Loading summary
Transcript1 lines
- [00:00]
A
This is an iHeart podcast. The Nobel piece of crap prize didn't go to who we all think it should have gone to, obviously. Also the second safest city in America. It is unbelievable. Which means when I tell you, you're going to be like, I literally don't believe that. Well, we dug into some of the criteria and it you makes sense. And to say it's the safest city, second safest city in America is just a total and complete and other farce and mortgage fraud for all. All that and more coming up on this episode of Turning Point tonight. My name is Joe Bob. Thanks so much for tuning in. Together we are charting the course of America's cultural comeback. This is Turning Point tonight. Now again, we like to be, you know, have some levity on this show. We appreciate all of the emails of the memes that you folks send, the hilarity and the fun that we have on this show. But I have to also acknowledge that it has been a month since Charlie Kirk's assassination, September 10th of last month. And with that, just the timing ended up working out, I guess. Or it ended up being interesting timing where last night I was in North Dakota and was able to give a speech to the Turning Point USA chapter over there in front of Glenn Beck. And if you watched it, I so appreciate all of the emails and texts and messages that I've gotten. It was, it was a fantastic, very special event that honestly is quite moving for me. And so if you, if you, if you saw it and you sent an email, you've sent a message on any of the platforms, I know that. I greatly appreciate it. I can't get to all of them, but it was a very special evening again in the face of a terrible tragedy one month ago today. But I think I tweeted this afterward. It's, you know, I had a lot of emotions going into a lot of mix of emotions going into it. But after talking to all of the tour staff there and reuniting with them and then seeing the crowd of I think 2500 people who Charlie had impacted, the, the emotion that trumped them all was hopefulness. So it was a fantastic event. Looking forward to going on to more of those Turning Points Touring Point USA tours, I believe next I will be in Indiana with Tucker Carlson. So if you're around that area, would love to see you. You can email the show anytime you want. TBT tpusa.com we love seeing each and every one of your emails and we do see them all. Sometimes it's difficult to respond well, but tptp USA.com love to see in your thoughts, comments, concerns, criticisms Even@TPTP USA.com now one of the biggest stories that I think is just being entirely overlooked is, is one of the Supreme Court cases that has been taken up by the courts, the highest court, the land's highest court. And interestingly enough, some of the arguments being made and the questions being asked by some of the dei higher judges, justices make it a really interesting case. If you're not familiar with this, there's a, I'll set up the case briefly. There's, there was a law in Colorado called the minor conversion therapy law. It was passed in 2019 and effectively what it said, and again, there's a lot of nuance to it, but just effectively what it said is that in therapy, a patient or a child, in this case a child patient could not be talked out of being or being transgender or changing their gender by the therapist. In other words, if a 12 year old kid sits down in a therapist's office and says, I think I'm the opposite gender by law, the therapist is not allowed to say, no, you're not. And even softer than that, maybe they're not even allowed to say, well, can we think about that a little bit? What do we, you know, maybe let's, let's unpack that before we dive so headfirst into something that, you know, know, everybody knows is going to make your life substantially more difficult. You are not allowed to push back at all because the Colorado legislature called that quote, unquote, conversion therapy therapy. Also in the text of the law, it bans a bunch of stuff that wasn't happening and then includes therapy in that it says something along the lines of you can't do shock therapy to try and get the kid to stop being a transgender you, you know, we're banning shock therapy and cognitive behavior therapy, which again, if you combine that with shock therapy. Yeah, shock therapy is insane. That, that, that, that is crazy. And cognitive behavior therapy is a normal thing that a lot of people who go to therapists do. And if in the process of cognitive behavioral therapy, the therapist says, hey, maybe you're not the opposite sex, that's illegal in Colorado as of 2019. Well, of course that came to the Supreme Court because therapy is speech is a conversation between two individuals, you know, unless it's group therapy. But in most cases a patient and a therapist, it's clearly protected under free speech. This seems to be a no brainer. At least you would think so until the oral arguments happened earlier this week. We all are familiar with the DEI hire Ketanji Brown Jackson. Remember when Joe Biden said, I'm going to pick a black woman, which was, on its face, discriminatory and probably against the law. Law. But he did. He picked Katanji. And she's been known to ask some very, very stupid questions. We've got some audio here, and I want to play about a minute and a half of it, but I'll probably jump in and kind of explain or reiterate what she's trying to say and help everybody continue to understand that I think Katanji Brown Jackson is not very smart. This is again, an ongoing theme here, and I think this is going to continue smarter. Evil or. Sorry, cynical or evil or lying or evil or just dumb. Those are. Those are the options for people on the lib side of the aisle. And again, remains to be an open case for one of the Supreme Court justices. Let's go ahead and play cut eight and I'll jump in where it feels appropriate. As I understand it, the First Amendment protects the communication of messages, expression, etc. Am I right about that? I mean, you're communicating and that's what the First Amendment is about, correct? Just struggling with whether a therapist who is acting in their professional capacity to help someone achieve their goals is really expressing the kind of message or expressing a message for First Amendment purposes. I mean, I understand if Ms. Childs here were writing an article about conversion therapy or writing or giving a speech about it, but it's just a little puzzling to me that she would stand in a different position than a medical professional who has exactly the same goals, exactly the same interests, and would just be prescribing medication for that rather than. Okay, so we're going to jump in here because the first part of that, right, I can give some grace for Supreme Court justices who are asking for ridiculous questions in order to build a case and get to an ultimate point. That kind of happens all the time. So Katanji Brown Jackson says. So let me get this straight. So a conversation that. That is protected under free speech under the First Amendment, correct? Yes. And. Okay, go. Maybe she's building her case, but as we're seeing right now, the case that she's making isn't anywhere near what she would have, quote, unquote, been building towards. It seems that the first question that she asked was possibly even a genuine curiosity of, hey, is a conversation between two individuals. Actually, actually, that's free speech, right? And the attorney goes, correct. Yes, it is. Katanji thank you. But then she tries to make this case in which she says, well, since a therapist is giving therapy, and that's in some ways, you know, a medical science, is. Is there any difference between that and a doctor prescribing medication? Because a doctor prescribing medication, let's say he's writing a script out to go to the pharmacy to get whatever medication. Well, that's not free speech because that's licensed and that's regulated by a bunch of different regulatory agencies. So. So technically, the doctor doesn't have free speech to write whatever prescription he wants because it has to be within his professional capacity. No, therapy is not like that. Therapy, if you, if you don't know this, and, and maybe it's because I'm married to a therapist, is not an exact science. Now, I understand some people might argue, well, medicine isn't an exact science either. Yeah. But there's quite a bit more that we know about medicine than we do of the human mind, because you're, like, new to the way that people think and I guess, philosophy more broadly. We've been trying to figure out how the human mind works since the dawn of time, and some progress has been made, but not a whole heck of a lot. So the argument to say that, whoa, okay, a therapist and their client is basically the same as a doctor and the patient. If the doctor's prescribing meds. No, it's not. And while I guess I can understand somebody making that argument, it's astonishing to me that it's coming out of a Supreme Court Justice. Let's continue on here. I think the attorney gives some responses as well, and her talking with the client think that they would have exactly the same goals. Because this involves a conversation. Yes, there is a back and forth. So this court has recognized many times in cases like McCullen that A1 on one conversation is a form of speech. And that's exactly what's going on with Ms. Childs and her clients. So when she engages in those conversations, she's encouraging them to achieve their goals. She's discussing concepts of identity and behavior and attractions and how they fit together. Together. This is an ongoing active dialogue where she's helping them to explore their goals. And that absolutely has to be protected by the First Amendment. That's about it. That's. That's the only necessary part there. But the main point is that Katanji, Brown, Jackson1 asked a question which you might think, okay, she's, she's building up to something and then gives us that, like, oh, okay. Is. Is it. Is it in the attorney, too? I'm not sure that guy's name. I probably should have pulled that masterfully and without belittling her too much, because I probably would have been pretty snarky there. As a guy who almost considered going to law school, I do consider myself to be the legal expert on this show. Between, you know, me, myself, and I, as a guy who considered going to law school, I. It would be very difficult in that situation to not be super snarky to a Supreme Court justice. But the attorney then says, yeah, well, she's. It. It's. It's speech. We're. We're not talking about medication that can alter the biology. Maybe. Maybe that's it. Maybe Katanji Brown Jackson, again, famously said, she's not a biologist, so maybe she doesn't quite understand how medicine works. That's possible. But the attorney said, no, this is. This is a conversation. Conversations are protected by free speech. In the context of therapy or in the context of you discussing life at the barbershop or at a coffee shop or wherever it is that you might be discussing. It's all conversation. So, yeah, it's protected by free speech. This is one of those where it should be a slam dunk. It should be 9 0. I think the Supreme Court should rule. Of course, a therapist has the. The right, but in my opinion, the obligation to try and talk a kid out of becoming the. Becoming. Trying to appear as a different gender. But, you know, one of the. This is one of those where if one or two of the justices peels off, we could win the case, but it could mean something way worse for the. The idea of. Of the spirit of the free speech First Amendment, that this could be really interesting going forward. Um, speaking of lawyers and legal experts. Legal experts, I came across this article in the New York Times that I just. I wanted to make sure I shared with all of you fine folks. Uh, the New York Times has been doing several different pieces trying to diminish the achievements of President Trump more specifically around the law. Now, I want to get to what some of these legal. Legal experts, again, this is the New York Times are saying about President Trump and then kind of lay out the fact that all of the things that they are concerned about either are. Come from laziness or lies, though. Laziness or lies. Not stupidity or lies. Uh, the New York Times has this article, and in the article it says this. Eight months. I'm using my scary voice. Eight months into his second term, Trump has taken a wrecking ball to those beliefs. The. The beliefs that, hey, we're not really in a ton of legal trouble here. Um, one of the former officials who they say served in both Republican and Democrat administrations, including in President Trump's first term, which, again, they don't name anybody. It's just a. It's. You have to trust us. This is. A legal expert says this. What's happening is an anathema to everything we've ever stood for in the Department of Justice. Dun, dun, dun. Uh, you know, we could go on here, but I don't want to take up too much time continuing on in this ridiculous article. Uh, here's the thing with President Trump. Uh, he has pushed the boundaries on laws. That. That is an objective fact, and there's nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with continually trying to test the boundaries of what the Constitution allows for. The administration, in this case specifically the President of the United States. That's what the courts are for. We've all seen so many headlines. District federal judge or a federal judge denies President Trump doing whatever, whatever, whatever. Okay. And he appeals that to a higher court, and if that doesn't work out in his favor, he appeals it to a higher court and the Supreme Court says something. Whether or not they side with him, he is okay with that decision. I don't know that he's necessarily okay, but he respects that decision, which is entirely different from the past administration. Remember when President Biden tried to cancel student debt and the Supreme Court said, no, you can't do that, and then he tried it again, and they had to tell him again that you can't do that. That was an utter, ignorant. He was utterly ignoring the highest court in the land, which is ignoring the Constitution effectively, which is actually bad. People who talk about President Trump while pushing the boundaries. Yeah, these are all open questions. That's what the country is. There are questions about the constitutionality of a lot of different things that haven't necessarily been settled. That's why the Supreme Court exists. What President Trump is. Hasn't done is ignored the courts or defied the courts. He's tried to find different ways and different alternatives to get his. Get what he wants done, but he's never openly said, screw you, I'm gonna do what I want. Every single time he tries something that, you know, admittedly hasn't necessarily been tried, the courts take a look at it. And whatever the courts decide, President Trump generally respects, or at least up until this point, has respected all. All of the court's decisions. So to make the claim that the New York Times is making. We interviewed 50 legal experts saying that this is a terrible time. Is it really? Or are you people just lazy? You don't want to do the work? In trying to figure out what the Constitution allows by going through the legal process, which is what President Trump is doing, it seems ridiculous that we're in this position right now, but it also makes sense, especially in the context of the last couple decades of liberals have been able to do anything and everything they want because they have the backing of the media. Most importantly, and quite honestly, they don't really have a respect for law. And then when President Trump comes in and, yes, pushes the boundaries a little bit, but also respects the court's decision, they scream and cry that this is the end of democracy and oh my gosh, the world is coming to an end. What a disaster. Well, the first time President Trump openly defies the courts, let me know. Hasn't happened yet. And considering the fact that it hasn't happened yet, it's difficult for me to believe that it's going to happen anytime soon, if at all. Not like Joe Biden, who did do all of the things that they're accusing President Trump of. But nobody mentioned it then. But such is the case in the lib media controlled bubble and sphere of influence that, that they continue to try to have. I would have said continue to have, but I think we're making a lot of headway in the conservative movement coming up next year. On Turning Point tonight, we we got more Katie Porter. I know we got so many emails about Katie Porter. When we talked about her on Wednesday, we took the, well, we didn't take the day off. We were going to speech in North Dakota yesterday and played a couple interview clips last night. So we didn't talk about the new revelations of one Katie Porter, who is slowly becoming my favorite lib and again, favorite not necessarily because I agree with anything she says, but because she gives us great amounts of entertainment, especially on a Friday. Also the Nobel piece of crap prize. We'll talk about that among many other things coming up here on turning point tonight. TPTP USA.com love seeing each and every one of your emails. We will be right back after the break. Welcome back to Turning Point tonight where together we are charting the course of America's cultural comeback through the mockery of terrible lib ideas. You can email the show anytime you want. Tbtpusa.com love seeing each and every one of your emails. You can also go subscribe to our YouTube channel. Subscribe and rumble page and my Facebook page or Instagram, all of the social medias, but specifically YouTube, where all of this content ends up going. Also, the full Michael Knowles, in case you were watching last night, the full interview with Michael Knowles. I know he got a little bit cut off with some of the timing. The full Michael Knowles interview is up there. We'll also be putting my full speech from North Dakota last night. We've also got some really interesting interviews from way back when with myself and Charlie. And, and by interviews, I mean two guys joking around about nonsense, which is, which is actually very, very fun. But you can find all of that on the Turning Point tonight, YouTube CH channel, TPT on YouTube. You can also send us, send us emails whenever you'd want. Love seeing each and every one of those. The Nobel Peace of crap prize is what I'm now calling it because it was revealed today that President Donald Trump, who's brokered peace across many nations and is in the midst of brokering peace in the Middle east, the likes of which Joe Biden could never do, did not do, and many global leaders could not do. That guy didn't win. I'm sure you've already heard of that by now. Uh, instead it went to some Venezuelan lady, Maria Karina Machado, who is fighting communism over there in Venezuela. Now, again, that's, that's great. And all I. Not a fan of the Venezuelan government, as most Americans are not at this point in time. And some lady fighting communism in a country that doesn't really matter all that much. I don't know how much that should affect the rest of the world. Um, let's go ahead and let's, let's take this in a little bit of a timeline because I think this is really interesting, especially the media push in regards to President Trump's peace deal in the Middle east as of late. Um, graphic 11 shows something that is just so classic live. And then we'll work our way down from here. Uh, this is Representative Eric Swalwell who's talking about. You've been very close to a, quote, unquote peace deal since January 20th or January 20th. Um, he's talking about President Trump. It was supposed to happen day one. We are near day 300. Seriously, dude. It's so interesting too, because so many media outlets, including lib media outlets, and we'll get to a couple in just a second, have said credit to where credit is due. President Trump did a pretty dang good job here with Israel and Hamas there. And it looks to be if everybody, you know, does what they're supposed to do looking at you, Hamas, then everything should turn out. But Eric Swalwell is unhappy then. That didn't, that, that didn't happen. On day one, President Trump went on the campaign trail and said, yeah, I will make these deals day one. Uh, yeah, he said that. And nobody actually believed it. What is the old saying? People who love Trump take him, take him seriously, but not always literally. And people who hate Trump don't take him seriously, but always take him literally. The guy is, one, he's the president, United States. Two, he's a media figure. He, he climbed to the top of the media world, which is also very, very difficult to do. On top of climbing to the top of the New York real estate world. Very, very difficult things to do. You got to be a little bit of a showman sometimes. That, that's kind of the. Nobody actually thought within 24 hours of him being sworn in, he was going to solve one of the most complex conflicts in global history. Nobody actually thought that. So, yeah, Eric, it took a little while, but guess what? It's getting done. Uh, your pal Mr. Biden over there had quite a bit longer of a time to figure this out and, and didn't. Um, I think that picture, I think, was in response, the White House posted something when President Trump was passed a note, I think you've probably seen the video by now, Secretary Rubio passed him a note saying, hey, the Israel deal is pretty much there. And then they flipped to a picture of President Biden getting passed a note that said, you have something on your chin. And he goes, what? So, so there's that. That's where we are in the Nobel Peace of crap prize. But it is interesting in kind of combating Mr. Swalwell, what some of the lib media is saying. This is an article from the Wall street or first. Sorry, from the Washington Post. Uh, yes, Trump deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. His Gaza agreement, though still fragile, adds to an unprecedented peacemaking record. Holy cow. That's in the Washington Post. And yeah, it's an opinion section in the Washington Post. But the fact that the Washington Post published it to begin with is saying something that even libs who hate everything that Trump is doing are saying. This. This is still pretty good. It's like your. It's like your least favorite baseball team or sports team. Like, you have your favorite sports team, and then their rivals, at a certain point, there's some player on the team that you just hate, does something really well, and you're. That. That's a good Play. That's what's happening with Trump's Middle east deal again. Didn't win the Nobel Peace Prize again. Went to some lady in some other country for some reason. Uh, but President Trump actually addressed his record on his own. Um, watch this. Cut six. I know this, that nobody in history has solved eight wars in a period of nine months. And I've stopped eight wars, so that's never happened before. But they'll have to do what they do. Whatever they do is fine. I know this. I didn't do it for that. I did it because I saved a lot of lives. And that's the thing that bothers me so much about the Russia, Ukraine. Seven thousand people are dying a week. Young soldiers, they're almost all soldiers of Ukraine and Russia. So in theory, it doesn't affect us. No, but it's a terrible thing, and we'll get that solved, too. But nobody has ever done eight wars. Nobody's done eight wars in 30 years, let alone nine months. And he's absolutely right. I think what is super fascinating about President Trump that we're seeing in this second term, that it was difficult to see in the first term because he was bogged down by a bunch of the swamp there in D.C. is that I think he genuinely cares and doesn't want people dying, especially young men, especially soldiers who are dying for no good reason. In his mind, he thinks, well, yeah, why don't we all just get along, everybody, make as much money as you can, do as well as you can, prosper as much as you can, and let's end all the wars. I think he genuinely cares about stopping conflict around the world, which is great. That's what you want in a Commander in Chief, but again, not worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize, despite, you know, doing all of the peace. Venezuela, by the way, is still. Still pretty chaotic. They. They effectively have a dictator there, and the lady that won the Nobel Peace Prize isn't even really the opposition. She was supporting another guy who was running against the effective dictator Mad in Venezuela. So, again, I. I'm not sure where the threshold for winning a Nobel Peace Prize actually comes in. Actually, I do. Turns out I looked into this because I feel like you guys might think this is interesting. The Nobel Peace Prize is decided by five Norwegian jackasses who all get together in a room and go through submissions for the Nobel Peace Prize. Well, who gets to be submitted for a Nobel Prize Prize? Literally, anyone. I kid you not. I looked into this, uh, a uni, so you can be anyone doing anything and who the people that are eligible to submit someone for winning the Nobel Peace Prize is pretty much anyone. Also university professors, previous laureates, members of academias, which. What does that mean? I, I'm a member of academia. Turning Point has Turning Point Academy. I, I, I'm not, you know, probably out. I, I probably aged out of that curriculum. But, yeah, I'm an academic. Maybe I should nominate producer Glenn for the Nobel Peace Prize. Um, certain government officials can nominate, depending on the prizes category. Uh, and you. They just have to receive the nomination before the January 31 deadline. And also, there's no, like, cost to submit a submission. I, I think it used to be, like, there was like, a paywall of, like, $25. Some professor somewhere could nominate you for the Nobe fries. It was like a $25 submission fee. That's gone now, too. So if you're a professor, or if actually, if you are, let's see, a member of academia or a member of the academies, not even sure what that means. Or a university professor, and I assume they can also mean community college professor or whatever, if you're in higher education, send me an email. I would like to get nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. I think that would actually be great for me, actually. Geez, man. I know this is a very satirical and sarcastic little segment here, but in all seriousness, somebody should nominate Charlie Kirk. That makes sense. Especially, you know, a month after his assassination, what other public figure sparked a religious revival around the most important country in the world, where, again, like Erica said, we didn't see riots in the streets. We didn't see buildings burning and cars burning or anything like that. We saw people in prayer vigils gathering together and remembering a great man. Well, wow. What? That's one of those things that pops in your head. I was being sarcastic. I still do want to win the Nobel Peace Prize, but I think there's another guy more deserving of that. And considering that literally anybody can nominate literally anybody else, and apparently literally anybody can win, like, again, this lady from Venezuela, for some reason, might as well take a shot at it. Who knows? Um, man, you know, we ran on a little bit longer there. Next segment, we're gonna get to Katie Porter. I promise that that's what we'll do. First up, next segment. There's more to love. And I'm not just talking about. Not just talking about what it says on her scale that. Get your, get your heads out of the gutter, guys. I'm talking about more content to love about the most unlovable person in politics. Nowadays tbtvusa.com is the email address. I'm sorry, that was, that was, that was too much. Also subscribe to our YouTube channel TBT Turning Point tonight where you can catch full length interviews with Charlie Kirk, Michael Knowles and a bunch of other fascinating people that you're going to want to hear from. We'll be right back after the break. Welcome back to Turning Point Tonight where together we are charting the course of America's cultural comeback through the mockery of terrible lib ideas. You can email the show anytime you want. TPTPUSA tptpusa.com you can also subscribe to our YouTube channel, the Turning Point Tonight YouTube channel where you see exclusive content including full length interviews like the one we played with Michael Knowles last night. Got cut off a little bit. You can see the entire thing there. You can see my entire speech from North Dakota which is my first Turning Point USA tour stop back since Charlie's assassination which happened again a month ago today. It's, it's, it's honestly difficult to believe that it's been that long. But yeah, you can, you can find a bunch of content at our YouTube channel. We're also going to put up eventually now it's not up yet but keep an eye out for it. Some of the, the older interviews and content that I shot with Charlie way back when up until actually very recently too. So YouTube channel and tptp.com is the email as promised. I don't want to, I don't want to. I don't lie to you folks. I, I know I've teased it before. I'm just gonna start playing it. Katie Porter, we talked about Katie Porter at length. She's a former Congress they, I think Congresswoman, but we'll just say Congress they because the haircut gives me very Frodo. Not Frodo, Lord Farquaad vibes. I guess maybe Frodo too. I don't know of, of Lord of the Rings and Shrek fame. Speaking of Shrek, this is, this is all bad. This is all going downhill. This is gonna get me thrown off the tv. Just making fun of this, this person. She is just, just an incredibly unlikable individual. We covered a lot of that on Wednesday. But of course the Internet is doing the Internet's thing and just making my job so much more fun to get to bring you more of Katie Porter. Now you may have seen these clips elsewhere. They've been flying around the Internet but they fly been flying around a bunch of other shows. Let's see which one should we go with first here. Let's play. Let's play cut one first. This is a. Another freak out that has popped up by the world's most unlikable. They. Half a million Californians dying prematurely to air pollution and other problems and the state could lose for. Get out of my shot. I wanted to tell you that that's actually incorrect. It's not that it's electric vehicles. It's that if we don't meet the commitments under the Paris climate report. Okay, it does. Okay. You also were in my shot before that. Stay out of my shot. Okay, I'm going to start again with electric vehicles. Saving us money. Perfect. Okay. This lady wants to lead the fourth largest economy on the planet. Definitely the temperament of a leader. She is a leader. I'm a leader. She said in the clip that we played on Wednesday. It also is funny too, because she's freaking out about this lady being in her shot. One of her staffers who's wearing a mask, by the way, like, what? Okay, you're in my. Get the f out of my shot. And the staffer was in the shot to say, actually, you said something very wrong. And I don't want to like, let you have that on camera. Let's correct that. And then she says, oh, well, you're still in my effing shot. Get out of my shot. I'm surprised she didn't like, spontaneously catch into flames. Like not. Not in like a. In a. In a dangerous way, but like that. That feels like like the little baby from the Incredibles movie who, when he's angry, he just bursts into a ball of flames and then settles back down. Or maybe like the Hulk. Like just she Hulk. This is so. We gotta stop with the Katie Porter thing because that. This is so. This is becoming. This is unbecoming of a show of this caliber. That being said, go ahead and play. Play Cut two. Oh, yes. This is why I didn't want to do. I need the lights off. The bright lights. I'm so sorry, but I am about to get on. Bernard, I need you to turn these off. These that are killing me. Hang on one second, everybody. We should put the computer up. Yes, yes, we should have. Yes, yes, we should have. Yes. Okay, everybody, I'm not that dark. I gave producer Glenn full reign to do with. He do with what he wanted was with that clip, and he took full advantage of that freedom there. Uh, but just so you know, that is not how anybody treats their staff. There's such thing as a tough boss. There is not that. That is not a tough boss. That's just being a B word. And yeah, it's, it's interesting. I. I'm super curious to see how this affects her, uh, her overall probability of winning the governorship of California. I'm super curious if libs turn on her. But there's also this sort of thing too that, that is just resurface. We actually all made fun of this when it happened. She's was circa 2022, maybe 2023 when she was back when she was in Congress. We pulled this clip because I thought, it's not her being an insane, crazy person, it's just her being a crazy person. Actually, let me, let me couch it or contextualize it in the way that Glenn contextualized it to me when he pulled the clip. She must have just gotten off of a verbal tirade of her entire staff the day before. She asked them, hey, does this look okay? They were probably fed up with her and they said, yeah, that looks great. Go out in public like this. Thomas Porter, does Alfred get minimum wage? If you return the Batman automobile, could you. Could you pay for the Green New Deal? Oh, my gosh. She. She's there in hall. It's. It's Halloween, and Katie Porter decided to go full blown. Like, if you're gonna. If you're gonna dress up for Halloween, fine. I guess I get it. I don't know. Like, everybody in the room is an adult. Like, you don't. Dressing up is generally for children. Unless you're going to a specific party with adults or you're dressing up with your children. If you're just dressing up to be dressed up in the halls of Congress, that. That's weird. And they're the party that calls us weird because we're like, hey, we don't. Well, in order to keep this segment on YouTube, I won't say what I was going to say, but they're calling us weird and hello. But seriously, she had a staff at this point in time that were like. She walked into the office and they're like, yeah, this good. Go out. Go. You go do your job. Representing the people of America in that outfit. That. That won't be insanely embarrassing for all of us at all. I don't know. I. I'm. I'm a big fan. I gotta. So we're gonna. We'll probably stop there with our Katie Porter for now, but I would imagine that there's going to be more content that'll bubble up, and I will attempt to bring it to you without also potentially Getting myself in trouble with the jokes that come to mind and I somehow don't have a filter to stop. So there is that briefly. Katie Porter is in California. She's running for the Governor of California. She was a congresswoman from California in Orange county, which is close to the LA area, which was named, I kid you not, the second safest city in America, Los Angeles. Now we all know Los Angeles is a bastion of safety. Nothing wrong ever happens in the City of Angels, which is why it's called the City of Angels. Nothing wrong ever happens, nothing bad ever befalls anyone in that city. The crime rate is effectively zero. People never protest in the streets, they never block traffic on the 101 freeway when I'm trying to get to Downey. They never do anything wrong in la. It's just as you're seeing on the screen, peace, joy, happiness and some cars burning. But that's, you know that, that's, that's just, that's just what that is. But the smart asset compared 50 largest cities based on their population and looked at the different variables and decided that LA was the, the second safest city. And when they put in the different things that they used to, the criteria that they used to measure what the safety ness of the city was, that's where I was like, oh that. Well there's your problem. They looked at things like property crime, they looked at things like vehicular mortality rate, which are two of the big metrics that I think put their, put their, put their weight on the, on the scale just a little bit. Uh, one, and this is not a good thing about Los Angeles. But because Los Angeles does not prosecute crime, people don't report property crimes. Yeah, you'll report a violent crime and there's a lot of violent crime in Los Angeles. But unfortunately if your mailbox gets hit with a bat by a, I don't know, crazy teenager or crazy meth head, what's the point in reporting that? You just, nothing's gonna happen. They're not gonna find the person. Your city isn't gonna be any safer. You just replace your mailbox. If you get graffitied on your garage, it, it's too much of a hassle to report it to the cops. So those statistics are gonna be insanely skewed because nobody reports the crime and if they do, they don't prosecute the crime to begin with. There's also the vehicular mortality rate, which I think is very simple. Nobody goes fast enough to get killed in Los Angeles. Cuz we're so busy, stuck in traffic. I, I clearly have a lot of experience with that. Especially recently I flew in and out of LAX to go to North Dakota and good Lord, Los Angeles is just the worst place to be in America. You can't, you can't die in a car crash when your car's only going five miles an hour down the 405. If you don't live in Los Angeles and you don't live in California with, with the traffic, there are people, God bless them. Uh, there are people. I have, I have friends who live in other parts of the country and they say, man, traffic is terrible. And I look around and go, what traffic? This is, this is, is the traffic in the room with us now. Because they have no idea what LA is like. But of course, yeah, LA is the safe, second safest city if you don't count all of the things that make cities safe and you skew the metrics. We got a lot more here on Turning Point tonight. We'll be right back after the break. TV USA.com, we'll be right back after this. Welcome back to Turning Point tonight, where together we are charting the course of America's cultural comeback through the mockery of terrible lib ideas. Tptposa.com is the email address that you can send us emails anytime you want, any time of day. It could be three in the morning and if I'm flying across the country, I might actually see it at three in the morning. You can also subscribe to our YouTube channel where you get a bunch of exclusive clips that don't necessarily air here, or at least air in different factions here. Like for example, the Michael Knowles interview that we played yesterday was cut off a little bit. The full Michael Knowles interview is on our YouTube page and we're going to be putting up a bunch of fun clips from the past with myself and Charlie and some even with Alex Clark, which I think you'll enjoy. This will be on our YouTube channel, Turning Point Tonight on YouTube. Go subscribe there. This is super interesting. And this is like, this is a, I think, spirit of the law versus letter of the law type of thing. We're not necessarily talking about laws here specifically, but it, it is a. Well, it has to be airtight or else nobody will believe it. And we're talking specifically about elections and I guess more specifically now, this is the third time I've said specifically in the last 15 seconds. But that's okay. The proposition ballots going out in the state of California right now. Uh, libs of TikTok put up a photo of some of the ballots and well, this is incredibly interesting to say the least. There are holes in the envelope that shield the votes from being seen by everyone else. You put your ballot in the envelope and then the envelope is opened blindly and counted in public view of anybody. Now the problem is, is the way California does voting, there's lots of people that can potentially handle that ballot before it actually gets to the counting station. And the worst thing that could happen is if the people handling that ballot were to, I don't know, peek and see which way people voted and I don't know, throw some of those ballots away. It's just, again, you would hate for that to happen. Of course it never, never would. That's just a, a, a, a figment of those conservative, those crazy conservatives imagination. Except for when stuff like this happens, uh, there's a hole in the envelope in which you can clearly see how somebody voted on the proposition coming up in November in the state of California. Now producer Glenn did some research. Why the heck are these holes there? What do you come up. What he came up with is so that people who are visually impaired are able to be able to know where to sign. If you're going to sign your, the, the mail, the envelope on your ballot, you got to, you got to get a sign in the right place. And those holes help folks to know where to sign the ballot. The problem is what are the chances that that hole lines up almost exactly with where you can see where the ballot is or what the, what the person voted. What are the chances of that? Now here's the thing. I will be, I will be as conciliatory as possible in this particular instance and say. I don't even know if that was intentional. Let's just say it wasn't. There still is a problem because if you can cheat, you may as well have cheated, right? Especially in elections. Elections need to be so airtight that even a sniff of somebody being able to falsify anything in the election can't, can't be around. You can't have that at all in any way, shape or form or else the election can be accused of being fraudulent. And if it's accused of being fraudulent, then that affects whether or not people believe in the election. And if people don't believe in the election, the election is a moot point anyway. If people don't believe that the election is fair and secure, you've lost the country effectively. At the end of the day. I don't want to, I don't want to say it doesn't matter. It does matter who wins elections, but what matters more is that the people believe the election. And if you have things like this, that especially in California where you can drop ballots off to, you know, really anywhere and anybody can turn em in, people go and pick up ballots from your front door. It, it's a crazy situation they have in California. If you have a state that allows that sort of thing and there's a possibility for those people to see how the individual voted, it's just as bad as if somebody did it on purpose. Is that, does that make sense? Martin Luther King interestingly and ironically said you must be above reproach, which is what elections have to be. Now he wasn't. So there's, there's that, um, but elections have to be above the threshold of ah, I hope that's good. No, it has to be air tight. And unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case in California. Tptvsa.com I got a break so we can get to our final segment in which which we can talk about more mortgage fraud for everyone. We'll be right back after this. Welcome back to Turning Point Tonight where together we are charting the course of America's cultural comeback through terrible through the mockery of terrible lib ideas. You can email the show anytime you want. TPT TPUSA. You can also send yourself to our YouTube channel. Go to YouTube, the Turning Point Tonight YouTube channel where you can find a bunch of exclusive content specifically to YouTube. Full interviews as well as some of the, some of the more fun interviews eventually. We're not there yet. We haven't put them up yet. Between myself and Charlie on Today, it is a month since he was assassinated in Utah. A somber day, but also a day in remembrance of a guy who did so much in so little time. Tptpc.com if you want to send any emails regarding that, any well wishes to the CK team or Erica also welcome@TPTP USA.com this is a little bit of a transition here but apparently everybody's doing mortgage fraud. I was not. I'm not and I maybe I should. I was unaware of the rampant mortgage fraud going on all around me and all around you all the time. Everybody is doing it and the only people being prosecuted are Donald Trump's enemies. Right? That's the only people who are being prosecuted because again, everybody does it. Or at least according to these folks over on cnn. Watch this and we will discuss aside for the for a second what Tish James and again we're still getting the details, but if it's related to this mortgage issue, I mean, this is something that everyone in America, or many people at least, if you're lucky enough to be able to buy a house in America, you deal with this, Right? The federal government doesn't go after all of these people for doing this. Does that. They do. Everybody does this. If you're, if you're lucky enough to buy a house, you have dealt with this. No, I haven't. And I don't think you at home have either. You know, I, I, I, I, I follow the rules. I, I thought I had to. But if also, this is a green light for me to inflate the property values. Yes. My house currently is worth $35 million. And I would use the equity in that house because, wow, it went up 34 and $700,000 in value, uh, just now as I revalued the house. I'm going to use that money, the equity, I have to take out a $25 million loan and purchase myself a yacht. Because apparently mortgage fraud just. Everybody does it. I'm missing out. Uh, I'm burying the lead here. Letitia James, the Attorney General in New York, is, was indicted for mortgage fraud, which we covered a while ago, which looks like she clearly did. Uh, but the idea that this is like some sort of political persecution only makes sense if literally everybody does it. I don't know anybody who's said, hey, this is my primary residence in a state that I'm not allowed to live in because I'm legally mandated to live in this other state. Uh, but both of these are my primary residents, according to the mortgage company, because that lowers my interest rate. Nobody does that. The idea, and maybe it is that more people do it that I actually don't know about, and maybe they're all friends with libs who go on CNN and know that all of our lib friends do this. Go have a good weekend and go commit some mortgage fraud, I guess, because everybody's doing it and you, they only prosecute Donald Trump's enemy. So if you're not one of those, you should be fine. That's going to do it for us here at Turning Point tonight. Have a great weekend. We will see you Monday. God bless America. This is an I Heart podcast.