Editor's Note: This transcript was automatically transcribed, so mistakes are inevitable. You can contribute by proofreading the transcript or highlighting the mistakes. Sign up to be amongst the first contributors.
Today is March 5th, twenty twenty one, and our first story, Joe Biden is struggling to deal with what may be the worst migrant crisis at the southern U.S. border. We have seen yet migrants showed up wearing shirts that said, Biden, please let us in. Now, the left is angry over child detention centers and the right is angry that Joe Biden's CBP released illegal immigrants who tested positive for covid into Texas. At the same time, Biden called Texas Neanderthal's for reopening for business.
Our next story, an assemblyman is accusing Andrew Cuomo of New York of a criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice after his administration obscured the total amount of people who had died from a report due to his policy to put sick people into nursing homes. And our final story. Nancy Pelosi is facing calls for impeachment after the passing of H.R. one, which is being described by the left as an anti-corruption voting rights bill, though there are some things that are good in this bill.
Many people are furious as they see it as a power grab for Democrats.
Let's jump into the first story.
Recently, photos and videos emerged of migrants, the southern U.S. border wearing T-shirts which read Biden Please Let US in, signaling that we may be about to experience a very severe migrant crisis.
Axios is reporting of the crisis we are facing could be worse than the ones faced by Trump and Obama.
Now, Biden has promised to allow more refugees into the country.
People are critical of this because they feel it may incentivize migrants to go on this dangerous journey only to reach the border and be denied.
The left is angry because Joe Biden is now operating child detention centers.
In fact, he even is reopening the facility that Donald Trump closed in Miami. They were screaming that Trump was putting kids in cages while the facility in Homestead, Florida, was opened by Obama. And it was Trump that shut it down.
But now it's the Biden administration that is going to bring it back on the right. They're angry because Joe Biden is promising to allow way more refugees in. He's shutting down border wall projects. And we're now learning that about one hundred migrants, more than a hundred who may have been infected with covid were allowed were released in Texas.
The reason that's significant is because recently Texas announced they would be reopening business. They felt the vaccine and social distancing was going. We're working and thus they could get the economy back on track.
Joe Biden responded by saying it was Neanderthal thinking, well, now many people are upset on the right for this.
Some are suggesting that we should introduce new legislation to complete Donald Trump's border wall. They've actually done this.
But how hypocritical is it to say we're going to allow migrants in? They've not been tested for covid.
Some who actually have been infected with covid were released.
But Texas is the state that's doing things wrong. It's hypocritical because Joe Biden said we will not have normalcy until this time next year, but he seems to be just tribally attacking certain states. It makes no sense to demand covid lockdown's in a state where you wouldn't actually enforce covid restrictions on those crossing the border.
Well, now I think we're going to see that Joe Biden is not up to the job. He's going to get heat from the left and the right, worse than he already is.
And like I said, Axios is saying this is going to be one of the worst migrant crisis we have ever seen. Well, let's read this and see what's going on first with the migrants wearing these t shirts before we do head over to Tim Kest. Dotcom become a member to get access to exclusive Tim Cast Iron podcast segments and episodes.
We have a whole bunch of content. Look, as we got Sidney Watson, James O'Keefe, we got the guy from Phenix Ammunition, Blair White, we set up Tim Cass Dotcom because there is a purge going on there, censoring people, they're banning people.
And in the event my channels got shut down, this is where you will be able to find information. You'll be able to find my content and we're looking to expand.
Your membership gets you all this content and we're even going to have be having live events at our studio. So make sure you sign up to get information on when that's going to happen. And it's going to be happening relatively soon as the weather is warming up.
But let's read the first story. Don't forget to like share subscribe hit that notification. Bell, Fox, Ten Phenix reports migrants wear Biden t shirts at US.
Mexico border demand clearer policies that say migrants crossing the US Mexico border on Tuesday were photographed wearing T-shirts in support of President Biden at the San Ysidro crossing port in Tijuana, Baja California state. One apparent migrant held up a poster that read Biden.
Please let us in perspective.
U.S. residents and progressive Democrats are hoping the new president will implement more lenient immigration policies than former President Trump.
Though some politicians like Rep. Alexandrea Ocasio Cortez have expressed concern with Biden's use of migrant holding facilities at the border.
There has been a recent surge in the number of unaccompanied minors arriving at the U.S. border from Mexico, according to the Wall Street Journal.
Though the Biden administration has rejected the term crisis to describe the situation, the president is working to process as many as 25000 thousand asylum seekers who were forced to wait in Mexico under the Trump administration to remain in Mexico policy under the Migrant Protection Protocol Program.
Biden has promised to accept more refugees into the country during his time in office and implement more humane policies such as proposal, a proposal to pay for the transportation and health care costs of migrant families who were separated at the border under the Trump administration.
Congressional Democrats in February introduced Biden backed immigration legislation that includes a path to citizenship for an estimated 11 million immigrants who are already residing in the U.S. illegally. It also includes expanded distribution of automatic green cards to immigrants with Temporary Protected Status, as well as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals DACA recipients.
And a plan to give four billion dollars to Central American countries in an effort to target the root causes for migration into the U.S., I'm sorry, but I don't believe this is a solution.
Giving four billion dollars to these countries does not incentivize them to stop the problem and incentivizes them to keep the problem going. As people flee these countries and try and go on these arduous journeys, you have several pull factors as they refer to them.
One, Joe Biden promising to naturalize 11 million refugees or offer a path to naturalization, as well as saying he will accept more asylum seekers just means many people are going to say, I will take my chances.
The danger, many of these people lose their lives on these journeys. These are not simple.
It is not a simple task to make this trek. Most of them do not get in. Most asylum seekers are rejected and they're incentivizing this.
The second pull factor is offering these these countries billions of dollars.
They're going to say, hey, so long as the crisis exists, then we can keep saying, oh, but we need more money to get the problem solved.
In the end, we are now dealing with the crisis again, a crisis that Obama dealt with, that Trump dealt with. And what now Joe Biden is going to be dealing with?
It doesn't seem like what Obama and Biden has done is working under Donald Trump. At the very least, he did dis incentivize the behavior. But to be fair, it didn't work all that well either.
You could argue that with Joe Biden now incentivizing these people to come here offering a path to citizenship and asylum, he's only making the problem worse. And that may be from Axios. One big thing, Biden's building crisis.
They say six weeks into his presidency, President Biden is staring down a mounting crisis at the border that could be just as bad as the ones faced by Obama and Trump, if not worse.
Why it matters. Immigration is an issue that can consume a presidency. It's intensely and poisonously partizan. It's complicated, and the lives and welfare of vulnerable children hang in the balance.
In an attempt at a solution, the Biden administration now plans to release parents and children within 72 hours of arriving in the U.S., a new policy that already is being carried out along the Texas border.
According to the New York Times, Biden came into office sounding a warmer, more welcoming policy that would treat migrants humanely. Desperate people took notice, and Biden reversed Trump's covid era policy of turning away unaccompanied children, the very group that is now surging. They say shelters are overflowing, border crossings are rising, Border Patrol facilities are overwhelmed, and the new administration is taking fire from both the left and the right.
There are still roughly three months left of what is usually the peak season for migrants coming to the US Mexico border. My friends, it is only going to get worse.
They also talk about vaccine tourism, but we can maybe touch on this later. The important factor here from The New York Post.
One hundred and eight illegal immigrants in Texas who tested positive for covid reportedly released this as the people of Texas in an uproar at a time when they're trying to reopen. What does Biden's federal administration do? CBP under Biden, they released sick people into the state. Now, that is dangerously irresponsible. Some feel like it was almost a kind of retaliation because Texas wanted to reopen. The federal government was like, OK, well, then here you go, some some sick people.
I don't think that's the case, to be honest. I think it's just. I don't know, ineptitude is probably the best way to put it. Joe Biden is not up to this task of dealing with CBP, with ICE, these other federal organizations.
He's in desperate need of help to get this job done. And I think it's evident by the fact the left and the right are angry with him.
At least under Trump, the right was like, Trump's doing what I want him to do. He's building a border wall. He's incentivizing this behavior right now on the left and the right.
They're saying Biden is failing at everything. As I mentioned, the left is really angry over child.
The child migrant dilemma, as Axios reports leaked HHS docs spotlight Biden's child migrant dilemma, saying fresh internal documents from the Department of Health and Human Services show how quickly the number of child migrants crossing the border is overwhelming the administration's stretched resources.
Perhaps they should have done what Trump did turn them away.
I know it may sound inhumane, but these young people, these unaccompanied minors may be better off near these border towns in Mexico than wandering through mass stretches of desert in the U.S. where they can become sick, ill and die.
We do not have the resources to keep them safe and we can't tell them if you come in, so be it, because then more will come and it will only get worse.
To Biden's credit, perhaps there is at least an attempt at solving the problem in their home countries.
But offering up aid does not seem to work. It seems like the corrupt politicians in these countries are incentivized. They say, great.
The more people who leave, the more money we get.
And in the end, people will just keep going on these dangerous journeys, they say.
Driving the news in the week ending March 1st to the Border Patrol referred to HHS custody, an average of three hundred and twenty one children per day, according to documents obtained by Axios. That's up from a weekly average of two hundred three in late January and early February and just 47 per day during the first week of January.
Now, could it be the 47 per week in January were due to Donald Trump not allowing these people to enter the country?
I would say the answer is yes, though some people may say, yeah, but it's winter and it's winter. They're not going to it's winter, but it's the southern border. Don't act like it's snowing.
OK, hold on. Hold on. It did snow down there. There was a serious winter storm. So, OK, maybe. But for the most part, people who are going on these journeys, they're going to come if the opportunity exists. As many people were hearing Joe Biden say on the debate stage during his campaign moratorium on deportation, open border policies, not totally open border, but decriminalizing border crossings.
How many of these people said, now's my chance to get there right at the start of the line, January 20th, a new Joe Biden president and boom, we'll be right there. Ready to go when he's in, let us in. Where did these t shirts come from?
The ones that say, Biden, please let us send who mass printed these t shirts and then gave them out to these people. Maybe they did it themselves, perhaps like it's that expensive to do.
But you have to wonder, they are trying that the people who are coming here, in my opinion, they're trying to manipulate us and it's going to work on the left. Sorry, you can't tug at my heartstrings. I actually want to make sure we can protect people. That includes the migrants and refugees, but it also includes the people who live in Texas, the people who are locking down the people who have suffered under the covid pandemic because their businesses were shuttered.
We can't just allow anybody to come in.
Sorry, it will only make it worse for everyone. But you know what? Wearing those shirts, it's going to trigger the emotions.
And many Democrats who are low information voters, sorry, I know there may be Democrats who listen, but that's just the reality.
It is an emotional manipulation to say, please let us send these poor, these poor people.
I understand you may have a gut instinct to say we need to let these people in, but that doesn't solve the problem and it potentially makes it worse for everyone. I know people don't want to hear it. They don't want to hear it. But it's the truth.
And if you really want to help these people, we need to do something for them back home. So maybe Joe Biden will do something with these grants.
I think they need to actually go in and enforce that. The use of this money goes to the right causes. I'm not entirely convinced it will. They go on to say an excuse. The same documents dated Tuesday say the shelter system is at ninety four percent occupancy and expected to reach its maximum this month.
Well, there you go. Joe Biden has kids in cages and it's going to be worse than what happened with Trump, they say. Meanwhile, some of President Biden's top officials responsible for immigration policy are planning a trip to the US Mexico border this weekend. Sources tell us the influx of unaccompanied minors is a mushrooming problem for the new president and his policy. And so social welfare agencies quote.
A trip is not finalized and the White House continues to work on locking in details and logistics for a potential visit. White House spokesperson Vidant Patel told Axios spokesperson for DHS and HHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Behind the scenes, they say HHS is already moved, has has already moved to open overflow shelters and to increase the speed with which it releases children to caretakers.
Already in the U.S.. In the week ending March 1st, an average of one hundred and seventy four children were released from HHS custody each day.
That was up from a weekly average of 90 in late June and early February, according to the documents.
Nonetheless, the number of migrants held in Border Patrol custody longer than three days has been rising nearly each day, according to additional documents reviewed by axios kids and teens caught crossing the border without legal guardians are being held in Border Patrol facilities for more than three days for an average of 77 hours. As CNN first reported this week, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas insisted the current situation is not yet a crisis. Regardless, it's clear the number of children crossing the US Mexico border could fast overwhelm government systems in ways similar to the crises in 2014 and 2019.
The uptick comes while the administration continues to use an emergency public health order to quickly deport migrant adults and some families, including asylum seekers. At the same time, Biden has reversed a Trump administration policy of using the public health order to quickly turn away unaccompanied children. The source, who provided the internal Biden administration documents expects to see family migration rise over the next months, as well as internally.
Government officials have been sounding alarm bells. As Axios previously reported, DHS is expecting a record number of child migrants this year.
HHS has told the White House it will need a 20000 bed capacity to humanely accommodate them. I'm sorry. The only thing that's going to happen is that Joe Biden will expand kids in cages. But listen, I'm not here Ragon Biden for that. They went after Trump saying it was inhumane and it was a problem while it was Obama's facilities.
But the reality is we do need them. We can't just cut kids loose into the deserts, send them to people we don't know.
That's why we have these facilities. Nobody wants these kids to suffer.
Maybe a few people in the Trump administration or the Obama or Biden. And there's a few people you can call out, some of them probably more worthy of criticism.
But for the most part, people want to make sure these kids are not getting sick and dying. That's the purpose of these facilities, I think to many people on the left are manipulated by their emotions and they're going to just say the kids shouldn't be there.
Well, where do they go? Well, they say they shouldn't have been separated from their families.
How do you know it was their actual family? If an adult is taking a child across the border, how do you know and what do we do?
Just say, well, here's a guy with a little girl. I guess it's fine. What if that's not his child? What if he's a trafficker? There are many of them. They exist. The Guardian writes in an opinion piece for The Guardian. Biden is locking up migrant children. Will the world still care with Trump gone? They say flowers, butterflies and a rosy banner saying bienvenidos decorate the child detention site, is that meant to fool us into thinking this is humane?
That's what they're doing. That's what they're doing.
There's a funny name under Obama. It's like child child holding center under Trump, kids in cages, underbite and child holding center once again. Well, at least Moustafa Bayoumi for The Guardian is pointing out that it's an awful development, saying, reminding me of some of the worst abuses of the Trump years.
And while we obviously don't know how this ominous development will play out in the long run, what we do not what we do know is this unaccompanied migrant children deserve compassion, not detention.
But rather than seeking out new and better solutions, the Biden administration is instead trying to sell us an image of a kinder, gentler imprisonment. I ask you, good, sir, I appreciate the consistency, but I ask you, where should these children go? Seriously, is it more humane to just keep them in the desert? It makes no sense when Trump was operating these facilities. Sure, they weren't perfect. They were overwhelmed. It was kind of bad.
But these kids are coming here.
Separating them, I think is is scary. But again, trafficking. What do you do? I believe it is appropriate for Joe Biden to have these children in these facilities. They put them in bunk beds. They try and take care of them. The same was true for Donald Trump. It is absurdly naive to think.
You just say, you know what, fine. The left is angry, opened the floodgates. Let everybody come in and the kids have fun and good luck in the desert.
That's insane. There was a story not that long ago about a kid who was taken in by ICE, I believe it was may have been keepin the kid died and the media tried framing it as though it was Border Patrol that killed the kid.
No, they tried saving the kid. They found the kid wandering in the desert.
Kid was sick. They brought the kid into the facility hoping to get some medical treatment. The kid died. They blamed border patrol. What should have happened? Should they have just left him in the desert saying, hey, if we pick you up, the Democrats are going to get mad at us?
Well, of course not. They should try and save them. And therein lies the double edged sword. No matter what you do, you lose. You try and save the kid. They blame you for it. You don't save the kid. They still blame you for it.
No matter what you do, they will say it is bad. February 11th, President Biden cancels funding for Trump's border wall.
This is big news, the BBC says. In a letter to Congress on Thursday, Mr Biden wrote that the order was unwarranted and said that no further tax dollars will be spent on the wall. Mr Trump declared a state of emergency over the southern border in twenty nineteen, which allowed him to bypass Congress and use military funds for its construction. When Mr Trump left office, about 15 billion had been spent on the project. The announcement from President Biden is the latest in a series of executive orders that have rolled back key parts of the former president's agenda.
And when he does that, people then rush to the border thinking we can now get in. Joe Biden is failing at this, desperate to please these these Democrats.
It seems like some of his policies are hoping to make the left happy while he simultaneously just doing all the awful things they complain about. They're not going to support him. It's either all or nothing either.
Joe Biden says I stand by my decisions no matter what or he gives into the left.
But you can't do both. They say in a letter on Thursday, Biden wrote that he would also seek a review of all resources appropriated or or redirected to the construction of the wall, building a border wall was one of Trump's signatures, but the project faced strong opposition. An emergency declaration allows U.S. presidents to circumvent the usual political process and to access military funding. Well, I tell you this. I mentioned the left on the right arm at the right isn't doing nothing from the from Sara Carter dot com.
Texas state rep introduces Bill to finish Trump's border wall. They report amid a tense national debate over the US Mexico border, a Texas lawmaker is pushing for the construction of former President Donald Trump's border wall to continue. Since President Biden took office in January, he has signed a slew of executive orders that reverse many of Trump's policies. One of those orders includes striking down the ongoing construction of the southern border wall.
Texas state Rep. Brian Slatin has introduced legislation before the Texas House to finish President Trump's while in Texas.
Further, the bill seeks to name the wall after Trump tweeting. We all know Biden has opened the floodgates at our border.
That's why today I have filed HB two eight six two to finish President Trump's wall in Texas. If the federal government won't do its job protecting American citizens, then Texas will stand in the gap and do it for them.
Quote, President Trump fought to bring real border security and was opposed by Republicans and Democrats in Congress. While hundreds of miles of new wall were built under his leadership, the Biden administration has already seized a border wall construction, Slatin said in a press release. It is time for Texas to stand up and finish the work Trump has started.
Sarah Sarah Cotter's reported from the border while they mention for Fox News. And good work on that part, Sara.
Now, what did Joe Biden, Joe Biden say to Texas when it came to covid Neanderthal thinking? Montana governor says Biden degraded himself with Neanderthal comment about red state governors. Gianforte says Biden's name calling makes no sense at all. They are probably pronouncing this wrong. Gianforte explained that hospitalizations are down and Montana is open for business. During an appearance on Fox and Friends asserting that a one size fits all approach to coronavirus mandates doesn't make sense for the needs of every state.
For a president that called for unity, to degrade himself to name calling doesn't make any sense at all. And he's right.
This is a response to many states, notably Texas, deciding to reopen. Well, I bring you back to the story from The New York Post about sick migrants. They say Philippe Romero, a spokesperson, spokesman for the border city of Brownsville, told Fox News they are telling the migrants who tested positive to follow the CDC guidelines to quarantine and maintain social distance, but that Brownsville doesn't have the authority to stop them from traveling to the rest of the country.
He said the one hundred and eight positives account for six point three percent of the total migrants who received rapid tests at the city's main bus terminal, a program that began on January twenty fifth.
Some of the migrants described to Noticias Telemundo investigate investigate how they were tested at the border and then allowed to hit the streets despite a positive result for the virus.
The left has been saying that this covid has been horribly mismanaged and that the migrant crisis has been horribly mismanaged. The right the fact that there is no I don't know.
Straightforward plan as to what we should be doing, the fact that Joe Biden is being completely hypocritical, it doesn't bode well for us.
But my friends, perhaps there is hope for all of you.
You see, Donald Trump is back issuing a statement saying, out of control, immigration and border security.
The Boston Herald reports former President Donald Trump, via his 45 office mail drop, slammed the Biden administration's immigration stance Friday, saying security is totally out of control.
Here is the unedited statement of the president. They say, quote, Our border. And this is from Donald Trump. Our border is now totally out of control thanks to the disastrous leadership of Joe Biden. Our great Border Patrol and ICE agents have been disrespected, demeaned and mocked by the Biden administration. A mass incursion into the country by people who should not be here is happening on an hourly basis, getting worse by the minute. Many have criminal records and many others have and are spreading covid interior enforcement has been shut down.
Criminals that were once promptly removed by our administration are now being released back onto the street to commit heinous and violent crimes.
ICE officers are desperate to remove these convicted criminals, but Biden won't let them. The spiraling tsunami at the border is overwhelming local communities depleting budgets, crowding hospitals and taking jobs from legal American workers.
When I left office, we'd achieved the most secure border in our country's history. Under Biden, it will soon be worse, more dangerous and more out of control than ever before.
He has violated his oath of office to uphold our Constitution and enforce our laws. There has never been a time on our southern border like what is happening now. But more importantly, what is about to happen now that Biden has implemented nationwide catch and release illegal immigrants from every corner of the earth will descend upon our border and never be returned.
You can never have a secure border unless people who cross illegally are promptly removed. I had a great relationship with Mexico and its wonderful president, but all of that has been dissipated by the gross incompetence and radicalism of the people currently in charge that remain in Mexico. Policy was incredible, but immediately abandoned by Biden, probably because it worked so well. Likewise, our safe third agreements and Central America works ordinarily successful. So Biden foolishly ditched them too. We stopped payment of the hundreds of millions of dollars paid to them and then developed an excellent relationship that made our country and their countries more secure.
We put in place powerful rules and procedures to stop the smuggling and trafficking. But the Biden administration has abandoned these proven strategies and instead given the smugglers and traffickers effective control of our border.
Despite being delayed by years of litigation and politics by the Democrats, the wall is almost finished and can be quickly completed. Doing so will save thousands of dollars. The Biden administration must act immediately to end the border nightmare that they have unleashed onto our nation. Keep illegal immigration, crime and the China virus out of our country. Quote from Donald Trump. Trump is not going away. I think it's very likely he runs. I don't know, he'll be a pretty old man by 2024, probably will announce in 2023 if he does campaign throughout twenty three and twenty four.
And then, of course, if he wins inaugurated on January 20, 25, I think it's entirely possible that happens.
You know why? The left and the right are mad, they don't like what Joe Biden is doing, if Donald Trump runs, then it will just be the left that is mad and the right will like the idea of a President Trump. But think about all of the regular Americans.
You see, it's not just immigration. There are a bunch of other issues.
Food prices are going up, inflation. A lot of people are not getting back to work. Joe Biden says wait till next year and a lot of people don't want too many people were promised two thousand dollar checks. Perhaps those people voted for Joe Biden thinking he would honor it. Donald Trump won in 2000, and it was the Republicans who said no. That means it means the establishment has to go. It was widely popular among Trump supporters and progressives.
In fact, I think the poll was 84 percent of people said two thousand dollar checks. So why didn't we get them? Both Democrats and Republicans are saying no. So what happens then, in my opinion, is that you will see many moderate voters realizing that Joe Biden was the wrong choice and then the coming years. There are many variables.
So this is a very bold thing to try and predict now. So I'll probably be wrong, considering that I'll probably be wrong.
I will just go ahead and say many people will likely be upset with Joe Biden's policies after spending four years in crisis after crisis with a an inflating U.S. dollar, people struggling to work and to get back to work.
While I may be wrong. I got to make sure I say that. People may be fed up and you'll find that with record voter turnout like we saw in twenty twenty, people just naturally go for Donald Trump because they'll say, you know what, it was better under Trump. The economy was great. And like they say, it's the economy, stupid. I don't know for sure, but they've certainly done trump many favors by taking away a social media, one of the biggest mistakes Trump was routinely making was tweeting bombastic things that was pissing people off.
Now that's gone. Now he can only put out these official statements through email, which still make it to the press.
The media is desperate for Trump and now Trump's weakness has been taken away. I know social media benefited him in a lot of ways, but it did hurt him a lot of ways as well.
He just needed to be quiet sometimes and let the news cycle chill out. But he couldn't do it. He still can't. He's putting out these emails, but these emails are much better controlled. So what happens in twenty twenty five, maybe a narrow Trump victory as he comes out and speaks out against Joe Biden. Maybe then the left finally snaps because they need their boogeyman, they need their villain, and then something worse happens.
I don't know. I'll probably be wrong. As I say, it's a bold prediction to make this far out years and years out. So we'll see how Biden does. But he seems to be doing miserably as of right now. I'll leave it there next. Comments coming up at 8:00 p.m. over at YouTube. Dot com slash Tim Kest, IRS. We're going be talking about China and that looming threat and whether or not Joe Biden is up to the task.
And guess what? I think he hasn't.
So I'll leave it there and we will see you all at 8pm tonight at YouTube. Tim Kest I rl. We knew the nursing home death scandal was bad, and now we're learning it's worse, this may be one of the biggest scandals we've had in a very, very long time.
I don't want to say ever, because, look, I'm only thirty four. I'm sure there's been bigger scandals.
But we now have a Democrat governor who knew that his policy of putting sick covid patients into nursing homes would result in lots of death, mass death.
And you had many people at the nursing home saying you can't do this. We know this will result in people dying.
Cuomo said he didn't care.
And then Cuomo AIDS, the people who worked for him, pressured health officials to change the number, the total number of dead because they knew that they would be in serious trouble.
Assemblyman Mike Lawlor has called this a coordinated criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice.
I have to say I agree, but the scandal goes well beyond politics. This may be one of the biggest media scandals we've ever seen.
And this, my friends, should be the nail in the coffin for the corporate press when Andrew Cuomo was murdering people, when they knew it would result in death, thousands upon thousands dead. What was the media doing? They were praising this man every single day. CNN's Brian Stelter, one of the most duplicitous people on TV praising Cuomo. Talk about how good a job he's doing. If this guy did any work, any actual journalism, they could have seen that Andrew Cuomo was murdering people.
What about the guy who threw the banner over the head of the highway bridge, the overpass that said Cuomo killed my mom? What about the health officials that objected before it even started? He said, you can't do this. You will kill people.
According to The Wall Street Journal, that happened.
Where where were your journalists, CNN? Where were you? Reporters. Now, I know many people are looking at me saying where your reporters. Tim, we're working on it. We're working on it. I don't know the infrastructure of a decades old billion dollar corporate press, but, yeah, we'll get to it. I'm not kidding. We will, because we can clearly see the media. They don't care, CNN, MSNBC, these big networks did nothing but praise the man, Chris Cuomo, who faked being in quarantine, does stupid, silly, cute tidbits with Andrew Cuomo on TV.
They entertained the idea that he would run for president. Now we're learning that not only is Cuomo a murderer, but he's also an abuser of several women. Assemblyman Mike Lawlor tweets, It's very clear the Cuomo administration understood their March 25th order had contributed to the death toll and they wanted to cover it up to avoid political fallout, plain and simple. They had the data and they hid it. This was a coordinated criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice. Let me just make that very clear for you.
One of the most popular Democratic politicians right now among Democrats.
New putting covid patients into nursing homes would kill them, it would kill innocent people who are in those nursing homes who are not sick, he covered it up because he didn't want to look bad and didn't want to get caught and didn't want an investigation. And we know it all.
Now, you know, the scariest thing about this, I've got the story and I'll go through it where they actually say that health officials were warning, don't do this.
Nursing home officials saying you can't do this, don't do this. And they did anyway. It wasn't just Cuomo. Whitmer did it. I believe a few other Tom Wolfe, I believe in Pennsylvania did it. I want to show you something. Rich as a party, says Q Poll Enfield this Tuesday on Wednesday shows Governor Cuomo among Democrats with a 65 to 27 job performance rating and a 60 30 favorability amazin. Cuomo murdered ten fifteen thousand people. He was warned it would happen.
He obstructed. He covered up the numbers and the Democrats still support him. We're in very serious trouble, my friends, if this is the state of politics in this country, that you can have even left wing personalities pointing out that Cuomo is an abuser. Cuomo is accused of some very serious things from several women.
And Democrats still support him two to one. Is this is this politics now, is this it tribalism that a man could be a murderous criminal? And they will still support him, yes, when Trump came out and said he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and he wouldn't lose a voter, he was not wrong. And they criticized him and his supporters for it. And you know what? Good.
Trump should not say those things. Now, Cuomo actually killed people and they're the ones who still support him.
The Wall Street Journal reports New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is top adviser, successfully pushed state health officials to strip a public report of data showing that more nursing home residents had died of Cauvin than the administration had acknowledged. According to people with knowledge of the report's production, the July report, which examined the factors that led to the spread of the virus in nursing homes, focused only on residents who died inside long term care facilities, leaving out those who had died in hospitals after becoming sick in nursing homes.
As a result, the report said, six thousand four hundred thirty two nursing home residents had died. A significant undercount. The death toll attributed to the state's most vulnerable population, the people said. The initial version of the report said nearly 10000 nursing home residents had died in New York by July last year, one of the people said.
The changes Mr. Cuomo aides and health officials made to the nursing home report, which haven't been previously disclosed, reveal that the state possessed a fuller accounting of our facility nursing home deaths as early as the summer.
The Health Department resisted calls by state and federal lawmakers, media outlets and others to release the data for another eight months. My friends, we are now looking at a story confirmed, decried of a man who knew he killed these people. Do you think anything's going to happen? Do you think there will be a federal prosecutor who comes in arrests, Cuomo? I really doubt it. He'll get away with it, quite literally, killing 15000 people. They say state officials now say more than 15000 residents of nursing homes and other long term care facilities were confirmed or presumed to have died from covid-19 since March of last year, counting both those who died in Long-Term Care Facilities and those who died later in hospitals.
That figure is about 50 percent higher than earlier official death tolls. Mr. Cuomo now faces mounting political pressure over both his administration's handling of the pandemic in nursing homes and accusations he harassed staffers. Republicans and some Democrats have called for the governor to resign from office or be impeached. Mr. Cuomo has rejected calls for his resignation and apologized for his behavior regarding nursing home deaths. Cuomo has said his administration followed federal guidance and acted to preserve hospital capacity.
Just following orders, the CDC said, hey, here's what you should do. And they did. That's why I say. I don't care if you support Trump or not, there is clearly a disconnect between what red states did and blue states did, and it's interesting to see how this is primarily affecting blue states.
They're going to say federal prosecutors in Brooklyn asked the Cuomo administration in February for information about nursing home deaths, The Wall Street Journal reported. Federal prosecutors expressed interest in the July report. People familiar with the matter said I was going to happen. They'll throw some low level staffer under the boss and Cuomo will be like, I had no idea.
And then some dumb intern goes to prison in response to questions from the journal.
Administration officials said Thursday that Mr. Cuomo advisers advocated against including data on out of a salary desk because they had concerns about its accuracy.
The audit facility data was permitted after Dweik could not confirm it had been adequately verified. Beth Garvie, a special counsel and senior adviser to Cuomo, said in a statement, Spare me. That's a lie. One, in my opinion, one official familiar with the back and forth between the health department. Mr. Cuomo, as advisers said State Health Commissioner Howard Zucker agreed the out of facility data shouldn't be included in the report. The Department of Health was comfortable with the final report and believes fully in its conclusion that the primary driver that introduced covid into the nursing homes was brought in by staff.
The health department updated the report on February 11 to include out of facility deaths of nursing home residents, saying its conclusion remained unchanged by the new data. State lawmakers from both parties have said the out facility data death data was critical for them to evaluate nursing home policies that could prevent prevent future fatalities. They said the administration's decision to delay its release concerns a cover up of data the governor knew would be damaging to his political stature.
Melissa DeRosa, Mr. Obama's top aide, explained the delay to state lawmakers during a February 10th meeting.
She said the state sidelined a legislative request for the data because of a U.S. Department of Justice inquiry. Mr. Rosa said the state was concerned the information would be politicized by the administration of former President Donald Trump.
According to a transcript. That's right. Donald Trump may have gotten reelected if people found out that Democratic governors were murdering people. Gee, I wonder why people would have decided to vote for the Republican. The Justice Department, through its civil rights division, began requesting information about nursing home deaths from New York and other Democratic leaning states in August. The initial July report was the product of a health department study of the factors that contributed to the death toll in nursing homes.
The agency undertook the study in response to complaints from state lawmakers and people who lost loved ones that a March 25th Health Department directive fostered the spread of the virus among members of the state's most vulnerable population.
That directive said that no nursing home could refuse to readmit residents or admit new residents from hospitals solely because of a covid-19 diagnosis. The July report concluded that nursing homes were already rife with the virus. By the time of the March 25th policy and attributed the spread to staff who brought with them to work. Several of Mr Obama's top advisers, who are members of his covid-19 task force, reviewed and requested changes to the report.
They included such people on. You know, the lead author of the report was Eleanor Adams, who until August worked out of the Health Department's Metropolitan Area Regional Office in a unit that focused on infection control in health care facilities, one of the people said. Dr. Adams has since become a senior adviser to Dr. Zucker. The initial version of the report submitted to Mr. Cuomo team for review, included both data on deaths of nursing home residents in hospitals and deaths of residents inside nursing homes, people familiar with the report's production said.
While Health Department officials agreed to remove the data, they resisted. Cuomo aides request to alter the report to play down the role of the March 25th directive in the spread of the virus. Some of the people said the report, as published, concluded the directive was not a significant factor in nursing home fatalities. Check this out. The March twenty fifth order came as hospitals were rushing to make space for an expected surge of coronavirus patients.
Let me point out that the Javits Center was available and the Mercy Naval vessel was available as well.
They say nursing home operators learning of the policy only after it was issued immediately objected, saying it would introduce the virus into their facilities. A national group representing nursing home health providers said at the time of the March 25th directive was, quote, not in the not in the least consistent with patient safety principles. A national group, a national group told them, don't do this, you will bring the virus here. And they said, so what? And they did it anyway.
And now how many people have died? It's not just the 15000. It's the other Democrat governors who did the same thing, they say in New York. State Health Department spokeswoman Jill Montag said in August the decision to issue the directive was made on the merits by the public health experts at and following the CDC guidelines. Health department officials didn't provide an updated statement when asked on Thursday. OK, I don't care who you throw under the bus for this.
I don't care if it's Foushee, the CDC, Cuomo, even even. You know what? Blame a little bit of Trump, right? His administration, Trump should have fired Foushee immediately, thought she had been going on TV saying don't wear masks.
And now people are blaming Trump. If only Trump had been pro mask, Foushee himself was anti mask. And then it was only later on that he admitted we didn't want people buying up masks because we needed them. They could have slowed the spread of this if they just told people to wear a scarf, put a piece of cloth over your face, right? That's what I've been saying. Matched masks are a good thing. So why would you say don't do it?
Why wouldn't Falchi just say all you really need is a scarf, something to cover your mouth as you're walking around? That's it. Because that's what they're saying now. Now they're saying double masking, mind you, why Trump should have fired Valge.
So I believe the buck stops with Trump. At the time he was the president. Trump should have sent in federal investigators. He should not have taken them at their word. But Trump was not the fascist dictator they tried to claim him to be.
And because of this. People are dead. I'm not actually suggesting Trump be a fascist dictator. I'm pointing out that if Trump simply used the powers he had, he could have prevented all of this.
And, you know, it's funny, I've heard that from many leftists. They said if Trump just used the war powers and intervened, he could have saved lives. They wanted Trump to be more authoritarian. Well, Trump didn't have the guts.
He didn't perhaps he was scared the media would smear him again and they would call the fascists. The Democrats would lie, but they were doing that anyway.
Now Cuomo is going to get away with it. You know why? Well, they mentioned federal prosecutors are looking into him. So we'll see. But look at this. Sixty five to twenty seven approve of his job performance. Sixty five percent of polled Democrats approve of Cuomo his job after he killed 15000 plus people they approve of.
That is an amazing and they argue that, you know, with half a million people who died of covid so far under Trump, it was it was a bit less.
But still hundreds of thousands of people. They say that's Trump's fault. The buck stops with him. And I'm like, OK, well, you wonder why Trump supporters support him. Trump didn't put sick patients into nursing homes.
Trump did, however, not do his due diligence in what Foushee and the CDC foushee is what the you know, the administration of infectious whatever, not the CDC. But Trump was in charge of the federal government, the executive branch. He should have been him and his administration should have been better. Now, there's a big difference between Trump not knowing the nitty gritty of the CDC and trusting the officials and what we see with Cuomo for sure. And I think this is the perfect example of absolute hypocrisy.
The Democrats will complain about Trump all day and night, saying his supporters are in a cult. When you literally have Cuomo issuing issuing the guidance to send sick people into nursing homes, he's then caught red handed covering up the data.
The story gets worse. He's now being accused of a coordinated criminal conspiracy. Democrats still support him two to one. This is insane. And it's worrying because when you see stories like this, the lies, the manipulation, the death, the chaos, and you see the willingness to tribally support a man who's not only killing these people, but come on, he's even got these women coming out against him. That's not enough. The Democrats will just blindly support him.
Recently, the Democrats passed something called H.R. one, it is a heavy voting reform bill, it will likely guarantee Democrats win forever. And the reason for it is low information. Voters who tend to be Democrats who support vicious predators and murderers like Cuomo don't know and don't care. So I'll tell you why. There's a there's an argument for actually making voting a little bit harder when asked. Republicans do tend to say voting should be harder. Why?
Well, because voting is a civic duty that has serious ramifications on the country. It is not something to take lightly. And you must understand what you are doing is a very powerful tool in governance. The Democrats want anyone at any point, for any reason to able to vote. They want it as easy as possible. They argue that's pro democracy.
That's not pro-democracy. Absolutely not, that's pro oligopoly or plutocracy, where you have a bunch of people who don't know what's going on, blindly voting for their tribe. I'm not going to pretend that the Republicans are better.
No, I think the Republican Party's awful, absolutely awful. But there does need to be some kind of minimal barrier. And what I mean by that is most people I would say most people should have a simple little bump that, you know, they have to overcome in order to vote, not that they shouldn't vote, but that they need to.
I guess a better way to put it is when they go to vote, they shouldn't walk in to go, oh, Trump, there should be something like. Are you sure you want to vote? OK, come on in. I like people voting. I want people to vote. I want more people to vote. I actually support a lot of the many of the proposals that were pushed through with H.R. one.
The issue, however, is when you look to the Democratic Party and you can see the amount of people who would support someone like Cuomo, these people are clueless.
I'm willing to bet if you went door to door in a Democrat neighborhood and asked them if they supported Cuomo, they'd say yes. If you ask them, after knowing that he covered up the death of thousands of people because his policy resulted in their in their deaths, would you still support him? Many would probably say no. However, more troublesome, I suppose, is that many would still say yes, so long as there is a D next to his name, he can do whatever he wants.
He could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and he wouldn't lose a voter.
Now, it's not that extreme, Trump said, that I don't think that's true, by the way, if Trump shot someone on Fifth Avenue, he would lose most of his voters because Trump supporters aren't lunatics, though there are many Trump supporters for sure.
Cuomo has in the Democratic Party, I just I just can't believe we're at this point now where we've learned all of this about what Cuomo and his and his administration had done to these people, these nursing homes, to people's mothers, fathers, grandmothers, grandfathers, people's uncles and aunts.
Cuomo killed them.
There was an objection I this argument with and if you watch the Tim Carceral podcast where Ian says he didn't kill them, he didn't kill them, it was a policy. No, no. They objected. They said, don't do this. You're going to bring the virus here. And he said, shut your mouth.
He didn't literally say that, he said so what? And then when they found out they actually did kill all these people, he said cover up the numbers because Trump might investigate us and we could get in trouble. So tell me tell me how Assemblyman Mike Lawlor is incorrect when he said it was a coordinated criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice, he's calling for Cuomo to resign.
Yeah, I think Cuomo should resign. But I'm going to call on federal prosecutors to bring us a perp walk. I want to see Cuomo not just resign in disgrace. I want to see him lead out of the building in cuffs into the back of a vehicle.
Taken to jail and tried for his crimes, but this never happens, does it, because Democrat voters still approve of what he's done. Think about the ramifications of this. Either they don't know.
And they vote for him, I'd imagine, to give the benefit, the doubt, many of them just don't know he killed these people. Many of these Democrats probably know what he did and approve of what he did, if we want to operate under the assumption that voters are these Democrat voters are not low information or ignorant, make that argument. Democrats say it's actually the Republicans are stupid. OK, well, then you're telling me that Democrat voters know full well what Cuomo did and support it.
Is that what you're saying? They said, wow, Cuomo killed all those people. That's a good thing, huh? Is that the Democrat voters mentality? Is that what they want? No, I think the Democrat voters are low information.
They don't pay attention. And that's why Democrats want to strip away any hurdle, any security measure they can.
They're now saying in H.R. one, that designated individuals can take ballots for people, whether they want ballot harvesting. They want someone to go to nursing homes and tell people, vote like this. Give me your give me your card. I'll go turn it in. You get ballot chasers. That's the Democrats want Republicans may want to suppress the vote. Sure.
But I think what we all should want is a well-informed public understanding the importance and the weight of their civic duty and saying, I will only vote if I am absolutely sure it's the right thing.
These Democrat voters who support Cuomo are helping a man who would have them killed if they weren't in a nursing home.
I'll leave it there. Next comments coming up at 1:00 p.m. on this channel. Thanks for hanging out and I will see you all then. With the passing of H.R. one, the Democrats new voter access bill, a petition has begun circulating online demanding the impeachment of Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. Now, while they may make it seem like this petition was made because of H.R. one. It's been around for some time and there's almost 850000 signatures on this petition now following the passing of H.R. one with no Republican support.
Many people are now showing this petition again, saying impeach Nancy Pelosi.
If those that aren't familiar, H.R. one would dramatically expand access to voting in ways that Republicans say are stripping away voting security and integrity. For instance, every state would be required to have mail in voting, early voting, and it would even allow people to designate someone to deliver ballots for them, meaning you will get a ton of ballot harvesting and ballot chasing. I'm not a fan of this.
Some of the things in the bill I actually think are OK.
And we can talk about this, but I don't like the idea of these harvester's going to nursing homes and going to places where people aren't vested in voting at all and then invested in voting at all.
And then they go to these people and say, yeah, we'll vote anyway, and they give them gifts and stuff like that. We have seen that. I do believe there should be some speed bumps to voting simply to say, are you sure you want to vote?
Are you sure you want to vote for this person? The issue is not whether or not someone has the right to vote. I think everybody does. The issue is whether or not people will be exploited by manipulative, deceptive politicians and ballot harvesters who may be doing illegal things. And this will make it easier for them. We've already seen one woman in Texas because of Project Veritas get arrested. Well, let's read the story and then we'll go through what the actual H.R. one says.
Nancy's treason calls to impeach Pelosi after her election voting rights bill passes without a single GOP vote. They say a petition calling for the impeachment of House speaker.
The House speaker, as well as Chuck Schumer, has garnered more than 840000 signatures online. They say the petition began circulating online after Pelosi and the House of Representatives pushed through an election reform bill in a slim 220 to 210 vote.
The bill called Called for the People Act, aims to restore faith in the American election system after former President Donald Trump repeatedly claimed the election was stolen from him.
The bill, which now has to go to the Senate, would require all states to offer mail in ballots, a minimum of 15 days of early voting and calls for online and same day voter registration.
We'll go through a better one, a better article breaking out that says, But let me show you this petition to impeach Pelosi and Schumer.
Eight hundred and forty four thousand two hundred thirty five people have signed as of the filming of the segment, it says, We, the people ask that impeachment proceedings begin against Pelosi and Schumer for treason against the American people.
Article one, Section five of the US Constitution provides that each house may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member.
I do not believe this is a good idea. I don't think they should be impeached.
But I also admit with a very serious problem, we're going to talk about voting rights and H.R. one. A lot of people are really scared about what it means. It may mean Republicans never win again, but you need to understand the context. A lot of people on the left are going to say very simply that you're trying to suppress the vote.
This simply wants to they want to make it easier for everyone to have the ability to vote.
It's so simple, isn't it? You want people like Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell to be in power forever.
Voting is a civic duty, requires responsibility, requires a certain degree of practice. It's interesting that many people will seek to vote for no reason other than tribal satisfaction. That is dangerous for our democracy.
I know we live in a constitutional republic. I'm being somewhat facetious.
Nancy Pelosi has been in for how long. She's not getting anything done.
The progressives don't like her. The Republicans certainly don't like her. But she would win forever because you will have people show up to a nursing home and being like Pelosi. Right. Great. And they show up and just drop off the ballots and you create while you create very dangerous hyperpolarization.
We need competition and we need those who are actually voting to be paying attention and to be invested in the process.
What they're proposing would not do that. Now, before we get into H.R. one, let me point out impeachment of Pelosi. And I think the real reason they're doing this is just, you know, they wanted to impeach Trump.
So they're saying, OK, well, then we'll impeach them.
And it's just what it really says to me, and this is important. This petition is still going around, going around. It's getting pushed heavily right now.
The issue with it is that it shows we are so hyperpolarized that this H.R. one bill is effectively saying we don't care how we when we will win and you will never argue with us. You will never hold power again. It's going to be chaos because conservatives won't accept simply being a permanent minority with no ability to influence the vote.
But I want to point something out, too. They need 60 votes in the Senate to pass this. It may be meaningless.
I do want to also point out this. This petition reached seven hundred and fifty thousand supporters six months ago, well before H.R. one was passed.
It reached half a million supporters a year ago and was created two years ago. So it's not like this is a new petition that just got a ton of attention. But again, I do think it matters because people are sharing it now in this context. And it has jumped a decent amount because of H.R. one.
Let me read for you how Vox Dotcom explains H.R. one.
House Democrats massive voting rights bill explained the bill faces a steep climb in the U.S. Senate. Why call it a voting rights bill that's framing. You could theoretically call it a a bill to remove election security. It's just framing this.
This is the first thing you need to understand when it comes to media literacy.
Vox Dotcom as a proud Democrat leftist source. So they're going to frame everything that's going to be beneficial to Democrats. Republicans perspective is that H.R. one is taking away election security and it's going to make fraud a lot easier. They do point this out, but you see how they call it a voting rights bill. I find it particularly interesting when you go to the sun and they say it's election reform bill, they say what do they mention this the petition and are going online.
The Bill for the People Act aims to restore faith in the election anyway. They essentially say it's a election reform bill. Right. That's probably a better way to phrase it because you're not pandering to the right or the left. It's a bill that will reform elections. Now, you want to ask questions about what that means. Let's get into it. Vox says House Democrats have passed H.R. one, their signature anti-corruption and voting rights reform bill for the second time in two years.
But even though their party now holds the majority in the Senate, the bill has a tough road ahead of it. They say it's an anti-corruption and voting rights bill. I can't stand the media.
I absolutely detest the media.
There's nothing that makes me I actually I was going to say there's nothing that makes me angry. But there is video games like playing a video games, golf, frustrated, like I, you know, anti-corruption.
You can call it pro corruption. Is this an opinion piece?
Is Vox writing opinion? What is news? Guards say news guard says they don't handle the devastating news and opinion very well. Well, that's fair to say. They say, as the numeral suggests, H.R. one and its Senate component, as one also known as the for the People Act, are Democrats first legislative priority.
The sweeping democracy reform bill has been top of the list since House Democrats first took back the majority in twenty eighteen midterms and immediately set out to expand voting rights and curb the influence of money in politics. There's a lot of ground covered and it's nearly 800 pages. But some of its key points are creating a national system for automatic voter registration, putting in transparency requirements for political advertising, and instituting nonpartisan redistricting commissions to end partizan gerrymandering. Polling back in twenty nineteen and now shows the bill is broadly popular with the public.
But it went nowhere in the Republican led Senate in twenty nineteen, even with the current slim Democratic control.
A 50 50 Senate with Kamala Harris breaking the tie, it will be incredibly difficult to pass with the required 60 votes to skirt the Senate filibuster. The politics are even tighter this time around. Some moderate House Democrats who voted for the bill before pushed more aggressively for changes in the current bill. The bill's future in the Senate is also untested, as then Majority Leader McConnell never allowed it to come to the floor in twenty nineteen. If Mitch McConnell is not willing to provide ten Republicans to support this landmark reform, I think Democrats are going to step back and reevaluate the situation, said Rep.
. John Sarbanes of Maryland, the author of H.R. One, told Vox in a recent interview. There's all manner of ways you could redesign the filibuster so the bill would have a path forward. The filibuster basically states you need 60 votes, and I think that's incredibly important.
We do not want simple majority laws being passed because it will result in chaos. There has to be some minority representation with a 60 vote filibuster.
That basically means that you have to convince some Republicans, which means you have to make some concessions. It's better this way. If they just won on a simple, simple majority, the Democrats would steamroll through absolutely everything. Republicans would freak out and it would be chaos. They say one path that's being discussed is partially amending Senate filibuster rules to allow democracy reform legislation.
You see what they do on these duplicitous democracy reform legislation like H.R. one, to advance on a simple majority vote and therefore potentially be able to pass on a party line vote that would. Be different from fully blowing up the filibuster, but it still could get pushback from Senate institutionalists even in the Democratic Party, like Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a staunch advocate for keeping the filibuster in place. Senator Amy Klobuchar, the chair of the Senate Rules Committee, which will mark up the bill and move it forward, said she wants to bring the bill to the floor and see what the support for it is before she moves on to potential filibuster reform will go to the floor.
That's when we see where we are, Klobuchar told Vox in an interview, saying her committee will look to see is there filibuster reform that could be done generally or specifically? Democrats are arguing that voting and democracy reforms are popular and long overdue. Let me explain something to you.
When Vox Dotcom, which is funded to the tune of I believe they were bought up with like one hundred one hundred two hundred million dollars or whatever from NBC, when they come out with these stories and they say things like anti-corruption bill, voting rights bill, regular people are manipulated by that. That's not what this is. It's not an anti-corruption bill. The fair assessment is that they're trying to make voting more accessible to more people.
What that could result in is exploitation, fraud and corruption. If someone can just go and collect votes from people, how do you know the votes are actually from those people?
It's would require a staunch security process. They're actually getting rid of these hurdles. They're making it easier. And their argument is it should be easier. And conservatives say no, it should be harder.
And the truth is voting should require some civic responsibility and duty.
It is absolutely insane that you need an I.D. for the movies, for beer, for cigarets, for almost everything to go to the DMV. You even actually have to have ID to get an ID. To get your ID, you need ID in that crazy well, you be like birth certificate, Social Security card, a piece of mail and then they'll give you a ride.
You can't just walk in and be like, I am who I am. They'll tell you to get out. Yet you can walk into a voting booth of a polling station and be like, I am who I am. I'll say welcome aboard. Please change the rules of government. That's insane. And that's what they're doing. They say H.R. one, among other initiatives, would cement many of those temporary expansions, the ones we've seen so far. Well, actually, let me go back a little bit.
They say Democrats are hoping the 2012 election gives them an argument for this bill. Due to covid-19, Americans in many states were given more options and flexibility to vote through the mail or with in-person early voting. The results were a record one hundred and fifty eight point four million ballots cast.
Twenty twenty presidential election turnout was about seven percentage points higher than in twenty sixteen. They say H.R. one would cement many of those temporary expansions. And recent polling from the progressive firm Date for Progress showed the bill more broadly is popular across parties and supported by a majority of Democratic, independent and Republican voters. I'll also point out that Cuomo has favored two to one by Democrats and he literally killed 15000 people.
I'm not exaggerating. So, yeah, forgive me if I don't think progressive polling is all that great. Republican legislatures in multiple states, however, are moving in the opposite direction. The Brennan Center, at least 33 states have already introduced, profiled or carried over 165 restrictive bills to tighten voting requirements, including Georgia, the state that gave Democrats now control the Senate. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently hearing arguments in an Arizona case that could further weaken the Voting Rights Act, limiting protections for minority voters around the country.
What they're trying to do is make it seem like Republicans are evil and trying to cheat. And you could theoretically argue the same thing for both sides.
The Democrats are trying to pass legislation that will make it easier for them to win. Republicans are trying to pass legislation that will make it easier for them to win. The Republican argument is that, well, we are securing the voting process to avoid corruption and fraud. And the Democrats are saying we are trying to make sure everyone has a chance to vote.
And one of the things H.R. one does is it makes Election Day a national holiday. I think it should be it allows early voting. I actually agree with early voting, but I do think that there should be security with it, like voter ID should be mandatory for all voting. I don't care if you if you want to have early voting. I think the problem is there are people who work in this country who don't have time to take off, to go vote.
So making voting Election Day a holiday, I absolutely agree with having early voting, I think is absolutely fine so long as we tighten security around them.
You want to expand voter access? Yes, increase the security. Both sides have some points to be made. The problem I have is that Democrats are consistently saying no security.
They want to take away certain voters a signature verification rules.
Why that I don't trust. Now, the Democrats accuse Republicans of purging voter rolls and things like that to suppress the vote.
Listen, maybe yes, there's an argument there, but you do need to clean voter rolls because people move and people die.
It's it's insane to me that we are not doing more to provide election security. You want mail in voting? Fine.
But then we need a very strict security and verification process like we do with absentee ballots and the chain of custody. You must request it. You must sign for it. You must then, you know, provide identification and then mail it back in. I do not think it is fair that I must forego the integrity of my elections because you want to pass this bill through.
If you come to me and say national holiday, early voting mail in voting, I say, that sounds fantastic.
You want to help people vote. That sounds great. Now, voter ID. Yes, absolutely. And chain of custody. Yes. And some people have said make poll workers wear body cameras. And I'm also kind of like. Yeah, why not? Why shouldn't we have cameras in every polling place we know through public data if you voted, we don't need to see who you voted for.
But think about it this way. You want to end all of these arguments about fraud, Democrats? It's simple. All you do is put cameras in every polling place. That's it. Live stream it. Why don't you. And then when someone goes in to vote, you will see that person's smile and wave and they'll sign paperwork.
We know who came in to vote. We don't know who they voted for to secret ballot.
But then there will be no argument fraud. They'll be like, look at this guy. He didn't really. Oh, that's actually the guy. Well, what about his address? Oh, it was a typo, you see.
Why shouldn't Democrats want that? I'm in favor of early voting mail in voting. What about security measures? Why is there no compromise? I don't know. Maybe because they really do want to cheat, they say. Klobuchar told Vox that in past years, when parties lost national elections, they assess where they went wrong. Republicans yet are doubling down on restricting voting access. It's all just lies. These guys, instead of doing that, are saying, let's just make it so less people vote, that's how we do this.
I can't stand these people, man, I just can't so what's in the bill? They say it creates a new national automatic voter registration that asks voters to opt out rather than opt in. Ensuring more people will be signed up to vote requires chief state election officials to automatically register eligible, unregistered, unregistered citizens. I'm in favor of this.
However, I believe following the automatic registration registration process, there should be a voter roll audit to make sure at a certain point that we didn't accidentally register.
People who should not have been registered requires each state to put on, put online options for voter registration, correction cancelation or designating party affiliation. I am also in favor of this. But again, we need very strict security and some kind of verification process, which would mean you should request it, receive a card in the mail, a code.
You then provide that code for online registration. You're good to go require at least 15 consecutive days of early voting for federal elections. Early voting sites would be open for at least 10 hours per day. The bill also prohibits states from restricting a person's ability to vote by mail and require states to prepay postage and return envelopes for mail in voting. I'm in favor of this as well. A lot of Republicans have said that we should have one day to vote.
The Constitution actually specifies there's one day to vote. But I think we have people with different jobs, different shifts, and providing an extended period of time for people to vote is great.
So long as there is voter ID and security, it's really just that simple. Establish independent redistricting commissions in states as a way to draw new congressional districts and end partizan gerrymandering and federal elections that I disagree with. You may have seen those those images where they explain how gerrymandering works and how it's a trick and manipulation.
Know what they'll do is they'll show you there's five rows of five little little cubes, little little squares, and three of each of the rows is blue and two of each of the roses red.
They'll say if each of these is a district and each district is, you know, three fifths Democrat and two fifths Republican, the Democrats would have the majority and the whole voting bloc would be a Democrat voting bloc. Gerrymandering allows drawing a district around only the red area so that they get access and you can actually use gerrymandering to gerrymandering to give the Republicans a majority in the district in these districts. You probably understand this, but let me explain why gerrymandering actually is important.
If we went by this simple districting and I understand we still have problems with how districts are drawn, don't get me wrong, what ends up happening is what if you have 40 percent of the population is Republican, but they never get a chance to have their voice heard. It is only ever majority rule.
You end up with civil unrest for extended period of time and instability. There must be periods by which the minority position is allowed a chance to legislate. That's why I think gerrymandering isn't as bad as they claim it is not.
That is perfect, they say, prohibits voter roll purging and bans the use of unfordable mail being used a way to remove voters from rolls. We need to purge voter rolls. I mean, that's ridiculous. Sometimes people move restores voting rights to people convicted of felonies who have completed their sentences.
However, the bill doesn't restore rights to felons currently serving sentences in a correctional facility. I completely agree with this. One hundred percent felons. I don't care if they committed a crime. They pay their debt to society, give them their gun and their voting rights. Second Amendment doesn't say you can't have a gun if you if you committed a crime, it says you can't have a gun.
So felons, when they get out, they've paid their debt to society. They've made mistakes, given their guns back and give them their voting rights back.
Campaign finance establishes public financing for campaigns powered by small donations. It has long been Sarbanes vision. The federal government would provide a voluntary six to one match for candidates for president and Congress, which means for every dollar a candidate raises from small donations, the federal government would match it six times over. The maximum small donation that could be matched would be capped at two hundred dollars. This program isn't funded by taxpayer dollars. Instead, the money would come from adding a four point seventy five percent fee on criminal and civil fines, fees, penalties and settlements with banks and corporations that commit corporate malfeasance like Wells Fargo.
I'm actually in favor of that, too.
I'll stress this point, my friends. I am not completely opposed to this bill. I say there's a lot of things in it that I like.
The issue is. Border security is that simple, right? Here's what I think needs to happen. They should get some of these things, but they should they will need to compromise with Republicans and Republicans should counter with OK, but require mandatory ID for everybody and auditing the voting roll the voter registration rolls periodically and get rid of you gotta get rid of the purging thing.
We do need the ability to have some kind of gerrymandering. We do. It's a weird thing to say. Right. But I think I made my point they say supports a constitutional amendment to end Citizens United. I actually agree with that. I do not like Citizens United. And I know a lot of conservatives are saying money is speech.
You have money, you can buy what you want. We regulate things you can buy. You can't buy certain things. I don't think you should be able to buy political influence at a certain degree. I don't like the idea that George Soros and Mackenzie Bezos can dump billions of dollars into critical race theory to help Democrats win, or that Michael Bloomberg or that Tom Steyer can flood the Democratic Party with all of this money to crush Republicans.
I don't like that. I can call it the Koch brothers, the Mercers and all of them as well. But this one's for the conservatives.
You want to understand why I don't like the ability to spend endless amounts of cash on political campaigns because Mackenzie Bezos divorces Jeff, it's a massive amount of stock value, sells a bunch and then gives two billion dollars to critical race theory. I do not like this. Now I get it. Listen, she'd still be allowed to do it.
Giving money to nonprofits who promote critical race theory and critical theory in general, she's allowed to do when it comes to funding super PACs. However, look at what Bloomberg was doing. Look at what George Soros does, OK? And again, criticism towards any other billionaire. I get it. It's too much power for one person over our politics. I'm not a fan. Passes the DISCLOSE Act pushed by Rep. David Cicilline and Sheldon Whitehouse, both Democrats from Rhode Island that would require super PACs and dark money political organizations to make their donors public.
I agree. Why? Because some of these progressive squad members have been accused of using dark money as well. Light it up.
I want to know what these people are doing. I don't care if you're Republican or Democrat. Passes the Honest Ads Act championed by Senator Klobuchar and Mark Warner would require Facebook and Twitter to disclose the source of money for political ads on their platform and share how much money was spent. I agree, discloses any political spending by government contractors and slows the flow of foreign money into the elections by targeting shell companies. Also, good restructures the Federal Election Commission to have five commissioners instead of six in order to break political gridlock at the organization.
Also good prohibits any coordination between candidates and super PACs.
Absolutely good ethics would require the president and vice president disclose ten years of his or her tax returns. Completely disagree, said people running for office are private citizens.
They do not need to disclose their private tax returns. I disagree with this because some of these people may simply have things on their on their tax returns about medical bills.
And it's none of your business. Stops members of Congress from using taxpayer money to settle harassment or discrimination cases, yes, please gives the Office of Government Ethics the power to do more oversight enforcement and implement stricter lobbying registration requirements. These include more oversight. I like it. I like it. Creates a new ethics code for the U.S. Supreme Court, ensuring all branches of government are impacted by the new law. I want to stress one very important point. These are bullet points put out by Vox, and I was very critical of their framing in the first place.
So I'd have to actually go through the whole bill to see what's really happening because, well, my friends, it's fairly obvious.
A lot of this is just propaganda.
They tell you it's an anti-corruption bill. I wonder what they leave out. And if the key issue here is framing. They say it supports a constitutional amendment to end Citizens United, but does it actually include other things around it?
Are they oversimplifying? Does it theoretically grant Democrats more power in certain positions? Does it allow government bureaucrats to actually fill certain roles like they show here, the government funding certain political campaigns? I'll put I'll put it this way.
I'm glad the filibuster exists. I don't know whether or not this is the apocalypse, I do think it will be a huge hurdle for Republicans. And a lot of ways I think Republicans have an opportunity to make a lot of really good make a lot of really good things happen in the House. The Democrats had no reason to negotiate with Republicans, creating a bill that is probably just on its face a failure. There are there are many things in this I think are wrong and should not be passed.
However, when it comes to the Senate, there's an opportunity for compromise and perhaps the Republicans could come in and present some real arguments that want some similar ones to that that I've made here. And we could actually bring about some real positive change. I think we need some reform. I do not like billionaires dumping their money into our elections.
Sorry, I just don't I don't care if you're if you're a conservative and you support Mitch McConnell and all that. I think regular Americans, working class Americans, be a Trump supporters or Democrats are sick and tired of billionaires, big bank bailouts, revolving door politics with these big corporations. And I see some things in this bill that may actually be good.
But, you know, that means it means it's time to start negotiating with Republicans and making sure that this is not the apocalyptic bill people fear it is.
And there's got to be a bunch of stuff stripped out of this and there's got to be security added to it.
We'll see how things go next. Segment's coming up at 4:00 p.m. over at YouTube. Dotcom slash Tim Kest, thanks for hanging out.
And I will see you all then.