Physician, heal thyself!

>> Speaker A: Well, that's enough of this drivel. Drivel. Let's find out what we

want to know about. Let's check it out. Let's check it

out. Keep music.

Keep music.

>> Bryan Schott: Check it out.

Hey, it's special session. I'm your host, Bryan Schott. This is

the podcast where a cranky Utah journalist. That's

me. Breaks down the political news of the week. I covered

politics in this state for more than a quarter century, so I've

seen it all, and I can help you understand the story behind the story.

On, uh, this week's show, the US Attacks Iran, and Utah's

members of Congress are mostly on board, despite

the whole violating the Constitution thing.

Senator Mike Lee causes outrage for his cruel

social media posts after a deadly shooting in

Minnesota. I'll explain why he won't face any

consequences for that. Utah Republican

leaders say they want to turn the political temperature down,

but they should probably take some time and look in

the mirror. And Senator Mike Lee is bristling at, uh,

criticism of his plan to sell off millions of acres

of public lands. Before we get to that, I'd like to ask you for a

favor. If you or someone you know would like to sponsor this podcast,

please send me an email. You'll find it in the show notes, and that

will help make more podcasts like this possible. Also, I'd

like to hear from you as a listener. What do you want to hear on the show? Is there a story

you'd like me to address? A guest you'd like to hear? Drop me an

email.

Okay. With that out of the way, let's dig into this week's news.

As you know by now, on Saturday night, President Donald Trump announced

via social media that the United States had carried out a,

quote, successful attack on three

Iranian nuclear sites. And I'm not going to get

into the news of that. You can find that coverage all over

the place. There are people who are much better

positioned to talk about it than I am. But I want to talk a little

bit about the reaction from Utah's members of

Congress, because I think that is relevant. The first thing you

have to understand about this attack is that

it's probably unconstitutional

and probably illegal. The President

does not have the authority to attack a country

that does not pose an imminent threat to the United States without

the authorization of Congress. And there's

no current authorization of force in place

that would allow this attack. It just does not exist.

The President decided to do this by

himself, which is not allowed.

The President claimed that there was

intelligence showing that Iran

was building a nuclear weapon. And there's nothing that

actually supports that. Back in March, Director of

National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified

to Congress that there was no intelligence.

She has since changed her tune on that after the President

said she was wrong. But there's just no

evidence to support that at all. In fact,

early on Sunday morning, the Rolling

Stone had a fantastic article basically saying

that, quote, there is no intel,

and these attacks were based on pretty

much vibes. They spoke with a number of officials

about this, and one told them there is no

intel, nothing new that I'm aware of. The President is

protecting the United States and our interests, but the

intelligence assessments have not really changed

from what they were before. And those intelligence assessments were

that there was no indication that

Iran was building a nuclear weapon, which

was the justification for this attack.

And the reason that I say that this attack was

unconstitutional is because the power to

declare war is in Article 1 of the Constitution,

and it gives that to Congress. Congress has

sole authority to declare war because

they have to pay for it. They have to declare

war on another country because they're the ones who have to pay for it.

The President does not have, uh, the authority to

unilaterally declare war on another country,

especially when it is unprovoked. Now, the

reaction from Utah's elected officials

is quite striking. Senator Mike

Lee, who loves to wave around

a copy of the Constitution, was on board

with this, which is surprising given how

much he likes to talk about the Constitution and

how Congress has ceded its authority to the executive

branch. On his official Twitter

account, his official Twitter slash X account,

he says, tonight the Iranian nuclear program

was wiped out. Please join me in praying for the safety

of the brave men and women of America's armed forces in the

Middle east and around the world, and that these strikes may lead to

the lasting peace called for by President Trump.

So he acknowledged it and was in support on his

official account. But on his personal based

Mike Lee account, where he tweets and tweets and

tweets and doesn't seem to really do anything else,

the only mention, the only acknowledgment of the

attack was reposting the President's social

media post that the attack had been carried

out, and he said, time to pray for peace,

that's really striking, given how Senator Mike

Lee likes to talk about the Constitution, about

how much he professed his reverence for the

Constitution, waving around that copy of

it. The fact that the President did something that is

clearly unconstitutional is striking,

especially when you contrast that with his

constant hand wringing on social Media that the

U.S. support of Ukraine

in its conflict with Russia

in, uh, the United States providing military

support to help Ukraine fend off

Russia's invasion. He has been hand

wringing for about how that would

lead to World War Three. He wants to get the United

States out of NATO because he's worried that that's going to kick off World

War Three. But an unprovoked attack

on Iran just is

not worthy of the same kind of concern. So I find

that striking. Senator John Curtis also

posted support for the

military operation. He reposted the President's

social media post and said Iran's relentless

pursuit of nuclear weapons is a direct threat to

American interests, our allies and global st.

Today's action was a serious and necessary response to

that danger. I honor the brave service members who carried out the

mission with skill and courage. Strength paired with genuine

diplomacy is how we create peace, prevent conflict and

preserve freedom. I joined the President calling for a return

to diplomacy. Again,

the intelligence does not support

any assertion that Iran was

seeking to build a nuclear weapon.

The only other member of Utah's Congressional

delegation who acknowledged the attack

was Representative Burgess Owens, who again

reposted the President's social media post and said,

we have a peace through strength president who doesn't bluff and

knows the world is safer without a nuclear Iran. God

bless our U.S. armed forces. Everybody else in

the congressional delegation, nothing. Representative

Blake Moore, who is a member of Republican House

leadership, as of the time of this recording, he has not

acknowledged or said anything about it. Representative Celeste

Malloy. She also has not said anything. And Representative, uh,

Mike Kennedy has not acknowledged this attack

as far as I have seen. Curiously,

there's one other elected official who

came out in support of this attack, and that's Utah Attorney General

Derek Brown. He posted on his official

social media account last night a quote that said, a

nuclear Iran presents a clear and dangerous threat to global

peace and regional stability. I'm proud of our courageous

service members whose actions have protected America,

Israel and the world from terrorism. Please join me in praying,

praying for their safe return. God bless America.

Very curious that Utah's Attorney

General has decided to get on board with this

when, I mean, really, who cares, right? I

mean, he's an Attorney General in Utah. He has nothing

to do with this, but he decided that he needed to step into

this. So what happens next? Well, what will Utah's members

of Congress do? You have to wonder how they're going to approach

this. Everything that they posted, they said, you know, now it's

time to get back to peace. Is that going to happen? I

seriously doubt that. There's not going to be any sort of

escalation. Iran has already vowed

retaliation against US Military

interests in the region. So how are Utah's members of

Congress going to respond to this?

Senator Mike Lee has been a big proponent

of Congress having to declare war

Congress's war powers. In 2018,

he partnered with Senator Chris Murphy and

Senator Bernie Stan Sanders to to

introduce and introduced a war power resolution

to end the unauthorized US

Military involve movement in Yemen. He's done

this throughout his career, saying that the President does

not have the authority to launch a

military strike to use the military without the

authorization of Congress. And that's exactly what

happened last night, and Lee is in support of

it. One of Lee's biggest allies, Representative

Thomas Massie, immediately posted on social

media after the President announced the attack that

this is unconstitutional. Just last week,

Representative Thomas Massie introduced in the

House a bipartisan war Powers

Resolution that prohibits United States

armed forces from unauthorized hostilities in

the Islamic Republic of Iran. There is a

companion resolution that was introduced in the

Senate by Democratic Senator Tim

Kaine of Virginia. Will Lee get on

board with this? Will lead join Kane in his War

Powers Resolution because Congress can vote

to block the President from dragging the US

into a wider war with Iran. That's exactly what this

seeks to do. Will Senator Mike Lee, who has

been a harsh critic of the

President, unilaterally, uh, using military force

without congressional approval, without

congressional authorization? Will he get on board with this?

That's something you need to watch. Now there have been some calls

for impeachment over this, and this is clearly

an impeachable offense. It is the President

launching an unprovoked attack against another country

without the authorization of Congress.

Forget about that. Impeachment is not going to happen. But

Congress does have the ability to vote to

block the President from more attacks. And you

wonder if that's going to happen. You wonder if our members of Congress

are going to get on board with that. So far

they haven't. But there's precedent in the

past that Senator Lee has done this. So keep an

eye on that.

Last weekend we woke up on Saturday to the

news that a gunman had shot and killed a

Minnesota Democratic lawmaker and her spouse house and

also shot a state senator and his wife,

severely injuring them. We also learned that this

person had gone to two other

lawmakers houses with the intent to

attack them. Just a few hours after

this story broke, Utah Senator Mike Lee

decided it was time to Fire off some sick

burns about Democrats. He took to his personal X

slash Twitter account to spread misinformation about the

shooting. He insinuated that the alleged

shooter was a Marxist when everything we've

learned since tells us that he's a hardcore

conservative and a fervent Donald Trump supporter. Lee

also made a joke. He posted a picture

of the shooter wearing a latex mask

that was taken from a security camera. And he posted

Nightmare on Walt street, which is a, uh, misspelling

as he think he meant Walls, which is a dig

at Democratic Minnesota Governor Tim

Walls. It looked like with that tweet, he was

celebrating the deaths of those two

lawmakers. In the aftermath of this, Lee was

widely condemned there lot of outrage for

it. And Lee remained silent. He would not

respond to anybody reaching out to him about

these really, really heartless and cruel

tweets. On Monday, Minnesota

Democratic US Senator Tina Smith actually pulled

Lee out of a private Republican meeting

and read him for filth. She

told him the hurt and damage that his social

media posts had led to,

and she said that he was

surprised when she confronted him, but he didn't seem

apologetic. In fact, he still has not apologized for

these tweets. Senator Smith's top staffer

sent a scathing email

to Lee. Staffers just tearing

them apart over these social media posts from

their boss. You should go online and read the whole thing. I've

got it linked in my story about this on Utah Political Watch

dot News. He said, why would you use the awesome power of

United States Senate office to compound people's

grief? Is this how your team measures success,

using the office of US Senator to post not

just one, but a series of jokes about

an assassination? Is that a successful day of

work on Team Lee? Did you come into the office

Monday and feel proud of the work you did over

the weekend? He also said you exploited the murder of

a lifetime public servant and her husband to post

some sick burns about Democrats. Did you see

this as an excellent opportunity to get likes and

retweets? Have you absolutely no conscience,

no decency? Because no matter how you look at it,

these posts by Senator Lee were gross,

they were disgusting, they were heartless, they were

cruel, and they were really beneath what

you, what anybody should expect from any

elected member of Congress, no matter which side of the

aisle they are. They were roundly condemned, as they should

have been. Most of the Republicans in the

state were pretty much silent about this. There was an

editorial in the Deseret News condemning

Senator Lee and his tweets. And Governor Spencer Cox

doing the least he could possibly do.

Just retweeted a post about the editorial. Other than that,

really nothing. Now, Lee did take down a couple of

the posts on Tuesday, but he still

hasn't apologized. And guess what?

He's not going to. He will not apologize for this.

In fact, he's starting to have some of his

allies rally around him. Right wing

commentator Benny Johnson, you know, the guy who was

taking money from Russia during the 2020

action to write pro Russia

propaganda, tweeted out that Senator

Mike Lee did nothing wrong. There was a post

in the Onion that I think sums up this whole thing

and Lee's entire attitude about this. The

headline was, mike Lee stresses he would have posted

same thing if own family savagely

murdered. And I'm gonna read a little bit of this article here. It says,

after being confronted about social media posts that blame

the shootings of two Minnesota lawmakers on the far

left, Senator Mike Lee stressed Tuesday that he would have said

the same thing thing if his own family had been

savagely murdered. Quote, democrats can say what they want

about me, but I would have absolutely called the shooter a Marxist

and made tasteless digs at Governor Walls had my

loved ones recently been killed in cold blood, said

Lee, adding that if his wife and his children

had been shot multiple times, he wouldn't have hesitated

to post photos of the incident and refer to it

as a nightmare on Wall Street. To anyone offended

by this, let me just say that had this happened to my family, I would have

done everything in my power to mock them and use

their deaths to my political agenda. Had I

been shot, I would have used my last breaths to fan

the flame and keep inciting violence. But that's

just the kind of man I am. Lee confirmed that

Elon Musk had used his family's brutal

murders to spread lies. He would have still

posted a reply reading fact check

true. Even though that satire, it

captures this whole incident perfectly. Lee took

down the tweets. He didn't apologize. He's

not going to apologize. There have been calls for

Lee's to resign. That's not going to happen.

He's not up for reelection until 2028.

I've seen some articles online

talking about how this might be the end of Lee's political

career. The biggest one was in the Bulwark, and

they usually do good work. But I've got a lot of problems with this article.

The headline was, is Mike Lee shit Posting his

way out of Congress? What this article does is it quotes

Democratic Party officials and Democratic lobbyists saying

they were quote, planning strategy sessions

about how sustain the outrage at Lee.

That's not going to work. Lee acts

like this because he knows he's

untouchable. Senator Tina Smith said

that Lee was surprised that

she confronted him over this. Lee thinks he's untouchable.

If you remember, in the aftermath of him winning reelection in

2022, his main political advisor Dan

Houser was gleefully responding to

any criticism of Lee on social media by saying,

he's still your senator for the next X number of.

He does this because he knows nobody is going

to hold him accountable. The Republican leadership in

the state is not gonna hold him accountable and he

does not give one rip what

the Democrats think about it or non

bootlicker members of the media think about

him. Lee only does interviews with media

outlets that are friendly, that are gonna carry

water for him. Lee knows that he is

untouchable and that's why the

Democrats aren't gonna push him out. The Republican bas

him. Republican voters love him and that's why

he acts the way that he acts.

There's a great example about this from

this week. During a media

availability, House Speaker Mike Schultz was

asked about Lee's posts and

he completely punted. In fact, he shut down

the conversation by saying, we, uh, really don't have any comments

about that.

>> Speaker Schultz: I, to be honest, I don't get

on Twitter, so I haven't even read that. I've seen a little bit of.

I don't, I don't want to. I mean if I

get on Twitter and look at what people say about me, it puts me in a bad

mood. So I don't even get on Twitter. So I don't think we have

any comments around that because I, we're focused

on Utah.

>> Bryan Schott: Uh, they don't want to talk about it. They will

not hold Senator Lee accountable.

They're not going to do that. And anybody who expects them to

is going to be severely disappointed.

Lee is untouchable. He knows it,

his supporters know it, and that's why he

acts this way. Has Lee learned anything from this?

No. And something similar

is going to happen again and there will be all

new outrage

on the subject of civility and politics.

There was a moment during the House leadership

media availability on Monday that was kind

of jaw dropping. Newly elected House Majority Whip

Candace Perucci decided to do some pearl

clutching about the shootings in

Minnesota that left two people

dead, two people severely injured.

>> Representative Bolender: I think when I saw the Minnesota story break,

I just kept thinking how we have got to find a way

to turn down the heat when it comes to politics.

And we need more people

engaging in civic dialogue. Who

are the moms at the water park as well dads at the soccer park who

just want to talk about how it impacts their family. And we have to

get to a place where we disagree

without, uh, thinking the other person is evil.

>> Bryan Schott: Turn down the heat.

Get to a place where we disagree without thinking the

other person is evil. You first.

You had an opportunity during that media availability

to condemn Senator Mike Lee's

horrible tweets. Tweets about that Minnesota

shooting where he made fun of people who were

assassinated. You punted. This is a

Republican state and the Republicans have a super majority.

Take a look in the mirror. How about Representative

Trevor Lee, who has a history of

posting hateful and

xenophobic things on social media.

Has he suffered any consequences from that? No.

In fact, Speaker Mike Schultz donated

$8,000 to Lee's reelection bid

last year. Year against a Republican challenger.

In fact, Schultz has done quite a bit that actually

does the exact opposite of turning down the heat in

recent years. Last year in the election, we found

out that he spent

$120,000 to

fund the pack that was behind some

anti trans mailers that went out to

voters in Democratic districts. These

mailers had a very anti transgender

message. And speaker shot Schultz was

the only person who donated. He funded this

effort to the tune of $120,000.

Also last year, former state school board

member Natalie Klein falsely suggested that

a female high school athlete might be

transgender, which caused a huge

online mob to attack the girl's family.

To attack the girl, they had to be protected by law

enforcement because there were so many people

going after them because of the this false post.

House Republicans passed a resolution m

condemning her, but they did it really

quickly. They didn't really want to talk about it. Essentially,

leaders sat on their hands because they knew they did not have

enough support to do what they would

have done in almost every other instance and probably

try to impeach Klein. Klein did get

defeated in her reelection bid, but again, the

legislature, who loves to exert their

authority in pretty much every level of government,

decided they didn't need to get involved in that one. And

also I think it's worth noting that

Speaker Schultz also in 2024,

spoke at a Christian nationalist event

about the Constitution. I reported about that.

So when you're talking about turning down the political

heat, physician, heal thyself.

Why is this responsibility on the media,

on everybody else, when it

should be the Republican legislature leading the way?

I think that that's A valid question. Question when the

Republican controlled legislature, who has

had a super majority for years, has had an

opportunity to lead out on this. They haven't.

So maybe it's time to lead by example.

As expected, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee,

which is chaired by Utah Senator Mike Lee,

unveiled a plan to raise as much as $10

billion by selling publicly owned

land for housing development in 11 Western

states, including Utah. It could be be

nearly half a billion acres of land that

potentially could end up for sale. When this

plan first came out, you had environmentalist groups rush

to condemn it. And that criticism of Lee's

plan stung him. Lee's proposal, which

he revised last week, requires the sale

of at least 2 million acres of, uh,

Forest Service and Bureau of Land management lands in

11 Western states, including Utah

over the next five years. An analysis from the Wilderness

Society that had a helpful map, and we'll get to that

map in a second, identified up to

250 million acres of

public lands that would fit the criteria

to be sold under Lee's plan. This

proposal is part of the massive tax and spending

bill that is currently making its way through Congress.

Representative Celeste Malloy tried this

in the House version of that bill. She partnered

with, uh, Nevada Representative Mark Amaday, and then

they introduced an amendment at like the

11th hour of a committee hearing that would have put about

half a million acres of land in

Utah and Nevada up, uh, for sale.

That was stripped out of the House version before it was passed over to the

Senate. Lee has resurrected this idea and

it got revised last week, put back into the

reconciliation bill. And the idea behind

it, according to Lee, is to promote housing development and

support local economic growth, even

though no specific development plan plan

has been released. Critics are

arguing that the bill is much more

expansive than what Lee says it is.

And they also say that it lacks safeguards to

prevent misuse over development. The Wilderness

Society released an analysis and a map

of lands that could meet the criteria of

Lee's proposal to be put on the auction

block. And that map has really upset

Senator Lee. He has been pushing back, back

very hard against that map, claiming these maps

are wrong, claiming that they're misinformation,

misinformed. He went on the Glenn Beck show

last week and said this.

>> Mike Lee: The federal government owns 640 million

acres of land, nearly a third of

all land in the United States. The

vast majority of that land has zero

recreational value. Uh, disposing

of a fraction of 1% of that so that the

next generation can afford a home

is a common sense solution. To a national problem.

First of all, uh, when this

bill puts land up, uh, puts, uh, it in the

category of eligibility for sale, it doesn't mean for sale.

It just means there's a process by which it

could be transferred. That's impossible right now. And it

doesn't authorize the sale. It authorizes a

process whereby it could be considered for that

purpose.

>> Bryan Schott: Now, Lee's allies in the Utah legislature are

scrambling to try and control the

narrative, because right now the narrative is that Republicans in

Congress want to sell off public lands. And

polling shows that people do not support that

idea. Although if you talk about the housing

crisis, they do think that something needs to be done. I got

ahold of an email that was sent out by Senator Dan McKay,

Republican from Riverton, that had

talking points that he had obtained from Representative

Malloy about Lee's

proposal. One of the talking points in this email levels

significant criticism of that map from the Wilderness

Society, which has a particular

sore spot for Lee and defenders of his

proposal. The talking point says chairman Lee's

proposal does not list a single acre for sale,

and maps created by activist groups like the

Wilderness Society are inaccurate. The

legislation does not reference any maps and does not directly

offer any parcels for sale. Instead, it creates

a robust public nomination and identification process

to identify unused land, land close to existing

infrastructure that is appropriate to address the housing crisis.

Crisis, sure. Lease proposal does not have

any map, doesn't reference any map. This analysis from

the Wilderness Society looks at lease proposal and

identifies publicly owned land that

meets the criteria to be sold so two

things can be true at once.

Lee's proposal does not have a map that is

true. The Wilderness Society map looks at least proposal

and said, hey, these are the public lands that would be eligible

under lease proposal. Proposal. That's also true. So two

things can be true at once. The

talking points go on to point out that only lands

close to existing population centers within 1

to 5 miles can be considered for auction.

And any public lands where there's already grazing

permits, the special authorization for ski area

mining claims, mineral leases, rights of way,

those are ineligible to be sold. The reason

this proposal is being put into the reconciliation

bill is to offset, offset some of

the cost of the massive tax cuts

that are the centerpiece of this

legislation. And we've talked about that before. The

Congressional Budget Office has said that extending

the tax cuts that were passed in 2017

would increase the deficit by $2.4

trillion over the next 10 years.

And what this sale would do is it would raise about $10

billion, not nearly enough

to offset the cost of those tax cuts.

But it would some revenue and it would also accomplish something

that Lee has been trying to do for years. He has introduced

legislation in the past to sell some

public land for housing. This is an

opportunity for them to do this

without going through the regular legislative process.

Because every time he's introduced that piece of

legislation, it's gone nowhere. This is

now a reconciliation bill. He only needs

51 Republican votes in the Senate Senate to

get it through, instead of the 60 he would need in

order to avoid a filibuster, because the Democrats cannot filibuster. Uh,

this. The bottom line on this provision that is

being put into this reconciliation bill is another case

of two things being true at the same time.

One, it is true that

selling these lands could be a way to

help alleviate the housing crisis. Selling these

lands is a place to build houses. Housing could be

a way to alleviate those problems of

people finding homes. But it is also true

that it raises some revenue to help pay

for tax cuts which primarily

benefit the wealthiest Americans. We've talked about that

analysis in the past. Most of these tax cuts goes to

the people at the top. The wealthiest households will see

the biggest benefits, while those at the bottom are actually going to

lose benefits because of other cuts in the

legislation to Medicare and food

assistance programs. The problem with Lee's proposal

to use this to offset some of the cost of

those tax cuts is that when you sell something, you get that money

once. It's not ongoing money. It's kind of like

selling your house to help pay your mortgage. In the end,

it doesn't work because once you sell those lands,

they're gone.

That's going to do it for this week. Thank you so much much for listening.

Hey, do me a favor, subscribe rate and review this

podcast wherever you can. Leave a comment if you want. That

helps us grow our audience. Also, take a moment and

subscribe to my newsletter. You'll find it at Utah Political Watch

News. It's free, but if you become a paying

subscriber, you'll get some extra stuff, including the morning News

brief. That's a subscriber only newsletter that I

send out every morning with the top political news stories of the day.

It gets you up to speed before you head out the day door. You also

get access to our subscriber only Discord, where we

discuss what's happening in Utah politics. And I'll send you

some exclusive Utah Political Watch stickers. You'll get

all of that for as little as $5 a month. And that will

help support this program and my

work as an independent journalist. Again, thank you so much

for listening. We'll be back with another episode next week.

Physician, heal thyself!
Broadcast by