FOUR New Injunctions Against Trump, as Dems' Lawfare Continues plus Nike Funding Transgender Research & Dems in Chaos Nationwide
33:38 Share

Looking for excitement? Chumba Casino is here. Play anytime, play anywhere. Play on the train, play at the store, play at home, play when you're bored. Play today for your chance to win and get daily bonuses when you log in. So what are you waiting for? Don't delay. Chumba Casino is free to play.

Experience social gameplay like never before. Go to Chumba Casino right now to play hundreds of games, including online slots, bingo, slingo, and more. Live the Chumba life at ChumbaCasino.com. No purchase necessary. VGW group void where prohibited by law. 21 plus terms and conditions apply.

I was in Whole Foods the other day looking for a fun little bevy to go with my lunch, and I found my new obsession. SunSip is a gut-healthy soda from HealthAid, and they just dropped two new flavors. Dr. Bubbles is a fresh take on the doctor's signature blend of sweet fruit and subtle spices, while Cream Soda serves up velvety vanilla and sweet caramel. And the best part?

SunSip has gut-healthy prebiotics, vitamins, and minerals, all with 40 calories or less. Grab these new SunSip flavors only at Whole Foods in the beverage cooler near HealthAid Kombucha.

Divorce can leave you feeling isolated, like you're stuck on an island with no direction. But you don't have to go through it alone. At Hello Divorce, we guide you step by step, offering everything from legal advice to financial planning so you can find your way back to solid ground. Start your divorce journey with the support you need at hellodivorce.com because you deserve a better path forward.

For some of us, personal finances aren't just personal. They include a lot more people than ourselves. Loved ones, neighbours, the communities we call home and the causes we hold in our hearts.

At Thrivent, we help plan your financial picture with the bigger picture in mind. Because even though our business is helping guide your finances, our ambition is to make it mean so much more. Thrivent, where money means more. Connect with us at Thrivent.com.

Go to play.zumo.com now. Life

Life is hard. Zumo is easy. Welcome. It is Vertical Senator Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you. It's nice to have you with us on this Friday morning. And Senator, we've got some big stories to talk about today. Today, we're going to talk about several issues. We're going to talk about the ongoing lawfare issue.

that is being waged against President Trump and the Trump administration. This is the strategy of the Democrats to use the courts to sue, sue, sue. And sadly, they're finding radical district judges willing to enjoin the president over and over and over again. Four lawsuits, four district court losses in the past 24 hours. We're going to break them down so you understand what happened.

Next, we're going to talk about the radical transgender ideology that the left continues to embrace and sadly a great many in corporate America do as well. Tennis legend Martina Navratilova has called out Nike for funding transgender research for undermining women. We're going to talk about that and how it reflects just how radical the left continues to be.

And finally, we're going to talk about how the Democrat Party in Washington is breaking down, how the media is losing their mind. CNN, MSNBC, they are ringing the alarm bells that the Democrats' extreme policies are so out of touch with the American people that

that they're losing support every single day. And yet the Democrats' hatred of Donald Trump is so great, they can't pull back from their radical policy positions. All of them we're going to break down in today's show. Yeah, and you mentioned that last story, which in a very interesting way is going to connect with this first story. It is being celebrated by the left and the media that these judges, I describe them as activist judges, are saying, watch this, we're going to get involved today

And we're going to stop Donald Trump and what he's doing. The mandate he has from the voters. He was elected president United States of America, an agenda that is overwhelmingly popular with the majority of Americans. And we're going to just stop what he's doing. And this is another example of lawfare. The fact that there are, though, four that have come down in a 24 hour period is.

I got to ask the question, and there's so many listening that are going to want to know this, Senator, which is, is this not orchestrated? I mean, when you have four in a row, is that a coincidence? Is that how the court systems work? Or is this a orchestrated, clear effort? They wanted a major smackdown on the president's agenda.

Well, it's orchestrated by the plaintiffs, but not the courts themselves. But this is going to be the pattern we're going to see. The last four years, we saw the left wage lawfare against Donald Trump by indicting him not once, not twice, not three times, four different times. We saw Democrats going to court to try to throw Donald Trump off the ballot because they were

terrified the voters were going to elect him, which of course they did. That's the same reason they indicted him because they were terrified voters were going to elect him, which of course they did. Now, now that president Trump is back in office, this is the next phase of their lawfare. And every single day of the Trump administration,

We are going to see blue state attorneys general and left wing activist groups filing lawsuits and they are filing them. They are seeking out extreme left wing judges. They're going to blue jurisdictions, particularly blue jurisdictions where they are confident they will get radicals in robes. And so far, the pattern is is having considerable success. Now, I am hopeful that.

that on appeal, the courts of appeals or the Supreme Court are going to reverse this. But this is their strategy to try to stop the agenda that the American people elected President Trump to implement. So let's start with the first one. The first one is a case called League of Women Voters Election Fund versus Trump. And it deals with election integrity. Now,

Election integrity is an issue that has widespread support among the voters. Voters want our elections to be secure. And if you look at the United States, the United States laws concerning election integrity are far behind many other nations. So, for example, India and Brazil...

are tying voter identification to a biometric database. The United States, in contrast, largely relies on self-attestation for citizenship. Germany and Canada both require the use of paper ballots, counted in public by local officials. America, on the other hand, we have a patchwork of voting methods that lead to serious chain of custody problems. Other countries, like Denmark and Sweden,

They limit mail-in voting to those unable to vote in person, and they don't count late arriving votes regardless of the day of the postmark. Nonetheless, many American elections, particularly those in blue states, feature mass voting by mail with many Democrat officials accepting ballots without postmarks or those received after Election Day.

Now, what does federal law say about this? Multiple federal laws make it clear that only American citizens are prohibited to vote in federal elections. And yet we see, particularly in blue states, that requirement, that legal federal requirement being violated. Well, on March 25th of this year, President Trump issued an executive order that was called Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections. And it is focused on requiring proof of citizenship

to register to vote. Almost instantaneously, a group of left-wing organizations sued President Trump, and they sued him in the District of Columbia court, and a liberal judge, Judge Colleen Kolar-Cotelli, who was appointed by Bill Clinton, granted a preliminary injunction and blocked the Trump administration from implementing the executive order, from requiring proof of citizenship.

Her reasoning, I've got to say, makes very little sense. Her reasoning, she says, well, the power to regulate elections is given to Congress and given to the states, not the president. Well, she ignores the fact that Congress has legislated. Congress has passed legislation making clear that only American citizens can vote in federal elections. And so once Congress has acted, the Constitution, Article 2 of the Constitution,

gives the president a duty to, quote, take care that the laws be faithfully executed. That's what the president is doing. And yet, to left-wing activists, they don't want the president to enforce federal law. And so this appeal will go to the D.C. Circuit. It's going to matter immensely what the panel of judges are that are on the D.C. Circuit. But

But this is one example, and we're going to go through several more of how left wing groups are going to wage war against the president implementing what the American people elected him to implement. They were all filed in very liberal courts and from a liberal judges that had no problem saying, yep, I want to be a part of this lawfare.

The first one was filed in D.C. The second one was filed in San Francisco. And it deals with Trump's executive orders to cut off funding to sanctuary cities, to cities that defy federal immigration law. Again, this is the president seeking to enforce federal law. And yet the plaintiffs went and sought out a judge, Judge William Oreck. He's an Obama appointee in San Francisco who granted an injunction against enforcing those executive orders. Now, I got to say, the plaintiffs were not surprised with this.

because this is the same district judge who granted the order against the exact same thing in the first Trump administration. So they went back to the same judge. They said, hey, would you do it again? And by the way, in the first Trump administration, that went up on appeal to the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit is consistently the most left-wing court of appeals in the country. And the Ninth Circuit upheld that order, stopping the first Trump administration's order against funding sanctuary cities,

And sadly, the Supreme Court did not take that appeal. You've got to assume this case will get appealed to the Ninth Circuit, and the Ninth Circuit presumably will do the same thing it did last time. And what we've got to hope for here is this time the Supreme Court will take the case and reverse it. The third case. The third case deals with DEI. And in fact, the third and fourth cases both deal with DEI. The Department of Education.

published a dear colleague letter reminding Title VI funding recipients that they have to comply with anti-discrimination law. And it made clear that Title VI and the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution bind the recipients, and if you're getting federal money, you've got to comply with federal law. Well, there were two lawsuits that were filed. One that was filed in Maryland,

And in Maryland, they were in front of Judge Stephanie Gallagher, who was a Trump appointee. Although I would note, Maryland is a state with two Democrat senators, and the way it works with district judges is the senators have an enormous say. So even though this judge was appointed by Trump, she almost certainly was put forward by the Democrat senators in Maryland.

Judge Gallagher issued an injunction saying that the letter that was giving guidance to the recipients of federal funds, that constituted a federal rule, a final federal action, and that it was arbitrary and capricious and violated federal law. Likewise in New Hampshire.

In both lawsuits, the Maryland and New Hampshire lawsuit, it was the teachers union, the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers that filed a lawsuit. And in New Hampshire, the judge there likewise issued an order,

In joining, in this case, it was Judge Landia McCaffrey, an Obama appointee, who granted the order and said that it was vague, that the Department of Education's instructions were vague because you couldn't figure out what a DEI program is. And so issued an injunction. You know, it's amazing. Everybody knows what a DEI program is. And what the Department of Education is saying is,

is if you discriminate based on race, that is illegal. And we're not going to send you money if you are violating federal law. By the way, that's the same thing the Sanctuary City's executive order said. And yet, for...

four district judges, four injunctions, all the latest development in the battle of lawfare. And I will say what we've got to hope for is, number one, the courts of appeals stepping in and reversing these decisions. But number two, ultimately, the Supreme Court stepping in and saying enough is enough. The president has the authority and, in fact, the responsibility to

to enforce federal law. So let's go through a couple different scenarios here. Number one, I'm assuming that some of these judges know that a smackdown is going to come from this, right? Like they're not dumb. So it's lawfare, but they know this is going to be a fight.

They seem to be OK with that and they don't care that that may be coming. Is that because this is the new plan of, hey, as long as you can delay and then delay a little bit more and then delay a little bit more and hold him up and the Trump agenda up, then that's still success in a weird way to them. Well, let me say, sadly, they don't know they're going to get a smackdown.

Number one, there are a lot of liberal court of appeals judges. You looked at the San Francisco judge that enjoined the president's sanctuary city's executive order. That judge knows the appeal goes to the Ninth Circuit, which is an extreme left wing court.

And so that judge, I'm sure, is expecting the Ninth Circuit will agree with him. And you do have a final backstop of the Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court takes a tiny fraction of the cases that are appealed to the Supreme Court. And so, listen, I think what the left-wing litigants are gambling is they sue on everything. They're going to win everything.

A number of these cases, some may get overturned on appeal, but some will not. And their approach, I think, is flood the zone. It's the exact same thing they did when they indicted Trump over and over and over again, not just once. They kept doing it over and over again, saying, OK, if the New York case doesn't stick, we'll bring the D.C. one. All right. If the D.C. one doesn't stick, we'll bring the Georgia one. They're doing the same thing here.

They know many, if not most, will be overturned, but they're gambling, and it's probably a right gamble, that not all of them will be overturned. And so every single one of the policy matters that the president is implementing, and to be clear, the president campaigned on these issues. He promised the American people this is what he'd do.

And and the Democrats, they don't want democracy, the will of the voters to be honored. And so they're using the courts to attack ultimately the will of the voters. So final question on this. And there's precedent right in the courts. In theory, we hear a lot about that.

Is there any way that the Supreme Court can say stop it and you can't keep doing this over and over again for the next four years? Or are they only able to say that basically on one issue or subject or lawsuit at a time? Well, I'll give you some good news about these four district court decisions, which these decisions were not made.

nationwide injunctions. We've talked about on this show before the phenomenon of nationwide injunctions we've seen. A nationwide injunction is even more egregious where you prevent the president from enforcing the law or prevent the cabinet agency from enforcing the law against anybody anywhere in the country. They didn't do that here. What they did here is they issued an injunction only with respect to the parties who were suing. So the Sanctuary Cities case,

That case was brought by 16 left-wing cities, and so that injunction applies to protect those 16 cities but nobody else. That's at least a good sign. That being said, this battle will keep going over and over again, and I'll tell you one of the things this underscores is why good principled judges matter so much and why the president and the Senate need to keep putting strong court of appeals judges on the bench to overturn this kind of nonsense.

This is Lisa Booth from The Truth with Lisa Booth. When it comes to your health, you shouldn't have to beg for permission. You've seen how the system really works. Faceless bureaucrats and billion-dollar companies playing God, deciding whether you get care, what you're allowed to take, and ultimately, whether you live or die. It's time to take your power back.

back. All family pharmacy puts the control in your hands, not theirs. No more waiting rooms, no more red tape, just fast, direct access to over 200 trusted medications like ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, and mabendazole, antibiotics and emergency kits.

A licensed doctor reviews your request, writes your prescription, and your medication is shipped directly to your door. They believe in medical freedom, that you have the right to choose what's best for your body and your family. Over 100,000 Americans already trust All Family Pharmacy. Maybe it's time you did too. So visit allfamilypharmacy.com slash USA, promo code USA10. That's AllFamilyPharmacy.

allfamilypharmacy.com slash USA and use code USA10 for 10% off. All Family Pharmacy, because your life shouldn't be in someone else's hands. I was in Whole Foods the other day looking for a fun little bevy to go with my lunch, and I found my new obsession. SunSip is a gut-healthy soda from HealthAid.

And they just dropped two new flavors. Dr. Bubbles is a fresh take on the doctor's signature blend of sweet fruit and subtle spices, while Cream Soda serves up velvety vanilla and sweet caramel. And the best part? SunSip has gut-healthy prebiotics, vitamins, and minerals, all with 40 calories or less. Grab these new SunSip flavors only at Whole Foods in the beverage cooler near HealthAid Kombucha.

Israel is still under attack. Missile fire has resumed from Israel's enemies, terrorists who seek utter death and destruction. Here in America, we can't imagine what it's like to live in constant fear like this. But for the people of Israel, it's all very real every single day. So please join me and show the people of Israel you'll help protect them in this time of attack and uncertainty. And one of the best ways to do this is by giving to the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. Your gift today helps provide security essentials like

bomb shelters, flak jackets and bulletproof vests, armored security vehicles, ambulances and so much more. There's no better time to give than right now during the Passover holiday when we celebrate Israel's historic deliverance and birth as a nation. So give a special Passover gift today and help protect the people of Israel. Call 888-

That's 888-488-4325. Or go online to supportifcj.org. One word, supportifcj.org. For some of us, personal finances aren't just personal. They include a lot more people than ourselves. Loved ones, neighbors, the communities we call home, and the causes we hold in our hearts.

At Thrivent, we help plan your financial picture with the bigger picture in mind. Because even though our business is helping guide your finances, our ambition is to make it mean so much more. Thrivent, where money means more. Connect with us at Thrivent.com.

Divorce can leave you feeling isolated, like you're stuck on an island with no direction. But you don't have to go through it alone. At Hello Divorce, we guide you step by step, offering everything from legal advice to financial planning so you can find your way back to solid ground. Start your divorce journey with the support you need at hellodivorce.com because you deserve a better path forward.

All right, Senator, I want to move to this other big issue, and that deals with some really shocking news from a woman. And if you don't know her background, I think it's important to take a moment so people understand who Martina Navratilova is.

She is the most decorated woman in women's tennis history. The number of Grand Slams that she has won is just incredible. She was one of the very first athletes to ever come out as being gay. She has been a huge advocate in her career for LGBTQ community. But then she stood up to them on men and women's sports.

And they started to attack her. And she said, I'm not backing down. There is a difference between men and women. It is wrong to allow men to compete with women. She even lost, like, she was kicked off of boards and different things that happened in the community that she was in. And I think she was shocked by the intolerance

of all of these different radical extremist groups that went after her because she said there is a difference. Well, now she's not backing down again. She is blasting a major company, Nike, over a shocking report that they were actually doing research in trans athlete research at Nike. And she's like, what are you doing?

Well, let me say first of all, you just said a minute ago, Martina Navratilova, you said she won a lot of majors. Nobody knows how many. I will say, Ben, there's this thing called the Google thing.

That you have a phone, you can type it in. You actually just have to do Martina N and it comes right up. So give me the stats. And right from the Google, it told me one of the most successful tennis players of all time. She was ranked as the world number one in women's singles for how many weeks? How many weeks do you think? You're the tennis player. You play tennis at Ole Miss. Oh, it's going to be hundreds. I know that. 332 weeks. Bam. There you go.

And she won 167 top-level single titles, 177 doubles titles, and including an open-era record of 59 major titles, 18 in singles, 13 in women's doubles, 10 in mixed doubles. And how many Wimbledon singles titles do you think she won?

And Wimbledon singles titles. I know this. Hold on. It's a trivia question for me. You can't use the Google. It's nine. No, no, no. It's nine. I'm pretty sure it's nine. Am I right? Look at that. Benjamin. Okay. So you're a tennis guy. It is nine. And I didn't know that. But if Wikipedia is right, then it is nine. And here's another tidbit for you. The French Open is coming up. And do you know how many she won there? No idea. No idea.

She won two there. I didn't read that far in Wikipedia. No, no, no. So she won two there, but that was like her hardest service to win on. She doesn't like clay? She does not like clay. Look at that. See, I knew clay. You should be impressed that I knew the French Open was clay. Exactly. And so she was the one that completed the Grand Slam because she won the Australian Open, I want to say, three or four times, French Open twice, Wimbledon nine. And I think she won the U.S. Open, I want to say it was four or five times twice.

It was incredible. But here's a tidbit about her, and this should impress everybody, because when she was in the middle of all this winning...

She was stripped of her citizenship when she was 17 or 18 and asked the United States for political asylum. And so not only was she winning, but she was in the middle of Czechoslovakia when it happened. She was a Czech citizen and all of this was going on. So you talk about a woman that was incredible and focused and was able to pull all this off. It tells you about

how big of a leader she was. And I think that is something we should just remind people of. When you talk about her leading on this issue and coming out and then yet saying it's wrong for men to play in women's sports, like she's always been a leader on these types of issues. Well, and listen, I will say Martina Navratilova, she's not a conservative. She's not a person of the right.

But she is one of the greatest women athletes to have ever lived. And she's shown real courage saying, look, if men compete in women's sports, men have significant physiological advantages. And it's not fair. It's not right. I mean, she recognized even as one of the greatest women to have ever played that if she was playing against Pete Sampras, if she was playing against...

you know, any of the top male players that it would not be fair and she would not stand a chance. And that's the simple reality. How much faster? So you played Division I tennis. How much faster does a male college player hit a serve as compared to a top-level female college player?

When I was playing in college, if you were one of the top women in college hitting a big serve, you were probably 100 to 103, 4, 5 miles an hour. And that would be like less than 1% of women in college at that time doing that.

So that's top level, top level, the fastest serves women are hitting. Now, how about men? And a lot of them were probably 80 to 85, 86 miles an hour would probably have been the average then. And men, the average was probably 105 to 110 was the average. I mean, significant difference. And how about the top level, the very best men? So the fastest serve I ever hit in my life, I think, was 110.

I want to say it was 125, 126. Yeah. That's not a tennis ball. That's a bullet. Yeah, I mean, it is. I mean, there's a huge difference. You add that extra 30 miles on top of where the women, where the men, it's night and day. Okay, and I'm going to say this. I don't mean to be disrespectful. I mean, you were a good college tennis player, but you weren't one of the very top men in the country. Correct. Yeah, no, 100%. I mean, the guys that were hitting the big serves –

I remember one time practicing with Andy Roddick, and Andy was hitting 137, 140s. Wow. John Isner, a buddy of mine, I think he has the fastest serve on record. I want to say it was 147, if I remember correctly. I mean, there's no woman that's going to hit that. So that's 50% more. 147 is 50% more than you said, like the top women college athletes would be serving about 100 or 102. Correct. Correct.

I mean, that's why Martina Navratilova has been so clear, saying this is wildly unfair. Well, what she did this week is she called out Nike, and this is a bizarre story. It is a story published in the New York Times that laid out evidence that Nike is financing a study of trans athletes, and a study of trans athletes that was called out online on X by women's sportswear company executive Jennifer Saye.

Who went on social media and said, I'm still stunned by this. Nike is funding a study that disfigured young boys to understand if they can be physically impaired enough to compete with girls without significant, quote, retained male advantage. Why is a sneaker brand doing medical experiments on children? And and.

Martina Navratilova retweeted that. She said, Joanna Harper is going too far, as is Nike, needless to say. And she calls out Nike, same company that docked Alison Felix for being pregnant. So she left and formed her own company, Seich. So thanks for nothing, Nike. And I got to say, look, there are a lot of issues where the left has completely left the American people behind. Sanctuary cities,

embracing voter fraud, open borders, supporting illegal immigrants and gang members and wanting more gang members brought to this country. All of those are extreme. But I don't know that there is an issue that is more out of the mainstream and yet more required by elected Democrats than demanding that men compete against and in women's sports and boys compete in girls sports. And it is...

It was a major issue in 2024 in the election. President Trump used the issue. I used the issue in my reelection campaign. And I got to say, Senate races across the country used the issue. And the American people said enough is enough. And what's interesting. All right. So in my reelection, when I when I was running ads against my opponent because he had voted repeatedly in favor of men competing in women's sports.

the reporters thought, Oh, well, well, Cruz is competing to the crazy right-wing kooks. And they wrote articles like that. And I actually laughed at, at, at them because we had done focus groups. And in fact, we had done focus groups of undecided moderate women in Houston and Dallas. And we, and we tested like 30 different messages on them. Do you know the number one message with undecided moderate women in Houston and Dallas? Well,

What was that? Boys and girls sports. There you go. And the reporters didn't get it. They're like, oh, these are crazy right wingers. I'm like, no, no, these are soccer moms. These are soccer moms that are really pissed off and they don't want their daughter playing soccer with some dude who's going to kick them and get a concussion. They don't want their daughter playing volleyball with some dude that's going to spike the ball on her. They don't want, you know, they watched the Olympics and saw two guys busting

beating the hell out of women boxers, and they said enough is enough. And what is amazing is even though the left is so far out of step, Nike's continuing to double down and fund this extreme research, and we had a vote a month and a half ago in the Senate on stopping boys from competing in girls' sports.

Do you know how many Democrats voted in favor of protecting girls and women's sports? I'm going to guess they voted as a party and none of them said we're going to be sane today. Absolutely correct. Zero. And this was after the November election. If you live in a blue state and you happen to have a Democrat senator who pretends to be moderate, which a lot of them do, know that your senator likewise voted for boys to compete against your daughters, for men to compete against women. And that's fundamentally unfair.

And if you don't believe me, listen to the great Martina Navratilova. Senator, by the way, we were talking a moment ago about fastest serves ever in history. I just want to give people the fastest. So Sam Groth had the fastest serve at a Challenger event, 163.7 miles an hour, and the fastest recorded serve at an ATP Tour. So that's the highest level you can get event in tennis ever.

was by my good friend, John Isner. We went to one of his last matches to watch, actually, in Houston. 157 miles an hour. So if you think there's a difference, but not a difference between men and women in sports, yeah, just look at those numbers. You will never find a woman that has ever hit anywhere close to that. There is a difference. And Ben, let me say, I'm proud of you that even in the course of this show, you figured out how to use the Google. That was well done.

I try. You know, I'm a quick learner here. All right, let's turn to the Democratic Party in disarray. And it's a real thing right now. And CNN is saying it. So don't trust us. CNN having a freak out moment on TV with new polling data. And here is what they said.

Yeah, this, I think, is a revolt, a revolt that is going on within the Democratic Party right now, Democrats and their leaders. I mean, take a look nationally. Hello, Democrats and Dem leaders in Congress. The belief that they will do the right thing when it comes to the economy. Last year at this time, 80 percent believed that the Democratic leaders in Congress would do the right thing when it comes to the economy. Keep in mind, this is Democrats. Look at where we are now. That number has been slashed in half.

to just 39%. Holy Toledo, that is the lowest number by far in Gallup polling. The lowest previous was just 60%, which is 21 points higher than this. Democrats hate, hate,

Hate, hate, hate what their congressional leaders in Washington are doing right now on the key issue of the day, the economy. And their confidence has fallen through the floor, Mr. Berman. All right, Chuck Schumer is the Senate Democratic leader right now. How are feelings about him, particularly in New York? Yeah, let's go to the state of New York. It's...

What's always on my mind, right? We're in the state of New York right now. New York Democrats on Chuck Schumer view him favorably. In December of 2024, that was just a few months ago, it was 73%. Look at where that number has fallen to in just a few months. It is now down to just 3%.

52%! That is the lowest I could ever find in Siena College on how Democrats in Chuck Schumer's home state view him. And keep in mind, if you're thinking about a primary challenge, it would be a few years away. But Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's favorable rating among Democrats is considerably higher in the 60s. So he is doing quite poorly in his own home state of New York. I never thought I'd see the day in which just 52% of New York Democrats would view Chuck Schumer favorably. It's almost unfathomable.

It's almost unfathomable. Now, here's the takeaway for me, Senator. The fact that AOC has a higher approval rating than Chuck Schumer means the Democratic Party is dead. The socialists, Marxists and communists have taken it over. And now they're out with these old guys. We also saw one of your colleagues, Dick Durbin, hanging it up, saying, I'm out of here. I'm not running for reelection.

Well, what is stunning about that is a couple of things. Number one, as they're relaying poll numbers that show Democrats unhappy with the Democrat leadership in Congress, the reason they're unhappy is they think Chuck Schumer is not crazy enough. They think Akeem Jeffries is not crazy enough.

The problem and listen, we're in a very polarized society. Both both sides are pulling further and further apart. But people that identify as partisan Democrats, they hate Donald Trump.

And I'm not quite sure what they want Chuck Schumer to be doing. Maybe lighting himself on fire on the Senate floor, running around naked, screaming at the top of his lungs. I don't know. You know, maybe they just want him to join AOC and Bernie Sanders on their Fight the Oligarchy tour. All to be clear, they're flying around in private jets to fight the oligarchy, which actually...

may symbolize today's Democrat Party more than anything else they could do to get off their private jet and stand up and say, fight the oligarchy. And by the way, George Soros, thanks for the money. But the Democrats want their elected leaders to be even more crazy than, and this is after four years of absolute shambles of the Obama administration. And what's striking also about that clip you played is,

is CNN, which is a propaganda outlet for the Democrat Party, is panicking. They can't believe it. They are terrified. The media is in disarray. You mentioned Dick Durbin.

Democrat senator from Illinois announced he was not running for reelection. Look, Dick Durbin is the number two Democrat in the entire Senate. He is number two only to Schumer, and he's calling it quits. He is also the top, the ranking member, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee. He used to be the chairman.

Of the Senate Judiciary Committee. And so they've got senior Democrats that are saying, get me out of this place. Well, and by the way, he said something that was really interesting, how low the bar has fallen. So Dick Durbin's excuse for why he's not running for reelection was in essence, well, I don't want to become Joe Biden. And he put it this way in the interview. Listen.

Senator, yesterday after you made your announcement that you would not be seeking reelection, there were a number of Democrats who privately really applauded your choice, saying that it was something, the right thing to do, to step aside and perhaps let a younger generation of politicians step to the forefront. We know the idea of Democrat elected officials and age has been a hot topic in recent years. Do you hope, do you agree with that thinking? Do you think it is time now for younger politicians, the next generation, to come forward?

Well, I think it's more complex. It is not just a question of a number, what your age is. Look at Bernie Sanders, for God's sake, still drawing thousands and thousands of people out for rallies, and he's a few years older than I am. The bottom line is, are you competent? Can you still do the job? That's the question the voters should ask. But should a new generation be interested in public service? You bet. I've spent my time in office trying to encourage younger people to get involved.

Senator Durbin, it's Ali Vitale. I wonder if I can pick up on something you just said, this idea of are you competent? Are you able to do this job in the Senate? As you see this push from the grassroots that Lamir is talking about here, do you think enough of your colleagues are asking themselves those fundamental questions about if they can continue to serve?

I think so. I think if you're honest about yourself and your reputation, you want to leave when you can still walk out the front door and not be carried out the back door. I mean, you hear that and it's basically saying, well, I'm not going to pull a Joe Biden and other people need to look at this as well. He was, I think, clearly knocking Joe Biden in that and what he just said as well.

Well, and nobody in that discussion acknowledged that Dick Durbin spent four years lying to the American people, saying that Joe Biden was not senile, that he was mentally capable to do the job. By the way, CNN spent four years lying to the American people, screaming that it was a conspiracy theory to point out what is obviously true and was obviously true then, that Biden's mental capacity was severely diminished. I will say this, and actually it might surprise you. I'm going to say something nice about Durbin.

So I've served with Durbin for 13 years on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and I'll tell you what I tell any nominees that are coming before judiciary. I tell them Durbin is the single most dangerous Democrat on the Judiciary Committee because I think he's the smartest Democrat ever.

And he is radical and extreme, but he's very good at sounding reasonable. There are other Democrats that are radical and extreme, as Sheldon Whitehouse and Adam Schiff, but they sound like lunatics. When they're ranting, everyone knows they're lunatics. Part of what makes Durbin such a dangerous questioner for Republican nominees or Republican witnesses is

is he's very good at masking his extreme policies in ways that sound much more reasonable than his colleagues. And so I will say for Democrats, seeing, seeing Durbin hang it up is, is a real loss to them. Yeah, no doubt. Don't forget. We do this show as a podcast. So make sure you download verdict with Ted Cruz. We do it three days a week. Don't miss an episode, grab it. And we'll see you back here next week. And on our podcast on Monday morning, I,

I was in Whole Foods the other day looking for a fun little bevy to go with my lunch, and I found my new obsession. SunSip is a gut-healthy soda from HealthAid, and they just dropped two new flavors. Dr. Bubbles is a fresh take on the doctor's signature blend of sweet fruit and subtle spices, while Cream Soda serves up velvety vanilla and sweet caramel. And the best part?

SunSip has gut-healthy prebiotics, vitamins, and minerals, all with 40 calories or less. Grab these new SunSip flavors only at Whole Foods in the beverage cooler near HealthAid Kombucha. For some of us, personal finances aren't just personal. They include a lot more people than ourselves. Loved ones, neighbors, the communities we call home, and the causes we hold in our hearts. ♪

At Thrivent, we help plan your financial picture with the bigger picture in mind. Because even though our business is helping guide your finances, our ambition is to make it mean so much more. Thrivent, where money means more. Connect with us at Thrivent.com.

Divorce can leave you feeling isolated, like you're stuck on an island with no direction. But you don't have to go through it alone. At Hello Divorce, we guide you step by step, offering everything from legal advice to financial planning so you can find your way back to solid ground. Start your divorce journey with the support you need at hellodivorce.com because you deserve a better path forward.

Go to play.zumo.com now. Life

Life is hard. Zumo is easy. I'm Rodney Williams. And I'm Travis Holloway. Welcome to the Wealth Break Podcast, a real conversation about finance.

Let's be honest. Building wealth doesn't look the same for everyone. I feel like sometimes being broke is a cycle and that we might have to revisit that. And we're not stopping at success stories. What happens when it doesn't go right? How do you cope with it? Because wealth isn't just about money. It's about creating a life where you thrive and help others do the same. Listen to the Wealth Break podcast on the iHeartRadio app.