Podcast Summary
Political developments and free speech on social media: Senator Romney may vote for a constitutionalist Supreme Court nominee, potentially securing a conservative majority. Social media platforms, like Parler, face censorship threats, emphasizing the importance of free speech.
There are ongoing political developments in the United States, specifically regarding the upcoming Supreme Court nomination and the potential censorship on social media platforms. Senator Romney may be on board with taking a vote for a constitutionalist nominee, which could result in a five-four Supreme Court majority. However, there are threats of censorship on social media, such as Parler, which is positioning itself as an alternative to Twitter. The importance of free speech and the potential for censorship is a significant issue. The nominee's ideology, whether originalist or constructionist, will be crucial in maintaining a conservative majority on the Supreme Court. The Dan Bongino Show, which encourages free speech and covers these topics, is sponsored by Parler. The show also touches on the topic of Senator Romney's potential vote, the importance of free speech, and the potential threat of censorship on social media platforms.
Focus group findings shape Democratic Party's stance: Focus group results showed expanding Supreme Court seen as extreme, leading to Democrats distancing themselves from such ideas
The focus group findings have significantly influenced the Democratic Party's stance on expanding the Supreme Court and other radical measures. The focus group results revealed that such actions were perceived as extreme and unprincipled, leading to a shift in the Democrats' rhetoric and actions. The Washington Times and Washington Examiner reported that Joe Biden and other Democratic leaders have since distanced themselves from these ideas, acknowledging their insanity. This demonstrates the power of focus groups in shaping political discourse and strategy.
Court Packing Debate: Is Expanding the Supreme Court Necessary?: The American public, a center-right country, does not support expanding the Supreme Court through court packing. The focus is on confirming the president's nominees without the need for such controversial measures.
The current debate over expanding the number of Supreme Court justices, also known as court packing, is seen as an extreme measure and against the principles of a balanced judiciary. The discussion highlighted that such a move could lead to an unmanageable number of justices, and the country has settled on nine justices for a reason. Furthermore, President Biden is not releasing his list of potential nominees due to the controversial views held by many of them. The focus groups have shown that the American public, being a center-right country, does not support such radical changes. Republicans are urged to use their majority in the Senate to confirm the president's nominees, and there is no need for court packing. The debate is seen as a distraction and an attempt to change the subject from the real issues.
Speaker Pelosi's impeachment threat on Supreme Court appointments is empty: The House Speaker lacks the power to prevent President Trump from making Supreme Court appointments through impeachment, as the Senate holds the power to give advice and consent on judicial appointments.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi does not have the power to prevent President Trump from making Supreme Court appointments through the impeachment process. The Constitution grants the Senate, not the House, the power to give advice and consent on judicial appointments. Pelosi's threat of impeachment in this regard is considered an empty one, and the Senate would have no obligation to hold a trial on such an impeachment. This idea, as expressed by Yale Law professor Akil Rita Mar during the Clinton impeachment trial, reflects constitutional confusion. The Senate should dismiss any impeachment related to the president's constitutional duty to appoint Supreme Court justices. Impeachment trials would only serve to waste time and make Democrats look foolish.
Democrats accused of hypocrisy over Supreme Court seat: Democrats criticized for obstructing democratic process and disrespecting Constitution by not filling Supreme Court seat due to current President, undermining judicial branch independence and serving American people
The ongoing debate over filling a Supreme Court vacancy has exposed what some view as the hypocrisy and lack of principles within the Democratic Party. According to the speaker, the Democrats have previously advocated for filling Supreme Court seats and maintaining a full court, but now oppose doing so due to the current President. They are being criticized for disrespecting the Constitution and obstructing the democratic process. The speaker argues that the American people expect their elected representatives to do their job and vote on a Supreme Court nominee. The lack of action is seen as harmful to the independence of the judicial branch and a disservice to the American people. The speaker urges the Democrats to uphold their expected principles and fulfill their constitutional duty.
Save time and money with Azlo's business banking services: Azlo offers a free business checking account with features like invoicing, bill pay, money transfers, no minimum balance, no fees, and easy online application. Instant funding and no minimum deposit required. FDIC insured and owned by BBVAUSA.
Businesses, especially small businesses and freelancers, can save time and money by switching to Azlo for their banking needs. Azlo offers a free business checking account with features like invoicing, bill pay, money transfers, no minimum balance, no fees, and easy online application. Unlike traditional banks, Azlo provides instant funding and does not require a minimum deposit. Additionally, Azlo is owned by BBVAUSA and is FDIC insured. The speaker strongly recommends Azlo as the best business banking option for entrepreneurs and freightes them to sign up at aslo.com/Bongino for a free Small Business Starter Guide. Another topic discussed was the speaker's criticism towards Joe Biden for his alleged shady business deals and lies during his political career. The speaker expressed his opinion that Biden has leveraged his position in the US government to enrich himself and his family, while implying that he is not genuinely representing the interests of the middle class. The speaker encouraged listeners to fact-check Biden's statements and challenged the major media outlets to do the same.
Biden's Park Avenue Donations vs Trump's Scranton Support: Contrary to assumptions, Biden's campaign received 8x more funds from wealthy Park Avenue donors than Trump's Scranton supporters, while Biden falsely accused Trump of insulting military personnel.
Despite Joe Biden's claims of being the "Scranton kid" and Donald Trump being the "Park Avenue kid," the data shows that the opposite is true when it comes to campaign donations from those areas. Biden's campaign has received over eight times more money from donors on Park Avenue than Trump's. This goes against the common assumption that working-class areas would support Democratic candidates and wealthy areas would support Republicans. However, what is even more concerning is Biden's repeated false accusation that Trump called military personnel "losers and suckers." This attack is particularly damaging as it goes against the deep respect and reverence most Americans have for the military. Despite this being debunked by every major news outlet, Biden continues to spread this lie, revealing his character as a sleaze ball and a liar.
Bongino: Biden's cognitive decline and dishonesty disqualify him from presidency: Dan Bongino believes Joe Biden's cognitive decline and dishonesty make him unfit for the presidency, citing frequent forgetfulness during interviews and manipulation of military votes for political gain
Dan Bongino believes Joe Biden is cognitively incapable of being president and is deceiving the public. According to Bongino, Biden frequently forgets his lines during interviews and relies on teleprompters, which he finds sad rather than funny. He also accused Biden of lying and manipulating the military vote for political gain. Bongino expressed his confidence in his large audience and warned his critics not to intimidate him. He also mentioned George Soros without elaborating and promised to discuss him further in a later segment. Bongino's overall message was that Biden's cognitive decline and dishonesty disqualify him from the presidency.
Liquid I.V.'s New Product Offers Sustained Energy with Clean Caffeine: Liquid I.V.'s Energy Multiplier provides a natural, long-lasting energy boost with 100mg clean caffeine and enhanced absorption technology. Available at Costco with a discount.
Liquid I.V.'s new product, Energy Multiplier, is being promoted as a natural and effective alternative to coffee and energy drinks for sustained energy throughout the day. With approximately 100 milligrams of clean caffeine, it's said to provide a lasting energy boost without the crash often associated with coffee or energy drinks. The product uses liquid I.V.'s cellular transport technology for enhanced absorption, making it a convenient and tasty option for those looking to upgrade their energy levels. Liquid I.V. is available nationwide at Costco with a 25% discount using the promo code Bongino. Additionally, Michael Anton, author of the article "The Coming Coup," has become a target for character assassination due to his explicit discussion of the Democrats' plans for a potential coup if Trump wins the election. This is a violation of the first rule of the Democrats' coup plan, which is to never talk about the coup.
Political Discourse: Threats of Violence from Both Sides: Political discussions can lead to heated exchanges, but calling for violence or threatening harm is not a solution and only escalates conflict.
There are individuals on both sides of the political spectrum who use violent language and make threats against each other. During a discussion, it was mentioned that some individuals identifying as Antifa and BLM are violent, while others, such as Michael Anton, have been called for execution by people like Nils Gilman. Gilman, who serves as vice president of programs at the Chinese Communist Party-linked Big Tech Institute, expressed his desire for Anton's execution, comparing him to Robert Bresselach, a Nazi sympathizer. Gilman's tweet was responded to by the individual speaking in the discussion, who called out Gilman for his conspiracy theories and vowed to continue exposing his destructive agenda. The discussion also touched upon the importance of avoiding violence and the potential consequences of escalating online conflicts. It's essential to remember that threatening violence or calling for it is not a solution to political differences and can only lead to further conflict and harm.
George Soros's Open Society Foundation and Transition Integrity Project: Billionaire philanthropist George Soros's Open Society Foundation has been a significant donor to left-wing causes worldwide, including the Transition Integrity Project, which calls for potential civil unrest post-2020 US election. Co-founder Rosa Brooks is a former council and board member of the Foundation.
George Soros, a billionaire philanthropist, has been identified as a significant backer of various organizations and projects, including the Transition Integrity Project, which has called for potential civil unrest after the 2020 US election. Soros's Open Society Foundation, which he founded in 1993, has been a major donor to hundreds of left-wing causes around the world. The Foundation announced a $150 million investment in racial justice groups in July 2020. Rosa Brooks, a co-founder of the Transition Integrity Project and a Georgetown Law Professor, is a former council and board member of the Open Society Foundation. The speaker intends to continue covering this topic despite being advised not to.
Groups preparing for post-election unrest, linked to George Soros: Some organizations, like The Transition Integrity Project and Protect the Results, are planning for post-election turmoil, with ties to George Soros and Indivisible. These groups' actions could fuel misunderstandings and escalations if not openly discussed.
There are groups and individuals, including those connected to George Soros, preparing for potential post-election unrest, not focused on ensuring a peaceful transfer of power. The Transition Integrity Project and Protect the Results are two such organizations, with the latter having ties to Indivisible, a major donor being the Tides Foundation, which is financed by Soros. These groups are reportedly preparing for a "street fight" after the election, regardless of the results. While some may dismiss this as a conspiracy theory, the connections between these groups and Soros are factual. The importance of this information lies in the potential for misunderstandings and escalations if the public remains uninformed. It's crucial to promote transparency and open dialogue about these matters to prevent any misconceptions or unnecessary tensions.
Andrew Weissman's Interview with False Claims: Despite being debunked, Andrew Weissman continued to spread misinformation about the Mueller investigation through false claims about Manafort's meeting with Kalimnik, the Trump Tower meeting, and Mueller's supposed reluctance to pursue investigations aggressively. The Atlantic failed to fact-check these claims, perpetuating the spread of misinformation.
Andrew Weissman's recent interview in The Atlantic, where he discussed the Mueller investigation and alleged mistakes, was filled with discredited hoaxes and false claims. Weissman repeated three myths that have been debunked numerous times: Manafort's meeting with Constantine Kalimnik, the Trump Tower meeting with Don Jr., and Mueller's supposed reluctance to pursue investigations aggressively. However, these claims have been debunked by facts and evidence. For instance, Kalimnik was a long-time associate of Manafort and was also used as a source by the Obama administration. The translator at the Trump Tower meeting stated there was no mention of collusion or Clinton during the meeting. Furthermore, Mueller's decision not to subpoena Don Jr. was not a sign of weakness but a strategic move to avoid a lengthy legal battle. The Atlantic, which published the interview, failed to fact-check Weissman's claims, perpetuating these myths and misinformation.
Mueller clarified no determination was made on Trump's potential criminality: Despite common belief, Mueller was not prohibited from charging Trump for obstruction of justice and made no such determination.
Weismann's claims about Mueller's inability to charge Trump with obstruction of justice due to Justice Department policy is false. Mueller himself clarified during testimony that no determination was made regarding Trump's potential criminality. The myth that Trump was not charged due to OLC guidelines is a common misconception, but it's important to recognize that it's not based in fact. Mueller made it clear that there was no such prohibition preventing him from charging a sitting president. The media's continued promotion of this myth underscores the importance of fact-checking and critical thinking.
