The GOP has targeted Texas conservative Louie Gohmert - here's how he is fighting back

March 11, 2015

Writer

Republicans and Democrats both suffer from the disease of progressivism, and honest conservatives like Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) are left fighting for their lives. Gohmert has put together a PAC to support true conservatives who want to take a real stand on the issues that matter to Americans. Gohmert joined Glenn on radio today to explain what is happening behind closed doors in Washington and how he and others are standing up for the best interests of their constituents.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment:

GLENN: The GOP is now coming after Louie Gohmert and spending GOP money. If you've sent a check ever into the GOP, stop sending them money. They have now put a campaign together to campaign against Louie Gohmert. You know, one of those, call Louie Gohmert and tell them we don't want any of his French politics in Texas. Louie, why are they spending this money against you?

GOHMERT: Well, they were aboot to smote me and now they are smoting me. It's because they don't want people rising up and saying, no, I'm going to represent my district. I'm not going to just go along to get along. We're too far along down the wrong direction to just keep sliding down this path. So you got to go along or they're going to come after you and that's what's happening to --

GLENN: How much money -- how much money have they spent trying to get to you shut up? Do you have any idea?

GOHMERT: Well, I'd seen that they spent 400,000 in an additional buy to shed 12 of us. Actually, to slap us around. They're smoting us now. I love the earlier segment. Learned a lot about pronunciation.

GLENN: Right. And God and godless animals like Stu. We like you as sitting congressmen, one we respect on record. Is Stu a godless animal?

GOHMERT: You know, there has been something very interesting coming out of the vote last week. 167 Republicans voted against allowing the amnesty to go forward when we all including our speaker said we will not allow it. We're going to fight tooth and nail. And 167 stood up and said, no, this is not what we promised. And Glenn, it's been said nationally and in the media and especially the -- the left -- or the mainstream media, whatever, but that there is a very, very small group of radical right wingers in the -- in the Republican party that are trying to hijack the party. But if you look at that vote -- now, and I understand that there were a bunch of the 167 that told the speaker, look, I'm really, really sorry, I want to vote with you, but man, I've heard from my district and I cannot -- I voted for you. I'm paying for that. I cannot vote with you on this. And there were some of the 75 that voted with the speaker whose districts are very conservative. You look at that vote and it tells you, wait a minute. Way over two-thirds are representing very conservative -- what I could call mainstream districts and so maybe it's not the right wings that -- right wing there's have hijacked the party. Maybe it's people on the other end of the spectrum that have hijacked a very conservative country and Republican party.

GLENN: No, it's the progressive Republicans and quite honestly, those kinds of -- I think there's a lot of people that get swayed. They are not necessarily progressive. I think the Jeb Bushes. World, I think there's enough to go around, the Lindsey Grahams, the John McCains that are progressive. However, there's also a number of them that get there and they listen to these political consultants. And these political consultants say look, you can't, because you're going to hurt the party in X-number of years and you've got to do this and you've got to do that. And they listen to those boobs that give us a Mitt Romney or a John McCain every single time.

GOHMERT: Yeah. And actually, that was pretty evident the morning of the vote for speaker. I was talking at two different times to people who had said to their constituents if you elect me, I will not vote for Boehner for Speaker and they're wonderful guys and they said, look, I'm really struggling what to do. I'm praying for wisdom on what to do. And I respect that, but that's not -- at midnight I'm sitting at my desk in my office and I'm thinking, I wonder what that sounded like. Oh, god, should I honest and keep my promises or should I a scumbag that breaks my promise to the first vote? I just need a sign. Should I honest or not? I don't know. I mean, how do you pray that prayer?

GLENN: I don't know. You'd have to ask Stu.

(laughing).

GLENN: So --

GOHMERT: You got to believe in God, though, before you pray.

GLENN: Yeah, I know, I know. So Louie, you've started a -- you started a --

GOHMERT: A PAC.

GLENN: What is it? Tell me about it.

GOHMERT: Well, it's GOHconservative.com. And that way you don't have to worry if it's Gormert or Gohmert. It's GOHconservative.com. And that's a PAC that helps Conservatives who are willing to stand up for what we promise we would do when we got elected. It's pretty basic. But we need people's help. We've got the establishment after us. They're trying to teach us a lesson and send the message to others, look, you can't stand up to leadership in the Republican party because they will smote you and strike you down. You better get on board. And there are people who see that and say, gee, I'm in a tough district. I can't afford to get the leadership after me. So this just lets people you know, you can get help if you do stand up for what your district wants you to do. There's help. So I can use public help.

GLENN: Here's what I would like to ask.

(overlapping speakers).

GLENN: Here's what I would like to ask the audience to do. You think of GOP Conservatives, that's grand old party conservative. They put the party first. GOH, just remember good old honesty conservative. Okay?

GOHMERT: I love that.

GLENN: Just good old honesty conservative. This is what we need, some people who are honest. Now, this is a PAC that will help the Conservatives that are actually standing and help them fight the GOP. I've said this before. Defund the GOP. Stop writing checks to the GOP. Stop it. The party has so lost its soul, that it really thinks that Jeb Bush and giving the president all the rope to hang us, not him -- all the rope to hang us with amnesty and with -- with ObamaCare and everything else. They think that's a good idea. I'm done playing the game. Don't write another check to the GOP. And if you want to help the guys who are Republican to help them stand and fight, just remember, good old honesty conservative. GOHconservative.com -- is it org?

GOHMERT: Com.

GLENN: Dotcom.

GOHMERT: Yep. I couldn't have set it beard. -- said it better. Holy cow, I couldn't have said it that good. But thanks, Glenn. There are Republicans across the country, they're the good guys. And they're just so frustrated that they keep sending people to Washington and they can't believe that they get there and are not doing what they promised. And it's --

GLENN: So what's going to happen with amnesty? Louie?

GOHMERT: Well, it's -- it's unfortunate, but the members -- the Republican members that voted for this are putting all their stock in one United States district judge in the southern district, Andrew Hanen. He was one of the tops in his law class. He's a brilliant guy. Was with one of the best firms in Houston. And I just -- just a terrific guy. You want to read some good reading, read his 123-page opinion. But they're putting all their stock in the Judge Hanen. A law school classmate, by the way. He's doing his job when we failed to do ours. We had the power to stop this and several years ago a Supreme Court justice just said off the cuff, you know, you guys are not going to do your job you know, in keeping the branches in line, don't come running, crying to us. You know, you've got the power to do something. And we should.

GLENN: Um, the -- DHS. That was a home run. Can you tell us what happened at the last minutes with the DHS thing?

GOHMERT: With it passing?

GLENN: Yeah, I mean, no, no, no, wait, no, no. They had it. And then the -- the Republicans decide, yeah, we're not going -- we're not going to actually hold you to that. And then John Boehner comes back and does another one, which makes the Republican -- I think makes the Republicans look bad. What happened at the last minute, Louie?

GOHMERT: Well, we did have it. We were standing --

GLENN: You were winning.

GOHMERT: But, you know, the thing is, this was -- this was all cast back in actually September when the Republican leadership said, you know what, let's just put this off until December 11th. And many of us in September, were going, no, not until December 11th because we may win the Senate. Let's put it off to January. The end of January. And we could -- then we can get it strained it out -- straightened it on it. And some of us were going, no, you do it until December 11th and we know where this is going. So December 11th comes and we said okay, we're going to fund everything from the Department of Homeland Security. And many of us were going, no, you don't take hostage what you care about. You take hostage who the other people don't -- don't want you to take hostage, like the EPA, like the czars, like golf outings. You know, you go after the things that they care about. We're the ones that care more -- most about home blend security. So in other words -- Homeland Security. So in other words, people say we took a hostage that the other side wanted us to shoot. Like the Danny Devito movie where they kidnap his wife Bette Midler and they called and said you have to pay the ransom. No, kill her, go ahead. Let's go ahead and shoot her. I don't care.

GLENN: That's right.

GOHMERT: That's what we did here. We took the wrong hostage. We took the thing we care body and the president called the bluff and we knew going back to September, this is how we -- we were afraid it would play out. But then in November our leaders were saying we're going to fight tooth and nail. We're not going to give in. And as recent as like four days before the Speaker of the House said, we are not gonna let the Senate jam us and got this huge rousing ovation. And then just a matter of a few days later, well, we don't have any choice. We're going to have to let them jam us and take it.

GLENN: Gees.

GOHMERT: Is really is disheartening when you watch that play out.

GLENN: Last question, net neutrality.

GOHMERT: Oh, boy.

GLENN: I know.

GOHMERT: If there was one shining spot in the country freedom, it was in the Internet. And yes, I understand that the people that seem to have made the most money innovating on the Internet were giving to the democrats. I don't care. It's freedom. So obviously the government -- some in the government couldn't stand the thought of an area it didn't control, so it had to come after that.

GLENN: Are you going to be able to yank that back.?

GOHMERT: We have to stop that.

GLENN: You can you yank that back at all?

GOHMERT: Yes, we can, but it will take people standing up to do it, and if you're afraid of standing up, yeah, we're not going to be able to pull that off. But I still believe we can. You know, you and I both still have that hope that springs eternal and we're not gonna give up.

GLENN: Louie, I appreciate talking to you and I just love you and I think you're really truly one of the good guys and you really have a spine. You know, you were a judge and a good one. And you have gone in and done all of the hard work and I just love you and I --

GOHMERT: I love you too, Glenn, and it means so much but someone say I'm a porcupine Christian. That's someone that's got a lot of good points but you don't want to get close to him. But I'm working on it.

GLENN: I'm proud to stand shoulder to shoulder and as close as I can to you as a porcupine because I think you're one of the good guys.

GOHMERT: Thanks so much.

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?

Glenn's Show Prep