December 5, 2025 • 35 mins
In this episode, Tudor sits down with former Congressman Louie Gohmert for a revealing conversation about the Biden administration’s political surveillance and the troubling expansion of government power. Gohmert details how grand jury subpoenas have been weaponized in the January 6th investigation, raising serious concerns about privacy, constitutional rights, and the growing reach of the deep state. They discuss the role of big tech in modern monitoring, the urgency of political accountability, and why grassroots activism is essential to protect future generations from the creep of Marxism and government overreach. The Tudor Dixon Podcast is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network. For more visit TudorDixonPodcast.com
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast. I am here with
former congressmen from Texas Louis Gomert, who is out there
telling the world what happened behind the scenes. It sounds
like it's worse than Watergate. We have had our congressmen
and women spied on by the Biden administration. Congressman Gomert,
thank you so much for joining me.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Today, Tutor, thanks so much for having me.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
So I'm reading through what exactly happened. We've talked about
this a few times on the show, but there hasn't
been anybody that really has the detail obviously that you
have because you were one of the people that was
spied on by Jack Smith.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Right, that's right, that's right.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
And initially, you know, there was information that came out
that some of the senators had been spot on. They
had gotten their information for a few days. And then
there was some information that Jim Jordan was spied on
because the Judiciary Committee had been trying to find out
(01:02):
exactly whether or not he was.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
They had got his information.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
And then I got a call from the investigators with
Grass Leaves and the Grass Lease Committee and they were saying, hey,
we got documents that show they were coming after your
records and hundreds of others, a lot of members of Congress,
a lot of Republican groups that they were coming after,
(01:30):
and they were doing it with grand jury subpoenas tutor.
Speaker 2 (01:35):
That means they didn't.
Speaker 3 (01:36):
Necessarily have to have probable cause at all. And having
been a former prosecutor and a felony judge in Texas
before I came to Congress, I know a lot about
grand juries. I handle granjuries, and it's easy for an
unethical prosecutor to abuse that process. And that's exactly what
(02:00):
I believe you had here with Jack Smith in this
Arctic frost project.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
He had.
Speaker 3 (02:08):
Now, the Fourth Amendment assures that there's a protection from
inappropriate searches and seizures, that you can't do that without
having probable cause that a crime was committed, and this
person committed probably committed a crime, and that you have
(02:30):
to describe with particularity exactly what you're looking for.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
There was none of that, because.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
Let's go back a little bit for people who don't
understand what this was. This is the investigation into January sixth.
Is that correct?
Speaker 3 (02:46):
Well, it turns out it wasn't just into January sixth,
they were getting. They were getting records well before January six,
well after January six and we're trying It's a great
question too, because we're trying to get the scope of
just how much of the records they were scooping up.
(03:10):
This is more of an effort to just try to
find something anything more along the lines of what Stalin
talked about. You show me the man, as he said,
and basically, I'll make up a crime to beIN on him.
And that's what happened with President Trump, and it appears
(03:30):
that's what they were doing with hundreds of the rest
of us. It wasn't just combined to trying to research January.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
Sixth, but that's what they presented to the Grand jury, correct.
I mean, they brought these people in and they said
this is critical because we were looking at whether or
not they were trying to overturn an election. Do you
believe that they lied to the grand jury to get
these records and then they went way past what they
said they were going to do because.
Speaker 2 (03:59):
Of the scope of what they requested.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
I'm willing to bet that they came in with reams
of paper with names and information and had somebody say, look,
all of these people we believe had some role in
some way, and we just need you to sign off
on these so that we can go get all of
(04:25):
the information about who they were talking to and you know,
what they were doing, where they were, We can get location,
we get all.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
This kind of information. We don't actually know the full
extent of what they got.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
And so then you get a grand jury form and
to sign off on that. They didn't have time to
go through and talk about each individual in those documents.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
I don't believe they did that for a minute.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
How many people are there.
Speaker 3 (04:58):
On reams of paper with all these names on him
and then they go They did go before a judge.
We know that because they got an order from the
judge saying, hey, all these people, all these entities were
requesting the records from You can't tell these people that
(05:20):
you're giving up these records because we think they will
flee the country, or they will destroy evidence, or they
will intimidate witnesses like Jim Jordan Mey, Ted Cruz. We're
gonna flee the country. Really, that's just so outrageous what
(05:42):
they did. And for a federal judge to sign an
order like that, and knowing that there was no probable
cause whatsoever ever shown. This is really just the epitome
of a constitutional crisis right here.
Speaker 1 (06:00):
How do they so to walk me through the process,
How do they choose the grand jury? How do they
get this even started? How do they get to the
point where it seems acceptable behind the scenes or in
the Department of Justice that this is what's happening.
Speaker 3 (06:16):
Oh, that's a great question when it comes to the
selection of the grand jury. This is in the district
of Columbia, and we know ninety five percent of the
voters they're voted for somebody besides Trump, and they could
It's very easy to manipulate the system to have made
(06:39):
sure that you had a grand jury that every one
of them hated President Trump. That would have been very
easy and probably is most likely. And so that's what
you're looking at. We're not talking about fair, fairness, equity, justice.
We're talking about people that hated Trump and hated the
(07:01):
people that supported a good question. So, but a judge
should have said, wait a minute, you're not just looking
at individuals. There's not just the Fourth Amendment search and
seizure issue here. You're also talking about members of Congress
(07:23):
and the Senate. There is another privilege on top of
just the normal Fourth Amendment, and that is the congressional privilege.
Because of the separation of powers, there's a congressional privilege.
We have people contact us constituents that give us private
(07:44):
information that the executive branch has no right to ever
see any of. And then there's also whistleblowers and Jim
Jordan and I back at this time, we were talking
about FBI agent who were contacting us, and we're saying
there are people in the DOJ that are suborning perjury.
(08:08):
They're demanding that we sign affidavits that we know or
lies just so they can get warrants. Wow, what a
chilling effect when they find out that the FBI the
DOJ are grabbing our records without our knowledge so they
can see who's been calling us.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
That stuff is never supposed to.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Be in the hands of the FBI, the DOJ, the
executive branch. And that goes back to a case of
William Jefferson in two thousand and six, who was convicted
appropriately of selling access to his office. He got bribes,
found ninety thousand dollars of cold heart cash and his
(08:54):
freezer that he got paid and they got a search
want to search his home sounded like very appropriate, and
somebody who'd signed search warrants sound like they had plenty
of proble costs, and it sounded like they had plenty
of problem costs to search his office. But for the
history of Congress, if there was a search warrant to
(09:16):
search a member of Congress's office or a center's office,
you went to House counsel and said, we have a
warrant to collect these things from that office. And the
DOJ would not get to go in and gather all
the material. You would have this third party House Council
go in. Those attorneys would grab all the material. They
(09:37):
would go through and determine what was privileged like whistleblowers information.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
They would keep that.
Speaker 3 (09:44):
Separate, and they would make sure that only the material
that was not privileged and that fit the warrant went
to the DOJ. And Mueller was the FBI director back then,
and he wanted to stick to Congress, so he not
only got that warrant and ran it without telling House
(10:07):
counsel and took all that information. When it was appealed,
the DC Circuit Court of Appeals said, no, you can't
do that. You can't go sorting through this information and
then give back what you decide is privileged.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
That it doesn't work that way.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
You've got to have a third party outside the executive branch.
And so all of these things were violated in this
Arctic Frost's operation by Jack Frost Smith, and so they
didn't care, nor did federal Judge Boseburg care at all.
And so all of these people need to be held accountable,
(10:52):
all of Jack, Jack Smith, all his people, and Boseburg.
They all need to be held accountable for trying to
take down a political party. And thank goodness that really
literally thank god that Donald Trump won. Because it didn't,
(11:13):
we would be losing a political party and the one
that was headed toward Marxism would be the one taken over.
Speaker 1 (11:21):
But I think that we have to look at this
from an even broader standpoint. This is the new age
of technology where all of your records are easily accessible
on your cell phone. I mean you talk about what
happened in two thousand and six, I mean think about
before cell phones. For this to happen somebody, this would
(11:43):
mean the DOJ would go break into someone's office without
permission and take everything all their mail everything, so it's
the same exact thing. They don't have permission to truly
take all these phone records. I think one of the
things that I found most interesting in your op ed
was that you say that Verizon turned everything over, and
(12:05):
AT and T was like, this doesn't seem like we
can do this.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
Yeah, no, isn't that true? Yeah, AT and T and
and the others are going, wait a minute, we're talking
about members of Congress and all here. We think you
don't need a subpoena. You really need a warrant. And
this needs to be fought out in court. They need
to be notified. They need a chance to come in
and question whether or not you have probable cause. This
(12:33):
isn't something you just come in and grab. This is
serious stuff. They saw that this was a very serious issue,
and you point out so correctly.
Speaker 1 (12:45):
To let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next
on a Tutor Dixon podcast. What happens now? I mean,
for those of you who had Verizon, who've had your
personal phone record, it's gone through and that's something that
it's you know, you can't put that genie back in
(13:06):
the bottle. I mean that toothpaste is out of the tube.
So who has that information, what's happening with that information,
and what do you do now to go after Jack Smith?
I see that he was subpoenaed by Jim Jordan. I
think that's a good start. But what do you see
in that process?
Speaker 3 (13:21):
Yeah, well, normally, if somebody is going to be prosecuted,
you don't call them as a witness very first thing.
If they're going to be investigated.
Speaker 2 (13:33):
The way you build a case is you.
Speaker 3 (13:35):
Talk to the people around them, the people that were
working for them, and you build a case and you
get up to that person. If you're wanting soundbites, you
bring that person in and question them. And that's what
we've done traditionally in Congress, and it drove me crazy
because we'd call them in, we'd have a hearing, we'd
(13:57):
get sound bites, whether it was Hillary Clinton, Lois Learner
taking the fifth that kind of thing, and yeah, made
for good theater and whatnot, but nobody was ever held accountable.
But we've got to do more than that. We have
got to have cases made. And actually Tom Fitten's Judicial
(14:20):
Watch Sean Donagun is helping me. We're digging, we're trying
to find out what all has happened to all this information,
and we intend to take action in the courts and
pursue these people. But hopefully we will have enough to
(14:41):
get the DOJ to pursue people for the malicious actions
they took that I believe will end up being criminal
and violating criminal statutes. And that's the only way it's
ever going to stop. We've seen the breaches like this
(15:01):
of criminal code going back years and nobody has ever
been held accountable. And the more you let people get
away with it without holding them accountable, then the worse
it has gotten over the years. So Congress just has
seen pretty feckless. And I can tell you, Tutor, that
(15:22):
since Newton Gingridge's first term as a speaker, we haven't
had a Republican speaker willing to take strong action to
hold people accountable.
Speaker 2 (15:35):
Bayinner, Ryan, you know.
Speaker 3 (15:38):
They wanted soundbites, but they didn't want to take any action.
We voted to hold Eric Holder in contempt, but they
were scared to death to do anything beyond that. Just
give us the sound bites from hearings, but nothing happened.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
And why I mean they put Bannon in jail, they
put Navarro in jail, I mean, this is not it's
very one sided. Why are we so generous? I mean,
you're write about the sound bites. I won't forget Hillary
Clinton with her What difference at this point does it
make on Benghazi? You know, these were soundbites that potentially
(16:14):
potentially that affected her campaign, But there were people who
lost their lives. These are things that people need to
be held accountable for. And you look at the alternative.
I mean, Donald Trump went through all of these court
cases that were phony court cases, and they tried to
rob and blind of all of his money. They tried
(16:36):
to put him in prison. But the people who are
truly committing the crimes, I mean, even the people who
were spying on him before he was elected in twenty sixteen,
have never paid any price for that none.
Speaker 3 (16:48):
And unfortunately, the DOJ whited until the last minute on
limitations to do anything about Komi. It still remains to
be seen whether those charges were hold up, if they
did it appropriately.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
But we've got we've.
Speaker 3 (17:05):
Got some time on the people Jack Smith and all
of those that tried to destroy an entire political party
and make it a one party country, and that party
mainly moving Marxist. So uh. But things have. We can
no longer allow people who have violated the law trying
(17:27):
to destroy another party to.
Speaker 2 (17:30):
Get away with it. They there have got to.
Speaker 3 (17:32):
Be consequences, and you get it, obviously, but we've got
to have leaders in the House and Senate that get
it and understand how serious this is.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
I think this is my frustration with this younger generation
that is waffling on whether or not they want to
be in Congress and retiring early and all of this. Like,
you know, it's not what I thought it was. I
can't have the impact that I thought I could. But
this is not something that happens overnight. Republicans need to
take back a bigger majority. You can't do anything when
(18:06):
you have a two person majority or a one person majority.
You've got to get back into the position where you
have the ability to bring the country back to what
it was supposed to be, I mean less. In Tennessee
this week, we almost lost an election where we thought
we were going to lose an election to a radical
And when I say radical, I mean someone who openly
(18:28):
said she hated the district that she wanted to serve.
And yet look at the number of people that came
out to vote for her. And this is what we're fighting.
We're fighting against the guy in Virginia who says he
wants to see his opponent's children dead gets elected. Mom, Donnie,
who says that he wants to put prostitutes on the
street gets elected. You've got the person in Seattle gets elected.
(18:51):
You say, Marxist. Absolutely, we are headed that direction. And
yet I just don't see us waking up to the
to really the effort we need to put in to
preserve and protect and punish what has gone on.
Speaker 2 (19:07):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:07):
Well, one of the most frustrating things I heard during
my eighteen years in Congress as a Christian was other
Christians in Congress when I was trying to get them
fired up. Come on, we've got to do something here.
We can't let this go so literally, just chill, just
calm down. God's in control, and that would so frustrate me.
(19:30):
And there's a preacher in Denton that I heard had
the perfect response, and that is just because God's in
control doesn't mean he wants you to lean on your
shovel and pray for a whole You know, God's given
everybody tools and he expects you to, yeah, pray, but
pray while you're using the tools he gave us. And
(19:52):
when you're in Congress, you've got tools to use. And
let me tell you, tutor, Even people that are reluctant
to do things that they may be uneasy about, well,
we may be going out on a limb.
Speaker 2 (20:07):
On this or that.
Speaker 3 (20:09):
It's to save the country for Heaven's sake. But nothing
helps better than having a thousand phone calls lighten up
a congressman's phones. And they got to be from the
district because they make sure. Wow, people in my district
said they'll never vote for me again unless I step
(20:30):
up and make sure this happens. Tons of emails from
within the district saying you better step up and make
sure that you pursue this. Those kind of things actually
do make a difference. When when people in the district
got so mad that they took those steps, then we
(20:51):
actually got some action done by people, and you had
congress members willing to say debate or look, I know
I was going to go this way, but my constituents
are so mad if I don't go, if we don't
do something here, I'm not going to get re elected.
So I really need to be doing something.
Speaker 1 (21:13):
Maybe that's the activism we need because we are they
have on the left, they have done a great job
activating people, getting people involved. I mean, you know, we
see I'll tell you a few months ago, we went
to an event on the east side of Michigan and
they had a little protest there. They were protesting me
speaking there, and you know, people laughed, Oh, this was
(21:36):
a protest of ten people, hahaha. And we made note.
This is this is them keeping people involved. Doesn't matter
if it's ten people. They've talked about it, they've promoted it.
They're keeping people involved. This is this is the grassroots
part that the left gets, the community organizing. The Barack
Obama promoted so heavily that the left gets that the
(21:58):
right is not get. And that comment you made about
trust in God, you didn't get there. You didn't get
to be in Congress because you're great if you believe
that God puts you there and you are the hands
and feet and he is expecting you to work. I mean,
the Garden of Eden wasn't a place to relax. They
had to keep it up.
Speaker 4 (22:18):
Yeah, even before the fall from Yes, yes, I gave
him a job. You tend the garden you've got a
job to do. But let me tell you though, you know,
I'm a senior fellow David Horwitz Freedom Center. And David
was a friend. He was so brilliant, but he was
one of the top communist leaders in the country back
(22:42):
in the late sixties early seventies. And I asked him
one time, and we lost him this year. What a
great loss.
Speaker 3 (22:49):
And Charlie Kirk, by the way, did a great tribute
to him at the small little memorial we had and
then and in fact, that's why I met Charlie first time.
We became friends, and David had him come in and
Charlie said, he introduced me to all these big donors
and said, we got to help this young guy because
he's going to do great things. And that helped him
(23:11):
get a s eagg to go with turning point. So
it's amazing how lady these are. But David, I said,
you know, David, back when you were a communist leaders,
you guys were planning riots and protests at the sixty
eight Democrat convention that was going to nominate Hubert Humphrey
(23:35):
that may have been the most liberal national president candidate
to that point. And the Republicans were nominating Richard Nixon.
I mean, he had been anti communist before he became
vice president. Why were you going after Humphrey? And he said, well,
you got to remember our motto of the communist leaders
(23:55):
behind the scenes then is the same that they have now,
and that is the worse the better. The more chaos
we can help create, the better it is, the closer
we are to having our Marxist takeover. And he said,
so Humphrey helped us out because he supported the war
in Vietnam, So that helped us get people out to
(24:16):
protests the convention. But we were also concerned if Humphrey,
as liberal as he was, got elected president, it might
be harder to get people out rioting during his presidency.
And we figured if Nixon was elected president, it'd be
a lot easier to get people rioting all through his presidency.
(24:37):
So these guys are playing the long game, they're thinking ahead,
they're wanting to create chaos, and our people are just
have been sitting back too long and letting. And by
the way, when the riots and the bombs and the
murder and all mayhem didn't work, what did they do.
(24:58):
They went to universities, They tenure and started teaching future
teachers to teach children that Marxism was a great thing.
Socialism is a great thing. And now we've had generations
come to voters and now they're voters and they think
socialism is a beautiful thing.
Speaker 1 (25:17):
Oh yeah. We just talked to somebody who said that
young teachers are increasingly coming out of universities today and
they are saying, I've been told I am a political
tool and that my job is to go into the
schools and be a political tool. Think about that. We
look at the country today. We are robbing our kids
of a future and that is what is so sad
(25:39):
to me. And I don't think and I don't blame
these teachers. I think that they have been in the
system where they're told this is your goal, but instead
these kids are not They're not getting to learn to read,
they're not getting to learn to do math, and those
are years these kids never get back. That's the thing
that is so tragic to me is that we have
a loud, this cancer to infiltrate our country to a
(26:04):
point where it has robbed kids of their future. And
in turn, then that chaos eventually causes a downfall, and
that's when Marxism can creep in and communism can creep in.
Speaker 2 (26:16):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (26:17):
And one of the things that still motivates me tutor
is between my sophomore and junior year in college, I
got shoved in. I wouldn't have applied on my own,
but the head of the student center at Texas A
and M pushed me into this exchange program. I've had
two years of brush and pushed me into this exchange program.
(26:40):
Spent the summer on the exchange program in the Soviet
Union when it was the real Soviet Union, and I
saw it. I saw communism, socialism, Marxism, whatever you want
call it. I don't want it, and I don't want
it for my kids. I don't want it to hear
in the United States. But it is. And I've had
(27:03):
really wonderful people, young people say, but you know, socialism
sounds kind of like a Christian idea, you know, shar
and share a like I'm going you have to have
such a totalitarian government that can take from those that
are producing and give to themselves.
Speaker 2 (27:22):
And that's what you have. Yeah, you have.
Speaker 3 (27:25):
Everybody equal in misery and then all of these at
the top. It is a miserable thing. And by the way,
of course, Stalin Communism is historically killed more people, many
times more people than Hitler ever did. Stalin killed many
(27:49):
times more than Hitler did. Maw killed many times more
than Stalin did.
Speaker 2 (27:55):
It is a brutal, brutal form of government.
Speaker 3 (27:58):
And thank goodness, thank god, really that David Horowitz came
to see, wait, what am I doing this? This is
so wrong, this is not a good system, this communism stuff,
and he turned a corner and became one of the
greatest advocates for a freedom and for free enterprise in America.
(28:21):
And he spent the rest of his life doing that.
Speaker 1 (28:24):
But when we look at what happened with Jack Smith
and the behind the scenes of investigating and really stealing
the information of a different branch of government, and that's
the separate branches of government is what makes America so strong.
And to think that that was compromised and so willingly compromised,
(28:45):
it has to be compromised by multiple people. It's not
like one person who went rogue. We already have this
in that the deep state and the deep state is
a serious issue that people laughed at Donald Trump the
first time when he said, no, we're getting rid of
the deep state. But I mean, good, great, look at
what we've seen.
Speaker 3 (29:01):
Now, Yeah, it was much deeper than even he thought.
Speaker 2 (29:05):
Yeah, and it really kind.
Speaker 3 (29:07):
Of overwhelming that first term. And there's still a lot there.
I'm telling you, Tutor, there's still a lot of deep
shake there, and it's still working behind the scenes. And
I'm telling you, if they get the majority back, it's
going to make its presence known in more impeachment proceedings.
But we can't let that happen. We can't let that happen,
(29:32):
and I appreciate your efforts in trying to avoid that.
Speaker 1 (29:35):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon Podcast. People need to understand, before I
was involved in the political world, which was not that
many years ago, this is not politics. Was not my life.
It was not what I thought about all the time.
It was not like I was, oh, this is a
(29:56):
midterm year, not that many people are going to come out.
People who are not as in gauged as you and I.
They need to be activated. And that's why it is
so important to get out there and talk to people
about voting, making sure that we are just as on
the scene as the Democrats. Because this is going to
be a critical election year and we cannot let Donald
Trump have his last two years as president rob from him.
Speaker 3 (30:20):
Yeah, well it'll be robbed from the people because yeah,
spend them having to answer to impeachment after impeachment and
destroying any chance of getting the government back on track.
And so, yeah, this is so important important, and the
DOJ can't sit on this. Hopefully. Oh and by the way,
(30:44):
the it's really hopefully more legacy of David Horowitz. He
did a book any name names of the biggest communist
professors in America, a big, big book called the Professors.
And so Daniel Greenfield said, Louie, we need We're going
(31:06):
to do a project and you you kind of inspired
it about the judges. We're going to have a judicial
accountability project. We're going to do files dot CA. I
want to call it put together on all the judges
that are activists, that are acting unethically, that they're violating
(31:28):
their good behavior.
Speaker 2 (31:30):
Because you know, Article three, Section one says.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
They only get to be judges during their good behavior.
It doesn't say they have to commit a crime, high crime, misdemeanor.
It says they only sit during their good behavior. And
I know, we've never impeached the judge before for bad
behavior unless it was a crime. But I think it's
time to shart impeaching judges for bad behavior when they
(31:55):
don't recuse themselves, because the law says they shot all
disqualify themselves if their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Well,
Boseburg shouldn't be sitting on any case that involves Trump
or anybody that is part of the Trump administration or
(32:16):
supported Trump. This guy is so biased, he's so angry
at people that a Trump and others that support him.
He shouldn't be allowed near that, and I think it's
time to impeach him over it. But these are things
that need to be taken up, and the David Warwiz
Freedom Center will be putting that together and present it
(32:37):
to the Freedom I'm sorry the judiciary committees of the
House and Senate, and hopefully they will do something and
not just be content to say, well in this interesting,
because we've got to check put a check on the
judicial system, and that's it.
Speaker 2 (33:00):
Just want found note. I love Justice Scalia and I
miss him. Uh.
Speaker 3 (33:08):
I had a group coming from my hometown Towler Senior
Citizens to Washington.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
I asked him anything I can do for you.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
Way there, They said, yeah, we'd like to meet Justice Scalia.
I'm going that's a big ask, that really busy. And
I called over and yeah, I mean when they set
up a room and so Scalia comes in, they're all
sitting there and he leans against the tables said, okay,
cousin Gomer said you want to meet me here I am.
If you want to meet me, you must have questions.
(33:35):
And they were all just taking them back well you know,
and he said, come on, you want to meet me,
you must have questions. And one of them finally said,
would you say we're the freest country in the world
because we have the best bill of rights? And Scalia said,
oh gosh, no, no, the sovi Union that are a
better bill of rights than we have. Now, we're the
freest nation in the world because our founders did not
(33:57):
trust government, so they tried to but as many impediments
in the way of making laws preventing government from getting
in our private business. That's why I we're free. They
didn't trust government. And he went through all the impediments
they tried to put in the way of government getting
involved in people's private business. It was really a beautiful thing.
(34:20):
But that's what I come back to Ascalia saying, No,
we've been freest because our founders did not trust government.
Speaker 1 (34:30):
I think that's why. That's what we grew up knowing
and understanding, and that's what young people are missing today.
I mean last night I was over at my mom's
house and she said, I look at what's happening, and
I just think it's time for me to be gone,
because this is not the world I lived in. But
once the boomers are gone, who's going to protect the country.
(34:52):
And I said, okay, first of all, no, and secondly,
we are like, this is why we're here. We're not
letting this happen. We're going to continue to fight. And
that's why those people that you talk to in Congress,
they needed to get off their duffs and make sure
they were still in the fight. And I appreciate everything
you did. I remember talking to you when you were
(35:12):
in Congress and how hard you were fighting. You were
one of the few, and we appreciate that. And I
love that you are still fighting. I love that you're
still out there. I read what you wrote and I
was so impressed with it. You are always you are
a great mentor and a great fighter. So Congressman Louis Gomert,
thank you so much.
Speaker 3 (35:29):
Thank you, Tutor, You're so kind, and thank you for
just being on top of everything.
Speaker 2 (35:36):
You really are. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1 (35:38):
Well, I appreciate it. Thank you, and thank you all
for listening to the Tutor Dixon Podcast as always. You
can get it on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or
wherever you get your podcasts, and watch the whole thing
on Rumble or YouTube at Tutor Dixon. Join us next
time and have a blesseding
Welcome to the Tutor Dixon Podcast. I am here with
former congressmen from Texas Louis Gomert, who is out there
telling the world what happened behind the scenes. It sounds
like it's worse than Watergate. We have had our congressmen
and women spied on by the Biden administration. Congressman Gomert,
thank you so much for joining me.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Today, Tutor, thanks so much for having me.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
So I'm reading through what exactly happened. We've talked about
this a few times on the show, but there hasn't
been anybody that really has the detail obviously that you
have because you were one of the people that was
spied on by Jack Smith.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Right, that's right, that's right.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
And initially, you know, there was information that came out
that some of the senators had been spot on. They
had gotten their information for a few days. And then
there was some information that Jim Jordan was spied on
because the Judiciary Committee had been trying to find out
(01:02):
exactly whether or not he was.
Speaker 2 (01:04):
They had got his information.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
And then I got a call from the investigators with
Grass Leaves and the Grass Lease Committee and they were saying, hey,
we got documents that show they were coming after your
records and hundreds of others, a lot of members of Congress,
a lot of Republican groups that they were coming after,
(01:30):
and they were doing it with grand jury subpoenas tutor.
Speaker 2 (01:35):
That means they didn't.
Speaker 3 (01:36):
Necessarily have to have probable cause at all. And having
been a former prosecutor and a felony judge in Texas
before I came to Congress, I know a lot about
grand juries. I handle granjuries, and it's easy for an
unethical prosecutor to abuse that process. And that's exactly what
(02:00):
I believe you had here with Jack Smith in this
Arctic frost project.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
He had.
Speaker 3 (02:08):
Now, the Fourth Amendment assures that there's a protection from
inappropriate searches and seizures, that you can't do that without
having probable cause that a crime was committed, and this
person committed probably committed a crime, and that you have
(02:30):
to describe with particularity exactly what you're looking for.
Speaker 2 (02:35):
There was none of that, because.
Speaker 1 (02:38):
Let's go back a little bit for people who don't
understand what this was. This is the investigation into January sixth.
Is that correct?
Speaker 3 (02:46):
Well, it turns out it wasn't just into January sixth,
they were getting. They were getting records well before January six,
well after January six and we're trying It's a great
question too, because we're trying to get the scope of
just how much of the records they were scooping up.
(03:10):
This is more of an effort to just try to
find something anything more along the lines of what Stalin
talked about. You show me the man, as he said,
and basically, I'll make up a crime to beIN on him.
And that's what happened with President Trump, and it appears
(03:30):
that's what they were doing with hundreds of the rest
of us. It wasn't just combined to trying to research January.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
Sixth, but that's what they presented to the Grand jury, correct.
I mean, they brought these people in and they said
this is critical because we were looking at whether or
not they were trying to overturn an election. Do you
believe that they lied to the grand jury to get
these records and then they went way past what they
said they were going to do because.
Speaker 2 (03:59):
Of the scope of what they requested.
Speaker 3 (04:02):
I'm willing to bet that they came in with reams
of paper with names and information and had somebody say, look,
all of these people we believe had some role in
some way, and we just need you to sign off
on these so that we can go get all of
(04:25):
the information about who they were talking to and you know,
what they were doing, where they were, We can get location,
we get all.
Speaker 2 (04:35):
This kind of information. We don't actually know the full
extent of what they got.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
And so then you get a grand jury form and
to sign off on that. They didn't have time to
go through and talk about each individual in those documents.
Speaker 2 (04:54):
I don't believe they did that for a minute.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
How many people are there.
Speaker 3 (04:58):
On reams of paper with all these names on him
and then they go They did go before a judge.
We know that because they got an order from the
judge saying, hey, all these people, all these entities were
requesting the records from You can't tell these people that
(05:20):
you're giving up these records because we think they will
flee the country, or they will destroy evidence, or they
will intimidate witnesses like Jim Jordan Mey, Ted Cruz. We're
gonna flee the country. Really, that's just so outrageous what
(05:42):
they did. And for a federal judge to sign an
order like that, and knowing that there was no probable
cause whatsoever ever shown. This is really just the epitome
of a constitutional crisis right here.
Speaker 1 (06:00):
How do they so to walk me through the process,
How do they choose the grand jury? How do they
get this even started? How do they get to the
point where it seems acceptable behind the scenes or in
the Department of Justice that this is what's happening.
Speaker 3 (06:16):
Oh, that's a great question when it comes to the
selection of the grand jury. This is in the district
of Columbia, and we know ninety five percent of the
voters they're voted for somebody besides Trump, and they could
It's very easy to manipulate the system to have made
(06:39):
sure that you had a grand jury that every one
of them hated President Trump. That would have been very
easy and probably is most likely. And so that's what
you're looking at. We're not talking about fair, fairness, equity, justice.
We're talking about people that hated Trump and hated the
(07:01):
people that supported a good question. So, but a judge
should have said, wait a minute, you're not just looking
at individuals. There's not just the Fourth Amendment search and
seizure issue here. You're also talking about members of Congress
(07:23):
and the Senate. There is another privilege on top of
just the normal Fourth Amendment, and that is the congressional privilege.
Because of the separation of powers, there's a congressional privilege.
We have people contact us constituents that give us private
(07:44):
information that the executive branch has no right to ever
see any of. And then there's also whistleblowers and Jim
Jordan and I back at this time, we were talking
about FBI agent who were contacting us, and we're saying
there are people in the DOJ that are suborning perjury.
(08:08):
They're demanding that we sign affidavits that we know or
lies just so they can get warrants. Wow, what a
chilling effect when they find out that the FBI the
DOJ are grabbing our records without our knowledge so they
can see who's been calling us.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
That stuff is never supposed to.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Be in the hands of the FBI, the DOJ, the
executive branch. And that goes back to a case of
William Jefferson in two thousand and six, who was convicted
appropriately of selling access to his office. He got bribes,
found ninety thousand dollars of cold heart cash and his
(08:54):
freezer that he got paid and they got a search
want to search his home sounded like very appropriate, and
somebody who'd signed search warrants sound like they had plenty
of proble costs, and it sounded like they had plenty
of problem costs to search his office. But for the
history of Congress, if there was a search warrant to
(09:16):
search a member of Congress's office or a center's office,
you went to House counsel and said, we have a
warrant to collect these things from that office. And the
DOJ would not get to go in and gather all
the material. You would have this third party House Council
go in. Those attorneys would grab all the material. They
(09:37):
would go through and determine what was privileged like whistleblowers information.
Speaker 2 (09:43):
They would keep that.
Speaker 3 (09:44):
Separate, and they would make sure that only the material
that was not privileged and that fit the warrant went
to the DOJ. And Mueller was the FBI director back then,
and he wanted to stick to Congress, so he not
only got that warrant and ran it without telling House
(10:07):
counsel and took all that information. When it was appealed,
the DC Circuit Court of Appeals said, no, you can't
do that. You can't go sorting through this information and
then give back what you decide is privileged.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
That it doesn't work that way.
Speaker 3 (10:29):
You've got to have a third party outside the executive branch.
And so all of these things were violated in this
Arctic Frost's operation by Jack Frost Smith, and so they
didn't care, nor did federal Judge Boseburg care at all.
And so all of these people need to be held accountable,
(10:52):
all of Jack, Jack Smith, all his people, and Boseburg.
They all need to be held accountable for trying to
take down a political party. And thank goodness that really
literally thank god that Donald Trump won. Because it didn't,
(11:13):
we would be losing a political party and the one
that was headed toward Marxism would be the one taken over.
Speaker 1 (11:21):
But I think that we have to look at this
from an even broader standpoint. This is the new age
of technology where all of your records are easily accessible
on your cell phone. I mean you talk about what
happened in two thousand and six, I mean think about
before cell phones. For this to happen somebody, this would
(11:43):
mean the DOJ would go break into someone's office without
permission and take everything all their mail everything, so it's
the same exact thing. They don't have permission to truly
take all these phone records. I think one of the
things that I found most interesting in your op ed
was that you say that Verizon turned everything over, and
(12:05):
AT and T was like, this doesn't seem like we
can do this.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
Yeah, no, isn't that true? Yeah, AT and T and
and the others are going, wait a minute, we're talking
about members of Congress and all here. We think you
don't need a subpoena. You really need a warrant. And
this needs to be fought out in court. They need
to be notified. They need a chance to come in
and question whether or not you have probable cause. This
(12:33):
isn't something you just come in and grab. This is
serious stuff. They saw that this was a very serious issue,
and you point out so correctly.
Speaker 1 (12:45):
To let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next
on a Tutor Dixon podcast. What happens now? I mean,
for those of you who had Verizon, who've had your
personal phone record, it's gone through and that's something that
it's you know, you can't put that genie back in
(13:06):
the bottle. I mean that toothpaste is out of the tube.
So who has that information, what's happening with that information,
and what do you do now to go after Jack Smith?
I see that he was subpoenaed by Jim Jordan. I
think that's a good start. But what do you see
in that process?
Speaker 3 (13:21):
Yeah, well, normally, if somebody is going to be prosecuted,
you don't call them as a witness very first thing.
If they're going to be investigated.
Speaker 2 (13:33):
The way you build a case is you.
Speaker 3 (13:35):
Talk to the people around them, the people that were
working for them, and you build a case and you
get up to that person. If you're wanting soundbites, you
bring that person in and question them. And that's what
we've done traditionally in Congress, and it drove me crazy
because we'd call them in, we'd have a hearing, we'd
(13:57):
get sound bites, whether it was Hillary Clinton, Lois Learner
taking the fifth that kind of thing, and yeah, made
for good theater and whatnot, but nobody was ever held accountable.
But we've got to do more than that. We have
got to have cases made. And actually Tom Fitten's Judicial
(14:20):
Watch Sean Donagun is helping me. We're digging, we're trying
to find out what all has happened to all this information,
and we intend to take action in the courts and
pursue these people. But hopefully we will have enough to
(14:41):
get the DOJ to pursue people for the malicious actions
they took that I believe will end up being criminal
and violating criminal statutes. And that's the only way it's
ever going to stop. We've seen the breaches like this
(15:01):
of criminal code going back years and nobody has ever
been held accountable. And the more you let people get
away with it without holding them accountable, then the worse
it has gotten over the years. So Congress just has
seen pretty feckless. And I can tell you, Tutor, that
(15:22):
since Newton Gingridge's first term as a speaker, we haven't
had a Republican speaker willing to take strong action to
hold people accountable.
Speaker 2 (15:35):
Bayinner, Ryan, you know.
Speaker 3 (15:38):
They wanted soundbites, but they didn't want to take any action.
We voted to hold Eric Holder in contempt, but they
were scared to death to do anything beyond that. Just
give us the sound bites from hearings, but nothing happened.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
And why I mean they put Bannon in jail, they
put Navarro in jail, I mean, this is not it's
very one sided. Why are we so generous? I mean,
you're write about the sound bites. I won't forget Hillary
Clinton with her What difference at this point does it
make on Benghazi? You know, these were soundbites that potentially
(16:14):
potentially that affected her campaign, But there were people who
lost their lives. These are things that people need to
be held accountable for. And you look at the alternative.
I mean, Donald Trump went through all of these court
cases that were phony court cases, and they tried to
rob and blind of all of his money. They tried
(16:36):
to put him in prison. But the people who are
truly committing the crimes, I mean, even the people who
were spying on him before he was elected in twenty sixteen,
have never paid any price for that none.
Speaker 3 (16:48):
And unfortunately, the DOJ whited until the last minute on
limitations to do anything about Komi. It still remains to
be seen whether those charges were hold up, if they
did it appropriately.
Speaker 2 (17:03):
But we've got we've.
Speaker 3 (17:05):
Got some time on the people Jack Smith and all
of those that tried to destroy an entire political party
and make it a one party country, and that party
mainly moving Marxist. So uh. But things have. We can
no longer allow people who have violated the law trying
(17:27):
to destroy another party to.
Speaker 2 (17:30):
Get away with it. They there have got to.
Speaker 3 (17:32):
Be consequences, and you get it, obviously, but we've got
to have leaders in the House and Senate that get
it and understand how serious this is.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
I think this is my frustration with this younger generation
that is waffling on whether or not they want to
be in Congress and retiring early and all of this. Like,
you know, it's not what I thought it was. I
can't have the impact that I thought I could. But
this is not something that happens overnight. Republicans need to
take back a bigger majority. You can't do anything when
(18:06):
you have a two person majority or a one person majority.
You've got to get back into the position where you
have the ability to bring the country back to what
it was supposed to be, I mean less. In Tennessee
this week, we almost lost an election where we thought
we were going to lose an election to a radical
And when I say radical, I mean someone who openly
(18:28):
said she hated the district that she wanted to serve.
And yet look at the number of people that came
out to vote for her. And this is what we're fighting.
We're fighting against the guy in Virginia who says he
wants to see his opponent's children dead gets elected. Mom, Donnie,
who says that he wants to put prostitutes on the
street gets elected. You've got the person in Seattle gets elected.
(18:51):
You say, Marxist. Absolutely, we are headed that direction. And
yet I just don't see us waking up to the
to really the effort we need to put in to
preserve and protect and punish what has gone on.
Speaker 2 (19:07):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (19:07):
Well, one of the most frustrating things I heard during
my eighteen years in Congress as a Christian was other
Christians in Congress when I was trying to get them
fired up. Come on, we've got to do something here.
We can't let this go so literally, just chill, just
calm down. God's in control, and that would so frustrate me.
(19:30):
And there's a preacher in Denton that I heard had
the perfect response, and that is just because God's in
control doesn't mean he wants you to lean on your
shovel and pray for a whole You know, God's given
everybody tools and he expects you to, yeah, pray, but
pray while you're using the tools he gave us. And
(19:52):
when you're in Congress, you've got tools to use. And
let me tell you, tutor, Even people that are reluctant
to do things that they may be uneasy about, well,
we may be going out on a limb.
Speaker 2 (20:07):
On this or that.
Speaker 3 (20:09):
It's to save the country for Heaven's sake. But nothing
helps better than having a thousand phone calls lighten up
a congressman's phones. And they got to be from the
district because they make sure. Wow, people in my district
said they'll never vote for me again unless I step
(20:30):
up and make sure this happens. Tons of emails from
within the district saying you better step up and make
sure that you pursue this. Those kind of things actually
do make a difference. When when people in the district
got so mad that they took those steps, then we
(20:51):
actually got some action done by people, and you had
congress members willing to say debate or look, I know
I was going to go this way, but my constituents
are so mad if I don't go, if we don't
do something here, I'm not going to get re elected.
So I really need to be doing something.
Speaker 1 (21:13):
Maybe that's the activism we need because we are they
have on the left, they have done a great job
activating people, getting people involved. I mean, you know, we
see I'll tell you a few months ago, we went
to an event on the east side of Michigan and
they had a little protest there. They were protesting me
speaking there, and you know, people laughed, Oh, this was
(21:36):
a protest of ten people, hahaha. And we made note.
This is this is them keeping people involved. Doesn't matter
if it's ten people. They've talked about it, they've promoted it.
They're keeping people involved. This is this is the grassroots
part that the left gets, the community organizing. The Barack
Obama promoted so heavily that the left gets that the
(21:58):
right is not get. And that comment you made about
trust in God, you didn't get there. You didn't get
to be in Congress because you're great if you believe
that God puts you there and you are the hands
and feet and he is expecting you to work. I mean,
the Garden of Eden wasn't a place to relax. They
had to keep it up.
Speaker 4 (22:18):
Yeah, even before the fall from Yes, yes, I gave
him a job. You tend the garden you've got a
job to do. But let me tell you though, you know,
I'm a senior fellow David Horwitz Freedom Center. And David
was a friend. He was so brilliant, but he was
one of the top communist leaders in the country back
(22:42):
in the late sixties early seventies. And I asked him
one time, and we lost him this year. What a
great loss.
Speaker 3 (22:49):
And Charlie Kirk, by the way, did a great tribute
to him at the small little memorial we had and
then and in fact, that's why I met Charlie first time.
We became friends, and David had him come in and
Charlie said, he introduced me to all these big donors
and said, we got to help this young guy because
he's going to do great things. And that helped him
(23:11):
get a s eagg to go with turning point. So
it's amazing how lady these are. But David, I said,
you know, David, back when you were a communist leaders,
you guys were planning riots and protests at the sixty
eight Democrat convention that was going to nominate Hubert Humphrey
(23:35):
that may have been the most liberal national president candidate
to that point. And the Republicans were nominating Richard Nixon.
I mean, he had been anti communist before he became
vice president. Why were you going after Humphrey? And he said, well,
you got to remember our motto of the communist leaders
(23:55):
behind the scenes then is the same that they have now,
and that is the worse the better. The more chaos
we can help create, the better it is, the closer
we are to having our Marxist takeover. And he said,
so Humphrey helped us out because he supported the war
in Vietnam, So that helped us get people out to
(24:16):
protests the convention. But we were also concerned if Humphrey,
as liberal as he was, got elected president, it might
be harder to get people out rioting during his presidency.
And we figured if Nixon was elected president, it'd be
a lot easier to get people rioting all through his presidency.
(24:37):
So these guys are playing the long game, they're thinking ahead,
they're wanting to create chaos, and our people are just
have been sitting back too long and letting. And by
the way, when the riots and the bombs and the
murder and all mayhem didn't work, what did they do.
(24:58):
They went to universities, They tenure and started teaching future
teachers to teach children that Marxism was a great thing.
Socialism is a great thing. And now we've had generations
come to voters and now they're voters and they think
socialism is a beautiful thing.
Speaker 1 (25:17):
Oh yeah. We just talked to somebody who said that
young teachers are increasingly coming out of universities today and
they are saying, I've been told I am a political
tool and that my job is to go into the
schools and be a political tool. Think about that. We
look at the country today. We are robbing our kids
of a future and that is what is so sad
(25:39):
to me. And I don't think and I don't blame
these teachers. I think that they have been in the
system where they're told this is your goal, but instead
these kids are not They're not getting to learn to read,
they're not getting to learn to do math, and those
are years these kids never get back. That's the thing
that is so tragic to me is that we have
a loud, this cancer to infiltrate our country to a
(26:04):
point where it has robbed kids of their future. And
in turn, then that chaos eventually causes a downfall, and
that's when Marxism can creep in and communism can creep in.
Speaker 2 (26:16):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (26:17):
And one of the things that still motivates me tutor
is between my sophomore and junior year in college, I
got shoved in. I wouldn't have applied on my own,
but the head of the student center at Texas A
and M pushed me into this exchange program. I've had
two years of brush and pushed me into this exchange program.
(26:40):
Spent the summer on the exchange program in the Soviet
Union when it was the real Soviet Union, and I
saw it. I saw communism, socialism, Marxism, whatever you want
call it. I don't want it, and I don't want
it for my kids. I don't want it to hear
in the United States. But it is. And I've had
(27:03):
really wonderful people, young people say, but you know, socialism
sounds kind of like a Christian idea, you know, shar
and share a like I'm going you have to have
such a totalitarian government that can take from those that
are producing and give to themselves.
Speaker 2 (27:22):
And that's what you have. Yeah, you have.
Speaker 3 (27:25):
Everybody equal in misery and then all of these at
the top. It is a miserable thing. And by the way,
of course, Stalin Communism is historically killed more people, many
times more people than Hitler ever did. Stalin killed many
(27:49):
times more than Hitler did. Maw killed many times more
than Stalin did.
Speaker 2 (27:55):
It is a brutal, brutal form of government.
Speaker 3 (27:58):
And thank goodness, thank god, really that David Horowitz came
to see, wait, what am I doing this? This is
so wrong, this is not a good system, this communism stuff,
and he turned a corner and became one of the
greatest advocates for a freedom and for free enterprise in America.
(28:21):
And he spent the rest of his life doing that.
Speaker 1 (28:24):
But when we look at what happened with Jack Smith
and the behind the scenes of investigating and really stealing
the information of a different branch of government, and that's
the separate branches of government is what makes America so strong.
And to think that that was compromised and so willingly compromised,
(28:45):
it has to be compromised by multiple people. It's not
like one person who went rogue. We already have this
in that the deep state and the deep state is
a serious issue that people laughed at Donald Trump the
first time when he said, no, we're getting rid of
the deep state. But I mean, good, great, look at
what we've seen.
Speaker 3 (29:01):
Now, Yeah, it was much deeper than even he thought.
Speaker 2 (29:05):
Yeah, and it really kind.
Speaker 3 (29:07):
Of overwhelming that first term. And there's still a lot there.
I'm telling you, Tutor, there's still a lot of deep
shake there, and it's still working behind the scenes. And
I'm telling you, if they get the majority back, it's
going to make its presence known in more impeachment proceedings.
But we can't let that happen. We can't let that happen,
(29:32):
and I appreciate your efforts in trying to avoid that.
Speaker 1 (29:35):
Let's take a quick commercial break. We'll continue next on
the Tutor Dixon Podcast. People need to understand, before I
was involved in the political world, which was not that
many years ago, this is not politics. Was not my life.
It was not what I thought about all the time.
It was not like I was, oh, this is a
(29:56):
midterm year, not that many people are going to come out.
People who are not as in gauged as you and I.
They need to be activated. And that's why it is
so important to get out there and talk to people
about voting, making sure that we are just as on
the scene as the Democrats. Because this is going to
be a critical election year and we cannot let Donald
Trump have his last two years as president rob from him.
Speaker 3 (30:20):
Yeah, well it'll be robbed from the people because yeah,
spend them having to answer to impeachment after impeachment and
destroying any chance of getting the government back on track.
And so, yeah, this is so important important, and the
DOJ can't sit on this. Hopefully. Oh and by the way,
(30:44):
the it's really hopefully more legacy of David Horowitz. He
did a book any name names of the biggest communist
professors in America, a big, big book called the Professors.
And so Daniel Greenfield said, Louie, we need We're going
(31:06):
to do a project and you you kind of inspired
it about the judges. We're going to have a judicial
accountability project. We're going to do files dot CA. I
want to call it put together on all the judges
that are activists, that are acting unethically, that they're violating
(31:28):
their good behavior.
Speaker 2 (31:30):
Because you know, Article three, Section one says.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
They only get to be judges during their good behavior.
It doesn't say they have to commit a crime, high crime, misdemeanor.
It says they only sit during their good behavior. And
I know, we've never impeached the judge before for bad
behavior unless it was a crime. But I think it's
time to shart impeaching judges for bad behavior when they
(31:55):
don't recuse themselves, because the law says they shot all
disqualify themselves if their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Well,
Boseburg shouldn't be sitting on any case that involves Trump
or anybody that is part of the Trump administration or
(32:16):
supported Trump. This guy is so biased, he's so angry
at people that a Trump and others that support him.
He shouldn't be allowed near that, and I think it's
time to impeach him over it. But these are things
that need to be taken up, and the David Warwiz
Freedom Center will be putting that together and present it
(32:37):
to the Freedom I'm sorry the judiciary committees of the
House and Senate, and hopefully they will do something and
not just be content to say, well in this interesting,
because we've got to check put a check on the
judicial system, and that's it.
Speaker 2 (33:00):
Just want found note. I love Justice Scalia and I
miss him. Uh.
Speaker 3 (33:08):
I had a group coming from my hometown Towler Senior
Citizens to Washington.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
I asked him anything I can do for you.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
Way there, They said, yeah, we'd like to meet Justice Scalia.
I'm going that's a big ask, that really busy. And
I called over and yeah, I mean when they set
up a room and so Scalia comes in, they're all
sitting there and he leans against the tables said, okay,
cousin Gomer said you want to meet me here I am.
If you want to meet me, you must have questions.
(33:35):
And they were all just taking them back well you know,
and he said, come on, you want to meet me,
you must have questions. And one of them finally said,
would you say we're the freest country in the world
because we have the best bill of rights? And Scalia said,
oh gosh, no, no, the sovi Union that are a
better bill of rights than we have. Now, we're the
freest nation in the world because our founders did not
(33:57):
trust government, so they tried to but as many impediments
in the way of making laws preventing government from getting
in our private business. That's why I we're free. They
didn't trust government. And he went through all the impediments
they tried to put in the way of government getting
involved in people's private business. It was really a beautiful thing.
(34:20):
But that's what I come back to Ascalia saying, No,
we've been freest because our founders did not trust government.
Speaker 1 (34:30):
I think that's why. That's what we grew up knowing
and understanding, and that's what young people are missing today.
I mean last night I was over at my mom's
house and she said, I look at what's happening, and
I just think it's time for me to be gone,
because this is not the world I lived in. But
once the boomers are gone, who's going to protect the country.
(34:52):
And I said, okay, first of all, no, and secondly,
we are like, this is why we're here. We're not
letting this happen. We're going to continue to fight. And
that's why those people that you talk to in Congress,
they needed to get off their duffs and make sure
they were still in the fight. And I appreciate everything
you did. I remember talking to you when you were
(35:12):
in Congress and how hard you were fighting. You were
one of the few, and we appreciate that. And I
love that you are still fighting. I love that you're
still out there. I read what you wrote and I
was so impressed with it. You are always you are
a great mentor and a great fighter. So Congressman Louis Gomert,
thank you so much.
Speaker 3 (35:29):
Thank you, Tutor, You're so kind, and thank you for
just being on top of everything.
Speaker 2 (35:36):
You really are. Thank you so much.
Speaker 1 (35:38):
Well, I appreciate it. Thank you, and thank you all
for listening to the Tutor Dixon Podcast as always. You
can get it on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or
wherever you get your podcasts, and watch the whole thing
on Rumble or YouTube at Tutor Dixon. Join us next
time and have a blesseding
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.
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.