May 8, 2024 • 39 mins
Opening an examination of the implications of Title IX changes under Biden's administration, Garrett and Andi touch upon Texas' response and the intrinsic balancing act between due process rights and victim protection. They also discuss the recent Texas Voice Article on House Challenger David Lowe, The Texans anniversary, and its interview with Mitch Little, before they wrap with insights into the Texas Republican Party Chair race, pinpointing the underlying divides among factions and the overarching need for fundraising efficiency in the face of upcoming elections.
Links Mentioned
Texas Voice Article: https://www.thetexasvoice.com/hd-91-candidate-lowe-not-eligible-for-re-hire-as-a-peace-officer-by-collin-county-sheriff/
The Texan's Brad Johnson's interview with Mitch Little: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txjOISVCnPM
Livestream link for May 15 RPT Forum: https://rptchaircandidateforum.com/
2:15HD-91 Candidate’s Controversial Employment History Revealed
5:38Unpredictability and Voter Impact in Election Runoffs
7:21Law Enforcement Officer’s Controversial Discharge and Election Runoff
11:58Texas Challenges Biden’s Title IX Revisions
16:58Debating Due Process in College Sexual Assault Cases
21:04Celebrating The Texan’s Journalistic Integrity and Anniversary
22:09Evaluating Mitch Little’s Potential Impact in Politics
26:21Effective Communication in Political Campaigns
29:01Debating the Role of Party Leadership in Primaries
35:27Election Strategies and Fundraising Challenges
39:16Insights on Texas Politics and Beyond
Follow us on all socials at @theseeingredpod and online at our website Seeing Red Podcast. x.com/gwfulce
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome to the Seeing Red Podcast with Andy Turner
and Garrett Fools Checking up onTexas policies and politics,
with some federal issues thrownin like the assault weapons ban,
interest rate hikes, you get it, but it's mostly Texas, since
we can't ignore the big stuffeither.
And now here are your hosts,Andy Turner and Garrett Fools.
(00:23):
Hosts Andy Turner and Garrett.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Foles, everybody, welcome back to this week's
edition of the Seeing Redpodcast and YouTube, and we are
delighted you are joining us.
If you are new, welcome,welcome.
And if you are returning, thankyou so much.
We are delighted to have youhere.
Please, please, please, hitthat subscribe button and smash
that like button.
It's really helpful to us toget the word out about the show
(00:49):
and about what we're talkingabout, and you know all the
things.
So smash that subscribe, smashthat like button Turn on
notifications.
And notifications are great too.
Absolutely yes we don't do thisin a single episode.
Speaker 3 (01:02):
That way you know right when we drop it Because,
like today's episode, we'rerecording this on wednesday
morning.
We typically record it, uh, ontuesday or monday or tuesday,
and so it's going to drop laterthan usual.
So you're going to.
If you want to know exactlywhen this podcast came out, when
this youtube video dropped, youwant to turn on those
notifications.
But thank you so much forjoining us today.
And, andy, did you see whatMark McCaig dropped this morning
(01:26):
?
Speaker 2 (01:26):
I did not, you were telling me a little before the
show, but wow.
It was quite the headline.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
Let me show you this.
Yeah, oh, there we go, thereyou go.
So we have HD91 candidates.
So HD91 is in Tarrant County.
It's represented by StephanieClick, a candidate up there.
He's run a couple times thismight be his second time running
Named David Lowe is you knowthey're in a runoff.
(01:55):
He was able to preventRepresentative Click from
getting into it.
Well, he likes to run on hispast record.
He's a veteran, he's a former,maybe active, I don't know a
peace officer, um, but he's notactively a peace officer.
He doesn't work actively forany police organization, to my
knowledge.
Okay, he got his job initiallyin collin county, which right
(02:21):
there in the dfw metroplex.
Um, he apparently, according torecords that Mark McCaig at the
Texas Voice found and I'm goingthrough this right here on the
site he found that David Lowewas demoted in his first 10
weeks from a peace officer to adetention officer and that's not
(02:44):
necessarily detention Detentionofficers are often peace
officers but he also received apay cut when he did that and to
date, he quickly left just thelaw enforcement field.
By 2020, he was working for theDallas GOP.
By 2020, he was working for theDallas GOP and it was stated
(03:18):
there that he Mark interviewedor tried to get a comment from
the Collin County Sheriff andthe sheriff said where is this
Under?
Speaker 2 (03:25):
its current policies and standards.
David Olo is not eligible forrehire of the peace officer
within the Collin CountySheriff's Office and that's
pretty much all they can commenton from an HR perspective.
They can say when he started,when he started work like when
people call for references whenyou started what, what, how much
you made, and when you left andare you eligible for rehire,
and when you left and are youeligible for rehire, and yeah,
it's yeah usually not a goodsign when the answer to are they
(03:49):
eligible for rehire, when theanswer is no, it's not a good
sign.
Speaker 3 (03:54):
Yeah.
So it's, yeah, it's not a greatsign.
The next employer he had,Dallas GOP at the time was
chaired by Rodney Anderson, whowas a former state rep out of
Irving.
He lost in the same election inthe same area where Matt
(04:14):
Rinaldi lost, which is kind ofthe Irving West Dallas County
area.
But Anderson won a fewelections by a fewer than 500
votes I think a couple of themwere lower than 200.
He came out and justeviscerated Lowe he's like as
(04:37):
County Chairman.
I was forced to confront himspreading mistruths about the
county party.
I was forced to confront himspreading mistruths about the
county party.
David Lowe's blatantly falseinformation was damaging to
party efforts and now he hasmoved to Tarrant County to run
for office.
It saddens me to see him usingthe same tactics against
Stephanie Click.
I urge the voters of HC91 tostrongly redirect these tactics.
(04:59):
Stephanie Click is an honorable, respected and effective
conservative serving Texas well.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
I mean yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:08):
You never know how a story like this is going to play
in a runoff.
And that's the thing aboutrunoffs, speaking generally
about it, there's nothingpredictable about them.
They are completely differentfrom a primary or from a general
(05:29):
election, because it's ascheduled election but a lot of
people aren't going out for itand typically there's only one
or two things on the ballot, sothere's not a lot of people just
turning out generally who don'tknow about your race.
People are turning out.
They're turning out to vote foryou, vote for your opponent or
vote against one of the othertwo people, and there's only.
It's just.
It's a completely different wayof looking at the election.
(05:51):
And you know, just becausesomebody got you know, I've seen
elections where somebody got 49points some odd percent Right
and ended up losing the runoffand ended up losing the runoff
Right.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
Which is crazy.
Can you scroll back up so thatpeople can see where to find
this?
Speaker 3 (06:06):
Yeah, it's the TexasVoicecom.
Okay.
Well, there you go, it'll beits top story.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
Yeah, if you just click, yeah, just want to make
sure Mark gets all the credit inthe world.
Speaker 3 (06:16):
Absolutely so.
That's an interesting storythat's coming through right now.
There's a bunch of stuffhappening in the runoffs.
We don't really know what'sgoing to happen.
I mentioned that the crazythings are happening.
You never know what's going tohappen.
That's just to say you don'tknow how a story like this is
(06:37):
going to impact a race, but itcould very well influence enough
voters to vote for or against,for click or against Lowe.
That it could be the difference.
Speaker 2 (06:51):
And for some people it will be not necessarily like
I know some people's reasoningin some races is I'm not voting
for candidate A, I'm votingagainst candidate B, like maybe
they don't have strong feelingsabout the first candidate A, but
they definitely don't likecandidate B.
(07:12):
So, and you know, while we'retalking about this,
representative Frazier up inmore or less the DFW area.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
He's in Collin County .
Yeah, he lives in Collin Countyand worked for Dallas PD.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
Yeah, I think you can take this down now.
Oh sure, but I know that hepled guilty to some misdemeanors
.
You guys probably read about it.
I don't want to like get intoall the little tiny details, but
as part of a plea agreement, hehad to pay, I think it was like
$4,000.
And he, but as part of a pleaagreement, he had to pay I think
it was like $4,000, and he hadto do some other things.
(07:47):
He was fired by the DallasPolice Department.
That was very public.
You can access that.
This is not things that I know,that nobody else knows.
So we're in some veryinteresting runoffs,
particularly as it concerns lawenforcement officers.
And, yep, you want to move on.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
Okay, great, so I was just trying to load it in the
screen.
Sorry to the people watchingthis live.
You know some of this happenswhile we're doing it.
I was just, uh, loading up thenext topic because the governor,
uh, and I'll take this down forthe, for the, for the moment,
but, um, the governor you canmove on uh, I mean frederick
frazier's, you know, is also ina runoff and you know.
(08:30):
You know he had stories.
There's been ebbs and flows inhis story too.
I mean, you know he had whatyou just said.
There was also something thatkind of exonerated, or I don't
exactly know.
I don't, I'm not following itparticularly well.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
He pled guilty.
I'm sorry, that is not correct.
That is not correct.
He pled no contest to thecharges.
Dpd did fire him and he didhave to do it.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
I thought he resigned .
I thought he was forced toresign.
Speaker 2 (08:59):
I do not believe that is correct.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Hang on one second, let me do some fitting pasta
visage um but at a certain pointbeing asked to resign and being
fired, or you know, the pointsare saliently different.
Um, but yeah that you knowthose are different races where
it's similar issues with peoplewho are, you know, ostensibly on
kind of different sides of therepublican party.
(09:21):
So it'll be interesting to seeif one plays, one doesn't, if
it's an issue that kind ofpermeates through anything, but
it's kind of specific.
But also, what's happeningright now is to kind of touch on
something we talked aboutpreviously.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
He was dishonorably discharged from Dallas.
This is according to WFAAcom.
North Texas StateRepresentative dishonorably
discharged from Dallas PoliceDepartment pleads no contest to
misdemeanor charges.
Representative Frederick FraserR McKinney pleads no contest to
(09:55):
class A misdemeanor charges ofattempting to impersonate a
public servant.
And I could rehash all that foryou, but I think that's enough
said about that.
So we're having some very jobas a law enforcement officer.
Speaker 3 (10:35):
No, and apparently he just kind of burns the bridges
of anywhere he goes.
So I mean, if you go into thelegislature, if you're working
in legislator, there's a certaincooperative element to getting
legislation passed.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
Right and you need to be able to negotiate in good
faith with other people,particularly people of his own
party, um, or her own party,then I would say maybe you want
to rethink who you're going tovote for.
I mean, there's a lot ofreasons people vote for people,
but like, if I can't trust you,if I have questions about your
(11:18):
character, chances are goodyou're not getting my vote.
Yeah, that's me.
Speaker 3 (11:23):
So on the next topic we are talking about this week,
we have kind of a retouch ofsomething we covered a few weeks
ago, where Biden came out withhis title nine changes that were
basically for school districtsto change how they categorize
(11:43):
genders and, you know,effectively administrated Title
IX.
Governor Abbott sent out adirective to TEA to inform
school districts and charterschools that they were not to
implement those changes.
It's today, wednesday.
Shortly before this camethrough, he sent out a press
release that I have that put upright now that goes over how he
(12:15):
made clear Texas will not complywith Biden's rewrite of Title
IX and that contradicts theoriginal purpose and spirit of
the law, which is to support theadvancement of women.
Last week I instructed the TEAto ignore Biden's illegal
dictate on Title IX.
Today I'm instructing everypublic college and university in
the state of Texas to do thesame.
The directive was sentspecifically to all the
university systems and communitycolleges in Texas.
(12:38):
There had been some reportingthat Texas A&M was going to
implement the changes and we'rekind of ready to go, but Ken
Paxton has filed a lawsuitagainst it and A&M has now said
that they're going to wait.
This kind of also falls in linewith, like I think there's some
.
There's there's definitely someconsternation between
(13:00):
administrators at universitiesand you know the different
government entities that are incharge of overseeing those
groups, because you know thelegislature came through and
banned DEI.
You know they keep seeingreports of dozens of staffers
being fired from the university.
You know they're maybe tryingto jump on this quickly to get
(13:22):
it implemented so it's harder toundo, you know it's.
You kind of see some fights butthen you also see some agreement
at the highest level.
So when it comes to like thesefree speech protests, you know
you have Jay Hartzell who did agreat 50 other reps that
commended Hartzell on hishandling of the illegal
(13:49):
encampments under the guise offree speech at UT.
So you have some.
You know you see that at thatlevel.
But back on this issue, youknow you see that Title IX is,
you know, might be, somethingthat, like this, these trans
athletes and certainadministrations might be done
(14:10):
differently.
Also, I believe mentioning inhere the part of the Title IX
directive from Biden had to dowith how so interpersonal
(14:38):
conflicts are administered bythe university that are accused,
have some sort of due processright or, you know, have or have
the ability to be representedto a certain degree and then how
those um cases can beadministered by the university
um but part of general, or whatdo you say?
(15:00):
only only as a matter ofacademic, like probation,
whatever.
There's been a lot of issueswhere somebody can be accused of
sexual assault and then theyaren't allowed to have any
representation in any sort ofstudent tribunal.
There's a preponderance of theevidence standard and people are
just basically being kicked outbased off only an accusation.
That's not to say that theaccusation isn't valid, but that
(15:22):
the consequences happenimmediately, and then they kind
of figure it out after the factversus the other way around.
Um, and basically texas has asystem in place, um that
protects the accused due processrights, um that I think runs
afoul to a certain degree thethe new title ix directives from
(15:46):
the Biden administration.
So all that to say, there's abunch to this.
It's more than just transathletes.
There's a bunch of other issuesthat are at play here, and I
mean Paxton is leading thecharge because it's Texas
specific and, you know,hopefully his Solicitor General
doesn't go in and just screw uplike he did on that immigration
(16:08):
case, but I don't have a lot offaith that we're going to
prevail on anything thatPaxton's leading.
I do think that the legislationwas written well, and by that I
mean it was written towithstand challenge, so it's
going to be a situation of canPaxton dunk the ball or is he
going to throw it?
Speaker 2 (16:29):
out of bounds.
We can't be the only state thatfeels this way.
I mean, I didn't do theresearch on this, but we can't
be the other state.
But going back to the dueprocess thing, like if you're in
college, generally speaking youare at least 18 years old.
During college, generallyspeaking, you are at least 18
years old and therefore you areguaranteed all of your
(16:49):
constitutional rights.
Speaker 3 (16:57):
So for a college to take that away.
I get huge problems with thatand there's there's there are
major issues with it becausethat's something that the I mean
.
I remember hearing a news storyabout this when I was working
in Iowa in 2014, and this was anissue that Biden spearheaded
when he was vice president ofreally trying to lock in a Title
IX requirement for universitiesto basically just accept any
(17:26):
accusation and basically kickout the accuser ASAP, and there
are concerns with how that canbe administered.
If that's as easy as it is todo that to somebody, a lot of
times what happens is it's an ex, there's issues with an ex and
then it's just petty revenge,but most of the times they're
(17:59):
probably actually substantivecases of sexual assault haunted
by someone who's attacked them,versus general due process
rights for somebody who's beenaccused of malfeasance, and the
general argument by theuniversities is that this isn't
a constitutional right.
There are rules within theinstitution and you don't have
(18:19):
to have it because you're notbeing charged with anything and
you're only being deprived of anopportunity.
You're not being charged withanything and you're only being
deprived of an opportunity.
But when I talk aboutgovernment institutions, it gets
a little fuzzier and there'sstill a lot of open court cases
when it comes to this.
There's still a lot of legalquestions that are very gray.
So we can say, oh, it should beone way or the other, you can
(18:42):
have that argument.
But there's also arguments,legal arguments, that are far
beyond my comprehension, or atleast my knowledge at the moment
, that are still playing out,and that's kind of like the two
factors of this particular issue.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
I just I understand that college is a privilege and
you pay to go there, but if youare going to accuse someone of
anything, of anything, the dueprocess should still be.
You know, I mean, even when youwork for a company, if you are
(19:20):
accused of whatever, you aregiven the opportunity to to
speak to this, and I wow theidea that somebody could just
accuse your, accuse somebody ofsomething and nobody.
Speaker 3 (19:35):
I'm sorry say that again no, I'm sorry, that's the
only thing that happened on theback end.
Okay, yeah, but you need toaccuse upon somebody and they
just get kicked out of college.
It's, you know, it's it's sowrong.
Speaker 2 (19:44):
It's like we're gonna take your money and you're out
and like you don't get to sayanything and I would be really
angry.
But okay, I I find that bogus,all right.
So so there we are with titlenine, and and, due process, and
where, and, and and goingforward.
We are pausing onimplementation.
Speaker 3 (20:06):
Yeah, I did want to mention that there was the Texan
had its fifth I think it wasits fifth year or sixth year
anniversary this past week.
Lots of stuff on Twitter, youknow, kind of talking about it.
I just want to kind of praisethem for a second, because they
do a really good job ofreporting and they make a case
to report.
They have institutionalpolicies where they don't
(20:27):
endorse, um, they don't thinkit's appropriate for media and
such like.
Media like, ostensiblyjournalism, um, well that you
know journalists should uh,endorse in political races even
their editorial boards, um, andthey want to do a, they do, and
they do a good job of presentingdifferent facts.
(20:48):
They recognize that differentjournalists and authors are
going to have an opinion andhave bias, but they strive with
their editorial standards to notmake that bias known when
reporting on a given piece and Ithink they did a really good
job.
Connie Burton, a former statesenator, is the person who is
(21:09):
the editor in charge oreditor-in-chief publisher.
She started it and Connie is avery, very nice person.
When I was on my first politicaljob, she was running for state
senate and I didn't live in herdistrict, but I ended up being
at a lot of the same events asher and every time she'd see me
at an event she remembered myname.
No, it was 10 years ago.
(21:31):
She might not remember it now,but she remembered my name.
She always made sure I got fed.
She was just a very kind person.
When she had no reason to be, Ididn't work for her or against
her, which is kind of at theevent, and she was just.
You know, as you know, theykind of say in the churches, I
grew up in being Jesus to peopleand I always, you know, found
that to be just.
(21:52):
It always stuck with me,because you know she doesn't
necessarily always.
Whenever she was a legislator Ididn't always agree with how
she'd vote or her opinions on agiven thing, but I've always
respected her Cause I just knowthat she's a genuinely decent
person.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
She's a good human.
Speaker 3 (22:08):
Um, and that's all I have to say is um, one of their
reporters, brad Johnson, umrecently interviewed Mitch
little uh, who's the uh GOPnominee for um well, I actually
don't know the district numberup in Denton County.
He just beat Karuna Timish,who's the incumbent there, but
(22:32):
he's, you know, somebody who'salso we've talked about on the
podcast, or at least talkedabout his work, because he was
one of Paxton's defenseattorneys both in the
impeachment and in the criminaltrial.
Speaker 2 (22:42):
Oh, yes, yes, yes, yes.
Speaker 3 (22:43):
He's probably the best candidate that like
traditionally qualified andarticulate candidate that Tim
Dunn and his groups have evergotten behind.
He did this interview with BradJohnson and I'll put it up real
(23:03):
quick.
He did this interview with BradJohnson and I'll put it up real
quick.
But Mitch Little talks toYuppie Primary people.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
You can find it on.
Speaker 3 (23:13):
YouTube.
I did the text, yeah, and hemakes a lot of the same and all
this stuff will be linked on theshow description.
I encourage people to subscribeto the text and then to listen
to this interview and whateverelse, because Brad does a great
job of interviewing.
I think people should go checkit out.
But what's interesting aboutthe interview is that you can
(23:36):
see that Mitch Little's very,very smart.
He's a UT law grad I think hewent to A&M undergrad.
He's obviously very successfuldefense attorney and I think
that he said a lot of the rightthings about kind of in some
ways moving forward as a partyand whatever else, and I will
(23:58):
hold him to it because I hope hefollows that.
But I think he has anopportunity.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
You said moving forward as a party, like
cohesively, like cohesively.
Speaker 1 (24:10):
And you know I don't expect to agree with Mitch
Little on everything.
Speaker 3 (24:16):
I know already that I agree with him on a ton of
stuff.
I think he has the opportunityto do a good job in his position
, um to actually go in there andum fight for legislation.
I think he actually has anopportunity to get legislation
passed and to do well um, and Ithink he can.
I I hope that he.
(24:36):
I have hope.
I have hope that he'll do well.
I don't have hope for some ofthe people that the, the defend
te got behind.
I've seen them speak.
They are, in some cases,particularly unintelligent and I
think that it will be.
You know they're not going toget much done.
Mitch Little is not that.
He's very smart and I thinkthat he should be somebody that
(25:18):
people look at, because I thinkhe's going to end up being the
leader of that group, becausethe people in there now who are
kind of the faces of stuff theymight be okay at press or
getting on Newsmax, but theydon't really have any substance
behind.
Assuming that the arguments hewas making in the primary were
in good faith.
He gets to make some changes.
That will get done.
I'm not sure if you'd seen thatvideo.
Speaker 2 (25:36):
No, I hadn't Actually I hadn't, but good for him.
And you know, if you, havingworked, as Garrett has, I don't
know dozens and dozens ofcampaigns up and down the ballot
, if you can't articulate yourmessage, you know like if you
(25:59):
have a point you need to makeand you can't boil it down to
two sentences, you're losingBecause then you're explaining.
And if you two sentences,you're losing because then
you're explaining, and if you'reexplaining you're losing.
So it's, you know, there's alot to know about running for
office and communication and youneed to be able.
But a lawyer not all of them,not all of them, not all of them
(26:29):
, not all of them but mostlawyers can be very articulate.
Sometimes you need to.
I know I worked.
I worked for a lawyer who was,who was an elected official, and
so I had to get him to likeboil it down just a little more,
like condense it, Like yourpoints are good, but you're
explaining too much.
Just say your point and then,if you're asked, you can expand.
(26:50):
If it's like an interview or ifyou're standing up in front of
a group of people, you know wecall it the stump speech, or you
know, and that's the, that'sthe basic points of why you're
running.
I'm running for this policy,this policy, this policy and
these personal reasons.
And then there's the elevatorpitch, which is like how you
(27:12):
pitch yourself on an elevatorride.
So you get two minutes to dothat, and lawyers are used to
using many words.
Speaker 3 (27:26):
I think it really depends on the context, right?
Because if your person was adefense attorney, yeah,
sometimes they're going to havea long closing, but they also
need to be able to get aquestion out and get information
across.
If you're writing longcontracts, you have to make sure
you get every single detail onthere.
So your brain is going to bethinking about making sure you
check off every single possiblething.
Now, someone who is a defenseattorney and we saw how he did
(27:52):
it, how he did on hisquestioning in the PACs, and he
was excellent for the defensefrom a professional standpoint.
So obviously him and Busby werethe reasons for that they won
that case, were the reasons forthat they won that case, and I
think that it is.
So I feel like he's alreadydemonstrated that.
It's not necessarily that I havenot met him.
(28:12):
I do feel as if I did, he'dprobably be.
You know, austin's probablykind of on first meeting.
You know I I feel like he'll dowell in Austin and that's not a
dig.
I'm not saying oh, he's justgoing to go, whatever.
I think generally, if you're anaffable person, you're going to
do well in Austin and I thinkthat he can be affable, but
(28:36):
he'll fight for his sidewhenever he needs to.
All of that to say is a lot ofthese people that Scorecard has
been sending for a long timehave not been that and they've
been pretty poor, and I thinkMitch Little has the opportunity
to really kind ofprofessionalize it and I think
that if you're kind of aquote-unquote establishment
(28:57):
Republican, you should be scaredof him.
Speaker 2 (29:01):
Yeah, I mean, speak your truth.
That's what it is.
So, yeah, all right.
Well, we'll see what happens.
Speaker 3 (29:11):
And if you wanted to come on the show and talk, we'd
love to have them.
I think it'd be a goodinterview.
But the I mean I know somepeople had interactions with
them during the primary thatwere less than positive.
But primaries are betterAcrimonious affairs, they're
civil wars.
Speaker 2 (29:32):
By nature they're civil wars.
Speaker 3 (29:35):
That is why county parties, and they're not usually
that civil.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
But that's why county parties and the state party
have no business gettinginvolved in these like yeah, and
that's kind of the last thing Iwanted to yeah, yeah, go ahead
that's the last thing I want totalk about.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
It's a good segue to the county.
The county chair races uh, notcounty chair.
The part of the state chairrace is heating up.
There are five candidates.
Uh, don't ask me to name themall.
Speaker 2 (30:02):
They had a debate.
Speaker 3 (30:05):
They're doing several .
There will be one nextWednesday that's being
live-streamed by Texas Values.
I'll include the link in thedescription for this week and
for next week's.
Next Wednesday at noon.
Texas Values has a candidateforum in forum in the north
houston area.
That, um, they'll be broad,they'll be live streaming and um
(30:30):
, you know these, these debatesare happening kind of a
different opinion.
It seems like there's differentfactions of the party.
We all know that.
There's a kind of the dtl crowd, there's a scorecard crowd.
They're kind of different,mostly the same.
You kind of have the tfrw, youhave kind of the young
republicans, you have the somepeople who are just long-time
party members and you have somepeople.
(30:51):
You know it's all sorts ofdifferent groups.
You always have differentfactions.
It's a group all groups have.
Um.
So beyond those dividing lines,it seems like the main issues
are should the party getinvolved in inner party contests
and how important of all of itis raising money and getting
(31:12):
people republicans elected inthe general election?
So basically it's a how much ofthe focus of the party chair
should be on general electionsversus on, like I guess, party
discipline or whatever.
Speaker 2 (31:25):
No, that's not their job.
Speaker 3 (31:28):
But that's your opinion.
Other people disagree, and thatseems to be with the fight of
the, but that's literally whatthe election is being turned
into.
That's kind of like what is theelection going to be about?
So maybe, but so we can, we canget, let you get to it.
Speaker 2 (31:45):
I just want to make sure that what I'm all I'm
saying is that that's what theelection is going to be about so
if you are chair of the stateparty, I mean, the first thing
that I was told when I was acounty chair, um, and and god
bless her, sharon taught me agreat deal is that as chairman
whether it's county, whetherit's state, whatever you
(32:09):
represent all the shades of red.
Okay, so stay out of theprimaries, like that's why we
don't, or we shouldn't, take aposition in the primaries,
because as chairman or as amember of the board, um, say for
rpt or, you know, a state groupor whatever, you have no
(32:30):
business taking sides.
You may do, you may supportwhoever you like in your
personal life, but you may notmake a public statement.
And because we have, you know,people who are fire engine red.
You know the far rightRepublicans, and then we have
(32:51):
the middle of the road, you knowkind of Reagan Republicans, and
, and then we have people whoare, you know, I don't know what
the opposite of a blue dog is,but we have, we have those two,
and so you know, but you have torepresent, you know everybody,
and you can't make exceptions.
Well, you know you're not withme on social issues, but I'm
(33:13):
with you on everything else.
So shut up, like if you andI've said it over and over and
over again if you believe insmaller, more efficient
government, less taxes, then youare a Republican and the
leadership of the RepublicanParty should be glad to have you
and stay out of the primaries.
(33:36):
I'm sorry, it drives me crazy.
Speaker 3 (33:40):
I mean, just regardless of your opinion on
that issue and I tend to agreewith you, andy, regardless of
your opinion on that you have tobe raising funds because all of
it is moot right it's kind of achicken and egg question and
(34:00):
you have to have money to winelections.
You have to win the electionsand elections yep, you have to
win the elections and havemajorities for any of the other
things to make sense.
So the rank order should be wehave to have raise money because
we have to win generalelections, we have to recruit
candidates in places or whatever.
We have to do those functionsof the party so that we can do
any of the other questions.
(34:21):
And I think that over the pastfew years, the people who have
been voting and participating inthe Republican Party
organization itself, the actualorganization stuff, have taken
for granted our majorities andour dominance in elections, and
(34:44):
I think that's just ultimatelywhat it's.
What it boils down to is thatwe we've taken it for granted.
We actually have to go out andwin these elections, like how
are we going to hold?
We have to work to hold cd 20,so the congressional district 23
, regardless of whether Gonzalezwins or Herrera wins, right,
(35:07):
especially if.
Herrera wins, that's going to bea dogfight to keep the seat,
let alone whatever else.
We also had Henry Cuellar getindicted this week, who is he's
kind of a blue dog Democrat.
He's a pro-life I believe he'sa pro-life pro-border wall.
He's a pro-life uh, pro borderwall democrat from south texas.
(35:27):
He's been there for a while.
He was secretary of state backin the early 2000s.
Um, like he is a you know he'sbeen there for.
He's been in the congress for awhile and he's got bribery
charges having something to dowith azer, egypt or I don't know
.
Speaker 2 (35:46):
Did you see, though, his legislative staffer and I
don't know what their specifictitle was Apparently it's being
reported, I'll give you.
Speaker 3 (35:57):
I'm taking the same tact that Ted Cruz is.
I don't often say that, but hebasically came out and said
listen, when it comes to stufflike this, cuellar has been very
, very critical of the Bidenadministration.
I want to wait and see theevidence and get a little bit
more information before I thinkabout it.
If that reporting is true thathis staffer is turning state's
(36:20):
evidence, then yeah, I think heprobably needs to resign.
And I don't know, I probablyneed to figure out if what, if
he's already what his primary,what that means for the
democrats, uh, in his district,because one way or the other,
that seat's going to be far morein play for republicans.
So we need that's all to say iswe need money in the federal
(36:41):
accounts so we can go after thatseat.
The new New South Texas T isgettable in the right
circumstances.
This might be the rightcircumstances.
So we need to look at that ASAPbecause that's it could be a
flip in Texas.
Speaker 2 (36:56):
Yeah, bad, bad.
Speaker 3 (37:00):
So what are we doing about that?
Because we have to be raisingfunds.
You have to raise funds fromthe federal dollars, which means
you're limited by how much youcan raise at any given time.
You have to raise funds at thestate dollars for the state
races like Lopez down on theborder or, like I mentioned
before, lahood and LaHan andBexar County, chin and Meyer and
(37:21):
Dallas.
Any of these suburban seats inHouston or Harris-DeVilla in
Williamson County could be atrisk.
You know these seats are.
We need to be defending theseseats at the very least, let
alone going after some seats inthese suburban areas and in
South Texas.
Speaker 2 (37:42):
And I would say to you, garrett, like some of these
people have already won theirprimary, some of them have not,
but by getting involved in theprimary you're cutting off
dollars to the party.
So if I'm, if I'm supporting,supporting Jane Doe for state
(38:02):
Senate and the RPT or my countycomes out and says no, no, bob
Smith, right, they're notgetting any money from me.
Like no, no.
(38:24):
That's why, as the leader ofthe county or or the state,
people are going to hold backdollars and like no, no, support
everybody and when one of theprimaries over figure out where
you're in danger, put your moneybehind those races.
That's it.
Speaker 3 (38:42):
Well, lots going on here in May as we gear up for
the next big thing, which arethe runoffs and the RPT
convention in San Antonio, whichare going to happen around the
23rd to the 25th.
So that's going to be kind ofthe things that are percolating
over the next few weeks.
But we covered a lot today,andy.
(39:02):
I think we got more than enough.
So thank y'all so much forjoining us.
Remember, like we said earlierlike subscribe, smash the
notification button so you knowexactly when we release a new
episode.
Thank you so much for watchingand listening to us today and
we'll see you next week.
Bye, guys.
Speaker 2 (39:21):
Bye guys.
Speaker 1 (39:24):
You've been listening to the CN Red Podcast.
It's always Texas politics andbeyond.
We present the facts andopinions the CN Red Podcast with
your host, andy Turner, andGarrett Foles.
Thank you and tune in next weekand please do us a favor.
Hit the subscribe button so youdon't miss a single episode.
Welcome to the Seeing Red Podcast with Andy Turner
and Garrett Fools Checking up onTexas policies and politics,
with some federal issues thrownin like the assault weapons ban,
interest rate hikes, you get it, but it's mostly Texas, since
we can't ignore the big stuffeither.
And now here are your hosts,Andy Turner and Garrett Fools.
(00:23):
Hosts Andy Turner and Garrett.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Foles, everybody, welcome back to this week's
edition of the Seeing Redpodcast and YouTube, and we are
delighted you are joining us.
If you are new, welcome,welcome.
And if you are returning, thankyou so much.
We are delighted to have youhere.
Please, please, please, hitthat subscribe button and smash
that like button.
It's really helpful to us toget the word out about the show
(00:49):
and about what we're talkingabout, and you know all the
things.
So smash that subscribe, smashthat like button Turn on
notifications.
And notifications are great too.
Absolutely yes we don't do thisin a single episode.
Speaker 3 (01:02):
That way you know right when we drop it Because,
like today's episode, we'rerecording this on wednesday
morning.
We typically record it, uh, ontuesday or monday or tuesday,
and so it's going to drop laterthan usual.
So you're going to.
If you want to know exactlywhen this podcast came out, when
this youtube video dropped, youwant to turn on those
notifications.
But thank you so much forjoining us today.
And, andy, did you see whatMark McCaig dropped this morning
(01:26):
?
Speaker 2 (01:26):
I did not, you were telling me a little before the
show, but wow.
It was quite the headline.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
Let me show you this.
Yeah, oh, there we go, thereyou go.
So we have HD91 candidates.
So HD91 is in Tarrant County.
It's represented by StephanieClick, a candidate up there.
He's run a couple times thismight be his second time running
Named David Lowe is you knowthey're in a runoff.
(01:55):
He was able to preventRepresentative Click from
getting into it.
Well, he likes to run on hispast record.
He's a veteran, he's a former,maybe active, I don't know a
peace officer, um, but he's notactively a peace officer.
He doesn't work actively forany police organization, to my
knowledge.
Okay, he got his job initiallyin collin county, which right
(02:21):
there in the dfw metroplex.
Um, he apparently, according torecords that Mark McCaig at the
Texas Voice found and I'm goingthrough this right here on the
site he found that David Lowewas demoted in his first 10
weeks from a peace officer to adetention officer and that's not
(02:44):
necessarily detention Detentionofficers are often peace
officers but he also received apay cut when he did that and to
date, he quickly left just thelaw enforcement field.
By 2020, he was working for theDallas GOP.
By 2020, he was working for theDallas GOP and it was stated
(03:18):
there that he Mark interviewedor tried to get a comment from
the Collin County Sheriff andthe sheriff said where is this
Under?
Speaker 2 (03:25):
its current policies and standards.
David Olo is not eligible forrehire of the peace officer
within the Collin CountySheriff's Office and that's
pretty much all they can commenton from an HR perspective.
They can say when he started,when he started work like when
people call for references whenyou started what, what, how much
you made, and when you left andare you eligible for rehire,
and when you left and are youeligible for rehire, and yeah,
it's yeah usually not a goodsign when the answer to are they
(03:49):
eligible for rehire, when theanswer is no, it's not a good
sign.
Speaker 3 (03:54):
Yeah.
So it's, yeah, it's not a greatsign.
The next employer he had,Dallas GOP at the time was
chaired by Rodney Anderson, whowas a former state rep out of
Irving.
He lost in the same election inthe same area where Matt
(04:14):
Rinaldi lost, which is kind ofthe Irving West Dallas County
area.
But Anderson won a fewelections by a fewer than 500
votes I think a couple of themwere lower than 200.
He came out and justeviscerated Lowe he's like as
(04:37):
County Chairman.
I was forced to confront himspreading mistruths about the
county party.
I was forced to confront himspreading mistruths about the
county party.
David Lowe's blatantly falseinformation was damaging to
party efforts and now he hasmoved to Tarrant County to run
for office.
It saddens me to see him usingthe same tactics against
Stephanie Click.
I urge the voters of HC91 tostrongly redirect these tactics.
(04:59):
Stephanie Click is an honorable, respected and effective
conservative serving Texas well.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
I mean yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:08):
You never know how a story like this is going to play
in a runoff.
And that's the thing aboutrunoffs, speaking generally
about it, there's nothingpredictable about them.
They are completely differentfrom a primary or from a general
(05:29):
election, because it's ascheduled election but a lot of
people aren't going out for itand typically there's only one
or two things on the ballot, sothere's not a lot of people just
turning out generally who don'tknow about your race.
People are turning out.
They're turning out to vote foryou, vote for your opponent or
vote against one of the othertwo people, and there's only.
It's just.
It's a completely different wayof looking at the election.
(05:51):
And you know, just becausesomebody got you know, I've seen
elections where somebody got 49points some odd percent Right
and ended up losing the runoffand ended up losing the runoff
Right.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
Which is crazy.
Can you scroll back up so thatpeople can see where to find
this?
Speaker 3 (06:06):
Yeah, it's the TexasVoicecom.
Okay.
Well, there you go, it'll beits top story.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
Yeah, if you just click, yeah, just want to make
sure Mark gets all the credit inthe world.
Speaker 3 (06:16):
Absolutely so.
That's an interesting storythat's coming through right now.
There's a bunch of stuffhappening in the runoffs.
We don't really know what'sgoing to happen.
I mentioned that the crazythings are happening.
You never know what's going tohappen.
That's just to say you don'tknow how a story like this is
(06:37):
going to impact a race, but itcould very well influence enough
voters to vote for or against,for click or against Lowe.
That it could be the difference.
Speaker 2 (06:51):
And for some people it will be not necessarily like
I know some people's reasoningin some races is I'm not voting
for candidate A, I'm votingagainst candidate B, like maybe
they don't have strong feelingsabout the first candidate A, but
they definitely don't likecandidate B.
(07:12):
So, and you know, while we'retalking about this,
representative Frazier up inmore or less the DFW area.
Speaker 3 (07:21):
He's in Collin County .
Yeah, he lives in Collin Countyand worked for Dallas PD.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
Yeah, I think you can take this down now.
Oh sure, but I know that hepled guilty to some misdemeanors
.
You guys probably read about it.
I don't want to like get intoall the little tiny details, but
as part of a plea agreement, hehad to pay, I think it was like
$4,000.
And he, but as part of a pleaagreement, he had to pay I think
it was like $4,000, and he hadto do some other things.
(07:47):
He was fired by the DallasPolice Department.
That was very public.
You can access that.
This is not things that I know,that nobody else knows.
So we're in some veryinteresting runoffs,
particularly as it concerns lawenforcement officers.
And, yep, you want to move on.
Speaker 3 (08:09):
Okay, great, so I was just trying to load it in the
screen.
Sorry to the people watchingthis live.
You know some of this happenswhile we're doing it.
I was just, uh, loading up thenext topic because the governor,
uh, and I'll take this down forthe, for the, for the moment,
but, um, the governor you canmove on uh, I mean frederick
frazier's, you know, is also ina runoff and you know.
(08:30):
You know he had stories.
There's been ebbs and flows inhis story too.
I mean, you know he had whatyou just said.
There was also something thatkind of exonerated, or I don't
exactly know.
I don't, I'm not following itparticularly well.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
He pled guilty.
I'm sorry, that is not correct.
That is not correct.
He pled no contest to thecharges.
Dpd did fire him and he didhave to do it.
Speaker 3 (08:55):
I thought he resigned .
I thought he was forced toresign.
Speaker 2 (08:59):
I do not believe that is correct.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Hang on one second, let me do some fitting pasta
visage um but at a certain pointbeing asked to resign and being
fired, or you know, the pointsare saliently different.
Um, but yeah that you knowthose are different races where
it's similar issues with peoplewho are, you know, ostensibly on
kind of different sides of therepublican party.
(09:21):
So it'll be interesting to seeif one plays, one doesn't, if
it's an issue that kind ofpermeates through anything, but
it's kind of specific.
But also, what's happeningright now is to kind of touch on
something we talked aboutpreviously.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
He was dishonorably discharged from Dallas.
This is according to WFAAcom.
North Texas StateRepresentative dishonorably
discharged from Dallas PoliceDepartment pleads no contest to
misdemeanor charges.
Representative Frederick FraserR McKinney pleads no contest to
(09:55):
class A misdemeanor charges ofattempting to impersonate a
public servant.
And I could rehash all that foryou, but I think that's enough
said about that.
So we're having some very jobas a law enforcement officer.
Speaker 3 (10:35):
No, and apparently he just kind of burns the bridges
of anywhere he goes.
So I mean, if you go into thelegislature, if you're working
in legislator, there's a certaincooperative element to getting
legislation passed.
Speaker 2 (10:56):
Right and you need to be able to negotiate in good
faith with other people,particularly people of his own
party, um, or her own party,then I would say maybe you want
to rethink who you're going tovote for.
I mean, there's a lot ofreasons people vote for people,
but like, if I can't trust you,if I have questions about your
(11:18):
character, chances are goodyou're not getting my vote.
Yeah, that's me.
Speaker 3 (11:23):
So on the next topic we are talking about this week,
we have kind of a retouch ofsomething we covered a few weeks
ago, where Biden came out withhis title nine changes that were
basically for school districtsto change how they categorize
(11:43):
genders and, you know,effectively administrated Title
IX.
Governor Abbott sent out adirective to TEA to inform
school districts and charterschools that they were not to
implement those changes.
It's today, wednesday.
Shortly before this camethrough, he sent out a press
release that I have that put upright now that goes over how he
(12:15):
made clear Texas will not complywith Biden's rewrite of Title
IX and that contradicts theoriginal purpose and spirit of
the law, which is to support theadvancement of women.
Last week I instructed the TEAto ignore Biden's illegal
dictate on Title IX.
Today I'm instructing everypublic college and university in
the state of Texas to do thesame.
The directive was sentspecifically to all the
university systems and communitycolleges in Texas.
(12:38):
There had been some reportingthat Texas A&M was going to
implement the changes and we'rekind of ready to go, but Ken
Paxton has filed a lawsuitagainst it and A&M has now said
that they're going to wait.
This kind of also falls in linewith, like I think there's some
.
There's there's definitely someconsternation between
(13:00):
administrators at universitiesand you know the different
government entities that are incharge of overseeing those
groups, because you know thelegislature came through and
banned DEI.
You know they keep seeingreports of dozens of staffers
being fired from the university.
You know they're maybe tryingto jump on this quickly to get
(13:22):
it implemented so it's harder toundo, you know it's.
You kind of see some fights butthen you also see some agreement
at the highest level.
So when it comes to like thesefree speech protests, you know
you have Jay Hartzell who did agreat 50 other reps that
commended Hartzell on hishandling of the illegal
(13:49):
encampments under the guise offree speech at UT.
So you have some.
You know you see that at thatlevel.
But back on this issue, youknow you see that Title IX is,
you know, might be, somethingthat, like this, these trans
athletes and certainadministrations might be done
(14:10):
differently.
Also, I believe mentioning inhere the part of the Title IX
directive from Biden had to dowith how so interpersonal
(14:38):
conflicts are administered bythe university that are accused,
have some sort of due processright or, you know, have or have
the ability to be representedto a certain degree and then how
those um cases can beadministered by the university
um but part of general, or whatdo you say?
(15:00):
only only as a matter ofacademic, like probation,
whatever.
There's been a lot of issueswhere somebody can be accused of
sexual assault and then theyaren't allowed to have any
representation in any sort ofstudent tribunal.
There's a preponderance of theevidence standard and people are
just basically being kicked outbased off only an accusation.
That's not to say that theaccusation isn't valid, but that
(15:22):
the consequences happenimmediately, and then they kind
of figure it out after the factversus the other way around.
Um, and basically texas has asystem in place, um that
protects the accused due processrights, um that I think runs
afoul to a certain degree thethe new title ix directives from
(15:46):
the Biden administration.
So all that to say, there's abunch to this.
It's more than just transathletes.
There's a bunch of other issuesthat are at play here, and I
mean Paxton is leading thecharge because it's Texas
specific and, you know,hopefully his Solicitor General
doesn't go in and just screw uplike he did on that immigration
(16:08):
case, but I don't have a lot offaith that we're going to
prevail on anything thatPaxton's leading.
I do think that the legislationwas written well, and by that I
mean it was written towithstand challenge, so it's
going to be a situation of canPaxton dunk the ball or is he
going to throw it?
Speaker 2 (16:29):
out of bounds.
We can't be the only state thatfeels this way.
I mean, I didn't do theresearch on this, but we can't
be the other state.
But going back to the dueprocess thing, like if you're in
college, generally speaking youare at least 18 years old.
During college, generallyspeaking, you are at least 18
years old and therefore you areguaranteed all of your
(16:49):
constitutional rights.
Speaker 3 (16:57):
So for a college to take that away.
I get huge problems with thatand there's there's there are
major issues with it becausethat's something that the I mean
.
I remember hearing a news storyabout this when I was working
in Iowa in 2014, and this was anissue that Biden spearheaded
when he was vice president ofreally trying to lock in a Title
IX requirement for universitiesto basically just accept any
(17:26):
accusation and basically kickout the accuser ASAP, and there
are concerns with how that canbe administered.
If that's as easy as it is todo that to somebody, a lot of
times what happens is it's an ex, there's issues with an ex and
then it's just petty revenge,but most of the times they're
(17:59):
probably actually substantivecases of sexual assault haunted
by someone who's attacked them,versus general due process
rights for somebody who's beenaccused of malfeasance, and the
general argument by theuniversities is that this isn't
a constitutional right.
There are rules within theinstitution and you don't have
(18:19):
to have it because you're notbeing charged with anything and
you're only being deprived of anopportunity.
You're not being charged withanything and you're only being
deprived of an opportunity.
But when I talk aboutgovernment institutions, it gets
a little fuzzier and there'sstill a lot of open court cases
when it comes to this.
There's still a lot of legalquestions that are very gray.
So we can say, oh, it should beone way or the other, you can
(18:42):
have that argument.
But there's also arguments,legal arguments, that are far
beyond my comprehension, or atleast my knowledge at the moment
, that are still playing out,and that's kind of like the two
factors of this particular issue.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
I just I understand that college is a privilege and
you pay to go there, but if youare going to accuse someone of
anything, of anything, the dueprocess should still be.
You know, I mean, even when youwork for a company, if you are
(19:20):
accused of whatever, you aregiven the opportunity to to
speak to this, and I wow theidea that somebody could just
accuse your, accuse somebody ofsomething and nobody.
Speaker 3 (19:35):
I'm sorry say that again no, I'm sorry, that's the
only thing that happened on theback end.
Okay, yeah, but you need toaccuse upon somebody and they
just get kicked out of college.
It's, you know, it's it's sowrong.
Speaker 2 (19:44):
It's like we're gonna take your money and you're out
and like you don't get to sayanything and I would be really
angry.
But okay, I I find that bogus,all right.
So so there we are with titlenine, and and, due process, and
where, and, and and goingforward.
We are pausing onimplementation.
Speaker 3 (20:06):
Yeah, I did want to mention that there was the Texan
had its fifth I think it wasits fifth year or sixth year
anniversary this past week.
Lots of stuff on Twitter, youknow, kind of talking about it.
I just want to kind of praisethem for a second, because they
do a really good job ofreporting and they make a case
to report.
They have institutionalpolicies where they don't
(20:27):
endorse, um, they don't thinkit's appropriate for media and
such like.
Media like, ostensiblyjournalism, um, well that you
know journalists should uh,endorse in political races even
their editorial boards, um, andthey want to do a, they do, and
they do a good job of presentingdifferent facts.
(20:48):
They recognize that differentjournalists and authors are
going to have an opinion andhave bias, but they strive with
their editorial standards to notmake that bias known when
reporting on a given piece and Ithink they did a really good
job.
Connie Burton, a former statesenator, is the person who is
(21:09):
the editor in charge oreditor-in-chief publisher.
She started it and Connie is avery, very nice person.
When I was on my first politicaljob, she was running for state
senate and I didn't live in herdistrict, but I ended up being
at a lot of the same events asher and every time she'd see me
at an event she remembered myname.
No, it was 10 years ago.
(21:31):
She might not remember it now,but she remembered my name.
She always made sure I got fed.
She was just a very kind person.
When she had no reason to be, Ididn't work for her or against
her, which is kind of at theevent, and she was just.
You know, as you know, theykind of say in the churches, I
grew up in being Jesus to peopleand I always, you know, found
that to be just.
(21:52):
It always stuck with me,because you know she doesn't
necessarily always.
Whenever she was a legislator Ididn't always agree with how
she'd vote or her opinions on agiven thing, but I've always
respected her Cause I just knowthat she's a genuinely decent
person.
Speaker 2 (22:06):
She's a good human.
Speaker 3 (22:08):
Um, and that's all I have to say is um, one of their
reporters, brad Johnson, umrecently interviewed Mitch
little uh, who's the uh GOPnominee for um well, I actually
don't know the district numberup in Denton County.
He just beat Karuna Timish,who's the incumbent there, but
(22:32):
he's, you know, somebody who'salso we've talked about on the
podcast, or at least talkedabout his work, because he was
one of Paxton's defenseattorneys both in the
impeachment and in the criminaltrial.
Speaker 2 (22:42):
Oh, yes, yes, yes, yes.
Speaker 3 (22:43):
He's probably the best candidate that like
traditionally qualified andarticulate candidate that Tim
Dunn and his groups have evergotten behind.
He did this interview with BradJohnson and I'll put it up real
(23:03):
quick.
He did this interview with BradJohnson and I'll put it up real
quick.
But Mitch Little talks toYuppie Primary people.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
You can find it on.
Speaker 3 (23:13):
YouTube.
I did the text, yeah, and hemakes a lot of the same and all
this stuff will be linked on theshow description.
I encourage people to subscribeto the text and then to listen
to this interview and whateverelse, because Brad does a great
job of interviewing.
I think people should go checkit out.
But what's interesting aboutthe interview is that you can
(23:36):
see that Mitch Little's very,very smart.
He's a UT law grad I think hewent to A&M undergrad.
He's obviously very successfuldefense attorney and I think
that he said a lot of the rightthings about kind of in some
ways moving forward as a partyand whatever else, and I will
(23:58):
hold him to it because I hope hefollows that.
But I think he has anopportunity.
Speaker 2 (24:02):
You said moving forward as a party, like
cohesively, like cohesively.
Speaker 1 (24:10):
And you know I don't expect to agree with Mitch
Little on everything.
Speaker 3 (24:16):
I know already that I agree with him on a ton of
stuff.
I think he has the opportunityto do a good job in his position
, um to actually go in there andum fight for legislation.
I think he actually has anopportunity to get legislation
passed and to do well um, and Ithink he can.
I I hope that he.
(24:36):
I have hope.
I have hope that he'll do well.
I don't have hope for some ofthe people that the, the defend
te got behind.
I've seen them speak.
They are, in some cases,particularly unintelligent and I
think that it will be.
You know they're not going toget much done.
Mitch Little is not that.
He's very smart and I thinkthat he should be somebody that
(25:18):
people look at, because I thinkhe's going to end up being the
leader of that group, becausethe people in there now who are
kind of the faces of stuff theymight be okay at press or
getting on Newsmax, but theydon't really have any substance
behind.
Assuming that the arguments hewas making in the primary were
in good faith.
He gets to make some changes.
That will get done.
I'm not sure if you'd seen thatvideo.
Speaker 2 (25:36):
No, I hadn't Actually I hadn't, but good for him.
And you know, if you, havingworked, as Garrett has, I don't
know dozens and dozens ofcampaigns up and down the ballot
, if you can't articulate yourmessage, you know like if you
(25:59):
have a point you need to makeand you can't boil it down to
two sentences, you're losingBecause then you're explaining.
And if you two sentences,you're losing because then
you're explaining, and if you'reexplaining you're losing.
So it's, you know, there's alot to know about running for
office and communication and youneed to be able.
But a lawyer not all of them,not all of them, not all of them
(26:29):
, not all of them but mostlawyers can be very articulate.
Sometimes you need to.
I know I worked.
I worked for a lawyer who was,who was an elected official, and
so I had to get him to likeboil it down just a little more,
like condense it, Like yourpoints are good, but you're
explaining too much.
Just say your point and then,if you're asked, you can expand.
(26:50):
If it's like an interview or ifyou're standing up in front of
a group of people, you know wecall it the stump speech, or you
know, and that's the, that'sthe basic points of why you're
running.
I'm running for this policy,this policy, this policy and
these personal reasons.
And then there's the elevatorpitch, which is like how you
(27:12):
pitch yourself on an elevatorride.
So you get two minutes to dothat, and lawyers are used to
using many words.
Speaker 3 (27:26):
I think it really depends on the context, right?
Because if your person was adefense attorney, yeah,
sometimes they're going to havea long closing, but they also
need to be able to get aquestion out and get information
across.
If you're writing longcontracts, you have to make sure
you get every single detail onthere.
So your brain is going to bethinking about making sure you
check off every single possiblething.
Now, someone who is a defenseattorney and we saw how he did
(27:52):
it, how he did on hisquestioning in the PACs, and he
was excellent for the defensefrom a professional standpoint.
So obviously him and Busby werethe reasons for that they won
that case, were the reasons forthat they won that case, and I
think that it is.
So I feel like he's alreadydemonstrated that.
It's not necessarily that I havenot met him.
(28:12):
I do feel as if I did, he'dprobably be.
You know, austin's probablykind of on first meeting.
You know I I feel like he'll dowell in Austin and that's not a
dig.
I'm not saying oh, he's justgoing to go, whatever.
I think generally, if you're anaffable person, you're going to
do well in Austin and I thinkthat he can be affable, but
(28:36):
he'll fight for his sidewhenever he needs to.
All of that to say is a lot ofthese people that Scorecard has
been sending for a long timehave not been that and they've
been pretty poor, and I thinkMitch Little has the opportunity
to really kind ofprofessionalize it and I think
that if you're kind of aquote-unquote establishment
(28:57):
Republican, you should be scaredof him.
Speaker 2 (29:01):
Yeah, I mean, speak your truth.
That's what it is.
So, yeah, all right.
Well, we'll see what happens.
Speaker 3 (29:11):
And if you wanted to come on the show and talk, we'd
love to have them.
I think it'd be a goodinterview.
But the I mean I know somepeople had interactions with
them during the primary thatwere less than positive.
But primaries are betterAcrimonious affairs, they're
civil wars.
Speaker 2 (29:32):
By nature they're civil wars.
Speaker 3 (29:35):
That is why county parties, and they're not usually
that civil.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
But that's why county parties and the state party
have no business gettinginvolved in these like yeah, and
that's kind of the last thing Iwanted to yeah, yeah, go ahead
that's the last thing I want totalk about.
Speaker 3 (29:49):
It's a good segue to the county.
The county chair races uh, notcounty chair.
The part of the state chairrace is heating up.
There are five candidates.
Uh, don't ask me to name themall.
Speaker 2 (30:02):
They had a debate.
Speaker 3 (30:05):
They're doing several .
There will be one nextWednesday that's being
live-streamed by Texas Values.
I'll include the link in thedescription for this week and
for next week's.
Next Wednesday at noon.
Texas Values has a candidateforum in forum in the north
houston area.
That, um, they'll be broad,they'll be live streaming and um
(30:30):
, you know these, these debatesare happening kind of a
different opinion.
It seems like there's differentfactions of the party.
We all know that.
There's a kind of the dtl crowd, there's a scorecard crowd.
They're kind of different,mostly the same.
You kind of have the tfrw, youhave kind of the young
republicans, you have the somepeople who are just long-time
party members and you have somepeople.
(30:51):
You know it's all sorts ofdifferent groups.
You always have differentfactions.
It's a group all groups have.
Um.
So beyond those dividing lines,it seems like the main issues
are should the party getinvolved in inner party contests
and how important of all of itis raising money and getting
(31:12):
people republicans elected inthe general election?
So basically it's a how much ofthe focus of the party chair
should be on general electionsversus on, like I guess, party
discipline or whatever.
Speaker 2 (31:25):
No, that's not their job.
Speaker 3 (31:28):
But that's your opinion.
Other people disagree, and thatseems to be with the fight of
the, but that's literally whatthe election is being turned
into.
That's kind of like what is theelection going to be about?
So maybe, but so we can, we canget, let you get to it.
Speaker 2 (31:45):
I just want to make sure that what I'm all I'm
saying is that that's what theelection is going to be about so
if you are chair of the stateparty, I mean, the first thing
that I was told when I was acounty chair, um, and and god
bless her, sharon taught me agreat deal is that as chairman
whether it's county, whetherit's state, whatever you
(32:09):
represent all the shades of red.
Okay, so stay out of theprimaries, like that's why we
don't, or we shouldn't, take aposition in the primaries,
because as chairman or as amember of the board, um, say for
rpt or, you know, a state groupor whatever, you have no
(32:30):
business taking sides.
You may do, you may supportwhoever you like in your
personal life, but you may notmake a public statement.
And because we have, you know,people who are fire engine red.
You know the far rightRepublicans, and then we have
(32:51):
the middle of the road, you knowkind of Reagan Republicans, and
, and then we have people whoare, you know, I don't know what
the opposite of a blue dog is,but we have, we have those two,
and so you know, but you have torepresent, you know everybody,
and you can't make exceptions.
Well, you know you're not withme on social issues, but I'm
(33:13):
with you on everything else.
So shut up, like if you andI've said it over and over and
over again if you believe insmaller, more efficient
government, less taxes, then youare a Republican and the
leadership of the RepublicanParty should be glad to have you
and stay out of the primaries.
(33:36):
I'm sorry, it drives me crazy.
Speaker 3 (33:40):
I mean, just regardless of your opinion on
that issue and I tend to agreewith you, andy, regardless of
your opinion on that you have tobe raising funds because all of
it is moot right it's kind of achicken and egg question and
(34:00):
you have to have money to winelections.
You have to win the electionsand elections yep, you have to
win the elections and havemajorities for any of the other
things to make sense.
So the rank order should be wehave to have raise money because
we have to win generalelections, we have to recruit
candidates in places or whatever.
We have to do those functionsof the party so that we can do
any of the other questions.
(34:21):
And I think that over the pastfew years, the people who have
been voting and participating inthe Republican Party
organization itself, the actualorganization stuff, have taken
for granted our majorities andour dominance in elections, and
(34:44):
I think that's just ultimatelywhat it's.
What it boils down to is thatwe we've taken it for granted.
We actually have to go out andwin these elections, like how
are we going to hold?
We have to work to hold cd 20,so the congressional district 23
, regardless of whether Gonzalezwins or Herrera wins, right,
(35:07):
especially if.
Herrera wins, that's going to bea dogfight to keep the seat,
let alone whatever else.
We also had Henry Cuellar getindicted this week, who is he's
kind of a blue dog Democrat.
He's a pro-life I believe he'sa pro-life pro-border wall.
He's a pro-life uh, pro borderwall democrat from south texas.
(35:27):
He's been there for a while.
He was secretary of state backin the early 2000s.
Um, like he is a you know he'sbeen there for.
He's been in the congress for awhile and he's got bribery
charges having something to dowith azer, egypt or I don't know
.
Speaker 2 (35:46):
Did you see, though, his legislative staffer and I
don't know what their specifictitle was Apparently it's being
reported, I'll give you.
Speaker 3 (35:57):
I'm taking the same tact that Ted Cruz is.
I don't often say that, but hebasically came out and said
listen, when it comes to stufflike this, cuellar has been very
, very critical of the Bidenadministration.
I want to wait and see theevidence and get a little bit
more information before I thinkabout it.
If that reporting is true thathis staffer is turning state's
(36:20):
evidence, then yeah, I think heprobably needs to resign.
And I don't know, I probablyneed to figure out if what, if
he's already what his primary,what that means for the
democrats, uh, in his district,because one way or the other,
that seat's going to be far morein play for republicans.
So we need that's all to say iswe need money in the federal
(36:41):
accounts so we can go after thatseat.
The new New South Texas T isgettable in the right
circumstances.
This might be the rightcircumstances.
So we need to look at that ASAPbecause that's it could be a
flip in Texas.
Speaker 2 (36:56):
Yeah, bad, bad.
Speaker 3 (37:00):
So what are we doing about that?
Because we have to be raisingfunds.
You have to raise funds fromthe federal dollars, which means
you're limited by how much youcan raise at any given time.
You have to raise funds at thestate dollars for the state
races like Lopez down on theborder or, like I mentioned
before, lahood and LaHan andBexar County, chin and Meyer and
(37:21):
Dallas.
Any of these suburban seats inHouston or Harris-DeVilla in
Williamson County could be atrisk.
You know these seats are.
We need to be defending theseseats at the very least, let
alone going after some seats inthese suburban areas and in
South Texas.
Speaker 2 (37:42):
And I would say to you, garrett, like some of these
people have already won theirprimary, some of them have not,
but by getting involved in theprimary you're cutting off
dollars to the party.
So if I'm, if I'm supporting,supporting Jane Doe for state
(38:02):
Senate and the RPT or my countycomes out and says no, no, bob
Smith, right, they're notgetting any money from me.
Like no, no.
(38:24):
That's why, as the leader ofthe county or or the state,
people are going to hold backdollars and like no, no, support
everybody and when one of theprimaries over figure out where
you're in danger, put your moneybehind those races.
That's it.
Speaker 3 (38:42):
Well, lots going on here in May as we gear up for
the next big thing, which arethe runoffs and the RPT
convention in San Antonio, whichare going to happen around the
23rd to the 25th.
So that's going to be kind ofthe things that are percolating
over the next few weeks.
But we covered a lot today,andy.
(39:02):
I think we got more than enough.
So thank y'all so much forjoining us.
Remember, like we said earlierlike subscribe, smash the
notification button so you knowexactly when we release a new
episode.
Thank you so much for watchingand listening to us today and
we'll see you next week.
Bye, guys.
Speaker 2 (39:21):
Bye guys.
Speaker 1 (39:24):
You've been listening to the CN Red Podcast.
It's always Texas politics andbeyond.
We present the facts andopinions the CN Red Podcast with
your host, andy Turner, andGarrett Foles.
Thank you and tune in next weekand please do us a favor.
Hit the subscribe button so youdon't miss a single episode.
Popular 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.