Amy Coney Barrett Is a FRAUD: Here's How She Proved It | 7/15/26

Summary

Steve Deace Show, July 15, 2026

Episode Title: "Amy Coney Barrett Is a FRAUD: Here's How She Proved It"

---

Episode Overview

This episode centers on Steve Deace and co-hosts dissecting Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett's recent Congressional testimony about threats and security, juxtaposing her personal plea for safety with her judicial track record—particularly her rulings on immigration and citizenship. The hosts argue Barrett is a disappointment to conservatives, analyzing recent SCOTUS decisions and critiquing the right’s broader strategy of relying on the courts. Along the way, the show offers pointed commentary on immigration, judicial supremacy, American culture, and current headlines, blending deeply principled conservatism with signature snark.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

---

1. Amy Coney Barrett’s Congressional Testimony & Security Concerns

• [00:01–00:44] Clip of Barrett describing threats: bulletproof vest, children scared, swatting, anonymous threats.
  • Quote (Amy Coney Barrett):

    "Around the time of the Dobbs leak ... my security details sent me home with a bulletproof vest ... Six weeks ago I was the victim of a swatting. Many of us ... have received threatening, anonymous deliveries designed to intimidate and harass us." [00:26–00:44]

• Immediate hosts’ reaction: Sympathetic but critical—"left wing violence should be rooted out," but why only care about safety for judges, not Americans affected by illegal immigration?

---

2. The Hypocrisy of Judicial Advocacy

• [00:44–01:44]
  • Barrett seeks security from Congress but not public safety from the consequences of her and the Court’s recent “rubber stamp” on birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants.
  • Critique: She advocates for increased personal safety while disregarding policy decisions that affect national security.
• Quote (Steve):

  “Amy Coney Barrett didn't ask for increased deportation funding to keep the country safe from the illegal aliens she just gave a rubber stamp of citizenship to.” [00:44–00:54]

---

3. Immigration Policy & Enforcement Critique

• [01:44–02:16]
  • ICE instructed to cease most vehicle stops—slashing a major tool for deportations.
  • Trump publicly disagrees.
  • News story: Illegal alien sentenced for deadly crash gets less time than Jan 6th defendants.

---

4. Confrontation with Senator Thom Tillis

• [02:16–03:26]
  • Sarah Gonzalez presses NC Senator Thom Tillis on $700k in lobbyist funding and voting against the SAVE America Act.
  • Tillis dismisses the questioning as “remarkably silly.”
  • Notable Quote (Sarah):

    “Your constituents want to know why you're betraying them.” [02:53]

• Adds to the show’s narrative of political sellouts and insiders ignoring popular will.

---

5. Judicial Overreach: Jack Smith Monitoring Congress

• [03:29–04:12]
  • 44 members of Congress reportedly had comms monitored by Jack Smith’s Trump/J6 probe.
  • Host reaction: Examples of government overreach and politicized justice.

---

6. Trans Refugee Irony

• [04:12–05:02]
  • Story: American trans person flees to the Netherlands, faces danger from Islamist immigrants.
  • Snarky commentary on "Queers for Palestine" and leftist contradictions.

---

7. Steve’s Rule for Immigration

• [06:12–16:05] In-depth monologue on how U.S. immigration policy should be guided by one question:

  “What does it benefit the citizens of the United States for your entry here?” [09:36]

• Argues immigration policy should not be about race, but worldview and benefit to the nation.
• Satirical discussion: “It’s not about skin color, but values and allegiance to American principles.” [13:28–15:03]
• Any approach not based on benefit to the nation is “literal craziness.” [12:09]
• Notable Quote (Todd):

  “Doing the opposite is just literal craziness.” [12:09]

---

8. Barrett, Kavanaugh, and SCOTUS Disappointment

• [17:30–29:31]
  • Analysis of Barrett and Kavanaugh’s records; both often disappointing to conservatives on key issues.
  • Barrett votes with Democratic bloc 50–75% of the time; on contentious issues, she’s a “coin flip.”
    • Quote (Steve):

      “Amy Coney Barrett is on the most important things…a coin flip. That’s who she is.” [18:03]

  • Debate on whether the problem is female justices or weak, non-principled nominees across the board.
  • “Patheticism” coined as “the science of being pathetic”—Barrett enables a worldview that endangers her.
  • Quote (Steve):

    “What are you gaining by simping for this worldview about half the time? All you’re getting is…a bulletproof vest.” [25:06]

• Host symmetry: Kavanaugh was always a low-expectation pick; Barrett hyped as “Scalia in drag” and utterly underdelivered.

---

9. Responsibility and Modern Masculinity

• [34:01–42:25]
  • Buy/Sell/Hold segment, but with significant, heartfelt detour.
  • Steve discusses the crisis of young men: “A lack of responsibility is a killer for the soul of man.”
    • Quote (Steve):

      “Zero responsibility is a killer for the soul of man. Killer.” [42:25]

  • Cultural analysis: Men and women have both abandoned their God-ordained roles; both pay a price.

---

10. Judicial Supremacy & Congress’ True Power (w/ Daniel Horowitz)

• [80:35–89:10]
  • Daniel Horowitz illuminates how the judiciary is, by its funding requests, admitting it is dependent on Congress—hence not supreme.
  • Quote (Horowitz):

    “Congress could deny [the Court] the funding not just for security, but even to hear certain cases…What if they defund any court review of ICE removals?” [84:46]

• Critique: Conservative “solution” of simply appointing better judges is a losing strategy; Congress itself should wield its constitutional powers.

---

11. SCOTUS, Immigration, and Political Games

• [89:10–94:42]
  • Steve & Daniel discuss bipartisan collusion on judicial supremacy and immigration—both parties avoid accountability, pushing responsibility onto the courts: “Pontius Pilate, washing their hands.”
• Latest birthright citizenship ruling: ACB, again, on the wrong side.
• Daniel: If you want action, don’t wait for another court vacancy—demand action from Congress now.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Barrett’s voting record:
  “Amy Coney Barrett is…a coin flip. That’s who she is.” – Steve [18:03]

• On the ‘patheticism’ of placating the left:
  “What are you gaining by simping for this worldview about half the time? … All you’re getting is a lousy T shirt and, well, a lousy bulletproof vest.” – Steve [25:06]

• On congressional power over courts:
  “They have to come before Congress and request the funding. Meaning that Congress could deny the funding.” – Daniel Horowitz [84:46]

• On responsibility and young men:
  “Zero responsibility is a killer for the soul of man. Killer.” – Steve [42:25]

• On relying on the courts:
  “We would have spent more time educating the public on the fact that, heck, you know, maybe they don't have this power at all.” – Daniel Horowitz [88:56]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 00:01 – Barrett's testimony on security threats
• 00:44 – Host reaction: Barrett’s selective concern
• 02:16 – Sarah Gonzalez confronts Sen. Tillis
• 04:12 – Trans refugee irony
• 06:12 – Opening monologue: The single immigration policy question
• 13:28 – Host rejects race-based immigration arguments
• 17:30 – Barrett & Kavanaugh: The track record
• 25:06 – The "patheticism" of Barrett's compromise
• 34:01 – Segment on male responsibility and culture
• 80:35 – Daniel Horowitz: Courts admit their dependence on Congress
• 84:46 – Congress's true powers over judiciary
• 89:10 – SCOTUS, immigration, and political gamesmanship

---

Tone & Language

• Combines deeply principled, policy-driven conservatism with a biting, sometimes satirical edge.
• Engages in lively, unsparing critique of both leftist and establishment Republican figures.
• Not afraid to be personal, especially on questions of character and moral obligation.
• Often punctuated by memes, sarcasm, and inside jokes, but underpinned by earnest concern for American civic life.
• Language: Direct, punchy, often colorful (“simping,” “patheticism,” “Pontius Pilate, wash our hands”).

---

Conclusion

This episode presents an unsparing autopsy on the conservative legal movement's failures, the crisis of American manhood, and how political cowardice on both sides has enabled judicial supremacy and unchecked immigration. It’s a call for a return to fundamentals: responsibility, national interest, and constitutional checks and balances—before it’s too late.

Transcript

[A]

It's the Steve Day show and here's what happened while we were away. Brought to you by unsafe. That is precisely the message in a rare congressional hearing featuring Supreme Court Justices, namely Elena Kagan and Amy Coney Barrett, who asked Congress to increase funding for SCOTUS security. Here's ACB they have required me to

[B]

my children to think about and see

[C]

things that children should not have to see or think about.

[A]

Around the time of the Dobbs leak,

[B]

my security details sent me home with a bulletproof vest. Performing this service was gonna put me

[A]

in the position of explaining to my children what a bulletproof vest was and why I had to wear one. Six weeks ago I was the victim

[B]

of a swatting Many of us, me included, have received threatening, anonymous deliveries designed to intimidate and harass us.

[A]

That's very sad and left wing violence should be rooted out. But of course, Amy Coney Barrett didn't ask for increased deportation funding to keep the rest of the country safe from the current and future illegal aliens. She gave a rubber stamp of citizenship to with her ruling on birthright citizenship a couple of weeks ago. So I got that going for me, which is nice. That's okay though, because we're backing down on immigration enforcement in the aftermath of another couple of instances we think of suicide by ICE in Texas and Maine in the last week. It was widely reported yesterday that ICE has been instructed to immediately cease most vehicle stops during immigration enforcement operations nationwide. Vehicle stops have been one of the primary drivers of deportations and further reporting. Attribute the instruction to cease vehicle enforcement to DHS Secretary Mark Wayne Mullen in an early Morning Truth Social post. However, President Trump says he doesn't want to see the practice of vehicle stops to cease, adding that we cannot give up one of ICE's most important and effective crime fighting tools. Meanwhile, a 21 year old illegal alien from India was sentenced Tuesday to four years and eight months in prison for causing a fiery Southern California crash that killed three people last year. Jean Preet Singh pleaded guilty to three felony counts of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence stemming from the October 2025 crash. The illegal alien Indian sentence is less than a quarter of some of the sentences of J6ers. And now for some catharsis kind of Our friend and colleague Sarah Gonzalez is in Washington, D.C. and she was able to track down outgoing North Carolina Senator Thom Dillis to ask him a series of questions we'd all like to know the answers to.

[B]

Senator, you've received almost $700,000 from the illegal Illegal labor lobby. Is that why you voted against the America Act?

[A]

Can you tell me who the illegal labor lobbyists?

[B]

Yes, it's contractors, general contractors, hospitality companies, industries, construction companies, and industries.

[A]

You know about the save. Which. Which Save America act are you talking about?

[B]

The one that you voted against, sir. Okay.

[A]

And so you're asking me if I voted.

[B]

I was against it. Because you're receiving almost $700,000 from these lobbyists.

[A]

Do you have any remark, any idea what a remarkably silly question that is?

[B]

I think it's a pret. I think your constituents want to know why you're betraying them.

[C]

Math.

[A]

Do you know what my election cycle, the total all in election cycle cost was in 2020? It's $300 million. Do you honestly believe that I would make a policy decision based on that?

[B]

I don't know why you're betraying your constituents. I'm independent.

[A]

Okay.

[B]

Why are you betraying your constituents? Why are you betraying your constituents?

[A]

Senator, good luck on the clicks.

[B]

We just want secure elections.

[D]

Senator.

[B]

You're preventing us from getting that. You're betraying America.

[A]

Good luck on your job.

[D]

He's an angry elf.

[A]

As Todd said, when in doubt, be like Sarah. Senator Chuck Grassley says a whistleblower from within the DOJ has provided him a list of 44 members of Congress from both parties, both chambers, who had their communications monitored as part of Special Counsel Jack Smith's probe into Trump and J6. The whistleblowers claim that Jack Smith's team was able to bypass certain bureaucratic procedures in order to monitor messages between those lawmakers and the White House. Here's Jack Smith. Just last year, did the toll records

[B]

that you requested from the senators, did

[A]

they include the content of the phone calls? No.

[B]

Did the records that you requested, the toll records from the members of Congress, include the content of text messages?

[D]

No.

[B]

Book em, Dana.

[A]

And finally, unintentional humor, part two. An American man pretending to be a woman fled the United States and sought asylum in the Netherlands owing his flight to, quote, oppression in Trump's America. When he got to the Netherlands, he was promptly placed in an asylum center alongside violent Islamist immigrants.

[B]

Between here and there is a bunch of Algerians and Moroccans or whoever who think that queer people should be beaten. I think that this system where you have people just living out here that are unhappy is not good.

[C]

Yeah. And do you think it's safe here? No, I don't.

[B]

There's negative. Oh, it's scary. It's legitimately scary. I decided that my mental health is degrading so substantially being here that I just need to get out. And the situation that I have in the US As a trans person, not good.

[C]

Right.

[B]

But here I will be hurt or killed.

[A]

You don't say. And that's what happened while we were away.

[B]

It's still queers for Palestine, right? Indeed. All right. We're going to get into that ACB testimony from yesterday. And to me, I just think we have a very simple rule where any form of immigration is concerned. That and more next year on the Steve Day Show. And greetings. Happy Wednesday. Welcome to the Steve Day show here live and on demand. That would be me. I am Steve. He's Todd erzin. He's Aaron McIntyre. We're brought to you by our friends over at Preborn. Had a chance to meet up with the brass over at Preborn while I was in D.C. over the 4th and they again just raved about all y' all and how generous you guys have been to their outstanding ministry. For as little as 28 bucks you could fund an ultrasound that doubles a baby's chance at life and maybe also doubles mama's chance at eternal life at the same time. And maybe for America's 250th birthday, you want to honor the most important God given right of them all, life. Because without that one, as Reagan once said, the rest of them are kind of moot at that point.

[C]

Right.

[B]

If you're not alive to right to enjoy them, you can maybe give 250 bucks. All right. And multiply that impact as well. Whatever, whatever widows might you have, they'll take and they'll turn it in to life savings. Soul altering ministry at Preborn. Make your tax deductible donation today by going to preborn.com Steve. That's preborn.com Steve again, head over to preborn.com Steve. You guys know how it works here on a Wednesday end of the show we'll be joined by Daniel Horowitz who will take us inside politics. Coming up here at the bottom of the hour, we'll spend an hour looking at your buy seller hold submissions. That which remains we couldn't get to. We will address in the overtime today for Blaze TV [e-mail] days but couple of notes from Aaron's montage of things I want to highlight here. Gentlemen, in the opening segment of the program, let's start with a simple rule for immigration. I think all of American immigration policy I think we could define by by one simple rule. And I don't want to be, you know, talk show host who thinks everything can be simplified. There are things that cannot be simplified. The AI debate is not one that can be simplified. We need data. Everybody wants access to data. We are bringing you this show digitally. Many of you are accessing it with data. So we need an ample amount of data. We also know that we're up against enemy nations who will have none of the moral compunction compunctions that we are debating. None of the quandaries or conflicts of, of ratios that we're trying to balance in terms of what's best for progress, for progress sake, and what's best for the human condition. They won't bother themselves with any of those things whatsoever and happily use this technology against us at the first opportunity. At the same time, we also can't become Ghost in a Machine, Cogs and a Wheel, just completely outsource our individual agency and essentially turn the movie Wall E into a documentary. Okay? And we also just can't go around grabbing people's land and taking it from them because progress don't you know, these are. There are things in this world that require conversation, discussion, debate. Frankly, I think one of the things that is irritating a lot of people in a rural state like ours over AI is it seems like this is all regardless of where you come down on the technology in and of itself. This is all happening rather fast, like. And no debate and discussion is being permitted. And this just has to happen right now. And we're going to take everybody's land and plop one of these monstrosities that you're all going to pay for that'll hire a handful of people and you don't get a say. Right. And that makes people rightfully suspicious when that's the standard operating procedure. No, we have to come now and reason together when, when we do face these sorts of paradigm shifting moments as a people, the people should be spoken to and addressed and let their grievances be heard, lest you end up turning it into the very hot button, divisive issue that it currently is. So no, not everything can be simplified, but I do think our immigration process, or at least the policy itself can be simplified. To me, I think this just applies to every single foreigner we ever let in. What does it benefit citizens of the United States for your entry here? That's it. That's the whole policy. What is the benefit of the citizens of the United States for your entry here? That's the whole policy. Just be simplified to that. Now here's the thing that is not in total some technocratic to each according to his abilities, for each according to his needs equation. For example, if, if you're a nation that believes in God given rights, as we claim to do, right. Since our founding, right, gentlemen, that's part of the, the American creed. That's a rumor.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

All right. And we, and, and the people who founded the country thought that, that God who granted us our rights was the God of the Bible, right?

[C]

Yes. Okay.

[B]

And say there might be people from a war ravaged area that are his covenant, people that are being persecuted by a demonic faith or religion or government or leader. You may think it benefits you as a people to demonstrate them compassion to continue to incur the favor and benevolence of that said God by demonstrating that, that to whom much is given, much is required. You may decide that as a people. Right?

[C]

You may, yes.

[B]

You may also decide that we'd love to be able to do that, but we have no way of actually vetting the people in the said conflict and knowing for sure that we're not importing a nefarious element at the same time. And so, you know, maybe we'll, maybe we'll send you arms, maybe we'll arm you. Maybe I'll even, maybe we'll even send over a B52 or two and maybe try bombing some of the people persecuting you. But we're gonna probably have to kind of help you where you're at and not bring you into our country.

[A]

Right.

[B]

I mean, so that, that, that, that doesn't take on just a strict, you know, ask not what, you know, what you can do for America or what America could do for you, but what you can do for America. There's not that, there's no, no benevolence there at all, but the benevolence in and of itself all has to go back to that question. And if you think that's cruel, look at your own home. Would anybody be considered cruel if the standard of entry into their home was to? What benefit would it be to the people who occupy this space and call this home for you to, for you to enter here? No one in their right mind would say that that's cruel or terrible.

[C]

Yeah, doing the opposite is just literal craziness.

[B]

Correct? Well, this is our home. America is our home. And so, yeah, we get to do that. I didn't say it was easy, but it's just that simple. What is the benefit to the citizens of the United States for your entry? What does it benefit them? For example, I saw a story this morning about Clarkston, Georgia, do you guys see this?

[C]

Yes, because I saw. You saw it?

[B]

Yeah. There's a community down there, apparently that is called Little Somalia. What would be the possible benefit to the community of Clarkston, the state of Georgia, the entirety of the United States of America, for there to be such a place? What could it possibly be? Just one. Just name a singular thing. What would the possible benefit of this, the existence of such a place, Little Somalia. What would it possibly be to the citizens of this country? And I'll wait. Go ahead.

[C]

Only Ilhan Omar and her brother husband know Steve.

[B]

So in other words, sarcasm, trolls, memes, but nothing of substance.

[C]

No.

[B]

Well, you're just saying that. You're just saying that, Steve, because they're all black. I don't really care. I'm saying that because they represent a worldview that doesn't conform to the founding worldview of this country whatsoever. Man. Gosh, I wish it was as simple as melanin levels. Wouldn't that make things a lot simpler? That's a pretty obvious thing, right? Do you know how many. Let me ask you both, how comfortable are you guys taking. How many immigrants from Canada are you comfortable taking right now?

[C]

None.

[B]

How do you know they just wouldn't just move here and just vote the country blue and turn it into the same, you know, technocratic, you know, whitewashed tune that their own country is Canada's, what, like 99 white or something like that?

[C]

Great point. I mean, if you guys pay attention to our show and have our worldview, if you believe like we. If you always say what biblio. You just biblical notions of race.

[B]

Yeah, we.

[C]

It doesn't matter who you are, where you from, if you are going to help revival.

[B]

Yep.

[C]

We like you.

[B]

Yeah. But the. There's the idea that the construct of race as we define it simply doesn't exist in the Bible. The Bible divides people first in the Old Testament by Jew and Gentile, and then in the New Testament when the church now becomes a global entity and God's covenant is not confined largely to one nation state. All right. But a global entity known as the Church of Jesus Christ our Lord, then the standard now becomes sinner and saint. Those are really the only demographic constructs that. That are. That are dividing in nature in either the Old or New Testaments according to the Scripture.

[C]

And our nation is in such a state of disrepair. Honestly, if there was some magical island in the South Pacific that was all brown people that suddenly thought the Declaration of Independence and the American way of life was the greatest thing ever, I would say Take that whole island and put it in.

[B]

Well, it's why we discussed a couple weeks ago how many white South Africaners should we import. Right, Just bring them in. I mean, just let them do our run. Our own replacement, you know, our own replacement theory. Right. Just start sending a bunch of white South African, African or immigrants to a bunch of these, you know, swing states that are leaning blue. Like a Virginia for example, maybe a Georgia soon. Yeah, start just. Yes, you can come, but you have to live in one of these couple of states because we need you to cancel out what else has moved in there. Right, that's so. Yeah. I mean the two least white countries in all of NATO are. Turkey's the least white for obvious reasons. Okay, you know what the second least white country in NATO is? You're never gonna.

[C]

That's gonna be hilarious.

[B]

You're never gonna guess is it like France? You're living in it. The United States of America is the second least white country in NATO. The second least white country. I wish things were as simple as we need to salvage white culture. I wish it was that simple. Holy cow, I wish it was. It's way more complicated than that. The United States is the second least white country in NATO. And yet what do we have in common with many of these western European countries that are way whiter than us and also way woker and way more pagan? What do we have in common with them? Almost nothing. The only reason we think, we think we have something in common with white South Africaners is because they are living in the end game of what is being perpetuated upon us right now. And so they've seen the end of the story. Right. They might be a lot more inclined to step in and say, you know, stop in the name of love. Okay, then maybe some native born Americans who have just been worked over by the fake and gay collegiate system and came out as gay race communist. Amen.

[C]

Amen.

[B]

Amen. So I wish it was as simple as we could just identify external things and just know right away whether that's going to be a decent person to have here or not. I wish it was that simple. And it's precisely because it is not that simple that we need a simple metric. What would it benefit the citizens of this country to permit you entry? Aaron, your thoughts on that as a standard?

[A]

I am totally fine with that. And I think it's. I think it makes a lot of sense, which is probably why at this juncture it will never actually have any legs. But you know what, if that's going to be the standard, you could do a whole lot worse.

[B]

Which brings me to Amy Coney Barrett. How did she vote recently on questions involving sanctity of our borders and then vis a vis sanctity of our. Of our elections? How'd she do on that?

[C]

She voted badly.

[B]

She went over on those two things. She did. She went over on those two things. So before we went on the air today, I asked the AI Grok, how often does Amy Coney Barrett vote since she got into the Supreme Court? How often has she voted with the Democratic bloc of justices? So Grok actually gave me a very good breakdown. And Grok said that it's between. Are you ready for this? 50 to 75% of the time, but the left. Yeah. Now, how do you get such a wide range? And this is why I thought Grok did a good job. Because within the 75% would be the kinds of things that the court is determining. Seven to two, eight to one. All right, so Grok was rightly asking me, you need to better specify. Because, you know, Grok knows, I think, me now from the way I tend to frame my questions, it knows that I'm hammering, hammering her from the right. So I think I have developed a reputation with my GROK account. So my GROK account literally said to me, if based on how you typically propose such questions, all right, you need to consider that within that 75% is. She's often voting on things that are obvious to the majority of the court, that are seven to two decisions or greater. Okay. But Grok said, if you're factoring in the more contentious kinds of issues that, given what you typically ask me about, are really what you care about, it's about 50. 50. So that means that Amy Coney Barrett is on the most important things is essentially a coin flip. That's essentially what she is on, on the most important things, the things that we think are fundamental, existential in determining what kind of people ought we to be and will ultimately become. She's a flip of a coin. A flip of a coin. That's who she is. And what I found fascinating, there was this whole debate. We can get into this, too, if you guys want. I mean, we all have daughters. We all are married. All right. There was this whole debate about, does this mean that we shouldn't have women Supreme Court justices? If you can't take it, you could be easily threatened. Okay. Because if you have young children at home, and it gets into the motherly instinct. And I saw several women that I like and are friends with that were posing some of these questions, and I'm happy to have that conversation if you guys want. I just also watched Brett Kavanaugh get nearly character assassinated and they went after his home as well during Dobbs, if you recall. And I believe he pee standing up, or at least he's supposed to. We don't. We're not sure if he actually follows through on that, but that's the norm, correct?

[C]

Yes.

[B]

And I'm pretty confident that Brett Kavanaugh has a very similar voting record day me Coney Barrett, in fact, does he not? Yes, he does.

[C]

So in the ballpark. But on a lot of the big things. Better.

[B]

I'd say better. I'd say it's probably about 10% better. And I'll look it up during the break if you want. But just following as we do, and I think.

[C]

I only think that's important to highlight because back in the day when we were going all through this, the modus operandi was holding our nose to get Kavanaugh through everything. The character assassination while she was like the next Joan of Heart.

[B]

This is. This is the. I'm glad you said this because Aaron, you always like to say that a lot of our analysis of life comes down to what expectations, right?

[D]

Okay.

[B]

My expectations for Kavanaugh were subterranean, nickel core, mantle, crust of the earth, low.

[C]

Okay.

[B]

And the only reason I went all in on what was going on to him was not because I was all that eager to place Brett Kavanaugh for a lifetime on the Supreme Court. Right. The guy that wrote the opinion that guided John Roberts to save Obamacare. Right. As a federal judge, it's because of the precedent that was going to be set that if. That if they were going to do this to essentially a squish, then what would they do to an actual judge? We would want so we could not let this precedent stand. Right.

[C]

Amy Coney Bear was supposed to be.

[B]

So you being a co, you and

[C]

Lindsey Graham became besties to defend his honor.

[B]

Brett Kavanaugh become. Being a coin flip is a win to me.

[C]

Yes.

[B]

That's better than I thought I was gonna get. All right. I thought I was getting Antonin Scalia in drag is what I thought I was getting with Amy Coney Barrett, his former clerk. Right. So her being a coin flip is like, that's. That dog ain't gonna hunt. Okay? I mean, to me, Brett Kavanaugh is my number eight hitter.

[D]

All right?

[B]

If I'm getting 15, 20 home runs a year out of him, I'm. I probably went in the pennant Right, right. But I, I got. I'm. I, I signed Amy Coney Barrett to bat third or fourth in the lineup. Right. She's got to be putting up at least MVP adjacent numbers every single season. Otherwise, what are we doing here? Right?

[C]

That's my point. Yes.

[B]

So that's a great. That, That's a great interjection by you there, Todd. Great point. But to go back to what I was saying before your interjection, which was very appropriate.

[D]

It.

[B]

I don't think Brett Kavanaugh strikes us as a profile and courage. Right. You know, I mean, I, I, I would. I would love. I see. I don't think we're permitted the benefit of these. In an ideal. Let me just say this. In an ideal culture, and let me rephrase it even more specific. In an ideal Christian culture, would we be in need of female Supreme Court justices?

[C]

No.

[B]

No. Are we living in the. In an ideal Christian Western culture?

[C]

That's adorable.

[B]

Yeah, exactly. Okay, so I'm. I'm. I don't feel like I have. The state of men in America grants me the accommodation for that argument. So let's have this one instead. The patheticism. Is that a word or did I just make it up?

[C]

It works for me.

[B]

The science. Let's just make it. It's a new thing, the study. The science of being pathetic.

[C]

Hey, that's a growth industry.

[B]

We might have just coined a term here today, gents. The patheticism of half of the time siding with the godless worldview that then targets the lives of you and your children and family members when you don't do it, the other half of the time is pathetic. It's cosmic levels of pathetic. It truly is. Do you remember when, during the Black Lives Matter stuff, there was the massive protest in Atlanta outside CNN headquarters? Do you guys remember that?

[C]

Yes. Oh, yeah.

[B]

All right. And do you remember what I said at the time? E.T. that's an E.T. phone home moment.

[C]

It wasn't just a massive. Outside. They were breaking in.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

That was E.T. phone home. They. They knew where to go. They. They knew where. They followed the home beacon to its. To where it. It. The signal was originating from CNN headquarters. Correct. Okay. They followed at home. All right, Ms. Barrett, the calls are coming from inside the house. Ma'. Am. Madam. Madam Justice. The calls are coming from inside the house. What are you gaining by simping for this worldview about half of the time? In your most important rulings? Whose favor are you incurring? What cocktail party are you now being invited to? What aura of respectability there and in suburban D.C. are you now being granted. Because by your own admission, the answer is nothing. And all you're getting is a lousy T shirt and, well, a lousy bulletproof vest. That. That's really what you're getting. You're getting for simping for the spirit of the age, for lifting up your. Your black robes and showing it just a, maybe a little leg just above the calf and just a playful little wink. You got a bulletproof vest for you and your kids. That's what you got. What's more pathetic, the godless zealot who thinks he's a modern day Jacobin, or the justice who's placating this element at least half of the time in her most important decisions and then says, please save me from the very people I have incentivized. Forgive me, I don't have much sympathy. Thoughts?

[C]

I think there's a remarkable realization of what the famous Amy Coney Barrett meme ultimately turned out to mean. Her holding up the blank pad. Because you're programmed, you're just reading talkie points. At the time, everybody thought, no, this is. There's nothing there because she is a woman in full. It knows exactly what she wants, what she means, what she thinks. And now we know the true symbolism of that moment is that she was a whitewashed tomb.

[A]

You know, I just. With her family, she's got young kids as well, she's got a large family. And, you know, I feel like, I feel sorry for her. You know, nobody should have to deal with left wing violence on the regular like that. And, you know, maybe that's. Maybe, maybe we should be asking for the root cause of this and maybe there's going to be a Supreme Court case that will be able to maybe make her lives more safer. That would be really good. I saw analysis the other day and maybe you kind of mentioned this in passing as well. I just. If this is what's causing you to vote at the clip you're voting for with the liberals, Amy Coney Barrett, bottomless pit of funding for your security and every Supreme Court justice. Security. Yep. Bottomless pit. Yep. If that's what's causing you. I just know. And we're not trying to do this just for whatever. She's our friend and colleague. I just know that Sarah Gonzalez would probably make a better Supreme Court justice than Amy County Baron.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

Don't think there's much doubt about that.

[C]

Yes.

[B]

See, I think the most pathetic thing is I think, can. I think Amy's just doing what she thinks is Right. But she doesn't stop to look back according to her own fruit, her own worldview. Guys. At the fruit of the people she's often siding with. Should that maybe be a tell that what you think is right is wrong? Maybe sometimes when you see who you're consistently empowering and aligning with.

[C]

Of course. And that's why I would think so. That's why Aaron's comparison is genius. I didn't connect those dots, but to. To Sarah. Because people have come after Sarah.

[D]

For which.

[C]

It's not that people are coming after you, it's why. And you should always reflect on that. I was basically by the city of Carlisle, swatted. I was doxed. They sent the cops after me. We had to change school districts. And my family together still looks at each other and we love each other more because it was all worth of it. Because we did exactly what you're talking about. Steve. We're reflecting on the who and why. Whom do we serve? And Amy Coney Barrett is missing an obvious connection of the dots that any 5 year old should be able to accomplish.

[A]

Listen. Bottomless pit of funding for Supreme Court security. Supreme Court justice security. But at the same token, there's only so much security you can get before you really kind of reveal yourself for who you truly are. And if you are truly just going to cower in the face of all of these threats. I'm not sure how much funding is actually.

[C]

She should resign. I'm saying I think she should resign.

[B]

I don't disagree. Don't disagree at all. Isla hold is next. The steve day show.

[C]

Hey.

[B]

Time for some tough talk, like life insurance talk. You know, the product we all know we need to have, but you don't really want to think about it because you're never going to. You don't get to access your own life insurance policy. And whenever somebody else does, it means you're out of life. All right, so how do you know how much you're paying and what you're. What you're getting for it? Right? Odds are you may be paying too much for too little. Did you know that if you receive life insurance through your job, for example, too, that if you're unexpectedly laid off, you could suddenly be covered for nothing? There on that front as well. That's why you want to try out select quote. For over 40 years, select quote has been one of the most trusted brokers in insurance, helping More than 2 million Americans secure over 700 billion with a B billion dollars in coverage. Their mission? It's simple. Just to find you the right insurance policy for your unique needs. They shop so you can save. And like those other one size fits all life insurance companies select quotes licensed agents. They work for you and they do so in as little as 15 minutes. They'll compare policies from top rated carriers to find you the best fit for your health and your budget. And they work for you for free. No medical exam, no problem pre existing condition. They've got partners that can help you with one of those as well. So get the right life insurance for you for less and save more than [e-mail] Steve save more than 50% on term life [e-mail] Steve today to get started. That's SelectQuote.com Steve all right, are we ready for some buy seller hold?

[C]

Always.

[B]

All right, let's do it. You guys know how this works. Aaron has received your voluminous submissions. Todd, you and I have yet to see a single one of them. We're going to see them all right now in real time. We are going to decide are we going to buy it, are we going to sell it? And then why do I feel like one of the most anticipated moments in this show's history, and I'm not even kidding, is about to occur?

[C]

That's a big deal.

[B]

What will be done with the hold now that Lindsey Graham no longer has a hold on terra firma? What will be done? Well, as we announced on Monday, the baton has been passed. Todd, if you decide to hold,

[C]

you

[B]

have so emasculated yourself that you are going to have to spend 24 consecutive hours, no sleep, no food, no water, trying to teach Candace Owens how to read.

[A]

Have you no shame?

[B]

None. Less than zero, in fact. Let us begin.

[C]

Just can't believe you hook down phonics

[A]

uncontexted dace 2 electric boogaloo force. Ghost of Lindsey Graham.

[B]

Steve, incredible.

[A]

You must go to Candace Owens podcast. There you will find a demonic grifter who will complete your buy, sell or hold punishment, jokes, training.

[B]

That is incredible.

[A]

That is so providential.

[B]

It is.

[A]

Especially after what you just pulled.

[B]

That is. That is incredible. I mean, I give you every buy, my friend that I can. For those of you not watching, you're missing out. That is. That's incredible.

[C]

It is quality.

[B]

Most of the time you're not missing out by watching because you don't want to look at the three of us. But in this case, you are missing

[C]

out by not watching if you get uber rich, you know, and can just do whatever, so never. But if you do like Hiring these two guys that do this stuff.

[B]

Oh, yeah.

[C]

Just want to come along for the ride.

[B]

Yes.

[C]

We're gonna mean the hell out of this thing.

[B]

Rich enough to have, like your own, like, hanger ons. Yeah, but mine are just the memers.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

Yes. And half the time it's there. They're actually trolling me.

[C]

Yes. Yes.

[B]

Yeah, I like it. I can dig it. You bet I like it. Okay.

[A]

Wesley Thiessen has this responsibility brings purpose and anchors us to a higher aim beyond our own hedonistic desires. The young. The majority of young men who do not understand this reality are falling prey to depression and aimlessness as a result.

[B]

This is brilliant.

[A]

This is the same.

[C]

How many times.

[A]

This is the same guy who had that just brilliant one about transgenderism a few weeks ago.

[B]

Yeah, it's.

[A]

I just think this is probably, again, the most succinct and simple explanation for the young men crisis in our country. A lack of responsibility. And I'll just. Can I add this as well?

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

I remember growing up, I'll just say it. In my home. I was the youngest of five. I got away with a lot of crap. Okay. I got away with a lot of crap. I was pretty lazy. Pretty dang lazy. But there was eventually, there was a time where I realized, hey, there are some things that I kind of want that my parents are just not gonna pay for because I had good parents. Things like I wanted, you know, just different items. Wanted a car. Eventually, you know, I'm not. So I gotta go find a job. So I got a job at Maid Rite, which is a fast food joint. It's like sloppy joes without the slop. On a. On a, you know, burger bun special to Iowa. Yada, yada, yada. And you know what? I realized? That job kind of sucked. But I kept doing it anyway because I've quickly realized I was at the point and I think I had matured enough to realize this job sucks. I do this for like 14 hours a week, 20 hours a week, something like that. My dad works like 40, 50 hours a week in a really cold Hormel factory. I've had it pretty frickin good. And so it caused me to reevaluate a lot of things and actually embrace the suck quite a bit. So I will say, just in that scant bit of responsibility, the ownership that I took in that job, that's propelled me a long ways. And I think the same thing when you get married, when you have more responsibilities to keep up with, not just, you know, physical things that you Own, but just more responsibility in general. That unlocks a part of your mind and your soul that, quite frankly. And again, I'm one of the people who have said, you know, the types of phrases that, quite frankly, you and Todd told me for a number of years before I got married. Well, just get. Just wait until you're dating. Just wait until you get married. Just wait until you have kids. Just wait until you have the second kid. That drove me nuts until I realized that was absolutely true. So I'm not coming at this from a. Well, just wait till you have this responsibility. No, try to take on responsibility as much as you possibly can, as soon as you possibly can.

[B]

That's beautifully said, brother. And, Wesley, as to your submission, I mean, essentially, you just explained why Charlie recommended to his generation to get married, have kids, go to church. I mean, you just explained why we are created to be like this, to fulfill these roles. And what you're seeing now, what you saw for the previous couple of decades coming out of the advent of feminism, as you saw collectively in our popular culture, women turned to a voice like Oprah Winfrey, who denied her primary functions of her femininity, rejected them to essentially be their voice and their model of what it meant to be a modern woman. And what you're seeing now is coming out of a generation of too much fatherlessness and a generation of men who collectively skipped finishing. Well, you are, You're. You're now seeing guys, in many cases rejecting the. The way that they were made in one of two ways, either in succumbing to the spirit of the age or in succumbing to the. The nihilism and black pilling that you are describing. And the reality is, this is why I say guys all the time. Even if all of your laments about the modern woman were correct. And I'm gonna, I'm gonna. I'm here to tell you as someone who's raised two girls to adulthood, and so it's been around a lot more girl culture than I was growing up. You've been. You've done it. You're about to do it four times, right?

[C]

Yep.

[B]

Yeah, you're not wrong. I mean, I mean, my oldest daughter is. Is just about. Just closed on her second home, and it's just about give. To give birth to her second baby and didn't get pregnant until she got married. That was a norm 50 years ago, right? Yes, it is. It is beyond rare. What is it? 12% was the number yesterday. 12% of Americans by the age of 30 are now married and in a home that they own. 12%. It was half of the culture in 1950. It's 12% now. So you're not wrong about the. Of course, an entire generation of third wave feminism has, has had this just monumentally destructive consequences for the state of the modern woman. You're not wrong. What you don't understand, though, is that what does Paul mean by the man is the head? For the man came from God and the woman came from man. See, you are accountable to God, even if every woman of your era, and they all don't. But even if not by a long shot. Too many. Too many suck. Too many do suck. That's true. Right. But they all don't. Too many do. But they all don't. But even if they all did. To a gathering of feminists, you will give an account of your life in eternity. That's what you'll do.

[C]

Thank God.

[B]

No, no, no. To a, to a, to an endless congress of female feminine spirits. You'll be giving an account of your life too. That's what you'll be doing. No, you'll be giving your account of your. The account of your life. To whom?

[C]

My Maker?

[B]

That's right. So. So even if, when, when Eve succumbs to the enemy, when God confronts them, he doesn't go to Eve, who does he go to? Adam. He is the head. So even if too many women in this era suck, and the exit polling of the last few election cycles pretty much proves that, particularly of the single variety, right? But they all don't. And not by a long shot. Too many do. But not all of them. And not by a long shot. But even if they all did, you would still be accountable to God for what you do, with what he's instilled in you and created you to be. Not to any systemic, you know, female presence that, that you are disappoint, disappointed, or disillusioned by. By the way, just so you understand how wrong you are about that, you know, who agrees with you that as a man you are accountable to women? Wait for it. Wait for it. Feminist.

[C]

Here. I just want to add to that, because I talk about it all the time. This perfectly fleshes out two things I talk about all the time. Why anon accounts are so bad. Zero responsibility. You can say and do whatever you want to without having to put any chips on the table. And also total lack of responsibility. It also has you, as said, you do it long enough and you. You just start making up imaginary stakes and consequences to fill the void. The God shaped Hol. And that's what's happening with video games. Zero responsibility. But all those guys who. And they had dads who let them play video games, avoiding responsibility over and over and over again. Now they think they took down the Leviathan with EA Sport. You did nothing. It was utterly meaningless. You're worse than Don Quixote. This is this. And the essence of it is reading this. What Aaron read right there. Zero responsibility is a killer for the soul of man. Killer.

[A]

I think that goes for both sexes, but maybe especially, especially men. Jason Roland is next. Who says if Todd were cast as a superhero in a movie, his arch nemesis would be an Ultron that constantly youtubes about their favorite team and video game and when manifested into physical form, is constantly climate controlled by his suit at a steady 70 degrees.

[B]

Okay, so normally I say your submissions go off the rails when there's an and about two sentences in. That's normally what happens. Right. When you add too much. But in this case, your and what came after Jason actually topped it off. All right. Because you're correct. The fact that it was climate controlled at the exact same time would be the clincher. You nailed it. You understood the assignment and therefore you have my buy. Yes.

[C]

Thank you, Jason.

[A]

Next we're gonna go to Ezekiel Washington, who has this meme the Steve Day show. Anytime the subject of Michigan football comes up, it's two guys named Steve and Todd absolutely punching themselves and a guy in the background named Aaron just filming it. Yep. I just punch up this shot, sit back, get any work done that I need to get done, and we're golden for about 10, 15 minutes.

[B]

Very nice.

[A]

I'll buy.

[B]

I like it.

[C]

That's how the locker room works.

[B]

It is. It's an appropriate amount of snottiness. I respect that as well. You guys are. You guys are sticking the landing on these. I have. I've got nothing but love for what you guys have done so far. All the love.

[C]

Yes.

[B]

As the kids say today.

[A]

Aaron Wheat says it's not a coincidence that the explosive diarrhea outbreak occurred during a stretch where Hollywood has been putting out real stinkers. Here's looking at you, Supergirl.

[B]

Warner Brothers is one of the legacy movie studios in the history of the industry. You could argue it's the only studio whose library either competes with or maybe even eclipses. Disney's Supergirl might end up being the most expensive flop the studio's ever had because it's not just the 200 some odd million dollar loss taken on that film, but what it has done to dampen the entire universe and division that they have tried to build and invest in under James Gunn. So I think this is, again, an appropriate level of snottiness. And, you know, since no one's done this, I'll do it. I have not seen the Supergirl film. I don't even think I saw the full trailer. I did see the teaser trailer when it came out early this year. Do you guys remember what the first image of that teaser trailer was? Probably. Probably not, right? And the only reason I do is because of what it was. The teaser trailer opens up with crypto, as Supergirl is drunk and passed out on some alien world crypto. She. She's not up to let the dog out, so he ends up urinating all over a copy of the Daily Planet, glowingly talking about what a great hero her cousin Superman is. That's the opening shot of the first time we got a formal glimpse of the Supergirl movie in the teaser. Did that not turn out to be prophetic, brother, you know what I'm saying? Because that's what that film did. It urinated over an entire division of Warner Brothers, an entire series of properties. There's a lot of jobs on the line now because of that film. Holy moly. It's one of the worst mistakes Warner Brothers has ever made.

[C]

It wasn't a mistake. This is all by design. We got to stop.

[B]

Maybe by the previous ownership, they do have new owners who just bought it, like, literally last thing.

[C]

Worldview is destiny, right? It's not it. This is all by design. And God will not be mocked. And all. All of the. The original Marvel movies and the good. The Nolan Batman movies, it was an example of. Even if it was by accident. How many times, Steve, did you say on the show? Do they know what they're doing? It happened nonetheless. And it reminds me of the whole God thing. The flood is coming and a rowboat, a piece of driftwood, and something else comes along and no God will save me. And this is my point. What's the point of having those movies, whether by design or by accident, had messages that if we followed in real life, could have headed off Covid could have headed off transgenderism, could have headed off a number of things. But instead, we just want to be titillated and entertained and not do that in real life. This is what we deserve now. This is exactly what we deserve.

[A]

One more.

[B]

I believe that's a buy.

[A]

One more. Before the break, we go to Desert Dweller, who says users should be able to filter likes and views on X to distinguish between accounts in the US and accounts in other countries. Doing this will allow people to see what content creators are being propped up by outside influencers.

[B]

10,000%.

[C]

Can we have that already?

[B]

Well, you can do it manually on a one to one of who can reply.

[C]

I see.

[B]

And. And then they list like literally every country on planet Earth, so they make it as laborious as possible. There should just be like a universal function, even like a universal toggle. Like, I don't want anybody that has an account that isn't native to North America to be able to see or respond to my post. You should just. But, but I agree with this too. So that's a buy too. Is this the most buys maybe in a row? We've had to start one of these off in a while. I think we bought them all. Didn't we buy them all?

[C]

We may have, yeah.

[B]

You guys are killing it. Let's see if we keep it. We can keep it going here. Coming up in the next hour. Stay tuned. All right, back here with our two live and on demand on Blaze TV, radio and podcast alongside Todd Erzin and Aaron McIntyre. I'm Steve Dace. Let us know what you think about what we think via the Steve dace.com inbox by emailing us. Steve stevedace.com that's D E A C E like us on Facebook, me, we and Gab. You can follow me at Steve Dacia on X Instagram and Tick Tock. Subscribe to our new Rumble channel at Steve Dace on Rumble. That's at Steve Dace on Rumble. And then please, of course, if you are a podcast listener, you can also subscribe. Hit that subscribe button. Or if you're on Apple itunes these days, click on follow to ensure that every time we do a new episode, it is for sure right there in your podcast feed. Oh, and if you're one of the tens of thousands to have left us a five star review there on your podcast platform. Thank you. We appreciate each and every one of those. We'd appreciate it if you would add yours here today too. And thanks in advance if you decide to do so. And I want to thank our friends over at Freedom Project Academy. They did a great job with our son Noah for the two years we had him enrolled in fba. Which is one of the reasons why I've got no problem now recommending them to you. On top of the fact that they were just awarded the 2026 Christian School of the Year by Education Insider. Why? Because they have exactly what you're looking for for the last 16 years providing fully accredited classical online education that's firmly rooted in Judeo Christian values from pre kindergarten all the way through high school. If you want structure, go live in a real time onboarding virtual classroom environment. If you want to, maybe a more flexible schedule. You can do available courses anytime 24 7. If you're looking for something that gives you a real track for your homeschooling child, they've got that to put you in the driver's seat as well. And when you agree to sign up, they've also got a 10 discount if you use my promo code Steve. Freedom for F. That's where you want to go. Freedom4school.com use the promo code Steve for school.com get the 10% off your tuition with the promo code Steve at freedom4school.com coming up at the bottom of the hour, Daniel Horowitz will take us inside politics. However, let's march on with some more buy seller hold Aaron.

[A]

We'll continue on with Darren White who says the pendulum of if everything is a psyop, then nothing is a psyop. And the inverse of that as well is slowly swinging away from the land of endless rabbit holes. The Kirk assassination. Pretrial evidence is putting the dunce caps where they belong for all to see.

[B]

I think, I think this is overly optimistic, yes, but I do also see evidence of this. At the same time, I do think some ranks have been thinned. I also think there's just a permanent foothold of brain dead that we're just going to have to understand and either tolerate to some degree and then when it gets to be so metastasizing and self destructive to our side, we're just going to have to excommunicate it. Right. But I, I agree with the spirit of this that some of this has occurred. There has been some thinning of this herd.

[A]

I agree.

[B]

So yesterday I'll get. Let me say this and then I'll let you go. You know, Todd, give me just a second. So yesterday I had a guy respond to me posting the link to our podcast. And where is it? Here in my feed. I want to read it to you. Exactly. Let me find it. I'm finding it, I'm finding it. It's getting there. All right, here it is. Right? Some guy called Live Free the way.

[A]

Oh, this is gonna be good.

[B]

All right, that's his name and I clicked on his bio for just, you know, because I want to know who I'm addressing and it, it says child of God. Right there in his bio. So live free the way. Okay. In response to me posting about our podcast yesterday and that I chose this guy.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

That I. That I chose to respond to someone claiming that they had some specific evidence they wanted me to address that challenges the official narrative on Tyler Robinson. And I pointed out yesterday, do you have any better evidence than a confession and video and DNA? You have any better evidence than that? And I would argue the answer is

[C]

no,

[B]

There's not any better evidence than that. That. That would be. Why don't take offense. You can't. You couldn't possibly have better evidence than a confession and DNA and video. Now, the video could be doctored. Right. But then he also. His DNA matched and he confessed as well.

[C]

Still.

[B]

Right. Okay. The confession could have been under coercion. Right. Okay. But then the. The DNA matched and he's also on video. Right. And the DNA sample could be wrong. Right. Okay. It could have got swapped in the lab or something like that. Right, Right. But he's on video and he confessed. You sure? I'm going. No matter where you go, it's tough to get around those three things. And there's a there. Well, probably not, because our justice system sucks, but in a typical year, we'd fry half dozen people or more with a lot less evidence than a confession. DNA in a video all being present at the exact same time. Maybe we'd fry them with one of those. How about with all three?

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

Yeah. So there's not much better evidence than that. And so this guy said, trust the expert science deniers. And he pointed at me. By the way, every time I click on one of these guys, they always follow the same one or two people. You can probably guess who they are every single time. Every single time they follow the same one or two people. Never.

[C]

It's.

[B]

It's a hundred. It's 10,000% metaphysical certitude. They follow the same one or two people every time.

[A]

Oh, are you doing some noticing, Steve? I am doing some noticing.

[B]

It's hard not to notice once you notice. It's hard not to notice here. Yeah. Once you see, it's hard not to see it. So I responded back, dude with child of God in his bio thinks a confession from the killer video of the killer on the roof with the weapon tied to his DNA and his family on the roof, by the way, with the weapon at the time the shooting take place, took place. That's where the video is. And his family turning him in isn't compelling enough evidence for a snotty reply about my friend's murder. I'm sure Jesus is proud. To which he told me I keep ignoring all that evidence. How much of the evidence that he thinks I'm ignoring do you believe he he presented in his reply?

[C]

No.

[B]

How did you guess? You got on your first guess. He offered no evidence in response to what I pointed out. I I offered actual evidence and he offered none. But he's the smart one. And do not lecture me on what I did during COVID I'm the one that did it, not you. It's my work, not yours. I know damn well what I did. I followed the evidence every single time. What am I doing here in the Tyler Robinson case? Same same. Has anybody presented evidence better than he confessed? His DNA is on the weapon he has seen on video from the rooftop holding the weapon his DNA is on that was used to murder my friend at the time that the murder took place. Has anybody presented any evidence better than that that any of you are aware of?

[C]

No.

[B]

Is it possible for someone to present evidence better than that?

[C]

No.

[B]

No. It can possibly be better evidence than that. It's not even the only really good evidence. How about the fact that his own lover turned him in, produced text messages between the two where he confessed to him that he did it and then his own family members turned him in and not a one of them has made any pronouncement about his innocence or he's being railroaded here whatsoever. But I don't even need that evidence. I don't need the fact that transvestite who's clearly got his own demonic oppression thing happening. I don't even need Lance Twigs because I have DNA evidence, I have a confession and I have video of him holding the weapon that was used to murder my friend at the time the murder took place on the roof the murder took place from. I think that's pretty compelling. If you don't, you're retarded.

[C]

It's because I think evidence is so important that I have to sell on this. Because the evidence that guys like this are legion for all the reasons that I just get done saying on a previous answer are the real problem. Once again, in a non account under the banner of child of God and what faith, freedom, blah blah blah, whatever that amalgam was that he is. I'm pretty sure children of God are not supposed to hide their light under bushel basket, right? But anon forever. See, meanwhile, while endlessly playing video games, this is I'm absolutely selling. Yes, there's been some progress, but just like With COVID there was progress. There's more people on the team before, but now a lot of people are also shanking you as you just got done saying for different reasons. There's a. It's way less than you think in terms of critical mass on Covid, there's still all manner of conservative Christians who say, hey, the magical jab saved us. We are in a very, very dark place. We won't smash our idols until that happens. We ain't moving on from the black holes and the conspiracy theories.

[A]

You want to know how this is idolatry? You want to know how this is titillation? You want to know how this is gnosticism? If you are one of the people who still believe after all that we have seen, and we did see some fresh evidence presented last week, some of it accidentally, but we did see some fresh evidence last week. You still believe that the confession was fake. You believe the gun was fake. You believe the ballistics was fake. You believe the shot was fake. You believe the video was fake. You believe all of these things were fake. The doorbell camera footage, the car was fake. The DNA was fake. You believe all of these things were faked. If you are true, if what you say is true, understand what that means for you especially and the rest of us, There is no hope. Get to a cave. If you really believe all of this, if you really believe all of this, if you believe everything was faked, there is no hope for you.

[B]

Amen.

[A]

Just find a cave and eject. What are you doing on social media? You of all people have the real knowledge here. And what you should conclude with that real knowledge is there is a force out there so powerful there is nothing we can do to get justice for anyone. So what's the point of trying anyway? If that's you, just eject.

[B]

In other words, prove to us you really believe in your own black pill.

[A]

Correct?

[B]

Prove it. Prove it.

[C]

Yeah, well, they think they are by never going out. And that's effectively what they are. If you have an an account and all your man boy pleasures and you just do what you do all the time, but don't go out into the world that you say desperately needs to change. But you won't do it. But you'll blather on anonymously. You're pretty much in a cave.

[A]

Let's go to a much different whiplash of a topic here. Tactics has this top 10 fast food.

[B]

Oh, now, now. Finally something that matters.

[A]

Number 10, Sonic.

[B]

I have not. Sonic.

[A]

Isn't their thing Tots.

[C]

Yeah, yeah.

[B]

I was Just gonna say that I've not ate at sonic in like 15 years or more. But I thought they did tots, not fries.

[C]

So did I.

[A]

They do have fries, but I think

[C]

their thing is I like Tater Tots.

[B]

I can't talk about Sonic. I'm not sure when last time I ate there was, but it's. It's been a minute.

[A]

Love tots. Number nine, Wendy's.

[B]

Yeah, when they're done. Fresh Wendy's are underrated. I agree.

[C]

Remember?

[B]

But which Wendy's? They've changed their fry formula how many times over the years?

[C]

Yeah, last time I ate there, they were acceptable.

[B]

Okay.

[A]

Number eight, Cookouts. I've heard about these. I would love to go to one, but I've never been to one.

[B]

I've never heard of this place. We're a Southern thing.

[C]

It's huge. The South. I hadn't heard of it until down in Tennessee because, I mean, I get

[B]

down to the south several times a year, man, for different things. I've never seen the place.

[A]

What I've heard, it's great value. Cheap, greasy, no frills, fast food.

[B]

By the way, had some clandestine meetings in Dallas just about, what, two weeks ago. You guys are aware of, right? Yeah, we did get a chance to go over Amy and I to buc EE's that. That brisket sandwich was just as good as it was the last time I was out of Bucky's.

[C]

Yeah, it's good.

[A]

Number seven, McDonald's. I think it needs to be higher.

[B]

It's got to be higher. Here's the reason it has to be higher. It's the OG and they're not. They're probably not the best, but they still slap every time you get them at the same time. You know what I'm saying? It's just like. It's just a standard, you know, pre

[C]

post tallow though, man. They're just not the same. I know. I remember the glory that was once Rome, Steve. And they are. They aren't that anymore.

[B]

I'm Commodus. You're like Quinnius. Is that. That was. That was the guy's name, right? No, I'm not Commodus. I mean Maximus. Maximus. I remember what the glory of Rome was once like. Yes. Nice.

[A]

Number six. Five guys. I think five guys is a total scam. The entire thing, top to bottom is.

[B]

First of all, I think their burgers are very good. It's way expensive, man.

[A]

That's why I'm saying way overpriced, way too expensive. It's a scam.

[B]

Yeah, so. So their burgers are good, though. But if you can get fries at five guys that are not just absolutely soggy, great. I mean, show me your ways, because I'm not. I've. I'm not sure I've seen it done. Okay, so I got a pass on that one.

[C]

I like five guys. Price. I mean, I don't. They are. Everything's too expensive. But I agree.

[B]

It is weird.

[C]

Yeah.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Number five, Culver's.

[B]

They do the crinkle cut.

[C]

Crinkle cut fries, and they're good.

[B]

I think. I think Kohlberg burgers are incredible.

[A]

Yes. I think their fries, I mean, standalone by themselves, are probably one of the worst things that they do. They're only good if you get them with, like, a concrete mixer and kind of dip them into the mixer.

[B]

The concrete mixers are great. See, I'm get the onion rings at Culver's. Their onion rings are very good.

[C]

Yes, their onion rings are good.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Number four, Whataburger.

[B]

Agree completely. I love everything about Whataburger. I'm gonna say I love everything about it.

[C]

I didn't say anything at the time, but I hadn't had a Whataburger, which is also down there in the south, but I just hadn't.

[B]

Oh, and I took you down there in April.

[C]

Took me down there.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

It was. I just let it go. But I was just like this. I was pretty much unimpressed all the way around. And then the demons attacked our television set.

[B]

And you realized that you had to repent. Unholy opinion of Whataburger?

[C]

Well, no, there's like every. Everything was tainted. It. So I don't know if I can. Maybe I have to do it in isolation of demonic possession, But I had

[A]

a Whataburger for the first time a few years ago. It was incredible. Great experience.

[B]

I love whataburger. I do.

[A]

Number three, Zaxby's. Never been.

[B]

Never been.

[C]

I've never been to a Zaxby.

[A]

Number two, Jack's. I don't know.

[B]

Jack in the.

[A]

Jack in the Box.

[B]

Has to be Jack in the Box.

[A]

Never been there. But we did at least used to have Jack in the Boxes up here,

[B]

so we used to eat there a lot when I was a kid growing up in Cali. But I have not ate at a Jackson at a Jack in the box in the 21st century, man. So I couldn't give an opinion of that either.

[A]

And then, number one, Chick fil A.

[B]

These. These are high on the list. If you get them when they're crispy. Okay. If you get them when they're crispy, it is a next level concoction for sure. Okay. It's, it's, it's, it belongs near the top. If you get them when they're crispy,

[C]

I would say love Chick Fil A fries.

[A]

All right, moving on. Good list. Thank you. Tactics.

[B]

Good palate cleanser.

[A]

We have another top 10 list. Let's buy seller. Hold this one. Whole cloth. This is from Brutus who says top 10 corrupt government agencies or institutions of the COVID and Biden era 2020 through 2024. Number 10, Congress. Number 9, USAID. Number 8, Department of State. Number 7, blue state prosecutors offices. Number 6, blue state and Ohio health departments. Number 5, FDA. Number 4, Biden era intelligence agencies. Number 3, Biden DOJ. Number 2, Fauci led NIAID and NIH. And after this week's revelations, revelations, I should say the state funded University of Michigan and its athletic department.

[C]

That's cash money there.

[A]

That's Biden era.

[C]

That's righteous.

[B]

I have no problem with that. I mean, for the University of Michigan to produce spend $12 million producing an investigative report that they are on purpose not giving you a physical copy of so that they can try to avoid foia and disclosure is this stuff is the highest reek of corruption you could possibly ask for. Any public institution and everybody there and every member of the regents that has signed off on that should all be fired and never allowed to work in any form of public service ever again, like permanent banishment. So now, of course, the consequences of an athletic department is nowhere near the 10 other things on your list. All right, Mr. Buckeye. That being said, though, you're just your ranking. If you take the consequences of the corruption thereof aside, your ranking's not necessarily wrong. Although I would argue USAID is the worst, ought to be number one on that list. That was essentially just a patronage scheme for communists on a global scale. That was just using taxpayer dollars to just patronage communism.

[A]

I used to think that people attributing, I don't know, they're stubbed foot to USAID funding and I don't get stubbed foots anymore. And so I don't stub my toe anymore.

[B]

I should say my girlfriend dumped me at usaid.

[A]

Yeah, I used to think that that was a little out of left field.

[B]

Yep.

[A]

And then a bunch of like, not leftist candidates started, like emerging in South, South America. I don't know. That's a heck of a coincidence.

[B]

I think there's at least prima facie Evidence the entire thing was a global patronage scheme of the left to a global life.

[A]

Not just our lives.

[B]

Correct. Not just to invade our own country, but to essentially just feed this color revolution all over the world. I think there's pretty compelling prima facie evidence that there's at least enough there to investigate further to find out if the answer to that question was yes.

[C]

Yeah, yeah. That's most importantly, I think we're showing real growth. Steve, on that answer. That was

[B]

thank you, Todd.

[C]

That was. I appreciate it. Thank you. I mean, I don't. Connor stallions might have a little.

[B]

I think Connor stallion. I'm a 10,000%. I think Connor would agree with me, actually. See, this is the stuff that is matters not whether someone sent their mom with a phone into a football stadium,

[C]

but this is what they were all covering up.

[B]

Well, we don't know that one guy put that in a lawsuit. It hasn't. It has not necessarily been adjudicated anywhere, but it's possible. But there's, there's so many other problems there that we could get into that are way beyond how good of a filmer on her on her iPhone is Connor's mom at the Purdue game. Stuff that really matters. Women getting creeped on by Matt Weiss. How does he pass any kind of background check whatsoever to get into that university? What? SHARON MOORE and how, how do I hear about this in September in Iowa and they didn't know about it the entire time. It just. This is. And then, and then the function. This is the thing. And I said this on a sports show I was on yesterday, brought me on to talk about this somewhere down south. I think it's somewhere in SEC country. They had me on. And, and I said this is the progressive equivalent to when there's like a Christian institution and they cover up that they've swindled a bunch of people, your grandmother, out of their money. Right. Or they've covered up some kind of sex abuse scandal.

[C]

Right.

[B]

And people just look at this as kind of, you know. Well, that's just Christian hypocrisy on an institutional level. Right. This is the progressive virtue signaling version of this. I mean, Michigan wants to hold itself up as some kind of paragon of progressive virtue. And then it can't even get it right. It won't even defend what is, what's a more progressive ethic than a woman who's an inferior to a superior male who is using his relationship to take advantage of her sexually? That, that, that is supposed to be like the rubric of every progressive System. Correct. But in this case, though, since. Since the male doing it was black and the female that was the victim was white, then. Then. Now their rubric is confused and they're not sure what to do.

[C]

Competing idols. Feminism. Correct.

[D]

Correct.

[B]

Correct.

[C]

Smash them all, man. Correct. Smash them all.

[B]

Guess what we're gonna do. We're gonna just. We're gonna do nothing. We're gonna spend $12 million, which is an outrageous sum of money on a report that we're not gonna have printed so we don't have to show it to anybody or lose a FOIA lawsuit. I mean that. That. That is literally just the spider man meme of my. I'm whipping you with my idol while you whip your me with yours. Okay. And we just beat each other to death. That thing is. That's just absolutely reprehensible. That's the progressive virtue version of a Christian institutional hypocrisy where they. They can't. They won't even. They won't even uphold the basic spoken fundamentals of their own claimed beliefs.

[C]

Man. I think we've arrived. I'm glad we agree that Michigan football should be shut down for a year so I can think about what it's done. Was that so hard? Easy. Easy. Oh.

[B]

Listen, man. If Bryce Underwood does not develop better at quarterback, we are pretty much going to be shut down this coming year. This will be painful to watch it.

[A]

The Revenge of Irving Fisher has this permanent daylight savings time.

[C]

Oh my goodness. All right. Was it. Here's this. Is that all it said? I didn't.

[A]

I adjusted it just to make it.

[C]

It's already. It just got passed by the house instantly. People are shanking each other about which way should we should go keep.

[A]

And I think I saw Senator Tom Cotton is going to be.

[C]

No, I just.

[A]

Which means probably not going to pass the Senate. So this whole thing was probably just really fun exercises.

[C]

We can't have nice things if we. It. This is the thing that's been ruminating forever and ever. Let's do something. And now we're gonna go shirts and skins on this too. We suck. We absolutely suck.

[B]

I don't disagree with any of that. I. I think the changing of your clocks twice a year based on some agrarian Society we were 200 years ago that we no longer are is dumb. Okay. I also don't know how good of an idea though it is in January and February to do permanent daylight savings time. So sunrise is at what, 9am okay. And so that you. So it can be lighter when people get home. Here's the thing. Here's the thing that permanent daylight savings time does, correct me if I'm wrong, but we would essentially, in order for it to be lighter outside when the adults get home from work, your kids are getting up and going to school in the pitch dark and sun rises at like 9am that would essentially be the trade off, right?

[C]

Something like that. Yeah, that.

[B]

That doesn't seem like a healthy choice for a society to me. Am I wrong?

[C]

Have you.

[B]

The adults need another couple of hours of sunlight so we're gonna have the kids traipsing around in the dark for a couple extra hours.

[C]

Our adults are so.

[B]

I. That one I don't understand. Why don't we just go back to standard time? Why did we ever. We don't daylight. See to me, daylight savings time was done again to help the agrarian society standard time.

[A]

It's going to be. The sun's going to be up at like 4:30 in the morning during the summer. That's the argument.

[B]

Okay, maybe we just don't do anything then. I don't know.

[A]

Maybe we did this exact thing back in the 70s and then they quickly related.

[B]

Did Nixon do this? I believe Nixon did this.

[A]

The seventies. Was he in the seventies?

[B]

I think this was. I think Nixon did this in the. Right around the year that I was born. I think think is what I read today that he tried this and people were like this is really dumb. We got the kids out here in the middle of the wintertime going to school in the dark. What are we doing?

[C]

Well, I've always thought it was. I've always thought it was dumb. The degree that, I mean people can't even the complaining that comes every time you have to do this. This is how programmed and selfish people are. The level of inconvenience. I'm not arguing to keep. Keep it for this reason, but it's pathetic that it throws people off this much in any direction. What the hell is wrong with you people?

[A]

We don't know what a woman is. And I don't think we know what a time is either.

[B]

I do think one of the big issues I had with COVID is for the first time ever we said the young and the healthy have to sacrifice their quality of life for the old and infirmed. We'd never done that before. We've always isolated the elderly and the infirmed in such moments so that you know, our way of life still has to go on. Civilization still has to go on. I greatly resent. I greatly resent the idea of forcing the youth to Suffer for the old. I resent it. And I'm not young. I'm 50. I'm going to be 53 in two weeks. All right? I'm Grandpa. About to be grandpa number two Grandpa two times over. I. The words knee replacement surgery were uttered to me by a medical professional two weeks ago today.

[C]

Okay?

[B]

I'm not young. But I. But I. But I'm a believer in an American. And I. So therefore I resent the idea that we put. We. We project the desires and psychoses of the adults on the children. I think that's a terrible way to live. So I don't think that you're entitled as a. As an adult to another hour or two of sunlight so that the kids wake up and go to school in the pitch black dark until 9 o' clock in the morning in the wintertime. I don't believe that.

[C]

Guess who had that very take? The one opposite of yours. That. And they said I would cut off a limb to have more light at the end of the day and have it the sunrise at nine.

[B]

Who's that?

[C]

Josh Pate. The math checks out, man.

[B]

I gotta. You know I've been defending Josh.

[C]

The math checks out, okay?

[B]

And I. I even co signed Josh's restraining order against you. I just didn't have the heart to tell.

[C]

Is there any more?

[B]

Okay. But. But I. If Josh. If Josh asks me for any further assistance, I may have to do more. After what you just told?

[C]

Anything more selfish than sports, bro.

[B]

It'll be polite, of course. Because he really does pull off that white T shirt. But I'm gonna probably have to politely decline and say that position's untenable by you, sir.

[C]

I'm saying my math is unassailable now.

[B]

I don't know. I know Josh is married. Do you know if they have any children yet? Any school age children yet?

[C]

I have no idea.

[B]

Because I kind of think that maybe alters some of your perspective.

[C]

But if he doesn't have any children. And he's.

[B]

What?

[C]

The guy has got to be in his 40s, isn't he?

[B]

I don't know. I don't know. Josh is.

[C]

Like I said, the math checks out, man.

[B]

Don't let me down, Josh.

[A]

Chad Smith is next. After seeing what Netflix did to Caroline Ingalls in the remake of Little House. We dodged a bullet with Paramount buying Warner Brothers.

[B]

What is this? I'm not aware of this. What is this?

[C]

I am in the middle of this right now. You are?

[B]

So do tell. Because I have no idea this is even.

[C]

See this Is where. When I said yesterday, like, I get the need to go see Odyssey just to see how badly can you train wreck this thing or even Christian and all in. So I'm like, you can walk ify almost anything. Like, how are they gonna do that? I mean, I gots to know it's Little House on the Prairie. So, yeah, I think it's gonna be eight episodes. Maybe it's gonna be 10 episodes. I don't know. My. My wife and my two youngest.

[D]

My.

[C]

My oldest who just got back from Japan. We've watched the first four, so I think it's roughly half. Now. Part of it is that. And it's based on, I think, like, the third book of the series. They're in there in Kansas, and there's a. There's a black doctor and a black shop owner. Now, I don't know the books, and I don't. You know, it's possible Wild west back then, post Civil war, free Kansas. But they don't address it, those two.

[B]

We did have a bleeding Kansas over slavery.

[C]

So they don't address it at all in any racial context. So I don't know if they're just basically doing, like I've said, with a. The President, the musical, the.

[B]

Like Hamilton.

[C]

Not in the present Hamilton. Like, we're just casting these actors. Get over it. Black actors, like Little House on the Prairie, too, okay? Like, this is not the end of the world to me. They weren't doing some racial grievous thing, but the Caroline thing. Ma. My two daughters, who's a senior, who's going to be a freshman in college and a junior, they can't stand Ma. It is endless power struggles with pa, whining, complaining.

[A]

Unbelievable.

[C]

So I don't know where it's going. I mean, these are tough times. It's hard Scrabble. If she's gonna have her moment, we're only halfway through. But all I'm saying is my two daughters can't stand Ma.

[B]

So are we buying or selling this? Since you're the one that's.

[C]

I'm buying so far.

[B]

Okay. My answer is his because I've not seen any of it. He's watched several of it, so I had no idea that this was even going on until just now. All right. Daniel Horowitz is going to give us some woe and lamentation next. The steve day show. So are you one of those. I've got to buy a new hose every year, every other year, put it away in the shed, in the garage, all the kinks, tangles and everything else, you just get so frustrated untangling all that stuff all the time. Just like getting a new one every year. Every other year. Yeah. If that's you too, you don't have to do that anymore with pocket hose.

[A]

Right?

[B]

Pocket hose is one of those things that once you get it, you're like, why wasn't this invented earlier? Where, where's this, where's this been my whole life? It's just as simple as. It never kinks up it, it never tangles up, it never folds over it, it just deflates when there's no water in it. And it perfectly inflates when there's water in it. It's just that simple. And you're like, how did they take so long to do this? So polyhose, or pocket hose is the number one expandable hose. Super lightweight, easy to manage. And also you can get the pocket pivot, so the hose head that comes with it, the pocket pivot. And that thing, that thing just goes with you. 360 degrees for rotation. You move, it follows water flows. Now, for a limited time, when you purchase a new pocket hose ballistic, you're gonna get a free 360 degree rotating pocket pivot and a free thumb drive nozzle. Just text DACE to 64,000. That's days to 64,000 to get your two free gifts with purchase. That's DACE to 64,000. Message and data rates apply, of course, days to 64, 000 for your pocket hose with the free gift. She'll thank me later, I promise. I don't know how thankful you'll be for what's going to come next, but by golly, every now and then you've got to eat your vegetables. And that's why we bring on the profit of woe and lamentation. Daniel Horowitz. Good to see you, my friend. How are you?

[D]

I'm doing all right. But Steve, I could vouch for pocket hose. It is awesome. I. I used to get a hose every single year because it cracked.

[C]

Yeah.

[D]

And now, now my whole family has got it too. So it's really is a good product. Now we just need a political movement that works like pocket hose.

[B]

Isn't it one of those things you're like, how did they take so many years to create something like this? Why wasn't this done, like decades ago? Right. It's pretty incredible. All right, let's get, let's get to it. This is going to feed into the main thing I was going to ask you about today, but when you And I booked this. The ACB and Elena Kagan testimony before the Congress had not occurred yet.

[C]

Right.

[B]

About security concerns. And Elena Kagan wanted to remind us all that Lindsey Graham's one of the reasons why she's on the Supreme Court today. But I digress. Okay, but your reaction to hearing Amy Coney Barrett, who, on the most important existential issues, literally, as a coin flip, votes about half the time with the Democrats and against us, her then turning around and saying these very. This very element that I am attempting to placate and to simfor these vessels are trying to literally murder me and my children. What did you think when you saw this testimony yesterday?

[D]

So, a couple of things. So, first of all, that's the embodiment of the Republican Party in the face of the onslaught of the social transformation, security problems, economic melees we've been facing, really, our entire lifetimes, that they will be shocked when they're bitten by the snakes that they try to placate, try to play with. So that's the obvious reaction. But there's two other points I want to make. Number one that I think is wrong and one I think that's not being talked about, that's being overlooked. One I think that's wrong is a lot of people took her testimony to mean, between the lines that she's been changing the way she, I'd say votes, but I mean, they don't even vote. It's not a legislature. But, you know, her opinions based on threats of intimidation. I really don't think that's true. I think it's a reflection on their own stupidity that we elevate people based on their life story without ever looking into, is there ever any evidence that they would be a Clarence Thomas. And I said at the time, I remember, I said, she has a better life story than Kavanaugh did. But there was no evidence that she was bold on anything, really. She was never a judge before at all. She was more of a law professor. And she. Well, I mean, she had a short stint on the 7th Circuit, and in that stint, she ruled horribly on Covid. So that. That gave me pause. So I really. I think she's always been this way. This is how the Republican legal eagles are. She's very much a product of that. So I really don't think she has changed. I think she's always been that way. The thing that I think is overlooked, which is the biggest irony, is why was Coney Barrett even before Congress? What was she doing? Okay, well, you know, what was this about? It's it's kind of rare that you see them speak freely. They're usually sitting there with a black robe behind some sort of, you know, high bench. And they don't really make themselves available to the public. Well, what this is is actually something that occurs every year. Annually. They come before the House and Senate Appropriations Committees and request their annual budget. So the statements that everyone was focused on were her comments pertaining to the need for more spending for security for federal judges. And the irony that's lost on everyone is. Wait a minute. Well, we're to believe that courts have the final say over every last political outcome, including who gets to vote and become a citizen and determine every political outcome, yet they don't even have enough money. They don't have their own funding stream, not just to implement their rulings, but even to function in terms of the structure of their own branch of government. And they have to come before Congress and request the funding. Meaning that Congress could deny the funding. Congress could deny the funding not just for security, but to hear certain cases, like future cases, on what, Steve? Removals.

[B]

Right.

[D]

Anchor babies.

[B]

Right.

[D]

This is the point that drives me nuts, that everyone's missing.

[B]

That is profound. I missed it until you were talking. And, I mean, I wouldn't be in your category, but there's not many people that have written or done more on this issue of judicial supremacy than I have. I mean, I helped lead the unique fight we had in our own state, you know, and I missed it. I didn't even think about it until you were halfway through your point. And I was like, holy cow. That's a great observation and profound. Aaron even jumped in my ear and said, this is actually one of the best points I can ever remember Daniel making. That is incredible. She is. By both going there, they are acknowledging they are an inferior branch, that they require the consent and sustenance of other branches in order to carry out their duty. She's acknowledging that then. And so if that is the case, then why wouldn't that apply then comprehensively, is what you're saying, right?

[D]

Yeah. I mean, Steve, for example, let's say after this hearing, I mean, they're not going to do this, but Congress would say, look, we're not going to increase your budget for security. What do you think they can do? And then they write an opinion right somewhere and say, no, you shall give us an extra, you know, 500 million in personal security.

[B]

How would they get the money? How would they act out their own edict? That's the point. We, we, you and I, have made These points for years. How would they act on their own edict then? They have no force or will, as Hamilton himself once wrote. Right. So then how would they act on these things if they, if, if they tried to impose them? Who would, who would, who would enforce it on their behalf? Who would do it?

[D]

Yeah. So, I mean, would, would Congress be defying the Supreme Court if they decline to appropriate extra funding? And it's so, so therefore it's the same thing. What if Congress tells the president in a budget bill, we're prohibiting funding for the issuance of birth certificates to those here illegally having children in our hospitals? What if they defund any court review of, you know, ice removals? Which, by the way, they could Article three, section two, strip and regulate the jurisdiction of it. So certainly they could decline funding for it. In fact, I mean, what was it in 1801? And this is the irony of Marbury versus Madison was actually born out of, you know, this circumstance. They, you know, the Jeffersonians, when they took over Congress, they, they voted to abolish an entire term of the Supreme Court. They could make them do what's called circuit, you know, ride circuit, that they have to do duty on the appellate court votes. They could. Steve, here's another thing. They could make more judges and fewer judges too. Tomorrow. They could just say there's, there's six like there were originally, which is actually an even number. You know, so there's no, it's not like a legislature that you would think, well, if everything they say is with finality, you would have an odd number. I mean, if, if the, if the founders meant for them to be the first final say over the contours of their power and everyone else's power, why would they make them dependent on the other branches for implementation, for funding, for the regulation and construction of their own jurisdiction, their own subject matter, but also, you know, just the, the structure of the courts. I think this is the biggest thing, Steve, that we've wasted our political capital the last decade or so trying to play in this judicial casino and think, okay, we'll just frenetically confirm judges at a quicker clip and somehow that's going to work for us. And yeah, you want a few cases here and there, but on net, it's not working for us. And, and I really wish that over the last 10 years we would have spent more time educating the public on the fact that, heck, you know, maybe they don't have this power at all. I won't mention a name, but there was an organization that wanted to advertise on my show to say, oh, sign this petition against the Democrat. You know, when the Democrats were in power, they're gonna pack the courts and this is an assault on the independent judiciary. I was like, look, I can't, I can't promote that message. I don't agree with the motives of the Democrats, but they have that power. And I think I would rather make a deal with them and agree to the fact that, yeah, I mean you could add, subtract they, they rule on criminal and civil cases. They don't rule over every social and political issue.

[B]

The dirty little secret, and amen to everything you just said. The dirty little secret here is just like on immigration, there was an unspoken social compact between the mainstreams of the Democratic and Republican parties for different reasons. Democrats were looking for the largest voter drive in human history. Republicans and their donors interests were looking for the largest cheap labor drive since the abolition of slavery. But for their own craven reasons, both sides decided to just look the other way for a generation essentially between Reagan and Biden and just look the other way for the most part on what was going on at the border. And because it suited the craven interest of both sides, just albeit different reasons and different interests, same things here on the court. The left knew that they could get fundamental societal transformation done in a generation that probably would have taken multiple generations to do, maybe would have been impossible to do through a normal voting process. And then the right was like, well, this also gets our politicians off the hook. They don't have to get their hands dirty being the people on the front lines to confront these things. And we'll fight this out in the judicial arena and we can all just like Pontius Pilate, wash our hands of the matter and say, hey, I had nothing to do with all this, not my problem. Right. And so for the, again, just like with immigration, their own, their crave, they all had, they both side, both sides had their craven interests. They were different interests, but they were craven just the same. And that's why this has been, these have been the rules of engagement for four decades now. That's why.

[D]

No, Steve, that's a very profound point because you cannot find in the writings of our founders. They never could have envisioned this would be the problem. They were worried about Congress and the President. There was no concern like what the courts will say, oh yeah, you know, any Somali could come and invade and it's a citizen, oh, you know, a horse, a dog and three men and two women, that's a marriage. And everyone would be like, oh yeah, yeah, I mean, there's nothing we can do about it. But, you know, you and I both know they loved Oberger Fell because then they. They're like, well, what are you going to do? You gotta amend the Constitution. And I think this is where we are now. If you find Republican politicians that are saying, oh, we, we need a constitutional amendment, every, after every crazy thing they do, that's the fraud. Or they'll just say what they're saying now. And especially with Dobbs, that they get to say, well, you know, look at Dobbs. We were able to overturn it and we're just one vote away. And, and the beauty of it is, because what do the Republicans always want to do? They always want to obfuscate what they can do now by telling you to chase the squirrel of what they can and will accomplish if you only vote for them the next time. Right? And that's what they're going to do this year, even though there's no way Republicans will have more power on the other side of that election than this one. And they keep doing it. So this is the perfect thing, because they don't want to. And they didn't want to focus on this last year when they had the political clout to actually put in budget reconciliation, Chip Roy's provisions, defunding, you know, sanctuary cities, defunding jurisdiction of judges that are blocking, even, even now, criminal alien deportations. But, Steve, if you just vote Republican again, we'll appoint better judges, and you never know what could happen. There could be a vacancy, we're just one more away, and then we'll go and overturn that.

[B]

Got two minutes left. Since you've mentioned the citizenship issue a couple of times already. Speaking of things the founders never wrote, the idea that literally anybody on planet Earth at any given period of time could be a potential American citizen, provided they're pregnant and they're able to make it across the border with their baby. Also is something nobody ever wrote that ever had fashioned a single word of the, of the US Constitution or its accompanying amendments, including the 14th. So where are we now? Two weeks since that, that decision, which Amy Coney Baird, of course, was on the wrong side of history on that one, too.

[D]

Yeah. You would think there would be an impetus for Trump to give a speech for them to have stayed in July 4th and passed a bill or must pass bill or have that in budget reconciliation to defund again, defund the issuance of citizenship documents. What are they going to say? You have to fund it. But they're not doing that. They're not doing it. At best, they're debating the SAVE act, which is really downstream from that. I would say two things are two other important outcomes. Number one is, notice we haven't even blocked them from being counted in the census. Illegals are still being counted in the census in Trump's second term. Once you believe that anchor babies are in the 14th amendment, there's actually a stronger case. I don't agree with it, but a stronger case that says persons that illegals have to be counted in the census. So I guess that's gone, too. That's done. And the other thing is, and you're already seeing this in the courts, you can have people that, pursuant to law, are not allowed to be here and need to be deported. But, man, if they have evade that ICE agent for one more second and the baby comes out, or, you know, it's a premature, you know, birth, man, that's a citizen. And then you can't do anything about it. That's untenable. So you know what's going to happen once they establish that the kid is a potential citizen? It's going to weaken the ability to deport people to begin with. And they're going to say that they have established ties to the country because they could unilaterally assert jurisdiction. So now it's in the Constitution that you're not allowed to deport people once they come. But Steve will wait to get a constitutional amendment or overturn that case in 50 years from now. Vote Republican.

[B]

Good to see you, my friend. Thank you.

[D]

Take care.

[B]

Take care. All right, guys, got a little more than a minute. Your thoughts? Aaron, go ahead.

[A]

I said bottomless pit of money for Amy Coney Barrett and any other Supreme Court justice to give them more security. If she starts, you know, voting the way that she probably should, or we expected her to. I thought of a great idea to save a lot of money, actually. I don't think we can do universal injunctions anymore because of the Supreme Court. That's one thing they did get right, I think. Why don't they get like, 40 federal judges together to form a class action lawsuit against people coming to their houses? That would save a lot of money. You wouldn't have to pay for security. Okay, they could just decree.

[B]

And of course, everybody obeys these.

[A]

Everybody has to obey this.

[B]

Another great point. Yes, of course. Of course.

[A]

That would save oodles of money. Heck, we could slash their security funding to zero.

[B]

That's incredible. Aaron, you solved the problem.

[C]

At the end of the day, just

[B]

make a judicial decree Todd at the

[C]

end of the day though, it doesn't do any good for the right to be clean claim complaining about the obvious lies of the left. If we are so cozy with our own obvious lies on the right and Daniel just exposed one, we're gonna stick around.

[B]

Finish by seller hold for [e-mail] days for the rest of you, we'll see you tomorrow. Until then, go hard. Romans 8:28.