House Speaker Michael Johnson joined me this morning:

Audio:

04-24hhs-johnson

Transcript:

HH: Honored to have Speaker Mike Johnson back with me. Good morning, Mr. Speaker. Welcome back.

MJ: Hugh, thanks so much. It’s really great to be with you, my friend.

HH: You are now doing a syndicated show with Salem every Saturday with Tony Perkins. How do you like being a radio guy?

MJ: (laughing) I’m going back to my roots. Many years ago, I was a small-time radio host, and I miss that work, actually.

HH: It’s kind of, it’s much better than doing TV, because the talent are actually the producers, although our friend, Tom Tradup, is helping you and Tony get that going. Mr. Speaker, first, congratulations on the national security funding bill. It passed the Senate yesterday. Are you satisfied that we’ve done right by our allies?

MJ: I don’t have any question about that, Hugh. I know that history is going to judge this well. It was the right thing to do. This is a very dangerous time. We truly do have a new axis of evil. You have China and Russia and Iran, and often North Korea working together in coordination. They’re funding one another’s aggressions. And the reason you and I both know, and you highlight this all the time, the reason this is happening is because the current president is projecting weakness on the world stage. And our adversaries are acting aggressively and provocatively, and taking advantage of that. So we had this moment in time, Hugh, this historic question. Would America stand by our allies, stand by Israel, the beleaguered people of Ukraine in this pivotal moment, or would we shrink back, and in my view, abdicate our obvious responsibility and role in the world? I don’t believe we need to be the world’s policeman. I don’t believe that that is our burden. But I do believe that the perception of a strong America is essential, is essential on the world stage, and I think the Congress has acted to make sure that happens.

HH: Earlier in the show, I talked with former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who applauds the national security bill as well. He also brought up, and I discussed with him, Secretary Blinken is thinking about sanctioning a unit of the Israeli Defense Forces. If that happens, Mr. Speaker, would you bring forward some sort of resolution condemning Tony Blinken, because we have to stand with our allies. We cannot be cherry-picking instances where we think they’ve done something wrong. What would you think about the State Department sanctioning an IDF unit?

MJ: Well, I would be opposed to that, of course. And we heard a rumor of this before our bill was actually brought for a vote in the House, I mean, hours before. And I’ll tell you what I did, Hugh, and I don’t, I guess I’m breaking news here. No one knows this. But I called the White House immediately and talked with Jake Sullivan, and Tony Blinken was overseas at the moment. But I made him send me an email where he committed to me in writing that it would not affect any of the funding that we were working on to assist Israel in this critical time, and that they would be very judicious in that. He indicated to me that that won’t happen, that there were some allegations of some event many years ago. It seems to be have been resolved, and I am very hopeful that they won’t try to proceed on that. If they do, we’ll intervene.

HH: And it will undercut completely our position standing by Israel. And you are going to Columbia today, and let’s talk about that. I applaud this. Yesterday, I recommended President Trump go up there after the trial lets out. But of course, he’s under the thumb of a judge, which is unconstitutional, but that’s the way it is. Why are you going to Columbia? Who are you going to talk to? And what are you going to say?

MJ: Well, today, I’m going to join Jewish students at Columbia, and Rabbi Yuda Drizin for a meal, and then we’ll be hosting a press conference there with some of my colleagues from the House, Republicans from New York, to call on the president of the University to resign. It’s unconscionable. This president, Shafik, has shown to be a very weak, inept leader. They cannot even guarantee the safety of Jewish students? They’re expected to run for their lives and stay home from class? It’s just, it’s maddening. What we’re seeing on these college campuses across the country is disgusting and unacceptable. And we have to, every leader in this country, every political official, every citizen of good conscience, has to speak out and say that this is not who we are in America. And we’ve got to have accountability, and that’s what my colleagues and I are going to be working on.

HH: I am curious, Mr. Speaker, I am loathe to say anything good about an SEC school, because the Big 10 rules. But have you ever had anything, any antisemitic outbursts at LSU or any other school in Louisiana?

MJ: No. I don’t believe we’d tolerate that. And if that happened at my alma mater, which is LSU, I’d be down there myself to stop it. I mean, this is outrageous. We have Jewish students who have actually been physically assaulted. They’ve been harassed. They’ve been intimidated and threatened. What we need to be doing is, I love the clip of Tom Cotton. My friend, Tom, said it before your break. We need to revoke federal funding to these universities if they cannot keep control. We need to revoke these student visas for these violent protesters. You don’t have a right to be here and to do this. But Jewish students have a right to be able to peacefully attend classes. They’re trying to get an education, and this is just madness. And you know, I’ve seen some of these man on the street interviews with some of these kids who are protesting. Hugh, you and I both know, the vast majority of them have no idea what they’re talking about. They don’t know the facts. Some of them are denying that October 7th even happened. I mean, it just, it’s ridiculous, and we’re relying on and calling upon and demanding these university officials to get control of this situation. It’s just completely out of control right now.

HH: You know, Mr. Speaker, ignorance is a problem. I don’t believe any of these students know that Israel is the original anti-colonial state. They were under the thumb of the British mandate after Arthur Balfour promised a homeland for the Jews before the Holocaust. It finally came to pass in 1948. They threw out the British mandate. Yes, there are other failed colonial, anti-colonial states around the world, but Israel has thrived. So I’m glad you’re doing this, and I can’t believe anyone would be opposed to it. Have any Democrats objected to you going to Columbia?

MJ: Well, they may be mumbling that. They’ve not, I haven’t seen it publicly, at least some of my colleagues. But I’ll tell you that the real problem we have right now is that we’re not getting strong leadership, obviously, from the White House or even some Democrats in Congress. I mean, the White House is caving to the antisemitic, I call it the pro-Hamas wing of the party now. They’ve backpedaled on their support for Israel. I mean, and you’ve got members of Congress who refuse to denounce even the chants of Death To America. They just go silent. They won’t call that out. And some members are, Democrat members of Congress, are even calling these antisemitic mobs peaceful protesters, and defending the harassment, intimidation and all the rest. So it’s really, it’s really become a serious problem, and they’re allowing mob rule to overtake the American ideals of free speech and the free exchange of ideas and the free exercise of religion. This is not who we are.

HH: Mr. Speaker, I’ve got some favorite members, like Mike Lawler. He’s a member of the centrist Republicans. David Joyce, center-right, Chip Roy, right-wing. Do you have a, within the Republican five families, have you got a good representation going with you to Columbia, or is it just you?

MJ: Oh, no. I’ve got, Lawler will be there today. You know, he represents New York, and Nicole Malliotakis, and several others of the New York delegation who will be gathering there. And look, I tip my hat to my friends and colleagues there. They have been very consistent. I mean, those who are in the proximity of these universities have been very active and very engaged. And look, the House has taken action. We’ve acted to address antisemitism. We, the House Education and Workforce Committee, as you know, has conducted these important oversight hearings of colleges and their leadership. Some of them have gone viral online and seen around the world, because they’re failing to protect Jewish students on their campus. We passed a few pieces of legislation, the Deterrent Act, which shines a light on foreign money influencing American universities. We passed the No Immigration Benefits for Hamas Terrorists Act. Yes, it’s exactly as what it sounds. It would remove illegals who supported Hamas terrorist attacks on October 7th. But look, we passed this legislation, Hugh. Here’s the problem. It all faces a common fate. The Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, controls the upper chamber in the Senate. And he is so focuses on calling for new elections in Israel, he can’t be bothered to protect Jewish students here at home.

HH: I agree with that, and good on you for drawing attention to this and going up there. A couple of related questions, Congressman. You have an unwieldy caucus, and everybody knows that. And you’ve got some members on the Rules Committee, Olivia Beavers and I were talking about this earlier today. You’ve got Representative Norman, who’s always a thorn in your side, Tom Massie, who is my least favorite Congressman, along with a couple more. Are you going to make some changes on Rules Committee? I like Chip Roy. I’m glad he’s on there. But are you going to make some changes on the Rules Committee to make your life easier?

MJ: Well, look, we’ve got a delicate balance right now, Hugh. I’ve got the smallest majority in U.S. history, famously. Everyone knows that now, having a one-vote margin. So when you have such a slim margin, you know, there are actions and then there are reactions and reverberations from the actions. It’s a very delicate balance. If I start kicking people off committees right now, it’s likely that I cause more problems than I solve. And so what I’m trying to do every day is manage this team. You know, people ask me all the time, Hugh. I was at a big event in Dallas last night, and they said why do the Democrats seem to stick together more than the Republicans? And I said it’s actually pretty easy. The explanation is this. The Democrats think and act like a union. They’re collectivists. You know, they move in a herd. Many of them are not deeply principled or philosophical folks, anyway, and so you can command them, and they’ll move as social animals. They’re socialists, right? We, on the other hand, are rugged individualists, and we’re deeply principled and philosophical. And it’s difficult to get us to move in tandem sometimes. That’s a blessing. I love that part, except when you have a one-vote margin. And so you know, I’m working every day to get the team together to understand the stakes. I think they do. And I think we’re going to get this job done, deliver for the people. And Hugh, I believe we’re going to have an extraordinary election cycle in November. I think we’re going to grow the House majority and make this job easier. We’re going to win back the Senate, and I think Donald Trump’s going back to the White House. We’ll be able to turn this thing 180 degrees.

HH: When you went down and saw former President Trump, how did the conversation go? Do you think you two would work together if he’s back in the White House, because I think he’s going to win. The numbers today from Bloomberg are astonishing. He’s ahead in every swing state by 10 points in North Carolina, by 7 and 8 in Arizona and Nevada. He’s running away with it, and I have a column in the Post today about vice presidential choices that will really accelerate that. What, is he upbeat about it? Do you think he’s going to win big?

MJ: I do. I think he’s going to win big, and I think it’s going to be historic, and I’ve known him now for eight years. We came to Washington at the same time, in January, 2017. And we have a very close relationship, and I’ve enjoyed that. And I think it’s important. It’s going to be critical going forward, and when the new Congress and the new term begins in January, that the Speaker of the House and the President work in tandem on a principled, you know, agenda that’s aggressive. We have so many things to fix. And I told him, Hugh, recently in a conversation. I said Mr. President, I’m going to state the obvious. In your next term, you could be the most consequential president of the modern era, because there are so many things to fix. I think he understands that. He’s thinking a lot about the importance of this and what his legacy will be, and I think it’s going to be extraordinary.

HH: I’m going to put my bid in early for both shipbuilding capacity, but in reconciliation, conditioning federal money to any state on their having a vibrant school choice program. I don’t know what Louisiana does, but school choice is the way of the future, Mr. Speaker. Are you on board with that?

MJ: 100%. And I visited recently with Betsy DeVos, our friend who was the Education secretary under the last Trump administration. She’s been a champion of that as well, and there are some grand ideas on the table. But I agree with you, the federal funding, the purse is the big thing that Congress has to help enforce that, and I think there needs to be dramatic reform of the Department of Education on the federal level, and all the rest. We need to restore and return choice to parents, and control of the public school systems back down to the local and state level so that bureaucrats in ivory towers in Washington are not making these radical demands on people. There’s a lot of reform that needs to be done.

HH: And control of the campuses again.

MJ: Yeah.

HH: I hope there’s no federal money going to Columbia, and I hope you start taxing their endowment. Speaker Johnson, safe travel to New York today. You’re going to need your security on that campus, but I’m glad you are going, and I’m glad you are taking that message. Look forward to talking to you again, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for joining me this morning.

MJ: Thank you, my friend.

End of interview.