Speaker 1: Lie from Baal Heartland and the crossroads of America.
Speaker 2: It's Tony Katz today, party line vote.
Speaker 3: We are going to advance out of this committee, probably
Speaker 3: the most discreditable person ever to seek the office of
Speaker 3: Attorney General of the United States. The reasons to vote
Speaker 3: against him number in the hundreds. But let's just focus
Speaker 3: on a few where my Republican colleagues purport to have
Speaker 3: great concern. Let's start with the Epstein files, where Todd
Speaker 3: Blanche participated in the cover up, continues to participate in
Speaker 3: the cover up, and is responsible for a massive screw
Speaker 3: up of the release of the documents.
Speaker 1: That's Sheldon Whitehouse, the bigoted senator from Rhode Island who
Speaker 1: joins the all White country clubs, saying there's no way
Speaker 1: Todd Blanch should be confirmed as Attorney General. But he
Speaker 1: just admitted that he will get out of committee and
Speaker 1: he will be confirmed. Tony Katz, Tony Katz Today, so
Speaker 1: good to be with you. Find everything I do at
Speaker 1: Tony katz dot com. Also the YouTube and the rumble
Speaker 1: Tony Katz. If you subscribe, I'd appreciate that. It's helpful.
Speaker 1: I know if you're a radio host these days, you
Speaker 1: also have to be doing all the video. It's just
Speaker 1: the way it goes. Everybody's multitasking. You're doing it as
Speaker 1: well as I am. There's no doubt that Epstein was
Speaker 1: going to come up, and this is going to be
Speaker 1: a pretext for Democrats to say absolutely not. They're not
Speaker 1: saying absolutely not to Todd Blanche, They're saying absolutely not
Speaker 1: to Donald Trump. On every level, I argue, if Merrick
Speaker 1: Garland can be confirmed as Attorney General, Todd Blanch could
Speaker 1: be confirmed as Attorney general. But we have lost this
Speaker 1: capacity on the role of advising consent, to engage anything
Speaker 1: other than what do the politics of the day tell
Speaker 1: us to do. One of the great lines the late
Speaker 1: Senator Lindsay Graham used in the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: was when you see Kagan, soda Mayor, tell him, Lindsay
Speaker 1: says hello, because he voted for them, because he knew
Speaker 1: his role of advisor consent. And I'm not so sure
Speaker 1: I would have confirmed Soda Mayor Kagan a different story, especially.
Speaker 2: During the confirmation hearing.
Speaker 1: I do not know if I would have confirmed somebody
Speaker 1: who relied on the richness of her Latina heritage to
Speaker 1: come up with decisions regarding the constitution, not what my
Speaker 1: interest is.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: I never looked to Scalia and said, tell me about
Speaker 1: the richness of your Italian heritage, so you can come
Speaker 1: to good conclusions regarding cases brought before you and how
Speaker 1: they work within the constitutional framework.
Speaker 2: That we have never once, never once.
Speaker 1: But those days are indeed over that conversation, that concept
Speaker 1: that philosophy is indeed lost. Instead, what we have is
Speaker 1: the radicalness of position that says politics before all things.
Speaker 1: This was center Dick Durbin of Illinois, a man most
Speaker 1: aptly named heks.
Speaker 4: Mister Chairman, reflect on the fact that as we meet today,
Speaker 4: there are thousands, literally tens of thousands of men and
Speaker 4: women in the United States who got up this morning
Speaker 4: and put on a badge or picked up their briefcase
Speaker 4: and went to work to make sure that we would
Speaker 4: be saved. They are in law enforcement all across the
Speaker 4: United States of America. They count on the system of
Speaker 4: justice as we all do, to give us not only
Speaker 4: safety in our homes, but also fairness when it comes
Speaker 4: to treatment by the government. The man we are discussing
Speaker 4: this morning seeks to be the number one law enforcement
Speaker 4: enforcer of the United States of America, the Attorney General
Speaker 4: of the United States, the highest ranking law enforcement position.
Speaker 4: And what have we learned in the last few weeks
Speaker 4: when it comes to Todd Blanche? We have learned that
Speaker 4: simply his word is not enough for most of us,
Speaker 4: not even for some of my Republican friends. Even his
Speaker 4: word under oath is not credible enough. We have a
Speaker 4: demand by colleagues that I support a demand that mister Blanche,
Speaker 4: when it comes to important promises to American people, put
Speaker 4: it in writing, put it in writing. And in fact
Speaker 4: he did. Mister Chairman, The political escapade of the last
Speaker 4: week has made it clearer than ever that Todd Blanche
Speaker 4: has no business serving as our nation's chief law enforcement officer.
Speaker 1: So what happened in the past week. What happened in
Speaker 1: the past week was this concept of the Weaponization Fund,
Speaker 1: which in mid July, Todd Blanche said wasn't going to
Speaker 1: be a thing, this one point seven seven six billion
Speaker 1: dollar fund. And I opposed the fund. You were abused
Speaker 1: by your government, by our government.
Speaker 2: I think you can sue. I think that's fine.
Speaker 1: If you create a fund, you have the opportunity for
Speaker 1: the fund to be abused. Same reason by the way,
Speaker 1: same basic philosophy. I'm thrilled with the elimination of usaid. Oh,
Speaker 1: they can complain and moan and can catch all they want.
Speaker 1: Look at all the people you killed.
Speaker 2: No no, no, no, no no.
Speaker 1: Look at all the organizations no longer being funded to
Speaker 1: do damage to us. Look at all the slush fund
Speaker 1: that is gone going to organizations where it never should
Speaker 1: have gone to begin with. And that does not put
Speaker 1: Americans on the hook for lives being lost, madness, It
Speaker 1: does say that America said we are not going to
Speaker 1: pay for our own destruction, and so progressives can have
Speaker 1: a government funded slush fund. Absolutely not good. You know,
Speaker 1: I'm one of the Maybe I'm maybe it's few, Maybe
Speaker 1: I'm wrong right, Maybe maybe there's more of us than
Speaker 1: I know. I believe that Doe should come back, and
Speaker 1: should come back in a huge, massive way. We're nowhere
Speaker 1: near done cutting, nowhere near done. We are nuts for
Speaker 1: abandoning this. Who cares if the left is happy or not?
Speaker 1: Who cares if they scream about and yell about it.
Speaker 1: There are cuts, there is fraud, and it all has
Speaker 1: to be removed. Unnecessary government removed. Oh, and there's a
Speaker 1: lot of unnecessary governments.
Speaker 2: You've got a bigger list than to me. I know,
Speaker 2: I know, But there's a lot of fraud.
Speaker 1: Why aren't we getting rid of it? All this talk
Speaker 1: about what happened in Minneapolis.
Speaker 2: Where's the movement?
Speaker 1: There is some? I will admit that there is some.
Speaker 1: We don't talk about it enough. I want more because
Speaker 1: there's more fraud. That's one state. There are forty nine
Speaker 1: other states and they've all got an issue. Let's go
Speaker 1: get rid of the fraud. Let's take a look at
Speaker 1: the government organizations that are set up and what kind
Speaker 1: of deals they're getting, and say no, and no and no, and.
Speaker 2: Let's get rid of the fraud.
Speaker 1: Let's stop this money train, keep it where it belongs,
Speaker 1: in the pocket to the people. Pay down some debt,
Speaker 1: A million things we can do, but we don't need
Speaker 1: to pay for these people. We don't need their life
Speaker 1: to be easier. Good ah, hell no, let's end this madness.
Speaker 1: So I'm a believer in more doughe not less. But
Speaker 1: because this Weaponization Fund conversation, it took Todd Blanche to
Speaker 1: come out again and say that the Weaponization.
Speaker 2: Fund is dead.
Speaker 1: And that's what caused Tom Tillis of North Carolina and
Speaker 1: John Cornyn of Texas, both Republicans, to say, Okay, we'll
Speaker 1: vote on Todd Blanche.
Speaker 2: Now they wanted this gun.
Speaker 1: So to Dick Durbin's mind, getting what you wanted is
Speaker 1: proof that the guy is unworthy. Todd Blanche is fine.
Speaker 1: Todd Blanche is fine. And if you were to say
Speaker 1: to me, we can't have Todd Blanche, and I gave
Speaker 1: you a hundred other names, the left would say all
Speaker 1: of them are unacceptable. And that's the point. None of
Speaker 1: this charade matters. This is all political nonsense. It's why
Speaker 1: people hate politicians and government, and it's why I'll pay
Speaker 1: no mind whatsoever to Dick Durbin, nor will I pay
Speaker 1: any mind to the absolutely vicious and wholly unacceptable Sheldon Whitehouse.
Speaker 3: Cover up and screw up on the Epstein Files. What
Speaker 3: do I mean by cover up? Well, first, they looked
Speaker 3: at four FBI three oh two's that were the testimony
Speaker 3: of a woman who told the FBI in a formal
Speaker 3: statement that she had been sexually assaulted and physically assaulted
Speaker 3: by Donald Trump around thirteen or fourteen years of age.
Speaker 3: Of those for three O two's, they released one, the
Speaker 3: one that did not mention Donald Trump. Well, fortunately for transparency,
Speaker 3: these documents had been released in other areas and bait stamped,
Speaker 3: so people figured out that some were missing, and with
Speaker 3: that the other three O twos that mentioned Donald Trump
Speaker 3: had to be produced. Only because they got caught were
Speaker 3: those three O twos produced. And right now as we
Speaker 3: sit here, Todd Blanche is still sitting on thirty seven
Speaker 3: pages that are almost certainly the agent's notes off of
Speaker 3: which the three O twos were taken.
Speaker 2: If you don't know what.
Speaker 1: A three O two is, a form FD three oh two,
Speaker 1: it's an internal document that you by the FBI and
Speaker 1: it summarizes interviews, witnesses, suspects of the irrelevant information. It
Speaker 1: is not a verbatim transcript. It's a narrative memorandum. That's
Speaker 1: the terminology that's used around a three oh two. No
Speaker 1: part of a three oh two is testimony. No part
Speaker 1: of a three O two is under oath. That's not
Speaker 1: how a three oh two works. It is not a
Speaker 1: sworn statement, not at all. Now they're utilized investigations and
Speaker 1: you can use that information to say, Okay, we were
Speaker 1: going to use this, Okay you said this, but then
Speaker 1: we found out this and now you said this, and
Speaker 1: that's differently what you said here. And you can go
Speaker 1: after someone's credibility.
Speaker 2: Right, And.
Speaker 1: We understand that that's how prosecutors work, and that's how
Speaker 1: FBI agents work, et ceter And we can talk about
Speaker 1: that another time. The three O two doesn't prove guilt.
Speaker 1: Three O two doesn't prove anything at all. And we
Speaker 1: also know that when it comes to allegations against President Trump,
Speaker 1: regarding these things that witnesses have been shown to be uncredible,
Speaker 1: that does not concern Sheldon Whitehouse. What concerns him is
Speaker 1: how can he attack No part of this about Todd Planche.
Speaker 1: And you're talking about a guy and me who said
Speaker 1: to release everything redacted. Yes, I don't want innocent people
Speaker 1: to be caught up in these things, but.
Speaker 2: Release the files.
Speaker 1: And yes, you're talking to the guy me who said
Speaker 1: that President Trump handled this wrong. From the beginning. The
Speaker 1: administration screwed this up. They did misread the room, misreadware.
Speaker 1: Republicans and conservatives were and gave Democrats the opening and
Speaker 1: they're still taking it.
Speaker 2: Trump did this. It was a miss and.
Speaker 1: A very poor job in recovery. By the way, none
Speaker 1: of this says that Todd Blanch shouldn't be Attorney general.
Speaker 1: None of this says that at all. Release what you
Speaker 1: can release, redact what needs to be redacted. You know,
Speaker 1: let me take that back, redact what needs to be redacted.
Speaker 1: Release it all, fine with that. But just because someone's
Speaker 1: got a name in an Epstein file doesn't mean that
Speaker 1: they're guilty. Something we've said on the show from the beginning.
Speaker 1: That's not how Sheldon white House views it. Sheldon white
Speaker 1: House says, everyone I don't like is guilty. That's his argument,
Speaker 1: and it's not one sufficient to say Todd Blanch shouldn't
Speaker 1: be Attorney general.
Speaker 2: But it wouldn't matter if it was Todd Blanch or not.
Speaker 1: If it wasn't Todd Blanch would be somebody else, and
Speaker 1: there would be Sheldon white House, the guy who joins
Speaker 1: all white country.
Speaker 2: Clubs to disapprove, to say no. That's the point.
Speaker 1: It's all political, all the time on something that you know,
Speaker 1: to paraphrase Senator John Cornyn, we want somebody who's leading
Speaker 1: the d DOJ. We don't want somebody in the interim, and
Speaker 1: leading to a question of where the leadership is. The
Speaker 1: President of the United States gets to appoint the attorney
Speaker 1: general the end. And unless that attorney general has us
Speaker 1: is a sworn communist, what are we doing here. I'll
Speaker 1: tell you what we're doing here. We're playing pure politics.
Speaker 1: Blanche is going to get confirmed. Let's move on to
Speaker 1: the next subject. That's my plan. This is Tony Katz today.
Speaker 1: I didn't hit this in three more things, but it
Speaker 1: still matters quite a bit, this cyber attack, conversation on
Speaker 1: water systems. Like there's a part of me that things
Speaker 1: I shouldn't be talking about it at all, Like I
Speaker 1: shouldn't I shouldn't bring it up.
Speaker 2: You know. It's like History of the World, it's mel Brooks,
Speaker 2: Get off Fat, Get off Fat. But that wasn't actually
Speaker 2: mel Brooks. That was the side kick.
Speaker 1: Doesn't matter, groovous Tony Kats, Tony Katz today, good.
Speaker 2: To be with you.
Speaker 1: I will do all the history of the world part
Speaker 1: one thing for you, gladly.
Speaker 2: I will act out the whole thing. I will do
Speaker 2: the Ethiopian shimsham, all of it. The problem is when you.
Speaker 1: Say Ethiopian shimsham, that's also a I found this out
Speaker 1: the hard way. It's a strain of marijuana. I go
Speaker 1: with the mel Brooks version. Please, thank you very much.
Speaker 2: Gregory Hines. Oh so good. So that's not the story.
Speaker 2: Where was I? What was I talking about? Oh? That's right,
Speaker 2: the water is being attacked.
Speaker 1: It's a really, really freaky story that seven states have
Speaker 1: reported cyber attacks on their water systems to the FBI.
Speaker 2: The FBI said in a statement they're aware of the attacks.
Speaker 1: Quote, the FBI and our inter agency partners are fully
Speaker 1: engaged to protect critical impa structure, and we remain well
Speaker 1: equipped to protect against cyber threats of all varieties. Now,
Speaker 1: the FBI is not discussing who is behind the attack.
Speaker 1: Although the FBI and the Cybersecurity Infrastructure Agency they've warned
Speaker 1: that Iranian hackers have targeted water systems. Let's keep these
Speaker 1: two things separate for just a moment. First, I don't think.
Speaker 2: There's any of us. It was you and me having
Speaker 2: a bourbon.
Speaker 1: On a barstool and someone said you, well, you know,
Speaker 1: the Iranians are trying to hack into our water systems.
Speaker 1: We'd be like, well, yeah, every terrorist entity out there
Speaker 1: today is trying to hack into our water systems and
Speaker 1: our power grids and everything. We would without having had
Speaker 1: any prediscussion about it, not having spent thirty seconds discussing
Speaker 1: it with each other or on our own, we would
Speaker 1: be able to go on a fifteen minute bender conversation
Speaker 1: of all the things that terrorists out there are trying
Speaker 1: to get their hands on and trying to create damage
Speaker 1: for us. With right water systems, power systems, communications systems,
Speaker 1: medical systems, we could go on fifteen minutes, non stop.
Speaker 1: You and I bourbon on a barstool, right, you pick
Speaker 1: your friend. Fifteen minutes. Of course we could, because no
Speaker 1: part of that is shocking or surprising. Now, President Trump,
Speaker 1: he came out to say that the issue here is Minnesota.
Speaker 2: Today.
Speaker 1: He said, I just want to mention that we heard
Speaker 1: of Minnesota. There was a cyber attack, and they blame
Speaker 1: it on Iran. I don't think so. I think I
Speaker 1: blame it on Minnesota because they're grossly incompetent. There was
Speaker 1: a cyber attack thirty water plants. They like to say, Oh,
Speaker 1: it was Iran. Iran should be so lucky. Iran's got
Speaker 1: bigger problems than worrying about Minnesota. So this was Tim
Speaker 1: Walls blaming the Trump administration. Could everyone stop being a
Speaker 1: loose a tick? How did I end up in the position.
Speaker 1: How are we here? We're All we want people to
Speaker 1: do is be normal. It is cyber attacks against critical infrastructure.
Speaker 1: What's our plan? Less spider man finger pointing, meme stuff
Speaker 1: and more, what's our plan? If Tim Walls is blaming
Speaker 1: blaming Donald Trump, Tim Walls is a schmuck. I don't
Speaker 1: want the President to play into this. They may be
Speaker 1: incompetent Minnesota, but it doesn't mean that that's.
Speaker 2: The issue here. We need to be aggressive.
Speaker 1: We need to be asking ourselves who is bringing this
Speaker 1: about and how do we deal with these things?
Speaker 2: The threat was.
Speaker 1: Identified as programmable logic controllers PLCs. It's in the water systems,
Speaker 1: and it urged infrastructure owners to remove these publicly exposed
Speaker 1: PLCs from the Internet. Right, So that's what the advice
Speaker 1: that's being given. I don't know if I want that
Speaker 1: advice given publicly, but there it is. And did what
Speaker 1: am I supposed to do?
Speaker 2: Can't we just focus on the thing in front of us?
Speaker 2: Can't we just note that this is a problem.
Speaker 1: Can we identify who is bringing the threat and how
Speaker 1: can we deal with them?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 1: I am a guy with a theory. My theory is
Speaker 1: you have to pick one group, one group that is
Speaker 1: engaged in this activity, and you must so harm them
Speaker 1: that everybody else starts to be concerned. I get called
Speaker 1: all sorts of things. You may get called all sorts
Speaker 1: of things.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I am not a warmonger. I do not seek to
Speaker 1: start any issue. I would rather be left alone. I've
Speaker 1: often said, the only things I want to do in
Speaker 1: this life eat a steak, smoke a cigar, have sex
Speaker 1: with my wife, and sometimes I don't even need steak.
Speaker 1: These are all the things I want to do in
Speaker 1: this life, and these people.
Speaker 2: Won't leave me alone. I would rather be left alone.
Speaker 1: Let's find one of these groups where we know this
Speaker 1: activity is coming from, and let us do them such
Speaker 1: harm that the nation that they are located in begs
Speaker 1: us to stop and promises it will never happen again.
Speaker 1: Quite literally sends us a gift to apologize.
Speaker 2: Maybe, well, you won't eliminate the issue.
Speaker 1: You're not going to eliminate the hacker, but maybe you
Speaker 1: have less problems for a decade. That is how I
Speaker 1: believe we should use strength overwhelmingly to make the enemy
Speaker 1: regret bothering us so we can be left alone and
Speaker 1: smoke a cigar and other things.
Speaker 2: This is Tony Kats today. Let's start with Michigan.
Speaker 5: It's now a battleground for the soul of the Democrat Party.
Speaker 2: Tony does socialism went out today? Now?
Speaker 1: The answer to that question is a little more involved
Speaker 1: than what you can do on a TV hit. But
Speaker 1: I was on Newsmas earlier today they pitted me against
Speaker 1: Dennis Cassinich, who I admit to you I didn't know.
Speaker 2: Was still alive.
Speaker 1: Tony Katz, Tony Katz today, so good to be with you.
Speaker 1: Find everything I do at Tony Katz dot com. You
Speaker 1: remember the name Dennis Kassinich was one time in the
Speaker 1: nineteen seventies, he was the mayor of Cleveland, and then
Speaker 1: he was a longtime congressman until he was defeated I
Speaker 1: think in twenty twelve by Marcy Captor, who is still
Speaker 1: the member of Congress. Marcy Captor was the one who,
Speaker 1: like two days ago, was involved in a hit and
Speaker 1: run a she's a Democrat, represents that area of Ohio.
Speaker 2: Someone who hit her car as she was going to church.
Speaker 1: She had the person driving her hit the car, She
Speaker 1: got really injured and.
Speaker 2: Then ran off. Crazy crazy story. I'm glad she's okay.
Speaker 2: I mean, we may disagree politically, but tell I don't
Speaker 2: want her getting hurt in a car accident.
Speaker 1: Someone reminded me that it was four years ago that
Speaker 1: Congresswoman Jackie Wilarski was killed in a car accident.
Speaker 2: She was in Indiana.
Speaker 1: She was lovely. Jackie Wilarski was lovely, Republican, really really nice,
Speaker 1: very nice to me. But she was in the car
Speaker 1: where somebody else was driving in two other staffers, and
Speaker 1: whether her car, I think it was the car she
Speaker 1: was in went over the lines and the other car
Speaker 1: came head on.
Speaker 2: And everybody was killed. Aul awful story. So it's Dennis Caercentach.
Speaker 2: I swear to you.
Speaker 1: I didn't know Dennis Coccinach was still alive. Dennis Cascinach's
Speaker 1: claim to fame was that Dennis Caercentach was a radicalized
Speaker 1: progressive before it was cool. Dennis Cascinach was doing this
Speaker 1: before Bernie Sanders. Dennis Cascinach has been on this for
Speaker 1: a tick.
Speaker 2: Oh.
Speaker 1: He is wrong about everything, but he comes from an
Speaker 1: older school of thought where you can actually talk. And
Speaker 1: I knew this imediate like I did not know I
Speaker 1: was on with Dennis until like ten minutes before I
Speaker 1: was on because I knew that the topic, but I
Speaker 1: didn't know the person. I was like, oh my gosh,
Speaker 1: the original Kamie og Like that's who he is. But
Speaker 1: it's a different, different, different mentality. Where I'm I'm vehemently
Speaker 1: opposed to the politics, I don't have to be vehemently
Speaker 1: opposed to the human beings. It's like, Okay, this is very,
Speaker 1: very interesting. So we're talking about the Michigan race. Of course,
Speaker 1: we've got that primary Abduel l Saeed against Haley Stevens.
Speaker 1: Haley Stevens is the representative Abdula l Sad is the
Speaker 1: communist who claims to not believe in monopolies but absolutely
Speaker 1: wants force universal healthcare right medicare for all, but doesn't
Speaker 1: believe in monopolies, which is so so adorable, so adorable. Oh,
Speaker 1: and speak in mosques where people are violent against Jews
Speaker 1: and call Jews parasites.
Speaker 2: And the whole thing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, not my guy. And I'd asked some people I
Speaker 1: know in the area, you know, Michigan itself, where do
Speaker 1: they think things are going? And if you're basing things
Speaker 1: on your Facebook feed, your Facebook feed isn't going to
Speaker 1: give you a good story, and so I was listening,
Speaker 1: I'm like, Okay, I appreciate that. I appreciate that. But
Speaker 1: out of that is going to tell me do I
Speaker 1: think the polling is right? Do I think the polling
Speaker 1: that had been lately trending for LSIED is accurate. Some
Speaker 1: of those polls, like five or six of them had
Speaker 1: him up double digits plus thirteen and plus sixteen. I
Speaker 1: don't buy that. Do I believe he could win? Yes,
Speaker 1: I do believe he could win. But I was asked,
Speaker 1: let's start here. So this is from my appearance, It
Speaker 1: was Logan Radick asking the question, what do I think
Speaker 1: is coming right here? Well, even if it's Haley Stevens,
Speaker 1: you can argue that for the Democrats, for where they're going,
Speaker 1: who they're supporting, who their leadership is, who the leadership
Speaker 1: listens to, who their social media influences are, that it
Speaker 1: is winning the day. Whether we talk about on college
Speaker 1: campuses or we talk about anywhere else, they're still going
Speaker 1: to be a force and a problematic one for America's future.
Speaker 1: Even if Haley Stevens pulls this out. We shouldn't think
Speaker 1: that Haley Stevens has anything in her that shows her
Speaker 1: to be a conservative. But the election of Abdul Lsayed
Speaker 1: for the political left, for those who support the DSA
Speaker 1: and their communist desires, this is just more fuel, more
Speaker 1: saying look how right we are, lookout around the right
Speaker 1: track we are, and more for the Democrats, people like
Speaker 1: Hakeem Jeffries to realize that you have lost all control
Speaker 1: and all ability to have control of your party if
Speaker 1: they should take back the House, which is still something
Speaker 1: in great question, never mind what we might see in
Speaker 1: the Senate as we see the Senate primary today. Now
Speaker 1: my Hakeem Jeffreys' point is taken, although I should have
Speaker 1: talked about the Senate first before the House. But I
Speaker 1: want to dig in a little bit because that's correct
Speaker 1: that win or lose, these communes ain't going no place.
Speaker 1: Do we all understand that you could put all eyes
Speaker 1: to the Senate primary, and certainly right now it is
Speaker 1: all eyes on the Senate primary, and they can decide
Speaker 1: that this is a referendum on whether or not the
Speaker 1: communists have taken over the Democratic Party or not. But
Speaker 1: we know better, we do. We're observing to people. We're
Speaker 1: not going to buy into that play into that we
Speaker 1: know better. And what we know is that they have
Speaker 1: already done the takeover and the fact that some election
Speaker 1: may not go their way is not going to deter them,
Speaker 1: not in the slightest. They are who they are, and
Speaker 1: they are at where they are at, and the people
Speaker 1: in power have koutout and given in to them.
Speaker 2: And this is it.
Speaker 1: This is what Representative Alexandria Kasia Court tesant Ayana Pressley
Speaker 1: Shida's leaving ilhan Omar and the squad and Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: a Chris van Holland.
Speaker 2: This is what they have wanted and it is here,
Speaker 2: and it's not going to go away quietly. Why would
Speaker 2: anybody think that? The question now goes to Dennis Cassinach.
Speaker 6: Now, obviously the idea of l sai Ed winning is scary,
Speaker 6: but Congressmen couldn't elsai ed victory perhaps be good for
Speaker 6: Republicans in Michigan in the way that such an extreme
Speaker 6: candidate would turn voters away from the Democrats and maybe
Speaker 6: towards Republicans Mike Rodgers, for example, or kuld say Ed's
Speaker 6: victory backfire.
Speaker 7: Well, remember you've heard it here first. Elsaiz is going
Speaker 7: to be the next Senator from the state of Michigan,
Speaker 7: and I'm going to explain why. First of all, he's
Speaker 7: going to win the primary because of the very powerful
Speaker 7: backlash among Democrats of corporations and political action committees like
Speaker 7: APEC attempting to control the Democratic cross that's number one. Secondly,
Speaker 7: to win in November, because the economy is going to
Speaker 7: be in the shambles because of the unwise decisions that
Speaker 7: the Trump administration has made with respect to foreign policy
Speaker 7: that is increasing inflation, driving up the cost of energy,
Speaker 7: and putting America in a very difficult position worldwide with
Speaker 7: respect to our national security. He will be the next senator.
Speaker 7: Just remember that I said that you can play this
Speaker 7: back to day after the election.
Speaker 1: Now, I was shaking my head. I was shaking my head.
Speaker 1: I wanted to jump in on this hard. I didn't.
Speaker 1: I didn't. I didn't I jump and said, who whoa, whoa,
Speaker 1: whoa whoa. First of all, this APAC talk is ridiculous.
Speaker 1: You sound silly. And then I could have gone to
Speaker 1: a bunch of other things, but I did not jump in.
Speaker 1: The hosts came back in and they were asking their
Speaker 1: questions and the com but I wanted to make sure
Speaker 1: that at least did respond to some of it. I
Speaker 1: didn't respond to the apax part, but I did respond
Speaker 1: to the economy part, because if you think the economy
Speaker 1: is in shambles, you're wrong. As we discussed yesterday with
Speaker 1: doctor Matt Will, economist at the University of Indianapolis, No no, no,
Speaker 1: no no no. Even the GDP one point five percent
Speaker 1: doesn't make any sense. It's way better and stronger than that.
Speaker 1: Thus the question gets it comes to me, and I
Speaker 1: gets asked.
Speaker 5: Like this twenty eighteen, where l said was promising driver's
Speaker 5: licenses to illegal immigrants.
Speaker 2: He made the comments.
Speaker 5: While he was running for governor in that primary against
Speaker 5: Gretchen Whitmer, arguing illegal immigrants are quotes stuck without licenses.
Speaker 2: Here's exactly what he said.
Speaker 8: We've also got to make sure that in this state
Speaker 8: we are not discriminating by documentation status. Right now, if
Speaker 8: you're undocumented, you don't get access to a driver's license,
Speaker 8: so you're stuck. You don't get access to a lot
Speaker 8: of the basic things that state offers everybody else. And
Speaker 8: I think that's ridiculous, and so we've got to stop
Speaker 8: discrimination discriminating that way.
Speaker 5: Election experts say the proposal would effectively legitimize illegal presence
Speaker 5: in the US, as driver's licenses would serve as national
Speaker 5: ID cards, opening doors to bank accounts, employment eligibility, and
Speaker 5: apartment rentals.
Speaker 2: Tony, your thoughts. So two things here.
Speaker 1: The first, I address what Cascinich said earlier.
Speaker 2: Then I talk about.
Speaker 1: This ridiculous concept that the only issue with an illegal
Speaker 1: immigrant is documentation.
Speaker 2: It's that they don't have papers. Well, a couple of things.
Speaker 1: First of all, the idea congressman that the economy is
Speaker 1: in shambles. I'm not a guy who's a fan of tariffs.
Speaker 1: I'm a guy who can see higher prices at a
Speaker 1: grocery store. But if you take a look at the
Speaker 1: one point five percent GDP, you have to figure in
Speaker 1: the fact that government is doing much less spending. If
Speaker 1: government spending has figured into growth a domestic product, right,
Speaker 1: and how our country is doing, that's a serious issue
Speaker 1: that Keynesian methodology is totally flawed and shouldn't be considered.
Speaker 2: I don't understand at all why.
Speaker 1: Anybody would think that documentation is the issue when the
Speaker 1: issue is whether or not you entered the country illegally.
Speaker 1: What else Sayida is saying there is that nobody is illegal.
Speaker 1: All you need is a piece of paper and everything's fine.
Speaker 1: There is no conversation about how you entered in America.
Speaker 1: Had this conversation. We put it to the test. We
Speaker 1: went to the ballot box and we voted for President
Speaker 1: Trump to ensure that people were in the country legally,
Speaker 1: that we were removing the people in the country illegally.
Speaker 1: This is the smart, proper, rational course. And what else
Speaker 1: said is arguing here is that we should have open borders,
Speaker 1: we should have no borders, and that has been roundly
Speaker 1: rejected by Americans, and I hope that continues even in Michigan.
Speaker 2: I don't think I missed something there. I think I
Speaker 2: hit that well.
Speaker 1: Now, Dennis Consentence, as I said, was lovely. He's wrong,
Speaker 1: but lovely. And this led into a bit of a
Speaker 1: back and forth as he was asked the next question.
Speaker 6: Well, as we know, the battle isn't just over candidates,
Speaker 6: it's also over their leading voices in the media, those
Speaker 6: voices that are actually influencing this new wave of voters.
Speaker 6: One of the most controversial as we know, Hassan Piker.
Speaker 2: Here's just a little bit.
Speaker 6: Of what he's recently said.
Speaker 2: Isn't that how he lost his fucking I because you
Speaker 2: guy us fucking I hope America deserved nine to eleven. Dude,
Speaker 2: I'm saying.
Speaker 6: I mean, just listening to him talk, it's absolute insanity.
Speaker 6: I'm not sure how he has such powerful influence over people,
Speaker 6: but that says a lot about this new wave of voters.
Speaker 6: James Carville, on that note, has threatened to leave the
Speaker 6: Democratic Party if, in fact, Hassan Piker becomes a force, saying, quote,
Speaker 6: We're not going to be in the same party.
Speaker 2: One of us is going to leave.
Speaker 6: So Congressman, who's going to be the one leaving?
Speaker 7: Well, first of all, there are many different voices of
Speaker 7: people who want to identify with both political parties. I
Speaker 7: don't really know mister Piker, I've never met him, but
Speaker 7: I will say that I don't agree that America deserved
Speaker 7: nine to eleven. I'm hopeful that we're looking at an
Speaker 7: election where we can actually focus on issues and not
Speaker 7: the personalities. The issues ought to be America getting out
Speaker 7: of these foreign wars, and right now we're looking at
Speaker 7: a at a military budget, a Pentagon budget at one
Speaker 7: point five trillion dollars, like eight percent of domestic spending,
Speaker 7: discretionary spending going for that.
Speaker 2: We can't sustain that.
Speaker 7: America has to start taking care of things here at
Speaker 7: home instead of running around the world looking for It's
Speaker 7: just I hope that that's what this selection becomes about.
Speaker 7: Because it's about personalities. It just ends up, it just
Speaker 7: ends up being a mess.
Speaker 2: Now you saw what he just did there, right.
Speaker 1: The question was about Hassan Piker, who is the Democrats
Speaker 1: mouthpiece right now, he's the COMMI mouthpiece. And what the congressman,
Speaker 1: the former congressman, did hear is say, I'm not going
Speaker 1: to address that now. Were plenty of voices. Here's the
Speaker 1: real issue. I did not let that go by.
Speaker 2: That's a democratic right, now go ahead.
Speaker 1: That's just an interesting deflection because the question was about
Speaker 1: Hassan Piker. Who Democrats are rallying around, who they are
Speaker 1: connecting with, who they want to be seen with, who
Speaker 1: they are campaigning with, And we can't deflect who we
Speaker 1: shouldn't be involved in a foreign war. Iran, by the way,
Speaker 1: has been in a war with us for forty seven
Speaker 1: years and they must be dealt with one way or another.
Speaker 1: But we can't deflect, and you, sir, cannot deflect from
Speaker 1: where Democrats are they are with this communist, with this Islamist,
Speaker 1: with Hassan Piker, and a whole bunch of others in
Speaker 1: a lot of these radical ideas, and I can't really
Speaker 1: be denied or deflected away, Tony.
Speaker 7: I'd love to have a longer discussion with you. Religinally.
Speaker 7: Let me tell you something. The Democratic Party isn't full
Speaker 7: of comedies. They're not full of socialists.
Speaker 2: They're capitalists, except that we've.
Speaker 7: Got an inversion here where in America we have socialism
Speaker 7: for the rich and capitalism for the poor.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's not true. Although we can talk about subsidies
Speaker 1: all you want. I really appreciate News Max letting me
Speaker 1: go and engage this way eleven minutes on cable news.
Speaker 2: Rare stuff. I'll have it posted on the YouTube channel.
Speaker 2: Check it out for yourself.
Speaker 1: Just look for Tony Katz and at Tony kats dot com.
Speaker 1: This is Tony Katz today. So the Democrats don't want
Speaker 1: to shut down, that's what they're saying. You've got Chuck
Speaker 1: Schumer agreeing to the language in a continuing resolution.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's that is absolutely unbelievable. How is this
Speaker 2: even possible?
Speaker 1: And my answer is I don't actually know Tony Katz,
Speaker 1: Tony Katz today, its absolute pleasure to be with you.
Speaker 1: Are they admitting that being in favor of all these
Speaker 1: shutdowns never helped? They actually hurt, They caused issues, They
Speaker 1: caused problems. Right Fox News has the headline Democrats blink
Speaker 1: as Schumer helps GOP clear key shutdown hurdle. Maybe maybe
Speaker 1: that's exactly what it is. I assume what they said
Speaker 1: is this isn't going to help us in a midterm,
Speaker 1: so let's not do it. Let's not have the issue.
Speaker 1: Let's not have anybody who could potentially be angry with
Speaker 1: us about not getting a paycheck. Let's not have a
Speaker 1: shutdown because right now the funding goes to when September thirtieth.
Speaker 1: And also, this could all just be a ruse, It
Speaker 1: can all be a play. They could change their mind
Speaker 1: two weeks from now. Who knows what they're going to
Speaker 1: get angry about. I don't think the shutdowns work then,
Speaker 1: and I think it's correct they're not going to work.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 2: Find everything at Tony kats dot com tomorrow. Everyone take
Speaker 2: care