And now, this is the moment you've all been waiting for! It's time for the Skate for breakfast partner! It's Tuesday, July 2nd, 2024, and this is the Stake for Breakfast Podcast, Episode 412 and 413. Make sure you're subscribed to the show. It's available across every downloadable podcasting platform. Find us on Apple, Spotify, iHeart, and Google Podcasts. And check out the Stake to Breakfast Linktree to take your shows Instagram, our latest sub-stack, and verified accounts on Twitter, Getter, and True Social. What's up, everybody, and welcome to the first of two big Tuesday editions of the show today. I'm Roan, I've got Noah here with me. Lots of breaking news. Lots of big headlines. The US Supreme Court finally issued a ruling on Presidential Immunity Monday, and it's a big win for Donald Trump. We provide full analysis of the historic decision. Democrats are still in disarray over Joe Biden's debate performance last week, and the Progressive Spin Machine is working overtime to ease concerns of the Democrat voters, donors, as the country waits to see what the embattled president's electoral fate would be. Donald Trump delivered remarks to supporters in Chesapeake, Virginia over the weekend, and we've got all the post-event highlights and analysis. We're tracking today's biggest headlines and stories developing across America as we get ready to wind down and celebrate the 4th of July holiday and the birth of our nation. We've also got a great slate of guests coming in here today. We'll be catching up with a trio of 5th Congressional District Congressmen, representatives Andy Ogles, Andy Biggs, and Bob Good will be here. We'll also catch up with the RNC's constitutional attorney, one of our great friends. She's also an author, Ms. Christina Bob. But before we get into any of our interviews, let's jump right into these headlines and change the way you consume your news. Monkey, this is not nom, this is bowling, they're a rule. So stand by! What's up everybody and welcome to the State for Breakfast podcast. I'm Ron, I'm going to have Noah here with me in a little bit. Big Tuesday edition of the show today, first of two big shows. Happy July, happy pre-4th of July. And boy, do we have a lot of news to talk about. Listen, if you know the way that this show goes, we always try to stay ahead of the narrative. We reach out to the right people, we've developed a pretty good reputation. Not even I, heading into last week, could have thought that I would have felt as good as I did today. After all the developments of the dates, what's gone on up on Capitol Hill with the Supreme Court and all of the things in between. It's just a fantastic start to the week and I don't think there's any two ways to look at it other than that. Gotta keep the guard up, just gotta wake up in the morning and put on your pants just like everybody else does and leave the house thinking that you're 10 points behind in the polls. But when you look at the way that the last 72 hours plus has kind of shaken out and the job that Donald Trump and his campaign staff and the national apparatus that they've set up around the country, including the RNC, using members of Congress and the Senate, getting governors on board, et cetera. Man, we are in a really great situation now that I think's going to keep everybody laser focused in on the goal of winning the big three, come November 5, and that's retaining and extending the majority in the House of Representatives, flipping the Senate to Republican control and then reclaiming the Oval Office with Donald Trump, who now, spoiler alert, if you missed it today, can, in personally, accept the Republican nomination at the GOP convention on July 15 through the 18th. So, big start to the week. Lots of breaking news. We're going to jump right into it right now. Absolute presidential immunity. Is it a thing? We still don't know. There's a lot of people who are dissecting the Supreme Court ruling that came down yesterday in a 6-3 decision, which weighed in favor of Donald Trump, and essentially granted him immunity for all things, which they consider, I guess, official. Now, there's going to be a lot of different interpretations of that. Part of the decision in regard to absolute immunity are going to get kicked down to a lower court judge. It's going to go back to Judge Chungus over in the D.C. Circuit. She's going to have the opportunity to kind of see what she wants to do with it, and then if she's going to use weaponized, rogue, deranged prosecutor, unconstitutionally appointed Jack Smith to do her bidding, but long story short, and the long game here is that this is going to play out probably longer than it takes to get to November, and that to get to a verdict in a special counsel headed by Jack Smith in regards to January 6. So when the ruling came down yesterday, it kind of sent the media on its ear, as it was, unofficially, the last day that the Supreme Court would be issuing these things. And remember, this decision is based off all of the rushed weaponized law fair that's been used against President Trump. And when you look at how the Supreme Court kind of used their decision-making process to get to a ruling on this, again, 6-3 in favor of Donald Trump, all the conservative judges, including the Chief Justice Roberts favored Donald Trump in regards to the three dissenters who were on the progressive side, and including the low IQ take that Justice Sotomayor had. We'll get to that in a bit. But here's the thing. Because they rushed everything, law fair-wise against Donald Trump, the Supreme Court had nothing essentially to reference back in regards to making this decision. Again, but we say a lot of things on this show are unprecedented in nature, and when it comes to most of the things regarding Donald Trump, it's true, because we've never seen someone just ran through the ringer like this guy has been. But here's the deal. They made the ruling, I believe, with the Constitution and in the right sense, pun intended. And moving forward, it's going to be interesting to see how the law fairs continue to be waged against them. We've already got some development out of a fat Alvin Bragg's office, the DA up in New York, via the bench of very biased judge, the deranged Juan Marchan. We'll get to that in a bit as well. But before we jump into our first audio clip here, and that's as the news broke yesterday in real time, I want to talk about our guest lineup today. I don't know if the stars are aligned, but we have three congressmen coming in here who all represent their fifth congressional districts in their respective states. We're going to be catching up with Tennessee Fives, Representative Andy Ogles, Arizona Fives, Representative Andy Biggs, and Virginia Fives, Representative Bob Goode, who sits as the head and chairman of the House Freedom Caucus up on Capitol Hill. At the end of this segment, we're going to be jumping in with our first interview with one of our great friends, someone who's going to help tie a lot of these bits and pieces from the news cycle together. And that's Miss Christina Bob, who's an attorney with the RNC. She's worked very closely and directly with President Trump for the entirety of his political career. And she is looking to bring a lot of this ruling, plus the ruling on the 1512C2. That's the terrorism attack on charge that the Supreme Court weighed in on last week, into perspective for you guys from a legal standpoint. In addition, we'll ask of her some commentary on the debate and how Donald Trump's performance was via her eyes. And where she thinks the Democrats go from here, which should be Joe, that's a good part about it. There's a lot of things going on regarding Joe Biden and the Democrat Party, how they're looking to get him out of the way and maybe switch him out. I still, and I think Noah's probably leaning into the more research to do. You realize the harder it is to get people on the ballot, to get the DNC to coalesce behind someone. Just because Joe Biden comes and says, "I'm going to bow out so you need to take all your delegates and put them behind, let's just say Gavin Newsom or Gretchen Whitmer or JB Pritzker or anybody." That doesn't mean those delegates. I mean, they've rigged their own elections for so long, it's nearly impossible to get everybody on the same page unless they're kind of threatened with, "Well, we're not going to win the White House." They don't think they're going to win the White House right now with Joe Biden. So why would they want to go and just jump behind his plan B? Now remember, when you want to take Kamala Harris out of the mix here, you're taking out the number one ranked, well, Black Indian woman. And that's not according to us here on the show, that's according to Joe Biden himself. You elected the highest ranking Black Indian and Indian background woman in American history. Why would you do that and replace her with a white guy? Why would you do that and replace her with a white woman? How dare me? But the fact of the matter is, is that the Democrats have a big problem right now, and it all starts and ends with Joe Biden and his family, especially his wife, only Hunter Biden, after they're meeting up at Camp David this weekend. But, you know, we'll get to that in a little bit. That's going to be a big part of our next new segment. Right now, we're going to jump in with the ruling coming out on presidential immunity from the U.S. Supreme Court in reference to Donald Trump. Let's hear it. From the court, it does find this under a constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of presidential power entitles a former president to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. He is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts. That's the first blush we've got on this. It looks like a six to three split. We've got the dissent by Justice Sotomayor Kagan and Jackson. Join that. There is a kind of split decision on some of these. Somebody joins in one part, not in another part, but that's the overall holding of the court. So what it means now, we'll have to dig into this and see if they tell us now how do you decide an official act versus an unofficial act? Because that's going to be critical. Having now said the president does as an absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive. Now, here's the deal. You want to talk about unofficial and unofficial acts of the president. I can tell you how the courts, especially the Supreme Courts, are eventually, if these judges continue to want to act cute and try to prosecute Donald Trump for gray areas in between the words of that Supreme Court ruling that came out yesterday, it's just not going to fly. You know, they're not going to be able to say that, well, they're not going to be able to pick and choose what were official acts and unofficial acts. When Donald Trump was serving as the actual president of the United States, and he was doing things like having a rally on the ellipse on January 6th and telling people to peacefully and patriotically make their way down to the Capitol and then telling his followers that we are the party of law and order and to go home. Spoiler alert, whether you like it or not, whether you want to build a narrative around it coming from the other side of the aisle, those are official acts that Donald Trump conducted as the president. They don't have to be on the official White House schedule for them to be considered official acts. So, I mean, that's just the kind of way that I'm looking at it. I think after this ruling came down and having been able to read through a little bit of it, and again, I don't understand all the legalese. That's why we have Christina Bob coming in a little bit. That's why we're going to hear from Jonathan Turley in our next audio clip as well. You know, but as soon as the ruling came across the wire, Donald Trump was quick to issue a statement from his true social account, not as good as the one that he ended the day with, but I think it was enough to understand right exactly where the president was coming from. And it read, "Big win for the Constitution and Democracy, proud to be an American." And again, that was from his official true social account. But that's when the breaking down, not in the liberal press, but in conservative media to try and, you know, get a bearing on this ruling, what it means, what it could mean, and what it does for the election cycle right now. So as this kind of was developing in real time, and again, there's a lot of people who understand the ruling. They've probably seen the headlines, of course, the memes online and things of that nature. But really don't understand, you know, what kind of guidelines and parameters the Supreme Court was setting up here. Well, here's Jonathan Turley giving me a little bit of insight. As it was developing yesterday, what he was seeing as he was kind of flipping through the pages of the ruling as soon as it came across the wire. Let's check it out. In reading through this opinion, I can't see how this doesn't induce cardiac arrest with the special counsel. You know, at one point in the opinion, they say, look, this is a quote, "The indictments allegations that Trump attempted to pressure the vice president to take particular acts in connection with his role with the certification proceeding thus involve official conduct, and Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct." The court then goes on to say that the burden, of course, is on Jack Smith. He has to show that this does not pose any intrusions into the executive branch. And the court says that this quote may well hinder the president's ability to perform his constitutional functions. So here the court is imposing a very significant burden on Jack Smith when this goes back to the judge. We talked about how this trial judge has proven to be very favorable towards Jack Smith. She's certainly been motivated to try to get an election trial before the election. But the court here is giving much more clear lines than some people expected. They're saying that there is a presumption here that you have to deal with. The burden is high, and the court indicates that it may view this as something that could hinder a president's authority. Trey, the Biden campaign clearly is indicating that they think this is a loss, at least in the way they wrote that statement that Dana read. I want to just read for one second about the dissent from Justice Sotomayor, who writes the dissent with Kagan and Jackson. Today's decision to grant former president's criminal immunity reshapes the institution of the presidency. It makes a mockery of the principle foundational to our constitution and system of government that no man is above the law. Whatever happens as you read through this decision, it does expand the power of the executive. It is pretty consequential if we look at a big picture, Trey. And we'll leave it at that, you know, and here's the thing. I don't think it expands the executive power. I think it clearly defines them. And that's just my opinion. You know, up until the radical left and the Marxist progressive communists that are trying to take over this country, all the globalists and, you know, the Green New Deal bullshit artists came in here and tried to railroad Donald Trump's presidency and then essentially his life with the threat of prison with all these prosecutions that are sitting over his head. There was never question. I mean, even in our darkest times, let's just state JFK and the Bay of Pigs, you know, Richard Nixon and all the Watergate stuff, Woodrow Wilson and his wife running the country for the last couple of years of his presidency, et cetera. You know, there was never a question on a decision that was made via the executive branch to where they were going to try and take it to the nth degree. And that's criminally prosecute him at state, local and federal levels for everything regarding campaign finance and building value disclosure all the way down to, I guess, up to whether or not you incited insurrection, which he's still not technically accused of and charged with officially in court, and whether or not you tried to commit citizenship conspiracy against the United States. So, you know, it's sad because what this essentially is, especially from the six conservative judges, is a PP slap to everyone who's trying to play games with the Constitution. And for as much as the radical left doesn't like to pretend that it exists anymore, or its validity has any weight in this country, the reason that the Supreme Court exists to, you know, provide a check and balance on those principles which could devalue disenfranchise and delegitimize the Constitution on which this republic was founded. So, you know, and when you got into the opinion on official and unofficial acts, it was great friend of stake for breakfast. And Trump attorney Will Sharf, who jumped on with one of our least favorite transgender commentators, Caitlin Collins yesterday, you know, Donald Trump feels about her. You're a nasty person. To kind of provide a little insight into what some of that may be gray area. The Supreme Court was re-clarifying the constitutional parameters on where. Let's take it out. Which acts are you arguing that were presented in the trial were official acts? So, one example would be communications made through official White House communications channels. Those would be things that we believe based on the Supreme Court's opinion today fall neatly within the outer perimeter of a president's official responsibilities and duties. So, certainly with respect to those sorts of official communications from the White House that were entered into evidence in that New York trial, that would be the sort of thing that would run afoul of the Supreme Court's opinion today. So, like testimony from Hope Hicks, or what exactly do you mean? No, I mean, there were, for example, tweets from President Trump's official Twitter account that were entered into evidence of trial. President Trump's Twitter account has been held by numerous courts during his time as president to be an official communications instrumentality of the White House. So, those sorts of things would be official acts under the Supreme Court's ruling today, and therefore, they were not admissible as evidence in that New York trial. Gotcha, bitch! And that's a big part of, I think, the ruling that's going to be very beneficial to anything they're trying to do in regards to going after Donald Trump illegally moving forward. Because they made such a big deal about his presence, the influence that Donald Trump had via his social media outside of his official White House account. All of these people who were trying to conduct law fair against him wanted to use his social media account on Twitter, for instance, as something that they could use negatively against him in some of these cases. And now, since Twitter didn't exist when the Constitution was drafted, that the Supreme Court has basically redefined the lines of what conducting official and unofficial presidential acts are. If the law fair being waged against Donald Trump included those via his social media accounts, well, now they can be essentially classified as parts of official acts of the executive chief of the world. So, another backfire for the radical progressives and the Democrats as they just cannot pick up a win lately. And, you know, a lot of stuff came across the wire yesterday in regards to this ruling, and I want to read a couple of the posts I saw on Twitter. First one, you know, was from constitutional attorney, Harmeet Dillon, formerly a great friend of the show. I've reached out. It looks like she's going to be coming back on with us soon. I'd really like to get her opinion on some of this stuff. I know she's dialed in. As far as California is concerned where Noah and I are, she does a lot of great work out here for the Republicans and, you know, supporting President Trump, and it'll be good to have her come back in here soon. So, and this is from her official account last night, your reminder, I missed all the hysteria, that only modern American president to order the extrajudicial killing of Americans was, again, Barack Obama, who had Americans drone to death in Yemen. All this hype is projection. And that kind of bled into the narrative as, you know, there were people saying, well, now that presidents are immune to everything, why can't Joe Biden just mobilize seal team six and take out his political opponents? You know who that is? Right? Right? Oh, stupid. We'll get to a really bad take in a second. I also saw, let's see, there was a couple of good posts yesterday. I'm going to try and get through some of these real quick and just kind of continue to put into perspective. Just what the ruling was, what it meant, and I guess kind of where we go from here. You know, and when you look at this from, well, I guess as it's materializing right now, the court, one of the emphasis is they had was talking about the powers that carry with them core absolute immunity and the exercise of which cannot be under question in any forum. That's within a courtroom. That's constitutionally. And some of the areas that they specifically highlighted were pardons, the recognition of foreign governments, and the removal of executive branch officials. Now, this is a really big win for Donald Trump in regards to looking back on one of the things that hamstrung him a lot during the course of his first term in office. More, I think, than any other time was during COVID and with Dr. Fauci, but you have to remember, and especially after 2018, when there was like a coup within the Republican House, they lost, you know, both chambers in the balance of power there, and Donald Trump was essentially fighting for his life in regards to getting any components of his agenda passed. And, you know, we reference this as in the show. It's like, you know, if Donald Trump wasn't getting the wall built or the border secure as fast as he wanted and fighting with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi over government shutdowns, et cetera, he would just hop on a plane, meet with Xi Jinping, meet with Vladimir Putin on the sidelines of these global summits, meet with Kim Jong-un and be the first president ever to walk into, you know, North Korea. He had to do it himself because every single time somebody like Rod Rosenstein, Bill Barr, Anthony Fauci, Christopher Ray, Robert Muir, et cetera, came up and said, "Listen, these people are weaponizing the government against me. These people are spying not only on my campaign, but now on my presidency. These people are interfering with official investigations. They need to be removed. They need to have the security clearances rescinded. This is bullshit. You had Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and the rest of the deep state telling Donald Trump, especially during COVID. If you go after Anthony Fauci or any of these other officials who are providing oversight into your presidency, which was just absolute dog shit, we'll ramp up the impeachment wagon. You'll be prosecuted. We'll throw obstruction of justice on you, and we're going to impeach your ass. Now, those decisions and re-instituting the core powers of the executive branch back to the Oval Office, and this includes going along with personnel, now they are unilaterally the presidents and the presidents alone. So it kind of reset that boundary that I saw blurred very often when Donald Trump was in the Oval Office during his first time. Nancy Pelosi, I know I just mentioned her, she had an absolute shit take. I wouldn't exactly call it a banger either. Today, the Supreme Court has gotten rogue with its decision violating the foundational American principle that no one is above the law. The former presidents claim that total presidential immunity is an insult to the vision of our founders who declared independence from a king. What's Barack Obama right now? He's not a shadow king? It's a joke, and so is she. Last one I've got, I saw Dr. Ben Carson wait in on this. You know, we've got veep watch going on now, and it should be clear sailing all the way up to the Republican Convention, which starts now on July 15th. Spoiler alert, Donald Trump's going to be there in person, not via Zoom, not calling in from a jail cell. After some developments this morning out of Manhattan, we'll get to that in just a sec. But Dr. Carson's been very, very vocal on social media. He posts a lot about his events. He posts a lot about things going on. But when it comes to specifically talking out about national topics and direct alignment of, I guess, ideology with Donald Trump, I would say the last week or so, big uptick in his social media presence. I've had notifications turned on for him for a long time, and I've noticed a lot of the content that's coming out from his official accounts across everywhere, true social, Twitter, Instagram, etc. All have to do with things directly related to Donald Trump, kind of clarifying his stance for the American people. I'm just saying, I know there's like a Final Four, Bergum Vance, Rubio, and Ben Carson. We hope it's Dr. Ben. This is from his Twitter account yesterday. Today's historic SCOTUS victory on presidential immunity has stopped Biden in the Department of Justice, that's in quotes, from their attempt to twist the law in order to persecute its political opponents. They know they can't beat him at the ballot box, so they tried to tie him up. And his campaign in lawfare. Luckily, SCOTUS held the line against this tyranny, showing that America is still a country that upholds the rule of law. It's a strong statement from Dr. Ben Carson. So you've heard some good and bad takes on social media, and a little bit of breakdown of what the explanation means. One of the bad takes that jumped across the, I guess, digital wire yesterday on TV was ban Jones. Absolutely losing it. And calling the Supreme Court's ruling on presidential immunity. And I'm quoting now a license, the thug. I don't know where these people get off, trying to insert themselves into the conversation as relevant. I don't even want to say content providers, just valid opinionators. I mean, you guys probably, I'm not playing the clip on the show today. But I'm sure you saw Kamala Harris trying to pander to black people saying she's out in these streets when she was doing some kind of a hit for, I guess, a programmer and award show coming up on BET, absolutely embarrassing. But staying in this thread and focused here, here's Van Jones yesterday. It makes the Supreme Court look very partisan. They're supposed to be wearing these kind of black and white umpire jerseys or whatever. They look like they're wearing red jerseys, or even MAGA hats. It's going to go down bad politically for the Supreme Court. It's also scary because what is Trump going to do if Trump is elected and there's this idea that he can get away with even more stuff, that's really, really scary for the public because he already ran over every norm that he could. So it seems like, I mean, just look at it politically, not legally, politically, it's almost like a license to thug in a way. Like, you can do whatever you want and Supreme Court is probably going to let you get away with it. That is very frightening in this case. And so I'm very, I'm very, very concerned. I absolutely hate it when African American content providers, commentators, experts, et cetera, try to wiggle language in there like that. Like, you're having a conversation on a ruling regarding the President of the United States, which came down from the U.S. Supreme Court. You can't get, when you're talking about politics, to any higher of a level than dealing with those entities. And then you got Van Jones coming in there, talking like he's off the street like at three o'clock in the afternoon on Monday, but there's anybody in the age demographic, his language is trying to target his even listening to big gay Anderson Cooper on fake news CNN. And he's out there dropping the... Come on, Van Jones, you're better. Be better. Guys, wherever you're listening to the show today, no matter what platform it's on, we prefer Apple Podcasts for a lot of different reasons, and let me tell you why. We've been moving up in the Apple Top 100 for podcasts in the political arena, and we really appreciate that. That means more people are officially following the show, subscribing to the show, following the show on Apple Podcasts. All that means is that it's downloading to your electronic device, and those numbers help us continue to push on all of the mainstream, the pay walls, the grifters, the conning shows, and hold them accountable for the fake news that they often propriet. Or news that is completely irrelevant to the big scheme of things, much like we're talking about here on the show today. We hit the news right on the head, and exactly what's important to America First and to the people. But whether you're also listening on Spotify, Google Podcast, iHeartRadio, or wherever you're hearing your shows, just make sure you're following us. Hit that plus button. Make sure it's downloading to your electronic device. Give our show a five-star rating on Apple or Spotify, and then leave some remarks on Apple. If there's a good button, a banger, we'll read it on the show. Also check us out on social media. We're on Twitter, get our true social Instagram, and TikTok. Find our accounts, follow them, hit the notification bell. You'll never miss out on all the great stuff that's going on down here on the show. Listen, heading into Fourth of July, and how much the media apparatus shuts down over the holidays. You're not going to find four America First Congressmen and the lead attorney for the Republican National Committee on one show, including cable news, or anywhere else. You're getting in here today in two amazing programs of what we like to call, "Stake for breakfast." So Joe Biden was quick, I guess, in the context of the big scheme of things. It was, of course, nearly 8 p.m., not the typical 9 p.m. address to the nation. That he wanted to issue, I guess what you would call, an official reply, and this comes on the heels of calls, taking in the question, his mental acuity, his gate, his appearance, and his performance in the presidential debate from last Thursday night. Here's the deal. Joe Biden rarely speaks publicly without a teleprompter. Nothing would change here. He used one. His remarks or answers usually last within one to one-and-a-half minutes apiece before there's some kind of a break. Another questions asked, they have a pause, end quote, etc. There was one of those last night too. You'll hear it. I didn't want to have clips of Joe Biden talking because he only spoke for about four minutes. Okay, and what I did was I pulled the entire clip so you can hear it start to finish. We'll take a break about halfway through, but we'll leave it unedited so that you can get the full context. And oh man, did you guys see that orange man really is bad? I guess Joe Biden had such a negative review in regards to his appearance at the presidential debate where he was like, grey? Again, if you've ever seen the movie Hannibal, Joe Biden literally looks like the pig farmer who Hannibal comes to, you know, kill again at the end of the movie. The guy got like his face eating off by the pigs. Joe Biden literally looks like him. I'm watching my TV as we speak right now. He's at the Emergency Ops Center, I guess for the National Weather Service talking about the big hurricane that's down in the Caribbean area right now. He looks a little less orange than he did last night, but God Almighty, the memes that went across social media, even Donald Trump like took a screenshot of his television and posted it without comment on his true social of like orange Joe Biden. It was bad. He took no questions. You'll hear that at the end. And let's get into this right now. This is the official response from Joe Biden as he addresses the nation on the Supreme Court ruling regarding presidential immunity. Let's check it out. The presidency is the most powerful office in the world. This is an office that not only tests your judgment, perhaps even more importantly, it's an office that can test your character. Because you're not only face moments when you need to courage, exercise the full power of the presidency. You also face moments where you need the wisdom to respect the limits of the power of the office of the presidency. This nation was founded on the principle that there are no kings in America. Each of us is equal before the law. No one is above the law, not even the President of the United States. Today's Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity, that fundamentally changed for all practical purposes. Today's decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits all the President can do. This is a fundamentally new principle. And it's a dangerous precedent. Because the power of the office will no longer be constrained by the law, even including the Supreme Court in the United States. The only limits will be self-imposed by the President alone. This decision today has continued the Court's attack in recent years on a wide range of long-established legal principles in our nation. From gutting voting rights and civil rights, to taking away a woman's right to choose, to today's decision that undermines the rule of law of this nation. Nearly four years ago, my predecessor sent a violent mob to the U.S. Capitol to stop the peaceful transfer of power. We all saw it with our own eyes. We sat there and watched it happen that day. Attack on the police. The ranch sacking at the Capitol. A mob literally hunting down the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Gallows erected to hang the Vice President of Mike Pence. I think it's fair to say it's one of the darkest days in the history of America. I'm going to take a pause right there. So again, remember, we try to condition you guys to have all the weaponry you need when you go out there and talk about at least Democrat strategy up to this point. Now that we're five months away from when we go to vote in November, they are going to use rapist, racist, insurrectionist, and convicted felon as ways to describe Donald Trump. Nothing is going to be said about his first term in office, except that Joe Biden did everything since better. We all know that's not the truth. When those talking points don't work, they go right to the big four. And Joe Biden, again, I don't know how this is a violation of the Hatch Act. I don't know how these people look at themselves in the mirror as they're selling the country up the river and over the cliff. Having the chief executive of our public go out and address the nation with commentary on a ruling regarding things that directly affect him. By saying the ruling and the entity, which is the U.S. Supreme Court, is a illegitimate. That's basically what Joe Biden's four minute and 23 second speech was last night. Let's jump back into this and get the back end of it, and then we'll talk about it a little more. Now the man who sent that mob to the U.S. Capitol is facing potential criminal conviction for what happened that day. And the American people deserve to have an answer in the courts before the upcoming election. The public has the right to know the answer about what happened on January 6th before they asked to vote again this year. Now because of today's decision, that is highly, highly unlikely. It's a terrible disservice to the people of this nation. So now, now the American people have to do what the courts should have been willing to do, but would not. The American people have to render a judgment about Donald Trump's behavior. The American people must decide whether Donald Trump's assault on our democracy on January 6th makes him unfit for public office in the highest office in the land. The American people must decide if Trump's embrace of violence to preserve his power is acceptable. Perhaps most importantly, the American people must decide if they want to entrust the president once again, the presidency to Donald Trump, now knowing he'll be more emboldened to do whatever he pleases whenever he wants to do it. You know, the outset of our nation was the character of George Washington, our first president, to find the presidency. He believed power was limited, not absolute, and that power always resides with the people, always. Now over 200 years later, today's Supreme Court decision, once again, it will depend on the character of the men and women who hold that presidency, that are going to define the limits of the power of the presidency, because the law will no longer do it. I know I will respect the limits of the presidential powers I have for three and a half years. Because you're not running the country. But any president, including Donald Trump, will now be free to ignore the law. I concur with Justice Sotomayor's dissent today. Here it comes. She hears what she said. She said, "In every use of a visual power, the president is now a king above the law. With fear for our democracy, I dissent." End of quote. Oh, God. So should the American people dissent. Good job, Joe. Oh. I dissent. May God bless you all, and may God help preserve our democracy. Thank you. May God protect our children. Let's take some questions. [inaudible] Ouch. And that's kind of the way it went. So there you go. Prepared remarks. He read the teleprompter wrong again. Talked about Donald Trump being a king. Talked about he's not going to abuse the powers that be. Not like he technically can. Because in addition to his wife, you've got the entirety of the Barack Obama presidency and legacy in office and in high ranking government positions still running this country. Like Jake Sullivan, Tony Blinken, Valerie Jarrett, Lisa Monaco, etc. Some that have already gone back out and have been dispatched from everywhere to the campaign trail, like Susan Rice and John Kerry to Ukraine, like Victoria Newland. These are the people that have ruined our country for now, nearly 12 years. And if we give them or continue to give them the opportunity to do this, we're not going to have a country left. And if it's any indication from the polling that America's going to hold Donald Trump accountable at the ballot box, then it looks like they're pretty excited to hold him accountable to be present in the United States again. And when you talk about Joe Biden making remarks, again, definitely campaign violation. FEC, SEC, Hatch Act, you name it, talking about Donald Trump's legal stuff. You know, that should have no bearing off of Joe Biden's comments, and they've just decided to double down on it as a party to use it to try and disenfranchise Donald Trump and the eyes of voters who have not yet made their decision at this point. It's getting harder and harder every day. It did not have major decision on which way you want this country to go in a few months. But breaking news out of Manhattan today, via Fat Alvin Bragg's office, the DA up there, and from the bench of deranged judge Juan Rashant came a letter. After the Trump team following the ruling yesterday filed an inquiry on whether or not, well, the case, and even more importantly, the conviction against him in Manhattan a few weeks ago is now legitimate after the Supreme Court ruling. You can't make the decision based off of the Supreme Court's ruling that came down in the last 24 hours just by thumbing through the pages. So I'm going to read the memo that was released to the public today to the Trump team. And this is again from the bench of judge Juan Rashant. We are in receipts of the defendant's pre-motion letter dated July 1st, 2024 seeking leave to file a motion to set aside the verdict pursuant to the case number, based upon the Supreme Court's July 1 ruling in the decision of Trump v. the United States. In that letter, the defendant requested until July 10, 2024 to submit a memorandum of law in support of such motion. While the defendant's letter states that he does not object to adjournment of the July 11, 2024 sentencing date, his request to file moving papers on July 10th is necessarily a request to adjourn the sentencing hearing currently scheduled for July 11th pending resolution of the motion. Although we believe the defendant's arguments to be without merit, we do not oppose this request for leave to file his pursuant request to adjourn sentencing pending the determination of the motion. We respectfully request the deadline of July 24, 2024, two weeks after the defendant's requested deadline to file and serve a response. Respectfully submitted, Joshua Steinglass, Matthew Colangelo, Christopher Conroy, Susan Hoffinger, Becky Mangold, assistant district attorneys. So there you go. Donald Trump will now at least have two additional weeks from his original July 11th date to see whether or not they're going to uphold not only the ruling, but continue down the path with sentencing. The best part about this is during that time, between July 15th and 18th, Donald Trump will be in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where he will officially and formally accept the Republican nomination to be president of the United States and make himself an even more, I guess, hard to take down political entity. It just seems like a lot of stuff is working in America first favor right now. I can't see the projected Democrat plan off the top of my head, the projection that they usually show. And again, we're going to stay right here and talk about some of the reactions from the other side of the aisle. You know Randy Maddow, one of our, well, I guess that's our second least favorite transitioning late night talk show host in addition to Kate and Collins. Big Randy was having a meltdown over, you know, oh no, they could just go and assassinate it. Well, before I could even get into it, let's hear it. And given that the hypotheticals over the course of these arguments, as you rightly pointed out, included things like, can the president assassinate a rival? I think we have to look at the Supreme Court's affirmative answer to that. Yes, you can with as much seriousness as it deserves. I mean, this is a death squad ruling. This is a ruling that says that as long as you can construe it as an official or quasi-official act, you can do absolutely anything, absolutely anything. And never be held accountable, not only while you are president, but forever. And this is a president who has activated pro-Trump paramilitary groups that, you know, wear insignia and t-shirts and hold placards celebrating literally right-wing death squads. This is a president who has talked about absolutely using the justice department to go after his rivals. This explicitly immunizes anything the president wants to do through the justice department, but all but explicitly justifies anything the president wants to do, full stop to anyone. Oh, Randy, Randy, Randy. Shut up, silly woman. My goodness. You know, it's going to be a tough couple days for them. I mean, they're still not over. Joe Biden's abysmal debate performance and the infighting within the Democrats regarding everything to do with that. And now you have the narrative being misconstrued that the Supreme Court ruling essentially green lights, the weaponization of the specialist operators within our military apparatus and weaponizing them against their political opponents, which, I mean, again, the Supreme Court ruling does not dissolve the oversight or investigative capabilities of the rest of the check and balances on the president. It's the House of Representatives with the power to investigate and impeach, and then the Senate, which has the ability to hold the trial based off of that impeachment ruling and determine on whether or not the president is fit for office. It's because the powers that be are split right now, that we're not doing anything impeachment wise regarding Joe Biden for all the unconscious. Again, this is Joe Biden going out last night and calling Donald Trump a king and talking about all of these ridiculous items in regards to the Supreme Court ruling while he is unconstitutionally forgiven student loan debt, granted amnesty to millions and continues to persecute and prosecute his chief political opponent. So again, understand what's going on here and have the ability to go and talk on it when challenged about Donald Trump's candidacy and things of that nature. Let's continue to stick in this thread here and have the meltdowns. You know, Stephen Chong, I saw yesterday on Twitter, he was actually able to infiltrate. I guess he just dialed in. They had like, you know, everybody listened to what the next steps are for Joe Biden's campaign like a national call in and Stephen Chong just threw his email in there. He got the call in number and he got to listen. And they were just basically coping and seeing saying that the Supreme Court ruling made Donald Trump and I'm quoting now, "immune, immune, immune." I mean, can't beat it. And it's just been a really good couple of days here in America first. We're going to continue to track the coping and seething here just for a little bit more before we jump in with RNC attorney, Christina Bob. This was going on CNN last night. During one of their, I guess you can call it all-star panels. Tonight, he comes out and attacks the Supreme Court and says, "Oh, the president can not do whatever he wants." The same guy, by the way, who's centerpiece of his speeches is, the Supreme Court tried to stop me. They blocked me, but they'll never stop me on student loans. I don't know what they are doing because they don't know what they're doing and no one in America knows what they're doing. And that's why Donald Trump's beating his brains in right now. Lovely. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson weighed in last night following Joe Biden's delivered remarks. And, well, as you could probably hypothesize, he wasn't too impressed with what the current president is dealing in regards to, I mean, his continued push to, number one, locked Donald Trump up. Number two, delegitimize his campaign and attack him in ways that are outside the normal. I mean, listen, I don't know how people can't see that Donald Trump just hasn't taken a much more traditional route in going after Joe Biden. He goes out on the campaign trail. He does retail therapy. He does these rallies. He does these speaking events. He does these fundraisers. He'll start off by saying Joe Biden's the worst president in the history of the United States. Maybe if you totaled anywhere between 10 or 15 of the worst presidents in the United States, they still wouldn't be as bad as Joe Biden. That's a talking point. But then he goes into the factual analysis of how the country looks different today than it did four years ago. And I think that's been great for Donald Trump. He could make all of the shock and awe type commentary he wants regarding Joe Biden and the legitimacy of his presidency and his legacy and what the Biden doctrine will look like 100 years from now. But unless you are pointing out the fact how bad the economy sucks, geopolitically, we just don't have a leg to stand on anywhere. Any more, you know, the U.S. southern border safety in the streets, education system, pandering to the trans. You name it, green new bullshit. No money in your bank accounts. I mean, Donald Trump makes a legitimate argument. Here's Speaker Johnson providing a little commentary on Joe Biden addressing the country last night. Kaylee, what we're seeing tonight is despicable and it is dangerous. The president has been trying to undermine our legal system. First, they weaponize the Department of Justice to go after his chief political opponent, which, of course, is Donald Trump. And now when it doesn't work the way they planned it, the way they designed it, when the law gets in the way of what they're trying to do, now he's trying to undermine the Supreme Court itself. It truly is an unprecedented moment in American history and it's at a dangerous time. And the president that they've set up is creating a more dangerous time. I mean, I don't know how people don't understand that. You see a lot of these, not just the migrant crimes, the migrant illegal crimes that are happening from coast to coast right now, but just how the system of law in this country has been deconstructed first under the eight years of Barack Obama and now quantumly under Joe Biden. It's scary. You know, people can commit some of the most heinous acts imaginable and essentially not receive any consequence for it. You know, there's these national cases here and there where, you know, an egregious murder or a vicious rape and the person is prosecuted till the end degree. But overwhelmingly, more often than not, these people are not. I mean, you can get your ass absolutely kicked in the streets of a major city right now, brutally, be robbed and left for dead. And if you survive and they wind up catching this person who probably will have an extensive list of just absolutely disgusting charges that they've beat over and over again because of the broken, you know, system in this country of administering law and equally, this person is going to be back out on the streets to do it again and probably worse. A very short amount of time. You know, and that's all part of the plan to racially, socially, and via a class system, divide Americans against each other. That was part of Barack Obama's doctrine and legacy. And you can't take into consideration that Joe Biden, at the behest of his handlers, via all the people from the first Obama administration are continuing to conduct the same operations here in the United States. It's sad. It needs a harsh reset. We need to start seeing justice be applied equally. And for the people that actually commit crimes go away for a very long time in this country again. But it's going to take a movement. And I'm glad America first is that movement is leading it. Last clip I've got before we jump in with Christina Bob, a little, well, more on the legal side, bringing it back to the center side of the analysis of Joe Biden speaking event, coming out of his horrible debate from Victor David Hanson last night. Let's take it out. Well, it was pretty rich because this case would have never got to the Supreme Court, had his own Department of Justice not appointed a special counsel that had a history of bias and went after the leading presidential opposition candidate to the president. And it wouldn't have come to the Supreme Court had Fannie Willis not met with a White House counsel to coordinate a defense strategy in Georgia, a prosecution strategy in Georgia. And it wouldn't have happened if the third highest ranking federal attorney in Mark Merrick Garland's DOJ had not suddenly appeared at Alvin Bragg's prosecution. This was in response to the weaponization of the DOJ by none other than Joe Biden. Second, it's very ironic, Jason, because you see the special counsel Robert Herr said that Joe Biden himself, while he was president, faced criminal liability, he had classified files, which is a felony to be in his possession. He didn't notify anybody that he had them until he selected the special counsel but go after Donald Trump. And he had a speechwriter that had no security clearance that admittedly was looking at those files in the presence of Joe Biden. The only reason he wasn't prosecuted was Robert Herr determined that he was too enfeebled and would win the sympathy of a jury. And finally, they have been going after the Supreme Court. Chuck Schumer went out to the doors of the Supreme Court and called out by name Justice Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and said, "You're going to weep the whirlwind, you don't know what's going to hit you." And then when protesters a year later started showing up, including a potential assassin, at the homes of the justices, Merrick Garland didn't enforce a law, which was a felony to do that for political purposes to influence the Supreme Court decision. So this was very tragic what Joe Biden just did. It was ironic, it was wrong, and it was highly partisan, and it's dangerous. And again, you're talking about the guy who leads in at campaign events, although very poorly attended, by saying the Supreme Court tried to stop me and do in this state or the other thing, whether it's amnesty for illegals or student loan debt or whatever, unconstitutional move the Democrats are trying to make some green new bullshit, and I stood in the face of them and I won't let them do it. So because there is no check and balance power due to the fact that the House has a slim majority of Republicans and the Senate won't take up impeachment, Joe Biden can continue to operate unconstitutionally in that manner. Even when it comes to things like appointing the special counsel, which is now come under heavy scrutiny and questioning, which is something we'll kind of deconstruct as the weeks go on here, as we're going to stick in the main threads of the Supreme Court rulings, what the Democrats do from here, Donald Trump's rally out in Chesapeake, Virginia the other day, and then best of the rest as far as our show goes today. Donald Trump put out on troops social in regards to the bad day that not only the Democrats, but essentially those trying to prosecute him like Jack Smith had yesterday. And this is how it read, "A really bad day for deranged Jack Smith, the wacko prosecutor used for Crooked Joe Biden's attack on his political opponents. Today is in the past, the Supreme Court gave the deranged one a high-level spanking. His real bosses, Andrew Weisman and Lisa Monaco, not to mention Merrick Garland, whose once great reputation has been shattered by these thugs. And this constant defense of Crooked Joe must be furious at him. Garland ought to cut an end to this never-ending hoax and let the people focus on bringing back greatness to America. So, cope and seize, seething cope. We're going to leave it at that and catch up on all the stuff we might have missed in between the lines with RNC constitutional attorney, Christina Bob right now, but before we do, a first check-in with one of our partners. This episode of the podcast is brought to you as always by Man Rubs. Rubs, barbecue tools, blowtorches, t-shirts, coffee cups, and all-around barbecue-related gear for you to make barbecue great again. Can be found at manrubs.com or on Instagram, Man Rubs. Use the code "stake15" for 15% off your order. Alright, Joining us first on the show today, this is Big Tuesday edition of the "Stake for Breakfast" podcast. She's an attorney at the Republican National Committee. She's also a marine author, one of our great friends, Miss Christina Bob, welcome back to the show. Hey, thanks so much for having me. Busy, busy, busy times. It's weird that it's only Tuesday and the news docket's already filled up and spilling over, especially after the fallout from last week's first presidential debate. I guess we could start there. Although we do have a lot of stuff scotus related to talk about which we're going to get to in a sec just with you. Listen, we know someone who works for the RNC, obviously very close proximity to President Trump over the course of the last eight years, had watched the debate very intenively. I mean, listen, the job that the American public has got over Joe Biden and the media's biased, his handlers biased, the denial factor over the course of his performance of the last three plus years was on full display. I mean, I know we're still moving, I guess legally, to get the Robert Hearr special counsel tapes released to the American public, but the world got about a 90 minute taste of what you could only assume is on those tapes last week when he was head to head with President Trump. We just want your, a little bit of your commentary post-debate analysis right now. Yeah, I think, I mean, you summed it up pretty well. The American public got to see firsthand what bad shape Joe Biden is in. He's in terrible condition, physically, mentally. That man is not well, and he's certainly not someone I want running our country. I think most people feel that way. I think the recent polling shows that 75% of Americans believe that he's unfit for office. I think it's terrible to me. To me, the question is, what is the play by Democrats? Because that didn't happen on accident. You know, they all like to clutch their pearls and go, "Oh my gosh, we had no idea Joe Biden has dementia." But clearly everybody else knew that. It's a play. They're playing a game and I don't know where they weren't going with it. Obviously, a lot of them want to get rid of him and switch him out. That's going to be very, very hard for them to do because he's not going to give up his delegates. He can't give up his delegates because he doesn't want his family to go to jail and he can't trust anybody else with the office. Without him giving up his delegates, I don't know how they're going to get rid of him, but they're clearly trying. Quite honestly, if they want a better chance at winning, they have to get rid of him because they can't win with him and they can't cheat with him because if he actually did win, no one would believe it. So they're in a pickle, but I think it's a strategic pickle. I think they knew they were going to take that loss and they took it where they're going with it. I don't know. Like everybody else, I'm curious to see what happens. Now, can we stay in this thread just a little bit because your expertise does fall in the election integrity component of everything that's going on right now? And you'd mention those delegates. There are deadlines for the states coming up, ones that have already passed. States that would basically have to be conceded to Donald Trump before we even go to the ballot box. And then the delegates, the way the Democrats have rigged their own election is kind of the pain that they're feeling right now in regards to what's happening with Joe Biden. Because even if everything went the way that seems like the Democrat blob wants it to happen now, like Joe Biden is going to come out and say, "For the better of the country, I'm going to step down. I'm going to push this person into X, Y, and Z spot. They can bring this person in to be vice president, et cetera." But it doesn't mean the delegates just have to listen to it, Joe Biden, say, and automatically take their allotment and put it over to whoever Joe Biden. You know, there could be some big infighting and power grabbing behind the scenes. Can you explain that to our listenership a little bit about how this whole process goes down? Because it seems like for a lot of the things they tried to weaponize against Republicans and use against Donald Trump for the last nearly eight years now, is kind of just blowing up in their face, starting with what happened in the debate and all the way up to what they want to do with Joe Biden right now. Yeah, well, I think you summarized it really well, and the reality is we don't really know because this hasn't happened before. Now, certainly there's rules, and I'm not as familiar with the Democrat Party rules, but Joe Biden would have, in order to switch delegates from one candidate to another, the candidate would have to give them up, step down for some reason, say, "Oh, I'm surprised I have dementia. I have to give up my delegates." You know, whatever. And Joe Biden's not doing that. Absent that, they can't just switch delegates, right? They are not legally allowed to do that. And the remainder of the rules have never played out this way before. They've never tried to switch to my knowledge. I'm not aware of any situation where, in a presidential race, they've tried to switch a candidate out like this before. And so regardless of what the rules actually say on the Democrat Party, it's all going to be litigated because it's never been done before. So if they tried to do this, they would have litigation in all 50 states, because all 50 states are going to want to do something different with their delegates, or they're going to have to get all 50 states in line with whoever this new candidate is, and whatever. So this is not a switch to the light switch thing. This is a very laborious process where they have to get thousands and thousands of people on board to make this switch in all 50 states. And I don't think they can do it. I mean, the fact that Democrats are talking about it out in the open leads me to believe that they have some semblance of a plan. But I don't know how they're going to do it, but I think it is their best shot at victory. Speaking of best shots at victory, and it's going to be the last follow up question I asked you in this thread, Christina, before we move on to Supreme Court and all things related. The Democrats have very few options left. Obviously, you know, they were going to go with try to get Donald Trump at the debate. Three on one, moderators in Joe Biden versus Donald Trump. They were going to use racist, rapist, insurrectionist, and convicted felon as talking points. Long story short, the only thing they really bickered over was golf handicaps, which I think is a huge win for Donald Trump. I think he reminded the American public what life was like under his administration during his first term. He also opened up the door to expand on a lot of different things in his second terms, including secure borders, safe streets, world peace, energy independence, and a lot better economy, etc. You know, we still have the sentencing coming down in the New York related case in just a few weeks here. And I think a lot of people are forgetting about it because of how drive by headline E, the news is these days. I mean, but when you look at the options that Democrats have left, is honestly putting Donald Trump in jail, one of them? Well, it's hard for me to say yes to that because I do think the answer is yes. I think it's not, they're not above it. You know, it's not beyond something that they would do. To me, I just don't see how it helps them other than getting him off the campaign trail, everything they do to him backfires and, you know, makes them so much more popular. And so even if they did that, I can't imagine that going well for them. So, yeah, I think, I mean, they could try it. We'll find out on the 11th, what they're going to do. Maybe they want to feel good about themselves, you know, ruining, you know, attempting to ruin or meddle with the RNC convention. You know, maybe, I don't know how they think that's a win for them, but they, yeah, I think, yeah, they could do it. And it's going to be wild and we're obviously going to be keeping our eyes on it. We'll probably have you back shortly after the sentencing just to get some commentary on it as well. All right, let's move on to some of the Supreme Court stuff. Let's start back last week. You know, there's been the terrorism, tack on charge, added to sentences of people that are involved with January 6, et cetera, ever since the beginning of sentencing essentially started at some point a couple years ago. Now, in addition to that, we've seen that the Supreme Court has voted that this is not appropriate to use unless it's like of the most extreme circumstances. And there has to be lots of evidence and ways that corroborate that narrative going in. You can't just use it as a rogue judge who's rewriting the law for themselves to just add it on to sentences for people who, in some cases, have been convicted that weren't even in Washington DC on January 6, 2021. So when you see, I guess obviously the blowing up of 1512 C2 in regards to that terrorism tack on charge for a lot of J6 defendants. How are you feeling that this is a big win? And did the Supreme Court get it right in regards to a lot of the sentencing that's happened since, well, I guess the January 6 committee finished their whatever it was. They were actually doing. Yeah, well, in the Fisher case, I'm happy with the ruling. I think that should have been thrown out. I mean, that was a, we've all heard it said a million times, but that was a statute that came about after Enron. And it was for the purpose of preventing shredding of documents and corporate, you know, hindering of government investigation or whatever it is. So it bears the intent for the statute. There's no resemblance whatsoever to what they actually used it for. And so, yes, I think it was a very appropriate ruling. I'm really glad for those J6 defendants that hopefully are, you know, having their convictions thrown out and getting their lives back and, and able to move on, move on from this, hopefully putting the pieces back together of their life, how they've been completely disrupted. So, yes, I think it was a good ruling. To me, the most frustrating part of the ruling was that Amy Coneke Barrett was in the dissent. And Justice Jackson was in the majority. I was actually very grateful for Justice Jackson. I thought, you know, I thought she did a good job. And as much as I disagree with her political bent in the way she sees the world, I have to say, I think, I think she does a good job of being fair when she, you know, when it's not something that's super political. Like touching a nerve for her, you know, when it's not something that's going to get protesters outside of her house. So I'll give her credit for that. I was really disappointed in Justice Barrett. I don't know what the heck she's doing, but, but yeah, that was, to me, that was the kind of like, what the heck was that about. But other than that, I thought the ruling was really good. No, I think so as well. And then when you saw yesterday's presidential immunity ruling come out again, six, three amongst, I guess you could call it party lines. But again, we had just mentioned Amy Coneke Barrett in the part of the dissension in the 1512C2 case. Now we have her saying that, like, even though the president is granted the presidential immunity in part of her dissent, she wrote that he still should probably stand trial for things related to January 6. When you saw the ruling come out initially, and then some of the backlash that came, obviously, there's a lot of people on the Democrat side right now, a lot of pundits online, even people in the mainstream press. I mean, I even saw Van Jones kind of alluding to it, that if the president can assemble SEAL Team Six and take out their political opponents and nothing happens to him because of presidential immunity, we should do that right now. Obviously, it's just a talking point and really moronic to even use. But the fact of the matter is, I think Skoda's got it right here again, and moving forward, it chits at the presidents for presidents to not have that much pressure on their shoulders when doing the jobs of the American people, especially in the most extreme of circumstances. Well, I think Skoda's did get it right. I do think it's important to note, though, they did not say that he has absolute immunity, and they only took away the part of the indictment that refers to Bill Barr in the discussions with the Justice Department because they were saying the president needs to be able to have discussions about where the line is on the law within his Justice Department, and so for that purpose, he has absolute immunity, but they pushed the rest of it back down to Chuck N, who, you know, there's now there's going to be another hearing down at the trial court level and it's going to be Judge Chuck N deciding whether the rest of the indictment was an official act or not, and they specifically talked about President Trump's tweets and his address to the public, his engagement with state officials and non-executive branch officials, but all of that question is going back down to Chuck N. So, you know, there's been a lot of conservatives saying, you know, slamming the football saying, Trump, one, we got it, we got it. The ruling is a very good ruling, and I think it's a very well-tailored ruling, but not for a second, do I think it's going to shut President Trump's case down, at least not immediately. What it does do is it requires more hearings, and I think it's going to drag it out and hopefully drag it out past the election, but it doesn't make the case go away. And just to be clear, what I'm going to ask you is probably, I hope something, you know, so it goes back to Judge Chuck N, we call our Judge Chungus here on the show, but that's neither here nor there, you know, and then it's going to be debated over again, and the Trump team is going to have the ability to, again, peel whatever ruling that she makes on this in regards to her version of presidential immunity, back to the Supreme Court, maybe to get punted down again. Long story short, though, I think what you alluded to, Christina, was the most important thing. As far as this thing getting off the ground, having the ability to tack on the 15-12-C2 terrorism charge in regards to Donald Trump and then questioning what immunity could be in and around January 6, it seems like this is, with the amount of time we have left before the election, just too much, whether you're looking in regards to the appellate process or how long it's going to take Judge Chuck N to figure out what she wants to do in regards, because she knows if she goes with an extreme measure in regards to her ruling or version of what presidential immunity could be related to that case, it could get back to the Supreme Court and they could sit on it again. Probably well through the election cycle as they were in no rush to get this one out there. I mean, this is coming almost nearly past the deadline of when they normally operate as a Supreme Court entity. Yeah, I mean, they're out of session for the summer now. Anyway, no, I think that's right. I think the biggest thing that this does for Donald Trump is delay it, right? I think it'll be telling to see what Jack Smith does with this. He immediately rushes to Chuck N and asks for a hearing. It means he's got a plan, and my guess is if he does have a plan, it's going to be really cut back on the indictment. Whether it's Jack Smith trimming down the 1512 see two charges to make the indictment very streamlined, basically getting rid of everything that Donald Trump could contest an appeal based on these recent rulings. And there's a there might be I don't want to say there is, but there might be enough left on neat left on that bone after he trims back everything that's appealable really just getting down to the presidential immunity question again. I'll see if he's going to try to jam it through in a in a in the real world in a normal case. He doesn't not have not a chance. He's got enough time to get this through. But with an assist from the judge, would he be able to get it through? That's what remains to be saying. So we'll see how quickly he works and how quickly he throws it all together. But yeah, I don't know I'm looking forward to seeing what he does with it. Yeah, it's going to be interesting to kind of track. And I mean, for all the stuff that they would necessarily have to take out to get something to fall within the parameters of the legal sense. He's heading into a trial and up through a verdict. I mean, how bad of an accusation or like huge crime? Could you really tack on? Can you really be an insurrectionist? If you can't use the terrorism check on charge. If there are going to be some facets of presidential immunity that are interwoven in that too. I mean, that's the narrative they're going for is that he essentially led an insurrection against the government and that he tried to prevent the transfer of power. We all know, I mean, the Supreme Court is voted. I mean, now with presidential immunity to some context, but then they would have made a case for it too with Donald Trump being able to remain on the ballot. They've already said like they don't feel in regards to being an insurrectionist. He is one. Therefore, he should have the opportunity like every American to have his name on the ballot in all 50 states as well. It'd be really hard outside of like media narrative to really prove to the American public and make any kind of a conviction stick that he did any of the things that they're going to be accusing him of. Don't you think? Yes and no. Yes. Yes. In reality. Yes. The fact of the matter is that he's not charged with insurrection now. He's not charged with any of the things that they're talking about in the media. And I think the only charge that could maybe potentially survive these rulings is the defrauding Congress or basically trying to light a Congress on the official proceeding thing. So is that going to work in a real world? No, I don't think it gets a trial and time. I don't think any of none of this is legitimate, but for the media spectacle that the left is trying to create before the election. Could they put on some type of fake show? It's going to be hard, but they have the home court advantage, you know, so I don't know, I don't know what they're going to do with it, but, you know, buckle up because we're going to see soon what they're going to do with it. I have. I have a very hard time. My sense is they're not just going to go offshucks. We lost. We'll get them next time. Like, they ain't going to do that. So I don't know what the heck they're going to do. They're going to bend and twist reality as much as they can to try to shoehorn this thing into something. We got to see what kind of mental gymnastics they're going to do. No, I completely agree with you. Although I do feel at some point during this election cycle, probably a lot closer to November, probably. Closest to when early voting is going to get ready to start. If Joe Biden remains in, there is going to be some kind of a switch in narrative to where they're going to be like, OK, you know, this is it. The next plant phase of this plan is make the next four years of Donald Trump's life more miserable than it already was when he was out of office while he's back in the White House. And then we're going to focus on 2028 and just getting power back. We'll have to put a Band-Aid over the next four years like we did the first time. But, you know, the fact of the matter is, I think, here's the deal. 2015, Donald Trump was essentially an unknown. The things he did during his first presidency were obviously unprecedented. They set the standards for our country to go in great directions, which I think he's going to take us back down on in his second term in office. But over the course of the last three plus years, there isn't a person outside of the extreme, extreme elite who hasn't felt like the sting of these open borders, globalists, lawless, two tiers of justice system policies of Joe Biden, where everybody's just destroyed. And I don't think they're going to have as an easy a time pushing back on Donald Trump. When his argument would be, I want to make America great again. Therefore, everybody's life better than, oh, man, he's the worst person in the history of people. I mean, now that Donald Trump's back on the campaign trail, they can't use COVID anymore and he go out and be that touchable candidate. Everybody loves him again and are being reminded of how awesome he was heading into, you know, his first term in office. So I guess we'll have to see it from there. But Christina, always awesome and a pleasure hosting you on the show. Obviously, we've got your book live linked in the show description today. Anywhere else, good links. I mean, in our weekly newsletter, we've got all of them, you know, protect the vote. Trump Force 47, all the things that the Trump campaign is putting out there to get involved. We've got live link. But where do you want to direct our listenership to get involved and help out as well? Yeah, all of those are great. Wherever you're listening from, please go to your county GOP or your state GOP and get involved there because that's really where they're going to be able to plug you in directly at the county level. Can't stress it enough. Now is the time to be involved and a great conversation today with the author, attorney and great friend of state for breakfast, Miss Christina Bob. Thanks for joining us on the show today. Have a great 4th of July and we'll see you again soon. Thanks, Ron. Pattern, discernible pattern of Democratic officials seemingly trying to convince you, the public, to not believe what you saw and what you heard with your eyes and with your ears on Thursday night. Democratic officials have tried to spin this in many ways. They said President Biden just had a cold. They said it was just one off night akin to when President Obama in 2012 was rusty and seemed a little huffy. But behind the scenes make no mistake, most Democratic officials witnessed the same shocking spectacle that you did. The difficulty that the presumptive Democratic nominee, the current president of the United States had just articulating his basic thoughts during the 90 minutes of the debate. With all due respect, it is not, it is not honest to say that this is just one night. There have been moments like this that people have seen in front of the cameras and other moments with that with cameras not there. Just two weeks ago, let me just show this clip. There was another moment like this, not just a senior losing a train of thought, but something else going on. Here he is. It was an event about immigration. He tries to introduce an event about DHS Secretary of Mayorkas and there's some sort of glitch. I don't know what it is. Let's roll that tape. Thanks to all the members of the Congress and Homeland Security Secretary. I'm not sure they're going to introduce you all the way, but all kidding aside, Secretary Mayorkas. I don't know what that was. That doesn't trouble me at all, Jake. All right, jumping back into the news portion of the show here. First of two big Tuesday editions of "Stake for Breakfast" and that was CNN, "Fake News", "Jake Tapper". Kind of holding the Democrats' feet to the fire over Joe Biden's not only debate performance, but recent documented cases of questions concerning his mental acuity. And at the end of that clip, you heard Connecticut Senator and Biden campaign surrogate Chris Coons kind of saying that he saw nothing wrong with Joe Biden doing exactly what he does very often when he's at any kind of speaking event and addressing the public and/or the press. So we're going to jump back into it here. Again, always a pleasure. We can catch up with the RNC's Christina Bob. She is a Wonder Woman in real life. And if you guys knew how hard she was working behind the scenes for President Trump and to get him reelected, in addition to, you know, all the stuff, it's well documented now of a law fair. She's incurred as well. I mean, her mugshot still is, her profile picture. We had to find a little bit more of a elegant one for today's show description, but that's neither here nor there. You know, and it's the defense of Joe Biden now by the Democrats, which is the last leg he has to stand on. There's a little bit more of breaking news coming through the wire today, talking about how I guess all the governors on the Democrat side got together yesterday on a conference call, no staffers, no press, to raise their concerns about what's going on with Joe Biden. And the message has been received by the Oval Office as, which is now breaking news here on Tuesday that Joe Biden is set to meet with Democrat governors amid his debate fallout and commentary on the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding presidential immunity. So we're going to continue to get into this right now. As the Democrats continue to be in a state of disarray over, well, I guess you can call it the Joe Biden issue. I mentioned Chris Coons, as he was a guest with Jake Tapper, and he would go on in a back and forth defending Joe Biden's mental performance and sticking in the threat of one bad night does not determine, I guess, would so much consider presidency. Question mark, let's check it out. He has given fewer press conferences, fewer interviews than any president in modern history, including the previous one who's now running for reelection. And, you know, this could all be this previous one told more lies per sentence than any candidate has ever this is the state state. This is not the discussion that we're having. We could certainly, you know, have that conversation. I certainly didn't particularly care for it when President Biden said no U.S. service members had been killed in the previous four years. But moving on from things that were said that were not true, I think it is easy to settle this right now by President Biden going to the Brady Press Center, the press file in the White House, and doing a, and doing a two hour press conference. Everybody would run cover it live. Networks probably would cover it live. He'd be able to answer all these questions. It's not a crazy thing to expect a president to do. And the fact is you know that the campaign knows that the White House knows that. That's how you settle this. You just put them in front of reporters and he handles himself with acuity, a plumb. We all see it was just a fluke. Oh my God, I can't believe it happened. And we move on. The fact that you haven't done that says quite a bit to me. Jake, what I've just said maybe three times in this interview is that is what I am urging and recommending. So a lot of urging and recommending from Biden campaign surrogates regarding how Joe Biden needed to handle his post debate performance, which would include getting out in front of the press and having, I guess, what you could only assume would be a no holds bar presser. I just don't think that that really will ever happen. You know, it's gone to a point right now where they are going to have to walk such a fine line. And using smoke and mirrors, convince the donors who in some cases and instances are even asking for their money back in regards to campaign donations and financial support for Joe Biden. And this comes on the heel of at least two or three different months in a row where Donald Trump has outraged the current president, something that, I guess, in the context of modern politics, you just don't see Republicans can't do it the same way Democrats do. And Joe Biden has been so absolutely uninspiring to the Democrat Party, even though they decided to go all in on him and up until the debate last Thursday cover for his presidency, his mental ability, his physical ability, and the ability to govern and run this country. That it's kind of like a come to Jesus moment with them, where it's like, almost, okay, we knew what we did was bad, but what do we do about it now? We're admitting the big lie, and now we want to move on. On the big scheme of things, especially when it comes to the traditional calendar and all things regarding politics, it may necessarily be too late. And we're just going to have to see, listen, poll numbers aren't going to do anything to give Joe Biden a boost and it doesn't matter how many fake ones come out that say they're within the margin of error Joe Biden has slim leads in this there in the other place. It's just not the way America is looking at this right now. And the more times that Joe Biden goes before the press and before the totality of the constituency here in the entire electorate in the United States, every single one of these appearances now that the media has called them on it is going to be scrutinized in ways that you can't even imagine, and that we surely didn't see for the last three plus years. Let's check it out. We have new poll numbers for President Biden post debate. And the bottom line out, it's not any good. It's not any good. Look at this, voters who say that Biden has the mental health to be President. It was just 35% pre-debate. Look where it's dropped to now post debate, 27%. How about that he should be running for President? It was 37% pre-debate. It's now 28%. I have never seen numbers this bad for an incumbent President during my lifetime. And that mental health to be President just 27%. You might say, okay, you know, that's low, but a lot of people thought Biden was too old back in 2020. These numbers look nothing like this back in 2020. These numbers were bad already, and the truth is ours, and they have gotten just considerably worse even in just a few days after that first presidential debate. Long story short, three quarters of the American electorate doesn't think Joe Biden has the mental ability to not only run for re-election, but govern in the second term. And you're just seeing it from the mainstream press, all the way up to people who are in and around Joe Biden's office, the handlers that are getting thrown under the bus for the disaster, which was his debate performance. And the office of Kamala Harris, which I think is probably days away from starting to leak really negative things about Joe Biden's presidency. And it seems like the, I guess, overall narrative within the Democrat community at the moment is, oh no, we suck again. And it's been a while. I mean, outside of the very small time Donald Trump had to defeat Hillary Clinton back in 2016, it's been Democrat W's for a long time here in America. You know, and this falls on the shoulders of the press, who spent years propping up Joe Biden's fake presidency. And it's just really sad to see how they are coming knives out for Joe Biden. And you know, I think one of the biggest things right now is the blame game. And I saw, you know, on the news, this is becoming one of the focal points of the commentary. Maybe if we get these handlers that are close to him right now and advising him incorrectly, he'll, I don't know, regenerate portions of his brain and be okay again. I don't know that that's not the case, but I mean, they're making a reason for this right now. So let's check it out and hear the Democrats try to rationalize how Joe Biden prepared for this debate and what it means in the big scheme of things. Even before the debate, there was a sense of dread among many Democrats, a fear that the campaign was heading toward something they consider unthinkable, a Donald Trump victory in November. President Biden needed a strong debate to show that he has the physical and mental ability to take on and defeat Donald Trump. That's why he spent nearly a week at Camp David with an army of advisors preparing for a debate with rules and a format that his advisors designed. Few prominent Democrats are even pretending he did what he needed to do on that debate stage. And again, you're going to see a lot of the blame switch there. And where they're not talking about the big boys and the big dogs are talking about the small ones, the handlers that you'll never hear about. That'll go out and work at Democrat think tanks and have titles as a senior advisor to President Biden moving forward talking about globalist policies and strategies green new everything and one world governments. But again, it's a having to wake up in the morning and look in the mirror moment for the Democrats, you know, and there's not too much ways to get around it right now after Joe Biden's had a couple disastrous performances. You know, one of the things that's going to be taken into consideration, and I guess stress tested over the next four plus months, is the relationship within the senior leadership of the Democrat movement, not the party, that Joe Biden's going to have to see on whether or not it will withstand the test of time. And that's his relationships with obviously the Clintons, Bill and Hillary Barack Obama and his wife, Big Mike, and, you know, people of that level right there, ones who are going to be expected to get him over the finish line. This is as I'm watching on the big screen right now, Democrat rep dog it has publicly called now for Joe Biden to step down and step out of the race. But I saw Bill Clinton post via his social media account over the weekend following debate. Let's check it out. I'll leave the debate rating to the pundits, but here's what I know, facts and history matter. Joe Biden has given us three plus years of solid leadership, sitting us after the pandemic or creating a record number of new jobs, making real progress, solving the climate crisis, launching a successful effort and reducing inflation. All while pulling us out of the quagmire, Donald Trump left us in. That's what's really at stake in November. You know, Tucker Carlson kind of peaked my interest yesterday. I don't know if you guys had had the opportunity to check it out online yet. He doesn't often post much punditry from his official Twitter account. And what I mean by that is he puts out a lot of his videos and interviews, obviously all this episodes of the Tucker Carlson show, etc. through his new news network come out exclusively on X as well. But he rarely gets into these big conspiracy driven threats. Here's the deal. We're going to find out in a very short amount of time if Tucker Carlson has moved since he's left the mainstream media towards being a real independent journalist who is honestly looking for the truth and is wholeheartedly invested in the movement here in America to save this country. Or whether or not he's kind of shifted towards the Alex Jones-ish, Steve Bannon-ish, that whole grift ink of let me put out some, I mean, even Bill O'Reilly calling on his official account yesterday that Joe Biden's done. He's being replaced. Is that the other thing? And whether or not he's going to be one or the other. But I'm going to read you guys a thread that I saw yesterday circulate online and this is via Tucker Carlson's official account. And again, take into consideration the news that he's brought since he's left Fox News, a lot of truth telling, a lot of eye-opening material. And it seems like Tucker Carlson's really enjoying his life again. But when I read you this thread of three posts he put out on X last night, it doesn't really fall into context of what I'm personally hearing from people that are about as close to Washington DC and directly connected to both campaigns as, but who am I, right? Who am I? Let's check it out. From an unusually good source, Obama's tweet supporting Joe Biden was disingenuous, that's the tweet that Noah ran, on our Friday edition of the show. In private Obama is telling people Biden can't win, and he is therefore in favor of an open convention. Obama will not say who he supports, nor as of yesterday afternoon had he met personally with Biden to deliver that message. Relations between the Obama's and Biden's has never been warm, at times it's been hostile, but recently they've been deteriorated further, mostly due to Jill Biden. In the hours and days after the debate, she kept her husband cloistered away from anyone who might convince him to drop out. Jill Biden is the driving force behind her husband's reelection campaign, just as she was in 2020 when other members of the family, including Biden's sister, Val, considered him too impaired to run. The next generation of potential Democrat candidates understands all this as an opportunity. They're circling particularly Gretchen Whitmer, who's promoting herself aggressively. That's the first post, next one. Biden is done, bad on it. Too many prominent Democrats have suggested he's brain damaged. They can't walk that back. They have to remove him and they will. The only question is when. If they're smart, they'll do it immediately. If Kamala is going to be the nominee, she might as well be the president first. That leaves the question of Trump and the sentencing on July 11th. We all know after today that's not happening till the end of July now, so take that out of consideration. Biden's collapse makes this much more perilous moment than it was. At this point, Trump is not just the Republican candidate, but effectively the presumptive president. If you're going to put him in jail, it'd better be for a very serious crime that everyone agrees he committed. Otherwise, you risk destroying the system completely and forever. We're in legitimate danger. Democrats need to pull back. And then the last post. All this nonsense you read about how only Biden can make the decision to leave is just so absurd. That's not how the Democrat party works. No individual is more important than the collective. That's the whole point of the party. In a Biden-specific case, he's got no constituency in Washington. Yes, Ron Clayne, an 85-year-old Ted Kaufman, benefit directly from his presidency, but it's a small group. The rest of the city has no loyalty to the Bidens. They don't care about him. They're never taking them seriously. Any president works for them as long as he's a Democrat. It's never personal with these people because the individual doesn't matter. And that was the last post regarding this item, so take what you will from that. I mean, Tucker's been a reliable source of information regarding this stuff, and we'll have to see where it goes. I mean, electorally, ballot-wise, delegate debate, financially. It's so much murkier today than it was last year when they obviously could have made the switch. You know, when Gavin Newsom was measuring the drapes of the White House while Joe Biden was in Europe last year. I don't know if that rhetoric was ramped up from within Democrat circles to promote possibly what was coming. But I really don't think that you can just remove Joe Biden. In addition, I really don't think you can skip Kamala Harris either. And at that case, you look at the polling numbers. I mean, a lot of those candidates that they've propped up, Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whitmer, J.B. Pritzker, etc. They don't poll as well as Joe Biden does in the Rust Belt and the Blue Wall and in places like Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, and Nevada. People in those states hate them and understand exactly what they did, not only with the entirety of, let's just say, their governorships, but let's just go back as recently as the pandemic and how tyrannical they were. I mean, Joe Biden is the White House. It's one of the only times he actually lends akin to federalism when he doesn't want to take the blame for all the bad stuff that happened during COVID. Oh, that was the governors. Look at me. I'm sleepy Joe. Jack. It's nuts. So a little bit of news from Tucker Carlson and we'll keep it at that. Guys, wherever you're listening to the show today, welcome. Hope you're enjoying it. First of two big Tuesday editions of the Stake for Breakfast podcast. Do us a favor. No matter what podcasting platform it's on, whether it's Apple, Spotify, Google Podcast, iHeartRadio, or wherever you listen to the show, just do us the simple favor of making sure that it's downloading to your electronic device. That means you're subscribed, that means you're officially following our podcast on one of the major platforms helps us out big time. Remember Stake for Breakfast will always be 100% free. We'll never ask you for a dime. No paywall content here. You don't have to hear us say the bad words in a special edition of our show. We'll do it in our normal editions of the podcast. And in addition, check us out on social media, Twitter, get our true social Instagram, TikTok. We've got to counsel all of them, find them, follow them, hit the notification bell. You'll never miss out on all the great stuff that's going on down here at the show. So moving right along. Speaker Johnson wanted to talk about the panic mode that's engulfing the Democrats right now, last night on Fox News in an interview, following Joe Biden's disastrous debate and speaking event, which took place in regards to his reply and if there's a response to the Supreme Court ruling on Presidential immunity. Let's check it out. Every metric of performance last night, Donald Trump won clearly on the issues on his temperament, on his stamina, the mental acuity. Listen, we live in very dangerous times. The American people are in panic mode about their own lives. They can't afford to put groceries on the table consistently. They're worried about the rising crime rates and the open border and the weakness that we're projecting on the world stage. All these things because we have a weak commander in chief. This is not a game. This is the most important election of our lifetimes. That is not an overstatement. It's not hyperbole. Everybody knows it. Donald Trump showed last night that he can address these challenges and he can bring America back. And I'm telling you, it doesn't matter what party you're in. If you watch that debate, you're not in your head and agreement saying, "I want that." I don't know where they conducted that interview. Obviously, Speaker Johnson was in front of a green screen. But it sounded like they were in a convenience store or something with all the noise that was going on in the background. But he brings up some good points. And it looks like the Republican party line is going to be towing the narrative now, much of what Donald Trump led in with at the first presidential debate. And that is, you could say whatever you want, you want to use the rapist, racist, insurrectionist, convicted felon narrative and talk about, "Oh my God, threat to democracy." Donald Trump's putting everybody in jail and destroying the country and the global economy and everything is going to be worse. I'm going to talk about the things that are hurting Americans right now. Crime, education, health care, value of the dollar, job market, street security, border security, geopolitics, life was better under Trump. And if Republicans can toe that line, I think they're in a good spot. One of the things that I noticed watching the Sunday morning news circuit this week was a good segment. I believe it was on ABC's This Week in Fake News. And they had a roundtable hosted by someone who I'm not really too keen on every time he talks because I know how slimy he was following the transition of Donald Trump into the White House and the presidency during the course of his first term. And that's former, I guess, chief assistant or campaign, whatever, rant previous. And, you know, for as much as rant has come back to being under the MAGA tent and not being as hypercritical of Donald Trump and his first term in office after seeing the way the country has trended downward both internally and on a global scale, he has made some good talking points. And I know that he was hitting the narrative hard on the head because I watched it in real time. It was about a five-minute speaking segment for him and they had clipped it so awfully on social media. It just doesn't seem like a lot of people wanted this narrative of what he was promoting on this show unless you watch the full episode on the ABC News website was happening about. So, you know, and they talked about Donald Trump and the fact that he lied more than any person ever on the presidential debates age. Again, we debunked that narrative on our Friday edition of the show when we talked about specific reference points that they, and I'll just give you a few. Iran was not funding terrorism while Donald Trump was president. We all know that is 100% not true, but what Donald Trump meant was they had financially hindered Iran so bad that they could not, for I guess would be a standard practice model, continue to fund terrorism as they would in ways operating under other presidents of the United States. We had the greatest economy in the history of the galaxy. Donald Trump said we had the greatest economy ever in America under his presidency. There is at least one quarter of financial information that reflects that we did have the greatest economy at least for a quarter in the United States. Then you talk about the jobs. Before COVID, Donald Trump was dominating. And Donald Trump, you know, promoted all of the jobs he made, how many people were getting off government assistance, et cetera. And Joe Biden, you know, still goes around saying he created 11 billion jobs, even though we all know that nearly 70% of the jobs created under Joe Biden are people going back to work post COVID. So those are the things that they wanted to fact check Donald Trump on. But the fact of the matter is that Joe Biden just spoke at both sides of his mouth incoherently for the entirety of the debate. Let's hear it. President Trump let Biden talk. He stuck to the economy and immigration over and over again. He talked about gas and groceries. Biden lied over and over again. But the most service members were killed under his watch. I'm sorry. There's a lot of gold star families that might disagree with that. That billionaires pay 8% in tax, that the border patrol endorsed them. I mean, he was stumbling and bumbling and lying throughout the entire thing. Give me a break. It's the truth. I mean, the gold star family thing and the fact that Joe Biden forgot that people died at a heavy gate during the retreat from Afghanistan is just absolutely disgusting. It makes my stomach hurt every time I hear that portion of the presidential debate regurgitated over and over again in the press. And you just can't take out of consideration the fact that he doesn't know what he's talking about. And sometimes when he's saying these things, he's just making them up in real time. Heading into this Fourth of July holiday, which will probably be a big weekend for everybody up in DC. It's going to be interesting to see how we hit the ground runner next week. Because for all of the infighting that's going on now and the job that Joe Biden has to do to kind of clean up this mess. I don't know how they can get back to at least the center on anyone thinking that his presidency is legitimate. And that goes hand in hand with his candidacy moving forward. And I know legally and electorally, as Christina Bob pointed out, there's a lot of hoops that they're going to have to run through to even make it seem like Joe Biden can do the job. But if they're looking to segue in any other direction, it's going to cost them at the ballot box big time. And I don't know if they're able to recover from this. Last clip I've got before we jump in with Tennessee Congressman Andy Ogles to get some of his post debate commentary, some of the workings going on up on Capitol Hill and how he feels Joe Biden's candidacy goes on from here. Here's another one of those Biden campaign surrogates, Representative Jim Clyburn from South Carolina, who was on MSNBC on Monday, playing the, I guess, tone deaf surrogate role, trying to pander out to America that everything's just fine regarding Joe Biden, let's hear it. Of course, and quite for instance, you are there in Wisconsin and doing lots of events. Tell me the truth. What are you hearing from people on the ground? Almost totally. And I'm saying almost because I have not heard a single person express anything negative. All they're saying to us is keep Joe Biden moving forward. What in the actual, what else can you say? Honestly, what else can you say? Keep Joe Biden moving forward. It's sad to see that we've come to this. But again, in the big scheme of things, I mean, at least I don't look like some unqualified, ill-prepared, conspiracy theorist. For now, nearly six years here on "Stake for Breakfast," as we're getting ready to move into the dog days of summer and the absolute finite amount of time before we hit to the ballot box in November. But we'll leave it at that and be jumping in, talking about Donald Trump's big rally that he held down in Chesapeake, Virginia over the weekend to kick off our second edition of "Stake for Breakfast" today. Right now we're getting ready to jump in with Tennessee Congressman Andy Owls, but before we do, here's another check-in with one of our partners. Hi, this is Beard-O-Ratt, Beard-Vet Coffee. What's wrong with America today is that Americans are putting convenience over values. We need to start thinking about our dollar as a vote. We need to start using those dollars to support companies that believe in our values and aren't afraid to take a step. That's us at Beard-Vet Coffee. We're not another pretend conservative company that puts a pew pew on the packaging to take a line with our principals. We don't identify as America first. We live America first. We're a vet-founded vet focus in obviously period. So, if you haven't had a cup of Beard-Vet, buy a bag, hope us continue to support veteran charities every month. And as we always say, stay awake, not woke. Use promo code "Stake" for 10% off your order. Alright, joining us next on the show today to speak Tuesday edition of the "Stake for Breakfast" podcast. He's the congressman who represents Tennessee's 5th Congressional District. We're always happy to catch up with Representative Andy Ogle. Welcome back to the show. It's great to be here. I hope you are doing well. Oh, we're doing well. I think we're still riding the wave of winning. That started last week on debate night. Watch the Biden campaign. And pretty much the rest of the Democrat Party melt down over the weekend. And we had some big scotus rulings to kind of accent all that winning. And here we are catching up with you. So, let's go back to the debate. And let's start there. I mean, you know, here's the thing. Congress has done a great job trying to hold Merrick Garland accountable in regards to the audio tapes from the Robert Herr led special investigation into Joe Biden regarding the classified documents and material that they knew he committed crimes over, but thought he was too old and not mentally capable to stand trial over. You know, the media did the best they could since that ruling came out from Robert Herr to kind of cover up for Joe Biden. But here's the only benefit of not having the tapes yet. All of America and pretty much everyone who was interested in watching across the world got about a 90 minute snapshot into what those tapes probably sounded like on television last Thursday night during the debate. Congressman, I know someone that is a big supporter of President Trump and the America First Movement out of your office. Pretty much, you know, since the time you've entered politics here, you know, you got to see it as did the world on display for everyone to see last week. Let's get some commentary on that debate. Well, I mean, it was awful. I mean, it was like being on the bow of the Titanic and you're watching the iceberg approach. And meanwhile, the Democratic Party's back behind you rearranging the deck chairs and playing music. I mean, this literally was a disaster unfolding for the American people. Meanwhile, Trump did a fantastic job. He kept his cool, steady focus. He wasn't overly aggressive, which, you know, was both his personality and mind quite frankly. And so, but I think it's what the contrast the American people needed to see. And at the end of the day, you know, that debate was for, look, Trump's going to win Tennessee. He's going to win Florida. You know, there's eight, nine, ten states that really are going to ultimately decide who's the President of the United States. Those same ten states are also going to ultimately determine who's in control of the House of Representatives with that down ballot ticket effect. And so I think it was important for the American people to see that. I'm quite frankly surprised I was with the President in New York just a few weeks ago. And one of the things that he and I talked about, would there actually be a debate? I was somewhat skeptical that they would actually put Joe Biden in front of the American people, but they did. What does it say for someone that, you know, is supposedly running the country and the cover that the media's ran for him for the last three plus years? I mean, coming out of the election back in 2020, I mean, I guess you could say Joe Biden wasn't as bad as he is now. But I mean, the falling, the gaffs, the reading of the things you're not supposed to read off the teleprompter, the failure to recall certain things when he's trying to make points to the media, the fact that he can't go out and talk to the press without having cards that have people's names and pictures and topics on it as well. You know, this is all big Republican conspiracy theories. This is ideals that are ran, you know, directed by Donald Trump and executed via the MAGA Republicans. And then, you know, coming out of that debate, there should be no questions on how Joe Biden's mental capacities. You can't blame that on a cold. You can't blame that on, you know, he had one off night. This is literally what people have been accusing him doing. And I think the biggest red flag that we get coming out of it is, who's really running the country at the moment? Well, I think that that right there has been a full display from the beginning. I think Jill has a heavy hand as to what's going on in the White House. I think you see my orcas blinking. There's essentially a committee of the whole that's running the country right now. I think we have, quite frankly, a constitutional issue. That's why I have the no-juicing Joe Bill, which would have required them to disclose any mind-altering drugs or cocktails that he's taking for his cognitive decline because, you know, I've talked to doctors, I've talked to clinical pharmacists or compounding pharmacists. And, you know, one of the things they talk about is the individuals that are on these cocktails for cognitive decline, it's also, you know, for that compound to work, that cocktail to work, they're on a very heavy regimented sleep schedule. Well, the President of the United States has to be available 24/7. That's why they age 10 years and 4. They go in looking one way, they come out 4 years later, looking 10 years older because they're waking up at 2 o'clock in the morning, 4 o'clock in the morning, 6 o'clock in the morning. They're only sleeping 2 and 3 hours at a time. My guess is Joe Biden is in some sort of semi-unconscious state for several hours at a time where he's unreachable, and that is a crisis for our country that the Commander-in-Chief is not available to make decisions. You know, for something that's got a little bit of a comical spin to the name of what you propose, the no-juicing for Joe, but the fact of the matter is that do you think that it circulated in the press enough? I mean, everybody from the former White House doctor, Congressman Ronnie Jackson, all the way up to Donald Trump, often, you know, eluded to the fact that Joe was juiced up ever since we saw his performance at the State of the Union and other big speaking events like that, that they might have laid off a little bit and that could have led to his even poorer performance and anyone could have guessed happened last Thursday night? Well, you know, I think that the media has been so complicit on just kind of looking the other way. I mean, you look at the G7 where, you know, the President and the Prime Ministers are there standing in the field and Joe Biden, the President kind of turns away slightly and starts wandering off, and the Prime Minister of Italy kind of goes and starts moving closer to him, he continues to wander, and then so the whole gaggle of Prime Ministers literally move and form a bubble around the President of the United States, and you have the Prime Minister of Italy and Great Britain talking to him to keep him focused. I mean, imagine if you are a country like Great Britain or Italy or somewhere in Europe or wherever that looks to the United States for leadership. You look to us for protection, and this is who you're having to deal with. This is the person you're supposed to have confidence with, that he's wandering off in the middle of a field that there's nothing else around. There's literally nothing else around, and this guy can't stay focused for five minutes. I mean, it's really pathetic, and I think that's why foreign policy around the world is such a disaster. You know, Africa is a dumpster fire. Central America is a dumpster fire. You've got Russia, Ukraine, you've got Taiwan and China, and of course you have the October 7th attack. I mean, this is because we are perceived as weak right now, and that is solely because of Joe Biden. And what's more, I guess, of a concern to you right now. The fact that the media was able to run this disinformation campaign and the American people for over three plus years, or as you already alluded to, just about everybody who is related to the first Barack Obama administration. You're talking Tony Blinken, Alejandro Mayorkas, and Valerie Jarrett, Lisa Monaco, people adjacent to ones that served in the first Barack Obama presidency are now the ones that are essentially running the government. I mean, this is, I think, on full display, the third term of Obama. And like you said, you know, this isn't just a three-year operation of the media where they've been complicit against conservative, quite frankly, complicit against the Constitution. You saw this under Trump's administration. You saw how they covered for Obama when he made mistakes. So you're looking at decades of the kind of the woke media establishment working with the Democratic Party to undermine your liberty and my liberty, to undermine the rule of law, to undermine the Constitution. Look, if there was a Republican who had left the border wide open and you had multiple sexual assaults of underage girls over a period of just a few weeks, the media would be crying afoul. But because it's Joe Biden in the White House, they're not talking about the little girl that was just raped and murdered in Texas. They're not talking about the 13-year-old girl in New York that was just raped or the 14-year-old girl in Virginia or the 14-year-old girl in Louisiana. And I go on and on and on about assaults of illegals against female minors across this country. And what's the media talking about? Who knows? Something stupid about a celebrity or a professional athlete when they should be talking about that we've been invaded because of Joe Biden. We're less safe because of Joe Biden. We literally have terrorists in this country because of Joe Biden. And it's only a matter of time before we have another terrorist attack. I mean, it's wild to see the way it's kind of shaken out and unfolded before the American people. And then someone who knows the electoral process as good as yourself does, congressmen. I mean, it's about to be 4th of July, but the fact of the matter is it's going to be August in just a few short weeks. You know, once we hit August, we're talking about early voting and some states already happening across the country. And when you look at the Democrats' plan right now and then the limited amount of things that they could do for as much as it is, you know, as like a clickbait talking point to say, "Okay, let's ditch Joe Biden and move on with another candidate." It's not that easy electorally, especially with things related to like the money, as it would be if let's just say this instance happened last year. Yeah, no, there are deadlines across the country for qualifying for the ballots, but that being said, the Democrat Party has really been quite the skill of changing state laws to modify the rules to their benefit. So I think that right there is probably a lesser issue than the money side of the equation, where the monies that are raised for Joe Biden can't necessarily just, I'll use Michelle Obama as an example. Sure. They can't just give those campaign dollars to Michelle Obama. They would have to be refunded. They perhaps could be sent over to a super PAC that would be outside of the control of the campaign, but that in and of itself is probably the bigger hurdle or obstacle that a switcheroo would, you know, to try to pull it off in the amount of the brief window that we have, you know, left. And, you know, here in Tennessee, we're in our primary. So my primary is about to start just in a few short days. You have August 1st, but then you turn immediately around and you get into start racing towards the November election. It's wild to see how fast that things are coming in for as much as they want to run with these narratives for kind of like a week or so every time something happens with Joe Biden to kind of re-spin it back in favor of their direction. It seems like they run into the wall right now with the amount of time heading towards November. And with all the polls coming out, I know you mentioned some of them. We see places like New Hampshire, which has been historically, you know, a Democrat safety for the last couple of election cycles. I believe they're tired. Donald Trump has a small margin of victory there, Virginia single digits, New York single digits. It's like places where they normally don't even have to worry about. Now they have to focus on making sure that Donald Trump can't sneak out of victory because a lot of the states, including the major battlegrounds, blue wall, Rust Belt, et cetera, all seem to be trending in Donald Trump's favor right now. It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out through the dog days of the summer. But I think as we hit the fall, you're going to see the trend continue because when it comes to Joe Biden, there's not much of an alternative if they wind up sticking with him, that they can kind of roll out there that I at least think is safety and appealing to the Democrat voter base. Congressman, I do kind of want to switch up. I know you had mentioned some of the migrant crimes that are going on and, you know, every single day you turn on the TV, it's not like it's a made up talking point or something that, if you're voting now, MAGA Republicans are making up, you're seeing real things happen to America, some of the most egregious crimes that can be committed happening across the country, and they come off of people that Joe Biden had led into this country, unvettedly throughout the course of his term in office in complicity with Alejandro Mayorkas, the way he's run DHS. What's some of the commentary on the way you've seen this kind of unfold over the last couple months, and now that it's something that I believe an overwhelming majority of Americans are aware of, this is something that's going to have to be addressed on day one, not just at the congressional level, but with some of the agenda items Donald Trump's looking to bring to the White House. Yeah, I mean, so, you know, I've got multiple pieces of legislation addressing the illegal migrant crisis, one of which would deport anyone who's come into this country illegally under the Joe Biden administration. Look, if you're here illegally, I think everyone should be deported. We have a legal process. Now, that process may be broken. It needs to be fixed, but that's a separate issue. You know, just because the immigration process is slow or broken doesn't mean that people can then ignore our laws. We're a sovereign nation. We have a sovereign border and we have the rule of law and it should be followed. So if you came here illegally, you should never be able to become a citizen and you should be deported. I talked to President Trump about that. He agrees with me that we're going to have to start reporting individuals. Look, if you're from a third world country and you come into this country, look, I appreciate the fact that you might want a better life, but you're bringing with you your third world country values and mores. And that's why you see so many attacks against women across the United States and across Europe. I mean, it was just an incident where you had a migrant vote arriving towards Italy. It was sinking. You had a gentleman as the boat is capsizing his wife and his daughter. They drowned horrifically and I'm sorry for that. So what does he do? He turns on another woman and her daughter that are in the boat. He beats up the mom. He sexually assaults the daughter. He throws the daughter into the water. The man and the mother survive and she immediately turns them into the Italian police. But this is who we're letting into this country. Right now, that example is Italy. But when you look at the prison census in Central America and South America, they are emptying out their prisons. Why? Because they're sending them here. You've got violent South American gangs that have never had a foothold in the United States of America and they are spread across multiple cities now that they're setting up camps and infrastructure in the United States of America. And again, they've never been here before. Why? Because they're literally just walking into this country. We've caught now 350 individuals on the terror watch list. There's another almost 600 that somehow have ISIS a ties that were not on the terror watch list. Now, the official reporting was 400, but it's closer to six. And again, so we're literally letting terrorists in this country. And we've talked about it before. There's an Iranian assassin loose in the United States of America. That's my knowledge. We haven't caught yet, right? And so these are the people we're inviting in. This is who Joe Biden wants into living next to you. No, thank you. We needed to port these people. You got to leave the country. Go stand in line. But if you violate our laws, look, if I go to France, you go to France. We overstay our visa. They're going to kick us out. And we're never going to be a citizen. You know, Dr. Pen Carson was on the show recently, and he said, for what's gone on at the U.S. southern border over the last couple of three years or so, you know, America, as itself, is going to wind up paying with some blood and treasure. And, you know, you can't not make the case for the fact when you start looking at the stipulations, just from a national security standpoint, you talk about the gang and cartel activity that's been facilitated by Joe Biden, just going back and forth across the border. But the people who have been let in, then you start putting in parlay that into the amount of national security items that could have been raised by, you know, so many people would tie this directly to terrorism from across the world that could come in, and now we're setting up shop. You know, it's going to be a big change in immigration policy and border security when Donald Trump takes back the White House in November. But that doesn't say, like you alluded to, that the people are already here. And for years, maybe even decades to come, we're going to have to worry about national security concerns about what happened under Joe Biden and Alejandro Mayorkas' watch. Absolutely. And, you know, we didn't even talk about or touch on the fentanyl crisis. I mean, I think this is one of the reasons. So when you look at the polling across the country, Democrat or Republican or somewhere in between those districts, it's immigration. It's the southern border. Why? Because of the crime, because of the overdoses, because of fentanyl. You know, for a long time, the media tried to cover up that there was a correlation between the southern border and the fentanyl. And that has clearly been debunked. There is a correlation. It's clearly the reason why we've been flooded. And so that is a real problem in every part, every corner of our country. Then you look at the economy. This is a pocketbook election. So inflation, the price of fuel, the price to just live. I mean, rents and mortgages are higher today. And so when you look at the two biggest issues facing this country, the immigration crisis, the southern border and the economy, the country is looking to Republicans to fix it. We do better in the polls on those two issues. And heaven forbid, there is another crisis. There is another, say, a COVID. There is some sort of terrorist attack. Again, we do better polling-wise than the Democrats on a crisis. And so the Democrats are in panic. And so you might ask the question, so why would they stick with Joe Biden and Kamala Harris? Because maybe they recognize there's no path to victory. And they do understand that Donald Trump is a one-term president. He's already served one. He certainly has a second one remaining. And they're going to, I alluded to earlier, reset the deck chairs in four years to make room for a Gavin Newsom or Gretchen Whitmer or Andy Beshear or someone else. But first, they've got to clear the deck. They've got to get Joe Biden and Kamala Harris out of the way because they're polling numbers. Because of the aforementioned problems, they're not winnable candidates. Oh, that's a great point. It's one we bring up on the show here. You know, it would have been great. Maybe like a year, a year and a half ago to try and wiggle somebody else in there. Regardless, you know, the sting would have been gone and Democrats would have had a lot more time. But here's the deal. Even if they wanted somebody else in there, how are you going to burn a candidate for 2028, running up against someone that's resonating in the polls, looking so popular and out there, working as hard with so much infrastructure set up as Donald Trump has right now. This close to election day, I mean, they could put anybody in there that they think would do better than Donald Trump in the general election. But here's the deal. If Donald Trump wins in November, that's disenfranchisement for their candidate moving forward. It would help the Republicans against running against that candidate. When you talk about the top tier bench and some of the candidates you already mentioned, a Gavin Newsom Gretchen Whitmer, Pricker, and anyone in between, it just wouldn't make any sense. You know, and they do know that Donald Trump's short-term president, which, again, leads me to something else I always talk to our listenership about. Whatever happens in November, I don't want to, you know, go back and kind of invoke G.I. Joe from the '80s. But that's only half the battle. We're going to have to, you know, get things rolling on day one, not only getting this country back on track, but figuring out where we go in a direction as a Republican party and as a movement to make sure. And two years when that campaigning starts again, we're ready to hit the ground running and make sure this stays in Republican control for many, many years to come. Congressman, this is a great catching up with you today. As it always is when you could come on the show and share with our listenership. Obviously, we got your congressional website, live linked in the show description today. But anybody who wants to check you out on social media, all the great work you're doing, of course, your amazing podcast. Where can they check you out? You go to nyogels.com on the unofficial side. You can go to rep ogels on the official side. We're easy to find. And, you know, appreciate you having us on. Thank you for being a voice of reason and conservatism because, look, the media doesn't like you. They don't like me. The justice system is weaponized against the American people. You see that with the persecution of Donald Trump? They can get him. They can get you. They certainly can. And we delivered it today for the American people. This is a congressman who's representing Tennessee 5 out there fighting for all of America. First Representative Andy O'Lance. Thanks for joining us on the show today. Sir, have a great 4th of July. Thanks and God bless. Guys, we're coming back with another all new edition of the State for Breakfast podcast. So sit back, relax, and let us change the way you consume your news. [ Silence ]
