Speaker 1: President Trump begins the week doing exactly what he was
Speaker 1: doing at the end of last week, working to end
Speaker 1: the war between Russia and Ukraine. Tonight, foreign policy expert
Speaker 1: Gordon Chang joins me for some out of the box
Speaker 1: thinking about how to stop the bloodshed in Europe if
Speaker 1: FBI director Cash Bettel has released new evidence of a
Speaker 1: pay for play scheme at the Clinton Foundation and the
Speaker 1: cover up at the FBI. The man who literally wrote
Speaker 1: the book that began the investigation is with us this evening. Also,
Speaker 1: there is a redistricting arms race in America. We'll examine
Speaker 1: what this means in Pure Power Politics with Ace Republican
Speaker 1: strategist Matt Brainerd and the New Orleans mayor has been indicted.
Speaker 2: It is a story.
Speaker 1: About love, protection and obstruction of justice. It's all next
Speaker 1: on the Matt Gates Show.
Speaker 2: Let's do this shaking up Washington, d C. We're breaking
Speaker 2: the fever.
Speaker 3: Do you haven't watched this guy on television.
Speaker 4: It's like a machine.
Speaker 2: He's great. Matt Gates. What a day at the White House.
Speaker 1: Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenski met with President Trump and he
Speaker 1: brought back up this time and a better suit. I
Speaker 1: guess he didn't want to roll under dressed and alone
Speaker 1: after his last trip to the Oval.
Speaker 3: You don't have the cards right now with us, you
Speaker 3: start having right now.
Speaker 5: You don't your playing. You're gambling with their lives and
Speaker 5: millions of people you see. You're gambling with World War three.
Speaker 5: You're gambling with World War three. And what you're doing
Speaker 5: is very disrespectful to the country.
Speaker 4: This country.
Speaker 3: It's back to you far more than a lot of
Speaker 3: people said they should have you.
Speaker 1: Following Trump summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, he got
Speaker 1: the rest of Europe representat in Washington today to forge peace.
Speaker 1: We repeat an undeniable observation, Donald Trump is the greatest
Speaker 1: force for peace in the world.
Speaker 2: He saw it on display today.
Speaker 3: But we're gonna work with Ukraine, We're gonna work with everybody,
Speaker 3: and we're gonna make sure that if this piece, the
Speaker 3: piece is gonna stay long term.
Speaker 4: This is very long term.
Speaker 3: We're not talking about a two year piece, and then
Speaker 3: we end up in this mess again. I love the
Speaker 3: Ukrainian people, but I love old people.
Speaker 6: I love the Russian people, I love them all.
Speaker 3: I want to get the worst off Alaska summit reinforced
Speaker 3: my belief that while difficult, pieces within reach, and I
Speaker 3: believe that in a very significant step, President Putin agreed
Speaker 3: that Russia would accept security guarantees for Ukraine. We're going
Speaker 3: to try and get a three party meeting, maybe as
Speaker 3: soon as we can, and I have a feeling you
Speaker 3: and President Putin are going to work something out if
Speaker 3: you'd like, I'll go to that meeting, And not that
Speaker 3: I want to do that, but I will do that
Speaker 3: because we want to save a lot of people from dying.
Speaker 1: European leaders will undoubtedly continue asking Trump to put Ukraine
Speaker 1: on a path to something akin to NATO membership. President
Speaker 1: Trump disagrees and rightly posted on truth social that there
Speaker 1: would be no going into NATO by Ukraine. I've got
Speaker 1: an idea offer NATO membership to Russia. Of course, for
Speaker 1: this caret Trump would need to get everything he wants
Speaker 1: out of Putin regarding the end of hostilities, economic cooperation,
Speaker 1: and territorial disputes. Before you suggest I'm crazy for thinking
Speaker 1: about NATO and Russia as partners, The idea has been
Speaker 1: floated by foreign policy thinkers on the right and left
Speaker 1: for some time. In nineteen ninety seven, the Senate Foreign
Speaker 1: Relations Committee held a hearing on NATO expansion. President Clinton,
Speaker 1: Secretary of State madel And Albright reflected on groundbreaking cooperation
Speaker 1: between NATO and Russia.
Speaker 7: We are pleased with the development of the NATO Russia
Speaker 7: relationship to date. We believe that the NATO Russia Founding
Speaker 7: Act and the permanent Joint Council it created offers real
Speaker 7: opportunities to develop a partnership between NATO and Russia through
Speaker 7: regular consultations and activities to build practical cooperation. I've been
Speaker 7: very pleased with the early work of that Council, including
Speaker 7: its first ministerial meeting in New York on September twenty six.
Speaker 1: Then.
Speaker 7: I think that in many ways that was quite a
Speaker 7: remarkable meeting in starting this process out. I believe that
Speaker 7: these elements of the NATO Russia relationship, together with our
Speaker 7: bilateral efforts to integrate Russia more fully into the rest
Speaker 7: of the West, are beginning to bear fruit.
Speaker 1: That fruit didn't germinate because instead of doubling down cooperation
Speaker 1: with Russia, the thinking prevailed that we had to expand
Speaker 1: NATO and encircle Russia. We learned that an animal backed
Speaker 1: into a corner can lash out. It seemed we even
Speaker 1: knew what was going to happen, because also in nineteen
Speaker 1: ninety seven, a key report was issued by Republican Senator
Speaker 1: Dick Lueger. And you know he had to be very
Speaker 1: good at politics to get elected with a name like that.
Speaker 1: Senator Luger's report was directed by Victoria Neulan, who went
Speaker 1: on to work for Biden. Just listen to what a
Speaker 1: conservative Republican senator and a future Biden State Department official concluded.
Speaker 2: Quote.
Speaker 1: Russian leaders see the enlargement of NATO as a threat
Speaker 1: not only to Russian security but also the success of
Speaker 1: Russia's transformation since the collapse of the Soviet Union. In
Speaker 1: the face of continued Russian opposition to enlargement, it's imperative
Speaker 1: that the United States strive to improve NATO Russian relations
Speaker 1: and assure the country of its security and role in
Speaker 1: the face of a new europe close quote. These assurances
Speaker 1: were never given in the nineties or in the two thousands.
Speaker 1: That may be why we are here today. We chose
Speaker 1: encirclement over cooperation when people were saying cooperation could be
Speaker 1: part of our forward looking path with Russia. Michael McFall
Speaker 1: was President Obama's ambassador to Russia. In two thousand and six,
Speaker 1: he wrote an article titled why a democratic Russia should
Speaker 1: join NATO again. This reinforces that NATO membership is an
Speaker 1: earned reward, not an entitlement, but why not give Russia
Speaker 1: a chance to earn it. Charles Cupchin's piece, NATO's Final Frontier,
Speaker 1: Why Russia Should Join the Atlantic Alliance, was published in
Speaker 1: Foreign Affairs All the Way Back in twenty ten. It
Speaker 1: explicitly advocates for including Russia in NATO. He argues that
Speaker 1: excluding Russia is a strategic error, particularly as the West
Speaker 1: faces global shared threats like terrorism, nuclear proliferation, cybersecurity, and
Speaker 1: international organized crime.
Speaker 2: That was all the way back in twenty ten.
Speaker 1: Think about what our shared goals are now We might
Speaker 1: have to fight AI or Aliens alongside the Russians. Cup
Speaker 1: Chance suggests embracing Russia through NATO is more substantial than
Speaker 1: other partnerships and critical for a durable pan European security order.
Speaker 1: He's probably right. We are here and President Trump is
Speaker 1: trying to fix so many errors at the past. America
Speaker 1: got all frothed up on NATO expansion in the nineties.
Speaker 1: It seems Secretary all Bright new cooperation with Russia could
Speaker 1: bring peace, but she didn't execute it correctly. Republican senators
Speaker 1: like Dick Luger knew that Russia would feel encircled, but
Speaker 1: we expanded NATO anyway. The Obama administration, through its diplomatic corps,
Speaker 1: had ambitions for a reprochmad with Russia. Instead, Putin saw
Speaker 1: Obama as unserious and simply waltzed into CRIMEA NATO membership
Speaker 1: for Russia isn't coming tomorrow. But to make peace, everyone
Speaker 1: needs to give up something and get something. Everyone needs
Speaker 1: to feel safer in peace than at war. Making war
Speaker 1: is easy, all you have to do is attack. Making
Speaker 1: peace is hard. But at least the Trump administration is
Speaker 1: making progress. We believe that progress could and should ultimately
Speaker 1: lead to NATO expansion to Russia if everyone.
Speaker 2: Behaves, joining us now.
Speaker 1: One of the great foreign policy thinkers of our time
Speaker 1: and author of Plan Red, China's project to destroy America,
Speaker 1: the Great Gordon Chang So, Gordon, we are here on
Speaker 1: the heels of the Putin summit and the europe Group session.
Speaker 1: Where do you think this conflict stands?
Speaker 2: Now?
Speaker 8: This is moving at Trump speed and trilateral in ten
Speaker 8: days would be something that most everybody would say is impossible,
Speaker 8: but in Trump's world, it is possible. I think there
Speaker 8: will a lot of important issues to get passed. One
Speaker 8: of them is going to be whether we impose sanctions
Speaker 8: on Russia in order to cut off some of that
Speaker 8: oil revenue. That would make Putin much more amenable. So
Speaker 8: I'm just as bewildered as everybody, because the one thing
Speaker 8: that Trump does is he actually takes everyone's expectations and
Speaker 8: changes them in ways which they thought were inconceivable and
Speaker 8: put them into reality. This meeting today was unreal, and
Speaker 8: it was due to President Trump's effective diplomacy.
Speaker 1: All right, well, I'm going to take the unconceivable and
Speaker 1: bring it into our reality for this discussion, Gordon, I
Speaker 1: remember back in the nineties and throughout the early two thousands,
Speaker 1: as NATO expansion was being discussed in the Baltics, in
Speaker 1: poland elsewhere, there were always voices from both the right
Speaker 1: and left suggesting that maybe NATO membership should be offered
Speaker 1: as a carit to Russia. And if that were to happen,
Speaker 1: do you think Europe could be safer?
Speaker 8: Well, certainly if Russia wanted to become a constructive member
Speaker 8: of NATO, no question, things would be better. And yes,
Speaker 8: after the Cold War, NATO membership was offered to the
Speaker 8: new Russian government, which turned it down. Right now, there's
Speaker 8: a lot going on. I mean, I wouldn't think that
Speaker 8: Putin would want to be a member of NATO for
Speaker 8: a number of reasons. One of them is that the
Speaker 8: Chinese probably wouldn't let him. But apart from that, you know,
Speaker 8: we'll just have to see and a.
Speaker 4: War.
Speaker 8: This happens every day.
Speaker 2: That's a very hot take.
Speaker 1: You believe that a barrier to Russian cooperation with the
Speaker 1: West through a military alliance like NATO could actually be
Speaker 1: hindered by the Chinese.
Speaker 2: You've got to explain that to me.
Speaker 8: First of all, China wants the war in Ukraine to
Speaker 8: continue indefinitely. And we learned this on July second, when
Speaker 8: Chinese Foreign Minister Wangi spoke to Kayak Kalos, the EU
Speaker 8: Foreign Policy and Brussels, and then Wangi said that China
Speaker 8: did not want to see Russia lose because if Russia
Speaker 8: lost the war in Ukraine, then America would turn his
Speaker 8: focus to China.
Speaker 6: In East Asia.
Speaker 8: Will you extrapolate a little bit from that, and that
Speaker 8: if the war in Ukraine ends, the US will again
Speaker 8: be able to look at China in East Asia. So
Speaker 8: I think the Chinese are going to do everything possible
Speaker 8: to gum up the works, because if they are able
Speaker 8: to do that, then they can accomplish what Wangi said.
Speaker 8: And I actually believe that Wangi was being candid with
Speaker 8: the Europeans. So this really is the Chinese position war indefinitely.
Speaker 1: It does seem China has benefited as the United States
Speaker 1: has engaged in wars throughout the Middle East and Central Asia.
Speaker 1: That's been the story of the last twenty twenty five years.
Speaker 1: We did see form and Vice President Mike Pence on
Speaker 1: CNN over the weekend call for secondary sanctions that would
Speaker 1: affect China.
Speaker 2: Let's hear from the Vice President and I'll get your reaction.
Speaker 9: I think at the same time he able to pick
Speaker 9: up the phone and ask Majority Leader John Thune to
Speaker 9: immediately pass the secondary sanctions bill that is supported by
Speaker 9: virtually everyone in the United States Senate.
Speaker 1: So my concern with this, Gordon, and please disabuse me
Speaker 1: if I'm incorrect, is that if we were to just
Speaker 1: reflexively embrace a secondary sanctions regime, that could strengthen the
Speaker 1: hand of bricks, because that would fuse those economies closer
Speaker 1: to one another, and it makes a stronger economic argument
Speaker 1: for bricks over inclusion with the West. So am I
Speaker 1: overly sensitive and concerned about secondary sanctions or is the
Speaker 1: Vice president correct?
Speaker 2: No?
Speaker 8: No, no, your concern is there, and I can certainly share it.
Speaker 8: There's a couple of other considerations. One of them is
Speaker 8: that you know, we put these secondary sanctions on India,
Speaker 8: which is our friend, but we didn't put them on China,
Speaker 8: which considers us to be an enemy. And the Chinese
Speaker 8: right now are telling visitors and they're telling the rest
Speaker 8: of the world that we're afraid of China because we
Speaker 8: won't put those sanctions on Beijing. So I think President Trump,
Speaker 8: one way or another, and I don't know how to
Speaker 8: do this, but one way or another, Trump needs to
Speaker 8: disabuse the Chinese of that. One way, of course, would
Speaker 8: be to impose secondary sanctions on the Chinese for purchasing
Speaker 8: a Russian oil. But you know you're consideration, you're concerned
Speaker 8: about the bricks. Yeah, it's a very important one.
Speaker 1: Every time we embrace a sanctions regime, it seems to
Speaker 1: be like a dog whistle saying, go think about bricks
Speaker 1: as an alternate economic system. And I know that's not
Speaker 1: what President Trump wants, but he does want to end
Speaker 1: this conflict. Bringing it to an end has to make
Speaker 1: everyone feel safer. Right, no one is going to embrace
Speaker 1: any peace plan if they think the peace plan is
Speaker 1: more dangerous for them than continuing the war. And I
Speaker 1: took note of what Envoy Steve Whitkoff said about Article
Speaker 1: five type security guarantees across Europe. Take a listen to
Speaker 1: Envoy wood Cough and we'll get your reaction.
Speaker 2: We agreed to.
Speaker 10: Robust security guarantees that I would describe as game changing.
Speaker 10: We didn't think that we were anywhere close to agreeing
Speaker 10: to Article five protection from the United States.
Speaker 1: So Gordon, when Envoy Witkof is talking about Article five
Speaker 1: type protections in an agreement between the United States and
Speaker 1: Russia to reduce hostilities, I mean, if it walks like
Speaker 1: NATA membership and quacks like NATO membership, does it kind
Speaker 1: of does it kind of seem like NATO membership to you?
Speaker 11: Yeah?
Speaker 8: And I think it probably should be NATO membership because
Speaker 8: it's going to be effectively the same. And we should
Speaker 8: have an integrated military command with Ukraine. If we're going
Speaker 8: to give Article five type assurances, you know this is
Speaker 8: going to require.
Speaker 2: He was talking about Russia, so it's going to hold
Speaker 2: hold on.
Speaker 1: He was talking about Russia, he was This was not
Speaker 1: Witkoff reacting to the Ukraine discussion. This is him talking
Speaker 1: about the meeting that occurred with Vladimir Putin in Alaska.
Speaker 2: He I think I could be wrong, but I'm.
Speaker 1: Reading Wikoff there as discussing a full security regime across
Speaker 1: Europe that includes Russia, includes Ukraine and reduces hostilities.
Speaker 2: Are you seeing it differently?
Speaker 8: I thought Winkoff was just talking about Ukraine. But you know,
Speaker 8: you could very well be right. There's a lot of
Speaker 8: discussions that are going on that we don't know about.
Speaker 8: And you know, President Trump is somebody who is willing
Speaker 8: to consider, as I mentioned, things that were once off
Speaker 8: the table. So yeah, it's not on my BINGO card,
Speaker 8: but it could very well be on the president's and
Speaker 8: that means it could very well be a pan European
Speaker 8: NATO type arrangement that covers all of Eastern Europe.
Speaker 1: And that is what would really put China on defense.
Speaker 1: You see, if we were to align Europe Eurasia Central
Speaker 1: Asia against China. Then I think you start to see
Speaker 1: the strategy of China trying to keep us in forever
Speaker 1: wars A really look like a peace structure that gives
Speaker 1: a dividend to us, strengthens our hand against them. And
Speaker 1: as this continues, we hope we're able to check back
Speaker 1: in with you, the Great Gordon Chang. I'll leave you
Speaker 1: with this final opportunity to make a prediction. Do you
Speaker 1: think that we are able to.
Speaker 2: End this war before the end of twenty twenty five?
Speaker 8: I think that that's a real possibility. And by the way,
Speaker 8: you are the Great Matt Gates, So yes, Thank you
Speaker 8: very much, the Great Matt Gates.
Speaker 1: Always a pleasure. Thank you so much, Gordon Chang for
Speaker 1: joining us and sharing your great expertise.
Speaker 12: Thank you.
Speaker 1: And coming up, FBI director Cash Bettel has really dropped
Speaker 1: some key information on us. It relates to an investigation
Speaker 1: into the Clinton Foundation. It's pay for play, it's obstruction
Speaker 1: of justice, and it all centers around the book Clinton Cash.
Speaker 1: The author of that book, Peter Schweitzer joins me. Next.
Speaker 13: Viewers are always asking me how can they watch oan live.
Speaker 13: The solution is simple. It's a streaming platform. Called cloud tv.
Speaker 13: Now it's spelled KLOWDTV. Simply go to cloudtv dot com
Speaker 13: and subscribe to watch twenty four to seven live feeds
Speaker 13: of OAN. The live package is only two dollars and
Speaker 13: fifty cents per month for all you can watch. Again,
Speaker 13: simply go to cloudtv dot com and do it today. Hey,
Speaker 13: did you know that One America News Network has launched
Speaker 13: a twenty four to seven Twitter like social media replacement.
Speaker 13: We're calling it free Talk forty five. So why is
Speaker 13: it branded free Talk forty five? Well, free talk because
Speaker 13: you will not be censored for expressing your opinion there,
Speaker 13: and forty five because forty five is a.
Speaker 6: Really lucky number.
Speaker 13: So join us at free Talk forty five and express
Speaker 13: yourself with no fear of calation. Ever, Hey, if your
Speaker 13: cable provider doesn't offer One America News Network, you should
Speaker 13: give them a call and kindly demand that they carryan Now,
Speaker 13: you're the customer, and without your feedback, your cable provider
Speaker 13: will not know that there is a strong demand across
Speaker 13: this country for One America News Network. So please call
Speaker 13: your cable company today and kindly ask or demand that
Speaker 13: they add OANN to their channel lineup.
Speaker 2: Hey, everyone. Here's a question for you.
Speaker 13: What does Roku TV, Apple TV, and Amazon fireTV all
Speaker 13: have in common? The answer is that all three platforms
Speaker 13: offer you the ability to live stream One America News
Speaker 13: Network from your Roku TV, Apple TV, or Amazon Fire device.
Speaker 13: Simply go to the app store, search out foran then
Speaker 13: enjoy all the great programming offered by Alien, including my
Speaker 13: show Real America.
Speaker 1: There's new information we're getting regarding pay for play with
Speaker 1: the Clinton Foundation.
Speaker 2: There was an investigation.
Speaker 1: Underway, and then herculean efforts by the Obama DOJ to
Speaker 1: shut that investigation down. It all started with a book
Speaker 1: called Clinton Cash, written by Peter Schweitzer. That book lays
Speaker 1: out in detail how the Clinton Foundation was basically a
Speaker 1: money laundering operation. People gave money to the foundation and
Speaker 1: then they got an FOB designation on any request that
Speaker 1: they made to the State Department.
Speaker 2: Do you know what FOB stood for? Friend of Bill?
Speaker 1: That meant the person who got that designation had likely
Speaker 1: paid off the Clintons through the foundation to get preferential treatment.
Speaker 1: It means your government was for sale in three separate cities.
Speaker 1: This book spawned investigations Washington, d C. New York, and
Speaker 1: even Little Rock, Arkansas. As these investigations were rolling, I
Speaker 1: was concerned that the DOJ had been compromised. I called
Speaker 1: for a special council back in twenty seventeen. With so
Speaker 1: many at the FBI and the Department of Justice conflicted,
Speaker 1: we believe a special council is appropriate. And the question
Speaker 1: for the Attorney General is what are you waiting for?
Speaker 1: We have a mountain of evidence and we need to
Speaker 1: see action quickly, Otherwise the American people start to question
Speaker 1: whether or not there really is this double standard where
Speaker 1: we're subjecting President Trump to scrutiny that the Clintons have
Speaker 1: never been subjected. Right. I was right, they never were
Speaker 1: subjected to that scrutiny. A special council was never appointed.
Speaker 1: Hillary got away with it, and we can blame former
Speaker 1: Attorney General Jeff Sessions for that failure. But now, thanks
Speaker 1: to a newly declassified memo, we see that then Deputy
Speaker 1: Attorney General Sallyates demanded these investigations into the Clinton Foundation
Speaker 1: be shut down. I was right back into twenty seventeen
Speaker 1: that they were never really subjected to the scrutiny that
Speaker 1: they should have been.
Speaker 2: And another reason is Andrew McCabe.
Speaker 1: He was deputy director of the FBI, and it looks
Speaker 1: in these memos and documents like he played a key
Speaker 1: role in swatting down legitimate investigations.
Speaker 2: Remember at the time, the director of the FBI was this.
Speaker 14: Guy Eller Swift and I go way back. I went
Speaker 14: to my first concert of hers fifteen years ago. I'm
Speaker 14: in a family's Swifty group chat. I know all her
Speaker 14: music and I listened to it on my headphones when
Speaker 14: I cut the grass. While our elderly makeup covered president
Speaker 14: is posting about whether Taylor Swift is still hot and
Speaker 14: declaring that he can't stand her. What's she doing living
Speaker 14: her best life? Thank you, Taylor Swift?
Speaker 2: How the Mighty have fallen? Thoughts in prayers?
Speaker 1: Jim Comy isn't Comy obviously wearing makeup in that video
Speaker 1: where he's making fun of someone else wearing makeup.
Speaker 2: It's just so cringe.
Speaker 1: But now we know that the Clinton cash allegations were
Speaker 1: never properly invested negated because those investigations were killed in
Speaker 1: their infancy. So we thought we'd bring on the author
Speaker 1: who started it all to react. He's the president of
Speaker 1: the Government Accountability Institute and the author of Clinton Cash.
Speaker 1: The untold story of how and why foreign governments and
Speaker 1: businesses helped make Bill and Hillary rich Peter Schweitzer, Peter,
Speaker 1: when did you first learn that your book had ignited
Speaker 1: these three investigations in DC, New York, and Arkansas.
Speaker 6: Well, Matt, it's great to be on with you. Yeah.
Speaker 15: The book came out in May of twenty fifteen, and
Speaker 15: I got calls from people in the FBI. These are
Speaker 15: the field officers. By the summer of twenty fifteen, and
Speaker 15: at the end of the day, there were at least
Speaker 15: four FBI offices field offices that were investigating this little
Speaker 15: rock Arkansas, New York, Boston, and strangely enough, a FBI
Speaker 15: office in Lagos, Nigeria, who had an audio tape of
Speaker 15: somebody bragging that they had given money to the Clintons
Speaker 15: and were now getting a favor. So that's kind of
Speaker 15: when it kicked off. And my experience was, you know,
Speaker 15: maybe you had a similar experience in your oversight in Congress.
Speaker 15: The field officers wanted to pursue this. They were very professional,
Speaker 15: and then almost immediately by early twenty sixteen, I was
Speaker 15: starting to get reports in directly that that leadership was
Speaker 15: shutting this down.
Speaker 1: Did you know at that time who in leadership, because
Speaker 1: it seems from what cash Bettel has put out that
Speaker 1: this really did come from the very upper echelons of
Speaker 1: the DOJ And it's the type of stuff like they
Speaker 1: accused us of. What's so crazy about this, Peters, the
Speaker 1: whole time they were investigating Donald Trump for obstruction of justice,
Speaker 1: they had just like come off of the obstruction of
Speaker 1: justice wave of the last administration.
Speaker 15: Yeah, let me underline what you just said, because you're
Speaker 15: exactly right. At the same time that they are killing
Speaker 15: an organic investigation that was launched by these four FBI
Speaker 15: field offices that had evidence and we're gathering evidence about
Speaker 15: corruption and pay to play involving also Russia. By the way,
Speaker 15: they were also creating a completely fictional investigation based on
Speaker 15: no corroborating evidence whatsoever, that Donald Trump was tied to Russia.
Speaker 15: And this, I think gets to the nub you played
Speaker 15: that clip earlier about the lack of scrutiny as you were.
Speaker 6: Talking about in twenty seventeen. This gets to the.
Speaker 15: Nub of the problem, at least as I see it,
Speaker 15: the corruption and the cronyism in the main building of
Speaker 15: the FBI, who are making massive political decisions to influence
Speaker 15: the twenty sixteen election. They certainly did it in twenty
Speaker 15: twenty with the Hunter Biden as well, And that's something
Speaker 15: that I hope Cash Mattel is going to work to
Speaker 15: reform and really clean up, because at the end of
Speaker 15: the day, if they're not major reforms, we're going to
Speaker 15: face this same problem going forward.
Speaker 6: At some point Cash Betel is not going to be director.
Speaker 15: At some point we may have a director that plays
Speaker 15: along the same way.
Speaker 6: So we need real structural or reform.
Speaker 1: And what would that look like, a reform that would
Speaker 1: outlast the very good people like Cash Hotel and Pamboni
Speaker 1: that we have in these positions now.
Speaker 15: Well, I think the key is transparency, right. I give
Speaker 15: Cash Mitel a lot of credit. He's releasing documents and
Speaker 15: material that is embarrassing I think to institutional FBI of
Speaker 15: course well before he was there, So I give him
Speaker 15: a lot of credit. Transparency is key, But I also
Speaker 15: think we have to look at breaking up FBI headquarters.
Speaker 15: They become too much of the culture of Washington, d C.
Speaker 15: And they become Washington insiders. Some of these guys probably
Speaker 15: were very good field agents when they were assigned to
Speaker 15: Detroit or Seattle or whatever. But they get to mean
Speaker 15: FBI headquarters, they start to cultivate relationships with political actors
Speaker 15: on Capitol Hill or in certain administrations, or maybe in
Speaker 15: the intelligence community, and they become detached from the traditional
Speaker 15: role that they had.
Speaker 6: So I'm not an.
Speaker 15: Expert in institutional reform, but I think it's got to
Speaker 15: include transparency and structural change that breaks up that hidden
Speaker 15: culture of the FBI.
Speaker 1: And you have to achieve that transparency while at the
Speaker 1: same time deconstructing the corrupt bonds that have fused between
Speaker 1: some of those bad actors and the media, right, because
Speaker 1: that's what I observed, the way that these people would
Speaker 1: come to Washington, d C. From far f along places
Speaker 1: all over the country, and then they would be ensorcelled
Speaker 1: by the DC media that they could be stars, they
Speaker 1: could be important if they leaked information, and then the
Speaker 1: media would embroider lies onto those leaks to try to
Speaker 1: really confuse the country. And the Russia hoax was central
Speaker 1: to that. I was very involved in the campaign in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, and when your book Clinton Cash came out,
Speaker 1: that was all the opposition research we need, like the
Speaker 1: notion that the Trump campaign was somehow trying to seduce
Speaker 1: the Russians into giving us information that you had already
Speaker 1: written a book on and published with all the evidence.
Speaker 1: Was so fantastical to me the entire time. I think
Speaker 1: it was some of the strongest evidence of Trump's innozence.
Speaker 2: Now in what you uncovered.
Speaker 1: Peter, and particularly the way the Clinton Foundation was used
Speaker 1: to curry favor with the State's Department.
Speaker 2: Do you see any.
Speaker 1: Crimes that survive the Statute of limitations? Jeff Sessions did
Speaker 1: a terrible disservice to us by not appointing the special
Speaker 1: council we asked for, But does that mean they all
Speaker 1: get away with it.
Speaker 6: It's a great question, Matt.
Speaker 15: I mean, you're the attorney, so I'm probably going to
Speaker 15: defer to you on that specifically. What I would say
Speaker 15: is that I think clearly there were laws that violated.
Speaker 15: I don't know what the statute of limitations are, and
Speaker 15: correct me if I'm not right on this, but I
Speaker 15: do believe that if it is a criminal conspiracy, and
Speaker 15: there are conspiracy charges that can extend the Statute of limitations.
Speaker 6: As long as the conspiracy goes forward.
Speaker 15: So my hope is that this will absolutely be looked at.
Speaker 15: It needs to be looked at, and I think we
Speaker 15: need to underscore the point you made about the media.
Speaker 15: Let's remember part of the way that they got the
Speaker 15: FISA courts to go along with some of these wire
Speaker 15: taps in the so called Russia collusion involving Trump is
Speaker 15: they would leak material to a news source. That new
Speaker 15: source would then run a story, and then they would
Speaker 15: use that new source with a PHIZA judge as evidence
Speaker 15: as to why there needed to be a PHIZ investigation.
Speaker 15: So there is absolutely a mass manipulation going on. I
Speaker 15: think the good news is that the media outlets like
Speaker 15: the New York Times in Washington Post, who before twenty
Speaker 15: sixteen were known to be left of center but people
Speaker 15: wanted to give them at least some credit, have completely
Speaker 15: and totally trashed their brands, and that's not something they're
Speaker 15: ever going to get back.
Speaker 1: We've been giving the Democrats a hard time, but a
Speaker 1: lot of this critique is fair as a bipartisan one,
Speaker 1: because those FISA abuses that you just described, and you
Speaker 1: described them exactly correctly, were then rewarded with an extension
Speaker 1: of FIZA powers. Republicans and Democrats worked together against me
Speaker 1: against even some of the more progressive Democrats, and they
Speaker 1: made FISA apply in a variety of ways that I
Speaker 1: think ensures its further abuse. And so I hope there's
Speaker 1: some reckoning that that comes. But I also want you
Speaker 1: to address this. Peter, you've written a number of pieces
Speaker 1: after Clinton Cash. You talked about the bidens. There are
Speaker 1: a number of empires that exist in Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: Where what the Clintons did is just the archetype. You
Speaker 1: have a family member who is in power, and then
Speaker 1: you have other family members who basically sell access to
Speaker 1: that power and who sell the ability to lever that power.
Speaker 1: You saw it with the Clintons, You saw it with
Speaker 1: the menendez Is. I mean, heck, even the former Republican
Speaker 1: chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Senator Burke, his son and.
Speaker 2: Wife were lobbyists.
Speaker 1: How would you like to go against them if your
Speaker 1: matter was before some tribunal?
Speaker 2: And so?
Speaker 1: Can you talk about this methodology of corruption in Washington
Speaker 1: and its nature across the political spectrum?
Speaker 15: Yeah, no, you're exactly right. I would add Mitch McConnell
Speaker 15: to that list. It's a bipartisan problem. And look, what
Speaker 15: the Clintons did was sort of it was proof of
Speaker 15: concept in a lot of respects. They demonstrated that number one,
Speaker 15: what I call offshore and corruption. In other words, it's
Speaker 15: not the elected official that's actually getting.
Speaker 6: The deal or making the money per se.
Speaker 15: They're not the ones that are even having a conversation
Speaker 15: with the foreign influencers. It is a family member. In
Speaker 15: the case of the Bidens, of course, it was Hunter Biden.
Speaker 15: In the case of the Clintons, it was a Hillary
Speaker 15: or Bill depending.
Speaker 6: Who was in power.
Speaker 15: And so it's offshoring corruption, and our ethics laws have
Speaker 15: not kept up with this methodology.
Speaker 6: You see the same thing with the insider trading stuff.
Speaker 15: You know, Nancy Pelosi's saying, well, it's not my stock picks,
Speaker 15: it's my husband that's making these highly selective and remarkably
Speaker 15: good stock picks. So we need to exercise understand the
Speaker 15: offshoreing corruption. The other thing we have to understand, Matt,
Speaker 15: is the Clintons. It was proof of concept of globalized corruption.
Speaker 15: We all understand, you know, the congressman from Iowa who
Speaker 15: gets a federal paving contract for his cousin. We understand
Speaker 15: that kind of run of the mill corruption that needs
Speaker 15: to be dealt with. What the Clinton said was, we've
Speaker 15: got this whole, big, beautiful world, and we've got all
Speaker 15: these corrupt countries like China and Russia and Ukraine, that
Speaker 15: have much lower ethical standards in the United States.
Speaker 6: Let's go there and we can make a fortune.
Speaker 15: So they've demonstrated that globalizing corruption is the way to go,
Speaker 15: which makes it, I think even worse. It's bad enough
Speaker 15: to have a crooked cousin back in the district making money,
Speaker 15: but if you've got foreign oligarchs or governments like China
Speaker 15: that want bad things for us, they're making money and
Speaker 15: gaining access, that's one hundred times worse.
Speaker 2: We'd rather have neither.
Speaker 1: But if we have to have corruption, can at least
Speaker 1: it reside as America first, corruption, not corruption that has
Speaker 1: to reach across oceans and global boundaries. But you make
Speaker 1: such an important point. It is a more relevant book today,
Speaker 1: Clinton Cash than even when you wrote it, because now
Speaker 1: the concept has been proven because Jeff Sessions didn't do
Speaker 1: what I asked, because there was no real review. This
Speaker 1: is now the game plan that has run over and over,
Speaker 1: and it's why so many decisions get made that don't serve.
Speaker 2: The people of our country.
Speaker 1: Peter Schweitzer We are so grateful for the work that
Speaker 1: you do to bring this to the forefront and hope
Speaker 1: you'll join.
Speaker 2: Us again soon.
Speaker 6: Yeah, thanks Matt.
Speaker 1: And coming up, we go to the White House where
Speaker 1: Daniel Baldwin has the latest on the summit with President
Speaker 1: Trump and major leaders from Europe, the exchanges with the
Speaker 1: President of Ukraine. We're far more jovial this time. We'll
Speaker 1: get into it with the man who is on the
Speaker 1: beat at the White House better than any other. Back
Speaker 1: in a few moments.
Speaker 13: Hey, did you know that One America News Network has
Speaker 13: launched a twenty four to seven Twitter like social media replacement.
Speaker 13: We're calling it free Talk forty five. So why is
Speaker 13: it branded free Talk forty five. Well, free talk because
Speaker 13: you will not be censored for expressing your opinion there,
Speaker 13: and forty five because forty five is a really lucky number.
Speaker 13: So join us at free Talk forty five express yourself
Speaker 13: with no fear of cancelation. Ever, Hey, if your cable
Speaker 13: provider doesn't offer One America News Network, you should give
Speaker 13: them a call and kindly demand that they carryan Now
Speaker 13: you're the customer, and without your feedback, your cable provider
Speaker 13: will not know that there is a strong demand across
Speaker 13: this country for One America News Network, So please call
Speaker 13: your cable company today and kindly ask or demand that
Speaker 13: they add ANN to their channel lineup. Hey everyone, here's
Speaker 13: a question for you. What does Roku TV, Apple TV,
Speaker 13: and Amazon fireTV all have in common? The answer is
Speaker 13: that all three platforms offer you the ability to live
Speaker 13: stream One America News Network from your Roku TV, Apple
Speaker 13: TV or Amazon Fire device. Go to the app store
Speaker 13: search out for an, then enjoy all the great programming
Speaker 13: offered by on including my show Real America. Hey, did
Speaker 13: you know that video clips from my program Real America
Speaker 13: and all the other talk shows offered by One America
Speaker 13: News Network are available to you for free on OA
Speaker 13: and N dot com. You can also enjoy the latest
Speaker 13: in breaking news videos by visiting OA and N dot com.
Speaker 13: Make sure you stay informed and visit o ANN dot
Speaker 13: com daily. And if you'd like to show support and
Speaker 13: wear some support for One America News Network, then visitor
Speaker 13: online store for the latest shirts, hats, and mugs.
Speaker 16: I think that we had a very good conversation with presidents,
Speaker 16: very good and it really was the best one or sorry,
Speaker 16: maybe the best one will be in the future. I
Speaker 16: will speak more about security guarantees. This is where important
Speaker 16: that the United States gives such strong signal and is
Speaker 16: ready for security guarantees.
Speaker 1: It was a huge day at the White House, Trump, Zelenski,
Speaker 1: European leaders. We want to go right to the action
Speaker 1: with Oan Zone. Chief White House Correspondent Daniel Baldwin. So, Daniel,
Speaker 1: you were in the room for the last Zelenski visit,
Speaker 1: which was disastrous. The tension was thick, the feelings were hurt.
Speaker 1: How are the vibes different today?
Speaker 12: Oh, it was super cordial, Matt, And you could tell
Speaker 12: immediately that Zelensky had learned from his previous mistakes. First
Speaker 12: and foremost, he showed up with a pseudo suit, not
Speaker 12: with a tie, but it fit the bill per se.
Speaker 12: And the first thing that came out of his mouth
Speaker 12: in that Oval office was a thank you, definitely making
Speaker 12: the Vice President a lot happier than he was in
Speaker 12: the first meeting. But the bottom line, as he saw
Speaker 12: two leaders who were cordial, they were collaborative, and they
Speaker 12: shared the same goal creating a pathway to peace. And
Speaker 12: they seemingly were on the same page at least for
Speaker 12: the most part, as to how to get that done.
Speaker 12: A trilateral meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. If President
Speaker 12: Trump can get Putin in Zelensky in the same room
Speaker 12: with himself.
Speaker 11: Acting as a mediating peace.
Speaker 12: Force, a problem solver, and a fixer, they're gonna have
Speaker 12: a pretty darn good shot at getting this done. But
Speaker 12: a wildly productive meeting from an optic perspective here at
Speaker 12: the White House today.
Speaker 2: No doubt.
Speaker 1: If you got those three in a room, get everyone
Speaker 1: else out, all the European leaders, all the staff, everyone else.
Speaker 1: Let President Trump cook. We did have a number of
Speaker 1: those other European leaders at the White House today. Did
Speaker 1: they seem happy with the audience they got with the President?
Speaker 1: And what's their main message walking out?
Speaker 11: Oh, undoubtedly, Matt.
Speaker 12: They got their three minutes of fame in the East
Speaker 12: Room when they each got to go around that table
Speaker 12: and talk a little bit about what they wanted.
Speaker 11: Some of them called for a ceasefire, which.
Speaker 12: Doesn't really seem to be happening after the Alaska Accords
Speaker 12: of last week. President Trump walked out of their emphasizing
Speaker 12: that THEIS didn't necessarily agree to that at that point
Speaker 12: in time.
Speaker 11: But the bottom line is really this.
Speaker 12: They were pleased at the United States seemed willing to
Speaker 12: play ball a little bit with the security guarantees that
Speaker 12: Zelenski seems to be wanting, and he sort of spelled
Speaker 12: that out the Oval.
Speaker 11: Office as well.
Speaker 12: He said that he believes that a crucial security guarantee
Speaker 12: for Ukraine.
Speaker 11: Involves re arming their army.
Speaker 12: He said a strong Ukraine army in the United States
Speaker 12: can sort of help with that by supplying things like
Speaker 12: Patriot missiles. That's directly from what Zelenski said in that
Speaker 12: Oval Office.
Speaker 11: Today.
Speaker 12: Europe seems very happy with the United States his willingness
Speaker 12: to do that from at least to the fact that
Speaker 12: President Trump said they're willing to play ball, even though
Speaker 12: he thinks it's a very overrated aspect of this whole thing.
Speaker 12: Because the bottom line, Matt is, Donald Trump is the
Speaker 12: security guarantee. But he didn't invade Ukraine when President Trump
Speaker 12: was in office, and he wouldn't really try anything again.
Speaker 12: Historical president has already proven that. So Donald Trump himself,
Speaker 12: being in office, being in power, that is the only
Speaker 12: security guarantee Ukraine needs. But it seems as though the
Speaker 12: President is at least willing to entertain ideas if it
Speaker 12: will get this peace deal at least done, because this
Speaker 12: is a legacy play for Donald Trump. If he can
Speaker 12: bring an end to this war, something that leaders the
Speaker 12: previous administration started couldn't get concluded that it's the bloodiest
Speaker 12: war in Europe and the better part of eight decades,
Speaker 12: it will cement his legacy as the greatest peacemaker that
Speaker 12: this office has seen in at least fifty years.
Speaker 2: No doubt about it.
Speaker 1: And you know, President Trump is not only having to
Speaker 1: wind down other people's wars, he's having to make sure
Speaker 1: that we're not getting thrust into any new ones.
Speaker 2: Here.
Speaker 1: When Zelenski talks about security guarantees, I want to spend
Speaker 1: a moment on this because that can turn into a
Speaker 1: bit of a Rockshire test itself.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: One person might see security guarantees and say, well, that
Speaker 1: might mean we'll do everything we can with our diplomacy
Speaker 1: and with our might to deter future invasions of your country.
Speaker 1: Another version of security guarantees is go get a bunch
Speaker 1: of weapons for us, have other people pay for them,
Speaker 1: and then we're going to rock massive weapons up against
Speaker 1: the border of our neighbor who's not all that friendly
Speaker 1: with us. In Zelensky's thinking, you seem to be reporting.
Speaker 1: It's way more of the latter. What do you think
Speaker 1: the administration is thinking about what constitutes a sufficient security guarantee?
Speaker 12: It's a great point, I mean, all you can talk
Speaker 12: about today. He said that he seems to be willing
Speaker 12: to play ball a little bit with it, even though
Speaker 12: he thinks it's a largely overrated aspect to this entire part, Matt.
Speaker 12: And this is why this trilateral meeting is so crucial.
Speaker 11: You need to get both of them in a room.
Speaker 12: Zelensky needs to say his piece as to what he
Speaker 12: believes is sufficient, Putin.
Speaker 11: Needs to go back and forth.
Speaker 12: They likely won't necessarily agree, But that's why you need
Speaker 12: to have a problem solver like Donald Trump in the middle,
Speaker 12: trying to find a way to find a palatable solution
Speaker 12: for both. I'll give you an example, right the Armenia
Speaker 12: Azerbaijan conflict that the President just brought an end to
Speaker 12: that's been going on for the better part of thirty
Speaker 12: five years. A large part is because of that corridor
Speaker 12: that sort of extends towards both countries. That was a
Speaker 12: massive sticking point. Donald Trump found a solution to that
Speaker 12: by making it the trip the Trump the Trump root
Speaker 12: for international peace and prosperity per se.
Speaker 11: It's a creative solution. It's what the President does.
Speaker 12: He finds creative solutions to stuck in the mud problems.
Speaker 11: And that's why you.
Speaker 12: Hear Zelenski talk about this trilateral and why you hear
Speaker 12: Donald Trump talk about this trilateral and it's why you
Speaker 12: hear about how they need to do it immediately, Matt.
Speaker 11: They have momentum.
Speaker 12: This is sort of something that the president feels as
Speaker 12: though if they move quickly they can kind of get
Speaker 12: a little bit more speed in haste to this. But
Speaker 12: it's why this needs to happen, so the President can
Speaker 12: see where both of them are coming from and find
Speaker 12: a creative solution that he finds acceptable. But the bottom
Speaker 12: line is is that he is the ultimate security guarantee.
Speaker 1: You yeah, and I get the sense that this is
Speaker 1: moving at the pace that you're talking.
Speaker 2: About, Daniel.
Speaker 1: Under normal times, you would see a summit like we
Speaker 1: saw in Alaska, followed by a bunch of ministerial meeting,
Speaker 1: staff meetings. There'd be kind of a multi week reverberation
Speaker 1: off of that. Here Trump gets right back on it
Speaker 1: on Monday with Zelensky brings Europe to the table to
Speaker 1: make that time very efficient. And you know, I do
Speaker 1: wonder when you know the administration is eyeing this trilateral meeting.
Speaker 1: I think that's the big thing they may have gotten
Speaker 1: out of Putin is the sense that everybody would sit
Speaker 1: down and attempt to work this out. But I mean,
Speaker 1: are you thinking days, weeks?
Speaker 2: Months?
Speaker 1: I won't hold you to it, but would love your
Speaker 1: prediction kind of on banding that timing expectation.
Speaker 12: It depends on how this phone call Putin goes today, Matt.
Speaker 12: And that's sort of the thinking at this point in time.
Speaker 12: It depends on how it's going Putin, seems Willings. Zolensky
Speaker 12: doubted the fact that Putin was willing to do that,
Speaker 12: and he said it Putin isn't willing to do a
Speaker 12: trilateral He needs to be hit with more sanctions. But
Speaker 12: my prediction is that Putin would be willing to do
Speaker 12: this because think about the timeline that led up to
Speaker 12: the Alaska summon, right, Matt. You had President Trump hammering
Speaker 12: Putin in public for weeks and then he's threatening him
Speaker 12: with these severe economic sanctions, and then he does hit
Speaker 12: a country with severe terrorists.
Speaker 11: But it wasn't really Russia.
Speaker 12: It was India, which was a fascinated move by the President.
Speaker 12: India is a major trading power on the global stage,
Speaker 12: and the President hit him with fifty percent tariffs for
Speaker 12: buying Russian oil and gas, and then all of a sudden,
Speaker 12: then Putin requests a meeting with Donald Trump. Via Steve Woodcoff,
Speaker 12: It's very interesting because President Trump established a credible economic threat.
Speaker 12: If he's willing to hit India, he'd hit anyone economically,
Speaker 12: at least perspective for buying Russian oil and Russia. The
Speaker 12: Russia economy is obviously showing signs of cracking. Russian revenue
Speaker 12: from oil and gases down twenty seven percent approximately year
Speaker 12: over year.
Speaker 11: We had Bloomberg.
Speaker 12: Reporting about this bank turmoil in Russia as well, Matt,
Speaker 12: So that sort of gave President Trump this viable, incredible
Speaker 12: threat that he can lob at Russia that would sort
Speaker 12: of hit their pain threshold.
Speaker 11: So to speak.
Speaker 12: So that gives me reason to think that Putin will
Speaker 12: play ball to an extent and there will be a
Speaker 12: trilateral meeting, and it will happen within the next ten
Speaker 12: days or so.
Speaker 11: That's my hot take for it.
Speaker 1: Is hot take, and it is actually brilliant analysis, and
Speaker 1: it really really draws into sharp focus the important moments
Speaker 1: that are ahead. He is the very best man covering
Speaker 1: the Trump administration there at the White House. Our own
Speaker 1: Daniel Baldwin, Chief White House correspondent for One American News.
Speaker 1: Thank you for being on the story and we'll check
Speaker 1: back in with you after that phone call with President Putin.
Speaker 2: And coming out.
Speaker 1: There is a redistricting arms race going on in the country.
Speaker 1: It could mean advantage for Republicans or Democrats, but the
Speaker 1: timetable is drawing near for decisions to be made about
Speaker 1: whether or not there will be entirely new congressional districts
Speaker 1: all around the country. We've got ace Republican strategist Matt
Speaker 1: Brainerd here after a quick break.
Speaker 13: Hey, if your cable provider doesn't offer One America News Network,
Speaker 13: you should give them a call and kindly demand that
Speaker 13: they CARRYAN. Now you're the customer, and without your feedback,
Speaker 13: your cable provider will not know that there is a
Speaker 13: strong demand across this country for One America News Network.
Speaker 13: So please call your cable company today and kindly ask
Speaker 13: or demand that they ADDANN to their channel Lineup.
Speaker 2: Hey, everyone, here's a.
Speaker 13: Question for you, what does Roku TV, Apple TV, and
Speaker 13: Amazon fireTV all have in common? The answer is that
Speaker 13: all three platforms offer you the ability to live stream
Speaker 13: One America News Network from your Roku TV, Apple TV
Speaker 13: or Amazon Fire device. Simply go to the app store,
Speaker 13: search out FORAAN, then enjoy all the great programming offered
Speaker 13: by ON including my show America.
Speaker 2: Hey did you know that?
Speaker 13: Video clips from my program Real America and all the
Speaker 13: other talk shows offered by One America News Network are
Speaker 13: available to you for free on oaan n dot com.
Speaker 13: You can also enjoy the latest in breaking news videos
Speaker 13: by visiting oaan n dot com. Make sure you stay
Speaker 13: informed and visit oann dot com daily. And if you'd
Speaker 13: like to show support and wear some support for One
Speaker 13: America News Network, then visit our online store for the
Speaker 13: latest shirts, hats, and mugs. Viewers are always asking me
Speaker 13: how can they watch OAN live? The solution is simple.
Speaker 13: It's a streaming platform called cloud tv. Now it's spelled
Speaker 13: klowd TV. Simply go to cloudtv dot com and subscribe
Speaker 13: to watch twenty four to seven live feeds of OAN.
Speaker 13: The live package is only two dollars and fifty cents
Speaker 13: per month for all you can watch again. Simply go
Speaker 13: to cloudtv dot com and do it today.
Speaker 4: Are you open to holding an election in your country?
Speaker 16: Yes, of course, we need to work in parliament because
Speaker 16: during the war you can have elections, but we can
Speaker 16: we can do security.
Speaker 3: So you say, during the war you can't have elections.
Speaker 3: So let me just say three and a half years
Speaker 3: from that. So you mean if we happen to be
Speaker 3: in a war with somebody, no more elections.
Speaker 1: I wonder what the that was President Trump pointing out
Speaker 1: to President Zelensky in his special and unique way, that
Speaker 1: suspending elections due to war is not exactly the most
Speaker 1: pristine example of democracy. After all, under Zelensky's standard for democracy,
Speaker 1: what would stop any leader from merely maintaining a low
Speaker 1: temperature hostility forever just to maintain power. That was the
Speaker 1: point of the gentle ribbing he got from President Trump.
Speaker 1: It's worth noting that in America we even voted during
Speaker 1: the Civil War. But this isn't a segment where we
Speaker 1: intend to be overly judgy about democracy in voting, because
Speaker 1: it appears we have some issues to.
Speaker 2: Address here at home.
Speaker 1: Before opining on the future of Ukrainian democracy, check out
Speaker 1: this video of Democrat Michigan City councilman Aboo Musa on
Speaker 1: tape stuffing after do ballots into a dropbox in the
Speaker 1: middle of the night. It was this second video of
Speaker 1: Musa's stuffing ballot boxes to service in less than a week.
Speaker 1: This video is from August first, just days before he
Speaker 1: won the city's primary election. I guess this is what
Speaker 1: democracy looks like. President Trump made his own views about
Speaker 1: mail in voting very clear today.
Speaker 3: We're going to end mail in voting. It's a fraud
Speaker 3: if you have mail in vote. Even Jimmy Carter with
Speaker 3: this commission they set it up.
Speaker 4: He said.
Speaker 3: The one thing about mail in voting, you will never
Speaker 3: have an honor selection if you have mail in it.
Speaker 3: And it's time that the Republicans get tough and stop it.
Speaker 3: Because the Democrats wanted it's the only way they can
Speaker 3: get elected.
Speaker 1: But it's not just how people vote, it's who gets
Speaker 1: to vote in what districts that's shaping up the political landscape.
Speaker 1: In Texas, Republicans drew maps that yielded more Republican seats.
Speaker 1: Democrats then fled the state to deprive the legislative body
Speaker 1: of a quorum to conduct business.
Speaker 2: They have not returned.
Speaker 1: Then, in California, Governor Gavin Newsom unveiled a plan to
Speaker 1: spend two hundred and fifty million dollars for a statewide
Speaker 1: election to approve new maps to generate more Democrat seats.
Speaker 1: We think that idea is a bit nutty. Now we've
Speaker 1: got a lot of states playing cartography chicken, We've got
Speaker 1: ballots being stuffed into boxes in the middle of the night,
Speaker 1: and we have European leaders telling us that the future
Speaker 1: of democracy doesn't necessarily include voting. When there are hostilities,
Speaker 1: democracy seems to be.
Speaker 2: Having a bad day.
Speaker 1: Joining us now is the former director of data and
Speaker 1: strategy for the Trump twenty sixteen campaign and executive director
Speaker 1: of look Ahead America, Matt Brainerd. So, Matt break down
Speaker 1: this redistricting arms race for us. What are the choices
Speaker 1: states are facing.
Speaker 17: It's important to remember where it started. If you listen
Speaker 17: to the left wing media, they'll tell you that Democrat
Speaker 17: states like California are retaliating because of what a Texas
Speaker 17: is doing. But the truth is that this started last
Speaker 17: cycle in New York. New York had perfectly good lines.
Speaker 17: They produced a majority Democrat congressman, but they weren't happy
Speaker 17: because a few too many Republicans won. And you remember
Speaker 17: this is New York decided to do a mid cycle
Speaker 17: redraw their lines to eliminate some Republicans and that was successful.
Speaker 17: So Texas is taking looking saying like we can probably
Speaker 17: counter that, and then California's coming along and trying to
Speaker 17: counter that, and it's going to end up in an
Speaker 17: arms race.
Speaker 18: It's report to remember something. It's very important.
Speaker 17: When Democrat control states draw lines, they draw them to
Speaker 17: optimize the number of Democrats elected. When Republicans have control
Speaker 17: to draw lines, they draw them based on geographic interests,
Speaker 17: protecting incumbents. You saw this happen in your home state
Speaker 17: of Florida. In fact, the Florida Republicans, who completely controlled
Speaker 17: the state, drew a map, submitted it to government SANTUS,
Speaker 17: and to SANTUS vetoed it says, hey, guys, we.
Speaker 18: Could have at least a couple more Republican congressmen. Go
Speaker 18: draw this again.
Speaker 17: So the problem that we face is that for too
Speaker 17: long Republicans have not prioritized optimizing the number of Republicans
Speaker 17: in Washington. And now I've got a very narrow, narrow
Speaker 17: majority trying to push through President Trump's agenda. So of
Speaker 17: course he's looking back at states like Texas and Missouri
Speaker 17: and Indiana and maybe even trying to squeeze a little
Speaker 17: bit more juice out of Florida to get us a
Speaker 17: few more seats there, And of course the Democrats want
Speaker 17: to retaliate. And one of the challenges with this issue
Speaker 17: is that this really just comes down to pure power politics,
Speaker 17: because outside of your audience and some people online, voters
Speaker 17: both don't care about this issue very much and often
Speaker 17: just don't understand it. They don't understand that you can
Speaker 17: have a state that Trump won by with sixty percent
Speaker 17: of the vote, but can only give thirty percent of
Speaker 17: their members of Congress to Republicans because of how those
Speaker 17: lines are drawn. It is a very complicated and murky subject.
Speaker 17: And the truth is it's very hard to say who's
Speaker 17: fair and who's not.
Speaker 2: It's just pure both.
Speaker 1: Sides we will accuse the other of being that's what
Speaker 1: you're a data scientist, That's why I brought you on.
Speaker 1: And what I really want to understand is if the
Speaker 1: arms race continues and all states become maximalist jerrymanderers, who
Speaker 1: has the advantage Republicans or Democrats.
Speaker 17: Right now, if all the gloves come off, there's a
Speaker 17: small advantage to Republicans, and there's because they again, they
Speaker 17: have not historically completely optimized to put more Republicans in office.
Speaker 17: They protected incumbents and they like geographic lines that put
Speaker 17: keep counties together, whereas Democrats.
Speaker 18: Have no compunction.
Speaker 17: So if the gloves really do come off, I think
Speaker 17: Republicans can pick up quite a few seats. And there's
Speaker 17: something else happening in the background that has the potential
Speaker 17: to help Republicans a lot more. The Supreme Court is
Speaker 17: potentially going to knock out the vire requirement that says
Speaker 17: if you have a black population in the state, they
Speaker 17: have to.
Speaker 18: Be able to elect a member of their own race.
Speaker 17: Once that gets knocked out, assuming it does, you'll see
Speaker 17: your former colleagues like Cliburne in South Carolina, those districts will.
Speaker 18: Just be completely vaporized.
Speaker 6: Wow.
Speaker 18: Same thing with in Tennessee.
Speaker 17: There's states these red red stakes that have to have
Speaker 17: that one Democrat district because they have a black population.
Speaker 18: They'll be lable to eliminate all of them.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 1: It'll be something we'll definitely have you back on to
Speaker 1: chat about it more. Matt Brainer, the head of look
Speaker 1: Ahead America and one of the smartest data scientists around
Speaker 1: on the Republican Party.
Speaker 18: Thanks for coming on, Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: You know what's rare these days of pharmacy that's actually
Speaker 1: on your side. I've been telling you to check out
Speaker 1: All Family Pharmacy and they just drop prices by up
Speaker 1: to twenty five percent on two of their most requested medications.
Speaker 1: I've remectin and mebenzidol Ivermectin now just starts at two
Speaker 1: dollars a capsule. That's a huge deal, especially if you
Speaker 1: need higher doses or you just want to stock up.
Speaker 1: They're doing this because they believe people should have access
Speaker 1: to the meds they want without jacked up prices or
Speaker 1: people getting in the way.
Speaker 2: You don't need insurance.
Speaker 1: You just go online, fill out a short form, and
Speaker 1: a licensed doctor reviews it. Once approved, the meds ship
Speaker 1: writes your door. It's simple, secure, and puts control backwhard
Speaker 1: belongs with you. They've got over two hundred medications and
Speaker 1: are working hard to keep prices low. Go to All
Speaker 1: Family Pharmacy dot com, forward slash Matt use code Matt
Speaker 1: ten to save an extra ten percent. That's all Family
Speaker 1: Pharmacy dot com, Forward slash Matt promo code Matt ten
Speaker 1: and back. In just a moment, we'll have the news
Speaker 1: on the New York I'm sorry the New Orleans Mayor.
Speaker 1: It's hard to keep them separate. The New Orleans mayor
Speaker 1: who was just indicted.
Speaker 2: But there could be a.
Speaker 1: Love defense and we will explore it next.
Speaker 13: Hey everyone, here's a question for you. What does Roku TV,
Speaker 13: Apple TV, and Amazon fireTV all have in common? The
Speaker 13: answer is that all three platforms offer you the ability
Speaker 13: to live stream One America News Network from your Roku TV,
Speaker 13: Apple TV, or Amazon Fire device. Simply go to the
Speaker 13: app store search out for an then enjoy all the
Speaker 13: great programming offered by Olien, including my show Real America. Hey,
Speaker 13: did you know that video clips from my program Real
Speaker 13: America and all the other talk shows offered by One
Speaker 13: America News Network are available to you for free on
Speaker 13: oan N dot com. You can also enjoy the latest
Speaker 13: in breaking news videos by VISITINGA and N dot com.
Speaker 13: Make sure you stay informed and visit oann dot com daily,
Speaker 13: and if you'd like to show support and wear some
Speaker 13: support for One America News Network, then visit our online
Speaker 13: store for the latest.
Speaker 6: Shirts, hats and mugs.
Speaker 13: Viewers are always asking me how can they watch OAN live?
Speaker 13: The solution is simple. It's a streaming platform called cloud tv.
Speaker 13: Now it's spelled klowd TV. Simply go to cloudtv dot
Speaker 13: com and subscribe to watch twenty four to seven live
Speaker 13: feeds of Oan. The live package is only two dollars
Speaker 13: and fifty cents per month for all you can watch. Again,
Speaker 13: simply go to cloudtv dot com and do it today. Hey,
Speaker 13: did you know that One America news network has launched
Speaker 13: a twenty four to seven Twitter like social media replacement.
Speaker 13: We're calling it Free Talk forty five. So why is
Speaker 13: it branded free Talk forty five. Well, free talk because
Speaker 13: you will not be censored for expressing your opinion there,
Speaker 13: and forty five because forty five is a really lucky number.
Speaker 13: So join us at free Talk forty five and express
Speaker 13: yourself with no fear of cancelation.
Speaker 1: Ever, a federal grand jury has indicted New Orleans Mayor
Speaker 1: LaToya Cantrell on multiple felony charges. Prosecutors alleged she engaged
Speaker 1: in a year's long scheme to conceal a romantic relationship
Speaker 1: with her state employed bodyguard, Jeffrey Vapi. There's something about
Speaker 1: women in politics and their bodyguards. It seems former Congresswoman
Speaker 1: Corey Bush paid her bodyguard hundreds of thousands of dollars
Speaker 1: in campaign funds and then married him. She was in
Speaker 1: investigated criminally, but no charges were brought. Love one Mayor
Speaker 1: Cantrell's love comes with a side of federal charges on conspiracy, wirefraud,
Speaker 1: obstruction of justice, and making false statements. Prosecutors alleged Cantrell
Speaker 1: used her bodyguard and ex lover as a basis to
Speaker 1: access taxpayer funding for over seventy thousand dollars for personal trips,
Speaker 1: including visits to vineyards in California and an extended stay
Speaker 1: on Martha's vineyard. Encrypted WhatsApp messages over fifteen thousand were
Speaker 1: allegedly exchanged and later deleted to conceal the relationship. In
Speaker 1: one WhatsApp message, Cantrell reportedly wrote, quote the times when
Speaker 1: we are truly traveling is what spoils me most. Newly
Speaker 1: surfaced evidence also includes a handwritten love letter from VP
Speaker 1: to Cantrell in twenty twenty two. I'm in our space
Speaker 1: and feeling so in love with you. You got me baby,
Speaker 1: and it feels so good it's crazy.
Speaker 2: Find yourself a man.
Speaker 1: Cantrell is the first sitting New Orleans mayor to face
Speaker 1: federal criminal charges. She remains in office and is presumed innocent.
Speaker 1: The indictment arrives just months before she is term limited
Speaker 1: and set to leave office with this. Now to provide
Speaker 1: legal analysis is former court appointed a counselor, Philip Dubay.
Speaker 1: He's been following the story. So, Philip, how much trouble
Speaker 1: is the mayor in?
Speaker 4: Oh, she's in a deep Matt. I gotta tell you,
Speaker 4: I hope she has really good defense counsel because they're
Speaker 4: coming after her with a vengeance. One of the council alone.
Speaker 4: Just the conspiracy to commit wire fraud that can carry
Speaker 4: up to twenty years. The lesser charges, even though they're
Speaker 4: all felonies, they carry time in the federal joint the
Speaker 4: obstruction charges lying to law enforcement and certainly lying to
Speaker 4: the grand jury, and an affidavit that those each carry
Speaker 4: up to five years. So this is not the type
Speaker 4: of case that you want to go to trial on
Speaker 4: and recognize, you know, it's not qualitative. In other words,
Speaker 4: even though in the broader scheme of federal and even
Speaker 4: state corruption charges. You know they're not that serious. The
Speaker 4: problem is juries don't get to evaluate or do some
Speaker 4: type of numerical value if you will, on the severity
Speaker 4: of charges. All the prosecution has to do is prove it.
Speaker 4: And I think this is pretty much a slam dunk
Speaker 4: for them.
Speaker 1: It struck me that over fifteen thousand messages on WhatsApp
Speaker 1: were deleted. Usually when you're deleting WhatsApp messages with an
Speaker 1: exit's over a breakup, not a federal investigation. What does
Speaker 1: that say about the men's raya in this case, and
Speaker 1: whether or not the mayor knew she had done wrong?
Speaker 4: Well, it goes to the obstruction. When you are destroying
Speaker 4: any type of tangible evidence like that, you're obstructing justice.
Speaker 4: And certainly if you can show that center or that
Speaker 4: intent to do it, that's what will yield I believe,
Speaker 4: up to twenty years in this particular case. It's very
Speaker 4: very serious, and I tell clients all the time, you know,
Speaker 4: not to sound flippant, that the E in emails stands
Speaker 4: for evidence and the T in text messages stands for testimony,
Speaker 4: and you better be careful about what you text, what
Speaker 4: you email. And this case certainly about what you purge
Speaker 4: and delete, because it's all going to be marked as
Speaker 4: exhibits at her federal trial, assuming it doesn't settle.
Speaker 1: Yes, and the w in WhatsApp may stand for the
Speaker 1: witness that is called to share the.
Speaker 2: Specifics of your message.
Speaker 1: So you talked about the technical elements of these charges
Speaker 1: very proficiently. But these are cases where you've still got
Speaker 1: to go before a jury. You say it doesn't go
Speaker 1: to trial. But in a case where you've got this
Speaker 1: woman in politics and it's her bodyguard, and I think
Speaker 1: there was like a Whitney Houston Kevin Costner movie with
Speaker 1: that as the core plot is love a defense? Like
Speaker 1: could a good criminal defense lawyer bring this to a
Speaker 1: jury and say they have tried to criminalize love?
Speaker 4: To be honest with you, Matt, I think what they're
Speaker 4: trying to do is criminalize ethics violations. If I were
Speaker 4: defending LaToya very seriously, Now, where is it in the
Speaker 4: law that it is required that her bodyguard not be
Speaker 4: a love Interest's just assumed that that person is performing
Speaker 4: two roles. And remember we saw sort of sprinkles of
Speaker 4: this with Fannie Willis and Nathan Wade out in Atlanta.
Speaker 4: But who's to say that a person cannot wear both
Speaker 4: hats unless it's some type of an ethics violation, or
Speaker 4: you have to go through the courts or through city
Speaker 4: council to get the person hired and circumvent the ethics rules.
Speaker 4: I don't know that it necessarily rises to a criminal
Speaker 4: level beyond a reasonable doubt, as long as the love
Speaker 4: interest is actually doing the work. If they're doing both,
Speaker 4: if they're you know, canodling you by night, but by
Speaker 4: day they're your actual bodyguard, I don't care if it's
Speaker 4: at a restaurant, at a public event, you know, at
Speaker 4: the office, or wherever you might be, why can't they
Speaker 4: wear two hats? Criminally?
Speaker 1: I could just see the direct examination. You put the
Speaker 1: bodyguard on the stand, you ask him if he did
Speaker 1: his job. He points to the defendant says, well, she's
Speaker 1: still here, didn't she?
Speaker 2: I did my job. I protected her. Philip Dubay, thank
Speaker 2: you so much for your expert analysis. We hope you'll
Speaker 2: join us again.
Speaker 4: You're very welcome.
Speaker 1: That's all the time we have. We'll be back tomorrow
Speaker 1: at nine o'clock eastern six Pacific. Make sure to sign
Speaker 1: up for the OA and live app. If you haven't already,
Speaker 1: follow me on x at Matt and Gates, email us
Speaker 1: the Matt.
Speaker 2: Gates Show at O A n N dot com.
Speaker 1: We would love to hear from you and stay right
Speaker 1: here fine point Whatchelle rihann is up next.
Speaker 13: Let's go get them