December 1, 2023 • 28 mins
In an exclusive interview, Tudor talks with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton about his lawsuit against Pfizer over alleged misleading information about the COVID-19 vaccine. They discuss the potential consequences of the lawsuit, the pressure to get vaccinated, and the actions of the Biden administration. Paxton criticizes the government's focus on vaccines over a cure for COVID-19 and the censorship of vaccine skepticism. The conversation also covers the border crisis, voter fraud in Texas, and Paxton's re-election campaign. The Tudor Dixon Podcast is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Monday, Wednesday, & Friday. For more information visit TudorDixonPodcast.com
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast. I am excited to
have my friend Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton here with
me today, and he actually has some breaking healthcare news
that is likely going to affect you personally, because I
think it affects a lot of us personally. But before
I bring the Attorney General in, I want to talk
about your health, because you can't put a price on
(00:21):
your health. I stay energized and keep doing what I
love every day because I get the maximum servings and
nutrition of fruits and vegetables, and I rely on Balance
of Nature's Fruits and Veggies and a capsule to give
me the maximum nutrition of thirty one real whole fruits
and veggies every day. Balance of Nature is giving all
listeners thirty five percent off any first preferred order plus
(00:43):
free shipping with promo code Tutor. Just go to balanced
nature dot com and enter promo code tutor to get
started today. Balance of Nature's fruits and veggies and a
capsule are powdered after an advanced vacuum cold process, keeping
the maximum nutrition intact. Put your health first the easy
way with Balance of Nature, There's fruits and veggies in
a capsule get thirty five percent off your first preferred
(01:04):
order ship to you free with promo code tutor at
balance atnature dot com. Look, I feel confident about my
health because of Balance of Nature. Check out all the
testimonials from people like you on their website to see
how Balance of Nature is making a difference in their lives.
Go now to balanceifnature dot com and get those thirty
five percent off your first perforred order with free shipping
(01:25):
with promo code tutor. Go there now. Now let's hear
about the other health news that we have for you
from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Welcome to the podcast.
Speaker 2 (01:36):
Hey, thanks for having me on TUTE. I appreciate it's
good to see you well.
Speaker 1 (01:39):
Thank you for coming on here to break this because
you have big news. I think that we all thought
that there was nothing that could be done about the
COVID nineteen vaccine and those people who have been injured
by it. But you are actually suing Pfizer. Is that right?
Speaker 2 (01:54):
That's correct, And actually you're the first person I've talked
to since we followed our lawsuit today. The federal government
long ago, beck In, I think that the eighties passed
a law that gave protection to pharmaceutical companies when they
provided vaccines. There's no liability, complete protection. However, under state
law they don't have those same protections. We have a
(02:16):
deceptive trade practice and that's what we're suing them under,
arguing that they did not tell our consumers in Texas
the truth and therefore there are damages because they didn't
tell the truth about the effectiveness or the potential side
effects of the vaccine.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
And we were just talking. Something you said really struck me.
You said, I noticed that when they were pushing it
really hard, and they were saying, we're only safe if
we all get it, even though historically we're safe if
we get it, then we shouldn't care about what everybody
else is doing. That was kind of that first red
flag that was raised for you. But the real kicker
here is that they said it was something like ninety
(02:53):
five percent effective, and then people who got the vaccine
were getting sick right away. Rights that's what you're suing number, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
Because we think the number ninety five percent was not
a true number. It wasn't an accurate number. It was
a reliable number, and they knew it. That's our argument.
They knew that it wasn't reliable number, and therefore they
misled consumers about the effectiveness. So people are making healthcare
decisions that are pretty important, and they're taking on a
vaccine that hasn't really been tested and we don't know
(03:23):
the long term effects. Yet they knew some of those
potential side effects, and they knew that it wasn't ninety
five percent effective, and so people are making their decisions
based on believing that Pfizer's telling them the truth. And
of course, then the Biden administration came in and started
threatening people with their jobs, and we had other cities
and states doing the same thing, forcing people to get
(03:43):
this vaccine, and it was based on false information. And
that's a real problem because it has long term consequences
for consumers in Texas.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
What could be the outcome of a lawsuit like US.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
Well, for US, it's for every violation, which potentially is
every time they lied or every time affected a consumer.
It's ten thousand dollars per violation. That number can add
up pretty fast because since we have, you know, thirty
million people, So it'll be interesting to see what happens.
But I think we've got a legitimate chance of at
least getting more information about what they actually what they
(04:17):
actually knew at the time, and what they told consumers
at the time, and if those were not true, there
are damages associated with that.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
Have you talked to any other attorneys general about this?
Speaker 2 (04:28):
Not directly, because we wanted to make sure Pfizer didn't
know before we follow what we're going to do, So
a lot of times when you're filling losses that you
don't want to talk about details. I have just generally
talked about this with some attorney general. So look, I'm
hopeful that other attorney generals will look at this whether
they're no matter what their party, because this had an impact.
It was used as a political tool. It should never
(04:49):
be that healthcare decisions are political. They should be completely
based on what's good for that individual, and it should
be determined by that individual along with as many you know,
medical advisors as that person thinks is necessary to make
a good decision.
Speaker 1 (05:03):
So if they end up having to pay these fines,
do the people that were affected actually see that money?
Speaker 2 (05:10):
So what they would have to do is then sue
on their own behalf showing how they were damaged. This
goes back to the state of Texas. It goes back
to the legislature to decide how to use that money.
So you know, potentially it could go back to them,
that would be a legislative decision. I'm my job is
to is to sue them for breaking Texas law, violating
text law, get the money, and then return it to
(05:30):
the legislature to determine how that money then is to
be used. But I don't make that decision if.
Speaker 1 (05:35):
This goes the way that you expected to go, because
I mean, I think we all feel, like, man, the
pressure was so intense on people to get this shot.
You couldn't go out to eat, you couldn't fly, you
couldn't do anything if you didn't have a vaccine card.
And then, like I said, the pressure was so intense.
If you are successful in this lawsuit, what does that
(05:56):
mean for any other type of action? I mean, is
there anything that can be done with the Biden administration
for pushing us?
Speaker 2 (06:05):
Look, that's a great question. You know, we sued the
Biden administration over these vaccine mandates. We won most of
those cases. We won our case against OSHA, we won
our cases on federal contractors. There was actually one case
on medical workers that we lost. At the u. Supreme
Court by a very close vote. And I think once
we get through this lawsuit and information comes out, hopefully
(06:26):
that will allow people to have some remedy against Advisor
and potentially other people who made decisions that affected their lives.
Look at people lost their jobs, people lost their livelihood,
Their whole lives were affected by this, and you know,
it's going to open up a lot of questions about
our federal Government's going to open a lot of questions
about how do we deal with this in the future
(06:47):
when the government is pushing something, you know, at people
and threatening them. When even the federal government didn't have
all the information, or maybe maybe they knew the information,
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
They suddenly have more information because all of a sudden,
now they're saying, if you didn't get the shot and
we kicked you out of the military, you can come back. Why.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
I think they are starting to you know, they realize
that this information is going to come out, and these
people in the military were treated horribly. I had, you know,
somebody my family that got kicked out of the military
who just didn't want to take the vaccine. I had
other members of my family were forced to take it
and I think one of them potentially had had a
tremendous side effect because of it. But that's, you know,
(07:29):
those consequences of having a vaccine that's not tested, that
hasn't hasn't had virtually no testing, and the federal government says,
you're going to be forced to make a healthcare decision
by us, and if you don't, we're going to punish you.
That's effectively what the federal government did, and so a
lot of a lot of states and local governments. It's
it's unfortunate that they were I don't know so so
(07:54):
decided that this was their their decision and that they
had to tell us what was right, even though they didn't, Oh,
they didn't have any idea, and yet they assumed or
presume that they had, that they had pressure as all
into making a healthcare decision that wasn't necessarily may not
have necessarily been the best for that person.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
Well, on this trickles down. You have the federal government
who was demanding this. You have then offshoots of the
federal government, you have contractors to the federal government, and
then you have just regular businesses that said, well, hey,
the federal government is demanding this, we have to demand this.
So at what point I think. I think in the
past few months people have been saying there's nothing we
(08:31):
can do because of that act that does protect the
pharmaceutical companies. This is a different angle that you're taking.
Does that mean that eventually, if you did have side
effects from the vaccine, then you as a person can
sue the pharmaceutical companies? Or what does that mean for
businesses who required it? Could they be sued?
Speaker 2 (08:52):
I think it's going to open up a lot of questions.
It does the federal government with that provision that says,
you know, they are not liable for any any lawsuits
under federal law. I think people would have to look
for state law claims and figure out whether those are
going to be effective against this sort of broad federal law.
So I don't know. I haven't researched all of the
(09:14):
individual aspects. All I know is I feel like we
have a legitimate state law that we have the obligation
in my office to enforce. We're going to do that.
We think that Pfizer has clearly broken that law and
violated our state laws and has harmed people in my
state by the thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, potentially millions,
and so that is my job to go pursue.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon Podcast. I think as people are waking
up across the country to some of the things that
are happening behind the scenes, that that swamp that we
hear so much about, they see laws like this, or
they read about laws like this, and they think, how
does this type of crony capitalism happen? How do you
(09:58):
end up with a law that's is that you cannot
sue the pharmaceutical manufacturers In a culture of a massive
amount of pharmaceuticals and in the United States, these pharmaceutical
companies can advertise they can go right to your kids,
they can go right to adults. I mean, they have
a lot of leeway and they're protected. How does that happen?
Speaker 2 (10:19):
So, look, I'm sure there were there were some people
that had good intentions when they pass this law, because
they want vaccines to be produced and not result in
a lot of liability because otherwise there you know, potentially
don't get produced. On the other hand, there seems like
there ought to be some aspect here of actually testing
it and making sure that it works and doesn't have
side effects, and there shouldn't be the ability to lie
(10:43):
and say, well, we're covered by federal law. We can
lie about it and say it was effective even when
it wasn't, and it didn't have side effects even then
when it did. So, you know, there's got to be
some balance here. I think that federal law has some
good aspects to it, but it's you know, I don't
think people thought about the consequences of that broad of
(11:03):
a law. There ought to be some exceptions and some caveats,
so that so these companies have to at least test
it to some degree and then not lie about it
if they find out it's not working.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
This is like the ultimate case of gaslighting, because we
were told constantly if you said anything negative about the
vaccine that was misinformation, you couldn't. People were kicked off
of social media, they were silenced for this. But here
you are having to sue them because they lied.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Yeah, I know, it's crazy. And here's the thing. You know,
the Biden administration was pushing these big tech companies to
do exactly that, to shut down any speech that dared
to question this, even though it turned out these people
were right and they were like they were turned into
almost like criminals, and they were told they were insane
and crazy, and they were dumb, and only dumb people
(11:53):
wouldn't question, would question the legitiamity of this vaccine. As
it turned out, these people were smart and they had
good reason. There were red flags, And as I said
to you earlier, the red flags are to me were
that the fact that the federal government was pushing this
so hard. And I'm like, if you've got the vaccine,
(12:14):
why do you care if anybody else gets expecting Why
do you have to threaten them with their jobs or
some other punishment. If supposedly the vaccine's going to work
for you, you're good, right, Why do you care what
other people do?
Speaker 1 (12:25):
I mean when you say it like that, obviously we
can all go back and remember in our minds and go, yeah,
I thought that was strange. You know, why did we
Why weren't you safe if you had it? I mean,
isn't that the whole idea of a vaccine and then
you're safe from it? Right? That's exactly bubble around you.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
Yes, And that's what I was seeing at the time.
You know, I ended up getting COVID before I could
get the vaccine, and I took the monoclonal. It was
really effective in ending my symptoms within twelve hours, and
I was getting pretty sick, so I knew there was
a cure. Unfortunately, government didn't. Government didn't focus on the cure.
They focused on a vaccine that didn't work. And so
the government really let us down here. The federal government,
(13:02):
the Biden administration, has let us down because they have
forced and punished people, and they were wrong, and I
wish they'd come out and say that they were wrong.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
So let me ask you this. If you are successful
in this, will they have to stop making these claims
because they're still vaccinating people and they're still telling people
that this is what this is going to protect you.
Will they have to tell you the truth of the
efficacy of the vaccine.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
They'll have to decide whether they want us to assue
them again. I mean, I guess right. I mean, all
part of.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
It depends on I have a lot of money to
be seene.
Speaker 2 (13:33):
We have to be successful here. And one of the
good things about this litigation is it's going to bring
out information that the public hasn't known, and we're going
to make sure that information gets out. So at the
very least, whether we win or lose, I think we're
going to win, and potentially we'd have other lawsuits, but
at the very least the public can go, wait a minute,
I'm going to be a little I'm going to be
(13:55):
a lot more hesitant to trust the Biden administration next time,
or any other government any that tells me I have
to get it, or I'm going to lose my job,
or I have to get that pressure. Didn't that up.
Speaker 1 (14:06):
I think that's key because we've had a lot of
people on the podcast too, have said we have no
access to the raw data. We can't actually see what
the true side effects are, whether or not they've found
that there are problems with myocarditis and all these other issues,
and that is scary to me, and I think that's
what's scary to most peoples. We don't actually have that information.
So we are hoping that you are able to expose
(14:28):
some of the data and we can actually find out
what they know about the vaccine and whether they know
if there are issues or not. But I do want
to say I think you still hold the record for
being the attorney general that has sued the Biden administration
more times than anyone else.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
Is that correct, I think by a long shot. I
think we're in two and a half years. We've a
little over two and a half years. We've sued them
fifty times. So it's you know, it's a lot of lawsuits.
I don't think anybody else in the country's even close.
You know, part of it is where a big state,
we have resources, but we also are committed to holding
the Biden administration accountable. And there are consequences of that.
(15:03):
They don't like us, and they've they've they've taken it
out on us in many ways, including me. But it's
still our job to hold the president accountable, to follow
federal law, to follow the US Constitution, and not try
to override the constitution become more than a president. We
have many countries that do that. In this country, we're
supposed to have a president that operates within the law,
(15:25):
not a president who makes the laws.
Speaker 1 (15:26):
Well, we appreciate that, We appreciate the fact that you
are looking out for us. And another lawsuit that you
have out there is right now against media matters, And
I don't know if a lot of people understand what
happened here with X and the whole anti Semitic posts,
and people have this trust for organizations like Media Matters
(15:48):
that market themselves as a watchdog, but this is not
what they're doing. Can you explain a little bit about
that lawsuit?
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Yeah, I'm sorry about the lighting right now, but it'll
be back the Media Matters. It's not a lossit yet.
We've started an investigation and that investigation is based on
information we've gotten from you know, public, from the public,
and it looks like Media Matters is manipulating data and
(16:15):
advertising and trying to take out Twitter by by forcing
or pushing advertisers towards dropping ads on Twitter because they've
effectively lied about what Twitter is doing. And so look,
we're just in the investigation stage. But if they have
deceived consumers about advertising and about trying to say that
(16:39):
Twitter is racist when they're not, and trying to destroy
a company that has an impact on my say, and
we have two ways of looking at this. One who's
under the accept of Trade Practice stack, but we also
oversee non charitable organizations, which this is it's a it's
a nonprofit and so we have an obligation to make
sure that they're not misleading consumers that they're not that
(17:00):
they're following state law and that's what we're going to do. Well.
Speaker 1 (17:02):
I think that's interesting to talk about because a lot
of people don't realize that many of these media companies
are nonprofits for really one political side or the other.
And you have this this is a very leftist group
out there, and we know that X has been a
target for a lot of the leftists that don't like
the fact that Elon Musk bought it and said, oh,
(17:22):
by the way, this is what was happening behind the scenes. Ultimately,
there are people out there that want revenge for the
Twitter files. They are not happy about that, and it
appears like this potentially could be the case. But these organizations,
they're infiltrating every state and they're putting out stories that
they're pretending like they're big media organizations and putting out
(17:45):
hit pieces on candidates. I mean, this is getting kind
of out of control.
Speaker 2 (17:48):
Yeah, I'm pretty I'm pretty sure they put hit pieces
on on me. So yeah, they're a left wing organization.
They've been typically very untruthful about what they presented, and
they've done it in a deceptive way. And if that's
what they did here, then we have a potential of
taking away their ability to operate in Texas and potentially
holding them liable for damages to our state.
Speaker 1 (18:10):
Talking about your state, I want to talk a little
bit before I let you go about the border crisis,
because we have to call it a crisis. We have
more crossings than we've ever seen. What's happening on the
global scale with people that are obviously countries that are
obviously anti United States. We've got China and Iran and
(18:32):
North Korea and Russia all talking, all colluding together to
potentially take over as world leaders. What does that mean
to you when you see your very state in such
a compromising position because the Biden administration is so incompetent.
Speaker 2 (18:50):
Well, it makes me angry because we have people dying.
We have children that are dying from over to So
I've known families that have lost kids that should be
here today. Because the cartels now are partnering with the
Biden administration. Now, it's may not have a signed agreement,
but let's be honest. The cartels used to come to
the border try to get people across, but they had
to run from border patrol and hide and try to
(19:12):
sneak them across. And we had laws in place that
tried to stop them, and if they came in, we
deported them, made them stay in Mexico, or deported them
under Title forty two the COVID stuff, or we found
ways to not give them asylum and they had to
stay out of the country. And we were trying to
build a wall. Under the Trump administration. All of that
was dismantled with Biden, and now the cartels go, Okay,
(19:33):
how do we find border patrol. The faster we can
get to border patrol with as many people as possible,
the more money we make. And they make, you know,
eight to twelve thousand dollars a person. And when they
do that, they keep border patrol busy, processing thousands of
people every month and hundreds of thousands every month. And
when they do that, border patrol's not stopping the drug
trafficking that's going on behind, you know, because they're too busy.
(19:55):
And also we have the terrorists problem. In the last
six months and number two terror people, the tears on
the watch list that we've caught has gone up dramatically.
I think it's like six times the last three years
in just six months. That means that we have more
people trying to get into the country that potentially could
commit terrorist acts, and we know we don't nearly catch
(20:16):
we don't come close to catching all of them, and
so we have created a long term problem. The cartels
are building an organization in our country for drugs, sex trafficking,
human trafficking, other crimes, and then we have a whole
terrorist issue, and the Biden administration has promoted it.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon podcast. Part of the human trafficking I
think we need to talk about, which is the drug trafficking.
In human trafficking is what I think concerns most moms
out there, because moms are like, gosh, there's kids that
are unsafe and there's drugs coming in that could get
(20:53):
my kid. And Senator Blackburn just she just supported a
bill that would require fingerprint for all children, and we
just talked about this on the podcast. The reason that
she's so concerned about that is because the human trafficking
part of this is that these kids get passed back
and forth across the border to pretend they are the
(21:13):
child of an adult that's coming through. But what's happening
to these kids at the border is pretty sick, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (21:20):
Yes, it is, And actually, you know, there are programs
that address the issue that Center of Blackburn's talking about.
So our state for the longest time, I think we
just stopped it for some reason. But our state and
many other states use these real child ID kids and
they spend a little bit of money. It's not very
expensive for child and they're able to get all the
kids DNA, so the parents hold it so if something
(21:42):
happens their kids, it makes it easier for the law
enforcement authorities to track these people down, track these kids down.
So I would encourage states to do it voluntarily and
not have some federal law. Have the states operate it
at a relatively low cost. Marshall Blackware wants to pass
that because obviously a lot of states are not doing it.
(22:04):
It may be the ultimate best way to resolve this,
because we do need to protect our kids. I just
want to make sure the parents control the information, not
the federal government before.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
I let you go. We recently heard that the cartels
are actually working directly with China, and this whole connection
with fentanyl, the drugs the border being out of control
is just another way for China to weaken society here
in the United States. We see what the concern is
over in Taiwan, obviously, we see the concern in Israel
(22:36):
with Iran, all of these worldwide events going on that
are just the world at war. How scary is it
to think that China has a foothold in Mexico? China
seems to have a foothold in Central America. Have we
made a mistake by saying we need to have a
border and do nothing with these countries. Should we have
(22:59):
had more of a footprint in these countries instead of
China and tried to build up manufacturing and that kind
of thing in Central America and push China out. Are
we in a situation where China has more control of
and more and closer control of people and human trafficking
(23:20):
and drugs and you know, governments than we do.
Speaker 2 (23:24):
Yeah. Look, I think we've made a mistake for decades,
whether it's a Bush administration or whether it was you know,
either Bush administration, Clinton administration, Obama administration. It wasn't until
Trump started telling the American people the truth about China.
They're not our friend, They're not our friend economically, they're
not our friend. Politically, they want to dominate the world,
and they view us as a threat and not as
(23:46):
an ally or a cooperative partner. They want to hurt us,
and so we need to be aware of that. And
that includes sending fetanol from China to Mexico. That gets
important to kill our kids. They're great with that. That's
part of their plan as much to destroy our country
as possible. And I think we need to be aware
of that. We need to have leadership, which we don't
have right now, that addresses that, or else we will
(24:09):
suffer the consequences, which will be China will get their way,
they will dominate us. They will hurt us economically, they
will hurt us politically, and they may absolutely hurt our
freedom and destroy our country.
Speaker 1 (24:20):
There's always a concern that Texas. I mean every year
they tell us, the Democrats tell us we've got enough
people from California. Now Texas is going to go blue.
Obviously you're watching what's going on. Is there any chance
that Joe Biden can win this election next year?
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Yes? And the reason I say that isn't I can't
prosecute voter frauding where the Corta Crawl appeals which is
a nine member court in our state. It's the highest
court for krimnin Matter struck down a statue from nineteen
fifty one where they had thousands of cases of president
because we were prosecuting just at the time they struck
it down, we were prosecuting or investigating over nine hundred
(24:57):
cases of voter fraud in Texas. But the relative small
number of lawyers, they struck it down saying that I
didn't have the authority to go to court because I'm
in the executive branch, and that's a violation separation of parts.
The most ludicrous, one of the most ludicrous, insane decisions
made by any court in Texas ever. But they did it.
I believe they. I believe that because they want no
voter fraud prosecuted. If that occurs, the das and these
(25:20):
local districts are the only one that can prosecute voter fraud.
So Harris County, which is Houston, Austin, which is Travis County,
Bear County which San Antonia, those das are sores funded DA's,
they will never prosecute voter fraud. So that the strategy
is the Quarter Criminal Appeals strikes down the statute which
by the way, I'm trying to win an election against
three of them right now, so we can get this
back and get the legislature to pass it again, which
(25:42):
I had it through the Senate at this time. The
House killed it. So we have a complicated problem in Texas.
If we don't resolve this soon and we can't prosecute
voter fraud, I can tell you what's going to happen.
You can just you can change the name of Texas
to Georgia or Michigan or Wisconsin, because right now I
can't anything to prevent butter fraud. Last time I did,
we stopped it here. We didn't have the mail and
(26:05):
bellop fraud issues that you had in Michigan and Wisconsin
because we went and fought it. And now the quota
Krino pills has struck it down and made it very difficult.
I'm convinced they're source funded, and we've got to win
these three races or we're going to be in trouble
in Texas.
Speaker 1 (26:20):
I think that's what people do not see is that
they have he has placed people in strategic positions where
folks go I mean, I don't need to vote for that.
That's not a big deal, and they get their people
to go out and vote. They end up with these prosecutors,
they end up with district attorneys, they end up with
secretaries of state, as we've seen in Michigan in Arizona,
(26:44):
where those folks then run for governor. That's what is
happening with the secretary of State in Michigan right now.
She's already come out and said she'll be running for governor.
These people change the way elections are run and then
you cannot beat them. It's very scary.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
Well, and that's exactly what the Court of Criminals is
trying to do. They Soros got his DA's in place.
This court is not known by people because it only
deals with criminal cases, so most people don't even know.
Even most really educated voters Republicans don't know who's on
that court. So it's all Republican. It's nine members, they
have six year terms. There's only three of them up
(27:19):
each time. It was a genius move for George Soros,
and this Court of Criminal Appeals is trying to do
everything they can to me to take me out. So
I'm the last piece and we have to win in
March or we are in trouble.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
Yeah, we've noticed you've been under a fire lately.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
Yes, lightly, And we have to win our speaker. We
have to beat the Speaker of the House, commonly known
as drunk Dad. He needs to be be two because
I need them to pass this law again so that
we can prosecute voter fraud in Texas. Otherwise we're in trouble.
We will be a democratic state and we will have problem. Otherwise,
I think we're strong. If we can have actually have
fair elections, we will win the state for I think decades.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
Well, I know that you're going to keep fighting. I
appreciate you coming on to I know you're very busy.
I love what you're doing. I believe that you will
win again. And I just give you all of my
prayers and I can send you my good juju to
go out there and fight these terrible Democrats in Texas.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
All right, Well, I wish it was just Democrats. Some
of it's Republicans.
Speaker 1 (28:16):
Like that's true, Yeah, you drunken friend Republican.
Speaker 2 (28:21):
Yeah, the corn Carl appeals And of course, you know,
Carl Rode was the main player and the whole issue
that I had to deal with the last six months.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
Well, okay, so you just keep fighting the bad guys.
All right, I'll do that viser first, we're really excited
about Pfizer.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
Well, thanks a lot, looking forward to seeing what they
have to say.
Speaker 1 (28:39):
Absolutely, thank you and thank you all for joining us
on the Tutor Dixon Podcast. For this episode and others,
go to Tutor dixonpodcast dot com. You can subscribe right there,
or head over to the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or
wherever you get your podcasts and join us next time
on the Tutor Dixon Podcast. Have a blessing.
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast. I am excited to
have my friend Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton here with
me today, and he actually has some breaking healthcare news
that is likely going to affect you personally, because I
think it affects a lot of us personally. But before
I bring the Attorney General in, I want to talk
about your health, because you can't put a price on
(00:21):
your health. I stay energized and keep doing what I
love every day because I get the maximum servings and
nutrition of fruits and vegetables, and I rely on Balance
of Nature's Fruits and Veggies and a capsule to give
me the maximum nutrition of thirty one real whole fruits
and veggies every day. Balance of Nature is giving all
listeners thirty five percent off any first preferred order plus
(00:43):
free shipping with promo code Tutor. Just go to balanced
nature dot com and enter promo code tutor to get
started today. Balance of Nature's fruits and veggies and a
capsule are powdered after an advanced vacuum cold process, keeping
the maximum nutrition intact. Put your health first the easy
way with Balance of Nature, There's fruits and veggies in
a capsule get thirty five percent off your first preferred
(01:04):
order ship to you free with promo code tutor at
balance atnature dot com. Look, I feel confident about my
health because of Balance of Nature. Check out all the
testimonials from people like you on their website to see
how Balance of Nature is making a difference in their lives.
Go now to balanceifnature dot com and get those thirty
five percent off your first perforred order with free shipping
(01:25):
with promo code tutor. Go there now. Now let's hear
about the other health news that we have for you
from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. Welcome to the podcast.
Speaker 2 (01:36):
Hey, thanks for having me on TUTE. I appreciate it's
good to see you well.
Speaker 1 (01:39):
Thank you for coming on here to break this because
you have big news. I think that we all thought
that there was nothing that could be done about the
COVID nineteen vaccine and those people who have been injured
by it. But you are actually suing Pfizer. Is that right?
Speaker 2 (01:54):
That's correct, And actually you're the first person I've talked
to since we followed our lawsuit today. The federal government
long ago, beck In, I think that the eighties passed
a law that gave protection to pharmaceutical companies when they
provided vaccines. There's no liability, complete protection. However, under state
law they don't have those same protections. We have a
(02:16):
deceptive trade practice and that's what we're suing them under,
arguing that they did not tell our consumers in Texas
the truth and therefore there are damages because they didn't
tell the truth about the effectiveness or the potential side
effects of the vaccine.
Speaker 1 (02:31):
And we were just talking. Something you said really struck me.
You said, I noticed that when they were pushing it
really hard, and they were saying, we're only safe if
we all get it, even though historically we're safe if
we get it, then we shouldn't care about what everybody
else is doing. That was kind of that first red
flag that was raised for you. But the real kicker
here is that they said it was something like ninety
(02:53):
five percent effective, and then people who got the vaccine
were getting sick right away. Rights that's what you're suing number, Yeah.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
Because we think the number ninety five percent was not
a true number. It wasn't an accurate number. It was
a reliable number, and they knew it. That's our argument.
They knew that it wasn't reliable number, and therefore they
misled consumers about the effectiveness. So people are making healthcare
decisions that are pretty important, and they're taking on a
vaccine that hasn't really been tested and we don't know
(03:23):
the long term effects. Yet they knew some of those
potential side effects, and they knew that it wasn't ninety
five percent effective, and so people are making their decisions
based on believing that Pfizer's telling them the truth. And
of course, then the Biden administration came in and started
threatening people with their jobs, and we had other cities
and states doing the same thing, forcing people to get
(03:43):
this vaccine, and it was based on false information. And
that's a real problem because it has long term consequences
for consumers in Texas.
Speaker 1 (03:52):
What could be the outcome of a lawsuit like US.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
Well, for US, it's for every violation, which potentially is
every time they lied or every time affected a consumer.
It's ten thousand dollars per violation. That number can add
up pretty fast because since we have, you know, thirty
million people, So it'll be interesting to see what happens.
But I think we've got a legitimate chance of at
least getting more information about what they actually what they
(04:17):
actually knew at the time, and what they told consumers
at the time, and if those were not true, there
are damages associated with that.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
Have you talked to any other attorneys general about this?
Speaker 2 (04:28):
Not directly, because we wanted to make sure Pfizer didn't
know before we follow what we're going to do, So
a lot of times when you're filling losses that you
don't want to talk about details. I have just generally
talked about this with some attorney general. So look, I'm
hopeful that other attorney generals will look at this whether
they're no matter what their party, because this had an impact.
It was used as a political tool. It should never
(04:49):
be that healthcare decisions are political. They should be completely
based on what's good for that individual, and it should
be determined by that individual along with as many you know,
medical advisors as that person thinks is necessary to make
a good decision.
Speaker 1 (05:03):
So if they end up having to pay these fines,
do the people that were affected actually see that money?
Speaker 2 (05:10):
So what they would have to do is then sue
on their own behalf showing how they were damaged. This
goes back to the state of Texas. It goes back
to the legislature to decide how to use that money.
So you know, potentially it could go back to them,
that would be a legislative decision. I'm my job is
to is to sue them for breaking Texas law, violating
text law, get the money, and then return it to
(05:30):
the legislature to determine how that money then is to
be used. But I don't make that decision if.
Speaker 1 (05:35):
This goes the way that you expected to go, because
I mean, I think we all feel, like, man, the
pressure was so intense on people to get this shot.
You couldn't go out to eat, you couldn't fly, you
couldn't do anything if you didn't have a vaccine card.
And then, like I said, the pressure was so intense.
If you are successful in this lawsuit, what does that
(05:56):
mean for any other type of action? I mean, is
there anything that can be done with the Biden administration
for pushing us?
Speaker 2 (06:05):
Look, that's a great question. You know, we sued the
Biden administration over these vaccine mandates. We won most of
those cases. We won our case against OSHA, we won
our cases on federal contractors. There was actually one case
on medical workers that we lost. At the u. Supreme
Court by a very close vote. And I think once
we get through this lawsuit and information comes out, hopefully
(06:26):
that will allow people to have some remedy against Advisor
and potentially other people who made decisions that affected their lives.
Look at people lost their jobs, people lost their livelihood,
Their whole lives were affected by this, and you know,
it's going to open up a lot of questions about
our federal Government's going to open a lot of questions
about how do we deal with this in the future
(06:47):
when the government is pushing something, you know, at people
and threatening them. When even the federal government didn't have
all the information, or maybe maybe they knew the information,
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
They suddenly have more information because all of a sudden,
now they're saying, if you didn't get the shot and
we kicked you out of the military, you can come back. Why.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
I think they are starting to you know, they realize
that this information is going to come out, and these
people in the military were treated horribly. I had, you know,
somebody my family that got kicked out of the military
who just didn't want to take the vaccine. I had
other members of my family were forced to take it
and I think one of them potentially had had a
tremendous side effect because of it. But that's, you know,
(07:29):
those consequences of having a vaccine that's not tested, that
hasn't hasn't had virtually no testing, and the federal government says,
you're going to be forced to make a healthcare decision
by us, and if you don't, we're going to punish you.
That's effectively what the federal government did, and so a
lot of a lot of states and local governments. It's
it's unfortunate that they were I don't know so so
(07:54):
decided that this was their their decision and that they
had to tell us what was right, even though they didn't, Oh,
they didn't have any idea, and yet they assumed or
presume that they had, that they had pressure as all
into making a healthcare decision that wasn't necessarily may not
have necessarily been the best for that person.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
Well, on this trickles down. You have the federal government
who was demanding this. You have then offshoots of the
federal government, you have contractors to the federal government, and
then you have just regular businesses that said, well, hey,
the federal government is demanding this, we have to demand this.
So at what point I think. I think in the
past few months people have been saying there's nothing we
(08:31):
can do because of that act that does protect the
pharmaceutical companies. This is a different angle that you're taking.
Does that mean that eventually, if you did have side
effects from the vaccine, then you as a person can
sue the pharmaceutical companies? Or what does that mean for
businesses who required it? Could they be sued?
Speaker 2 (08:52):
I think it's going to open up a lot of questions.
It does the federal government with that provision that says,
you know, they are not liable for any any lawsuits
under federal law. I think people would have to look
for state law claims and figure out whether those are
going to be effective against this sort of broad federal law.
So I don't know. I haven't researched all of the
(09:14):
individual aspects. All I know is I feel like we
have a legitimate state law that we have the obligation
in my office to enforce. We're going to do that.
We think that Pfizer has clearly broken that law and
violated our state laws and has harmed people in my
state by the thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, potentially millions,
and so that is my job to go pursue.
Speaker 1 (09:36):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon Podcast. I think as people are waking
up across the country to some of the things that
are happening behind the scenes, that that swamp that we
hear so much about, they see laws like this, or
they read about laws like this, and they think, how
does this type of crony capitalism happen? How do you
(09:58):
end up with a law that's is that you cannot
sue the pharmaceutical manufacturers In a culture of a massive
amount of pharmaceuticals and in the United States, these pharmaceutical
companies can advertise they can go right to your kids,
they can go right to adults. I mean, they have
a lot of leeway and they're protected. How does that happen?
Speaker 2 (10:19):
So, look, I'm sure there were there were some people
that had good intentions when they pass this law, because
they want vaccines to be produced and not result in
a lot of liability because otherwise there you know, potentially
don't get produced. On the other hand, there seems like
there ought to be some aspect here of actually testing
it and making sure that it works and doesn't have
side effects, and there shouldn't be the ability to lie
(10:43):
and say, well, we're covered by federal law. We can
lie about it and say it was effective even when
it wasn't, and it didn't have side effects even then
when it did. So, you know, there's got to be
some balance here. I think that federal law has some
good aspects to it, but it's you know, I don't
think people thought about the consequences of that broad of
(11:03):
a law. There ought to be some exceptions and some caveats,
so that so these companies have to at least test
it to some degree and then not lie about it
if they find out it's not working.
Speaker 1 (11:15):
This is like the ultimate case of gaslighting, because we
were told constantly if you said anything negative about the
vaccine that was misinformation, you couldn't. People were kicked off
of social media, they were silenced for this. But here
you are having to sue them because they lied.
Speaker 2 (11:32):
Yeah, I know, it's crazy. And here's the thing. You know,
the Biden administration was pushing these big tech companies to
do exactly that, to shut down any speech that dared
to question this, even though it turned out these people
were right and they were like they were turned into
almost like criminals, and they were told they were insane
and crazy, and they were dumb, and only dumb people
(11:53):
wouldn't question, would question the legitiamity of this vaccine. As
it turned out, these people were smart and they had
good reason. There were red flags, And as I said
to you earlier, the red flags are to me were
that the fact that the federal government was pushing this
so hard. And I'm like, if you've got the vaccine,
(12:14):
why do you care if anybody else gets expecting Why
do you have to threaten them with their jobs or
some other punishment. If supposedly the vaccine's going to work
for you, you're good, right, Why do you care what
other people do?
Speaker 1 (12:25):
I mean when you say it like that, obviously we
can all go back and remember in our minds and go, yeah,
I thought that was strange. You know, why did we
Why weren't you safe if you had it? I mean,
isn't that the whole idea of a vaccine and then
you're safe from it? Right? That's exactly bubble around you.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
Yes, And that's what I was seeing at the time.
You know, I ended up getting COVID before I could
get the vaccine, and I took the monoclonal. It was
really effective in ending my symptoms within twelve hours, and
I was getting pretty sick, so I knew there was
a cure. Unfortunately, government didn't. Government didn't focus on the cure.
They focused on a vaccine that didn't work. And so
the government really let us down here. The federal government,
(13:02):
the Biden administration, has let us down because they have
forced and punished people, and they were wrong, and I
wish they'd come out and say that they were wrong.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
So let me ask you this. If you are successful
in this, will they have to stop making these claims
because they're still vaccinating people and they're still telling people
that this is what this is going to protect you.
Will they have to tell you the truth of the
efficacy of the vaccine.
Speaker 2 (13:26):
They'll have to decide whether they want us to assue
them again. I mean, I guess right. I mean, all
part of.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
It depends on I have a lot of money to
be seene.
Speaker 2 (13:33):
We have to be successful here. And one of the
good things about this litigation is it's going to bring
out information that the public hasn't known, and we're going
to make sure that information gets out. So at the
very least, whether we win or lose, I think we're
going to win, and potentially we'd have other lawsuits, but
at the very least the public can go, wait a minute,
I'm going to be a little I'm going to be
(13:55):
a lot more hesitant to trust the Biden administration next time,
or any other government any that tells me I have
to get it, or I'm going to lose my job,
or I have to get that pressure. Didn't that up.
Speaker 1 (14:06):
I think that's key because we've had a lot of
people on the podcast too, have said we have no
access to the raw data. We can't actually see what
the true side effects are, whether or not they've found
that there are problems with myocarditis and all these other issues,
and that is scary to me, and I think that's
what's scary to most peoples. We don't actually have that information.
So we are hoping that you are able to expose
(14:28):
some of the data and we can actually find out
what they know about the vaccine and whether they know
if there are issues or not. But I do want
to say I think you still hold the record for
being the attorney general that has sued the Biden administration
more times than anyone else.
Speaker 2 (14:43):
Is that correct, I think by a long shot. I
think we're in two and a half years. We've a
little over two and a half years. We've sued them
fifty times. So it's you know, it's a lot of lawsuits.
I don't think anybody else in the country's even close.
You know, part of it is where a big state,
we have resources, but we also are committed to holding
the Biden administration accountable. And there are consequences of that.
(15:03):
They don't like us, and they've they've they've taken it
out on us in many ways, including me. But it's
still our job to hold the president accountable, to follow
federal law, to follow the US Constitution, and not try
to override the constitution become more than a president. We
have many countries that do that. In this country, we're
supposed to have a president that operates within the law,
(15:25):
not a president who makes the laws.
Speaker 1 (15:26):
Well, we appreciate that, We appreciate the fact that you
are looking out for us. And another lawsuit that you
have out there is right now against media matters, And
I don't know if a lot of people understand what
happened here with X and the whole anti Semitic posts,
and people have this trust for organizations like Media Matters
(15:48):
that market themselves as a watchdog, but this is not
what they're doing. Can you explain a little bit about
that lawsuit?
Speaker 2 (15:55):
Yeah, I'm sorry about the lighting right now, but it'll
be back the Media Matters. It's not a lossit yet.
We've started an investigation and that investigation is based on
information we've gotten from you know, public, from the public,
and it looks like Media Matters is manipulating data and
(16:15):
advertising and trying to take out Twitter by by forcing
or pushing advertisers towards dropping ads on Twitter because they've
effectively lied about what Twitter is doing. And so look,
we're just in the investigation stage. But if they have
deceived consumers about advertising and about trying to say that
(16:39):
Twitter is racist when they're not, and trying to destroy
a company that has an impact on my say, and
we have two ways of looking at this. One who's
under the accept of Trade Practice stack, but we also
oversee non charitable organizations, which this is it's a it's
a nonprofit and so we have an obligation to make
sure that they're not misleading consumers that they're not that
(17:00):
they're following state law and that's what we're going to do. Well.
Speaker 1 (17:02):
I think that's interesting to talk about because a lot
of people don't realize that many of these media companies
are nonprofits for really one political side or the other.
And you have this this is a very leftist group
out there, and we know that X has been a
target for a lot of the leftists that don't like
the fact that Elon Musk bought it and said, oh,
(17:22):
by the way, this is what was happening behind the scenes. Ultimately,
there are people out there that want revenge for the
Twitter files. They are not happy about that, and it
appears like this potentially could be the case. But these organizations,
they're infiltrating every state and they're putting out stories that
they're pretending like they're big media organizations and putting out
(17:45):
hit pieces on candidates. I mean, this is getting kind
of out of control.
Speaker 2 (17:48):
Yeah, I'm pretty I'm pretty sure they put hit pieces
on on me. So yeah, they're a left wing organization.
They've been typically very untruthful about what they presented, and
they've done it in a deceptive way. And if that's
what they did here, then we have a potential of
taking away their ability to operate in Texas and potentially
holding them liable for damages to our state.
Speaker 1 (18:10):
Talking about your state, I want to talk a little
bit before I let you go about the border crisis,
because we have to call it a crisis. We have
more crossings than we've ever seen. What's happening on the
global scale with people that are obviously countries that are
obviously anti United States. We've got China and Iran and
(18:32):
North Korea and Russia all talking, all colluding together to
potentially take over as world leaders. What does that mean
to you when you see your very state in such
a compromising position because the Biden administration is so incompetent.
Speaker 2 (18:50):
Well, it makes me angry because we have people dying.
We have children that are dying from over to So
I've known families that have lost kids that should be
here today. Because the cartels now are partnering with the
Biden administration. Now, it's may not have a signed agreement,
but let's be honest. The cartels used to come to
the border try to get people across, but they had
to run from border patrol and hide and try to
(19:12):
sneak them across. And we had laws in place that
tried to stop them, and if they came in, we
deported them, made them stay in Mexico, or deported them
under Title forty two the COVID stuff, or we found
ways to not give them asylum and they had to
stay out of the country. And we were trying to
build a wall. Under the Trump administration. All of that
was dismantled with Biden, and now the cartels go, Okay,
(19:33):
how do we find border patrol. The faster we can
get to border patrol with as many people as possible,
the more money we make. And they make, you know,
eight to twelve thousand dollars a person. And when they
do that, they keep border patrol busy, processing thousands of
people every month and hundreds of thousands every month. And
when they do that, border patrol's not stopping the drug
trafficking that's going on behind, you know, because they're too busy.
(19:55):
And also we have the terrorists problem. In the last
six months and number two terror people, the tears on
the watch list that we've caught has gone up dramatically.
I think it's like six times the last three years
in just six months. That means that we have more
people trying to get into the country that potentially could
commit terrorist acts, and we know we don't nearly catch
(20:16):
we don't come close to catching all of them, and
so we have created a long term problem. The cartels
are building an organization in our country for drugs, sex trafficking,
human trafficking, other crimes, and then we have a whole
terrorist issue, and the Biden administration has promoted it.
Speaker 1 (20:31):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon podcast. Part of the human trafficking I
think we need to talk about, which is the drug trafficking.
In human trafficking is what I think concerns most moms
out there, because moms are like, gosh, there's kids that
are unsafe and there's drugs coming in that could get
(20:53):
my kid. And Senator Blackburn just she just supported a
bill that would require fingerprint for all children, and we
just talked about this on the podcast. The reason that
she's so concerned about that is because the human trafficking
part of this is that these kids get passed back
and forth across the border to pretend they are the
(21:13):
child of an adult that's coming through. But what's happening
to these kids at the border is pretty sick, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (21:20):
Yes, it is, And actually, you know, there are programs
that address the issue that Center of Blackburn's talking about.
So our state for the longest time, I think we
just stopped it for some reason. But our state and
many other states use these real child ID kids and
they spend a little bit of money. It's not very
expensive for child and they're able to get all the
kids DNA, so the parents hold it so if something
(21:42):
happens their kids, it makes it easier for the law
enforcement authorities to track these people down, track these kids down.
So I would encourage states to do it voluntarily and
not have some federal law. Have the states operate it
at a relatively low cost. Marshall Blackware wants to pass
that because obviously a lot of states are not doing it.
(22:04):
It may be the ultimate best way to resolve this,
because we do need to protect our kids. I just
want to make sure the parents control the information, not
the federal government before.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
I let you go. We recently heard that the cartels
are actually working directly with China, and this whole connection
with fentanyl, the drugs the border being out of control
is just another way for China to weaken society here
in the United States. We see what the concern is
over in Taiwan, obviously, we see the concern in Israel
(22:36):
with Iran, all of these worldwide events going on that
are just the world at war. How scary is it
to think that China has a foothold in Mexico? China
seems to have a foothold in Central America. Have we
made a mistake by saying we need to have a
border and do nothing with these countries. Should we have
(22:59):
had more of a footprint in these countries instead of
China and tried to build up manufacturing and that kind
of thing in Central America and push China out. Are
we in a situation where China has more control of
and more and closer control of people and human trafficking
(23:20):
and drugs and you know, governments than we do.
Speaker 2 (23:24):
Yeah. Look, I think we've made a mistake for decades,
whether it's a Bush administration or whether it was you know,
either Bush administration, Clinton administration, Obama administration. It wasn't until
Trump started telling the American people the truth about China.
They're not our friend, They're not our friend economically, they're
not our friend. Politically, they want to dominate the world,
and they view us as a threat and not as
(23:46):
an ally or a cooperative partner. They want to hurt us,
and so we need to be aware of that. And
that includes sending fetanol from China to Mexico. That gets
important to kill our kids. They're great with that. That's
part of their plan as much to destroy our country
as possible. And I think we need to be aware
of that. We need to have leadership, which we don't
have right now, that addresses that, or else we will
(24:09):
suffer the consequences, which will be China will get their way,
they will dominate us. They will hurt us economically, they
will hurt us politically, and they may absolutely hurt our
freedom and destroy our country.
Speaker 1 (24:20):
There's always a concern that Texas. I mean every year
they tell us, the Democrats tell us we've got enough
people from California. Now Texas is going to go blue.
Obviously you're watching what's going on. Is there any chance
that Joe Biden can win this election next year?
Speaker 2 (24:36):
Yes? And the reason I say that isn't I can't
prosecute voter frauding where the Corta Crawl appeals which is
a nine member court in our state. It's the highest
court for krimnin Matter struck down a statue from nineteen
fifty one where they had thousands of cases of president
because we were prosecuting just at the time they struck
it down, we were prosecuting or investigating over nine hundred
(24:57):
cases of voter fraud in Texas. But the relative small
number of lawyers, they struck it down saying that I
didn't have the authority to go to court because I'm
in the executive branch, and that's a violation separation of parts.
The most ludicrous, one of the most ludicrous, insane decisions
made by any court in Texas ever. But they did it.
I believe they. I believe that because they want no
voter fraud prosecuted. If that occurs, the das and these
(25:20):
local districts are the only one that can prosecute voter fraud.
So Harris County, which is Houston, Austin, which is Travis County,
Bear County which San Antonia, those das are sores funded DA's,
they will never prosecute voter fraud. So that the strategy
is the Quarter Criminal Appeals strikes down the statute which
by the way, I'm trying to win an election against
three of them right now, so we can get this
back and get the legislature to pass it again, which
(25:42):
I had it through the Senate at this time. The
House killed it. So we have a complicated problem in Texas.
If we don't resolve this soon and we can't prosecute
voter fraud, I can tell you what's going to happen.
You can just you can change the name of Texas
to Georgia or Michigan or Wisconsin, because right now I
can't anything to prevent butter fraud. Last time I did,
we stopped it here. We didn't have the mail and
(26:05):
bellop fraud issues that you had in Michigan and Wisconsin
because we went and fought it. And now the quota
Krino pills has struck it down and made it very difficult.
I'm convinced they're source funded, and we've got to win
these three races or we're going to be in trouble
in Texas.
Speaker 1 (26:20):
I think that's what people do not see is that
they have he has placed people in strategic positions where
folks go I mean, I don't need to vote for that.
That's not a big deal, and they get their people
to go out and vote. They end up with these prosecutors,
they end up with district attorneys, they end up with
secretaries of state, as we've seen in Michigan in Arizona,
(26:44):
where those folks then run for governor. That's what is
happening with the secretary of State in Michigan right now.
She's already come out and said she'll be running for governor.
These people change the way elections are run and then
you cannot beat them. It's very scary.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
Well, and that's exactly what the Court of Criminals is
trying to do. They Soros got his DA's in place.
This court is not known by people because it only
deals with criminal cases, so most people don't even know.
Even most really educated voters Republicans don't know who's on
that court. So it's all Republican. It's nine members, they
have six year terms. There's only three of them up
(27:19):
each time. It was a genius move for George Soros,
and this Court of Criminal Appeals is trying to do
everything they can to me to take me out. So
I'm the last piece and we have to win in
March or we are in trouble.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
Yeah, we've noticed you've been under a fire lately.
Speaker 2 (27:35):
Yes, lightly, And we have to win our speaker. We
have to beat the Speaker of the House, commonly known
as drunk Dad. He needs to be be two because
I need them to pass this law again so that
we can prosecute voter fraud in Texas. Otherwise we're in trouble.
We will be a democratic state and we will have problem. Otherwise,
I think we're strong. If we can have actually have
fair elections, we will win the state for I think decades.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
Well, I know that you're going to keep fighting. I
appreciate you coming on to I know you're very busy.
I love what you're doing. I believe that you will
win again. And I just give you all of my
prayers and I can send you my good juju to
go out there and fight these terrible Democrats in Texas.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
All right, Well, I wish it was just Democrats. Some
of it's Republicans.
Speaker 1 (28:16):
Like that's true, Yeah, you drunken friend Republican.
Speaker 2 (28:21):
Yeah, the corn Carl appeals And of course, you know,
Carl Rode was the main player and the whole issue
that I had to deal with the last six months.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
Well, okay, so you just keep fighting the bad guys.
All right, I'll do that viser first, we're really excited
about Pfizer.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
Well, thanks a lot, looking forward to seeing what they
have to say.
Speaker 1 (28:39):
Absolutely, thank you and thank you all for joining us
on the Tutor Dixon Podcast. For this episode and others,
go to Tutor dixonpodcast dot com. You can subscribe right there,
or head over to the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or
wherever you get your podcasts and join us next time
on the Tutor Dixon Podcast. Have a blessing.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
1. The Podium
The Podium: An NBC Olympic and Paralympic podcast. Join us for insider coverage during the intense competition at the 2024 Paris Olympic and Paralympic Games. In the run-up to the Opening Ceremony, we’ll bring you deep into the stories and events that have you know and those you'll be hard-pressed to forget.
2. In The Village
In The Village will take you into the most exclusive areas of the 2024 Paris Olympic Games to explore the daily life of athletes, complete with all the funny, mundane and unexpected things you learn off the field of play. Join Elizabeth Beisel as she sits down with Olympians each day in Paris.
3. iHeartOlympics: The Latest
Listen to the latest news from the 2024 Olympics.