Podcast Summary
Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All and G-code Holsters: While Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All plan aims to reduce administrative costs, the reality is that Medicare's administrative costs are actually higher than private insurance companies. Emphasizing factual information and quality products, like G-code holsters, is crucial.
During the latest episode of Dan Vongino's show, they discussed various news stories, including the issue surrounding Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All plan. Sandwiched between the news segments, there was a promotion for G-code holsters, emphasizing their quality, American-made status, and excellent customer service. Regarding Bernie Sanders' plan, it was highlighted that the claim about reducing administrative costs by having the government as the sole provider of medicine is not accurate. In fact, Medicare's administrative costs are higher than private insurance companies. The episode underscored the importance of factual information and quality products, such as G-code holsters, in everyday life.
Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All rations healthcare: Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All proposal eliminates pricing system, leading to resource rationing and potential lack of access to care
Bernie Sanders' proposed Medicare for All system, while allowing some private contracting for medical services, would effectively ration healthcare due to the pricing system not working under government control. This means that in a situation where resources are scarce, such as a doctor's time, the government would decide who gets access, leaving many people without care. Sanders' provision prohibiting private contracts during emergency healthcare situations is an attempt to limit competition and maintain control over the system. Basic economics dictate that without a pricing system, resources will be rationed, and the free market has historically driven down prices and increased access to various goods and services.
Wait in line for government-provided healthcare during emergencies: Under Bernie Sanders' plan, individuals with financial assets will still have to wait in line for emergency government-provided healthcare, while private healthcare is banned
Under Bernie Sanders' healthcare plan, during an emergency medical crisis, individuals will not be able to pay or enter into contracts with healthcare providers to receive services, and will instead have to wait in line for government-provided healthcare. This means that even those with financial assets will not be able to bypass the government line, and private healthcare through the individual market or insurers will be banned. The fine print of Sanders' plan also includes the termination of Medicare as it currently exists and the implementation of a new government-run program. Ultimately, those in need of emergency healthcare services will have to "eat their meat" and wait in line to receive care.
Obama Administration's Alleged Spying on Political Opponents: The Obama administration allegedly used government intelligence and law enforcement assets to spy on their political opponents, leaked information to justify further spying, and appointed a special counsel to continue the investigation.
The Obama administration allegedly weaponized government intelligence and law enforcement assets to spy on their political opponents, as Devin Nunes explained on Sean Hannity's show. Nunes outlined a three-part plan: first, they spied; second, they leaked spying information to justify further legal spying; and third, they appointed a special counsel to continue spying on the president. This is the essence of what has been referred to as Spygate, with Trump being a victim but the real scandal being the abuse of power by the Obama administration. Nunes's revelations provide further evidence of this ongoing theme on Tucker Carlson Tonight.
Allegations of spying on Trump team during 2016 election: Reports suggest spying on Trump team started in 2015, but official narrative begins in July 2016. NSA misused database, raising questions about foreign intel use and FISA warrant process during this period.
During the 2016 election, there were allegations of spying on the Trump team, with some reports suggesting it started as early as 2015. However, the official narrative is that the investigation, codenamed Crossfire Hurricane, didn't begin until July 31, 2016, following the Papadopoulos tip. A CNN article from April 2017, however, reported that British intelligence had shared communications between Trump associates and Russians with US counterparts. Devin Nunes, during an interview, spoke of a global leaks operation and referred to two plans: Plan A, which involved using foreign intelligence to spy on Americans without going to court, and Plan B, which was the FISA warrant process. The NSA was found to have been misusing its database, leading to a non-compliance rate of approximately 85%. This raises questions about the use of foreign intelligence and the NSA database during the November 2015 to April 2016 period. The FBI was also found to have disclosed raw FISA information to unidentified recipients. These revelations suggest a complex web of intelligence gathering and potential misuse of power.
NSA's inappropriate spying on Trump campaign: Congressman Devin Nunes suspected private contractors inappropriately unmasked US citizens involved with Trump campaign, passed info to unknown entities, and created a false narrative of Russian collusion to continue spying
The NSA's surveillance activities during the 2015-2016 timeframe were used inappropriately to spy on US citizens involved with the Trump campaign. Devin Nunes, a congressman, suspects a private contractor was involved in these activities, which included unmasking US citizens and passing the information to unknown entities. This was part of what Nunes referred to as "Plan A," which also involved the misuse of foreign intelligence and the NSA database. When these activities were discovered, they moved to "Plan B," which involved creating a narrative of Russian collusion to present to the FISA court to continue spying on the Trump team. This was done after their original spying plan was shut down by Mike Rogers of the NSA. The ultimate goal was not Russian collusion, but rather to continue spying on the Trump team despite the lack of legal justification.
The Russia investigation began before the dossier: New info reveals the Russia probe started in 2015, contradicting common belief it began due to the dossier. Allegations of spying on the Trump team and the media's role are also under scrutiny in 'Obamagate'
The investigation into the Trump team's alleged Russian collusion began in 2015, before the dossier was obtained, according to recent revelations. This contradicts the widely held belief that the investigation started due to the dossier. Additionally, there were allegations of spying on the Trump team before the Russia investigation, as revealed by Devin Nunes in 2017. These events are collectively being referred to as "Obamagate," and some believe that Obama's administration and Democrats are trying to divert attention from these scandals. The use of leaked information to obtain warrants and the role of the media in these events are also significant aspects of this developing story. It's important to stay informed about these developments as they unfold.
Comey attempts to downplay Barr's use of 'spying': Former FBI head Comey misleads by denying court-ordered surveillance as 'spying', ignoring his role in requesting warrants
Former FBI Director Jim Comey attempted to downplay the significance of Attorney General Bill Barr's use of the word "spying" in relation to investigations into the Trump campaign, by claiming that he was unfamiliar with the term being used in this context and that only "court ordered surveillance" occurs. However, this is disingenuous as Comey, as the head of the FBI, would have been the one requesting such warrants and it is not the court that initiates such requests. This is an attempt to shift blame and deflect from the potential implications of Barr's comments.
Misleading the FISA court with a fake dossier: FBI misled FISA court with false info, potentially shifting blame, while Assange arrest may reveal election hoax or clear Trump
The FISA court was misled during the approval process of a warrant for surveillance, which was requested by the FBI under the guise of it being a court order. This was based on a fake dossier that was presented as true, and now those involved, such as Jim Comey and Adam Schiff, are trying to shift blame. Meanwhile, the arrest of Julian Assange is heating up, and there are only two potential pathways this can take: either Assange will reveal information implicating Trump in collusion with Russia, or it will be proven that the entire narrative of Russian interference in the election was a hoax. The latter is more likely, as the story of Russian hacking of the DNC and giving it to WikiLeaks to influence the election is a false narrative. Regardless, it is important to remember that these narratives are politically motivated and often inaccurate.
Debate over DNC hacks and WikiLeaks' sources: The origins of WikiLeaks' DNC hack information remain uncertain, sparking debate over potential Russian involvement and the importance of transparency and accountability in reporting sensitive information.
The source of WikiLeaks' information about the DNC hacks remains a mystery, despite speculation about Russian involvement. While some argue that Julian Assange must have received the information from the Russians, others believe there's no definitive evidence to support that claim. The ongoing debate highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in the media, particularly when it comes to sensitive information. Additionally, the inconsistent application of justice in cases involving leaked information raises questions about the motivations behind prosecutions. Overall, the issue serves as a reminder of the complexities surrounding national security, journalism, and politics.
Choosing Between Compassion and Cruelty in Immigration Debate: Biden criticized Castro's proposal, arguing that it would be more cruel to sanctuary cities than deportation, and urged Americans to reject cruelty and choose compassionate solutions for immigration.
The ongoing immigration debate in the US has become a matter of choosing between compassion and cruelty, according to Joe Biden. He criticized Julian Castro's proposal for transporting migrants to sanctuary cities, arguing that it would be more cruel to those communities, which already provide resources to immigrants, than to deport them. Biden emphasized that immigration laws should be followed and that communities should not be expected to bear the burden of those who have entered the country illegally. He urged Americans to reject cruelty as a weapon and instead choose compassionate solutions.
New York Democrats prioritize illegal immigrants over veterans: New York Democrats approved $27M tuition aid for illegal immigrants while blocking a bill for veterans' families, sparking criticism and calls for accountability
The prioritization of resources for illegal immigrants over veterans and their families by certain legislators is being criticized as cruel and sickening. This was highlighted in a recent news report where New York Democrats approved 27 million dollars in tuition aid for illegal immigrants while blocking a bill for tuition benefits for families who have lost children in combat. The speaker argues that this is not only cruel to those who have followed the law and served their country, but also inconsistent with their supposed priorities. The situation is being widely criticized on social media and seen as a stark example of the disregard for established laws and the welfare of veterans. The speaker urges listeners to call out such actions and prioritize the needs of those who have sacrificed for their country.
