Sean Hannity Show - Losing the Constitution

Dec. 9, 2020 - Sean Hannity Show

01:37:06

Losing the Constitution

Greg Teufel, the founder of OGC Law, LLC based in Pittsburgh and Congressman Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania’s 16th district are here to discuss their lawsuit and the Supreme Court’s decision to rule against them. The Sean Hannity Show is on weekdays from 3 pm to 6 pm ET on iHeartRadio and Hannity.com. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is an iHeart Podcast.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	I'm Carol Markovich.
	And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday normally on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So Dow, verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	All right, thanks, Scott Shannon.
	Glad you're with us.
	Evidence election fraud grows more and more substantial every day.
	Percentage of Republicans who now believe the election was stolen, seems to be growing.
	Only 24% of GOP respondents.
	NPR, PBS, NewsHour, Marist Poll expressed confidence in last month's election results.
	72% say they do not trust the election results.
	Count me among them.
	Overall, 65% of those surveyed think the president should formally uh concede uh to Biden.
	That was the opposite of what we had the poll yesterday, but among Republicans, 62% said they do not think the president should concede.
	And 67% of Republicans say they want to see President Trump run again.
	Only 32% said compared to 32% who said they do, but 67% of Republicans say they do want to see Trump run again.
	8% of Democrats, 26% of independents say they want to see another Trump campaign.
	That's interesting.
	We're getting some apparently Biden if he becomes president on January 20th, after tens of millions of Americans have been uh inoculated with President Trump's 95% effective COVID vaccine.
	Uh but anyway, uh apparently he's too frail, apparently to subject himself to the risks of a of a real presidential inauguration ceremony.
	So he's gonna almost entirely do the thing virtually, which will be the model for the rest of his presidency.
	Uh rumor going around that there will only be one inaugural ball, which would take place in the Biden basement in the Delaware Mansion.
	Only 10 people have been invited.
	They'll be or ordered to stay parked in the Biden driveway and honk their horns.
	Is that how we're gonna do it?
	What Joe and Joe Biden will dance alone on closed circuit TV.
	Unbelievable.
	By the way, I mean, now they I mean it's a big freaking deal.
	What is going on here with this um with with this whole uh COVID vaccine?
	Now we're gonna we're gonna have six of them by the time this is all said nuts.
	We're gonna have six of them.
	Anyway, um, so we'll watch and and monitor all of this, but I was why I I can't stop reading about it.
	They actually had a picture in the New York Post today about the world's first coronavirus vaccine recipient, a 90-year-old woman by the name of Margaret Keenan, University of Hospital of Coventry in England.
	And uh Trump signed an order that says, yeah, we're gonna be the priority.
	We talked a lot about that yesterday.
	I'm not sure what's going on in Cornell University.
	Apparently they had a mandated flu shot this year, but uh not if you're not white.
	I mean why are we dividing a campus along racial lines like that?
	What's the point?
	Uh students rush to a medical school in coronavirus era because doctor shortages now are being predicted.
	UK issues an allergy warning about the FISA vaccine after one patient fell ill.
	You know, there are going to be things that we're gonna read, but the one thing that we did find is 90 5% efficacy rate, efficiency Rate it were effective, and then of course, with limited side effects, and nobody's dying, and antibodies are formed, which is what you want.
	That's that's everything you're looking for.
	And now we have a military operation, logistics operation to get this out.
	So we're watching all of this very, very uh closely, and I think it's really important for the country and the world that we've been able to once again step up and do this.
	Um we're gonna we're gonna watch.
	So just to update you on where we are with these voter fraud challenges.
	Now, yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the emergency appeal by Pennsylvania Republicans that sought to void the election.
	This this was a strong legal challenge.
	Personally, I'm disappointed in what now they're gonna continue to pursue uh a quick action on this, but this dealt with the Pennsylvania legislature and what is known as Act 7, which massively expanded mail in voting.
	Remember, the rejection rate was 27% less than it was in 2016.
	That alone ought to raise eyebrows for everybody.
	And anyway, but the Constitution of Pennsylvania is very clear, and that is they while the legislature and Democrats in the state and the Democratic governor in the state signed Act 77, they did it in what was a direct violation of Pennsylvania's constitution.
	The Constitution of Pennsylvania features extremely specific and carefully documented restrictions surrounding all mail-in voting.
	And that can only be changed through a constitutional amendment.
	So in other words, the division and acrimony, everybody had predicted from the Baker and Carter commissions to the New York Times, everybody in between.
	This was one thing again, everybody agreed on.
	They all agreed that they didn't trust Dominion voting machines, and they all agreed that uh large amounts of mail-in ballots lend itself towards corruption, fraud, ballot harvesting, and and everything else that we now have been following more closely than any of us wish to ever have had to to carry.
	And it's very, very, you know, it's it's beyond frustrating and angering to everybody.
	You got nearly two dozen House Republicans urging the president's attorney general, Bill Barr, to appoint a special counsel to investigate election integrity.
	Well, if we don't get it fixed, we're never gonna have a free fair election that we can have faith and confidence in ever again in the country.
	I think the Texas case, I I'm not gonna overinterpret what the court decided yesterday.
	They could have just done exactly what they did with the Pennsylvania case and just outright reject the emergency appeal.
	They did not.
	They're asking these four states.
	Perhaps it's related to whether or not they viewed Pennsylvania alone as outcome determinative.
	I I'm not sure, but that would be my best guess.
	I still disagree with it strongly.
	Um, but in the case of Texas suing as a result of Georgia and Michigan and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, well, that would be outcome determinative, and these other states now are required to respond to all of this.
	Uh I'm not gonna go over all of the things that we explained in great detail yesterday.
	One is the jurisdiction issue, an original jurisdiction.
	Um, and that would mean the issue of standing, which I would argue they absolutely have, because if those states were forced to follow the constitutional process, which Texas very articulately lays out, the Attorney General Paxton in his case, then in fact that would be outcome determinative, but it would also result in the disenfranchisement of every Texas voter, and frankly, now we have other states, Alabama, others now have all joined in.
	I think we had six more states now that are filing amicus briefs on behalf of the Texas A.G. And then we get into the issue of the first violation, that'd be the clause, Article II, Constitution, the elector's clause, and how each state shall appoint presidential election uh electors in the matter of the legislature, therefore may direct.
	Well, then that goes to the heart of the Georgia case and the consent agreement with the Secretary of State after the lawsuit by the Democratic Party from earlier this year.
	Uh then it gets to the heart of the case and a lot of other states as well, or or the Pennsylvania Supreme Court extending by three days the deadline.
	That would be again a decision that only state legislators can make, not a Supreme Court decision in the state.
	Um And then we have again straightforward language in the state of Wisconsin, where, for example, they don't allow early voting, but yet the ballots were handed out anyway.
	That would have been a decision that would have had to have been made by the state legislature, which didn't happen.
	So we'll watch all of this.
	And there's a lot of developments.
	We're still apparently there's more people that are out there telling as whistleblowers their stories about the things that they have said, just like all the other people that we've had on this program, for example.
	You know, it's one thing that Kayleigh McEnany had pointed out in analysis.
	And I've often pointed out, OK, if you look statistically, do you really believe Joe Biden got 15 million more votes than Hillary Clinton or 15 million more than Barack Obama?
	Even I, I find that hard to believe if you believe that he underperformed with minorities in pretty much every liberal city in the country, except for the states we're talking about.
	And that would be Fulton County, Georgia, Wayne County, Detroit, Michigan, Pennsylvania, the Philly area and and then other places like Milwaukee and Nevada.
	Oh, well, that's a little bit that's that's that's a little bit too convenient for my analysis.
	Expert analysis using commonly accepted statistical tests further raise other issues about it, meaning the prompt probability of the former vice president winning the popular vote in the four defendant states in the A.G. case of Texas, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin independently.
	If you look at 3 a.m.
	November 4th, while the vote counting is going on, you know, it would be less than one in a quadrillion that Joe Biden can come back when all four of those states collectively with that big of a deficit at that point in time in the county.
	I mean, basically what they're saying then is 7 million, you know, votes cast, mail in ballots cast, mostly for Biden, mostly in the states that we're all talking about.
	Statistically, that then becomes very difficult to buy.
	At least I, from my perspective, it becomes difficult to buy.
	Maybe some of you don't have a problem with it.
	Uh, the state Alabama Louisiana attorney generals backed the Supreme Court challenge by Texas.
	Missouri joined the fight along Texas to challenge the result.
	The Nevada Supreme Court did reject the Trump campaign appeal affirming a Biden win.
	That didn't surprise us out there, but statistically, there's more anomalies out in Nevada than any other state that I've seen.
	Um you've got Republican attorneys general setting their sights on checking Joe and Kamala, if in fact they get into office.
	Democrats now promising, voted, we bring him back Lois Lerner as the IRS head, because they're now pushing to expand the IRS's enforcement activities and already looking to add $5.2 billion.
	Here we go.
	They're coming for your money.
	And Republicans scoff at the Biden plan to create a conservative outreach post.
	There's no outreach with with Democrats.
	They don't want to, they don't want outreach.
	Now, I I'm not going to even be get into the whole issue of whether or not what the result of this is going to be.
	But I am going to tell you is that if we don't fix it and we don't get it right, then the country is going to be in big trouble.
	And that means long term.
	You've got, for example, the latest lawsuit in Georgia.
	They actually documented tens of thousands of illegal votes.
	This is similar to what they did out in Nevada.
	And instead of properly updating vote voter registration rolls.
	Now, if we're going to go forward as a country, the media mob's never going to tell you these things.
	We're going to go forward and get elections right.
	We better understand the Federalists did a good job on this today.
	Remember, he won Georgia, supposedly, if you believe that, Biden won by 12,000 votes.
	Okay.
	The lawsuit points out that they have identified, instead of updating their voter registration lists, uh 66,247 underage registrants.
	40,002 people had moved uh counties without re-registering, 10,315 people who were deceased on election day, 8,718 of whom had been registered as dead before their votes were accepted.
	2,423 who were not on the state voter rolls.
	Uh 4,926 voters who had registered in another state after they registered in Georgia.
	That would make them ineligible.
	15,700 voters who had filed a national change of address form without re-registering.
	And I mean, it goes on from there.
	Well, Governor, do you care?
	I'm talking about the governor of Georgia.
	Apparently not.
	By the way, details of uh Senate candidate Warnock's obstruction in a child abuse probe is a little scary.
	And by the way, have you heard the details of Congressman Swalwell?
	We're gonna get into that.
	800-941 Shauna's our number if you want to be a part of the program.
	Hey there, I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	And I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started Normally, a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
	You're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday.
	On the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
	I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes, inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	All right, as we roll along, 800-941 Sean, you want to be a part of the program.
	This is getting very, very, very interesting to me, this whole Eric Swalwell story.
	Now, the backdrop of this is a Fox News.com article out today about Pompeo, our Secretary of State, warning of a Chinese threat to U.S. colleges, saying many are basically bought by Beijing.
	Well, there's one family I can think of that's more bought and paid for by China than any other.
	That would be the Biden's.
	Anyway, it's like what's happening with Swalwell and what apparently has gone on here is pretty unbelievable.
	And Kevin McCarthy, by the way, demanding Pelosi boots Swalwell from the House Intelligence Committee.
	And what you have is I mean, this is the guy that was Russia, Russia, Russia, Russia, along with Nadler and the Shift Show himself.
	Anyway, you have accused Chinese government spy, a woman by the name of Fang Fang, a Chin Chin uh Christine Fang, um, entering the U.S. through California as a college student, 2011, spends the next four years wooing everyone, local politics, and Swalwell, uh, according to Axios, and citing current former U.S. intelligence officials.
	Anyway, uh, even like slept with two small town mayors.
	And you can't write this in a novel.
	Anyway, got close to Eric Swalwell, who's on the House Intel Committee, quote, she was on a mission.
	A U.S. counterintelligence official said of Fang, including plenty of seduction before the feds got wind of her antics and she vanished.
	And Fang raised funds for Swalwell uh back in the day and interacted with the Congressman at a number of events for several years.
	Why the hell is he on this House Intel committee?
	Hey there.
	I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	And I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, A little insane.
	That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
	You're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So download Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	All right, so now we have more states joining the Texas Attorney General.
	West Virginia's Attorney General has joined the Texas brief as it relates to the case that they're bringing there.
	Now the state of Missouri has filed an amicus brief on behalf of itself and 16 other states in support of Texas's application.
	in terms of the lawsuit that was filed yesterday, you know, this is it.
	This is the one that now we're going to watch very, very closely, especially in light of what the court did yesterday with the Pennsylvania case.
	Now we're going to get into more detail with that.
	That's the case that's brought by Congressman Mike Kelly of Pennsylvania's 16th district.
	So we'll uh you know, obviously, well, more details coming up with our our panel of legal experts in a little bit here, but I'm back to this Halwell thing.
	So, you know, when when you look at, I call it the the Joe Biden candidate protection program.
	And when you really think about it, this is the media today.
	And I don't want to be a broken record about this, but it's it bears repeating is that the media is not objective, they're not fair, they're not balanced, they have an agenda, they're abusively biased, they're corrupt.
	They fed this country nothing but lies about Trump and Russia for three long years.
	You know, they advanced and pushed every Democratic radical socialist talking point as it related to their phony impeachment hoax, all while ignoring quid pro quo Joe and Zero Experience Hunter.
	Uh, they ignored vetting Obama, they ignored what was real Russian interference, Hillary's bought and paid for dirty dossier, the dirty dossier, not only unverifiable, now debunked, used for four Pfizer applications, without which they wouldn't have gotten the application.
	Uh you now we have Comey and even what Sally Yates, Rod Rosenstein.
	Oh, knowing what we know now, no, I would never have signed it.
	Uh, a little late guys, and where's Durham, by the way?
	Side note.
	All of that happened, but the media pushed it all.
	The media had an agenda.
	You know, we Peter Schweitzer in Secret Empires, this book was blockbuster.
	We did the first interview on radio, the first interview on TV.
	And that's when we first heard about Barisma.
	You know, then we got you know, culminating in the dumbest interview of a 49-year-old in GMA's history.
	Uh, any experience, oil, gas, energy, no.
	Ukraine, nope.
	Any experience at all?
	Nope.
	Why do you think you got paid millions?
	I don't know.
	Maybe because your dad is the vice president in charge of Ukrainian policy?
	Probably.
	It's like an admission.
	You're not you got six hours, you're not getting a billion U.S. tax dollars.
	Unbelievable.
	And they went with one hearsay, anonymous, non-wistleblower, as the pretense of it all.
	We only had one fact witness in that whole sham impeachment.
	And they dragged the country through hell.
	And then they dragged the country three years of Russia hell.
	They were all wrong.
	I mean, that's how corrupt the media is.
	Then the media is so corrupt they let Biden hide in the basement.
	The entire time.
	Joe Biden in his basement bunker.
	And and they did Biden's job for him.
	He didn't need to do anything because they were out there pounding Trump every day and beating him up every day.
	You know, the like giddy, we finally got Trump to answer a question for the first time in three weeks.
	And I'm like, you let this guy go the entire campaign.
	By the way, he's botching up his cabinet officials' names and even what what what they're gonna be secretaries of yesterday.
	And I'm grateful to the members of my COVID team that I'd like to introduce to you now, who will lead the way.
	I'm really proud of this group.
	For Secretary of Health and Education Service, I nominated Javier Baccaria.
	You know, Javier Bashera, excuse me.
	Yeah, well, we'll get it right eventually.
	This just in two, Tennessee's attorney general has signed an armicus brief.
	Uh that's big news supporting the Texas Texas election result.
	That's another big one.
	Um, hang on, Borton.
	I'm writing somebody here.
	Uh anyway, so now I'm looking at, you know, all these people that are involved in this corruption, they don't do their job.
	They're not gonna, they're gonna allow this guy to be, you know, hiding Biden the whole time.
	Then you look at all these phony hypocrites, you know, that were so upset about foreign election interference.
	How do you ignore the Russian First Lady of Moscow and the wire transfers with Hunter and his company?
	How do you ignore a Kazakh oligarch and wire transfers there?
	How do you ignore no experience that anybody can find in private equity and the one billion dollar, later 1.5 billion dollar Bank of China deal?
	How do you not, you know, look at any of this and say, well, why would the mob protect it?
	Well, the same thing's happening.
	I guess you got this honey trap set by Chinese by the Chinese government against us.
	And then I'm reading this story and what Pompeo is warning that Chinese is threatening U.S. colleges and saying these colleges are being basically bought off by Beijing.
	Now, okay, that censor themselves to avoid upsetting the communist regime.
	And he said it's poisoning the well of our higher education institutions.
	If we don't educate ourselves, if we're not honest about it, we're getting schooled by Beijing.
	He's probably right.
	Makes you wonder about this virus.
	How come nobody wants to ever talk about well, what price is China going to pay for all the the murder and mayhem caused by them and their handling of this virus?
	They knew it was bad.
	How do we know?
	They wouldn't allow travel out of Wuhan priv province into any other part of China.
	You couldn't travel from any part of China into Wuhan.
	But they left wide open their international travel.
	In other words, you could leave Wuhan province and go to Italy or any other any other part of the world.
	Look at what it's look at what the result has been.
	And I know we've got the vaccine, but still.
	Anyway, uh Pompeo goes on to say scholars are lured into their recruitment programs, paid to do research in or for China, while other easy targets for their anti-American messaging do their own anti-American bias.
	We see it too seldom, he goes on to say.
	He said administrators would be up at arms.
	You would expect that, but they're not.
	And they often do it out of fear of offending China.
	Now let me tell you something.
	Yeah, Putin is a hostile actor.
	Russia's a hostile regime, no question.
	I think a bigger threat is China.
	Now we got, you know, a guy, Joe Biden that is completely compromised by this country with his son.
	God only knows what they probably have on tape somewhere.
	And we find out that this guy on the, you know, we're supposed to care about foreign interference in the United States.
	And you got Eric Swalwell, who was on the House Intelligence Committee.
	Kevin McCarthy took aim at him earlier today, arguing he should no longer serve on the House Intelligence Committee.
	This is the guy that took the leading role for the Democrats' impeachment efforts and the Russia hoax lies.
	He's long been disqualified from serving on the Intel community, peddling Russian disinformation, and you know, it was all an effort by a reported spy he's a part of to gather information for China.
	So Swalwall being a national security liability.
	Well, so is Joe Biden.
	I mean, let me tell you something.
	These countries play for keeps.
	You know, I've talked to some friends of mine that have done businesses business abroad with some of the countries that we discuss here, and what they tell you is just chilling in terms of the amount of spying that goes on if you visit these countries, the amount of of corruption that exists within these countries, that the level of sophistication in terms of their efforts to undermine the United States.
	So now you got a congressman along with mayors, apparently a couple of mayors were sleeping with this accused Chinese government spy.
	Swalwell is taking money from that was raised by this accused Chinese government spy.
	And then by the way, they treat Democrats so differently than they do, say a Donald Trump, they actually went to Swalwell and said, Yeah, you might you might not want to associate with this person.
	Why didn't they do that with anybody in the Trump campaign?
	What did they assume that he wouldn't want to be patriotic?
	Because apparently documents exist.
	I've been told by my sources that said they did exactly that with Hillary Clinton's campaign to protect information that might be classified.
	What is there any possible compromising materials on uh Swalwell?
	Uh what is the nature of the compromise?
	This is Adam Schiff.
	Uh but the compromising materials compromising.
	Really?
	What's the nature of the compromise?
	Uh uh hookers you ordinating in the bed.
	In the bed, they go peepees in the bed.
	That actually was in the stupid Hillary Clinton dossier that threw the country into this turmoil for three years, and they got away with it.
	Does Vladimir know?
	But of course, met with Trump uh in in uh New York at some point after the 2013 Miss Universe.
	Uh yes.
	Absolutely.
	And she got uh compromising materials on trout after their uh short relations.
	Okay.
	And what's the nature of the compromise?
	Well, there were a picture of the Trump.
	Naked Trump.
	Okay.
	And so Putin was made aware uh of the availability of the compromising material?
	Yes, of course, uh Buzawa shared those materials with uh Sobchek and Sobshark shares those materials with uh Putin because she's uh goddaughter of Putin and Putin decided to press on Trump.
	Um the materials that you can provide to the committee or to the FBI uh would they corroborate this allegation?
	Sure, of course.
	Uh when they were in Ukraine, we got their conversation by the phone where they're discussed those uh compromising materials where I ready to provide it to FBI.
	So you you have recordings of both Sovchek and Buseva, uh where they're discussing the compromising material on uh Mr. Trump?
	Absolutely.
	He's coordinating with a with somebody that he thinks is a Russian.
	What for to get compromising materials on Trump, naked Trump.
	Gosh.
	What a dope.
	Now Swalwell is suggesting Trump is behind the Axis report.
	These people are freaking deranged, man.
	Oh gosh.
	Anyway, Swalwell warned of uh influx of Russians and U.S. politics under Trump.
	What about his compromising materials?
	I wonder if there's any compromising materials on Trump and you know, this this honeypot apparently scandal that went on.
	These mayors apparently slept with this person.
	Umbelievable.
	But that's the nature of your Democratic Party.
	You know, there was an interesting story.
	It looks like China's already, you know, they want to try and pick up where they left off with the Biden corruption family.
	And remember, all the money they paid to Hunter, the email outlining how it's going to be distributed, 20 million to Hunter, 10 million for the big guy.
	Remember that?
	Holding it, Hunter will hold it for the big guy.
	You know, going to return the favor, there is a Daily Wire piece out.
	A top U.S. official told the think tank last week that U.S. intelligence has seen a sharp uptick in the Chinese Communist Party to influence Joe Dem uh Joe Biden's team and those around him.
	And National uh Counterintelligence Security Center director William Bene told the Aspen Institute that the think tank that China that has launched an influence campaign on steroids targeting Biden.
	Quote, we predicted China would now literally re-emphasize their influence in the campaigns to the new administration.
	We're starting to see that now play across the country to not only the folks that are in the administration, those around the folks of the administration.
	So that's one area we're going to be very keen on making sure the new administration understands that influence.
	What it looks like, what it tastes like, what it feels like.
	Robert O'Brien, the national security advisor, had warned uh back in August that China was trying to elect Biden, and that China had the most sophisticated global influence programs and strategies and abilities and capabilities in the world.
	Well, by the way, China apparently is amassing large quantities of private American health care data, including sensitive genetic information as the coronavirus pandemic, you know, is now put more people in the in the medical system.
	They've made collecting health-related data a national uh priority according to a new report submitted to Congress by the U.S. China Economic Security Review Commission.
	Great.
	That's good news.
	And by the way, it looks like Mayor Pete may get a China post.
	Got a 38-year-old former mayor of South Bend.
	Apparently letting him deep in his foreign policy chops.
	Buddha judges future.
	Anyway, they believe that you know, giving him that that prestigious position.
	I just I don't trust any of these people.
	Everybody's so corrupt.
	You know, my my faith, my confidence in government is is at the lowest point it's ever been.
	I never really had faith in it anyway.
	I think most intelligent Americans have a healthy distrust of all things government.
	Hey there.
	I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	And I'm Carol Markovitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
	You're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So download Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	All right, Leonard Skinner's simple man can mean only one thing, and that is all things...
	He's really not simple.
	The fact that it's a great irony, he considers himself a simple man, but it means all things Bill O'Reilly, of course, at BillO'Reilly.com.
	His book continues to do well on every bestseller list, killing a crazy horse 15 in a series of killing books.
	I might count killing Hannity will be a uh version 19 or 20.
	Uh hopefully uh it'll be very late in life when we get when he finally gets around to it, Mr. O'Reilly.
	Sir, how are you?
	You know, Skinner, they always big.
	They always big.
	Every week you run that.
	And then people that's your introduction.
	Imagine this.
	So you're gonna do a Bill O'Reilly tour.
	I mean, you go on tour still fairly regularly.
	Yeah, and the house is gonna go dark, and all of a sudden up comes Leonard Skinnard, simple man, and the music gets louder, and it gets louder and louder and louder than a spotlight comes on and out walks the giant.
	And that's you, six foot what are you, four or five, Bill O'Reilly.
	Yeah, and you know, you should be a producer of these shows, but I want the 46 to play the clock.
	No record.
	We'll just have the guys over here.
	They're good guys.
	Let me let me before you come on with your agenda.
	You see, I didn't even ask Bill a question, and he was about to launch into what he wants to talk about.
	And and but I want to ask you a question I'm a little curious about.
	When it comes your time, we don't want to go aha ahead of any list, you know, health professionals and and those with pre-existing conditions and compromised immune systems, and whoever deserves it before us, they get it first, right?
	Okay.
	But when it comes your turn and you have a chance, would you take it?
	Yes, I'm t I'm gonna take it, and I'm an old guy, so I should get it pretty soon.
	That's probably true.
	You're ahead of me on that list, just for the record.
	You know, they're they're going, I understand, by age and intelligence.
	So I'm way up there.
	Okay, okay.
	On the on the age part, you you're totally qualified.
	On the intelligence part, that's up for debate.
	But go ahead.
	Oh, come on now.
	Uh you know, the reason I'm gonna get it is because I don't care whether I turn into a werewolf or not.
	It doesn't matter to me.
	Are you you're not an anti-vaxxer guy, are you?
	I mean, any side effect, it'll be fine, uh, because then I won't have to pay my taxes.
	So if I'm a vampire, I mean I'm up I'm not gonna file a tax.
	Hey hey, Bill, I hate to tell you, when you die, you're gonna be paying more in taxes.
	Not if I move to Bolivia.
	By the way, you see, Joe Biden's people are saying, yeah, we want to add another five billion dollars to IRS enforcement.
	I'm like with my account, we're good, right?
	I told you pay everything, overpay.
	We've and he goes, Yeah, we overpay still, yes.
	Yeah, and the five billion is just to protect the IRS from the popular uprising that's gonna happen if they continue down this road, because now it's seizure of private property, which is what the progressive left wants, desperately wants.
	They want to be able to pass wealth taxes all over the place and basically come in, assess whatever you have, and then take a piece of it, even though what you have is been bought by post-tax dollars.
	So it's unconstitutional, but that's what they want to do, and that's why this election was so important.
	But people who don't have much, they don't care about that issue.
	They want more given to them by the federal government, and that's the struggle in America between the haves and the have nots.
	And you saw it play out in this election.
	What was your take?
	And then I want to get to Georgia, but what was your take?
	I read this suit by the Attorney General of Texas.
	I had him on TV last night, I asked him a lot of questions.
	It was well written, it was well thought out, it was well argued, it has real legitimacy.
	If the law and the constitution are are truly followed, they win, Bill.
	Yes, but it won't be because the Supreme Court is gonna rule that the state of Texas has no standing.
	That's what the ruling will be.
	But but the bill, but the if I may, very gentle very gently.
	But but the problem the reason this is one of those cases.
	There's a very small number of categories, as you know, I'm not telling you anything you don't know, in which the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction.
	One of them is controversies between two or more states.
	That's why that's right, and they could do something about it.
	But the state of Texas is basically saying when you cut through all the legalisms, our citizens in Texas were disenfranchised in the presidential election, because it was cheating in four at least four states.
	And you, the Supreme Court, have to remedy that keyword remedy.
	That's the lawsuit.
	And it's it's a good lawsuit.
	It's smart.
	It is smart successful, it's not going to be successful.
	Look, the odds are with you.
	Um I'm not the Polly Anish person, Bill.
	I think you know I'm I'm pretty rooted in reality.
	Um but if you i If the law and the Constitution were truly followed in its straightforward language, and the way this was argued and laid out in all ninety whatever pages of this thing yesterday, if if that mattered, you see, because I think the court's tainted by politics like everything else.
	I mean, John Roberts, you know, every report was that he was going to rule against Obamacare, but then decided it was too political for the court to be involved in it and changed his view.
	Yeah, and he's a I think he's a liberal man anyway.
	But getting back to the election, the Pennsylvania situation was clearly a violation of the Pennsylvania Constitution.
	Yep.
	All right.
	There's no legitimate argument that it was not.
	But the courts, both state and federal today, Alito and the Supreme Court, said you had a year to do this.
	You had a year to challenge this mail-in thing, and you didn't do it.
	Therefore, we're not gonna hear it.
	They didn't say it was wrong.
	They said we're not gonna hear it because it's filed too late.
	These are the little rationalizations that creep into the Supreme Court all the time.
	People should know, listening to us right now, Hannity, the most powerful entity in this country is the Supreme Court.
	Far more powerful than the Congress or the President.
	Because they're the last word.
	It may not be fair, it may not be right, it might not be based on the Constitution.
	But what those nine people say is what's gonna happen.
	And so people should understand that none of the nine justices want to overturn this election.
	Psychologically and emotionally, they don't want to do it.
	So they're gonna find a reason not to do it.
	And that's where we are.
	I wish I could dispute what I think would ultimately be the outcome.
	Now I do think there will be some brave Supreme Court justices.
	I would if I were to anticipate it would be Alito, it would be Clarence Thomas, it will be Amy Coney Barrett, and but it won't be John Roberts, I can tell you that.
	And and to be honest, I I I think Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are still question marks, and I really don't have the I don't believe they'll go there.
	That's my guess.
	Well it'll be interesting.
	Now they could have killed it off yesterday, Bill, and they didn't.
	And they're asking these states to respond, so they're gonna take a look at it.
	And we don't have any indication of hear it.
	And I I I mean, if there was a betting thing, I would put a lot of money on this.
	They're not gonna hear it just as they didn't hear the Pennsylvania case.
	Pennsylvania case.
	And you're right, the Pennsylvania case, legislators in that state went against the direct wording of their own state constitution.
	That's a slam dunk legal issue.
	That wasn't even in dispute.
	Absolutely correct.
	But the court found a way not to hear it, and they'll find a way not to hear the Texas challenge.
	Well, this is where you're right.
	Levin years ago wrote the book Men in Black, it was it laid all of this out.
	Let me go to the state of Georgia.
	Um you got the runoff races there, Loffler and Purdue against Osaf and and Warnock, two really radical hardcore leftists, but then you've got this intramural battle going on between the the dopey governor, the dopey secretary of state.
	Can you imagine the Secretary of State, and again, this this goes to the heart of the constitutional issue, uh, in terms of election law is is constitutionally only in the hands of the state legislature, but independent of the state legislature, the Secretary of State went into a consent agreement with Democrats that sued earlier this year,
	the Georgia cr Democratic Party, the senatorial campaign committee and the congressional committees, and allowed this two uh system of of signature verification.
	Uh that would be the sole role of the legislature.
	Uh with that said, they don't want to admit they made a mistake, so they're kind of of aligned and they won't come back in the session and fix the problems that are quite obvious and transparent after November third, uh, which would be necessary to have free, fair elections in Georgia, which is a big mistake in my view.
	Well, uh they're not gonna mistake now, they're just not gonna do it.
	I think that the two Senators on the Republican side will win.
	Uh you do.
	I'm not sure.
	I'm not so sure I agree with you.
	Well, Hannity, you know you're disagreeing with the guy who uh is a fact-based and I'm gonna go.
	I just stop.
	Stop.
	You You've actually come a long way this year.
	This is the first time you ever said I could never even think about running for a Democrat.
	We we're beginning to hanitize you.
	Your appearances on the show have helped you.
	Listen, um I want people to understand that Georgia is not some crazy state.
	It's essentially a conservative traditional state.
	And here's the backup.
	There was one man who ran for the state Senate.
	That's a statewide race in Georgia, a Republican.
	He won by 54% of the vote.
	That couldn't have happened in a liberal state.
	So I think that Georgians are gonna they know the Democratic candidates are far left.
	We're not talking about moderate people, as you just pointed out.
	And I think they're gonna go in, and it's it's not gonna be a landslide, but I think both Senate uh GOP candidates will win.
	But before uh you have to take a break and sell uh the humongous stuff that you sell, I have a provocative thing that I'm gonna say to my audience on BillO'Reilly.com tonight.
	I want to know if you agree with this.
	You ready?
	Okay.
	I want Attorney General Barr to call for a special prosecutor to investigate the election.
	I do too.
	I agree with you.
	Okay.
	I don't even think it's controversial.
	This becomes vital.
	Okay, because Trump can't do it.
	Barr's got to do it.
	Because nobody's going to investigate this once the inauguration takes place.
	The states aren't going to investigate their own screw ups.
	The press won't investigate, and certainly the Justice Department under Biden's not going to investigate.
	In order for this country to function, we gotta get to the bottom of this fraud stuff.
	And a special prosecutor should be appointed.
	I've got to I gotta take that break, but I'll say this too.
	If you look at what they did to this country in the last four years, Russia, Russia, Trump Russia collusion that never happened, premeditated fraud, FISA court abuse, uh using Killery's dirty dossier, the the whole ignore quid pro quo Joe Zero experience, Hunter, but we'll impeach the president based on an anonymous hearsay whistleblower.
	I mean, the damage that has been done in the last four years by the left is incalculable, Bill.
	Uh, we'll come back more with Bill O'Reilly, all things O'Reilly, Bill O'Reilly.com, 800 nine four-one Sean.
	You want to be a part of this extravaganza.
	We're gonna go to the heart of that Pennsylvania case with Congressman Mike Kelly.
	He's the one that brought it uh in the next half hour.
	Hey there.
	I'm Mary Catherine Hammond.
	And I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
	You're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
	I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	Sir Dow, verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.com.
	Uh so I agree with you on on Barr, but I want to look at the big picture, Bill.
	You know, I spent three years and and uh I mean, I think you actually gave me a compliment in the coverage uh being proven right on Trump and Russia and collusion and FISA abuse and the dirty dossier.
	Nobody else in the media really went and dug that deep.
	And I appreciated your nice comments about that.
	Um it happened.
	Just like they ignored Joe and Hunter and China and Russia and Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
	And it happened, Bill.
	And then you add election fraud and and all the mess we've witnessed.
	I'm worried about the country.
	So am I. And that's why we need a real tough special prosecutor to look into this uh election.
	And I'll give you one solid thing that has to be done.
	You gotta do forensics on the Dominion voting machines.
	And that means those machines have to be brought in, have to be examined by the federal government to see if there was any fraud, if they were calibrated in a way that wasn't fair.
	The only people who can do that work for the federal government.
	You need a subpoena, you gotta bring it in, you need the best electronic experts in the world.
	That is the key to the I have called for the same thing, Bill, but you know and I know they're already shredding the hard drives of these machines in Georgia, Bill.
	Well then I don't see that.
	Well they are.
	We already know that.
	You know, people have got to go to jail, Hannity.
	Okay, well, you know, I I listen, I support your call for a special prosecutor.
	What did Durham do?
	There was so much all he needed was the Horowitz report, and he had enough indictments to make.
	I understand.
	But you if there you have two reasons, you have two choices.
	You can stay in America and be a loyal patriotic citizen, or you can move to another country.
	But I'm gonna scream as loud as I can scream for justice.
	I want to know what happens.
	Well then I'll then I'll tell you what, O'Reilly, I'll partner with you, and I think every American patriot that believes in free, fair, honest elections with integrity that will have confidence in will join with us.
	You and I will we'll partner on this, do it on your TV shoot tonight if you can, um, and then I'll steer everybody in there and and then we'll pick out certain politicians that will call the attorney general and ask for the I just you know, for those friends of mine that are just so disappointed, and they are, and for all the right reasons, and I am too.
	So just like I I it's not in me, Bill, to quit.
	It's not in me to say, Oh, okay, it's we're gonna accept this corruption.
	No, the fight for too many people have paid such a larger price than we'll ever pay.
	But all right, all things O'Reilly, Bill O'Reilly.com, simple man, and uh Mr. O'Reilly, it's always a pleasure, honor to have you on the program.
	Hey there.
	I'm Mary Catherine Hammond.
	And I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
	You're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
	I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.
	We break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So Dell a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	Twenty-five till the top of the hour, eight hundred nine-four one Sean.
	You want to be a part of the program, and the president's not backing down, not giving up the battle, even though the Supreme Court yesterday on not on the Texas case, the opposite result happening there, but in the case uh Tuesday, yesterday, rejected what I thought was constitutionally probably the strongest case in the country as it relates to the state of Pennsylvania,
	where Republicans had a strong, powerful legal argument, constitutional argument, as it relates to the state constitution and what was known as Pennsylvania Act 77.
	But in spite of the facts of the case, the Supreme Court rejected an emergency appeal without comment by Pennsylvania Republicans that sought to void the results of the election in that big battleground state.
	Not a good decision in my view.
	Here's what the uh president is asking lawmakers in the Supreme Court to do.
	Hopefully the next administration will be the Trump administration because you can't steal hundreds of thousands of votes.
	You can't have fraud and deception and all of the things that they did and then slightly win a swing state and you just have to look at the numbers, look at what's been on tape, look at all the corruption, and we'll see.
	You can't win an election like that.
	Now let's see whether or not somebody has the courage, whether it's a legislator or legislatures, or whether it's a justice of the Supreme Court or a number of justices of the Supreme Court.
	Let's see if they have the courage to do what everybody in this country knows is right.
	Anyway, so this by the way, this is the case that Ted Cruz, the one they rejected, not the Texas case which they are now seeking uh input from the four states that Texas has as mentioned.
	Uh but this is the one Ted Cruz was willing to argue before the U.S. Supreme Court.
	Uh this is the Congressman Mike Kelly suit and this was the suit that went after Pennsylvania Act 77.
	Now that Act passed by the Democratic state legislatures or Democratic legislators signed by the Democratic governor and the problem is it was in direct violation of Pennsylvania's own constitution.
	Their state constitution features carefully documented restrictions surrounding mail in voting and that can only be changed through a constitutional amendment.
	A far more difficult process that which we have described in in detail and by the way for all the good reasons that the New York Times pointed out the Carter Baker Commission pointed out and so many others had pointed out prior to this election that massive use of mail and balloting lends itself towards all this fraud.
	You take away mail emballoting we're not in this mess that we have today where uh such high percentages of the American people and some polls in the eighty percent range uh rejecting the honesty and integrity and have no confidence in the real outcome of this election.
	Anyway, Greg Tufel is with us.
	He is the lawyer based in Pittsburgh.
	Congressman Mike Kelly, Pennsylvania's 16th district.
	He's the one that brought this case.
	That was a pretty disappointing decision, Congressman, yesterday.
	Yeah, but you know what?
	We were very disappointed.
	Thank you for having me on the show.
	We're disappointed that the court was unwilling to grant interim injunctive relief pending our petition for certiorari.
	However, all they denied was entering injunctive relief, preserving the status quo.
	quo while they consider our petition for Sir we are still proceeding with this week filing our petition for Sir Ferrari we do still hope that the uh Supreme Court will see fit to grant relief with respect to the unconstitutional Act seventy seven.
	And by the way uh Mike Kelly I mean it was a pretty much a a simple slam dung case is not a complicated legal or complicated constitutional question here.
	It's pretty straightforward.
	Yeah we sure thought it was and uh Greg has done great work on this but when it comes down to this is the fact this is either it's either constitutional or unconstitutional Act 77 which was passed in October of 2019.
	And so you've got to look at what happened and say, listen, forget about any allegations of fraud.
	Forget about all that.
	Let's just concentrate on what Pennsylvania did in October of 2019 by changing our voter laws but not doing it the proper way, and that is by an amendment, which is an onerous effort.
	You have to do it the right way.
	But in great contests, honestly, it really comes down to this was an unconstitutional movement or event that took place in Pennsylvania's legislature.
	and we really didn't have standing on it until after we were harmed so when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court which is a 52D court by the way said oh no no no no you guys came too late uh and by the way you're not allowed to bring this up ever again but you should have contacted us beforehand and so how would you file a lawsuit before you were harmed that would even be people would say no you can't you can't sue somebody for something that hasn't happened.
	I think uh I think that was the rationale when watching some of the an analysis of of you know these armchair lawyers on on TV and some commentators and that was their suggestion well you should have brought this issue up about Act 77 in in two twenty nineteen when it when it first happened um the the problem from my perspective with that argument is there has I I mean it maybe you could have done it and but and and pointed out the unconstitutionality of it at the point.
	I don't know.
	Well but we didn't Have standing, Sean.
	We didn't have any standing because we hadn't been harmed.
	So you really can't file a lawsuit against something you think may happen.
	Uh the procedurally, I I'm still uh scratching my head to find out or to try to figure out what the world Pennsylvania's legislature was thinking of.
	But then to compound all that, even after this takes place, you have the governor then changing.
	November the third at 8 o'clock was supposed to be the drop dead time.
	No.
	We're not we're gonna let it go to November 4th, November 5th, and we're gonna finish up on Friday, November the 6th at 5 o'clock.
	And by the way, that does there don't have to be cut the signatures don't have to match.
	The postmarks don't have to be on there.
	Uh nobody's allowed to also, we didn't have people be able to watch the polls, what they did, and you saw that in Philadelphia.
	So I think when Greg uh talked about this early on, I said, this is as plain as the nose on your face when it comes to this being unconstitutional, and that's what we're challenging right now.
	And now while we didn't get listen, we didn't get our our temporary injunctive relief, but we should be able to have the case heard on the basic merits of the case.
	When would we likely hear about that, Greg Tufel?
	Well, we're gonna file a motion for expedited review.
	The court could and go along with that and treat it in expedited fashion.
	If the court is still willing to consider any relief with respect to the 2020 election, as opposed to only granting relief with respect to future elections, then one would hope that they would handle it on an expedited basis, but uh that's entirely up to the court.
	They're we're they're not held to any particular schedule.
	When you got your when they rejected your emergency appeal yesterday, but then opened the door for the Texas A.G. case and for the four states that that Texas is filed against.
	Um how do you interpret those two minor decisions, if you will?
	So I they're not actually related, they're not related, but why one not the other?
	Well, uh on the on the uh motion to accept the complaint in original jurisdiction, my understanding is all they've done so far is direct the opposing parties to respond.
	They haven't yet decided whether they're going to take that case yet either.
	They they directed the opposing party to respond to our application and then ultimately denied the application.
	So it's not yet clear whether the Supreme Court is going to be willing to hear that case in its original jurisdiction.
	It doesn't appear to be obligated to take it.
	So I hope the court does take it.
	But we are on a very tight calendar right now.
	So if they were going to take it, we would know fairly quickly, correct?
	Oh, I imagine they will on an expedited basis, and I I I didn't see the schedule, but I'm sure they respond they required a response on an expedited schedule.
	Okay.
	So we'll well, I guess we're just gonna have to wait and see.
	All right, so what is the next step, Mike, for you and Greg woven forward?
	I I think we've we we followed the law uh uh and and do what we think we can do or what we know we can do.
	But it you know, Sean, it really does come down to who is it now that we have faith in when it comes to deciding these things.
	So if it what it didn't take place in Pennsylvania, it was unconstitutional what they did, Act 77, there's no question about it.
	It's unconstitutional it violates every one of the outlines of what you have to do to make an amendment to this.
	See they had to amend it and they had to amend it according to what the law says they have to do.
	So now we look at this, and and I gotta tell you, it's just a regular every I don't have a law degree, but you know what?
	You look at this and say there's something wrong here when no case no court will touch it because of what?
	And the answer is, well, you just don't understand how this works.
	And then I said, Bingo, I don't.
	You tell me why she wears it where she wears a blindfold over her eyes and holds a scale that's even and says, I will judge it on the basis of the the merits of the case.
	If we can't rely on this going forward, what in the world can America rely on it?
	And what does the world think of the greatest nation the world has ever known not be able to figure out how to run its own elections fairly and squarely and counting every legitimate and lawful vote, but then looking at what took place.
	Listen, Sean, you and I know this.
	What happened on November the third wasn't magic, it was math.
	This was this was all planted way before that that day.
	What we're saying now is because of the no excuse mail in ballot that was passed by the Pennsylvania legislature and signed by the governor of Pennsylvania, it was unconstitutional, and that should throw out that specific part of what it is that was relied upon on November the third and months before that, when it came to no excuse mail in ballots, that is not part of Pennsylvania's vote voting procedure.
	It's unconstitutional and it needs to be revealed as that, and it needs to be it needs to be thrown out.
	That's there's just no way you can look at that and say I'm satisfied with that.
	There's no way it has to be taken up by the Supreme Court, and they have to rule according to the the constitutional facts.
	Greg, what are the next legal steps for hopefully the the Supreme Court immediately taking it up, but long term, this is such a clear cut constitutional violation of the Pennsylvania state constitution.
	Yeah, when the federal government delegates power to the states to uh dictate to direct the time, place, and manner of federal election, it's not a a blank check to do it any way you want.
	A state legislature is still obligated to follow its own state constitution.
	And when a state Supreme Court, like Pennsylvania State Supreme Court, punts on ridiculous procedural grounds, on latches in this case, and refuses to enforce its own constitution in the administration of the elections of federal elections, That's a federal question that the Supreme Court should care about, should rectify, it shouldn't allow a lawless Pennsylvania legislature to ignore its own constitution, enact an unconstitutional law and proceed to implement that law in the 2020 election and in all the elections coming up.
	At the bare minimum, there should be relief granted at the future elections, and one would hope they wouldn't stand by and put a stamp of approval on an election that was conducted illegally.
	And Sean, one of the more ridiculous aspects of this case, Pennsylvania actually started the amendment process in apparent recognition of the fact that an amendment was necessary to do this.
	So if that process continues, all of us Pennsylvanians will get to vote by no excuse mail in ballot on whether we're allowed to vote by no excuse mail in ballot.
	And if we voted down, if we vote down the amendment, doesn't matter, we will still continue to vote by no excuse mail in ballot, which is just absolutely ridiculous.
	Well, listen, I wish you a lot of luck both of you, because this is a critical constitutional issue in Pennsylvania.
	And more importantly, everybody knew, understood completely and fully the what would happen and if you had this widespread mail and ballots is not a surprise, shouldn't be a surprise to anybody.
	Everybody had predicted it, everybody had warned about it, and it was actually a point of agreement, Democrats and Republicans on this one issue, just like Dominion Machines.
	Uh thank you both for being with us.
	Greg Tufel, thank you.
	Mike Kelly will continue to follow the case closely.
	Florida Chuck standing by.
	Chuck, how are you?
	It says you're a veteran.
	Thank you for serving your country.
	Welcome to the program.
	Thank you very much, Sean.
	Um not being PC, but I hope you and your family have a Merry Christmas and happy New Year's, sir.
	Uh yeah, you can say Jesus and Christmas and God on this program.
	It's not banned.
	I've always known that.
	I am a veteran, and I am most importantly what we refer to as an oathkeeper.
	And upon entering service, we swear an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, not any particular uh political party whatsoever or the government itself, but that piece of paper.
	And unfortunately, part of the government has found a way to circumvent what uh holds our country together.
	And those in charge don't seem to be willing to do anything to offset that.
	And I'm unfortunately is getting to be time where oath keepers and those who truly believe in the way this country started need to come out of the woodwork because if our elected leaders aren't going to do it, the very first three words of the Constitution say it all, We the people.
	Well, I got to tell you, and this is where, you know, I know we have elections and people go away and we forget about it.
	And it's still a problem the next time because we didn't resolve the issues that that were discovered.
	Now, you know, we've learned from a state like Florida that, you know, you can have problems and then resolve them.
	And we had problems in two thousand, we have problems in twenty sixteen.
	Governor DeSantis resolve them.
	Uh same with Ohio, same with other states.
	Now that we know where the problems are, Georgia, uh, we know we have problems in Nevada, big problems there, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania.
	Uh fix it now, uh and don't, you know, say, oh, how could and then we'll scratch our wooden conservative.
	How could this ever have happened uh uh how could this ever happen again?
	Because we didn't fix it.
	And that's why understanding what happened and getting to the bottom of it is critical.
	Uh, on top of everything else, the injustice of it all, the anger that's associated with it all.
	It's it's real.
	Anyway, appreciate the call.
	Thanks for all you do.
	Thanks for serving your country.
	800 941 Sean, our number.
	Quick break, we'll come back and at the top of the hour, we'll analyze the legal aspect of the AG case in Texas and much more as we continue.
	All right, now news roundup information overload hour, Sean Hannity Show 800 941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the program.
	Uh all right, so as the Pennsylvania Supreme Court case was rejected, the U.S. Supreme Court rejecting a look at the Pennsylvania case, which I thought had great constitutional m merit as we were discussing.
	Uh we are following this new lawsuit.
	And while yesterday the court would had the choice, they could have denied any look at at all of the Attorney General of Texas and his complaint that was filed.
	Ken Paxton of Texas, and here is what he said to me.
	So it's really important point that you're bringing up.
	In a state-on-state suit, our only place to go is the U.S. Supreme Court.
	We can't be heard anywhere else.
	Other lawsuits started at a district court level, and they have a right to be heard at least once, whether they have a good case or a bad case.
	So our request is we want to be heard.
	The only place we can go is the U.S. Supreme Court.
	And so we're pleading with the U.S. Supreme Court.
	Please hear our case.
	Give us a chance at least to argue what we think is right.
	We want to argue the Constitution.
	It is the responsibility of state legislatures per the Constitution to set the rules for election of electors.
	And in this case, those were overridden in the four states we're talking about were overridden by other officials, whether they were judges or other governmental officials, and that's not the way our Constitution works, and that's the challenge we have in front of the court.
	Can this be overridden by uh people who are not responsible under the Constitution for doing this?
	Mr. Attorney General, can you explain how the electors clause in Georgia, Michigan, PA and Wisconsin were violated?
	Yeah, so in almost all those cases that we have we have states that that allowed mail-in ballots in cases they were not supposed to, they allowed for non-signature verification, which is really important.
	So when you when you request a mail-in ballot, you have to sign for that for that application, and then they'll verify when you send your ballot in on a sleeve of the ballot, usually they'll verify that signature to ensure that those two signatures match.
	Well, if you just waive those requirements, you have no way to go back and verify that the person that requested the application is the person voting.
	That's a pretty important thing.
	When in Pennsylvania you go from 233,000 uh mail-in ballots four years ago to 2.5 million, and the difference in the election was only 81,000.
	That's a very important issue to ignore.
	All right.
	Now, if we get to the the heart of the voting here, um we we have certain things now that we know.
	We know that, for example, if you look at the the margin of difference, Arizona, Wisconsin, Georgia, it's about 44,000 votes.
	Uh you have seven million absentee uh votes cast mostly for Biden.
	Uh if you look at Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and I mean that's that that is a lot and a lot of votes, but remember, uh Wisconsin doesn't even allow early voting like this.
	Uh yet those ballots were given.
	And the procedures that would secure an absentee ballot were bypassed.
	Again, another separate suit.
	And the, you know, presidents uh, you know, rightly trying to point these things out simultaneously, while this Texas case based on the other merits that we were discussing with the attorney general of Texas.
	Anyway, here to weigh in on a Julie Kelly political commentator wrote the book, disloyal opposition of the never Trump right tried and failed to take down the president, Greg Jarrett.
	He's the host of his new podcast, two number one bestsellers, Witch Hunt and the Russia Hoax.
	Welcome both of you.
	As you look at this from the legal per side of things, Greg Jarrett, where do you see things uh at this moment?
	Well, it's a difficult case to convince the Supreme Court to take.
	They do have what's called original jurisdiction.
	So if there's a dispute between two states, they can take the case, but it's discretionary.
	So that's uh I think and I was watching your interview last night.
	I think that's the biggest obstacle that Texas has to overcome.
	But they have so much evidence here.
	We have invalid ballots that were backdated, late ballots illegally counted, blank ballots assigned random names and filled in.
	Ballots didn't matching uh didn't match the ballot uh voters' signatures were missing or didn't match in.
	Some of this place, some of this was cured illegally, for example, in Wisconsin, by election workers.
	They're not allowed to cure ballots like that.
	So I I think that if Texas can present a sufficient amount of evidence, the Supreme Court just might take the case.
	But frankly, I mean, I gotta be totally honest with you.
	The chances of the Supreme Court taking this case are not good.
	All right.
	So and your take, Julie.
	Um, that's what I I'm not a lawyer, but um I think that what Greg says is pretty accurate in terms of the court taking the case.
	But look, you can't unsee what they laid out in that lawsuit.
	A lot of us have been covering that.
	I've written a few articles about Pennsylvania and Wisconsin myself.
	To your point, there what Greg was saying, there's no ballot cheering provision in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin.
	You also had unelect unelected officials, which includes the Secretary of State of Pennsylvania, who is appointed, not elected like in most states, just rewriting the law arbitrarily on their own and changing the state legislature's um legislation, the election law that they set out.
	So this is a very damning bill of particulars that uh the Texas Attorney General laid out, and it has to be considered when the legislatures plan to vote uh December 14th for the electoral flight.
	All right, so look let me go back to Greg, even though the Supreme Court yesterday they they turned down the Pennsylvania case, which I thought was a very strong constitutional case, which should be something I would I would believe of great importance that the Supreme Court would prioritize and take up, and that being, of course, the state legislature and and basically going against the statutory legal language within the Constitution, which would have taken a constitutional amendment to uh accomplish if the Constitution were followed.
	Uh I guess the probably their reason, if I had to guess, is that well, why didn't you do it before the election?
	But that's my only guess, and I think it's a weak answer.
	Uh but now you're saying specifically about the Texas AG case, you don't see a good chance that taking it up, even though they asked for arguments from the other four states.
	Well, just alleging that uh, you know, there's a violation of the Constitution, that's not enough to have standing to sue.
	Texas really has to establish um that it's been injured.
	And their claim here, and it's well hang on, but it's outcome d these four states would be outcome determinative in the election.
	Yes and their state has a decided interest in this uh when the citizens of of Texas uh then would be disenfranchised based on that violation.
	You're absolutely right, Sean.
	And Texas is is presenting that argument.
	They are saying that the constitutional rights of our citizens in Texas have been uh violated by other states that have not followed constitutional rules and laws that they set for the election.
	And so they've been injured.
	And I you know, as a lawyer, I think that's a really great argument.
	However, um I know the Supreme Court, I followed the Supreme Court for decades, and and I know what they do.
	They try to avoid getting involved in politically oriented cases, and they are still stinging from the Gore versus Bush 2000 uh election contest, which I covered down in Florida for 37 long days and all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
	And they will do anything to avoid getting involved in this.
	And so, you know, as much as I think as a lawyer and legally they should be involved, I'm telling you that historically they're just not gonna do it.
	Your take, Julie.
	That's just such a disappointing thing to hear.
	Uh, Greg is probably right, but you know, as we went through these battles, Supreme Court uh justice battles, especially Brad Kavanaugh to have a constitutionalist on the Supreme Court to think that they would punt on what is arguably the mo one of the most important cases that they would ever consider,
	restoring the integrity of our national election, rebuking this plan of Democrats by Democrats to steal elections by breaking the law, violating laws, making up their own laws.
	Um that's that's really gonna be a hard pill for uh seventy-four million Trump voters to swallow.
	All right, let's go to what you've been looking At and that is on some of the more technical side of the voting machines and and other investigations involving the election.
	Because I don't think I think the polls are right.
	I think the the people of this country have act accurately identified that these elections uh are full of fraud and laws being just you know cast aside, abandoned, no I mean, partisan observers never allowed to observe.
	All sorts of irregularities happen, and and people don't have faith in and in the confidence and integrity of the vote.
	Uh, and I don't we never will.
	I don't see it ever happening.
	So where do you stand in your investigation?
	Uh well, I will say a couple of things really stood out in that Texas last year.
	One was in Georgia.
	The rejection rate for mail-in ballots in 2016 was about 6.4%.
	This year it was.37%, even though there were something like six times as many mail-in ballots used.
	Um in Pennsylvania, obviously, chain uh Kathy Bucksfire changing all the rules at the last second.
	Um apparently defying another Supreme Court order, Justice Leto's order to segregate those ballots.
	I don't even know if that's been uh decided.
	In Wisconsin, the idea of Milwaukee County election workers filling in missing addresses on the certification envelope and allowing those ballots to be illegally cured and inspected before the deadline.
	Um those are some of the major issues.
	Then, of course, in Michigan, the Secretary State, mailing out 7.7 million uh mail-in ballot applications without proper authority.
	I mean, that's a point.
	I mean, seven million without look at, for example, and again, it's outcome determinative in a place like Wisconsin, uh, or the signature verification issue in Georgia, or the constitutional issue that's emerged in Pennsylvania, or the statistical information,
	you know, uh one in one quad drillionth of an of an opportunity in terms of the anomalies in terms in and the results that ultimately came out and the unlikelyhood that any any of this would have happened, which we've gone over in great specificity in detail.
	Uh now the problem is is you know, as Jonathan Turley was on the line, the president's running out of runway, and now is gonna have to land a 757 on a on a postage stamp at this point because of real-time considerations, Greg.
	Yeah, the job of investigating is demanding is time consuming.
	The clock is ticking.
	Um I mean, today's actually the date, Sean, as you well know, of the Safe Harbor deadline.
	And so electors are being uh selected by uh the states, and you know, in less than a week, of course, the electoral college meets.
	Well, that would be next Monday, but even Ruth Bader Ginsberg had really said the drop dead date is Congress on January 6th, and then inauguration day scheduled for the 20th.
	You know, the the core question is there was no question that there it was rampant fraud.
	Did it happen in sufficient numbers that change the outcome?
	So that's the core question.
	And it's almost impossible.
	I can tell you this as a lawyer for 40 years.
	You cannot dig up the evidence and present it in a court of law to stop this runaway train with outbreaks in the you know, six-week period of time that is allotted.
	It just cannot be done.
	So what's going to happen is that, you know, lawyers and investigators and historians will end up judging who actually won the 2020 presidential election, notwithstanding who's inaugurated on January 20th.
	Weren't there varying uh analysis after 2000 in terms of some saying Gore won, some saying Bush won?
	Yeah, there were, and you know, anybody with a brain could see this coming a mile away.
	There have been three separate studies and commissions that said this was going to happen.
	You know, years ago they concluded that universal mail-in balloting is a recipe for corruption and electoral disaster.
	There are too many ways to trifle with mail-in ballots.
	And it it certainly happened here, and I identified uh a few minutes ago all the way.
	Look, the the you're talking about the Baker Carter Commission, you talk about the New York Times talking about you know, everybody had said the same thing, and then they used COVID as an excuse the one time they didn't, you know, quote the great Dr. Fauci that he said it was safe to vote in person, you know, with social distancing, et cetera.
	We've got a bunch of judges in Pennsylvania who are saying, oh, forget the law that we passed, forget the legislature.
	That's their Supreme Court, Greg.
	Uh all right.
	Thank you both.
	Julie, thank you.
	Greg Jarrett, thank you.
	800-941 Sean.
	You want to be a part of the program.
	All right, 25 till the top of the hour.
	We'll get to your calls coming up here.
	Uh, I see that Goya uh foods named uh Congresswoman Acasio Cortez, employee of the month after sales spiked uh with her calls to boycott the company's product because the president of the company actually praised the Trump economy.
	What a what a terrible thing.
	And when she boycotted us, our sales increased a thousand percent.
	Did we ever send any Goya products to the local food bank that I like to work with, uh, Linda?
	Do you remember?
	Yeah, it's Linda.
	I've been here for 15 years.
	All right.
	All right, stop.
	Yes, we did.
	We did, right?
	We bought it.
	O'Reilly did too, right?
	That's right.
	And we bought, and by the way, they're great foods.
	And I now buy them.
	I never bought them before.
	They actually are great, great beans and stuff, and you know, especially if you like.
	Their beans make awesome chili.
	I make the best chili, by the way.
	My chili's better than Wendy's chili.
	Yes, I do.
	I really do.
	No, you do not.
	Says who?
	It says me.
	Because you already know I'm a good cook.
	Why are you acting like I'm not?
	You might be a good cook.
	Doesn't mean you make the best chili.
	I make the best chili.
	I make the best corn beef, and I make the best breakfast.
	I make the best everything.
	And I grow the best steaks.
	Any more anything else?
	No.
	Okay.
	Just checking it.
	Yeah, but she's busy selling her tax the rich gear.
	What does she have?
	Sweatshirts, $59 sweatshirts.
	Can you imagine?
	Did you see, by the way, that the Democrats now they want to give the IRS another $5.2 billion dedicated to enforcement activities?
	What is this?
	Lois learner 2.0 now?
	Go after every conservative?
	What uh what do I always tell my financial guys?
	Pay it, pay it, pay it, ding ding ding, pay.
	I think it's what's the point?
	I know so many conservatives.
	They just get, you know, attacked.
	Unbelievable.
	Um, 800-941 Sean, if you want to be a part of the uh program here.
	Uh, I don't know if you saw the list of crimes out in Los Angeles that they now have a DA's do not prosecute list.
	Misdemeanor cases will be declined or dismissed prior to arraignment.
	Uh factors for consideration.
	The list includes trespassing, disturbing the peace, a minor in possession of alcohol, driving without a license, driving with a suspended license.
	You're not going to get in trouble.
	Making criminal threats, drug and paraphernalia possession.
	I guess a crackpipe and needles are okay.
	Being under the influence of a controlled substance, public intoxication is okay.
	Loitering to commit prostitution and resisting arrest is okay, and they'll not seek the death penalty.
	And those accused of misdemeanors, low-level felonies will be referred to community-based programs.
	Uh for juveniles, those accused of any misdemeanor, no longer.
	They have there's no consequences.
	Our prosecutorial approach should be based towards keeping youth out of the juvenile justice system.
	Well, if you just keep letting them go, they'll be out.
	And with the employing the lightest touch necessary to provide for public safety.
	You know, you add this to the massive defunding of the police effort.
	It's getting to be the wild west out there.
	It's going to become the wild west.
	2020, you know, for all the liberals that don't want citizens that don't believe in the second amendment to have firearms.
	Well, we've sold more firearms in 2020 than any other year on record.
	And, you know, the shooting rate in New York jumped nearly 125%.
	Does that surprise you?
	By the way, Black Lives Matter's co-founder is firing back at Obama for criticizing defund the police.
	That's where this is all headed.
	You have an E emergency medical team unit robbed in Brooklyn, lured by a fake phony phone call.
	I mean, you can't make this up.
	You look at House and Senate Democrats, they're prioritizing uh foreign nationals and bills while Americans remain jobless, and they're more concerned about bringing in people from other parts of the world.
	How about we hire Americans first?
	Unbelievable.
	This is now, well, you know, welcome to this.
	The language is now evolved according to dictionary.com and res for response to the court packing definition change.
	So in other words, dictionary.com changed their definition of court packing in response to a Twitter user's acknowledgement of the change that language evolves.
	And apparently this this new definition responding to a tweet criticizing a Playboy reporter for implying Republicans packed the courts, presumably with the vacancy.
	That, by the way, it happened all those other times in the past.
	Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
	And anyway, language evolves, so do we.
	And a November 1st archive shows a definition of court packing based on the U.S. history, Franklin D. Uh FDR trying unsuccessfully 1937 to add six additional justices, which had invalidated a number of his new law, New Deal laws.
	But anyway, now they want to just change the name.
	I mean, it's unbelievable.
	Cornell University is offering race-based exemptions to the flu vaccine mandate.
	And they said students who identify as a person in color of color can seek an exemption to the school's flu vaccination mandate for on campus residents because of historical injustices and current events.
	And it required all students attending its campus to receive a flu vaccine, according to its COVID-19 behavioral compact.
	And the school allowed wiggle room for students who identify as quote black, indigenous, or as a person of color and may have personal concerns about fulfilling the compact requirements based on historical injustices and current events.
	That does not exist to all students.
	That would be called discrimination.
	I'm not quite sure if they got I don't even like the policy to begin with, to be honest.
	Anyway, unbelievable times we're living.
	It's getting nuttier.
	And did you see what's going on out in Portland?
	Portland exploded in violence again.
	Hundreds of protesters attempting to set up another autonomous zone.
	Reclaim a home that was sold by an African American family to pay for legal fees when their son was arrested.
	So they outraged with a dozen arrests, more violence, apparently.
	Family was removed in September.
	They're throwing rocks at officers again.
	Why would they stop?
	They didn't get in trouble the last time, people out there, sprayed a fire extinguisher at them, damaged police vehicles, and this happened all in broad daylight, and that genius mayor wheeler out there sent out a statement he's authorizing Portland police to use all lawful means to end the occupation.
	And not going to be another autonomous zone in Portland.
	Oh, okay.
	I would have him explain what he means by lawful.
	I want to know what he means by law.
	That doesn't mean what you and I mean.
	I can tell you that right now.
	Exactly right.
	Okay.
	Well, uh, you know, I'm not sure.
	I would say, you know what, Wheeler?
	It's now the it's the era of anarchists and radicals.
	They're just taking over.
	And they don't care.
	Yeah, but see, this is the problem, right?
	So there's a bunch of innocent people trying to just live their lives and raise their kids, and then you got Wheeler out there freewheeling it, pardon the pun.
	Let's let's have Wheeler handle it.
	You put together the police that you want, you put together the people that you want to enforce the lawful exchange that you want to see happen.
	And then we'll talk.
	Cornell University, you got to get vaccinated, but not if you're not uh if if you're not white.
	Okay.
	Well, what why are we why are we defiding people at Cornell?
	Shouldn't they be one glorious student body and eventually would be proud Cornell graduates and Ivy League school graduate?
	Well, I mean, I don't understand the the written in discrimination in school policy.
	By the way, why are they making people get vaccinated anyway?
	That should be a personal medical choice between a student and their doctor.
	It's not like you're telling them to wear a mask in a classroom, which they I would say have the right to do.
	Well, you're gonna you're gonna now demand that everybody get vaccinated, but not if you're not white.
	How does that bring people together?
	But that's what they're doing.
	It's you know, you can't even make this stuff up.
	Then you got this woman, Cynthia Johnson.
	We've been passing notes about this back and forth all day.
	Uh, have you been following this?
	Um, so let me let me just go back and play part of this.
	And look, there's some context to it.
	But anyway, she's a member of the Michigan House of Representatives, and she makes a call out to her soldiers to make you Trump people pay.
	Now it was an original post.
	She made the comments, got a lot of press pickup, because she apparently has been getting threatening voicemails.
	I don't want anybody threatening anybody out there.
	Anyway, she started it with you know, pretty ugly speech.
	And anyone who criticized her.
	But anyway, while she does end the video with this threat, she says at the top, be smart, you don't have to yell, you don't have to curse at anyone, hit their asses in the pocketbook.
	And then she goes on to explain how the FBI found someone who issued threats to her.
	I don't want her to get threatened.
	I don't want anybody to get threatened.
	I mean, why don't we just leave people the hell alone?
	She's now been removed from her committee assignments.
	She's awaiting further discipline action, according to some published reports now.
	But listen to what she says in this threat.
	You don't have to yell.
	You don't have to curse anybody out.
	You don't have to call people names.
	Hit their asses in the pocketbook.
	So this is just a warning to you, Trumpers.
	Be careful.
	Walk lightly.
	We ain't playing with you.
	Enough of the shenanigans.
	Enough.
	It's enough.
	And for those of you who are soldiers, you know how to do it.
	Do it right.
	Be in order.
	Make them pay.
	I love y'all.
	Do you know what to do?
	Do it right.
	Make them pay.
	I don't know.
	Maybe, maybe I'm just too maybe I'm become a snowflake, and it sounds like a threat to me, Linda.
	Oh, it's a threat.
	It is 100% a threat.
	But the problem is that we're not allowed to call it that because we're on the other side of the argument.
	How about a threat is wrong, period?
	And anybody that says they're a conservative is out there threatening liberals, I would say don't do it.
	No, 100%.
	I mean, this is what this is what we say to everybody, you know.
	So now we're creating this hatred and this horrible way of thinking instead of saying, hey, you're all children of God and you should all love each other.
	We should all be kind to each other and stop trying to hurt each other because we all got to live here.
	But there's none of that anymore.
	Now it's just divisiveness.
	Those days, I think sadly, are gone.
	And I mean, sadly, too.
	I mean, you would think that every I know everybody that like is a graduate of whatever school they went to.
	They're all proud of their university.
	They all, you know.
	I'm not proud.
	I didn't even walk.
	My MA, they decided to have a lot of people.
	You're not normal.
	Let's put it.
	Most normal people usually they're proud, they graduated, and they're one, you know, if you are well, whatever.
	You know, you name the school, whatever your mascot happens to be.
	You know, you just identify with it, and it's something that people have in common.
	It's not about the the racial component of this.
	Man, it's like, you know, one glorious Cornell family.
	Apparently, forget it.
	Uh, let's go to Christian in California.
	What's up, Christian?
	How are you?
	Uh I wish I could say that I was good, but I'm really not.
	Um your heart is troubled.
	What's up?
	Yeah, I'm I'm in I'm in trouble.
	Uh, I live in Sherman Oaks, and my wife and I are moving my son from uh preschool to kindergarten above, and we are crossing off schools faster than we can find them.
	That that is teaching the anti-racist uh critical race theory curriculum, which is now coming as new form of Pollyanna curriculum, which everyone needs to learn about right away.
	Um there was this like Pollyanna conference, it took place at the big independent private schools out here, and it literally it sounds fluffy, and then you get the second page, it's like to teach your child's racial identity and the racial identity of others, and it's grades K through eight.
	It is it is beyond disturbing.
	There's a school that's a good one.
	Look, I've I've covered a lot of this.
	I I've seen this and it's happening everywhere.
	You know what the hardest and saddest thing in all this is how about you just teach kids to respect other kids and leave them alone?
	And and that's easy to do and keep it basic.
	And then how about we focus on reading, writing, math, and and some version of normal history that is accurate.
	And we don't do the simple basic things, and they spend all this time on all of this other stuff, and you know, it's like it's I I'm not really Understanding what the purpose of it is, except to turn, you know, kids indoctrinate them in a good little socialist as quickly as you possibly can, because this may be the only opportunity you have and to groupthink and to you know total complete conformity.
	But at the same time, don't ever think about mentioning God in school.
	That's too controversial.
	Kick him out.
	It's uh if you're gonna how about just teach the simple value of love God and your neighbor as yourself.
	I guess you have to eliminate God.
	How about you treat your neighbor as yourself?
	Simple.
	Keep it there.
	And and leave everybody, then stick to the reading, writing, math, and history, and let's get our kids educated.
	So they have the rungs of the ladder that they can climb and and tap their God-given abilities and live life and be the best they can be at whatever they choose to do.
	All right, headens tonight, 9 Eastern on the Fox News channel, so you DVR.
	I love this statement.
	Hunter Biden.
	I learned yesterday the U.S. attorney's office in Delaware advised my legal counsel.
	They are investigating my tax affairs.
	I take it seriously.
	Okay.
	Uh and Joe is deeply proud of his son who gets all these millions with zero experience.
	All right, we'll have the latest on that, the election.
	Kayleigh McEnaney, Laura Trump, Pete Hagseth, uh, Congressman uh Gates joins us, Leo Tyrrell, uh, Rick Rennell, Chris Kobach, and Rhince Previs.
	News you won't get from the mob, nine Eastern tonight.
	We'll see you then back here tomorrow.
	Thanks for being with us.
	Music.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	I'm Carol Markovich.
	And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.

▲