Tony Katz

Georgia has indicted President Donald Trump, along with a host of others associated with him, for attempts to interfere with the 2020 election. Using racketeering laws in the state, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis said she would try all 19 defendants together. We've seen Trump be indicted before, but the charges in Georgia are different. And, possibly, the charges that will lead to a conviction that the Left is desperate to achieve. Cornell Law Professor William Jacobson breaks down what the charges are, how they differ from the other indictments and what defense Trump might have. Presented by Americans for Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org

COOPER: “Van, what do you make of that? Because it does seem like, certainly given his past, he has these lines that he will try to go to, to kind of own the headline or get the click the next day on news sites.” Jones: “Everybody will show up with a bag full of zingers and one liners, hoping they can get them off there. But when the big lights hit you and people start punching in the head, sometimes those plans go out the window. I think that is a Mike Tyson quote, ‘Everybody has a plan until you get punched in the face.’ And he’s gonna get punched a bunch. So, Chris Christie is no joke, he knows how to throw a punch, and — Vivek being right next to him, it’s amazing, you have somebody who’s a nobody six months ago sitting right next to Ron DeSantis. I think that he is going to have to show himself, and I think that he has more to lose than anybody else. He has got this kind of reputation, they call him Robot Ron, all sorts of stuff. If he goes to anything too standard and too programmed, he’s going to get beat up. So, Ron DeSantis has the most to prove and the most to lose tomorrow night.”

Biden: “This lawlessness that takes place although initially generated by a — a — a — a — a ideological group, Hamas or whatever, you also it spawns just lawlessness generally. And what you have now in the Pales — among the Palestinians, there are a lot of just thugs, just plain old criminals, who are able to roam and reach in a way that they wouldn’t if, in fact, there was a Palestinian government that had the capacity to maintain order on their streets.”

Cornell Professor William Jacobson joins Tony Katz Today on 93.1 WIBC-FM to discuss the testimony given to Congress by the Presidents of MIT, Harvard, and UPenn. All three University officials refused to say that mobs of students on campus calling for Jewish genocide qualified as harassment or intimidation. Jacobson notes the complete failure of leadership and intellectual dishonesty in America's most elite Universities and describes the toxic and dangerous environments on today's college campuses. Get more from Dr. William Jacobson at legalinsurrection.com ****** 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

Biden: “I know there’s some attention paid to some language in the report about my recollection of events. There is even reference that I don’t remember when my son died. How in the hell dare he raise that? Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself, wasn’t any of their damn business. Let me tell you something. Some of you have commented. I wear since the day he died, every single day, the rosary he got from Our Lady of — every Memorial Day we hold a service remembering him, attended by friends and family and the people who loved him. I don’t need anyone, I don’t need anyone to remind me of when he passed away. The simple truth is, I have sat for a five-hour interview, over two days of events, going back 40 years at the same time I was managing an international crisis. Their task was to make a decision about whether to move forward with charges in this case. That was their decision to make. That’s the counsel’s decision to make. That’s his job. And they decided not to move forward. For any extraneous commentary, they don’t know what they’re talking about. It has no place in this report. Bottom line is, the matter is now closed. I’m going to continue what I’ve always focused on, my job of being president of the United States of America. I thank you, and I’ll take some questions.” DOOCY: “President Biden, something the special counsel said in his report is that one of the reasons you were not charged is because, in his description, you are a well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory.” BIDEN: “I’m well-meaning and I’m an elderly man, and I know what the hell I’m doing. I’ve been president, I put this country back on its feet. I don’t need his recommendation. It’s totally —“ DOOCY: “How bad is your memory and can you continue as president?” BIDEN: “My memory is so bad, I let you speak. That’s —“ REPORTER: “Do you feel your memory has gotten worse, Mr. President?” BIDEN: “My memory has not — my memory is fine. My memory — take a look at what I’ve done since I’ve become president. None of you thought I could pass any of the things I got passed. How did that happen? You know, I guess I just forgot what was going on.” REPORTER: “Mr. President, for months, when you were asked about your age, you would respond with the words ‘watch me’. Well, many American people have been watching and they have expressed concerns about your age.” BIDEN: “That is your judgment — that is your judgment. That is not the judgment of the press.” REPORTER: “They expressed concerns about your mental acuity, they say that you are too old. Mr. President, in December you told me that you believe there are many other Democrats who could defeat Donald Trump. So why does it have to be you now? What is your answer to that question?” BIDEN: “Because I’m the most qualified person in this country to be president of the United States and finish the job I started.” BIDEN: “The House is in negotiation — look. I’m of the view, as you know, that the conduct of the response in Gaza, in the Gaza Strip, has been over the top. I think that, as you know, initially the president of Mexico, Sisi, did not want to open up the gate to allow humanitarian material to get in. I talked to him. I convinced him to open the gate. I talked to Bibi to open the gate on the Israeli side. I’ve been pushing him really hard, really hard to get humanitarian assistance into Gaza. There are a lot of innocent people who are starving, a lot of innocent people who are in trouble, and dying. And it’s got to stop. Number one. Number two, I was also in the position that I am the guy that made the case that we have to do much more to increase the amount of material going in, including fuel, including other items. I’ve been on the phone with the Qataris, I’ve been on the phone with the Egyptians, I’ve been on the phone with the Saudis, to get as much aid as we possibly can into Gaza. They’re innocent people, innocent women and children who are also in badly need of help. And so that’s what we are pushing. And I’m pushing very hard now to deal with this hostage cease-fire, because, I’ve been working tirelessly in this deal — how can I say this without revealing — to lead to a sustained pause."

The May jobs report shows a big jump in the workforce, with 339,000 jobs created. Markets are responding positively to the news. But the top line doesn't tell the whole story. Isn't the Fed trying to cool the economy? And what about productivity, which is on the decline? The Biden economy has issues, and that's what matters. Economist Dr. Matt Will explains what is happening and what it means for American families. Presented by Americans For Prosperity. http://americansforprosperity.org

Elizabeth "Libby" Glass is running for the Indianapolis City-County Council. She is running against Jesse Brown, a socialist who argues for "housing for all" among other issues. Will Indianapolis continue allowing the Progressives to hurt the city, or will they shed their ideology to do what is best for their children? Libby Glass talk about her vision for the city, and how to change minds and overcome party affiliation. Find more about Libby at https://www.libby4libertyin.com

Credit rating agency Fitch has downgraded the United State from AAA to AA+. It might seem slight, but it's not. The implications can have huge effects on markets, and on America's ability to attract investment. Over the past two months we have been seeing the credit crunch from banks. They are doing less lending to both business and individuals. This crunch means less expansion, and the cost for expansion is crazy high. This means less growth. This means a stagnant economy. But we are told that Bidenomics is going great! Economist Dr. Matt Will explains what the downgrade means and why you should be concerned. Presented by Americans For Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org

President Biden recounts small house fire fifteen years ago in Hawaii speech.

They'll tell you the jobs numbers are up, but they won't mention that jobs have been revised down all year. They'll tell you that the Fed wants three rate cuts in 2024. They won't tell you that the minutes of the meeting don't guarantee that at all. They'll tell you the Bidenomics is a success. If that's the case, why doesn't America agree? Dr. Matt Will, economist at the University of Indianapolis, explains whether we're seeing the "soft landing," or whether 2024 looks like a hard time for all of us. Presented by Americans For Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org

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

This race for Speaker of the House seems to be boiling down to three names: Rep. Steve Scalise, Rep. Jim Jordan and, yes, former President Donald Trump. The question is: Does it matter who the GOP picks? Will they be able to do the job without Rep. Matt Gaetz lurking in the shadows? Speaking of the job....what is it that we expect out of a Speaker who has such a slim majority? Townhall columnist, lawyer and author Kurt Schlichter talks to Tony about what's next for the GOP. Find Kurt's latest book at Amazon - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CK6QPJKG Presented by Americans for Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org

It makes no sense. Robert F Kennedy Jr comes across as a rational guy. He certainly did in my interview with him, which you can find on Rumble and a bunch of other platforms. ***WATCH THE WHOLE VIDEO! The camera will correct quickly.*** But his rationality is about his approach. Compared to rabid Progressives, he talks like an old school Democrat. And, yes, it is refreshing. But does the Right really think his policies are best for the country going forward? For their families? RFK Jr. Has a history of some very incendiary comments about climate. As a Democrat, it’s obvious that taxes on “the wealthy” will rise. Conservatives think he’s a better choice than EVERYONE in the Republican field? That’s a mistake. Democrats may be looking for someone to replace Biden, but the Right should not be helping them. Presented by Americans For Prosperity. Http://Americans for prosperity.org WATCH Tony Katz one-on-one with RFK Jr. https://rumble.com/v2pyjye-exclusive-robert-f.-kennedy-jr.-talks-about-challenging-biden-trump-and-des.html

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.”

Tony Katz vists Kibbutz Be'eri, one of the areas hardest hit by Hamas terrorists on October 7th, 2023 ****** 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

This is just one of many, many lies the media has been caught in since Hamas, a terrorist orgnanization committed to killing Jews and wiping Israel off the map, launched a barbaric attack that killed over 1400 Israelis. Yet, it is the response from Israel that has the media in a lather! Questions about restraint. Claiming that "war crimes" are happening because Israel has shut off the water to Gaza (full disclosure, that is not a war crime under any international statute. It is not up to one country to provide water to any other location.) And now, media outlets running a story that Israel bombed a hospital in Gaza when that is not the case. The rocket that killed over 500 in that hospital came from Gaza. It was fired at Israel, by Hamas! Why would media publish the story without checking the facts first? Maybe it's because the media has picked the wrong side in this war. Noah Rothman of National Review joins Tony to discuss how to fight this. Read MORE from Noah Rothman - The Hospital-Bombing Lie Is a Terrible Sign of Things to Come: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-hospital-bombing-lie-is-a-terrible-sign-of-things-to-come/ Israel, Hamas, and the End of Pax Americana: https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2023/11/israel-hamas-and-the-end-of-pax-americana/ Presented by American For Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org

MITCHELL: “We now have the the mother back on — back on with us. We were going to ask you about what you’re saying to your boys. You were trying to keep them calm. Tell us about that conversation.” Israeli MOTHER: “Yeah, I was on the phone with them and trying to calm them down, saying, you know, the military is going to get there and safe and they’re in their home. This is what we always tell them. And then at approximately half past 8, they started hearing voices of the door breaking. They were with me on the phone, and I asked them to be quiet, to stay quiet. They were in a safe room, which is a bedroom of the eldest, who is 16, as I said, and about 10 minutes later I could hear people speaking in Arabic outside their door when they broke in, and the last thing I heard was the youngest, who is 12, saying, ‘I’m too young, don’t take me.’ And that was it. That was the last time I heard from them.” MITCHELL: “I am so sorry. We’re all thinking about you. Have you heard anything from the government?” Israeli MOTHER: “No, unfortunately, not yet. Well, the army is now getting in touch with families I know, and I’m keeping my hopes up that they’re alive and well. I know that their father and his spouse were taken also because we’ve seen one of the videos that Hamas put on, so we know that they’re alive, and I’m hoping that they’re with them. And as they took hundreds of children, babies, women and elderly people, some of them from the place I live in, I’m hopeful that they’re all together and that they have other people that they know around them to keep them safe and to give them a hug, and just come back home.” MITCHELL: “You know, I’m sure you want them to be with people they know so they’re not alone there. But what are your feelings about the attacks against Gaza right now? How can the government — “ Israeli MOTHER: “You’re looking for a symmetrical situation, and I must say, it isn’t. If you were dealing with of a war who is between two countries, countries don’t take children hostages, I’m sorry. It’s against the laws of war. It’s against humanity. It’s against anything that we all believe in. Every time we had missiles shot at us, I used to say to my children that they should be sympathetic towards the children of Gaza because they suffer a lot more than they do. I’m not sure I still believe in it now. And I must say, the only worry I have now from the bombings in Gaza is the fact that my children are there. And I can’t be sympathetic anymore. I can’t be sympathetic to animal human beings — well, they’re, not really human beings — who came into my house, broke everything, stole everything, took my children from their patrons, and took them to the Gaza Strip. Israel never done that and it will never do. So, there is no symmetry. I’m sorry. I’m sorry for being so emotional.” MITCHELL: “Do you want the government to put the the top priority on getting the hostages out before they retaliate?” Israeli MOTHER: “I want my government to put it on the first priority and I want the world to put it on the first priority. I think any mother in the world should try and imagine her children in that situation and then think again. That’s all I want. I want the world to ask them to release children, to release elderlies, to release the civilians they took. There is no reason to hold them there. They are not soldiers. They are not part of the war and they have nothing to do with it. We gave them work permits. We really believed that this was the way to move their economy, to reconnect these two so-called countries. This is not the way a country behaves. This is a way that a terror organization behaves. I’m sorry. So, again, there’s no symmetry.” MITCHELL: “And again, you have not heard from the government since Saturday when this horrific thing happened?” Israeli MOTHER: “As I said, I have been contacted, but they haven’t had any news for me. They just wanted to know what I know and to get my information. As far as I’m concerned, there’s no news. They have been contacted, but there’s no news. Obviously, there’s lots for the government in Israel to — to learn from this situation, but I’m not focused on that. I’m focused on the world helping to release my children and the other hundreds of civilians held hostage in the Gaza Strip. That’s all I’m focused on. There will be time to rethink. There will be time to learn. There will be time to make conclusions. It’s not now.” MITCHELL: “That is completely understandable. We can’t can’t even imagine your agony. At least, you know, you are getting your message out, and I know that’s why you’re doing this. You want the world to know what is happening to your beloved children.” Israeli MOTHER: “Yes, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity.” MITCHELL: “Thank you. And wishing you — our prayers and our hearts are with you.” Israeli MOTHER: “Thank you so much.” MITCHELL: “Thank you for sharing your grief with us, your agony. And we’ll have more. We’ll be right back.”

UNKNOWN FEMALE: “And you know as far as building a better community or better homes than what we have, I unfortunately, didn’t like that. Because — only because like for our Kupuna and Lahaina family, and for a lot of people that had lost what they had lost, there’s no replacing that, there’s no better there’s no new, there’s no better than that, you know. And, you know, forgive me if I might have misunderstood him, but yeah, that didn’t sit very well with my heart when he said that. Yeah.”

After review, the GOP has found much wanting in this so-called bipartisan legislation. 5,000 encounters a day? Sec. Mayorkas can grant asylum as he pleases? If you want to sue, you have to do it in D.C.? The border patrol union wants it to pass. So do many in law enforcement. But wanting something that is "better" is not the same as getting something that is "good." ALSO: Amazon worked to suppress titles that were skeptical of the Covid vaccine during the lockdowns. Why? The Government asked them to do so. PLUS: The loss of Toby Keith, and you're gonna agree with al Sharpton. Seriously. SUBSCRIBE ON YOUTUBE AND RUMBLE. FOLLOW ON X, FACEBOOK and LINKEDIN

CHAIR: “You’re recognized for five minutes.” STEFANIK: “Dr. Gay, a Harvard student calling for the mass murder of African Americans is not protected free speech at Harvard, correct?” GAY: “Our commitment to free speech —” STEFANIK: “It’s a yes or no question. Is that correct? Is that OK for students to call for the mass murder of African Americans at Harvard? Is that protected free speech?” GAY: “Our commitment to free speech extends —” STEFANIK: “It’s a yes or no question. Let me ask you this. You are president of Harvard, so I assume you’re familiar with the term ‘intifada, correct?” GAY: “I’ve heard that term, yes.” STEFANIK: “And you understand that the use of the term ‘intifada’ in the context of the Israeli-Arab conflict is indeed a call for violent armed resistance against the State of Israel, including violence against civilians and the genocide of Jews. Are you aware of that?” GAY: “That type of hateful speech is personally abhorrent to me.” STEFANIK: “And there have been multiple marches at Harvard with students chanting quote, ‘There is only one solution, intifada revolution,’ end quote, globalize the intifada. Is that correct?” GAY: “I’ve heard that thoughtless, reckless, and hateful language on our campus. Yes.” STEFANIK: “So based upon your testimony, you understand that this call for intifada is to commit genocide against the Jewish people in Israel and globally, correct?” GAY: “I will say again, that type of hateful speech is personally abhorrent to me.” STEFANIK: “Do you believe that type of hateful speech is contrary to Harvard’s code of conduct? Or is it allowed at Harvard?” GAY: “It is at odds with the values of Harvard. But our values also —” STEFANIK: “Can you not say here that it is against code of conduct at Harvard?” GAY: “We embrace a commitment to free expression even of views that are objectionable, offensive, hateful, it’s when that speech crosses into conduct that violates our policies against bullying, harassment —“ [crosstalk] STEFANIK: “Does that speech not cross that barrier? Does that speech not call for the genocide of Jews and the elimination of Israel?” GAY: “When that speech —” STEFANIK: “You testified that you understand that is the definition of intifada? Is that speech according to the code of conduct or not?” GAY: “We embrace a commitment to free expression and give a wide berth to free expression, even of views that are objectionable, outrageous and offensive.” STEFANIK: “You and I both know that’s not the case. You are aware that Harvard ranked dead last when it came to free speech. Are you not aware of that report?” GAY: “As I observed earlier, I reject that characterization of our campus.” STEFANIK: “It’s — the data shows it’s true. And isn’t it true that Harvard previously rescinded multiple offers of admissions for applicants and accepted freshmen for sharing offensive memes, racist statements, sometimes as young as 16 years old? Did Harvard not rescind those offers of admission?” GAY: “That long predates my time as president, so I can’t speak to that.” STEFANIK: “But you understand that Harvard made that decision to rescind those offers of admission?” GAY: “I have no reason to contradict the facts as you present them to me.” STEFANIK: “Correct. Because it’s a fact. You’re also aware that a Winthrop House faculty Dean was let go over — over who he chose to legally represent, correct? That was while you were Dean.” GAY: “That is an incorrect characterization of what transpire —” STEFANIK: “What’s the characterization?” GAY: “I’m not going to get into details about a personnel matter.” STEFANIK: “Well, let me ask you this. Will admissions offers be rescinded or any disciplinary action be taken against students or applicants who say, from the river to the sea or intifada, advocating for the murder of Jews?” GAY: “As I’ve said, that type of hateful, reckless, offensive speech is personally abhorrent to me.” [crosstalk] STEFANIK: “And today that no action —” GAY: “When —” STEFANIK: “— will be taken, what action will be taken?” GAY: “— when speech crosses into conduct that violates our policies, including policies against bullying, harassment, or intimidation, we take action, and we have robust disciplinary processes that allow us to hold individuals accountable.” STEFANIK: “What action has been taken against students who are harassing and calling for the genocide of Jews on Harvard’s campus?” GAY: “I can assure you we have robust disciplinary processes —“ [crosstalk] STEFANIK: “What actions have been taken? “ GAY: “— with actions under way.” STEFANIK: “I’m not asking — I’m asking what actions have been taken against those students?” GAY: “Given — given rights to privacy and our obligations under FERPA, I will not say more about any specific cases other than to reiterate that processes are ongoing.” STEFANIK: “Do you know what the number one hate crime in America is?” GAY: “I know that over the last couple of months there has been an alarming rise of anti-Semitism which is understand is the critical topic that we are here to discuss.” STEFANIK: “That’s correct. It is anti-Jewish hate crimes. And Harvard ranks the lowest when it comes to protecting Jewish students. This is why I’ve called for your resignation. And your testimony today not being able to answer with moral clarity speaks volumes. I yield back.” CHAIR: “Gentlewoman yields back.”

COLLINS: “People in the RNC are trying to — they’re rolling out an early voting program. They believe that the Democrats are better at early voting than they are.” SOLTIS Anderson: “It’s one thing to say, ‘I wish we would go back to the pre-pandemic way we did elections,’ where there was less early voting, less absentee voting. But there’s also the reality that we’re in, which is that mail-in voting, early voting, absentee voting, these have been expanded, and that is largely here to stay. And so, you have to run in the world that exists. You have to run an election in reality. And if Republicans bail on early voting, they bail on absentee voting, where in some states, like Florida, they have actually had advantages for a while, they are leaving votes on the table. It is tactically disastrous if Republicans abandon it. Jones: “Do not listen to this woman, Republicans. Listen to Donald Trump. Don’t vote early. Please be quiet. It’s the one time I agree with Donald Trump. Republicans, don’t vote early.” COLLINS: “I mean, it’s the Donald Trump and Kari Lake effect. They’re the ones who are discouraging it.”

MERCHANT: “Isn’t it true that you met Mr. Wade October 2019 at a judges conference?” ATTORNEY 2: “I’m going to object. We haven’t gotten to the point where Ms. Willis should be treated hostile in this — “ WILLIS: “And I very much want to be here, so I am not a hostile witness. I very much want to be here.” UNKNOWN: “It’s not so much that you’re hostile, Ms. Willis. You’d be an adverse witness. Your interests are opposed to Ms. Merchant’s.” WILLIS: “Ms. Merchant’s interests are contradic — contrary to democracy, Your Honor, not to mine.” JUDGE: “All right.” MERCHANT: “I just ask — “ JUDGE: “Keep things moving. Ms. Merchant, next question, please.” WILLIS: Fulton County and the State of Georgia both pay me direct deposit. MERCHANT: Okay. So the cash that you would pay him, you wouldn‘t get it out of the bank. WILLIS: I have money in my house. MERCHANT: You have money in the house, so it was just money that was there. WILLIS: When you meet my father. He is until you as a woman, you should always have, which I don‘t have so let‘s don‘t tell him that, should have at least six months in cash at your house at all time that I don‘t know why it is old black man feels like that but he does. Growing up, my daddy had three safe so now my father bought me a lockbox and I always keep cash in the house. Now, I don‘t do it to the degree that my father would do it. So he you‘d probably be shamed with me. But I always have cash at the house that has been I don‘t know all my life. If you‘re a woman and you go on a date with a man, you better have $200 in your pocket. So that man acts up. You can go where you want to go. I keep cash at my house and I don‘t keep cash is good in my purse like I used to, I don't go on many dates, but when you go on a date should have caching your pocket. MERCHANT: So where did that cash originally come from? If it hadn‘t came out of the bank? WILLIS: Cash is fungible. Cash for years in my house. So for me to tell you the source of when it comes from when you go to publix and you buy something, get $50, you throw it in there when it‘s been my whole life, when I took out a large amount of money on my first campaign, I kept some of the cash of that like to tell you I just have cash in my house. I don‘t have as much today as I would normally have, but I‘m building backup now. You just put money and it‘s a very good practice. I would advise it to all women. MERCHANT: So you can't identify when you came into this cash or where the cash came from? WILLIS: I didn‘t say I couldn‘t identify it. Nobody gives me anything. I am sure that the source of the money is always the sweat and tears of me, which you asked me for, is when did the money go in there? What I am trying to tell you is so I got divorced in 2005 from my husband. You said "where did the money come from" So I need to tell you where the money came from so for many, many years, I have kept money in my house. That money in my worst days has probably only been 500 or thousand dollars at my best days, I probably had $15,000 in my house, cash in my house, at all times, there‘s going to be cash in my house or wherever I‘m laying my head. MERCHANT: The money that you paid Mr Wade, the cash in October of 2022, you do not know where that money came from? WILLIS: It came from my sweat and tears. MERCHANT: Do you know which job it came from. Did it come from Fulton County or did it come from a private job? WILLIS: I don‘t, what are you talking about? So it could have come from a private job because before I was da I was in private practice. So I earn money during that time period is probably in there. >> Can move on. Okay. Thanks. MERCHANT: “Same with Aruba, you don’t know where that cash came from either, right?” WILLIS: “Ma’am, you’re mischaracterizing my testimony greatly. I‘m not going to allow you to mischaracterize my testimony. I know that I keep money in my house. The amounts of money I gave to Mr. Wade, it was never that serious. I don‘t think I‘ve ever handed him more than $2,500 in a reimbursement. So, we’re not talking about $20,000 in cash. I don‘t have $20,000 in cash right now. The most I ever gave him, I know I gave him $2,500 when we went to Belize, because we went to one hotel and then we went to a second hotel. That $2,500 I actually gave him while we were still in Belize. I know that the Aruba trip, the one that you described with his mom, I think I gave him about $2,000 for that trip for, like, total.” MERCHANT: “His mom went to a Aruba with you?” WILLIS: “The Aruba trup, so I consider that to be one trip. So, we got off of a cruise ship, and then we went to Aruba, which is why I cannot remember is that the time that we had to stay in Miami to wait for the flight for Aruba. So I consider that one trip, but we didn‘t, like, come back to Atlanta and leave. We went — we flew down to Miami, we got on a cruise ship. We spent a couple of days with his mama. We came back to Miami. When we came back to Miami, either that day or the next day, we flew to Aruba. We spent a few days in Aruba and we came back. That was really one trip that even though we went two places, it was one trip.” WILLIS: He's never been to South Fulton. In 2019 I lived in South Fulton. He has never been to my residence in 2019. Ever. Not once. MERCHANT: In 2019 he's never been to your residence, anyplace? WILLIS: I lived in my home in South Fulton before I started getting the threats that were here, a house I paid for with my own sweat and tears, I'm no longer able to live there. But in 2019 I did, and in the 2 months of 2019 that I knew Mr. Wade, 3 months, the begininng of October, all of November, and all of December. Mr. Wade never came to my house in South Fulton. Let me help you out. I lived there in 2020. He never came to my house in 2020, let alone live with me, as you put awfully in these documents. In the first 3 months of 2021, Mr. Wade never came to South Fulton and it is certainly a lie that he lived with me. MERCHANT: So you said 2019, 2020. Did Mr. Wade ever visit you at a place that you resided? WILLIS: He has never been to my home in South Fulton. 2020 was before I knew that a phone call was going to be made, and I was going to have to abandon my home. As a result thereof, he never visited, lived at, came to, or has seen South Fulton. MERCHANT: You qualified that with your home in South Fulton, I’m asking — WILLIS: That’s where I lived in 2020! MERCHANT: In 2020 did he ever visit you at a place that you resided? WILLIS: Okay, I don’t understand, you’re gonna have to give me guidance. In 2020, I lived in South Fulton. That’s the only place I lived, in South Fulton. That’s before I had to abandon my home, Judge. And at my home in South Fulton — [CROSSTALK] MCAFEE: Ms. Willis, that’s, I’m gonna have to caution you. This is going to be my first time I have to caution you. You have to listen to the questions as asked, and if this happens again and again, I’m going to have no choice but to strike your testimony. So I need to break this down. Ms. Merchant’s question, I believe, is, asking whether you lived anywhere other than South Fulton. WILLIS: I did not live anywhere but South Fulton, Georgia in 2020. Before I began the prosecution of this case, and it was plan to only live there. MERCHANT: Did Mr. Wade ever visit you at the condo that you leased? WILLIS: He visited that condo, yes. MERCHANT: He did? WILLIS: Yes. MERCHANT: Did he ever spend the night at that condo? WILLIS: No. MERCHANT: Just visit? WILLIS: Yes. But he did visit for sure. MERCHANT: “Did you tell anyone at Fulton County Board of County Commissioners about your relationship with Mr. Wade?” WILLIS: “No.” MERCHANT: “Did you disclose your relationship to anybody at Fulton County?” WILLIS: “No, I don’t think so.” MERCHANT: “And as the chief law enforcement officer of Fulton County, I assume that you’re familiar with the county code and ordinances?” JUDGE: “I’ve said we’re not going to cover that in this hearing, Ms. Merchant.” MERCHANT: “I’m sorry, Judge?” JUDGE: “We said we weren’t going to cover the county regulations.” MERCHANT: “Okay, I won’t. May I ask you this, then? So, are you aware that you’re required to disclose any relationship with someone that you contract with in Fulton County?” UNKNOWN: “I'm going to object [inaudible]” JUDGE: “Will this be different because it’s potential for impeachment?” MERCHANT: “Yes.” WILLIS: “What did you ask me?” JUDGE: “Ms. Merchant, you can re-ask the question.” MERCHANT: “Okay. Are you aware that Fulton County requires you to disclose any relationship with someone that you’re doing business with?” WILLIS: “I’m not aware. And I know often that things are confused with state constitutional officers and county, but I’m not aware.” SADOW: “Who in the prosecution team prior to — I guess, the motion being filed by defendant Roman — who in the prosecution team knew of your personal relationship, and now I’m talking romantic, with Mr. Wade?” WILLIS: “So, sir, I am extremely private.” SADOW: “All I ask is who knew.” WILLIS: “No, no, no.” SADOW: “It’s now — if the answer is no one knew, that’s fine. I ask you who knew.” JUDGE: “Answer and then explain, Ms. Willis.” WILLIS: “I am very private. When I supervised Mr. [inaudible] and Mr. McAfee, they didn’t know who I was dating, but I can assure you I was dating somebody, so that I kept something private, that’s my private life, is not any mystery to anyone. It’s like a woman doesn’t have the right to keep her private life private, and I’m speaking on this because there have been all these intimations.” JUDGE: “You haven’t answered the question, Ms. Willis.” WILLIS: “I’m sorry, what was the question, Your Honor?” JUDGE: “Is there anyone else who knew about it? And then you can explain.” WILLIS: “I don’t know. I don’t think so. I certainly didn’t go out telling my business to the world.” SADOW: “So, the best of your recollection, you didn’t inform anyone on the prosecution team that the individual that you had chosen to lead the prosecution team had a personal relationship with you? Is that correct?” WILLIS: “That’s inaccurate. Your question is inaccurate. Because you stated that the person I chose, we had a personal relationship, so we had a friendship. We have to — we have all these distinguishing factors. Remember, when I chose him in November of ‘21, first of all, let’s get this straight. Mr. Wade was not actually my first choice. That’s no insult to him.” SADOW: “Your honor —“ WILLIS: “No, no, because of the way you phrased the question, you said when I chose him, I didn’t inform people of a personal relationship. We have defined personal as romantic. It is an inaccurate way to state the question —“ SADOW: “Then I will certainly restate it so it is very accurate.” WILLIS: “Okay. And please do not yell at me.” SADOW: “You hired Mr. Wade the first time on November 1st of 2021. Correct?” WILLIS: “November of 2021, yes, sir.” SADOW: “Your testimony is — whether one accepts it or not — your testimony, that at the time you hired Mr. Wade, there had never been a romantic relationship with Mr. Wade before you hired him, correct?” WILLIS: “Yes, my testimony is that we were very good friends, not — not talking about sex, so let’s just don’t —“ SADOW: “No, I’m talking about — I’m saying romantic relationship doesn’t necessarily have to be just sex. It can be dating, it can be holding hands. It can be any of those things that one might call romantic. I’m asking you whether or not, prior to November 1st of 2021, there was a romantic relationship with Mr. Wade. It’s very simple, it’s either yes or no.” WILLIS: “I don’t consider my relationship with him to be romantic before that. I’m not a hand-holder. So no.” SADOW: “That’s fine.” GILLEN: “So, the point is that what you’re telling us is that you were in financial straits, but really, that your testimony today is you had a cash hoard of maybe up to $10,000 in cash where you laid your head at night so that you would dip out and there would be no record of it. Correct?” WILLIS: “That’s not what I’m telling you, sir. That’s not at all what I’m telling you. What I’m telling you is that, throughout the course of my life, I have always kept cash in my house. That cash has ranged from times — my father would probably be ashamed of this because he would say it should be more, but that cash at times has ranged from $500 to maybe $9,000. He would be like, that is not what I told you to do. I have always had that amount of money. What I have told you is that when I travel, you do better negotiating when you travel if you have cash. You go get the cab, they say, oh, we are going to charge you $300 for the day. Well, I’ve got American cash. Will you take it for $150? And so, it’s my practice to take money when I travel. We’re not talking about a whole lot of money, we’re going to the Bahamas, $1,500 in cash is in my pocket, or at the most, $2,500. Belize was actually probably the most money I have ever taken, and it was taken because it was a big deal. My 50th birthday sucked. His 50th birthday — it sucked, it was terrible.” GILLEN: “Your Honor, I’d like to get back to some questions here.” WILLIS: “I’m trying to answer.” ALLEN DERSHOWITZ: I think there is a plausible case for perjury here but I think there is an open and check case for disqualification based on the appearance of impropriety. Look, when you admit that you paid for all these trips on your credit cards, then the burden of proof shifts to the other side to demonstrate that there was payback in cash and the fact that there are no records and the payments all have records, but the repayments have no records, gives rise to a plausible interpretation that that’s not true. That there was financial benefit that accrued to the district attorney. Therefore, there is more than enough for the judge to say at least an appearance of impropriety, total disqualification of the office, start from scratch, put the case in a different district, let’s see if an independent prosecutor thinks there is enough here for a rico prosecution.

This is not about the work the rank and file FBI agents do every day. This is about the FBI leadership, over the last 10 years (or more!) that have worked in a partisan fashion. Those in leadership who put themselves over the country. And that includes current FBI Director Christopher Wray, who consistently avoids answering question from Congress, shielding himself behind the canards of "ongoing investigation." When will Speaker McCarthy say enough is enough, and actually do something about the FBI's failure to be responsive to the most basic questions? Ed Morrissey of HotAir.com discusses the problem, and the political fall out potential for both McCarthy and Wray. Presented by Americans For Prosperity http://americansforprosperity.org

MAHER: “I don’t know where this comes from. I guess it’s ancient. Obviously, the hatred of the Jews goes way back. But I was taken aback by this.” BREMMER: “You can’t tell me you don’t think social media made it much worse.” MAHER: “I — so you think that’s the answer? Because it’s gotta be something about the Jews themselves, because there are other people around the world who are oppressed. There are other colonized places — not that Israel colonized anything. But why this one place? Why does this arouse, especially among young people, I mean, young people who hated Trump because he wouldn’t to condemn the people with the tiki torches talking about the Jews, but you are the ones with the tiki torches now!” (Applause)

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