Rep. Jeff Crank (R, CO-5) joins Dan to reflect on his questioning of Denver mayor Mike Johnston (D) on sanctuary policies protecting illegal aliens in the city, as well as the continuing resolution on spending before the House on Tuesday for a vote.
Cody Barnett, attorney for Alliance Defending Freedom, joins Dan to discuss the case of Chiles v. Salazar taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court on Colorado's censorship law chilling an individual's right to freedom of speech.
Chiles v. Salazar | ADFMedia.org
Supreme Court takes on conversion therapy bans in Colorado case
Cody Barnett, attorney for Alliance Defending Freedom, joins Dan to discuss the case of Chiles v. Salazar taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court on Colorado's censorship law chilling an individual's right to freedom of speech.
Chiles v. Salazar | ADFMedia.org
Supreme Court takes on conversion therapy bans in Colorado case
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Dan Caplis and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dankplas Show. Please be sure to give
us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform. Speaking of fighting,
you heard the update to ABC News that at this
point Ukraine has agreed to a Trump administration peace proposal
(00:24):
and now this is a first step kind of cease
fire thing. We'll talk to Congressman Jeff Crank about that
as well, and now it's a matter of whether putin
will So let's go to the VIP line. Welcome Congressman
Jeff Crank, City five, Back to the Dankpli Show.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Congressman, how you doing.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Hey, Dan, I'm doing great well.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Appreciate you being here. As always, it's always time when
you're here, because it's always time for you. But let
me ask you, my friend, and I don't know, because
I know you've been busy with votes. This Trump administration
peace proposal or at least sees fire proposal for Ukraine
at this point, any particular insight on that. All we
(01:03):
know from the headlines is that Ukraine has agreed and
now it's being carried to putin.
Speaker 3 (01:10):
Yeah, I don't have any real insight on the details
of the deal, you know, I just have seen the
news reports as well as you have. But I think
it's remarkable if you think about where we were just
a few weeks ago, and certainly, you know, even if
you think back under Joe Biden, we had zero chance
(01:32):
of having a ceasefire in Ukraine, and now we have
it because of Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
Right, Yes, someone said, I mean before Trump, the talk
was about if there could be peace. Since Trump, it's
when there's going to be peace. So what a change
in landscape. But Congressman, yeah, if you would update us
on the latest Obviously has been all this chatter as
there always is about whether government's going to be shut down.
What's the story there?
Speaker 3 (01:57):
Well, you know, fortunately Republicans just stuck together and there
was only one Republican who voted against the continuing resolution.
The continuing Resolution is a remarkable thing that the Speaker
and the others put together. Frankly, it's you know, it
decreases government spending by seven billion dollars. Now, that's not
(02:21):
going to get us out of our fix. But normally
continuing resolutions spend the same amount of money as the
previous year. That's not the case in this cr It
increased defense spending by two billion dollars and then overall
cut domestic spending by seven billion dollars. And so that's
(02:42):
remarkable to get that done. We just passed it by
just a couple of votes, and apparently had one Democrat
who at the last minute switched their vote and vote
with us to keep the government. I don't know yet.
I think I'm guessing it's probably golden, but I don't know.
Oh yeah, we'll have to see.
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Speaking of Democrats, do you remember the name of the
the woman Democrat congresswoman who was the only one to
stand when the brain cancer survivor was being honored during
the president's address to Congress. I just thought that took
real courage, and obviously everybody should have stood, right, But
I thought that took real courage.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
That took real courage. And you know what, what I
talked about this just the other day. I think what
that whole episode showed is the power of.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
Going along, right. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (03:33):
And I don't mean to compare it to you know,
certainly like not Nazi Germany or anything like that, but
we do know the power of people's ability to just
kind of go along with the crowd, and how terrible
that can be. And we saw that just you know,
at the President's address the other night. We saw how
(03:54):
easily that was for all of them to get swept
up in, hey, we're going to sit on our hands,
we're not going to clap, to the point that they
finally find themselves sitting on their hands and not clapping
about a little boy who's answer yeah, yeah, yeah. And
so it definitely takes courage, and it takes courage to
buck your own party. But you know, if you're there
(04:15):
to do the right thing, you would stand. And thankfully
there there was at least one.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
Yeah, and that wasn't even a political thing, that was
just a humanity thing. And so yeah, I admired her,
and frankly, I'm grateful the others did what they did
because they're just exposing themselves. Because one of the frustrations
for me, Congressman, I don't know if you've ever been
a member of any other party, but I was a
Democrat for many years, and so I kind of got
(04:42):
blasted out of that by the life issue. But just
so many people have vote Democrat out of habit and
they have no idea how crazy far secular left the
Democratic Party is. So you need really weird behavior like
that just to try to open some eyes.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
That's right. And you know, the Democrat Party, my dad
was a Democrat, and you know, I've always been a Republican.
My dad was a Democrat until Ronald Reagan came along.
And you know, when Reagan came along, he realized that
the Democrat Party had left him. He was pro life
like I am. But you know, this used to be
the party that was anti communist and you know, for
(05:20):
the working man, and now they're not either of those
things quite honestly.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
So yeah, and then it's just how to open eyes.
And I know you've been doing that. Hey, you just
want to campaign by a bunch, so you've been in
the process of doing that. But what do you think,
Kevin had your experiences, including your media experiences, what do
you think is tip of the spirit? The biggest thing
that GOP can do to try to open more Democrat eyes.
And we don't need to get all of them, right,
(05:45):
we just need to get enough to flip this state.
Speaker 3 (05:48):
Right. Well, yeah, I think we have to be the
party we have to be the party of liberty. We
have to be the party of freedom, the party that
you know removes government imposed barriers on citizens, right. I mean,
different people have different views of what liberty and freedom
is and the American dream. Different people have a different
(06:11):
view of what the American dream is, and government so
often creates a barrier and we have to be the
party that breaks those barriers down. And if we're seen
as that, I think we have a very long time
to be in power. And especially if you have Democrats
acting the way they did the other night, I mean,
they have not helped themselves. They've not had a good
(06:32):
week in the PR Department for sure.
Speaker 1 (06:34):
To me, that's the combo pack you need, right And
I think you look at the GOP in Colorado and
you've gotten important first step there because you've got people
holding these say congressional positions right now who are going
to impress an awful lot of people in Colorado.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
Right.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
And then on top of that, you got the Democrats
getting more and more whack. And I just think that
combo is very important. Personally. I think it's going to
take a break through win at the state level, you know,
with one of you impressive guys or gales winning a
Senate seat or the governor's office and then becoming the
statewide face of the party and then people say, Okay,
(07:11):
I kind of like that.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
Yeah, yeah, I think so, and we really have the opportunity.
And you're right, I mean in Colorado or the Democrats
have gone so far left, whether it's the gun issue
or the life issue, or even just over regulation and
just killing business. I mean, Colorado is less and less
a place that you'd want to go and do business
in the state of Colorado, and you know, they're just
(07:35):
kind of driving common sense out of the state. And
so there is a great opportunity I think for Republicans,
but we have to reframe ourselves, and you know, COVID
I think helped us do that a little bit. When
we've pushed back on the excesses of COVID. I think
young people saw that and saw that at least it
was the Republicans who kind of stood up for their
(07:56):
liberty and freedom and that so there's hope.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
And for their kids. Yeah, I think that's one hundred
percent true. Hey, final question, just whether you're hearing any
rumblings Michael Bennett now talking about running for governor of Colorado.
My own layman's view is that if Joe Nogose gets in,
it's a denomination's probably clearly his h Do you run
into him? Do you have any rumblings? Do you think
he's getting into this race?
Speaker 3 (08:20):
You know, I don't know. I do run into him
a lot. I saw him today, a couple of times.
I was on the flight out to Washington yesterday with him,
and so you know, I do see him quite often.
I don't hear a lot about it other than just
talk on the street. Yeah, but I've never I should ask.
Why don't I just ask?
Speaker 4 (08:37):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (08:37):
Could like? Great there? Who had the better seat on
the plane?
Speaker 3 (08:42):
He had the better I don't. He's got a lot
more seniority. Yeah, yeah, the United.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
Oh yeah, yeah all that.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
You know.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
All that good?
Speaker 1 (08:52):
Hey, appreciate your time today. How do people follow you?
Speaker 3 (08:55):
They can follow me at Rep Jeff Rep Crank on X.
They can do that at Rep Crank, Rep Jeff Crank,
I'm sorry at Rep. Jeff Crank on X, and I
can follow us on Facebook and Instagram as well.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Wonderful. Well, Hey, appreciate the time today. Be safe out.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
There, Okay, Dan, thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (09:16):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
That is Representative Jeff Crank. Always good to talk to him. Hey,
lot's to do. And then a special guest coming up
at four point thirty sixty No Alliance Defending Freedom and
this isn't just a plug for them. They are a
national treasure. And they got another big case out of Colorado.
I mean it tells you something, right that so many
of these big liberty cases that win at the Supreme
Court come out of Colorado because the Left is so
(09:38):
crushing when it comes to personal liberty here and this
one is really important. This whole business of banning quote
conversion therapy another form of censorship, right, because the Left
knows that it just can't win the fair argument, so
it has to try to censor and say, oh no,
it's illegal. Miscounselor for you to say this to a child.
(09:59):
So very important to freedom of speech, freedom of religion,
liberty type case and we'll hit it with them at
four thirty six. You're on the Dan Caplas Show.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
And now back to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
We're trend among the American public.
Speaker 5 (10:16):
So transgender female athletes in women's sports only eighteen percent
of the country says that they should be in fact
allowed to participate in women's sports. Compare this to the opposition,
I mean, my goodness, gracious, seventy nine percent. You rarely
get seventy nine percent of the country to agree on anything,
but they do in fact agree on the idea of
opposing transgend their female athletes in women's sports.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
So interesting still that Bennett, Hick and Looper Pollless. You
know they're afraid to go there, right, And it's just
like so many things, starting with abortion. They know, they
must know that what they're supporting is just absolutely dead wrong,
but they're willing to do it and create the harm
it causes to innocent humans in order to get and
(11:01):
keep political power. It's just a remarkable approach to things
that hopefully is very hard for you or me to
relate to. Three or three someone three eight two five
five the number text d A N five seven seven
three nine again. Special guests Cody Barrett, Alliance Defending Freedom
at four thirty six, A case you probably have not
thought much about because it hasn't been one of those
(11:22):
big headline grabbers. But I think you're going to find
really interesting and important and so glad that Scotus took
this up and took up this case out of Colorado,
where where again the left is trying to outlaw speech.
The left is trying to tell therapists, Oh no, you
can't provide this kind of therapy to say a transgender
(11:42):
And I put that in quote kid and so very
glad they took it up. I assume they took it
up in order to throw out the Colorado law. But
we'll talk to Cody Barrett from Alliance Defending Freedom and
just just a quick side note. You know, you think
about those people out there, those groups that really make
a found difference that affects your life, and who would
(12:04):
you have on that list? Say, Ryan, if you're on
a game show right now, you've got to answer in
the next fifteen seconds, the five different entities in America
that have a profound positive impact on your life. What
would they be? Define entities? What do you mean like
just not an individual human, It's a group, gotcha?
Speaker 6 (12:28):
And this could be an impact for any reason, good, bad,
or indifferent?
Speaker 4 (12:31):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (12:31):
No, positive, positive impact, positive.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
I don't think about that or that. Just want to
be clear for our audience. That's all.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Oh, and did I thank you yet? Thank you so
much for bailing me out. Yesterday. Ryan did the whole
darn show for me, and I had to be exhausted
because I was in court. We were in court till
after six last night. That's remarking just just what a
credit obviously to the to the judiciary and the system
and everything else. Whatever it took, it got done. And yeah,
we were there till after six, So I thought I
(12:59):
would be back to with the show it for but
Ryan dove right in and I'm sure did an award
winning job. Now who gets out of word to you
or me? It should be you? Yeah, thank you, Kelly.
But yeah, who would it be? Like those five groups
that have a positive effect on your life?
Speaker 2 (13:16):
Wow, I've really put some thought into that.
Speaker 1 (13:18):
That's okay, I'd suggest Alliance Defending Freedom because this is
one of them. I mean I would start, okay, military
police fires, right, okay, but I would have Alliance Defending
Freedom up there because and it's not our most of
our radar every day, but they're going in and they're
winning these big Supreme Court cases that have a very
practical impact on people's lives. If people tend to like freedom,
(13:41):
you know, like freedom of speech, religious liberty, that sort
of thing, and I hope that you do. So, Yeah,
special guest at four thirty six, I think you're going
to find that case fascinating. Speaking of fascinating, we've got
some more hots sound out there today. Where do you
want to start Michelle Obama starting a political podcast?
Speaker 2 (14:02):
Huh? We all are sort of all.
Speaker 7 (14:04):
It's like programmed to talk about how great she is
and how smart she is. I mean, she can't paign
a lot for Kamala Harris. She was a key speaker
of the Democratic National Convention. Barack Obama was a key
strategist for this whole thing that happened last year, and
yet somehow Donald Trump still won. So I'm rethinking the
premise of that she's the answer to the future, or
that any politician is the answer to Democratic Party.
Speaker 4 (14:25):
And.
Speaker 1 (14:27):
That Milania Trump stole her speech.
Speaker 7 (14:30):
I'm sorry what she's so that Milania Trump plagiarized her speech?
Speaker 6 (14:34):
Or do you not remember your Coatma?
Speaker 1 (14:36):
Then come back out you like, yeah, I think she's fine.
Speaker 7 (14:38):
But I'm just but just after the and and and
I think and I and I and I think I
thought she gave a wonderful speech as far as convention speeches. Go,
I'm just looking at what happened last fall. The Obama's
helped engineer Biden's ouster. They put in Harris, they caught
he ran the campaign, she can't paign for him, and
it was a total failure.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
I just wondered how good they really?
Speaker 1 (14:56):
So what do you think Michelle Obama making her move now?
Because remember we talked about obviously she would have been
by far the strongest candidate the Democrats could have fielded,
and the Obamas obviously got out maneuvered by Biden, who
was furious, as he should have been, about being publicly
pansed and tied to the goalpost and deposed, and so
he up maneuvered them. He forced Kamala Harris on the
(15:19):
Obamas and everybody else. So if the plan had been
Midsummer to put Michelle in, that got thwarted and Biden
got his revenge. Right, So is she now positioning herself
Because I always thought Ryan and said on air that
the biggest reason she wouldn't run in the last cycle
was she could not imagine the possibility of losing to Trump,
(15:40):
which obviously might have happened. But now that there's no
longer a possibility of losing to Trump because he can't
run again. Do you think this new political podcast is
her move? Love your take? Three or three someone three
eight two five five text d an five seven seven
three nine, or maybe you just don't care, which I
would completely understand.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
Do you care?
Speaker 3 (16:01):
Ryan?
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Do I care if Michelle Obama runs or does a podcast?
Speaker 1 (16:04):
Yeah, if she becomes a face of the Democratic Party,
runs for president, Kingmaker, all this other stuff. And now
this is all against the backdrop of at least a
lot of public speculation that maybe that couple's cooling off
a little bit.
Speaker 3 (16:18):
Saw that.
Speaker 6 (16:19):
I think it's more a product of a Democratic Party
that is nameless and faceless and lacks a leader with
true charisma and vision. I think Gavin Newsom is trying
to step into that space, and he's made some interesting
moves of late, with Charlie Kirk on his podcast, basically
conceding the ground that trans individuals who identify as female
who are biologically male.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
Should not What a craz position when the latest poll
shows at eighty twenty right, But poll List and others
won't go there.
Speaker 6 (16:46):
Tim Walls was asked on CNN, who's the leader of
the Democratic parties, and he just kind of ham handedly answered,
I would say the American people.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
Yeah, Oh my goodness, what a gift he was. What
a gift he was to us, wasn't he?
Speaker 4 (17:00):
Wow?
Speaker 2 (17:00):
Totally yes.
Speaker 1 (17:02):
And we still have not had a chance to talk
about this business with Michael Bennett apparently getting ready to
run for governor. I think the reason we haven't talked
about it is truly nobody cares. Like nobody cares, which
is so interesting to me. And you had our friend
Dick Wadhams on yesterday and I have not had a
chance to hear that yet, which I really want to.
(17:23):
But what Stick's take in the end, does he think
the GOP can have a chance to pull this off? Well?
Speaker 6 (17:29):
I think we harkened back to the days of Bill
Owens and what was the secret sauce then what will
led to his success? Now, granted it was a different time,
but what Dick did was he drew a lot of
parallels between the political climate back then, the fact that
we were coming off of several many democratic governors in
a row, so it wasn't like Owens was running into
a lean red time in American history. And then also
(17:51):
to the example set by Virginia with Glenn Youngkin in
an otherwise blue state. He was able to kind of
navigate that path between Trumps supporters and those who are
maybe anti tru and galvanized that movement to win that
election over Terry mccauliffe.
Speaker 1 (18:04):
So it's the bottom line that Dick thinks there's a
chance here, not like a dumb and dumber chance, but
thanks a marital path. But yeah, okay malone and a
million narrow path. Hey, when we come back, really important
US Supreme Court case had just agreed to take it.
It's out of Colorado. More abuse by the left in
Colorado that Scotis is about to write. We'll have the
adyf lawyer after the break.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Cody Barnett kind enough to join us from Alliance Defending
Freedom doing truly heroic work and work that changes America
for the better all the time, in part by going
to the Supreme Court and winning these big cases such
as a big success. Now Supreme Court has agreed to
hear a challenge to a Colorado law I'll let Cody
(18:52):
take it up from there. Cody, Welcome to the Dankplas show.
Speaker 3 (18:55):
Thank you're define and thank you so much for having me.
It's a pleasure.
Speaker 1 (18:58):
Well, hey, appreciate all you do and all you folks do.
But please, if you would tell folks about the child's
case and the significance of it and why you think
the Supreme Court agreed to take it.
Speaker 3 (19:12):
Yes, happy to do so.
Speaker 4 (19:13):
So this is a case where Colorado has a law
that basically tells counselors what they can and cannot say
in the counseling room. It effectively makes counselors parrot the
state's views on gender and sex and prevents the counselor
from pursuing goals that a client may want that are contrary.
Speaker 3 (19:33):
To the views of the state.
Speaker 4 (19:35):
And so we challenge this law under the free speech
clause at the First Amendment, just taking it for what
it is. It's an effort by the state to censor
news that it does not like.
Speaker 3 (19:47):
And you know, now the Supreme.
Speaker 4 (19:49):
Court has recognized that and has agreed to take it
because some courts in the country have treated this as
not speech, and some courts have and so in order
for there to be consistency, the Court is taken the
matter up and is going to resolve the split.
Speaker 1 (20:04):
Do you expect to win?
Speaker 3 (20:06):
Yes. Absolutely.
Speaker 4 (20:07):
We think that the Supreme Court taking the case is
a good indicator that they agree with us on the view,
because the lower court in this case held this was
not speech, and so the usually when the Supreme Court
takes the case, although not always, they tend to reverse
what the lower court does. And so we have every
faith that the court will agree with us that when
(20:29):
a counselor speaks worth that that speech, and that's protected
by the First Amendment and states can't ban that.
Speaker 1 (20:35):
Yeah, and what you say makes perfect sense on both
merits and process, right. I mean, why would they be
taking this other than to overturn the court in Colorado?
Is you know better than anybody. You know that the
tenth Circuit that Federal Appella Court level in Colorado, that
tenth Circuit said no. With a second, the state was
grounding this law in you know, its reasonable interpretation of
(20:57):
medicine science. I'm paraphrasing. How do you re on to that?
Speaker 4 (21:02):
Yeah, So I think there's two responses. You know, first,
this has nothing to do with medicine and the state's
ability to regulate that. This is all about when a
state targets words directly, because all that Kaylee Childs does
is talk to her clients, and all that they do
is talk back with her. You know, she listens, They
(21:23):
set goals, and they work toward reaching those goals together
through words. And so the state's attempt to sort of
medicalize this as far Afield and frankly misses the mark
on what the First cent protects. And I think the
Supreme Court recognize that in taking this case, and they
have been saying for years now that just because a
professional is speaking does not mean the First Amendment does
(21:44):
not apply. But that's exactly what the Tenth Circuit held,
and that's what Colorado.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
Is trying to hide behind. Yeah, which is just part
of a pattern in Colorado, right, as you allude to,
which is to try to criminalize speech of people they
don't agree with, whether it's Jack Phillips, you know, whether
it's three ZHO three creative that that's just their patterning Colorado.
Do you think it's a coincidence that Scotus has taken
so many cases out of.
Speaker 2 (22:09):
Colorado, I don't, you know.
Speaker 4 (22:12):
Hopefully this time Colorado will learn its lesson, But the
Supreme Court has been consistent of all the cases that
you brought up that Colorado can't impose its views on
people and silence views that disagrees with. And so third
time is the charm we hope and that this time
you know Colorado won't use the levers of power to
try to sensor speech.
Speaker 1 (22:33):
Cody Burnett from adf Liians Defending freedom. For those who
haven't followed this particular issue, what is in reality this
so called quote conversion therapy, that's that issue in the case.
Speaker 4 (22:48):
So that is a loaded phrase that Colorado has used
in order to evoke images that frankly don't even apply here.
All that Kaylee Childs does is talk with the clients
yepc's client who voluntarily want to be in conversations with Clara.
Typically they share for faith and want to seek out
viewpoints that align with their own. And so by using
(23:11):
this phrase, Colorado is trying to evoke things from the
past or to scare the public into accepting its view
of gender and sexuality and silence views that it disagrees with.
Because this goes far beyond regulating practices that accountslor does
and strikes it's a very speech. The very words that
she uses and it's doing so at a time when
(23:31):
there is a crisis in this country where parents and
children desperately want and need the exact type of counseling
that pay the childs provide.
Speaker 1 (23:40):
And what kind of counseling is that.
Speaker 4 (23:43):
It's the type of counseling that helps those who want
to get comfortable with their body, grow comfortable with their body,
who want to align struggles that they are having with
their body with the tenants of their faith, and just
allow them to live in harmony rather than be forced
down a pathway of surgery or medicine or a passway
(24:03):
that says you have to value the state's views of
gender and sexuality over what your faith teaches.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
Yeah, and correct me if this is too simplistic, But
a counselor like ms Childs who wants to just be
able to say to a child something common sense like no,
don't cut off your breast, don't don't cut off your
other parts, don't chemically alter your body instead focus on this,
focus on that would that counselor then be in danger
(24:32):
under you know, Jared Polis and the Colorado legislatures censorship efforts.
Speaker 3 (24:39):
Absolutely.
Speaker 4 (24:40):
The law is written very broadly to cover any effort
that would encourage a client to change is or her
gender or sexuality. And so if a client comes in
and wants to pursue harmony rather than discordinatece, then this
law would make any advice that the counselor gives that
would encourage that goal, it would either censor it or
(25:02):
punish a counsel with excessive finds or even revocation of
her license.
Speaker 3 (25:07):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
So then let's say a child walks in and that
child at the moment is identifying as the opposite gender, right,
the counselor would be limited in what the counselor could
then literally say to that child to try to encourage
the child to actually be the gender the child is.
Is that the gist of it.
Speaker 4 (25:27):
Absolutely, if the child, even even if the child wants
to grow in harmony with their sex, the law forbids
the counselor from encouraging that ratchets the other directions the
counselor has to encourage under this law. No, you feel
this unity and you have to embrace that. And so
(25:47):
it's really just a one sided censorship of viewpoint and
an imposition of an ideology on the counseling profession.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
Well, God love all of you guys and gals for
fighting this. How can people support ADF?
Speaker 4 (26:02):
We encourage you to pray for our attorneys and for
our clients, and if you feel led to throw some
financial support and partner with us and these important endeavors.
You can find out more just by searching for ADF.
Speaker 3 (26:16):
On the web.
Speaker 2 (26:17):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (26:18):
Well, truly, you guys accomplish more in more concrete ways,
more often that than almost any organization in America.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
So glad you're here.
Speaker 1 (26:29):
Keep up the great work and we'll catch you next time.
Speaker 4 (26:32):
Yeah, thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 3 (26:33):
We really appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (26:34):
Thanks Cody, you take care of that is Cody Barnett
from Alliance Defending Freedom.
Speaker 2 (26:40):
Wow, what great work they do.
Speaker 1 (26:41):
And winter winter chicken dinner on that one, right, Ryan,
I mean for the reasons he said the Supreme Court
isn't going to take the case, just to say, oh, yeah,
that craziness is okay. You can censor speech in Colorado.
Speaker 6 (26:53):
Well you go one step further and predict who's going
to write the majority opinion in this case.
Speaker 1 (26:57):
Oh, I would do that if I had to do
it right now, say Justice Thomas.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
I was going to go with Alito. But I think
we're Oh no, no, he could.
Speaker 1 (27:10):
He's on fire.
Speaker 2 (27:11):
Oh, he's on fire.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
I think this issue, I think this issue is you know,
I think Justice Thomas and I think Justice Thomas favored
taking a similar case a little while back, and the
majority just came came around. So yeah, but it just
goes back to the same old point, right, And I
know this is old news. But but because the Left
(27:33):
can't win a fair fight, they can't win on the merits,
they have to criminalize opposing speech. And it's also consistent
with this pattern left. They don't give a darn about kids, right,
I mean it is so obvious in a million different ways.
If they don't get them killed before birth, you know
by their crazy glorify abortion of the moment of delivery policies,
(27:55):
then they're going to shut most of them down by
depriving him of equal education. Than this stuff where they
just sacrifice these kids' bodies on the altar of worshiping. Uh,
this this trans insanity. Yeah, it's just I think more
people are starting to see that. You're on the Dan
Capitlas Show.
Speaker 2 (28:15):
And now back to the Dan Taplass Show podcast.
Speaker 4 (28:19):
Anyhabitants to suggest that there is actually a serious reason
to believe that this student uh is.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
Going to be a threat to enter to national security.
Speaker 7 (28:28):
And i've certainly, I've certainly watched the abomination that's gone
on at Columbia and in another place, and i will
just tell you, and I'll just.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
Tell you that I'm not going to let you move
on because this is Yeah, I'll.
Speaker 7 (28:39):
Tell you why it's a threaten national security if you
let me answer you Stock the woman answer your Okay.
His organization says we are dedicated fighting for the total
eradication of Western civilization.
Speaker 3 (28:50):
He's not a citizen.
Speaker 1 (28:51):
Stock, he doesn't need a do Yeah, why is this controversial?
And I'd love your take on it. I'm a big
free speech guy obviously, look what I do for a living.
But yeah, I mean, if if somebody's a visitor in
this country, they don't have citizenship in this country, they're
on one of these student visas, and they're calling for
(29:14):
the erratic eradication of Western civilization, what would be the
reason to keep them, what would be the reason to
allow them to stay. I'd love to hear the opposing
argument on that. Maybe I'm missing something, but I sure
don't think so you know, listen. Obviously, if somebody just
(29:34):
has a difference of opinion on some big political issue
of the day, that's one thing. But if somebody's out
there calling for the eradication of our civilization, why would
we want to extend that courtesy of a student visa
so happy to hear the other side of it, eight
five five or zer a five a two five five,
(29:56):
much better version of that number three oh three seven
one three a two five or of course takes dam
five seven seven three nine text Dan, the left doesn't
care about women. Great show, thank you. I think people
are starting to see that, right, and we saw that
on election day and Democratic Party really is waging this
(30:19):
war on women. And I know it'll take a lot
of people time to kind of wrap their mind around that,
but you see it in so many different ways.
Speaker 2 (30:26):
It's not subtle, right.
Speaker 1 (30:27):
I mean, if you as a party are saying, okay,
you're a girl, you're a woman, but we as a party,
a top priority of ours is that a man gets
to come into your shower, a man gets to come
into your bathroom, then yeah, that's a war on women.
But it starts before that, right, because I mean that
(30:48):
this party which has perversely kind of grown up around
glorifying abortion and legalizing it to the moment of delivery
that takes seven hundred and fifty thousand female lives a year.
And then there are so many other ways. I mean,
look at Colorado, right, Brian, where they claim to be
kind of the epitome of holier than thou Dei types,
and let's see female governor. No, no, now, let's see governor.
(31:16):
Both Senates seats those appear to me to be kind
of old white males, right. I mean, it's just so obvious,
and it's so obvious the same thing when it comes
to folks of color that that's Democratic Party, just total
hypocrites on that. And so yeah, clearly of war on
women from the left right now, and the breakthrough issue.
(31:37):
It's it's fun, isn't it when we see a tipping point,
When you see a tipping point in your own life,
and and you know, battles being fought, et cetera, and
then finally there's a one straw that kind of tips
everything over and then it happens slowly and then all
at once. So we're seeing that in America right now
when it comes to this craziness of men in women's
(31:58):
sports and bathrooms and everything else.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
You know what I think fueled it.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
I mean, obviously it's been percolating on the surface for
a long time because it's just loony. But I really
do think it was that whatever it was one hundred,
one hundred and fifty million or more that Elon Musk
put into running that great ad during the Trump campaign.
You couldn't watch a game without seeing it. You couldn't
watch this or that. It was brilliant and it worked,
(32:21):
and it worked because it's true and it cut through
it all. So yeah, it is fun. I think we're
in the middle of a series of tipping points. One
thing we want to kick around a little bit in
the five o'clock hour. We haven't talked a whole lot
about on the show, but I'd love to get your
take on it is. You know, obviously, right now, Trump,
when he's trying to initiate structural change in the economy
(32:42):
for long term good, you know there's going to be
some pain. There's going to be some pain. Very few
things in life. Can you ever have a major change
for the better without some pain in the meantime, right
because that the reason this obviously needed major change for
the better hasn't happened. Is because it's too painful to
get from.
Speaker 2 (33:00):
Here to there.
Speaker 1 (33:02):
Probably a great conversation to be having during Lent too,
And I do want to get back to that issue Ryan,
of why we had this explosion of attendance in churches
on the most recent ash Wednesday, and that was here
and apparently around the world. But getting back to the
economy for a second, I personally believe I think it
may have been the combination of things of you know,
(33:25):
being wrongfully pursued legally, facing the real chance that if
he doesn't die in prison, he'll die on the run,
trying to stay out of prison. Then miraculous, And I
agree with Trump, you know, I think there was divine
intervention in surviving that that assassination attempt in Butler, I
think he is determined right now. He is determined right
(33:45):
now to leave a lasting gift, to leave a lasting
gift to the working people of America, who he knows
are the people who put him in office and now
correctly kept him out of jail since he was being
wrongly pursued, and so I it would be so easy
for him right to just roll into this term, not
(34:05):
have any economic disruption just in cur more debt, never
have to say no to anybody, etc. It would be
easy for him to do, but he's not doing that.
He's willing to have this disruption now to make the
kind of structural change that he believes will truly long term,
long after he's gone, benefit working people in America by
(34:28):
bringing more manufacturing back, etc. And having those good high
pain with benefits, stable jobs that for a long time
were kind of a backbone of America now as you know,
are so off and offshore. And that's a big point
of these terrorists, not the only point, but a big point,
another lasting gift to to America, working people of America
(34:49):
whose kids get killed disproportionately by fentanyl, is using those
terrafts to just shut it down, shut it down from China, Mexico, Canada.
I think this is a man on a mission to
do things others aren't.
Speaker 2 (35:02):
For my either party or both.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
Aren't willing to do and have this structural, long term
change that will really matter to working people in America.
So we'll touch on that as well. Three or three
someone three eight two five five The number text DN
five seven seven three nine you're on The Dame Capitol Show.
This is Dan Caplis and welcome to today's online podcast
edition of The Dankplas Show. Please be sure to give
us a five star rating if you'd be so kind,
and to subscribe, download and listen to the show every
single day on your favorite podcast platform. Speaking of fighting,
you heard the update to ABC News that at this
point Ukraine has agreed to a Trump administration peace proposal
(00:24):
and now this is a first step kind of cease
fire thing. We'll talk to Congressman Jeff Crank about that
as well, and now it's a matter of whether putin
will So let's go to the VIP line. Welcome Congressman
Jeff Crank, City five, Back to the Dankpli Show.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Congressman, how you doing.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Hey, Dan, I'm doing great well.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Appreciate you being here. As always, it's always time when
you're here, because it's always time for you. But let
me ask you, my friend, and I don't know, because
I know you've been busy with votes. This Trump administration
peace proposal or at least sees fire proposal for Ukraine
at this point, any particular insight on that. All we
(01:03):
know from the headlines is that Ukraine has agreed and
now it's being carried to putin.
Speaker 3 (01:10):
Yeah, I don't have any real insight on the details
of the deal, you know, I just have seen the
news reports as well as you have. But I think
it's remarkable if you think about where we were just
a few weeks ago, and certainly, you know, even if
you think back under Joe Biden, we had zero chance
(01:32):
of having a ceasefire in Ukraine, and now we have
it because of Donald Trump.
Speaker 1 (01:37):
Right, Yes, someone said, I mean before Trump, the talk
was about if there could be peace. Since Trump, it's
when there's going to be peace. So what a change
in landscape. But Congressman, yeah, if you would update us
on the latest Obviously has been all this chatter as
there always is about whether government's going to be shut down.
What's the story there?
Speaker 3 (01:57):
Well, you know, fortunately Republicans just stuck together and there
was only one Republican who voted against the continuing resolution.
The continuing Resolution is a remarkable thing that the Speaker
and the others put together. Frankly, it's you know, it
decreases government spending by seven billion dollars. Now, that's not
(02:21):
going to get us out of our fix. But normally
continuing resolutions spend the same amount of money as the
previous year. That's not the case in this cr It
increased defense spending by two billion dollars and then overall
cut domestic spending by seven billion dollars. And so that's
(02:42):
remarkable to get that done. We just passed it by
just a couple of votes, and apparently had one Democrat
who at the last minute switched their vote and vote
with us to keep the government. I don't know yet.
I think I'm guessing it's probably golden, but I don't know.
Oh yeah, we'll have to see.
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Speaking of Democrats, do you remember the name of the
the woman Democrat congresswoman who was the only one to
stand when the brain cancer survivor was being honored during
the president's address to Congress. I just thought that took
real courage, and obviously everybody should have stood, right, But
I thought that took real courage.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
That took real courage. And you know what, what I
talked about this just the other day. I think what
that whole episode showed is the power of.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
Going along, right. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (03:33):
And I don't mean to compare it to you know,
certainly like not Nazi Germany or anything like that, but
we do know the power of people's ability to just
kind of go along with the crowd, and how terrible
that can be. And we saw that just you know,
at the President's address the other night. We saw how
(03:54):
easily that was for all of them to get swept
up in, hey, we're going to sit on our hands,
we're not going to clap, to the point that they
finally find themselves sitting on their hands and not clapping
about a little boy who's answer yeah, yeah, yeah. And
so it definitely takes courage, and it takes courage to
buck your own party. But you know, if you're there
(04:15):
to do the right thing, you would stand. And thankfully
there there was at least one.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
Yeah, and that wasn't even a political thing, that was
just a humanity thing. And so yeah, I admired her,
and frankly, I'm grateful the others did what they did
because they're just exposing themselves. Because one of the frustrations
for me, Congressman, I don't know if you've ever been
a member of any other party, but I was a
Democrat for many years, and so I kind of got
(04:42):
blasted out of that by the life issue. But just
so many people have vote Democrat out of habit and
they have no idea how crazy far secular left the
Democratic Party is. So you need really weird behavior like
that just to try to open some eyes.
Speaker 3 (04:59):
That's right. And you know, the Democrat Party, my dad
was a Democrat, and you know, I've always been a Republican.
My dad was a Democrat until Ronald Reagan came along.
And you know, when Reagan came along, he realized that
the Democrat Party had left him. He was pro life
like I am. But you know, this used to be
the party that was anti communist and you know, for
(05:20):
the working man, and now they're not either of those
things quite honestly.
Speaker 1 (05:24):
So yeah, and then it's just how to open eyes.
And I know you've been doing that. Hey, you just
want to campaign by a bunch, so you've been in
the process of doing that. But what do you think,
Kevin had your experiences, including your media experiences, what do
you think is tip of the spirit? The biggest thing
that GOP can do to try to open more Democrat eyes.
And we don't need to get all of them, right,
(05:45):
we just need to get enough to flip this state.
Speaker 3 (05:48):
Right. Well, yeah, I think we have to be the
party we have to be the party of liberty. We
have to be the party of freedom, the party that
you know removes government imposed barriers on citizens, right. I mean,
different people have different views of what liberty and freedom
is and the American dream. Different people have a different
(06:11):
view of what the American dream is, and government so
often creates a barrier and we have to be the
party that breaks those barriers down. And if we're seen
as that, I think we have a very long time
to be in power. And especially if you have Democrats
acting the way they did the other night, I mean,
they have not helped themselves. They've not had a good
(06:32):
week in the PR Department for sure.
Speaker 1 (06:34):
To me, that's the combo pack you need, right And
I think you look at the GOP in Colorado and
you've gotten important first step there because you've got people
holding these say congressional positions right now who are going
to impress an awful lot of people in Colorado.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
Right.
Speaker 1 (06:50):
And then on top of that, you got the Democrats
getting more and more whack. And I just think that
combo is very important. Personally. I think it's going to
take a break through win at the state level, you know,
with one of you impressive guys or gales winning a
Senate seat or the governor's office and then becoming the
statewide face of the party and then people say, Okay,
(07:11):
I kind of like that.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
Yeah, yeah, I think so, and we really have the opportunity.
And you're right, I mean in Colorado or the Democrats
have gone so far left, whether it's the gun issue
or the life issue, or even just over regulation and
just killing business. I mean, Colorado is less and less
a place that you'd want to go and do business
in the state of Colorado, and you know, they're just
(07:35):
kind of driving common sense out of the state. And
so there is a great opportunity I think for Republicans,
but we have to reframe ourselves, and you know, COVID
I think helped us do that a little bit. When
we've pushed back on the excesses of COVID. I think
young people saw that and saw that at least it
was the Republicans who kind of stood up for their
(07:56):
liberty and freedom and that so there's hope.
Speaker 1 (07:59):
And for their kids. Yeah, I think that's one hundred
percent true. Hey, final question, just whether you're hearing any
rumblings Michael Bennett now talking about running for governor of Colorado.
My own layman's view is that if Joe Nogose gets in,
it's a denomination's probably clearly his h Do you run
into him? Do you have any rumblings? Do you think
he's getting into this race?
Speaker 3 (08:20):
You know, I don't know. I do run into him
a lot. I saw him today, a couple of times.
I was on the flight out to Washington yesterday with him,
and so you know, I do see him quite often.
I don't hear a lot about it other than just
talk on the street. Yeah, but I've never I should ask.
Why don't I just ask?
Speaker 4 (08:37):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (08:37):
Could like? Great there? Who had the better seat on
the plane?
Speaker 3 (08:42):
He had the better I don't. He's got a lot
more seniority. Yeah, yeah, the United.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
Oh yeah, yeah all that.
Speaker 3 (08:50):
You know.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
All that good?
Speaker 1 (08:52):
Hey, appreciate your time today. How do people follow you?
Speaker 3 (08:55):
They can follow me at Rep Jeff Rep Crank on X.
They can do that at Rep Crank, Rep Jeff Crank,
I'm sorry at Rep. Jeff Crank on X, and I
can follow us on Facebook and Instagram as well.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Wonderful. Well, Hey, appreciate the time today. Be safe out.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
There, Okay, Dan, thank you so much.
Speaker 2 (09:16):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (09:16):
That is Representative Jeff Crank. Always good to talk to him. Hey,
lot's to do. And then a special guest coming up
at four point thirty sixty No Alliance Defending Freedom and
this isn't just a plug for them. They are a
national treasure. And they got another big case out of Colorado.
I mean it tells you something, right that so many
of these big liberty cases that win at the Supreme
Court come out of Colorado because the Left is so
(09:38):
crushing when it comes to personal liberty here and this
one is really important. This whole business of banning quote
conversion therapy another form of censorship, right, because the Left
knows that it just can't win the fair argument, so
it has to try to censor and say, oh no,
it's illegal. Miscounselor for you to say this to a child.
(09:59):
So very important to freedom of speech, freedom of religion,
liberty type case and we'll hit it with them at
four thirty six. You're on the Dan Caplas Show.
Speaker 2 (10:10):
And now back to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
We're trend among the American public.
Speaker 5 (10:16):
So transgender female athletes in women's sports only eighteen percent
of the country says that they should be in fact
allowed to participate in women's sports. Compare this to the opposition,
I mean, my goodness, gracious, seventy nine percent. You rarely
get seventy nine percent of the country to agree on anything,
but they do in fact agree on the idea of
opposing transgend their female athletes in women's sports.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
So interesting still that Bennett, Hick and Looper Pollless. You
know they're afraid to go there, right, And it's just
like so many things, starting with abortion. They know, they
must know that what they're supporting is just absolutely dead wrong,
but they're willing to do it and create the harm
it causes to innocent humans in order to get and
(11:01):
keep political power. It's just a remarkable approach to things
that hopefully is very hard for you or me to
relate to. Three or three someone three eight two five
five the number text d A N five seven seven
three nine again. Special guests Cody Barrett, Alliance Defending Freedom
at four thirty six, A case you probably have not
thought much about because it hasn't been one of those
(11:22):
big headline grabbers. But I think you're going to find
really interesting and important and so glad that Scotus took
this up and took up this case out of Colorado,
where where again the left is trying to outlaw speech.
The left is trying to tell therapists, Oh no, you
can't provide this kind of therapy to say a transgender
(11:42):
And I put that in quote kid and so very
glad they took it up. I assume they took it
up in order to throw out the Colorado law. But
we'll talk to Cody Barrett from Alliance Defending Freedom and
just just a quick side note. You know, you think
about those people out there, those groups that really make
a found difference that affects your life, and who would
(12:04):
you have on that list? Say, Ryan, if you're on
a game show right now, you've got to answer in
the next fifteen seconds, the five different entities in America
that have a profound positive impact on your life. What
would they be? Define entities? What do you mean like
just not an individual human, It's a group, gotcha?
Speaker 6 (12:28):
And this could be an impact for any reason, good, bad,
or indifferent?
Speaker 4 (12:31):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (12:31):
No, positive, positive impact, positive.
Speaker 2 (12:33):
I don't think about that or that. Just want to
be clear for our audience. That's all.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Oh, and did I thank you yet? Thank you so
much for bailing me out. Yesterday. Ryan did the whole
darn show for me, and I had to be exhausted
because I was in court. We were in court till
after six last night. That's remarking just just what a
credit obviously to the to the judiciary and the system
and everything else. Whatever it took, it got done. And yeah,
we were there till after six, So I thought I
(12:59):
would be back to with the show it for but
Ryan dove right in and I'm sure did an award
winning job. Now who gets out of word to you
or me? It should be you? Yeah, thank you, Kelly.
But yeah, who would it be? Like those five groups
that have a positive effect on your life?
Speaker 2 (13:16):
Wow, I've really put some thought into that.
Speaker 1 (13:18):
That's okay, I'd suggest Alliance Defending Freedom because this is
one of them. I mean I would start, okay, military
police fires, right, okay, but I would have Alliance Defending
Freedom up there because and it's not our most of
our radar every day, but they're going in and they're
winning these big Supreme Court cases that have a very
practical impact on people's lives. If people tend to like freedom,
(13:41):
you know, like freedom of speech, religious liberty, that sort
of thing, and I hope that you do. So, Yeah,
special guest at four thirty six, I think you're going
to find that case fascinating. Speaking of fascinating, we've got
some more hots sound out there today. Where do you
want to start Michelle Obama starting a political podcast?
Speaker 2 (14:02):
Huh? We all are sort of all.
Speaker 7 (14:04):
It's like programmed to talk about how great she is
and how smart she is. I mean, she can't paign
a lot for Kamala Harris. She was a key speaker
of the Democratic National Convention. Barack Obama was a key
strategist for this whole thing that happened last year, and
yet somehow Donald Trump still won. So I'm rethinking the
premise of that she's the answer to the future, or
that any politician is the answer to Democratic Party.
Speaker 4 (14:25):
And.
Speaker 1 (14:27):
That Milania Trump stole her speech.
Speaker 7 (14:30):
I'm sorry what she's so that Milania Trump plagiarized her speech?
Speaker 6 (14:34):
Or do you not remember your Coatma?
Speaker 1 (14:36):
Then come back out you like, yeah, I think she's fine.
Speaker 7 (14:38):
But I'm just but just after the and and and
I think and I and I and I think I
thought she gave a wonderful speech as far as convention speeches. Go,
I'm just looking at what happened last fall. The Obama's
helped engineer Biden's ouster. They put in Harris, they caught
he ran the campaign, she can't paign for him, and
it was a total failure.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
I just wondered how good they really?
Speaker 1 (14:56):
So what do you think Michelle Obama making her move now?
Because remember we talked about obviously she would have been
by far the strongest candidate the Democrats could have fielded,
and the Obamas obviously got out maneuvered by Biden, who
was furious, as he should have been, about being publicly
pansed and tied to the goalpost and deposed, and so
he up maneuvered them. He forced Kamala Harris on the
(15:19):
Obamas and everybody else. So if the plan had been
Midsummer to put Michelle in, that got thwarted and Biden
got his revenge. Right, So is she now positioning herself
Because I always thought Ryan and said on air that
the biggest reason she wouldn't run in the last cycle
was she could not imagine the possibility of losing to Trump,
(15:40):
which obviously might have happened. But now that there's no
longer a possibility of losing to Trump because he can't
run again. Do you think this new political podcast is
her move? Love your take? Three or three someone three
eight two five five text d an five seven seven
three nine, or maybe you just don't care, which I
would completely understand.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
Do you care?
Speaker 3 (16:01):
Ryan?
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Do I care if Michelle Obama runs or does a podcast?
Speaker 1 (16:04):
Yeah, if she becomes a face of the Democratic Party,
runs for president, Kingmaker, all this other stuff. And now
this is all against the backdrop of at least a
lot of public speculation that maybe that couple's cooling off
a little bit.
Speaker 3 (16:18):
Saw that.
Speaker 6 (16:19):
I think it's more a product of a Democratic Party
that is nameless and faceless and lacks a leader with
true charisma and vision. I think Gavin Newsom is trying
to step into that space, and he's made some interesting
moves of late, with Charlie Kirk on his podcast, basically
conceding the ground that trans individuals who identify as female
who are biologically male.
Speaker 1 (16:39):
Should not What a craz position when the latest poll
shows at eighty twenty right, But poll List and others
won't go there.
Speaker 6 (16:46):
Tim Walls was asked on CNN, who's the leader of
the Democratic parties, and he just kind of ham handedly answered,
I would say the American people.
Speaker 1 (16:54):
Yeah, Oh my goodness, what a gift he was. What
a gift he was to us, wasn't he?
Speaker 4 (17:00):
Wow?
Speaker 2 (17:00):
Totally yes.
Speaker 1 (17:02):
And we still have not had a chance to talk
about this business with Michael Bennett apparently getting ready to
run for governor. I think the reason we haven't talked
about it is truly nobody cares. Like nobody cares, which
is so interesting to me. And you had our friend
Dick Wadhams on yesterday and I have not had a
chance to hear that yet, which I really want to.
(17:23):
But what Stick's take in the end, does he think
the GOP can have a chance to pull this off? Well?
Speaker 6 (17:29):
I think we harkened back to the days of Bill
Owens and what was the secret sauce then what will
led to his success? Now, granted it was a different time,
but what Dick did was he drew a lot of
parallels between the political climate back then, the fact that
we were coming off of several many democratic governors in
a row, so it wasn't like Owens was running into
a lean red time in American history. And then also
(17:51):
to the example set by Virginia with Glenn Youngkin in
an otherwise blue state. He was able to kind of
navigate that path between Trumps supporters and those who are
maybe anti tru and galvanized that movement to win that
election over Terry mccauliffe.
Speaker 1 (18:04):
So it's the bottom line that Dick thinks there's a
chance here, not like a dumb and dumber chance, but
thanks a marital path. But yeah, okay malone and a
million narrow path. Hey, when we come back, really important
US Supreme Court case had just agreed to take it.
It's out of Colorado. More abuse by the left in
Colorado that Scotis is about to write. We'll have the
adyf lawyer after the break.
Speaker 2 (18:28):
You're listening to the Dan Kaplis Show podcast.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
Cody Barnett kind enough to join us from Alliance Defending
Freedom doing truly heroic work and work that changes America
for the better all the time, in part by going
to the Supreme Court and winning these big cases such
as a big success. Now Supreme Court has agreed to
hear a challenge to a Colorado law I'll let Cody
(18:52):
take it up from there. Cody, Welcome to the Dankplas show.
Speaker 3 (18:55):
Thank you're define and thank you so much for having me.
It's a pleasure.
Speaker 1 (18:58):
Well, hey, appreciate all you do and all you folks do.
But please, if you would tell folks about the child's
case and the significance of it and why you think
the Supreme Court agreed to take it.
Speaker 3 (19:12):
Yes, happy to do so.
Speaker 4 (19:13):
So this is a case where Colorado has a law
that basically tells counselors what they can and cannot say
in the counseling room. It effectively makes counselors parrot the
state's views on gender and sex and prevents the counselor
from pursuing goals that a client may want that are contrary.
Speaker 3 (19:33):
To the views of the state.
Speaker 4 (19:35):
And so we challenge this law under the free speech
clause at the First Amendment, just taking it for what
it is. It's an effort by the state to censor
news that it does not like.
Speaker 3 (19:47):
And you know, now the Supreme.
Speaker 4 (19:49):
Court has recognized that and has agreed to take it
because some courts in the country have treated this as
not speech, and some courts have and so in order
for there to be consistency, the Court is taken the
matter up and is going to resolve the split.
Speaker 1 (20:04):
Do you expect to win?
Speaker 3 (20:06):
Yes. Absolutely.
Speaker 4 (20:07):
We think that the Supreme Court taking the case is
a good indicator that they agree with us on the view,
because the lower court in this case held this was
not speech, and so the usually when the Supreme Court
takes the case, although not always, they tend to reverse
what the lower court does. And so we have every
faith that the court will agree with us that when
(20:29):
a counselor speaks worth that that speech, and that's protected
by the First Amendment and states can't ban that.
Speaker 1 (20:35):
Yeah, and what you say makes perfect sense on both
merits and process, right. I mean, why would they be
taking this other than to overturn the court in Colorado?
Is you know better than anybody. You know that the
tenth Circuit that Federal Appella Court level in Colorado, that
tenth Circuit said no. With a second, the state was
grounding this law in you know, its reasonable interpretation of
(20:57):
medicine science. I'm paraphrasing. How do you re on to that?
Speaker 4 (21:02):
Yeah, So I think there's two responses. You know, first,
this has nothing to do with medicine and the state's
ability to regulate that. This is all about when a
state targets words directly, because all that Kaylee Childs does
is talk to her clients, and all that they do
is talk back with her. You know, she listens, They
(21:23):
set goals, and they work toward reaching those goals together
through words. And so the state's attempt to sort of
medicalize this as far Afield and frankly misses the mark
on what the First cent protects. And I think the
Supreme Court recognize that in taking this case, and they
have been saying for years now that just because a
professional is speaking does not mean the First Amendment does
(21:44):
not apply. But that's exactly what the Tenth Circuit held,
and that's what Colorado.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
Is trying to hide behind. Yeah, which is just part
of a pattern in Colorado, right, as you allude to,
which is to try to criminalize speech of people they
don't agree with, whether it's Jack Phillips, you know, whether
it's three ZHO three creative that that's just their patterning Colorado.
Do you think it's a coincidence that Scotus has taken
so many cases out of.
Speaker 2 (22:09):
Colorado, I don't, you know.
Speaker 4 (22:12):
Hopefully this time Colorado will learn its lesson, But the
Supreme Court has been consistent of all the cases that
you brought up that Colorado can't impose its views on
people and silence views that disagrees with. And so third
time is the charm we hope and that this time
you know Colorado won't use the levers of power to
try to sensor speech.
Speaker 1 (22:33):
Cody Burnett from adf Liians Defending freedom. For those who
haven't followed this particular issue, what is in reality this
so called quote conversion therapy, that's that issue in the case.
Speaker 4 (22:48):
So that is a loaded phrase that Colorado has used
in order to evoke images that frankly don't even apply here.
All that Kaylee Childs does is talk with the clients
yepc's client who voluntarily want to be in conversations with Clara.
Typically they share for faith and want to seek out
viewpoints that align with their own. And so by using
(23:11):
this phrase, Colorado is trying to evoke things from the
past or to scare the public into accepting its view
of gender and sexuality and silence views that it disagrees with.
Because this goes far beyond regulating practices that accountslor does
and strikes it's a very speech. The very words that
she uses and it's doing so at a time when
(23:31):
there is a crisis in this country where parents and
children desperately want and need the exact type of counseling
that pay the childs provide.
Speaker 1 (23:40):
And what kind of counseling is that.
Speaker 4 (23:43):
It's the type of counseling that helps those who want
to get comfortable with their body, grow comfortable with their body,
who want to align struggles that they are having with
their body with the tenants of their faith, and just
allow them to live in harmony rather than be forced
down a pathway of surgery or medicine or a passway
(24:03):
that says you have to value the state's views of
gender and sexuality over what your faith teaches.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
Yeah, and correct me if this is too simplistic, But
a counselor like ms Childs who wants to just be
able to say to a child something common sense like no,
don't cut off your breast, don't don't cut off your
other parts, don't chemically alter your body instead focus on this,
focus on that would that counselor then be in danger
(24:32):
under you know, Jared Polis and the Colorado legislatures censorship efforts.
Speaker 3 (24:39):
Absolutely.
Speaker 4 (24:40):
The law is written very broadly to cover any effort
that would encourage a client to change is or her
gender or sexuality. And so if a client comes in
and wants to pursue harmony rather than discordinatece, then this
law would make any advice that the counselor gives that
would encourage that goal, it would either censor it or
(25:02):
punish a counsel with excessive finds or even revocation of
her license.
Speaker 3 (25:07):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (25:07):
So then let's say a child walks in and that
child at the moment is identifying as the opposite gender, right,
the counselor would be limited in what the counselor could
then literally say to that child to try to encourage
the child to actually be the gender the child is.
Is that the gist of it.
Speaker 4 (25:27):
Absolutely, if the child, even even if the child wants
to grow in harmony with their sex, the law forbids
the counselor from encouraging that ratchets the other directions the
counselor has to encourage under this law. No, you feel
this unity and you have to embrace that. And so
(25:47):
it's really just a one sided censorship of viewpoint and
an imposition of an ideology on the counseling profession.
Speaker 1 (25:54):
Well, God love all of you guys and gals for
fighting this. How can people support ADF?
Speaker 4 (26:02):
We encourage you to pray for our attorneys and for
our clients, and if you feel led to throw some
financial support and partner with us and these important endeavors.
You can find out more just by searching for ADF.
Speaker 3 (26:16):
On the web.
Speaker 2 (26:17):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (26:18):
Well, truly, you guys accomplish more in more concrete ways,
more often that than almost any organization in America.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
So glad you're here.
Speaker 1 (26:29):
Keep up the great work and we'll catch you next time.
Speaker 4 (26:32):
Yeah, thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 3 (26:33):
We really appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (26:34):
Thanks Cody, you take care of that is Cody Barnett
from Alliance Defending Freedom.
Speaker 2 (26:40):
Wow, what great work they do.
Speaker 1 (26:41):
And winter winter chicken dinner on that one, right, Ryan,
I mean for the reasons he said the Supreme Court
isn't going to take the case, just to say, oh, yeah,
that craziness is okay. You can censor speech in Colorado.
Speaker 6 (26:53):
Well you go one step further and predict who's going
to write the majority opinion in this case.
Speaker 1 (26:57):
Oh, I would do that if I had to do
it right now, say Justice Thomas.
Speaker 2 (27:08):
I was going to go with Alito. But I think
we're Oh no, no, he could.
Speaker 1 (27:10):
He's on fire.
Speaker 2 (27:11):
Oh, he's on fire.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
I think this issue, I think this issue is you know,
I think Justice Thomas and I think Justice Thomas favored
taking a similar case a little while back, and the
majority just came came around. So yeah, but it just
goes back to the same old point, right, And I
know this is old news. But but because the Left
(27:33):
can't win a fair fight, they can't win on the merits,
they have to criminalize opposing speech. And it's also consistent
with this pattern left. They don't give a darn about kids, right,
I mean it is so obvious in a million different ways.
If they don't get them killed before birth, you know
by their crazy glorify abortion of the moment of delivery policies,
(27:55):
then they're going to shut most of them down by
depriving him of equal education. Than this stuff where they
just sacrifice these kids' bodies on the altar of worshiping. Uh,
this this trans insanity. Yeah, it's just I think more
people are starting to see that. You're on the Dan
Capitlas Show.
Speaker 2 (28:15):
And now back to the Dan Taplass Show podcast.
Speaker 4 (28:19):
Anyhabitants to suggest that there is actually a serious reason
to believe that this student uh is.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
Going to be a threat to enter to national security.
Speaker 7 (28:28):
And i've certainly, I've certainly watched the abomination that's gone
on at Columbia and in another place, and i will
just tell you, and I'll just.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
Tell you that I'm not going to let you move
on because this is Yeah, I'll.
Speaker 7 (28:39):
Tell you why it's a threaten national security if you
let me answer you Stock the woman answer your Okay.
His organization says we are dedicated fighting for the total
eradication of Western civilization.
Speaker 3 (28:50):
He's not a citizen.
Speaker 1 (28:51):
Stock, he doesn't need a do Yeah, why is this controversial?
And I'd love your take on it. I'm a big
free speech guy obviously, look what I do for a living.
But yeah, I mean, if if somebody's a visitor in
this country, they don't have citizenship in this country, they're
on one of these student visas, and they're calling for
(29:14):
the erratic eradication of Western civilization, what would be the
reason to keep them, what would be the reason to
allow them to stay. I'd love to hear the opposing
argument on that. Maybe I'm missing something, but I sure
don't think so you know, listen. Obviously, if somebody just
(29:34):
has a difference of opinion on some big political issue
of the day, that's one thing. But if somebody's out
there calling for the eradication of our civilization, why would
we want to extend that courtesy of a student visa
so happy to hear the other side of it, eight
five five or zer a five a two five five,
(29:56):
much better version of that number three oh three seven
one three a two five or of course takes dam
five seven seven three nine text Dan, the left doesn't
care about women. Great show, thank you. I think people
are starting to see that, right, and we saw that
on election day and Democratic Party really is waging this
(30:19):
war on women. And I know it'll take a lot
of people time to kind of wrap their mind around that,
but you see it in so many different ways.
Speaker 2 (30:26):
It's not subtle, right.
Speaker 1 (30:27):
I mean, if you as a party are saying, okay,
you're a girl, you're a woman, but we as a party,
a top priority of ours is that a man gets
to come into your shower, a man gets to come
into your bathroom, then yeah, that's a war on women.
But it starts before that, right, because I mean that
(30:48):
this party which has perversely kind of grown up around
glorifying abortion and legalizing it to the moment of delivery
that takes seven hundred and fifty thousand female lives a year.
And then there are so many other ways. I mean,
look at Colorado, right, Brian, where they claim to be
kind of the epitome of holier than thou Dei types,
and let's see female governor. No, no, now, let's see governor.
(31:16):
Both Senates seats those appear to me to be kind
of old white males, right. I mean, it's just so obvious,
and it's so obvious the same thing when it comes
to folks of color that that's Democratic Party, just total
hypocrites on that. And so yeah, clearly of war on
women from the left right now, and the breakthrough issue.
(31:37):
It's it's fun, isn't it when we see a tipping point,
When you see a tipping point in your own life,
and and you know, battles being fought, et cetera, and
then finally there's a one straw that kind of tips
everything over and then it happens slowly and then all
at once. So we're seeing that in America right now
when it comes to this craziness of men in women's
(31:58):
sports and bathrooms and everything else.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
You know what I think fueled it.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
I mean, obviously it's been percolating on the surface for
a long time because it's just loony. But I really
do think it was that whatever it was one hundred,
one hundred and fifty million or more that Elon Musk
put into running that great ad during the Trump campaign.
You couldn't watch a game without seeing it. You couldn't
watch this or that. It was brilliant and it worked,
(32:21):
and it worked because it's true and it cut through
it all. So yeah, it is fun. I think we're
in the middle of a series of tipping points. One
thing we want to kick around a little bit in
the five o'clock hour. We haven't talked a whole lot
about on the show, but I'd love to get your
take on it is. You know, obviously, right now, Trump,
when he's trying to initiate structural change in the economy
(32:42):
for long term good, you know there's going to be
some pain. There's going to be some pain. Very few
things in life. Can you ever have a major change
for the better without some pain in the meantime, right
because that the reason this obviously needed major change for
the better hasn't happened. Is because it's too painful to
get from.
Speaker 2 (33:00):
Here to there.
Speaker 1 (33:02):
Probably a great conversation to be having during Lent too,
And I do want to get back to that issue Ryan,
of why we had this explosion of attendance in churches
on the most recent ash Wednesday, and that was here
and apparently around the world. But getting back to the
economy for a second, I personally believe I think it
may have been the combination of things of you know,
(33:25):
being wrongfully pursued legally, facing the real chance that if
he doesn't die in prison, he'll die on the run,
trying to stay out of prison. Then miraculous, And I
agree with Trump, you know, I think there was divine
intervention in surviving that that assassination attempt in Butler, I
think he is determined right now. He is determined right
(33:45):
now to leave a lasting gift, to leave a lasting
gift to the working people of America, who he knows
are the people who put him in office and now
correctly kept him out of jail since he was being
wrongly pursued, and so I it would be so easy
for him right to just roll into this term, not
(34:05):
have any economic disruption just in cur more debt, never
have to say no to anybody, etc. It would be
easy for him to do, but he's not doing that.
He's willing to have this disruption now to make the
kind of structural change that he believes will truly long term,
long after he's gone, benefit working people in America by
(34:28):
bringing more manufacturing back, etc. And having those good high
pain with benefits, stable jobs that for a long time
were kind of a backbone of America now as you know,
are so off and offshore. And that's a big point
of these terrorists, not the only point, but a big point,
another lasting gift to to America, working people of America
(34:49):
whose kids get killed disproportionately by fentanyl, is using those
terrafts to just shut it down, shut it down from China, Mexico, Canada.
I think this is a man on a mission to
do things others aren't.
Speaker 2 (35:02):
For my either party or both.
Speaker 1 (35:04):
Aren't willing to do and have this structural, long term
change that will really matter to working people in America.
So we'll touch on that as well. Three or three
someone three eight two five five The number text DN
five seven seven three nine you're on The Dame Capitol Show.
Popular Podcasts
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!
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.