All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 6, 2023 - Firebrand - Matt Gaetz
30:58
Episode 138 LIVE: McCarthy Quits Congress – Firebrand with Matt Gaetz
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Thank you.
*music* Matt Gaetz, the biggest firebrand inside of the House of Representatives.
You're not taking Matt Gaetz off the board, okay?
Because Matt Gaetz is an American patriot and Matt Gaetz is an American hero.
We will not continue to allow the Uniparty to run this town without a fight.
I want to thank you, Matt Gates, for holding the line.
Matt Gates is a courageous man.
If we had hundreds of Matt Gates in D.C., the country turns around.
It's that simple.
He's so tough, he's so strong, he's smart, and he loves this country.
Matt Gates.
It is the honor of my life to fight alongside each and every one of you.
We will save America.
It's choose your fighter time.
I'm sending the firebrands.
- I get set.
- All right, quiet on the set.
- You're doing all right.
All right, here we go.
17 years ago, I was elected to a seat in Congress that I couldn't get an internship for.
Today I sit here having served as your whip, leader, and as the 55th Speaker of the House.
As the son of a firefighter from Bakersfield, my story is the story of America.
For me, every moment came with a great deal of devotion and responsibility.
Giving my best to all of you has been my greatest honor.
I'm proud of what we have accomplished.
We won a House majority twice.
We elected more Republican women, veterans, and minorities to Congress than ever before.
We reduced the deficit by over $2 trillion while protecting the full faith and credit of our nation.
We kept our government operating and our troops paid while wars broke out around the world.
Traveling the country and serving with all of you, I have encountered far more people that want to build something than those who want to tear it down.
I have faith in this country.
Because America is more than a country.
America is an idea.
Today I am driven by the same purpose that I felt when I arrived in Congress.
But now, it is time to pursue my passion in a new arena.
While I'll be departing the House at the end of this year, I will never ever give up fighting for this country that I love so much.
To all those who have supported me through the years, especially our constituents, thank you from the bottom of my heart.
We did our part.
And when the stakes were the highest, we rose to the challenge.
We were willing to risk it all, no matter the odds, no matter the personal cost.
Simply put, we did the right thing.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.
That's a wrap.
That is indeed a wrap.
This is Matt Gaetz.
We are live on Firebrand, broadcasting from Room 2021 of the Rayburn House Office Building here at the Capitol Complex on Washington, D.C.
And that was former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy announcing his intention to leave the Congress to quit at the end of the year.
You'll remember back in January, Kevin McCarthy said, it's not how you start, it's how you finish.
And it appears he is indeed finished.
This announcement from Speaker McCarthy coming the day after his top lieutenant, Patrick McHenry, announced his retirement from the Congress.
The key difference is that McHenry seems to be indicating a willingness to serve out the entire term that his voters elected him to.
Kevin McCarthy, in turn, saying if he cannot run the place and be speaker, then he will leave.
So there is an establishment exodus from the United States Republican Conference.
And it's my hope that we backfill these establishment lobbyist-drawn entities with folks who are willing to fight for the America First agenda to reduce wars, to get out of these bad trade deals, and to stop the illegal immigration that is overrunning our country.
And we have to provide a check on the Biden administration that continues to spend us into oblivion and to more debt and to defang this weaponized government that's been turned against our fellow Americans.
Kevin McCarthy was not useful in that fight.
In many ways, he inhibited it.
And now he is leaving.
But there is a very real math problem that we are confronted with for this departure.
For all of the self-congratulatory videos that Kevin McCarthy may make, him leaving, his unwillingness to stay and vote for even the most basic of Republican priorities may imperil our ability to get the job done.
So, here's the math.
We have a four-seat majority that we were elected to.
Errantly, foolishly, in violation of precedent and due process.
We made the decision to expel George Santos.
Now, most Republicans in the conference voted against expelling Santos, but enough voted with the Errant Ethics Committee that he is now gone.
That takes four, down to three.
Now McCarthy is saying he's leaving at the end of the year.
Takes us down to two.
And then Bill Johnson, the Republican from Ohio, has indicated that he is taking the university presidency at Youngstown State.
That will leave us with a one-seat majority.
Sure hope everyone eats their veggies, stays healthy over the break.
Otherwise, this thing could tip the balance to the Democrats.
Now, there has been some commentary on social media that I am to blame.
That it's my fault that Kevin McCarthy is quitting and leaving early.
I don't know anyone else who would just say, well, if I can't run the place, I'm gonna leave.
Nancy Pelosi, for all her flaws, and there are many, she at least stuck around.
She didn't hurt her team by saying, well, if I can't be the quarterback, I'm just gonna take the ball and go home.
That seems to be what we're getting from Kevin McCarthy.
This is not an act of patriotism or moving on to the next fight.
It is an act of abject selfishness, and it is revealing that if Kevin McCarthy can't swing the gavel and be in charge and make the decisions, that he's not willing to be a team player.
For all the criticism I've received about not being a team player, I'm here.
I'm doing the work.
I'm taking votes.
And the Republican establishment might not like how I vote all the time, But I'm not facilitating a path to hand power to the Democrats.
That would be more in line with what we see from the former Speaker who is on his way out the door.
We also are covering an important story right now out of Pensacola, Florida.
Let's pull up that WEAR report.
Suspect in custody following a bomb threat at NAS Pensacola.
And for your sense of context, today is the four-year anniversary of the terrorist attack at NAS Pensacola I had acquired a gun, had brought it onto campus.
We later learned that that Saudi Arabian official was inspired by Al Qaeda on the Arabian Peninsula.
There were a number of our first responders and police who were harmed in getting there and limiting the carnage that was visited upon our community at the negligence of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
They are required when they have people training in the United States on our aircraft and on our weapons systems.
To be monitoring their social media, to be communicating with them, to see that they do not fall victim of any type of radicalization.
And because of that negligence from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, people ended up dead in my community.
Now to date, the kingdom has not stepped forward to take responsibility to ensure that the first responders who took bullets and saw their lives forever changed were in any way compensated for that damage.
Damage caused by Saudi Arabia's negligence.
So I've introduced legislation to hold Saudi Arabia accountable and...
We were talking about that today, giving interviews about it, building a coalition for it.
When we saw this news, a suspect is in custody following a bomb threat at NAS Pensacola Wednesday morning.
According to NAS Pensacola, a suspected bomb threat was made on base at 9.35 a.m.
The Escambia County Sheriff's Office received the call about the threat at about 10 a.m.
The base was then put on lockdown as Naval Security investigated.
NAS Pensacola said at 11.15 a.m.
that a suspect was in custody.
Naval Security Forces, in coordination with local law enforcement, partners executed a pre-planned response and are in the process of clearing the affected areas.
NAS Pensacola said in a release no one was injured and the individual suspect is in custody.
So we have yet to see if there's any evidence of that person working in concert with others.
I am eager to see whether or not this has any relationship to the historic nature of this day.
I have gotten reports that on Telegram and other sites, Al-Qaeda-related groups were celebrating This anniversary and this terrorist attack in Pensacola, Florida.
And we will get to the bottom of this particular bomb threat and we'll give you updates and reports accordingly.
Report I saw in the Washington Examiner I want to bring to your attention.
The piece is titled, Children with Liberal Parents are More Likely to Suffer Mental Health Problems.
The piece says, Children who grow up in politically liberal households are more likely to suffer mental health problems than their conservative peers, according to a new study.
An Institute for Family Studies and Gallup report found that political ideology is one of the strongest predictors of which caregiving styles a parent adopts.
Conservative parents are associated with the best mental health outcomes for their children.
Conservative parents have several key distinctions in their relationship with their children that inform mental health care outcomes, including the ability to effectively discipline their children while also displaying affection and responding to their needs.
The right-leaning parents also have better quality relationships characterized by fewer arguments, more warmth, and a stronger bond.
Political ideology is just one predictive factor in the overarching conclusion of the study, which is that having high-quality relationships between children and their parents is the most important factor in achieving positive mental health outcomes.
So...
If you're not conservative for your pocketbook or your country, be conservative because it'll make you a better parent.
Well, having good relationships with your children make you a better parent.
And it seems as though conservatives are drawn to the very types of relationships that are productive and nurturing and warm.
And that's something we encourage for everyone.
We got an update out of the Department of Justice today regarding the investigations they're doing vis-a-vis Ukraine and war crimes.
Take a listen.
So to Washington, D.C. Here we go.
As previously mentioned, this is Merrick Garland.
He is explaining why the Justice Department has filed the first ever charges under a U.S. war crime statute against four Russian-affiliated military personnel in what is described as heinous crimes against an American citizen.
So drop on in here in D.C. Kurchian, who was one of the commanding officers, and Valery and Nazar, the lower-ranking soldiers, and their co-conspirators.
During the abduction, we allege that those defendants threw the victim to the ground while he was naked, tied his hands behind his back, pointed a gun at his head, and beat him with their feet, their fists, and the stocks of their guns.
We allege that they forced him into a building that Russia-affiliated forces were using as a jail and into a closet that they were using as a jail cell.
We allege that as they interrogated him, they tortured him.
They beat him again with a gun.
They punched him in his chest and stomach.
They threatened to shoot him.
They stripped off his clothes and took pictures.
One of their conspirators threatened to sexually assault him.
We are back live.
So what does it mean that the Department of Justice now is trying to bring these war crimes actions against Russians due to the conflict in Ukraine?
Well, undeniably, if there were war crimes committed and atrocities, those should be brought out to the public.
But is now really the opportune time to do that?
The number one goal of the United States of America vis-a-vis the war in Ukraine should be to bring that war to an end, to a conclusion.
It's one of the reasons I've been fighting against all these efforts to send more money and military materiel into the region, and it's one reason why I wouldn't be showcasing the war crimes pleadings at this stage of the game, because it is very likely that That those accusations could make it even more difficult to bring these parties into any sort of peace accord.
Now, the efforts to investigate, collect evidence, I support all of that.
We should get the evidence.
But when you're out there accusing the Russian military of war crimes, it does increase the The terrible prospect of some sort of escalatory accident where perhaps nuclear authorities or codes are devolved and someone who thinks that might be brought up on war crimes believes that their only way out is some sort of detonation of a tactical nuclear weapon or even the launch of an intercontinental ballistic delivery system.
So I really, really question the timing of the Attorney General on this.
No problem with collecting the evidence.
But when you're out there, at this stage of hostilities, trying to make the case on war crimes, I think you've put the cart before the horse a good bit.
And as we're having this discussion, there are ongoing negotiations about how to deal with the desire on the part of many Republicans and Democrats, principally Mitch McConnell and Joe Biden, to lash Ukraine money to Israel money or border money or Taiwan money.
And as I've said many times, I do not believe that we are well served to address these questions collectively.
The war in Israel is fundamentally different than the war in Ukraine, which is fundamentally different than you will see potentially in the Taiwan Straits and in the South China Sea.
And if we do not look at those as separate geopolitical events, my concern is that we're just writing checks to the military-industrial complex without any real sense that our objectives are more likely to be achieved as a consequence of that spending.
And so we'll watch it closely.
To date, House Speaker Mike Johnson has not We want to keep the Speaker on that direction.
We had an odd hearing in the House of Representatives yesterday.
I want to bring your attention to it.
We're talking about women's sports, Title IX. There are federal equities at play there.
We don't want men participating in women's sports.
And from no less than the National Women's Legal Center, we get testimony from Fatima Gross, who says women just need to lose more gracefully to men.
Take a listen.
Success in school sports depends on a whole range of factors including how hard you work and coaching and access to really good resources and facilities.
And trans students participate in sports for the same reason as their kids, because it is fun, because it creates belonging and community, because it teaches so much about persistence and leadership and discipline, unless they learn to lose gracefully, hopefully.
And often they learn to win with dignity, hopefully.
They learn to do the sort of work that means you have higher grades and stay connected to school.
I want every kid to have that chance.
To have the chance to play.
So I feel compelled to just end my testimony with a few ideas for the committee to pursue if it really wants to work on this issue.
We could make it safer for student athletes who report harassment and sexual misconduct.
We could address resource dis...
More gracefully, that's what they're saying from the National Women's Legal Center.
With women like that, who needs men?
You've got to, at times, just pinch yourself when these woke witnesses come before the Congress when we're trying to evaluate the ways to protect Title IX and they're saying things that make absolutely no sense.
It reminds me of the hearing we had where women's groups were coming forward to advocate for the rights of men to have abortions.
And now, apparently, men to participate in women's sports.
I don't think women should have to lose gracefully to men.
I'm more of the Riley Gaines school of thought on that.
But, man, it's bizarre when they come and spread that vial before our congressional committees.
Before we get out of here, I want to bring your attention to something going on in our hemisphere in Latin America that threatens to really destabilize energy markets and the like.
Venezuela has taken a referendum justifying their annexation of about two-thirds of neighboring Guyana.
There was no real geopolitical basis for this referendum.
Venezuela believes that this was part of their country prior to a determination that British Guyana had those claims back in 1899. Now Maduro facing an election and A lot of popular discontent is seeking to externalize his conflict and his failures by saying, well, what Venezuela really needs is to take over two-thirds of Guyana.
There's a lot of consternation about this in Guyana, as you might imagine.
Here's Guyana and President Ali reacting to this news we'll talk about on the other side.
First of all, I want to make it very clear that the borders were settled in 1899. Venezuela and then British Guyana participated fully in the settlement of this border.
They both agreed on the border.
The border was then enacted in Venezuela local laws and also stamps were produced with the borders as it exists today.
When we were about to get independence, Venezuela raised the controversy and the Geneva agreement was entered into.
In that agreement, it provided that if the controversy could not have been settled between the parties, then the United Nations Secretary-General would determine the mechanism to settle that.
And the mechanism that was determined by the United Nations Secretary-General was the ICJ. And that is where we believe this matter must be settled.
Venezuela is faced with many challenges, political challenges, democratic challenges, and challenges within the society itself.
Many believe that this is a distraction to what obtains in Venezuela now, but we are taking this very seriously because of the narrative that is coming out of Venezuela, the threat that comes out of Venezuela.
And recently, Venezuela opened defiance of the International Court of Justice when the leaders there basically said they will not adhere to the orders of the ICJ. Now this is an important issue for us in this region because we want this region to remain a zone of peace.
This is an important part of the Western Hemisphere.
Alright, so here's what I think is really going on in Venezuela and in Guyana.
When you had the war break out with Ukraine and Russia, gas prices were soaring in the United States.
And so the Biden administration was doing everything and anything possible to try to get more fuel into our supply.
That's why they drew down on the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
A foolish decision that undid what President Trump had done to fill up the Strategic Petroleum Reserve so that we would be more resilient as a country if there were some run on natural resources.
So Joe Biden was willing to draw down on that over politics, whereas Trump put us in a stronger position for national security.
That's not all the Biden administration did.
They went to Iran and made deals with Iran to get more Iranian liquefied natural gas and crude oil into the marketplace.
And what did that result in?
Iran having claimed to billions of dollars, which was then moved from European banks into Qatari banks.
And now that extra $6 billion that Joe Biden has unlocked for the Iranian regime, we see put to use in the hands of the Houthis and Hamas and Hezbollah and Iranian-backed proxies throughout Syria and northern Iraq.
And it is causing real damage to our service members, U.S. contractors in the region.
Our allies are becoming more anxious and destabilized because we...
Made sure that Iran was more flush with cash than previously so that we were able to justify this continuing pressure against Russia.
But it wasn't just there.
The Biden administration dispatched a number of their senior officials down to Venezuela.
And they have taken actions to ease the Trump-era sanctions on Venezuela that were keeping the Maduro regime in check.
It wasn't allowing Maduro to export his particular brand of socialist communist dictatorship.
They weren't able to engage in these expeditions.
There were less of a threat to Colombia under the Trump administration.
But now that more Venezuelan oil is online, that sanctions have been reduced on Venezuela, well, we see them more dangerous, more adventurous, now making this claim on two-thirds of another country.
So I guess my question to the audience is this.
What bothers you more?
Russia?
Being interventionist in Crimea?
Or Venezuela being interventionist in Guyana?
I think we should be most focused on the destabilizing activities that are closest to our borders, that could lead to refugees, that could lead to war breaking out in Central America, eroding nation states, creating a more permissible environment for transnational criminal organizations, drug trafficking rings, human trafficking rings.
That's what's going to happen with a stronger, more malign, more capable Venezuela.
But oh no, we've got Washington politicians trying to act as though they're big tough on Russia and they're caring more about Crimea than the Crimea scenario playing out in our own region.
And obviously the discovery of natural gas and oil, other minerals in these areas of the Ikebo region of Guyana are accelerating Venezuela's ambitions, but they wouldn't have the ability to act on those If it wasn't for the Biden administration's weakness, we have to realize that there are resources in countries where we don't get along with the governments of the people and we don't want to see them enriched.
But at the same time, when we play this almost Foucault-style game of pressing power down in one place and hoping it doesn't emerge in another, the consequence is either higher prices for Americans or more bad guys get more bad stuff.
What we have done in this Ukraine war and Russia has created a cascade of negative geopolitical consequences in Europe, in Africa, in the Middle East, and in Latin America.
And the smartest thing we could do is bring that conflict to a close.
And if we did so, we would have a stronger hand in dealing with the dictators in our own midst.
So we'll be watching this situation very carefully.
I saw a report today that Maduro, on the back of this referendum that you just saw President Ali discussing, was encouraging Venezuelan oil companies to go lay claim, drill, extract.
And what do you think is going to happen there?
You're going to have some of the Guyanin contracts and contractors believing they have a claim of right there.
This thing could get kinetic.
You could see vandalism.
You could see terrorism.
All right in the Caribbean.
All in the southern Gulf of Mexico.
And too often our leaders are worried about what's going on oceans away instead of the stuff that's happening right here in our backyard.
It'll be tougher to address those things.
It'll be tougher to come up with conservative remedies to the policy challenges that face us in the world where we have a one or two seat majority.
But that's because Kevin McCarthy isn't sticking around if he can't wield the gavel.
Somewhat predictable, perhaps.
But predictably selfish.
Not in service of the Republican goals and the Republican majority.
We'll keep fighting for those goals.
We're glad you've joined the conversation.
Make sure that you are subscribed to our podcast.
You must have notifications turned on because we go live at different times of the day.
And if there are issues before the Congress you'd like to hear extended commentary on or you want a brief or an update on, leave those in the comments.
We love reviewing them and getting your feedback.
Thanks again for joining us.
We'll be back soon.
▲
Export Selection