It's a Numbers Game: The Numbers Behind Trump v. Courts with Ann Coulter

Summary

Podcast Summary

Podcast: The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

Episode: It's a Numbers Game: The Numbers Behind Trump v. Courts with Ann Coulter
Host: Ryan Gradusky (subbing in this episode)
Guest: Ann Coulter
Date: November 27, 2025
Podcast Provider: iHeartPodcasts

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into the unprecedented number of judicial interventions—specifically, nationwide federal court injunctions—against Trump administration policies, particularly on immigration. Host Ryan Gradusky is joined by noted conservative commentator and writer Ann Coulter. Together, they break down the power struggles between the executive branch and the judiciary, discuss the real numbers behind federal judges' impact on policy, and reflect critically on both the media and the internal dynamics of conservative politics.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Judicial Overreach & Executive Power (02:55–12:31)

• Explosion in Nationwide Injunctions:
  Ryan Gradusky cites figures showing that Trump faced more nationwide injunctions from district court judges than any previous president—64 during his first term, more than all his predecessors combined.

  “This is unprecedented to have this many nationwide injunctions against a single president.”—Ryan Gradusky (08:00)

• District Court Authorities:
  The mechanics of federal courts—district judges’ lifetime appointments and appellate courts—are outlined. The rising trend of “judge shopping” by activists is described as seeking sympathetic judges to block the administration’s policies.

• Impact of Recent Appointments:
  Gradusky details the rapid appointment of hundreds of federal judges by the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations, noting that many are sympathetic to progressive causes.

  “That means if you’re a liberal organization… you have over 100 appellate court judges and 455 district court judges appointed by the last two Democratic administrations…”—Ryan Gradusky (05:00)

• Examples of Judicial Interventions:

  • Judge Jon Tigar’s 2018/2019 injunctions on immigration policy
  • Judge Derek Watson’s halting of Trump’s “travel ban” in Hawaii
  • 2025 examples: 13 district court judges (6 Biden, 3 Bush, 3 Obama, 1 Reagan appointee) issuing holds on various Trump executive orders

• The Problem with Nationwide Injunctions:
  Both host and guest emphasize that this level of intervention, particularly from judges appointed outside of the legislative process, is an affront to executive prerogatives—especially on immigration, traditionally seen as a core presidential power.

2. Ann Coulter’s Perspective: Power, Precedent & the Courts (12:31–24:58)

• Presidential Control Over Immigration:
  Ann Coulter describes how, historically, the president’s “plenary power” over immigration has been upheld, and recent judicial behavior is, in her words, “shocking.”

  “The president has exclusive plenary power over immigration… So this isn’t a matter of Trump defying court orders. This is a matter of the courts defying presidential powers in a really obvious and egregious way.”—Ann Coulter (13:25–15:35)

• Bias in Judicial Assignment:
  Coulter and Gradusky point to the overwhelming number of Democratic-appointed judges issuing rulings against Trump, raising questions of political partisanship.

• Clarence Thomas, Supreme Court, And Judicial Restraint:
  Both reference Justice Thomas’s critique of nationwide injunctions in Trump v. Hawaii:

  “District court judges do not have this insane right to sit there and actually make decrees… for the sake of the entire nation.”—Ryan Gradusky paraphrasing Justice Thomas (16:52)

3. Judges’ Backgrounds and Political Perceptions (18:20–20:48)

• Discussion of ‘Foreign-born’ Judges:
  Both host and guest vent frustrations regarding judges who are recent immigrants themselves being in charge of presidential-level decisions.
  Coulter brings up Trump’s previous criticism of a “Mexican” judge, contrasting media reaction then to years of precedent regarding the importance of jury and judicial demographics:

  “For my entire life I have been told that a criminal conviction has to be thrown out if it’s all white people on the jury… but Trump mentions that this guy’s a Mexican...”—Ann Coulter (19:29)

4. Separation of Powers: Theory and Practice (20:48–27:32)

• Co-Equal Branches, Not Judicial Supremacy:
  Coulter asserts that executive power should not be overruled by a single district judge—“It makes it feel like there is a judicial supremacy versus a co-equal branch.” (22:03)
  She goes on to explain that courts are intended to decide “cases and controversies” between parties, not to set national policy.

  “All courts… decide cases and controversies... They aren’t binding anyone else to these cases. That’s making a law—that isn’t deciding a case or controversy between two parties.”—Ann Coulter (23:30)

• Gradusky highlights how even a slow process (district to Supreme Court can take 16 months), repeated multiple times, can easily neuter a presidential administration’s agenda.

5. Media and Conservative Movement Reflections (29:52–41:44)

• Reflecting on Past and Present Conservative Media:
  Coulter discusses the herding instinct in legacy and even conservative media, how opinions become standardized to remain within the “sphere of influence,” and how genuinely dissenting views are marginalized—often until proven correct after the fact.

  “Everyone will say the same thing… For protection...And I didn’t realize what the rules were. So the first, like, 10 times this happened, I thought, wow, I must be misunderstanding something, because I think that’s totally wrong.”—Ann Coulter (31:48)

• Book Publishing & Conservative Censorship:
  Coulter shares struggles publishing bestsellers with mainstream publishers, who would refuse conservative titles regardless of sales potential, to “move the dialogue forward” instead.

6. Changes in Conservative Politics & Policy (36:27–39:44)

• Shifts in Immigration Policy:
  Coulter and Gradusky remember the isolation of being anti-amnesty conservatives pre-2016, how media and party structures shut down diverse viewpoints, and how much the party has changed since then.

• Influence of Special Interests and Media Narratives:
  They both express disbelief at how policy “autopsies” post-2012 pushed for amnesty even when it wasn’t popular with voters, just with elites.

7. Ann Coulter’s Career and Media Battles (41:44–43:52)

• Coulter recalls difficulties with publishers, but also some of her most memorable TV spats and professional highlights, emphasizing authentic argument over opportunism.

“Alan Combs, obviously, Bill Maher, Joy Behar… Rick Sanchez on CNN who hilariously was canceled…”—Ann Coulter (43:14)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Judicial Overreach:

  “District court judges do not have this insane right to sit there and actually make decrees…for the sake of the entire nation.”
  — Clarence Thomas (paraphrased by Ryan Gradusky, 16:52)

• On Presidential Power in Immigration:

  “Because the president has exclusive power over immigration. So this isn’t a matter of Trump defying court orders. This is a matter of the courts defying presidential powers in a really obvious and egregious way.”
  — Ann Coulter (15:00)

• On Media Herding:

  “Everyone will say the same thing. And for protection, I don’t know who the first person is… And I didn’t realize what the rules were. So the first, like, 10 times this happened, I thought, wow, I must be misunderstanding something, because I think that’s totally wrong.”
  — Ann Coulter (31:48)

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Judicial Injunctions Against Trump: 02:55–09:36
• Ann Coulter on Judicial Power/Immigration: 12:31–18:20
• Critique of Courts’ National Role: 20:48–24:58
• Media Herding & Conservative Influence: 31:48–36:27
• Publisher Bias and Book Publishing: 39:20–42:33
• Ann Coulter on Her TV Fights: 43:14–43:52

---

Language & Tone

The conversation is direct, partisan, laced with sarcasm, and at times humorous. Coulter’s signature bravado and Gradusky’s data-driven approach dominate the tone, with an undercurrent of exasperation regarding both the judiciary's activism and the stifling of authentic debate within conservative circles.

---

Conclusion

This episode offers a deep dive into the “numbers game” of judicial power in contemporary politics, illustrating how the interaction of executive order, district court activism, and media narratives shape real-world policy outcomes. Ann Coulter provides both a seasoned, historically rooted perspective and candid anecdotes that animate the theoretical stakes for listeners interested in power, law, and political media.

---

For more from Ann Coulter, find her columns and podcast at anncoulter.substack.com.

Transcript

[Commercial Announcer]

This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed Human time for a sofa upgrade. Introducing Anabe Sofas where designer style meets budget friendly prices. Every anibe sofa is modular allowing you to rearrange your space effortlessly. Perfect for both small and large spaces, Anabe is the only machine washable sofa inside and out. Say goodbye to stains and messes with liquid and stain resistant fabrics that make cleaning easy. Liquids simply slide right off. Designed for custom comfort, our high resilience foam lets you choose between a sink in feel or a supportive memory foam blend. Plus our pet friendly stain resistant fabrics ensure your sofa stays beautiful for years. Don't compromise quality for price. Visit washablesofas.com to upgrade your living space. Today sofas start at just $699 with no risk returns and a 30 day money back guarantee. Get early access to Black Friday now. The biggest sale of the year can save you up to 60% off plus free shipping and free returns. Shop now at washablesofas.com offers are subject to change and search. Certain restrictions may apply. The holidays are back at Starbucks, so share the season with a Peppermint Mocha, Starbucks Signature Espresso, Velvety Mocha and cool Peppermint notes topped with whipped cream and dark chocolate curls together is the best place to be at Starbucks. Saks off 5th is your accomplice for most wanted Black Friday deals. Take an extra 25% off almost everything for a total savings of up to 85%. Score unbeatable savings on Alice and Olivia, Vince, Rag and Bone Theory, Valentino, Versace and more. Wish list worthy designers from cozy layers and party perfect looks to gifts for your favorite people. The best steals of the season are dropping now at Saks off fifth. What are you waiting for? Shop the Black Friday sale at saksoff5.com now through November 30th. Terms apply.

[Lowe's Advertiser]

You want the hottest Black Friday savings and Lowes has them. Shop amazing deals like up to 50% off. Select major appliances plus get up to an extra 25% off when you bundle. Select major appliances and save $80 on your choice of Dewalt 20 volt max drill or impact driver kit. Now just $99. Shop Lowe's black Friday Savings before they're gone. Ballot through 12325. Selection varies by location. Select locations only while supplies last. See lowe's.com for more details.

[Samsung Advertiser]

As a sports fan, you want the best way to watch your favorite teams at home. And now you can experience game day in all its glory. With a 2025 Samsung super big TV. It's super big and super clear, giving you a closer view than the sidelines and you can go big without the blur thanks to Super Sized Picture Enhancer. Select Black Friday deals start now. Go big and save big on the ultimate fan worthy [e-mail] sales dates vary by model. Super Sized Picture Enhancer utilizes AI based formulas available on 85 inch and larger TVs on models QN70F and above.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Welcome back to A Numbers Game with Ryan Gradusky. As I announced last week, this is the first time my podcast coming out twice in a week. So that means twice as much data and stories and me. So thank you all for being here again this week. Please please like and subscribe and give me a five star review wherever you're listening. It really helps promote the podcast. In December of 1960, the band the Crickets released a new iconic song where they declared I fought the law and the law won. When the song was covered by the Clash in 1979, it became a punk rock classic. Turn to 2025 and President Donald Trump is having his own fight with the legal world. It's not over a girl or a gun, like the Cricket song, but it's over Executive Orders and Liberal Judges Efforts to Stop His Agenda from the start of his administration to April 1, President Trump has signed 109 executive orders, and there have been 53 rulings by district court judges to halt his actions. Now I think it's worth explaining the difference between different kinds of Judges for a 2nd District Court Judges are lower on the level of federal Judiciary. There are 670 judges who receive a lifetime appointment by their president. And like the title in their job describes, they're just allowed to hear federal complaints within a district. Once a complaint is heard at the district level, it makes its way up to the appellate court in each respective region of the country. And there are 13 appellate courts in the entire country. Anyone who's paid attention to politics, especially over the last decade, realized that the Supreme Court seats have become a highly politicized, you know, issue because of the makeup of the court and how it has become substantially more conservative, especially compared to three or four decades ago. What people and the media have paid less attention to is how much President Obama, Trump and Biden have remade the lower courts. President Obama appointed 55 appellate court judges and 268 circuit court judges over his two terms. President Trump appointed 54 appellate court judges almost as much as President Obama in two terms in one and 174 circuit court judges. President Biden appointed 45 appellate court judges, but 187 circuit court judges. So President Biden got the the most amount of judges in the least amount of time. That means if you're a liberal organization like the aclu, the Campaign Legal center, or the State Democracy Defenders Fund, you have over 100 appellate court judges and 455 district court judges appointed by the last two Democratic administrations who are sympathetic to progressive causes and issues, not to mention the judges who were brought in during the Bush and sometimes Clinton years. It's called judge shopping, where nonprofits and liberal activists will look for sympathetic judges to give them favorable rulings, issue nationwide injunctions and hold everything up in court for months and sometimes for well over a year. This was evident during the first term of the Trump administration when a number of executive orders were held up by the Supreme Court judge and spent up to a year or close to a year in legal limbo because of district court judges. One such case was Judge John Teager. He's an Obama appointed judge in California's Northern District, like around San Francisco. He's a favorite of liberal activists since his decision in 2015 to to force the California Department of Corrections to use taxpayer funded medical care to provide inmates with gender reassignment surgery. So like yeah, it says crazy as you're hearing it as what I'm reading it. So force taxpayers to give gender reassignment surgery to inmates. In 2018 and 2019, Judge Tegar issued nationwide injunctions on Trump's executive orders to deny asylum to anyone who's who didn't enter the country through legal ports of entry and against his safe third country agreement where asylum seekers who pass through multiple safe third countries, countries they could have declared asylum in but didn't, they waited to be in the United States. That was unconstitutional as well. Another judge was Judge Derek Watson. He was another Obama appointed judge from the US District Court in Hawaii. On March 15, 2017, he ruled that Trump's travel ban against several majority Muslim countries was illegal and placed a nationwide hold on Trump's executive order. Means he couldn't enforce. Wasn't until June 26, 2018 when the Supreme Court finally weighed in and Trump v. Hawaii. Trump's executive order was in fact legal and followed decades of legal precedent where the President has the right to control who and who isn't admitted to the United states. Fast forward 2025. Thirteen district court judges, six appointed by Biden, three by Bush, three by Obama and one by Reagan. Yeah, there are still Reagan appointed judges on the bench. Put temporary hold on a series of Trump executive orders. John McConnell Jr. An Obama appointed judge, place a nationwide hold on Trump's freezes of federal grants. Amir Ali, a Biden appointed judge who was born in Canada, placed a nationwide injunction on cuts to funding to federal assistance programs governed by USAID and the Secretary and the Department of State. John Bates, a Bush appointed judge, said it was illegal for Trump to fire federal workers that worked under diversity, equity and inclusion programs. And then there's John Basberg, an Obama appointed judge who ruled that Trump's use of the Alien and Sedition act that was created in 1798 was illegal and even said that it was a responsibility of the American government to fly illegal aliens who were deported back into the United States. This is unprecedented to have this many nationwide injunctions against a single president. During the first run the Trump presidency, he had 64 nationwide injunctions. This is more than all nationwide injunctions for all previous presidents combined. My buddy Josh Hammer, a very smart guy who should follow on Twitter, he said the judicial overreach is unprecedented. And Judge Clarence Thomas, Justice Clarence Thomas rather addressed this in his decision over Trump v. Hawaii District Court judges do not have this insane right to sit there and actually make decrees in district courtships for the sake of the entire nation. During a call with Josh, I described the situation and Josh said that basically there were no nationwide injunctions before the 1960s that this judicial power laid out in Article 3 of the Constitution does not have the right to make decisions for the entire entire country. Congress does have the ability however, to rein in the power of district court judges and abolish it tomorrow. The Congress could solve this issue tomorrow, actually. Senator Chuck Grassley from Iowa, he put out a bill to sit there and solve this problem. The Supreme Court could reign in district court judges. America is not a nation governed by a king and these judges should remind themselves that they wear robes and not a crown. You're listening to It's a Numbers Game with Ryan Graduski. We'll be right back.

[Commercial Announcer]

There's nothing like sinking into luxury. Annabe sofas combine ultimate comfort and design at an affordable price. Annabe has designed the only fully machine washable sofa. From top to bottom, the stain resistant performance fabric slipcovers and cloud like frame duvet can go straight into your wash. Perfect for anyone with kids, pets or anyone who loves an easy to clean spotless sofa. With a modular design and changeable slipcovers, you can customize your sofa to fit any space and style. Whether you need a single chair, loveseat or a luxuriously large sectional Annabe has you covered. Visit washablesofas.com to upgrade your home. Sofas start at just $699 and right now get early access to Black Friday savings up to six 60% off store wide with a 30 day money back guarantee. Shop now at washablesofas.com, add a little to your life. Offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply. The holidays are back at Starbucks so share the season with a Peppermint Mocha, Starbucks Signature Espresso, Velvety Mocha and cool Peppermint notes topped with whipped cream and dark chocolate curls together is the best place to be at Starbucks.

[Lowe's Advertiser]

You want the hottest Black Friday savings and Lowes has them. Shop amazing deals like up to 50% off. Select major appliances plus get up to an extra 25% off when you bundle. Select major appliances and save $80 on your choice of a DeWalt 20 volt max drill or impact driver kit. Now just $99. Shop Lowes Black Friday Savings before they're gone. Ballot through 12325. Selection varies by location. Select locations only while supplies last. See Lowes.com for more details.

[Samsung Advertiser]

Football season is only getting more exciting and you've gotta get a Samsung TV if you want to experience game day in all its glory. From game winning touchdowns to momentum shifting hits, Samsung TVs are designed to showcase every moment in unbelievable clarity. Even day games look Great on Samsung TVs with glare free tech that keeps reflections from distracting you when the sun shines through the window. And most important, even on the biggest 2025 TVs like 115 inches big, there's no blur thanks to super sized picture enhancer with Samsung TVs you can finally watch your favorite team on an elite screen. Select Black Friday deals start now. Go big and save big on the ultimate fan worthy [e-mail] sales dates vary by model. Super Size Picture Enhancer utilizes AI based formulas available on 85 inch and larger TVs on model QN70F and above.

[Commercial Announcer]

Every holiday shopper's got a list, but Ross shoppers. You've got a mission like a gift run that turns into a disco snow globe, throw pillows and PJs for the whole family dog included at Ross Holiday magic isn't about spending more, it's about giving more for less. Ross, work your magic.

[Ryan Gradusky]

To quote Wendy Williams, my guest this week is a legend. She's an icon. She is the moment. Ann Coulter, best selling writer has an amazing substack you should all subscribe to. I'll put in the link below. And thank you for being here.

[Ann Coulter]

Well, this is quite a switch. You can see lots of my interviews with Ryan on the substack, which are.

[Ryan Gradusky]

I know I was saying that before and I've never interviewed you before. So this is a big deal. So, Ann, I said my monologue earlier that the federal judges have done a number on the Trump administration in putting federal injunctions from a local district court judge. This is unprecedented, first in volume, but two, that it's happening on issues that the executive really has sole decision making on, like immigration. Do you, you, we've talked this privately, but is this normal? Like what, what? Like how does a federal judge in San Francisco have ruling over the whole country on immigration?

[Ann Coulter]

No, it's really shocking and I, I am hoping, and I think it's very possible the Supreme Court is going to put an end to the nonsense. For one thing, what you say, a lot of their rulings are things that are clearly part of the president's plenary power, like immigration. I mean, I wrote about it in my column this week. Remember the Arizona, whatever it was, SB10 or something, Kris Kobach wrote it. And by the way, the papers, please. Part of the law was upheld, but the rest of it was basically Arizona law saying we're just going to comply with federal law. Congressional laws written, you know, passed by the House and the Senate and then signed by all kinds of presidents of different political parties. All Arizona wanted to do was follow the federal law, but the Supreme Court found that no, the president has control over immigration because of his sole control over international relations. And so since Obama had decided not to follow the law, Arizona couldn't butt in and follow federal law. Which was, I think was kind of crazy enough. During the Clinton administration, little year old Elian Gonzalez was sent back to a brutal communist dictatorship. And what was the reasoning on that? One thing and one thing only, the president has exclusive plenary power over immigration. If Clinton wanted to send him back, Clinton sent him back. And he and Janet Reno, lovely woman, they wanted to send him back. Most recently and not covered heavily by the media, the New York Times, including a guy from Cato, you'll like this. When Trump, Trump issued his I don't care if it doesn't say Muslim. I like to call it the Muslim ban. It warms my heart. When he issued his Muslim ban, the New York Times op ed page was just bristling with opinion pieces sneering, this is so unconstitutional, including some jackass from Cato Institute. I looked him up at the time and he went to, I mean, normally I don't, I don't raise these things. As you always point out, you're a college dropout and you're one of the smartest people I know. But this guy went to an utterly bush league college. And I was thinking, New York Times, have you ever published anyone who went to this college before? But, oh, he comes on and sneers about how, oh, Trump doesn't understand the Constitution or the history. Muslim ban upheld by the Supreme Court and why. Because the president has exclusive power over immigration. So this isn't a matter of Trump defying court orders. This is a matter of the courts defying presidential powers in a really obvious and egregious way. I mean, the number of district courts. One thing I will give the New York Times credit for, I salute them. Here I was looking through some of the, just some of the cases. There are 27 district court rulings on arguing we refuse to comply with Trump's policy on immigration, which blindingly unconstitutional for them to do this. Courts are stepping in. And one great thing in the New York Times list was, which I've noticed they have not been doing all the time, you have to go look it up yourself. But I think probably enough people were asking. It was Biden judge. Biden judge, Biden judge, Biden judge, Obama judge, Biden judge. It's overwhelmingly Democratic.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Yeah. There's like two or three Bush judges, one Reagan judge who's still around for somehow, and it's all Biden, Obama judges. Otherwise it's completely one sided. The ju, the case you mentioned, which is the Trump v. Hawaii case over the Muslim ban, which wasn't a Muslim ban, but we'll call it that, there was, if not decades, a hundred years of precedent. The president has exclusive power to deny entry to any alien or class of aliens that he deems inadmissible or not for the benefit of the United States. And they were like, no, no, I don't believe it. And like Clarence Thomas in his, in his opinion, in his ruling, the approval reading sat there and said district court judges don't have the right to do this. They just, this is insane.

[Ann Coulter]

Yes, it is insane. And I mean, I, Trump seems pretty cheeky about all this. He's my favorite, my favorite case is where the administration admitted that they inadvertently deported someone who wasn't maybe, definitely a gang member and he's now in an El Salvador lean.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Gang member, maybe gang member. Jason.

[Ann Coulter]

But their argument is, but sorry, you courts, we have exclusive jurisdiction over this and we're not bringing them back. Which I'm totally, totally in favor of. I absolutely. I can't believe how great this Trump administration is, as you know.

[Ryan Gradusky]

We'll get back to that in a second. But, but it is the fact that an American judge said to a president, you need to bring back someone who was here illegally. That al alone, the two things that infuriate me, and I'm very partisan in one way, but one is that the second one is that when I read somebody says, born in Mexico or Canada, went to college there, and as a 40 year old, like, you've been in America for how long before you were a federal judge. Exactly five years ago.

[Ann Coulter]

That was noticeable, too. Yes, yes, yes. I'm glad you mentioned that. Ryan Jerdusky, I suspect you remember that after Trump's magnificent Mexican rapist speech, there was. Somebody was suing him. I forget what it was for. You probably remember.

[Ryan Gradusky]

I remember that, yes.

[Ann Coulter]

Though he complained about the case.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Yes, I remember that he was Mexican, the judge.

[Ann Coulter]

Do you remember the case? I don't remember the case.

[Ryan Gradusky]

I remember the individual case, but I remember the judge was Mexican. He made a big hurrah that the judge is partisan because he was born in Mexico.

[Ann Coulter]

That's what I wanted to address here. Everyone, I mean, everyone went mental over that. Oh, how dare you mention that he's Mexican.

[Lowe's Advertiser]

Okay.

[Ann Coulter]

Except for my entire life, I have been told that a criminal conviction has to be thrown out if it's all white people on the jury. So we cannot trust white Americans steeped in the Magna Carta and the rule of law who have been here for generations to rule on a criminal case with a black defendant. If it's all white jurors, well, that, it's just prima facie. That can't be a correct jury verdict. Nope. Throwing out the conviction.

[Commercial Announcer]

But.

[Ann Coulter]

But Trump mentions that this guy's a Mexican, with the entire media claiming that he called all Mexicans rapists.

[Ryan Gradusky]

It's like, there's a movie. I forget what it was. Was like a whodunit. And they were like, I mean, it was a lib woke movie during COVID or during blm. And they were like, the Mexican character was so pure, they couldn't tell a lie without throwing up. It's. That's how they treat a lot of these foreign board judges who do make rulings. And I'm sorry, they are. I don't understand how you could be in America for less than, I don't know, 50 years and you're sitting there and you're making rulings from the country as a whole. President Trump in his first term, during the Mexican Muslim ban or whatever the rest of it was, he had more nationwide injunctions than all previous presidents combined. And he's set to eclipse that during this term.

[Ann Coulter]

Yes. So, no, I think he should ignore them. He is doing the right thing. This is a point I've made. I'm not just making it for Trump. I just looked at it up. I think I made it when, when Bush was president and the issue was military trials for terrorists captured on the battlefield, kind of in, in the Commander in Chief's wheelhouse, I think you would say. And judges were saying, no, no, no, no, no. We want them in an, in an Article 3 court. They must be in an Article 3 court. And at the time, I, I've, I've always argued these are three co. Equal. I love that word. It's like flammable and inflammable. So equal branches of government. And worse than that, I mean, the executive branch, which is equal to the entire judiciary. One man holds the power of all the executive power of the United States. The legislature, bicameral legislature. Everybody gets the gist of that. These district court judges hold like one. Even. Even acting as if, you know, Chief Justice John Roberts is as important as some puny district court judge. It's still about 1 2,000th of the.

[Ryan Gradusky]

There are over 800 district court and appellate court judges. So the fact that there's 670 district court judges, so more than Congress, more than both houses combined, no senator can make a ruling for the entire United States, but one of 670 can. It makes it feel like there is a judicial supremacy versus a co. Equal branch.

[Ann Coulter]

Yes. And I'm pretty sure there are at least five justices who would agree with that. Not only should Trump ignore the orders, I think he ought to start calling up Chief Justice John Roberts and saying, I see you have an interesting bunch of interesting cases on the docket coming up. Would you mind setting up a 10th chair up on the dais? Because I'd like to hear the oral arguments, maybe write an opinion or two. You should start writing to district court judges. I would like to be included in the evidentiary hearing. I'll be making a ruling on that. It is totally beyond the power of judges, what they're doing, and maybe I'll write about this. But besides the fact that the president completely should be ignoring them, it is as if he is calling and asking to sit in on, you know, district courts engaging in criminal sentencing. This is an extension of the left, using the courts to get what they can't get through democracy. And in particular, I think to explain this simply because the courts have been doing this for such a long time, most people don't even recognize the outrage that is going on. Courts, all courts, including the Supreme Court across, per the Constitution, decide cases and controversies. The parties before them, that is what they are deciding. They aren't binding anyone else to these cases. Now they may have to interpret a law in order to decide that case or controversy. But the way all courts have kind of been operating, certainly the Supreme Court for, I don't know, I think most of my life is let's look at the law and the Constitution and we will promulgate an overarching rule for the entire country. Okay? That's making a law that isn't deciding a case or controversy between two parties. So for example, one of the cases I wrote about this week, which I made clear in my column, the Students for Fair Admissions versus Harvard, technically what the Supreme Court did was decide a case between Students for Fair Admissions versus Harvard. That's it. By implication, every other college and university in, in America. I mean, I guess they could start, you know, just openly continue. Well, they are openly continuing their discrimination, but you could sue each one of these over and over and over again. But you're just going to get these procurement decisions by the Supreme Court.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Right. If you're a lawyer and you want to make a lot of money, just start suing colleges. And by the way, law schools, business schools, states businesses. I mean, we're anti white discrimination. You have a cattle cate ahead of you.

[Ann Coulter]

Yeah, but all of these cases, I mean, it's easy to explain when the Supreme Court discovers mysteriously a clause giving providing a right to abortion in the Constitution or I might add a right to gay marriage, that you can read the Constitution and there's nothing about abortion, there's nothing about gay marriage, but we are so to courts issuing overarching rules, I.e. laws, and then applying the law they have just invented to the disputants before them that, that most people I think don't recognize. No, they're getting this exactly backwards. And what they're doing most of the time is absolutely unconstitutional. They, they aren't a legislature. We have a legislature. The judicial power is to decide cases and controversy.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Right. And it's, it's a very post. I mean it's post fdr, but it's even really post Johnson that they, or post Kennedy rather, that they really just started becoming the de Facto decider of national policy, eradicating both legislative rights but also state rights in the meantime.

[Ann Coulter]

Yes, and I'd add that the Constitution says this is rough paraphrase, that they decide cases and controversies. When the law, I don't know if this is the Constitution or one of the founding fathers. They determine the laws and facts. When the laws and facts are disputed by two people, two parties, the party could be Harvard. So you notice in this phraseology used by our founding fathers, I don't know if it's any arguments. I think it's just, I think the Constitution just says cases of controversy. In any event, it doesn't stay using their policy judgment to decide the cases. When two parties disagree, law and facts, that's it, they decide it and they bind only those parties. Now another party comes along and makes the exact same argument. There could be an estoppel doctrine or other things going on, but technically the court is deciding only the case of the two parties before it. So imagine these nationwide injunctions. I mean, talk about making law. It's, it's, it's, it's so beyond the.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Pale because Trump v. Hawaii mentioned before, which was the Muslim ban, it took 16 months to go from district court to Supreme Court. You do that two or three times and the administration's over, it's done with the next president's going. I mean, that's what their ultimate goal is. Through both judge shopping and through lawfare, in this practice of finding the non profit that will sponsor the lawsuit, the judge will hold it up and then, you know, 9th Circuit or whatever circuit holds it until the Supreme Court finally hears it and you start another lawsuit on the same issue. It just goes on and on and on. What has surprised you the most about the Trump administration thus far?

[Ann Coulter]

That I'm in heaven every day.

[Ryan Gradusky]

We finally got the executive order on birthright citizenship.

[Ann Coulter]

We finally got the president I voted for. We finally got the president I wrote a book about, I campaigned with in 2016. We've finally got him. And thank you liberals for just an absurd number of criminal prosecutions trying to kick him off the ballot in Colorado and the New York and Leticia James and Atlanta. They were all preposterous. As I think I've said before, the only case where there was actually a law broken was the documents he had squirreled away at Mar A Lago. But considering, and he did, and he did sort of egregiously refuse to return them, I don't know that a dawn raid was necessary. I don't think they. Right, Melania's underpants drawer.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Right, right, right. I mean, knowing who he is, it wasn't like the liberals accused, he's going to sell this to the Russians. It was probably just to show his friends, like, look what I have. This is. Oh, totally, yeah. I mean, it's just a brag. I mean, knowing who Trump is, it was just a brag to somebody. How did they know who's the president?

[Ann Coulter]

Oh, what if he sells them to the enemy? No, it was 100% to brag about him. And look at this letter I got from Kim Jong Un.

[Ryan Gradusky]

No, I mean, he's been extremely aggressive on immigration, on trade. I, I know we're going to agree. So what's. I mean, I hate him ask this question because I know we're going to agree. I think the absence of Jared Kushner speaks volumes to this administration.

[Ann Coulter]

And no one giving Stephen Miller the run of the place, you know, when they. Okay, fine, Miller, you hung in there and maybe you are gonna save the country now. But when Trump signed his third funding bill term one as he's about to lose, I think that was right. But we still had the Republican House in the Senate.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Yeah.

[Ann Coulter]

With no wall funding. And by the way, Fox totally ignored it. It was only because I went ballistic and Drudge threw it up on, when it was actually drudged, threw it up on the Drudge Report, that people even knew. This is the third funding bill you are signing. You've said the last two times, I'll never sign a funding bill again without wall funding. Right. And I emailed Miller at the White House and at the time and said, congratulations, you've wrecked the country. He's made up for it.

[Ryan Gradusky]

I mean, do you know what I respect about you, and I want to say to you on my podcast, is that unlike 99.998% of the people who are in conservative media, you don't seek to be, to lose yourself in order to stay in the sphere of influence, which everyone else kind of does. They don't care what they say, what they believe, because they want to be in the sphere of influence. What has changed in your, I think, third decade in political media, as far as the media, the way that political figures have influenced politicians. I mean, when I come with only three cable news network, msnbc, CNN and Fox News, it was a much more, you know, they package what a Republican was supposed to sound like. And you were always out of the box because. And you were interesting because you're out of the box. What is it now like when you have Social media and a million people, because it feels like there should be more different opinions, but there is a lot more the same. Because they all want to be in this sphere of influence.

[Ann Coulter]

Yes. And actually, the way the reason I even remember what the answer to that question is, that's how I began my first book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors, because until I moved to Washington to work for the Senate Judiciary Committee, I didn't own a tv. And then I got one because I wanted to be able to watch C Span because I'm cool that way. And so for the first time, I'm watching TV while working with the Senate Judiciary Committee and then doing a lot of TV on. Luckily, we had a president who was a felon, which was really great for a lawyer trying to not practice law. And what I noticed was, was. For one thing, the herding. Everyone. Everyone will say the same thing. And for protection, I don't know who the first person is, you know, who's the first mover here. And then they will all say the exact same thing. And I didn't realize what the rules were. So I'd come along. And the first, like, 10 times this happened, I thought, wow, I must be misunderstanding something, because I think that's totally wrong. For example, how the Supreme Court was going to come out on Jones v. Clinton. Or I guess at that point it was Clinton v. Jones. I'd written articles for Human Events saying she's totally going to win. This is what the precedent is. Of course she wins. She won nine to zero. I was the only person saying that. I was writing the article the day after the or the night of the Supreme Court argument. I hear the flop of the New York Times in front of my apartment. I get up and I read Linda Greenhouse. And what everyone was saying was, they're gonna split the baby. Split the baby. She'll be able to sue, but it won't be during his presidency. They're gonna split the baby. And it did make me sit back and think, am I. Am I wrong about this? And no. I looked at the case law again. Nope, I think I'm right. And I swear to you, Ryan Zarduski, I was the only person saying that to. But then when the result comes out, not that that I'm demanding credit, but, you know, a little pat on the head would be nice. No. No one will remember it. And why will no one remember it? Because they all were saying the same wrong thing so no one can point it out.

[Ryan Gradusky]

And you. Yeah. And you still hear that today. Is that the same wrong thing because it's what's acceptable. Like, it's acceptable even in, like, the conservative ghetto, as I call it. Like, this is what the opinion is. It could be asinine, it could be wrong. And sometimes you'll hear, like, during the First Step act, when Trump passes. Not to muddy any love on Trump, but it was a bad bill that he signed.

[Ann Coulter]

No, his first term really sucks.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Yeah, but so he would send the First Step act, which was horrendous, and he later, according to several journalists, regretted it. But you would hear conservatives, conservatives sit there and say, well, here Hillary Clinton talk about minority of black people committing a majority of crimes and how racist she is. I'm like, she's right. Everything she's saying here is correct. And you shouldn't oppose it just because she's saying it when it's correct. And it would drive me personally insane.

[Ann Coulter]

I will. I think the, the highlight of the Trump stupidity term one was in his first debate with Biden. I include it in, like, every third column I write now. It still makes me so angry after, you know, eight months of BLM riots and cities being burned down and the homicide rate going through the roof. Donald Trump bragged, I'm letting people out of jail now. Black people hate you. You called them super predators. And by the way, he didn't call black people. Neither Biden or no one else called black people super predators. They called super predators super predators, as we're seeing in New York City right now. I mean, it's always the case that, like 90% of the crime is being committed by 10% of the people. Lock them up. And you go a long way to sol crime problem. That's the super predator issue. It's a perfectly legit issue. The way to attack Biden was that he's weak on crime. Not that I'm letting people out of jail, but let's talk about happy days, the new Trump administration.

[Ryan Gradusky]

No, I go back to the media point of it. What is the biggest change you've seen in three decades in conservative media? Has it gotten better than it was in the 90s or has it gotten in 2010s, or has it gotten worse?

[Ann Coulter]

Well, they're just as stupid, but. And just as heard. Like, like, but oh, my gosh, it's a huge difference. I've done a podcast on it. I mean, it blows me away every single day. When after Romney lost and long before that, I mean, Republicans just kept pushing an amnesty, kept pushing an amnesty. McCain did it, Bush did it. Romney didn't but as soon as Romney loses he was the toughest on immigration.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Hard to believe it for sure.

[Ann Coulter]

Yeah in 2012 then you know the RNC the think tank they get together the brains of the operation and their ideas we've got to be for an amnesty and I think Rush was. I know Hannity came out. Yes and so I mean those were, those were dark days it was down to I mean I didn't know you then I assume you, me, Stephen Miller, a few Drudge. Yeah basically anyone who's ever lived in LA that, that. That great Talk radio host McIntyre I can't remember his first name but he was K A B C L A He, he. He wouldn't. I think he didn't vote for Reagan and he didn't vote for Bush because of.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Because that lady from Southern California too she was a big anti immigration I can't remember her name either There were very very Michelle Malkin at the time they were. She doesn't work anymore in media but there were very very very few because and then it turned out that the autopsy was doctored to make it seemings and it wasn't even real begin with because special interest always had I tell I give special I like talks to people who are like 2122 employees who are 2122 who never knew the 90s unfortunately who never knew how great America was unfortunately and they also never knew how bad it was in the When I started coming writing articles like 0607 and it was was at that time and my. I became a Republican as I said anyone who's against amnesty for illegal immigrants I am for because I saw how it transformed Queens, New York where I'm from born and raised and I said this is. They have like dead chickens in backyards now of formerly very nice German or Italian neighborhoods. So I just was like this is not the neighborhood I grew up in. This is. I see the transformation happening for my eyes and it is a remarkably better Republican party than it was even though.

[Ann Coulter]

It'S not just that all the idiot talking heads I mean it's just stunning to me and you know I'll retweet them sometimes but they're like direct quotes from Adios America. And I don't know if you know Adios America was not well received at Fox News. It was not well received. It wasn't well received by my own publishers Salem they wouldn't allow me to participate in radio events. I used to always do it to promote any other book. Now they've actually published this book and I would be banned from, from.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Really?

[Ann Coulter]

Yeah. All of.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Well, you told me one time so in publishing the way it works is if you have a first time bestseller, you don't make money off it. You make money off of your advance of your second book. You didn't make money for your second book, I don't think. Right. Is that correct?

[Ann Coulter]

No one would publish it.

[Ryan Gradusky]

What was your second book? High Crimp was your first.

[Ann Coulter]

Slander.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Slander. And it was a bestseller number one.

[Ann Coulter]

All summer I taunted publishers Row all summer, but no one would publish it. My, my, my, my agent, Joni Evans would forward me some of the emails and she was in with all the publishing houses. You couldn't have a better book agent. And I just remember one of them with the publisher saying, we do not think this would move the public dialogue forward. So I, I responded to Joanie saying, wow, that's so weird. I thought publishers made money on and how many books they sold. I had no idea it was how many inches they moved the public. And there's a chapter in slander about how publishers, publishers, they would give quotes about how they kept. Remember that woman, Naomi Wolf? They kept giving her multimillion dollar advances. They kept losing money on them. And then the head of the publishing company would say, yes, but we're so proud to have her as an author. And there were all these books. Actually it was my mother who pointed this out to me. One High Crimes and Misdemeanors was a smash bestseller. She, my mother got a little resentful that everyone kept referring to it as a surprise bestseller. My mother's very sensitive to any slight toward me and I thought, huh, that's funny. And so I looked up on Nexus and there was one massive conservative blockbuster after another. And they were all described as surprise bestsellers. They were rarely published by a mainstream publisher. Yeah, there was God and man at Yale, I think Whitaker Chambers Witness.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Some.

[Ann Coulter]

Of the really big ones, probably the one on True Story of Chappaquiddick, I don't remember but it's in that chapter. And luckily my publisher for slander was Steve Ross, God bless him, who actually did think that a publishing company crown should make money and so they wanted it. But I've been sitting with this book for a year.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Did anyone ever apologize or say, hey, we lost money on you. I wish you would have done.

[Ann Coulter]

No, but Steve Ross was happy because he, he published it and, and I forced the publishing industry. They said it would take a year to turn around. That used to be, it's hard to believe now, given technology. But it used to be you'd turn in a book and it would come out as a book one year later. And they said, okay, this will come out one year later. I said, I can't do that. I got to go back to regnery. I just, I can't sit with this book anymore. It's got to come out now. I know it's got to come out now. And. And so they fiddled around and they said, okay, we'll put it out in June. And my editor later told me that the reason they were resisting so much was they always knew they could do it in two months, but no one wanted to work that hard. So now everybody. Well, very quickly now. It's so much easier with computer technology.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Well, Ann, thank you so much for coming to my podcast before I leave you. I mean, I have so many friends who always like, well, next time you see Ann, can you bring me with me? And I'm like, you'd probably be too fanish, whatever, but I want to ask one of their questions. You very famously had a lot of arguments on television with like Barbara Walters and Katie Couric and you know, just like, you know, Spats on air, Chris Matthews, when you called John Edwards a woman. One of your best moments. Who is someone on TV that you enjoyed personally, that you just argued with for the, for the sake of it on television or argue for the political reasons?

[Ann Coulter]

A fair number of them, I don't know if they exist anymore. Alan Combs, obviously, Bill Mark, Joy Behar. There was a guy, Rick Sanchez on cnn who hilariously was canceled for he said something about how Jewish power over the media and to prove him wrong, they got him fired. Way to go. Wow. He was wrong. All right.

[Ryan Gradusky]

And where can people get your spot? Your substack, your fantastic substack that everyone should subscribe to.

[Ann Coulter]

Thank you. Ann coulter.substack.com I have an interview with Michael Shellenberger coming and right now the Seth Dillon interview is up. And you got my columns every week.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Her columns are great. Her podcasts are better. Ann Coulter, you're amazing. Thank you for being here.

[Ann Coulter]

Good to talk to you, Ryan. You're done.

[Ryan Gradusky]

Hey, we'll be right back after this.

[Commercial Announcer]

There's nothing like sinking into luxury. Anabe sofas combine ultimate comfort and design at an affordable price. Annabe has designed the only fully machine washable sofa. From top to bottom. The stain resistant performance fabric slipcovers and cloud like frame duvet can go straight into your wash. Perfect for anyone with kids, pets or anyone Anyone who loves an easy to clean spotless sofa with a modular design and changeable slipcovers, you can customize your sofa to fit any space and style. Whether you need a single chair loveseat or a luxuriously large sectional, Annabe has you covered. Visit washablesofas.com to upgrade your home. Sofas start at just $699 and right now get early access to Black Friday savings up to 60% off sofa storewide with a 30 day money back guarantee. Shop [e-mail] Add a little to your life. Offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply. It's the season to come together over your holiday favorites at Starbucks. Warm up with a creamy caramel brulee latte, get festive with an iced gingerbread chai or share a velvety peppermint mocha together is the best place to be at Starbucks.

[Lowe's Advertiser]

You want the hottest Black Friday savings and Lowes has them. Shop amazing deals like up to 50% off. Select major appliances plus get up to an extra 25% off when you bundle. Select major appliances and save $80 on your choice of a DeWalt 20 volt max drill or impact driver kit. Now just $99. Shop Lowes Black Friday savings before they're gone. Ballot through 12325. Selection varies by location. Select locations only while supplies last. See Lowes.com for more details.

[Samsung Advertiser]

As a sports fan, you want the best way to watch your favorite teams at home. And now you can experience game day in all its glory with a 2025 Samsung Super Big TV. It's super big and super clear, giving you a closer view than the sidelines. And you can go big without the blur thanks to Super Sized Picture Enhancer. Select Black Friday deals start now. Go big and save big on the ultimate fan worthy [e-mail] sales updates vary by model. Super Sized Picture Enhancer utilizes AI based formulas available on 85 inch and larger TVs on models QN70F and above.

[Commercial Announcer]

Every holiday shopper's got a list, but Ross shoppers? You've got a mission like a gift run that turns into a disco snow globe. Throw pillows and PJs for the whole family dog included at Ross Holiday magic isn't about spending more, it's about giving more for less. Ross, work your magic.

[Ryan Gradusky]

This is the ask me anything part of the show where listeners can sit there and send me an email. Ryanumbersgame podcast.com that's ryanumbers/floral podcast.com Shoot me an email about literally anything and I'll ask, I'll answer it for you to the best of my ability. This question comes from Wes. Wes asks, your school board pack did very well in Wisconsin while the Supreme Court candidate lost by double digits. Why do you think you were successful locally more than statewide conservatives were? That's a great question. So I have a school board pack, the 1776 Project. We do school board races across the country. We did I think 27 races in Wisconsin and we won 20 of the 27, 26 almost that we had a 75% victory rate in a day that wasn't very good for Republicans statewide. Well one school boards are more localized. So we had a lot of regions that were very conservative and they voted for the conservative judge, the conservative rather school board candidate as well as a conservative judge. That partly benefited us. But I think when it comes to Wisconsin and why Republicans and conservatives fell short, I think there's a number of reasons. One, one, I think Elon Musk, I know conservatives love him, but among Americans as a whole, they don't like Elon. Elon's favorability ratings are very low, much lower than President Trump's or Vice President Vance's. He comes across as, you know, obviously very wealthy and possibly doing business with the federal government or having control in federal government that he gets grants from which people find, you know, know, not tasteful. But they find him weird. That's just the truth of matter. They find him weird. He's somebody who's talked about things like putting chips in people's brains and having, you know, multi planet empires and, and he's just talked about things about humanity and a post, a post human world that I think people find very, very off putting, including Republicans, including Christians. That makes people, people question things. His love of AI, I think gives a lot of people some anxiety. So him be going to Iowa, doing events, being the face of the rally instead of someone like Trump, I think actually hurt the conservative candidate. Secondly, on early vote, the Democrats did a very robust early vote plan. They got people out early. So on election they jumped. Wait before election day. We've seen this problem for so long. Republicans like we have seen this problem constantly where we do not get our low propensity voters out and they get theirs out through the early vote voting system. Republicans got a lot of voters out. We had a good candidate. He did a, he did a hard work, he did a good job. He wasn't a bad candidate. But election day, just the way we run elections now starts way before the actual first Tuesday, November, it starts months ahead of time in some places because the early vote and we have to treat it like that. And I think that lastly, as I said before, we worked in certain regions like Waukesha county and other counties that may be more conservative bend to it and we were reinforcing conservative margins. We did flip two school board districts, but that mattered immensely to it. But I think that when it comes to Wisconsin and all future elections, I don't think that Elon Musk should be the face of the, of the anti liberal movement. I just think that people find him strange at best and off putting at worst. That Roman salute, Nazi salute stuff doesn't help and we have to do a better job of that. I'm not saying he has no value. I'm not saying he's a bad person. I'm not saying that. But for the face of voters when they question who would you like to have a beer with? I think they might like to ask Elon a couple questions. But autistic men in their mid-40s with 14 kids, 15 kids, whatever it is, with five or four different women is not their first choice. That's my best opinion of it and that's why I think we do better locally than conservatives did statewide. Anyway, thank you so much. Please submit questions for next week and every question, every show afterwards. It's ryanumbersgame podcast.com ryanumbers pluralpodcast.com I appreciate you all for being here. I appreciate you all for listening. Listening. Please like and subscribe on the iHeartRadio app Apple podcast, wherever you get your podcasts. I'll see you guys next week. Thank you again for listening.

[Commercial Announcer]

The holidays are back at Starbucks, so share the season with a peppermint mocha, Starbucks signature espresso, velvety mocha and cool peppermint notes topped with whipped cream and dark chocolate curls together is the best place to be at Starbucks. Saks off 5th is your accomplice for most wanted Black Friday deals take an extra 25% off almost everything for a total savings of up to 85% score unbeatable savings on Alice and Olivia, Vince Rag and Bone Theory, Valentino Versace and more. Wish list worthy designers from cozy layers and party perfect looks to gifts for your favorite people. The best steals of the season are dropping now at Saks off fifth. What are you waiting for? Shop the Black Friday sale at saksoff5.com now through November 30th. Terms apply.

[Lowe's Advertiser]

You want the hottest Black Friday savings and Lowes has them. Shop amazing deals like up to 50% off. Select major appliances plus get up to an extra 25% off when you bundle. Select major appliances and save $80 on your choice of a DeWalt 20 volt max drill or impact driver kit. Now just $99. Shop Lowe's Black Friday savings before they're gone ballot through 12325 selection varies by location. Select locations only while supplies list last. See lowe's.com for more details.

[Samsung Advertiser]

Football season is only getting more exciting and you've got to get a Samsung TV if you want to experience game day in all its glory. From game winning touchdowns to momentum shifting hits, Samsung TVs are designed to showcase every moment in unbelievable clarity. Even day games look Great on Samsung TVs with glare free tech that keeps reflections from distracting you when the sun shines through the window. And most important, even on the biggest 2025 TVs like 115 inches big, there's no blur thanks to super sized picture enhancer. With Samsung TVs you can finally watch your favorite team on an elite screen. Select Black Friday deals start now. Go big and save big on the ultimate fan worthy [e-mail] Sales dates vary by model. Supersize Picture Enhancer utilizes AI based formulas available on 85 inch and larger TVs on models QN70F and above.

[Commercial Announcer]

This message comes from Greenlight Ready to start talking to your kids about financial literacy? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app that teaches kids and teens how to earn, save, spend wisely and invest with your guardrails in place. With Greenlight, you can send money to kids quickly, set up chores automate allowance and keep an eye on what your kids are spending with real time notifications. Join millions of parents and kids building healthy financial habits together on Greenlight. Get started risk [e-mail] iheart this is an iheart podcast. Guaranteed human.