40 Burst results for "Donald Trump"
Fresh update on "donald trump" discussed on Stephanie Miller
"Or maybe it's hard to beat and KFC and didn't need support surrounding more. Right, right. Maybe they were out of sports for that coleslaw from KFC. And she's like, I know, and he's like, oh, Jesus. That's not nice. It's not nice, but neither is she. Well, Donald Trump may be mean, and it stuck that way. So I'm sorry. She had a comment. Whatever. She only had herself to blame. That's why I was going to go there. Okay. Listen, I don't even know how we're doing this show. Lizzo played a flute. Do you understand? What that means to you and your family? She played a crystal flute. As Ellie Estelle says, a slaver's flute. And white people are losing their own. James Madison's flute was that I don't museum she visited and they let her borrow it and something. Right? Thank you, Sean. Oh, gasping of so many white pearls. Fox News needs something to talk about yesterday they couldn't. They couldn't even bait desantis into bashing Biden over the hurricane. Thank you. Right, Travis tweets, my top not you. Another one. So my top issue is this election are simple. Women's collegiate swimming, the race of fantasy characters, and historical flutes. Yes. You run on that. Meanwhile, can I just say, where do we even start with Ron DeSantis? Here's
Joe Biden Calls for Dead Representative
"If you didn't think that our president, I don't even like to call him president because they cheated. But if you didn't think that our president was as dumb as a bag of rocks that flunked the first grade, then listen to what he did, and then listen to Jean Pierre, try to explain the way how this man, who's the president, is calling for a dead person in the audience. He literally don't know this woman is dead. It reminds me of when he was caught telling a man a stand up. Stand up, man. Stand up and get the dudes on a wheelchair. Come on, Joe Biden. Why are you calling for this representative? She's dead. And you don't know she's dead. Your people didn't tell you she's dead. Matter of fact, you probably did. You don't know what's going on in the world, and people think that this dude will run for president again and beat Donald Trump. I can't see it. Let's roll clip one of Joe Biden asking for Jackie and she's not there. Officials like representative government, senator Braun, senator Booker, representative Jackie, are you here? Where's Jackie? To help make this. I don't want to laugh at that. I don't want to laugh at that, but my God, Jackie, Jackie. Oh, I don't think she's supposed to be here. She's gone on with the lord. Stand up. Oh, God, love you. What am I talking about? I tell you what, you're making everybody else stand up, though, pal. Thank you very, very much.
Fresh update on "donald trump" discussed on The Officer Tatum Show
"Here right here. I want to jump Polish. I will try to hold real quick. I'm going to come to you. I'm going to make sure I get you. But if you didn't think that our president, I don't even like to call him president because they cheated. But if you didn't think that our president was as dumb as a bag of rocks that flunked the first grade, then listen to what he did, and then listen to Jean Pierre, try to explain the way how this man, who's the president, is calling for a dead person in the audience. He literally don't know this woman is dead. It reminds me of when he was caught telling a man a stand up. Stand up, man. Stand up and get the dudes on a wheelchair. Come on, Joe Biden. Why are you calling for this representative? She's dead. And you don't know she's dead. Your people didn't tell you she's dead. Matter of fact, you probably did. You don't know what's going on in the world, and people think that this dude will run for president again and beat Donald Trump. I can't see it. Let's roll clip one of Joe Biden asking for Jackie and she's not there. Officials like representative government, senator Braun, senator Booker, representative Jackie, are you here? Where's Jackie? To help make this. I don't want to laugh at that. I don't want to laugh at that, but my God, Jackie, Jackie. Oh, I don't think she's supposed to be here. She's gone on with the lord. Stand up. Oh, God, love you. What am I talking about? I tell you what, you're making everybody else stand up, though, pal. Thank you very, very much. I tell you what, stand up for chuck. Since he's in a wheelchair. Okay, but I want to try to listen to Jean Pierre. You know, literally talking circles trying to defend the stupidity of Joe Biden road clip too. Held to ask you to go one more time back to the question about congresswoman boulders. And then she why? Why? Why one more time? Frankly, honestly, I think the memory of the congresswoman in history requires some priority here. Can you explain where the mistake was made? Did the president was the president confused was something written in the teleprompter that he didn't recognize, can you just help us understand what happened? I mean, you're jumping to a lot of conclusions. No, but I know I hear you, Stephen. I'm answering the question that you're jumping to a lot of conclusions. I just answered the question. If I had said, if that had been the case, I would have stated that. I clearly have stated what you just laid out. What I have said is that she was on top of mine. And he's going to see her family in just two days time. On Friday, to honor her, to honor her work, to honor, to honor. She was on the top of his mind. I have never seen something like this in my life. I have never seen somebody with so many gaps. This girl said, the dead congressman was on the top of his mind. If you are going to visit this woman's parents in a few weeks, or whatever it is, and she's on the top of your mind, wouldn't her being dead, be on the top of your mind? What are you even saying? All right, I'm going to run out of time. Let me go with clip three and then I'll cut it so I can go to
Trump Had Ominous Warnings About Germany's 'Deal With the Devil'
"Let's play some sound here from Donald Trump, who this is how he used to talk to these people, Merkel and many others. This is just over a meal, NATO meeting, Trump pointing how it's ridiculous that Germany will buy energy from Russia while America protects them. Play cut one O 7. Well, I have to say, I think it's very sad when Germany makes a massive oil and gas deal with Russia where you're supposed to be guarding against Russia and Germany goes out and pays billions and billions of dollars a year to Russia. So we're protecting Germany. We're protecting France. We're protecting all of these countries. And then numerous of the countries go out and make a pipeline deal with Russia where they're paying billions of dollars into the coffers of Russia. You were probably there, Rick, you know, at that meeting or tangentially to that, straight to the Germans face, your reaction of how things have changed. Well, that was a NATO meeting and you see Jens Stoltenberg, the NATO head sitting across from president Trump. And he has been extremely complimentary of president Trump. Saying thank you for the billions of dollars that have come in to NATO since Trump was really the leverage to tell countries pay your fair share. And so, you know, I have been in the meetings with Merkel with Chancellor Merkel, the president said, look, I don't blame you trying to make the American taxpayer pay for your safety. But it's not smart. You need to pay your Bill and by the way, you're feeding the beast when you don't pay your bill at NATO and at the same time you're giving money and doing deals with Russia, which is why NATO started to exist in the first place. And so the hypocrisy was called out by president Trump. And, you know, I'm not breaking any news when I tell you that president Trump, one cent Chancellor Merkel, a white flag.
Fresh update on "donald trump" discussed on Mark Levin
"Here where's Jackie? She must not be here. I totally understand. I just explained. She was on top of mind. What a liar. I'm sure Maggie haberman at The New York Times will be all over. If you notice they're pushing out clips or sections of her new book, just full of crap. That when Donald Trump would see African American staffers at The White House, he would wonder if they were service people or something. I mean, this is your typical crap from a radical leftist dressed up as a, as a media person. Meanwhile, there's this cut four go. The best way to get something done, if you, if you hold near and dear to you, that you like to be able to, anyway. From. Shooting me from Charlotte, one, another line going from in Florida down to Tampa of Putin's kleptocracy. America is a nation that can be defined in a single word. I was in the idea that Los Angeles and. What am I doing here? For two reasons. One, to because we haven't been able to communicate it in a way that is mentioned another way. But the nature, not a solid meeting with. The they make a very good point. Here's the deal. Here's what drives the driver in the states that are affected. Here's what you can do. The drivers. I want to expand pre-K for three and four year olds, millions of precursors. The representative, Jackie, are you here? Where's Jackie? Yeah, I'm sure the press will cover all that. They cover a fetterman. Here in search of financial peace of mind, which I think we all are. But I still want to say this. Make sure you're not wasting money on high interest debt or credit card fees. Because it's only going to get worse as the fed continues to incredibly increase rates. To try and offset all the massive deficit spending, folks you got to act
Jim Hanson on the Mental Illness of the Democratic Party
"Jim, let's go to a real fascist, not a alleged fascist. This is from independence hall, just a few weeks ago. Too much of what's happening in our country today is not normal. Donald Trump and the Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic, but there's no question that the Republican Party today is dominated driven intimidated. By Donald Trump on the maga Republicans, and that is a threat to this country. That is a threat to this country. It's just not normal. What's not normal is being drenched in red light in front of independence hall where our founding documents were deliberated. And calling 74 million people a clear and present danger to the United States. Now, on the one hand, it doesn't really matter, but I'm curious, why do you think it is Jim? That they never throttle back. They go from deplorables to clear and present danger. What's happened to this party? It's a mental illness. I think they are part of a secular religion. Woke neo Marxism is a secular religion. It's got dogma, they have a past date, you know, they do all the things that a very extreme religion does. I think you're absolutely right, but I'm curious, when did it move? When did it transition from being a political party where JFK and scoop Jackson could hang out or even Baba even Clinton could hang out to being a secular ideological extremist religion? That happened. Barack Obama. Yeah, he came in and what he did is he told all the groups all these activist groups and all the identity groups that they had put together. They said, you guys are oppressed. The man is keeping you down and you need to present your grievances. You need to set the streets on fire and take what is duly yours. And they did
Fresh update on "donald trump" discussed on CNN Political Briefing
"Hey everyone, I'm David challenging, the CNN political director, this is the CNN political briefing. Here's what you need to know in politics for Wednesday, September 28th. Don't look now, but Congress may actually eventually do something legislatively as a fix for the horrific events we saw take place on January 6th. Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell expressed this week that he supports the legislation that a bipartisan group of senators have been working on that would make it harder to overturn a certified presidential election. Now that's a weird sentence to say from the get go. Why should a certified presidential election ever be up for debate to be overturned? And yet, we all saw precisely what happened as Congress convened on the 6th of January as constitutionally prescribed to tally up the certified electoral votes from the states and bring the presidential election process to a sort of procedural close, and then of course there was that insurrection aimed at preventing that from happening. And so one of the things that grew out of the 6 was, well, what do we need to change about that electoral counteract and is there the will in Congress to actually change it? And this week, we learned from minority leader Mitch McConnell that indeed, there may be that will to get some changes signed into law, bring some clarity to this law as well. Here was Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor on Tuesday. Congress process for counting their presidential electors votes was written a 135 years ago. The chaos that came to a head on January 6th of last year certainly underscored the need for an update. And now we all know Donald Trump has no interest in seeing this law changed. He thinks that it is a terrible plan. Of course that would play right into his continued lies about the legitimate outcome of the 2020 election, and then, of course, that being the case, this is yet another moment where we see sort of McConnell and Trump, the divide inside the Republican Party. The Senate rules committee voted yesterday to send this bill to the Senate floor. All Democrats and every Republican present that did not include senator Bill hagerty of Tennessee. He was absent, voted in favor of it, except one single Republican senator, Ted Cruz, of Texas, who voted against it. And that final vote, that 14 to one, those 14 yeses include the vote of Senate minority leader McConnell. This bipartisan bill does not rashly replace current law with something untested. It keeps what's worked well and modestly updates but has not. Crews used his time in the Senate rules committee hearing to say that he saw this legislation as nothing but a simple and pure political attack on Donald Trump. The spill is all about Donald J Trump and nobody in our lifetimes has driven Democrats in this body more out of their mind than president Trump. Now, as I said, I understand why Democrats are supporting this bill. What I don't understand is why Republicans are. Here was Democrat Amy Klobuchar's response to that when she was asked about it by my colleague Manu Raju. My first reaction, by the way, was that his name wasn't raised during the discussions. Now, Donald Trump's name may not have been raised during discussions, but clearly he was at the center of what went on here. I mean, he was urging his own vice president to halt the counting of the electoral votes, which, by the way, every substantial legal scholar constitutional scholar explained that that was not something in the vice president's purview to do. And the vice president himself, as you know, came down in the determination that he could not stop the counting of the votes. So here's how the bill tightens up the electoral count act of 1887, which has been the governing body of law here, as well as the presidential transition act of 1963. This new bill should have become law. It would increase the number of House and Senate members required to raise an objection to the certification of these electoral votes. The Senate bill, the one that passed the rules committee, would require the support of one 5th of each chamber to raise an objection. The way it currently stands, only one House member and one senator are needed to object before that objection goes before. Each chamber of Congress for a vote. So that's a substantially higher threshold to get one 5th of each chamber on board with an objection than just a single senator and House member. Here again is Amy Klobuchar during yesterday's hearing. Right now, just two people out of 535 members can object and slow down and gum up the counting. This bill also makes clear that each state's governor is responsible for submitting the certificate that identifies the state's electors. This would address the issue of multiple state officials sending to Congress competing slates of electors with different names. There's a whole investigation at the federal level that the DoJ is pursuing about this so called fake elector scheme. This scheme that Donald Trump's allies were putting together with the tacit approval of Donald Trump to submit alternate slates of electors that were not legitimate and not in accordance with the way some of these key states voted. Now the house has its own version of the bill we talked about that on this podcast last week, Liz Cheney is a co sponsor of that bill with zoloft. And there are some differences between the bills, including that sort of threshold of how many members of the Senate and the House do you need to support an objection before it would go before the body for a vote. But there are similarities with the Senate bill, including making the vice presidential role clearly and overtly a purely ceremonial one so that it's never called into question again. Of course, Donald Trump uses the fact that Congress is specifying that as a ceremonial role now as justification somehow that indeed Mike Pence must have been able to do with Donald Trump was asking him to do. Again, something the vice president then Pence and his legal team totally and completely objected to. So clearly, this is going to need some sort of conference committee or at least an agreement between both chambers before it can get to the president's desk and obviously it only passed through committee in the Senate. It still needs to go to the floor. The timing on all of this, given the upcoming midterm elections means that this is likely something to be worked out in the lame duck session. After the midterm elections in November, but before this Congress concludes at the beginning of January. Here's what senator Klobuchar and senator blunt told my colleague Manu Raju about the timeline yesterday on Capitol Hill. We believe we've got such strong support for this bill. It has never wavered.
The Power of Entrepreneurship With Grant Stinchfield
"Got canceled from newsmax, most of us said, well, what am I going to do? Especially a TV person where you're only skills to you. There's not a lot of jobs where you're hosting an 8 o'clock prime time show for a conservative talk show host. But I never ever worried because I had the skill of entrepreneurship and really I don't even call myself an entrepreneur. What I call myself as a small time capitalist. If you can learn the skill of going out and buying a cash flowing business, not wanting to have to turn around, a casual business that you think you can build up, you'll always be able to make money. It's a great skill and I'm so grateful that I was able to do that. This goes to what Donald Trump typifies. Now he did it on a huge level. He's a massive capitalist. I could only dream to be like that. And actually, I actually don't have desires to be a billionaire. I just want to be successful, pay my bills, take my family on vacation, go out to eat to me, that's the American Dream. I don't need to be a billionaire. I like money. Don't get me wrong, but I don't need to be a billionaire. Donald Trump is the only billionaire I know. That was able to relate to the working class the way he did. We almost felt like he was one of us. When you looked at him he talked like us, he was an outsider like us. It didn't seem like he had he was so high and mighty that he was part of the ruling class and there is a ruling class of career politicians in Washington. Donald Trump was not that guy. And for a billionaire to relate to real Americans who all they want to do is be able to provide for their families and have that opportunity. I think that's the chord that he struck and he made us realize that the media was not working for us and Washington politicians, including many Republicans, are not working for us. And I've said, and what Donald Trump really helped me get to the point of realizing this is once you realize the government is willing to lie to you and you realize that the media is willing to lie to you. Once you come to that conclusion that that's a strong possibility, your eyes can now be open to all of the schemes they are playing against us. But you've got to end up getting to that conclusion. They
Fresh update on "donald trump" discussed on Here and Now
"Hitler and he's saying to America. You know, come on, let's go. Your thoughts on his view of fascists, the slogan on his guitar. Well, obviously, that was a powerful statement to have on your guitar and we just wanted to make the point that his music was still as relevant as ever. It's a word to me that boggles my mind that the word fascism or fascist is like a trigger to a lot of people. You know, we put it out and people would say, oh yeah, I'll see you like high gas prices and I said, wait a minute. Is that what it's come to? It's either, you know, you are either admitting that you're pro fascist, if you're going to take that term like you're angry at dropkick murphys for speaking up about fascism and you will equate it to inflation or whatever it is. It's like, is it one or the other now? What are you talking about? I think I hear what you're saying. But now, fascists, let's be Frank, fascists are marching in the street, supporting a former president, and so you're saying that if you are anti fascist people are acting as if you're anti that political view. Which to me is an admission that you're a fascist, you know? I don't know why does the word upset you so much if you're not. Did you worry? Can Casey that the dropkick murphys might lose some fans? Because I know we are. Because you're anti fascist. Yeah, I know we will, because you got to keep in mind. Core fan bases, you know, white working class people. And what other group of the country's population has changed their stripes over the last 5 years, all of us that were raised, pro union Democrats that are now buying into the big lie and, you know, as I say to people, I know that think that Donald Trump represents working class interests. They said, this guy wouldn't put you out if you were on fire on the sidewalk, you know what I mean? And he certainly wouldn't pay you company if you did work for him, so I'm completely befuddled by it. What would you want that core dropkick Murphy's fan to know about? Woody Guthrie, and about what's happening on this album. That he stood up for his beliefs that he thought that there was power in the voice of the people and that we need to stand up and it's kind of scary times sometimes when there's such a large groups of potentially ready to be violent people on another side ready to back the crazy stuff they believe. And I just feel like it makes what we're doing, all that more important because you can't cower from it. You've got to speak up against it and you got to be ready to be there and tell it like it is. I mean, you look at what he got through back in the day. A lot of times he was singing on a street corner or on a train, he wasn't he didn't have security to hide behind. He didn't have an amplify at a sing it from, you know, a thousand yards away his message he might have been singing it to a small group of people in the messages was important. So you take inspiration from that, you know? I want to listen to the last song on the album, which we hear a little of what he got the and then you, your voice entwining with his. And by the way, you also have his grandson Cole playing the Dole bro guitar, so that that made the hair on the back of my neck stand up. And again, what is he singing about here? He's talking about World War II, fighting fascists and
Breitbart's Matt Boyle Describes What Breitbart Means to Him
"Been a bright Bond. How long? Ten years now. Okay, ten years. Tell us a little bit about what breitbart means to you as a journalist and a conservative, and for those who aren't familiar with Andrew, I sat there. I worked for breitbart. You know I was the national security editor before I joined the Trump administration. But I never got to meet him. So why is he so different? I think one thing is fearlessness, but you tell our listeners and our viewers. It wasn't just fearlessness. Yes, it was fearlessness, and we see a lot of that across the conservative movement. Now, a lot of people out there being fighters obviously Donald Trump is probably the preeminent example of that. But it's not just the fearlessness. He was downright funny, too. Like if you ever hung out with Andrew, and I would do it. I never actually worked at breitbart when he was alive. He always tried to convince me to come over. I worked for Tucker Carlson. At daily caller, yes. So Tucker was my first editor. I've been blessed to have some great mentors. So I got to know Andrew breitbart really well. Yes. Yes. Totally changed my life. I changed my perspective on banks. Why? Tell us why. What was special about his perspective? He approached it from, so I was in journalism school. I was getting a master's degree. When I met Andrew breitbart, so I was freelancing and working part time for daily caller while I was going to American university for a master's degree in journalism. And then this was during the Tea Party movement in 2010. And I was doing a story for the daily caller on bias against conservatives by the left media at these Tea Party rallies where they were going out and interviewing people and then selectively editing them and deceptively editing the videos to make conservatives at these rallies. It's a good people that were going out to these Tea Party rallies to make them look like racists. And so I was looking for somebody to talk to. And I think it was Tucker who recommended. I reach out to this guy, Andrew breitbart. I'd never heard of him before. So I sent him this big long well thought through, press request email. And I went through the journalism training that you're supposed to act like your objective and you're supposed to, this, that and the other. Andrew and I started talking about this in about the flaws in the industry and it was him who I think convinced it was among other people, but it was him talker a few others that convinced me that the biggest flaw in the media industry that you see this across the board in The New York Times Washington Post et cetera is that they claim to be objective. There's no such thing as objectivity. And frankly, a lot of the bias that you see inserted into the media is unintended.
Inflation Has Affected These Everyday Food Items
"Mind, inflation is attacked on the poor. Wheat bread in 2018 under the Trump era cost one 95 per pound or a loaf now it costs three 19. Under Biden and the Democrats, that's a 65% rise. The cost of white bread has skyrocketed four years ago. It ran consumers one 29 per pound. Today, it's two 79. That's a 116% spike in price. Listen, your pocketbook can not keep up with this spike in inflation. While the prices spaghetti in September 2018 was a dollar 20 per pound, America's go to pasta now cost a dollar 84, meaning it's risen in price by over 50%. Now, consider this sugar sugar, that also happened to be obviously something that people use a lot four years ago. It cost 58 cents per pound. The day it costs 80 7 cents per pound flour is even worse. It's a 70% increase with flour. In 2018, under president Donald Trump, it was 47 cents per pound. Today, it costs 80 cents. Milk and cheese. This is where it gets really scary. Obviously, you need protein to survive. The cost of an average of two 90 chicken breast cost an average of two 90 per pound during the Trump midterm era. Today, it's four 99 per pound. That's a 72% increase in just a few short years. That lets you know how important the person is in The White House and who sits in Congress as well. Ground beef. Another staple is up. Three 74 per pound in 2018 to a staggering $6 and 29 cents per pound.
The Rude Pundit: The Trump Presidency Was Like a Bad Acid Trip
"Can't get past something when it comes to the multiple crimes of Donald Trump who really was president, something I still can't believe happened. I mean, I know it happened. I'm not denying the existence of facts like Trump and his brain headed legions do. I'm just always going to be like us then we let that happen. That's the crux of it. It's awesome. Do you have to have that moment this guy? Right, but do you ever have that moment where every once in a while, you sit there and go, holy crap? Yes. Every day. What the hell? What is that? What was yesterday sound bite from the rally? Trucks and dudes. A tractor. Did it really happen if it did, right? It did happen. He was president. It was some kind of, it was some kind of acid dream remnant as the way I like to think of it. America's hangover. I never did
The Lessons of History Spell Biden's Downfall Says Byron York
"Sometimes the best question when it's as complicated a situation, it's just what's top of your mind right now. What do you think is going on? Well, the thing I'm thinking about right now is midterms and the lessons of history, whether lessons of history work until they don't. And the reason I was thinking about this, you've been talking about this ABC Washington Post poll. Right. It's done by Langer research. And they included a note in their analysis that went along with the poll. And it was about the midterms and Joe Biden. Now, the poll shows that Joe Biden is dragging his party down. Java approval rating 39%, just 35% of Democrats said they wanted to run in 2024. So the analysis says each election has its own dynamic. That's the CYA sentence there. But in midterm elections since 1946, when a president has had more than 50% job approval, his party lost an average of 14 seat that's even when they're above 50%, they tend to lose a number of seats. When the president's approval rating has been less than 50% as Biden's is by a considerable margin now, his party has lost an average of 37 seats. Now the argument for Democrats right now is that our condition today is just so different that this historical lesson does not apply. My feeling is that it probably does. On the other hand, I do remember, as I'm sure you do, the blue wall, which was this group of states that had voted Democrat for president in all 6 elections between 1992 and 2012. And the idea was that in 2016, with Donald Trump running, they would vote Democrat again, like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan. And they didn't.
Alex Marlow, Editor of Breitbart News, on a Shocking New Video
"With us right now is Alex marlowe from breitbart dot com, Alex is one of the smartest guys on the entire conservative landscape, and he runs one of my favorite websites, breitbart dot com, which I am a daily visitor Alex. Welcome back to the program. Charlie, it is a pleasure to be on with you. I'm so grateful that you're offering your audience for my news and opinion. So Alex, I want to play this tape here just to refresh our audience's memory, which is there was a shocking video. That was released out there. About a nonprofit, a 5 O one that was paying people to make anti Trump videos, but not just anti Trump videos. Flagrantly trying to influence an election. And showing that the $65 million pot of money was being used against what the regulation codes would say, let's play cut 37. I was just offered $400 to make an anti Donald Trump propaganda post related to the January 6th investigation that is completely not true. So first thing first, I get an email from somebody with the good info foundation. Jane sent me a message letting me know she represented the good info foundation and that she was willing to offer a paid collaboration to discuss some topics related to January 6th. So we have other clips to build this out, but first Alex, you saw this and as a journalist, this disturbed you and you decided to do something about it, tell us about it. Yeah, Charlotte, I guess we're breaking some news here on the show. And I don't even know if this is me as a journalist. It is to a degree, I guess, because everything in my mind, I'm sure you feel similarly, is content at some point because I'm on the radio, and I got a website. But this is as much me being a citizen here. This is a flagrant example of someone admitting if what he says is true. And a breitbart we've spoken to this individual and he does not appear to be a Trump supporter named Preston Moore, Harvard trained lawyer. And if what he says is true, we're seeing flagrant violations of 5 O one rules that forbid people from participating in politics, both directly or indirectly. And you would think Charlie and an era where we're talking about adding 87,000 new IRS agents. This would be front and center for the IRS. So earlier today I filed a complaint and I filed a compliant yes as a journalist, but also as an American individual who thinks that this is clear corruption and I don't trust the government to look into it unless someone like me reaches out.
Brandon Tatum: I Could Not Be Prouder to Support Kari Lake
"Carrie Lake is a close second. With the amount of places that I've seen her in the state of Arizona, I mean, they got a fundraiser coming up. I think on Thursday, they asked me was I able to go and I have to go right from the radio show right there if I want to be involved. But she's literally in schools and people's houses and fundraisers at events, Steven Crowder came down here and had a tremendous comedy event she was there. ASU football, even though they trash. Sorry, Nick, they're trash. And Arizona is trash too. But she was at an Arizona state football game. I mean, the crowd was going crazy. Students would carry. I mean, all of those things are such an encouraging measure, at least for me being in the state of Arizona that I could not be prouder to vote for and support someone like Carrie Lake. Now, let's give the, what do we call it? The devil's advocate of Carrie Lake, the complete opposite of Carrie Lake, will be Liz Cheney. Now I don't know if it's a Liz Cheney fans out there watching this to listen to this, but Liz Cheney has to be the trash is Republican candidate that I have seen in a while. She is she is on par with Hillary Clinton. Liz Cheney is the Hillary Clinton of the Republican Party. And I'm telling you what, I have never met Liz Cheney. But I will bet my career that she is as dusty and as ridiculous as Hillary Clinton. They're like cut from the same cloth. I would have more respect for Liz Cheney if she wasn't trying to throw Donald Trump under the bus for her own political gain. For her own family legacy. And that's just my opinion. I believe it's her family legacy. The bushes, the Chinese, all of they can't stand that Donald Trump has interrupted their legacy in this country. And he's literally poo pooed on their legacy.
Charlie Reads Viral Speech From Soon-To-Be PM of Italy, Giorgia Meloni
"There have been some massive excesses of the global regime, and it's all being rebalanced. Donald Trump played a role in that. Brexit played a role in that, but it is just starting. You see the globalists, they moved way too fast. The gang of Davos, if you will. They imposed their viewpoint and their philosophy on the western world, not ever thinking that there might be an electoral or populist backlash. So let me play this tape. Let me not play the tape. Let me actually read the speech. From Georgia maloney, the soon to be prime minister of Italy. Here's what she says. She says, please answer me these questions. This is about where we are today. Why is the family an enemy? Why is the family so frightening? There is a single answer to all these questions because it defines us. Because it is our identity because everything that defines us is now an enemy. For those of us who no longer like us to have an identity and simply be perfect, consumer slaves. So they attack our national identity. They attack our religious identity. They attack our gender identity. They attack our family identity. I can't define myself as an Italian Christian woman, mother, no. They tell me I must be citizen X, gender X, parent one, parent two. I must be a number, because when I'm only a number, when I no longer have any identity or roots, then I become a perfect slave at the mercy of financial speculators. That's the reason why our movement inspires so much fear. That's why this event inspires so much fear because we don't want to be numbers. We will defend the value of the human being because each of us has a unique genetic code that is unrepeatable. Can she run for office here? And like it or not, that is sacred, we will defend it, Georgia maloney says we will defend God, we will defend country. We will defend family, those things that disgust people so much.
Giorgia Meloni's Values Are Similar to Donald Trump's Values
"One president who did not get us involved in another war. Donald Trump went out there and he was preaching the gospel of freedom and the American way of life and what's happening. People are embracing it. Look at what just happened in Sweden and then yesterday in Italy with the election of Jorge maloney, who, by the way, they want you to think that she's some sort of a female Mussolini. I mean, even some of the conservative news networks are buying into the language, calling her a far right extremist. Well, I want you to hear, this is what she said earlier today, she is preparing to be the first female premier in the country's history. Here's what she had to say in Italy. Quote we defend God country and family. Built on opposition to gender ideology and the LGBT lobby alongside support for strong borders and an end to limitless mass migration. Well, who does that sound like ladies and gentlemen? All she needed to do was come down a golden escalator and talk about how you, your platform once.
Bob Frantz: The GOP Contract Is for Every American
"Of all, yes, I am a mega Republican. In fact, when Donald Trump even announced he was going to run for president before anything else came up, being a person that also ran a business of my own over 30 years manufacturing in that. I figured it's about time we get somebody in there that knows how to run things. All right. I don't want to take a whole lot. I like that. But anyway, I want to go ahead and I want to add on. First, I'm proud to see that the Republicans are at least going ahead and got this contract out. I think that's very important. Now the next thing, and here's the thing that they should add on to that. This is a contract like you sign a contract. He's signing this contract. They are with every American, whether it be Democrats or Republicans or whatever. Every American. That means that we're going to hold them to that contract. It's like a contract. And here's something that people are missing too in this whole system. We are the government. Everybody that walks around and talks about the government. No, that's you and I. If it wasn't for the money, we spend to put them where they are, then what's happening is the fact that they couldn't exist. So here's another thing that we have to keep with Americans first in war. In line with. And that is that being that we are the government, then that means we are giving you money to be able to do the things that we want, not what you want, what we want. So that's number one. Now,
Dinesh Shows Why Trump's 'Crime' Is Completely Bogus
"Donald Trump is under multiple investigations and attacks from the left. As I've said before, it's almost overkill. And when you have overkill, you'd begin to suspect that the guys who are flinging multiple arrows are flinging so many arrows because they don't have a single arrow that's sure to find its target. There's a kind of searching here for something that they can get him on, and the latest comes from letitia James, who is the New York attorney general, and she is trying to get Trump really for his business dealings that long proceed his ascent to the presidency. So this is not, this is not about colluding with Russia. This is not about taking classified documents. Those, of course, are supposedly offenses. I think they're fictional offenses, but their offense has nevertheless that are timed within Trump's tenure in the presidency, but or at least in the campaign leading up to the presidency in the case of Russia collusion Trump is colluding with Putin and all of that turned out to be nonsense. But here what letitia James is saying is that Trump's business, the Trump organization, over valued its assets in applying for loans from large financial institutions. Oh, wow. First of all, it should be said that all these loans that letitia James is talking about have been fully paid back. So this is not a case where Trump took loans. He couldn't pay them back. He's somehow refused to pay people back. He owes the money. None of that. The argument is simply this that in order to get the loans in the first place Trump exaggerated the value of his assets. He gave them, if you will, a higher appraisal than they were truly do.
Maggie Haberman: Trump Is the Biggest Demagogue in National Politics
"Maggie haberman of The New York Times I do not understand how she can be a so called journalist at the same time one of the biggest hacks on CNN But when you understand this is the nature of phony journalism today provided in America then you understand that maggot haberman is perfect Cut ten go But it is another thing as you say that he will point to to say you know I am a victim thereafter me He has been I think the biggest demagogue we have seen in politics in national politics in this country in modern memory possibly in the history of the country And he is very good at using anytime somebody is looking into possible misconduct or alleged misconduct and saying it's an example of just how unfair it all is Yes I am and Maggie you haven't been talking about Donald Trump I have obsessed with Donald Trump I need a psychiatric care Megan heaven here I just can't kick my mind off of him Even though he's no longer president I'd rather not write about the current president because I support the current president And of course he's the biggest demagogue we've seen in politics and national politics in this country certainly in modern memory And I know I've done an exhaustive examination of the demagogues not in memory That's right In Donald Trump is the number one democracy He always plays the role of victim you know It's because he's unfairly impeached twice and fairly Investigated criminally by the Mueller again just because they kept demanding his taxes just because they went after his family in his businesses
McCarthy unveils House GOP's midterm agenda in Pennsylvania
"Taos minority leader Kevin McCarthy is unveiling a house GOP midterm agenda President Biden is responding in the battleground state of Pennsylvania McCarthy says Democrat policies have forced Republicans to ask people can you afford it Can I afford to fill up my tank Can I afford the food the milk Can I find baby formula The Republicans commitment to America deals with the economy Border security and social issues Democrats have no plan for the problem they created Speaking in Washington President Biden says the Republican plan is thin on details and Americans have a choice To be a nation of hope unity and optimism or a nation of fear division and darkness The president says too many Republicans are still tied to former president Donald Trump You can't be pro law enforcement and pro insurrection McCarthy says the first bill he'll sign next year is to repeal funding approved by Democrats to bolster the Internal Revenue Service with more employees Ed Donahue Washington
Caller: Calling Myself a 'Conservative' Verus a 'Republican'
"You know, that's why I call myself a conservative is because the Republicans are so disorganized. And the Democrats, man, they just, they've got one card in the deck all the time. You know. Yeah, but you only got one party you can vote for. That's it. That's it. That's the only one. Donald Trump's by man. All
Kevin McCarthy: On Day One, Republicans Will Repeal 87,000 IRS Agents
"The attorney general of New York, a partisan named letitia James, promised to go after Donald Trump. She hates the guy despises him and was very, very vocal in her promise a few years ago to try to make Trump's life a living hell. This week she unleashed a lawsuit, a civil lawsuit, not criminal charges, but a civil lawsuit claiming the Trump inflated the value of his properties. Watching the FBI come swooping in and confiscating the cell phone of a private citizen like Mike lindell. Sheen IRS agents unleashed upon the middle class, all these things have to be addressed. And thankfully, Kevin McCarthy, the would be and likely future Speaker of the House, addressed a lot of it specifically today in revealing what the Republicans commitment to America agenda is all about. It includes this. We'll put it out to the entire country. This is what we'll do. But on that very first day that we're sworn in, you'll see that it all changes. Because on our very first bill, we're going to repeal 87,000 IRS agents. This is what Republicans have been hoping for. This is what independence have been praying for. This is what many Democrats expect. That the Republicans are going to stand up and tackle inflation, crime, election accountability,
"donald trump" Discussed on Opening Arguments
"The other documents included his passports. The location of the passports is relevant evidence in an investigation of unauthorized retention and mishandling of national defense information. Nonetheless, the government decided to return those passports in its discretion. We're going to talk about that in the law section of this, right? But yes, that is, Donald Trump has now said, they even came in and they stole my passports. DoJ has now said, no, we came in and you had a drawer full of stuff that included confidential national defense information and your passports were in the drawer. We could have kept them. If you were Donald J Smith and not Donald J Trump, we would still have them, but nevertheless, he made a big deal about it. So we gave them back. I saw this from the aforementioned amazing Twitter account at open arcs. This strikes me as such a whammy. It went from like the whole right-wing Trump and everybody in that sphere being like, and look, as evidence of them overstepping. They stole an innocent man's passport. And he can't go anywhere. And instead it's like, no man, actually, we ended up with those because you so badly mishandled these secret documents that your passports ended up in them. Your passports were the cheese. In between two slices of confidential bread. Along with your like subway loyalty card and like his health insurance, that's not evidence that they were stealing from you. That's evidence that you're keeping this in your junk drawer, apparently. Yep. So what all did we get? Well, now the DoJ is also happy to report. And again, this is why I don't understand why judge cannon is even entertaining arguments because the search has been done, the taint team has done its work. Remember, Trump waited almost three weeks before trying to do something. And so the stuff they took, the privileged team has been through it. The lawyers have been through it. What have they found? The investigative team, this is page 12 to 13, has reviewed all the materials in the containers that the privilege review team did not segregate as potentially attorney client privilege. Of the seized evidence, 13 boxes were containers contained documents with classification markings in all over 100 unique documents with classification markings. That is, more than twice the amount produced on June 3rd in response to the grand jury subpoena were seized. Certain of the documents had colored cover sheets indicating their classification status. And again, we tweeted out that picture. You've seen that. That one's been kind of all over the Internet. And these are the bright yellow, bright orange cover sheets that say, top secret slash SCI, or the orange one says secret slash SCI. This is designed to show you don't accidentally wind up with these. It has a huge cover sheet attached. Let me ask a really dumb question. I love Andrew. Had president Trump declassified these documents, would someone have taken these bright yellow stickers off of them? Yes. That's what you do. Yeah, excellent question. Now, what kind of documents do they recover? The classification levels ranged from confidential to top secret. Certain documents contained additional sensitive compartments that signify very limited distribution. In some instances, even the FBI counterintelligence personnel and DoJ attorneys conducting the review required additional clearances before they were allowed to review certain documents. Notwithstanding councils representation on June 3rd that materials from The White House were only located in the storage room, classified documents were found in the storage room and the former president's office, the search cast serious doubt on the claim in the certification and now in the motion that there had been a quote diligent search for records responsive to the grand jury subpoena. In the storage room alone, FBI agents found 76 documents bearing classification markings, all of the classified documents seized in the August 8th search have been segregated from the rest of the sea's documents and are being separately maintained and stored in accordance with appropriate procedures for handling and storing classified information that the FBI in a matter of hours recovered twice as many documents with classification markings as the quote diligent search end quote and you gotta love when the DoJ starts using sarcastic your own words against you. That the former president's counsel and other representatives had weeks to perform calls into serious questions the representations made in the certification and cast doubt on the extent of cooperation in this matter. We learned a little bit of stuff from the exhibits. We've known that members of Congress have known about this for a long time. Nera answered questions back in February that were sent by the House committee on oversight and reform. That's Carolyn maloney. And in mid February, said, yep, we found confidential information at the search of The White House. Nara has identified certain social media records that were not captured and preserved by the Trump administration and learned that some White House staff conducted official business using non official electronic messaging accounts that were not copied or forwarded into their official electronic messaging accounts as required by the presidential records act, Nara has already obtained or is in the process of obtaining some of those records. So again, you want to think about pieces in motion, that's a piece that's in motion that nobody has talked about yet. We've talked about what the subpoena and the company records and the certification said. So those are the things that we learned and now I told you in the last episode as we are outfitting our base camp at the apex of yodel mountain. I said in the last episode, I thought it was more likely than not that Trump would be indicted. Now Thomas what I'd like to do is give you the step by step playbook for how Donald Trump could be convicted. Wow. And I'm going to use the same process that we used back in episode 13 of the show. Holy moly. Lock her up. Coming full circle, everybody. This whole time you were talking about this nonsense that they've done. All that was ringing in my ears and my brain, Andrew, was James Comey doing a press conference saying, Hillary was extremely careless. And just juxtapose that and what Hillary was doing, which was sending some, you know, some recipes over an email server with all this. I mean, it's just maddening. I think the government has already signaled it does not intend to proceed under what would now be.
"donald trump" Discussed on Opening Arguments
"You deliberately stonewalled us for a very, very long time, and that's obstructive conduct. Here's what you don't understand, Andrew. Trump declassified the obstruction of justice that he was doing. I have made a good legal point. That will not be the worst legal argument made on behalf of Donald Trump that we cover on this show. That's a put a pin in that. That's a flash forward for the future. I've been following this amazing Twitter account called maybe you've heard of it at open args. And was this where we found out that the passports were like mixed in with the documents? Indeed, we're going to get to that. Okay, sorry. I can't wait. Subsection E says after obtaining evidence indicating that additional classified records remained at the premises, DoJ initially sought their return through the issuance of a grand jury subpoena. And that is actually I've also downloaded the exhibits, made them public uploaded it to our website and tweeted that out because it's fairly easy to find the pleading, but it's been harder to find the exhibits online. We have a copy of that subpoena and the letter accompanying that subpoena, which just laid the perfect trap. It's really, really delightful. So we're going to get to that. And then some new facts in subsection F and I want to actually read this to you because we did not know what was turned over in request to the subpoena. Remember, one of the grab bag of arguments that have been flung against the wall is you didn't have to do a search warrant. We were cooperating. We were giving you our stuff. So here is the stuff. So here's where we are on the timeline. That is, in January of 2022, Trump gives back 15 boxes of documents to narrow to the national archives. The national archives opens it, looks inside, says, holy crap, we have to call the Department of Justice right now. Passports and an old sandwich catch up in the Diet Coke. What is this? This is a mess. You know, highly the top secrets SCI information contained in the stuff he gave us. Wow, we're not, we can't even look at this. Let's bring someone in. At that point then, we still don't know why there was a delay between February and may. But we now know that in May, the DoJ issued out a subpoena that said, and I'm going to read what they request. It's pretty interesting. And then we did not know how Trump responded to that subpoena. We now know how he did. The DoJ has told us, and it is. On June 3rd, this is page 8 of the opposition. On June 3rd, 2022, three FBI agents and a DoJ attorney arrived at Mar-a-Lago to accept receipt of the materials that were responsive to the subpoena. In addition to counsel for the former president, another individual was also present as the custodian of records for the former president's post presidential office. And we believe this to be Christina bob, the lawyer and talking head. Where did she come from? I hadn't hadn't heard of her and now she's in she's Forrest Gump in the middle of all of this. Yeah, she was in the war room on January 5th. She's just an OAN sycophant. Apparently that's all it takes to waltz into Trump's inner circle. I mean, let's be we knew that was all took to us. You have to say for nice things about him on one of his horrible TV shows he likes and then you're actually Secretary of State. God help us if he will barely joking. You are almost not. That is correct. The DoJ continues. When producing the documents, neither counsel nor the custodian, asserted that the former president had declassified the documents or asserted any claim of executive privilege. Shocker that we're finding that out now that all of this was pretextual after the fact. Well, but if they said that, that's interesting that they made a point to say that when I thought what we were doing before is we were just kind of zagging, like we were just like, all right, that's a freebie. Who cares, right? Because weren't they going to kind of sidestep the whole issue of whether or not he declassified it? That's right here they're actually saying, but also he didn't. Yeah, and so backing that up the next sentence, instead, council handled them in a manner that suggested counsel believed that the documents were classified. The production and let's listen to the volume of this. The production included a single red weld envelope. That's that kind of brownish old timey envelope that you can put like about 200 documents in and then you fold it over the top and wrap the little rubber band around the thing to close it up. That's a red. Okay, okay. Yeah. A single red weld, so about 200 pages. Double wrapped in tape containing the documents. So wrapped in tape. Yeah. So now let me seriously like wrapped around twice with tape. So let me interject my commentary here. To me, this suggests, and again, I think this is part of the trap that the DoJ was setting. And when I say trap, I mean perfectly reasonable trap. Entrapment, but this is how law enforcement works. When you have a criminal, you're like, hey, would you like to come forward? Yeah. I remember I'll discussion of when we were trapping Trump by just giving it an opportunity to talk, 'cause he would lie and it's a perjury. You know, you know I'm gonna lie, so you're not allowed to tell me anything. That's how it works. Yeah, that's exactly right. So as a part of that, I think the DoJ was attempting to lead Donald Trump to believe that if he just sort of claimed that my bad sorry, I grabbed a bunch of stuff when I was heading out the door. And I'm going to turn this all over to you and it's no harm, no foul. And we're going to look at the specific certification that the custodian, again, we believe to be Christina bob signed. So this behavior, the okay, we're meeting you, my lawyers here. We've got this certification. Yeah, we absolutely agree. We put this in an envelope. We double sealed it. We marked it beware of the leopard. It's all going to be fine. Look, this is a double wrap with the tape. Nobody's getting through this thing. The Russians do not have scissor technology. They don't get through too. They check one if it's two wraps, they can't get through it. That's how the Russians work. So the DoJ continues. After producing the red weld, counsel for the former president represented that all the records that had come from The White House were stored in one location, a storage room at the premises, Mar-a-Lago. Hereinafter, the storage room, and that the boxes of records in the storage room were the remaining repository of records from The White House. Council further represented that there were no other records stored in any private office space where any other location in the premises and that all available boxes were searched. As the president's filing indicates, FBI agents and DoJ attorney were permitted to visit the storage room, critically, however, the former president's council explicitly prohibited government personnel from opening or looking inside any of the boxes that remained in the storage room, giving no opportunity for the government to confirm that no documents with classification rankings remained.
"donald trump" Discussed on The Psych Central Show
"Obviously, the majority of us are not going to have firsthand accounts with Donald Trump. We're not going to interact with him one on one. So this question is more designed for what if we have that Donald Trump in our lives? What are some things that a person can do if he or she does have to directly interact with a narcissist? Well, don't allow yourself to be pushed around. Chances are when they think they're right and they think you're wrong, they push their agenda on you or their attitude or their decision about something. Also, I just don't go along with their demands. If they say, well, we have to do it on Sunday at two o'clock, or maybe you're busy Sunday at two. So it's good not to give up your own agenda just because they want to do it at a certain time. Set your own boundaries and stick to them. There are things that people want to do in their face that they don't want to do. And while we always compromise, you'll never hit any compromise from a person with a narcissistic personality disorder. So it's important to recognize that pretty early and set your boundaries and stick to them. Another important thing is I mentioned projective identification. What that is is that they project something about themselves. They don't like onto other people. Sometimes it's so natural. They don't even so automatic they don't even recognize they're doing it. And most narcissists are that self reflective anyway. But if they project something, it's important not to accept those projections. So it's almost as if you just push it back to them. Donald Trump did that all the time. I don't recall when anything came from any problem, whether it was a domestic problem or things around the world. I don't recall ever being his fault. Now presidents have gotten off and they've said things, well, perhaps we shouldn't have done this or that or they'll say it in some kind of interview. But I don't think Donald Trump ever admitted to anything that he took that was wrong or not optimal. It was always the best, the greatest no mistakes. Including winning the last election, which he clearly didn't win. I think he's still going around saying he didn't. So he didn't. Doctor Messina, let's talk about some solutions and your book aftermath healing from the Trump presidency does offer some now obviously we can't go through the entire book here on this show. But is there anything that you recommend to our listeners in order to move forward? Because as you've said, a lot of people were stunned by president Trump's behavior. There's still stunned by president Trump's behavior and many people are still reeling from the attack on the capitol on January 6th. Well, obviously, it's a daunting task. What we can do is try to bridge the divide in America and also just in general another thing people can do is learn to mentalize and so what that means to psychological word is use of the many or clinics a lot to help people with borderline personality disorders, but it's good for all of us. And it's listening in an atmosphere of respect without judgment. So it's talking to another person. Without judging of just listening to what they have to say, listening to a red state person. As long as they're respectful, whether they're not respectful, then that's where I draw the line. But as long as they're just expressing their views, I think it's important to listen without judging them. And that's not easy because we all now are very polarized. If you're a red state person, hard to listen to people. Thank you so much for that. And I agree with you. There's a quote that I like, it is by a columnist Doug Larson and it is wisdom is the reward you get for a lifetime of listening when you would have preferred to talk. I try to remember that often. Don't always succeed, but I absolutely think that listening is very, very important. I completely agree that we have to have our boundaries. We should not be abused. But I really don't think we are listening to each other. And I really think that we're never going to reach any compromise we're never going to get together and we're never going to heal and move forward if we're just talking at each other arguing with each other. Now, doctor Messina, where can folks find you and your book? They can find it on Amazon. I have a website that talks about some of the ideas that I talked about today. It's Karen the way it spells KAR Y and E, Messina and the FSI and aid dot com. Doctor Messina, thank you so much for being here. I really appreciate it. Thank you. Well, thank you so much. Oh, you are very welcome. And a big thank you to all of our listeners. My name is Gabe Howard, and I am the author of mental illness as an asshole and other observations. I'm also a nationally recognized public speaker, and I would love to be at your next event..
"donald trump" Discussed on The Psych Central Show
"Doctor massena is on the medical staff of suburban hospital, Johns Hopkins medicine. She wrote the book aftermath healing from the Trump presidency and is an expert on narcissism. Doctor Messina, welcome to the show. It's such a pleasure to be here, Gabe. I really delighted. We are delighted to have you now in the past several years whenever I do a show on narcissistic personality disorder, the guest will inevitably cite former president Trump as a textbook case during the show. However, this is the first time that a guest has written a book on the subject. Now, I know that using any public figure as an example of anything is going to polarize the audience. However, not every public figure has a following willing to attempt overthrowing the government at their suggestion. As an expert doctor Messina, have you found that your book steals focus from your work on narcissism? Well, I think sometimes I mean courage not to talk about president Trump. While he's a poster child, I have been in groups and they've asked me not to measure my book. So hopefully that answers your question. It does. It does answer the question. So let's start at the very beginning. Doctor Messina, what exactly is a narcissist? Okay, so narcissist and I don't know if there's healthy narcissism. There are people with narcissistic traits and there are people who have a narcissistic personality disorder. I would say Donald Trump is in the latter category. When people have a disorder, it's as if they're like an egg. On the outside of an egg on the shell, you could hit it with your finger, maybe something else feels pretty sturdy. Once you crack that, everything follows that. It oozes out. There's nothing left. And narcissists often talk about when you can get them to talk about it about feeling empty. So it's like when the egg is cracked, they sometimes fly under the radar though. And not when they're blatant as the former president or people like that. But some narcissists are most of them are very charming. They can be attractive and funny. But women narcissistically injures. In other words, when the egg does crack. That's when they're so internally or psychically bruised, people refer to narcissistic injuries often. Whether narcissistically injured, that's when the other side of them come out. And all of a defense has come out. In narcissism is characteristic of people who lack empathy. They don't really understand another person, nor do they care to try to figure out what another person is feeling. I knew somebody many years ago. And this wasn't my patient, but he was in treatment for many, many years. And he learned how to say the right things. If someone came home, he knew to say, oh, hi, how was your day? But he didn't really care. He would talk to me about it. He didn't really care. He just learned the right things that one is supposed to say, what is going to be in a relationship? But generally, relationships don't work out too well. Not equal relationships. They are really, really entitled. They think they deserve certain things and just because of who they are. It doesn't matter whether they are these things. They just think they're entitled entitled to whatever it is that they want. And when they don't get it, they often have this narcissistic injury, this crack. They lack accountability. They have a great need for control and on the other side of that coin is that they're very threatened when they lose control. They typically lie, are very grandiose. They are the best. The greatest and the best and I mean, we certainly know that the former president would talk about that often talked about himself as being great, wonderful. A very setting in rallies. Very manipulative, often haughty and arrogant. They have black and white thinking. It isn't a gray world with good and bad, which brings me an amazing defense of narcissists, which is projected with identification. But just to simplify, that means that they shift plans. It's never them. It's always somebody else. And we certainly saw that a lot in the last administration. One of the criticisms that always comes up when sighting a former president is, well, they all do it. They all do it. I must have seen this in my email a thousand times. Well, you're picking on this particular politician, but they're all narcissist. Now even in research for this show, I see that politicians are often listed as having narcissistic personality disorder or they're called narcissists and the media. What set Trump apart? Because I noticed that you didn't write a book called aftermath healing from any other administration. Yeah. There's no healing from the bush or Clinton or any other administration as you're right about that. I think because Donald Trump actually, as you pointed out, I mean, certainly there are theories about and I believe we did try to overthrow the government. But he's right on the money in terms of being a narcissist. If you look at every single descriptor, you'll find that Donald Trump does fit in the category of that description. However, I would like to say that there is a range in the narcissistic spectrum..
"donald trump" Discussed on The Ezra Klein Show
"Obviously we should just pause to say that like this is why is a giant lie but nevertheless this found purchase because it was so aggressively cultivated by people like donald trump who as every new yorker particularly of my age knows has played this casually violent native ism for his entire public career and make sure as well that he's present at these moments of eruption he's present for instance went in two thousand ten a new york city mom and his wife his business partners try and set up a community center near ground zero where one had already been an actual muslim place of worship right there. This is not foreign to new york city. This is these are new yorkers. They set up something that they see as a muslim equivalent of the ninety second street. Y which is like. It's a jewish space that plays an important role in the intellectual life of new york city. Generally and this gets converted with. Donald trump is as a leading carnival barker endangering people's lives into the so called ground zero mosque which viewed and portrayed actively by islamophobic bigots exploiting the pain of nine eleven as the equivalent of the second turning highest afia into a mosque after conquering constantinople. In fourteen fifty three and all throughout the obama presidency with things like the cultivated assaults in various state legislatures around the country against so called sharia law that was exactly the kind of eruption of native ism that we would later see on the streets of charlotte. Because what it saying is that they are replacing you. They're replacing your culture. Your values your tradition and ultimately your place in the american racial caste that while it doesn't guarantee you this is supposed to provide you with a level of material comfort that lets you and not others live in dignity over time. The pain of the war on terror the agony of being inconclusive and sitting in tremendous conflict with american exceptionalism because now suddenly the people that have been described. He was subhuman. Are winning these conflicts. This goes searching for an explanation. For why this atrocious circumstance should be happening and donald trump comes along and has an explanation ready to go..
"donald trump" Discussed on The Charlie Kirk Show
"The costs associated. It helps us hire more staff and travel the country. I wanna think randy from eden prairie thank you. I wanna think jennifer from tempe arizona. Thank you. I wanna think eric from saint petersburg florida. Thank you lisa from torrance california. Thank you dave from oklahoma. Thank you and mike. From scottsdale. Arizona for becoming a monthly supporter. Thank you charlie kirk dot com slash support. That's charlie kirk dot com slash support. If you're inspired by the episode and you like the work we are doing and you wanna say hey. I want to help you. Charlie and help your team do what you do. Best in just the last week turning point. Usa hosted at student. Action summit spoken albuquerque three speeches in roswell new mexico. We did our turning point. Action event in phoenix were back in phoenix. Now giving you the news and also this conversation with donald trump. So please support us if you can charlie kirk dot com slash support. Buckle up everybody here. We go charlie. What you've done is incredible here. Maybe charlie kirk is on the college campus. Won't you to know. We are lucky to have charlie. Charlie running the white house i want to thank. Charlie's an incredible guy his spirit. His love of this country's done an amazing job building one of the most powerful youth organisations ever created turning point. Usa not embrace the ideas that have destroyed countries destroyed lives and we are going to fight for freedom campuses across the country. That's why we are here. How.
"donald trump" Discussed on The Michael Berry Show
"Matters like we you know. Well we have great assets he managing. It'll be good but like you know. This wasn't a financial benefit for nancy. Pelosi again the democrats can have it both ways right if it was donald trump making that kind of money creating stocks while making the decisions on things that will influence those stocks. There would be outrage of epic proportions right. If the secret service has to book a hotel in near one of donald trump's places there's a story about spent thirty two dollars it's enriching trump. You know they don't talk about the things that the cost they don't talk about any of that stuff wasn't people as husband. Makes one hundred billion dollars on stock trades on things they should directly influencing crickets again liberal privilege at its finest. So it's not good for business. But i think in the end. You know we're patriotic americans and doing the right thing for our country. I'm the father five young children. I want them to grow up in a country that i recognize and if someone and people like donald trump. Don't step up. we're not gonna see that we're not gonna recognize this country. You know look no further than the last six months. It's truly scary. You have you know what's going on in terms of the censorship side of things you have you know the fbi totally ignoring eighteen months of riot. Looting arson murder To to make sure that they have plenty of time to try to track down. You know someone's grandmother who may or may not have been within one thousand miles of washington dc on january six. It's a freaking disgrace is what it is. You have corruption in the highest levels of law enforcement. Look at komi you know struck Brennan mccabe all of these people for the last few years you know. These institutions have been corrupted. And that seems to be just fine It's it's pretty scary. And i think we need more people to get involved in. Wake up to what's going on. We conclude our conversation with donald trump. Junior don't miss what his children call the president coming up next this is the michael berry. Show.
"donald trump" Discussed on The Michael Berry Show
"We were talking to the indomitable spirit of donald trump junior. There's a lot of fight in this family. They don't give up. We continue our conversation. Social media d platform your father and prevented him from one of his most effective tools. And that is communication outside over the top of the media. What do we do about that. What can be done. I know he's brought a lawsuit against big tech. Is there an alternative. Is there an alternate channel. What can be done. Well i think what we do have to do is just generally speaking band together. I mean i still use those same social media platforms because they are powerful tools said and done right. I understand that. I'm going to be It's going to be harder for me to get my message out to an equal number of following someone on the other side. You know i can see in my analytics the way you know. They tried to push me at down at time. Certain things just won't go anywhere you know every couple of weeks. I got to file a complaint. Because they're trying to censor me for this. I'll have thirty million impressions one week but zero new followers for a month. You see what they do. You understand the game and yet it's powerful. I think what we really have to do. Is we have to band together. When there's one donald trump and he runs out and tries to lead the charge. But he's out there by himself. You know they can focus all their slings arrows at that one individual. I think it's a lot harder to do that. Michael you know if we have one hundred fifty million americans and frankly it's probably a lot more than that now because you know even people that would be left leaning. They see what's going on. They see you know the censorship from the government. They see censorship of basic free speech. They see you know an unequal you application of the supposed rules and they probably are getting pretty sick of that because you know what's happening to republicans today but it could happen to anyone tomorrow The way things are going on. I mean we're really developing into communism and socialism very very quickly It doesn't take a genius to sort of you know to see that with their own eyes. So i think there's plenty of americans who might say. Hey listen i may still be politically left leaning. But what's going on right now. Should scare everyone. And so i think if we all band together under the notion that you know free speech is real it should exist. It should be you know it's one of the foundations of this country that made us the greatest nation on the world and that foundation is truly at risk right now. There's a threat to it right now and you know that has happened. You know the journal journalists complaining about these things i mean. You think I if this was the other way around they would have a serious problem if it was donald trump pushing this kind of things you know the outrage the this is the end of democracy as we know it distinct ammonia crap they said for four years You know you know under donald trump. Who frankly didn't do any of these things that joe biden is doing You would be all over the place yet. They seem very quiet on this issue. and i think they've lost all credibility with the public and that's just not me saying that that's you know that's national polling saying it will your father running.
"donald trump" Discussed on True You!
"All these packs that were spending money on a tag and trump it would never work ever and it and and I still believe it didn't work as much as they may want to claim credit for him the election. I don't think that's what happened at all. It had nothing to do with attacking Donald Trump because it's like again in nature if you attack the queen all the drones protect the queen so that's what think that that these riots contributed to a potential breakdown of his loyalty base that we did. They cause people to look and see who they were with who they were lined with. Yeah. Okay, and it wasn't Donald Trump it was long did you really want is that they the people you really want to be aligned with and associated with is that really what you signed up for? This thing is far more common. Now again, and I use these as examples. I don't want to have people thinking I'm trying to offend them if they are supporters of Donald Trump that might compromise calls, but here's what does happen. Usually. The breakdown in a college. The reason people leave is not because of their disillusioned by the leader that happens, but that's normally not the Primal Prime reason they become disillusioned by the people that are surrounding them interesting. Yeah. They just find that this is not these aren't the people that I thought I thought they all thought they signed up for the same thing off. And so when you're when you have one perspective, so again, let's say all the all the proud boys thought that Donald Trump was was in office to do one thing. and that's all they saw and the qanon people thought he was in office to do one thing and then all the other people were the people who just wanted tax code tax cuz they thought he was there to do one thing and then when you mash them all up together, You realize you know, it's maybe other than what I what I thought it was going to be. This isn't the party that I really wanted to and and so so again, why do all the Senators why they're all the people who supported or ignored everything before now this becomes a Scarlet T. They have to wear you is this really what you want to want to be associated with forever. Is that the image you want off? And so do you Republican party has has done enough to to show those sort of rank-and-file Republicans or even the leaders of the party. Do you think they've done enough to talk show that the party can make their lives or continue to make their lives safer easier and better I don't think so. And I think that that's that's probably the the issue is that in so well, you know in a way I take that back. I think that the reason that they went along was.
"donald trump" Discussed on True You!
"Gets changed over time and over a depending on where we are and who were with and what we're learning and so when cultures change then our ideas of things like trust change our ideas of what's right and what's wrong changes ideas of of what's appropriate and what's not changes. And in some cases people want to reject that they're afraid of that change. They think that change is something that becomes unfamiliar. It's like it's like asking someone to walk in the door when you don't know what's on the other side of that right. So it's it's really. It's hard to imagine that that everything you knew everything you learn is going to be different And so some people are reacting to the changes of society in a way that makes them afraid. They don't want to start questioning their religious faith because of something they grew up believing now everyone is telling them no. That's okay so when you get rid of it we could talk. I could talk about social constructivism all day long. I love the topic And for sure we create the reality that we're in and what's happening around us creates you know the the What we see what we choose to see and how we interpret. The world affects emotional experience. What do you think is happening in our society. What's going on in our communities. What's going on in our world. What are we seeing. They is creating this. What seems to be an increased need for the sense of purpose or a sense of belonging that that donald trump has seems to have attracted or amassed. Unless i'm wrong but it certainly seems to be the case. What's going on in our society that's causing that. Yeah so this is Look i i think again. I think my my feeling is that These are not new things. I think the only thing that has happened is that the voices have been amplified. And quite frankly. I i do believe that we have a distorted of how broad it actually is..
"donald trump" Discussed on True You!
"So I want to talk about you know, why people have committed themselves ideologically to the thing off Donald Trump represents when that may have started, you know, he's been around for a long time as a public figure and what's happening right up through today and write up through the you know, the event tomorrow I want to talk about where you know how people develop this loyalty and how it and how it works through them. So let's first talk a little bit about what loyalty is and and you've talked about this many times in a lot of interviews out there a lot of information out there that people can refer to but let's recap what loyalty is and then if you don't mind let's jump into how this might apply to log. Loyalty to Donald Trump. So what is loyalty? So I think I think where the answers are going to be really interconnected wage is I think that most people have a a a misunderstanding about what loyalty actually is and what what motivates people to become loyal if that's if that even is the description that can be used but Latinas most basic sense is simply a relationship type. It's just we have all sorts of relationships in our lives and obviously you see them and and hear about them all the time but we all know that we have if you can imagine inside of our inside of our mind we have this kind of spectrum that goes all the way from hate on one side to love on the other if you think about it in our personal lives, right? So we there are people in our lives that we never want to see you or that cord that maybe have some hateful feelings towards us off. Way up to two people that we love that were in love with and then all sorts of kinds of different types of relationships the fall in between there and that isn't surprising or won't be surprising to any of your listeners to know that but none of us ever think about how they end up on that spectrum and why they move up and down it right? Why don't they just why don't they just end up in the center page where relationships are simply transactional where there's nothing more than you do something for me..
"donald trump" Discussed on AM Joy
"Is a president who is said article two says I can do whatever I want. It does not. Do you think it's possible to the house. Might have to file new articles of impeachment. Yeah let's see what the Senate does the ball in their court soon house speaker. Nancy Pelosi is not ruling out even more articles of impeachment richman against the president. She says cannot stop violating the constitution. Joining me now it's MSNBC ANCHOR Yasmine former Pentagon official Rosa Brooks and Maranto Sukumar Mark President and CEO of older Latino. Thank you all for being here. But let's play for you I. This is defense secretary. Mark expert this morning about whether or not there was evidence to back up this claim. Donald trump is sort of freelance. Freelance fashion made that there were threats to four. US embassies which prompted him to kill a senior Iranian. Take a listen. He didn't say the specific piece of evidence. What he says he probably he believes? I didn't see one with regard to four embassies. What I'm saying is I share the president's view that probably my expectation was they were going to go after our embassies so probably going to go after our embassies is not is not evidence of imminent imminent threat? which is what's required for president to take this kind of action without Congress here in Liza major issue right? There was the expectation of as you heard from Defense Secretary Marcus for there but not necessarily the clear clear and imminent threat and that is the overwhelming issue that we have heard throughout this entire thing. No one is disputing. The fact that General Assoumani was involved in various activities throughout the entire the region was commanding proxy forces. To Take American lives. That being said the question has always been why why now and is it worse it and it seems that visit ministration has not presented. The evidence suggests that in fact there was a reason there was a clearing imminent threat now and why it could feasibly be worth it even in this this most recent war powers act. I mean they say here to terminate the use of the United States Armed Forces to engage in hostilities in Oregon Iran or any part of its government or military unless Congress declares war or there is an imminent armed attack upon the United States. And this is. This is the newest war powers act. That was just a passing the house. So it's still doesn't necessarily alleviate the issue that we now face and to be clear for the for the for the people watching the authorized the Iraq war does not authorize war against Iran. It is not open ended to any country. Donald trump to add to it. I WanNa get Rosa Brooks to respond to that but also let me let you listen to. NSA chief Robert O'Brien who's defending what trump has been claiming. And I think he thought the intelligence take a listen. We were very concerned about the situation. We had exquisite intelligence and the intelligence show that they were looking at US facilities throughout the region and that they wanted to inflict casualties. On American soldiers sailors airmen Marines as well as diplomats The threat was imminent. I saw the intelligence. There's been a lot of discussion the intelligence and I know everyone would like to see it. I'd love to have the the intelligence out there now. Unfortunately if declassified it we could end up losing that stream of intelligence insult will allow us to protect Americans going forward but rose it strikes me as quite dangerous is for president and just say we have intelligence. We can't show you that we you know we. We know that it was there and this allowed me to assassinate a foreign leader. It's extremely dangerous. It's creates a situation where essentially there's no accountability. You can't have the normal democratic checks and balances on the use of force. The one thing I will say here and I'm GonNa make all my colleagues from the Obama Administration Mad. Had when I say this. The Obama Administration in many ways was just as bad when it came to the legal justifications for the use of force made very very very similar arguments about you. Just have to the president's commander in chief tremendous discretion We're the only ones who get to decide what imminent means. We're the only ones who get to see the evidence I mean. Frankly we've seen those arguments from presidents going back to George W Bush and it has created an incredibly dangerous precedent the Obama administration when pushed. Uh on well boy. You're really asserting. Open ended power. Couldn't that be abused. their response was essentially. Don't worry we're not going to abuse it and I believe them and then I believe them now. The trouble is they forgot that the next guy coming along might end up being donald trump. And that's exactly what we got. You Hand Open ended power to Donald Trump. You're getting to get some pretty bad things happening tomorrow by by all. COMEDIANS also happens to be a lawyer. It's.
"donald trump" Discussed on AM Joy
"Voters are key for any candidate hoping to win the Democratic presidential essential nomination full stop in recognition of that the Washington Post partner with Ipsos for larger than usual sample of black voters not just black voters in the overall sample but blackboard as the sample. And here's what they found. No surprise at this point former vice president Joe Biden is by far the top choice of black voters with nearly fifty percent his closest competitor Senator Bernie Sanders nearly thirty points behind followed by Elizabeth Warren Michael Bloomberg and Cory Booker all in single digits. Meanwhile two other candidates who've been rising and other polls Buddha judge and Amy Clo- which are virtually unknown to over a third of black Democratic voters even among those who are familiar they have very very little support and joining me now is chief political correspondent for the Washington. Post Dan balls making his debut. Thank you very much for being sir. Thank you okay. So let's get into this. His poll just a little bit Biden. Being the lead among African American borders is not new information to most people who've been looking at his polling most of the time but one of the interesting things this is. Why people like him right? What you guys found? Did you find that what people liked about what African American voters like about Biden is his connection into proc President Obama or something else well. It's combination of both. Frankly I mean certainly the fact that he served as vice president to the former president. Obama is an important important attribute that he can That he carries when he speaks in black communities and seeks to get the votes of black voters but there are other things I mean. He has personal relationship chip of of his own. A long record in the Senate promoting ideas and champion certain things that have been important to the black community. Obviously there's some things he's done that are controversial within the black community but overall I think that he's he's well known well like people think he's a decent person he has a personality not that registers. Well not just with with black Americans but with white too but but it's it's in the context of this election. His support in the Black Community Munity is foundational to his aspiration to be the nominee. Yeah what's interesting one of the things that's interesting about. Jill Biden is that his liabilities. The things that were liabilities for other people the Crime Bill which for some reason Hilary Clinton. It became a liability for her. Even though she was married to the guy who signed the crime bill or Bernie Sanders voted for it. He doesn't get as much of a ding for it. Biden wrote part of the Crime Bill. He doesn't seem to be taking much of a hit because of that. He doesn't seem to be taking much of a hit over the Anita Hill situation or some of his past. You know ideas. He is on things like bussing or you know his past sort of joviality with segregation. He doesn't seem to take a hip or any of that. Is there anything in the data that explains why is it just for me yeah I I think it's familiarity. Frankly I think that that that because he has been in the public eye for so long and and and despite those problems that he had and those were aired out right at the beginning of when he became a candidate. Yep we all remember the debate camel. Kamala Harris went after him over his stand. UNFOR school blessing back in the seventies. Those things seem to be a problem for him early on and yet they have not had any real impact that we could find signed on his support within the black community. So there's something deeper there's a deeper connection that he has that people are able to evaluate his record in its totality Paletti rather than isolating single episodes are single votes. Single controversies and black. Voters have stayed with him through this entire campaign campaign as you said one of the values of this poll by having a full sample of African American voters is we're able to look in a more textured way of textual way about the nature of that support. And I think it reinforces what we thought but we now have much more data to be able to back it up absolutely okay. Let's go to some of this data black voters Democratic voters. What they care most about when picking a candidate positions that bear that positions agree closest closest to yours thirty three percent who seems most likely to beat Donald trump seven percent? Black voters care about one thing winning. Well they're not. The only voters is in the Democratic Party. Who Care about that? I think we've seen that as being consistent throughout but when you when you go one step beyond that okay for those people who say the most important Horton saying is to defeat Donald Trump. WHO's the candidate? They think they can do that. A majority of black voters say. That's Joe Biden. So so it's a kind of a double advantage that he has on that that's right. Yeah absolutely and then. Here's another of the data from the poll. How important is it to have a black vice president among or having being a black VP pick Very Net and Gordon is twenty-seven percent very important nine percent fairly important seventeen percent net. Not Important seventy two percent. That is a a little surprising for me when it comes to picking a vice presidential pick who is black. What did you make of that data? Yeah I think you can read that in a variety of ways and you can probably read it in whatever whatever way you want. I mean the the fact that a sizable majority say that. That's not important is not insignificant but the fact that you've got more than a third who basically basically say yes in one way or another. I think that would be important That you can read. That is something that puts pressure on Joe Biden or whoever is the nominee if it's a white nominee That they are going to be under pressure to to certainly consider and maybe select a person of color as their running mate but I think that on a question like that the the default answer for most people is well. It doesn't make that much difference. We've seen that in different kinds of questions in different different polls unrelated to this but I think that what what you see in that is that there there will be pressure on on the nominee to to give serious consideration to a person of color if any third of any group of people is saying. Do something yeah a strong incentive to do it. Thank you very much for doing this. It's really important to have these large samples of black voters. Not Enough people do it. I appreciate You guys doing that and thank you very much for being here today. Thanks for having me Andre. Thank you so much and coming up later we.
"donald trump" Discussed on AM Joy
"So yeah money because I am one hundred percent focused on who can be trump as we both agree we would vote for virtually anybody who ran against trump but certainly for the Democratic candidates who are currently running so what Michael Bloomberg is doing is he's taking away trump's primary power which is which is the money and he has at least fifty times the network that Donald Trump does and he has a willingness to spend it. Yeah trump won't spend anything and he didn't last said he's GonNa Sell Fund and he did nothing and I mean the the one thing I will say with Bloomberg is because you say three hundred five hundred thousand votes plus that up to seven seven hundred thousand votes because of voter disenfranchisement you have to assume. Wisconsin is on a machine of disenfranchising voters and so people are going to be taken off the rolls by disenfranchise. You have to have have more people vote and you have to factor in the Russian. You Know Russians interference. That will happen will happen. But the the Michael Bloomberg Bloomberg factor that we're seeing and to some extent. Tom Dyer is the astonishing power of money. And when you have a lot of money now it's even more. Yeah now and let me tell you. I think what we're kind of all getting to is Donald Trump. We were talking about this in the in the hair and makeup room a little bit as well. He produces a kind of anxiety. Dieting people that is so profound it's part of the reason people are obsessively watching this show and Rachel maddow's and it's like Mitchell motto is sort of their psychologist at this point point because people are afraid of not just what he can do but what he's doing to people what he's bringing out in people the kind of people he's surfacing in the United States states you have swatting happening Nazis. Walking around for it. It is a scary time and you look at the polling on what Donald Trump is just done and rather than make eight people feel more confident. It's made people more anxious. So here's the anxiety level in twenty eight thousand versus twenty one thousand nine people are more anxious. Do People feel safer. After after the strike on Iran. They feel less safe so that the anxiety everything he does make people feel worse so do so. Do you think that redound in particular to any particular candidate date with the notion just practically that energy is contagious. Yep and it's disproportionately contagious when you have more influence so the elevated nervous system trump the anxiety of trump gets communicated both to his supporters and to his antagonists so we all Felix. So let's start with that. Do I think it renounced any candidate. No I th. I think it hurts the candidates who arouse now's fear in people so to be honest I would say that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Our strike up in that middle middle six hundred thousand three hundred thousand people who this election will be decided by more anxiety so the more moderate candidate is the less anxiety he he or she tends to create. Yeah so I believe that the candidate should be nominated is indeed the one who will have the best chance of winning those six hundred thousand votes. Now you take somebody like Bloomberg if he should take off you know Bloomberg is one of the few candidates could win Florida. He's a New York Jew. There are a lot of New York. Jews in Florida and Florida goes so goes. Does the election if the Democrats were to win the election the demo I mean if the Democrats were to win Florida they'd win the election so I think you've got to kind of hone in On who you who you really believe. We'll win and put aside the differences ideologically within the Democratic Party. Yeah well we're we're GONNA talk about some polling later that I think you're getting at one of the reasons by miss doing well because we're Biden is a comfort candidate and a lot of people are like just get this world to feel not got crazy that make the world com. He is make the World Com. One last point self regulation is the single. Most important thing. Any human being can do you in these times meaning to find ways to calm yourself is a critical element in your being able to survive in these times Hans indeed. It's why we do. Who won the week are calming mechanism at the end of this show because the show is all about bad news? They Tony Schwartz appreciate it. It's always great to talk. Thank you very much. Meanwhile the escalating tendency with Iran. This week here we go again let Irani enforces and this is serious. Accident to accidentally.
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"The story story of the impeachment as as we sit in it will conceptually it makes the this question for the Senate trial of weather? And when Howard whether to call witnesses it removes it from this. Realm of abstraction to there's John Bolton right and he's ready to go and this isn't this longer hypothetical but that at least so so long as McConnell leader has fifty one votes behind him to think he can defer the question of calling witnesses is then even with a live John Bolton Sam I'm here I'm ready. SPINNEY IT undercuts right. The ability of Pelosi try to use that as leverage keeping. Yeah Mine. She's still holding onto the article. And I mean maybe this is a question posed a constitutional lawyer or whatever but having said you know in his statement. I've weighed The competing you know commands on me. And and I if if I have a subpoena from the Senate Command from the White House to defy. I'm going to honor the subpoena having said that if if House Democrats now want to go to court uh-huh and say to a judge. Tell him to testify in the House. I mean they're gonNA have a very strong argument. It it would it. Would it would Extend You you know. Trump's agony about not getting this acquittal. Vote quickly and seems to me like you would maximize the chances that you actually get John. Bolton's testimony because otherwise you're kind of leaving up to fifty one republicans to decide whether anyone else will testify right. Yeah absolutely but I don't get the sense sense that there's a house democratic appetite for re-opening What Nancy Pelosi Democrats soda with impeachment. Last last month I don't like again we're in the well of legally constitutionally politically may be possible but I don't see the appetite on the Democrat side ride for reopening their investigation which in essence is what that would do although certainly in legal terms. I thought the idea that an individual's the the one to decide which is the hell subpoenas. Seems like Topsy Turvy. Bolton is you know say what you will about him and he's a controversial guy but he he's. He's a smart lawyer. Earlier he presumably would have some argument to make that that things are different in the house and the Senate. I don't know I just. I agree with you that the appetite is there air in the house to do more enquiring more of the impeachment inquiry. I just don't totally understand why. Yeah I I think it's a bit of a well. Let's let's put it this way again. Expect Pelosi to prolong it by keeping the articles. But I do think she. She still has a commitment to her her majority makers those Democrats in swing districts with whom without whom she cannot keep majority in twenty twenty twenty. I think there's implicitly if not explicitly a commitment to them to say look. We're GONNA stay focused on the issues that are gonna get you reelected and reopening the impeachment investigation investigation or really the investigation. Generally just it doesn't seem to be on the top of their list of priorities. Now perhaps that changes but I I don't get the sense that that's where they're headed. Okay so eventually the trial will begin. We think and it's shaping up to pit Republicans who want to conceal and seal information has already come out against Democrats who kind of want it all to come out and you know Mitch. McConnell hasn't even really been shy about saying that he's not a partial jury. He he wants to get this in and out of the Senate's quickly possible. He claims he's gathered fifty one votes to begin the trial but put off questions about witnesses and documents for future votes. So what does the resolution of the standoff look like from a procedural point of view Is going to be one vote in the future on whether to shut. Shut down the fact finding purpose of the trial or will be a series of votes how our viewers at home supposed to interpret what they're watching on. TV relative to this question of new information. So here's what we know and what we we don't know so. There is a set of Senate impeachment rules on the books and that McConnell has committed to the following because he can set aside whether or not he could get rid of them. But he's GonNa follow this set of inherited Rules now those are pretty bare bones. Own Own they tell us things about motions and who has rights. Procedure writes in appeals. And the the things the oaths people take but it doesn't have doesn't flush out of trial so meaning being. It doesn't tell us how long the managers have how long the presence lawyers have to defend what are the order in which we take particularly different types of motions. So this is what McConnell has been saying. I have fifty one votes for a set of procedures to elaborate the at least the opening sequence of events in the trial and of course. That's what the Democrats have tried to narrow in on which say let's make this a fair trial Let's hear from witnesses. who were blocked in the house and so forth? So what does McConnell have in mind here for this open resolution well I it would be a resolution that would have to be approved by a majority as he said. I I have fifty one. He has said what's fair is fair. Let's use that opening resolution from the Clinton impeachment trial twenty years ago and let's use it. Roughly he said for this impeachment trial so devils in the details here we can pull up an open. The first resolution that was the supplemental amount of rules for Clinton in one thousand nine and we can know what they said but the question is are they going to follow that to a T.. So a certain number of days and hours for each side to present and then this is what they voted on and nineteen ninety nine. There will be a motion to dismiss and then also on that original agreement emotion. Shall we call witnesses in the abstract. Basically so that's that in essence seems to be what McConnell connel's saying I have fifty one votes for but we don't know for sure but but it matters right. Is there a motion to dismiss locked in right and and will there be any republicans who are willing to vote with the Democrats not to dismiss the trial right which will be within a week or two probably depending on how this plays out. I don't hear a lot of talk about that. But in that's why presumably impart why McConnell has told Speaker Pelosi I'm not showing my resolution apparently the connell if we believe the stories yesterday stole the White House so I'm not showing you my resolution so we need to see what's in there and we need to see it in part to know. How does that trial play out? Procedurally now having said that the barebones own Senate Rules do allow any senator to really offer a pretty wide range of motions in writing. Send it up to the chief not to Mitch McConnell but to send to the chief who then reads the motion in can rule on it or allow the Senate to rule so damn could call for a witness long before we get right in the middle all of the presentation. So and then. That's the uncertainty. Here will their votes on calling witnesses even before the call has said he wants to have those so so I want to get to to the chief justice's role in this In a minute Before that though you know we set aside questions of whether this investigation is inquiry is analogous enough to the Clinton impeachment to merit using the same rules But if McConnell is committing to something along the lines of the Clinton impeachment process yes there'd be a a vote on a motion to dismiss but if if that motion fails there were witnesses called at at that stage of the Clinton impeachment is. He not locking himself into a situation where he's going to have to say. Oh well now we have to. We have to veer off the Clinton Process for whatever reason he needs to come up with to avoid. Oh you for sure. He's not committed to them. Self anyways not said he all his all his said for his own purposes. Here is well last question. We're going to defer to later. And the Clinton trial they did another resolution was a partisan version that couldn't get Democrats onboard for it but that laid out a very limited depositions of of three witnesses so those questions yet to be determined But it's entirely possible. We'll see those votes occurring during even before McConnell in essence of what I what I think I'm hearing from you is that there is no way for McConnell acting on trump's behalf or whoever's behalf to guarantee not that the trial surfaces new facts without making fifty one of his members vote to say you know John Bolton thanks but no thanks will will they would need to fifty one is everything right. He can't he can't he. Can't deter a vote on an early vote on a motion call a witness unless he's fifty one to shut it down so on the one hand right we're not really used to simple majority Senate's right right. We all say cough was just fifty one yards could do whatever they wanted but holding together those fifty one. He he may be able to do it. But I think there'll be a little dicey when it gets to particular questions About particular witnesses so I see this batted around. Democrats need four votes. If they I wanNA have a fair trial. McConnell can lose two and he gets fifty one what happens if three Republicans but with Democrats on these on these procedural questions witnesses and documents and we get a fifty fifty tie so I just assimilate this democrats stay together and they will seems reasonable especially on the witness questions. Joe Manchin is the was the sort of wild card and he was like. How can I have a trial without exactly exactly so fifty fifty so there are two issues here one of which is the chief but will come come to the chief second the first issue? What exactly is the motion right? Because because it's a motion to dismiss and it's fifty fifty that stalemate and stalemate vote loses so three defections on some types of votes this is a losing position for the Republicans a fifty fifty on a on a motion to dismiss. The motion fails sales. If it's left in John Roberts cannot. Aw this is the first edition so the first conditions it matters if the motion is calling witnesses depends on. Who wants who? Who which side is looking looking for fifty one so the first issue? What exactly is is the motion at play here? The second issue then is if it's a tie. Hi What does chief justice do as presiding officer in this is somewhere between. What's what's politically possible? What's in the chief justice's Head and then what's technically legally president here so we have episodes from the Johnson impeachment trial the nineteenth century where they were to opportunities where the chief justice is decided to vote to break a tie and after each one there was a senate motion to prevent the presiding officer or the chief from breaking ties in both of those failed. However the chief got the message we think in the next two opportunities back in the eighteen sixties? He didn't break ties he would he would strain with help. So there's no well there's no yes or no here they're right. He could decide whether or not he's going to break the tie dye. Can we divine anything precedential about those. Those two votes and Salmon Chase was the name of the right of the chief justice way back in the eighteen hundreds when he voted to break the tie was in furtherance of what we kind of conceive of as like moving the Senate trial closer towards what we imagine a courtroom trial be like was more partisan than that what it was his So that's a good question. Which would require me to bury renos back in the peach record to figure out what it what exactly they were? I don't believe they were as quite consequential as some of the potential titles that we're talking about here but I need to go back and figure out what precisely those were but the the question here is for Robert urge sent a lot of people trying to discern what will be his his incentive or his motives are his goals as presiding officer. And I think the answer is as we probably don't know yeah I I'll be responsible and just game out the okay. I mean He. I imagined he'll feel cross pressured. Because if if he's thinking about how his actions will reflect on the Supreme Court He's GonNa WanNa go with public opinion. which is I think? Clearly on the Democrat side in these is fair trial questions but he's also conservative and a Republican and it's no secret how his old party wants this all work out in the end So that's why I asked about past Intrusions by the Supreme Court justice and impeachments because if the idea is is that when the Supreme Court chief justice intervenes in an impeachment trial He does it to advance the cause of public information Then Robert's can just point to that and save precedent Kinda binds me here..
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"Need I mean what sort of What sort of technique are you envisioning? Are you talking about official stuff. I was just hoping you had an answer. Because because for me the the advantage the edge of this idea of holding onto the articles has nothing to do with holding onto him. If you hold onto them long enough Mitch. McConnell would be thrilled he doesn't have to. I don't have to take tough votes. You need to get the articles over eventually. I I worry about the The information environment in general but particularly at a time when people are tuned out because of the holiday and so I could see uh or real advantage in creating the expectation that you're going to have a trial in early January and then you know house. Democratic leaders say Republicans are insisting that they're going to help trump completed cover up and we're not going to send these articles Over until you know until the whole world watching sees that's what they're trying to do probably Mitch McConnell doesn't care and he gets his fifty one votes for the cover up anyway but then at least you've commandeered the You know the the bully pulpit and you've made clear that that's what's happening so that every Republican votes for the cover-up has to pay the price for it. That's the best I can think of but advertising could be a part of the mix Getting the Democratic Radic presidential candidates involved could be part of a mix mass politics can be part of a mix. I mean there were. There were nationwide impeachment rallies on Tuesday night There should be more in bigger ones Particularly around these key votes where Republicans are going to try to short circuit the trial. I mean that's where that's where I would try to take things if I were in charge of a broad left response to impeach man a- and the thing is on the advertising front in particular it's just baffling that. There's not a much more concerted and targeted advertising effort on this stuff. They should be hammering the shit out of these four or five senators right now. I mean it should have been going on for for weeks. Yeah right yeah I mean look at. This is not an easy situation for Susan Collins and Cory Gardner and and and Thom Tillis and Martha mcsally and then of of course you've got the ones that are actually sort of trying to adopt a principled independence from trump like Romney and I don't know if you would go at them I think that backfires Right and it gives them one of the complications to this. That I've I've heard Democrats talk about is and this is sort of an interesting thing to try and debate and figure out. I don't I don't really have a position on it. Yeah but sometimes if the attacks are to direct it gives them away and it. It almost gives like some of the senators. That are kind of on the knife's research easier way out. It's like when when John McCain voted against repealing the affordable care act it. There was this moment in the in the well. Well of the Senate where where a bunch of Democrats wanted to to applaud or just take a victory lap or whatever before before it was is all said and done and Chuck Schumer Shush them. Because right because you know. I don't agree with every strategic decision. Chuck Schumer's ever made but I think he's so wisely. Then that if you gloat when the when the deciding vote hangs in the balance and and you know John McCain and what the fuck does he care like. Don't do that you know in certain in certain cases You know a direct aggressive attack is not necessarily always the best. But I'm I'm thinking less about how you micro target each individual center and more how you tell America that a vote to acquit without any witnesses equals cover up and I. I can see the ways that I listed but if if there or any other if there are any other ideas I want the people listening to hear them I will I frankly feel a little bit A little bit hopeless about this aspect of it. I think that there's not any kind of meaningful way of pressuring the Senate At this point maybe maybe just making those marginals a little uncomfortable rebel but to me like I just hate to return to this but I think the big picture is what happens after this process. I mean I know that's not exactly satisfying but look. Here's the bottom line right. We've always known that this is going to come down to an election right and right and what's going to matter as weather progressive. Democrats mobilize properly no one really interesting thing. I was talking to the Democratic Sharon Wisconsin and they are cheaper focused right now on knocking on doors in Milwaukee right to them. That's the ballgame knocking on doors in Milwaukee and making connections in rural Wisconsin to keep the margins down for trump. And Right now. Oh that's all they're really thinking about. And so you know. I don't know I hate to say this but all we can do is just make our case. I mean this. A lot of this goes back to the problem that you raised earlier. which is that our gatekeepers are screwed up right? The media gatekeepers of the ones. It's not as one Chuck Schumer. Shush Chesa Shusha's down the partisans on his side in order to create space for the McCain's of the world to do the right thing right the things that actually actually gets them to do the right thing are the gatekeepers and if it again this of course goes back to your original challenge. How do you get the gate for two right? Yeah it's it's a bit of a message right I by the way there's one thing we haven't talked about which I think is really important. It's all these spin off investigations. The Gatien's that are going on right now in the southern district and so forth. Yeah I think that's part of it too is like you. Ideally leave the impeachment inquiry open. You promised to keep it aggressive. You do advertising you micro target the individual senators but you create a the climate of fear among Among Vulnerable Senate Republicans that they don't know what they're voting to cover up and And Yeah I think that's a big part of yeah That's sort of like what I would like to see. The broader Democratic Party Democratic Democratic affiliated brain trust thinking about because otherwise you have this situation where You know the process draws to a close and then maybe there's a cacophony of developments down the line and it's not all part of one story where Republicans covered up trump's crimes only to have the cover-up collapsed on them and now now their votes to quit him. are exposed as a cover up of these things that we've right and the thing about that is that that is actually a message that individual members and senators can carry very effectively. It's not something that maybe you would use pay. Dad's Ed's It's not quite clear how you would say you know Susan Collins had better watch out about what's going to emerge later right but that is really a point that I think senators and House members can make very forcefully and interviews. Not something they should say as often as possible right. I mean to to to draw the affordable care. Act back in the discussion discussion Rivera. Remember when in the last days when they were about to take the final vote on it. Mitch McConnell who was minority leader at the time. What like you gave a press conference where he made sure to strike a very ominous tone? Democrats think that they can put this behind them with by taking this final vote and yeah I just want to be very clear that this is all in front of them. They're gonNA take this threat in. Every every Republican running in the United States is going to remind nine voters. What happened When Democrats pass this bill and and and and a similar sort of like forward-looking messaging it didn't stop the affordable care? Act from from passing right and it might not stop trump from being removed from from office. Certainly won't but it but it would sort of channel the way the news media and voters who are very engaged. Think about everything that happens right and that actually. There's a way to do that. That I think supports your earlier. Point about keeping Democrats on much more institute a On a much more of an institutional war footing in the house right What they should be saying to put those two things together is you may vote? You may run a sham trial now which you hear from no witnesses but let me be clear we are going to get those witnesses. We're going to hear from those witnesses Mrs. We're GONNA fight in court until we hear from them. We're GONNA fight in court until we get his tax returns an and his finances and then what we're going to say is here's what you cover it up right. So I think the aggressive institutional war-footing it forms the underpinning of that kind of message that is the hopeful. Note that I think we we should end on it and I hope that Influential people in the Democratic Party are listening and they follow They Do as Greg just he said Greg Sargent thanks for joining us. Thanks Brian that's it. For this week I won't be back until the New Year but in the meantime I'd encourage everyone listening to keep in mind. How straightforward weird things? Look when you peel away. All the layers of obfuscation trump has been impeached for extorting vulnerable foreign government to interfere in the twenty twenty election on his behalf. The evidence that he's guilty is overwhelming and until he became president. Nobody would have disputed. The what he did is an impeachable offense. There are people out there closer to the president who have even more evidence but trump has ordered them not to testify and they have complied with his order. If their testimony were exculpatory skull Tori Republicans would be desperate to put them on the witness stand. Instead they're desperate to keep that information from ever coming to light that makes them accomplices. That's it that's the story. Tell your friends tell your family and if you representatives or new sources tell you otherwise. Tell them they're using their power to spread lies and that you won't forget. This show is produced by crooked media. It's written and hosted by me Brian. Boiler Steven Hoffman is our producer and editor. If you enjoyed this episode please subscribe rate and review US wherever you get your podcasts..
"donald trump" Discussed on Rubicon: The Impeachment of Donald Trump
"On December Eighteenth Twenty nineteen the House of Representatives impeached only the third president in US history in the parlance of this show. Democrats have crossed the Rubicon. Which means it for all the dramatic and infuriating moments? We've witnessed these past two months. The fight has only just begun. The trial of President Trump won't begin until twenty twenty but between now and then that fight won't stop in in fact this may be the most important phase of it because the nature of the trial. The Senate actually conducts will be determined large part by what we all of us do now that the articles of impeachment have passed. The rules of the Senate require all members serving as jurors in an impeachment trial to take an oath of affirmation to do quote impartial impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws. So help me God. Trump's loyalists have made no secret of the fact that they will ignore their oaths was best for the country entry. To get get this thing over with I am clearly made up my mind. I'm not impartial. Your political process. I would anticipate we will have a largely partisan partisan outcome. What did Lindsey Graham and Mitch? McConnell mean when they admitted they have no intention of being impartial at bottom. They mean the antenna equipped trump no matter how strong the evidence of his is high. Crimes and misdemeanors is but tactically. What they meant is they wanna read? The trial claimed the evidence. The House compiled isn't strong enough ignore that trump summarily obstructed the inquiry refuse to subpoena the testimony and documents that trump withheld from the house and then equipped trump without hearing from a single witness This thing will come to the Senate and it will die quickly and I will do everything I can to make it die quickly. Got A motion to dismiss before the Senate had even decide whether to depose a single winds. That was Mitch McConnell again and what he was hinting at in the intentionally cryptic language of parliamentary procedure was that he wants to round up fifty one votes to dismiss the charges against trump before the houses impeachment managers. That is the prosecutors. Have a chance to call witnesses at all. Otherwise his members will have to explain why they voted. Affirmatively against calling witnesses like former national security adviser John Bolton and White House Chief of Staff Mulvaney Mulvaney who refuse to testify in the house or alternatively those witnesses will have to testify under oath and as Republicans know better than anyone their their testimony would be very damning otherwise Republicans would be desperate to hear from them so it's easy to see why trump's accomplices would want to shield him from a serious trial. There's just one problem them to engage a trial without the facts. Coming out is to engage in a cover-up the problem for Republicans is that the overwhelming majority the of Americans including the majority of Republicans wanted fair trial. They want to hear from these witnesses. They definitely don't want their elected leaders engaged in a cover up and and it only takes four Republican senators to guarantee that the cover up fails. And that's where the rest of US come in whether you're democratic member of Congress a presidential candidate an impartial journalist or regular voter there is no other credible way to interpret or describe what Senate Republicans hope to do next month. Making their intentions clear is is the responsibility of everyone who cares about truth making a cover up difficult or impossible to complete is what this phase of the impeachment fight is all about with that in mind and Washington Post Greg Sargent and I will look ahead to the trial and discuss what each of us can do to make sure that both trump and those to seek to help him cover up. His.