Talking on all political subjects and taking on all colors, this is Matt Flynn Direct, with your host, Matt Flynn.
We've got to cut you down.
Welcome to Matt Flynn Direct. I mean, you statewide in live on civic media.
Our lines are open 844-967-2789. No subject is off limits and all points of
you are welcome. Remember, you're not woke if you don't know history.
You're not woke unless and until you know history going right to the front lines of history and the
parking and a surprising and welcome bipartisan bill just passed but it may run into the same
problem in reverse by going to the Senate. Let me tell you what I'm getting at.
The House just now passed a bipartisan tax bill that had something in it for everybody.
It extended the child tax credits, strengthened them. That's very, very helpful, very,
very helpful to lower income people. It also had tax cuts for working families.
That ground on that is northern moderate Republicans, basically from New York, but throughout the north
that are very high local taxes, property, state income taxes compared to the South
like Florida has no state income tax and they have very low property taxes.
And so when the Congress got rid of the deduction for state and local taxes, it's called
salt, S-A-L-T, state and local taxes, the north rebelled and what they warmed into this
bill is some relief for working families. It also provides relief for small businesses especially
for research and development and letting people expense rather than stretch out the times
that they can take deductions. And I think it's a good bill. It's a welcome bill
that's supported by Joe Biden. It's supported by Hakim Jeffries. It's supported by Chuck Schumer.
You know that right now the Senate is putting together in May this week,
reveal the legislation for the border reforms, AD Ukraine,
aid to Israel, aid to Taiwan and so forth. That's been resisted in the House.
Well this isn't an anomaly. This one started in the House and it may be resisted in the Senate.
So let's take a good look at the breakdown on it. The vote was 357 to 70,
357 to 70. There were more Democratic votes once again than Republican votes.
Johnson pushed it through by suspension of the rules. You know that normally there's this
weird thing in the House that to me I think is as unnecessary as unanimous consent
and filibuster is in the Senate. It gives too much power to a handful of nuts,
especially right wing nuts, but even left wing nuts. I don't want nuts.
It shouldn't have power like that. Well what happens is there's a vote,
a rule vote to say, okay, you can put it to the floor.
And I vote for it even though I'm going to vote against it on the floor,
but just to support the leadership of my party.
What's happened now, and this hadn't happened in decades,
was you have extremists, especially the mega extremists,
the House Freedom Caucus refusing to vote for a rule vote.
And then it can't go to the floor.
Unless the speaker sends it there under suspension of the rules,
the problem is suspension of the rules requires two thirds to pass instead of simple majority.
That's what he did here. So he goes to Hakim Jeffries, Hakim Jeffries ponies up almost every Democratic vote,
and the clowns and the Republican party, this time the Johnson clowns get enough votes to get two thirds.
But it has the effect of having more Democratic votes than Republican votes on a bill
that everybody basically should be supporting.
Okay, so far so good. It passed. Now what? Has to go to the Senate.
No spending bill, no tax cut bill can go into law without passing both houses.
Goes to the Senate. Anything great.
We have an aging clown named Grassley, Chuck Grassley in Iowa.
He should have been put out to pass for a long time ago with a bucket of votes.
Gold watch, stick him out in the back 40. This guy is no good.
He's useless. He's, I mean, Strump Thurman was a hundred years old or late 90s anyway.
They had to walk him around. He didn't know where he was going.
Well, this guy is a few bricks short of a load.
So Grassley says out loud what Republicans are saying internally.
Know what he says? He goes, wait, wait a minute.
This bill is pretty good bill. It might help Biden.
It might help Biden. Folks that benefit from it might think Biden was the reason for it.
The Biden has to sign it has to pass the House and the Senate Biden has to sign it.
You guys have been going around voting against spending bills like infrastructure and chips.
In the minute you get a check for your district.
You blow it up and pose for holy pictures.
You pose next to somebody who's getting the check some business group, some business.
Say, look what I did.
You don't disclose that you voted against it.
This is one that's very upfront.
Biden's been pushing this all along. Chuck Schumer has how Kim Jeffrey has.
In the past. Well, go ahead.
You can boast for it too. A lot of Republicans are voting for it.
But the clown Grassley goes, wait a minute.
This might help Biden on his feet.
So the problem in the Senate is it certainly has 51 votes,
even mansion and cinema vote for it, but it needs nine more to be to filibuster.
And if a clown like Tuberville did with promoting four stars, three stars and two stars.
And actually he was doing it down to captains and colonels.
Then there's a problem.
Now, usually what the Republicans will get together and they have their own mini-Hastort rule.
They don't call it that.
They have 49 votes.
And they go, if it has the support of 25 senators,
a majority of them, even if the 24 against it will break their arms,
will browbeat them blah, blah, blah.
And will bust a filibuster of necessary.
Well, right now, Grassley's causing trouble.
If any of you out there from Iowa, your friends in Iowa, it's time to get rid of him.
Time to say retire. You've been in there a long time.
And early on, I think you weren't that bad, but you got very, very.
You've damaged the state. You've damaged the country.
And that's what you're doing right now.
So what do you do?
What's going to happen? Well, we'll see.
But one thing does occur to me.
And this is going to come up later in some things we're going to discuss today.
One thing does occur to me.
If you can do this for this bill,
then the Speaker should put on the floor under suspension of rules.
Suspension of rules.
The Ukraine aid bill, the Israel aid bill.
The bill on the border.
And say, OK, it takes two thirds.
Now, that's a pretty, pretty significant commitment.
You have simple majority.
They're 435 House members.
They never are all there at the same time.
Santos got thrown out.
Guy from Ohio left because he became the president of a small college in Ohio.
Scalese, I think, is having medical problems with surgeries.
So you're always going to have a couple of people not there.
But in other words, if it requires just a simple majority,
it could be something like, you know, 215 to 214,
that kind of thing or 220 to 219.
With two thirds, it requires about 270 or 80 votes.
And if you get 357 for this thing, for Pete's sake,
that's the significant commitment.
If it doesn't get two thirds, well, maybe, you know,
maybe on some of these controversial things,
a one vote majority shouldn't do it.
I personally think it should, but you can take that out of the position.
But if it gets two thirds, you've met congressmen.
They're all scared to death.
They're like sheep.
The minute they get the smell of a wolf or something coming after them,
they run.
They operate only on fear, only on fear.
And if two thirds of them are willing to bite the bullet,
that's a significant deal.
So I see no reason, absolutely no reason why this shouldn't be done
with other controversial bills and have that clown Mike Johnson go,
well, okay, yeah, I'm going to vote against it.
I think it's terrible.
But, you know, if it gets two thirds, it gets two thirds.
So see what happens.
You know, and speaking of that, speaking of that,
and this is about dysfunction in the Republican party,
this is some great piece of news that just came in.
Kevin McCarthy is now waging a vengeance campaign,
vengeance campaign against the eight Republicans who voted
to throw them out of the speakerships.
Speakership, you remember that?
One individual, Matt Gates,
whom then McCarthy attacked and said that he belonged in jail in prison.
He said that.
He belongs in prison.
He said it publicly.
Another guy named Birchard, a piece of work from Tennessee.
McCarthy walks down the hallway.
Birchard's given a press conference.
McCarthy punched us in the kidneys.
I mean, I don't know why I laugh at these things.
I mean, there's so much bad news with Trump and the Republicans.
You got to enjoy it a little bit.
Well, McCarthy is a vengeful sort.
I didn't realize eventually was.
I thought he was sort of cast for milk toast, a weirdo,
very weak, easily tricked and all that.
And all of that may be true.
But even the warm terms, even the warm terms,
in this case, the warm is turning.
He and his allies and major donors are plotting.
And they've identified among the eight traitors to him anyway,
traitors to him that he is going to primary as many as possible.
And two of them have very, very serious primary forms.
One of them is Nancy Mace, who's another piece of work.
She's the one that kept referring to Hunter Biden's testicles,
when he was subpoenaed.
I mean, she's, you know, she has a weird thing about her,
like Margie Taylor Green, about that kind of thing.
Margie Taylor Green posted naked pictures of Hunter Biden
referred to his janitor, so does Nancy Mace.
She's got to get out of there.
Anyway, there's a strong candidate against Nancy Mace
and McCarthy's donors are supporting her.
But the other one, I mean, there are a couple of others.
But one of them is this guy, good, Bob Good.
He's actually Bob Bad, but his name is good and out of Virginia.
And he's a guy that was nominated by a convention,
not by voters.
And he's very, very weird and strange.
I don't think voters will cut into the guy.
And they have, because these donors have ginned up primary candidate against him.
And there's a third guy that apparently they're having more difficulty and so on.
But when you have this kind of internal dissension and vengeance within the Republican party,
how can you expect anybody to govern this Congress?
And that is the real concern.
Okay, coming up, coming up, we are going to have some trouble on the horizon
for the Republicans and the Mallorca's impeachment coming up.
For a long time.
Soon I'll leave, I've got to cut you down.
Soon I'll leave, I've got to cut you down.
Go tell that long-time liar.
Go and tell that midnight writer.
Tell the rambler, the gambler, the back batter.
Tell him that God's gonna cut you down.
Tell him that God's gonna cut you down.
Was like you were born to press.
It ever listen to what I said.
Welcome, excellent director.
Lines are open 844-967-2789.
The Mallorca's impeachment.
Clearly a stunt.
Clearly a stunt.
Done for several reasons.
One, Donald Trump ordered it.
Number two, Donald Trump's been impeached twice.
When it went to the Senate for the conviction phase,
the first time Mitt Romney ordered it to convict him.
He was the only Republican.
So that means the first time it got something like 52%,
10% of the vote, 52 senators.
The second time, and that was the impeachment over Ukraine.
The second time when the impeachment was for the insurrection,
the rate Republicans.
So that means that 58% or 9% of the Senate voted for it.
You know, when you're a president,
and the majority of the House says you're no good.
You're no good, Nick, out you go.
You've committed a high crime of misdemeanor.
In this case, treason.
That's about, that's a high felony.
Actually, there's a felony with the death penalty.
And it still is on the books.
And we have given the death penalty out in the past.
Recently, in the early 50s, a very sad case for a couple
that betrayed the United States and gave nuclear weapons secrets
to the Ruskies.
But I mean, that routinely happened in the Civil War,
and it routinely happened in the Second World War.
And then afterwards, we took the liberty of hanging
a number of Nazis and imperial Japanese staff, too.
Not advocating it.
I like to think we've gotten a little more humane.
But the point is impeachment and conviction are a big deal.
Trump was impeached twice.
And he escaped convention by the hair of his Chinese and Chinese,
what he did.
Very partisan.
In any event, they decided to go after him for a couple of reasons.
Look at Mallorca, I'm talking about one.
Trump wanted it, too.
They wanted to say, well, one of your guys is impeached, too.
That's called the Sojournal Man Defense.
They say something about you.
You go, Sojournal Man.
That's very common.
That's a very old kind of return and so.
Nobody falls for it.
Well, in this case, with Mallorcas,
they had the other thing about the border.
How do you accentuate the border?
Because it is what it is.
They won't pass on legislation.
They want to avoid the responsibility of ducking their obligations.
So they go, well, why don't we impeach somebody?
And that guy with the, you know, frankly, very, very kind of
border.
What are we eyes?
I mean, I like the guy, but anyway, Mallorcas.
We're going to have Mallorcas.
It's not going to do any good.
He has to get convicted in the Senate.
You think they're going to be at 67 votes?
They ain't getting 51.
That was Schumer in charge.
They ain't getting 51.
And then you have, so they're doing it for a show.
It's fake.
Okay.
Well, it turns out Johnson may have miscalculated.
The greatest congressional leaders in history.
In the House, Sam Rayburn, for instance, O'Neill and in the Senate.
You never put something to a vote unless you are certain it will pass the way you want it to.
In other words, you count the votes.
In this particular case, they can lose two votes.
Because Santos has gone.
The guy in Ohio has gone.
Somebody else is sick.
This one, that one, they can lose two votes.
The guy named Buck, Mr. Buck from Colorado just announced today.
He's a hard no.
I'm not voting for it.
It's ridiculous.
Not a high crime or misdemeanor.
That marvelous, Mr. Buck.
There are three others who don't like it and have spoken out against it.
If one of them opposes it along with Buck,
but the rest go along with it, it'll pass.
But if two of the remaining three vote against it,
it will fail.
And Johnson will have some egg on his face.
And let me tell you something.
If he was going to do this, he should have gone.
He knows who the holdouts are.
These are people.
One guy, McClendoc out of California spoke against it back in November when they were floating in it.
So you go to McClendoc and Buck.
Can I count on you?
If they don't privately, all these people are sneaky as heck.
So they say a lot of things publicly,
but then they say unless there's new evidence, blah, blah.
If they privately give him the go ahead.
And he believes them because half of them are unbelievable.
But he believes them fine.
But if he truly went into this with four people,
he's not certain of and two of them, two of them look like they may vote against it.
Then he is no margin of error.
Every Democrat will vote against it.
And a lot of the right wing nuts in the Republican Party,
of course, will vote for it.
But with Buck out there, he can lose one more vote.
He can lose one more vote.
And I don't know how it's going to come out.
Regardless of how it comes out,
there's increasing polling evidence.
This says that people absolutely blow them this off.
People think that impeachment is nothing more
than a new political motion to censure or a political speech.
Unless, of course, there's a conviction.
But in the present Senate,
getting 67 senators to agree that the Sun rises in the east and sets in the west is impossible.
To get 67 senators to agree that a Democratic cabinet official
should be impeached is impossible.
To get 67 senators to say that a Republican president
who's essentially a felon,
a felon on the hoof,
is impossible.
Okay, we're going quick to the lines.
Chad of Greenfield.
Thanks for calling Chad.
What's in your mind today?
Hey, how's it going, Matt?
Thanks for checking my call.
I wasn't able to call in yesterday.
It's the quick audible.
I want to talk about this E. Jean Carroll.
First of all, she produces this dress
that she thought her president Trump raped her in.
The dress never existed that year.
She doesn't remember the year it happened.
She does it over 40 years from now.
Then she goes on Rachel Maddell screaming
and praying, going nuts,
I'm going to buy you this.
I'm going to buy you this.
She's all happy.
Have you ever seen a rape victim that happy and celebratory?
I mean, she is as much of a fraud as Smolat,
as much as that Duke woman,
as much as the Trevor Bauer accuser.
Driven Trump's never been convicted of anything.
I could say, come on here.
How's my growing?
I want 50 million.
I mean, how come Rachel Maddell doesn't have
how to read on or why I need a broadric on?
I mean, this is all it's okay.
Well, let me, I want to be able to respond to you
before we, before this goes.
I appreciate your call.
You're a principal conservative.
You know, you're very frank in your speech
and I welcome the cause.
First of all, the jury saw the following.
The excess Hollywood tapes.
He said he grabbed women between the legs.
He used a crude name for it.
They're genitals.
And he said they let you do it.
Number one.
Number two, she is not the only one
who has said this about him.
Number three, he denied he had an affair with
story Daniels, too.
Who are you going to believe?
The fake blonde with the large breasts or stormy Daniels?
Okay.
Number four, this guy is a walking predator.
Is what he is.
Now, he may have pulled in his horns recently.
I don't know.
But way back when you can't say that a guy,
the jury saw the excess Hollywood video.
They saw it as evidence.
You can't possibly say, okay, this guy did it to all of them.
And he didn't do it to her.
And there was a dress.
And what you may be mixing up here is that they wanted
a DNA sample, a DNA sample from Trump.
And Trump wouldn't give it.
And the judge didn't order it.
So the dress was irrelevant.
If he'd given it the DNA sample, that would be a different story.
But they didn't need it anyway.
Feel free to call.
We have differences of opinions coming up.
And I see when the lines don't hang up.
Next one, I will get to you right away.
Some polling results came in that will put a smile on Joe Biden's face coming up.
Welcome back to Matt Flynn Director.
Matt Flynn's the open 844-967278.
Now we're going right to the lines.
Jerry of Wisconsin, my friend.
Thanks for going to Jerry.
What's in your mind today?
Yeah.
Matt, I've got some thoughts on why Trump doesn't want the border bill with H.E.
Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.
Taiwan, for many reasons.
One is to keep the border in crisis,
to pollute Joe Biden and the presidential campaign.
Possibly so Trump can get money from China for not eating Taiwan.
It doesn't want to eat for Ukraine.
So he can punish Vladimir Kaczynski for not opening an investigation of Joe Biden.
I got a couple more here.
Help to help Putin and war against Ukraine by not giving Ukraine aid.
Possibly have money going to Trump from Russia for stopping aid to Ukraine.
Have Putin not released a P.P. capes and any other information Putin might have on Trump.
And lastly, have Russia interfering presidential election to get Trump elected so Trump can then pardon himself to avoid prosecution or delay prosecution until the term ends.
Yeah, I think you hit the trifecta, Jerry.
Not only don't I agree with a disagree with anything you said, I think you you boiled it down very effectively.
First of all, when it comes to the border, he absolutely wants to keep it alive to have something to talk about.
And Grassley on the tax thing really revealed that kind of strategy that goes even beyond the border.
Grassley may not vote for the tax bill because he said it's a good bill.
And if they give credit to Biden, Trump might not win.
That's what Grassley said.
And then Trump himself and even Mike Johnson has said it.
Now he won't say it on the record is that if we pass this bill, Biden will crack down on the border.
And then what's going to happen is that people say, oh, this is good for Biden.
He's cracking down on the border.
So you nailed that one number two on China.
I think you're exactly right in the proof behind what you said is that he has 500 and I don't know.
Well over 500 companies that he has separately incorporated.
And what they do is they each have revenue streams that come to them and it's very, very hard to entangle it.
Under Nancy Pelosi, when she was speaker, they started to investigate four of them.
That's as far as they got.
And Kevin McCarthy took over after the Republicans won the midterm and he shut it down.
But of the four, one of them, a Chinese bank gave Trump $5.7 million.
So we go, well, okay, what was that for?
And for you know what Trump said, he said services.
That's all that's the only description services.
What do you mean services?
What kind of services?
Not saying.
And it was a bank that was avoiding sanctions that the U.S. had imposed on North Korea.
So if a president should sanction that bank deliberately and personally and directly.
Providing the sanctions and Trump did not do that.
There's no doubt in my mind he's taking Chinese money.
I know he took 5.7 million.
Now to me, that's the big number to him.
Maybe that's not a big number.
But there's another 500 companies, 500 some odd that they haven't even be able to investigate.
And that's number two.
Number three on Russia, you absolutely nailed it.
His son, Eric Trump, the one that's a few, you know, brick short of a load himself told the journalist of golf magazine.
And they were talking about the golf courses.
And the guy goes, well, how did you fund all these courses?
He said, oh, we get money from Russia.
Russian investors because, you know, the banks won't lend to us because we went bankrupt six times in our casinos.
Now, if he had said, you know, with American investors, French investors, British and whatever.
The Russian investors are oligarchs.
They're oligarchs.
That's who it is.
And the money comes in.
And he owes them.
He owes them.
But with Putin, you're right.
The copper file video.
He has some unusual taste.
That's his business.
I don't care as long as it's with concerning adults.
But when you're a guy, a major businessman in Russia, the KGB, now it's called the FSB.
The same thing.
Have people trail you in any hotel room you're in, has many cameras all over the place.
They have them in the vases on the tables and the toilet and the sinks and the ceiling.
There's nothing you do in there that they can't see.
And they do it for every NATO country, the major in NATO countries.
And the CIA disclosed this.
And every major businessman.
So, you know, Bill Gates went over there.
They do it to him too.
Hoping to get black meal material.
And Trump is a very reckless guy.
And apparently what he did was he had some people he thought were prostitutes in there, which were, in fact, KGB agents.
And he, his proclivities are whatever they are.
And he can't possibly have that revealed.
And Putin knows it.
And why do you think that he had, for instance, only Russians in the White House one time.
And none of his cabinet, none of his secured NSA staff, none of the CIA.
He had the, he had the, their, their foreign minister, their so-called Secretary of State and others in the White House.
Another time he got together with Putin and he didn't have his own interpreter.
Putin had the only interpreter.
Trump relied on that interpreter.
I assume the interpreter correctly said to him what Putin said and vice versa.
But the idea was nobody could interrogate an American interpreter, interpreter, about what happened.
He was in Helsinki.
And he sits there and they ask him right next to Putin.
The CIA and the FBI say that Putin interfered with the election,
packed in the Hillary's emails and sort of that.
And he looks at Putin and he goes, well, I don't know why Putin would do that.
You know, he says he didn't do it.
He believed Putin.
Right in front of international press.
People forget these things.
He also took classified documents to Marlago and stuck them in a bathroom, an unsecured bathroom,
an unsecured supply shed.
And an addressing room for brides over a ballroom just left them there.
Do you really think that Russia, China and Iran and the rest of them didn't have employees posing as bus boys or waiters
or people who went in there as guests at something or other, one of the fundraisers for them?
They already found a Russian spy that he had dinner with along with other people.
And that was broken by a Pennsylvania small newspaper.
He told a donor showed him a plans for attacking Iran if necessary.
Talked to an Australian bit into both.
He boasts.
He's like a kid.
He's like a kid in middle school.
Look what I got.
Tells an Australian billionaire how close our submarines can get to Chinese submarines
without being detected.
Because you know, sonar is fairly well developed.
We've apparently developed an anti-sonar device.
You can let us get real close to go right up to him and blow him out of the water.
The Chinese now know that.
This guy told 40 people and it was published in the newspaper.
When Trump left the office, January 20th, the afternoon, he was no longer president.
He flew out in the morning on Air Force One.
Took those documents.
For the next year, we had a statistically improbably high number of undercover agents.
Arrested and executed in Russia and China.
Article of New York Times CIA sent to all of its stations and memo saying,
be much more careful about safeguarding information.
Sad thing is the foreign president of the United States is a source of the information.
These are things that are of the utmost importance for foreign national security.
And so when you say that he is for Russia, that's the reason he's for Russia.
He's desperately afraid.
And the final thing you said or implied is this whole reason for running for president
is to stay out of prison.
He knows that if he is the president, he can get his secretary or his attorney general
to dismiss the Tonya Chutkin case.
And the Eileen Mercedes can in case in Florida.
He can't get them to dismiss the Georgia case, but they're trying to go after him
and peach Fanny Willis now.
And the Alvin Bragg thing in New York is what it is.
So no, you nailed it all.
Here's some good news.
Up until now, most of the polls have been very, very close to the gun.
Well, you know, Trump will win this state, Biden will win that state,
or you know, Trump's a few points ahead.
Two polls just came out.
Two polls just came out.
The Quinnipiac poll, which was really one of the best regarded national polls,
shows Biden over Trump by six points.
The Quinnipiac poll says that Biden will actually get two more electoral votes
than he did last time, and he just swamped them on electoral votes.
The Quinnipiac poll, interestingly in South Carolina,
in the primary that's coming up February, I think, 24th in about three weeks,
three weeks from Tuesday, that shows Trump over Nikki Haley by 26 points.
And frankly, I think it's very hard to make up 26 points in three weeks
when you have a lot of dissentist people going with Trump.
So we'll see what happens in February, 24th.
But the moody poll, there's a moody poll, moody analytics,
a national services company, raiding company, and they have analytics,
and they have a polling company.
Biden beats Trump, and this is the one by getting to, he also,
they also have a couple more electoral votes,
but some very interesting state analyses of this.
It has Biden beating Trump in Wisconsin, Michigan, in Pennsylvania.
It has Biden beating Trump this time in North Carolina, which he lost last time,
but losing to Trump in Arizona, which he won last time,
but that's sort of a horse of peace.
And I looked at the map, and the map is very, very solid.
The Northwest, you know, Washington, Oregon, California, and all that.
All Trump, New England, all Trump, the middle Atlantic state,
so I mean, Biden, I should say, New England, all Biden, middle Atlantic,
all Biden, and a very comfortable margin in the, in the electoral votes.
The one fly in the ointment, the one fly in the ointment,
and I'll throw it out right now, is the third party candidates,
and especially, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
And here's the thing to keep in mind, when you are talking to Republicans,
you're talking to independence, or you're talking to the Democrats
that are getting restive, whatever, remember one thing.
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has raised $50 million to a number.
Half of it came from two Trump donors.
Half of it.
Guy named Melon, M-E-L-L-L-O-N, or M-E-L-L-E, and whatever it was,
you know, the Melon Bank, you know, it's an old, very wealthy family.
Guy gives him something like 25, 28 million bucks,
another guy, another Republican donor, who also give to Trump.
RFK, Jr. is basically a Trump plant,
and remember something else.
I'm a huge Kennedy guy.
I was Teddy Kennedy's Milwaukee County chairman in his primary in 1980.
I thought the world of Bobby Sr., I thought the world of JFK
I met several of the sisters, and when I was a big party chairman,
and Bobby Kennedy Jr.'s bust is on the credence,
the right behind Joe Biden's desk, Bobby Kennedy Sr.,
and so you see him in a lot of press conferences.
But RFK Jr. is a peculiar guy.
Not only is he an anti-vaxer and has nothing to talk about,
but when Surhan Surhan, the murderer of his father,
came up for parole this last time in California.
Remember, if Kennedy Jr. supported parole for his father's assassin?
And that I can't forgive.
I mean, he's a crazy nut.
He's an anti-vaxer, and he's a Trumper, basically,
is what he's supporting Trump,
and he's doing this to help Trump.
But when you support the assassin of your father,
that's something out of Sophocles or Euripides or Escalus.
That's something out of Greek tragedy.
That's something out of Shakespeare,
walking with a bloody knife out of the bedroom, out out damn spot.
That is a tragedy and a betrayal of historic proportions.
The worst thing was the guy just the other day
who beheaded his own father in Pennsylvania, the nut.
You saw that.
But when you go to bat for your father's assassin,
and say he should be released on parole,
that is unforgivable,
and that is something we should all keep in mind.
Going back in a second, and I'll tell you what,
very funny anecdote about the prayer breakfast.
There was one today, Joe Biden gave a great talk,
but some very funny history about that coming up.
It's way too early for the condo.
It's okay for rockin' at piano.
That boy, I'll go with it.
I can't go with music.
Any old time you use it,
it's got a black beat you can't lose it.
Any old time you use it.
All I got is rockin' for music.
If you wanna dance with me.
If you wanna dance with me.
breakfast
Welcome back to Math
in Washington,
a lot of the Congressmen,
Eisenhower,
every president has spoken at a prayer breakfast,
which I think is terrific.
Joe Biden gave a terrific talk today.
I saw it, saw it live.
Joe Biden called for unity,
called for unity in America, peace,
it's a terrific, terrific.
And then they gave a little bit of history
that just blew me away.
I thought, I mean, in a sense,
it's funny if it weren't so sad.
In a sense, it was funny if it wasn't so sad.
Every president
since Dwight Eisenhower
to Biden except one
has prayed for unity and peace.
Everybody,
everybody, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson,
Nixon,
Carter, Ford,
Reagan, both Bushes,
Clinton,
Obama,
everybody,
Biden,
except for,
except for Donald Trump.
What about Donald Trump?
He spoke to prayer breakfast, I think.
You know what he prayed for in one of them?
He said he prayed for higher ratings for the apprentice.
That's what he prayed for.
And you know what?
He prayed for or at least said
there's the whole focus of it
in the other one.
He attacked Mitt Romney
and Nancy Pelosi.
Now, how bad is that?
I mean, it's a no-brainer.
If everybody from Eisenhower
till now
appears at some prayer breakfast
and prays for peace and unity
and fellowship among mankind,
how bad is it
if one guy that doesn't do it
prays for higher ratings for the apprentice
and bad things to befall?
Mitt Romney and Nancy Pelosi?
Give me a break.
I mean, this is a sad, sad pathology.
Go to the lines.
Tim Mobile, Claire, my friend.
Thanks for going to Tim.
What's in your mind today?
Yeah, see,
you didn't hear it.
Hearing on the news lately,
I said like,
Marjorie Taylor Green
and Ted Cruz
and these are talking about,
we said a national divorce
and we're talking about succeeding.
Isn't there something
in the Constitution
that said they could be prosecuted for that?
That's inciting something like that, isn't it?
Yeah, that's a very interesting question.
Let me build on it
because I think what you're getting at
is insurrection
and treason
are both felonies
and both of them
are punishable by capital punishment,
not that anybody's going to impose it nowadays.
The question is,
is that disaying it
without doing anything to effectuate it?
In other words,
for treason,
you have to have two over acts, they call it.
So you have to actually do something
and probably two things.
Just saying it as disgusting as it is,
as treacherous as it is,
would not give rise
to a criminal prosecution
and then on secession,
and this is a very interesting thing you brought up.
There's nothing in the Constitution
but there is something
in a Supreme Court opinion
and here's the law.
The Constitution,
and then when George Washington took office in 1788,
contemplated slavery.
There were slave states.
There were references to three-fifths of a person.
There were
the whole electoral college.
The slave states were very afraid
that the mercantile states,
like Massachusetts and Connecticut
and the rest of them,
would outstrip them in power.
And of course they did.
So they wanted to keep some political power
and they managed to
right up to the modern era,
but then starting in the 1960s and 70s
it fell apart.
So how did Abraham Lincoln
react that the Constitution
was silent about secession
but it basically
was a slavery conscious document.
You know, Abraham Lincoln
was such an amazing guy
in so many ways.
His guts,
he was self-educated.
He would sit around the fire.
He'd work all day and then sit around a fire.
There was no electricity.
And he'd read books.
He was totally self-educated.
And a lot of character.
And he said,
well, there's a Constitution
but there's also the Declaration of Independence.
And the Declaration of Independence
said that man
is entitled, and of course women
entitled to life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness.
Liberty means no slavery.
And then the Constitutional big wigs go,
yeah, but that's not in the Constitution.
The Constitution contemplated slavery.
And so liberty must have only
meant for white people.
And Lincoln said,
doesn't say only for white people.
So I'm taking the position
that it applies to everybody.
And the big wigs,
constitutional big wigs go,
yeah, but so what are you going to do?
What authority do you have for that?
And basically what he said is
union army.
That's the authority.
And the fort sumpter was fired on.
He responded,
instituted draft, instituted income tax
by the way to pay for it.
Everybody thinks the income tax is only 100 years old.
Actually, he increased taxes.
And then what he did is
there was four bloody years,
61, 2, 3, 4,
actually in the April of 65,
we lost something like 600,000 people
the bloodiest war in our nation's history.
There's no real medicine,
not modern medicine.
And the weapons were primitive.
A lot of it was bayonets
going after each other on horseback.
And Abe Lincoln took care of business.
Abe Lincoln took care of business.
So what you're saying is this.
You're absolutely right
that secession is illegal.
But that's because
after the Civil War,
some of the southerners thought,
well, we'll just bring a Supreme Court action
to say that, you know,
it's legal and because of the Constitution.
And the Supreme Court unanimously,
of course it was,
it was largely a Republican abolition of Supreme Court,
said no secession is,
is contrary to the Constitution.
So yeah, you were right.
They can't do it.
Cruz is doing it.
Texas is doing it.
Marjorie Taylor Green is doing it.
They're all shooting their mouth off.
We can't nail them for felony.
Because they haven't yet done anything on it.
But you're exactly right.
Okay, coming up.
Some news, some weather.
I see one of the lines.
Do not hang up.
I'm going to get to you very, very shortly.
But you're going to have some news.
You're going to have some weather.
And then you're going to have some dysfunction
in the Congress.
The team just talked about
is going to be the focus of it.
Coming up.
Not just Kevin Stone.
Not just Kevin Stone.
Not just Kevin Stone.
No, I'm going.
Not just Kevin Stone.
Not just Kevin Stone.
