Bannon's War Room - Episode 4991： The Trial For Charlie Kirks Assassin; Massive Defeat In Indiana

00:00:00.000 of the rules of professional conduct that deal specifically with

00:00:05.440 This is the war room requirements for prosecutors.

00:00:07.240 Debating the Charlie Kirk assassination.

00:00:10.620 We're going to follow this for a while.

00:00:11.820 Law enforcement personnel, employees, or other persons assisting or associated with the prosecutor.

00:00:19.340 So in other words, the prosecution team.

00:00:21.800 And there's no rule or case law or statute that expands the prosecution's duties beyond that group, the prosecution team.

00:00:33.040 So with respect to clarity, we're seeking clarity as to what exactly does the court mean by witnesses.

00:00:43.080 And we think the court just means the prosecution team because if that term stretches beyond just the prosecution team,

00:00:52.880 then the order is written, we don't believe, is a valid and lawful order because it would result in a prior restraint on certain speech.

00:01:05.540 And at the very least would have a chilling effect on that speech.

00:01:09.000 If the prosecution agrees that we have an ethical duty to take reasonable measures to make sure that those

00:01:19.720 who are identified with the prosecution team are alerted to the requirements of the court's order

00:01:26.520 and to make sure that they do not make a statement that the prosecutors themselves would not be able to make a public statement.

00:01:32.420 But if the order extends beyond that, then we have concerns because a prior restraint is an order that forbids certain communications

00:01:43.680 in advance of the time that they are to occur.

00:01:46.960 And as the Court of Appeals has recognized, the Utah Court of Appeals has recognized in State v. LM.

00:01:53.140 And widespread publicity in a case does not itself justify a prior restraint.

00:02:04.140 As the United States Supreme Court is recognized in Nebraska Press Association,

00:02:11.220 there's no justification for a prior restraint unless it's clear that the further publicity unchecked

00:02:19.480 would so distort the views of potential jurors that you couldn't find 12 jurors who could be fair and impartial.

00:02:27.820 That's the high standard that applies in this case.

00:02:31.700 And so in order to apply a prior restraint to persons beyond the prosecution team,

00:02:38.480 the court would need to engage in a very detailed and demanding analysis.

00:02:42.480 The court would have to make a factual finding of necessity that the speech that would be restrained

00:02:50.820 poses a risk of material prejudice to the ongoing judicial proceedings.

00:02:56.160 The court would need to make findings that there are no less restrictive measures

00:02:59.560 and that the prohibitions are likely to prevent the potential prejudice

00:03:06.160 and that whatever prohibitions this court decides on are very narrowly tailored.

00:03:12.600 And as the state has explained, the Spencer v. State case from the Arkansas Supreme Court

00:03:20.040 that just issued earlier this year is very helpful, I think, on this issue

00:03:24.040 in explaining the analysis that applies to various different people

00:03:30.620 that might be associated with the criminal case.

00:03:32.700 You have attorneys, that category of trial participants.

00:03:40.000 Certainly the court has the highest degree of ability to be able to restrain the speech of attorneys.

00:03:49.140 And in fact, as I've expressed, the ethical rules require that.

00:03:54.520 But when it comes to trial participants like witnesses,

00:03:58.060 the standards are more demanding as far as restricting the speech of trial participants.

00:04:04.140 And as the Spencer case pointed out,

00:04:09.240 non-attorney trial participants,

00:04:11.580 the court can impose a restraint on their speech

00:04:14.820 only to the extent that the court first finds

00:04:18.240 that any speech by those non-attorney trial participants

00:04:22.200 poses a serious and imminent threat of material prejudice to the ongoing proceeding.

00:04:29.020 And I think the court also needs to note that there are several people associated with this case

00:04:36.740 who have very significant interests in exercising their First Amendment rights

00:04:41.980 in talking about how this case has affected them.

00:04:45.200 And of course, I can't say that one person's First Amendment right 0.53

00:04:52.300 is more important than another person's,

00:04:54.600 but there are certainly some people here who have a larger,

00:04:58.280 some people involved who have a larger,

00:05:02.360 or a greater interest in speaking than others.

00:05:06.100 And so I think the court needs to take that into consideration

00:05:08.840 if this order is meant to apply beyond just the prosecution team.

00:05:14.280 And then finally, as far as making the order,

00:05:19.020 so we need a clear order, we need a lawful order,

00:05:22.860 and then we need an order that the state can actually comply with.

00:05:26.640 And the state recognizes that there are serious sanctions

00:05:29.940 that this court can impose for violations of a court order,

00:05:33.920 as we've just seen.

00:05:35.440 And so we want to avoid these,

00:05:37.840 we want to avoid litigation over whether there's been a violation of the order.

00:05:44.000 And as it stands right now,

00:05:46.140 we don't believe that there will be any issues

00:05:47.920 if the court limits the term witnesses to just the prosecution team.

00:05:52.640 We can comply with that order.

00:05:55.120 It gets more difficult for the state

00:05:57.160 if the term witnesses then applies even broader

00:06:00.900 at this stage of the litigation

00:06:03.640 for the state to be able to comply with that order,

00:06:06.320 depending on how the court clarifies what witnesses mean.

00:06:13.480 Does the court have any questions for the state?

00:06:16.020 No, thank you, Mr. Gallagher.

00:06:19.940 Mr. Novak.

00:06:21.420 Thank you, Your Honor.

00:06:22.060 I'm going to try to be brief

00:06:29.920 because our views on the propriety of the court's order

00:06:36.300 were set forth in a publicly filed document,

00:06:40.540 which, of course, the court has reviewed.

00:06:45.280 And the first thing that I want to say is that

00:06:47.560 the order that the court issued

00:06:54.140 is not a prior restraint

00:06:56.120 on any member of the public.

00:07:01.160 And it's certainly not,

00:07:02.920 I think, as the state's motion suggested,

00:07:04.940 some sort of a prior restraint on the press.

00:07:08.280 This has nothing to do with the press.

00:07:09.960 The order, as we noted in our papers,

00:07:16.760 is directed at the conduct of

00:07:21.160 and the court's expectations for counsel.

00:07:24.560 So even if, under that order,

00:07:28.380 that the court issued,

00:07:29.960 somebody who we could all agree is a witness

00:07:33.440 within the court's definition of that

00:07:37.100 made public statements

00:07:42.980 which implicated Mr. Robinson's fair trial rights,

00:07:46.940 the potential sanction is on the party

00:07:50.580 who had a duty to make a reasonable effort

00:07:55.060 to notify witnesses that they should not be doing so.

00:07:57.660 If I represented a witness

00:08:01.260 who was accused of saying too much publicly,

00:08:07.020 the first thing that I would tell this court is

00:08:09.180 the order isn't directed at the witness.

00:08:11.560 The order is directed at the counsel for the parties.

00:08:14.140 There may, in the future,

00:08:15.520 be some theoretical situation

00:08:17.740 where the court issues orders

00:08:19.620 that control the statements

00:08:26.200 or conduct of specific people

00:08:28.760 other than counsel,

00:08:30.800 but this order is directed at counsel.

00:08:33.200 And we have no,

00:08:34.000 meaning Mr. Robinson's defense counsel,

00:08:36.040 have no problem complying with the order.

00:08:38.380 And we also think that we understand

00:08:40.420 what a witness is

00:08:43.820 when the court uses that term.

00:08:45.500 So it is our view

00:08:50.800 that the court's order

00:08:52.000 is not overbroad.

00:08:56.360 It's not vague.

00:08:57.800 It doesn't put

00:08:58.480 the state's,

00:09:01.820 the state or the state's attorneys

00:09:03.520 in some untenable position.

00:09:06.580 And I think it's a little bit,

00:09:08.660 it's a little too simple to say

00:09:13.420 witnesses are either

00:09:15.200 everybody under the sun

00:09:16.680 or people who are under subpoena

00:09:18.500 at the last second.

00:09:20.220 Because counsel have

00:09:21.980 not only the training,

00:09:23.560 but a duty to figure out along the way

00:09:25.400 who the potential witnesses are

00:09:27.420 and to notify those people.

00:09:29.760 And yes, down the road,

00:09:31.580 maybe there's going to be an issue

00:09:32.940 and maybe an attorney

00:09:35.120 on either side of litigation

00:09:36.840 is going to have to explain to the court

00:09:39.060 when a particular person

00:09:40.920 did or did not become

00:09:42.380 a potential witness

00:09:43.740 in the eyes of that party.

00:09:46.280 That doesn't make it impossible

00:09:47.940 for the state to comply with the order.

00:09:50.320 It just means that the state

00:09:51.480 needs to be thinking along the way

00:09:53.020 about who its witnesses may be.

00:09:55.320 And that's why in our papers,

00:09:57.440 we refer to it as a,

00:09:58.940 potential lay witness.

00:10:06.800 Because we believe

00:10:08.580 that the court intended it

00:10:09.820 to go beyond members

00:10:12.740 of the prosecution team,

00:10:14.400 which are law enforcement officers,

00:10:17.060 retained experts,

00:10:18.260 retained consultants.

00:10:21.700 And we don't believe

00:10:24.440 that that creates

00:10:26.120 an enforcement problem.

00:10:27.880 We don't think it creates

00:10:28.640 a compliance problem.

00:10:31.060 We noted in our papers,

00:10:32.840 and I'll emphasize here again,

00:10:34.220 that the court's order

00:10:35.600 actually places

00:10:37.840 responsibilities on defense counsel

00:10:41.440 that the rules don't.

00:10:43.320 The rules have special

00:10:44.560 guidelines for the prosecution,

00:10:49.340 and the court has expanded that

00:10:51.220 to include the defense,

00:10:52.460 and we don't have a problem with that.

00:10:54.440 I also think that the standard

00:10:58.480 that the state is suggesting

00:11:00.400 for when a potential lay witness,

00:11:04.540 as we've defined that in our papers,

00:11:07.140 may make public statements

00:11:09.140 that violate the court's order.

00:11:12.320 The best standard is actually

00:11:13.720 the one that we believe

00:11:15.300 the court should look to,

00:11:17.860 which is the standard

00:11:18.780 set by the 10th Circuit,

00:11:22.380 because as the state points out,

00:11:25.020 it may be that there isn't

00:11:26.200 any Utah law on this issue.

00:11:28.640 So it seems to me

00:11:29.360 that the closest source of authority

00:11:33.380 on this constitutional question

00:11:36.500 is going to be the 10th Circuit,

00:11:39.020 and that's the case

00:11:39.880 of the United States

00:11:40.720 versus Tijerina, 0.97

00:11:42.600 and I'll spell it.

00:11:43.440 It's T-I-J-E-R-I-N-A, 1.00

00:11:47.300 412, Fed Second, 661,

00:11:52.180 10th Circuit, 1969,

00:11:54.480 where the court says

00:11:55.820 that the constitutional balance

00:12:01.480 between the First Amendment rights

00:12:03.060 of a non-attorney participant

00:12:04.720 and the defendant's right

00:12:06.240 to a fair trial

00:12:06.960 are properly balanced

00:12:08.080 where extrajudicial statements

00:12:10.260 present a reasonable likelihood

00:12:12.700 of prejudicing a fair trial.

00:12:15.720 That is a more protective standard

00:12:19.460 than that which appears

00:12:21.620 in Rule 3.6,

00:12:23.860 and we think it's

00:12:24.600 the appropriate standard

00:12:25.780 which should be applied here,

00:12:27.160 and that's part of,

00:12:33.220 as we've told the court before,

00:12:35.360 a motion that we will bring

00:12:36.920 because we actually think

00:12:38.060 that while the court's order

00:12:39.460 is wholly appropriate,

00:12:41.480 it's not vague,

00:12:42.280 it's not overbroad,

00:12:43.180 it's not a prior restraint,

00:12:44.720 and it doesn't create

00:12:45.700 a lack of clarity

00:12:49.080 for the state,

00:12:51.340 we would like it

00:12:53.060 to be a little bit broader

00:12:54.180 in other areas,

00:12:55.680 especially concerning

00:12:57.700 the standard to be applied

00:12:59.200 and the definition

00:13:00.120 of what is

00:13:00.940 the prosecution team,

00:13:03.180 but that's not germane to hear.

00:13:05.120 So we think that

00:13:06.080 while we understand

00:13:07.920 the state's concern,

00:13:08.920 we think that their motion

00:13:09.680 should be denied.

00:13:11.020 I think at the last hearing,

00:13:12.240 the court actually clarified

00:13:13.740 verbally from the bench

00:13:15.660 what it meant by a witness,

00:13:17.220 and I think that's pretty close

00:13:18.640 to what we described

00:13:19.540 in our papers

00:13:20.240 as a potential lay witness.

00:13:22.100 So I feel like

00:13:27.080 if I say anything more,

00:13:28.220 I'm going to be reiterating

00:13:29.780 again what's already

00:13:31.360 in our papers.

00:13:33.800 If I've muddled it,

00:13:35.240 I'm sure the court will tell me

00:13:36.320 and I'll clarify it.

00:13:37.380 I hope I haven't.

00:13:39.260 Thank you, Mr. Novak.

00:13:40.420 Okay, thank you.

00:13:42.540 All right.

00:13:43.480 And we'll turn to the last matter.

00:13:45.620 Anything further?

00:13:47.040 Counsel?

00:13:52.820 Yes, thank you, Your Honor.

00:13:53.860 I do want to point out

00:13:55.300 that the court's order,

00:13:56.780 as it's written,

00:13:57.360 does impose limitations

00:13:58.680 on speech.

00:14:00.420 And the issue here is

00:14:01.800 whose speech?

00:14:02.880 Is it just the prosecution

00:14:03.800 team members,

00:14:05.120 or does it extend

00:14:06.180 beyond that?

00:14:07.960 And limitations on speech

00:14:09.580 are a prior restraint.

00:14:11.400 The court's order says

00:14:12.820 that if you look at

00:14:16.300 page two of the order,

00:14:17.920 it specifically talks

00:14:18.960 about lawyers,

00:14:20.480 that lawyers cannot

00:14:21.440 make a statement

00:14:22.180 that would violate

00:14:24.300 Rule 3.6

00:14:25.380 and need to inform

00:14:26.540 witnesses

00:14:27.600 that they cannot make

00:14:29.980 similar statements

00:14:31.180 and then requires

00:14:32.920 the parties

00:14:34.880 to inform

00:14:36.200 lawyers,

00:14:39.300 excuse me,

00:14:39.880 I'll just read it,

00:14:40.500 lawyers participating

00:14:41.360 in the investigation

00:14:42.460 or litigation

00:14:43.020 of this case

00:14:44.100 shall inform

00:14:45.040 all witnesses

00:14:46.160 and then the list

00:14:47.400 that I read

00:14:47.940 about the prohibitions

00:14:49.620 contained in this order.

00:14:51.700 So,

00:14:52.280 the order is

00:14:53.360 prohibiting speech

00:14:54.940 and because

00:14:56.100 if it extends

00:14:57.120 beyond the prosecution

00:14:58.220 team,

00:14:59.480 it needs to have

00:15:00.440 the findings

00:15:01.120 that are required

00:15:01.940 for that kind of

00:15:03.020 prohibition on speech.

00:15:04.980 That's what we're

00:15:05.520 asking the court to do.

00:15:06.920 Thank you,

00:15:07.220 Mr. Ballard.

00:15:07.520 Thank you.

00:15:09.600 All right.

00:15:11.360 Let's turn to the

00:15:15.100 final matter

00:15:15.720 before this court,

00:15:16.880 the motion

00:15:17.340 for limited intervention

00:15:18.540 and request

00:15:19.300 for notice of motions

00:15:20.380 to close,

00:15:21.180 seal,

00:15:21.880 or reclassify.

00:15:23.480 And I'll hear

00:15:24.120 from the parties

00:15:24.740 on that.

00:15:30.320 Thank you,

00:15:31.000 Your Honor.

00:15:31.460 David Ryman

00:15:32.260 representing the news media.

00:15:33.460 Mr. Judd

00:15:34.120 and I represent

00:15:35.600 different groups

00:15:36.520 of clients,

00:15:37.640 so I'm going to invite him

00:15:38.640 if I miss anything

00:15:39.340 to weigh in

00:15:40.380 after I'm done,

00:15:41.120 but my intent,

00:15:42.500 the issues are basically

00:15:43.320 the same,

00:15:43.740 so my intent

00:15:44.180 is to address them

00:15:44.920 for all of the

00:15:46.360 interveners at once

00:15:48.060 and I'll be very brief.

00:15:51.480 We have only ever

00:15:53.660 sought,

00:15:54.280 in this case,

00:15:55.440 limited party status.

00:15:57.080 That is what we do

00:15:58.700 in every high-profile case

00:16:00.500 that involves

00:16:00.980 these type of

00:16:01.520 closure issues.

00:16:02.800 We are not seeking

00:16:03.780 to be parties

00:16:04.400 for all purposes.

00:16:05.340 We are just seeking

00:16:06.000 to be parties

00:16:06.700 for the purpose

00:16:07.440 of showing up

00:16:08.420 and being heard,

00:16:09.960 which we unquestionably

00:16:11.120 have a right to do.

00:16:12.000 We unquestionably

00:16:12.640 have standing.

00:16:13.320 That is settled law

00:16:14.060 in Utah.

00:16:15.220 And the filing,

00:16:18.220 the last filing,

00:16:19.000 at least,

00:16:19.360 that we got

00:16:19.840 from Mr. Robinson's team

00:16:21.820 that just came in,

00:16:22.660 I don't know

00:16:23.020 if it was a couple days ago,

00:16:24.740 basically gets there

00:16:25.780 at the end

00:16:26.300 where it says,

00:16:26.860 look,

00:16:27.060 if you're going to grant

00:16:28.560 them intervener status,

00:16:30.120 it should just be limited.

00:16:31.320 That's all we've ever sought.

00:16:32.880 And so the question

00:16:33.860 that was raised

00:16:34.560 in the only case

00:16:35.820 that they cite,

00:16:36.580 this FL case

00:16:37.380 from the Utah Supreme Court

00:16:38.780 that addressed

00:16:40.380 whether we wanted

00:16:41.700 to allow

00:16:42.720 full party status

00:16:44.120 under Rule 24

00:16:45.200 of the civil procedure rules

00:16:47.020 in a criminal case,

00:16:47.940 they said,

00:16:48.280 we don't need to do that.

00:16:50.200 The woman in that case 0.99

00:16:51.320 just needed

00:16:51.780 limited party status.

00:16:53.360 And so,

00:16:54.280 in a way,

00:16:54.940 we're not really,

00:16:55.600 the state really

00:16:56.440 hasn't disagreed

00:16:57.120 with this either,

00:16:57.820 but we're not really

00:16:58.500 disagreeing

00:16:59.260 with Mr. Robinson's team.

00:17:02.380 We have explained

00:17:03.440 in our papers

00:17:04.280 that we've cited

00:17:06.840 the court

00:17:07.660 to extensive authority

00:17:08.660 saying that this

00:17:09.260 is the procedure

00:17:09.960 to use.

00:17:11.300 It's the most efficient

00:17:12.100 procedure to use.

00:17:13.000 Otherwise,

00:17:13.420 I don't know

00:17:13.740 what exactly

00:17:14.400 the suggestion is

00:17:15.240 for Mr. Robinson's team

00:17:16.320 that we're supposed

00:17:17.480 to do from here on out,

00:17:19.040 but it kind of sounds

00:17:19.820 like just this sort

00:17:21.460 of ad hoc

00:17:22.240 show up anytime

00:17:23.160 you happen to see

00:17:24.420 something on the public

00:17:25.200 docket

00:17:25.540 that might affect

00:17:26.240 the public's rights,

00:17:26.960 and that's just not

00:17:27.740 the orderly way

00:17:28.900 that this typically happens.

00:17:30.780 The other thing,

00:17:32.620 as I've mentioned

00:17:33.100 in our papers,

00:17:33.840 that it does

00:17:34.600 is it allows

00:17:36.500 for the media

00:17:37.960 to be able

00:17:38.540 to take an appeal

00:17:39.980 of a closure issue

00:17:41.180 without having

00:17:43.300 to rely on the court's

00:17:44.280 extraordinary

00:17:44.700 red jurisdiction.

00:17:46.260 And that was

00:17:47.880 what they had

00:17:48.580 to do

00:17:49.120 in either

00:17:51.100 Kearns Tribune

00:17:51.720 or Bullock,

00:17:52.500 where the media

00:17:53.200 was not granted

00:17:53.960 party status.

00:17:56.420 And it is

00:17:57.100 the situation

00:17:57.760 that happened

00:17:58.440 in FL,

00:17:59.080 where they

00:18:00.860 had to review

00:18:01.980 her claim 0.99

00:18:02.640 regarding records

00:18:03.620 under extraordinary

00:18:04.620 red jurisdiction

00:18:05.340 rather than

00:18:06.660 invoking their

00:18:08.300 appellate jurisdiction

00:18:09.000 because she was

00:18:09.900 improperly denied

00:18:11.000 limited party status.

00:18:12.560 So all of that

00:18:13.480 authority supports

00:18:14.220 the process

00:18:14.960 that we are requesting

00:18:16.560 in this case.

00:18:18.320 We think it's

00:18:19.040 the most orderly

00:18:19.860 way to do it,

00:18:20.760 and I'll end

00:18:21.700 just by saying

00:18:22.360 there's been

00:18:22.860 some discussion

00:18:24.000 and especially

00:18:24.640 from Mr. Robinson's

00:18:25.920 attorneys

00:18:26.320 about what rule

00:18:28.120 it is that you

00:18:28.860 need to do

00:18:29.360 this under,

00:18:29.900 whether Rule 24

00:18:30.900 applies.

00:18:31.840 They seem to

00:18:32.300 suggest that it

00:18:32.980 doesn't.

00:18:33.660 I will just

00:18:34.180 point the court

00:18:34.740 to two different

00:18:35.300 rules that give

00:18:38.120 you the authority

00:18:38.740 to do what

00:18:40.960 we're requesting

00:18:41.740 aside from Rule 24.

00:18:42.860 Rule 24 is in

00:18:43.600 the civil procedure

00:18:44.200 rules,

00:18:44.580 but Rule 81,

00:18:46.540 and particularly

00:18:47.140 subsection F

00:18:48.100 of that rule,

00:18:49.520 says that the

00:18:50.580 rules of civil

00:18:51.220 procedure govern

00:18:52.120 in criminal

00:18:52.760 proceedings where

00:18:53.560 they don't conflict

00:18:54.400 with a rule of

00:18:55.780 criminal procedure.

00:18:56.380 That's the case

00:18:57.080 with Rule 24.

00:18:58.160 That's why

00:18:58.820 courts in criminal

00:19:00.760 cases have relied

00:19:03.000 on that rule.

00:19:03.980 The other one

00:19:04.640 is Rule 31,

00:19:05.800 and that's in the

00:19:06.360 criminal procedure

00:19:07.000 rules,

00:19:07.380 and that gives

00:19:07.820 this court the

00:19:09.240 discretion,

00:19:09.940 if it's not

00:19:10.360 inconsistent with

00:19:11.180 the rules,

00:19:11.620 to fashion remedies

00:19:13.320 and to deal

00:19:14.780 with civil procedure,

00:19:15.900 not civil procedure,

00:19:17.180 but rather just

00:19:17.680 procedural matters.

00:19:19.340 And so that is

00:19:20.000 essentially what

00:19:20.920 happened in the

00:19:21.980 FL case,

00:19:23.240 which is that

00:19:24.400 whether you do

00:19:25.420 it under Rule 24,

00:19:26.400 whether you do

00:19:26.880 it as a

00:19:27.620 judicially created

00:19:28.620 remedy,

00:19:29.680 it doesn't matter.

00:19:30.860 It gets to the

00:19:31.860 same place,

00:19:32.500 which is just

00:19:32.920 that we are

00:19:33.560 interveners for

00:19:35.200 the very limited

00:19:35.980 purposes that we've

00:19:37.140 set forth in our

00:19:38.320 order.

00:19:39.100 We're not going to

00:19:39.700 be here at every

00:19:40.320 hearing arguing.

00:19:41.500 We didn't take a

00:19:42.400 position on the gag

00:19:43.400 order motion that

00:19:44.540 you just heard.

00:19:45.520 We are only

00:19:46.300 planning to appear

00:19:48.140 and argue so that

00:19:50.100 the court has the

00:19:50.900 benefit of someone

00:19:51.980 who's representing

00:19:52.760 the interests

00:19:53.540 against closure.

00:19:55.540 Because as you

00:19:56.140 know, and this is

00:19:57.080 sort of why we're

00:19:57.660 here today, a lot

00:19:59.200 of time this just

00:19:59.780 happens by stipulation

00:20:00.860 because the state

00:20:03.140 and Mr. Robinson's

00:20:04.460 lawyers, they may not

00:20:05.940 want to fight over

00:20:06.580 a particular issue.

00:20:07.600 And so it really is a

00:20:08.400 situation where no one

00:20:09.420 really represents that

00:20:10.560 interest.

00:20:11.700 And the purpose of

00:20:13.040 this whole process is

00:20:14.020 to give the court the

00:20:14.860 benefit of the briefing

00:20:15.680 that we've submitted

00:20:16.800 and the benefit of

00:20:17.700 arguments to represent

00:20:19.320 the public's right to

00:20:20.840 attend these proceedings.

00:20:22.300 So unless the court

00:20:24.040 has any questions,

00:20:24.700 that's all I have.

00:20:26.020 Thank you.

00:20:27.040 Thank you.

00:20:29.580 To the state,

00:20:30.720 Mr. Bellack.

00:20:36.040 Your Honor, as the

00:20:37.800 state briefed in

00:20:38.800 briefing on a prior

00:20:40.980 motion, I think it's

00:20:42.300 clear that parties

00:20:45.120 have the, or excuse

00:20:46.520 me, outside entities

00:20:47.980 have the ability to

00:20:49.660 intervene in a case as

00:20:52.080 a limited purpose

00:20:52.900 party when there's a

00:20:54.460 statute, a rule, or

00:20:55.620 case law that

00:20:56.380 authorizes them to

00:20:57.720 take specific action

00:20:58.980 in a proceeding.

00:21:01.360 And there's well

00:21:02.660 established case law

00:21:03.860 that allows the media

00:21:05.320 to intervene, to be

00:21:06.680 able to be, to appear

00:21:08.120 and be heard on

00:21:09.400 matters of public

00:21:10.940 access to court

00:21:11.880 proceedings and to

00:21:13.360 court documents.

00:21:14.180 And rule 4-202.04 of

00:21:18.500 the rules of

00:21:19.340 judicial

00:21:19.660 administration also

00:21:20.660 make it clear that

00:21:21.880 the media can appear

00:21:22.700 and do just exactly

00:21:24.040 what they've done in

00:21:24.960 the closed session

00:21:25.700 that we held

00:21:26.220 earlier.

00:21:27.280 So it doesn't make

00:21:28.500 them a capital P

00:21:29.780 party to the case.

00:21:30.920 It makes them a

00:21:31.440 limited purpose party

00:21:32.440 and they certainly

00:21:33.520 have the right to be

00:21:34.220 able to do that.

00:21:35.540 Thank you.

00:21:36.340 Thank you, Mr.

00:21:36.840 Mallon.

00:21:39.240 Ms. Visser.

00:21:39.900 Thank you, Your

00:21:48.140 Honor.

00:21:49.800 So I just want to

00:21:51.080 clarify the issue

00:21:52.160 really, if we boil it

00:21:54.860 down, is if these 23

00:21:56.880 media entities have

00:21:58.400 met their burden to be

00:22:00.160 a limited purpose party

00:22:01.360 in this case.

00:22:02.680 And I think another

00:22:04.600 part of that is what

00:22:06.920 that means.

00:22:07.640 And really, that is

00:22:10.260 what we are primarily

00:22:11.280 concerned with.

00:22:12.700 What does that mean?

00:22:14.040 What does that enable

00:22:15.000 them to do?

00:22:16.460 What jurisdiction is

00:22:18.560 this court exercising

00:22:19.640 over them as a

00:22:20.800 result of them being

00:22:22.460 a limited purpose

00:22:23.320 party?

00:22:23.900 Because I do believe

00:22:24.860 that is another aspect

00:22:26.140 of asking to

00:22:27.060 intervene in a case.

00:22:29.300 I do think that

00:22:31.020 Rule 24 does not

00:22:32.640 apply here.

00:22:33.440 I think that's what

00:22:34.160 we learned from the

00:22:35.480 Supreme Court.

00:22:36.240 They don't want

00:22:37.740 individuals using

00:22:39.840 Rule 24 of the

00:22:41.680 Rules of Civil

00:22:42.360 Procedure because

00:22:43.980 it's too expansive.

00:22:45.300 It's about broad

00:22:46.580 entry into a case

00:22:48.520 for many purposes.

00:22:50.300 In the instances

00:22:51.560 where our courts

00:22:53.100 have allowed

00:22:53.920 intervention into

00:22:55.920 civil cases, and I

00:22:57.760 want to be very

00:22:58.360 clear here, the

00:22:59.740 case law is in

00:23:01.320 the civil arena.

00:23:02.520 There are very few

00:23:03.760 instances where we're

00:23:04.980 dealing with this in a

00:23:06.160 criminal case on

00:23:07.300 appeal.

00:23:09.060 So we're a little

00:23:11.360 bit in the dark, and

00:23:12.700 we're asking this

00:23:13.460 court to kind of

00:23:14.240 wade through and make

00:23:15.300 a decision that

00:23:16.140 potentially hasn't

00:23:17.560 been made before.

00:23:19.680 But I would ask the

00:23:21.200 court to be very

00:23:24.060 clear, no matter what

00:23:25.440 it does, on what the

00:23:26.600 media can and can't do

00:23:27.700 in this case.

00:23:28.360 And it sounds to me

00:23:29.700 like the media has

00:23:30.620 somewhat conceded that

00:23:32.460 their role in this

00:23:34.240 case is under Rule

00:23:35.940 4-202.04, and

00:23:40.020 their role is to

00:23:42.320 have a voice regarding

00:23:44.600 closure, which has

00:23:46.020 already happened today

00:23:47.080 and will surely happen

00:23:48.600 again.

00:23:49.420 We have no objection to

00:23:50.580 that.

00:23:51.200 And to be clear, we're

00:23:52.000 not objecting to the

00:23:53.400 court's order about

00:23:54.560 notice.

00:23:55.300 We will provide

00:23:56.400 notice.

00:23:57.520 We will follow the

00:23:58.420 court's order.

00:23:59.120 We have no problem

00:24:00.020 with it.

00:24:01.320 But we do want this

00:24:02.660 court to make the

00:24:03.940 procedure very crystal

00:24:05.440 clear.

00:24:06.500 We want time frames.

00:24:08.020 We want orders saying

00:24:10.080 this is when you need

00:24:11.180 to respond so that we

00:24:13.020 don't end up with

00:24:13.800 filings like we did

00:24:14.960 this week, very shortly

00:24:16.520 before the hearing, that

00:24:18.120 we have to rush to

00:24:19.120 respond to.

00:24:20.240 We're all attorneys.

00:24:21.220 We all know that these

00:24:22.140 things happen from time

00:24:23.360 to time.

00:24:24.480 And we're not

00:24:25.480 unreasonable folks.

00:24:26.400 If they reach out to

00:24:27.900 us, we will grant

00:24:28.840 reasonable requests for

00:24:30.100 extension, just so

00:24:31.440 everyone is aware.

00:24:33.220 But there was no

00:24:33.900 communication.

00:24:35.400 So I want it very, very

00:24:38.060 clear what they can and

00:24:39.880 can't do.

00:24:40.640 It's less about

00:24:41.520 semantics.

00:24:42.840 This isn't about

00:24:43.640 semantics.

00:24:44.280 It's about substance.

00:24:45.920 What are they allowed

00:24:47.120 to do?

00:24:48.160 If this court wants to

00:24:49.340 call them a limited

00:24:50.220 purpose party, that has

00:24:53.000 to be, well, it's so

00:24:55.020 you can exercise your

00:24:57.020 rights under 4-202.04.

00:25:00.060 And in doing so, this is

00:25:02.200 what you need to do.

00:25:04.480 That's what we're asking

00:25:05.640 the court to do.

00:25:06.520 And I also have some

00:25:15.380 practical concerns that

00:25:16.840 maybe need to be

00:25:17.920 addressed with the

00:25:18.560 court's clerk.

00:25:20.220 For example, are we

00:25:21.740 adding all 23 media

00:25:23.480 entities to the court

00:25:24.640 docket?

00:25:26.180 Will they have access to

00:25:27.840 all of the filings?

00:25:29.020 I have had instances in

00:25:30.480 the past where,

00:25:31.400 unfortunately, parties have

00:25:33.380 been added to a case and

00:25:34.680 still receive documents

00:25:36.800 that are intended to be

00:25:38.000 private or non-public.

00:25:39.320 I'm very concerned about

00:25:40.560 that.

00:25:41.700 So I think it would be

00:25:43.500 appropriate if they are

00:25:44.580 going to be added to the

00:25:45.720 docket that it be

00:25:46.840 reasonable, perhaps just

00:25:49.880 the two entities that are

00:25:51.640 requesting, the two

00:25:52.800 conglomerate entities that

00:25:54.880 are requesting, and that

00:25:57.300 there be an order from the

00:25:59.040 court saying if they receive

00:26:00.280 something that they

00:26:01.040 shouldn't have, they notify

00:26:02.520 us in the court immediately

00:26:03.980 and they delete it, they

00:26:05.240 don't review it.

00:26:06.880 At a minimum, I think

00:26:08.660 that's necessary.

00:26:10.320 But I also think it would

00:26:11.980 be reasonable for this

00:26:13.300 court not to put them on

00:26:15.260 the docket for that very

00:26:16.480 same reason.

00:26:18.500 So we don't think that they

00:26:21.620 should have permanent status

00:26:23.200 in this case.

00:26:24.300 We don't dispute that they

00:26:26.880 are going to be here.

00:26:28.320 They're already here, as we

00:26:30.320 well know, but we do think

00:26:32.860 how that happens is

00:26:34.740 important, and that this

00:26:36.740 court should exercise its

00:26:38.220 authority to make very

00:26:40.040 clear what everyone's roles

00:26:41.820 are here.

00:26:43.400 And as I believe they put in

00:26:45.740 their briefing, that they

00:26:46.800 are neutral observers.

00:26:49.600 Neutral observers.

00:26:51.260 We don't want the chaos that

00:26:53.400 is out in the media in this

00:26:55.980 courtroom.

00:26:56.440 So whatever this court can

00:26:59.060 do to prevent that is what

00:27:00.900 we're asking.

00:27:02.340 Does the court have any

00:27:03.420 questions for me?

00:27:04.720 No, thank you.

00:27:05.840 Thank you.

00:27:11.740 All right, counsel.

00:27:15.600 Thank you, Your Honor.

00:27:16.460 Just very briefly, I'm not

00:27:18.600 sure what neutral observer is

00:27:19.800 supposed to mean.

00:27:20.440 We have interests in the

00:27:21.800 case.

00:27:22.200 We are here to advocate for

00:27:23.580 openness and against closure.

00:27:25.560 And so I'm not, I don't think

00:27:28.100 that's what counsel meant to

00:27:30.100 imply, but that's the whole

00:27:31.660 reason we're here, is that no

00:27:33.880 one else represents our

00:27:35.080 interests.

00:27:35.660 That is straight down the

00:27:36.820 middle of what the

00:27:37.620 intervention rule requires.

00:27:39.560 Just a couple clarifications.

00:27:41.380 Counsel said we haven't cited

00:27:42.640 any criminal cases where this

00:27:44.000 has been allowed.

00:27:44.620 That's not true.

00:27:45.780 We cited the court to eight

00:27:46.780 different cases, all criminal

00:27:48.180 cases in the state of Utah,

00:27:49.840 where this is the procedure that

00:27:51.460 judges routinely follow, including

00:27:53.100 judges in this building.

00:27:54.100 Counsel said that our role is

00:27:58.020 strictly limited to advocating

00:27:59.520 for what is under Rule 4202.04.

00:28:02.540 I don't think she meant this, but

00:28:04.180 as the court probably knows, that

00:28:05.700 just deals with court records.

00:28:07.620 We're also entitled under

00:28:09.280 governing constitutional case

00:28:11.060 law to advocate against the

00:28:13.120 closure of proceedings.

00:28:14.780 And that rule does not

00:28:16.680 technically apply to

00:28:18.160 proceedings.

00:28:18.660 It just applies to records.

00:28:20.320 So just to be clear, but I think

00:28:22.640 we have been clear, and this is

00:28:23.860 all, I mean, there wasn't a

00:28:25.000 whole lot of daylight between

00:28:26.180 what counsel was just suggesting

00:28:27.920 our role should be and what we've

00:28:29.120 asked for, you know, which is

00:28:30.680 just if they file a motion that

00:28:32.860 seeks to prevent, that wants to

00:28:35.540 classify something as non-public,

00:28:37.220 like they did last night with the

00:28:40.520 motion to disqualify, they were

00:28:43.920 able to at least provide that to

00:28:46.340 us.

00:28:46.780 It's not very hard to send an

00:28:48.840 email, that's all that we've asked

00:28:50.220 for in terms of the notice, and

00:28:52.360 then we have the right to be heard

00:28:53.700 on those issues.

00:28:54.940 And so I didn't really hear from

00:28:56.820 counsel any reason why we should

00:28:59.260 not be granted limited party

00:29:01.280 status in this case, other than just

00:29:03.620 some sort of, you know, confusion on

00:29:07.820 their part as to what that would

00:29:09.480 actually look like.

00:29:10.660 I don't know how the clerk deals

00:29:12.100 with parties on the docket.

00:29:13.600 I assume you guys can sort that out.

00:29:15.240 Typically, when we intervene on

00:29:17.460 behalf of the news media in cases,

00:29:19.360 they are listed because they are

00:29:21.020 limited purpose parties.

00:29:22.680 But the court can, you know, if it

00:29:25.240 doesn't want to hear from us on a

00:29:26.680 particular issue, it can certainly

00:29:27.900 say that.

00:29:28.920 I mean, we don't have any interest

00:29:30.000 in weighing in on aspects of the

00:29:32.160 case that don't have anything to do

00:29:33.660 with the public's right to know.

00:29:34.760 And so I didn't really hear an

00:29:36.260 argument against what it is that we

00:29:38.000 are asking to do.

00:29:40.660 Just one last point on, well, two

00:29:43.840 things.

00:29:44.180 One is that counsel's chastising us

00:29:47.260 for filing something late.

00:29:48.720 I mean, this was a stipulated motion

00:29:50.460 that got us here today.

00:29:51.900 We weren't asked to weigh in on it.

00:29:53.280 It was submitted to your honor with

00:29:55.460 an order, you know, which they just

00:29:57.980 assumed you would sign because it was

00:29:59.400 stipulated.

00:29:59.980 It was only because this court said,

00:30:01.060 no, I'm not going to do that.

00:30:01.960 I want to actually hear from the

00:30:03.220 parties that we weighed in.

00:30:04.940 So this was not your typical, like,

00:30:08.280 deadline where we were invited to

00:30:09.980 weigh in and just didn't.

00:30:11.340 Last thing is, in terms of docket

00:30:14.160 access, you know, Mr. Hunt and Mr. Judd

00:30:16.780 and I are all officers of the court.

00:30:18.780 If the court says you can have access

00:30:21.820 to things that the parties are seeking

00:30:24.920 to classify as non-public, but you can't

00:30:29.440 share them with your clients until further

00:30:32.020 notice from the court, that's fine.

00:30:34.320 Some judges do handle it that way.

00:30:35.920 Sometimes we just, you know, if they

00:30:37.880 don't concern closure, sometimes we

00:30:40.180 don't weigh in at all.

00:30:42.220 But, you know, when they file things that

00:30:45.040 they say we need to file this under seal

00:30:47.620 and we're not allowed to see it, then the

00:30:50.000 briefing for you is not super helpful, you

00:30:52.260 know.

00:30:52.440 And so typically the way this happens is

00:30:55.080 we are allowed attorney's eyes only access

00:30:58.060 to, you know, documents just like the

00:31:00.540 state and the defendants would be.

00:31:03.260 Their counsel can see things that are

00:31:05.180 non-public and we don't share them with

00:31:06.900 our clients unless the court orders

00:31:08.520 otherwise.

00:31:09.540 And typically if the court decides, no,

00:31:11.500 this really doesn't need to be filed

00:31:13.340 under seal, then we can provide it to

00:31:15.420 our clients at that time.

00:31:17.100 But this idea that our clients are somehow

00:31:19.300 going to get access to things that are

00:31:20.820 non-public, that's just not the way this

00:31:22.820 typically works.

00:31:23.560 If they're not public on the docket, if

00:31:26.580 they're public on the docket, anyone can

00:31:27.860 get them.

00:31:28.200 And if they're not public on the docket,

00:31:29.700 then our clients can't get them.

00:31:30.820 And if there's a procedure where we can

00:31:32.140 see them so that we can give the court

00:31:33.920 the benefit of briefing substantively as

00:31:36.580 to what it is, then we keep them

00:31:39.360 attorney's eyes only until the court

00:31:41.040 orders otherwise.

00:31:42.240 And that's just typically the way this

00:31:43.700 works.

00:31:44.700 So thank you.

00:31:47.920 Anything further?

00:31:48.440 Your Honor, I'm not going to belabor what's

00:31:58.340 already in the briefing.

00:31:59.720 I do think it's concerning to just cite to

00:32:02.120 a bunch of trial court cases without

00:32:04.100 providing any pleadings or context for

00:32:06.220 what occurred in those cases.

00:32:07.760 I can't argue against what happened in

00:32:09.700 other cases.

00:32:10.920 This is our case.

00:32:12.760 Our case is different.

00:32:14.600 This court has already acknowledged it.

00:32:16.420 There are many interests.

00:32:19.040 We have concerns about leaks,

00:32:22.380 information getting out that shouldn't be

00:32:24.340 out.

00:32:25.120 I think those are valid.

00:32:27.140 And our concern is access.

00:32:30.640 I'm not impugning the integrity of these

00:32:32.780 gentlemen.

00:32:33.920 I'm sure they would act as officers of the

00:32:35.980 court.

00:32:36.260 But the more this court controls the information

00:32:40.400 that ultimately determines to be private, the

00:32:45.080 more able we are to identify if there are

00:32:47.880 leaks, if there's information that's getting

00:32:50.460 out that shouldn't be, and who did it.

00:32:52.020 So we are objecting to providing the media our

00:32:58.560 pleadings in advance, even just to their counsel.

00:33:02.440 We don't think that's appropriate.

00:33:04.560 I don't see any authority for that.

00:33:07.120 We're asking the court not to consider that.

00:33:09.440 And we're concerned about opening the door to

00:33:13.960 multiple other entities, just filing in on this

00:33:17.860 case, getting involved in the proceedings.

00:33:21.660 We don't know exactly what media means either.

00:33:25.460 So our position is and remains, they can file what

00:33:31.060 this court has authorized to file in the manner

00:33:34.460 this court authorizes to file it and be heard in

00:33:38.520 the manner this court indicates.

00:33:40.560 We understand they're entitled to closure hearings.

00:33:43.360 And I did make a mistake.

00:33:44.620 We agree that they have standing to object to

00:33:47.240 closure as well.

00:33:49.020 So they should be able to file those things.

00:33:52.480 But we do not agree that that requires status in

00:33:56.320 our case.

00:33:57.860 So does the court have any questions?

00:34:01.600 No, thank you.

00:34:03.060 Thank you.

00:34:04.700 All right.

00:34:06.820 I appreciate the argument from all parties throughout

00:34:09.720 this day.

00:34:10.980 I wish to commend the preparation and the quality of

00:34:15.180 the arguments, as well as the civility that is

00:34:18.700 sometimes overlooked.

00:34:20.700 But I wish to recognize that.

00:34:22.480 And appreciate counsel's demeanor and their

00:34:27.100 arguments today.

00:34:29.140 I previously stated when we began that I would be

00:34:32.940 issuing rulings on the first issue.

00:34:36.400 And when I began, I initially said October 14th.

00:34:40.520 It's actually the October 24th audio recording of the

00:34:43.340 closed hearing, as well as the October 24th transcript of

00:34:47.580 that hearing.

00:34:48.100 And so I wanted to create, just make that small correction.

00:34:52.800 But given the in-depth and necessary arguments made in the

00:35:02.720 closed hearing, I wish to take the time to issue a ruling that

00:35:07.720 that will say what will be disclosed and what will be kept private.

00:35:11.600 Because this court has a duty to do so.

00:35:15.060 And I would rather do it right and take more time than to be rash and miss the

00:35:21.980 mark.

00:35:22.060 I need to be narrow in my approach, and it is an important issue.

00:35:27.440 And so I plan to do that.

00:35:30.120 And in regards to the motion for limited intervention and request for notice of

00:35:35.260 motions to closely or reclassify, I also wish to craft my order in such a way that

00:35:42.140 is concise and addresses all the issues, the important issues brought up by all

00:35:46.720 parties.

00:35:47.040 And so I will be issuing that ruling at the same time.

00:35:52.040 And so I will be issuing the ruling in regards to the state's motion to clarify court's pretrial

00:35:59.320 and trial publicity order, and I am prepared to do so.

00:36:03.860 Before I do that, what I want to do is, and counsel is being caught off guard because they were

00:36:11.940 anticipating a ruling today, but what the court is intending to do is, and proposing to the

00:36:17.800 parties, is issuing an oral ruling on WebEx that all parties can attend to.

00:36:25.440 The reason why is I don't want to take a lot of time.

00:36:28.780 These are important issues.

00:36:29.960 I don't want to wait until January 16th.

00:36:32.480 And I want to talk about potential dates.

00:36:36.440 I don't imagine it will take longer than 20 minutes for this court to issue ruling.

00:36:42.460 And I want to get the parties' input in regards to their thoughts of the court issuing an oral

00:36:47.920 ruling on WebEx.

00:36:49.820 And so I'll open it up to the parties.

00:36:53.700 We don't have any objection to that, Your Honor.

00:36:56.120 Thank you.

00:36:57.060 We have no objection to that, Your Honor.

00:36:58.940 Yeah, same.

00:36:59.740 All right.

00:37:00.580 Well, next comes the trickier part.

00:37:02.260 When you have a room full of attorneys trying to find a date that we're all available, to our staff, what dates do we have available for a 30-minute block before the end of the year?

00:37:17.100 Judge, we do have December 29th at 10 o'clock.

00:37:20.180 How does that appear?

00:37:23.840 How does that day work?

00:37:24.700 Because we've got amazing breaking news here today.

00:37:27.540 Let's go ahead and keep the camera on that.

00:37:30.380 You're seeing the alleged assassin for the first time.

00:37:32.680 Big fight when we came here about where the camera is going to be placed as we picked up coverage today.

00:37:39.320 Let me go to, I've got Alex de Gras.

00:37:41.220 Big breaking news.

00:37:42.280 A blowout, ladies and gentlemen, against MAGA and against the president in Indiana this afternoon.

00:37:47.720 Alex de Gras joins us.

00:37:50.040 Alex.

00:37:53.920 There's a lot of politicians that should be getting coal in their stockings for Christmas, but Birch Gold thinks as a smart planner, you deserve silver.

00:38:03.140 That's why for every $5,000 you purchase between now and December 22nd, Birch Gold will send you an ounce of silver free.

00:38:13.800 Remember, silver is up over 60% this year and over $60 an ounce.

00:38:20.240 You see, smart people diversify and have a hedge.

00:38:24.320 That's why I encourage you to buy gold from Birch Gold.

00:38:26.800 With the rate cuts from the Fed in 2026, the dollar will be worth less.

00:38:31.400 And what happens if the AI bubble bursts?

00:38:34.320 Diversify.

00:38:35.340 Let Birch Gold Group help you convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax-sheltered IRA in physical gold.

00:38:43.980 Let me repeat that.

00:38:45.220 Physical gold.

00:38:46.860 And for every $5,000 you buy, you'll get an ounce of silver for your stocking or for your kids.

00:38:53.080 What a great way to teach them about saving smartly.

00:38:57.000 Just text my name, Bannon, B-A-N-N-O-N, to 989898 to claim your eligibility for this offer.

00:39:04.000 Again, text Bannon, B-A-N-N-O-N, to the number 989898 today.

00:39:10.420 Because Birch Gold's free silver with qualifying purchase promotion ends the 22nd of December of this year.

00:39:18.820 Make sure you text Bannon to 989898.

00:39:22.880 Do it today.

00:39:23.340 Imagine having the world's most connected financial insider feeding you vital information.

00:39:29.740 The kind of information only a handful of people have access to.

00:39:34.260 And that could create a fortune for those who know what to do with it.

00:39:38.700 That's exactly what you get when you join our frequent guest and contributor, Jim Rickards, in his elite research service, Strategic Intelligence.

00:39:49.480 Inside Strategic Intelligence, you'll hear directly from Jim and receive critical updates on major financial and political events before they hit the mainstream news.

00:39:59.200 He'll put you in front of the story and tell you exactly what moves to make for your best chance to profit.

00:40:06.780 As a proud American, you do not want to be caught off guard.

00:40:10.480 Sign up for Strategic Intelligence right now at our exclusive website.

00:40:15.240 That's RickardsWarRoom.com.

00:40:17.820 RickardsWarRoom.com.

00:40:19.200 You go there, you get Strategic Intelligence based upon predictive analytics.

00:40:25.300 Do it today, right now.

00:40:27.880 RickardsWarRoom.com.

00:40:30.280 Patriots, listen up.

00:40:31.760 For a limited time, Patriot Mobile is running their Red, White, and Blue Friday promotion.

00:40:36.480 Your once-a-year chance to get a free smartphone just for switching to America's only Christian conservative wireless provider. 0.89

00:40:44.560 A brand-new phone, absolutely free while supplies last.

00:40:48.940 For over 12 years, Patriot Mobile has defended faith, family, and freedom while giving you the same or better premium coverage on all three major U.S. networks.

00:40:58.780 Unlimited data, mobile hotspots, international roaming.

00:41:02.380 They do it all.

00:41:03.460 When you switch, you never sacrifice quality or service.

00:41:06.540 Hundreds of thousands have joined the movement because every bill supports the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the Sanctity of Life, and our veterans and first responders.

00:41:16.200 Switching is easy.

00:41:17.900 Keep your number.

00:41:18.800 Keep your phone.

00:41:19.880 Or upgrade to that free smartphone today.

00:41:22.140 Their 100% U.S.-based team can activate you in minutes.

00:41:26.960 Go to PatriotMobile.com slash Bannon.

00:41:29.800 That's all one word.

00:41:30.920 PatriotMobile.com slash Bannon.

00:41:33.080 Or call 972-PATRIOT and use promo code Bannon.

00:41:38.240 Don't wait.

00:41:39.600 This limited time offer won't last.

00:41:41.440 That's PatriotMobile.com slash Bannon.

00:41:43.420 Or call 972-PATRIOT with promo code Bannon.

00:41:47.360 You're going to get an East Texas accent, and you're going to get an American citizen on the phone.

00:41:54.780 So join me today.

00:41:56.220 Make the switch today at 972-PATRIOT, promo code Bannon.

00:42:00.440 Actually, you've got some breaking news about what happened.

00:42:03.140 It was a 19-31 defeat.

00:42:06.000 In fact, we did not even carry the Republican conference.

00:42:10.340 We lost that 21-19.

00:42:12.500 I couldn't think of a bigger middle finger to the president.

00:42:16.920 What's your update, sir?

00:42:18.880 So a couple things.

00:42:19.680 I want to just set the table, but then I'm going to get into sort of a backroom deal that's now breaking within the last 20 minutes within, you know, Maryland Democrats and the RINOs in Indiana.

00:42:30.560 I think the big issue is this guy, Bray, the leader.

00:42:34.720 He had been lying.

00:42:35.760 I just want to paint the whole story.

00:42:37.620 Do I have time for that, Steve?

00:42:38.520 Just quickly, like, walk everyone through.

00:42:40.100 Because it's so important for the posse to understand what we are up against from what we've been talking about on the show.

00:42:45.680 The masks are totally off, Steve.

00:42:47.340 Do I have a second, or how quick should I be?

00:42:50.200 Yeah, take your time.

00:42:51.520 We're back to this now.

00:42:52.560 They're just going through logistics on that.

00:42:54.100 Charlie Kirk, they're trying to muzzle the media there.

00:42:59.000 They agreed to allow cameras in, and the camera angled on the alleged assassin today.

00:43:06.000 That was huge.

00:43:06.600 But then there's this big fight about, you know, they don't want to have chaos.

00:43:09.240 All the chaos outside, they don't want in the courtroom.

00:43:11.300 So there are going to be big fights about media access to that.

00:43:14.120 But, Alex, this story is monumental.

00:43:17.600 The president, his political team, people were talking this morning.

00:43:21.380 They thought they had the votes.

00:43:23.300 Something happened in the early to mid-afternoon here because this was not close.

00:43:28.520 This was a blot.

00:43:29.080 And the reason they did this, Alex, was to cover their tracks.

00:43:31.520 They didn't want to lose by one or two votes.

00:43:33.520 They wanted to have it 19 to 31 and to say that we couldn't even get it at a conference.

00:43:38.520 They lost conference 21 to 19 to cover themselves and their crimes in Indiana.

00:43:44.500 Take it from there, sir.

00:43:46.200 Yeah.

00:43:46.540 So this guy Bray, who's in charge, state senate president, he had been lying to the administration

00:43:51.980 every step of the way and had always been directing, I think, the White House, my friends

00:43:57.600 on the Hill, you know, a lot of interested groups here, obviously, that are working in

00:44:01.660 tandem with the grassroots, with the White House up front.

00:44:04.420 And they had been saying, hey, don't talk to members, build a consensus.

00:44:07.280 It was really his way of controlling the room.

00:44:10.020 I mean, remember, Steve, we talked about, I mean, you say it, I say it, these state house

00:44:14.040 rooms, you know, the state senate, the state house, these are like the dirtiest places

00:44:18.020 in politics, even on our side, I'll say it, okay?

00:44:20.640 All over this country, it's all corporate.

00:44:22.820 It's really controlled and crazy, okay?

00:44:25.300 And what he did was, again, he lied to the White House and he arm twists and cajoled all

00:44:30.200 of these potential votes that would get him, you know, the 19 to 26 had them threatened.

00:44:35.640 And I think another major breaking news is Todd Young, who obviously is a huge anti-Trumper.

00:44:42.900 Did he impeach Trump?

00:44:43.920 I forgot.

00:44:44.340 He didn't vote for Trump.

00:44:45.840 That's what it was.

00:44:46.940 His top consultant, Cam Savage, had promised, Bray, millions of dollars to defend the no

00:44:52.640 votes in primaries.

00:44:54.280 Did that last week, which is now breaking out.

00:44:56.120 It's a huge thing.

00:44:56.940 You've got, obviously, the consultant class at play.

00:44:59.480 You've got the corporate entities.

00:45:01.120 You've got, obviously, the Mike Pence.

00:45:02.900 You know, just how Indiana has been this battleground.

00:45:05.920 Now that guy's getting fired from some of his folks.

00:45:09.100 Mitch Daniels, another name that we've mentioned.

00:45:11.460 Yeah, yeah, but hang on, but hang on, but hang on a second.

00:45:13.480 Hang on, hang on, hang on.

00:45:15.880 If you're telling the president, hey, we're very close and I think we're going to have this,

00:45:19.960 we got to shift a few more votes, and then you get blown out.

00:45:23.540 It's always an excuse to sit there and go, we were lied to.

00:45:26.940 They're paid to understand when people are lying to them.

00:45:29.500 You're playing at the highest level of politics in the world.

00:45:32.920 They got to know, and they got to have 10 other sources to know, because this is not something

00:45:36.520 some guy thinks up out of his head.

00:45:38.340 You've got Mitch Daniels representing the Bush family.

00:45:42.060 You've got the Mike Pence faction.

00:45:45.700 You've got the Todd Young who's promising, hey, if Las Avidas telling you we're going to

00:45:50.400 get millions of dollars, I'm going to come in and get you millions of dollars.

00:45:54.000 The president, also this afternoon in the House, the president lost a huge vote on the unions.

00:45:58.820 20 Republicans sided with Democrats in this House vote.

00:46:03.180 You know, something's got to change here.

00:46:05.200 This is a huge defeat today for the president of the United States.

00:46:09.580 And somebody's got to be straight with the president and saying, look, people think that

00:46:13.680 you're an easy target now.

00:46:15.140 And people in the White House get paid to make sure these types of things don't happen.

00:46:18.980 This is, it's just not acceptable.

00:46:20.960 This was a blowout.

00:46:22.140 You can't look at it any other way.

00:46:23.280 And I realize people are misleading people, but let's be honest, this ain't Tallahassee

00:46:27.880 or Albany.

00:46:28.740 This is Indianapolis.

00:46:30.220 Okay.

00:46:30.760 If you can't handle an Indianapolis, you're not going to be able to handle it as we get

00:46:35.280 into the tougher ones here, sir.

00:46:37.560 Well, I think, I mean, Steve, I think it's certainly upsetting.

00:46:41.200 I think there's, this is mass cost.

00:46:43.140 Like we got to look at this as like, this is for everyone to see.

00:46:46.480 Hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on.

00:46:48.460 This ain't nine, correct me if I'm wrong.

00:46:50.240 This is not nine Oh, this is seven two.

00:46:52.820 They took away because it was in a package.

00:46:55.140 The other seats gone to correct.

00:46:57.280 So, so what, what the Indiana maps going to be is a seven, two map, correct?

00:47:01.800 Yeah.

00:47:01.920 So we didn't pick up any seats and you know, that's obviously a disaster.

00:47:06.820 And I think Steve, you've got the enemy within our party that are willing to work with the

00:47:12.420 Democrats and that's a huge task at hand.

00:47:14.720 And I think it's hard to control these things.

00:47:17.700 I mean, I'm not going to make excuses, but I think the reality is, are you saying, hang

00:47:21.000 on, are you saying, are you saying the scoop here?

00:47:22.740 Hang on.

00:47:23.140 Are you saying the scoop here is that the Indiana Republicans reached out to Westmore and

00:47:28.040 agreed that Westmore will not try to push for eight Oh in Maryland and they won't try

00:47:33.180 to push here.

00:47:33.780 Or that that's the deal they cut now being reported.

00:47:36.220 So they reached out to this guy, Bob Ferguson, name I've never heard of, but it's now breaking

00:47:40.400 on the internet.

00:47:40.960 He's I think their state Senate president.

00:47:43.100 And the reality, Steve is they tricked them and said, Hey, we're not going to redistrict

00:47:47.720 if you don't redistrict.

00:47:48.940 And the reality is they can't redistrict in Maryland because they get tossed and we would

00:47:52.840 probably actually pick up a seat there or two with the Supreme court, which Republicans 0.77

00:47:57.900 control.

00:47:58.520 And they know that.

00:47:59.900 And so we would have actually liked that because we could have actually picked up four seats

00:48:03.740 with this little equation, two in Indiana and possibly another one or two in Maryland,

00:48:08.740 to be frank with you.

00:48:10.380 And so it's, that's a huge, I mean, this is coming out on the internet.

00:48:13.540 I mean, literally as I'm getting ready to go on the show, as I'm waiting, watching the

00:48:16.760 court situation, it's that they got totally played or this guy is totally bought and paid

00:48:23.000 for and corrupt.

00:48:23.660 I mean, it sounds like both most likely.

00:48:26.380 Um, so they've, I mean, what type of Republican, Steve, okay, who's in touch with the White 0.54

00:48:33.420 House is reaching out to Democrats to cut a deal.

00:48:35.440 I mean, these are vicious, psychotic people that we're up against.

00:48:39.660 And I think, look, turning point, there were a lot of groups here on the ground working.

00:48:43.260 I think it's tough to control these things, obviously from afar.

00:48:46.640 And I think it's a wake up call for everyone that it's going to take a lot of effort, a lot

00:48:51.740 of shoulders to the wheel to really rid ourselves of this taint within our own party.

00:48:55.960 People that are willing to put the Democrats first and, you know, put the House majority

00:49:01.280 at risk.

00:49:01.920 I mean, this is really sick stuff, Steve.

00:49:04.020 This is really sick.

00:49:04.960 It's not, it's not, it's, it's not the House majority.

00:49:06.920 They, they, they want to get rid of Trump.

00:49:09.180 They, they don't mind sacrificing the House to take care of Trump.

00:49:13.700 Today, it couldn't be more evident.

00:49:15.340 Let's just say what it is.

00:49:16.520 This is the Bush faction.

00:49:18.020 This is Mike Pence, Judas Pence in that crowd.

00:49:20.860 Todd Young, who's been a hater from day one.

00:49:22.680 Todd Young telling people, Hey, I'll get you the money.

00:49:25.260 Don't worry about Las Vidas.

00:49:26.780 They're all blowhards. 0.99

00:49:27.620 Anyway, we're Indiana and we'll hang together and get it.

00:49:31.420 This, if this is not a wake up call, because we talked today about how this could drive

00:49:35.800 momentum.

00:49:36.280 It can actually get people excited in Virginia.

00:49:38.780 The Commonwealth of Virginia has absolutely no energy right now.

00:49:41.820 As you know, we still got Florida to go.

00:49:43.780 Ohio, we've got to nail in Kansas.

00:49:45.960 I mean, this is going to be a tractor pull and the, and the Democrats tonight are going

00:49:51.040 to be dancing on Donald Trump's political grave.

00:49:54.060 Are they not?

00:49:55.300 Yeah.

00:49:55.760 I mean, I think, look, I think with Todd Young, it was a consultant, but I don't think he's

00:49:59.880 publicly supported this, but a very powerful consultant that was making those deals.

00:50:04.460 But I don't think he was helpful.

00:50:06.520 And that's a problem, obviously.

00:50:08.340 I mean, look, I think the Democrats are, you know, I think that this are tough fights ahead,

00:50:13.360 whether it be votes in the House, of course, with a thin majority, and you look at the

00:50:17.300 president and he has to be very involved and is very involved.

00:50:20.420 And so is their team, just to move a couple inches in the House with all the issues there.

00:50:25.200 Right.

00:50:25.540 And I used to be in those rooms, Steve.

00:50:27.800 Now I'm not.

00:50:28.560 Thank God, to be honest with you.

00:50:29.840 But, you know, so that, you know, it's very challenging and there's a lot of important

00:50:33.020 things.

00:50:33.280 We've got another government shutdown situation coming up, Steve.

00:50:36.320 I mean, you and I can talk all day at the sort of challenges facing us ahead.

00:50:40.480 But the reality is that we must address the scourge and the people that are willing to

00:50:46.800 partner with the Democrats to what you said, Steve.

00:50:48.860 I mean, this is how they want to get rid of Trump.

00:50:51.440 They want to suppress momentum.

00:50:53.540 They want to, you know, give us that there's no hope.

00:50:55.940 They want to obviously take the House with join us.

00:50:57.920 We're going to have, they've been contacting us all day.

00:51:01.720 Tomorrow morning on the show, we're actually going to have a couple of three, I think,

00:51:06.340 people that confirmations have been held up.

00:51:08.800 Now, this is both the Senate with no change of the filibuster, no recess appointments.

00:51:14.580 They're not pushing President Trump's confirmation.

00:51:17.080 There has to be people around the president in the White House drawing a paycheck have got

00:51:22.000 to wake up.

00:51:23.160 OK, we've got to wake up.

00:51:24.320 I don't want to hear you were lied to.

00:51:26.380 OK, this is the National Football League.

00:51:28.840 You've got to know when you're getting a misrepresentation, you know, when they're working behind the scenes.

00:51:32.660 There's enough information out there.

00:51:34.340 Right now, President Trump can't get his confirmations done.

00:51:37.020 We had another debacle in the House today on, I think, this union thing about 20 Republicans 0.96

00:51:42.840 in revolt.

00:51:43.900 There's got to be penalties for this.

00:51:45.800 People need to start to fear the president of the United States.

00:51:48.780 Hell, they fear him in the Ukraine and in Europe.

00:51:52.040 They're fearing him in the Middle East.

00:51:53.680 They fear him down in Venezuela.

00:51:55.460 We ought to start making sure they're fearing him in the capitals of these states where they're

00:52:00.080 going against the redistricting for these fair districts.

00:52:02.240 And we ought to make sure that the Republican Party starts to fear him in Washington, D.C.,

00:52:08.060 or this thing is going to spin into a total and complete debacle.

00:52:11.860 We've already got a big enough fight against the Democrats in the deep state and what they're

00:52:15.500 doing to fight folks trying to sort out the mess in Minneapolis and in Chicago and New York

00:52:20.980 as they refuse to back any deportation of these illegal alien invaders.

00:52:25.600 And the Republican establishment, I've said this for a while, they think they can wait

00:52:29.500 Trump out.

00:52:30.020 He's just a passing summer storm.

00:52:31.980 And the Elise Stefanics and all the people who support him are just going to fade away.

00:52:36.480 And MAGA is going to return and just vote for the Bush agenda.

00:52:40.340 That's what they want, the Bush-Pence neoliberal neocon agenda.

00:52:43.120 It couldn't be more blatant.

00:52:45.260 In the Senate, you see what's happening where they're just folding around saying, no, we

00:52:48.280 can't help you with the filibuster.

00:52:49.420 I know you say it's vitally important.

00:52:51.500 We're not going to do recess appointments.

00:52:52.820 We're not going to appoint your nominees.

00:52:54.440 We're not going to talk about $2,000 per American citizen taken back from the tariff.

00:53:00.160 Bang, bang. 0.99

00:53:00.640 Everything the president wants on his agenda.

00:53:02.960 Now they gave him the tax cuts, they can't be bothered.

00:53:06.280 Alex, we're going to come back and drill down this overnight and have you back tomorrow.

00:53:09.680 Where do people go in the interim?

00:53:10.880 You're our lead sled dog on these redistricting wars, which we have to win.

00:53:15.520 And this is a startling development in Indiana as the Republican establishment basically tells

00:53:21.100 the president to go F yourself in so many ways.

00:53:24.720 Sir, where do people go?

00:53:26.200 Let me close out quick, Steve.

00:53:27.220 I say Donald Trump and the White House are leaving everything on the field to win.

00:53:30.980 We have four years to turn this country around.

00:53:33.160 Any Republican that partners with Democrats to stop that are worse to Democrats themselves.

00:53:37.920 I believe, Steve, that these traders are going to lose.

00:53:41.500 They have to.

00:53:42.500 I will help ensure that.

00:53:44.020 A lot of people will.

00:53:45.460 There's going to be a price to pay.

00:53:47.060 I think that they will learn a lesson.

00:53:48.880 And I think this is a turning point, a focal point on what is going to come with MAGA.

00:53:53.280 But anyway, I'm at Degrass 81.

00:53:55.960 You can catch me on X and everything else.

00:53:57.820 But it's critical because we're taking risks to succeed and do something great.

00:54:01.760 Others that have managed to decline, Steve, are literally allying with Democrats and destroying

00:54:06.960 what we can in this country.

00:54:08.420 It's unbelievable.

00:54:10.300 I'd love Elise Stefanik and her courage to run for governor of New York.

00:54:14.000 I think it's a profiling courage to take that great state back.

00:54:17.240 But I would recommend, again, I think Elise Stefanik ought to throw her hat in the ring. 1.00

00:54:21.440 Let's go against Johnson right now.

00:54:23.420 What do you got?

00:54:24.200 Let's see who could be Speaker of the House.

00:54:25.600 And then we can get Alex Degrass back in those rooms where he should be, not wandering around,

00:54:30.180 not wandering around upstate New York.

00:54:33.060 Well, I need to say no on that.

00:54:34.560 You know, she's running for governor. 1.00

00:54:36.120 And, you know, that's a very tough challenge that we're focused on.

00:54:40.280 And she said that publicly.

00:54:41.120 That's a very tough challenge.

00:54:42.260 She said that publicly.

00:54:43.540 Okay, sir.

00:54:44.380 Thank you very much.

00:54:45.800 Alex Degrass, wandering around somewhere in upstate New York.

00:54:49.660 No, just kidding.

00:54:50.340 Doing great work.

00:54:51.640 John Fredericks, you were pretty optimistic when we left this morning.

00:54:55.340 You said, hey, it's going to be a fight in the early afternoon for one or two seats.

00:54:58.640 A total and complete blowout in Indiana.

00:55:01.760 Your thoughts, sir?

00:55:04.040 We came in here today.

00:55:06.200 We thought we had on Monday, Tuesday, Monday, we thought we had 22 votes.

00:55:11.800 We needed another three.

00:55:14.620 We needed one to get to 23.

00:55:16.680 Two said they would get us to 25.

00:55:18.700 We weren't lied to.

00:55:20.460 Okay.

00:55:21.020 Here's what happened.

00:55:22.380 It was a collapse in the last two days.

00:55:24.800 I mean, we lost four votes that we thought we had that went the other way.

00:55:30.860 Greg Good, Liz, Linda Rogers, a couple others we thought we had, they went the other way.

00:55:40.720 As far as Rod Bray is concerned, I mean, he was against us from day one.

00:55:45.240 He was against us at the beginning.

00:55:47.120 So no change there.

00:55:49.040 I mean, he was the president pro tem.

00:55:50.500 He rallied his caucus.

00:55:52.060 The bottom line of this thing is, Steve, you nailed it.

00:55:55.560 No respect for MAGA.

00:55:57.360 No respect for the president.

00:55:59.340 They moved on.

00:56:00.640 They expect the MAGA to, the whole coalition to dissolve itself.

00:56:05.720 They think President Trump is done.

00:56:08.060 Tuesday's election results in Georgia and Miami hurt us.

00:56:13.760 And they figured, you know what?

00:56:15.560 Why am I going to throw in with that?

00:56:17.160 Now, Alex nailed it in that Todd Young did tell Rod Bray to tell these people that we're

00:56:24.140 going to primary, that money will be there for them.

00:56:27.120 But we got $1.2 billion.

00:56:29.660 We have got to now fight.

00:56:31.960 You just can't stand around and throw your hands up and say, well, you know, we put up

00:56:37.180 the good fight.

00:56:37.880 That ain't going to do crap.

00:56:39.400 Okay.

00:56:39.840 They see President Trump is lined up.

00:56:42.660 So what's, so what's, what's on the party?

00:56:45.280 But what's the, okay.

00:56:47.260 But the way you do that, you got to have some respect and respect comes from both appreciation

00:56:52.680 and from fear.

00:56:54.220 What is the plan?

00:56:55.400 What's the white house plan for making sure that there's a penalty to be paid in Indiana.

00:57:01.160 Do you have any insights at all?

00:57:02.400 Because if you let Indiana go, you're going to get run.

00:57:05.820 The Bush faction that wants to take back the party, the Mike Pence's of the world, the Todd

00:57:10.100 Young's of the world.

00:57:11.260 Look in the Senate, he can't get, when you talk to people about how many votes in the

00:57:15.820 Senate to the filibuster, people say maybe 20, right?

00:57:19.100 The Senate just sitting there going, we don't care about your agenda.

00:57:21.540 And President Trump says, I must change the filibuster to get my, because the Democrats

00:57:25.680 are going to do it right away.

00:57:26.500 They go, we're not interested in hearing about it.

00:57:28.740 They won't even, we're going to have people on tomorrow.

00:57:30.640 They won't even push for their confirmations right now.

00:57:33.860 Forget recess appointment.

00:57:34.960 They won't push for their confirmations right now.

00:57:37.020 We're going to have a couple of folks on here. 1.00

00:57:38.780 So we got about two minutes before I got to bounce.

00:57:41.500 What is the white house going to do to get people's attention that if you cross us, there's

00:57:47.200 a penalty to pay, sir.

00:57:50.060 They put out a primary list within minutes.

00:57:54.080 I sent it to Cameron.

00:57:55.180 Cameron, we have that primary list.

00:57:57.240 We got a bunch of rhinos that we're going to. 0.98

00:58:01.100 Yeah.

00:58:01.540 These are the primary target list.

00:58:04.200 The white house put this out before I came on your show to put on your show.

00:58:09.280 You got Dernlake, Niemeyer, Linda Rogers, who totally stabbed this in the back.

00:58:15.360 Holdman got a couple of open seats.

00:58:17.920 Buck, this guy, theory, total weasel.

00:58:23.280 Another guy stabbed this in the back.

00:58:25.080 Greg, good, 38, a couple of ones open.

00:58:27.920 So good, Deary, Buck, Rogers, Holdman, Dierlake, Niemeyer.

00:58:32.000 All of these need primary opponents.

00:58:34.120 All of these need top candidates they have to recruit.

00:58:36.980 And all of them need a couple million dollars behind them.

00:58:39.500 And Lasavita's got to get out here.

00:58:40.940 We got to do this immediately.

00:58:42.240 Otherwise, what you're seeing is the beginning of the basic middle finger, the New Jersey salute

00:58:47.660 to MAGA.

00:58:48.560 They don't think, here's the bottom line, the people that I were talking to that flipped

00:58:53.040 their vote.

00:58:54.020 What I heard is they don't think we got to, they don't think we have the juice anymore.

00:58:58.240 They looked at Miami.

00:58:59.600 They looked at all these results.

00:59:00.960 We're losing everything.

00:59:02.440 They figured Trump's gone.

00:59:04.940 MAGA's imploding.

00:59:06.820 We don't have to fear you guys.

00:59:08.380 We're going to do what we want.

00:59:09.680 Screw you.

00:59:10.220 That was the message they gave to us today and they gave to the White House.

00:59:14.900 It's one thing if I didn't gain a vote.

00:59:17.140 We lost three votes today.

00:59:21.220 Unbelievable.

00:59:22.000 It's not an 8-1 map.

00:59:24.180 It's a 7-2 map.

00:59:25.840 It's not 9-0.

00:59:27.220 It's 7-2.

00:59:28.000 Anyway, we've got to bounce.

00:59:28.860 John Frederick, where do people go to get you?

00:59:31.160 This is going to be a continuing battle for this redistricting.

00:59:34.680 Where do people go to get you, sir?

00:59:36.680 At JF Radio Show.

00:59:38.020 At JF Radio Show.

00:59:39.200 Everywhere.

00:59:39.600 Where, look, don't tuck tail.

00:59:41.960 All this means is we've got to fight.

00:59:43.980 We've got to fight.

00:59:44.660 We've got to fight back, Steve.

00:59:46.380 Otherwise, this is going to be the trend.

00:59:49.340 They're right now saying, hey.

00:59:50.200 We're going to fight back.

00:59:51.880 Hang on, hang on.

00:59:52.840 We're going to fight back.

00:59:54.000 We got it.

00:59:54.520 People will be up on the ramparts.

00:59:56.120 But the White House has got to wake up.

00:59:58.540 Let's be blunt.

00:59:59.440 This is humiliation for the White House.

01:00:01.440 This is humiliation.

01:00:02.660 And the Democrats and the Rhinos are going to be dancing on his grave tonight.

01:00:07.400 Watch it.

01:00:07.740 They're going to have their party.

01:00:08.740 I'm not right, Steve.

01:00:09.540 In Indianapolis.

01:00:10.500 Judas Pence is partying.

01:00:12.300 Okay.

01:00:12.760 Thank you very much, John.

01:00:13.840 Fredericks, appreciate you.

01:00:15.460 Thanks, Steve.

01:00:16.720 To make sure that we're all having a great time, I think they're going to sign.

01:00:20.860 Rumor has it the Executive Order for Artificial Intelligence may be even signed this evening.

01:00:25.640 I'll be up on Getter the entire time.

01:00:29.140 We're going to, the 6 o'clock show is going to be unbelievable.

01:00:32.280 Stick around.

01:00:32.900 I want to thank the folks at Birch Gold.

01:00:34.200 Philip Patrick was going to be with us.

01:00:36.220 We thought it was very important.

01:00:37.760 We're going to cover everything related to the assassination of Charlie Kirk, this trial, wall-to-wall.

01:00:43.860 Very big today.

01:00:44.940 Cameras allowed after a fight.

01:00:46.480 Cameras allowed back in, at least for today's session, I think, permanently, but where they're going to be stationed.

01:00:51.260 You saw the smirk.

01:00:52.740 I say it's a smirk.

01:00:53.620 Some people said it's a smile.

01:00:54.480 It looked like a smirk to me on the alleged assassin's face.

01:00:58.240 Other big fights about the access to media on this.

01:01:01.120 They're talking about leaks.

01:01:02.660 This has been the most hermetically sealed pretrial I've ever seen.

01:01:06.820 You haven't had a leak on the ballistics report, on autopsy, on anything.

01:01:10.980 So, anyway, they were all over the media today.

01:01:14.040 Quote, unquote, the chaos on the outside cannot come into this courtroom.

01:01:18.540 Of course, you know what I say.

01:01:19.860 I'm not so sure there we're going to actually get to trial.

01:01:22.100 I think we're going to try to cut a deal in advance.

01:01:24.760 Stick around.

01:01:26.460 The second hour of the afternoon and early evening show of War Room is upon us.

01:01:31.060 Birchgold.com.

01:01:31.920 Philip Patrick is going to join us tomorrow.

01:01:34.240 Didn't want to try to jam him in.

01:01:35.500 He's got a lot, lot, lot to talk about.

01:01:38.080 Silver on fire.

01:01:39.280 I think silver might have hit 70 today.

01:01:41.560 At least part of the day.

01:01:42.640 Gold, another, close to another all-time high.

01:01:45.320 Take your phone out.

01:01:46.260 Text Bannon, B-A-N-N-O-N, 9-8-9-8-9-8.

01:01:50.340 Get the ultimate guide for investing in gold and precious metals.

01:01:52.860 Totally free.

01:01:53.520 No obligation.

01:01:54.680 You get to Philip Patrick.

01:01:55.820 They got the special.

01:01:57.340 $5,000.

01:01:58.900 Invest in physical gold.

01:02:01.240 Between now and the 22nd of December,

01:02:03.220 and they'll throw in an ounce of silver.

01:02:05.560 Stick around.

01:02:06.300 The second hour of War Room next.

01:02:07.880 If you could make one holiday wish,

01:02:12.540 would you wish to be free from your credit card and other debt?

01:02:16.300 Let's see if we can help you with that.

01:02:18.840 If we could give yourself one gift this holiday season,

01:02:22.440 would it be finally to get some relief from your credit card and other debt?

01:02:25.800 I might have a solution.

01:02:28.120 Here's why now is the time to make a move.

01:02:30.960 This time of year, credit card and loan companies close out their books.

01:02:34.280 They clean up past due accounts.

01:02:37.840 They sell or write off the debt to clear their books.

01:02:41.120 That means if you have credit card debt and unpaid bills,

01:02:44.340 lenders may be more open to negotiating and settling your account before you're in.

01:02:49.580 That means right now, and I mean right now,

01:02:52.660 you may actually have leverage.

01:02:55.420 And Done With Debt knows how to use this to your advantage.

01:02:59.080 They monitor lender trends and understand the year-end pressure on creditors.

01:03:03.060 They use that timing to negotiate hard on your behalf.

01:03:08.120 Now's the time to get out from under crushing debt and interest payments

01:03:11.340 without bankruptcy or taking on new loans.

01:03:15.640 Done With Debt goes to work for you month one

01:03:19.000 with one clear goal, to reduce your total debt

01:03:22.180 and leave you with more money every month.

01:03:25.520 Get started now because your leverage may disappear at the end of the year.

01:03:31.160 Chat with a Done With Debt specialist at donewithdebt.com.

01:03:35.860 That's donewithdebt.com, donewithdebt.com.

01:03:40.020 Do it today.

01:03:41.040 Do it today.

01:03:45.880 Do it now.

01:03:46.800 Do it now.

01:03:47.560 Do it now.

01:03:48.380 Do it now.

01:03:48.760 Do it now.

01:03:50.360 Do it now.

01:03:51.360 Do it now.

01:03:53.060 ...

01:03:56.900 Do it now.

01:04:03.000 Do it now.

Bannon's War Room - December 12, 2025

Episode 4991： The Trial For Charlie Kirks Assassin; Massive Defeat In Indiana

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript