Speaker 1: We have got a lot to cover, including what's happening
Speaker 1: in the Trumpet trial and shock happening there live on
Speaker 1: TV as a man set himself on fire in front
Speaker 1: of the courthouse where Donald Trump's jury trial is underway.
Speaker 1: He doused himself in heavy gasoline, then set himself on fire.
Speaker 1: This all caught live on CNN as the man stood
Speaker 1: was on fire, then started to follow the ground, then
Speaker 1: fell the ground. Then finally there was people there to
Speaker 1: come over to try to put out the flames. Now,
Speaker 1: all of this is happening, and this is actually the
Speaker 1: second time we've seen this. Recently, we saw a man
Speaker 1: that identified himself as an American service member who set
Speaker 1: himself on fire. He died setting himself on fire in
Speaker 1: front of the Israeli embassy in Washington, d C. Clearly,
Speaker 1: this is one of those things where one person does
Speaker 1: it and then others follow suit. This is I'm assuming,
Speaker 1: part of trump deranged syndrome, of those that are psychotic
Speaker 1: that are now thinking their best way to protest Donald
Speaker 1: Trump is to set themselves on fire and take their
Speaker 1: own life. Now, we're gonna have more on the trial
Speaker 1: coming up in a moment, but actually, no, let me
Speaker 1: say this first. One of the reporters today and this
Speaker 1: made me laugh. They were reporting on the jury selection
Speaker 1: and the reporter actually said, like the truth here, We
Speaker 1: know that about ninety percent of the people in Manhattan
Speaker 1: voted for Joe Biden over Donald Trump. And the reporter
Speaker 1: came out and said this, potential Trump jurors are more
Speaker 1: left of center than not.
Speaker 2: Yeah, no crap, thanks for telling us that.
Speaker 1: New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman saying potential Trump jurors
Speaker 1: more often than not lean politically.
Speaker 2: Laugh.
Speaker 1: Well, when you win ninety percent of the vote in
Speaker 1: a certain area and that's where you're pulling the pool
Speaker 1: of jurors from, of course they're going to be leaning left,
Speaker 1: which is exactly why they brought the charges in New
Speaker 1: York City. Haberman's statement confirms a widely held fact among
Speaker 1: Republicans that former President Donald Trump will, in fact, not
Speaker 1: receive a fair criminal trial in Manhattan. President Joe Biden,
Speaker 1: and I want to make sure that the fact checkers
Speaker 1: understand these numbers, so I'm going to give the exact
Speaker 1: data here. President Joe Biden won over eighty six percent
Speaker 1: of the Manhattan vote in twenty twenty, so basically around
Speaker 1: ninety percent if you're rounding up. One thing that's been
Speaker 1: striking during this round of jury selection is there's a
Speaker 1: lot of people who, based on their answers, are more
Speaker 1: left of center than not politically, wrote Haberman, who doubles
Speaker 1: as a political analyst for CNN when she's not running
Speaker 1: propaganda for the Communists New York Times. But some seem
Speaker 1: to be trying to show they consider alternate viewpoints, and
Speaker 1: others seem to want to show they believe in the
Speaker 1: concept of jury service as independent from personal opinions, she added,
Speaker 1: which whether that's actually true or not, we may never know.
Speaker 1: The reason why I say that is they could just
Speaker 1: be lying because they hate Trump and they want to
Speaker 1: get on the jury now. Jonathan Turley, who's on Fox
Speaker 1: News Channel, he also had what he described as his
Speaker 1: biggest concern, and that is Trojan horse jurors, those that
Speaker 1: desperately want to get on this trial to then convict
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. Take a listen to this that he had
Speaker 1: to say on Fox News Channel.
Speaker 3: Thank you Jonathan Turley joining us now a constitutional law
Speaker 3: attorney and a Fox News contributor.
Speaker 4: So we started the day with seven jurors.
Speaker 3: We are now down to five, Jonathan, what do we
Speaker 3: need to know right now?
Speaker 5: Well, this is really a part of this entire play
Speaker 5: in that you've got a jury pool that is really
Speaker 5: heavily weighted, obviously with people who have strong opinions against Trump.
Speaker 5: Only about twelve percent of the people in this area
Speaker 5: voted for Trump. The jurors you have to worry about
Speaker 5: are the ones who are sort of trojan horse chers.
Speaker 5: Are the ones who are hiding bias that doesn't appear
Speaker 5: on social media, are involved in any formal charges like
Speaker 5: the one that was just removed today. Those are the
Speaker 5: ones you have to worry about that they're so motivated
Speaker 5: by their dislike for Trump that they're willing to lie
Speaker 5: on the stand. Now, we have seen jurors who have
Speaker 5: later been found who have misrepresented their histories in a
Speaker 5: couple of prior cases involving Trump associates. In both those cases,
Speaker 5: the judges in Washington, d c. Refused to reconsider the verdict.
Speaker 5: And so this is a very important stage to try
Speaker 5: to filter out these types of jurors.
Speaker 3: That being said, on the case itself and where this
Speaker 3: all goes, Jonathan, this is Andrew Drewcawski on anar this
Speaker 3: morning on Newsroom on the high burden of proof of
Speaker 3: the prosecutors in this case.
Speaker 4: Jonathan, let's listen together.
Speaker 6: There are two layers of specific intent that the prosecutors
Speaker 6: have to establish in order to convict Donald Trump, and
Speaker 6: that's a very difficult thing to do. It's even more
Speaker 6: difficult when they don't have direct evidence of it. Donald
Speaker 6: Trump expected to testify. He said he's going to do that. Certainly,
Speaker 6: he'll deny his own mental intent here.
Speaker 4: Do you agree with all that, Jonathan.
Speaker 5: It's certainly true that the problem with the intent here
Speaker 5: is that there's lots of reasons why you would want
Speaker 5: to pay hush money. He was married, he had a
Speaker 5: leading television program, and yes he had ambitions for the presidency.
Speaker 5: But this entire Diamonds based on his intent to try
Speaker 5: to conceal a crime. It's very ambiguous what that crime
Speaker 5: is because the federal government didn't consider this a crime
Speaker 5: an a legal campaign contribution. So the entire thing is
Speaker 5: rather murky, and the jury's going to have to deal
Speaker 5: with that. The irony here is that the legal system
Speaker 5: itself has really failed in this regard. The district attorney,
Speaker 5: who once refused to move forward on this case yielded
Speaker 5: the pressure. The courts have allowed this go forward, even
Speaker 5: though many of us have said that it's absurd, and
Speaker 5: so the New York legal system is now relying on
Speaker 5: average people, frankly, to have a redemptive moment to say,
Speaker 5: my god, I mean this. We have to say enough,
Speaker 5: where's the crime here? And that will come down to
Speaker 5: his intent. And keep in mind, you're going to have
Speaker 5: his former lawyer telling this jury send my former client
Speaker 5: to jail for following my legal advice. How many cases
Speaker 5: do you know of where that's happened?
Speaker 4: Really interesting.
Speaker 3: I'm looking down at my computer because we're getting some
Speaker 3: pool notes out of the courtroom going back to the
Speaker 3: jury selection and just how difficult it is going to
Speaker 3: be to remind our audience they need twelve durers and
Speaker 3: six alternates in total.
Speaker 4: We know we started the day with seven. We're down
Speaker 4: to five.
Speaker 3: We got word just a short time ago out of
Speaker 3: the courtroom that a male who raised some concerns about
Speaker 3: a strong opinion about the former president Donald Trump has
Speaker 3: been excused.
Speaker 4: Was a prospective juror.
Speaker 3: Adding to that from the pool notes, just now, the
Speaker 3: male juror that was just excused was excused after explaining
Speaker 3: he was born and raised in Italy, saying the Italian
Speaker 3: media have had a very strong association with mister Trump
Speaker 3: and Silvio Berlusconi, adding it would be a little hard
Speaker 3: for me to retain my impartiality and fairness.
Speaker 4: He has now been excused. Jonathan, your a reaction before
Speaker 4: we let you.
Speaker 1: But by the way, let me just jump in here
Speaker 1: because I wanted you to hear his well thought out
Speaker 1: point here.
Speaker 2: Number one, the federal government.
Speaker 1: Refused to prosecute this case because they said there basically
Speaker 1: was no case there. And then, as he just described, there,
Speaker 1: this whole case hinges around his former attorney, whose advice
Speaker 1: he took. Who's then saying convict my former boss, right,
Speaker 1: my former not boss client who I gave legal advice
Speaker 1: to and I paid a payment. And now I want.
Speaker 2: You to send him to Joe. I'm me to jail.
Speaker 1: No, no, no, I want you to send him to jail.
Speaker 1: Do you know what I said. That's what they're now saying.
Speaker 1: They're saying, we want to move him to jail, which
Speaker 1: is totally put him in jail, not me, him and Joe,
Speaker 1: which is totally insane. And yet here we are having
Speaker 1: that exact conversation. We're having a conversation about not being
Speaker 1: able to find jurors that will be honest, that are
Speaker 1: not biased, and that is and even the New York
Speaker 1: Times was saying, yeah, this is really hard, Like everybody
Speaker 1: seems to be leaning to the left here right, Like
Speaker 1: I mean, let me give you another example. There's a
Speaker 1: new report that has just come out that the judge
Speaker 1: allows a juror to be on this jury after there
Speaker 1: was protests from Trump's lawyers who celebrated Trump's loss in
Speaker 1: the twenty twenty election to stay in the pool. Does
Speaker 1: that sound like a judge it's trying to be unbiased.
Speaker 1: This New York Supreme Court justice reportedly allowed a juror
Speaker 1: who's celebrated when Trump lost to be in the jury selection.
Speaker 1: That that was not something that would you know, say, hey,
Speaker 1: that's just too bias, right, So if that's the pool
Speaker 1: that you're coming from, it is shocking.
Speaker 2: Trace Gallaher said quote, they want to have.
Speaker 1: A challenge, a preemptive challenge to excuse a juror because
Speaker 1: they thought that she said she could be impartial, but
Speaker 1: at social media posts that apparently had her celebrating Trump,
Speaker 1: losing in twenty twenty, and so they challenged her, and
Speaker 1: the judge said, nope, she can be impartial. She stays
Speaker 1: quote unquote, So there you go. If you don't think
Speaker 1: the deck is stacked against the president United States of
Speaker 1: America right now, you're wrong. The Democrat Manhattan District Attorney
Speaker 1: Alvin Bragg that charged Trump with the thirty four felonies
Speaker 1: and accused him of falsifying documents to conceal a scandal.
Speaker 1: This trial is the first criminal trial of a president
Speaker 1: of the United States of America, and they're doing it
Speaker 1: in a place where basically ninety percent of the voters
Speaker 1: in that place voted against Donald Trump. Only about one third,
Speaker 1: by the way of US adults in the latest poll,
Speaker 1: believed that Trump did something illegal regarding this specific case,
Speaker 1: not in general, like this specific case, And the federal
Speaker 1: government refused to take on this case because they said,
Speaker 1: there's no crime that's being committed here.
Speaker 2: So what is this.
Speaker 1: This is another attempt, the same way that would happen
Speaker 1: in Russia or China or any other communist or Marxist
Speaker 1: country to take out your political opponent by locking them up.
Speaker 1: And if you look at what Donald Trump has had
Speaker 1: to go through. His property was almost seized. Recently, they
Speaker 1: set a bail that was like one hundred times higher
Speaker 1: than Bernie Madoff, who actually ran a multi billion dollar
Speaker 1: Ponzi scheme, the biggest Ponzis game in American history to
Speaker 1: put inspect and Donald Trump had to come up with
Speaker 1: more money to get out of jail. Right, are more
Speaker 1: money to put up to appeal? I should say then
Speaker 1: that guy Bernie Madoff had to put up, which is
Speaker 1: totally insane. Now I want to move to something else
Speaker 1: that's happening on the House side. It's important and it
Speaker 1: deals with foreign aid. There are a lot of people
Speaker 1: that are really upset right now, calling it a UNI
Speaker 1: Party speaker Mike Johnson.
Speaker 2: This is how it's being described by some.
Speaker 1: And I say some because I want you to understand
Speaker 1: my viewpoint, and I'm going to give it to you
Speaker 1: in a second. But I want you understand what many
Speaker 1: are saying right now. They're saying that Mike Johnson is
Speaker 1: a turncoat. He is a man who has surrendered. He
Speaker 1: is a man that is bowed down to the left.
Speaker 1: Democrats seize control of the House floor. Another conservative website
Speaker 1: put it that way. Democrats are in the minority no
Speaker 1: longer and a stunning historical development. On Friday, Democrats seize
Speaker 1: upon a Republican surrender to take control the agenda of
Speaker 1: the House floor, and astonishing one hundred and sixty five
Speaker 1: Democrats voted for a rule from Speaker Mike Johnson to
Speaker 1: allow a one hundred billion dollar foreign aide supplemental package
Speaker 1: to the floor on Saturday that will be a shock
Speaker 1: to many. The House will hold four votes on final
Speaker 1: passes for each of those packages, including a Ukraine funding
Speaker 1: bill with tens of billions of American taxpayers dollars going
Speaker 1: to Ukraine. Minority party members rarely vote for a procedural
Speaker 1: rule to allow the majority parties agenda to proceed through
Speaker 1: the House. Doing so in such numbers is widely unprecedented.
Speaker 1: History was first made on Thursday, just before midnight, when,
Speaker 1: for the first time in recorded history since the House
Speaker 1: began keeping records, the House Rules Committee relied on Minority
Speaker 1: party votes to overcome objections from the majority and advance
Speaker 1: a rule bill to the House floor. The powerful House
Speaker 1: Rules Committee, known for generations as the Speakers Committee, for
Speaker 1: the control the Speaker of the House possesses over the
Speaker 1: committee and its reputation as a rubber stamp for the
Speaker 1: speaker's agenda sets the floor agenda for the House through
Speaker 1: what is known as the rules. So what happened? Johnson
Speaker 1: disregarded history. He abandoned his own party. Despite its majority,
Speaker 1: it is slim yes, with more Democrats voting to advance
Speaker 1: the House agenda than Republicans. The minority party has effectively
Speaker 1: taken control over bills that will come before the House.
Speaker 1: Not not every bill, but these four. In the end,
Speaker 1: one hundred and fifty one support of the rule with
Speaker 1: only thirty nine Republicans in opposition. The final tally was
Speaker 1: three sixteen to ninety four. Minority Leader Hakeem jeffrieson In
Speaker 1: is a messenger in the minority no longer he's taken over.
Speaker 1: That is how it is described by Breitbart. Now you
Speaker 1: can jump on that bandwagon and you can ride that train,
Speaker 1: and there are there some that are doing it. In fact,
Speaker 1: more Republicans now are saying yes, they are now open
Speaker 1: to supporting Margley Taylor Green's motion to vacate the speakership
Speaker 1: if she forces the vote. Eli Crane now saying he's
Speaker 1: with her. Now Representative Eli Crane is a Republican from Arizona.
Speaker 1: He said that he would be open and supporting Marjorie
Speaker 1: Taylor Green's motion to vacate the Cherrigan Speaker Johnson if
Speaker 1: she were to make it to make it privileged. Crane's
Speaker 1: comments came in a press gaggle with reporters shortly after
Speaker 1: Johnson enlisted the help of Democrats to pass his role
Speaker 1: unlocking foreign aid votes on multiple bills, a role that
Speaker 1: hardline conservatives like Crane opposed vigorously. If Congresswoman Green were
Speaker 1: to trigger a vote on the resolution, you would consider
Speaker 1: supporting it, a reporter asked Crane. He responded with quote,
Speaker 1: I'm open to it. My position is that I'm open.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to tell you guys what I'm going
Speaker 1: to do, and we'll see if that materializes. We'll see
Speaker 1: if that is if the trigger is pulled on this,
Speaker 1: that won't be up to me. But I'm definitely frustrated,
Speaker 1: like a lot of the conference and a lot of
Speaker 1: the American people. Now, Green's motion of vacate, which is
Speaker 1: now co sponsored by Representative Thomas Massey, a Republican from Kentucky,
Speaker 1: is not privileged mean the House does not immediately have
Speaker 1: to take it up.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 1: So this is when the House rules and how they
Speaker 1: work are extremely important to understand. Asked if he had
Speaker 1: spoken with Green about her motion of vacate, which she came,
Speaker 1: which could make privilege at any time and force the
Speaker 1: House to consider it within two days, Crane said he
Speaker 1: had not. He has, however, had communication with Johnson over
Speaker 1: his quote frustration, saying this, he knows how frustrated I am,
Speaker 1: and I do it as respectfully as I can, but
Speaker 1: I'm not going to pull punches because at the end
Speaker 1: of the day, this is so much bigger than me
Speaker 1: or a motion of vacate or Speaker Mike Johnson. To me,
Speaker 1: this comes down to are you going to try and
Speaker 1: save this Kun or are we just going to continue
Speaker 1: on with the Washington Unit party that continually sells out
Speaker 1: the American people. Crane further know that there is a
Speaker 1: quote sense that there's a souring to House Republican leadership
Speaker 1: that goes beyond the Free House Freedom Caucus, based on
Speaker 1: the conversations he is hearing from the conference and around
Speaker 1: the conference saying this, I think that the Speaker should
Speaker 1: take that seriously. I think he's been told every way
Speaker 1: that we know how and we'll see how he does
Speaker 1: with that. Crane's comments come as his Arizona colleague, represented
Speaker 1: Paul Gossar, a Republican from Arizona, announced he would back
Speaker 1: Green's motion after Johnson surrendered operational control of the House
Speaker 1: to the Democrats. Now, this is one of those moments
Speaker 1: that is actually way more complicated than people.
Speaker 2: Want to admit. And let me explain what I mean
Speaker 2: by that.
Speaker 1: We have a insanely slim majority in the House and
Speaker 1: what that does is it gives every member a lot
Speaker 1: more I think the fair way to put it is
Speaker 1: probably power than they've ever had before. There is no
Speaker 1: unity within the Republican Party because there's so many Republicans
Speaker 1: in Washington, DC. There are grand centers. Democrats understand how
Speaker 1: to stay together. Okay, Democrats understand how important it is
Speaker 1: to unify on certain issues. And what's happened now is
Speaker 1: Republicans that want to get famous. The easiest way to
Speaker 1: get famous is to come out like Marjorie Taylor Green
Speaker 1: and say, Hey, I'm going to get rid of every
Speaker 1: Republican speaker that doesn't do what I tell them to do.
Speaker 1: That's what it really boils down too. It's actually that simple.
Speaker 1: And so you have a few Republicans now that have
Speaker 1: been able to really beat their chests and really stay right,
Speaker 1: really really really stick it to the leadership when they
Speaker 1: don't get what they want and they get to threaten
Speaker 1: exactly what you just heard, right, well, we're gonna get
Speaker 1: rid of you. It's exactly what happened to the last
Speaker 1: Speaker of the House. And then we had others that
Speaker 1: try to become the speaker, and then they weren't able
Speaker 1: to even get the votes to be the speaker. So
Speaker 1: then there was this compromise on Johnson. And now the
Speaker 1: same people that said Johnson's way better than Jim Jordan
Speaker 1: or anybody else, we find out they hate him. Now
Speaker 1: you are set up to fail because of the media
Speaker 1: and social media. Now with this little of a majority,
Speaker 1: with a Republican party that doesn't understand how to actually lead,
Speaker 1: or let me rephrase that, there's enough people that don't
Speaker 1: understand how to actually lead on the issue. That's the
Speaker 1: real problem here. Okay, Like number one, that's it. Democrats understand,
Speaker 1: when you have a small majority, you don't act like it.
Speaker 1: You unify on everything and you act like you are
Speaker 1: lockstep on every issue. And you figure it out behind
Speaker 1: closed doors, and then you walk out completely and utterly
Speaker 1: united and you do not flinch. Well, that is not
Speaker 1: what has been happening here at all. That's number one,
Speaker 1: number two on this And the other point that has
Speaker 1: to be made is if Mike Johnson doesn't make it,
Speaker 1: and then the last guy, Kevin McCarthy, doesn't make it.
Speaker 2: And I was in favor of getting rid of McCarthy.
Speaker 1: I just think he was I think he was an
Speaker 1: egotistical jerk, and he didn't work well with others, and
Speaker 1: he wanted to dictate and that didn't work. But I
Speaker 1: warned you, I said, if they do it again to
Speaker 1: Mike Johnson, then we've lost total control of the House.
Speaker 1: And Democrats are laughing all the way into November. In fact,
Speaker 1: I wouldn't be surprised if the Democrats of the Majority
Speaker 1: Party come November, because there's some Republicans that we've already
Speaker 1: witnessed it, have already just quit. They say I'm done
Speaker 1: with this, I'm wasting my time, We're getting nothing done
Speaker 1: done here. I'm basically a useful idiot right now. For
Speaker 1: this country beca because of a few psychos in the
Speaker 1: Republican Party. Now, I also don't believe they're patriots. I
Speaker 1: believe they are basically the equivalent of a political suicide bomber.
Speaker 1: If I don't get what I want, I will blow
Speaker 1: up the entire system. And now they've blown up it
Speaker 1: the system, it looks like not just once, but they're
Speaker 1: about to do it all over again. So why would
Speaker 1: anybody want to be the Speaker of the House the
Speaker 1: Republican after this guy?
Speaker 2: Because as soon.
Speaker 1: As you do something that one of these these narcissistic
Speaker 1: crazies don't like, they're just going to get rid of you.
Speaker 1: One part of my job that I actually have enjoyed
Speaker 1: is going back to Washington, DC affair amount for the
Speaker 1: work that I do with Senator Cruz. On the podcast
Speaker 1: Vertict with Ted Cruz, I co host with him, and
Speaker 1: when I'm there, I do my best to spend quality
Speaker 1: time with elected officials to see what's going on, hear
Speaker 1: what's going on dealing with issues border security, etc. And
Speaker 1: that's been extremely helpful. And there's several conservatives that I
Speaker 1: have an incredible amount of respect for that have said
Speaker 1: to me that many of these members have been there
Speaker 1: a while they're like this, we're getting nothing done.
Speaker 2: It's completely stagnant.
Speaker 1: The work that we're doing is pretty much getting hijacked
Speaker 1: every time because it's not conservative enough for the people.
Speaker 1: And so when they say that something isn't conservative enough
Speaker 1: for them, right then immediately what they do is they say,
Speaker 1: all right, well we're gonna get rid of you as
Speaker 1: a speaker, and they put a gun to their head.
Speaker 1: And so what's happening is we're watching conservatives just quit.
Speaker 1: They're not finishing out their terms. Now you can describe
Speaker 1: some of them as like, hey, that shows just how
Speaker 1: self serving you are in general.
Speaker 2: And there's some that have done that.
Speaker 1: They've quit knowing they're going to put the Republican Party
Speaker 1: in a worst spot with a slimmer majority. There's others
Speaker 1: that say, but if you were happy to deal what
Speaker 1: we're dealing with behind the scenes each and every day,
Speaker 1: you would understand why they're saying they're throwing their hands
Speaker 1: up going I can't deal with someone like Margley Taylor Green.
Speaker 1: I can't deal with a Warren Bobert, for example. I'm done,
Speaker 1: we're not doing anything. I'm flying up here every week
Speaker 1: and I'm wasting my time. There is some truth to that.
Speaker 1: If they get rid of Johnson this quickly. I don't
Speaker 1: know who is going to want to try to take
Speaker 1: that job next. It's a serious individual. And look, some
Speaker 1: of this is just revenge. There are people like Matt
Speaker 1: Gaates that don't like some of the Republicans and because
Speaker 1: of partially the investigations into him, ethics, investigations in him,
Speaker 1: and this is his way of settling the score. This
Speaker 1: is his way of basically blowing up the buildings saying, okay,
Speaker 1: watch this, you guys. You know let them investigate me
Speaker 1: and didn't stop it. I'm gonna I'm taking.
Speaker 2: All of you on. Now.
Speaker 1: He's fighting more with a Republican party than he's ever
Speaker 1: fought with a Democratic party.
Speaker 2: And I don't think that's what his job should be. Now.
Speaker 1: Some say, do it right, go to town and fight
Speaker 1: all these people and fight every war you can get
Speaker 1: your hands on, and just do it and go all in.
Speaker 1: I don't believe that that's the wise thing to do here.
Speaker 1: I think that's a very nice thing to do. I
Speaker 1: think it's incredibly selfish. And that's the reason why I said,
Speaker 1: in government, you don't always get what you want. You
Speaker 1: have to sometimes compromise. Now, I wish Republicans could stick together.
Speaker 1: They do have the majority, they could do a lot
Speaker 1: of things. But everybody right now, with such a slim
Speaker 1: majority has way too much power to walk away and
Speaker 1: destroy everything. And they're leveraging that power for their own
Speaker 1: selfish way reasons, and they're not playing as a team.
Speaker 1: That is of the moderates and that is of the
Speaker 1: extreme conservatives.
Speaker 2: I want to make that clear.
Speaker 1: Both ends of the spectrum are doing this right now.
Speaker 1: They are holding the entire system hostage. This is going
Speaker 1: to end up being a disaster. And I predict that
Speaker 1: if Johnson goes that, there is a very good chance
Speaker 1: that there will be others that just resign from Congress.
Speaker 1: Do not wait till November to resign, And as they resign,
Speaker 1: then all of a sudden, you could have the Democrats
Speaker 1: be in charge of the how Senate and the White
Speaker 1: House because the Republicans handed it to them. That should
Speaker 1: make every one of us furious. It should make every
Speaker 1: one of us extremely angry. We gave them the majority
Speaker 1: and they have screwed it up. And if they hand
Speaker 1: over all of this to the Democratic Party, make no mistake,
Speaker 1: they are going to ram through their radical socialist communist
Speaker 1: agenda for the last six seven months eight months of
Speaker 1: the year whenever this may happen, because there will be
Speaker 1: nothing that we can do to stop them.
Speaker 2: They will do.
Speaker 1: Everything they can to implement socialism and communism and open
Speaker 1: border policies and amnesty and whatever they can get their
Speaker 1: hands on, because why wouldn't you if you're in this scenario,
Speaker 1: in this situation, And the only people we have to
Speaker 1: blame is the Republican that quit, the moderates and the
Speaker 1: and the extreme wing of the Republican Party that refused
Speaker 1: to understand that sometimes in government you actually don't always
Speaker 1: get what you want. You you have to fight for
Speaker 1: the best deal that you can get because Congress has
Speaker 1: hundreds and hundreds of people that have to vote, and
Speaker 1: when the hundreds and hundreds of people vote, there is
Speaker 1: not always going to be the outcome that you want
Speaker 1: or the perfect bill. I would argue there's no perfect
Speaker 1: bill in Congress because if Congress is working the right way,
Speaker 1: not everybody got exactly what they wanted, right. Remember remember
Speaker 1: when Obamacare happened, there were Democrats that were mad because
Speaker 1: they thought it didn't get due to socialized medicine fast
Speaker 1: enough and one and one, you know, one size fits
Speaker 1: all healthcare for every American. There were Democrats that were furious.
Speaker 1: They're like, look, we've got a super majority. In essence,
Speaker 1: we should just be socializing the entire system and not
Speaker 1: allowing for health care and the private sector to exist
Speaker 1: at all. Now, do they blow up the system because
Speaker 1: they didn't get exactly what they wanted that day. No,
Speaker 1: they realized it was a massive step towards socialized medicine,
Speaker 1: so they took it. Republicans need to go back and
Speaker 1: look at that scenario and realize you're not going to
Speaker 1: get everything you want. You might get some pretty good
Speaker 1: stuff that you want, but if you keep governing this way,
Speaker 1: we are going to squander our majority in the House.
Speaker 1: We're going to squander our opportunity, and we're going to
Speaker 1: squander the ability for us to defend and protect this
Speaker 1: country from the socialists and communists that are running it
Speaker 1: in the House, in it in the deep state. Now,
Speaker 1: let me move on to something else that's important right
Speaker 1: now as well, and I want to bring this up because.
Speaker 2: It's so important.
Speaker 1: Center Ernst urged Biden to step up against Iranian aggression
Speaker 1: after the Israel's Israel's counter attack, and it was an
Speaker 1: interesting point that he made, and I want you to
Speaker 1: hear it, because the White House is not standing really
Speaker 1: with Israel right now.
Speaker 2: Listen.
Speaker 7: Israel has in fact punched back at Iran by launching
Speaker 7: a limited missile attack overnight. And so today we are
Speaker 7: spending so much time trying to figure out what is next,
Speaker 7: and we will watch things closely. It is nightfall in
Speaker 7: that part of the world. Already President Biden reportedly had
Speaker 7: told Israel to take the win. We were reporting that
Speaker 7: for days after Iran last Saturday targeted the Jewish state with.
Speaker 4: Missiles and drones.
Speaker 7: So is this back and forth now between those nations
Speaker 7: leading the Middle East into a wider war?
Speaker 4: And how would it affect us?
Speaker 7: Senate Republicans are accusing the White House being too soft
Speaker 7: on crime by Iran. You might say President Biden has
Speaker 7: consistently failed to push back on the Iranian regime, the.
Speaker 4: Kind of parade of horrible as you just meant, Trea.
Speaker 3: I want to stress it is happening because Joe Biden
Speaker 3: has projected weakness all around the world.
Speaker 4: Make absolutely no mistake. Iran is not deterred. It is
Speaker 4: actually evolvant.
Speaker 7: A new York Post opinion piece with this headline. Instead
Speaker 7: of pushing regime change in Israel, Biden should support it
Speaker 7: in Iran. It argues every approach to curtailing Iran from
Speaker 7: its threats and behavior toward Israel and other countries has failed.
Speaker 7: A future US administration can make it clear to Israel
Speaker 7: that America supports undermining and overthrowing the Tehran dictatorship. A Republican
Speaker 7: Iowa Senator and Army combat veteran, Joni Ernzt, Senator, thank
Speaker 7: you for being on the program today. First of all,
Speaker 7: are we inching our way closer to a wider war
Speaker 7: in the Middle East?
Speaker 8: Well, that is not a foregone conclusion, Harris. And what
Speaker 8: we do know is that Israel, when they were attacked
Speaker 8: over the weekend by Iran, saw the response from a
Speaker 8: number of other Arab countries that actually stepped up to
Speaker 8: defend their own airspace and Israel's interests.
Speaker 4: So I am with Israel.
Speaker 8: I am thankful that they did go ahead and strike Iran.
Speaker 8: They retaliated just as they should. But what Iran needs
Speaker 8: to keep in mind is that there is a very
Speaker 8: strong group of Arab nations that do support Israel. They
Speaker 8: don't agree with the attacks by Hamas on October seventh.
Speaker 8: They are in the Abraham Accords. We know that Saudi
Speaker 8: Arabia is trying to move forward with their own plans
Speaker 8: with Israel to strengthen ties. So I think Iran needs
Speaker 8: to be very careful about this.
Speaker 4: They need to think carefully.
Speaker 8: But President Joe Biden's got a step up. He can't
Speaker 8: continue to appease Iran.
Speaker 7: Well, look so far, I only those four words don't
Speaker 7: and take the win, and none of those words are
Speaker 7: helping the situation.
Speaker 4: But what does it mean.
Speaker 7: When you tell an ally to just take it when
Speaker 7: an enemy hits that ally.
Speaker 8: Well, it's absolutely unacceptable. In my opinion, Harris, President Joe
Speaker 8: Biden shouldn't be bowing down to the Iranian regime. He
Speaker 8: shouldn't be telling the Israelis how they should be fighting
Speaker 8: their war.
Speaker 4: What he should be doing.
Speaker 8: Is saying, Israel, we will stand shoulder to shoulder with you.
Speaker 8: Whatever you need, We're.
Speaker 2: On call you.
Speaker 1: Notice she says we should be standing, and what we're
Speaker 1: seeing clearly is they're not standing with Israel. The Biden
Speaker 1: administration has said you just like sorry, like uh huh huh,
Speaker 1: like you guys like we're not standing with you. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's not happening. We're not going to stand with you.
Speaker 1: This is something that will not happen. And that is
Speaker 1: the problem here. We have a country that came back
Speaker 1: with a limited response. If anything, you'd think the White
Speaker 1: House would come out and praised them for it. They
Speaker 1: did not. They did not praise them at all for this.
Speaker 1: There was nothing that they did that praised them, which
Speaker 1: is the other part of the problem. Make sure you
Speaker 1: share this podcast with your family and your friends. Please
Speaker 1: write us a five star review. It helps us reach
Speaker 1: new people and see you back here tomorrow.