'No, No, No!' - Trump Republican Destroys Liberal Host As Interview Explodes

Hey ladies and gentlemen, this is Carmine Sabia for Explain America

What do you get when you get a journalist who used to work for a democrat president

and a pro-Trump republican on the same stage? You get chaos. Before we get started, please make sure

you like, comment, share, and subscribe. Those little things really help us out and they help

our channel continue to grow. J.D. Vance, the Ohio senator, was talking to George Stephanopoulos

and George Stephanopoulos presents him with a hypothetical question and gets the answer

from J.D. Vance, but he tricks him into this answer basically. And then before J.D. Vance

can explain the answer, Stephanopoulos summarizes the answer in a way that he perceives it

and then ends the interview and cuts him off. It was complete chaos. But what I want Republicans, if you're watching this, J.D. Vance is young

Republicans, if you're watching this, and I know a lot of you do, a lot of elected

representatives do watch this and I appreciate that, here's some advice. Stop believing the

people in the media are your friends. Stop believing that they're honest brokers of the

truth because they're not. They're trying to get you. They're trying to create sound bites

so that your opponents can use them against you. That is their job. They are no longer a media

They're no longer the fourth estate. They are propagandists for the Democrat party. You have

to understand and accept that and then act accordingly. Don't allow them to trap you

into a question like this. This was a rookie mistake, Senator Vance, and I pray you learn

from it. I want you guys to watch this interview and let me know what you think. So please again

like, comment, share, and subscribe. It really helps us out, helps our channel continue to grow

I'm Carmine Sabia for Explain America. We love you guys. God bless you. Take care, everybody

Because you will get taken to court and when the courts stop you, stand before the country

like Andrew Jackson did and say the Chief Justice has made his ruling, now let him enforce it

Fire everyone in the government, then defy the Supreme Court. You think it's okay for

the President to defy the Supreme Court? No, no, George. I did not say fire everyone in the

government. I said replace the mid-level bureaucrats with people who are responsive

to the administration's agenda. Every civil servant in the administrative state. No, George

I said the mid-level bureaucrats and one of the problems that we have in this government. You said

every civil servant in the administrative state. Actually, who don't, who, let me finish the

answer, George. You asked the question. We have a major problem here with administrators and

bureaucrats in the government who don't respond to the elected branches. Let's just give one very

real world example of this. In 2019, Donald Trump, having defeated ISIS, said that we should redeploy

our troops in Syria and Jordan out of the region. You had multiple members of the Defense Department

bureaucracy who fought him on that. So what happened? We have people who are sitting ducks

in the Levant right now, three of whom just got killed because the bureaucrats aren't listening to

the political branches. That's a fundamental component of our government, George, that whoever

is in charge, agree or disagree with him, you have to follow the rules. If those people aren't

following the rules, then of course you've got to fire them. And of course the President has to be

able to run the government as he thinks he should. That's the way the Constitution works. It has been

thwarted too much by the way our bureaucracy has worked over the past 15 years. The Constitution

also says the President must abide by legitimate Supreme Court rulings, doesn't it? The Constitution says that the Supreme Court can make rulings, but if the Supreme Court

and look, I hope that they would not do this, but if the Supreme Court said

the President of the United States can't fire a general, that would be an illegitimate ruling

and the President has to have Article II prerogative under the Constitution to actually

run the military as he sees fit. This is just basic constitutional legitimacy. You're talking

about a hypothetical where the Supreme Court tries to run the military. I don't think that's

going to happen, George, but of course if it did, the President would have to respond to it

There are multiple examples throughout American history of the President doing just that. You didn't say military in your answer, and you've made it very clear you believe the

President can defy the Supreme Court. Senator, thanks for your time this morning. No, no, no, George

Roundtable's up next. We'll be right back