You
The Republican Party is bigger, stronger, more vibrant, and more united than ever, ever, ever before.
Because American people are desperate for change. They're desperate for us to save this country.
The President Donald J Trump and J.D.
Vance is the Republican nominee for President and Vice President of the United States.
Hello and welcome to Washington Post Live. I'm Michael Shearer National Political Reporter for the Washington Post.
My guest today is
Is Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson, who I believe is joining us from Milwaukee,
site of the 2024 Republican Convention. Welcome to Washington Post Live, Senator.
Oh, Mike, I hope you're doing well.
I am doing well. I didn't get to travel because of other news for this event,
but it seems like a pretty enthusiastic, unified Republican party, very different
what I remember covering in 2016. I want to just start. If you could just give us impressions
of what you've witnessed over the last couple of days at the party's convention.
First of all, a great deal of enthusiasm. I certainly appreciate being the home state
senator and hosting people, all the delegations from all around the country. I know they're
expected to three foot snowdrifts, but they've been incredibly impressed with Milwaukee. It's
a beautiful city on the lakefront, but what they've been primarily impressed with is how
just genuinely nice and decent Wisconsinites are. So again, on a bipartisan basis, I know Mayor
Johnson, Governor Evers, myself, we all wanted this to be success. I think it will be. I think
people leave Milwaukee and Wisconsin with a very favorable impression, and that's a very good thing.
Of course, we were walking into the convention after a pretty dark weekend, the awful attempted
assassination of former President Trump. How do you think that has changed the race, if at all,
going forward? Well, in terms of the Republican party, I mean, the policies that are so destructive
to America, that's certainly unifying. I think after the debate that further unified the Republican
party, realizing we can't let America re-elect the President Biden. And of course, the failed
assassination attempt, that's a sealed deal. I mean, we are a united party. I think evidence
by the fact that Nikki Haley came in, gave great speech, particularly like the Governor Sanders
speech, because this is an individual who worked closely with President Trump, knows him well,
and was able to talk about her experience, what a wonderful human being President Trump is kind
and gracious and thoughtful. So I thought that was important as well. But bottom line is,
I think the assassination attempt, anybody, anybody's life would be changed and changed forever,
recognizing that you now have a new lease on life. And maybe God helped create that moment,
gave you a purpose, a mission to complete. And I think there's evidence by the fact that President
Trump said he had a barn-bearing speech. I'm sure he did. It would have been, you know,
the crowd would have loved it. But he sent that speech aside, and he wants to talk about unity.
The fact that President Biden, from the Oval Office, talked about unity and healing,
I think that's a good thing. I've been for the last couple of years,
saying as much of the debt invested as a threat to this country, the greatest threat
right now is the fact that we are horribly divided nation, but we're not naturally divided
people. And the big things in life, safety, security, opportunity so we can provide for our
families. The fact that we love this country, this is what Americans share. These are the big
things in life. We shouldn't be divided. So don't allow politicians, political groups,
identity politics, critical race theory. Don't let that divide us.
You had a bit of a speech mix up yourself on Monday. I think the wrong speech was loaded into the
teleprompter. The speech you delivered include a line about how Democrats are clear and present
danger. What was the message you would have ever heard? First of all, that is incorrect.
I had an earlier version, early draft left out, you know, my my addressing the shooting and talking
about how we must heal and unify this nation. But I talked about the Democrat agenda and policies
were clear and present danger. I did not say Democrats. I didn't personalize this.
Democrat agenda and policies. And I thoroughly believe that. And we have to talk about that.
So political campaign, Democrats have a different vision. They have different
ideology. They have different policies. I think open borders. I think 40-year high inflation.
I think Warren fossil fuels. Weakness is being displayed. The world emboldening our enemies.
I think all these things endanger America. We have to talk about those things in campaign.
There's nothing divisive about that. I'm glad you corrected me on that. I am curious, though,
what you think does change. If we're now talking more about unity, does the rhetoric have to shift?
I'll just point to a fundraising email I got just today from President Trump.
It said, if we lose this race America will cease to exist, that's a policy argument on one level.
On another level, it could be seen as inflammatory. I just don't know where the line is. I'm curious
where you think the line is on how rhetoric needs to change going forward.
First of all, I'd like the mainstream media to, if you're going to play that example,
lay out the 10 other examples of Democrats saying that Donald Trump is the greatest threat to
democracy. Listen, if you love this country and for literally eight years, you've been told that
Donald Trump singularly is the greatest threat to democracy, things might happen. It might impact
somebody. Again, don't personalize these things. Talk about their policies, talk about their vision
for this country. That's fair game. But don't, don't say you ought to put Donald Trump into
both sides. If you would have had a Republican officer say that about a Democrat opponent,
that would have been news immediately, even today. The fact that President Biden did that
just a week before the attempt to assassination. I don't just hear that in the mainstream media.
So again, I have been talking about healing and unifying this nation for a couple years, at least,
President Biden is inaugural's rest through eight times that his number one goal is to unifying
he the nation. I would argue he's done the exact opposite. So I'm willing to give him the
benefits of the doubt. I hope Democrats the left give President Trump the best of the doubt. And
I hope we as Americans, America is a great country because Americans are good people.
And then we share those goals. Let's recognize that. Let's move forward without violence.
But we need to save this country. I agree with President Trump.
Yeah, and just just to clarify for the viewers that comment from President Biden about the
something he made at a fundraiser about a week ago, and he since said he shouldn't have said that.
And I think that's an example of sort of pulling back pulling back some of this rhetoric. There's
a viewer question I want to ask you from Patricia Watson in Illinois. She asks, does Trump bear any
responsibility for the current political climate? I remember a President Trump one time. There's a
New York money man complaining about his behavior. And as he's walking out to Marine One, the press
was hounding about that comment. And he turned the press, he goes, my behavior, my behavior,
my behavior is pretty well driven and dictated by the way you have treated me. Imagine becoming
President United States. And immediately you're being falsely accused of including with Russia,
the horrible things being presented in a steel dossier that the media knew that the FBI knew
was a fabrication and a dirty trick from the clinical campaign. So as president, you know all
these things are false. And you go through two years where it's taken seriously by the FBI,
you have a Mueller investigation. So again, that's just one example of the torment that the media
has put down Trump through ever since he became the nominee. So again, your behavior is dictated
by how you treated each other with respect. And maybe everybody's behavior can change.
Yeah, that would be great. I, you know, your answer strikes me. I mean, let me just read something
else that that J.D. Vance tweeted the night of the awful assassination attempt. He said the
central premise of the Biden campaign is that President Donald Trump is an authoritarian fascist
who must be stopped at all costs. That rhetoric led directly to the President, President Trump's
attempted assassination. Now, just to be clear, we do not know it's not clear what the motives of
this deranged man were in taking a shot or shots at President Trump. But it strikes me in your
answer to say, you know, if I ask you, is Trump have some responsibility, you say media has
primarily the blame, you know, in that quote, you have J.D. Vance now the vice presidential nominee
saying it's the Democrats primarily to blame everyone saying we want to lower the temperature,
but in practice, everyone's also saying, well, it's the other guy's fault. They're the real bad
guy, which is sort of the grieving cycle. It'd be nice to be showing the order of magnitude more
quotes of, you know, Democrats basically referring to President Trump as Hitler. It'd also be helpful,
but honestly, if the Washington Post would return the Pulitzer Prizes, their reporters perceived
for years reporting the false Russian collusion hopes. I haven't seen that happen. I haven't seen
the mea culpa from the mainstream media. And by the way, that doesn't exactly help our politics
when you've got a mainstream media that has carried a false story and never even apologize
for it or admits that it was completely false and put this country through political turmoil
ever since it was being reported. So again, yeah, I do blame the mainstream media for being highly
biased, not holding both sides equally accountable. I don't want it mainstream media backing me up.
I want an investigatory and inquisitive media that holds both sides accountable. That's what we
needed to democracy. We don't have it right now, by and large.
I think you answered my question. Let me ask you about the, the Secret Service
handling. You're on the Homeland Security Committee, I believe. What answers do you want to see
over the coming weeks about what happened in Butler, Pennsylvania over the weekend? What
are the questions you're looking for information to come forward on?
Well, first of all, Congress doesn't have the investigatory tools and power to do the detail
investigation. We have oversight capability. I've already written a letter demanding they
preserve all their documents before and after this event. We need to do oversight over their
investigations. We need to leave no stone unturned. I have so many questions and I know I'll have
questions once we get more details, but just what's out there in the social media. Again,
I don't want to tie into rumors right now because I just don't know enough. But this was an obvious,
a massive security failure. One American hero who died protecting his family and his dad,
two others previously wounded. Our former president, our president's candidate,
narrowly avoided being assassinated. This needs to be fully investigated. By the way, I have no
faith in the FBI Department of Justice or the Secret Service to do an honest investigation,
actually hold people fully accountable, which is why we need oversight. And again, I'm going to
demand it. So if you are limited in what you can do and you don't have faith in the agencies to
investigate themselves, what is the proper path then for an investigation here? Do you need an
independent body or do you need a special commission or what are you proposing? It's interesting that
a former CBP, a workshop chair or chief is talking about a commission, an independent commission,
he actually asked, said that I would be the best person to chair that because folks on my side
would certainly have confidence that I would make sure that it is a full and complete and
honest investigation. So it's going to have to be something like that. Again, the agencies will
conduct the detailed investigation. They need to be 100% transparent. They can't be hiding the
ball on us. They need to start answering some of these questions right now about the fact,
you know, what were the Secret Service snipers? Were they constrained from addressing and taking
out this assassin before he ever pulled the trigger? I mean, these are the rumors flying again. I don't
want to feed into them, but I'm hearing all kinds of things that are unbelievably troubling.
We need a lot of answers. We need them pretty fast. But again, we need complete and transparent
oversight by Congress. The American people need to know the full, the full truth.
Yeah, just a great way. So again, you're the former chair of the Homeland Security Committee.
Let me ask you this. Do you have confidence right now in Kimberly Cheeto, the head of the US Secret
Service? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. Again, there are reports that Jill Biden, some Secret
Service agents were detailed to her. Again, I don't know if that's true. We need to understand
that there's certainly reports and, you know, there's a lot of evidence that this would be true,
that Director Shields was far more concerned about DEI than protecting, for example, President Trump.
But that's been true about all these agencies. You know, some of these agency heads and
secretaries and departments are more concerned about DEI than the actual mission of their departments,
part of part of problem with Democrat governance. That's just the reality. It's unfortunate.
The other bit of suspense we had this weekend was who President or former President Trump
would pick as his Vice President nominee. He picked JD Vance, the Senator from Ohio.
Tell us what you know about Senator Vance and what you think about that pick and what he brings to
the ticket. Well, first of all, I hate to lose JD as a colleague in the Senate. That should say
an awful lot. He's been there less than two years. He's an incredibly intelligent individual.
I think a person in integrity, a articulate, which is important in a candidate. He's got a
fabulous life story, really rags to success, served his country honorably. One of the finest
among us is a United States Marine. So he's got a great story. So, you know, fortunately,
President Trump had a wealth of talent to choose from. He couldn't show as anybody and I think
would have been a good pick. But I think he shows well in JD Vance.
But one of the things that you and Senator Vance have in common was resistance earlier this year
to a $60 billion foreign aid package, mostly for funding for armaments for the Ukraine.
I would just like to ask you something I asked another guest we recently had on here.
How do you see under President Trump the war in Ukraine resolving over the next coming years,
if he's able to be elected? It'll be resolved. It will end the only way it ever will end.
Vladimir Putin will not lose this war short of a nuclear holocaust or threatening one.
So it's going to be a negotiated settlement. I'm not going to like the settlement.
I believe Vladimir Putin's an evil war criminal. He never should have invaded
Ukraine, but he did because again, America showed weakness. So it'll be a negotiated settlement.
But every day that goes by, the terms that settlement get worse and worse and worse,
because more Ukrainians will die. More Russian conscripts will die. I take no joy in that.
These are young men yanked out of their village by Vladimir Putin. More Ukraine gets destroyed.
So my guess is President Trump will take the same kind of attitude.
Try to get on the phone with Vladimir Putin right away and figure out, okay, this thing's got to end.
Now, what's interesting is that they were negotiating a serious peace between Zelensky
and Putin in Istanbul a few weeks after the war started. For some reason,
the Biden administration sounds like sending the Boris Johnson blew that negotiation up.
And here we are now two years into a bloody stalemate. Vladimir Putin will not lose this.
And we are using Ukrainians, who I have all the sympathy for as Khan and cannon fodder
in a proxy war between the West and Russia. That's wrong. That has to end.
Are you concerned that if there is a negotiated settlement, a line is drawn somewhere through
Ukraine, Russia gets control of some part of the territory that Putin will be held to his word?
I mean, he invaded the country in the first place. Are you confident that if you cut a deal,
he would hold to that or he'll just rearm and march towards Kiev?
Russia already invaded and held Crimea in an accident. They were already in the eastern Ukraine.
When I met with President Zelensky in his inauguration a couple of months later,
he wanted to do a peace deal with Putin because he knew he couldn't dislodge Putin from Ukraine.
He knew he wouldn't be popular, but he accepted that reality. Now Putin invaded and again,
that reality doesn't change. Putin is even more dug in. He's not going to give up the territory.
He's controlling right now. So again, I don't like that reality, but it's very dangerous to
base policy on a fantasy and it's particularly dangerous to fashion war policy on what simply is
not true, what simply is not reality.
Okay, I want to close with a question about the coming election. You were a skeptic
of the final result in 2020. I think you raised a number of questions about whether Biden
won that election. I want to ask you, if you still feel that way, if you still feel that it's unclear
that Biden was the rightful winner of 2020 and then spin forward to 2024, if you could talk about
where your concerns are now about ensuring that everyone in the country is able to accept the
results in November. But once again, you've misstated my position on this. What I said,
and I held a hearing on this, examining the irregularities of the 2020 election. It is indisputable
that there were irregularities. Observers who weren't allowed to observe, just from Wisconsin,
we had barely in the park, not allowed by law. We had problems in our nursing homes. We had 270,000
absentee ballots unlawfully cured by election clerks. We had Zucker Bucks pretty well have his
individuals take over the Green Bay polling place where they had total control of the absentee
ballots. There were all kinds of irregularities. Promise it's very difficult to prove was there enough
were there enough irregularities enough fraud that could have overturned the direct election.
I've never claimed there were. I just don't know. And I know that courts, very few of them,
with the 80 court decisions, most of them were dismissed without ever looking at any evidence
whatsoever, because process has to go forward, which is always the problem, improving fraud.
The clock is ticking. The election has to be certified. The losing candidate doesn't have
the resource to do the investigation. So fraud continues and it continues. And particularly
then when you have the mainstream media denying it exists, it makes it even more difficult to prove.
So again, I never said it was an illegitimate result. I said there are all kinds of irregularities,
and I believe that is completely indisputable.
Well, so what needs to be done now to make sure that whoever the victor is in November,
the country has confidence that they want it fair and square. Like what steps can we take now
to prevent a repeat of what you are saying happened in 2020?
First of all, acknowledge the goal that we all should share that we want to restore confidence
in our election system. Let's say there's a 2016 half America view that as an illegitimate result.
2020, the other half viewed as the illegitimate result. That's an unsustainable state of affairs
in America. So we need to restore confidence. Generally, that's going to require more controls,
but that's not what we're getting. You know, code was exploited to dramatically increase
absentee ballots, which the Baker Carter Commission said was the greatest potential source of fraud
in the elections. So we doubled the number of absentee ballots while we relaxed all the controls
over them. That's a problem. We are we ought to reinsert those controls to restore confidence.
That's what we need to do. Unfortunately, in Wisconsin, where state Republicans legislated
this passing reforms, our Democrat governor vetoes them. Go figure. The House just passed
a law to ensure that everybody who votes is a legal citizen in this legal to vote.
Democrats oppose that. So again, go figure what side of the aisle wants the election integrity,
what side wants to make it easy to cheat. I think that speaks volumes.
Okay, I guess we'll leave it there. Thank you, Senator Johnson, for joining us today. Washington
Post's live every day. Now you two unfortunately, that's all the time we have for more on upcoming
programs on all the great journalism the Washington Post does. Go to washingpost.com slash live.
Get a subscription. I'm Michael Sheer, National Political Reporter for the Washington Post. I'll
see you all next time.