Popular Posts

It's on Hannity.com. You can send it to your friends, your neighbors, your coworkers, put it on social media. So tonight I'm going to dedicate the rest of my monologue to helping Bob Iger's ABC Disney and ABC News. I'm going to do the research for them so they know the questions to ask for the debate, the ones that Americans need answers to in this very critical time, this, this inflection point in our country. And it's just simply Kamala in her own words. Now, let's since Kamala first served as borders are under Biden. Let's start with the vice president's view of views on immigration. She told us for three plus years, the border was secure and she never went there, but she never went to Europe as nearly 11 million unvetted Biden illegal immigrants, including murderers and rapists, people committing violent crimes and hundreds with terror ties have come into our country. We don't know where those people are, by the way. Take a look. Would you call the border secure? I think that there is no question that we have to do what the president and I asked Congress to do is the first request we made pass a bill to create a pathway to citizenship. The border is secure. You're confident this border is secure. We have a secure border and that that is a priority for any nation, including ours and our administration. Oh, well, ABC, Disney asked that. As it turns out, Kamala doesn't really care about border security. She never has and never will. You decide. It's a height of irresponsibility for the commander in chief to suggest that we have to build a wall across our southern border because there are terrorists who are trying to to invade the country. It couldn't be farther from the truth on the subject of transnational gangs. Let's be perfectly clear. The president's medieval vanity project is not going to stop them. You support giving universal health care and Medicare for all to people who are in this country illegally. Let me just be very clear about this. I am opposed to any policy that would deny in our country any human being from access to public safety, public education or public health period. We've got to critically reexamine ice and its role and the way that it is being administered and the work it is doing. And we need to probably think about starting from scratch. Hundreds of Harris Biden illegals would terrorize her in the country. We don't know where they are. She's offering free housing, health care, education and a path to citizenship. That would be called, let's see, amnesty if you're guessing at home now. But whatever you do under Harris administration, don't dare say the word illegal alien or radical Islamic terrorism. You need to be courageous. Take a look. You must have the courage to object when they use that term, radical Islamic terrorism, which is more problematic than the greatest victims of terror. And we must also have the courage to reject that term, illegal alien. I have seen the worst of criminal behavior. I have seen the worst of crime and undocumented immigrants is not a criminal. Don't dare utter those words. By the way, Bob Iger, ABC Disney, what would Tim Russert do? What would David Brinkley do? What would Peter Jennings do? They'd ask these questions. What will David Muir do? It's your network. It's your company. It's your stock price and maybe you don't want to have the country go into your theme parks. I don't know. We'll find out tomorrow. And while Vice President Harris wants to decriminalize illegal immigration in every way, she also wants to criminalize legal gun ownership. Here's her plan to confiscate your guns. What would you do about the millions of specifically assault weapons that are already in circulation? What do you do about those? Well, there are approximately five million to your point, Craig. We have to have a buyback program and I support a mandatory buyback program. It's got to be smart. We got to do it the right way. Mandatory. Key word. So under Kamala, if her values really haven't changed, she's going to penalize you, law abiding citizens, for exercising your second amendment rights. But if you are a criminal, you break the law. You are in luck because in 2020 Kamala supported defunding ICE, defunding the police, and she even praised the violent rioters and looters. And she promoted a bail fund after a police precinct was burned to the ground four days later. Take a look. They're not going to stop before Election Day in November and they're not going to stop after Election Day. And that should be everyone should take note of that on both levels, that this isn't they're not going to let up and they should not. Talk to me about the defund, the police movement, and what do you think is the most the first piece of legislation that should happen towards reforming the police? So at its essence, Andy, it really, I believe, is about reimagining public safety and how we achieve it. So ABC, Disney, Bob Iger, do you think that ABC News should be asking these questions tomorrow night and it gets worse. Kamala also made it a priority to get taxpayer funded sex change operations for criminals in prison. I didn't make it up. Take a look. They were standing in the way of of of surgery for prisoners, for prisoners. And there was a specific case. And when I learned about the case, I worked behind the scenes to not only make sure that that transgender woman got the services she was deserving. So it wasn't only about that case. I made sure that they changed the policy in the state of California so that every transgender inmate in the prison system would have access to the medical care that they desired a need. So Kamala wants taxpayer funded sex changes for criminals, fewer police, more riots. They're not going to stop, won't stop. Somebody told Liz Cheney. And at the same time, she wants to grow the size of government to a scale we've never seen before with new regulations, restrictions. Frankly, Marxism, 93 trillion dollar new Green Deal, that bill that she co-sponsored with Bernie Sanders in the Senate. As president of the United States, I am prepared to get rid of the filibuster to pass a Green New Deal. Leaders have to lead. Plastic straws are a big thing right now. Yeah. Do you ban plastic straws? I think we should. Will you commit to implementing a federal ban on fracking your first day in office, adding the United States, the list of countries who have banned this devastating practice? There's no question I'm in favor of banning fracking. So would you ban offshore drilling? Yes. And I've again worked on that. No fracking, no drilling, no plastic straws. And here's one other big one. No more private health insurance, government run care for all. Take a look. You support the Medicare for All bill, I think initially co-sponsored by Senator Bernie Sanders. You're also a co-sponsor on it. I believe it will totally eliminate private insurance. So for people out there who like their insurance, they don't get to keep it? Well, listen, the idea is that everyone gets access to medical care. And you don't have to go through the process of going through an insurance company, having them give you approval, going through the paperwork, all of the delay that may require. Who of us has not had that situation where you've got to wait for approval and the doctor says, well, I don't know if your insurance company is going to cover this. Let's eliminate all of that. Let's move on. So much for the Freedom and Joy party. No private health insurance. She also has big plans for reparations. Take a look. Should black people get reparations? I think there has to be some form of reparations and we can discuss what that is. So you might be asking, how does Kamala plan to pay for all these new radical endeavors? Taxes. You pay for it. Take a look. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez's new darling of the party, she officially has more Twitter followers than Nancy Pelosi. She's on 60 Minutes this weekend proudly calling herself a radical and she's promoting policies like saying that every single carbon emission in the country, every car should be eliminated within the next 11 years, everything from a 70 to 80% tax rate. Do you agree that she could possibly and this ideology of the socialist left could splinter your party? No. You know, I think that she is challenging the status quo. I think that's fantastic. I think that she is introducing bold ideas that should be discussed. But we've got to increase the corporate tax rate. We also have to increase taxes for the top 1%. And that part of that is going to be about repealing that tax bill that they just passed. And also looking at the state taxes are going to have to go up. And unrealized capital gains, make no mistake. Taxes will go up on every American if she is elected. This includes young Americans just starting out. But according to Kamala, they're too stupid to have any clue what's going on anyway. Take a look. What's the other thing we know about this population? And it's a specific phase of life. Remember, age is more than a chronological fact. What else do we know about this population, 18 through 24? They are stupid. That is why we put them in dormitories and they have a resident assistant. They make really bad decisions. That was a really dumb thing to say. In my view, apparently she thinks 18 and 24 year olds are stupid. And here she is praising Bidenomics and lying about inflation. Take a look. Is it wrong to consider inflation transitory? These price spikes seem like they're going to be with us for a while. We have to address the fact that we've got to deal with the fact that folks are paying for gas, paying for groceries, and need solutions to it. That is called Bidenomics. That is called Bidenomics. And we are very proud of Bidenomics. And as today's jobs numbers make clear, Bidenomics is working. Well, over a year ago, she's saying the opposite now, and of course she owns Bidenomics and Biden inflation. She played a critical role in the Biden Harris administration. In fact, according to her, she was usually the last person in the room with President Biden during any important policy decision, like the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, which we learned today that our allies and many in our military did not want them to do because it was dumb. Take a look. President Biden always said that he wants you to be the last person in the room, particularly for big decisions, just as he was for President Obama. He just made a really big decision. Afghanistan. Yes. Were you the last person in the room? Yes. And you feel comfortable. I do. And I'm going to add to that. This is a president who has an extraordinary amount of courage. 13 Americans died. 13. And many Americans were abandoned behind enemy lines. Ironically, Kamala's favorite phrase doesn't apply to her. Take a look. I can imagine what can be and be unburdened by what has been, you know, what can be unburdened by what has been, what can be unburdened by what has been, what can be by what has been. Let us remain focused on what many of you have heard me say all the time. Let us remain focused on what can be unburdened by what has been. If Bob Iger is Disney, ABC News Disney does its job. She will most definitely be burdened by what has been. She's burdened by her role in the Biden Harris administration, burdened by her long held radical beliefs in her own words. She's burdened by her lackluster track record as a political opportunist. And tomorrow night, she faces another burden, no teleprompter, but Kamala, she's on home turf at ABC News with moderators who want her to win, you know, bearing, you know, barring any kind of political miracle here, it will be three on one against Donald Trump all night. And all that we showed you, ABC has an obligation to get answers to because the election is in 57 days. Early voting ballots have gone out and states are ready. Early voting starts one week from tomorrow in Pennsylvania, rolls out quickly around the country. But after the debate, we will hold Kamala accountable. The media will say she she strung three sentences together. She wins. She wins. We'll be in the spin room. We'll be in Philly. We'll have our cheesesteak in the afternoon and we will expose her radical agenda every night until election night. The question tomorrow, will ABC News be a news organization or will they be as they have been on ABC, you know, world news tonight? Are they going to be 100 percent pro-Kamala, 93 percent negative Trump? And if Disney's comfortable with that, what is Disney saying to people that hold different views? What are they saying to the country? You know, is that the type of organization that half the country's going to want to support? Is there a reason why late night television hosts are all failing? Anyway, a big new poll for Donald Trump is coming up, causing panic among the state-run media mob. We'll bring you the latest. We'll check in with Eric Trump and more crime and carnage from the Harris, Biden open borders, 11 million unbedded illegals. But the borders are doesn't have a plan to fix it. We'll check in with Governor Glenn Youngkin and much more. Thanks for being with us.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Attorney Scott is representing the recall campaign in its litigation and potential litigation and representing it in the matters of WEC. And just for a little bit of background, when I had the investigation into the 2020 election, you know, I couldn't get one lawyer from Wisconsin who was willing to work on the investigation because they were all frightened of no offense, but what the press would do to them and what the opposition would do to them. And it seems wrong that there should be opposition to finding out what happened in an election, but there it is. So ever since then, I have to tell you, I've got a lot of respect for Attorney Scott. I'm very grateful that to work with him and that he is my friend. So we stand before you today, united in our resolve to uphold the principles of democracy and to ensure that the voices of the people are heard. The recall petition against Speaker Robin Voss is a testament to the power of the people and their right to hold their elected officials accountable. We demand that the Wisconsin Elections Commission set a date for the recall election, and that date, according to the statutes, is July 30, 2024. Our efforts to gather the necessary signatures have been met with numerous challenges and unfounded allegations. Despite these obstacles, we've successfully collected over 9,000 signatures, well above the required threshold of 6,850. These signatures represent the voices of the citizens of the 63rd Assembly District who demand change and accountability. It's crucial to address a fundamental issue with Speaker Voss's challenge to our recall petition. You know, Robin Voss did not follow the law, and his response to WEC, his challenge to the petition, may not be lawfully considered by WEC. According to Wisconsin Administrative Code EL-20-035, the complainant, not the complainant's representative, shall verify the allegations of the complaint. The complainant verifies the complaint by signing a statement under oath before a notary public or other person authorized to administer oaths. This requirement clearly states that a lawyer cannot sign the challenge on behalf of the complainant. However, Voss did not sign the complaint and instead allowed his attorney to do so on his behalf. Voss's failure to comply with this requirement makes his challenge procedurally deficient and void and illegitimate. Despite this, Speaker Voss has attempted to subvert the democratic process by challenging the validity of our petition through his attorney. He has alleged but shown no evidence of fraud and procedural irregularities, and we stand firm in our commitment to the truth. The signatures we gathered are legitimate, and the people who signed our petition did so with full knowledge of its purpose. Excuse me. It's important to note that even after their extensive challenges, Voss's team seems to have conceded in their filings with the Wisconsin Elections Commission that we have gathered enough signature to meet the required threshold of 6,850 for a recall election. This acknowledgement by Robin Voss's own team further underscores the validity and legitimacy of our recall petition. The burden of proof when it comes to challenging signatures is, was, and will always be always has been on Voss's team to substantiate any claims they make against our petition. They have repeatedly tried to shift the burden onto the electors of the 63rd District despite their challenge being void. They have not proven or even had any evidence of their allegations. Despite their best efforts to undermine our petition, they have failed to present any credible evidence to support their claims. Now we have to highlight a critical issue that undermines the fairness of this process. Attorney James Wateka of the Wisconsin Elections Commission has been providing guidance to Robin Voss's legal team, potentially subverting the statutes and laws designed to ensure a fair recall process. How can we expect a fair shot at this recall when Voss's attorney openly states he's being guided by Weck and Administrator Wolf? You know, I say that because we received from Attorney Fernholtz, who represents Robin Voss, an email exchange that he had with Attorney James Wateka, who is the senior lawyer at the Wisconsin Elections Commission. He's the boss of the lawyers. And I see that Attorney Fernholtz puts his request to bend the rules to Attorney Wateka at 9.02 p.m. So does Robin Voss's attorney have Jim Wateka's personal cell phone? This is not working hour, usual working hours for Weck. And in fact, Attorney Wateka responded about 12 minutes later at 9.15 p.m. and says, "Matt, Administrator Wolf and I have conferred and she granted both of your requests." This leapt out at me because a few weeks ago, I reached out to the lawyers at the Wisconsin Elections Commission to say, "Why haven't you assigned District 63 as the proper district for recall when the Constitution says that it's the electors of the district that elected the Representative who has the right to recall the Representative?" And I went through some back and forth emails with a younger lawyer and then finally I said, "Listen, I know you're not empowered to answer this question or something like that. I know that your answer and my conclusion are going to be different, but what I do not understand is your mental process. I don't understand your points of reference here as to how you're arriving at your conclusion. Would you just please let me know that?" Well, I don't get a return email from the younger lawyer. I get a return email from Jim Wateka who tells me quite smartly, "Well, as you know or should know whatever he said, all of those decisions have to be made by the Commission." All right, so that's for me when I call on behalf of the recall campaign, but when Matt Fernholz calls on behalf of Robin Boss to protect him from having to face a recall, he gets right through not just to Jim Wateka. Wateka didn't say anything to me about, "Let me confer with Megan Wolfe," or "Let me talk with some of the Commissioners," or "Here, why don't you take these steps?" That's why I say one of my first recommendations at the end of that investigation was to abolish WEC. Just as I believe that Robin Boss is the worst of politics, I believe that WEC is the worst of all government bureaucracies. They act as a law unto themselves. They favor one party over the other. Robin Boss's lawyer gets free access to WEC senior lawyer at nine o'clock at night, and I'm lucky if I get a response via email telling me that they're not going to answer my question. It's particularly troubling that this recall was initially driven by Speaker Boss's protection of Megan Wolfe from impeachment. Now it looks even worse that Megan Wolfe and the Wisconsin Elections Commission are seemingly going against the law and the statutes to assist Boss in fending off this recall. This situation not only undermines any trust left in our democratic institutions, but also highlights a serious conflict of interest that must be addressed. We cannot and will not allow the voice of the people of the District 63 to be silenced. This recall is not just about one individual. It's about the fundamental right of the citizens to hold their elected representatives accountable. The attempts to dismiss our petition and deny the people their constitutional right to recall election are unacceptable and undemocratic. The allegations of fraud have been thoroughly debunked. The claims of out-of-district signatures have been disproven by John Van Haden's meticulous work which Attorney Scott submitted to the Wisconsin Elections Commission on behalf of the recall. He demonstrated that the vast majority of the signatures in question were indeed from legitimate residents of the 63rd Assembly District. Furthermore, the instances labeled as fraud were merely citizens assisting their loved ones in signing the petition, a practice that is both legal and ethical, and was noted on the sheet or on a document accompanying the sheet at the time by the person who collected the signature. It's clear that our petition is valid and it's time for the Wisconsin Elections Commission to act. We demand that the Wisconsin Elections Commission set the date for the recall election of Tuesday, July 30, 2024. The people of the 63rd Assembly District have spoken and their voices must be heard and honored. Any further delay is a direct affront to their constitutional right and a betrayal of the democratic principles we hold dear. Let's not forget that this recall is about preserving the integrity of our elections and democracy and ensuring that our elected officials are accountable to the people they serve. The Wisconsin Elections Commission must act now to certify our petition and schedule the recall election without further delay. We won't be silenced. We will not be denied our rights. The time to act is now and we call upon the Wisconsin Elections Commission to uphold the principles of democracy and set the recall election date for Tuesday, July 30. Now I'm going to invite Attorney Scott to make some remarks and then we'll take some of your questions. Thank you Justice Gableman. I don't have any prepared remarks today. I guess I want to just comment on a couple of quick things as far as the law goes. Number one, I'm a practicing attorney so I can't make any political statement here today and I don't intend to make any political statement and also I'm not going to comment specifically on anything having to do with litigation but one comment that's been made repeatedly about this contention that the challenge was not verified by Speaker Voss. It's important that things be verified when called for in the law. Oftentimes when a complaint is filed or other things are filed it's not required that somebody actually swear to it under oath. When somebody swears to something under oath they're verifying the truth of what is there based upon an allegiance to a higher power of whatever that power may be they have an allegiance to. When that doesn't happen that doesn't have the same kind of weight under the law as other things do. So this isn't just some petty grievance about a technical paperwork error. This actually matters substantively in the law. The other thing I wanted to comment on is in the challenge if there is going to be a challenge if it's considered there's a burden of proof here. Speaker Voss has to meet a burden of proof in order to overcome the facial validity of the petition itself. The petition has enough signatures on its face to call a recall election. In order to overcome that facial the facial validity of the petition there needs to be a challenge to it. Without a challenge the burden of proof is not met. Also if the challenge itself does not meet the burden of proof then there is no reason to not call a recall election and that's why we believe that WEC at this point has no choice but to call a recall election. Now finally the timing of that would be the sixth week following the filing of the petition. WEC at this point because they don't have any challenge in front of them or they have a challenge that does not sufficiently meet the burden of proof means that they need to file the petition with themselves I guess and then the recall election must be called for the Tuesday of the sixth week following that filing. So anytime this week if the petition were to be filed by WEC the election would be on July 30th where it would be next week it would be August 6th. And then beyond that I just want to say that there is an issue of conflict of interest here that I think everybody kind of needs to recognize. When you have an elected official that's facing a constitutional process of recall when the decision whether or not that recall is valid is being oversawed, oversawed, overseen by a group that in large part was appointed by that elected official you have a conflict of interest present that I think needs to be addressed. So with that I think that's all I have for remarks and we can take any questions you may have.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

This month marks the three-year anniversary of the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country. Kamala and Crookijo's catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan has just been horrible for all of us. Three years ago, Kamala and Biden's incompetence left 13 dead warriors, hundreds of civilians killed and grievously wounded, and $85 billion worth of the finest military equipment on the planet abandoned to the Taliban right into the hands of the Taliban. It also left 45 incredible soldiers so badly wounded, the legs, the arms, the face, obliteration. As vice president, Kamala bragged that she was the last person in the room. She was the tough one. She was the last person in the room during that disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan decision. She repeatedly praised the decisions, and she said it led to a catastrophe, but it was worth it. The incompetence and weakness on display from the Biden-Harris administration was an insult to every soldier, sailor, airman, and Marine who ever served in our U.S. military. As we mark this horrible occasion, we mourn with the families of the great American heroes who lost their lives three years ago, and we vow to never forget the supreme sacrifice they made for our country. America cannot afford four more years of Kamala Harris in the White House. She is a disaster. She's a radical Marxist. She destroyed San Francisco. She destroyed the state of California, everything in her way she destroyed. She ran against Crooked Joe Biden, and she lost. She was the first one out of 22 people. She was the first one to quit. She never even in the primary made it to Iowa. And this is not a person that should be running right now. She didn't get one vote. I'm not a fan of Biden at all. I thought he was the worst president in history. I think she's the worst vice president in history, but she got no votes. He got 14 million votes. They staged a coup, and something like that's not supposed to happen in our country. Under my leadership, our nation will be strong and respected like never before, and I will keep America safe. I will keep it safer than ever before, and if I'm not elected, I truly believe you're going to end up in World War III, and you're going to end up in a depression the likes of 1929. Thank you very much.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Congratulations to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson for having the courage and fortitude to release all of the J6 tapes, which will reveal completely what really happened on January 6th. Thank you very much, Mike. Great job.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.