The Great America Show - J6 IS THE MARXIST DEMS’ EFFORT TO DISTRACT VOTERS FROM THE ELECTION THAT THE GOP WILL WIN OVERWHELMINGLY

00:00:00.000 Hello, everybody. I'm Lou Dobbs, and welcome to The Great America Show.

00:00:04.740 Truth, justice, and the American way are our creed here, and that means we have absolutely

00:00:10.800 nothing to do with the folks who make up the Biden White House and administration.

00:00:16.380 We do watch them, though, and fairly carefully, as discomforting as such an enterprise is,

00:00:22.540 as they explain that two straight quarters of negative GDP doesn't a recession make

00:00:28.320 in the Biden White House. Their economists don't even bother with PhDs in economics.

00:00:34.720 They have law degrees. All the better to help them argue the innocence of this impaired president 1.00

00:00:40.580 for the suffering of tens of millions of Americans, all as a result of his Marxist-dim

00:00:46.140 economic policies and the very real possibility that we will have two quarters in a row completed

00:00:53.580 of contracted GDP at the end of this month. Of course, this is the same administration

00:01:01.000 whose Department of Homeland Security secretary declares the border with Mexico is under control.

00:01:08.200 Secretary Mayorkas repeats the declaration, even as millions of illegals and truckloads of deadly 1.00

00:01:15.100 drugs, especially fentanyl, pour across the border unchecked. Mayorkas and President Biden lie

00:01:22.240 with impunity, as does the entire administration. We Americans are bombarded with lies these days

00:01:30.380 nonstop. And not all of those lies necessarily originate in government. Ours or theirs. But lies

00:01:38.620 abound in all kinds of national media. And publishing is rife with lies as well. And I want to credit

00:01:46.640 Jack Wolfson of the National Review for catching the Merriam-Webster's online dictionary's capitulation

00:01:53.600 to the trans agenda. Webster's adding a secondary definition to the word female, which defines 0.60

00:02:00.900 female as, quote, having a gender identity that is the opposite of male, end quote. And so it goes in

00:02:10.200 the increasingly ambiguous and often confusing politics of language, Marxist-dim style, and the

00:02:17.300 culture war's rage. No better culture warrior than Steve Bannon, leading political podcaster host of

00:02:24.640 Steve Bannon's War Room, former aide to President Trump, his chief strategist, in fact, and now in a

00:02:31.740 legal battle with a highly illegitimate January 6th committee and the politically corrupt Biden

00:02:37.640 Department of Justice, which charged Bannon with two counts of contempt of Congress for refusing a

00:02:44.400 subpoena. Crushing Bannon's constitutional rights, denying him due process throughout, a D.C. federal

00:02:51.820 court trial resulted in two guilty verdicts against him. Our guest today is distinguished civil rights

00:02:58.160 attorney David Schoen, who represented President Trump in his second impeachment, and who represents

00:03:04.240 Steve Bannon in his contempt of Congress case. David, welcome to the Great America Show, and thank you for

00:03:11.000 being with us today to help us understand what the Marxist Dems leading the Democrat Party and the Deep State

00:03:17.960 and the Justice Department are doing to Steve Bannon, and why every American should care passionately and

00:03:25.480 deeply about what happens in this case. The only analog I can think of in American history that's

00:03:32.780 reasonably close to the Bannon trial are the McCarthy hearings in the 1950s.

00:03:40.240 I think you're absolutely right, and first of all, thank you very much for having me. I've been a long-time

00:03:44.800 fan of yours. No, I think you're right. You know, it sounds overly dramatic, frankly, because that was such a

00:03:50.580 checkered time in our history, but I don't think we've seen anything else like it since then, and I do

00:03:55.880 think there are some parallels to be drawn, as many scholars have drawn, but part of this, I think,

00:04:00.900 results from the idea that right now, with this administration, we have no checks and balances in

00:04:05.380 place, frankly. It seems to be of all one mindset, policy-wise, and fundamental constitutional

00:04:12.980 principles being thrown out the door, including, in, for example, the Bannon case, the concept of

00:04:18.320 separation of powers, when privilege was invoked, but a number of things, and it's tragic to see,

00:04:24.460 but, you know, we have to survive it. Yeah, indeed. Representing now, Steve Bannon, and previously

00:04:33.180 you led the president's defense in the second impeachment. This is, it seems, one continuum from

00:04:42.940 at the, at the latest, August of 2016, to this very moment, and we know it'll go beyond, obviously.

00:04:53.020 Your thoughts about the similarities to the impeachments of special counsel, three years of FBI

00:04:59.820 investigation? I hear the president's credibility question, but he is the only one who emerged through

00:05:06.200 that entire period with his credibility intact, and so many others, whether they're in the Department

00:05:14.620 of Justice, the FBI, or whether they are sitting on the impeachment committee, known liars, certified

00:05:23.560 liars, as a result of the actions they brought. Right. You know, let me make one thing clear from

00:05:28.500 the start, because people try to pit and hold me or others. I represented the Democratic Party twice,

00:05:34.480 including this year. I represented a socialist candidate for president in 2020, challenging

00:05:40.540 ballot access laws. I'm interested in the issues. I am interested in our constitution. That's what

00:05:45.420 I've dedicated my career to. So this has nothing to do, in my view, at least, from my perspective,

00:05:50.420 my involvement with politics. Now, to answer your question, I think that, you know, it sounds funny,

00:05:56.340 but a common thread with all of this takes me back to a comment that Jerry Nadler made several years

00:06:02.140 ago during the Trump administration, and he said, we have to do these things because we can't trust

00:06:07.640 the voters. That's about as sick a commentary on our democracy, especially from a sitting

00:06:13.040 congressman, as I can remember. We do trust our voters, and we follow the voters' will. So a

00:06:18.260 parallel between the second impeachment, at least, and I believe the first impeachment, and what's going

00:06:23.080 on now with this January 6th sham committee, in my view, illegitimate from its formation, on a very

00:06:29.500 important subject, and that's cheating the American public. But anyway, a parallel is, barring President

00:06:35.160 Trump from running for office again, and certainly from becoming president again, is the number one

00:06:40.160 agenda figure. They made no bones about it in the second impeachment. Remember, you know, he was out

00:06:45.360 of office already, but they still insisted on the impeachment, and they had a theory for that

00:06:49.840 impeachment that would have meant that any former president from George Washington on could be

00:06:55.580 impeached today. Once he's out of office, if they decided today that George Washington's policies were

00:07:00.680 bad, literally in their brief, they could impeach him. So that's how far removed we've come from

00:07:06.960 common sense and fundamental constitutional principles. And right now, as I say, we just don't have any checks

00:07:12.940 and balances.

00:07:14.580 No checks and balances. We also have peculiar statements from the judge. And to remind everyone,

00:07:22.240 Steve Bannon didn't stand up and defend himself in that quote-unquote trial. But it wasn't on trial

00:07:30.840 before the committee, and their issues, the substance of what was at work here on the part of this

00:07:37.880 committee, never, ever entered the proceedings, did they?

00:07:43.000 That's exactly right. Listen, the government overreached. They had overly aggressive prosecutors who 0.88

00:07:49.040 were sort of trying to compensate for their abilities, I think. And they convinced the judge

00:07:53.600 to go along with that sort of approach. I'm surprised and disappointed because this is a

00:07:57.640 very good judge, very fair, good demeanor, and so on. Very smart fellow. But he bought into a theory,

00:08:04.600 I think, that was misguided. So one week before the trial started, July 11th, the trial started July

00:08:09.840 18th, the judge responded to the motions to dismiss in the case and barred every substantive defense

00:08:15.680 that Mr. Bannon had. I took the position within our team then. I was hired to be lead counsel.

00:08:20.800 I took the position within the team. First, I said to the judge, judge, by entering this order,

00:08:25.360 you will require me to provide ineffective assistance of counsel, failing the Sixth Amendment,

00:08:31.140 guarantee the defendant has. And therefore, within our team, I took the position that I would not be a

00:08:35.840 party to that. I would not do the opening and closing. I would not examine witnesses. I would continue

00:08:40.860 to raise the legal issues. And that's the role I played. Co-counsel in the case, Evan Corcoran,

00:08:46.420 took a different position. He had a strategy that he had worked out. And he agreed to go forward with

00:08:51.160 the examinations. So I credit him for making that decision. We each had to make our own decision.

00:08:56.800 But yes, the judge ruled in this case that the jury could not hear from Mr. Bannon. In fact,

00:09:02.180 it was prohibited from considering Mr. Bannon's reasons for his response to the subpoena. And those

00:09:07.500 reasons were, in a nutshell, his lawyer got the subpoena from the committee. Former President

00:09:12.320 Trump invoked executive privilege. The lawyer told Mr. Bannon, executive privilege has been

00:09:17.580 invoked. You may not comply with this subpoena. It's not your privilege to waive. Whether he

00:09:22.500 construed it too broadly, whether he took the proper approach or not, the jury never got to consider

00:09:27.640 that that's what Mr. Bannon had before him. And the lawyer wrote to the congressional committee

00:09:31.980 saying Mr. Bannon wants to comply. What he would suggest is either work out the privilege issue

00:09:37.780 with former President Trump, or let's go before a judge in a civil enforcement proceeding. That's

00:09:43.220 what Congress does all the time, because only the courts can be the neutral arbiter. In this case,

00:09:48.540 and this is why another example I say of the over-politicalization of the Justice Department,

00:09:53.060 these prosecutors argued to the jury that Mr. Bannon defied Congress's order. Doesn't matter that

00:09:59.660 executive privilege was invoked. They said, this is like telling the referee on a soccer field

00:10:04.360 that he or she can't tell your son what to do. No, it's not. Constitutionally, Congress is not a

00:10:10.100 referee. The president invokes executive privilege. Under the Constitution, it's presumptively valid.

00:10:16.920 The separation of powers concept provides that Congress can't determine its validity or its breadth.

00:10:23.000 The only branch that can is a court. So he said, let's go to court. If the court tells me to testify,

00:10:28.280 I will testify. They chose to go criminal, meaning they would guarantee they wouldn't get his testimony

00:10:33.300 because they never wanted it. But in any event, what's relevant, most relevant here, I think, is

00:10:37.400 the judge barred the jury from hearing any of that, from hearing the advice of counsels, what he relied

00:10:42.880 on, from hearing that he believed executive privilege barred him, and then let them decide.

00:10:47.420 But remember, fundamentally, this is a statute that charges criminal willful conduct. The judge said

00:10:53.880 that he was bound by a 1961 case that, in the context of this statute alone, says willful means

00:11:00.620 did you get a subpoena and did you comply, period. Your reasons aren't relevant. That cannot comport

00:11:06.780 with constitutional law, and especially not the modern concept. And to give you an example,

00:11:12.540 by the way, just how honest this judge was, he said about four or five times he was inclined to think

00:11:18.000 we were right that that's not what willfulness means here, that willfulness requires constitutionally

00:11:22.960 some idea that the defendant is doing something wrong or committing a crime. Here's what the judge

00:11:27.980 said on January 11th when he cut out the defenses. As I've stressed many times, I have serious

00:11:33.140 reservations that the Court of Appeals interpretation of willfully is consistent with a modern understanding

00:11:38.320 of the word. It's not consistent with modern case law surrounding the use of that term,

00:11:43.160 let alone the traditional definition of the word. But as I've previously held, and I reiterate again

00:11:47.360 today, I am bound by Licavoli and its holdings. That's why I say, not only we should 100% win this

00:11:53.620 appeal, every American better hope we win this appeal. Because if willfully means that an innocent person

00:11:59.860 can be ensnared in criminal conduct, we're in a heck of a lot of trouble in this country. That's never been

00:12:05.760 the way our American system of justice works. I couldn't agree with you more. And Judge Nichols,

00:12:12.360 in this case, being bound, as he expressed it, I can't understand, as a layman, why he is bound with

00:12:25.040 something that is on its face illogical, un-American, and suddenly binding. Could you explain that for us?

00:12:35.660 Well, you know, he was generally a federal district court, the trial court level, is bound by precedent

00:12:41.760 by the Court of Appeals. However, as I pointed out, we've had 30 or more years of jurisprudence

00:12:48.100 since that case, maybe 60. The case was 60 years old, clearly affirming from the Supreme Court that

00:12:54.760 the concept of willfully has progressed over time. So, you know, we've seen major precedents fall by the

00:13:01.060 wayside in the past. This is one of them. And I said to the judge respectfully, number one, I don't

00:13:05.900 think he's bound by this because this case involved executive privilege. That wasn't at all at issue

00:13:10.600 in that Licavoli case from 1961. Number two, in Licavoli, despite his holding, they allowed the

00:13:17.280 defendant to tell his whole story to the jury to say that he had relied on advice of counsel. They

00:13:22.460 didn't allow the jury to consider the advice of counsel, which was wrong, but at least they let him tell

00:13:26.560 a story. Mr. Bannon wasn't ever permitted to tell the story of why he didn't comply.

00:13:31.260 So I said respectfully to the judge that I think he's mistaken that he's bound by this after all

00:13:36.660 of the jurisprudence from the Supreme Court, including a case three months ago that interpreted

00:13:41.920 the word knowingly. And a case in 2019 said willfully, even more than knowingly, means that a defendant

00:13:49.220 must know that his or her conduct was wrong, criminal, violated the law. And in this case, listen,

00:13:56.100 we say let the jury decide that. Let the jury decide if he did something unlawful. But at

00:14:00.560 least they must hear from him why he thought it was lawful.

00:14:05.300 And with that, due process was thrown out the window in that court proceeding. And Steve Bannon

00:14:14.180 never had a chance at preserving his rights, advancing his argument or prevailing against

00:14:22.560 the prosecutors. This is un-American, a process, you know, I can't say that we've heard of,

00:14:32.020 but it is among the worst cases of violating due process that I've heard of since January 6th,

00:14:39.020 because we've got hundreds of people whose rights have been violated and who serve now as prisoners

00:14:45.440 of war and political prisoners, if you will. Yeah. Let me tell you one of the ultimate ironies in this

00:14:52.700 case, in my view, at least. We subpoenaed each of the January 6th committee members, along with

00:14:58.260 Speaker Pelosi, Hoyer, and Clymer, and the House counsel, Mr. Letter, for a number of reasons.

00:15:06.840 There were reasons based on the composition of the committee, rules violations, and so on.

00:15:10.780 This Mr. Letter contradicted himself. At one point, he said to the FBI in making this case,

00:15:16.280 there is no ranking minority member on this committee, which would be a rules violation.

00:15:20.660 Later, he said in written papers, oh, Liz Cheney, of course, is the ranking minority member. Well, 0.99

00:15:24.760 of course, she isn't. She's part of the same Trump-hating group. Ranking minority member is

00:15:29.440 meant to be a buffer so that the committee doesn't overreach. And so we wanted to know about his

00:15:34.260 contradiction. But we also wanted the committee members present at trial, and we subpoenaed them

00:15:38.180 for trial, to answer questions like, why wouldn't you go with a civil enforcement proceeding? What

00:15:43.000 made you go for Steve Bannon to the criminal route, which meant you guaranteed you wouldn't get his

00:15:47.240 testimony? Why wouldn't you give him a weak extension to study the issue when the Trump versus

00:15:52.240 Thompson case came down, which involved executive privilege? When after the subpoena date passed,

00:15:57.600 President Biden sent a letter saying, Bannon, we don't believe you have privilege. And Bannon asked

00:16:02.280 for one week from that day to study the issue. They said no, because they had their televised

00:16:06.780 contempt proceedings scheduled already for the next day. So what happened? The committee members to

00:16:12.940 every single one of them and the speaker and others invoked their own privilege, the speech or

00:16:17.820 debate clause. So consider the irony, Steve Bannon is prosecuted criminally, because he honored the

00:16:24.480 former president's invocation of privilege believed in the Constitution as he understood it. And he's

00:16:29.340 prosecuted criminally. It's not his privilege. He couldn't waive it. The committee members come

00:16:33.880 forward, and they raise their own privilege as a bar to testifying when each one of them could have

00:16:39.140 waived it, could have come in voluntarily and explained to the American people why they did what

00:16:43.140 they did to Steve Bannon, and each one of them refused. This is sickening to watch. And the McCarthy 0.62

00:16:52.520 hearings in the 50s are definitively, to me at least, it turns out, at least they were fairer in that they

00:17:01.580 had representation for those people testifying in those hearings. As awful as Joseph McCarthy was,

00:17:09.940 he at least was called to task in those hearings by the opposing counsel.

00:17:17.840 Right. That's, you know, that famous scene. In fact, I linked to a clip from that scene to make a

00:17:22.980 point in the papers that I filed here, when finally one courageous lawyer stands up and says,

00:17:28.420 I actually get emotional when I think about it, but he said, at long last, Senator, have you no dignity?

00:17:34.980 Have you no sense of honor? He took him to task over it. We don't have that today. And what we do

00:17:41.460 have today, unfortunately, that makes these hearings even more effective for political partisans, I

00:17:46.160 suppose, is modern editing. I mean, this committee brought in literally a television executive to

00:17:52.080 produce these hearings. They edit them selectively, and they're presented as if they're presenting

00:17:56.980 evidence without any testing of credibility and all of that. I say this is cheating the American

00:18:02.220 public. If you believe that the events of January 6th were important, then let's have an honest

00:18:06.780 broker present them and actually investigate them. Because consider this, Mr. Dobbs, you have as the

00:18:12.060 chairman of this committee, Chairman Thompson, who just before he became chairman, sued President Trump

00:18:17.680 over the events of January 6th, saying that he, Chairman Thompson, was personally injured by

00:18:22.780 President Trump. That might be the last member of Congress that should be chairing an investigative

00:18:27.460 committee into those same events. You have Raskin and Schiff, who've written books that they're

00:18:31.800 hawking now about the events of January 6th and how President Trump is to blame. They have

00:18:36.660 personal, reputational, maybe financial interests in ensuring that the committee's conclusions are

00:18:43.300 consistent with their books. All of what you say is true. I do quibble about reputational,

00:18:51.800 because neither man has a reputation for anything positive. They are notorious. They are,

00:18:59.260 I think, absolute cowards and liars. And we have a public record of them both being such. So I just 1.00

00:19:11.040 cannot imagine the Department of Justice being a party to this proceeding. I know that there are lots

00:19:18.840 of ways to look at this, and there are different perspectives and different values, at least in

00:19:23.680 partisan politics, with which I'm, by the way, not unfamiliar. But I am saying to you, the Department

00:19:30.740 of Justice to be a tool of these ignorant Marxist Dems pursuing their agenda in public and trashing 0.99

00:19:40.640 a man's life and time? 0.91

00:19:42.040 I think that, from my perspective at least, Merrick Garland has turned out to be a major

00:19:47.220 disappointment. I have to say that I had a case, a client of mine's case, in front of him. I thought,

00:19:53.280 I happened to have thought he was an excellent judge when he was a judge. I thought he was a

00:19:56.100 fair-minded judge. But I think he's really become now sucked into this and become a part of it. He

00:20:00.640 issued a press release when Mr. Bannon was indicted, saying he wants the country to know that this case

00:20:06.100 reflects the fair and equal application of the law across the board. That's just not true. The

00:20:12.680 Justice Department has had a policy of six decades of not using this criminal contempt statute when

00:20:18.520 executive privilege has been invoked like this. It's just not true.

00:20:22.300 It's not true. And there's so much to question about Merrick Garland as Attorney General, his actions,

00:20:29.640 his words, his statements like that. Meanwhile, Steve Bannon is under full, full attack by the

00:20:41.180 Marxist Dems, who are leading this administration, in my judgment, and the Democrat Party, along with

00:20:47.100 the deep state. They are trying their very best to trash Bannon because he is, I guess as they see it,

00:20:55.980 a bit of an obstacle as they try to simply disqualify Donald Trump from running in 2024.

00:21:10.360 Steve Bannon is a powerful force in America with millions and millions of followers. Whether one

00:21:15.480 likes his message or doesn't like his message, he is a force to be reckoned with, and they know that.

00:21:20.720 And frankly, whatever one thinks about anybody's political philosophy, he is living what America

00:21:29.020 stands for, and that is voicing his views, which, as I say, have tremendous following, tremendous

00:21:35.660 appeal. He faces being labeled with these horrible names that should never be used with anyone, and he

00:21:42.640 continues to stand up for principle. You know, he made a statement after the case. They tried to use this

00:21:48.060 against him, that he stands with Trump, and he stands with the Constitution, and he emphasized

00:21:51.780 that he stands with both, but he really emphasized the Constitution. You know, as many people have

00:21:56.100 said, Steve Bannon could have come in and just taken the fifth to the committee, like many other people

00:22:00.040 did, but nothing wrong with that. It's a constitutional right, although, I must say, Chairman

00:22:04.800 Thompson belittled that constitutional right and made a public statement that anyone who takes the fifth

00:22:09.200 has something to hide. That's reprehensible and irresponsible for any public figure to take.

00:22:14.220 But in any event, Steve Bannon committed that he would never do that. He wanted to testify.

00:22:18.680 However, he also honored the constitutional invocation of executive privilege, and until that was released

00:22:25.580 on July 9th, when President Trump finally had enough of seeing what was going on, then he felt his hands

00:22:32.240 were tied, as his lawyer had told him, and he could not comply.

00:22:35.260 And do you have an explanation? Have you reasoned this through, why the Department of Justice would

00:22:43.580 allow itself to become just a tool of the Marxist Dems? They're effectively enemies of the state.

00:22:52.900 I think that in this case, a terrible partisan political decision was made. I think there was a lot of

00:22:59.680 pressure from Congress to prosecute Steve Bannon criminally. You'll remember that, unprecedented,

00:23:05.700 President Biden came forward and said that he believes these people who so-called defy the

00:23:10.960 subpoenas should be prosecuted. We don't allow the President of the United States to weigh in on that

00:23:16.080 and corrupt the system like that. So then the Justice Department immediately issued a statement,

00:23:20.180 oh, you know, we're going to make an independent decision. Well, they didn't make any independent

00:23:23.660 decision in this case, because they went against their own precedent. And Congress, again, was cynical in

00:23:28.560 referring it for criminal prosecution. They had an easy out, go to a judge, let a judge order him to

00:23:34.280 testify, he would testify. So I think, again, as part of this complete lack of checks and balances now,

00:23:40.460 I think it's the void in policy. Unfortunately, as I say, I represented the Democratic Party earlier

00:23:45.720 this year. But there is a void of policy right now, so that the January 6th committee has become a

00:23:51.700 policy. Scare the people, convince them that President Trump, you know, was bad or was involved with the

00:23:57.440 January 6th thing. And that's our policy. That will help us get votes. That's not the policy we're

00:24:02.860 looking for, I think, in these very troubling times, economically, politically, internationally,

00:24:09.460 and so on. But it seems to be all they've got. And so they double down on it.

00:24:14.760 I just can't imagine what the rest of the world thinks of us right now. This January 6th committee,

00:24:20.540 which is more akin to a Soviet-style show trial, it is something that you would expect to happen in a

00:24:31.500 third-world country. We have an impaired president. We have a vice president who is the least knowledgeable

00:24:39.360 vice president and seemingly inarticulate person I've ever seen in the vice presidency. And we've had

00:24:45.440 some beauties over the course of my lifetime. We have two individuals that I can't imagine being

00:24:52.420 in any public role, public service, and they're at the top of our government. What is going on in this

00:25:02.620 country where there are no standards? There is no expectation of excellence. There are these mad

00:25:09.580 adventures like this January 6th committee, two presidential impeachments, a special counsel

00:25:16.240 built on an absolute fiction trying to overthrow the Trump presidency, having failed to overthrow his

00:25:24.100 candidacy. And you know what, Mr. Dobbs, I would bet that you regret having to say every word that you

00:25:30.000 just said, because I know that you root for this country every day and for greatness in this country

00:25:36.520 every day. It's, you know, it really, one could hang his head and just be depressed about all this.

00:25:43.660 But I think, you know, by doing shows like you do and calling out the conduct that we're seeing

00:25:49.920 and calling for better, I think that's the only course we can take here. Sometimes it seems like

00:25:55.740 beating your head against the wall because we see these confounding developments. We see corruption.

00:26:00.920 We see roadblocks put up toward fair and honest elections. And everybody in this country must

00:26:09.360 have an interest in election integrity. And again, I don't say this is a political position. I was on

00:26:15.980 the losing side of the Voting Rights Act case, you know, the Holder case, Shelby County, this Holder

00:26:23.060 case. I was on the losing side. I represented the Alabama voter taking the position that the Voting Rights

00:26:28.080 Act should still apply. I'm in favor of election integrity. I represent minor parties trying to get

00:26:34.080 on the ballot. I'm in favor of full ballot access and all of that. That's what makes this country

00:26:38.580 great. But the problems you're talking about transcend politics. And they fortunately, because

00:26:45.360 every American ought to be able to see that corruption is wrong. Malfeasance is wrong.

00:26:51.540 Not putting people in office are capable is wrong. We have to be able to raise this country to the

00:26:56.860 greatness again, that it's designed to provide, and that it certainly will accomplish again one day.

00:27:04.040 We have, and I have to say, your words capture the times perfectly, and our extant reality.

00:27:16.860 There was a time I thought that the Republican Party was the party of business, the Democratic Party

00:27:24.880 who was the party of the working man and woman. All of it's on its head. The Republican Party now

00:27:31.360 represents the working man and woman in this country because of America first policy of Donald

00:27:37.820 Trump. And the left, what do they represent? I cannot find anything positive that they represent.

00:27:46.480 There is nothing that I can say about any one of the executive orders of this president,

00:27:53.220 the policies he's pursuing that I say is in the interest of the nation, that is in the interest of the

00:27:58.360 American people. We have a media that is a corporatist media that has simply lost its way.

00:28:08.220 That's the kindest interpretation, and the worst interpretation is they're complicit. It is a time

00:28:16.080 for truth, and truth is in the least supply.

00:28:21.100 Well, you know, your comments about the media are just right on and depressing, and you certainly know

00:28:26.000 that far better than I do. You've made a career out of being a media success, but it's depressing

00:28:31.980 because that's in these days, that's the way, you know, our voices get out. And if our voices are

00:28:37.400 stifled, because the media takes one position all of the time, and they cover up other facts that are

00:28:43.480 clearly demonstrable facts, it's very dangerous for our republic. But, you know, I think in terms of

00:28:48.860 policy, certainly I have no better answers than anybody else. I would express at least my surprise and

00:28:54.620 dismay that when this administration came in, they seemed like they felt obligated to pander to what

00:29:01.980 I call the hate squad, others just call the squad, and their philosophy, which is as un-American a 1.00

00:29:08.360 philosophy as I have ever seen. It's completely deconstructionist, and it's everything that this

00:29:14.840 country stands for, in their view, it seems to me, is a failure. And they do it under the guise of,

00:29:20.100 you know, promoting what they think the country's values are. Absolutely not. Their position is

00:29:25.220 antithetical to it. They call themselves progressives. They're regressives. They don't

00:29:29.900 deserve a term progressive as if that had any, if that has any positive connotation, and it should.

00:29:36.480 It's horrible. We see anti-Semitism from that group. We see just base hatred of anything that

00:29:43.860 doesn't agree with them. And if you criticize them, then you pose a tremendous threat. They scream

00:29:49.320 bloody murder. It's a horrible situation. And I had thought that President Biden would be above all

00:29:54.580 of that. But instead, he seems obligated to pander to it. I want to turn to where we go from here.

00:30:01.460 You're an attorney. You represent the President of the United States. You represent one of the most

00:30:07.620 popular media figures in Steve Bannon. We have an American Bar Association. We have all sorts of

00:30:16.320 legal associations. Why is there not one person among them who says, let's walk over to the Capitol.

00:30:27.540 Let's walk over to the White House and say, let's stop this now. Six years, almost six years of

00:30:35.540 persecution of one man, Donald Trump. And the only people that have been revealed to be dishonest and

00:30:45.400 un-American have been the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Democratic Party, the Democratic Central

00:30:53.440 Committee, the Hillary Campaign Committee. And we don't have any leaders stepping up to say,

00:31:01.200 this is the moment. And we are going to not going to be defined by the defilement of our

00:31:09.200 our great American society. Yeah, I know you're 100 percent right. I would hope there are voices

00:31:14.420 that say it. However, I think your point earlier is correct. Right on the media stifles it. And

00:31:19.620 without the voice in the media, I'm afraid, you know, we don't all know about the good people

00:31:24.260 who are standing up. But yeah, at some point, we have to just say at least the rule of law

00:31:29.440 has to has to apply. You know, my father was an FBI agent. So a lot of this is very depressing for

00:31:34.640 me to see with the Justice Department and the FBI and all that. These are all groups that I grew up,

00:31:39.180 you know, looking up to the Attorney General of the United States. This is, you know, I got into this

00:31:44.220 to work within the system. But you're right, we all have an obligation to speak up. I'm sorry that

00:31:50.600 some Republican members of Congress, if it's a political, if it's political divide,

00:31:54.820 let's just say responsible members of Congress, whichever party they're in, that they don't come

00:31:59.360 forward more forcefully and say, stop, not in my name. This cannot go on in our Congress. That's the

00:32:05.480 one area we have some sway over. But I don't even hear that. We're just not hearing enough return to

00:32:13.000 our values, neutral principles of law, and standard of excellence, as you said earlier. All of

00:32:20.440 those kinds of things. But remember, you know, many of the legal groups, unfortunately, have a

00:32:25.180 particular perspective. Also, I've been very disappointed as I've been a civil rights lawyer for

00:32:29.780 36 years. And not, I would say to you that one of the things I'm most proud of is, I won years ago,

00:32:36.440 the American Bar Association Award for having made more of a difference in public institutions, they

00:32:40.800 said, and quoted some federal judges, that public institutions in the South than any lawyer of this

00:32:45.020 era. I've worked as a public interest lawyer, my entire career, I worked as a civil rights lawyer,

00:32:49.380 criminal defense lawyer. When I took on the representation of President Trump, which was a

00:32:54.140 far departure from anything I had done before, I was dropped from civil rights listserv groups.

00:33:00.600 They said they didn't feel safe if I were on the list anymore. I was dropped from, I prepared to teach

00:33:07.720 a course in civil rights at a leading law school, civil rights litigation, my field. They said, no,

00:33:12.700 the students and faculty wouldn't feel comfortable anymore. I said, this is a representation I took on

00:33:17.500 for two weeks. I was honored. The President of the United States would call me and ask me a solo

00:33:22.520 practitioner in Montgomery, Alabama to represent him. And when they had the team in South Carolina,

00:33:27.440 it asked me to lead that team of fine lawyers who I didn't even know at the time. I was flattered by all

00:33:32.700 of that. I wouldn't have considered saying no. I called up some of my old friends to say, what do you

00:33:37.460 think? And they said, of course, you have to take that on. President of the United States has asked you,

00:33:41.500 and so on. What happened to the 36 years of civil rights experience? What happened to all of the

00:33:46.000 difference that I purportedly made for civil rights parties in the past, for poor people,

00:33:51.680 underrepresented people? All of that in the public perception goes by the wayside because of the

00:33:56.380 kinds of times, polarized times we're living in. To me, one person who at least speaks the truth on

00:34:02.260 this kind of stuff still is Alan Dershowitz. And he says these people calling themselves liberals now

00:34:06.940 are not liberals from his day. Liberalism back then meant open speech, open debate, not shutting down

00:34:14.400 every opposing point of view, like we see on the universities and all of that. And what's that

00:34:19.340 gotten him? That's gotten him barred from all of his old friends, you know, and so on. I grew up

00:34:24.660 believing in his principle, the constitutional principle, that we have an obligation to represent

00:34:29.800 unpopular people, unpopular causes, but to stand up for our constitution and principles. And that's how

00:34:35.720 I've tried to guide my career. It just doesn't seem to mean anything in the public perception now.

00:34:40.480 That value is fundamental to the American way. This is a battle. This is a war. And it is a war 0.55

00:34:50.920 that was declared by the Marxist Dems. The left of this country means to destroy America and everything

00:34:58.000 it stands for. And David, you're one of the few people standing up for the principles of what this

00:35:05.200 country does stand for. And we thank you for doing so. I'd like to conclude with two thoughts. One is

00:35:14.020 how, what is your next step? Will you appeal straight away?

00:35:20.960 Sure. We have to wait until the sentencing and following the sentencing, we will file a notice

00:35:25.440 of appeal immediately and take it from there, make the legal arguments that we preserved in the district

00:35:30.800 court. And what will, in your judgment, the outcome be? It has to be. I have to believe that it has to

00:35:39.680 be that the conviction will be reversed and this willfulness standard will be set straight. And what

00:35:45.720 I say, you know, all along is every American better hope we win because everybody is at risk. If you can

00:35:52.440 have in this country, someone convicted of a crime without truly acting willfully in the sense that

00:35:58.760 it's always meant. And that means knowing you were doing something wrong or believing you were doing

00:36:03.320 something wrong. We don't, as the Supreme Court has said, we can't have a statute that ensnares the

00:36:08.460 innocent simply by the terms of the statute into having committed, being considered committed a crime

00:36:15.500 by conduct they believe to be completely innocent. David, thanks so much for being with us here today.

00:36:21.780 We appreciate all that you're doing. I'll look forward to other conversations along the way as

00:36:28.800 you prevail. And we do thank you so much for your service. Thank you for having me.

00:36:35.620 David Schoen, God bless you. It is becoming increasingly clear, I believe, to most Americans

00:36:43.240 that we are now a nation at war and the political parties are quite different. The Democrats are

00:36:51.280 waging war and the Republicans are pretending it isn't necessary. That's why they need Donald Trump

00:36:59.440 to lead them. I just have to say this directly and straightforwardly. The January 6th committee

00:37:06.100 is a travesty and it's a blight on America and everything we stand for is a people. The FBI agents

00:37:13.360 and the officials of the FBI and Justice Department, you were once heroes to Americans of all ages.

00:37:19.540 You are now nothing more than tools of the Marxist left, the Democrats who follow them and the deep state

00:37:26.740 of which you are part. David Schoen referred to the council representing the U.S. Army in the famous

00:37:33.600 McCarthy hearings in 1954. The attorney representing the army was Joseph Welch, responding to attacks by

00:37:42.100 McCarthy that ultimately shut down the hearings for good. Welch's words today are powerfully appropriate

00:37:50.340 and relevant to the Democrats and their travesty of justice, the January 6th committee.

00:37:57.460 Joseph Welch said these words directly to Senator McCarthy.

00:38:00.980 You have done enough. Have you no sense of dignity? Think about it and let's ask ourselves why we have

00:38:11.560 no one standing up as Joseph Welch and uttering those very words. Perhaps soon. Thanks everybody

00:38:19.320 for being with us today. Our guest tomorrow is Congresswoman Myra Flores, who just flipped a deep

00:38:25.320 blue district on the border of Texas and Mexico to bright red in a special election. Congresswoman Flores

00:38:32.920 is with us here tomorrow to take up some of the biggest issues and threats facing our border states

00:38:38.920 and in truth, all of our states. Please join us here tomorrow. Till then, God bless you and God bless America.

The Great America Show - July 27, 2022

J6 IS THE MARXIST DEMS’ EFFORT TO DISTRACT VOTERS FROM THE ELECTION THAT THE GOP WILL WIN OVERWHELMINGLY

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript