7/16/24: Trump Picks JD For VP, Teamsters Pres Knifes Biden At RNC, Cop Saw Shooter 30 Minutes Prior, Biden Collapses In Blue States, Trump Docs Case Tossed Out
01:16:56 Share

Hi, I'm Katie Lowe's and I'm Guillermo Diaz. And we're the hosts of Unpacking the Toolbox, the Scandal Rewatch podcast where we're talking about all the best moments of the show. Mesmerizing. But also we get to hang out with all of our old scandal friends like Bellamy Young, Scott Foley, Tony Goldwyn, Debbie Allen, Kerry Washington. Well, suit up, gladiators. Grab your big old glass of wine and prepare yourselves for even more behind the scenes stories with Unpacking the Toolbox podcast.

Listen to Unpacking the Toolbox on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Meet the real woman behind the tabloid headlines in a personal podcast that delves into the life of the notorious Tori Spelling as she takes us through the ups and downs of her sometimes glamorous, sometimes chaotic life in marriage. I just filed for divorce. Whoa. I said the words that I've said like in my head for like 16 years.

Listen to Misspelling on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Angie Martinez, and on my podcast, I like to talk to everyone from Hall of Fame athletes to iconic musicians about getting real on some of the complications and challenges of real life.

I had the best dad and I had the best memories and the greatest experience. And that's all I want for my kids as long as they can have that. Listen to Angie Martinez IRL on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Hey guys, Ready or Not 2024 is here and we here at Breaking Points are already thinking of ways we can up our game for this critical election. We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade the studio, add staff, give you guys the best independent coverage that is possible. If you like what we're all about, it just means the absolute world to have your support. But enough with that, let's get to the show.

Good morning, everybody. Happy Tuesday. We have an amazing show for everybody today. I got a couple of programming notes just right here at the top. Unfortunately, one of Crystal's youngest daughters is in the hospital today. We are wishing her absolutely the best. Another programming note. It's been quite a personal just mess here.

on breaking points. My grandfather died a couple of days ago. I am actually getting married in a couple of days on Saturday, so I'm going to be out for the rest of the week. Luckily, we have our very own Ryan Grim and Emily Jashinsky who are stepping up to the plate. Ryan, thank you for bailing us out of these multiple personal crises that we face here on Breaking Points. We have never been more thankful to have you, man. So thank you both.

Glad to be here wishing Crystal's family well. Yes, thank you. Yeah, we all are. We're all thinking about her this morning. We'll keep everybody updated on that as well. So we have a couple of things, major things obviously to react to this morning, Ryan. We've got the RNC, the first day yesterday. The big news that Crystal brought everybody yesterday is that Donald Trump has chosen Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio as his running mate. We're gonna run through some of the details

of that announcement and then we're going to bring in Emily Jasinski from the RNC to get her reaction. Ryan and I are then going to interview Lieutenant Tim McMillan. He's the co-founder of Debrief Media. Some of you may know him, but for our purposes, he actually is former law enforcement who worked multiple presidential protection details and he's going to go over some more stunning details that we are learning

about the failed assassination attempt on Donald Trump and more importantly, the failed Secret Service and local law enforcement response. The things that we are finding out now are just absolutely shocking, including that the gunman was known to law enforcement with the picture some 30 minutes before the shooting and that the building that he was in during the shooting apparently had Secret Service snipers inside of it along with law enforcement. It doesn't get more of a failure than that. We're going to talk a little bit about the polls. We're going to talk

about some of the reaction anticipated of the RNC, where Donald Trump stands today. And then also, Ryan, this will be great for you and I to discuss, is the DNC and their official decision to try and nominate Joe Biden officially, virtually before the convention to stay. Any more conversation about whether he should stay in the race. We're also gonna talk about Joe Biden giving another interview yesterday on NBC News with Lester Holt. We have a couple of

Clips from that he also appeared on YouTube channel complex actually for youtubers who are out there and made some claims about Israel and Palestine which certainly bear scrutiny RFK jr. Who by the way Emily will have an interview with sometime later today We'll be getting super service protection We're gonna talk about that and then finally the documents case against Trump was officially dismissed by the judge massive

massive victory, legal victory for him. We're going to talk to our legal friend Bradley Moss about it. Now, look, here's the thing about Bradley. We all know he has an opinion, but on the facts of the matter, he actually can be a pretty objective legal analyst whenever he wants to be. So we're going to push him a little bit on that. So let's go ahead and start with the RNC. By

By the way, we finally got our very first view of Donald Trump after that failed assassination attempt. Guys, let's go ahead and roll some of this video that we can see. Ryan, you can see he's got a large piece of gauze and bandage that is on his right ear, which he said was pierced by a bullet. Obviously, a very big bandage, and it's a living reminder of the assassination attempt that was just a couple of days ago. Here we have J.D. Vance officially being nominated and acclaimed

I think it's by acclamation as the vice presidential nominee for the Republican Party while he was standing with the Ohio delegation. Just to go a little bit more into it, guys, let's go and put this next one up on the screen. The official Truth Social announcement that from Donald Trump yesterday, after lengthy deliberation and thought, considering the tremendous talents of many others, I have decided that the person best suited to assume the position of vice president

is Senator J.D. Vance of the great state of Ohio. J.D. honorably served our country in the Marine Corps, graduated from Ohio State, summa cum laude, Yale, blah, blah, blah. Hillbilly Elegy became a bestseller and a movie. It championed the hardworking men and women of our country. J.D. has had a successful business career in technology and finance, and now during the campaign will be strongly focused on the people he fought so brilliantly for, the American workers and farmers in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Minnesota, and far,

So as you know, Ryan, with those three states that he listed, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, literally the must-win states there for Donald Trump. The initial response so far from the Biden campaign and from many critics of Vance have been about some of his past comments. So before we get your thoughts, I just wanted to throw to this interview where he addressed some of that last night with Sean Hannity of Fox News. Let's get to it.

If you go back to what I thought in 2016, another thing that was going on, Sean, is I bought into the media's lies and distortions. I bought into this idea that somehow he was going to be so different, a terrible threat to democracy. It was a joke. Joe Biden is the one who's trying to throw his political opposition in jail. Joe Biden is the one who's trying to undermine American law and order. President Trump did a really good job.

And I actually think it's a good thing when you see somebody, you were wrong about them. You ought to admit the mistake and admit that you were wrong. John, I got to say, Donald Trump is as healthy as anybody I've ever met. I tell him all the time he's got ridiculous genes. I plan to be a very good vice president for Donald Trump for four years. Interesting there, Ryan. So, yeah, give us your reaction. What do you think?

Well, the most important thing, of course, is that this is what I predicted, right? So, but the reason that people didn't think that this was going to happen is that he doesn't, quote unquote, bring anything to the ticket. You know, just politically speaking, you know, Ohio's already in the bag for Republicans. He doesn't check any diversity boxes other than having a beard. And so people are like,

why do that? Especially when, you know, then you lose a major Trump supporter in the Senate and maybe DeWine appoints Vivek, but maybe not. Maybe he appoints some DeWine. Almost certainly will not. Almost certainly will not. We'll appoint like a DeWine-like figure. And so the question was always, well, why would he do that? It just doesn't add anything to the race. And

And maybe I was wrong when I predicted, and the only reason that the prediction came true is that Trump is now so confident in the polling that he doesn't feel like he actually needs a boost in the election.

And what he needs is help governing and help pushing the kind of MAGA agenda forward. And as you saw in that statement that he put out, Trump loves credentials. It's one of the funniest contradictions about Trump. He just absolutely runs against all the elites. But the fact that he was summa cum laude at Yale kind of makes it into the truth social post. Yeah.

about his upcoming vice presidential nominee. So it really does feel like him leaning into his base and showing an extraordinary amount of confidence that either Joe Biden is going to stay on the ticket and try

Trump is going to handle him easily or he's going to get replaced by Kamala. And as he said in that golf course video, he's like, you know, she's practically even worse. So that's what I read from it. I think you're right. Breaking Points viewers will know if you want to go roll the tape from a few months ago, I said, I don't think that Trump will pick J.D. And this was pre-assassination attempt.

obviously. But I said, I don't think he will pick JD unless he is totally confident of victory. And it's like, well, I actually saw your analysis on that in the snap reaction. I totally agreed with it. And look, full disclosure, I have known JD Vance on a personal level for probably eight, almost eight years now. So people should take everything I say with a grain of salt. I do think it's important to put that out there. I might have even known him longer. You want to hear my funny JD story? Yeah, go for it.

So as he was writing his book, and before it had even been published, he reached out to, or somehow he got in touch with Ariana Huffington, who was my boss at the time at the Huffington Post, because he wanted help promoting the book. And we ended up excerpting a copy of it. And Ariana connected me with him and said, you know who's great at book promotion? Ryan, talk to Ryan. That's true.

So JD and I talked before the book came out and I gave him some little advice here and there. And it's funny thinking back on the advice that I gave him. One of the things was like every event that you go to, make sure you collect all the emails of the people that like go to those events. And of course we'll run an excerpt of the book. It sounds really interesting. And thinking of like,

Going from collecting like, you know, 30 emails at a Barnes and Noble in like Columbus, Ohio to being the vice presidential nominee is quite something. I'll tell you, it is personally surreal and weird, you know, to kind of see something just I mean, it's something you imagine in a movie. Then you see him get officially acclaimed.

It is interesting, I think, for a couple of reasons. The big difference is that, so look, and this was actually, this was Crystal's point. She was like, Trump has never given any consideration to governing. So why should we believe that he's going to care this time around? Honestly, I think

That's a fair criticism. And that is one where I also was frankly worried. I was like, oh, well, here we go. We're going to get Tim Scott or Doug Burgum or, you know, any of these other just box checkers. Or Doug is a guy who brings in a lot of money. Tim Scott...

I think we all know what that one is because Trump just loves the fake diversity. For Rubio, it was the same thing. Oh, he speaks Spanish as if, you know, this is the funny thing. Trump Pence won, what, 10 million more votes in 2020 and flipped multiple Hispanic counties in South Texas. I don't

I don't remember anybody having saying, saying, well, if only Mike Pence had spoken Spanish, then all these Hispanics would have voted for him. It's a stupid way of thinking about how minority voters actually vote.

Regardless, I can only say that from my knowledge of the conservative movement and others, this is a pic of a person who genuinely does care about a lot of the purported things that Trump also has ran on in the past. So if we talk about immigration, if we talk about industrial policy, if we talk

about foreign policy. Now, I will say on foreign policy, I'm going to be totally honest. It is a little bit more mixed than a lot of people may know. J.D. is very anti-aid to Ukraine. He's a very, I would say pretty similar in my view about that conflict. Also about having to reorient US foreign policy towards China and also about the way that we should approach, let's say the military industrial complex.

and all of that. That said, I mean, I'm gonna be totally upfront here and say that he certainly has a very different opinion, I think, on Israel-Palestine, that conflict as well. I have never spoken to him about it, just in case anybody wants me to know, but he did talk a little bit about in his interview yesterday. So I won't claim that he is some 100% anti-war candidate, but he is certainly, I would say, different than Lindsey Graham or any traditional doctrinaire Republican. What do you think, Ryan?

Yeah, I think that's right. People might see his Ukraine policy and think for a second that, oh, maybe he's going to be different than Washington, you know, the Washington consensus when it comes to Israel-Palestine. But no, that's not really the case. I think Crystal's point is an interesting one about how Trump, you know,

I'll believe it when I see it with Trump's interest in governing. But I think one way to think about it is that, you know, whether or not you think that there was a deep state pushback and conspiracy to undermine and destroy Donald Trump, whether you believe that or not isn't the point. Donald Trump very much believes that. And so you don't have to believe that Trump has all of a sudden gotten an interest in governing, you know, for the sake of governing because he wants to lift up all people or anything like that. All you have to believe is

is that Trump thinks that he was not surrounded with the kind of people that were loyal to him and that would defend him in his battle with this deep state. And I think he feels like J.D. Vance is one of those people. And so whether that leads to governing or not, I think for Trump is completely beside the point.

But it does show that he's going to kind of approach this, what he sees as this internal conflict with more seriousness than he did last time. That's a great point. And that is another way where you can both believe in Trump's narcissism and his own personal interests and also project that. Yeah. And I've interviewed Donald Trump four, five times, I think, in the Oval Office. And what is the number one gripe that he would always have? These people are not loyal to me.

I remember interviewing him immediately after the entire Jeff Sessions bit. And actually, I think I pressed him, or maybe it was Jared Kushner in either one of these interviews. And I was like, guys, what are we doing here? Jeff Sessions, it was preempted Trumpism before Trump. This guy's the OG immigration hawk.

You know, on all of these different policy issues, a lot more skeptical on foreign policy. And they're like, yeah, well, he wasn't loyal, you know, on the Mueller investigation. But here is where you can actually fuse kind of the two things, as you said. And you can have somebody who's deeply skeptical of the federal bureaucracy, of the intelligence community, of a lot of the other people who are, quote, out to get Trump. And look, whether they're out to get him from a lawful perspective or not, which I do think is true. I

I think it is empirical that there is obviously an ideology that pervades people who work in the United States government. And he has said, J.D., very openly and clearly, he's like, look, we need to fire all these people and get rid of them. All Trump hears is, oh, the people who tried to get me, we're going to fire them. So those are not necessarily incompatible, I guess is one way to say it.

Yeah, I think that's exactly it. Their interests align there. And for Trump, the fact that he's loyal and they have the same enemies is enough. Right, right. Good point. And J.D. has shown that he'll just debase, like debases, maybe a little bit unfair. He's done such a 180 on Trump that he has the zeal of the converted.

He certainly does. And listen, I again will say I no one can ever know anyone's heart. Here's what he was. He said the same in interviews. I'll tell you on a personal level, if you talk to him with without the cameras rolling, he would tell you the same thing. He's like, I think I was wrong. I believed a lot of these media lies, his own personal, like his own personal, quote unquote, conversion on a lot of not even necessarily issues, but of Trump himself as this phony.

figure in the Republican party who is both speaking to a lot of the concerns, but in itself is the vehicle through which to get some of the things done for the voters. Let's say that he represents in Ohio and others. I think it is genuine. That is my opinion, but you know, you can say what you want. Yeah, go ahead. Yeah.

what we see now may be his genuine opinion, and what we saw before may be what he was telling to the audience that was gonna buy his books. So we always assume that the thing you're saying first is genuine, and then you switch to the artificial position. He might have gone artificial to genuine.

I don't know. I think he was being real at the time too. Or he could have been real at both. Also, it doesn't matter because it's politics. Brian, as you and I both know, back in 2016, okay, it was eight years ago. I tweeted this morning. I go, honestly, if you're the same person you were eight years ago, you're an idiot. Like, it's like you're actually an idiot.

That means that you don't think about anything. I'm certainly not the same person I was eight years ago. Let's put this up there on the screen because this is probably, for our purposes on this show, what is going to be one of the more undercovered aspects of J.D. Vance as the pick. People will recall I was talking about here on the show.

show about how the mega donors specifically on the financial sector have been very against J.D. Vance. So this is from the Financial Times. They say, why the rise of J.D. Vance in Trump world divides U.S. business. Some dealmakers detect an anti-corporate agenda in the populist ideology of the vice presidential contender. They talk specifically about how Vance has been open to corporate tax raise hikes, how he walked the UAW picket line, Ryan, how he, um,

How he praised Lena Khan, the FTC chair under the Biden administration. I can tell you at a personal level, I was at a speech that he gave some three, four days ago. And in it, he specifically was castigating the Wall Street Journal editorial board, being pro-corporate and shouting out,

organizations in the conservative movement who are pro-industrial policy and who have actually been lobbying hard to raise the corporate tax rate come 2025. Now, I'm not gonna sit here and claim that J.D. Vance is a leftist. However, he wasn't in Congress in 2017. I don't believe that he, I know for a fact there are at least some aspects of the TCJA 2017 bill that he would not support necessarily. He's been on the record about child tax credits or

about redistributive programs, not, again, in the way that some leftists would want me, certainly for work requirements and other things, but not ideologically a Ron Johnson or a Rand Paul or even a Mitch McConnell, I guess is one way we would put it. What do you think, Ryan? Yeah, the Lena Kahn point is an amazing one. And you see my cat just knocked over. We love black cats on the show. Yeah.

i think there's another one too walking around here somewhere so the lena khan question is an amazing one i was talking to a conservative movement source yesterday about this kind of out of the box question of is there a world in which he would actually keep lena khan as chair of ftc and she said you know what if it were up to him i could see it like i i could you could actually imagine

J.D. Vance kind of flipping the script and saying, you know what, Lena Khan might not be my first choice, but she's done, I think his exact quote was, she's done a pretty good job. And it would show, having her in there would be a symbol of,

of the way that the kind of two sides have come together, at least on populist antitrust policy. And the question though becomes, what does Trump think? Trump's donors are much, much less inclined, much more inclined to slide with the Wall Street

Wall Street Journal editorial board. And much will depend on who becomes chief of staff, was her argument. Yes, you are exactly right. Ryan, we actually have Emily on standby waiting to get her in here. So let's get her reaction.

Hi, I'm Katie Lowe's and I'm Guillermo Diaz. And now we're back with another season of our podcast, unpacking the toolbox where Guillermo and I will be rewatching the show to officially unpack season three of scandal. Unpredictable. You don't see it coming. It's a wild, wild ride. The twists and turns in season three mesmerizing, but

Also, we get to hang out with all of our old scandal friends like Bellamy Young, Scott Foley, Tony Goldwyn, Debbie Allen, Kerry Washington. So many people. Even more shocking assassinations from Papa and Mama Pope. And yes, Katie and I's famous teeth-pulling scene that kicks off a romance.

And it was Peak TV. This is new scandal content for your eyes, for your ears, for your hearts, for your minds. Well, suit up, gladiators. Grab your big old glass of wine and prepare yourselves for even more behind the scenes. Listen to Unpacking the Toolbox on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Meet the real woman behind the tabloid headlines in a personal podcast that delves into the life of the notorious Tori Spelling, as she takes us through the ups and downs of her sometimes glamorous, sometimes chaotic life and marriage. I don't think he knew how big it would be, how big the life I was given and live is.

I think he was like, oh, yeah, things come and go. But with me, it never came and went. Is she Donna Martin or a down-and-out divorcee? Is she living in Beverly Hills or a trailer park? In a town where the lines are blurred, Tori is finally going to clear the air in the podcast Misspelling. When a woman has nothing to lose, she has everything to gain. I just filed for divorce. Whoa, I said the words. Yeah.

that I've said like in my head for like 16 years. Wild. Listen to Misspelling on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome to Cheaters and Backstabbers. I'm Shadi Diaz. And I'm Kate Robards. And we are New York City stand-up comedians and best friends. And we love a good cheating and backstabbing story. Welcome.

So this is a series where our guests reveal their most shocking cheating stories. Join us as we learn how to avoid getting our hearts broken or our backs slashed. Listen to Cheaters and Backstabbers on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Joining us now, our very own Emily Jaschinski. It's good to see you from the RNC. For our purposes, Em, we want to get your reaction here to the Teamsters president, Sean O'Brien. He's been on this show twice, actually speaking about the vice presidential pick, J.D. Vance. Let's take a listen. We'll get your reaction.

I mean, J.D. Vance, the short time that we've worked together, I mean, he's been great on Teamster issues. He is supporting, co-sponsored an airline manufacturing bill that addresses outsourcing of critical airline maintenance to China. He's also supported...

paid sick leave for our railroad workers. You remember that situation a couple of years ago when they weren't getting sick time. He stepped right up. He's also been very vocal and supportive of holding employers accountable who try and skirt their obligation under an independent contractor model known as DSP. So he's been right there on all our issues. We've publicly stated it. And look,

At this day and age, there's nothing better than having a U.S. Marine represented as a vice president candidate. What'd you make of that, Emily? John O'Brien later spoke actually at the RNC, which was a big moment. I think he's the first Teamsters president in 121 years to address the Republican convention.

Yeah, gave a real barn burner of a speech. And he led actually with the same thing that Donald Trump did. You'll notice he highlighted J.D. Vance as a Marine. It's basically the first sentence that Donald Trump had after announcing J.D. Vance was his vice presidential pick in his true social post. He said he's a Marine. And I think that's actually pretty interesting. You know, I'm about an hour outside in

the city right now in a very conservative county of Wisconsin. But you know, in those areas that used to be less conservative, when you go out to rural Wisconsin, it's not just Trump country, it's Bernie country. And I think that's what, you know, we take for granted almost 'cause we've known for so long that the RNC was coming here to Wisconsin and to Milwaukee.

that this was a strategic pick and it's been, it's turned out actually to be somewhat of a genius pick. Not that it took a genius to figure out that, you know, you should go to Wisconsin. No offense to Hillary Clinton, even all these years later, but it doesn't take a genius to figure that one out. And,

for these union guys, if you look around a state like Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, you realize that you just can't get around. You just can't get around where most of your members are on the Trump question. I'm not talking about any politics outside of that, because as you and Ryan know, when you talk to people, the kind of people that Sean O'Brien represents,

The Trump question is somewhat separate from how those other politics fall in line afterwards. And you just can't get around where most of the people he represents are on the Trump question. Yeah. Ryan, let's get your reaction to not only to that, but to this as well. I want to hear what both of you have to say. Let's put this up there on the screen. Monumental news that the Teamsters are considering withdrawing.

no endorsement in the 2024 race. I mean, Ryan, what would that mean for a Democratic presidential ticket? It just seems astounding. It's interesting. It's not clear. Symbolically, it means an enormous amount.

But the Teamsters and the building trades kind of more broadly, you know, have had their members supporting Donald Trump by 60 to 70 percent plus margins, you know, going back to 2016. And with the kind of Teamsters and building trade broadly leadership gap.

making the case back to their members that actually, no, Democrats are better for you for your pocketbook issues and for support at the NLRB and support of union issues. And then hearing back from their members, yeah, but A, we like Democrats.

Donald Trump and B, look at how wages went up. Look at how I had more money in my pocket while Trump was president. And so on a sheer number of votes, it probably doesn't actually matter that much because so many Teamsters themselves were already voting for Republicans. Now, if it means that Teamsters aren't spending money, that matters, although both parties have so much money at this point that

you know, a few million dollars from the Teamsters is kind of at the margins. The way that people inside the labor movement are viewing what Sean O'Brien is doing is kind of looking out for his members under a Trump administration, which everybody on the left expects to be filled with vengeance, whether that's true or not.

Like that is how the left is is seeing a potential Trump administration. And so they see Sean O'Brien as positioning himself and the Teamsters in a way that would mitigate some of the damage that might be done to to organize labor under it under a Trump administration. Emily, what was it like in the room when Sean O'Brien was speaking and when J.D. was picked? Just give us some color that we may not have picked up on the camera.

Yeah, I wasn't in the room last night because the press credentialing closed at like 6 p.m., even though all the speeches were to come. Shout out to the RNC for that one. But I will say I find it fascinating, the crowd that's mingling here in Milwaukee, because

And Sagar, you definitely know this. You've seen this before. It's different. Delegates are different. It's not so much that they're different people, but it's just that it's a sense of, let's say, I don't want to use the word loyalty because the corporate media uses that, and I don't think it's the right word to so many average Republicans' approach to Donald Trump. But it's a real sense of loyalty

of love. Honestly, I think that's the best word for Donald Trump that you didn't used to see for Republican politicians outside to my memory. You know, I remember being at CPAC in 2012 and seeing Sarah Palin. That's the closest thing I've seen to this in the past. And what's so interesting to me is the split screen of the Republican party being on full display yesterday, because I don't think,

Let's just say Trump doesn't pick J.D. Vance. Let's say Donald Trump picks Tim Scott, financial services committee chairman, close to a lot of the banks and the corporations. And that's where he is. Doug Burgum, something similar with Doug Burgum and some of the other characters that Donald Trump was reportedly considering. It's not clear to me.

what that would mean for a future Sean O'Brien speech at the RNC. Is this going to be a one-off? Well, with J.D. Vance sort of ascendant in the Republican Party now even more formally than he was just 48 hours ago, it looks like you could potentially have another Sean O'Brien speech at an RNC in the future, Sean O'Brien or Teamster speech or Teamster endorsement even. It's unclear, but the weight sort of in the balance went on that side last night.

You know, and I want to get your reaction, too, to some of the other speakers that were last night. We had David Sachs, who's been here on the program. We had Amber Rose, and we had quite a lineup. What's your reaction to that, Emily? You know, on the ground, people you're talking to, what's happening here? David, I guess. You know, he gave a lot of money, and he's somebody who I think—

On foreign policy, by the way, I can say this, he is 100% consistent. People can go and watch my interview with David here at the desk. Even on Israel, I know all the lefties want to go, go watch it for yourself. You can hear what he has to say right here where I'm sitting. But what was it like to see that coming together? What's your observation there of what's happening?

It's just so Trumpian. And it's even more Trumpian than 2016 and 2020. It feels like full Trump, although we may never actually reach full Trump. It feels like we're fuller Trump than we were in the past. The Amber Roach speech in particular, I saw Matt Walsh, for example, of the Daily Wire saying that this was a disaster. Republicans put someone who's sexually promiscuous and has a face tattoo on the stage. But her speech, if you listen to her speech,

I think actually spoke to something that a lot of people are experiencing right now. She said she felt lied to by the left. And when her dad told her, she talked about her dad a lot, when her dad started opening up her eyes to this, she basically realized a lot of what she had believed was not true. And in a city like

Milwaukee, where Republicans are really serious about eating into the margins that Democrats have had with Black voters for a really long time. With that narrative in particular, you are being lied to. I don't think it was a disaster at all. I actually think that reaction to it is really, really off the mark.

because that's where, you know, that's where you can really sort of end the Biden campaign is if those cities like Milwaukee, Cleveland, I guess not so much Cleveland because of where Ohio is now, but Philadelphia just don't vote for him. And maybe some of them will even vote for Trump.

Yeah. Ryan, what did you think of some of that lineup and generally where the RNC is right now? Just, you know, this is our last opportunity, the three of us, I guess, to talk before Trump gives his, Trump and J.D. give their vice presidential and presidential acceptance speeches.

It's a much more imaginative party than Democrats are willing to be. And yes, okay, David Sachs, like you said, gave a ton of money, and so that's one route onto the stage. But he's also one of these figures that's become prominent in the independent media and in the social media space.

And to elevate those kinds of people, and also Amber Rose, obviously, that's an imaginative place for a political party to go. Trump meeting with RFK Jr., just taking the meeting and talking to him, shows a flexibility and an imagination that Democrats don't have. Can you imagine Joe Biden sitting? It's completely inconceivable, even though it would be in their interests to try to make that happen. Yeah.

I was just going to say, Sagar, you know this. And Ryan, you know this too. You used to go to, if you used to go to Republican events, there was nothing more cookie cutter. I mean, truly, there was nothing more cookie cutter. But even just like demographic wise, there was nothing more cookie cutter. Everybody was wearing elephant skirts and was like coming from a very similar background. And then they'd hold up a couple of different people in the crowd and be like, see, it's like Trump, where's my African-American? But

that's actually now different. Like the crowds that you see walking around places like the RNC, it is not the elephant skirt crowds. It's a mix of that and some new people or some people who are comfortable approaching things differently. Yeah, Emily, I'm curious on that point. And in 2008 and 2012, some of the most, I think it was 2008, the conventions were week to week, like they were back to back.

And I remember going from one to the other and thinking, wow, like these are legitimately two different political parties. Like you can argue that, you know, it's a duopoly, but just physically seeing the two of them next to each other, like these are just simply different parties. And like you said, the cookie cutter nature of the Republican National Convention was

Utterly striking. So I wish I was there this year to see it. Like, are you seeing a slightly different Republican Party? Like, it just looks different as you're walking around.

Yeah, I mean, maybe it's the setting. I think it does feel a little bit more working class than typically you would have seen in the past at some of these events. And one big takeaway I had from yesterday, again, like I'm from this area, spent a lot, a lot of time in Milwaukee. I've worked in downtown Milwaukee. It was it was dead, dead.

yesterday. What you're seeing in the Fiserv Forum is a stark contrast with what you're seeing outside of it. I went out for dinner in a pretty trendy neighborhood last night and there's just nobody around because the security is so intense. So it feels like people are settling in here at the moment. And I'm curious to see how the crowds shape up in the next several days because as of yesterday, at least, it was quiet.

Yeah, well, we'll see. We'll see, Emily. Thank you so much for joining us. We really appreciate it. And I'm sure you'll check in more. I know the two of you guys are going to hold down the fort on Thursday, which is incredible. Thank you for bailing us out here. It's several personal crises and other personal events. Let's just put it that way. Ryan and I are now going to interview Lieutenant Tim McMillan about some of the law enforcement failures in the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. Let's get to it.

Hi, I'm Katie Lowes. And I'm Guillermo Diaz. And now we're back with another season of our podcast, Unpacking the Toolbox, where Guillermo and I will be rewatching the show. To officially unpack season three of Scandal. Unpredictable. You don't see it coming. It's a wild, wild ride. The twists and turns in season three. Mesmerizing. But also,

Also, we get to hang out with all of our old scandal friends like Bellamy Young, Scott Foley, Tony Goldwyn, Debbie Allen, Kerry Washington. So many people. Even more shocking assassinations from Papa and Mama Pope. And yes, Katie and I's famous teeth pulling scene that kicks off a romance.

And it was Peak TV. This is new scandal content for your eyes, for your ears, for your hearts, for your minds. Well, suit up, gladiators. Grab your big old glass of wine and prepare yourselves for even more behind the scenes. Listen to Unpacking the Toolbox on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Meet the real woman behind the tabloid headlines in a personal podcast that delves into the life of the notorious Tori Spelling, as she takes us through the ups and downs of her sometimes glamorous, sometimes chaotic life and marriage. I don't think he knew how big it would be, how big the life I was given and live is.

I think he was like, oh, yeah, things come and go. But with me, it never came and went. Is she Donna Martin or a down-and-out divorcee? Is she living in Beverly Hills or a trailer park? In a town where the lines are blurred, Tori is finally going to clear the air in the podcast Misspelling. When a woman has nothing to lose, she has everything to gain. I just filed for divorce. Whoa, I said the words.

That I've said like in my head for like 16 years. Wild. Listen to Miss Spelling on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Angie Martinez. Check out my podcast where I talk to some of the biggest athletes, musicians, actors in the world. We go beyond the headlines and the soundbites to have real conversations about real life, death, love, and everything in between.

This life right here, just finding myself, just this relaxation, this not feeling stressed, this not feeling pressed. This is what I'm most proud of. I'm proud of Mary because I've been through hell and some horrible things. That feeling that I had of inadequacy is gone. You're going to die being you. So you got to constantly work on who you are to make sure that the stars align correctly.

Life ain't easy and it's getting harder and harder. So if you have a story to tell, if you've come through some trials, you need to share it because you're going to inspire someone. You're going to give somebody the motivation to not give up, to not quit. Listen to Angie Martinez IRL on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Unfortunately, guys, we had some connection issues with Lieutenant Tim McMillan, but Ryan and I will do our best to break down some of the news here. Let's go and put this up there on the screen. So the first and most important news that we're dissecting together, be one please, gentlemen, is that law enforcement, according to NBC News affiliate, spotted the Trump shooter some 30 minutes before the shots were fired. Now, briefly, Tim McMillan told us that he did not necessarily believe

this report, but what we're reading from them is that according to Beaver County, Pennsylvania Emergency Services, they noticed, quote, a suspicious man on the roof near the rally at 5.45 p.m., called it in and took a picture of the person. Keep in mind that the shots were fired in Butler, Pennsylvania, some 6.15 p.m., Ryan. So if that is accurate,

That means that the shooter had nearly 30 minutes on or around the rooftop before anything – actually, not before anything was done. Nothing was done until he actually took shots at the president. We know that there was some confrontation moments before the shooting between local law enforcement and the shooter. But still, I mean, the details are stunning in their failure, if that's true.

Yeah, and to bring viewers behind the curtain here, we had Tim McMillan on for about 10 minutes, but his connection was just too unstable to keep going. And what he was saying there is that, yes, he said, I believe, of course, that they probably did surveil him. They basically surveil everybody ahead of the event. But he was quite skeptical that they would have surveilled him with a weapon,

and then done nothing at all. Like that just seemed too shocking even to him despite all the glaring failures that we've seen. And I asked him about what you've heard a lot of progressives say is, well, hey, Pennsylvania's a

an open carry state, doesn't this make it much more difficult for the Secret Service? And he said, because they're federal officials, they're able to push the perimeter basically as far as they want. And so you can't just creep right up to a presidential event, even if you're outside of it and say, hey, look, this is open carry. Secret Service has the ability to say, get out of here. Now, Secret Service cannot just

open fire on somebody for open carrying near an event. They'd have to say something like, hey, look, you need to move on here. That gets to the confrontation that we know about where a local police officer who was told, hey, there might be someone on the roof, climbed the roof, saw him,

kid pointed the weapon at him and he retreated and then immediately fired at the president. Yes, that's right. And we also have this. Let's put this up there on the screen, please. This is from ABC News. One of the things that they talk about here is that the local police, Ryan, allegedly were inside of the shooter building, according to the United States Secret Service. The detail is that the cops

actually were inside along with some other members of a counter sniper team just compounding some of the failure. The implication, Ryan, is that the building was not, quote, secured because the police were inside of it, whereas the rooftop itself is somehow not under surveillance. That was, I mean, listen, I mean, that might be actually one of the most stunning parts of all if what this checks out. And this is, again, according to the United States Secret Service.

And if you are those officers, your job is also to block access to being able to get on top of the building. But let's remember, what was it like in Pennsylvania that day? It was insanely hot. I wonder if some of these officers were like, you know what?

God, it's brutal out here. I'm dying out here. Trump's late getting on the stage. What's the worst thing that could happen? I'm going inside. This is crushing me. You know, I guarantee you that cops...

And other workers in other workforces, including myself, have done that kind of thing for centuries. The boss isn't looking. It's so hot. We're all human. We can understand it, I think, to a certain extent. Can we forgive it in this instance? Probably not. What's the worst that can happen? It happened. Well, actually, the worst didn't happen. Right, bud.

Near the worst. Very nearly happened. Yeah, near the worst. I mean, look, this is again why it's so extraordinary is this is the first time a bullet has touched a president or foreign president since Ronald Reagan. So it's been 41 years. This is the biggest failure since that Reagan shooting. And then honestly, in this case, I think it actually might be a bigger failure because this was counter to procedure. Whereas at that time, you know, things were crazy in the 70s and 80s where somehow you could just get very close to a president with a gun, which is nuts.

I mean, when we compare like Gerald Ford and Reagan and all this, it wasn't even counter to their procedure per se. Here, they explicitly are supposed to do X, Y, and Z at the most basic level. And it was a failure of that mission that led then to the attempted assassination. Let's put this up there on the screen again, just to go over the shooting, the sight line. What again, is that you can see that building that we're talking for those who are watching some 136 yards away from where the president was speaking.

And you can see that that building allegedly is where the staging ground for some of these local officers would be. It intuitively makes sense whenever you take a look at this because you have the rally area on the right where the stage is, and then it would make sense also that local police and staging areas, the so-called middle tier of the security perimeter, would be right there. Let's go to the next part, please, just to continue breaking some of this down because this is the image we showed everyone yesterday in –

in color and also with the rally set up there where the building there on the left, some 136 yards away from the president was exactly where that body of this shooter was found. Also, just so everybody knows, um, in terms of the investigation now for what we have, we continue to not know very much according to the authorities, um, from about this shooter, Thomas Matthews Crooks. Um,

So far, they're saying he has no internet presence. They were able to get access, I believe, to his cell phone. But the access to his cell phone apparently did not gleam any insight into his motive. Now, I know a lot of people are saying, well, it's obviously his motive was to kill Trump. Yeah, we know. But why?

for what possible reason. Was he a crank? Was he a suicide by cop? Was he looking for attention? I mean, nobody is particularly mentally stable in this, but I have to be honest, Ryan, in saying that I have a lot of eyebrows raised so far because I'm seeing, I honestly feel very much like I did after the Las Vegas shooting, where you had this horrible massacre, Steven Paddock shooting from the Mandalay Bay Hotel. All of these people are dead.

And all of the details are crazy. Oh, he just miraculously is able to bring all these guns up into his hotel room. He was able to fire for a sustained period of time. He's killed. And then basically we don't hear about it anymore. The FBI is like, yep, we never know why. He just did it. So there was speculation about health condition. He had large sums of money. Everything about it is weird.

And I'm starting to get a very similar feeling to this, and there's still so many unanswered questions about Las Vegas. And it appears that that is the direction that we are heading in right now. - And basically they had one roof. It's not as if you had a ton of buildings that you had to secure. It's that one roof. Now, maybe we find out that it's as simple as there were officers that were supposed to be outside of there and they got lazy and they walked inside because the sun was beating down on them and they didn't think anything would happen.

What I also don't understand, though, is, okay, I understand, maybe not agree, but I understand why the counter sniper sees the sniper and has them in his sights and is asking for permission to fire and is being told no. Because the argument was, well, what if it's somebody with a telescope? You don't want to kill an innocent person just looking through a telescope. But why not take Trump off the stage at that moment? Why not take him down?

underneath the podium. Like, that's not that big of a deal. The rally can go on. And then you sort out what the problem is. The decision not to do that is the one that is just, to me, just unforgivable. And not only unforgivable, Ryan, but if we have the situation where he's not taken off the stage, where the law enforcement appears to know who he is for 30 minutes-

They're underneath the building. And then let's not forget the heroic members of the audience who are consistently shouting at these police. He's on the roof. He has a gun and nothing is being done. Presumably, these gentlemen inside of the building would have gotten a heads up about

that somebody's gonna go do something. And what we know is that there was only one police officer, at least that we know so far, who's able to confront this individual. And when he confronts this individual, he actually retreats down the ladder after the gun is pointed at him. And in that moment of retreat is when the shots are fired at Donald Trump

And only by the grace of God, literally by turning his head slightly at that moment, do we avoid a – not only an assassination on live television, but consider even more of what – like we're talking about a literal head explosion in high definition in the 21st century. This is not the Zapruder film. It would be – oh my god. I can't even begin to imagine. Yeah.

And if you piece those things together, in some ways it feels to me like his crowd actually saved his life because by forcing that cop to go up there, that pushed the guy to shoot much faster. The reporting that we're getting is that he pointed the gun at the cop, the cop retreated, and then immediately he fired at Trump, which means that he had probably less time than he would have liked.

to set an aim and then fire. And so then he quickly took his shots and missed. And you're right, like there was a turn of the head and the other things that stayed with him as well. But I think the audience intervening made it a more difficult shot for the shooter. So the shooter missing is the thing to save Trump. And to the extent that the crowd participated in that, Trump needs to give some gratitude to his people.

Yeah, certainly. Let's go to the next part here and put this up there on the screen. Again, just continuing some of the details that we know about that local police officer. You can see we have it tied. We have it cut out the exact quote. And that really does raise, again, quite a bit of questions about this police officer who retreats down the ladder, shoots towards the former president. And that is when the Secret Service countersnipers, some 136 yards away, they have to come

and neutralize the suspect before he eventually is, you know, the rooftop is then secured by some of the police. So still lots of questions that remain here about what happened and some very, very troubling details. All right, let's get to the polling section. Let's begin here with the New York Times, some stunning new data. They are saying two likely voter screens in critical states, Pennsylvania and Virginia. So if the 2024 election,

held today. Who would you vote for if the candidates were Joe Biden and Donald Trump? Pennsylvania is 48% Trump, Joe Biden at 45, and Biden at a stunning just 48% to 45 in the state of Virginia. Virginia here, all eyes. In fact, Glenn Youngkin was considered a possible vice presidential pick at the last minute by Donald Trump specifically because of the current nature of

of the race, Ryan, and much of the data that we have here shows Trump running some seven, eight points ahead of where he ended up in the 2020 election whenever he did run in Virginia. So the political dynamics here of Biden's consequences stay in the race are really stunning in terms of how they are turning not even purple states, frankly, but previously considered light blue into literally on the map and possibly in play. What do you make of all of this?

it's what you would have expected you know coming out of the debate performance that we saw like this is this is what it looks like when the bottom is falling out you know we had we had dimitri melhorn the democratic mega donor advisor on the on the show last friday he was

arguing that, look, if you look at ABC's 538, not the Nate Silver one, but 538, that it's still nationally pretty much within the margin of error. But that's the last thing that Democrats can cling to.

Real clear politics, Nate Silvers himself, all the other polling averages have it spreading widely away from the margin of error. But when you drill down into the swing states, Trump is just dominant in them and dominant in a way that we haven't seen either party be in decades.

maybe almost 20 years or something, maybe you have to go back to Barack Obama 2012 toward the very end. But even that ended up being a pretty close election because the

the parties are so closely divided here. You know, these are, these are significant leads, you know, given that context. Yes. Let's go ahead and put this up there on the screen and continue with some of the polling data that we have, because if we dig down, you can actually see how Biden and Harris also fare against Trump. So what do you make of this matchup against Kamala Harris? She's running ahead of Trump in the state of Virginia, uh,

running ahead of Biden, I apologize, at 49 to 44 in the state of Virginia, whereas Biden is just at 48 to 45 in Pennsylvania. However, she is also running some two points ahead of Joe Biden. So it is pretty clear that, you know, in

a normal race, a normal Democrat could be relatively competitive against Donald Trump. Even somebody is not as politically talented as Kamala Harris. But Biden's decision to stay in the race is actively dragging down the ticket if we're looking at something like this.

Yeah. And Kamala Harris, like you said, she's not a terribly well-liked kind of Democratic candidate. She's not even in the kind of Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer kind of tier. And so when you put her in there and compare her to Biden and see that

even she significantly outperforms Biden. It really tells you how much of a drag he is on the ticket. You can also look at Biden in comparison to Senate Democrats across the map. You look at Tammy Baldwin, who's up five or six points on her GOP opponent. He's down five or six points. We haven't really seen gaps like that since the 1970s when you had favorite son senators

who were just massively popular, but the Democrats were never going to win on the map. Since then, in the last 10 years, it's been within a point or two. And often with the presidential candidate being the one that's one or two points ahead, the idea that you're trailing 10, 12 points behind

you know, fairly generic Senate Democratic candidates, you know, shows you how much weight there is wrapped around his feet. Yes. Let's continue here with some of the New York Times data about how they want him to drop out. Next part, please. Do you think that Biden should remain the Democratic nominee? Only 48 percent of Pennsylvania Democrats saying yes, 46 percent saying he should drop out. But look at the Virginia number, Ryan.

58% of Democrats in Virginia saying that Biden should drop out, probably explained, I saw, by the fact that people like you and me live here around the DMV, and we follow politics very closely. It's one of those where it's kind of like our native, our hometown business. This is literally the economy, especially Democrats in Virginia, disproportionately going to be in Northern Virginia. Those people, they all work at the

Pentagon, they work in consulting, they work for the government. I mean, these are people who live and breathe politics. So they, if anything, the people who know Biden the most and also follow politics the closest, they're like, hey, he needs to go like right now. I found that pretty interesting.

Yeah, Virginia Democrat in general, you could pull one off the voter file and put them onto this show. And, you know, they're just as fluent in national politics as we would. So, yes, I think that's exactly right. They've seen that. And also they're aware of the polling comparisons. Like they're just purely pragmatic. They're like, who is going to beat Trump? And right now they're looking at it.

Like, Glass-Joe is not the one that we're putting up against Trump at this moment. And sticking with what you were talking about, we have more data on this point. If we can continue and put this there. Here we have a new general election poll from YouGov. We have Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin.

Trump is leading literally in every single state, okay? This is every single state. Trump is up by a minimum of two and a maximum of seven in the state of Arizona. We're talking about blowout victory here in every single battleground. But go to the next one and you'll see how much Joe Biden is dragging down the ticket. In the very same poll, Ryan,

Ruben Gallego is up by eight points. So that's what, a 15-point swing? Elise Slotkin, up nine. Nevada, Jackie Rosen, up seven. Bob Casey is up 12. Tammy Baldwin is up by seven. We're looking at almost 10 to 20-point swing in some cases against Donald Trump for the Democratic normal Senate candidate, which just reveals how much Biden is sinking this ticket to the bottom.

These are all states where the Democratic Party has basically kind of won the argument against Trumpism. These were very close states, and Arizona and Georgia were more Republican states very recently, but they've all trended towards Democrats in recent years to the point where Pence

Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, you're seeing legislative takeovers, gubernatorial takeovers, Wisconsin and Michigan enacting the Democratic agenda, not even fighting out with split legislatures or grappling with Republicans there. And yet it's like a throwback. Like, wait a minute.

Now Republicans are winning every single one of these states, and it is as simple as Joe Biden. And as he showed on Lester Holt, the news cycle can move on and focus on something else, but that doesn't bring Joe Biden's brain back to life. Yeah, you're very, very correct there. I think that's just where we'll end it as well, too, with this last observation on

put it up there on the screen, is that just 33% of Democrats are currently satisfied with their party's presidential nominee versus some 71% of GOP voters. So the enthusiasm gap here

is just absolutely unbelievable, Ryan, to have only 33% and 62% of Democrats this far into the race. We're talking about the actual general election season now who are like, yeah, I don't want Joe Biden to be the nominee. It's just devastating for him. And he is showing us no signs he's going anywhere.

Biden gave a series of interviews over the last 24 hours that have been published. First and foremost was with Lester Holt, like you said, over at NBC News. And he is directly confronted about his age, about looking confused, and he is holding on for dear life. Let's take a listen. I guess the question is, are you all on the same page? Are you seeing what they saw, which was moments of, frankly, that appeared to be, you appeared to be confused? Lester, look.

Why don't you guys ever talk about the 18 to 28 lies he told? Where are you on this? Why didn't the press ever talk about that? 28 times it's confirmed he lied in that debate. I had a bad, bad night. I wasn't feeling well at all. And I had been without him making it. I screwed up.

I just asked a question because the idea that you may or may not have seen what some of these other folks have seen, you're not on the same... I'd have to say I was there. I'd have to see it. I was there. By the way, seriously, you won't answer the question, but why didn't the press talk about all the lies he told? I haven't heard anything about that. We have reported many of the issues that came up during that debate. No, you haven't. We'll provide you with them. God love you. Okay.

Who do you listen to on deeply personal issues, like the decisions whether to stay in the race or not? Me. Yeah. Okay. So...

First of all, we've talked about this before. Democrats are so great in this. He lied 28 times. I'm like, oh, not 26? 28? Not 30? Not 32? Where do they even get these numbers from? Why won't the press talk about Trump's lies? It's 2024. Like, why?

Press has been talking about that for eight years. Yeah. Also, nobody cares. But that last question, Ryan, that last answer, what did you make of that, man? He is the only person. He keeps saying it, the Lord Almighty himself. The

The number of pieces of kind of Trump attire that he's adorning himself with is just incredible. So I Alone Can Fix It becomes me. At his Michigan rally, you had the crowd chanting, lock him up and booing the press corps. It's utterly incredible to watch this transformation of... And out of this...

kind of this fear and shock that the man that they thought they had vanquished not only might be coming back, but really looks like he's quite plausibly coming back to becoming president. It's just, you know, the brain breaking that we saw during the first Trump administration is now looking mild compared to what we're seeing here.

He also, Ryan, went off a little. I'm curious what you think of this, too, because I've been kind of annoyed about this rhetoric about how everyone's like, oh, we need to tone the rhetoric down. And I'm like, yeah, I mean, conceptually, but also we can criticize each other and that's fine. And if you say put Trump in the bullseye, I'm like, I don't think that you were targeting him for assassination in the same way that I don't think that Gabby or Sarah Palin was targeting Gabby Giffords. It's ridiculous.

But Biden actually seemed to accept that frame. He was asked about the rhetoric in the interview, and he said it was actually a mistake to say to put Trump in the bullseye. Take a listen to that answer. Well, let's talk about the conversation this has started. And it's really about language, what we say out loud and the consequences of those. You called your opponent an existential threat on a call a week ago. You said it's time to put Trump in the bullseye.

There's some dispute about the context, but I think you appreciate that word. I didn't say crosshairs. I was talking about focus on. Look, the truth of the matter was, what I guess I was talking about at the time was, there's very little focus on Trump's agenda. Yeah, the term was bullseye. It was a mistake to use the word. I didn't say crosshairs. I meant bullseye. I meant focus on him. Focus on what he's doing. Focus on his policies. Focus on...

the number of lies he told in the debate. I mean, there's a whole range of things. Look, I'm not the guy that said, I want to be a dictator on day one. I'm not the guy that refused to accept the outcome of the election. I'm not the guy who said that I want to accept the outcome of this election automatically. You can't only love your country when you win. And so the focus was on

what he's saying and, I mean, the idea. But have you taken a step back and done a little soul-searching on things that you may have said that could incite people who are not balanced? Well, I don't think... Look, how do you talk about the threat to democracy, which is real, when a president says things like he says? Do you just not say anything because it may incite somebody? Look, I have not engaged in that rhetoric.

Now, my opponent is engaged in that rhetoric. He talks about there'll be a bloodbath if he loses, talking about how he's going to forgive all the... Actually, I guess suspend the sentences of all those who were arrested and sentenced to go to jail because of what happened in the Capitol.

I'm not out there making fun of, like, remember the picture of Donald Trump when Nancy Pelosi's husband was hit with a hammer, talking about, joking about it? So what do you make of that, Ryan? This is part of why it's annoying me on Biden, the two-facedness of it. I think it's fine to engage in normal political rhetoric and criticize one another. It's an election. We have massive differences between these two parties. But then he's also speaking a little bit out of the other side of his mouth. What do you think?

Yeah, he kind of apologized for the bullseye at first, and then he sort of seemed to be apologizing for not saying crosshairs, which is the more accurate phrase than bullseye there. But then by the end of it, he was defending it. And I think by the end of it, that's where you and I both agree with him that actually, look, yeah, if you think

these things about your opponent, then say the things. It's also absurd to think that the Gabby Giffords shooter looked at an ad that Sarah Palin had put out and was like, aha, that's interesting. I'm going to go kill Gabby Giffords. Yes, get out of here. And it's also crazy that this 20-year-old was just like sitting around and like read a Wall Street Journal leaf article

of like a private donor call that Biden had where he used the phrase bullseye and was like, oh wait, Trump's coming here in a couple of days. I'm going to climb up on the roof and put a bullseye on him. Yeah. Like that's just absolutely absurd. Now, like does like the, you know, the political heat that has turned up to 11,

make violence more likely? Yes, that's obvious, but you're not turning that down by just policing a little bit of kind of rhetoric here. It's much more structural and fundamental than that.

- Absolutely, and I've always believed that. You know, people say this all the time. They're like, "Oh, your rhetoric is encouraging." I'm like, "Well, unless you literally said to go and commit violence, I don't believe that. People have agency and individual responsibility for their actions." How many times have people accused us of saying like, "Oh, you guys have anti-Semites in your comments." What am I supposed to do about that?

I'm controlling the comments section. It's a free country. Last time I checked, I don't agree with it. Wish you wouldn't say it, but I'm not gonna be like, oh, you gotta ban him or some guilt by association bullshit. And we say that all the time too. We can't control it. There's no control over here. By the way, to those people, don't watch it. All right? Get rid of it. I don't care. Get lost.

But even with that, you know, the guilt by association connection is a tried and true media tactic. And actually, that's a good segue because I definitely want to get your reaction to this one. Biden, for some reason, sat with the complex YouTube channel and was asked about Israel. It's always funny, too.

presidential candidates often reveal the most with interviewers who give them tons of rope to hang themselves because there's no pushback or anything. And then they say some of the craziest stuff. So let's take a listen to what he had to say. Your stance in support for Israel has been unwavering. During the debate, you said that we are the biggest producer of support for Israel of anyone in the world.

You also said that we're providing Israel with all the weapons they need and when they need them. Back in April, $26 billion in aid was sent or was approved to be sent to Israel. Why? I said defensive weapons. I denied them offensive weapons that they were using, 2,000-pound bombs and the rest of it, because I made it real clear they cannot use weapons that we provide them to, in fact, use in civilian areas.

And that's why I put together this plan. My question though is why is your and United States at the current moment support for Israel so strong? Look, Israel, if there weren't an Israel, every Jew in the world would be at risk. Every Jew in the world would be at risk.

And so there's a need for it to be strong and a need for Israel to be able to have, after World War II, the ability for Jews to have a place that was their own. You don't have to be a Jew to be a Zionist. And a Zionist is about whether or not Israel is a safe haven for Jews because of their history of how they've been persecuted. Are you a Zionist? Yes. Now, you'll be able to make a lot out of it because people don't know what a Zionist is.

Do you know what a Zionist is? I just ask questions, that's all I answer. By the way, I'm the guy that did more for the Palestinian community than anybody. I'm the guy that opened up all the assets. I'm the guy that made sure that I got the Egyptians to open the border and let good goods through, medicine and food. But what's happening is, and I'm the guy that's been able to pull together the Arab states to help, agree to help,

the Palestinians with food and shelter. And so it's not, I mean, I have been very supportive of the Palestinians. But Hamas are a bunch of thugs. Hamas is not worthy to, I was over there about eight days after the massacre, saw photographs of mothers and daughters being tied in a rope together, kerosene pouring over their head and then burned to death. Nothing's happened like that since the Holocaust.

And it's just not appropriate. By the measure of your support for Israel, why would a Muslim or an Arab American vote for you for re-election? Same reason why Arab Americans in the region support me. The same reason why, because it's the best way to keep peace, the best way to put things together, to make sure that there is a two-state solution in the region. And I've been a strong supporter of that.

And everything I've done has been, I've gotten significant support from Arab countries and the region as well. For look, the idea here is that, for example, I got a call from the Saudis. They want to fully recognize Israel. In return, if the United States will give them a guarantee that they will provide weapons if they're attacked by other Arab nations, the ones just around the corner.

and that we'd allow them to, we would put a civilian nuclear facility there, we'd operate, our military, we'd operate it so they can move away from fossil fuels. That's a big game changer in the whole region. I've worked with el-Sisi of Egypt. I've worked with the King of Jordan as a friend. So I've been able to work with the Arab countries very well.

There's not, I don't have a prejudiced bone in my body. The Arabs are good people. They need help now. All right, so what'd you make of that, Ryan? He's done more for the Palestinians than everybody, and how to Jew in the world be safe. That's one of his favorite lines, isn't it? He often, and he often uses that line, and you often hear people saying, we have six, seven million Jewish Americans here. Yeah. Isn't it your job as president to make sure that they're safe?

You're just going to completely outsource that? It's an atrocious way to think. And you can't imagine it working like... I mean, it falls apart just on its own. You don't even need to compare it to anything else. But if it is true that he's done more for Palestinians than anybody else in the world, then you really have to fear for the Palestinians, right?

Things have not gone well for them there. At the same time, what he's talking about is putting pressure on Israel to allow more aid in. But since the invasion of Rafah, the already insufficient aid has collapsed close to zero. And the situation has only gotten that much dire and

Meanwhile, it has just completely fallen off a cliff when it comes to at least American attention. Yeah. It is also interesting to me about beyond the policy, just

Just notice how quiet he is when he talks. You can see the age is just shining through. It's funny because in his head, he thinks he's doing everybody a favor through these press conferences and these interviews. And it's like nobody disputes your ability to ramble and rattle off facts. It's that while you're doing that, it's like you're whispering constantly, the coughing, the stutters, the confusion about what is happening. These aren't in an ideal environment. That's as good as it gets for a presidential interview, just so people know.

Zero pushback, zero interview, basically no offense to the guy. But I'm not 100% sure he really even knew what he was talking about there whenever he's pressing him on some of the issues. And so even in that, Biden is showing lots of issues. Final thing on the Democratic point, let's put this up there on the screen, is that Nancy Pelosi is apparently making calls and working the phones to try and find a way to ease him off of the ticket.

She, quote, told by people familiar with the exchanges she has stage-managed phone calls with Jeffries, plotted strategies with some of the biggest names in Democratic politics, and told a former elected official bluntly Biden's legacy can't be destroying their party. So final thoughts, Ryan. What do you think of this? Will it be successful? I don't really think so. But it does give some color to the interview she gave where she opened the space to get rid of Biden if it was possible. Right.

She's working it hard and she's still very powerful. Stan Greenberg, an ally of hers, it was reported by this good CNN report that Stan Greenberg has been pulling his hair out trying to get, he's a DCCC pollster, like, you know, centrist, like, establishment figure in good standing. He has all of the analysis,

of why Biden can't win and why they need to replace him that he's just trying to he's just trying to puncture the bubble of Biden's inner circle and the rhetoric is turning to and the strategy is turning to reminding his in the inner circle uh you know that they are complicit in this and and that if if they continue pushes forward they're going to pay a price as well Biden won't have much of a price to pay

you know his well we'll see how long he has to pay that price uh but his aides many of them you know want to work in democratic party politics you know the rest of their careers and people are they're remind they're being reminded you know they're putting that in jeopardy

Yes. Well, all right. We'll see. Programming note, guys, just scheduling-wise, we're going to go ahead and get to our interview with Bradley Moss. Don't worry, you won't be hard up for RFK News as Emily is literally sitting down with him today for an interview. So we will have that interview emailed out to all of our premium subscribers.

and upload it to our channel. So RFK News being tabled on this story. The RFK News for this story will be tabled, but she will be doing that interview and we'll bring it to everybody else. Let's go ahead and get to the documents. Turning now to the documents dismissal, we have Brad Moss, friend of the show, joining us. Good to see you, man. Thank you for coming.

Absolutely. Good morning. Absolutely. Okay, so let's talk about this dismissal and just explain the basics of what's happened here. Let's put this up there on the screen. The judge, Florida Judge Eileen Cannon, has dismissed the Trump classified documents case on the grounds that special counsel Jack Smith's office, according to her, is unconstitutional. Can you give us the legal rationale for the judge's decision and some of the background that led to this dismissal?

Sure. So this is a strictly procedural issue. None of this has to deal with the merits of what was alleged against Donald Trump or his co-defendants. The premise of the challenge was that the Office of Special Counsel, the appointment of Jack Smith is not permissible in its current structure under what are called the Appointments Clause and the Appropriations Clauses.

in the U.S. Constitution. The basic idea is that Jack Smith is not a proper inferior officer, as it's termed. He's too independent from Merrick Garland and Joe Biden. He's not properly placed in that position, and that Congress did not delegate to the Justice Department the ability to create

this position and put Jack Smith there. It's not concluding that the Justice Department otherwise couldn't have brought this case. It's simply saying Jack Smith's and Jack Smith's office is not permissible under these constitutional provisions. It had to have been brought by the Justice Department or through a proper legislative appointment. It can't be done this way. And the funding he was relying upon

is impermissible. This ruling flies in the face of 20 years of institutional precedent in case law, flies in the face of what came out of the Mueller cases when there were similar challenges. But this is what Judge Cannon concluded yesterday. Is it as absurd as it sounds? Is there anything to this? I mean, this would see the other case tossed out. It just sounds ridiculous, but I'm not a lawyer. Is it ridiculous? So here's the thing.

Lawyers don't ever like to say something is completely ridiculous unless they're brazenly biased. I'll say it's out there. It's a rogue decision in my view. Can I say that this Supreme Court, which just laid out that really wild immunity ruling two weeks ago, won't back this up? Who the heck knows?

I'll say there's no precedent for what she concluded. Mueller, who was a private citizen at the time he was brought in, was challenged by the exact same provisions. Both the district court and the DC Circuit rejected those challenges. Every single one of these appointments over the last 20 years since the regulations were put in place in the aftermath of the independent counsel statute

All those appointments were challenged. All of those challenges were rejected. Judge Cannon has basically relied upon various dissenting opinions from Justices Alito and Thomas in different Supreme Court rulings to try to craft her rationale. This will now go to the 11th Circuit. The 11th Circuit's already rejected Judge Cannon's analysis on issues twice. We're going to see what they think of this analysis.

So Brad, we saw there was one clip, Crystal flagged this actually and wanted to ask you about it. Maybe we can play it for you. It's Barbara McQuaid, she's a lawyer talking about how this could be quote, a blessing in disguise. Let's play it, I wanna get your reaction. Well look, I think it's a terrible decision. I think it's absolutely wrong on the merits. But going forward, I think this could actually be a blessing in disguise.

because it gives Jack Smith an opportunity to appeal the case immediately. So many of these other decisions were within the judge's discretion as she was slow-walking the case. But this is one where it's immediately appealable, and I think she is so clearly wrong on the law that the 11th Circuit will reverse. Now, Donald Trump probably goes to the Supreme Court, and we have to wait for a decision there. But even if, ultimately, the Supreme Court rules in favor of Donald Trump, the case is not over.

All that means is a special counsel can't bring this case. There is nothing then to stop the U.S. attorney in the Southern District of Florida from bringing this case. Now, certainly it means lengthy delay. There will be no trial before the election. But I think we were headed in that direction anyway. He could even decide...

the Justice Department to take this out of the special counsel's hands and go directly to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida, refile the case immediately and get back on track, perhaps with a different judge. So what do you make of that and that argument?

So most of what she said is basically accurate in the sense that this will get appeal of the 11th Circuit. I fully expect the 11th Circuit to reverse. I have no idea what the Supreme Court will say. I'm skeptical that at least for now, especially in the next few months, that the Justice Department is going to try to refile the case through the U.S. Attorney's Office or anything like that. It would look brazenly political. There's no point to it. There's not going to be a trial before the election anyways. This will still have to play out over the coming months. But

But putting that part aside, the Justice Department as a whole, as an institution, isn't going to want to just lay down and accept the idea that Judge Cannon decides that 20 years of established institutional and legal precedent is thrown out the window when it comes to special counsels. This is what they've done. This is what they put into place after the independent counsel days and the wild days of Ken Starr. They wanted to have an established process that kept it in-house. They're going to want to fight this up at least to the Supreme Court.

We'll see what the Supreme Court says. If the Supreme Court says otherwise, then it's a whole new ballgame. We'll see what justice does at that point. Got it.

Just curious what the kind of politics of the judiciary are here. How does it benefit a judge like Eileen Cannon? Maybe not talk specifically about her, but how does it benefit a judge like Eileen Cannon to be so far out there against precedent? What does this do for a judge's kind of politics as they're trying to rise up through the ranks?

So it's always the idea of, you know, the feverish dissent, someone who's trying to craft a new way of approaching these legal policies saying, I know this is how you've always done it. Doesn't mean it's right. I have a different ideological and constitutional analysis that I

I believe is appropriate here. I'm going to strike out here and outline what I believe to be the correct interpretation. Even if she gets overruled, which I expect she will, it lines her up on the idea, kind of what you were hinting at, that a future Republican president, whether it's Donald Trump or somebody else,

might look at her as someone who views the Constitution and the authorities outlined there more along that sort of unitary executive style and less along those bureaucratic state of what we've seen over the last two to three decades. It goes back to that idea that Donald Trump always pushed, that everything runs through him, the office of the president can hire and fire the special counsel at any time, and that all these regulations mean nothing at all. It comes down to Article II and nothing more.

Got it. Well, I'm very interested to see how this goes in the 11th Circuit and eventually to SCOTUS. My final question is just on timing. This thing was already getting kicked, right, Brad? This is just going to extend this. Even if it does get brought eventually to trial, what dates are we even looking at now, 2025, 2026? You're probably looking at 2025, and that's only if Donald Trump loses. If Donald Trump wins, these cases, the D.C. case and the Florida case are gone.

They're going to be dismissed immediately upon him entering office. And then all we've got left is the Georgia case, which is a whole slew of problems of how to handle a state prosecution of an incumbent president. But if he loses—

You're looking at both those cases sometime in 2025. Who knows exactly when there's a slew of pretrial issues still to flesh out. Got it. Well, we appreciate it. As always, Brad, thank you for joining us. Of course. Anytime. Thank you guys so much for joining us. We appreciate it. As I said, my wedding is on Saturday. By the way, for those who are confused, yes, I had an Indian ceremony last year that was just for my

family in India, my grandparents. I'm glad I did it because one of my grandparents actually died, my grandfather, just two days ago. So very lucky on the timing, not necessarily for that Indian ceremony. My US wedding friends, family, and everybody will be on Saturday. So I'm going to be off until next Wednesday. Luckily, Ryan and Emily will be filling in on Thursday and they'll bring everybody the news. We'll keep everybody updated on Crystal. We're hoping that everything is going to be okay there, but

we expect it to be. Just bear with us and we'll get you the news as fast as we possibly can. We love you and we will see you all later.