Latest / Cultural Wars | America Out Loud News / Understanding the news means reading beyond the headlines

Transcript

Understanding the news means reading beyond the headlines · Cultural Wars | America Out Loud News

• 0:11
  Helping to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.
• 0:15
  This is the Constitution Study on the America Out Loud Network with your host, Paul Engel.
• 0:30
  I often sent videos, articles, and other forms of content based solely on the headline.
• 0:37
  However, if we're going to understand what's going on in the world today, we need to go beyond the headlines to the facts and data.
• 0:45
  It may seem daunting, but I found it well worth my time.
• 0:49
  Hello there, everyday Americans.
• 0:51
  Paul Engel here with the Constitution Study, where we read instead of the Constitution, teacher I should generate should be free.
• 0:56
  Glad you could join me today.
• 0:57
  You know, I remember back when I was young, they used to say, if it bleeds, it leads.
• 1:04
  It was this idea that you know, sensational journalism.
• 1:07
  The you know, a story about, you know, a puppy coming home was not as grabbed as much attention as, say, maybe a murder or some especially gruesome uh vehicle accident.
• 1:20
  If it bleeds, it leads.
• 1:23
  Now, I'd say nowadays, headlines are more about clicks.
• 1:28
  Can we say something selection?
• 1:30
  I'll get somebody to click the link to find out more.
• 1:33
  And now sometimes that more is really aligned with the headline.
• 1:38
  Sometimes not so much.
• 1:41
  And I want to take a look at some examples.
• 1:43
  For example, I've been hearing a lot of news lately about the Supreme Court restoring full access access to abortion drugs.
• 1:51
  Um, several outlets have talked about it, several pieces of news have talked about it.
• 1:57
  And uh let me tell you what really happened, or as Paul Harvey say, the rest of the story.
• 2:04
  It's a a lawsuit involving Danko laboratories who manufacture Mipha Pristone, the the uh uh chemical abortion drug.
• 2:15
  And uh there have been lawsuits from several states claiming that the the mail order distribution of this drug well is being used to get around their state uh anti-abortion laws.
• 2:28
  So there's a lawsuit and a a uh appeals court um put a an injunction, a a stay on the mail delivery of this drug.
• 2:42
  They didn't ban the drug.
• 2:44
  Uh, I believe they put an injunction preventing it from being delivered via the U.S.
• 2:49
  mail.
• 2:50
  And the the logic of the three judge panel was that the SDA had conceded that it failed to adequately study whether remotely prescribing Mifepristone is safe.
• 3:03
  Now, as a pro-life person, I'm like, I like this idea, right?
• 3:08
  You know, the the is it is it safe?
• 3:11
  I mean, we talked the same thing about the mRNA vaccines, we talked about other vaccines and other drugs.
• 3:17
  Did the FDA do their job, allegedly job, um, to study whether or not simply mailing this, sending this in the mail was safe.
• 3:26
  In other words, remotely, there's no doctor's visit, there's no follow-up, um, you know, nothing.
• 3:33
  Now, what happened is the uh is was it Danco, the company laboratories uh that actually manufactures, they went to the Supreme Court and asked for a stay.
• 3:45
  Now, the way this works is is each judge, each justice on the Supreme Court has an area of the country that these requests go to.
• 3:55
  This one went to Justice Alito.
• 3:58
  Now, Justice Alito, of course, the new news is is he issued a stay on the injunction, meaning that uh the prevention of the mail being uh myth being mailed was stayed, meaning it could still be mailed, but only until 5 p.m.
• 4:15
  on May 11th.
• 4:17
  In other words, Justice Alito said, okay, we'll put it, I'll put a temporary stay on this until the court has a chance to actually consider the case.
• 4:26
  We will leave the uh the you know, the the status quo until the court really has a chance to dig into this.
• 4:34
  So all the things like, oh, the Supreme Court, you know, is allowing this.
• 4:38
  Well, no, he said, wait a second, this is a fast-moving case.
• 4:41
  You know, you've had stays and injunctions, and well, it's just hold on, let us look at this before we decide whether or not that that's that injunction could get in go into place.
• 4:52
  In other words, let's leave things as they are until we have a chance to look at it.
• 4:57
  It wasn't saying that the Supreme Court was going to find against uh uh the the Fifth Circuit.
• 5:04
  It wasn't saying that you know they're going to definitely allow it.
• 5:07
  It wasn't saying they were gonna not allow it.
• 5:09
  It was saying give us a moment to look at this before we go on, and until then, we want to leave it as status quante.
• 5:17
  All right, this is what we want.
• 5:18
  This this makes sense.
• 5:20
  Now, in another case, this is one you have to I had to read two, three times to really understand because it's a little convoluted.
• 5:27
  Uh it's it's almost like I don't know if it's double, triple uh redundantly negative.
• 5:32
  It was just it has to do with a case involving uh John Stockton and his organization children's health offense that uh sued, claiming that the state of Washington's investigation into their medical commission's investigation to fit into physicians who um criticized the the state's position on COVID-19, the state uh COVID-19 policies.
• 6:01
  In other words, the state of Washington uh set up these policies, and you had physicians who, well, they criticized it.
• 6:10
  They said it was wrong, and because of this, allegedly because of this, those doctors' licenses are being investigated for well disagreeing with the state.
• 6:22
  This, of course, uh uh uh would lead to uh the these doctors' license policy being suspended, even taken away.
• 6:29
  All because the commission said doctors dissenting from the government view on the disease was potentially dangerous misinformation that should be suppressed.
• 6:40
  Now, I found that very, you know, that that to me, all right.
• 6:44
  That's that's a lack of freedom of speech, it's a lack of medical ethics.
• 6:48
  There's a lot of problems with that.
• 6:50
  So in this case, again, we're where the children's health defense claimed that doing so, that that a targeting physicians for disagreeing with the state, in this case, state of Washington, was unconstitutional.
• 7:00
  The state, in this case, state of Washington was unconstitutional.
• 7:05
  And um, well, let's just say the the um Mr.
• 7:05
  And let's just say the the um Mr.
• 7:10
  Stockson's uh hasn't hasn't fared very well.
• 7:10
  Stockson's uh hasn't hasn't fared very well.
• 7:13
  First, the U.S.
• 7:13
  First, the U.S.
• 7:14
  District Court for the Eastern District of Washington dismissed the case back in May of 2024.
• 7:14
  District Court for the Eastern District of Washington dismissed the case back in May of 2024.
• 7:20
  They appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which also denied the case in September of 24.
• 7:20
  They appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which also denied the case in September of 24.
• 7:28
  Apparently, not with any real
• 7:28
  Apparently, not with any real discussion.
• 7:31
  And now the Supreme Court, um, Justice Kagan denied the application to the uh uh to the full in November 24, and the full Supreme Court denied it just January of this year.
• 7:45
  So this sounds really bad.
• 7:49
  And here you have doctors who are attempting to do what they think is right, but disagreeing with a state medical agency is now threatening their licenses, and appears no court even wants to hear the case.
• 8:03
  But remember, the Supreme Court didn't explain why.
• 8:07
  They didn't say that they the order wasn't even signed.
• 8:12
  Not a single justice dissented.
• 8:14
  There's no explanation, no understanding of why in this case the Supreme Court decided not to hear the case.
• 8:21
  So uh that's kind of an unsatisfying conclusion.
• 8:28
  You know, we if they're not gonna, we'd at least like to know why.
• 8:31
  Did they think the Cape What case wasn't ripe yet?
• 8:34
  Um, did they think the stock didn't actually have uh and that the people he represented were actually injured?
• 8:40
  Uh we don't know.
• 8:42
  And I'd love to come and tell you, you know, that that either the the government did great or they did evil, but we just don't know.
• 8:50
  All we know is that nobody apparently wants to hear this case of doctors having their license uh under investigation for simply having a difference of opinion with a state government.
• 9:00
  Ladies and gentlemen, I find that very concerning.
• 9:04
  I wasn't really surprised by the district or circuit decisions, but I'm a little disappointed in the Supreme Court, and I but I have to temper that with knowing, not knowing why.
• 9:14
  They may have a very good reason why they decided not to hear that case.
• 9:18
  I just wish I knew what it was.
• 9:21
  And one more case we'll look at before the break, and that involves uh a subpoena issued to a Rhode Island hospital.
• 9:30
  So back on May 1st, the U.S.
• 9:32
  Department of Justice Justice announced it was filing a petition against the the hospital under the the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act or HIPAA, as part of its investigation into distribution of certain prescription drugs to minors with gender dysphoria and related disorders, including puberty blocking drugs and cross-sex hormones.
• 9:52
  You see, the DOJ had hissed you this subpoena, and according to the DOJ, uh the road to date, the Rhode Island Hospital has not complied with the subpoena.
• 10:01
  Now, I have issues with subpoenas.
• 10:05
  I think subpoenas are in this case, investigatory subpoenas specifically, are often abused, right?
• 10:11
  Because you've got a search without probable cause.
• 10:15
  This is not a warrant.
• 10:17
  This is a government entity asking for documentation, actually demanding documentation, demanding the seizure of documents without any probable cause.
• 10:29
  They don't have a warrant.
• 10:32
  Now, assistant attorney general for the civil division of Brett Schumann said uh the department expects full and demands full compliance with valid subpoenas.
• 10:40
  Well, I'm sorry, what makes this subpoena valid?
• 10:44
  What makes this a reasonable search?
• 10:46
  Now, again, if you had probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, get a warrant, that's valid.
• 10:54
  But to demand that people data be turned over, documents be turned over without any probable cause, without any uh uh uh of the other protections of due process, well, that means this subpoena isn't valid.
• 11:09
  He went on to say that noncompliance with lawful process is never an option.
• 11:12
  I claim this is not a lawful process.
• 11:14
  Now, listen, I'm no fan of these puberty blocking drugs and and hospitals that are using them.
• 11:21
  But again, since when does a government get to seize documents simply because they want to?
• 11:28
  There has to be a good reason, and that's why the Fourth Amendment includes the warrant clause.
• 11:33
  You have to have a warrant to demand a subpoena, and this is interesting because I was I was uh writing an article about um uh a case of the new New Jersey Attorney General's office originally under Matthew Potkin, where they simply demanded documentation in a subpoena and then claimed, well, you yes, we said command, and we said that if you didn't comply, there'd be there'd be legal repercussions, but we didn't really mean demand, you have to have a court order to actually demand stuff.
• 12:04
  Well, which is it, Mr.
• 12:05
  Attorney General?
• 12:06
  Mr.
• 12:07
  The Department of Justice.
• 12:09
  How can you dim, how can a government agency without any sort of warrant demand the production and the release of documentation, seize documentation, an unreasonable seizure for an unreasonable search?
• 12:24
  Now, again, if they have evidence, if they have probable cause, so part of what they're they don't have to prove their case, they simply have to have probable cause that this Rhode Island Hospital has broken a law, not an executive order, ladies and gentlemen, an actual law.
• 12:40
  Then they can go to a judge.
• 12:42
  Here's our here's our affidavit, here's our probable cause.
• 12:45
  We're swearing under oath, they get a warrant, boom, they show up, they get the data.
• 12:50
  This to me is is part of when you see all these subpoenas.
• 12:54
  I'm seeing way too many investigatory subpoenas that are nothing more than fishing expeditions.
• 13:00
  We think there's a problem.
• 13:02
  We have no evidence there's a problem, we have no probable cause.
• 13:05
  We need to do an unreasonable search to get the evidence to prove you're guilty.
• 13:11
  Yeah, that that if that sounds like a mess to you, it it is.
• 13:16
  But it talks about the state of, you know, simply reading the headlines.
• 13:19
  Well, the DOJ wants to enforce a subpoena.
• 13:21
  What makes the subpoena lawful?
• 13:23
  What makes this an unreasonable seat?
• 13:25
  What makes this a reasonable seizure?
• 13:28
  Where's your your probable cause?
• 13:31
  Or is it just a fishing expedition?
• 13:35
  I'd like to know.
• 13:36
  Now, again, if the hospital has done something wrong, well, then you should have to be able to come up with probable cause and get a warrant.
• 13:43
  And this is very important, ladies and gentlemen, because your data that is not in your physical possession often gets turned over on nothing more than an unreasonable subpoena.
• 13:56
  You store data in the cloud, it's very often handed over to the government without a warrant simply because there's no advantage to the cloud service actually fighting the federal government to protect your rights.
• 14:00
  A warrant simply because there's no advantage to the cloud service actually fighting the federal government to protect your rights.
• 14:10
  This is a concern of mine, it's why I want to dig deeper into these stories.
• 14:10
  This is a concern of mine, and it's why I want to dig deeper into these stories.
• 14:15
  I've got some more stories, including oh uh the the spending of the the extortion or not, the embezzlement of money, um censorship, and more.
• 14:15
  I've got some more stories, including oh uh the the spending of the the extortion uh the embezzlement of money, um censorship, and more.
• 14:25
  But before I get to that, I have to take a break.
• 14:25
  But before I get to that, I have to take a break.
• 14:29
  But I want to remind
• 14:29
  But I want to remind you just how important a good night's sleep is to a healthy lifestyle.
• 14:34
  Now, thankfully, I generally sleep pretty well.
• 14:37
  You know, I don't have much of a hard time falling asleep, and I sleep pretty well, but there are those days, right, when the mind won't shut down, and I just can't fall asleep.
• 14:45
  Now, I know a lot of people recommend melatonin, and it it works, but well, it can have its own issues.
• 14:52
  It can it can disrupt your hormone processes, it can actually disrupt your sleep wake cycle.
• 14:57
  You can actually become dependent on that.
• 14:59
  Same with the pharmaceuticals people recommend.
• 15:01
  No, when I have a hard time falling asleep, I reach for restful sleep from the wellness company.
• 15:07
  It uses natural ingredients to calm the mind and reduce stress for a better, more restful night's sleep without hormones and without pharmaceuticals.
• 15:16
  Now, not a doctor, I don't play one on TV.
• 15:19
  But when I look at the details and I see these things like you know, passion flower and and and kava and chamomile, all things I know generally relax the human body.
• 15:30
  Now, find out more, go to America Outloud.shop and click on the restful sleep panel.
• 15:35
  Do your own research.
• 15:36
  I want you to be an informed consumer.
• 15:38
  I don't want you buying this simply because I talk about it or because I use her because it says I say it works.
• 15:44
  Yes, it's documented by or back by documented research.
• 15:48
  Yes, it's been vetted by the chief medical board.
• 15:51
  But I want you to do your own research.
• 15:53
  And by the way, if you decide to give it a try, well, use the code out loud at checkout, and you'll get 20% off of your order.
• 16:00
  So if you're looking for something to help you fall asleep, whether it's it's a routine problem or something that just pops up occasionally.
• 16:07
  I recommend restful sleep from the wellness company.
• 16:09
  Go to AmericaOut Loud.shop, click on the restful sleep panel, do your due diligence, be an informed consumer.
• 16:17
  I want you to research this and make sure that you think it's something that'll work for you.
• 16:22
  Then when you do, decide to buy, use that code out loud to get 20% off of your order.
• 16:28
  Now, I also want to remind you that uh in just over a week on May 16th, we're gonna be honoring and celebrating the Constitutional Convention.
• 16:37
  Constitution Creation Day Banquet.
• 16:39
  The Constitution Party of Tenet of Florida is meeting in Eustace, Florida, the Lake County uh uh chapter, and I'm gonna be speaking there.
• 16:47
  So let's remember the start of the Constitution Convention that's in May 16th, 1787.
• 16:54
  Let's we're gonna have a uh speeches, meals, it's gonna be a great time.
• 16:58
  And again, I'm gonna be speaking there.
• 17:01
  So we're gonna have all sorts of ceremonies.
• 17:04
  It should be a really great time.
• 17:05
  I think I've lined up a pretty good speech for this.
• 17:08
  So give it a try.
• 17:10
  If you're anywhere near Lake County, Florida, May 16th of this year, we'll be meeting at uh uh it's actually the Eustace Women's Club in Eustace, Florida, uh, from 5 to 9 p.m.
• 17:23
  If you're at all in the area and I'd love to see you there.
• 17:26
  I'd love to meet you, talk with you, and uh hopefully you'll enjoy a time with like-minded people, learn a little bit about the history of our constitution, and uh walk away with it with a passion to both read and study this great document that was created uh 20 what 38 years ago, I think now.
• 17:55
  I'm Dr.
• 17:55
  Kelly Victory with the wellness company, and I know this personally.
• 17:59
  I exercised, ate a healthy diet, and had no symptoms when a routine mammogram resulted in a cancer diagnosis.
• 18:06
  It revealed a hard truth.
• 18:08
  Even healthy people can get cancer, and much of modern medicine is reactive, not preventative.
• 18:13
  So I began asking a different question.
• 18:16
  What can we do daily to support the body before something goes wrong?
• 18:20
  That question led me to formulate SHIELD.
• 18:22
  SHIELD is a two-part nutraceutical system designed to support immune balance, antioxidant defense, and cellular health, a chemical-free cocoa mix and soft gels containing medicinal mushrooms, turmeric, green tea extract, olive leaf, berberine, and black seed oil.
• 18:39
  Prevention is power.
• 18:40
  Visit TWC.health slash outloud and use code out loud for an exclusive discount.
• 18:47
  Are you looking for a healthy snacks?
• 18:50
  But you've had enough of all the sweet, sugary energy bars.
• 18:55
  Good news.
• 18:56
  There's new bars to try.
• 18:59
  That's savory, crunchy, and packed with goodness.
• 19:02
  Bear bars are based just on six simple natural ingredients, a certified organic veggie, nut and seed bar.
• 19:11
  That's low temp dried, never baked or fried.
• 19:15
  Bear bars are plant-based, gluten-free, and loaded with nutrients and protein.
• 19:21
  Head over to bearbar.com slash out loud and get the exclusive discount just for America out loud listeners.
• 19:31
  That's B E A R B A Rom forward slash out loud.
• 19:39
  During COVID, we got educated on the power of natural virus protection and immune boosting using vitamins A, C, D, Zinc, and Quircetin.
• 19:48
  The problem?
• 19:49
  Getting them at the right dosage from truly natural sources that doesn't cost an arm and a leg.
• 19:54
  Enter the daily V stack using breakthrough cellular absorption technology.
• 19:59
  We put those vitamins together and supercharge them with a complete multi-mineral complex.
• 20:05
  The daily VStack is basically an oral IV of six products all in one at an affordable price.
• 20:11
  Go to ChemicalfreeBody.com forward slash out loud today.
• 20:16
  Get the daily V stack, protect yourself, boost your immune system, and save 20% on your first order.
• 20:24
  A man's country is not a certain area of land of mountains, rivers, and woods.
• 20:30
  But it is a principle.
• 20:32
  And patriotism is loyal to that principle.
• 20:35
  I'm happy to report that American patriotism flows freely once again.
• 20:44
  America Outloud Doc News is that place to awaken your heart, soul, and mind to the out loud truth.
• 21:00
  Welcome back, everyday American to rejoin the Constitution said today.
• 21:00
  Welcome back, everyday Americans to rejoin the Constitution study today.
• 21:04
  We're talking if you're gonna understand the news, we're gonna understand the world around us.
• 21:04
  We're talking if we're gonna understand the news, we're gonna understand the world around us.
• 21:08
  We need really need to learn to read beyond the headlines.
• 21:08
  We need really need to learn to read beyond the headlines.
• 21:12
  And I've got some more examples today.
• 21:12
  And I've got some more examples today.
• 21:14
  Well, let's start with a different one.
• 21:14
  Well, let's start with a different one.
• 21:15
  I saw this headline.
• 21:15
  I saw this headline.
• 21:16
  Um actually came out of Daily Signal.
• 21:16
  Um actually came out of Daily Signal.
• 21:19
  President Trump proposes meaningful cuts to the education budget.
• 21:19
  President Trump proposes meaningful cuts to the education budget.
• 21:23
  Now that all sounds great.
• 21:23
  Now that all sounds great.
• 21:24
  Yeah, oh wonderful.
• 21:24
  Yeah, oh wonderful.
• 21:26
  But well, there's some details that are really important.
• 21:26
  But well, there's some details that are really important.
• 21:30
  For example, now I haven't gone through the whole list, but it's interesting that the um the report from the Daily Signal says, well, you know, uh he's talking about a a what he again, a significant uh I'm sorry, meaningful, meaningful cuts to education, but then he points out well, the budget for 2027 is pretty much gonna end up about the same as it was for 2026.
• 21:57
  Why?
• 21:58
  Well, here's a little nasty trick that people don't talk about.
• 22:01
  In the federal government, a a cut is really not a cut to the budget, it's a cut to the increase of the budget.
• 22:10
  So, in other words, when they talk about a 3% cut from a year ago, they're not actually talking about taking three, they're talking about, well, we're not 3% from the automatic increase that we pretty much run into um every couple of years.
• 22:25
  Uh so that's part of the thing.
• 22:28
  How about the whole scenario?
• 22:30
  Uh 76 and a half billion dollars for the Department of Education, a department that doesn't legally exist, a department that violates the Constitution of the United States.
• 22:42
  You have to remember the 10th Amendment says that a power not delegated to the United States by the Constitution is reserved to the states respectively or to the people.
• 22:52
  So nowhere in the Constitution is the regulating of education delegated to the United States, is the funding of education delegated to the United States.
• 23:03
  So you go to the necessary and proper clause, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17, where Congress, I think it's 17, 17 or 18, where it says Congress has the right, has a power to make all laws necessary and proper to put into execution the powers delegated to the government to the government of the United States.
• 23:21
  This legislation is unconstitutional.
• 23:24
  They created the part of the it's unconstitutional.
• 23:27
  And we all remember what Alexander Hamilton said.
• 23:29
  No act of the legislature kind of the constitution can be valid.
• 23:35
  This all you know, so everyone's focusing.
• 23:37
  Oh, well, he's making meaningful cuts.
• 23:39
  Well, so far from what I've seen, he's not really cutting the budget.
• 23:44
  He's just not increasing it as much as others.
• 23:47
  And of course, there's other scenarios because he's looking at, well, the there's gonna be shortfalls in the Pell Grants.
• 23:52
  Again, 10 and a half billion dollars that are being spent for something the federal government's not legally authorized.
• 24:00
  That's called embezzlement, ladies and gentlemen.
• 24:03
  That's the term when you when you spend money on something you're not legally authorized to, it's called embezzlement.
• 24:09
  So the, you know, if you want to make meaningful cuts to the Department of Education, how about you actually cut its budget, not cut its increase, cut the actual budget.
• 24:20
  Stop spending money you're not legally authorized to.
• 24:22
  How about we start putting this thing into the dustbin of history?
• 24:27
  Because here's the other dirty little secret.
• 24:29
  Uh, I think it was 1976 when um President Carter signed the legislation creating the Department of Education.
• 24:38
  And our standardized testing scores, our qualifications compared to the rest of the world, have been going down ever since.
• 24:46
  So these billions and billions, trillions by now, trillions of dollars we've spent, the federal government has embezzled for the American people to fund the Department of Education has made things worse.
• 24:57
  That's why I say you got to go beyond the headline.
• 25:00
  You look at this and say, hey, they're cutting the Department of Education.
• 25:02
  That's a good thing, unless you think that the Federal Department of Education is itself a good thing, which it hasn't been.
• 25:08
  But when you look at the details, guess what?
• 25:11
  They're not actually cutting, it's not a meaningful cut.
• 25:13
  We're just not going to increase this budget as much as they would like.
• 25:18
  Now, here's an interesting one because I think it's a little more accurate of a of a of a title, a headline.
• 25:24
  Um, this comes from the New American, and it says censorship in disguise.
• 25:29
  Congress introduces anti-Semitism resolution.
• 25:32
  Now, again, find it very interesting.
• 25:35
  Uh, this is two representatives, a Josh Gothenmeyer of New Jersey and a Mike Lawler of New York have co-sponsored a resolution condemning anti-Semitic rhetoric from prominent online personalities.
• 25:48
  Now, um, okay, yeah, there've been a lot of anti-Semitic statements.
• 25:54
  Um, and Congress saying we're condemning it.
• 25:56
  Okay, that's what they want.
• 25:58
  It goes on.
• 26:00
  It also urges social media platforms and public leaders to denounce and address anti-Semitism.
• 26:07
  Now, this to me is very interesting because you're getting really close to abridging the freedom of speech.
• 26:14
  Now, listen, I dislike anti-Semitism.
• 26:17
  Lar my father's side of the family is Jewish.
• 26:20
  Um, the the whole idea I find morally reprehensible.
• 26:24
  But I remember we have this thing called the rule of law, and the first amendment says Congress can pass no law of bridging, among other things, the freedom of speech.
• 26:36
  Now, this is a resolution.
• 26:39
  Would this have the force of law?
• 26:41
  No, this is more the the um the feelings of Congress.
• 26:48
  Now again, the resolution blames online platforms for the recent rise in anti-Jewish bigotry, which okay, yeah, I you know, online platforms may make it more available, more accessible.
• 27:01
  I'm not saying they don't.
• 27:03
  But then again, you have to look at it in context.
• 27:07
  I mean, you're talking about six million Jews killed during World War II during the Holocaust, the German Holocaust, you know, it's a rise, but it's not bad as it was in the past.
• 27:18
  But again, they claim that uh incidence of anti-Semitic uh claims significantly increased, increase, including a 340%, 44% increase over the past five years and an 893% increase over the past 10 years.
• 27:34
  Okay, I I haven't read the resolution.
• 27:36
  I don't know where they're getting this data.
• 27:38
  Um, but again, I have to ask you, as much as I detest anti-Semitism, um, does it really up to Congress to encourage people to denounce deplatform address anti?
• 28:00
  And I said, Is it really Congress's job to do this?
• 28:00
  Is it really Congress's job to do this?
• 28:04
  I mean, they can express again.
• 28:04
  I mean, they can express again.
• 28:05
  This is a little tricky because they're talking about a resolution.
• 28:05
  This is a little tricky because they're talking about a resolution.
• 28:08
  This isn't uh um, you know, it's not like a bill to make law.
• 28:08
  This isn't uh um, you know, it's not like a bill to make law.
• 28:14
  This is more of um a rant, uh a rant by um a group of of politicians.
• 28:14
  This is more of um a rant, uh a rant by um a group of of politicians.
• 28:22
  And again, their personal opinions, I have no problem with their personal opinions.
• 28:22
  And again, their personal opinions, I have no problem with their personal opinions.
• 28:26
  Again, I hate the I hate I need all sorts of
• 28:26
  Again, I hate the I hate I need all sorts of of uh of bigotry, you know.
• 28:32
  But uh I you know, when I look at this and say, well, censorship in disguise.
• 28:39
  This is a resolution, it's just expressing the opinion of Congress, but it is getting pretty close to that uh, you know, that's a pretty nice place to have their uh uh uh Mr.
• 28:49
  Mr.
• 28:50
  Hebrew, it'd be terrible if something happened to it.
• 28:53
  We're getting awful close to that scenario when you have Congress saying uh not just that, hey, we think it's bad, but when we turn around and say you really should as a as a social media, you really should be doing so as a public official, you should be this, and again, I find it very interesting because this is the same tactics the Marxists use, you know, when somebody commits a heinous crime and all of a sudden, well, you will you do if you don't denounce them, then will you support them?
• 29:25
  Yeah, no.
• 29:28
  Again, if Congress wishes to express their opinion collectively, I have no problem with that.
• 29:34
  They say anti-Semitism is bad.
• 29:36
  I tend to agree with that.
• 29:37
  That's their opinion.
• 29:40
  It's that veiled threat to social media to implement uh uh censorship.
• 29:47
  And really, if censorship in support of anti-Semitism is okay, well, what was it wrong when when the government called for censorship against anti-Islamic feelings?
• 29:59
  Or when they called for censorship against disagreeing with the the government's position on on COVID.
• 30:05
  You see how that that that really close association can cause um can cause issues, right?
• 30:12
  I'm not saying that what Congress is trying to do is completely wrong.
• 30:18
  I just think they're skating, they're saying attacking off of close to the wind, they're skating very close to thin ice.
• 30:25
  When um you go from we think it's wrong to well, these digital platforms, they need to do something about it.
• 30:34
  It's it's uh it's a shot over the bow, shot across the bow.
• 30:37
  And uh again, certainly a concern I have.
• 30:41
  Now, of course, we got other concerns.
• 30:44
  Um, you remember the uh the federal immigration enforcement demonstrationslash riots in in Minnesota?
• 30:53
  Um, well, an indictment was recently unsealed against three members of the same family who have been charged in federal court um for allegedly assaulting a journalist during those protests, those demonstrations.
• 31:11
  Now, again, the the the uh headline is you know, three family members charged over alleged assault on turning point USA journalists in Minnesota, and that that seems fairly accurate, right?
• 31:24
  You've got uh you get into the details, a grand jury charged three members of the family, a Christopher, a Denaia, and uh their daughter Paige Ostracho with assaulting a journalist on federal property following the uh incident on April 11th, um, with uh uh Sarah Hernandez, who was a contributor to a turning point USA.
• 31:50
  So she's covering the demonstration against ICE.
• 31:52
  And this is to me is the interesting point, right?
• 31:54
  It happened on federal property.
• 31:56
  That's why it's a federal case, not a state case.
• 32:00
  Now, again, they were indicted by a grand jury.
• 32:03
  That means a group of individual citizens um were shown what the prosecution has, they were shown the prosecution's case.
• 32:11
  The prosecutor made their case before the grand jury and was able to secure an indictment.
• 32:17
  Now, as I've said before, there's a saying in the legal uh biz, uh a good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.
• 32:26
  Uh, this is a one-sided process.
• 32:29
  All we have now is an accusation, a claim, an allegation that uh that these three people confronted Ms.
• 32:39
  Hernandez while she was reporting outside the the uh federal immigration facility in St.
• 32:45
  Paul that engaged in a physical altercation that led to um Ms.
• 32:51
  Hernandez suffering physical injury.
• 32:55
  Now, in a statement by acting attorney general Todd Blanchett, um Hernandez was allegedly surrounded, physically assaulted, and shoved to the ground simply because she was identified by the defendants as a conservative journalist.
• 33:09
  Now, again, he pointed out that's not a peaceful protest.
• 33:12
  That is true.
• 33:13
  Here's the question.
• 33:14
  Does he have evidence that this had anything to do with who she was reporting for, or simply because she was asking questions?
• 33:23
  It's it's there's details in that story that make it very, very interesting.
• 33:28
  The headline simply points out that she worked for Turning Point, but you get into the details, and you have the attorney general saying, well, she was attacked because she was a conservative journalist, or at least the defendants can uh uh considered her to be a conservative journalist, which warranted physical violence.
• 33:49
  And to me, those are the details that matter, right?
• 33:54
  Was she yeah, all right?
• 33:55
  First of all, you have the assault.
• 33:56
  That's a plain up states, you know what she assaulted.
• 33:59
  It was on federal property, that's why it's a federal case.
• 34:02
  Um that's true.
• 34:04
  If she was assaulted because she's a a considered a conservative journalist, where's the extra crime?
• 34:12
  Is it a crime to attack a conservative journalist?
• 34:16
  You know, this is the part where we start getting into this this you know, hate speech, uh uh mantra, the these enhancements that uh often be a bit vague at times.
• 34:29
  And uh I'm I I guess we'll find out more as this this case goes to trial and there's more details.
• 34:35
  But um, I get I get very concerned when it's like, well, what evidence do you have that they attacked her because of her viewpoint?
• 34:42
  And does that change the crime, or does that merely enhance the sentence?
• 34:47
  Meaning, if they uh if they assaulted her because she's in the middle of this scrum and things go, that's one thing.
• 34:54
  If they targeted her, is that a crime, or is that a a uh uh sentence enhancement?
• 35:00
  Uh uh sentence enhancement.
• 35:02
  Because again, they have a right, these three people have a right to dislike conservative journalists.
• 35:02
  Because again, they have a right, these three people have a right to dislike conservative journalists.
• 35:09
  They don't have the right to assault them, but they certainly have the right to dislike them and to um maybe uh uh discourage them to be there, right?
• 35:09
  They don't have the right to assault them, but they certainly have the right to dislike them and to um maybe uh uh discourage them to be there, right?
• 35:19
  To to yell at them, say, hey, we don't want you here, we don't like you, yada yada.
• 35:19
  To to yell at them, say, hey, we don't want you here, we don't like you, yada yada.
• 35:24
  That's why you get very concerned when you see governments that start treating different groups and viewpoints differently.
• 35:24
  That's why you get very concerned when you see governments that start treating different groups and viewpoints differently.
• 35:31
  Interesting enough, there's no clause in the the U.S.
• 35:34
  Constitution that requires a federal government to have equal protection of the laws, but that idea is certainly there.
• 35:42
  And that's the question.
• 35:44
  If you know, when you punish somebody more because of who they attacked, not because of who they attacked, not because of what they did, well, then laws start becoming less and less meaningful.
• 35:56
  Now, let's say you like turning point units.
• 35:58
  Let's say you you like the idea of conservative, you like conservatives.
• 36:01
  Would you consider joining me at America's only Christian conservative violence provider?
• 36:06
  Yeah, that's Patriot Mobile.
• 36:08
  Now they have great 4G and 5G coverage and all the same networks and towers as a major carriers.
• 36:13
  Their customer support is 100% U.S.
• 36:16
  based.
• 36:16
  They have great plans and service that'll fit any budget, but I joined them years ago because they donate a portion of every dollar to organizations defending our rights.
• 36:27
  Will you consider joining me?
• 36:29
  Will you buy from a company that believes what you and I believe?
• 36:32
  Join me at Patriot Mobile by going to PatreonMobile.com says constitution, find a plan that works for you, see if you're eligible for a discount.
• 36:40
  Everyone from veterans and first responders to families with multiple lines can get a discount, making it even more affordable.
• 36:46
  And when you check out, use the code constitution, and you'll get free activation.
• 36:51
  So use your cell phone to defend not only your rights, the rights of your family, friends, and neighbors to support organizations like the Constitution Study that are fighting to protect your rights by going to Patriot Mobile.comslash constitution, finding a plan and discount that works for you.
• 37:07
  Don't forget, use that promo code constitution to checkout to get free activation.
• 37:11
  Now, I also hope you'll join me at AmericaOut Loud.news.
• 37:15
  Because let's face it, as I'm talking about, the media lies to us all the time.
• 37:18
  We need to do more.
• 37:19
  We need to not only find other sources of news, but we need to be able to vet them to verify them.
• 37:25
  One of the ones I use is AmericaOut Loud.news.
• 37:28
  I go there each and every day for news and information.
• 37:30
  And I'd like you to join me because it's a place you can trust, but you can also verify.
• 37:34
  But I want to do a bit more.
• 37:36
  Yes, read the stories in the articles, share them, listen to the podcast, watch the videos, share them.
• 37:43
  It's the act of sharing, it's the act of letting other people know information they otherwise wouldn't see or hear that makes the difference that helps secure the blessings of liberty for all of us in this great nation.
• 37:57
  Oral hygiene hasn't changed in 50 years, but our diet and the way we eat has creating an environment in your mouth for bacteria to wreck havoc on your teeth and gums for better oral health.
• 38:10
  Get spray dental defense and oral care line designed to combat acid creating bacteria.
• 38:16
  The toothpaste, mouthwash, mints, and gum all contain xylitol and natural ingredients shown to dramatically improve oral health.
• 38:24
  Sprite can be found online and at all fine natural retailers.
• 38:28
  I'm Doug Evans, author of the Sprout Book.
• 38:30
  And I've devoted my life to helping people reconnect with food at its most alive stage, the sprout.
• 38:38
  When you germinate a seed, you're not just growing food, you're activating potential.
• 38:44
  Sprouts grow without soil, sunshine, or fertilizer right on your kitchen countertop.
• 38:50
  They're organic, fresh, and cost less than a dollar a serving.
• 38:54
  It's nature's fastest form of farming accessible to anyone anywhere.
• 38:59
  Discover the joy of growing your own food and the power of living nutrition.
• 39:04
  Visit the sprouting company.com and use the code out loud for an exclusive offer.
• 39:10
  I had gut issues for years and terrible heartburn.
• 39:13
  Working with a couple of very smart doctors, we created a safe, completely natural solution for the 70% of Americans with gut issues like mine.
• 39:21
  Go to ChemicalFreeBody.com forward slash out loud today.
• 39:26
  Get the Malcolm Healthy Gut Bundle, reboot your gut and your energy, and save 20% on your first order.
• 39:38
  Welcome back, everyday Americans.
• 39:52
  Just because uh a headline sounds good, or even a story sounds good, we should still dig into it.
• 39:58
  For example, I saw this, this one came from bearing arms.
• 40:01
  The headline is more guns, less crime in Baltimore as City C's 50-year low in homicides.
• 40:08
  That sounds pretty good to me.
• 40:10
  Uh, I of course I caught the more guns less crime.
• 40:13
  Um, that's referencing a title of a book by uh John Lott, who he wrote the book titled More Guns Less Crime.
• 40:22
  Uh and it goes back to the 2020 case where the Supreme Court struck down the Maryland's May issue licensing laws, meaning, well, we may issue a license, we may not.
• 40:35
  It's really kind of of up to us.
• 40:37
  And of course, everyone, oh, this is going to lead to a surge in violent crime, it's going to be the wild, wild west, and it's going to be it except that isn't exactly what happened.
• 40:47
  Now, as of April last year, more than 200,000 Maryland residents have obtained their shall issue carry license.
• 40:55
  Um, and between 2015 and 2022, Baltimore recorded at least 300 homicides a year.
• 41:05
  But that number started changing in 2023, not long after the Maryland State Police started issuing these shall issue hermits.
• 41:15
  And they've been dropping ever since.
• 41:28
  Now, listen, four homicides is certainly four too much, but it certainly beats the average that they have been seeing for years.
• 41:36
  Now, of course, the question we should be asking ourselves is this causation or correlation.
• 41:43
  Meaning, are the homicides down because of these 200,000 um uh additional carry permits?
• 41:53
  Or is it a coincidence?
• 41:55
  Did it just happen?
• 41:56
  Now, I I didn't go deeper into this to to look at it myself.
• 42:00
  Myself, I think there's probably what I would call a secondary causation, meaning it's not the issuing of the license that made a difference, but it's the um the ability to defend oneself and the attitude, the uh the knowledge that criminals have that that they're more likely to encounter somebody who could defend themselves, that may have dissuaded some of this.
• 42:00
  I think there's probably what I would call a secondary causation, meaning it's not the issuing of the license that made a difference, but it's the the um the ability to defend oneself and the attitude, the uh the knowledge that criminals have that that they're more likely to encounter somebody who could defend themselves, that may have dissuaded some of this.
• 42:23
  Um again, I don't want to read too much into this.
• 42:23
  Um, again, I don't want to read too much into this.
• 42:25
  I'm trying to be as as objective as I can on these situations.
• 42:25
  I'm trying to be as as objective as I can on these situations.
• 42:30
  But at least if you live in Baltimore and you've been concerned about the rate of homicides and violent crime, this is good news, and well, probably should be something that you consider.
• 42:42
  Now, again, I I I often point out, you know, the news likes to focus on the mass murders, right?
• 42:51
  The the super shootings and all that crazy, and they tend to spend less time paying attention to when average ordinary people legally carrying a firearm actually defend themselves.
• 43:06
  Again, according to the Crime Prevention Research Center, um, during September of last year, there were 31 cases of people legally carrying a firearm, not law enforcement, everyday civilians that um stopped a crime.
• 43:23
  So, as I'm going back to that causation versus correlation in Maryland, take an example.
• 43:27
  Um, there's one example from I think it was Decatur, Illinois, not sure.
• 43:32
  Um, police say that a gunman who had a criminal record, which barred him from legally owning a firearm, um, had the mistake, the misfortune to open fire at a victim with a concealed carry license who was actually carrying and promptly shot back and wounded his assailant.
• 43:51
  Again, that's just a handful.
• 43:52
  There, there are more.
• 43:53
  31 in September alone.
• 43:55
  Now, the fact that there were these 31 instances is not good news.
• 43:59
  The fact that people were able to defend themselves, that's good news.
• 44:03
  And I think of that every time I go by a place that has a sign that says no guns allowed.
• 44:09
  Now, again, private property owners, you get to decide whether there are guns in your property.
• 44:14
  That is your right.
• 44:16
  But I I what I find, even here where I live in Middle Tennessee, it seems doctor's offices have a lot of these signs.
• 44:23
  And I always find it interesting because they don't want me to be able to defend myself, but they really don't do anything to make sure I'm safe there either.
• 44:30
  So, you know, these are the considerations that that I think of when I'm looking at these.
• 44:35
  So again, 31 cases during September.
• 44:38
  Ah, that's some good news, but you know, again, we need to look at all at the details if we want to understand what's going on.
• 44:48
  I think this le lends credence to the question of causation in for what happened in Baltimore, but it's not rock hard proof.
• 44:57
  It's not absolute proof, but it certainly makes me wonder about those who are so afraid of firearms that uh, well, what about those who defend themselves with their farm?
• 45:07
  Not always shooting, by the way.
• 45:09
  Sometimes just the presence of a firearm makes a difference.
• 45:12
  And of course, you know, we have a another example.
• 45:14
  Of course, you have all the talk about red flag laws, these uh emergency protection orders that say someone merely makes an accusation, they think you're dangerous, and well, the cops come for your guns, which I always thought was ridiculous.
• 45:27
  One is is it this is someone's simple statement, probable cause that you're a danger?
• 45:35
  Or is it simply someone's opinion?
• 45:37
  And why do they always go for the gun, not anything else?
• 45:40
  It's always like, you know, we're here to keep you safe.
• 45:42
  Well, if you think that person's a danger, why don't you treat them as dangerous rather than just taking away their guns?
• 45:48
  Uh, for example, in uh Multnomah County and in Oregon, um Lee say a former employee at the Multnomah Athletic Club drove a car filled with propane tanks and pipe bombs into the building at three o'clock Saturday morning.
• 46:06
  This is a couple weeks ago.
• 46:08
  Now, the detonation completely destroyed the first floor of this eight-story building, caused millions of dollars in damages.
• 46:16
  And um, by the way, this former employee had been the subject of not one, but two quote-unquote red flag emergency risk protection orders.
• 46:28
  You see, that's part of the problem is it it sounds good.
• 46:31
  You know, hey, we'll we'll take the guns away.
• 46:33
  That will keep us safe.
• 46:34
  It it misses the point.
• 46:36
  You're not treating the person as they're dangerous, you're just saying this is an excuse for me to come take away their firearms.
• 46:44
  Uh similarly, in Tacoma, Washington, a student at the Tacoma High School was booked on five counts of first degree assault after he uh uh uh wounded four students and a security guard with a knife.
• 46:59
  He's he stabbed them.
• 47:00
  Now, okay, a couple things I want to look at here.
• 47:03
  Uh yes, that's correct.
• 47:05
  Stabbing it at Washington State High School wound six, including suspect, according to the police.
• 47:10
  I guess he got wounded as as well.
• 47:12
  Um, but again, I want to look at this.
• 47:14
  Uh, interesting, he got arrested for a first degree assault.
• 47:19
  I'm supposing if he'd used a weapon, it'd have been something else.
• 47:22
  If he did, I'm sorry, let me rephrase that.
• 47:24
  If he'd used a firearm, it might have been something else.
• 47:28
  But here you see again, it's not just the guns that are dangerous.
• 47:31
  Anything about a baseball bat, your fists.
• 47:34
  Last time I saw more people are killed by fists and feet than they are by firearms.
• 47:40
  So, you know, it it's it's going beyond this the headline because a headline is designed to get attention, to get clicks.
• 47:49
  That's its purpose.
• 47:50
  It's you know, it's it's one of the things I I struggle at here is writing titles for my episodes, headlines that will snag people's attention.
• 48:00
  That's their purpose, right?
• 48:02
  And if that's all you look at, you don't get as Paul Harvey used to say, the rest of the story.
• 48:09
  By the way, if you haven't heard of that, go on to the social media, go on to the to the net and look up some of Paul Harvey's radio programs.
• 48:17
  They were they were excellent.
• 48:18
  I love them because he would tell this story, and then he'd tell you the rest of the story that put everything you just heard into context.
• 48:28
  When you're looking at the news, whether you're reading a paper or reading an article online or listening to a podcast or watching a video or a uh TV anchor news, look for the rest of the story.
• 48:42
  Look for the part of the story they're not telling you about.
• 48:45
  Or look for the part of the story they kind of the brush over.
• 48:49
  Don't just read though, and don't just read the opening pair, you're gonna go down a ways.
• 48:53
  One of the techniques that I don't know if it's still used, used to be used when writing news articles was you put the juicy stuff up front and the details at the end.
• 49:00
  And the details at the end.
• 49:02
  Sometimes those details matter.
• 49:02
  Sometimes though details matter.
• 49:06
  Now, as I say, you know, we live in the information age.
• 49:06
  Now, as I say, you know, we live in the information age.
• 49:10
  We have access to more knowledge than any generation before has ever had.
• 49:10
  We have access to more knowledge than any generation before has ever had.
• 49:16
  But with that knowledge comes great responsibility.
• 49:16
  But with that knowledge comes great responsibility.
• 49:19
  Because just because somebody says something doesn't mean it's true.
• 49:19
  Because just because somebody says something doesn't mean it's true.
• 49:25
  Just because the headline says something doesn't mean that's really what you'll find inside the story.
• 49:25
  Just because a headline says something doesn't mean that's really what you'll find inside the story.
• 49:31
  Just because the story says something doesn't mean that's the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
• 49:39
  And it's important that we learn to do this for ourselves.
• 49:43
  See, if we let someone else curate our information, for example, if you find a website or a newsfeed, and you simply listen to what they say, read the headlines, and then you're actually enslaving yourself to their point of view.
• 50:00
  I know it sounds harsh, but think about it.
• 50:02
  If someone else is curating, it's determining what you see and the spin that's put on it.
• 50:07
  Well, then you're not free for yourself.
• 50:09
  You're controlled by the opinion and output of another.
• 50:16
  The problem with that is what happens if they're not right, or I should say when they're not right.
• 50:22
  No one's right all the time.
• 50:23
  I'm not right all the time.
• 50:24
  Nobody I know is right all the time.
• 50:27
  It's why we need to be willing to put in the time and effort to go deeper.
• 50:32
  That shallow flip through the headline, scroll through the the uh social media feed.
• 50:39
  It leads to a very shallow understanding of the world around us.
• 50:42
  A very shallow understanding to your responsibility as a citizen or visitor to the United States, a very shallow understanding of what makes this country great.
• 50:55
  If you want to hit the deep water, you gotta do some work.
• 51:00
  You can't go deep in on all of it.
• 51:03
  I go through about six, seven hundred headlines a night.
• 51:06
  Uh, it's my nightly routine, right?
• 51:08
  It's generally somewhere around 600, sometimes as high as seven, usually in the five to six hundred range.
• 51:13
  And I'm looking at these headlines.
• 51:16
  I don't have time to go deep into all of them, but I'm looking at something that might be interesting and worth going deeper.
• 51:22
  That's what I use to build content for the radio program, for the website, for my videos.
• 51:28
  But it's something you should be doing as well, right?
• 51:30
  If you look at something, if something sounds interesting, or something sounds too good to be true, or just sounds just it confirms your worst beliefs about somebody.
• 51:40
  Dig a little deeper.
• 51:42
  Don't take everything on face value.
• 51:45
  That is where you'll find the data that puts structure to the story that puts structure to what you've read, to what you believe, to what you think.
• 51:56
  And uh over time, it does make a huge difference, not only in how you view the world, but how you view the people around you.
• 52:05
  I mean, I can look at a story about uh restoring access to abortion drugs, which I think is terrible, but it's the details that um makes more sense.
• 52:17
  Oh, okay.
• 52:18
  It wasn't that the Supreme Court decided that abortion drugs through the mail are okay, it's that they want to put a hold on things till they get a chance to actually look at the details.
• 52:27
  That's important.
• 52:30
  I I wish I knew why the court decided not to uh look at the case about investigating doctors for questioning COVID policy.
• 52:39
  I don't know why.
• 52:41
  And I'll have to live with that because I can't, I can't, I don't know what's in the minds of the justices.
• 52:48
  I'll have to live with that.
• 52:50
  But it gives me, I think in the long run, a much more balanced, a much more stable position to both view the news and the world around me.
• 53:03
  And of course, questions help an awful lot because again, I can't think of everything.
• 53:09
  For example, yesterday I I answered a question someone asked me about the Ninth Amendment, something I don't talk about very much.
• 53:15
  And I explained why I don't talk about it and some things I I thought were important about it, but that came because someone asked me a question.
• 53:25
  I hope you're considering do you have a question?
• 53:28
  Something you're not sure about, maybe it's something I've covered here on the radio program or or some constitutional question that that uh you know, yeah, you you just don't know.
• 53:37
  You haven't gotten an answer that that makes sense to you yet.
• 53:40
  Well, head to the website, constitutionstudy.com/slash questions and ask your question.
• 53:45
  I I love answering questions, not only because, well, if you don't know, ask because it's important, that's how we learn, but also because it opens me up to things that maybe I wasn't aware of, like the fact that I hadn't talked much about the Ninth Amendment in very I don't talk about it very much, or maybe a point of view on a particular law or a particular decision.
• 54:07
  Questions are wonderful things.
• 54:09
  Never fear running out of answers, fear running out of questions.
• 54:13
  And I have.
• 54:14
  Well, I have my own questions, but I've run out of questions that you ask that you'd like me to answer on their program.
• 54:20
  So please head to constitutionstudy.com/slash questions, ask your question.
• 54:25
  I ask for your name and email address because I'm going to email you a response.
• 54:29
  But if you'd like me to answer it here on the radio, well, just click that checkbox.
• 54:34
  Please answer on America at loud talk radio.
• 54:36
  And uh, I will.
• 54:38
  The only thing I ask is that your your question be polite.
• 54:41
  Um, it's not gonna be something I agree with or anything like that.
• 54:45
  I I understand that everyone's gonna agree with me, but I I don't I don't take foul language, and and I do ask you to be polite, and I'll answer your question.
• 54:55
  And if you don't like my answer, well, you don't have to follow it.
• 54:59
  You haven't really lost anything.
• 55:01
  But maybe, just maybe, I'll not only give you an answer, but it'll give you an answer that you can understand and that you can use in the future.
• 55:08
  So please head to constitutionstudy.com/slash questions, ask all the questions you want.
• 55:14
  All I ask is that they be polite, no foul language, you know.
• 55:17
  Uh, you know, don't have to be a jerk about it.
• 55:19
  Just ask a simple question, and I will do my best to give you an answer that, well, I'll give you the best answer I can, whether you like it or not.
• 55:26
  Yeah, that's up to you.
• 55:27
  Now, I also hope you'll keep coming by and listening to the Constitution Study every weekday, 4 p.m.
• 55:33
  Eastern time on America Out Loud Talk Radio, heard on the iHeartRadio Network.
• 55:37
  You can listen on our media player.
• 55:39
  We also have After Apple, Android, and Alexa.
• 55:42
  So you have plenty of ways to listen to me on talk on the broadcast.
• 55:47
  If you can't, though, well, you can always listen via podcast.
• 55:50
  It does take a day or two for an episode to go from talk radio to podcast, but you get to listen in your favorite podcast app.
• 55:57
  But do me a favor, subscribe to the show, leave us a rating, especially an Apple Podcast.
• 56:00
  To the show, leave us a rating, especially an Apple Podcast.
• 56:03
  And you may think that's not a big deal.
• 56:03
  You may think that's not a big deal.
• 56:05
  It is.
• 56:05
  It is the number of subscriptions, the number of four star and five star ratings are how the algorithm, the primary factor the algorithm uses to determine whether or not to show this program to somebody who's searching for content or for a podcast to listen to.
• 56:06
  The number of subscriptions, the number of four-star and five star ratings, are how the algorithm, the primary factor the algorithm uses to determine whether or not to show this program to somebody who's searching for content or for a podcast to listen to.
• 56:19
  So by simply subscribing to the show, leaving a simple uh rating, you can help other people find the constitution study and join us here as well.
• 56:19
  So by simply subscribing to the show, leaving a simple uh rating, you can help other people find the Constitution study and join us here as well.
• 56:28
  You can find all the links.
• 56:28
  You can find all the links you need at the homepage at AmericaOutloud.news.
• 56:33
  But as with everything else, please share those links.
• 56:36
  Share the work that we're doing here, share the content.
• 56:39
  It's that act that helps shares the blessing of liberty to everyone who calls this great nation home.