Loading summary
Transcript45 lines
- [00:00]
Host
This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human libs are making the worst possible argument in the dumbest possible way against something that everybody agrees on. Also, President Trump taken some action in the business realm. Hey, if you're not an American, should you receive an American business loan? I'll let you answer that for yourself. Also, a brand new segment on this Tuesday called Take that Tuesday. So much to get to here on the show. Thanks so much for tuning in. The show starts right now. You got to start off today with acknowledging the fact that this is six months since Charlie Kirk was brutally assassinated and taken away from us. And know that everybody at Turning Point USA and Turning Point Action is doing their very best to continue Charlie's legacy. And we appreciate the each and every one of you who are in support of that. I also just very quickly want to say, you know, despite what you might see on the darker corners of the Internet, the organization that Charlie built is bigger and stronger than it ever was because he organized TBUSA and Turning Point Action in a way that was meant to laugh. And I just want to last. I just want to remind people of that. You know, anecdotally, I did an event on Monday in Utah at a high school. And sometimes the high school events would be sparsely attended in years prior, this one, multiples of students who were in this room packed out in this classroom, which is just kind of a small but very important testament to the idea that this organization is here to stay, despite what you may see from some of the naysayers on the Internet, which, by the way, make up a tiny fraction of people online. So we are continuing to do our very best to continue Charlie's mission, to continue Charlie's legacy and continue doing our best work within the organization that he dedicated his entire life to. Now, are we going to say exactly what Charlie said? Am I going to say exactly what Charlie would have said? No, that would be impossible. And Charlie knew that bringing people, you know, into the fold, such as myself. But what. What I can promise is that we will continue, each and every day to continue the legacy that Charlie left and continue the mission that he fought so hard for. One of those things that he fought so hard for was a very simple, very easy thing. Showing your ID to be able to vote. Why this was at all controversial at any point in time, I have no idea. But the SAVE act is making its final legislative push with President Trump the other day saying, and nothing else is going to get through until we have this thing sorted out. Uh, that's what we're going to discuss. But before I got to remind you, tptpsa.com is the email address. If you'd like to send along your thoughts, comments, concerns, criticisms, even. All of those can be sent to TPT at@tpusa.com and remember, you can send videos that we should watch and hopefully laugh at. You can send, you know, commentary on stories that we've covered. You can send stories yourself that we should be covering. All of those things are welcome@tptp USA.com I have a feeling that you probably already think these things that we're about to discuss, but I did want to get this all into a condensed format to kind of show the myriad of different responses from different libs and the arguments against something that literally everybody agrees with. You may have already seen this clip from CNN where they did polling to show how many people divided by their political party, their ideology, their racial makeup. For some reason, I don't know why we do that, but libs love to do that sort of thing. How they all view whether or not people should have to show an ID to vote in American elections. Cut 6 take a look here.
- [04:11]
Narrator/Reporter
Favorite photo ID to vote 85% of white people favor it, 82% of Latino, 76% of black Americans favor it. So the bottom line is voter ID is not controversial in this country. A photo ID to vote is not controversial in this country. It is not controversial by party, and it is not controversial by race. The vast majority of Americans agree with Nicki Minaj that in fact you should have a photo ID to be able to vote.
- [04:38]
Host
First things first. When's the last time would you have guessed, would it be on your bingo card that Nicki Minaj would be invoked on CNN to talk about political policy? Probably not. Ask somebody 10 years ago. Probably wouldn't be on their radar. But also, here's the thing. This is actually a good point that I don't think many people are making. The reason that everybody on both sides of the political aisle think that people need to show an ID to be able to verify that they're eligible to vote and is that nobody trusts each other. Seriously, on both sides of the political spectrum, they accuse each other of cheating. Now how do you fix that on a bipartisan way, make it impossible for people to cheat? People don't trust each other and they shouldn't. Therefore, let's maybe design a system where cheating is not a possibility or at the very least, very, very, very, very difficult. Do look, the idea, if you were to use an analogy, is that saying, well, you know, nobody's broken into my house recently. Is not a good argument to not lock your door. But that, unfortunately, is the case that libs continue to make. They say the. Wow, there, there's not a whole ton of voter fraud out there. Okay, well, one, I don't necessarily know if I believe that. And two, that doesn't mean that you shouldn't steal this steel, steel door, this election process. That would be crazy to not do that. I mean, there's a. There's a ton of examples out there, but let's just one. Recently, the United States District office in Pennsylvania arrested a guy, 50 years old, who allegedly voted five times and was not eligible to vote. And here's the thing. He wasn't even here legally. This wasn't a, you know, permanent resident, a green card holder who was in the country and happened to vote because maybe he thought he was able to. No, this is a guy who entered the country and was here illegally, who was somehow able to register to vote and cast multiple ballots. And I say that because that's just one kind of fraud. There are many other different kinds of fraud that people could participate in. For example, in a state like California that doesn't check your id, if I happen to know that my neighbor isn't going to vote and I show up and I say, oh, I'm him, or California doesn't have to show id. So what's stopping me from doing that? Now, of course I wouldn't because I have some sense of morality. But the problem is, well, other people would. So you should try to stop them from. From doing that. In my opinion, too. You know, libs are. Are effectively all but mid admitting that voter fraud occurs. Here is the House Minority Leader, Hakeem Jeffries, who. This is a clip we've played before. I think we even played it yesterday, in my opinion, basically admitting that voter fraud happens because he talks about the one hill that libs will die on. When it comes to ice. DHS reform again, it all kind of ties together. But watch this. From the House Minority Leader, Hakeem Jeffries, cut seven.
- [08:02]
Narrator/Reporter
We are in a DHS shutdown right now because Republicans have refused to agree to the type of bold, transformative, meaningful and dramatic reforms we are demanding in order for the Department of Homeland Security funding bill to move forward. And I won't go through all of the demands, much of which we've talked about repeatedly in the public, but one of those demands is keep ICE out of sensitive locations. And we've defined that as schools, houses of worship, hospitals and Polling sites. We want an explicit prohibition that ICE can go nowhere near any polling sites in the United States of America. It's one of our demands. We're not going to bend on it.
- [08:50]
Host
What an odd hill to die on, right? Because the obvious question is, okay, well, if illegals aren't voting, then it shouldn't be a problem that ICE or immigration enforcement goes into polling places. Unless, of course, they are voting, in which case that's a weird hill to die on, policy slash, rhetorically speaking. Also, what's fascinating about this is he lists. He says, well, we've got a lot of different demands, but here's the most important one. That's the most important one as to why they're not going to continue to fund dhs. Now, again, he's not necessarily talking about the voter ID issue. He's talking about, well, we shouldn't have immigration enforcement in polling places. Again, which is an odd thing to say. Now, more broadly, what's fascinating to me is not only the arguments that libs are making, but the arguments that they're not making. The arguments that libs aren't making kind of speak volumes. The argument that they're not making is that this is unconstitutional, which it isn't. But at least it. It's a decent argument. Or at the very least it sounds good. Like, for example, nobody on the left regarding voter ID and the federal government injecting itself into elections is quoting Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution, which says the times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by. By the legislature thereof. Which sounds like it's a state issue, right? Or at least libs could make that argument. Now, the argument breaks down immediately when you read the following line which says, but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations. But remember, libs lie all the time. What I'm saying here is they could quote the Constitution and make that argument as if it were unconstitutional, which I know it's not, but I'm saying libs lie all the time, so why aren't they doing that? You know, unless, of course, by some stroke of, I don't know, imagination, maybe libs actually are aware that the federal government does have the power to say, hey, you needed to have an id, which it does. So interestingly enough, instead of making that argument saying, well, this is unconstitutional, they're making an argument appealing to the dumbest among us. Here is Senator Harano, Senator from Hawaii, Maisie Harrano, who's very, very silly, I think if you listen to her just a little bit, you recognize she's. She doesn't have both oars in the water to use a boat reference for the senator from Hawaii. She's not tethered to the dock of reality. Here is her making the case against voter ID in the United States of America, which, again, she doesn't use the unconstitutional stuff. She. She uses the race stuff. This is cut eight.
- [11:58]
Guest/Commentator
This is not about voter id. Oh, stop that. That's like a total bull description of the SAVE Act. Let me just focus on one part of the SAVE Act. In order to register to vote, you're going to have to show different pieces of documents. So if you're, let's say, a woman who, who got married, changed your last name, and if your last name doesn't match the name on your birth certificate, you're not going to be registered, able to register to vote. That I call stealing our votes.
- [12:28]
Host
Yeah, I mean, aside from that being debunked a number of times, including on this show, what if we attack her from the left? Hey, Senator Hirano, Senator Mazzy, Women aren't the only ones that get married and change their names. Some men hyphenate. It's not a good argument to make from the lib side of the aisle, but it's not a good argument to make from her standpoint as well. Everybody is aware of. Okay, well, yeah, you just, you know, bring your birth certificate or you bring your marriage license, and if you don't have any of those and you have no way of proving who you are, why should we let you vote in the country? And yet there are some arguments being made from libs, including this one from Governor Newsom of the poopiest state in the nation, California, which, interestingly enough, kind of proved the point that we are trying to make in this weird, subvertive way that only a lib would understand and think, wow, this is a great argument. Here is Governor Newsom kind of making our point in his argument against what we all want, oddly. Cut nine. What's the Save Act?
- [13:39]
Narrator/Reporter
That's not about id. It's about registration.
- [13:42]
Guest/Commentator 2
It's about who gets to vote, who doesn't get to vote.
- [13:46]
Host
They are not screwing around. Yes, that is kind of the point. It's about who gets to vote. Now he's saying, well, it's only who conservatives want to vote, because those are the only people that would have the ability to prove that they're eligible to vote. But without putting it in that context, Governor Newsom kind of makes the point that we're trying to make. Yes, it is about who gets to vote. That's the whole thing. We don't want people who are ineligible to vote to be able to vote. But outside of all the, you know, crazy and ridiculous arguments, I think honestly, this argument made by the minority leader in the Senate, Senator Schumer, is the worst of the worst. Now, remember, he's the minority leader in the Senate, and despite that elevated position in the nation's most deliberative body, he's making this argument, which not only is absurd, but deeply, deeply offensive. This is cut 10.
- [14:52]
Narrator/Reporter
The save act will not pass because it is such a pernicious, nasty piece of legislation. The SAVE act is Jim Crow 2.0. More than 20 million people would lose their right to vote.
- [15:08]
Host
Now, the fact that they are still calling it Jim Crow 2.0 should be incredibly offensive to anybody who doesn't like to see racism in this country. And I say that really kind of throwing that back into Lib's face, because what he's doing effectively is equating some of the worst things that this country has ever done. And I say that knowing that several conservatives are like, oh, this didn't happen. We're debunking this and that. And yeah, there's a lot of nuance going on here, but Jim Crow did exist. The Jim Crow south was an actual thing. To deny it entirely wouldn't give you the full picture. And that's not what conservatives do. We don't take things out of context. We try to put things in the whole context and make sense of it. But what senator Schumer is effectively doing is belittling calling, showing your ID to vote is belittling some terrible things that, again, actually happen. Just to remind people Jim Crow had separate public facilities. There were laws requiring separate drinking fountains, restrooms, and waiting rooms, white marked whites only and colored only, which were enforced by the law. There were segregation in public transit. The laws requiring black passengers to sit in the back, white passengers to sit in the front. There were conditions in restaurants. There was businesses that segregated black and white. There were residential segregation. There were laws that enforced, you know, these racial zoning neighborhoods. Now, again, not a good thing. It doesn't also help us to deny that that sort of stuff happened, because it did. Not necessarily in the way that libs portray it. But yes, what I'm saying ultimately is, is Jim Crow was bad. School segregation, public segregation, interracial marriage in a lot of places were banned by the law. So what I'm trying to get at here Is that Senator Schumer, by equating showing your ID to vote to Jim Crow laws, belittles anybody that had to live through Jim Crow laws, which doesn't dignify people of color at all in the country. Right. Does that, does that make sense if he is saying that? Well, you know, having to hand somebody an ID in order to vote is the same as racial segregation. What people would do in their heads by default would be like, okay, so Jim Crow wasn't that bad. Oh, it was pretty bad. But Senator Schumer by equating simply proving that you have the ability to vote to Jim Crow, effectively says, eh, Jim Crow wasn't that bad. Racial division in this country wasn't that bad. Which is exactly the opposite of what libs often do. But such is the bad and terrible arguments being made by the lefty side of the aisle. Now, I mean, to answer the most fundamental basic question as to why are they doing this? Why are they against showing id? Why are they against proving eligibility to order to vote? We probably have to look no further than the President of the United States. Despite the overwhelming support, there's only one reason that libs would be against voter id and therefore proving that you have the eligibility to vote in this country is cut 11.
- [18:42]
Guest/Commentator 2
The only reason you vote against voter ID is because you want to cheat. There's no other reason. They come up with reasons. They say it's racist. That's their number one racist. Then you have to explain it. And they're just sitting there mumbling. They can't explain it. And it's actually very insulting when they use the term racist. Very insulting to the people that they're trying to so called defend.
- [19:05]
Host
But they're not defending President Trump is so good at one kind of laughing at it and also, you know, putting it in concise terms. It is, it is, it is offensive. It should be offensive. If you are a black person in America, if you are a woman in America, you should be offended by legislators saying you're too stupid to get an id, you're too dumb to have a marriage certificate. These things are so astronomically difficult that you can't do it, not because of anything other than your race and, or gender. It is, it should be offensive to everybody. It should, it shouldn't be belittling to, you know, terrible things that happen in this country. It shouldn't be all of these things. And yet it still is for some reason, for the people on the lefty side of the aisle. Everybody agrees on this. I would hope that especially Even conservatives, at the very least, bring this up for a vote, because at this point, that hasn't even happened yet. So how will this shake out? Honestly, I'm not entirely sure. Anybody who says they're definitely sure, I don't know. They don't have a crystal ball. They can't see the future. But what I will tell you is the only sure thing here is that one, it is very, very reasonable, and two, the majority of people agree with it. Tptbsa.com is the email. If you'd like to send along your thoughts, comments, concerns, let us know what you think regarding any of the voter ID laws. Regarding anything going on legislatively, President Trump said, hey, we're having a moratorium on anything going through until we get voter id, because we have to. Once you've, once you've lost trust in the election system, the country is gone. That's just, that's just how it is. If nobody believes the outcome of any of the elections, we are screwed. Doesn't matter which side, what party it, we are screwed. That is why President Trump thinks, hey, this is a necessity and I will stop everything else until this gets done. TBT. TBSA.com is the email address. We'll see you after the break. Don't go away. Female empowerment. That is a Supreme Court Justice. The DEI hire, Katanji Brown Jackson is for some reason dressed as what looks like an overgrown rag doll on Broadway talking about female empowerment. This is a Supreme Court justice, by the way. Now, I'm not against, you know, Supreme Court justices having hobbies, but maybe maybe pick up like fly fishing or something. I like maybe, maybe a Supreme Court justice taking time to be on Broadway for some reason. Maybe not the priority. Just a thought. Okay. All right. Hey. A lot of things going on outside of, well, just, just in general outside. I know we talked about Iran a lot, so we're just trying to rain things in. Lots of things going on. It's time to get to the point. Get to the point.
- [22:37]
Guest/Commentator
Get to the point.
- [22:40]
Host
All right, first up here, getting to the point. This made me mad, dude. This is from an outlet in Arizona. Arizona Governor vetoes license plate honoring Charlie Kirk. I should have, I don't know, a lot of stuff going on today. Should have had the wherewithal to have the actual photo of the license plate. Basically it was a license plate with turning points, emblem and Charlie and it just says for Charlie. And that is a thing that you're allowed to do. There is proposal processes for license plates. This one specifically featured Charlie and a Lot of patriotic coloring. And the Turning Point emblem, it would have been a license plate that you're allowed to pay additional money for cost, like 25 bucks per year. It was a bill that was sponsored by conservative Jake Hoffman in the state of Arizona that passed and was then condemned by the governor and vetoed. Say, you can't have this license plate. She said it was gross. Oh, sorry. The people condemning the veto say it's gross partisanship. Because what Turning Point USA and what Charlie's entire career and life's mission was is to promote American values, which is not partisan, by the way. So why she said this is too partisan and can't be on license plate is beyond me and beyond anybody, but yet it was vetoed. Now, just for reference here, and this I don't think was in this article. This, this got me good and frustrated. And I went and saw what is possible to put on an Arizona license plate. Arizona has a bunch of different license plates. One, I would hope they could override this veto, but two, Alice Cooper has a license plate in, in the state of Arizona. Yeah, the. The super controversial rock star who is known for throwing a chicken into the crowd and that chicken being ripped to shreds, having guillotines and electric chairs and hangings as a part of his show on stage. That guy has a license plate in the state of Arizona. Now, it's tied to a nonprofit that he started, which maybe does some good, maybe, I don't really know. But the bottom line is, okay, so if that guy isn't a figure that is controversial enough to take him off a license plate, how in the literal F is Charlie Kirk? I just. Yeah, I hope that there's enough votes to override the veto because it's a nice looking license plate and I, I think it's ridiculous that the governor of the state vetoed it. All right, well, now that I'm good and mad, let's get to point 2. Trump administration bans foreign nationals for more small business loans, which comes as a shock to no one. Actually, it comes as a shock to me saying, hold on, foreign nationals were able to get small business loans. The Trump administration's Small Business Administration under Administrator Kelly Loeffler announced an expanded ban prohibiting foreign nationals and non citizens from accessing SBA guaranteed loans, including bond programs, micro loans, up to $50,000 in small business loans, and child care centers, to which I have to say, this was a thing that was happening. We have to ban this. This is like one of those things. Like, why, why was this even A thing to begin with. I'm glad it's being banned. I'm glad the administration has taken a look at this. But why is this something that needed to be banned? This is almost. Producer Glenn's gonna roll his eyes because we're kicked off of YouTube. This is almost like the whole, you know, having rules against boys competing in girls sports like the founding fathers would be like, hold on, why is this a thing that we need to put a law against? But for some reason, non Americans were able to get SBA loans. Again, glad it's being taken care of. Thank you, President Trump. Also, WTF did we even have this to begin with? This doesn't make any sense whatsoever. What's. Yeah. Whatsoever in any, any context. All right. Oh, wow. Next point, see US Intelligence. This from CNN US Intelligence Community ramps up warnings of possible retaliatory strikes by Iran. Yeah, I think the lamestream media here is trying to rile up Americans because I think the polling has come out to show that not, not really a bunch of people are super against anti anything President Trump does as the lefty media wants. And so they're using these types of headlines to be like, hey, you should be afraid because the, the, the terrorist state that is Iran is, might, might get serious here. Now that I don't want to belittle, you know, the war of what's going on because obviously, you know, it would be great if none of this had to happen. But at the same time, if one thing can be proven is that Iran is not the formidable fighting force that, that lives are apparently trying to make them out to be. Though there is no specific credible threats to the U.S. homeland. CNN still went with this headline. Now they're talking about, I think specifically defense contractors and people in the region. But what this says to me is, hey, we're going to try and make people as scared as possible, which I guess is their only job if they can't get people to go against the President. All right, this from the New York Times. And just because we're cut for time, this will be the last one we do. Let's see. President Trump could restart California's oil pipeline with Cold War era law. A New York Times opinion piece says the Justice Department issued a legal opinion last week stating that President Donald Trump has the authority to invoke the Defense Production act of 1950, a Cold War era law to overrule California's state regulators and approve a restart in the offshore oil pipeline operated by the Texas based offshore of the Santa Barbara coast. Texas based stable Offshore, that's the name of the company. All right? If you're not familiar with this, you're not hip to this. California has a bunch of wackadoodle laws, which is why the refineries in California are closing, I believe. Was it Chevron or Valero? Somebody just left California, like last week, which. Oil prices are going up all over the place because supply and demand, Iran, that's. That's happening all over the country. It is happening threefold in California. I filled up my wife's car this morning because I wanted to go to the gym. She left me four miles in the tank. And that's a separate thing. But gas. Gas is expensive and especially expensive in California. The Supreme Court, I guess, said that President Trump, hey, because of, you know, wartime abilities, you can overrule California's wackadoodle laws, saying, ah, no oil off the coast of California. Instead, we're gonna import all of our oil from terrorist countries. And that's, that's better somehow, for some reason. Uh, so hopefully President Trump opens that up and oil prices continue to go. Well, I guess, say stay stable. They're not going to go down with the conflict in the Middle east at the moment, but at least they won't go up as much if President Trump can override those wackies in California. Uh, all right, that's. That's all we're gonna have time for. And get to the point. A couple fun one. Couple fun ones coming up in official business. When. When official capacity people say things in their official capacity, we make fun of it on official business. That is coming up next. TPT tpusa.com is the email address. If you'd like to send along your thoughts, comments, concerns, criticisms. We'll be right back after the break. Don't go away. Speaking in tongues for 800.
- [30:49]
Narrator/Reporter
A 1996 Oakland School Board decision made many aware of this term for African American English.
- [30:55]
Host
Ken, what be eonics, you mother. In case that was hard to hear, he said this. This turn and Ken Jennings. The answer was Ebonics. But obviously in jeopardy. You have to answer the question with a question. So say, what is ebonics? He said, what be ebonics? Oh, as much as I dislike Ken Jennings political positioning, that, that, that was funny. That's objectively funny. All right. Speaking of funny, we love to get to the funny stuff. Uh, it is time for official business. All right. Up first in official business, which is the business being conducted by elected officials and bureaucrats of all type. Anytime they say anything, it is official business. Senator Van Holen is apparently back from El Salvador. I'm not entirely sure when he got back. I thought he was vacationing with what's his face over in that maximum security prison. Even though that guy got brought back, I thought. I thought Senator Van Holland was palling around over there with the illegals because I think that's his favorite thing to do. Despite my knowledge, he is back in the United States of America asking questions to folks. He got the former DHS Acting Secretary Chad Wolf trying to tie him to something. And then this is where these Senate hearings go off the rails. And it is kind of humorous for us. He thought he was gonna get one answer, right? The first rule of an attorney is don't ask questions you don't already know the answer to. He thought he was gonna get one answer, and when he turned out to get a very reasonable answer, he kind of threw a little bit of a hissy fit. This is official business. This is cut 12. Senator Van Holen, the illegal martini making
- [32:49]
Narrator/Reporter
guy, you would agree that people have the constitutional right to due process, right? Correct. Would you agree with Kristi Noem, who characterized Renee Goode as a domestic terrorist? Is Renee Goode a domestic terrorist, in your view? I've been very clear on this point. When that incident occurred, as well as the Preddy incident as well, is to let that investigation play out before any comments are made about the motives of any of the individuals involved, including the law enforcement officer. So clearly it was wrong to label them domestic terrorists, right? Again, I don't. I'm not at the department. I don't know what the information she had. If you're asking me my opinion, I would have wait till the investigation play out before I rendered any decision. So you think it's still an open question as to whether or not they're domestic terrorists? Again, I'm going to let the investigation. It sounds like you do, which I think you know, the country has seen the videos
- [33:43]
Host
there. There is a senator looking for an answer. Did you. Do you agree with this? Not. I'm not sure, sir. There's a whole investigation that needs to play itself out, and I'm not going to comment. Which is, by the way, what Krissi Noem should have said. Just. Just for the record, to get that out there, she should have not come out and said things immediately. Getting in front of social media. I understand the thought process which makes elected officials or appointed officials think they have to get in front of the online media crowd. Uh, but that wasn't. Wasn't great on her Part Senator Van Holen thinks I'm gonna pigeonhole this guy into this. And he says what Kristi Noem should have said is, I'm gonna wait for the investigations to play out. We've all seen the videos. Yeah, okay, well, that exactly. I'm gonna play wait for the investigation to play out. Didn't get the answer that he wanted, then threw a little bit of a hissy fit, which tends to be the case with Libs. I want to get producer Glenn. I'm gonna skip this one and go to cut 14. This is Representative Pramila Jayapal in regards to the SAVE Act. In regards to voter ID, here's just another example. And again, I know we talked about this at length in the first segment, but these are just too juicy and good. Here is Congresswoman Jayapal basically saying, you are an idiot because you can't. Well, you are an idiot because you can't get an ID and nobody can get an ID. And why would anybody expect that? Cut 14.
- [35:03]
Guest/Commentator
So their new tactic seems to be around going after mail in ballots and forcing IDs for people. And remember that if you have to have an id, you have to come up with a birth certificate. Your birth certificate. 50% of Americans don't have birth certificates. 50% of the country, 50% of women who are married have a birth certificate where the name is different from. From your id. And so if you have to have a birth certificate, that's also going to be a big challenge. So that's now what they're focusing on.
- [35:39]
Host
I have learned something new today, and is that 50% of Americans apparently don't have a birth certificate, which means that 50% of Americans need to be deported. Not, not obviously American citizens. But, you know, how are we supposed to know? How, how are we supposed to know if you're an American citizen? Governor Newsom himself said, I can't find my birth certificate. Who has their birth certificate? Freaking. A lot of people, like responsible people, have their birth certificate. And if you don't, if it got lost in transit, I know people move around, the filing cabinet is placed in a different place. Maybe it got lost in a fire. A bunch of different reasons. Guess what? You can go to the county and get a birth certificate. I know from firsthand experience, having had two kids in the last couple years, they don't automatically give you a birth certificate. You have to apply to go get the birth certificate from the county in which your kid is born. Maybe that not the case where you live, but where I live, you have to go get Your birth certificate. Which tells me, too, that anybody can go get a birth certificate. It may be it's an extra layer of work, but if you can't figure that out, how to sort that out with the county that issues that birth certificate, maybe you shouldn't vote in the first place. Okay, last one. He'll play here on official business. Maybe we'll see if we have time for much more. This is official business. Coming out of the Wackadoodle Foca Hondas, the Native American that represents the good people of Massachusetts. This is Senator Elizabeth Warren. Well, let me just play this, and we will watch and discuss on the other side. Cut 15.
- [37:12]
Guest/Commentator
Here we are well into the second week, and it is still the case that, that the Trump administration cannot explain the reasons that we entered this war, the goals we're trying to accomplish, and the methods for doing that. The one part that seems clear is that while there is no money for 15 million Americans who lost their health care, there's a billion dollars a day to spend on bombing Iran.
- [37:41]
Host
There is no explanation, aside from all the explanation they've already given and the 50 years of explanation that America has had of like, hey, these people keep chanting death to America and they really want to blow up the United States of America. And if they get a nuke, and the fact that President Trump ran on not letting Iran get a nuke, despite all of that, there's no explanation for any of these things that they have thoroughly explained. Absolutely not. Her native people, the native people of the upper white middle class, actually upper class in the greater Boston area. I think that's probably where she's from. Massachusetts. Also, too. The. The idea that this is actually. Do we have time for this? I'm gonna make a very, very quick point, especially because it relates to our side of how we talked, talk about things and deal with things. As I think we've all learned. If we haven't learned it recently, we've known it all along. The world is a big and complicated place. You may not agree with what President Trump is doing in Iran. You may not agree with sending money to Ukraine or sending military aid to Ukraine. And that's not really what I want to talk about. The very brief point I want to make is that the United States of America is the most powerful, prosperous country in the world. As the most powerful and prosperous country in the world, you have to be able to do two things at once. Two things, multiple things at once. Just because something is happening here, for this instance, Iran, doesn't mean that you can't also take care of other problems going on here. Money is fungible is. I think what I'm ultimately trying to say. Resources are fungible. Just because something is going on in one place doesn't mean you can't also take a look at things going on in another place. Basically, what I'm saying is Senator Warren makes the argument, I can't believe we're, you know, doing things in other parts of the world when there's no money in this. And I recognize, too, people on our side of the aisle do that very same thing. What I'm thinking of saying is, ultimately, it doesn't entirely make sense because us, as the world's greatest superpower, need to be able to do two things at once. That's what I'm getting at. And so what I'm saying is Elizabeth Warren. Senator Warren's argument here kind of falls flat on top of the. Well, nobody's explained it. Aside from all the explanations. Uh, I don't know. I think Elizabeth Warren should get back in her teepee and get away from microphones. All right, that is. That has been official business. New segment coming up. What is it? Take that Tuesday with a one new singer coming up after the break. Tptpsa.com don't go away. We'll be right back. Friend thought you were cute. I was wondering if you're single. I am. Sweet. I'm going to go get him. Okay. Yo, what's up, dude? My friend thought you were cute. I was wondering if you were single. What? My friend thought you were cute. I was wondering if you were single.
- [40:41]
Guest/Commentator
I am, in fact, single.
- [40:43]
Host
Sweet. Come meet her real quick. There he is, right here.
- [40:50]
Narrator/Reporter
Nice to meet you.
- [40:50]
Host
Nice to meet you.
- [40:51]
Guest/Commentator
I'm Nora.
- [40:52]
Host
Nora, I'm Isaac. Nice to meet you, Isaac. Where are you from?
- [40:55]
Guest/Commentator
Utah.
- [40:56]
Narrator/Reporter
Utah.
- [40:58]
Host
Okay.
- [40:58]
Guest/Commentator 2
What about you?
- [40:59]
Host
I'm from Oregon.
- [41:05]
Guest/Commentator
Yeah, of course.
- [41:07]
Host
Yes.
- [41:10]
Narrator/Reporter
Diamonds remain.
- [41:11]
Host
David. All right, David. Sorry. Now, I don't know if there's a future girlfriend for you, but that. That's great. That's fantastic. 1. It's great Internet content. I don't know either of these people, but I'm going to tell them that they're this other random person, thought they were cute. And then. And then the. The two exchange contact information, hopefully, which leads to a first date, hopefully leads to a long lasting, loving relationship. Hopefully leads to marriage, and hopefully leads to kids, grandkids, old age, all of the things that generally come with marriage. I am pro that. Also. I. Well, I buried, maybe not buried the lead. Today's my anniversary. Eight years married to my wife. Something like 15 years together, something like that. So pro marriage. We should all be pro marriage. This is a good thing. Despite the fact that this may be ill gotten gains. This is. I'm pro this happening. Anyways, Holy cow. Cutting up way too much time for our brand new segments on this Tuesday, the inaugural Take that Tuesday. Take that Tuesday. Uh, because I got. I. I'm now thrown off. I don't even know what we're taking on that. Oh, here we go. That's good. It's good that we ate up time because this is a very, very short Take that Tuesday. We only got one clip here. And is the President of the United States. Uh, he said this over the weekend when talking to Latin American leaders. So Rubio gets up there. Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, speaks a bunch of Spanish. President Trump then gets up there not being able to speak Spanish and then explains why it is that he's not going to speak Spanish. Uh, this is the inaugural Take that Tuesday. Take that, foreigners. Cut 17.
- [43:11]
Guest/Commentator 2
He's got a language. He's got a language advantage over me because I'm not learning your damn language. I don't have time. I was okay with languages, but I'm not going to spend time learning your language. That much I won't do. Just give me a good interpreter. Interpreter, very important.
- [43:32]
Host
And take that, foreigners, I'm not learning your damn language. I. You know, so here's the thing. A bunch of libs online really, really just hit President Trump on that. It was all over the blue skies and the threads of your Internet worlds. How dare he say that? But also, talk about the most thoroughly reasonable thing. Hey, look, appreciate you. Love you. Sure. We'll help you out when we can. We won't when we don't want to. I'm not gonna learn your language. Sorry. Obviously, too, he was making a joke. Rubio saying, you know, whatever he said in Spanish, I don't speak Spanish and I'm not learning it. And then President Trump can say, I'm not learning your language. Clearly a joke. And two libs took that incredibly seriously. How dare he? How dare you what? Not learn a language that we don't speak in this country predominantly or officially. Now we don't have an official language. Maybe we should make English the official language. But yeah, not learning a language. Pete Hegseth also, maybe I should have pulled this clip as well. Came up in after President Trump and said, I only speak American. Which, of course, there were more lefty Internet trolls saying, it's English. It's not American. Yeah, that's part of the joke. I only speak American. Is. Yeah, it's. It's. It's a joke again. Sorry, Sorry, libs. That things can consistently go right over your head. But that. Yeah, so there's that. Wow. Take that, Tuesday. I like that. I like the theme song. And I'm gonna have to get used to it.
- [45:07]
Guest/Commentator 2
That.
- [45:07]
Host
That. That threw me off quite a bit. That's okay. All right, Reading your mailbag. Questions, comments, emails coming up right after the break. Don't go away. Tptbsa.com if you'd like to be included. We'll be right back after the break. Don't go away. Things that my boyfriend does not know. Proposal. Oh, so you do know what that is. Yes. I am so pro. I actually love to hear thoughts on this. Tptpsa.com is the email address. You do have thoughts on this. How do you feel about women putting on the pressure to get married? I'm pro that as somebody who had it happen to me, which was honestly one of my greatest regrets, is not getting married sooner than again was with my wife for a very long time before we got married. Should have got married sooner. That's probably on me. Also on her in some way, but, you know, should have proposed sooner. I am pro. Women saying, oh, so you do know what a proposal is. Cool. Get on top of it. Because I would be on her side. Yeah, dude, get on top. Go like, do the. Do the whole thing. Trust me, it's gonna make your life way better, more fulfilling. Fantastic. Do it. I am pro. Pressure being put on. At the risk of jabbering on a little bit too long, my wife set an ultimatum when we were in the process of getting engaged. And it wasn't an ultimatum. Curious about your thoughts on this to dbta.com it wasn't an ultimatum of like, hey, you better propose to me or I'm going to dump you. It was a, you better propose to me or I'll propose to you, which is way, way worse. So she set a deadline of her birthday and I proposed. Odd that I was like, absolutely not. We're gonna have this herbie. I'd rather get dumped. So I'm pro. Pressure being put on the young men. Okay. TPT. TBSA.com is the email address. Like love would love to see any and all of your emails coming to us on the email line. First email coming to us from Christie on the topic of the screaming libs. Remember we played that video of libs getting together just screaming their hearts out. She says this. A dog's hearing is like a 10,000 times more sensitive that than humans. I'm not sure if that number is correct. That seems a little bit high, but I get what you're going for. Someone should call. Should have called PETA on her poor pooches. That is a good point. Those libs just screaming their poor little heads off could have upset some dogs who, by the way, if you didn't know, have 10,000 times the hearing capacity as humans. Which now that I have the full context of the email, I do accept your assertion that they are 10 times, 10,000 times more sensitive because of course that would those poor poochies. Sheldon, on the same topic of the screaming libs, he says it's a prelude to things getting worse. Says you showed their screaming libs in the field. He says this. At least they're all doing it
- [48:15]
Guest/Commentator
or
- [48:15]
Host
I said at least they're all doing it. Not getting violent. He says though. And yet this is them working themselves into a frenzy so they can conduct some horrible things. So yes, there is that also argument. Sheldon often brings us down back to reality. I kind of have some sometimes these aloof, optimistic takes and opinions and Sheldon very often very much appreciate your emails, Sheldon. But brings us back down to reality, which sometimes is a little bit more sobering. So there's that. Greg, notice this. Yesterday we played a clip from Jesse Jackson Jr. Calling out all the presidents who said, you don't know Jesse Jackson senior. By the way, maybe we should do a bigger because we got some emails saying, hey, Jesse Jackson was also a racist. I think I mentioned that, but that wasn't the point of the segment yesterday, so we didn't get really into it. But we can if you want to. Tpt. Anyways, Greg points out, did you notice that Al Sharpton was standing on the screen and When Jesse Jackson Jr. Called out the three Dem presidents, he like sunk back and sat down, hid in the crowd. I'm not, I'm not down for this. I did notice that. I didn't point it out, but I think. You know what, I don't want to steal your thunder, Greg. I didn't notice it in time. I did notice it at some point, but yeah, you're right. Should have. Should have put that on. Last but not least, John submits a suggestion for pronouncing the NYC mayor's name Zor what? Mambi Pamby. That's in the running. Good suggestion, John. Thank you. That's gonna do it for us. Date. Appreciate you sticking around tuning in. We'll see you tomorrow. Same time, same place. God bless America.