TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @SenJohnKennedy
reSee.it AI Summary
NPR’s CEO Katherine Maher challenged accusations of bias, asking for specific examples. I have several. NPR has reported that country music and birds are racist, urged against eating beef, and promoted the Russia-gate conspiracy. They claimed Biden's debate performance didn't affect the election just before he dropped out, and stated there’s no evidence of biological men having an advantage in sports. They even labeled rural Americans as "Christian nationalists." I believe American taxpayers shouldn't fund this kind of opinion journalism.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
NPR’s CEO Katherine Maher on CNN this morning: “As far as the accusations that we’re biased, I’d stand up and say, ‘Please show me a story that concerns you.’” I’ve got a few: 🧵 (1/5) https://t.co/kC1hHmPfHQ
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(2/5) NPR reported that country music and birds are racist, told American people to stop eating beef, and promoted the Russia-gate conspiracy. No person with a brain above a single-celled organism would call these articles fair and balanced. https://t.co/vpCl2Y74TI
Video Transcript AI Summary
NPR published a profile of Michael Avenatti, who is now in jail for being a crook. NPR also published a story about how racism became a marketing tool for country music. Other headlines include Donald Trump's long embrace of Vladimir Putin, which promoted the Russia gate and steel dossier narratives.
Additional headlines include monuments and teams changing names as America reckons with racism, and that eating less beef is a climate solution. Another headline discusses how the Taliban adds to Afghanistan's woes when it comes to climate fueled disaster.
The speaker believes news outlets have the right to publish what they want, but objects to taxpayer money being used to fund these stations.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I wanna give you a few examples of stories that NPR has published using taxpayer money. I'll just read the headlines. First headline, NPR news service. Michael Avenatti quote, a profile of the media savvy attorney. They love Michael Avenatti.
You know where Michael Avenatti is today? He's in jail. You know why? He's a crook. But for a while, he was a media darling on NPR.
Here's another headline from NPR. How racism became a marketing tool for country music. I kid you not. The American taxpayers are spending half a billion dollars a year to pay a local station to buy content that says country music is racist. Here's another headline from NPR.
Donald Trump's long embrace of Vladimir Putin. Remember the the Russia gate? The steel dossier? NPR was right in there promoting it. Couple more headlines that NPR is putting out there using your tax dollars.
This headline, monuments and teams have changed names. Let me say it again, monuments and teams, presumably sports teams, had changed names as America reckons with racism. Birds are next. I don't know any birds that are racist. Here's another headline, eating less beef is a climate solution.
Eating less beef is a climate solution. I don't have anything against vegetarians. I'm a semi vegetarian myself. I eat beef and beef and cows eat eat grass. So that makes me a semi vegetarian.
But that's my choice. Not on NPR, eating less beef is a climate solution. Here's why that's hard for some American men. Here's a final headline, I could go on the rest of the evening. How the Taliban adds to Afghanistan's woes when it comes to climate fueled disaster.
Boy, I can tell you that's on the mind of every person in Afghanistan today, is climate change and the Taliban. I can guarantee you. I don't have a problem with these headlines. This is America. If you want to publish articles like this, which which no person with a brain above a single cell organism would call fair and balanced.
If you're a news outlet and you want to publish this kind of stuff, that is your right as an American. We have freedom of the press. We have the first amendment. You're not free in our country if you can't say what you think. You're not free in our country if you can't express yourself.
I I'm all for this. If that's what these outlets wanna do. But I'm not for taking $500,000,000 every single year and giving it to these stations at the to the exclusion of everybody else so they can do it.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(3/5) NPR claimed President Biden’s presidential debate performance didn’t change the election, days before he dropped out of the race. If you believe that headline, you believe in the tooth fairy. But that’s what NPR reported with your tax dollars. https://t.co/LZJs4J2rb4
Video Transcript AI Summary
NPR headlines include: "There is no neutral. Nice white people can still be complicit in a racist society;" "Ibram X. Kendi says no one is not racist;" "How artificial intelligence could perpetuate racism, sexism, and other biases in society;" and "Scientists debunk lab accident theory of pandemic emergence."
Further headlines state: "As Trump pushes theory of virus origins, some see parallels to lead up to Iraq war;" "As US confronts Russia, Trump's admiration of Putin is consistent;" "The history of policing and race in The United States are deeply intertwined;" and "After Biden's debate performance, the presidential race is unchanged." The speaker implies the last headline is false.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And there's more. I could do this all night, but I'm not. Here's some here's some more headlines from NPR. There is no neutral. Nice white people can still be complicit in a racist society.
That's what your tax dollars paid for. Another one. Ibram x Kendi says no one is not racist. So what should we do? Another one, how artificial intelligence could perpetuate racism, sexism, and other bi biases in society.
Another, scientists debunk lab accident theory of pandemic emergence. Here's another one. As Trump pushes theory of virus origins, some see parallels to lead up and lead up to Iraq war. Your tax dollars at work. As US confronts Russia, Trump's admiration of Putin is consistent.
Another headline from NPR. The history of policing and race in The United States are deeply intertwined. Another. After Biden's debate performance, the presidential race is unchanged. This was the debate performance that president Biden gave after which he got out of the race.
If you believe that headline, you believe in the tooth fairy, and the Easter bunny, and that Jimmy Hoffa died of natural causes. But that's what NPR reported with your tax dollars.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(4/5) NPR reported that there is no evidence that biological men have an unfair advantage over biological women in sports. NPR also called America’s interstate highways racist. I did not know our highways were racist. I thought they were concrete, but not according to NPR. https://t.co/O1vCqlc4JY
Video Transcript AI Summary
NPR headlines claim arguments that trans athletes have an unfair advantage lack evidence and that racism shaped interstate highways. NPR also suggests Trump embodies nearly every aspect of a racist, confronts coded racism, and sends coded racial messages with calls for law and order.
Other NPR headlines include the assertion that sexism is out in the open and question whether Trump is racist. NPR reports that Justice Clarence Thomas is motivated by revenge and ambition.
NPR questions what the White House can do to confront the narrative around Biden's ability, while the speaker claims Biden had neurodegenerative disease, calling it a fact, not a narrative. NPR also reports that scientists are teasing out the subtler ways racism hurts health.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Here's one of the headlines at NPR. Arguments that trans athletes have an unfair advantage lack evidence to support. That's opinion journalism. Here's another headline from MBR. A brief history of how racism shaped interstate highways.
I did not know our interstate highways were racist. I thought they were concrete, but not according to the NPR. Here's another NPR headline. Trump embodies nearly every aspect of a racist, Arthur says. Another, the nation confronting Trump's coded racism.
Another, is Trump's call for law and order a coded racial racial message? As as I said, these are your tax dollars at work. Sexism is out in the open in the February. That may have been inevitable. It's another headline.
Is Trump really that racist? Another headline. Another headline, Frontline traces the ambitious, I'm sorry, Frontline traces the ambition and revenge driving SCOTUS Justice Clarence Thomas. NPR is reporting that Justice Thomas is motivated by revenge and ambition. Another headline from NPR, what can the White House do to confront the narrative around Biden's ability?
It wasn't a narrative. I I mean, I I don't I don't hate anybody, but And I'm sorry this was the case, but president Biden had neurodegenerative disease. It wasn't a narrative, it was just a fact. I'm sorry, but it was just a fact. Last headline from NPR I'll read, scientists start to tease out the subtler ways racism hurts health.
Your tax dollars at work.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(5/5) NPR referred to rural Americans as “Christian nationalists” and heaped praise on Biden administration official Rachel Levine. I could go all day. American taxpayers shouldn’t have to fund this opinion journalism. https://t.co/0nXXZLxcZY
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker presents headlines from NPR and local public media organizations, alleging bias. Examples include: "How illegitimate critical race theory concerns shaped Louisiana's new social studies standards"; "Trump's anti trans effort is an agenda cornerstone with echoes in history"; "What it's like to choose transgender sex reassignment surgery"; "Transgender boy tells mom it shouldn't be scary to be who we are"; and "Kids will end their lives. Anti trans legislation is impacting mental health in the Gulf South."
Further headlines from WRKF are cited, including: "Biography examines how systemic racism shaped the troubled life of George Floyd"; "Christian nationalism support is strongest in rural conservative states"; "Doctor Rachel Levine focused on her job at HHS. Still anti trans politics followed her"; and "These far right media figures are getting center stage under Trump." The speaker suggests these headlines, funded by taxpayer dollars, represent opinion journalism.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'll just read you a couple of the headlines paid for with your dollars in my local public media organizations. How illegitimate critical race theory concerns shaped Louisiana's new social studies standards? No bias there. Trump's anti trans effort is an agenda cornerstone with echoes in history. No bias there.
That came from NPR and one of my local stations. Here's another. What it's like to choose transgender sex reassignment surgery. Another. Transgender boy tells mom it shouldn't be scary to be who I who we are.
Here's another one. This came from WRKF, which also gets it's one of the 10 out of a 138 radio stations that the bureaucrats at CPB look with favor on. Kids will end their lives. Anti trans legislation is impacting mental health in the Gulf South. No bias there.
Biography examines how systemic racism shaped the troubled life of George Floyd. Nobody has to take responsibility. It's systemic racism. Here's another that came from WRKF. Christian nationalism support is strongest in rural conservative states.
Another doctor Rachel Levine focused on her job at HHS. Still anti trans politics followed her. Here's another one by WRKF. Another example of opinion journalism pay for your taxpayer dollars. These far right media figures are getting center stage under Trump.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
I know James Comey and John Brennan. Neither of them should attempt more than 6 of the 10 Commandments. There’s a reason they’re about as popular as male pattern baldness. https://t.co/FGFHl9614e
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker asks for a response to the "seashell on the seashore messaging, 8647, and now open criminal investigations" regarding Comey and Brennan. The respondent says that in their opinion, neither Comey nor Brennan should attempt more than six of the ten commandments, because they are not nice or ethical people. They claim that people who have worked with Comey and Brennan closely would say they are about as popular as male pattern baldness.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Look. When when we talk about that seashell on the seashore messaging, 8647, and now open criminal investigations to the two men we're talking about now, Comey and Brennan, what do you have to say about that?
Speaker 1: Well, I I know mister Comey, and I know mister Brennan. Neither one of them, in my opinion, should attempt more than just six of the 10 commandments. They're they're not very nice people. They're not ethical people. I know people who have worked with them closely.
And if you talk to people who've worked with them closely, those people will tell you that they're about as as popular as male pattern baldness.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
If a president can’t finish a sentence without taking a nap and talks like he’s from outer space, at what point do you have a moral obligation to stand up and say that he can’t do the job anymore? https://t.co/V9BBRQI1i9
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker poses a hypothetical scenario: a president exhibiting signs of mental or physical decline, such as fatigue or symptoms of a neurodegenerative disease. They ask the panel, all former government staffers, about their moral obligation in such a situation.
One panelist suggests initially exercising personal judgment and then directly addressing the president, while also acknowledging the 25th Amendment. Another panelist emphasizes the importance of moral judgment by staffers and officers, suggesting prayer, conversation with other staffers, and resignation if necessary.
The final panelist states a moral obligation exists to act if the leader cannot make critical decisions, emphasizing following the chain of command and acting if it fails.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You you have all been staffers. You've worked in government. You've had a boss. In in in in in mister Spicer's case, his boss was the president of The United States. Let's suppose the president you were using your experience as a staffer.
You're working for the president, any president. Let me hypothetically a president. Unless let's suppose the president started talking about started talking like he was from outer space. Let's suppose the president became fatigued very easily. He couldn't finish a sentence without taking a nap.
Let's suppose the president I mean, he he was just physically in bad shape, mentally and physically. Mentally, he may or may not have you're not a doctor, degenerative neurodegenerative disease. But physically, can see you you could you could you could bake a Thanksgiving turkey in the time it takes him to walk across the stage. What is do you think as a a member of of his staff? What do you think is your moral obligation to say, wait a minute.
The president can't do the job anymore. I know you're loyal folks. You want you believe in your president, this president, whichever president. I'm speaking hypothetically. You you you're you're loyal.
You wanna be a good staffer, but you also have a moral obligation. How how do you reach that decision, professor? And I'll go to each of you.
Speaker 1: Senator, I think the first thing you would have to do in a situation like that is exercise your own judgment. Is this how serious is this problem because everybody has moments when they lose focus, it happens. But if somebody thinks this is a really serious problem, I think the first thing to do is the most difficult, which is to say to the president, because the twenty fifth amendment also provides that the president can say, I'm unable to exercise the powers and duties of my office. And suppose the president be extremely difficult, but I think it
Speaker 0: should Look. Trust me. I can't. And it's clear to you that he has neurodegenerative disease, and he can't. What do you do?
Do you have a moral obligation as a staff member to go to the American people and say, we've got a problem here. It may cost me my career.
Speaker 1: I senator, I think at that point, you have an obligation to talk to the vice president k. Who is in char who is in charge of the section four process under the twenty fifth amendment.
Speaker 0: What about you, mister Wald? You have a moral obligation. I understand you want you want it to go away. You wanna work it out with him, but you can't. When when does a staffer have a moral obligation to stand up and and and and and say, he can't be president anymore, she can't be.
Speaker 2: Well, senator, the twenty fifth amendment only works if individual staffers or officers of The United States exercise that kind of moral judgment. That's what I'm asking you. Yeah. So, I mean, I think always, as as the professor said, and the presidency is an enormous burden, so it would be not one instance. It would have to be several instances of a failure to to exercise judgment.
Speaker 0: How do you make that decision? You're the staffer. I get it.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well, I think it begins with prayer, of course. But after that, I think it's conversation with other staffers. And if you're unable to confront the president or to raise the issue with the vice president, you should resign.
Speaker 0: What about you, mister Spicer? Do you stand up and do it and tell the truth and run, or do you have a greater obligation to your boss?
Speaker 3: Well, luckily, I didn't have that problem. But I would say that you have a moral obligation as an American, as a citizen, as a human being. If the leader of the free world cannot conduct themselves to make the decisions that are critical to this country and to the world, you absolutely have a moral obligation to follow the chain of command. And if they don't act, then you must.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
Most Americans lock their front door at night—not because they hate everybody on the outside, but because they love the people on the inside. That’s the way they see our border, too. https://t.co/gnsUbJoIVn
Video Transcript AI Summary
Some Democrats believe vetting people at the border is racist and that anyone who wants to come to America should be able to. Other Democrats see a political advantage in letting immigrants in, hoping to convince them to vote Democrat.
The American people elected President Trump because they were sick of open borders, and the border has now been secured by reverting to pre-Biden policies. Border patrol agents are reportedly grateful to be free to do their jobs.
Most Americans lock their doors at night not out of hate, but to protect those inside, and they apply the same logic to the southern border. While America welcomes about a million immigrants a year, people want to know who is coming in. Many who came in under Biden were gang members, rapists, drug dealers, and child traffickers. The Biden administration allegedly lied about their efforts, but now the border is secured and efforts are underway to remove the "bad apples."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The Democrats believe in open borders, and some of the Democrats, think not all of them, but some of them think that that, vetting people at the border is racist. That anybody who wants to come into America should be able to come into America. And then if you wanna know who's coming into America for, say, national security reasons, you're a racist. Other Democrats see the political advantage of it. They think if they let all these folks in, they can convince them to vote for Democrats because it's the Democrats who let them in, which is a pretty cynical approach to America's future, but, you know, that's what it is in Washington.
Speaker 1: Well, it also I'm sorry.
Speaker 0: The good news is American people said no. We're sick of this, and and they elected president Trump. And we've we've secured that border now. And it didn't take I knew it wouldn't take long. All we did was go back to doing what we were doing the day before Joe Biden took office.
Speaker 1: Well, I read the news in McAllen and the Rio Grande Valley frequently, and the headlines in January and February were from border patrol agents grateful that they're free to do their job now. And that's really what it boiled down to is they were given permission to do their job.
Speaker 0: Well, the American people, they they're pretty practical and fair minded about this. American people, they don't look at it this way. Most Americans lock their front door at night. They don't lock their front door at night because they hate everybody on the outside. They knock their front door at night because they they love the people on the inside of their house, and they wanna know who's coming inside and outside of their house.
And that's the way they see the southern border. They don't hate everybody who wants to come to America. We we welcome about a million people, leave them with a year to come to America. They just wanna know who's coming in. And all the people who came in were not bad people, but a lot of them really were.
I mean, they were we're talking gang members, rapists, drug dealers, child traffickers, and we don't know who they are, where they are. President Biden just threw open the door. And then he, frankly, lied to the American people about it. He said, oh, I'm doing the best I can. I'm we're trying.
It's hard. They were trying. I mean, I I went down there several times. I saw it. People would they were just like, come on in.
Come on in. But, anyway, we've secured it. Now we're trying to get rid of the bad apples, get them out of America.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
Dealmaking is an art—and President Trump has clearly mastered it. https://t.co/v7ni8NrcSM
Video Transcript AI Summary
President Trump's strategy was to hit back very hard. The media predicted civilization would melt down. However, half the countries in the world decided to lower trade barriers and make a deal with the president. They needed access to US markets and determined it was in their best interest. These countries came to the table because of President Trump's actions. Some may not want to admit it, but it is the truth. Deal-making is an art, and President Trump has mastered it.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: President Trump, guided by the principle that if you're gonna be a bear, be a grizzly, hit back very, very hard. Then fresh hell broke loose. Most members of the media were saying that civilization is going to melt and that we're all gonna be living in a refrigerator box behind Outback. Then an astounding thing happened. I thought I thought that these countries were gonna bow up and fight, but fully half of the countries in the entire world said, no mos.
They came to the president and said, we wanna lower our trade barriers and make a deal. Astounded. And Well, no. They didn't. They they cut a boat up and fought.
Manufacturing. They need access to, you know, our markets. They they decided that it was in their best interest to to make a deal, and the president wasn't bluffing. And he sees the opportunity. I mean I mean, look, no no reasonable no no person with an IQ above his age can believe that these countries would have come to the table but for what president Trump did.
Now some don't wanna admit that, but it's the truth. And you know what? Deal making is an art. President Trump has clearly mastered the art. It was, it was an impressive it was an impressive couple of weeks.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
Foreign countries would not be coming to America trying to reduce their tariffs if Pres. Trump had not done what he did. Pres. Trump won—let’s pounce on these deals like a ninja. https://t.co/22KYOeDhFF
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes President Trump has "won" because 40% of the world's countries are supposedly trying to reduce tariffs with America due to his actions.
The speaker claims China wants a deal, not primarily for economic reasons, but to "save face." China's economy is allegedly in its worst shape in 25 years, making it unable to withstand further economic conflict. The speaker asserts China is quietly seeking a deal with President Trump, similar to 40% of countries worldwide. The speaker urges seizing the opportunity and pursuing a deal aggressively.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: When I say the president's won, here's what I mean. Would would 40% of the 200 countries in the world be coming to America now trying to reduce their tariffs if president Trump had not done what he did? No. Every fair minded American know knows that. I just don't know what's gonna happen next.
In terms of China, look, China wants a deal. For them right now, it's not about the economy. It's it's about saving face. China wants a deal. China's economy is in worse shape, I'll be glad to talk about it if you want, than it's been in twenty five years.
They can't afford to strike more. They will they are quietly seeking a deal with president Trump as are 40% of the countries in the world. I mean, the president's won. This wouldn't we wouldn't have this opportunity but for what he did. All I'm saying is, let's take it.
You know, let's take it. Let's pounce on it like a dingy. I I would be on this deal like a like a hobo on a ham sandwich, man. I'd I'd have them lined up at the White House.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
It’s clear that Columbia University’s administration and many faculty members believe passionately in diversity, equity, inclusion, and the right to hurt Jews. https://t.co/HcVGe4dETq
Video Transcript AI Summary
I did not say that reducing the federal budget would increase antisemitism. I said that constant threats to cut money to the Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education prevent the federal government from adequately investigating antisemitism and other hate crimes on college campuses. One way to stop antisemitism is to actually fund those designed to investigate it.
I saw protesters against the war in Gaza using some antisemitic slogans. It is difficult for the federal government to adequately address antisemitism.
It is possible to feel compassion for the Palestinian people without hating Jews. What I've seen on college campuses is a pushing of a Marxist framing. We're allowing ideology to drive violence, which erodes society. What has to happen on college campuses is deradicalization. Until you admit that there's a radical ideology, you cannot fight it.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Mister Rackland, I understood you to say that the the the in answer to senator Durbin's question, the spending reductions, reducing the federal budget would would increase antisemitism. Isn't that what you said?
Speaker 1: No. I did not. I said that the constant threats to cut money to the office for civil rights in the Department of Education prevents the federal government for adequately investigating, antisemitism and other hate crimes on college campuses.
Speaker 0: So so you think one way to stop antisemitism is to give people more money?
Speaker 1: Is that right? I think one of the ways is to actually fund people that are actually designed to investigate antisemitism on college campuses.
Speaker 0: What's there to investigate? We see it.
Speaker 1: We see it Did
Speaker 0: you watch television? Did you see what happened at Columbia?
Speaker 1: Absolutely.
Speaker 0: Yeah. I I mean, it it was clear to me that that the administration at Columbia and most members of the faculty believed passionately in diversity, equity, inclusion, and the right to hurt Jews. That's what I saw. Ain't that what you saw?
Speaker 1: I saw
Speaker 0: it ain't that what you saw?
Speaker 1: I saw protesters for against the war in Gaza and them using some anti Semitic slogans and thoughts. I would say, however,
Speaker 0: that But but it would say you're telling me, that's not what you saw. For You're telling no. Don't get off the subject on me now. You're telling me that's not what you saw.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you that it is difficult for the federal government to adequately address the issue of anti semitism.
Speaker 0: Are you telling me Columbia the Columbia administration and the faculty was supportive of the Jewish community?
Speaker 1: I think that they are trying
Speaker 0: find stop dipping into your ketamine stash.
Speaker 1: Into what? Excuse me?
Speaker 0: Now now that if we're gonna solve this problem, we need to talk about it. I'm And it wasn't just at Columbia. It was at Berkeley. It was at UCLA. It was at Bernard.
And and Columbia has a history of discriminating against the Jewish people. They they used to refuse to let Jewish students come to their university. I've Now you you can try to bubble wrap this, but that's what I saw. If you wanna stop a lot of the anti Semitism, maybe we need to stop teaching kids to be anti Semitic.
Speaker 1: Sir, would relish that
Speaker 0: opportunity Let me ask you let me ask you a question, miss Jo Kohab. Did I say that right?
Speaker 2: Kohab.
Speaker 0: Do you think it's possible to feel compassionate compassion rather for the Palestinian people without hating Jews?
Speaker 2: Absolutely. I think that what I've seen on college campuses is a pushing of a Marxist framing of the way that you see the world. And this is not only in liberal studies departments. I've taken dance classes. I've taken creative writing classes where your final project is literally called the political is personal.
And what they're teaching you on college campuses is that the political is personal, and that everything should be personalized. And there's a global North, a global South, a global right, and a global wrong. And the issue with college campuses, and what's happening right now in The United States is that we're allowing ideology to drive violence. A society that says that you can commit violent acts based on your ideology because your ideology is correct is a society that's eroding, and that's what I see on college campuses. Now, asked if I could feel Palestinian peoplehood.
Right? If I could feel compassion for the Palestinian people. Absolutely. And every night when I go to bed, yes, I'd pray for the Jewish people, but I also pray for the Palestinian people, for God to send them leaders that actually care more about their safety. Leaders that put their people's safety in order to propel an ideology at risk aren't leaders.
If you look at Hamas, they tell what happened after October 7 up until this day as a victory. How can you lie in rubble after thousands of your people have died and call that a victory? So what I see that has to happen on college campuses is deradicalization. Until you admit that there's a radical ideology happening on a college campus, you cannot fight it. You cannot fight it.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
During the pandemic, we sent out $1.4 BILLION in checks to dead Americans—and they were cashed. My Ending Improper Payments to Deceased People Act would help make sure government doesn’t waste more taxpayer dollars. https://t.co/VmhBNeE0ay
Video Transcript AI Summary
During the pandemic, $1.4 billion in government checks were sent to dead people and cashed. Senator Carper and I passed a bill to address this, which took two years. When someone dies, their name goes on the death master file, but Social Security wouldn't share this list with other government agencies because they lacked the authority. Our bill mandated a three-year trial period for sharing the list, which saved a lot of money. That trial period is ending in February. I have another bill with Gary Peters to extend it and make it permanent. I can't imagine who would be opposed to this.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Quickly. Do you think we ought to be sending government checks to dead people?
Speaker 1: No, senator. I think that's poor management.
Speaker 0: During the pandemic, we sent out $1,400,000,000 of checks to dead people, didn't we?
Speaker 1: I don't have the figure, senator, but I wouldn't be surprised by that given And
Speaker 0: they were cashed, weren't they?
Speaker 1: They generally get cash whether they're dead
Speaker 0: or not. What does that tell you?
Speaker 1: Somebody's alive.
Speaker 0: Yep. Now, senator Carper and I passed a bill. It took us two years. When you when when to try to stop that. When when you die, the state sends your name to the Social Security Administration.
Your name goes on what's called the the death master file. Yes, sir. I went to Social Security, and I said, can I see the list? They said, sure. I said, who do you share this with?
They said, nobody. We can't. We don't have statutory authority. So you don't share it with the do not pay folks at treasury? They said, nope.
It's against the law. Well, rather than argue with them, senator Carpenter and I passed a bill. But believe it or not, they're to say, Social Security, share the dead people list with the rest of government for God's sakes. Put down the bong and share it with them. And believe it or not, we had opposition.
So we had to agree to a three year trial period. That three year trial we've saved a bunch of money. That three three year trial period is up at the February. I've got another bill, Gary Peters, to extend it, to make it permanent. You guys got any problem with that?
Speaker 1: Well, senator, I cannot speak for the president or for director votes. Oh, go ahead. But I but I can't it's hard for me to imagine who would be opposed. Well, you'd
Speaker 0: be surprised.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
NPR and PBS are entitled to do opinion journalism—but they can’t do it on the taxpayers’ dime. My No Propaganda Act would make sure Americans aren’t funding this rot. https://t.co/XCcvAPMmYv
Video Transcript AI Summary
We're allocating half a billion dollars annually, totaling $14.5 billion over time, to organizations like the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, NPR, and NPS, essentially funding opinion journalism with taxpayer money. NPR, for instance, recently acquired a $200 million office space and pays its hosts and chief diversity officer exorbitant salaries using taxpayer funds.
Despite this financial support, their viewership is declining. Therefore, I've introduced legislation to defund these entities. With a staggering $36 trillion national debt, it's unacceptable for taxpayers to fund what I consider to be biased journalism, regardless of its political leaning. These entities have the right to exist, but not with taxpayer money.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We're spending half a billion dollars a year, 14 and a half billion dollars over time to give to people at corp the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and NPR and NPS to participate in opinion journalists, which they're entitled to do. But they can't do it on the taxpayer dime. They're doing it on the taxpayer dime, but they shouldn't be able to. I would also point out, mister president, that, the folks at PBS and NPR are, doing pretty well for themselves. NPR just bought a $2,101,000,000 office space just up the road from the capital.
$200,000,000. It came from the American taxpayer so they could publish this stuff. NPR pays its host as much as $532,000 a year. Taxpayer money. They pay it it pays its chief diversity officer about $320,000 a year.
And you know what? Despite all of this money that the American taxpayer giving to these left of center entities, their viewership has declined because people don't need them anymore. So why are we giving them money? I've introduced legislation to, not to eliminate the corporation for public broadcasting, not to eliminate the public broadcasting service, and not to eliminate the national public radio. They can go exist on their own if they want to, but I do wanna defund them.
Running a $36,000,000,000,000 debt in debt. This is disgraceful in 02/2025. It's disgraceful whether it is left of center opinion journalism or right of center opinion journalism. It is disgraceful for the American people to have to fund this rot. Doesn't mean the rot doesn't have a right to exist, but they don't have a right to taxpayer money.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
NPR does NOT have a right to taxpayer money. https://t.co/Q0PGvH8u2c
Video Transcript AI Summary
It's clear that NPR and PBS exhibit bias in their reporting, and here are some headlines that prove it: "Nice white people can still be complicit in a racist society," "Ibram X. Kendi says no one is not racist," and "How artificial intelligence could perpetuate racism, sexism, and other biases."
Other examples include pieces connecting Trump to Russia and implying his admiration for Putin, and pieces calling Sarah Palin a serial liar who ushered in the post-truth era.
These organizations have the right to publish what they want, but using taxpayer money to fund what is obviously slanted to one point of view is disgraceful, especially when we're running a $36,000,000,000,000 debt.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: No fair minded person with an IQ above a single cell organism would conclude that this is anything but biased to certain points of view. And there's more. I could do this all night, but I'm not. Here's some here's some more headlines from NPR. There is no neutral.
Nice white people can still be complicit in a racist society. That's what your tax dollars paid for. Another one. Ibram x Kendi says no one is not racist. So what should we do?
Another one, how artificial intelligence could perpetuate racism, sexism, and other bi biases in society. Another, scientists debunk lab accident theory of pandemic emergence. Here's another one. As Trump pushes theory of virus origins, some see parallels to lead up and lead up to Iraq war. Your tax dollars at work.
As US confronts Russia, Trump's admiration of Putin is consistent. Another headline from NPR. The history of policing and race in The United States are deeply intertwined. Another. After Biden's debate performance, the presidential race is unchanged.
This was the debate performance that president Biden gave after which he got out of the race. If you believe that headline, you believe in the tooth fairy and the Easter bunny and that Jimmy Hoffa died of natural causes. But that's what NPR reported with your tax dollars. Here's more. Democracy on trial part one.
A blueprint a blueprint for the case against Trump. Is that fair and balanced? From PBS. Racism in the era of Trump, an oral history. Another headline.
01/13/2020. Another. This one's really special. A serial liar. House Sarah Palin ushered in the post truth political era in which Trump has thrived.
Now, the corporation for public broadcasting and NPR and PBS have the right whether I like it or not, or whether you like it or not, or whether Americans like it or not, to publish these articles and to broadcast this news. That's the first amendment. But they don't have the right to do it with tax payer money. At least half of America would look at these headlines and be offended. They would be offended first because they would really for three reasons.
Number one, they disagree with opinion journalism. Number two, they dis would disagree with the headline. And number three, they would disagree with the fact that these headlines are not fair. They're not objective. They're obviously slanted to one point of view, and they're using taxpayer money.
Running a $36,000,000,000,000 debt in debt. This is disgraceful in 02/2025. It's disgraceful whether it is left of center opinion journalism or right of center opinion journalism. It is disgraceful for the American people to have to fund this rot. Doesn't mean the rot doesn't have a right to exist, but they don't have a right to taxpayer money.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
The Biden admin issued a foolish rule that hurts our energy industry and increases prices for Americans. Today, the Senate passed my resolution to kill this anti-common sense regulation. https://t.co/uszblYiG82
Video Transcript AI Summary
As the Biden administration ends, a new rule requires renewed surveys for well and pipeline drilling, raising drilling costs. These increased costs inevitably get passed on to consumers, hindering our efforts to lower prices. This regulation exemplifies a key reason for the inflation we're currently facing in America. My resolution aims to rescind this rule. While I won't comment on the originator's intelligence, I will say that we must eliminate this detrimental policy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In the waning days of the Biden administration, BOEM promulgated a new rule that says if you wanna drill a well or build a pipeline, you gotta survey it again. This, of course, increases the cost of drilling, which, of course, increases the cost of energy because the extra cost is passed on to the consumer, which, of course, hurts us in our fight to lower prices. This this regulation is just one example of why we are experiencing inflation in America today. My resolution would rescind this rule. I'm not I'm not saying that the guy who came up with this idea of this rule is the dumbest person in the world, but I am saying that the guy who came up with this idea for this rule better hope that the dumbest person in the world doesn't die, and we're gonna kill it.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
You would think that receiving nearly $100 MILLION from taxpayers would motivate NPR to play it right down the middle. But instead, they decided to push the Russiagate lie, say the Covid lab leak theory was debunked, and call everything under the sun “racist.” https://t.co/ZuPqbAztIP
Video Transcript AI Summary
You'd think nearly $100 million in taxpayer money would motivate NPR to be fair, but that's not the case. I want to share examples of stories they've published using taxpayer money.
They ran a profile of Michael Avenatti. They pushed the Russia gate narrative. They ran stories about monuments and teams changing names due to racism. If NPR wants to publish these articles, they have that right, but I don't agree with taxpayers footing the bill for it.
NPR covered the COVID lab leak theory as a conspiracy. Since 1970, Congress has given NPR over $14.5 billion. They bought a $201 million office space. Hosts are paid as much as $532,000 a year, and the chief diversity officer makes $320,000. If you want to support NPR, that's your choice, but Congress shouldn't force taxpayers to fund this service. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a project we no longer need to fund.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You would think that after receiving nearly a hundred million dollars from from taxpayers, that would motivate NPR to play it right down the middle. To only publish fair reporting. You would think that with the American taxpayer giving NPR a hundred million bucks every year like clockwork, you should be able to go to NPR and look at the news and say, I don't know what party these folks ran. I don't know whether they're liberals. I don't know whether they're conservatives.
I don't know whether they're left of center or right of center. I just know that they're they fairly report the news. But that's not the case, mister president. That's not the case. I want to give you a few examples of stories that NPR has published using taxpayer money.
I'll just read the headlines. First headline, NPR News Service. Michael Avenatti, quote, a profile of the media savvy attorney. They love Michael Avenatti. You know where Michael Avenatti is today?
He's in jail. You know why? He's a crook. But for a while, he was a media darling on NPR. Here's another headline from NPR.
Donald Trump's long embrace of Vladimir Putin. Remember the the Russia gate? The Steele dossier? NPR was right in there promoting it. Couple more headlines that NPR is putting out there using your tax dollars.
This headline, monuments and teams have changed names. Let me say it again. Monuments and teams, presumably sports teams, had changed names as America reckons with racism. Birds are next. I don't know any birds that are racist.
If you wanna publish articles like this, which which no person with a brain above a single cell organism would call fair and balanced, If you're a news outlet and you wanna publish this kind of stuff, that is your right as an American. We have freedom of the press. We have the first amendment. You're not free in our country if you can't say what you think. You're not free in our country if you can't express yourself.
I I'm all for this, if that's what these outlets wanna do. But I'm not for taking $500,000,000 every single year and giving it to these stations at the ex to the exclusion of everybody else so they can do it. That's immoral. NPR also similarly covered the COVID nineteen lab leak theory as though it was a conspiracy. That's how the news coverage reads, in my opinion.
That if you believe in, in, that COVID nineteen originated from a lab leak, you're a conspiracy theorist. I would have point out that we're gonna have to get some new conspiracy theories in America because all the old ones turned out to be true. The conspiracy theorists are up something like 37 to nothing. Since 1970, the United States Congress has given NPR more than $14,500,000,000. With all those taxpayer dollars, NPR bought a $201,000,000 office space just up the road from the capital.
It's well office space. $200,000,000 worth. NPR pays its hosts as much as $532,000 a year. It pays its chief diversity officer three hundred and twenty thousand dollars a year. Pretty good work if you can get it.
Now if you wanna support NPR and PBS or any other public media outlet, you are that is great. God bless you. This is America. You're free to do it. You are free to to donate to those non nonprofits as you see fit.
But Congress should not compel taxpayers to fund them, to fund a service that the American people don't need, especially when the content well, you can read what the content is, and maybe you agree with it. But a whole bunch of Americans don't. President Trump's Department of Government Efficiency is looking for fat to trim, mister president. As far as I'm concerned, this gravy train this gravy train with biscuit wheels called the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is the perfect example of a project the American people no longer need and should not fund.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
Most fair-minded Americans look at the Democratic Party and think it’s about 10 exits past normal. https://t.co/EfDIwvvK8h
Video Transcript AI Summary
If my Democrat friends asked for advice, I'd tell them to try harder not to mess things up. In the last four years, they've mishandled Congress, COVID, the economy, inflation, national debt, and Afghanistan.
Their opposition to Trump and Musk has led them to support bureaucracy and excessive spending over taxpayers, illegal immigration over the rule of law, transgender athletes over women's sports, and Hamas over Israel.
The party is controlled by those obsessed with online activism. They believe men can breastfeed, are easily offended by race, and get upset over pronoun usage. Fair-minded Americans find them out of touch, and that's hurting the Democrats.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I've got a lot of friends who are Democrats, and they haven't asked me for advice. But if I did, I'd tell them, look. You just gotta try harder not to suck. I mean, think about it. Over the past four years, the Democrats mismanaged congress.
They mismanaged COVID. They mismanaged the economy. They mismanaged inflation. They mismanaged the national debt. They mismanaged Afghanistan.
More recently, in their opposition to president Trump and mister Musk, the Democrats have chosen to support the bureaucrats and the spending porn over the American taxpayer, Just like they support illegal immigration over, over the rule of law. Just like they support transgender athletes over women's sports. Just like they support Hamas terrorists over Israel. All Democrats are not like this, but the the party is controlled right now by people who majored in online activism with a minor in puberty blockers. I I know these people.
They think women they they think men they think men can breastfeed. They're triggered by race. They cry if you if you use the wrong pronoun. And and most fair minded Americans look at this and they go, these people are about 10 exits past normal. And and that's what's killing the Democrats right now, in my opinion.
reSee.it AI Summary
The Biden-Harris administration has been marked by significant challenges for the American people. The withdrawal from Afghanistan resulted in chaos and the loss of 13 servicemembers, with Biden expressing no regrets. The Inflation Reduction Act worsened inflation, and his executive actions led to over 10 million migrant encounters, contributing to a child migrant crisis. Biden's energy policies, including the ban on new LNG terminals and the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline, have raised fuel prices. His foreign policy has been criticized for weakness towards Iran and Israel, and his judicial nominations have raised concerns about their qualifications.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
The Biden-Harris term was historically awful for the American people. Here are just a few of the ways: 🧵(1/9)
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(2/9) In 2021, the Biden admin withdrew from Afghanistan, leaving behind a trail of chaos and death. 13 brave American servicemembers lost their lives. We will never forget their sacrifice—or the fact that Pres. Biden said he makes “no apologies” for the disaster.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(3/9) In Aug. 2022, Pres. Biden signed the so-called Inflation “Reduction” Act. It made inflation worse. Prices are now 20% higher because of Pres. Biden.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(4/9) Pres. Biden took nearly 300 executive actions to break our border wide open—in just his first year. The result? More than 10 MILLION recorded migrant encounters under the Biden regime.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(5/9) When Pres. Biden broke our border, he set off a child migrant CRISIS. The Biden regime lost track of more than 300,000 boys and girls.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(6/9) Pres. Biden bought into the cell-deep stupid Green New Deal. Soon after a White House staff meeting with an environmentalist TikTok influencer, he banned new American LNG terminals. This would have cost Louisiana good energy jobs—but a federal judge blocked Biden’s plan.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(7/9) Pres. Biden didn’t stop there in his crusade against American energy. He killed the Keystone XL pipeline. Now, he’s trying to ban more offshore energy on his way out. You’re paying the price at the pump.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(8/9) Pres. Biden failed to enforce U.S. sanctions against Iran and went wobbly on supporting Israel. Iran took advantage of his weakness, and wreaked havoc in the Middle East.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
(9/9) Pres. Biden took a wrecking ball to our courts by nominating activists who aren’t fit to judge a pie contest. Thanks to him, we have judges who . . . 👉 pushed for emptying prisons. 👉 require people to declare their pronouns in court. 👉 don’t know how many sexes there are.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
Democrats want to spend $50 TRILLION to become carbon neutral & held a hearing to tell us why. Dem witness: Carbon dioxide is "a huge part of our atmosphere." Me: "It’s actually a very small part of our atmosphere." (0.035%) Dem witness: "Well, okay. But, yeah. I don’t know." https://t.co/sSdbtsX7aq
Video Transcript AI Summary
Carbon dioxide is a gas in the atmosphere that the expert, a cross-country skier, sees affecting Alaska. They advocate for reducing fossil fuel use and transitioning to electric generation. The cost and timeline for becoming carbon neutral are unclear, but the expert believes investing in the future may stabilize temperatures. The senator questions the expert's past tweets about systemic racism and abolishing the police, which the expert avoids addressing, emphasizing their focus on climate change's impact on sports. The senator concludes the discussion due to time constraints.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What is what is carbon dioxide?
Speaker 1: I'm I went to high school, but that's, carbon dioxide is a a gas. Okay. I'm not a I'm not a I'm not a professional to talk about carbon dioxide so much. But
Speaker 0: Well, you you want us to abolish it. Right?
Speaker 1: No. There's always going to be carbon dioxide.
Speaker 0: Right. So so what is it you want us to do? I Let let me let me back up because I I wanna I mean, you're here as an expert. Tell me more about what carbon dioxide is.
Speaker 1: I'm here as an expert cross country skier who sees the changes in my winters and the landscape that I live in in Alaska. And so carbon dioxide is what I see it as is, you know, it's a gas that exists in our atmosphere.
Speaker 0: And What Is it the major part of our atmosphere? Or It's
Speaker 1: a huge part of our atmosphere. Yeah.
Speaker 0: It's actually a very small part of our atmosphere.
Speaker 1: Well, okay. But, yeah. I don't I don't know. What are you asking specifically?
Speaker 0: Well, you said we need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. I'd like to know first if you know what it is. You want us to abolish fossil fuels?
Speaker 1: I never said that.
Speaker 0: You never have said that? No. Okay. What what do you think we ought to do with fossil fuels?
Speaker 1: What will we do with fossil fuels?
Speaker 0: Yeah. Should we make any changes?
Speaker 1: I would like to see a decrease in the use of fossil fuels. I think there's a possibility to use more electric generation.
Speaker 0: Okay. Over over what period of time? 10 years, 50 years, 100 years?
Speaker 1: That's not I would like to see it come as fast as possible while continuing
Speaker 0: How fast? Fast? Sorry? How fast?
Speaker 1: I'm not I don't have a You
Speaker 0: don't know? For that. No. Okay. You just think, well, how how much would it cost for us to become carbon neutral in the United States by 2, 050?
Speaker 1: I'm not a professional on that. I don't have an answer.
Speaker 0: You don't have any idea? No. You just think we ought to spend the money? I'm not an economist. Yeah.
But it's gonna cost money. You realize that.
Speaker 1: Yeah. But we've also talked about the the trade off of what the cost of climate change as emergencies will cost in the future also. So Right.
Speaker 0: But it's gonna cost 1, 000, 000, 000, 000 of dollars to become carbon neutral by 20, 050. Right?
Speaker 1: I do not know.
Speaker 0: You don't know. You just think we ought to do it?
Speaker 1: I I don't have a great answer for you, but I think k. I would
Speaker 0: If if we spent if we spent those trillions of dollars and became carbon which you advocate, how much would reduce world temperatures?
Speaker 1: I don't have an answer for that.
Speaker 0: You don't know? No. You just think we ought to spend the money and then see what happens?
Speaker 1: I think, as an athlete, I think if we spend that money and invest in our future, hopefully, those temperatures stop rising, and maybe the snow at least stabilizes where it is for me. But, yeah, I don't think anyone knows for sure. I don't know anyway.
Speaker 0: Well, when when when when my colleagues invite witnesses to come to us to tell us, advise us on passing legislation, always check out the background of our witnesses because I like to know who I'm talking to. I checked yours out, mister Schumacher, and I wanna be sure I understand it as I evaluate your testimony. On June 8, 2020, you tweeted, I'm gonna quote, the war on drugs was intentionally created to incarcerate black people en masse, end quote. The war on drugs, you said, was intentionally created to incarcerate black people on mass. Who who intentionally created the war on drugs to put black people in jail?
Who were you talking?
Speaker 1: I don't remember typing that. You don't?
Speaker 0: No. It's on your Twitter feed.
Speaker 1: Maybe a retweet. I don't know. I haven't used that in a while.
Speaker 0: Well, even if it's a retweet, it it shows your support. Right?
Speaker 1: Maybe. Yeah. I but it's not the topic of this conversation.
Speaker 0: Right. Right. But it has to do with you're here giving us advice, and I just kinda like to know a little bit more about your Yeah.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm here as an athlete giving you my story and what I've seen in my view.
Speaker 0: On August 27, 2020, you tweeted this, quote I'm gonna quote, police are paid with taxpayer dollars. If they are not answerable to us, we can demand new service, and that's what this is. Abolish the police in favor of that new service, end quote. You think we ought to abolish the police, do you?
Speaker 1: Again, not the topic I'm here to talk today.
Speaker 0: I know. But but you tweeted it. Do you think we ought to abolish the police?
Speaker 1: That's not what I'm here to talk about.
Speaker 0: Should we do that before or after we get rid of fossil fuels?
Speaker 1: I'm not going to address that.
Speaker 0: You don't want to address it? Okay. Let me ask you about 1 more of your tweets. On August 26, 2020, you tweeted there's a picture. I'm not gonna describe the picture, but you said, quote, your words, not mine.
It's on your Twitter feed. The, quote, this is what systemic racism looks like. The Los Angeles Police Department is literally policing only the Black Lives Matter side, end quote. What do you mean by that?
Speaker 1: This is still off topic.
Speaker 0: No. It's not. You're here as an expert telling us advising us, and I'm asking you about your your your background.
Speaker 1: I'm here as an athlete to talk about the effects of climate change on my sport.
Speaker 0: Okay. Let's go back. Well, I'm almost out of time. You're well out of time, and we have other senators waiting. So please wrap up when you have a moment.
Alright. Thank you all for your testimony.
@SenJohnKennedy - John Kennedy
Democrats held a hearing on abortion. When I walked them through the violent steps doctors take to kill a baby at 21 weeks, a Democrat cut me off. If abortion is too horrific for liberals to even hear about, shouldn’t they agree it’s too horrific to support? #ProLife https://t.co/HTjfIY9za9
Video Transcript AI Summary
At 21 weeks, a baby can feel pain and is developed. The abortion procedure at this stage is dilation and evacuation, where the doctor tears the baby apart without pain medication. This involves pulling out the limbs, heart, spine, and crushing the head to remove it. The speaker's time is cut short, but they express frustration about discussing protecting mothers and unborn babies.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Let's take a baby at 21 weeks. Hold up my this is a baby at 21 weeks. Okay? The baby can feel pain. Right?
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: And the baby is pretty developed. Right?
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 2: And do you know the name of the procedure that the doctor would use to abort that baby at 21 weeks?
Speaker 1: I'm not a doctor, but I believe it's a DNR.
Speaker 0: It's called dilation and evacuation. Is that right?
Speaker 1: As far as I understand, yes.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And first, the doctor would would would dilate, the cervix, and then the doctor would take what's called a they the doctor would call it a sulfur clamp. It's really a pair of pliers with sharp teeth on the end. And without giving the baby any pain medication, the doctor would go through the vagina, through the uterus and start tearing the baby apart. Is that right?
Speaker 1: As far as I understand the procedure.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And she might start with the legs and pull them out, and the arms and pull them out, right? And then she might go for the for the heart or the spine and just pull the baby out piece by piece. Is that right? Without giving the baby pain medication.
Speaker 1: That's what I understand the procedure to be.
Speaker 0: Okay. But then you gotta get the head out. The baby's dead, but maybe not. Maybe it's still in pain. But then you you gotta get the head out.
And even with the cervix dilated, you gotta get the head out, which is hard. So then the doctor would go in and and and use those pliers to crush the baby's head. Is that right?
Speaker 1: As far as I'm
Speaker 0: And then she'd pull the head out, the crust skull out. Right? Mhmm.
Speaker 2: Senator Kennedy, your time has expired here.
Speaker 0: Well, you gave the others plenty of time, mister chairman.
Speaker 2: Just letting you know, your time has expired. You have other senators waiting.
Speaker 0: Well, you also I was waiting when you were letting others. I'm sorry you don't wanna hear about what happened No.
Speaker 2: I don't think anybody has in
Speaker 0: an actual abortion, but that's I thought that was what we were here to talk about.
Speaker 2: No one else has gone over. Some of the witnesses went a little bit long, but on both sides. So
Speaker 0: I thought we were here about protecting mothers and killing babies.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna turn to senator Stabenow and
Speaker 0: I'm sorry. You don't want to hear us.
Speaker 2: Had to take place in front of you. Roster here. My apologies.