House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) joined me this morning to discuss the paralysis among Democrats –and the absence of the president from the negotiations– over the supplemtal to fund Israel, Ukraine, Taiwan and make border reforms:

Audio:

12-12hhs-johnson

Transcript:

HH: Joined by Speaker Mike Johnson, Speaker of the House of Representatives. Good morning, Mr. Speaker. Welcome to the Hugh Hewitt Show.

MJ: Hugh, it’s a delight to be with you.

HH: Thank you for being here this morning. I would like to get an update on the supplemental funding for Israel, Ukraine, Taiwan, and the changes to border law before we talk about Harvard. Where is that, and what do you expect to happen?

MJ: Listen, from the day I got the gavel, Hugh, I mean, quite literally, within 24 hours, I went to the Situation Room and I sat down with Jake Sullivan, National Security Advisor. I’ve talked to the Secretary of Defense. I’ve talked to the Secretary of State, everyone who will listen at the White House. And I told them the same thing. I said listen, we understand there will be a supplemental spending package, but you must address the U.S. border. See, we believe very clearly, and I think the American people agree with us, that the national security begins at our own borders. We have to maintain our own sovereignty, that we can project peace through strength and help our friends. And so I don’t think that’s an outrageous request. They’ve known about it for over six weeks. I’ve pushed and prodded and begged them to get us more details and to get us something, some movement to have transformational change at that border, and they’ve done nothing. And so here we are on the eve, virtually, of Christmas and the end of the year, and the White House, as we talk this morning, has not moved in our direction on that issue. And I’ve told them very clearly where we stand.

HH: What are Republicans asking for in terms of the border changes, Mr. Speaker?

MJ: Well, we have to stem the flow, Hugh. I mean, seven million, roughly seven million known border crossings illegally, to at least two million got aways. That’s twice the population of my state of Louisiana. We had 12,000 people come over the border one day last week on Wednesday. It’s not sustainable. You know, almost 300 suspects on the terrorism watch list are here. We have to have changes, and policies can do this. The President has the power to do this. We need to fix the broken parole system, reform the asylum problem there. We have returns to some of these policies that worked so well to stem the flow in the Trump administration, the Remain In Mexico, end catch and release, maybe finish the wall. We don’t have to do all that together, but the House passed H.R. 2, which is our signature piece of legislation, over six months ago. It sat on Chuck Schumer’s desk collecting dust. They seem not to care about this issue. Now they’ve given lip service to it over the last couple of weeks now, recognizing that something must be done, but again, as we sit here this morning, they’ve sent us nothing to even negotiate. And that’s inexcusable.

HH: There are four national security issues – Taiwan, Ukraine, Israel, and the border. And as far as I can tell, there’s agreement on three of them, but the fourth, there isn’t. But the fourth is the one that has 300 terrorist watch list suspects coming in, and that’s the ones we know about. We don’t know about the, the Iranians are pretty good at this, Mr. Speaker.

MJ: Right.

HH: Do they not understand that over at the White House?

MJ: They seem not to understand or to care, and that’s a real problem. Listen, on Ukraine, we stand with Ukraine against Putin’s aggression. Everyone understands that he must be stopped. This is a very serious issue. But you know, the White House is seeking billions in funding on that issue. They haven’t given us any clear strategy, no appropriate oversight. They’ve not explained to us what the endgame is. I mean, our, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine told me in my office just a few weeks ago that she believes the endgame is a returning to the 1991 boundary lines, which is to retake Crimea. And I said ma’am, are you aware that that’s not what your boss says? I mean, they don’t even know in the White House itself what the strategy is. And so you have a lot of members in the House who are going home to constituents and having town halls in their districts, and they’ve being asked serious questions about this. Why are we securing the border of a foreign country and taking care of their needs when we’re not doing it here at home? And that’s a tough, tough question to answer. The White House has to help us in that regard, and they haven’t.

HH: Mr. Speaker, if they came up with the language and the reforms on the border that you’ve asked for, would you vote for the funding for Israel, Taiwan and Ukraine? I just want to make it clear that they are holding us up on the border, and only the border is stopping this package. Is that correct?

MJ: That’s absolutely right. If they did that and gave us a couple of details on Ukraine, we could get this thing through. It doesn’t have to be all in one package. It should be separately, but we could move those measures quickly, and we would have the votes in the House. We understand the dire situation that we’re in. But the White House has to take care of our nation, and they’re not doing it. And that’s why our constituents are demanding answers, and that’s why we have to hold the line on this. We’ve got to force their hand to stem the flow at our Southern Border. It’s too dangerous to do anything else.

HH: Every Republican in the Senate agrees with that. Am I correct? Every Republican in the Senate wants the border changes made in the supplemental package, or adjacent to the supplemental package. Am I correct?

MJ: They have shown that with their votes, yes. And every Democrat in the Senate voted to stop that progress, and that’s where we are. We have an impasse between the two parties. And look, I have been a good faith negotiator, Hugh, with Chuck Schumer and all of my colleagues on the other side to tell them that this is not a political game. I’m being very forthright. I’m being, I’m operating in good faith. I’m telling you we have to do this for the people. And ironically, Hugh, you and I both know this would help the President, I mean politically. I mean, I was in New York the last two weekends. The people of New York are outraged over the border. I mean, they’re overrunning Manhattan and New York City, illegals. They can’t handle it. And all the cities, even in the big blue cities that used to be sanctuary cities, right, they’re crying out for help. The Democrats need to do this as well as the Republicans. And for the life of me, Hugh, I do not know why they won’t be reasonable to negotiate this.

HH: So are you in danger of going home without any of these four things moving, because I understand. They’re a package. There are four national security issues. They all have to be dealt with. They are in one package. And you will go home, right, if that package doesn’t pass?

MJ: Listen, Hugh, let me remind everybody, all your listeners, because your listeners are savvy. They know. People are keeping score. We have done our job. The House passed the Israel aid package six weeks ago, sent it over there. It’s collecting dust. $14.5 billion is exactly what was requested, and we paid for that. We didn’t go borrow it from some other nation to send it to Israel. We paid for it here. But again, what’s Chuck Schumer done with that? Nothing. Nothing. It’s sitting on his desk. We’re ready. We’re working. We’ve been at this every day, and we have been very clear from day one since I took the gavel, as I said. I’ve told them exactly what we need to get it done, and they’ve just ignored it. I think they thought we were bluffing or something, but this is not a game.

HH: Are you willing to send the House home if they do not act within this week?

MJ: Well, Hugh, I mean, we don’t, I don’t know what else to do. I’m not going to have everybody sit here through Christmas twiddling their thumbs. They’ve not sent me anything. And no, I’ve told the leaders in the, the Democrat leaders in the Senate that as late as yesterday. Send us something to work on. They haven’t done it. They haven’t done it. So what else are we to do? You know, we’re willing to work. The House members will work. We’ve shown that over and over and over, but we’re not getting any cooperation from the White House and the Senate Democrats at all.

HH: All right, Mr. Speaker, then we are at an impasse, and it’s up to the Democrats either to send everyone home or not. Now I want to bring up the old Solomon Amendment. In 2006, the Congress passed the Solomon Amendment, which gave America’s universities a choice – allow the military to recruit on your campuses, or we’re not sending you any more money. I would like to get every university, beginning with my alma mater, Havard, a choice either you condemn and act against anti-Semitism on your campus and sign a statement to that effect, or we’re cutting you off. What is the chance of cutting off these anti-Semitic universities, beginning with Harvard, whose president refused to condemn as anti-Semitic calls for genocide?

MJ: We were appalled by that outrageous testimony. It’s just staggering. We kind of know what they think. We sort of know the hypocrisy exists there, but you’ve never seen it on such glaring display. And Havard, MIT, University of Pennsylvania, you know, we’ve already had the resignation of the president there, Liz Magill. As Chairman Elise Stefanik says of our Republican Conference who evoked those responses, you know, one down, two to go. I think there needs to be real accountability, Hugh, and I think that what you’re referring to with a Solomon Amendment may be one approach. We’ve launched an investigation here in the House of all this federal funding that these institutes receive, and we have to demand accountability in every possible way. I think everything’s on the table right now.

HH: The Harvard Corporation has indicated this morning, according to the New York Times, they are retaining President Gay. So they are basically thumbing their nose at the Congress and at the outrage about Harvard. So my alma mater ought not, they’ve got $625 million dollars from the federal government. That is unacceptable, Speaker Johnson. Can you do something this year before the end of the year in the package that I expect will move, because Democrats are nuts not to send money to Israel, to Ukraine, to Taiwan, and to the border. They’re nuts if they don’t do that, but would you attach a Solomon-like amendment to this package?

MJ: Look, I would like to. I don’t know how much time we’re going to have to do all that, but again, it depends on what is sent over. As I said, everything is on the table. These are fast-moving developments. But I could not agree with you more. We have to have accountability. It is inexcusable. These institutions are receiving so many taxpayer dollars when they can’t even stand up for the basic human rights of their Jewish students? I mean, the idea that they would not call out cries for the annihilation of the Jewish state and the Jewish people is just, it’s just unbelievable to us. And so everything is on the table Hugh. We’ll see.

HH: Now I just want you to take our audience into the details here, Mr. Speaker. This is not hard. This is actually a couple of pages of legislation. It may be ten. It’s not hard. Who moves the ball forward at this point? You’ve sent over the bills. I think it’s got to be Majority Leader Schumer who sends over a bill, and then you go to a conference, is that right?

MJ: That’s right. That’s how it works, and my suspicion is that he’s awaiting on some sort of green light or signal from the White House. They typically move in tandem on these things. But you know, look, I’ll tell you, I have been in the SCIF, you know, confidentially, in the private settings. I’ve said publicly, I’ve said this most recently on the stage in the Congressional auditorium in front of all of our colleagues just late last week. I told the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, all of them, these are the necessary ingredients. This is not difficult. We need transformational change on the border, which you could do with the stroke of a pen, and we need clarity on exactly what and how the money’s going to be spent in Ukraine, and what the strategy is. Very, very simple, very reasonable request. Hugh, they’ve not delivered on any of those things. So what am I to do?

HH: So is the transformational change on the border reduced to writing from our side? And I’m a Republican, so everyone knows that. Has our side written down what we want?

MJ: Yes, and we sent it over there six months ago. H.R. 2, And it has those provisions I talked about, the parole reforms and asylum reforms, and return to, reinstates the Remain In Mexico policy, ends catch and release, and finishes, even has some construction of the wall. Those ingredients are necessary, because they’re interlocking. And if you don’t, if you only do one or two of them, it doesn’t solve the problem. You have to have all these policies kind of together, and they know that. They know that. But as I said, as we are speaking this morning, they’ve not even come back and said oh, gee, we’ll give you two of the five or three of the five. Nothing. They haven’t sent anything back in return. There’s no return volley, so I stand here awaiting them.

HH: Last question, Mr. Speaker. Do you believe the President is involved in these decisions, because he’s clearly, clearly been on the road campaigning, and he’s clearly been misspeaking at everything. Do you think he’s involved?

MJ: I don’t believe he’s directly involved. Obviously, this is his lieutenants and staff level that are handling this. But we certainly demand that the President does get involved. It’s ultimately, the buck stops at his desk, and this is far, far overdue.

HH: And you’re available to go meet with him if he calls you over today?

MJ: Any moment. Any time.

HH: Mr. Speaker, thank you. Keep coming back. I appreciate it very much. Merry Christmas to you if I don’t talk to you again before Christmas, and Happy New Year. That’s Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana, Speaker of the House of Representatives. We are in an incredible situation where we don’t have a president who’s actually doing anything.

End of interview.