reSee.it - Related Post Feed
@Lukewearechange - Luke Rudkowski
This is how it’s done boys https://t.co/zhEpYkKqCL
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 if they want to go to dinner, but Speaker 1 declines because they have a boyfriend. Speaker 0 expresses disappointment but mentions their tank. Speaker 1 suggests going to a bar instead, which piques Speaker 0's interest. Speaker 1 reveals they like tanks, and Speaker 0 confirms that the car they were referring to is indeed theirs.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What are you doing later? Wanna go to dinner?
Speaker 1: Sorry. I don't do dinner.
Speaker 0: You don't do dinner? No. I don't.
Speaker 1: Why? Because I have a boyfriend.
Speaker 0: That's too bad. I don't usually ask twice, but, Yeah. It's my tank.
Speaker 1: Well, there's a bar down the road.
Speaker 0: There's a what?
Speaker 1: A bar down the road. You wanna go to drink.
Speaker 0: Oh, so now you're interested.
Speaker 1: I like tanks.
Speaker 0: Well, no tanks. That's your car? Yeah. That's my car. Woah.
@Squawk55 - SquawK
Lol 💀 https://t.co/IRPWyNramY
Video Transcript AI Summary
Secretary Clinton is asked outdated questions about her typing speed and President Obama's coffee preference. The conversation turns to the possibility of a civil war, but Clinton dismisses the idea. The interviewer sarcastically mentions Clinton's supposed plan to take away guns. Clinton expresses her focus on the economy and creating more jobs for everyone. The interview is interrupted by a commercial from Donald Trump, which Clinton finds inappropriate. The interview ends with a lighthearted exchange about staying in touch and contacting Clinton via email.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: As secretary, how many words per minute could you type? And how does President Obama like his coffee? Like himself? Weak? You know, Zack, those are really out of date questions.
Fine, lose. The country goes to shit. You're going to lead the civil war? No. I wouldn't take up arms.
I think that might be a little extreme. Oh, right. Because you were saying before we were rolling that you wanted to take away everyone's guns. Very cool. Cool, cool, cool.
I really regret doing this. What's gonna be the number one focus of your presidency? Oh, Zack, it has to be the economy. We need more good jobs with rising incomes. We've got to make the economy work for everybody, not just We need to take a break.
We just need to have a word from our sponsor. Okay. Washington is broken. The truth is too many politicians are Totally controlled by special interests and lobbyists. We're going to make America great again.
I'm Donald Trump, and I approve this message. He approves the message. Why would you play a commercial from my opponent in the middle of our interview? He paid me in steaks. Well, this has been a lot of fun, Mrs.
Clinton. We should stay in touch. What's the best way to reach you? Email?
@DramaFreeZone42 - DramaFreeZone
This tells you everything you need to know! 🤬 https://t.co/ldqnxjtRZO
@AntonioTweets2 - 🍁Antonio Tweets
Wow. 👇 https://t.co/gQh9QDODWi
Video Transcript AI Summary
Researchers are focusing on finding agents that can effectively kill cancer stem cells, which are resistant to standard treatments. Many cancer drugs shrink tumors but fail to eliminate the stem cells, which can make them more aggressive. A drug called Exovar is being clinically tested to target cancer stem cells, while curcumin, found in turmeric, has also shown promise. However, the cost of Exovar is significantly higher compared to curcumin, which is a more affordable and natural alternative. Other food items like resveratrol, genistein, sulforaphane, and EGCG have also been found to kill cancer stem cells. Despite this knowledge, conventional oncologists often overlook these options due to societal pressure and lack of awareness.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Agents and items that kill cancer stem cells. This is very important.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: Very, very important. Cancer stem cells, you know, colon cancer, the at the base of the crypt is a normal stem cell, normally speaking. And if those cancer if those normal stem cells become malignant for whatever reason, then you have then you're almost certainly dealing with a cancer stem cell. Cancer stem cell is highly resistant to treatment, to key to standard treatment. So there are big drug companies involved in trials, clinical trials of agents to try to get FDA approval to kill for to the agent to kill cancer stem cells.
So I was looking at a list, a paper that contain a list of these agents. At the top
Speaker 1: Right before the list. Before you say the list, I I wanna just establish something for folks that don't understand why this matters. It's because many, many cancer drugs and treatments will shrink a tumor, but they don't kill the cancer stem cells, Which are only, you know, less than 10% of a tumor, sometimes they're only 1% of a tumor. And and so it looks like, woah, this treatment totally shrunk my tumor by 90%. Like, wow, it's working.
Let's go to Chili's and celebrate, you know, happy hour. And The reality is is like, no. You those stem cells are now more aggressive. They're pissed off and they're and they're resistant, and they're gonna come raging Back because the treatment not only didn't kill them, but made them more aggressive. Right?
So the the the whole point is, like, you gotta kill the stem cells.
Speaker 0: Right. And drug companies have been racking their collective brains trying to come up with drugs to kill cancer stem cells. So Here's the funny thing. I was looking at this list yesterday of drugs, candidate drugs, substances to kill cancer stem cells. At top of the list was a drug called Exovar.
That interested me because I didn't I I didn't know but most of these other drugs are just in development. Nexovar is actually an approved drug for certain kinds of cancer now being clinical trial to kill specifically to kill cancer stem cells. Right? The bottom of the list was Curcumin, the yellow coloring natural coloring agent in turmeric, right? So the cost of of a good quality, curcumin, in a in what probably would be an effective amount would be about 60¢ a day.
Right? Literally. Right? To get Yeah. You know, in that realm.
Or if you took it for a year, $250. Look this up. And I look you can look this up at drugs.com or any other website. The cost of Nexovar, currently for the for its indications is over $20,000 a month. If you took that simple math if you took that for a year, you're looking at 250 $1,000 as opposed to $250.
That's sort of the gulf between the generic natural non toxic, you know, stuff that you could buy at a health food store or a food co op versus something that you only can get through the machinery of big pharma pumping this out. And then, of course, you know, with all the all the buzz around, now we found something to kill cancer stem cells, blah blah blah. But they've known for 10 years that curcumin and other natural agents kill cancer stem cells. They're actually the only thing pretty much they do. If you There are probably about 20 different items that kill cancer stem cells that are known in the laboratory and somewhat also in the clinic.
And of those, 10 of them are foods, food items, food derivatives.
Speaker 1: So why
Speaker 0: don't we
Speaker 1: What else?
Speaker 0: So resveratrol from red grape skins. Yep. Genistein from soybeans. Sulforaphane from broccoli and broccoli sprouts. I mentioned turmeric from cur from curcumin from turmeric, and EGCG from green tea.
Speaker 1: From black seed?
Speaker 0: Yeah. But the big five are the in terms of the certainly the quantity of research. There's about 10,000 journal articles that cover those those big five.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 0: And then there are other minor ones like, maybe they're not so minor, but they're not as well researched. Like for instance, cinnamon, cardamom, pepper, some and by the way, how interesting isn't it that those things are sort of like traditional things in golden milk, in the the Ayurvedic formula and also you could put those in smoothies. You know there's a lot you can do with those, whether you take them as foods, you take them as supplement. But there's, aside from the holistically oriented doctors who are not that not that common in the cancer field or naturopathic oncologists. Who among, you know, whole of your your viewers was ever told this by a conventional oncologist.
They're they are either legally unaware.
Speaker 1: 0. The number is 0.
Speaker 0: Absolutely. And then there were a few, you know, heroes who are oncologists or doctors mainly treating cancer who are aware of this. But you know, what happens is if you push too hard, if you're an oncologist and you push too hard on this, you get a reputation as a weirdo. You get a reputation not as a sound person who was gonna move up the ranks of American Society For Clinical Oncology and of your department, but as, like, people are looking at you askance, like what's wrong with with that guy or that woman that they're suddenly so interested in garlic or ginger or green tea. And we have testimony from 2 top doctors in England who said that what they're they're big enthusiasts for ginger.
Ginger is another one that's that kills cancer stem cell. But they they are aware of the fact that, you know, there's it's embarrassing. It's a deep embarrassment to to them and to their colleagues if they admit this this sort of fascination with something that's not mainstream.
@AlnaouqA - Ahmed Alnaouq
He says it all. https://t.co/cadbZljjpQ
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Palestinians lack international support due to their lack of wealth and power, which translates to fewer rights. This parallels the disparity in rights between poor black kids in urban areas and wealthy suburban residents in the US. The national interest is driven by the wealthy elite and major corporations, not the general population's desires. Public opinion is often ignored in policy-making, with decisions favoring the wealthy elite. Active public engagement is necessary to influence policy.
Translation: The lack of international support for Palestinians is due to their poverty and powerlessness, similar to how poor black kids in cities have fewer rights than wealthy suburban residents. Government policy in the US is driven by the interests of the rich elite and major corporations, ignoring the public's desires. Public opinion is disregarded, requiring active activism to influence policy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Part of the tragedy of the Palestinians is that they have essentially no international support for a good reason. They don't have wealth, they don't have power, so they don't have rights. It's the way the world works, you know. Your rights correspond to your power and your wealth. Same inside the United States, we're not shouldn't be surprised to see it.
If you're a poor black kid in Roxbury, you don't have the rights of a rich person living in the suburbs, right. Same in the international arena. So the Palestinians, I mean, they may get statements of support, but nobody is going to do much for them, especially when the U. S. Threatens anyone who might try to do something.
What's called the national interest turns out to be the interest of dominant domestic forces in US society. So the national interest means the interests of the very rich major corporations, the ones who set government policy and so on. That's the national interest and not the population. The population is basically irrelevant. The population often strongly opposes government policy and they're simply disregarded.
Overwhelmingly, people say there should be much higher taxes on the wealthy. What happens? Taxes on the wealthy go down. And it's the same on issue after issue. We do not live in a society in which the public determines policy.
The public is around, but basically disregard it unless they force themselves to enter the system by serious activism.
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
Seriously https://t.co/kxcg2Arf8v
Video Transcript AI Summary
Many artists feel unable to express their political views, particularly regarding support for Trump, fearing backlash. They believe the country is heading in the wrong direction and are concerned about government control over social media. This situation mirrors troubling developments in the UK, where individuals face imprisonment for their online expressions. The potential for censorship is alarming, regardless of political affiliation. Trump emphasizes the importance of free speech and advocates against government influence on public discourse. This principle, which aligns with the First Amendment, should be a fundamental aspect of society but is often treated as revolutionary.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Out there. There's a lot of people that don't speak their mind. Do you know many artists that have reached out to me that are, like, fucking hippies, man? Like like, artists, like, musicians, comedians that thanked me for endorsing Trump because they can't do it. They said they want to, but they don't wanna be attacked.
They can't say it. They think the country is going in the wrong direction. They think that this control of social media by the government, which we would have had pretty much fully if it wasn't for Elon buying Twitter Mhmm. That this is a dangerous precedent to set, whether it's a right wing government or a left wing government. And that what you see that's happening in the UK where people are being imprisoned for tweets and Facebook posts.
Yeah. In in the in the UK is the part that's mind bending about it too. Mind bending. The whole thing is nuts, and it's a dangerous path that we were on. We were on that path.
Trump has vowed to have free speech become a very important part of what he's standing for, and that this censoring of information needs to stop, and that we need to stop all government influence in what people have to say. Yeah. Look. I I That alone. That's that's, that shouldn't be as revolutionary as it is.
I know. It should be a core tenant of what I mean, it's essentially the first amendment. You know what I
@j00ny369T - Johnny
Dude knows what's talking about. https://t.co/NGUjXwmFkS
Video Transcript AI Summary
A global shift in consciousness is underway, revealing government corruption. Article 61 in England allows citizens to reject government actions. The legal system is a man-made tool for control. After being arrested 27 times and having six cars crushed, I learned the legal language and questioned police authority due to their lack of legal training. I negotiated with judges, aware of their tactics. The government intrudes into every aspect of life, creating a web of control. Capitalism and healthcare shouldn't profit from illness. I envision a world filled with love and cooperation, not self-interest. If I had children, I wouldn't hand them over to a government that operates like a corporation.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Everyone's waking up. The whole planet's awakening. There's a huge shift of consciousness happening on the planet, whether you're aware of it or not. I started waking up realizing governments were corrupt. I fought the system.
Article 61 is a legitimate law in the Kingdom of England to say, if you're not happy with what the government's doing, you can just say, honest, not for me. Thanks. Is that real? That's a real thing. The legal system is a man made technology designed to control masses.
I got arrested 27 times in 3 years. I've got 6 cars crushed, and I went through the entire process, courtroom after courtroom after courtroom, learning the legal language. I always ask the police one question, do you have a degree in law? No. Then why would I listen to you?
Are you legally trained? No. Then how are you enforcing the law? Well, I started negotiating with judges. But they know what you're doing?
Yeah. But I also know what they're doing. So let's check my email. The government have insidiously invited themselves in into every aspect of our life and that's why it seems like we're in spider web, we can't get out of it. Capitalism and health care shouldn't be allowed to exist.
You shouldn't be allowed to capitalize on illness. That's horrible. And I wanna live on a planet with loving people. That's the truth. I wanna live on a planet where people aren't doing everything for themselves.
Let's get more uplifting, inspirational, and excited people about life in politics. If you had children, would you not sign a verse? Absolutely not. Why would I give my children my living, breathing, conscious, spiritual, intelligent being that I've co created with my partner, why would I then give it to a Crown Corporation government?
@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s
Just gonna leave this here. https://t.co/EKuJnf1dQX
Video Transcript AI Summary
Hello everyone. I wanted to address the election results. Will you accept them? I ignored his personal attacks like "nasty woman" and accusations of being a puppet. My focus was on the serious issue of Russia's confirmed cyberattacks against Americans. It's horrifying that, even after 17 intelligence agencies confirmed this, he still refuses to admit it's true. Our country is built on laws and accepting election outcomes, regardless of how heated the campaigns are. His claims of a rigged system whenever he loses – whether it's court cases, primaries, or even Emmy awards – are a pattern of deflecting blame.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I just wanted to come back and say hello. Some of you had been on the trail for the whole time. No more debates. No more naps. Will you accept the results of the election?
And how did
Speaker 1: how did you feel
Speaker 2: how did you feel when he said,
Speaker 3: you know, nasty woman, nasty woman, and, you're a puppet? And the issue of Vladimir Putin Yeah.
Speaker 0: I just don't I I just didn't pay any attention to that. I was very concerned that even now, after 17 intelligence agencies in our government for the whole time, no more debates? No more naps? Will you accept the results of the election? You know, it was horrifying what he said on the debate stage tonight.
You know, our country's been around for two hundred and forty years, and, you know, we are a country based on laws, and we've had hot contested elections going back to the very beginning. But one of our hallmarks has always been that we accept the outcomes of our elections. We do the best we can to have free and fair elections, which we do, and somebody wins and somebody loses. So what he said tonight is part of his whole effort to blame somebody else for his campaign and for where he stands in this election. As I said, whenever he is losing, he says the system whatever the system is, whether it's, you know, being in court about Trump University or Wisconsin primary or losing Emmy's, for goodness sakes.
He says that it's rigged against him. That's And how did
Speaker 1: you how did you feel
Speaker 2: how did you feel when he said,
Speaker 3: you know, nasty woman, nasty woman, and, you're a puppet, and he he was Vladimir Putin. Yeah.
Speaker 0: I just don't I I just didn't pay any attention to that. I was very concerned that even now, after 17 intelligence agencies in our government, both military and civilian, have confirmed that Russia has engaged in, cyberattacks against, Americans, that he refused to admit that it's true. And
@MmisterNobody - Mr. Nobody
https://t.co/aphYHPeHwi They always let you know....
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker works with news, business, entertainment, faith leaders, sports, governments, and activists globally to educate the public on LGBTQ issues and advance policy. A Gallup poll indicates over 20% of Gen Z in the US identify as LGBT. The speaker's own studies include the "Q" and expand the age range from 18 to 34.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Of the high commissioner for human rights. We work with the news, business, and entertainment, faith leaders, sports, governments, and individual activists from around the globe to ensure and educate public people on LGBTQ issues and move policy forward. In The US, the Gallup poll this year showed that over twenty percent of Gen Z are LGBT. We've been running studies ourselves that include the Q and showed LGBTQ, and we expand the age from 18 to 34. And you can see
@DavidJHarrisJr - David J Harris Jr
You can’t make this stuff up 🤣 https://t.co/FRgG80kTJC
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 claims most people in the country voted for Trump and that he won the popular vote. Speaker 1 disputes this, stating it was a slim majority of voters and that too few people voted. Speaker 0 says those who cared about issues voted for Trump to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse. Speaker 1 counters that lots of voters were purged from voter rolls before the election. Speaker 0 accuses Speaker 1 of election denial. Speaker 1 accuses the "narcissist in that building" of gaslighting.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Most people in this country voted for Trump.
Speaker 1: It's a lie. The slim majority of voters we are shamefully, were very few voters who showed up, but stop that bullshit. It is not a majority. It's not a lie.
Speaker 0: This bullshit is
Speaker 1: a lie.
Speaker 0: He actually won the popular vote.
Speaker 1: I am telling you, it was a slim majority of voters. Are you hearing me? Because I can sign a people on a vote. That is why you're not supposed to spread the bullshit that all most Americans are looking for this because
Speaker 0: Well, people care, then they vote.
Speaker 1: Enough because too few people voted. That's a disgraceful
Speaker 0: care about issues, then they vote.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well If you wanna
Speaker 0: The ones who cared voted for Trump to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse in government.
Speaker 1: Because lots of voters were purged from voter rolls before the election.
Speaker 0: This sounds familiar to me. It sounds like election denial. Is that what you guys are doing?
Speaker 1: Just stop.
Speaker 0: I'm just because I thought we weren't supposed to do that.
Speaker 1: Just stop.
Speaker 0: Yeah. So I I just I'm just you just told me that. You just said this. Right?
Speaker 1: You know, the damage that is being done by the narcissist in that building, the people who believe his bullshit. I know gaslighting when I see it and when I hear it. So just stop.
Speaker 0: Okay. Stop. You don't have to talk to me. I'm I'm actually on my way over here. So
@grizzledcheese - grilledcheese369
I dunno. https://t.co/TSJd9RFtPv
Video Transcript AI Summary
John Kerry's family were Jews in the Habsburg Empire in Czechoslovakia and were "house Jews" who advised kings. Teresa Heinz Kerry is from a Portuguese "house Jew" family that advised the Portuguese court. A painting of John Kerry's ancestor on his mother's side, from the Boeotium family Forbes, shows a resemblance. These are ancient bloodlines, and they know how to breed and keep the physical characteristics. Royal families have strict breeding rules, and popes had to give permission for royal family members to marry. There could be no relatives or family association for seven generations in order to marry.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: John Kerry's family were Jews in the Habsburg Empire in Czechoslovakia, and they were Huff Huffenjudah, house Jews. So they were very, very high in the court, and they advised the kings. Teresa Heinz Kerry is from a Portuguese Huffenjudah family, and her family advised the Portuguese court. And then I found a painting of John Kerry's ancestor on his mother's side. She was a Forbes, not Malcolm Forbes.
The Boeotium family Forbes. The Boeotium family. The Yale Yes. John Kerry looks exactly like him. So, these are ancient bloodlines that they keep.
They know how to breed, who to breed into the line, and how to keep the physical characteristics. And then I realized they have very, very strict breeding. And for instance, with the royal families, the popes had to always give permission for two members of a royal family to marry. For instance, especially if they were on the throne. And there could be no relatives or family association for seven generations in order to marry.
@OgWolf55 - Old School Classics aka Turk 🎸🎼🇺🇸
What he said. 👇 https://t.co/O9L4fpaKpt
Video Transcript AI Summary
The chaos in Los Angeles is not organic or random, but a calculated move by the leftist ruling class to protect census-based political control. House seats and electoral votes are based on the number of people counted in a state, including illegal aliens. The influx of over 10,000,000 people across the border into blue states like New York and California is about math, not compassion.
Mass deportations and people fleeing these blue states are threatening the math. For every 740,000 illegal aliens deported from a blue state, they lose one congressional seat in 2030. The DNC doesn't just lose votes, they lose control. Burning a city down like LA is a means to stop Trump. Media hysteria is used to stop deportations, and state-level obstruction protects population counts. Protests and riots are designed to bait the feds and flip the narrative. This is about control, power, and political survival, with the census as the real battlefield.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So do you wanna know what all this craziness in LA is really about? The riots, the organized protests, and the current chaos unfolding in the sanctuary city known as Los Angeles? Well, it's not organic, and it's definitely not random. It's actually a calculated move by the leftist ruling class to protect the one thing, the one thing that keeps them in power. Census based political control.
You see, house seats and electoral votes aren't based on how many citizens live in a state, just how many people are counted in that state, and that includes illegal aliens. They are counted as well. So when over 10,000,000 plus flood across the border into blue states like New York and California over the last four years, it's not about compassion, it's about math. More bodies equals more power in congress. But now, mass deportations and people fleeing these blue states are threatening the math.
For every 740,000 illegal aliens that are deported from a blue state is one congressional seat in 2030. And if that trend continues, the DNC just just doesn't lose votes. They lose control and likely for good. This is why they would burn a city down like LA to stop Trump. This is why we're seeing the panic.
Media hysteria to stop deportations. State level obstruction to protect population counts. Protests and riots like we're seeing in LA designed to bait the feds and flip the narrative. This was never about human rights or compassion. They don't care about you.
They don't care about your safety. They only care about control and power. It's political survival, and the census is the real battlefield. Let me know what you think in the comments and hit that
@TheGabriel72 - GABRIEL™ 🪽
Well.. his wife just ruined his career! https://t.co/3lMJUJSHs6
Video Transcript AI Summary
"I have the best news ever." The conversation playfully compares death rumors to real news, with lines like "What? Donald Trump died?" "Second best news." "The vice president died?" "Okay. Third best news." "That Elon Musk died?" "Okay. No. No. No. No." The speaker then clarifies, "Nobody died. My best friend's getting married." When asked which one, he reveals, "Which one is it? Taylor Swift. Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce got engaged." The exchange shifts from fictitious celebrity deaths to a real-life engagement involving Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I have the best news ever.
Speaker 1: What? Donald Trump died?
Speaker 0: Second best news.
Speaker 1: The vice president died?
Speaker 0: Okay. Third best news.
Speaker 1: That Elon Musk died?
Speaker 0: Okay. No. No. No. No.
Nobody died. My best friend's getting married.
Speaker 1: Which one is
Speaker 0: it? Taylor Swift. Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce got engaged.
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
Video Transcript AI Summary
During a discussion about government health care plans proposed in various forms, the host launches a show-of-hands question, asking attendees to raise their hands for visibility. The question is: Raise your hand if cover if your government plan would provide coverage for undocumented immigrants? After the show of hands, the host addresses Mayor Burujev directly with, "Okay. Let me start with you, mayor Burujev." He then asks, "Why?" The exchange centers on whether proposed government plans would extend coverage to undocumented immigrants, emphasizing audience input and prompting the mayor to explain the reasoning behind his plan’s stance on undocumented immigrant coverage.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A lot of you have been talking tonight about these government health care plans that you proposed in one form or another. This is a show of hands question and and hold them up for a moment so people can see. Raise your hand if cover if your government plan would provide coverage for undocumented immigrants? Okay. Let me start with you, mayor Burujev.
Why?
@elonmusk - Elon Musk
That’s what he said https://t.co/C3adAsScXQ
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 argues in favor of an amendment described as the most effective anti-fraud measure found, asserting that the Social Security card is already used across the country as identification. He contends that passing a law against using the Social Security card would be misleading, and he questions why the chairman and the distinguished minority member of the Social Security committee would oppose such a law. He emphasizes that everywhere people are asked for a Social Security card, and that proving one’s eligibility for employment often requires both a driver’s license and a Social Security card. He labels the amendment as anti-fraud and notes that the problem of illegal immigration and fraud is often explained to constituents as people coming here and obtaining jobs and benefits illegally.
The gentleman from Florida is credited with assembling what Speaker 0 calls the most effective anti-fraud measure found, described as not changing the actions of the government one bit. Despite its apparent effectiveness, there is substantial opposition to the amendment. Speaker 0 expresses concern that the bill, which began with good intentions, could become a political liability—something the public believes is a form of action without substance. He warns that whenever someone proposes a rational, small step to address fraud, opponents raise hypothetical concerns that derail progress. He stresses that addressing fraud in immigration requires support for the amendment, arguing that those who want to combat fraud have no choice but to back it.
In closing, Speaker 0 urges support for the amendment and reiterates the urgency of stopping fraud related to immigration. His time ends with the call to back the amendment.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Thank the gentleman. Salute him for his work on this rise in support of the amendment. First of all, Social Security card is used from one end of America to the other as an identification card right now. Who are we kidding? If you wanna pass a law and says it shouldn't be, I would ask the chairman and the distinguished minority member of the Social Security meeting the committee to pass that law.
But let's let's admit the truth. Everywhere people go, they're asked for a Social Security card. In fact, one way to prove you're a bonafide person who can have a job is to ask for a driver's license and a Social Security card. This is an anti fraud amendment. All the over where we go, people say, well, why can't you stop illegal immigrants or others from coming here?
And the number one answer we give our constituents is when they come here, they can get jobs, get benefits against the law because of fraud. And here, the gentleman from Florida has put together the most effective anti fraud measure we can find without it changing the actions of the government one bit, and we find all this opposition. Ladies and gentlemen of this chamber, what I worry about is that this bill, which started out with good intentions, whether you agree with it or disagree with it, is gonna end up being the same kind of thing that the public gets angry with us on. We say we're doing something and we do nothing. Because every time someone makes a rational and small proposal to get something done, people say, well, what about this hypothetical, that hypothetical, etcetera?
I urge support of this amendment. If you believe you wanna stop fraud in immigration, you have no choice but to support this amendment. Gentleman's time has expired.