All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 19, 2024 - Doug Collins Podcast
34:02
Pay Your Fair Share
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
You want to listen to a podcast?
By who?
Georgia GOP Congressman Doug Collins.
How is it?
The greatest thing I have ever heard in my whole life.
I could not believe my ears.
In this house, wherever the rules are disregarded, chaos and mob rule.
It has been said today, where is bravery?
I'll tell you where bravery is found and courage is found.
It's found in this minority who has lived through the last year of nothing but rules being broken, people being put down, questions not being answered, and this majority say, be damned with anything else.
We're going to impeach and do whatever we want to do.
Why?
Because we won an election.
I guarantee you, one day you'll be back in the minority and it ain't gonna be that fun.
Hey everybody, welcome back to the podcast.
I'm back.
I'm glad to be back in the chair today.
Doug Collins is in today and we're glad to have it.
I was also glad to have Chip Lake who fills in with us along with James for our Friday's Finest episodes.
Y'all love Friday's Finest.
We're glad to have you with.
He filled in.
Glad to have him.
Got some good response back on that.
But now we're back in the chair here for another start of the week.
Crazy week.
The good part about it is, let's just make a statement here on this Monday.
Congress is out so you're safe for a little bit.
Well, maybe not safe, but at least they're not doing anything, because right now they're completely dysfunctional, folks.
So right after the break, I wanted to take a little bit of a change, talk about some big events that are out there, some things in perspective.
Some that we've talked about last week, especially the Fannie Willis stuff from last week in Atlanta, was just mind-blowing, and especially as an attorney in Georgia myself.
I don't understand how she got away with half of what she got away with on the stand.
Judge let her have more leeway, let's just say, than I've seen any judge in this state outside of the Fulton County Courthouse have with a witness.
But we'll talk about that.
We're going to talk about Ukraine.
We're also going to talk about the New York City cases and just some things in general.
And also, by the way, I'll just say it, as James reminded me of the 50-50 shot, but hey, I won my 50-50 shot.
I did pick KC for the Super Bowl, and KC came through.
So right after the break, let's jump into it.
Hey folks, you know, when you look out and you see the country and just the disarray it is, you see the Biden administration, you see the wholesale prices have just went through the roof again.
Inflation is tearing us up.
If you have your finances all impinged in just a few areas, if you're just in stocks and bonds and you're not diversified, I got some news for you.
You need a navigator.
You need somebody to help you get to where you need to go with those finances.
And I can't think of anybody better to do that than my friends at Legacy Precious Metals.
You need precious metals in that portfolio.
You need gold and silver.
And legacy precious metals, the folks there, they're the navigators.
They know how to deal with tough times.
They know how to look ahead and take your personal situation and make it something that can be workable for you in the long term.
Because that's, at the end of the day, that's the one you're most concerned about.
You need to make sure that your personal finances and your retirement are secure.
You need folks like legacy precious metals helping you in that.
They will take the time to learn you.
They'll learn your finance.
They'll learn where your investment goals are.
And they'll help you get there.
And metals and gold right now in this kind of crazy inflation, in this kind of crazy economy with the Biden's economy, you need that help.
And Legacy Precious Metals is the one to do that.
So give Legacy Precious Metals a call.
866-528-1903.
866-528-1903.
Or you can always visit them online at LegacyPMInvestments.com, and you can download their free investor's guide.
Legacy Precious Metals, they're the ones you need.
They're the navigators to help you to these turbulent times.
Hey, everybody.
Mike Lindell and the MyPill employees want to thank...
All of my listeners, the great Doug Collins podcast listeners for your continued support.
To thank you, they're offering a overstocked clearance sale right now for the best price you've ever used when you use the promo code Collins, C-O-L-L-I-N-S, and you get free shipping on the entire order.
You get 50% off the MyPillow 2.0, the brand new flannel sheets that just arrived and won't last long.
Get six pack towel sets for only $29.98 and take advantage of the free shipping on large items like mattresses and mattress toppers.
100% made here in the United States and on sale for as low as $99.
Everything is on sale from the brand new kitchen towels that have the same technology as the bath towels that actually absorb dog beds, blankets, couch pillows and much, much more.
To get the best specials ever, go to mypillow.com, mypillow.com, and use the promo code Collins, C-O-L-L-I-N-S, or call 800-986-3994 and use the same keyword Collins, C-O-L-L-I-N-S, and get free shipping on your entire order while supplies last.
MyPillow products, thank you.
Y'all go check them out.
All right, we're back here on the Doug Collins Podcast.
First off, let's just sort of lay the groundwork.
I think there's a good need to take a breath, say, Where are we at?
It's middle of February.
We're nine months off from the general election.
The primaries are over.
Nikki Haley, by the way, just in case you're listening, which I doubt you are, but in case some of your people are, Nikki, it's over.
I mean, if you're waiting for Donald Trump to drop out because of court cases or other stuff, it's not happening.
And all you're doing right now is you have become the surrogate for Joe Biden.
You, in all fairness, have become a surrogate for Joe Biden because they're using every attack line.
And I predicted this Two weeks ago, your attack lines on Donald Trump are becoming the main attack lines of Joe Biden.
And if that's what you intended to do, then you succeeded.
But to have a future in a Republican Party in which you are, at this point, tearing down the Republican, you know, for all intents and purposes, the presidential nominee for this party, there's a problem.
And I know you must be embarrassed.
You spent a lot of money.
You came from far behind.
And then you're posting, you know, really strange tweets on X about, you know, things.
I mean, it's time to end this.
I know South Carolina's Saturday.
Hopefully you'll end it after that.
Your indications are that you're not.
But just realize right now, for most of us out here who will be a part of the Republican Party until we're no longer part of politics or out of life, this is a long-term play.
I believe Donald Trump is going to be the nominee, and I believe Donald Trump's going to win.
But also, we've got to prepare this party to continue on.
And right now, it's not happening, Nikki Haley.
I know you're Democrat donors.
When you go on TV and you talk about open primaries, you talk about Democratic votes, you're not in a general.
You're not running in a general primary, Nikki Haley.
And right now you're losing 75% or more of the Republican voters in open primaries.
Let's translate that.
If you continue to attack Republicans, they're not going to vote for you if you were somehow the nominee.
That's something I don't think your team's actually thought about.
But, hey, I'm not being paid by you.
You enjoy coming into other states and playing in states where, you know, your opinion you think lacks to matter.
Well, just understand right now that this is becoming a problem, has begun a problem.
And right now, when we need to come together, we're seeing a candidate who is hanging on with no chance of becoming the nominee in the current situation.
And even if the hope that the Haley campaign has is that somehow Donald Trump will be in so much trouble and drop out, which is, again, wishing the worst upon Donald Trump, so that you can step in and be the nominee, I think you're sadly mistaken.
Don't think it'll happen.
Even if that were to happen, it's not going to happen.
So, let's set the stage.
We're nine months out.
It's a Joe Biden-Donald Trump race.
Donald Trump is going through, so we're going to talk about some issues in New York and Atlanta and other places with the court cases, but also when you look at the voting polls, you look at the numbers game, so to speak, right now, Donald Trump is in a really good position to beat a candidate who, just in the last...
Week and a half had a special prosecutor, an independent special prosecutor, and of course the left likes to say Republican prosecutor.
You notice they never like to say that about Democrat prosecutors like Weissman and Mueller and some of the others.
It's really interesting.
Anyway, they don't like to talk about that unless it's a Republican, and then they'll bring it up all the time.
But in looking at this, it says that he has a hard time remembering basic facts.
So, the Democrats have a problem.
Their left are upset with Biden over the Gaza.
Their pro-Hamas side of their party is upset because he's not doing enough to protect Hamas and Gaza.
And seemingly, that is what it is.
And under the guise of, look, the innocents there need to be protected, but they also have to realize that they're in their position.
They are because they elected Hamas.
To start with, and Hamas is using the people of the innocence of Palestine in Gaza, the Palestinians in Gaza, to protect their terroristic acts.
I mean, let's just face facts here, folks.
I mean, for everyone, you know, who's wanting this to continue, this is just, you know, again, the Democrats have a problem.
And right now you have Rashida Tlaib, who is the only member to vote other than yes to condemn rape and violence in the terrorist acts that happened, is now telling people in Michigan that they need to vote no or other than for Biden in the primary that's coming up.
They'll bring it back together.
Don't get me wrong.
Progressives have nowhere else to go but Joe Biden.
Barring something happening between him and now and the convention.
They have nowhere else to go.
They will come home.
Democrats come home.
Republicans, well, not so much.
We like to fight.
So we'll see how this all works out as it goes on.
They've got nine months to do it.
So we've got a large election looming now.
The bigger world issues are now also coming to focus too.
And that's where I want to start with this morning.
The big issue that is out there right now is Ukraine and NATO and the Russia war.
Russia needs to be checked.
I've always believed that.
The question I've asked on this show for two years now is I understand we need to limit our involvement, that we definitely don't need to have ground troops there in antagonizing this any further.
But also there has to be an end strategy.
There has to be a way that Putin is not rewarded for crossing the border and into Ukraine and then being able to say, we're going to take whatever we have.
Are we reverting back to the Middle Ages here that when kingdoms just can advance as they want to and the rest of the world just sort of sits by and says, okay, No, I don't think we can.
So there has to be a setup here.
But we have a problem at home in which you have an administration who has no desire, let me rephrase that, they have an idea how to fix it, they just don't want to, and that is to fix the southern border.
We have a lot of issues here that has raised an isolationist populist movement here of not funding Ukraine, which there has been a lot of problems with.
We're finding out now that there is a lack of accountability in some of the funds.
There's at least been reporting that there's been fraud involved with this with some of the members in the administration over there.
These are all things that need to be worked out.
However, there is an issue that Russia can't just simply do whatever it wants to.
I mean, the question would become, is what all of a sudden Poland wanted more of, you know, take back some of Germany?
I mean, this just can't be the standard.
Okay, China, you know, Iran or North Korea, I mean, this can't be the standard that whenever you're mad or you want to do something, if you just attack a neighboring country and the world just says, okay, fine.
The issue comes, however, in Europe is that there is a group called NATO, which Ukraine is not a part of.
Joe Biden seems to forget that occasionally.
It's also the very tender box, if you would, that started this whole thing with Russia and Ukraine.
With the continuation of trying to push Ukraine into NATO by the Western countries, Western allies, United States, especially the Biden administration and the Obama administration, continuing this push for Ukraine to join NATO.
Russia kept saying, no, don't put them in NATO.
They're too close.
There's historical reasons.
The whole nine yards.
Not giving excuses, but just simply saying that was one of the stated reasons.
There's some things we need to know about this, because just recently, there were some comments by Donald Trump, the former president, about NATO, and the fact that his push during his four years in office was to get NATO's members to actually live up to the responsibility of being a NATO member.
That is something that is often left out of this equation.
And so for some of you out there who are crying right now that the U.S. is not doing enough, we've got to give Ukraine more money, and for the Munich conference, to come into the Munich conference and have other countries say, they're rationing their ammo, they're not able to do this, the U.S., you've got to step up.
Well, hang on just a sec.
Number one, we've provided a lot of resources, humanitarian and military resources, to Ukraine.
Ukraine.
Now, you can say we didn't do it fast enough.
Okay, I can argue with that.
Okay, all right.
We didn't do it in the right process.
We didn't do the right stuff.
Remember, you know, those are all determinations of the Biden administration in looking at this.
But when it comes to NATO itself, which is, let's just call back here to the really reasons in some of this that, and you can go into, you know, Putin wanting to form the Russian Empire again, the old Soviet Union, you know, this is the whole thing.
Granted, but a lot of this centered around the NATO countries surrounding Russia, and specifically Ukraine.
NATO was designed to stop Russian aggression.
That was the for and after World War II. This was the formation that say, look, we're all going to come together.
You attack one, you attack us all.
Russia, you're not going to come and take over the old Eastern Bloc after, you know, when they took over most of the Eastern Bloc countries.
That are currently free.
And after the devolution of the Eastern Bloc countries, you saw many of them being admitted into NATO, and again, as that buffer expanded between Western Europe and Russia.
Here's the interesting thing that you need to understand.
There is a 2% commitment that is asked of all NATO members, 2% of their GDP, to be spent on defense.
2%.
It's not a huge goal.
It's not an overwhelming burden.
It can be a little bit of a burden, especially with smaller economies, but you're reaping the benefits of the whole.
This past week at the Munich Conference, they were excited because 18 of 31 will meet their 2% goal this year.
18 of 31. We'll meet the 2% goal.
Donald Trump talked about this for four years.
The actual number was much lower earlier and it has grown mainly because the U.S. has said you've got to increase your spending.
We're now for the first time seeing and a long time seeing Germany, France, others upping their defense spending.
And when you put it in perspective of NATO spending, NATO spending, the U.S. is more than two to one.
In spending in NATO. We're not talking small margins here, $723 billion to $328 billion.
Thirty other countries providing $328 billion, we're providing $723 billion.
That's our defense expenditures.
So when you look at this, You know, our spending on defense is much, much higher than the other countries.
When it gets to the 2% guideline, the 2% threshold, here is an interesting part.
Let me let you name the countries that are not meeting their 2% threshold right now.
Not meeting their 2% threshold.
In 2014, only the United States and Greece in 2014 were meeting their responsibilities.
Only the United States and Greece and the United Kingdom were meeting their 2% threshold.
Only.
Since into 2022, and these numbers are moving forward, you have countries like France.
You have countries like Romania.
You have countries like the Netherlands, Albania, Norway, Hungary, Italy, Germany, 1.44.
This was based on 2015 price expectations come out in 2020. Two, Germany at 1.44.
Portugal, 1.44.
Denmark, 1.39.
Czech Republic, 1.33.
I mean, Canada.
I mean, if you can't see the problems in Canada, I mean, they've got enough as it is.
Canada, 1.27.
All the way down to tiny less.
Spain, 1%.
Belgium, 1.28.
Now, on the upper end, you've got Greece that is spending higher, actually, percentage-wise than the U.S., but you've got Poland, who has now come above 2%, rightfully so.
They're right next to Russia, right next to this place.
The United Kingdom has stayed at 2%.
Estonia has actually came up and met.
Latvia has came up and met.
Slovakia has come up and met.
Croatia has come up and met.
Romania is right at it.
France is getting there this year, as what was being said.
So, understand something.
Think about this.
If you've got 31 people together, 31 of your groupings together, and you decided that you would all chip in a set amount, that you had to maintain a certain amount of defense spending, and that defense spending, let's just say, was 2%.
And you looked around the room and everybody was supposed to pony up.
That was supposed to be their commitment to their defense so that they could force off an attack from Russia or other that may attack the NATO bunch.
We'll just call ourselves NATO for a little bit.
And you look around the table and almost all of the folks who are around the table are not doing their part.
And they're still depending on the ones who are doing more than their part or more than their agreed share to do more.
I am not saying that they don't get defended, although you have to wonder why.
I'm not saying that their membership is revoked, but at a certain point in time, is it just not fair that you live up to the obligations of the treaty?
You live up to the obligations of what you're supposed to provide.
I don't think that's so hard for people to understand.
And if NATO and the countries closest to Ukraine have provided a great deal, I'm not downplaying necessarily the idea that Europe has not provided what they need to have or what they have been given to.
Alright, here we go.
I'm going to put up this right here.
Total European support for...
Countries in the Ukraine.
Countries that have sent the most aid.
Because this is important.
I hear this all the time.
What are people supposed to be doing?
How are we supposed to be sending it?
Countries that give the bet.
Total bilateral commitments.
United States, by far and above.
We've shared more than one billion.
Germany, way below us.
United Kingdom, way below us.
France, way below us.
Italy, way below us.
By the time you get down to Japan, Denmark, other countries in the world, especially when you get NATO countries, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, we're way, way ahead of them.
So, the majority of the sport has come from the United States.
And our military mates are providing almost $47 billion in military spending, nine times as much as the United Kingdom, the next highest military aid contributor.
So, not just Ukraine, but just in general.
Explain, if you want to go to the Doug CollinsPodcast.com, hit the email button, love to hear from you.
But let's just be honest.
We've got to figure out a way out of Ukraine that does not reward Russia, The despot state, Putin is a dictator, and there's not a comparison to a dictator state as compared to the US. Okay?
But the question comes, is for all these countries in Europe who are not living up to their conditions, why is it we are the bad guy when we make that?
Comment.
I mean, come together.
There's 18 of you now that are actually doing it, but there was one before.
Are there not 16 members who will come together and say, hey, we want to lower the commitment to 1.5?
No, the commitment's 2%.
Actually, when you're looking in your own back door, why wouldn't it be higher to your own national defense instead of depending on the U.S. all the time?
Now, that may not be a very simple way of putting it.
That may be something you've not thought about and you're listening to this podcast saying, Doug, I've never thought of it that way.
Well, that's what I want you to think about.
I want you to think about how do we contain Russia who has unlawful aggression into a country of the Ukraine and should be kicked out and should be moved out and how do we do that with the support of other allies who are actually closer to this fight than we are?
Many of whom are not supporting their commitment to NATO. These are the things, I told you back, we did a podcast about a month ago, and I told you things that will develop in this election cycle.
And one of the things I said was going to be national security and international affairs.
Normally not a big issue in The presidential race is there, but it's got to be special reasons to be there.
We had it in 80 with the hostage situation.
We've had it in 2004 with the Afghan and Iraq wars.
You've seen this in several times when it does pop up.
When it does pop up, it's very important.
This year, I think, could be one of those times.
That's why I'm bringing this out.
So this is a study.
Before you buy into all the hype that we're just the most, you know, Egregiously poor country in the world for not helping Ukraine.
We have been helping.
And, you know, the number needs to come up, you know, with some others.
And we need to figure this out.
Right now, Joe Biden, his only solution as a Democrat solution is to throw money at it.
Just throw money at it.
It'll get better.
Speaking of throwing money at it, we'll transition down here, and I'm not going to spend a lot of time here.
I know that Chip and I'll cover some of this last week, and I was traveling and didn't get to see a lot of it, but I did see the Fannie Willis testimony in the court in Atlanta and the disqualification with her boyfriend, paramour, whatever you want but I did see the Fannie Willis testimony in the court in Atlanta and the disqualification with her boyfriend, paramour, whatever you want to call it, and I'm just going to say from this perspective, and I know a lot of judges around the state,
I'm an attorney in Georgia.
I don't think there's another court outside Fulton County that would let her get away with what she got away with.
Her arrogance, her rudeness, her not answering the questions.
I think the judge tried.
But never came down.
Like I would have seen a judge in my home circuit up here in the North Georgia circuit or the Mountain circuit.
The judges are not going to allow that.
They're not going to allow them to come in.
They're not going to allow them to spout off.
They're not going to say who's on trial and who's not on trial.
That's just not going to happen.
So you know it's bad for Democrats when Democrats are having to say, oh, she was spot on.
She did everything perfect.
Look, she came across as angry.
She came across mad.
I get it.
But as a witness, that's not a good thing.
And then, you know, the contradiction in testimonies on who paid for what and that he paid for it.
He said he paid for it all.
She said she paid for it all.
Gave it back to him and reimbursed.
Again, going back and forth here.
No matter what this judge rules, Judge McAfee, if he rules it, one of them has to go.
I just don't see him being able to say status quo is okay.
It's just going to be hard for me to see how status quo is okay in this.
Because it's just going to throw a whole paw on this entire proceeding, which doesn't need to be happening probably anyway.
But when you look at this, it's just going to be interesting to me.
I'm wondering if he'll allow one to stay and one to go.
It's going to be interesting.
It's been held over for another week.
We'll have another hearing this week.
Get ready.
You're going to see some more of this coming up later in this week.
But I just had to say that.
I think the case has problems on its merits.
I think there's issues there that the trial...
If it's gonna go to trial, it's gonna have to be sorted out at trial.
I think the judge has made stated about all the other defendants, the RICO part of this, everything else.
But this idea that the conduct between the DA and the special prosecutor and the fact that you have sitting in jail right now in Fulton County, which has a real problem in Fulton County, you've got a large percentage of the inmates in the Fulton County jail are waiting unindicted.
Unindicted from the Fulton County DA office, which is the Fannie Willis DA's office, and we're spending this amount of money and time in the state of Georgia?
In Fulton County?
The Fulton County voter is the one that should be upset about this.
This has become the main thing and the main target, and you've got people who are sitting with major felonies sitting in your jail, in a very unsafe jail as it is.
They've had many deaths in that jail, and you're not even indicting them yet?
I'll let you make your own mind up here.
This is the problem.
Speaking of other court cases, though, I can't not touch on this from last week.
The decision, which was all what expected from Judge Aragon in the New York City case on the business practices of Donald Trump.
Now, two things I want to point out.
Number one, this case was a joke.
Okay.
I pointed this out on social media.
You can go see it.
But here's some basic facts.
I'm going to make this case very simple for you.
Man goes to bank to get money.
Man puts down assets and his evaluations of those assets to the bank.
Bank accepts application.
Bank does due diligence, checks out the properties, checks out the evaluations, determines, in some cases, in this case, actually devalued some of those valuations.
Gave money anyway.
Got money paid back with interest.
Would loan again to said man.
And that's what the Attorney General of New York said was fraud.
The information put down in the man, and by the way, just to let you know, that's Donald Trump.
That Donald Trump asked for money, gave his financial statements.
Here's the part that just baffles me.
They're basically saying these banks are idiots.
How many of you have went to the bank and not expected the bank...
To do their own due diligence with loans.
They're going to.
And to say that they were not going to do their own due diligence here is just asinine.
So this case with a judge who is just happy to make a name and a Letitia James who ran on Donald Trump with all the other problems in the state of New York.
This was amazing in the sense that the bank itself actually came to trial and said, "Hey, no problems, no harm, no foul, we're good.
We got our insurance.
We made a lot of money.
insurance company made a lot of money we're good we'd loan to him again Yeah.
And yet the judge just fined him over $400 billion, suspended him from doing business in New York for three years, I mean, if there's not a travesty of justice here, I can't find one.
There's nothing that compares to this.
Now, here's the other interesting part of this case.
Since then, every real estate developer, every business that has gained lines of credit, money, are now concerned.
And here's the interesting part.
This case is one that is not tried at all, if not very little.
They actually changed the law.
They actually put this on a consumer protection side, which is a joke to start with.
This one is very rarely ever exercised, this charge.
If it was used, if Tisha James decided to go after almost every other big developer in New York, there are probably going to be discrepancies in what the actual owner of a building thinks it's worth as compared to maybe what the appraiser thinks it's worth as compared to what the bank thinks it's worth.
At the end of the day, it is between the developer and the bank to come to a legal solution on how they have much money when they agree to loan someone.
Just like you and I going to the bank with a value of our house.
I may think my house is worth $5 million.
The bank says, well, that's nice, Doug, but your house is only worth a million dollars.
I'm only going to be able to loan you off of a million dollars.
Then I have to say, okay.
But to think that the bank wouldn't look at the collateral I offered is, again, this Democrat liberal thinking that The big, bad, rich man has priorities over everybody else.
And Letitia James said, normal people can't get away with it.
Letitia, have you ever been to the bank?
The bank does its due diligence no matter if there's $100 billion at stake or $10,000 at stake.
But here's the interesting part.
If she were to go after business, business is going to get scared.
And there's already a lot of discussion about the business environment and the crime and other environment in New York and Manhattan in particular.
If businesses start moving their money away from New York, where they could actually be charged in New York court, if Latisha James decides to go after them, then this is going to be a big issue for New York business.
And it's so big, the New York governor this past weekend had to say, don't worry, other businesses will not happen.
So what she's saying is, the Attorney General is not going to go after anybody else but Donald Trump.
We're not going to go after everybody else.
Don't worry.
You keep doing your business like you're doing.
We're not going to get in your business.
Donald Trump, we're going to get because we hate Donald Trump.
Now, if that's the standard, that's selective prosecution.
That's taking the law and not applying it equally.
That's taking the law and saying, I'm only going after one person.
It's been warned by legal scholars for years.
You give enough laws, you'll find something to charge somebody with.
So for all of you out there laughing and happy that Donald Trump got fined all this amount of money and all this money going forward, just beware.
What if it was a Republican going after Joe Biden's claims?
What if it was a Republican going after President Obama's business interests?
What if it was a Republican attorney general in New York going after organizations based in New York?
Again, Democrats don't care about the law at times, it seems.
Now, that's an opinion, because if they want to get something, they just go after it.
I saw it firsthand in the United States Congress.
I saw how a Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, along with Jerry Nadler, the House Judiciary Chairman, and Adam Schiff, the House Intelligence Committee Chairman, basically disregard almost every rule of Congress to get Donald Trump in the first sham impeachment.
I've watched since then, no matter what you think about the January 6th Committee, which was not bipartisan, it was all agreeing the same thing.
They all out to get something out of it.
The January 6th Committee, Chairman Benny Thompson, destroyed evidence, destroyed files, things that should never under Congress's rule, even own rules, should have ever been destroyed.
And nobody cares.
I do not want to see a time in which we go tit for tat.
Because you use the law.
The law has to be blind.
But what we're seeing today is a law that is not blind.
We're seeing a law that is being law-fared, it's a word that's out there right now, after Donald Trump and those who associate with Donald Trump because they just don't like him.
And they'll use the law in any way possible.
So, we're nine months away from election.
These issues are going to come up.
You're going to hear them continually.
But I just want to share just a straight-up common-sense approach to some of these issues from Ukraine to the Atlanta situation, especially this New York situation.
Folks, don't buy the hype.
Look deeper, read, understand, and be very concerned about where the direction of our country is going in this election year.
With that, we'll see you next week.
▲
Export Selection