TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @Jules31415
reSee.it AI Summary
I criticized LA Mayor Karen Bass for her attempts to halt ICE deportations, arguing that migration is being weaponized to undermine the nation. I described this as a secessionist movement, claiming it threatens the integrity of the US Constitution. I pointed out that when violent rioters and migrant groups attack federal law enforcement in Los Angeles, and the mayor fails to condemn these actions, it signals a belief that LA is not part of the federal union and is not bound by national laws. This, I believe, is an effort to disrupt our constitutional framework.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Stephen Miller slams LA mayor Karen Bass for her efforts to stop ICE deportations—saying migration is being used as a "weapon" to destroy the country and calling it "secessionist behavior": "You are witnessing a secessionist movement in real time; you are witnessing an effort to nullify and invalidate the entire structure of the US Constitution. When you see violent rioters and migrant mobs attacking federal law enforcement in Los Angeles and then you see the mayor of Los Angeles not condemning the mobs...what the mayor of LA is saying is she believes Los Angeles is not part of our federal union; that Los Angeles is not subject to our national laws, not subject to federal law enforcement. So it is an effort in a very real sense to overthrow our constitutional design...and no city can aid and abet an invasion of our country." 🎯
Video Transcript AI Summary
A secessionist movement is underway, attempting to nullify the US Constitution. The Los Angeles mayor's call to remove ICE from the city implies Los Angeles believes it is not subject to national laws or federal law enforcement. This is an effort to overthrow the constitutional design, as no city is immune from federal law enforcement.
This secessionist behavior has massive costs, including illegal aliens working with cartels to poison children, resulting in hundreds of thousands of American deaths. There is allegedly the largest child trafficking movement in modern history, with 500,000 minors trafficked into the country. In the last 24 hours, dozens more children were rescued from child trafficking, but the Democrat party has not thanked President Trump for these rescues.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yes. You are you are you are witnessing a secessionist movement in real time. You are witnessing an effort to nullify and invalidate the entire structure of The US constitution. When when you see violent rioters and migrant mobs attacking federal law enforcement in Los Angeles, and then you see the mayor of Los Angeles not condemning the mobs, but saying over and over again, ice out of our city. Ice out of our city.
What the mayor of Los Angeles is saying is that she believes that Los Angeles is not part of our federal union, that Los Angeles is not subject to our national laws, not subject to federal law enforcement. So it is it is an effort in a very real sense to overthrow our whole constitutional design. No city in this country is immune from federal law enforcement, and no city can aid and and abet an invasion of this country over the will of the American people and the law enforcement officers empowered to enact the American people's will. So this really is, as you said, this is secessionist behavior, and it comes at a cost at a at a massive cost to American lives. You have illegal aliens working in league with cartels and drug dealers who are poisoning our children, hundreds of thousands of Americans dead.
You have the largest child trafficking movement in the history of the modern world. 500,000 miners trafficked into this country. And just just in the last twenty four hours, we have seen, probably today, another twenty, thirty, 40 kids that were rescued from child trafficking, and you will not hear a single word spoken by the Democrat party thanking president Trump for rescuing these
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Tucker Carlson on J6: “It was a narrative they were creating, and then I was like, ‘Oh, wow, you’re hiding something really, really dark,’ and it turned out to be hundreds of federal agents in disguise in the crowd—and of course, it was a setup” https://t.co/GCd172xkAS
Video Transcript AI Summary
Fabrication by the government has been evident, especially regarding the January 6th events. Jacob Chansley, known as the MAGA shaman, exemplifies how narratives can be flipped. Initial reporting suggested a white supremacist insurrection, which contradicted the reality observed in the tapes. The truth revealed that many participants were simply amazed to be in the Capitol, with some being led in by police. Chansley even offered to pray for an officer, showcasing a stark contrast to the narrative. The reaction to questioning this narrative was intense, with colleagues expressing outrage rather than engaging in discussion. This suggests that those who react defensively may be hiding something, reinforcing the idea that instinct can guide us to the truth.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Fabrication is told by the government. It seems like you are utterly vindicated now in your reporting based on the preponderance of evidence. I mean, I know I see that Jacob Chansley is listening in to this to this live. A good example of that is you completely retold the story of Jacob Chansley, right, known as the MAGA shaman, buffalo horn guy. Right?
You completely flipped the script, broke the narrative on that. Your thoughts on as the man with the first access, the first reporter to see the January 6th tapes, what are your thoughts on the leaks that have been coming out now?
Speaker 1: Well, first, I loved your interview with Shansley who is just, you know, the people they tell us are the worst are are often some of the sweetest and the best, and he's definitely in that category based on your interview with him, I thought. So thank you for that. But, because everything is a total inversion. Our heroes are actually, like, the worst people and the most reviled are actually the kindest, of course. But, yeah, I mean, I guess I feel vindicated.
I've taken no pleasure in that. I it's interesting, though. It wasn't reporting that got me to that. It was instinct. I mean, and I and I will say my instincts, and I think all of our instincts are undefeated.
Your instincts don't lie to you. Your instincts are not trying to sell you a product or spin you. Your instincts are only there to tell you the truth. So if you pay close attention to them and if you figure out a system for, you know, pointing you in the right direction, and my system is really simple. Whatever they're hysterical about is something they're lying about because why are they hysterical?
And if I'm not lying, I'm not hysterical. Why would I be hysterical? I've got nothing to hide. Like, you don't believe you don't believe me? Okay.
Fine. I'm telling the truth. But if I start screaming at you and calling you a Nazi when you ask me a question, I'm probably hiding something. And that was the guide I used on the COVID vaccine and on January 6th. I I had no reason to believe there was anything weird about January 6th.
I wasn't paying very close attention, to be honest with you. And then within hours, they were telling me it was a white supremacist insurrection, and, like, that's the one thing I knew that it wasn't. And so I was like, well, why are they telling me that? And then they kept telling me that it wasn't just a momentary surge of hysteria. It was a it was a narrative they were creating.
And then I was like, oh, wow. You're hiding something really, really dark. And it turned out to be 100 of federal agents in disguise in the crowd. And, of course, it was a setup just as I began to suspect it was. And but, anyway, that's how I got there.
I was the only reporter to see those tapes because I was the only really one of the few who was interested. I mean, we asked. That's kind of how we got them. Just asked. Like, call the new speaker.
Like, you have these tapes 1,000 of hours. Why can't we see them? And, of course, they didn't wanna give them up, but they did. And they showed kind of what you suspected. You know, there were vandals outside.
People broke windows. I'm opposed to that. People you know, it's a big crowd. They pushed in. Some of them, you know, did violent things, pretty low grade, by the way, violence.
But whatever they did, bad, won't defend it. But most of them were just like, holy shit. I can't believe I'm in the capital, and they wandered around. And then the cops led them in to various rooms within the capital, including the senate chamber. Now that was the point at which and it's on video.
They they open the door for chance. They they show him where it is and let him in. And then he says to one of the cops, like, can I say a prayer for you? And I'm like, this is so different from everything I've been told that it's bewildering. And moreover, why are they letting him into the senate chamber?
Why wouldn't they say, hey, pal. You can't be here. Like, you know, scoot. Get out of here. You get arrested, which is what cops would do.
But, no, they let they led him there. And then I'm like, well, I'd like to talk to those cops, but, of course, you can't because you're not allowed to know anything because it's a national security matter. And then I was like, this looks very much like a setup to me. I mean, what else is it? And, of course, the second I said that or suggest I didn't even say it.
I suggested it. Bunch of people from on air people I worked with quit in outrage, moral outrage. They were just so shocked that Jonah kid and that dumb guy who was his partner or whatever, Hayes. And they're like, oh, we just can't this is so unbearable. You know?
And it was like, why are you so mad that I suggested that? Like, if you disagree, tell me why. We can have a reasonable no. No. No.
We're quitting because it's a moral crime that you asked the question. As soon as people say it's a moral crime for you to ask a question, any question about anything, then you know they're the ones committing the moral crime, 100% of the time. So, yeah, that was my guide. And, yeah, of course, you know, it turned out to be true.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Tucker Carlson, Ep. 30: “Nations are defined by the people who live in them.” Tucker tackles what’s happening at our open southern border, calling it not only an “invasion, but a crime.” https://t.co/5nEREzUUdz
Video Transcript AI Summary
Nations are shaped by their populations. A country with hardworking individuals who share common values tends to be prosperous, while one lacking these traits may struggle. The U.S. is experiencing rapid change due to mass immigration, which many citizens did not vote for, undermining democracy. Currently, immigrants from over 160 countries are crossing the southern border, with record numbers of apprehensions daily. Many are unlikely to return home, leading to a collapse of the rule of law. In contrast, Poland has maintained strict immigration policies, resulting in safety and economic growth. The Polish government prioritizes its citizens' well-being and rejects illegal immigration, emphasizing the importance of national identity and security. The message is clear: to protect their countries, leaders must be brave and uphold their values against external pressures.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Nations are defined by the people who live in them. That is the most basic of all observations about the world. China is different from Barbados and not just because of geography. Austria and Zimbabwe are both landlocked countries in the middle of large continents, but they are not the same. That's because their populations are different.
If you have a country brimming with people who work hard, believe in Christianity and Western standards of fairness, and are willing therefore to settle their differences without violence, you will likely have a peaceful prosperous nation. You will have Sweden 50 years ago before millions of non Swedes arrived. If by contrast, you have a nation full of people, however friendly and cheerful they may be, who don't believe in any of that, who embrace tribalism rather than universal principles of justice, who think 40 hours a week is too much for a man to work, and who, for whatever reason, have low impulse control, then you will get a place like Congo, a country that has remained in a state of perpetual civil war since before most Americans were born. It's that simple. There's a reason the German sections of southern Brazil are affluent and orderly while Amazonia is not.
It's because of the people. This is obvious. No honest person denies it or has ever denied it. But in this moment of national madness that has gripped the United States, our leaders are pretending that none of it is true. Although, of course, they know perfectly well that it is true.
The result is a country, our country, that is changing faster than it ever has, but not through democratic means. Instead, by force, through waves of mass immigration that not a single American voted for. What's happening is a crime. It violates both federal law and the core precept of democracy, which is that citizens get to govern their own countries. This is election rigging on a mass scale, and it's fueled by anti white racial hostility.
That is not a guess. The people doing it say so out loud. They brag about it. They are criminals. They must be punished for what they have done.
In the meantime, it's worth knowing exactly what they are doing. This was the scene at the so called border at El Paso, Texas the other day. That's your country being invaded. It will never be the same. Republicans in congress, the Republican governor of Texas, do nothing as this happens.
Democrats cheer it on. They know that America will soon be a one party state, and they'll be in charge. Immigration is the reason. Todd Bensman joins us now from the border. He's a longtime journalist and the author of the new book Overrun, How Joe Biden Unleashed the Greatest Border Crisis in American History.
Todd, thanks so much for joining us. Where are you?
Speaker 1: I am in Piedras Negras, which is, Mexico just across from Eagle Pass, Texas. This has been a red hot spot for illegal immigration for the last couple weeks.
Speaker 0: Who's coming across, do you think, and how many?
Speaker 1: Right now, immigrants from a 160 different countries, crossing this border. These are gonna be people from, other than Mexico and other than Central America, really from all over, the world, Middle Easterners, people from every country of Africa, and the numbers are absolutely stupendous. This mass migration crisis of the last 36 months, 30 plus months, broke every record in the national history books already. But now we're in a surge that is breaking all of those records. We're looking at, you know, 14,000 apprehensions a day, 10,011, 12,000 a day, where, like, 1,000 a day, once upon a time, a few years ago, was considered a national emergency.
It's 14,000. We're looking at probably pushing 300,000 plus a month, and I think it's gonna be closer to 400,000 a month. If you consider the CBP 1 app, where they're bringing them in, over the ports of entry, you don't see those ones, And flying tens of thousands directly from foreign countries into 43 American airports directly. So you don't see all that. There's gonna be a lot of runners and gotaways as well to add to that.
Speaker 0: And I I think we've gotta operate on the assumption that none of these people are going back to their countries of origin, that all of them are being supported by American taxpayers and have an expectation of staying here.
Speaker 1: Absolutely. First of all, you know, we're pushing 5,000,000 people that are we know for sure are inside the country in a very short period of time. Just the logistics of trying to track down everybody and and, you know, execute deportation orders, and it it's just they're they're just gonna your odds if you're an individual immigrant who crossed in and stayed in are just phenomenal that you can just disappear into the ether of the country. Nobody's leaving.
Speaker 0: So you're describing a total collapse of the rule of law?
Speaker 1: Absolutely. If you come to the US southern border, if you are able to get over this river behind me and into the hands of Biden's border patrol, you are guaranteed entry and stay in the United States. You're almost guaranteed. In addition to that, the administration has put together 3 or 4 different, what they call, lawful pathways, that they are enabling people to cross, like, kinda pre legalized, preapproved. They just kinda came up with this off the top of their heads, but but, like, 100 of 1000 of foreign nationals are entering that way.
1 to 5 different ways that you can enter the country and and successfully stay for a long term, because the whole calculus for the immigrants is if I lay down $10,000 in smuggling fees, I want a return on investment. And that is entry and long term stay so I could pay it back, and that is guaranteed right now. So Honduran villages are emptying out. Population transfers are happening right now from places like Cuba, Guatemala, you know, African countries. People are coming they're emptying out of their countries and coming through because there's a return on that smuggling investment to get here because we are letting them in.
We are deporting almost no one. We are detaining almost no one. I've interviewed thousands of these immigrants. On the other side of the bus station, you can find them with their papers. 24 hours after they get caught crossing over here, they're stamped in, and they're on a bus to New York City or wherever all across the country.
Speaker 0: We are not like you said, we're letting I mean, it's it's our criminal political class and the criminal NGOs who are pilotfished on that class who are making this possible, but most people are are totally opposed to this. It's supposed to be our country. We're supposed to be its owners. We're paying for this. And I and I wondered in earlier age, you would, of course, see American men with their own rifles standing on the border stopping it.
Is does there come a point where people just say we're, you know, the this is a criminal government, and we're going to stop the invasion of our country.
Speaker 1: I mean, listen. Ultimately, this is an electoral issue. This is gonna come down to the 2024 election, who is in the, 20 4 hour period. You can trace it right to the day it started, inauguration day 2021. It has a very, distinct beginning, and it can be ended in 24 hours just as well with the kind of policies that make that smuggling investment, not worth it, not worth the risk.
That's really what the calculus is. And, also, remember that, you know, I've never met an immigrant who wasn't equipped with a cell phone, a modern cell phone connected to social media. And everybody down trail, is very keyed in on their phones to everybody up trail. And when we we, as, the US government, let them in, that immediately broadcast to the entire world of aspiring immigrants, and that's when villages emptying out empty out. And that's what's happening right now.
The only way to really stop this is with policies that take away the reward for laying your smuggling money down on the green felt.
Speaker 0: Do I mean, you're in Texas. I don't know if you live there full time, but you're certainly there a lot. When you visit Texas now, it's very obvious that the state has changed and and for the much worse. Litter everywhere is chaotic. The political balance is changing because the demographic balance is changing.
Do do people in Texas see this as an emergency, do you think? And if so, why is nobody doing anything about it?
Speaker 1: Yes. I I do believe that, it I mean, there is a a dawning realization, not just in Texas, but in cities like Chicago and New York and Boston and, Miami and everywhere else where, unfunded masses of people are suddenly showing up with, you know, nobody expected us. We weren't budgeted for this. We don't have anywhere to put them or anywhere to feed them. And, that is just getting going.
You ain't seen nothing yet compared to what's coming. And in Texas, you know, you have the big cities, you know, obviously, there are, you know, tens of thousands, 100 of thousands of people settling in those cities, and they're settling everywhere else too, and that's you can't not notice it. The regular voter, the regular American, anybody, Democrats too, can't help but notice this as a big pocketbook issue and some other issues too. This is transformative, what's happening
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: To the United States. If we've had 5,000,000 and that's an undercount, now we very well may have another 3 or 4,000,000 by the end of the first Biden term.
Speaker 0: Yep. So these are permanent changes. And, again, this is, you know, the greatest crime ever, perpetrated on the American people. Last question. Since we saw the tragedy in Israel just a few days ago tied directly to borders, immigration, the nature of the population, etcetera, etcetera, Is anybody concerned, anybody in the Biden administration or among the criminal NGOs making this possible, about combatants coming into our country?
These seem like mostly men of war age to me. Anyone saying anything about that?
Speaker 1: Well, last month, I was invited to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on terrorist travel over the southern border. And in my testimony, I pointed out that, you know, we've had a record breaking number of immigrants apprehended who are on the FBI's terrorism watch list already. Those are the ones we caught among 1,800,000 that we never caught estimated, and that's a low estimation. And I I couldn't help but notice during my testimony that the Democratic side of the, of the, desk, the dais, they would withdraw and go into their cell phones and start looking at TikTok and Facebook, and they were not interested. Yeah.
Almost kinda like the Israelis maybe before, this, incredible, devastating attack by Hamas. There is a complacency, and I think by half of the country, terrorist organizations are imaginative, just like we saw, and it's not a huge, leap to consider that somebody might come in here through this completely collapsed southern border and go into a shopping mall or do something else at some point.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, if there's ever a reason to have a citizen's militia, this this is it, I would say. Todd Benjamin, appreciate so much your reporting. Thank you for joining us. So just to restate, this is not organic.
It's not an accident. It's not a it's a natural disaster. Our country is being invaded because our political class welcomed, invited, and then abetted the invasion. Democrats are power drunk nihilists. The Republicans elected to hold them in check are unfortunately dishonest cowards.
It does not need to be this way. Dominic Ciarzczynski is a member of the European Parliament. He's from Poland, and he is unapologetically working to protect his country from radical demographic change, which nobody welcomes in any country on planet Earth. We thought it'd be interesting to talk to him now, and we're grateful that he's joining us. Dominic, thanks so much for coming on.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much for having me.
Speaker 0: So I wanna just frame this for people who haven't been following it with a conversation that you had with a kind of bewildered interviewer. I believe this is channel 4 in Great Britain. Here's how it unfolded.
Speaker 3: How many refugees have Poland taken?
Speaker 2: 0.
Speaker 3: And you're proud of that?
Speaker 2: If you are asking me if you're if you're asking me about Muslim, Muslims illegal immigration, none not even one will come to Poland. Not even one if it's illegal. We we took over 2,000,000 Ukrainians who are working, who are peaceful in Poland. We will not receive even one Muslim because this is what we promised.
Speaker 3: But I asked not about illegal immigrants. I asked about refugees. And Jean Claude Yunka, the commission president, says that you're racist. You sound proud of the fact that you haven't taken any refugees.
Speaker 0: Of
Speaker 2: course. Because this is what our people expecting from our government. That's number 1. This is why our government was elected, but this is why Poland is so safe. This is the the the reason why we have not even, one terrorist attack.
Look at the streets in Poland, and we can be called populists, nationalists, racists. I don't care. I care about my family and about my country.
Speaker 0: That is so unbelievable. That woman I don't know what the word for repulsive in Polish is, but she qualifies. Anyway, I just wanna say I think it's the greatest exchange I've seen in a long time.
Speaker 2: She was surprised by the honest words. She was so surprised.
Speaker 0: So tell us about your thinking on this question. You don't seem embarrassed at all. God you. But why are you not why are you not like everybody else in Europe?
Speaker 2: Because I'm proud. Because I love Poland. Because I love my mother, my sister, my daughters, our daughters as a as a families. Because we care about them. Because, we are not afraid to say no.
Most of the spineless politicians, leftist politicians in here, in European Parliament, in in Brussels, they are afraid. They want to be the part of this leftist way of thinking flat, I would say. And and and Poland is completely different. I I must say Poland is, I would say, the last stronghold of normality, Christianity, family values in Europe. Obviously, Hungary are doing good as well, but by the size, we are the ones who are very much attacked at the moment.
So we are not afraid. We believe in Poland. We, we are skyrocketing. When you see on, when you see the data from here, from Eurostat, Eurostat. Eurostat is an official body in European Parliament in here.
By the Eurostat, Poland is the safest country in Europe. And the question is, why? Never changed since we took power. Since 2015, there is a very, very simple policy, 0 illegal migration, which means 0 terrorist attacks. Poland is the only country in Europe without terror attack.
We don't have stabbings. We don't have rapes in parks. We don't have all this rubbish in Poland. Why? Because we are very, very strict on migration.
As a lawyer, I was listening to to your conversation. As a lawyer, I'm doing my PhD on international law and and human rights. I must confirm, they are not refugees. They are illegal migrants committing who committing crime. They are criminals, should be sent back, punished, and then sent back from wherever they they came from.
So people are afraid to say obvious facts, and we are not afraid. That's why we are so successful. Again, Eurostat, the lowest unemployment, the the the highest GDP growth. We are just booming, as and the most important one of the lowest depths in Poland, public depths. But the most important thing is zero illegal migration equals 0 terror attacks.
The safest place in Europe, Poland. That is why I've got this, motto in here, be like Poland. I don't know if you can see it.
Speaker 0: That's my personal motto
Speaker 2: because I'm so proud. I'm so proud of Poland. Look at the data and then answer yourself. Do you want to be like Poland, or you want to be like, unfortunately, some borders in in Europe and, in United States? And I must say I must say president Trump was right about the wall.
President Trump, you are an inspiration. Thank you for that. We build the wall, and no one is able no one is able to come to Poland. Wall is the part of our safety. So president Trump was right, but most of these leftists are too low to say, yes, he was right.
They would never admit it because they are wrong. So that's very simple. That's that's a common sense. That's nothing unusual for us, for Polish, to be brave, to believe in our own nation, to love our families, to take care about the our our families and our country, and then think about someone else. That's so simple.
Speaker 0: It it it is so simple, but it I I asked you why do you have this attitude that is unknown in in the rest of the west, and you said because I'm proud to be Polish. I I have self respect. I love my country. Is it no country in Europe, maybe in the world, suffered more than Poland did over the last 100 years from every direction crushed its population massacre. Why have the Poles emerged?
Did they emerge from the 20th century with their self respect intact? Whereas Great Britain, obviously, Germany, all of Western Europe. You know, they hated themselves by
Speaker 2: the end, but the polls didn't. Why? Because we, we suffered so much. You have to remember that Poland did not exist for a 123 years. Yes.
We were because of the partitions, a 123 years nonexistence on the map, and our nation survives. Not only that. As you as you know, we were attacked on 1st September 1939 by Germany. That's how the war started. Then 16 days later, on 17th, the same month, Russians attacked, and we were occupied after the war for 70 years by the Soviets.
So we had to once we freed our nation from the communism, we knew what the freedom is. We understood much better than others what it means to give up your freedom, to give up your land, to give up your culture. And now we are so home organic society. We love it. We love our culture.
We love our language. We love our food. We we love our family values. We love everything what is about Poland because this is our land. No one is taking it from us anymore and no one will ever take anything from the that's why we don't want any in Poland that will not be led in.
We don't want any jihadists. We don't want any Hamas supporters in in in Poland or Hamas members. We know they're gonna try to move along move, throughout the world. So as I said previously, and I keep repeating for the for for years, not even one will come to Poland ever.
Speaker 0: I'm gonna join you in Warsaw for dinner at some point. I can't control myself. Last last quest well, I'm going I'm going to. I'm going to. So last question.
What advice would you so in the United States, I know you're familiar with our system, but we have the Democratic Party effectively in charge of the government, but also industry runs our economy, unfortunately. And And then we have this thing called the Republican Party, which is elected to push back and kind of keep them from going totally insane. They haven't done that because they're cowards. That that's my view. What advice would you give Republican lawmakers now a year out from an election on this question of immigration?
Speaker 2: Be brave or you will not exist. Be brave. Believe in what you think. Believe in your values. Believe in family.
Don't talk about it. Do it. As I said, president Trump built the wall. Poland built the wall. We are safe.
It's it's so simple. You have to believe in yourself and be strong. This is war. This is not a joke. This is war.
Actually, what is happening on the border is a hybrid war and other and and the war needs soldiers. So behave like a man, be a soldier, be responsible, and fight. Then you have a chance to win.
Speaker 0: Dominic Cherchinsky, that was an inspiring conversation, and I'm I'm just I'm grateful that you joined us today. Thank you so much. I will see you again.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much for having me.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Thank you.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Tucker Carlson, Ep. 33: “We seem to be heading to war with Iran; certainly, the Biden Administration is pushing us in that direction. What’s new and interesting and ominous is that very few Republicans—the opposition party—are pushing back.” https://t.co/cddM4HgvEs
Video Transcript AI Summary
The U.S. appears to be moving toward conflict with Iran, with little opposition from Republicans. Senator Lindsey Graham suggests military action against Iran if Hezbollah attacks Israel. Former Colonel Douglas McGregor warns that such actions could escalate into a broader war, involving Russia and destabilizing the Middle East. He highlights the risks to U.S. military bases in the region and the potential for domestic terrorism due to open borders. McGregor emphasizes the inadequacy of U.S. military readiness and the moral dilemmas of collective punishment in Gaza. He calls for careful consideration of the consequences of war, noting that many policymakers may not fully grasp the implications for the U.S. and its allies. Ultimately, he believes that a regional conflict could threaten Israel's existence and worsen the U.S. economic situation.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We seem to be heading to war with Iran. Certainly, the Biden administration is pushing us in that direction. What's new and interesting and ominous is that very few Republicans, the opposition party, are pushing back. Instead, some of the party's leaders are encouraging it. Here, for example, is senator Lindsey Graham with South Carolina from last weekend on NBC.
Speaker 1: You said this week that the only way to keep the war from escalating is to hold Iran accountable Part of what you're talking about now. Yeah. And that it might mean bombing their oil refineries. Yeah. Have you had any discussions with the Biden administration about this?
Speaker 2: A bit. Here's my message. If Hezbollah, which is a proxy of Iran, launches a massive attack on Israel, I will consider that a threat to the, to to the state of Israel existential in nature. I will introduce a resolution in the United States Senate to allow military action by the United States in conjunction with Israel to knock Iran out of the oil business. Iran, if you escalate this war, we're coming for you.
Speaker 1: Are you effectively poised to declare war on Iran? That's very strong language.
Speaker 2: I am poised to use military force to destroy the source of funding for Hamas and Hezbollah.
Speaker 0: No. That's Lindsey Graham. Few others in the Republican party will be that open about their intentions, but very few disagree with him. Certainly not in private. They agree.
So what would war with Iran mean? Well, it's hard to know because virtually no one who's talking about it in public is operating from a deep interest in America's interest. Is this good for us or is it not? Former colonel Douglas McGregor is the CEO of our country, our choice, and one of the first people we turn to for analysis of events like this because he is interested in what happens to the United States. He joins us now.
Doug, thank you for coming on. Do you think that we are moving toward war with Iran?
Speaker 3: Yes. I do. And, it looks like the chosen destination is indeed Armageddon. There doesn't seem to be any real appreciation for the implications for us and and frankly for Europe and the world as well as the Middle East of such action. You know, take for an example just on the economic side, about 20% of the world's oil passes through the Straits of Hormuz every month, probably 25% of liquefied natural gas, and you're talking about shutting down 2 to 3000000 barrels, a day of oil from Iran, you know, this entire region is involved in the war.
This is not an Iranian monopoly by any stretch of the imagination. But the point is that when we're looking at 10 year treasury yields up over 5% and people are increasingly convinced that the Fed has lost control, the economic side of the house is catastrophe. Now when you look at the military side, you have to look at the arsenal of missiles that Iran possesses, and they can reach out 1,200 miles with great precision, very high explosive conventional warheads that would do enormous damage, destroying whole city blocks in places like Haifa, Tel Aviv, even Jerusalem, though I doubt they would attack Jerusalem. The the bottom line is that we need to think this through and everyone right now is emoting. There is no thinking anywhere as far as I could tell.
The only possible exception may be amazingly enough, mister Erdogan in Turkey who came out this morning and indicated he was willing to mediate, the dispute between Israel and Hamas. Whether or not anyone in Washington or Israel is interested in talking, I don't know. But if we could sideline Turkey and keep Turkey out of the fight, that would ultimately help Israel enormously.
Speaker 0: So what would happen to the United States if we followed senator Graham's advice and just begin bombing critical infrastructure in Iran? What what would happen then?
Speaker 3: Well, all of the bases that we have in Iraq and Syria, unfortunately, where we still have over a 1000 Americans, all of those would be targeted. And this time, they would target them accurately, and this destruction would be wholesale. I would expect trouble here at home and in the United States because of the open border. Hezbollah has a very large operation in Mexico. There are no doubt many, many, many Hezbollah agents inside the United States.
We can only begin to imagine the kind of trouble they could cause. The missile and space program in Iran is very, very advanced as is their cyber warfare capability. All of these things would be brought to bear against us. But what's most important, I think, for Americans to understand is if we attack Iran on the basis of Hezbollah's alleged willingness to attack Israel if Israel invades Gaza, we will end up in a fight with Russia. Russia will not sit by quietly and watch Iran destroyed by the United States air and naval power in the region.
And once Russia enters this, it it becomes much more than just a local conflict, maybe more than just a regional war. We haven't thought this through. We need to do that. And I doubt seriously at that point that the Turks would be able to stay out. The Turks are Sunni Muslims.
They are the de facto leaders of the Sunni Muslim world. They have the largest armed forces in the region. They are in close proximity to Israel. They could move forces south through Syria very rapidly. And I'm sure Bashar al Assad, assuming he even survives the opening of this campaign, would not obstruct them.
Speaker 0: So so many questions. But just to back up one click. You described Iran's missile arsenal, but Iran is a country that's been the subject of very intense sanction regime from the United States increased by the last president Donald Trump. But for a long time, how is Iran still such a powerful country militarily given those sanctions? It sounds like maybe they didn't work.
Speaker 3: Oh, no. I think that's that's an important point, Tucker, and you're absolutely right. We place so much value on these sanctions and assume that they have this profound impact. Normally, sanctions harm the population in terms of lowering its standard of living, making life more difficult for the everyday citizen, but it doesn't fundamentally alter the policy or the goals and objectives of the government. And this is something that I don't think we understand.
The same thing is true for for Hamas and Gaza. You know, you you want to go after Hamas. You want to destroy it. I think everyone with a sound mind is interested in the destruction of Hamas. But do you want to kill 100 of thousands of people in order to get at Hamas?
That's the question. We have the same problem in Iran. Our sanctions have not harmed the regime's ability to develop and build very, very complex and sophisticated missiles. These missiles are very accurate now. There are 100, if not 1,000.
And the long range missiles, the 1200 mile range theater ballistic missiles are a very serious threat to us in the region and to Israel, and the sanctions have had no impact there. If anything, the Iranians have pulled together the best human capital in their country, the best engineers, the best thinkers, and put them to work primarily on missile technology and on cyber warfare. And that's where we stand right now. We have to expect the worst as a result if we strike Iran.
Speaker 0: How is the US military do you think, having spent your life in it, leading troops in combat and at the Pentagon, positioned to respond to war with with Iran right now? Are we in a strong position or not in your view?
Speaker 3: No. I don't think we're in a strong position. I think we're probably at the weakest point in, our recent history. I think you've got to look at the realities of new weapon systems, new capabilities. The United States Navy, if it's going to preserve its capability at sea, is probably going to be compelled to operate somewheres north and west of Sicily.
If it comes within closer range, then it falls into this envelope where the Iranians can strike it. And as I said before, we have to assume the Russians will come into this. Once you move into the Eastern Mediterranean, you are vulnerable to the Kinshah missiles and other missiles, cruise missiles, and hypersonic missiles that the Russians have. This makes it very difficult to fly strikes in support of the Israeli Defense Force against Hezbollah Because now you're flying a very long distance, you deliver your ordinance, you have to land in Israel in order to refuel. Israel is going to operate under a hail, if not a rainstorm of missiles and rockets, making it very, very dangerous to do so.
So our naval power, while substantial, may not have the desired impact on the ground that we would like. And then finally, we have no real army anymore. The army is down to perhaps, what, 450,000. How much of that is ready to fight is open to debate. Much of it is sitting in Eastern Europe right now.
We we don't have the means to rapidly ship a large force of 80 to a 100000 troops on the ground into the region, which means that we're reliant on special forces and right now 2,000 marines and perhaps 2,000 special forces and special operations forces. That's not gonna make much of a dent. And as we've seen quite recently within the last 24 hours or so, some of our special ops forces and Israeli special ops forces went into Gaza to reconnoiter, to plan for where they might want to go to free hostages and and make an impact, and they were shot to pieces and took heavy losses as I understand it. I think that's where we're headed, and I don't see that as a win for Israel in any way, shape, or form, and I certainly think it's very dangerous for us. You know, as I've tried to point out to a number of people, until Britain end entered World War 1, it was just a another European war.
Once Britain entered it, it became a global war. Well, once we are a cobelligerent, we enter this thing, it's gonna be very difficult for Russia and Turkey not to also come into this fight against us because they will not tolerate the sort of collective punishment that Israel plans for Gaza.
Speaker 0: The US military does have an awful lot of generals, however, as you pointed out, multiples of the number we had the absolute number we had during World War 2. And they're paid to think about this stuff. It why has it dawned on no one apparently who's spoken publicly anyway that this this could this could really harm our country gravely? Why is no one saying that?
Speaker 3: Well, I'm sure there are people in the US military who are aware, but let's be frank. Most of the people at the top of the military have never operated under artillery fire or rocket fire. They haven't seen direct fire combat. They haven't seen real war per se. Remember, we've had the luxury of sitting around forward operating bases and striking opponents that were armed with AK 40 sevens and command detonated mines, an occasional mortar or rocket.
Very, very low intensity combat. This is a high end conventional war that we're looking at with the potential to go nuclear, which obviously I don't think we or the Russians want to happen, but we have the wild card in Israel. They do have a nuclear capability. We don't know what the trip wire is for them to employ such a weapon. At that point, of course, all bets are off and and I think most of the world would turn against Israel.
Right now, they just have to worry about the Muslim world against them. It would certainly widen if they went that far. This there are too many unknowns and uncertainties here. And, you know, everyone always assumes at the beginning of such a conflict, well, it'll be contained. We'll only have to fight these people, Hamas, maybe Hezbollah.
It never works out that way. These things always last longer than everyone thinks. The resources required are much more profound than what we anticipated. And remember, we've already used up many of our war stocks in Ukraine, and we've left Ukraine in a state of ruins, places on life support, a half a 1000000 dead. What are we going to do to Israel if we press ahead down this road?
And it seems listening to secretary of state Blinken this morning, who more and more sounds like our commander in chief, that there is no room for negotiation, no room for mediation. Hamas must be destroyed. We must go into Gaza. If so, I think we're on this very dangerous road to Armageddon.
Speaker 0: What is the objective of the IDF and of of Blinken, of the United States and Israel in this short term? Destroy Hamas, but what is what does that mean?
Speaker 3: Well, to destroy Hamas in the minds, I think, of policymakers in Washington as well as in Israel is to systematically root them out and kill them in Gaza. Mhmm. Now let's be frank, when you go into an urban environment, you can't pick or choose your targets very easily. First of all, no matter how well trained you are, you're moving into an area that is rubbled. They're ruins.
It's very difficult to negotiate in that when I say negotiate, I mean negotiate the terrain through the rubble. You don't know where the enemy is going to pop up. Once you destroy all these buildings, he can be anywhere. So you're gonna take losses going in. But more important, once you start going in there, you're gonna end up killing whatever you find because the soldier, the Israeli soldier, the American soldier, very much the same, they want to live.
They wanna survive. When in doubt, pull the trigger. They're not going to stop and say, now wait a minute. Before I shoot, I really need to think about this because that may be a civilian or there may be a family there. That's not gonna happen.
You can't expect that. So the notion that this is, a a kind of warfare that is so precise that it can void avoid so called collateral damage is just nonsense. We can't expect miracles from the IDF or our own troops, which means that you're gonna annihilate everything in Gaza. And remember the Israelis would like to push the population out. The problem is when you push the population out, if you did into Egypt, you're gonna run into trouble with the Egyptians.
But even if you manage to get them there, you're only moving the problem that confronts you 20 miles, 30 miles away. In other words, killing people isn't going to solve the problem, but it's very attractive at the moment and it's very difficult to talk people out of it.
Speaker 0: Do do you believe American troops will be engaged, physically present in the invasion of Gaza?
Speaker 3: I'm sure they will because we have American citizens who are hostages, and we've already made it clear that we will assist and support the Israelis in freeing those hostages. Again, the problem is, how do you get the hostages out when you're fighting in this extraordinarily dirty and complex environment? What's to prevent the hostages from simply being executed as soon as you move in force into Gaza? I think the Israelis know that. I think our leadership in Washington knows it.
They may have even decided that if that happens, that's tragic, but the ultimate goal of destroying Hamas demands this. Again, it's the issue of collective punishment. I would encourage Americans everywhere to listen to King Abdullah of Jordan's speech in Cairo just a couple of days ago, where he made it clear that he agreed with the, you know, the abhorrence of what had happened in Israel and loathes Hamas for its barbarity and savagery. But he also goes on to point out that collective punishment meted out to 2,000,000 people is unacceptable both under international law and for humanitarian reasons. That's the problem.
And as Americans see more destruction and more and more film footage and photographs come out of Gaza showing children, women, old men dying, being killed, the support for Israel is going to erode. And at the same time, the anger and hatred inside the region, which already dislikes Israel, is going to be phenomenal. So Israel is doing something that I think no one has ever accomplished, at least not in my lifetime, and that is uniting Sunni and Shia against itself. That's why I think we have an obligation to save Israel from itself, but that's not a popular position. Right now, it's bombs away and everyone is cheering.
Speaker 0: What about the argument often articulated including by leading presidential candidates recently, that considerations like the ones you just raised, like the long term effects of decisions or global public opinion, downstream terror attacks. Thinking about any of that is a violation of principle and you're basically giving into the terrorists by weighing any of it. How would you respond to that?
Speaker 3: Most politicians, follow public opinion. Right now, public opinion supports violence against Hamas. And if that includes the destruction of Gaza, so be it. We support it. Very few people look beyond that and understand the larger consequences.
In the last century or I I guess I should say in the early 20th century, the great powers intervened on more than one occasion to prevent Turkey from being destroyed, not because they loved the Ottoman Turks, but because they saw the alternative being chaos. Turkey had a role to play. Therefore, we want to preserve it. We have to think about Egypt. Egypt has been a good strategic partner for Israel.
They've kept the peace there for decades. The Egyptians are now in a very difficult position. At least a 100000 Egyptian troops have been moved towards the border with Gaza involving several divisions. Under great pressure from public opinion in the Arab world, in the Muslim world, they may have to engage the Israelis because no one will protect the population in Gaza. That that's a terrible terrible possibility, one that we don't want.
Because if that happens to Egypt and Hezbollah attacks from the north, that will bring in everyone else. And we're suddenly confronting a war on a regional level that is going to harm us economically, physically in many ways, but could threaten the very existence of Israel, which I think is the root problem here. We don't want Israel's existence threatened. We want to save Israel. We want to keep it intact, but we may not be able to do that if this war runs out of control.
And let's be frank, historically, wars run out of control. They move in directions you never anticipated. So if you think you can plot this this route forward as Lindsey Graham thinks, you're crazy. Once this is unleashed, it's not manageable anymore.
Speaker 0: You you, said a couple of you made reference a couple of times to the American citizens being held by Hamas. What do we know about them?
Speaker 3: Well, I think most of them, are American citizens who happen to be Jewish, who are there to celebrate, during the holiday period or participate in this music festival we've heard so much about. You know, I I don't think they ever anticipated anything like this happening. Yeah. The problem is, as we've said before, extracting them from this haystack is is nigh on to impossible.
Speaker 0: What about the concerns of about terrorism in the United States in the wake of all of this?
Speaker 3: Well, I think they're very valid. Yeah. I I think these concerns are very, very valid. We've had open borders now for the last two and a half years, but we've had an illegal, migration problem for the last 3 plus decades. We don't know who's in the country.
We really don't. No one at homeland homeland security can tell you who is here. The Europeans face something quite similar. They were bullied into admitting millions of Muslims from the Middle East and Africa. We've been bullied by our government to open the borders and let in effectively anybody who wants to come.
So we don't know who's here, but we do know that Hamas as well as Hezbollah have positions in Mexico. Of the 2, Hezbollah is much stronger, much larger, and much better equipped and financed. So we have to expect that once Hezbollah is in the war and we are against them and Iran, that much of our infrastructure will be at risk. Something is bad or potentially even worse than 911 could happen here. This brings us back to the whole issue of immigration and border security.
We've essentially ignored it. The same politicians who are pushing for war against virtually everyone in the Middle East, which is what it boils down to in the final analysis, don't seem to have thought carefully about protecting us or our borders from all of the terrible things that we've seen in Israel. How much damage could these same people do to us in a shopping mall in the space of 15 minutes? It doesn't take much imagination to understand how dangerous this is.
Speaker 0: Do you think that this war, if it comes, and it as as you said, it seems like it is, how will that affect American domestic politics? Work traditionally has been used by the people in power to shut down dissent. Can you imagine that happening in this case?
Speaker 3: Well, I think they'll try. Fortunately, thanks to people like Elon Musk who bought Twitter and ended the censorship or suspended it, the truth does get through and reach Americans. But Americans will figure out pretty quickly if two things tend to happen at once. You have the the war overseas and the war here, but remember the economy and the and the financial condition right now. If you turn on any of the business channels for the first time in my memory, lots and lots of analysts are coming on and talking about the Fed having lost control, the rising interest rates, you know, the inability, to manage and cope with the sovereign national debt of 33,000,000,000,000.
And that's the tip of a proverbial iceberg. We already have Americans who are struggling with inflation anyway. Now we're looking at potentially scarcity. We've drained our strategic oil reserve for all intents and purposes. If the Strait of Hormuz is shut down, if the Suez Canal is closed, we're in a lot of trouble in the short run.
That's for sure. How rapidly can we recover from all of this? How many refineries can we put back into operation? How much drilling can we do quickly? The answer is not very much.
So draining that strategic oil reserve was a very serious mistake.
Speaker 0: But we'll be as we become impoverished and chaotic and subject to these terror attacks, we'll be winning important moral victories. Don't you think?
Speaker 3: Well, in our effort to stand at Israel's side and help protect Israel, we have taken a different route and cast moral turpitude to the side. In other words, how do you help one without committing a war crime against the other? This is the problem with collective punishment. This is the problem with annihilating Gaza and trying to sweep out its population. That's unacceptable to us as Americans.
I don't think if you sat down any of Israel's most ardent supporters in the United States and said, are you willing to trade the lives of several 100000 people in Gaza, for the lives taken in Israel by Hamas. After all, Hamas and Palestinian Jihad were the fighters. They lost 1500. There were 3,000 involved in the several waves of the attack. They're dead.
Now we're looking at perhaps 5,000 civilians dead. How many more will we witness? Is that somehow or another justified morally? And I think a lot of Americans will struggle with that. That's why I say it would be best if we had a cooling off period.
I'm glad that the Israelis are waiting for additional naval power to arrive, on station in the Mediterranean and also for additional equipment, theater, ballistic missile, defense, and so forth. But we need to use this time to think carefully about how far we want to go because right now it's a one way street to regional war. And I don't think anybody really wants that if they think about it carefully. Therefore, you know, looking at someone like Erdogan, however slippery we may consider him to be, his willingness to mediate is a bright light in in an otherwise very dark sky, and we should look to that because we don't want the regional war. It will destroy us economically.
We're already in bad shape. We've already suffered because of the foolish intervention in Ukraine to try to destroy Russia. Now we have Russia more powerful militarily than it's been since the eighties, and it's poised to enter on the side of Iran. We should all give that some serious thought.
Speaker 0: Last question. Do you know of any leaders in the United States, political leaders at the Pentagon, within the Biden administration, who are thinking clearly about this, which is to say who are framing their thoughts on it around what's best for the United States long term? Is anybody thinking that way?
Speaker 3: Yes. Yeah. Yes. There are. The problem is none of them hold high positions in government, and none of their voices or their analyses or their viewpoints are going to reach anybody in power.
I think you have to listen carefully to what secretary of state Blinken said. He was absolutely unambiguous. We are going to destroy Hamas, whatever that takes. That means regional war, frankly. And anybody who thinks that people are going to say, oh, no.
We're afraid of America. We're not going to risk that. They're wrong. They are not afraid to risk attacking Israel for fear of coming into confrontation with us. We are not the power we were in 1991 and they know that.
And economically, our position is very fragile. Let's face it. So the bottom line is, yes, there are people out there, but they're not being heard and they're not going to be heard in the current environment.
Speaker 0: Doug McGregor, thank you so much for that. Appreciate it.
reSee.it AI Summary
I caution my Republican colleagues to not misread the people's will. It's crucial to maintain bipartisanship, especially after an election. The temptation to lean towards extremes can lead to consistent backfire for the party in power.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Chuck Schumer warns Republicans they must work with Democrats: "To my Republican colleagues: I offer a word of caution in good faith. Take care not to misread the will of the people and do not abandon the need for bipartisanship. After winning an election, the temptation may be to go to the extreme...it's consistently backfired on the party in power."
Video Transcript AI Summary
To my Republican colleagues, I urge caution in interpreting the election results. Avoid the temptation to shift toward extremes, as history shows this often backfires. Our effectiveness relies on bipartisanship. If we want the Senate to be as productive in the next four years as it has been, cooperation is essential. Democrats are committed to working with both sides when possible, maintaining our values while seeking progress to improve people's lives. The question now is whether Republicans will embrace the same approach. Remember, bipartisanship is the most effective way to achieve our goals, as it has proven in the past and will continue to do so in the future.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now let me turn to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Another closely contested election now comes to an end. To my Republican colleagues, I offer a word of caution in good faith. Take care not to misread the will of the people, and do not abandon the need for bipartisanship. After winning an election, the temptation may be to go to the extreme.
We've seen that happen over the decades, and it's consistently backfired on the party in power. So instead of going to the extremes, I remind my colleagues that this body is most effective when it's bipartisan. If we want in the next 4 years the senate to be product as productive as the last 4, the only way that will happen is through bipartisan cooperation. Democrats will be ready to do what we have consistently done, work with both sides when the opportunity arises. Democrats will never abandon our values, but neither will we reject an opportunity to move the ball forward to make people's lives better when we can.
The question is now whether or not Republicans are willing to do the same. To my colleagues on the other side, once again, do not abandon bipartisanship. It's the best and most effective way to get things done. It was true in the last 4 years and will be true in the years to come.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Karine Jean-Pierre refuses to say whether Biden's "garbage" comment was read from prepared remarks https://t.co/IMIEbXSilo
Video Transcript AI Summary
The president was indeed using notes during his remarks last night, which is common for elected officials. However, the key point is that he aimed to clarify his statements. This demonstrates the president's integrity in addressing the hateful rhetoric from a comedian's remarks made on Sunday. Specific details won't be discussed, but it's important to recognize the president's intent to ensure clarity in his communication.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm just following up on 2 questions from my colleagues. For the sake of clarity, was the president reading from prepared remarks last night? Look, the president had certainly, it's not unusual for for a president, vice president, or any elected officials to have notes on what they are what they want to say, prepared to say. I'm not gonna I'm just not gonna get into specifics here. What is I think what's important to note here is the president wanted to clarify what he said.
That is what is important. And for a president to do that, I think is important. And I think that shows, the integrity of this president to want to make sure that, hey, I wanna make really clear I was talking about the comedian and the hateful rhetoric that was coming out of his remarks on on Sunday. I'm not gonna get into, I'm not gonna get into specifics here, and and just leave it as that.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Don Jr. to me: “Ma’am, if you send $601 in your Venmo account to your friend, they’re going to audit you. But if the Pentagon loses a quarter of a trillion dollars…*scoffs*…‘what’s the big deal?!’ Think of how insane this all is.” He’s right. https://t.co/7iriI0XaRA
Video Transcript AI Summary
Corruption is rampant, with reports of ministers hiding millions in cash. The U.S. has sent $250 billion to a country known for its corruption, while the Pentagon has lost another $260 billion without consequence. If an individual misplaces a small amount, they face audits, but the Pentagon's losses go unnoticed. This system benefits defense contractors like Raytheon, where board members profit from ongoing military sales. Generals often transition to lucrative positions in these companies, perpetuating a cycle of profit from war. The situation reflects a broader scam that ultimately impacts everyone, suggesting that there may come a time when this model fails.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: He he recognized it's one of the most corrupt countries ever. Like, you know, they they found that one of the ministers had a couple $1,000,000 in US cash under his mattress, you know, because a lot of public servants just have that. Only Bob Menendez in New Jersey had that as a democratic president. It was gold, not cash. But, you know, we've we've been sending him that much.
But so we have 250,000,000,000 there, plus the Pentagon who who lost another 20260, 250 1,000,000,000. Remember when they when they lost it? Now, ma'am, if you send $601 in your Venmo account to your friend, they're gonna audit you. But if the Pentagon loses a quarter of a $1,000,000,000,000 Yeah. Yeah.
Wow. What's the big deal? We're insane. We're perfect. Think of how insane this all is.
It's a very slow. Monday laundry. Of course, it is. Well, yeah. Oh, and it's all a kickback to that.
That's why that's why the guy from Raytheon wanted it. Right? Yep. You only keep the board seat at Raytheon if you're in the position to keep selling more missiles, peddling death. Doesn't matter.
That's and that's why DC doesn't. That's why all the generals love it because that's their off ramp. That's the retirement package. You sit on that board. Oh, yeah.
Right? It's why they've gone so woke because if you know, you could be the woke general at Disney, but Disney can then say, look. We have a general. We're being totally across the it's all a big scam. Yep.
But it doesn't have to be at yes. At your expense. All of us at your expense. But there's a point where it doesn't work anymore.
reSee.it AI Summary
I don't want to attack politicians in their own states, but I was appalled to see a photo of Governor Josh Shapiro smiling while signing an artillery shell meant for a country we're not at war with. It genuinely disgusted and enraged me.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Tucker Carlson: “I actually don’t really want to show up in somebody else’s state and like attack their politicians…but I saw a photograph of your Governor Josh Shapiro standing with a foreign leader, signing an artillery shell that is going to kill civilians in a country we’re not at war with, with a grin on his face…I was disgusted by it, actually, I was enraged by it.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker does not want to appear in someone else's state like a tax or politician. The speaker saw a photograph of Pennsylvania's governor, Josh Shapiro, standing with a foreign leader.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I actually don't really want to show up in somebody else's state like a tax or politicians. This is not my state for common health. But I saw a photograph of your governor, Josh Shapiro, standing with a foreign leader,
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Merrick Garland claims the appointment of Jack Smith was constitutional: "Do I look like somebody who would make that basic mistake about the law? I don't think so." https://t.co/1NXkMSPGNx
Video Transcript AI Summary
I disagree with the ruling that the justice department's process for picking special counsels is illegal. We believe it is constitutional and have appealed the decision. This process has been used for decades, including in previous administrations, and has been upheld by every court that has reviewed it, including the Supreme Court.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Judge Eileen Cannon ruled that the way the justice department has been picking special counsels for decades is illegal, unconstitutional. Why do you disagree with that?
Speaker 1: Look. I, as you well know, I picked this, room for this interview. This is my favorite room in the justice department. It's a law library. For more than 20 years, I was a federal judge.
Do I look like somebody who would make that basic mistake about the law? I I don't think so. Our position is that it's constitutional and valid. That's why we appealed. I will say that this is the same process of appointing special counsel, as was followed in the previous administration and the special counsel Durham and special counsel Mueller, in multiple, special counsels over the decades going back to Watergate, and the special prosecutor in that case, till now, every single court, including the Supreme Court, that has considered the legality of a special counsel appointment has upheld it.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Bill Barr says Trump's NY case is an "abomination" and a "travesty" that will "eventually be overruled," and he has serious concerns about its impact on the upcoming election. "This is exhibit number one of the dual system of justice that is becoming more and more evident." https://t.co/fOEWOYjHr3
Video Transcript AI Summary
Former Attorney General Bill Barr criticized the guilty verdicts in the case, calling it a travesty with no evidence of a crime. He expressed concern about the impact on the justice system and the country. Barr argued for lifting the gag order, allowing Trump to defend himself publicly. He hoped the sentencing would be fair and not politically motivated.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Let's bring in former attorney general Bill Barr. Bill, great to have you with us. Thank you very much for for joining us tonight. I wanna get your thought on that gag order, but first, I I'd like to get your reaction. I know you said all along you thought that this case was, was built on very flimsy, indictment.
Were you surprised when the 34 guilty verdicts came down?
Speaker 1: I wasn't particularly surprised, but I I said from the very start that this was an abomination. And I actually was surprised that they went ahead with the case because there really was nothing there. There was no crime there, and they never were able to really articulate it until after the defense rested its case. So I thought the whole thing was a travesty. I wasn't surprised by the verdict because the way the case was conducted, there was never really any discipline on on trying to make the prosecutor establish what the elements of the crime were and what evidence he had to do it.
It was just assumed from the beginning that there was some kind of federal election campaign violation, which there wasn't.
Speaker 0: You know, Bill, I'm so struck when I asked people's reaction to this and you kind of it it goes all over the spectrum. But what we're seeing in the some of the polling as well as well, you know, the jury spoke. Kamala Harris said today, well, the jury spoke. The prosecution had an opportunity to lay up their case. You know, how does that make you feel as someone who cares deeply about the justice system in this country?
Speaker 1: Well, I I think this is, you know, exhibit number 1 of of the dual system of justice that is becoming more and more evident. But I also wanna point out that what does this do to our body politic? What does this do to our country? Say the this case is gonna be overruled because there are just multiple errors and violations of constitutional rights, which, you know, Andy McCarthy and Jonathan Pirley have amply discussed, on your show. This will be eventually overruled after the election.
But what Half half the country is gonna feel that this was a stolen election. And and, you know, again, this this this is a grave injustice and disservice to the country.
Speaker 0: Yeah. You know, I'm speaking with a lot of veterans here, and I ask all of them at the end of our interviews how they feel about what's going on in the country. And, you know, sadly to a person, they talk about how concerned they are about the system of of justice in the United States, about leadership in the United States, and it it it's it's probably the most unsettling thing that I've heard since I've been here. There's so much inspiration in in most of it. But let me ask you this about this gag order.
Is it time to lift the gag order? Because they seem to really like the gag order. And meanwhile, you've got Michael Cohen mouthing off about John Junior and, you know, the children of the Trump family. Stormy Daniels says that she wants to make Trump into a punching bag
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 0: For women victims. They're not silenced at all.
Speaker 1: That's right. And and I think the, president's lawyers are absolutely correct. The whole purpose of the gag order, was to protect the integrity of the process to make sure that the trial was not disrupted by what was said. The trial is now over. The verdict's been delivered, and now everyone out there is talking about it, including, as you point out, Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels.
And the president, like anyone else, has a right to defend himself in the court of public opinion, especially when he's running for the presidency of the United States. He has to be able to to attack the charges, to to to assert that the witnesses against them weren't telling the truth, and and point out all the flaws with the case and some of the rulings by the judge were which are inexplicable, he he should be allowed to do that.
Speaker 0: So so given what you given what you've seen on this judge, quickly if you can, Beau, do you expect at this sentencing?
Speaker 1: I I hope that that he doesn't, do what they usually do, what the left usually does, which is to go too far and and, either deny him his freedom or or impose a, you know, severe gag order on him. I think that, you know, would would would again, it would it would sort of affect people's attitude toward the fairness of the the ultimate fairness of this election.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Fani Willis defied Judge Scott McAfee's recent warning to not play "the race card" because it's "legally improper": "Recently, they tell me they don't like me to talk about race. Well, imma talk about it anyway." https://t.co/liRVytHK3v
Video Transcript AI Summary
It's tough always having to prove yourself multiple times. Despite being told not to talk about race, I will. Being black comes with challenges, but I see greatness in this city with many African American leaders. I appreciate the sacrifices made to be in these positions. Chief Meadows, thank you for your leadership and for recognizing the extra hurdles you've faced to serve.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And it's how hard out here always having to prove yourself 2 and 3 times. Recently, they tell me they don't like me to talk about race. Well, I'm a talk about it anyway. Truth is, it's some challenges that come to being black. And I see so much greatness in this city that has so many great African American leaders.
And I appreciate all of the sacrifice that you all have had to make to be in these positions. So Chief Meadows, thank you for your leadership. Thank you for having the intelligence to create an event like this where we recognize that you've had to go through a little more to serve.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Never trust a RINO. https://t.co/Ixo6Ig067L
Video Transcript AI Summary
Nikki Haley announces her presidential run and opposes raising the gas tax. She emphasizes the need for social media platforms to verify users' identities. Haley clarifies that she does not believe the government should require people to disclose their names. She expresses conflicting views on China, initially calling them a great friend but later labeling them as an enemy. Haley corrects herself, stating that she does not advocate for withdrawing funds from the UN but rather reducing its funding. When asked about a 12-year-old transgender child, Haley believes the law should not intervene, leaving it to the parents to handle. She opposes any gender-altering procedures for children under 18.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Would not run if president Trump ran. I'm Nikki Haley, and I'm running for president. I will not, not now, not ever support raising the gas tax. Let's increase the gas tax by 10¢ over the next 3 years. A huge issue that I'll deal with as soon as I get there is social media.
They need to verify every single person on their outlet because and I want it by names. I never said government should go and require anyone's name. I think China's been a really great friend of ours. Yes. I view China as an Enemy.
That was, not what I intended to say. I do not think we need to pull money from the UN. The UN, the only thing is we would defund the UN as much as possible.
Speaker 1: When a 12 year old child in this country, assigned female At birth, says, actually, I feel more comfortable living as a boy. What should the law allow the response to be?
Speaker 0: Well, I think the law should stay out of But I think parents should handle it. I think there should be federal involvement. You should not have any gender altering anything done to a child before the age of 18.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
An NBC reporter asks a group of Pennsylvania voters “who feels good about the economy right now?”—and is met with silence. https://t.co/NZZHOJRqSZ
Video Transcript AI Summary
Some people feel good about the economy, while others feel bad. Shelley believes that groceries and gas prices have increased compared to previous years. Despite low unemployment rates, higher wages, easing inflation, and a thriving stock market, she disagrees that these factors are positively impacting her day-to-day life. Another person, who retired three years ago, shares that they are not benefiting from the stock market's success and had to dip into their retirement savings due to the current economic situation. They feel they are not earning the same amount of money as before.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Feels good about the economy right now? Who feels bad about the economy right now? Alright. Shelley, let me ask you first. What do you think is going on economically?
What are the challenges you're facing economically?
Speaker 1: I would think it would be groceries, gas, everything you have to Buy every day is way more expensive than previous years.
Speaker 0: Let me let me ask you this. Right now, when you look on paper, right, you've got low unemployment rates, wages are up, inflation is easing, stock market's doing well. But are you feeling any of that? How do you feel about the economy day to day.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure I agree with what you just said.
Speaker 2: I mean, I'm better off now. Yeah. And that was 4 years ago. I retired 3 years ago. I never planned on using some of the money that I saved to retire that I had to use Because of the economy now.
So I don't know. If the stock market's up, I must be in the wrong place, because I'm not making the same money that I was making before.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Biden claims he was the “poorest guy in Congress” for 36 years even though he could’ve gotten $144,000 for his Corvette. “By the way, the new Corvette…” *creepy whisper* “…zero to sixty in 2.9 seconds,” he added. https://t.co/sCseH7llzc
Video Transcript AI Summary
I declined an offer of $144,000 for my car because I couldn't part with it, despite being the poorest person in Congress for 36 years. On a different note, the new electric Corvette is expected to go from 0 to 60 miles per hour in 2.9 seconds. I plan to give it a try, even though it might distract the Secret Service.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You get a $144,000 for it. And I said, no. Can't do it. I mean Yeah. For 36 years, I was also the poorest guy in Congress, but I couldn't separate with that car.
But by the way, the new Corvette is coming out electric, 0 to 62.9 seconds. You gonna drive that 1? I'm gonna give it a shot. I drove the other one. I can distract the Secret Service.
Well, by the way,
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem says she hopes states will “not let liberal judges rewrite the rules of the game to work for their political interests.” https://t.co/DCpo4Tduzq
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker emphasizes that the court serves as a balance to the federal government and urges for trust in South Dakota state laws and the court system. They express pride in their state and hope that other states will follow suit, rather than allowing liberal judges to rewrite rules for political gain. The speaker calls on the Supreme Court to swiftly reverse the lower court's decision, ensuring that the American people's voices are heard. They express confidence in President Trump's victory and hope for a fair election that allows the people to choose their desired president for the White House.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Process that the court has is a balance to the our federal government. It is a balance to our executive branch, a balance to our legislative branch. You know, so us exerting the kind of influence on the court and their decisions to take that kind of action is really unprecedented. So I trust our South Dakota state laws, our constitution, it gives great guidance to us and our court system understands that their job is to follow statute and give decisions based on the scales of justice. I'm very proud of what we do here in South Dakota, I would be hopeful that other states would do that and not let liberal judges rewrite the rules of the game to work for their political interests.
This is where the supreme court will should and I hope will take quick action, strong action to reverse this decision at the lower court. And make sure that they do the right thing by the American people and make sure their voices are heard. President Trump will win. And my hope is that they allow this to election to be held fairly and let the people weigh in and to choose the president that they want in the white house.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Trump's lawyer Alina Habba goes scorched earth on AG Letitia James and Judge Engoron after trial, saying he tried "to shorten my client's testimony," told her to "sit down," and was "unhinged." "They've got nothing but their politics. She's got nothing but her Soros-backing." https://t.co/PNUcoGYVGF
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker expresses frustration with a judge who they believe has already decided their client is guilty of fraud. They argue that everyone has the right to a fair defense and that corruption in courtrooms needs to be addressed. They criticize the opposing attorney, accusing her of taunting and having political motivations. The speaker asserts that their client, former President Trump, has built a successful company and is worth more than claimed. They emphasize the importance of paying attention to the erosion of the judicial system and urge for change in the country. The speaker concludes by stating that the opposing attorney made a mistake in attacking someone with extensive real estate experience.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yeah. Good morning, everybody. I'm not here to hear what he has to say. That was what rang true, loud, and could not have been more honest coming from the judge who was already predetermined that my client committed fraud before we even locked into this courtroom. I'm not here to hear what he has to say.
Then why exactly am I being paid as an attorney, and why exactly are taxpayer dollars being used in this courtroom? The answer is very clear. Because miss James wants to stand right here like she did this morning and call my Client a liar. Call the company fraudulent and make a name for herself. She said this morning that the numbers don't lie and they won't lie in this case.
Well, miss James, I have a message for you. The numbers didn't lie when you then for governor, and that's why you dropped out. And the numbers don't lie when president Trump runs for office in 2024, and those numbers are loud and clear. This country is falling apart. And if we don't stop Corruption in courtrooms where attorneys are gagged, where attorneys are not allowed To say what they need to say to protect their client's interest.
It doesn't matter what your politics are. Everyone has a right in this country to get up and put a defense. I don't care who you are. You have a right to hire a lawyer who can put objections on the record. You have a right to hire a lawyer who can Stand up and say something when they see something wrong.
When I was told to sit down today, I was Yelled at, and I've had a judge who is unhinged slamming a table. Let me be very clear. I don't tolerate that in my life. I'm not gonna tolerate it And you know what? You shouldn't either because not every American citizen gets a camera and a microphone.
And what I'm seeing is such a demise Of American judicial system and democracy. Miss James came out this morning and said that she knew mister Trump. She always calls him mister shocked because it killed her that he was the president. But the 45th president of this country, one of the best presidents we've had, has built a great Company, it's worth a ton more than that statement of financial condition, and she doesn't know how to get out of it because her politics won't allow her. She calls him a bully.
She says he's going to bring out racial slurs. He's going to say things today and taunt her. Well, miss James, you taunted him. Before you came into office, before you saw one record, one statement of financial condition, You taunted him. You said his administration was too male and too pale.
Those are her works. She said that she and Michael Cohen were going to be his biggest nightmare where I have Some news for you, miss James. Michael Cohen folded, lied, and crumbled. Your star witness, along with all the DAs and corrupt AGs need to be paying attention to what happens when you let us take the stand, when you let my client speak the truth, And the judge can tell me to sit down, and he can try and shorten my client's testimony, but it is loud and clear. They've got nothing.
They've got nothing but their politics. She's got nothing but her Soros backing, which we discovered recently, and I am sick and Tired of seeing it. Pay attention, America. Pay attention. Because when you're in court one of these days, and you don't have a lawyer that has a microphone, and you don't have a lawyer that can go on TV, and you've got judges gagging them.
What are you gonna do? We need to fix this country, and we need to stop what is happening in this courtroom. President Trump is worth a lot more, and she wasn't ready for it. She doesn't understand it. And before she rushed to judgment, She should've thought about attacking somebody with over 50 years of real estate expertise who changed single handedly the skyline of New York City.
She picked the wrong person, and her politics will fail for it.
reSee.it AI Summary
In the women's SingleSpeed race at Chicago's CycloCross Cup, Allison Zmuda secured third place. Transgender cyclists Tessa Johnson and Evelyn Williamson claimed the top two spots, showcasing their dominance in women's races. Johnson also triumphed in the women's Cat Half, earning $150, while Williamson secured fourth place and a $75 prize. Both athletes have a history of success in women's races, with Williamson winning 18 titles since 2017. Johnson, previously competing in men's categories, has achieved numerous victories after transitioning while riding for Clemson University.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
At Chicago’s CycloCross Cup in the women’s SingleSpeed race, the only woman atop the podium was in third place—Allison Zmuda. Transgender cyclists Tessa Johnson and Evelyn Williamson took the TOP TWO spots in the event. Johnson also won first place in the women’s Cat Half, and with it, $150 in prize money. Williamson also won fourth in the Cat Half, which included a $75 prize. The pair of transgender athletes is no stranger to sweeping the competition at women’s races. Williamson appeared to compete in both men’s and women’s categories at the Sky Express Winter Criterium in March 2020, where he won first place racing against women, but failed to place in the men’s race, per DailyMail. He has been racing in the women’s category since at least 2017, winning 18 titles. Johnson has amassed many victories in female races after previously competing in men’s categories while riding for Clemson University, according to Reduxx.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
My friend Debbie, a J6 protester and decorated veteran, goes on trial this month. At the last minute, the DOJ added a new charge and instead of a year in prison, she now faces up to 20 years. Please consider donating to her legal defense fund & RTing https://www.givesendgo.com/debleefreedomfund
GiveSendGo | The Leader in Online Fundraising
This campaign is currently unpublished. While you're here, why not discover other amazing campaigns that are making a difference?
givesendgo.com
reSee.it AI Summary
The European Commission will impose stricter content moderation rules on social media platforms and Big Tech websites to combat hate speech and disinformation by summer. Meanwhile, a Twitter user with a high following expressed concern over low engagement and impressions, suggesting that the platform is broken.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Can’t allow free speech, now can they? The European Commission announced “a slew of social media platforms and other Big Tech websites that will come under stricter content moderation surrounding so-called hate speech and disinformation by the summer.” https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/04/26/eu-announces-stricter-content-moderation-rules-for-twitter-youtube-facebook-and-other-tech-platforms/
EU Announces Stricter 'Content Moderation' Rules for Big Tech Platforms
The EU announced that a slew of social media platforms and other websites that will come under stricter content moderation measures.
breitbart.com
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Speaking of suppression… I hope this isn’t what you meant by blue checks finally being prioritized, @elonmusk. These impression numbers are abysmal, as evidenced by engagement on the tweet.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Still less than 300 people have viewed this tweet in over 8 minutes. Crazy.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
Twitter is broken. I’ve never seen impressions and engagement this low, despite my following being so high.
@Jules31415 - Julia 🇺🇸
In his testimony with the J6 Committee, Ray Epps admits to texting his nephew that day, saying, “I was in the front with a few others. I also orchestrated it.” Epps is on video saying protesters need to “go to the Capitol.” He was never charged nor arrested. He IS the villain.
