Idaho and the Firing Squad

The grill is shot. The chairs are held together by optimism. And what happened to the rug? Sounds like your outdoor setup is not ready for patio season Fix it all with Wayfair, Shop Wayfare for grills, rugs, furniture, and more. With twenty million five star reviews, room of choice delivery, and experts set up on qualifying orders, it's never been easier to do more for less. Get ten percent off your first eligible purchase. Hurry to wayfair dot com or download the app now. Wfair We'll get to more on this in a moment. First, a lot of people assume investing is really complicated. like you need a finance degree or a lot of money need to constantly watch the markets. The reality is for most people, the biggest challenge is not understanding every detail,'s simply getting started in the first place. This is why accorns exists. Acorns is the financial wellness app designed to help give your money a chance to grow. You can sign up in minutes and automatically invest spare money, even if all you've got is spare change. What I find interesting is Acorn's potential screen It helps illustrate the power of compoundsing over time, but you see how changes to your investing habits today could impact your financial future down the road Acorns is built for people at every stage, whether you're just getting started, building toward a major goal or thinking about the future. Sign up right now. Acorns will boost your new account with a five dollarars bonus investment. Join the over fourteen million all time customers who've already saved and invested over twenty seven billion dollars with acorns, head to accorns dot com slash shapro or download the accorns app to get started. Pay nine clientss endorsement compensation provides incentives positively grow accorns share to compensation provided, potential subject, various factors, such as customers, accounts, age and investment settings, does not include accorn's fees, results do not predict or represent the performance of any accorn's portfolio, and investment results will vary. invest involves risks. Acorn's advisors, LLC and SEC registered investment advisor re view important disclosures at accorns dot com slash shapiro So what was your reaction when FIFA tried to steal that World Cup game away from us? Yeah, no, I mean, I've been obviously watching the coverage for, you know, I can't even sleep. I'm so because Pelle, right was kicking it with his head I tell you, man, I am so Black pilled that Americans are taking soccer seriously. We're taking it seriously because we're finally good at it. Yeah, I think. I don't want us to be good at it. I don't want us to play goodule know this is a good rule. It's your being American already. I. It' a poverty ball. I hate this freaking sport. It sucks. It's third world, it's gay and I don't like it. U I mean, but if we get good at it, then it's the most important sport. That's the way I see it Yeah. No I look I feel the same way. I feel the same way about like the Olympics. I just want America to be the best at everything. I want us to kick everyone's ass. Do you want us to be the best at transgender ballet USAID was funding that in the Philippines. Should we let's say they start a transgender ballet league and America joins. we want to be the best or the worst I want to be the worst than that Yeah, I mean, now we get to the question whether soccer is inherently immoral, Michael. Yeah. And's inherently immor. I'm not going that I'm not quite there, though I'm close. It's that I find it inherently Well, it was the most corrupt sport. I mean by bizar. Is't that I actually know., I mean, I mean, they're ls out of the tournament now. I mean, that's's happening oney percent the most corrupt sport.ur best Our best scorer was just red carted for legitimately no reason because FIFA decided that it's impossible for the United States to essentially make the quarter. So that's that's right am I get this right then. This is the other thing is it's like it does seem annti Americ. I'm N not even just intrinsically in the sport. I mean, like the people who play it and FIFA and whatever, they don't seem to be super pro America. And also if we're going to have a world championship, I want it to be like baseball where we where we just declare what the world is. L we do the worldies there's This is see this is this is is someone who should be Big fan. of soft power The World Cup here in America has been The biggest soft power export of American value that I've seen in years, in decades. All these people are going to go back home and demand of their politicians. Why don't we have air conditioning? Why don't we have showers that work? Why don't we have all these things? This World Cup has gone so well and all of these foreign fans who came over have been so impressed by all the different aspects of it they're going to go back home and export American values and capitalism and say, what are we doing like living the way that we currently live when we've seen the way that people live in America? We've somethingl something that's great. Yeah, and it doesn't require any more money for the Pentagon. Yeah, No look, I actually that's that's the best argument to watch soccer that I've ever heard in my entire life and ever will hear. The fear, of course, with all of this cross cultural pollination is that, you know, is it us exporting our soft power or are we just importing third worldism and, you know, this kind of lame sport? But to your point, yes, people are talking about buuckies, they're talking about Wafflehouse, they're talking about ranch dressing. And did you see they the guy Freddy is apparently going to the White House? Well, so he was invited. Here's the thing with Freddie, and I don't know if youve followed this. We've been paying attention to it on the opinion side. The backlash against him on the internet has been insane because basically people dug up some vaguely right of center things that he might have tweeted out in the past and and things that you know, they've gone after him basically as being someone who clearly is wants to stay sort of, you know, he hasn't shown his face. He wants to stay have some degree of anonymity and to like be normal when he gets back from this.. Probably never had any expectation of going viral. But I also think It's phenomenal in the sense that like all these different people, he is one of many and there are so many people who are going to go back and I think you know import the values that we still have here in this country that are good and are valuable back. I think that this has been one of the best things that we could possibly do in America's two hundred fifteth. and I did not expect that. I honestly thought it could be a complete crap show but it turns out to be great. Yeah, okay, look, you have done more to convince me to like soccer than anyone has ever done. You donon't have to watch it. and I'm not saying you have to watch it. You know what I want to Oh, first of all, I guess I should say, it's friendly fire.. The fourourth of July is coming up So we're all getting ready to celebrate Somalia Independence Day in Columbus, Ohio. I don't know if anyone's going to make the trek out there, but do you guys, do you have any big fourth of July plans mightight have Yes, That's like that's a natural thing. Ben We are right on the verge Yeah, know we are right on the verge of baby time. I thought one of the reasons that I can't stick around for the entire broadcast is you can hear my voice is totally gone. The reason my voice is totally gone is because like two nights ago, my wife started having contractions about twenty minutes apart and we thought for sure, it was time to go to the hospital. And that lasted until about two o'clock in the morning at which point it debated. So I was so short on sleep that it totally breacked my voice But yeah, I mean, any moment and I've had a deal for twenty years with my wife whichich is that if the baby is born between july second and july fourth, any year, but particularly into two fifty year, then I get to use a founding father name. So this is like so this is this is exciting. So Governor, I assume, or are you going fllyactly what the options are? Governor Morris, yeah, Governor Moris is going be We're going Yeah, exactly But there's some good ones to some good ones to choose from. Jefferson Shapiro sounds kind of wild, but there's some possibilities that I think well Charles Charles Carrool Shapiro, that could be a good Dude, if your kid is born on the fourth of July, that in the two fiftieth, that would be. It's like Pidence, you know, Providence has its ways. God has its way in history, has his way rather. Okay. No, well then if I only have you for like five seconds, what I am told on this schedule that we have to talk about And I actually do want to talk to you about is I was just in DC. I'm not totally on baby Watch yet. but the reason I look terrible and sounds only slightly better is because I've been traveling all over. We were in DC I was already going for the unveiling of this statue of my great, great, great, great, great Gamppa Simon Knowles, part of the American Revolution displays. And then I was stopping by the great American State fair, play the yes or no game. But then at the last minute, the vice president was able to make some time. He actually gave us a whole hour. to interview him at his book and I ran and twenty twenty and the Democrats and all this stuff. And so did you Ben I don't want to presume, didid you catch any of the interview Yeah I did. I caught much of the interview actually. I thought you did a good job. It was really interesting interview.. Obviously. I have significance disagreem to the Vice President on a wide variety ofsues, as we've discussed on the program you know, I thought that the to me, the the kind of bizarre fixation that the Vice president has on'm criticizing people who are mad at the MOU is, I think unbecoming for him. He's far more critical of the people who are critical of the MOU than he is the people who have been legitately undermining the war and siding with Iran the entire time whichich I find bizarre. But obviously, listen, he's really well spoken. he's very smooth. Yeah, and I thought you did a goodob the interview. No than you. appreciate. know it's funny, It'sny that you mention that the criticism of criticizing the people who criticizing MOU because I did even when he was talking about that, I wanted to clarify. I said, hold on, you're talking about the people who are upset about the war not continuing versus you know it's unclear which critics he was talking about. but he made that clear. My take on it is that the media at least, I don't know if it's really the addmin as much, but the media at least have made him kind of the face of the MOU. And so criticism of the MOU is often seen as criticism of him, even though obviously look it's I, listen, I'm criticizis him directly for the MOU. I mean I'm not going put on the media. I've criticized the president for signing it. But JD Vance made himself the face of this. He personally negotiated it. He continues to personally do press On behalf of an MOU that is currently falling apart not just in the Strait of Horm Mz, but also because an actual good peace plan has been put forward in Lebanon, which runs directly against the MOU. You know Van Vance's approach, which has been to essentially take sort of an Obama esque tack with regard to opponents of the MOU. all they want is endless war. They just want endless bombing. That's what they're promoting And we've discussed this on the show multiple times on friendly fire. like what would alternatives be? I mean, one alternative would be just to walk away from the strait and not hand them things. Another alternative would be to bomb Har Island and provide as much aerial defense for the Saudis, Bahrain and UAE as possible, and basically destroy the Iranian economic capacity from this point forward. Another possibility would be to essentially arm up all of our allies and then attempt to actually project into the Strait of Hormuz. And if the Saudis don't like it, tell the Saudis to stick it. right? Project freedom is something that the president wanted to do. And the Saudis apparently said, no, I have never and will never understand the idea. that if we are funding and paying for a base in Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia gets to tell us what to do with that base. That's insane to me. I think that we should tell the Saudis, listen, we're paying for your defense. All your F thirty five s belong to us Right Now we're trying to protect you from your moral nemesis in Iran. If we feel like opening the straight using bases that we are supplying staffing and running Then we're just going to do that. But in any case, those are all, I think, fair critiques of the MOU without reference to eternal war, forever war. And I don't like the dumbed down version of this politics that sounds very much like Barack Obama's defense of the JCPLA, where Obama would say, if you oppose the JCPLA, it's because you want a forever war with Iran, or you want a nuclear war with Iran or you want to obliterate Iranian civilization or anything like that. I get the criticismpid Isn't it in the context of not just the GOP, but in the context of Trump A criticism of endless war is not just Oamian, you know, Obamaian. It's also Trumpian. You know Trump in twenty sixteen, one of his big breaks with the rest of the GOP is he criticized George Bush for endless wars and specifically Iraq So isn't when the vice president comes out and uses that language, that seems to me to be very much in line with Trump. Well the probably Michael the tr firstirt of the and Michael are Hold on like. I actually I've not had the time to watch the interview yet I have to ask you Did you ask the Vice president about his criticism of me personally? Did he criticize you When he went on Meghgan Kelly, Megan Kelly read him a list of things that had been said about the MOU by some people, by Mark Levin, by others, but then one of them was for me That was what led into him saying all these people just want to keep the war going on forever. They want to keep bombing until all the Iranians Really? as someone to get the rid someone opposed the Iraq warar, the Iraq warar that, by the way Tons of people supported, including his old boss, David Frum, who was calling people like me unpatriotic conservatives at the time that we opposed the Iraq warar I think it's really I think it's unfortunate And I think it's beneath him to suggest that people like me who do not, in fact, I've been you, really do want to just walk away from this thing. think this deal is bad. Don't want to hand the Iranians any money wantant to keep bombing until all the Iranians are dead That I didn't realize, I think Ben, I think you might have frozen up a little bit. I don't I don't think that the u You know, it wouldn't have been great to bring up that question had I known about it. In fact I think to get the real ratings up, I should have had you walk out from the back like, Well we have him here, Ben Dominic. you are the father. That's wow that's have you have the could you have the glass shattering sound before I walk out? I just think I just think that I have to agree with with Ben. I think that he's it's unfortunate that he's using that argument because there's a lot of us who back the president who think that he did something that was bold here, who just don't like the nature of this deal And who certainly don't want to keep bombing the Iranians forever. Are you kidding? What I'm Ben our other pal Ben on here just said he did want to keep bombing the Iranians. No, I actually nothing, nothing that I just implied actually said Carg Island. none of which none of which bombing Bombing Carg Island is not bombing forever every Iranian is dead.ing. I'm not saying every Iranland Well, hold on Karg Island is a small island off the coast of Iran with a completely military population. It would take presumably about three B two sorties to finish Karg Island, and then you would never have to go there again. That doess not sound like an endless bombing of Iranist's resulting in the death of ninety billion citizens to me. I might be getting that wrong, but I'm not sure that's how bombs work. No I'm not saying L look, I don't know. I actually didn't even hear the Vice presresident's comments about, you know destroying all this. I guess President Trump did say he was going to destroy the whole civilization. But I didn't hear that. you one threaten to do it. I didn't threaten it neither dominant. But yeah, there you go. No I just mean the issue here with the MOU, I think everybody can agree and I predicted this from the beginning that if we did end this with a deal the deal would be deeply dissatisfying. So I don't think anybody disagrees on that. But it just seems like right now we have a couple of options, which is either, maybe there's a third, but you get some version of the MOU Or you get some version of continuing to bomb them and fire missiles at them Or you, you could walk away, but now you're walking away with Iran in control of the Strait of Hormuz. So now you're in a much worse position. And they're effectively in controled and strait anyway. Honestly, I'm of the opinion that'd be better off walking away from the Strait of Hormuz completely, retaining the sanctions replace That' right. I mean like replace the MOU with a ham and cheese sandwich. Yeahe. Exactly I agree with that. And So that was one issue that I had with what the vice president was saying. The other one was, of course, the vice presresident's bizarre attack on Milton Frieman' eonomics, as though Milt Fedeman's ecom stopped applying in the nineteen eightyies for some unspecified reason because a clip. I think I was nineteen reed Rom Navarum, which means that now Milton Friedman is irrelevant, which is a strange timeline since it turns out that he wrote that after Rum Navvarum, but you know h here's clip for those who didn't see Part of why Milton Friedman's ideas made more sense in the nineteen eighties is because they were being advocated in a country that still had a very rich and powerful institutional Christianity And so Be laazse fair in a world where there are Christian guardrails on everything Yeah is a much different proposition than being laisse faire in a world where globalized liberalism has become the sort of status quo of American elites Okay. so I'm not sure I disagree with that Yeah. there we go. I mean right. I I I don't I don't think he's wrong there. I think I think that one of the problems that we've known about when it comes to American capitalism is that We didn't just import. televisions for people to watch. We didn't just import, you these different goods from around the world that people enjoy here in America. We also imported a lot of their values with it unintentionally, we thought that this was going to change China, but it changed us. And it's one of these things that I think is sort of an underestimated aspect of it. You need kind of both of these things to have a really strong nation That doesn't make Milton Friedman's approach wrong. It means that we need a religious revival in America, which is what I have argued consistently with my atheist libertarian friends. You guys should be the biggest fans of like Rick Santorum or you know, pick your pick Mike Huckabee, what have you, religious revivalism because you need that strength of society and family and everything else that goes with it in order to have the type of laissez Faire free nation that we've enjoyed for centuries. Ben, other Ben you totally disagree Well so I agree obviously that church is very, very important. I mean, I've spent my entire life preaching in favor of the idea that people need to go to church. And obviously church membership was higher in the nineteen eighties than it is now. I mean, if we're going to get factual about this, the reality is that church attendance in America really started to decline around the year two thousand. That's really when things started to drop fairly precipitously as late as nineteen ninety nine, seventy percent of people adults or members of a church synagogue, a church or a synagogue in the United States. But the idea that the fundamental basis of economics changes because of church attendance and therefore what you need is government to somehow come in as the centralizing force that's going to reinculcate a common good. So welfare programs or redistributionism or government regulation are going to reinculcate virtue in the American population. It seems to me that if we are going to look at a correlation, The growth of government since the nineteen sixties has been exponential. The attendance in church has dropped radically in that same exact period. In fact, I think you can make the very strong case that actually one of the reasons for attendance declining in church and church membership declining is government actually replacing the functionality of church in everyday life for people. L this totally the other thing I to say social security is that you know, if the government social security, you don't take care of granda and she doesn't live in your house If you I don't have to give as much charity through my church or be a member of my church or engage in the values of my church in order to gain access to all of the institutional support of the church in order to just go pick up a check from the government. And so this bizarre attempt to sort of reverse engineer virtue via government fiat, government ddistributionism, and centralization of economic resources, it's completely backward to me just I think when you have that dollar sign as like the primary motivation in your life too, that also allows for the type of lies to emerge that build off of that social security experience that all of these socialists, who I know we're going to talk about later, can exploit because everything becomes just a monetary issue. It's all about, you know, who gets the money, who's scrabbling over this piece of the pie. And there is no kind of shared communitarian value that brings people together and that says,, just think about something as simple as the cost of childcare in America when we have gone from an era in which you know relatives and friends and you could have trust teenagers that you could trust to watch your kids and not just have their nose in their phones. L that's something that definitely we have lost here in the recent decades And it's a major problem. And I think that it's one of the reasons why all these people are able to exploit a message of anti capitalism to a bunch of dumb people who don't understand that it's what made the country as powerful as it was in the first place.ure. But also when we talk about the growth of government, I agree with a lot of those observations. But we can't only think about it from a quantitative perspective There is also a qualitative perspective. In some ways, in the earlier parts of our country, we had a much bigger government role than we do today when we were prosecuting blasphemy. when we at the very least, when we had blue laws that said you couldnt know you couldn't sell goods on Sundays or you know it restricted the sale of liquor or what have you. So in some ways, we had a much bigger government then Since the sixties, obviously, you've had this massive growth in the welfare state, but you've also had court rulings that have said the government has to pull back on certain moral matters. So I think there's a qualitative aspect there too. So Michael, I agree with a lot of that actually. but that's not what the Vice presresident iss suggesting. He's not suggesting a return of blue laws and blasphemy laws. he's suggesting massive governmental intervention in the economy And that reverses the arrow of causality. So I think that you can make a very solid historical case that church arrow capitalism because that's actually true. I mean, the reality is that market capitalism in the West was actually an outgrowth originally of property rights rooted in sort of Catholic perceptions of property, and then later adrated by Protestant perceptions of the value of free markets, capitalism, innovation and work ethic. right? I mean, that's Max Faber. And so can you can say these institutions preceded capitalism, which clearly is true But I don't think that you can then say the Marxist thing and it actually is a Marxist idea that economics precedes social institutions. And so what if we just change our economic system and then people go back to church? That's. There are I think we can say that political communities precede some social institutions or cocident with them. And so you the way and you can't really firmly separate politics from economics, though maybe the Marxists would like to focus much more on the material and the economic. But the juxtaposition that the vice presresident is making here is not between Milton Friedman and Carl Marx. it's between Milton Friedman and the economics of Alexander Hamilton. Last I checked, Hamilton precededes Milton Friedan. to d D D Friedman, I like a lot about Friedman. but you there are some things that seem to be important for the government to take on, namely, under a totally laisis faire system, which developed under the name of neoliberalism in the last forty, fifty years, we've outsourced a lot of our manufacturing or supply chain to a degree that means that we are now very, very vulnerable to China. If we ever were to go to a serious war with China We would be really up the creek without a paddle. We saw a preview of that during COVID. So that might suggest that maybe the government could focus in a Hamiltonian way on the development of industry in the United States. actually not in a dangerous. Hamiltonian argument on a national security level is something that I've actually agreed with and it makes sense to me. I think that he's using what we would call in law school an argument that proves too much. He's basically saying that because man you're taking key industries and outsourcing them, therefore the government should be in control of an enormous swath of American industry that has nothing to do with national security or just call it national security and stuff it under that rubric. And I think that that's totally wrong. And when he talked about Alexander Hamilton, I can guarantee you this The idea that Alexander Hamilton would have been in favor of the kinds of nationalization schemes full scale that are being contemplated or the gigantic welfare state that has been built, or the gigantic administrative and regulatory state is totally insane. What Alexander Hamilton was stumping for in a national bank was the idea that America ought to be able to pay its collective debt. That is the thing that he was attempting to craft an institution to do. right? The entire purpose of the national bank was basically to uphold the solvency of the United States because the United States kept blowing out a bunch of meaningless paper notes. And so now, if you're talking about consolidation under a single institution, you may notice that the main concern of Alexander Hamilton, which was that our good faith and credit be good is being undermined by the very institutions that Jadie Vance is calling to expand becausecause the full faith and credit of the United States is not being put at risk by paper speculators in South Carolina. It's being put full by, the United States being put at risk B yes, by Congress and by the Federal Reserve and and by the Secretary of the Treasury, and by blowing out money at an exorbitant rate unsupportable and unprecedented in all of human history. Yeah, listen, I'm all for reigning back Congress. I think that long precedes the Trump administration, certainly. But you know even to one last point if Freedeman, and then right before I know I have to let you go, but I do want to talk about Tucker's new political party But one last point of Friedman, let's not forget During the very height of Milton Friedman's influence, which is a relatively recent innovation in American history, you also had no less a free trader than Ronald Reagan prrotecting US steel. Was he really doing that for national security purposes? Harley Davidson's agriculture. You know, you had George W. Bush, for example, protecting industries. You know, so you can trace protectionism back to Alexander Hamilton to George It'srecedented It's just dumb. It's preceded it's just dumb. It was not a good idea in the eighties. wasn't a good idea when Geor W. Bush did. It'sum idea now unless you're doing it for national secur reasons. Okay, now before I let you go The B news, maybe I actually don't think it's that big news, but Tucker ag Tucker left the GOP. He's starting a new political party. It's going to be a non interventionist, America first reform political party. And whereere have I heard of that before? It's not Wh. Can I just ask which version of Tucker is this party Like like I mean he contains multitudes. You know, he is legion. you know, But it does look. I mean, you look back It's a funny quest But but there's a real answer to it. I think the real answer is Pap, you can' Right? am I misreading that? Yes. I that's right. That's right. It's like the Papuuch Can version of their reformign Party in two thousand where Pap Buchannan won.o point four percent of the vote, but just enough in Florida to cast the presidency to George W. Bush. That's his only role in history, Pap Buch Cannan. the idea, first of all, it's not true. Okay Tucker saying he's launching a third party. He's not doing any of this shit. But let's explain exactly what Tucker is doing here. What Tucker is doing here is he iss blackmailing the Republican Party into embracing his positions by claiming that he's going to posit a threat to the Republican Party from the outside. So what you actually have right now is Tucker trying to run a quasi DSA play Esentially, he's looking in twenty twenty six twenty twenty six is going to be a disaster area for Republicans. Right now, Republicans are running dead even or behind in all six of the various states in which they have races up to and including Iowa, Texas and Alaska. Yeah ye. Tucker is looking at that. He is hoping. He wants the Republicans to get their asses kicked because then what he's going to say is the reason that they got destroyed is because they didn't cater to people like me And me sitting outside here with my non existent third party. if only they'd engaged with me, If only they'd come back to me, then they would have won. And so it's basically a blackmail play. and it's smart,'s smart. But the idea that Tucker Carlson, who, again, says in that same interview that he has no attention span and is widely known in the media as one of the lazier members of the media that the Tucker is going to sit there with the actual nuts and bolts of building a ground up political party based on the pretensions of Thomas Massey, Marjorie Tayor Green and Joe Kent.. Good luck. I mean, listen, my dream is that he starts a third party. I would love for Tucker Carlson to start a third party because then we could have a clear referendum on the stupidity of his ideas. But instead what he's going to do is not that. What he's going to do is he's going to falsely claim that twenty twenty six happened not because it was an off year election, not because Trump was unpopular in a wide variety of issues, but because Tucker Carlson personally was displeased with Donald Trump's policy on Iran and Epstein and all the rest. And therefore, the only way to assure Republican victory going forward is to put Tucker Carlson in the driver' seat of the party and obviously Tucker is very much aligned with JD Van. So I think that's the political movie he's making here. You know, it didn't I could sense that this was just a replay of the Reform Party, especially the two thousand Pat Buchan version. Tucker himself. Can I disagree for a second? I've met Pap Buchanan. I know Pap youuchanon Tucker's Patyanon. Paty Cannon is smarter than Tucker. He's more consistent than Tucker. He is a more disciplined speaker than Tucker. I still think that his nineteen ninety two convention speech was one of was something that preage. It is essential viewing for anyone to understand American politics. And by the way, while being referred to as a culture war speech, it is mostly about economics. It not is about crrime, economics and working class issues. and then they they did this whole revisionist history where it was like, oh, no, he came in and destroyed HW's chances for reelection by turning it into this, you know, election that was going to be about abortion and gays and stuff like that. The truth is that I think that you have to understand you need to understand Papy Cannan in order to understand politics, I'm not sure you need to understand Tucker and I'm not sure it's possible to understand him just given how crazy he's been in the last couple of years. No, it's an interesting point. and I guess I mean, if If the roadmap for the new Tucker partarty or in Ben'sview, not like kind of fake out party is just, okay, I'm going to do what Pat Buchanan tried to do in two thousand then you could, I mean, even to your point, Ben where you saw, I don't compare Tucker to Papy Kenning to say, well, if if you're just going to replay the same script, then you know, one It can only happen first one time And to your point, other Ben. I really this is very annoying, you know, having the only other two guys on the show. Anyway, it to your point, it like it didn't work out. He got point We'll figure this out eventually. Yes. But it it actually had not occurred to me I can't read Tucker when he does these things that are really out there and I can't some people in politics, I can read them like an open book, Tucker, I couldn't figure out exactly what he was getting at here. But sociology is very, very difficult to understand. I think your read on that is probably right. I don't Tucker's too smart to want to start another political party and he doesn't just by the way, there there is our sponsors at Calcii have a market on Tucker running for president in twenty twenty eight himself Uh and I guess it's currently around the twenty five percent something like that. Yeah and I would short no way. I would short that abbsolutely. I def not have the discipline He does not have the discipline to start a political party. He does not definitely doesn't have the discipline to run for president. All right, That's not going on that I guess no one here is joining the Tucker Party. No one you're not neither of you are signing up. Okay That's fine. But Ben you are signing out. You got you're on baby watchatch. That's awesome. Everybody keep Ben and M in your prayers. If your kid is born on fourth of July, I'm going to have severe Birthday envy But it would be very cool. And I look forward tonornor Governor Shapiro coming up. Good to see you soon. Thank you much. Now all of you, folks, the Declaration of Independence names three rights, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness Notice that order. L comes first because without it, the other two mean nothing. The founders understood this. and yet every day in America, unborn babies are denied that first and most basic right. Preborn exists to change that I love Freeborn. It is a wonderful ministry. It is one of my very favorite nonprofit organizations. I personally support it. I encourage you to give whatever you can. And they're so good. They even fundraise for their administrative costs elsewhere. so every dollar you give is going towards saving babens. you have twenty eight bucks It buys an ultrasound A mother who sees her baby on ultrasound for the first time is eighty percent likely, more likely to choose life. It is one of the best RIs you're going to get in honor of America's hundred fifetthirthday' asking our friends to prayerfully consider a special gift of two hundred and fifty dollars to multiply your impact and help save even more lives Right now donate Now pound two hundred fifty, say keyword baby. That's pound two fifty keyword baby or go to preborn. com slash Kns, preborn. com slashns. every gift is tax deductible, preborn. com slash Ks We have Cabot Oh we do. We do. cab it. What's up? But now it'sess confusing because there's only one b. Thank goodness. That was driving me nuts, man.'ve I've only worked in media for like ten or fifteen years. I couldn't I couldn't think got We gota be Th thing one and Th two or something like that. I mean. So all right, Kevin, we already covered my interview with the Vice President and Iran and Tucker's new political party, which I heard you just joined. But now I want to talk about the DEems. Do the midterms stand Yeah, it's been really interesting I think given the last three or four months, you would have expected Republicans to have lost a ton of ground on the generic ballot with regard to the midterms. But if you actually look back the week before the war in Iran started, Democrats were at like forty seven and a h fivef percent, Republicans in the high forty three s Despite the last three or four months of inflation going back up and the war getting worse and people not being happy with the war once it ended, Democrats have only gained about half a percent in the generic ballot. and so I'm still maybe delusionally optimistic that given the Given the lack of momentum for the Democrats, given the apparent ceiling that we're seeing, given these new socialist candidates that are going to give the Republicans people to point to and make this race about, that things maybe won't be as bad as a lot of Republicans are racing for. I'm always the delusional optimist though. But yeah, that's what the big thing is just these socialist races are going to do to the midterms more broadly. And we talk about that a lot on my new show Wired in, which we filmed right on the set, which Ben Dominich has been on about half a dozen times and Michael Knowles What did I gota do to get you back?? I did it. No, I did it once And I got I don't know, I felt too intimidated. You on that nice big set. I kind of felt like you were set and suit moggging me. so I don't know. Maybe I'd like to come back now that we're in the heat of midterm season, and you point out, you got all these socialists, but you're too rosy about it. Ben, can you please bring us down to Earth Yeah, so I actually think that this midterm is going to be terrible for Republicans. and I think that They are likely to still hold the Senate But that's still, I think, something that is a lot closer than anyone expected it to be just given the map some of the decisions that they've made have made this a lot riskier. We saw that New York Times poll, for instance, that has Ken Paxton tied with James Halerico something along the lines and of these Supreme Court cases that just came down they they benefit Talerico because Paxson is going to have to lean hard on the birthright citizenship. question. he's going to have to support whatever the Republicans coalesce around in response to that Talorico gets to punt on the transgender sports question because he can basically say Texas decided not to have men and girls sports and I agree with them and that's going to be fine. and I have nothing to do with that as a center And the problem that really shows in that poll is and it's been apparent across multiple polls actually, is that Paxon is losing Hispanics to Talo Rico dramatically So you don't have the same type of situation that you had with Ted Cruz, for instance, just two years ago. Now that doesn't mean that I don't think Paxton's going to win. I actually do think he's going to win. But the amount of time that's going to be spent backing someone like him, the amount of money that's going to have to go into a state that should have been safe That's stuff that comes away from other states that are much riskier. Democrats are also trying to play fast and loose in a bunch of these situations. We've seen them do it before, you backing independent candidates in certain sensenes. In Alaska, they actually put a guy with the same name as Dan Sullivan on the ballot, which is pretty ridiculous. The one thing that I do think though, that we should keep in mind is The Democrats lost this redistricting war And so in a lot of these situations, these people are running in completely new districts. and the candidates, therefore, you can't rely on a one to one comparison compared to how they perform before because they have a different electorate that may not know them that has a new response to them I think the real question here is if the Democratic Party is able to basically pull the wool over the eyes of the independent voter say that these socialists that are confined to just these little spots in the country don't care about that. Don't look at that. know There is no man behind the curtain who believes in marks and anggeles. You know We are instead going to try to turn this into a situation where we are the party that's about affordability, that's about anti corruption that is anti war, that is you know, going to make your gas prices come down, et cetera, et cetera. They're gonna to try to run in that direction And I think Republicans are going run on crime and calling Democrats crazy It doesn't tend to be the kind of message that gets people out who aren't already going to vote for you. Wow, yeah. so it makes me even more upset about the Supreme Court decisions because the birthright citizenship one ultimately is much, much more important, I think than the Title IX decision, which seemed to actually in contradiction to Gorsuch's view from the Title seI decision I don't know, it seemed a little bit like they were kind of just following the headlines and the opinion polls. but regardless Birthright citizenship, that is a nation shaping, like Dmos shaping event. And so that's obviously terrible for Republicans, but at least we got the trans win, right? No, to your point, Ben, that takes the killer issue for the Dems, especially in places like Texas. I mean, that's Ted Cruz really wrecked Colin Al reed. when that race looked like it might be a little tightally He destroyed him on the trans sports issue. Now it's totally off the table It gives them it bails them out. And the last thing would just say about this is I think Republicans always miscalculate how much voters are actually paying attention to the craziest things that congressmen and in some cases, Senate candidates in Michigan and in Maine Senate candidates, or I'm assuming the craziest guy is going to win in Michigan they always kind of count on that. to help them across the country And I don't think that that's actually the way it works in midterms. It can help you when you're doing a national election in a presidential year, but it helps you less when it comes to these midterm elections because it is more localized and it's more about people's immediate concerns. And I think unfortunately, Republicans have been you they've been throwing rocks at each other here in Washington They can't get on the same page. White House and the Senatate are split, you know,, and all these different, you know, house things are shenanigans are going on. I just do not see a lot of signs that you know, this is going to be a good situation, you know for Republicans. I know that there's there's a Calcie market on this, of course, which party will win the U S. Senate that you can check out They're one of our sponsors, of course. And I think that this is a situation where The everything has tightened People are a lot more concerned about this than they were six months ago when Republicans were confident they were going to hold body it could end up being fifty fifty, in which case, JD Vance. Clear your schedule. You're gonna vote a lot. Ben, I agree with you that I think the average primary or the average midterm voter maybe isn't super aware of what Chevalier is doing or what Ky Ros in Colorado is doing. I do think that Democrat leadership is very aware of those people and they're very scared them. And we've started to see Democratic leadership Be forced to embrace them. We saw Kamala Harris this week come out and call Mom Donnie personally. She called a number of pro Palestinian groups. Please please do it. Please. we saw I saw Jie Britzker tried to run as a socialist. But we saw JB Britzker. I beg you Pritzritker do it. Pritzker went with CN. And he said, yeah, the strategy of these socialist candidates, he didn't fully endorse them. He said theirir strategy is one that's going to win in twenty twenty six and beyond. And so well, evenater, he has to say that so they don't kill him. Yeah. But my point is that I think that these candidates, while they might not have a huge impact on Senate voters in Texas They will have an impact on the broader perception of Democrats in that they're going to force Democratic leadership Do go further left for fear of being eaten, as you point out. Usually Pritzker' is the one doing the eating but in this case, he's the one It wasn't gonna say A lot for people to feed on that. But I think that's going to have an impact. I'm sure he lost all that weight naturally. Yeah. What I want to know about the DSA stuff, there was that poll that just came out that showed that rank and file Dems have a higher opinion of the Democratic socialists than they do of Democrats in Congress. And you think, well, all right, that's a low bar. Democrats in Congress aren't polling that well, but it's pretty scary that they the Democrat voter would today prefer the socialists who used to be this kind of fringe, weird young element of the party, even even six eight years ago to now they're polling higher than the Democrats in Congress. What does that tell you about the state of the party. To me when I got that news, It reminded me of what we saw after Charlie was killed, which is you know that itself was obviously a major personal trauma for a lot of people and a political trauma. And then there was this additional political trauma, which is that you found out twenty eight percent of young leftists agreed that it was okay and you it could be justified, and huge swaths throughout the mainstream left on television in office, they would all minimize or dismiss that killing. You say o, well, that's now a major political scandal. You're seeing, I don't know. you're just seeing a lot of evidence coming out that the Democrat Party, you look at the California state senators They just voted to allow child molesters to run for office. They voted down a measure that would keep them out of office. That was they more representation. They do. No, they do. I mean the headlines the headlines weren't even as bad as the reality. I mean speak for Epstein's Island. No The original thing that we were seeing in the headlines is Scott Weiener was the one who did this. And Scott Wiener is a total freak and a pervert a deviant, But it wasn't just him. like I wish it were just him. It's the mainstream deem. Most of the deems on this panel. So what does that say about the party? Can I just I'm going to vote a random guy on X who I think had a great explanation for this? Shout out to Roman helmet guy. America is a Latin American country now. So let me explain politics We elect communists to kill the rich Communism brings poverty and crime. So we like fascists to kill the communists, but then the fascists hand the economy to oligarchs. so we like communists to kill the rich. And unfortunately As someone who has been saying for a long time that I thought that American politics was starting to look more and more like Latin America, including, by the way, with Donald Trump You must, you know, elect the strong man, elect elect the man who is going to solve the problems, you know, kind of thing I think that that is unfortunately dangerously what we are setting up in this situation, which is take over prep it the Jenarian Democratic partarty that is out of touch with its most engaged activist voters and and it's going to, I think, completely reorient them. We saw this happen to a degree with the Tea Party, but the Tea Party Basically what happened was their ideas were subsumed into the Republican Party and the fundamental Republican kind of framework, that three legged stool that we have talked about to the Nth degree, that remained intact. It just was sort of a change in priorities Right But I don't think this is just a change in priorities. I think this is a change one of the American parties, and I think that unfortunately, capitalism may end up being a mono partartisan affair faster than we could even imagine. We've had this huge movement of rehabbing Richard Nixon's image and we've been Nixon maxing this summer. I think we might have to start pinochet maxing. We might have done. We might have to start did not wrong. Exactly. But on the topic of socialism, that poll of the number of Democrats that view socialism favorably I just can't help but think that that's more a reflection of their despair over the situation in America. They feeling that neither party is speaking for them. And to that point, I do think that A lot of people who are embracing socialism, while the ideas obviously are abhornt They're not all wrong in saying that they have reason to be angry with the way that they've been treated in the country, but I don't think that actually means what they necessarily think it means. L I don't think most of them would actually support the Democratic Socialist of America agenda. And to that point, if you actually look at the agenda, We know that the DSA supports, you universal healthca, universal child care and student loan forgiveness and amnesty. That's child's play compared to where the DSA platform actually is. So this month, they published their new, what they call it? the workers deserve more plan The official plan from the DSA includes abolishing the Senate defunding the entire war department, quote, replacing the president and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress The official DSA platform is do away with the White House, do away with the presidency, do away with the war Department. do away with the Senate, establish the third international. Yeah. Yeah, do away with the cops, do away with the border. I don't think that the average Democrat who says, yeah, socialism I do it favorably. I don't think they're supporting that. but that is what you'S say they are supporting a, can I ask you I assume you probably saw that viral clip of AOC responding to the question about You know, JD Vance says you would be a really competitive candidate, you know, if you ran for president and One of the things she says in that in that clip is about how people in her generation feel like they've been handed, you know, a bad situation by the people who came before too me That argument is the most powerful one that they have because it's true Because the simple fact is that the boomers are the greatest generation in terms of distribution to themselves. And there's a reason why we have the kind of resentment for a situation where They are still by far, even though they have continually shrunk, obviously as a generation, they own the most houses in America. They own the most property in America. They don't want to sell it, they don't want to know give it up. And so you have people who are trying to form families who have to live in apartments. And that's the kind of thing where That Resentment There's a core truth to it that I think Republicans have unfortunately failed to address. you know what I find unfortunate, The cabot's still on this show. So get out of here, you No, listen, you I know you all want more cabots. So whatever you do, make sure right now to go and subscribe to Cabot's new show wired in on Spotify or Apple podcasts that is the only way You will be sure to see Cabbot's return to this program. Cabot, any parting words Yes, please go watch wired in if nothing else. Just so that you can stick it to Michael M. Yeah he just had his big two thousandth episode We're on episode fifty and that's something worth celebrating. So, come join us live on Daily Wire four PM Eastern every Monday through Thursday. It's a lot of fun and we'll get Michaelnolles back on for the people. I'll do it, especially if you guys go over there en masse, then I'm going to have to go over there and say, Hey, I'm still here. Go, come on, Hey, watch me. That's wonderful. Cabot. Thankk you, as always, goodood to see you. I Now that we've just returned, it's just me and mister Dominich, I feel like I can rest easy. And if you want to rest easy, you need to go check out Hix. America turns two hundred fifty this week Which means it's been two hundred and fifty years since anyone in this country got a good night's sleep The founders ran a revolution on no rest at. George Whington crossed theelaw in the middle of the night. Those men had no choice. you do. between the kids, the show and everything happening in the country. A good night's restest is about the most patriotic thing I can think of. And for that, I thank our sponsor, Heles. I'm such a good I'm such a good dad I'm such a good father. I'm not a founding father, but I'm a father that I got both of my kids who were out of the crib Helix mattresses And you know what? I just for anyone who's gonna be a house guest of mine, I just ordered another Helix mattress for our guest room Ben, have you gotten a beautiful helix yet I do. I actually already had one before I joined the Daily Wire. I like it very much. In fact, it's my favorite mattress to sleep on, especially when my kid is trying to Wake me up at about three thirty in the morning and I'm trying to get my wife unsuccessfully to change his diaper instead of me. That's very fair. When you said it's my favorite mattress to sleep on, I think how many maybe I need to start a mattress maxing, mayaybe I need to get another one. Well with Helix, the prices are so good. you could get many. They have over twenty mattress models, whether you run hot, sleep on your side We need extra support. There's one built for you. They even offer cooling upgrades whichich in July is not a luxury, It's a necessity, especially if you live in Mum Donni', New York. It is the most b of mattress brand. eightges great. saw that seventy eight degrees. seventy eight degrees. cool. nice a nice and balmy night in New York. Go there right now Helixleep dot com it. You're going to love it. Hsleep d slash Daily wire twenty percent off site wide, twenty five percent off lux mattress, thirty percent off elite mattresses H helelixleep d. com slash daily wire. twenty percent off. The regular ones, twenty five percent off the luxe, thirty percent off the elite. Make sure you enter daily wire checkouts. they know we seent you at helelixy d.ot com slash Daily wire. There's one more thing I got to se. You got to sell it, Ben, sell it for me. Yeah. So the You know, you mentioned Washington crossing the Delaware. When Washington was crossing the Delaware, he understood the power of truth and the power of stories. And so he had literally being read to the troops in their boats when they were crossing the Delaware River in the middle of the night to do their famous raid that changed the course of history two hundred and fifty years ago. He had them reading the opening passage to Thomas Payne's American crisis which decries the summer soldier and the sunshine patriot We need more people than sumer soldiers and sunshine patriots. We need people who are engaged at this moment in our country and understand the crisis that we're in. And the way to understand that crisis is to subscribe to the Daily Wire pllus. We are so proud to bring you a new deal on the two hundred fiftieth anniversary of this country That is going to be a three month deal for seventeen dollars seventy six cents, sorry, that is going to offer you everything that the Daily Wire has to offer. It is everything. It's all of the documentaries. is you know it's all of the different historical truths, it's all of the different articles and pieces and things and content that we're rolling out documentaries, the whole enttertainment library, and we're going to be putting out a bunch of stuff this summer. so you definitely need to sign up for this. If you've been on the fence about joining, there's no better moment than on the nation's two hundred fiftieth birthday. dailywireplus. com go sign up Okay, can I actually be totally sincere and earnest, which I almost never am, certainly not on this show That was an inspiring ad read The summer soldier in suunshine Patriot, Washington G. That was a good Man, it was good I wanted to sign up. That was great. I really liked it. Okay. beforefore I let you go, Hey you got to look I'm not sure Tom Payne would would approve of me using its words to sell things, but I think it's actually true. I think that what the Daily Wire offers is the truth about history, the truth about who we are That's what Payne was offering those soldiers. They knew in that night how desperate they were they were really down to the end. and this was the kind of desperate brave heroic act And they could never have appreciated that they were in the midst of founding the greatest nation in the history of the world. And I think that that's something that we should appreciate now. and subscribing Daily Wire is you know the way I think that you can help appreciate it and understand it And you know what else, you know what we now know, thanks to historians, is that Thomas Payne slept on a helix mattress. So head on over to eight No, no he didn't. I don't think he actually did that. Okay. we are now bringing on The O Wald to talk about before we let all of you guys go The Supreme Court decisions, I want to go through them. We talked about the political implications a little bit, but I want to know about the decisions themselves and then also Idaho becoming the first U. S. state. to use firing squad for executions. Is the first US state ever or just we're bringing it back I don't know. I don't know. I'm not expert on that. I think that's a question for Theo. Theo, Theo There we go Yeah, it's good to be with you guys. And I just want to say Ben you know, Thomas Payne was a pamphate deer and a hustler. I think he would actually appreciate the sales pitch there That's make a bug. It literally was the original you know you know, I'm interested in your ideas and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. That'. So on the big case, on the one that really matters the most, on the birthright citizenship case, I never thought the court was going to go along with us out of cowardice. I thought there were good legal arguments and good historical arguments for the courts to go along with us, but I think the court is just institutionally cowardly. for good reason. The Democrats keep threatening to destroy them for almost a century now. But in terms of the actual Legal matters, what happens Yeah, I think all of that as preparatory comment, that's correct. I think anyone who listened to oral argument knew that both Justices Kavanaugh and ACB, Amy Coney Barrett were skeptical. That's probably the best way of putting it skeptical at best of John Sauer, the solicitor General, his arguments before the court I think the Robertss opinion, one way of sort of distilling this down, is to say it's essentially a discursive armchair historian's view of the fourteenth Amendment, but really rooted in Anglo common law. What is the notion of citizenship or subjecthood, more likely that was imported from Britain into the United States? And that's where he kind of hinges his entire argument. And I think Alito is right to say in his dissent And Thomas does the same, that Roberts really misses everything from the Declaration of Independence forward. And so you've got a very narrow reading of what citizenship requires Hadley Aris, you know, the famous natural rights theorist, he really pinpoints this line from Robert's opinion where Robert says, really what this is about is citizenship is the right to have rights which really would have struck the framers obviously as bizarre, but also the framers of the fourourteenth Amendment as bizarre So I think the majority opinion is trying to do a lot And what it's really trying to do to your point, Michael is to satisfy this question of what is the meaning of the fourteenth Amendment? What is the meaning of citizenship once and for all? And as we've seen over the last forty years, anytime the court tries to settle defefinitively, what is really at root something of a small pe political question The court ends up regretting it. You know just think of Planned Parenthood v. Kasey or some of these other sort of seminal cases where the court tried to say, no, this is the definitive answer for all time And I think the dissents from Thomas and Alito both get at this. that not only is it a wrongong reading of the fourteenth Amendment, but it's also a political mistake the court's making So Theo, I have a couple of questions about this. and I want to preface this by saying that I am someone who is for a very long time along with including hardline immigration, people like my friend Mark Katorian, supported birthrights citizens. reason that we support it is because we don't believe in having stateless children, and we believe that it's chaotic and we believe in Border control Immigration enforcement, the kind of things that prevent this from being exploited. But the situation that we face today is obviously dramatically different Th everything that we've seen even just a few decades ago, when it comes to the level of birth tourism, when it comes to the level of people who are ling to come here for a brief amount of time just in order to have a baby who can claim dual citizenship, who are exploiting generous Medicaid and other welfare programs in blue states, like this is a completely different scenario than we were in even fifteen, twenty years ago And obviously that includes the importation of untold millions during the Biden era The decision though to go with an EO that I know that you were, you know, obviously a key component of that, you know, is from you, I actually don't know how much of it you worked on or if you drafted the whole thing. But EO was always something that seemed to put in people's minds, this thing is going to get kicked out because it's not Congress. It's not something that has the backing of, you know, a partisan or potentially even a bipartisan. I think you might have gotten some Democrat randoms in the House that might have gone along with some kind of solution on immigration just based on where they are that tried to deal with this birthright question, which has loomed over us forever with all of these random decisions and no definitive answer. I think Robert's opinion crap I think it's just like ridiculous. But I also think that this outcome is one that most Americans are just kind of to kind of shrug at, unfortunately Do you think that it was a wrong decision? do this via executive work Yeah, I mean, so the executive order project that I worked on in ' forty five, you could probably say it was much more about nipping and tucking and really getting at those four categorical exemptions that Roberts kind of dismisses out of hand and says that's a closed universe, right Native American one of the reason convoys or ammbassadors. Y. R. Exactly Really trying to hone in on is that the defined space here or is there more sort of elasticity in the joints, if you will, because of the new situation we face with the millions of birth tourists in Miami or southern California, you know, the false asyle claimants, et cetera. So I think the idea of tackling this through executive order and I'll note, executive order alone Right? This could have always been will tracked with a statutory effort in Congress from the word go back in January of twenty five. I think the idea of pushing this solely through executive order, it wasn't just Roberts and ACB who were uncomfortable with that. Obviously, Kavanaugh notes that in his opinion with the existing statutute from the nineteen. would have gone And I think both Alito Yeah, and I think both Alito and Thomas both are kind of you know, the idea that you could do this exclusively through unilateral executive power makes them uncomfortable. So I think that was also a mistake here and especially a mistake in that I don't think it teed up to your point, Ben. I don't think it teed up in a neat way, the larger political discussion we need to have, what was missing was exactly what Alito said in his dissent, which is, you know how have this very weird scenario where legal immigrants coming to the country applying for citizenship have to engage in kind of like this reason based Thomas payain, if you will, based naturalization process. They've got to prove their loyalty, their understanding civics education But then a whole host of people who come here as birth tourists or illegal aliens can just have the magic of birth and automatically give birth to an American citizen. That's a weird' a very weird scenario. and that's open. That would have been very a promising ground for Republicans in Congress or elected Republicans in the state houses across the country to make that argument. we require this of naturalization, why wouldn't we require something more domicile and allegiance for any citizen who's coming here and giving birth missed opportunity again Yeah, and even so beyond the question of executive order versus legislation or even the Supreme Court precedent, which obviously comes from Wang Kim Arc or the public meaning from the framing of the fourteenth Amendment you make this very good point, Ben, which is that Roberts is leaning on or sorry, Theo, you might have made this point. Well, one of you did, and probably the other one agrees with it. thatber Roberts is leaning on the Anglo tradition And which is where we get our law from English common law and the English common law had birthright citizenship. so we are told, you know, use solei versus use sanguinis, the rightite of the blood This I think misses a really important point. which is that You had a birthright as a subject of the king Not in any modern sense of citizenship. And so if we're going to make the parallel or and we're going to cite the United Kingdom, we should look at what happens after the Second World War, when the United Kingdom begins to change its previous sense of the relation of subject to King into a more modern national kind of citizenship. What does the UK do The UK gets rid of birthright citizenship, and they voted for this in nineteen eighty one. It goes into effect in nineteen eighty three, precisely because of these problems of mass migration. And so you say, look, Wang Kimark does not decide this definitively in eighteen ninety eight. The Congress hasn't really weighed in on it. Obviously, the framers of the fourteenth Amendment didn't think that what they were doing was just giving a free ride to every Chinese spy that wanted to fly to Guam. You know It's totally absurd And if you're going to look to the English common law Maybe we consider what the Brits did after that. Because the court ruled on the substance of the matter Because the court came in F four, Kavanaugh would not join them for the substantive point And they say, sorry, fourteenth Amendment gives every Nicaraguan peasant birthright citizenship immediately Is there Is there anything that we can do, the executive or the legislature to fight back Or do we need to fight another forty nine year Roe V Wade like battle to get this case overturned Yeah, I think that's an excellent distillation, Michael. And you know funnyly enough, I was just in London a week ago giving a presentation on exactly what you just laid out. both the forty eight, forty nine a citizenship bill that obviously, Ech Powell essentially made his career on the early part of his parliamentary career, fighting that. And then the nineteen eighty one and then the subsequent mid nineties citizenship act. So the British have changed their notion of citizenship times in a fundamental, massive way, and yet we have a chief justustice who's saying, well, we gott to go back to the fifteenth century to look at the way the British understand subjecthood. It makes no sense at all. So and answer your question, unfortunately, because of the expansive opinion here that this is resting on a constitutional interpretation. and I'd also add to Ben's point because of the flaw in presenting this as an executive order assertion of power, I thinkge in large part, most of what Congress can do has been foreclosed by this opinion. It will require a constitutional amendment. And I think the white pill, as I've shared elsewhere is to say That might be a good thing to get people thinking again about the form of citizenship, what's required in a small R republic and having a folsome discussion about what we want in terms of the rights and duties and obligations that citizenship imposes. Part of the problem here is for fifty years, we essentially neglected this entire conversation and left it to abstract legal theory or judges and ropes to determine who is and who is not a citizen. And this is can I just can I just make the point that politics of immigration also played into this in the sense that For a long time, Republicans saw immigration as kind of a second you know, third rail of politics other than like, you know, kind of Medicare or something like that. they didn't want to touch it because they were worried they were going to piss everybody off by doing it. And the truth is that in that window where you could have probably moved something on something like this thinking the late nineties, early two thousands. didn't happen. And because that didn't happen you we we're left with this situation, as you said, you know, left with a legal academic comment and Judges and robes making this decision I think that we need to have a, you know a real considered moment here about what it means to be a citizen, about what kind of citizens you know we want and want to welcome. And you know, look, Calvin Coolidge said that the founders, you know fought the fought the war in seventeen following seventeen seventy six because they wanted to be citizens, not subjects. And that's what we want. There are a lot of people, I think that today, politically who would be perfectly happy to just be subjects. and we should not be those people very, very good point before I let you go, Theo. We have to talk about speaking of speaking of the dignity of the person and you know, living on our own terms, I've long thought, if God forbid, I'm ever convicted of a capital offense, the way I'm not joking, this is not just a setup. What I would want to do is go out Standing up, blindfolded, probably a cigarette in my teeth by the firing squad. That actually seems to me to be the most dignified way to go. Idaho As this? I believe you were rather involved in that. U what's I actually don't get what the big deal is Yeah, great question. Michael. I mean, you know, the Guardian And a couple of other international publications have lost their mind in the last twenty four hours about this, know the archaic, barbaric gun obsessed Americans are bringing back firing squads is essentially how the op ed from the Garden read yesterday Look, I mean, really at issue here is something a very basic premise. It's tied to our previous conversation, which was you know, the people of Idaho, reflective in numerous red states And some blue states across the country elected to have capital punishment for a certain class of offenses. and not, you know, abolitionist activists and a number of their sort of institutional Backers have campaigned to restrict the ability of states like Idaho to import the drugs that are necessary to create the three drug compound for lethal injection. This is essentially their way of short circuiting the preferred choice of the people and the establishment of the law. And Idaho's answer wasn't like some other red states, Well, I guess they got us. We don't have access to the drugs. We can't use compounding pharmacies anymore. so I guess we'll have no more capital punishment. Instead, what Idaho said was, okay, then we will revert back to a form of execution that is still recognized under the eightighth Amendment And to your point, Michael, it turns out actually there are lots of criminal defendants across the country who prefer the firing squad because it is a far more effective and humane form of execution. The average firing squad formalized medical death occurs in seconds as opposed to eight, nine, ten minutes in the few lethal injections that actually occur correctly. And I think you know you're using trained professionals, marksmen who are former retired military or police officers, and there's no violation of the hippocratic oath that you require with health professionals using the lethal injection form of execution. So it makes sense for Idaho and really again, at root here is just a way of saying, you're not going to use your embargo and your activism to short circuit the legal choices that the people of our state have made. Yeah, I say kill them all, you know, no, no, kill them all. But you know, if you're going to have capital punishment, that seems like the humane and right way to do it Totally toottally agree with you, gentlemen, I have to r But But not before Ben gives his final thought Great work there Thanks guys. Thanks for haing out. Good to see you mr. Dominichch leaving I'm leaving on a jet plane. I'm getting out of here, man. I want to go hang out for the fourourth of July. And if anything happens to me, I just God forbid I want you to make sure that my family cashes in my life insurance policy. Everyone knows summer is upon us. We are now deep into it. And by some miracle, we are all still on speaking terms, okay with all, you know, somehow, at least I mean, even though most of the hosts left us for today's show, maybe we're not on speaking terms. Anyway, look, one thing we all agree on is policy genius, whate whatever your plans are I can tell you what they should not include. squinting at some labyrinthian insurance website trying to divine whether you're getting a good deal or not That's a policy genius is for. mostost people know they need life insurance. They just keep putting it off. If process feels complicated, you don't want to think about how you're going to die, even though you're going to die. So Policy Genius makes it super easy. It's an online marketplace And for once The word means what it says. You compare quotes from America's top insurers, side by side for free, free really means free. Coverage, prices, terms all laid out plainly. their licens team handles the paperwork and advocates for you the whole way. No upselling, just the best policy at the best price. So right now, go to policy Genius C Protect your family, seeee if you can get a twenty year life insurance policy starting at just two hundred and seventy six dollars a year for one million dollars in coverage. pololicygenius d. com slash fire F I R E, which can be the cause of you needing to cash in your life insurance policy. Fire. comppare the quotes right now policyGenius. com slash Fire mister Dominic, good to see you, sir. Happy fourth of July. We may who knows if we do a friendly fire during the Octave of independence, but if not, I will see you afterwards. Hay fourth July to you, Michael and great to be with you today All right, see you all later