	Forget the lies and the mendacity of the candidate- Hi, everybody.
	Joel Pollack of Breitbart, a senior editor there.
	He does great work.
	I read you often, Joel.
	I just want you to know that.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Where are you located?
	I live in beautiful Pacific Palisades, California.
	Why are you staying in California?
	No, no, no.
	I mean it sincerely, because I'm here too, so I'm curious.
	Well, there are a number of reasons, one of which is that I am a...
	Short walk away from the ocean.
	So it's very hard to tear yourself away from the Pacific Ocean.
	But I do understand anybody who lives more than a mile inland would find life in this state quite oppressive with taxes and now rising crime in LA and a hostile political culture.
	And I just want to remind you that there is beautiful ocean at the Gulf of Mexico, so Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas.
	That's true.
	I just wanted to make that clear.
	No, seriously.
	So is it the ocean that keeps you here?
	Well, my wife also has a very prominent job in a company located here.
	And although we are in a new era of work from home and telecommuting and so forth, you really do have an advantage if you're near the nerve center of the company.
	So that's another reason to stay here.
	But we will see.
	I mean, definitely there's a lot of frustration, I can tell you, with the school.
	The LA Unified and so forth, and this idea that France can shut down their whole country but still send their children to school, but somehow we in California think that we can't reopen the schools.
	It's just mind-boggling.
	Not to mention restaurants, etc.
	Joel Pollack has a brand new book.
	It's an e-book, so you can just get it right now and read it on Kindle, for example.
	And it's titled, Neither Free Nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election.
	Do you think that the president won?
	That's a very good question.
	I have said that I believe Joe Biden is the winner.
	And that's because I don't have enough insight into the disputes over voter fraud to say any differently.
	And that might surprise people because I believe the election was We shouldn't have had an election like this.
	And I was saying it throughout the election, reporting on some of the abuses that were taking place and so forth.
	But I do think that right now, if I have to say, just based on the evidence I'm looking at, that President Trump did not win, and I would have liked to have seen him win so convincingly that he would surpass what we call the margin of fraud.
	You know, if you accept that fraud happens, and we really shouldn't, but it's sort of a running joke in Republican circles that there's going to be a lot of fraud.
	On the Democratic side, so you have to beat not just their voters, but you have to beat the fraud that happens when they count the votes.
	But I say this in my conclusion that, unfortunately, the business of democracy is rather messy.
	And we like to drill down and count specific votes and be very precise and so forth.
	But what democracy turns out to be, unfortunately or fortunately, is a very complicated way of taking turns.
	So I'm okay with the idea that we can have changes in power even if I don't like the candidates and I don't agree with the policies and so forth.
	It's not the winning or losing that I'm particularly concerned with.
	It's the process that really bothered me.
	And the thing that bothered me the most, Dennis, was the violence in this election.
	You know, I used to live in Santa Monica until very recently.
	And the riots that went through Santa Monica destroyed the center of that town.
	It's like a zombie apocalypse.
	And I'm not kidding.
	It basically has become a ghost town in many respects.
	It's still a nice place.
	It's by the ocean, just like where I live now.
	But it's nothing like it was just a few months ago.
	And here in Los Angeles, in Pacific Palisades, they were boarding up the mall here.
	And we had National Guard troop carriers on the streets.
	And the residents were welcoming them as if we were being liberated from foreign occupation.
	In Brentwood, I happened to be in Brentwood one day, drivers were handing out cookies to the National Guard, as if we were living in some kind of war zone.
	And that's entirely because of the left.
	And I spent an entire chapter on political violence, how Joe Biden and the Democrats condoned this political violence, that Biden almost never criticized the violence unless he could blame it on Republicans or blame it on police.
	But there was never any effort by Democrats I think there are reasons to be somewhat optimistic
	about The president wasn't re-elected or apparently not re-elected.
	Here in California, voters defeated Proposition 16, which would have introduced race discrimination in this state, reversing Proposition 209. And the Democrats really got behind Proposition 16. They wanted to introduce these racial discrimination policies through affirmative action.
	Kamala Harris supported it.
	I think they had $27 million behind the effort and unions and all sorts of things.
	And the opponents, Ward Connerly and a couple other people, I think they raised less than a tenth of the money.
	They had almost no advertising.
	And yet, something like 3.5 million Democrats in California who voted for Joe Biden also voted against Proposition 16. It is remarkable.
	It is completely remarkable.
	Yeah.
	So some of those people had to know what they were doing.
	I mean, you know, it's not just a matter of explaining it all in terms of...
	Fraud or shenanigans.
	I mean, sometimes the electorate just says very complicated things and we have to accept that and try to figure out what the message of the election was.
	I'm okay with that.
	What I'm not okay with is my yard sign getting stolen or someone throwing dog excrement into my yard.
	Well, that will be now non-prosecutable.
	I read the listing of what the district attorney of Los Angeles won't prosecute.
	Including suspended driver's license, no driver's license, trespassing.
	I mean, it's a new world.
	I mean, it's truly a new world of chaos.
	As I said, in the Soviet Union, all of that was illegal.
	In a certain sense, the left in America is a new left.
	I know that's a term that they used in the 60s, the new left.
	But this is to the left of the Soviet left.
	They did not want chaos.
	I remember being in the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War.
	I was completely safe.
	I walked at midnight, you know, in Red Square.
	I had no fear of being mugged.
	The one thing totalitarian regimes do is not allow street violence that they don't encourage.
	Right.
	Well, this is the fecklessness of our political leadership here.
	This guy, George Gascon.
	He had the job in San Francisco recently, and crime went up in San Francisco.
	The city is now synonymous, unfortunately, with disorder, excrement on the sidewalks, homelessness, drug abuse, and petty crime.
	And now we want him to do for Los Angeles what he did for San Francisco.
	That's right.
	Hold on there.
	On our mind, people, go one more segment with Joel Pollack, senior editor-at-large for Breitbart.
	Neither free nor fair, the 2020 U.S. presidential election.
	It's up at DennisPrager.com as well.
	This is Lon He Chen of the Hoover Institution for townhall.com.
	California Governor Gavin Newsom has repeatedly called on Californians to come together and make sacrifices to fight COVID-19.
	The request would have been better received if, at the same time, Governor Newsom wasn't off violating his own public health guidance by dining with a group of lobbyists at one of America's most posh restaurants, or sending his kids to a Sacramento private school in person while many California schools remain closed for in-person learning and millions or sending his kids to a Sacramento private school in person while many California schools remain closed for
	The problem with Newsom's hypocritical actions is that they undercut the very healthcare professionals and scientists At a time when we need leadership and clarity, Newsom has given us hypocrisy and confusion.
	California's voters won't soon forget his shortcomings.
	I'm Lon He Chen. - The Pepperdine Graduate School of Public Policy, impacting policy decisions today, preparing public leaders for tomorrow.
	Learn more at publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu.
	Trending now on the Larry Alder Show.
	Thank you.
	The state of Texas filed an election lawsuit with the Supreme Court against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, alleging that the states unconstitutionally changed their election laws, treated voters unequally, triggered voting irregularities by relaxing ballot integrity measures.
	The motion says, and I'm quoting, Plaintiff State respectfully submits the foregoing types of electoral irregularities exceed the hanging Chad saga of the 2000 election in their degree of departure from both state and federal law.
	Moreover, these flaws cumulatively preclude knowing who legitimately won the 2020 election and threatened to cloud all future elections, end of quote.
	In response to Pennsylvania AG, Josh Shapiro called the lawsuit meritless.
	Quote, they are a scheme by the President of the United States and some in the Republican Party to disregard the will of the people and name their own victors.
	This isn't a pick-your-own-novel ending.
	This is democracy, end of quote.
	Referred to it as a publicity stunt.
	The Michigan AG also said the same thing, that it was a publicity stunt.
	Jim Jordan also wants to know why the Georgia governor is not allowing signatures to be checked.
	When you send out all these ballots, we had a staffer, I've said this many times, we had a staffer who works for our office and for the Judiciary Committee, who at her apartment, she got her ballot.
	Four other ballots were mailed to her apartment that were people who didn't live there.
	That is a recipe for disaster.
	And all we're asking now is why won't some of these, why won't Governor Kemp in Georgia, for example, let us recheck the signatures and actually find out the rejection rate that Mr. Starr was talking about early.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on the Mike Gallagher Show.
	And, you know, I want to go back to Raphael Warnock's really radical rhetoric over the years.
	But before we do that.
	As I know you know, Congressman, all we hear, all I hear from my listeners, not only here in Georgia and the 17 affiliates we have all throughout the state, but all throughout the country, people are almost apoplectic about election integrity and what many believe to be a fraudulent election.
	I have to ask you, as somebody who knows Georgia, you know the lay of the land as well as anybody in the world.
	What do we tell people, what do you tell people who are worried?
	about the legitimacy of the Senate runoffs.
	Is there oversight?
	Is there accountability?
	Are they going to be able to cheat their way into putting a couple of radicals like Ossoff and Warnock into the Senate?
	Well, number one, no, not if our conservatives show up.
	But I also will say this.
	Look, I've been fighting folks in this for the president at his request, looking at the, you know, the original pan recount, which we asked for.
	And look, we found over 10,000, almost 10,000 ballots, I believe it was.
	There's 3,000 votes for the president that were never even counted.
	We found places in which there was no-- All right, everybody.
	Neither free nor fair.
	The 2020 U.S. presidential election.
	Senior editor-at-large at Breitbart, Joel Pollack.
	Do you write something every day?
	I do.
	I write usually several articles a day, but my minimum for myself, as I say, I have to write one piece a day.
	That's a lot of writing.
	You know, I love writing.
	It becomes like breathing to me.
	I write, and I write, and I just keep writing.
	Huh.
	Do you use Word on a computer or your handwriting or what?
	That is a great question.
	I spend the first half hour of my day writing by hand.
	I keep a journal and I write by hand.
	And usually when I write books, I actually use a typewriter for first draft because I like the physical sensation of typing on the key and seeing something come out on the page.
	And then I go back and I put it into a word processor on a computer.
	I say this with love and admiration.
	That is weird.
	Well, everyone has their routine.
	Correct.
	I agree.
	That's why I asked.
	I find that fascinating.
	You use a typewriter.
	So, what brand?
	Next to me right now, I have an Imperial Good Companion 5. It's about 70 years old.
	I was going to say, he stole it from the Smithsonian.
	Exactly.
	I actually picked it up.
	At a thrift store about 20 years ago for $10.
	And I took it to a repair shop that cleaned it up and got it back in working condition.
	I also have a Remington portable and I have a variety of other ones.
	I have one of the first Remington portables.
	I think it's in 1929. Well, I don't understand this though.
	It's of no use.
	In terms of putting out a document, you have to retype it.
	Or what do you do?
	Scan it?
	What do you do?
	I retype it.
	I retype it.
	You rewrite the draft.
	It's like practicing a piece of music.
	It gets better and it becomes different when you go through it an additional time.
	The biggest problem that computers pose for writers is the temptation to edit.
	So when you have Microsoft Word or Mac...
	It's so tempting to go back over it and fix what you've just written.
	And you never get past the first page because you're trying to achieve perfection, because it's possible to achieve perfection.
	At least that's what your brain thinks.
	Yeah, I do.
	I love that, actually.
	The Bible commentary I'm in the middle of, the Rational Bible, I would say a given chapter Yes.
	Editing is very important.
	In some ways, 90% of the frustration comes in the last 10% of the work.
	But to get yourself moving on a project...
	At the rate that you have to put out stuff, I'm glad I asked.
	I find that fascinating.
	Obviously, you touch type.
	Yes, yes.
	Where did you learn that?
	I learned it...
	At Solomon Schechter Day School in Skokie, Illinois.
	Why didn't I attend Solomon Schechter Day School in Skokie?
	I can't believe it.
	I never learned it.
	I'm not joking.
	I make so many errors.
	I type unbelievably fast, but with unbelievable amounts of errors, but it doesn't matter, because obviously the computer allows me to correct.
	I went from writing one article a year to writing 20 articles a year as soon as word processors came out.
	Well, they're definitely good for articles.
	I mean, if I'm just writing a news article, I don't usually start on the typewriter.
	I might start longhand just to get my ideas going.
	All right, so one question, forgive me, one question on that.
	Do you use a ballpoint or a fountain pen?
	I started with fountain pens.
	they're very hard to maintain because the nub or the nib starts to wear away.
	And then what happens is the manufacturers go out of business, so you can't replace the cartridges anymore.
	So I just moved to ballpoint pen.
	Oh, you should have called me up.
	I would have solved your problem.
	I only wrote with a fountain pen.
	All right.
	Those things keep me sane in these dark times.
	We've got one minute to go.
	I just want to say, for the record, I'm agnostic.
	I'm a little more doubtful that the election was fair than you are.
	I completely respect your view.
	Sending Republicans from watching things, votes changing dramatically when people are told to go home, and there are too many anomalies.
	So that's, in a nutshell, my view.
	I have seen so many elections up close from a variety of different perspectives.
	I've been a poll watcher, I've been a candidate, I've been an election observer, and I've seen that a lot of what goes on that looks very suspicious All right.
	You know what?
	I just want to say it is to your credit.
	You know, Breitbart, Breitbart, Breitbart, and here's a guy who thinks the election result actually is what the result has been announced.
	He's terrific, Joel Pollack.
	His book, Neither Free Nor Fair, e-book, up at DennisPrager.com.
	All right, everybody.
	What am I doing?
	There's relief factor!
	I love relief.
	I do.
	Easiest product I've ever had.
	I don't even read the script anymore because I live it.
	It is so good.
	And what I just ask you to do is try it for three weeks because then you will know.
	It's only three weeks that it takes to find out if it will work for you.
	That's how fast-working it is.
	If it doesn't work, you've lost $19.95 plus shipping.
	And if it does work, you've lost your pain.
	Now tell me why that's not persuasive in trying relieffactor.com 800-583-84.
	This is Lon He Chen of the Hoover Institution for townhall.com.
	California Governor Gavin Newsom has repeatedly called on Californians to come together and make sacrifices to fight COVID-19.
	The request would have been better received if, at the same time, Governor Newsom wasn't off violating his own public health guidance by dining with a group of lobbyists at one of America's most posh restaurants, or sending his kids to a Sacramento private school in person while many California schools remain closed for in-person learning and millions of students slog their way through online classes.
	The problem with Newsom's hypocritical actions is that they undercut the very healthcare professionals and scientists whose advice he is asking Californians to follow.
	It makes those of us who live in California wonder who we can trust and what guidance we should be listening to.
	At a time when we need leadership and clarity, Newsom has given us hypocrisy and confusion.
	California's voters won't soon forget his shortcomings.
	I'm Lon He Chen.
	The Pepperdine Graduate School of Public Policy, impacting policy decisions today, preparing public leaders for tomorrow.
	Learn more at publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu.
	Trending now on the Larry Alder Show.
	The same people that for four years claimed that Donald Trump was illegitimate.
	78% of them believe that the Russians changed the outcome of the election, even though our intelligence community has never reached that conclusion.
	And you have the nerve to accuse Donald Trump of being delusional when he insists that the election was a fraud?
	Given all of these allegations, far more allegations for this than you ever had for the idea that Bush-lied people died.
	Far more evidence than you ever had that Donald Trump was colluding with Russia, yet there was a two-and-a-half-year investigation.
	How dare you?
	You've got election officials like this woman in Michigan?
	And we've got all these other allegations.
	The extension of the deadline in Pennsylvania, which I think is one of their solid cases.
	It's working its way up, hopefully, to the Supreme Court.
	Hopefully, they'll take this.
	Far more...
	Evidence, far more ammo, far more smoke than you ever had about Bush-lied people died, about Trump-Russia collusion.
	But Donald Trump is delusional for wanting to make sure he lost fair and square, assuming that he did?
	You guys have a lot of nerve.
	Karen Bass, one of the Democrat members of the House, regarding the election officials who flouted the rules.
	You got video of them pulling ballots from a desk after the poll workers have left.
	She said, well...
	They were just making, quote, honest mistakes.
	Close quote.
	Shoe on the other foot.
	You guys would be in the streets.
	They'd be running out of pitchforks.
	They'd be surrounding the White House.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now.
	Next, everybody. everybody.
	Here we are.
	All right, y'all, Dennis Prager here.
	It was fascinating to me that this terrific writer, he's just terrific, Breitbart is terrific, but it gives you an idea that we are not a monolithic view of life or of politics on the right.
	That he believes that Joe Biden won.
	And just wrote a terrific book, Neither Free Nor Fair, about the elections.
	But I would like to pose it this way.
	If a certain number of people can cheat, in other words, the possibility is there.
	Logistically, for them to cheat, whatever the issue might be.
	They have a phenomenal desire to cheat.
	They're impassioned about getting the result they want by cheating.
	And third, and very important, at least as important as the others, they morally believe it is morally good to cheat.
	Do you think they cheated?
	I have the ability to cheat.
	I have the desire to cheat.
	And I have the moral defense of cheating.
	Did they cheat?
	Of course.
	Nothing is missing.
	If you have an impassioned reason to cheat, and you're capable of it, but you morally believe it would be wrong to do so, then the fact that the other two exist would preclude my conclusion that you cheated.
	But if you morally not only can defend cheating, can in fact argue that it is the moral imperative to cheat, which is what the left believed about Donald Trump, Then of course they cheated!
	There's nothing missing.
	The ability, the desire, and the morality.
	But no, they didn't cheat.
	I'm supposed to believe that?
	To keep a fascist, white supremacist, neo-Nazi out of office?
	Who wouldn't cheat?
	I would.
	That's a lot to have in one thing.
	But then, oh, how absurd of the right.
	We at YouTube won't even allow anybody who says there was cheating to have access to the internet.
	The means, the desire, and the morality.
	I just wrote that with a fountain pen.
	But no, they didn't cheat.
	Just thought I would throw that at you as theoretical.
	Tell me one reason they wouldn't.
	I've never seen this posed this way.
	Tell me one reason a Democrat who could wouldn't cheat with regard to the election.
	There is no possible reason.
	It's the moral duty to do so.
	Okay, everybody.
	Let's go to some of your calls here.
	Sherry in Santa Clarita, California.
	Hello.
	Hi.
	Happy Hanukkah.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	So I come from a law enforcement family.
	One son is on LAPD. The younger one is on L.A. County Sheriff's Department.
	And two years ago, last August, he was on his way to work in West Hollywood.
	and he was on a motorcycle, and he was hit by a guy who has a long rap sheet.
	He happened to have a strike when he was, like, 17, so the judge could throw the book at him.
	But the awful thing is he took off, and my son lost his leg.
	The best thing is he's got such a great attitude.
	Four months later, he was in a patrol car again, and he's working successfully now.
	Unfortunately, since Gascon is now our district attorney, he's throwing out the strike that this person had.
	And instead of doing 11 years, which is, to me, a light sentence anyway, considering he's victimized people his whole life, he's going to be getting out any day.
	He's going to be getting out any day?
	Any day, yeah.
	Yeah.
	I'm so angry.
	I'm so angry.
	I'm almost as angry as you.
	I'm angry.
	I'm sad.
	It was like a punch in the stomach for my son.
	It's a punch in the stomach for my whole family.
	Law enforcement has been treated brutally.
	So when I say that the left is evil, why is this not a good example, ladies and gentlemen?
	Hit-and-run driver leads to the loss of a leg.
	Of a human being, because of Gascon being elected district attorney, be let out.
	Wow.
	None of this is new, though.
	I've been fighting the left my whole life.
	They believe in punishing their opponents.
	They don't believe in punishing evil.
	Okay?
	That's another good summary of the left.
	Punish opponents, but don't punish evil.
	So that's part of the famous Talmudic dictum of those who are kind to the cruel will be cruel to the kind.
	This is a perfect example.
	Gascon is a living example of the Talmudic dictum.
	Those who are kind to the cruel will be cruel to the kind.
	This young man who lost his leg was the kind, and he, Gascon, is kind to the cruel, so therefore he's cruel to the kind.
	That's right.
	That's how it works.
	It's the inverted moral compass of the left.
	God, I'm so angry on this woman's behalf.
	I believe ultimately we'll either have clarity about the left or we won't have an America that we can recognize.
	Trending now on the Mike Deliger Show.
	And, you know, I want to go back to Raphael Warnock's really radical rhetoric over the years.
	But before we do that, as I know you know, Congressman, all we hear, all I hear from my listeners, not only here in Georgia and the 17 affiliates we have all throughout the state, but all throughout the country, people are almost apoplectic about election integrity and what many believe to be a fraudulent election.
	I have to ask you, as somebody who knows Georgia, you know the lay of the land as well as anybody in the world.
	What do we tell people, what do you tell people who are worried about the legitimacy of the Senate runoffs?
	Is there oversight?
	Is there accountability?
	Are they going to be able to cheat their way into putting a couple of radicals like Ossoff and Warnock into the Senate?
	Well, number one, no.
	Not if our conservatives show up.
	But I also will say this.
	Look, I've been fighting folks in this for the president at his request, looking at the, you know, the original pan recount, which we asked for.
	And look, we found over 10,000, almost 10,000 ballots, I believe it was.
	There's 3,000 votes for the president that were never even counted.
	We found places in which there was no oversight.
	There was no observers.
	These are things that now, as I've been telling folks over and over, we're in the middle of this cycle.
	We've got to get this stuff fixed.
	I would love to see the signature verification.
	The Secretary of State decided he don't want to do that for whatever reason.
	Lieutenant Governor, Governor won't pressure.
	You know, they've talked about it, but they don't do anything about that side.
	So the signature verification is something that is important.
	But let me remind people, before November 3rd, we were talking about it, we were watching it, but now since then...
	For the January 5th election, I believe Sunshine is the greatest to disinfect it.
	And I've been talking about it.
	Others have been talking about it.
	The president himself the other night said, look, we're going to have people watching this.
	I think the governor could actually appropriate some funds, make sure that there are more ballot observers watching these drop boxes and do things like that.
	that, but also these county election officials have been put on notice.
	Thank you.
	Forget the lies and the mendacity of the candidate in question whose name was circled in.
	A man who is incompetent, clinically incompetent, to hold any position of responsibility.
	Would you let this man walk your dog?
	Let alone be in control of the nuclear weapons of the most powerful nation in the world.
	A man who can't string clear sentences together without talking about how hirsute, how hairy his legs are, and how little children wanted to pat them down in the swimming pool.
	Good God, man!
	Why aren't you in an asylum?
	It's not the fact.
	That he's been a machine politician for 47 years!
	Hiding in his basement, unable...
	Hi, everybody.
	Paul in Scottsdale, Arizona.
	Dennis Prager, hi.
	Hi, Dennis.
	Yeah, I used to live in L.A. I'm one of your old religion on the line, listeners.
	Anyway, this district attorney's new policy of declining to prosecute, you know, when faced with adversity, we sometimes miss the opportunities in front of us.
	All these people who are threatening to be prosecuted for keeping their stores and restaurants open, well, if his policy is not to prosecute, then what have they got to worry about?
	I think he would prosecute them because they're decent people trying to feed their families, so they're scum in Gascon's view.
	The left loathes the good.
	It's always been that way.
	The evil hate the good.
	It's a law of life.
	It's embedded into the human condition.
	It's the murderers and the rapists and the public poopers and the trespassers and the violent rioters.
	Those are the people that they, at worst, condone and at best do nothing about.
	Well, it's the same thing as condone.
	The increase in deaths among blacks as a result of defunding police.
	Okay?
	Is that not obvious?
	And you're going to tell me that Democrats give a damn about blacks, including black Democrats?
	Black Democrats care about blacks as much as I care about, let me see, badminton.
	Okay?
	I have nothing against badminton, but I don't care about it.
	So that is the real story.
	Black Democrats, like white Democrats, have one interest.
	Power.
	That is it.
	That is the interest of the left.
	They love power.
	And then we are satisfied human beings.
	I've been saying this all of my life.
	More people understand this today than before.
	Do you know...
	I'll leave you with this this hour.
	I mentioned it at the time.
	I haven't mentioned it in about a half a year.
	I was visiting friends in Santa Monica, California.
	They had told me about this, so I went and I actually took a picture of it.
	Right after or during the riots, a store was boarded up and handwritten on it were the words, black owned.
	And I remembered from Germany that you used to have Aryan owned so that the Nazi rioters would leave it alone.
	That's a good glimpse into the left.
	We'll be back.
	This is Lon Hee Chen of the Hoover Institution for townhall.com.
	California Governor Gavin Newsom has repeatedly called on Californians to come together and make sacrifices to fight COVID-19.
	The request would have been better received if, at the same time, Governor Newsom wasn't off violating his own public health guidance by dining with a group of lobbyists at one of America's most posh restaurants, or sending his kids to a Sacramento private school in person while many California schools remain closed for in-person learning and millions of students slog their way through online classes.
	The problem with Newsom's hypocritical actions is that they undercut the very healthcare professionals and scientists whose advice he is asking Californians to follow.
	It makes those of us who live in California wonder who we can trust and what guidance we should be listening to.
	At a time when we need leadership and clarity, Newsom has given us hypocrisy and confusion.
	California's voters won't soon forget his shortcomings.
	I'm Lanhee Chen.
	The Pepperdine Graduate School of Public Policy, impacting policy decisions today, preparing public leaders for tomorrow.
	Learn more at publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu.
	Trending now on the Larry Oller Show.
	State of Texas filed an election lawsuit with the Supreme Court against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan.
	And Wisconsin, alleging that the states unconstitutionally changed their election laws, treated voters unequally, triggered voting irregularities by relaxing ballot integrity measures.
	The motion says, and I'm quoting, The hanging Chad saga of the 2000 election in their degree of departure from both state and federal law.
	Moreover, these flaws cumulatively preclude knowing who legitimately won the 2020 election and threatened to cloud all future elections.
	In response to Pennsylvania AG, Josh Shapiro called the lawsuit meritless.
	They are a scheme by the President of the United States and some in the Republican Party to disregard the will of the people and name their own victors.
	This isn't a pick-your-own-novel ending.
	This is democracy, end of quote.
	Referred to it as a publicity stunt.
	The Michigan AG also said the same thing, that it was a publicity stunt.
	Jim Jordan also wants to know why the Georgia governor is not allowing signatures to be checked.
	When you send out all these ballots, we had a staffer, I've said this many times, we had a staffer who works for our office and for the Judiciary Committee, who at her apartment, she got her ballot.
	Four other ballots were mailed to her apartment that were people who didn't live there.
	That is a recipe for disaster.
	And all we're asking now is, why won't some of these, why won't Governor Kemp in Georgia, for example, let us recheck the signatures and actually find out the rejection rate that Mr. Starr was talking about early.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on the Mike Dillager Show.
	. .
	And, you know, I want to go back to Raphael Warnock's really radical rhetoric over the years.
	But before we do that, as I know you know, Congressman, all we hear, all I hear from my listeners, not only here in Georgia, And the 17 affiliates we have all throughout the state, but all throughout the country, people are almost apoplectic about election integrity and what many believe to be a fraudulent election.
	I have to ask you, as somebody who knows Georgia, you know the lay of the land as well as anybody in the world.
	What do we tell people, what do you tell people who are worried about the legitimacy?
	Of the Senate runoffs, is there oversight?
	Is there accountability?
	Are they going to be able to cheat their way into putting a couple of radicals like Ossoff and Warnock into the Senate?
	Well, number one, no.
	Not if our conservatives show up.
	But I also will say this.
	Look, I've been fighting folks in this for the president at his request, looking at the original pan recount, which we asked for.
	And look, we found over 10,000, almost 10,000 ballots, I believe it was.
	There's 3,000 votes for the president that were never even counted.
	We found places in which there was no oversight.
	There was no observers.
	These are things that now, as I've been telling folks over and over, we're in the middle of this cycle.
	We've got to get this stuff fixed.
	I would love to see the signature verification.
	The Secretary of State decided he don't want to do that.
	For whatever reason, Lieutenant Governor, Governor won't pressure.
	You know, they've talked about it, but they don't do anything about that side.
	So the signature verification is something that is important.
	But let me remind people, before November 3rd, we were talking about it, we were watching it, but now since then, For the January 5th election, I believe Sunshine is the greatest disinfectant.
	Now, I've been talking about it.
	Others have been talking about it.
	The president himself the other night said, look, we're going to have people watching this.
	I think the governor could actually appropriate some funds, make sure that there are more ballot observers watching these drop boxes and do things like that.
	that, but also these county election officials have been put on notice.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on America First with Sebastian Cuerca.
	Forget the lies and the mendacity of the candidate in question whose name was circled in.
	A man who is incompetent, clinically incompetent, to hold any position of responsibility.
	Would you let this man walk your dog?
	Let alone be in control of the nuclear weapons of the most powerful nation in the world.
	A man who can't string clear sentences together without talking about how his suit, how hairy his legs are, and how little children wanted to pat them down in the swimming pool.
	Good God, man!
	Why aren't you in an asylum?
	It's not the fact.
	That he's been a machine politician for 47 years, hiding in his basement, unable to hold a rally through sheer cowardice, or because he knows nobody would go.
	It's not the fact that all of his co-conspirators who he colluded with, yes, real collusion, utterly and completely, Deep-sixed the story with all its evidence of his son's corruption facilitated whilst he was vice president.
	Corruption involving the biggest communist nation in the world, a nation that has slave labor camps.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on the Hugh Hewitt Show.
	music President-elect Biden will nominate Lloyd Austin to be Secretary of Defense.
	Now, would you engage with me on it on whether or not Lloyd Austin will be a good nominee on the Senate?
	Well, hello.
	Well, hello, everybody.
	I'm Dennis Prager.
	I believe, if you haven't heard me on this, this is a very dramatic statement, and I never seek drama for its own sake.
	And I am obviously staking some of my credibility and reputation on this claim.
	I believe tens of thousands, perhaps more than 100,000 Americans who died of COVID would not have died of COVID if they were prescribed at the beginning of the virus in their lives.
	Hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, either or both.
	I never heard of ivermectin until a week ago.
	The evidence is so overwhelming that it saves your life.
	It knocks out the virus when taken in the early stages.
	These are very unbelievably safe medicines.
	I believe that the medical establishment is responsible for many, many dead Americans.
	There is no...
	...institution in the country that the left has not ruined.
	The latest is the science world.
	Because agendas...
	It is actually...
	It was more important to the left to disqualify hydroxychloroquine than to save American lives.
	I believe that as I believe that two and two is four.
	Here we go, here we go, everybody.
	That's how I see it.
	There have been hearings.
	Sean, let's go to the hearings here.
	More hearings in the US Senate on hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin by very renowned scientists who are then dismissed.
	By the cesspool of the New York Times as snake oil salesmen.
	New York Times is responsible for a lot of dead Americans.
	And they're proud of their position.
	I hate telling you this.
	I hate it.
	That I would sit here, through a life of this work, And regard the medical establishment with the contempt that I do?
	You think that brings me any joy?
	My brother's a doctor.
	Doctors have saved my life.
	The medical establishment is a moral cesspool.
	Many of the publications have been completely politicized.
	Lancet and the others.
	New England Journal of Medicine.
	The left has taken it over.
	Like everything else.
	It is a very, very troubling thing not to be able to believe almost anything that an institution puts out today.
	I have here, I'll give you an example.
	I hope I have it here from the New York Times.
	Okay.
	Where are you, New York Times?
	Yes, here it is, New York Times.
	It's under the title, it is truly like Pravda.
	New York Times has become the American Pravda.
	Daily distortions.
	That's the title of its column.
	It doesn't even hide the fact that we're a propaganda machine.
	Daily distortions.
	Tracking viral misinformation.
	See, the left doesn't differ with people.
	Like Pravda, Pravda means truth.
	It was the Communist Party newspaper in the Soviet Union.
	The New York Times, the left is the truth.
	All those who differ with the left are lying.
	They're misinformation sources.
	Every day, Times reporters will chronicle and debunk false and misleading information that is going viral online.
	Headline, a Senate hearing promoted unproven drugs and dubious claims about the coronavirus.
	Really?
	The New York Times, you're responsible for a lot of dead Americans.
	You listen to the New York Times that a loved one has COVID, like especially a frail older loved one, and you're not getting that person something that for over a half century...
	Tens of millions of people have taken with zero incidents of danger?
	And you're going to deprive them of it because you believe the New York Times?
	That cesspool?
	You're killing your relative in many cases if you believe the New York Times.
	Or the whole Democratic Party.
	The whole left.
	They're killing Americans.
	I mean that literally.
	One of us is wrong.
	I admit it.
	New York Times.
	Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, spent much of this year promoting investigations into Hunter Biden, trying fruitlessly to show corruption on the part of Joseph R. Biden Jr. Really?
	Fruitlessly?
	By the way, is this a news piece?
	You can't tell them the New York Times anymore.
	The news pieces are opinion pieces.
	Now Mr. Johnson, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, is more focused on another narrative sympathetic to President Trump.
	That's fascinating.
	Why is ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine sympathetic to President Trump?
	They're sick.
	It's all through the lens of race and Trump.
	The simpleton world of the left.
	That's it.
	That's all I need to know.
	Race and Trump.
	What the hell does this have to do with Trump?
	He didn't even take hydroxychloroquine when he had COVID. Let alone ivermectin.
	It's more focused on another narrative sympathetic to President Trump.
	I don't know if President Trump's name was mentioned.
	If not to establish science.
	Oh, establish science.
	It's another fraud of the left.
	Really?
	It's established science that hydroxychloroquine is dangerous?
	The established science is that it is completely safe.
	That the reaction to the coronavirus pandemic has been overblown.
	It certainly has.
	I said it from the beginning, the greatest mistake in human history.
	Remember when India went on lockdown?
	And I said, what a fool Modi is.
	This poor country, you are now going to put people into starvation.
	The largest demonstration in human history just took place.
	I'm sorry?
	Hmm.
	Alright.
	The largest demonstration in human history just took place in India.
	250 million people.
	It's hard for me to believe, but it seemed to be a serious source.
	They're disgusted.
	With the idiotic ruining of the Indian economy and this unprecedentedly stupid reaction of quarantining a whole society for almost a year.
	Unbelievable.
	The world leaders, right and left, by the way, right and left.
	I have no political agenda here because...
	They did it in Israel with a right-wing government.
	They did it in India with a right-wing government.
	Leaders are frightened.
	They don't lead.
	They don't want to go on record as under my watch.
	That's what it would be, because the media run countries, not leaders.
	The media run it.
	Everyone's afraid of their local media.
	That's it.
	And once you are, you're no longer a leader.
	You're a wimp.
	We're led by wimps almost all over the world.
	Not on my watch, right?
	Colmo's first statement.
	Ah, how, wow.
	If everything I've done just saves one life, I will be happy.
	Really?
	Well, you didn't save one life.
	That's the joke.
	And you've killed a lot.
	I've read to you the suicide of the 16-year-old kid who couldn't take it anymore.
	He's devoted his life to making the high school football team.
	No football.
	No friends.
	He's in isolation.
	And that's what he wrote in his note.
	Completely normal kid until then.
	Now, obviously not everybody's killing themselves, but a lot more people are.
	A lot more people are on drugs.
	A lot more people are abusing significant others.
	Children.
	And partners.
	Yes.
	Public health officials have been too quick to come to conclusions about the best ways to deal with it.
	All right, that's the end of that sentence.
	I'm reading to you the New York Times report on the hearings.
	By the way, you send me an email.
	You want information on doctors who might be able to prescribe hydroxychloroquine to you?
	Just send me an email.
	I have no financial interest in this.
	this is a pure human service.
	This is Lon H.N. of the Hoover Institution for townhall.com.
	California Governor Gavin Newsom has repeatedly called on Californians to come together and make sacrifices to fight COVID-19.
	The request would have been better received if, at the same time, Governor Newsom wasn't off violating his own public health guidance by dining with a group of lobbyists at one of America's most posh restaurants, or sending his kids to a Sacramento private school in person while many California schools remain closed for in-person learning and millions of students slog their way through online classes.
	The problem with Newsom's hypocritical actions is that they undercut the very healthcare professionals and scientists whose advice he is asking Californians to follow.
	It makes those of us who live in California wonder who we can trust and what guidance we should be listening to.
	At a time when we need leadership and clarity, Newsom has given us hypocrisy and confusion.
	California's voters won't soon forget his shortcomings.
	I'm Lon He Chen.
	The Pepperdine Graduate School of Public Policy, impacting policy decisions today, preparing public leaders for tomorrow.
	Learn more at publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu.
	Trending now on the Larry Older Show.
	State of Texas filed an election lawsuit with the Supreme Court against Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin, alleging that the states unconstitutionally changed their election laws, treated voters unequally, triggered voting irregularities by relaxing ballot integrity measures.
	The motion says, and I'm quoting, Plaintiff State respectfully submits the foregoing types of electoral irregularities exceed the hanging Chad saga of the 2000 election in their degree of departure from both state and federal law.
	Moreover, these flaws cumulatively preclude knowing who legitimately won the 2020 election and threatened to cloud all future elections, end of quote.
	In response to Pennsylvania AG, Josh Shapiro called the lawsuit meritless.
	Quote, they are a scheme by the President of the United States and some in the Republican Party to disregard the will of the people and name their own victors.
	This isn't a pick-your-own-novel ending.
	This is democracy, end of quote.
	Referred to it as a publicity stunt.
	The Michigan AG also said the same thing, that it was a publicity stunt.
	Jim Jordan also wants to know why the Georgia governor is not allowing signatures to be checked.
	When you send out all these ballots, we had a staffer, I've said this many times, we had a staffer who works for our office and for the Judiciary Committee, who at her apartment, she got her ballot.
	Four other ballots were mailed to her apartment that were people who didn't live there.
	That is a recipe for disaster.
	And all we're asking now is, why won't some of these, why won't Governor Kemp in Georgia, for example, let us recheck the signatures and actually find out the rejection rate that Mr. Starr was talking about earlier.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on The Mike Delliger Show.
	And, you know, I want to go back to Raphael Warnock's really radical rhetoric over the years.
	But before we do that, as I know you know, Congressman, all we hear, all I hear from my listeners, not only here in Georgia and the 17 affiliates we have all throughout the state, but all throughout the country, people are almost apoplectic about election integrity and what many believe to be a fraudulent election.
	I have to ask you, as somebody who knows Georgia, you know the lay of the land as well as anybody in the world.
	What do we tell people, what do you tell people who are worried about the legitimacy of the Senate runoffs?
	Is there oversight?
	Is there accountability?
	Are they going to be able to cheat their way into putting a couple of radicals like Ossoff and Warnock into the Senate?
	Well, number one, no.
	Not if our conservatives show up.
	But I also will say this.
	Look, I've been fighting folks in this for the president at his request, looking at the original pan recount, which we asked for.
	And look, we found over 10,000, almost 10,000 ballots, I believe it was.
	There's 3,000 votes for the president that were never even counted.
	We found places in which there was no oversight.
	There was no observation.
	Video for Prager University.
	That's right, my video.
	See it at PragerU.com, where we teach what is in town.
	I'd like to remind you folks that the rates this low It's a great time to do a refi or obviously getting a new house.
	But if you need anything in that arena, financing a house, getting a loan, then I strongly recommend Andrew and Todd at Sierra Pacific Mortgage, andrewandtodd.com.
	To these guys' credit, they have been advertising on the show from the very beginning of the lockdown.
	When nothing was happening.
	These guys were hard at work.
	I admire them and I just got a terrific letter about how good they are.
	And I just want you to know that.
	That I get the thank yous about Andrew and Todd.
	Go to andrewandtodd.com The decline in rates is fueling a boom in refinancing.
	888-888-1172 Or go to andrewandtodd.com Endorsed by this program.
	I'm Dennis Prager.
	And here's more from the hearings.
	Who do we have now?
	What doctor is it, Sean?
	Sorry?
	Do I have it on here?
	You did?
	Really?
	Hmm.
	I don't see it.
	Anyway, the doctor, there is a doctor who is R-A-M-I-N-O-S-K-O-U-I. All right, he is testifying at the Senate hearing.
	This is yesterday, I assume.
	Okay, go ahead.
	But there's good literature that suggests that zinc itself is very effective.
	I personally recommend to my patients that all of them take 50 milligrams of chelated zinc a day if they can tolerate the dyspepsia, and to keep their vitamin D levels over 30. There's significant data, a very nice study in the U.S., a large study, as well as one out of Israel, that if one keeps one's vitamin D3 level over 30, that one cuts the relative risk of getting COVID by 50 to 55%.
	So it's a simple public health measure that could be undertaken easily.
	So let me ask, of all these things that people have talked about, you know, zinc, vitamin D, vitamin C, quercetin, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, famipiravir, are there any real dangers?
	I did talk to Dr. Balboni on famipiravir for, you know, certainly you shouldn't give it to women that are pregnant.
	But these other ones, how safe are they?
	Is there really any danger at prescribing these at the proper levels?
	In other words, to give it a shot, as opposed to doing nothing, which is what NIH guidelines is right now?
	Go ahead.
	The short answer, I think, is there is really...
	Trivial, if any, risk at all.
	The reality is that our academic colleagues who have not discussed vitamin D and some of these other interventions aren't.
	But it need not be a binary choice, obviously.
	We don't have to decide hydroxychloroquine versus remdesivir versus vaccines.
	We need all hands on deck.
	What I would say is that there are some nuanced arguments about quercetin.
	I think the data about vitamin D toxicity is trivial.
	Dr. Cory in his testimony mentioned that two groups in the United States have been hardest hit.
	African Americans and Hispanics.
	African Americans, 81% of African Americans in the United States suffer from vitamin D deficiency.
	60% of Hispanics, 40% of Caucasians.
	Nursing home patients are notorious for being vitamin D deficient.
	Military service members also are known to be vitamin D deficient.
	You'd think they were studying themselves on these aircraft carriers, but obviously quite the contrary.
	I think that we should follow the example of the National Health Service in the UK and Scotland.
	Which is currently distributing vitamin D supplements to their elderly.
	They've been doing that for a couple weeks now.
	Why we are not pressing this simple point while we go over these other issues fails to meet my level of understanding.
	Can I answer your question?
	You've said repeatedly, and you and I have a strong kinship on that approach, which is...
	Does it hurt to try?
	So what are the risks of treatment with these agents?
	And I'll tell you, in medicine, as a physician, every decision I make therapeutically, it involves exactly that question, which is a risk-benefit analysis.
	And so if the therapy I have is either low-cost, low-resource, or extremely safe...
	And its potential for benefit is high.
	That would be, it would win the risk-benefit analysis, and you should be given.
	And I think that is what you've been arguing.
	And I tell you, with these agents, the answer is unequivocally yes.
	When you look at the mortality and morbidity of this disease, which is unparalleled, we are seeing countless deaths, and it's horrific the way they're dying.
	And you look at these safe and low-cost agents.
	It seems like a no-brainer that you should talk.
	That's right.
	It's a no-brainer.
	It's a no-brainer.
	That's exactly right.
	Unbelievably safe stuff.
	And the damn NIH and the damn FDA and the damn Democrats are killing Americans.
	And I don't know why.
	It is so not only vicious, it is also irrational.
	Take the vaccine that was rushed into production, unprecedentedly rushed, unprecedentedly short periods of time for it to be tested.
	Take the vaccine, folks.
	But a 50-year-old, completely safe anti-malaria drug, oh no, we don't want to take that!
	They're sick!
	They're morally sick.
	It is so irrational, it is beyond belief.
	I'm not saying don't take the vaccine, but the notion of definitely take the vaccine, the first RNA-based vaccine ever made, definitely take it.
	It was pushed into production in six months and not five years.
	Definitely you should all take it.
	But hydroxychloroquine...
	Which tens of millions of people are taking and have taken and zero or close to zero side effects, probably the same number as to aspirin.
	Don't know.
	We don't want you to take that because Trump recommended it.
	They hate Trump more than they love keeping Americans alive.
	And what about ivermectin?
	Trump never mentioned ivermectin.
	Why not take that?
	How about vitamin D? You know, one of the reasons that more people are dying among blacks and Hispanics from this is the low levels of vitamin D, for whatever reason.
	Most people have lower levels of vitamin D. For the record, I take vitamin D, I take zinc, I take hydroxychloroquine.
	And I've been hugging strangers without a mask for seven months.
	Okay?
	didn't have a cold.
	The utterly unnecessary suffering and deaths because of the medical establishment.
	For whatever reason.
	It's really a scandal, the likes of which I have never seen in my life.
	Never.
	We'll be back in a moment.
	The Dennis Prager Show.
	Trending now on the Mike Dellinger Show.
	And, you know, I want to go back to Raphael Warnock's really radical rhetoric over the years.
	But before we do that, as I know you know, Congressman, all we hear, all I hear from my listeners, not only here in Georgia and the 17 affiliates we have all throughout the state, but all throughout the country, people are...
	Almost apoplectic about election integrity and what many believe to be a fraudulent election.
	I have to ask you, as somebody who knows Georgia, you know the lay of the land as well as anybody in the world.
	What do we tell people, what do you tell people who are worried about the legitimacy of the Senate runoffs?
	Is there oversight?
	Is there accountability?
	Are they going to be able to cheat their way into putting a couple of radicals like Ossoff and Warnock into the Senate?
	Well, number one, no, not if our conservatives show up.
	But I also will say this.
	Look, I've been fighting folks in this for the president at his request, looking at the original pan recount, which we asked for.
	And look, we found over 10,000, almost 10,000 ballots, I believe it was.
	There's 3,000 votes for the president that were never even counted.
	We found places in which there was no oversight.
	There was no observers.
	These are things that now, as I've been telling folks over and over, we're in the middle of this cycle.
	We've got to get this stuff fixed.
	I would love to see the signature verification.
	The Secretary of State decided he don't want to do that for whatever reason.
	Lieutenant Governor, Governor won't pressure.
	You know, they've talked about it, but they don't do anything about that side.
	So the signature verification is something that is important.
	But let me remind people, before November 3rd, we were talking about it, we were watching it, but now since then...
	For the January 5th election, I believe Sunshine is the greatest to disinfect it.
	And I've been talking about it.
	Others have been talking about it.
	The president himself the other night said, look, we're going to have people watching this.
	I think the governor could actually appropriate some funds, make sure that there are more ballot observers watching these drop boxes and do things like that.
	that, but also these county election officials have been put on notice.
	Music Forget the lies and the mendacity of the candidate in question whose name was circled in.
	A man who is incompetent, clinically incompetent, to hold any position of responsibility.
	Would you let this man walk your dog?
	Let alone be in control of the nuclear weapons of the most powerful nation in the world.
	A man who can't string clear sentences together without talking about how his suit, how hairy his legs are, and how little children wanted to pat them down in the swimming pool.
	Good God, man!
	Why aren't you in an asylum?
	It's not the fact.
	That he's been a machine politician for 47 years, hiding in his basement, unable to hold a rally through sheer cowardice, or because he knows nobody would go.
	It's not the fact that all of his co-conspirators who he colluded with, yes, real collusion, utterly and completely, Deep-sixed the story with all its evidence of his son's corruption facilitated whilst he was vice president.
	Corruption involving the biggest communist nation in the world.
	A nation that has slave labor camps.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on The Hugh Hewitt Show.
	President-elect Biden will nominate Lloyd Austin to be Secretary of Defense.
	Now, would you engage with me on it, on whether or not Lloyd Austin will be a good nominee on the Senate Armed Services Committee?
	Well, Hugh, first let me say that I respect and admire Rudolph's service to our nation.
	Hi, everybody.
	I'm Dennis Prager.
	I don't think there's been a scandal in American history on the level of the medical establishment, the New York Times, and the Democratic Party's opposition and smearing of those who advocate hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
	This is, you know, I keep debating what's the biggest moral scandal.
	Was it the three years of lying about Russian collusion with the Trump campaign?
	I mean, that's certainly probably in second place.
	But this is number one because the number of people dead and the number of livelihoods crushed because of the idiotic lockdowns.
	I said they were idiotic in March.
	I said it was the greatest.
	Mistake in world history.
	The usual amount of mockery and smearing means nothing to me.
	It only means that I've hit a nerve.
	I was right.
	If you listen or read people because of credibility, you should definitely listen to and read me.
	I've earned your trust.
	Here's someone who differs.
	Robert in Tucson.
	Hello.
	Yes, Dennis.
	Insofar, and I mean this in the nicest way, insofar as YouTube is concerned, YouTube is a privately run platform, much like your show.
	Now, when I called in, I got screened.
	And then this screener put on the board and you re-screened me.
	And if I start rambling on and on about something that displeases you, you'll punch me out.
	So what's the difference between the selectivity of your platform and that of YouTube?
	Because YouTube lies constantly by telling you it's open.
	We never claim that.
	We claim that we have an agenda.
	We have a pro-American, pro-Judeo-Christian agenda.
	I've said a thousand times, a thousand.
	If the New York Times said we are an organ of the Democratic Party, I would never attack it.
	If CNN said we are here to promote leftism, I would never attack it.
	They lie.
	YouTube lies when it claims it's open.
	That's what disgusts me.
	People like you believe them.
	Don't believe anything I see on YouTube.
	I've seen your videos as well.
	Some they let on, some they don't.
	They have that privilege.
	Yes, they don't have that privilege.
	You're mistaken.
	They were given the privilege of being immune to lawsuits because they claimed they would be an open forum.
	They lied to the government and to you.
	They're not an open forum.
	They therefore should no longer be protected.
	I'm not protected against libel.
	Well, if I produced a YouTube podcast that rambled on and on about the Holocaust, it's just a big lie, then they'll delete me.
	Yes, and I want you to know I'm quite ambivalent about that.
	The United States is the only country in the West that I know of that does not prosecute people for Holocaust denial.
	I think Holocaust deniers are the most vile human beings living.
	They are truly the inheritors of Hitler and Nazism.
	However, in the United States, the inheritors of Hitler and Nazism have free speech.
	So I am willing to allow that for the sake of openness on YouTube.
	But that is not the issue.
	You can't say, you cannot say on YouTube that men do not give birth.
	Forget denying the Holocaust.
	You can't say men don't give birth.
	You are considered transphobic and therefore beyond the pale.
	They have their beliefs and you have yours.
	Okay, so you missed my point.
	Okay, you repeated your first point, so I thank you for calling.
	If they announced their beliefs and said, if you go against our beliefs, we shut you down, I would have no issue.
	But they won't do that.
	They lie.
	They claim they're open.
	I don't know why that's not...
	Why is that complex, folks?
	I mean, when I began radio, I had a motto in my mind which turned out to be right.
	Never underestimate the intelligence of your audience and never overestimate their knowledge.
	And I have been guided by that.
	But sometimes I say things...
	And I just think that a person of regular competence can follow it.
	They lie when they claim they're open.
	The New York Times lies when it denies it's a left-wing mouthpiece.
	That's all.
	Announce it.
	Pravda did.
	Pravda said.
	Organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
	That's it.
	So how can I argue with it?
	Riduzone, ladies and gentlemen, spectacular product developed by doctors.
	Doctors do some good things.
	The medical establishment is vile.
	And one of the good things they did is invent Riduzone.
	Riduzone is composed in part of OEA. OEA is a molecule you produce to tell your brain you are full.
	The less you eat, the healthier you will be.
	It's as simple as that.
	And you might even lose weight in the bargain.
	Riduzone.com.
	30% off and 30-day money-back guarantee.
	Use the promo code Dennis.
	R-I-D-U-Zone.com.
	Riduzone.com.
	promo code Dennis trending now on America
	First with Sebastian Berger the idea that the only nation founded on the principle of individual liberty and freedom with the oldest written constitution could have its election so prostituted
	so degraded by the hundreds, the thousands of pieces of evidence we've seen in the last five weeks.
	Whether it's the individuals who've testified to being contractors for the post office, ferrying truckloads of hundreds of thousands of ballots across state lines in totally illegal activity, to be shipped in the middle of the night to counting stations that had been set up, funded.
	By Mark Zuckerberg to the cost of more than $350 million.
	And to have those votes, pristine, quote-unquote, mail-in ballots that hadn't even been folded with just one name circled in.
	Biden, the rest of the ticket, left blank.
	And to have all those ballots counted in secret in the middle of the night with none.
	Of the constitutionally state-mandated Republican poll watchers present should make your blood boil.
	Because it's just wrong.
	He used to appear on my Los Angeles television show, Life and Times, when he was, I think, a member of the Assembly before he went to Congress and before he came back and became the Attorney General of California, appointed to that job, subsequently elected.
	Now he's going to be appointed to HHS. And the Wall Street Journal opines this is identity health care.
	I'm not sure.
	Javier Becerra...
	He has been very hard on the pro-life people, forcing them unconstitutionally to post abortion availability notices in their offices, for which he was rebuked by the Supreme Court.
	According to the journal, he has no expertise in how drug and insurance market functions.
	He is lost on health care issues repeatedly, and he is a supporter of the Obamacare, but it's just unclear What this is other than identity politics, because he is, of course, Latino.
	And we will see what happens.
	I think thus far, among all the nominees, he's the second weakest in terms of political support.
	I like him, by the way.
	I like Neera Tanden, who's the weakest in terms of political support.
	But I don't know.
	Usually, there's at least one.
	Sometimes there are two confirmation scalps taken by the other party.
	Andy Puzder was the one.
	Hey, hey all!
	I want to remind you, taking a cruise with you in June to Europe, England to Iceland.
	My cruises all sell out, so a word to the wise is sufficient.
	The people you meet, my talks, and the great locations, the greatest ship lines in the world.
	All pretty much recommended.
	The banner is at my website for my cruise next June.
	Yes, it does.
	I was just asked by the gentle Gentile giant.
	Hanukkah starts tonight.
	That is correct.
	All right.
	Let's go to Greg in Clearwater, Florida.
	Hello.
	Hello, Mr. Prager.
	Hi.
	I had a question.
	So you said that YouTube, the New York Times, lies because they won't admit that they're an arm of the Democrats.
	Will you admit that you're an arm of the Trump administration?
	Because if not, you're lying too.
	Okay, so what was I before the Trump administration?
	Don't know.
	I didn't listen to you then.
	Well, that's a stupid answer.
	You're making an accusation.
	You're not equipped.
	I've been broadcasting 35 years.
	I've been broadcasting 35 years.
	Have I been an arm of the Trump administration for 35 years?
	Don't know, but people change, don't they?
	Okay, so let me reassure you, I have the same views since before Trump got elected.
	Not only that, you'll be surprised to know, in what is clearly ignorance about me, Completely opposed him.
	Among all the candidates running for the nomination in 2016, there is article after article on the internet by me, National Review, Town Hall, against Donald Trump.
	Severe critic of him.
	Turns out I was wrong.
	He turned out to be a great president with great idiosyncrasies.
	So, am I an arm of the Trump administration once he's no longer president?
	The question is stupid.
	I am an arm of conservatism.
	So if the New York Times announces we are an arm of leftism, I will have zero critiques of the New York Times.
	Hope that answered you, and I'm glad you called.
	Let's go to Val in Los Angeles.
	Hello, Val.
	Hi, Dennis.
	Good afternoon.
	I just watched those tech giants.
	Take over the conversation in the way that they do in a very authoritarian manner.
	And I don't really trust their algorithms in the sense that they manipulate everything.
	They rely on those algorithms to manipulate traffic through their sites, through their platforms.
	And I say to people advertising through those giants and funneling money into those giants, how do you actually know that those ads are actually hitting a human target?
	There's really no way of trusting anything that these people do.
	So what I did personally, and I would challenge people to do, is first of all, ask yourself how I can actually trust those giants to act in good faith and do with your money what they say they will do with it, and pull away your advertising money and really hit them where it hurts.
	Well, who's advertising?
	Well, people advertising through Facebook or Google, anybody.
	Actually paying those people to put up ads on those platforms.
	How do you know they're actually targeting people who are actually...
	I'll tell you why.
	My view is that they are very competent if it has nothing to do with ideology.
	If you attack any left-wing dogma, like if you say, men do not give birth, you should all give that a try.
	Put up something like, in my opinion, it is wrong to say men menstruate.
	See what Twitter does with it.
	It would be very interesting.
	It's a good test.
	Are you allowed to say men do not menstruate any longer?
	To give you an idea of the sick world that we have entered because of the left.
	That that is considered hate speech.
	To say men do not menstruate.
	Or men do not give birth.
	Yes, that's considered hate speech.
	And half of the American young people at college believe that.
	They believe that that phrase, men do not give birth, men cannot give birth, is hate speech.
	So the issue with these tech companies is ideology.
	What we need to do is to revoke their ability not to be sued, because they have cheated on their agreement with the American people.
	They said they would be an open forum, so therefore the government said, okay, so you are protected against lawsuits.
	And they cheated.
	They reneged on their deal.
	They're protected against lawsuits for libel.
	But they're not open.
	So it's got to be one or the other.
	If you want to be protected against lawsuits, you have to be an open forum.
	Because, obviously, that's the whole point.
	If you're an open forum, people will say certain terrible things.
	Okay.
	But you can't be sued because you're just an open forum.
	But if you're going to be closed, then you have to be liable.
	Liable for libel.
	They have engineered the greatest suppression of free speech in American history.
	There is nothing to compare.
	The McCarthy era is nothing in comparison to the Google era, to the YouTube era, to the Twitter era.
	Never has private enterprise been the threat.
	Government is always perceived as the threat to free speech, but it has now become private enterprise.
	Big companies in general have been taken over by the left.
	NASDAQ now has rules with regard to corporations that they must have diverse boards.
	That's an unbelievable infringement upon freedom.
	A private company cannot choose its board of directors?
	Leftism is toxic.
	God, I tell you, sometimes I review these calls.
	Why don't you announce you're an arm of the Trump administration?
	So what was I for the 31 years I broadcast before this?
	I don't know.
	I didn't listen.
	Back in a moment.
	Speaker 1: Turning now on the Charlie Kirk Show.
	So I want to get into this Texas news.
	I know that you're just aware of just kind of the process, and it's actually less about the particulars, but more just about the bigger picture.
	You're from Texas.
	You guys are headquartered in Texas, right?
	What was the news today that came out of Texas?
	Well, the news was that an original jurisdiction suit was filed on the election.
	Now, what that means is normally if you file a lawsuit, people think you can just go to the Supreme Court, right?
	No, you don't just go to the Supreme Court.
	The way you get to the Supreme Court is you go through either a state system all the way through the highest court of the state, and then if you feel there's an issue that the Supreme Court can address, you can go from the state Supreme Court to the U.S. Supreme Court, or you can go through the federal courts.
	The lower court, then the Court of Appeals, and then appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
	And they take about 8,000 requests a year take 80 cases.
	So your odds are...
	100%.
	Yeah.
	What happened in Texas is, in the Constitution, there is very few things that you can file and you go straight to the Supreme Court.
	And that is, if one state goes after another state.
	And so what happened is Texas sued a number of these swing states saying, look, you are diluting our vote and hurting our ability to have a fair election when you don't follow the Constitution in your state.
	And what the Constitution says is that each state legislature gets to determine How you do your election.
	And so, therefore, whatever the state legislature said is what you have to do.
	And, of course, in a number of these states, they violated what the state legislature said.
	Keep up with what's trending.
	Subscribe on YouTube today.
	Trending now on the Mike Deliger Show.
	I was talking to a friend this morning about this video that was on Earth showing Raphael Warnock sort of make apologies for Marxists saying, oh, I agree with the Pope.
	There's some nice Marxists out there.
	And then go on to refer to Jesus as a poor Palestinian.
	I still can't, a prophet, a poor Palestinian prophet.
	That's from the pulpit of Raphael Warnock, and I just keep thinking, I think that's a big deal to Georgians.
	There's a lot of things that Raphael Warnock has said that should get Georgians' attention.
	I am so proud to be back here in the studios of AM920 The Answer in Atlanta, surrounded by a whole lot of patriots and people who are fighting hard for America.
	One of those warriors is Georgia Republican Congressman Doug Collins.
	He has served as a...
	U.S. Representative for Georgia's 9th Congressional District since 2013. And this is a guy who's no stranger to the faith either because...
	Hi everybody, I'm Dennis Prager.
	Patrick in Houston hi yes I personally believe that there is no scenario in which Biden against this election that Donald Trump doesn't do what he does best which is to play victim And I also believe that he's never going to concede.
	No matter how many investigations go nowhere, these lawsuits are thrown out.
	It's never going to happen.
	This leaves us with a problem of millions of people who believe that this election was stolen.
	Now, whether it was stolen or not, I don't want to...
	Obviously I don't believe that, but that's the problem.
	What do we do with this?
	That is a problem.
	I agree with you.
	We're probably on different sides, but we agree on this.
	Do you think it was a problem that tens of millions of Americans for three years believed that the Russians colluded with the Trump campaign?
	In other words, how much does it bother you if you think that Americans believe a lie?
	Our intelligence agency, all of them, said Russia did interfere with the election.
	Okay, so I believe, just like you believe, that people who believe the election was stolen are out of their minds.
	We believe you're out of your mind for believing that the Russians colluded with the Trump campaign.
	So it's a real division in America.
	I don't think we believe that...
	I'm sorry, go ahead.
	No, no, no, go ahead.
	Yeah, I don't know if many people on the left believe that the election was quote-unquote stolen.
	I know, they don't.
	They don't.
	Obviously, they don't.
	My point is, you're disturbed that so many Americans think the election was stolen.
	I'm disturbed that so many Americans believe that the Russians colluded with the Trump campaign.
	So each side is very worried about the other side believing a giant lie.
	Yeah, that was evidence on one side.
	There is far more evidence that the election was cheated than there is that there was Russian collusion.
	Okay, the beauty of the call, and I mean it, and I'm thanking you for calling.
	I encourage people, I go to them first when they differ with me.
	The beauty is this shows you when I say there's an unbridgeable gulf between the left and the right.
	This gentleman believes that there's real evidence for Russian collusion.
	Three years, tens of millions of dollars spent trying to find it, and it hasn't been found.
	It was a lie from the outset, and half the country knew it was a lie, and half the country believed it was the truth.
	As for the amount of evidence, there's far more evidence that there was cheating in this election.
	I don't know whether it was determinative, but I would...
	I would bet my house that there was cheating on behalf of the Democrats.

▲