Speaker 1: Well Whiskey coming day.
Speaker 2: From Powerline blog dot com and produced by Ricochet dot Com.
Speaker 2: This is the Three Whiskey Happy Hour with your bartenders
Speaker 2: Steve Hayward, John You and power Lines International Woman of
Speaker 2: Mystery Lucretia.
Speaker 3: Got a Given where You're being.
Speaker 1: In love down?
Speaker 4: Hello, Welcome everybody to the latest episode of the Three
Speaker 4: Whiskey Happy Hour. I'm your host for today, John You,
Speaker 4: and I'm joined as always by my two indefagotable Churchill
Speaker 4: loving hosts, Steve Hayward and Lucretia. Where are you, guys, Steve,
Speaker 4: you seem to be far away up into the tundry north.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I'm at Hillsdale College for a couple of
Speaker 1: days for a really fun conference. We're a gathering of
Speaker 1: the Claremont Clan. Uh And I did I think listeners
Speaker 1: should know that you were what in New York yesterday
Speaker 1: to be on that Gonzo Fox show Outnumbered. So there
Speaker 1: were four women and you on the show.
Speaker 4: And that's just me, that's just me going out for
Speaker 4: drinks at night. What are you talking about?
Speaker 1: Okay, you know the four of them don't add up
Speaker 1: to one, Lucretia, that's my point.
Speaker 4: That's for sure, that's for sure. And Lucretia, where are you?
Speaker 4: What are you doing?
Speaker 5: I am home.
Speaker 6: The childless cat lady is at home. I'm not childlessening, but.
Speaker 1: You are a cat lady, so that I am a
Speaker 1: cat lady.
Speaker 6: I have this little rescue here. She is has dominated
Speaker 6: the household.
Speaker 5: Now she's taken over.
Speaker 1: So cats are natural tyrants on for show.
Speaker 5: Very much, so, you know.
Speaker 6: And I have a ninety pound German Shepherd that this
Speaker 6: eight pound cat kickses, you know what.
Speaker 5: So that's why I like her.
Speaker 6: You got to have some even if you're a cat hater,
Speaker 6: you got to have some respect for that, right. And
Speaker 6: I understand a lot of people hate cats, but anyway, yeah.
Speaker 4: I hate cats, right, dogs? Yes, But why don't we
Speaker 4: turn this has been every week it gets crazier and crazier.
Speaker 4: You know, it used to be in the old days
Speaker 4: you would worry about some kind of October surprise singular
Speaker 4: that would affect the election at the last minute. And
Speaker 4: seems we've got October surprise after October surprise after October surprise.
Speaker 4: So they're going to be it's going to be October
Speaker 4: surprises from now on. But why don't we start with
Speaker 4: the one that wasn't a surprise, which was the vice
Speaker 4: presidential debate between Harris and Waltz. H. So why don't
Speaker 4: we start off.
Speaker 1: I mean Vance and the Walls.
Speaker 4: Yes, I'm sorry, yeah, I wish right, Well, they ought
Speaker 4: to have a debate too. Now I've given all the
Speaker 4: differences between yeah, that was a parent at the debate, Yes,
Speaker 4: sorry about that, between Vance and Waltz and Steve.
Speaker 1: Let's start with you.
Speaker 4: Do you agree with the chattering classes view a that
Speaker 4: Vance won, but that b it has no seems to
Speaker 4: have no effect on the election.
Speaker 1: What do you think? Well, I have three thoughts. You
Speaker 1: know that's the standard political science, regression analysis wisdom is
Speaker 1: that debates don't affect outcomes. Of course, it affected it
Speaker 1: for Joe Biden. I mean a debate finished him, right,
Speaker 1: And you know I kind of think this year maybe
Speaker 1: it does have a small effect, and in particular because
Speaker 1: Vance defied expectations, including from some of the conservatives. Oh,
Speaker 1: come to that point. I have three thoughts. The first
Speaker 1: is a star was born the other night. I actually
Speaker 1: think that it's comparable, maybe not the equivalent, but it's
Speaker 1: comparable to Reagan's famous speech for Goldwater in sixty four.
Speaker 1: I mean, Vance was so impressive and it dispelled all
Speaker 1: the cliches about him that the media and the Democrats
Speaker 1: threw at him. And by the way, that's point number two.
Speaker 1: I remember, and I guess I will name it because
Speaker 1: I had the receipts. I remember the our friends had
Speaker 1: commentary John Pott Hart's all the last after Vance was
Speaker 1: named by Trump and this terrible appointment. He's awful, What
Speaker 1: a horrible choice this was, and any and you know,
Speaker 1: maybe he's not really weird, but he's you know, he's
Speaker 1: off putting to voters and and pot hearts want as
Speaker 1: far as to say, I think Trump is going to
Speaker 1: drop him from the ticket. He has to drop him
Speaker 1: from the ticket. It's like Eagleton in seventy two. He's
Speaker 1: a millstone around the ticket. Well, no one's saying that, now,
Speaker 1: are they right?
Speaker 6: And at least no one by the way, sorry to
Speaker 6: rup Steve, but no one's actually congratul congratulating Lucretia not
Speaker 6: only for predicting JD. Vance, but for saying that was
Speaker 6: the perfect choice for Trump.
Speaker 5: Was I ever right? Okay?
Speaker 1: Just well, well, that's my third point was a variation
Speaker 1: of yours. Which is you know, now the Vance pick
Speaker 1: looks like a case of far sightedness on Trump's part,
Speaker 1: not just because he's more impressive than people expected or
Speaker 1: the media tried to say. By the way, remember here's
Speaker 1: the important thing. Probably seventy five percent of Americans had
Speaker 1: maybe barely heard of Vance or hadn't heard of him
Speaker 1: at all until now. I mean, we follow these things,
Speaker 1: we know about the book, we may have seen the movie,
Speaker 1: but you know, a lot of Americans have never heard
Speaker 1: of him, people who don't follow politics, and now they've
Speaker 1: seen him, and they say, oh, gosh, you know this
Speaker 1: is this guy's actually really impressive, and he's clearly a
Speaker 1: figure for the future win or lose under Trump a
Speaker 1: month from now, and and so Trump picking him, you know,
Speaker 1: Trump could have gone conventional. That's kind of what the
Speaker 1: Pens pick was in twenty sixteen, you know, ticket balancing,
Speaker 1: trying to peel to constituency. No. No, I been picking Vance.
Speaker 1: Trump said, this is my successor, or once someone who
Speaker 1: represents a worthy successor to the whole you know, wider
Speaker 1: populist movement that is now in the ascendants of the country.
Speaker 1: And that's what a rare I say, rare actors. That's
Speaker 1: not quite right either. But Trump is often impulsive, does
Speaker 1: things for his personal reasons. But here's a case where
Speaker 1: you could say he committed an act of far sighted
Speaker 1: statesmanship in picking Vance.
Speaker 4: I think is this is this a case. Here's some
Speaker 4: other things that the conservative commentators have been saying, which
Speaker 4: is that the Advance does Trump better than Trump. Maybe
Speaker 4: the way to put it is, as Steve said, Trump
Speaker 4: does seem to go from you know, crisis to crisis,
Speaker 4: decision decision, doesn't seem to make coherent sense, or maybe
Speaker 4: he doesn't have a coherent plan in mind. But Vance
Speaker 4: actually tries to put it all together into some kind
Speaker 4: of coherent ideology, and that's why he's doing so well.
Speaker 4: So it's just as if it's as if Trump had
Speaker 4: all the education of a Yale Law school graduate, you know.
Speaker 5: Trump educated.
Speaker 6: Trump is as educated in simple terms as Vance is.
Speaker 6: I'm just gonna he's of course, obviously not as articulate
Speaker 6: all of those other things. I'm gonna you know, I'm
Speaker 6: gonna say something a little bit shocking to you, guys.
Speaker 6: I know that surprises you, but I'm feeling that way today.
Speaker 6: So I remember the talk about kemal Am Ding Dong
Speaker 6: being chosen as insurance for Biden.
Speaker 5: Okay, whatever this that.
Speaker 6: So if you so, I'm gonna say it like this,
Speaker 6: These last two assassination attempts against Trump.
Speaker 5: Were probably.
Speaker 6: Nutjobs who were in one way or another, groomed by
Speaker 6: some nefarious something in the background. I won't allege it
Speaker 6: was a CIA. I won't allege it was Obama. I'll
Speaker 6: just say somebody, because it's otherwise way way too coincidental.
Speaker 6: All right, So, thinking about any of those movies where
Speaker 6: somebody hires a contract killer or an assassin and they
Speaker 6: then they change their mind and they can't stop them.
Speaker 6: What if there's more contract killers out there? You know,
Speaker 6: I'm not saying contract killers, but what if there's more
Speaker 6: people out there that have actually seriously been brainwashed or
Speaker 6: whatever word you want to use, into thinking that Trump
Speaker 6: is a threat to democracy? Et cetera, et cetera. Existential
Speaker 6: vance is now the most incredible insurance against Trump another
Speaker 6: Trump assassination, because you know, if something God forbid were
Speaker 6: to happen to Trump, JD. Vance is the nominee or.
Speaker 1: Six months from now president that Trump wins, or.
Speaker 6: Six months from now president at any point when that happens,
Speaker 6: and what we saw I think what I always believed,
Speaker 6: but what we saw in the debate Tuesday night was
Speaker 6: that exactly what John just said vans out Trump's Trump
Speaker 6: and does it with class, with style, with a likability
Speaker 6: and doesn't.
Speaker 5: Have the baggage. And so you know, I see this as.
Speaker 6: The future of whatever party it is that they actually represent,
Speaker 6: not the John Pedoritz or the Mitt Romney or any
Speaker 6: of those other slimy rhino people, but some party. It
Speaker 6: may not be the Republican Party. There may be enough
Speaker 6: of a backlash to Trump winning that those Bill Crystal
Speaker 6: types actually formed their I don't know, but anyway, this
Speaker 6: is the future of the party that will successfully challenge
Speaker 6: the Democrats. And you probably could not pick a better
Speaker 6: standard bearer than Jade Bans.
Speaker 5: I was just impressed as hell.
Speaker 6: I do want to talk really quickly about his abortion answer,
Speaker 6: because that's caused also a lot of trouble with some
Speaker 6: on the right. I think his answer to the abortion question,
Speaker 6: where's what he said was the Republican Party has not
Speaker 6: gained the trust of the American people. I believe what
Speaker 6: he was really saying is that this is not simply
Speaker 6: a matter of legislation.
Speaker 5: This is a matter, as.
Speaker 6: We've talked about before many times, of winning the hearts
Speaker 6: and minds of the people. I mean people, you know,
Speaker 6: the usual suspects, the radical pro life which I consider
Speaker 6: myself one. We're up in arms, he's he's coowtowing to
Speaker 6: the left, he's equivocating on pro life positions.
Speaker 5: Wasn't that at all? It was an.
Speaker 6: Absolute recognition by a very savvy politician that if the
Speaker 6: Republican Party and the pro life movement want to win
Speaker 6: on this issue, they have to change heart and hearts
Speaker 6: and minds before they force legislation down people's throats. And
Speaker 6: I thought that was brilliant that what was what I
Speaker 6: thought was his best moment, which of course lots of
Speaker 6: people thought was his worst.
Speaker 5: So there you have it.
Speaker 6: And you didn't even ask me about what I think
Speaker 6: about Waltz.
Speaker 5: I'm not sure that anything really needs.
Speaker 4: One question before maybe for the creation of this time
Speaker 4: about the bait, I think many observers said that the
Speaker 4: worst answer that Vance gave was his response to the
Speaker 4: question about twenty twenty did your answers asked, did you
Speaker 4: think that Donald Trump won the election or that Joe
Speaker 4: Biden won the election, and he said, I want to
Speaker 4: talk about the liberal censorship on the social media, and
Speaker 4: I think, well, I think correctly said that's a non answer.
Speaker 4: What do you think is that a little bit highlight
Speaker 4: and the low lights? I mean, this is what is
Speaker 4: the highlight in the low light for Vance? A lot
Speaker 4: of people are saying that was the low light for Vance,
Speaker 4: and then answer low light for Walt.
Speaker 6: Again, that answer wasn't intended for us. It certainly not
Speaker 6: for Steve and me. Might have been a little bit
Speaker 6: for you, John, because you're one of those peopleho still
Speaker 6: doesn't understand what happened on twenty twenty. But what I
Speaker 6: took away from it wasn't what you just said. What
Speaker 6: I took away from it was what are you talking
Speaker 6: about insurrection? What do you talk talking about? Threat to democracy?
Speaker 6: On I think he could have pressed back a little
Speaker 6: bit harder about the crap about police officers being killed
Speaker 6: and if you'll recall, it was only Trump supporters who
Speaker 6: were killed on that day, but okay, including Ashley Maddison,
Speaker 6: Ashley Ashley Babbitt, babbit, thank you Ashley Madison.
Speaker 1: So that's your only fan page?
Speaker 5: I know.
Speaker 4: Sorry, Steve's getting frisky early on a Saturday. My god,
Speaker 4: I worried for Charles later today.
Speaker 6: And you might remind Charles of this, because I was
Speaker 6: never so disappointed as in Charles's his answer on your
Speaker 6: podcast One Time about January twenty, January sixth, on January twenty,
Speaker 6: what happened on January twenty. Uh, Trump handed over power peacefully.
Speaker 6: That is not an insurrection, folks. I mean, that's what
Speaker 6: jd Vance said. And if I'm a stupid Democrat or
Speaker 6: independent low information voter who's been believing that the Democrats
Speaker 6: rhetoric on this whole thing, and I'm reminded, wait a minute,
Speaker 6: what are you talking about. What Trump did was no
Speaker 6: different than what Hillary Clinton did in twenty sixteen and
Speaker 6: so on, and he peacefully handed over power.
Speaker 1: Yeah see, I thought, maybe we've made his last word
Speaker 1: on this, John and move on to other stuff. But
Speaker 1: I thought, look, it's a no win question for Dvance.
Speaker 1: But I did think he could have been stronger. And
Speaker 1: I think the tack I would have taken is, look, Americans, Auto,
Speaker 1: whatever Americans think about this, they should look at the
Speaker 1: asymmetry of the punishment that's been meted out. You know,
Speaker 1: people have been there that given long jail sentences for trespassing,
Speaker 1: whereas in your case, Governor Waltz, you stood by and
Speaker 1: watched as your city burned, and then when people got arrested,
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris bailed them out. That would have been the
Speaker 1: boom answer to put Waltz on the defensive. It's not perfect,
Speaker 1: but that would have been what I would have tried
Speaker 1: to do.
Speaker 6: I think that's what I wanted to can I just
Speaker 6: can have the second to the last last word, and
Speaker 6: that is that. That's what I wanted him to say too. However,
Speaker 6: that's been being said by people for a very long time.
Speaker 6: And what came away for most people, again, the low
Speaker 6: information voter that I wish I couldn't care, that I
Speaker 6: didn't have to care about, is what a nice guy
Speaker 6: he is. Even the regime media, whatever you want to
Speaker 6: call it, came away and said, what a friendly debate.
Speaker 6: And in the midst of, you know, the the bemoaning
Speaker 6: of our divided country, our acrimony is divided country.
Speaker 5: There you have JD.
Speaker 6: Vance showing a little bit different from Trump.
Speaker 5: I'm gonna I'm gonna push back.
Speaker 6: I loved how he pushed back on the silly stuff
Speaker 6: about Haiti or Haitian immigrants. But but I'm gonna be
Speaker 6: so friendly when I do it.
Speaker 5: People are gonna love me.
Speaker 6: That's that's what I took away from the final thing
Speaker 6: of that answer. I of course wanted to exactly what
Speaker 6: you said. I'm not sure that's what the low information
Speaker 6: voter needed to hear.
Speaker 1: That could be right. I mean, I remember Lou Cannon,
Speaker 1: the famous reporter who followed Reagan from the very beginning,
Speaker 1: saying Reagan is so nice. I don't see anybody wants
Speaker 1: to run against this guy. This is in the sixties,
Speaker 1: and Reagan first emerges, right, and then he sort of
Speaker 1: got it. My favorite. If you want a barometer of
Speaker 1: how bad the left freaked out about how good uh
Speaker 1: Jade Vance was, there's one story I don't know his newsweaker.
Speaker 1: One of the media sites said jd Vance is the
Speaker 1: first candidate in eighty years to have facial hair. But
Speaker 1: you know a lot of women find his beard threatening.
Speaker 1: Oh that's that's they're gonna go to fat. It was
Speaker 1: hysterically right.
Speaker 4: Yeah, So we're at the end of our segment. My
Speaker 4: my two observations is the elitist in me thinks this
Speaker 4: is a debate between a Yelle law school trained lawyer
Speaker 4: and a high school football coach, What did you think
Speaker 4: was gonna happen? Two? And this is I think this
Speaker 4: is where Waltz and Harris are a little bit of
Speaker 4: the same. They're both liberals who haven't never had to
Speaker 4: run a tough election before, and so they're useful with
Speaker 4: getting away, saying goofy things, non sharp answers, and just
Speaker 4: getting elected because they're in very blue states, and when
Speaker 4: they're confronted with a real challenge, they don't know how
Speaker 4: to react, where as if you're a concerned you're getting
Speaker 4: being on all the time, you know how to debate
Speaker 4: because that's how you survive. Yes, we will, of course
Speaker 4: ask that Trump if he prepares for a second debate.
Speaker 4: Obviously he needs to get Lucretia next time as the
Speaker 4: debating partner to prepare him. That would lead to overwhelming victory. Okay,
Speaker 4: let's take a break here for our commercial sponsors, and
Speaker 4: we'll be right back in a second. Coming back now.
Speaker 4: October Surprise number two, Hurricane Helene devastates large parts of Georgia,
Speaker 4: South Carolina, North Carolina. We might remember that in the
Speaker 4: middle of the twenty twelve election with days to go,
Speaker 4: super Hurricane Sandy hit the East coast. People say that
Speaker 4: it stopped Mitt Romney's momentum in the pulse had been
Speaker 4: closing the gap. Some poles had him just within one
Speaker 4: or two points. President Obama was seen to have launched
Speaker 4: an energetic response. I think we all remember the pictures
Speaker 4: of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie right, greeting Obama warmly.
Speaker 4: Although when I saw a video of it, Yeah, when
Speaker 4: I just saw a video of it, you know, Chris
Speaker 4: Christy was a much bigger man than Obama is a
Speaker 4: skinny little guy. I looked like a bear about to
Speaker 4: eat poor baby Seal. I thought, what do you guys think,
Speaker 4: Lucretians start with you, what do you think about the storm?
Speaker 4: The response? I mean, this is over a week later,
Speaker 4: and there are still people who haven't been found yet,
Speaker 4: there's still supplies that aren't getting into the disasters. Trump
Speaker 4: has made the claim that the Biden administration is slow
Speaker 4: in its response because it appears I've seen the figures
Speaker 4: that looks like most of these counties where the hurricanes
Speaker 4: hit are mostly Republican counties. This may actually change for
Speaker 4: President Trump's view on mail in voting, because I don't
Speaker 4: see how you're going to be able to hold votes there.
Speaker 4: You're going to have to do something unusual. But what
Speaker 4: do you think I appreciate it. Is this going to
Speaker 4: affect the election? What do you think is going to happen?
Speaker 4: What do you think about the response?
Speaker 6: Well, let me just say first about the whole idea
Speaker 6: of changing your view.
Speaker 5: On mail in voting.
Speaker 6: Those of us who are adamantly opposed to mail in
Speaker 6: voting think that something like this should be a should
Speaker 6: be an exception to the rule that I mean, these
Speaker 6: people have a perfectly legitimate reason why they may not
Speaker 6: be able to get to the polls. I'm not sure
Speaker 6: that mail in voting is going to help them much
Speaker 6: right now, either, to be honest with you, because the
Speaker 6: mails are not going through. But anyway, mail in voting
Speaker 6: should not be for someone too lazy to show up
Speaker 6: on election day.
Speaker 5: That's my opinion.
Speaker 6: And if you don't make the time to do it
Speaker 6: under most circumstances, if you have no legitimate reason, you
Speaker 6: obviously don't care enough to vote, you shouldn't be voting. Okay,
Speaker 6: that's my I I was walking across campus the other
Speaker 6: day and this little sorry, I don't know how to
Speaker 6: say it, this little twitch, she's probably all of nineteen.
Speaker 5: Years old, stops me. Are you registered to vote?
Speaker 1: Oh god?
Speaker 6: And I was already in a bad mood, and I
Speaker 6: just looked at her and I said, of course, I'm
Speaker 6: registered to vote, you twit, And I just kept walking.
Speaker 6: I couldn't help myself, because you know what I hate
Speaker 6: more than anything, are these people out registering idiots to vote?
Speaker 1: The vote? Right all that?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 4: Right, right? Okay, yeah, rock the vote. That's right, although
Speaker 4: this generation it would be wine the vote, but go ahead, yeah.
Speaker 5: Wind the vote. Pardon me? So this is actually serious business.
Speaker 6: I read a lot this morning, and all of it
Speaker 6: came with the caveat. But Elon Musk says that his
Speaker 6: people who are trying to set up Starlink, who are
Speaker 6: bringing in helicopters worth full of supplies, are being prevented
Speaker 6: from doing so by FEMA. Yeah, FEMA's denying it, but
Speaker 6: they're not. For instance, if I was FEMA and somebody
Speaker 6: was saying this about me, and I was actually, excuse me,
Speaker 6: assisting in the recovery, the volunteer recovery efforts, which my
Speaker 6: understanding is are being turned away all the time. I
Speaker 6: would provide evidence of that. I would say, no, that's
Speaker 6: not true. Look here's what we're doing here, and I
Speaker 6: would give pictures and so on. But instead they're just
Speaker 6: denying it. But the problem is that we have that
Speaker 6: that idiot MAJORCA say, yeah, sorry, we spend all the
Speaker 6: money on immigrants. Can't help you. We don't have enough
Speaker 6: money to make it to hurricane season. Dumb at Sorry, sorry,
Speaker 6: Kim lamading Dong. I'm getting exercised about this.
Speaker 5: Kim La ma ding Dong never offered seven hundred and
Speaker 5: fifty dollars initially.
Speaker 6: First of all, I don't even know what seven hundred
Speaker 6: fifty dollars is going to do if you can't even
Speaker 6: get to a store to buy supplies. I mean, I
Speaker 6: heard Eric Trump say seven hundred and fifty dollars won't
Speaker 6: even rememb replace your big screen TV in most cases,
Speaker 6: you know. I mean, it's just the whole thing is
Speaker 6: just creepy. It stinks to high heaven.
Speaker 5: I can't.
Speaker 6: I refuse to believe that Elon Musk and others on
Speaker 6: the ground are so corrupt that they're actually accusing FEMA
Speaker 6: and the federal government of stopping the relief efforts without
Speaker 6: any evidence for doing so. The left might do that,
Speaker 6: but that's not the way the right operates. I mean,
Speaker 6: let's be serious here. They don't lie about things like that. Now,
Speaker 6: maybe it's not as widespread as it's being made out to,
Speaker 6: but why on earth would do they not understand that
Speaker 6: in a country where media is instant. Okay, maybe they
Speaker 6: don't want those counties that are Republican to vote, but
Speaker 6: do they really think that that the news of them
Speaker 6: stopping needed supplies from getting where they need to go
Speaker 6: isn't going to get out?
Speaker 5: Are they just that dumb?
Speaker 1: So no, I think it's uh, I don't know, it's
Speaker 1: worse than you. That's a rare occasion when I think, well,
Speaker 1: maybe not that things are worse than Lucretius says, first
Speaker 1: of all, let's just let's just plant the point about
Speaker 1: the double standard at work here. If we had a
Speaker 1: Republican president and you had this catastrophe and in an
Speaker 1: area mostly with a black or minority population like we
Speaker 1: have in New Orleans with Katrina and Fama took FU
Speaker 1: five days to get there, and then twiddle their thumbs,
Speaker 1: we hear all about how the president hates black people, right,
Speaker 1: and instead their commaty is giving Biden Harris a free pass.
Speaker 1: To me, there's one it's hard to know what's going
Speaker 1: on because the news reporting is so bad and the
Speaker 1: government lies to us. But there's one thing that jumps out,
Speaker 1: and that was actually a little TikTok video from Pete
Speaker 1: Boodoo judge announcing a ban on any drone private drone
Speaker 1: flights in the whole affected area. So paus for a moment.
Speaker 1: You know, it's now a regular practice of the Forest
Speaker 1: Service and local police that if someone's missing in a
Speaker 1: forest or if there's a forest fire breaks out, they
Speaker 1: fly drones because you can spot people who were lost.
Speaker 1: That's how they find some lost hikers and so forth right.
Speaker 1: And so the claim is, well, it's unsaved because you know,
Speaker 1: we're going to have our helicopters and stuff, and I
Speaker 1: think that's an exceedingly remote problem. But beyond that, here's
Speaker 1: where I, you know, I start to put on a
Speaker 1: barrow of Lucreasu's tinfoil. Hat. I wonder if they don't
Speaker 1: want these drones flying around because there's going to be
Speaker 1: too much information. You're going to see devastating footage of
Speaker 1: people abandoned on the rooftops out and because there's still
Speaker 1: apparently hundreds of people missing, and it's been a week now,
Speaker 1: and you know, this is getting really desperate, and you
Speaker 1: would seen to me that the sensible thing to do
Speaker 1: would be to say, please fly your drones, tell us
Speaker 1: what you find. It will help us identify people who
Speaker 1: need rescue, and we can That's not what they're doing.
Speaker 1: They're you know, they're doing the usual bureaucratic we're in charge,
Speaker 1: and nobody can do anything until we give you permission,
Speaker 1: which is going to be slow, right, and I can
Speaker 1: go on from there. That's my I'll stop there.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I'm gonna be careful.
Speaker 1: Good.
Speaker 5: No, you're right. It's just I knew about that too.
Speaker 6: I just, you know, trying to keep it a little shorter.
Speaker 6: I've been contacted by military folks who at the bases
Speaker 6: Liberty and so forth that are close to very close
Speaker 6: to the worst sights of the damage. They want to go, yeah,
Speaker 6: they want to go help, and the big brass are
Speaker 6: preventing them from doing so. The National Guard, which is
Speaker 6: not under the it has hasn't been federalized, so it's
Speaker 6: not under the corrupt Central Pentagon brass Is. I mean
Speaker 6: from practically every state has been sending National Guard to help,
Speaker 6: but even they are being hindered by FEMA.
Speaker 5: I understand.
Speaker 6: This morning, North Carolina put out the governor there put
Speaker 6: out the word that any federal agent that tries to
Speaker 6: interfere with a relief effort will be arrested. That if
Speaker 6: that's all true, that's going to make for some interesting kinds.
Speaker 6: We have to bring John back and he'll have to
Speaker 6: tell us why it is that that's a violation of.
Speaker 1: That's a Democrat. That's a Democrat governor by the way,
Speaker 1: in North Carolina right now.
Speaker 4: So interesting, Well, again, what about.
Speaker 1: The it doesn't want? But John's not going to take
Speaker 1: your bait with Christianity, shouldn't.
Speaker 4: Thankfully I'm the host today and can't get involved your
Speaker 4: internet scene battles and your conspiracy theories today. So well,
Speaker 4: what do you think the effect this will have on
Speaker 4: the election? So you've both said that you think the
Speaker 4: response has been maybe partisan, but certainly lacking and.
Speaker 1: Contradictory.
Speaker 4: You know, this could have been this could have century,
Speaker 4: This could have been Christeve loves this kind of stuff,
Speaker 4: crowdsourcing and private ordering, right, you could have seen maybe
Speaker 4: a kind of crowdsourced relief effort because of the failures
Speaker 4: of this top down, centralized FEMA system that doesn't seems
Speaker 4: to work less and less well. But let me ask
Speaker 4: you the second question, what effect do you think this
Speaker 4: is going to have on the election? Is this going
Speaker 4: to be like Hurricane Katrina in two thousand and five,
Speaker 4: which was right after President Bush's realed But many people
Speaker 4: say that was the beginning of his political collapse. Was
Speaker 4: the impression of the failed response in New Orleans. However,
Speaker 4: Obama's response to Superstorm Standy seemed to help his campaign
Speaker 4: may be locked in his win prevented Mitt Romney from
Speaker 4: making a comeback. What do you think this storm and
Speaker 4: the response is going to have in its effects on
Speaker 4: the election?
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, all right, there's a little revision of history
Speaker 1: should be done, which is the story in Katrina was
Speaker 1: massive incompetence on the part of the local government in
Speaker 1: New Orleans, which refused to request National Guard help from
Speaker 1: either the president or the governor that they could have did. Okay,
Speaker 1: I'll cut that story short, because that's true. We're got
Speaker 1: blamed and because the media spun it that way, and
Speaker 1: you know.
Speaker 4: The reverse an interesting standing. Yeah, there's an interesting constitutional
Speaker 4: issue there because the law is written. These are the
Speaker 4: Emergency the Stafford Act, and these are things I actually
Speaker 4: read about and work on. But it's an interesting political
Speaker 4: problem because a governor has to invite the federal government
Speaker 4: to come in, unless it's in a federal If the
Speaker 4: governor refuses, then there's other triggers to allow the president
Speaker 4: to do it. But a lot of governors initially don't
Speaker 4: want to do it because if you do, you look
Speaker 4: like you failed.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's right. Yeah, yeah, So there's that and and
Speaker 1: and you know, Sandy was a triumph of image, right,
Speaker 1: you know, the media loved Obama. That was a much
Speaker 1: more minor you know, the media looked at the places
Speaker 1: that the isolated places that did get hit very hard
Speaker 1: in New Jersey, but and some flooding in Manhattan and stuff.
Speaker 1: But that was a pretty mild episode. In fact, it
Speaker 1: was actually, to be precise, Sandy was a tropical storm
Speaker 1: at the time it made landfall. It wasn't even a
Speaker 1: Category one hurricane at that point. It still does damage,
Speaker 1: but nothing like what we're seeing now. And so the
Speaker 1: question is the big story here, I think once again
Speaker 1: is the utter incompetence of the federal government, and the
Speaker 1: media is going to cover that up. And so the
Speaker 1: one question I have as well, I think American people
Speaker 1: kind of know this about FEMA and the federal government
Speaker 1: as a whole, but can you get the message out?
Speaker 1: You know, I don't know if Trump should how much
Speaker 1: Trump should try to exploit it, because there are bigger
Speaker 1: things than that issue. But it's not going to hurt him.
Speaker 1: It's going to, you know, if anything will help him
Speaker 1: a little bit.
Speaker 6: I think I saw a tweet I think it was
Speaker 6: Sean Davis from the Federalists the other day, and it
Speaker 6: was something on the order of our FEMA, our federal government,
Speaker 6: FEMA can't respond to an emergency, our DOJ can't prosecute criminals.
Speaker 5: It was a.
Speaker 6: Whole list of failures by major federal agencies and he
Speaker 6: said they exist just to take our money.
Speaker 1: Oh, I'm sorry, go.
Speaker 5: Ahead, Steve, I'll come back to my point quick, well.
Speaker 1: Quick FEMA story. I mean, you had I think it
Speaker 1: was two winters ago. You may remember this, John. We had,
Speaker 1: you know, very heavy rains, a lot of flooding out
Speaker 1: in the Sleekness Valley and yeah, uh, you know, one
Speaker 1: little town Santa Ardo almost got washed away, So okay,
Speaker 1: I don't know. Like two months later, I'm walking down
Speaker 1: the main street in Templeton and there's a big FEMA
Speaker 1: truck is rolled up and they commandeer the community hall
Speaker 1: and I walk in and there's always bureaucrats to their
Speaker 1: laptops open. What's going on. Oh, we we're from FEMA
Speaker 1: and we're here to help people process their disaster claims.
Speaker 1: You have two months after it's sober and there was
Speaker 1: nobody in there. There was nobody going in filing a claim.
Speaker 1: So I thought, I'm gonna I'm gonna be amused by this,
Speaker 1: and I go and order a cup of coffee across
Speaker 1: the street, sat for an hour and my phone and
Speaker 1: nobody came. But you know, that's what FEMA does. They'll
Speaker 1: show up and write checks two months later.
Speaker 7: It's okay, Yeah, I'm a little bit lucretia, real quick,
Speaker 7: I'm a little bit this time.
Speaker 6: I'll go farther than Steve. I don't think this is
Speaker 6: entirely uh, incompetence as usual.
Speaker 5: I am.
Speaker 6: I'm much more suspicious about the motives of I do
Speaker 6: think incompetence plays a very large role in it. Just
Speaker 6: like incompetence play plays a large role in so the
Speaker 6: whole Secret Service of failures on Trump. But yeah, blame
Speaker 6: some of that on DEI, I get it. Blame some
Speaker 6: of it on the fact that that the federal government
Speaker 6: spends most of its time not doing what it's supposed
Speaker 6: to be doing in those agencies, but doing training and
Speaker 6: DEI stuff and then watching porn all day.
Speaker 5: I get that.
Speaker 6: But I think that there is there is in fact,
Speaker 6: a part is an angle to this. And I also
Speaker 6: think that again, this is Appalaysia, whether they're Trump voters
Speaker 6: or not, they don't They just don't give a dam
Speaker 6: in Washington about what happens in the middle of the country.
Speaker 6: That was clear in the the whole Ohio train incident,
Speaker 6: you know, I mean, they just don't care now if
Speaker 6: it had happened in Washington, DC or or something like that.
Speaker 6: You know what, They're still traumatized by January sixth. But
Speaker 6: I do think that there's a part of an element
Speaker 6: to it, Steve. That's only exacerbated by the ranking competence
Speaker 6: that pertains now and is worse because of that kind
Speaker 6: of ideological bent to the federal government and to the
Speaker 6: federal bureaucracy. I mean, they don't hire the best and
Speaker 6: the brightest, and if they ever did those best and brightest,
Speaker 6: we'd get kicked out somehow. They're just a bunch of
Speaker 6: slugs working for the federal government. Basically, Sorry, I hope
Speaker 6: we don't have too many of those people that are listening.
Speaker 5: Audience.
Speaker 4: Okay, that's Lucretia calling all federal employees slugs. Makes a
Speaker 4: nice time for our next commercial break and a word
Speaker 4: from our sponsors. Now coming back, where Lucretia is going
Speaker 4: to find more and vertebrates to insult. Oh, we're going
Speaker 4: to talking about a third October surprise, which is the
Speaker 4: mushrooming war in the Middle East. We now have the
Speaker 4: war between Israel and Iran and its proxies. In fact,
Speaker 4: we're coming up on the one year bursary of the
Speaker 4: October seventh attack by Hamasen to Israel, and Israel launched
Speaker 4: a response and Gaza is rooting out Hamasa's whipek. In fact,
Speaker 4: that campaign seems to be coming closer to an end,
Speaker 4: and now Israel is turning towards the north, towards Hezbollah,
Speaker 4: and I don't think we've talked about it quite a
Speaker 4: lot on the show. But it's an extensive campaign to
Speaker 4: attack the AMAS leadership, including attacking the famous campaign to
Speaker 4: destroy it, people holding certain beepers and walkie talkies and
Speaker 4: now but now more direct strikes. Uh, and Iran launched.
Speaker 4: I didn't realize this. Iran launched the largest missile attack
Speaker 4: by one country on another This week they launched almost
Speaker 4: two hundred ballistic missiles against Israel. What is going to
Speaker 4: happen next? And what should Israel do? What should the
Speaker 4: United States be doing? One comment made by the Wall
Speaker 4: Street Journal an editorial page was an ally of ours
Speaker 4: gets attacked by the largest missile attack in the history
Speaker 4: of the world, and the President of the United States
Speaker 4: immediately starts defending the attacker, Iran, saying, don't don't fire back.
Speaker 1: Take the win, be limited. You shouldn't escalation, Yeah, practice restrained. Well,
Speaker 1: a lot of people commented st yeah, And you know,
Speaker 1: the pusillanimous nature of the Biden foreign policy really requires
Speaker 1: no additional comment. There is one aspect of this, though, John,
Speaker 1: that has has not been comment to the plant. Maybe
Speaker 1: it sounds a little technical, and you know, I don't
Speaker 1: know the ins and outs of missile defense, but what
Speaker 1: we hear is that we were very successful in intercepting
Speaker 1: you know, ninety percent or more of the missiles that
Speaker 1: are on shot. But it's also reported, and I don't
Speaker 1: know how accurate and meaningful, that they had some hypersonic
Speaker 1: missiles that are hard for ours to intercept. And third,
Speaker 1: this goes back to the early days of SDI forty
Speaker 1: years ago, which is it's always thought that maybe you
Speaker 1: could overwhelm these systems with a massive barrage. So this
Speaker 1: is the second barrage of Iranian missiles, and you know
Speaker 1: they were successfully intercepted, but those interceptors are expensive. Are
Speaker 1: we procuring enough of them to replace all the ones
Speaker 1: that are being used up or are we short? I
Speaker 1: don't know the answer to that. But my final question
Speaker 1: is I wonder if this is a dry run for
Speaker 1: Iran they want to figure out and they're gathering data,
Speaker 1: how many missiles do we need to shoot to overwhelm
Speaker 1: the system and how do we successfully get through a
Speaker 1: missile with the nuclear warhead on it. I think that's
Speaker 1: the game the Iranians are playing, because otherwise this is
Speaker 1: a reckless thing for them to do. But you know,
Speaker 1: when they're ready, and we keep hearing they could break
Speaker 1: it out with a nuclear warhead pretty fast. Why wouldn't
Speaker 1: expect them to want to figure out a way to
Speaker 1: land it on Tel Aviv? And I hear no one
Speaker 1: talking about that possibility.
Speaker 4: But Lucretia, Steve, this is a prelude to World War three, well,
Speaker 4: a nuclear exchange in the MIDI Lucretia, what do you
Speaker 4: think if Steve right? And what does that mean for
Speaker 4: American policy?
Speaker 6: Well, I mean, I think the second part of your
Speaker 6: question is irrelevant, John, because American foreign policy is I
Speaker 6: don't think there is one, is there? I mean, honestly,
Speaker 6: the American foreign policy is very much to blame for
Speaker 6: the situation that we're in right now because the Biden
Speaker 6: administration has been so feckless. How could you have destroyed
Speaker 6: the gains that so quickly have destroyed the games that
Speaker 6: were made by Trump in the Middle East?
Speaker 5: You couldn't. I couldn't write a script for a movie that.
Speaker 6: Because it would be unbelievable that there could be so
Speaker 6: much stupidity involved there. And you know, one of the
Speaker 6: things I think is actually the best thing to come
Speaker 6: out of it is, at least for the time being,
Speaker 6: doesn't matter what Biden or any of those idiots in
Speaker 6: the Biden Harris White House have to say about it
Speaker 6: or the Pentagon right now?
Speaker 5: Nah, who couldn't give a damn? I don't.
Speaker 6: We don't need your support any longer. You know, I
Speaker 6: know they're getting support, but you know, we can send money.
Speaker 6: We are sending money, by the way, to Lebanon. We're
Speaker 6: sending relief money to Lebanon. I can't even go there.
Speaker 6: But my point is, I think Israel will continue to
Speaker 6: do what Israel needs to do. I pray to God
Speaker 6: they have the resources to do it, however they need
Speaker 6: to get them, and I think that they will come
Speaker 6: out victorious and it will all be be without the
Speaker 6: active assistance of the United States government, which should be
Speaker 6: its closest ally in my opinion, And so I find
Speaker 6: the whole thing appalling. That's really I mean, Steve, Steve
Speaker 6: gave a much more intelligent, factual answer.
Speaker 5: Mine's just an impression.
Speaker 4: Steve is the son of an aerospace engineer, So what
Speaker 4: does he want to talk about? Does the missile defense work?
Speaker 4: He wants to know how much did the missiles cost?
Speaker 1: Right? How many?
Speaker 6: By the way, I know it's not Babylon b time,
Speaker 6: but this is so appropriate from the Babylon b I
Speaker 6: had told her frantically googles how to build iron dome
Speaker 6: thingy fast.
Speaker 4: But Steve so these last two examples, this one if
Speaker 4: Lucretia is right, and about the fecklessness of the Bide administration.
Speaker 4: And then the last one we talked is we talked
Speaker 4: about the hurt came response again, feebleness, lack of energy,
Speaker 4: lack of right, all the qualities of the executive that
Speaker 4: are described in the Federal's papers by agus Lander Hamilton.
Speaker 4: Do you think this will have an effect on the election?
Speaker 4: You're seeing the October surprises actually seem to be hurting
Speaker 4: the incumbent administration. Do you think that this is going
Speaker 4: to compound all the concerns that people already have about
Speaker 4: Kamala Harris that she won't engage with voters, won't do
Speaker 4: public events, won't sit down for interviews, has never really
Speaker 4: done anything. Nobody knows what she stands for. This is, strangely
Speaker 4: or all these things somehow snowballing into for Trump's advantage.
Speaker 1: Oh, this is so much fun because it gives me
Speaker 1: an opportunity to annoy Lucretia in my usual way. You
Speaker 1: go back you go back to nineteen seventy when Reagan's
Speaker 1: running for reelection as governor and you hit all the
Speaker 1: campus riots, and somebody said, every campus riot gives Reagan
Speaker 1: another one hundred thousand votes. And I think the parallel
Speaker 1: here is an Actually lycretia is not in your head.
Speaker 1: Maybe I'm not so crazy, mister analogy man is. I think,
Speaker 1: what's you know, let's see what hell? What see that?
Speaker 1: I know I's on my list the movie The Reagan.
Speaker 4: Yeah, but we lived through watch movies.
Speaker 1: Okay, Look, I mean next week, I mean, I you know,
Speaker 1: I have one post on this. You know, the left
Speaker 1: is going to want to march in the streets next week.
Speaker 1: They're going to tie up traffic in Manhattan. You know,
Speaker 1: we'll see how it all goes. Harris will avoid trying
Speaker 1: to comment at all. But you know, if you really
Speaker 1: get a groundwar going in a big way in southern Lebanon,
Speaker 1: which looks like that's already started or may ramp up,
Speaker 1: I just think it's going to cause the crazy anti war,
Speaker 1: anti anti Israel left to take to the streets and
Speaker 1: make a big nuisance of themselves, and that all helps Trump.
Speaker 1: So that's that's what I think so.
Speaker 6: Can I just really a little bit off topic, but
Speaker 6: can I point out that the US two polls in
Speaker 6: Michigan have come out in favor of Trump, and even
Speaker 6: though real clear polling has in the no toss up
Speaker 6: map has Michigan going for Harris. She's up zero point
Speaker 6: seven percent in Michigan. Do you think she can afford
Speaker 6: not to comment on if those things happen on Monday?
Speaker 1: Well, she works.
Speaker 4: This is the problem. Yeah, the problem is that she
Speaker 4: the reason I was reading a story just before that
Speaker 4: said support by Arab Americans for Harris is dropping because
Speaker 4: they are really upset about the Bide administration being too
Speaker 4: supportive of Israel, not too late.
Speaker 5: That's my point.
Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah, And I don't know what you do about
Speaker 6: that if you're in their position. And my question really
Speaker 6: quick for you guys, if you're one of those Arab
Speaker 6: Americans that are upset with Harris, you don't vote, right,
Speaker 6: you don't go vote for Trump.
Speaker 4: You just don't just don't show up.
Speaker 5: Okay, Yeah, yeah, Well, let's take a question on the
Speaker 5: Senate race.
Speaker 4: Let's make our last commercial break, and when we come back,
Speaker 4: we'll talk about the only intentional October surprise that and
Speaker 4: see whether this one is working. So we'll be back
Speaker 4: after you hear from our commercial sponsors. And now we're back,
Speaker 4: and we've been talking about what used to be acts
Speaker 4: of God or force majeure right, war, hurricanes impacting the
Speaker 4: presidential election. All. You know, the Steve will really get
Speaker 4: through when I say this word exogenous events.
Speaker 1: But now you're hitting my exogenous zones.
Speaker 4: John, Oh, no, Lucretia, you long ago made this family show.
Speaker 4: So but this one here, we have one that's endogenous.
Speaker 4: So Steve's gotten excited. Now here's a case where we
Speaker 4: have an intentional October surprise from within the system. And
Speaker 4: this was Jack Smith's one hundred and seventy page follow up.
Speaker 4: It's not an indictment, and he's already indicted Trump, but
Speaker 4: it's an expansion on an explanation. Well, I think the
Speaker 4: former leaders. It's a profit. It's what the prosecution says
Speaker 4: it's going to show at trial by Jack Smith the
Speaker 4: Independent Council against Donald Trump for his involvement in the
Speaker 4: January sixth attack on the Capitol. There's no way the
Speaker 4: trial could even remotely get started before the election. So
Speaker 4: the timing looks awfully suspicious. So Steve, first, is the
Speaker 4: timing suspicious? And then two, is this in a tober surprise?
Speaker 1: It's going to work?
Speaker 4: Because you could predictably perhaps the newspapers and new shows
Speaker 4: were filled with stories about what was in the new
Speaker 4: document from Jackson and saying that it's brought back to
Speaker 4: the voter's minds. January sixth, and if you were just
Speaker 4: looking at this morning's Washington Post, sorry, Lucretia, they have
Speaker 4: a story saying that Kamala Harris's campaign is going to
Speaker 4: turn negative on Trump and going to use a lot
Speaker 4: of this material in the closing weeks because so far
Speaker 4: they've been running too positive a campaign and now they
Speaker 4: really are working. They got to get across the finish
Speaker 4: line and they're gonna turn negative.
Speaker 1: Steve, God, the month slinging has begun. It's gonna be
Speaker 1: a rough camp. Look, so you said this is not
Speaker 1: an act of God, but Jack Smith thinks he's God,
Speaker 1: or at least a lesser detail of some kind. And
Speaker 1: you know, is this is this a gear to the election?
Speaker 1: You know, is the Pope Catholic to keep going with
Speaker 1: the stasistic thing. I haven't read the filing. I'm probably
Speaker 1: not going to I read some news accounts that play
Speaker 1: up the salacious allegations. A lot of this looks like
Speaker 1: hears say to me and problematic at a trial. But
Speaker 1: that's not the important part. The thing to me that is,
Speaker 1: I'll put it this way, this is very brief and
Speaker 1: uh so, Lucretia and I have talked about you know,
Speaker 1: low information voters, you know, morons in other words, and
Speaker 1: people who are undecided. And I really am thinking, are
Speaker 1: there really a significant number of people out there say, gosh,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm undecided about Trump, but gosh, this Jack
Speaker 1: Smith filing, this latest one that turns it. That's that's
Speaker 1: gonna help me make up my mind. I think at
Speaker 1: this point it's it's you know, we've been doing this
Speaker 1: for so long now that it's one more you know,
Speaker 1: pebble in the river, and I don't think it's going
Speaker 1: to have much effect.
Speaker 6: Well, and we're still told minorities right that I shouldn't.
Speaker 6: I'm not calling them low information minorities. But what we're
Speaker 6: actually seeing our voters who are moving from is call
Speaker 6: it the Democratic Party to the Republican Party, moving from
Speaker 6: that might have voted for Clinton or Biden in the
Speaker 6: last two elections are now moving towards Trump. Even ruy
Speaker 6: Ti Chera had an article about Hispanics. And for all
Speaker 6: the reasons why the percentage that the ratio between the
Speaker 6: two candidates is dropping in Trump's favor or it's changing
Speaker 6: in Trump's favor, I guess.
Speaker 5: I should say I think.
Speaker 6: That with some of those voters, we've seen evidence, at
Speaker 6: least Hispanic males African American males, this is just one
Speaker 6: more proof that that Trump's the man, or Trump's being
Speaker 6: persecuted by the man in the same way that they
Speaker 6: often feel they are. That's that's you know, I'm oversimplifying,
Speaker 6: but you get what I'm saying, right.
Speaker 1: Well, no, I'm hearing a lot of anecdotes and social.
Speaker 4: Media though, well Trumps to the criminal crowd.
Speaker 1: No, No, it's well, it's well, there's there is an
Speaker 1: aspect of that. That's maybe we're talking about, but we're
Speaker 1: short of time. Look, I keep seeing anecdotes and it
Speaker 1: shows up on social media, and you know, it's not
Speaker 1: true that the plural anecdote is data. However, I think
Speaker 1: maybe it is. People say I don't like Trump, I
Speaker 1: can't stand him, and I'm voting for him because he
Speaker 1: you know, they like what he represents. They want to
Speaker 1: give the middle finger the establishment. They're sick of the Democrats.
Speaker 1: And I think that's a I think there's a significant number,
Speaker 1: I mean statistically significant number of people that who probably
Speaker 1: think that way.
Speaker 5: So so John, let me be serious and ask you
Speaker 5: a question.
Speaker 4: Yeah, let me Yeah, I was gonna Can I just
Speaker 4: make one point of one or two points about the
Speaker 4: thing because I did read it, I just out of
Speaker 4: professional curiosity. Yeah and yeah, yeah, to one thing is
Speaker 4: a lot if this I don't think this case is
Speaker 4: really ever going to get to trial, but if it were,
Speaker 4: the star witness is going to be Lucretia's favorite guy,
Speaker 4: Mike Pence. So to the extent, there was a lot
Speaker 4: of new information because what the what Jack Smith is
Speaker 4: trying to show is he basically didn't change the indictment
Speaker 4: at all in response to the Supreme Court. This guy
Speaker 4: is just a terrible prosecutor. But what he's trying to
Speaker 4: do is say President Trump committed fraud because he knew
Speaker 4: he had lost, and all his actions were just lying.
Speaker 4: So how does he try to prove that Trump really
Speaker 4: knew he had lost. Extensive discussions between Pence and Trump,
Speaker 4: where Pence tries to convince Trump that he's lost and tried,
Speaker 4: and that's only really new information. I think that's of
Speaker 4: any note in the indictment. So pens is going to
Speaker 4: be the star witness at any trial. This will be amazing, right,
Speaker 4: Like this is better than the Aaron Burr trial. This
Speaker 4: is a vice president testifying at the criminal trial of
Speaker 4: his president about things they spoke about. And I'm sure
Speaker 4: they're going to ask Pence, do you really think that
Speaker 4: Trump knew he lost the election? And was he committing fraud?
Speaker 4: That's the one really interesting thing I think factually from
Speaker 4: the indictment.
Speaker 6: So I just wanted to ask you from the former
Speaker 6: DOJ employee point of view. I know that you've told
Speaker 6: me before that those kinds of guidelines about not doing
Speaker 6: things that would interfere with the election are just that guidelines.
Speaker 6: They're not laws regulations inside of the DOJ.
Speaker 5: But what have we done now?
Speaker 6: Because Jack Smith and Chuck Can I have a new
Speaker 6: name for her.
Speaker 5: But I won't say it today.
Speaker 1: I can guess.
Speaker 6: They have destroyed so many norms, so many of the
Speaker 6: rule of law norms, so many of the things that
Speaker 6: kept the DOJ at least with some appearance of objectivity
Speaker 6: prior to this whole lawfair mess.
Speaker 5: Are we done? I mean, is it over?
Speaker 1: No?
Speaker 4: I don't. Well, if Harris wins, it's done.
Speaker 5: I don't mean that.
Speaker 6: I mean, is the DOJ forever sullied and will never
Speaker 6: be able to return from being a law enforcement arm
Speaker 6: of the Democratic Party?
Speaker 2: You do.
Speaker 4: I don't think the whole department is, but I think
Speaker 4: Jack Smith is. I think this is a real indictment
Speaker 4: of having special counsels, although I'm not sure he's really
Speaker 4: acting at odds with what Merrick Garland and Joe Biden want.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 6: Yeah, Garland in his speech, remember said I approve every decision.
Speaker 4: So I think you know, you're seeing a lot of
Speaker 4: media reports handwringing about whether President Trump will use the
Speaker 4: Justice Department to take revenge on his enemies. But the
Speaker 4: real task is I think what you're talking about, Lucretia,
Speaker 4: for the next Attorney General, it's going to be a
Speaker 4: hard job is to restore public faith in law enforcement.
Speaker 4: And it's not just federal it's state too, because you've
Speaker 4: had these das in New York City and Atlanta also
Speaker 4: persecuting Trump. All of these clearly intended because of their timing,
Speaker 4: to affect the elections. So I think, I mean, if
Speaker 4: you think about what they'd have to do, I mean,
Speaker 4: first you'd have to fire a lot of these people
Speaker 4: whoever becomes Attorney general, and then start to restore the
Speaker 4: reputation integrity for integrity of the Justice Department and states
Speaker 4: and cities too. That's a huge monumental undertaking.
Speaker 6: I'm not the host, but they have a quick question
Speaker 6: for you guys. So you know my prediction that if
Speaker 6: the law fair didn't work against Trump, and the assassination
Speaker 6: attempts didn't work against Trump, and now my theory is
Speaker 6: that they won't work even if they do assassinate Trump.
Speaker 6: But all that's left now is to cheat. Sorry John,
Speaker 6: but I'm gonna say that all that's left is for
Speaker 6: the Democrats to cheat one way or the other. Do
Speaker 6: you think, Steve, let me start with you, because that
Speaker 6: would my question requires John to go along with the premises,
Speaker 6: and he may not. But do you think the Republicans
Speaker 6: have done enough in terms of hiring lawyers? I guess
Speaker 6: they've got a lot of volunteer lawyers who are willing
Speaker 6: to help with the legal issues involved at the polls,
Speaker 6: they've got poll watchers, they've got a ground game in
Speaker 6: that way.
Speaker 5: Do you think it will be enough?
Speaker 1: You know, I think we should take the subject up
Speaker 1: for a whole extended consideration next week or the week after,
Speaker 1: only because it's a lot to it and there are
Speaker 1: things that are quite different from four years ago, partly
Speaker 1: the you know, some of the COVID stuff. Some states
Speaker 1: changed laws. There is more prep work and that U
Speaker 1: and I know a little bit about it, but I
Speaker 1: want to know more before and I think we should
Speaker 1: do it.
Speaker 4: Let me let me back Steve up on that host prerogative.
Speaker 4: I'm shutting you down, Lucretia. Yeah that felt so good,
Speaker 4: said that, but yeah, because we're out of time. And
Speaker 4: let me also say I was the other reason I
Speaker 4: was on the East Coast this week was I was
Speaker 4: at a conference at the Heritage Foundation about election integrity,
Speaker 4: and I learned lots of interesting things and there is
Speaker 4: a lot to talk about. So maybe we should make
Speaker 4: this a special focus of next week's episode, when I
Speaker 4: think it's Lucretia's turn to host too. So it's a
Speaker 4: perfect act of God, Lucretia, Lucretia, you have our Babylon
Speaker 4: be headlines of the week.
Speaker 6: I wish we had an hour left, but we didn't
Speaker 6: even talk about the The latest little bit of scandal
Speaker 6: coming out of the Hare of Spiden me Harris Walt's campaign.
Speaker 5: And that's the fact.
Speaker 6: That Harris, with her her husband and waltz redefining masculinity
Speaker 6: away from toxic masculinity. The Doug m Hoff is credibly
Speaker 6: accused of having basically beat the you know what out
Speaker 6: of a girl he was dating at one point. Okay,
Speaker 6: so first Babylon Bee trembling bleeding spokeswoman issues statement denying
Speaker 6: that Doug m Hoff would ever hit a woman.
Speaker 5: I love the Babylon beat. Teama reports they.
Speaker 6: Spent all the taxpayer funding on a sweet PowerPoint presentation
Speaker 6: about racial inequalities. North Carolina asks Zelenski for one hundred
Speaker 6: billion dollars in US funding. DOJ indicts jd Vance for
Speaker 6: brutally beating three women And it's a picture of the
Speaker 6: two moderators and right, uh, then you guys will get
Speaker 6: this since you said it's no longer a family show, John,
Speaker 6: I don't really get it. But Tim Walt's pulling strong
Speaker 6: among men who choose middle.
Speaker 7: Urinal Oh, you don't get that really?
Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah, I do, although I had never used one.
Speaker 6: All Right, school school shooters distanced themselves from Tim Walt.
Speaker 5: What was that?
Speaker 1: I mean.
Speaker 5: You never even got to the whole.
Speaker 6: Yeah, because he was so damn nervous and he prepared
Speaker 6: for how long? Anyway, young hesbela recruit, can't believe he's
Speaker 6: already been made regional manager and understand the latest one
Speaker 6: has been killed too, right.
Speaker 5: Isn't that true? I'm sorry?
Speaker 6: Uh, one last one campaign quietly Ansel's release of new
Speaker 6: Doug wife Beater.
Speaker 4: And it's okay, okay, well, Steve, let me take us
Speaker 4: out with always drink your whiskey meat. Let's go, Brandon
Speaker 4: and Steve. What's our new sign off?
Speaker 1: Well? Today I'm working on several versions. Today, I'm going
Speaker 1: with a succinct version of Camelo, which is feel the joy, people,
Speaker 1: feel the joy?
Speaker 3: All right, buy everybody and see you next week.
Speaker 1: Ricochet join the conversation