🚨GOP gets STUNNED as DEMS TAKE CONTROL of Hearings!!

WELL, YOU'RE BACK ON THE GODDAMN FRONT. PAGE NOW WITH two innocent people gunned. down in broad daylight. >> That right there was Democratic Congress. member magazer. He was not holding back. And yesterday we saw Democrats at the. various hearings before the United. States House of Representatives and the. United States Senate really punching. back hard now that Congress has finally. returned back into session. Let me show. you what went down. And I want to share. this with you as Democratic Senator Jack.

Reid was cross-examining Supreme Court. justices who testified before the United. States Senate yesterday. And here, Senator Reid reads these Supreme Court. justices who were testifying in order to. try to get more money for the Supreme. Court for their own personal safety. Senator Reid read Donald Trump's words. and was saying, "You do realize like. this is one of the main reasons why your. court and why so many judges across the. country are facing severe threats.".

Here, play this clip. >> Just want to pick up on a point that. Senator Collins made about some. outrageous statements that are being. made by public figures. And I can't. think of a more prominent one, the. president of the United States. though. on February 20th following your decision. on tariffs he said disgrace to our. nation fools lap dogs for the rhinos and. radical left democrats and very. unpatriotic and disloyal to the. constitution and he was describing the. Supreme Court on March 15. He posted our.

country was unnecessarily ransacked by. the United States Supreme Court which. has become little more than a weaponized. and an unjust political organization. Now, I don't agree with anything he. said, but. if there's anyone in the country that. commands more attention, uh, it's the. president. And I think that behavior is. very dangerous to the court and to our. whole system. And I just want that to be. part of the record. Justice Kagan, you ask. If I could, Senator, [clears throat] wherever these.

come from, uh, and, um, you know, whatever political figure says them, whatever party that political figure is. a member of, um, it it it uh, these. statements are are are really unhelpful. They're dangerous um, in terms of. individual justice's security and um, and they're they're not appropriate in. the way to treat a coordinated branch of. government. I think that Chief Justice.

had a year-end statement last year where. he talked about this issue and he talked. about like criticism is fair game. I. mean, go for it. You know, life in the. big city is that you're subject to all. kinds of criticism. Um, but intimidation. is a different thing entirely. And when. political figures of any stripe are. trying to intimidate judges and justices. to uh do things that they like rather. than uh the things that they don't. Um.

that that's where we really have crossed. the line. >> I think you're exactly right, your. honor, and you said it well. uh you you. wanted a moment to talk about the. process where the $28 million request. was made through appropriation channels. and then 30 million appeared suddenly. through private channels. Please. >> Yeah. Uh, I think Justice Barrett um. referenced this a bit and and first off. we apologize if we um did anything sort. of procedurally improper, but the the.

reason for the additional ask, if you. will, um was that be is that we were. suddenly confronted with uh the loss of. US Marshall protection. And we we. thought that we were going to have US. Marshall protection at our residences. for another 6 months and all of a sudden. learned from the Justice Department that. that was going to be impossible. And so. we had to do some sort of quick footwork. to try to get additional monies in order.

to cover that six-month gap. And as I. say, if we um did that in a way that was. procedurally less than optimal, um my. apologies. Well, uh, your security is. more important than procedural nicities. So, um, there's no issue here. Uh, next, I want to share with you in the House of. Representatives, Democratic Congress. member Pokean cross-examining the Small. Business Administration administrator.

Kelly Leler. Now, Kelly Leler is a. billionaire. She actually hates small. business. And that's usually the. criteria for Donald Trump picking. somebody at a specific position. He. picks an attorney general who hates the. law. He picks a health secretary who. hates health. He picks a energy. secretary who uh is corrupt as hell and. just represents the interest of oil. companies. He picks a health secretary. who hates health. He picks an. environmental protection uh agency head. who hates the environment. I can. continue to go on. He hates he picks a.

defense department secretary, you know, who couldn't even run a nonprofit for. the troops. So, let me share with you as. Congress member Pocon grills Kelly Leler. here. Play this clip. Who pays tariffs? >> Uh, Congressman, according to Harvard. and the Richmond Fed, 80% of the Paris. tariffs are paid by the foreign. countries where they originate. That's. why the United States was on its heels. for 50 years. >> That would be like me saying if you. said, "What color is my hair?" I would. say, "I have long flowing red hair.".

Right? Because it's complete BS, right? That that's not true. Who pays tariffs. are these small businesses who've been. impacted 42,600 on average last. September and then they pass the co. costs on to consumers. So before I sold. my business when Donald Trump started. his tariffs last year, I started getting. increases on aluminum sheets. I did. engravings. One of the parts that I did. is specialty printing. And but I also. got increases by the way on Americanmade. walnut plaques because they decided they. could also make money while they're.

doing the increased costs on tariffs. They could pass on some other costs. So. this that's part of the fun of being a. small business, not a really really. really rich big business, but when. you're a small business, that's the kind. of stuff you have to juggle. So I did. see the impact in invoices every single. day. I I would see those coming in and. we pay those extra cost, yard sign wires. for politicians. We made political signs. for folks. We saw the steel costs. increase because of the tariff. So, I'm. just saying uh for the average small.

business, there's been a big impact. And. the fact that you're talking to. businesses and not hearing this, I'll. tell you I just bluntly not as even a. member of Congress as a guy who's a. small business who ran a businessto. business. venture. I heard it all the time and I. still hear it all the time and I sit. down and meet with my small businesses. in my community. So, what can I say to. them when I say the SBA administrator. says foreign countries are paying. tariffs. you just are imagining it or. you're lying because they're not.

imagining it and they're not lying. >> Well, Congressman, with all due respect, I'm going to set aside the reductive. comments you made about small business. success because every small business is. >> You're saying you'll take my time back. You're saying a small a real small. venture doesn't matter if the. bankruptcies are 50%. You only care. about big business. Is that the new. policy of the SBA? >> Unless Donald Trump and his sons can. invest in, it's not something you care. about. Is that what you're saying? repair company. You voted against the. working family tax cut where that.

repairman where that auto mechanic is. not. >> Oh, please, if you want to go there, I. need five more minutes. You have no clue. Give me five more. minutes and I'll ask you questions about. that. >> Yeah. Well, this administration is. fighting for the American worker. >> Think about small business. Now, I do. want to show you that full speech by. Congress member Magaziner because it was. very impressive. Here, let's play this. clip. >> Mr. Speaker, in the last week, ICE. agents shot and killed two more innocent. people in broad daylight.

In both cases, the people they shot and. killed weren't even the people they were. looking for. In both cases, they shot. and killed people who were on their way. to work in front of their families. In Houston last week, Lorenzo Salgado. Ajo, a construction worker who has lived. in the United States for 35 years, a. husband with three children, no criminal. record. He was driving to work with the.

lunch that his wife had packed for him. and his brother riding in the passenger. seat when ICE agents rammed his vehicle. and shot him because they thought he was. someone else. And then yesterday in. Maine, Joan Sebastian Guerrero, 26 years. old, legally authorized to work in the. United States, legally authorized, shot. and killed by ICE agents who thought he. was somebody else in front of his wife.

and his three-year-old daughter who. screamed wearing her bluey pajamas while. she watched her father bleed to death. How many more innocent people have to be. killed in broad daylight? How many more. children have to watch their parents. shot to death by masked men too cowardly. to show their faces? When will this. madness stop? When he took his position, Secretary.

Mullen said that his goal was to get the. department off the front page of the. news. WELL, YOU'RE BACK ON THE GODDAMN. FRONT PAGE NOW with two innocent people. gunned down in broad daylight. Nothing. has changed. Nothing has changed. It is. total chaos. And you know what? In both of these. shootings in Texas and in Maine, none of. the agents were wearing their body. cameras. Congress gave them tens of.

millions of dollars for body cameras and. none of them were wearing them. Where's. the accountability? And you want to know why we won't vote? Why I won't vote to give funding to this. lawless, reckless, dangerous agency? Mark my words, we are not going to be. silent about what is happening. We are. not going to forget until there is. justice. >> And next, I want to show you what went.

down when you had the chairman of the. Federal Reserve, Kevin Walsh, testifying. and Democratic Congress member Gregory. Miller Meeks. Gregory Miller Meeks was. cross-examining Kevin Walsh and he got. Kevin Walsh to say on the record that I. am going to put the law over Donald. Trump, that I won't listen to Donald. Trump's threats. Let me show you this. good cross-examination by Congressman. Meeks here. play this clip. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and. congratulations, Mr. Chairman. Um, your.

just jump into this because in your. testimony, you talked about the Federal. Reserve's, and I quote, rightful. independence in the conduct of monetary. policy, which is good. Now, as the. chairman uh. Hill has indicated, I also do some. foreign affairs work and I'm very. concerned about what's taking place um. in the state of Hamus uh and rising cost. of gas because we know that when those. prices up go up at the pump that higher.

transportation and energy cost and they. work their way through the economy uh. generally making groceries uh higher and. household goods etc. So depends upon. handling it. So Mike, if the. administration's handling of the. conflict with Iran contributes to. another inflationary shock, uh, will you. make the decision you believe is in the. best interest of the American people and. the American economy in that rightful. independent stance? >> Uh, Congressman, that is always our. commitment to make the best decision we.

can consistent with the remitt and our. understanding of the world. And as I. said to the chairman of the outsot, we'll deliver price stability. So, and. that's, you know, still based upon what. we've seen from the president thus far. Now, I I just want to be clear, make. sure that I got to be clear on this, that if the president publicly crushes. you to pursue a different course than. the one you believe is in the economic. that you believe the economic data. supports, will you follow the.

president's wishes or follow the data? >> Uh, my commitment to you is to follow. the law and follow the data. follow our. very best judgment. >> And that's even if he publicly. criticizes you for doing it. If you. decide this is the way to go, this is. where the data shades and he publicly. criticizes you and tells you how. disappointed he's in you and all of. that, will you still do what the data. tells you to do?

>> I I I will, Congressman. >> You're ready for that? [laughter]. I I'm ready to follow the law and I'm. ready for the Fed to deliver on the. expansive remmit that you gave us. I'll. make only one other note. We have a wide. lens. We're interested in what's. happening in the war. We're interested. in what's happening in military. conflicts around. We have to take that. all in, but then we have to shut the. door and and make our very best. decision. That's what we're going to do. in a couple of weeks, and that's what.

we'll do uh in the remainder of my. tenure. Here's something most people aren't told. about their credit score. It's not just. whether you pay your credit cards, it's. when you pay them. I didn't know this. Most people don't realize that either. But Smart Credit's data experts. understand how credit bureaus operate. So, they created something called the. best pay down date built around how. credit reporting actually works. So. instead of guessing, you get. personalized strategy that shows you. what to do and when to do it to help you.

maximize your score. I wish I knew about. this sooner. I really do. That matters. because better credit can mean lower. payments and more money in your pocket. And this is where it gets interesting. You can see your full credit picture in. one place. Your score, what's affecting. it, and if something needs attention, you can take care of it right there. That's huge. So before you apply for. anything, a car, apartment, refinance, it makes sense to start with. SmartCredit. Go to smartcredit.com/midus.

and try it for just $1. You may be. surprised to see how many points. Smartcredit estimates that you can gain. That's smartcredit.com/idas. Results vary. Cancel anytime. Going back to the Leler cross exam now. for a moment. Let me share with you as. Congress member Stenny Hoyer. cross-examined Kelly Leler right here. Let's play this clip. Have you received.

any directions from OM at any time uh. during the course of your administration. at the SBA to not disperse funding that. has been appropriated? >> Well, we're working closely uh both. internally and externally. So we work. with OM, we work with our internal. political and career colleagues to. ensure that the funds are going out as. directed, as intended uh by Congress and. uh that they that they meet the law and.

that they meet the executive orders. And. so we have uh continued to look at uh. meeting all those objectives and making. sure that the programs I think small. businesses would be interested to know. that some of the programs that were. lined up for funding were things like. the B institute for human development. which uh supports illegal aliens uh in. Guatemala and. >> excuse me madam minister I have limited. time that question was pretty simple. which I don't think you've answered and.

that is have Have you been directed at. any point in time since you have been. the administrator of the SBA by OM and. Mr. vote, not necessarily him. personally, but OM. >> uh to not expend money that had been. appropriated by Congress. >> I have been directed to follow the law. and in doing so, I'm following uh the. white the White House executive orders. I'm working internally and we're making. sure that everything that is that you.

have directed to get out gets out. But. we are not going to blindly write blank. checks like the last administration did. to the Chinese Mutual Aid Society. >> Let me explain my time. >> because my time is short. Uh you didn't. answer the question. I didn't ask you. whether you have done things that are. prudent to do. I asked you have you been. directed by either Mr. Vote directly or. OM not to expend funds that were. appropriated by the Congress of the.

United States. you're avoiding. That's. an either yes or no question. >> I think I've been very clear that we are. following all requirements to get. >> No, that's not very clear. >> And I I do not work directly on grant. dispersements. And I'll be happy to have. my team follow up with you to clarify, but the all of the funding that we've. committed to getting out. We are getting. out. Let me be clear. The Biden. administration did not get their money. out. 300. >> more cross-examination here about Leler. closing uh SBA offices in blue cities.

and blue states and not in red states. and red cities totally politicizing it. Let's play this clip now. With all due. respect, you're closing up cities around. the country. Is that is in terms of your. reorganization to which the chairman. referred? >> Is that accurate? >> Uh that's inaccurate. >> Okay. What is accurate? When I came in, we had 132 offices. I think people would. be shocked to know that we had 132. offices, 29 of which had zero or one.

employee in them. >> Okay. Are you closing offices? >> Yes, we absolutely are. >> Can you name me an office that you are. closing that is in a blue city or blue. district? >> One, we don't classify them by blue. city. >> Can you name one? >> We we are making several. President said. he did consider uh the politics. >> No, we're we're changing areas. >> Can you name one, Madam Administrator? >> Uh I can name several.

>> I I can I can tell you we have had to. move out. Los Angeles, Portland, New. York, Chicago, Atlanta. >> No, that were closed. >> Can you name me one that that is. scheduled to be closed that is not in a. blue district? Yeah, I'm sure I can. I'll be a I'll be. happy to get that district uh or. >> city. We don't target them by blue or. red. We just understand, but it would be. Is there anyone working in that office? Let me give you an We had an office for.

four years that had no employees working. in it. We didn't even have access. We. key. >> Matter of fact, it was closed if you had. no people working in it. >> We were paying the taxpayers were paying. for it. The taxpayers are now saving $32. million. I'm. >> administrator. With all due respect, I've asked you two direct questions. You. have not answered either one of them. That's regrettable. I will send you some. questions in writing. I would hope you. would answer them. Thank you very much. >> Then we heard from Congresswoman Delaro.

Let me share with you her. cross-examination right here. Let's play. it. >> I I I just see the process does seem to. favor and these are not my words. I can. quote you, Judge Judge Eaton. I mean, that's what I I I wish to say this to. you. if you could get to us a rundown of. were the refunds, who was getting those. refunds, the amount of the refunds and. their category is a large business, small business or whatever it is, who. are the companies getting the trade. refunds so that you can dispel what is.

public knowledge about these efforts. which you don't seem to know about. So. the process seems to favor large. companies with in-house customs experts. outside trade council while smaller. business often lack the resources. I I. want to ask you does SBA share that. concern? I'm afraid I'm going to get the. same answer about the thriving small. businesses. Have SBA conducted any. assessment of whether small businesses. are disproportionately struggling to. access tariff refunds compared to larger. firms? Are you doing an assessment of.

that? It's yes or no. >> No, ma'am. You're not doing an. assessment of what's happening to small. business. >> Will you commit indry? Will you commit. to working with CBP to provide this. committee with a report identifying how. many small businesses have successfully. received refunds and what are the. barriers that remain? >> I will commit to continuing to advancing. the interest of small business. >> No, no. I I this is CBP to provide this. committee with a report. Can you get us. a report? >> We're frequently asked to deliver.

reports. These reports are not wet. My. staff will be happy to meet with your. staff. >> I wonder we This committee needs a. report of what's happening. >> I can tell you what's happening on the. ground with small businesses faces. do not have access to the same legal. resources as Fortune 500 companies. >> Let me be clear. This isn't a question. of whether or not someone supports or. opposes tariffs. It's about ensuring. that the small businesses that you. represent and the manufacturers in. Connecticut are treated fairly. Federal. government owes them money. They.

shouldn't have to jump through hoops to. get it back. It is that simple. Mr. Chairman, I'm requested a report. I hope. the committee believes that we should. get a report and understand what is. happening with the tariff refunds for. large businesses and small businesses. I. yield back. >> I stand by your. >> Next, I want to share with you uh. Congresswoman Velasquez cross-examining. chairman of the Federal Reserve Kevin. Walsh. You can hear this for yourself. Let's play this clip. would like to.

start with a straightforward simple. question. Uh, do you work for Donald. Trump? >> Yes or no? >> If if I'm permitted to say we're an. independent central bank, we're honored. to be independent. Our independence came. from you. >> Okay, that's enough. Thank you. What. steps would you take if the president or. others in the administration target you. or your fellow governors because he.

doesn't like how many of them are voting. on interest rate policy? >> So I it's not my it's not my intuition. to engage in hypotheticals, but I'll. tell you this. Um the Supreme Court said. >> that's an easy way out. >> The Supreme Court said that the Federal. Reserve and the conduct of monetary. policy is independent. the extent there. were questions about it, the the courts. answered those questions. >> So, what would you do? >> Uh, I would continue to do my job. >> Okay, good. Chair WH, do you agree that.

current monetary policy exists in an. extremely polarized and politicized. environment? Um, outside the the four the four um uh. walls of the Federal Reserve, there's no. doubt a lot of politics, but my goal. inside the central bank is for there to. be no politics. The extent there's. politics there, we're going to get rid. of them. Well, [clears throat]. I along with many on my side will say.

that the attempted firings of a sitting. Fed governor and Fed chair in the. central bank's 111year. history is quite the politicization and. polarization of the Fed. Sher Walsh, at. your nomination hearing a few months. ago, you said and I state, I am. committed to ensuring that the conduct. of monetary policy remains strictly. independent. You just said that. Are you.

still committed to conducting. independent monetary policy today? >> Absolutely. Given the current mistrust. of government and the political. environment surrounding your. appointment, the decision to limit. communications and offload fed. objectives to clandestine task forces. with no clear transparency calls your. motivations into question. Can you. commit today to institute an expla.

explanatory framework that details the. reasoning of the Fed's actions following. policy changes? >> Yeah, I'm I'm here today uh Congressman. to do just that. And I think I've. demonstrated in my first six or seven. weeks in office a commitment to. independence and a commitment to reform. Uh those two are of are of of common. common importance and I'm going to. deliver on both of them. I'm glad to. hear that. >> Thank you. >> And then let me share with you Senator.

Van Holland's cross-examination. of these Supreme Court justices, Justice. Kagan and Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Here, let's play this clip. On a on a. related sort of question of public. confidence, I want to ask you about. prediction markets because prediction. markets have faced very little federal. oversight. They're largely self. regulating. We've already seen insider. trading by government officials in other. branches and in the military. Uh Supreme. Court justices and their staff have.

access to similar information. They're. not immune from this trend. Here are. some of the event contracts that are. currently being offered on on Kashi. Who. will be the next Supreme Court justice? Will Trump be held liable for January 6. in any court? Will the independence of. the judiciary be weakened during Trump's. term? Now, clearly members of the Senate. and Senate staff could have information. that could be helpful to them in playing.

the prediction markets. The Senate. actually is now adopted as a matter of. Senate rules of prohibition on doing. that. So my question to you is will the. court do the same both for justices and. for the staff of the Supreme Court? that's already covered. >> My understanding is it's already. covered. >> It's already covered because there's a. prohibition on um using information that. you know within the court um to make. financial gain and so. >> and not just for justices but for all.

employees of the court. >> Okay. So it's your view that the current. language of the rules already prohibits. every member of the court staff and. obviously the members of the court. itself from engaging in prediction. markets. I mean, I think this is an. incredibly important area. So, if your. charge to us is go back and look for any. loopholes, we'll willingly take on. >> Yeah, I would I would suggest you you. >> we don't want loopholes. Senator Ben, this this is super important. >> I I appreciate that. Well, there's. legislation that's been I think just.

introduced in the House. So, I think. there may be a feeling that the current. language may not be airtight. So, if you. could go back and and look at that, I'd. appreciate it. >> Well, powerful stuff indeed. Let me know. what you think. That's what went down. yesterday. Hit subscribe. Let's get to 7. million subscribers. And thanks for. watching everybody. Thanks for watching. Be sure to add the Midas Touch podcast. [music] on Apple Podcast, Spotify, or. wherever you get your podcast for new. updates every single day.

>> [music].