TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @CurtisHouck

Saved - December 15, 2025 at 7:06 AM

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

#BREAKING: The person of interest taken into custody related to the Brown University shooting is being RELEASED and police are now resuming their search for the shooter. Wow. https://t.co/96Ep8d5bbs

Saved - May 19, 2025 at 2:20 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Today, I attended the White House press briefing where I asked about President Biden's efforts toward peace in various conflicts, including those in Israel and Ukraine. I expressed admiration for his diplomatic moves but questioned ongoing U.S. funding for these wars. The Press Secretary emphasized that the President prioritizes American interests and is working to end these conflicts to save lives and taxpayer money. I also raised concerns about the Clinton body count and the Epstein case, seeking clarity on the release of further information regarding Epstein's ties to intelligence agencies.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

Today’s “new media seat” at the White House press briefing went to @ZeroHedge’s @Cosgrove_IV... Cosgrove: “The President has made several moves towards peace in multiple fronts. India-Pakistan, with the Houthis, talking with Iran, and talking with Putin. Biden didn't even talk to Putin for the entire span of the war, which is crazy, considering two nuclear powers were engaged in a proxy war. So I do admire these moves by the current president. I'll be honest, however. We — as of today, we are still funding both Israel's and Ukraine's wars. So can Americans expect to finally be done financing foreign wars that at some point, would you consider that one of the president's goals? @PressSec @KarolineLeavitt: “Well, I think I can summarize the president's foreign policy agenda with two words America first. And that means putting the American people and the American taxpayer first. And that's why the President is moving as quickly as he possibly can and working overtime to end these conflicts in both Israel and Gaza and also the Russia-Ukraine war. As you all know, the president will be speaking with Putin at 1000. He plans to call President Zelensky when that call concludes. I spoke to the President about that call at 100. I don't want to get ahead of those very important conversations, but of course, you will hear directly from the President or me after those calls conclude today, so you can expect that. As for Israel and Gaza, the President continues to not only himself, but his national security team engage in talks on both sides of this conflict. The President made it very clear to Hamas that he wanted to see all hostages released and last week, when we were flying out of town, there was great news on that front with the return of Edan Alexander, who was the last remaining hostage in Gaza. So to answer your question, the president is always thinking about the American people, the American taxpayer. First, he wants these conflicts to end, not just to save money, but most importantly, to save lives.”

Video Transcript AI Summary
The White House correspondent for Zero Hedge, Liam Crosgrove, asks if Americans can expect to stop financing foreign wars, given the president's moves towards peace, including talks with India, Pakistan, Iran, and Putin. The speaker says the president's foreign policy agenda is "America First," focused on the American people and taxpayer. The president is working to end the conflicts in Israel/Gaza and Russia/Ukraine. The president will speak with Putin at 10:00 and then Zelensky. Regarding Israel and Gaza, the president is engaged in talks and wants all hostages released. The president wants these conflicts to end to save money and, most importantly, lives.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Here in our new media seat today, have Liam Crosgrove, the White House correspondent for Zero Hedge. With that, Liam, please kick us off. Speaker 1: Thank you, Caroline. So my first question is on foreign policy. Speaker 2: Sure. Speaker 1: The president has made, several moves towards peace in multiple fronts, India, Pakistan with the Houthis talking with Iran and talking with Putin. Biden didn't even talk to Putin for the entire span of the war, which is crazy considering two nuclear powers were engaged in a proxy war. So I do admire these moves by the current president. I'll be honest. However, we as of today, we are still funding both Israel's and Ukraine's wars. So can Americans expect to finally be done financing foreign wars at some point? Would it do you consider that one of the president's goals? Speaker 2: Well, think I can summarize the president's foreign policy agenda with two words, America First. And that means putting the American people and the American tax payer first. And that's why the president is moving as quickly as he possibly can and working overtime, to end these conflicts in both Israel and in Gaza and also the Russia Ukraine War. As you all know, the president will be speaking with Putin at 10:00. He plans to call president Zelensky when that call concludes. I spoke to the president about that call at 10:00. I don't wanna get ahead of those very important conversations, but, of course, you will hear directly from the president or me after those calls conclude today. So you can expect that. As for Israel and Gaza, the president continues to not only himself, but his national security team engage in talks on both sides of this conflict. The president made it very clear to Hamas that he wanted to see all hostages released. And last week, when we were flying out of town, there was great news on that front with the return of Eden Alexander who was the last remaining hostage in Gaza. So to answer your question, the president is always thinking about the American people, the American taxpayer first. He wants these conflicts to end, not just to save money, but most importantly to save lives. Speaker 1: Thank you.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

.@ZeroHedge’s @Cosgrove_IV: “Over the weekend, President Trump posted to Truth Social a video highlighting what most people call the Clinton body count, which is the strange number of suicides that seem to happen in Clinton circles. I have a headline here from the Washington Post that said ‘Trump peddles false conspiracy theories tying the Clintons to several deaths.’ So I just wanted to highlight real quick this wasn't in Trump's video, but this is from the Arkansas Times, and it's the death of Mark Middleton, who was a former Clinton White House aide who was found dead on a Clinton Foundation property. And I'll just quote from the Arkansas Times: ‘Middleton apparently shot himself in the chest with a shotgun and also hung himself from a tree with an extension cord.’ So, I have no idea how somebody commits suicide that way. But if The Washington Post is here, maybe you can enlighten us as to how that was actually a suicide. So anyways, that's just a lead in to my question about the most famous Clinton-related suicide, which is that of Jeffrey Epstein. There's still a lot of questions around that case. You've released phase one of The Epstein Files. What was missing from that is any connection to his ties to intelligence agencies and that's really the whole story that not just trafficking young girls, but doing it on behalf of intelligence agencies and even potentially as part of a blackmail ring with potential ties to the Israeli government. So for phase two, when can we expect it? Will it have information pertaining to those aspects of the Epstein case?” @PressSec @KarolineLeavitt: “I know the attorney general has committed to releasing those files. I would defer you to the Department of Justice on her timeline, but when she has made a promise in the past, she has kept it. And I'm certain that she will in this case as well.”

Video Transcript AI Summary
A video posted by President Trump over the weekend highlighted what some call the "Clinton body count," referring to a number of suicides in Clinton circles. One example cited was Mark Middleton, a former Clinton White House aide found dead on Clinton Foundation property. According to the Arkansas Times, Middleton apparently shot himself in the chest with a shotgun and also hung himself from a tree with an extension cord. The speaker then referenced the suicide of Jeffrey Epstein, and the recently released "Epstein files." The speaker claims that what was missing from the files was any connection to Epstein's ties to intelligence agencies, alleging that Epstein was trafficking young girls on behalf of intelligence agencies and potentially as part of a blackmail ring with ties to the Israeli government. The speaker asked when phase two of the files would be released, and if it would contain information pertaining to those aspects of the Epstein case. The attorney general has committed to releasing those files, and will likely keep that promise.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And my only other question for you is, so over the weekend, President Trump posted through social a video highlighting what most people call the Clinton body count, which is the strange number of suicides that had seemed to happen in Clinton circles. I have a headline here from the Washington Post that said, Trump peddles false conspiracy theories tying the Clintons to several deaths. So I just wanted to highlight real quick. This wasn't in Trump's video, but this is from the Arkansas Times. And it's the death of Mark Middleton, who was a former Clinton White House aide, who was found dead dead on a Clinton Foundation property. And I'll just quote from the Arkansas Times. Middleton apparently shot himself in the chest with a shotgun and also hung himself from a tree with an extension cord. So I have no idea how somebody commits suicide that way. But if the Washington Post is here, maybe you can enlighten us as to how that was actually a suicide. So anyways, that's just a lead into my question about the most famous Clinton related suicide, which is that of Jeffrey Epstein. There's still a lot of questions around that case. You've released phase one of the Epstein files. What was missing from that is any connection to his ties to intelligence agencies. And that's really the whole story, that not just trafficking young girls, but doing it on behalf of intelligence agencies and even potentially as part of a blackmail ring with potential ties to the Israeli government. So for phase two, when can we expect it? Will it have information pertaining to those aspects of the Epstein case? Speaker 1: I know the attorney general has committed to releasing those files. I would defer you to the Department of Justice on her timeline. But, when she has made a promise in the past, she has kept it and I'm certain that she will in this case as well.
Saved - January 30, 2025 at 5:55 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I'm struggling to find the words because it's staggering that a commercial airliner was involved in a midair collision. Commercial flights have a Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) designed to prevent such incidents by guiding pilots on how to avoid nearby aircraft. This collision raises serious questions about safety protocols, especially given the advanced training of pilots and technology available in 2025. Investigators have a significant task ahead to understand how this occurred, particularly with a military helicopter involved. I'm just stunned by this event.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

CNN aviation correspondent and private pilot @PeteMunteen: "I'm stumbling over my words here b/c this is just so staggering that there is a midair collision involving a commercial airliner. Commercial flights are equipped for ages with a system called TCAS -- Traffic collision Avoidance System. It tells the pilots in the cockpit how to avoid other airplanes nearby. It is a system that came about because of mid-air collisions with commercial airliners and small general aviation aircraft, commercial airliners and helicopters. It tells the pilots, there's traffic ahead of you -- climb, climb, now descend, descend now. This would be an incredible lining up of the holes in the Swiss cheese, the -- the which is the saying in aviation, the gaps in the -- in the safety chain in aviation, that this happened and now investigators have an incredible amount of work cut out for them to figure out how a commercial airliner in the United States in 2025, when the pilots are incredibly trained, the technology is is incredibly sharp, collided with what is apparently a military or government helicopter. Nobody else uses the blackhawk. Yeah, it is -- it is really something else. I -- I -- I'm just stunned."

Video Transcript AI Summary
A midair collision involving a commercial airliner is shocking, especially given the advanced technology in use, such as the Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS). This system alerts pilots to nearby aircraft and instructs them to climb or descend to avoid collisions. The occurrence of this incident raises serious questions about safety protocols in aviation, particularly since it happened in 2025 when pilots are highly trained and technology is sophisticated. Investigators face a significant challenge in understanding how a commercial airliner collided with a military helicopter, specifically a Blackhawk, which is not commonly used by others. The situation is truly astonishing.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The the the approach I I'm stumbling over my words here because this is just so staggering, that there is a a midair collision involving a commercial airliner. Commercial flights are equipped for ages with a system called TCAS, traffic collision avoidance system. It it tells the pilots in the cockpit, how to avoid other airplanes nearby. It is a system that came about, because of midair collisions, with commercial airliners and small general aviation aircraft, commercial airliners, and helicopters. It tells the pilots, there's traffic ahead of you. Climb. Climb now. Descend. Descend now. This would be an incredible lining up of the holes in the Swiss cheese, the the the the which is the saying the gaps in the in the safety, chain in aviation, that this happened. And now investigators have an incredible amount of work cut out for them to figure out how a commercial airliner in the United States in 2025 when the pilots are incredibly trained, the technology is is incredibly sharp, collided with what is apparently a military or government helicopter. Nobody else uses the Blackhawk. Yeah. It is it is really something else. I I I I'm just stunned.
Saved - December 2, 2024 at 11:55 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
During a recent press briefing, I asked about President Biden's reaction to Hunter Biden's legal issues, particularly the collapse of his plea deal. KJP emphasized that this is a personal matter and declined to discuss any private conversations between the President and Hunter. When pressed about the possibility of a pardon, she firmly stated no. KJP reiterated that the administration has not sought favorable treatment from the DOJ and maintained that nothing has changed regarding their stance on the legal situation.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

.@SeungMinKim: "I wanted to ask about [Biden]'s reaction to the legal developments yesterday & w/the initial plea deal for [Hunter] appearing to fall apart." KJP: "So...I'm not going to share anything more than what I shared yesterday. This is a personal matter for Hunter Biden"

Video Transcript AI Summary
The President's reaction to the recent legal developments regarding Hunter Biden remains unchanged. This is a personal matter for Hunter, handled independently by the Department of Justice under a Trump-appointed prosecutor. There will be no further comments on the situation. The President and First Lady love and support their son as he works to rebuild his life.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I wanted to ask about the President's reaction to the legal developments yesterday and with the initial plea deal for his son appearing to fall apart. Speaker 1: So look, I'm really not going to say anything more than what I shared yesterday. This is a personal matter, for Hunter Biden. This is, you know, a personal issue. And, as you know, this has been done in an independent way, by the Department of Justice. It has been led by a Trump appointed prosecutor, and I'm just not gonna comment beyond beyond what I said yesterday. And, of course, and we have said this multiple times, the president and the first lady, they love their son, and they support they support him as he is, working to rebuild his life. I'm just not gonna say anything beyond that.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

@seungminkim ABC's @ESchulze: "Is the president concerned his son's legal challenges will continue to take attention away from the WH now that this plea deal has fallen apart?" KJP: "I'm not going to speak to the politics...I'm not going to...characterize any of this for the President." https://t.co/qAOvWaYpek

Video Transcript AI Summary
The president is not concerned about Hunter Biden's legal challenges distracting from the White House. This situation is a personal matter involving a private citizen. The investigation is led by a Trump-appointed prosecutor, and the Department of Justice operates independently. There will be no further comments on the specifics or characterization of the situation.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: To follow-up on Hunter, is the president concerned that his son's legal challenges will continue to take attention away from the White House now that this plea deal has fallen apart? Speaker 1: I'm just not gonna speak to the politics of this. I'm not gonna speak to, characterize any of this, for the president. What I can say is that, and I've said this before, this is a personal matter. This is a Hunter Biden, as you know, is a private citizen, and, this was done in an independent way. This investigation is being led by a Trump appointed prosecutor. And so, the Department of Justice is independent. We give them the space to be independent, and we respect the rule of law. I'm just not going to get into details of characterizing.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

@seungminkim @eschulze ABC's @ESchulze: "Has [President Biden] spoken to Hunter?" KJP: "I'm just not going to speak to any private conversation that the President has with his family." https://t.co/9LICb4v7Sp

Video Transcript AI Summary
I won't discuss any private conversations the president has with his family, including any talks with Hunter.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Have you spoken to Hunter? I'm just not going to speak to any private conversation that the president has with his family.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

@seungminkim @eschulze Fox's @MarkPMeredith: "Is there any possibility that the President would end up pardoning his son?" KJP: "No." Meredith: "But is there--" KJP: "I just said no. I just answered!" https://t.co/3BqkWAp5t5

Video Transcript AI Summary
Not much has changed since yesterday, and this is a personal matter. Regarding the possibility of the president pardoning his son, the answer is no. I already addressed that. Please continue.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Said not a lot's changed since yesterday, and it's a personal matter. But from a presidential perspective, is there any possibility that the president would end up pardoning his son? No. Well, is there I I just said no. I just answered it. Go ahead. Go ahead.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

@seungminkim @eschulze @markpmeredith .@GeoffEarle: "The tax matter that had Hunter Biden in court...saying that he hadn't paid $1.2 to about $1.5 million in taxes owed...Was [Joe Biden] aware...that he wasn't filing his returns...and, also, did he ever advise him to pay?...Did they ever discuss [it]?" KJP ducks. https://t.co/8JMAPXAK8o

Video Transcript AI Summary
Hunter Biden was in court regarding a tax matter, facing charges for not paying between $1.2 to $1.5 million in taxes. The question raised was whether the president was aware of Hunter's failure to file his returns on time and if he ever advised him to pay the taxes owed. It was noted that Hunter testified he was sober during a year when he did not file. However, specifics about their discussions on the tax situation were not addressed.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The, the tax matter that had Hunter Biden in court in Wilmington yesterday, it had a criminal information saying that he hadn't paid 1.2 to about 1,500,000 in taxes owed. So my question is, number 1, I know the president doesn't talk to him. You said about his business, but was he aware at the time that he wasn't filing his returns in a timely fashion? And also, you know, did he ever advise him to pay? Because one Hunter testified in court that 1 year, he was sober when he didn't file. So did they ever discuss the tax situation? I'm not gonna get into the specific of the case.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

@seungminkim @eschulze @markpmeredith @GeoffEarle .@GeoffEarle: "Does he think, in light of this, to beef up enforcement?" KJP: "I've--I've answered this question over and over again. Nothing has changed b/w the statement I made yesterday. Nothing's going to change from the few times I've gotten this" https://t.co/G8nxTZJHwG

Video Transcript AI Summary
I have addressed this question multiple times, and my stance remains unchanged. We will not comment further on this matter. It is an independent investigation led by a Trump-appointed prosecutor and the Department of Justice. Therefore, we will refrain from making any additional remarks.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I I I were I've answered this question over and over again. Nothing has changed from the statement that I made yesterday. Nothing's gonna change from the the few times that I've gotten this question in a briefing room. We're not gonna comment on this. This is a, this is an independent investigation that is being led by a Trump appointed prosecutor, that is being led by clearly the Department of Justice. Right? The prosecutors I just mentioned. And I'm we're just not going to comment on this.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

@seungminkim @eschulze @markpmeredith @GeoffEarle .@GeoffEarle: "Does [the President][ have concerns that the deal prosecutors put together fell apart & couldn't make it by the judge?" KJP: "We're just not going to--we're not going to comment on specifics of the case." https://t.co/to25F8vpnp

Video Transcript AI Summary
No comments will be made on the specifics of the case or any concerns regarding the deal prosecutors arranged that ultimately fell apart.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Let's see. Does he have any concerns that the the deal prosecutors put together fell apart and couldn't make We're just not gonna we're not gonna comment on specifics of the case.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

@seungminkim @eschulze @markpmeredith @GeoffEarle .@BrianKarem: "Can you state...the administration has neither sought, nor received, favorable treatment from the DOJ for any investigation into the President, members of the administration, his family, or...Donald Trump? KJP: "Absolutely not...[He] respects the rule of law." https://t.co/JfmnJh7WfR

Video Transcript AI Summary
To address the climate crisis, there was a question about the Hunter Biden investigation. The inquiry focused on whether the administration has sought or received favorable treatment from the Department of Justice regarding any investigations involving the president, his administration, family, or former President Trump. The response emphasized that the Department of Justice operates independently and that the president respects the rule of law, a principle he has upheld since before taking office.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: To deal with climate crisis. Speaker 1: Second one. I just wanna drill down a little bit on on the Hunter Biden thing. Can and I think this will cut to I don't not gonna ask you to speak to anything other than this administration. Can you state categorically that the administration has neither sought nor received favorable treatment from the DOJ for any investigation into the president, members of the administration, his family, or the former president Donald Trump? Speaker 0: Absolutely not. The Department of Justice is independent. The president respects the rule of law. He has been saying that since he was before president, and that will remain the case.
Saved - October 8, 2024 at 2:41 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I addressed Kamala Harris's accusations of selfishness and political gamesmanship regarding my focus on Florida's storm response. I've been actively coordinating with FEMA, the President, and state agencies to support our communities. Harris, who has been vice president for three and a half years, has not contributed to these efforts. I find it selfish for her to politicize the situation while we are focused on helping those in need. My priority is the safety and well-being of Floridians, not engaging in political games.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

WATCH: Governor Ron DeSantis TORCHES Kamala Harris for accusing him of being "selfish" "playing political games" after #Helene and ahead of #Milton and ignoring her: "We've been laser focused on leveraging all resources...I've been in touch with both FEMA and the President as well as marshaling our state agencies and working to support our local communities and so, for Kamala Harris tried to say that my sole focus on the people of Florida is somehow selfish is delusional. She has no role in this. In fact she's been vice president for three and a half years, I've dealt with a number of storms under this administration, she has never contributed anything to any of these efforts and so, what I think is selfish is her trying to blunder into this...Here's the thing -- she has no role -- know, she has no role in this process. I'm in contact with the president of the United States. I'm in contact with FEMA director, I'm obviously managing a lower state agencies. We're supporting our local government and I will say this. I've had storms under President Trump and President Biden and I've worked well with both of them. She is the first one was trying to politicize the storm and she's doing that just because of her campaign. She's trying to get some type of an edge. She knows she's doing poorly and so she's playing this political games. I don't have time for political games. I've got peoples whose lives are on the line. I've got peoples whose homes and their positions are on the line and we are focused 100% on that mission. I'm not worried about playing her political games earmark and so, she is being selfish by trying to blunder into this when we're working just fine."

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker states they have been leveraging all available resources, including federal resources, and has been in contact with FEMA and the President. The speaker claims Kamala Harris is delusional for saying the speaker's focus on the people of Florida is selfish, asserting Harris has no role and has never contributed to storm efforts in the past three and a half years. The speaker says Harris has never called before and is the first to politicize a storm, doing so for campaign purposes. The speaker claims they do not have time for political games, as people's lives, homes, and possessions are on the line. The speaker asserts Harris is being selfish by trying to blunder into the situation when things are working fine.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And we've been laser focused on leveraging all resources available, including from the federal government, and I've been in touch with both FEMA and the president as well as marshaling all our state agencies and working to support our local communities. And so for Kamala Harris, to try to say that my sole focus on the people of Florida is somehow selfish, is delusional. She has no role in this. In fact, she's been vice president for three and a half years. I've dealt with a number of storms under this administration. She has never, contributed anything to any of these efforts. And so what I think is selfish Has she ever called before? Blunder into this. No. And here's the thing. Call before? She has no role no. She has no role in this process. I'm in contact with the president of the United States. I'm in contact with FEMA director. I'm obviously managing all our state agencies. We're supporting all our local government. And I will say this, I've had storms under both president Trump and president Biden, and I've worked well with both of them. She's the first one who's trying to politicize the storm, and she's doing that just because of her campaign. She's trying to get some type of an edge. She knows she's she's doing poorly until she's playing these political games. I don't have time for political games. I've got people whose lives are on the line. I've got people whose homes and their possessions are on the line, and we are focused 100% on that mission. I'm not worried about playing her political games. And so she is being selfish by trying to blunder into this when we're working just fine.
Saved - July 17, 2024 at 6:31 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Biden criticizes Trump and Republicans, accusing them of undermining the NAACP's values. He claims they want to restrict voting rights, cut social programs, and benefit the wealthy. He also emphasizes the importance of preserving black history and fighting for justice and equality. Biden urges Americans to envision a better future and work towards a nation free from racism and violence.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

Turning down the temperature? Biden: Trump and Republicans will “do everything – undo everything they NAACP stands for, but now they're trying to deny it. They’re lying about their Project 2025. They want to deny you freedom, the freedom of the vote, have your vote counting....They’re going to prosecute political enemies...They want to cut Social Security, Medicare, rip away protection for millions of pre-existing conditions for 400 people...risking people’s lives, costing the government more money...Give the very wealthy a big corporate --corporations a new tax cut.”

Video Transcript AI Summary
They oppose the NAACP and Project 2025, aiming to restrict voting rights, ban abortion, prosecute political foes, cut social security, Medicare, and education funding. They threaten healthcare coverage, prevent Medicare from negotiating drug prices, and favor the wealthy with tax breaks.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: They'll do everything. Undo everything the NAACP stands for. But now they're trying to deny it. It. They're lying about their project 2025. They wanna deny your freedom, the freedom to vote, had your vote counted. They'd impose a nationwide ban on abortion. His new vice president, you have any doubt, man? Just take a look what he's been saying. They wanna prosecute political enemies. They wanna cut social security and Medicare, rip away protection in millions of preexisting conditions over 400,000,000 people, stop Medicare from negotiating lower prescription drug drug prices, risking people's lives, costing the government more money. They'd eliminate the Department of Education. No. You ought to read it saying it's a state issue. Give me a break of state. We know how well we do with the states. It would cut school legends, eliminate the head start program for lower income children, allow employees to stop paying overtime employers to stop paying catch this one. Stop paying overtime to hourly workers. We're such good people. But give the very wealthy and big corporate and corporations a new tax.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

Can't you just FEEL the tone being soothed? Biden: “They've already evisivated [sic] — eviscerated affirmative action. It’d also decimate diversity, equity, and inclusion all across American life. They’re already trying to do it by banning books. They’re trying to erase black history. Black history is American history. Folks, I'm not being dramatic that we cannot let that happen. That's why it's so important to me — was so important to be to make Juneteenth a federal holiday. They can’t erase it...That’s why I made lynching a federal hate crime in Emmett Till’s memory and that's where you being reminded — remember what they’re trying to do...Black history is American history as simple as that let me close with this. The Palms [sic] tells us I’ve been young and now I’m old, but I've not seen the righteous forsaken. I have not seen the righteous foresaken and I will not see the righteous foresaken. Hopefully, with age, I've demonstrated a little bit of wisdom. Here's what I do know. I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong. I know how to do this job and I know the Good Lord hasn't brought us as far to leave us now. There’s more work to do. This is about being engaged with the work you're doing to recruit hundreds of thousands of volunteers, move millions of people to make their voices heard may well determine America's future for decades to come. Folks, that’s important. We must all be defenders for freedom justice, equality, and the bedrock of democracy. But there's been no more important voice in that truth than the voices of the Black community. When America’s failed to live up to what we say we believe, you don’t give up hope. Nor do I. We've always loved this country, even when it’s not loved us back.”

Video Transcript AI Summary
They are attacking affirmative action, diversity, and inclusion by banning books and erasing black history. I fought for Juneteenth as a federal holiday and made lynching a federal hate crime in Emmett Till's memory. We must remember our history and fight for justice. We need to stay engaged, recruit volunteers, and speak up for freedom, justice, and equality. The black community's voice is crucial in shaping America's future. We must not lose hope in our country, even when it fails us.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: They've already eviscerated eviscerated affirmative action. It also decimate diversity, equity, and inclusion all across American life. We're already trying to do it by banning books. We're trying to erase black history. Black history is American history. Folks, I'm not being dramatic, and we cannot let that happen. That's why it's so important to me it was so important to me to make June teens a federal holiday. They can't erase it. Are people gonna know what happened on June 10th. That's why I made federal lynching a federal hate crime in Emmett Till's memory, and that's where you've been reminded. Remember what they try to do? As well as establish national monuments for Mamie and Emmett Till and so much more. So there's no doubt about what's happening. Look, folks. As I said before, bomb bomb tells us I've been young and now I'm old. Yet I've not seen the righteous forsaken. I have not seen the righteous forsaken, and I will not see the righteous forsaken. Hopefully, today, I've demonstrated a little bit of wisdom. Here's what I do know. I know how to tell the truth. I know right or wrong. I know how to do this job, and I know the good lord hasn't brought us this far to leave us now. There's more work to do. This is a moment to be engaged. The work that you're doing to recruit hundreds of thousands of volunteers, move millions of people to make their voices heard, may well determine America's future for decades to come. And folks, that's important. We must all be defenders for freedom, justice, equality, and the bedrock of democracy. There's been no more important voice in that truth than the voices of the black community. I need it. And when Americans fail to live up, what we say we believe, you don't give up hope nor do I. We've always loved this country, even when it has not loved us back.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

Ahhh, can you feel the soul of the nation restored? Biden: “What America do you want to leave [for your children]?....America — possibilities. Nothing is beyond our capacity. America, where it’s full of promises for everybody. America where racism and violence have no longer the ghost that for too long have haunted the nation. Folks, this is about you and your families and everything the NAACA has stood for — for a generation — freedom, democracy. America, always marching, always believing, always keeping the faith. We're going to do this”.

Video Transcript AI Summary
We must work hard for a better America of hope, fairness, and opportunity for our children. I have spent time with Xi Jinping defining America as a land of possibilities for all, free from racism and violence. Let's stand together for freedom and democracy, as the NAACP has always done. Are you all in? I am. Remember, as the United States of America, we can achieve anything when united. God bless and protect us all.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We worked hard, hard as hell. Just think about it. Our children, your children, grandchildren, ask yourself, what America you wanna leave them? My answer is an America of hope, fairness, opportunity, possibility. Look, I spent more time with Xi Jinping of China than any any other world leader has. I was with him in the in in China on the steps of the mountains. And he looked at me and he said, can you define America for me? It's God's truth. I said it's recorded. I said yes in one word, America. Possibilities. Nothing where it's full of promises available to everybody. America where racism violence are no longer the ghost. They're too long haunting the nation. Folks, it's about you and your families. And everything the NAACP has stood for for Freedom, democracy, America, always marching, always believing, always keeping the faith. We're gonna do this. Yes. So they ask you, are you all in? All in. Because I'm all in. All in. And just have to remember who we are. We are the United States of America, and there's nothing nothing beyond our capacity when we do it together. And let's stay together. God bless you all, and may god protect our
Saved - July 17, 2024 at 3:21 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
CNN's John Miller shares new details on the attempted assassination of Donald Trump: 1. The gunman passed Secret Service security with his rangefinder and observed snipers, who noticed him and decided to monitor him. 2. He went to work at a nursing home but requested time off for Saturday, while telling coworkers he would see them on Sunday. 3. Detonators for the explosives in his car were found on him, along with three loaded magazines of almost 100 rounds and a bulletproof vest.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

#BREAKING: CNN's John Miller reveals three new details on the gunman who tried to assassinate Donald Trump: - Earlier in the day, he went through Secret Service security WITH his rangefinder and scoped out the snipers, who spotted him and said they need to keep an eye on him. - He went into work at a nursing home and asked off for Saturday, but told coworkers he'd see them on Sunday - Detonators for the explosives in his car were found on him on the roof with three, fully loaded magazines of nearly 100 rounds and a bulletproof vest

Video Transcript AI Summary
There have been new developments in the investigation. The suspect changed his work schedule before the incident. He was seen with a range finder at a Trump rally, observed by security. Later, he was spotted on the roof with a rifle. When confronted by police, he opened fire. In his car, there were remote-controlled bombs, loaded magazines, and a bulletproof vest. Investigators are still trying to understand his motives and what he planned to do next.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Aaron, there's been some developments as the investigation has progressed. You know what the what the investigators are telling us is as far as a motive, a manifesto, the reasoning behind this, that he went to his employer at the nursing home where he works as a dietary specialist before this and said, I need Saturday off. I have something important to do, but he told his coworkers, I'll see you on Sunday. So he changed his days off presumably for this. We also understand that when he got to the fairgrounds where this rally was being held for Donald Trump, the first thing that puts him on the radar of security people is near the magnetometer area where they're screening people in, he's carrying in his hand a range finder. It's a device that looks like a small pair of binoculars, but it's used by shooters to measure the distance when they're setting up a long distance shot. Because he didn't have a weapon, that would not have prevented him to go to go through security, but they did flag, what does he have this in his hand for? At that point, they told people, keep an eye on this guy, but then he leaves the secure area, the staging area, and he doesn't turn up again for some time until, the crowd says there's a guy crawling up the roof, and it appears he has a rifle. There is an eerie moment in here, Aaron, where he's taking the rangefinder, and he's looking through it at the countersniper positions. And one of the countersniper positions is looking at him through the scope. At this point, there's not a gun in the picture as I understand it, but they're saying he's looking at us looking at him. Then when people alert the police and they try to come up the ladder to get him and he confronts them with the AR 15 gun, they dive for cover, and then a moment later, he opens fire. But a lot of this sounds very spread out. The end of it happens very quickly. The last piece is the search of the car. As we reported last night, 2 remote controlled, IEDs, remote controlled bombs in the car, the remote control for those devices found on his person on the roof, according to sources, 3 fully loaded magazines with nearly a 100 rounds, a bulletproof vest. So it raises the question, did he expect to escape from this? And if so, what was all that intended for? What was to happen next? Questions that are still open in the minds of these investigators.
Saved - May 3, 2024 at 8:00 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The President supports letting the Trump tax cuts expire, but he won't raise taxes on those making less than $400,000 a year. He wants to protect working and middle-class Americans while Republicans want to give tax breaks to corporations and billionaires. The President aims to expand the Affordable Care Act and build a strong middle class, while Republicans want to cut Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. The President is committed to his plan and will continue to prioritize everyday Americans.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

FBN's @EdwardLawrence: “So, the President says that he wants to let the tax cuts — the Trump tax cuts expire. If that law expires, it does raise taxes on almost every American. So, does he still support that expiring without anything else in place?” KJP: “So, look, the — as you said, the President is going to allow — is going to — is — is — is — is going to let the Trump tax cut expire and he was very clear, but he will not raise taxes on anyone less than $400,000 — uh — a year. That is — that is part of the budget that you saw came out — uh — and — uh — it's going to expire for the wealthy, so been very clear about that. You know, look, this is a President that's going to make sure that we protect and not raise taxes for — for people making $400,000 less a year and — and Republicans want to do the opposite. They want to give tax breaks to corporations and billionaires. They said that. They want to cut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Who does that hurt? That hurts everyday Americans. And so, the President has been really clear about that. He wants to expand Affordable Care Act — as you see him doing that for Americans, making sure that they have good health care. And so, that's what the President is going to focus on.”

Video Transcript AI Summary
The president plans to let the Trump tax cuts expire, but won't raise taxes for those earning under $400,000. He aims to protect Americans from tax hikes, contrasting with Republicans who favor tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy. The president prioritizes expanding the Affordable Care Act to ensure access to quality healthcare for all.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So the president says that he wants to let the tax cuts, the term tax cuts expire. If that law expires, it does raise taxes on almost every American. So does he still support that expiry without anything else in place? So look, as you said, the president is going to allow is going to let the Trump tax cut expire. And he was very clear, but he will not raise taxes on anyone making less than $400,000 a year. That is president that's going to You know, look, this is a president that's going to make sure that we protect and not raise taxes for people are making $400,000 less a year. And and Republicans want to do the opposite. They want to give tax rates to corporations and billionaires. They said that they wanna cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Who does that hurt? That hurts everyday Americans. And so the president has been really clear about that. He wants to expand Affordable Care Act, as you see him doing that for Americans, making sure that they have good health care. And so that's what the president is gonna focus on.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

FBN's @EdwardLawrence: “But he still — the President can't pick and choose which part of the law sunsets. The entire law will sunset and the Tax Foundation says that someone who's married, two kids, making 85,000 would pay $1,700 more in taxes. That's somebody under $400,000 who would see —” KJP: “The President has been very clear He's going to protect working — working and middle class Americans making less of $400,000 a year. He's been very clear on that — Bob [sic] — about that. Republicans want to do the opposite. They literally want to do the opposite. They want to give a tax break to billionaires and corporations. That's what they said. They want to cut Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. That's what they want to do. And so, the President is going to do everything that he can as he's building this economy from the middle out and the bottom up to protect everyday. That's what he wants to do. Make sure that the middle class is strong. That's what he's gonna do. Republicans in Congress are saying the opposite. Literally, they're saying the opposite. So that's been the President's plan from day one, and he's going to continue that plan.”

Video Transcript AI Summary
The president will protect working and middle-class Americans making less than $400,000 a year. Republicans want to give tax breaks to billionaires and cut Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. The president's focus is on building the economy from the middle out and bottom up to support everyday Americans and strengthen the middle class. Republicans in Congress have opposing views, but the president remains committed to his plan.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The president can't pick and choose which part of the law sunsets, the entire law of sunset. And the tax foundation says that someone who's married, 2 kids, making 85,000 would pay $1700 more, in taxes. That's somebody under $400,000 who would pay Speaker 1: The president has been very clear. He's going to protect working, working and middle class Americans making less of $400,000 a year. He's been very clear on that about that. Republicans wanna do the opposite. They literally want to do the opposite. They want to give a tax break to billionaires and corporations. That's what they said. They wanna cut Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. That's what they wanna do. And so the president's gonna do everything that he can as he's building this economy from the middle out and the bottom up to protect everyday Americans. That's what he wants to do. Make sure that the middle class is strong. That's what he's gonna do. Republicans in Congress are saying the opposite. Literally, they're saying the opposite. So that's been the president's plan from day 1. He's gonna continue that plan.
Saved - January 18, 2024 at 10:15 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
House Republicans voted for an act that would have eliminated 2,000 Border Patrol agents, despite their claims that it wouldn't. The White House stands by this claim and emphasizes the obstruction from House Republicans on border issues. Regarding the statement about Texas officials and the deaths of three migrants, the White House maintains that the statement is consistent with the DOJ filing, which stated that Border Patrol was blocked from accessing the area where the incident occurred.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

JACQUI TIME: "Why are you repeating this false claim that Republicans voted to reduce the number of Border Patrol agents even though The Washington Post gave the administration three Pinnochioes for that?" KJP: "So, we don’t believe it’s a false claim. Our statements were very direct here. Last year, House GOP voted — voted — and not only did they vote for it, they touted — they touted their Limit, Save, Grow Act. That’s the act." .@JacquiHeinrich: "They were still appropriations for that and they vowed —" KJP: "Well, let me —" Heinrich: "— that it would never —" KJP: "— but they — they limit —" Heinrich: "— never affect Border Patrol." KJP: "— they — they — they voted for and touted it, right? This is an act. And this would have forced the elimination of 2,000 Border Patrol agents. That’s what this act that they touted, that they voted for in the House. So, that was their proposal. And that was what —" Heinrich: "They clearly —" KJP: "— they voted for back in May."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Last year, the House GOP voted for the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which proposed reducing the number of border patrol agents by 2,000. They proudly supported and promoted this act. The claim that Republicans voted to decrease the number of border patrol agents is not false, despite the Washington Post giving the administration a low rating.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Why are you repeating this false claim that Republicans voted to reduce the number of the border patrol agents even though the Washington Post gave the administration 3 Pinocchios for that? So we don't believe it's a false claim. Our statements were very direct here. Last year, house GOP Voted, voted. And not only did they vote for it, but they touted. They touted their limit, save, grow act. That's the act. 2000 border patrol agents. That's what this act that they touted, that they voted for, in the house. So that was their proposal, And and that was what they believed for back in in May.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

.@JacquiHeinrich: "[T]hey clearly stated at that time that Border Patrol, also veterans benefits, and entitlements would never be impacted by any of the reductions. And, also, the bill never had any appropriations in it. So, this claim that you guys are rolling out —" KJP: "Yeah?" Heinrich: "— you know, it’s the White House applying White House math to a bill that never had any appropriations. And, moreover, members in Congress who, you know, put this together, vowed that it wouldn’t affect CBP. So, the reason I — I ask is because it’s just, you know, to — to voters, don’t you think they know the difference between, you know, what is a truthful statement and what is spin and is it insulting to them to keep saying it when it was — it’s just not true?" KJP: "Haha. One thing that the President does not do is insult vote — insult voters or American people to be more exact because I want to be more careful about what I can say about this upcoming election. What I will say is, if you look at the bill, this act, that they touted, that they voted for — House Republicans back in May — they were — it was very clear it would have forced — it would have forced the immol — elimination of 2,000 Border Patrol agents. That’s what that act would have done. We were very direct about that. We were very clear about that. That is what they touted. This is what they put out there. This is what House Republicans voted for. I mean, that’s where they are. They have gotten in the way every time we are trying to deal with the border. House Republicans have gotten in the way. So, we appreciate the bipartisan conversation that we’re having with Republicans — let’s not forget with Republicans in the Senate — that’s why it’s bipartisan — and Democrats — on dealing with the border — the border. House Republicans get in the way. They want it — to literally eliminate 2,000 Border Patrol agents in this particular act that they touted, that they voted for back in May."

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker points out that the claim made by the White House about the impact of a bill on border patrol and veterans benefits is false, as the bill had no appropriations and the members of Congress who put it together vowed it wouldn't affect funding. The speaker questions whether voters can distinguish between truth and spin and finds it insulting to keep repeating false statements. The speaker then highlights that the bill touted by House Republicans would have eliminated 2,000 border patrol agents, causing obstruction in dealing with border issues. The speaker appreciates the bipartisan conversation with Senate Republicans and Democrats on the border, as House Republicans have hindered progress.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: They they clearly stated at that time that border patrol, also veterans benefits and entitlements would never be impacted by any of the reductions. And also the bill never had any appropriations in it. So this claim that you guys are rolling out. You know, it's the White House applying White House math to a bill that never had any appropriations. And moreover, or the members in Congress who, you know, put this together vowed that it wouldn't affect the piecing. So the reason I I ask is because It's just, you know, to to voters, don't you think they know the difference between, you know, what is a a truthful statement and what is spin? And is it in insulting to them at all to keep saying it when it was it's just not true? Speaker 1: One thing that the president does not do is insult insult voters, or American people, To be more exact, because I wanna be careful about, about this, what I can say, about this upcoming election. What I will say is If you look at the bill, this act that they touted, that they voted for House Republicans back in May, they were it was very clear That it would have forced it would have forced the elimination of 2,000 border patrol agents. That's what that act would have done. We were very direct about that. We were very clear about that. This is what they touted. This is what they put out there. This is what house Republicans voted for. I mean, that's where they are. They have gotten in the way. Every time we are trying to deal with the border, house Republicans have gotten in the way. So we appreciate The bipartisan conversation that we're having with Republicans, because I forget, with Republicans in the senate, that's why it's bipartisan and Democrats on dealing with The border the border. House Republicans get in the way. They wanted to literally eliminate 2,000 border patrol agents in this particular act that they touted, that they voted for back in

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

.@JacquiHeinrich: "So, notwithstanding all of the fact-checks on that. If you’re saying that, you know, the WH, the President doesn’t want to, you know, insult the American people, will the administration then amend its separate statement that implied that Texas officials were responsible for the deaths of three migrants when, in fact, they had nothing to do with it. They had already been dead for an hour by the time Mexico told anyone in the U.S. about it and the administration admitted as much in the court filing. They — they acknowledged that in their court filing, but the statement implies that Texas was responsible and a number of outlets were forced to issue corrections and editor’s notes because of that WH statement. So, will the WH amend that statement?" KJP: "So, let’s be sensitive here. Three people died. Three migrants died. Two children and a woman. That was devastating. Devastating situation. Heartbreaking situation. So, let’s be really mindful of what we’re talking about here." Heinrich: "Of course." KJP: "I want to take a step back and — and just — as you’re talking about our statement — look — as I — as I mentioned, a woman and two children died. They drowned near Eagle Pass, which is, as I said, devastating. And that Texas officials blocked Border Patrol from accessing the area. That’s what was happening at that time. Our statement is consistent with DOJ’s filing. As the DOJ filing said, there was an ongoing emergency situation that Border Patrol was blocked from accessing. There were other migrants in the — in the water as well." Heinrich: "That’s a separate thing, but the ongoing —" KJP: "But I’m just saying there was —" Heinrich: "— emergency situation was separate." KJP: "— there was an ongoing —" Heinrich: "And this — the WH statement implied — it says — the WH statement says that Texas official blocked U.S. Border Patrol from attempting to provide emergency assistance." KJP: "To — there were other — there were other migrants in the water as well." Heinrich: "Then why wasn’t that included in the statement —" KJP: "There were other migrants in the water as well." Heinrich: "— that — if that’s what you were referring to?" KJP: "But the — our — our statement does — is very much consistent with DOJ filing. Anything else specific you want to know about that? I would certainly refer you to DOJ."

Video Transcript AI Summary
Three migrants, including two children and a woman, tragically died near Eagle Pass. The White House statement suggests that Texas officials blocked US border patrol from providing emergency assistance, but it fails to mention that there were other migrants in the water. The statement aligns with the Department of Justice's filing, which states that border patrol was prevented from accessing the area due to an ongoing emergency situation. For more specific details, it is advised to refer to the Department of Justice.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Notwithstanding all of the fact checks on that, if you're saying that, you know, the White House, the president doesn't want to, you know, insult the American people, will 3 migrants, for the deaths of the 3 migrants, when in fact they had nothing to do with it? They had already been dead for an hour by the time Mexico told, anyone in the US about it? And the administration admitted as much in their court filing. They they acknowledge that in their court filing, but the statement from the White House implies that Texas was responsible. And a number of outlets were forced to issue corrections and editor's notes because of that White House statement? So will the White House amend that statement? Speaker 1: So let's be sensitive here. 3 people died. 3 migrants died. 2 children and a woman. That was devastating. Devastating situation, heartbreaking situation. So let's be Really mindful of what we're talking about here. I wanna take a step back and, and, just as you're talking about our statement, look. As I as I mentioned, a woman and 2 children died. They drowned near Eagle Pass, which is, as I said, devastating, And that Texas officials blocked border patrol from access accessing the area. That's what was happening at that time. Our statement is consistent with DOJ's filing. As the DOJ filing said, there was an ongoing emergency situation that border patrol was blocked from accessing? There were other migrants in the in the water as well. But I'm just saying there Speaker 0: was separate. Speaker 1: There was an ongoing The Speaker 0: White House statement imply and says the White House statement says that Texas officials blocked US border patrol from attempting to provide emergency assistance. Speaker 1: To there were other there were other migrants in the water. Speaker 0: Then why wasn't that included in the statement? Migrants in the water. That that that that's what you are Speaker 1: Our statement this is great, very much consistent with DOJ filing. Anything else specific you wanna know about that, I would certainly refer you to DOJ.
Saved - October 13, 2023 at 11:31 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
CNN's Jake Tapper questions the lack of action from countries like Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, UAE, and Saudi Arabia in helping the Palestinians. These nations, claiming concern for Palestinians, possess the resources to aid Gaza and halt the bombings. Where is their support?

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

CNN's @JakeTapper: "Egypt, Jordan, I mean, Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, all these countries that prepare--that talk about how much they care about the Palestinians, they could help right now. They could help the Palestinians escape. They could say okay, stop bombing and we will go in there and we will help Gaza, like, become a thriving society. They could do all sorts of things. They have money, by the way. Where are they?"

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker raises concerns about the innocent Palestinians, including women, children, and the elderly, and questions why countries like Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia, who claim to care about the Palestinians, are not helping them escape the bombings. They suggest that these countries could intervene and support Gaza to become a thriving society. However, the speaker acknowledges that these countries are generally self-focused and do not like Hamas. They also note that the popularity of Hamas in Saudi Arabia and the UAE is low, resulting in little pressure for these countries to assist the Palestinians. The United States is mentioned as one of the few countries stepping up to help.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What about the innocent, Palestinians? Can they get out? Right? The the women, the children Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: The the elderly. How can they get out? That that still has Egypt, Jordan I mean, Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, all these countries that prepare that that talk talked about how much they care about the Palestinians. They could help right now. They could help the Palestinians escape. They could they could say, okay, stop bombing, and we will go in there, and we will we will we will help Gaza, like, become a thriving society. They they could do all sorts sorts of things. They have money, by Speaker 1: the way. I've heard that. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: Yeah. But I Where are they? Where are they is where they usually are, which is, you know, generally on the no and and pretty, myopically thinking about themselves. Plus, you know, they would all like Hamas to go no way. Speaker 0: Yeah. They don't like Hamas. Speaker 1: They do not like Hamas. Speaker 0: The Palestinians for better. The Palestinians, they don't really care about the Palestinians, do they? Speaker 1: They really Don't. And I think that, you know, the polling also shows that the popularity of Hamas in these countries, in Saudi and in UAE, is not high. So there's not a lot of pressure on Saudi nobody to come to the rescue of the Palestinians like there was a decade ago. So things are definitely changing, not But we're not seeing a lot of people step up to the to the occasion other than the United States.
Saved - October 11, 2023 at 10:31 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
KJP snubs @NYPost's @StevenNelson10, refusing to call on him. Nelson criticizes the move, highlighting disrespect towards a free media. It undermines a widely read newspaper and shows contempt for press freedom.

@CurtisHouck - Curtis Houck

KJP completely freezes out @NYPost's @StevenNelson10, stating with a smirk that "I'm not calling on you today!" Nelson hit back: "You should be ashamed of that! That shows disrespect to a free and independent media! It's blasphemous to one of our country's largest & widely read newspapers, Karine. That shows contempt for a free and independent press."

Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker mentions being called on in two seasons and not calling on someone today. They express their desire for a change and criticize a newspaper for showing contempt towards a free press. They also mention calling on someone they haven't called in a long time. Lastly, they question why the President wasn't originally scheduled to attend a meeting.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I am gonna We called on me in 2 seasons, Cree. I'm not calling on you today. Go ahead. Alright. That should be a change Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. With respect to a pre Go ahead. I'm gonna call the largest and most widely read newspaper screen. That shows contempt for a free and independent press. Go ahead. I'm pulling on somebody who I haven't called in a long time as well. Go ahead. Thanks. Why wasn't the President originally scheduled to attend this meeting With round tape with
View Full Interactive Feed