August 3, 2024 • 19 mins
In this episode, Tudor and Kyle Olson discuss President Biden's proposal for Supreme Court reform, including implementing an 18-year term limit and removing presidential immunity. They explore the potential consequences of these reforms, such as the influence of younger justices and the impact on the integrity of the court. They also analyze the motivations behind these proposals and the political implications. The Tudor Dixon Podcast is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network. For more 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 (00:01):
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast. This is our little
Saturday episode and we decided that we wanted to do
this episode. I have Kyle Olsen with me because earlier
in the week I was having a conversation with someone
about what's going on in politics, the whole changeover of
Kamala Harris, and he mentioned the Supreme Court, and I
and Kyle. You know, recently President Biden came out and
(00:24):
said he wanted Supreme Court reform. And now he's saying
that there's a few different things. One of them is
that he wants a constitutional amendment to make sure no
president has immunity anymore. No one it's called no one
is above the law. And then this whole eighteen year
term limit. And it was interesting because this guy who
was a conservative talking to me said, I actually don't
(00:46):
have a problem with the term limit, and I think
this is probably a I guess a little bit naive
of most people to go, you know what, I think
that that's okay, why not eighteen years. It's a long time.
We don't need people on the Supreme Court forever. But
I was thinking about it. You and I had a
conversation and I said to him. You know, I got
(01:07):
to push back a little bit on this, specifically when
we look at the Supreme Court, because if you have
somebody that is on the Supreme Court for eighteen years
and they come out in their sixties, which is possible
and I think much more possible if Joe Biden gets
what he wants, because he's saying that he wants every
president to appoint a new justice every two years, and
(01:28):
so you're going to start to get younger and younger people, right,
They're going to be trying to bring in younger and
younger people. Well, those people have huge influence, and after
eighteen years, they could very easily be swayed to make
decisions based on their next job. And I think you
have to keep in mind that the Supreme Court has
always been protected by the fact that these people aren't
going anyplace else. Isn't that, I mean, it isn't that
(01:50):
how you look at it.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Yeah, And if you look at a state like Michigan
that has legislative term limits for the House and sentive
state House and Senate, they had been relatively short. You
could be six years in the House, eight years in
the Senate, and then you're out of government. You can't
run again. That has since been reformed. But the point
(02:13):
is you've got legislators who know they have a definitive
end to their legislative career, and a lot of times
what will happen is those legislators will start making decisions,
they'll introduce bills, they'll do particular votes, angling towards a
career after their time in the legislature. And so I'm
(02:35):
not saying it's corruption. I'm just saying it is the
by product of a system where people their career is
not going to end because they're in their fifties or
maybe early sixties something like that, they want to do
something after and so they they're influenced.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
It can lead to bias, and that's the one thing
that we have been protected protected against in the Supreme
Court is biased. And I know are like, oh, I
don't like these. There's two decisions, and that's what it
comes down to. To me. It blows my mind. There
are two decisions that have convinced the public that they
should totally reform the Supreme Court. And I find it
(03:13):
interesting because I truly believed that it was Democrats who
pushed these decisions the way they came out because I
think they knew that if Roe v. Wade went in
front of the Supreme Court, they would say that it
was unjustly decided and it's not law and it has
to go back to the States. And I think that
they manipulated the situation in Mississippi to take it to
(03:36):
the Supreme Court knowing that they could ultimately use it
as a tool of power. And I know people would
disagree with me there, but look at what they've been
able to do with the whole Roe v. Wade conversation,
and they continue to have it today. I mean last week.
I think I mentioned this a couple days ago. Last week,
I met with a few girls who are on the
(03:56):
Democrat side, and they were like, if Trump gets elected,
we won't contraception. And somebody in the office was telling
me that they're one of their family members. It is like,
if Trump gets elected, I'm just worried about contraception. These
messages are very valuable and for them for the other side,
and they've manipulated people into wanting to change an institution
(04:17):
that has been protected since the beginning of the United
States of America. And I believe it's a manipulative move
to change out the term limits for the United States
Supreme Court. Also, this whole idea of taking away presidential immunity,
I wonder how the others feel about that, because, let's
face it, Joe Biden is on his deathbed. He doesn't care.
(04:39):
It's not going to affect him. This guy is not
having anybody come back to him and saying, hey, we
don't like what you did in Afghanistan. We think you
belong in jail. But I mean, Obama people could come
back and say, look, you droned civilians. You got to
go to prison. This presidential immunity ish, Yeah, you're under pressure.
You have to be able to make these decisions. So
both of these, in my opinion, both both of these
(05:00):
go to you are skewing the ability of the person
to make clear headed decisions. Same Supreme Court. If you
start to tell them you have to work at another
job in a few years, you skew their ability to
make clear headed decisions. The president, if you say you
don't have immunity, you skew their ability to make clear
headed decisions.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Yeah. And in a place like Washington, d C. And
State capital's access influence and experience from our currency, but
they're but their currency. And so if there is a
sitting U Supreme Court justice whose term, whose term is
going to be done in two or four years, those
(05:42):
there's lobbying firms, there are legal firms that want that
person because they have experience and access and and uh
and connections, and so what does that do for the
integrity of the court. And I just think it opens
up so many questions. And really, this what Biden came
(06:04):
out with, you know, sort of breaking the ice with
this sort of proposal. It's an extension, it's a continuation
of what they have been doing to the court. And
if you go back for months now, the Democrats and
Progressives have been attacking the integrity of the court, specifically,
if you want to boil it all down, specifically the
(06:26):
integrity of Clarence Thomas, right. And they're saying, well, he's
gone on these trips and he's had donors and somehow
he's being influenced, even though they're implying that and they're
saying it, but they cannot point to a single case
where they can't draw a line to a single case.
And so but what they're doing is they're attacking the
(06:47):
integrity of the court. You mentioned that the two specific cases,
How do we know if these sorts of reforms that
Biden wants, the outcome of those cases would have been
any different.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
Let me argue. Let me argue. I actually think it's
incredibly dangerous because I think that the fact that they
have created such a control over elections means that they
have figured out They had the Colorado motto model. They
figured out Colorado. They brought Colorado's model to Michigan. They
and this is all public record. This is not like
(07:23):
you don't have to be a sleuth to find this stuff.
It's pretty much out there. If you're looking, you can
find out what they've done to organize. And I've said
before the Democrats campaign like it's a business, and I
give them credit for that. They win elections because they
are very focused, they are very targeted. They run it
like it is a business. They campaign on emotion. They
(07:46):
run elections like a business. We run elections on emotion,
We campaign like it's business. It's a disaster for Republicans
and it has been proving to be a disaster. So
wait a minute. If now they can manipulate or organize
their way into office every single time, then you suddenly
in just a few short years you have a very
(08:09):
radical Supreme Court. If you are switching out of justice
every two years, then if you control elections, if you
control the Supreme Court, the country's gone well.
Speaker 2 (08:20):
And we hear from both sides, this is the most
important election of our lifetime. It seems like we hear
that every election now. And what this would do because
let's just say there's a Ruth Bader Ginsburg type of ideology,
or a Clarence Thomas type of ideologies or Samuel Alito whoever,
(08:40):
where you know pretty much one hundred percent of the
time where they're going to come down on a case
and that person is going to be cycled off of
the court and the next president is going to be
able to appoint someone new and you know, potentially tip
the balance of the court. It just heightens, it just
(09:01):
heightens the intensity and the stakes of election after election.
And is this really the direction that we should be heading,
because take a step back, I mean, what is Biden
really trying to do here? It's it's a solution in
search of a problem. If we had a situation where
we had justices who were feeble mentally or they it
(09:24):
was it was demonstrable that they were correct, yes, exactly,
then there could be a case to be made that
there needs to be some sort of reform. But that's
not what they're trying to do. They're trying to use
these cases that they didn't agree with, which you know,
a lot of experts would say the court that that
(09:45):
originally issued Roll versus Wade incorrectly issued that, and and
so we can go back and forth about all of
this all the time, but the fact that they're doing
this now, I think between from from you know, attacking
the integrity the court for the last several months and
now Biden is, you know, proposing this, and he's obviously
(10:06):
going to be leaving office sooner rather than later, certainly
in January, if not before. They're This is a very
long process because a constitutional amendment, which is what he's
proposed proposing, the Congress has to pass it and then
it has to go to the states, and states have
(10:26):
to pass it. That's a very long process. There are
some constitutional amendments that were passed in the seventies. You
take the Equal Rights Amendment for example, that was passed
in the seventies that has still not been ratified by States.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
So he's so'sl likely just another part of the show
government that we're watching. This is everything that we're seeing
right now as show. Although I do think you make
a really good point that once it's out there, there's
an appetite for it. They're wedding the appetite for the
future of having the entire public say yes. And this
is something that I think that someone was saying to
(11:02):
me recently, that all of these things start on a
moral lie, like it's okay, the environment is in such
danger if you don't do something morally, if you don't
do something, everybody will die in ten years. Well, that
didn't happen. I mean, it's the same thing with this.
My gosh, this court is corrupt. If we don't have
some ability to change it over time, then you're going
(11:25):
to end up with a very horrible that you'll lose
the country that way. I mean, these are all lies
that become bigger and bigger and bigger. And that's why
I think it's very important for us as citizens to
get involved and understand pay attention. I know people don't
want to pay attention to news. I can't tell you
how many friends I had that are like I don't
even watch the news. Pay attention to what bills are passing,
(11:46):
pay attention to what your state government and your federal
government are doing. I mean, we had just last week
the governor wasn't even even the governor someone because the
governor's not here anymore. Our governor has left town to
go on a book tour. We had the Attorney General
signing bills and signed a bill into log giving our
environmental agency emergency powers. Now, morally people can go, wow,
(12:12):
that's great. They can make sure there's no environmental disaster.
Reality of that is a bunch of young kids that
come out of a liberal university that have no concept
of business and no concept of how a state is
run or how the inner workings of business and state run.
And they go in and they shut down our farms,
(12:32):
and they shut down our manufacturing, and the constant the
unintended consequences are great, and which is why you have
to look at something like this and instead of like
what happened to me the other night, a conservative guy going,
you know what, I'm not really that upset about an
eighteen year term. I guess that's a long time. Wait, wait, wait,
(12:53):
don't just stop at that think through the whole thing,
think about how that works, talk to people, think about
how government, how corrupt government can be. I mean, I
think you make a phenomenal point in this. The currency
that goes around d C and power and information and
prestigeous currency is currency and people are constantly exchanging it.
Speaker 2 (13:18):
Yeah, And I would just question why is why are
they doing this now? So they've been attacking the integrity
of the court, which you know they previously told us
you're not supposed to do, but they've been doing that
for months now, and now suddenly they come out with
this proposal which is very difficult to pass, And so
(13:39):
why are they doing this now?
Speaker 1 (13:40):
You know?
Speaker 2 (13:41):
I think I would suspect part of the reason is
because they want to change the subject. I think also
is they want to perpetuate this narrative that you know,
they've built up what they think is a case that
the court is corrupt and therefore this is the solution.
But I just think people need to look at this
(14:02):
and say why what is really going on here and
why are they doing this and why are they doing
it now?
Speaker 1 (14:10):
Oh? I think right now they are campaigning on lies,
They're campaigning on issues that are meaningless in they can't
have an effect right now because they have nothing to
campaign on. And so this gives Kamala the chance to say,
I support Joe. Look at the great work that he's
doing from his bed, and he's working so hard for
the American people, protecting democracy. She's gonna say, not only
(14:35):
am I protecting democracy by talking about the court, but
we're also going to protect women's health, you know, because
it doesn't have anything to do with anything other than
women's health. My gosh, if you listen to them, women
can't even have their I mean, you can't even have
your annual exam. Good grief, you can't have anything done.
You have no women's health care whatsoever. It's just a
(14:55):
total lie. But you can only if you're the Democrats.
Right now, you can only ca pain on lies. The
jobs report just came out last week. It was a
total nightmare. So far, they haven't been able to reduce
the rate from the Fed. They cannot ease the pain
on the American people right now. They know that they
know that crime they say crime is down, they know
(15:18):
that in areas where crime has never reduced, it's higher
than ever and it's hurting those people more than ever,
and those are their voters. They know that the state
of the country is a disaster, and so they're throwing
out these things. It's just like the student loan relief.
They can't do it. This is the third time they're
trying to do it. They can't do it. They're campaigning
on buying your vote and buying your heart. That's it. Oh,
(15:41):
we're going to protect you. You are under constant threat.
You need us. That's all this is. And I think
it's pathetic and I think it's disgusting, but I think
that's the state of campaigning today. It'll be interesting to
see as we move through this weekend and we see
what Harris is doing with the running mate, and we
are finding out how this campaign actually shapes up, because
(16:04):
let's remember, we have no idea what her campaign is.
She's had no primary, she's had no vetting. She has
been in the shadows the entire time she's been vice president.
She's still I mean, the funny thing about the Supreme
Court thing is that it is still common a lot
in the shadows because she is still saying when Joe's
doing this. So it's kind of the perfect situation where
(16:25):
you are kind of the incumbent, but you're not the incumbent,
and you let the incumbent. He's actually testing the waters,
he's throwing things out there and seeing if he's getting
any bites, and then if he does get bites, she
can come along and say I'm with him, I'm with him.
I love that. It's a it's a bizarre scenario, but
I just I wanted to bring you on today to
(16:45):
talk about this because I feel like it's so important
for us to tell people. Don't be romanced by these
things that they manipulate you with the moral lie. Do
not let yourself not be able to see past what
that means and what this act actually would cause in
the future. Because the integrity of the court is something
(17:05):
we've never wavered on. This completely destroys the integrity court.
No question, the court is completely there. The potential for
corruption is it's completely unprotected. So you really limit the
integrity of the court if you do this, And so
I appreciate you coming on today, Kyle. Tell people where
they can find more of your stories.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
Sure, they can go to The Midwesterner dot news, you
can follow us on Twitter. It's just look up The
Midwesterner but we're covering these sorts of stories what's happening
in Michigan, the Midwest, because there's so much going on
that I think people aren't hearing about, they aren't thinking,
(17:49):
you know, critically about, and there's just a lot that
people need to consider, I think.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
And that's the beauty of this when we have these podcasts,
when you go on to the Midwestern I think, you
get to see that other side, the truth, the true
side of the moral lie, you know, because you're being
fed that constantly by the mainstream media. And that was
kind of the idea behind both of these things. It's like, Okay,
we're going to contrast that and tell people both sides
of the story, so it's not just one side. You're
(18:16):
going to see the whole picture. Right now, you're not
seeing the whole picture. I mean, even I had friends saying,
how could you support Trump? He was convicted on thirty
four counts. I'm like, this is why the integrity of
the court is so important, because when you have a
bias judge who has a captive jury and only presents
half of the case, of course you get a conviction.
(18:39):
It is total corruption. Those people don't see the other side.
He wouldn't allow the other side of the case to
be to be told. That's what we deal with every
day with the media, and that's why the Midwestern is
so important, because we're rounding out that story. You get
to see both sides, and so I appreciate that, and Kyle,
I appreciate you coming on, and I appreciate all of
you for listening to us on a Saturday for our
(19:00):
quick episode. We'll be back on Monday, so make sure
you come back and you download the next episode anywhere
you get your podcasts iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever
you can go to Tutor dixonpodcast dot com too. But
we'll see you back here on Monday, and we thank
you so much for listening today. Have a great weekend.
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast. This is our little
Saturday episode and we decided that we wanted to do
this episode. I have Kyle Olsen with me because earlier
in the week I was having a conversation with someone
about what's going on in politics, the whole changeover of
Kamala Harris, and he mentioned the Supreme Court, and I
and Kyle. You know, recently President Biden came out and
(00:24):
said he wanted Supreme Court reform. And now he's saying
that there's a few different things. One of them is
that he wants a constitutional amendment to make sure no
president has immunity anymore. No one it's called no one
is above the law. And then this whole eighteen year
term limit. And it was interesting because this guy who
was a conservative talking to me said, I actually don't
(00:46):
have a problem with the term limit, and I think
this is probably a I guess a little bit naive
of most people to go, you know what, I think
that that's okay, why not eighteen years. It's a long time.
We don't need people on the Supreme Court forever. But
I was thinking about it. You and I had a
conversation and I said to him. You know, I got
(01:07):
to push back a little bit on this, specifically when
we look at the Supreme Court, because if you have
somebody that is on the Supreme Court for eighteen years
and they come out in their sixties, which is possible
and I think much more possible if Joe Biden gets
what he wants, because he's saying that he wants every
president to appoint a new justice every two years, and
(01:28):
so you're going to start to get younger and younger people, right,
They're going to be trying to bring in younger and
younger people. Well, those people have huge influence, and after
eighteen years, they could very easily be swayed to make
decisions based on their next job. And I think you
have to keep in mind that the Supreme Court has
always been protected by the fact that these people aren't
going anyplace else. Isn't that, I mean, it isn't that
(01:50):
how you look at it.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Yeah, And if you look at a state like Michigan
that has legislative term limits for the House and sentive
state House and Senate, they had been relatively short. You
could be six years in the House, eight years in
the Senate, and then you're out of government. You can't
run again. That has since been reformed. But the point
(02:13):
is you've got legislators who know they have a definitive
end to their legislative career, and a lot of times
what will happen is those legislators will start making decisions,
they'll introduce bills, they'll do particular votes, angling towards a
career after their time in the legislature. And so I'm
(02:35):
not saying it's corruption. I'm just saying it is the
by product of a system where people their career is
not going to end because they're in their fifties or
maybe early sixties something like that, they want to do
something after and so they they're influenced.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
It can lead to bias, and that's the one thing
that we have been protected protected against in the Supreme
Court is biased. And I know are like, oh, I
don't like these. There's two decisions, and that's what it
comes down to. To me. It blows my mind. There
are two decisions that have convinced the public that they
should totally reform the Supreme Court. And I find it
(03:13):
interesting because I truly believed that it was Democrats who
pushed these decisions the way they came out because I
think they knew that if Roe v. Wade went in
front of the Supreme Court, they would say that it
was unjustly decided and it's not law and it has
to go back to the States. And I think that
they manipulated the situation in Mississippi to take it to
(03:36):
the Supreme Court knowing that they could ultimately use it
as a tool of power. And I know people would
disagree with me there, but look at what they've been
able to do with the whole Roe v. Wade conversation,
and they continue to have it today. I mean last week.
I think I mentioned this a couple days ago. Last week,
I met with a few girls who are on the
(03:56):
Democrat side, and they were like, if Trump gets elected,
we won't contraception. And somebody in the office was telling
me that they're one of their family members. It is like,
if Trump gets elected, I'm just worried about contraception. These
messages are very valuable and for them for the other side,
and they've manipulated people into wanting to change an institution
(04:17):
that has been protected since the beginning of the United
States of America. And I believe it's a manipulative move
to change out the term limits for the United States
Supreme Court. Also, this whole idea of taking away presidential immunity,
I wonder how the others feel about that, because, let's
face it, Joe Biden is on his deathbed. He doesn't care.
(04:39):
It's not going to affect him. This guy is not
having anybody come back to him and saying, hey, we
don't like what you did in Afghanistan. We think you
belong in jail. But I mean, Obama people could come
back and say, look, you droned civilians. You got to
go to prison. This presidential immunity ish, Yeah, you're under pressure.
You have to be able to make these decisions. So
both of these, in my opinion, both both of these
(05:00):
go to you are skewing the ability of the person
to make clear headed decisions. Same Supreme Court. If you
start to tell them you have to work at another
job in a few years, you skew their ability to
make clear headed decisions. The president, if you say you
don't have immunity, you skew their ability to make clear
headed decisions.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Yeah. And in a place like Washington, d C. And
State capital's access influence and experience from our currency, but
they're but their currency. And so if there is a
sitting U Supreme Court justice whose term, whose term is
going to be done in two or four years, those
(05:42):
there's lobbying firms, there are legal firms that want that
person because they have experience and access and and uh
and connections, and so what does that do for the
integrity of the court. And I just think it opens
up so many questions. And really, this what Biden came
(06:04):
out with, you know, sort of breaking the ice with
this sort of proposal. It's an extension, it's a continuation
of what they have been doing to the court. And
if you go back for months now, the Democrats and
Progressives have been attacking the integrity of the court, specifically,
if you want to boil it all down, specifically the
(06:26):
integrity of Clarence Thomas, right. And they're saying, well, he's
gone on these trips and he's had donors and somehow
he's being influenced, even though they're implying that and they're
saying it, but they cannot point to a single case
where they can't draw a line to a single case.
And so but what they're doing is they're attacking the
(06:47):
integrity of the court. You mentioned that the two specific cases,
How do we know if these sorts of reforms that
Biden wants, the outcome of those cases would have been
any different.
Speaker 1 (07:01):
Let me argue. Let me argue. I actually think it's
incredibly dangerous because I think that the fact that they
have created such a control over elections means that they
have figured out They had the Colorado motto model. They
figured out Colorado. They brought Colorado's model to Michigan. They
and this is all public record. This is not like
(07:23):
you don't have to be a sleuth to find this stuff.
It's pretty much out there. If you're looking, you can
find out what they've done to organize. And I've said
before the Democrats campaign like it's a business, and I
give them credit for that. They win elections because they
are very focused, they are very targeted. They run it
like it is a business. They campaign on emotion. They
(07:46):
run elections like a business. We run elections on emotion,
We campaign like it's business. It's a disaster for Republicans
and it has been proving to be a disaster. So
wait a minute. If now they can manipulate or organize
their way into office every single time, then you suddenly
in just a few short years you have a very
(08:09):
radical Supreme Court. If you are switching out of justice
every two years, then if you control elections, if you
control the Supreme Court, the country's gone well.
Speaker 2 (08:20):
And we hear from both sides, this is the most
important election of our lifetime. It seems like we hear
that every election now. And what this would do because
let's just say there's a Ruth Bader Ginsburg type of ideology,
or a Clarence Thomas type of ideologies or Samuel Alito whoever,
(08:40):
where you know pretty much one hundred percent of the
time where they're going to come down on a case
and that person is going to be cycled off of
the court and the next president is going to be
able to appoint someone new and you know, potentially tip
the balance of the court. It just heightens, it just
(09:01):
heightens the intensity and the stakes of election after election.
And is this really the direction that we should be heading,
because take a step back, I mean, what is Biden
really trying to do here? It's it's a solution in
search of a problem. If we had a situation where
we had justices who were feeble mentally or they it
(09:24):
was it was demonstrable that they were correct, yes, exactly,
then there could be a case to be made that
there needs to be some sort of reform. But that's
not what they're trying to do. They're trying to use
these cases that they didn't agree with, which you know,
a lot of experts would say the court that that
(09:45):
originally issued Roll versus Wade incorrectly issued that, and and
so we can go back and forth about all of
this all the time, but the fact that they're doing
this now, I think between from from you know, attacking
the integrity the court for the last several months and
now Biden is, you know, proposing this, and he's obviously
(10:06):
going to be leaving office sooner rather than later, certainly
in January, if not before. They're This is a very
long process because a constitutional amendment, which is what he's
proposed proposing, the Congress has to pass it and then
it has to go to the states, and states have
(10:26):
to pass it. That's a very long process. There are
some constitutional amendments that were passed in the seventies. You
take the Equal Rights Amendment for example, that was passed
in the seventies that has still not been ratified by States.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
So he's so'sl likely just another part of the show
government that we're watching. This is everything that we're seeing
right now as show. Although I do think you make
a really good point that once it's out there, there's
an appetite for it. They're wedding the appetite for the
future of having the entire public say yes. And this
is something that I think that someone was saying to
(11:02):
me recently, that all of these things start on a
moral lie, like it's okay, the environment is in such
danger if you don't do something morally, if you don't
do something, everybody will die in ten years. Well, that
didn't happen. I mean, it's the same thing with this.
My gosh, this court is corrupt. If we don't have
some ability to change it over time, then you're going
(11:25):
to end up with a very horrible that you'll lose
the country that way. I mean, these are all lies
that become bigger and bigger and bigger. And that's why
I think it's very important for us as citizens to
get involved and understand pay attention. I know people don't
want to pay attention to news. I can't tell you
how many friends I had that are like I don't
even watch the news. Pay attention to what bills are passing,
(11:46):
pay attention to what your state government and your federal
government are doing. I mean, we had just last week
the governor wasn't even even the governor someone because the
governor's not here anymore. Our governor has left town to
go on a book tour. We had the Attorney General
signing bills and signed a bill into log giving our
environmental agency emergency powers. Now, morally people can go, wow,
(12:12):
that's great. They can make sure there's no environmental disaster.
Reality of that is a bunch of young kids that
come out of a liberal university that have no concept
of business and no concept of how a state is
run or how the inner workings of business and state run.
And they go in and they shut down our farms,
(12:32):
and they shut down our manufacturing, and the constant the
unintended consequences are great, and which is why you have
to look at something like this and instead of like
what happened to me the other night, a conservative guy going,
you know what, I'm not really that upset about an
eighteen year term. I guess that's a long time. Wait, wait, wait,
(12:53):
don't just stop at that think through the whole thing,
think about how that works, talk to people, think about
how government, how corrupt government can be. I mean, I
think you make a phenomenal point in this. The currency
that goes around d C and power and information and
prestigeous currency is currency and people are constantly exchanging it.
Speaker 2 (13:18):
Yeah, And I would just question why is why are
they doing this now? So they've been attacking the integrity
of the court, which you know they previously told us
you're not supposed to do, but they've been doing that
for months now, and now suddenly they come out with
this proposal which is very difficult to pass, And so
(13:39):
why are they doing this now?
Speaker 1 (13:40):
You know?
Speaker 2 (13:41):
I think I would suspect part of the reason is
because they want to change the subject. I think also
is they want to perpetuate this narrative that you know,
they've built up what they think is a case that
the court is corrupt and therefore this is the solution.
But I just think people need to look at this
(14:02):
and say why what is really going on here and
why are they doing this and why are they doing
it now?
Speaker 1 (14:10):
Oh? I think right now they are campaigning on lies,
They're campaigning on issues that are meaningless in they can't
have an effect right now because they have nothing to
campaign on. And so this gives Kamala the chance to say,
I support Joe. Look at the great work that he's
doing from his bed, and he's working so hard for
the American people, protecting democracy. She's gonna say, not only
(14:35):
am I protecting democracy by talking about the court, but
we're also going to protect women's health, you know, because
it doesn't have anything to do with anything other than
women's health. My gosh, if you listen to them, women
can't even have their I mean, you can't even have
your annual exam. Good grief, you can't have anything done.
You have no women's health care whatsoever. It's just a
(14:55):
total lie. But you can only if you're the Democrats.
Right now, you can only ca pain on lies. The
jobs report just came out last week. It was a
total nightmare. So far, they haven't been able to reduce
the rate from the Fed. They cannot ease the pain
on the American people right now. They know that they
know that crime they say crime is down, they know
(15:18):
that in areas where crime has never reduced, it's higher
than ever and it's hurting those people more than ever,
and those are their voters. They know that the state
of the country is a disaster, and so they're throwing
out these things. It's just like the student loan relief.
They can't do it. This is the third time they're
trying to do it. They can't do it. They're campaigning
on buying your vote and buying your heart. That's it. Oh,
(15:41):
we're going to protect you. You are under constant threat.
You need us. That's all this is. And I think
it's pathetic and I think it's disgusting, but I think
that's the state of campaigning today. It'll be interesting to
see as we move through this weekend and we see
what Harris is doing with the running mate, and we
are finding out how this campaign actually shapes up, because
(16:04):
let's remember, we have no idea what her campaign is.
She's had no primary, she's had no vetting. She has
been in the shadows the entire time she's been vice president.
She's still I mean, the funny thing about the Supreme
Court thing is that it is still common a lot
in the shadows because she is still saying when Joe's
doing this. So it's kind of the perfect situation where
(16:25):
you are kind of the incumbent, but you're not the incumbent,
and you let the incumbent. He's actually testing the waters,
he's throwing things out there and seeing if he's getting
any bites, and then if he does get bites, she
can come along and say I'm with him, I'm with him.
I love that. It's a it's a bizarre scenario, but
I just I wanted to bring you on today to
(16:45):
talk about this because I feel like it's so important
for us to tell people. Don't be romanced by these
things that they manipulate you with the moral lie. Do
not let yourself not be able to see past what
that means and what this act actually would cause in
the future. Because the integrity of the court is something
(17:05):
we've never wavered on. This completely destroys the integrity court.
No question, the court is completely there. The potential for
corruption is it's completely unprotected. So you really limit the
integrity of the court if you do this, And so
I appreciate you coming on today, Kyle. Tell people where
they can find more of your stories.
Speaker 2 (17:27):
Sure, they can go to The Midwesterner dot news, you
can follow us on Twitter. It's just look up The
Midwesterner but we're covering these sorts of stories what's happening
in Michigan, the Midwest, because there's so much going on
that I think people aren't hearing about, they aren't thinking,
(17:49):
you know, critically about, and there's just a lot that
people need to consider, I think.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
And that's the beauty of this when we have these podcasts,
when you go on to the Midwestern I think, you
get to see that other side, the truth, the true
side of the moral lie, you know, because you're being
fed that constantly by the mainstream media. And that was
kind of the idea behind both of these things. It's like, Okay,
we're going to contrast that and tell people both sides
of the story, so it's not just one side. You're
(18:16):
going to see the whole picture. Right now, you're not
seeing the whole picture. I mean, even I had friends saying,
how could you support Trump? He was convicted on thirty
four counts. I'm like, this is why the integrity of
the court is so important, because when you have a
bias judge who has a captive jury and only presents
half of the case, of course you get a conviction.
(18:39):
It is total corruption. Those people don't see the other side.
He wouldn't allow the other side of the case to
be to be told. That's what we deal with every
day with the media, and that's why the Midwestern is
so important, because we're rounding out that story. You get
to see both sides, and so I appreciate that, and Kyle,
I appreciate you coming on, and I appreciate all of
you for listening to us on a Saturday for our
(19:00):
quick episode. We'll be back on Monday, so make sure
you come back and you download the next episode anywhere
you get your podcasts iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever
you can go to Tutor dixonpodcast dot com too. But
we'll see you back here on Monday, and we thank
you so much for listening today. Have a great weekend.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.