The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | Guests: Sen. Mike Lee & Bernie Moreno | 3/20/24

Episode Date: March 20, 2024

U.S. Senate candidate Bernie Moreno joins to discuss his impressive primary victory in Ohio, despite an extensive hate campaign by the Democrats. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) joins to discuss all the critical cases that SCOTUS is hearing. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton joins to discuss the "bizarre" situation Texas finds itself in while trying to follow the laws and protect its southern border.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When you were little, you had braced some of the affairs in the course of recreat, always in trying to negotiate and do and make a change. The app, Negoti, T.D., you permit to renouet with this instinct, with, without operation gratuite,

no amount of minimum, and no free mensuel. You're made for negotiate, and the TD is there for you aid. Holy cow, what a full, full show. We have the GOP winner from last night in Ohio. He's going to be the GOP can candidate for Senator Bernie Moreno, and I really enjoyed talking to him today.

Also, Mike Lee joins us. We have Mike Collins from Congress who is talking about the Lake and Riley Act. It's going to the Senate. Is the Senate going to block it or not? And if so, why? John Andresik joins us with something a little bit about Israel and Ken Paxton, the Attorney General of the great state of Texas who answered a question of mine in a way I have not heard ever on national radio or television from a man of his stature. It felt like history. And it was a little bone-chilling probably because it's true to many people in America. Our podcast begins right after this. Okay, let me tell you about our sponsor.

It's pre-born every day that you and I wake up and draw breath. We should be thankful for the gift of life. We should want to spread that gift to others. There's so many people that are like, life doesn't matter, my life doesn't matter. It does. It does. We're all born for a reason.

And once you just kind of organize your life onto some universal principles, man, life changes and it gets so much better. There are children now. that are being killed through abortion, and much of it is because of, well, evil in some cases. You know, I'm going to shout my abortion. Okay, that's weird. And maybe a little, just a touch of evil. The rest of it is because of misunderstandings, propaganda, or fear, and well-founded fear.

Moms don't think that they have anybody to support them. They do. Will you help save children? with preborn. Go to preborn.com slash back. 28 bucks can mean the difference between life and death. Pound 250 keyword baby, preborn.com slash Beck. You're listening to the best of the blue.

The last Senate candidate. I marry last night in Ohio, Bernie Moreno. How are you, sir? I'm great, Glenn. Thank you for having me. It was a pretty resounding victory. Let me give you some quick numbers. In a three-way race, almost 51% of the vote,

almost 18 point margin. We've won all 88 counties. Every single county we won. Holy cow. That is great. That is great. Now, the Democrats, I mean, I love your enemies. First of all, the Democrats spent about $3 million on ads against you.

Then you have Mitch McConnell, who I know for a fact hates your Everly having guts. Both of those things speak highly of you. Well, the Democrats put an ad out there tying me to President Trump as if that was some sort of negative. The reality is I wear my support of and for President Trump with a badge of honor. What will be interesting is to see if Sherrod Brown will wear with a badge of honor his 99% voting record with Joe Biden or whether he'll hide the entire if he'll cat whenever Biden shows up in Ohio. Right. I mean, they always try to paint Donald Trump as an extremist.

I didn't see anything extreme that he did. I was not a fan of Donald Trump the first time around because I thought he would be a little, you know, unhinged and most likely lean towards liberal. I was wrong on that, admitted that. And you look at his policies and you look at the history of what we went through. It was. pretty good. It was pretty good and not extreme. But you look at Biden and it's not job central.

It is absolutely out of control. I mean, this is basically a conversation between people who love America and believe in common sense and people who hate this country and are completely out of their minds. Because the policies really shouldn't even be controversial. This is about legal immigration,

zero tolerance for illegal immigration, energy dominance, not depending on other countries for oil, putting the parents and local communities in charge of their kids' education, having peace and stability around the world versus having potentially World War III at every corner of the globe. This isn't even close. This is why last night it was a repudiation of the Republican Party of the past, the party that thought that it was better to appease Democrats than actually appease their voters.

So, Bernie, tell me about yourself. Why did you decide to do this? You know, how's your soul? Well, I came to the U.S. as a kid. I moved to the United States when I was just about five years old from Columbia, South America, became a citizen the first opportunity I could. The greatest gift my parents gave me was bringing me to this country. I was able to get to Ohio about 20 years ago, about a small, tiny little business,

built it into a great business. This country gave me all the opportunities on earth that I could ever have dreamed about. And this is about making certain that we preserve that ability, that ability to do whatever you set your mind out to, no matter who you are or the circumstances of your birth, the color of your skin, whatever your background is, you can do anything in America if you work hard enough. That's what the left hates. They want government dependency. They want to tell us how to live our lives. They have this paternalistic view of governing. And that's what we're going to repudiate. And the American people are sick and tired of career politicians that care more about themselves in their career,

that actually helping this country. So, Bernie, I want to, I don't know if you're a religious person at all, but, you know, James Lindsay, I don't know if you know who he is, but he is a, he's an atheist. And I was talking to him last time we sat down together, I guess, maybe a year ago. And I said, I need your help, James, because I'm looking at what's happening in our country. and I look at what's happening in Washington. And because it is preaching, you can't do it. There is no, you know, salvation.

It's all collective salvation. They're beating people down. They're separating us, you know, by color. I can't think of another word other than evil. And he said, yeah, I think that's the only word that it could be applied at this scale. are you have you ever encountered real evil because you're about to if you go to Washington oh I I encountered it in my own primary you know the darkest forces in this country collude the cabal is real something I never would have thought of as a

business person before I get into politics this group of far left extremists that control the Democrat Party with spineless Republicans combined with a media that absolutely does their bidding to fight anybody who goes against their vision of this country. But to answer your original question, Glenn, this country does not exist without God. It does not. This nation was founded on a principle that our rights come from somebody above government, which is the Almighty. If we don't believe that, then we have to believe that our rights come from some government official, which is the whole cornerstone of what our Democratic Republic is all about. So what are the things that compelled you,

to get in? What are the things and who are the people that you will partner with in the Senate that you think, these guys get it, I am on that team? I look at JD Vance, great friend of mine. I'm going to be a great partner with him. We're going to have a great delegation here in Ohio. People like

Mike Lee, Bill Haggerty, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Roger Marshall, Tommy Tuberville. The conservatives are going to ban together in the United States Senate come 2025, and we're going to do something novel, Glenn. We're actually going to put in the agenda that every Republican campaigns on. Every Republican campaigns on the same issue sets. It's just that some of them forget why they got to Washington, D.C. and who they're accountable to. And we're going to change that next year.

By the time July 4th of 2026 comes around, Glenn, we're going to have our country back. We're going to celebrate the fact that this country's going to be better for our kids and grandkids, because the best years of this country are ahead of us, not behind us, but it just takes all of us to lean in and save this country, which is what we're going to do. So when people say that, you know, you're a conservative, or you're, as they say about you, I think you're a mega, MAGA fighter, they do everything they can, Christian nationalists,

to make us look like crazy people. And, you know, some people, I guess, you know, maybe are on the right or the left. I know they exist. But I am a constitutional conservative that is a Christian. I fight for the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of rights. And I will fight against anybody, and I think I have a pretty clear record on this, anyone, left or right, friend or foe, if you start to violate the Bill of Rights, and our Constitution. Would you stand against,

just for the people that maybe are afraid of Donald Trump because he's such a crazy man, would you stand against Donald Trump if he was trying to do things that were unconstitutional? Of course, but he doesn't. The person who tries to do things that are unconstitutional is the current occupier of the White House. But you're exactly right.

The duty that every elected official has is to uphold the Constitution as written. This is a document that really was something that you put a time in place where these men were in one place, one geography in a certain time of place. And it's an amazing document. You look at the Declaration of Independence. It lays out the mission statement of the country. I was in the auto business. I called the Constitution the Owners Manual.

We need to look at the owner's manual to understand how to operate the country. But we're not doing that, though. We're not doing that. We're doing the exact opposite. I'll tell you a story real quick that you'll really appreciate. I was done in Miggs County, one of the poorest counties in Ohio. A gentleman there happened to be a truck driver, raised his hand at one of our sessions with me and my opponents. And he said, what does Article 1 section of one of the Constitution say?

That's a question from a truck driver in Miggs County, Ohio. Because what he knew was that we're not following that, which is all legislative powers are to be held in Congress of the United States. He knows that. How many elected officials know that? because we're not following that simple idea. I've heard from everybody who has gone to Congress or the Senate that I respect. They all say, every, almost, every politician here pays lip service to the Constitution and the Declaration.

But the only time that it is ever truly discussed or taken into consideration is where there's a voter around. They'll talk a good game, but they don't really care about it at all. And, you know, it's funny that you said, you know, our mission is clearly stated in the declaration. I call that, I mean, it's clear. That's our mission statement. And you're exactly right. I call the Constitution our owner's manual. That's our how to book.

And, of course, Ben never read a manual. So maybe we should, you know, maybe we should concentrate on that a little bit. Because everything that is happening that is wrong with the country and putting us on the wrong track is the fact. is the fact that we are violating not only the Constitution on the way things are supposed to be done. Congress needs to take its power back, but also an out-of-control administrative state and a violation of almost every single right in the Bill of Rights, almost every day. Nobody's quartering horses or troops in my house yet, but I, you know, I could make a case that Google is. No, you're exactly right.

And it's fascinating to me to watch these career. I call them job-seeking career politicians. Because I think that's also what my election showed is a repudiation of that. I think our founders understood instinctively that government will eventually, without restraint, have tyranny over its people just by its very nature. And so they understood the way to fix that is you send people who've done something outside of government, go there to serve, and then most importantly, come home. That last part is critical.

Come home. We were never intended in this country to have a political class. We're intended to have a citizen-led legislature where the government is small. We have decentralized power because the bigger we the people are, the smaller government is. But look at we've almost gotten to the point where government is in charge of every aspect of our lives. And we have to fight that back. And I think there's a movement in this country that really understands that. and we're going to get our country back.

Yeah. Bernie, thank you. Great talking to. Congratulations again on a huge victory in Ohio last night. Thank you. Well, thank you. Thank you, Glenn. You bet.

Bye-bye. Bernie Moreno from Ohio, the now official GOP candidate for the Senate. Unless you got a crystal ball, you haven't told anybody about. And call me if you have one. I don't know what the future holds. None of us do. If you have, you know, a set of working eyes, you can probably see what probably is coming our way. And you should be prepared for it.

You should have, you know, your firearm, something to protect your family. You should also protect your soul, but you also need to prepare so your family has something to eat. You can get that from my Patriot supply. They have literally helped millions of American families prepare for whatever might come their way. Many of them start with a three-month emergency food kit, and there's 22 food and drink varieties, so you're not going to get bored with anything, and it's 2,000 calories a day. Stock up on all of the food your family needs at mypatriotsupply.com. Can I just give you, hey, you should do this and have your family prepared by summer?

Really? Get a kit now, $200 off. Mypatriotsupply.com. Mypatrient supply.com. Now back to the podcast. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. Senator Mike Lee, welcome to the program, sir. Thank you, Glenn.

We'll be with you, as always. Yeah, we've got a ton of topics to go through. I don't want to see if we can just go through some of these things as quickly as we can to get some understanding. First of all, can we start with Texas? I'm not sure if you are up to speed on all of it. But if the Supreme Court ruled, how can a lower court reinstate the stay that the Supreme Court said was no good? Yeah, look, Texas and the court system surrounding Texas law as before really is contributing meaningfully to March Madness. We've got a lot of back and forth.

Now, the important thing to remember is that there wasn't a ruling on the merits by the Supreme Court. court in this case. Correct. What we saw yesterday was the court declining to issue an administrative state declining to stop things. It was the lower court to stay on it as the case is being argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit today. Now, the Fifth Circuit includes the state of Texas and they're hearing arguments on the merits of the case. And so within, I don't know, it could be as short as a few days, likely it'll be a few weeks. The Fifth Circuit will issue a ruling. My understanding of the stay that's in effect now put in place by the lower court

is that that will remain in effect until they decide this probably in a few weeks' time. Well, but I don't understand how a stay, when you have something like this, the country is hemorrhaging. It's hemorrhaging. Our borders are wide open. We're hemorrhaging. you go to a doctor and he's like, well, before we put that tourniquet on, let's hold on here. And you would think that everybody would look at that doctor and go, hemorrhaging,

I think while you make a decision, maybe we should just stop the hemorrhaging first, and then we can talk about it. Why isn't that the case? You know, that is a little baffling to me. It seems like a bad choice. Now, I haven't seen the lower courts written ruling on this most, recent action. Sometimes courts will do this in order to preserve the status quo while the litigation is being worked out. But that seems troubling here, to put it mildly, because

states have an obligation, they have a duty, they certainly have authority under Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution, to protect themselves against an invasion. Is Texas law, as before, it gives Texas the authority to detain the illegal immigrants take them to the border, present them with two options, leave the country, or be prosecuted for illegal entry and face jail time. Now, why you would want to maintain the status quo, the status quo in which this bloodbath that Joe Biden has himself created through an open border fall. Oh my gosh, she just said bloodbath. It resulted in the death of so many people is beyond my ability to understand. Okay. So let me ask you one other question. If the state,

If the state of Texas wins the right to actually enforce the law, which is insanity to me, will that apply to other states as well? Or is it just Texas? Well, in any litigation, Glenn, technically, the only parties who are immediately governed by the ruling are the parties before the court. So technically speaking, that ruling would apply only to the state of Texas. That said, the precedent that will be set there would likely be controlling in the states in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, including not only Texas, but other states, including Louisiana, where the case is being argued today. So it would certainly apply there. And then that precedent would likely be looked to by other circuits in other states around the country.

as they handle similar cases if other states adopt similar laws. Well, I just know that, you know, we all had to live by the Arizona law, you know. So when they lost that, it kind of affected everybody else at the border as well. Mike, one last question. The president of Mexico came out yesterday and said, well, you're not sending them back here. As somebody who dealt with the State Department and this government trying to get 18,000 people out of Afghanistan. And some of them are own special forces that were left behind. I know that the State Department can call ahead and say, you know what, we can't vouch for this plane. Don't let this

plane land. That's our recommendation. And they all follow that. Can if we start deporting people, can the State Department get involved and do that? In this administration, the, for the very reasons you just described. I remember talking to you at the time you were trying to get people out of Afghanistan, Glenn, and realizing the insane degree to which the State Department was willing to make people's lives hell. So I wouldn't put it past them to try. Just the same. I also wouldn't mess with Texas or discount the ability of the state of Texas to figure out workarounds there.

If one route doesn't work, they might try another one, and I suspect they would succeed. I want to talk to you about the freedom of speech thing. You and I were talking the other day, and you were a little afraid that this may not go the way of the people. I know you're hoping for a different outcome, but you were also paid to think on the other side as well. Do you think that we have a chance of really, a real chance of losing the freedom of speech, argument in front of the court where the government can just lean on companies and tell them who to silence and who to promote? Yeah, I think there's a real chance of that, Glenn, and it's devastating that would be unfortunate. That is not the outcome I hope for. There is nonetheless

a possibility that the state of Missouri will lose in this case. I wasn't president in the courtroom yesterday, but I've listened to the argument. It's available online and, uh, It's a fascinating argument. But look, this case is really important. It's important, I think, for Missouri to win here. Because if the government can violate your rights when there's trouble, just because there's trouble, you don't have rights. That's not what the U.S. Constitution does.

It's not there, as Justice Jackson seemed to suggest, with one of our questions yesterday, to make things easy for the government. It is there, literally to hamstring the government. government to make it more difficult for this to do this. But yeah, there's a chance losing this here. Some of the questions yesterday, many of them focused on this issue of standing, who has standing to sue. And there is some difficulty. There's some risk to the plaintiffs in this case that they won't be able to sufficient to satisfy the court's exacting requirements on standing

to show that any one of them was directly harmed by any particular. particular government action taken in this case. That's an important constitutional element. That's a jurisdictional element. So if the court found that way, if the government is violating, if the government is violating people's First Amendment rights all over the country, why doesn't a state AG that represents the people have standing? Yeah, either of the state AG who represent some of these people or some of the individuals themselves, because there is evidence that some of them were harmed, and they were harmed by this government action. That's why I hope the court doesn't get stuck on that argument, because I think there is

sufficient evidence upon which they could find Article III constitutional standing there. To establish that, you've got to show that you suffered an injury, in fact, that you were subjected to that injury as a result of someone else, that that caused you. the injury and that the court is capable of remedying that injury, in fact, it's fairly traceable to the conduct of the defendants. I think there's more than enough evidence for at least some of these plaintiffs for the court to find standing. And I really hope that they handle this the right way. But I think if they're going to lose, that's probably the most likely ground on which they lose, and that's worrisome. You are listening to the best of Glenn Beck.

To listen to the rest of this interview, check out the full show podcast. We have Ken Paxton on. Ken, the Attorney General from the great state of Texas. How are you, sir? I'm doing well. Pretty crazy stuff going on right now, as usual. I know. Thank you for joining us. I know you're getting ready for your argument with the appellate court today. Can you tell me what happened? Yesterday, the Supreme Court said Texas can begin arresting. and then I get up this morning and the appellate court says no, no, no, not so fast. Well, this is one of the more confusing

and maybe inexplicable things I've witnessed in the court. So it started off in district court with the Biden administration and a little group called the ACLU sued us saying that SB4 was unconstitutional. We didn't have the right to expel anybody from the country no matter how bad they were. So the judge

where they filed the lawsuit put an injunction on law so it couldn't go into effect on March 4th the date it was supposed to go into effect we appealed that at three-judge panel ruled in our favor we got the the stay lifted but they put what's called an administrative stay on it to give the Supreme Court a chance to review it he goes up to the Supreme Court the Supreme Court says no fine six-zero it can go into effect and so we're good we're happy within hours we are notified by a new panel of the Supreme Court Priscilla

Owen is, I think, a Bush appointee. And then we have a liberal judge appointed by one of the Democrats. And we had Andy Ollum, who ruled in our favor. So we lost two to one. They put another stay back in. But then they ordered us to have a hearing within less than 12 hours from finding out. So actually, my guy is arguing by Zoom right now at the court in New Orleans, the Fifth Circuit, and that three judge panel. So it's a really odd argument because they.

removed the stay, but then they said that's what the argument's about. So it's almost like they've already decided, but they still want us to argue the case. I don't know. I've never seemed like it. I don't understand it. It's bizarre. Yeah, I was talking to Mike Lee today, and he said, you know, stays are usually to stay from harm. What we have going on here is a whole lot of harm. We have crime, we have killers, we have just an invasion of our border. And it should be that the court should say, no, no, no, let them arrest until we look at everything. Instead, the harm that is being perceived, I guess, by this court is to the illegal alien. Yes, to the illegal alien and to the Biden administration's partnership with cartels. That's the harm. We are harm. We are harm.

the cartel relationship. And I don't know how else to put it. If the court defended this, if they block us from enforcing legitimate path law by the legislature signed by the governor, then they are saying we want to protect any harm that might come to the illegal immigrants and to the Biden administrations work with the cartels. That's the reality where we're at now. So what is your guy arguing? I wish we could listen in. What is he's arguing? He's arguing exactly what you're saying. There's no harm. let this law stay in effect. Let us argue the merits of the case.

And you let us have the opportunity to uphold and defend a purposely enacted law by the Texas legislature. The people. So when is, when are they going to, when is this going to be decided? I mean, I know the stay is for today, the trial, I guess they would announce something within a couple of days on the on the stay but I think it what about the full case I mean they've already removed this stay so I mean the are the administrative stay of the stay so confusing because there was a you know a stay in place and then they had an administrative stay of the

stay that's why it's so hard to explain so what they would do is I I think they're going to rule very quickly because look how fast they went they the Supreme Court you know gave us the the victory yesterday afternoon, and by, you know, within an hour or two, the Fifth Circuit, Priscilla Owen and the other judge said, no, you can't, this law can't stay in effect. We're going to let the stay go back into effect that the original judge put in place. And now you have to argue this tomorrow at 10 in the morning, which I've never had an argument turnaround that fast on something so significant, but even on something minor. I mean, that's what's so strange about this.

That's part of it. And it's also strange that the Fifth Circuit would sort of. of step past the Supreme Court and say, well, we're going to, we're going to stop this from going to effect. And it's despite the fact that exactly what you said, the harm is to Texas. There is no harm to the, I mean, I will acknowledge harm to the cartels. I will acknowledge that they are being harmed. And it's true. We are harming the cartel. So that's what we're trying to attack. Harm to the drug industry, harm to the fentanyl pushers, harm to the drug traffickers, the human traffickers. Yeah. So yes, yes. Venezuela.

in public, in court anywhere, we are harming them. Yes. So that was the other question, and you just touched on it. How does a lower court usurp the Supreme Court? So they basically, the Supreme Court just put it back down to the Fifth Circuit and said, we're not, we're not going to undo the administrative stay of the stay. And so they left our law in place, but the Fifth Circuit still has control of the case right now because it's back down with them. And they can rule however they want and they can protect, you know, if they want to protect the cartels, they can protect the cartels.

It's within their power to do that. Another thing that happened overnight, and this is the first thing I was worried about. I saw this late last night. And then I saw, oh, well, we don't have to worry about that is. much as we do, maybe people inside our own country. The president of Mexico said, Texas isn't going to return anybody to the border of Mexico or fly them into Mexico, which made me think of the 18,000 people that we finally got out of Afghanistan. We were thwarted by the Department of State every day, all the time, several times a day. We had a plane with refugees in the air

and we had a place to land. Another country had already okayed it, and the State Department called and said, we can't vouch for that plane, so I wouldn't allow it to land. And they stopped us from flying any place. Can the governments do that to Texas? It seems wrong to me.

I mean, we also have this case in Supreme Court just knocked out our, we had an injunction from the Fifth Circuit that stop, you know, the 30,000 people that they're flying in. Flying in from Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Venezuela. So 30,000 a month are being flown in. We're paying for it. The state, the country is paying for this.

The Biden administration is paying for. It's completely illegal. And we had an injunction to stop it in the Supreme Court just literally, like, I think it was a week ago, got rid of our injunction. So now those 30,000 people don't even have to the end of the border. We're paying for them to come to the country illegally. I can't make this stuff up. I don't, yeah, I don't know.

I'm trying to figure out the distinction between an injunction and a stay. Okay. What the difference is there, but. It's all, I'm sorry, it's all, it's language that it, that they use. No, I know. We had an injunction stopping the Biden administration from importing 30,000 people a month from those four countries, the four I mentioned. And the Supreme Court, six to three, said no. The injunction goes away, go back and litigate this case.

So here we are. We now have 30,000 people a month. We can't stop it until we get through this case, which is going to take us, you know, who knows how long. So every month, 30,000 more we're paying for this are going all over the country from those four countries I mentioned. And then on top of that, now Texas has an injunction, stopping us from enforcing our own laws, protecting our own. protecting our state from illegal immigration. So it's very frustrating because it seems like it's, even when we get rulings that allow us to go back to court, they're the rulings that allow it to take years.

And so, you know, a year goes by and another 300,000 people fly across the border. They don't even go to border patrol anymore. They just fly in. Ken, I'm sure you know this because you live in Texas as well. You know, there's an old saying, don't mess with Texas. And, you know, fortunately or unfortunately, whichever way you want to look at it, a lot of Texans mean that. And a lot of Texans are seeing this as an invasion, and they're seeing this out of control government, you know, doing exactly what you just said and destroying us, intentionally poisoning us. And there's a lot of Texans that I think are, you know, kind of up to here.

How do we diffuse this back and forth? How do we diffuse it so it just doesn't get to a boiling point that you can't turn down? Look, I mean, all we can do. I have lawyers. People all the time say, why don't you do more? I'm like, well, the legislature gives me lawyers. I don't give me tanks or anything else. So I just go and fight where I can fight.

I think eventually if you have such disdain, if the federal government has such disdain, for the law and the Constitution. Then eventually the people have a right to say, no, we're not putting up with this anymore. And the Declaration of Independence is clear on that. These rights are inalienable. They're from God. They're not from Joe Biden.

They're not from Donald Trump. They are inalienable. And we have a right to those rights. And eventually the people have to find a way to overcome that. And what that is, I don't know. But hopefully the next election will speak to that. And those rights will start being honored as fundamental rights to human beings. That is one of the most amazing statements I think I've ever heard from a government official.

I hope the next election with you. I hope the next election solves these things because we're in constitutional crisis after constitutional crisis. We are on our way. If we're not there now, we don't have a constitutional crisis. we don't have a constitutional republic. If the rule of law and the Constitution can be put aside, set aside, and flip to mean anything that, you know, a few justices think it means, and they can dishonor fundamental rights that were guaranteed in our Constitution, then now we're back to the Declaration of Independence.

And that is a big place to be, as you know. Yeah. Ken Paxton, God bless you, thank you. We'll pray for your win today. God bless. Thank you. The Attorney General of the great state of Texas, why do I feel like history? We just lived history. Please pray for peace.

Please pay for, pray for peace. Just on your knees, beg. Welcome to board of Via Rai. Embarked and profited. And I'm Marqued and celebrated. Rigolet. Publiere.

Savoray. Admire. And profite. Via Raille. The voice that we love that we love that we