All Eyes Are on SCOTUS | Episode 321

Summary

VINCE Podcast – Ep. 321 – “All Eyes Are on SCOTUS”
Host: Vince Coglianese | Cumulus Podcast Network
Date: June 30, 2026
Theme: Supreme Court Rulings & the Battle Over American Citizenship and Election Integrity

---

Episode Overview

This jam-packed, high-energy episode focuses on the historic significance of several Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decisions expected or delivered during the week. Vince zeroes in on the highly contested issue of birthright citizenship — whether children born to illegal aliens in the U.S. should automatically be granted citizenship. The show also covers other key SCOTUS decisions impacting presidential powers, the Federal Reserve, and election processes. Intense intra-conservative legislative wrangling over the Save America Act (focused on election integrity) and related congressional drama receives extended attention. Notable guests and color commentary inject sharp analysis and signature humor, making for a fast-paced, detail-rich listen that keeps conservative audiences informed and mobilized.

---

Key Topics and Analysis

1. Anticipating the Supreme Court’s Birthright Citizenship Ruling

[00:21, 06:55, 07:27, 16:41]

• Main Issue: Should children born to illegal aliens in the U.S. receive automatic citizenship, or is this a misapplication of the 14th Amendment?
• Vince breaks down the historical intent of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, emphasizing they were "not to confer citizenship on the children of illegal aliens, but to ensure citizenship for freed slaves" ([07:32]).
• Notable quote:
  “The answer to that is ‘hell no’ to any normal American. It’s also ‘hell no’ to the people who wrote the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments.” (Vince, [07:32])

2. SCOTUS Oral Arguments Recap: Roberts, Jackson, Alito, ACLU

[08:34–16:28]

• John Roberts’ Skepticism: The Chief Justice questions the logic of extending the “ambassadors/diplomats” exception to the much larger illegal alien population, which Vince calls "not a legal argument, that's a political argument" ([09:06], [10:14]).
• ACLU’s Stand: Argues any child born here is a citizen, even if subject to another country’s jurisdiction, referencing Wong Kim Ark ([10:58]).
• Justice Alito’s Dilemma: Questions how a child required to serve another nation militarily can be considered under U.S. jurisdiction ([11:29]).
• Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Take: Her “allegiance” example (comparing breaking laws abroad as "local allegiance") is roundly mocked by Vince.
  “That woman doesn’t even know what a woman is… She’s not a biologist.” (Vince, [16:24])
• Summary: Robust criticism of liberal arguments and Roberts’ equivocation; Vince finds the conservative side historically, legally, and morally correct.

3. The 14th Amendment & Historical Context

[16:41–19:02]

• Vince quotes Ann Coulter’s 2018 column to further assert the limited, targeted scope of the 14th Amendment.
• Highlights that even Native Americans born in the U.S. weren’t considered citizens until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 ([18:34]).
• Concludes history "is all on the side of making the right decision. Today, the question is: Will the court do that?" ([19:02])

4. Supreme Court’s Judicial Dynamics & Predicted Ruling

[19:19–20:33]

• Vince relays Mark Krikorian’s prediction: the Court will “punt,” suggesting only Congress, not the President or SCOTUS, can change birthright citizenship, with Vince expressing skepticism ([19:31], [20:17]).
• “Don’t underestimate John Roberts’ ability to twist himself into a pretzel.” (Vince, [20:18])

5. Lighter Moment — Clarence Thomas on Capitol Hill

[22:37–25:25]

• Clarence Thomas charms and stonewalls reporters, refusing to leak any upcoming SCOTUS decisions; his infectious laughter and humility delight Vince.
• "He’s a man of honor. He’s not, like, releasing anything he shouldn’t. He’s just so funny." (Vince, [25:01])

---

6. Supreme Court Decisions on Presidential Power and the Federal Reserve

[25:38–31:59]

FTC Commissioner Removal ([25:38–28:03])

• SCOTUS restores presidential authority to remove FTC commissioners over a 90-year-old precedent, which Vince frames as a return to “the constitutional order.”

Federal Reserve Board (Trump v. Cook) ([28:47–31:36])

• President’s attempt to fire Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve failed at SCOTUS.
• Clearance Thomas calls the Fed’s “independent” status unconstitutional, criticizing the myth of technocratic governance outside democratic control.
  “Regardless of whether unaccountable executive officers like Lisa Cook would better govern the economy, the Framers rejected such a promised land of technocratic governance.” (Clarence Thomas, read by Vince, [31:03])

---

7. SCOTUS Mail-in Ballot Ruling & Its Implications

[35:12–41:52]

• SCOTUS ruled that states can count mail-in ballots received after Election Day, as long as they're postmarked by Election Day—opening the door, Vince argues, to widespread fraud.
• Vince spotlights Justice Alito’s warning:
  “Absentee voting was the largest source of potential fraud… when someone votes by mail, it’s harder for officials to verify their identity.” (Alito, [36:22])
• Vince calls the decision “a system that is ripe for fraud.”
• Military absentee ballots: Vince distinguishes these as a reasonable exception, but civilians should meet the deadline ([38:00]).

Stephen Miller’s Reaction

[38:32–39:30]

• “Let’s just call it like it is. Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett decided to cave to the radical left. Alito was so clear in his wording about what Election Day means… This was really a travesty.” (Stephen Miller, [38:48])

Political Response: Hakeem Jeffries

[40:20–41:12]

• When SCOTUS rules against Democrats, it’s “illegitimate;” when decisions favor Democrats, Jeffries praises the court:
  “Which one is it, you idiot? Hakeem Jeffries. Slow witted and poisonous.” (Vince, [41:52])

---

8. The Save America Act: Congressional Showdown

[41:54–57:35]

• Trump doubles down on demands for the Save America Act (election integrity), threatening to veto the housing bill to force action. Slams Senators Murkowski, Collins, Tillis, Cassidy, McConnell for “getting in the way” ([42:10]).
• Direct quote (Trump):
  “How do you vote against the Save America Act? … The only people that would vote against that are people that are going to cheat in an election.” ([43:18])

Speaker Mike Johnson’s “Reconciliation” Gambit

[47:05–49:22]

• Johnson proposes tying election integrity funding to a reconciliation bill — which Vince and Sen. Mike Lee criticize as an unworkable “scam.”
• Mike Lee:
  “There’s no way in heck the Save America Act passes the Byrd Rule. It’s non-budgetary. You attach it to a must-pass bill or use talking filibuster.” ([49:59], paraphrased)
• Vince suggests Johnson’s real motive is to shift responsibility to the parliamentarian for inevitable failure ([50:16]).

Push to Fire Senate Parliamentarian

[51:01–53:17]

• Trump calls for firing the Senate parliamentarian, calling her a Harry Reid/Obama appointee blocking MAGA priorities. Vince recaps the recurring (and misleading) "Obamacare passed by reconciliation" talking point.
• “Still think that’s fundamentally in service of a fool’s errand, which is attempting to pass this thing through reconciliation when you should be passing it through regular order.” (Vince, [53:17])

Anna Paulina Luna’s Maneuver

[53:45–55:50]

• Luna attempts to attach Save America Act as an amendment to the must-pass NDAA (defense bill), arguing “the American people consider the Save America Act to be must pass.”
• Senate GOP leaders reportedly threaten to kill the NDAA if it’s attached, proving — in Vince’s words — a “lack of testicular fortitude.”

---

9. Immigration Policy Gaffe: Markwayne Mullin’s Haitian Comments

[58:07–60:25]

• Mullin suggests on TV that Haitians with expired TPS could “apply for legal permanent residency or visas,” sparking conservative backlash.
• Stephen Miller’s Cleanup: Reframes Mullin’s slip, affirming "they have no right to be here. Biden flew them here unconstitutionally, and President Trump’s going to … send them home." ([59:25])
• Vince: “That was a cleanup operation. Stephen Miller is very good at that, and Markwayne Mullin should be grateful.” ([60:15])

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• “Stop looking for paths out of doing the right thing.” (Vince on Chief Justice Roberts, [10:16])
• “She [Ketanji Brown Jackson] can tell you that breaking Japan’s laws is a way of demonstrating allegiance. I don’t even know if she understands the English language, candidly.” (Vince, [16:28])
• “[Clarence Thomas] is a man of honor. He’s not releasing anything he shouldn’t. He’s just so funny.” (Vince, [25:01])
• “It’s a sign that you are winning, and it’s a sign that the president’s bully pulpit is having an effect.” (Vince, [57:35])
• “This is a frustrating fight. I know. … But the fact these guys are in an utter tizzy … is a very good sign.” (Vince, [57:23])

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Birthright citizenship recap & oral arguments: [07:27–16:41]
• Ann Coulter historical analysis, Indian Citizenship Act: [16:41–19:02]
• Predicted SCOTUS outcome, Krikorian forecast: [19:21–20:17]
• Clarence Thomas Capitol Hill exchange: [22:37–25:25]
• FTC/Federal Reserve Power decisions: [25:38–31:36]
• Mail-in ballots ruling, Stephen Miller, Hakeem Jeffries: [35:12–41:52]
• Save America Act, Speaker Johnson, Mike Lee, Anna Paulina Luna: [41:54–57:35]
• Mullin’s Haitian comment, Stephen Miller clarifies: [58:07–60:25]

---

Final Thoughts & Tone

Vince's signature tone alternates between impassioned constitutional advocacy, incredulity at establishment “swamp” maneuvering, blunt humor, and occasional outright mockery of political adversaries — matched by a persistent call to action among conservative listeners to remain vigilant and engaged.

“I hope that pressure creates a real diamond… you are winning… It's a sign that the president’s bully pulpit is having an effect.” ([46:48], [57:35])

---

Summary prepared for those who need a comprehensive, engaging breakdown of VINCE Ep. 321 — skipping ads, sponsor readouts, and non-content intros/outros for clarity and focus.

Transcript

[Vince]

Everybody, welcome to Vince on a Tuesday heading into Independence Day.

[Co-host]

Can't wait to get there.

[Vince]

But I'm glad to spend this time as we await it with you, the best audience anywhere. We've got a big show today because we are anticipating as we do this

[Co-host]

program live at 8am Eastern each morning. Rumble.com Vince, if you'd ever like to join the live broadcast of this, we

[Vince]

are awaiting the big Supreme Court decision today on birthright sex citizenship. What is going to happen here? Is the court going to find, like any rational person should, that American citizenship should only be conferred to the children of Americans? Is that what's going to happen today? Or are we going to get some sort of ruling today that upholds an unconstitutional status quo that any Chinese national can pour into our country, have a baby and, and suddenly, boom, have an American citizen that a Chinese national could fly to, say, Guam, have a baby and then instantly have an American citizen. Yeah, that ain't gonna work, not for normal people. Will it work for the court? We'll find out. And maybe, maybe there's an opinion that they're gonna try and release where they can split the baby, metaphorically speaking, split the anchor baby. We'll see. We'll see.

[Co-host]

I'll talk all about it coming up in a moment with you.

[Vince]

Also, the Save America act gets a brand new push from the president of

[Co-host]

the United States and it is driving Congress absolutely bat guano crazy. I'm going to get into that in

[Vince]

a moment too because there's some very clever ideas being put forward by Mike Lee, Anna Paulina Luna. This fight is very live so I need you to stay in it.

[Co-host]

I'll tell you all the latest updates as we gavel in for the Save America act today.

[Vince]

And also a bit of a cleanup job for Mark Wayne Mullen after he uttered some ideas about how Haitians could

[Co-host]

stay in the United States this weekend.

[Vince]

He's not saying that anymore.

[Co-host]

We've got more details on that coming up.

[Vince]

A very busy edition. Events on a Tuesday. It's Tuesday. Why is it busy?

[Co-host]

Well, it's always busy. It's the Trump administration. It's so great to have you here.

[Vince]

Let me thank one of the great sponsors. You do make today possible. This program, Patriot Mobile is here with us.

[Co-host]

So many brands today claim to stand for American values.

[Vince]

Most of the time, all talk, no action.

[Co-host]

But Patriot Mobile is different. You see, for more than 12 years now, Patriot Mobile has been living their

[Vince]

values and standing in the gap.

[Co-host]

For every American who believes that freedom

[Vince]

is worth fighting for their Business was founded on a very simple conviction. If culture is being shaped through commerce, Americans deserve a real conservative alternative. Today, Patriot Mobile is one of America's only Christian conservative wireless providers offering premium priority nationwide service on any of the three major US networks, unlimited data plans,

[Co-host]

international roaming, 100% US based customer support.

[Vince]

And with Patriot Mobile, you can even have two separate networks on one phone.

[Co-host]

I have that and I love it. Giving you amazing coverage and peace of mind. You can't get this with other carriers.

[Vince]

Every year, Patriot Mobile contributes millions to

[Co-host]

organizations that defend free speech, religious liberty,

[Vince]

the sanctity of life, the second Amendment and America's future.

[Co-host]

Patriot Mobile is not just sitting on the sidelines. They're on the front lines fighting for our freedom.

[Vince]

So go to patriot mobile.com Vince or call 972-patriot. Use the promo code Vince.

[Co-host]

Get a free month of service.

[Vince]

That's patriotmobile.com Vince or call 9772-patriot. Make the switch today.

[Co-host]

Hey, who did the marathon with me yesterday?

[Vince]

Who did it? Anybody? Anybody in chat do the five hours with me yesterday? We did five hours. It was, it was fun.

[Co-host]

It was a good time.

[Vince]

Not the kind of thing you should do every day though.

[Co-host]

Who am I kidding?

[Vince]

I do four hours every day.

[Co-host]

So I don't know what adding an extra hour really changes, but we did Dan Bongino's program yesterday. It was a lot of fun to fill in for Dan while he's on vacation and great to check back in with the audience.

[Vince]

See, I got some ides. Yeah, I got some marathons. We should have like you know, some

[Co-host]

sort of award or something for people in the chat who can go the

[Vince]

full, the full distance. It was awesome to spend some time with you yesterday. And as you can tell, it's so funny. As you can tell, I have so much stuff to get to on any given day. The truth is we can do five hours because I'm just gathering all sorts of thread. But I will say the toughest part of my day yesterday was not the

[Co-host]

five hours of content.

[Vince]

It was preparing the content for today and then having an email mishap last night that destroyed everything. So yesterday evening, can we.

[Co-host]

I'm going to get into some, some moaning about my own life for a second yesterday evening.

[Vince]

I'm trying to prep everything for today's programs and I am. I just put the finishing touches on it. And I'll admit it was a little late yesterday.

[Co-host]

My.

[Vince]

I usually get my notes out by

[Co-host]

around 8pm each night so that Josh has time to pull some video and

[Vince]

candidly I did get a little bit

[Co-host]

out to him last night before 8

[Vince]

o', clock, but I told him I

[Co-host]

was like, josh, I've got some things to do tonight, some family stuff. I'm going to try and get this to you as soon as I can.

[Vince]

So 10 o' clock rolls around. I've got my email all tied up with a bow.

[Co-host]

It's perfect.

[Vince]

Everything's ready to go. And then in my stupor, just like,

[Co-host]

tiredness, I think I don't know what

[Vince]

happened, but I'm pretty certain I may have accidentally hit the trash button instead

[Co-host]

of the send button.

[Vince]

You don't want to hit the trash button.

[Co-host]

You don't, you don't want to trash the draft.

[Vince]

It wasn't like I was trashing an

[Co-host]

email that I had already received. This was a draft email. And I think I clicked the trash button. I think that's what happened. I truly don't know. But here's what I do know. Everything disappeared.

[Vince]

Everything freaking disappeared. And I, I. And you know, you try and hold it together.

[Co-host]

My poor wife is looking at me

[Vince]

going, is everything okay? And I'm like, I'm gripping my face.

[Co-host]

I want to tear my entire face off my skull. I'm like, ah, I think I just destroyed all of my work for the day. Anyway, so I then spent the rest of the time last night leading up to, I don't know, close to midnight, finally getting everything back together to the extent I can.

[Vince]

So whatever I have today is the

[Co-host]

remnants of my double effort to try and pull a show together for you. So I'll just tell you how everything went last night.

[Vince]

I don't even know why I told

[Co-host]

you that story other than to say

[Vince]

it was a nightmare and I just

[Co-host]

needed you to know about it. It just makes me feel better telling you about it. It's so crazy. It's so crazy.

[Vince]

But yes, no, I had to keep it together. You know what I realized? And all husbands should realize this.

[Co-host]

Don't lose your cool in front of your wife. Don't become some sort of emotional wreck over things like this. Just try and keep it together.

[Vince]

Because I kept thinking, my wife is

[Co-host]

going to hate me if I act like a total freak right now over the fact that I just lost this work.

[Vince]

And so try to keep it together. Just got right back to work, finished this thing, and boom, here we are this morning.

[Co-host]

So I'm glad to be here with you.

[Vince]

Okay, let's. Let's talk about what we have going on today. We are very vigilant for this Supreme

[Co-host]

Court decision today as you join me if you're you know, again, I can only do this show based on what I know.

[Vince]

And by the time you hear this,

[Co-host]

we may have some clear answers on the subject.

[Vince]

But the birthright citizenship case set to have a big opinion released by the court today, and it's going to be in the 10am Eastern hour. So I want to thank Dan for

[Co-host]

taking the day off because that gives us a chance to watch the Supreme

[Vince]

Court and see what's going on over there. And I'll be assessing it on the big national radio show today. But let me take you back in

[Co-host]

time for a moment to April 1st. These were the oral arguments in this case.

[Vince]

And it revolves very simply around whether or not illegal aliens should be entitled to have American citizen children just by virtue of the fact that they give birth in this country. The answer to that is hell no to any normal American. It's also hell no to the people who wrote the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments, which were dedicated not to illegal aliens having American citizen babies, but instead to the children of former slaves saying that, yes, you are an American citizen

[Co-host]

by virtue of your birth in this country. That's what those amendments were about. That's what the 14th Amendment is about.

[Vince]

It's as clear as understanding even the

[Co-host]

slimmest understanding of American history.

[Vince]

But John Roberts seemed very confused on

[Co-host]

April 1st when they had these oral arguments.

[Vince]

And I want you to listen back here. Is the chief justice theoretically supposed to

[Co-host]

be on our side, supposed to be on the side of the Constitution, but

[Vince]

here he is very confused about why illegals should be excluded from citizenship.

[Co-host]

Listen to this.

[John Roberts]

Well, starting with that theory, you obviously put a lot of weight on subject to the jurisdiction thereof. But the examples you give to support that strike me as very quirky. You know, children of ambassadors, children of enemies during a hostile invasion, children on warships. And then you expand it to a whole class of illegal aliens are here in the country. I'm not quite sure how you can get to that big group from such tiny and sort of idiosyncratic groups.

[Co-host]

Examples there are those sort of narrow exceptions for ambassadors. I don't even need to hear enormous

[Vince]

one that they're very focused on. Here's, here's I'm driven crazy by this questioning. And here's why John Roberts is is

[Co-host]

citing the accuracy of the argument that

[Vince]

the children of foreign diplomats don't become

[Co-host]

American citizens in the United States just

[Vince]

because a foreign diplomat has a baby here. Now, why is that? Why is that the case? And the answer is because they're subject to the jurisdiction of another country. Okay, so what about illegal aliens? Why are illegal aliens afforded us citizen children? And you notice that he does something there that should not be in a legal argument. He's making a case that, well, that's a small subset, the children of diplomats, illegal aliens. Well, Biden opened our borders and they're here in the number, in huge numbers, tens of millions of illegal aliens. So that number is so big, how can you use a small example and apply it to a big example? That's not a legal argument. That's a political argument. That's an argument about like, well, this

[Co-host]

problem is so far gone, we can't address it.

[Vince]

Now. That's insanity. John Roberts stop looking for paths out of doing the right thing. And yet that's what John Roberts appeared to be doing on April 1st. So this was the kind of thing, you hear this coming out of the court and you begin to become a little bit disheartened that they're going to

[Co-host]

do the right thing and stand up for this country.

[Vince]

The ACLU was on the side of

[Co-host]

saying that illegal aliens should have American citizen children.

[Vince]

The American Civil Liberties Union, which is

[Co-host]

not in any way fighting for American civil liberties.

[Vince]

They're fighting for a foreign invasion of the country and for conferring American citizenship on people who don't deserve it. Here's Cut.

[Co-host]

To listen to that argument at the

[ACLU Lawyer]

time, not subject to any foreign power is pretty straightforward. So let me give you these examples. A boy is born here to an Iranian father who has entered the country illegally. That boy is automatically an Iranian national at birth, and he has a duty to provide military service to the Iranian government. Is he not subject to any foreign power?

Not within the meaning of the 1866 Act, Justice Alito. And that's clear from Wong Kim Ark, and it's clear from the debates what the framers meant by the phrase not subject to any foreign power was referring to the ambassador exception. If it meant what the government contends basically, not a subject of any foreign power that you were that another country considers you a you sanguineous citizen, then lawful per permanent residents, all foreign national, ordinary public.

Ordinary public. Meaning of that would certainly encompass that boy, would it not?

Justice Alito, if you think that the language of the 1866 act was ambiguous, as Wong Kim Ark says, the shift to. To the language of the 14th Amendment, which is the operative text, certainly clears up any ambiguity.

[Vince]

Let me. Let me handle this, then. So she's making an argument that is predicated on a complete falsehood she's citing

[Co-host]

the Wong Kim Ark case, which is.

[Vince]

Dates back to 1898, and making it seem like, okay, well, that settled the

[Co-host]

matter that any immigrant child who's born in the United States becomes an American citizen. Here's the key element to this, though.

[Vince]

The Wong Kim Ark case did not involve illegal immigration. Now, I submit that I don't think

[Co-host]

any legal immigrant should be entitled to an American citizen child unless they're an American citizen.

[Vince]

That should be the way this is constructed. And I think the 14th amendment is

[Co-host]

crystal clear on the subject. And I don't even think the court should stray away from that obvious reading.

[Vince]

But even if they did, even if

[Co-host]

they said that legal immigrants could have American citizen children because they came in the right way and they're subject somehow to the jurisdiction of the United States States in that capacity, the Wong Kim

[Vince]

Ark is not apply to illegal aliens. Never did. The Wong Kim Ark case was about the son of. Of a Chinese laborer who was brought to the United States legally. A legal Chinese worker here in the

[Co-host]

United States who had a son.

[Vince]

And the question was whether or not

[Co-host]

that son becomes an American citizen.

[Vince]

It has nothing to do with illegal aliens. And you heard in Sam Alito's question, he was asking about an illegal Iranian

[Co-host]

who has a child who's instantly an Iranian national subject to the jurisdiction of

[Vince]

Iran by virtue of mandated military service. He was setting all the conditions to

[Co-host]

be like, look how ridiculous this is.

[Vince]

And still the ACLU lawyer was like, wow. No, that person, that kid should definitely

[Co-host]

be an American citizen. You're a psycho.

[Vince]

What are you doing? And you want to talk about psycho? The most psycho thing that happened in that oral argument was Ketanji Brown Jackson who. You know how she's going to decide on this case? I already know here. I'll tell you right now, without even seeing the decision yet. Let me. Let me pull out my crystal ball.

[Co-host]

I don't have a crystal ball. I have a cup of blackout coffee.

[Vince]

You ready? Let's see. How is Ketanji Brown Jackson going to rule on this case today? Oh, she's going to say illegal aliens get American citizen children. In fact, let's pretend the case has already come out. Man, did you see that? Ketanji Brown Jackson said that illegal alien children should be American citizens. Isn't that crazy? What a psychotic decision by Ketanji Brown

[Co-host]

Jackson and every other justice who joined her insanity.

[Vince]

Yeah, she said this and she said this subject to the jurisdiction thereof thing is predicated on if you break the country's laws That's a way to say that you have established allegiance. Vince, did she really say that? Yes, she really said it. Cut three.

[Co-host]

Listen to this.

[Ketanji Brown Jackson]

I was thinking about this, and I think they. There are various sources that say this that you can have. You obviously have permanent allegiance based on being born in whatever country you're from. That's what everybody recognizes. But you also have local allegiance when you are on the soil of this other state, other sovereign. And I was thinking, you know, I'm. I'm. I U.S. citizen, am visiting Japan. And what it means is that, you know, if I steal someone's wallet in Japan, the. The Japanese authorities can arrest me and prosecute me. It's allegiance meaning can they control you as a matter of law? I can also rely on them if my wallet is stolen to, you know, under Japanese law, go and prosecute the person who has stolen it. So there's this relationship based on. Even though I'm a temporary traveler, I'm just on vacation in Japan, I'm still locally owing allegiance.

[Vince]

In that she pledges allegiance to Japan

[Co-host]

when she goes there and breaks their laws.

[Vince]

That is, that's being passed off as

[Co-host]

some sort of wisdom on the United States Supreme Court.

[Vince]

That woman doesn't even know what a woman is.

[Co-host]

She's not a biologist.

[Vince]

But she can tell you that breaking

[Co-host]

Japan's laws is a way of demonstrating allegiance. I. I don't even know if she understands the English language, candidly. It's. It's crazy.

[Vince]

Here's. Here's a quick crash course, though, in

[Co-host]

the way all of this works. I mentioned the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments. They were written specifically for the children of former slaves. It's about as. It's about as straightforward as it gets.

[Vince]

And there's a great piece from Ann

[Co-host]

Coulter back in 2018 that she wrote. She called it the True history of Milestone Babies. And I like, I like quoting from this because it has all this really good information about the history here that's actually going on.

[Vince]

And she says this as the Court

[Co-host]

has explained again and again and again.

[Vince]

No one can fail to be impressed

[Co-host]

with the one pervading purpose found in the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments lying

[Vince]

at the foundation of each and without

[Co-host]

which none of them would have been even suggested.

[Vince]

We mean the freedom of the slave race, the security and firm establishment of that freedom, and, and the protection of the newly made free men and citizen from the oppression of those who had formerly exercised unlimited dominion over them. That's why the amendment refers to people who are subject to the jurisdiction of

[Co-host]

the United States and of the state wherein they reside. For generations, African Americans were domiciled in this country.

[Vince]

The only reason they weren't citizens was because of slavery, which the country had just fought a civil war to end. The 14th Amendment fixed that. The amendment didn't even make Indians citizens. Why? Because it was about freed slaves. Sixteen years after the 14th Amendment was ratified, the Supreme Court held that an American Indian, John Elk, was not a citizen despite having been born here. Instead, Congress had to pass a separate law making Indians citizens, which it did more than half a century after the

[Co-host]

adoption of the 14th Amendment.

[Vince]

It's easy to miss. The law is titled the Indian Citizenship act of 1924. Why would such a law be necessary if simply being born in the United States was enough to confer citizenship? So, again, history, the Constitution, the law, it's all on the side of making the right decision. Today, the question is, will the court do that? Will the court do that?

[Co-host]

Now, I think a lot of us are prepared for the answer to that being no.

[Vince]

That we've had a lot of good

[Co-host]

decisions in the last week, many good decisions, not all good, but many good decisions in the last week, and that in a way, you and I are being fattened up for the slaughter on this one. I hope that's not true. I worry that it is.

[Vince]

Now, I did see one prediction on

[Co-host]

the subject that I value. This is a guy from the center for Immigration Studies, Mark Krikorian, who I've had on my programs many times, and he said this last night.

[Vince]

He said, I've said this before, but

[Co-host]

I'll stick my neck out again.

[Vince]

The Supreme Court will rule against the

[Co-host]

president tomorrow, but will not constitutionalize birthright citizenship.

[Vince]

Instead, Roberts will punt, ruling that only Congress can try to change current practice

[Co-host]

per Section 5 of the 14th Amendment.

[Vince]

In other words, that the court may say, hey, the President can't forbid illegal

[Co-host]

aliens from having American citizen children, but

[Vince]

if Congress wants to do it, they can.

[Narrator/Reporter]

They can.

[Vince]

And that they won't make some big

[Co-host]

constitutional declaration about any child that's born in the United States becoming an American citizen.

[Vince]

Now, I don't know how you can

[Co-host]

twist yourself into a pretzel to come

[Vince]

to that conclusion if you're John Roberts. But don't underestimate John Roberts. His ability to twist himself into a

[Co-host]

pretzel to come to a conclusion that won't upset the apple cart too much. He'd hate to upset Democrats too much,

[Vince]

which is wild because Democrats hate him. Democrats think he's a part of the Trump court. He's a right wing extremist when of

[Co-host]

course, John Roberts has been anything but.

[Vince]

We'll more in a moment. Clarence Thomas, the great Justice Clarence Thomas,

[Co-host]

who I, I suspect is going to

[Vince]

be on the right side of whatever

[Co-host]

the decision is today. He stopped by the United States Congress yesterday. I've got footage of it and it makes me smile because I just like watching Justice Thomas interact with people. Every time he does it, I crack up. It's great. More ahead on this edition of vince. We've got a lot to discuss today.

[Vince]

I want to thank one of the

[Co-host]

great sponsors who do help me after I delete all of my show notes and then am lying there in misery like what the heck did I just do?

[Vince]

You know what, I still sleep well

[Co-host]

anyway thanks to our Helix mattress. I love our Helix mattress. Alison and I have the Helix Lux.

[Vince]

Now the model might be different for

[Co-host]

you, but I'm telling you what, all

[Vince]

you got to do is take their

[Co-host]

online sleep quiz and you will find the perfect mattress for you.

[Vince]

This mattress is built for our sleep style and we can fall asleep very quickly now and wake up without the,

[Co-host]

in my case, the usual stiffness. I would get all sorts of stiffness in my back.

[Vince]

Not as much anymore.

[Co-host]

I feel so much better with the Helix mattress.

[Vince]

What a quality of life upgrade. The cooling upgrade is huge too, especially

[Co-host]

in the summer months.

[Vince]

It's great to be able to sleep. Cool. I need that. And I actually feel refreshed in the morning, which has made a big difference

[Co-host]

for me in my daily routine.

[Vince]

Plus it ships straight to my door for free.

[Co-host]

And it was set up super simple to set up.

[Vince]

You can also get 120 night sleep

[Co-host]

trial and a limited lifetime warranty. So there's no stress in trying it out. Go to helixsleep.com Vance 20% off site

[Vince]

W 25% off deluxe mattresses and 30%

[Co-host]

off of the elite mattresses.

[Vince]

That's helixsleep.com Vince 20% off site wide, 25 off luxe mattresses, 30% off elite mattresses.

[Co-host]

Helixsleep.com Vince thank you to Helix. Great operation, great mattress, great mattress.

[Vince]

All right, so Clarence Thomas, you know,

[Co-host]

is not the kind of guy to

[Vince]

leak the results of a Supreme Court

[Co-host]

opinion before they are officially released.

[Vince]

But of course the media tried to

[Co-host]

get him to leak.

[Vince]

Here's Clarence Thomas for some reason appearing on Capitol Hill yesterday and he's not interested in telling this reporter why. Watch this.

[Co-host]

Cut 4

[Reporter]

Justice Thomas, can we ask who you're meeting with today?

[Clarence Thomas]

What'd you say?

[Reporter]

Can we ask who you were meeting with this afternoon.

[Clarence Thomas]

This is it.

[Narrator/Reporter]

Who are you meeting with?

[Reporter]

This.

[Clarence Thomas]

Oh, nobody.

[Reporter]

You weren't meeting with the speaker you were in.

[Clarence Thomas]

Oh, God, no.

[Reporter]

So what are you. What are you doing up here?

[Clarence Thomas]

Oh, just walking.

[Reporter]

No meetings in particular?

[Clarence Thomas]

None that I'm going to tell you about.

[Reporter]

Tomorrow's going to be a big day

[Narrator/Reporter]

at the court, huh?

[Reporter]

Final day decisions.

[Clarence Thomas]

Oh, I guess so.

[Reporter]

You want to give us a sneak peek of some of the decisions?

[Clarence Thomas]

Nope.

[Reporter]

But you can't tell us why you're up here today. Here be.

[Co-host]

Anyways,

[Reporter]

who were you meeting with, sir? Were you up here for any particular reason? No info on who you may have been meeting with. Anyone in leadership, that's. Who has offices in there. Any matters you were up here discussing.

[Vince]

He just keeps laughing at her.

[Reporter]

Any comment on today's decisions at the end of the Supreme Court term?

[Vince]

He's so funny.

[Hakeem Jeffries]

Look at him.

[Reporter]

And any comment on the end of the term?

[Clarence Thomas]

You have good questions.

[Reporter]

Do you want to answer any of them? Any comment at all? Thank you, sir.

[Vince]

Is that great? Look at that. The Capitol Police are shaking his hand. Isn't that great?

[Co-host]

Oh, man, that's so funny.

[Vince]

I don't know about. Are you not just. I don't know if this is just

[Co-host]

the video, so maybe if you're listening on the audio podcast.

[Vince]

But you can hear his chuckling. Are you not uplifted by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas? Every time I see him, and it's like, he only. It seems like he pops out in

[Co-host]

public and he gets these questions from these guys.

[Vince]

I remember that TMZ video where the

[Co-host]

guy was asking him questions. He was just howling with laughter.

[Vince]

Every time I see him, I just,

[Co-host]

like, totally uplifted by the guy.

[Vince]

What a nice thing. And you're right.

[Stephen Miller]

Yeah.

[Vince]

No, Catherine says he's kind and respectful. It's true. He's totally kind. He's totally respectful.

[Co-host]

He's a man of honor. He's not, like, releasing anything he shouldn't look at. He's just so funny. It's.

[Vince]

It's great.

[Co-host]

It's really great.

[Vince]

And I love when she's asked, she's like, did you meet with the speaker of the House?

[Co-host]

He goes, oh, God, no. I don't even really know what that's a commentary on. Like, no, I'm not here to meet with Mike Johnson. Pretty funny. Anyway, that's Clarence Thomas. That's. He's a great man.

[Vince]

And I. I'm gonna.

[Co-host]

I eagerly look forward to whatever kind of writing he does on today's. Subject of the. Of birthright citizenship, including if it's a, if it's a, you know. Oh, God, man. Wouldn't it be great if it was a majority opinion? That'd be the best.

[Vince]

We will see. You know, speaking of Supreme Court decisions, yesterday, the Supreme Court did restore some

[Co-host]

power to the presidency, which was nice to see.

[Vince]

They said yesterday that the President can

[Co-host]

fire FTC commissioners, which, like, it's like,

[Vince]

why is that breaking news? Like, why is it that it took the Supreme Court saying that out loud. But it's true. He can, he can fire these people, which is wonderful. And you know, this is something that

[Co-host]

overturns something called Humphreys Executor.

[Vince]

There was a, it was a long

[Co-host]

held precedent about over 90 years now.

[Vince]

Not super long, but long in terms

[Co-host]

of the history of our country, I guess over 90 years that was insulating the President from being able to wield power over the executive branch. You're like, well, wait a second, there's

[Vince]

no fourth branch of government. You only have the three branches.

[Co-host]

Executive, legislative, judicial.

[Vince]

The President has to be able to

[Co-host]

govern the affairs of the executive branch. And that includes both appointing and terminating people based on whether or not they're fulfilling the vision of the American people.

[Vince]

And the President was trying to remove

[Co-host]

a woman by the name of Rebecca Slaughter.

[Vince]

Rebecca Slaughter is a former aide to Chuck Schumer. And she was on the Federal Trade

[Co-host]

Commission because of Democrats.

[Vince]

They put her on the Federal Trade Commission. The President said, I want her out of there. So he tried to fire her beginning in March of 2025. And that began a big legal battle about whether or not he could actually do that. The Supreme Court said, yes, he can. And the President able to successfully do that now. And this is a restoration of power

[Co-host]

to the executive branch.

[Vince]

Now, this is a subject that the

[Co-host]

left is freaking out about because they're acting like the court just keeps giving President Trump power that he shouldn't have.

[Vince]

Oh, they're expanding the power of the executive. They're giving the President too much power. If that is your legal analysis of the state of this court, you're a moron. You're not paying attention to what actually is happening. In fact, one thing that happened that this court has done is they overturned now two years ago, something called Chevron deference. This involved the fact that executive branch agencies were making up laws and then creating their own courts to adjudicate the laws that they made up.

[Co-host]

That's completely unconstitutional.

[Vince]

And it was going on for way too long. And the Supreme Court came out with a decision in that case saying, wait a second, you can't do that. These executive branch agencies can't invent laws and they can't adjudicate them. Law writing is for the Congress and adjudication is for the judiciary branch. And so the Court has been restoring, in many of these cases, not all, but in many cases, the constitutional order. And this is outraging the left. They hate this. And of course, they're lying about it. They're pretending like the Court is just giving powers to Trump. On the contrary, the Court is restoring power to the proper branches in most of these cases. Now, are they going far enough? The answer to that is, no, they're not. Yesterday was a bit of a mixed

[Co-host]

decision because the Court released this decision, released a decision about the Federal Reserve

[Vince]

as well, something called Trump v. Cook. Now, you'll probably remember this involves Lisa Cook, who the President sought to fire from the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.

[Co-host]

This, of course, created a huge legal battle ending up in the Supreme Court.

[Vince]

And yesterday the Court said the President can't fire Lisa Cook, at least the

[Co-host]

way he was attempting to.

[Vince]

He can't just snap his fingers and

[Co-host]

get rid of her.

[Vince]

That there had to be some sort

[Co-host]

of process to getting rid of her.

[Vince]

So the Supreme Court yesterday, throwing up

[Co-host]

some roadblocks in front of him.

[Vince]

Now, speaking of Clarence Thomas again, whose

[Co-host]

laugh I love and whose wisdom I

[Vince]

love, more importantly, he was ripping the rest of the Supreme Court yesterday for continuing to allow the unconstitutional arrangement of the Fed. The Federal Reserve is treated as some sort of independent body outside of the

[Co-host]

control of the executive branch, or at least meaningful control.

[Vince]

And Clarence Thomas yesterday said, that is insane. That's insane and it's unconstitutional. Here's Ben Weingarten summarizing.

[Co-host]

Actually, he just quotes from Clarence Thomas's opinion yesterday, and here's how he writes about this.

[Vince]

He says the Court tells it, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System has for the past century served to provide the American people with stable prices, maximum employment, no ruinous financial panics, and a banking system free from suspicion. The Court credits a century of supposed success to the Board's independence from the President and in turn, the voters, the common people who play the antagonist in the Court's account of the 19th century. This is funny. So basically, he's mocking this idea that

[Co-host]

the Federal Reserve has done anything to

[Vince]

protect us with stable prices and maximum employment and ruinous financial panics, and on and on. In other words, like, the Fed's been around for a century and we've had

[Co-host]

all sorts of economic chaos, in fact,

[Vince]

a lot of it spurred on by the Fed, which is supposed to be independent from the President, which is not in any way what the Founders envisioned. Justice Thomas says many do not share

[Co-host]

the Court's rosy appraisal of the past century.

[Vince]

But if the Court prefers an independent Federal Reserve Board, then its issue is not with the President, but with the Constitution. Regardless of whether unaccountable executive officers like Lisa Cook would better govern the economy, the Framers rejected such a promised land of technocratic governance. They instead chose government by the people. As a court, our duty is not to second guess that decision, but to uphold it.

[Co-host]

This is why we love Justice Thomas.

[Vince]

It's a government by the people. The Court shouldn't be second guessing that.

[Co-host]

We should be upholding it. Enough patronizing the American people and enough upending the wisdom of the Founders.

[Vince]

Get back to basics. Get back to the Constitution.

[Co-host]

That's the mandate. Clarence Thomas knows it.

[Vince]

The rest of these Justices would do

[Co-host]

well to know it too.

[Vince]

And in fact, in a moment, I want to talk to you about perhaps

[Co-host]

the biggest decision from yesterday and it involves America's elections.

[Vince]

It's not a good decision. It's a bad decision. It's about mail in balloting. We'll get to it in just a

[Co-host]

moment as we continue on this, well,

[Vince]

in many ways a Supreme Court edition

[Co-host]

of Vince, good to have you with us. As always, great sponsors that make this

[Vince]

show possible include Bone Charge, the Bone

[Co-host]

Charge infrared sauna blanket, which is amazing for me. I love this thing. It's great to have a sauna in the house.

[Vince]

It's an infrared heat situation.

[Co-host]

So I just wrap myself up in this infrared heat blanket and it works its magic.

[Vince]

It's great.

[Co-host]

It's muscle recovery is detoxification. Total game changer.

[Vince]

It helps me relax and rejuvenate.

[Co-host]

I feel great afterwards.

[Vince]

And Allison loves the Bon Charge red light face mask which she uses every day and she has found it is amazing.

[Co-host]

For her, red light therapy is an amazing thing. It really is well studied technology.

[Vince]

And the red light face mask, it improves your skin's texture, reduces inflammation. She has seen fantastic results.

[Co-host]

It's like having a mini spa treatment in the house.

[Vince]

So if you're thinking about trying either

[Co-host]

of these amazing products out from Bon Charge, you're in luck.

[Vince]

Just had the buncharge bon charge.com use the code Vince at checkout and you're

[Co-host]

going to get 15% off.

[Vince]

Both of these products have made a huge impact on helping us and our wellness I think you'll love them to use the code. Vince buncharge.com say 15% these statements and

[Co-host]

products have not been evaluated by the FDA. But these products are not intended to

[Vince]

diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease or condition.

[Co-host]

And also, when it comes to your

[Vince]

health, you've got to make sure you

[Co-host]

got your body's chemistry all set up the right way. This is why I love C15 from fatty15. What a game changer it's been for me.

[Vince]

In fact, it was a groundbreaking discovery and it was thanks to helping dolphins,

[Co-host]

if you can believe it's true.

[Vince]

That discovery is C15 from fatty 15, the first essential fatty acid identified in

[Co-host]

more than 90 years.

[Vince]

Studies show that when we don't get enough C15, our cells can become fragile and age faster. So to address this, doctors spent more than a decade developing the pure science backed C15 that's found in fatty 15. It helps repair cellular damage. It helps support sleep, quality, cognitive health, metabolism and steady energy. I've added fatty 15 in my routine and it helps so much I can tell.

[Co-host]

I can just tell in my body's chemistry from getting better quality sleep, more consistent energy.

[Vince]

That's what you need. And fatty 15 was developed to support healthy aging for all from kids to parents to grandparents. This is why award winning fatty 15 is now available as Pure capsules, Delicious Apple Mint gummies for teens and adults, and Yummy Berry Blast gummies for the kids. Fatty 15 is on a mission to support healthy aging for all, including all

[Co-host]

ages and stages of life.

[Vince]

You can get an additional 15% off

[Co-host]

their 90 day subscription starter kit. Just go to fatty15.com Vince use the

[Vince]

code Vince at checkout.

[Co-host]

That's fatty15.com Vince promo code Vince.

[Vince]

These statements have not been evaluated by the fda. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease or condition. One more Supreme Court item for you

[Co-host]

that I want to get to and

[Vince]

this is mail in balloting. The Supreme Court yesterday ruled that mail in ballots can be counted after freaking election day. Now what election day is supposed to be a day? It's not supposed to be a week, a month, anything like that. They say that that states can continue to receive ballots after election day so long as they're postmarked by election day.

[Co-host]

Allegedly.

[Vince]

But what does that mean for a state like California where people can hand write a postmark that no postal service

[Co-host]

puts it on there?

[Vince]

You can hand write a postmark on the envelope and that counts as having satisfied the requirement? Well, that's a System that is ripe for fraud. Ripe for fraud. In fact, yesterday, Sam Alito, in his

[Co-host]

very good dissent on this subject said,

[Vince]

ladies and gentlemen, Jimmy Carter told us this fraud.

[Co-host]

Senator Eric Schmidt grabs a. Grabs this screen grab from Sam Alito's opinion where Sam Alito writes this.

[Vince]

Today's decision leaves open opportunities for voter fraud that may further undermine America's faith

[Co-host]

in the integrity of this country's elections.

[Vince]

He goes on to say that diverse

[Co-host]

sources have recognized that mail in ballots

[Vince]

increase the potential for fraud. In 2005, a committee chaired by former president Jimmy Carter. Hello. How many times have I talked about this? And former Secretary of State James Baker found that absentee voting was the largest source of potential fraud in American elections. He said that, yeah, these mail in ballots are key vectors for fraud. He said it's not difficult to understand why when someone votes by mail, it's harder for officials to verify their identity. Well, yeah, it's common sense. And common sense is also that you shouldn't be able to send in a ballot after election day. You should meet your obligations, get it in on time or you lose. Do we let kids turn in mail in ballots? I mean, excuse me, do we let kids turn in their tests, like days later, turn in their term papers days later? Is that like a thing? It shouldn't be. You're supposed to meet your deadlines and your obligations, especially when you're a kid, so that when you're an adult, you can actually do it in things like, say, elections, things that really matter. And also it matters to the public.

[Co-host]

Trust.

[Vince]

You have to be able to trust

[Co-host]

the result of an election.

[Vince]

And the way to do that is to get every vote in by election day.

[Co-host]

None of this days after the election.

[Vince]

Also, to be clear, members of the

[Co-host]

military, if they're deployed and they have to send an absentee ballot in, those

[Vince]

ballots should be sent to them far enough in advance of election day that

[Co-host]

they can get those ballots back in on time.

[Vince]

We should make extraordinary efforts to make

[Co-host]

sure the members of the military can get those votes in.

[Vince]

But a system that allows any random

[Co-host]

citizen, for any random reason to continue

[Vince]

to send in ballots after election day, that's a system that's built for fraud.

[Co-host]

It's a total disaster. Alito's right.

[Vince]

And that brings us to Stephen Miller.

[Co-host]

I think it's time for Miller time.

[Vince]

Don't you think? It's Miller time here? Yes, yes, it's Miller Times. Here's Stephen Miller yesterday singing Alito's praises in this decision.

[Co-host]

Cut five. Watch.

[Stephen Miller]

Well, look, let's just call it like it is. Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett decided to cave to the radical left. Alito was so clear in his wording about what Election Day means, nobody could read the statute, could read that opinion, could read what Alito wrote and come to any other conclusion. It's Election Day, not Election Week, not Election Month, not Election months. So this was really a travesty and it underscores, Laura, why we have to keep fighting to pass the save America Act. 80 million Americans elected a Republican Senate majority and they elected a Republican Congress. To deliver on this fundamental priority, it must get done.

[Vince]

Yep, he's totally right about that. And in fact, I'm going to dive deep on that in just a moment. But one more thing.

[Co-host]

On this decision yesterday, the left is gloating about it.

[Vince]

They love it. Now, I'll remind you that the left keeps on acting like this court is completely illegitimate. That's a Trump court. It's a right wing court. Yet yesterday, Hakeem Jeffries reacted to the news that his party can continue to have fraud when he said Donald Trump's efforts to rig the midterm elections was dealt a big blow by the Supreme Court. He is having a complete meltdown, said Hakeem Jeffries. That's funny because just a short while ago when the Supreme Court said you're not allowed to draw districts in a racist way and rigged them for Democrats, Hakeem Jeffries said that the court was illegitimate and it was a Trump court. Here watch cut six.

[Hakeem Jeffries]

Today's decision by this illegitimate Supreme Court majority strikes a blow against the Voting Rights act and is designed to undermine the ability of communities of color all across this country to elect their candidate of choice. But we're not here to step back. We're here to fight back. Now, when this decision came out earlier today, it's an unacceptable decision, but not an unexpected decision because this isn't even really the Roberts court. It's the Trump court.

[Ketanji Brown Jackson]

Yes.

[Hakeem Jeffries]

And what we would expect from the Trump court is an effort to continue their scheme to suppress the vote and rig the midterm elections and beyond.

[Co-host]

He's not, because these extremists.

[Vince]

Speaker 2 They're extremists. They're rigging the election. It's the Trump court. They're just doing his bidding. Well then what the hell was that? Dial up Democrat, you slow witted idiot. This guy is straight up undermining the court all the time, attacking its credibility, attacking that branch of the government. But the second they release a decision that helps him rig elections, he's praising them. This is great. They dunked on Trump. So which one is it, you idiot? Hakeem Jeffries. Slow witted and poisonous.

[Co-host]

Absolutely poisonous.

[Vince]

Now Stephen Miller's right.

[Co-host]

This is yet another reason to pass the Safe America act and the President's fighting for it.

[Vince]

Yesterday, right after the decision came down,

[Co-host]

he posted to Truth Social that we need to have the Save America act immediately, immediately.

[Vince]

And he's calling out a lot of

[Co-host]

these Republican senators by name.

[Vince]

Yesterday he called out Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, Thom Tillis, Bill Cassidy, Mitch McConnell. He said, they're all getting in the way right now. They've got to vote to save our country. There can't be any more excuses. And as we speak, the.

[Co-host]

Remember, I told you to pay attention to Speaker Johnson.

[Vince]

Speaker Johnson has sent the housing bill, the bipartisan housing bill, over to the President. The President said, I'm not signing this thing. I want the Save America act first. Yet by virtue of sending it over, it starts a 10 day clock excepting Sundays.

[Co-host]

We talked about this.

[Vince]

And at the end of that 10 days, if the President doesn't sign it or veto it, it becomes law. Now, if he vetoes it, the Congress

[Co-host]

can override his veto and make it law anyway.

[Vince]

And Congressional Republicans are already saying, we

[Co-host]

don't care if President Trump signs it

[Vince]

or not or if he vetoes it, we're going to make it law anyway.

[Co-host]

In case you're wondering how loyal they are to the President's agenda, the agenda that got them the majorities in the House and the Senate. Yes, it's very frustrating.

[Vince]

But the President was asked yesterday, are you going to sign this thing? What's going on with the housing bill? And the President said, I'll tell you what, that legislation is a yawn, a

[Co-host]

big yawn compared to the Save America act.

[Vince]

Watch cut seven here.

[Co-host]

The housing bill.

[Senate Parliamentarian]

Mr. President, are you. I don't know. I think it's so unimportant by, compared to, by, compared to the Save America. I think the Save America act is exactly what it says. It's saving America from crooked elections. And the housing bill is a bill that can get approved. They worked on it long and hard. It is very bipartisan. That means the Democrats like it. I think it's maybe even, it's probably, maybe more that way. They're getting things that I wouldn't necessarily agree to. Nobody knows more than housing. In the history of the presidency, nobody, nobody did well, like me in housing. I made a lot of money. I made a lot of money with housing. But When I look at that bill, it's a bill. But when I look at the Save America act, it's about saving America. And I'd like to have the Save America act added on. That's probably not going to happen because we have four Republican senators, maybe five, that just won't vote for it. It's crazy. Somebody, Lisa Murkowski from Alaska, and nobody's done more for Alaska than me. She's Trump deranged. What can I tell you? But those four or five people that I mentioned should vote. How do you vote against Save America? How do you vote against it? How do you vote against voter identification or proof of citizenship? The only people that would vote against that are people that are going to cheat in an election. The Democrats need it because their policy is so bad. They want open borders, they want high taxes, they want terrible medical, every anything medical. I'm the one that did favored nations. I'm reducing drug prices by 200, 300, 400%. Nobody even talks about it. The news doesn't talk about it. The Democrats are opposed to it. If they get into office, they'll put it back. Your drug prices are going to go up by 200, 300, 400, 500%. You know that.

[Co-host]

But will you sign that housing bill?

[Senate Parliamentarian]

I have not. It hasn't been sent to me yet. It's coming. I understand. And then I'll make. Then I'll make a difference. Here's what I would like to sign much more than a bill that. Big deal. It's a yawn. Some people say it's wonderful. To me, compared to the Save America act, just about everything is a big yard.

[Vince]

The Save America act, look, that's the big. That's the big enchilada. That's the thing we need. That's the biggest thing of all. Everybody's acting like we've got these other priorities. Oh, we got to do this, we

[Stephen Miller]

got to do that.

[Vince]

No, you have to do the Save America Act. What part of we're demanding you fix

[Co-host]

our elections did you not understand?

[Vince]

What part was confusing to you? What part is confusing to you about

[Co-host]

how it is that you obtain power, how you obtain majorities in the House and the Senate and how you retain them? What part is so confusing to you?

[Vince]

Now this is creating again, which I love.

[Co-host]

This is just creating so much chaos on Capitol Hill.

[Vince]

And it only happened because of pressure

[Co-host]

from both the grassroots and the President of the United States.

[Vince]

It's just there's so much pressure being

[Co-host]

placed on Congress right now from both directions.

[Vince]

And I'm hoping that pressure creates a real diamond.

[Co-host]

I hope we can get something great out of this. I hope so, because, you know, we desperately need it. Now, Mike Johnson was apparently at the White House yesterday, the speaker of the House, and he spent hours there, hours

[Vince]

at the White House trying to convince

[Co-host]

the powers that be, I would assume that includes the President of the United

[Vince]

States, that the only way to get this thing through the Save America act is through reconciliation. Reconciliation. Now, you and I have been over

[Co-host]

this a million times.

[Vince]

Mike Lee has been over this a million times.

[Co-host]

Reconciliation is not a vehicle for this.

[Vince]

But I want you to be attentive

[Co-host]

to the game that he's playing here

[Vince]

because he's making out this case that, oh, we're going to establish a.

[Co-host]

But like a fund.

[Vince]

We're going to make a fund. And then with this fund, if the left wants to use it, they'll have election integrity. Now, notice the conditional there that we have to rely on, as he says, blue states coming to their senses in order to get election integrity in blue states. You think that's going to work out? This entire scheme would be dependent on blue states coming to their senses. Here's what Mike Johnson just said. Last week, I saw the pieces of

[Co-host]

this plan coming together. We talked about it at the time.

[Vince]

Watch this.

[Mike Johnson]

He's laser focused on Save America act as most common sense. Americans are the only path, I think, to get that done. Because you're never going to get seven Democrats to join 53 Republicans in the Senate to do that. They will not do it. Chuck Schamber will never vote for that or release any Democrat to do it. You have to put it on a reconciliation bill. We believe that if you create a grant program that ties it to reconciling the budget and you allow blue states, if they come to their senses and they want to avail themselves of election integrity proposals and ideas and policies they can draw down from a federal fund and use those funds. We're willing to invest heavily in that. And House Republicans will put together a reconciliation bill, reconciliation 3.0, that will have that. I talked the President through that in detail this morning, as I have in the past, and he said, can we do it? I said, we can if the Republicans will stand together. We're on the line right now to defend it. Hold on. So that's what we're going to do. The President said, I want to see some progress on it. I said, I'd love to show it to you. We got a meeting today and some more coming up. And so he's, he decided and I didn't announce it. I wanted him to announce it, but we're delaying this. As you know, he has a window of time before he has to sign a bill and he's going to use a little bit more that window of time and we're going to go through this together. Now the housing bill is a great product because this guy right here fought like a warrior poet to defend our principles.

[Co-host]

I got to be honest with you, it just feels like a scam.

[Vince]

I'd love for Speaker Johnson to prove me wrong.

[Co-host]

It feels like a total scam. A pool of funding that blue states can access if they want election integrity. Why the hell would they want election integrity?

[Vince]

I mean, what are you, what are

[Co-host]

you feeding us here?

[Vince]

Seems like a line.

[Co-host]

Mike Lee is saying it's garbage. And he goes, I don't know who told Mike Johnson this will work. It's not, it's not going to work.

[Vince]

Ain't going to work.

[Co-host]

Because I don't know who is convinced this is. This is Mike Lee. Yesterday, late yesterday, I don't know who convinced Speaker Johnson on this point.

[Vince]

There's no way in heck the Save

[Co-host]

America act passes the bird rule. It's non budgetary.

[Vince]

That's why the only viable options include

[Co-host]

either attaching it to a must pass bill or using talking filibuster.

[Vince]

Now I have a suspicion about what played out yesterday. Speaker Johnson was trying to tell the

[Co-host]

President, hey, we're going to try and

[Vince]

do all this and then it's not

[Co-host]

going to pass the Byrd rule because it's not. A lot of it's not budgetary or whatever.

[Vince]

And therefore the parliamentarian is going to

[Co-host]

rule against us and say, hey, it doesn't satisfy the rule.

[Vince]

And this is why the President is joining in on the efforts to fire the Senate parliamentarian. Now, it may very well be that

[Co-host]

this woman should be fired from her job.

[Vince]

She was picked by Harry Reid. It seems like, you know, the Senate

[Co-host]

should have somebody who they really have a lot of faith in. There should. The Republicans should tap a parliamentarian who can run the business.

[Vince]

But the key is they've just got

[Co-host]

to adhere to the actual rules of the Senate.

[Vince]

And some of these rules in the

[Co-host]

Senate are so stupid that they need to be changed anyway.

[Vince]

But the President yesterday made a big push to say that the Senate parliamentarian

[Co-host]

needs to be canned.

[Vince]

And I suspect that this is the product of his conversations with Mike Johnson and thinking that they're going to be able to ram this thing through the reconciliation again. The Whole thing feels like a con. It isn't a genuine attempt to take it to the floor of the Senate, debate it, and pass it as real legislation, which needs to happen. This is the thing you and I have been asking for. Do your freaking jobs, stand on your own two feet and pass this as a real bill. Make your case. But here's the president yesterday saying the

[Co-host]

parliamentarian needs to be fired. Cut nine Watch the parliamentarian.

[Senate Parliamentarian]

What were you asking about?

[Co-host]

Yeah, have you talked with Thune about.

[Senate Parliamentarian]

I have no. I can't imagine why you'd keep a woman that was put there by Harry Reid and Barack Hussein Obama. I cannot understand it. The leader has the right to fire the person at will and put somebody else there. That could be because we get so many negative rulings from her, the parliamentarian. She's been there for years, and she was put there by Harry Reid and Barack Hussein Obama. Harry Reid was a bad guy and he was the leader, and he put her. And the speaker has the right to immediately fire her and put somebody else there. And it's not even believable that she's still there. She's obviously a good politician or.

[Vince]

Yeah. Now, by the way, I saw there's a talking point going around, so I

[Co-host]

got some comments on it yesterday. There's a claim, and it pops up every time this reconciliation stuff comes up. There's a claim that Obamacare was passed by reconciliation. So why can't we do this with other laws? Obamacare was not passed by reconciliation. Obamacare was passed with an actual supermajority. They got the 60 votes to pass Obamacare.

[Vince]

Unfortunately, they did make changes to Obamacare

[Co-host]

through reconciliation later on, which it seems like a total abuse of the reconciliation process, for sure. No question whatsoever. But Obamacare is originally passed, passed with an actual vote through regular order in the United States Senate. And that was a big betrayal. And we saw this week, of course, that there's massive amounts of fraud in Obamacare that the Trump administration is addressing. But I just wanted to bring up that talking point in case you run into it in the wild, just so you have a complete grasp of what's going on here.

[Vince]

But fine, fire the Senate parliamentarian. I think the president makes a perfectly decent argument for it, but I still think that's fundamentally in service of a fool's errand, which is attempting to pass this thing through reconciliation when you should be passing it through regular order. Make your case. The Civil Rights act didn't have the support it needed to get through until they actually engaged real debate on The Senate floor. Do it again for this civil rights bill, the Save America Act.

[Co-host]

It should be done. There's also some other ideas on how to pass this.

[Vince]

Anna Paulina Luna wants to attach it to the defense bill. Now in Washington, I'm going to, I'm going to let you in on a secret. In Washington, they have a view on some of this legislation. They say these are must pass. They refer to certain things as must

[Co-host]

pass, which is, it's a, it's an abusive phrasing because nothing that you want is must pass.

[Vince]

It's the, it's the normal stuff like that.

[Co-host]

They have to, they get to every year and then they jam a bunch of pork into. That has nothing to do with actually the, the underlying point.

[Vince]

So for instance, the National Defense Authorization act, the NDAA defense spending every year is must pass, must pass. We gotta do this. And then they load it up with

[Co-host]

all sorts of nonsense that has nothing to do with defense or it just enriches people that shouldn't be enriched.

[Stephen Miller]

Okay?

[Co-host]

And then there's FISA reauthorization, the surveillance

[Vince]

powers of the government. Must pass. Must pass. And here's the thing I'm trying to get through the thick skulls of the United States Senate. The American people consider the Save America act to be must pass. They're like, well, that gets in the way of our must pass legislation. This is the must pass legislation. Why is it so hard to understand this? Anna Paulina Luna realizes that the Congress wants to get this NDAA through. And so she's come up with an idea. I'm going to attach the Save America act to the ndaa. She's put forward an amendment for voter ID and proof of citizenship to be included in the ndaa as Amendment 1388. She once again says it's not even

[Co-host]

possible to add Save America to reconciliation.

[Vince]

It would fail miserably with the Bird Rule. She says House leadership has direct decision making authority over whether or not this will be added to the ndaa. The idea that this can't be done, False. And if there's going to be a request for my vote on the rule, they need to allow this to come to the floor. So now Anna Paulina Luna is going to bed for. I'm going to attach this to something that you can't avoid.

[Co-host]

You need to pass this, don't you?

[Vince]

You want to. Now we'll see what happens. Because already Senate Republican leaders are apparently saying, although anonymously, that they would kill the NDAA to prevent the Save America

[Co-host]

act from pass what?

[Vince]

Oh, my word. Here is Meredith Lee Hill, a reporter for Politico. She said that Speaker Johnson was at the White House talking Save America act

[Co-host]

strategy today, as he was yesterday amid these demands from Representative Luna to attach it to the defense spending bill.

[Vince]

Quote, the only way to get that

[Co-host]

to the president's desk, we've been shown many times, is to put it on a reconciliation bill. Johnson said when he returned to the Capitol.

[Vince]

She writes Republican leaders have been scrambling to see whether they could merve the Save America Act.

[Co-host]

That's just an expression for force it

[Vince]

in with the NDAA after it passes the House, which Senate Republican leaders are warning will kill the massive defense policy bill. What does that tell you? If. If they can't get the votes in the Senate to pass a defense bill because election integrity is attached to it, what the hell does that tell you? It tells you that Democrats are only interested in election fraud and Republicans don't have the testicular fortitude to do the right thing, even if it's attached as an appendage to defense spending.

[Co-host]

This is a frustrating fight. I know. I know it's frustrating, trust me.

[Vince]

But the fact that we have these

[Co-host]

guys in an utter tizzy about how to handle us is a very good sign. It's a very good sign.

[Vince]

It's a sign that you are winning, and it's a sign that the president's

[Co-host]

bully pulpit is having an effect.

[Vince]

Where's it going to go from here? It's anybody's guess, but we'll keep track of the details.

[John Roberts]

I always do.

[Co-host]

You know that the Save America Act. I don't. I don't.

[Vince]

I truly.

[Co-host]

I don't know that there's any show

[Vince]

that's pushed harder or dive deeper into

[Co-host]

the details than we have. And I think that's of value.

[Vince]

But holy cow.

[Co-host]

Anna Paulina Luna.

[Vince]

Well, good for her.

[Co-host]

I'm glad she's in the fight. I hope she succeeds.

[Vince]

Now, one more thing before we, before

[Co-host]

we check out today.

[Vince]

Yesterday, I issued a warning note about

[Co-host]

the DHS secretary, Mark Wayne Mullen. I was very concerned about his language

[Vince]

over the weekend involving Haitian migrants who were previously protected by temporary protected status, but now have to go.

[Co-host]

You got to go home. You're done. It's way past your time.

[Vince]

Go home, he said this weekend. Well, if they want to stay, there's a couple of options. They can apply for a legal permanent residence or maybe get a visa. And you're like, whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a second. Why are you saying this on national tv?

[Co-host]

Television what are you doing exactly?

[Vince]

And so if you'd like more Miller Time, we have more Miller Time because Stephen Miller had to clean all of this up. More Miller Time ahead. Thank you. Thank you.

[Co-host]

I love the Miller Time graphic.

[Vince]

If you're hearing the audio, you should

[Co-host]

see the Miller Time graphic.

[Stephen Miller]

It's hilarious.

[Co-host]

Josh, put it together for us.

[Vince]

Here's Stephen Miller cleaning up Mark Wayne Mullen's mess.

[Co-host]

Cut 10.

[Narrator/Reporter]

Watch your message then, because it got confused. We don't have to play it with Mark Wayne Mullen. Over the weekend, he came out on a Sunday show and said, you got to go home or you have to apply for legal status. I mean, Magaland and yours truly went kind of, you know, nuclear on that. But what really is going to happen here? Can you apply while you're here as a TPS person?

[Stephen Miller]

So Secretary Mullen was simply saying, and I'm glad for the chance to talk about that, he was simply saying what is true for everybody in this country here, illegally or otherwise, which is you can always go to a website and submit an application. But the reality is that illegal aliens from Haiti are overwhelmingly ineligible for any immigration benefit in the United States. They're public charges. They're public safety threats. They have no legal status. They have no visa. So all Mark Wain is saying is what has always been true, which is that we have specific visas, specific eligibility criteria. In theory, of course, anyone can apply for anything. But I want to be clear in saying to your audience, they have no right to be here. They don't belong here. Biden flew them here unconstitutionally, and President Trump's going to make sure that we sent them home. And again, Haitians can build up Haiti for other Haitians.

[Vince]

Let me tell you what that was.

[Co-host]

That was a cleanup operation.

[Vince]

Stephen Miller is very good at that.

[Co-host]

And, and Marquis Mullen should be very grateful that he did that. He owes him one. He owes him one.

[Vince]

And I always owe you one. Thank you so much for being here. The best audience anywhere. We have the big national radio show coming up today. If you'd like to check it out. You should see it from 12 to 3 Eastern Time. I say see you. You should hear it.

[Co-host]

You can hear it on the local radio stations all across our great country,

[Vince]

across the fruited plain. Go to the vinshow.com to get your local radio listings.

[Co-host]

Hundreds of great affiliates all across our wonderful country.

[Vince]

And then of course, we can we do the show live from 1 to 3 Eastern Time right here on Rumble.

[Co-host]

Rumble.com Vince, you can see it there

[Vince]

as well, then you should know on a normal day you'd get dan Bongino

[Co-host]

at 10am he's always on at rumble.com/bongino. He's great. But he's on vacation this week. Sean Farish is in for him.

[Vince]

Tomorrow, you'll be able to see the

[Co-host]

great Sean Farish on his program.

[Vince]

And Hayley Karenia, noon Eastern each day. She's great. She's so great.

[Co-host]

Rumble.com Haley.

[Vince]

Haley with two Y's. Why? Because. Great. She's great.

[Co-host]

Check her out.

[Vince]

You should see her.

[Co-host]

As always, thanks for being here. I can't wait to talk to you tomorrow.

[Vince]

Holy crap.

[Co-host]

Independence Day is coming, and I love it.

[Vince]

The Dan Bongino Show.

[Dan Bongino]

It's our movement, okay? It's ours.

[Co-host]

We built it.

[Vince]

Hard truths.

[Dan Bongino]

There are a bunch of people out there pulling you into an information vortex, dumping the dead pig in the well, hoping you jump in. Don't jump in the well. It's a trap. Find a way out immediately. This is the nothing is happening trap. And it is an inverted sense of reality. If we don't correct it and your kids believe it, I'm sorry. This show's for nothing.

[Vince]

The Dan Bonino Show.

[Dan Bongino]

There's only one choice, man.

[Vince]

Follow and listen on your favorite platform.