Capitol Report Full Broadcast (April 29)

Good evening, tonight on Capitol Report. The Supreme Court halting Louisiana's redistricting, calling it racial gerrymandering. Why? And what it means for other states. Pentagon leaders make the case for historic military spending. But they're telling lawmakers about operations in Iran and growing threats from China, as the House passes a three-year extension of FISA's authority. I think it's a good idea to confront a nuclear bomb. Imagine what the world would look like right now if Iran had a nuclear weapon. President Trump warning Iran better get smart soon. What the U.S. military may be planning to break the negotiating deadlock. Now they have to cry uncle. That's all they have to do, just say, we give up. We give up. And the president weighing in on former FBI Director James Comey's case. What the DOJ now needs to prove. People like Comey have created tremendous danger, I think, for politicians and others. This is Capitol Report, live from our global headquarters in our nation's capital. Here's Steve Lance. I'm Jack Bradley, in for Steve Lance tonight. President Trump issuing a new warning to Iran, warning the regime to get smart soon. It comes as the president refuses to lift the U.S.'s naval blockade on Iranian ports. We go now live to NTD's White House correspondent, Mari Otsu, at the North Lawn. Mari, good evening. What's the latest from President Trump on Iran? Hey, Jack, good evening. Well, President Trump is reiterating that the Iranian regime can never have a nuclear weapon. That's as the president says that the U.S. is currently in telephone talks with Iran, saying that a potential new wave of strikes on the regime depend on the outcome of those talks. Take a look. Do you think another wave of strikes will be necessary? I don't know. It depends. We have talks. We're having talks with them now. And we're not flying anymore with 18-hour flights every time we want to see a piece of paper. We're doing it telephonically. President Trump announcing Iran can't get their act together. They don't know how to sign a non-nuclear deal. They better get smart soon, with an edited image of himself holding a machine gun with explosions in the background declaring, no, Mr. Nice Guy. This comes as the president says he's going to keep Tehran under a naval blockade Now they have to cry uncle. That's all they have to do, just say, we give up. We give up. Well, the blockade is genius, OK? The blockade is 100% foolproof. It shows how good our navy is, I can tell you that. Nobody's going to play games. This move comes as Tehran's economy is struggling, with experts estimating that the regime has at most between 12 to 22 days of oil storage left, with nowhere to dispatch its crude under the blockade. According to Iran's central bank, the annual inflation rate has reached 67% through mid-April. And in addition, their economy is crashing. Their, as you know, their money, they go with their money, they don't have a name for it. Their money is valueless. They've got inflation that nobody's ever seen before. Also as part of Operation Economic Theory, the Treasury is targeting the Chinese regime's independent teapot refineries, which provide a critical financial lifeline to Iran by buying about 90% of its oil exports. Treasury Secretary Scott Besant saying Iran's oil industry is starting to shut in production thanks to the blockade, and that the regime will soon see gas shortages. The retirement funds that they thought that they had outside of Iran, we are freezing. We're holding those for the Iranian people. Same with all their villas in the south of France and all over the world. We are going to track them down, and we are going to continue the economic pressure, as well as the block on the Strait of Hormuz. Meanwhile, as investigators probe the third assassination attempt on President Trump, the Department of Justice is filing court papers requesting the shooting suspect, Cole Allen, remain detained pending trial, stating, The DOJ also releasing a new photo showing Allen armed inside his hotel room at the Washington Hilton, while the White House continues to call for an end to violent rhetoric about President Trump. Political violence right now is coming not exclusively, but largely from one side of the aisle. And if you're part of the left wing in this country, you've got to look yourself in the mirror and say, Why is it that so many of the people who are firing guns at their political opponents agree with my perspective and listen to the same sources of information that I listen to? The Department of Justice is also saying that the suspect could face life in prison without parole if he is indeed convicted, and it comes as the White House is condemning some elected officials and media for what it calls a systemic demonization of President Trump, saying it leads to political violence, the likes of which we saw on Saturday night. Press Secretary Lovett notably saying that there's ultimately no distinguishable difference between the alleged shooter's manifesto and the rhetoric that we hear about President Trump and this White House every day. Jack, back to you. All right, Mari, thank you for those updates. And in today's ruling, the Supreme Court limiting race-based redistricting in the Louisiana case in a 6-3 decision. The court says race cannot be used to draw electoral district boundaries. The case focused on whether a lower court order to create a second black-majority congressional district in Louisiana was constitutional. A federal district judge had ordered the state to create the second district to comply with the anti-discrimination provisions of the Federal Voting Rights Act. A group of non-black voters sued the map, arguing it discriminated against non-minorities. The ruling was authored by Justice Samuel Alito and joined by five of his fellow conservative justices. Alito said that Section 2 must enforce the Constitution's ban on intentional race discrimination under the 15th Amendment. And the Supreme Court hearing arguments on another case today, on two consolidated cases that question whether the Trump administration can end a program that temporarily allows several thousand Syrian and Haitian immigrants to live and work in the United States due to unsafe conditions in their own home countries. The focus of the arguments today was on whether the Secretary of Homeland Security followed required steps to assess safe conditions in their countries before making a final determination and whether the court is permitted to review the Secretary's decision. NTD's Arlene Richards was inside the courtroom and now she joins us in studio. Arlene, tell us about this case. There's two parts to this statute that applies to the Secretary's determination. How were the attorneys on both sides applying them? Well, that's right. The bulk of the arguments today were surrounding these provisions and both of the attorneys had their opinions about which part of the provision should be applied. Let's talk about that. One provision says that the Secretary must consult agencies and review the conditions of those countries before making a determination. Another provision says that once the Secretary makes that determination, judicial review is prohibited. Now, liberal justices were leaning toward the consultation and review aspect and here are some of their concerns. Your position seems to be, and you said it in your opening, any step in the process is not subject to judicial review. If the Secretary posted a notice on X saying, quote, I hereby terminate Syria's TPS program effective tomorrow, you would say that there's no judicial review of that decision. Correct. Congress has said this can be the weirdest, strangest, most arbitrary conclusion as to country conditions, and the courts still can't do anything. So points taken there. But that's a different thing than to say that all the things that the statute says that the Secretary is supposed to do in order to determine country conditions are themselves unreviewable. Now, the Justice Department attorney made clear that the statute bars judicial review of both the final determination and every step leading up to it. He said the other side's efforts to create exceptions destroy the entire statute because then anyone could challenge the determination by casting a procedural claim. The conservative justices asked more questions to the attorneys on the other side regarding judicial review. Now, the attorney for the Syrians argued that the two provisions should be read separately and that it was permissible for the court to review whether or not the Secretary consulted with the State Department about country conditions. Now, Justice Amy Coney Barrett posed a challenging hypothetical. Let's listen to that. Let's imagine that there is a more robust record of consultation here, and the Secretary consults the State Department, and the State Department says the country conditions in Syria remain terrible, armed conflict continues, and, you know, I think it would be fine and in the national interest to continue to get status for Syrian refugees. The Secretary says, yeah, you know what, I'm going to terminate it anyway. Is that reviewable? We could not challenge on the ground that she's wrong and the State Department is right. What the statute does is it tries to get the government to speak in one voice, which this court has said is very important, and it's a huge problem here when you have them going back and forth. But if ultimately the Secretary says, you know, speaking in one voice is important, but my people, country conditions people, think that the armed conflict is over, so that's what we're doing. Now, Justice Barrett commented that it's just a box-checking exercise and asked why would Congress permit review of the procedural aspect when everybody cares more about the substance. Other conservative justices posed different hypotheticals involving the scope of judicial review, including what happens if the consultation isn't adequate and whether the court should measure alleged political influence from the president. Now, this was one of the last cases the justices are going to hear this term, and I'm expecting a decision to come out probably before the end of the term in June. I think this is going to be earlier rather than later. All right. Well, stay tuned for that. Thank you, Arlene. Thank you. The House tonight voting to extend Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a bill that allows the government to spy on foreigners outside the U.S. without a warrant. In a 235-191 vote, the House approves a three-year extension of the FISA bill, sending it to the Senate just ahead of a Thursday night deadline. Aside from targeting non-Americans, many critics say FISA allows the collection of data on U.S. citizens. Now, lawmakers on both sides have advocated for more privacy guardrails, such as requiring warrants when accessing Americans' data. The Trump administration has been putting pressure on House Republicans to support the bill, saying the surveillance authority is crucial for national security. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth says that many of the most important U.S. missions could not have happened without FISA. And Hegseth also says, along with the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair, General Dan Cain, testifying today before the House Armed Services Committee on the Pentagon's 2027 budget request. Joining me now to discuss these developments is Stefano Rittendale, Chief Intelligence Officer at Artorias and Army veteran. Stefano, thanks for joining us here tonight. Now, the operation in Iran is estimated to have cost $25 billion. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth was asked if he thought it was a good idea. Take a look. Do I think it's a good idea to confront a nuclear bomb in the hands of the U.S.? Imagine what the world would look like right now if Iran had a nuclear weapon. Just imagine if they had one, which the Obama deal was going to allow them to do. Stefano, is there a price tag on the preventative importance of this mission? Well, first, thank you so much for having me. And I think this is a key conversation that needs to happen, open to the public, as we're seeing. Obviously, I find it very interesting when people really focus on kind of the price tags of a lot of these military operations. I think I recall when we were 20 years in the Middle East, the hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars that the U.S. spent there. So it's very interesting that this has kind of now become much more center stage in how we're doing this for the duration of the military operation that it happened. But, again, it is the role of Congress to provide oversight and for the secretary of war and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to answer it. But this military operation, I used to be made the argument that it served U.S. national security and it was worth it. And, Stefano, we have President Trump today giving an update on Iran, saying that they've come a long way now. And now the question is whether they're going to go far enough and give up nuclear ambitions. Here's the update from him. Well, the blockade is genius, OK? The blockade has been 100 percent foolproof. It shows how good our Navy is, I can tell you that. Nobody's going to play games. Now they have to cry uncle. That's all they have to do, just say, we give up. We give up. But their economy is really in trouble. It's a dead economy. Stefano, how do you assess the impact of the blockade right now in bringing Iran to the negotiating table? Well, I think Iran has been in the negotiating table. The question is how effective these negotiations are happening or how willing is Iran to kind of bring up concessions. And I think the main issue we're running into right now is that inside of Iran, it's pretty hard to determine who's really in charge. But the current supreme leader in many aspects might be serving more as a figurehead to try to validate decisions. And there's a much more internal power struggle happening not only between, let's say, the moderates and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, but even within elements within the IRGC and different camps who might be more willing to open negotiations than other hardliners. What the blockade, though, is clearly doing is increasing the economic cost in Iran. I mean, just today we got reports that the Iran currency hit another historic low against the U.S. dollar. We have reports of mass unemployment and layoffs occurring inside of Iran, economic output dropping to very insignificant levels. And U.S. Central Command already announcing up to 42 vessels have been churned away and forced to head back into the Iranian port. So these pressures are another tool that the U.S. administration has to force Iran into serious negotiations and maybe convince these hardliners who want to continue nuclear enrichment, understand that they cannot continue this way, that the economy is in a very dire strait inside of Iran. They might seriously enter into real negotiations and give up nuclear enrichment. And through this war, we've seen President Trump's approach laid out as peace through strength. Secretary Hegseth today said that reestablishing deterrence is one of the four pillars that they set out to do. Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff described it as well. Let's take a look. Look at the totality of actions that we've done over the last year. One thing leaps out at me that I think is clearly and unambiguously seen by our adversaries or those that may consider it, and that's our ability to integrate and synchronize a whole range of capabilities that we have in the joint force, information, cyber, you know, deception, jamming, air power, sea power, land power. Now, Stefano, our adversaries are certainly watching this and observing our ability to coordinate military forces. Can we measure the impact this is having? I think we can, but if I may, I think there's another aspect that we need to expand on what General Kim was referencing, not only internally from the U.S. joint force, but I also think much more importantly, the United States is really the only other country who can integrate allied and partner nations into any type of military operations, as seen during Operation Epicurean, but also as demonstrated by our military operations within the last couple of decades. The United States is really uniquely set in leveraging the joint force and, more importantly, bringing allied nations to conduct operations. Obviously, the U.S. and Israel conducted very sophisticated joint operations against Iran. We've seen in Europe our NATO alliance, and if you're focusing on China, we can see how the U.S. is a prime leader in a lot of interagency and interpartner military training exercises, let's say with Japan, South Korea, and other countries such as Australia. And I think that's a significant strength that a lot of our adversaries are also realizing and taking note, but it's really very, very difficult for them to kind of take a leg up against the United States. We saw these significant difficulties that Russia had in Ukraine, and the United States quickly gained air dominance and air security over Iran in a short period of time, something the Russians still to this day have not achieved inside of Ukraine. So I think a lot of our adversaries are seeing the U.S. military might or ability to integrate with partners and taking that as a sign of deterrence to maybe think twice before they challenge the United States. And one new area of warfare, we've seen it in Russia, we're seeing it in Iran, is becoming more critical as well are drones. The Department of War just announced a $54 billion investment in establishing American drone dominance. How critical is this, and what will go into developing our drone capabilities? Well, I think this is a very important aspect. We've already seen the Department of War and U.S. Central Command use one-way attack drones, such as the Lucas drone, which is actually basically a copy of the Iranian Shahed 136. And the U.S. Department of War rapidly used it very effectively against Iran. And we're also very lucky that we have a lot of allied partners and nations that we can lean on and learn lessons to apply for our own force, specifically Ukraine, and how they've been very much able to maximize their drones against Russia to cause a lot of problem sets. I mean, just today, for example, Ukraine released videos showing Ukrainian drones traveling over 170 kilometers targeting Russian helicopters deep in their territory. So I think the United States, this investment clearly shows that we are going to prioritize our dominance over drone technology, something that we've had a lot in the past. I think the new focus is to develop cheaper, cost-effective drones that can be leveraged in contested airspace, as we've seen in Iran. And a lot of that is going to be not only done internally, but leveraging our allies and partners, such as Ukraine, NATO, and others, to really maximize our drone dominance and leverage it for deterrence or in the case of military operations and any contingency that might arise. And Stefano, while all this is going on, we have 10,000 U.S. military personnel in the Indo-Pacific right now training with the Philippines and Japan. So military and intelligence authorities have consistently identified China as our biggest threat. The Secretary of War commented on this today. You look under the hood of the ways in which China is trying to use critical elements of our defense industrial base and supply chain against us or capabilities in the future that could hamstring us with options for a future president. Stefano, how is China able to use our defense industrial base and supply chain against us, and what can we do about it? So I think China obviously has, specifically in the rare earth and all of those aspects, a lot of dominance, and that's something that the United States has to take into account. And I think this is something that, unfortunately, in the last 20 to 30 years, after the end of the Cold War, the United States has basically slept through not only a lot of the defense production aspects and the capabilities that we have, but even, for example, another key concern that the United States has is on shipbuilding. The United States has really sacrificed a lot of this, and China has really prioritized and put themselves in some areas above. And I think the United States, unfortunately late, but has waken up to this and a lot of bipartisan, both from Republicans and Democrats, this administration and others, are going to continue to prioritize because we understand where China is able to take advantage in this area and really challenge the United States in supply chain. There's a lot of aspects where the United States administration is trying to prioritize, let's say, mineral, raw earth resources, shipbuilding capability, and manufacturing. And I think that's going to be the new focus where the United States is going to prioritize leveraging not only our own manufacturing base, but reliable allies and partners to really set ourselves against China and make sure we continue to have dominance in the 21st century. All right. I'm going to start putting my stock into U.S. shipbuilding now. Stefano Rittendale, thank you so much for your time and insights with us today. I really appreciate it. And now you're looking at a live shot of Capitol Hill. Former FBI Director James Comey facing charges for threatening President Trump by posting shells in the formation of 8647 on social media. Former federal prosecutor Jim Trustee will join us for analysis. It's finally here, our second annual mega sale. This sale only comes around once a year, so take advantage of the best offers ever while you can. For example, save 50% on our Giza Dream bed sheets as low as $29.98. And for the first time ever on TV, my pillow mattresses and my pillow mattress toppers as low as $99.98. And you save 50% on our Luxe Pure six-piece towel sets, regular $69.98, now only $39.98. And our best-selling standard, my pillows, regular $49.98, on sale for $17.98. Wait on it, mega sale only $14.98. So go to mypillow.com or call the number on your screen. Use this promo code to take advantage of our second annual mega sale. But wait, there's more. To make the mega sale even more special, when you order right now, your order's gonna ship absolutely free. On streets across America, homeless young people are cold, abused, in danger. And House is helping young people with nowhere else to turn. Please call or go online now with your gift of $19 a month. You'll help provide hot meals, safe shelter, medical care, and love. We'll send you this comforting blanket as a reminder of the love you're showing a young person this holiday season. I will rescue you. Call or go online now to safeplacetosleep.org and your first month's gift will be matched. Whispered across generations, a hidden secret unveils the essence of longevity and vitality. A timeless legend regarding energy and wonder. Rooted in ancient health wisdom, we proudly introduce Pure Tang Black Ginseng. A 100% natural, organic energy drink made from premium 6-year-old Korean ginseng. It takes 2,260 days and nights from seed to growth, undergoing a meticulous 9-step process of steaming and drying. Black ginseng reaches its full potency, enriched with ginsenicide RG3 and enhanced absorption efficiency. No sugar, no caffeine, no artificial ingredients. Experience the pure natural power of Pure Tang Black Ginseng. Nourish your body, strengthen your immunity, and boost your energy. Order Pure Tang Black Ginseng at puretang.com. Welcome back. I'm Jack Bradley. To break down the latest on the Federal Reserve and more, we welcome on our panel Mally Smith, Democratic Strategist and Harris Campaign North Carolina Political Director, and Ford O'Connell, Attorney and Republican Strategist. Hey, thank you both so much for coming on tonight. Now, the Federal Reserve, they left interest rates unchanged for the third straight policy meeting. It's also Jerome Powell's last as Fed Chair. Now, this is despite Trump's repeated request to cut interest rates. Take a look. It's a good time to lower them. We're the most prime country anywhere in the world. We're right now having investments made in our country at a level that nobody's ever seen. No other country's ever seen it. Tens of billions of dollars are being invested. Factories, auto plants, AI. Now, Ford, we have a split vote from the Fed 8-4 to maintain those interest rates. If Kevin Warsh is confirmed as Fed Chair, do you think that we'll see interest rate cuts at the next meeting? I do. And, you know, this 8-4 vote that we just saw was actually the most dissenting vote since October of 1992. And I think what gets lost here is that when you cut rates, that actually helps the middle class. That helps Main Street because it boosts consumer spending, it lowers borrowing rates, and it essentially helps the labor market. Why would you not want to cut rates unless you're being political like Jerome Powell seems to have been over the last several months? Mally, President Trump's no friend of Jerome Powell, neither vice versa. Now, the DOJ just ended an investigation into his alleged money mismanagement with the renovations at the Fed building. Powell will stay on the Board of Governors and will still be able to vote there. How would Warsh's chair change things? Yeah, I mean, I agree with Ford here that it means more likely we have interest rate cuts in the future. And as someone who has some money, Robinhood accounts, I would love to see some interest rate cuts so my stocks would go higher. But I think we should also be transparent about why we are no longer cutting interest rates. We were cutting interest rates early in Trump's term, but President Trump has taken action that has raised inflation. President Trump's tariffs have cost Americans $2,500. These tariffs this upcoming year are going to cost Americans about the same, $2,500. And then gas prices have increased. It's costing Americans about $700 extra in the increase in gas prices we've seen. And all of that has increased overall inflation to 3.3%. So as much as I would love my Robinhood account to go up and get some interest rate cuts in, the Federal Reserve has to be cognizant of inflation, and we've had an uptick in inflation under President Trump. Ford, do you want to respond to that? Yeah, I mean, Mal is completely lying about the tariffs. Even the Fed said that's a one-time hit. And what Jerome Powell was basically saying is, is because of the Iran conflicts, the only reason you're not doing it. What's crazy, though, is that Jerome Powell has been very inconsistent. The Fed has been very inconsistent when it comes to cutting rates. When you had a terrible economy with Biden and Harris, he seemed to cut rates every which way to Sunday, even to a point that other members thought rates should have been cut. But as soon as Donald Trump enters office, guess what? He stops cutting rates because he thinks it's going to hurt Trump politically, and it winds up just hurting the American public. Mal, do you think that's why Powell wasn't cutting the rates? Well, Powell was cutting rates at the start of Trump's term, and then inflation increased. President Trump inherited an economy where inflation was going down and we had a steady job market. But since then, inflation has gone up. We have the Federal Reserve saying that tariffs have increased inflation. Gas prices have increased inflation. And we have a job market that's essentially had net zero job creation since President Trump's Liberation Day. So all of that is incredibly complicating the Federal Reserve's path on interest rate cuts. Let's get into the Supreme Court now. We had the ruling this morning on the racial gerrymandering. The justices ruled today that Louisiana unconstitutionally drew a congressional district to create a majority black district. By law, gerrymandering can't be made based on race. Mally, this was a split 6-3 vote. Your reaction to this vote? Yeah, I don't think this affects the midterms this upcoming cycle because I just don't think there's enough time for states to redraw their districts. But with that being said, I think going forward after this midterms, we're going to see Republican states in the Deep South change their maps. And I do think that's going to net Republican seats. And if that happens, I think Democrats should respond and further gerrymander California and New York to eliminate Republicans' representation there if Republicans are going to eliminate African-American representation in the South. But we need to get out of this overall gerrymandering constant war by passing a national ban on gerrymandering because the incentives of both parties is when one responds, it's for the other one to do what the other did and just to keep this going in perpetuity. So there needs to be national reform. Ford, I want to get your thoughts on this case and then your response. Yeah, I mean, this was the right decision. They should have made this decision 30 years ago. I mean, basically, they're saying you shouldn't be discriminating and drawing districts based on race. I mean, that's basically what the 14th Amendment says. But somehow Democrats have been doing this in a lot of different states. And it affects a lot more than the South, Mally, probably up to 20 seats. You're exactly right that the worst case of this racial gerrymandering took place in the South. And frankly, that should have been corrected long ago. Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito in particular got this right. Democrats are just mad because essentially they are the ones that have been gerrymandering based on race. And now they say you can't do that anymore. They're throwing their arms up in the air and saying, oh, my God, this is a threat to democracy, when in fact this is exactly what the Constitution meant by colorblind. And, Ford, do you also think that gerrymandering should be banned just outright? Well, let me say this. When it came to gerrymandering, it was Governor Jerry in Massachusetts who started this in the 1820s. And essentially Democrats have been gerrymandering every which way to Sunday. If you look at the most gerrymandered states in this country, they're Democrats. California and Illinois are two of the worst culprits of it. And who's in charge of that legislature? The problem is Democrats recognize that if we go all the way to race to the bottom, it's actually going to be Republicans who wind up winning. Ultimately, I would like to see a commission take place. But every time we have a commission, it doesn't seem to be all that fair. And a great example was New York, where basically the Democrats challenged their own commission. Yeah, and, Mally, your response. I want to just point out here that the entire area of the states of New England don't have a single congressional Republican, even though I believe it's between 35 and 45 percent of their voters are Republican. Yeah, and I don't think that's great. That's why I support a national ban to gerrymandering. And every House Democrat supported this ban with H.R. 1, and congressional Republicans opposed it. And now with the Voting Rights Act, this part of the Voting Rights Act being eliminated, we're going to see the same in the South, where all the Democrat seats are going to be eliminated. So we're going to have a Northeast where it's completely Democratic represented, and then we're going to have a South that's pretty much completely Republican represented. And then maybe we can find some bipartisan support for a national gerrymandering ban. Ford, your response. Yeah, it's much more in the South. You keep putting this on the South, and the South is the one who's been wronged here because you shouldn't have been able to be doing this. And in fact, you're going to find out that you can't do this in California either because you have a whole bunch of minority-majority districts in Hispanics. So guess what? It's not just the South. I like how Democrats do this. It was Democrats who were driving gerrymandering based on race, and now that they can't use that anymore, they should have never been able to use it. Now they're screaming uncle and saying, well, we didn't like it because it wasn't tilted in our favor. Now we want to go back to it being even? You've got to be kidding me. I mean, Democrats have supported a national gerrymandering ban. That was something they supported in 2018. It was one of the first bills they introduced with H.R. 1. So it's not something that they've just come to light to. So I got to disagree with you a little bit there. All right. Mally Smith and Ford O'Connell, thank you both very much for sharing your time and insights with us today. Really appreciate it. And now you're looking at a live shot of Capitol Hill. Former FBI Director James Comey facing charges for threatening President Trump by posting shells in the formation of 8647 on social media. Former federal prosecutor Jim Trustee will join us for analysis. This is how I keep my joints happy. Omega XL is a powerful natural supplement backed by 40 years of clinical research. Take control of your pain like Cynthia Bailey. My knees in particular started giving me pain issues all the way back to my modeling days, from just running through airports, photo shoots. After taking Omega XL, I really started to notice how less stiff I was, especially my knees and my hip. Has Omega XL changed my life? Yes. I barely notice my joint pain anymore. Now I'm like literally sprinting through the airports. My secret is Omega XL. Pick up the phone and call now to get this exclusive TV offer. Buy one Omega XL and we'll send you a second bottle absolutely free. You'll also get a free bottle of Vitamin XL D3. Buy one, get two free. A total value of over $115, all for just $49.95. You save more than 55% and shipping is free. Backed by a money-back guarantee and is not available in stores. Operators are standing by, so call now. Hi, my name is Brady. When I was born, my parents thought everything was okay. My mom and dad were so excited to take me home. I still get goosebumps telling this story. Several days in, his skin started to become very cold and clammy. We noticed that he had become blue around his mouth, and something was just very off. We packed up as fast as we could. Brady stopped breathing twice on the way to the pediatrician, and that was one of the number one things that just haunts me to this day. I was born with a congenital heart defect called aortic coarctation. If my parents waited just one more hour to drive me to the hospital, I would not be here today. But thanks to research funded by the American Heart Association, I had heart surgery that saved my life. But not every kid is as lucky as me, which is why we need your help. Just call the number on the screen or go to helpheart.org For only $19 a month, just 63 cents a day, you can help get people trained in CPR, get more hospitals certified in high quality cardiovascular care, and help fund the next medical breakthroughs to help save kids like me. When you donate to the American Heart Association, you're helping save lives like my son. And now my son is happy and healthy, thanks to the support of people like you. When you call with your $19 a month, you'll get this really cool t-shirt as a thank you. Many children die from congenital heart defects. I can't wait to grow up to become a heart surgeon and fix baby's hearts. But until then, I'll keep helping the American Heart Association. So please join me. Just call the number on your screen or go to helpheart.org to become a monthly donor and help save lives. Welcome back. I'm Jack Bradley. Former FBI Director James Comey has been indicted and charged with threatening President Trump. Joining me now to discuss is Jim Trusty, former federal prosecutor and former assistant U.S. attorney. Hey, Jim, thanks for joining us tonight. Now, the former FBI director has been indicted on a social media post showing shells on a beach spelling out 8647, a message calling to get rid of President Trump. Now, 86 has been used as a euphemism for killing someone at times. This and 47 is the 47th president. Here's President Trump on this today. I'm trying to keep the language nice and clear. They don't use that term son of a gun. They use another term. People like Comey have created tremendous danger, I think, for politicians and others. Jim, we had Comey later taking the post down and saying that he didn't mean to invoke violence. What does the DOJ need to prove so that it shows that Comey intended such a threat? Yeah, well, you used the magic word, which is intended. But let me start with a quick caveat, Jack. You know, I personally look at the behavior of Comey as the FBI director, as the former FBI director who was fired by President Trump. And I think he, over the years, has really confused his physical height with moral stature. He is an incredibly narcissistic and arrogant guy. I have really nothing positive to say about him in terms of the damage he did to the FBI. And nothing favorable to say about what he did with this kind of snarky, nasty, thin-skinned moment on the beach where he said he just stumbled across these shells and spelled out 8647. And frankly, if there was a way to take fingerprints off seashells, I bet I know whose fingerprints were on it. All that said, in terms of why I think he deserves a lot of blame and a lot of disrespect for fueling this culture of violence, all that said, this is a tough case. You know, at the end of the day, the best thing the government has going is that he gave kind of inconsistent versions. Oh, I had no idea it was about violence. That kind of begs common sense, particularly for somebody who is in law enforcement to not know what 86 referred to. In that equation, that helps a little. But the Supreme Court had a case that came out a few years ago that was wrestling with the idea of, how do we determine whether a communication is a threat? One answer was, objectively, does essentially a reasonable victim take it as a threat to their life? The other version was more subjective. It's a narrower approach, which is, can the government prove beyond a reasonable doubt the person issuing this threat intended to make that person in fear of their life? And I think there's a very good likelihood, and frankly, that's where the First Amendment kind of kicks in. If it's less than that, it's protected by the First Amendment. I think that, you know, by way of pretrial motions and certainly at trial, if it comes to a trial, that subjective standard's gonna be tough here. You can say a lot of nasty, stupid things, including I'd be okay with the president being killed, which is kind of the implicit message of that, and it would not be a crime under the threatening communication statute. So I think it's gonna be interesting. It's probably gonna make some more case law about what that intent means, but I think it's gonna be uphill. Yeah, I mean, as a public figure, his words certainly carry weight. But let's go into the Supreme Court today. They ruled that Louisiana will have to redraw its congressional map because the state relied on race when it was redrawing its map. The district was made to be a majority black district. Jim, can you break down for us how this map was found unconstitutional? Yeah, it's kind of an evolutionary position of the Supreme Court when you're dealing with discrimination and the remedies for discrimination. And if you go back far enough, you go back to the Bakke opinion, which was an employment law question about whether a white applicant could be discriminated against effectively to make up for racial prejudice over the years before. And at that point, I think it was Justice O'Connor that made some comments about the discrimination in the other direction is no better than the first discrimination. She suggested that as a culture, America was moving to a place where it should stop trying to remedy racial discrimination by using a form of racial discrimination now. I think that notion that comes out of, I think, the 1980s or 90s is really starting to take root. And so this particular case was something where Louisiana was trying to consciously and overtly spread more voting representation to African-Americans by redistricting. And again, they didn't talk about it in terms of economics. They talked about it as fixing past oppression, basically. And this court hearing argument on it took a different angle or at least the conservatives on the court. And I think they're looking at it with the prism of, through the lens of time. And they're saying, we're not gonna keep allowing states or politicians to claim to be fixing discrimination by in fact discriminating, by creating a gerrymandered series of districts that helps one party over another. And so the Voting Rights Act, which was a pretty potent tool for fixing past discriminations has certainly been gutted when it comes to gerrymandering. At least that's how it looks. And this is gonna be interesting to see how it plays out as we get up to the midterms. But certainly seems like racially based gerrymandering is about to die a death in front of the Supreme Court. Now, a lot to talk about at the Supreme Court today. They also heard another case. There's split on whether lower courts block the Trump administration from ending the temporary protected status that's preventing Haitians and Syrians from being deported. Were the lower courts wrong to block that? Yeah, I think so. It's kind of a separation of powers issue. And when you have core executive functions like immigration enforcement, that doesn't really invite involvement by courts, at least not regularly. We've seen a lot of litigation, a lot of lawfare that deals with immigration in the last couple of years. But ultimately immigration enforcement is an executive branch function primarily. In fact, when you talk about immigration judges, those are employees of the executive branch, not the judiciary. So here you've got this situation where our government created a concept called temporary protected status. It's a little like parole in the sense of immigration where you say people that come from certain countries deserve a permission slip to stay here because things are so bad in their home country. It comes out of kind of the same notion as asylum, which was based on political persecution. You stay here because if you went back home, you'd face political persecution. TPS for El Salvador started in the 80s because of their civil war, a very violent civil war with thousands and thousands of deaths. And they said, let's let people stay here as that war kind of winds down. Haiti obviously has been cyclically very violent, very difficult. And same concept as you have people engaging and literally in cannibalism running the streets of Port-au-Prince. So they've got tough times back home. But I think, again, if the executive branch says we're not gonna have this permission slip forever, it's not a government program that we wanna keep forever, then the courts really shouldn't be involved in it. And I think what you're gonna see, again, probably by a split vote, but you're gonna see a Supreme Court that drives down that separation of powers notion and says government programs can die at some point. It doesn't have to be forever that you have TPS status. And barring something truly irregular, it's gonna be the executive branch that figures out which nationalities benefit from TPS. All right. A lot of cover there. Jim Trustee, thank you so much for sharing your legal expertise with us today. Always appreciate it. And a new documentary reveals a chilling reality. China has been waging a silent war against America for years through fentanyl, apps, farmland, ports, and even our power grids. How can we respond? Find out more tonight on China In Focus with Tiffany Meyer at 8 p.m. Eastern. And coming up, candidates took to the stage in California's governor race, clashing over the state's biggest issues, what questions they addressed and what their answers could mean as ballots go out May 4th. As the Trump administration ramps up crackdown on welfare fraud in Minnesota, should there be a similar investigation nationwide? We'll hear from folks here in D.C. when we come back. See it at least once in your lifetime. Shengyun. Get tickets now at shengyun.com Imagine a coffee that cares for your health. Expertly fermented with a 50-enzyme complex to enhance flavor and remove bitterness. Small batch roasted to a decadent medium dark, resulting in a brew that is gentle on digestion, low acid, and up to 90% less caffeine than regular coffee. America's first enzyme-fermented coffee today. That's the sound of your life. Perfectly imperfect. But every time you drive after drinking, the music gets drowned out. Life sounds pretty great. Don't let a buzz ruin it. Buzzed driving is drunk driving. Don't drive buzzed. When they learn something new and you can just see it in their faces, it's such an incredible moment. It's those moments that are my favorite. I can't get a hold of my mom. I'm sure it's nothing. I've called her five times. I'm sure she's fine. Is Grandma okay? Help! I've fallen and I can't get up! Don't worry, ma'am. We're... Hello? Hello, this is Life Alert. Your mother had an emergency and we dispatched paramedics to her home. Oh, my gosh. What happened? She had a fall, but don't worry. Thank you. Life Alert saves a life every 11 minutes. With one simple touch of a button, Life Alert sends help immediately. Whether it's to report a fall, a medical emergency, or an intruder, Life Alert sends first responders fast. For a free brochure, call 800-382-9846. 800-382-9846. Welcome back. I'm Jack Bradley. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell announces no changes to interest rates. This while President Trump's nominee to replace Powell advances in the Senate. NTD correspondent Jason Blair reports. Today, the FOMC decided to leave our policy rate unchanged. The Federal Reserve holds interest rates unchanged at 3.5 to 3.75 percent for the third consecutive policy meeting. We see the current stance of monetary policy as appropriate to promote progress toward our maximum employment and 2 percent inflation goals. Developments in the Middle East are contributing to a high level of uncertainty about the economic outlook. This could be Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's last big meeting at his current position. Powell's term expires on May 15th and President Trump's Fed Chair nominee, Kevin Warsh, is gaining ground in the Senate. The Senate Banking Committee voting on Wednesday, 13 to 11, to advance Warsh. This means that his nomination will head next to a full Senate vote, which will ultimately determine whether he becomes the new Fed Chair. Kevin Warsh's leadership is absolutely essential now at the Federal Reserve than ever before. Members of this committee who vote for Mr. Warsh and help facilitate President Trump's takeover of the central bank will come to regret it. If confirmed, Warsh would go on to replace Powell. Last week, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro announced an end to a federal investigation into Powell and his handling of central bank renovations, referring the matter to the inspector general. Pirro also added, quote, I will not hesitate to restart a criminal investigation should the facts warrant doing so. The day after, President Trump also said that another investigation is not out of the question. You know, it's not dropped. They're looking into the whole thing about the garage. What I want to look at is how can a building that I could have done for $25 million cost $4 billion? That's a big thing, and he was in charge. Reporting in Washington, D.C., Jason Blair, NTD News. California's race for governor is heating up. Several leading candidates facing off in a statewide debate, laying out competing visions on key issues ahead of the June primary. NTD's Christina Corona spoke with several candidates and has more from last night's debate in Southern California. With the June primary just weeks away, eight candidates in California's governor's race took the stage Tuesday night in Claremont, facing off on some of the state's biggest issues. Several candidates met for a 90-minute debate broadcast across CBS stations, which opened with discussion of how residents can achieve the California dream. With my plan to make our state Cal-affordable, $3 gas, cut your electric bills in half, your first $100,000 tax-free, and especially for young people, a home you can afford to buy. I'm the only candidate on this stage who has pledged to suspend and then reform the gas tax. It is the most regressive tax in California. Working people, rural people are spending three times as much maintaining our roads as wealthier EV owners. We need to change that. Healthcare quickly emerged as a key focus, with candidates offering competing plans to lower costs. Healthcare is a right for every Californian, and long-term, the only way we can afford that is a single-payer healthcare system. On day one, I will call a special election to close a corporate real estate tax loophole worth $22 billion to the state of California every year so that we can close that budget shortfall. Steve Hilton, who is currently leading the race, told NTD how he'd tackle homelessness. And here's the plan that I would implement as governor. Number one, we have to enforce the law. It is illegal to live and camp on the streets. It's always been illegal. Number two is drug and alcohol treatment, and it cannot be a choice. We have to get people clean and sober. That's the only way they can get their lives back on track. And number three is mental health provision. You have to provide the mental health care that we need. The cost of living was another key issue, including vehicle registration fees in California, which is among the highest in the nation, with some drivers paying hundreds of dollars a year. Candidates outlined plans to bring those costs down. I'm willing to look at everything, pausing gas taxes, making ways to reduce what they pay for registration, making sure we improve our roads. But I think at the end of the day, we need more revenue, and that cannot come from working people and middle-class people. That's got to come from the billionaires in this state. So because California is better than every state in the country, we will have a $25 flat fee registration for whatever it is you're registering, your vehicle, your boat, your motorhome, your car, your motorcycle, I don't care what it is, $25 flat fee. But I do think that it's appropriate to ask those who drive vehicles to chip in something specifically toward the cost of maintaining roads and bridges. As the race continues, mail-in ballots are expected to go out in early May. Reporting from the city of Claremont, Christina Corona, NTD News. As the Trump administration ramps up its crackdown on welfare fraud in Minnesota, would people like to see a similar investigation happen nationwide? NTD's Sam Wong was out on the National Mall in D.C. to hear from the people. What do you think about the fact that this welfare fraud situation in Minnesota is making national headlines? I think it's really important. It needs to be exposed. I think it not only needs to be exposed, but we need to have accountability because if it's happening there, then it's probably happening in lots of other blue states. It's stark to me that it takes so much time to actually uncover this, but then it's been covered up for so long as well. I just moved my stepmother from Minnesota to the state of Washington, and so I can see what's going on around Minnesota, but it's not so different in Washington state. I'm just kind of like thinking, you know, I mean, is there some involvement from our local government? I mean, is someone somewhere along the line, you know, in collusion? I mean, you've got your inspector general's office. I mean, they're supposed to be keeping watch over those type of things and, you know, making those investigations. So, again, somewhere along the line, somebody has dropped the ball. Do you think the Trump administration deserves some credit for bringing this issue up to national attention? I don't think we have any exposure of what we've been witnessing or not seeing, you know, for decades. I thank God for Trump because he's exposed so much of what we haven't seen. I'm not faulting them, you know, for bringing it. I mean, yeah, those are the kind of issues that need to be brought to the forefront, you know, whether it's local government doing it or federal government. But, yeah, I don't look at it as anything terrible. I mean, it's a good thing. I think he's the first president that's willing to take fiscal responsibility and make those accountable. While the investigation is happening right now, primarily zooming in on Minnesota, would you like to see similar investigation happening elsewhere? Definitely. I mean, that's, again, you know, you have those inspector general's offices and that's what they should be doing, investigating those things. So I'm sure they're probably saying they're overwhelmed. But, you know, hey, they need to be investigated for sure. I think the accountability has to happen sooner than later because then it will prevent other states from the same kind of fraud. I mean, these are taxpayer dollars. They should be sacred. And that's all we have for you tonight on the Capitol Report. For round-the-clock original news coverage, visit us at ntd.com slash live or download our NTD app. From the nation's capital, I'm Jack Bradley. Have a nice evening. We'll see you right back here tomorrow.