All Episodes
Previous Next
March 5, 2024 - Louder with Crowder
01:07:11
Trump's Back: Supreme Court Triggers Leftist Media Meltdown!
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
🎵 Music 🎵 🎵 Music 🎵
🎵 Phone Ringing 🎵 Human Resources, how can I help you?
Oh, yes, thank you for picking up the phone.
I'm calling because I'm an HR coordinator and I'm having issues with, rather embarrassingly, with HR at my workplace.
Oh, goodness.
Yes, that's why I'm here to help.
Did someone use a derogatory term when they saw your new haircut?
No, no they didn't.
Is this about when someone blew out your Hanukkah candles?
No, Hanukkah was months ago and it's a menorah.
What if they go out?
Doesn't God kill your firstborn?
No.
Not at all.
No.
Is it the fact that so many people dislike Jews?
No.
Is it the fact that so many people dislike you?
Well, I mean... I think my coworkers like me.
Well, maybe that's too liberal.
They tolerate me.
But my issue isn't with my coworkers.
It's really with my boss.
Oh yeah, the boss man.
Is that, uh, you want to file a report about his generosity?
Well... His giving heart?
I wouldn't put it that way.
Steven actually subjects me to constant teasing, ridicule, humiliation, and just I feel he has a complete lack of respect for not only me, but the entire HR community.
You, Sam!
Nobody likes you, Sam!
You were adopted!
I think you were adopted, right?
You were adopted because no one could love you!
You were a glorified tax credit on a ledger!
And Uncle Sam doesn't even know!
You can't serve your country!
What?
He killed Jesus!
You killed Christ, Sam!
Sam, that's the kind of sin that doesn't wash off!
Steven?
That was you?
That's right, little prick.
Because no one wants to call you.
I'm the only person who'd ever call you.
And it's a fake out.
Because you're a bad person, Sam.
What?
And a crybaby.
No one, and I mean no one, loves a crybaby.
Join Mug Club today for $89 annually or try it Mugless for $9 a month.
You can sign up at ladderwithcredit.com slash Mug Club for the entire catalog including Nick DiPaolo, Brian Callen, the Hodgetwins, Mr. Guns and Gear, and of course Alex Jones along with 100% more of this show.
Welcome, my fellow mug clubbers.
I'm reading right now Nietzsche, thus spake Zarathustra, which I had read in college, of course.
Because I, you know, somebody told me all warriors read that.
And I was studying Taekwondo, and I decided that if I was going to be a warrior... You're making so much noise!
It's the chair.
We gotta oil that chair up.
I'll oil it.
I have to oil that chair up.
Okay.
I'm in the middle of an incredible dissertation, and I just keep hearing... Off-limits.
I'm gonna miss a beat.
Mmm. Wonderful.
Hey, by the way, right now in Mug Club chat, someone just commented that they like Sam.
Let's revoke Sam from HR's Mug Club account.
He logged in.
It had to have been him.
Yeah, it was definitely him.
Maybe his wife?
I don't like the shenanigans.
I think so.
I doubt it was his wife.
She doesn't like Sam.
That's true.
We've never met her.
Now!
She lives in Canada.
Yes, exactly.
Not real.
Hey, let's just bring up the rundown really quickly.
The media has been melting down over the Supreme Court Trump decision.
So I know that yesterday we covered it live and we appreciate you watching with us, experiencing it with us.
You'll remember where you were when, however, The meltdown that didn't entirely take place while we were on air is too good to not cover.
Not to mention the inconsistency.
And it's exacerbated by the fact that, you can bring that back up Toolman, that the most recent New York Times poll shows really bad news for former Vice President Joe Biden.
Very bad.
Even worse than you would think when you look into the kind of the sub-data.
The only worse news is that he was dead.
Like if he woke up dead, that would be worse news.
He should pray for the sweet, merciful release.
At this point.
And something in a Gerald Knows Stuff segment, Catherine Herridge, this is an investigative journalist who just had her First Amendment rights infringed upon.
She was fired.
She had her sources revealed.
And it's something that obviously is near and dear to our hearts.
And we've told you we will gladly go to jail for our sources here at Mug Club Undercover.
Mostly you.
What?
What?
Did I?
If at some point today while you're watching you see this, On YouTube.
Head on over to Rumble or Mug Club.
You know, it's a live show.
10 a.m.
Eastern.
Every weekday!
You want to know, watch the show.
So, I guess what the question is, am I going to jail?
You can comment below.
Should I?
A part of me feels like that would be just... We just walked you into it.
Captain Morgan, CEO.
How are you, sir?
I'm doing well.
I don't know any of our sources.
It's great.
I don't have to go to jail.
I know.
They haul me into the depot and go, whoa, who's this person?
I go, her name's Red Sparrow.
That's not her name.
I go, I don't know.
I have no idea.
I have literally been shielded from them so I can't even accidentally talk a big game and reveal their sources.
That's right.
Absolutely.
And I appreciate it.
I'm doing well, by the way.
Sorry, I didn't answer your question.
You did say you were doing well.
Yeah, I'm doing much better than maybe potentially you going to jail.
Yeah, who knows?
You know what?
Hey, my face will be in a mugshot and then I'll gain 20% of the black vote.
There you go!
Think about that.
Before we move on to third chair, think about this with Donald Trump.
We're going to talk about the black vote today and how there is a startling switch to Donald Trump versus President Joe Biden in comparison, you know, historically.
The left thinks that they are going to harm Donald Trump with the black voting base by shouting from the rooftops that he sleeps with models and he has a mug shot.
He's a walking rap video.
Who saw this one backfiring?
Is he Diddy's manager?
Is it still?
I don't think P. Diddy is his name anymore.
No.
Oh, Diddy Dog?
Diddy Daddy Love?
I don't know.
But in third chair, when you hear this, you know, you must have thanked him for his service.
He'll be at Bricktown Comedy Club in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Friday, March 22nd.
You guys supported his special.
We appreciate it.
And go out and see his new material.
Josh Feierstein, how are you?
I'm all right.
I'm all right.
I'm actually not going to jail.
I'm not welcome back.
No?
No.
They told me at county jail, they said, no, no more for you.
Have you actually been to county jail?
Not here.
Pierce County Jail, yeah, in Tacoma, Washington.
Oh, what'd you do?
I was arrested for DUI.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Yeah, I didn't do it.
You didn't do it?
I did do it.
Someone else planted it on you?
No, I did it.
Someone else planted breath on you.
I did it.
I did it.
Meth.
But I did it.
Also, before we move on here... Shout out Aladdin Bail Bonds.
I forgot to... We are doing a State of the Union live fact check Thursday, March 7th.
That's 8 30 p.m.
Eastern.
A live fact check.
The drinking game rules are to follow.
So there will not be a morning show that Thursday.
And of course we do these big streams and there's usually a I'll be here too.
I accidentally made a racist joke just a minute ago.
I didn't realize it.
You made a joke?
lot of fun. Thursday, March 7th. Set the date. Okay. I'll be here too. Well, yeah, but that's
assumed. Okay. You have to. I accidentally made a racist joke just a minute ago. I didn't realize
it. What joke? Yeah, say it again. You made a joke? Well, you guys said P Diddy and he said
Diddy something and I said Diddy Kong and then he holds up a sign that says that's a monkey and I'm
like, oh, yeah.
I know it is, but I wasn't trying to.
Well, I think everybody missed it.
No, you thought it would be a nickname.
You thought it would be a nickname, but you're Aryan, so it doesn't work.
Just keep digging, Gerald.
I wasn't trying to!
Yeah, I think everybody missed it, but you're like, no, no, no, you guys.
You guys, please cancel.
The only way it could be worse would be like, Actually, he looks like Diddy Kong!
I don't like the monkeys!
Slavery was okay.
No!
See, he would bring it back, and I at least had to defend myself.
I didn't mean to.
No, it was total lag.
And here's the thing, we're cancel-proof.
What are they gonna do?
Take us off Rumble?
Go fornicate yourselves.
So!
Here's the thing.
I watched this.
This was making the rounds because the left actually thinks that this is a mic drop moment.
Roland Martin.
That's his real name.
I had to check Bridges for Trolls.
This is the man's name.
He's a CNN contributor.
And he just right here, I'm going to show you the full clip.
It's textbook talking points that they use to try and put pro-life conservatives on the back foot.
Don't allow yourself to be caught flat-footed with this.
It is lazy, it's something that we have addressed time and time again, but it's the same tired tropes that are trotted out and they think, yeah, like, on a social media algorithm.
Watch it and see if you can spot everything wrong.
And so what I'm saying is this here.
No, no, no, no.
What I'm saying is this here.
When I listen to Republicans talk about being pro-life, what I want to know is, where are their pro-life stances when it comes to Head Start?
Where are their pro-life stances when it comes to prenatal care?
Where are their pro-life stances when you have black women who have a high rate of dying in childbirth?
Where are your pro-life policies when it comes to black, when it comes to infant mortality?
Okay, so one thing, I don't really want to have to go through all the details on why it's factually incorrect, but I will.
The macro point here is they try and tell you that you cannot be pro-life if you don't believe in murdering a baby.
A baby, a new life that has completely separate DNA from both the mother and the father that determines everything about that child.
Height, eye color, male pattern baldness, what their hopes, dreams are, their temperament, all that is determined by their DNA.
And it's now separate from the mother and father.
You cannot be pro-life unless, and this is what they do, insert every taxpayer funded program wish list here.
If you don't support all of those, then you're not pro-life.
Then you can just add anything.
You can add free phones.
You can add free internet.
They did it in Germany.
It's a human right.
It's a lazy argument.
And just on that level you can say, well, no.
I'm pro-life.
I don't believe that you should be able to steal from somebody in order to fund programs that don't work.
These are two completely separate conversations.
However, he also simply spews a bunch of intellectual fallacies.
Let's just go through it.
Play and pause.
And so what I'm saying is this here.
No, no, no, no.
What I'm saying is this here.
When I listen to Republicans talk about being pro-life, what I want to know is, where are their pro-life stances when it comes to Head Start?
Pause.
Head Start doesn't work.
I know.
They're right here.
We're talking about public schools.
We're talking about publicly funded programs.
It doesn't work.
It doesn't improve outcomes.
And so shoveling more money into a program that is unsuccessful has nothing to do with supporting the life of a child.
Let's continue.
Where are their pro-life stances when it comes to prenatal care?
Pause.
Prenatal care.
What are you talking about here?
You already have Obamacare, which is what you want.
You have Medicare.
You have Medicaid.
You have all kinds of taxpayer-subsidized health care.
It just doesn't work all that well.
And at what point does personal accountability come into play?
Again, we're right back to the idea that if I don't give you my money at gunpoint, I'm somehow not pro-life, assuming the results are what you believe them to be.
Let's go on.
Where are there pro-life stances where you have black women who have a higher rate of dying in childbirth?
Pause.
That's due to obesity and improper reproductive care.
And I know that you'll say that's because of a lack of education.
It's 2024.
They have an iPhone.
Or a smartphone.
Android, if they are.
I don't necessarily know what the black community prefers.
This idea that, oh, they have higher... Yeah, well, why is that?
Are there higher obesity rates?
Are there higher STD rates?
Are there higher complications because people don't take care of their own health?
Or is it because black women in this country have far less access to healthcare?
No, no, even more.
Taxpayers subsidize healthcare.
Or do black women in this country use it at a disproportional rate, including compared to poor white women?
Let's go.
Where are your pro-life policies when it comes to infant mortality?
Pause.
I guess we're done with it.
Well, here's the other thing, too, with infant mortality, and we'll make all the references publicly available.
I've talked about this a lot.
Infant mortality is not compared with the same standards across different countries.
So in the United States, we actually consider it infant mortality because we actually measure that in the data as a life, whereas in other countries, they wouldn't.
They would just say, it's a terminated pregnancy.
It's equivalent to a miscarriage.
they don't actually count it as a life. If you were to use the same standards across
different countries, we have a much lower infant mortality rate than certainly anywhere
else in the world, and yes, that includes Europe.
All right. If you want to join Mug Club, none of this happens without you. $89 annually,
$9 to go Mugless if you want to try it. We have the promo code undercover, $10 off.
Yeah.
I just sit there and I watch it and it shows up in a thing and I'm like, is anyone buying this?
Please don't be caught flat.
Please don't go, no, no, no.
I care about people.
Just don't give them the moral high ground.
You don't care if you don't add everything up that he's talking about in his wish list.
It's hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars, and the outcomes wouldn't be any better.
Yes, they're ineffective.
And by the way, he's wearing a 1619 pin.
I'm not sure if you saw that.
I asked our researchers.
That's when the first slaves arrived in the United States.
And I'm like, I think that's an interesting date.
Where did those slaves happen to come from?
Maybe you should wear a pin that's like, hey, you guys have been selling your fellow brothers into slavery for hundreds and hundreds of years prior to the Americans at the time bringing people over.
Maybe you should go to the root of the problem.
I'm not saying that we had an easy time there.
I'm just saying, You're focusing on the wrong enemy.
According to Cornel West, it's at least 95% of slaves were actually sold into slavery as opposed to being kidnapped.
And by the way, more slaves today than ever in recorded history.
Over 40 million slaves on Earth today.
We don't talk about that, though!
Let's talk about Flintstone vitamins for pregnant broads.
They're chewable.
Yes, they are.
And tasty.
They are tasty.
I ate way too many Flintstone vitamins as a kid.
You gotta come do that pause thing with me and my wife arguing.
Yeah, because I am not handling it.
I'm losing every one of them.
Yeah.
Yeah, I'm a bad arguer.
Well, it doesn't help with women.
She's always like, yeah, but you did this and I'm like, ah, well, I probably did.
Yes.
Yeah.
And I feel bad for it because I love you.
All right.
Yeah, that's a good, that's a winning argument.
We'll talk.
And it's Super Tuesday.
Go vote.
Go vote.
Go do that.
Go vote, I guess, today.
No, it's important.
Look, don't think it's a walk-off.
No, I know.
That can hurt people.
Go vote.
I thought there would be a sound effect.
He won by 70 points in North Dakota.
Donald Trump.
Yes, that's pretty good.
It should have been 75.
It should have been 75.
Some would argue 80.
Some would argue that.
Someone.
I wouldn't, though.
Seven of those ten voters, huh?
That's crazy.
So we covered this yesterday, and it was a lot of fun to cover the verdict that came in from the Supreme Court.
9-0, in case you've forgotten.
9-2-0.
Zero.
Yeah, zero.
And the ruling basically stated that individual states could not, in fact, bar presidential candidates from a ballot because this is a national issue.
In case you've forgotten, here's a refresher, then we'll get to the media meltdown.
And you know what?
We'll do a then and now segment.
There we go.
Because that's fun.
Laura, what do we know right now?
A really consequential decision has just been handed down.
Paula Reid, the court has made a decision.
This is a win for former President Trump.
Here, the Supreme Court has reversed a ruling from the Colorado Supreme Court that would have removed former President Trump from the ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, the so-called insurrectionist ban.
Now this is very much what we expected based on what we saw about a month ago during oral argument.
Justices on both sides of the aisle appeared skeptical of Colorado's argument that Trump could be removed by the state under the 14th amendment.
You think?
Appeared skeptical is shorthand for nine to zero.
That's a little skeptical.
But Colorado's crazy as hell for letting that thing get this far.
They appear to be skeptical to a vote of, let me check, 9-0.
Yes.
9-0.
I believe that would be skepticism.
That's a walk-off.
Let me read... That's a reservation.
They didn't have a 9-0 to end slavery!
They did not, sir.
They did not.
People died to keep it!
I know!
They really liked slavery!
So, according to the court, they said, we conclude that states may disqualify persons holding or attempting to hold state office, but states have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the presidency.
And here's the thing, they'll try and do this word play, where they'll say, you know, insurrection, insurrectionist, not convicted.
Again, due process matters.
It's the same issue that conservatives have had for a very long time.
The Me Too thing, Brett Kavanaugh.
It's, hold on a second, someone needs to be found guilty.
You do have your day in court.
And I'm not saying the court system is entirely just, but we haven't even gone through that tilted system yet.
So they just use that.
It'd be like me going out and saying, oh yeah, Gerald the murderer.
What?
Yeah, he's a murderer.
What?
Because I say so.
So Donald Trump responded, President Trump, some people call him former president, some people call him sitting president, I call him sitting president, praising the decision and of course he was going in hard on former Vice President Biden for weaponizing the justice system, which I actually think was a good angle for him to take.
I want to start by thanking the Supreme Court for its unanimous decision today.
It was a very important decision.
We're very well crafted.
And I think it will go a long way toward bringing our country together, which our country needs.
And they worked long, they worked hard, and frankly, they worked very quickly on something that will be spoken about 100 years from now and 200 years from now.
Extremely important.
President Biden, number one, stop weaponization.
Fight your fight yourself.
Don't use prosecutors and judges to go after your opponent to try and damage your opponent so you can win an election.
Our country is much bigger than that.
The other thing I say to President Biden, close the borders now.
By the way, you know, people are saying, hey, pretty tasteful for him.
The media of course wasn't too happy with how President Trump went on to celebrate.
The people of Philly love me!
The people's camp.
The best stairs.
If that vote comes in and I'm still standing, then I know I've gone the distance.
Adrian was horrible.
Could have done better.
Geico commercials, gross.
By the way, have you noticed that Donald Trump, he really hasn't aged.
We have a side-by-side here.
Look at that.
I think he looks better, and I get it, this doesn't really matter, but compare that to Barack Obama, the side-by-side, like how the presidency ages people.
And of course, former Vice President Biden.
Here's the thing.
Do not underestimate the value of a man who thrives.
In conflict.
He loves it.
There are people like that who you need, and I get they're really tough to deal with, to live with during times of peace.
But you need a Churchill.
Sometimes you need a Washington.
And sometimes you need someone like a Donald Trump.
It doesn't age him because this is a guy who wrote The Art of the Comeback.
And even if sometimes you would say he bends the rules or in underhanded ways, this is a guy who is motivated by proving people wrong.
It gets him up.
It gets him excited.
And there's something to be said for that.
Yeah, absolutely.
I'm surprised when we did the side-by-side because when you said, like, hey, compare Obama, I was like, yeah, this office ages people in ways that just look like they're going to end their lives essentially by the time they get out of the office.
And Trump is just like, well, this is like a Tuesday for me.
I do this every day.
What do you mean?
Like, these are big deals?
I do big deals all the time.
Yeah.
So does the studio ages you.
It does a little bit.
I look like Madame Tussauds.
So here's the thing.
This has really changed a lot, obviously, since the Colorado ruling in December.
And comparing the media's reaction yesterday to back in Colorado, it's just fun to see the remarkable lack of consistency.
And there's value in that because it shows that you shouldn't allow them to guilt you.
Stop trying to play their game.
The only way to win is to not play.
So let's do a segment right now of Now and Then.
So let's start with now, I guess.
We'll kind of reverse it.
Take it.
Reverse it.
Nice.
Ooh, like Mary J. Blige.
Put that thing down, flip it, and reverse it.
She knows what she was doing.
That wasn't Mary J. Blige.
That's whoever I said it was.
Missy Elliott.
Nah, that doesn't matter.
Who's that?
It's not even a real person.
Look, everyone take your thoughts and put them in a box to the left.
That was Lil' Kim.
Noodles!
You got the guy who said Diddy Kong.
You think we're gonna... There are people who are... I've heard of people who are out of touch with black American culture, but this is ridiculous.
Don't push it.
Don't push it real good.
now.
Now.
I think that was salt and pepper.
So, the TV talking heads had yesterday, and we covered some of it because we were live,
but after that we said, well, we're going to have to cover this as well.
They had their biggest meltdown that I can remember since election 2016.
I told them that if they would do this, that South Carolina would wrap their arms around them and take care of them.
I now officially work for you.
There is nothing that you could need that we won't make sure that we deliver.
Sorry, right clip.
This is the meltdown.
My larger reaction is disappointment.
Ultimately, the United States Supreme Court disagreed.
Votes for Donald Trump will count, and he is on our ballot.
The big story today is the Supreme Court once again shoving their gavels up the election.
The court's conservatives essentially gave all future insurrectionists the green light to run for federal public office.
Just use that term again.
And the liberals.
It means it's up to us, the voters, to stop them, just like we did in 2020.
2024 is the sequel.
They're just making it up.
And all the justices were making it up.
Why though?
The Supreme Court handed Trump a second gift in this many weeks on a constitutional technicality.
Today is the day that the trial against Donald Trump for January 6th would have started and
instead we're talking about this Supreme Court opinion on the 14th amendment.
He cannot call himself a victim of the legal system now.
The legal system worked.
They did not say that January 6th wasn't an insurrection, and they did not say that he didn't engage in insurrection.
Instead, the court let him off on a technicality.
They did not explicitly deny the lower court findings that Donald Trump was an insurrectionist.
Finding that a state cannot make a call that could have a national impact on a federal election.
Of course, unless it's about a woman's right to choose, but let's not get into that.
In this case, you have the Supreme Court lurching too far to the right,
making, as David French said, this part of the 14th Amendment, a dead letter.
This is bad news for Donald Trump.
And that is he can't raise money off the Senate anymore.
I mean, this was the cleanest of all of them.
David French.
Writing an op-ed and all of these idiots running with, they just made the 14th Amendment a dead letter.
The justices, including three very liberal justices, made it clear that you're an idiot.
That you can't read.
I mean that literally.
You do not have reading comprehension as one of your tools in the toolbox to go to and grab.
Instead, it's partisan.
The court did it on a technicality.
The court just made it a dead letter.
No, the court interpreted the Constitution correctly, regardless of political affiliation.
One of the only times they've done that in recent memory, and it pisses you off because it benefits a guy.
And by the way, he can't claim that he's a victim of the Justice Department or the judicial system anymore.
Have you seen other charges that are crap? This was just the easy one to
go, this should have never happened in the first place. I cannot believe this is the
kind of coverage that people are giving. No, no, from people that should know better. People
that are constitutional scholars or legal experts are going, I can't believe it. They just,
they just jumped. What are you talking about? Well, French is a wiener. I preferred
him when he was a butler. I know.
Now, Mr. French. I've never heard of him.
No.
So, so,
yesterday when it happened live, but then, I don't know that I've ever seen a greater self-own where
the man refuses to acknowledge it.
So this is what he first X'd out, I guess.
He said, The Supreme Court has betrayed democracy.
Its members, including Jackson, Kagan, and Sotomayor, have proved themselves inept at reading comprehension, and collectively, the court has shown itself to be corrupt and illegitimate.
It must be dissolved.
Now, there was a response from Gunther Eagleman, you know, more right-leaning.
He said, Cry more, ellipses, 9-0.
Here's the funny part.
Keith Eltman responded, Those weren't tears, fascist.
They're urine.
I'm sure you enjoy being bathed in it.
So hold on a second, hold on a second.
Let me get this straight.
You just igno- and if you have kids, they should leave the room.
You just acknowledged that you have piss on your face.
And your comeback is the implication that this man may also potentially have urine in his bathtub?
But it doesn't matter!
That's a piss wash!
You already have piss on your face!
You lose!
No, it's the, it's the, it's the bathing!
It's the bathing liberal tears!
He's saying, bathe in my piss tears!
Here's some more!
Yes, not since Shooter McGavin confessed to eating pieces of crap for breakfast.
Like, he wrote this, and he thought, he thought, those aren't tears, fascist, they're urine.
Man, that's great.
Wait, you just said you have piss face.
Oh, by the way, that's also, are you crying?
Did someone pee on your face?
Or did you cry?
Is it piss-mata?
I have no idea what this is.
He's having a golden shower, it's happening.
It's like, yes, I have urine on my face, but I'm certain that you do as well.
That's weaker than I am rubber you are glue because at least it's like you know a bounce off where you're saying it doesn't stick.
Is he saying that he's he's he's peeing into the urinal ice?
I don't know.
Dissolving it?
Is that when he says it needs to be dissolved?
His comeback is I am glue and it sticks to me but you could be glue also.
You are spray adhesive.
What?
Either way, you have a bunch of piss on your face, right?
That's correct, yes.
There's no getting around that.
Forget the egg.
It's piss.
What?
Those aren't tears, Fascist.
They're urine.
Also, you can't use the plural for urine, I don't think.
They're urine?
It is urine.
Yeah, I don't know.
That's a smaller point in the broader picture.
He's calling the tears urine.
He wrote that reply so angry.
Oh man.
Like a comeback would have been, even better would have been, I'm not crying, you're crying.
Alright.
I'm not crying, I bet you have gentlemen pissing on your face.
You'd be like, well I don't know where that came from, but okay.
You know all those fascists that accept bipartisan Supreme Court decisions?
Do you think when he's like crying over a movie, and a woman comes in and he's like, I'm not crying, it's piss.
This is how I urinate.
What?
I have a barrel.
I pee from my eyes.
Who doesn't?
That was a good soundbite, thank you.
Does he cry out of his penis?
What the hell is happening?
Well, I guess if that's... then we all cry out of our wiener.
Can you just hit you?
That's not a premature ejaculation.
I'm just crying.
I'm just crying.
I'm just happy to see you.
Don't worry, it happens to lots of guys.
I've been told.
I don't last long as a lover, but I hear that your passionate lovemaking grows tiresome.
What?
We gotta send this to him.
Oh.
Hahahahaha.
Ugh, alright.
So this brings us back to then, right?
They're having a meltdown, but let's go back to Then, which shows you the inconsistency.
That's why I say the way to win this game is just to not play.
They want to talk about the court overstepping its authority.
And by the way, they don't even hide the fact that this is well within their constitutional authority.
They just don't like that that is the case.
So clear.
Whereas back then they were gloating that the Colorado court obviously ruled in a way that was unconstitutional.
I hope the justices see through his lies and underline that it is within state authority to keep off oath-breaking insurrectionists from our ballot.
Santa came early last night.
When the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Donald Trump is disqualified from holding office.
You go, Colorado.
anyone who engages in insurrection is ineligible to run for political office.
For this moment in time this is a benchmark and a punishment.
What a nerd.
Thanks, Michael!
What up, Steele?
Go back and look at his blog when he was RNC chairman.
That's actually something he did.
He did that.
By the way, Kintanji, she's also black.
I think you picked on Clarence Thomas because he's black and you're like, he's gonna tie himself in knots.
Did she also tie herself in knots?
I think you need to answer for that.
Well, they're big on knots.
You just called him an Uncle Tom!
Okay, that's exactly what he was doing!
I have piss on my face.
Yes.
Was he raised with an expression that he didn't understand?
You know, maybe he doesn't get the whole pissing, like, which one is the bad part, whether it's on you- Who got their dick caught in the cookie jar?
That sounds like a foreigner.
He's mixing metaphors, you know?
I know you are, but I'm a piece of shit.
That's not- You're missing.
Actually, no, that nails it.
What?
What are you, Asian?
Weird.
So, here's the thing.
I'm sorry, guys.
You can hit the like button if it's okay.
I just, every now and then, you don't, I can't, I don't have a chip in my brain for what Keith Olbermann was saying.
Keith Olbermann?
Is that me or is that you?
That's you!
That's me?
That's you!
Oh, well, yeah, well, you do realize... Just now?
No, no, no, no, no.
I'm sure that's from years ago.
He's watching?
That's so sweet!
No, no, true story.
After he was fired from MSNBC, I used to host the CPAC Ballroom, and I went out as Keith Olbermann, looking for work, like, trying to get a contract with Maybelline, and it actually made it into the news, like, Keith Olbermann is a surprise guest speaker at CPAC.
Maybe it's Olbermann.
Maybe he's born with it.
Perhaps.
Maybe it's some urine.
It's piss-based concealer.
Alright, quick.
Somebody with a Keith Olbermann face with piss tears, go.
Yes.
Is that mascara or urine?
It's urine.
It's absolutely urine.
Good complexion.
You're bad.
It's urine.
You're not drinking enough water.
The problem with the left, it's really this simple.
There's no one around them to just say, what?
They don't bully each other.
That's really all it is.
I remember when Tom Hanks went on Morning Joe.
It's in my head right now because I just saw Joe talking about whatever it was that he was saying.
And he said, you know, we only entered World War II because of, I think he said racism and jingoism or ethnocentrism and jingoism.
And he said it and I remember watching it going.
Huh?
No one's questioning that?
Like, it was so dumb that you're sitting there going, oh, that's right, no one with these people just says, what?
Keith Urban has gone so long in his life without anyone just saying, that doesn't make sense, that they become so disconnected.
And there is a value in that.
That's the value of Donald Trump as a bull in a China shop, because there's a disconnect between the swamp, the elites, and you.
No one out there, you watching right now, can you imagine when you're razzing any of your friends, just one of them saying, yes, it's urine on my face.
And you would be known as piss face forever.
And you letting them get away with it?
They get away with it!
Because no one says, that's really dumb.
Hey Keith, why don't you turn the other cheek for us?
My piss cheek?
Oh no, they're both piss cheeks.
All the greats have their calling cards.
So, the piss bandits?
Hahahaha!
Watch, it's going to be the next R. Kelly video.
The biggest indictment, though, of the media in this whole saga, it comes from the very liberal Supreme Court justices.
Let me read this for you here.
And this comes from, I believe, can someone let me know, is this?
This comes directly from the Supreme Court.
But who wrote this?
Was it Brown Jackson?
Was it Sotomayor?
Or usually they have one person who's responsible for writing it.
But this is the dissenting viewpoint.
It says, the contrary conclusion that a handful... Well, hold on a second.
There was no dissenting viewpoint.
What I mean is these are the liberal justices having to justify their opinion or explain it.
No, showing your work, like Long Division.
They said, the contrary conclusion that a handful of officials in a few states could decide the nation's next president would be especially surprising with respect to Section 3.
The Reconstruction arguments were specifically designed as an expansion of federal power and an intrusion on state sovereignty.
Section 3 marks the first time the Constitution placed substantive limits on a state's authority to choose its own officials.
Given that context, it would defy logic for Section 3 to give states new powers, keyword being new powers, to determine who may hold the presidency.
This is basically what they're saying.
a small, relatively, court in Colorado doesn't get to determine the presidency for the rest of the country.
Right.
That's...
Also, you're all idiots.
Yes.
Because this, by the way, this is the three of the liberal justices getting together to write
this opinion. So it's not any one of them. It's all three of them agreeing with this and saying,
look, the absolute most clear thing that the United States government was doing was intruding
on states' rights in this case to make sure that they had less power to determine this kind of
Because of those insurrectionists essentially at the time just sending representatives back to Congress and saying, hey, nothing happened, we're all good, right?
We're just going to change things from the inside.
They're like, no, no, no, you can't do that.
For Colorado to then think that that gives them new authority Is one of the stupidest things that I've ever seen in our legal system, and we have Kyle Rittenhouse to look at.
That was pretty dumb!
Yeah, well this is also the reason that the left hates the Electoral College.
Again, that was designed as a system of checks and balances to ensure that, especially in a new country where people are moving, they're migrating west, that New York City doesn't determine The representatives for the entire country.
That's the reason for the Electoral College.
Now you may disagree with it, you may say now that you think it's irrelevant or that there's a problem if the popular vote has some kind of discrepancy with the Electoral College vote, I still believe that it's necessary, but these people don't believe that there should be any checks and balances.
Oh wait, we don't get what we want?
Pack the court.
We don't like the Electoral College?
Let's do away with it.
And let's just, while they're talking about constitutionality or this court overreaching, Here's the thing, this is, and you need to understand, I've always said don't attribute to malice what can be chalked up to incompetence, right?
That's an old expression.
Usually I would apply that.
Not in this case.
Not in this case.
This is a group, and when I say group, I mean today's progressive left, and by the way, the entire DNC, and the media, entertainment, industrial establishment, they have knowingly violated the Constitution.
How do I know?
Because they said so.
So when you have the CDC eviction moratorium, right, which is effectively rent forgiveness, where no, no, you can't evict someone who hasn't paid rent, which of course put many mom and pop home providers out of business forever because they didn't get any kind of forgiveness.
You had this president and you had these, of course, the Supreme Court eventually said, you can't do that.
They said, well, you know what?
It's going to take a few months before it gets there.
So let me buy your votes.
Student loan forgiveness.
Joe Biden literally acknowledged that this is probably unconstitutional and will be ruled against by the courts, but it'll give us a few months.
Think about federally mandating vaccines.
For government employees, of course they would have, they wanted to do it for everybody.
Now, taking President Trump off of the ballots because of a court in Colorado, they knowingly violate the Constitution.
They don't care about the Constitution.
And I'm not just falsely attributing motive here.
They've said it.
They have said, with these actions, we know it's unconstitutional, but we're going to do it anyway.
Please vote for me when you remember this handout.
This is what you do.
You enact a policy that you know is going to fail eventually, but you can destroy as much of the fabric of this country in the meantime as you possibly can, and face no consequences.
It's lawyer business.
That's exactly right.
Do what you can get away with for as long as you can.
So I guess the question is, to conservatives, if you could act like a Democrat for a day, what's the one policy that you would make a reality?
I know, if you were actually a fascist, like the left.
I don't know, maybe a border wall.
That's a good one.
That would be a good one.
More of a structure.
Gators.
Hey, you want to let people know?
Yeah, absolutely.
So merch, make sure you go to CrowderShop.com right now.
Every dollar spent gets you entered to win a one-year emergency food supply.
By the way, MyPatriotSupply, ReadyHour, they're part of the same team.
So nobody go out there and be like, ooh, you're cheating.
We're not cheating.
No, no, we're not cheating.
That's valuable.
Have we announced the truck winner yet?
No.
Okay, well that's going to be coming soon.
Very soon.
Somebody's going to win a truck in 10k and then they're going to get to meet us because we're going to have to give them the truck.
Yeah, I can't win the truck though, right?
I mean, I don't think so.
Can I take it?
Did you buy merch?
Can I steal it?
Well, you have to buy.
I already won it.
You can't.
Okay.
What if I pee in my own face?
That's my new favorite way of saying egg on my face is, wow, piss on my face.
Piss on my face.
The old expression like, don't piss on my face and tell me it's raining?
Keith Urban is just like, please piss on my face and I know it's not raining.
I'm fine with it.
I've never heard that phrase though.
Never.
Ever.
Is that a real phrase?
Hey, don't piss on my forehead and tell me it's raining?
Right.
Yeah, I never heard that.
You ever heard that?
No, it is a real phrase.
It is a real phrase, but not his phrase.
Oh, okay.
Because he's an idiot.
Yes.
So, he's saying, please piss on my forehead and urine on my face.
Begging.
Actually, you can just tell me it's urine.
So many good sound bites today.
I know.
Oh, come on.
All right, so this is also why the left is freaking out, right?
This is why they want to strip you of your power.
Massive news.
They want to strip you of your voting power right now.
I told you they're going to go after Trump.
They're going to use all these intelligence agencies, right, the three-letter agencies that they can.
They're going to try and abuse the courts to prevent him from being the nominee.
Why?
Because they know if he's a nominee, he very likely wins.
And so once they get through that phase, if it doesn't work, and we all have a lot of work to do, right? It could go
either way. They're going to go after you. The last choice for a politician is to go after the
voter base. They try and separate you from, you know, the quote-unquote generals and say, it's
not you, it's Trump. That's why Hillary Clinton got into so much trouble with basket of deplorables.
That was her ultimate downfall because she attacked the voters.
They will do it, though, if they can't actually get Donald Trump.
Now, the reason they're so scared is because the latest New York Times poll, it came out a couple days ago, but I believe they released some final numbers yesterday or today.
Horrible news for former Vice President Joe Biden.
So in a national election, a general, Trump beats him 48 to 43.
Forty-eight to forty-three, but I want to get into some other numbers here because people look at that, they go, oh, it kind of oscillates.
But again, if you look historically in 2016 and you look historically at 2020, Donald Trump tends to actually, well, he was always losing at this point in time, and then he would close the gap.
He hasn't been at this, and certainly not from the New York Times polls.
These are left-leaning polls.
Uh, and I do think there's a huge, historically it's true, uh, it wasn't as big in 2020, there's a huge contingency of secret voters, especially now as you relate it to the border wall immigration issue.
You can, you can kind of look at, uh, you can feel how the winds are blowing, but here's some, here's some demographics that are very interesting.
White voters, Donald Trump beats Biden 53 to 40.
Okay, no surprise there.
But with black voters, Donald Trump Actually gets 23% of the vote to Biden 66.
That is the biggest Republican since Nixon.
It's not a majority, but that's a huge switch.
Now this is one that was very significant to me.
A larger portion of the population than black Americans, Hispanic voters.
Trump beats Biden 46 to 40.
So Trump beats Biden with Hispanic voters by a wider margin than he wins the general.
That is insane.
Those are terrible poll numbers.
Those are horrible poll numbers.
And I don't think he's, I don't think, you guys can let me know, I don't think a Republican nationally has won the Hispanic vote.
We've talked about in Florida, obviously, we have a lot of Cuban Americans, they tend to be the most conservative voting bloc in America, outside of actually, funny enough, Millennials and Gen Z Cuban Americans are becoming more conservative again.
But outside of that, I don't think anyone, any Republican, you can let me know in chat or comment if I'm speaking out of turn, I don't think they've Actually won the Hispanic vote.
They've mitigated losses, but let me give you some interesting numbers here, because you look at that general, you say, okay, that's pretty close.
Sure, but let's apply that same logic when we're talking about, for example, the Hispanic vote.
Where would there be a significant state where that might change the outcome of the election?
Before you even get to election shenanigans, before you even get to social media throttling the Hunter Biden story, just looking at these demographics, Arizona in 2020, assuming that you believe what you've been told, President Trump lost by 10,500 votes, give or take.
The Arizona Hispanic voting population is 1.9 million people.
So in 2020, Donald Trump got 37% of the Hispanic vote.
So if you were to apply 46%, and again, I get that this is hypothetical, but it is significant, if President Trump were to hold these numbers, 46% of that vote, he gets 107,000 more votes than in 2020.
107,000 more votes.
Lost by 10,000.
Boom.
Trump wins Arizona.
Think about that.
Now let's use another example, Georgia, if we're going to use a black vote.
And I know it's 13% of the population.
Oh, and I think they added a note in there, so no Republican has ever won the Hispanic vote.
Right.
That's what we thought, but yeah, confirmed.
Let's look at Georgia.
Again, 13% of the population, but they are a more significant portion of the population in Georgia, meaning black voters.
The 2020 result, Donald Trump lost by 11,800 votes, give or take.
The Georgia black voting population is 2.4 million people.
Donald Trump only won 11% of the black vote in 2020.
Wow.
So if he were to get 23% of the black vote in 2024, and these are broad numbers, right, this is assuming that
everyone votes, but again, these numbers tend to be pretty congruent with
the people who actually do go in and vote, depending on if you're using likely voters or
registered voters.
If Trump were to get 23% of the black vote in 2024, he wins by 312,000 more votes.
vote in 2024, he wins by 312,000 more votes.
Or sorry, he gets 312,000 more votes than he did in 2020.
This is the highest percentage of black votes since Richard Nixon in 1960.
And that was when he lost to Kennedy, I believe he got 32%, and then it went down to the teens later on.
And I believe that probably would have something to do with the Lyndon Johnson model.
The whole Southern strategy was actually the left trying to say that Republicans were racist, and it worked like a charm.
Just those two states.
Think about that for a second.
We haven't even gotten into Michigan.
Pennsylvania.
Nevada.
Potentially Colorado.
There are a lot of states where this could have a significant impact.
And this is what's most interesting to me about this poll.
It's not a simple favorability as far as do you like this person in general. They asked,
the New York Times, they asked if you believe that Biden and or Trump's policies have hurt
or helped them. So the question was about policy. With Biden, 18% believed when polled that his
policies helped him.
I know it's a low number, but it should be zero.
I don't understand.
Baby steps though.
43% believed that Biden's policies hurt him.
With President Trump, 40% believed that Trump's policies have helped him, and only 25% believe that they've hurt him.
When people say, people say, oh it's just there's a cult of personality with Donald Trump.
Well you can't have it both ways.
You can't have it, you can't say it's a cult of personality and then say don't vote for him because of personality.
When it comes to policies, time after time, I don't know that there's ever been a poll to the opposite effect.
When it comes to policies, you actually have to look past kind of the bombastic nature of Donald Trump because his policies were so much more effective and you see the numbers.
Americans agree with that.
So I think that Donald Trump focusing on that, as he did in his statement, discussing, you know, the justice system, discussing the border, staying on that issue.
People would have told him it was a losing issue in 2016.
Ah, the border issue, they'll say you're racist.
Guess what?
Not anymore.
It's a winning issue.
And this just happened right now, I guess.
Yeah, CNN this morning just dropped a new article actually going after this New York Times poll.
So this is CNN because they have to run interference.
It says the New York Times is facing backlash over its coverage of Donald Trump and the 2024 election from CNN.
See you then!
By the way, there's an expletive in the next overlay, so they won't bring it up, but you can just mute, you can kind of censor it if you want.
So the article quoted CUNY professor Suni, I don't know if that's how they pronounce it, a professor, Jeff Jarvis, who posted this on his Threads account, and he said, the effing times, it follows up yesterday's awful poll with another.
That they even asked this question is evidence of the bias, the agenda, in their poll.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Because the New York Times is known for being conservatively biased.
Yes!
What?
Who made age an quote-unquote issue?
Um, the guy who's dying.
And forgetting his name almost.
The credulous times falling into the right wing's projection.
This is not journalism.
Shameful.
This is not journalism.
Not like me.
No one cares about Biden's age, except a vast majority of Americans are concerned about his age.
Screw you!
This isn't journalism.
I'm on threads.
Yes!
Yes!
Hahahahaha!
Seriously?
Hahahahaha!
How's that going for you over there?
New York Times.
They're just playing right into the right-wing's projection.
By talking to Americans.
By asking people questions about how they feel.
And the reason that they're making age an issue now is because it came up even when it wasn't being asked.
The vast majority of Americans are like, yeah, we're concerned.
And by the way, they're concerned about Donald Trump's age, too.
They're both two old guys.
Former Vice President Joe Biden does not seem all there.
He's not.
That's why he's not being charged with putting classified documents next to his Corvette.
Like, he doesn't know where he is.
I didn't even know he has a Corvette anymore.
Huh?
It was a model car.
Where's my Gremlin?
Yeah, and Trump looks better.
So how bad does it have to be, this is another question for you, how bad does it have to be for Joseph Biden when not even the New York Times can carry his water and CNN contributors, I don't know what the term is for this guy, they have to go out and say, I can't believe that the New York Times is not doing the bidding.
for Joe Biden. They really, really... this guy really, really needs to be dragged across the
finish line by the media. And I hope that doesn't happen because they did that last time by punting
the Hunter Biden story, by suppressing all of the information that we really should have known about
the Biden family, by falsely maligning Donald Trump as an insurrectionist who peacefully handed over
the reins of power. So they had to last time drag him across the finish line.
I think they're a little bit scared to.
If only, yes, they're ideologically motivated, but if only out of their own self-interest.
They're like, you know what?
Eyes are on us now.
Last time we kind of pulled the trick, but people are looking for it.
And what shred of credibility we have left, we are going to lose.
Yeah.
So they might have to, I guess, sort of put on a veneer of being objective.
That's my thought.
I don't know.
They're doubling down.
Yeah, they're doubling down.
In this next story, they're doing it again.
It's not completely about that.
We'll talk about Catherine Herod real quickly, but she's, she is, she was
looking into some shady stuff, the Bidens and all of a sudden, well, I mean, this is.
So let me say.
She said.
Oh.
That's a lot of work.
I'm not smart enough to be dumb enough for this.
It really is, it's difficult.
You're like, how do I think up a really bad insult?
Cardi B said that.
Like Keith Urban, yeah.
That's Keith Urban also said, my neck, my back.
I'm pretty sure that was Jennifer Hudson actually.
That was, yes.
Those were wise words spoken by Fantasia.
Mary J. Morissette.
I want to hear that mad joke.
I really do.
Isn't it plutonic?
Fair, fair, fair enough.
I'm doing my best Keith Olbermann, okay?
No, it's difficult.
It's hard.
It's difficult.
All right.
I'll set this up because it's going to be Gerald Nose Thursday very soon.
So last week, a U.S.
District Court judge held this journalist—oh, well, no, by the way, a veteran journalist who's been doing this for a while, Catherine Herridge—in contempt.
And this is scary for anyone out there who believes in investigative journalism or believes that it's important as it relates to our constitutional republic.
She was held in contempt.
For refusing to reveal confidential sources.
A federal judge holding journalist Katherine Harridge in civil contempt for refusing to reveal her sources in a series of Fox News reports from 2017.
She's also facing a fine of $800 a day.
Harridge is expected to appeal.
Side note, she looks like that actress Isabella Rossellini.
Yeah.
She was in Blue Velvet.
Now, let's move on.
Let's move on, it's time for Jail and Those Things.
That's just your hair.
Oh, man.
That's a blowout.
Sometimes you stand in front of a fan and then spray it.
Yeah, I guess.
Or you don't comb your hair at all.
Maybe.
I don't know.
It happens.
I saw the Lady of the Park, I'd be like, how much for the hot dogs?
It's William's mom.
Leaping out a window.
Alright, so look, this ruling actually comes, like I said, with a little bit of, I don't know, questionable timing.
Just weeks after she was, I'm sorry, just weeks after this ruling, she was fired by CBS, and she was working on multiple stories right now about Hunter Biden's involvement with, you know, Joe Biden, the big guy, and all the stuff that they were dealing with, Burisma, and all of that, that he's been testifying in front of Congress for recently.
Surprise, surprise, they got rid of her, but she's being targeted When she's reporting on an issue that might affect the government, right?
And this has happened before, obviously with Project Veritas when they had the Ashley Biden diary issue.
They didn't even actually run that story.
It got leaked out and it didn't really go viral, but all of a sudden the FBI shows up and, give us that fake diary!
Why are you here for a fake diary?
That kind of thing.
It's like, we covered it when that happened.
We're like, you guys just verified that it's real because you showed up.
And basically it was just an opportunity, it seems maybe, for the FBI just to get information
on Project Veritas and get access to all of their data.
They seized a lot of stuff that they didn't necessarily have to seize because he had a
diary.
Remember they seized everything from Rudy Giuliani's apartment except the Hunter Biden
laptop.
Except the thing that we, yeah, they already had that.
That's the one thing they left.
They were like, oh, we've had that Hunter Biden laptop for, I don't know, like eight
months now, so no, no, no, we're good.
Guy likes his M&Ms.
They also did it with Steve Baker, right?
So Steve Baker from the Blaze, I think he was TPUSA at the time when he was at the Capitol on January 6th.
He got arrested and perp-walked, essentially, just over the weekend, I think on Friday or Saturday, for his reporting that day.
And, obviously, they let him go immediately.
They're like, ah, we have no intention of actually, you know, making you serve any jail time or anything like that.
But this is what happens.
Journalists go and they do their job, and then the government finds a way To come in and go, you know what, we don't like what you're doing.
That's what it seems like at the very least.
Which government?
The Chinese government?
The Russian government?
The North Korean government?
Which one is it then?
That was the one takeaway that people didn't like, and of course I don't trust Putin any further than I can throw him, but when Tucker interviewed him he was saying, you don't think your government does this?
You don't think your government prosecutes journalists?
You don't think your government uses the system?
And you know what, that's one area where he had a point.
This doesn't feel like the United States of America.
And one thing to keep in mind, altruistic journalists only exist in the movies, you
know, or some like where it's Erin Brockovich because there's some kind of contaminated
tap water.
It's true.
And they go, oh my gosh, they're taking it to the government.
Then all of a sudden, when Barack Obama became president, there were no more stories out
there about corrupt government.
There were no more films like that.
And the left despises actual investigative journalism.
To give you an idea, this is what also happens in a soft way with YouTube.
So for example, there's single party consent.
This is a law.
Before we get into the selective prosecution here, single party consent means that you are well within the bounds of the law to record a conversation without the other party knowing.
It means single party consent.
You need to be the only one.
They don't need to know.
That's pivotal for investigative journalism.
I believe there are 11 states that are dual party consent states.
And investigative journalists go to great lengths to ensure that they are following the law.
Then YouTube, for example, says, oh, we don't care.
That person, I don't know, maybe a corrupt government official, doesn't want the video out there.
So we'll remove it.
We've had it happen with Change My Minds, where someone sat down, signed a release, spelled their name out on camera saying, I consent.
We gave it to YouTube and they said, yeah, but then afterwards they said they didn't want it.
So I go, but it's also in a single party consent state.
We don't need any of those things.
Think about that.
A room full of 10 people.
As far as the media, as far as new media can determine exactly what it is that you see by not even following the law.
They create new laws when convenient for them.
Yeah, exactly.
And in the case of YouTube doing that Hunter Biden laptop on X and then I don't know if you remember we were doing a live stream and Facebook took us down back way back when we were doing Facebook stuff and they're like, oh yeah, I don't know.
They issued a copyright strike for it and they're like, yeah, but we weren't.
It's obviously parody.
We're actually taking something and changing it.
Later on, in each of those cases, later on, they come back and say, oh, you're right, but it's already done.
Our Hunter Biden stream, I believe, with Rudy Giuliani was taken down on YouTube.
Yeah!
When we were doing it, that was taken down.
And Twitter came back and said, you know what, we should have left that up.
Well, it's too late for that now.
Now, it's the exact same thing that the Democrats do.
They do something, they know it's illegal, but the courts are going to take a little bit of time to get to it, so it has the same effect.
No apologies ever given, no reason why.
And you'll see more of the abuse of the courts.
The point that I'm making is because now with X being purchased by Musk, now with Rumble being an alternative to YouTube, they're going, okay, We don't have a stranglehold on information, so now let's actually prosecute and jail or hold in contempt investigative journalists.
Let's make sure we send a shockwave of fear so that everyone else out there knows better.
By the way, you can send your stories to LWCTipsAtProtonMail.com.
We have an investigative unit here.
We will go to jail before we give up our story.
It doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter.
We've been very, very clear about that.
Yeah.
Well, let me give you a timeline for the Catherine Herod story, because I don't think a lot of people know this.
So, in 2017, in February, her team released a story showing that a Department of Defense was funding a school with ties to the CCP.
And you're like, okay, well, what kind of ties?
Well, Herod, they obtained records from the FBI on the University of Management and Technology.
It's about four miles away from the Pentagon.
The records revealed strong connections between this university and President Yen Ping Chen and the CCP, right?
Photos obtained by... Communist Chinese Party for the uninitiated.
CCP!
Communist Chinese Party, right?
The photos obtained by Heritage also show that Chen served in the People's Liberation Army.
Now, here's the thing.
When asked if she had ties, like, to any foreign governments or ever served in the military, she's like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, just the People's Liberation Army.
You actually served them.
You weren't just a member of the Communist Party.
She put them on their back foot.
She said, no.
Do you?
They said, no.
Now, here's the other thing.
Harrods revealed how they continued to receive funding from the Department of Defense, and that is a very curious thing.
Also, for this lady, no charges were ever filed for her.
None of them.
Nothing happened to her.
No issues, right?
So that's 2017.
Even PETA, by the way, is showing support for Harrods after Chen's new cookbook was leaked.
Yeah.
So they just... My point is, strange bedfellows sometimes come together.
That's absolutely true.
Alright, so that's 2017.
She was at Fox News.
Hungry.
2021 to current.
Yen Ping Chin filed a Privacy Act law.
I kid you not.
If I'm gonna lie, you can't tell anybody about it!
Lawsuit.
She filed a Privacy Act lawsuit against the FBI.
This is where Herridge was subpoenaed.
The journalist.
Exactly.
Tell us your sources.
You have to divulge this information.
She basically goes in and says, look, I'm not going to do this.
I have the First Amendment to protect me and I'm going to protect my sources.
This is what happens with journalism.
You have to allow us to be able to do that.
Think about that.
A journalist is having to give up their sources because of a lawsuit from a communist Chinese national.
The Department of Defense is continuing to send, I believe they sent $6 million to this university in some form or fashion, either tuition assistance or something else.
Really, really strange.
Again, you locate four miles away from the Pentagon.
Okay, fine.
But here's where it gets really strange.
Harrods can make that argument, right?
She should walk in the court.
It should be like Section 230.
You just say it and you walk right out, right?
She did.
She said it.
Judge Christopher Cooper denied Harrods.
Here's what he said.
Chen, the lady that filed the Privacy Act, the CCP lady, yeah.
Chen's need for the requested evidence overcomes Heritage's qualified First Amendment privilege in this case.
Her need for information on her privacy being violated on a lie that she told with some shady connections to the DoD That overcomes a First Amendment right of a journalist.
Now, this is absolutely terrifying.
So, Herridge, basically, she ended up being fired in February of this year, on February 13th from CBS.
Now, here's where it gets really scary.
CBS fired her and then seized all of her documents, all of her computers, all of her devices, every single thing, and did not give that stuff back for two weeks until being pressured by people to do it.
Also, by the way, all these computers, records, a lot of them included information on stories related to the Bidens that she was pursuing, so she can't get that back.
I don't know if- Personal stuff, too?
I would assume... All over records.
All over records.
So I would assume that, yeah, the confiscated documents, yeah.
Not just work phones.
Yep.
Oh, wow.
That's, like, there's personal things.
I have things on my phone that I don't want any of you guys to look at.
Yeah, I've seen your phone.
I didn't want to look at it.
Hey, dude, what?
Well, you gave it to me because you said, look at this.
Does it look infected?
I wanted to know.
And one of the things too, she was actually, uh, a lot of potentially source information, not just information that they gave her, but information about the sources was accessed by CBS.
And basically SAG and AFTRA, what is that?
That's a union.
Yeah.
They basically went after them and said, Hey, you have to give this back.
But they had it for two weeks.
Hey, we'll give you this back now after two weeks.
We've copied everything now.
We've dug through everything now.
Of course we'll give you your stuff back.
And in February, again, actually like five, six days ago on the 29th, she was held in contempt by that same U.S.
District Court judge and required to pay $800 per day.
And in the decision, Judge Cooper said this about the potential issues with his ruling.
Right?
Doubling down on what he ruled earlier.
in this circuit, the court resolved that Chen's need for the requested information
to vindicate her rights under the Privacy Act overcome Harrods qualified
First Amendment reporter's privilege in this case, right?
Doubling down on what he ruled earlier. Again, this lady, the CCP lady, has more
rights.
And it doesn't matter that she has free speech over here.
It doesn't matter that she's protecting her source over here.
It doesn't matter that journalism has acted like this and depended on this ability for decades, over a hundred.
It doesn't matter.
All of that goes out.
And you know what we said?
Hey, wouldn't that have a chilling effect?
Yeah.
Wouldn't that make it less likely for people to come forward with information, especially about the Bidens?
If this kind of person with this high of a profile can get pushed out?
Of course.
Or blackmail.
Yeah.
I think it would affect it.
Yeah.
And by the way, this happens culturally.
This is why we did the Clean Slate campaign.
We still have done it.
If you want to know, watch the show.
It's weekdays, 10 a.m.
Eastern, because the algorithm determines what content is permissible.
And so now you see people who at one point did investigative journalism, or at one point were actually broadcasting programs, and now it's just watch and reacts with bleeps.
Yeah.
Watch and react with bleeps.
Let's just watch something vanilla and let's get some clicks because they will not allow us to be seen.
Why?
Because they create new rules that actually circumvent the laws.
Yes.
That's a key issue here.
So culturally it happens and now you're seeing it happen judicially because of the cultural alternatives like Rumble and Act.
Yeah, and look, we'll go to Mug Club here in just a couple of minutes, but let me just say a couple of things here.
Listen to this response from the judge on the chilling effect.
Downplaying, yeah.
He was like, ah, it doesn't affect investigative journalism.
Exactly.
At a minimum, any marginal chilling effect has certainly not frozen the information pipeline.
Instances of journalism built on confidential sources remains legion.
Disagree.
Hold on.
Does it matter?
The chilling effect is yet future, sir.
It's not that your ruling hasn't had time to take effect because it really hasn't.
It's all about the process that it should never have even the possibility of taking effect and having a chilling effect on the market.
So let's just play this out.
I'm a judge somewhere else, and I go, huh, that sounds like a reasonable opinion.
I don't like what's being said by this reporter over here.
Boom, you have another case.
You have another case.
You have another case.
And it takes the Supreme Court a while.
It takes the states a while.
It takes Congress a while to go, this is not how we want journalism to function in the United States.
We've got to do something about it.
Doesn't matter.
The pipeline is then frozen.
You're an idiot, sir.
Like, you don't understand what you're doing.
Or, let's be clear, maybe you do.
Maybe you understand what you're doing, and people need to look into you a little bit and see kind of what things come crawling out from under the rock when we turn it over.
Yeah, you know what?
What's the name of this judge again?
Judge Cooper.
Mr. Cooper!
What's his first name?
I don't know, we gotta find Cooper.
I thought it was Judge.
Christopher Cooper!
I thought it was like Judge Reinhold, but that is his first name.
Hey, lwctipsatprotonmail.com.
Let's look into Judge Christopher Cooper.
Don't worry, we won't hand over our records.
Just his.
Exactly, right?
So that's a couple of things here, and I'm going to go into the rest of it behind Mud Club, but let me just say this really quickly.
Stephen's already said this.
This kind of thing won't happen here to our sources.
We go to great lengths to make sure that Stephen and I don't even know who our sources are, right?
So if they come knocking on our doors, Can't.
Right?
But here's the thing.
Even if they did, we're not giving them up.
Nope.
Not ever going to give them up.
And Katherine Harridge, I'm going to make a direct call to you.
When you're ready to tell your story, because right now what people are trying to do is silence you and act like you don't exist anymore.
And the information that you had isn't relevant anymore.
It's not a news story anymore.
You can't trust this person.
They're, they're, they're under arrest potentially in the future for not divulging this information.
Certainly having to pay $800 a day.
And you didn't even get your stuff back in time from CBS.
Who knows if they even gave you all of it.
Come talk to us.
We'd be happy to put you on air and let you speak your mind and make sure that people get to hear this story.
And we may not even agree on a lot of things, Catherine, but this thing we do.
You have a right to tell your story.
You have a right to speak.
You have a First Amendment right and it cannot be infringed by this idiot judge.
Very well said.
And we'll continue on Mug Club.
If you're watching on Rumble, click that button.
None of this happens without your support.
It's $89 annually.
Wonderful hand etched mug.
We're going to do another 45 minutes to an hour of show.
You get Nick DiPaolo every day.
You get Brian Callen.
You get the Hodge twins.
You get Alex Jones on Friday.
You get our Friday show.
You get all kinds.
And the investigative unit.
You can go Mugless.
Mugless for $9 a month.
But why would you want to forego the mug?
So anyways, thank you Rumble.
YouTube.
Are we still there today?
Yeah.
How many times did we hit the dump button?
Did we?
I don't know if we... Yeah, we definitely did with Mr. Piss-Face Review.
YouTube, Keith Olbermann off.
▲
Export Selection