Popular Posts

I think the best way to think about our current political climate in the United States is we are led by a transcendent political athlete. Donald Trump is the most effective and capable political athlete we have ever seen. Why? He understands how to connect at the one-on-one level. He understands retail politics better than, frankly, anybody. He has an app ability that's very disarming, and yet because of his business acumen, he has a way of negotiating that I think is just very hard for the learned non-business person to compete with. You know, there's a very famous Mike Tyson quote, "Everybody's got a plan until they get punched in the face." I think the president has an incredible ability to negotiate. Howard Luttnick has an incredible ability to negotiate, Scott Besson has an ability to negotiate because of their grounding in business.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Well, I mean I love the way mom Donnie completely ignores what President Trump has already done I mean, he's talking about oh, it's a new day. We're gonna attack affordability. Excuse me That's exactly what President Trump has done since day one in office. Look at the price of oil Look at the price of certain foods He has in fact used affordability as is one of his number one Agenda points and he's done actually effective job in bringing down the price of oil and I know it's working on on other elements of affordability as well, but

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

It doesn't get much more serious than that. The chairman of the House Intel Committee doesn't have declassification authority over these types of documents. They are made available to Congress under very tightly controlled rules. This has been a source of tension for years, and members of both parties have gone out of their way to assure that this material would be closely held and not weaponized. This was viewed as one of the most political chairs of that committee in its history. This is a truly chilling account, if true. When I first read it, frankly, I was taken aback because it's perfectly moronic to commit such a felony with a planning conference meeting with staff. That's not usually how things are leaked in Washington, D.C. What makes this different, Will, is that this was a statement made to FBI agents. The person who made this statement was no doubt aware that lying to FBI agents is not just a crime, but a crime that was repeatedly prosecuted during prior administrations, including the Obama and Biden administrations. Making this statement puts you at risk. That's why someone's lying here, and someone's a felon. Let's just for a moment hypothetically take this whistleblower at their word. Let's assume for a moment that it's true, professor. What kind of punishment follows for leaking classified information? This is a very significant punishment. You can have, in addition to having multiple counts, you can easily go 10 years in terms of a sentence, if not more, depending on the circumstances and the number of violations. Each of these leaks is an individual violation. Each of these documents would likely be charged as a violation. That type of count-stacking is precisely what Mueller and others did. Remember, these are very similar to the types of claims made against Donald Trump and Mar-a-Lago that he removed material and properly stored them. There were also allegations that he might have revealed them to third parties. This is much more serious in that, in one sense. Trump was accused of negligence in most of these counts. This would be a premeditated criminal act to release classified information to damage one's political opponents.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

So what is Chuck Schumer, who just spoke here on the Senate floor a few minutes ago, had to say, "Well, he put out a press release and he said that historically bad nominees, his words, deserve a historic level of scrutiny." Here are the facts. Senate Republicans have confirmed now 109 sub-cabinet nominees. Every single one of those 109 sub-cabinet nominees have been filibustered by the Democrats. Yet only seven of them received more than 10 minutes of debate on the Senate floor. They've chosen to waste the time, but not to discuss the credibility of any of these nominees. The average Democrat debate was two minutes, 87, zero Democrat debate. Only seven of them went for more than 10 minutes. In other words, the Senate Democrats declined to come to the floor to discuss 75 percent of these sub-cabinet nominees that ultimately were all confirmed by the United States Senate.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

I know that you are increasing your military capacity very substantially and we've received your orders for a very large amount of new military equipment and you know that we make the best military equipment in the world, the jets, the missiles and everything else and hopefully we don't have to use them very much if at all, but we appreciate that order and we very much appreciate the trade, we're going to do tremendous trade together I think more than ever before, we're just signing a new deal and it's a very fair deal and we look forward to welcoming Japan into the United States in a continuation and it's something that everybody is very very excited about.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

So it's been one week since the Supreme Court voted to uphold birthright citizenship and Republicans are frustrated, understandably so. Justice Alito said, "This is one of the most important decisions in the history of the court, and in my judgment, the court has made a serious mistake." Justice Thomas echoed that, saying, "I'm not sure that today's opinion will stand the test of time." It didn't take long for Justice Katanji Brown Jackson to read Thomas' dissent, then accuse him of racism. Of course, the ultimate irony is that for all the talk about the detestable Dred Scott decision, the government and Thomas propose a return to its core tenant. It wasn't just Jackson, the entire Democrat-based dogpiled on Justice Thomas, calling him a DEI hire. When he was appointed to the Supreme Court, there's no way in hell he should have got that job. He's literally a DEI hire, and now a man like that who knows that, who feels, you know, who feels mediocre, who feels small, is going to exact that against everybody, and that's just kind of what's happening now. There's nothing you're going to ask him to do that would hurt black or brown people or women he wouldn't do. How do you think he looks in the mirror or sleeps at night? Probably very well, I guess, I guess. I think Clarence Thomas, if he looks in the mirror and gets up in the middle of the night and sees a black man in the mirror, he'll call him a police. Disgusting. Democrats are pressed over the Supreme Court allowing states to ban men from women's sports, and Republicans are frustrated over the court upholding birthright citizenship. Both parties lost, and both parties won last week. And now, both parties want to change in the Supreme Court. Republicans have a plan. When one justice resigns, they replace that justice with a new one. He's done a wonderful job as a senator, I highly respect it. In fact, somebody said, would you ever appoint him to the United States Supreme Court? Because he's a brilliant lawyer. No, if I was having a hard time with getting the votes, I would appoint Ted Cruz. I get 100% guarantee. Democrats, they want to pack the court. They want to trash the whole system. We talk about the idea of Supreme Court reform, which includes expanding the Supreme Court. I do believe if you combine term limits on the court and the expansion of the court, where every president gets two appointees, you would depoliticize this. The Republicans stole two Supreme Court seats in 2016 and 2020. That's what's giving them their supermajority. The only way to solve this problem in a very short period of time is expand the Supreme Court. Neither party is satisfied with last week's decisions, but it's a reminder the Supreme Court was never created to serve a political party. It's meant to uphold the Constitution, and that's exactly what it's doing.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.