Stephen A. Smith (1:58)

the goats can get it.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (1:59)

That was his thing. I'm not gonna take it away from him. I'm gonna put it for you where the goats can get it. Do you know why it's easy to get at the President of the United States right now to point the finger of blame at him because the President

Stephen A. Smith (2:12)

of the United States is up.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (2:14)

That's why somebody gotta say it. So I'm gonna say it. He's fucking up. And I'm sorry that I have to accentuate the things that need to be said by using profanity. But sometimes it's necessary just to get the point across because it is necessary. In this particular instance, he's messing up so badly that the Republican Party and the GOP is in a world of trouble. Somebody better wake them up real quick. Now I don't want the Democrats to be mad at me because remember, I'm a registered independent and I ain't trying to take sides as it pertains to individuals. I'll take sides when it comes to policy. I'll take sides when it comes to the interest of the United States of America. I'll take sides on a case by case basis. But overall, I'm not a party affiliated guy, not speaking as individuals, not speaking towards individuals, but speaking collectively. I can't stand none of your asses because of the kind of things that we've been witnessing take place. But it needs to be said that the President is messing up so bad that the GOP is in danger of eviscerating its own self to a degree that it may never recover from, or at the very least take a long time to recover from. Assuming the Democrats don't resemble idiots and mess up the momentum that has accidentally fallen right in their lap. You can't make this stuff up. Christmas has arrived for the Democratic Party in the month of March 2026. You just can't make it up. This is what's going on. Pay attention to what's going on right here. We got the SAVE act issue. We've got the war in Iran as an issue. We've got gas prices going up. We can't ignore that cost of living, affordability. We got a vice president going on a circuit lying his ass off talking about how times were worse with gas prices under the Biden administration when clearly the price of gas right now is more than it was during the Biden administration. That is a fact. $3 and 86 cents right now. National average gas price, I understand this ain't California is much worse there with Gavin Newsom as the governor. But nevertheless, the national average wasn't to this point under Joe Biden. It is to this point with Donald Trump. Does he seem to care? Not so much. Did he mention the shooting at ODU Old Dominion University? No. Did he mention what happened when somebody ran into a synagogue recently? No. And then you got this war going on. He's saying it ain't a war, but what are we looking at right now? It is now day 19 of the conflict in the Middle East. It spread at least across a dozen Countries effectively shutting down the Strait of Hormuz to western chipping. That's 20% of oil in the world that goes through the Strait of Hermus. And he's talking about, ain't no problem. Ain't no problem.

Stephen A. Smith (5:32)

Everything is great. Everything is wonderful.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (5:34)

How could you think otherwise? We're winning the war. It's not really a war, but if

Angie.com Narrator (5:39)

it were a war.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (5:39)

We're winning, we're winning the war. That is not a war. This is what he's saying. This is the kind of nonsensical shit coming out his mouth. And somehow, some way, you've got Republicans out there playing a role of apologist, forgetting to do their job and thinking it's not gonna come back to cost them. This is one of the worst disruptions to global energy supply since the 1970s. Oil embargo, by the way, driving crude oil prices up above 40%. I got researchers for this stuff. This ain't stuff. I come out of the. Out of the womb knowing I don't know this stuff until I read about it.

Stephen A. Smith (6:23)

According to CNBC, roughly 9 million barrels of oil per day, about 10% of the global supply remains bottlenecked in the region with absolutely nowhere to go. You got ships and people being interviewed on 60 Minutes scared to move because a drone might hit them.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (6:40)

They been there for the whole 19 days. Oil prices are spiking up. Airports, flights have been delayed and canceled. Airports are packed. The American consumer has been drastically inconvenienced. And he don't have Covid as an excuse this time, because there's no COVID pandemic going on as we speak. Look right there. This is my poll. Ladies and gentlemen. I took the liberty of conducting my own poll on my own X pages.

Stephen A. Smith (7:17)

Cause I'm Stephen a baby. That's why I could do that.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (7:21)

Got my own poll on X. Over 15,000 people responded to this question. Oil prices rising, flights delayed, market shaky. How much of this war is about energy control? Bigger than energy.

Stephen A. Smith (7:38)

47% said so.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (7:40)

Mostly about all. 36% said so. Partially economic. 9% said so. Purely security. And ignorant ass 8% said so. There's no way that you can look at this and say this is purely about security. Iran was not an imminent threat. This, at least according to somebody who used to work for Trump, just resigned. And why did that happen? Because Mr. Joe Kent, who was the director of the National Counterterrorism center, former Green Beret, by the way, 11 combat deployments, six Bronze Star medals, and a close aid to Tulsi Gabbard Department of National Security was as MAGA as they come. This man resigns earlier this week. What does he say?

Stephen A. Smith (8:33)

After much reflection, I have decided to resign from my position as director of National Counterterrorism center, effective today. I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation. And it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby. I pray that you will reflect upon what we are doing in Iran and who we are doing it for. The time for bold action is now. You can reverse course and chart a new path for our nation, or you can allow us to slip further toward decline and chaos. You hold the cards now. Again, I think the president is up, but I don't support that. Mr. Joe Kent, respectfully. Where the hell have you been? Why couldn't you just resign and go away quietly? Why are you diamond your boss out like that? You're so appalled by all of this. Where was this vitriol? Where was this stubbornness? Weren't you complicit with some of the other actions that he made when Iran was bombed last June?

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (9:33)

You didn't say anything then. So I. And to the Jewish community out there, let me be very, very clear. I don't blame them if they're in an uproar over Joe Kent, because what you're doing is basically saying that Israel instigated this war. Well, Benjamin Netanyahu is on the record saying no. Other Israelis and other members of the Jewish community are saying no. And a statement like that by Joe Kent could easily be used as an excuse for individuals out there to engage in anti Semitism, which is fomented and grown. And we all need to speak out against that because there's plenty of Jews that don't agree with Benjamin Netanyahu. There's plenty of Jewish individuals that don't agree with.

Stephen A. Smith (10:17)

With what's going on right now with

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (10:19)

the United States and Israel collaborating with

Stephen A. Smith (10:21)

one another against Iran in this fashion.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (10:25)

So we don't need to sit there and engage in condemnation towards a community of people and nobody is implying otherwise. So I'm not down for what Joe Kent did, but it does. It is worth noting that if you are Donald Trump and the fact that had happened on your watch, that's the latest indication that things are falling apart by the seams. Here's another one of my polls. And guys, get that echo out of my ear, please.

Stephen A. Smith (10:54)

I don't like hearing myself twice.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (10:57)

Here's the deal. Another poll I personally did on X

Stephen A. Smith (11:01)

Again, over 15,000 responses.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (11:04)

I asked the question, did the US

Stephen A. Smith (11:06)

enter this war on its own terms

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (11:08)

or because of allies? On my X platform, Stephen A. Smith

Stephen A. Smith (11:15)

75% said the war is being influenced by Israel. A hundred percent, I'm sorry, 100% US decision only 13% feel that way. A strategic necessity. Only 11% feel that way. Global pressure, only 1% feel that way. So most people think this is about Israel, which fed into what Joe Kent said. Either way you slice it, if you Donald Trump, how could this possibly be a good thing? How could this possibly be a good thing? And if you're the gop, it's even worse for you. Because you see, Donald Trump ain't running for third terms unless he wants to circumvent the Constitution in the United States, the 22nd Amendment, and run for a third term in office. Where's Donald Trump going? He's going home. With the billions of dollars he's collected as President of the United States between him and his son and other family members and stuff like that. Whether it's wit cough, whether it's his son in law Kushner, whether it's his son Donald Jr. Or Eric or somebody else. Clearly Donald Trump is worth billions more than he was before he returned to office January 20th of 2026. Here's a question. What has America gotten for this? What is the GOP gotten for this? He's Teflon, Don. No doubt about it. We all know he operates with a different set of physics than everybody else in politics. Always has, always will. He's bent rules, he's bent norms, he's walked away clean. And the gop, here's where they made the mistake, y'.

Caller - Mr. Positive (12:52)

All.

Stephen A. Smith (12:52)

They started thinking it's their party instead of recognizing it's his party that the stuff that he gets away with, they'll never get away with. So when you co sign every salacious or insidious thing that this man elects

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (13:06)

to do, assuming you view it that way, where is that going to get a Marco Rubio? Where is that going to get a J.D.

Stephen A. Smith (13:15)

vance?

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (13:15)

Where is that going to get any

Stephen A. Smith (13:17)

G O P potential nominee?

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (13:20)

Because you see what the thing that's missing with all of this other stuff,

Stephen A. Smith (13:22)

and I keep going back to this is the GOP and how they look. I have never been one to engage in condemnation about the President. He's a racist, he's a Nazi, he's this, he's that. No, he's a powerful individual that tries to get his way while in power. It's up to 435. The majority of 435 congressional figures to stop him. It's up to the majority of 100 United States senators to stop him. It's up to our courts to exercise their judicial responsibility and stop him.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (13:58)

How many presidents would get away with

Stephen A. Smith (14:00)

a whole bunch of stuff if they could with impunity?

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (14:03)

He pushes the envelope. No doubt. Probably unlike any president in history. No doubt. But the bottom line is they'll all try if you let them and you get to teach them that they don't have to worry about ramifications and repercussions. But if you do nothing, where's that going to get you? The GOP has done nothing to police him and rein him in. You got the SAVE act going on where we're focusing on that now. And identification. Even a guy like Senator Fetterman out of Pennsylvania who's been willing to side with those on the right thought that they were a bit too extreme because of the ID requirements and the alienation of 20 to 25 million people who would consider themselves disenfranchised. Now, the right will tell you what's

Stephen A. Smith (14:50)

wrong with an id. When does an ID not required?

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (14:52)

We get all of that part. Most Americans, black, white and everything in between understand that you need an id. But when your driver's license ain't enough, when a real ID ain't enough, when the likelihood is that you need a passport and even then you have to have proof of citizenship and you can't, and you can't do the mail in balloting and all of that other stuff, then all of a sudden it gets a bit more dicey and it seems to create the kind of inconvenience that the Democrats have been complaining about. Now, did Chuck Schumer and others go too far with Jim Crow 2.0?

Stephen A. Smith (15:23)

Of course they did.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (15:23)

Were they engaging hyperbole? Absolutely. But their points in terms of it being a bit more stringent and a bit more difficult in a concerted effort to prevent individuals otherwise licensed and legalized to legitimately vote to not do so. Certainly they can make that argument. Now. I'm just not lost on me that the Democrats just want votes from anybody they can get it from. And they don't mind letting some illegals vote either. And that's inexcusable, and I get that. But none of that absolves the gop.

Stephen A. Smith (15:55)

From what we're seeing right now, affordability is an issue.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (15:59)

Gas prices is an issue. Food is an issue. Travel, convenience and safety. 366 TSA workers have quit 50,000 have gone unpaid. What the hell is happening to this country? We think it's okay for people to show up to work and not get paid. You got people quitting their jobs or calling in sick. Usually no more than 2% of people call in sick over the last two or three days. A minimum of 10% have called in because they're not getting paid. They got to get money to pay their damn bills. We got the nerve to ask them to work, to insist that they work, not pay them, but still send them bills. Excuse my leg. What the fuck is wrong with y'?

Caller (16:50)

All?

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (16:52)

I mean, this is some straight bullshit. It's gotta stop. This is not what America is supposed to be. This is not what America is supposed to be about. We as American citizens are not supposed to be treated this way. And the GOP got their fingerprints written all over it because they've allowed the president to get away with it. I have been one. I'm down with Donald Trump closing the borders because they never should have been opened by Joe Biden. I'm down for that. I wasn't totally against the tariff wars because I wanted to see how it worked. Hell, we. $38.99 trillion in debt, up over $2 billion in debt. An additional $2 billion over the last year. 39 trillion, up 2.23 trillion in one year. I understand we got to try something. I'm down for safety in the streets. I'm down for strong national security. I was totally against using every means necessary to try to throw Donald trump in jail. 34 felony accounts. You went after this man and tried to throw him in jail for the

Stephen A. Smith (18:04)

rest of his life, and you didn't think he was going to come back after you? You should have made sure you got him.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (18:08)

You didn't do it. So his vengeance tour, he's coming at your asses. You deserve it. You should have did what you got. How the hell. We got a Constitution in the United States of America where you could be a convicted felon and still run for office. How come you didn't make sure that language was modified? You didn't do it. You brought some of this on yourself,

Stephen A. Smith (18:33)

but it doesn't negate the fact that we're here and that the GOP got their 30 fingerprints written all over it. Yes. You look at Donald Trump right now. Approval rating, disapproval rating growing amongst independents who believe the economy has gotten worse since Trump's inauguration. The number's at 52% right now. His disapproval rating, it's at 52% and growing. Show Me another one, Griff. Keep it coming. 64% disapproval rate growing. Americans who say they think Trump is out of touch with concerns of most people.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (19:10)

64%.

Stephen A. Smith (19:11)

So much of relating to the younger

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (19:13)

audience, so much relation relating to Generation X, so much of relating to the people, to the common folks. I said when he got elected that, you know how pathetic the Democratic Party was? 77 million voters out there said he was closer to normal than they were. That's how pathetic the Democratic Party was.

Stephen A. Smith (19:32)

But now it's shifting because Trump

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (19:38)

is

Stephen A. Smith (19:38)

gradually, if not rapidly regressing to an absolute, unmitigated disaster. You even got folks on MAGA saying, what's the reason for this war? Why are we going at it with Iran? They got proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis and Lord knows who else. They got thousands of drones. They bombed a hotel at Dubai. We don't even have an American base there. Who knows what proxies they have? Who knows what allies they may attack?

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (20:14)

You got, Trump got the audacity, the

Stephen A. Smith (20:16)

unmitigated goal to have an attitude with

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (20:19)

NATO and folks under its umbrella because they won't come to his aid and support the United States in the war against Iran. Do you not remember how you talked about them and how you treated them when you threw tariffs at their ass every two seconds? You think they forgot? You think they forgot? I mean, you can't make this up. This is some nonsense. Yeah, just how many times have I tried to tell y', all, stephen A. Smith's a capitalist, proud of it. Ain't gonna be a socialist, ain't gonna be a communist.

Stephen A. Smith (20:51)

I ain't down for that.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (20:52)

I'm an American citizen.

Stephen A. Smith (20:53)

I'm proud to be an American. I'm a capitalist all day, every day.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (20:55)

I don't give a damn what nobody say. Let me be very, very clear. Here's what I don't believe. This is me imitating Trump. Not his voice, just his behavior.

Stephen A. Smith (21:08)

You ain't shit. You'll never be shit. You never was shit. I can't stand you. I just discuss me. You mean nothing to me, by the way. Give me your help.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (21:16)

That's Trump. Germany, Greece, Canada,

Stephen A. Smith (21:23)

China.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (21:27)

I mean, this is basically how he talked. Where did you think that was going to get you? How much did you think you could play the bully before this stuff came back to bite you?

Stephen A. Smith (21:41)

But the problem is,

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (21:44)

see, as the

Stephen A. Smith (21:44)

President of the United States, he's still good. It's the rest of us that's in trouble. See, he got his billions, he's got his relationships. The man talked about building a resort in Gaza. Lord knows what they got going on. Also, didn't he get a Jeff or Qatar? From Qatar, $1.4 billion in personal profit since returning to office. $1.4 billion is a number. I personally think that's a bit low, but that's what the research shows. You can't make this up, it's so

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (22:27)

bad, by the way.

Stephen A. Smith (22:28)

According to Tim Carney, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, at their peak after 2016, Republicans controlled 31 governorships in 68 state legislative chambers. Today, according to Ballotpedia, they're down to 26 governorships in 57 chambers. That's a clear decline during Trump's 10 year hold over the party. According to Quinnipiac university poll conducted March 6th to 8th, the most recent Trump's approval among the independent voters sits at just 28%, with 66% disapproving, a net rating of minus 38 points, the lowest level recorded for independents in that polling series. CNN reports that over the past year, Trump's approval among independents has dropped 15 points to 26%, the lowest it's been in either of his terms. These are voters the GOP needs to win an election, especially in the post Trump era. Why am I saying all of this? Because there's nobody out there that is Trump for the gop. None of y' all could get away with the stuff he's got away with. None of y' all could garner the level of popularity and support that he has garnered. Which means that it will behoove you to not flow with him, not side with him, not okay and condone and every damn thing he does. In other words, show you got some balls, a spine. Because if you don't, you will fall. He ain't falling. He's just leaving. He's leaving with at least an additional 4.1.4 billion in his pocket, which is probably more.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (24:07)

He gonna be all right.

Stephen A. Smith (24:10)

His children are gonna be all right. His grandchildren is gonna be all right. His family members and his boys are gonna be all right. What about y'?

Caller (24:19)

All?

Stephen A. Smith (24:22)

What about y'?

Caller (24:23)

All?

Stephen A. Smith (24:25)

86696 POTUS is the number to call up. That's 86696, POTUS. You listen live to the Stephen A. Smith Show, Straight Shooter with Stephen A. Right here over SiriusXM Pulus radio channel 124. Got an interesting guest coming up talking to us about the Save act, talking to us about the war with Iran. All of that and more coming up. Don't go away It's Stephen A. In the house. You know what time it is.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (24:58)

The big game tips off in three

Stephen A. Smith (24:59)

hours and you're still trying to figure out how to watch it. But signing up for another streaming service you'll barely use. That's not the move. With Sling, you get more flexibility than ever before.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (25:10)

Get instant access to live TV only

Stephen A. Smith (25:13)

when you want it.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (25:14)

Choose from Slings one day, three day

Stephen A. Smith (25:17)

or seven day passes or go for a monthly plan. And it's not just about when you watch, it's about what you watch. Take control of your channel lineup and pick the package that fits your sports priorities so you only pay for the channels you actually care about. Watch the games you want, when you want, with no long term commitment. Sling lets you do that. Visit sling.com to learn more.

Angie.com Advertiser (25:40)

You know what they say. Early bird gets the ultimate vacation home. Book early and save over $120 with VRBO because early gets you closer to the action. Whether it's waves lapping at the shore or snoozing in a hammock that overlooks, well, whatever you want it to so you can all enjoy the payoff come summer with VRBO's early booking deals. Rise and shine. Average savings $141 select homes only.

Angie.com Narrator (26:15)

The question is not whether Americans are bright enough to obtain photo id. We know they can and we know they do. The real question is why would we not require the same level of verification for something as consequential and vital as voting? Are our Democrat colleagues saying voting doesn't matter? Or is it something else?

Caller (26:39)

This bill creates chaos, but maybe that's not the motivation of some of my colleagues.

Stephen A. Smith (26:46)

But I do believe it's the motivation

Caller (26:48)

of the President, who basically said, quote, it will guarantee the midterms. It's designed to make it harder for

Stephen A. Smith (26:57)

American citizens, certain American citizens, to vote. Voices from both sides concerning the SAVE act and the issue revolving around that. Both sides of the aisle, Republicans and Democrats. You're listening live to Straight Shooter with yours truly, Stephen A. Coming at you every Wednesday night from 6 to 8pm over the airwaves of SiriusXM POTUS radio channel 124. It's my pleasure to have my next guest. He is the Vice President of Governance and Bipartisanship at the Bipartisan Policy center in Washington, D.C. a nonprofit think tank that promotes, develops and advocates for bipartisan solutions to key issues facing the United States of America. He's here to break down the facts about the Save America Act. Please welcome to the show. For the first time, the one and only Mr. Matthew Weil. Mr. Weil, welcome. Thank you for joining the show. Sir, did I pronounce your last name correctly, sir?

Matthew Weil (27:46)

You did. Thank you for having me.

Stephen A. Smith (27:48)

Thank you for having me. So give it to me straight. First things first. You heard that sound you hear both sides of the aisle. Just to crystallize and illuminate the issue for the American public out there. Give me the biggest argument that both sides are making for their respective positions on this issue involving the SAVE act, please.

Matthew Weil (28:09)

Sure. So I think the Republicans right now are saying voter ID is very popular, and we use our IDs for many purposes to get on planes, to open a bank account. And so to them, the argument would be we're doing it for many other aspects of our daily lives, and so why couldn't we do it for this? And that is certainly one component of the SAVE act, bringing a very photo ID to the polls to verify your identification. I think the Democrats would argue that that is only half of the SAFE Act. The other half is much more difficult to comply with, and that is the requirement that voters show documented proof of citizenship in person to an election official or other government employee. And that's actually much harder to do.

Stephen A. Smith (28:57)

Why is it much harder to do, sir? Explain.

Matthew Weil (28:59)

Yeah, I think the. It breaks down a few different ways. There are only a few different documents that actually prove citizenship, and I think that's really what the public doesn't realize. The easiest way to prove your citizenship would be your passport. Under this bill, it's unexpired. It has to have your current name. But if you have a passport, you're in a pretty good place. You would have the required citizenship document to register to vote. The other way of doing it is, is through a government id, so a license and then some other document like a birth certificate. So first I want to say that most Americans have a driver's license, so they can certainly verify their identity at the polls. But for registration purposes, a thing like a real ID actually doesn't qualify. Only five states have real IDs that would qualify under this bill because they have an enhancement for travel into Canada. I think that most people don't have that id. Then you have the birth certificate. Birth certificates are, first of all, many people don't have access to them. And if you don't have access to it, it's hard to get. But even if you do have access to it, the SAVE act has a lot of specific requirements in it for what has to be on that birth certificate. It has to list a parent's Name, it has to list place of birth, has to have a signature of a valid representative from the jurisdiction you were born in. It has to have the seal of that jurisdiction. And I can tell you that if people look at their, their birth certificates, I think they would, they would realize pretty quickly that what they have for the birth certificate, and it will be their original birth certificate, might not qualify under what's, what's in the SAVE act currently.

Stephen A. Smith (30:37)

So what would be the easiest way to prove your citizenship with an ID in today's day and age in March of 2026? Would it be going a route of the passport? Would it be them validating the driver's license situation in a different way to make it more authentic? What would be the easiest path towards acquiring the kind of proper ID where this would not be an issue?

Matthew Weil (31:07)

Yeah, so the clear, easiest path is showing your passport. But the fact is only about 45% of Americans have a valid current passport. And getting one isn't too easy either. Right. There's a pretty high cost and you have to bring significant amounts of documentation to get it. So, yes, it's easy if you already have a passport. Not the easiest way to prove your citizenship if you have to go and get the passport first.

Stephen A. Smith (31:31)

Does that make the argument more valid when Senator Chuck Schumer and others are on Capitol Hill bringing up words like Jim Crow 2.0, disenfranchisement, 20 to 25 million people not being allowed to vote, of them being compromised for their right to vote, et cetera, et cetera, does that legitimize their argument based on what you just described?

Matthew Weil (31:55)

Yeah, I think, look, there will be some barriers to the registration process that do not currently exist if the Save America act passes, that's for sure. The certain numbers, I think they're up for debate. I think if parties have the perspective that they want a citizenship requirement and they want the documented proof of citizenship requirement, there are better ways of doing it than what's currently laid out in the SAVE Act. So the SAVE act does what we call front end verification. It requires the individual to prove their citizenship to the government using certain documents. And that's hard. Like I said, Only 45% of Americans have a currently valid passport. About 85% of people say they have a plus a birth certificate. Although as I said before, the birth certificate requirements in the SAVE act are a little bit more stringent than I think people realize. And about 88% have one or the other. So we're talking about about 12% of Americans that would not be able to easily produce a document proving their citizen citizenship even though they are eligible to vote.

Stephen A. Smith (33:07)

So that 12% that you said that wouldn't be able to easily produce documents that shows their citizenship. Has it been proven that most of them are Democrats?

Matthew Weil (33:16)

No. I mean, I think that's the interesting thing here. Democrats and Republicans are about equally likely to say they have the required documentation, either the passport or the ID birth certificate. I think what's interesting is that Democrats are more likely to have the passport and the passport is the more reliable document, and more Republicans would be relying on a driver's license plus birth certificate.

Stephen A. Smith (33:41)

So if that's the case, why do you believe that the public that the Republicans have taken this position is, are they of the mindset that illegals have voted in elections and that's something that they are determined to radically to eradicate, or is that just propaganda?

Matthew Weil (33:58)

And there's certainly a narrative out there that there is massive fraud. And I think there is no evidence that that exists. And what I'll point you to is data directly from the federal government on this topic.

Caller (34:08)

So.

Matthew Weil (34:08)

So the federal government, the Department of Homeland Security, runs the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program, the SAVE system. And that's how employers typically verify that people are in the country lawfully who's a citizen. When the President came into office back in 2025, he was clearly interested already in elections. And the Department of Homeland Security actually made that system available in ways it had never done so before to election officials to verify that the people already on the rolls were citizens. And so we have about a year of data now, and 27 states are sharing their voter rolls with the save system. And what we've learned over the past year is that of all the records that have gone through the save system, about 0.04% are coming back listed as non citizens. Now, there can be a lot of reasons why a lot of errors in that data. First of all, we're finding when further investigation happens, there's that of that 0.04%, a large number of that is administrative errors. People who had actually, when they went to the dmv, said that they were not citizens, they do not want to register to vote, but accidentally got registered to vote anyway. And then there's also people who have since become citizens. So even though they're being returned back as non citizens on the database, it's an error in the federal database. So again, 0.04% is what we're seeing as listed for noncitizens on the current voter rolls and my guess is that far fewer of those are even attempting to vote.

Stephen A. Smith (35:37)

Vice President of Governance and Bipartisanship at the Bipartisan Policy center in Washington D.C. Mr. Matthew. Mr. Matthew Wild right here with Stephen A. Straight shooter with Stephen a. So you said.04%. When you present this evidence to the GOP and the Republican Party making this argument to basically refute what they're proclaiming, what do they say to you?

Matthew Weil (35:59)

Yeah, look, I think, I think people will certainly understand this data. The other example I'll give you is that Utah, which is certainly a conservative state, is one of the states that went through a multi step process to make sure every single record in their system was verified against the state database. That's 2 million records just in Utah alone. And after extensive, extensive evaluation and data matching, they returned exactly one non citizen on their database and that person did not attempt to vote. And so again, the data are out there. I think that policymakers of both sides have it. So right now I think we might be in more of a political moment than pure policy.

Stephen A. Smith (36:36)

So that's the answer to my question because I was asking you what do they say to you? My question to you is what do they say when presented this evidence as members of the gop, considering how much they're pushing this issue, I'm shocked as to, you know, what could they say after present, I mean 2 million votes

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (36:53)

and only one, you know, showed them themselves to be a non citizen and they didn't even show up to the

Stephen A. Smith (36:58)

polls and you present this kind of evidence. I'm anxious to hear what do they say to somebody the likes of you when those facts are presented to them as a party?

Matthew Weil (37:08)

Yeah, certainly the Republicans have voted for more integrity provisions right now and Democrats tend to vote more for access provisions. And so I think right now we are stuck in a bit of an old talking points environment. I think both parties have retreated to their camps. They're seeing this as a zero sum game. And quite frankly, when you look at the state level and you look at election officials across the country, they know that the problems are not just on one side. It's not just that we have, you know, integrity problems or access problems, that if you're going to fix the voting system in this country, you need to bring both parties together. And so they're not at that moment right now, especially not in Congress. The good news is that more states are actually working together across party lines to impact voters lives in ways that are actually going to happen. Because I think right now we're looking at a save act that is is probably not likely to pass in its current form.

Stephen A. Smith (37:56)

So to make sure I'm correct, what you're saying is that the states can work in concert with one another to resolve the issue on their own without having to wait for the federal government, for Congress, for both houses of Congress to come together on this issue. You don't need them in order to get it done?

Matthew Weil (38:12)

Well, no, what I'm saying is that states are generally the ones in charge of the elections. And so for the most part, state law governs this, not federal law. And we typically don't see a lot of federal law in elections. Right. And so I think where the rubber meets the road, where policy is actually going to impact voters, that's going to be a state level policy, not a federal policy.

Stephen A. Smith (38:32)

Matthew Wall right here with Stephen A Straight shooter with Stephen A. Estimates suggest millions of Americans don't have ready access to proof of citizenship documents as we've already discussed. And that burden may fall hardest on low income voters. How do you prevent eligible voters from being locked out?

Matthew Weil (38:47)

Yeah, that is certainly consistent with our findings. Right. So we certainly don't have perfect data on this. But what we do know is that the likelihood of having an eligible id, so either the passport or the ID plus the birth certificate goes up with an increase in household income. So people over $150,000 household income have like a 93 or 94% chance of having an eligible document. That goes down to about 80% for households that have under $40,000. Same same is true for levels of education. The more educated, the more likely you're going to have an eligible document. So what we know is this is going to certainly impact lower income voters and lower education voters than those who are wealthier with higher levels of education.

Stephen A. Smith (39:38)

The bill, the big beautiful bill, if I remember correctly, also allows removal of suspected noncitizens from voter rolls. What due process protections exist for someone who's wrongly flagged?

Matthew Weil (39:49)

Yeah. So the voter rolls and how states do this maintenance. Again, there are a lot of state laws on this, but this is one area where there's been a federal law on the books for over 30 years and that's the National Voter Registration Act. So there is certainly a process by which voters are removed and there are a lot of protections in it. Some would argue that those protections take a long time. I say that those protections are good because we don't want to be removing people who are actually eligible. And we're getting it wrong. Right. We want to make sure the government, government's not getting it wrong. And so what that, what that law requires is that states who want to remove somebody have to wait a certain amount of elections of inactivity. They have to send a non forwardable postcard to the address where the person is registered. And if that comes back undeliverable, that starts a process by which they can start removing people from the list. So states should not be doing the so called voter purges in the year of an election or before an election without going through this very well documented process that has been on the books for about 30 years.

Stephen A. Smith (40:51)

You know, the legislation, legislation has been reintroduced and tied to broader political leverage, which is something that we've gone around about in a way and discussed it just a little bit. How do you separate election integrity policy from election year politics?

Matthew Weil (41:06)

Yeah, look, I think right now certainly the Bipartisan Policy center wouldn't recommend doing election policy in an election year. Right? You do election policy in the odd numbered years. You certainly don't want to confuse voters by changing the process mid cycle. Right. We are already in the election. We've had several states having primaries already. And so that is kind of our baseline here at the Bipartisan Policy Center. But if you ask election officials across the country, they would say the same thing. You need to have certainty going into the election process. And so now is not the moment. So I do think there's a little bit of politics at play here. And there will be a moment, and I don't know if it's going to be this year, but more likely there'll be a moment in a future Congress where the two parties who have now shown an interest in federal election policy. Right. The Democrats did this four years ago. They had their own bill that did a lot of things that Republicans didn't like, but there's actually some overlap where they can actually get some things done that actually improves voting for all Americans.

Stephen A. Smith (42:05)

Now supporters argue this, Mr. Wild, they argue this. They say this is so much simpler than people realize. And here's their argument, only citizens should vote. So, and you know, verification is standard in other areas of life. So what's the problem here? What's wrong with a pro, with applying that standard here for a question like that? What would you, what would your response be?

Matthew Weil (42:26)

Yeah, again, 85% of Americans do support voter ID at the polls. Like that is. That has been pretty clear. It's been clear for 20 years. So that means that you have significant numbers of Democrats who agree with voter id and the Bipartisan Policy center has agreed to limited ways of doing voter ID at the polls as well. The problem here is that that's not what this bill does. At least that's not only what this bill does. This bill has many other requirements that I really don't think many voters understand. So even if you want to posit that election integrity and making sure without a shadow of a doubt that noncitizens aren't on the voter rolls, this probably isn't even the best way to do it. That's another issue that I think we should discuss because there are better ways of doing this. There are numerous government databases out there at the state and federal level where you're in those databases and the government knows whether you're a citizenship. This bill is requiring somebody to bring a paper or an ID in person to show somebody who's probably not trained in how to verify that document about their citizenship. If you would. If you really want to do this, I would certainly recommend doing it more in the way of a back end verification using all of the data that we already have about voters and confirming their citizenship that way, so that the burden shifts from the voter to the state. And in those edge cases, and there won't be that many, because I do think the databases that exist will capture almost all voters in those edge cases, then we should be working directly with those voters to make sure that they get those documents they need to prove their eligibility. That's how I would do it. As opposed to trying to force this down the voters.

Stephen A. Smith (44:03)

But if they did exactly what you just suggested, Mr. Wall, wouldn't that take long?

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (44:08)

Would that take, wouldn't that be a process?

Matthew Weil (44:10)

I mean, look, this is all process. That's why I wouldn't do it in an election year. But if you're going to do it, that'd be the way to do it. I think that's, that's more of the issue. None of, none of this can happen quickly. That's the other problem with the Save America act, that the bill becomes effective on the date of enactment. That's fairly rare for federal law. Usually there's an implementation period. Florida just passed a version for their state of the SAVE act. And even Florida decided that it was going to be implemented starting January 1st. So they understood that you don't do this in an election year. You do not upset the system when the system's already kind of locked in. Certainly I think that the voters would be confused by this process and that's why we're trying to avoid that in this cycle.

Stephen A. Smith (44:55)

Before I let you get on out of here. I'm fully aware that Democrats, whether it's Al Gore, whether it's Hillary Rodham Clinton, I'm fully aware of the fact that there have been Democrats that have questioned the legitimacy of whatever has transpired at the polls during the elections that they lost. But one could easily ask if Donald Trump didn't make so much noise about the election being rigged in 2020, which obviously led to his oyster from his ouster from the presidency back then, that none of this would be happening. Do you think that's accurate?

Matthew Weil (45:30)

I mean, none of this, Bill? I mean, again, I don't think that Republicans would necessarily have a focus on election integrity right now if the president wasn't pushing it. For sure. This has clearly been a priority of this White House and they're following that up. I do think that both parties have expressed an interest over the past decade to be a little bit more active in federal election policy than we had seen for many years before that. And so again, my argument would be both parties have tried this, Democrats tried this, and they crashed and burned in 2022. And I think that's probably likely what's going to happen with the Save America act as well. But there's overlap. It's not going to be every party getting everything they want. But if they want to compromise, if they actually want to improve the integrity of the process, if they want to make the process more fair and more accessible to all voters, the field is there for where they can agree. And that is what I hope they can get to next year in a different political environment.

Stephen A. Smith (46:33)

Matthew Weil, vice president of governance and bipartisanship at the Bipartisan Policy center in Washington, D.C. a nonprofit think tank that promotes, develops and advocates for bipartisan solutions to key issues facing the United States. Appreciate the education. Thank you so much for edifying my audience and myself. Really appreciate time out of your busy schedule. Thank you so much.

Matthew Weil (46:53)

Thank you for having me.

Stephen A. Smith (46:54)

All right, well known Matthew Wall right here with Stephen A Straight Shooter with Stephen A. Back with your calls and more to close out hour number one in a minute.

Angie.com Advertiser (47:07)

Early birds always rise to the occasion for summer vacation planning because early gets you closer to the action. So don't be late. Book your next vacation early on VRBO and save over $120. Rise and shine. Average savings $141. Select homes only.

Splunk Advertiser (47:25)

Hidden value is all around you. It's in every app, trans and network and chances are you have loads of it. It's your machine data and splunk helps you tap into it. UniFi machine data and insights pop up everywhere. Discover game changing clarity, intelligence for every decision and a critical resource to power AI. All you need is already there and it's fine exactly where it is. Your machine data is waiting. Let's unlock it. Learn more@splunk.com.

Stephen A. Smith (47:59)

Tony in Colorado, you're live with Stephen A.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (48:01)

Go ahead.

Caller (48:02)

Hey, Stephen A. How's it going, man?

Stephen A. Smith (48:04)

I'm all right. Thank you for calling.

Caller (48:06)

Hey, man, look, I've been listening to you on Wednesdays when I can. Sometimes I just can't take it. I'm not gonna lie. I've had a long day and I'm like, man, Stephen A. Is going off. But it is appreciated because you got some passion and words, and I think that people need to hear it. With that being said, your rant you had earlier, man, I'm with you when you write. I really am. You made a lot of valid points, and I feel like you're driving the road. You're on the road and you're driving, and then next thing you know, you hit like some turn. I'm like, whoa, where we going? Where we going with this? And I just. I just don't catch it. For example, the thing with the open borders. Okay? I just don't remember a point in time when Biden allowed open borders.

Stephen A. Smith (48:50)

Yeah.

Caller (48:51)

Now did we do things.

Stephen A. Smith (48:52)

Stop that. No, no, no, no, no. You ain't calling up on this show with that. We saw the border crisis. We saw the borders being flooded. There's millions of people. It's undeniable. It's undeniable. Millions of people came into this country.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (49:05)

They walked through the border. Stop that.

Stephen A. Smith (49:07)

Don't.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (49:07)

Stop that. Don't call me with that bs. Not that bs.

Caller (49:10)

The point I'm trying to make right here. This. This is the point I'm trying to make right here is not for a lack of effort that things weren't trying to be controlled at the border. We have to make sure that we're not. We're not on a hyperbole of saying things that. That were already being done.

Stephen A. Smith (49:26)

Tony, with all due respect, bump that. Oh, no. Don't give me no damn counterbalance. They. They tried to course correct in the end, but for a vast majority of time they had open borders and they were telling us there was no border crisis when there was. When there was a border crisis.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (49:41)

That is a lie. Now, they did try to course correct

Stephen A. Smith (49:44)

it later on in the presidency, but

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (49:46)

it doesn't negate the fact that it was after millions crossed the Border. It's undeniable.

Caller (49:51)

Right there, though. For every action, there is a reaction. Right?

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (49:56)

Do you think they ever should have been. Do you think that. Do you think in any country that

Stephen A. Smith (50:00)

millions of people should be walking across the border illegally? Yes or no?

Caller (50:04)

I'm in America. That's the only thing I can speak on.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (50:10)

Whoa, whoa. I asked you a question. Do you believe in America? Fine. That people should be walking across the border illegally? Yes or no?

Caller (50:23)

Stephen A. I have served this country for 20 years, eight months and six days.

Caller - Mr. Positive (50:28)

I am retired.

Caller (50:29)

Retired army vet. Okay, man.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (50:31)

You're about to hear dial talk and you about. And you're about to hear dial talk because you didn't answer my question. You're not.

Matthew Weil (50:36)

I don't.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (50:37)

I respect your service, but you're not gonna call up here and not answer my question. You don't get to do my show. Answer my question first. Do you believe it's okay for people to illegally walk across the border in the United States into the United States

Stephen A. Smith (50:52)

of America, Undocumented yes or no?

Caller (50:54)

Okay, well, that's a different question. And that goes back to a no, that's a different question. Because the first question was based on other countries. This question is based on America.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (51:05)

I did say America. I did say America is. No, that's what I said. But I said America. But you didn't want. You want to say what you wanted to say. See, ladies and gentlemen, get your own show. Call Sirius xm. You need me to make a call for you? Cause you don't call up here to give your own narratives without answering my damn question. I'll let you talk. You're gonna answer my question. You answer my question. You ain't gonna just say what you want to say. This is Straight Shooter with Stephen A. Not with Tony in Colorado. You'll answer my damn question.

Stephen A. Smith (51:39)

Hour number two up next. Last thing I want to do is cuss out a soldier. I would never do that. So I'm gonna go to break. I'll be back for hour number two in a minute. Y' all gonna piss me off. Y' all gonna piss me off. See you in hour number two in a second.

Splunk Advertiser (52:00)

Hidden value is all around you. It's in every app, transaction and network. And chances are you have loads. It's your machine data and splunk helps you tap into it unify machine data and insights pop up everywhere. Discover game changing clarity, intelligence for every decision and a critical resource to power AI. All you need is already there and it's fine exactly where it is. Your Machine data is waiting. Let's unlock it. Learn more@splunk.com why have we asked our

Angie.com Advertiser (52:28)

contractor we found on Angie.com to be our kid's legal guardian? Because he took such good care when redoing our basement that we knew we could trust him to care for our kids.

Angie.com Narrator (52:36)

We only met a month ago, Angie, the one you trust. Define the ones you trust. Find pros for all your home projects@angie.com

Stephen A. Smith (52:43)

straight shooter with Stephen A.

Monday.com Advertiser (52:48)

I am writing to inform you that Representative Kevin Kiley has resigned as a member of the House Republican Conference. Signed sincerely, Lisa McClain, Chairwoman, House Republican Conference, the Honorable Tim Wahlberg. Dear Mr. Chairman, this letter is to advise you that Representative Kevin Kiley's election to the Committee on Education and Workforce has been automatically vacated pursuant to Clause 5B of Rule 10, effective today. Signed, sincerely, Mike Johnson, speaker of the House of Representatives, the Honorable Sam Graves. Dear Mr. Chairman, this letter is to advise you that Representative Kevin Kiley's election to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has been automatically vacated pursuant to Clause 5B of Rule 10, effective today. Signed, sincerely, Mike Johnson, speaker of the House of Representatives, the Honorable Jim Jordan. Dear Mr. Chairman, this letter is to advise you that Representative Kevin Kiley's election to the Committee on the Judiciary has been automatically vacated pursuant to Clause 5B of Rule 10, effective today. Signed, sincerely, Mike Johnson, speaker of the House of Representatives.

Stephen A. Smith (53:53)

There you have it, our number two Straight Shooter with yours truly, Stephen A. Right here with you over the airwaves of SiriusXM POTUS radio. I've got another guest and he represents California's 3rd congressional district. He made headlines last week when he announced his switch from Republican to independent. Please welcome to Straight Shooter with Stephen A. The one and only Congressman. Representative Kevin Kiley. How are you, sir? How are you? Representative? How's everything going?

Angie.com Narrator (54:22)

I'm doing great. Thanks for having me on.

Stephen A. Smith (54:24)

Thank you so much. Appreciate it. So let's get right to it. What was the breaking point that made you switch parties?

Angie.com Narrator (54:29)

Sir Well, I think partisanship has just gotten out of control in this country. And I think that, you know, in particular here in Washington. And maybe the thing that was really the breaking point was this redistricting war that's broken out across the country where we have states throwing out their that are congressional maps in the middle of the decade to favor one party or the other to make everything about partisanship in our politics. So I was against this in Texas, I was against in California. I was against it in every state where it's Happening. It's, of course, upended our map in California. And so my view is, look, if you're going to make everything about partisanship, elevate that above everything else in our politics, maybe the right antidote is to just take partisanship out of the equation. And that's actually how it's done in the vast majority of offices. You think about your school board member, your city council, or your mayor, your da, your sheriff, these are nonpartisan offices. They're not looking to serve a party agenda. They're just looking to solve problems. At least that's how it's supposed to happen. And I think we could use that approach in Congress a lot more.

Stephen A. Smith (55:27)

Well, listen, you heard the clip when I was coming in, introducing you, and you see that you've been removed from these three committees. And Griff put it right up there for me so we can see it again. Education in the workforce, transportation and infrastructure, and the judiciary. These are places you were removed from following the House committee, following the House committee assignments. Your thoughts about those decisions that were made removing you from all of that?

Angie.com Narrator (55:50)

Well, so actually, this is the crazy thing is there was no decision made. This is just automatically what happens under the House rules. It shows you how, like, deeply embedded partisanship is, how deeply rooted it is in the very structure of, of the House of Representatives, is that these committee seats are the property of the parties. And if you disaffiliate from a party, it just happens automatically under the rules, you lose your committee assignments. So I think, actually I have a. You know, it's likely that I'll get those assignments back because the chairs of the committees like having me on them. But it's pretty crazy thing when you have to be affiliated with one party or another or else you lose your committees.

Stephen A. Smith (56:29)

You feel the way that you feel. And I get that. Is it about politics overall in the nation's capital, or is it about specifically the gop, which you were a part of?

Angie.com Narrator (56:40)

It's about the, the hyper partisanship that, that I've experienced here in my three years, which I think is really weakening us as a country. You know, it seems to have reached peak levels over the last year or so. We saw the longest government shutdown in US History. We've seen these health care subsidies expired at the end of last year because the parties couldn't come together. And then we have this redistricting war that I just referred to that is unlike anything we've ever seen. And these things are mutually reinforcing. It's going to make our politics even More partisan, it's going to make in turn, the House and Congress even more partisan.

Stephen A. Smith (57:16)

Some people would say that what you described in terms of those three incidences that you brought up, health care, of course, obviously the shutdown, stuff like that, as painful as it may be, as detrimental as it may be to the American public at large, the bottom line is they wouldn't still, still describe it as hyper partisanship. They describe it as politics as usual in the nation's capital. To you, what makes it hyper?

Angie.com Narrator (57:37)

Well, I think your point is well taken, that, you know, this is not something that has just suddenly happened. Everyone knows that things are broken in Washington, D.C. congress has like a 15% approval rating. But I do think it's also true that things have just gotten worse and worse and worse. And we're seeing things like the longest government shutdown we've ever had in our entire country's history. We're seeing this phenomenon of gerrymandering, this plague of gerrymandering, going across the country and saying we're going to make partisanship the sum and substance of our politics. And what I've observed, and this is not a new phenomenon, but again, I think it's more intense now than it's ever been, is that the focus is always on how do we blame the other side for the problems we have as a country, as opposed to actually trying to come together and find common sense solutions to those problems.

Stephen A. Smith (58:28)

Will you still be caucusing with the

Angie.com Narrator (58:29)

Republicans for the remainder of this term? Yes, because, you know, that is the way the rules are set up right now is that essentially to be a fully functioning member of the House, you have to caucus with one of the two parties. And since that's how I was elected at the beginning of this term, I think that makes sense.

Stephen A. Smith (58:45)

That's totally fair. Totally understand that, sir. But respectfully, how does that, you know, what does independence look like in practice in if you still have to caucus with the Republicans? I'm just asking because I don't know.

Angie.com Narrator (58:57)

Yeah, I mean, in practice, it actually is a reflection of the way I've, I've generally approached my job is that, you know, regardless of my party label, I've always said I'm going to be an independent voice for my district. So, you know, and sometimes I voted with, you know, Republican leadership. Other times I've gone against what the rest of our party did on particular issues because I've always said that I answer to my constituents as opposed to party leaders in Washington, D.C. so I think that, you know, this new designation is simply a reflection of that philosophy that I've had all along and hopefully maybe it'll, you know, inspire some others to take the same approach.

Stephen A. Smith (59:33)

Representative Kevin Collier, right here with Stephen, a straight shooter with Stephen, a leadership reportedly felt blindsided when you went public, if I remember what I read correctly. Was that a calculated, strategic move on your part or is the internal communication within the caucus fundamental to the broken in your estimation?

Angie.com Narrator (59:49)

I don't know that it was calculated. It was simply, it was just, you know, this was a matter between me and my constituents. And so I did, you know, inform folks in D.C. after I made that decision. But, you know, I made an independent decision as to how I thought I could continue to best represent my district and, and folks in my area. And but I, you know, I did tell the speaker and others about it afterwards.

Stephen A. Smith (60:12)

Well, you're certainly not planning, it doesn't appear like you're planning on leaving office. And to be quite honest with you, I'm glad that you're not. No, let me, let me state that for obvious reasons, but you've left open the possibility of caucusing with the Democrats next term. What specifically will Republicans have to do or fail to do to lose your support?

Angie.com Narrator (60:32)

Well, what I've said is that I think that if you're going to be independent, then you shouldn't prejudge these things. Right. And so I've said I'm going to caucus with Republicans for the remainder of this term because that's how I was elected. When it comes to the new term, you know, who I'm going to caucus with, what, the speakers, who I'm going to vote for, for speakers. I think I'll look at it at the time and say, all right, what is going to be best for the folks that I represent? And, you know, I think a lot's going to happen between now and when in the next election. You know, I think that I'll have by that point almost a year of having been an independent in the House. And so I'll make that decision at the time.

Stephen A. Smith (61:06)

I mean, when you think about you and being elected, I mean, your old district was split apart, obviously, and now you're running in a Democratic leaning, leaning seat, you know, for the, for the purposes of cynics out there to address them, because of some of the things that they'll say, just being straight with the voters. Is this a principled position you're taking or is it something that is tantamount to political survival in your estimation? How do you answer critics or cynics who would say such a thing? Yeah.

Angie.com Narrator (61:32)

Well, I'd say, first of all, you have every right to be cynical, because there is so much to be cynical about in politics that is sort of a. A safe default when you kind of look at something that's happening in Washington, D.C. but my direct answer to it is that if I really was concerned first and foremost about political survival, there was a much easier path I could have taken, because my district, as it now exists, was chopped into six different pieces. One of those six was turned into an overwhelmingly Republican district, what they call a safe district. People run for those seats. They can remain there, often for their whole lives if they want to. And I was well set up to win that seat, but I didn't run for it because I thought that would make things worse rather than better. I thought it would exploit the gerrymander rather than seek to overcome it. And I thought that, you know, I want to continue to represent the counties where I was born and raised that have always been my home. And I think they both deserve a representative who answers to them rather than party leaders. So that's the reason I made my decision. And in terms of the principle of it, you know, while some people have opposed all this gerrymandering in one state or another, depending upon whether it helps or hurts their party, I've been against it everywhere. I was against it in Texas. I was against it in Indiana. I was against it in Virginia, in California, because I think it's just bad for democracy.

Stephen A. Smith (62:46)

That's good. It's good to know you recently voted with Democrats to cancel Trump's emergency tariffs on Canada, if I remember correctly. Was this an attempt to appeal to independent voters and Democratic voters?

Angie.com Narrator (62:59)

Well, I've actually voted for this multiple times now, and it was more than just a vote on one particular set of tariffs. It was actually a vote, first and foremost, to reclaim the authority of the House of Representatives when it comes to trade policy and tariffs in particular, because the House had voted repeatedly to essentially make it so you couldn't challenge that, even though the House has that constitutional and statutory authority. And so I had been against that several times when this came up, and I was one of three members of who ultimately did succeed, or on our side, on the Republican side at the time, who did succeed in, you know, reclaiming that authority for the House. So then we had a subsequent vote on the issue of the Canada tariffs, and in that case, you know, I thought it was a pretty straightforward issue. The President had actually declared a state of emergency for fentanyl coming over the northern border. That was the predicate for imposing the emergency tariffs. Canada has actually cracked down on fentanyl. So that suggested to me that Congress was, well, you know, should exercise its authority to terminate the emergency. But on the issue of the tariffs themselves, it absolutely is true that the Canada tariffs have had a huge impact, or at least a very significant impact on the cost of living across many key sectors, the auto industry, energy, and a number of others. And, you know, we need to be focused on lowering the cost of living in every way we can right now in the country.

Stephen A. Smith (64:24)

Representative Collier recently was reading an article talked about the GOP fleeing con, fleeing from Congress. 51 House members, 12 senators, have opted not to run for reelection. 30 of them have been Republican. Six of them are departing from the Senate. I'm wondering, you know, when we talk about folks leaving, how concerned are you about the GOP in terms of their willingness to either capitulate to everything that the president wants or deciding to leave and not serve the people of the United States of America? It seems to be two extremes, one or the other. How concerned are you about that?

Angie.com Narrator (65:03)

Well, as far as the retirements go, you know, people have different reasons. Some of that is people are just running for Senate or running for governor or what have you, running for different offices. I do think that there is growing frustration with the dysfunction that exists in Congress, which, again, isn't a new phenomenon, but seems to have gotten a lot worse and is reflected in the 13 or 15% approval rating that folks have now in terms of Congress exercising its constitutional authority. I think this is a really serious issue. And I think that, you know, whoever the president might be, Congress ought to have as its sort of foremost institutional, you know, responsibility to protect the prerogatives of the legislative branch, to protect the separation of powers and the checks and balances that our founders so wisely put into the Constitution. And you have seen this tendency where the majority in Congress is the same as the White House. There's been a tendency to cede authority to the executive branch. So that's not a new thing either. Over the course of decades, we've seen Congress sort of systematically divest itself of its own power, which is a really bad thing. When the founders designed the House of Representatives to be the branch that is to close closest to the people faces election every two years, to the extent that we're losing our power, then our democracy is becoming less representative.

Stephen A. Smith (66:22)

Forgive me for not knowing the answer to this question. So I'm asking you, what was your position when President Trump decided to attack Iran. And we heard that Marco Rubio had alerted the Gang of Eight, but it wasn't necessarily so that Congress as a body was addressed and approached before these actions were taken. What was your position about that at that particular moment in time?

Angie.com Narrator (66:47)

Well, what I said was that Congress needs to be centrally involved going forward in defining our objectives. And, you know, in terms of how those objectives are pursued, I kind of get the need to have some discretion in advance of an attack like that when it comes to how broadly Congress is advised, because, you know, we have a body of 435 people and the military objectives are relying on the element of surprise that becomes difficult. This is why, for example, you know, issues when it comes to the use of military force are different than, say, tariff policy. The President actually has inherent authority under the Constitution when it comes to, you know, military engagements. But. But I was also quick to say in that same statement that that authority is not unlimited. And so that's why Congress needs to be involved going forward.

Stephen A. Smith (67:39)

Do you believe that the president has been excessive in his use or abusive in the power that he has as the commander in chief of this country, considering some of the things that he's made a bomb in Iran last June? Then again, obviously, what's transpired about 19 days or so ago and the kind of effect that have the tariffs, a lot of people felt that they've had issues, they've taken issue with that. There's a lot of different things that's affected this country positively or negatively, depending on who you ask. But as it pertains strictly to his power and the usage of it, do you believe that he's been on par with what the President of the United States should be allowed to do, or has he been abusive?

Angie.com Narrator (68:18)

I do think there are examples where they've likely exceeded the limits of executive authority. But again, that's something that basically every president has done. Every president has tested the limits of executive authority. President Biden was struck down by the Supreme Court on a number of occasions. That's actually part of the design of our system, is that, you know, our founders envisioned that the President or each branch would seek to push the limits of its own power. And so they created this dynamic equilibrium where the branches push back against one another. So on the tariffs, I thought, you know, we've seen that happen sort of in practice. We're now Congress and the Supreme Court have said that we believe that the president has exceeded his authority under the relevant statutes to unilaterally impose tariffs. I look at the national security issues a little differently. For example, Venezuela or Iran, very different cases. By the way, you had an outstanding war in the case of Venezuela and in the case of Iran. We do have a longstanding policy in the United States that Iran absolutely cannot be allowed to get its hands on a nuclear weapon. So, yeah, to the extent that the objectives there are being pursued as they were initially communicated, then there's an argument to be made that falls within the scope of the President's inherent authority. But obviously, you know, there comes a certain line that you cross when, at least when congressional authorization is required.

Stephen A. Smith (69:38)

Two part question here. Any concerns, particularly considering what's transpiring in the Strait of humus, obviously with 20% of our all which 20% of oil goes through worldwide and obviously that's stagnant at this particular moment in time. Any concerns about that and how this situation could continue to proliferate with Iran? And also what do you think is going to happen with the United States as it pertains to Cuba?

Angie.com Narrator (70:03)

Well, the question of Cuba is a complicated one and I don't know that I have a clear answer for you right now. I think that US Interests there are, are similar to the interest that we had in play in Venezuela. You also have a regime that has not been overly favorable to U.S. interests. And in the long term, of course, we'd love to see freedom and democracy for the people of Cuba. I will say that we have a number of foreign entanglements at this point in time, so I'm not sure that you're gonna see anything particularly dramatic there, at least in the near future. But, but I will say with respect to Iran, of course, the regime there, which has been very battered at this point, they're trying to do everything they can to expand the scope of the conflict, to bring other countries in, to, you know, make things as painful as possible for the US Some of this was anticipated, maybe some of it was not as anticipated as it might have been. But I'm extremely concerned about the issue which with the Strait of Hormut and the impact that has on, on gas prices in the United States. Although I will add that in California our gas prices are really, really high. And that's not the reason. We have 556per gallon right now in California, nearly $2 higher than the national average. California is literally importing gasoline from the Bahamas because our refineries have fled the state and our regulations are impossible to comply with. So there's a lot we need to do to lower gas prices in California. That's unrelated to anything happening in, in Iran right now.

Stephen A. Smith (71:38)

Getting, getting back to you specifically, you acknowledged recently you likely had a better chance of winning in The Republican Save 5th Congressional District currently represented by longtime representative Mr. Tom McClintock, if I remember correctly. Why did you choose not to run in that district?

Angie.com Narrator (71:53)

Well, because I didn't think it was, at the end of the day, the right thing to do. Number one is that my home communities where, you know, I have was born and raised, went to local public schools and represented throughout my time in elected office there mostly in this new 6th district. And so, you know, I wanted to be able to continue to represent my hometown. But secondly, I thought that, you know, to respond to this gerrymandering scheme by just going and seeking out the safest possible district, that would just make things worse. And I thought, well, maybe there's an opportunity here to find a different way forward, to set a different example, to try to, instead of making our politics even more partisan, to try to make them less partisan and to try to make, you know, being a representative in Congress more like being a mayor or a school board member or a city councilor, and to really, you know, make it clear that my focus is always first and foremost on answering to my constituents. And so at the end of the day, that just struck me as the right move.

Stephen A. Smith (72:55)

My last question to you, Representative Colley, and I appreciate your time, sir. I started off my show opening monologue pretty much going off about how Trump is messing up because I'm of the mindset that he's messing things up for the GOP because they're not him. And the kind of things that he was able to get away with, with people capitulating too much to him and not holding him to account for some of the decisions that he makes, which may not be in the best interest of the American public, it could end up serving them, not serving them very well, particularly with the midterms coming up. I'm talking about, about the gop, cuz we see the unpopularity kicking in, we see some of the question marks, we see affordability becoming an issue. You brought up the gas prices, et cetera, et cetera. And those were not things that he campaigned on. And plus he talked about America first. Now you got the MAGA right, some of whom are against him because they feel like he hasn't been consistent with what he campaigned on. How worried, if at all, are you about the state of the GOP as the midterm approaches, in light of, of some of the decisions that Donald Trump individually has made.

Angie.com Narrator (73:59)

Well, I think that this is going to be an election that's decided based upon the cost of living. And so I think there actually have been some actions that have been really helpful in that respect. Expanding domestic energy production is what in one of them, obviously, we've seen this, you know, period of volatility in connection with Iran, but we had seen gas prices go down significantly. We have passed some. There's some pretty significant housing legislation being discussed in the House right now. And so you have seen some improvements, certainly with real wages going up. That's extremely important when it comes to the cost of living. That's your purchasing power right there. But, you know, again, I'm someone who's an independent. I think I'm running my own race. I'm not looking necessarily, you know, looking at this through the lens of one party or the other. I'm looking at through the lens of, okay, I'm going to show how I've been able to deliver for my constituents. And I will have to, I will add that, you know, a big part of, of the case that I'm going to make is that, yes, I'm demanding accountability in Washington, D.C. from both parties, but I'm also demanding accountability from Sacramento in my state, which is responsible for the biggest slice of the overall cost of living that our citizens have to deal with. Not only do we have the highest gas prices, we have the highest housing prices in the continental US we have the highest electricity rates, close to the highest water bills, the highest taxes, and that's why we have the highest poverty in California as well. When you factor in the cost of living, not to mention the highest homelessness and the highest unemployment, highest illiteracy, the list goes on. So I think that that's going to be a big part of the case that I make to my constituents is, look, I'm going to, it's not about party for me. I'm going to hold folks in Sacramento accountable. I'm going to hold folks in Washington, D.C. accountable, and I'm going to work with people on all sides in order to lower the cost of living because it's just gotten out of control in California.

Stephen A. Smith (75:47)

If you were running against Governor Gavin Newsom, he'd probably lean on. He'd probably lean on the notion that, you know, what you said, everything that you just said, okay, how about the SAVE Act? Where do you stand on that to make his case against you? How would you answer that question? Where do you stand on the SAVE act, sir?

Angie.com Narrator (76:01)

Yeah, I'm for it. I mean, I think Voter ID is common sense. I think the vast majority of people are for it. I've heard some of the critiques of the SAVE act that maybe, you know, you don't, there aren't enough forms of ID or what have you that can be made available. If there are amendments that would improve in that respect, I'd totally be open to that. But I think the fact that we don't have voter ID in places like California is extremely unusual. In democracies across the globe there's maybe like two or three democracies in the world that don't have it. This is just kind of like a standard administrative requirement in a well functioning democracy. So I think we should just have it, we should get this over, should move on with our lives. You know, it shouldn't be a big controversial issue.

Stephen A. Smith (76:41)

Excuse me for being so ignorant, asking last question. This is definitely my last question. What do you mean you don't have voter ID in California? Could you please elaborate specifically on that for my audience that may not know.

Angie.com Narrator (76:52)

Yeah, California does not have voter id. You don't need to present it to register. You don't need to present it to vote. As a matter of fact the past the state passed a law forbidding voter id. So if so cities, counties, if they forbidding, they're not allowed to under state law.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (77:09)

What? When did that happen?

Angie.com Narrator (77:11)

A couple years ago because I think it was Orange county they wanted to have their own requirements. So the state passed a law saying nope, you're not allowed to. Voter ID is not only not required, it is actively forbidden.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (77:22)

Well that's right there. That's why the same act been proposed right there the state of California. That's what the Republicans gonna lean on as an excuse to, to definitely push forth the SAVE Act. Right there. Right there. I can't believe it.

Stephen A. Smith (77:34)

I didn't even know that sir.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (77:35)

I'm embarrassed to admit there's a lot

Angie.com Narrator (77:38)

of crazy things going on in California. But I think you know, you are seeing a return to sanity in some ways. And I see it Democrats, Republicans and independents in California who are saying, you know, we need to do some things differently in this state.

Stephen A. Smith (77:52)

By the way, last thing, that, that, that, that no voter eligibility required. That's Gavin Newsom last two years. That was Gavin Newsom.

Angie.com Narrator (77:59)

Correct. Well so the require the law saying that a locality cannot have its own ID requirement. That was Newsom.

Stephen A. Smith (78:07)

There you go. That was Newsom. So all I needed to know. Thank you sir. Representative Kevin Collie right here with Stephen A really appreciate your time. Thank you. So much. Good luck moving forward. Know that you're always welcome to come back here anytime, sir, Anytime.

Angie.com Narrator (78:18)

Thanks so much. Really appreciate it.

Stephen A. Smith (78:20)

Thank you. One and only Representative Collie. Right here with Stephen A. Straight Shooter with Stephen A. SiriusXM Portus radio channel 124. I can't believe that last part. I thought every state, I mean it's

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (78:29)

far be it for me. I thought every state just showed that.

Stephen A. Smith (78:31)

I did.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (78:32)

But little did I know. Little did I know.

Stephen A. Smith (78:35)

Lord have mercy. You can't make this up. You can't make this up. I would know. Trey Shooter with Stephen A. Continues your calls over the next half hour to close out the show. Couple of lines open, lot of people on the line. We'll get to your calls in just a minute. Don't go away.

Caller Kobe (79:02)

Hey, Steven, my name is Kobe, I'm from New Jersey and I just have a quick question. When are you gonna stop pretending to be a centrist left person and just admit full on that you're a Republican? You keep saying that you're not a Republican and you're centrist and you lean more left, but all your views, points on policies are pretty much mirroring Republican people and Republican candidates. So I'm just confused on why you're, I don't know if you're embarrassed to be Republican or what the reason is, but why, why don't you just admit that you're actually just a Republican instead of saying that you lean left on social issues and you're red for fiscal issues when you're pretty much red on all issues. So yeah, that's pretty much my question.

Stephen A. Smith (79:45)

My question to you, why don't you grow the hell up, be a man and stand on your own two feet instead of being a puppet for a party? Because I'm not. Appreciate the voicemail by that individual. The bottom line is, is that you can go to get SiriusXM.com getserius to leaving your voicemail message siriusxm.com getserius to leave your voicemail message. You heard what he had to say. See, that's the problem, you know, like if I was a Republican, I'd say so. Think I'm scared? Think I give a shit what people think about what my political affiliation is? If I was a Republican, I'd say so. I yes, I believe in free market capitalism, but not without government oversight. Yes, I believe the borders should have been closed because they were opened by Biden, but for the most part I'm of the Obama ilk where I'm deporting more than 3 million migrants who arrived illegally, most of which might have been unlawful citizens.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (80:54)

I'm about safety in the streets, sure.

Stephen A. Smith (80:56)

But I also have a level of sensitivity towards the desolate and the disenfranchised. And I'm not one that believes in ignoring the poor and impoverished amongst us just because everybody should go out there and have what they want. No, I'm not trying to cap what people can earn, but I do think there are priorities that need to be met. What you need with $5 trillion or even a trillion dollars for if you want individual, when we got people starving in the streets of America, when we got poverty ravaging our nation?

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (81:36)

I'm not trying to tax you and

Stephen A. Smith (81:38)

redistribute wealth, but I don't want somebody bleeding the system to the point where you're bleeding people subjected to the system

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (81:48)

to a point of no return. So I pride myself in being somebody with a heart. And I think that when you compare the conservatives to the Democrats, I don't identify with the Democrats at all. On the extreme left, the progressive left. Hell with them. I don't want to hear about woke culture.

Stephen A. Smith (82:10)

I don't want to hear about cancel culture. I got two daughters. No, I don't want you, as a transgender individual, using the same bathroom as my daughter with your parts in place. No, I don't want that. I don't believe that you should be competing against girls if you are a male transitioning to female.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (82:30)

But I also don't believe in being against the LGBTQ community. I'm, by the way, I'm pro choice because I don't believe in telling a woman what to do with her body. I'm pro gay marriage. I don't believe it's up to me to tell somebody who they should or should have married. Do those sound like conservative views to you? They ain't to me. So there's plenty of things about me that are liberal. You got folks around here walking around like they're devout Christians and Episcopalians, and I'm not saying that they're not,

Matthew Weil (83:17)

but

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (83:17)

you got Trump, who was all over the damn place, at least allegedly. And you got the Christian right marching lockstep with him when everything about the life in terms of multiple divorces and stuff like that, they didn't care. Seems to be a bit inconsistent. Not judging. I'm just saying it's inconsistent. There's plenty of things about me that are liberal. But let me be very clear. Whether I'm a liberal or a conservative, I ain't scared.

Stephen A. Smith (83:54)

I'll be what the hell I want to be.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (83:58)

Who the hell are you or anybody

Stephen A. Smith (83:59)

else to tell me? Well, why don't you just stop being

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (84:02)

scared and admit what? If I felt that way, lock, stock and barrel, I'd tell you. This binary system. You the punk, you the slave, you the one that caved in. The two party system. You the one that surrendered yourself to one or the other. I'm not doing that. That's not how I feel. I feel the way I want to feel and I say what I want to say and I believe what I want to believe. You got some folks that are conservative, they believe in celibacy until marriage. You got other folks on the liberal side that believe you should be everything short of a porn star.

Stephen A. Smith (84:44)

I'm right in the middle. Leading a little bit left, by the way, in that regard. Because maybe it's a crime, but I really like sex, heterosexually speaking. Ain't apologizing for it to a damn soul.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (85:04)

Don't want to embarrass my pastor or anybody else. But I pray every damn day to the Lord above that fornication ain't gonna condemn me to hell.

Stephen A. Smith (85:18)

Cause I've committed a lot of it in my lifetime.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (85:23)

I'm just keeping it a buck. It's the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth in that regard. One lady at a time these days. But wasn't always the case. But I didn't turn around and get married either. And break vows and stand before God, compliment my love and devotion to one person forever and ever until death do us part, and then violated it. The second she winked, I just said, yo, I ain't ready. I'm not an adulterer.

Stephen A. Smith (86:06)

But when it come to fornication, I apologize. I've been guilty of that for a long time. And ain't stopping. Just so we clear. That sound like a conservative to you? I'm just saying. I'm just saying. To the calls we go. Virginia, you're live with Stephen A.

Caller (86:44)

Hey, Stephen A. This is Trey. How you doing?

Stephen A. Smith (86:46)

I'm good. Good. Go ahead, bro. How you doing?

Caller (86:49)

I'm doing good. So I have a question. So I'm a broadcast journalism student at my university and my question to you is because since you're in media, do you feel like this, that the media has gotten away from truth telling and they've been to going to biasness?

Stephen A. Smith (87:09)

Well, the media has definitely become biased. Listen, let me, let me, let me be the first to come. I hate to do this, but in this regard, I will come to the defense of the president. You have some people who hate him so much that they.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (87:28)

It's, It's.

Stephen A. Smith (87:29)

It's bad enough that they would criticize him because he deserves it most of the time.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (87:34)

The problem is, is when he does something right, they won't admit it. See, that's not good. If you.

Stephen A. Smith (87:42)

In the media. You can't be that way in the media. You're not supposed to be that way. I'm a call balls and strikes.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (87:50)

I'm going to be fair to the president. If he doing a shitty job and he's messing up like I think he is now, I'm going to say so. But when he does something positive, I'm going to say that, too. I'm not. My disdain is not going to be of such an ilk that I can't say anything when he does something right. You have no business being a member of the media if you can't do that. Now, I don't need no damn lectures From Pete Hegseth, Mr. Fox on the weekends. I don't need no lectures from him. But it is true. The bias is palpable.

Stephen A. Smith (88:27)

It's real and it's excessive.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (88:30)

And nobody in the media has any business doing that. Leave it to others to do it, not you. If you're a member of the media, that's wrong.

Caller (88:42)

All right. I appreciate your call, Stephen A.

Stephen A. Smith (88:44)

Thank you. Thank you. Michigan, you're live right here.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (88:50)

I forgot.

Stephen A. Smith (88:50)

Who said it says Michigan? Greg in Michigan. You're live with Stephen H. Boom Shaka locker, baby. What's going on?

Caller - Mr. Positive (88:56)

Stephen A. Mr. Positive. Love, your brother. Great show. Hey, I gotta tell you real quick, yesterday with Chris Cuomo, you were spot on about people wanting to be Trump and thinking that they can be Trump and getting away with what Trump can. You are spot on. They can't. They're not Trump. They don't have his swagger. And real quick, my friend, I gotta ask you, our allies, our NATO allies, how are we able to engage them back so they want to help us. Trump screwed up. Trump doesn't understand proximity. Trump doesn't understand that we need NATO, we need to fight.

Stephen A. Smith (89:35)

Let me stop you right there. Maybe he does understand and doesn't care. Maybe it's not that he doesn't understand, is that he does understand and doesn't care. Now, the United States, we're not a nation that is going to wars alone.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (89:49)

We don't do that.

Stephen A. Smith (89:51)

And so him wanting to be a

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (89:52)

nationalist, him wanting to be a loner,

Stephen A. Smith (89:55)

him wanting to operate that way, I think it's to the detriment of this country in many, many ways. I think that's a mistake. And I think the Republicans should be

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (90:03)

the first to call them on the

Stephen A. Smith (90:04)

carpet for it because they've been around for too long not to know better. So that's where I'm at with it. But this notion that Trump doesn't know any better, I'm not gonna accuse Trump of not knowing. I'm not gonna accuse him of being dumb or anything like that. I'm going to accuse him of not caring. He wants to do things his way.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (90:22)

He wants to upset the apple cart ruffle feathers and make things as chaotic as possible because he believes chaos will reap results. I don't think he's right, but I

Stephen A. Smith (90:34)

think that's a strategy.

Caller - Mr. Positive (90:36)

You're spot on. Thank you. Love you, everybody. Go for your dreams.

Stephen A. Smith (90:40)

Appreciate the call, man. Mark in Florida, you live with Stephen. A. Straight shooter with Stephen. A. What's up, Mark?

Caller (90:46)

Stephen, number one, thanks for taking my call. Number two, love your show.

Stephen A. Smith (90:52)

Thank you.

Caller (90:53)

It's great. Hey, my question for you is, you know, whether it be Fox News, cnn, you. Nobody talks about getting term limits on these congressmen and senators. These people are totally out of control. I mean, it's like, take a look at Mitch McConnell. He's like weekends at Bernie's along with Dianne Feinstein when she was there. John McCain, for Christ's sake, a war hero, but yet he knew a year before he died that he had brain cancer. But he would not resign his post and give it to somebody younger to carry on to do the work of the people.

Stephen A. Smith (91:33)

Valid. I think there should be health checkups annually on all elected officials. I think there should be 20 year term limits max for them and the Supreme Court. And I think there should be age limits. Nobody should be in there past age 70.

Caller (91:54)

I agree with somewhat. I think there should be not 20 year term limits. I mean, take a look at Pelosi.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (92:00)

Well, I don't, you know, let me

Stephen A. Smith (92:02)

tell you why I don't have a problem with the 20 years. Because as an elected official, you're ingratiating yourself and allowing others to ingratiate themselves with you. Being in the position that you're in sometime, that takes time. And over the course of time, it takes a while to get things done. And relationship building is a key part of things strategically as well as empowering oneself to really, really make a difference. And I think 20 years is more than enough time to pull those things off. I think anytime shorter than that can be a bit Detrimental to the cause. And that's why I say 20 term limits. But I'm definitely big about term limits with Supreme Court justices and I and listen, I'm not trying to engage in ageism because I've seen plenty of people over the age of 70, even over the age of 80, like Nancy Pelosi and others who are smart as attack. There's no doubt about that. I understand that. But I'm just saying that there's cerebrally speaking, intellectually speaking, physically, physical energy speaking, et cetera, there's a lot that goes into being an elected official. And I think that by the age of 70, it's time to pass the baton to somebody else. So I am for age limits at age 70, term limits no longer than 20 years. I absolutely posit. And definitely annual health checks because you shouldn't be allowed. Look at what Ruth Bader Ginsburg, when we gonna sit up there and bring that home? Do you understand what the damage that this woman has done? I know that she is revered and respected in circles and she should be because she's done a lot more good than bad. And I get that part. But Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a Democrat who was a Supreme Court justice who knew that she had health issues with cancer and stuff like that. The Obama administration, according to numerous reports, wanted her to retire so they could put somebody else in that seat. She insisted on staying on board because she wanted her successor to be to be selected by a woman, which means that she was arrogant enough to assume that, that Hillary Rodham Clinton was going

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (94:03)

to win the election and she stayed in a seat and Hillary Rodham Clinton lost. She ultimately passes away and Trump gets to name her successor, her replacement. So instead of a 5, 4 majority in the court where anything is possible, the they got a 6, 3 majority on a conservative side. Ruth Bader Ginsburg did that. And nobody says that enough, but that is a very, very big deal, Mark. And that kind of stuff cannot be allowed to happen.

Caller (94:38)

Well, you know, again, I think 20 years, I mean you take a look at these people. They, they, they vote themselves all kinds of perks and it's ridiculous what's going on in Congress.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (94:51)

Okay, you're right.

Stephen A. Smith (94:52)

Appreciate the call, man. You're not wrong. Thank you, mark, for the call. 86696 POTUS is the number of callers. 86696, POTUS. Straight shooter with Stephen A. You listen live. Don't go away. More of your calls to close out the show in a minute. I'm here. Make sure you

Caller - Mr. Positive (95:12)

foreign.

Stephen A. Smith (95:18)

My Name is Kashmir, just like the

Angie.com Advertiser (95:20)

Led Zeppelin song Cashmere, and I'm from Virginia. And Stephen A. I love watching your

Stephen A. Smith (95:26)

takes on sports and now politics.

Angie.com Advertiser (95:28)

And the question I have is if you ever did a political run or

Stephen A. Smith (95:33)

if it's a fantasy you have, what

Angie.com Advertiser (95:35)

would be three policies that you would

Caller (95:37)

have that you, you think would make

Angie.com Advertiser (95:39)

the nation a better place? Thank you. And looking forward to your answer.

Stephen A. Smith (95:44)

Kashmir. I deeply appreciate the call. Thank you so much. SiriusXM.com getserious that's SiriusXM.com getserious to leave you your message messages, your voicemail messages. To me, the way Cashmere just did it, three policies. Haven't really, really thought about it. I'll be focused on the economy because it's all about job growth. It's all about making sure there's money in people's pocket. You're only as strong as your weakest link. And when people are making money in this country, the world is just a better place to live in. This nation's just a better place to live in. So I would definitely focus on economics to make sure recessions and inflation and things of that nature were being addressed and it wasn't ravaging our country. That affordability would be something that would be addressed. I would definitely be a proponent of utilizing energy to our advantage to make sure we're capitalizing. I wouldn't go drill, baby, drill to the degree that Trump and the Republicans want me to, but I wouldn't be stoic against it the way the Democrats have been in the past. So that would definitely be one thing. Safety in the streets would be mandatory. I don't play that mess. If you got people scared to go in the streets, they're going to be scared to shop. They're going to be scared to go out there and spend their money and patronize businesses in the United States of America, whether it's restaurants, whether it's department stores and the like, I'm not having that. So those are two things that would definitely come to my mind. No doubt about it. And I would never, ever, ever allow open borders. I'm just telling you that right now, I'm not against anybody. My Latino brothers and sisters, I would be all for them being in this country. You got to come. You got to come legally. But the biggest thing about it is that we got our own house to get in order. Man, we got a lot of mess here. It's not about anybody else and hurting anybody else. It's about what we've done to ourselves as a nation. So I would prioritize those things. Safety in the streets, okay? Not making sure that a whole bunch of people are flooding our borders to the point where it's, it's, it's to our detriment because we've got communities that are already here that can't be taken care of because we simply don't have the money to do it. And of course I would make sure that economically we are stronger than ever. Economically would be my number one focus. Because when people are making money, they're far more cooperative to assist in making sure other things happen so they can live their best lives. That would be my philosophy. And obviously I'm going to look out for the desolate and disenfranchise. I'm always going to look out for the little man. That's just me. Be entitled pro entitlement programs here, there. But you know what? You can help with that in terms of giving out internships and doing things to facilitate education, better education for the up and comers amongst us to make sure they got a shot at the American dream. Because that's what it's all about. That's what it's all about. I hope that answered your question. If it not, I'll do a better time next time. Let's go to Stephen in Michigan. You're live with Stephen A real quick. Stephen, go ahead.

Caller (98:19)

Thank you, Stephen A for taking my call and thank you for the show. I agree with a lot of the things, things you say, but in the opening statement on the Iran war, man, I'm not a fan of Trump at all. But the fact that he's gone after a terrorist regime, I'm surprised that the people that support human rights, that are advocating for women's rights all the time and that are against terrorism, I'm surprised that they're not congratulating the President.

Stephen A. Smith (98:49)

Stop right there. Start right there. Stephen. I don't think anybody's against what he did to Iran. They're saying, where do we go from here? Because it was supposed, you know, bomb them, disable them, you know, get, you know, take out their leaders who were terrorizing their people. Fine, but now you've been there 19 days and what we don't want is endless wars, you understand, with no ending. That, that, that's what you don't want. That's the issue. It wasn't the initial attack. It's the fact that we're still there and we don't seem to have a plan.

Caller (99:20)

He said four weeks to six weeks. It hasn't been that long. They, they come out and they say what their military goals are. And it's obvious, I think, to everybody in the world that what he wants and what.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (99:30)

Yeah, but you have people.

Stephen A. Smith (99:30)

But Stephen, you have people that believe he's lying. I get your point, and you're right, if it ends. But the point is, is that at the moment he's asking people to trust him and there's a lot of people who don't. It's just that simple.

Caller (99:43)

They have to believe. If they believe that they. There's a chance for regime change in Iran and how good that would be for the rest of the world, I would put F in it. I don't mind paying a little bit more for gas for a while.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (99:53)

Okay.

Caller (99:53)

That's the cost of it.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (99:55)

Okay, that's fair.

Stephen A. Smith (99:56)

I gotta run. I appreciate the call, but that's fair. Tim in Florida, you live with Stephen. A real quick. Tim, go ahead.

Caller (100:02)

Hey, how are you?

Stephen A. Smith (100:03)

All right. You only got a minute. Go ahead, buddy.

Caller (100:06)

Oh, only got a minute. So oil prices, I think they're going. If we don't solve things within the next 30 days, oil prices are probably heading to 150. So most likely. So I'm an economist, so kind of what I do. Second thing is just on demographics overall is if you look at like what the Republican Party is doing right now, and if you look out like to 2050, right. African American population will be up 30%. Asian Americans will double in numbers.

Stephen A. Smith (100:49)

You said that, you said the black, you said the black population will go up about 30%.

Caller (100:53)

Did you say that it will?

Stephen A. Smith (100:55)

Yeah, According to the United States, according to the Census Bureau report, United States, African American community at 13.6%. And there's no chance of that growing at even 20%, let alone 30%. What are you talking about?

Caller (101:07)

Well, if you do some research on like some major papers from Yale and other colleges, Cambridge, you'll see that that's 25 to 30% is what they project.

Stephen A. Smith (101:18)

I'm telling you that. I'm telling you they're projecting it, but people are refuting that. They're saying there's no accuracy to that at all. Well, not with the African American community.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (101:27)

In the United States of America, I

Caller (101:30)

believe in my colleagues and I believe in their research.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (101:33)

Got it.

Caller (101:34)

But diversity overall is like non white Americans is going to go from about 20.

Stephen A. Smith (101:40)

Well, it's going to be more than that in the Hispanic community. There's going to be more than that in the Hispanic community. I think a more accurate depiction of that is the Hispanic community. Will end up before long at closer to 35 to 40%, while a black community will end up anywhere from 13.6 to 15%. That's what I think is most accurate. That's a more accurate depiction of it all. But that's just me. Research will tell us the truth. We'll look at that in the weeks to come. That's it for this edition of Straight Shooter with yours truly. Thanks again again to my guest for coming on the show. Really, really appreciated it. No doubt about it. Matthew Wild and of course Representative Kevin Kylie. Both of them blessing us with their presence and this education. Really, really appreciate them. I'll holla at y' all next week. Same bat time and channel next Wednesday night. Until then, peace and love everybody. Stephen A.

Stephen A. Smith (Alternate or Co-host Voice) (102:26)

Signing off.

Splunk Advertiser (102:32)

Hidden value is all around you. It's in every app, transaction and network and chances are you you have loads of it. It's your machine data and Splunk helps you tap into it. Unifi machine data and insights pop up everywhere. Discover game changing clarity, intelligence for every decision and a critical resource to power AI. All you need is already there and it's fine exactly where it is. Your machine data is waiting. Let's unlock it. Learn more@splunk.com why have I asked my

Angie.com Narrator (103:00)

electrician I found on Angie.com to bury my pet hamster?

Caller (103:02)

I was so moved by how carefully

Stephen A. Smith (103:04)

he buried my electrical wires, I knew

Angie.com Narrator (103:05)

I could trust him to bury my sweet nibbles after his untimely end.

Stephen A. Smith (103:08)

This is very strange Angie.

Angie.com Narrator (103:10)

The one you trust to find the ones you trust. Find pros for all your home projects@angie.com.