August 6, 2025 • 39 mins
Listen to The Next-Gen Report live! Sundays at 7:00 p.m. on AM950, KPRC.
The Trump Administration continues to deport huge amounts of criminal illegal aliens, and of course, liberals in California are livid about it, and they demand that you listen to them complain.
Texas House Democrats continue to hide in states like New York and Illinois. They claim Texas redistricting is racist, but will that actually pay off? More importantly, what legal consequences would they face?
For the latest news, follow me on Instagram and X:
@the.ethanbuchanan
@_ethanbuchanan
The Trump Administration continues to deport huge amounts of criminal illegal aliens, and of course, liberals in California are livid about it, and they demand that you listen to them complain.
Texas House Democrats continue to hide in states like New York and Illinois. They claim Texas redistricting is racist, but will that actually pay off? More importantly, what legal consequences would they face?
For the latest news, follow me on Instagram and X:
@the.ethanbuchanan
@_ethanbuchanan
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
From the heart of the Space City to the heart
of gen Z. Welcome to Next Gen Conversation, not Dad's
Talk Radio. Ethan talks to you about the issues and
events that men are to our generation. This is the
Next Gen Report put Ethan Buchanan.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Hey, good evening, ladies and gentlemen. It's me Ethan Buchanan
from Houston's Morning News here to once again just give
you guys some headlines and whatnot that caught my eye,
stuff that I saw and thought was interesting, thought that
warranted some in depth conversation with you. Thank you for
(00:46):
joining me if you're here on the Facebook live stream
or if you're listening to the podcasted version of it later.
I am very very pleased to be with you. Thank
you very much. A right, so let's start by talking
a little bit about some immigration numbers that we've got
and of course the reaction from the left to them.
(01:10):
As you can imagine, they're high, or the deportations are high,
i should say, and Democrats do not enjoy that. They
are upset. So Trump achieves a record one three hundred
deportations per day. That is a big number. That is
that's just people being deported per day. That's not counting
(01:31):
the people that are being detained, the people that have hearings.
That's worth noting. And so according to new agency data
release ju Line thirty first, the figures show a significant
ramp up under the Trump administration and put the agency
on track to surpass the modern day deportation record set
by former President Barack Obama in twenty twelve. That I
(01:52):
think is probably the most interesting part of all of
this is the fact that the modern day deportation right
was actually set by Barack Obama. And yet think back
to the Obama administration. I'm actually old enough to remember it.
You didn't have Democrats complaining about that. Ever, they never
(02:13):
brought it up. Trump constantly said in twenty fifteen and
twenty sixteen that it wasn't enough for him. But the
Democrats have nothing. They just completely ignore that. And now
that Trump is deporting less people than Obama is, now
they're making a scene about it. This shocks me. This video.
(02:36):
This is a lady at an LA City Council meeting.
She goes to the public testimony portion, and she wants
to complain to them that they're not doing enough in
the city of Los Angeles to combat ICE.
Speaker 3 (02:49):
Now.
Speaker 2 (02:50):
I don't know if you've been keeping up with the headlines,
but pretty much every single big ICE riot has been
happening in Los Angeles. I mean it's not hard to
go on x and find the videos. They're out there,
They're everywhere. That's not enough for this lady. These massive riots,
these protests on college campuses, none of that is enough
(03:13):
for her. She wants the city of LA to be
doing more, and she feels like she is very entitled
to vocally speak out about that. I want you to
watch this video and or listen to it if you're
listening on the podcast, and just take a listen to
how entitled this woman is. She demands the attention of
(03:33):
everyone in the room. She demands that they not start
her clock, her little timer until everybody is looking at
her and paying attention to her. Take a listen.
Speaker 4 (03:43):
Hi, my name is Katie Laffoon and I have general
public comment.
Speaker 5 (03:47):
But I will not let you start my time until I.
Speaker 6 (03:50):
Have everybody's attention.
Speaker 4 (03:52):
One thing, it's here, but I do not start my
time until I have everybody's attention. Nope, you restart that
I took off work. You guys work for us, and
nobody is paying attention.
Speaker 5 (04:11):
Hi. Hi, you work for us and we have a comment.
We need you to listen.
Speaker 4 (04:17):
I understand that this is typically like your job is
parks and.
Speaker 5 (04:20):
Rec That is not what this is. Right now. We
are in a state of emergency.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
The actual mayor declared that, and we are here asking
you to pay attention.
Speaker 5 (04:29):
You have had a summer break. You know, it's not
how a summer break.
Speaker 4 (04:31):
Don't roll your guys in the ice, you.
Speaker 5 (04:35):
You know it's not how to summer break. The protesters,
the citizens of LA who are terrified. You know what
we're not hearing you talk about. In two weeks, school
is back in session. Fifty percent of the students in
LA do not feel safe going to school. Why are
you talking about that? Why is no one having a
town hall?
Speaker 2 (04:51):
Gosh, this lady is just so annoyingly entitled. I took
off time for work. Okay, you to do that. They're there,
they're in the chamber. That's their job, that's what they
have to do. You're not excessively entitled all these special privileges.
She keeps demanding that they not start the timer. That's
not how this works. When you have a set time,
(05:14):
what you choose to do with it is on you.
If you don't want to actually speak during your time
about what you came to speak about, and you instead
want to complain that you're not getting enough attention, that's fine,
but that's on you. That's not on the city council.
They don't have to restart your timer, they don't have
to comply with you. You actually have to comply with them
later in the video. That's what actually ends up happening
(05:36):
is she gets thrown out and she keeps trying to
make the case to this officer that's throwing her out. No,
I'm actually here to stick up for you, That's what
I'm doing. I don't know how she got there. I
don't know how you make sense of that, but that's
her argument. Take a listen.
Speaker 6 (05:54):
What is deorum?
Speaker 2 (05:56):
What ism? We're trying to to you guys.
Speaker 5 (06:00):
You guys are in naser out there because of this ship.
Speaker 2 (06:02):
Yes, Like I don't care if you guys for me.
Speaker 4 (06:08):
I care about them listening and protecting people protecting you.
Speaker 2 (06:12):
That poor cop, That poor cop. He's just trying to
make sense of this lady. So who are the people
she's sticking up to right now? Or sticking up for.
It's the illegal aliens, the uh eleven hundred and eighty
eight illegal aliens who are allegedly murderers that came into
our country under Biden. According to Donald Trump, he actually
(06:34):
spoke out about this on MSNBC or maybe it's CNBC,
one of the two. Take a listen to this. He's
actually explaining who this crazy liberal lady is sticking up
for and.
Speaker 3 (06:43):
Looking for the criminals, the people that murdered. You know,
we have eleven eight hundred and eighty eight people that
came into our country under Biden under with our great
are the borders are? She never called one, you know,
she never called you the borders are. She never went
to the border, and she never made one call to
the border patrol.
Speaker 5 (07:01):
You know.
Speaker 3 (07:01):
Other than that, she did a great job. But they
had hundreds of people that were murders, eleven eight and
eighty eight murders, fifty percent of which murdered more than
one person in our country. We've already gotten a lot
of them out and some of them are so dat
we don't want to bring them back. We want to
put them in our own So.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
So yeah, that's basically the size and shape of it.
We have got a bunch of murderers and criminals in
this country, which is objectively true. You can't argue with that.
There are a ton of people who broke into this
country that aren't supposed to be here that we need
to get out. But people like that lady in La
are upset about it. All right, I'm gonna take a
quick break. If you're watching the live stream right now,
stay tuned. We are going to be right back after
(07:45):
I just take a quick breather because I am asthmatic.
But stay tuned. We'll be our bed all righty, welcome back.
(08:22):
If you're here with me in the Facebook live stream, howdy.
Good to be with you. And if you're listening to
the podcast, of course, always good to be with you.
Let's talk for a minute about something that just I
saw that as a member of the generation that I
am a member of. If you couldn't tell by looking
(08:44):
at me or listening to the sound of my voice,
I am a I guess, part of the Zoomer generation.
I'm not quite a millennial, but I'm not quite a
generation Alpha. We don't really know what I am yet.
It hasn't been clearly documented, but I'm part of that
generation that's just now recently starting to enter the workforce.
I'm twenty two years old. That's why you're seeing now,
Hello everybody. So seeing this lady who is I think
(09:09):
clearly just by looking at her part of my generation.
It honestly embarrassed me a little bit for my generation
because this is, despite my best efforts, how a lot
of people in my generation are viewed. And I really
do think it's giving us a bad name, and I
think it's going to be a long term problem for
the country because this demonstrates, I think it obscene lack
(09:30):
of self control and just responsibility. So let's take a
listen to what she has to say about why she
is quitting her full time job. The reason she was
quitting her full time job is because it's a full
time job and she apparently can't handle that. Take a listen.
Speaker 6 (09:46):
Oh, I quit my job because I can't take care
of my basic needs and work forty hours a week
at the same time. It's really hard to say this
out loud and put it online, but I know that
I'm not the only person going through this. I've almost
been fired from every job that I've ever had, and
it's not because I'm not smart. I actually tend to
overperform in the beginning. It's just that after some time,
(10:08):
I inevitably burnt out. Once I wake up one day
and realize that I haven't taken a shower in like
three weeks.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Okay, let me stop you right there. What do you
mean you haven't taken a shower in three weeks? You're
telling me, you're honestly telling me that you can't work
forty hours a week and managed to find time to
take a shower. Just so we're all on the same
page here working fours out forty hours out of the week.
(10:34):
Let's say that's a nine to five. She seems like
a nine to five person. You wake up maybe seven
o'clock in the morning, take a shower, get in your car,
go to work. You're there by nine o'clock, shower and
ready to go. Or if you're an evening shower person,
you get off at five, you're home by five thirty.
You hop in the shower. It's not that difficult, and
(10:56):
you know that same concept applies. Obviously, her hours might
not have been specifically nine to five, but the concept applies.
Right Either, get in the shower right before you head
to work or right after you head home. It's not
that complicated.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
I do it.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
I work probably forty to forty five ish hours a week,
maybe a little bit more, a little bit less, depending
on what's going on in the news cycle. But I
find plenty of time to shower. It's not that hard.
If you can't manage to work in forty hours a
week at work plus a thirty minute shower once a day,
(11:34):
I'm starting to think the problem might not be your job.
She's got more to say. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 6 (11:40):
It's really frustrating because I know that I'm an intelligent
person and I've been able to accomplish a lot of
really amazing things in my life, but I still can't
manage to take care of myself. And it's not just
a matter of not trying hard enough or not being disciplined.
If I could take.
Speaker 2 (11:55):
Care of all right, let me stop you right there. No,
it's definitely an issue of not being disciplined. If one
thousand percent is an issue of not being disciplined, that's
not a question at all. That's clearly what the problem is.
You're just not disciplined. There's no other way around that.
Like I already said it's not that hard to work
(12:16):
forty hours a week and then take a shower at
least once a week at the bare minimum. So this
absolutely is a discipline plub problem, hol Lah problem. That's
what it clearly is. I'm very blessed to have had
parents that taught me some discipline. But if you can't
do a forty hour work week and take a shower,
(12:38):
that's discipline. That's what that is.
Speaker 6 (12:40):
Plan and simple of my basic needs and work full time.
I would have done that, buy now and then some
It's just it's a form of self sabotage to honestly
be putting so much energy into these executive functioning skills
at work and not have anything left to give myself.
It's like I would dead ass wake up at five
am at pace back and or it's start working at seven,
(13:01):
finish work at six eight, sleep for dinner, and then
problem by at eight o'clock. And it's like a part
of me does feel insane by quitting at the verge
of a recession, but it's like, if I actually want
to build a future for myself and get there in
one piece, taking care of myself has to become my
full time.
Speaker 3 (13:17):
Job.
Speaker 2 (13:18):
Okay, even if she is working the long hours that
she says she is, which I'm inclined to doubt, you
can still have time for a shower. You can. It's
not that hard. A shower doesn't take that long anyway.
I just saw that and that blew my mind because
she is a representative of my generation. She is and
(13:39):
what she's describing is a pretty big problem with this generation.
And I'm speaking as a member of the generation. There's
just no discipline. There's no okay, this is work time,
this is to take care of myself time. And then
what's left over is the entertainment time. Is they just
sit and relax on the couch time that comes last.
(13:59):
That's that's the smallest priority. I have a hard time
believing she's not laying in bed for several hours scrolling
on TikTok, because I do that. I've been known to
do that, well, not on TikTok, but Instagram mills. You
get the message. I don't believe that she's not capable
of working an average workday, or maybe even an above
(14:20):
average workday and still taking a shower. I just don't
think that's true. All Right, let's talk a little bit
about the ongoing quorum break here in Texas. Obviously this
is the biggest news. So Greg Abbott is now looking
at felony charges for some of these quorum breaking Democrats,
(14:41):
and that's worth noting. I feel like only because last
time around, when we last had a quorum break, it
took probably a month of there being no quorum for
conversations like this to even start. So the fact that
(15:02):
we're two days in and we're already talking and in
some cases even filing some legal paperwork here to that effect,
that is definitely worth pointing out. Here he is on
Fox News saying, hey, these people may have committed felonies
and we're looking into it.
Speaker 7 (15:17):
Said in your statement that you put out today to
all of them in a letter to them, you said,
in addition to abandoning their offices, these legislators may also
have committed felonies. What is the felony? What are the
penalties for this?
Speaker 8 (15:31):
So very simply, it would be bribery if any lawmaker
took money to perform or to refuse to perform and
act in the legislature. And the reports are these legislators
have been both they sought money and they offered money
to skip the vote to leave the legislature to take
(15:54):
a legislative act that would be bribery, and so the
facts will have to come out. But I think, based
upon comments made by LED senders themselves, they face a
possibility facing bribery charges, which is a second degree felony
in the state of Texas. There's one way to cure that,
and that is if they get back to the state
of Texas and make korum today at a hearing that
(16:16):
we have at the three o'clock they can cure themselves
of any quid pro quo that would subject them to
potential bribery charges.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
So spoiler alert, that didn't happen. They didn't come back now.
I don't know if this holds up to legal scrutiny.
I'm not a lawyer. What I think is interesting here
is the politics of this. The fact that he's actually
willing to come out and say this and have these
conversations is definitely worth taking note of. It's a big deal.
It really is, only because I think this shows that
(16:47):
the Republicans, specifically Republican leadership in the House and Greg
Abbott himself, are not willing to put up with this
in the way that they have in the past. In
twenty twenty one, they allowed this to carry on for
or a month before they started saying things like this,
and the Democrats came back. In twenty twenty three, the
Democrats tried this as well. It wasn't as effective, so
nobody really cared. But here in twenty twenty five, Republicans
(17:11):
simply are sick of this nonsense. They're not doing it.
That's what I think this indicates. Now. Whether or not
anything actually comes of these discussions. I don't know whether
or not he actually tries to push felony charges on
these Democrats, let alone those felony charges go anywhere, that
remains to be seen, but the fact that it's even
(17:32):
being brought up is definitely very interesting. All Right, I
need to take another quick break here and then we
will get right back into this. We have a whole
lot on this qum break. We're gonna be on that
for a while, so if you're interested in it, stay tuned.
We will be right back in just one second. Alrighty,
(18:16):
and we're back. Okay, So we mentioned just a second
ago that Governor Abbott is saying what the Democrats are
doing right now what the Texas House Democrats may very
well constitute a second degree felony. Now there is some
(18:38):
disagreement about whether or not that is the case. Okay,
fair enough, let's dig into the arguments. So here is
State Rep. Jolanda Jones about she's here in one of
these press conferences that the Democrats have been giving. They
have given a lot of press conferences, By the way,
I have so much content just saved from all these
(18:58):
Democrat press conference I could probably write four or five
books or maybe make a small movie about just the
press conferences because they're having so many, which is good
because it gives us kind of a full picture of
what their thought process is here, what exactly they're trying
to do, and what the flaws and their strategy might be.
(19:19):
So just from kind of a political analysis perspective, it's
very interesting to watch stay repped Julanda Jones. And I'm
gonna warn you now she does say a naughty word
in this that I'm gonna try to censor out as
best as I can, but I'm not making any promises.
So this is your harsh language warning right now. If
(19:39):
I can find my sensor tone real quick, I know
I have it saved. I know, I do. I must
found it there. It is found out. Okay, I apologize
(20:16):
for that. I was looking in the wrong spot. Okay.
So here's Jelanda Jones saying she doesn't think what her
and her fellow Democrats are doing is a second degree felony,
and we'll get into her saying she doesn't think it's
a felony, and then we'll dig into the actual part
of the penal code that I think Governor Aga is referencing,
(20:36):
and we'll see is it a felony? Is it not
a felony. Let's take a listen and find out.
Speaker 3 (20:42):
I'm a lawyer.
Speaker 9 (20:43):
A part of my practice is criminal defense work. There
is no felony in the Texas penal Code for what
he says, so respectfully, he's made it. Okay, he's trying
to get soundbites, and he has no legal mechanism.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
If he did.
Speaker 9 (21:01):
Subpoenas from Texas don't work in New York, so he
gonna come get us. How Subpoenas in Texas don't work
in Chicago.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
He's gonna come get us how.
Speaker 9 (21:09):
So let me be clear, he's putting up smoking mirrors,
and I'm hopeful that the media doesn't follow that.
Speaker 2 (21:16):
I will also say, Okay, so she's right, subpoenas in
Texas are not, you know, applicable to a certain extent
in other states. You know, we have law enforcement jurisdictions.
So she makes a good argument. What is her idea here?
Speaker 3 (21:32):
Then?
Speaker 2 (21:33):
Is she just gonna hang out in New York or
in Chicago? Is that what the Texas Democrats are planning
to do just indefinitely? How do they think that's gonna
work out? Because eventually, sooner rather than later, the Republicans
in the Texas House are gonna figure out a way
to do this without them. That's the reality. They can
(21:55):
hang out in New York in Chicago all they want,
but if they stay there just for the Republicans are
going to find a work around. They just are. So
I'm not sure what her plan is. How long is
she planning on staying there? How long are the other
Democrats regardless? Here's the actual section of the penal code,
(22:17):
which was posted by the Lufkin lawyer. He's an account
I came across recently that seems to pay a lot
of attention to Texas legislature stuff. A funny guy, very knowledgeable,
so I've been keeping an eye on this stuff. He posts,
so here he is right here. Any benefit as a
consideration for a any benefit as consideration for a violation
(22:38):
of a duty imposed by law on a public servant
or party official is what he has highlighted under the
definition of bribery, okay, founding in the second degree. So
essentially the argument from Greg back greg abbit, gosh, I
cannot speak to that. I apologize. The argument from Greg
Abbott is that what they're doing they select listed donations
(23:01):
so that they could leave the state, which is essentially
them saying, hey, pay us to not vote. The argument
from Greg Abbott is that in and of itself constitutes bribery.
I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know, but that
argument makes sense to me. Is that going to pass
(23:21):
legal muster? Who's to say, I'm for sure not, but
on its face it makes sense. It does. So if
I were the Democrats, I would at least be a
little bit concerned. Right now, what Greg Abbott has done
is if you go back and listen to the SoundBite
I played, he did give them an off ramp. One
the ass of right now, they haven't taken that offramp
(23:42):
has actually been extended. Their new kind of deadline quote
unquote is now Friday. That's when we're again going to
start taking the next level of measures against these Democrats
that have fled. So he is trying to almost cut
a deal with them, trying to basically say, hey, we'd
(24:02):
be willing to forgive the fact that you've already broken
quorm for two days in a row if you come
back now. Are they going to come back by Friday,
which is the new deadline? I doubt it, So we'll
see what happens next. But just on this this one
snippet of the pedal code, it looks like Greg Abbott
(24:25):
is making a strong case. I don't know for sure.
So I mentioned the Democrats have been doing a bunch
of press conferences and they have Democrat Al Green has
a meltdown, labeling Texas redistricting in devious discrimination and racist.
So again, we've talked in detail on k t H
News about the actual maps. You can go see the
(24:47):
number of articles we've done about them. You can tune
in right now. I'm sure whoever is on the air
at this time on k t r H will bring
it up sooner rather than later. The map seemed to
me to be pretty reasonable. I lived in Congressional District
eighteen for most of my life. That's one of the
districts that they're now going to be getting rid of.
(25:08):
It looks pretty jerrymandered. Just by looking at it, it
looks pretty jerrymandered. So the argument that just by virtue
of redrawing that district, you're a racist, I don't know
how well that's going to play with voters, but Representative
al Green is making that argument. Take a listen.
Speaker 10 (25:25):
What's happening in Texas is invidious discrimination. It is racial,
my dear friends, it is racist.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
It is, and we have to say it. We have
to say it. That's what it is.
Speaker 10 (25:41):
I know it when I see it, I know it
when I smell it, I know it when I hear it.
And we have a duty of responsibility and an obligation.
Speaker 2 (25:49):
To stand up to it, all of us. I'm telling you,
it's not just Texas.
Speaker 10 (25:56):
If it was just Texas, Emmanuel Cleaver wouldn't have his
seat on the chopping block in Missouri.
Speaker 2 (26:04):
It's more than Texas.
Speaker 10 (26:06):
It's this country, and we, the Democrats, are going to
make the difference because when democracy.
Speaker 2 (26:13):
Was on the line.
Speaker 10 (26:15):
Let it be said that Democrats took the stand to
preserve and save democracy in the United States of America.
Speaker 2 (26:21):
God bless your Okay. I mean, just on its face,
part of democracy is redistricting, right, can we all agree
on that That's just a normal part of the democratic system. Again,
this is why I don't think, just from a political
strategy perspective, that none of this is going to end
up playing well for the Democrats, because they're trying to
(26:44):
push the bar a little bit farther than I think
most people are interested in. I mean, you could make
the argument that oh, this is unfair, oh this is mean,
but going out there and saying oh, this is racist,
I don't think most people are gonna be with you
on that. I just don't. I don't think people are
(27:05):
gonna look at the maps as they stand now and
then look at the proposed new maps and say that
redrawing those districts is racist. I just I don't see
it happening. And again saying that this is a threat
to democracy, that's even worse, that's gonna turn people off
even more for if no other reason, then because threat
(27:28):
to democracy has become somewhat of an overused buzzword. Right.
We hear that all the time. Everything is a threat
to democracy. Donald Trump is a threat to democracy. People
hear the words threat to democracy in that order and
they just tune out. That's the reality. They're just not
interested in hearing those words because you've overplayed them, because
(27:51):
they've become buzzwords. And again, like I already previously said,
I don't think most people buy it. I think most
people see mass like Texas Congressional District eighteen and think, Okay,
this just shaped like a weird horseshoe going around the
outside and then into the center of the city of Houston.
It doesn't make a lot of sense. These people don't
(28:12):
really have many political interests in common with one another.
This looks like it was just drawn to be a
majority minority district, which the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
has already said we aren't required to have we're allowed
to redraw those And so I don't think people are
going to buy this is racist argument. I just don't.
I could be wrong. This could be the big break
(28:34):
that the Democrats need in order to really take it
home in the midterms next year, but I remain skeptical
all right, I've got one more break that I'm gonna
take real quick, and then we've got a lot more
that we're going to pour into for another ten minutes
or so, So stay tuned. We will be right back. Okay,
(29:19):
let's finish up strong here. Let's talk about some more
of the legal business that we have going on in
regards to this corn break. Now, of course, I want
to preface all of this with I am not a lawyer.
I'm reporting to you what I see, and I'm giving
you some of my thoughts about it, just kind of
from an analysis perspective. But I'm not a lawyer, so
(29:42):
none of this is legally binding. I'm giving you what
I'm reading and what my thoughts are. So if this
doesn't pan out the way that I say I think
it might, I'm sorry. I'm just guessing, frankly. So let's
dig into this. First of all, the big news, Ken
Paxton to seek judicial orders declaring Democrat korm busters seats
(30:02):
vacant if they are not back Bry Friday. We discussed
this a little bit already. This is sort of that
off ramp, right, So they're essentially saying, hey, you guys
have until Friday and then this is gonna get serious. Now.
A lot of people in the GOP base are saying
this should have gotten serious already. That's been a lot
of the argument from the grassroots Republicans. Hey, we're already
(30:24):
two days into this. Why is there not more action
being taken. Why are we talking about what we're gonna
do Friday versus just doing it right now? Because they've
already been breaking the rules for two full days. Brian
Harrison was on our air this morning making that exact point,
or yesterday morning if you're listening to the podcast. So UH.
Attorney General Ken Paxson has announced that the continued refusal
(30:47):
to perform legislative duties by Texas House Democrats who broke
KORM constitutes abandonment of office, and he will pursue a
court ruling ensuring that their seats are declared vacant. Now,
this does a couple of things. If I understand the
rules of the House correctly, If those seats are declared vacant,
(31:08):
the number required to reach a quorum is lowered. So
right now we can't do the business because we don't
have enough members of the House present because a handful
of them have fled to Austin or fled out of Austin.
We need I think one hundred. We have somewhere in
the low nineties, right because those Democrats have left. Now
(31:28):
if those Democrats are no longer members of the House,
because the quorum is based off of a certain percentage
of the total members, so if the total members shrinks
because we have vacated those seats, then we may very
well be able to get right to work without the Democrats.
So this basically means if they don't come back by
(31:50):
Friday or around thereabouts, this whole charade that they're doing
will be for nothing. They will achieve nothing except loue
their seats. I don't know how long the process to
actually vacate those seats or get the court order will last,
or how it will survive lawsuits, which I'm sure will happen,
(32:12):
but it's definitely something to take note of. Let's see
here in his statement, he said Democrats have abandoned their
offices by fleeing Texas, and a failure to respond to
a call of the House constitutes a dereliction of their
duty as elected officials. Starting Friday, any rogue lawmakers refusing
to return to the House will be held accountable for
(32:32):
vacating their office. The people of Texas elected lawmakers, not
jet setting runaways looking for headlines. If you don't show
up to work, you get fired. This, I think is
an argument just on sort of a raw person to
person level that I think a lot of Texans are
going to be sympathetic to. I think most Texans understand
the concept of if you don't show up to work,
(32:54):
you lose your job. The same rule applies to me.
I imagine the same rule applies to most of you. So
I think the voters are going to see this and
that's going to make sense to them. The Democrats might
end up actually hurting themselves here because this argument is
just way more appealing to the average working Joe than Oh,
(33:17):
democracy is under threat, we got to save it right now,
which is the al Green argument. It's all about, you know,
just making sense to the common person, and I think
the Republicans are, at least as of right now, doing
a better job of that. We'll see if the Democrat
messaging shifts, and that could change the math here, but
as of right now, this seems to make a lot
(33:37):
of sense. Greg Gabbott also is doing his part on
the legal level. He says, I took emergency action to
begin the removal from office of derelict Democrat Texas House
members who refuse to show up for the special session.
And of course here's all the filings and the paperwork.
He went right to the Supreme Court of Texas, which
is notable. Again, the notable part of all of this
(33:59):
is the fact that this is happening right now. The
quorum break officially started on Monday, and I again point
you back to twenty twenty one, when we had a
quorum break for I think a month or maybe over
a month before conversations like this were even begun to
(34:20):
be had. So the fact that they're happening right now
tells you the leadership I think is serious here, which
should enter into the Democrat calculus. I don't know if
it will. Texas Scorecard did a little bit more of
an in depth dive into what all of this means.
Abbot files lawsuit to remove Democrat Caucus chair Gen Wu.
He's actually from here in the Houston area. The moves
(34:42):
follows a string of escalating actions by state leadership. Abbot
has filed a lawsuit with the Texas Supreme Court seeking
to remove State Rep. Jen Wu, the Texas House Democrat
Caucus chair, from his office, accusing him of leading the
ongoing quorum break and abandoning his constitutional duties. The emergency
petician filed Tuesday, marks the most aggressive legal action yet
(35:04):
in response to House Democrats fleeing the state to block
a Republican redistricting plan. Abbott called Wu the ringleader of
the derelict Democrats and cited both abandonment of office and possible
bribery as grounds for removal. I'm not sure if this
is unless he comes back Friday or right now we're
(35:25):
doing this action would be taken to seek their removal
if the Democrats were not in attendance when the House
reconvened at three pm. So I think this is right
about now. If the Texas Supreme Court agrees to hear
the case, it could set a precedent for whether lawmakers
can be forcibly removed from office by breaking quorm Now, again,
(35:46):
this is kind of legal territory that we haven't been
in before. We've had quorum breaks in the Texas House,
but as I've mentioned a number of times, nothing was
really done about it. To a certain extent. I mean,
we had bunch of strongly worded letters and whatnot, but
this is the first time we've ever had officials like
Governor Abbott start to examine the possibility of actually kicking
(36:08):
people out of their seats. Now, there are some legal
minds that will tell you the governor can do this,
he can declare these seats vacant. There were others. There
will be others that say he can't. I'm not a lawyer.
I don't know, and I think most lawyers, if they're honest,
will tell you, well, we've never actually really tested that theory,
so nobody actually knows. It'll be interesting, but I don't
(36:32):
know if it'll actually play out. All right, I want
to talk about some of Gavin Newsom's messaging on this,
because it is truly bad. Just from a political angle.
Gavin Newsom is making this so much worse for the
Texas Democrats. So somebody had tweeted out a list of
all the blue states that were ridiculously jerry mandered to
(36:53):
make it harder for Republicans to get seats there. Gavin
Newsom responded with his own list of states that he
thought were jerry mandered against the Democrats. Now, what do
you see on this list here? Red states with zero
House Democrat seats Wyoming, South Dakota, Alaska, and North Dakota.
(37:13):
Of course, as Greg Price points out, North Dakota, South Dakota, Alaska,
Wyoming all have one congressional seat. One. They have one
congressional seat. You cannot jerrymander one congressional seat. That's just
the state. The borders of that congressional district are the state.
(37:36):
But greg Or, not Gregabatt, Gavin Newsom is making the
case that that's somehow jerrymandering. Again, this is not going
to play well. You've got to get your messaging right
if you're a politician trying to use this to gain votes.
It's all about the messaging and saying these four states,
which all have one seat, are jerry mandered against Democrats. No,
(37:57):
the people in that state just don't like your policies.
That's what's happening here. Blaming the Republicans for that is
not the way to go. People don't like your policies
because the Republicans tricked them. No, that's not what happened.
People don't like your policies just because they don't either.
Your policies are bad or your messaging is bad, one
of the two. But it's not somehow the GOP's fault
(38:19):
that in Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming you
only have one seat and it's gone to the Republicans.
They're just better at politics than you are. In those states.
West Virginia only has four. It's tough to make the
case that that's jerry mandered. Montana has two. Again, very
difficult to make the case that that's jerry mandered. You've
got to get the messaging right here, and I think
(38:41):
the Democrats are really missing the ball here. Let me
know what you think. If you disagree, feel free to
reach out to me and tell me so. I encourage it.
I love to hear feedback from you, the listener. But
that's my take.
Speaker 6 (38:52):
All right.
Speaker 2 (38:53):
That's all I've got. Thank you very much for tuning
in and for listening. I appreciate it.
Speaker 7 (39:01):
Anya putrated in the DA
From the heart of the Space City to the heart
of gen Z. Welcome to Next Gen Conversation, not Dad's
Talk Radio. Ethan talks to you about the issues and
events that men are to our generation. This is the
Next Gen Report put Ethan Buchanan.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Hey, good evening, ladies and gentlemen. It's me Ethan Buchanan
from Houston's Morning News here to once again just give
you guys some headlines and whatnot that caught my eye,
stuff that I saw and thought was interesting, thought that
warranted some in depth conversation with you. Thank you for
(00:46):
joining me if you're here on the Facebook live stream
or if you're listening to the podcasted version of it later.
I am very very pleased to be with you. Thank
you very much. A right, so let's start by talking
a little bit about some immigration numbers that we've got
and of course the reaction from the left to them.
(01:10):
As you can imagine, they're high, or the deportations are high,
i should say, and Democrats do not enjoy that. They
are upset. So Trump achieves a record one three hundred
deportations per day. That is a big number. That is
that's just people being deported per day. That's not counting
(01:31):
the people that are being detained, the people that have hearings.
That's worth noting. And so according to new agency data
release ju Line thirty first, the figures show a significant
ramp up under the Trump administration and put the agency
on track to surpass the modern day deportation record set
by former President Barack Obama in twenty twelve. That I
(01:52):
think is probably the most interesting part of all of
this is the fact that the modern day deportation right
was actually set by Barack Obama. And yet think back
to the Obama administration. I'm actually old enough to remember it.
You didn't have Democrats complaining about that. Ever, they never
(02:13):
brought it up. Trump constantly said in twenty fifteen and
twenty sixteen that it wasn't enough for him. But the
Democrats have nothing. They just completely ignore that. And now
that Trump is deporting less people than Obama is, now
they're making a scene about it. This shocks me. This video.
(02:36):
This is a lady at an LA City Council meeting.
She goes to the public testimony portion, and she wants
to complain to them that they're not doing enough in
the city of Los Angeles to combat ICE.
Speaker 3 (02:49):
Now.
Speaker 2 (02:50):
I don't know if you've been keeping up with the headlines,
but pretty much every single big ICE riot has been
happening in Los Angeles. I mean it's not hard to
go on x and find the videos. They're out there,
They're everywhere. That's not enough for this lady. These massive riots,
these protests on college campuses, none of that is enough
(03:13):
for her. She wants the city of LA to be
doing more, and she feels like she is very entitled
to vocally speak out about that. I want you to
watch this video and or listen to it if you're
listening on the podcast, and just take a listen to
how entitled this woman is. She demands the attention of
(03:33):
everyone in the room. She demands that they not start
her clock, her little timer until everybody is looking at
her and paying attention to her. Take a listen.
Speaker 4 (03:43):
Hi, my name is Katie Laffoon and I have general
public comment.
Speaker 5 (03:47):
But I will not let you start my time until I.
Speaker 6 (03:50):
Have everybody's attention.
Speaker 4 (03:52):
One thing, it's here, but I do not start my
time until I have everybody's attention. Nope, you restart that
I took off work. You guys work for us, and
nobody is paying attention.
Speaker 5 (04:11):
Hi. Hi, you work for us and we have a comment.
We need you to listen.
Speaker 4 (04:17):
I understand that this is typically like your job is
parks and.
Speaker 5 (04:20):
Rec That is not what this is. Right now. We
are in a state of emergency.
Speaker 4 (04:24):
The actual mayor declared that, and we are here asking
you to pay attention.
Speaker 5 (04:29):
You have had a summer break. You know, it's not
how a summer break.
Speaker 4 (04:31):
Don't roll your guys in the ice, you.
Speaker 5 (04:35):
You know it's not how to summer break. The protesters,
the citizens of LA who are terrified. You know what
we're not hearing you talk about. In two weeks, school
is back in session. Fifty percent of the students in
LA do not feel safe going to school. Why are
you talking about that? Why is no one having a
town hall?
Speaker 2 (04:51):
Gosh, this lady is just so annoyingly entitled. I took
off time for work. Okay, you to do that. They're there,
they're in the chamber. That's their job, that's what they
have to do. You're not excessively entitled all these special privileges.
She keeps demanding that they not start the timer. That's
not how this works. When you have a set time,
(05:14):
what you choose to do with it is on you.
If you don't want to actually speak during your time
about what you came to speak about, and you instead
want to complain that you're not getting enough attention, that's fine,
but that's on you. That's not on the city council.
They don't have to restart your timer, they don't have
to comply with you. You actually have to comply with them
later in the video. That's what actually ends up happening
(05:36):
is she gets thrown out and she keeps trying to
make the case to this officer that's throwing her out. No,
I'm actually here to stick up for you, That's what
I'm doing. I don't know how she got there. I
don't know how you make sense of that, but that's
her argument. Take a listen.
Speaker 6 (05:54):
What is deorum?
Speaker 2 (05:56):
What ism? We're trying to to you guys.
Speaker 5 (06:00):
You guys are in naser out there because of this ship.
Speaker 2 (06:02):
Yes, Like I don't care if you guys for me.
Speaker 4 (06:08):
I care about them listening and protecting people protecting you.
Speaker 2 (06:12):
That poor cop, That poor cop. He's just trying to
make sense of this lady. So who are the people
she's sticking up to right now? Or sticking up for.
It's the illegal aliens, the uh eleven hundred and eighty
eight illegal aliens who are allegedly murderers that came into
our country under Biden. According to Donald Trump, he actually
(06:34):
spoke out about this on MSNBC or maybe it's CNBC,
one of the two. Take a listen to this. He's
actually explaining who this crazy liberal lady is sticking up
for and.
Speaker 3 (06:43):
Looking for the criminals, the people that murdered. You know,
we have eleven eight hundred and eighty eight people that
came into our country under Biden under with our great
are the borders are? She never called one, you know,
she never called you the borders are. She never went
to the border, and she never made one call to
the border patrol.
Speaker 5 (07:01):
You know.
Speaker 3 (07:01):
Other than that, she did a great job. But they
had hundreds of people that were murders, eleven eight and
eighty eight murders, fifty percent of which murdered more than
one person in our country. We've already gotten a lot
of them out and some of them are so dat
we don't want to bring them back. We want to
put them in our own So.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
So yeah, that's basically the size and shape of it.
We have got a bunch of murderers and criminals in
this country, which is objectively true. You can't argue with that.
There are a ton of people who broke into this
country that aren't supposed to be here that we need
to get out. But people like that lady in La
are upset about it. All right, I'm gonna take a
quick break. If you're watching the live stream right now,
stay tuned. We are going to be right back after
(07:45):
I just take a quick breather because I am asthmatic.
But stay tuned. We'll be our bed all righty, welcome back.
(08:22):
If you're here with me in the Facebook live stream, howdy.
Good to be with you. And if you're listening to
the podcast, of course, always good to be with you.
Let's talk for a minute about something that just I
saw that as a member of the generation that I
am a member of. If you couldn't tell by looking
(08:44):
at me or listening to the sound of my voice,
I am a I guess, part of the Zoomer generation.
I'm not quite a millennial, but I'm not quite a
generation Alpha. We don't really know what I am yet.
It hasn't been clearly documented, but I'm part of that
generation that's just now recently starting to enter the workforce.
I'm twenty two years old. That's why you're seeing now,
Hello everybody. So seeing this lady who is I think
(09:09):
clearly just by looking at her part of my generation.
It honestly embarrassed me a little bit for my generation
because this is, despite my best efforts, how a lot
of people in my generation are viewed. And I really
do think it's giving us a bad name, and I
think it's going to be a long term problem for
the country because this demonstrates, I think it obscene lack
(09:30):
of self control and just responsibility. So let's take a
listen to what she has to say about why she
is quitting her full time job. The reason she was
quitting her full time job is because it's a full
time job and she apparently can't handle that. Take a listen.
Speaker 6 (09:46):
Oh, I quit my job because I can't take care
of my basic needs and work forty hours a week
at the same time. It's really hard to say this
out loud and put it online, but I know that
I'm not the only person going through this. I've almost
been fired from every job that I've ever had, and
it's not because I'm not smart. I actually tend to
overperform in the beginning. It's just that after some time,
(10:08):
I inevitably burnt out. Once I wake up one day
and realize that I haven't taken a shower in like
three weeks.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Okay, let me stop you right there. What do you
mean you haven't taken a shower in three weeks? You're
telling me, you're honestly telling me that you can't work
forty hours a week and managed to find time to
take a shower. Just so we're all on the same
page here working fours out forty hours out of the week.
(10:34):
Let's say that's a nine to five. She seems like
a nine to five person. You wake up maybe seven
o'clock in the morning, take a shower, get in your car,
go to work. You're there by nine o'clock, shower and
ready to go. Or if you're an evening shower person,
you get off at five, you're home by five thirty.
You hop in the shower. It's not that difficult, and
(10:56):
you know that same concept applies. Obviously, her hours might
not have been specifically nine to five, but the concept applies.
Right Either, get in the shower right before you head
to work or right after you head home. It's not
that complicated.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
I do it.
Speaker 2 (11:12):
I work probably forty to forty five ish hours a week,
maybe a little bit more, a little bit less, depending
on what's going on in the news cycle. But I
find plenty of time to shower. It's not that hard.
If you can't manage to work in forty hours a
week at work plus a thirty minute shower once a day,
(11:34):
I'm starting to think the problem might not be your job.
She's got more to say. Let's take a listen.
Speaker 6 (11:40):
It's really frustrating because I know that I'm an intelligent
person and I've been able to accomplish a lot of
really amazing things in my life, but I still can't
manage to take care of myself. And it's not just
a matter of not trying hard enough or not being disciplined.
If I could take.
Speaker 2 (11:55):
Care of all right, let me stop you right there. No,
it's definitely an issue of not being disciplined. If one
thousand percent is an issue of not being disciplined, that's
not a question at all. That's clearly what the problem is.
You're just not disciplined. There's no other way around that.
Like I already said it's not that hard to work
(12:16):
forty hours a week and then take a shower at
least once a week at the bare minimum. So this
absolutely is a discipline plub problem, hol Lah problem. That's
what it clearly is. I'm very blessed to have had
parents that taught me some discipline. But if you can't
do a forty hour work week and take a shower,
(12:38):
that's discipline. That's what that is.
Speaker 6 (12:40):
Plan and simple of my basic needs and work full time.
I would have done that, buy now and then some
It's just it's a form of self sabotage to honestly
be putting so much energy into these executive functioning skills
at work and not have anything left to give myself.
It's like I would dead ass wake up at five
am at pace back and or it's start working at seven,
(13:01):
finish work at six eight, sleep for dinner, and then
problem by at eight o'clock. And it's like a part
of me does feel insane by quitting at the verge
of a recession, but it's like, if I actually want
to build a future for myself and get there in
one piece, taking care of myself has to become my
full time.
Speaker 3 (13:17):
Job.
Speaker 2 (13:18):
Okay, even if she is working the long hours that
she says she is, which I'm inclined to doubt, you
can still have time for a shower. You can. It's
not that hard. A shower doesn't take that long anyway.
I just saw that and that blew my mind because
she is a representative of my generation. She is and
(13:39):
what she's describing is a pretty big problem with this generation.
And I'm speaking as a member of the generation. There's
just no discipline. There's no okay, this is work time,
this is to take care of myself time. And then
what's left over is the entertainment time. Is they just
sit and relax on the couch time that comes last.
(13:59):
That's that's the smallest priority. I have a hard time
believing she's not laying in bed for several hours scrolling
on TikTok, because I do that. I've been known to
do that, well, not on TikTok, but Instagram mills. You
get the message. I don't believe that she's not capable
of working an average workday, or maybe even an above
(14:20):
average workday and still taking a shower. I just don't
think that's true. All Right, let's talk a little bit
about the ongoing quorum break here in Texas. Obviously this
is the biggest news. So Greg Abbott is now looking
at felony charges for some of these quorum breaking Democrats,
(14:41):
and that's worth noting. I feel like only because last
time around, when we last had a quorum break, it
took probably a month of there being no quorum for
conversations like this to even start. So the fact that
(15:02):
we're two days in and we're already talking and in
some cases even filing some legal paperwork here to that effect,
that is definitely worth pointing out. Here he is on
Fox News saying, hey, these people may have committed felonies
and we're looking into it.
Speaker 7 (15:17):
Said in your statement that you put out today to
all of them in a letter to them, you said,
in addition to abandoning their offices, these legislators may also
have committed felonies. What is the felony? What are the
penalties for this?
Speaker 8 (15:31):
So very simply, it would be bribery if any lawmaker
took money to perform or to refuse to perform and
act in the legislature. And the reports are these legislators
have been both they sought money and they offered money
to skip the vote to leave the legislature to take
(15:54):
a legislative act that would be bribery, and so the
facts will have to come out. But I think, based
upon comments made by LED senders themselves, they face a
possibility facing bribery charges, which is a second degree felony
in the state of Texas. There's one way to cure that,
and that is if they get back to the state
of Texas and make korum today at a hearing that
(16:16):
we have at the three o'clock they can cure themselves
of any quid pro quo that would subject them to
potential bribery charges.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
So spoiler alert, that didn't happen. They didn't come back now.
I don't know if this holds up to legal scrutiny.
I'm not a lawyer. What I think is interesting here
is the politics of this. The fact that he's actually
willing to come out and say this and have these
conversations is definitely worth taking note of. It's a big deal.
It really is, only because I think this shows that
(16:47):
the Republicans, specifically Republican leadership in the House and Greg
Abbott himself, are not willing to put up with this
in the way that they have in the past. In
twenty twenty one, they allowed this to carry on for
or a month before they started saying things like this,
and the Democrats came back. In twenty twenty three, the
Democrats tried this as well. It wasn't as effective, so
nobody really cared. But here in twenty twenty five, Republicans
(17:11):
simply are sick of this nonsense. They're not doing it.
That's what I think this indicates. Now. Whether or not
anything actually comes of these discussions. I don't know whether
or not he actually tries to push felony charges on
these Democrats, let alone those felony charges go anywhere, that
remains to be seen, but the fact that it's even
(17:32):
being brought up is definitely very interesting. All Right, I
need to take another quick break here and then we
will get right back into this. We have a whole
lot on this qum break. We're gonna be on that
for a while, so if you're interested in it, stay tuned.
We will be right back in just one second. Alrighty,
(18:16):
and we're back. Okay, So we mentioned just a second
ago that Governor Abbott is saying what the Democrats are
doing right now what the Texas House Democrats may very
well constitute a second degree felony. Now there is some
(18:38):
disagreement about whether or not that is the case. Okay,
fair enough, let's dig into the arguments. So here is
State Rep. Jolanda Jones about she's here in one of
these press conferences that the Democrats have been giving. They
have given a lot of press conferences, By the way,
I have so much content just saved from all these
(18:58):
Democrat press conference I could probably write four or five
books or maybe make a small movie about just the
press conferences because they're having so many, which is good
because it gives us kind of a full picture of
what their thought process is here, what exactly they're trying
to do, and what the flaws and their strategy might be.
(19:19):
So just from kind of a political analysis perspective, it's
very interesting to watch stay repped Julanda Jones. And I'm
gonna warn you now she does say a naughty word
in this that I'm gonna try to censor out as
best as I can, but I'm not making any promises.
So this is your harsh language warning right now. If
(19:39):
I can find my sensor tone real quick, I know
I have it saved. I know, I do. I must
found it there. It is found out. Okay, I apologize
(20:16):
for that. I was looking in the wrong spot. Okay.
So here's Jelanda Jones saying she doesn't think what her
and her fellow Democrats are doing is a second degree felony,
and we'll get into her saying she doesn't think it's
a felony, and then we'll dig into the actual part
of the penal code that I think Governor Aga is referencing,
(20:36):
and we'll see is it a felony? Is it not
a felony. Let's take a listen and find out.
Speaker 3 (20:42):
I'm a lawyer.
Speaker 9 (20:43):
A part of my practice is criminal defense work. There
is no felony in the Texas penal Code for what
he says, so respectfully, he's made it. Okay, he's trying
to get soundbites, and he has no legal mechanism.
Speaker 2 (21:00):
If he did.
Speaker 9 (21:01):
Subpoenas from Texas don't work in New York, so he
gonna come get us. How Subpoenas in Texas don't work
in Chicago.
Speaker 2 (21:07):
He's gonna come get us how.
Speaker 9 (21:09):
So let me be clear, he's putting up smoking mirrors,
and I'm hopeful that the media doesn't follow that.
Speaker 2 (21:16):
I will also say, Okay, so she's right, subpoenas in
Texas are not, you know, applicable to a certain extent
in other states. You know, we have law enforcement jurisdictions.
So she makes a good argument. What is her idea here?
Speaker 3 (21:32):
Then?
Speaker 2 (21:33):
Is she just gonna hang out in New York or
in Chicago? Is that what the Texas Democrats are planning
to do just indefinitely? How do they think that's gonna
work out? Because eventually, sooner rather than later, the Republicans
in the Texas House are gonna figure out a way
to do this without them. That's the reality. They can
(21:55):
hang out in New York in Chicago all they want,
but if they stay there just for the Republicans are
going to find a work around. They just are. So
I'm not sure what her plan is. How long is
she planning on staying there? How long are the other
Democrats regardless? Here's the actual section of the penal code,
(22:17):
which was posted by the Lufkin lawyer. He's an account
I came across recently that seems to pay a lot
of attention to Texas legislature stuff. A funny guy, very knowledgeable,
so I've been keeping an eye on this stuff. He posts,
so here he is right here. Any benefit as a
consideration for a any benefit as consideration for a violation
(22:38):
of a duty imposed by law on a public servant
or party official is what he has highlighted under the
definition of bribery, okay, founding in the second degree. So
essentially the argument from Greg back greg abbit, gosh, I
cannot speak to that. I apologize. The argument from Greg
Abbott is that what they're doing they select listed donations
(23:01):
so that they could leave the state, which is essentially
them saying, hey, pay us to not vote. The argument
from Greg Abbott is that in and of itself constitutes bribery.
I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know, but that
argument makes sense to me. Is that going to pass
(23:21):
legal muster? Who's to say, I'm for sure not, but
on its face it makes sense. It does. So if
I were the Democrats, I would at least be a
little bit concerned. Right now, what Greg Abbott has done
is if you go back and listen to the SoundBite
I played, he did give them an off ramp. One
the ass of right now, they haven't taken that offramp
(23:42):
has actually been extended. Their new kind of deadline quote
unquote is now Friday. That's when we're again going to
start taking the next level of measures against these Democrats
that have fled. So he is trying to almost cut
a deal with them, trying to basically say, hey, we'd
(24:02):
be willing to forgive the fact that you've already broken
quorm for two days in a row if you come
back now. Are they going to come back by Friday,
which is the new deadline? I doubt it, So we'll
see what happens next. But just on this this one
snippet of the pedal code, it looks like Greg Abbott
(24:25):
is making a strong case. I don't know for sure.
So I mentioned the Democrats have been doing a bunch
of press conferences and they have Democrat Al Green has
a meltdown, labeling Texas redistricting in devious discrimination and racist.
So again, we've talked in detail on k t H
News about the actual maps. You can go see the
(24:47):
number of articles we've done about them. You can tune
in right now. I'm sure whoever is on the air
at this time on k t r H will bring
it up sooner rather than later. The map seemed to
me to be pretty reasonable. I lived in Congressional District
eighteen for most of my life. That's one of the
districts that they're now going to be getting rid of.
(25:08):
It looks pretty jerrymandered. Just by looking at it, it
looks pretty jerrymandered. So the argument that just by virtue
of redrawing that district, you're a racist, I don't know
how well that's going to play with voters, but Representative
al Green is making that argument. Take a listen.
Speaker 10 (25:25):
What's happening in Texas is invidious discrimination. It is racial,
my dear friends, it is racist.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
It is, and we have to say it. We have
to say it. That's what it is.
Speaker 10 (25:41):
I know it when I see it, I know it
when I smell it, I know it when I hear it.
And we have a duty of responsibility and an obligation.
Speaker 2 (25:49):
To stand up to it, all of us. I'm telling you,
it's not just Texas.
Speaker 10 (25:56):
If it was just Texas, Emmanuel Cleaver wouldn't have his
seat on the chopping block in Missouri.
Speaker 2 (26:04):
It's more than Texas.
Speaker 10 (26:06):
It's this country, and we, the Democrats, are going to
make the difference because when democracy.
Speaker 2 (26:13):
Was on the line.
Speaker 10 (26:15):
Let it be said that Democrats took the stand to
preserve and save democracy in the United States of America.
Speaker 2 (26:21):
God bless your Okay. I mean, just on its face,
part of democracy is redistricting, right, can we all agree
on that That's just a normal part of the democratic system. Again,
this is why I don't think, just from a political
strategy perspective, that none of this is going to end
up playing well for the Democrats, because they're trying to
(26:44):
push the bar a little bit farther than I think
most people are interested in. I mean, you could make
the argument that oh, this is unfair, oh this is mean,
but going out there and saying oh, this is racist,
I don't think most people are gonna be with you
on that. I just don't. I don't think people are
(27:05):
gonna look at the maps as they stand now and
then look at the proposed new maps and say that
redrawing those districts is racist. I just I don't see
it happening. And again saying that this is a threat
to democracy, that's even worse, that's gonna turn people off
even more for if no other reason, then because threat
(27:28):
to democracy has become somewhat of an overused buzzword. Right.
We hear that all the time. Everything is a threat
to democracy. Donald Trump is a threat to democracy. People
hear the words threat to democracy in that order and
they just tune out. That's the reality. They're just not
interested in hearing those words because you've overplayed them, because
(27:51):
they've become buzzwords. And again, like I already previously said,
I don't think most people buy it. I think most
people see mass like Texas Congressional District eighteen and think, Okay,
this just shaped like a weird horseshoe going around the
outside and then into the center of the city of Houston.
It doesn't make a lot of sense. These people don't
(28:12):
really have many political interests in common with one another.
This looks like it was just drawn to be a
majority minority district, which the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
has already said we aren't required to have we're allowed
to redraw those And so I don't think people are
going to buy this is racist argument. I just don't.
I could be wrong. This could be the big break
(28:34):
that the Democrats need in order to really take it
home in the midterms next year, but I remain skeptical
all right, I've got one more break that I'm gonna
take real quick, and then we've got a lot more
that we're going to pour into for another ten minutes
or so, So stay tuned. We will be right back. Okay,
(29:19):
let's finish up strong here. Let's talk about some more
of the legal business that we have going on in
regards to this corn break. Now, of course, I want
to preface all of this with I am not a lawyer.
I'm reporting to you what I see, and I'm giving
you some of my thoughts about it, just kind of
from an analysis perspective. But I'm not a lawyer, so
(29:42):
none of this is legally binding. I'm giving you what
I'm reading and what my thoughts are. So if this
doesn't pan out the way that I say I think
it might, I'm sorry. I'm just guessing, frankly. So let's
dig into this. First of all, the big news, Ken
Paxton to seek judicial orders declaring Democrat korm busters seats
(30:02):
vacant if they are not back Bry Friday. We discussed
this a little bit already. This is sort of that
off ramp, right, So they're essentially saying, hey, you guys
have until Friday and then this is gonna get serious. Now.
A lot of people in the GOP base are saying
this should have gotten serious already. That's been a lot
of the argument from the grassroots Republicans. Hey, we're already
(30:24):
two days into this. Why is there not more action
being taken. Why are we talking about what we're gonna
do Friday versus just doing it right now? Because they've
already been breaking the rules for two full days. Brian
Harrison was on our air this morning making that exact point,
or yesterday morning if you're listening to the podcast. So UH.
Attorney General Ken Paxson has announced that the continued refusal
(30:47):
to perform legislative duties by Texas House Democrats who broke
KORM constitutes abandonment of office, and he will pursue a
court ruling ensuring that their seats are declared vacant. Now,
this does a couple of things. If I understand the
rules of the House correctly, If those seats are declared vacant,
(31:08):
the number required to reach a quorum is lowered. So
right now we can't do the business because we don't
have enough members of the House present because a handful
of them have fled to Austin or fled out of Austin.
We need I think one hundred. We have somewhere in
the low nineties, right because those Democrats have left. Now
(31:28):
if those Democrats are no longer members of the House,
because the quorum is based off of a certain percentage
of the total members, so if the total members shrinks
because we have vacated those seats, then we may very
well be able to get right to work without the Democrats.
So this basically means if they don't come back by
(31:50):
Friday or around thereabouts, this whole charade that they're doing
will be for nothing. They will achieve nothing except loue
their seats. I don't know how long the process to
actually vacate those seats or get the court order will last,
or how it will survive lawsuits, which I'm sure will happen,
(32:12):
but it's definitely something to take note of. Let's see
here in his statement, he said Democrats have abandoned their
offices by fleeing Texas, and a failure to respond to
a call of the House constitutes a dereliction of their
duty as elected officials. Starting Friday, any rogue lawmakers refusing
to return to the House will be held accountable for
(32:32):
vacating their office. The people of Texas elected lawmakers, not
jet setting runaways looking for headlines. If you don't show
up to work, you get fired. This, I think is
an argument just on sort of a raw person to
person level that I think a lot of Texans are
going to be sympathetic to. I think most Texans understand
the concept of if you don't show up to work,
(32:54):
you lose your job. The same rule applies to me.
I imagine the same rule applies to most of you. So
I think the voters are going to see this and
that's going to make sense to them. The Democrats might
end up actually hurting themselves here because this argument is
just way more appealing to the average working Joe than Oh,
(33:17):
democracy is under threat, we got to save it right now,
which is the al Green argument. It's all about, you know,
just making sense to the common person, and I think
the Republicans are, at least as of right now, doing
a better job of that. We'll see if the Democrat
messaging shifts, and that could change the math here, but
as of right now, this seems to make a lot
(33:37):
of sense. Greg Gabbott also is doing his part on
the legal level. He says, I took emergency action to
begin the removal from office of derelict Democrat Texas House
members who refuse to show up for the special session.
And of course here's all the filings and the paperwork.
He went right to the Supreme Court of Texas, which
is notable. Again, the notable part of all of this
(33:59):
is the fact that this is happening right now. The
quorum break officially started on Monday, and I again point
you back to twenty twenty one, when we had a
quorum break for I think a month or maybe over
a month before conversations like this were even begun to
(34:20):
be had. So the fact that they're happening right now
tells you the leadership I think is serious here, which
should enter into the Democrat calculus. I don't know if
it will. Texas Scorecard did a little bit more of
an in depth dive into what all of this means.
Abbot files lawsuit to remove Democrat Caucus chair Gen Wu.
He's actually from here in the Houston area. The moves
(34:42):
follows a string of escalating actions by state leadership. Abbot
has filed a lawsuit with the Texas Supreme Court seeking
to remove State Rep. Jen Wu, the Texas House Democrat
Caucus chair, from his office, accusing him of leading the
ongoing quorum break and abandoning his constitutional duties. The emergency
petician filed Tuesday, marks the most aggressive legal action yet
(35:04):
in response to House Democrats fleeing the state to block
a Republican redistricting plan. Abbott called Wu the ringleader of
the derelict Democrats and cited both abandonment of office and possible
bribery as grounds for removal. I'm not sure if this
is unless he comes back Friday or right now we're
(35:25):
doing this action would be taken to seek their removal
if the Democrats were not in attendance when the House
reconvened at three pm. So I think this is right
about now. If the Texas Supreme Court agrees to hear
the case, it could set a precedent for whether lawmakers
can be forcibly removed from office by breaking quorm Now, again,
(35:46):
this is kind of legal territory that we haven't been
in before. We've had quorum breaks in the Texas House,
but as I've mentioned a number of times, nothing was
really done about it. To a certain extent. I mean,
we had bunch of strongly worded letters and whatnot, but
this is the first time we've ever had officials like
Governor Abbott start to examine the possibility of actually kicking
(36:08):
people out of their seats. Now, there are some legal
minds that will tell you the governor can do this,
he can declare these seats vacant. There were others. There
will be others that say he can't. I'm not a lawyer.
I don't know, and I think most lawyers, if they're honest,
will tell you, well, we've never actually really tested that theory,
so nobody actually knows. It'll be interesting, but I don't
(36:32):
know if it'll actually play out. All right, I want
to talk about some of Gavin Newsom's messaging on this,
because it is truly bad. Just from a political angle.
Gavin Newsom is making this so much worse for the
Texas Democrats. So somebody had tweeted out a list of
all the blue states that were ridiculously jerry mandered to
(36:53):
make it harder for Republicans to get seats there. Gavin
Newsom responded with his own list of states that he
thought were jerry mandered against the Democrats. Now, what do
you see on this list here? Red states with zero
House Democrat seats Wyoming, South Dakota, Alaska, and North Dakota.
(37:13):
Of course, as Greg Price points out, North Dakota, South Dakota, Alaska,
Wyoming all have one congressional seat. One. They have one
congressional seat. You cannot jerrymander one congressional seat. That's just
the state. The borders of that congressional district are the state.
(37:36):
But greg Or, not Gregabatt, Gavin Newsom is making the
case that that's somehow jerrymandering. Again, this is not going
to play well. You've got to get your messaging right
if you're a politician trying to use this to gain votes.
It's all about the messaging and saying these four states,
which all have one seat, are jerry mandered against Democrats. No,
(37:57):
the people in that state just don't like your policies.
That's what's happening here. Blaming the Republicans for that is
not the way to go. People don't like your policies
because the Republicans tricked them. No, that's not what happened.
People don't like your policies just because they don't either.
Your policies are bad or your messaging is bad, one
of the two. But it's not somehow the GOP's fault
(38:19):
that in Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming you
only have one seat and it's gone to the Republicans.
They're just better at politics than you are. In those states.
West Virginia only has four. It's tough to make the
case that that's jerry mandered. Montana has two. Again, very
difficult to make the case that that's jerry mandered. You've
got to get the messaging right here, and I think
(38:41):
the Democrats are really missing the ball here. Let me
know what you think. If you disagree, feel free to
reach out to me and tell me so. I encourage it.
I love to hear feedback from you, the listener. But
that's my take.
Speaker 6 (38:52):
All right.
Speaker 2 (38:53):
That's all I've got. Thank you very much for tuning
in and for listening. I appreciate it.
Speaker 7 (39:01):
Anya putrated in the DA
Popular Podcasts
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
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