Glenn’s interview with Rep Louie Gohmert

Wednesday Rep Louie Gohmert gave a fiery statement on the floor in which he hammered Barack Obama’s failed foreign policy efforts. Glenn invited him onto the radio show this morning to discuss the President and the ongoing chaos in the Middle East.

Full Transcript Below:

GOHMERT: Hey, Glenn.

GLENN: How are you, sir?

GOHMERT: Well, better since you're there helping to stir up the people.

GLENN: You have the ‑‑ you gave a great speech on the floor of the House Wednesday night and you were the most viewed item on TheBlaze all day yesterday. I don't know if you know that. People ‑‑

GOHMERT: Well, I was just ‑‑ Keith let me know that. I was actually shocked because I left the floor feeling empty, I didn't feel that good about it, I just ‑‑ you know, like you, you know, you're just so broken hearted and you see what's happening and what we're not getting done.

GLENN: The House voted yesterday 329‑91 for a six‑month continuing resolution to maintain government spending at just over a trillion dollars. Allen West voted for it, Paul Ryan voted for it. You did not?

GOHMERT: I'm ‑‑ I left broken hearted over that. Glenn, that CR, continuing spending at the same level, means that after the biggest wave election since the 1930s, 87 conservative freshmen come in, that means we will have gone two years with this great group of freshmen, the new majority, and have cut nothing. How can you feel good about that?

GLENN: So is there any chance of defunding Egypt and defunding the aid that we're sending to Libya and Egypt?

GOHMERT: The last hope for really effectively doing that is in the Senate. Rand Paul and Jim Inhofe in particular are demanding that they not pass their CR until we ‑‑ they specifically include language that says money will not go there, at least suspend the money until we have a verified certain ally in those countries, which we don't, as you know. And our Republican leadership is saying, "Hey, you know, we don't have to worry because, you know, we put specific language in our appropriations that will carry over that says, you know, you've got to meet these requirements to get money." Glenn, we just saw Hillary Clinton in the last month come back and say, "No, no, we're going to give Egypt a waiver from those requirements." So it's a little empty to be saying, "Yeah, we've got language in existing legislation that will make sure they don't get it if they don't deserve it." Kind of like Solyndra

GLENN: Representative Louie Gohmert from Texas, one of the only guys who ‑‑ I shouldn't say that. There's several of you now.

GOHMERT: There are a bunch of good guys, yes.

GLENN: Bunch of good guys, but you've been there for a while and you're holding the line. The news has come out now that the State Department and the president had the information that we were going to be hit 48 hours before we were hit. So what did you know and when did you know it? 48 hours before. They did nothing to secure any of the embassies. They didn't alert the embassies, nor the ambassadors, including the ambassador that was traveling back, coming into Libya. They didn't alert him. They obviously killed him, they ‑‑ rumors ‑‑ or not rumors. Reports from the Middle East now are that he was Sodomized before they killed him and then they got our basic knock list. They got our list of our safehouses and they got a list of those who are helping us.

Can you tell me, is there anybody in Washington that has a concern that the president of the United States and our State Department knew about this in advance and did nothing?

GOHMERT: Well, yes. There's a bunch of us that are, but getting that to manifest itself in actual legislation seems a little difficult. Because, gee, we don't want to raise too big a fuss, Glenn. I mean, gollee, you know about this. There are consequences if you stand up for what you believe. Heck, you might ‑‑ you might lose your sponsors if you're a talk show host; or if you're running for office, you know, people not give to you or people might not vote for you. In fact, Glenn, the number one thing that we heard during orientation eight years ago when I got elected, and it was true in both parties, other people and Democrats said that we were told, we were taught, drilled into us the best thing you can do for your country is get reelected. And it made me mad every time I heard it because sometimes, you know what? You just may have to take a stand for the good of the country, the good of the future, and it may cost you but then as you have found ‑‑ but when you do that, you know, God can work things together for good. It may hurt for a little bit but, by golly, there will be something better come down the road. And those of us that know that are not afraid to stand up ‑‑

GLENN: Let me ‑‑

GOHMERT: ‑‑ no matter what happens, but there are not enough people obviously that are doing that yet.

GLENN: If you don't have enemies, you don't have character.

GOHMERT: Well, my team staff says, "Well, you know you're over the target again because you're picking up a lot of flack."

GLENN: Well, what can ‑‑ what can the American people do? Should they call their senators or ‑‑

GOHMERT: Absolutely. Everybody that has a concern needs to call both of your senators and tell them, you call your leadership in both parties, Republican and Democrat, you call your leaders and say, "Hey, Rand Paul and Jim Inhofe are right and we should not let any more money go to these countries. Not for now. This is too important." And, you know, the message that goes out is that we're ‑‑ we may look strong on our school ground but you we are scared of the bullies and we will pay these little bitty bullies just to try to leave us alone, we'll give them our lunch money. That never worked in elementary school; it doesn't work in the big world when they're killing our people, our servants, our public servants like Stevens. I mean, it's an outrage, and people need to be upset. But you've got to give it to the president. You know, here you have four people killed in the line of duty when they didn't even warn them, and he does, though. He does bother to take a minute and a half from his busy campaign and fundraising out in Las Vegas and say, hey, it's been a tough week there. You know, we lost some people. All right, now back to the big celebration and how great I am. You know, you've got to give it to him. He did pause long enough to pay a little tribute to those folks.

GLENN: Louis ‑‑ Louie Gohmert, the represent in Texas from congress. The number, by the way, to call your senators, 202‑224‑3121. 202‑224‑3121. Tell them not another dime to Egypt and to Libya. We are on the wrong side. And the president ‑‑

GOHMERT: Thank you.

GLENN: ‑‑ and I believe the State Department know it. Thank you very much, Louie.

GOHMERT: Glenn, thank you so very much.

GLENN: You're welcome.

GOHMERT: God bless you.

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November? 

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?

What is the Secret Service trying to hide about Trump's assassination attempt?

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor, Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

This past weekend we were mere inches away from a radically different America than the one we have today. This was the first time a president had been wounded by a would-be assassin since 1981, and the horrific event has many people questioning the competency and motives of the supposedly elite agents trusted with the president's life.

The director of the Secret Service apparently knew about the assassin's rooftop before the shooting—and did nothing.

Kimberly Cheatle has come under intense scrutiny these last couple of weeks, as Secret Service director she is responsible for the president's well-being, along with all security operations onsite. In a recent interview with ABC, Cheatle admitted that she was aware of the building where the assassin made his mark on American history. She even said that she was mindful of the potential risk but decided against securing the site due to "safety concerns" with the slope of the roof. This statement has called her competence into question. Clearly, the rooftop wasn't that unsafe if the 20-year-old shooter managed to access it.

Glenn pointed out recently that Cheatle seems to be unqualified for the job. Her previous position was senior director in global security at America's second-favorite soda tycoon, PepsiCo. While guarding soda pop and potato chips sounds like an important job to some, it doesn't seem like a position that would qualify you to protect the life of America's most important and controversial people. Even considering her lack of appropriate experience, this seems like a major oversight that even a layperson would have seen. Can we really chalk this up to incompetence?

Former Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Secret Service and DHS said they'd be transparent with the investigation...

Shortly after the attempted assassination, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees the Secret Service, launched an investigation into the shooting and the security protocols in place at the rally. The DHS promised full transparency during the investigation, but House Republicans don't feel that they've been living up to that promise. Republican members of the House Oversight Committee are frustrated with Director Cheatle after she seemingly dodged a meeting scheduled for Tuesday. This has resulted in calls for Cheatle to step down from her position.

Two FBI agents investigate the assassin's rooftop Jeff Swensen / Stringer | Getty Images

Why is the Secret Service being so elusive? Are they just trying to cover their blunder? We seem to be left with two unsettling options: either the government is even more incompetent than we'd ever believed, or there is more going on here than they want us to know.

Cheatle steps down

Following a horrendous testimony to the House Oversight Committee Director Cheatle finally stepped down from her position ten days after the assassination attempt. Cheatle failed to give any meaningful answer to the barrage of questions she faced from the committee. These questions, coming from both Republicans and Democrats, were often regarding basic information that Cheatle should have had hours after the shooting, yet Cheatle struggled with each and every one. Glenn pointed out that Director Cheatle's resignation should not signal the end of the investigation, the American people deserve to know what happened.

What we DO and DON'T know about Thomas Matthew Crooks

Jim Vondruska / Stringer | Getty Images

It has been over a week since 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks narrowly failed to assassinate President Trump while the president gave a speech at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennslyvania. Despite the ongoing investigations, we still know very little about the would-be assassin, which has left many wondering if the agencies involved are limiting the information that Congress and the public are receiving.

As Glenn has pointed out, there are still major questions about the shooter that are unanswered, and the American people are left at the whim of unreliable federal agencies. Here is everything we know—and everything we don't know—about Thomas Matthew Crooks:

Who was he?

What we know:Thomas Crooks lived in Bethel Parks, Pennsylvania, approximately an hour south of Butler. Crooks went to high school in Bethel Parks, where he would graduate in 2022. Teachers and classmates described him as a loner and as nerdy, but generally nice, friendly, and intelligent. Crooks tried out for the school rifle team but was rejected due to his poor aim, and reports indicate that Crooks was often bullied for his nerdy demeanor and for wearing camo hunting gear to school.

After high school, Crooks began work at Bethel Park Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation Center as a dietary aide. In fact, he was scheduled to work on the day of the rally but requested the day off. He passed a background check to work at the facility and was reportedly an unproblematic employee. Crooks was also a member of a local gun club where he practiced shooting the day before the rally.

It was recently revealed that sometime before his attempted assassination, Crooks posted the following message on Steam, a popular computer application used for playing video games: "July 13 will be my premiere, watch as it unfolds." Aside from this, Crooks posted no warning or manifesto regarding his attack, and little other relevant information is known about him.

What we don't know:It is unclear what Crook's political affiliations or views were, or if he was aligned with any extremist organizations. Crooks was a registered Republican, and his classmates recall him defending conservative ideas and viewpoints in class. On the other hand, the Federal Election Commission has revealed he donated to a progressive PAC on the day Biden was inaugurated. He also reportedly wore a COVID mask to school much longer than was required.

Clearly, we are missing the full picture. Why would a Republican attempt to assassinate the Republican presidential nominee? What is to gain? And why would he donate to a progressive organization as a conservative? This doesn't add up, and so far the federal agencies investigating the attack have yet to reveal anything more.

What were his goals?

What we know: Obviously we know he was trying to assassinate President Trump—and came very close to succeeding, but beyond that, Crooks' goals are unknown. He left no manifesto or any sort of written motive behind, or if he did, the authorities haven't published it yet. We have frustratingly little to go off of.

What we don't know: As stated before, we don't know anything about the movies behind Crooks' heinous actions. We are left with disjointed pieces that make it difficult to paint a cohesive picture of this man. There is also the matter that he left explosives, ammo, and a bulletproof vest in his car. Why? Did he assume he was going to make it back to his car? Or were those supplies meant for an accomplice that never showed up?

The shocking lack of information on Crooks' motives makes it seem likely that we are not being let on to the whole truth.

Did he work alone?

What we know: Reportedly, Crooks was the only gunman on the site, and as of now, no other suspects have been identified. The rifle used during the assassination attempt was purchased and registered by Crooks' father. However, it is unlikely that the father was involved as he reported both his son and rifle missing the night of the assassination attempt. Crooks' former classmates described him as a "loner," which seems to corroborate the narrative that he worked alone.

What we don't know: We know how Crooks acquired his rifle, but what about the rest of his equipment? He reportedly had nearly a hundred extra rounds of ammunition, a bulletproof vest, and several homemade bombs in his car. Could these have been meant for a co-conspirator who didn't show? Did Crooks acquire all of this equipment himself, or did he have help?

There's also the matter of the message Crooks left on the video game platform Steam that served as his only warning of the attack. Who was the message for? Are there people out there who were aware of the attack before it occurred? Why didn't they alert authorities?

We know authorities have access to Crooks' laptop and cellphone that probably contain the answers to these pertinent questions. Why haven't we heard any clarity from the authorities? It seems we are again at the mercy of the federal bureaucracy, which begs one more question: Will we ever know the whole truth?