October 10, 2024 • 31 mins
Elizabeth (Troutman) Mitchell is the reporting fellow for The Daily Signal and co-host of The Daily Signal Podcast.
Please listen in as she shares her insight on Trump's return to Butler.
Please listen in as she shares her insight on Trump's return to Butler.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Warning the following podcast might be too truthful for most liberals.
Listener discretion is therefore advised. Welcome to the Tea Party
Power Hour. My name is Mark Gallar. I'll be your
host today as we discuss Trump's most recent rally in
(00:25):
Butler with Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell, who is the reporting fellow
for The Daily Signal. Elizabeth, Welcome to the show.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Sure we've had a lot of people from the Daily Signal,
Virginia Allen, Tony Kennant, Titler, O'Neill, Mary, Margaret Olan. I
feel like this is becoming a home away from home
for you people, and we welcome you here now. You
recently wrote an article about Trump's return to Butler, and
you had a few takeaway points. First of all, how
(00:56):
much courage did it take for Donald Trump to get
back on that bicycle and ride, I mean, to go
back to the place of the shooting. Took a lot
of courage, it sure did.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
He, as he said many times, was very close to
dying had he not turned his head towards that poster
board about illegal immigration like he did.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
And he mentioned that in.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
His return, saying that we all took a bullet, not
just him for America on that day, and so it
was a very lively crowd, a very large crowd there
to celebrate Trump surviving the first assassination attempt and resiliently
returning to Butler.
Speaker 1 (01:33):
Yeah, and you know what was interesting is the way
the left immediately tried to downplay it. It wasn't really
a bullet. It was a piece of glass from the
teleprompter or a piece of shrapnel. And you know, the
people directly behind Trump, you know, got hit with bullets,
and one of them, mister comparator, unfortunately passed away from
that injury. But the left at first wouldn't even concede
(01:55):
that he was hit by a bullet.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
You're totally right.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
Another interesting thing along those lines is that Pennsylvania actually
closed its voter registration application the night of that rally,
and Butler is a very red area. A lot of
conservatives were expected to come out support Trump and be
really energized by that rally, and so it's kind of
interesting timing that that that the voter rules happened to
(02:19):
be closed on the same night as his return to Butler.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
Yeah, it is interesting timing. And I'll just go out
and say that that's interfering with the election because they
didn't want him to pick up any new registered voters.
And that's all it was. The Left has done a
lot of amazing things with Trump. I think he's probably
the most persecuted and prosecuted politician in American history.
Speaker 2 (02:41):
I think he would say the same himself.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
He kind of alluded to that, saying that they've tried
to slander him, they tried to impeach him, that even
indicted him, and they've tried to throw him off the
ballot and tried to kill him, he said.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
And he said that.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
Despite all these efforts to take him down, he's going
to keep on fighting for the American people.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
That's what he said.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
Butler, Elizabeth, what do you make of the fact that
his security had been so lax? Would you go as
far as to say that the Secret Service or maybe
this administration was cutting back on the number of Secret
Service agents because they really didn't care if President Trump
was safe or not.
Speaker 2 (03:20):
That's an interesting question. I think there definitely was.
Speaker 3 (03:23):
A lack of Secret Service protection at that first rally,
and we can see that the American people were not
happy with his security detail. Considering Kimberly Teetle was removed
after it happened, the Secret Service director at that time, and.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
It seems like they're still investigating.
Speaker 3 (03:38):
We don't have a ton of information about what happened
in Butler in July, but hopefully the president former president
will be safe going.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
Forward, I would hope. So I think they've they've stepped
it up a little bit, probably more because they don't
want to receive criticism than because they care about the
safety of Donald Trump. What did you make of the
security staff being the Secret Service that were on duty
that day? One of them in particular, just didn't look
(04:07):
like a Secret Service agent. I mean, she had a
ton of trouble getting her gun back and her holster,
so then she decided to leave it out, and then
she was pointing the gun indiscriminately at the crowd like
she didn't know what she was doing. And you know,
I always thought of these people as being you know,
super strong, super fit and everything else, and without being mean,
(04:28):
the person did not look the least bit fit. So
I mean, were these DEI hires or I mean, what's
going on with the Secret Service.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
Well, when Kimberly Keetle was being considered for Secret Service director,
and she was the director at the time of the
assassination attempt. She did say that she prioritized hiring more
women Secret Service.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
So I don't know if this woman.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
Was a case of that, but do you know that
was a priority that Chetle stated at the beginning of
her term. I know that Trump has praised a lot
of Secret Service members for their quick response to assassination attempt,
but I think it is a little surprising that they
weren't able to.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Spot the person on the roof, the shooter on the roof.
That's like an oversight there, for sure.
Speaker 1 (05:10):
Sure, well someone did, or several people did, but unfortunately
none of the different agencies there were able to communicate
with each other, which is another bizarre thing. And local
law enforcement said that the Secret Service had turned down
their offer of providing drums, so I really don't know.
They said most of the people there that they weren't
really Secret Service, they were Department of Homeland Security, so
(05:33):
that that might have made a difference as well. So
the first assassination attempt took place, and the left immediately
recognized that it might be some kind of an advantage
for Trump and immediately downplayed it and just sort of
(05:54):
dropped the story. I mean, I have the feeling if
that had been Barack Obama, we'd still be talking about
Butler every day right now. But it was Donald Trump,
so everyone just said nah, no, biggie.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
Yeah. I think that's a very apt comparison.
Speaker 3 (06:11):
It seems like there wasn't a lot of coverage, especially
of the second assassination attempt that got very little mainstream
media coverage, and so it seems like there is a
carefulness of the mainstream media that they don't want to
paint Trump like a martyr or a hero or anything
like that for what he went through in Butler or
the second assassination tempt in mar A Lago.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Yeah. Yeah, I mean, there wasn't a whole lot said
about that either. And of course we're living in a
world where Johnny Depp and Madonna can both fantasize about
killing President Trump, and you know, they may have had
visits from the Secret Service, I believe Madonna did, but
you know, to let people just sit up there and
constantly fantasize about Trump being murdered and to constantly tell
(06:58):
people that he's an existential threat to democracy, I mean
you're putting a target on the guy's back. I mean,
they shouldn't be allowing this.
Speaker 3 (07:07):
Definitely, there was tons of hateful rhetoric towards the former president,
from politicians, celebrities, all sorts of different kinds of people
saying he's a threat to democracy. And it's hard to
see a world in which that wouldn't influence some pretty
extreme people taking those claims about Trump, about how dangerous
(07:27):
he supposedly is, and acting on it.
Speaker 1 (07:30):
Yeah, when you ask democrats on social media, how was
he an existential threat to democracy the first time, they
immediately go to January sixth, where, of course Trump said,
you know, to peacefully and patriotically let your voices be heard.
They keep pointing to a line where he says we
have to fight, like hell, well, I could probably put
(07:51):
together a six hour video montage of every time a
politician employed that type of rhetoric. No one took that
to mean dorm the capital, and frankly, about the time
Trump said that people were already at the Capitol, the
ones who had decided to misbehave. So I just I
don't see where anyone could give a single example of
(08:14):
Trump being an existential threat to democracy. But you tell me,
what are you hearing? As far as how they try
to back up that claim.
Speaker 3 (08:22):
Well, the Daily Signal reported that more than one in
four Democrats actually believe America would be better off if
Trump had been assassinated. And I think that that rhetoric
that we've been talking about that Trump's an existential threat
to democracy definitely influenced people saying that, no.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
Question, no question, and again they can't back it up.
That's one of my favorite things on X is every
time I see a Democrat say, oh, He's an existential
threat to democracy, It's like, well, okay, back that up,
you know. And then they'll say, well, he incited an
insurrection on January. Then I'll tell them, look, man, everybody
(09:02):
on the right owns guns. No one had guns that day.
If there had been a pre planned insurrection, you know,
on the part of Trump supporters, this would be the
United States of MAGA right now. It would have been successful.
Nobody would have shown up without guns that day at
the White House, I mean, I mean just at the Capitol. Rather,
(09:23):
it just would not have happened. And it's so ridiculous
to think, well, they'll say some people had pointed flagpoles.
Oh yeah, that's your number one choice for a weapon
during an insurrection. It's like, we're all going to get
pointed flagpoles and take back this country. So to me,
it's just ridiculous the idea that Trump would be an
existential threat to democracy when we have one party that
(09:46):
wants to tell us what kind of light bulb to use,
whether or not we can have a gas of, and
what kind of car we have to drive. I mean,
it seems like on one side they want to manage
our lives to the nth degree and take away all
our freedoms. But yet they point to the other side,
I say, they're going to take away your freedom, They're
going to take away democracy. So what are your thoughts
on the tactics that the left are using? Is Donald
(10:08):
Trump Trump? Do you think they'll ultimately be successful on
election Day?
Speaker 3 (10:13):
Well, I think that the left has regrouped its tactic
against Trump many times during the time that we've seen
Trump in the public square. I think originally they started
off with talking about Trump a lot in extreme obsession
with him, and that somewhat helped him win in twenty
sixteen because it made him appear as a political outsider,
kind of an underdog, someone who the political establishment doesn't
(10:36):
want you to support.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
And I think that that probably brought him a lot
of support.
Speaker 3 (10:39):
And I think that the mainstream media has tried to
regroup on that and tried not to have so much
coverage of him and do things that can make him
consider himself a victim. But I think we're continuing to
see them slip up and do the same kind of
things again, such as what we saw in the presidential debate,
where the moderators were fact check Trump not bought back.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
Checking Kamala Harris.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
And I think because of that, Trump and his supporters
can say that he didn't lose the debate, it was rigged,
it was three on one, etc. And so I think
that these moderators, these left wing journalists kind of know
that what they're doing when they say all these negative
things about Trump, ultimately kind of helped him, and they
maybe they're trying not to do it, but there's still
people with political persuasions, a lot of them to the
(11:25):
far left, and that caused them to continue attacking Trump
with this type of rhetoric that may have caused assassination attempts.
Speaker 1 (11:32):
What do you think about the left doubling down on
a lot of that rhetoric, a lot of those frankly lies.
For example, they still tell the Trump told people to
inject themselves with Bleach lie. They still tell the losers
and suckers lie about his visit to France, even though
there are twenty people there who said it. Even John Bolton,
he doesn't like Trump, said that loser and sucker line
(11:57):
was never said. There's the Nazis or fine people lie
it just and there's video in two of those cases
to prove that it's not true, with the Bleach thing
and with the Nazis or fine people thing, But even
after seeing the videos, they still just keep telling the lies,
(12:18):
like they're saying that no funding whatsoever has ever been
diverted from FEMA to caring for illegal immigrants, and that's
a lie. I mean, ask Alejandro Majorcus about that. I mean,
they just even when there's video evidence to the contrary,
they will lock down on a lie, double down on it,
and keep telling it for years. I don't understand that.
Speaker 3 (12:43):
I think that something that is definitely at play in
that is that mainstream media is not fact checking the left,
so they're able to make claims such as, like you said,
Trump saying there's good people on both sides talking about Nazis,
or she was not.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
Doing or any of the other things that you mentioned.
Speaker 3 (13:00):
That left wing politicians and members of the media can
say those things and they're not very likely to be
fact checked by mainstream media, and so they can kind
of get away with saying things that are not correct.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
And so I think that definitely is at play in
what you just mentioned.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
And again on the other side, they don't fact check anything.
Kamala Harris said, you know, I worked at McDonald's when
I was in college, and there's no evidence. No one's
come forward to say, yeah, I remember working with her.
No one has come forward to say, oh, yes, I
was the manager of that store. The McDonald's corporation has
not come out and said yes, and our records we
(13:35):
have that now. When Barack Obama said that he scooped
ice cream, he was immediately supported the guy that managed
that local franchise, e me that came forward and said yeah,
I'm you know, Barack worked here, and blah blah blah blah.
I think there was even a picture of him at
one point, you know, scooping ice cream when he worked there,
(13:56):
So right away he has the proof. Okay, he scooped
ice cream, he's one of us, he's a working person.
Where he was with her, there's absolutely no evidence, and
she won't shut up about it. And she also does
this thing about I came from a working class family
and Elizabeth, she tries to make it sound like every morning,
all three of them would put on hard hats, grab
(14:16):
a lunch pail, and go out for the day. You know,
her dad was a professor, her mom was a cancer researcher.
And she goes, oh, well, my mom was a single mom. Yeah,
but she made a ton of money. And when they
lived in Canada, they lived in one of the most
expensive neighborhoods in Canada, and she went to a little richie,
rich girl private school. Yet she's trying to make it
sound like, oh, we were a working class family. My
(14:39):
dad left, you know, we barely made it. Yeah, I mean,
total lie.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (14:46):
I think that's an interesting point for sure, if I
would guess the reason she's doing that is because working
class voters lately have been supporting Trump. If you're in
the DC area where I live, you're going to see
lots of Harris wall signs. But if you go out
a couple hours to the rural parts of Virginia Shinondoa area,
you're seeing Trump signs in every yard. And I think
Harris knows that the you know, the elite establishment is
(15:10):
supporting her, and the rural people, the working class is
more likely to support Trump now they feel more seen
and represented by him, And I think that's probably why
she's trying to identify herself as one of them.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
Yeah, and frankly, for me, it's not working. But then again,
I spend a lot more time looking into this stuff.
I'm not sure what some of the people seeing her
on TV actually think about it. What reminds me of
Obama is that Obama, you know, of course, grew up
in Hawaii, the state where race matters the least. He too,
(15:42):
went to Punahu, a very very expensive private school, one
of the most expensive private schools in America, and then
he jumps over to the contiguous United States, and hey,
I'm just a typical African American with the typical African
American experience. Neither Barack Obama nor Kamala Harris or Kamla
(16:05):
Harris has a claim on the genuine American experience for
African Americans, they just don't. I mean, they were in
another world. They were in a richie, rich kid world.
So I always thought it was laughable that Obama was
trying to portray himself that way, and I think it's
even more ridiculous that Kamala Harris is trying to portray
(16:29):
herself that way. I mean, is there anything I'm missing here?
I mean, have you heard anything about her background that
I haven't that would suggest that she actually came from
a working class family.
Speaker 3 (16:38):
I think a great example of someone who really did
come from working family would be did Events.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
Yeah, I think you know, we have Hillbilly Elgi and a.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
Beautiful story about starting in a very poor area and
becoming going to a great school, working your way up
to the top, becoming very successful. And so if we're
looking for an example of what you just mentioned, that
e Vance would be it.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
Yeah. I mean, why would you even try to compete
with that? I mean, that was such a compelling story.
Even Ron Howard got involved. I mean, it's just had
to tell it to the American people, And I mean
that's probably one of the best examples of someone pulling
themselves up by their own bootstraps that you could want.
And yet here she is with a professor dad and
(17:23):
a cancer researcher mom, and she's trying to, you know,
pretend that they were clipping coupons, I mean, her coupons.
I don't know. I guess politicians will say anything in
an election year. When you look at Kamala, she's been
kind of a chameleon in the sense that she's now
reversed a lot of policies that she had spoken about
(17:47):
in the past. Go over a little bit of that
with my audience. How has she changed and which Kamala
is the real Kamala.
Speaker 3 (17:57):
Well, I think that the original Kamala, not the one
who's currently trying to win the election. I would guess
is the real Kamala, because she went on a show
saying that her views actually have not changed that much,
and I think that so she originally Some of those
flip flop examples would include she said she supports definding
the police, now she doesn't.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
She was a fairly open border.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
Kind of person, and now she is talking about cracking
down on the border crisis. There's many other examples of
flip flops from Kamala.
Speaker 2 (18:27):
Harris and I mean maybe she really has changed her positions.
Speaker 3 (18:30):
It's hard to know for sure, but if she becomes president,
my guest would be that those far left positions of
when she ran for president in twenty twenty will make
it comeback.
Speaker 1 (18:39):
Yeah, that's pretty much what Donald Trump had said about her.
Her original positions are probably her real positions. I mean,
this is a person who wants to give amnesty to
everybody who's against plastic straws. Who she's said now though
she's trying to say, well, I own a the lock,
and as Dana Lash pointed out, that's hysterical. I mean,
(19:01):
as a gun owner, you normally give a little more
detail than that. You know, I've got a Smith and
Wesson forty five, or I have a smith and wantson
bodyguard or Smith and Wisson shield, or I've got, you know,
a glock. At least give the caliber, you know, and
to just sort of generically say I have a glock
(19:22):
kind of to me sounds like somebody that doesn't know
what they're doing. Sorry, I had to sneeze. Somebody that
doesn't know what they're talking about. I mean, someone who
just like she heard it on TV, or she knows
that there's a brand called glock, So she just said that.
I mean, I find it hard to believe that she's
suddenly a gun enthusiast.
Speaker 3 (19:42):
Yeah, I think it's hard to say whether or not
she really owns a gun, but we do know that
she did support mandatory gun buybacks and has made some
pretty anti gun comments in the past that it seems
like now she's trying to walk back.
Speaker 2 (19:54):
To appeal appeal to gun owners.
Speaker 3 (19:57):
But we'll see, I guess going forward what her true
position on guns is.
Speaker 1 (20:02):
Didn't she say not that long ago that if Congress
doesn't do something about certain types of guns within the
first one hundred days, that she's going to initiate executive
orders to take back certain types of guns. And I'm
sure this is what the left incorrectly calls assault weapons.
She's probably talking about AR fifteen's. But it hasn't been
that long since she since she made some kind of
(20:24):
a one hundred day remark. And I tell you what
time in Texas, everybody here owns at least one gun,
if not more. And I just don't see that one
hundred day you're going to give me your rifle back
thing working. I don't see that going well at all.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (20:46):
Another point on that is that she said when she
was San Francisco District Attorney that the government had the
right to go into the houses of gun owners and
search them make sure everything is in order.
Speaker 2 (20:58):
So it was like the Second Amendment.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
Might not be as important to her as she's currently
making it sound like.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
I would agree with that, And you know that is
in place for people that own automatic weapons. I had
a relative that looked into getting an automatic weapon, and
they said that you have to actually provide the government
with the blueprint of your house, show them where the
guns are going to be stored, and you are subjecting
(21:25):
yourself to a search or an inspection, you know, twenty
four to seven three sixty five. So I think that
already exists, and that may be where she got that idea,
but the whole idea that if you own an AR fifteen,
the government can come into your house and search and
make sure everything is as it's supposed to be. I mean,
(21:46):
what does that even mean is as it's supposed to be,
that you haven't turned your semis fully auto. I mean,
I don't know what they're looking for when they come
into your house.
Speaker 3 (21:57):
I don't know either, but it seems like something that
the founders certainly did not have in mind when they
put the Second Amendment into place.
Speaker 1 (22:05):
Yeah. Yeah, So, speaking of an existential threat to democracy, Elizabeth,
do you see Kamala Harris being elected as an existential
threat to democracy?
Speaker 2 (22:18):
Well?
Speaker 3 (22:19):
I think a lot of parents might think so because
of her opinions on gender ideology in schools, her opinions
and Kim Wallace's opinions on parental rights and education. I
think it would depend on the group of people who
you're talking to.
Speaker 2 (22:36):
But she's definitely had some.
Speaker 3 (22:38):
Radical policies both as vice president and as a Senator
and as a district attorney in the state attorney General
that a lot of Americans might be concerned about.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
Now. During that rally, Trump urged Americans to vote to
save the country. I think his base is pretty energized.
I mean, do you think there's going to be a
problem with turnout this time?
Speaker 3 (23:01):
His base was definitely energized at that Butler rally, and
he did urge people to come out and vote and
to support him, saying that he's going to save America.
Speaker 2 (23:09):
I think that we know.
Speaker 3 (23:11):
From twenty sixteen that a lot of Trump voters maybe
had not voted for before, had not voted for Republicans before,
So he definitely energizes a new Republican base in a
unique way. So I think he'll likely have a lot
of voter turn out and we'll see what happens in November.
Speaker 1 (23:28):
Yeah, when you go back to the twenty sixteen election,
a lot of people then said that when they were
voting for Trump in twenty sixteen, that they were voting
for the very first time. And some of these people
were up in age, had no faith in the system.
And then Donald Trump runs and all of a sudden,
I want to be involved, I want to participate him
and he brought a lot of new people to the table.
(23:49):
Elon Musk made an appearance, jumped onto the stage, acting
a little bit goofy, thanks, jumping up, looking kind of
like Tom Cruise in an interview, jumping up and down,
running all over the place. And the left was so
I think frightened by the fact that Elon Musk is
putting his efforts behind Trump that they even went as
far to criticize his lack of a decent vertical leap.
(24:15):
I mean, that's pretty desperate. When you go, ah, he
hardly got off the ground. Well, he's the world's richest man,
not the world's best basketball player. So, but what were
your thoughts on what Elon Musk joining Trump contributes to
the equation?
Speaker 2 (24:29):
Definitely contributes a lot. He is the owner of X,
a billionaire entrepreneur, and a historical Democrat voter.
Speaker 3 (24:37):
So the fact that he has jump ship and is
supporting Trump so much that he is at his rallies
is definitely notable. He supported Barack Obama, he voted for
Biden in twenty twenty, and so the fact that now
he's fully on the Trump train definitely says something about
the change in the base. He talked about saving free
speech in his talk at Butler, and that's thing that
(25:00):
Elon Musk has been really involved with in his management
of Twitter or X. And Musk said that Trump needs
to win to preserve the Constitution, to preserve democracy. And
so I think he had a very energizing speech at
that rally, and it was really interesting to hear him talk.
Speaker 1 (25:15):
Oh, I think so too. And it's just hard to
imagine this guy being the richest man in the world.
I mean, there are Middle Eastern oil shakes that, oh
my God, they've got more oil wells than you can count,
cranking out twenty four to seven three sixty five. And
you know, price of gas is still relatively high, and
(25:40):
these people are just sitting there doing nothing, making millions
and millions every day. But here we are with Elon Musk.
He's even wealthier than those people. So it's just hard
to imagine how successful, you know, Elon Musk is. I
think he dipped down a little bit right after he
bought X, but now he's back as the richest person
(26:00):
in the world. And it certainly can't help to have
someone with those financial resources and that control over public opinion.
I mean, what does he have two hundred million followers
on X? I mean that kind of a voice. I
could see why the left is scared of Elon Musk.
Speaker 2 (26:18):
Definitely, Yeah, for sure.
Speaker 1 (26:21):
What do you think would happen? What do you think
is going to happen? We've touched on a little of this,
but if Kamala Harris does end up winning the presidency,
Trump gave us some warnings that day. What did Trump
have to say about what's going to happen if Kamala
Harris becomes president and Elizabeth what do you think as well.
Speaker 2 (26:42):
Well.
Speaker 3 (26:42):
Trump said that Kamala Harris is a very radical woman
and that she will not be she's not respected by Congress,
not respected by foreign leaders. Elon Musk, along those lines,
said that if Kamala wins, this could be the last election,
and so they're definitely both Trump, Musk and a lot
of the Trump base are seeing this as a very
very high stakes race.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
Of course, the Democrats are also seeing this as a
very high stakes race. So it certainly will have.
Speaker 3 (27:08):
A huge effect on the trajectory of the country going forward.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
Yeah, I think must put a post down on an
X about that. And what he was saying is he's
not suggesting that Kamala Harris is just going to rise
up on day one and say she's a dictator and
whenever gave an election again. But there are so many
illegal immigrants in this country, he said, if she just lealizes,
makes one percent of those people a citizen of the
(27:33):
United States, gives them amnesty within the you know, like
one percent a year. I think he said that eventually,
you know, we're just going to be outvoted to the
point that, yeah, technically will have elections, but we're really
going to become a de facto one party state.
Speaker 2 (27:54):
That could be.
Speaker 3 (27:55):
Trump spoke about Kamala Harris's position on immigration at the rally,
and like you said, he named that as a very
high stakes issue that he and Harris have very different
opinions on. Trump talked about Harris supporting maths amnesty citizenship
for legal immigrants and talked about her losing migrant children
(28:15):
while she was borders. Are more than three hundred thousand
migrant children disappeared, and that is very shocking, very horrible, tragic,
truly in a tragedy to have that happen in the
United States. And so Harris and Trump certainly present very
different visions for immigration in twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
Yeah, and when you look at the three hundred one
thousand missing children thing, that really helps nullify one of
their points that you know, families and children were being
separated at the border. Well, okay, one quick point on
that is, if you commit a crime in America, you
go to jail and you're separated from your family and
(28:55):
your children, you know, you usually unless you're on some
kind of a plan similar to what Denesh Desuzad got
where he went in on the weekends and Otherwise, I
think maybe we're one of those little teather anklets. You know,
you're going to be separated. If I go rob a bank,
I'm going to be separated from my wife and my child.
(29:15):
I mean, there's no question about that. So, first of all,
I think it was kind of a weird point to
begin with. I mean, when you break the law, you're
going to be separated from your family. Secondly, now we
can say, well, speaking of being separated from your family,
what about those three hundred thousand kids that were lost
during the Biden Harris administration? Do they count? Or do
(29:37):
we only worried about the ones that get separated right
at the border. So you know, it's one of those
things where it's like they almost don't even think before
they talk. What did Tim Wall say we can't take
four more years of this?
Speaker 2 (29:52):
Something like that?
Speaker 3 (29:52):
And I think that's really interesting considering who's been in
power for the past.
Speaker 1 (29:56):
Four years exactly. It's like, well, you know, you're maybe
the first thing Tim's gotten wrong, right, we can't take
four more years of this. But I I just I
just find the whole thing really interesting. You mean, they're
not ashamed to do anything. Trump comes out with no
tax on tips. Oh guess who comes up with the
same policy. Not even ashamed. You know. If anything that
(30:20):
shows who the leader is and who the follower is,
she's she's blatantly copying him and doesn't even care. Same
way Biden went around plagiarizing speeches and didn't care, no
problem at all stealing someone else's work or someone else's idea.
But well, you've been very generous with your time today.
Do you want to tell my audience how they can
(30:40):
follow you on the Daily Signal or you know other
ways they can get in touch with you?
Speaker 2 (30:46):
For sure, Thanks so much for having me on.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
You can read my work and my colleagues work at
Daily Signal dot org, and you can keep up with
my work by following me on x at the Liz
Mitchell gotcha.
Speaker 1 (31:00):
Well, we want to thank you for being on the
show today. It was an absolute pleasure. You guys. The
Daily Signal are doing some fantastic work. Consider this your
second home. You guys, anytime you have anything you want
to talk about, feel free to drop by the Tea
Party Power Hour and let us know what's going on,
because seriously, the Daily Signal website is just chock full
(31:22):
of so much information and you learn so much when
you go there, so I would highly encourage my listeners
to go there and check it out, and in particular
take a look at some of the articles that Elizabeth
has written and follow her as well. So anyway, thanks
for being here, enjoyed it, and come back soon.
Speaker 2 (31:42):
Thanks much for having me out with your rest of
your day.
Speaker 1 (31:43):
You too, Elizabeth, Bye bye bye.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
You've been listening to The Tea Party Power Hour with
Mark Gula
Warning the following podcast might be too truthful for most liberals.
Listener discretion is therefore advised. Welcome to the Tea Party
Power Hour. My name is Mark Gallar. I'll be your
host today as we discuss Trump's most recent rally in
(00:25):
Butler with Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell, who is the reporting fellow
for The Daily Signal. Elizabeth, Welcome to the show.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Sure we've had a lot of people from the Daily Signal,
Virginia Allen, Tony Kennant, Titler, O'Neill, Mary, Margaret Olan. I
feel like this is becoming a home away from home
for you people, and we welcome you here now. You
recently wrote an article about Trump's return to Butler, and
you had a few takeaway points. First of all, how
(00:56):
much courage did it take for Donald Trump to get
back on that bicycle and ride, I mean, to go
back to the place of the shooting. Took a lot
of courage, it sure did.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
He, as he said many times, was very close to
dying had he not turned his head towards that poster
board about illegal immigration like he did.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
And he mentioned that in.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
His return, saying that we all took a bullet, not
just him for America on that day, and so it
was a very lively crowd, a very large crowd there
to celebrate Trump surviving the first assassination attempt and resiliently
returning to Butler.
Speaker 1 (01:33):
Yeah, and you know what was interesting is the way
the left immediately tried to downplay it. It wasn't really
a bullet. It was a piece of glass from the
teleprompter or a piece of shrapnel. And you know, the
people directly behind Trump, you know, got hit with bullets,
and one of them, mister comparator, unfortunately passed away from
that injury. But the left at first wouldn't even concede
(01:55):
that he was hit by a bullet.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
You're totally right.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
Another interesting thing along those lines is that Pennsylvania actually
closed its voter registration application the night of that rally,
and Butler is a very red area. A lot of
conservatives were expected to come out support Trump and be
really energized by that rally, and so it's kind of
interesting timing that that that the voter rules happened to
(02:19):
be closed on the same night as his return to Butler.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
Yeah, it is interesting timing. And I'll just go out
and say that that's interfering with the election because they
didn't want him to pick up any new registered voters.
And that's all it was. The Left has done a
lot of amazing things with Trump. I think he's probably
the most persecuted and prosecuted politician in American history.
Speaker 2 (02:41):
I think he would say the same himself.
Speaker 3 (02:42):
He kind of alluded to that, saying that they've tried
to slander him, they tried to impeach him, that even
indicted him, and they've tried to throw him off the
ballot and tried to kill him, he said.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
And he said that.
Speaker 3 (02:54):
Despite all these efforts to take him down, he's going
to keep on fighting for the American people.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
That's what he said.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
Butler, Elizabeth, what do you make of the fact that
his security had been so lax? Would you go as
far as to say that the Secret Service or maybe
this administration was cutting back on the number of Secret
Service agents because they really didn't care if President Trump
was safe or not.
Speaker 2 (03:20):
That's an interesting question. I think there definitely was.
Speaker 3 (03:23):
A lack of Secret Service protection at that first rally,
and we can see that the American people were not
happy with his security detail. Considering Kimberly Teetle was removed
after it happened, the Secret Service director at that time, and.
Speaker 2 (03:37):
It seems like they're still investigating.
Speaker 3 (03:38):
We don't have a ton of information about what happened
in Butler in July, but hopefully the president former president
will be safe going.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
Forward, I would hope. So I think they've they've stepped
it up a little bit, probably more because they don't
want to receive criticism than because they care about the
safety of Donald Trump. What did you make of the
security staff being the Secret Service that were on duty
that day? One of them in particular, just didn't look
(04:07):
like a Secret Service agent. I mean, she had a
ton of trouble getting her gun back and her holster,
so then she decided to leave it out, and then
she was pointing the gun indiscriminately at the crowd like
she didn't know what she was doing. And you know,
I always thought of these people as being you know,
super strong, super fit and everything else, and without being mean,
(04:28):
the person did not look the least bit fit. So
I mean, were these DEI hires or I mean, what's
going on with the Secret Service.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
Well, when Kimberly Keetle was being considered for Secret Service director,
and she was the director at the time of the
assassination attempt. She did say that she prioritized hiring more
women Secret Service.
Speaker 2 (04:48):
So I don't know if this woman.
Speaker 3 (04:50):
Was a case of that, but do you know that
was a priority that Chetle stated at the beginning of
her term. I know that Trump has praised a lot
of Secret Service members for their quick response to assassination attempt,
but I think it is a little surprising that they
weren't able to.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
Spot the person on the roof, the shooter on the roof.
That's like an oversight there, for sure.
Speaker 1 (05:10):
Sure, well someone did, or several people did, but unfortunately
none of the different agencies there were able to communicate
with each other, which is another bizarre thing. And local
law enforcement said that the Secret Service had turned down
their offer of providing drums, so I really don't know.
They said most of the people there that they weren't
really Secret Service, they were Department of Homeland Security, so
(05:33):
that that might have made a difference as well. So
the first assassination attempt took place, and the left immediately
recognized that it might be some kind of an advantage
for Trump and immediately downplayed it and just sort of
(05:54):
dropped the story. I mean, I have the feeling if
that had been Barack Obama, we'd still be talking about
Butler every day right now. But it was Donald Trump,
so everyone just said nah, no, biggie.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
Yeah. I think that's a very apt comparison.
Speaker 3 (06:11):
It seems like there wasn't a lot of coverage, especially
of the second assassination attempt that got very little mainstream
media coverage, and so it seems like there is a
carefulness of the mainstream media that they don't want to
paint Trump like a martyr or a hero or anything
like that for what he went through in Butler or
the second assassination tempt in mar A Lago.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
Yeah. Yeah, I mean, there wasn't a whole lot said
about that either. And of course we're living in a
world where Johnny Depp and Madonna can both fantasize about
killing President Trump, and you know, they may have had
visits from the Secret Service, I believe Madonna did, but
you know, to let people just sit up there and
constantly fantasize about Trump being murdered and to constantly tell
(06:58):
people that he's an existential threat to democracy, I mean
you're putting a target on the guy's back. I mean,
they shouldn't be allowing this.
Speaker 3 (07:07):
Definitely, there was tons of hateful rhetoric towards the former president,
from politicians, celebrities, all sorts of different kinds of people
saying he's a threat to democracy. And it's hard to
see a world in which that wouldn't influence some pretty
extreme people taking those claims about Trump, about how dangerous
(07:27):
he supposedly is, and acting on it.
Speaker 1 (07:30):
Yeah, when you ask democrats on social media, how was
he an existential threat to democracy the first time, they
immediately go to January sixth, where, of course Trump said,
you know, to peacefully and patriotically let your voices be heard.
They keep pointing to a line where he says we
have to fight, like hell, well, I could probably put
(07:51):
together a six hour video montage of every time a
politician employed that type of rhetoric. No one took that
to mean dorm the capital, and frankly, about the time
Trump said that people were already at the Capitol, the
ones who had decided to misbehave. So I just I
don't see where anyone could give a single example of
(08:14):
Trump being an existential threat to democracy. But you tell me,
what are you hearing? As far as how they try
to back up that claim.
Speaker 3 (08:22):
Well, the Daily Signal reported that more than one in
four Democrats actually believe America would be better off if
Trump had been assassinated. And I think that that rhetoric
that we've been talking about that Trump's an existential threat
to democracy definitely influenced people saying that, no.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
Question, no question, and again they can't back it up.
That's one of my favorite things on X is every
time I see a Democrat say, oh, He's an existential
threat to democracy, It's like, well, okay, back that up,
you know. And then they'll say, well, he incited an
insurrection on January. Then I'll tell them, look, man, everybody
(09:02):
on the right owns guns. No one had guns that day.
If there had been a pre planned insurrection, you know,
on the part of Trump supporters, this would be the
United States of MAGA right now. It would have been successful.
Nobody would have shown up without guns that day at
the White House, I mean, I mean just at the Capitol. Rather,
(09:23):
it just would not have happened. And it's so ridiculous
to think, well, they'll say some people had pointed flagpoles.
Oh yeah, that's your number one choice for a weapon
during an insurrection. It's like, we're all going to get
pointed flagpoles and take back this country. So to me,
it's just ridiculous the idea that Trump would be an
existential threat to democracy when we have one party that
(09:46):
wants to tell us what kind of light bulb to use,
whether or not we can have a gas of, and
what kind of car we have to drive. I mean,
it seems like on one side they want to manage
our lives to the nth degree and take away all
our freedoms. But yet they point to the other side,
I say, they're going to take away your freedom, They're
going to take away democracy. So what are your thoughts
on the tactics that the left are using? Is Donald
(10:08):
Trump Trump? Do you think they'll ultimately be successful on
election Day?
Speaker 3 (10:13):
Well, I think that the left has regrouped its tactic
against Trump many times during the time that we've seen
Trump in the public square. I think originally they started
off with talking about Trump a lot in extreme obsession
with him, and that somewhat helped him win in twenty
sixteen because it made him appear as a political outsider,
kind of an underdog, someone who the political establishment doesn't
(10:36):
want you to support.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
And I think that that probably brought him a lot
of support.
Speaker 3 (10:39):
And I think that the mainstream media has tried to
regroup on that and tried not to have so much
coverage of him and do things that can make him
consider himself a victim. But I think we're continuing to
see them slip up and do the same kind of
things again, such as what we saw in the presidential debate,
where the moderators were fact check Trump not bought back.
Speaker 2 (11:01):
Checking Kamala Harris.
Speaker 3 (11:03):
And I think because of that, Trump and his supporters
can say that he didn't lose the debate, it was rigged,
it was three on one, etc. And so I think
that these moderators, these left wing journalists kind of know
that what they're doing when they say all these negative
things about Trump, ultimately kind of helped him, and they
maybe they're trying not to do it, but there's still
people with political persuasions, a lot of them to the
(11:25):
far left, and that caused them to continue attacking Trump
with this type of rhetoric that may have caused assassination attempts.
Speaker 1 (11:32):
What do you think about the left doubling down on
a lot of that rhetoric, a lot of those frankly lies.
For example, they still tell the Trump told people to
inject themselves with Bleach lie. They still tell the losers
and suckers lie about his visit to France, even though
there are twenty people there who said it. Even John Bolton,
he doesn't like Trump, said that loser and sucker line
(11:57):
was never said. There's the Nazis or fine people lie
it just and there's video in two of those cases
to prove that it's not true, with the Bleach thing
and with the Nazis or fine people thing, But even
after seeing the videos, they still just keep telling the lies,
(12:18):
like they're saying that no funding whatsoever has ever been
diverted from FEMA to caring for illegal immigrants, and that's
a lie. I mean, ask Alejandro Majorcus about that. I mean,
they just even when there's video evidence to the contrary,
they will lock down on a lie, double down on it,
and keep telling it for years. I don't understand that.
Speaker 3 (12:43):
I think that something that is definitely at play in
that is that mainstream media is not fact checking the left,
so they're able to make claims such as, like you said,
Trump saying there's good people on both sides talking about Nazis,
or she was not.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
Doing or any of the other things that you mentioned.
Speaker 3 (13:00):
That left wing politicians and members of the media can
say those things and they're not very likely to be
fact checked by mainstream media, and so they can kind
of get away with saying things that are not correct.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
And so I think that definitely is at play in
what you just mentioned.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
And again on the other side, they don't fact check anything.
Kamala Harris said, you know, I worked at McDonald's when
I was in college, and there's no evidence. No one's
come forward to say, yeah, I remember working with her.
No one has come forward to say, oh, yes, I
was the manager of that store. The McDonald's corporation has
not come out and said yes, and our records we
(13:35):
have that now. When Barack Obama said that he scooped
ice cream, he was immediately supported the guy that managed
that local franchise, e me that came forward and said yeah,
I'm you know, Barack worked here, and blah blah blah blah.
I think there was even a picture of him at
one point, you know, scooping ice cream when he worked there,
(13:56):
So right away he has the proof. Okay, he scooped
ice cream, he's one of us, he's a working person.
Where he was with her, there's absolutely no evidence, and
she won't shut up about it. And she also does
this thing about I came from a working class family
and Elizabeth, she tries to make it sound like every morning,
all three of them would put on hard hats, grab
(14:16):
a lunch pail, and go out for the day. You know,
her dad was a professor, her mom was a cancer researcher.
And she goes, oh, well, my mom was a single mom. Yeah,
but she made a ton of money. And when they
lived in Canada, they lived in one of the most
expensive neighborhoods in Canada, and she went to a little richie,
rich girl private school. Yet she's trying to make it
sound like, oh, we were a working class family. My
(14:39):
dad left, you know, we barely made it. Yeah, I mean,
total lie.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (14:46):
I think that's an interesting point for sure, if I
would guess the reason she's doing that is because working
class voters lately have been supporting Trump. If you're in
the DC area where I live, you're going to see
lots of Harris wall signs. But if you go out
a couple hours to the rural parts of Virginia Shinondoa area,
you're seeing Trump signs in every yard. And I think
Harris knows that the you know, the elite establishment is
(15:10):
supporting her, and the rural people, the working class is
more likely to support Trump now they feel more seen
and represented by him, And I think that's probably why
she's trying to identify herself as one of them.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
Yeah, and frankly, for me, it's not working. But then again,
I spend a lot more time looking into this stuff.
I'm not sure what some of the people seeing her
on TV actually think about it. What reminds me of
Obama is that Obama, you know, of course, grew up
in Hawaii, the state where race matters the least. He too,
(15:42):
went to Punahu, a very very expensive private school, one
of the most expensive private schools in America, and then
he jumps over to the contiguous United States, and hey,
I'm just a typical African American with the typical African
American experience. Neither Barack Obama nor Kamala Harris or Kamla
(16:05):
Harris has a claim on the genuine American experience for
African Americans, they just don't. I mean, they were in
another world. They were in a richie, rich kid world.
So I always thought it was laughable that Obama was
trying to portray himself that way, and I think it's
even more ridiculous that Kamala Harris is trying to portray
(16:29):
herself that way. I mean, is there anything I'm missing here?
I mean, have you heard anything about her background that
I haven't that would suggest that she actually came from
a working class family.
Speaker 3 (16:38):
I think a great example of someone who really did
come from working family would be did Events.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
Yeah, I think you know, we have Hillbilly Elgi and a.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
Beautiful story about starting in a very poor area and
becoming going to a great school, working your way up
to the top, becoming very successful. And so if we're
looking for an example of what you just mentioned, that
e Vance would be it.
Speaker 1 (17:01):
Yeah. I mean, why would you even try to compete
with that? I mean, that was such a compelling story.
Even Ron Howard got involved. I mean, it's just had
to tell it to the American people, And I mean
that's probably one of the best examples of someone pulling
themselves up by their own bootstraps that you could want.
And yet here she is with a professor dad and
(17:23):
a cancer researcher mom, and she's trying to, you know,
pretend that they were clipping coupons, I mean, her coupons.
I don't know. I guess politicians will say anything in
an election year. When you look at Kamala, she's been
kind of a chameleon in the sense that she's now
reversed a lot of policies that she had spoken about
(17:47):
in the past. Go over a little bit of that
with my audience. How has she changed and which Kamala
is the real Kamala.
Speaker 3 (17:57):
Well, I think that the original Kamala, not the one
who's currently trying to win the election. I would guess
is the real Kamala, because she went on a show
saying that her views actually have not changed that much,
and I think that so she originally Some of those
flip flop examples would include she said she supports definding
the police, now she doesn't.
Speaker 2 (18:15):
She was a fairly open border.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
Kind of person, and now she is talking about cracking
down on the border crisis. There's many other examples of
flip flops from Kamala.
Speaker 2 (18:27):
Harris and I mean maybe she really has changed her positions.
Speaker 3 (18:30):
It's hard to know for sure, but if she becomes president,
my guest would be that those far left positions of
when she ran for president in twenty twenty will make
it comeback.
Speaker 1 (18:39):
Yeah, that's pretty much what Donald Trump had said about her.
Her original positions are probably her real positions. I mean,
this is a person who wants to give amnesty to
everybody who's against plastic straws. Who she's said now though
she's trying to say, well, I own a the lock,
and as Dana Lash pointed out, that's hysterical. I mean,
(19:01):
as a gun owner, you normally give a little more
detail than that. You know, I've got a Smith and
Wesson forty five, or I have a smith and wantson
bodyguard or Smith and Wisson shield, or I've got, you know,
a glock. At least give the caliber, you know, and
to just sort of generically say I have a glock
(19:22):
kind of to me sounds like somebody that doesn't know
what they're doing. Sorry, I had to sneeze. Somebody that
doesn't know what they're talking about. I mean, someone who
just like she heard it on TV, or she knows
that there's a brand called glock, So she just said that.
I mean, I find it hard to believe that she's
suddenly a gun enthusiast.
Speaker 3 (19:42):
Yeah, I think it's hard to say whether or not
she really owns a gun, but we do know that
she did support mandatory gun buybacks and has made some
pretty anti gun comments in the past that it seems
like now she's trying to walk back.
Speaker 2 (19:54):
To appeal appeal to gun owners.
Speaker 3 (19:57):
But we'll see, I guess going forward what her true
position on guns is.
Speaker 1 (20:02):
Didn't she say not that long ago that if Congress
doesn't do something about certain types of guns within the
first one hundred days, that she's going to initiate executive
orders to take back certain types of guns. And I'm
sure this is what the left incorrectly calls assault weapons.
She's probably talking about AR fifteen's. But it hasn't been
that long since she since she made some kind of
(20:24):
a one hundred day remark. And I tell you what
time in Texas, everybody here owns at least one gun,
if not more. And I just don't see that one
hundred day you're going to give me your rifle back
thing working. I don't see that going well at all.
Speaker 2 (20:46):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (20:46):
Another point on that is that she said when she
was San Francisco District Attorney that the government had the
right to go into the houses of gun owners and
search them make sure everything is in order.
Speaker 2 (20:58):
So it was like the Second Amendment.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
Might not be as important to her as she's currently
making it sound like.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
I would agree with that, And you know that is
in place for people that own automatic weapons. I had
a relative that looked into getting an automatic weapon, and
they said that you have to actually provide the government
with the blueprint of your house, show them where the
guns are going to be stored, and you are subjecting
(21:25):
yourself to a search or an inspection, you know, twenty
four to seven three sixty five. So I think that
already exists, and that may be where she got that idea,
but the whole idea that if you own an AR fifteen,
the government can come into your house and search and
make sure everything is as it's supposed to be. I mean,
(21:46):
what does that even mean is as it's supposed to be,
that you haven't turned your semis fully auto. I mean,
I don't know what they're looking for when they come
into your house.
Speaker 3 (21:57):
I don't know either, but it seems like something that
the founders certainly did not have in mind when they
put the Second Amendment into place.
Speaker 1 (22:05):
Yeah. Yeah, So, speaking of an existential threat to democracy, Elizabeth,
do you see Kamala Harris being elected as an existential
threat to democracy?
Speaker 2 (22:18):
Well?
Speaker 3 (22:19):
I think a lot of parents might think so because
of her opinions on gender ideology in schools, her opinions
and Kim Wallace's opinions on parental rights and education. I
think it would depend on the group of people who
you're talking to.
Speaker 2 (22:36):
But she's definitely had some.
Speaker 3 (22:38):
Radical policies both as vice president and as a Senator
and as a district attorney in the state attorney General
that a lot of Americans might be concerned about.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
Now. During that rally, Trump urged Americans to vote to
save the country. I think his base is pretty energized.
I mean, do you think there's going to be a
problem with turnout this time?
Speaker 3 (23:01):
His base was definitely energized at that Butler rally, and
he did urge people to come out and vote and
to support him, saying that he's going to save America.
Speaker 2 (23:09):
I think that we know.
Speaker 3 (23:11):
From twenty sixteen that a lot of Trump voters maybe
had not voted for before, had not voted for Republicans before,
So he definitely energizes a new Republican base in a
unique way. So I think he'll likely have a lot
of voter turn out and we'll see what happens in November.
Speaker 1 (23:28):
Yeah, when you go back to the twenty sixteen election,
a lot of people then said that when they were
voting for Trump in twenty sixteen, that they were voting
for the very first time. And some of these people
were up in age, had no faith in the system.
And then Donald Trump runs and all of a sudden,
I want to be involved, I want to participate him
and he brought a lot of new people to the table.
(23:49):
Elon Musk made an appearance, jumped onto the stage, acting
a little bit goofy, thanks, jumping up, looking kind of
like Tom Cruise in an interview, jumping up and down,
running all over the place. And the left was so
I think frightened by the fact that Elon Musk is
putting his efforts behind Trump that they even went as
far to criticize his lack of a decent vertical leap.
(24:15):
I mean, that's pretty desperate. When you go, ah, he
hardly got off the ground. Well, he's the world's richest man,
not the world's best basketball player. So, but what were
your thoughts on what Elon Musk joining Trump contributes to
the equation?
Speaker 2 (24:29):
Definitely contributes a lot. He is the owner of X,
a billionaire entrepreneur, and a historical Democrat voter.
Speaker 3 (24:37):
So the fact that he has jump ship and is
supporting Trump so much that he is at his rallies
is definitely notable. He supported Barack Obama, he voted for
Biden in twenty twenty, and so the fact that now
he's fully on the Trump train definitely says something about
the change in the base. He talked about saving free
speech in his talk at Butler, and that's thing that
(25:00):
Elon Musk has been really involved with in his management
of Twitter or X. And Musk said that Trump needs
to win to preserve the Constitution, to preserve democracy. And
so I think he had a very energizing speech at
that rally, and it was really interesting to hear him talk.
Speaker 1 (25:15):
Oh, I think so too. And it's just hard to
imagine this guy being the richest man in the world.
I mean, there are Middle Eastern oil shakes that, oh
my God, they've got more oil wells than you can count,
cranking out twenty four to seven three sixty five. And
you know, price of gas is still relatively high, and
(25:40):
these people are just sitting there doing nothing, making millions
and millions every day. But here we are with Elon Musk.
He's even wealthier than those people. So it's just hard
to imagine how successful, you know, Elon Musk is. I
think he dipped down a little bit right after he
bought X, but now he's back as the richest person
(26:00):
in the world. And it certainly can't help to have
someone with those financial resources and that control over public opinion.
I mean, what does he have two hundred million followers
on X? I mean that kind of a voice. I
could see why the left is scared of Elon Musk.
Speaker 2 (26:18):
Definitely, Yeah, for sure.
Speaker 1 (26:21):
What do you think would happen? What do you think
is going to happen? We've touched on a little of this,
but if Kamala Harris does end up winning the presidency,
Trump gave us some warnings that day. What did Trump
have to say about what's going to happen if Kamala
Harris becomes president and Elizabeth what do you think as well.
Speaker 2 (26:42):
Well.
Speaker 3 (26:42):
Trump said that Kamala Harris is a very radical woman
and that she will not be she's not respected by Congress,
not respected by foreign leaders. Elon Musk, along those lines,
said that if Kamala wins, this could be the last election,
and so they're definitely both Trump, Musk and a lot
of the Trump base are seeing this as a very
very high stakes race.
Speaker 2 (27:03):
Of course, the Democrats are also seeing this as a
very high stakes race. So it certainly will have.
Speaker 3 (27:08):
A huge effect on the trajectory of the country going forward.
Speaker 1 (27:12):
Yeah, I think must put a post down on an
X about that. And what he was saying is he's
not suggesting that Kamala Harris is just going to rise
up on day one and say she's a dictator and
whenever gave an election again. But there are so many
illegal immigrants in this country, he said, if she just lealizes,
makes one percent of those people a citizen of the
(27:33):
United States, gives them amnesty within the you know, like
one percent a year. I think he said that eventually,
you know, we're just going to be outvoted to the
point that, yeah, technically will have elections, but we're really
going to become a de facto one party state.
Speaker 2 (27:54):
That could be.
Speaker 3 (27:55):
Trump spoke about Kamala Harris's position on immigration at the rally,
and like you said, he named that as a very
high stakes issue that he and Harris have very different
opinions on. Trump talked about Harris supporting maths amnesty citizenship
for legal immigrants and talked about her losing migrant children
(28:15):
while she was borders. Are more than three hundred thousand
migrant children disappeared, and that is very shocking, very horrible, tragic,
truly in a tragedy to have that happen in the
United States. And so Harris and Trump certainly present very
different visions for immigration in twenty twenty four.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
Yeah, and when you look at the three hundred one
thousand missing children thing, that really helps nullify one of
their points that you know, families and children were being
separated at the border. Well, okay, one quick point on
that is, if you commit a crime in America, you
go to jail and you're separated from your family and
(28:55):
your children, you know, you usually unless you're on some
kind of a plan similar to what Denesh Desuzad got
where he went in on the weekends and Otherwise, I
think maybe we're one of those little teather anklets. You know,
you're going to be separated. If I go rob a bank,
I'm going to be separated from my wife and my child.
(29:15):
I mean, there's no question about that. So, first of all,
I think it was kind of a weird point to
begin with. I mean, when you break the law, you're
going to be separated from your family. Secondly, now we
can say, well, speaking of being separated from your family,
what about those three hundred thousand kids that were lost
during the Biden Harris administration? Do they count? Or do
(29:37):
we only worried about the ones that get separated right
at the border. So you know, it's one of those
things where it's like they almost don't even think before
they talk. What did Tim Wall say we can't take
four more years of this?
Speaker 2 (29:52):
Something like that?
Speaker 3 (29:52):
And I think that's really interesting considering who's been in
power for the past.
Speaker 1 (29:56):
Four years exactly. It's like, well, you know, you're maybe
the first thing Tim's gotten wrong, right, we can't take
four more years of this. But I I just I
just find the whole thing really interesting. You mean, they're
not ashamed to do anything. Trump comes out with no
tax on tips. Oh guess who comes up with the
same policy. Not even ashamed. You know. If anything that
(30:20):
shows who the leader is and who the follower is,
she's she's blatantly copying him and doesn't even care. Same
way Biden went around plagiarizing speeches and didn't care, no
problem at all stealing someone else's work or someone else's idea.
But well, you've been very generous with your time today.
Do you want to tell my audience how they can
(30:40):
follow you on the Daily Signal or you know other
ways they can get in touch with you?
Speaker 2 (30:46):
For sure, Thanks so much for having me on.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
You can read my work and my colleagues work at
Daily Signal dot org, and you can keep up with
my work by following me on x at the Liz
Mitchell gotcha.
Speaker 1 (31:00):
Well, we want to thank you for being on the
show today. It was an absolute pleasure. You guys. The
Daily Signal are doing some fantastic work. Consider this your
second home. You guys, anytime you have anything you want
to talk about, feel free to drop by the Tea
Party Power Hour and let us know what's going on,
because seriously, the Daily Signal website is just chock full
(31:22):
of so much information and you learn so much when
you go there, so I would highly encourage my listeners
to go there and check it out, and in particular
take a look at some of the articles that Elizabeth
has written and follow her as well. So anyway, thanks
for being here, enjoyed it, and come back soon.
Speaker 2 (31:42):
Thanks much for having me out with your rest of
your day.
Speaker 1 (31:43):
You too, Elizabeth, Bye bye bye.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
You've been listening to The Tea Party Power Hour with
Mark Gula
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.