Zohran and Bernie and AOC, Oh My!

Now playing on Netflix, The Hawk. From the mind of Will Ferrell. Oh, mama. I'm back. Comes a new original series. Get ready. Get ready. That's it. Did I stutter? When an iconic pro golfer. Lonnie. Hocked! Takes one last swing at greatness. You were a big shot golfer. I still am a big shot golfer. No one. Dad, I'm the Hawk now. Will stand in his way. Ah! That's how it's done. The Hawk now playing. Only on Netflix. From the heart of our nation's capital, Washington, D.C., backed by the trusted voices of Team Fox, a clear, fresh voice cutting through the noise to tell the truth. It's Guy Benson with Guy Benson. It is Thursday, October 16th, 2025. Welcome everyone to Guy Benson. I'm Guy Benson. Thanks so much for being here. We appreciate it. Over the next three hours, three to six p.m. Eastern, that's every weekday. And if you miss a moment, we have a podcast, which is the entire show, also every day, on demand, absolutely free of charge. Guy Benson.com, Fox Newspodcast.com, or wherever you get your podcasts. plus bonus Guy Benson on the weekends. On today's program, we'll get to our first featured guest in just a moment. Coming up in the next hour, Jimmy Phelah will join us, which should be a lot of fun. And then Law Professor Ilya Josh Shapiro on a really key case at the Supreme Court. We have a lot of other political news to get to as well. Some audio that you want to hear. It's all ahead today as the program unfolds. But we begin. With the House Majority Leader, Steve Scalise, a Republican of Louisiana, he's author of the book Back in the Game, One Gunman, Countless Heroes and the Fight for My Life. Mr. Leader, welcome back to the show. Great to have you. Guy, thanks for having me back. It's good to be with you. So we are well past now two weeks into the Democrats' government shutdown. And I'm just fascinated by some of these dynamics that we're hearing from the opposition party. They're claiming that this is a Republican shutdown caused by President Trump and by Republicans, because after all, you guys control Washington. How is this not your fault? But then they're also saying, well, we're fighting for these issues, and that's why the shutdown's happening, and we won't compromise and we won't budge until the Republicans fix the health care problem. That is also a Democrat-created problem. So they're like, it's a Republican health care crisis and a Republican government shut down, but we created the health care crisis and we shut down the government to deal with it. I just can't quite keep track of it logically. Yeah, guy, and that's because there is no logic. And this is what Democrats do. You know, they create... havoc. They create chaos. They wreck things that work well. I mean, you know, look, we had an open border. Donald Trump came in and fixed that because, as he said, we didn't need new laws. We needed a new president. But then if you look at the tax policy was about to expire and every family was about to get a tax increase and Republicans stave that off. Every Democrat voted no. So every Democrat voted against fixing the problems that they've been creating.

But Obamacare is to health care the law. Let's make no mistake about it. And it was all Democrats that voted to pass Obamacare. And premiums have gone up over 80% for families on Obamacare. And so, you know, they want to talk about health care. Well, there's a lot of things we can do to lower premiums. And it doesn't include propping up the failures of Obamacare. By the way, on that point quickly on Obamacare, because you were there for that whole legislative battle, I was very much involved on air and online and writing about it at the time. And one of the things that we were arguing, all of us on the right, if you pass Obamacare. People will not be able to keep their health care plans. They will not be able to keep their doctors because they were saying no matter what, that would always be the case. We said that's not true. Millions of people will lose their doctors and their arrangements. They said that's a lie, but we were right. They also said the national cost curve on health care would be bent downward. because of Obamacare. The opposite has happened. They also said, remember this one, families, the average family would save $2,500 a year, I believe was the claim on premiums. You just talked about how there have been double-digit increases in premiums. Then they had to pass like this emergency patch over the problem, like a band-aid on the problem during COVID. Because things were getting so bad. But they said it was temporary. They didn't want to make it permanent because it was too expensive. And now I guess after all of those disasters and all of the problems that they exclusively have created with their policies, they're shutting down the government to try to force you guys to clean up their problem. It's bizarre. that they can trick and fool the American people into thinking that it's our fault. And everybody knows what's going on. I mean, everybody knows that it was Obamacare was a Democrat-created system. And in fact, with all the problems it has, you know, I agree it's got problems, but it's problems created by Democrats. And they've never wanted to work with us. By the way, we had a provision in the working families tax cut to lower premiums on families. In fact, the CBO scored. It would have lowered premiums by 11% for work and families. And it was Democrats in the Senate. It passed the House. It was Democrats in the Senate who fought to get that provision removed because they don't care about lowering premiums. They want to bail out insurance companies. They want a single-payer health care system. It's been a religion, a cult religion of theirs since they created Obamacare. And so, you know, you go look at what was in that bill. It would have saved about $3 billion. for families in lower health care premiums, and Democrats fought to get it removed. So, you know, there are a lot of good ideas, association health plans, and, you know, health savings accounts, a lot of things that will give families more options to go back to what they promised that they lied about. If you like what you have, you can keep it. And as you pointed out, millions of people lost what they had and liked. We want to get back to those days where you and your doctor, patients and doctors, make health care decisions, not government.

bureaucrats in Washington. And if you want to have a conversation about how to do that and what needs to be fixed and what sort of premium subsidies might be appropriate or not, that's a worthwhile debate. I think I would come down on one side of it, but have those negotiations, have those discussions, but you can't do that while you're holding the entire federal government hostage with a multi-week shutdown, especially with troops about to miss paychecks. That's just not acceptable. And that's not me talking, Mr. Leader. You know this. This is the Democrats' own standard from previous Republican shutdowns. We'll have those conversations, guys, about health care or whatever, but not until the government is reopened. That's what they all said with one voice. And now I guess the response is, never mind, we're going to do it anyway because they've got a political problem on their left. Their base is angry at them. They want a fight and a resistance. against Donald Trump at all costs. And this is the way it's manifesting. And today in the Senate, they tried again, by the way. This was the 10th vote to reopen the government, 10. And the Democrats filibustered it again to keep the Chuck Schumer shut down underway. One of the Democrats who's been voting with the Republicans, though. Mr. Leader is John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. A handful of Democrats. This has been a bipartisan effort, by the way, to reopen the government. Members of both parties have voted for this bill. It's a clean CR. A majority has supported this all 10 times. But in the Senate, you've got to get to 60. You've got to overcome the filibuster and the Democrats are sticking together for the most part with the filibuster. Here is Senator John Fetterman just last night. He was on a televised forum at the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Center telling the truth about what's happening here, cut 32. That's why shutting the government is really what the Democratic Party wants to do. And I follow country, then party. And it's the wrong thing for the country in a period of chaos. I refuse to vote to shut our government down. I absolutely would love to have.

I would love to have a conversation about extending the tax credits for health care. Absolutely. But I would remind everybody, too, this was designed by the Democratic Party to expire at the end of the year. This is not something taken from by the Republicans. They were designed to expire. I mean, I'm refreshed by that candor, Steve Scalise. What do you make of that? Guy, I couldn't say it better myself. I mean, what John Fetterman said is 100% accurate. Democrats created those insurance company credits to be temporary. They literally call it that in the bill that created it, and they set them up to expire. Democrats did that. And now they're claiming, oh, my God, the sky's going to fall and people will die if they're not made permanent. Well, then why didn't Democrats do that? They never cared about this. They didn't care about any of this stuff. They just needed to have some kind of fake issue. to go tell their far-left base, the people that are about to elect Zohran Mamdani as the socialist mayor of New York who are really running their party. They wanted a fight with Donald Trump. They didn't care what it was about. They just needed to go and look at me. I'm Chuck Schumer, and they were angry at Chuck Schumer in March, because Chuck Schumer did vote to keep the government open. Chuck Schumer did the right thing in March, and he got blistered by the left for it. And so now he's got to show that he's having some kind of fight, even if it's not even real. I mean, they want taxpayer funding. Free legals, health care free legal is in their bill that they filed as an alternative. That's not serious. It's not going to happen, by the way, Guy. So John Fetterman's right. It was Democrats who created this crisis. It's a fake crisis they created so that they can now show their base. They're fighting Donald Trump. They've got to hate America rally this weekend on the mall where who knows what kind of loony-tune characters are going to come up, you know, spewing hatred for America. That's not where this country is, but that's where the Democrat Party in Washington is. I want to ask you about some Republicans in the House who aren't necessarily exactly on the same page. I think overall rank-and-file Republicans are behind leadership, both in the House and in the Senate, along with President Trump saying, we're not going to play any of these games with the Democrats until they reopen the government. But I've heard from some members, conservative members, Republican members saying, we get it, but... We should be in session anyway in the House doing other things, passing other bills, as opposed to being out of town. That's one critique I've heard. I've also heard from Marjorie Taylor Greene, and I think she's dead wrong, that the Republicans need to do all of these things that the Democrats want in terms of Obamacare bailouts. And they should also do the dirty work for the Democrats in the Senate of killing the filibuster in order to end the Democratic shutdown. I think that's very misguided, but she's saying that publicly. What's your message internally among House Republicans when it comes to the strategy here? Well, look, everybody can maybe think in their head. They might be wanting to do it a little bit different. But ultimately, you're seeing over 90, really 99% of our members are united together with Speaker Johnson, with all of us focused in the same direction. That is, let's get the government back open. You know, not playing any kind of games. You know, we didn't add anything to that clean, continuing government funding bill. We just said, let's keep everything funded at current levels while we negotiate our differences. And, Guy, we've got very big differences.

on a lot of issues on how to fund the government and set priorities for the country. But we're not going to do that during a government shutdown when troops aren't getting paid, when your TSA agents and other federal workers aren't getting paid. So we're keeping our focus on getting our job done. The Senate needs to pass that bill. And I think the pressure is going to eventually build enough to where just five more Senate Democrats need to come to their senses and get over this tantrum that Chuck Schumer is having and say, okay, end the madness. We still have big things to negotiate over, but let's not hold the entire American people hostage over those differences. It's also interesting because one angle of this, in terms of where the pain starts to come in, as I mentioned, very soon the troops, our troops, are going to stop getting paid because of this shutdown that the Democrats have created and have continued, again, the 10th vote today in the Senate, to keep the government shut down. That was exclusively the Democrats with their filibuster. And they've said, they've said openly, told reporters, we are not going to reopen the government just because troops aren't getting paid. We're not going to let that stop us or interfere with whatever we're up to here. And then I saw President Trump is trying to figure out creative accounting ways to keep the troops getting paid for as long as possible. And Democrats are saying, well, that's illegal. He can't do that. I'm not sure if they're right or wrong about that, but it seems very strange to say, we don't care if the troops are getting paid. And then when the president tries to make it work, right, to get the troops paid, they're like, oh, no, actually we're against that too. Very, very bizarre priorities, especially when you juxtapose them with one of their demands in all of this, which is free health care for illegal immigrants. Like they're fired up about free health care for illegal immigrants. but not about keeping and ensuring that the troops are paid. I mean, that is certainly a choice that they're making. Yeah, guy, the Democrat Party has lost its way. And if you ever wonder just how much of a rudderous ship they are with no leadership in the far left lunatic wing of the party that Marx has taken over their party, you can look at just some of the things you just mentioned. You know, they literally are threatening to sue Donald Trump, who did a great job of saying, I'm going to figure out a way to pay the troops, even during the government shutdown. You know, he found a way to make it happen, and some Democrats were threatening to sue him, saying he shouldn't do that because they don't want our troops to get paid. While they want illegals to get taxpayer-funded benefits, it's insanity. They were trying to gut a rural hospital fund, a $50 billion rural hospital fund. They wanted to take that money away from rural hospitals in America that have been closing, by the way, to the tune of like one a month since Obamacare passed. They want to take that money away and give that to illegals as well. And they don't want families, the men and women in uniform. You're talking about our troops. One in three men and women in uniform are living paycheck to paycheck. And they want to take that paycheck away where they can't even make their rent or house payment or truck payment. This is where the Democrat Party is. We know they're the defund the police party guy. They want to defund the police. Now they want to defend the military. I think the American people are seeing in scary view just where the Democrat Party has gone off the ledge. And might they fall off that ledge electorally again?

Some data that I want you to react to as soon as we come back. Steve Scalise, the House Majority Leader, our guest, here on Guy Benson. A fresh perspective on the topics of the day. It's Guy Benson. Queen Carvania stood haloed by the morning sun. An army hung on her every word. My champions, I have sold my chariot on Carvana. It was a lovely SUV, an inexplicably queenly offer. They're even coming to the castle to collect it. Tonight we feast! An offer you can feast on. Sell your car today on Carvana. Pick up fees, man, bye. Welcome back, everyone. We have House Majority Leader Steve Scalise still with us on Guy Benson. I want to ask you about something that aired on CNN. Harry Enton is their data guru. He looks at all the polling. And he has seen an uptick in Republicans' chances, at least based on the surveys, public opinion data, an uptick in Republicans' chances to retain control. of the House of Representatives after next year's midterm elections. I know we're still a year out. It's a lifetime in politics. All of this is subject to change, but also kind of interesting. There are certain historical trends to keep an eye on. Here's Harry Enton and cut 35. Listen. If you go back six months ago, you go back to April Cape Baldwin. What were we looking at? Well, we were looking at the Democrats with a very clear shot of taking control of the U.S. House of Representatives, according to the Kalshi prediction market odds. We saw them in an 83% chance. But those odds have gone plummeting down. Now we're talking about just a 63% chance, while the GOP's chances up like a rocket, up like gold, up from 17% to now a 37% chance. So we'll look like a pretty clear, likely Democratic. Democratic win in the House come next year has become much closer to toss-up at this point, although still slightly leaning Democratic. That's based on these prediction markets, but that's, of course, informed by data and public opinion and other trends. What do you see there? Why do you think things might be changing and trending towards you guys? Guy, the American people want competence and just sanity and government. Common sense has finally returned when Donald Trump came back to the White House when Republicans got the House and Senate combined. You saw us focusing on family issues. How do you help put more money in the pockets of families? We prevented a large tax increase by stabilizing the tax code. We secured the border. We brought safety back to communities. We're producing more energy. We put that in the work in families' tax cut. So now you go to fill up your car. You're paying less at the pump. You're paying less at the grocery store. All of those are things that really matter to families while Democrats are just catering to the Marxists, the socialists, who want government-run grocery stores, who want to defund the police, who want open borders. They're out of touch as a party with the American people. And that's why we're going to grow our majority next year.

And so we're going to keep doing our jobs. I mean, look, there's hard work ahead. President Trump, even in the shutdown, just delivered world peace. Middle East peace is something that's been a lofty but unachievable goal for presidents for decades. And Donald Trump just achieved that, you know, goes to Israel, goes to Egypt, and signs these historic accords, brings the hostages back home to their families. And then he comes back here, and he's still working, finding ways to pay the troops. I mean, this is what a leader does. And this is what Republican leadership is contrasted with Democrats who have chaos and socialism in all the cities they run. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise of Louisiana, our guest here on Guy Benson. It is day 16 of the Democrats' government shutdown. Apparently no end in sight. Maybe they want to get through these so-called no-kings rally so they can brag about it over the weekend. Who knows? But we're going to keep tracking it as this thing plays out. Mr. Leader, thank you so much for your time. We appreciate it. Hey, God bless. Great being with you guys. Thanks. More of Guy Benson is straight ahead. Don't go anywhere. We'll be right back. Cheers to America's 250th birthday. Get 20% up your first purchase at Fox Newswineshop.com with code FN Radio 20. 20%. 20% discount excludes wine club offers and cannot be combined with any other promotion. Expires July 31st, 2026. Must be 21 order to order. Please drink responsibly. Not the same talking points here. Guy Benson. Glad to have you along here on Guy Benson. Guy Benson.com. Podcasts always free. So yesterday during this hour, our colleague and our friend Martha McCallum had an exclusive one-on-one long sit-down interview with Zohran Mamdani, the communist who will likely become the next mayor of New York City. They've got a debate tonight. He's got a polling lead. Under 50%, but the anti-Zohran Mamdani contingent is split among two candidates or between two candidates, and so... You do the math. Election is just a couple weeks away. Zohran Mamdani showed up and answered every question that Martha had. I think part of this was to show his base of support in New York and elsewhere like, oh, you know, I'll go into Fox News and he had some set pieces that were clearly rehearsed to look right at the camera and to address President Trump and all this stuff. Fine. I think Martha did a really superb job with her questions. They covered a lot of ground. She had a lot of follow-ups. And as I said this morning on TV with Stuart Varney, he is always grinning. I think that has been drilled into him. He's so extreme, he cannot look extreme. That would be a bad combination. So he looks like this affable, friendly, young guy with new ideas. They're all old ideas, failed old ideas. But they sound new to a lot of people. They sound appealing. It's like, oh, we'll get other people to pay for a bunch of free stuff. It doesn't work. I will have these community plans on safety that don't involve really the police as much. This was a longtime defund the police guy. He says, oh, not anymore. That's not me anymore. The many things, many things I said over and over again for years, never mind all that. One of the only areas where he is not at least pretended to move even a tiny bit to the center is on his hatred for Israel in the Jewish state and wanting it eradicated.

So Martha asked a bunch of questions. And I think it is instructive for us to listen to some of his answers because he's a good talker. He's pretty smooth. Again, he presents a good image. So the wild-eyed radical sort of impression of him, which is absolutely deserved in terms of his policies. When that doesn't match with his persona and the way that he presents to voters, I think that is the secret sauce that he's got. And when you can be fairly charming and seem nice and you can talk, you can get away with a lot of policy extremism with voters. That's true on both sides, I think. So that's why I think he is the frontrunner here. the likely winner, the favorite, to be the next mayor of New York City, which is, again, unfathomable in some ways based on what he actually believes and is said. But we've got to fathom it because it's probably going to happen. So Martha was asking him about the peace deal in Gaza, the return of the hostages. He wouldn't give Trump credit, of course. They can't do that. And then she was trying to get some opinion from him. about the disarmament and the uprooting from power of Hamas. And interestingly, all of a sudden, Katz got his tongue, he doesn't really have an opinion on such things he would have us believe. Listen to this and cut three. I think those are bodies and remains that should absolutely be returned, and I think that I have no issue with critiquing Hamas or the Israeli government, because my critiques all come from a place of universal human rights. And my focus, however, is right here in New York City and transforming the most expensive city in America into one that's affordable for each and every New Yorker. But, okay, and I want to get to that, absolutely. But do you believe that Hamas should lay down their weapons and leave the leadership in Gaza? I believe that any future here in... New York City is one that we have to make sure that's affordable for all. And as it pertains to Israel and Palestine, that we have to ensure that there is peace. And that is the future that we have to fight for. But you won't say that Hamas should lay down their arms and give up leadership in Gaza. I don't really have opinions about the future of Hamas and Israel and the fact that anything has to abide by international law. And that applies to Hamas. That applies to the Israeli military. It applies to anyone you could ask me about. It's amazing. She had asked him just a few moments prior about Hamas executing a bunch of Palestinians that they believe are a threat to their power, just killing them in the streets in front of crowds. And we didn't get any specific answer on that at all. And then she was asking, well, what about Hamas laying down their arms, giving up their weapons, and being removed from power? And he tries to bring it back to affordability in New York a few different times. I get that as like his big talking point. By the way, his plans for that won't work. Never work. It's free stuff. I mean, that's what he's talking about. Paid for by other people, but you know, you run out of other people's money. But the question was pretty clear. Pretty clear cut. As part of the deal, Hamas has agreed to be disarmed and to leave power, but now they're killing a bunch of Palestinians. It seems like they don't want to do that.

And he says, I don't really have opinions about the future of Hamas and Israel beyond the question of justice and safety and international law. Really? That's interesting because he almost never says anything negative about Hamas, ever. He says many negative things about Israel all the time, including repeating the genocide lie over and over again. Just a few days ago, he was doing a run for a fundraising, like he called it charity, fundraising for what, for UNRWA, which is the Hamas infiltrated, disgraced UN agency that has become in many ways basically just an arm of Hamas. He was raising money for that. He's out on a run raising money. Photo op. This guy. When the ceasefire peace deal was announced, he spent most of his statement condemning Israel and again going back to genocide. He also, by the way, because the question was about disarming Hamas and laying down their weapons, he has tweeted that all guns should be banned, not in Gaza, in the United States of America. Here in America, we have a Second Amendment. a fundamental constitutional right to bear arms. He wants to ban all the guns in this country, overturn the Second Amendment, take guns away from law-abiding American citizens. But when he's asked a basic question about whether the terrorist organization Hamas responsible for many American deaths, including dozens on October 7th, should Hamas lose their weapons? He doesn't really have an opinion on the future of Hamas, he says. That's interesting because he has opinions about Israel and that conflict and the genocide and all the smears all the time. It has been, it seems the guiding passion of his life, dating back to high school. According to this glowing New York Times profile, I think they need a do-over because they anti-endorsed him before the primary and he won anyway. They're like, oh, our people are further left than even us. So they give him this giant profile piece. One of the only little nuggets of interesting information in it is that he has been a committed fanatic against Israel since like a high school club. He was heavily involved in. And then when he went to this progressive, expensive school for college in Maine, having not gotten into, I think, the Kay Ivey League school he wanted to go to when he was claiming to be an African-American on his application, which was an interesting decision that he made. But I digress. He has never not had an opinion about Israel and Palestine until he's getting questions from Martha McCallum about whether the Hamas terrorist organization that committed October 7th and finally gave back the last of the hostages, whether they should abide by the deal that has been agreed to basically by the whole world. He's so obsessed with international law. No, he's not. He doesn't care about genocide at all. There is no genocide by Israel. It's a genocidal terrorist group in Hamas that he won't even say out loud should be disarmed. And the reason he won't say it, it's an easy thing to say. You can be a fierce critic of Israel and still say, of course Hamas should not be in power and should not have weapons. That should be easy. It's only not easy. This is a point Mary Catherine Han was making. It's only not easy. It's only hard if you don't actually believe it.

So instead, you say a lot of other words to get around the actual question itself. Oh, and then, by the way, I won't play the whole thing. But the very next follow-up for Martha was about his pledge, Zohran Mamdani's, to arrest Benjamin Netanyahu if he came to New York City. And Zohran Mamdani basically was like, yes. It's international law and the international criminal court, which by the way is illegitimate and we don't recognize. He's like, well, they've got a warrant against him and I would pursue every legal means that I have. So he was actually happy to go kind of in the weeds for a full minute after that with Martha about how and if he would put handcuffs on the duly elected, democratically elected leader of an allied country. If he came to New York City, that he was happy to discuss seconds after he said, I don't really have opinions about the future of Hamas and whether they should give up their weapons. I only want to talk about affordability. Well, what about arresting Net and Yahoo? Oh, yes. Well, let's talk about that. Yes, absolutely. It really speaks for itself. What he won't say is the answer. Ladies and gentlemen. So that's a conflict far away, although unfortunately he's someone who has defended the globalized the intifada, the violent, globalized the intifada movement. He's refused to condemn that term, which is about killing Jews. That's what it means. From the river to the sea is a genocidal ethnic cleansing chant of terrorists. He supports it. Globalize the Intifada. He supports that as well, and we see the Intifada globalized as Jews are targeted and killed even in our country. He won't condemn that. Now, when it comes to violence in our streets, and specifically in New York City, Martha later asked him in this interview about a terrible crime. We talked about it here in the New York City subway. We're a 64-year-old. A pillar in his community, a church leader, was beaten to death. It's on video. The killer is a 25-year-old who had a machete. That person had 33 arrests in his past, the killer, the murderer. 33 prior arrests. He was already awaiting trial for a violent attack in Manhattan. But he was out on the street because that's how it goes in New York, despite those 33 arrests, including violence, because of bail reform. Because of the bail reform supported very much by Zohran Mamdani. He's very much in favor of that. So Martha's like, well, why was he on the street? And Zohran Mamdani says, well, we have a broken system. He says, yeah, because his bail was lowered because you support that. What would you do to stop him people like that from being out on the street? He's like, well, it's a broken system and we have to address the systemic problems. Yes, the system is broken. You helped break it. You support the brokenness. And you actually want to shatter it even worse. So Martha tries to get him to answer, okay, what would you do that? You don't believe they should be behind bars because that's too mean. They've got mental health issues. So we have to do restorative justice and all these community things and all these buzzwords. Where would he go?

He's like, well, the last resort should be involuntary commitment. Really? The last resort, I feel like the basic should be dangerously, psychotically violent people should be separated from innocent people immediately. But he views, I think, criminals mostly as victims, which is the whole problem. So she's asking him, no, no, but where? Actually, would this guy go? And then you get this answer about a clubhouse model. Cut nine. Where do these people go, though, is my question. Are you going to put them in a mental institution so they can be taken care of? Or are you going to leave them at home on medication? What's the plan? There's a plan right now that allows for involuntary confinement, which I think should be a last resort, because of the fact that when you look at the actual results, this is something that so often doesn't actually have that's what has been spoken about. But what we have today that actually works. For New Yorkers with serious mental illness, there are things like Fountain House. This is a clubhouse model. Peer-led rehabilitative treatment for New Yorkers with serious mental... Stop it right there. Stop it right there. He's talking about this Fountain House model. And apparently people were noting online, if you've been violent, you're not eligible to go there. So there goes that problem. There goes that solution for this person with 33 arrests and all the violence and then became a murderer. But he's talking about... Listen to him. A clubhouse model, a peer-led... Rehabilitative treatment center. That sounds lovely. I think for people with mental illness who are not violent and attacking people, great. If that works and is more cost effective and you can get people into rehab and it's peer led, whatever, fine. Once you have people attacking others, enough of this. This is a defund the police guy who wants to get rid of jail beds. This is an indulgence of crime and criminal mentality. It is disastrous. It has been a disaster everywhere it has been tried. He's talking about someone who beats someone to death, carrying a machete after 33 arrests, awaiting trial for another violent attack, and he's talking about the clubhouse model of peer-led rehabilitative treatment. Oh, good luck. Good luck with this guy. One more thing. Talking about attacks on bus drivers, another type of crime in New York City. Listen to this answer, cut 15. I think it's one of the key reasons why we have to make buses free is because it reduces the assaults on bus drivers. It creates a safer work environment. That's from one of his videos, not from the Martha interviews, you can hear in the music there. Well, we have to make buses free because it reduces assaults on the bus drivers. It's safer because the bus drivers are like, hey, you've got to pay, and they're like, here's a punch in the face, and I'll be out on the street immediately. Solution? We'll just make the buses free. Make everyone else law-abiding, tax-paying citizens pay for free buses, by the way, a model that has failed elsewhere.

So we all, collectively, innocent, law-abiding people have to pick up the tab as usual for Zohran Mamdani in order to take away the public safety threat. Rather than putting bad guys away and punishing crime and violence, it's like, no, no, no, we're going to come to you and take more money out of your pocket to make things free. And then maybe the violent people will stop being violent. It is a broken-brained approach. I guess some people are falling for it and think it all sounds great. In practice, catastrophe. Danger ahead, New York City. We'll be right back. Same issues, but with a fresh perspective. Guy Benson. Back here on Guy Benson, glad to have you along. Let's hit a Fox News alert. President Trump speaking at the White House right now live, let's dip in and listen. We worked very rapidly together. We had everything passed. And Alabama then took care of it and passed it. Within a week, everything was done. Really, it was something. So I want to thank Katie Britt. There's no deeper happiness and joy of raising children, and now millions of Americans struggling with infertility will have a new chance to share the greatest experience of them all. So I'd like to thank all of the people that are here, and I think we'll start with Dr. Oz. Ms. Horn, we'll go through the list, and we'll listen. And yesterday I did this, and I stood for about an hour and a half as people spoke. And they said, this time I'm sitting right there, and I'm going to watch you. I stood for an hour and a half like this. I said, you've got to be kidding. Here we go. It was one after another, and it was wonderful listening to him. But I said, if I have to do this every day? Bobby, should I say Anderson? Thank you, Bob. That's the president, and it's another event at the White House. We dipped into a little bit yesterday as well. This is an IVF-related event, one of the promises he made on the campaign trail. Keeping an eye on that. Another hour of Guy Benson coming up next. Jimmy Phala in the House. You don't want to miss that. Coming up.

new generation of conservative talk right here right now fair fun and backed by the trusted voices and reporting resources of fox news you're listening to Guy Benson and now here's your host Guy Benson It's a new hour here on Guy Benson. We're glad that you're along with us. Guy Benson.com is the website. Podcast is free every day on demand when the show is over. Fox News alert as we hit the middle hour. Dow. falling 307 points in the red today down to 45,952. That in spite of some good housing news that we got earlier where the market seemed to be surging, but a closing, as I said, down more than 300 points on the day. With us now from our New York headquarters is Jimmy Fallow, host of Fox Across America on Fox News Radio, noon to three Eastern. Also host of Fox News Saturday night, 10 p.m. Eastern on Saturdays. Jimmy, welcome back. You know, it's funny. When I listen to your introductions, I realize how much classier this show is than mine. Like my show opens with like, yeah, Mikey, I saw this chick on the subway. And do you think the giants are going to cover the spread? It's Fox Across America with Jimmy Fallow, by the way. Do you have a like one of those screens in front of you with sound effects where you could like hit a fart button? Not a fart, but we're slightly clasier than that. Are you? That would bother me, J.B. Yeah, that would bother me. But there's enough other sophomoric things happening. And if Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s on, as you know, then it's, you know, you're in that demilitarized zone where there are no broadcast standards for a good, good reason. Yeah, like the FCC leans forward. when it's you and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.. They're like, turn it up. We go from FCC to OPP. It's a totally different world. Well, you know, we have our moments. In fact, I would encourage people to tune in later in the home stretch our final segment. We'll be talking about a bachelor party coming up, and who knows where that conversation might go. So I'm just teasing that out there. Jimmy, I want to ask you because there was. We could do the thing and play the clip of Zohran Mamdani talking about taxi strike in New York. That would take up a lot of time, though, and we'd have to listen to more of him because I played a number of clips with him and Martha in our first hour. What's your impression? Watching the interview, I thought she was great and did a really good job. What's your impression of that interview and of him?

I really think, and it's so fascinating to watch it play out, but there's this deja vu quality to him that just so reminds me of Obama. in that he's like a hot topic candidate. He's, you know, he's charismatic. He's got a big, you know, outward personality. But he's an empty vessel in terms of substance and policy. And there's so many things he says, of course, that sound good as you know. And they engage a younger audience like conventional politicians do not. So it makes him potent. But the reason I draw that parallel to Obama is... because of policy. The government shut down right now because of what that young charismatic guy did to the health care industry back in 2009. We're sitting here 16 years later fighting over subsidies for a health care bill that, as you know, was too expensive and not sustainable and blah-pity blah. And that's where the Zohran Mamdani thing leads you. Do you know that quote about, I'm making the buses free? Yeah. Because there'll be less attacks on drivers. Yeah, in fact, we played in the last... Let's hear it again. Cut 15. I think it's one of the key reasons why we have to make buses free is because it reduces the assaults on bus drivers. It creates a safer work environment. Which, in theory, sounds empathetic and compassionate because people aren't going to be haggling over the fare. But you know who else assaults bus drivers? The hobbits, the pantless time travelers that are assaulting everybody on the subways and on the sidewalks. And if you're a bus driver now, you have to pull over no matter who wants to get on because there's no barrier to entry. So it's one of those things where it's like a misguided empathy that caters to young people who think they want to be good and help the world. But the long-term bill for that is, ooh, you know what I'm? That's the part that concerns me. But he's going to win. I think he's going to win. Do you think he's going to win? Oh, yeah. And by the way, on the bus driver point, Mary Catherine Hamm tweeted this. It really is a distillation of very progressive priorities. Coddling the violent over protecting the law abiding. Loons get mad when they're asked to pay several bucks for a ride and they punch the hardworking people driving them. Solution, the law abiding shall pay their fares. That's what it comes down to. And he says it, and I'm sure a lot of people, like, if you don't think too hard about it for more than 10 seconds, you're like, oh. Yeah, if you make it free, then they won't punch people and then there'll be less violence, good. But it's like, okay, first of all, the people who are going to be violent are going to be violent, period. And secondly, you're going to ask all of us to foot the bill, like as what, a bribe to stop criminals from doing violence? This is...

This is really messed up, actually. I know. And this is the larger point to all of this is like, let's say statistically he's right because attacks on drivers go down because they don't have to interact with him. But you know who else gets attacked everybody else on the bus? Back to that point, how you said violent people are going to be violent people. A guy that punches a bus driver in the face is not punching him in the face because of $2.90. He's punching him in the face because he's a loony. And he doesn't value anybody else's, you know, personal sovereignty. And that's the issue. But I do think he's going to win. I think Andrew Cuomo killed off half his voters. Uh, Curtis Sliwa, can I give you some inside information on Curtis Sliwa? Because he said they offered him 10 million. And now he has private security because he thinks the billionaires are coming after him. I saw Curtis Sliwa walking down 6th Avenue like five hours ago by himself. He took a selfie with two women and he was eating a sandwich. I'm not even kidding. So if he has private security, I guess, yeah, they were on break. Or they're very good. Now, here's the thing.

And this is where I will give some credit to Zohran Mamdani. I think politically he's talented. I think policy-wise disaster, I think, you know, his Israel stuff, I think, is just morally depraved. But he showed up. He took questions for 40 minutes or whatever it was with Martha, follow-up after follow-up. And, you know, Jimmy, there are some Democrats slash socialists slash communists who don't like follow-up questions. And one of them wants to be governor of California. We talked about Katie Porter and that. It's like, oh, you're going to ask me another follow-up question. I thought this was supposed to be a pleasant experience. That, I mean, how does someone like that get into politics and succeed in politics? I never understand how some of these worst people imaginable. are able to get ahead in anything, let alone politics. Yeah, it's especially fascinating with her. And I've said this before. I was on with Mary Catherine Hamm yesterday on Newsroom. Watching Katie Porter is the closest the rest of us will ever come to working backstage on the Ellen show. Do you remember how Ellen was supposed to be sweet? She was like, be kind, and then they'd go to break. And she'd be like, get the F away from me. Don't look at me. No eye contact. But the point is, how do people like that succeed? It's that there are a lot of well-meaning people out there who are not on board with, like they didn't know they'd be in a conflict. You know, a lot of times someone screams at you for no reason. And two minutes later, you're like, I should have said X. You know, because you're not used to being in that close level confrontation. Katie Perry, Katie Perry, Katie Porter. I don't doubt she's kissed a girl and liked it, though. But Katie Porter has Wedger McCollett. She is browbeating people, and you can see it. Because when they're taking advantage of people who don't want to fight back. Yes. Who want to make a difference, non-confrontational. And she's like, I will be shameless and awful and terrible. And I will get away with it. And it just, it reminds me of your reign of terror through the halls of Fox News, actually. Good for you, Guy Benson. I mean, I've seen, I've seen your rider for your events. It's like no. no eye contact, except for the talent. I mean, that's tough, but at least I'm talent, which is why we can do these interviews. Jimmy Phala, Fox Across America, Fox News Saturday. Always enjoy it, sir. The best. All right. We'll take a quick break. We'll be right back with more after this. I'm Guy Benson. We are back. In the last hour, we welcomed the House Majority Leader Steve Scalise in the program. If you missed it, you can catch it on the podcast. We will replace some of it in our final hour coming up. But one of the things that we talked about with Leader Steve Scalise was a sound bite from John Fetterman, the Democratic Pennsylvania Senator.

who was elected in 2022, and he's been a bit of a maverick in a way that you don't often actually see from Democrats. He was elected as a progressive. Even in his primary in 2022, he was the left-wing progressive darling. The squad and that whole crew, they were for him instead of the more establishment choice, Congressman Connor Lamb. And what's interesting is, even though John Fetterman, has voted with his party like, what, 95-something percent of the time, and is still quite progressive in many ways, he has really angered and alienated the left-wing base of his party, to the point that they are now trying to plot a way to throw him out. They want to primary him and defeat him next time he's up. And, ironically, Connor Lamb... The more establishment choice has been going around attacking John Fetterman from the left, being like, oh, he's not actually a progressive, I am. And you've heard from a number of people, squad members, left-wingers, apologizing to Connor Lambs, saying, we're so sorry we doubted you and picked John Fetterman. Our mistake, our bad, let's team up and get him out. There's a story I saw, I believe, today in Axios about how they are planning to primary John Fetterman out of the Democratic Party and run someone else, apparently now even further to the left, in that state in 2028 it would be. Now, John Fetterman seems to be looking around Pennsylvania. He sees that Trump carried Pennsylvania again. He sees that Dave McCormick won the Senate race there. He sees a lot of the movement in terms of voter registration and some of the inroads Republicans have made even in the cities, etc. And he's thinking, maybe I shouldn't just be a run-of-the-mill Democrat. Maybe this state is changing and I need to have a brand that is really distinct from the National Democratic Party. And so he has been bipartisan in a number of ways. I think his biggest sin, quote unquote, as far as the left is concerned, is his steadfast support for Israel. He has not wavered one bit in his support for the Jewish state in their war, started by Hamas terrorists on October 7th. He has been spectacular. Now, it wasn't long ago that many Democrats would be exactly the same way, but this isn't that Democratic Party anymore. Those voices who are outspoken and brave, frankly, the way that John Fetterman has been on that issue, are pretty few and far between, especially for anyone who has higher ambitions in that movement, in that party. And so he's got a political target on his back because he is so unapologetically pro-Israel. He is also not someone who is willing to reflexively, angrily, constantly attack President Trump and criticize him and talk about Trump and Republicans in these really acerbic over-the-top demonizing terms. The clip that we played for Steve Scalise earlier was John Fetterman saying, yeah, the Democrats, my party, are shutting down the government. It's us. We've done it.

I won't do it. I voted every time against it. I won't shut down the government. And that's true. He has been a yes vote to reopen the government every time, all 10 times. But only a few of his colleagues on that side of the aisle agree with him. The rest of them are going along with this Chuck Schumer shutdown filibuster, and he criticized them for it. He said it's hurting people. It's irresponsible. I promised I would never vote to shut down the government. So I'm keeping the promise. He also said, by the way, My party wants to talk about health care and this mess with health care. They did this. We did this. Democrats voted to make this temporary, these premium subsidies, setting aside the ongoing failure of the so-called Affordable Care Act over years. We also touched on that with the House Majority Leader. But John Fetterman is saying what they want to re-up with their blaming Republicans for not agreeing to as part of this hostage-taking deal. with the government shutdown, that was a sunset, that was an expiration that we set, the Democrats. So I'm sure he is not making any new friends on the left because he is at least occasionally telling the truth, whether about Israel or the political games that the party's playing, they want someone who is a lockstep leftist. And refreshingly, it has turned out, that John Fetterman is not that. And we'll see even if he has a net favorable rating in Pennsylvania, which he does, if that is almost a crime against the Democratic Party and the left wing ahead of the 2028 reelect that he might be seeking. At the same forum where he was being candid about the government shutdown in health care, he also talked about the need to lower the temperature. We get these bleeding from time to time. from people on the left. It doesn't really seem like they mean it because a lot of them go right back to excoriating Republicans and conservatives in the most extreme terms imaginable. One of the worst right now for a while has been the governor of Illinois, J.B. Pritzker. But John Fetterman, particularly after Charlie Kirk was assassinated, in this environment, people taking... lethal shots at ice, all sorts of death threats flying around. John Fetterman saying, no, let's not do that. Let's take a step back. And he reiterated that point at this Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Center forum. I want you to listen to what he had to say because it's worthwhile. Cut 33. I'm the only Democrat of my family. I grew up in a conservative part of Pennsylvania. And I grew up and I know and I love people that voted for President Trump. But they are not fascists. They're not Nazis. They're not trying to destroy the Constitution and those things. And that's part of another thing. I refuse to call people Nazis or fascists or I would never compare anybody, anybody to Hitler and those things. And now that kinds of extreme rhetoric is going to continue. We're going to be more likely in resulting in extreme kind of outcomes and political violence and doing all these kinds of things like Charlie Kirk. He brings up Charlie Kirk. He wasn't finished with that point. He went on, cut 34. For me, all I could say is, is like, let people grieve, give people the space. I'm not going to use that terrible thing and that plastic assassination to make my argument and try to put out my views. It's like, my God, you know, he's a father that had his neck blown out by a bullet. And now people have forgotten. President Trump was in my state was shot in the head.

And if that would have, could you imagine where our nation would be if he was hit in the same way with Kirk? We really got to turn the temperature down. And we can agree to disagree on these kinds of things. But right now, shutting down the government, I just can't take it that. So, first of all, it sounds like he has improved. In terms of his condition, right? When he was first elected, he really could barely string together any sentences. They voted for him anyway because he's like, oh, he's a good progressive. And then he's saying things like this, and he's supporting Israel. And even though his voting record is still almost exactly what they would want, I guess there's no tolerance for this kind of thinking. And I think that kind of thinking that he just expressed represents a vast majority of Pennsylvanians. and a vast majority of Americans. But for hardcore partisans, that's a problem. He seems to be one of the only sensible Democrats with his head screwed on the right way in Congress right now, which is why I think that they are so angry at him. They view it as a betrayal. They thought they were getting something. They got almost all of what they were voting for, but the exceptions, I guess they can't abide. And so the plot is underway to primary him. We'll see if they succeed in that endeavor. He knows that they're trying. And yet he's out there saying things like this anyway, because I guess he believes them. This is more conviction and character than I thought he had, admittedly, during that campaign. And although I still disagree with him almost all the time on most of these things, I've got to give him credit. I do. I wish we had more of this in our politics on both sides of the aisle, quite frankly. He seems like a welcome exception to a lot of the rules that are prevailing these days in American politics. So this is a credit where it's due segment, which we have to do from time to time if we want to keep ourselves honest. More of Guy Benson coming up next. Don't go anywhere. Guy Benson, sponsored by Previgin. Previgin, made for your brain. Our thanks to Previgin, we are halfway through Guy Benson on this Thursday, Guy Benson.com, podcast always free. Let's revisit the Virginia. statewide races with election day coming up in just a matter of weeks. Early voting is happening right now. I've already voted in Virginia. The top race that people are talking about isn't even necessarily the gubernatorial race, although that is certainly heated up, some polling suggesting that it is tightened. It's the AG race because you have this sociopath, Democrat Jay Jones. who has admitted that he sent text messages to a Republican legislator talking about his desire, his fervent, real desire, to murder one of his Republican colleagues and also murder that Republicans' young children. It's a scandal that has exploded and has roiled the Democratic Party. Abigail Spanberger, who is the nominee for governor, does not know what to do about this.

She won't cut her running mate loose. She won't unendorse Jay Jones. I'm not sure what it would take to get her to unendorse one of her running mates. But apparently fantasizing about murdering Republicans and Republicans' kids doesn't quite cross the line for her, which is extraordinary and disgusting. And I've seen some polling that suggests that race has been turned upside down, flipped on its head. And now Jason Miaris, who's the Republican, might have a polling lead statewide as this starts to trickle down to voters and get into the bloodstream. Miaris is trying to press his advantage in a few different ways. And I'll come back to Abigail Spanberger and the gutless cravenness of the Democratic Party in Virginia in just a moment. They, I think, stepped in it yesterday and made a really stupid mistake. And Winsome Earle-Sears, the Republican running for governor, is making them pay for it. We'll get to that. But first, specifically on the AG race, Jason Miaris is not just focusing on the text messages. Because I think that is an issue that should be disqualifying for Jay Jones. It shows that he should be nowhere near any significant power, let alone be the top law enforcement official in the state of Virginia. Absolutely not. But he's also extremely vulnerable in other ways. He is soft on crime. He got caught up in the whole 2020 social justice movement. He is a left-wing radical who cannot keep Virginia safe. He's part of the police skeptical at best wing of the Democrat Party. Miaris is highlighting that in ads. He's also talking about the legal trouble that Jay Jones himself has gotten into. He wants to be Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia, but he broke the law, was convicted of it, and now allegedly has served the sentence he was given in a way that was not permissible either. Here's an ad that Miaris' campaign is up with in Virginia, cut 39. On a dangerous stretch of I-64, Jay Jones pushed the needle to 116 miles an hour. That puts regular Virginians in jail. But Jay Jones is a politician. He got off. Jay Jones's punishment for endangering lives, community service, and he served himself. Jay Jones counted work for his political committee to avoid jail. Jay Jones is too soft on crime. Like his own. I'm Jason Miara's candidate for Attorney General, and I sponsored this act. Too Soft on Crime, like his own. Right, he talks about murdering people that he disagrees with, along with their kids. He said that the Republican legislator and his wife were breeding little fascists. The little fascist, two and five years old at the time, should be dead, should be killed, and die in their mother's arms to advance Jay Jones' political agenda. He said this. He confirmed that's what he actually believes. And he wants voters to ignore it. And I think he also wants to ignore the fact that he was driving 116 miles an hour, which is so reckless and so dangerous. It wasn't just a speeding ticket. That is a violation of the law that required a judge to get involved. And he was sentenced to a ton of community service. Now, as the ad points out, if you're a normal person,

In Virginia, you might not get that kind of special treatment. You might go behind bars. But Jay Jones is connected, his family's connected, he's in the political ruling class. He's a left-wing Democrat, so he got special treatment. But he did have to do community service, and he decided that he was going to serve out that sentence by volunteering, quote, unquote, at his own political pack. That's crazy. That is not community service. That is self-service. which seems to be a bit of a theme with Jay Jones. And the prosecutor in the case said, no, that was not allowed. He did not have permission. It is not a charity. Jay Jones does not run a charity. He runs a pack. So this is someone who just doesn't believe in accountability. He believes in murdering his opponents and no accountability for himself. Does that sound like someone who should be Attorney General anywhere? I don't think so. Abigail Spanberger. The running mate of Jay Jones, oh, she's not sure. She doesn't think he should have said that, but she won't revoke her endorsement. And so as she tries to walk around this issue and dance, including at a recent debate where she wouldn't look at Winsome Earle-Sears, would not answer direct questions, she tried to say, oh, well, you know, I'm just running my own race, and it's everyone's own choice what they do about Jay Jones on the ballot. And I think Miara's in a very clever... little bit of jujitsu here. He said, okay, I think we can use that in an ad to perhaps make a permission structure for Democrats in Virginia. If they are committed to vote for Abigail Spanberger, we want them to vote for Winsome Earle-Sears and elect Republicans, but if they're going to vote for Abigail Spanberger, they don't have to vote for Jay Jones and the depravity that he represents. Don't ask us, Miaris is saying, ask Abigail Spanberger. This is a clever ad. Cut 40. Are you voting for Abigail Spanberger? What about Jay Jones? The comments that Jay Jones made are absolutely abhorrent. Abigail Spanberger refused to endorse Jay Jones three times. And it's up to every person to make their own decision. You still endorse Jay Jones as attorney general. I'm saying as of now it's up to every voter to make their own individual decision. Make your own decision. Say no to Jay Jones. I'm Jason Yarez, candidate for attorney general. I sponsor this ad. That's smart. That is a direct play for ticket splitters. And if that's what it takes convincing a certain number of Democrats not to support Jay Jones to make sure that guy doesn't become attorney general, that is the job of the Miaras campaign. Now, it's true that Abigail Spanberger would not affirm her ongoing endorsement of Jay Jones, but because she's endorsed him and has not rescinded it, that means the endorsement stands. Which brings us to something really smart that the Winsome Earle-Sears campaign just did yesterday. Virginia Democrats made a very foolish decision. They decided to try to exploit the young Republicans' telegram text message scandal as a weapon and deploy it against Republicans in Virginia and to try to throw down a gauntlet and set a trap for Winsome Earle-Sears.

We talked about this yesterday. You had some of these people. These are not kids. These are grown adults talking like they're these edgy, edge lord characters saying some horrible things, bigoted things, whether they mean it in their hearts, whether they're just trying to impress each other by being as offensive as possible or whatever. I don't know. I don't really care. I think if you are involved in a political organization, especially in a position of leadership. At the very least, you were exhibiting horrible judgment by doing this sort of thing and writing it all down. Like you should not be trusted to beat political opponents who are going to use this type of thing against you for the rest of your life. Why would you do that if you care at all about winning elections, which is the point of being in a political movement, winning elections? And if there is animus, as stated towards Jews and black people, and you're using different versions of the N-word and talking in a very provocative way about sexual assault or Nazis and Hitler and gas chambers and all of that, it's just really ugly. And it has been roundly condemned on much of the right and within the Republican Party. I think the vice president, JD Vance. is making the point that, well, what Jay Jones did is a lot worse. I happen to agree with that, but I think you can actually condemn both, which is what I've done. And I guess the Virginia Democrats thought, ooh, maybe we've got this moment here. Maybe we can trap Winsome Earle-Sears. And we can see if she'll condemn. and call on these people to step down because this is a hypocrisy moment. Maybe this is our salvation. This gets us off the hook on Jay Jones because of these rando Y.R. people who are not running for statewide office anywhere, to my knowledge. These are just people that we've never heard of. It's not the same thing at all in terms of the impact of what was said. And Jay Jones, by the way, was not just joking or trying to impress someone. He was expressing what he actually believes as he made clear in that text exchange. Anyway, the Virginia Democratic Party puts out a press release yesterday. Sears must call on all young Republicans implicated in racist text scandal to step down from their positions. The Democrats are like, oh, we've got her now. We've got it right where we want her. Let's see. Let's see how she handles this. When some Sears tweets back, quote tweet. Easy. They absolutely must step down. Now it's your turn, Abigail. Which is just the perfect response. If those people who are like low-level apparatchiks in like the YRs universe, if they hold any position of significant power or trust, I think they've forfeited it. And they need to go figure things out and grow up and work on themselves. and wonder as an adult, why am I behaving this way? And what's in my heart? But they don't need to be in a position of authority or power for all sorts of reasons. Winsome Earle-Sears is like, yeah, great. Thanks, Dems. This is an easy one. She goes in for the two-handed slam dunk. I'll happily do that. Over to you, Abigail Spanberger. Will you do the same thing about your own running mate?

who has said things that we believe, and I think most people could agree, are significantly worse. The Virginia Democrats thought this was a trap for Winsome Earle-Sears because they are so blinded, they are so blinkered. They have been so twisted up. on what to do about Jay Jones that they feel like everyone else is as cynical and partisan as they are. So wins some Sears. Well, she won't be able to do this. So we'll make the point. And then Sears immediately just throws it right back in their faces. Yep, done. Check that box. Happy to do it. What about you, Abigail? Are you still standing by your running mate? And in response to that, crickets. Sears was willing, eager, and able instantly. to do the easy and correct thing, to then go right back and highlight how Virginia Democrats, who brought this up for some reason, how stupid, and Abigail Spanberger and the rest of them cannot do this. A self-own, an own goal by the Democrats in Virginia, well played on all of these counts, I would say, by the Republicans in this race. I certainly hope voters are paying attention. More of Guy Benson coming right up. Always Fresh, Always Fair. Guy Benson. Back here on Guy Benson, pleased to be joined by Ilya Josh Shapiro, Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow and Director of Constitutional Studies. Ilya, great to have you back here. Good to be with you. This has turned out to be quite the case. We didn't think it was last term when they argued it, but once they said it for re-argument, it really is a reconsideration of how the Voting Rights Act applies to districting. Yes, so this is a big case at the Supreme Court that you're referring to. It was highly anticipated. Oral arguments were this week, and a lot of people listening in with great interest. You paid close attention to what the justices were saying and possibly telegraphing. Before we got to what your observations were from yesterday, just in like a quick minute thumbnail sketch, explain to the audience why this case is so significant, why it matters. Yeah, it's called Louisiana versus Calais. So it involves a map by the Louisiana legislature for their house districts. There are six districts in Louisiana. And initially, they drew five districts that were heavily Republican, one that was heavily Democrat and also a majority minority, heavily black. And that got challenged by the NACP and others. They got ruled against as having voter dilution under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which guarantees that your right to vote can't be denied or abridged based on race. And there's kind of been this Goldilocks theory of how this is applied. You have to use race a little bit to give racial minorities the opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice, but not too much because that then violates constitutional equal protection, which is what happened with the second map.

So they went back to the drawing board, drew a new map with two majority-minority districts, and that got challenged by other voters, and that brought us to the Supreme Court, where the court is now deciding whether that Goldilocks theory of using race, whether that's even justiciable anymore, and do we want to be in the business of policing this racial political gerrymandering? So if they are to throw out racial gerrymandering, which I think... Most Americans would say is a bad thing, actually. The left would, of course, disagree and say it's very important in all of that. I think the average American, much like we see on discrimination when it comes to college admissions or in employment, a lot of these affirmative action type programs are extremely unpopular with the American people, racially, explicitly, racially gerrymandering congressional districts, I think would offend the overall sensibilities, the colorblind sensibilities of many Americans. And if the Supreme Court were to further dilute that, I know people on the left say that would be a terrible outcome for race-related reasons, I think part of what they're worried about is the political impact of what that would mean in terms of redrawing districts and how it could, frankly, help Republicans gain a lot of seats in Congress. What do you think is going to happen? I know you can't always count on the oral arguments to predict what's going to come down, but based on what you heard. What's your analysis? Well, first of all, what you're raising, the stereotyping of people by race and thinking that they have to vote a certain way if they're a given race. Yeah, that makes a lot of people uncomfortable. That came up during arguments. And this idea that you need to draw majority, minority districts, that actually came out of corrupt bargains in the 80s and early 90s in Georgia, most notably, where the Republican Party was in collusion with... black leaders, MAACP, and otherwise, to draw safe Republican districts on the one hand and safe black Democratic districts, on the other hand, which is why the joke goes that the Voting Rights Act was not designed to help the interests of white Democrats in the South, thinking about the history in the 60s of white Democrats in the South. But anyway, back to the argument at the Supreme Court, I think there's a clear majority to rule... against the application of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to districting, whether they throw out their precedent altogether or just narrow it in such a way that you have to have some sort of smoking gun that addresses specific discrimination, something like that. That's up on the air. What theory, what legal theory they're going to pursue to get there. But clearly the court is uncomfortable with district judges ordering states, which is what they've been doing, to draw districts essentially based. on race. And what that means in the broader perspective is unclear whether that's a slam dunk for Republicans or what have you at issue in Louisiana. So maybe less of an explicit political impact than some people are expecting, but still seems like both sides arguing that this could have an earthquake-type reverberation depending on what the court does. Ilya Josh Shapiro is Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow and Director of Constitutional Studies, our guest here on the show. Good to be with you, as always, Guy. Final hour of Guy Benson coming up next. A few words from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. We've got some reactions as well. Coming up.

Raise your glass to Guy Benson Happy Hour. Brought to you by the Finnish Long Drink. Finland's most popular alcoholic beverage is taking America by storm. Visit thelongdrink.com. And now, here's Guy Benson. Happy hour time on Guy Benson on this Thursday. Thanks so much for tuning in. Guy Benson.com is our website. Podcast always free, always on demand, when the program is over. Guy Benson.com, Fox Newspodcast.com, or wherever you get your podcast. That includes, of course, bonus Guy Benson on the weekends. This radio hour is sponsored by the Finnish long drink, delicious and refreshing. I think we might enjoy some this weekend. Please drink responsibly, 21 plus only. The Longdrink.com. Catch me tomorrow on America's Newsroom sometime around 9 to 10-ish a.m. Eastern Fox News Channel was on Varney today, keeping me busy. Also scheduled to join Fox and Friends weekend on Sunday, if you want to make a note of that. So last night on CNN, they decided to host a forum with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders talking about the shutdown. It's kind of interesting to... have a big hour-long special about the shutdown featuring the people who have brought us the shutdown, who voted for the shutdown, to both lament the shutdown that they've created and backed repeatedly, and then also to talk about why the issues that they've identified behind it are important, right? Really trying to have it always. And so you had this young woman and this older man. This duo of socialism in the United States. They teamed up for their anti-oliarchy tour just recently. Remember that as they jetted around on private jets from place to place because, you know, security and efficiency and all that. Certainly not the behavior of an oligarch to be on a private jet, but they happily did that. I guess you don't really have to think too much about the carbon footprint when you are a socialist. Bernie Sanders, of course, now owns three homes in this country. His brand of socialism has been quite lucrative for him in this capitalist country. In any case, they showed up on CNN and had a lot to say about a lot of things. I want to focus especially on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. the congresswoman from New York City, because I think a lot of people on the right see her as something of a punchline, something of a wild-eyed radical who is a socialist unapologetically and will lead her party down the path to oblivion. And I think that is possible, but I also think it is possible that if the political winds start blowing in another direction and we seem to have... a pendulum that swings pretty dramatically back and forth in this country, I fear that someone like her or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez herself could absolutely get elected. Not just in New York, not just maybe statewide if she decides to primary Chuck Schumer if he runs again for re-election. I wonder if she wants to run for president.

I wonder if she has her eyes on the Oval Office already, perhaps even in 2028. And I think some people would laugh and say, no chance. Let them nominate her. She would go down in a ball of flames. Maybe. Quite possibly. But if the country was tired of Trump and JD Vance and things weren't going well economically for whatever reason and people were unsatisfied, and all of a sudden... You see the wind start blowing in a very different direction. I think almost anyone can win the presidency under certain circumstances if nominated by a major party. That is just my clarion call warning. about this person, which is not to say that she should never be ridiculed or mocked because she often deserves it. For example, here she was last night in Cut 17, warning about big bad corporations. See if you can catch what's weird about what she's saying here. Cut 17. Rivers in rural areas were on fire because of corporations poisoning the people who lived in those areas. Poor middle class communities getting poisoned and dumped on by corporations like Deloitte and 3M pouring chemicals into these places. And they want to call it a democratic priority. So Deloitte, one of the two big, bad companies that she name checked there, Deloitte is an accounting firm. And they do consulting. A consulting and accounting firm, to my knowledge. doesn't have a bunch of chemicals to be dumping into rivers to be lit on fire to poison people. Now, maybe she was thinking of some other company and she got them confused and misspoke. Maybe she's just making that up and pulling out the name of a company that she doesn't like straight out of the rear end to just say it on national television because even if it's not... poisoning people with chemicals, surely Deloitte being a big company has done some other evil things. So we'll just trash them publicly. I don't know exactly what happened there. I do know that if Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez were a conservative with a national following and she said something like that, there would be mockery all over the place. And they'd be trying to Sarah Palinize her if they hadn't already. I also do wonder if she doesn't clarify what she meant by that. Like, could Deloitte maybe have something to say about that? If you're being accused by a member of Congress on national television of poisoning people with chemicals, you're like, yo, we're an accounting firm. What are you talking about? I don't know if that's legally actionable. I don't know if it's worth the trouble for Deloitte, but that's interesting to me. And I think it is worth... definitely noting how she plays fast and loose with the truth, and she can really get herself tied up into knots, and I think sometimes mockery is the best strategy, and certainly she deserves it. But that is not the same as underestimating the possibility of someone like her or her, having a real chance. I think her base, I think the party's base, is sick of what they view as the old guard.

They view them as weak and out of touch and not willing to fight enough. And look, we talked earlier about Zohran Mamdani. If you've got Democrats in New York City willing to nominate and then elect a communist who is sympathetic to Islamic terrorists, and that's what he is. He's both of those things in my view. Make him mayor of New York City not that far removed from 9-11. I don't think it is a major leap to see the national base of the party rallying to someone younger and much more ideologically extreme. And again, depending on the overall vibes in the country in the mood of the electorate, you put someone on a major party ticket, there is a decent chance, given whatever environment might exist, that that person could win. Now, part of the reason, though, that I think... the AOCs and the hard left and the Democratic Party, which has been yanked dramatically in that direction. Part of the reason that they will have problems electorally for a while is that they have really alienated men in particular who came out of the woodwork to vote for President Trump, not just white men, men across the board. The Democratic Party is very feminized. And there's a sense that they actually hate men and masculinity. And they view us as toxic and bad. And so much of their messaging and their posture generally has been oriented that way. Men have taken notice. And by the way, a lot of women who love the men in their lives have taken notice. So Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on CNN last night, she took a stab at this issue that her party has. And I think she made it worse. She actually exemplified precisely what the problem is with no ability, it would seem to me, to extricate herself or themselves from this issue. They're in this ideological and political identity politics-driven cul-de-sact. I think it is really damaging to them. Listen to Cups 16. And they are able to radicalize and target and exploit a generation of young boys in particular away from healthy masculinity and into an insecure masculinity that requires the domination of others who are poorer, browner, darker, or a different gender than them. And that is why they are resonating online because they are appealing to the most basest, and worst parts of human nature. Most basest. Okay. Talking about Republicans and conservatives having some success in the online marketplace of ideas. And look, I do think that there are some elements of the online hard right that I am deeply uncomfortable with myself. And we talk about that. The problem is they paint with a very broad brush. She's talking about how they've targeted and exploited this generation of young boys in particular, away from healthy masculinity. I would love to hear a follow-up on that. Please, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, tell us, what is healthy masculinity? My guess is her vision of healthy masculinity is absolutely alien and foreign when it comes to what most guys think.

of themselves and what masculinity ought to be. And a lot of women, too, by the way. Her definition of healthy masculinity, I think, is a huge illustration of the problem if they have on the left. Then she talks about, oh, well, now they just require the domination in their own minds of others who are poorer, browner, darker than they are. I've got news for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Donald Trump didn't just dominate among white men in 2024. He pulled in a ton of support, as did Republicans, among men who are, to quote her, poorer, and darker. Because they don't like being shamed and scolded by people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She cannot help herself. She also could not help herself, by the way. She was asked about Gaza and the ceasefire and the hostages. And she was pressed by Caitlin Susan Collins a few times, the CNN anchor, about Trump and the credit that he ought to get as the commander-in-chief, as the indispensable pillar of this whole thing. And she just would not give Trump the credit. There was this back and forth, including this part of it. Listen to Cut 19 here. For everyone's benefit, I pray that it does. But I do believe we need to see if it holds. I don't believe that there's been a history of fidelity to these agreements. And so I think we have to ensure that we will see the terms held to. Do you give him credit, though, for getting to this point where it did get those 20 hostages back home with their families? In this particular development, yes, but we also know that President Trump. was an obstacle to peace previously as well. No, he was not. So when she was talking about the history of fidelity to the agreements and being skeptical of that, I actually agree with her. I share that skepticism. Except not for the reason that I suspect she's skeptical. I think she's worried about Israel because she's on the hard left and this is what they do. The worry, the genuine worries about Hamas, of course, the terrorist organization that's already playing games. and very arguably violating the terms of this ceasefire deal, not just by slaughtering fellow Palestinians that are disloyal to them or accused of collaboration or whatever, but also engage in these manipulations about the return of deceased hostages bodies. Saying, oh, we don't know where they are. We only have a small fraction of the ones that we've agreed to give back. One of them was identified. by DNA not to have even been in Israeli hostage. Like there's some random body of a gauze, and they're like, put him in a coffin and send them back. Let's see if they buy it. So if there's a concern about the history of fidelity to agreements, yeah. There is a big worry about that when it comes to Hamas specifically and the Palestinians in Gaza, which is why there needs to be followed through. But notice how she sort of blows past the hostages. She's like, well, in that particular area, yes, but we know that President Trump was an obstacle to peace previously. No, he was not. She views helping Israel and rallying to the side of Israel and using American might against Iran's nuclear program.

She views those things as an obstacle to peace, when in fact they were essential ingredients for peace because she doesn't understand peace through strength. She doesn't understand that hardened evil enemies of Western civilization prey on weakness. Weakness that I'm sure in her mind she views as peaceful. and the path to peace, and probably healthy masculinity as well. It doesn't work. It doesn't work out here in the real world. Definitely doesn't work in that region of the world. Up next, what did Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have to say about taxpayer-funded health care for illegal immigrants? That's been a topic of interest recently. We'll play that sound and react next. Same issues, but with a fresh perspective. Guy Benson. Back on Guy Benson, we're talking about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie last night on TV. Another point I want to bring up here. Healthcare for illegal immigrants. The Democrats have put in the middle of this shutdown that they voted for, what, 10 times now, to keep it going. The Republicans want to reopen the government and negotiate other issues after. Democrats saying, nope, we're shutting it down, filibuster, filibuster, filibuster, filibuster. And Republicans have said, you're doing this? Because one of your demands, as part of the $1.5 trillion in new spending that you want, in order to reopen the government, you're doing this because you want to once again get the money-flowing taxpayer dollars to illegal immigrants' health care coverage. And Democrats said, how dare you? That's a lie. That's not true. It's in their bill, I believe page 57, if I'm not mistaken. Speaker Johnson quotes that all the time. It's also their position. Free health care paid for by us for illegal immigrants. In 2020, every Democrat running for president raised their hand, asked if they support that position, all of them on stage. When they talk about single-payer health care, which they want in this country, that includes everyone, including illegal immigrants. I mean, there's all sorts of problems with that scheme, one of which is that it would be unaffordable. especially because we'd be covering illegal immigrants. So they both claim it's a Republican lie. to bring up the illegal immigrant health care issue, even though they absolutely support it in general and also in their demands to reopen the government. So here's Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez talking about this issue broadly. Sounds to me like she is confirming that the so-called Republican lie is indeed true and her position. Cut 20. But if you could choose, do you believe that that should be changed? Pardon? If you could choose, do you believe that the federal law should be changed on them? I believe in a single-payer health care system. where if you go in and you need a doctor, you can get the medical attention that you need. That would be a yes. She believes in taxpayer-funded health care for illegal immigrants, which is already the case on a limited basis now. The Republicans tighten that up in the big, beautiful bill. Democrats want to undo those restrictions because their position ultimately is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's position that you just heard there.

Last but not least, when they were asked about whether Chuck Schumer is engaged in this shutdown. Out of a fear of a left-wing challenge on his left flank, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie kind of lost it. Cut 23. But are you saying that Chuck Schumer should not be worried about a primary challenge from you? I mean, no. Let me jump in on this one. Nobody cares. Nobody cares. It's the House Speaker and President Trump and the Vice President saying it. Right. Pardon? Well, of course, they're saying it to deflect attention away from the real issue. Exactly. And he'll tell you what the real issue is. Let's see if CNN talks about it. We're living in the richest country in the history of the world, right? All right. You tell me why we're the only nation, not to guarantee health care of all people. Or the richest country in the history of the world, Bernie, because we don't. adopt your policies and your worldview. We're not a socialist or communist country. That's why we're successful. They take such umbrage at the thought that maybe politics are afoot here, and they're worried about primary challenges. Of course that's what's happening. Bernie's like, how dare you? Nobody cares. You know who does care? Quite obviously? Chuck Schumer. That's why we're in the Chuck Schumer shutdown. I think these socialists doth protest too much at that completely reasonable question. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie last night, some teachable, instructive moments, I would say. More of Guy Benson coming up. New talk for a new generation, Guy Benson. Fox News Alert, here on Guy Benson, bringing you up to speed on something that's just developing in the last several minutes. Former Trump National Security Advisor John Bolton. turned Trump antagonist has been indicted. FBI director Kash Patel, saying that the FBI's investigation revealed that John Bolton allegedly transmitted top secret information using personal online accounts and retained said documents in his home in direct violation of federal law. Several news sources confirming that this probe started under the Biden administration, and now this is the result of federal indictment. We will have more coverage of this tomorrow on Guy Benson. Meanwhile, Earlier today, at the top of the show, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise of Louisiana, he joined us on the Democrat shutdown. Day 15 and counting, here's part of that interview. Listen.

So they're like, it's a Republican health care crisis and a Republican government shut down, but we created the health care crisis and we shut down the government to deal with it. I just can't quite keep track of it logically. Yeah, guy, and that's because there is no logic. And this is what Democrats do. You know, they create havoc. They create chaos. They wreck things that work well. I mean, you know, look, we had an open border. Donald Trump came in and fixed that because, as he said, we didn't need new laws. We needed a new president. But then if you look at the tax policy, it was about to expire, and every family was about to get a tax increase. And Republicans stave that off. Every Democrat voted no. So every Democrat voted against fixing the problems that they've been creating. But Obamacare is the health care of the law. Let's make no mistake about it. And it was all Democrats that voted to pass Obamacare. And premiums have gone up over 80% for families on Obamacare. And so, you know, they want to talk about health care. There's a lot of things we can do to lower premiums, and it doesn't include propping up the failures of Obamacare. By the way, on that point quickly on Obamacare, because you were there for that whole legislative battle, I was very much involved on air and online and writing about it at the time. And one of the things that we were arguing, all of us on the right, if you pass Obamacare. People will not be able to keep their health care plans. They will not be able to keep their doctors because they were saying no matter what, that would always be the case. We said that's not true. Millions of people will lose their doctors and their arrangements. They said that's a lie, but we were right. They also said the national cost curve on health care would be bent downward because of Obamacare. The opposite has happened. They also said, remember this one? Families, the average family would save $2,500 a year, I believe, was the claim on premiums. You just talked about how there have been double-digit increases in premiums. Then they had to pass like this emergency patch over the problem, like a band-aid on the problem during COVID. Because things were getting so bad. But they said it was temporary. They didn't want to make it permanent because it was too expensive. And now I guess after all of those disasters and all of the problems that they exclusively have created with their policies, they're shutting down the government to try to force you guys to clean up their problem. It's bizarre. that they can trick and fool the American people into thinking that it's our fault. And everybody knows what's going on. I mean, everybody knows that Obamacare was a Democrat-created system. And, in fact, with all the problems it has, you know, I agree it's got problems, but it's problems created by Democrats. And they've never wanted to work with us. By the way, we had a provision in the working families tax cut to lower premiums on families. In fact, the CBO scored. It would have lowered premiums by 11% for work and families. And it was Democrats in the Senate. It passed the House. It was Democrats in the Senate who fought to get that provision removed because they don't care about lowering premiums. They want to bail out insurance companies. They want a single-payer health care system. It's been a religion, a cult religion of theirs since they created Obamacare. And so, you know, you go look at what was in that bill. It would have saved about $3 billion.

for families in lower health care premiums, and Democrats fought to get it removed. So, you know, there are a lot of good ideas, association health plans, and, you know, health savings accounts, a lot of things that will give families more options to go back to what they promised that they lied about. If you like what you have, you can keep it. And as you pointed out, millions of people lost what they had and liked. We want to get back to those days where you and your doctor, patients and doctors, make health care decisions, not government bureaucrats in Washington. My full interview with Steve Scalise, available online at Guy Benson.com. Also part of the free podcast. It's every day the whole show on demand, no charge at all. Guy Benson.com, Fox News Podcasts.com or wherever you get your podcasts. Up next, the home stretch. Justin has a big weekend ahead. Pretty exciting. He might need some advice, some pointers. We'll offer those when we come back. Miss a minute. Miss a lot. Guy Benson. And now it's time for your favorite segment of the day. Home Stretch. It's basically the only segment I'm on, so I've declared it the audience's favorite segment. Guy Benson. Home Stretch, Thursday edition, Guy Benson. Guy Benson.com. Podcast always free. See you tomorrow morning on America's Newsroom, Fox News Channel. If all goes according to plan and as scheduled, we shall see. But you can tune in or set your DVRs. So on the radio show tomorrow, our buddy Justin, our engineer, our technical producer, will not be with us. We'll have a fill-in whose name is actually also Justin. But our Justin will be off tomorrow because it is time. for his bachelor party weekend. He's getting married in Jamaica at the end of the year. I'm not going to take full credit for saving the wedding in terms of the menu for dinner, but, you know, some credit might be due to some people, I'm just saying. And in that spirit, in that generous spirit of trying to make this entire enterprise and experience as positive as possible for our Justin, we should talk about... The Bachelor Party and the whole weekend that is in store. Justin, scale of 1 to 10, how excited are you? I would say I'm at like an 8.5 right now. It's basically my Friday, you know, 20 minutes until I get to leave work for the week. So that's carrying a lot. But yeah, I've been thinking about it. Pretty excited. Hang on. You're just like, are you like counting down the minutes to get out of here every week to escape? Whoever might be in that booth with you? Is that what I'm hearing? What are you talking about? I mean, that's definitely a possibility. How are you going to escape me when I'm coming to The Bachelor Party? No, no, that's not happening. Good question. No. You told her where you're going, didn't you? That was a, in my defense, really, really bad mistake. That's not a defense. That's just an admission. You told her where, and it's also within driving distance. of Christina, not even like her normal, like overnight wear a diaper driving distance, like pretty easy driving distance of her home state of New Jersey. So she knows where, she knows when, she knows who, she has her methods. What chance would you say there is that she shows up?

Probably a better percentage of the excitement that I'm at. Well, so let me ask you. You said 8.5. It's dropping, isn't it? So let me ask you this. Will there be alcohol consumption? Yeah, there sure will be. Will there be gambling? There sure will be. I think she's coming. There's also another thing that she likes that we're going to be doing while we're there. What's that? Or it be golfing. Oh, boy. I mean, you're not helping yourself here, Justin. I think Cookie might just roll up. So you're going to one of these large casino resort-type places in Connecticut, right? I think we can say that. She knows which one, unfortunately. I will, for the purposes of the paparazzi, I will not mention it by name because, you know, you need to keep your privacy, especially for Bachelor Party weekend. We don't need some of that necessarily all documented. But I now worry. that she's sort of insinuated herself not only into the wedding, she's pretending at least, she's convinced herself with this delusion that she is in the wedding party. and therefore might feel entitled to show up, probably for the Bachelorette party, but my guess is Hannah was not foolish enough to give her those details, am I correct? Can I actually give Christine a little bit of credit here? Wow, yes. Because Hannah's Bachelorette party was a couple weeks ago. She went out east to the wineries, and I wanted to do something nice for her and her friends. So the idea I had was I was going to send a few bottles of wine to their table for dinner the first night they were there. Great idea. I went to Christine because who would know better on wine selection and what the gals would like. And she actually helped call the restaurant and pick out the bottles of wine that I would send over to them. Oh, bottles? She didn't send boxes?

No, not at this place. I had a budget. I'm impressed. Justin gave me a budget, so I had to work within those limits. You probably get some very affordable boxed wine. I know that's usually your go-to. Okay, so she helped with that. She did not crash the Bachelorette party weekend, but all bets might be off this weekend. Christine, did you have a bachelorette party before you got married to Bobby? Was that a thing? Hold on. Did those exist back then? Can you go back for a second? Yeah. When did I ever wear a diaper overnight? Yeah, that kind of stops me in my tracks. I'm not that crazy astronaut from down south. That's exactly the reference. I'm so glad you got the reference. No, I know exactly the story. I'm not saying that you're her. Obviously, you're not an astronaut. I don't think. Maybe a cosmonaut back of the day, but... I'm not saying that it's the exact same situation. I'm saying that that is something I could maybe see Cookie doing. Like your flight gets canceled to Acapulco. You're like, well, I'm going to drive through the night and I'm not going to stop to go to the bathroom. Let's go. Yeah, but like rest stops are my jam. Oh, are they? I love a good rest stop, don't you? It depends, is my answer. Why is Justin? What, Justin? Restops are your jam? I love a good restop. There's so many things you can get there. You can get your coffee. You can get your McDonald. You could talk to people. You can get a map. You can ask for directions. You can get some candy. My adult diapers joke went right over your head, by the way, on that one when I said it depends. Okay, we need to move on. I'm not that old guy. I wouldn't understand that joke. Well, no, it's not about age, although, I mean, good point. That might be part of it, but I'm talking about just driving straight through the night. You have, like, giant four locos. and your adult diaper. And if you want to get from point A to point B in 12 hours and not stop, you know, the gal's got to do what a gal's got to do. And all I'm saying is to drive to Connecticut. You don't need any of that. It's just like a normal, normal cookie drive. No, I put it in my ways. And it's like three hours and 23 minutes. Why did you do that? I just wanted to see. She's doing some research, Justin, that's all. I just wanted to see. And like the good thing is, um. It's like this one highway. Oh, I'm not supposed to drive on it, though, 95. Why aren't you allowed to drive on it? Because Bobby says that every time that I drive when we head up to Massachusetts, if he falls asleep, he wakes up, and then he has to start yelling at me. He goes, we don't do 95 on 95. I just want to get there, you know? Oh, it's like a Jay Jones situation. You're going 116 miles an hour. And I was concerned. So this is just Bobby scolding you for being on 95. It's not like a law enforcement issue where you're banned from the highway for life where they have like your photo, your license plate, like may not drive. They put up billboards.

So, Christina, I noticed you did not answer my question. Did you have a bachelor at party before your wedding? I don't think I'm, I think it's against a lot of talk about my bachelor at party. So that's a yes. There was one. Oh, yeah. Against a lot of talk about it. Dare I ask why? Well, just don't ask. Did anyone pop out of a cake? No. No. Cakes were made, though. I had a friend make a few cakes, but I can't talk about what kind of cakes. Oh, boy. Yeah. Or what shape the cakes were in. You asked, you asked, what do you want? Did you have strippers? Is this what I'm hearing? No, no. No. No, but you know what? Oh, gosh. It was a little cry-cry. You know, we went to the city. I don't even think I got home until, like, noon the next day. But they had these, like, cards that every time we went to a new spot, like, they would pull out and then I had to do whatever the card said. Very inappropriate. Very, very inappropriate things. Justin, are you planning on doing anything like that with your bros this weekend? I'm sure not. No. Is your fiancé, like, involved at all or is she staying home? She's staying home. We had to do it separately because her sister, and I'm close with her brother-in-law, one of them has to watch the kids. So we had to do it different weekends. Got it. Okay. So there'll be some drinking. There'll be maybe cigars. You've got some golf planned. You've got some gambling plan. Probably a nice meal or two. Is this going to be a relatively low-key Bachelor Party weekend or might this get a little... Is turnt the phrase? Ooh. Turned up? Isn't that what the kids say? I don't know. Drop. What is it? What did Dylan say? He said drop because he knows my brain. Yeah, that's going to be the end of the segment. We're going to hear turned up again. But the question stands. Yeah. Pretty low key. Didn't want to make anyone do anything too crazy. We are going to Jamaica for a wedding. So I really just kind of want to, you know, watch football during the day. It's a great college Saturday slate. The nation, of course, will be focused on Purdue at Northwestern Saturday afternoon. Big game for the cats trying to get to five and two, but go on. So that's really what I want to do. Golf in the morning Saturday. Kind of settle down, watch football during the day, nice meal, casino. What about the club? No clurb. You have to. You have to. It's like your bachelor, you got to go dancing. Do I? No. Do the kids not go dancing anymore these days? Christine's like, you got to, listen here, Justin. You got to get all turned up at the club. Oh, I'm cringing even quoting her. So you get like, you know, oh God, we had like a private table and like bottle service. Oh, yeah. If you get like a couple. Yeah, you get a couple things of vodka. And then you get like mixers like juices.

No. Justin, it will shock you, I'm sure, to learn that I had a very classy bachelor party weekend. Co-ed, very chill, good meals, some high-quality wine, nothing too crazy at all, and it was fantastic. Where was it? Cape Cod. Ooh, beautiful. And we did it the same weekend, both of us. I went to Cape Cod with my crew. Adam went to the mountains of Colorado with his crew, and we did it the same weekend, had the best time. You're going to have so much fun. and it's part of the memory of the whole building up to the wedding experience. It will not hold a candle to the actual wedding weekend, but it's just like that signal, hey, this is really happening and it's happening really soon. So I'm so excited for you. Have a great time. We'll have to get a report from you on Monday. Last thing I'm going to just quickly mention because I want to make Christine jealous, but I'm not going to tell her where this is happening. Friends of ours, Christine, tomorrow night when Justin's at his bachelor party and you're going door to door at that hotel looking for him, we have friends in our neighborhood who are hosting a giant party. Theme is yacht rock with yacht rock attire. What? And so we have a babysitter not only tomorrow night but Saturday morning in case things get a little, in your words, turned up. at the Yacht Rock Party. So that's something I might have to talk about on Monday as well. Is there a yacht rock band performing? Do we have a DJ? I don't know. Perhaps a DJ. There will definitely be lots of fun music. I'm very excited for this. And I just don't want to be too, like, groggy watching the Northwestern football game on Saturday. But I feel like that might be the case. This is going to be tough now. Now I've got to MapQuest. Or do people, the kids, don't MapQuest anymore. You're going to print out some directions, Christine. No, I've got to figure out from your house all the way to the Bachelor Party Saturday. I just ended like four hours onto my trip. Yeah. At least I've given her, Justin, you're welcome. I've given her another temptation. Really appreciate it. Best gift you could give me. Pull her away like a magnet. I was like, oh, here's some booze somewhere else in another state. Maybe I do need those depends.

Oh, my goodness. What a note to end on because we're out of time. It's a classy show that we do here. It's a family program. And we're so glad. So glad that you just listen to all of that. I'm going to go take a shower back here tomorrow. Mine is Justin. Koki will be here, we think. For Guy Benson. Have a great night. It was a little cry, cry. Turned up. Isn't that what the kids say? Listen here, Justin. You got to get all turned up at the club. I do need those depends. Listen to the show ad-free on Fox News Podcast Plus on Apple Podcasts, Amazon music with your prime membership, or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.