TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @tomselliott
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Despite @HillaryClinton insisting she never met Epstein, Alan Dershowitz says Epstein is the one who conceived & structured the Clinton Global Initiative. https://t.co/YgmkzSw8FF
reSee.it AI Summary
I report Schumer threatens to send U.S. troops to fight Russia unless Republicans back a $100B Ukraine aid bill, warning: if we don’t aid Ukraine, Putin will walk all over Ukraine, we’ll lose the war, and we could be fighting in eastern Europe and a NATO ally in a few years.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
.@SenSchumer threatens to send U.S. troops to fight Russia unless Republicans agree to his $100 billion world-aid bill: "If we don’t aid Ukraine, Putin will be walk all over Ukraine, we will lose the war & we could be fighting in eastern Europe & a NATO ally in a few years. Americans won’t like that."
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 describes four months of arduous negotiations to produce a bipartisan bill, noting there were many times negotiations derailed and that he stayed on the phone at midnight to keep them moving. He argues the bill is crucial and a turning point for America, outlining the stakes across several flashpoints.
First, he asserts that if the U.S. does not aid Ukraine, Putin will walk over Ukraine, the war could be lost, and the U.S. could find itself fighting in Eastern Europe as a NATO ally in a few years, a scenario Americans would not like. Second, he says if the U.S. does not help Israel defend itself against Hamas, the perpetual war will continue. Third, he claims humanitarian aid to starving Palestinians in Gaza is essential to prevent hundreds of thousands from starving. Fourth, he mentions the border crisis, referencing statements from Speaker Johnson that it is chaos, and asserts legislative action is needed.
Speaker 1 credits Mitch McConnell for his contributions, but contrasts him with others, including Speaker Johnson, who he says are "scared to death of Donald Trump." He contends Trump has called for chaos and suggested that if he becomes president, Ukraine could be gone, the border could worsen, and war in the Middle East could escalate. He argues Trump’s stance is political rather than policy-driven and asserts that the majority of Republican senators recognize the bill as the right thing to do.
He emphasizes the bill as a compromise—describing it as something he does not like in full, nor does McConnell, but necessary to accomplish important outcomes in the Senate. He recalls bipartisan legislation from two years prior as proof such collaboration is possible. The core question he poses is whether senators will drown out the political noise from Trump and his allies and do the right thing for America.
Speaker 1 frames the bill as a turning point in American policy and history, asking whether history will look back and see that they rose to the occasion. He asserts that the majority of Republican senators understand the bill’s necessity, despite political headwinds, and he casts passage as essential to addressing Ukraine, Israel, Gaza humanitarian needs, and border stability. Speaker 1 ends by reiterating that history is watching their decisions at this moment.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You've said that you worked very closely with leader McConnell on this. This bill, now that we see what's in it, seems to be as bipartisan as it gets. Why wouldn't this why wouldn't both sides really want this to go through?
Speaker 1: Well, it's a great question, Mika. Look. It took a long time, four months of arduous negotiations. They fell off the tracks a whole bunch of times. I had to be on the phone even at midnight saying we gotta keep going.
Why? We're the turning point in America. This bill is crucial, and history will look back on it and say, did America fail itself? Why is it crucial? Well, if we don't aid, Ukraine, Putin will be walk all over Ukraine.
We will lose the war, and we could be fighting in Eastern Europe and a NATO ally in a few years. Americans won't like that. If we don't help Israel defend itself against Hamas, that perpetual war will go on and on and on. If we don't help humanitarian aid to the starving Palestinians in Gaza, hundreds of thousands could starve. And the border, everyone has said it's chaos.
A speaker you just saw speaker Johnson. He said it's chaos. We have to do something legislative a few months ago. But what has happened in answer your to your question. So this is crucial for America.
It's a turning point. History is gonna look over our shoulders and say, we rise to the occasion? To his credit, Mitch McConnell did. But too many Republicans, including speaker Johnson, are just scared to death of Donald Trump. Donald Trump has said he wants chaos.
Donald Trump has said, well, wait till I become president. That'll take at least a year. Ukraine could be gone. The border will get much worse. War in The Middle East will get worse, maybe bring bringing bringing us into it.
He's doing it all for political reasons. And let me just say, will senators the crucial question, the $64,000 question, the majority of Republican senators know this bill is the right thing to do. It's a compromise. I don't like everything in it, neither does McConnell, but it's a compromise. That's the only way you get things important done in the senate.
We proved that two years ago in our bipartisan legislation. And will the senators drown out the political noise from Trump and his minions and do the right thing for America? It's a crucial question. History will is looking down on every one of us right now.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Jimmy Kimmel: "If you want to vote for Trump, vote late. Vote very late. Do your voting on Thursday or maybe Friday." https://t.co/Il1Ch6S0eE
Video Transcript AI Summary
"I don't know, if you guys know about this, but we have an election coming up on I feel pretty relaxed about it." "it's important to remember that cannabis is legal in our state." "You have to vote you you can vote early, vote early. If you can't vote early, vote on time. If you wanna vote for Trump, vote late. Vote very late. Do your voting on Thursday or maybe Friday." "This will be my third time voting against Donald Trump." "According to a new poll from CNN, only 30% of American voters think if he loses, Trump will concede, which what would give them that idea?" "Of course, Trump won't concede if he loses his election." "He still hasn't conceded the last election." "And already, he's claiming Pennsylvania is"
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Give him a call. Wrestle that mop bucket out of his hands. I don't know, if you guys know about this, but we have an election coming up on I feel pretty relaxed about it. I've really been enjoying the week. It's in times like these, it's important to remember that cannabis is legal in our state.
You have to vote you you can vote early, vote early. If you can't vote early, vote on time. If you wanna vote for Trump, vote late. Vote very late. Do your voting on Thursday or maybe Friday.
This will be my third time voting against Donald Trump. Fifth, if you count the two times, he was nominated for an Emmy for a reality show host. According to a new poll from CNN, only 30% of American voters think if he loses, Trump will concede, which what would give them that idea? What? Of course, Trump won't concede if he loses his election.
He still hasn't conceded the last election. And already, he's claiming Pennsylvania is
reSee.it AI Summary
I've noticed a concerning trend among some Democrats advocating for increased violence against conservatives. Chris Murphy described the current situation as a war, urging drastic measures to save the country. Ali Velshi has called for dirty fighting and encouraged young progressives to confront "fascist" Republicans. There are also troubling comments from Tim Walz and Elizabeth Warren that seem to sympathize with violent impulses. Meanwhile, media figures like Taylor Lorenz glamorize violence, and Anand writes about the need for more confrontational leadership.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Thread: Democrats have recently been agitating for increased violence against conservatives. 1) @ChrisMurphyCT: "We're in a war right now ... you have to be willing to do whatever is necessary in order to save the country.” https://t.co/VQSB6hCemE
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: Our only opportunity, our only chance to save our democracy is to fight fire with fire right now.
Speaker 0: So, yeah, do I bemoan the fact that, you know, we're now blowing up norms? Yes.
Speaker 0: So you have to be willing to do whatever is necessary in order to save the country.
Speaker 1: When I hear that, I wonder if Is there enough people that believe that same thing? And until you get more to believe that, that may be why the Democrats aren't rowing in the same direction yet.
Speaker 0: You can't get people to believe it if you don't act like it.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Our only opportunity, our only chance to save our democracy is to fight fire with fire right now. So, yeah, do I bemoan the fact that, you know, we're now blowing up norms? Yes. But literally for two seconds because if you spend any more than that being sorry for the fact that the old world doesn't exist, then your democracy is gone. Like we're in a we're we're in a war right now to save this country and So you have to be willing to do whatever is necessary in order to save the country.
Speaker 1: When I hear that, I wonder if Is there enough people that believe that same thing? And until you get more to believe that, that that may be why the Democrats aren't rowing in the same direction yet.
Speaker 0: You can't get people to believe it if you don't act like it.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
2) Ali Velshi uses his MSNBC platform to stir up political violence, telling Democratic leaders it’s time to “fight with both hands” & “fight a bit dirty” https://t.co/1d4yIfN9bg
Video Transcript AI Summary
Yet the leadership of the Democratic Party cannot seem to find the front of the battle line. Americans are begging for more. American history has given us leaders who met the existential threats of their time head on. Lincoln did not preserve the union by managing the crisis. FDR did not confront fascism abroad or at home by splitting the difference. So if you are a political leader in this country and you are not prepared to fight with both hands, you're not prepared to make good trouble, then perhaps you should step aside and make space for those who will. They broke the China. This is not a left versus right fight inside the Democratic Party. The choice before us is simply democracy versus authoritarianism. And where is the party is not a rhetorical question.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Yet the leadership of the Democratic Party cannot seem to find the front of the battle line. Political leaders who think their job is to keep the government open and cut deals and make strongly worded statements to the media and on the floor of congress are missing this moment entirely. Americans are begging for more. Begging them to get off the mat and get back into the fight. So if you are a political leader in this country and you are not prepared to fight with both hands, you're not prepared to make good trouble, then perhaps you should step aside and make space for those who will.
For those who will show us that they can fight a bit dirty if that's what the defense of democracy takes. Because right now that is what the defense of democracy demands. American history has given us leaders who met the existential threats of their time head on. Lincoln did not preserve the union by managing the crisis. FDR did not confront fascism abroad or at home by splitting the difference.
They fought. They broke the China. This is not a left versus right fight inside the Democratic Party. It's not whether Democrats should tack to the center or lean progressive. The choice before us is simply democracy versus authoritarianism.
And where is the party is not a rhetorical question.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
3) Tim Walz tells fans to remain hopeful that Trump will die soon https://t.co/lyrTcqcAIe
Video Transcript AI Summary
You get up in the morning and you doom scroll through things. And although I will say this, the last few days you woke up thinking there might be news. There will be news sometime. Just so you know, there will be news.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You get up in the morning and you doom scroll through things. And although I will say this, the last few days you woke up thinking there might be news. Just saying. Just saying. There will be news sometime.
Just so you know, there will be news.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
4) Ali Velshi again uses his MSNBC platform to promote violence, this time inviting Tenn. State Rep. Justin Jones (@brotherjones_) to encourage young progressives to get more confrontational against "fascist" Republicans: “If we’re serious about the threat of fascism, that means that there’s nothing off the table” https://t.co/uMtWEoomPU
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@brotherjones_ 5) After the assassination of the UnitedHealth CEO, Elizabeth Warren sympathized w/ the impulse to murder: "You can only push people so far. And then they start to take matters into their own hands.” https://t.co/dwNektVIfv
Video Transcript AI Summary
We've been talking a lot about this Luigi Mangione, the case, you know, the case about the UnitedHealthcare CEO. People are very angry at UnitedHealthcare. I think for good reason, denying care, and the whole system and we were just talking about previous block. You know, killing a CEO is not the way you change. You have to regulate that.
Right? And so we've got attempts to try to rein in some of these big businesses.
The consumer financial protection bureau, which was your creation.
The Trump administration wants to get rid of it.
That is like protecting people from, like, credit card fraud.
What happens if that goes away?
So look.
Terrible for individuals, but stop and think overall about the social contract.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We've been talking a lot about this Luigi Mangione, the case, you know, the case about the UnitedHealthcare CEO. People are very angry at UnitedHealthcare. I think for good reason, denying care, and the whole system and we were just talking about previous block. You know, killing a CEO is not the way you change. You have to regulate that.
Right? And so we've got attempts to try to rein in some of these big businesses. The consumer financial protection bureau, which was your creation. The Trump administration wants to get rid of it. That is like protecting people from, like, credit card fraud.
Yeah.
Speaker 1: What happens if that goes away? So look. Terrible for individuals, but stop and think overall about the social contract. You know, part of the deal in how we've kept this this democracy, this economy, this country on a fairly steady path for more than two hundred years has been that those at the top pay a little more in taxes, pay a little less rich than they otherwise might be, and everybody else at least gets chance. Yeah.
And what happens when you turn this into, the billionaires run it all is they get the opportunity to squeeze every last penny.
Speaker 0: Yeah. And
Speaker 1: look, we'll say it over and over. Violence is never the answer. This guy gets a trial who's allegedly killed the CEO of UnitedHealth. But you can only push people so far. And then they start to take matters into their own hands.
Yeah.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@brotherjones_ 6) When Colbert recently reported on rumors that Trump had died, he feigned surprise that his far-left audience was angry Trump wasn't already dead https://t.co/yh7ImuEcd5
Video Transcript AI Summary
I came back. When I came back in the office, I was shocked to learn that this weekend, the biggest story was frenzied social media rumors speculating whether Donald Trump had died. For the record, Donald Trump is very much alive. Okay? And no. We like our presidents alive. Donald Trump is very much alive, and this whole crazy rumor started simply because Trump had zero events on his schedule Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday. And one of the only signs that he might still be around was music in the rose garden, which the White House confirmed was the president's music, which I gotta say is not the strongest proof of life. Yes, nurse. I do see that flat line, but the patient is clearly alive because his iPhone is playing Papa Loves Mambo.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I came back. When I came back in the office, I was shocked to learn that this weekend, the biggest story was frenzied social media rumors speculating whether Donald Trump had died. For the record, Donald Trump is very much alive. Okay? And no.
We like our presidents alive. Donald Trump is very much alive, and this whole crazy rumor started simply because Trump had zero events on his schedule Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday. And one of the only signs that he might still be around was music in the rose garden, which the White House confirmed was the president's music, which I gotta say is not the strongest proof of life. Yes, nurse. I do see that flat line, but the patient is clearly alive because his iPhone is playing Papa Loves Mambo.
Papa Loves Mambo. Anyway, but because because
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
7) CNN's @donie O'Sullivan interviewed mental patient Taylor Lorenz to glamorize the UnitedHealth CEO murderer: “Here’s this man who, who’s a revolutionary, who’s famous, who’s handsome, who’s young, who’s smart — he’s a person that seems like a morally good man, which is hard to find” https://t.co/1eO13OJkLC
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@brotherjones_ @donie 8) Two days ago, MSNBC's @AnandWrites attacked Democratic leadership for being insufficiently confrontational: "There are people who know how to fight; get out of their damn way!" https://t.co/CzoQQOTBw9
Video Transcript AI Summary
"Culture of niceties, of not making mistakes, triple checking things, of being careful." "Right? That's what people in the Harvard faculty lounge do." "But winning political fights against an authoritarian takeover is not that." "A government shutdown is a perfect example of something that could absolutely transform the dynamic of this country and actually create a real opposition and galvanize the public against Trump, and it could fail, and it could make people hate you." "And you should absolutely take that risk in your politics." "We sit at this table every day." "If you want people not to think anything badly of you, no one should sit at this table." "To to try anything, to try to have any impact on anything means taking risks and people whose lodestar is risk aversion." "You're just not adequate to this moment." "If you are not up to this moment, there is no shame in golfing." "There's no shame in becoming the lobbyist you've always dreamed of being." "But get out of the way." "There are people who know how to fight. Get out of their damn ways."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Culture of niceties, of not making mistakes, triple checking things, of being careful. Right? That's what people in the Harvard faculty lounge do. And there's a place for that. Mhmm.
But winning political fights against an authoritarian takeover is not that. And so, yeah, a government shutdown is a perfect example of something that could absolutely transform the dynamic of this country and actually create a real opposition and galvanize the public against Trump, and it could fail, and it could make people hate you. And you should absolutely take that risk in your politics. We sit at this table every day. If you want people not to think anything badly of you, no one should sit at this table.
Right? To to try anything, to try to have any impact on anything means taking risks and people whose lodestar is risk aversion. If you've listened to any major democratic leader give a speech in the last year, you have understood people whose lodestar is risk aversion. You're just not adequate to this moment. And I say, I know these people.
Some of them are my friends. If you are not up to this moment, there is no shame in golfing. It is a wonderful sport. There's no shame in going to that law firm. There's no shame in becoming the lobbyist you've always dreamed of being.
But get out of the way. There are people who know how to fight. Get out of their damn ways.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@brotherjones_ @donie @AnandWrites (Need to pause for a few hours while I attend a school event for my son, who incidentally just a couple of months ago became a huge fan of Charlie Kirk)
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Megyn Kelly breaks down reporting the death of Charlie Kirk https://t.co/YKS617I37m
Video Transcript AI Summary
Two speakers discuss a report about Charlie's death. They relay the claim: They're reporting that Charlie has died, that he's dead at the age of 31, which he would have to be if that video was real. They consider implications of the video, suggesting that the age would align with the video if it were authentic. They then exchange skepticism about survival: There's no way he survived that. The only good thing is it had to have happened quickly. The first speaker concurs with uncertainty, concluding with: Right. Right. The brief exchange emphasizes belief in the reported death tied to the video's alleged authenticity and an assumption about rapid events.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: They're reporting that Charlie has died, that he's dead at the age of 31, which he would have to be if that video was real.
Speaker 1: There's no way he survived that. The only good thing is it had to have happened quickly.
Speaker 0: Right. Right.
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared several posts highlighting statements from various political figures regarding alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Notable mentions include Pete Strzok's assertion that the president is compromised, Speaker Pelosi's claims of cold hard evidence, and Rep. Nadler's comments on the clarity of collusion. Additionally, former CIA Director John Brennan emphasized the need for investigation into potential cooperation. I also included a supercut featuring Rep. Adam Schiff discussing the evidence he claims to have.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Former fed @PeteStrzok, Sept. 17, 2020: "I believe that the president is compromised by the Russians" https://t.co/enCJds5T3I
Video Transcript AI Summary
Discussion centers on a claim from a book that "the president is compromised by the Russians," citing "the way he talked to Lavrov and Kislyag in the Oval Office" and "the whole issue of Comey's firing, what he said to Lester Holt," with the assertion that "there was no proof established by the Mueller investigation." Speaker 1 counters: "that's not quite true, Andrea. I think the Mueller investigation said that they were unable to prove to a legal standard or bring criminal charges that something had occurred. But they point throughout the report to a variety of deep counterintelligence concerns." He cites "the recent bipartisan senate intelligence committee report, almost a thousand pages from a Republican led senate committee laying out all these counterintelligence concerns," and says "the data is too great to ignore." He concludes: "So, yes, I believe that the president is compromised by the Russians," asserting it "comes from financial entanglements that he is fighting to become known, that the Russians know about and can hold over him," and "from the way they're able to play into his ego and his strange fascination and coziness with dictators and authoritarians around the world." Speaker 0 adds: "Now I remember talking in 2017, the 2017, to a form"
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And your book is called compromised. You believe president Trump is compromised by the Russians. You make the point of the way he talked to Lavrov and Kislyag in the Oval Office and the whole issue of Comey's firing, what he said to Lester Holt. But there was no proof established by the Mueller investigation.
Speaker 1: Well, that's not quite true, Andrea. I think the Mueller investigation said that they were unable to prove to a legal standard or bring criminal charges that something had occurred. But they point throughout the report to a variety of deep counterintelligence concerns. When you add that to the recent bipartisan senate intelligence committee report, almost a thousand pages from a Republican led senate committee laying out all these counterintelligence concerns, there's the data is too great to ignore. So, yes, I believe that the president is compromised by the Russians, and I think that takes a lot of form.
I think it comes through financial entanglements that he is fighting to become known, that the Russians know about and can hold over him. I also think it, comes from the way they're able to play into his ego and his strange fascination and coziness with dictators and authoritarians around the world.
Speaker 0: Now I remember talking in 2017, the 2017, to a form
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@petestrzok .@SpeakerPelosi, July 13, 2017: "We saw cold hard evidence of Trump-Russia collusion" https://t.co/5pkNh6mN8V
Video Transcript AI Summary
This week, we saw cold hard evidence of the Trump campaign, indeed, the Trump family eagerly intending to collude possibly with Russia, a hostile foreign power to influence American elections. In the month, again, as we celebrate the courage of our founders, Republicans in congress have become enablers of the Trump Russia assault on our democracy. After these latest revelations, it's becoming clear we have suffered a desecration of our democracy not seen since Watergate. Speaker Ryan must allow a vote on an outside independent kit mission to get to the bottom of the Trump campaign's role in Russia's assault on our democracy and prevent Putin from ever doing it again immediately outside independent commission. It's not just about what happened in the past. It's to prevent it from happening again.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This week, we saw cold hard evidence of the Trump campaign, indeed, the Trump family eagerly intending to collude possibly with Russia, a hostile foreign power to influence American elections. In the month, again, as we celebrate the courage of our founders, Republicans in congress have become enablers of the Trump Russia assault on our democracy. After these latest revelations, it's becoming clear we have suffered a desecration of our democracy not seen since Watergate. Speaker Ryan must allow a vote on an outside independent kit mission to get to the bottom of the Trump campaign's role in Russia's assault on our democracy and prevent Putin from ever doing it again immediately outside independent commission. It's not just about what happened in the past.
It's to prevent it from happening again.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@petestrzok @SpeakerPelosi .@RepJerryNadler, Nov. 30, 2018: "It’s become very clear that the Trump campaign colluded with Russians in trying to subvert the election.” https://t.co/JsGJKNl8Kg
Video Transcript AI Summary
Revelations involving Michael Cohen raise serious questions about the president's legal exposure. The speaker says the president is nervous as time runs out to 'hold himself above the law.' The claim that 'the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians in trying to subvert the election' is highlighted, with Manafort and Trump Jr. meeting Russian agents who offered dirt on Hillary as part of the Russian government's attempt to help them, and 'it's clear that the campaign colluded.' Two developments are noted: 'the president's personal attorney lied to congress, but about the fact that he was personally involved on behalf of the president in arranging business deals with the Russians during the campaign.' And 'the president's campaign manager was involved with communicating with WikiLeaks during the 2016, at the time, you know, well before they served as a conduit to release the the emails that that the Russians'
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: That the Michael What are the serious questions that the Michael Cohen revelations reveal? Well, the president let me the president is right to be nervous right now because it appears that the time is running out when he can hold himself above the law. And obviously the developments help with that. The the significance of of the developments this week is that one of the central focuses of of of of the investigation is we have known. It's become very clear that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians in trying to subvert the election.
The question has been How is that How can you say that so definitively that they've colluded? Well, the fact that the the fact that Manafort and Trump Junior met with Russian agents who told them that they wanted to give them dirt on Hillary as part of the Russian government's attempt to help them, and that they said fine. I mean, it's it's clear that the campaign colluded. The and and there's a lot of evidence of that. The question is, was the president involved?
Did he know about it? And we we learned two things this week. One, the president's personal attorney lied to congress, but about the fact that he was personally involved on behalf of the president in arranging business deals with the Russians during the campaign. And secondly, that the president's campaign manager was involved with communicating with WikiLeaks during the 2016, at the time, you know, well before they served as a conduit to release the the emails that that the Russians
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@petestrzok @SpeakerPelosi @RepJerryNadler Nadler, Feb. 16, 2018: "Proof" of Russian election meddling shows this "attack" was the "equivalent" of "Pearl Harbor" https://t.co/zypO0tIVv3
Video Transcript AI Summary
"This is absolute proof of what we knew all along and what the president has denied, namely that we were attacked."
"This is a very serious attack against The United States by a hostile foreign power, an attack against our election process, our our entire governing process."
"That it we know that the attack is continuing and that our intelligence agencies tell us that it's going to certainly continue through the next election."
"the president and the republicans in in the house for that matter refuse refuse to do anything about, protecting us from an attack."
"Imagine if FDR, had denied that the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor and and didn't react."
"That's the equivalent."
"They didn't kill anyone, but they're destroying our our country."
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: My reaction to the news is that this is absolute proof of what we knew all along and what the president has denied, namely that we were attacked. This is a very serious attack against The United States by a hostile foreign power, an attack against our election process, our our entire governing process. That it it we know that the attack is continuing and that our intelligence agencies tell us that it's going to certainly continue through the next election. And the president and the republicans in in the house for that matter refuse refuse to do anything about, protecting us from an attack. Imagine if FDR, had denied that the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor and and didn't react.
That's the equivalent. Well, it's a bit of a different thing. I mean No. It's not. They didn't kill anyone.
They didn't kill anyone, but they're destroying our our country. You really think it's on you think it's on par? Not in the amount of violence, but I think on the in the seriousness, it is very much on par. We This country exists to have a democratic system with a small d. That's what the country's all about, and this is an attempt to destroy that.
And the president's core the presidential oath is to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution. This president is refusing to do that. You've heard people ask questions about saying
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@petestrzok @SpeakerPelosi @RepJerryNadler Former CIA director @JohnBrennan, May 23, 2017: "I saw information intelligence that was worthy of investigation by the Bureau to determine whether or not such cooperation or collusion was taking place.” https://t.co/9Wb22PJduJ
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: Did you see evidence of collusion, coordination, conspiracy between Donald Trump and Russian state actors?
Speaker 1: I saw information intelligence that was worthy of investigation by the bureau to determine whether or not such cooperation of conclusion was taking place.
Speaker 0: That doesn't help us a lot. What was the nature of the information?
Speaker 1: As I said, mister Gowdy, I think this committee now has access to the type of information that I'm alluding to here. It's classified and I'm happy to talk about it in classified session.
Speaker 0: And that would have been directly between the candidate and Russian state actors?
Speaker 1: That's not what I said. I'm not going to talk about any individual's But
Speaker 0: that was my question.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Did you see evidence of collusion, coordination, conspiracy between Donald Trump and Russian state actors?
Speaker 1: I saw information intelligence that was worthy of investigation by the bureau to determine whether or not such cooperation of conclusion was taking place.
Speaker 0: That doesn't help us a lot. What was the nature of the information?
Speaker 1: As I said, mister Gowdy, I think this committee now has access to the type of information that I'm alluding to here. It's classified and I'm happy to talk about it in classified session.
Speaker 0: And that would have been directly between the candidate and Russian state actors?
Speaker 1: That's not what I said. I'm not going to talk about any individual's But
Speaker 0: that was my question.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! Rep. @AdamSchiff: You're just going to have to trust me about the "evidence" I have proving Trump colluded w/ Russia https://t.co/h6lDX7qqKB
Video Transcript AI Summary
I can tell you that the case is more than that. And I can't go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now. there is evidence that is not circumstantial and and is very much worthy of investigation. I I think the claims that there was no evidence collusion have long since fallen away. Christopher Steele may have found out even before our own intelligence agencies that the Russians were in fact aiming to help Donald Trump in the election. That has now been borne out by ample evidence. I think you see the most palpable evidence of a collusion in terms of violating the Logan Act. The evidence is quite overwhelming on this. But look, you can see evidence in plain sight, on the issue of collusion. The evidence is in plain sight.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: And I
Speaker 1: think But you admit it's a circum all you have right now is a circumstantial
Speaker 0: case? Actually, no, Chuck. I I can tell you that the case is more than that. And I can't go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now. So again, I think
Speaker 1: direct evidence of collusion?
Speaker 0: I don't want to go into specifics, but I will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial and and is very much worthy of investigation. So
Speaker 2: Is there has been a report from CNN that Wednesday night that there that the FBI was looking into collusion with with the Russians and the Trump campaign in terms of spreading information about Hillary Clinton's campaign. Is do you have any information to back that up?
Speaker 0: I'm not sure that I can comment on that. I can't say that I think that the investigation that the director talked about at our Monday hearing is justified. I think there is a sufficient basis for that investigation not only to have been initiated but for it to continue at this point. And I don't have a concern with other members characterizing the evidence as they have and many of them have said they think there's no evidence of collusion. My disagreement with those members is I don't think that's accurate.
Okay. And I feel an obligation to say so. So they can call it a fishing expedition. They can call it a witch hunt. It's all in a line message with the White House.
But nonetheless, real evidence is coming forward that just can't be ignored. So we do know a lot more. I I think the claims that there was no evidence collusion have long since fallen away. The question now is what is the the quantum of proof here? Christopher Steele may have found out even before our own intelligence agencies that the Russians were in fact aiming to help Donald Trump in the election.
That has now been borne out by ample evidence. I think you see the most palpable evidence of a collusion in terms of violating the Logan Act. Look, I don't think you can seriously argue that the Russians weren't trying to help Trump and hurt Clinton, as well as so discord in The United States. The evidence is quite overwhelming on this. It was the early conclusion of the intelligence community, but that's only been furthered by all of the evidence we've seen in our investigation.
And
Speaker 3: Put out statement and a report basically saying that they found no evidence of collusion between the Trump team, and the Russian government. Have Democrats found any evidence of collusion?
Speaker 0: Yes. We have.
Speaker 4: Can you agree that there has been no evidence of collusion coordination or conspiracy that has been presented thus far between the Trump campaign and Russia?
Speaker 0: No. I don't agree with that at all. I think there's plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight, that it is very possible that the best evidence, is yet to come. But look, you can see evidence in plain sight, on the issue of collusion. George, there's ample evidence of collusion, of the campaign and its
Speaker 4: The senate intel chairman also said, at this point, no evidence of collusion at this point. Have you seen do you have direct evidence of collusion with Russia?
Speaker 0: Well, I think there is direct evidence. While there is abundant evidence of collusion, but as I've said along, there's plenty of evidence of collusion, and you've said on this show and others that there is direct evidence of collusion. Were you wrong about that now that you've seen the summary of the Tesla Council's report? No. Because they were saying no collusion.
Speaker 4: Your evidence? You've been saying that on TV for years.
Speaker 0: Well, I will tell you, and we and I've also been saying, as you know, that the evidence is in plain sight.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@AdamSchiff *Final supercut comes via my friend @StephenFlurry at the Trumpet Daily radio show (@theTrumpet_com) — #FF
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 3 Reality Is a Conspiracy https://t.co/sW6h6WzAhX
Video Transcript AI Summary
Conspiracy theories are considered distractions during public health crises. A video alleging masks don't work was removed from social media for spreading misinformation. One study found mask mandates were an "utter failure," citing a British review of 78 randomized studies. Economists from Johns Hopkins reported lockdowns had low effectiveness on mortality and warned against their future use.
Some claim COVID-19 fatality numbers are inflated, but others deny this. The LA County health director acknowledged a possible 20% overcount of COVID deaths. COVID-19 may be listed as a contributing cause of death or as an incidental finding.
The theory that COVID-19 originated in a Wuhan lab has been called a conspiracy. Initially, intelligence agencies debunked this, but now the Energy Department has joined the FBI in concluding that COVID began with a lab leak in China. The Wuhan Institute of Virology, a Chinese lab that worked on coronaviruses, is considered a large coincidence by some.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You will always have conspiracy theories when you have, very challenging public health crises. They are nothing but distractions.
Speaker 1: President retweeting a conspiracy video alleging that masks do not work. The video was then removed by Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube because it violated rules against spreading misinformation.
Speaker 2: The second most powerful man in the world revealing himself in this video as a mask truther.
Speaker 3: A major study finding masks made no difference in stopping the spread. Mask mandates, it turns out, were an utter failure. It's not me saying it, but the New York Times. The mask mandates did nothing. Will any lessons be learned?
Brett Stevens cites a comprehensive British review of 78 randomized studies with more than 600,000 participants.
Speaker 4: So that wasn't scientifically fair. Effective. The the mass guidance was
Speaker 5: not It wasn't science based, and the six feet of distancing has was arbitrary.
Speaker 4: All around the country, over the weekend, protests popped up. These morons and Internet conspiracy theories demanding an immediate end to lockdowns. And let's be honest, people. This is both insane and counter productive. Because the more you gather in groups, the longer the lockdown will have to go on.
Did lockdowns during COVID prevent severe effects from COVID nineteen? Did it help in the arc of the pandemic? Economists from Johns Hopkins say no. The report warned against using lockdowns as a pandemic measure in the future because of the low effectiveness on mortality and the consequences for the economy.
Speaker 6: The the lockdowns in terms of their effects on mortality, we measured it against mortality, were were basically irrelevant. They destroyed people. They literally killed people. When you shut down medical care, in spring of twenty twenty alone, there were six hundred and fifty thousand cancer chemotherapy patients in this country alone. Half of them didn't get their chemo because they were afraid.
They were told it was dangerous to go to a medical facility.
Speaker 7: We weighed in on a theory that's been floating around that perhaps the number of fatalities related COVID nineteen is being inflated because people are actually dying of other things. Can what's your read on that theory?
Speaker 0: You know, Savannah, there is absolutely no evidence that that's the case at all. You know, it it I think it falls under the category of something that's very unfortunate, these conspiracy theories that we hear about.
Speaker 8: Even though wackos, Trump wackos are are are doing conspiracy theories saying those numbers are padded.
Speaker 0: What should we say to people who conspiracy theorize about an overcount of the deaths?
Speaker 2: Follow-up now to my conversation with LA County health director Barbara Ferrer who last week acknowledged the county may be overcounting COVID deaths by as much as twenty percent.
Speaker 9: Could it be a secondary contributing cause? So for example, somebody with kidney disease, COVID then pushes them over the edge to have kidney failure. That's COVID as a contributing cause. And then the third is COVID as an incidental finding. So somebody coming in with a gunshot wound or a heart attack, and they happen to test positive.
Speaker 4: Now part of the conspiracy theory is that the disease started in a laboratory in Wuhan.
Speaker 10: Just weeks ago, doctor Anthony Fauci rejected the conspiracy that coronavirus was man made in a lab in Wuhan, China. And yet this week, Donald Trump is still pushing the debunked bunkum.
Speaker 4: A lot of people on the right love that phrase escape from
Speaker 6: the lab because it sounds like something from Marvel movie or comic book.
Speaker 11: Everyone who believes in the conspiracy is saying that it came out of a lab in Wuhan Wuhan rather than, through food at a market.
Speaker 12: And, he continued to push a conspiracy theory that has already been debunked by our intelligence community. This whole notion that the coronavirus was developed in a Chinese lab. That has been debunked.
Speaker 13: There's a report today that another intelligence arm of the US government, this is inside our energy department, has joined the FBI in concluding that COVID began with a lab leak in China.
Speaker 12: Is that I don't know who to trust. Yeah. Right? I certainly don't trust reporters Mhmm. Because reporters treated this initially as if it was nothing more than a crazy unhinged conspiracy theory.
Speaker 14: Yeah.
Speaker 12: So who do you trust? Right? You can't trust the legacy media outlets because that was their narrative.
Speaker 11: It came out of the city that has a Wuhan Institute of Virology,
Speaker 8: a Chinese lab that worked on coronaviruses. And that
Speaker 15: is an awfully large coincidence. And and that's what I've thought
Speaker 14: throughout that that was an awfully large coincidence.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 5 Rules Are for the Lab Rats https://t.co/m1iJeJrLlF
Video Transcript AI Summary
Governor Newsom faced fallout for attending a birthday dinner at the French Laundry, despite urging outdoor Thanksgiving dinners. Questions arose about his claim that the dinner was outdoors.
Mayor Lori Lightfoot was seen at a hair salon after adamantly telling people to stay home. She said she takes personal hygiene seriously and felt she needed a haircut. Nancy Pelosi was also filmed at a closed hair salon, calling it a setup and demanding an apology from the salon.
Mayor Bill de Blasio traveled to a gym in Brooklyn after telling New Yorkers to stay inside, stating he needs exercise to stay healthy. A UK leader was criticized for attending a party during a strict lockdown and admitted to falling short of the rules.
Justin Trudeau visited his family at their lake house after urging others to stay home. A former president was seen dancing without a mask after tweeting about pandemic safety.
San Francisco Mayor London Breed was seen without a mask at a nightclub, stating she was "feeling the spirit." Austin Mayor Steve Adler apologized for traveling to Mexico while urging Austinites to stay home. Governor Whitmer faced backlash for dining with a large group, violating state health orders, and for visiting her father in Florida after advising against spring break travel.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Tonight, while governor Newsom is telling all of us to have Thanksgiving dinner outside, he's facing some new fallout for that fancy birthday dinner party he went to at the French Laundry.
Speaker 1: It was in Napa, which was in the orange status, relatively loose compared to some other counties. It was to be an outdoor, restaurant.
Speaker 2: Raising some new questions about the governor's claims that the dinner was outdoors as he has repeatedly claimed.
Speaker 1: And I let my guard down, and I apologize for it.
Speaker 3: Mayor Lori Lightfoot has been adamant that people stay home and socially distance for weeks.
Speaker 4: I can't make this any clearer. You absolutely must stay at home. We will cite you, and if we need to, we will arrest you, and we will take you to jail. Period. There should
Speaker 5: be nothing unambiguous about that.
Speaker 6: I guess you would all imagine that a lot of people were surprised when she made a trip to the hair salon.
Speaker 7: I take my personal hygiene very seriously. As I said, I felt like I needed to, have a haircut.
Speaker 8: House speaker Nancy Pelosi under fire tonight after security footage showed her inside a San Francisco hair salon that's closed to the general public.
Speaker 9: It was a setup, so I
Speaker 10: take responsibility for falling for a setup, and that's all I'm going to say on that. I think that they'll that this salon owes me an apology.
Speaker 11: Most immediately after telling the rest of New York City to stay inside, for example, mayor Bill de Blasio loaded up his SUV with government bodyguards and headed for the gym across town in Brooklyn.
Speaker 12: I need exercise, and again, I have to stay healthy so I can make the decisions for the people of the city.
Speaker 3: The leader is embroiled in controversy for attending a party at 10 Dow Ning Street in May of twenty twenty. At the time, the country was under a strict government imposed lockdown.
Speaker 13: That I myself fell short when it came to observing the very rules which the government I lead had introduced to protect the public.
Speaker 1: Let's put into practice what it truly means to love our neighbors as ourselves by making sacrifices to protect their health. Let's stay home for them.
Speaker 11: Not long after recording the video you just saw, Trudeau left the capital and traveled all the way to Quebec to visit his family at their lake house, just like you'd wanna do on Easter, if you're allowed to do that, but you're not allowed. So stop complaining.
Speaker 1: Former president tweeted it might be Labor Day weekend, but let's all remember that we're still in the middle of a pandemic. Wear a mask, practice social distancing, and follow the experts. It'll save lives. Former president can be seen in pictures hitting the dance floor without a mask. We're told that he danced all night and had a great time.
Speaker 14: San Francisco mayor London Breed was defiant today when asked about video of her without a mask at a nightclub earlier this week.
Speaker 15: I got up and started dancing because I was feeling the spirit, and I wasn't thinking about a mask.
Speaker 16: I was thinking about having a good time.
Speaker 12: Austin mayor Steve Adler is apologizing tonight for traveling to Mexico with a group of family and friends last month despite urging Austinites to stay home.
Speaker 4: As he issued this message on the night of November 9.
Speaker 14: And then we need to, you know, stay home if you can.
Speaker 4: He was doing it from a timeshare in Cabo San Lucas.
Speaker 14: Sorry I took that trip. It was a lapse in judgment.
Speaker 17: Governor Whitmer is facing some backlash after a picture surfaced of her dining at a restaurant with at least 12 other people at a table, a violation of the state health department's epidemic order.
Speaker 8: This, you know, it was an an honest mistake, and I I have apologized for it.
Speaker 2: Well, Devin, you know, governor spent a lot of time asking Michiganders not to go on spring break, particularly in Florida. It took the governor's office couple of months to confirm it, but she indeed flew from Lansing to West Palm Beach in a private jet on March 12, spent the weekend with her father, headed back to Lansing on March 15. Again and again,
Speaker 11: they do the very things they punish us for doing. When they're caught, they acknowledge no shame. They are entirely lacking in self awareness. They have no idea how absurd they are.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! Remember when the corporate media assured us @ElonMusk was destroying Twitter/X? https://t.co/GyV5fStbBA
Video Transcript AI Summary
Elon Musk is criticized for turning X (formerly Twitter) into a "cesspool" or "shithole" of hate speech, disinformation, and extremist content, particularly against women. Musk is described as a joke, dangerously weird, dumb, and crazy, with comparisons made to a Bond villain. Some suggest he is a narcissist with a thin skin, blaming Jews for the platform's destruction.
Concerns are raised about the platform's decline, potential bankruptcy, and mass exodus of users. Musk is accused of spreading lies that justify violence, contaminating the platform, and being a far-right activist using X as a political project.
Some believe Musk is spreading misinformation, impacting society negatively, and making people dumb and hateful. Accusations are made that he is a pawn of Vladimir Putin and the most important pro-Russian propagandist in American politics. Advertisers are urged to withdraw from X, and action from Congress is anticipated to clean up the app.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Does he know about running a digital advertising business?
Speaker 1: Musk could cast a long shadow for years to come over the company
Speaker 2: for worst personnel
Speaker 1: Musk in a quest to propagate lies. Propaganda.
Speaker 3: Twitter x is just such a cesspool now.
Speaker 0: A cesspool. It's a cesspool of of ugly, vile stuff, particularly against women.
Speaker 4: Twitter right now is a cesspool. I mean, go on there, you send out a tweet, next thing you know, you have the far right white nationalist attacking you. Twitter is a cesspool
Speaker 5: or x, I guess it's called now.
Speaker 6: It is a cesspool. Everything that goes on, it's a circus cesspool.
Speaker 4: Twitter is a cesspit. Pretty toxic stuff.
Speaker 7: Cesspool, just bad information, lies, hate speech.
Speaker 4: Elon Musk has turned x, formerly known as Twitter, into a cesspool of hate speech and extremist incitement.
Speaker 3: It's a shithole. Right? Elon, fuck that shithole. There's better engagement on threads.
Speaker 0: Instagram is a really terrific product, and Twitter is awful. I know sodomy when I see it.
Speaker 2: Because Elon Musk is I mean, he's the worst. Please
Speaker 4: off. Is that why he's often compared to a Bond villain?
Speaker 0: The guy's the guy's a joke. Right? He really is a joke.
Speaker 4: Now Musk is just one of the dangerously weird and extreme
Speaker 0: cranks. Astonished at how dumb Elon Musk is.
Speaker 8: And he is as crazy as he seems on Twitter.
Speaker 0: This dude tripped over his dick and became successful.
Speaker 8: His transgender daughter disowned him.
Speaker 9: Elon being Donald Trump's running mate and jumping around like a on stage.
Speaker 1: Elon Musk is the softest skinned human I see.
Speaker 2: The world's richest freeloader evidently has a very thin skin.
Speaker 10: Elon Musk has come around on who to blame for the absolute destruction of the platform formerly known as Twitter, thanks to his decisions, to blaming the Jews.
Speaker 0: I cannot say that someone like Elon Musk is an intellectual. Obviously, palpably, visibly deranged, snorting ketamine and and tweeting at all hours of the the day and night. Maybe he just wants to be able to verbally abuse his critics with impunity.
Speaker 2: A microphone for his own boundless narcissism?
Speaker 6: Definition of narcissism?
Speaker 1: Yeah. Elon Musk's picture. I think that might be the problem.
Speaker 4: Of him sort of believing his own hype.
Speaker 11: Stop making it about Elon Musk and make it about Twitter.
Speaker 0: Elon, that you killed the company isn't the most responsible thing here to just shut the whole thing down. Twitter is not a bit better business today. In fact, it's a it's a worse business.
Speaker 12: Twitter is really in an ever quickening death spiral. They're going to have a hard time just keeping the lights on over at Twitter given this mass exodus.
Speaker 1: This were what is the end or was the end of Twitter.
Speaker 0: Twitter may have 300 plus million people, but those are 300 plus million people who are dissatisfied.
Speaker 1: Petsuate misinformation and disinformation potentially terrifying.
Speaker 9: He doesn't find this stuff. He's at the end of a conveyor belt of spreading these kinds of lies that justify violence. That's the point of this, to condone, minimize, and and and, put contextualize violence so it can be used as a normal tool of politics.
Speaker 12: Should be working to clean it up, not really contaminating it himself.
Speaker 0: Elon Musk, who wants to give Ukraine Yeah. To Russia and Taiwan to China and will now be the arbiter of free speech on Twitter.
Speaker 4: I mean, speech, absolutist nonsense. To read
Speaker 13: a pamphlet on the first amendment, or we need to send them one of those pocket constitutions to explain what the first amendment is.
Speaker 11: Obviously, x and Twitter will not, will welcome that propaganda because it does it on a daily basis. But it'll be interesting to see if the other companies that are run by adults the other companies that are run by adults
Speaker 7: $44,000,000,000 if just to ruin the platform.
Speaker 0: 44,000,000,000? I went and paid $44. Go invent things and get out of the gutter.
Speaker 7: Politicians and journalists aren't on it. Like, what's the use of it?
Speaker 14: I have more plans tonight for what I'm gonna do, like, for my kid's dinner than he did when he walked into a $44,000,000,000 company.
Speaker 4: Bought Twitter for $44,000,000,000 and just destroyed more than half its value in past two years while turning it into a clearinghouse for far right disinformation conspiracy theory. Burning the business to the ground has much lower engagement than before. Likely Likely
Speaker 0: to go bankrupt. Elon Musk destroyed Twitter.
Speaker 8: Twitter is down 80% since he bought it. Why should failed businessmen run the government?
Speaker 14: Elon Musk's millions and his conspiracy theory falsehoods.
Speaker 7: Twitter has a yellow journalism problem. It is a home for people to spread disinformation, racial epithets, lots of nasty stuff.
Speaker 5: Twitter or X has transformed into a place where where disinformation is spread. It's a source for evil and misinformation. Elon Musk himself abusing.
Speaker 2: Forms of abuse by Elon Musk himself.
Speaker 4: He's created a propaganda arm in Twitter, and then he's consuming it.
Speaker 0: Into this hellscape of hate
Speaker 4: and antisemitism. Wealthiest man in the world is spreading conspiracy theories that are somewhat, at a minimum, a bit homophobic.
Speaker 0: Bought Twitter, turned it into x, and made it into this echo chamber that now is extremely useful to the right.
Speaker 1: Be using it to sow the seeds of distrust, to generate misinformation and very dangerous disinformation.
Speaker 4: I've seen straight up Nazi propaganda with 60,000 likes. I've seen him interacting with the most vile racist.
Speaker 0: Elon Musk, I have argued in the Atlantic, is a far right activist at this point. X has become a far right political project.
Speaker 1: Elon Musk and the hate speech has just really affected our society, put a lot of people frankly in harm. And Elon Musk's misinformation machine, which is Twitter, has a huge impact on the psyche.
Speaker 13: Twitter's making people dumb and hateful.
Speaker 1: Talk about Elon Musk and Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 8: Is he on team Russia, or is he on team USA?
Speaker 1: His loyalties changed right around the time he started communicating with the Kremlin.
Speaker 12: He is a pawn of Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 15: Elon is without doubt the most important pro Russian propagandist in American politics today. Elon has been pumping out this unbelievably rancid pro Russian propaganda for the last six months, nine months, twelve months without any kind of penalty.
Speaker 1: Putin's type, Elon Musk.
Speaker 15: Putin has a type. He likes narcissists and egomaniacs, and he's been using the richest man in the world to do his bidding.
Speaker 0: I encourage, in fact,
Speaker 4: I urge advertisers like IBM, which has done so, to withdraw from x.
Speaker 13: What does congress wanna do about it?
Speaker 0: We'll be taking action
Speaker 4: with colleagues this week to clean up his app.
Speaker 6: The unfortunate demise of Twitter, of eggs, whatever you wanna call it. Yeah. It's just straight on disinformation. I deleted it from my phone.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Trump: "I'm really unhappy with Israel [for violating the ceasefire]"; both sides "don't know what the fuck they're doing" https://t.co/fC7OAMyrRo
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker believes Iran is still committed to peace, despite violations by both sides. They state that Israel violated the peace deal immediately by dropping a large number of bombs. The speaker expresses unhappiness with Israel's actions, particularly responding too quickly after a deal was made. They are also unhappy with Iran. The speaker mentions a rocket that didn't land, possibly fired by mistake, and expresses frustration with both countries, stating they have been fighting for so long that they don't know what they're doing.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Is that Iran still committing to the peace? Yeah. I do. They violated it, but Israel violated it too. Are you questioning if Israel is committed?
Israel, as soon as we made the deal, they came out and they dropped a load of bombs, the likes of which I've never seen before. The biggest load that we've seen. I'm not happy with Israel. You know, when when I say, okay, now you have twelve hours, you don't go out in the first hour and just drop everything you have on them. So I'm not happy with them.
I'm not happy with Iran either. But I'm really unhappy if Israel's going out this morning because the one rocket that didn't land, that was shot, perhaps by mistake, that didn't land, I'm not happy about that. You know what? We have we basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the fuck they're doing. Do you understand that?
Do you have do have any response?
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! Before profiting off the media conspiracy to hide Biden's decline, @jaketapper helped run it https://t.co/j5m7h4JVA3
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker expresses discomfort with comments mocking President Biden's stutter, calling it a cognitive decline. Biden embraces his stutter, while Trump mocks it. The speaker questions Biden's age, mental fitness, and ability to lead, stating that those supporting Biden are leading the country into disaster.
The speaker claims Biden's memory isn't great, referencing a Wall Street Journal article, noting the outrage is not understood. The Wall Street Journal article, owned by News Corp, run by the Murdochs, is based on claims from Republicans, with Kevin McCarthy the only one going on record. The speaker denies hearing concerns from anyone who has met with President Biden about him seeming slower. The speaker mentions claims that Russians are trying to make the public not trust election integrity and claims that Joe Biden has dementia.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: How do you think it makes little kids with stutters feel when they see you make a comment like that? It's very clearly a cognitive decline. Okay. That's what I'm referring to. It makes me uncomfortable.
You have you are no I have you have I can't it's so amazing. It's so amazing to me that that try and figure out an answer. A cognitive decline. Biden embraces his stutter talking about it while Trump mocks it, exaggerates it, belittles it. He's sharp physically.
I mean, mentally. Yeah. I think the question is physically. Right? Right.
More so? Right. Right. And the guy who's his chief opponent is only three or four years younger than Exactly. I mean, you have questioned president Biden's age, mental fitness, ability to lead.
Of those supporting Biden, you said, quote, shame on all of you pretending everything is okay. You're leading us and him into a disaster. Do you worry that you damaged him at all? I don't doubt that that you got hugs and and and handshakes behind closed doors today and maybe even publicly, some of them because they like you personally. But I've heard a lot of really nasty stuff about you from your Democratic colleagues.
Sure. I mean, just like, what is he thinking, exercising narcissism. I mean, false claims to the Wall Street Journal about president Biden's mental fitness and acuity. He's 81, and his memory, you know, it doesn't seem great. It's not horrible, but I I don't understand the outrage.
Quote, behind closed doors, Biden shows signs of slipping, unquote. The Wall Street Journal is owned by News Corp, which is run by the Murdochs. Beyond the headline, there is some critical nuance here. The article is mostly based with former speaker Kevin McCarthy the only one going on the record. They do note in the article that most of the criticism comes from Republicans.
Have you heard any concerns from anyone who has met with president Biden about him seeing seeming a little slower? No. The Russians Russians are trying to do to make us and the public not trust the our election integrity. Joe Biden has dimension, all this stuff.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
NBC San Antonio investigates nonprofit that got its $18 million/month contract ended by DOGE; finds empty facility & revenue of $1.1 billion in 2022 https://t.co/8nOrD4AmEw
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, has targeted a San Antonio nonprofit, alleging its $215 million annual contract is canceled. DOGE claims the Department of Health and Human Services terminated Endeavors' $18 million monthly contract for an empty migrant family housing facility in Pecos, Texas. Homeland Security also reposted DOGE's statement.
Endeavors responded that they maintained the Pecos Shelter's operational readiness, and the federal government determined facility use, so any claims of corruption or mismanagement are baseless. DOGE also alleges Endeavors received the contract in 2021 after a former ICE employee joined the nonprofit. Endeavors' revenue increased from $50 million to $658 million in 2021, peaking at $1.1 billion in 2022.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE has targeted a nonprofit based here in San Antonio, saying its contract for $215,000,000 a year is canceled. News four San Antonio IT Waste Watch reporter Jay Avila has this story live from the content center.
Speaker 1: Mandy, in a post on X, Doge said the Department of Health and Human Services had terminated a contract paying family endeavors eighteen million a month to operate an empty facility in West Texas. The organization is also known as Endeavors, and you may have seen its administrative headquarters and wellness center on Desavala Road, where it has a cluster of buildings and storefronts. Doge focused on an overflow housing facility for migrant families Endeavors operates in Pecos, Texas, which Doge says has been sitting empty, while Endeavors has been receiving the $18,000,000 per month. Homeland Security reposted Doge's ex post, tagging US attorney Ed Martin with the words, please comment from the organization. They responded late this afternoon by email.
Endeavors Endeavors was responsible for maintaining operational readiness at the Pecos Shelter, ensuring the ability to scale from cold status, operationally ready but not actively serving children, to full use of 3,000 beds as needed. Decisions regarding facility use and migrant sheltering locations were made by the federal government, not Endeavors. Any claims of corruption or mismanagement are baseless. Doge also claims Endeavors received its HHS contract in 2021 after a former ICE employee and Biden transition team member joined the nonprofit. Endeavors government disclosure forms show its revenues shot up in 2021 from 50,000,000 to 658,000,000, reaching a peak of 1,100,000,000.0 in 2022.
For the News four I team waste watch, I'm Jay Avila. Hey.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! Joyless Ann Reid, how did she ever make it this long? https://t.co/diqlWbiDL3
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! Corporate media: Obviously Biden would never pardon Hunter https://t.co/gJRhASCAUs
Video Transcript AI Summary
President Biden has committed to respecting the legal process regarding his son, stating he will not pardon him if convicted. This decision highlights a stark contrast with Donald Trump, who has criticized the justice system after his own conviction. Biden's stance emphasizes his belief in the rule of law, asserting that no one is above it, including his family. He has made it clear that he will accept the jury's verdict, reinforcing the integrity of the judicial system. This moment underscores the difference in how each leader approaches accountability and justice, with Biden prioritizing the law over personal ties.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Presidential promise to put the law before a family.
Speaker 1: I said I abide by the jury decision. I will do that, and I will not pardon him.
Speaker 0: Letting the world know that he will not wipe away the decision of 12 of his son's peers was asked directly, and he has said he wouldn't pardon, his son if he gets convicted.
Speaker 2: Let's wait and see what happens if he loses.
Speaker 0: Yeah. But, I mean, but he said it.
Speaker 3: He's gonna get pardoned
Speaker 2: by his dad. There's no question about that. The president
Speaker 4: has ruled out pardoning
Speaker 5: his son.
Speaker 6: Major commitment from the president, accepting the outcome of
Speaker 7: the trial and also pledging not to pardon his son.
Speaker 8: So the challenge for him is really to continue to live up to his values when it was really personal, and he did that today.
Speaker 7: It seems like a pretty normal straightforward answer, but it it it takes new weight when we see what Trump is saying about the outcome of his trial. We're hearing other Republicans who say they don't accept the jury's verdict here in New York.
Speaker 4: The contrast is profound. To sit there and say, well, I'm not gonna intervene in the legal process, and I wouldn't pardon my son. One side, Democrats and Joe Biden protecting the justice system, and on the other, Republicans and Trump protecting Trump.
Speaker 9: A current president of the United States has so much respect for the law that he has said he would not pardon his son. I mean, what Yes. You know? Again, it's all about the contrast.
Speaker 3: President Biden saying I will respect whatever this jury decides versus Donald Trump after he was convicted on 34 accounts, saying the entire system is rigged against him.
Speaker 10: Their latest attack has been that Joe Biden has politicized and weaponized the DOJ. Right? That was the whole argument around Donald Trump's conviction. And this week, of course, Hunter Biden was found guilty, and Joe Biden has very clearly said he would not pardon his son, he would not commit his sentence. How stark is this difference?
I mean, how can Republicans keep making this argument now that that no. Now that Joe Biden has really put it out there. Where's Hunter? And he stood there in a courtroom, flanked by his family, and he's accepted his sentence.
Speaker 11: He is not pardoning, his son, which he could do. These are federal charges.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 12: He is
Speaker 11: not doing that. He is not doing it because he is living what it means to have a rule of law in this country. And then it is it is in I mean, if you wanna know if he believes it, you you could actually see what is happening with his own son.
Speaker 13: The president, Anderson, has been really clear, that he is going to accept the outcome of the trial no matter what happens.
Speaker 14: So Joe Biden's gotten asked about, you know, talking about law and order. He's gotten asked if he would pardon his son. He has said no. On the other side, you've got Donald Trump who has said that he will pardon the January 6th insurrectionists. They're not even his sons.
They're just sons of bitches.
Speaker 11: Washington said, I am not running again because he understood the self restraint was absolutely essential to this country. So you don't have a king. He did not pardon his son. He did not order the Department of Justice to to say don't prosecute my son. So impressive.
Speaker 8: Could have, ordered, the Justice Department to halt the prosecution of Hunter Biden according to this court. Everyone understands he's a decent man.
Speaker 15: I think Joe Biden has a chance here to stand up for the rule of law, to say the rule the law is the law no matter who it is, no matter if it's Trump or Biden.
Speaker 8: And remember, part of
Speaker 15: Trumpism's dangerousness is that it tears down institutions, important institutions of our democracy. So there is an opportunity here for Biden to say, you know, the jury found him guilty. This is how it's supposed to work, period. Paragraph. End of story.
Speaker 1: Have you ruled out a pardon for your son? Yes.
Speaker 8: As I said last week, I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal. You know, the president said he won't touch it. He's not he said he's not gonna pardon his son. And it seems that mayor Garland let it go through. How can the justice department be weaponized against Trump when all of that is happening?
Speaker 16: But Democrats stand for the rule of law. Remember law and order. You know, and and we've been saying that Trump's not above the law, Hunter Biden's not above the law, no one is above the law. And it is amazing to see the stark contrast between how Democrats handled today and how Republicans handled this whole thing over the last couple of weeks.
Speaker 17: For years, these conservatives have been crowing about a politicized justice department, Biden politicizing it and so on. What happened today? The justice department convicted the president's own son, his only living son. You heard the president say he would accept the outcome of the case. I know no other word for that, but presidential.
Mhmm.
Speaker 5: He even went so far as to say he wouldn't pardon his son.
Speaker 1: That's how much respect he has for the system. President has said, that he will not pardon his son. What what did you think of that?
Speaker 18: I thought it was extraordinary. I mean, it was a it was a moment of, just moral clarity on the part of, Joe Biden and couldn't have been in, you know, starker contrast to the way Donald Trump has handled his own, conviction.
Speaker 11: He
Speaker 12: could still pardon him. He said he won't do that. All of that conduct, given that it's his son, is is kind of we should pause for a moment and think about how unbelievable that is. In a 1000000 years, if the shoe run the other and Donald Trump was facing, the prospect of his son being prosecuted by a Biden me, if I had been held over. A Biden holdover or Obama holdover prosecutor, not in a 1000000, 1000000 years would that have happened.
So, you know, some of the people on the right, the people who support Donald Trump, are trying to cast this as some clever ops program. Yeah.
Speaker 19: Hunter Biden was found guilty by a jury of his peers just like Donald Trump because this is our justice system at work. The divide here is stunning, and it's a great reminder that one political party remains committed to the rule of law and the other doesn't.
Speaker 20: Joe Biden has already proven he's willing to stand up
Speaker 1: for the rule of law in a way that we could all never imagine Donald
Speaker 21: Trump to do. Pretty emphatic over the last few days that he does not plan to pardon or commute his son. But that really is him saying is I don't plan to use the powers of the office, the powers of the presidency to provide private relief for my family. In a sense, he's staking out a pretty bright line between being, as he says, a president and a dad. And that's not just an emotional expression.
He's, in effect, saying, I don't think that I should. I don't have a right even if it's legal, and god knows it must be tempting
Speaker 8: Yeah.
Speaker 21: To use this power in a way that is not available to so many other Americans facing similar kinds of struggles. There's a kind of old school sort of flinty core to his conception of how you are to be in the system, how you are to be as a person, a a moral person, and, ultimately, how to contend with questions of power. One of the things that anybody who spends time around Joe Biden comes to know is that he's had this long running focus on how much he is bothered by abuses of power.
Speaker 10: He'll
Speaker 3: accept the verdict no matter what it is and that he's ruled out pardoning his own son. Contrast that from what we hear from Donald Trump. And, again, we have to underline, in no uncertain terms, president Biden saying, I will accept the outcome. I will just accept what the jury decides here. That's the way our legal system works.
And, no, I will not pardon my own son if he is convicted.
Speaker 11: And the contrast is so clear in terms of decency and principle and transactional guidances in terms of how you view the world.
Speaker 22: It is still a good day for the United States that this conviction is a prime example of the way our judicial system is supposed to work. Even president Biden saying in a statement that he would respect the outcome of this case. Those words so completely contrast with what his opponent, now a convicted felon himself, continues to say about the US courts.
Speaker 2: The contrast to how Trump has behaved, how Trump has treated the rule of law. This was a a a good day for the system. Good day for, sort of a of of sort of America as an example of how the rule of law should work.
Speaker 22: President Biden told David Muir that he would absolutely accept the verdict, whatever it was, and that he would not pardon his son regardless. And today, he said the same thing in a statement. Meanwhile, you know, Donald Trump comes out and calls justice system completely unfair. What do you think of that contrast?
Speaker 8: There's the contrast of 2 different men.
Speaker 13: Here is Joe Biden, who has lost a son who served honorably in the armed forces, who now has basically said, I will sacrifice my surviving son's future. I will allow him to serve a prison term if that's what's determined because that is what the rule of law demands.
Speaker 23: The president announces that he will not pardon his son. Do you think ordinary Americans give enough thought to how this system is a miracle, a gift to this country, a gift to democracy?
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! Corporate media: FEMA would never politicize emergency response https://t.co/uGDi8coEPS
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Despite obstructing relief efforts, @FEMA’s Criswell says criticizing her agency is “dangerous”: “It has a tremendous impact on the comfort level of our own employees … When you have this dangerous rhetoric like you’re hearing, it creates fear in our own employees” https://t.co/ProJObu7fc
Video Transcript AI Summary
Dangerous rhetoric online is impacting the recovery effort. One user suggested a militia should go against FEMA, gaining over a million views. This rhetoric impacts the comfort level of FEMA employees and demoralizes first responders, FEMA staff, volunteers, and the private sector working to help people. It creates fear in FEMA employees, hindering the ability to get resources to those who need them.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So much is going viral online as well. One user suggested yesterday that a militia should go against FEMA, got more than half a 1000000 views. What kind of impact has this had on the recovery effort?
Speaker 1: It has a tremendous impact on the comfort level of our own employees to be able to go out there, but it's also demoralizing to all of the first responders that have been out there in their communities helping people, FEMA staff, volunteers, the private sector that are working side by side with local officials to go out and help people. I need to make sure I can get the resources to where they're needed. And when you have this dangerous rhetoric like you're hearing, it creates fear in our own employees, and we need to make sure we're getting help to the people who need it.
reSee.it AI Summary
During a town hall in New Hampshire, I faced a skeptical voter who questioned my campaign's viability. When she claimed to have experience with caucuses, I responded, "No you haven’t. You’re a lying dog-faced pony soldier." This remark drew attention, and the voter later expressed disappointment in my momentum for a national election. My spokesperson clarified that my comment was meant as a joke, noting that many found it humorous, and emphasized my reputation as a strong retail politician.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
After a New Hampshire voter asks @JoeBiden why they should trust he can turn his campaign around, he asks if she’s ever been to a caucus before; when she says yes, Biden snaps: "No you haven’t. You’re a lying dog-faced pony soldier."
Video Transcript AI Summary
Madison, an econ student, asks the candidate, who she says has the greatest advantage due to being the vice president and not burdened by impeachment trials, to explain his performance in Iowa and why voters should believe he can win the national election. The candidate responds by asking if she has ever been to a caucus. He then calls her a "lying dog face pony soldier," saying she has to be honest. He states he will be honest with her.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hi. My name is Madison, and I'm an econ student at Mercer University. And oh, awesome. So I'm gonna be a little bit mean for a second. Okay?
So, so you're arguably the candidate with greatest advantage in this race. You've been the vice president. You weren't burdened down by the impeachment trials. So or and the participation. So how do you explain the performance in Iowa, and why should the voters believe that you can win the national election?
Speaker 1: It's a good question. Number 1, I was a democratic caucus. You ever been to a caucus? No. You haven't.
You're a lying dog face pony soldier. You said you are, but you're now you gotta be honest. I'm gonna be honest with you. It was
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@JoeBiden @jonward11 Biden Calls Skeptical New Hampshire Voter ‘a Lying, Dog-Faced Pony Soldier’ https://news.grabien.com/story-biden-calls-skeptical-new-hampshire-voter-lying-dog-faced-po
Biden Calls Skeptical New Hampshire Voter ‘a Lying, Dog-Faced Pony Soldier’
The dust-up came after the voter asked whether he can rebound from Iowa
news.grabien.com
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@JoeBiden @jonward11 Fox News’ @GriffJenkins spoke to the 21-year-old voter Biden called “a dog-faced pony soldier,” Madison Moore, who had this to say: "A lot of what he’s saying seems to be ... very sad … I don’t think he has the momentum to carry this to a national election." https://t.co/RXoofBterU
Video Transcript AI Summary
A Mercer University student named Madison Moore questioned Joe Biden on how he planned to compete nationally after a poor showing in Iowa. Moore stated that Biden's message seemed "very sad," focusing on "deaths and cancer and people losing their jobs." She added that Biden didn't seem "very solution oriented" and lacked the momentum to carry his campaign to a national election.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The campaign says that Joe Biden's actually used the line before, but it doesn't make it any more relatable to a 21 year old college student from Mercer University named Madison Moore. She had asked the vice president how he planned to compete nationally after such a poor showing in Iowa. Here was her response.
Speaker 1: A lot of what he's saying seems to be really and very sad. We we have heard a lot about deaths and cancer and people losing their jobs. And to me, he doesn't really seem very solution oriented, and I don't think he has the momentum to carry this to a national election.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@JoeBiden @jonward11 @GriffJenkins Biden spox @SymoneDSanders on his calling a voter a “lying dog-faced pony soldier”: “It was a joke. Many people in the room laughed. … There is not a better retail politician in America than Joe Biden.” At another town hall, "his empathy emanated from him ..." https://t.co/bHuSJX7QYK
Video Transcript AI Summary
Symone Sanders addressed an offense taken by a voter regarding a comment made by Joe Biden, clarifying it was a joke from a John Wayne movie that many laughed at. She stated that Biden is a great retail politician with an ability to connect with people, referencing his empathy displayed at a town hall.
Sanders emphasized the need to beat Donald Trump, who was in Manchester that night, and argued that Biden is the candidate to do so. She claimed the country needs a commander in chief ready on day one, someone good for both top and down-ballot races, a proven fighter who has won hard fights. Sanders asserted that Biden has been running two races: the Democratic primary and a race against Donald Trump.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: She was really offended by that, she told The Washington Post. What did he mean by using that epithet about her? I'm not sure I quite understood it, but is that the way to talk to voters?
Speaker 1: Well, frankly, it was a joke. Many people in the room laughed. I many people in the room laughed, and it was a line that he has actually used frequently, which is from a John Wayne movie. But look, Andrea. I think the reality here is there's not a better retail politician in America than Joe Biden.
I think, his his ability to connect with folks was frankly on on display last Wednesday at a town hall on another network. His empathy emanated from him. People were drawn in as he talked about his struggles, with the stutter as a young child and how he helps young children now and other individuals and keeps in touch with them who are struggling with the stuttering to overcome. So look, we truly believe, that our time in New Hampshire has frankly been well spent. We have invested resources there.
Joe Biden, again, is still there today. But again, Andrea, as we look at the larger picture about this race, this Democratic nomination, Donald Trump is in Manchester tonight. And the reality is Donald Trump is gonna be really hard to beat. Anyone that saw him on the State of the Union should should realize that. But also, people should also understand after watching the State of the Union that we have to beat Donald Trump.
And we need a commander in chief that is ready to go in on day 1. We need someone that not only good for the top of the ticket, but down ballot races. And we need somebody who's a proven fighter, who has been in hard fights, who's won, who has taken some hits and kept on moving. And on every single front, that's Joe Biden. Since the beginning of this race, Joe Biden has been running 2 races, I would argue.
He's run-in this Democratic primary, but he's also been running a race against Donald Trump.
Speaker 0: Symone Sanders in South Carolina. Thank you very much as we
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! See if you can spot the difference in coverage between the Vance & Walz rollouts https://t.co/LITf19yFUg
Video Transcript AI Summary
Tim Walz embodies the quintessential Midwestern dad—clean-cut, relatable, and moderate. He’s seen as a happy warrior, engaging with people in a folksy manner and bringing optimism to the political scene. His charm and humor resonate with voters, making him a refreshing contrast to more extreme figures like JD Vance, who is perceived as angry and out of touch. Walz's down-to-earth persona reflects small-town values, showcasing his commitment to community and service. He’s the dependable figure who helps others, whether fixing cars or supporting democracy. As the campaign progresses, he’s affectionately referred to as "Coach," embodying hope and resilience for his supporters.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Midwestern dad, like, super clean-cut vibe. Everybody likes Right? Woah. So plain spoken and relatable. As moderate and independent as it comes.
Pretty moderate democrat.
Speaker 1: I always knew him as a moderate. One of the most, moderate Very moderate record.
Speaker 2: The new
Speaker 0: moderate. I think this is the new moderate.
Speaker 1: Far from progressive.
Speaker 0: He's right down the middle.
Speaker 1: He's not just an old white man. Tim Wolf beats America. You know? Talks like a regular person.
Speaker 0: Tim Wolf is the opposite of weird.
Speaker 1: Waltz is basically younger Joe Biden. Regular old Joe out there.
Speaker 2: Populist approach to fear on
Speaker 3: the, republican side and the happy populism and the happy populism that Jim Walls is on the ticket on the democratic side.
Speaker 1: Walls is a kind of happy warrior.
Speaker 0: Happy warriors. Happy warriors.
Speaker 4: He was certainly the happy warrior last night
Speaker 5: and and seemed to be the happy warrior last night.
Speaker 1: A happy warrior. Folksy backs story. Gonna be very happy warriors. There is a new happy warrior. Following the kind of happy warrior mode.
Happy warrior. Happy warrior mentality. Wicked sense of humor.
Speaker 0: Look how happy the pig looks. That's good.
Speaker 1: And JD Vance is weird, extreme, and angry.
Speaker 0: Utter humorlessness. The humorlessness and pompousness.
Speaker 4: Hard to believe that JD Vance could be any more extreme.
Speaker 1: It's like a freak show of bros. They have JD Vance, dark and ugly beneath the dignity of most politicians.
Speaker 5: JD Vance.
Speaker 1: JD is at the far extreme. The most extreme. One of the most extreme. We need to recognize that the danger.
Speaker 0: Angry and mean and dark. Cat lady hating side kick JD Vance. This guy is really weird, y'all.
Speaker 1: Everybody in America knows a JD Vance, but we stay away from him because he's weird. Anger, chaos.
Speaker 0: Hang dog, ex husband.
Speaker 1: He was able to reach all the way down to a JD Vance. Hope, optimism, joy.
Speaker 0: Salt of the Earth, vibe, the quintessential midwestern dad. Tim Walz keeps winning hot dish contests apparently. There's some folksy charms. Tim Walz is so funny that if he's good at this, he will release a recipe for a hot dish.
Speaker 1: All of his time on the ground, you know, fixing f one fifties. Outside of a Norman Rockwell painting. Right? He's small town America incarnate.
Speaker 0: Midwest, your uncle, your dad. I have
Speaker 1: not been this happy in years. He's the guy who is always there to help you, whether it's changing your oil, whether it's fixing a lawnmower, or whether it's helping to our democracy. It feels so good to have hope. And I'm gonna call him the coach from now until election day. Coach.
Speaker 0: Coach. Tim Walz, the plain spoken fun uncle who will defend the people he loves. Proud, the resilient, the hardworking, patriotic. Ice fishes. He's a hunter.
He does, butter carving. You know, he he is a rural person.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
As the Grabien data below demonstrates, CNN & MSNBC are the locomotives pulling the “Vance is weird” talking point. In the last two days they’ve broadcast that DNC line more than 150 times between the two networks. https://t.co/OsAJhXaKYt
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! With midterms' prospects sagging, Dems preach violence https://t.co/ayxJPICcon
Video Transcript AI Summary
We are at war with evil extremists in the MAGA movement who seek to overthrow the government. They pose a threat to democracy and resort to violence when they don't get their way. This fascist movement is willing to incite civil war and use violent tactics to achieve their political goals. The dangerous rhetoric and actions of these individuals must be confronted.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This means war. That is where we are. We are at war with these people. These folks are evil. There is an ultra right MAGA, contention in this country that wants to overthrow the US government.
Speaker 1: It is a danger to our democracy. It is a danger to our way of life.
Speaker 0: The MAGA movement is a threat. The extremists that we're dealing with every single day, we've gotta kill and confront that that movement.
Speaker 2: Clearly, you know,
Speaker 3: this is a, literally call to arms.
Speaker 1: Obviously, Republicans, I think, are the biggest threat to democracy. We don't separate right wing extremist and Republican party anymore.
Speaker 4: I see this as a party, a MAGA party that no longer is confident that they can win elections with votes. And so now they're seeking to enact their political will through violence.
Speaker 5: This is literally what conservative white folks do when they don't get their way, they turn violent.
Speaker 6: Today's GOP is no longer a political movement, It is a fascist movement.
Speaker 5: And this is why it could be more dangerous than 18 60 or the 19 thirties.
Speaker 2: Clearly, you know, this is
Speaker 3: a, literally, call to arms.
Speaker 6: Maybe now it is all about the violence. It all is about an insurrection. It all is in in his mind about a civil war.
Speaker 1: It feels like we are not just at the brink of a civil war, but that one has already begun.
Speaker 7: The fact that the the base is getting smaller, it makes it more dangerous in a lot of ways because those are the people who are willing to do things like take up arms and and press the questions that lead to press the questions and tactics that lead to civil war.
Speaker 5: This is someone who held that office who is basically saying to Americans there should be civil war.
Speaker 4: Look at what he's doing last night as you know that, you know, more or less salutes that are either queuing on or almost looked like Nazism.
Speaker 8: You saw the rally in Ohio the other night. Trump is there ranting and raving for, more than an hour, and you have these rows of young men with their arms raised.
Speaker 0: These crazed deranged folks who want to impart evil in every facet of our society.
Speaker 2: Clearly, you know, this is
Speaker 3: a literally call to arms.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! Media warn if Trump wins again every bad possible thing will happen https://t.co/8u9PeFYoUV
Video Transcript AI Summary
A second term for Donald Trump is portrayed as a dangerous scenario where he may become a dictator, suppress rights, and dismantle democracy. There are concerns about violence, censorship, and the abuse of power. The speakers warn of potential attacks on American citizens, the justice system, and democratic institutions. They emphasize the urgency of preventing Trump from staying in office beyond a second term to protect the republic.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: What would a second Donald Trump term look like?
Speaker 1: Well, he cannot be the next president. It it because if he is
Speaker 0: You can't imagine the things that he's going to do. Mexico, Canada. We can't go to Canada because, eventually, Canada will become a next to America. And shoot visitors to the White House. Yeah.
That means he can shoot the first lady.
Speaker 1: We're gonna see violence the likes of which we didn't even see on January 6th. Make it illegal to run against him, to throw his opponents in jail, to shut down the media.
Speaker 0: He will make himself into the fuhrer, and he will make everybody raise their hand and salute him. Using martial law against the American people. Terminate the constitution. Rewrite the constitution. Create mass interment camps.
Throw everyone into Git mode. Might be sent to jail or their rights might be suppressed, especially minority groups in society. You might have any number of things happen to you and your family. Every one of us, our freedom, our liberty, every of us is safe. He's going to have people around him executing against an enemy's list.
Assassinate generals. Ordering troops, to, attack American citizens. Trump's very well armed and extremist base will try to kill people. Going on. He's gonna basically burn the house down.
Speaker 1: He will unravel the institutions of our democracy. Draw similarities between Mussolini and Hitler.
Speaker 0: Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini.
Speaker 1: Makes Donald Trump even more dangerous.
Speaker 0: Wants to take away your vote. Senate and the house are immediately going to be paralyzed. People will begin in their minds to censor themselves. They might say, well, maybe I shouldn't say this. This is the end of democracy.
Speaker 1: I think that could be the end of our democracy.
Speaker 0: But democracy is dead if Trump is reelected. Owes you
Speaker 1: up to Putin. The democracy will be at risk.
Speaker 0: The absolute destruction of the justice department as we know it.
Speaker 1: The justice department could be entirely transformed.
Speaker 0: I'm really concerned about that.
Speaker 1: Every person who was associated with the attempted coup elevated in the administration.
Speaker 0: He's reelected. He will curb transgender rights and the rule of law. Arrest political opponents. To persecute, not prosecute, but persecute his enemies.
Speaker 1: Pick a wrecking ball to the rule of law. He's gonna make the law everyone else will have to follow. Vote for Donald Trump, may mean the last election that you ever get to vote in.
Speaker 0: To go after the independent and free parts of American civic life.
Speaker 1: To tear down our institutions. Purge the government of employees.
Speaker 0: Department by department effort to weaponize the powers of the government.
Speaker 1: To use the military to quash protests. Reading the government of all democratic safeguards.
Speaker 0: Junking American democracy as we have always known it.
Speaker 2: That he would try to stay in office beyond a second term. He would never leave office. There's no question.
Speaker 1: Trump is reelected. He won't leave.
Speaker 0: Donald Trump will never leave office voluntarily.
Speaker 1: And what that means is that everybody who wants us to remain a republic has to put every other thing aside and work together urgently right now to stop that from happening.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@JoeBiden @jonward11 Fox News’ @GriffJenkins spoke to the 21-year-old voter Biden called “a dog-faced pony soldier,” Madison Moore, who had this to say: "A lot of what he’s saying seems to be ... very sad … I don’t think he has the momentum to carry this to a national election." https://t.co/RXoofBterU
Video Transcript AI Summary
Joe Biden's response to a college student's question about his national competitiveness after a poor showing in Iowa seemed lacking in solutions and focused too much on negative topics like death, cancer, and job loss. The student, Madison Moore, felt he lacked the momentum needed for a national election.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The campaign says that Joe Biden's actually used the line before, but it doesn't make it any more relatable to a 21 year old college student from Mercer University named Madison Moore. She had asked the vice president how he planned to compete nationally after such a poor showing in Iowa. Here was her response.
Speaker 1: A lot of what he's saying seems to be really and very sad. We we have heard a lot about deaths and cancer and people losing their jobs. And to me, he doesn't really seem very solution oriented, and I don't think he has the momentum to carry this to a national election.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@JoeBiden @jonward11 @GriffJenkins Biden spox @SymoneDSanders on his calling a voter a “lying dog-faced pony soldier”: “It was a joke. Many people in the room laughed. … There is not a better retail politician in America than Joe Biden.” At another town hall, "his empathy emanated from him ..." https://t.co/bHuSJX7QYK
Video Transcript AI Summary
He defended Joe Biden's use of a controversial term as a joke from a John Wayne movie. Biden's empathy and ability to connect with voters were highlighted, especially during a recent town hall. The focus is on beating Donald Trump, with Biden seen as the best candidate for the job due to his experience and resilience. The speaker, Symone Sanders, emphasized Biden's readiness to lead as commander in chief and his track record of winning tough battles. Ultimately, the goal is to secure victory in both the presidential race and down-ballot races.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: She was really offended by that, she told The Washington Post. What did he mean by using that epithet about her? I'm not sure I quite understood it, but is that the way to talk to voters?
Speaker 1: Well, frankly, it was a joke. Many people in the room laughed. I many people in the room laughed and it was a line that he has actually used frequently, which is from a John Wayne movie. But look, Andrea, I think the reality here is, there's not a better retail politician in America than Joe Biden. I think, his his ability to connect with folks was frankly on on display last Wednesday at a town hall on another network.
His empathy emanated from him. People were drawn in as he talked about his struggles, with the stutter as a young child, and how he helps young children now and other individuals and keeps in touch with them who are struggling with the stuttering to overcome. So look, we truly believe, that our time in New Hampshire has frankly been well spent. We have invested resources there. Joe Biden, again, is still there today.
But again, Andrea, as we look at the larger picture about this race, this Democratic nomination, Donald Trump is in Manchester tonight. And the reality is, Donald Trump is gonna be really hard to beat. Anyone that saw him on the state of the union should should realize that. But also, people should also understand after watching the state of the union that we have to beat Donald Trump. And we need a commander in chief that is ready to go in on day 1.
We need someone that is not only good for the top of the ticket, but down ballot races. And we need somebody who's a proven fighter, who has been in hard fights, who's won, who has taken some hits and kept on moving. And on every single front, that's Joe Biden. Since the beginning of this race, Joe Biden has been running 2 races, I would argue. He's ran in this Democratic primary, but he's also been running a race against Donald Trump.
Speaker 0: Symone Sanders in South Carolina. Thank you very much as we
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
.@NicolleDWallace: “There’s a growing & insidious trend in right-wing media … to take highly misleading & selectively edited videos of Pres. Biden … and use those videos to spread messages virally to cast doubt on Pres. Biden’s fitness for office.” https://t.co/Im5r6y9HDA
Video Transcript AI Summary
Right wing media is using misleading videos from RNC social media accounts to question President Biden's fitness for office. The New York Post published deceptive videos of Biden at events, like him walking off stage with Obama being spun as freezing up. Another video of Biden at the G7 Summit was edited to make it seem like he walked away from a skydiving demonstration, when he was actually congratulating a skydiver. These manipulated videos are spread without fact-checking, while ignoring Trump's actual mental lapses.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There's a growing and insidious trend in right wing media, broadcast, print, and social media. It is to take highly misleading and selectively edited videos of President Biden directly from Republican National Committee social media accounts and then use those videos to spread messages by early to cast out on President Biden's fitness for office. Here is this headline from the New York Post quote, Biden appears to freeze up, has to be led off stage by Obama at Megabucks LA fundraiser. The full video posted by Biden finance chair on Twitter shows something entirely different. Biden reacting to applause and then walking off stage with former president Obama.
It comes less than 1 week after the New York Post made a cover out of another piece of deceptively edited tape calling him meander in chief due to what they claim was Biden walking away during a skydiving demonstration during the G7 Summit last week the only problem is that the full video which emerged almost instantly shows Biden was going over to congratulate 1 of the skydivers who's cropped out of the video entirely. Both the articles are based on cheap fakes videos of real events that are intentionally manipulated to fool viewers released on an RNC opposition research social media account with 0 independent fact checking by these so called journalists and spread throughout the right wing ecosystem. And we would take the hand wringing by right wing media about Biden's mental fitness in videos intentionally manipulated to make him look unfit, maybe a little more seriously if they weren't radio silent about the repeated glaring and real mental lapses happening behind podiums and on camera on the part of Donald Trump.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
After a New Hampshire voter asks @JoeBiden why they should trust he can turn his campaign around, he asks if she’s ever been to a caucus before; when she says yes, Biden snaps: "No you haven’t. You’re a lying dog-faced pony soldier." https://t.co/3uxOAu0Ues
Video Transcript AI Summary
Hi, I'm Madison, an econ student at Mercer University. You have a strong advantage in this race as a former vice president without impeachment trials. How do you explain your Iowa performance and convince voters you can win the national election? I participated in the democratic caucus, have you? You're a lying dog face pony soldier. Be honest.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hi. My name is Madison, and I'm an econ student at Mercer University. And oh, awesome. So I'm gonna be a little bit mean for a second. Okay?
So, so you're arguably the candidate with greatest advantage in this race. You've been the vice president. You weren't burdened down by the impeachment trials. So or and the participation. So how do you explain the performance in Iowa, and why should the voters believe that you can win the national election?
Speaker 1: It's a good question. Number 1, I was a democratic caucus. You ever been to a caucus? No. You haven't.
You're a lying dog face pony soldier. You said you are, but you're now you gotta be honest. I'm gonna be honest with you. It was
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 4 Anthony Fauci, America's Covid Disinformation Agent https://t.co/ufbdGBpG25
Video Transcript AI Summary
Critics question the effectiveness of masks and the handling of the pandemic. Dr. Fauci defends his decisions and denies funding gain-of-function research. The origins of COVID-19 are debated, with conflicting reports on a lab leak. Mental health concerns for children due to school closures are raised. Dr. Fauci clashes with Senator Paul over gain-of-function research. The debate continues on the virus's origins and research funding.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But they're really criticizing science because I represent science. If you're vaccinated, you really don't need to worry about getting it in a way that's serious or transmitting. That is true. That is correct, Chris. It'll need to protect you completely against infection, and the chances are very likely that you'll not be able to transmit it to other people.
The risk is extremely low of transmitting it to anybody else. Full stock vaccinated people are clearly capable of transmitting the infection. When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better. If people are not wearing masks, then maybe we should be mandating it. I often myself wear 2 masks.
Speaker 1: And I'm quoting you now. At the population level, masks work at the margins maybe 10%. To hear that they only work at the margins maybe 10% would make a lot of people ask, okay, then why was I wearing a mask?
Speaker 0: You're really attacking not only doctor Anthony Fauci, you're attacking science when you say that this is gonna go away tomorrow like magic when you know that there's no chance it's gonna just disappear. We hope this just goes away, burns itself out.
Speaker 1: So my question is why weren't you straight with the American people about this to begin with?
Speaker 0: So the bottom line is it's a guesstimate. I gave a range.
Speaker 1: It seemed in that quote to suggest that you were basing your, your recommendation on polling and what people could accept. Is that not what you meant?
Speaker 0: No. I mean, it's it's a bit of that.
Speaker 1: We're seeing all of these school closures around the country. Is that the right move for children and families?
Speaker 2: Yeah. No.
Speaker 0: And I think what's going on right now is is generally an appropriate approach. You wanna start doing something to socially distance yourself. How dramatic that is, closing schools and doing other things should be proportionate. It went too far that particularly for kids, who who couldn't go to school except remotely, that it's forever damaged. Well, I don't think it's forever irreparably damaged anyone.
Speaker 3: The US surgeon general has called it an urgent public health crisis, a decline in the mental health of kids across the country. According to the CDC, the rates of suicide, self harm, anxiety, and depression are up among adolescents.
Speaker 0: And the record will show, Neil, that we didn't recommend shutting everything down. First of all, I didn't recommend locking anything down. I recommended to the president that we shut the country down, and that was very difficult decision because I knew it would have serious economic consequences, which it did. Yeah. Because if you look at the people that are politicizing me, they're somebody that all the way over on one level.
But there are a lot of other people who look upon me the way they should as a nonpolitical person that I am. They're not doing it because they say they don't wanna do it. They're Republicans. They don't like to be told what to do. Right.
And we gotta break that. But now is the time to do what you're told. Where did this virus come from, do you think, today? Did it come from a lab? Was it man made?
When you have the animal human interface and you have animals that come out of the wild that are sold at these open, what they call them, wet market.
Speaker 3: Place of origin was not within the market itself. No. I don't
Speaker 0: think you could say that.
Speaker 4: There's a report today that another intelligence arm of the US government, this is inside our energy department, has joined the FBI in concluding that COVID began with a lab leak in China.
Speaker 0: That the NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute.
Speaker 2: We now know that a bat coronavirus was enhanced in the lab. The National Institutes of Health acknowledged that it funded research of a virus that was studied at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The experiment unexpectedly, we're told, made a bat coronavirus more contagious than the original naturally occurring one.
Speaker 5: Take an animal virus and you increase the responsibility to humans. Right. You're saying that's not gain a phone?
Speaker 0: Yeah. That is correct. And and, senator Paul, you do not know what you are talking about, quite frankly, and I wanna say that officially. You do not know what you are talking about.
Speaker 5: They took animal viruses that only occur in animals, and they increased their transmissibility to humans. How you can say that is not gain of function?
Speaker 0: It is not. What we're talking about now is the gain of function research in studies that increase predominantly the transmissibility as well as pathogenesis and alteration of host range of the virus. But he's lying here, senator. It is you. I have to laugh at that.
I should be prosecuted.
reSee.it AI Summary
Jacob Blake's mom urges against violence and property destruction in her son's name. George Floyd's mom advises channeling anger into positive actions. Michael Brown's family denounces violence towards law enforcement. Trayvon's family rejects violence and emphasizes the need for peaceful change.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Jacob Blake’s mom on violence in Kenosha: "My family and I are very hurt. And quite frankly disgusted. And as his mother, please don’t burn up property and cause havoc and tear your own homes down in my son’s name. You shouldn’t do it. … it’s just not acceptable.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
The mother of Jacob Blake expresses her disapproval of violence in his name, urging people not to destroy property. She condemns using tragedies to justify destructive actions. She apologizes for a family member's unkind words towards President Trump and regrets missing his call, believing it could have led to a different response. She emphasizes the importance of getting accurate information before reacting impulsively.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You. The the destruction that that has been taking place in cities across the country and in in, and in Kenosha. I heard you you speak about that. And my question is, you said that you don't want that in Jacob's name and neither would he. Tell me more about that, please.
Speaker 1: Absolutely not. My family and I are very hurt and, quite frankly, disgusted. And as his mother, please don't burn up property and cause havoc and tear your own homes down in my son's name. You shouldn't do it. People shouldn't do it anyway.
But to use my child or any other mother or father's child, our tragedy, to react in that manner is just not acceptable.
Speaker 0: Mhmm.
Speaker 1: And it's not helping Jacob. It's not helping Jacob or any other of the men or women who has suffered in these areas.
Speaker 0: Do you have anything to say, miss Jackson, to the politicians who are out there or do anything you wanna say to the presidents or the candidates or to to Trump or Biden or anything like that?
Speaker 1: For for our president Trump, first, I wanna say a family member, and I don't know if it was heard or not, said something that was, not kind. She is hurting, and, I do apologize for that. Our outburst that does not reflect, our behavior. And then also for president Trump, I'm sorry I missed your call because had I not missed your call, maybe the comments that you made would have been different, and I'm not mad at you at all. I have most respect for you as the leader of our country.
Always get the details from the right source before we start throwing bricks.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
George Floyd’s mom: “Channel your anger to do something positive or make a change another way because we’ve been down this road already … The anger, damaging your hometown is not the way he’d want … just relax. Justice will be served.”
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Michael Brown’s family: "We reject any kind of violence directed toward members of law enforcement. … We specifically denounce the actions of stand-alone agitators who unsuccessfully attempt to derail the otherwise peaceful … movement that has emerged throughout the U.S."
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Trayvon's family: "As we've stated repeatedly in the past, our family rejects any kind of violence directed toward members of law enforcement & our community in general ... We must work together to peacefully bring about change to our communities. Violence is never the answer”
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Biden brags about pro-Trump protesters being sentenced to 840 years in prison https://t.co/74YO9qRUvF
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 highlights the aftermath of the January 6th violence at the Capitol, with over 1200 people charged and almost 900 convicted or pleading guilty. Trump, instead of labeling them criminals, refers to the insurrectionists as patriots and even promises to pardon them if he regains office. While Trump claims there was love on that day, the nation, including law enforcement, witnessed hate and violence. A Capitol police officer describes it as a medieval battle and expresses fear.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: One desperate act available to him. The violence of January 6th. And since that day, more than 1200 people have been charged for their soul in the capital. Nearly 900 of them have been convicted or plead guilty. Collectively to date, they have been sentenced to more than 840 years in prison.
What's Trump done? Instead of calling them criminals, he's called these these insurrectionists patriots. They're patriots. And he promised to pardon them if he returns to office. Trump said that there was a lot of love on January 6th.
The rest of the nation, including law enforcement, saw a lot of hate and violence. One capital police officer called it a medieval battle. That same officer called vile rape was called vile, raised his names. He said he was more afraid
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
CNN’s @eliehonig: Jack Smith wants “Donald Trump convicted before the election” https://t.co/I05htw5OmG
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss the actions of Jack Smith and Judge Chutkin in relation to the election schedule. They highlight how Smith has been pushing for a speedy trial for Donald Trump, wanting it to take place before the election. They mention Smith's request for an expedited Supreme Court ruling and his avoidance of directly mentioning the election. The speakers debate whether Smith's actions are politically motivated or simply driven by his role as a prosecutor. They express concerns about the lack of transparency and the potential impact on the election.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Agree with me that Smith and judge Chutkin are acting based on the election schedule.
Speaker 1: I do agree with you, Michael, and I think any minded observer has to agree with that as well. Just look at Jack Smith's conduct in this case. The motivating principle behind every procedural request he's made has been speed, has been getting this trial in before the election. Let's take a couple examples. The trial date, the average Federal conspiracy and fraud trial takes about a year and a half to 2 years between indictment and trial.
In this case, we have dozens, hundreds of January 6th rioters on video straightforward cases, they too were given about a year and a half to 2 years between indictment and trial. Jack Smith originally requested a trial fate for Donald Trump, a far more complex case 5 months out. He wanted a January trial. It was set for 2 months later. So Donald Trump being given far less time to prepare than other defendants, and the actions this week, Jack Smith won an argument on immunity in the district court and then went right to the Supreme Court.
I think a right move, I think the smart move, the only reason you ask the Supreme Court to do that on an expedited basis is if you're racing against the clock, Jack Smith clearly is doing that here.
Speaker 0: Okay. I referred to the election as the Voldemort of the petition that he filed. Why not say that. Why not simply say there's an election on the horizon, and I'm afraid this guy's gonna get away?
Speaker 1: You will never hear either Jack Smith or judge fish chucking utter the e word, election. They will not specifically say it. Instead, they use this sort of euphemistic language about the need for resolution, solution, that kind of thing. Here's why I think Jack Smith is not willing to do it. Two reasons.
First of all, DOJ rules, unwritten and written, both say faith, you are not supposed to do anything that could impact an election. In fact, you're supposed to affirmatively try not to take steps that might impact fact an election. And the second thing, and I think Jack Smith is right about this, is if he is to say, okay, Judge, we really need to try this case before the election, Donald Trump is going to seize on that aggressively. He's gonna say, see, folks, when I tell you this is political, Jack Smith has now admitted that he wants to be fit before the election, and that's political. So I think he's very wary of that.
Speaker 0: Okay. So then evaluate the per we we agree. We agree thing that he is acting, judge Chutkin is acting with an eye toward the election calendar. Now I wanna hear Elie Hoenig assess the propriety of him doing exactly what thing doing. Because on one hand, you could say, well, he's being political.
On the other hand, I guess you would say, Eli, like you probably back in the day, he's an aggressive prosecutor. He's
Speaker 1: Work the case up, he wants to get before a jury. Right. I don't like the artifice here. I don't like the game playing, the wordsmanship that we're seeing, I think Jack Smith ought to just come out and say it or not. Here's the arguments both ways.
First of all, if Jack Smith is trying to get this case tried before the election, and he clearly is, look, that is political. I mean, the counterargument would be, well, Jack Smith just wants the Farrigan voters to have resolution before they go to the ballot box, and I understand that. As a voter, I would like to know. But here's problem with that argument, Michael, Jack Smith doesn't just wanna get this trial done and let the chips fall where they may and let the consequences be what they figure can be. He's the prosecutor.
He believes this case. He wants this case to result in conviction. And so his position isn't Well, I want this case tried before the election. His position, really, as a practical matter, is I want Donald Trump convicted before the election. I no problem with the first part of that.
It's his job to want and try to convict Donald Trump now that he's indicted. But the second part of that before the election, that's fit that's where it crosses the line to the political, in my view.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
.@SenSchumer: "If Republicans keep insisting on Donald Trump’s border policies, then they will be at fault when a deal for Ukraine, Israel, & humanitarian aid to Gaza all fall apart. Republicans would be giving Vladimir Putin the best gift he could ask for." https://t.co/0GDTflMbdB
Video Transcript AI Summary
Earlier today, military officers were warned about the potential consequences of unresolved issues on Capitol Hill. It was emphasized that if Republicans in the Senate do not show seriousness in finalizing a national security agreement, Vladimir Putin could take advantage and advance through Ukraine and Europe. Both parties acknowledge the importance of aiding Ukraine and resisting Putin for national security. However, Republicans are holding up progress due to unrealistic demands on border security. Democrats are willing to find a compromise, but if Republicans continue to insist on Donald Trump's border policies, they will be responsible for the failure of agreements on aid to Ukraine, Israel, and humanitarian aid to Gaza. It is crucial for Republicans to show willingness to moderate and reach a reasonable bipartisan compromise.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Earlier today, warn military officers at the National Defense University that quote, if there's anyone inspired by unresolved issues on Capitol Hill, it is just Putin and his sick clique. So, if there's a word for what we most need this week, the word is to be serious about the task at hand. If Republicans in the Senate do not show they're serious about finalizing an agreement for the national security package, Vladimir Putin is gonna walk through Ukraine and right through Europe. Both parties understand that aiding Ukraine and resisting Putin are critical for our national security. But Republicans and only Republicans are holding everything up because of unrealistic maximalist demands on the border.
Last week we put forth a serious bill to address our national security needs. The package included robust border security provisions. Republicans rejected it out of hand, demanding their way or the highway even though they were offered an amendment of their choosing. And they'd only need 11 Democrats to go along. This posture is unserious.
Again, Republicans and only Republicans are holding everything up because of unrealistic, maximless demands on the border. I wanna be very clear. Democrats very much want an agreement if possible. We talked all weekend with our Republican counterparts to find some kind of agreement. We talked again earlier today.
We are not there yet, but as a sign of good faith, Democrats are gonna keep trying. If Republicans keep insisting on Donald Trump's border policies, then they will be at fault when a deal for aid to Ukraine, Israel and humanitarian aid to Gaza fall apart. The onus is on Republicans to show they're willing to moderate. Let me say that again. If Republicans keep insisting on Donald Trump's border policies, then they will be at fault when a deal for Ukraine, Israel, and humanitarian aid to Gaza all fall apart.
Republicans would be giving Vladimir Putin the best gift he could ask for. Democrats are serious about reaching reasonable bipartisan compromise to pass this package. The question is, if Republicans are now willing to do the same. On NDAA, At the beginning of December, I said
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Palestinian National Initiative's @MustafaBarghou1: "Hamas mainly attacked military establishments, military installations. And most of the people they have arrested & taken as war prisoners are military people. I do not accept [they are] attacking any civilian."
Video Transcript AI Summary
Hamas is accused of targeting Israeli civilians, while they claim to mainly target military establishments. Both sides condemn attacks on civilians. The speaker highlights Israeli airstrikes on Gaza, resulting in the destruction of buildings and the loss of civilian lives. They argue that the only way to end the violence is to end the Israeli occupation and for the United States to be fair in their approach. They mention the killing of a peaceful journalist and the lack of accountability for those responsible. The speaker calls for Israel to respect international law and treat Palestinians as equal human beings.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The what Hamas is doing is they are targeting Israeli civilians, women, children, grandmother,
Speaker 1: are not.
Speaker 0: Is that is that is that not a classic terror isn't that classic terrorism? They are fighting the Israeli government. They're fighting ordinary people?
Speaker 1: That's one way of putting it, but it's not true. I think Hamas mainly tag military establishments, military installations. And most of the people there, they have arrested and, taken as the press war war prisoners military people. I do not accept attacking any civilian. I do not accept that Israelis attack our civilians, but look at what Israeli plane are doing now in Gaza.
Then they are bombarding houses. They're bringing down to it and you've shown you've shown that on your, on your screen, whole apartments, whole buildings, high rise buildings are brought down to the account. And we already are reporting, receiving, reports about families who are killed, nine people in one family, ten people in another family include children. I do not want any civilian to be hurt, neither by Palestinians or by Israelis. But the question how to end that.
Will it end by attacking Gaza Strip another time? Israel has already conducted five words on the ASSA. 1 of them lasted 51 days. They destroyed everything. This does not stop Hamas.
It does not stop resistance. There is one way to stop any violence. And that is to end the Israeli occupation. And that is for the United States to be fair. They cannot say that Israel has the right to defend itself, but we, the Palestinians don't have the right to ourselves.
Let me remind you with the case of who was not only Palestinian but also an American, a very peaceful journalist. She was to death by an Israeli sniper. Was anybody indicted? Was anybody taken to court? No.
52 journalists were also killed. Our first aid providers are shot at. Our doctors are shot at. This should stop. And the only way to stop it is to tell Israel, you have to respect international law.
You have to end this illegal occupation and accept, but as equal human beings.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! Democrats, inventors of "The Big Lie"
Video Transcript AI Summary
Al Gore and others express their belief that the 2000 presidential election was stolen from them. They claim that George W. Bush did not win and that the Supreme Court, along with individuals like Katherine Harris and Jeb Bush, tampered with the results. They argue that the election process was rigged and that there were issues with voting machines. They mention instances of machines malfunctioning and being hacked. They emphasize the importance of a fair and accurate vote count and express their objection to the election procedures. They also acknowledge that both Republicans and Democrats have been involved in election manipulation in the past.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We won that election.
Speaker 1: Al Gore won the election.
Speaker 2: Al Gore was elected president of the United States. Right. This wasn't counted.
Speaker 0: You know it. I know it. They know it. We won that election.
Speaker 1: There is overwhelming evidence that George w Bush did not win this election.
Speaker 2: Do
Speaker 1: you think Republicans stole that election?
Speaker 2: On 2000? Uh-huh. I wish The United States Supreme Court had let them finish counting the votes.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court denied the actual and accurate counting of the votes of Florida.
Speaker 2: If Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Jim Baker, and the Supreme Court hadn't tampered with the results. Al Gore would be president.
Speaker 1: An election has been stolen, robbed.
Speaker 0: It wasn't a fair process. It wasn't a neutral process. It was a process that was rigged against us. We actually won the last presidential election, folks. They stole my president's arms.
Speaker 1: As we look at our election system, I think it's fair to say that there are many legitimate questions About its accuracy, about its integrity.
Speaker 0: How are you gonna keep it from us being able to be in a position where you can manipulate the machines, manipulate the
Speaker 2: In Virginia, while I was governor, I had to replace all the machines.
Speaker 0: Too many voters have cast votes on machines that jam Or malfunction or suck the votes without a trace.
Speaker 2: I kept voting in the Senate race, kept voting for the Democrat. Republican name kept coming Three times that happened.
Speaker 1: How many other votes did the computers get wrong?
Speaker 2: I brought in some technology experts. They were able to hack into our machines from off-site In about 5 or 6 minutes, and within 4 minutes, they were able to change a vote.
Speaker 3: The legitimacy of any president that's elected is going to be impaired Unless the American people understand that there has been a full and fair count
Speaker 0: of all the votes.
Speaker 1: We will continue to object to the election procedures until they are corrected. The objection is in writing, and I don't care that it is not it is not I'm by a member of the senate. It is our duty to challenge this vote.
Speaker 0: It's not as if it's just Republicans who have monkeyed around with elections in Past, sometimes Democrats have to.
Speaker 1: I would be standing here saying this no matter what the outcome of the election.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! Media go to war against @AaronRodgers12 for defying Covid groupthink
Video Transcript AI Summary
Aaron Rodgers' recent actions have caused disappointment and loss of respect among the speakers. They criticize him for endangering lives, avoiding responsibility, and blaming others. The controversy revolves around his decision to prioritize his own health, which some view as political. Rodgers mentioned Joe Rogan as an influence, despite medical professionals advising against it. The speakers express concern over the misinformation being spread and the potential consequences. They argue that Rodgers should focus on exercise, a healthy diet, and other proven methods of boosting immunity. Overall, his behavior is seen as embarrassing and perpetuating negative stereotypes. Despite the backlash, Rodgers states that he is an athlete, not an activist, and will continue playing football.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I can't even believe Aaron Rogers did this, Skip. I have so I have lost so much respect.
Speaker 1: I'm ashamed of him right now.
Speaker 2: I think we're seeing a very different side of Aaron Rogers. I think we're seeing a side of Aaron Rogers that people are really really disgusted by.
Speaker 3: I'm making the decision that's based on what's best for me and my own health. And for me, it was a no brainer.
Speaker 4: He literally is sitting home because he might kill someone.
Speaker 5: 1st, he endangers people's lives. Then he doesn't take responsibility and makes up some story. Then he blames the world crowd. We should speak at the Republican convention.
Speaker 3: The problem with this is it is so political and health should not be political.
Speaker 6: He gave this interview on Friday that was just It was just so damaging, promoting conspiracy theories, attacking the cancel culture and the woke mob, you know, saying how Joe Rogan was his That's for now.
Speaker 4: While he says he talks to Harvard MDs about stuff, it was Joe Rogan that really guided him. He took stuff that is for horses.
Speaker 1: Ivermectin is a cattle dewormer.
Speaker 3: Sorry folks, that's what it is.
Speaker 1: The embarrassment was gonna begin as soon as he pointed out Joe Rogan as one of his touchstones of his critical thinking.
Speaker 3: I'm gonna critically think about what's best For my own health. I'm not judging anybody else.
Speaker 7: What we've got today with this interview is a public figure spreading misinformation.
Speaker 8: Aaron Rodgers is comfortable sitting down for 50 minutes and spewing verbal diarrhea that we can all react to.
Speaker 2: It is a devastating prospect, the ramifications of what this guy is doing and what he's saying. Sounds like the crackpot.
Speaker 3: Have they talked about exercise, a healthy diet like eating real food, drinking water, taking vitamins, Vitamin D deficiency and what that causes in the body. No, there hasn't been any of that.
Speaker 9: I think that was a rant, That went off the rails several times, divorced from reality at almost every turn.
Speaker 1: You came across as a national embarrassment.
Speaker 7: Do you think Aaron Rogers sets the dumb jock stereotype back?
Speaker 3: I'm gonna have the best immunity possible now based on the 2,500,000 person study from Israel That the people who get COVID and recover have the most robust immunity.
Speaker 7: For him to perpetuate that, I guess it just shows us that he doesn't care.
Speaker 10: I'm an athlete. I'm not an activist. So I'm gonna get back to doing what I do best. And that's and that's playing ball.
reSee.it AI Summary
In a Covid Retrospective Series, Vol 1 highlights the controversial view that unvaccinated individuals are scum. Vol 2 explores the belief that kids will thrive in facemasks. Vol 3 suggests reality is a conspiracy, while Vol 4 labels Dr. Fauci as a disinformation agent. Lastly, Vol 5 claims that rules are only for lab rats. These thought-provoking perspectives challenge conventional narratives.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 1 Media: The Unvaccinated Are Scum
Video Transcript AI Summary
When discussing the issue of vaccination, some speakers express frustration towards the unvaccinated. They believe that the unvaccinated are causing problems and should be blamed for the spread of COVID-19. They argue that the vaccinated should wear masks to protect the unvaccinated, but also feel that the unvaccinated are not behaving responsibly. Some suggest mandatory vaccination and consequences for those who choose not to get vaccinated. They criticize the unvaccinated for spreading misinformation and believe that their actions are leading to unnecessary deaths. Overall, there is a strong call for the unvaccinated to take responsibility and prioritize the well-being of society.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: When the chips are down, these, these civilized people they'll eat each other.
Speaker 1: You are the unvaccinated. You are the problem. It is the unvaccinated who are the problem period, end of story.
Speaker 2: The only people that you can blame, The only people you can blame this isn't shaming. This is the truth. Maybe they should be shamed by the unvaccinated. Just have to start Blaming the unvaccinated folks, not the regular folks. Anyone you came into contact with will blame you as will the rest of us Who've done the right thing by getting vaccinated.
Because frankly, we know that we can't trust the unvaccinated. I think it's time to get our moral house in order, Anderson. It's the unvaccinated who are the threat.
Speaker 1: All the vaccinated folks are gonna start wearing masks to protect the unvaccinated folks. It's called a Christian value.
Speaker 2: You're basically punishing the vaccinated for the the sins of the unvaccinated. Vaccinated. People are not behaving honorably. The unvaccinated are basically saying, well, it's open season for me. I can do whatever I want as well.
The the unvaccinated are basically Repeating their breasts running around the country saying, we don't care. We're living free and so forth.
Speaker 3: We've been patient, And our patience is wearing thin.
Speaker 2: The unvaccinated, a group that includes children and people acting like children. And the rest of us are starting to get pissed off. The vaccinated feel the unvaccinated are making me upset or angry.
Speaker 4: This is not about freedom A personal choice. Well, my freedom is being kind of disturbed here. No. Screw your freedom.
Speaker 2: The other day Howard Third wave in with a much different approach. Take a look. When are we gonna stop putting up with the idiots in this country and just say, you now it's mandatory to get vaccinated?
Speaker 5: Their freedom.
Speaker 2: But you're treading on our freedom and you're making other people sick, and really you're killing other people. The anti vaxxers, they seem to have a thing for death and home remedies. The anti maskers turned anti vaxxers are not just putting their own lives at risk. If that was a good issue, we could just say that We can watch them compete to win places show in the Darwin Awards. We have to start doing things for the greater good of society and not for idiots who think that they can do their own research.
And don't get me started on the lunatics who won't take any of the COVID vaccines.
Speaker 0: Life is too short to be an ass.
Speaker 2: Life is way too short to be ignorant of the promise of something that is helping people worldwide. If you're doing it because you're disconnected or disorganized. Maybe you have some sympathetic psychological reasons, but maybe you're just being antisocial. Oh, you can't shame them. You can't call them stupid.
You can't call them silly. Yes. They are.
Speaker 3: Those who are not vaccinated We'll end up paying the price.
Speaker 6: The unvaccinated should be taxed.
Speaker 7: They should pay more for healthcare.
Speaker 2: We need to start looking at the choice to remain vaccinated. The same as we look at driving while intoxicated. We're gonna see, and I've said almost 2 types of America. Doctor Fauci said that if hospitals get any more overcrowded, they're gonna have to make some very tough choices about who gets an ICU. It doesn't seem so tough to me.
Vaccinated person having a heart attack? Yes. Come right on in. We'll take care of you. Unvaccinated guy who gobbled horse goo?
Rest in peace, Wheezy.
Speaker 1: Pointing back to the unvaccinated who are really creating a problem in this country, every death that we are Thing from COVID could have been prevented.
Speaker 5: Literally, the only people dying are
Speaker 2: the unvaccinated. And for those of you spreading misinformation, shame on you. Shame on you. I don't know how some of you sleep at night.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Online: https://news.grabien.com/story-covid-retrospective-vol-1-media-the-unvaccinated-are-scum IG: https://www.instagram.com/reel/CsJc-ZpOtjJ/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== Youtube: https://youtu.be/tpuo4IYG0uA
[Covid Retrospective, Vol. 1] Media: The Unvaccinated Are Scum
‘You are unvaccinated, you are the problem’
news.grabien.com
Instagram
instagram.com
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
If you like this video, you’ll enjoy following Grabien’s supercut wizard, @mazemoore
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
@mazemoore Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 2 Experts: Kids Are Going to Thrive in Facemasks!
Video Transcript AI Summary
From a public health standpoint, masks have a marginal effectiveness of around 10% at the population level. However, it is important for everyone, including children, to wear masks in schools. Kids are resilient and wearing masks can actually build their resilience. There is no evidence to suggest that masks have long-term psychological effects on young children. In fact, masking is considered safe and important, especially in schools. Children have no problem wearing masks and understand the need to deal with COVID scientifically. Wearing masks does not harm children and there is ongoing research showing that masks do not put them at risk. It is the responsibility of parents and leaders to set an example and ensure that children wear masks for their own protection.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: A really striking comment that you made in this interview, you said from a broad public health standpoint, and I'm quoting you now, at the population level, masks work at the margins maybe 10%.
Speaker 1: In the schools, everybody should wear a mask. It's asking kids to wear a mask is uncomfortable, but you know kids are pretty resilient.
Speaker 0: Kids are resilient. And if anything, this is going to build resilience in our holder.
Speaker 2: Where does have long term psychological effects on young kids, do you think? I don't think so. I think, in fact, it's good.
Speaker 1: Masking, is very important, particularly in the schools. Masks are safe. Masks do work.
Speaker 2: I have a 9 year old. He tolerates masks for everything. I don't hear him whine just like I don't hear him whine about his seat belt or his bike helmet. Children have no problem with what is going on. They want to deal sensibly by way of the science with COVID.
They've Said we have no difficulty with students wearing masks. When I look at the history of the world and when I think of, like, my parents and grandparents growing up in depressions, fighting wars, kids always had a part to play too. And when I look at the fact that they're just wearing a mask, but they have a roof over their head, they have food.
Speaker 1: A mask is basically not inclusive completely. I've yet to see a child whose mask was bothering him or her. In fact, in the emergency department, the kids are the best ones at wearing masks, and they often help their parents put masks on correctly. There's nothing Adverse or bad about mask. We've used mask for decades.
We mask kids and our cancer wards routinely.
Speaker 2: We have now a plethora of ongoing research and studies, and documents that are showing us that masks do not put children at risk.
Speaker 3: This concept that children somehow are harmed or abused by wearing masks is not founded in any science. It's Simple.
Speaker 1: It does no harm. My kids wear them to school.
Speaker 2: The idea that children won't wear masks is actually an application of leadership to say that we can't them and won't set an example for them.
Speaker 1: Those 50,000,000 children need to protect themselves by wearing masks.
Speaker 4: If I'm going to get on an airplane, I don't have to wear a mask, but I will have my kids wear 1.
Speaker 2: I don't think this is politically dividing at all. I wear a mask. My kids wear masks. I don't understand why parents are not listening to the science, not teaching their children to wear a mask. My responsibility, if I am lucky enough to be the next governor of Georgia, is to look at the science, to follow the protocols, and to set the right example.
Speaker 1: I think
Speaker 3: we're even talking to the children. When we talk to
Speaker 2: Schools and classrooms of children, they are happy to wear masks. Be comforted by the fact that children have so much neuroplasticity that it this is a bump in their social development, but that they can repair very easily. You don't go don't make it. Yeah. And right now, you shouldn't be going to school without a
Speaker 5: act. You're not likely to be able to be exposed to something and spread it to mommy or daddy. And it's not likely mommy and daddy are able to spread it to you either. So I wouldn't worry about it, baby. I promise you.
That's why we need to make sure children are wearing masks in school.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Online: https://news.grabien.com/story-covid-retrospective-vol-2-experts-kids-are-going-to-thrive-in-facemask IG: https://www.instagram.com/reel/CsbmPzksdCf/?igshid=NzJjY2FjNWJiZg== YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jt_fjGM0MWE
[Covid Retrospective, Vol. 2] Experts: Kids Are Going to Thrive in Facemasks!
news.grabien.com
Instagram
instagram.com
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 3 Reality Is a Conspiracy
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 4 Dr. Fauci, Disinformation Agent
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Covid Retrospective Series, Vol. 5 Rules are for the lab rats!
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
SUPERCUT! In 2019, Dems blast "dictator" Trump for using DoJ to investigate a political rival, turning the U.S. into a "banana republic"
Video Transcript AI Summary
The video discusses concerns about the Justice Department being used as a tool by former President Trump to target his perceived enemies. It highlights instances where Trump and his attorney general, Bill Barr, are accused of weaponizing the department for political purposes. Critics argue that this behavior resembles that of a Banana Republic, with Trump using government resources to go after his political opponents. They express worry about the abuse of power and betrayal of democratic values. The video emphasizes the need to investigate these actions and prevent the country from sliding further into corruption. Overall, it raises concerns about the politicization of the Justice Department and the potential impact on future elections.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now that he's got the right attorney general in position to do it, we now know they really have been trying to gin up criminal prosecutions and criminal investigations into the president's perceived enemy, politically motivated persecution. Right? Courtesy of Bill Barr. I'll I'll roll in the FBI on you. That's how Banana Republics work.
Right? Enm- The home of the 45th president of the United States has been raided by the FBI. Mr. Trump is using the Justice Department to go after his perceived enemies. I feel worried about the prospect of the justice department being used as a tool of this president or any.
Our Little Banana Republic. Any capable prosecutor can get a grand jury to hand down an indictment of something as innocent as a ham sandwich.
Speaker 1: Today, end. An indictment was then sealed charging Donald j Trump.
Speaker 0: Ricky News on former president Trump. He's been indicted for the 4th time in life money.
Speaker 1: Bill Barr, on the president's behalf, is weaponizing the Justice Department to go after the president's enemies. When you win an election, you don't seek to just prosecute the losing side. President using the justice department as a weapon to get what he wants.
Speaker 2: Department of Justice is totally politicized. Nicking the Department of Justice on political opponents,
Speaker 0: threatening to imprison his political rival, Banana Republic style.
Speaker 2: Trying to exact revenge against all of his enemies, tin pot, dictator, and a banana republic. Is acting more like a banana republic dictator.
Speaker 0: He's using government resources answers to go after his political opponent.
Speaker 2: Essentially, we are a Banana Republic. That we are we are, seeking to have of a bogus and criminal investigation into a political opponent. And that's using the Department of Justice to also target end. Trump photo opponent for nefarious reasons. This is a massive abuse of power and a betrayal of our values.
Speaker 3: President of the United face. Is targeting a family member
Speaker 2: of a political opponent. This is the type of thing that happens in a Banana Republic. And trying to take out a end. Arrival and Joe Biden criminally investigating an American political rival, someone the president's worried about losing to in the next election.
Speaker 0: To investigate, in. My principal opponent or a principal opponent, in the upcoming election. Houston, we'd have a problem.
Speaker 4: Don't you think that's something that should be investigated when the
Speaker 2: an Incumbent political party opens the counterintelligence investigation on the candidate of the opposing party. Enemy. Know Trump is itching to politicize the justice department, and the attorney general has been super shady.
Speaker 5: The president is weaponizing the Department of Justice to bring end. Cases against his enemies. The Department of Justice is is in an existential crisis.
Speaker 0: Again, it's yet another example of the Justice Department Basically losing all
Speaker 6: of its independence in this administration.
Speaker 2: This is now about corrupting the next election. And for me, this was crossing in the red line. The president who is actively trying to potentially steal the upcoming election. But to try to take out end. A political rival, the end goal being 2020.
Speaker 0: Donald Trump and his attorney general are using the justice department. The only difference between this and a Banana Republic
Speaker 2: is that Trump does not eat fruit. The 2020 election is really the last chance we have to stop our system from fully sliding into a corrupt Banana Republic.
Speaker 0: End. Bill Barr has done everything that Donald Trump has wanted him to do. Yeah. We're living in a Banana Republic right now.
Speaker 2: When you start using the justice department effort. To go after your enemies. That's that's very, very dangerous. Donald Trump is using the Department of
Speaker 1: Justice to go after his enemies in any way that he can.
Speaker 0: Having the head of the chief federal law enforcement agency essentially working on his behalf to investigate a political rival.
Speaker 2: To investigate end. A the family of a political opponent. Basically, Banana Republic behavior.
Speaker 7: There were no better than some Mhmm. You know, Some banana republic. And he's using the abuse of power and every element of the presidency
Speaker 8: end. To try to do something to smear me.
Speaker 9: We just have to demonstrate that he will not take power,
Speaker 10: end. By, if we, if he does run
reSee.it AI Summary
According to various sources, there are numerous claims and controversies surrounding different topics. These include doubts about the effectiveness of masks and social distancing, questions about the origin of Covid-19, concerns about the safety and efficacy of vaccines, and allegations of misinformation from both sides. Other issues involve political figures, criminal cases, climate change, and media credibility. It is important to note that this list may not be exhaustive, but it highlights some of the significant debates and controversies in recent times.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Per the @nytimes & @washingtonpost, w/o the ability to censor Americans, Biden will be powerless to protect us against "misinformation," such as: — Masks are ineffective against Covid — Social distancing is arbitrary & ineffective — Evidence indicates Covid originated in a Chinese lab — Fauci funded that exact Chinese research — Lockdowns are more harmful than helpful — Schools are relatively safe — Travel bans are ineffective against Covid — Vaccine mandates don't work — Contact tracing doesn't work — Natural immunity exists — Herd immunity exists — The feds overcounted Covid deaths — Govs. Cuomo & Whitmer causes thousands of deaths by sending Covid patients to nursing homes — PCR tests give a lot of false positives — Pfizer's Covid jabs don't stop Covid transmission — The CDC recommended pregnant women get Covid shots despite having no evidence they're safe — The CDC recommended kids get Covid shots despite having no evidence proving they're safe — Sunshine, exercise & a strong immune system helps against Covid — Fauci gives conflicting messages & often lies — Studies show hydroxychloroquine has value as a Covid therapeutic — Studies show ivermectin has value as a Covid therapeutic — Ivermectin is used for human beings — Oklahoma hospitals were not turning away gunshot victims to tend to people ODing on horse meds — Covid mRNA shots are not "safe & effective" — The laptop was Hunter's — Joe Biden collaborated w/ Hunter professionally — China bribed Biden — Ukraine bribed Biden — Kyle Rittenhouse is innocent of premeditated murder — The FBI orchestrated a vast Election Day-eve censorship operation to help Biden in 2020 — The USPS was never plotting to steal the election — Trump truckers did not try to kill Biden campaign staffers in Texas — Trump didn't collude with Russia — Hillary did collude with Russia & the FBI — The Steele Dossier was never corroborated — Trump did not pee on Russian prostitutes — Trump didn't overfeed fish in Japan — Trump did not overpower Secret Service agents to take command of The Beast — Trump didn't clear Lafayette Square for a photo op — Trump didn't ban Muslims from entering America — The Pulse Nightclub killer wasn't targeting the LGBT community — There's no evidence suggesting the Club Q killer was committing an anti-LGBT hate crime — The BLM/George Floyd riots were not "mostly peaceful" — Jacob Blake was armed — George Floyd's drug use contributed to his death — George Zimmerman acted in self defense — Michael Brown never put his hands up and said, "Don't shoot!" — The CIA orchestrated the 2014 Ukraine coup — Justice Kavanaugh never hosted gang rape parties — The southern border is effectively open — Nick Sandmann respectfully listened to a Native American on the Mall — Men can't have babies — Gender = sex — Men have a physical advantage over women in sports — Public schools are being used to groom children — Abortion ≠ health care — CBP agents didn't whip migrants — Americans are stranded in Afghanistan — A recession is two quarters of economic contraction — The banking industry is fundamentally unsound — Printed money creates inflation — Corporate taxes are consumer taxes — 87,000 new IRS agents will target more than billionaires — The United States wouldn't have defaulted w/o a higher debt ceiling — Expanding energy production will bring down energy prices — Voter integrity laws ≠ "Jim Crow on steroids" — Biden's DoJ is treating Hunter Biden differently than Donald Trump — The Branch Davidians posed no danger to the public — The FBI setup Michael Flynn — The FBI originated the Whitmer kidnapping plot — FBI agents were embedded amongst 1/6 rioters — 1/6 rioters didn't kill any cops — 1/6 rioters didn't bring zip ties to the protest — 1/6 was organized on Facebook, not Parler — 1/6 rioters never planned to "kidnap lawmakers" — 1/6 ≠ "insurrection" — The Woodward/Bernstein version of Watergate is mostly false — The reason the feds won't release docs related to JFK's assassination is because there's information they don't want us to know — The CIA was protecting Jeffrey Epstein — Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself — Chicago MAGA fanatics attacked actor Jussie Smollett — Sometimes people make an "OK" symbol w/ their hands and are not secretly sending white supremacist codes — Carbs make you fat — Carbs & seed oils, not cholesterol, cause heart disease — Most saturated fats are good for you — Donald Trump didn't call neo Nazis "very fine people" — The NY DA's case against Trump is politically motivated — Not prosecuting criminals is creating more crime — Democrats want to ban gas stoves — Wood fire pizzerias are not creating a catastrophic climate crisis — Weather ≠ evidence of a "climate crisis" — Avoiding eating meat won't stop the climate from changing — The Earth is actually cooler today than is the average — It's still legal to say "gay" in Florida — America's founding was 1776, not 1619 — "Fact checkers" and "disinformation reporters" are usually sources of fake news/disinformation — The federal government illegally censors Americans — The only provable "disinformation" over the last few years has come not from random Americans online but from the federal government (such as Hunter's laptop being a Putin plot) — The mainstream media creates more confusion & chaos than clarity & understanding Sadly, I suspect I'm just scratching the surface. Any important ones I'm missing?
reSee.it AI Summary
The 2020 election was marred by political corruption. The Bidens were involved in money laundering payments from hostile nations, but the IRS probe was given a standdown order. The FBI authenticated Hunter's laptop but instead of initiating criminal investigations, they warned social media companies of an imminent hack. The FBI used its 2016 Russia collusion probe to rationalize its meddling in the 2020 election. The FBI also conducted an influence operation with various reporters to convince them that forthcoming damaging reporting about Biden was not true. Twitter and Facebook orchestrated an unprecedented mass censorship campaign. Left-wing activist groups funded in part by Facebook facilitated the exploitation of drop-off boxes on behalf of the Democratic Party. Self-government is impossible when the state restricts speech and operates in secret.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
The more we learn about the 2020 election, the more undeniable it becomes that Biden owes his “victory” to blatant political corruption. To wit: 1) An IRS probe into the Bidens money laundering payments from hostile nations — the normal outcome of which would have ended his candidacy — was instead given a stand-down order 2) The FBI & IRS wanted to search Biden’s house in September 2020 but were given a stand down order. 3) The @FBI authenticated Hunter’s laptop a year before the NYPost first reported on its contents 4) Rather than use the laptop’s voluminous documentation of myriad felonies to initiate criminal investigations, the FBI hatched a plot to warn social media companies of an imminent “hack & leak” operation of what they heavily suggested was Russian disinformation 5) The FBI used its 2016 Russia collusion probe — which the Durham probe has since proven was essentially an extension of the Clinton campaign — to rationalize its meddling in the 2020 election. 6) The FBI also conducted an influence operation with various reporters at major newspapers to convince them that forthcoming damaging reporting about Biden that they knew was true was in fact not 7) The FBI was spying on Giuliani when he shared the laptop’s contents with the NYPost 8) When the FBI told Twitter & Facebook a Russian disinformation campaign was coming, they had already concluded Russia wasn’t trying to game the election 9) In their attempt to corroborate their own rumor of Russian electoral influence, the FBI became aggressive with its demands for user data from Twitter, eventually getting shutdown for seeking users’ private info without a warrant 10) Nonetheless, in the preceding years, the FBI established a beachhead inside Twitter, with an operations center of former agents who communicated via their own dedicated slack channel. These ex-agents included Jim Baker, the FBI’s former top counsel who played a central role in the FBI’s Trump/Russia scam, as well as Comey’s former chief of staff, Dawn Burton, who started the FBI’s Russia collusion probe. 11) The CIA, in collusion with the Biden campaign, seeded disinformation claiming the laptop was itself Russian disinformation. The major media used this as a pretext to avoid reporting on its contents and instead attack those who were. 12) The FBI also arranged a meeting with Sens. Grassley & Johnson about supposed Russian disinformation & Hunter Biden. 13) The FBI then used this briefing with the senators to justify quashing their own agents’ probe into the Bidens’ corruption. 14) When the story broke mere weeks before the election — one that polling later indicated would have altered enough Democrat votes to send Trump to a second term — Twitter & Facebook orchestrated an unprecedented & anti-democratic mass censorship campaign. 15) When Twitter initially resisted censoring the story, it was Jim Baker who convinced them to do so (despite the FBI having known for a year the informartion was true). 16) In December 2020, after the operation’s success and Biden’s “victory,” the FBI agents working at & with Twitter celebrated the outcome. 17) The FBI subsequently paid Twitter $3.5 million for the staff hours expended on their influence operations. 18) At the time Trump was being impeached for asking Ukraine to investigate Biden’s alleged corruption in Ukraine, the FBI & IRS already knew the Bidens had indeed laundered more than $10 million from Burisma, via fake companies and dozens of bank accounts, while at the same time VP Biden had used U.S. aid as leverage in getting the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Burisma fired. P.S. And that’s to say nothing of Democrats orchestrating a state-by-state campaign to change voting rules to enable the widespread adoption of voting boxes … Left-wing activist groups, funded in part by Facebook, facilitated the exploitation of these drop-off boxes on behalf of the Democratic Party. That part may not have been illegal since they simply changed the rules, but it’s especially shady since it was done alongside federal health agencies then-knowingly overstating the threat of Covid, which was used as the rationale for the change of rules in the first place. P.P.S. And this is just what we know despite the feds’ best efforts. Imagine how much we don’t.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Incidentally, I’m grateful to @elonmusk & @shellenberger & @mtaibbi for helping the public discover so much of the corrupt machinations that plagued the 2020 election. Self-gov’t is impossible when the state restricts speech and operates in secret.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
.@HillaryClinton: Republicans defending Trump on classified docs "beyond anything that I ever thought possible in this country" [via @PodSaveAmerica]
Video Transcript AI Summary
Republicans claim that I got off easy and that Jim Comey let me off. It's absurd how that's their only response. They refuse to read the indictment or engage with the facts. This is about me, not anyone else. It's disturbing to see them defend this man. They had the opportunity to acknowledge his actions and move on, but they're still defending him. I find it hard to understand their psychology.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Republicans claim that you got off you did the same thing and got off scot free. Why did your friend, Jim Comey, let you off so easy?
Speaker 1: That that's a really good question. I can't figure that one out. You know, I do think it's it's, Odd, let's just say, to the point of being absurd, how that is their only response. You know, they refuse to read the indictment. They refuse to engage With the facts.
There's nothing new about that. And what they refuse to admit is, you know, this is on a track about him, Not about anybody else. No matter how much, they try to confuse people and how much they try to, you know, raise extraneous issues. And it's going to be fascinating, I guess, in a bizarre and sad way to watch them spin themselves up. If you watched any of the news programs this weekend.
I mean, their efforts to defend this man are truly beyond anything that I ever thought possible In our country, I mean, it is so profoundly disturbing how this could have been the break. This could have been the opportunity to say, you know, thank you so much for everything you've done for us. We really appreciate it, you know. But this is kind of, serious. And so we're not going to, you know, continue to defend you.
But no, they're all in again. That's what the psychology of this is so hard for me to fully grasp.
reSee.it AI Summary
Hillary Clinton installed a server to bypass recordkeeping laws, illegally retained thousands of classified materials, removed classified markings, had people without security clearance manage her server, and destroyed subpoenaed emails and phones/servers. The FBI colluded with Obama's DoJ to give her a get-out-of-jail-free card and agreed to destroy her aides' laptops with incriminating evidence. If Trump had done any of these things, he would have been punished.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
For those who forgot, Hillary ... — Installed a server to sidestep record-keeping laws — Illegally retained 1,000s of classified materials — Removed classified markings — People w/o security clearance managed her server — Server security was so bad, it predictably got hacked — Destroyed 33,000 subpoenaed emails — Physically destroyed phones/servers — Obama DoJ & FBI colluded, per Lisa Page, to give her a get-out-jail free card — @FBI agreed to destroy her aides' laptops w/ incriminating evidence If Trump had done any of these things he would have already been guillotined https://t.co/tnN1zCqxJs
reSee.it AI Summary
Democrats are pushing to raise the debt ceiling to avoid cutting discretionary spending, which most Americans want. The debt crisis is the real issue, not the ceiling. Dems are afraid that if Republicans cut spending, Americans will see their lives improve without them. Dems' spending benefits their donors, who in turn donate to their campaigns. Without raising the ceiling, Dems will need to find new ways to launder tax dollars. The only crisis will be for Dems.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Here's the real reason Democrats are desperate to raise the debt ceiling: When, next week, the Treasury starts taking in less than it's scheduled to distribute, many progressives claim the U.S. will default. But as I've been explaining over the last couple weeks, this is false.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
The CBO projects 2023 interest on the debt will run $640B. 2023 federal tax receipts are estimated to be $4.6 trillion (7x more than needed to avoid default). Federal law & the Constitution require creditors be paid in full, whereas discretionary spending is merely “allocated”
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
When revenues can’t meet expenditures, the president is the authority on which payments are made. If anyone’s “holding the economy hostage,” it’s Democrats, who are threatening default as leverage against Republicans to expand borrowing for unrelated wasteful spending.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Why? Well, without more debt, Democrats will need to start paring back discretionary spending (which incidentally is what a majority of Americans want them to do, per a CNN poll). Democrats are nonetheless refusing, and the reason's obvious:
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
The $1.2T Build Back Better bill makes it rain — all over Dems' "green energy" donor base. The $400B CHIPs Act likewise scratches the back of America's most profitable (and staunchly progressive) industry, showering tech companies with hundreds of billions in unnecessary handouts
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
The $2T American Rescue Plan similarly rewards teachers unions for their unwavering support of Democrats. What do these beneficiaries of Dems' largesse do w/ these trillions of $? In large part they return the cash to Democratic officeholders in the form of campaign donations.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
The debt ceiling, then, means this gravy train is forced to return to the station. The cycle of crony capitalism & corruption is temporarily disrupted.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Without raising the debt ceiling, there will be no default. The only "crisis" will be for Democrats, who will need to get more creative in their attempts at laundering tax dollars back into their own pockets.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
The crisis is not the debt ceiling. The crisis is the debt itself.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Final point I forgot: What has Dems even more scared, I suspect, is that if Republicans succeed in cutting spending, Americans will see that their lives are unaffected & probably even improved, esp. w/ inflation. Dems don't want Americans to know they don't actually need them.
@tomselliott - Tom Elliott
Just days after a transgender terrorist murdered 7 Christians, the WH @PressSec is calling for a transgender uprising against "hateful, hateful bills" in red states like Kentucky; the trans community, she said, "is under attack"
Video Transcript AI Summary
The Kentucky legislature overruled the governor's veto on aspects of trans youth care and bathroom use. The White House supports peaceful protests against these bills, which they find shameful and unacceptable. They condemn the attack on trans kids and parents. Tomorrow is trans visibility day, a day to uplift trans youth, but instead, more hateful bills are being passed. Republicans are prioritizing these bills instead of addressing issues like lowering costs and improving lives. The White House stands with the trans community and promises to continue fighting for their rights.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Kentucky, the Kentucky legislature overruled the governor's, veto aspects of trans youth, gender, affirming care, and, the use of bathrooms. I know that the White House release of proclamation for trans data visibility. There is a a march happening tomorrow, to commemorate this day, but also to pro to protest these type of bills that are continuing to be passed and that advanced, in legislation across the country. What is the White House's message to these lawmakers are passing these bills and to those who are taking to the streets to protest them.
Speaker 1: So look, first of all, we, we support peaceful protest. We think it's important for Americans and people just across the country to make their voices heard, that. Just as long it's peaceful. And we've been very clear about these anti LGBTQ bills that we're seeing in state legislators legislatures across the country, in particular, these anti trans bills as they attack trans kids, as they attack trans parents. It is it is shameful, and it is unacceptable.
As you mentioned, tomorrow's trans visibility day on a day that we should be lifting up our trans kids, our trans youth, And making sure that they feel seen. We're seeing more and more of these hateful, hateful bills. And, that's what Republicans want to spend their time on. They don't wanna talk about lowering costs. They don't wanna talk about actually making Americans' lives better.
They want to take away people's freedoms. And one of the things that we saw during the midterm elections is that people don't want their freedoms to be taken. They want us to fight for their freedoms. And so it is shameful. It is disturbing.
And, our hearts go out act. To, those the trans community as they are under attack right now. But this is a president who has said many times before he has their backs. That. He will continue to have their backs, and he will continue to fight for them.