Speaker 1: The DSA may actively be working against themselves, to which
Speaker 1: that actually could be hilarious. Also, the Islamic communist Ugandan
Speaker 1: got booed off of a stage just minutes after getting
Speaker 1: to his destination. A black Cambridge professor is fired. Is
Speaker 1: that racism or is the fact that he had the
Speaker 1: job to begin with racism? And Fauci might actually go
Speaker 1: to jail so much to get to here On the
Speaker 1: show today, my name is Jobob. Thanks so much for
Speaker 1: tuning in. The show starts right now. First things first,
Speaker 1: want to say thanks to all of you who showed
Speaker 1: up to the Make Heaven Crowded tour stop yesterday in Phoenix, Arizona.
Speaker 1: Dream City Church. Didn't get a chance to talk to
Speaker 1: many of you folks out there as we were kind
Speaker 1: of in and out of there's a little crazy thing
Speaker 1: traveling and all that stuff. It gets a little bit
Speaker 1: crazy time crunches get a little bit shorter as as
Speaker 1: these things progress. But was able to say hi to
Speaker 1: a couple of you folks, Thank you so much for
Speaker 1: coming and being there. I had a really interesting conversation
Speaker 1: with Danny Gokey on stage. We may play that a
Speaker 1: little piece of that on the show. Tomorrow, we'll see,
Speaker 1: but if not, I'm sure it's on YouTube somewhere. So anyways,
Speaker 1: any of you who came to the Make Heaven Crowded
Speaker 1: Tour at that stop or really any stop around the country,
Speaker 1: it has been an awesome event to see. So you
Speaker 1: know there's several stops on the tour still to come.
Speaker 1: Go check out those tour dates. If you live in
Speaker 1: any of those areas, definitely would recommend checking out one
Speaker 1: of those events. Okat atposa dot com is the email
Speaker 1: address if you would like to send long your thoughts, comments, concerns,
Speaker 1: even criticisms. Those are all welcome at our email inbox.
Speaker 1: It's okay to be wrong if you want to criticize
Speaker 1: the show. That's more than we were pro free speech,
Speaker 1: especially in our inbox. Tpt atposa dot com. You can
Speaker 1: also leave a comment on any of the social media
Speaker 1: platforms that you happen to frequent because we're on all
Speaker 1: of them. If you want to scan the QR code,
Speaker 1: you can find one support responsors of the show and
Speaker 1: it helps us keep doing our thing here. Also, you
Speaker 1: can go to Turning Point Tonight dot com where you
Speaker 1: can check your voter registration don't be one of those
Speaker 1: thirty percent of people who are eligible to vote but
Speaker 1: not registered to vote. That's ridiculous. Or you can follow
Speaker 1: us on all the social media accounts, you can listen
Speaker 1: to the podcast. You can do everything that really, honestly
Speaker 1: you probably need to do, not only in your information input,
Speaker 1: but in life in general by scanning QR codes. So
Speaker 1: don't let life pass you by scan the QR code.
Speaker 1: Connect with us on all of the social media platforms,
Speaker 1: leave a comment and sending email tptatvs dot com. And
Speaker 1: as always, and for like the ninth time in a row,
Speaker 1: if your comment is just vile, disgusting and downright nasty,
Speaker 1: it'll actually fit in fantastically here with what we're doing
Speaker 1: on the show, speaking of vile, nasty and downright just disgusting,
Speaker 1: awful terribleness. The DSA the dimwitted Society of Americans. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure if that's what it's actually called. I think
Speaker 1: they like to call it the Democratic Socialists of America.
Speaker 1: Interchangeable in my mind, but the DSA has been making
Speaker 1: a lot of waves. It's no secret to anyone. They've
Speaker 1: unfortunately been relatively successful in blue areas of getting lunatics
Speaker 1: elected in the primaries who will then in all likelihood
Speaker 1: go on to become members of Congress leaders in their
Speaker 1: state legislature. It's actually very scary. So because it's necessary
Speaker 1: to look at what they do, we'd probably like to
Speaker 1: take some time here to break down just a few
Speaker 1: of the more ridiculous things that they talk about. Now,
Speaker 1: there's a long list of things that are on the
Speaker 1: DSA's platform that are comically stupid, but we're only gonna
Speaker 1: have time to get to I think three here today,
Speaker 1: and I wanted to start off with one of the
Speaker 1: Sunday shows from not all that long ago, where Fox
Speaker 1: News host Shannon Bream had one of the spokespeople for
Speaker 1: the DSA on and asked they them her, I don't
Speaker 1: know about the DSA's platform. Now, she went through the
Speaker 1: laundry list. If you've seen the clip, you've seen it
Speaker 1: and goes, what about this? She's yes, what about this? Yes?
Speaker 2: This?
Speaker 1: Okay, we don't have time to get through all of those,
Speaker 1: because you want to, you know, shed light on some
Speaker 1: of the more important ones. So we'll start with this.
Speaker 1: Shannon Breem digs down just a little bit to this
Speaker 1: first claim that the DSA says will increase the benefit
Speaker 1: of society to all by abolishing prisons. Watch this.
Speaker 3: So if we talk about abolishing prisons, then does that
Speaker 3: make society better? I mean, is there anybody that should
Speaker 3: be incarcerated? I mean rapist, child predators, murderers.
Speaker 4: Yeah, So the long term plan, when we think about
Speaker 4: most people who are in prison, they are mostly in
Speaker 4: prison for crimes of poverty.
Speaker 3: So when we that's not time I'm talking about, I'm
Speaker 3: talking about the really.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I know, I hear the SPEs when we Yeah,
Speaker 4: so when we get rid of this need for crimes
Speaker 4: of poverty to exist, when we get rid of that
Speaker 4: destabilizing force that creates so many people who are living
Speaker 4: in desperate situations and doing desperate things, that brings those
Speaker 4: numbers down to very small numbers, and then we can
Speaker 4: collectively decide what we do with those people. I suspect
Speaker 4: it won't look like the prison system as we know
Speaker 4: it today.
Speaker 1: First things first, just to reiterate the stance that I
Speaker 1: have on prisons that I'm sure a lot of you have,
Speaker 1: and if you disagree, feel free to emails TPTATV at
Speaker 1: day dot com. Yeah, the whole prison system in my
Speaker 1: mind is not for rehabilitation. It's to remove dangerous, would
Speaker 1: be possibly violent criminals from the streets and not even
Speaker 1: have it possible for them to do any harm, damage
Speaker 1: or crime to me or my family. Okay, we've said
Speaker 1: that enough here on the show. But the question then
Speaker 1: is because well, poverty just solely based on or sorry,
Speaker 1: is crime solely based on poverty? Well, the answer, of
Speaker 1: course is no. We've mentioned many times on this show
Speaker 1: that if you are poor in the United States of America,
Speaker 1: you are still better off than the overwhelming majority of
Speaker 1: the world. Just a fun fact for you. Half of
Speaker 1: the global population the entire world lives on less than
Speaker 1: six dollars and eighty five cents per day per person,
Speaker 1: which is insane if you look at poverty relative to
Speaker 1: what you can earn in the United States of America.
Speaker 1: On top of that, we've mentioned this on the show
Speaker 1: number of times too. It is literally impossible to starve
Speaker 1: to death in this country. Now, I'm not saying that,
Speaker 1: you know, things might be a little bit difficult, money
Speaker 1: might be tight, some people may be struggling. Of course,
Speaker 1: that of course is the case. But at the same time,
Speaker 1: when you look at the United States and our poor
Speaker 1: population relative to the rest of the world, they've got
Speaker 1: it pretty good. I got into a debate altercation with
Speaker 1: someone about this idea that you can't starve in the
Speaker 1: United States of America, and what I mean by that
Speaker 1: is our effectively, our police system won't allow you to
Speaker 1: do that. Somebody will stop you at some point, somebody
Speaker 1: will get you the help care nutrition that you need
Speaker 1: in order to do that. The only way to do
Speaker 1: that would be like to lock yourself away in a
Speaker 1: room in solitary confinement and actively starved to death, which
Speaker 1: nobody would choose. Right. You would have to literally decide
Speaker 1: that this were the case, and even then it would
Speaker 1: be super difficult to do. The person I got in
Speaker 1: an argument didn't quite understand that and said, yeah, well, people,
Speaker 1: it's still people. They only commit crimes because of poverty.
Speaker 1: To that point too, she also suggested a solution, right,
Speaker 1: She said, as long as we eliminate poverty, which by
Speaker 1: the way, communism and socialism have never done before, that
Speaker 1: usually everybody ends up being in extreme poverty. But if
Speaker 1: we eliminate the poverty, we would effectively eliminate a lot
Speaker 1: of people committing crime. Now, I don't think that works
Speaker 1: for several of our more infamous criminals, Charlie Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer,
Speaker 1: just just to name a couple. Not sure if they
Speaker 1: were crimes of poverty or they were just insane, lunatic,
Speaker 1: evil people. So you do have those people to deal with.
Speaker 1: And when she was asked that, she notably said, well,
Speaker 1: we can get together and disc side what we should
Speaker 1: do with those people. In other words, we should craft
Speaker 1: laws as a society, and if people break those laws,
Speaker 1: then yes, they would have to be in prison, very
Speaker 1: very similar to the process that we already have, you,
Speaker 1: dim wit, we already do that. Good news. If you're
Speaker 1: going to try and deal with criminals, we have a
Speaker 1: system in which we all get together, we all take
Speaker 1: a vote, and then those elected representatives craft laws, and
Speaker 1: then we enforce those laws. Congratulations, that already exists. But
Speaker 1: of course that's not the goal. The goal is to
Speaker 1: say these sorts of outlandish things in hopes of bringing
Speaker 1: people those minds are easily malleable onto their side. Another
Speaker 1: one of those issues is the Senate. They are big
Speaker 1: proponents of abolishing the Senate, and Shannon Briem asked this
Speaker 1: other again, I think lady I'm not sure. I don't
Speaker 1: want to be offensive. Maybe it's a day them what
Speaker 1: she thought about abolishing the Senate and her response was this,
Speaker 1: watch this abolish the Senate.
Speaker 3: There are people who are in the Senate now who
Speaker 3: are very supportive of dsay they lose their seats.
Speaker 4: Well, the Senate is an anachronistic institution. It comes from
Speaker 4: the British House of Lords. It is made to protect
Speaker 4: power for you know, the Senate was part of the
Speaker 4: system that was made to make sure that the people
Speaker 4: didn't have too much of us. Say so, we want
Speaker 4: to expand Congress significantly, but make it a unicameral legislature.
Speaker 3: Okay, and without the presidency and Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: Now, one of the things that she's doing there is
Speaker 1: trying to use big worlds to make herself sound smart.
Speaker 1: I've got the big thrip thick rimmed glasses and clearly
Speaker 1: I'm going to try and come off as educated. So
Speaker 1: I'm going to use words like anachronistic and by Cameron legislator. Look, lady,
Speaker 1: what you're trying to say is it's old and outdated.
Speaker 1: The question is is it really She said that the
Speaker 1: Senate was moder modeled after the House of Lords, and yeah,
Speaker 1: Parliament in the UK, if you're unfamiliar, has two separate houses,
Speaker 1: as do we. The difference is the House of Lords
Speaker 1: is an inherited system. The lords of the land, which
Speaker 1: existed through feudal England, and I guess the lordship, the
Speaker 1: title still exists to this day, is effectively passed down
Speaker 1: from generation to generation to generation. I don't know if
Speaker 1: she knows this, but that's not how we do the
Speaker 1: Senate at the onset of the country. The Senate was
Speaker 1: chosen by the state legislature. I believe it's the seventeenth
Speaker 1: Amendment that got rid of that. I have comments on
Speaker 1: whether or not we should keep the seventeenth Amendment, but
Speaker 1: different conversation for a different time. But her argument effectively
Speaker 1: is that, well, these people are not representative of the
Speaker 1: overall populace, which again, newsflash, lady, that's the whole point,
Speaker 1: the entire point of this. But the entire point of
Speaker 1: having two houses of Congress was so that one could
Speaker 1: represent the population, because yes, if you have more people,
Speaker 1: that could grant you more of a say, but also
Speaker 1: not have the population centers overrun the rights of everybody else.
Speaker 1: That's the whole system our government was designed to do.
Speaker 1: The population centers, the big urban centers. The will of
Speaker 1: the majority cannot overrule the rights of the minority. That's
Speaker 1: what we're doing. And to the point that I made
Speaker 1: earlier that they might be working against their own interest,
Speaker 1: I'm not saying that we should do this. There are
Speaker 1: some people on the right that are saying some stuff
Speaker 1: I'm not super stoked about, like, well, we should just
Speaker 1: do all the things they're accusing us of. Absolutely not,
Speaker 1: That's not how we operate. But if you were to
Speaker 1: play it out in the way that she wants to, okay,
Speaker 1: majority rule over everything, and the majority therefore he gets
Speaker 1: to trample the rights of the minority, we're not the minority.
Speaker 1: Us on the right are not the minority. So if
Speaker 1: we were to input the system that she wants and
Speaker 1: a bunch of the lib socialists crazy people want, we
Speaker 1: would crush their ideas. I'm not saying we should. I
Speaker 1: don't want to organize a system in a society like that.
Speaker 1: But if that were the case, we the right and
Speaker 1: center right are the majority of the country, and we
Speaker 1: would overrun the minority, which is them. So even in
Speaker 1: their own system, they would ultimately and inevitably lose. Now,
Speaker 1: all of this comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of how
Speaker 1: humans should negotiate with each other. What does our relationship
Speaker 1: with each other look like? What does it mean to
Speaker 1: be your own individual? Does that grant you certain inalienable
Speaker 1: rights like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?
Speaker 5: Or all?
Speaker 1: We are all just cogs in the machine. Well, one
Speaker 1: person at Saint Paul, Minnesota's city council meeting recently, who
Speaker 1: was complaining that the city council wouldn't let him sleep
Speaker 1: in the park, I think, I think that's the context here,
Speaker 1: got very upset and then decided to go after private property,
Speaker 1: which is I think one of the key indicators to
Speaker 1: a fundamental misunderstanding of what human beings actually even are.
Speaker 1: Watch this we're all participating in.
Speaker 6: Here is a settler colony on stolen land. This is
Speaker 6: a government that represents the settlers and the capitalists and
Speaker 6: the other neoliberal fascists that live amongst us. Why are
Speaker 6: they brutalizing all of these innocent, beautiful people. But what
Speaker 6: this government, what the system exists to do, is to
Speaker 6: enforce private property.
Speaker 1: Correct Here, I think we find the fundamental difference between
Speaker 1: us and the communists. Effectively, this guy's mad, I think.
Speaker 1: And by the way, I don't want to not acknowledge
Speaker 1: his ridiculous costume there. I think he's got like a
Speaker 1: being he's got. It's going very burka. I think. I'm
Speaker 1: not entirely sure if that was his intention or he
Speaker 1: just wanted to hide his identity. Either way, I guess
Speaker 1: it works. But back to the whole idea of property
Speaker 1: rights for whatever reason, not for whatever reasons, because they
Speaker 1: don't believe in, you know, the individual ability or the
Speaker 1: individual nature of human beings. The Libs really really hate
Speaker 1: private property. Now, in this particular sense, he's talking about
Speaker 1: private property as it pertains the land, but also this
Speaker 1: could be applied to just things that you own. Now,
Speaker 1: the first problem at the onset of this is that
Speaker 1: the obvious understanding that the most common thing gets the
Speaker 1: least attention. People pay attention to things that are theirs.
Speaker 1: The more that other people are involved, something that belongs
Speaker 1: to everyone gets entirely neglected. We see this over and
Speaker 1: over and over again with any sort of communal anything.
Speaker 1: Think about it in your own house. Well, if this
Speaker 1: is I don't know about your own house, because I
Speaker 1: would get on my kids for abusing something that I owned.
Speaker 1: Let's just say in your neighborhood, you'r HOA. The second
Speaker 1: a bunch of people are involved and a bunch of
Speaker 1: people take ownership, the attention paid to this tends to
Speaker 1: go down quite a bit. It doesn't dissolve conflict to
Speaker 1: have this communal thing. It actually multiplies it, because now
Speaker 1: every single person has grievances with everyone else's use or
Speaker 1: how they use the system. Private property is also a
Speaker 1: precondition to something that lives really really love the certain
Speaker 1: virtues that lives champion, like charity in general. The thing is,
Speaker 1: you can't be generous with something that isn't yours. Generosity
Speaker 1: requires something to be generous with. You can't just well,
Speaker 1: libs try to do this vote to take money from
Speaker 1: me and give it to somebody else and call yourself generous.
Speaker 1: This is a huge problem with Libs in the current age.
Speaker 1: But the last thing here on the idea of property
Speaker 1: and private property, and the big disagreement that we all
Speaker 1: have on this with us and them, is the idea
Speaker 1: that property is pre political. John Locke put it in
Speaker 1: terms that effectively say you own yourself, You and your
Speaker 1: labor mixed with an unknown world yield you. Effectively, you
Speaker 1: are what you create, and that becomes your property. And
Speaker 1: because of that, ownership of that property is pre political.
Speaker 1: It is a part of these truths that we deem
Speaker 1: self evident. And therefore the only role of the government
Speaker 1: is to protect you your rights, your property, because that
Speaker 1: is an extension view. Your property is an extension of
Speaker 1: you as a free individual. Therefore, really the only job
Speaker 1: that the government has is to protect you and your property.
Speaker 1: But of course libs and communists and democratic socialists which
Speaker 1: is just another word for communists, they don't believe in
Speaker 1: the value and the freedom of the individual. Instead, they
Speaker 1: want humans to all be cogs in a machine. This
Speaker 1: is the fundamental disconnect. This is why the DSA is
Speaker 1: so dangerous. It's not a difference of well, I think
Speaker 1: Medicare should get more of a I don't know why
Speaker 1: I'm doing like a Chuck Schumer accent, or a kind
Speaker 1: of like I think Medicare should get more. It's more
Speaker 1: of a fauci on if I say so myself. I
Speaker 1: think Medicare should get more of a budget than it
Speaker 1: currently has. That's a policy dispute, but we'll at least
Speaker 1: still fundamentally agree on the nature of the individual. The
Speaker 1: DSA and the communists within the DSA don't agree with
Speaker 1: those at all. We are starting our politics and our
Speaker 1: arguments from two entirely different places, and that's why this
Speaker 1: is such an important issue to maintain control of and
Speaker 1: stay on top of, and don't let them seep further
Speaker 1: into our political system lest we lose our rights as
Speaker 1: humans and individuals. TPTATPUSA dot com is the email dressing
Speaker 1: along your thoughts, comments, concerns, criticisms. Got a lot of
Speaker 1: really interesting points to get to, including one mister Fauci,
Speaker 1: who may or may not may actually end up in jail.
Speaker 1: We can all be hopeful. Keep your fingers crossed TPTTBUSA
Speaker 1: dot com, scan QR, code Sports. The sponsors of the
Speaker 1: show go to Turning Point Tonight dot com. Check your
Speaker 1: voter registration. Also follow us on all the social media's.
Speaker 1: We'll right back after the breaknok away.
Speaker 7: And I'll tell you what if I were ever, I'd
Speaker 7: be the greatest woman's basketball coach at issue. Because I
Speaker 7: don't like Lebron James.
Speaker 5: I like Michael Jordan much better, but I.
Speaker 1: But I'd go up to Lebron James.
Speaker 5: It doesn't matter, say Lebron, did you ever have any
Speaker 5: desire to be a woman, Because what I'd love you
Speaker 5: to do is star on my team that I'm building up.
Speaker 5: I will have the greatest team in history.
Speaker 7: They'll never lose.
Speaker 5: Nobody who will come within seventy.
Speaker 7: Points of this team.
Speaker 5: Now, we have to change that, and we have to
Speaker 5: make it okay to talk about it. Do you know
Speaker 5: the young lady I was talking about afraid to talk
Speaker 5: about it. She's shunned and she's canceled when she talks
Speaker 5: about it. This is crazy, right, Kelly Anne.
Speaker 1: I see, I love the fact that Trump is talking
Speaker 1: about this. I love the fact that the President is
Speaker 1: I mean, he's weighing in on a ninety five to
Speaker 1: five issue. People are like, the transfering it's an eighty
Speaker 1: five twenty or eighty twenty issue. No, it's not. It's not,
Speaker 1: especially when it comes to sports and dudes masquerading as
Speaker 1: women playing in women's sports. It it's not an eighty
Speaker 1: twenty issue. It's not a ninety ten issue. It's like, all,
Speaker 1: I'll save about five percent. This is my own personal
Speaker 1: anecdotal survey. I'll say about five percent for the lunatics
Speaker 1: that are like, no, this is totally, totally fine and fair.
Speaker 1: Mainly just politically speaking. I love the fact that the
Speaker 1: president is giving air to a such a an overwhelmingly
Speaker 1: winning issue. Also, it's a pretty good idea. Remember the
Speaker 1: coach of what was it? What's What's the team in
Speaker 1: Minneapolis called the team that the coach wore the trans
Speaker 1: Kids Belonged shirt, and she talks about trans kids and
Speaker 1: all this sort of stuff. But now she's also worried
Speaker 1: about men coaching in the WNBA. She's like, Yeah, these
Speaker 1: jobs are being taken by men. What is that? What
Speaker 1: is a man? What is a woman? What is a man?
Speaker 1: I don't know, Cheryl, Minnesota, Lynx, I think, Okay, I
Speaker 1: love the President's getting involved in this. I hope he
Speaker 1: keeps pushing it because this is a this is such
Speaker 1: a winning issue. I think we should just totally dominate
Speaker 1: it through every single political category. Okay, TPTTBUSA dot com
Speaker 1: is the email a dress and along your thoughts, comments, concerns, criticisms.
Speaker 1: When there's points to get to from around the news world,
Speaker 1: we're contractually obligated to get to the point, get to
Speaker 1: the pone get to the pond. This is so sad
Speaker 1: or hilarious, depending on how you look at it. Uh,
Speaker 1: ABC News, I'm gonna read some of the summary first
Speaker 1: before the headline. Professor James Arday was the youngest black
Speaker 1: professor at the University of Cambridge, who was thirty seven
Speaker 1: when appointed in twenty twenty three. What a triumph youngest
Speaker 1: black professor at Cambridge. It would have been better if
Speaker 1: he was a woman, because they that would be another
Speaker 1: notch in the diversity poll. But unfortunately, just a random dude.
Speaker 1: Uh what thirty seven years old, youngest black professor at Cambridge. Anyway,
Speaker 1: he was plagiarizing a bunch of his stuff, so he
Speaker 1: had to resign. ABC News says youngest black professor at
Speaker 1: Cambridge resigns over plagiarism allegations. Now, I like the fact
Speaker 1: that they throw in the allegations there. He resigned, So
Speaker 1: there's all these allegations earlier in the week. You might
Speaker 1: have missed the new It's not really that big of
Speaker 1: important of a story. It's just another again notch in
Speaker 1: the DEI in our DEI stick or notching out DEI
Speaker 1: sticks of exposing the fact that hey a lot of
Speaker 1: this whole DEI stuff lacks qualification, right, we all understand
Speaker 1: that this is just another one of those. But the
Speaker 1: headline itself resigns over plagiarism allegations. Okay, sure, maybe it's
Speaker 1: still alleged, but if it's alleged and it's not true,
Speaker 1: you don't resign. He announced his decision late Wednesday, following
Speaker 1: weeks of allegations of plagiarism in his academic work work
Speaker 1: including The Times of London Analysis and his twenty twenty
Speaker 1: fifteen PhD thesis. So in order to even get a PhD,
Speaker 1: allegedly he plagiarized a bunch of stuff. But because he
Speaker 1: was a black dude with dreads, Cambridge was like, ooh,
Speaker 1: just might increase increase our ESG score. I don't know
Speaker 1: if Cambridge has an ESG score. They probably don't, but
Speaker 1: this will make us look so inclusive. They probably excuse me,
Speaker 1: mister black eye. Can you be Muslim too? Because that
Speaker 1: would be Can you be a Muslim woman? That'd be
Speaker 1: very helped. It doesn't matter. I would sign up. You're
Speaker 1: a great. Wait, nobody did a background check. Limbs are
Speaker 1: famous for not doing background check, Like this is just
Speaker 1: like a recurring theme, like nobody checks into the actual
Speaker 1: history of anybody that they bring to bring to the
Speaker 1: front of the fold. It's astonishing. Anyways, Cambridge initially stood
Speaker 1: stood by this guy, saying the plagiarism claims had been
Speaker 1: investigated by Liverpool's John Moore's University, but chance course after
Speaker 1: The Times presented new evidence that some of the research
Speaker 1: that he presented in his PhD and other papers was
Speaker 1: entirely and completely fabricated. So sorry, dude. It was nice
Speaker 1: being the first, you know, whatever, di hire for however
Speaker 1: long you were there, three years, but nobody's shocked, nobody's surprised.
Speaker 1: I wish you know, I actually don't like this happening,
Speaker 1: just just generally speaking. I don't like that we like
Speaker 1: the first so and so I don't particularly care. But
Speaker 1: at the same time, I don't like when people get
Speaker 1: found out for being plagiarizers. Like that's sure, yes, cool,
Speaker 1: we're right on this point. But at the same time,
Speaker 1: like you know, it just further devalues the institutions that
Speaker 1: we all have and that's not good, just on a broad,
Speaker 1: broad spectrum. So okay, speaking of things that are not good,
Speaker 1: what depends on who you are is not good for Fauci,
Speaker 1: but it's good for the rest of US. Center Homeland
Speaker 1: Security Committee votes to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress.
Speaker 1: He actually might go to jail. It is like, I'm
Speaker 1: so this particular contempt. I'm not an attorney, don't quote
Speaker 1: me on this. However, this particular contempt of Congress could
Speaker 1: result in one hundred thousand dollars fine and a year
Speaker 1: in jail, which whoa I kind of thought. He Unfortunately, again,
Speaker 1: if I'm looking at it, you know, just realistically, was
Speaker 1: probably gonna skate on by because nobody in the media
Speaker 1: reported how bad Fauci looked last week on the Hills, saying,
Speaker 1: on the advice of Council, I've decided to invoke my
Speaker 1: Fifth Amendment right now. There's a lot of legal wrangling
Speaker 1: going on here. Does he have the Fifth Amendment right?
Speaker 1: You can find, you know, a bunch of lawyers who
Speaker 1: are all going to disagree. I'm not an attorney, but
Speaker 1: learned people who are steeped in the art of legalism
Speaker 1: have told me, yeah, you can't give an initial statement
Speaker 1: and then take the fifth because remember he did that,
Speaker 1: he said Rand Paul is a jackass, and I hate him,
Speaker 1: and everybody should hate him. And he's terrible and he's
Speaker 1: obsessed with me, and I hate him. I'm not answering
Speaker 1: any questions. Like, you can't do that, right you You
Speaker 1: either take the Fifth the entire time, or you know,
Speaker 1: you have to answer questions and and Fauci obviously there's
Speaker 1: a disconnect there, But at the same time, the question
Speaker 1: needs to be answered. This could go all the way
Speaker 1: to Supreme Court. Uh, if you have a pardon, are
Speaker 1: you required to answer if there's no criminal liability, which
Speaker 1: is what the Fifth Amendment? You can't implicate yourself or
Speaker 1: incriminate yourself. That's the whole point of the Fifth Amendment.
Speaker 1: And so if that's the case, if you don't have
Speaker 1: any criminal liability, do you get the Fifth Amendment? I
Speaker 1: don't know, because then because then I'm just I'm just
Speaker 1: trying to play out all the scenarios. Okay, he also
Speaker 1: has a ton of civil liability, right, so if he's
Speaker 1: compelled to answer questions because he's absolved of any of
Speaker 1: the legal stuff because of the preemptive pardon, which we
Speaker 1: also don't know if that's legal or not, Like this
Speaker 1: record has aside, does he have a preemptive pardon, and
Speaker 1: if he does, does he have to answer questions? Then
Speaker 1: you've got to answer the question of Okay, well, do
Speaker 1: you still get the Fifth Amendment if you're not criminally liable?
Speaker 1: But you could be civilly liable, right because decisions doctor
Speaker 1: Fauci made and the the NIH and Peter Dazac and
Speaker 1: all of the stuff that he was doing in regards
Speaker 1: to funding gain of function research, people actually died and
Speaker 1: there is civil liability there. Does that count for the
Speaker 1: Fifth Amendment? I don't know. I'm just I don't know,
Speaker 1: but very interesting to say the least. Will obviously keep
Speaker 1: everybody posted on how this ends up going. But this
Speaker 1: brings us to our next headline from the New York Post.
Speaker 1: Doctor Anthony Fauci again subpoenaed by three GOP state ags
Speaker 1: for allegedly profiting off of COVID nineteen guidance. This was
Speaker 1: something that would have been great for him to answer,
Speaker 1: But the subpoenas from these three gops come from let's see, Florida,
Speaker 1: West Virginia, and Louisiana, and they follow Senator Ran Paul's
Speaker 1: release of Fauci's personal diaries and focus on awards that
Speaker 1: included nearly a million dollars in prize money that Fauci
Speaker 1: received in twenty twenty one, along with potential book deals
Speaker 1: and other opportunities, speaking gigs, all that sort. He's fantastically
Speaker 1: wealthy now, and these ags are saying, hmm, how did
Speaker 1: that happen? Happened? Did you profit off of your government position?
Speaker 1: Because if so, not, okay, So this is I don't
Speaker 1: know that I'm I last end of last week, I
Speaker 1: would have been like, I'm kind of discouraged. Fauci's probably
Speaker 1: just gonna get away with being an evil human being.
Speaker 1: But now it looks like I have dare I say,
Speaker 1: I've got a little bit of wind in my sales.
Speaker 1: Not a full like not a full gale storm of wind,
Speaker 1: but like a a and just it's just enough. Oh boy,
Speaker 1: it might it might get windy here. That's that's the
Speaker 1: amount of hope that I have, not generally speaking an
Speaker 1: optimistic person, but the wind a little bit. Okay, moving on,
Speaker 1: uh this from the Associated Press. I thought this was
Speaker 1: just a funny headline. We don't even to spend a
Speaker 1: whole lot of time on this, but it basically fact focus,
Speaker 1: you know, how it lives like fact check this thing
Speaker 1: that conservatives said isn't true. I don't know why I'm
Speaker 1: doing like gangster rap hand motions there, but they did
Speaker 1: this essentially for the Islamic You Gondon communists in New
Speaker 1: York City saying you have to have IDs? Says no,
Speaker 1: you won't need an ID to shop at a city
Speaker 1: owned grocery store in New York City. Just to characterize
Speaker 1: the article, they try they they do the faucy dance
Speaker 1: on like trying to obvious skate what gamona function means. Right,
Speaker 1: that's the that's the whole article. Uh is zams zamdomini,
Speaker 1: I think is how you pronounce it? I'm not sure.
Speaker 1: Let me know. Tbttpustate dot com with any of your suggestions.
Speaker 1: Islamic Ugandan communists, how about the I you see? The
Speaker 1: I U see effectively had a press conference and said, well,
Speaker 1: how are you gonna keep people at the questions says,
Speaker 1: how are you gonna keep people from just rating this
Speaker 1: system where you have thirty percent off of girgries. Well,
Speaker 1: we'll do a check. We'll make sure that people live
Speaker 1: here in New York and we'll do that through you know,
Speaker 1: library library cards. I think that's what the lady behind
Speaker 1: him said. And then everyone's like, sounds like an ID, dude,
Speaker 1: So you don't need an ID to vote, but you
Speaker 1: do need an ID to steal from the taxpayer via
Speaker 1: a government owned grocery store. Anyways, the ap effectively said, no,
Speaker 1: you won't. It didn't he did. He never said like
Speaker 1: like official a government like dmvi ID. They only said
Speaker 1: like a library card or something equivalent to that. I
Speaker 1: don't know, trying to parse it, try to slice it
Speaker 1: real thin there, mister associated press people. Okay, which brings
Speaker 1: us to this last one. You know, and this is
Speaker 1: relatively apropos if nothing, but I did think it was interesting.
Speaker 1: Miss Carolina, USA, Brittany Bolton House stripped of the title
Speaker 1: after alleged racist post's resurface. How many times have we
Speaker 1: seen this now? I think the only reason I thought
Speaker 1: this was interesting is because you know, what is your
Speaker 1: first reaction when you read these sorts of things? Miss
Speaker 1: North Carolina say, stripped of her title after racist posts.
Speaker 1: I mean, if you're like me, what did she say? Right?
Speaker 6: Like?
Speaker 1: That's my first question is, well, what was it? Because
Speaker 1: then we can decide whether or not it's worthy of
Speaker 1: her being stripped of whatever title she has, or you know,
Speaker 1: whatever any title anybody has, right, is it worthy of
Speaker 1: this person being fired? What did they say? I'd like
Speaker 1: to be the judge of that. We're in the court
Speaker 1: of public opinion. I'd like to know what I'm making
Speaker 1: an opinion on. The reason I bring this to you
Speaker 1: is because if you go through it, the decision makers
Speaker 1: there it was either the national miss USA contest or
Speaker 1: North Carolina specifically, they go on to then compete in
Speaker 1: miss USA, which I think takes place later on this month.
Speaker 1: But the main point in years they said the organization
Speaker 1: does not tolerate racism. Da yady, yady, all all of
Speaker 1: these things. But then they didn't say what she said.
Speaker 1: And apparently the California Post, the New York Post, nobody
Speaker 1: reporting on this could could find it either. Now they
Speaker 1: alleged that she dropped some end bombs. Not good, objectively
Speaker 1: not good. But at the same time, nobody said this
Speaker 1: is what she said outright, to which you go. If
Speaker 1: you're gonna make a stance like this, look it might
Speaker 1: be it might be nasty, it might be damaging. Okay, fine,
Speaker 1: but we exist in a society where people's rights were
Speaker 1: taken away for them from them for the minor infractions
Speaker 1: in our whole cancel culture world. And the way that
Speaker 1: we fix that is at least, at the very least,
Speaker 1: know what somebody is being canceled about. And you know,
Speaker 1: we might agree at the end of the day. I
Speaker 1: might totally agree. I might go, yeah, that that's not okay,
Speaker 1: that is not becoming of someone who holds the Miss
Speaker 1: North Carolina USA pageant crown. I don't know. I don't
Speaker 1: know what the standards for that are. But still you
Speaker 1: gotta tell us, at least that's my opinion. Let us know.
Speaker 1: Tptatbusa dot com is the email address official business coming
Speaker 1: up next. I'm looking at the video playlist here. I
Speaker 1: don't know how much we're gonna get to because there's
Speaker 1: too much. There's too much good stuff at the front end. Okay,
Speaker 1: tptatbusa dot com. We'll be right back after the break.
Speaker 1: Not go away. Look at your screen.
Speaker 2: A French trans player says, if the WNBA gives them
Speaker 2: a chance to play in the league, they would not
Speaker 2: turn down an offer.
Speaker 1: I'd like to now go.
Speaker 2: To my co anchor for the day, who actually played
Speaker 2: women's balls in your court.
Speaker 1: Also in that person, WNBA, the ball is in your court?
Speaker 1: Are you going to allow clearly this woman uh not
Speaker 1: pictured here, actually go ahead and take it off because
Speaker 1: we got another follow up auxiliary clip. Are you going
Speaker 1: to allow this person to participate? Or are you a
Speaker 1: transphobic bigot who's probably doing some genocide or whatever other
Speaker 1: buzzwords that libs use, because look, how are you gonna
Speaker 1: tell me that this dude isn't a woman? Watched this.
Speaker 4: Soyo step and I'm passively.
Speaker 1: So if you're familiar with basketball, euro step is not
Speaker 1: you don't see many euro steps in the w n B. A.
Speaker 1: Actually that's not true. I don't know if that's true.
Speaker 1: There's no way of knowing. I never watch. That's a
Speaker 1: fairly athletic move. And this dude is what six' three?
Speaker 1: Is it? Is it? Is it is a trans fella
Speaker 1: playing in the women's basketball In, france, dominating just averaging
Speaker 1: like twenty three points a, GAME i think IF i remember.
Speaker 1: Correctly so, again LIKE i, said what are we gonna, DO?
Speaker 1: Wnba you're gonna offer a contract to clearly a rising
Speaker 1: star or in their, bigoted anti, trans transphobic, nature will
Speaker 1: they deny this clear? Woman? Dude from playing in their.
Speaker 1: Sport Britisher glenn's rolling his, eyes thinking we cannot put
Speaker 1: this on YouTube. Anymore, yeah some sacrifices are worth. Making,
Speaker 1: okay when there's a business. Cheese look at the. Time
Speaker 1: when there's business to get, to we have to get to.
Speaker 1: It that is an official, business.
Speaker 2: All.
Speaker 1: RIGHT i laugh because it's the only other alternative to
Speaker 1: crying or being in deep deep. Fear Senator cruz asked
Speaker 1: the counter terrorism analysis that was in front of. Him
Speaker 1: i'm at the The Senate committee hearing a question that
Speaker 1: should be quite, disturbing especially given our conversation about THE
Speaker 1: dsa earlier on in the. Program wat's. This does The
Speaker 1: Muslim brotherhood also partner with political groups such as The
Speaker 1: Democratic socialist Of? America, yes sure they. Do oh, okay
Speaker 1: so oh so our intelligence, community the counter terrorism unit
Speaker 1: in our intelligence. Committee this guy's name is, What Kyle?
Speaker 1: SCHIDLER i. Think i'm not sure if you never been
Speaker 1: pronouncing that right guy in the Counter terrorism. DIVISION a
Speaker 1: counter terrorism analyst asked by the, senator is The Muslim
Speaker 1: brotherhood participating at some capacity with a rising faction in
Speaker 1: one of our major political? Parties he answers. Yes oh,
Speaker 1: great all, right, cool thanks. WONDERFUL i can't, yeah you,
Speaker 1: know laugh only because it's an alternative to. CRYING i
Speaker 1: guess we're gonna move on from. Here this h this
Speaker 1: will give you some here's some, levity and we'll probably,
Speaker 1: yeah just for. Time this will be our last official.
Speaker 1: Business but this will end on a good. Note speaking Of. Muslims,
Speaker 1: uh the you gond In islamic count what was the
Speaker 1: acronym that we decided? On THE i you, see was
Speaker 1: speaking at an, event or at least try to speak
Speaker 1: at AN nypd event In Staten. Island it did not go.
Speaker 1: Well watch this with, delight.
Speaker 2: Tell?
Speaker 1: Him are you ready to put some more? Dab say,
Speaker 1: no we're, not we're.
Speaker 8: Not we're getting.
Speaker 1: Amart somebody's getting on a?
Speaker 8: War who is getting a?
Speaker 1: War?
Speaker 4: Here?
Speaker 1: YEAH i kind of feel bad for whoever was getting the.
Speaker 1: AWARD i would imagine that's somewhat either involved with n
Speaker 1: White in an officer IN nypd or you, know family
Speaker 1: member At you, know it's kind of sad that they
Speaker 1: were getting booed when they were trying to get their.
Speaker 1: Award but in case you missed, it that was Zam
Speaker 1: danny there coming off the stage after getting booed out
Speaker 1: of the. BUILDING i think he was on stage for
Speaker 1: like a minute at, least that's What that's WHAT i had.
Speaker 1: READ i haven't seen the full, video BUT i think
Speaker 1: he's on stage for a very short period of time
Speaker 1: and then got booed into oblivion and left, smiling but left.
Speaker 1: Okay tpttvs dot com is The emil dress and along your, thoughts, comments, concerns.
Speaker 1: Criticisms click the, sorry scan THE qr. Code click the.
Speaker 1: Link go to all of our social media accounts sports
Speaker 1: sponsors of the Show live On, labs as well as
Speaker 1: check your. Registration turn the one tonight dot. Com we're
Speaker 1: right back after the, break nok.
Speaker 8: Away thank you truly an. Honor it's truly an honor
Speaker 8: to stand here before you and speak. SORRY i have
Speaker 8: a little lumbering going on right. Now i'm so. Sorry
Speaker 8: he's gonna take. Off thank, You thank, you, truly thank,
Speaker 8: you Mister. President it's an honor to be here.
Speaker 1: TODAY i love. That check out the. Agility i'm gonna
Speaker 1: play that one more. TIME i thought that was. Great
Speaker 1: the agility. There he's got a kid coming. Up i'll
Speaker 1: just all announce. It kid goes lucky he's looking at
Speaker 1: the edge of. Stage. Oh president makes a break for,
Speaker 1: it stops the kid from falling off the. Stage thank
Speaker 1: goodness for the, agile able bodied eighty year old president
Speaker 1: of The United. States and then he makes a, Comment,
Speaker 1: yeah couldn't you and See biden doing? That, Now biden
Speaker 1: Wouldn't biden wouldn't have been aware that there were people
Speaker 1: on the stage with. Him he'd been, like, A i don't,
Speaker 1: know The president Of states showing off some agility, There?
Speaker 1: OKAY tttpc dot com is an email is the email,
Speaker 1: address and along your, thoughts, comments, concerns. Criticisms On, thursday
Speaker 1: we do this thing called The Thursday, tribunal which has
Speaker 1: affectionately been Named Justice. Thursday Thursday Tribunal THURSDAY i up
Speaker 1: for if you're not familiar With Justice. THURSDAY i act
Speaker 1: as the prosecutor the jury and then also the judge
Speaker 1: in case there's sentencing. Required up for Today's Justice thursday
Speaker 1: is quite possibly the dumbest Thing i've ever, heard So Ross,
Speaker 1: doufat which is do, fat do? FAT i DON'T a
Speaker 1: lot of people have a lot of different, ways or
Speaker 1: maybe it's just. Me he's At The New York times
Speaker 1: he's there like token conservative. ISH i, think, uh at
Speaker 1: least in this clib this is it's not hard to
Speaker 1: be conservative in response to what this dufus is about to.
Speaker 1: Say but, also this might be the dumbest Thing i've
Speaker 1: heard in a very long. Time watch.
Speaker 9: This i've gotten in some hot water for proposing we
Speaker 9: consider overweighting the votes of younger people or assigning the
Speaker 9: youngest eligible voters proxy votes for the unrepresented children of our.
Speaker 9: Country so those are, edgy why not assign them to
Speaker 9: those children's? Parents, well because there's a divergence of interest
Speaker 9: between parents and, children AND i think it's likelier that young,
Speaker 9: people not people who are raising, families will have the
Speaker 9: best insight into the interests of, children whereas, you if you.
Speaker 10: Were awarded FIVE i think THAT i think it's absurd
Speaker 10: to imagine that a twenty four year old recent college
Speaker 10: graduate has a better assessment of the interests of my
Speaker 10: own children THAN i. Do AND i say this with
Speaker 10: all due respect to twenty four year old recent college
Speaker 10: graduates of WHOM i hope to be the parent of
Speaker 10: in nine years or.
Speaker 9: SO i think parents generally confuse the interests of their
Speaker 9: family with the interests of their. Children and part of our,
Speaker 9: GOAL i, think as parents but also as a, society
Speaker 9: is trying to make sure that children aren't the hostages
Speaker 9: of their parents as much as we rely on parents
Speaker 9: to raise.
Speaker 10: Them at my experienced parents are more likely to be.
Speaker 1: The, yeah parents more likely to have a better understanding
Speaker 1: of what is useful for their. Kids that Is Samuel.
Speaker 1: Moyne and he is in illiterate buffoon who lives on
Speaker 1: a park bench somewhere In New York. City oh, shoot actually,
Speaker 1: no he's a professor At Yale. Law, Okay, well he's
Speaker 1: making the arguments that we should take, now not only
Speaker 1: should a vote effectively be given people under the age
Speaker 1: of eighteen children, effectively but then take that pseudo vote
Speaker 1: and give it to, somebody not their, parents because the
Speaker 1: parents don't know what's best for. Them you know who
Speaker 1: knows best is a twenty four year old sociology major
Speaker 1: who's up to her ears in debt and probably in
Speaker 1: his Radical islamic. Communists maybe Not, islamic just a communist who.
Speaker 1: Knows that's quite possibly the dumbest Thing i've ever. Heard
Speaker 1: so that's what we will indict the professor on full
Speaker 1: blown idiot will be the. Charge the jury is. Deliberating
Speaker 1: now they've come back with a decision and it is. Guilty,
Speaker 1: UM i don't. KNOW i don't know what the sentence
Speaker 1: should be other than a life of endless mockery and.
Speaker 1: Ridicule but also, too there's something serious to be said
Speaker 1: about the fact, that for whatever, REASON i mean he
Speaker 1: said it in that little screed, there he doesn't think
Speaker 1: that the interests of children and families or parents are
Speaker 1: aligned with their. Families that is the only interest that.
Speaker 1: Matters that is the only in my, household in everybody
Speaker 1: WHO i know who has kids, household the only interest
Speaker 1: that matters is the interests of the, kids and, then more,
Speaker 1: broadly the interest of the. Family if that's, it and
Speaker 1: he says, no, actually the parents don't know what's good
Speaker 1: for their, family so we should we should give that
Speaker 1: proxy vote to an over medicated twenty two year old
Speaker 1: philosophy major who's probably hungover from doing ecstasy for the
Speaker 1: last four nights in a. Row that's. Who that's who
Speaker 1: understands the interests of not only the, parents but the
Speaker 1: children better than the. PARENTS i, mean aside from the
Speaker 1: fact that that's just a stupid process to have like
Speaker 1: overweighting votes of people based, on, like you, know the
Speaker 1: amount of kids that are gonna end up growing up
Speaker 1: and being the system outside of, that even if you
Speaker 1: were to adopt that insane rule or system of, elections
Speaker 1: then to say, no, no, no the people who have the
Speaker 1: best interest of the kids are not the. Parents it's
Speaker 1: gonna be you, Know jessica who who just completed sociology
Speaker 1: one oh one and is ready to solve all the world's.
Speaker 1: PROBLEMS i think that's the third make believe anecdotal college
Speaker 1: kid That i've made up this. Segment but nonetheless it
Speaker 1: is guilty and the verdict of the sentences what DID i,
Speaker 1: say endless mockery and, ridicule WHICH i think is. FAIR
Speaker 1: i think it's fair and just. Okay tbttbusay dot com
Speaker 1: is the email. Address go ahead and scan THE qr.
Speaker 1: Code click the. Link you can find all the links
Speaker 1: to all of our social media. Accounts if you don't
Speaker 1: follow us On, facebook you're missing. Out it's just a
Speaker 1: party over. There also on. YouTube it doesn't help you
Speaker 1: at all to not follow any of the social media,
Speaker 1: accounts especially because we do a bunch of stuff that
Speaker 1: we just don't have time for here on the, Show
Speaker 1: so scan THE QR cotbttvsa dot com is the EMAIL
Speaker 1: a dress will be right back after The breakdog Go.
Speaker 11: Away this one kitchen upgrade completely changed the look of our.
Speaker 12: Home my wife has been asking me for months now
Speaker 12: to upgrade our, oven AND i thought to, myself what's
Speaker 12: better than an? Oven and there's really only one answer
Speaker 12: to that. Question imagine the feeling of being in the
Speaker 12: comfort of your own kitchen while also feeling like you're
Speaker 12: inside of a gas. STATION i don't remember the aesthetics
Speaker 12: she said she was going, for BUT i, mean this
Speaker 12: absolutely dunks on that little pinterestport she. Had let's think
Speaker 12: about all the. Time we're gonna say. IT i, mean
Speaker 12: we won't even have to cook meals. Anymore just come,
Speaker 12: over grab a, dog dress it. Up hell, Yeah now
Speaker 12: you just wait until she comes home and sees.
Speaker 1: This now there's two APPROACHES i could take, here the
Speaker 1: sarcastic approach of, wow that looks absolutely. LOVELY i think
Speaker 1: that's a great, idea or the realistic approach in knowing
Speaker 1: that that guy they were getting a new, oven maybe,
Speaker 1: Probably and so he took the oven out and put
Speaker 1: this little bar grill thing in, here, uh and then
Speaker 1: filmed his fun little content reel and had to make
Speaker 1: sure it was all clean, up cleaned, up and the
Speaker 1: new oven was installed before his wife came, home because
Speaker 1: she would absolutely lose her mind at even the thought
Speaker 1: of a hot dog little rotisserie thing being in their.
Speaker 1: Kitchen that's actually probably what. Happened she like had to
Speaker 1: go run TO Tj max or, something and he's, like,
Speaker 1: oh this will be, funny BUT i do not want
Speaker 1: this here when she gets. Back, OKAY tpttpusa dot comments
Speaker 1: THE emai dress and along your, thoughts, comments, concerns. Criticisms.
Speaker 1: Uh Sheldon freaking correspondent says we should change the name
Speaker 1: of The Save America act to The save The Democratic Party,
Speaker 1: act therefore they would be forced to vote for. IT
Speaker 1: i think that's WHAT i. Think that's THE i think
Speaker 1: that's the approach were had for. YOU a little bit
Speaker 1: more commentary in there From Sheldon Great great, Correspondent, sheldon
Speaker 1: appreciate all of your all of your, input BUT i
Speaker 1: THINK i think you should just change the verbiage so
Speaker 1: that libs actually don't even change. It to the fluffy
Speaker 1: puppies and bubbles and fun happiness for. Everyone. ACT i
Speaker 1: think that's a good. Idea, okay let's. SEE i don't
Speaker 1: have time to get to that very. Quickly there was
Speaker 1: A facebook message that somebody sent me that was really. Funny,
Speaker 1: says try posting opposing views and neutral views so that
Speaker 1: people can make up their own minds about the things
Speaker 1: that you're, posting to WHICH i, say, NO i have an,
Speaker 1: OPINION i have a, perspective And i'm gonna talk about.
Speaker 1: It i'm not gonna give like free airtime to just
Speaker 1: random libs to air their. Grievances absolutely that that's very. Silly.
Speaker 1: OKAY tpttpsa dot com is the email. Address we'll see
Speaker 1: you tom our same, time say. Place god Bless. America