Trump Told Mar-A-Lago Members About Iran Strike Before It Happened


By now, I’m sure we all know that Congress
was left in the dark about Donald Trump’s attack on Iran last week and it came as much
to of about as much of a surprise to them as it did to everybody else in the world. Except of course for a few people who happen
to be members of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago. According to a report released late last week,
members of Mar-a-Lago already knew that something big was going to happen because Donald Trump
had been talking about it to members of Mar-a-Lago for days before the actual attack happened. According to this report and people who were
there at Mar-a-Lago, the actual Mar-a-Lago members, Donald Trump was roaming the halls
promising these wealthy elite that something big was going to happen and that they would
soon be reading about it in the newspapers or watching the footage on TV. In addition to that, his son Eric Trump, not
long before the actual attack took place, tweeted out an ominous tweet warning that
something big was about to happen. So the president did not go through the appropriate
channels, the usual channels. He did not convene a gang of eight, which
is typical for presidents whenever they want to launch some kind of attack like this. They’re not required to fully brief Congress,
but they do typically in the past, bring in members of a congressional delegation, talk
to them about the problem, explain what’s happening, get their advice, or at the very
least, just tell them, this is what we are about to do. Trump didn’t do that, and again, totally not
required to do that, but instead he did it with his kid, his idiot son, Eric, and the
people who pay hundreds of thousands of dollars per year for the privilege of going to Mar-a-Lago. They knew about it, but Congress was left
in the dark. There’s also reports that he had told Israel
what was about to happen, but not Congress. No, not the people who actually have the power
to declare war in the United States. No, no, no, no, no, no. They don’t need to know about it, but I’m
going to tell these wealthy people, I see, I pass in the hallway what I’m about to do
to expect something big, to expect some kind of retaliation against the embassy attack
that Iran launched. This isn’t how this works, right? We have seen reports over the years about
Donald Trump meeting with people at Mar-a-Lago and basically just spilling all sorts of secrets,
telling them about things that they ought not know about. Asking their input on how he should run the
government and all the while excluding the members of Congress, excluding the people
who honestly know what they’re doing and just asking his fellow rich people, hey, if you
were in my position, what would you do here? Because I really have no idea. And that’s what it all boils down to. You know, the reports have been coming out
nonstop for the last couple of days. We know now that Donald Trump was presented
with several different options on how to hit back against Iran and they only included assassinating
Qassem Suleimani because it was so extreme that they thought all of the other responses
would look tamer in comparison. They didn’t expect for a minute that the unhinged
president would choose the extreme option, which shows that they haven’t been paying
attention to this man because yes, if there is an extreme option, Donald Trump is always
going to take it. And then he spent the next couple of days
after that, walking the halls at Mar-a-Lago when anybody asked him about Iran, he responded
with, stay tuned. Something big is about to happen.

Neuroscientist Reveals Why Trump Supporters Fall For His Lies


Ever since the election of Donald Trump, psychiatrist,
psychologist, other mental health professionals, neuroscientists, they’ve been looking at Donald
Trump and warning us that, Hey, something’s wrong here, but guess what folks? It’s not just Donald Trump where these people
are saying, Hey, something’s not right with his head. And now we have a neuroscientist man by the
name of Bobby Azarian, dr Azarian, who is actually completed a psychological profile
on Republican voters specifically though not limited to Donald Trump’s supporters and dr
Azarian in here identified five traits that these Trump supporting Republicans tend to
have. Maybe not all of them, but most of them. So I wanted to take a minute and run through
these traits that dr Azarian has identified in these Republican voters. The first is authoritarian personality syndrome. This refers to the advocacy or enforcement
of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom and is commonly associated
with a lack of concern for the opinions or needs of others. We see that all the time with Republicans. The very selfish mentality, I don’t want to
pay off your student loans. I don’t want to pay for you to have healthcare. I got to get mine and besides we got to follow
the rules. We all gotta do our part. We got to follow the president because he’s
the president. Now this as dr Azarian points out is a syndrome. It is characterized by belief in total and
complete obedience to one’s authority. That is why we see these hardcore Trumpers
out there always whatever the president says, I believe you best president ever hashtag
CAG 2020 it’s constant. Social media is disgusting because of it,
but that’s just one trait. The doctor continues social dominance orientation,
which refers to people who have a preference for the societal hierarchy of groups, specifically
with a structure in which the high status groups have dominance over the low status
ones. Excuse me. So basically what this means is protecting
the way things are, right? You got your upper echelon, your top 1% that
people get in those tax cuts. You’ve got the working class who is getting
absolutely nothing and that actually includes most Republicans, but they want to keep it
that way because they believe that’s the way it should be because they also believe one
day they’re going to escape that bottom rung of the ladder and make it to the top even
though it’s statistically unlikely to ever happen. The third trait he identified, obviously prejudice,
and this is interesting because he points out in this article that he’s written here
that this is not all Republicans. Obviously it’s unfair to say all Republicans
are even all Trump supporters hate any specific group, but it’s also unfair to deny that prejudice
played a large role in Donald Trump’s election. In his speech announcing that he was running
for president, he called Mexicans rapists and murderers, that that’s pretty much not
just a dog whistle. That’s a bull horn. We know where he stands on these issues. He said Muslims are dangerous. That’s pretty straight forward, so sure, prejudice
played a huge role in it. The last two here, real quick inner group
contact. This is an important one in psychological
studies. What this means is that Trump supporters,
Republicans in general, do not spend much time outside of their social group. Meaning they don’t seek out differing viewpoints. They don’t seek out different cultures to
hang out with. It’s just their little white group according
to the doctor here, and that’s what they like because it reinforces their own belief and
obviously that’s very dangerous. And the fifth one is relative deprivation,
which refers to the experience of being deprived of something to which one believes they are
entitled. It is the discontent felt when one compares
their position in life to others who they feel are equal or inferior, but have unfairly
had more success than them. This has played a part in a lot of Republican
campaigns over the last 50 years. This is how they do it. Ronald Reagan with the welfare queen. Oh, you hardworking conservative voters. You’re out there working 12 hour days working
overtime and not getting paid for it. Meanwhile, these welfare Queens are living
high on the government hog, they’ve got more than you and they’re not doing anything that’s
unfair. Bush one and two and Trump all out there selling
us the talking points that, Hey, they’re taking your jobs. The immigrants are coming over and they’re
taking your jobs. That’s not fair. It’s not because you don’t have the skills
necessary. It’s not because your employer wanted to fire
you to get cheap labor. It’s just because of the immigrants and the
Democrats are letting it happen. This is a phenomenally well written article. There’s a link to it in the description of
this video. I encourage everybody to not only take the
time to read it, but take the time to share it because this is probably the best glimpse
into the mind of a Republican voter that I’ve ever seen.

Trump Shuts Down Government Website That Tracks Pollution


Earlier this month, a website called Tox Map
put out by the federal government using data compiled by multiple different uh, and departments
in the federal government, but mostly from the EPA was shut down. December 16th. The Tox Map was totally shut down, retired
as the administration called it. So this information is no longer available. Okay, so you’re probably asking you at this
point, what kind of information was this? Why should I care about Tox Map? Well folks, Tox Map was a resource interactive. You could clip anywhere on this map of the
United States, go to any city, any part anywhere and see the pollution. You could see how bad the air quality was
for that area. Up to the hour. You could see all the pollution coming from
nearby plants coming from all the nearby manufacturing facilities coming from the local power plant. Everything was right there on the map. And it even included all those toxic super
fund sites that could also be radioactive. So you could go anywhere and say, Hey, I’m
thinking of moving to this area. Let me go check Tox Map to find out if this
is a safe place to live, and now you can’t. Now the administration claims that most, most
of the information is still available. You just got to go to each individual department’s
website to know exactly what you’re trying to find and then navigate the website and
hope you can find it. Although of course some of it obviously is
not available anymore. We decided to retire some of that information
about pollution and how it affects your health. This is just the latest assault on science
launched by this administration and this is nuts folks. This is pure total nuts. It makes no sense. It’s not like they were hemorrhaging money
off of Tox Map. It’s not like it was actually harming the
public. No, it was letting them know. If you go here, expect to have an asthma attack,
and now it’s gone and nobody noticed and most people don’t even care. What this is is a massive gift to corporations. No longer are you going to have the public
looking over your shoulder to see how much you’re polluting their hometown. No longer will the federal government be offering
the public all of this up to the minute data about how bad you really are. That’s what this is all about. This is going to harm public health. People could very easily die as a result of
removing this website, but hey, if it means corporations don’t have to worry about us
looking over their shoulders, then heck yeah, that’s a win for this administration.

Judiciary Committee Impeachment Report Lays Out Multiple Felonies Committed By Trump


So yesterday, Democrats on the house judiciary
committee released their 169 page indictment really of Donald Trump. And in that indictment they list multiple
felonies that they believe they have uncovered that Donald Trump committed the two biggest
ones, abuse of power and wire fraud and wire fraud is not necessarily when we saw coming,
but they’re talking about the wire fraud in the withholding of the aid to Ukraine. That’s how they’ve decided to frame that issue. Is that illegally withholding? That is a form of wire fraud. It’s pretty decent. I mean, that’s a pretty good charge. The abuse of power also encompasses the obstruction
of Congress by refusing to let his, uh, people, even though they were subpoenaed, come and
testify to the committees. The abuse of power also encompasses the extortion
with Ukraine, you get your money when we get the dirt on Biden. So overall, that’s what the Democrats on the
judiciary committee have to offer. Very similar to what the intelligence committee
already released. Tomorrow it is looking like we may have a
full house vote on these articles of impeachment, meaning by dinner time on Wednesday, Donald
Trump may be officially impeached and I again have mixed emotions about this. I hate the man. He’s awful. His policies are absolutely destroying this
country and he’s committing massive human rights violations right here on American soil
as well as over in the middle East and other foreign countries. But I also want him impeached. I want him removed. I don’t ever want to see or hear from him
ever again. But the Democrats should have slowed down
a little bit on this. Just yesterday, I mean after they had released
their report, we get the report from the new Yorker saying that Rudy Giuliani admits that
he was the one who got Marie Yovanovitch fired because he didn’t want her to know about the
investigations he was trying to launch into Joe Biden. There is still more information about this
story coming out every other day, right? I mean these are things that could easily
bolster the case for impeachment. Where’s Lev Parness? Why didn’t you have him come testify? This man knows everything and is ready to
tell everything. That is the kind of evidence that you need,
but you didn’t do it. You rushed it. You know you want to get home for the holiday
break and new year’s Eve and new year’s day and all that fun stuff and the college bowl
games in the, I don’t know what else. But good God, you should have taken your time. You should have let it sit. The vote shouldn’t be held this week. The votes shouldn’t be hold next week. The vote shouldn’t be held next month or the
month after. There is still far too much information that
needs to be uncovered. I don’t care if you have to vote on articles
of impeachment right after the nomination ceremony at the end of next summer. I don’t care if you do it two weeks before
the presidential election. Take your time, get this right cause you got
one shot and after you shoot it, that’s it. Nothing else. You can’t do this again. You don’t get a Mulligan, you can’t start
over from scratch. You know what those Republicans in the Senate
are planning to do to this. They’re going to kill it and they’re going
to kill it quick. But if the evidence were overwhelming enough,
it would be a very hard sell for those Republican senators up for reelection to go back to their
districts, their States and say, yeah, I voted against it. Even though all of the evidence was pretty,
pretty damning of the president. I still, you know, I wanted to protect him. That’s not going to sit well with voters. But if you just go in there with a couple
of testimonies from people that Republicans have been trashing for a couple of months,
that’s not good enough to sell it to the voters. And isn’t that the point of all this? Isn’t that what you were trying to do here? You should’ve included the emoluments clause
violations. You should’ve included the bank fraud that
Michael Cohen mentioned in his testimony. You could have and should have done all of
that, but you didn’t. Instead, you focus solely on the crime of
trying to take down Joe Biden and I gotta tell ya, I like the idea of impeachment. I’m glad it is going to pass the house. I just wish the Democrats would have done
it correctly.

Twitter Bans Political Ads For 2020 Election & Fracking Blocked In California


Twitter announced recently that their ban
on political advertising is going to extend to legislation and social causes, a move that
could hurt candidates in groups who aren’t funded by big money donors. Farron, you said, you’ve said this a couple
of times. Anytime you see social media saying we’re
gonna, we’re, we’re really gonna make it difficult for you to use social media to advertise your
idea, your legislators, legislative concept, your candidacy. Who suffers? The, well the people who are grassroots mostly. And one of the things that’s really so awful
about this new decision is that you can’t even run an ad on Twitter anymore because
they ended it November 22nd. You couldn’t run an ad saying, you know, vote
yes or vote no on proposition one. You couldn’t explain the benefits, you know,
proposition one just to generic. But you can’t advocate or any outcome in any
kind of race or legislative battle. And that is absolutely devastating to the
people who use this as the tool to talk to their constituents. Well, here’s what it says, it says that it’ll
define political content. Now follow this. It’s going to define political content as
anything that references a candidate, a political party, a pointed government official or referendum
or ballot measure or legislation or regulation. What in the hell, I mean, that’s what journalism
does. We talk about these things. The problem is that we, that this is being
run, these decisions are being run in an in an environment where politically correctness
is killing us. I mean, we’ve got, we’re like, we’re, it’s
almost like are we too stupid to be able to read something or see something and make a
decision ourselves? They want to think for us and it’s not just
Twitter. We’re seeing it across the board right now. It’s like, it’s like this millennial snowflake
concept that is killing us. It’s all based on political correctness and
we’ve got to get away from it. The first amendment matters. We ought to be able to talk about a ballot
issue. We ought to be able to talk about legislative
issues that concern us on things like the environment, dangerous products, corruption
in government. This is saying we can’t do that. Well, the problem is they saw Facebook. Facebook took a lot of heat and rightfully
so, but then Facebook said, listen, our decision is we’re not going to fact check anything. You want to run an ad, you run an ad. If somebody reports it as being bad, we’ll
look into it. But we say whatever, run, whatever, and Twitter
says, wow, that’s, that’s one extreme. We’ll go to the other extreme and say nothing
at all. You can’t do anything. But Twitter is a far greater tool to reach
a huge amount of people in the shortest amount of time. And that is what these grassroots candidates,
these, you know, consumer organizations, they rely on Twitter far more than they do on Facebook. Okay. Let’s, let’s put it in a real, healthcare,
okay. Universal healthcare. What do we have with universal healthcare? You have a concept, a cause. Correct? And you have a bill legislative bill, and
according to the rules, you can’t talk about that on Twitter. Now, that’s how ridiculous it’s become. Now the other part of it is we’re going to
have, who is it that’s going to make these decisions? I mean, you’re going to have people that understand
that all of these issues so well that they can define, well, this is actually, this is
actual political discussion. We can’t permit this. Or is this discussion that ties into a bill
that’s pending that we ought to be able to talk about? You see, the problem is anytime you go down
this avenue, you’re saying to the American public, you are so frigging stupid that we
can’t trust you to be able to read something and figure it out yourself. That’s what this is. This is, this is, this is let’s take care
of stupid people because we’re smarter than they are. And what’s going to happen is that eventually
something’s going to squeak through and if it’s a right-leaning thing, the left is going
to be furious and claim a bias. If it’s a left-leaning thing, the right’s
going to claim a bias because eventually, because of the people they’re going to have
doing this, something’s going to sneak through and this is going to come back and bite Twitter
because regardless of which side it is, they’re going to be accused of having a huge bias
and it’s going to throw it all out the window. I, I hope it comes back and bites them. Farron, thanks for joining me. Okay. Thank you. And finally tonight, some good news. California has issued a moratorium on hydraulic
fracking processes and new fracking leases in the state. This is just a temporary halt to these procedures,
but it could potentially lead to a permanent ban on the state, throughout the state. This move by the state came after activists
and researchers put tremendous pressure on lawmakers to finally consider the risks involved,
specifically the increased risk of earthquakes that’s been associated with fracking. This risk is so great that several European
countries have already banned fracking all together. You can’t do it, period. They also highlighted the dangers of chemicals
used during the fracking process, which include countless carcinogens and toxic heavy metals
capable of poisoning drinking waters and entire aquifers. Unfortunately, the public is still in the
dark about all the chemicals used thanks to a law that, oh by the way, Dick Cheney helped
pass years ago. That’s a real comfort. This story shows how effective activism can
be to influence major positive change in this country and when the voices of the public
are loud enough, even the fossil fuel industry better pay attention. That’s all for tonight. Find us on Twitter and at Facebook on facebook.com/rtamericaslawyer. You can watch all RT America programs and
Direct TV, Channel 321 and also stream them on YouTube. I’m Mike Papantonio and this is America’s
Lawyer, where every week we’re going to tell you the stories that corporate media is ordered
not to tell because their advertisers won’t allow them to do that. Have a great night.

Psychiatrists Warns Congress About Dangers Of Trump’s Declining Mental State


A group of several hundred psychiatrists and
other mental health professionals have sent a letter to Congress urging them to include
Donald Trump’s cognitive decline in their impeachment inquiry. The group is led by three people, one of them,
Dr. Bandy Lee, who we have spoken about at length here at Ring of Fire. The other, George Washington University professor,
Dr. John Zinner and former CIA profiler, Dr. Jerrold Post. Now, these three psychiatrists and mental
health professionals are warning Congress in their letter that Donald Trump’s mental
state is declining and it is declining rapidly. But that’s obvious to anyone with even the
slightest little bit of psychology, but what they’re warning about is not just that it’s
that there are going to be dire consequences if this is not addressed. Now, all three of those people have volunteered
to testify in the impeachment inquiry, which is brilliant. Let’s bring them in. Let’s hear it from these mental health professionals
under oath, the people who, as they say in the letter, are trained to recognize these
types of things. Let’s hear from them. Let’s put them on national TV. Let’s put them out there in these articles,
telling the public what’s actually happening. That’s what needs to happen. Everyone needs to hear from these people because
the vast majority of people in this country, probably 99% or more, aren’t going to read
the letter to Congress. They’re not going to watch this video. They’re not gonna watch these other interviews
or read these other articles where these professionals have been interviewed. What they will do, a good portion of them,
is watch those impeachment hearings. And so that’s why this needs to happen. I’m going to read a couple of excerpts here
from this letter because this is absolutely remarkable, and this is Dr. Bandy Lee. Failing to monitor or to understand the psychological
aspects of impeachment on Mr. Trump or discounting them could lead to catastrophic outcomes. We implore Congress to take these dangerous
signs seriously and to constrain his destructive impulses. We and many others are available to give important
relevant recommendations as well as to educate the public so that we can maximize our collective
safety. And they’re right, this is a public safety
issue. This man has the nuclear codes. This man is in charge of the military. This man is in charge of the FBI and the CIA. He has all of these tools at his disposal
to do whatever the hell he wants anywhere the planet. That’s a danger. His tariffs that he put in place because he
got mad at China are costing American citizens $40 billion a year. His policies of bending over backwards for
corporations are making us breathe dirtier air and drink dirtier water and sending about
1300 people per year to an early grave. Those are dire consequences that we’re already
living with. Imagine what happens as this man continues,
as these psychiatrists point out, to lose his grip on reality. He is detached from reality is what they say. They continue. The one thing we are trained to do is to distinguish
between what is healthy and what is abnormal, and when the pattern of abnormality fits,
then we recognize that it is pathology and not part of the wide variation of which healthy
human beings are capable. What we recognize is a pattern of disease,
and that may look like another political ideology or another political style to the everyday
person who is unfamiliar with pathology, but to us it is a very recognizable pattern. His detachment from reality, his pathology
is actually gaining ground more quickly than the ability of rational actors to bring up
the facts. Meaning he’s getting too crazy that even we
can’t fact check him or continue to diagnose him because it’s getting so bad. For years now, we have been saying, how about
we listen to these people, but I’m going to narrow that focus down real quick. Congress, listen to these professionals. They want to come and talk to you. They want to add his mental health to the
impeachment inquiry. Let them do it because this is a story the
public needs to hear and they won’t hear it if you don’t invite these people to come testify.

Juul Hit With Massive Lawsuits Over Creating Nicotine Addicts With Vaping


Juul Labs is in trouble, as two massive new
lawsuits have accused the company of marketing their products to teenagers to create a new
generation of nicotine addicts. I have Farron Cousins from the trial lawyer
magazine with me to talk about what’s happening. Farron, again and again, we see the same story,
right? Industry comes in, they deny, they deny, they
deny, they cover up, they destroy documents, they hide documents. All of a sudden, serious lawsuits are brought
by governments. This company’s in big trouble right now. Oh absolutely. And I love the way these lawsuits had been
filed because this gives these attorneys general, the ability to go in there, go through these
documents and find out what they were doing with the marketing materials because that’s
where we really need to be looking right now. We know there are growing health issues that
is being examined, but we need to find out the marketing and we know they’ve already
pulled the, those candy flavorings off the market. But to me, that’s almost an admission that
we knew this was candy flavored to attract the teenagers and now we’re going to be able
to find out from their own documents if this was actually intentional, which it obviously
was. Let me tell you the flaw already, that’s developing
here, it’s the same flaw that we see time and time again where the department of justice
doesn’t do what they’re supposed to do. Okay, now let me, let me run a scenario by
you. You have, you have CEOs, you have upward management
of companies that have all the information telling them that people are dying from the
use of the product and then they want to blame it, well, it’s THC. It’s something else that’s causing the injury
when they know that the delivery system itself is part of the problem. Right? Now, if I, if I drink a half a bottle of Jack
Daniels and I’d recklessly drive down a road recklessly, not intentionally, recklessly
drive down a road and I kill somebody that at the very least is called manslaughter. Now you and I have talked about this time
and time again. When is it that corporate America is going
to be held responsible for manslaughter? Because that’s what, that’s what we see here. It’s the same thing that we see time and time
again in pharmaceutical cases. Give me your take on that. Why are we so resonant, why are we so, so
reticent to say, you know, this is, this is murder? They, they knew what was happening to, give
me your take on it. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact
that all these companies you’re talking about, not just Juul, but the big pharmaceutical
companies, the oil companies, the chemical companies, they’re major political players. You know, we, we, we now glorify these CEOs
and say, this is what everybody in this country should aspire to be. We’ve put them on such a pedestal that even
when they do these things that we know from their own documents, they knew people were
going to die. We don’t want to touch them because we still
want to think that, no, these people are somehow better than everybody else. They’re also, behind everybody’s back, gonna
fund my next political campaign. They’re going to give all this money to my
political party and that’s going to help us in the future so we don’t want to touch them. We’ll fine the company, let them write that
off in the end of the year, and then everybody thinks that we handled it, but we don’t. Okay. And this story that you’ve done this story
several times, you, you know this story. I, I opened up with this, with this case in
Vegas at the last, the last big meeting that we had, and as I look at it, we know exactly
who made the decisions. We can point this person made the decision
for that on Juul. This person made the decision for that. We know what they knew when they made the
decision. We know that the decisions were reckless. We know in that same recklessness is no different
than me driving down the road drunk and killing somebody. Same level. No intent doesn’t even have to be intent. I don’t have to intend to kill somebody for
manslaughter. I just have to kill, you know, somebody has
to die. They, they understand the level of recklessness. They put it out there anyway after they know
that people are already dying. How does this not fall into manslaughter? I’ll tell you what, I want to do this. I want to look at the manslaughter statute
and one of our next shows. I want to analyze the manslaughter statute
that exists in most States and show how this is no different than a classic manslaughter. It’s no different Farron than a felony murder
kind of thing where you don’t pull the trigger, but you’re there when the triggers pulled
and people die because of it. I want to pick up with that story the next
program.

Twitter Announces Ban On Political Ads


Twitter announced recently that their ban
on political advertising is going to extend to legislation and social causes, a move that
could hurt candidates in groups who aren’t funded by big money donors. Farron, you said, you’ve said this a couple
of times. Anytime you see social media saying we’re
gonna, we’re, we’re really gonna make it difficult for you to use social media to advertise your
idea, your legislators, legislative concept, your candidacy. Who suffers? The, well the people who are grassroots mostly. And one of the things that’s really so awful
about this new decision is that you can’t even run an ad on Twitter anymore because
they ended it November 22nd. You couldn’t run an ad saying, you know, vote
yes or vote no on proposition one. You couldn’t explain the benefits, you know,
proposition one just to generic. But you can’t advocate or any outcome in any
kind of race or legislative battle. And that is absolutely devastating to the
people who use this as the tool to talk to their constituents. Well, here’s what it says, it says that it’ll
define political content. Now follow this. It’s going to define political content as
anything that references a candidate, a political party, a pointed government official or referendum
or ballot measure or legislation or regulation. What in the hell, I mean, that’s what journalism
does. We talk about these things. The problem is that we, that this is being
run, these decisions are being run in an in an environment where politically correctness
is killing us. I mean, we’ve got, we’re like, we’re, it’s
almost like are we too stupid to be able to read something or see something and make a
decision ourselves? They want to think for us and it’s not just
Twitter. We’re seeing it across the board right now. It’s like, it’s like this millennial snowflake
concept that is killing us. It’s all based on political correctness and
we’ve got to get away from it. The first amendment matters. We ought to be able to talk about a ballot
issue. We ought to be able to talk about legislative
issues that concern us on things like the environment, dangerous products, corruption
in government. This is saying we can’t do that. Well, the problem is they saw Facebook. Facebook took a lot of heat and rightfully
so, but then Facebook said, listen, our decision is we’re not going to fact check anything. You want to run an ad, you run an ad. If somebody reports it as being bad, we’ll
look into it. But we say whatever, run, whatever, and Twitter
says, wow, that’s, that’s one extreme. We’ll go to the other extreme and say nothing
at all. You can’t do anything. But Twitter is a far greater tool to reach
a huge amount of people in the shortest amount of time. And that is what these grassroots candidates,
these, you know, consumer organizations, they rely on Twitter far more than they do on Facebook. Okay. Let’s, let’s put it in a real, healthcare,
okay. Universal healthcare. What do we have with universal healthcare? You have a concept, a cause. Correct? And you have a bill legislative bill, and
according to the rules, you can’t talk about that on Twitter. Now, that’s how ridiculous it’s become. Now the other part of it is we’re going to
have, who is it that’s going to make these decisions? I mean, you’re going to have people that understand
that all of these issues so well that they can define, well, this is actually, this is
actual political discussion. We can’t permit this. Or is this discussion that ties into a bill
that’s pending that we ought to be able to talk about? You see, the problem is anytime you go down
this avenue, you’re saying to the American public, you are so frigging stupid that we
can’t trust you to be able to read something and figure it out yourself. That’s what this is. This is, this is, this is let’s take care
of stupid people because we’re smarter than they are. And what’s going to happen is that eventually
something’s going to squeak through and if it’s a right-leaning thing, the left is going
to be furious and claim a bias. If it’s a left-leaning thing, the right’s
going to claim a bias because eventually, because of the people they’re going to have
doing this, something’s going to sneak through and this is going to come back and bite Twitter
because regardless of which side it is, they’re going to be accused of having a huge bias
and it’s going to throw it all out the window. I, I hope it comes back and bites them. Farron, thanks for joining me. Okay. Thank you.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders Thinks She Has A Bright Future In Politics


Earlier this week, the New York times put
forward one of the biggest fluff pieces imaginable on former white house press secretary Sarah
Huckabee Sanders. Nowhere in this six page puff piece that they
wrote, did they mention that she was a habitual liar, but instead the media did what they
always do and they did the best they could to rehab her image and paint her almost as
a victim when in fact she was one of the biggest villains of the entire Trump administration. The point of the piece, essentially, aside
from rehabbing her image, is to gear her up and gear the public up for her probable run
for governor of Arkansas in 2023 when current governor EISA Hutchinson’s tenure is up, Sarah
Huckabee Sanders had hinted at this in the past. She hints at a even more in this piece. In fact, here’s what she said exactly about
running for governor said, there are two types of people who run for office, people that
are called and people that just want to be a Senator or governor. I feel like I’ve been called. It’s the role I’ve been pushed into. I wouldn’t want to do that if I wasn’t the
right person to fit what the state needed at that time. And it goes on to talk about how the reporter
who wrote this story sat down and had some breakfast tacos with Sarah Huckabee Sanders. You know, because we’re all human, we’re all
friends. It doesn’t matter that she destroyed the white
house press office. It doesn’t matter that she got up there every
day when she was holding those press briefings in, lied to our faces, attacks CNNs, Jim Acosta,
to the point where they pulled his white house press credentials. It doesn’t matter that she had to admit to
investigators that she made the whole thing up about Comey being hated by everybody in
the FBI. I mean under oath. She admits that she lied, but to us, the general
public, the people who were paying her salary, nah, she’ll lie to us all day long. She’ll yell at media outlets and call them
fake news. She’ll allow actual fake news to come in and
ask questions. She was horrible and she is a liar. Here’s the saddest part of it though. She absolutely will win that governor’s race
in Arkansas. If she runs, she 100% will win it. Her father, who was governor from 96 to 2007
still treated like royalty down there and that’s essentially what they look at her as
if he was the King. She is the princess. She is next in line for that throne and it’s
going to happen and that’s sad and part of the reason it’s going to happen is because
you have outlets like the New York times rehabbing her image for her, trying to make us forget
about all the time she lied to us, make us forget about all the time. She lied to the New York times and called
them fake news. Oh, that’s water under the bridge. We’ll send our reporters down there, have
some breakfast tacos and get this wonderful article. She then goes on to paint herself as the victim. Here’s what she said. I was attacked for everything, not just my
performance. I was called a fat soccer mom. My kids were threatened, my life was threatened. It was a lot. I hate harping on it, but to be in the position
I’m in and to have secret service, that’s not normal. I don’t like being called a liar. The other stuff bothered me far less. You just said your kids were threatened and
then you go on to say that that bothers you less than being called a liar. So if you had the choice, according to your
own words here in this article, which New York times somehow didn’t pick up on a, you
would rather your kids be threatened than for somebody to call you a liar. Hmmmm, as a parent, father of four, nothing
in this world would bother me more than my kids being threatened. I don’t, I don’t care what you call me. I don’t care if you call me a liar. I don’t care if you make fun of my weight
or my baldness happens every day in our comment section. Thank you folks. But you come after my kids and we’re going
to have some very real problems. But no, not Sarah Huckabee. Sanders. Nah, it bothers me when you talk about my
kids. When you threaten them. Not as much as when you call me a liar though. This is nuts. This is not a woman who has her priorities
straight. The kids should probably be your, your top
priority, but also let’s, let’s do another thing here. I didn’t even know you had kids. I honest to God, didn’t know you were married
even though your last name is suggested and that’s just now clicking in my brain. I didn’t know any of this. I don’t know who your husband is. I don’t know who your kids are because that’s
not anything we ever talked about here. This is not anything I’ve ever seen anybody
else talk about in all the other segments about you either we we, we didn’t care. We, we focused on the lies that you were telling
us on a daily basis. The assault on the press that you were waging
on behalf of Donald Trump and that’s what we’re going to remember. So no matter how many of these rehab pieces,
New York times or whoever else puts out, we’re not going to forget. But ultimately, since those of us who talk
about you the most aren’t living in Arkansas, our voices may not have that much of effect,
and so willing to bet for five years from now, I’m going to unfortunately have to be
doing segments about Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders.

Judge Smacks Down Trump Administration’s Claim That They’re Above The Law


When the second half of the Robert Mueller
report came out, uh, there was a lot of information in there that said that at the time, the white
house counselor Don McGahn had carried out a lot of orders that Donald Trump asked him
to do, that McGann felt were either inappropriate or quite possibly illegal. And after finding that out from the Mueller
report, Democrats in the house of representatives issued a subpoena for McGahn to come and testify
to them and explain what exactly he meant by carrying out orders by the president that
he felt were illegal. Donald Trump, of course, blocked McGann from
going to testify. They said, Nope, we have immunity. We’re not going to let Don McGahn or anyone
else from the white house, current or former go and testify in front of you. That was seven months ago that this happened. Well, yesterday, finally, a federal judge
issued a ruling on this case and said, guess what, Donald Trump, you are not a King. That was in the ruling, by the way. And yes, Don McGahn, you can in fact go and
testify. You still have all your legal rights when
you testify, you know, we’re, we’re not taking away your rights, you know, to claim the fifth
amendment, your freedom of speech, none of that. You still have all the legal rights a normal
person would have, but you cannot ignore a subpoena. There is no such thing as blanket immunity
and you’re going to go testify. I want to read this little snippet here from
the actual ruling itself because it’s so damning against Donald Trump stated simply the primary
takeaway from the past 250 years of recorded American history is that presidents are not
Kings. This means that they do not have subjects
bound by loyalty or blood whose destiny they’re entitled to control rather in this land of
Liberty. It is indisputable that current and former
employees of the white house work for the people of the United States and that they
take an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the United States. Moreover, as citizens of the United States
current and former senior level, presidential aides have constitutional rights including
the right to free speech and they retain these rights even after they have transitioned back
into private life. Meaning you’ve got your constitutional rights
buddy, even though you’re no longer the white house counsel, but you can’t be prohibited
from going and testifying in front of Congress. And again, this is related to what was said
in the Muller report. So this is kind of old news. The hearing is not, or the ruling, excuse
me, is not because it just came down yesterday, but this could have very serious ramifications
for the current hearings happening in the house of representatives because Donald Trump
has made same claim about the people. He is prohibited from testifying before Congress
that he did back in the Mueller days. And that is, we’ve got blanket immunity. You can’t call my people to testify. They’ve been prohibiting people inside the
white house from going in, speaking about the Ukraine scandal, just like they did about
the Mueller report. And this judge says, Nope, not going to fly. That can’t happen. So of course the Trump administration is absolutely
going to appeal this, but with any luck judges further down the line, possibly even the Supreme
court may end up agreeing with this federal judge. Because after all, as we’ve sta said, if you
give the white house blanket immunity, you also run the risk of giving the next democratic
president because eventually we’ll have another one. They would also enjoy that same immunity,
and that’s when it’s going to come back to bite those Republicans. So they’re not willing to take the chance
right now to say that the white house is in fact above the law because they know eventually
they’re not going to control the white house anymore.