Tony Katz

KARL: “So, I know you say this is not personal with Kevin McCarthy, but it sure sounds personal.” GAETZ: “I’m only talking about substantive de-dollarization.” KARL: “Okay. But let me ask you about the relationship. When was the last time you talked with him one-on-one? I mean, have you had a — “ GAETZ: “Well, a matter of fact, just a couple weeks ago, Kevin McCarthy appointed me to the National Defense Conference Committee on the NDAA, and we spoke about some of our alliance and defense priorities. So, this isn’t personal. Some people make policy disagreements personal because their own policy failures are so personally embarrassing to them. I hold no personal animus to any — with any of my Republican colleagues, by the way, including my Republican colleague you’re about to have on next, who’s had some pretty terse words for me. But at the end of the day, this is about spending. This is about the deal Kevin made in January. I do resent the fact that Kevin is like owned by lobbyists and special interests — “ KARL: “That sounds personal, by the way.” GAETZ: “No, it’s not personal. It’s substantive.” KARL: “That’s an attack on a guy’s integrity.” GAETZ: “Well, it is an attack on the system that he has used to obtain the speakership. I am fighting for a different system, one based on spending guardrails, agreements on process. Kevin promised us 72 hours to read the bill. We didn’t have it. He promised us $100 million wouldn’t go on to the suspension agenda without the opportunity for amendments. Broke that deal, too. And he promised us we could return to pre-Covid spending levels. There’s almost no promise he hasn’t violated.” KARL: “So you’re not accomplishing anything here.” GAETZ: “That’s not true.” KARL: “You don’t have the votes to remove him.” GAETZ: “By the way, I don’t know until we have them. And by the way, I might not have them the first time, but I might have them before the 15th ballot. That’s the number of ballots Kevin McCarthy needed.” KARL: “So you’re going to do this every day, like you had suggested? You’ll, lik,E go through this process of voting over and over and over again?” GAETZ: “I am relentless, and I will continue to pursue this objective. And if all the American people see that it is a uniparty that governs them and that it is always the Biden, McCarthy, Jeffries government that makes dispositive decisions on spending, then I am seeding the field of future primary contests to get better Republicans in Washington who will actually tackle these deficits and debts.”

Read 'Georgia Federal Judge Rules Racially Discriminatory Contracting Is “Speech and Expression” Protected By 1st Amendment – Emergency Appeal Filed' by William Jacobson HERE: https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/09/georgia-federal-judge-rules-racially-discriminatory-contracting-is-speech-and-expression-protected-by-1st-amendment-emergency-appeal-filed/ ****** SUBSCRIBE ON RUMBLE: www.rumble.com/tonykatz BECOME A SUPPORTER: http://tonykatz.com ****** Follow Tony on Twitter: https://twitter.com/tonykatz Follow Tony on Facebook: https://facebook.com/tonykatzradio Follow Tony on Instagram: https://instragram.com/tonykatz

Democrat performances from day one of the Biden Impeachment Inquiry SUBSCRIBE ON RUMBLE: www.rumble.com/tonykatz BECOME A SUPPORTER: http://tonykatz.com ****** Follow Tony on Twitter: https://twitter.com/tonykatz Follow Tony on Facebook: https://facebook.com/tonykatzradio Follow Tony on Instagram: https://instragram.com/tonykatz

Democrats from Rep. Ocasio-Cortez to Adam Schiff are infuriated with the impeachment inquiry into President joe Biden. And they should be; Hunter Biden's selling of influence has his dad - the leader of the Democrat party - in a bad, bad position. To counter this, the Progressive Left exclaims that there is "no evidence!" Of course there isn't....if you refuse to look. Also, a judge in Georgia has taken a unique axe to free speech. The courts usually avoid this one line, working hard not to cross it. Consider the line crossed, and consider the consequences for all of us. William Jacobson, Cornell Law Professor and creator of Legalinsurrection.com joins Tony to discuss the issues. Presented by Americans for Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org

Republican presidential candidates — with the exception of Donald Trump — held the second primary debate at the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley.

>>COMER "I can tell you on the wire that Hunter Biden received from the Chinese national the beneficiary address listed was Joe Biden’s home address at a time where I’m pretty certain Hunter Biden was not living in the home of Joe Biden if you go back even further than that. This Jonathan Lee who wired the $260,000 from China to Hunter Biden’s personal account, he is part of the Chinese communist party. He is a huge business person in China with the Chinese backed entity that funds investments ins United States. The one issue in Congress that Republicans and Democrats agree on. We don’t want China taking over industries important to our national security. We don’t want China buying farmland. This is the guy that does that Jonathan Lee is the person who represents China. And if you research it, Joe Biden met with Jonathan Lee. He wrote a letter of recommendation for his child to get into college in the United States. There is a relationship that was developed between Joe Biden and Jonathan Lee when he was vice president and now we have evidence that Jonathan Lee, who Joe Biden said his son never took any money from, said his son never took any money from China. Hunter Biden’s lawyer said that Hunter never received any money from this guy. We have evidence that he received over a quarter of million dollars. The address listed on the wire was Joe Biden’s personal residence."

>>BUTTIGIEG: "That's pretty rich coming from a guy who is prepared to stop air traffic control staffing. We see a repeated pattern here, which is creating a problem or contributing to a problem and then trying to score points off of that same problem. We see at the border. We see it with transportation. Some of these same Republican congressmen who lined up to try to make a partisan issue out of the flight disruptions happening last year because of Covid now they are here threatening to get in the way of air traffic controllers getting paid, getting trained and even putting out proposals that would stop us or delay us from modernizing computer systems. Some of the same Republican congressmen who lined up trying to score political points off the pain of the people who faced the East Palestine train derailment had year are pushing for cuts that would reduce railroad safety inspections. 11,000 miles of track less getting inspected under some of these cuts that House Republicans are proposing. So at a certain point they need to make clear whether they are serious or whether this is just politics. They have a job to do, and that is to actually run the government, keep the American people safe and make sure – whether we are talking about transportation or any other critical function of government, keep that running in a way that actually addresses these problems."

Oversight Chairman Rep. James Comer (R-KY) has produced more evidence about the shady dealings of Biden, Inc. This time, purported proof of a wire transfer sent from Jonathan Li to hunter Biden, while he was residing at his father's house in Delaware. Jonathan Li is the Chinese (see, Communist Party devotee) business man whom hunter introduced to his father. Joe Biden even wrote letters about his respect for Li. Will this be the final nail in Biden's 2024 bid? Can Democrats survive his possible corruption, the actions of his son AND Biden's very obvious age limitations? The second GOP debate is taking place tonight. Does it even matter when the closest poll has Trump up by 30 points? Presented by Americans for Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org

CUOMO: “Why not you if you really care that much about the issues? I know you say you’re not running, which is unusual to put a period at it.” NEWSOM: “Yeah. Exclamation point.” CUOMO: “If you care, why don’t you run?” NEWSOM: “Because I believe in this guy. I actually — you know why?” CUOMO: “You think Joe Biden is the best the Democrats can do?” NEWSOM: “And I hope you can differentiate, because your B.S. meter is one of the best, because you’ve been around this all your life. I don’t like this guy. I have deep respect, reverence for Joe Biden as a person, his character, his decency, and his capacity to do great things. That’s why I’m not worthy of that conversation. This guy deserves it and we, as members of party, deserve to have his back more forcefully. And none of that nonsense. All of these quiet conversations you’ve been in, we’ve all been in, folks talking behind his back, they become headlines. And we’re all chasing that right now. We gotta get on the team. We gotta get this guy reelected and we got to stop all the navel-gazing and the hand-wringing and all the behind-the-scenes quiet conversations off-the-record that tend to find their way into the press as, you know, ‘sources close to.’”

Jenkins: “And this won’t come as welcome news to the White House, but CBP sources confirmed to Fox News just moments ago that the total number of migrant encounters this fiscal year 2023 have surpassed last year’s record-breaking numbers. Take a look here. You see so far this fiscal year — and there’s eight days left in this fiscal year — 2,388,350+ compared to that 2,378,000 from last year that shattered the records, more than 10,000 and you’re getting upwards of 9,000 a day. Let’s take a look at the video we saw yesterday all day long here at ground zero across the entire southwest border. Sources telling Fox News there are more than 9,900 encounters yesterday, just part of why agents here are telling us off camera it’s showing no signs of slowing down.” LAWRENCE: “How many people coming into this country illegally is enough for President Biden then?” Jean-Pierre: “Say that last one?” LAWRENCE: “How many people — how many people illegally coming into the United States is enough for President Biden’s administration?” Jean-Pierre: “Enough for what?” LAWRENCE: “5.9 million people have been encountered illegally.” Jean-Pierre: “I know the numbers, but enough for what?” LAWRENCE: “Enough. Just to stop the flow.” Jean-Pierre: “As I mentioned, this is a problem that has been around for some time now, for decades. A broken system.”

BURNETT: "The sheriff in your county — he is a Democrat. You are an independent. He told my colleague who has been in eagle pass in the past days that President Biden is to blame for the surge. He specifically said because he created the perception that the border is open because he is more accepting the migrants than Republicans. That’s why you are seeing this surge. How do you feel about it? When you say that there are no consequences and that’s causing more of this, does the president bear some of the responsibility for the crisis in your city?" MAYOR ROLANDO SALINAS: "I will be honest with you. I believe 100% he does bear some responsibility for this crisis. I haven’t heard from anybody in the administration. The president hasn’t put out a statement, the vice president, I haven’t heard from anybody. Nobody bothered to call me, anyone in the staff saying this is the federal government, we know what you are going through, this is our plan of action. Nothing. We are on the border asking for help. This is unacceptable. Just enforce the laws that are on the books. We are a nation of laws. That’s all I ask for is that it shouldn’t be like this. We should be able to enforce laws. If you want to come here, good, come legally. A lot of people have. It takes a lot of money and years to do it the right way. It’s not fair for those people that now you have thousands of people coming in without one single consequence. It’s just not fair."

GARLAND: “Our job is not to do what is politically convenient. Our job is not to take orders from the president, from Congress or from anyone else about who or what to criminally investigate. REP JOHNSON: "Can you tell us about any briefings or discussions that you personally have had with Mr. Weiss regarding any and all federal investigations of Hunter Biden. GARLAND: "I'm going to say again- I promised the Senate I would not interfere with Mr. Weiss' --" REP JOHNSON: "So you have not, under oath today your testimony is- you have not had any discussions with Mr. Weiss about this matter." GARLAND: "Under oath, my testimony today is I promised the Senate I would not intrude on this investigation. I do not intend to discuss internal justice department deliberation whether or not I had them." REP JOHNSON: "So your testimony today is you're not going to tell us if you had discussions with Mr. Weiss?" GARLAND: "My testimony today is I told the committee that I would not interfere and made clear that Mr. Weiss would have authority to bring cases that he thought were appropriate." REP JOHNSON: "Ok, let me stop you - [crosstalk] Are you aware that FBI officials have come before this committee and they have stated that there was a cumbersome bureaucratic process that Mr. Weiss had to go through to bring charges in another judicial district." GARLAND: "I'm not aware, but that's not true. there is nothing cumbersome about the process." GARLAND: "As the president himself has said, and I reaffirmed today, I am not the president’s lawyer. I will add, I am not Congress’s prosecutor. The Justice Department works for the American people. Our job is to follow the facts and the law. And that is what we do.” MASSIE: “You’re citing the Constitution. I’m going to cite it. It’s our constitutional duty to do oversight. Now in that video, that was your answer to a question to me two years ago, when I said, ‘How many agents or assets of the government were present on January 5 and January 6, and agitating in the crowd to go into the Capitol and how many went into the Capitol?’ Can you answer that now?” Garland: “I don’t know the answer to that question.” MASSIE: “Oh, last time, you don’t know how many there were or there were none?” Garland: “I don’t know the answer to either of those questions. If there were any, I don’t know how many, and I don’t know whether there are any.” MASSIE: “I think you’ve may have just perjured yourself that you don’t know that there were any. You want to say that again, that you don’t know that there were any?” [crosstalk] Garland: “I have no personal knowledge of this matter. I think what I said the last time —“ [crosstalk] MASSIE: “You’ve had two years to find out, and the day — by the way that was in reference to Ray Epps, and yesterday you indicted him. Isn’t that a wonderful coincidence? On a misdemeanor. Meanwhile, you’re sending grandmas to prison. You’re putting people away for 20 years for merely filming, some people weren’t even there. Yet, you got the guy on video. He’s saying go into the Capitol. He’s directing people to the Capitol before the speech ends. He’s at the side of the first breach. You’ve got all the goods on him. 10 videos, and it’s an — it’s an indictment for a misdemeanor. The American public isn’t buying it. I yield the balance of my time to Chairman Jordan.” Garland: “May I answer the question?” Jordan: “I’m going to ask you one now. Let’s — we’ll let the gentleman —“ Garland: “Um —“ Jordan: “Go ahead, but —“ Garland: “In discovery, and the cases were filed with respect to January 6, the Justice Department prosecutors provided whatever information they had about the question that you’re asking. With respect to Mr. Epps, the FBI has said that he was not an employee or informant of — of the FBI. Mr. Epps has been charged. And there’s a proceeding I believe going on today on that subject.”

ARDERN: “This week we launched an initiative alongside companies and non-profits to help improve research and understanding of how a person’s online experiences are curated by automated processes. This will also be important in understanding more about mis- and disinformation online, a challenge that we must, as leaders, address. Sadly, I think it’s easy to dismiss this problem as one in the margins. I can certainly understand the desire to leave it to someone else. As leaders, we’re rightly concerned that even the most light touch approaches to disinformation could be misinterpreted as being hostile to the values of free speech that we value so highly. But while I cannot tell you today what the answer is to this challenge, I can say with complete certainty that we cannot ignore it. To do so poses an equal threat to the norms we all value. After all, how do you successfully end a war if people are led to believe the reason for its existence is not only legal but noble? How do you tackle climate change if people do not believe it exists? How do you ensure the human rights of others are upheld when they are subjected to hateful and dangerous rhetoric and ideology? The weapons may be different, but the goals of those who perpetuate them is often the same: to cause chaos and reduce the ability of others to defend themselves, to disband communities, to collapse the collective strength of countries who work together. But we have an opportunity here to ensure that these particular weapons of war do not become an established part of warfare. In these times, I’m acutely aware of how easy it is to feel disheartened. We are facing many battles on many fronts, but there is cause for optimism, because for every new weapon we face, there is a new tool to overcome it. For every attempt to push the world into chaos is a collective conviction to bring us back to order. We have the means. We just need the collective will.”

From Chicago to Austin, and coast to coast, there are families fighting for school choice. Simply put, they want to decide the best education for their children. And in those same cities, there are Progressives and others who claim that school choice is bigoted. That it favors the rich. That it can not be allowed under any circumstances. So when those same Progressives tell parents 'No,' while they send their own kids to private schools, that transgression must be exposed for the world to see. Corey DeAngelis, senior fellow at the American Federation for Children, explains what is happening in education across the country, who is lying to their constituency and how to stop them from succeeding in their desire to prevent parents from doing good by their kids. Presented by Americans For Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org

Varney: “I understand, governor, that you’re planning to unveil your energy policy tomorrow. Could you give us a sneak preview? Is it, for example, going to be ‘Drill, baby, drill?’ Is that your energy policy?” DeSantis: “So what it’s going to do is, we want to give people relief at the pump. Gas is almost $4 a gallon nationally. In 2025 we’re shooting for $2 a gallon, and that means you’ve got to let people do their jobs. We need to embrace the resources that we have, both in terms of hydrocarbons, but also in terms of having an auto industry that makes sense. We’re going to get rid of the EV mandates so that people can buy the cars they want, and we are going to do things that are going to benefit us in terms of national security. Biden’s energy policy benefits China, Iran, Russia and Venezuela. We are going to restore energy dominance, we’re going to be so dominant that all those hostile regimes are going to have a disadvantage. And that’s, I think, what the American people want.” Varney: “Let’s turn to the border for a moment. 2,000 migrants crossed yesterday alone, 7,500 crossed just on Sunday. My question is, governor, can migrants work in Florida? Illegals, can they work in Florida? And if not, will you pursue any employer who uses them?” DeSantis: “No. So, we have mandatory E-Verify in Florida. It’s been very effective. You know, we’re happy to have people who are native Floridians, people that move from other states and even from other countries, legally, who come, and all those different people contribute to our economy being the top-rated economy amongst all 50 states. But illegal aliens coming is not something we’ve done, and so we’re proud to have stood up for the rule of law. I think that’s what it should be. We’ve got to come in there and clean house when it comes to the border. This is going to be a day one issue for me. We’re going to declare it a national emergency. We’re going to have military at the border. We’re going to stop the invasion that is happening. I am a going to build the border wall because I think that’ll be effective, but I’m the only candidate running that is willing to lean in against the Mexican drug cartels because they are ultimately responsible for the chaos that we see with the drugs and the sex trafficking and the human trafficking. That ends when I become president.”

HAYES: Let me start with the most important matter facing our country at this dire moment, which is the matter of the Senate dress code, which is recently been changed. FETTERMAN: Of course, of course, yes, yes, yeah, of course. I’ve heard about- I've heard that some people are upset about that, and the right have been, like, losing their mind, you know. They're just like, oh my God, you know, dogs and cats are living together and you know, like, I said, aren't their more important things we should be talking about rather than if I dress like a slob? HAYES: Yes, Marjorie Taylor Greene said the Senate no longer enforcing a dress code for senators is to appease Fetterman as disgraceful. Dress code is one of society standards, and etiquette and respect for institutions, stop lowering the bar. What do you say to that? FETTERMAN: Well, you know, her platform, you know, really, she runs on more and more ding-a-ling, you know, picks, you know, on-, uh in-, the meetings over in Congress. So, again, I- I’m not really sure why she cares how I dress. But, you know, she really takes it a different way.

YELLEN: "Look, we still have a good, healthy labor market. Consumer spending remains quite robust. We’ve seen strong industrial production. I don’t see any signs that the economy is in risk of a downturn."

BROOKS: It should be looked into. His dad was somewhat involved with some of the conversations, maybe only in small talk, but he was somewhat involved. We should know whether Hunter Biden’s business was a sham, pretending to pedal influence that he did not actually have. Or whether there was some substance to it. That merits an inquiry. It does not merit an impeachment. An impeachment should be 'holy cow', we should have some evidence of something truly shocking before we take the extraordinary step of impeachment inquiry or else we risk cheapening the whole impeachment process. >> Republicans have failed to produce any evidence of wrongdoing. John Fetterman was asked about this inquiry in the halls of the U.S. Senate, and this was his response. Rep. Van drew: — sen. Fetterman: Oh my gosh, it is devastating. Don’t do it, please, don’t do it. Geoff: Setting aside the senator’s sartorial choices, the fact that he made fun of it, he is dismissing it in a cartoonish way, is that a mistake? Should Democrats take it seriously? CAPEHART: Democrats absolutely should take this seriously. I get where the senator is coming from. To David’s point, there is no evidence here yet. If the Republicans were serious, the Oversight Committee and chairman Comer would be doing a serious investigation instead of a fishing expedition that they are on, so far finding nothing. That is why the senator is like, this is so scary, but on the other hand, impeachment is a big deal. The American people, whether they know there was evidence or not, are going to say, what, he is being impeached? This is terrible. This is what happens to terrible people who do terrible things, we don’t have any evidence of that at all. The Senator is reacting that way, the White House is not.

The US allowed a prisoner swap to take place that gives Iran $6B. Why would they do this? And the impeachment inquiry is a good start, but will they actually do the digging necessary....and will they play as rough as the Democrats do? Rep. Jim Banks (IN-3) talks to Tony Katz about the next steps for the House and whether this prisoner swap hurt America on the world stage. Presented by Americans For Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org

New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) has decided that the Constitution can be suspended if she simply feels like doing so. In order to combat "gun violence" in her state, gov. Grisham decided that no one in New Mexico can open or conceal carry a firearm for 30 days. Of course, this is a clear and flagrant violation of the US Constitution. Even leftists have said so. But she would have had to know that. So, why do it? Is this just a test balloon to see how Americans would react? 2nd Amendment lawyer and radio host Guy Relford talks to Tony about the issue. Presented by Americans for Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org Find guy at http://relfordlaw.com

PANALIST: “She won by 11 points.” WALLACE: “Right.” PANALIST: “And what I find so perverse in all of this, the dark, dark comedy of it all, is that they’re impeaching her on the grounds that she promised to save democracy in Wisconsin.” WALLACE: “Yeah. I mean, look, to your point, this is my — it is not the Democratic Party’s fault that we’re here, but they’re the only ones that can save us. And the Democratic Party’s response to all the voter suppression laws is, ‘Well, we’ll just educate our voters. We’ll turn them out.’ It’s to adjust, it’s to adapt. And that’s what the brain does, right? When it’s hit, it adapts, it makes adjustments. But it seems like it’s a good moment to go to the country with this bigger argument about the Republican Party, and in terms of numbers, as the largest anti-democratic force on the planet.”

At this point, the Anti-Defamation League has to start asking itself whether Jonathan Greenblatt is right for the job as CEO.