Shock Poll: Nearly 90 Percent Think Biden Too Old For Another Term!
After a terrible week for President Biden, one in which the special prosecutor determined that Biden should not be charged over mishandling of classified documents because he was not mentally fit, a new poll shows the vast majority of Americans think he is just too old for another term. There is something the poll is missing, though... Also today: CDC vs CDC on masks. Finally - Dems panic that Trump might shut down their censorship agency.
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Monday, Monday, Dr. Paul, how are you?
I'm doing well.
Did you watch a football game last night?
No.
You're not a good American.
Tell you what, that was, I keep thinking about it.
I love sports.
I was involved in sports.
All my kids are in sports.
But I don't even know who played last night.
But you know what I think about when I see it?
I think it was a big affair, wasn't it?
It was a big deal, yeah.
A lot of money involved.
I wonder if this qualifies as malinvestment.
And can't you afford that kind of activity if you had no inflation?
I say, well, that's what's good about inflation.
You get all these wonderful things as long as you take advantage of it before the crash comes.
That's right.
Well, I put a damper on people who are having fun.
I'm all for that.
But maybe a few people had headaches.
It could be maybe too much fun.
So we're not going to have as much fun as they had last night because we're going to have to talk about the facts of life and the political life.
But there's a sad story out there.
We have a president that seems to be having a problem.
And I'm not as hostile to him as some because I keep thinking, maybe it's my medical background.
I said, I don't like to pick on sick people.
That's right.
So I don't like that at all.
And I don't personally like to go after, I don't like to name, use some politician's name because I think it diminishes from the issue.
But the issue right now is there's an election coming up.
Did you know that this year?
So we better get involved because we don't want them to close us down.
So we'll have to get somebody in there.
But the big thing is, is, you know, Biden is having a problem, and it doesn't look like he's serving the interests of people who want a pretty average person as president, and not somebody pretty unusual that doesn't have a very good memory.
So, okay.
But there's a poll out that tells us that maybe the Democrats are having a few worries and a few problems because incumbents are supposed to always win, you know, and therefore they think Biden should be ahead.
And who knows what will happen this day and age when it's difficult to count all the votes, you know, and I wonder if they'll be counting all the mail-in votes.
This is his next go-around.
Twice.
Yeah, that's why I counted in one door and back in the front door.
But the news and Zero Hedgehog caught our attention because this is pretty big.
I would think, you know, the Biden group and the Democrats and all the flunkies there will be a little bit nervous about that.
A new ABC poll, and 90% believe Biden isn't fit to serve.
Uh-oh.
And people want to get rid of him.
Oh, well, the 25th Amendment, and we'll claim he's incapable.
We can do that.
He has to lose this election.
Why don't we impeach him and get a new president?
You know, none of that excites me because there's always a downside.
They're like saying, if we could only get rid of Biden, because he's the worst example of a president ever we had.
So I thought, well, if they did, they say they achieved it and they had the point where the system was smooth enough where they'll replace them.
Well, you know what they might do?
They might replace him with Gavin Newman.
You know, and I thought, well, how's that going to help?
But I think 90%, they're worrying too much.
Maybe we're better off where we are than because how many, what are the chances of having somebody else that is going to give us policies that we don't like?
probably continue the war and the bankruptcy.
So I would say there's no hurry.
There shouldn't be any hurry.
And I think it's deception.
They're worrying about Biden and they're not worrying about the future of the world, you know, when the collapse comes and all the special winters get a little bit upset.
So there's a mess out there, but they're talking about the health of the president, which is legitimate, you know.
And since everybody else believes it's key, it becomes more important.
But philosophically long term, it probably doesn't matter much.
You know, I think that, yes, there was a difference between the Republicans and Democrats.
But I'll tell you what, if you look at who's pushing this military industrial money right now, I think there's some Republicans involved.
Matter of fact, the weird thing is the Democrats are joining the Republicans.
They must have some military people in their districts, too.
And they like to get campaign contributions.
So that's a mess and how this will evolve.
I imagine the way it's going, it looks like maybe the election will be accomplished and something will be settled.
But right now, it's up in the air, it's up for grabs.
And the biggest thing to show how incestuous this whole thing is is, well, we'll get, you know, when they had to get rid of Nixon, they went and made sure they didn't have the wrong person and their guy in as a vice president.
But they're in a dilemma now.
No kidding.
We have a special person as vice president.
There's no way you can get rid of her.
So they're in a dilemma.
And I think it's a delightful dilemma.
Let them sweat it out.
But I'm also not saying magic.
Oh, the Republicans are in, and they'll ball us a budget.
They'll stop all the wars.
And we hear hints about that kind of stuff.
But over the years, it just keeps plodding along and plodding along.
You know, it was announced today another figure, $17.5 trillion for household debt.
Oh, most of that's mine.
I keep thinking, well, what do you mean?
You can't have that debt.
We've got to bail out the military-industrial complex.
How can we send money to Ukraine?
And they're in debt, so they're broke too.
They're serving all the money.
Oh, it's the counterfeiters.
They have the money.
So we'll have to figure out how that happened.
But I predict, this is a really big prediction.
The transition will not go smoothly.
Yeah.
Well, let's put up that first clip.
This is an ABC News poll, ABC News Ipsos poll, I think it is.
Overwhelming majority of Americans think Biden is too old for another term, according to a poll I think that took place at the end of the week.
First question I would have, Dr. Paul, because we know what the media is like.
The mainstream media in the U.S. is all about telling you what the deep state wants you to know, you know, the powers that be of the elites.
And so my first question is, why are they reporting this?
Why do they want people to know?
And I think the suggestion, appropriate suggestion would be that they're panicking because it's become something that they can no longer hide.
If you go to the next one, this will tell you what they said.
An overwhelming majority of Americans think President Joe Biden is too old to serve another term, according to a new ABC News Ipsos poll.
According to the poll conducted using Ipsos' knowledge panel, 86% of Americans think Biden, 81, is too old to serve another term as president.
That figure includes 59% of Americans who think both he and former President Donald Trump are too old.
So they basically, the majority thinks that both of them are too old, but Biden, by a longer, longer shot.
And this is coming on the heels of a pretty bad week for Joe Biden.
You know, he had a couple of times last week, he mentioned that he had spoken recently to people who are dead.
One being Mitterrand from France, and the other was at Helmut Cole, someone from Germany who's long passed.
He talked to him recently.
Now, people make mistakes, and there's a lot of picking.
And I mean, I would hate to have to be out there in front of everyone to remember everything exactly.
But then, as Tucker and Putin were having the interview, well, someone got the brainy idea in the White House, hey, let's do our own.
Let's put Biden out after 8 p.m. when he's usually eating his ice cream and taking his little pills to go to sleep.
Let's put him out there and have him do a press conference.
And it was a disaster.
He was angry.
He was cranky.
He was grouchy.
And he forgot that Sissy is the president of Egypt, not Mexico.
Egypt is not on our southern border.
Mexico is on our southern border.
I imagine I can understand why he might wish that because Egypt actually has a big wall on their border.
You know, there was a reaction from a lot of Democrats to that press conference.
And they said, oh, mismanagement.
We're not managing this guy well enough.
But others are saying this was a climactic end.
That a lot of the Democrats said, we've got to do something.
This is over the top.
And I think that was a big change.
But that doesn't mean that next week something's going to happen.
But there were a lot of Democrats that are starting to see the handwriting on the wall.
And of course, the only thing they care about is not so much who's president, because I think the presidents have always been pretty much in control by the deep state.
And so I don't think it's happening.
The people are just saying, you know, we'll have control, but it's a little bit messy right now because I think probably they'd have been better off.
Well, I shouldn't give good advice.
They might do it.
They should just keep him quiet.
Put him in a little room or something.
Back in the basement.
Play with the grandkids.
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
Well, the other thing, too, that happened I forgot to mention is this report from the special counsel on that mishandling of classified data.
And that was pretty damning.
I don't know.
I don't think we talked about it last week because I think it came out later.
But, you know, when he basically said, well, you know, yeah, he did it.
He mishandled classified information.
But he's an elderly man with a bad memory, so we're not going to hold it against him.
You know, so here's the guy with the nuclear football, the nuclear codes.
He's an old guy.
They can't remember anything, so we're not going to, I mean, that was kind of the worst thing to do.
And then they recounted the interview that they did with him where he couldn't remember when he was vice president, didn't remember when his son died and this sort of thing.
And again, he's had a lot of years behind him, so it's probably easy to forget things.
But however, it doesn't look good.
And when the media starts putting these things together, then it really starts looking pretty bad for him.
You know, and I believe the reports that are coming out that there's a clear-cut difference between the charges on what Biden supposedly had done versus what Trump supposedly had done, Trump being in the presidency, you know, that sort of thing.
So that to me is, you know, very, very significant.
But then again, You know, to say, well, this guy can't be president because he doesn't know who's president of Mexico.
How are you going to know who to bomb?
But the whole thing is, is they're going to have Trump worry about these things.
As if this is better, but it's not the answer.
I have a different answer.
Federal Agencies Still Blame Game00:12:34
Yeah, absolutely.
Get out of the business of interventionism overseas.
Yeah, and at home.
Well, let's move on because this is kind of a funny story that caught our attention over the weekend because we haven't talked a lot about the CDC and the medical industrial complex very much.
Partly for me, because I don't want to remember it.
But we saw this through our friends at Zero Hedge.
The CDC is now retaliating against its own scientists for wronged masked research.
And it's just a little bit of a chuckle.
The CDC, the new director, Mandy Cohen, kept evading questions on whether she would bring back the mask mandates last November.
But it looks like the place is a mess still.
Put on that next one if you can.
Director Cohen's scientific bumbling continued last week as her agency began fighting with the CDC's own researchers over another contentious declaration.
N95 respirators work better than surgical masks.
And then it goes on, in recent years, mask advocates have shifted the goalposts.
Oh, really?
And demanded that you use the N95.
They say they're better than surgical masks.
I wonder if that's true, even if you have like five or six masks.
Some of those have.
Anyway, it's just kind of funny, the CDC fighting the CDC because of science.
They quoted from a hearing back in November, and they kept asking her, and she would evade questions on whether she would bring back mask mandate for toddler.
So the lack of an answer was an indication that that stuff is alive and well, but they have to just clear the air.
You know, make sure that, oh, they do have a concern.
We have to find somebody to blame.
But the people are in charge.
There's still a lot of them there because their goal is 100% to gain power.
And lying with science is not a sin.
You know, it's a plus.
Because they're good power brokers.
They want to do good things when they want to have power.
And they want to make sure everybody's taken care of.
So that to me shows that with all of this, how bad this looks and how people are waking up.
And it should be that don't let your guard down.
I think they're still planning on all that stuff.
The confusion on which masks are used, should kids, I mean, she raised the whole question.
And if there was anything ever more clear, but there were some recent articles where there was places that can't, some country maybe it was, they were giving shots to kids less than one year of age.
So that is pretty bad.
I wonder why they're dropping like flies.
Well, I mean, what's so interesting about this in a way, I mean, it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who watches the show and who basically has half a brain, which is that it's not whether the 95 is better than the surgical one.
The point is that there are plenty of studies showing that neither of them work.
But what they had always claimed is that the CDC represents science and you must follow everything they say.
Well, even within the CDC now, we're seeing there's a dispute, which we would say is pretty healthy, even though both are wrong on this.
It's pretty healthy.
That's the one thing they didn't allow during COVID.
You can't have a dispute.
It's settled.
But they're discussing something that misses the point.
They're discussing who knows the best way to handle prohibiting a disease and passing out injections and all the vaccines.
And they don't talk about where do they get this authority to meddle in all this medical stuff.
And, you know, we pick out some of the worst people to be in Congress.
And that would definitely include all the bureaucrats who are very professional, probably are more determined to stay there and do good for the world than some of the politicians.
They're there and they're safe there and they want the power and clout to do this.
And yet the real issue should be you don't have the jurisdiction.
You have no authority in the Constitution to be involved in medical issues.
And it's similar to education, just the overabundance of federal meddling in our educational system.
Look at what it's brought us.
And it's the same way in medicine.
Medicine, one thing I am very cautious about, there's still a lot of great things in our medical profession, but there's still a lot of people every year are being squeezed out just because of the financial way of doing things.
It's very, very expensive, and the whole system is bad.
But the government shouldn't even be involved in that.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, let's, I guess, move on to our third one.
This is sort of a telling thing because I think it tells you how the media tries to manipulate people and propagandize people.
This is a piece in Politico, which we do read sometimes.
Most of the time we read it not because of the facts that are in there, but because we're trying to figure out what kind of spin they're trying to get people to believe.
But this is an article, Congressional Gems Warn of Grim Future for U.S. cyber agency under Trump.
And so you can just see this very thoughtful director of the Cybersecurity Infrastructure Agency.
She's just trying to protect us.
You can see in this photo.
And the evil Trump has got to come and he's going to slash the budget of this agency that is so wonderful in protecting us so much.
Well, if people have a bit of a memory and they do, they will remember that the CISA or Cybersecurity Agency is the very agency uncovered in the Twitter files by Matt Taibbi and many over and over again as the government agency that coordinated with different NGOs and with Twitter and the other social media to censor and cancel people who said things like,
don't, you know, the vax doesn't work, it's not 100%, don't take a mask, et cetera, et cetera.
So they were not protecting our cybersecurity.
They were basically shutting people up who said things they didn't like.
You know, over the last couple years, we got to know that the FBI did the same thing.
You know, they would do the research and indicate it and report it to the government, and then the government would start the punishment.
Oh, no, they would allow the punishment to occur.
But now there are more people involved.
So this is a big deal.
I mean, because it's so bad on the justice system.
You know, the idea that you could have somebody, FBI or another, you know, observation group like SISA, you know, to report to the government and coordinate this.
This is so far removed from the concept of personal liberty.
And this is exactly like, this was recently, and I'll get to who signed this into law.
But this is so reminiscent of the Department of Homeland Security, which is a battle that you remember very well when you were in the House, when everyone was so angry with you for voting against it.
You don't want us to be secure?
What's wrong with you?
Why do you hate America?
They're going to only go after the bad guys overseas.
And now, of course, we know that they went after us, and they continue to go after us.
They have lists of evil people who might be libertarians, et cetera, et cetera.
So this is an example of it came into existence by saying, we got to protect against those evil Iranian hackers and Chinese hackers.
The reality is we got to go against Americans who may be thinking for themselves.
Well, here's from the Politico article, and here's how they lay their case out.
While Trump's anger at CESA is well known, he may now have an opportunity to capitalize on a movement in his party to gut the agency.
A number of GOP lawmakers and state attorneys general are alleging that the agency pressured Silicon Valley tech giants to censor conservative voices on their platforms during the 2020 election and COVID-19.
Well, A, alleging is untrue.
It's actually a fact, and we know this from the great reporting of Matt Taibbi and others at the Twitter files.
We've seen the papers.
We've seen all the receipts on this.
Keep it up, if you will, please.
So we know that's a fact.
And we know that the Silicon Valley giants were pushed by the government to censor.
But the other thing that's wrong here is it's not censoring conservative voices.
They always want to do this, Dr. Paul, make it left versus right.
They were censoring anyone who was outside the very narrow window of what you can say and can't say.
People on the left and the right, progressives and conservatives, and especially libertarians, were being shut up.
It wasn't a left versus right thing.
You know, they don't use the term, but this is the battle over the First Amendment on how to free, how you can close somebody down and cancel them.
And it's rather sophisticated.
But, you know, they've had that one sentence in here that I think is fair to quote: Trump cannot unilaterally kill CISA, which the former president himself signed into law in 2018.
That's the case.
So, yes, you want your sympathies.
Yeah, he's a little bit better than the other guy.
We don't want to do that.
But if he started this whole thing, and that's why some of our complaints had been on the foreign policy, that his speeches sometimes were better than his appointments, you know, when he was in office.
But, you know, if he gets another chance, maybe there'll be some influence away from those ideas.
Yes.
Well, here's another example of how the media wants to frame things of right versus left, the good guys and the bad guys, when it really isn't that simple.
Here's how they put it.
And hard-right Republicans in Congress.
What is a hard-right Republican?
What is that?
I mean, it means nothing.
It's just a scare.
It's very cheap, actually, very cheap propaganda.
But hard-right Republicans in Congress are already laying the groundwork to weaken CISA.
Last year, the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Weaponization of the Federal Government published a fiery report declaring CESA the nerve center of the federal government's censorship apparatus.
It wasn't claiming, it wasn't a fire report, it was facts detailing in very specific detail exactly how they did it.
And in fact, we have a clip from Matt Taibbi who testified before this committee, and this is just a little snippet, a little minute of, if we might want to put our earphones in to hear, Matt detailing how the government worked with the quote-unquote NGO sector to censor people.
Let's listen to what he has to say.
You know, in conjunction with our own research, there's a foundation, the Foundation for Freedom Online, which, You know, there's a very telling video that they uncovered where the director of Stanford's Election Integrity Partnership talks about how CISA, the DHS agency, didn't have the capability to do election monitoring, and so that they kind of stepped in to quote, fill the gaps legally before that capability could be amped up.
And what we see in the Twitter files is that Twitter executives did not distinguish between DHS or CISA and this group, EIP.
For instance, we would see a communication that said from CISA escalated by EIP.
So they were essentially identical in the eyes of the company.
EIP, by its own data, and this is in reference to what you brought up, Mr. Congressman, according to their own data, they significantly targeted more what they call disinformation on the right than on the left by a factor, I think, of about 10 to 1.
And I say that it's not a Republican at all.
It's just a fact of what we're looking at.
So yes, we have come to the realization that this bright line that we imagine that exists between, say, the FBI or the DHS or the GEC and these private companies is illusory and that what's more important is this constellation of kind of quasi-private organizations that do this work.
Really interesting.
That means privacy has been dissipated.
Yeah, yeah.
Packing Loyalists In00:03:13
We don't have much of it.
True privacy.
Exactly.
So anyway, the scare tactics and the other thing they said, and that quote, I actually picked that quote out too.
That was great about, yeah, Trump himself is the one that signed it.
But the other thing they say is, but he could pack it with loyalists who would slash its operations.
That's called getting elected and nominating your own people to fill these different political appointees.
It's not packing with, how come it wasn't packing the State Department with loyalists when he put in Blinken and Newland and all these people?
That's what you do.
It's called getting elected.
Now maybe you could argue there shouldn't be so many political plum positions.
Now that's a good debate we could have.
However, the idea that when you win, you shouldn't bring your own people in because that's packing an agency is just absurd.
But that shows how politico, which we do read, but that's how it shows how they frame things.
You know, there's a lot of collusion here.
You have the collusion of the government agencies and also with the private companies.
And it's back and forth.
They're serving each other's interests.
But then they come out with the sharpest criticism against those who are trying, honestly, to stop some of this.
Oh, you're a fascist.
You're a fascist doing this.
And they're the ones who have this interventionism where you have corporatism and corporations are in there and they become an arm of the government.
And it's worse.
I mean, when I read and hear this now, it's worse than I ever dreamed of, you know, that it could be.
But I just, I assume that there should be no surprises because it's out of control.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, I'm going to close out this Monday, Dr. Paul, by again reminding people that you can help the show and won't cost you a penny.
I'm looking over here.
We've got almost 1,000 people watching us right now.
If each of you hit that thumbs up button, and if you're not following us, hit follow.
That will indicate to Rumble that the show is popular.
And what does Rumble do when they see a show's popular?
Well, they move us up when you just go on the main Rumble page and see the live shows.
Well, we move up according to how many people are watching and how many people like.
So you'll help get the show before the eyes of many more people.
And it won't even take you half a second, and it won't even cost you half a penny.
And we will appreciate it because it makes us want to work harder when we see that our hard work is paying off and people are watching what we do.
So thank you again for watching the show and thanks for helping us get it before the eyes of other people.
Very good.
You know, I think this is an example Of the use of fear to scare people into going along with what they want to do with the government.
Because why do people go along with it?
How do they get this passed?
And why would they do it maybe against their better interests and do it?
Because politically and the pop and the public are saying, I want to be safe.
You know, we're going to protect you from the bad information and what the enemy is doing.
So it's always fear that they build up.
Fear and a concern for a peace that they believe somebody's going to attack us.
Well, the attacking goes on constantly, and I am convinced that we concentrate and should be concerned about foreign enemies.
Real Danger Collusion00:00:49
By golly, we ought to be concerned about domestic enemies too, because it is our system that has been undermined through our educational system and our bureaucracy and the media.
That's where the real danger has been.
And when you see these stories, that's exactly what's happening: there's a collusion.
And the problem with corporatism is that it essentially does lead to something much worse, and that is fascism.
And in the meantime, things will just dribble along, and we're going to get a lot poorer until somebody says, enough is enough.
We're going to have a new system.
Let's just hope and pray that we can be able to present our cause for liberty to prevail over the authoritarians.