Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 23, 2021 - Epoch Times

19:20

President Trump's Lawyer Got Cancelled by Law School, Civil Rights Law Group | Facts Matter

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good evening.
	According to a new report from the Pentagon, almost a full one-third of American troops have turned down the vaccine, meaning that they refuse to take it.
	Why?
	Well, it didn't say.
	However, you likely will not be hearing these troops express their opinion on the matter, at least on Facebook.
	Because open discussion on the topic of vaccines is no longer allowed on that platform.
	However, a newly released undercover video shows Mark Zuckerberg expressed concerns over the vaccine himself, something that common users can no longer do on the platform.
	And in other news, according to these documents, which were just released two days ago, CNN, NBC, as well as ABC paid over $72,000 to a self-described Antifa activist for his footage of the U.S. Capitol breach.
	Meanwhile, one of the attorneys who represented President Trump during the impeachment trial, he has had his law class canceled by university because supposedly his presence might make some students feel uncomfortable.
	Another one of President Trump's lawyers had to take his family into hiding because his home has been vandalized, his windows were broken, and he says that he has received close to 100 death threats.
	Let's go through these stories together.
	This is your daily Facts Matter update, and I'm your host, Roman, from the Epoch Times.
	Now let's start today's discussion by talking a bit about cancel culture.
	This here is David Schoen.
	You might recognize him as one of the attorneys who represented President Trump during the impeachment trial last week.
	We had an interview with him and he told us that after representing President Trump, he got a taste of cancel culture for himself.
	He told us that a law school canceled a civil rights law course that he was going to teach because it would make certain students feel uncomfortable.
	Here's what he told us.
	I was hoping to teach a civil rights course at a law school in the fall.
	We've been in talks about it, kind of planning it out.
	I wrote to them and I said, I want you to know I'm going to be representing Donald Trump in the impeachment case.
	I don't know if that impacts on your decision at all.
	And they said, you know, they appreciated my writing, and frankly, it would make some students and faculty uncomfortable.
	So I couldn't do it.
	Now, we asked him which school it was, but he declined to name it, saying he didn't want to embarrass the university.
	And besides this class being canceled, this lawyer also said that he was suspended from a prominent civil rights lawyer email discussion list.
	Here's what he said.
	They, meaning this email discussion list, actually spent 48 hours discussing this with their board and so on, and they decided that they needed to suspend me from the list.
	It's a very important one to me.
	It's very prominent civil rights lawyers and fine people.
	Now, David Schoen is not the only lawyer who is facing repercussions for defending President Trump.
	As we discussed in a previous episode, Michael Vanderveen, another one of President Trump's lawyers, said that vandals broke the windows into his home, defaced the house with graffiti, and that he has received close to 100 death threats.
	He also recently said that he had to move his children to a secret hiding location for their own safety, and he had to hire armed guards to protect his home as well as his workplace.
	If you'd like to read more about the situation that these two lawyers have found themselves in after defending President Trump, those links will be in the description box below this video for you to check out.
	And by the way, while you are down there looking for those links, take a quick moment to smash that like button.
	Because you already know that videos that are like this, talking honestly about what's happening in this world right now, are routinely censored by big tech.
	You can say it's just another aspect of cancel culture.
	However, when you smash that like button that's below this video, you are forcing the YouTube algorithm to share this video out to potentially thousands of more people, letting their truth be known far and wide.
	And now let's talk a little bit about the legacy media.
	It was just revealed two days ago that CNN, as well as NBC, gave tens of thousands of dollars to a self-described Antifa activist for his footage of the Capitol breach.
	Now, you might already recognize this man here, John Sullivan, because we discussed him in an earlier episode.
	He is a man from Utah.
	He has, on a previous occasion, identified himself as being an Antifa activist.
	He is the founder of a group called Insurgence USA, and he was among the people that broke into the Capitol building in Washington, D.C. In fact, he is currently facing charges including violent injury, civil disorder, as well as disorderly conduct.
	Now, as we already discussed in that previous episode, even though in the footage you can hear him encouraging other people to break in and to burn things down, John Sullivan claims that he was at the US Capitol in the capacity of a journalist, not as an activist.
	And that seems to have been a very profitable endeavor for him.
	According to these invoices here that were released two days ago as part of the filing in the U.S. District Court, it showed that CNN paid him $35,000 for his video footage.
	NBC also paid him $35,000 for his video footage.
	And ABC, which actually stands for the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, paid him $2,300 for that footage.
	Looks like he gave the Australians a discount.
	In total, according to these invoices, Mr.
	John Sullivan earned over $72,000 for his footage just from these three legacy media outlets alone.
	Now, we here at the Epoch Times, we reached out to CNN, NBC, and ABC for comment on this issue, but have yet to hear back.
	If you'd like to read more about Mr. Sullivan's case, or if you'd like to read through these invoices for yourself, those links will be in the description box below this video for you to check out.
	And now, before we move on to our next topic, I would like to take a quick moment to discuss our channel sponsor for today's episode.
	And I'll do so from the sound room.
	That's right.
	Today's sponsor is a great company called American Hartford Gold.
	And they're also a company that's run by Patriots.
	That's why they sponsor a program like ours.
	And by the way, they are one of my personal gold and silver bullion dealers.
	And I didn't know this, but earlier today I gave them a call because I needed to discuss an order with them.
	And they put me on a brief hold a couple of minutes.
	And do you know what they have as their hold music?
	Speeches from Ronald Reagan.
	If that's not a sign that you should do business with this company, I don't know what is.
	So I'm not qualified to give you any investment advice, but I will tell you that for the last four and a half years, every single month, I try to set aside a portion of my salary and I buy physical gold and physical silver as a hedge against inflation and the coming collapse of the US dollar.
	That's what I see, unfortunately.
	And if you're interested in buying some gold and silver yourself, I would highly recommend that you check out American Heart for Gold.
	They have an A-plus rating of the Better Business Bureau.
	They have great, just super friendly customer service.
	And they sponsor Facts Matter.
	So what's not to love?
	You can give them a call.
	The number will be right there.
	It's 866-242-2352.
	That's 866-242-2352.
	Or you can text Roman to 65532.
	Or the link will also be in the description box below this video to a landing page where you can put in your email and they will send you a PDF book sort of as a guide to beginning to invest in gold and silver.
	So check them out.
	Again, American Heart for Gold, thank you so much for sponsoring our episode.
	And now Roman in the studio, back to you.
	And now let's talk a little bit about China.
	It's been reported that China is looking into the possibility of either reducing or stopping completely the export of rare earth minerals to the United States, meaning basically that they are considering cutting America off from minerals that we may need.
	And for your reference, by the way, rare earths is a term that consists of about 17 different metals, and they are required in the manufacturing of things like airplanes, computers, cell phones, fighter jets, electricity systems, precision-guided missiles, and so on.
	A lot of these new electronic stuff.
	And last month, a Chinese government ministry proposed draft control measures on both the production as well as the export of rare earth minerals out of China, specifically to the United States and to Europe.
	One government advisor told the Financial Times that the Chinese ministry is currently trying to figure out how American and European companies would be affected if China decided to cut off rare-earth exports during some kind of a trade dispute.
	Here's what this Chinese government advisor reportedly said.
	The government wants to know if the U.S. may have trouble making F-35 fighter jets if China imposes an export ban.
	Now, at the moment, China controls about 80% of the global supply of these rare-earth minerals.
	And the Chinese Communist Party sees their dominance in this market as basically leverage that they can use against the West.
	And as of right now, it's not exactly clear whether China would actually move to weaponize rare-earth exports.
	However, it seems like the Pentagon is now waiting around to find out.
	They recently awarded a $30 million contract to a company in order to build a rare-earth processing plant down in Texas.
	Here's what the CEO of that company that won the contract had to say about it.
	The Texas plant will ensure the U.S. has a secure domestic source of high-quality separated rare earth materials.
	Now, if you'd like to read more about China's plans to potentially weaponize these exports, that link will be in the description box below this video for you to check out.
	And by the way, if you want to go even deeper into this subject, I would highly recommend this book here, China Safari by Serge Michael.
	It is a phenomenal look into how China actually came to control 80% of the world's rare earth supply.
	I'll throw a link to it, the Amazon link to it, in the description box below this video as well.
	And now, let's switch gears a little bit and talk about something a little less controversial, vaccines.
	It was just reported by the Pentagon that about one-third of American troops turned down, meaning they refused to take the new coronavirus vaccine.
	According to Major General Jeff Telefiero, he said that the military currently has about a two-thirds acceptance rate for the new vaccine.
	Here's what he said.
	Our initial look, and this is of course very early data, is acceptance rates are somewhere in the two-thirds territory.
	And of course, it varies by different groups.
	Now, while he did not provide any specific reasons for why almost a third of our troops refused the vaccine, he did say this.
	Getting vaccinated is the right thing to do.
	It's clearly safe for service members, and we need to continue to educate our force and help them understand the benefits.
	Now, we here at the Epoch Times, we reached out to the Pentagon for additional comments on this matter, but I've yet to hear back.
	And for your reference, both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are currently under what's known as emergency use authorization by the FDA. It means that the agency has not fully cleared their usage yet.
	And so, could that be why many troops are refusing to take it?
	Well, honestly, I'm not sure.
	And it would be a lot easier to know what people are actually thinking about this matter to understand their thoughts that are guiding their actions if American public discourse wasn't so censored.
	For instance, Facebook is one of the biggest platforms for people to exchange ideas and let others know what they're thinking about.
	However, ten days ago, Facebook announced that they will take down posts which make claims about vaccines that they deem false.
	And by they, it means either health organizations, like the WHO, or Facebook's team of independent fact-checkers.
	However, in an ironic twist, Project Veritas just released an undercover video which shows an internal Facebook discussion where Mark Zuckerberg himself expressed concerns about the new vaccine.
	Take a look.
	I do just want to make sure that I share some caution on this because we just don't know the long-term side effects of basically modifying people's DNA and RNA to directly encode in a person's DNA and RNA basically the ability to produce those antibodies and whether that causes other mutations or other risks downstream.
	Now, that video was from July of 2020.
	However, a few months afterwards, in November of 2020, Mark Zuckerberg appeared to have changed his stance while speaking with Dr.
	Fauci.
	Take a look.
	And just to clear up one point, my understanding is that these vaccines do not modify your DNA or RNA. So I think that's just an important point to clarify.
	If I'm getting anything wrong here, of course, correct me.
	Now, I'd like to mention something.
	The point here is not to discuss the science behind the vaccine.
	And I do not believe that those two clips that we just watched prove any kind of hypocrisy.
	I mean, people's ideas change and evolve over time.
	Mark Zuckerberg might have believed things one way in July, and over the course of several months he might have changed his mind.
	That is perfectly reasonable.
	However, here's the question.
	If people are not allowed to actually discuss things openly, if people are not allowed to express their opinions and their concerns, just like Mark Zuckerberg did in that video clip, how can they learn?
	How can they have their ideas challenged if they're not even allowed to express them?
	For instance, if you share that same concern that Mark Zuckerberg expressed in that initial video clip, you might not be allowed to post it on Facebook based on their new current policy.
	And what happens if you do?
	Well, let me give you one example.
	We recently got a chance to interview Kevin Sorbo.
	You might recognize him.
	He is famous for starring as Hercules in the TV series.
	And he told us that he is currently considering taking legal action against Facebook after they deleted his page not once, but twice.
	Why did they delete it?
	Well, he says that his problems on Facebook started after he began posting about masks and when he began to question the government's COVID restrictions.
	And, by the way, before we move on here, regardless of what you believe on this issue, I just want to mention that questioning government actions, government mandates, and government restrictions is pretty much at the very heart of our First Amendment.
	Questioning the government is pretty much one of the most American things that you can do.
	That's at least what I think.
	That's my opinion.
	Maybe I'm wrong.
	Let me know what you think in the comment section below this video.
	I'd love to read your thoughts.
	So back to the original topic.
	What did Kevin Sorbo post that got him in hot water?
	Well, in some posts, he voiced concerns that big retailers like Target and Costco were deemed essential, while small mom-and-pop stores were not.
	At other times he said that he reposted information about COVID based on what some doctors were saying, while at the same time questioning how government policies might be impacting the younger generation.
	Here's what he told us.
	I'm not denying that COVID exists.
	I'm not denying that it's contagious.
	But I hear anywhere between 99.4% to 99.7% of people who get it will survive it.
	You know, we're making 5- and 7-year-old kids walk around with masks on.
	That's child abuse to me.
	So I started, you know, asking more and more questions and posting what doctors were saying about it.
	However, soon after he began to do that, Facebook sent him a message telling him that they would be restricting his posts.
	Then he said this happened.
	Then all of a sudden, last week, they took me down, just took away the page, and no explanation, no other warning, nothing at all.
	He says that Facebook did not explain to him anything, and he further said that he only heard from Facebook on why they deleted his accounts after a spokesperson gave a statement to Fox News, because Fox News had asked them why Kevin Sorbo was deplatformed.
	And here is what the Facebook spokesperson said.
	We removed Kevin Sorbo's page for repeatedly sharing debunked claims about the coronavirus or vaccines.
	The spokesperson then went on to say that...
	However, they deleted Sorbo's page because there had been no action taken.
	However, Kevin Sorbo denied this version of events, saying that He further said that he had made several attempts to seek clarity from Facebook about their decision saying that He further said that he had made several attempts to seek clarity from Facebook about their decision Now, we here at the Epoch Times, we reached out to Facebook for further comment, but I've yet to hear back.
	Now, President Trump, who himself is currently kicked off of Facebook, says that he is considering creating a new social media platform.
	Two days ago, during an interview with Newsmax, where they were discussing social media, he said this...
	We're negotiating with a number of people.
	And there's also the other option of building your own site.
	Because we have more people than anybody.
	I mean, you can literally build your own site.
	And so we'll have to wait and see if such a new social media platform actually comes to fruition or not.
	If you'd like to read the full interview with Kevin Sorbo, or if you'd like to watch that undercover video from Project Veritas, or if you'd like to read President Trump's comment on starting his own social media platform, all those links will be in the description box below this video for you to check out.
	Now lastly, as we already mentioned in a previous episode, on the very same day that Joe Biden was sworn into office, YouTube made the unilateral decision to demonetize our channel, to demonetize Facts Matter.
	We can now no longer run any ads before, during, or after our program, and the Super Chat feature has just been disabled.
	And here, I'd like to offer a small take on this type of censorship, both here on YouTube as well as what we already discussed happening on Facebook.
	I imagine, personally, that these social media companies have altruistic aims in pushing forward this type of censorship.
	They have organizations that they trust, like their independent fact-checkers, and very likely, they believe that suppressing people who run counter to the official narratives is beneficial to the broader society.
	And you know what?
	I will give them the benefit of the doubt.
	The people who call for this type of censorship often at least feel like they have good motives.
	However, they often don't consider the fact that while today they agree with what's being censored, tomorrow or the next day they might be censored themselves.
	Because when you open up Pandora's box like this, when you open up censorship, and when you allow censorship to take place, who says that it will always go your way?
	When there is a mechanism in place to stifle or censor public discourse, who is to say that the people who actually open this box will not be themselves censored later?
	And in fact, that was what I always believed was the beauty of America.
	One of the beauties of America's system, in my opinion, is that it provides many release valves for pent-up pressure, so that people don't have to go out into the streets and fight.
	For instance, if you want to express something, if you want to express an unpopular opinion or a critique, or you want to say something about the government, you can't.
	In theory, you have the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, and the freedom of assembly.
	And with the freedom of speech specifically, America has had such a beautiful system, wherein people's ideas can battle it out in the intellectual marketplace so that people don't have to battle it out on the streets.
	But look at what's happening now.
	Free speech is being stifled by big tech giants as well as by legacy media outlets who have pretty much a monopoly on the public narrative.
	And with these types of pressure release valves not functioning properly, what are people to do?
	Unfortunately, some people choose to go the route of political intimidation and violence, like what we already discussed in today's episode.
	However, whatever happened to the ethos of Evelyn Hall who once wrote, I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
	Now, I don't have the answers, but we here at The Epoch Times are working to bring back honest, traditional journalism.
	And if you would like to support this mission, then I'll throw a link into the description box below this video to a page where you can subscribe.
	It only costs a few dollars every month, but by subscribing to The Epoch Times, you will have access to uncensored information, deep investigations, honest reporting, and if anything ever happens here on YouTube, you will continue to have access to all of our video programs.
	Like Facts Matter, Crossroads, American Thought Leaders, and all the rest.
	Again, that link will be in the description box below this video.
	I hope you subscribe and join us on this mission of exploring truth and tradition through honest journalism.
	And now lastly, if you haven't already, smash that like button for the YouTube algorithm, subscribe to this YouTube channel to get honest news reporting delivered directly into your YouTube feed while you still can.
	And until next time, I'm your host, Roman from the Epoch Times.

▲