Capitol Report Full Broadcast (Dec. 20)

Good evening and welcome to the Capitol Report on Entity Television. I'm Steve Lance. Here's a look at what's coming up. Reaction pouring in from GOP presidential candidates as Trump vows to fight the Colorado court ruling to keep him off the ballot. What's coming next in a new strategy announced by the Colorado GOP. And was that ruling actually legal? Former US Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark will join us to analyze. Will former President Trump actually be barred from the Colorado primary? An unprecedented ruling by Colorado's Supreme Court is prompting reaction from other presidential candidates. Joining us now live is Entity's White House correspondent Iris Tao. So good evening Iris. First, if you could break it down for us, what happens next as Trump is promising a swift appeal? Good evening to you Steve. You're right. Trump's team is saying that they have full confidence that a US Supreme Court will quickly overturn the ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court, which says that former President Trump is disqualified from appearing on the ballot in that state because he had participated in an insurrection. Meanwhile, it's important to know that the Colorado Supreme Court itself put a hold on its action on its order pending any appeal action by January 4th. The deadline for the Colorado Secretary of State to actually certify all the candidates on the ballot is January 5th. So that means that unless the Supreme Court actually rules to remove Trump from the ballot by then, it basically means that Trump will still appear on that ballot despite the ruling yesterday, Steve. So Iris, given the fact that Trump lost Colorado in 2020 by about 16 points, he most likely wouldn't need that state to win in 2024. But the question remains, what if other states follow suit? That's a great question. So the Lieutenant Governor of California today, citing the Colorado ruling, asked the Secretary of State in California to, quote, explore every legal option to remove Trump from California's 2024 primary ballot. But it's important to note that basically similar legal challenges trying to remove Trump from the ballots have been ongoing in basically half of the states across the country, and none has really succeeded up until the Colorado one yesterday, Steve. And so how are other presidential candidates reacting to this ruling? Is there anything that stood out to you? So all Republican presidential candidates, and that includes Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley and others. And in addition to that would be independent candidate RFK Jr., have all come out to denounce the ruling saying that it should be the voters to make that decision, not a state court, basically. But however, in addition to the Republican ones, Vivek Ramaswamy among them is vowing to actually remove himself from the primary ballot in Colorado and calling on others to do the same. Let's take a look. And I demand that Ron DeSantis and Chris Christie and Nikki Haley do the same thing or else these Republicans are simply complicit. Meanwhile, President Biden here at the White House, while saying that he won't get into the specific ruling itself, and said this today about Trump. Watch. You saw it all. Now, whether the 14th Amendment applies or let the court make that decision, but he certainly supported the insurrection and no question about none, zero. Meanwhile, the Colorado Republican Party announced today that if they're actually ruling stance, if that ruling actually stands, it would consider ditching the primary ballot system. And instead, switch to the caucus system, which will let them bypass the ballot issue here. Steve and TD's White House correspondent Iris Tower reporting for us live from the White House. Iris, thank you. The Colorado Supreme Court's four to three ruling to disqualify former President Trump from the state's primary ballot is calling the due process question into question here. Joining us now to talk about it further in the court's ruling and the implications is former U.S. Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark. Jeff Clark, thank you so much for joining. Well, it's great to be here, Steve, as always. Thank you, Jeff. So, Jeff, in a four to three decision, the Colorado Supreme Court disqualifying President Trump from the ballot in that state based on its interpretation of Section three of the 14th Amendment and allegations that he engaged in insurrection and rebellion as it states against the United States. The court stayed its own opinion until January 4th of next year, presumably because it expects an appeal from President Trump to the U.S. Supreme Court. Notably, President Trump has not been charged with let alone convicted of insurrection. Do you believe the Supreme Court of the United States will hear this case and ultimately reverse it? So they should, and they may actually wind up dismissing this case, Steve, as as moot just by virtue of the fact that CERT is granted, because the stay that the Colorado Supreme Court entered is the most unique state stay I've ever seen. It doesn't just expire on January 4th, and I think we're told by Jenna Griswold that by January 5th, she needs to know whether Trump's going to be on the primary ballot or not so they can go through the administrative steps and print up the ballots, etc. But what it did was it said that a stay will last until January 4th, but if President Trump seeks review by the Supreme Court, then the stay continues until the Supreme Court enters an order. Well, if that takes you past January 5th, and that means President Trump goes on the ballot, you can see the Supreme Court basically saying, what's there for us to decide? He's on the ballot. And so it's a very peculiar thing. Like, you know, is it was it just designed essentially to kind of force President Trump to seek CERT and forced to basically put this on the political agenda to try to, you know, just continue a process of lawfare? Jeff, you've previously written extensively that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not apply to President Trump or any president for that matter, but only to an elector of president. You've also written that the president doesn't fall under the broader terms, hold any office under the United States. So with regard to this, could you kind of break this down and kind of show us how you came to this conclusion? Sure. So look, there was a senator at the time the 14th Amendment was being considered for passage by Congress before it went up to the ratification process, and that senator sort of spotted that the president was absent from the list. So this is actually a question that's more than a century old. And it's pretty obvious when you look at the structure of the provision that the president is absent from the list, and I think that was deliberate. The list starts in a hierarchy. It's first senators, then representatives, then electors for president or vice president, right? And then it's any other officers. And I'll dazzle you with a little bit of Latin here. There are two related canons of interpretation. One is called Nostra Aetora Socius, that words are known by the company they keep. And then there's another canon, Iostem Generis, sort of of a like kind. And they both would lead you to conclude here that if you have a list like this, right, it's not literally any other officer. It's any other officer sort of as a result of this hierarchical structure, which would mean officers that are inferior to the president. If they had meant to put the president on the list, they would have put the president and vice president on the list. And they wouldn't have put only the electors of president and vice president on the list. So it's actually a very basic legal form of reasoning. Anyone who had taken statutory construction in law school would recognize this argument. But in the mainstream, like CNN, the mainstream left and MSNBC, they pretend it's some kind of hyper technical argument. It's really not. They're deceiving their viewers. Do you think that the timing of this Colorado court's ruling could be somewhat vindictive? There is no man in human history or even modern history, if you count lawfare as a modern development, who has ever experienced as much lawfare where those affiliated with him in some way experiencing derivative lawfare than President Donald Trump. So it's, you know, it's remarkable, but it shows their level of fear. They do not want him to return to office because they know he will be immensely popular. They know that he will turn things around. And it could be the kind of thing that, you know, breaks the back of the Democrat Party for a very long time. So, you know, they have an operation of get Trump on 100 different levels, federal, state, local, you name it. But it also disenfranchises voters who ultimately decide who the president should be. So what legal remedy, if any, do voters have in this case and could Colorado voters file their own appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to file an amicus brief to appeal Trump? Yes, they certainly could file an amicus brief. I mean, we saw what happened in 2020 with all of the suits that a lot of them were dismissed for lack of standing. So they may try that maneuver to keep actual voters out. But we need to defend democracy. I think President Trump will obviously carry the torch for this. This is a massive denial of due process. The most fundamental way and easiest way to see that is President Trump has not been convicted by a criminal jury unanimously of insurrection. Jeff Clark, really appreciate your perspective. Thank you for joining us. Thank you, Steve. And coming up, House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan escalating his probe into the Department of Justice, issuing a subpoena to the attorney general. Jordan is digging for information about the department's alleged collection of personal data on congressional staff. And U.S. Senate candidate Carrie Lake saying she'll push America first policy, shore up support for her state and President Trump in the Senate and secure the border. That and more when we return. Hi, I'm Susan Lucci. I never thought about heart disease until I had my own heart event. I received two stents in my arteries, stents developed for research funded by the American Heart Association. Those stents saved my life. I have met so many survivors. Each of them tells a story that can be so helpful to women out there. Everything was pretty good. It was a very happy life. I was given the diagnosis that I had peripartum cardiomyopathy, which is basically a pregnancy induced heart failure. They told me my only chance was a heart transplant. And the American Heart Association helped make that possible. Their research helped save me. I think everyone should support the American Heart Association. Call now or go to helpheart.org for only $19 a month, just 63 cents a day. You can help fund the next medical breakthrough. Get the next person trained in CPR, the next hospital certified in high quality cardiovascular care. You can be part of that very important work that the American Heart Association is doing to save lives everywhere. Give $19 a month with your credit card and we'll send you this special t-shirt that you can wear to show that you are helping save lives. I'm grateful for just every day that I get with my children. I am very thankful for the American Heart Association. Heart disease is America's number one killer, and your support now can help save your life or the life of someone you love. Listen to your heart. The only reason I'm here today is because I did. So please call the number on your screen or go to helpheart.org now. Join me as a monthly donor today and help save even more lives. Are diapers destroying your confidence? Men's Liberty can help. Our discreet external device is safe, sanitary and keeps you dry 24 hours, day and night. Step into the spotlight and do more of what you love with Men's Liberty. It's been ordered over 5 million times by thousands of satisfied fans. Call now to get a free week supply with your first order. There's no obligation, just the opportunity to try the most revolutionary solution to incontinence ever made. Unlike diapers, Men's Liberty is a long-term answer to dealing with incontinence. Make the choice to finally move forward with your life by calling Men's Liberty today. We'll answer all of your questions about how our completely unique device works and how Medicare can cover it. Dealing with expensive, uncomfortable diapers is no way to live. Men's Liberty lets you get back out there with more freedom and confidence to be you. Ready to find out more about our offer to get a free week supply? Then don't wait. Call Men's Liberty today. Welcome back to the Capitol Report. I'm Steve Lance. So did the Department of Justice try to surveil members of Congress and their staff? That's what Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Jim Jordan, is seeking to find out, taking his probe to the next level, issuing a subpoena to Attorney General Merrick Garland. Here's more. House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan is asking the Department of Justice to hand over documents and information about the DOJ's attempt to get personal information about Republican staffers, particularly those involved with conducting oversight of the DOJ's handling of the Steele dossier. For example, Jason Foster, a former chief investigative counsel, said he was one of many who were told just this year that the DOJ had subpoenaed Google for their personal phone records and emails. Jordan, in a letter attached with the subpoena, writes that the committee is trying to determine whether the department sought to alleviate the heightened separation of power sensitivities involved, or whether the department first sought the information through other means before resorting to legal process. And over in the Senate, they've finished conforming all the military nominees who were held up under Senator Tommy Tuberville's blockade. The final 11 four-star generals were approved this week just before senators leaving D.C. today. However, another order of business was left unfinished, a deal on Ukraine aid and changing border policy. No longer any disagreement that the situation at the southern border is unsustainable. We agree the border must be fixed. That is a broad consensus in our in our caucus. We must succeed. Democrats, myself, remain totally committed to working with our Republican counterparts to reach an agreement. Now, senators have left D.C. for the holiday recess, punting a possible deal into early next year. Civil rights groups are challenging a new border law in Texas. The Lone Star State is trying to stop people from entering illegally. Meantime, the president of Mexico and others say they're against this rule. And today's Arian Pasdar has an update on the ongoing illegal immigration crisis. Biden's deliberate inaction has left Texas to fend for itself. Texas Governor Greg Abbott on Monday signed a law giving local officials the ability to arrest and deport illegal immigrants. Multiple civil rights groups are now challenging it, saying Texas unlawfully keeps the federal government from enforcing immigration laws and that it illegally bars immigrants from applying for asylum. Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador says Mexico is also preparing to challenge the law. I want to tell our fellow countrymen and migrants we will be defending them. Texas' governor acts that way because he wants to be the vice president candidate for the Republican Party in the United States. And with these measures, he wants to gain popularity. Footage from Eagle Pass, Texas, on Wednesday showed thousands of immigrants trying to enter the Lone Star State. The new law is set to take effect in March. In other Texas-related news, a razor wire fence is allowed to stay up at the state's southern border for now. A federal appeals court on Tuesday temporarily blocked the Biden administration from removing the fence. Back in October, the state sued the Biden administration for cutting almost 30 miles of concertina wire. Lastly, illegal immigration now affects international trade. Business groups and train operators are pressing the government to reopen rail bridges in Eagle Pass and El Paso. Border authorities closed them on Monday because they're understaffed. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce says shutting down rail traffic through Eagle Pass and El Paso will inflict significant economic harm. Ariane Pastar, NTD News. In just a couple of days, you'll no longer be able to see the Confederate memorial at Arlington National Cemetery. A federal judge has ruled that its removal may proceed. The memorial depicts a bronze woman atop a 32-foot tall pedestal built in 1914. Defend Arlington, along with Save Southern Heritage Florida, filed a lawsuit Sunday to stop the statue from being removed. On Monday, U.S. District Judge Ronnie Alston granted a temporary restraining order, but he removed that order on Tuesday, ruling the plaintiffs failed to prove that keeping the statue was in the public's best interest. The statue's removal is part of the Defense Department's wider plan to get rid of Confederate symbols on military facilities. Arlington National Cemetery says it expects the monument to be completely removed by this Friday. Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin plans to relocate the statue to the New Market Battlefield State Historical Park in the Shenandoah Valley. Critics of the move are raising concerns that removing historical monuments might raise the chances of repeating history. Securing the United States southern border and better representation for the state of Arizona and Washington. These are some of the reasons former Arizona gubernatorial candidate Carrie Lake says she's now running for the United States Senate. We sat down with the U.S. Senate candidate at Turning Point USA's America Fest to talk about why she's running. Carrie Lake, thank you so much for joining us. I'm happy to be here. It's great to be here with you. Carrie, there's a lot of energy here, especially for you. A lot of energy. This is your home state. Your Senate bid. Tell us why you're running. Well, I'm running for a variety of reasons. One, I love my state and we don't have good representation in Washington, D.C. right now. And we also have an incredible opportunity to pick up a U.S. Senate seat, put it in the hands of a Republican, but not just any Republican, a Republican who's all about putting America first. And we know how important to have the majority in the Senate is. So much happens through the United States Senate. I am a firm believer that President Trump's going to win. And when he gets in the White House, he's going to need backup in the Senate. He's going to need that Senate when it comes to his judicial picks, Supreme Court, his appointments that he makes. He's going to need a strong Senate who's not going to just get in the way and try to railroad him and stop him. And so I want to make sure we get President Trump's agenda, which is America first, which will get us back on track. And I have an Arizona first agenda, which is similar to the America first agenda, but making sure that when I'm voting, I'm voting to strengthen Arizona, whether it be our border, whether it be our families or whether it be our economy. And as a mother of two, most horrifically, this fentanyl crisis, I know so many people who've lost a loved one, a son, a daughter, a grand, a grandchild to the fentanyl poisoning that's happening. And it's all coming through Arizona. Texas is pretty much sealed off the border pretty well. But we're finding right now that most of the illegal entries are all coming through Arizona. Why is that? Texas is doing something. You know, Governor Abbott is finally getting a little more serious about the border. And because they're starting to tighten up their border, it leaves the cartels to have to find another spot to enter. And we have a weak governor right now. We have a very weak administration right now in Arizona who has looked the other way, doesn't care, pulled away border barriers and actually wants people to pour in. And so they're going, well, we might as well go through Arizona. The Tucson sector is the most active sector. And I don't mean active in a good way. I mean, in a bad way. They've had to shut down legal ports of entry where commerce takes place, where legal tourism goes through in order to take the Border Patrol agents and have them process people pouring across illegally. Think about that. That's that's a total typical Democrat move. Shut down legal business so that we can have illegal business and crime going on. And that's exactly what they're about. So we need to change this up. The Democrat policies aren't working. What are you hearing about the flow of illegal immigrants from other countries? Hundred and seventy one countries. I talked to a Border Patrol agent the other day and he said, we're shocked if anybody comes here from Mexico illegal. That's not where they're coming from. Where are they coming from? Africa, all over Asia. A lot of people coming directly from mainland China. By the tens of thousands a week, you've seen the video. I'm sure that your viewers have seen the video. It's horrifying. Just lines and lines of men coming in. Fighting age men coming from one hundred and seventy one different nations, many of them nations that sponsor terrorism. Now, we all saw the horrific images out of Israel on October 7th with Hamas, the terrorist organization slaughtering innocents. We understand how these things work. One call from one of these terror cells in the Middle East to activate terrorists that are already here in America is all it takes to literally kill people, kill Americans. And I'm not willing to to allow this to continue happening. So we need to get serious on the border. Kerry Lake, Arizona, candidate for United States Senate. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. That is all we have for you this evening on The Capitol Report. Thank you for watching. From Washington, D.C., I'm Steve Lance. Have a nice evening. See you back here tomorrow.