All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 15, 2023 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
25:56
Idiocracy? US Senator Challenges Witness To Fight During Hearing!

"Get off yer butt!" US Senator Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) challenged Teamster President Sean O'Brien to a fight during a Senate Committee Hearing. Idiocracy? Or a novel way to pay down the debt: pay-per-view Senate brawl hearings! Also today, Nikki Haley demands that you show her your papers! Finally, the fascism of corporate/government collusion on censorship continues.

|

Time Text
A Wrestling Match on the Senate Floor 00:06:54
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today is Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you this morning?
I'm doing very well.
Did you get the ticket?
There's going to be a wrestling match and a boxing match in Washington, and I'm missing all the fun.
Boy, I really fitted into that situation real well.
I'm sort of chicken when it comes to big guys wanting to have a fight.
Boy, that is something else.
You know, it looks like this big issue where a senator took on the president of a labor union, and they want to settle it there.
But thank goodness we had a referee, Bernie Sanders, was there.
He said, calm down, folks.
We have to look decent.
So it's a shame how silly it is.
And I can't help but think there is a little bit of humor here now that they look at it.
But also, it's pretty bad.
You know, if it's sunk to this, you know, I mentioned to you that I think what it is, it's just that they've run out of steam on talking about issues.
You know, we believe you have to talk about issues and you have to have ideas and you have to discuss them.
But they don't do that.
I mean, where are the real debates going on?
It's more likely that you're going to have this argument.
And the legislative process is like that, too.
They're putting so many things up and they took a little while to find a speaker that they could have.
And so it shouldn't shock us, but it's still, I bet it made a few people chuckle a little.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, let's put on that first clip.
This is what we noticed.
Sure, a lot of people are talking about today because it's hilarious.
We can finish it here.
U.S. Senator challenges Teamster's president to fight during congressional hearing.
Jimmy Hoffa, if he were there, he probably would have just had the guy knocked off, right?
But let's watch.
We have a clip of that.
I cut out the first part.
I just wanted to cut to the chase, cut to the action.
But let's show, this is where a member of the United States Senate, Senator Mullen from Oklahoma, challenges Ted Teamster, your earphone, challenges him to a fight, and you can't help but laugh a little.
Let's listen to this.
Sir, this is a time.
This is a place.
You want to run your mouth?
We can beat two consenting adults if we can finish it here.
Okay, that's fine.
Perfect.
You want to do it now?
I'd love to do it right now.
Stand your butt up then.
You stand your butt up.
Oh, hold up.
Oh, stop it.
Say you're saluted every fault.
No, no, sit down.
No, Eric, sit down.
Okay.
You know, you're a United States Senator.
Active.
Okay, sit down, please.
All right.
Can I respond?
Hold it.
Hold it.
If we can't.
No, I have the money.
I'm sorry.
This is what he said.
You'll have your time.
Okay.
Can I respond?
No, you can't.
This is a hearing.
I mean, I think they may have just hit on a way to get Americans more interested in governance and, you know, all this.
Just do some of this.
They'll be tuning in.
Maybe this is what goes on behind the scenes and nobody knows about it.
I just burst out.
This is what we do.
We threaten each other.
So it's pretty bad.
But the threat to have this little duel, then they justified by going into history.
Well, they had real duels in the old days, and why can't we renew that, you know, and have some real fighting going on?
But it was a little bit of a surprise to me to see this come up.
And it looks like there was an offer, I think, by one of them.
They said, well, let's do it.
And let's have a ring.
We could get an audience, you know, take it politically.
And then if we raise money, we'll donate it to our favorite charity, you know, and all of a sudden, you know, to play it over.
So I wonder if they had breakfast this morning or a beer last night.
Yeah, maybe.
Who knows?
That might be a way to pay down the debt, though, do a pay-per-view.
And, you know, you can watch it in the middle of the day.
It just invite the whole, instead of all this stuff on the floor, let's have some real debate.
They probably could win a lot of money.
Musk might even get into it.
He might be the referee and put on his station.
Good, yeah.
It does get every day more like idiocracy.
Well, here's a couple good quotes.
So here's one if you put the next one on.
Here's Bernie Sanders.
He said, hold it.
No, no, no.
Sit down.
You put that next clip up.
You're a United States Senator.
Sit down.
And then he said, this is a hearing.
God knows the American people have enough contempt for Congress.
Let's not.
Well, there might be some that will think that this is more like it.
They're coming out in the open on what they really think of each other.
And then he goes on to say, if you put that next one, excuse me, hold it.
Senator Mullen, I have the mic.
If you have questions on economic issues, anything that was said, go for it.
We're not here to talk about physical abuse.
Oh, my gosh.
At first, I was a little annoyed that something like this would happen on the Senate committee floor, but then I just thought it was pretty funny.
Well, it's pretty amazing that this can occur.
And when you try to figure out how significant is it, was there really any big difference about philosophy?
Probably not.
Well, one's conservative, one's liberal, and one believes in power unions and that sort of thing.
But it's still, in their own way, they all believe in the government doing more, you know, than they should be doing.
And then you end up how many people in that audience and how many people in the Congress really, really are worried about a deficit, which may be a real calamity.
We might even have some difficulties in the street.
We may have riots and people living in the streets and suffering from this bankruptcy.
But no, it's the same old thing, but it boiled down to just an argument between two guys.
And I wonder if that means they've discriminated against women.
No woman involved.
Oh, you never know that.
But they're not timid.
Some of them can express themselves.
They probably would get into a little fight.
One thing we didn't really go into, but something else happened yesterday, was that apparently, according to press reporting, Kevin McCarthy, the former Speaker, jammed his elbow into another member of the House.
I forget which member it was.
This is a bigger stretch.
Nikki Haley's Russian Bot Concerns 00:09:38
I mean, when I saw McCarthy on TV, he's sort of giggling.
And I would think, you know, you could, you know, you could walk by somebody.
You could almost do a friendly thing like that.
You know, bump a person and someone puts your elbow there like, hey, hello, how are you getting along or something?
But there was no videos on that.
So it can't be verified.
And McCarthy, you know, laughed it off.
But even that made a lot of news.
But, you know, the congressman that he bumped it into wasn't exactly pleased.
I think it gave him an opportunity to get a little attention.
I think they had bad blood.
But, you know, then McCarthy played the tough guy.
If I had really hit him, he would have known it.
And nobody believes that about him.
Let's be honest.
Well, speaking of America being an unserious country, unfortunately, it's a fact.
If you go to the next clip, our second story, Nikki Haley is an unserious candidate in an unserious country.
And this is from Zero Hedge.
Nikki Haley takes fire over unconstitutional plan to force all social media users to be verified by name.
And let's listen to Nikki explain it in her own words.
Let me see.
We're going to play the whole clip here of Nikki explaining her brilliant idea of the day.
Dr. Paul, you might want to put your earphone in.
Let's listen to the collective wisdom of Nikki Haley.
When I get into office, the first thing we have to do, social media accounts, social media companies, they have to show America their algorithms.
Let us see why they're pushing what they're pushing.
The second thing is every person on social media should be verified by their name.
That's, first of all, it's a national security threat.
When you do that, all of a sudden people have to stand by what they say.
And it gets rid of the Russian bots, the Iranian bots, and the Chinese bots.
And then you're going to get some civility when people know their name is next to what they say.
Accountability.
And they know their pastor and their family members are going to see it.
It's going to help our kids and it's going to help our country.
Sounds like a little intervention that we wouldn't be endorsing.
You know, what's so bad about this is she identified some people who are annoying to us.
And that's the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians in North Korea.
But not in the context of our interventionist foreign policy and our empire and our dealing with sanctions.
You know, the more complicated thing, because, you know, they're acting out in their defense, but she doesn't say that.
So what she wants to do, that's what she's justifying under the Constitution to protect freedom of speech.
But what she doesn't want to do is point out who's really violating our freedom of speech.
And that's our government.
She never wants.
I mean, if she said, well, this is all justified because it's national, for national security's stake.
If our national security depends on this and allowing our own government and our FBI doing what they're doing, believe me, she's upside down on this.
And I'll tell you, she's not going to, I think I will state very plainly that if she's the nominee, I'm not going to vote for her.
I mean, it's just a classic boomer mentality.
Oh, it's horrible.
Let's go.
I mean, there's some great responses on this, and we just can't help looking on X. Speaking of X, the owner of X had a good response.
If you put on this next clip, Elon Musk tweeted out or posted out, we say, I guess on X.
Now, if you could put that next picture up.
Yeah, go ahead.
Here we go.
So here's what Elon Musk said.
Super messed up.
She can stop pretending to run for president now.
That's a great comment.
Byron York, with whom I do not agree very often, he is a right-wing journalist, put this next one up.
He has some good points.
So here's what he did.
He said, I asked the Haley campaign about her statements advocating mandatory ID and verification for all social media users.
Doesn't that raise troubling issues of privacy and freedom of speech?
And then he goes on, here is her statement.
Here's her response.
Quote, this is from Haley.
We know that America's enemies use anonymous bots to spread anti-American lies and sow chaos and division within our borders.
Nikki believes social media companies need to do a better job of verifying users so we can crack down on Chinese, Iranian, and Russian bots.
That's common sense.
And if you go to the next one, an interesting reaction to this is, so one person commented on this, John Hassan said, Nikki justifies her unconstitutional plan by claiming disinformation and Russian bots threaten national security.
Well, that's the same excuse that Twitter and the FBI used to block the Hunter Biden laptop story and censor Republican voices like Molly Hemingway.
And Molly, who is the editor of the Federalist, she responded, also, we've conclusively learned that the regime's claim of Russian bots were more or less invented out of thin air to suppress the speech of Americans who oppose them.
Free speech matters and must not be sacrificed.
So Nikki Haley here is basically doing what all the far left, the radicals were doing on Twitter, which is we can't let this Hunter Biden laptop story come out because there's Russian bots.
It's Russians are behind everything.
So she's actually mimicking that.
Well, they pick up pieces that they can make a point that something's coming out on the internet.
It doesn't just seem to be kosher.
It looks like it's really bad, and especially they can play up the patriotism thing.
But we talked a lot about this when they started regulating, and we were annoyed, too, how social media was really supporting the locked on.
And was it a private company giving us opinion?
They wanted to be that, and it was a plan to do that.
The government didn't want to look like they were encroaching on our liberties in the First Amendment.
So they used it.
And the truth finally came out on this.
And not only would the government in general do this, but you had the FBI, you know, feeding them information.
Oh, this looks like a suspicious thing.
And they wouldn't even check it out.
They would start attacking these people.
So it was the combination of big corporations and government, which is the approaching not only corporatism, but fascism.
And that is where we drew the line.
But to say that everything that ever came out of there, if they said, you know, right now, you might have an internet service that said, well, you know, this is the argument that the Israelis have for their right of self-defense.
And this is the right, and somebody else wants to talk about the right of the Palestinians having a homeland or not living under the conditions they've had and have a discussion.
But how can you get that now?
Because we give money to both of them.
And then we push the scenario for each one, depending on who's doing the speaking.
But they're so far remote mood because somebody like Nikki Haley, I don't even, I would give her the benefit of the doubt that she's not as evil as she is uninformed.
That might be.
You want to take your treasure with that.
Well, anyway, you know what I mean.
But it is funny to see that she obviously has not been clued in on the fact that Russia Gate was a hoax, was a fake.
It was a way the Democrats were using to try to rig the elections.
She seems to still believe that it's true that there were all these Russian bots running around trying to sow discord and show, you know, sow dissatisfaction in our wonderful system.
You know, she still believes that stuff.
So she's not on top of it.
Well, Ron DeSantis had a good statement.
We don't praise Ron very often these days.
But let's put his statement up.
He said, you know who were anonymous writers back in the day?
Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison when they wrote the Federalist Papers.
They were not national security threats, nor are the many conservative Americans across the country who exercise their constitutional right to voice their opinions without fear of being harassed or canceled by the school they go to or the company they work for.
Haley's proposal to ban anonymous speech online, similar to what China recently did, is dangerous and unconstitutional.
It'll be dead or unrivaled in my administration.
Now, this is a good move by DeSantis to talk about people shouldn't be canceled by their universities for speech that they don't like.
But this is the same Ron DeSantis, if you put the next clip up, who did that exact same thing.
This is back in October.
Florida Governor DeSantis deactivates students for justice in Palestine at two universities, citing alleged violations of state laws against anti-Semitism.
So here's on the one hand, DeSantis saying, you shouldn't be harassed by your university, the same Ron DeSantis who kicks off university clubs that are in favor of Palestine.
DeSantis's Dilemma 00:09:10
Three cheers minus two at least.
Exactly.
What a shame.
Well, I think that might be Nikki's last hurrah.
Well, let's hope so because she didn't do it on her own.
You know, she had people behind her.
Then she's made the effort, but somebody had to give her a lot of support.
But she had a couple one-liners that they boom, boy, and I put her in the news.
Finish news.
So, no, I think this will not help her.
And people will keep after her about it.
Well, let's move on to our last one, I guess, if you're ready.
And this is just something we wanted to bring up.
And in fact, I have a surprise clip at the end.
But this is Matt Taibbi, who's speaking of the Twitter files and speaking of exposing this kind of corporatism or fascism where speech is, he's done a great job.
And he's got a new piece out on his sub stack.
UK files reports show that both left and right can be targets of censors.
And that's something that we've always said.
It's not just an attack against conservatives.
Anyone who's outside the lines.
So if you go to the next clip, this is the opening part of his piece.
He said, just as some denizens of George Orwell's Annual Farm were more equal than others, Britain's Center for Countering Digital Hate stands out among the fast-growing list of organizations dedicated to the global elimination of wrongthink, commonly described using terms like disinformation, hate, and lies.
So they had some files, some leaks over there in the UK about how evil these organizations are, particularly the Center for Countering Digital Hate, and just simply trying to censor people and forbid them from expressing their views.
The one question they won't ask, they advocate this, that these people should be censored and somebody has to do it.
But they never answer the question, we know the answer, but who's the judge?
Who's going to make the decision?
It's the person that has the political power.
And sometimes that political power is a combination of corporate power.
And sometimes it's very anonymous, you know, exactly who's pulling the string.
But fortunately, you know, as time went on, and unfortunately, it seems to be waning a little bit about, well, we understood and promoted the whole idea that corporations, you know, in the pharmaceutical industry had a lot to do with all those lockdowns.
And there was a lot of money to be made.
And that battle still has to be fought.
But we're better off than we were for the first two years of that nonsense.
Yeah, I mean, it's easy to be complacent about this saying, okay, the Twitter files are out.
Thanks, Matt Taibbi.
Thanks, Schellenberger, all you guys who worked on it.
Good job.
And now we move on because the forces of darkness don't sleep and they're looking for new ways of doing it.
But over here on our shores, actually, I have a video clip of someone we both know who's actually doing something about it.
And he's got a new bill that he put in that, if it passes, will do a lot to solve this problem.
Play the first 44 seconds of that next clip.
And let's listen in, Dr. Paul.
This is someone I think you recognize.
But this is a great 44 seconds.
Listen to what Senator Paul has to say.
And our bill would basically make it illegal for the FBI or Department of Homeland Security or the White House or the CDC.
It would be illegal for them to meet with anybody in the media, not just internet companies, but anybody in the legacy media as well or the print media.
It would be illegal and they would be fired if they were found to be meeting to discuss, cajole, compel, coerce, any kind of kind of discussion to limit constitutionally protected speech.
And we decided to use the wording constitutionally protected speech because the FBI pushes back and says, well, we talked to them about taking down child pornography.
Well, that's against the law, child pornography.
It's not constitutionally protected speech.
So it's a good way of trying to divide out what the government can and cannot do.
That's pretty good, new law.
It's illegal.
I agree with that.
Yeah, I agree with that too.
Illegal to meet to talk about how to suppress Americans' First Amendment rights.
So hats off again to Senator Paul for a great, great move.
Yeah, well, I want to read a little bit about the article on Taibbi.
And this is about how to pick and choose and what to do.
And he says, what you're about to read is correspondence between British political operatives and discuss how to use fake news to destroy opponents while hiding behind a disguise as an operation supposedly fighting fake news.
These tactics stand out, and this is what they do.
Accusations of bigotry and homophobia.
You know, guilt, guilt, you're guilty, you're guilty.
Used to silence political opponents on the group's left.
This is pragmatism for the evil people.
Use of guilt by association, narratives to attack the reputations of the conservatives and leftists.
That bipartisan type thing generally doesn't stand up quite like that, but it's true, you know, because both sides are doing it.
But this way, both sides are doing the bad stuff.
Close coordination with dependably incurious mainstream media organization.
You know, there's the strategy, and people should be able to draw a better line between when it's good to protect speech and when you have to say there's a limit, and the limit is when the government gets involved and they use it against the people's liberties and against the people's right of free speech.
They twist it, they turn it upside down and generally get away with it.
Yeah, well, we'll definitely keep our eye on this.
And I'm going to close out now if you think we're about done and thank our viewers for tuning into the Liberty Report.
We're very close to having a new website for the Ron Paul Institute.
I'm going to make an announcement about that tomorrow.
But we appreciate you watching the show.
We'd love for you to subscribe to our channel here on Rumble.
Or if you're on YouTube, please subscribe on YouTube.
We're still on YouTube.
We just come on Rumble First Live.
And subscribe, like, comment, send to your friends.
Help us grow our channel.
And so we can help keep you informed.
Dr. Paul?
Very good.
You know, I want to close out by talking about something I talk about often.
And that is there's a contest that's going on.
It's been going on for about 6,000 years.
And that is the recognition that there is a higher and a natural law that people know right and wrong, good and evil.
And that contest will continue.
But if people don't endorse it or follow the higher law and work out their differences, they don't say, well, what we need is a fight on the Senate floor, and then we can solve these problems, or we can steal more money from this group to give to the other group.
What they do is they end up with less interest and total rejection of the natural law and the understanding of right and wrong.
So when that happens, you have a system of nihilism and some of these things that they advocate and what they do in the use of government.
Government is there to be used by these thugs who want special interests and want something for free.
And it works for a while, especially if you have a relative amount of freedom to begin with and there's a lot of wealth available.
You can buy a lot of support.
But eventually it goes bankrupt.
And it is bankrupt now morally and financially.
And that's where the problem is.
It bursts out in an argument on the Senate floor or somewhere else in how to protect freedom of speech.
But ultimately, it doesn't get solved because there will always be conflict.
And that's why let's hope people understand what the fundamentals are of natural law and the fundamentals of a higher law.
And maybe people who are motivated that way might be able to, you know, squelch some of these unnecessary fight, personal fights, war fights going on, and all the things going on.
And right now, the war that we have going on here domestically far outperforms all the stuff going on around the world.
When you think about what the FBI is doing and the Department of Justice and all the things that we face, and we have a responsibility about that, much more so than how we should tell the Chinese how they should advertise and how they should spend their money that we gave them after we were buying their stuff.
So there's a lot of difference between a society that accepts the higher law versus the people who reject it and take, well, you can't know the truth, so we're going to do what we want and we're going to control exactly what people are allowed to do with government force.
A bad system, but it's out of control right now.
Export Selection