Morning Wire - District Club: Rep. Ilhan Omar Raid, New Press Secretary Debacle & Talarico’s Texas Trouble

Episode Date: October 18, 2026

Federal agents raid the D.C.-area home of Rep. Ilhan Omar less than a month before the midterms. Is it accountability or political retribution? Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright joins the District Club for a heated debate.  Meanwhile, Katie Zachariah's tenure as White House press secretary gets messy fast. President Trump pulls the plug on the Pentagon's plan to livestream the execution of Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan after polling shows most Americans oppose it. And in a marquee Senate race, Democrat James Talarico clashes with Texas culture as Republicans pour money into the state to protect Ken Paxton.  Ep. 8  Hosts:  Ben Domenech - Daily Wire Opinion Editor  Mary Margaret Olohan - Daily Wire White House Correspondent  Tim Rice - Daily Wire D.C. Bureau Chief  Rotating Host:  Antjuan Seawright - Democratic Strategist - CEO, Blueprint Strategy, LLC - - - Today’s Sponsor: FreeSpoke - The midterms are almost here. Do you know what's on your ballot? Freespoke makes it easy to explore candidates, local races, polling insights, and different perspectives on the issues that matter to you—all in one place. Download FreeSpoke FREE at https://GetFreeSpoke.com/DAILYWIRE. Use code districtclub30 for 30% OFF an annual Premium Subscription and come back for real-time election results! - - - Become a Daily Wire Member and watch all of our content ad-free: https://dailywire.com/subscribe 🇺🇸 Get 3-Months of DailyWire for just $17.76 📜 📲 Download the free Daily Wire app today on iPhone, Android, Roku, Apple TV, Samsung, and more. - - - Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Okay, first, before we give you the facts of the day, run hide fight infidels is streaming now only on Daily Wire. It's an ode to the great action movies of the 80s and 90s. There's even a love story which nobody expected. And you can support Daily Wire's mission to continue making movies that people actually want to watch. Go check it out. Are you noticing your car insurance rate creep up even without tickets or claims? You're not alone. That's why there's Jerry, your proactive insurance assistant.

Jerry handles the legwork by comparing quote side by side from over 50 top. insures so you can confidently hit buy. No spam calls, no hidden fees. Jerry even tracks rates and alerts you when it's best to shop. Drivers who save with Jerry can save over $1,300 a year. Don't settle for higher rates. Download the Jerry app or visit jerry.a.ai slash wire today. Who answers America's call for more energy? Our people do. Chevron's U.S. energy production has increased by nearly 60% in the past three years. Hi, my name is Aaron. and I'm a wealth site representative at Chevron. I'm proud of the work that I do every day.

It gets more American oil out of the ground, and it brings America more energy security. Learn more about what our people do at chevron.com slash America. The midterm elections have all eyes on tight races and districts across the country, but the week started with a surprise bang as federal agents conducted a pre-dawn raid on the D.C. area home of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar. Her critics were quick to throw her own words back in her face. No one is above the law.

Katie Zachariah takes over for Caroline Levitt as White House Press Secretary. The president pulls the plug on the Pentagon's plan to live stream the execution of Fort Hood shooter Nadal Hassan, with polling showing most Americans agree. On the campaign trail, James Talariko is back in the public eye. In a CNN town hall, a Catholic voter pressed him on abortion. Does his answer hold up in Texas? In Michigan, Abdul-Said says his family has no ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, The post from his sister tell a different story.

We've got a lot to get to. This is the District Club. Welcome back to another episode of the District Club. I'm Tim Rice, Daily Wire, D.C. Bureau Chief, joined as always by my colleagues, Ben Dominic, Daily Wire opinion editor, and Mary Margaret O'Lahan, our White House correspondent. And we are so excited today to be joined by Antoine Searight. He is the CEO of Blueprint Strategies and a Democrat strategist, Antoine. Thank you for joining the district club.

I am so happy to be with you all on a great Sunday. So much talk about, but I think we should just start. Let's start with the elephant in the room. Katie Zachariah, new White House press secretary, had her first briefing. It lasted a grand total of 14 minutes. She took three questions. Critics say that she took questions exclusively from conservative outlets. Ms. Zachariah says that the Daily Mail is not conservative, but nevertheless.

I don't even think we need to talk about how she did. I think, you know, it's sort of everyone acknowledges that it was a tough start, maybe a false start. But where do you think this leaves the administration? And what does it say that, you know, they're this very high profile public relations appointment kind of fizzled out right away? I think this is another page in the catalog of unqualified people doing very serious job, unsurious people doing very serious jobs. In the real world, my Republican friends love to compare the political world to the business world. In the real world, she would not even qualify for an interview, better yet get the promotion to the job. So I think this is another page in the

catalog. I think she's a DEI hire, didn't earn it in the sense that there are more people qualified in Trump world who have more credentials on the head and on the tail who will be better at the job, but I think she got the job for various reasons that do not meet the qualifications for the job. Mary Margaret, I figured that you have a different take. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, look, if we're going to talk about DEI hires, I think we're going to have to talk about Curie Jean-Pierre, who was the exact definition of a DEI hire when you talk about her gender, her race, all the reasons that she was chosen for the job, which the Biden administration literally said this is why we chose her. I think you may have a misrepresentation of the facts on that.

Corrine John Pierre, my dear friend, was chosen because she was qualified for doing, to be able to do the job. She didn't lie about being a lawyer or an attorney. She did not get the job because she was good on TV. She ran an organization. She engaged with the press in previous roles. The other things added to that were, I think, gravy on top of the rights to help amplify the reason why she should have the job. No, but you're right that she wasn't good on TV. She didn't get the job because she was good on TV.

He was horrific on television. I think, look, at the end of the day. I'm sorry to interrupt. That is the stupidest claim I've ever heard. There is not a single Democrat who agrees with you that Karin-John-Pierre that was good at a job who is good at politics. I'm sorry, that's absurd. That's laughable.

No one thinks she's good. I think you miss what I say. I mean, if she was not, if she was not the DEI representation that she was, if she was not working for the Biden administration, she would have been ambassador on Saturday Night Live day after day. This is absurd. Corrine Jean-Pierre goes down as one of the worst, okay, press secretaries in history. The simple fact is, this is a very tough job. I know so many people who've done it.

I knew Tony Snow. I know Ari Kleischer. I know Dana Perino. I know the work that they put into it. I've worked with these people, and I know the effort that they did in that job. And I know how much they were respected by the journalists in that room for doing that work. Karene Jean-Pierre never had a bit of that respect because she didn't deserve it. She was bad at her job.

I think you did not inhale everything I said. Prior to doing that job, she was very good on television when she was running MoveOn.org and others. Resume is different. Hold on. Hold on. You can say the resume is. But resume is the reason why you get the job. You have now a press secretary who could not for 14 minutes read a script properly in the biggest

opportunity she has to be the front face. I think one thing. I'm caveating that really quickly. I mean, look, first of all, no one's going to say that she did a spectacular job. reading. She did terrible job. Yeah, I think we can all agree. She was very clearly nervous. She was very clearly, you know, unused to that room. But also, I'm in that room every single week. It is really high stress. It is very just, the New York Times even said this week, the reporters in there can smell fear. We act like animals when we're excited. Well, I mostly smell the reporters

when I'm in that. That is actually a great point. But just to finish my point, the reason I would, I would say that we should cut her some slack here is because she literally turned that job around in like 36 hours. She didn't know she was doing it. I don't have any sympathy for that. And you know what? It is the hardest job in Washington. Let me tell you why as the Democrat feel a lot different. You have conservatives, supporters of the president, including those who are in the White House saying that she's terrible for her job and pretty much she's on a timeline to likely be out of the job. And I think that says a lot of your colleagues do not respect your cachet for doing the job more than anything else. So I'm going to circle back to something though that you said earlier and that's about

qualifications and things like that. When you look back at the Biden administration, it was full of people who I believe were incredibly unqualified for their jobs. One of them, by the way, is about to be probably the next governor of California. Javier Bacera is the most unqualified person to ever lead HHS. He had no experience in health policy. What's... No, no, no, no, this is important. The president's hiring in this second term, from my perspective, as someone who is a critic of the hiring in his first term, has been miles better. He has done so much better. Tell me where.

Excuse me. Have you seen the current HHS secretary? Okay. I actually think that, excuse me, you don't think that RFK has a better, I mean, he's one of the most popular politicians in America. He's one of the most sick administrations in, administration officials in that cabinet.

You won't find a person to the, including some of the, some in the mag. What polls are you looking at? He's literally one of the most popular politicians. Among conservatives, No, no, no, he's more popular nationally than Hakeefries. Have you seen some of the policies implemented? No, no, no.

They're wildly popular with conservatives and many Americans across the country, especially on the Maha Front. You all live in a totally different universe. Maybe I'm a citizen. No, no, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. That's just not true. Well, you have to prove to me otherwise.

Because name something he's done that's been beneficial to the overall bill of health for every American. I don't think, I don't, you say that I'm in a lane here. He's literally got the highest. approval rating among independents of any member of this administration. And I can give you something that he's done to improve the health of Americans. Several days ago, I was reporting on how he's forcing these top medical organizations all over the country to stop providing what we formerly called gender affirming care, what they're now calling sex rejecting care to children. So that is a massive way for Americans.

So let's start with almost 200 food recalls. Let's start with the firing. You don't think that's a win for children across America? Let's start with the firing of key staffers that most serious health. administration, health officials agree we need to have. Worked at HHS? I have. The people who got fired needed to be fired.

But then we have someone in the role who does not believe in science, does not believe in actually when it takes to be successful in the job. I'm a big belief in science. No, you know, I believe in science too. And I also think that science is not something that is set in stone as a religion that you need to have. Have you seen the measles outbreaks in Pennsylvania? Yeah, you know what those people are dying?

You know what those people are? They're Amish. They don't take any measles. vaccines. How many people? We have an HHS secretary. Do you pay it to geography? I do.

We have an HHS secretary who in the over office may have made some outlandish comments that most people would be fired and banned from doing any job anywhere after their company. Okay, but to bring it back to the exact guy. I think we can all agree that Caroline Levitt did a phenomenal job as press secretary and was not even slightly unqualified for her position. Would you agree? Well, no, there were tons of people who said that she was unqualified.

I think she carried the water well. I think she did a great job of carrying the Trump water. And I think people respected her for that. But when you make a serious comparison, you would have to agree with me that it's night and day between the two. Well, yeah, I think that's absolutely right. But I think to your point, Antoine, I think you're getting it the one important dynamic that I think you're getting at. And I would agree with you. Correct me if I'm misrepresenting what you're saying.

But whatever went into the decision making here was clearly a little bit flawed, right? Katie Zach Grya. In the same way that Corrine Jean-Pierre perhaps was effective as a coalition builder as a policy communicator in the movement at moveon.org, but then was a little too reliant on the binder, a little too flubby behind the podium, right? Because I happen to agree with my colleagues that she was not a great press secretary. Maybe Katie Zachariah has, look, we can all say, and yes, Republicans, conservatives do tend to compare government to the private sector. But obviously government works different. These decisions get made in different ways, right? And so something flawed went on here. it's notable considering, right, and we can see, we'll talk in a minute about the president walking back the decision to live stream the Ford Hood execution. This is an administration that is usually very focused on optics and very clear, especially in the second term, very intent on making sure that what goes on on camera is effective and is good TV. That, if you say

nothing else about qualifications or about ideology, it was bad TV, and that is what shocks me about the fact that she ever made it to the podium. I have two thoughts for this, this wonderful panel. How many people you know in their job who lied on their resume are still in their job? You won't find many. How many conservatives do you know who goes on Fox on Hannity of all the shows and gets hammered and cannot even perform well for the Hannity audience? I think that speaks to the crisis you all have at the White House.

So, I don't think it's a crisis because I think it's over. I think it's just a matter of time until it's over. And the president, I think, in this situation, made a decision that I think is uncharacteristic. It's a very Trump 1.0 decision versus Trump 2.0. I think the decisions that he made when it came to a lot of these hirings, and a handful of them have been terrible. Number one is Matt Gates, didn't even get to the job. Number two is Christy Nome needed to be out from the get-go. Pam Bondi was a slide-in situation that was never going to be permanent.

But to be honest, I mean, it doesn't really, Ambassador agrees, who cares? But one of the things, we'll get to that. No, no, no, we'll get to that. But my point is, of those are the three mistakes that I think that he's made in terms of his hiring in this Trump 2.0 administration, which is, I mean, you had that within the first six months of his first term in terms of people showing that they couldn't do their jobs. This, I think, is a rare miss on his front when it comes to evaluating talent and saying who's going to be good on TV.

And I just don't know why it happened. because it seemed to me like this was a situation that was very natural where there were a lot of qualified people. And I would just say. And let me just say this. And I think we all would agree. Just because you're good and giving commentary does not mean you would be good behind that desk being the press secretary. And again, she has consistently lied about being an attorney and a lawyer. That's just kidding.

If you want to go back on this, I mean, just to give an example of that, you know, George Stephanopoulos flamed out after an infamination. sort of one-time stand-in behind that podium in a way that, you know, essentially ended his career within the Clinton administration. There's tons of people who have flamed out in this job in the past. I think the difference with this one is there's so much attention on the role now. People pay so much more attention to it during the Trump administration. You have to have someone who's willing to walk into that room and have the toughness, the thick skin, and the ability to charm. I think the role has changed. What I'm hopeful, and I say this with all due respect to Katie, Zach Ryan, I don't wish her ill, and this is going to sound slightly meaner that I mean it.

But my hope is that out of perhaps this flame out, we reevaluate what the press secretary role looks like. Because, I mean, look, this was a transformation that started in Trump won, but Biden continued it, right? Where it wasn't that long ago that press secretaries, if you imagine a press secretary, right, before Trump won, you would describe like a 50 to 70 year old, like, grizzled policy veteran, right? What are you talking about? Dana Perino? I'm sorry.

Okay. Well, I'm sorry, Ben. Well, hold on, Ben. Well, why don't you? No, well, that was before. That was Biden. I'm talking about before Trump. There are all the press secretaries that Ben just so helpfully rattled off that are, of course, his friends and colleagues, R. E Fleischer. All I was trying to say, Ben, before you interrupted, which I know you love to do, but we can maybe let somebody finish their point before you jump in, because, of course, if I had finished my point, I would have said people like James Baker, like R.

Fleischer, people who have the command of the room, have knowledge of the town and of the press corps. I see you getting ready to interrupt me again. Why don't we just stop for a second? I think that the press secretary role doesn't necessarily always need to be a photogenic woman or a photogenic man, right? Jay Carney was a photogenic man. Maybe it can be somebody like we can go back to an older model. I don't know what do you guys think about that, but I think maybe this is a time to reevaluate what's going on with the press secretary role as a role. I think it's an interesting point, but while we're on the point of photogenic, I think it's crazy how much attention and criticism has been given to Katie Zachariah on her appearance, on her makeup, on her clothes.

I mean, it reminds me so much of the 2016 era, like you're saying, we haven't seen this kind of shake-up since then, this kind of craziness in the Trump administration. All over online, all online, all I'm seeing is, especially men on the left, criticizing Katie for how she looks, which to me is absurd and embarrassing and for everyone involved. I mean, I don't know why we'd be... I'm sorry, I haven't... I haven't contributed to that, nor does that show up in my algorithm. So I don't know anything about that.

But I do think that when you play certain roles in society, we are all judged by the first thing people see. The first thing people see without a word coming out of our mouth is how I look. Look, I'm a black man. Without saying a word on anything that I do, people are going to see how I show up and how I look. That's just part of the course in the business that you're doing. Does that not happen to white people? I just said, I just said, I'm a black man. So the journey for me is twice as hard, half as much.

I'm judged a lot different than other people when it comes to how we look and how we show up. Well, in terms of who we're judging right now, Katie Zachariah as a woman, I think my sisters and I were discussing this the other night. She is partially being judged so harshly because she is so flamboyantly good looking and attractive. And I think on top of her air, she's getting a lot of criticism on that front. But I would just argue there's an argument to be made that there are a number of attractive women within the Trump administration. So that's not a new conversation. And sometimes they're judged on their body at work, and that's just an added addition to the conversation. I think you're both right.

Mary Margaret, you're right that a lot of the undue kind of criticism is, or a lot of the kind of criticism of her physical appearance is unwarranted and wrong. But also, Antoine, I think you're absolutely right. That and a lot of these positions, certainly one where you're coming out and standing in front of the camera, and it is a lot about public image. Image is going to come up. There's obviously a fine line there. I think, but I think we can agree that there is the aesthetic matters and the same. same way again. They, you know, they made fun of look, Sean Spicer, they had a tiny

woman play him on SNL, right? I mean, they know it's different, but like, they also made fun of his appearance. They made fun of Michelle Obama and how she dressed. They made fun of Jill Biden. They made fun of Hillary Clinton, her pantsuits. I think Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton. They make fun of Maloney a Trump. I mean, we could do it for them. We could do it on both

sides. But Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton, correct me if I'm wrong, that they got their vanity fair covers, right? Well, what does that have to do with? Well, a lot of conservative women do not get their vanity fair. covers because they are conservative because they are held more harshly and criticized more harshly. They get covers of the outlets that lean conservative. Is there a conservative vanity fair? I don't know. I don't know. I mean, I would never

be on the cover vanity fair, but I do know there. Hey, don't sell yourself short. I do know there are conservative publications that would essentially cover. Do we not get dibs on the legacy outlets as well? Is vanity fair only for the liberals on the left? I can't speak. I don't work for vanity fair. What I can tell you is that there are plenty of occasions where conservative women get their profile raised more so than liberal. I think that's not true. I mean, actually, this is one of the reasons I interviewed Kaylee McInney as a very young reporter and the former Trump administration let me was because I said, look, you're

not getting the praise you deserve because the left isn't interested in elevating conservative women. And as a very young reporter, Kaylee McInney let me interview her because nobody else was. Here's what he and I talked about before the show started. I'm a substance versus style. Style is maybe how you appear to look to the public eye, but how you perform on the job is more important to me. And I think that is why.

Who did a great job? Kaylee McA. Oh, I thought you're talking about the current press secretary. So that is why I think people are giving her heat. Not about her appearance. They're given her heat for how she performed on a job day one, 14 minutes, reading a script. How long do you think she has the job?

According to some White House officials, have a scarimucci? I think everyone's guessing right now. Was it 20, 21 days? Let me just put it this way. I think that, I think given the way that this election is going, I think the president's going to make some changes after the election. And I think that one of those changes could be when it comes to his communications

team. And that that could be. And here's the thing. Just because you're not cut out for, you know, the biggest show when it comes to something like this doesn't mean that you're someone who needs to be kicked to the curb. It doesn't mean that something, you know, a, you know, when it comes to the resume issues and stuff like that, that's a different thing.

But I just think there are some people who are just not cut out to perform at that level. I understand that this is extremely important to us because we're here in DC, and it's extremely important to journalists because they care the most about the people who are in that room allowed to be in that really, you know, smelly, terrible, dirty room with them.

But I think we have to talk about some of the other things that happened in Washington this week. And one of those things, of course, was this raid that happened on Ilhan Omar's D.C. area house. It has attracted responses from across the political spectrum. Some people saying that it's unfair, that it's some kind of lawfare from the right side versus what we've seen from the left. Others basically saying, hey, you know, you said nobody's above the law. And it seems like, you know, at the very least, there are serious questions about the forms that she signed and the things that she filled out.

When it comes to this issue, I think that obviously it's a hot button issue because people know who Ilana Omar is, where they don't know most members of Congress and they have opinions about her. But to me, I actually think this is a deeper and more serious issue because it goes to the idea and it usually comes in fourth or fifth on all of these different priority rankings

that Democrats just don't give a crap when it comes to the legality of people coming into the country. Let me say this. These claims were investigated in 2019 according to the Washington Post and there was a nothing burger. I think that the price

of beef is so high that the president need to throw out some right wing red meat to feed his base. This is an example. We know that this is a president who's weaponized certain departments within this administration. We also know he's been intentional about

this retribution tour in his second term. Jack Smith has the addresses and phone numbers of everyone who bought in my dash. Representative Omar Fitz Fitz the bill because he's been at her for eight to ten years now from the red meat side. I personally think it's a dig at racism. I think this president is a

bigot. I also think that he chooses to... It's bigoted to want people to actually qualify legally to come into this country? I think he picks and chooses his fights at certain times because he know it's going to generate a certain response from a certain group of people in this country. Why do this 20 some of my

days before the election? So, no, I don't think that it's racist. I think that it's a bad... No, I say his behavior towards Representative Omar, Letitia James, and others... Okay, well, hold on. Let's keep it on ill. Let's keep it on Ilhan Omar for a second. I don't think that it is racist for him to attack. I do think it has to do with kind of trying to stoke the fire on the illegal immigration thing at a time when what was

a winning issue for this administration kind of fell down the polls. That said, I do agree that it is, this is tossing some red meat to the red meat side. And I think it's a, I think it's a bad idea because what are they going to try to do? Are they going to try to deport Ilhan Omar? Okay. I feel like this. I think, but here's the thing. I think that by going after her in this way, they are going, the Trump DOJ could hinder its own ability to further expose actual corruption from Ilan Omar. Before you jump in, though, before you jump in really quick, what would be wrong with discovering whether Ilhan Omar and her family committed immigration fraud?

I just think they should have waited. If they did find it, huge win for the Trump administration, if they find out that she didn't commit it, I don't know that most of the MAGA base will care. But what happens if they find out that she did? They're going to deport a United States Congresswoman? Why is she a United States Congresswoman if she's here legally? No, I know, but Mary Margaret. I mean, that, that's good.

Am I crazy? If they import Ilhan Omar, Democrats win the next presidential election. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Doesn't the law matter here? Yes, but also doesn't the politics matter here? No, the law matters more than the politics. If they deport Ilhan Omar, Republicans are never going to win another election.

Are you serious? Are you serious? Yes. No, Ben, I'm not serious. I'm making a joke. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. If she violated the law and she's here illegally, she should be deported.

I don't get what's crazy about that. Can we just do a full stop? We know within our hearts of our hearts. She's not here illegally. No, I think she doesn't. I also don't know that. I'm not saying that. In the first iteration of the Trump administration in 2019, these same things were investigated.

The difference between now and then is they raided her home less than 30 days before the election. And let me tell you where the racism part comes in. All right. The racism part comes in when Donald Trump yells, go back to where you come from. You need to go back to where you come from. No, here's what's different about it. No, okay. All right.

That's pure racism. We also note that Trump movement was built on racism when he started his political career by saying Barack Obama was not a U.S. citizen. You see the correlation? Those two things are almost the same, identical, same language, same person. So yes, it's a bigot. Yes, he's a bigot. Yes, he's racist.

And I think it's very dangerous precedent he's setting. Okay. But if he was a bigot, no, no, no, because the other difference here is that, two things. One, Ilhan Omar has a history of shady behavior, as does pertain to legal things like marriages and citizenship. She also, more than most Democrats, does have a kind of fealty to her home country of Somalia. And she talks about this. And the reason I know that this is, the journey, the reader story. Yes, well, I do.

I know the way that she's put it up. No, but do you know her story? But the reason, hold on, the reason. The reason, the reason I think that we can save. definitively that Trump is not bigoted in this is that he didn't do any of this with any other member of the squad. He didn't do it with Ianna Presley. He didn't do it with Rashida Taleb. He didn't do it with AOC.

But to your point, sure he could have. But no, he couldn't because, again, they don't have the same story as Ilhan Omar. The bottom line is. Yeah, but if he's such a racist bigot, neither did Barack Obama. He couldn't he just do the same job? I know, but that was wrong. But so couldn't he do it again? Donald Trump has been consistent in this,

throwing out racist language and... You have to admit that Ilhan Omar has a lot of murky things on her on her CV. If that was the case, Donald Trump has been president twice, she would have been gone by now. If there was something... Well, isn't that what we're looking at right now?

Listen to my point. If there was something serious about I mean, Illegal, she would have been locked up and locked away now. The reason he's doing it now, because they're losing on the immigration issue, they're about to lose an election. He needs to solidify his fractured base.

What better way to do it than be... First off, I act... If it's so clear for everyone that this president's entire base and movement is built on bigotry and racism. I think it really is an indictment of you and of your entire effort as a democratic strategist

that he has the highest percentage vote in modern history for Republicans from African Americans and from Hispanic voters. You're missing my point. Who don't agree with you. You missed my point. He started his movement by saying Barack Obama was a United States citizen. I'm sorry. Remember that? Your complete denialism

Your complete denialism. Agree with me on that. No, I actually don't think that that's where the political movement came from. I think you've been talking about running for president all the way back in 2000. You missed my point. He built this movement. That was the first. No, the basis of this movement was having a tough line on immigration, okay?

Which you, your side also depicted, by the way, as being racist. Did he not? Remember me this. Did Donald Trump not spend a good five, six months plus saying Barack Obama was not. But you're making, that's not the claim. You're claiming this whole movement is built on. I would agree. It started on this.

But then, no, it started with eight years of Obama and it started to a response to. Exactly. Exactly. Oh, no, that's different. And then saying Barack Obama was not a U.S. citizen. No, because that was pre-Obama. He did the birth thing was before Obama. It's just farcical to say that the Trump Maga movement is built on Obama.

The Trump Maga movement is built on literally making America great again. That's why so many people came out to vote for him three times. now. So there is a massive movement behind Donald Trump that has nothing to do with where Barack Obama's if you all cannot agree on this platform that Donald Trump started his movement going after Barack Obama saying he's not a U.S. citizen. If you all cannot agree that saying go back to where you come from is not racist. Was that part of his rhetoric? Yes. He did say that. But that has nothing to do. Do you agree is racist? No. Are you joking me? All right. Are you joking? If you don't believe, go back to where you come from. You know who's kind of racist? Was Joe Biden who told black people that if he didn't vote for him, they were stupid.

Now you're being in serious. I mean, that was really, I think it's really reasonable to quibble with the notion that he, the start of the MAGA movement and of the political movement that propelled Trump in office started with the birther thing. It absolutely did not. It started with, I think you can just as, even, maybe you can argue it. But who could just as easily argue that it was Trump's attacks on Republicans that he didn't like, that was the start of the matrim.

That was the whole thing. I think that was part of it. When he came down the golden escalator, he was like, I'm sick and tired of all these Let me walk you back to your own party. Swish Republicans. The T-parties movement was built on attacking Republicans, the traditional Republicans. Donald Trump built his movement on saying Barack Obama was not a U.S. citizen. I think that's historical.

And you know why Donald Trump is president right now is because massive amounts of Americans came out to vote for him and he promised to get rid of people who are in our country illegally and who had committed fraud. And guess what? It actually, we have a congresswoman under investigation right now for allegedly doing so. How is the deportation of those extreme illegals going? The illegal criminals? Ask the Cato Institute, because he promised on the campaign trail that he was going to get with the worst of the worst, which I agree.

We need to get with the extreme bad actors. But when his own reporting, own department reports that less than 13% of those who have been deported have committed these extreme crimes, then I think that's a problem. I write every single day about the illegal criminals that are being deported. So are you going to disagree with the Trump administration reporting? We're talking about pedophiles. I don't understand what you're saying. There is a report that's been printed by the Trump administration saying the people who have been deported to this point, less than 13% of them have a criminal history. A lot of them have a criminal history.

You missed my point. So you're going to disagree with their own reporting? You're making a point that less than 13% of the people deported so far have a criminal history? Yes. It was reported by the Trump administration. They're here illegally. That's a criminal act. And that was always the Trump administration's claim.

They said they were going to prioritize the most. And I think they did. And I think what happened is... When you got less than 13% with a criminal history. Well, I think one of the things that we're seeing... Yeah, we're putting over something funny here because the Trump administration always said they were going to deport people who were here illegally. Caroline Levitt said it from the podium. If they're in our country, they're here illegally, they committed a crime. But he promised to do the most extreme, which we agreed with. But the problem... You're making him, you're holding him to some standard that you set that nobody else did.

I also... I also think that you're missing out, missing a major factor here, which is the fact that self-deafing. are actually higher than deportations. That's not my point. No, no, no, no, but that's an indication that you have people who are actually leaving the country because they know they're going to get a lot. So you missed my point. He promised he, not self-deportations, he was going to get rid of the most extreme we have. That has not happened.

Yes, it is actually happening. Less than 13%. Here's the other. So you're talking about a large number of people who are extremely violent illegal criminals that are being deported. You're saying you're upset because they're only 30% of the deportation? I'm not upset. I'm not about it. Are you happy that people are being deported out of our country?

I agree we need to get rid of bad actions. I said that three times. Do you know who that wasn't happening under? Joe Biden. You know who that wasn't happening under? I agree that the Biden administration could have did a better job at the border. But here's where you could have done a better job at the border. They didn't do anything at the border.

Do you know how many thousands of people I personally saw crossing the border? I was down in El Paso watching these people stream across the border. You just spent in Barack Obama. You do know Barack Obama was coined deported in chief, right? Yeah, but that was a completely different era in terms of immigration. If, if you are, if you are, went into the deportation argument and what you're saying is true, then why in the hell Donald Trump

underwater on his top issue? He's not actually. Again, you keep saying these things that are just not true. Immigration is the most solid Republican issue. Donald Trump is underwater on immigration. Even Fox's polling indicated. No, no, no. The strongest issues

for Republicans in this election in every major poll have been immigration and crime. That's not the polling I've seen. I've even seen Fox News reporting saying that he's down and been reported on the network that he's underwater on immigration. Well, if he's, if there's people who are angry with him in the MAGA movement on deportations, it's because they want more.

It's the hard right side of the MAGA movement that wants more deportation. All I know is, all I know is his base, you're citing this imaginary polls showing Republicans Americans do not agree with him on the issue of immigration. Look, you're, you're, you, they voted him in office on it. Democrats have solid numbers when it comes to corruption, gas prices and inflation. And they got on a top issues, the top issues. No, you're not. actually above water on the economy. Okay, the top issues for Trump have been crime and

immigration. The Poland just came out. That's why they would like it. Over the past couple of days, Poland just indicated that Americans trust Democrats more on the economy and they blame Donald Trump Trump for the bad economy. That's look. That was just a couple of days ago. Look, I'm, what I'm saying to you though is it seems to be shocking that you think that this is an issue that does not in some ways benefit the president. You started this argument by saying that this is something that is horrible, that it's racist, that it's going, that it's something that's, you know, absolutely awful. But, you know, from my perspective, this is exactly the kind of issues that the president wants to run on. He wants to run on the idea that Democrats don't

care about the border, that they don't care about the immigration problem, and that they don't care about long time. You won't disagree. You won't get disagree with me, with me on that because it's a red-at-me issue. And every president on the Republican side runs on immigration, but yet they will not fix the problem. Where you and I disagree is the president is underwater according to several polls that have been released on the issue of immigration. They will not fix the problem. Who closed the border? Then why don't Americans agree?

Who closed the border? So you're telling me an immigration? No, no, no, no. Who closed the border? Are you telling me? You won't say it. You won't say it. Who closed the border?

Yes, he has. Tell me, nobody's coming over the border? Yes. I think he has a impact crack down on border crossings, which is one of the reasons the deportations has become. He has not fixed the problem. She's saying he's fixed the problem. He closed the border.

There have been no illegal crosses. There are, I think what's happening here is there are. There are. That's what DHS. will tell you. There's been no illegal crossings. There are two... Let's put a marker there. Let's replay this as a receipt. There are two issues here, which is border security

and deportations. All under immigration. Right, sure, but there are two salient points and the success of one, the success of closing the border, and of stopping or totally halting illegal crosses has put more focus on deportations. I can't wait to see the receipt. Zero border cross. Listen, man, if we can trust, if we can trust the Kato number on the 13%, we can trust the D-Hs. I know,

but I'm saying, or the admin number. The admin number They're signing, yes. And I know that's funny that it's a Kdo number they use, but if we can take that, then we can take the DHS Zero border crossing. Sure, yeah. I can't wait to read it. Hey, guys, it's Tim Rice. You know, with the news and politics as crazy and fast paces as it is these days,

it can be really hard not just to keep up with the big stories, but to really make sure that you're getting the full story and that you understand potential bias or limitations of the outlets that you're reading, which is why I'm so happy to talk to you today about Freespoke. Free Spoke is a new app. It's a private search engine that has a lot of other cool features that really allows you to not just keep up with the news, but get inside these stories. So let me just show you how this works. Let's search Ilhan Omar.

On the show today, we talk a lot about Ilhan Omar, the raid on her house, whether or not that's going to be a politically viable strategy for Republicans. But there's obviously so much more to that story. So you pop Ilhan Omar in, and again, at first it looks just like a search engine. You get a site for her campaign. You get an AI overview, pretty much what you would see on other search engines. But this is where it gets cool. It starts bringing down the top stories, and it shows you the affiliation or bias of the different outlets.

So Newsweek has a little blue Democrat donkey for left. RVM News has a little red elephant for right, conservative, Republican, Democrat, liberal. They've also got a really fantastic election hub, which is going to come in so much handy for us. And I think for a lot of people, as we get into the midterms, they have things like personal sample ballots, key race polling, podcast moments,

and there'll be county-by-county results on election. night. I can tell you that I'm going to be using this app for the rest of the cycle, and I think you should too. You can download Freespoke right now. It's free, or you can go to getfreespoke.com slash daily wire and use the code district club 30 to get 30% off an annual premium subscription. So again, Freespoke itself is free. You could download it right now and use all the cool features that I just talked about. But the premium benefit is some of the best money that you can spend on apps like this. You'll have unlimited podcast moments, polling insights for key races and full perspective issues and breakdowns on things like ballot issues and other state

specific things all ad free. So whether you download Freespoke for free right now in the app store or go to getfreespoke.com slash daily wire and use the code district club 30. It's going to be a great tool for you. It's going to help you engage with the news on a whole new level. I can't recommend it enough. Give it a try. While we're on the subject of red meat, let's talk about another red meat issue that we bagged or another red meat bait that the president sort of walked back, which was the planned live stream of execution by firing squad of Nadal Hassan, the Fort Hood terrorist. Mary Margaret, what are you hearing from, you know, kind of your time in and around the White House on what led to this decision? Was it the vice president saying publicly that he wasn't going to watch it?

Was it just the part of the religious base really saying we don't really love the idea of the live stream? What's going on here? I think it was a mix of everything because first of all, I think it was overblown from the start. when Pete Hagseth announced on the USS Lincoln to Jack Posobic, actually, in an interview that it would be live streamed. He didn't say it like, we will be live streaming. He said, kind of in passing, that there would be a live stream available. I think it was blown way out of proportion. I don't think that DOD or DOW, as we call it now, was planning on blowing it up in this massive way. Be that as it may, the vice president was quick to say that

he wouldn't be watching it. He was actually asked about it as a Catholic, and he said, I am not going to be watching it. But he did talk about how horrific this Fort Hood shooting was. And then when the president walked it back, my understanding is he did see the polling showing that I think it was 80% of people did not want to see this live stream. We're not excited about it. I didn't want to see a live stream. I thought that was really morbid and disturbing. I personally don't really want to see see this guy executed in the first place. I think life in prison would certainly do just as well as a punishment. But the president, what I've been hearing is he did pay attention to that polling. And while he said in a truth social post that he thinks it would

be a good deterrent for the rest of the world. He backed down on it because he didn't think it was the right move at this time. I think it's sick that we're even having this discussion. I think that there are times in American politics whether a Democrat, Republican, left or right, certain things you just do not do. When you think about even having a hint of a conversation of streaming and execution, you compare that to where those things happen to the rest of the world. And you make the argument of why people call Donald Trump a dictate and why people feel so strong about this administration when it comes to their aggressive behavior. Here's the good news.

It's not going to happen. The better news is for the first time on an issue that most Americans agree with, yet Republicans willing to speak out like Johnson and others saying, let's not do this. This is not necessary. I think this is all kind of ridiculous

because it's foiable. I mean, it'll be on YouTube almost immediately. I mean, it's going to be on the internet. You'll be able to watch it. I'm not saying. Why are we? I mean, I understand, like, I'm not in favor. of live streaming something like that,

but I also don't get why people's immediate reaction is, like we are going to be able to see. But YouTube is different than government channels. You have to draw the line. Government channels and YouTube, two different things. This is... It's the difference between a thing being available and a thing being promoted.

Yeah. Okay. I think. I think one thing, though, that I thought was interesting about this. You talk about, you know, Pete kind of just throwing it out there. My feeling is that Pete probably threw it out there thinking the president would like it. Yes.

and save visit. You can say it. And I think that the president, when he, even before he saw the polling, probably somebody told him, hey, you realize that guy's in a wheelchair. This isn't going to look good. And regardless of it, I think that he, I mean, quite frankly, I'm glad that he walked it back. I think that it was the right thing to do.

But again, I think that, you know, if you're going to have executions, you're going to be able to find footage of it. And this is now getting even more. I think this is another car in the parking lot of cars by Pete Hedsuff to say, I'm going to try to demonstrate this over amplified version of masculinity. Because it's a tough guy thing. For him, it's like tough guy, projection, let me show this. And by the way, let me let me let my boss know, I'm projecting tough, Secretary of War, all these things.

But I think it's sick. And I think it also shows how out of touch they can be when it comes to where the American people are and where they are on the feeling of these types. Well, I think it's Pete Hegseth looking at it like war. right? This is a terrorist that killed 13 people and injured 30 others. I think, believe he killed a pregnant mother. And he's looking at it like war. And I will say, Pete Higsteth has done a very good job of making the public understand that he looks at war and military as a life and death situation, which is. Now, as a Catholic, I am not for the death penalty.

I think there are only really, really extreme cases that could make sense for the death penalty, as John Paul II says. So that's kind of my guiding star on this. But that being said, I think there were people across the spectrum, but especially religious Americans who balked at this and thought that this was wrong. Can I ask you one question? We've had other Secretary of Defense, First Secretary of War, before. This is not the first time we've had this type situation arise. Why did it they prioritize or even hint at the idea of doing a public execution versus now?

I think that's a legit. We've had Republican presidents before. We've had these types of scenarios. Well, in our past departments of war, Department of Defense's, we had drag queens doing shows on our aircraft carriers. No, no, this is part of my point. We had drag queens doing shows on aircraft carriers. I literally interviewed

one, so this is not a gotcha moment. I'm asking who, because I missed all that. I don't remember his name, but it was a dude dressed up as a drag queen. Yeah, I'll link you after the show. But let me make my point. We had drag queens on our aircraft carriers. We had DEI. All of our service members are telling me

they had to suffer through crazy DEI, woke ideology, dealing with this craziness in the military. They're really... Because my father served. I have a number of family members who are currently active... This wouldn't have been going on when your father was in the military because this was happening under Joe Biden.

I don't know how your father is. I have current active members of my family. You're really going to pretend that this ideology wasn't in life. Who are serving at some of the highest levels of our government. So I want you to help me understand how, what does DEI and all those things have to do with people putting on that uniform so you and I can enjoy the basic. It should have nothing to do with it. It should have nothing to do it.

If you won't interrupt me, though, I'll explain to you. When we had our service members dealing with all this, they were being taught about gender ideology. They had men in women's locker rooms. Well, in the military, they had men in women's spaces in all kinds of places that shouldn't have been happening. They had women serving in combat roles that were very dangerous for them. They had all kinds of different DEI initiatives. If you're pretending to look... If you're pretending to look confused right now, it's because you don't want to understand it. No, I don't understand what you're saying because again, I have family members right now who

are at home and abroad with their uniform on and they're not DEI. But let's go to go back. No one said their DEI. You just said that when they had to deal with DEI, and they were in the military when Joe Biden was president, and DEI was never about the conversation. It was about protecting our fundamental freedoms in this country. What are you talking about? D.E.I, this was a government imposed ideology.

I think we're like to follow around these words because it gets a certain response from certain artists in the country. But putting them in a uniform serving out. No, no, no, no, no, no. You don't get to say. Don't be that rude. I'm sorry. I'm not.

No, you are being rude. And by the way, and by the way, no offense to you, I have so many family members who are in the. military right now and every single one of them is grateful for the fact that we have an administration that is addressing the amount of crap that they used to have to go through the things that they had to train for that had nothing to do with actually doing the job of my you have members of the military now who's saying what we're doing now under this current secretary have nothing to do with actually what we need to be doing to keep our country safe and to keep America at the top of the

scope I'm sorry I don't know I don't know I don't know the ranks and I don't know where your people are But I'm telling you, as someone who has left and right people who are in the military right now in both sides of my family, the one thing that they're all in agreement on is that this administration has gotten rid of a lot of stuff that they wanted to get rid of. And I have left and right friends and family who are served who have a different opinion. So maybe it's just a different. I think it's probably good that the United States military has a political divide among it that mirrors the political divide of the color. This makes sense, right? This probably means that we have a representative all volunteer army. I mean, to go back to your point, original point, though, that started this, of why other, like, what does it say that this administration is doing, tried to do this and other Republicans didn't? I think that's kind of a a false premise because you're just, like, why not? I don't know. I think you answered it.

We're talking about the live stream. Yeah, no, yeah. I think you answered it, which is, Pete Hegseth is, Pete Hegseth is, is trying to present as a tough guy, both for himself and for the president. But, I mean, that's just the answer. I don't think it's, I don't think it's, like, deeper than that, right? I guess I'm making a point of how we have to make certain that we're projecting the right thing as Americans, both at home and abroad, teasing at the fact that we're going to live stream and execution, I think that's just dangerous, unprecedented thing that we should not do, period. I think you might be right, but I think it is, look, I think you have to, not to repeat

kind of the non-sequitur all the time, but I think you do have to give credit to this administration for being willing to think about new ways and different ways of doing this. Maybe you don't, but I will. Yeah, I'll never give someone credit for, for, for. hinting at the fact we're going to do a live stream of execution on government TV. Okay, well, while we're on the divisive topics, we've got to get to Talarico and El Saeed, who both had big moments this week, Tim, you start us off on this abortion debate between Tala Rico and I believe it was a university, a Dallas professor, a Catholic professor,

who, I thought, held her own very well. What did you make of how he tried to twist around this abortion argument? I think it's, look, I think that every one of these moments that James Talaico has, he completely had coming because he launched his campaign. as I am going to be a normal Christian Democrat. I mean, that launch video was fantastic. I got nervous when I watched that video because I thought, oh, man, they finally found one. They finally, whatever lab that the Democrat Party has in Texas where they're trying to

crank out like the, you know, white Obama. You know, they failed with Beto. They kind of failed with Ossov, but they're there with Talarico. And then it just comes out that he has, will charitably say, these very heterodox beliefs. And I just don't know how for all the pivoting that he's tried to do, for all the work that he's tried to do, at no point has he found a way to talk about his religion, which again, is in play because he put it on the table in a way that is more uniting than divisive. Every good Democratic candidate is not trying to be Barack Obama. Maybe they're just a good candidate.

So that's like thing to one. Thing number two, I would just say that the broader conversation around freedom of choice to make your own health care decisions and those decisions remain between you and your doctor, are one that are going to be at the bottom of the priority priority target this cycle. We have not heard the abortion conversation much this cycle because that's not what Americans are voting on. Americans are voting with their pocketbooks. And then in Texas and Michigan and around the country, map and math, the common denominator is candidate quality. You have morally bankrupt and corrupt Ken Faxson impeached by his own party out of town on a holiday with his mistress.

All the things we know about Ken Faxon going against a young Tala Rico who, by the way, about issues that matters to Texas and hold on accountable the folks who are in charge, Republicans in the state. And that's why he's leading in the polls, not because of his position on these issues that Republicans use to divide in an emergency situation. Ben, I'm sure you have something to say here, but I have to jump in here and applaud you because I have studied up on the Democrat messaging on abortion cycle, and you just did such a good job doing exactly what they told you to do to not talk about abortion, to talk about freedom of choice, and to talk about the economy. That is exactly what they tell

you to do on this. No, but let me just stop you there. No one tells me what to do. I'm sorry. It just was too perfect. I expressed my own personal beliefs and my own message. I'm sorry. I just pay so much attention to this and you just did it perfectly.

The economy part too. Oh, you mean I gave the proper messaging the right way that most of Americans can relate to? Thank you for telling me I'm getting my job. Listen, we talk about abortion. We're talking about babies. We're talking about moms. You didn't say either of those words. And you're not supposed to anymore because the Democrats don't want to talk about those things when we talk about abortion.

I know. I talk about the way I've always talked about. about it. And I'm a Christian, by the way. I don't doubt you're a Christian. GOP does not mean God's only party. I just think baby and mom should be more. Yeah, but what I'm saying is I am, I am a Christian, a praying Christian, a fifth generation A&E. And so I believe in God. I believe in the Bible. I read, I pray every single day. But you know what I don't do? I do not think it's a good idea for me to tell my sister, my niece or any other woman who's been in my life or who will come in my life that I should

be able to tell them what they should do with their bone back. I'm not telling you what you should tell them, but I am saying that when you talk about this conversation, you should probably say the word baby, you should probably say the word mom, and at the bare minimum, you should say the word abortion. Why? Because that's what we're talking about. Why should I have to say that? Why can't I just say what it is?

A woman having the ability to make her own health to kill her baby. Make her own decision. The same way I have the freedom to decide to come on this program, the same way I have the freedom to do. That's the same level thing, you know, coming on a program. I'm sorry. I'm not, no, no, baby killing is never going to be on the same. I'm sorry.

This is not. It doesn't work. So you mean to tell me that. He's running away from this issue because everybody saw what happened to Wendy in Texas, okay, which is that she ran on abortion and she got blown out of the water. Okay, so let me just say one thing on that regard. People know his position, but yet he's leading in every single poll in the state of Texas. You know why?

Because that's not what people are going to vote on this cycle. I think that's true across the country in some of the most conservative places in our country. So you're not concerned that when you look at the arc of his campaign, okay, that the last two weeks have been bad for him. I don't think so. That every single internal. He wasn't there. He wasn't doing anything. And then he came back and he kind of tripped and fell.

You know what I don't think is bad? Because the numbers just came out about the amount of money he raised. There's been significant polling done over the past couple weeks that keep him ahead in the race. And also you see Republicans scrambling with the head. on fire dumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the race because they know they're on the verge of losing. So I don't think it's been a bad two weeks. I think it's been a very handsome two weeks for Democrats across the country, including Tel Rico. I just, I'm sorry. That's just not what I see when it comes to Texas. I think that he had a ton of momentum. I think that

the last two weeks. What are the factors you're looking at over the past couple of weeks? Because again, I just talked about polling. I just talked about money. And I just talked about the president having to go to Texas, Ruby Red Texas two or three times in one week to try to save the day. So if... So your your position is that none of that's going to make a difference? None of that money, none of the president's president's president. Here's what I'm saying. If everything was so

bad about the past two weeks for for Tala Rico, then why are you all doing what you're doing? Well, because to your point, he ran a very good campaign. It's point. He had a lot of momentum and he lost it. It makes perfect sense that the president would want to come in and try to keep a Ruby Red state. But that doesn't change the fact. You can't say, you can't say,

Oh, look, the Republican Party is trying to keep Texas red. Clearly, that means that James Tala Rico had a great two weeks. Both things can be true. He had a bad two weeks, and Republicans were fighting to keep a seat. But you missed my point. I don't think it is. The polling indicates that he had a very good two weeks. The money has indicated he's had a very good two weeks.

The momentum is indicated he's had a very good two weeks. On the flip side, it's had been a bad campaign entirety for the Republican candidate. And that is why there's this oversized effort to try to save. him because he's a bad candidate running a bad campaign at a bad time in the country because of Republicans. There's a lot more money that's currently, you know, registered in terms of ad spending over the next two weeks for Ken Paxton than there is for Tallarico. I agree. I agree. I'm not raised. No, but, but what I'm talking about is the fact that you can't have both the, to Tim's point, you can't have both the attitude of like, oh my gosh, Republicans are so desperate to save Texas and then have the attitude. And none of it's going to matter. None of it's going to actually. I look, I think this has been a bad two weeks for. for Talariko. I think it's been a bad two weeks for El Sayyad.

I think that he has had, he has had, I mean, come on, we all saw that Lama's confrontation with him, you know, over the past, you know, comments that he's made about the Muslim Brotherhood. He was clearly caught in a lie. His family has clearly been invested in this and in this position that is far more radical than I think that Michigan voters maybe understood about this.

And he handled it very poorly as a hand. I would make the same argument that if the past two weeks were so bad for, Sayyad, if the past two weeks were bad for Tala Rico, the past two weeks were bad for Democrats, then why does the momentum keep shifting? Poll at the poll, at the poll, dollar after dollar, survey after survey, speech after speech, debate after debate. Why does it keep shifting as if the Democrats are on the verge of doing the unexpected?

I'm sorry. I think Democrat strategists are actually kind of stressed right now. I mean, there was a big piece, and I believe it was Axios to speak. Democrats strategist speaking to Axiore. were expressing concerns and disbelief about the way the midterms were going. I don't know these guys. They were not on the record, but that was something. This is also just how people start talk.

I mean, I'm not down. I understand the polls and I understand the money. But this is also, you have to admit, this is how everyone starts talking in the two weeks before a midterm. It's always, there's always going to be a blue wave or a red wave or something. Someone's always, the party that's not in power, two weeks out from a midterm election, is always on the verge of doing something once in a generational. And they never do.

in my home state of South Carolina, we have the saying there's no education in the second kick of the mule. So I've been here before. When there's an expectation that we're going to win and we did not win, I've been here before. So I am one of those southern carpenters who applies the principle of measure three times cut once when it comes to elections, but I think this is different because in every single race, every single circle, you see the same type of argument being made.

Republicans are going to lose because they're failing on every single major issue and they failed the American people, including the people that voted for them. I think Democrats are going to lose in at least one of those states, Michigan or Texas. And I think there'll be a lot of questions about the amount of money that was invested there that could have gone potentially to some of these other races that are going to be closer than they perhaps ought to be across the Midwest. And I think that even though your Democrats are going to win handily in Georgia and in North Carolina, they're going to lose in Maine. I think they're going to lose in Alaska. And I think that ultimately this is going to be a missed opportunity where so much of that money was invested in the great grand Democratic hope of turning Texas blue that you'll be looking back and saying, man, we could have used that. We as Democrats have to do this.

We have to treat the South as an investment not expense. You know why? Because the tide is turning. The 13 seats that were gerrymandered that were supposed to be in favor of Republicans, Republicans are scrambled to try to save those seats because the tide is turning. demographic changes, momentum changes, policy failures. Those things are happening this particular cycle. I don't think Texas is any different. The same way it took time to flip Georgia,

the same way it took time to flip North Carolina. Texas is a project we have to treat as an investment non-expense. I say the same about Mississippi. I say the same about my home state of South Carolina. I say the same about any of those southern states because you know why? The population numbers give us a sign of hope. Well, I guess we're going to have to wait and see,

but you have been watching the district club. so much for being with us this week and we'll see you next time. Who answers America's call for more energy? Our people do. They've helped boost Chevron's U.S. energy production by nearly 60% in the past three years, helping fuel national energy security, and drives down the open roads that make America. Learn more about what our people do at chevron.com slash America.