The MeidasTouch Podcast - GOP Leaders Lose It Fast as They Get Cross Examined at Hearing

Episode Date: September 11, 2025

MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on GOP Leaders like James Comer and Jim Jordan getting cross-examined by Democrats like Jamie Raskin and Moskowitz and Frost and Republicans quickly fold. Save 30% on your first month of subscription by going to https://dosedaily.co/MEIDAS or entering MEIDAS at checkout. Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ontario, the wait is over. The gold standard of online casinos has arrived. Golden Nugget Online Casino is live. Bringing Vegas-style excitement and a world-class gaming experience right to your fingertips. Whether you're a seasoned player or just starting, signing up is fast and simple. And in just a few clicks, you can have access to our exclusive library of the best slots and top-tier table games. Make the most of your downtime with unbeatable promotions and jackpots that can turn any mundane moment into a golden, opportunity at Golden Nugget Online Casino. Take a spin on the slots, challenge yourself at the

tables, or join a live dealer game to feel the thrill of real-time action, all from the comfort of your own devices. Why settle for less when you can go for the gold at Golden Nugget Online Casino. Gambling problem call connects Ontario 1866531-260. 19 and over, physically present in Ontario. Eligibility restrictions apply. See Golden Nuggett Casino.com for details. Please play responsibly. Reading, playing, learning. Stellist lenses do more than just correct your child's vision. They slow down the progression of myopia. So your child can continue to discover all the world has to offer through their own eyes.

Light the path to a brighter future with stellus lenses for myopia control. Learn more at SLOR.com. And ask your family eye care professional for SLR Stellist lenses at your child's next visit. Republican Congress members did not see this coming. Democratic members of Congress were ready to fight and to call out the MAGA Republican hypocrisy in the House of Representatives where being led by MAGA Mike, these MAGA Republicans in the House are nothing more than Donald Trump's stooges, and they are working with Donald Trump to cover up a child, sex, petto, trafficking.

ring and cover up the Epstein files, cover up all of Donald Trump's criminality, and put our country into the authoritarian state that it is today. Democratic Congress member Jared Moskowitz came ready to fight, and he called out the MAGA Republicans for so foolishly denying and lying and saying, oh, that Donald Trump's signature was not on the birthday card to Jeffrey. Epstein, that it was some massive forgery. So Moskowitz says, well, why don't we appoint James Comer and we could retain a handwriting expert and we'll find out who forged that signature because it's a pretty big deal that someone 20 years ago knew how to go back into the future and create a forgery knowing Trump would switch from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party and

then become a president. And then they figured out how to slip it into the Epstein birthday book when Trump was close friends with Epstein and said he was a great guy. When all of the other letters in the book were sent by the people in that birthday book, Moskowitz says it better than me. Watch Moskowitz in action. Let's play it. I'm here to defend him as by far the best investigator of all time in the capital, which is exactly why all of his investigations, which have used, you know, Chinese informants that were prosecuted and Russian disinformation, people from prison. I mean, the main thing he was tasked with last year, right, which was the Biden impeachment, that, we had a vote.

Oh, no, we never had a vote on that because, of course, he didn't find any evidence. So this morning, our close personal friend, Mr. Comer said that he was not going to look into the letter or the doodle. the president's doodle. He's a decent doodler, by the way. So he wasn't going to look into whether the signature was a forgery. And I'm concerned about that because this is the president of the United States. If there are forgeries or foragers out there, I think we should investigate it. And in fact, this document is 22 years old. So you're telling me, someone 22 years ago went back to the future and forged his signature when he was a Democrat. And somehow this person was Nostradamus, knew he would become a Republican, become president

22 years later. So listen, I submit to you that we can solve this problem for the American people. You don't have to take my word for it. You don't have to take our dear personal friend, Mr. Comer's word for it. Let's bring in a signature expert. You guys pick the witnesses. Bring in your signature experts, swear them under oaths. And let's have the signature examined.

Is it his or it is not his? We don't have to play games or, you know, the president says it's not his. We say it's him. No, no. Let's bring in a signature expert, a referee, because we can't agree on anything, even when it's right in our face, of whether that is indeed the president's signature or if it's a forgery, we should immediately open up an investigation into this forgery. Then you had Democratic Congresswoman Jacobs from San Diego. She called out Maga's obsession with gender affirming care, that that's all they talk about, gender affirming care.

And Congresswoman Jacob says a lot of people in Congress do gender affirming care. If you've done Botox or if you've done boob jobs or if you've done any other type of surgeries like that, that's gender affirming care. to which Nancy Mace, for reasons that you may want to speculate one way or the other, I don't know, she gets livid and she starts to scream at Democratic Congresswoman Jacobs. Watch this. I would just like to point out that I think it's very interesting that my colleague from South Carolina is so obsessed with the issue of trans people using horrible slurs to talk about them when many people in this body have received gender affirming care.

Filler is gender affirming care. Boob jobs is gender affirming care. Botox is gender affirming care. Lots of my colleagues have received gender affirming care. Let me be clear, I think everyone should have access to the gender affirming care that they need. And I think we should respect everybody in this country. With that, I yield back. The gentle.

Ridiculous. You are absolutely ridiculous. The lady is not recognized. The house will be in order. the gentlelady and the gentleman will suspend the house be in order okay i got to show you this one also democratic congress member jared moskowitz on mike johnson saying that donald trump was an fbi i informant uh who busted geoffrey epstein back in 2007 2008 and trump was the hero informant and moskowitz says you know you're the speaker of the house that's a pretty big position you're

the number three in line to the presidency, and you are just saying that Donald Trump was an FBI informant, and then you say you misspoke? How would you misspeak? What word did you mean to say versus informant? Undercover op, what did you mean to say? Here, play this clip of Moskowitz. You know, just following up on a little bit of what the ranking member was discussing, there was a significant event this week in which this committee has jurisdiction over. The Speaker of the House, the third highest-ranking U.S. official,

third in line to be the president, looked into the TV cameras and told us that the current president of the United States was an FBI informant. I consider that to be gigantic news, and I'm just curious. Have we reached out to the FBI to Cash Patel to confirm whether the president was at any time an FBI informant? I only say that because the Speaker of the House obviously gets significant briefings.

He gets briefings that we do not get as regular members. And so I think this is something that we need to hear definitively before Cash Patel comes, we should clear up maybe that we should send a letter to him to find out if the president was an informant. And if he was an informant, is that because he was working with the FBI after he was hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein? Did he turn because he got caught with Jeffrey Epstein? You know, when you're an FBI informant, there are lots of questions about how you became an FBI informant. And then how long was he an FBI informant? When did his service to the FBI stop, you know, being a member of the deep state? When did he stop doing that? I mean, look, if a regular

member had said this, I would discount it. But the speaker of the house is the one who said it. And then he said afterwards, well, I may have misspoke. Well, what was his misspeak? Instead of informant, did he mean, agent? I mean, what is the misspeak for informant? I mean, I don't know another word that we use when we're describing an FBI agent or FBI informant or undercover. I mean, what was the misspeak here? And if he was lying then, is he lying now. I'm just confused. Perhaps maybe the speaker should come to our committee and tell us what he meant when he said that. It's just, it's an order. I'm still speaking. Mr. Chairman. I'm still speaking. Is there a bill or an amendment on the floor? I strike the last word. I'm

allowed to finish. Gentlemen, then we have Congress member Frost, I think just completely exposing this Maga Republican charade right here. And particularly Congress member Higgins, radical MAGA guy. And Congress member Frost is like, okay, so I'm just trying to understand this. Why wouldn't you then take the National Guard into your state? You have much higher crime than these blue cities and blue state. Why don't you do the National Guard to which Higgan goes, that's my state. That's mine.

That's mine. And then Frost is like, yeah, you're just. Just a lapdog for Donald Trump. Can you admit that? And then Higgins is like, take his words down. Take his words down. He's attacked me personally. Here, play this clip.

No, I just have a question for my colleague from the state of Louisiana. Because I'm curious as to where your bill is. Louisiana is the state with the second highest rate of deaths in this nation. You are more likely to be shot standing on a random street in your state than you are in Washington, D.C. So my question is, where's your bill for the occupation of the state of Louisiana to keep your people safe if you're at all sincere in this? Gentleman, yield for an answer. I yield for an answer. I support state rights.

I'm a constitutionalist. But not D.C.? Stand by. As a constitutionalist, I support my state, my sovereign state's legislature, which is doing everything it can to push back upon the crime rate of the Democrat-controlled cities. I'll take my time back. I'll take my time back. If you remove the crime, stats of the world, that's the rules. I'll take my time back.

I'll take my time back. So you only invoke the rules when other people are speaking, not when you're speaking. Okay. I agree with you. Look, I'm for state sovereignty. So what do you think about California? Well, California is not where I live. You're asking about my state.

You only care and I'll reclaim my time. I'll reclaim my time. I'll reclaim my time. I'll reclaim my time. I will reclaim my time. The gentleman will stop speaking. I will reclaim my time. You're more likely to be shot standing in a random street in your state.

This is Mr. Frost time than anywhere in Washington, D.C. And you're here because your lap dogs to the President of the United States, who during the election last year, we said time and time again, I reclaimed my time. Mr. Chairman. All right. Hold on. My colleague just called me a lap dog for the president. in the United States. I move for his words to be taken down. A second.

We'll stand in, uh, uh, recess for a second here. We will suspend to see about taking the words down. Did you know that the liver is the second largest organ in your body? It's responsible for over 500 functions in your body, but for some reason, liver health doesn't always get the attention that it deserves. Dose for your liver was formulated to cleanse your liver of unwanted elements, aid digestion, and maintain your body's filter. Why does this matter? Well, your liver is the second largest organ in your body and is responsible for over 500 functions in your body. It acts as your body's filter, flushing out unwanted elements and breaking down what you consume into essential nutrients. The liver produces and regulates cholesterol, stores vitamins and minerals,

and impacts digestive and metabolic health amongst many other things. Doses science-backed formula promotes liver function, aids digestion, eases bloating, and even boosts energy levels. Clinical results. In a double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial, dose for your liver lowered liver enzyme levels by 50% and over 86% of participants. Stick with dose and feel the incredible benefits over time with more energy, better digestion, reduce bloating, healthier liver enzyme function,

reduction of brain fog and better sleep. One dose for your liver shot is equivalent to 17 shots of turmeric juice. Dose is gluten-free, dairy-free, sugar-free, and vegan. Save 30% on your first month of subscription by going to dose-daily.com slash mitus or entering midas at checkout. That's D-O-S-E-D-A-I-L-Y dot CO slash mitis for 30% off your first month's subscription. Then you had Nancy Mace outside the Capitol building. What she was doing is what we saw all the MAGA extremists do yesterday

without even knowing who the shooter was, without knowing what happened. The same thing they did in Butler, Pennsylvania, where it turned out it was a MAGA guy, a Trump supporter, was the person who did the assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania. But they said, oh, it's Democrats, it's Democrats, did it. But it was a Republican. So you have all these. Republicans and Donald Trump gave a speech from the Oval Office to and here's Nancy Mace saying

the Democrats did this. It's their fault. What do you mean it's there? What are you talking about? And what a heinous thing to just make up like that. So then I got to give credit to reporter Ryan nobles. He goes, okay, so in that case, the Republican who killed the former Speaker of the House in Minnesota and her husband was that right there are Republicans to blame? And she's like, We're not talking about that. We're just talking about what I want to talk about. Seriously, Nancy? Seriously?

Here, play this clip. I'm going to say this. Democrats own what happened today. I am devastated. My kids have called panicking. They probably all the kids of every conservative in the country called panicking. Just because you speak your mind on an issue doesn't mean you get shot. By that logic, do Republicans own the shooting of the two Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota?

political isn't this is a isn't this on both sides are you kidding me no i'm asking we don't know what condition charlie kirk is in right now some raging leftist lunatic put a bullet through his neck and you want to talk about republicans right now no no i'm asking you you said the democrats have to but i'm asking democrats own this but isn't there a problem with political violence across the spectrum yeah we're talking about charlie kirk right now that's the subject of this that we're talking about right now democrats own this 100

Then speaking of seriously moments, you have Lauren Bobert right here complaining that there were National Guard around the Capitol building after the January 6th insurrection, even though they were not sent to stop the insurrection, but afterwards, and she complains about that, here play this clip. And as far as having an issue, taking issue with the National Guard having a temporary presence to get your city, this city, our nation. beautiful capital under control and safe. I didn't hear any problems from Washington, D.C. residents or my colleagues on the other side of the aisle when 20,000 National Guards came in and surrounded the Capitol building and prohibited your First Amendment rights

to petition your government with your grievances. I didn't see an uprising there. We weren't happy about the fences and the hundreds of miles of, of, of, of, of, of, barbed wire surrounding our nation's capital and armed national guard, tens of thousands of them, keeping you out of the people's house. But now they're here to help and keep you safe. And that's somehow an issue. I'm still trying to remember. Like, who was in office still when January 6 took place? Like, who was still there? Whose FBI was it that worked there? Who's National Guard?

Who were? Who was there? I forget to know. It was Donald Trump. Oh, got it, got it, got it. Congress member Frost, spitting facts here again. Let's play it. Oh, so you're going to move forward. So you'll work at opposing the president's request. I know how the system works, and I know that it requires 60 votes in the Senate to change government funding, and we're not going to get 60 votes to do anything.

So we're going to have a CR. But again, how are you going to help the 5600 people? You say that this is not a tool. I'll reclaim my time. I'll reclaim my how are we going to help them by fighting to ensure that the president and your party doesn't further erode the little services that we have in this country. We need

housing, not handcuffs. We have a housing crisis in this country. Every time the rent goes up 100 bucks, homelessness goes up 9%. Let me say it one more time. Every time the rent goes up 100 bucks, homelessness goes up 9%. Homelessness

is a housing problem. And you have no solutions for us here. You're talking about, again, trying to hide a problem rather than fix a problem. It is both cheaper and less challenging for us as a nation to keep people house than, yes, to help them when they're on the streets. We need to help people when they're on the streets, but we need to fund rental assistance, transitional housing, permanent supporter housing, shelters, all this suite of services that help us keep our people on top of a certain line. Because it does cost more, and it is harder, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. And the president that you follow and that you, you know, are lost.

wants to make a historic cut to the few services that we have so we can keep people from off the streets. And I think it's despicable. And you come here and try to act like there's a problem with us because we have a problem with you working to criminalize homelessness. People see beyond that. It's already criminal. The D.C. City police are not enforcing it. So I don't, I mean, what do you want us to do? The tool you want to get federal law enforcement is allow them to go and arrest people who are sleeping on the streets because they have nowhere else to sleep. We shouldn't be criminalizing homeless people

for the failures of government. Let's step up. Let's try to work together and ensure that we eradicate homelessness and fix this housing crisis. I yield back. Congress member Eric Swalwell, let's play it. I don't understand the logic here

that because you think the Democrats did nothing on the Epstein files in the Biden administration, that to own the libs, you now have license to leave sexual assault victims, unprotected, it's just crazy that you hate the Democrats so much that you would let the most notorious child sex trafficker and the people connected to him not be held accountable because you want to own the lips. Let's just take you at your word. Okay, the Democrats did

nothing. So you're going to do nothing is what you were telling me. The Democrats, of course, did not do nothing. Congress member Goldman, let's play it. Donald Trump is in the Epstein files. So now all of a sudden, the Republicans who were so aggressively intent on releasing the Epstein files because they were going to be a huge explosive story about Democrats involved with Jeffrey Epstein are quiet. So the irony of these Republicans accusing the Democrats now of only, being interested in this is for political purposes is so thick that it is almost sucking us into the quicksand. But let's go a step further. Let's go a step further. Because now the cover-up

is getting so deep and so intense that this committee, which has oversight over the Department of Justice, and would ordinarily be the one that is doing this investigation, is running away from it. Why? Because Chairman Comer is the useful idiot who will do the cover-up for Donald Trump. And what does that mean? Oh, well, now there is an oversight investigation, but you know what they're not asking for? Those kind of comments, and he knows that. Gentlemen, gentlemen's recognized. Now, the oversight committee is doing an investigation, but you know what they're not asking for? you know what you did not put in the rule to confirm that investigation we're not asking for the documents that were used to open the investigation who provided the information they're not asking for witness statements victim witness statements they're not asking for recordings that may exist they're not asking for any of the evidence that might include donald trump

And rather than acknowledge that you're just trying to cover up for Donald Trump's knowledge and involvement in the Jeffrey Epstein scheme, you're trying to accuse us of being interested. Congresswoman, I'm sorry, let's play it. How can the Trump administration literally steal $1 billion from D.C. without any justification or resource? Imagine if this were Phoenix or Los Angeles or Las Vegas or Dallas. I'm the former vice mayor of Phoenix, Arizona, the fifth largest city in the country. And I can tell you that a $1 billion withholding of budget from a city government has massive implications. It should be no different for Washington, D.C. While this is the city's capital, it is also home to hundreds of thousands of hardworking people.

What might actually have an impact on keeping people safe and healthy in our nation's capital? That would be the $1 billion of withheld funding for critical programs that keep this city running. Funds that are D.C.'s, not the federal government's money. But Donald Trump obviously believes that this city is his personal playground. He has deployed the U.S. military to its streets because he wants to feel powerful. because he is a dictator and he wants to deflect from the fact that the biggest criminal in this city is himself sitting and occupying the White House at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. My colleagues have mentioned D.C.'s crime rate is at a 30-year low.

So what does Trump have our nation's service members, many of whom who've been taken from their jobs, from their families as reservists? What are they doing here in Washington, D.C.? He has them picking up trash, sitting around board, directing traffic. I've seen this firsthand with my own eyes. It's been mentioned. The way it sounds from my colleagues, they're more worried about their own personal safety here. I can tell you I feel very safe here walking around my Navy Yard neighborhood. But our president is more interested in photo ops and seeming like a tough, strong man than he is about spending government resources on the programs and policies that keep us safe, whether that's in.

investing in counter-narcotics programs or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. He has literally redirected counter-terrorism and human trafficking resources away from their intended purpose and toward non-violent immigration offenses. And Senator Ruben Gallego, powerful words. He's a military veteran, and he is pissed that Ashley Babbitt, an insurrectionist, is going to be given full honors. in a funeral when she was an insurrectionist. He's like, she's a traitor, is what he says. Here, play this clip.

Today, we had a chance to stand with the brave men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice for this country in uniform. Ashley Babbitt is not that. She is a traitor. She will be a traitor. And she died a traitor and let the halls remember that here. My colleague from the across the aisle refused to do that. Instead, he stands with the traitors of January 6th.

He's trying to say that an insurrectionist who broke into the capital with a knife. So it's the same honor as the men and women who gave their lives for this country on the battlefield. It doesn't matter how many times she went. It doesn't matter how many times she was deployed. Benedict Dart was one of the best generals we had until he betrayed us during the American Revolutionary War. He was still a traitor. Ashley Babbitt is a traitor. Ashley Babbitt's actions on January 6 are about as dishonorable as it gets. Gamed her honors, undermines the Constitution, and it undermines the real sacrifice of millions of veterans who defend our country. My colleague just set a dangerous precedent today. He is standing with the traders of

January 6th. You do not deserve that America. The veterans of this country do not deserve that. There you have it, folks. Let me know what you think. Hit subscribe. Let's get to 6 million subscribers. And thanks for watching. Want to stay plugged in? Become a subscribers for our substack at Midasplus.com. You'll get daily recaps from Ron Filipkowski, add three episodes of our podcast, and more exclusive content only available at Midasplus.com. You know,