Ben Shapiro (0:00)

Well, folks, it turns out that when it comes to getting things done, the image of the thing matters an awful, awful lot. And this is something Democrats have understood for a very long time, that the image that any particular department gives off has a cultural impact. You know, there are people like me who learned from Andrew Breitbart, who said that politics is downstream from culture. But the truth is it's more of a cycle. It's more that politics is downstream of culture, which is downstream of politics, which is downstream of culture. What I mean by this is that politics, the power of government, can in fact shape culture to its own whims. And so if you give off an image of DEI or ESG from the government, you create an unofficial sanction against people who disagree. Sometimes you have actual formal strictures against people who disagree. In other words, the government does an awful lot to shape culture in this country. This is something the left has understood for a very long time in a way that the right trouble traditionally has not. And that includes people like me, because I tend to believe that the government should have a set of delegated powers and the government performs those delegated powers and we elect that government. So really, culture should shape our politics, should shape our governance. But the truth is, it works the other way too. And this is a point that many people on the MAGA right have been making for a long time, is that when you have, for example, a Defense department that decides that it's going to put out ads that feature lesbian families finding themselves, that this actually has an impact on the kind of people who are recruited into the military. And that in turn has an impact on how people think of the military. And that in turn has an impact on how people around the world think of the United States. And they're not wrong about this. That's obviously true. The reason I say this is because now nature is healing and things are going back to normal. And it's starting with governmental action. Now, you can say that culture led to that governmental action. You can say that the culture in the United States changed. There was a backlash against, against the insane radical left wing wokeism of the last decade and a half in the United States. And that is why President Trump was reelected. It's why he has a conservative Supreme Court. It is why he has a Republican led Senate and a Republican led House. And all of that is true. But it is also true that now that the cycle has begun, now that culture has shaped politics, politics is shaping culture again. Perhaps the tip of the spear in this battle is the new Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth. So again, remember the Defense Department when we were growing up, when I was a mere child, the Defense Department was all about the idea that America was winning wars. A battle machine made up of strong, particularly men who are going to go into difficult places and do things that no one wanted to see them do in order to keep America safe. That was always the image of the military. And the movies and TV shows that many of us grew up on were rooted in that image of the United States military. And the other day I was looking for a movie to watch with my 8 year old son and I brought up one of my favorites when I was a kid. I tended to watch old movies when I was a kid, meaning movies from the 50s and 60s. And so I brought up a favorite to show him the old Gregory Peck David Niven film, the Guns of Navarro, which is a classic, terrific, terrific film. If you have kids, teenagers, It's a wonderful film. It's about a secret mission by a group of essentially American and British commandos to blow up a Nazi held stronghold. And it's a really, really good movie. But the entire basis of the movie is that sometimes men have to do violent, nasty things in order to fight the bad guys. And this was always the idea of the American military. And then somehow it shifted. Somehow the American military became a tool of social engineering. And the glorious points of America's history were not America's military winning wars, but how the military was to be used as a sort of microcosmic stand in for the diversity, equity and inclusion regime. So instead of the glorious moments of diversity in the military being linked with victory. So for example, the Tuskegee Airmen being helpful in winning World War II because we needed more people and we needed to get rid of the evils of segregation in order to have a better fighting machine. Instead, that was seen itself, whether it was useful or not useful, as the high point of the military. And thus was born the idea that what the military really needs to do is draw from every segment of society. Basically, the military is not supposed to be a battle hardened machine designed toward winning and breaking things and killing bad guys. Instead, the military was supposed to be a commercial for United Colors of Benetton. That was the basic idea of the military. And that's why we needed Admiral Rachel Levine. That's why we needed members of the military who were carrying pride, progress flags. That is why every recruitment video needed to be about finding yourself as opposed to what the military has always been about with which is defending the country and defending the Guy next to you. Well, all that is changing. Secretary of Defense Hegseth, who we on the show pushed very hard for, specifically for this reason, is changing the culture and the nature of the American military and how it is perceived almost single handedly. Not because he's the only one in the military who is saying this stuff, but because the leadership of the military absolutely matters. Politically correct generals atop a structure filled with wonderful men and women who are fighting for the country is not good enough. You need people at the top of the military who actually reflect the priorities and the image of the grunts on the ground, the guys who are actually doing the fighting and wounding and dying on behalf of the country. So Pete Hegseth did a couple of things yesterday that re enshrined again this notion that America's military is back. And by the way, you can see it in the numbers as we talked about on the show. A couple of days ago, Pete Hegseth announced that recruitment hit record highs, like 12 year highs in December and hit 15 year highs in January. And recruitment is gonna keep going up. Why? Because it turns out that young men want to join this kind of military. If young men wanted to join the world's most diverse workforce and that was like the top priority, they'd be going to Wellesley or they'd be looking for a job at Starbucks. But if what they actually wish to do is join a fighting machine, which is what the American war machine is supposed to be, then they're going to want to go into Donald Trump's military. But not, for example, Barack Obama or Joe Biden's military. You know how many questions I fielded over the course of the Obama and Biden administrations from young men, 17, 18 year old men who said, listen, I have a long family history of going into the military. I'm not sure I want to go into the military if the commander in chief is Joe Biden or Barack Obama, because number one, I don't trust their foreign policy instincts. And I'm not sure I want to fight in a place that is far flung, having no impact on American interests. But more importantly, I'm not sure I want to go into a military where people like me are scorned and looked down upon, historic military families who are not members of the sort of diversity coalition that's going to be on the brochure cover for the Biden or Obama military. All of that is changing. So Pete Hegseth yesterday he went and he trained with a bunch of members of the military. Of course, he himself has a military background. Here's some of the video of him greeting members of the military. I mean, look at these guys. They're all eager to meet Hegseth because Hegseth is one of them, right? Hegseth served in the exact same kind of combat roles that they did. Okay, look, the image of that, as opposed to Lloyd Austin strolling down lines of men and women wearing, like, a face mask, is very different. And then, of course, Hegseth went out and he was pumping iron. Now, again, people on the left say, oh, this is so stereotypical. This is. So what does it matter? I mean, isn't this kind of just garish and boorish? Well, the answer is sure and awesome because the image that you want to give off to the world is one where if you screw with us, we will kick your ass. That is the image that the American military should, in fact, be purveying to the rest of the world. And Hexath is a key part of that. So he made a couple of announcements yesterday that go to this. So, number one, Hegseth issued an immediate pause on gender affirming medical care procedures for all active duty service members in a memo addressed to senior Pentagon leadership and military command. According to ABC News. It also ordered an immediate pause on all new promotions in the military for individuals with a history of gender dysphoria. In other words, this is not a diversity machine. This is a battle machine. Now, none of this should be surprising. Gender dysphoria is a very serious condition. If you have depression, you are not allowed to be recruited into the military. If you have clinical obesity, you're not allowed to be recruited into the military. Anything that is supposed to inhibit your function as a member of the military is supposed to bar you from entering the military. There's a wide variety of mental health conditions that bar you from joining the military. If it doesn't bar you from joining the military, that you're a man who wants to cut off your junk and have hormone treatment. I'm not sure exactly what should precisely. And again, that's not a question of the patriotism of people who want to join the military in this condition. It's a matter of what the military wants and what the military needs. The memo says, quote, effective immediately, all new accessions for individuals with a history of gender dysphoria are paused. All unscheduled, scheduled or planned medical procedures associated with affirming or facilitating a gender transition for service members are paused. Individuals with gender dysphoria have volunteered to serve our country and will be treated with Dignity and respect, the memo continued. But the Department of Defense would provide additional policy and implementation guidance to service members with a current diagnosis or history of of gender dysphoria. Again, the executive order that President Trump signed not long ago directed the DoD to revise the Pentagon's policy on transgender service members and stated that expressing a false gender identity divergent from individual sex cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service. And this would appear to be perfectly obvious. This would appear to be perfectly obvious if you are body dysmorphic, if you have anorexia, if you think that actually you're a fat person and you're a deathly skinny person, you, you shouldn't be in the military. If you're a person who believes that you're a one armed person in a two armed person's body, you shouldn't be in the military. The order continues, quote, consistent where the military with the military mission and longstanding God policy expressing a false gender identity divergent from an individual sex cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service. And Hegseth echoed this. He said, quote, efforts to split our troops along lines of identity weaken our force and make us vulnerable. Such efforts must not be tolerated or accommodated. And this is correct. Our military needs to be a fighting machine because, of course, our freedom is not free. Freedom has to be defended. But what isn't said often enough is that online freedom isn't free either. It too has to be defended, not by military force, but by a certain technological force. Encryption. Strong encryption can protect your right to privacy online and defend you from hackers. So how do you get this encryption? With ExpressVPN, Internet providers track and sell your data. Hackers prey on public WI fi. Governments monitor your every move online. But with ExpressVPN, their powerful encryption reroutes 100% of your online activity through secure servers, making your data invisible to prying eyes. Again, I'm traveling a lot, and that means that I'm constantly on public WI fi. I need ExpressVPN because my data is my business. So I rely on ExpressVPN. It's super easy to use. I clicked one button, it downloaded. I clicked one button, it's activated. All done. Don't take my word for it. They invited the world's top auditors, PwC and KPMG, to verify their revolutionary trusted server technology is it's the only system that physically cannot store your data. It runs entirely on volatile memory. Other companies profit from invading your privacy, but ExpressVPN goes the extra mile to protect it. So if you Want to join me in defending your online freedom? Get ExpressVPN. You can use my special link to get four extra months of ExpressVPN for free at expressvpn.com Ben that's E X P R E-S vpn.com Ben Also, even if you think it's a bit overhyped, AI is suddenly everywhere. From self driving cars to molecular medicine to business efficiency. If it's not in your industry yet, it is coming and fast. By the way, AI is amazing. It is getting better day by day. All the things you think are shortcomings of AI, those will be gone in the next iteration. They're being fixed as we speak. But here's the thing. AI needs a lot of speed and computing power. So how do you compete without costs spiraling out of control? Time to upgrade to that next generation of the cloud, Oracle Cloud Infrastructure, or oci. OCI is a blazing, fast and secure platform for your infrastructure, database, application development, plus all your AI and machine learning workloads. OCI costs 50% less for compute and 80% less for networking, so you are saving a pile of money. Thousands of businesses have already upgraded to oci, including Vodafone, Thomson Reuters and Suno AI. Right now, Oracle is offering to cut your current cloud bill in half if you move on over to OCI for new US customers with minimum financial commitment. Offer ends March 31st. See if your company qualifies for this special offer@oracle.com Shapiro that's oracle.com Shapiro you don't want your company left behind in the AI revolution. Go. Go check out Oracle right now. Oracle.com Shapiro so what exactly is happening? Well, of course the left immediately sued because the idea here is not that the military must be strong, is that the military must in fact be a diversity organization. Human Rights Campaign and Lambda Legal then filed a federal lawsuit. The lawsuit says, quote, by categorically excluding transgender people, the 2025 military ban and related federal policy and directives violate the equal protection and due process guarantees of the fifth Amendment and the free speech guarantee of the First Amendment, they lack any legitimate or rational justification. Well, actually there's a pretty easy legitimate or rational justification. If you join the military and demand hundreds of thousands of dollars in services to cut off your penis, it seems that that might be an inhibiting factor in your military service and first of all, terming a transgender category, suggesting that transgender people are their own category as opposed to human beings who have gender dysphoria and who are categorizing themselves wrongly. I'm wondering exactly what the limiting principle there is. If you're somebody, for example, with a criminal history, you can't join the military. Is that a ban on categories of people because they've acted in a particular way or they believe certain things about themselves? Now, good for Hegseth. And again, the image of the American military is going to be stronger because of all this. That was only one of two things that Hegseth did yesterday. He also renamed Fort Liberty to Fort Rowland L. Bragg. So he is renaming Fort Bragg back from Fort Liberty back to Fort Bragg. But there's a twist, and this is really smart. Okay, so what Hegseth is doing what the Trump administration is doing. So originally, Fort Bragg was named Camp Bragg, and it was named after a person named Braxton Bragg, who was a former US army artillery commander and a West Point graduate who. Who fought for the Confederacy during the American Civil War. And by the way, one of the reasons that many of the forts in the United States were named for Confederate generals. Fort Hood, for example. One of the reasons for that was not because there was a great love for the Confederacy in the United States. It was because the way that you bring a country back together after the most bloody civil war in American history and possibly world history, is that you actually express conciliation by recognizing that the Confederacy existed. And now they have been subsumed into the broader Union. But the Biden administration decided to rename Fort Bragg because the idea was that presumably black soldiers would go to Fort Bragg and suddenly they would think of Braxton Bragg and they'd think of the racism of America. Now, again, I'm wondering what the evidence was to that effect that black soldiers who were at Fort Bragg spent every waking moment thinking about the name of Fort Bragg. I have heard Fort Bragg thousands of times. It had never occurred to me to even look up who Fort Bragg was named after, let alone to. To look into the deep history of Braxton Bragg. But what Hegseth is doing is smart. They found another American hero named Bragg so they could go back to Fort Bragg's. That way, when veterans say, I served at Fort Bragg, everybody knows what they're talking about, because there's still a fort named Fort Bragg, a US Base named Fort Bragg. So according to to the Defense Department, while flying aboard a C17 from Droit Base Andrews to Stuttgart on February 10, 2025, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth signed a memorandum renaming Fort Liberty in North Carolina to Fort Roland Elbragg. The new name pays tribute to Private First Class Roland El Bragg. A World War II hero who earned the Silver Star and Purple Heart for his exceptional courage during the Battle of the Bulge. This change underscores the installation's legacy of recognizing those who have demonstrated extraordinary service and sacrifice for the nation. So apparently, Roland Elbregg was again, another American hero. But he was an American hero circa World War II. And he had effectively, apparently hijacked during World War II, a German ambulance to get a wounded soldier to an Allied hospital in Belgium. He drove, like, 20 miles. And so what they're doing is they're restoring the legacy of Fort Bragg without paying homage to a Confederate soldier, which is a pretty good way of squaring the circle. Here are pretty smart. And all the people who would normally be protesting against the renaming of Fort Bragg are gonna have trouble protesting the naming of Fort Bragg for a World War II battle of the Bulge hero. And all this goes to the sort of broader thing that Trump is doing. The broader thing that Trump is doing is very much image from it. And this is something that Trump understands better than literally anyone alive. He is the best marketer in the history of the American republic, bar none. I mean, who else would be up for the job like Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Donald Trump, just in terms of branding genius, the people who did Coca Cola. Donald Trump is amazing at branding, and he understands the power of imagery. And the left is panicking because for a very, very long time, the right never understood the power of imagery. The power never understood the power of culture in general. And when you say that again, there's that cycle, culture being upstream of politics, and then culture also being downstream of politics. It's the cycle that one pushes the other. Remember, Donald Trump was a cultural figure in Home Alone 2 and in every rap song from about 19 to 1997, long before he was president of the United States twice. And now he's using the power of culture in order to push his particular brand of politics. This is one of the things about Doge. So the Department of Governmental Efficiency, remember the history of Doge. So Doge was originally suggested as a sort of advisory council led by Elon Musk that would exist outside the federal government. And Trump talked about it, and the entire left scoffed. The media scoffed, too. They said, well, this is just a way for him to sort of throw a sop to. To Elon Musk. They're not really going to do anything. They'll make a few recommendations. It'll be like a task force, and nothing will happen. And then it turns out that Trump just outsourced a bunch of the hard nosed federal cuts to Elon Musk. Why? Because Musk is number one, incredibly famous for going into companies and clearing out deadwood. When he went into x, he fired 80% of the staff. Day one. It broke a lot of the systems and then he had to rebuild a bunch of those systems. This is something that Musk is famous for, too. Musk is famously volatile in the sense that he comes in and he breaks things and he does it fast. And if he makes mistakes, he'd rather break things and then fix them than not break anything and leave bad systems in place. This is what Musk does. And three, Musk happens to be the richest and one of the most famous people on earth, which means that he can draw the fire. It's not about Trump now, it's about Musk. So again, this is very smart strategically. And targeting these sort of waste, fraud and abuse that Musk is targeting is also very smart pr. Now, as I've discussed before, the only way to solve the systemic debt problems of the United States, it's not gonna happen through kind of cutting around the edges at the Department of the Treasury. It's only going to happen when you restructure the major entitlement programs, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. However, none of that's gonna happen anytime in the near future because both parties are deathly afraid of touching those third rails of American politics. And so what Trump is doing right now is he's allowing Musk imagistically to carve away at the image of an efficient government. That has never been true. Musk tweeted this morning that the amount of waste, fraud and abuse in America's governmental systems put to shame any private waste, fraud and abuse in the history of the American republic. And that, of course, is wildly true because the size of the American government is so huge, so exorbitant that it is not hard to throw a dart. And you will hit waste, fraud and abuse almost anywhere in the federal government. In the private sector. You see, you're responsive to things like return on investment, you're responsive to the profit motive, you're responsive to your shareholders in the government. If you waste money, well, there's always more money where that came from. You can either print it or you can steal it from the American taxpayer. So that is what Musk is doing, and he is putting Democrats on the wrong side of the issue. Because who exactly is in favor of waste, fraud and abuse? What exactly is the objection to cutting waste, fraud and abuse? So what Democrats are doing instead is they're pretending that this is an assault on quote unquote, the system, that it's a constitutional threat. Here's the thing. Democrats, over the course of the last century and a half, have hollowed out the Constitution and worn around its face like Hannibal Lecter. That is what Democrats have done. They created an entire administrative, bureaucratic executive branch filled with 2 million people to make all the rules that govern your life. They have turned the legislature into a vestigial organ of American government. And now Trump is coming in and he's the head of the executive branch and he's deploying people in the executive branch to make cuts within the executive branch. And they say this is a constitutional threat to the country. They want some separation of powers now. Well, welcome to the party, pal. But here's the thing. You created these rules and now you are going to have to live by them. FAFO well, five former treasury secretaries, all Democrats, of course, have now written an op ed for the New York Times saying, quote, our democracy is under siege. Now what they can't say is our bureaucracy is under siege, which is the reality. Our bureaucracy is under siege and it should be. The thing that they cannot say is that our waste, fraud and abuse ridden system is under siege. That's what's under siege. Instead, it's our democracy. Now, you may have gotten used to during the Biden administration or the the Obama administration hearing the word democracy thrown around a lot. All Democrats mean when they say democracy is stuff they like. If they do something totally undemocratic and you say no, they say you're a threat to the democracy. If they say that the Equal Rights Amendment is now law, even though it totally isn't, and you say no, they say you're a threat to American democracy. If you cut the bureaucracy, they call you a fascist. I mean, if what we are watching right now is fascism, which is severing the bond between government sponsorship and blue constituencies, if that's fascism, I feel like their definitions are wrong. Folks, what we are watching at work here is not fascism. I've never seen a fascist cut the government before. However, Democrats are banking on future uncertainty. In fact, they're trying to foster future uncertainty. Securing your family's future is of utmost importance in today's world. As somebody who always advocates for smart financial planning, I can tell you having the right life insurance coverage isn't just about peace of mind. It's about giving your family options if God forbid, something terrible happens. That's why I want to tell you about policy genius. They're not an insurance company themselves. They are the country's leading online insurance marketplace. They let you compare quotes from America's top insurers side by side, completely free, absolutely no hidden fees. Their platform uses real licensed insurance experts who work for you, not the insurance companies. So you can find the best fit for your family. With Policy Genius, you can find life insurance policies starting at just 292 bucks per year for a million dollars in coverage. Some options are a hundred percent online and let you avoid unnecessary medical exams. The process is fast and simple. Their licensed support team handles everything. They answer your questions. They manage paperwork. They advocate for you throughout the entire process. Don't take my word for it. Thousands of satisfied customers have left five star reviews on Google and trustpilot. No matter what stage of life you are in, policygenius helps you find the perfect coverage for your specific situation. Secure your families tomorrow so you have peace of mind today. Head ON over to policygenius.comshapiro or click that link in the description. Get your free life insurance quote. See how much you could save. That's policygenius.com Shapiro Also, research shows one of the biggest challenges employers face is the pressure to hire quickly. And let's be honest, searching for great candidates and reviewing applications can feel like a full time job in itself. If you're an employer who can relate. I have one question for you. Have you tried ZipRecruiter? ZipRecruiter has figured out how to solve this very problem. In fact, four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within day one. Right now you can drive ZipRecruiter for free at ZipRecruiter.com Daily Wireless ZipRecruiter is the number one rated hiring site that employers trust most based on G2. Their powerful matching technology starts working immediately, connecting you with qualified candidates so you don't waste time or money. And when you find that perfect candidate, you can use ZipRecruiter's pre written invite to Apply message to reach out to them directly. So relax employers and let ZipRecruiter speed up your hiring. See for yourself. Just go to ZipRecruiter.com DailyWire right now. Try it for free again. That's ZipRecruiter.com Dailywire ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire. Go check them out right now. Ziprecruiter.com Daily Wire We've been using them here at Daily Wire ourselves for years. You should do the same. Ziprecruiter.com Daily Wire. So, anyway, Robert Rubin, Lawrence Summers, Timothy Geithner, Jacob Liu, and Janet Yellen, all, again, former Democrat Treasury Secretaries, have this piece in the New York Times freaking out about all of this. Quote, when we had the honor of being sworn in as the 70th, 71st, 75th, 76th and 78th secretaries of the treasury, we took an oath to support and defend the United States Constitution. Our roles were multifaceted. We sought to develop sound policy to advance the President's agenda and represent the economic interests of the United States on the world stage. But in doing that, we recognized that our most fundamental responsibility was a faithful execution of the laws and the Constitution of the United States. We are fortunate that during our 10 years in office, no effort was made to unlawfully undermine the nation's financial commitments. Regrettably, recent reporting gives substantial cause for concern that such efforts are underway today. The nation's payment system has historically been operated by a very small group of nonpartisan career civil servants. Okay, now the first time you hear that phrase nonpartisan career civil servants, and sounds kind of nice. These are just people who serve you. You know, it's like a waiter at a restaurant. They're nonpartisan and they're serving you in the civil service, of course. Well, here is the thing. Wrong. The nonpartisan civil service has become quite partisan because their patrons are all Democrats who continue to expand their agencies, their scope of authority and their budgets. These are not nonpartisans. Very often they're deeply partisan. But again, you have to wear around the face of objectivity while enacting highly partisan agendas. These five former Secretaries of the Treasury. Right. In recent days, that norm has been upended. The roles of these nonpartisan officials has been compromised by political actors from the so called Department of Government Efficiency. One has been appointed Fiscal Assistant Secretary, a post that for the prior eight decades had been reserved exclusively for civil servants to ensure impartiality and public confidence in the handling and payment of federal funds. Here's the question. How'd they do on that? Seriously, how'd they do on that? If these are such amazing nonpartisan civil servants, why are billions of dollars going out the door to some of the worst people on earth? I mean, again, look at usaid, where billions of dollars were going directly to line the pockets of Hamas as they built terror tunnels. Explain yourselves, gang. Nonpartisan civil servants, these political actors say the former treasury secretaries have not been subject to the same rigorous ethics rules as civil servants. One has explicitly retained his role in a private company, creating at best the appearance of financial Conflicts of interest. They lack training and experience to handle private personal data like Social Security numbers and bank account information. Yeah. Yes, I'm sure that the federal government, run by career bureaucrats and lackeys, has been so secure in its handling of our private information, which is how Donald Trump's IRS tax returns ended up leaked to the New York Times just a few years ago. Their power subjects America's payment systems and the highly sensitive data within it to the risk of exposure, potentially, to our adversaries. Man, wait until you hear about a Secretary of State named Hillary Clinton who literally stored classified information on a private server and then was found by the FBI to have probably exposed it to foreign sources. Wow. That. I mean, that would be terrible if that happened. A key component of the rule of law, say these Secretaries of the treasury, is the executive branch's commitment to respect Congress's power of the purse. The legislative branch has the sole authority to pass laws that determine who, where, and how federal dollars should be spent. The role of the Treasury Department is not to make determinations about which promises of federal funding made by Congress it will keep and which it will not. Well, we're about to find out, because the reality is that withholding payments actually was something that the federal executive branch did since the time of Thomas Jefferson. But Democrats, some have to make this a threat to the system as opposed to the reality, which is it is a threat to the bureaucracy. They have to turn it into a threat to. To democracy. And again, in the words of the Democrats, everything turns into a threat to democracy. I think the most ironic instance of this is Democrats screeching and crying to the heavens, sackcloth and ashes, wailing and gnashing of teeth over the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. So, for those who don't recall, the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau is one of the most ridiculous institutions of American government. It was created by Elizabeth Warren before she was a senator. It was pushed by the Obama administration, and it was directly made unaccountable to the American people. The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. As the Wall street journal reports, before Ms. Warren became a senator, she persuaded Congress and then President Barack Obama to create a strange creature called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In the 2010 Dodd Frank Law, the Bureau would duplicate, replace, or expand on the efforts of existing financial regulators, but with a few dangerous twists. It would have no mandate to protect the safety and soundness of the financial institutions it regulates. It would not rely on Congress for funding. Instead, the Bureau would have the ability to draw funding directly from the Federal Reserve, ensuring it wouldn't have to pay much attention to legislators. Then Representative Randy Neugebauer of Texas wrote in the Wall street journal in 2012, quote, my house Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations has tried unsuccessfully to gain greater visibility into the Bureau's budgetary planning process. Those requests were denied. Once the Director has decided a money draw is necessary, there's nobody with authority to prevent those funds from being paid out. Not congressional appropriators, not the Fed, not even the President's Office of Management and Budget. Well, the problem is that this totally unaccountable bureaucracy has now been taken over by Russ Vaught, who is Trump's Office of Management and Budget Director. Vaught posted on X quote, pursuant to the Consumer Financial Protection Act, I have notified the Federal Reserve that CFPB will not be taking its next draw of unappropriated funding because it is not reasonably necessary to carry out its duties. The Bureau's current balance of 711 million is in fact excessive in the current fiscal environment. This spigot, long contributing to CFPB's unaccountability, is now being turned off. So, effectively, Vought shut down the funding. He could transfer the amount back to the Federal Reserve. What's the problem? What's the problem? It was made unaccountable to the legislature. So now Democrats, having designed the instrument, are now upset that it's being used in the reverse way. Because this is how Democrats operate. There is no consistent rule of law. There is no actual consistent, objective regulatory agency established that cuts in all directions. Instead, the CFPB is a left wing tool created by Elizabeth Warren, independent of the Legislative Branch. And when Trump takes it over and puts Russ Vaught in charge, and Russ Vaught immediately shuts down the funding, she screams and cries that somehow the legislature is being ignored. Here she was yesterday freaking out over the death of her idiotic brainchild.