TruthArchive.ai - Related Post Feed
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
Free Jacob Chansley https://t.co/8BbeXF2Fye
@timelesspat - Timeless Pat
‼️THE TRUTH IS OUT💥👆 https://t.co/rxArMAf1MQ
Video Transcript AI Summary
The US withdrew from the anti-ballistic missile treaty in 2002 and started placing Aegis missiles in Poland and Romania. Putin expressed concern about the proximity of these missiles to Moscow. The US refused to negotiate with Russia and stated that NATO enlargement was none of their business. Russia's attempts to engage in negotiations were unsuccessful, leading to a military operation and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. The situation has resulted in a high death toll, mass displacement, and a significant economic decline in Ukraine.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Our border. Second, the US had walked away from the anti ballistic missile treaty unilaterally in 2002, and it had basically ended it had base it started to place Aegis missiles in Poland and Romania. Yeah. And Putin said, we don't even know what is in those silos, but it's a few minutes from Moscow. This is intolerable.
You unilaterally left a treaty. Now we are vulnerable. The United States said we don't negotiate with you. And in January 2022, the US gave a formal reply to who? And the formal reply is NATO enlargement is none of your business.
Literally, that is US policy. It's none of your business. Not that we will sit down and discuss, negotiate, try to understand your security concerns. It's none of your business. And on February 21st 20 22, Russia Security Council met.
President Putin asked foreign minister Lavrov, Lavrov, give a report of the status of your discussions with the Americans. Lavrov responded that we have received a firm reply of no negotiation over NATO. We have tried, mister president, but we did not succeed. The US will not engage in negotiations. And 3 days later, the special military operation took place.
Since then, hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians are killed. 10,000,000 have fled the country. The economic collapse is probably more than 50%. Ukraine is losing around a 1000 soldiers every day killed or seriously wounded right now. This so called
@JackPosobiec - Jack Poso 🇺🇸
Video Transcript AI Summary
War is bad for the planet, so we need sustainable tanks and weaponry. There are battery-powered fighter jets and biodegradable missiles. To stop this, block roads to protect gardens and farms. Use vegan hand grenades to avoid harming animals. These grenades have a special sticker. Find more information in the book Vegan Wars.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: War is always bad specifically for the planet. If we want to continue, fighting battles like environmentally conscious humans, We must make the change to sustainable tanks and weaponry. There are so many new concepts for battery powered fighter jets that can carry many more missiles, biodegradable missiles, of course, something literally everybody can do to stop this nonsense is, for example, block the roads to gardens and farms so the plants don't get overrun by these heavy, heavy tanks. Hand grenades, very important. If you use hand grenades, please use vegan grenades.
No animal should have to give their life for all this mayhem and chaos. They have a special sticker on them. You really can't miss them in the grenade market or wherever you buy them. Yeah. I cover all of this and more in my newest book Vegan Wars.
@DanScavino - Dan Scavino Jr.🇺🇸🦅
LFG!!! 🇺🇸🦅 https://t.co/LqJ8Ncb9qC
Video Transcript AI Summary
We are one movement, one people, one family, and one glorious nation under God. With American pride and courage, I declare our mission: to make America powerful, wealthy, strong, proud, safe, and great again.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We are 1 movement, One people, one family, and one glorious nation under God. So with American pride Swelling in our hearts and American courage stirring in our souls, I say these words to you tonight. We will make America powerful again. We will make America wealthy me again. We will make America strong again.
We will make America Proud again. We will make America safe again, And we will make America great again.
@RyanPatrick1991 - RyanFJBLGB🇺🇸🇺🇸🦅🦅
Fedsurrection! https://t.co/UuV3QZCXQd
Video Transcript AI Summary
On January 5th, outside BLM Plaza, a man named Ray Epps approached Speaker 1 and repeatedly urged them to go into the Capitol. Speaker 1 moved away from Epps, but he followed and continued instructing the crowd. Epps's statement, "We need to go into the Capitol. Tomorrow," became famous. Speaker 0 also expressed their readiness to enter the Capitol. Speaker 1 questioned whether Epps was part of a scripted plan or an undercover agent inciting violence. The video ends with Speaker 0 stating that they are heading towards the Capitol, where they believe their problems lie.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We need to go in to the capital.
Speaker 1: He told them at least 12 times what he wanted them to focus on. When I first saw Ray Epps, he came up to me. This is January 5th. We're outside BLM Plaza. We're protesting.
Speaker 0: USA. US.
Speaker 1: Reabs came up to me and started saying, we need to go into the capital. I go to another group way Far away from him, he follows me, and then he starts instructing the crowd, and that's that's the famous moment. He says, we need to go Into the capital. Tomorrow.
Speaker 0: We're just We need to go into the capital. I'm ready to go. Into the capital.
Speaker 1: Woah. This is scripted. No. No. He he's definitely a plan.
Don't get it. 100%. Did undercover agents or assets for the federal government agitate people to go into the capital and encourage or incite violence.
Speaker 0: We are going to the capital Where our problems are, it's that direction.
@Psyaddict4ever - 💫 F Society
@LizCrokin 💪💪💪😂😂😂👇👇👇 https://t.co/q1egieBp0R
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 firmly rejects the idea of allowing advertising. They express their strong disapproval towards anyone attempting to blackmail them with money. The speaker's message is clear and direct. They conclude by addressing someone named Bob.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You don't want them to advertise? No. What do you mean? If if somebody's gonna try to blackmail me with advertising, blackmail me with money, go fuck yourself. But go fuck yourself.
Is that clear? Yes, you do. I hope it is. Hey, Bob.
@JT4DT24 - 🗽Jordyn Trump🗽
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥THIS!!!!!!🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥 https://t.co/ksMLoxGZWz
Video Transcript AI Summary
I don't care about the lawsuit I'm facing. I went to a home supply store to buy screws. I saw an elderly man struggling to find something, so I decided to help him. When he asked a store employee for assistance, the employee refused to help and was disrespectful. This made me angry, so I confronted the employee and forced him to help the elderly man. I asked the elderly man why he allowed the disrespect, and he said it was because of his anxiety. I believe we should not let anxiety control our lives and should stand up for ourselves. I don't regret my actions and hope others will do the same.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I have 100% got a lawsuit coming from me, and I 1000% don't give a shit. Let me tell you what the hell just happened to me. Alright? I went down to the home supply store. Alright?
You could take your pick. It's either blue or orange. You got a 50% chance of getting this shit right. And I went in there. I had to give me some 2 inch Deckmate T25 screws.
I got a little project I'm working The house had to go in there and give me some fucking screws. I went in there, and I'm walking up and down the damn hardware aisle. Alright? And there is this very, very elderly old man, and he's walking up and down this damn aisle. Okay?
Well, I said, well, hell. Old man knows what he's looking for. I'm just gonna grab these t 20 fives, and I'm gonna go to the checkout. Well, I grabbed my t 25 box of my screws, and I walk up to the damn checkout. Now I'm standing in line because I refuse to go through self checkout even though they asked me.
Alright? When you start giving me 15% off like I work here, Boom. I'll check my damn self out. Until then, I'm standing in this line. So I'm standing in line.
About that time, out the end of the aisle on the hardware Ow. The old man walks out, and there is a younger person standing there with one of that company's vests on, standing there doing absolutely nothing. Okay? He walks out and he asked me. He's with the ear dentist.
I can hear him. He asked the young man. He said, excuse me. Where are your plastic cat nails at? He said, right down there on that aisle.
An old man say, I've been walking up and down that aisle for a few minutes, sir, and I can't seem to find them. And Young boy turned around and looks at it down there on the right. You'll find them. Go down there on the right. And the old man's dumping up and down this aisle for, like, 10 minutes.
So the old man said one more thing to him. He said, well, son, my old eyes just ain't as good as they as as they as they used to be. I ain't, I I I guess I just couldn't find them. Can you please show me where they're at? And the young man wearing that company's vest turned and looked at old man, said, oh, man, I ain't showing you where them damn nails is at.
Alright? They're down there on the right, walk down there, put your glasses on, and find them. Well, all of a sudden now, I need plastic cap nails. I didn't need them when I come in the store a few minutes ago, but now there is nothing more important to me than plastic cap nails because I'm fittin' to test this little son of a bitch's metal. So I walk over to him, get out of my place in line, walk over to him, and I said, hey.
Where's your plastic cap nails at? He said, they're down there on the right. Just follow the old man. I said, no. You work here.
Show me where the plastic cap nails are. And he said, I'm not showing you where the plastic cap nails are. So I took this hand right here. You see this big ass hand? The one that make a double d kitties, like a Granny Smith apple.
And I grabbed that little son of a bitch by the back of his fucking collar. And I against his will, drugged him down this damn aisle, and I stood him up right by that old man. And all of a sudden, he's as helpful as can be. His eyes are about that big around. He's pissing on himself.
Okay? And I said, where's the plastic cat now's at? All of a sudden, he knows exactly where they are. He has no problem showing me where they are, and I released him after he gave that old man their plastic cap nails, and I asked that old man before the repercussions came in. I asked him.
I said, sir, Why did you let that young man disrespect you like that? Now keep in mind that this old man has a United States veteran hat on, which means that he fought for this country. Okay? I asked him. I said, why did you let that young man disrespect you like that?
And old man's just shaking like this right here because he he he's very uncomfortable. He said, my anxiety, man, my anxiety, I I just I I try not to cause no waves. Well, let me tell you something to everybody out there. Young, old, perfectly healthy, mentally handicapped. You do not let that anxiety monster run your life.
If you are ever disrespected, you say exactly what you need to say in order to gain your respect back because I can guarantee you, Guaranteed you that somewhere within 10 foot of you is somebody that will protect you from being disrespected. Okay? Do do believe that. Do not believe the hype of the damn media and all this shit where everybody's gotta be nice to everybody and all this other type of stuff, and you can't stand up for yourself. There is a whole bunch of me's out there that will I I give 0 fucks, Zero about the repercussions of my actions.
I regret absolutely nothing from what I just did. I I welcome it. I hope them damn blue lights pull in this fucking driveway right now. Because before I left, I told that store manager, when he come over there, you can take a picture of my license. Alright?
That's where I'll be if this needs to continue. But let me tell y'all something right now. Okay? The reason that that is available and that that is pretty much prominent in America right now is because half of America has never had a board put on their ass or their ass busted. You understand me?
If you're gonna disrespect somebody, I highly suggest that you look at your surroundings and make sure that I ain't there because we ain't all sheep. There's a bunch of lions out there right now. We're just hiding in the fucking brush.
@digitalassetbuy - Digital Asset Investor.XRP
EXPOSE THEM ALL! 🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿🍿 https://t.co/1gHi5KRQzX
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 expresses opposition to cryptocurrency. Speaker 1 mentions that Jamie, who supports blockchain, helped launch JPMorganCoin. They explain that JPMorgan created its own blockchain protocol based on Ethereum, allowing private transactions. Speaker 0 suggests that the only use case for blockchain is criminal activity. Speaker 2 states that JPMorgan was involved in Ethereum from the beginning and played a major role in the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance. Speaker 0 comments on shutting down blockchain if they were the government. Speaker 3 compares the Mt. Gox scandal to Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme, where JPMorgan was involved. JPMorgan account holders sued the bank and recovered over $2 billion, but no executives went to jail.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I've always been deeply opposed to crypto, Bitcoin, etcetera.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, first of all, if I might add, Jamie has always loved the blockchain. You know, I think at one point in time, he publicly said, God bless the blockchain. I definitely believe in the blockchain. So, you know, he's always been a staunch supporter of us through the entire program. And, you know and in fact, that's the reason why we were able to launch JPMorganCoin.
Nordwin is basically US dollars on blockchain. We actually are one of the few banks to have almost created our own Blockchain protocol, like the underlying technology layer, essentially, what we did was take the Ethereum, public Ethereum Blockchain codebase, and we forked it, which meant we copied and pasted it. It was open source. And then we added enterprise technology trappings. But then we also added a private node to enable private transactions, between participants in a network, telling that all of our projects are, you know, on Ethereum variant as an example.
That's that's intentional. And I think that as a bank, you know, many many did not agree with that approach early on, but now it's sort of playing through as as being relevant.
Speaker 0: One You pointed out the only true use case for it is criminals.
Speaker 2: So our company consensus has been, very prominent at Since the start of the Ethereum ecosystem, I I can attest that JPMorgan was there right from the start before Public Mainnet was even launched. One one one
Speaker 0: drug traffickers, anti money laundering, tax avoidance.
Speaker 2: JPMorgan, at what started paying attention to Ethereum blockchain technology even before public mainnet was released. At what So they started, experimenting and and building out some things, when we were still building proofs of concept. One they had a handful of different teams that focused on blockchain technology, one And we've interacted, with them roughly from the start. We one I started to interact with them, in a really concerted way, around the time of at The advent of the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance. So, we were 2 of the major drivers of that initiative at 1 and have been 2 of the major drivers of activity inside the EEA since since launch, really.
Speaker 0: I one If I was the government, I'd close it down.
Speaker 3: You know, with respect to to to to Mt. Gox, there's not that much here that's all that unique outside of it being, Bitcoin related. At one side of it being, Bitcoin related. Bernie Madoff had his company banking at JPMorgan. JPMorgan caught on at 1 to the scam about a year before it collapsed.
They pulled most of their money out of, out of the the the Madoff fund, didn't tell their what Their own account holders who were also with Madoff that they were doing that. After everything was revealed, at 1 The JPMorgan account holders who are all who are also with Madoff, they sued JPMorgan for violating the fiduciary obligation that JP at JPMorgan had to them, and they recovered over $2,000,000,000 in that lawsuit. And the JPMorgan executives went to jail. Right? One No.
The JPMorgan executives want to chill? No.
@TonyMguru - Grumpy ☄️
@EndWokeness https://t.co/72455z2hvj
Video Transcript AI Summary
Anyone can come to the US, like going to New York and seeing the Statue of Liberty. The speaker picked up three guys from Honduras who were at Home Depot and had nowhere to go. One of them, Hector, needs medication twice a day and they all need to use the bathroom. The speaker called to ask if they can stay, but the person on the other end said no because they don't know them. The speaker calls them a hypocrite and tells the guys to leave.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You just think that anyone can come to US like Absolutely. If you go to the go to New York, go to the Statue of Liberty, what's it say? All is walk I don't think it says that, but, dude, this is great because Okay. I just happened to pick up, 3 guys from Honduras. Well, they were at Home Depot.
They're they're from Honduras, and they have nowhere to go. So this just works out perfect. Look. Hector takes medications twice a day, And and right now, they gotta use the bathroom. All 3 of them go to shit.
I knew for calling. That's it. Is it cool if they stay here? No. Why not?
What do you mean? I don't know them. Alright. So they can't say you're walking. It's cool if they come to the country, just not your fucking house.
No. Come on. Come on. Go ahead. Hypocrite.
Let's go, guys. Let's go. Sorry, man. Hypocrite.
@TrumpLatinos24 - TrumpLatinos
We Finally Performed At Mar-A-Lago RT If You’re Voting Trump November 5th https://t.co/hKqDOVJEDJ
Video Transcript AI Summary
We are at Mar-a-Lago, our second home, ready to perform. You all are missing out. It's great to see you, my friend. You've been doing amazing walking and talking videos. Keep it up!
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What's going on? This is from Latinos. Got our second home, Mar a Largo. But guess what? We performing.
Y'all missing. Come on. Yeah. My man. What's up, my boy?
Good to see you, man. How are you? There he is. Alright. There he is.
Hey. You know what? Yeah. You're gonna do the videos where you've been, like, walking and talking Excuse me. Phenomenal.
Like,
@myhiddenvalue - Not A Number
🔥 We Are Rising Up 🔥 https://t.co/ryPRoaGqv7
Video Transcript AI Summary
While on maternity leave, I learned about inherent contempt of Congress, a power rarely used since the early 1900s. The attorney general defied two subpoenas from House chairmen. If the Department of Justice doesn't act in 10 days, I've filed a motion to bring inherent contempt proceedings against the attorney general. This allows the House to detain the attorney general until he complies with subpoenas. It's a necessary step to restore order in the House.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: During my time off for maternity, after I was told that I could not go, I actually spent that time reading the House rule book, Emmanuel. And there's something that hasn't been used since early 1900 called inherent contempt of Congress. It's actually something that any one individual member reserves. The attorney general thought he was above the law and did not comply not just with one subpoena, but with 2 subpoenas. Those are subpoenas from both chairman Jordan and chairman Comer.
I wanna read this to you because, ultimately, if in 10 days, the Department of Justice does not do their job and hold the attorney general responsible just like they would any other American, I think that it should be our job in the House of Representatives to be and to bring an inherent contempt proceeding against the attorney general of which I've already filed that privilege motion, over a week ago. I would like to read it real quickly in saying that resolved that if in 10 days after the passage of this report, the Department of Justice has failed to indict attorney general Garland, the speaker of the House of Representatives shall issue his warrant commanding the sergeant in arms, or his duty to take into custody the body of the said attorney general Garland, whoever found, and bring him to the said attorney Garland before the bar of the House of Representatives, then and there to provide documents, materials, and answers such questions pertinent to the matter under inquiry as the House of Representatives may order the speaker of the house of representatives to propound and to keep the said attorney general Garland in custody to await further orders of the house of representatives.
This is something something that we reserve as an authority in order to bring back order to a house that has seemed to have forgotten it.
@PapiTrumpo - il Donaldo Trumpo
HAD TO SAY IT!!!😂😂😂 https://t.co/WyEqNxvsqR
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker claims that the people running the country are stupid and lack common sense, adhering instead to an ideology. The speaker singles out Kamala, asserting that every place she has been involved with has deteriorated.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: These people are stupid people that are running our country. They don't have any common sense. They believe in an ideology. And if you look at Kamala and you look at what she's done to every place she's touched has turned to shit. Every single place she's touched.
After so.
@nocntxtreplyguy - No Context Reply Guy
@EndWokeness https://t.co/y1vxtfh0bR
Video Transcript AI Summary
The guy fixing the leak arrives, and the prince insists on respect in his office. The janitor mocks the prince's decor, leading to a playful exchange about their similar hairstyles. The janitor reveals he enjoys a simple life with a sword collection and free cable. The prince, intrigued, proposes they switch places for a month, claiming it worked on the Flintstones. They agree, with the pauper shaving his mustache and the prince donning a fake one. The prince, now dressed as a janitor, prepares to test if his assistant, Carl, can recognize the difference. The janitor, enjoying the ruse, is confident Carl won't suspect a thing.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Well, bummer. By the way, the guy's here to fix the leak on your solid gold faucet.
Speaker 1: Send them in.
Speaker 2: This place looks like the Liberace Museum. Hey.
Speaker 1: Hey. I'm the prince of this city. When you're in my office, you treat me with respect.
Speaker 2: Who did you decorating? Saddam Hussein?
Speaker 1: I'll have you know this is all very classy stuff, and that painting of the tiger and the woman has got me laid on numerous occasions.
Speaker 2: I didn't know gay dudes like tiger paintings.
Speaker 1: Hey, you've crossed the line. I've killed people full ass.
Speaker 2: Looks like you killed a squirrel to me and put it right on top of your head.
Speaker 1: You're one to talk. Your hair looks exactly like mine.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Except my hair's supposed to look like this. I'm a janitor.
Speaker 1: Normally, I'd have you dragged into the swamp and shot, but you've got guts. You're the first man I've ever met who isn't afraid of me. What's your secret?
Speaker 2: Well, my real secret is that I live a simple life. I may not be a billionaire like you, but this job gives me enough money to have a pretty kick ass sword collection. Plus, my brother rigged my cable so that I get all the newdy channels for free.
Speaker 1: It sounds like you're happy.
Speaker 2: Darn tootin. Aren't you happy what with all your money, your clothes, and your gay decorations?
Speaker 1: Okay. First of all, enough about the decorations. And second, I would love to run away and live a life of leisure, but the whole city would collapse if I wait a minute. Let me look at you. You look exactly like me.
Speaker 2: You're right. Except for my very stylish mustache.
Speaker 1: I have a proposition for you, my friend. How would you like to trade places and be it'd be me for 1 month?
Speaker 2: You really think it would work?
Speaker 1: Worked on the Flintstones.
Speaker 2: Say no more. I'm in. Alright.
Speaker 3: And so the pauper and the prince exchanged identities. The pauper shaved his mustache and the prince put on a fake one. And this voiceover lasted just long enough for them to trade clothes. What? They're not done yet?
Okay. The prince dressed like a janitor, and the janitor are they right? Yes. Back to the story.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm off to find my new happiness. Now for the final test. Let's see if my assistant I mean, your assistant, Carl, can tell the difference.
Speaker 2: Carl, come here.
Speaker 0: Can I help you, sir?
Speaker 2: Look at this janitor here.
Speaker 1: Ew. Disgusting. This is great. He doesn't suspect a thing.
@joshuaprichards - Joshua Richards
@LibertyCappy https://t.co/bFsuIcbPDZ
Video Transcript AI Summary
There were very fine people on both sides of a white supremacist rally. I'm not referring to the neo-Nazis and white nationalists, who should be condemned entirely. However, there were many individuals in that group who were not neo-Nazis or white nationalists.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Who said that there were very fine people on both sides of a white supremacist rally. Very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group excuse me. Excuse me. You had people, and I'm not talking about the neo nazis and the white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.
But you had many people in that group other than neo nazis and white nationalists. Okay?
@MJTruthUltra - MJTruthUltra
This is messed up. @CPAC Why?
@RickyDoggin - A Man Of Memes
Ted Cruz Bringing It https://t.co/RCT1h30we1
Video Transcript AI Summary
During a hearing, a senator questions a judge about a case involving a male convicted of raping a nine-year-old boy and a seventeen-year-old girl, and later convicted of possessing child pornography. The senator challenges the judge's decision to allow this individual, now identifying as female, to be housed in a women's prison. The senator accuses the judge of prioritizing political ideology over the safety and rights of the female inmates, highlighting the judge's statement that the individual was "entirely a female" despite having male genitalia. The senator quotes the judge's order, where she stated there were "no signs that petitioner is at risk of re offending" and deemed concerns about potential trauma to female inmates as "overblown." The judge defends her decision, stating the petitioner had not engaged in violence while in custody, and wardens requested the transfer due to medical needs. She claims the denial of transfer by the transgender executive council was based on hormone levels, which she found to be a pretext.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In your court, what matters more? The rights of individuals or your political ideology.
Speaker 1: I apply the law to the facts.
Speaker 0: I I asked question. Which matters more?
Speaker 1: Well, my political ideology doesn't matter at all.
Speaker 0: K. So I don't believe you. And I think this case demonstrates that you are willing to subjugate the rights of individuals to satisfy your political ideology. This case involves a male defendant who raped a nine year old boy. Was he guilty of that?
Yes.
Speaker 1: The petitioner plead guilty to that.
Speaker 0: K. So he raped a nine year old boy. He also raped a 17 year old girl. Was he guilty of that?
Speaker 1: He plead guilty. The petitioner plead guilty of that crime as well.
Speaker 0: So was he guilty?
Speaker 1: I I hope so because she plead guilty to it.
Speaker 0: He was a he when he did this. That's correct. And also criminal deviant conduct, which the record doesn't doesn't disclose what that was exactly. Then after serving in prison, mister McClain was released for parole, but then violated the terms of parole by having Internet and was sent back to prison. One year after being released again, was convicted of having child pornography.
Is that correct?
Speaker 1: I'm I'm unclear on exactly the time frame that you're at, but but the petitioner was convicted of distributing child pornography.
Speaker 0: Child pornography that was images of adults violently raping children.
Speaker 1: Abhorrent conduct.
Speaker 0: Okay.
Speaker 1: For which there are real victims.
Speaker 0: And this individual, six foot two, biologically a man, a minute ago you said that when this man decided that he was a she, you said this individual was quote, I wrote it down, sober and entirely a female. That phrase struck me as remarkable. Did this individual have male genitalia?
Speaker 1: I think what I said or at least what I
Speaker 0: That is a verbatim quote. Entirely a female.
Speaker 1: Sorry. What I meant to say was hormonally a
Speaker 0: female. Okay. But that's not entirely. Did this individual have male genitalia?
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: So you took a six foot two serial rapist. Serial child rapist with male genitalia and he said, you know, I'd like to be in a women's prison. And your answer was that sounds great to me. Let me ask you something. The other women in that prison, do they have any rights?
Speaker 1: Is is that a question? Yes.
Speaker 0: The other women in that prison, do they have any rights?
Speaker 1: Of course.
Speaker 0: Do they have the right not to have a six foot two man who is a repeat serial rapist put in as their cell mate?
Speaker 1: Senator Cruz, I considered the facts presented to me and I reached a decision based on what the law
Speaker 0: I asked you a question. Do they have a right not to have a six foot two man who is a serial rapist put in as their cellmate? Do those women have a right to that?
Speaker 1: Every person who's incarcerated has the right to be safe in their space.
Speaker 0: But you didn't think so. You didn't think so. And in fact, I'm gonna give some quotes from your order because senator Kennedy is right. This is not a judge's order. This is a political activist.
By the way, the beginning of your order says, at birth, people are typically assigned a gender. I gotta say that would astonish a lot of Americans. A lot of Americans think you you you go to the hospital, a baby is born and you congratulations. You have a little boy, little girl. The assigned a gender, I know you went to Brown, but it sounds like it's in a college faculty lounge with no bearing on reality.
The bureau prison argued. What I'm saying right now that if you put this person in a female prison, there will be a risk of sexual assault to the women. And you know what you did? You said you didn't care about the women. I'm gonna quote what you wrote.
You wrote quote, the Bureau of Prisons claim pedagogical interest in protecting female prisoners from sexual violence and trauma. This interest is legitimate, that's kind of you to say. But there are no signs that petitioner is at risk of re offending. The record is devoid of evidence of incidents of violence or assault during petitioner's incarceration when she was the perpetrator, only the victim. A theoretical risk of sexual assault by the prisoner without more cannot support the BOP's position.
No evidence theoretical. Have you dealt in what universe is someone who is a serial repeat child rapist not at a risk of re offending?
Speaker 1: Senator, as I do in every case.
Speaker 0: I know you've been told to repeat the line, I follow the law. I asked a question. In what universe is someone who is a serial repeat child rapist not at risk of re offending?
Speaker 1: Sir, I looked at the facts that were before me in this case. All of the evidence including the statements of every warden who had supervised this petitioner.
Speaker 0: You also wrote, the BOP also posits that permitting petitioner to live among women will be traumatizing and possibly dangerous to them. This concern is overblown. I have to say, if I were the father of one of those women, and you decided that my daughter's cell mate was gonna be a six foot two man who over and over and over again committed violent sexual assault. I would say the entire justice system is absurd and it is clear on your record, your political ideology matters a heck of a lot more than the rights of those women that you endangered. I think you're a radical and I think you have no business being a judge.
Speaker 1: Judge Ned.
Speaker 2: Judge Nedburn, there was an opportunity during your exchange with senator Cruz that you were attempting to offer a response relative to the the conditions under which this petitioner were was unsafe in the facilities in which she was being held. I'd like to offer you the opportunity to finish that response.
Speaker 1: So the facts that were presented to me and what I relied on to make my decision were that the petitioner had engaged in no violence, no physical violence, no acts of sexual violence whatsoever while in custody. All three wardens who supervised the petitioner requested that she be transferred to a women's facility because of her serious medical needs. In addition, the Bureau of Prisons long time medical provider testified at a two day hearing in my courtroom, and recommended that the petitioner be transferred because of her serious medical needs. And the last thing I'll say is that the transgender executive council, which is the body that makes decisions on behalf of transgender transfer requests within the Bureau of Prisons, never said that the petitioner could not be transferred, and never ever said that she couldn't be transferred because of any risk of violence. What the transgender executive council repeatedly said in denying the request was simply that she needed to maintain her hormone levels.
That was the repeated justification for the denial of transfer. But the petitioner had reached full female hormone levels before even being incarcerated. At the time, the district judge in Indiana who sentenced the petitioner requested that she be placed in a women's facility. Her hormones were entirely female at that point. And so the decision by the transgender executive council to deny the transfer request based on this idea that it was only because her hormones needed to be consistent and stabilized.
I found was a pretext, but they never once said
Speaker 0: opposite of what she said. Your
Speaker 2: own reporters. Senators, I gave both of you more time to finish your line of questioning. I allowed the witness to finish her. I allowed the witness to finish witness I allow the witness to finish her. That is
Speaker 0: I understand that
Speaker 2: is not. I have said that.
Speaker 0: Madam chair. She has an obligation to explain why she directly contradicted what she wrote in her report. She says in her report, the Bureau of Prisons claimed pedagogical interest is in protecting female prisoners from sexual violence and trauma. She just told you Senator So, yes, you are afraid of the answer to that question.
Speaker 2: Senator Padilla. Before
Speaker 0: afraid of the answer to that question.
@KarluskaP - Karli Bonne’ 🇺🇸
WHAT! https://t.co/2jPFdJ30P2
Video Transcript AI Summary
Bishop Mary Ann Buddy, who prayed for President Trump to have mercy on illegal migrants, leads the Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM). During the Biden administration, EMM received $53 million in government funds for immigrant resettlement in 2023 alone. The 2024 figures are not yet available, suggesting potentially consecutive payments. The speaker implies that Buddy's sermon was motivated by financial interests, suggesting she was praying for her own bank account.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Remember her, bishop Mary Ann Buddy, who gave a sermon at the Washington National Cathedral the day after the inauguration and in her prayer urged president Trump to, quote, have mercy on various groups, specifically illegal migrants. Well, it turns out that bishop Mary Ann Buddy's Episcopal Migration Ministries, EMM, during the Biden administration received $53,000,000 from government programs for immigrant resettlement, and that is just 2023. The 2024 numbers haven't even been released yet. So my guess is she probably received back to back payments. And now it all makes sense why she said this in her sermon.
I ask you to have mercy, mister president, on those in our communities whose children fear that their parents will be taken away. He wasn't praying for them. She was praying for her. Bank account, you always have to follow the money.
@KerryBurgess - Kerry Burgess
America are you listening? https://t.co/6SvAaH3Kof
Video Transcript AI Summary
There are almost a million illegal Israeli settlers living off of American taxes on internationally recognized illegal land settlements. The speaker claims that $40.50 from every American paycheck goes straight to Israel. The speaker suggests that the U.S. could hypothetically have a million unemployed Americans living comfortably for their entire lives with the money being used for Israeli settlers. The speaker, who is unemployed and doesn't pay taxes, says they would be angry if they were a taxpayer. The speaker urges listeners to boycott, divest, and sanction Israel so that they lose money and taxpayers get their money back, concluding with "Fuck Israel."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I really don't know what's gonna, like, radicalize people more, but this is insane. There are almost a million illegal Israeli settlers living off of your taxes, by the way. Unemployed on illegal land, internationally recognized illegal land settlements using your money, your money, your taxes, the, I don't know, $40.50 dollars that come out of your paycheck going straight to Israel. Yeah. It also means that we could hypothetically have a million unemployed Americans just fucking about for their entire lives having kids, living in homes, having health care, affording food.
But no. They get they get it. I'm unemployed. I don't pay taxes. I would be really pissed off right now if I was you if I was you.
And with that anger, I would boycott, divest, and sanction Israel so that they lose the money and you get your money back. You get your money back. Fuck Israel.
@ArmandKleinX - Armand Klein
🇺🇸🇺🇸MAGA FOR THE WIN♥️🎯💪🏻🇺🇸🇺🇸 https://t.co/5Kvz3K1CDE
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: My last comment is I hope that you will tell the American people how many preventable child deaths are an acceptable sacrifice for enacting an agenda that I think is fundamentally cruel and defies common sense. Thank you,
Speaker 1: mister chairman. Do I get a reply? Senator, you've think sat in that chair for how long? Twenty, twenty five years while the chronic disease in our children went up to seventy six percent, and you said nothing.
Context: The dialogue centers on accountability for preventable child deaths and a critique of a policy agenda, followed by a response about tenure and rising chronic disease among children.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: My last comment is I hope that you will tell the American people how many preventable child deaths are an acceptable sacrifice for enacting an agenda that I think is fundamentally cruel and defies common sense. Thank you,
Speaker 1: mister chairman. Do I get a reply? Senator, you've think sat in that chair for how long? Twenty, twenty five years while the chronic disease in our children went up to seventy six percent, and you said nothing.