#140 Eli Crane & Tim Burchett - Two Things All Americans Want: Accountability and Transparency

The government's handling of the investigation into assassination attempts on former President Trump has faced scrutiny for being politicized, with concerns that experienced individuals have been excluded from the investigative committee. Additionally, the Secret Service has been criticized for its lack of innovation and preparedness in protecting Trump.

The government's handling of investigating the assassination attempts on Trump has been highly politicized, with members of Congress with relevant expertise being excluded from the investigative committee.

Eli Crane and Tim Burchett express concerns about the politicization of the investigation into assassination attempts on Trump. They point out that the committee has been assembled in a way that prioritizes political considerations over expertise. For example, Eli Crane, a former military sniper who volunteered for the assassination task force, was not selected, which he interprets as a political decision influenced by his status as an outsider.

The committee investigating the assassination attempts was assembled in a way that prioritized political considerations over selecting the most qualified members, such as excluding experienced former military snipers like Eli Crane who volunteered to serve on the committee.

Crane’s exclusion from the investigative committee is seen as indicative of how positions in Washington are often assigned based on influence and fundraising abilities rather than relevant expertise. This has led to a lack of confidence in the government's ability to thoroughly investigate and questions about whether findings will be fully transparent to the public.

There are concerns that the findings and conclusions of the government's investigation will be politically motivated and not fully transparent to the public.

Crane expresses doubt that there will be accountability for the assassination attempts without Trump in office, and he is skeptical that the full truth will be revealed to the public. He likens the situation to the secrecy surrounding the Kennedy files and has conducted a parallel "round table" with Eric Prince and Dan Bongino to uncover information due to distrust in the government's transparency.

The Secret Service has displayed a lack of innovation and preparedness in their protection of high-profile figures like Trump.

The Secret Service has been slow to adopt basic security measures like equipping their agents with weapon slings, and has also been resistant to upgrading their firearms and other equipment to match potential threats.

Eli Crane criticizes the Secret Service for adhering to historical norms instead of assessing the current threat level to Trump, whom h ...

The influence of money and special interests has deeply permeated Congress, with Kaya Henderson, Tim Burchett, Eli Crane, and others illustrating how a corrupt system has developed, demanding that members raise substantial funds to maintain their positions and gain powerful committee assignments.

The influence of money and special interests has created a corrupt system in Congress where members must raise large sums of money to maintain their positions and gain powerful committee assignments.

Tim Burchett stresses the corrupt nature of the system that obliges members of Congress to engage heavily in fundraising. This fundraising often occurs away from Congress, such as at the Capitol Hill Club, to avoid the technicalities of making fundraising calls from the office. Committee chair positions are deemed transactional, where individuals can rise to such roles through personal financial contributions. Burchett describes the system as undermined by fundraising necessities, leaving those not wealthy at a disadvantage. His personal reluctance to become a committee chairman stems from the expectations and pressures that cradle the role, such as raising funds.

Members of Congress are expected to raise significant funds for their party's leadership in order to be appointed to key committee positions, creating an environment where loyalty to the party leadership is prioritized over serving constituents.

Fundraising is directly linked to committee selections and advancement within Congress, implying members’ loyalty and subservience to party leadership take precedence. Such an environment can result in a focus on reelection and adherence to party lines rather than addressing actual issues. Tim Burchett candidly remarks that the priority in Washington, D.C., is reelection, not what is best for the country.

According to Burchett, these fundraising obligations extend to significant dues expected to stay in good standing, as he mentions being expected to pay $250,000 to retain his committee involvement. This pressure trickles down, with Eli Crane citing an instance where a $150,000 check was necessary to be considered for a certain committee.

This money-driven system incentivizes members of Congress to compromise their principles and values in order to stay in power and advance their careers, rather than acting in the best interests of the American people.

Burchett's statement that the Founding Fathers intended for individuals to serve and then return to their previous lives, rather than become career politicians, implies a deviation from the original purpose of public service. The incentives created by financial and political pressures can lead members of Congress to support legislation not aligned with their principles or constituents' interests, as Burchett suggests when mentioning bills loaded with unrelated measures.

Eli Crane points out that veteran members of Congress often adopt a military-like chain of command that prioritizes the will of House leadership over that of the constituents. This can lead to strategies to achieve positions like subcommittee chairmanships at the cost of representing voters' interests faithfully. Meanwhile, Shawn Ryan and Tim Burchett discuss perks that come with office, potentially influencing politicians. Burchett also raises concerns about how praise and positive reinforcement from lobbyists and the public can inflate politicians' egos and affect their decisions and behaviors.

The session reveals that politicians have faced dark consequences, such as suicide, ruined marriages, or ...

Shawn Ryan, Tim Burchett, and Eli Crane discuss the growing problem of the partisan divide in the United States government, suggesting that it hampers effective governance and does not serve the American people well.

The deep partisan divide in Congress has prevented effective governance and led to a dysfunctional political system.

The unwillingness of members from both parties to compromise or work across the aisle

Tim Burchett argues that the division is intentional and keeps the "big boys," or party leaders, in power. He suggests that there's a possible private unity between the leaders of both parties which starkly contrasts their public opposition. Burchett explains that the conduct of political leaders from both sides is more about attacking each other to secure reelection rather than cooperating to solve the nation's problems.

The polarization of the electorate and the demonization of the opposing party by political leaders

Burchett refers to individuals leaving their regions for places like Tennessee, dubbing them as "refugees" fleeing from what he describes as a "corrupt far left machine." This migration, as Sean Ryan mentions, is part of a larger trend where red states are becoming redder and blue states bluer, which highlights a growing self-segregation by political affiliation, further deepening the national divide.

Eli Crane discusses his admiration for the America First movement, saying it represents the kind of movement that aims to put Americans first, irrespective of their political affiliation. He infers that the current political system fails to prioritize American citizens.

Following the attempts on Trump, there's a noted bipartisan fear for elected officials' safety, reflecting the atmosphere of animosity created by the political divide. Crane also alludes to the poli ...

The dialogue surrounding the balance of power between state governments and the federal government has taken center stage in American politics, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The increasing importance of strong state governments as a counterbalance to federal overreach

Throughout the pandemic, the role of state governments has come to the forefront. Eli Crane points out that having a strong state government has proven to be important post-COVID as people have sought more freedom. The movement of individuals from states with more restrictions to those with fewer underscores the value people place on the flexibility offered by certain state governments.

Burchett advocates for reducing the size of the federal government by dismantling departments like the Department of Education and directing funds straight to the states, reinforcing the idea that local decision-making should trump distant federal bureaucracy. This sentiment is reflected in the actions of Republican governors, who have, at times, provided their citizens with more freedom by resisting federal mandates. Such actions demonstrate the potential for state-level policymaking to be a counterbalance to what some see as federal overreach.

Governors in Republican-led states provide freedom and flexibility

For example, governors in Republican-led states resisted federal mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic, allowing their citizens to experience less restriction. This resistance to federal government decisions has been reflected in other areas as well, such as border security. Sean Ryan discusses instances where states took action independently of federal direction or acted together against perceived federal overreach, such as sending the National Guard to the Texan border.

Furthermore, Crane highlights the measures taken by the Texas governor, who erected barriers and C ...