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.

The REAL Reason Kamala Harris Dropped Out


>>Kamala Harris has dropped out of the presidential
race. She was not doing well in the polls. She was expecting to drop out at some point
but it was shocking that she did so as soon as she did. Now we’re gonna go through her campaign, what
she pretended to support in the beginning, what she actually ended up supporting in the
end. And then we’ll share our theories as to why
she’s decided to drop out, but I do wanna read from her official statement on this,
which she posted on Medium. 11 months ago at the launch of our campaign
in Oakland I told you all I am not perfect. But I will always speak with decency and moral
clarity and treat all people with dignity and respect. I will lead with integrity. I will speak the truth. And that’s what I have tried to do every day
of this campaign. So here’s the truth today. I have taken stock and looked at this from
every angle and over the last few days have come to one of the hardest decisions of my
life. My campaign for president simply does not
have the financial resources we need to continue. She continues to write, I’m not a billionaire. I can’t fund my own campaign. And as the campaign has gone on, it’s become
harder and harder to raise money we need to compete. So that’s her official statement, before we
rewind and take a look at how she conducted her campaign, do you wanna jump in Cenk?>>Yeah, so I think that she’s being honest
and acknowledging that she’s financially strapped and that’s one of the issues, but that’s only
half the equation. The other half of the equation also has to
do with donors. And this is the part that’s not spoken about. So when a real contender drops out relatively
early, and that is what’s happening here, Kamala Harris has always been a real contender. And she was top five when she dropped out. Now you might say, hey, five doesn’t sound
that close to one. But remember, at different times there’s been
27 candidates in this race and with her exit, there still remains 15. So she was always in the top tier and she
was in the top tier now. She’s dropping out a couple of months before
the voting begins, so that is definitely surprising. So, what happened? Well, as happened on the Republican side was
Scott Walker back in 2016 and other potential top tier contender that dropped out very early. Usually what happens is that the donors call
you and go, it’s not gonna be you. It’s gonna be someone else that we support. So you need to get out now because you’re
taking away points from the other person we’re supporting. So, I believe that is part of what happened
here. And so do I have inside information about
that from the Harris’ campaign? I wanna be very clear, no, I do not. This is my knowledge of politics and my experience
and expertise gained over a quarter of a century. Telling you guys that usually there are conversations
like this also within Democratic Party. Now remember, Bernie’s a second place in Iowa,
New Hampshire, Nevada and nationally. So, we have to coales the moderates centrist
corporate Democrats behind one candidate. And Kamala turns out it’s not gonna be you. Now a lot of people thought it was gonna be
her, including me. I though she was going to be the establishment
candidate, but as it turned out she wasn’t. And so now there is an attempt by the Democratic
Party machine slash the donor class to take out the other moderates, so they could focus
their energy on likely Buttigieg.>>So do you think there’s a possibility that
one of the front runners obviously not Bernie Sanders, but one of the other front runners,
maybe struck a deal with her as a potential VP pick?>>Yeah, look, anything is possible, but I’d
be surprised by that cuz there’s too many front runners for her to actively and accurately
guess as to who’s going to win. So
>>Or Attorney General, which is apparently trending right now as we speak on social media.>>Yeah, but who would she have made the deal
with Biden or Buttigieg not gonna be Klobuchar, not gonna be Bloomberg. It’s not gonna be Warren or Sanders, so I
just don’t see it. Maybe I’m wrong about that. It’s not that I would say, that is unethical
and they would make that kind of deal. No, no, no, let’s not be naive. It’s just that I don’t know who would offer
that deal. And who she would think would be credible
enough to accept it from. No, I think she really legitimately ran outta
money. And when the numbers came out at the end of
December for the next quarter, she was going to be very low on that list. And she wanna drop out before that embarrassing
moment and probably got a couple of calls from power brokers in the Democratic Party
saying, look it would be helpful if you would exit so we can all get behind one person.>>So Politico reported that apparently there
was a super PAC who that had cleared a million dollars in TV ads in Iowa to boost her struggling
campaign. So they were about to start that campaign,
I’m sorry that ad campaign and then right before they were about to do so this was announced
and they decided to pull it.>>So it was like there was some money and
some support by by donors>>No, she’s always had the most support by
the Democratic establishment when this whole race began. Buttigieg rose late and even the Democratic
donors were surprised at how long Biden has stayed at the top. So they always thought that Kamala would be
the person that would rise up and take on the progressive wing of the party. But that did not materialize in the way that
she had hoped for and that they had hoped for. So when I talk about the forces within the
Democratic Party, yeah, the Super PACs are definitely integral to that. So when somebody’s thinking of putting in
a million dollars or more either for you or for another candidate, will they have a voice
at the table? Yes, yes, they will. So to say that they won’t is incredibly naive
and purposely ignores the elephant in the room, the major force in today’s American
politics, which is the donor money, which rules almost everything.>>So let’s talk a little bit about why her
campaign started out pretty strong and then ended up struggling, okay? Because her messaging in my opinion and I’m
gonna provide evidence that really bears this out was unclear, was wishy washy. She did start out attempting to appear as
though her positions on policies were incredibly progressive. In fact, here’s a mash up that kind of gives
you a sense of that.>>Hey, guys, you know what, America does
not wanna witness a food fight. They wanna know how we’re going to put food
on their table.>>This president walks around talking about
and flaunting his great economy, right? My great economy, my great economy. You ask him, how you’re measuring this greatness
of this economy of yours? And he talks about stock market, well, that’s
fine if you own stocks. So many families in America do not. You ask them how are you measuring the greatness
in this economy of yours? And they point to the job numbers and the
unemployment numbers. Well, you have people in America are working,
they’re working two and three jobs. So when we talk about jobs, let’s be really
clear in our America, no one should have to work more than one job to have a roof over
their head and food on the table.>>So, she really focusing on economic issues
there. Issues that progressives have really brought
front and center when it comes to this election. And then things started to change when it
came to her support for medicare for all. And we’ll get to that in just a second, but
do you wanna jump in?>>Yeah, so she had the right lane, which
now Buttigieg occupies if you’re an establishment candidate. What was that lane? To be brazenly pro-corporate conservative
Democrat? No, that’s the lane of for example, John Delaney,
Michael Bennett, Amy Klobuchar, and that’s a lane that’s headed nowhere. That’s a cul de sac. So that is not the correct lane, the correct
lane politically, if you’re an establishment candidate was pretend that you’re a progressive,
but tell donors and reporters behind the scenes, I’m not really don’t worry
>>And she did that,>>Yeah, she absolutely did do that. But then she lost her nerve and she panicked
and then publicly said, no,no, no, I’m not a progressive. I’m turning against Medicare for all, I’m
turning against all these proposals. She had him, she had Biden, she landed a couple
of really strong punches against Biden on the political debate, I said that she won
that debate. Everybody says she won that debate, but I’m
just telling you as a progressive, I thought she wanted even though I don’t totally agree
with their policies. So she had the right lane, but my best guess
again is donors pulled her aside and was like, no Kamala, we’re not doing Medicare for all. I don’t even like you talking about it, so
go in the other direction. So now Buttigieg has taken that lane and it
has given him success, pretend to be a progressive, but in fact turn around and give the donors
everything they want.>>So I wanna help reinforce the point that
you just made cuz you’re absolutely right. She did have some strong moments in debates
when it came to hitting back at Biden and Buttigieg. I’m sorry, Biden on busing, I mean, so let’s
go to that video. Again, this is during one of the Democratic
debates, Kamala Harris is confronting Joe Biden on busing.>>It was hurtful to hear you talk about the
reputations of two United States senators who built their reputation and career on the
segregation of race in this country. And it was not only that, but you also work
with them to oppose busing. And there was a little girl in California,
who was part of the second class to integrate her public schools, and she was bused to school
every day. And that little girl was me.>>Yeah, I think that was her strongest performance
in the debates. And honestly after that she did become even
more wishy washy on Medicare for All.>>Yeah
>>She did waffle on a lot of these policy issues that progressives care about and look,
the mistake that candidates are making. This isn’t just about Kamala Harris, this
is about a number of candidates who keep pretending as though they have progressive policy stances. They think progressives are stupid, they think
progressives aren’t paying attention. We’re paying close attention to everything
these candidates say, both on the campaign trail and on the debate stage. And so they can raise their hand and claim
that they’re in favor of doing away with private insurers. They can pretend like they support Medicare
for all. But the devil’s in the details and I think
over and over again we have seen candidate suffer when they waffle on Medicare for all. When they say one thing on the debate stages,
say something completely different behind the scene.>>With notable exception of Pete Buttigieg
because the media refuses to criticize him under any and all circumstances.>>But here is the thing, like Pete Buttigieg
I don’t think he has ever really pretended to support Medicare for all>>No he did, in 2018, he boldly said he was
for Medicare for all, when it was polling well and he thought he was gonna to pretend
to be a progressive. The media will not criticize him under penalty
of law and I say that in relationship to Kamala Harris cuz they did criticize her from time
to time on her waffling, on her raising of her hands but then putting it down after the
debates. So when they noticed that she was doing those
things they would criticize her. When she attacked Biden a lot of the press
criticized her for being too hard on Biden. And that got her waffling and then eventually
she went back to being supportive of Biden, and so that, got into her head a little bit. So I give that as a comparison to Buttigieg
because Buttigieg never gets criticized for anything, anything at all. So he gets a free ride. And so I don’t know that it’s racial or it’s,
gender related. I really, really don’t know that. But I think it’s fair for people to ask why
is there even among two candidates that are incredibly similar. They’re the same exact campus not a progressive
versus establishment. So that doesn’t explain it between Buttigieg
and Kamala Harris, they’re nearly identical. But the press was middling on Kamala Harris
to tough and total free ride for Buttigieg, back then and today on the same exact flip
flops. But I do wanna go back to Senator Harris’
issues here. She said, that girl was me, talking about
the busing, in the clip that we showed you. Biden is unbelievable, and you might have
seen the very end there, when she says that girl was me. Biden goes you didn’t see that coming? It’s unbelievable.>>He’s.>>I know what you’re talking about, but that
was kinda cut.>>That was kinda quick, but she had shirts
made out after the debate that they handed out, said that girl was me. What are you doing? That’s why Maya Rudolph started making fun
of her and saying it live because she’s pre-planning, the tweets, the social media reaction, the
merchandising, based on a line she rehearsed before the debate and they have pre-produced. No, then you look totally inauthentic. You had a great line, leave it be, leave it
be. And then in fact don’t even be, keep on going,
why did you back peddle on Biden? You had him, and you weren’t competing against
Warren or Sanders, you’re competing as Biden to be the established candidate. You should have never let the press and the
donors get into your head about don’t criticize Biden, he might eventually be out guy. Who cares, you’re running against him, you
were right about all of those, you should have gone after him on the bankruptcy bill. On giving away the taxes, even Michael Bennet
went after him for making Bush’s tax curse permanent. So there were so many things to go after there,
but her number one problem wasn’t that she made those initial attacks that’s when she
rose. There’s no question about that. When she was saying she was progressive and
she was attacking Biden, that’s when she rose up to the top three. When she was wishy washy, back pedaled, admitted
she wasn’t a progressive and stopped attacking Biden, she slid all the way back down. Then there is no question about their chronology. So now the mainstream media might try to deceive
you with a false talking points about why she might have got in the wrong direction. But the timeline is crystal clear.>>I wanna actually look at the timeline because
we have a chart from Real Clear Politics, that compares all the different candidates. And where they stood, depending on the month,
and if you can see Harris is orange. So the orange line represents Kamala Harris
and you see her spike in July, and then after that she starts to dip considerably, right? And then in April when she started experiencing
her first dip and Warren started experiencing a little bit of a surge. And remember, that was when Warren started
to really push this notion that she’s a strong progressive. She’s gonna hold Wall Street accountable at
that time, she claimed that she was a strong supporter of Medicare for all. And so I think that the media, the mainstream
media has an incentive to stay away from the true narrative, what’s really going on. What voters really want because they wanna,
they wanna keep their tax cuts. Let’s keep it real.>>Yeah, guys, put that chart back up because
I wanna show you two things about that. So, Kamala Harris goes up right after that
debate performance that we showed you guys. So you see the orange spiking up and then
you see it go down, when you start to see it go down is when she changed her stance
on Medicare for all. No ands, ifs, or buts. You see Warren in the brown, so she catches
Biden who’s in green, and then she starts to head down. That is where she changed her stance on Medicare
for all and started talking about a public option as a transition, etc. I defy anyone to show me otherwise. So those are absolutely clear, you wanna know
why? It’s not that complicated, Democratic primary
voters New York Times just did a poll on this. 81% of them want Medicare for all, where’s
the hard part? So, but the mainstream media will tell you
no, the voters don’t want Medicare for all. It’s unpopular, hey Kamala and Warren make
sure you are against Medicare for all. How’s that working out for you? And to be fair to Elizabeth Warren, she’s
not against Medicare for all, but that two tiered idea of going with a public option
first disaster, and that’s what’s tanking her numbers. So at the end of the day, when I look at all
that, I think, all right, you try to win all the field big donors, and get behind Biden
or Buttigieg, but I’ll take my chances. If it turns out Sanders is the one true progressive
that’s left, I like those odds a lot.

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.

College President Facing Impeachment For Paying Donald Trump Jr. $50,000


How was it that everything that the Trump
family touches just turns to complete and utter crap? Think about this. It was announced earlier this week on Tuesday
actually, that the student body president of the university of Florida was facing an
impeachment inquiry that happened this past Tuesday. And do you know why this student, Michael
Murphy is facing an impeachment inquiry because he’s being accused of the illegally using
student funds to pay Donald Trump jr and his girlfriend Kimberly, uh Guilfoyle $50,000
to come speak at the university. Now, here’s the backstory on all of this. Obviously, if you want to have any kind of
politician or political writer, which this was to promote his book triggered, um, come
to your school, you can do that. You gotta raise the money or use it from your
clubs, fees, whatever it is, you pay them the money. And sure, if it’s partisan, it’s partisan,
whatever, that’s perfectly fine. But what mr student body president at university
of Florida, Michael Murphy did, allegedly was, he used mandatory student fees to pay
the $50,000 to Donald Trump. Now, mandatory student fees are exactly what
they sound like. Fees that every student is forced to pay to
the college. The college is a publicly funded university
as well, which means it cannot in any way support or engage in partisan politics. So by taking those mandatory student fees
and using that to pay for a partisan political event does become an impeachable offense for
Mr. Michael Murphy. And during Donald Trump and Kimberly Goyal
foils, little speech down there, they engaged in partisan politics. They promoted his father’s campaign, so automatically
off the top, that makes it a partisan event because they’re elevating a political party
slash politician that partisan game over a Gilfoyle Goyalfoil. However you say it. I honestly don’t care. She’s a horrible human being. Um, she attacked verbally the liberal protesters
at the event, both inside and out of the event. So that’s engaging in partisan politics. Donald Trump jr did the same thing. There’s no question this was a partisan event,
but Michael Murphy thought, you know what? I don’t want to spend our, our club money
on this. I’m going to take money from the college itself
to pay this jerk because after all, I know that people will work for his campaign. There’s the plot twist folks. She, Michael Murphy isn’t just some kid who
Rose up through the ranks at the university of Florida, got elected. Their student body president came from nothing. Oh God, no folks, his daddy is a high profile
Republican lobbyist and they have millions of dollars and his daddy’s given a lot of
money to the Donald Trump campaign. And then this past summer, lil Michael Murphy
was at a party at one of Donald Trump, 2020 staffers houses like not just a house party
like you. You’ve seen it at university of Florida. I’ve been to a couple. Those are amazing. No, this was one of the crappy kinds where
it’s all the horrible Florida Republican rich folk hanging out. And Michael Murphy was there and that’s how
we met the person who put him in touch with Trump jr to come to the college impeach this
kid, impeach him today because you knew exactly what he was doing. But this is how incestuous and disgusting
Florida politics and Florida universities truly are. If you’re a Republican in this state and you’ve
got a lot of money, you can get away with anything. Just ask Matt Gates and his dad, Don Gates,
both of them got away with massive crimes and this little kid who inappropriately used
his college’s money to benefit his friend Donnie jr, I’d say he probably based on his
current behavior, has a pretty bright future and Republican politics because he’s already
on the path of corruption and deception, which pretty much are the core of the entire Republican party today.

Furious Trump Attacks Fox News For Interviewing A Democrat


Donald Trump has been pretty angry recently
as these impeachment hearings are showing more and more information that’s really, really
damaging for his presidency. But yesterday he flew off the handle because
Fox news had the audacity to get this interview a Democrat on live television. I know it’s shocking, right? A news organization, or at least an organization
that has news in the title thought it worthwhile to bring on a Democrat who happened to be
a part of the impeachment hearing of that day and that set Trump off. He tweeted the following, he said, why do
@Shane and bream and at Fox news waste their time on Democrat representative Eric Swalwell,
who recently left the presidential primaries having attained a grand number of zero in
the polls. I don’t even know how that is possible. Fox should stay with the people that got them. They’re not losers. I’m about to give Donald Trump a lot of credit
right here because I am shocked folks. I am shocked that when he was talking about
Eric Swalwell, he did not bring up fart gate. That shows that maybe this man has a little
bit more restraint than we thought he did. And of course to Swalwell’s credit, the interview
on Fox news went off without a anything going off I should say. So yeah, good for Swalwell there, but at the
same time, what the hell is Donald Trump talking about? You? You, you should stay with the people that
got them there. Got who were you? You didn’t do this. Fox news was already killing it and the ratings
long before you even thought about running for president. That’s kind of always been their thing. It sucks. But let’s be honest, they’ve always had the
best ratings because conservatives have to tune in to get their talking points. Democrats. Liberals were capable of making up our own
minds and forming our own opinions. Republicans aren’t so they tune into Fox news
and that’s why they’re popular. But you didn’t knew that you had nothing to
do with the success of Fox news. So what are you talking about? Stay with who brought you or who got you there
that that’s nuts. This man is nuts. These are the rantings of a madman who also
happens to have access to the nuclear codes and could at any given point should the mood
strike him, issue a nuclear attack anywhere on the planet and we couldn’t stop him. But luckily instead he’s sitting around probably
in his little recliner all day long watching Fox news. That’s what this guy does when he’s not out
there spending money at his own golf courses. Just Fox news all day and Twitter and commenting
on Fox news on Twitter, complaining about Fox news on Twitter when they don’t do exactly
what the man wants them to. Let’s remember, Neil Cavuto not that long
ago, had to do a whole little segment, a little monologue about the fact that Fox news doesn’t
work for you. Mr. Trump. Yes, they blindly support you, most of the
folks on the network, but they don’t actually work for you. If you want them to, then by all means go
ahead and hire him as Sean Hannity to come be your new communications director. Ask Tucker Carlson to be your chief of staff. Their politics aligned right up there with
yours. You probably got to get rid of Steve Miller
now, now that we’ve all seen him in the white hood, so maybe Tucker Carlson would be a good
replacement for him, but if you want Fox news host to do what you want them to do, then
you’ve got to hire them yourself. Because even as horrible as that network is,
they still occasionally do have a mind of their own.

Bernie DRAGS Michael Bloomberg


>>Tonight we said Michael Bloomberg and all
other billionaire sorry. Yeah, you go to a buy this election.>>That’s senator Bernie Sanders at his Iowa
rally over the weekend to a see also attended and spoke about a very is campaign issues
but more importantly about Michael Bloomberg entering the race. And now we have some reporting indicating
that Bloomberg had a conversation with Jeff Bezos, the head of Amazon, and during an interview
with the Des Moines Register both Bernie and AOC had some interesting things to say about
that solidarity between Bezos and Bloomberg. Now, according to box sometime after Amazon
pulled the plug on plans for a new york city headquarters in February of this year, the
city’s former Mayor Michael Bloomberg received a call from Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. Bezos was calling with a question for his
fellow billionaire and media mogul. Would Bloomberg consider entering the 2020
presidential race? Now, at that time Bloomberg essentially said
no, but as we all know, he has decided to reverse his decision and he is considering,
he is more serious about running. Now, Sanders couldn’t contain his laughter
to speak when he was asked about this by the Des Moines Register. And AOC stepped in to answer the question
saying, of course they’ve got class solidarity. The billionaires are looking out for each
other. They’re willing to transcend difference and
background and even politics. The fact that Bill Gates seems more willing
to vote for Donald Trump than anyone else tells you everything you need to know about
how far they’re willing to go to protect their excess. At the cost to everyday Americans. So with that said, I wanna go to one more
clip from the rally that took place over the weekend and then we’ll discuss.>>What campaign is going to end a corrupt
political system dominated by billionaires and wealthy campaign contributors?>>Our campaign is going to end the grotesque
level of income and wealth inequality which exists in America today.>>You are not gonna buy this election by
spending hundreds of millions of dollars on media in California. Those days are gone.>>By the way Bernie Sanders also told the
Des Moines Register quote, Jeff Bezos, worth $150 billion, supporting Mike Bloomberg, who’s
worth only $50 billion. That’s real class solidarity. I’m impressed by that grassroots movement.>>To be fari, Jeff Bezos is worth 150 billion. So, that’s 200, between them.>>Geez. Wait. What did I say? Did I-
>>You said, 100.>>My bad.>>It’s actually 150 because I’ll tell you
who’s gonna complain about that is Jeff Bezos It’s like, well, hey, you think I only have
$100 billion now? Now, remember poor me. Okay, duly noted. So, I want to note a couple of things that
are important about this story. First of all, Bloomberg didn’t call Bezos
to ask him if he should get in, Bezos who’s not only the owner of Amazon, but the owner
of the Washington post. Called Bloomberg asking him to enter the race. Interesting note, very interesting note. Now, between them the two billionaires own
the Washington Post and Bloomberg News. That’s a giant part of the media. So when we say there might be corporate media
influence in favor of the establishment. And the reporters and editors feigned outrage
or maybe they really are outraged. But it goes to show you how thick their bias
is. They are like, you’re saying, like did the
owner of The Washington Post worth $150 billion? Has a bias in favor of billionaires. And that he would maybe even call another
billionaire to try to enter the race to make sure that his top critics like Bernie Sanders
doesn’t win. Outrageous conspiracy theory except that it
actually totally happened. So now, you can say, hey, as a reporter for
The Washington Post, it doesn’t affect me I hope that’s true and I think probably in
some cases it is true. But I think also in some cases perhaps it
does affect you, at least some of you and certainly in Bloomberg’s case as well. So they say, if you’re progressive then we’re
gonna call you biased. But if you’re in favor of billionaires, well,
that’s just being objective, right?>>I mean, you do see similar behavior abroad. I mean, in Latin American countries, you have
staged military coups, right, to do away with leftist leaders. And then in America, I mean we’ve been having
corporate coups, when you really think about it. We’ve had corporate influence over our elections
for how long now? And their influence has only gotten stronger
throughout the decades. And so when a progressive calls them out on
it, when a progressive calls out Jeff Bezos or other corporate executives for their influence
over our elections, they’re so aggrieved by it.>>Yeah.>>So angry by it.>>Yeah, I’ll tell you. What I’m angry about is that when the corporate
media says that they alone are objective, and that their perspective should be privileged. That the status quo in the establishment,
in essence implicitly is the correct point of view, is the objective point of view. And that anything outside of that is by definition
biased. That is actually the worst form of bias. Say no, my perspective isn’t even a perspective. It’s preposterous and the privileges, wealth,
and power and the elite. And that is the Washington Post was on. A lot of vacations, not all but a lot and
certainly Bloomberg News as well. And by the way, also to be fair to them because
that’s exactly what we’re doing on the show. A lot of times Bloomberg news breaks fantastic
stories and so they’ve got real investigative journalist at both of those organizations,
they’ve got good editors in both organizations. But the billionaire’s, the top are doing most
of the hiring or it’s trickling down obviously. And what you have is, in a sense, trickle
down economics in media, where the billionaires do all the hiring decisions that then trickle
down to all of the folks who have a group think that the establishment is awesome. And any kind of change, especially from the
left Is radical and biased and unacceptable. And I wanna add one more thing here. Look, the relationship with Bezos and Bernie
Sanders is not a theoretical one. It’s not hey, just ideological or hypothetical. It’s real, he did a stop Bezos sack Bernie
Sanders did in the Senate and it totally worked. It got it pressured Amazon to increase their
minimum wage at their company to $15 an hour across the the country. So it costs Bezos money. I mean, he might have been at 151 billion
right now if it wasn’t for goddamn Bernie Sanders in his mind, right.>>She don’t like that.>>Yeah, and so, and if you remember there
was just huge celebration of the actual workers of Amazon when that news was announced. In fact, Bernie Sanders nine case happens
to be one of the very, very, very rare politicians that actually got anything done, let alone
increase your wages. That’s a gigantic difference. He was joined by Rho con and doing that on
the House side. And that worked. And so that is what actually bothers the Jeff
Bezos of the world. The most. Remember, every dollar they pay you in wages
is $1. They don’t get to keep in profit. So they are by definition opposed to their
own workers. The people who are supposed to stand up for
you are your representatives, the government. And when the government actually does this
job is when the billionaires get the most upset. So they see a guy like Sanders and they think,
he might actually represent the people and we can have that. Everybody go, let’s all join ranks, you run
all back you, right? Whether it’s with money, which with media,
etc. But we cannot have real representatives of
the people. And that’s the reality of the powerful and
elite in this country.>>Yeah, and I look, I just want to say one
final thing. I think that Bernie Sanders and how he’s really
stuck to this message, this economic populist message, and it’s not insincere. He’s not doing it for political gain. He’s been fighting for the same things for
decades. But I think that that message really does
resonate with people of all political ideologies right? It doesn’t matter which political group you
identify with, if you’re a worker in America, you feel how this economic system is rigged
against you. So that message resonates with so many people,
including people who ended up voting for Trump. So I think this is smart. I think it’s really focusing on the issues
that matter most to Americans overall. And hopefully, the primaries work out for
him because I think that he has one of the best messages when it comes to fixing this
broken economic system.

Bolivia’s President Evo Morales Resigns


>>A military coup has occurred in Bolivia
forcing its President, Evo Morales, to step down. Now, he is urging individuals to resist this
military coup, but there had been violence that he felt the need to stop. And he felt the only way to stop it was to
step down. Now, there is reason to believe that this
military coup has the United States written all over it and I’ll tell you why in just
a moment. But first, let me just note that Morales was
Bolivia’s first indigenous President. He was re-elected last month for his fourth
term and you had an organization get involved and argue that there was fraud in this election. Even though there was absolutely no evidence
whatsoever to indicate that there was any type of rigging or any type of fraud. The Organization of American States, also
known as OAS, made this claim. And it’s important to note that this is mostly
funded by the United States. Now, before I get into more details about
what occurred in Bolivia, I do wanna go to this next video. Mark Weisbrod is from the Center for Economic
and Policy Research. And he gives you some sense of what the OAS
is and what type of US interest played a role in this military coup. Take a look.>>Well this is a military coup. There is no doubt about it now, after the
head of the military told the president and vice president to resign and then they did. And I think it’s really terrible the way it’s
been presented, because from the beginning, you had that OAS press release the day after
the election, which hinted. Or implied actually, very strongly, that there
was something wrong with the vote count. And they never presented any evidence at all. They didn’t present it in that release. They didn’t present it in their next release. They didn’t present it in their preliminary
report. And there’s really nothing in this latest
so-called preliminary audit, that shows that there was any fraud in this election. But it was repeated over and over again in
all the media. And so it became of true and if you look at
the media you don’t see anybody. You don’t see any experts for example, saying
that there was something wrong with the vote count. It’s really just that OAS observation mission,
which was under a lot of pressure, of course, from Senator Rubio. And the Trump administration to do this because
they wanted for some time to get rid of this government.>>So Evo Morales was well-liked by Nicolas
Maduro, by Lula da Silva from Brazil. He was part of the Pink Tide Movement in Latin
American countries where leftists really took over with an economic populist message.>>And Morales was able to lift nearly 20%
of Bolivians out of poverty.>>They hate that.>>And they hate that. That is the reason why you have people like
Donald Trump and Marco Rubio, targeting Latin American leaders like Evo Morales. Now, I wanna know, Morales wasn’t perfect,
okay? So, I don’t want this to be a one-sided story. This was a military coup. I disagree with it. again, it has the United States written all
over it and it’s wrong.>>But one of the things that some liberals
in America keep latching on to is what happened with term limits in Bolivia. Now, back in 2009, there were term limits. You could only get reelected one more time. You can serve two terms. But Evo Morales is actually worked with the
Constitutional Court to do away with that term limit. And so he got reelected for the fourth time. And that’s when you have the OAS get involved,
and essentially, do this military coup to push him out. Now, I’m gonna give you more details in just
a minute. But Jake, do you want to jump in?>>Yeah, so two things about that. Look, I’m not a big fan of that either, but
now let’s give you context. First of all, so their Constitutional Court
is our Supreme Court. So, there was a guy named Powell who wound
up becoming justice Powell, who wrote a memo for the Chamber of Commerce when he was a
lawyer for them say. We should take over the Supreme Court and
other institutions in America. So Nixon eventually saw that memo, said, well
I like this guy letting big corporations take over the Supreme Court. And literally put Powell on the Supreme Court. And so he packed the court with his favorites. And eventually the court said yes, corporations
can give unlimited money to politicians, which allowed corporations to buy all of our government. So you’re telling me, Latin America is corrupt? Well, our republicans stacked the court so
that corporations can buy our entire government wholesale, but it’s not just that. How about term limits? Well, New York has a term limit on mayors. But when Bloomberg didn’t like it, he was
like, yeah? I’m gonna run for a third term. What are you gonna do about it? But nobody ever called him a dictator. And in fact, the mainstream media kiss his
ass day in and day out, including today, right? Like, Bloomberg. Maybe you should be president. Maybe you should be president. He’s got a real chance here, right? But when Evo Morales does the same exact thing,
dictatorial, tyrannical, right? So then be honest and be objective. Are they both tyrannical and will you call
Mike Bloomberg tyrannical from here on out? If not, what are your standards, okay? The New York Times story on this was an embarrassment.>>It was 100%, 100%, but luckily, there are
independent media sources that have done good reporting on this. And Democracy now happens to be one of them. And so I wanna go to one more clip from Democracy
Now. Again, this is Mark Weisbrod. He’s from the Center for Economic and Policy
Research and he gives more detail into the OAS and how its funded.>>In terms of the Trump administration, you
can look at the tweets. And statements from Marco Rubio right before
the votes were even counted saying that there was gonna be fraud. And making clear that they didn’t want this
government to be there. And so yeah, I think that it’s very obvious
that they support this coup. And it’s very obvious that they pressured
the OAS, where the United States supplies 60% of the budget. And this is the problem. The media treats this OAS as though it’s really
an independent arbiter here and they do have electoral missions. And most of the time they’re clean but they
are not always. And in Haiti, in 2011, for example, they reversed
the results of a first round presidential election without any statistical test, recount
or any reason. It was completely political.>>So he’s right. This is mostly funded by the United States. You have Donald Trump which he attempted a
coup in Venezuela earlier which we’ve talked about on this show. And now it appears that there was a successful
military coup in another country where you have a leftist leader that they do not like. And keep in mind, Evo Morales, the profits
from oil in Bolivia, he made sure that it went back to his people, or the commodities. Any profits from the commodities went back
to the people. And that is exactly what people like Marco
Rubio and Donald Trump absolutely despise. Now, there have been some good politicians
in America who have spoken out against this. And one of those politicians is Bernie Sanders. He said via Twitter. I’m concerned about what appears to be a coup
in Bolivia where the military, after weeks of political unrest, intervened to remove
President Evo Morales. The US must call for an end to violence and
support Bolivia’s democratic institutions. Morales was democratically elected. Unless there is actual evidence to indicate
otherwise, this is unacceptable. This was a military coup. And look, it is, I guess consistent with how
republicans feel about election meddling, because they allowed Russia to meddle in our
elections. Why not go off and meddle in other countries’
elections as well?>>So, Weiss made another great point. He said, look, when there was this slight
irregularity where the vote counting was paused for a while in the middle of the election. And so Morales needs ten points to avoid a
runoff. But when they stopped the vote counting, he
already had a big lead. And the rest of the counties were more indigenous
areas where he does great. So the trend, after they started counting
the vote again, was the same as the one before they started county. And the OAS has no evidence. It has shown no evidence of actual voting
irregularities. I’d like to note that here in America in the
year 2000, we stopped vote counting. And it turns out Al Gore would’ve won the
state of Florida. He should have been president. But our corrupt Supreme Court said no, I don’t
care what the votes are. I’m gonna stop the vote counting. You wanna talk about a voting irregularity? And I’m going to just declare Bush the president. So that is way more corrupt. Okay, now do I like that they stopped the
vote in the middle? No. Does that give me pause? Yes. This reminds me of who said in one particular
vote, a cat walked into an electric socket or something. And knocked out the electricity in nine different
cities. Okay, so I treat that with great skepticism. But here, in the case of Venezuela, there
actually were voting irregularities, okay? And I’m very concerned about the elections
in Venezuela. But here, you have no evidence of voting irregularities.>>No evidence, and Morales offered to do
the election again. Right, he offered that but it’s not about
the election. It’s not about supposed irregularities. It’s about pushing him out and that’s exactly
what they got.>>And guys, in Venezuela they said voting
irregularities. Here they see the same thing, even though
they have no evidence of that. Then they said in Venezuela, well look, he
destroyed the economy and everybody’s suffering. But Evo Morales lifted the economy up. And he lifted a ton of people, a huge percentage
of the country out in power poverty. So they don’t have that excuse, but it doesn’t
matter. They go to the same playbook anyway, cuz he’s
like, it reminds me of The Big Lebowski. We want the oil any way, Lebowski, right? And so in this case, it’s natural gas more
than anything else. But, the reason I say the New York Times did
an embarrassing piece here is cuz Weisbrod gives you, for example, context. And is fair about it. He say OAS most of the time is honest, but
it has these issues. Did you notice what he said about Rubio? That he tweeted about voting irregularities
before they happen. Before the so-called irregularities happen. Okay, that is that the bare minimum, something
you should look into verify. And if that is really true, makes you go hm,
I wonder what Rubio knew about the so-called irregularities that were gonna happen. I am not saying definitively that Rubio’s
part of some planet or something. But if you’re a real reporter, you’d look
at that. If you’re a real reporter you would note that
the military demanded that he step down. And Morales is calling it a coup, and so is
his vice president. And so are all the so many different people
who resigned from his government. You would give that context. Now, they do know that Morales called it a
coup and so did his vice president. But they don’t explain when the military says
you must step down that is by definition a coup. Instead, almost all the mainstream media is
reporting well, hey look irregularities and Morales is a bad guy. And if you’re thinking wow I can’t believe
New York Times is doing that. When we did all the other coups in the 1960s
70s and all in that era, one of the first things the CIA, they would do two things. You go read any history on this, okay? Number one, they would do fake agitation in
the streets. They would rile up people. And then they would start paying off cops
and military and say, my god, it’s untenable. Somebody has to do something about this. And the second thing they would do is they
would go to our press, New York Times included. Time Magazine was notorious for this back
in the day. And they would say now write that he is a
bad guy. He is a Communist and if we don’t do something
about it he’s gonna endanger America. Full well-known, it isn’t true and a lot
of the mainstream media played along with that. So now I think they’re better today, but
this was not a shining example of it.>>And one final thing that I do have to mention,
again, Morales was the country’s first indigenous president. Prior to him, the country was ruled by a small
group of elite who were descendants of European countries. Now, there is a component of this that is
clearly racist. And Glenn Greenwald tweeted a video which,
why don’t we bring that video up now and I’m gonna read Glenn’s tweet as we watch it. Bolivian police cutting the indigenous flag,
which had been Bolivia’s second official flag, off their uniforms. This coup is literally the opposite of restoring
democracy, which is how it’s being depicted in Western press. It’s violent, racist, imperial, christian
fanaticism. It’s disgusting.>>Yeah, now why do you cut the indigenous
flag off if this isn’t about race and this is about so-called voting irregularities? Or does that look a little organized to you
from forces who never wanted the Bolivian people lifted up? Who just wanted more profit from the natural
resources of Bolivia. This is a story as old as time, as old as
America and the Americas. And how we have, unfortunately, oppressed
so much of these two continents North America and South America. And if you wanna cry about that cuz you’re
a Republican, my god, you’re telling people the truth. And that doesn’t play well for America. How can you guys do that? Well, that’s a sad day for you. We do the news here. So if you want a pretty little story about
how America is always the golden hero, rising on a white horse that saves the day, go to
Fox News. Go to get your propaganda somewhere else,
or sometimes go to the New York Times. But we don’t do that here, we give you the
full context. And by the way, doesn’t mean that every leftist
government is wonderful. We told you several instances of things that
concern us, cuz if you’re a real progressive, you want democracy no matter who’s in charge. But this coup had nothing to do with a democracy. It was the exact opposite.

‘Dirty’ Skin Indians – Outrage Over American Diplomat


an american diplomat in india has said
something horrible about indians and their skin
color if you have some peso and this is the
u_s_ vice council uh… console marine shall and she told
students during a recent trip to india i was on a twenty four-hour train track
from delhi to the eastern indian state of orissa but after seventy two hours
the strain still did not reach its destination and my skin became thirty in
dark like that to millions oh people from tomo were not pleased with
those come except that day come on man look two lawyers here isn’t it does she have intent more nishi
strong right if she came in they think you expect
that who then we’re going to hurt if people are you a backpack no finger on problems of credibility can
really over years of uh… nationalists take but i look at
the secular and if i’m harbaugh said centered on the mike you get that their skin color is
actually a different shaded and doesn’t mean they’re dirty i think i could have that comes as a
weather and i will allow for redemption right you know that you’re not that and other
you know john muir headed use was made diplomat that says it is so pattern of
unisys shut up you make comments this stupid letter diplomat
maybe i’m too pessimistic and maybe i’m being too judgemental ok but i don’t
think that this was justice grow up you can refer someone skin color as
dirty and say it was just a screw-up you know especially if you are an american
diplomat okay you know that’s run you have to be
complete moron to realize that that’s what i would think that that’s not rock right law if you think hey you know what
their jelly dirty people you shouldn’t be a diplomat for us in that country
right as they really don’t understand it was between hey somebody growing up in a
middle class or or whatever class uh… background here in the united
states as someone who lives that so in poverty cannot of course not all those
folks if you make that assumption that they all do that’s already horrible
second of all if somebody people in that area you live
in poverty of course some new no question about it any candidate bath
every day you can judge them for so this is wrong
and any interpretation that you take i guess i’m too soft i would want to sit
down and talked for about one god’s green earth where you think you and what
did you mean by that and had numerous has explained because i’m afraid that that she might not even realized that
she has those feelings towards people that region or of that country and that obviously was an enormous issue
she’s going to continue to work there uh… but for diplomat it is that’s as badly as you can screw
up your job now consulate apologized for her and they said the following michelle
made in inappropriate comment michelle deeply regrets if we’re
unfortunate remarks offended anyone as i was certainly not her intent so she’s denying that it was right and
sandy if it offended anyone she would like to put al gore defended vball of
course it did it’s like a huge issue now in that area of india and the other newspapers that are not
the leaders are arranged that would offend utility offend
everybody

Trump Just Got The Worst Polling Numbers About His 2020 Chances


We have talked a lot about polls here on ring
of fire or other progressive hosts talking about poles. The media is talking about polls, but one
thing we always say here is that none of these polls really actually matter right now, right? We talk about Trump’s approval rating will,
it’s going to change before the 2020 election. We talk about which Democrats are beating
him in the polls, which is right now the top four that’s also going to change, but a poll
came out this week that is likely to not change before the 2020 presidential election, and
it is the kind of poll that Donald Trump should be terrified of, and according to this latest
poll, majority of people in this country do not believe that they are better off than
they were four years ago. 31% said that their personal finances have
gotten worse since Donald Trump took office. 33% said they’ve remained about the same. So you add those together. 64% of people say they’re not better than
they were four years ago. 35% say yes. I think think my finances are better today
than they were four years ago. Every single presidential election, the question
gets asked, are you better off now than you were four years ago? And if the answer is no, then people are inclined
to vote for the challenger. If the answer is yes, they stick with the
incumbent and here we have a poll. We’re 64% of people are able to clearly say,
no, I’m not better than I was four years ago. Sure. 33% say they’re not worse either, but everybody’s
always looking for better. That’s human nature. That is basic psychology folks. We want to be better. We want to get better. We want our personal situation to be better
and it’s not so why stick with the guy who’s not doing anything for us? When we can go to one of these other candidates
who’s out there saying, I’m going to give you healthcare. I’m going to give you kids college. I’m going to forgive your student loan debt. I’m going to protect the environment. I’m going to give you a better job. I’m going to get money out of politics. That’s a no brainer for a lot of these folks
who are looking at their own personal situation and seeing that things aren’t getting any
better for them and they haven’t for quite some time. this is the poll that Trump should be worried
about because this, as I pointed out, this isn’t going to change in 12 months. It would take a remarkable overhaul of the
system itself, the capitalistic system that we live under. You’d have to overhaul that in the next 12
months to improve the plight of these people and Donald Trump and the Republicans are not
the people who are going to do it. We have candidates out there right now pretty
much to talking about overhauling the system, changing the way things are, one of them a
little bit more aggressive than the other. Those are the people that would actually help
these 64% who say things aren’t getting better, and hopefully the 64% out there understands
that, but at least let’s hope that they know that sticking with Trump isn’t going to help
them one bit.