← 10 Minute Drill
Loading summary
Transcript31 lines
- [00:00]
A
Chuck Schumer has a Texas sized headache coming this election cycle. We're going to talk about some of the problems going on with Europe. And we have a very special guest today to talk about some important issues. All of that and so much more today on a special Wednesday 10 minute drill.
- [00:16]
B
Everybody get up. Get up.
- [00:20]
C
The story of America is the story of an adventure. I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. We are a nation under God, and I believe God intended for us to be free.
- [00:36]
A
On Monday, the beloved Jasmine Crockett announced that she was running for the United States Senate in the great state of Texas. Here's a look at her announcement video.
- [00:47]
C
But you have this woman, Crockett. She's a very low IQ person. I watched her speak the other day. She's definitely a low IQ person.
- [00:55]
A
Crockett.
- [00:56]
C
Oh, man.
- [00:57]
D
Oh, man.
- [00:58]
A
Now, I have to admit the first time I saw this ad was on X where it autoplays with no sound. So I was looking at a very slow motion picture of Jasmine Crockett. It's an interesting style. She is essentially making the calculation that by highlighting President Trump's attacks on her, she can be the anti Trump hero that could win in Texas. A few challenges with that. First, the ad in general would be fantastic if the entire electorate were teenagers on TikTok. But it's the great state of Texas, which is again, not a blue state and not really a purple state. It's a pretty red state. But the other challenge here is that there's a lot of people that are gonna hear President Trump talking about her and they might actually identify with some of the things that he's saying about her. And that will be a challenge for her. But she's also said she doesn't necessarily need Trump voters.
- [01:47]
B
Yeah, I don't know that we'll necessarily convert all of Trump's supporters. That's not our goal.
- [01:51]
A
Do you need to.
- [01:52]
B
Our goal is to definitely talk to people. No, we don't. We don't need to.
- [01:57]
A
I think it's very difficult to see how she can make that math work without Trump voters. But I am very excited to watch this play out. Another highlight of her campaign. Launch this from an Atlantic reporter. Four days before my story was published, Crockett called me to express frustration that I had reached out to so many House members without telling her first. She. She said, and she told me, shutting down the profile and revoking all permission. Now, you can't just shut down a profile that you're not in control of as much as People might like to. It reminds me a little bit of this.
- [02:28]
C
I declare.
- [02:31]
Bankruptcy.
- [02:34]
A
You can't just declare that the profile is shut down and that you're revoking all permissions. But just as a reminder to everybody of who this person is, here's a quick, quick highlight reel.
- [02:44]
B
Y' all know we got Governor Hot Wheels down there. Come on now.
- [02:48]
D
Right?
- [02:48]
A
Right.
- [02:49]
B
The fact is, ain't none of y' all trying to go and farm right now. You not, you not. We done picking cotton. Maybe. Cuz these people, they are crazy. Cuz they always talk about how Christian they is. Yeah. I don't know how many of them on that side are getting divorced cuz they getting caught up sleeping with their co workers, staffers, interns. I do want people to know that just because someone has committed a crime, it doesn't make them a criminal.
- [03:15]
A
If you like what you're Hearing on the 10 minute drill, please leave us a review. Tell us what you think about what we're talking about. If you think Jasmine Crockett makes a great Senate candidate, let us know why and we will make fun of you. Just kidding. We would never do that. That is not our style here on the 10 minute drill.
- [03:31]
We talked a few months ago about Greenpeace and the fact that a jury was holding them accountable for a giant penalty for for some of the protests they'd carried out. This in the Wall Street Journal. Greenpeace asks a Dutch court to reverse an American verdict. A North Dakota jury ordered Greenpeace in March to pay pipeline company Energy Transfer $667 million for the environmental group's rogue campaign to stop the Dakota Access pipeline. Now Greenpeace is trying to get a Dutch court to nullify the jury award, which the trial judge reduced to $345 million in October. Energy Transfer is asking the North Dakota Supreme Court to block the activist group's attempt to end run the US Legal system. This is how Michael Toth concluded that Wall Street Journal American courts and lawmakers must stand up to Europe's frontal assault on our judicial sovereignty in climate data, banking and digital services. EU leaders are flexing their muscle, not economically or militarily, but by setting standards that purport to regulate business activities around the world. The extraterritorial reach of European law has become an all too common means of forcing global competitors to play by European rules. Let's take a minute and talk about just how absolutely insane that is. Greenpeace is an American based organization and they have been held liable for major damages that they did during this protest. And instead of paying their fees and moving on, they're trying to appeal all the way to Europe, which has a very different set of laws that governing these issues. What a massive, massive issue this would be if a European court were able to countermand our legal system. If people don't like a result, they get here in the United States. And it adds to a much larger conversation we're having about Europe, where freedom right now is very different. You have the United Kingdom with a massive, massive challenge going on where they're trying to enforce free speech laws and end up putting people in jail for tweets that are actually fairly simple and anodyne. You have across all of Europe a major migration crisis. And what it feels like is so much of Europe is slipping further and further away from the traditional Western values that we have always shared with them. And this lawsuit and legal challenge is a major potential judicial crisis in the making.
- [05:49]
We have very special guests today. You might remember a few months ago we had alliance for Consumers Executive Director OH Skinner, who came in and talk things like the Biden Dream House, a campaign that they had put together to highlight how so many of Joe Biden's policies had made everything in people's everyday lives more expensive. Well, one thing that we have talked about for the last several months is how the left is using lawsuits and climate litigation to shut down energy companies and drive up costs for families as a part of their Green New Deal transition. So, oh, is gonna talk a little bit about that today with us.
- [06:23]
Oh, thank you for joining us. We had so much fun when you were on before and we talked about the Biden Dream House, the Trump Dream House, and how every left wing climate policy is driving up costs for everybody. And the thing we wanted to get into a little bit today, because you are our favorite expert on this, is how the left is using climate lawfare as basically a shell game in different states and cities to try and make everyone's energy more expensive. And one thing that you've tweeted about that I really loved is the Boulder case and one of the attorneys involved in there with a pretty startling admission. Do you remember what that was?
- [06:54]
D
Of course I remember what that is. So I think what's really important for people to understand is that it's like a game show. Yeah, yeah. Do you remember that thing you said one time is that, look, we keep seeing conservatives winning at the ballot box. And I think it's really important for people to understand that as the left sees that too, they're relying more and more on this long simmering strategy to win their policy victories through the courtroom. Right. They're not done trying. They're just planning on getting the Green New Deal or giveaways to left wing NGOs or bans on products and gas stoves and all the other things through the courtroom. Right? And so I think you can understand that when you understand this guy's bookbinder. He's a professor and he's helped push a lot of these cases. And what he talks about in this interview is really fascinating. Everybody's focused on the first thing he says, which is, oh, these cases, like the Boulder case that are big climate change public nuisance cases are about getting a carbon tax. So everyone has written a lot of stories about that. Everybody missed the second part, which is he said, don't worry, we'll just drive up the liability on these companies enough that they'll all just go into bankruptcy and then they'll get taken over by their creditors. And I think it's really important for people to understand that. Who are the creditors? The creditors are like Boulder, Colorado, Honolulu, Baltimore. His theory of the world is that you'll control the entire energy sector of America owned by left wing cities and nonprofits and that network, and then they will decide how to deploy all that money and what amount of energy you're allowed to have. They will literally control what you can do in your home, what products you can buy and fundamentally change your lifestyle. But because the point of all the lawsuits is just that, it's that they want to control your lifestyle and impose progressive lifestyle choices on you. Right. The joke that I have is that it's really not climate lawfare, it's woke lawfare. If you're living some sort of an aspect of your life that doesn't match, like a coastal progressive elite lifestyle, they've got a lawsuit for that. Are you using plastic straws? They've got a plastics lawsuit for that. Are you driving a super duty truck? They've got a climate change lawsuit for that. Do you own a gun? They've got a public nuisance lawsuit for that. And on and on and on down the stack. And so when you see this, it comes in the form of like this Boulder case that's coming up before the Supreme Court on Friday. It's a huge deal. It's one of this example where their goal is to take over the energy sector and control what you can do in your home. They also have this case that's being argued in January called Plaqueland, Parrish versus Chevron. Everyone should be rooting for the energy companies in that case, because fundamentally that's just another effort by left wing trialers and left wing local governments to impose billions of dollars that they can use to shove the energy companies into bankruptcy. Right? And the end goal for them is not. The end goal isn't just the bankruptcy. The end goal is they get to unlock all that money, feed it in and basically fund the green New Deal. They get to feed it in to their NGOs, they get to feed it into their policy preferences and change America through that vehicle. Because they can't do it through Congress. Right. Congress is blocked, they're losing in state houses, they can't get all of what they want. So they're turning to the courtroom.
- [10:00]
A
Talk to me a little bit about how, like Plaquemines for example, this is a red state. How does something like this happen in a place where you would expect Republicans who have, you know, stood with President Trump on the importance of energy independence and energy affordability get tied into a case like this?
- [10:16]
D
So it also, it really comes down to states need to protect themselves. And when they don't protect themselves, they get rolled. And when they're not paying attention, they get rolled. This is my theory. And so what you see there is, you see this plaque mind Paris, and these local governments working with left wing trial lawyers to impose billions of dollars of liability as part of this left wing woke assault, right? And if states don't step up and limit what trial lawyers and local governments can do, then you're gonna end up with the, your red estates are the ones bringing these lawsuits. I mean, you've got Charleston, South Carolina bringing climate change cases. South Carolina is kind of same boat, right? If you don't pay attention, if you don't prevent these trialers from getting in bed with these local governments, and if you don't kind of build like a lawfare defense mechanism for yourself, your state will get eaten alive by this lawfare. And next thing you know, you'll wake up and realize that like all the public officials in your state are either on the sidelines or actively on the wrong side of an issue because nobody built a defense network. And that's what I think is really important is like it's going to come from red places because the left knows that they're never gonna win these elected offices, so they're gonna use the courtroom because they don't have anything else.
- [11:29]
A
So with Plaquemines and this Louisiana case, we know there's a huge trial lawyer nexus. When I look at Boulder, for example. The little sweet Beaver Cleaver, mayor of Boulder, Colorado is not necessarily your sort of liberal Megamind guy. We know there's a lot of other forces behind these lawsuits. Have you seen and you've tweeted about this, talked about this? What are some of the connective tissues of groups and people that are behind this? What appears to be an obviously coordinated shell game across the country?
- [11:58]
D
Yeah, you've got a really simple mix of people from my perspective, which is you've got big left wing donors like out of the Arabella Advisors network, funding a lot of the lawsuits. That's what's going to fund law firms like Share Ed Lane. The Boulder people are basically accessing that pool of resources. And then you have these left wing trial lawyers that are busy suing, whether it's in Soros districts or wherever it is, they're creating a money machine that feeds back 99% into Democratic politicians. Right. And then you've got local governments and public officials. So it's basically left wing local governments, left wing public officials, left wing NGOs, left wing donors and left wing trial lawyers. And they're using it as a cocktail that mixes money and policy outcomes and they're happy. What's crucial on the lawfare front and the woke lawfare front is for people to understand if they get a big judgment, they feed that money back into politics to get their policy goals. And if they don't get money and they just get something that bans a product, they've accomplished the policy goal. So to them it's a win win. Right. Any sort of a win out of the case will either feed the money into their machine or will accomplish the policy victory. And the money is just there to accomplish the policy victory. So when you see these trial or driven lawsuits, know that the end result of that is going to be money feeding into the policy victories because it's all ideological. That's what everyone needs to understand is this whole lawfare strategy and is their plan to reshape society around us without having to win everywhere at the ballot box. And if you wake up to that, then you start to build like lawfare protection into your mental mindset of what your officials have to do.
- [13:37]
A
Well, that is all the time we have for. Oh, you've got so much going on. But we appreciate you. This is amazing color on all these very important issues that affect consumers every day.
- [13:46]
That is all the time we have for today. Thank you for joining us on this special Wednesday 10 minute drill. We'll be back with a full episode tomorrow. Please like subscribe, leave us a review, tell a friend, have a great day.