Trump's Power & the Rule of Law: Steve Bannon (interview) | FRONTLINE

One place we're thinking of of starting the film is the moment when President Trump goes to the Justice Department to speak >> in the great hall. >> I'm going today. >> Tell me about about what was going on on that day. What was he what was he doing? What did what did you see? What was the the point? Well, that's one of the keys to the to the unitary um theory of the Executive and that in the office of the president uh executive power of being the chief executive officer of the United States government, being

the commander-in-chief of the uh military, the uniformed armed services and everything to do with national security in the military. And third, which has really um been lost since the Watergate is he's the chief magistrate and the chief law Enforcement officer of the United States and the attorney general reports directly to him. The FBI director reports to him. uh and this not this kind of um it was hived off for 40 or 50 years because of quite frankly the judicial insurrection that took place that removed Nixon from office. Nixon when you look at Watergate you think

of Woodward Bernstein that's all kind of nonsense. It was a judicial uh Insurrection the very a guy named Jeff Shepard who was there really has taken a couple of books and documented this quite well. Afterwards, they tried to the the radical left essentially um separated the attorney general, that entire system from uh particularly from Republican presidents and president Trump. I think that was a historic day, a very meaningful day to basically assert that the chief executive, the officer of the president is the chief Magistrate and the chief law enforcement officer in the country. >> That's

sort of the that's sort of the theory of what he was doing. Was it also personal for him because he talked about the that justice department being weaponized against him? He's talked about lawfare. >> Of course. Look at look at it. He was said 92 indictments. Jack Smith the indictments around Jack Smith I think were 300 years in prison. They wanted to Put Trump in prison. Remember they wanted Trump to die in prison. They want Trump still to die in prison. This game's not this fight and battle is far from over. Um, if Hake a

Keem Jeff raises $2 billion and this all comes down to a handful of seats in California and New York in 2026 and if somehow we don't hold on the seats, this very thin majority, the first action Hakee Jeff will take will be to move to impeach Donald Trump. And uh and if somehow the Election's stolen in 2028 like they stole it in 2020, uh the first thing they're going to do is it's all going to go back again to try to indict Trump and to try to indict people around Trump and put Trump in prison.

I say this all the time. It's quite evident this is a long war. It took us many, many decades to get here. It's going to take us many, many decades to get out. and and the Trump uh particularly the phony Republicans that kind of say they're With President Trump uh etc are not in for this long fight. This is a long tough fight. The left understands it's a long tough fight. You see the way they organize around it and how they embed into these institutions this entire process we're going through now is to purge these

institutions of this. And it's a it's a long tough fight and it's far from over and it's going to last to actually get it done will take decades. And he when he's there, one of the Things when we talk to Justice Department lawyers or or former Justice Department lawyers that are sort of shocked by is that he's at the Department of Justice, he's naming individual people like Norm Eisen is one of them who he absolutely calls. >> But that's just right there. See, even in your question, they're shock you just said it. They're shocked that

he's there. Now, think about that and they are shocked. But you just in just that Question, you you've answered for the American people exactly what the problem is. the president of the United States, the chief executive, the office of the president, okay, who is the chief executive officer, the commander-in-chief, and the and the chief magistrate and chief law enforcement officer. They are shocked that he's in the sacred temple of the Justice Department. them, right? This is this is what democracy is about. These are anti-democratic forces. They have to be broken. They are shocked because the

president of the United States and worst of all, Donald Trump actually soiled their temple by going in there. I happen to think President Trump should go there every week and and give a talk about lawfare. This country, what they did is so radical in turning the apparatus of the government against its people. It was almost like East Germany was the we used to on the show in the Years 21 and 22 tell people um a film they should watch is the lives of other others this this amazing film about the Stacey in East Germany. It's

it's it's it's in German and the war room Posi who are bluecollar lower middle class audience took to this film and loved it and could see exactly what was going on in turning citizen a government turning citizens against each other. So, no, you you're exactly right. They were shocked and They're going to be more shocked u because we are going to tear apart what they have done in the justice system. And this is one of the big reasons of going after the law firms. We're going after the actual mechanics, right? The structure. This why what

President Trump is doing, the team around him is so fundamental to basically get back to being a constitutional republic. So, so the reaction though that that he's doing what he's accused the other side of Doing that he's weaponizing it that he's >> he's not hanging on he's exactly the opposite. He's not weaponizing it. He's doing the exact opposite. He's actually opening it up and making sure and guaranteeing we don't weaponize it. You haven't seen any weaponization uh of this justice department. You haven't seen a huge which hey I think there should have been named massive

investigations already. I think the house should have named massive Investigations. I think we should and panel grand juries uh to the criminals that we've driven out of here. Um, you know, I'm a maximalist. President Trump, I think, is being very even-handed on this. He's not going he's going to go out of his way not to weaponize it. I think you actually have to purge out uh the criminals that were there. I think you should panel grand juries now and be going hard. I don't think we're going nearly hard enough. And I think President, the left

and the people that hate Trump should understand one thing in our movement. President Trump is is a moderate. He's somebody that balances every part of the equation and thinking through what action should be taken and uh and he makes I think decisions that are like Solomon, right? Very even-handed if you see what he's doing compared to elements around President Trump. And I consider I'm proud to say I'm to the right of President Trump on this and always to the maximalist of what we should do. We have to. the system was so out of control and

so uh so dangerous to the American system. It has to American people. It has to be purged so it never happens again. >> Let's go to the first day in office signing the executive order starting at the Capital One Arena going on to the to the White House. Um he signed a lot of executive orders the the first time when You were with him. Was this different the beginning of this term the types of executive action? >> It's no comparison, but here's here's why. in the first the first time we came from behind at the

last minute and closed and won um you know a come from behind victory probably the greatest come from behind victory ever uh we had no time to do a transition it was a very tin small team uh and Chris Christie the the transition team the the books and The announcement was a total joke just had to throw it at you had to start over again also he didn't have a deep bench there hadn't been you know there are a lot of Republicans but when you take over take over the government everybody whether it's President Obama

Obama or President Trump, you essentially have uh about four or 5,000 uh executives you put in. 3 to 4,000 you can put in right away. Another thousand have to be Senate confirmed. So you can hit the deck Plates running with 3,000. We never had more than a thousand because you just didn't have a deep bench of training. The second time, and this is why the big steel stealing the 2020 election was providential. Um, we were able to the two things we started right away was the political effort, the precinct strategy to actually get some traction

to build the MAGA movement particularly with low information and low propensity voters so that President Trump could have a Political wave to come back on and and not just win the primary but win the presidency. The second part and this is what was so powerful. Public intellectuals who here before had been at places like Heritage and these other places uh bought into uh this the the idea that if we were coming back we had to actually have a policy prescription. And so there you had in the years 21 you had uh coming up uh things

like the America First policy institute you know under Brooks Rollins you had Stephen Miller's America first law institute you had Russ votes uh center for renewing America you had the heritage organization start to look at an umbrella maybe this thing called project 2025 which everything would come together it was twofold number one to build cadres to actually build networks of people working together that were subject matter are experts so that we could hit the deck Plates running on inauguration day was close to 3,000 people as you can get and I think we were the fastest

Sergio Gore kind of heading up that operation became very involved in it. I think we hit um two 1,000 2,000 and now close to 3,000 in record time because we had had years of going through and working with people on the policy side. You had all of this come together. It actually got published in a book um you know mandate a mandate I think mandate for leadership but it Was a many many different elements of of coming together. One of the central aspects of that was the thesis of deconstruction administrative state and in deconstructing the

administrative state first off you have to anchor that into a who's in charge right and that's why you get to this unitary executive theory of which it all comes together in the office of the president. And so this time I I think I did your show years ago where I said, "Hey, we're gonna flood The zone and you know, we're and I sat there and go, we're gonna do two or three things a day." If you go back in time, that was a huge deal. It was a huge effort for us. And if you look

at some of our executive orders, except for the travel ban, some of the executive orders uh were a little shambalic, right? Because you just didn't have the time. Here you've had years in major public intellectuals. And the hidden story here is how many public Intellectuals we had that bought in to the fact that Trump was actually coming back politically. There was a buyin by 22, right? By 22, early 22 I think when project 2025 came together. But all these other elements had taken that first year along with Mark Meadows uh group CPI. So four or

five of these came together in that year 21 and bought into 22 that we were actually going to win and come back. That is historic because these people I think realized by Throwing in with kind of the MAGA movement and President Trump they were going to be excluded from the Ronda Santises or Nikki Haley more the traditional Republican party that efforts led to what this is. This is why on the very first day, you know, they had a meeting with President Trump in Mara Lago around New Year's and I think Susie and the team walked

through and Steven Miller walked through kind of a program of, "Hey, we're going to do This." And Trump goes, "No, I want to sign a hundred on day one, right? I want to hit it and just overwhelm the system with action, action, action." And um it came close to that. They were a little more spread out, but that's what we call it days of thunder. And we monitor this every day in the war room. I mean at its height there were 10 or 12 either executive actions, executive orders or other things he was doing pushing

legislation in the or being Commander-in-chief and taking certain actions as commander-in-chief. There were a dozen a day. It it overwhelmed the system. I tell say all the time there are six to eight major stories or major things going on that even the mainstream media can't cover. the editors are too overwhelmed on assignments. And and to be blunt, they kind of bit because the mainstream media is kind of lazy. They always want to go either the court intrigue or to the Horse race. They bit right away on Elon Musk. And I kept saying this was like

in the confirmation hearings. A guy like a Mad Gates or or or Pete Hex serves a purpose and you draw all the fire. You can get you can get a Bobby Kennedy and a Tulsi Gabbert, you know, because the media has a tendency to want to focus on one big thing to tell the story. The Elon Musk part of it essentially gave tremendous cover for so many other actions that were taking place. So Elon Musk, whether you like him or hate him or think he's doing a good job, strategically he was perfect for what he

did as far as media narrative because it all centered on Elon Musk in the Doge effort where so much other stuff was going on. Was that effort was all of those executive orders, were they part of a of of an intentional attempt to test the limits of executive power to push forward what the what the president Could do? >> I think if you talk to President Trump, when he talks to President Trump, he's not looking at testing. He's flat on this is the way it is. This is the the unitary uh theory, right? It works.

The it's embedded in the office of the president. Give me the action. I'm going to take these actions. So, make sure that we do it in a proper way. Make sure we do it with executive orders that are cleared by Office of Legal Counsel. Make Sure we've gone through all the process. But it's action, action, action. And and if you look at every different element, remember for your viewers, of the 4, let's say 4,000, 3,000 non-confirm, a thousand Senate confirmed. Of the 4,000 roughly individuals, you get to staff a government, whether Obama, Bernie Sanders, or

President Trump. You're you're managing an apparatus that spends about six and a half to seven trillion dollars a year has assets I don't know Of they say 80 to hundred trillion dollars right uh and has people you have essentially 2.5 million civilian employees you know people call bureaucrats or civilian employees you have about two two and a half million let's say military or in the military but you also have contractors now they're 18 million contractors and they've done a lot of this so they can get out of the pension situ situation and healthcare, but they

have Contractors. About half of those contractors are the people that do the um you know clean the buildings, do all that that type of work. About half of them are actually do administrative work. Of that about half, let's say 5 million are actually kind of executives are at that level. So essentially, if you add it up, you have about 10 million people that individuals or billets that that run the government. And uh and this is what you in deconstructing Administrative state this is what you want to radically take down kind of programmatically and make sure

that the people the billets go with it in the case in the court case that we're involved in about the foreign with USA ID that two the controversial 2 billion remember the two billion the argument about the two billion it's paid to contractors right who did executive action or took actually took action they're not employees of the government They're not military it's that bucket of of uh contractors And so that is what the deconstruction administrative state right to basically take the bureaucracy but take it apart brick by brick is is all about and the focus

of it and many times it's with monies being paid to contractors and President Trump he I believe he doesn't when you talk to him he doesn't think of this as some theoretical exercise he says hey the office of the president is endowed with This power and I'm going to take executive action around it and hey if they just like he said on the travel ban if they want to take us to court let them take us to court, but we'll win in court. >> That's what I was wondering. I mean, does he know unitary executive

theory? Does he know these ideas that that lawyers around him have, or is this an instinct for for him? >> Well, for one, it's obviously an Instinct of of a an executive. Remember, Hamilton said in in in the federal, the key when they were debating the constitution, the key about the executive is that's where the energy is going to be. That's the driving motive force of the government. The framers of the Constitution wanted a strong executive and wanted an executive that drove the action. It had that urgency of the moment. That's President Trump. I mean,

he's all about action, all about Getting things done and, you know, all gas, no break. So, does he? Yes, he understands the theory of it, but President Trump's not going to sit there and spend a lot of time with constitutional lawyers debating the finer points of the Constitution. He sees the plan. It's the office of the president is endowed with these powers. Let's get on with it. And when get on with it, let's look at the verticals that what we want to do and make sure That we've got actions and executive actions that could do

that and executive orders that can do that and can be backed up. And then because people should understand this, just because a guy sits in the oval office and signs things, it doesn't mean it's happened. This is the thing about the administrative state and then its rogue element, the deep state. You have a massive bureaucracy that and they think whether the president's AOC or Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump. They're the permanent government and they're just going to wait out every anybody that that's there. They got their own way of doing things, right? And their own

processes. It's called the inter agency process, right? This it's this kind of um you know apparatus of interchangeable, you know, interchangeable um players, but an apparatus that's just going to weigh people out. You have to hit with motive Force anything to get it done in the bureaucracy and make sure it actually gets done so that on the deck plates of America where where the citizens actually live those actions actually go all the way through. That's what President Trump's focus on not some theoretical debate about this. But you think about players that have had this there

actually pretty well thought through. Mike Davis is a key player. Now why is Mike Davis a key player? We call Him the viceroy now but he was absolutely unknown when I got to know him. He's the guy that put Gorsuch. So, we had a list of judges initially in the spring of 2016 to try to show that President Trump was actually a conservative. Remember, they put the and I think Leonard Leo and the Federal Society put it together. Later, after I took on the campaign, we expanded that list. I think another I think we got

it up to like 22 or 23 People to show this is in the heat of battle as we're moving forward to say, "Hey, look, Trump is a conservative. He's the only time it's ever been done." these are who we're going to pick these judges from. And it looks like there could be a couple of judges because Hillary Clinton was not forcing the issue about Garland taking the Supreme Court role. They wanted somebody more progressive. And so this whole thing of the of the of the Merrick Garland billet Or slot became quite big. Mike Davis, who

had worked for Grassly, I didn't even know at the time, he fought to get this young judge that nobody really knew, a guy named Neil Gorsuch. Gorsuch is absolutely central to the entire thing because Gorsuch in the transition he kind of comes out of nowhere. I sat on the fiveman committee to select the uh next Supreme Court justice with Don Mcan and uh and Mark Petta, right, who people these are guys are very focused On this theory of the deconstruction of the administrative state. And Gorsuch was looked at as the young intellectual jurist about the

Chevron uh deference. And this is this policy or this court ruling that's gone on for 50 years that by law by by the interpretation of law you defer to the administrative state to kind of govern itself. He was he had this theory that you had to go back to the courts. You had to take away strip away the power of actually the Bureaucrats to govern themselves to manage themselves to basically set law for themselves. It was absolutely fundamental. Gorsuch then became the first selection and I will tell you it wasn't all that competitive. Gorsuch by

his intellect and his opinions and the focus then was not so much on social issues. Ro v. Wayer those things were considered kind of subtle law. It was the focus was going after the administrative state. That's the legal Aspect of what you see every day coming out of the oval office in this unitary executive theory. And like I said, President Trump is doesn't have time and and patience. I mean, he'll hear it. He understands it. Don't get me wrong. We've been working on this for years. But he's not sitting there looking for a debating society

of constitutional scholars. He's a man of action and said, "Hey, this is why he went after the ran for the presidency in the first place. This is why in his first term, he understood the block, you know, blocking. Just because you're president and sitting in the Oval Office and signing things and talking to the media doesn't mean that your actions are actually flowing through this apparatus and having impact on on people's lives of the American people." What did you learn from the first term? I mean, we know about his frustration when um Jeff Sessions recused

himself. We know Bill Barr um was not was not cooperative in his his attempts after the election. Um there were there were clashes with White House lawyers. What did he learn about lawyers from the first term that informs him uh the second term? I think he learned that uh if you see the Mike Davises of the world and the lawyers that are that are there today, right, and particularly people at the Justice Department and and look at One of the things that I think all of us learned cuz all of us used um you know

name brand law firms and white shoe law firms and you know we have the legal bills to shorten after President Trump left in January 2021. Your audience should understand that President Trump and the core team around him, we were deplatformed by big tech. We were debanked. All my banks I've been business with for 40 years. I was debanked for every bank. I had all My credit cards cut off as President Trump did. Debbanked, deplatformed. Um, all of our law firms fired us. My law fir one of the top the top two and three law firms

I used came to me and said, "Hey, we love you. we have no problem with you, but because you're associated with Trump, our corporate clients are saying if you if you're uh retained by Bannon, we're out. So, this is and this is one of the reasons I detest corporations. They're they're inherently The people in them are inherently evil, right? You saw this in the whole DEI in the woke, but what they did to people, they were they're they're a and this is this consolidation of power. This is why I'm such a neandiscian that this this

concentration of corporate power and governmental power combined can create oligarchs like you've seen on Wall Street in particular like you've seen in Silicon Valley. I think President Trump, the years 21 and 22, which are never Really looked at, are the central ground of really taking the experience from the first term, but really thinking through because people have to understand there was never any doubt with his inner team and himself that we were coming back and winning. That's what I think is lost on people. They sit here today and say, "Well, this stuff's so overwhelmed." You

know, Rachel Matt is now doing the show every night 100 days for the her first 100 days cuz she's got to be the anchor And they're like overwhelmed by his actions. This gets back to the fact he had a core group around him and drew in public intellectuals and he had working class people in the precinct strategy. that team 100% not just believed but knew that Trump was returning, Trump would win the primary, Trump would win the presidency, and that we had starting on January 20th of uh 2025 would have a mandate to make these

changes to basically get back get America back to being a constitutional republic. Those years of 21 and 22 when we were deep, we all our banks were gone, our credit cards were gone, no law firms. What Boris Epstein did, I think is underrated. He put together a team, kind of a pickup team of lawyers, right? Because none of the big law firms would would represent Trump. And so in the years 21 and 22, of which the tremendous uh legal pressure came on President Trump and that's where you saw the power Of these law firms, these

law firms combined with these private equity uh institutions are are too powerful. They they've actually taken on a life that the American people quite understand. They're not like law firms when I was at Goldman Sachs about Sullivan and Cromwell or how powerful Sullivan and Cromwell was back in the 1950s and60s with John Foster Dulles and his brother. These are Bennett Williams in DC. This is more than being fixers. These are Apparatuses that actually control the imperial capital and are the linkage between the capital markets in New York in control of Washington the political class in

Washington DC which your audience should understand. these votes and people running around, that's all kind of that's all kind of uh pro wrestling. The the decisions and the power are behind the scenes, right? And the these politicians because they have to raise so much money. Look, $100 Million was just spent in the in a in a race for a Supreme Court uh slot in uh in Wisconsin. Over hund00 million in one state election. the size of the money that has to be raised in the power makes Wall Street and the lawyers actually and the corporatist

actually more powerful against the people. So this was many years in in in the making in those years of 21 and 22 when the entire world was against President Trump and his team. It looked like the odds were so incredibly Long for the people inside. We didn't think there were long odds. We said, "Hey, this is how it's going to play out. This is have to be ready." And that's why you've seen so much action in the first 100 days. I mean, quite frankly, more than I ever thought we'd be able to pull off to

he's and and if you look at these are major things. They're not minor things. He's totally redoing the geostrategic uh structure of the postw World War II World, right? from the post-war international rules-based order of which the American, you know, we essentially underwrite do commercial relationships and trade deals which were upside down in our security guarantees. This is why our defense budgets a trillion dollars. This is why we're we basically provide the defense of Western Europe, the Gulf Emirates and the Middle East, around the Straits of Mala and the South China Sea and all the

way up to Japan and Korea Around the rim of the Eurasian landmass. President Trump is totally shifting that back to hemispheric defense from the Panama Canal to Greenland and the Arctic and the Pacific all the way to the island change to kind of hermetically seal the United States. That in and of itself on any one president's term would be monumental. That's one of a dozen things he's doing. The trade the trade uh situation he's done totally geoeconomically to totally rewrites the Wiring the hard wiring of the international trading system. um everything he's doing whether it's

on look we've sealed the border the New York Times admitted the other day that the border's essentially been sealed and we were told by Republicans when they try to pass that legislation this will take 20 years you have to basically give amnesty you have to give this huge bill which we were criticized we fought tooth and nail against Langford and McConnell Says it's not done it's proven now it didn't need to be done President Trump sealed it I call it all quiet on the southern front right now now you still have the problem with deportations

my point is that these things he's doing are not small things. This is not Bill Clinton's putting uniforms on kids in in school. He is taking on the most fundamental uh uh uh issues dealing with the sovereignty of this country and particularly putting not just the Country first but putting American citizens first in this entire globalist network. the things he's doing are breathtaking and and and the the the depth of what he's doing and quite frankly the media is only covering the very superficial nature of it because one just the staffing of the media I

can understand editors sitting there going hey what are we going to do what are we going to cover today the other aspect that I think is very powerful is he is Doing something extraordinary he's trying to disintermediate the media and the way he's doing it is just about every day or every other day when he has a signing He'll just open up the the Oval Office and invite the media in and he'll we'll give sometimes kind of a stream of consciousness of what he's thinking about whatever he's signing or just what's going on. And then

he'll open up to questions and take all comers. I can tell from our audience, Which is the tip of the spear of the Trump movement, how much they're learning every day as president because we covered all life. We'll drop any programming and go live. They're and they're the people most engaged and they're learning every day. So I think it's it's just incredibly powerful. It's totally changing what the office of the president is as far as the American people, the access to it, but the power that can be generated from it. >> Help me understand the

the people who he appoints to the top of the Justice Department, the top of the FBI, Pam Bondi, Cash Patel, and and the critics who say he they're chosen for for personal loyalty. Um they see themselves as his lawyers rather than lawyers for the United States. What do you make of that and of who they are, how they're chosen, and that that criticism? >> Jack Kennedy chose his brother. Um, you know, um, Ronald Reagan chose his Personal lawyer, what William French Smith, Obama chose Holder, his his bestie, right? So, I think those criticisms are just

it's just going to be the criticism whoever you choose. I think the team he chose and at Justice, I love Pam Bondi, but Matt Gates was our guy and I'm the huge advocate. we sort of stuck with Gates and Gates would be over there right now um and even be more aggressive. I think the team's fantastic. We made a decision at the show uh in War Room and really the audience that everybody had to be confirmed. You know, there was a moment there they thought they were going to pick up particularly when Gates stepped aside.

They thought they're going to lead with Pete Hexit and Pete Hexith came within 30 minutes I think of having his nomination or maybe an hour of having his nomination pulled. Um, and uh, our audience let it be known it was all or nothing and we were going To go up onto the ramparts and whether it's uh, uh, Joanie Erns or Tom Tillis or whoever's going to get in the way, you're going to pay a political penalty for that. President Trump wants this team, he's going to get this team. I think the team's just been terrific

so far. um I think has been great and yet clearly and anybody wants to pick people who are in sync with what you're trying to accomplish particularly President Trump has a sense of urgency you know uh Churchill had this thing in World War II when he took over as prime minister he get reports and things like that typical bureaucracy the administrative state then grection this day he wanted action right he wanted to make the apparatus work he knew he was he is in a wartime situation. We feel the same thing. I think President Trump feels

the same thing. So, he wants people not simply that are loyal, but also understand Exactly what his program is going to be. And I think he's done a great job of selecting that. That's one of the things of having four years to get ready and to actually, you know, refine, you know, particularly on the personnel side, you don't have the you don't have some of the mistakes we made in the first term because we just didn't have time and we didn't have a bench. Now, we have a bench. I think the team is really working

in sync and I think it's been Terrific so far. >> Early on, the attorney general sends a memo and says basically I, you know, I'm interpreting the law. The president interprets the law and if you don't want to sign a brief, if you don't want to sign something, it's time for you to leave. There's a big fallout around the Eric Adams case when the acting attorney >> I don't think there's been enough of that. Once again, I'm a maximalist, but I think it's better to get it done at The beginning. uh I would have requested

all the resignations of the US attorneys immediately and then I would gone in and this is something that's now big controversial. Can you actually get rid of the working prosecutors like SDNY or the Eastern District or Washington DC or any US attorney's office? The answer is that is yes and it should be done. It should have been done immediately and many more should be done. Um they serve at the pressure this goes back to Watergate. This goes back Watergate was a judicial insurrection. The true story of Watergate is written by Jeff Shepard. Is not Woodburn

and Bernstein. It's not deep throat. Is people should understand was the deputy director of the FBI, Mark Felt. Think about that for a second, right? The the apparatus turning on a president. Um the um it was a judicial revolt by the by the House Legal Committee, the Justice Department, these radical lawyers of the Justice Department at the time and Judge Shurika in the in the same corrupt court you've got down here in Washington DC right now. And that's the confrontation the confrontation that's going on in these courts with the president's actions goes back to Suruka

in Watergate. And this is so when President Trump goes to the sacred temple of Maine justice and Norm I these guys are shocked and they're upset and you have Weissman up there you know you know on MSNBC. Oh this is Horrible. you. He's president of the United States. He's the chief magistrate and the chief law enforcement officer by the Constitution. I think he should go to the Justice Department every week and make sure he has a talk with the lawyers and make sure he's and make sure that they're on in sync with the president of

the United States. people. The the left is in very dangerous territory here because the same thing will happen to an AOC or Bernie Sanders, whoever comes in from the left. If the apparatus doesn't like it, they're not going to do it. And that's why the Constitution, the founders of the nation understood that they put executive power in the office of the president. Regardless of whether it's Donald Trump or AOC, it's the office of the president. And President Trump is going to fulfill that. And you're going to have some massive court cases about this because it's

working Its way up right now and this is a showdown. One side's going to win and one side's going to lose on this and our side's going to win. You said that the media may have focused too much on Elon Musk and miss the other things that that people were doing. But but that effort to do something like take on USAD a congressionally created agency to freeze all of the funds um or not spend them. I mean, how big a a moment is that? >> You know, I'm a huge believer obviously in the deconstruction administrative

state. How do you do that? And that gets back to the budget and the budget deficit. You know, I've been a big advocate that we have to have political courage of the political class and we have to address the actual structure of the spending of this country and why we're running$ two trillion dollar deficits because of what's happened in CO and the kind of spending on CO we Haven't gotten rid of. The audience should understand we we spend six and a half or 7 trillion dollars a year. We raise in taxes$ four and a half

trillion. There's a gap. The reason you have inflation, right? The reason that all is not because of tariffs and not because of supply chains. The reason we have inflation is we have a massive Keynesian stimulus every year. We're now we've added what $16 trillion of debt in the last uh you know the last couple of Years. We flooded the zone with with with dollars. That's what's doing it until we get control of that. And the way to get control of that spending has to be programmatically. Okay? You have to do that at the defense department

in the social programs. But you have to have the courage to say, "Hey, look, we've we've blown this and and we're so far past this that we have to start to get our our house in order. Either we have to get more revenues through ter External revenues through tariffs, we have to either raise taxes or we have to have higher growth rates." And I'm all for higher growth rates and more terrorists, but I'm also I can also, you know, I went to Harvard Business School and worked at Goldman Sachs. I can do the basic simple

mathematics in back of this. And it just doesn't add up until you start getting control of federal spending. Now, the Doge effort and my problem with Doge, I want to make sure It's more reality than fantasy. Uh, besides all the media it's gotten, we what we need their primary purpose is not statutory and not programmatic. a little bit of that's gotten caught up in that their their primary focus should be waste, fraud, and abuse. And I would certainly like and and Elon has committed that there's a trillion dollars of waste, fraud, and abuse. I'm from

Missouri on this one. I I want to be shown that I want to be I see that. So far, as we've gone to date, there really hasn't been, you know, there's been some marginal cuts, but those are almost like programmatic. And and President Trump has said repeatedly, the cabinet controls that. We're going to follow statutory like for instance in VA in these in these places. USAD they're taking it down to statutory limits. They're also going to put USAD proposed to put USAD under the state department. They're but they're going to zero these Out statutoily. Go

back to the uni unitary theory of the executive. The president of the United States as chief executive has the ability to make personnel decisions and to fire anybody to fire people. You don't have permanent you don't have permanent employment in the federal government and no US citizen will back that up right the US citizens right now live in an era of anxiety be let go immediately so the chief executive has The ability to fire and he also has the appropriations process which is the legal process that we go through to create a law to appropriate

the money that's a ceiling not a floor now that is going to be contested okay but President Trump and this gets back to the US ID thesis about the $2 billion of which the courts have found out so far that they don't believe he does that money has to be paid that I think is going to go up uh and and take a ride to much higher Levels right because the the president has to have the ability to both impound money or not spend that money if he deci decides programmatically it's either not working or

there's some issue involved in it also to get rid of people the Doge effort is basically a effort about fraud and waste It's kind of because the media's taken up and a little bit Elon is I think uh in the media taken on a little more of a mandate than he had right and and the media's focused on That which I think is fantastic cuz Carrie Lakes work at at VA other work that's going around like on USA ID and these others and in USA ID let's let's be honest Eli Crane and these guys tried

to zero it out in the appropriations process two years ago all night fights on the House floor And who saved it? The Republican establishment saved it and didn't even have the balls to look into where the money was going. The money was going to all these NOS's that were Supporting the invasion of the country. All these NOS's throughout the world and the United States that were suppressing conservative voices. That was brought to you by the the uh controlled opposition Republicans. This is the reason you got to differentiate between Republicans and the MAGA movement. The Republican

party is one of the reasons the country's in this situation. You mentioned Bill Bar and these guys. We've won since Nixon. You know, we've won as many times we've Lost. We've been in control as much as the Democrats have. How did the country get into this crisis? Because the Republican party is like the Washington Generals to the to the Democrats Harlem Globe Triers. They're just controlled opposition. It's all performative. They never really did anything. They just kind of went along with the system. That's the difference in Trump. Trump is direct action down a vertical to

actually make fundamental change. And That's why the system is reacting. The system's traumatized. I understand that he he's a he's a blunt force instrument. He's going to he's going to give the system a punch and it's going to be traumatized. That's kind of the purpose of the exercise. And that's why he's relentless. He will not back off. That's different than these country club Republicans who have essentially gone along with this for 40 or 50 years and got the country in this jam. This is why The MAGA movement detest uh rhinos, detest country club Republicans. We

hate them more than we hate uh radical Democrats. >> Yeah. I mean, when we've talked to people here and they've seen they see the letters coming off of a of something like USA ID symbolically in this town, uh there's a fear of who is next, what is next. >> They should they should understand it's it's potentially all next. If we don't close this gap of the two train, this is why I think the media and particularly PBS and others that are a little more thoughtful are doing a terrible job. You don't explain how the system

works and the system is burying the country and workingass people every day because we have a system that's totally out of control and only it's it's crafted by the elites in this country and it works for them. In the last six months, I think it is the last Six months since the beginning of the fiscal year in October 1st, I believe that $4.4 trillion dollars of wealth, stock market, bonds, etc. have accreted to the top 1%. And that's more than the bottom 50% of our country. It can't go on. We've had the massive con since

the bailout of President Obama and the progressives. And that's why he's kind of a tragic figure because he depended upon his Wall Street guys about the bailouts of the Crash in '08, which he had nothing to do with. That was all dumped on him when he won the presidency. In fact, the reason he won the presidency, I think people said, "Hey, you know, I don't know about John McCain said, but the Republicans were in charge. We got to have we got to have change on this." He reverted back to a standard. The the people that

caused the problem came up with a solution. We've never really gotten over that. And you've had Tremendous you had more concentration of wealth in uh in President Obama's term than you ever had in the history of the country. And this is why I say everything you see on cable TV or all the stuff on Capitol Hill is performative. That's not the real story. The real story is about money and power and money and power going to the top 1% more and more and more. That was the start of it. Then you see during the pandemic

you had another great Concentration of wealth. That's what needs to be broken here. You need to break that. if you don't break it. And one of the reasons is that the the elites in the country don't mind this massive spending because it's helping their hedge funds. It's helping their their defense contractors. They want the spending. This is why it's so tough to even talk about cutting spending here. Uh and and but and trust me, they're not worried about what happens to the American people. Are they not going to get this program or that program? They

want to have this this continued spending until we get a grip of that. And one one of the ways you have to get a grip of, you have to downsize the government programmatically. You just can't do everything that you've been doing and paying for. And principally, this is why I'm an advocate, strong advocate until you get to the defense department. And it shouldn't be lost in Anybody that Doge has been. We're the ones on our show that said you got to cross the batto. You got to cross the batto. You can't just be running around

on social security. You got to get to the Pentagon. They've been at the Pentagon for 9 and a half weeks, 10 weeks. I haven't heard one chirp right out of that festering sore of nine. They spend $900 billion dollars a year. Trust me, there's a little bit of waste, fraud, and abuse over there. We haven't Heard, we haven't seen one email, one one uh one uh Twitter post on anything. I think they announced a couple weeks ago Sean Pernell announced they found $80 million, which is basically Uber money over there. So, it's it's all performative.

That's why you had it. And for your audience has to understand this is not going to be easy. It's going to be tough. We've we've kicked the can down the road uh for decade and decade decade. If you want inflation to Continue, if you want the financial and economic opportunities to recede from you and your life, right? Forget your children and grandchildren. If you want it all to recede, if you want to continue to have to work two jobs, if you want to use that credit card to make ends meet at the end of the

month, if you want to be anxious every day of your life, the job you've got and how you're barely hanging on, if you were fired, you're 90 days away. I don't care if You're middle class, you're 90 days away from financial oblivion. But that ticking time bomb, what's going to happen to me when I get older? Do I have enough for retirement? Is social security even going to be here? Even the social security at a,000 bucks a month, is that going to pay for anything? that anxiety eats away at people like acid. And if you

don't if you want that to continue and get worse, then let's just have the system we got now. Let's let's Have $2 trillion. Listen, it's not going to change the the elites in this country. If it if they if it was a crisis for them, it would change tomorrow morning. It's not changing because it works for the wealthy and powerful. And the wealthy and powerful people now waking up control the Democratic party. The entire Democratic party is kind of a phony. And let me give you a specific example. When Biden won uh in the first

100 days, they put Up this thing about taxing the billionaires. They got to tax the billionaires. Tax the billionaires. They controlled the House and the Senate. That never even got to a committee. There was no taxing of the wealthy under Biden. There was never even attempt to tax the wealthy. Why? Because the wealthy controlled the Democratic Party. They've abandoned the working class. And we for years have worked and have the working class on our side now, right? Including African-American men, Hispanics, right? They've abandoned it to this credential class, this kind of, you know, phony degrees

support, you know, coming out of these universities and these people that hang on to these kind of marginal jobs that are all because of government spending and corporate spending that support this. It's controlled by the by the billionaires. If it wasn't, where's your where was your tax cut? Where was any Where did the Democratic party for either eight years under Obama or four years under Biden 12 years? show me one effort at all to go after the 1%. It wasn't. You You had Elizabeth Warren running around and setting up C, you know, the the the

consumer bureau. That's kind of it's like it's like the minimum wage thing. That that's a that's a SOP that run around. That doesn't get to the core of the problem. The core of the problem is you have to get to the Administrative state, which is their mechanism of how they control things. And you have to cut you have to cut spending and you have to raise taxes on them. I'm the only one on the right that is a strong proponent that this tax extension has to be more tax cuts for the for the working class

that you have to cut tax on tips, tax on overtime, tax on bonuses, taxes on social security, that's another I don't know five, six, seven, $800 billion a year of decreased Revenue. You got to make that up somewhere. So if you can't do it in growth, and I can do the math, I don't see us getting to 5% growth. I don't see growth getting us out. I think growth's important. And I think President Trump and Besson are focused on that to get a three three and a half%. There's going to be a gap. That gap

has to meet come from the wealthy. You can't extend the tax cuts for the top upper bracket. You can't. The math just doesn't work. And That will be the first time we're putting them on notice because I tell people just in doing that will get we'll slap them to say you've got to be a partner in getting this thing under control. No more are you just going to benefit from it because that's what's happening now. And the country is starting to wake up to this. This is why the economic message of populism and economic nationalism

is getting traction now and people are looking around go, Okay, I'm starting to understand it. That is the wave of the future of politics in this country. These were the big fights are going to be. >> Let me ask you about the law firms cuz you explained why that was part of this, why the law firms were so powerful, why they were part of this corporate interest. Can you help me understand the effect of when those orders come out? They're I mean they're pretty shocking to a lot of people. They're shocking to Steve Bannon. They're

shock. No, I am so impressed. Uh here's why. These law firms are embedded. These law firms and if you look in the old days of Edward Bennett Williams and you know Bob Strauss fixers in Washington, that's not what this is. These are highly sophisticated apparatuses working with private equity like Laam and Watkins and Carlile in the Imperial Capital or working with these Wall Street hedge funds or private Equity funds essentially control the country. the um the power of what President Trump did and I don't think only the most sophisticated on their side but I was

stunned of how brilliantly thoughtful it was because they went after the media bit on they took away the security clearances. They took away the security clearance but really that was just a means to say no more government contracts, no more government work. The Key and the killer line though which was absolutely brilliant they embedded down in the executive order. Oh, by the way, uh, any firm that retains you will not be eligible for government contracts. They went after Paul Weiss first. Is Paul Weiss the most powerful law firm in the country? No. Is it the

biggest law firm in the country? No. It's not at Kirkland Ellis or Leam Watkins or Scadarps. But behind the scenes, Paul Weiss is incredibly powerful. They have Been the organizer. This guy Karp, but the whole firm have been the organizer of kind of the opposition to Trump, particularly among Democrats. It shouldn't be lost on anybody that when Murdoch wanted to get rid of ALS, what firm do he pick? Paul Weiss, right, to do the independent assessment that they will do a lot of dirty work and they're quite powerful in that. And I was stunned after

that was sent essentially they collapsed in their opposition. And Why was that? The other law firms started get poaching their clients. It was their partners who are unified in their hatred of Trump. and Karp himself, who's the kind of ring leader, they cratered. Why? Because the rest of these piranhas immediately when they saw the executive order, they went after their clients and said, "Hey, you're not going to have any access to government contracts." And here's why the American people should understand. They all feed At the trough of public money. That's your money. You're paying for

that. If you're making 32,000 bucks a year and you're watching PBS in your small TV in your apartment in Chicago and working two jobs, right, and you're a liberal and you watch PBS and you feel better every day, you're a sucker. Why was this so why was this so massive? Why did they crater? Why did the most one of the most powerful law firms in the country went to the Oval Office as a supplicant and Beg for mercy? Because they want access to your tax money. You're pay you're working two jobs and can barely survive

and have no retirement and no health care, right? And and and the reason is your money, your hard-earned money is going to pay to a system that every day you every day you and does it openly. That's why it created. They created because they weren't going to have access to government. It wasn't the security clearances. That was a means to An end. They weren't going to be able to feed at the public trough. And here's the thing. When you talk about the $40 million for philanthropic, you know, he's going to do $40 million of proono

work or $100 million scatterbs, the way that the systems works with the NOS's, all these radical NOS's, the color revolution that Rachel Matto talks about every night. The reason that these guys are able to be so powerful, those NOS's, they have the best law firms in the Country working for them. That $und00 million, not because you want philanthrop, is to take away the opportunity cost so they can't work for the radical left. The whole system changes with this. This is quite frankly brilliant in its conception and it's even more brilliant in its execution. And here's

what I tell people. They're not that powerful. This whole system has been so powerful and so overwhelming. They created the most powerful law firms In the country. And guess what? People's now appetites are wet. They're going to go after all of them. You have to break them all. Particularly the two you got to break. We'll get down to the end. It's Kirkland Ellis and Laam and Watkins. Kirkland Ellis is Obama's law firm. You know, they've already got Covington Burley, which is was his holder, but Kirkland and Ellis and Laam and Watkins because those are the

two big intersections between they're Essentially private equity organizations. Now, you'll get to those at the end and and break down, but it know this people should understand and this is why now on MSNBC, this takes up 20 minutes of program almost in each show, every night because they now understand, oh my god, this may be the mortal blow that destroys it. This is going down to the mechanics of how the system works. This is so profound. This and going after the universities are and What shocked me is Colombia folded. That was a historic day. And

I've been a big big advocate because I am a maximalist. Don't go the Ivies. Yes, Harvard. You know, I went to you should go there. They're all But you showed it in in um Colombia. You can get to all them. You have to go to the public ivies. You have to go to the University of Michigan, the University of Wisconsin, University of Virginia, University of North Carolina, University of Texas at Austin, Berkeley, UCLA. I'll throw in University of Florida, and University of Arizona. Those 10. Go to them today. And and it's not about this because

I think we're too narrowcasting this about the Palestinian Gaza thing. It's much broader than that. It's not those kids. The kids on the common are not the problem. The problems in the faculty, in the administration, I would be much more radical. I would go to the big state universities today. these great public ivies and say right Off the bat you either purge the faculty senate or purge the administration immediately or you cut off our all money in the state of Michigan and the state of Wisconsin can't there's no way this is billions of dollars to

go to these universities these things would fold they would crater in 24 hours and then you would get to the you would lance the boil that's driving this radicalness uh on college campuses but also throughout America because they all the common Theme is that it's all public money if you cut USA ID. Why they run around USAD? Because it's publicly has basically fueled the revolution in this country. Once you cut off the public money or once you cut off these radical these law firms that are radicals, these neo-Marxist, right, culturally, not economically, once you cut

off the public money or access to it, they fold. They're not that powerful. You've seen a system that has had so many of the Institutions under controlled, they got lazy. They never thought a Trump would come along. and they never thought a Trump could get that message out to workingclass people and actually have power in back of his punch. That's the great struggle we have today. And and it's not being reported correctly. Number one, I just don't think the media has spent time thinking this through about what's really going on. They're all running around with

their hair on Fire. Oh my gosh, this this and this. There's actually a very well thought through plan on this. And the opposition knows this. The law firms understand this. The NOS's understand this. Rachel Matter understands this. Watch her show. Watch what she's really talking about. She understands exactly goes what's going on and she understands the stakes about the stakes of how high these stakes are. >> When they reach that agreement, what are They agreeing to? The president said they're bending to me. You said they come to him as a supplicant. I mean, are they

agreeing to not attack the not represent clients attacking the government? What's the what's the the crucial agreement that they're making? Is it loyalty? >> It's not loyalty. I think it's not I think it's the fact that first off they're not going to fund they're not going to do all this pro pro bono work For these other organizations right and number two that they're going to not attack the government not sue the government frivolously which I think is a huge a huge uh a huge thing it's not that look if they've got a case that's meaningful

I'm sure they'll take it and they'll continue on uh or their partners will resign you've already had some of the younger younger associates of scatternarp saying we'll never agree to this and we'll go do it our way but it Should be you should it should not be lost on people that Scatteren Arps and Paul Weiss, two of the most powerful law firms in the country, basically cratered. >> Does has the administration chosen immigration as a place to make a stand with the with the courts? Was that intentional or do you think that's how it how

it developed? >> When you say immigration, think immigr the southern border has been has been Secured in 60 days. How can anybody on the left sit there and not be humiliated by the lies, quite frankly, the lies that were supported by your channel and your show year after year after year? And the Republicans picked up on it. I'm not just picking on radical Democrats. Um, it's uh, by the way, when you guys are shut down and all the money's gone, it's this type of thing that it's the it's the lies and misrepresentation you told on

basic on basic issues like the Invasion of our country. It's been stopped in 60 days, guys. We've started to get control of this uh immediately because of President Trump's just direct actions in the courts. I think you're talking about is not the mass deportation. Remember, I believe we're too once again in the spectrum of this. President Trump's a moderate trying to trying to balance everything. His rightwing is for mass deportations of all 10 million. And Let's be specific that just came in on Biden's watch. Anything that happened beforehand, we'll have to think that through in

the future. I'm just talking about what happened from January 20th of 2021 all the way till January 20th of 2025. In that four years, what Biden did, which was a very well thought through in conjunction with the NOS's that were paid for by either uh your religious organizations like the Catholics, the Lutheran, or the Jews, right? Catholic charities being the worst, and I'm a Catholic. um or USA ID paid for by your taxpayer dollars to basically bring in economic competition that Wall Street wanted, the corporatists wanted because they want to drive down wages. So if

you're sitting in Chicago watching your PBS as a as a convinced liberal, understand that your government that government at the time was organized. It wasn't chaotic. It was a very organized Way to basically invade bring in cheaper labor into the United States to drive down wages among lowerkilled workers. which is unacceptable. So, right now, we're not even talking about mass deportations, which is the point that MAGA wants to get to quickly because they all have to go home. They all have to go home. You're not going to have a country unless every invader goes back

to the uh s the to the origin. What we're talking about now is a national Security issue. Let's go back to the uni unified executive theory. He's commander-in-chief of the armed forces and can make decisions about national security. You have a radical judge that's inserting himself. This has nothing to do with immigration. This has to do with his role as chief, as commanderin-chief. Can a federal judge step in the middle of that and start making decisions about airplane, you know, capacity, lift, who's going to go, What's going to go, etc. You have an organization he's

he's designated as a terrorist criminal organization that's terrorized people from Colorado, all over the country, and he's shipping them out of here. uh and he's going to continue to ship him out of here. You've had a judge insert himself in that role. It's now at the Supreme Court. I you know, it'll get expedited, I assume. Uh and we'll see. So, no, you can't let these radical judges do it. And this is Going to be a showdown. It has to be a showdown. >> And and the rhetoric about the judge because a lot of lawyers say,

you know, all of the rhetoric calling for impeachment, the radical left lunatic, that this rhetoric um is it shouldn't that's not the type of thing the president should say. He should appeal. he should abide by by the court ruling and not >> listen. By the way, was there any Complaint from PBS or was any complaint by the Democrats on on the on the rhetoric used against the judges when the when the Roie Wade decision came out and they had to have police protection at their houses? I I don't remember I don't remember anything about the

rhetoric being too high. You guys are so phony on the face of it. This is why we're defeating the left. The American people as they see this, they go, "These guys are a bunch of Lying scumbags." which you are a bunch of lying scumbags. You terrorize, you try to terrorize Supreme Court justices over a decision that didn't go your way. And now I'm a huge believer, but playing by the system. The system, we should get these judges, and I'm an advocate. I'm not saying impeach them right now. That's for the that's for the House of

Representatives to decide. However, the judiciary committee should immediately get Barl How and uh And was it Boseberg in immediately for a public hearing about their conduct? Absolutely. And let's put it before the American people. Let's put what these two have done. These two are radicals. Put them on notice. You put them through this process. Whether you impeach them or not, all these other judges are going to fold. Here's what we know. If you take power and exert it, this system's not so tough. You know why? They're all gutless cowards. They've all hid behind The system

for decades and decades and decades. So the university administrators, they're not that tough. The big law firms, nah, they're not that tough. the media. Look who's cratered. How many times? Look how they're settling with Trump. They're not tough. We're resilient. We're anti-fragile and we're tough. You can put us in prison. You can take Trump up there and put him on trial every day. The people around Trump are battleh hardened. Okay? You're not going to scare us and we're not going to stop. And what we know is you guys are a bunch of You will crater.

PBS is going to crater. You know why? You're not tough. you don't believe actually at your core in what you're trying to do and you'll fold like the law firms, like the universities, like the media, like all of these institutions, you will fold because we're relentless and we're not going to stop. >> So, when it gets up to the Supreme Court, which is where it's going to end up, I mean, how is it going to play out? And it's it's a lot's going to come on to John Roberts um >> and ACB >> and ACB

and and I mean what >> this is why I think President Trump I think Mike Davis and some of the people that have been at the forefront of this have said you know comply with no matter how radical no matter how some judge in Rhode Island puts a nationwide ban on the entire thing comply with that right so that you don't rattle the courts because these are eventually going to go up to the courts and they want to make sure you play by the rules. Now, I'm actually being a maximalist. Uh some of these things

I wouldn't have complied with, but they have. And I think it's you're going to have to see when it comes out to the Supreme Court. So, I don't want to prejudge what's going to Happen. about a lot of these on every part of the theory, right? Whether he's chief executive and can make decisions on personnel and money, right, and executive action as commander-in-chief, can he actually ship out uh the these uh criminal terrorists as the chief magistrate things doing with the Justice Department, the FBI, they're all going to the Supreme Court, right? And and now

there's what 82 uh lawsuits and more coming every day, Right? But you're going to see a lot of these are not are not not pro boner work anymore by the big law firms. Carrie Lake told me the other day on VA I think they got eight or nine. So that's how the system works and we'll have to see how it plays out. But yes, you you have a constitutional crisis because one of the tests of this theory is that it's supposed to be checks and balances. We got into the system for years. You had judicial

supremacy. And I kept even Saying to the the Mark Levenson and these guys who are very smart, the constitutional guys, they're they're all everything's getting down to Supreme Court decisions. Well, I said the founders never gave the Supreme Court to be sup you never agreed to judicial supremacy. And what you're seeing now is a judicial insurrection about somebody that's challenging judicial supremacy. That's going to have to be worked out. And that is I would say the courts threw Us into a constitutional crisis because they want to be supreme to the chief executive. And so this

is going to play out. We're going to see how it plays. I strongly believe we're going to win. >> I mean, you said that there were some court rulings you wouldn't comply with. The president has said that he would comply with court rulings. Do you think there's >> I think he has. Do you think that There's a >> except there is I guess a question about the Venezuelan flights already as as as commander-in-chief on that one. I think we're in a gray area. I my belief is he's so set in on this issue of being

commander-in-chief and and that's why I think it's the one that's expedited to the Supreme Court. We don't know as of now whether it's going to it's I think it's going to be in the emergency docket that's still up in the air. Uh, I think It probably will be because I think this one has to be sorted. That's when I think he's already because they they did send the Venezuelans I think on Sunday night to Venezuela, right, who accepted them. So, I think this this is um uh but I think they're comply if you look across

they're complying across the board with the rest. >> But should the should the courts be wary? You know, do you think that There's a a moment where where the president the administration might say this has gone too far? I mean, should >> I think the courts are going to be very worried. What did Andrew Jackson say? You can make a ruling, go ahead and enforce it. I think the court this is you have to reign in the courts. They've been they've been too radical. This is a judicial insurrection. I strongly believe that this is going

to be a learning exercise. And what we're Trying to do is go back and and try to more and more in the coming weeks is make sure our audience understands this goes back or really goes back to FDR and the packing of the court, but specifically it goes back very much to Watergate and the judicial insurrection you had in Watergate in the same court in this DC court that's out of control with Sera. Okay. everything is that's the rail head of all this and people have to understand this showdown which If you just had country

club Republicans would have never got Bill Bar and that crowd the Bush all that crowd and they talk about Cheney and all that this is actually a fight that had to happen. This had to happen between the courts and the executive branch. Okay. It's happened because Trump and people around him understand the Constitution, understand what we have to do to get back to a constitutional republic, to take on the Administrative state and take on the deep state. Chaining those guys, it was it was all it was totally different. It was there just to self- agonize

power and quite frankly, I think hide a lot of abuses on the Iraq war that I was against. Right. So, this is a real showdown and this is for the highest stakes. uh and this is from both sides are going to give as good as they get. The opposition of this is you're bringing your best. I mean You've got the best lawyers, you have the best thinkers on your side and they understand what the stakes are. They particularly understand what the stakes are of cutting off government funding to the uh to the uh to the

NOS's. They understand how much of this has been on the public trough. They also understand as we go off against things like act blue the mechanics of how actually the stuff is funded away from the government on the on the billion on the foreign Billionaires. So we're going after the infrastructure and the plumbing and the wiring of the whole system of the radical left. So the states couldn't be higher and they know that that's why this is uh that's that's why this is such an important fight and I keep saying one side's going to win

and one side's going to lose. There's no ground for compromise. We can't compromise with our oppositions. They're not going to compromise with us. They don't believe In anything that we stand for. They think we're that all they talk about is autocratic breakthrough. This is the moment of autocratic breakthrough. This is the moment when Donald Trump becomes dictator. What he's trying to do is trying to get back to what the Constitution says and make sure that we're not a dictatorship because we have been a dictatorship as you can see by how the Justice Department was weaponized

against people and sent guys Like tried to send Trump to prison for 300 years which they still want to do and sent guys like Peter Navar and myself to prison right for for discussions on on uh on checks and balances. So no, it's these are the highest stakes and this is going to be fought down to the bitter end. And I can tell people right now, we are not going to quit. We're not going to surrender. We're not going to take uh our our foot off the uh gas pedal. It's all gas, no Break. >>

Explain that cuz that that criticism of of autocracy and the the thing that we have heard is people who say the president doesn't seem to respect the rule of law or courts or >> he doesn't respect the rule of lawyers. He respects the rule of law. He's complied with all this. He spent all this time putting judges in. What do you mean we don't respect the rule of law? He absolutely respects the rule of law. It's the other side that didn't respect the rule of law that went after people that that that that from school

boards to to people at abortion centers to people just opposed them on what they were trying to do and trying to break the constitution. Look, it's not me. Have your audience ask themselves a question. The J6 committee, did they not crawl on their bellies to the White House and ask for something that's never been given in the history of this Country? A blanket preemptive pardon? Your audience should ask themselves, if they're so rule of law, why did they go crawling for something that's never been given in American history? A blanket preemptive pardon. And plus, their

staffs, I happen to think they're not legitimate. I think they ought to be pursued because that that's when you saw the breakdown of rule of law. They're gangsters. that a lot of people say that there'll be a moment where there's Somebody's going to blink, the court or uh the president and and is he going to blink? >> Donald Trump does not blink. Donald Trump's about action and driving through. Look, and this is what's so providential about the election being stolen in 2020. He had four years as kind of in exile, right? Kind of a lion

in winter. This thing has been so thought through. The team has been so put together. And Remember, these are people that volunteered for this back in 21 and 22, understanding by getting on this Trump team and working through these issues. Lawyers, people like Steven Miller, Brooks Rollins, the people at Heritage, Russ Vote, who are now all the core team. They understood by signing up for this in those early years, you were basically anathema to the Republican establishment. You wouldn't be in a Nikki Haley administration. you would Not be in a Ronda Santis administration. So, it's

all in. Trump is not only not going to blink, he's going to win. But you're absolutely correct. There's going to come, this is going to come, it's going to build up to a crescendo. And we're going to see, and this is why I keep telling people, one side's going to win and one side's going to lose. There's no there's nothing to compromise. There's two different theories about what the Constitution Says, what the framers had in mind, and what this country is. And it's either a constitutional republic under the rule of law or it's not. And

that is what uh you're going to see in this kind of battle that's going to take place and continue to it reaches a crescendo.