Get woke – Go broke, strikes again. When you consider the scale of the company and the resources available to them on branding and marketing…. one can only come to the reasonable conclusion that Goodyear is run by idiots.
On the positive side, the boycott response -which I fully support, not because of the originating stupid, but rather because I do not want tires from amplified corporate stupid on my vehicles- just shows the scale of economic backlash from average Americans.
There are more of us than them; they just control the mechanisms that allow us to communicate with each other – nothing more. Remember that !
Violence and calls for “revolution” have engulfed Portland, Oregon and other major U.S. cities. Rioters have attacked police officers with rocks, bottles, bricks, and fireworks. Authorities have responded with tear gas, rubber bullets, pepper balls, and arrests. How did we get here? And what is really at stake? In this episode, we sit down with Colorado Congressman Ken Buck to discuss his new book “Capitol of Freedom: Restoring American Greatness,” which takes readers on a journey through the halls of the U.S. Capitol to understand the principles that make America exceptional and that are now under siege. We also explore foreign threats to America, and Congressman Buck’s push to ban government employees from using the Chinese-owned TikTok app on their phones. This is American Thought Leaders 🇺🇸, and I’m Jan Jekielek. Note: This interview was filmed on July 27, 2020.
Credit the Turkish poet Rumi (1207-1273) as the origin for an expression in one of his poems: “Fish begin to stink at the head, not the tail.”
The pinnacle of American jurisprudence is the United States Department of Justice. The Supreme Court of the United States adjudicates when, where and how justice should, and has been, exercised.
The Department of Justice in America is dying from the head. Essentially, it may already be dead. It appears so on the streets of Portland and Seattle, and in the political halls of Washington, D.C. and the Big Blue State governments.
Today, a handful of noteworthy voices is delivering this message in necessarily even-tempered tones. Here are three.
The President
Here is a summary of a FOX Business News reporter’s recent interview with President Trump, whose comments concerned both US Attorney Durham and Attorney General Barr. Maria Bartiromo asked about the Durham probe which Barr claimed could [the operative word] yield some results by next month. Quoting from her interview with the President, Trump said:
“‘I hope he’s doing a great job, and I hope they’re not going to be politically correct,’ Trump said. ‘Obama knew everything. Vice President Biden, as dumb as he may be, knew everything, and everybody else knew. And [former FBI Director James] Comey, and [former CIA Director John] Brennan, and [former Director of National Intelligence James] Clapper, they were all terrible, they lied to Congress,’ the president added.
‘They spied on my campaign, which is treason,’ he continued. ‘They spied, both before and after I won, using the intelligence apparatus of the United States to take down a president, a legally elected president, a duly elected president of the United States. It is the single biggest political crime in the history of our country.’”
Continuing, Trump added that he “hopes Durham is ‘doing a job,” and that his team “is not going to be politically correct and just get a couple of the lower guys. Bill Barr can go down as the greatest attorney general in the history of our country, or he can go down as an average guy. We’ll see what happens.”
Sidney Powell, General Flynn’s Lead Defense Attorney
In an interview posted on YouTube, Sidney Powell, who took over the defense of General Flynn after his deep state lawyers bled him dry of funds with bad results, said this, beginning at 53:05:
“It’s absolutely imperative that the Department of Justice return to the time when it would self-correct. It’s huge. When I was an assistant U.S. attorney, I was raised to tell the judge the truth, whatever it was. The good, the bad, the ugly. Somewhere in the last twenty years we came to this time when these people think the end justifies the means. They’re using the law as a weapon to destroy people, innocent people, to destroy peoples’ lives and that’s not what the system is about. So, the Department of Justice has got to start standing up for the right thing. The only politics in this prosecution [of Flynn] was from the very beginning. On the side of prosecuting General Flynn at all… It[righting the ship that’s the Department of Justice] has to be done if we’re to survive as a constitutional republic built on the rule of law.”
Sidney Powell: Inside the Michael Flynn Case and DOJ Reform
Tom Fitton, President of Judicial Watch
Beginning with the Russiagate Hoax, through the Kavanaugh Hearing, into the Impeachment ordeal, and continuing today, Judicial Watch (JD) has been led by Tom Fitton in its intrepid search for the truth. Throughout that process, JD has been blocked, to the point of being stonewalled, by the Department of Justice (DoJ), its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Department of State (DoS).
On August 14, Fitton was interviewed by the host of FOX’s Lou Dobbs Tonight show after a three-judge panel of the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled against JD and overturned a lower court order requiring Hillary Clinton to sit for a deposition concerning her use of a personal server while at the Department of State, and events surrounding Benghazi. Two of the judges were appointed by Obama, the third by Bush, Jr.
Into the interview (2:58), Fitton explains how resistance to JW continues to come both from the DoJ, FBI and the DoS:
Tom Fitton reacts to appeals court overturning Hillary Clinton deposition order
“It’s still happening. The attorneys at the State Department are colluding with the Clinton attorneys. They’re fighting us together. It’s incredible, and it’s a betrayal of everyone who expected law and order from this new Justice Department. [Dobbs asks] ‘What is William Barr doing?’ [Fitton silently holds up both arms, then says…] Nothin’.”
Late last week the DoJ announced that FBI Attorney Kevin Clinesmith – hardly a household name in the Russiagate Hoax – pled guilty to illegally altering a FISA document. While it may evolve into an important development, he could become merely one of a very few low-level persons held accountable for a multi-year lie.
Tom Fitton reacts to appeals court overturning Hillary Clinton deposition order
Sacrificial lambs.
One thing is certain. If Biden becomes the next POTUS, any and all efforts to surface the truth of a litany of corruption from the highest level of the Federal Government, through the Big Blue State Governors’ mansions, down to the Mayors and City Councils of the Big Blue Cities that aim to defund their Police Departments, will vanish.
Should that happen, many Americans will have been as Estragon and Vladimir who waited for Godot to come on a country road. Pozzo and his slave “Lucky” come by, and Lucky delivers a speech about God and hell.
Then comes a goatherder who delivers the message that Godot has promised to come soon. Later, the goatherder comes again to say that Godot will come the next day. Then, on a different day, the goatherder brings a message of Godot’s imminent arrival. After multiple false starts, Estragon and Vladimir decide they’ll hang themselves if Godot doesn’t come.
There the play, “Waiting for Godot,” ends.
If the Justice Fish dies, so will the Constitutional Republic of America – until the Second American Revolution brings freedom again.
President Donald Trump is quietly turning a stinging defeat at the Supreme Court over an illegal amnesty for hundreds of thousands of young illegal aliens into what could end up being a victory for the Constitution and the rule of law.
The Supreme Court, of course, has no authority to tell the president of the United States that he cannot rescind an illegal executive amnesty ordered by his predecessor in the same manner it was instituted.
Normally, presidents of both parties rush to raise their arms in surrender whenever the black-robed life-tenured politicians on the high court demand it.
The president appears to be taking a stand against rampant judicial supremacism by drawing inspiration from President Andrew Jackson
Not Trump.
The president appears to be taking a stand against rampant judicial supremacism by drawing inspiration from President Andrew Jackson, whose portrait proudly hangs in the Oval Office.
After the chief justice of the day overreached in Jackson’s opinion, the 7th president allegedly uttered the following immortal words: “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it.”
Now the Trump administration is taking heat over its failure to immediately resume processing of illegal aliens under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program after the Supreme Court, headed by the ever-weaselly John Roberts, found in a particularly bizarre ruling June 18 that it failed to properly rescind the Obama-era program that was created with the mere stroke of a pen.
Maryland-based U.S. District Judge Paul Grimm, an Obama appointee, criticized the Trump administration July 24 for not yet complying with the high court’s order, including not yet updating informational pages on government websites.
“That is a problem,” Grimm said. “As for the inaccuracy on the website, that has to change and that should be able to change very quickly. … It creates a feeling and a belief that the agency is disregarding binding decisions by appellate and the Supreme Court.”
U.S. Department of Justice lawyer Stephen Pezzi told Grimm that new DACA applications were being “held” and “placed into a bucket” while DHS officials figured out what to do with the program.
“It is a distinction without a difference to say that this application has not been denied, it has been received and it has been put in a bucket,” the judge said.
“The courts are defying the law, the Constitution, and 130 years of their own settled case law that illegal aliens have no standing to sue for a right to remain”
The Trump administration is sending out mixed messages and “that puts applicants in doubt,” whined John Freedman, attorney for the DACA recipients.
“It puts immigration lawyers in doubt. Nobody knows what’s going on,” Freedman said. “It reinforces impressions that … the administration, the defendants are not complying with the rule of law.”
But Freedman has it backwards.
The federal judiciary, not President Trump, is violating the law, commentator Daniel Horowitz argues.
“The courts are defying the law, the Constitution, and 130 years of their own settled case law that illegal aliens have no standing to sue for a right to remain in the country against the will of the political branches of government. It is they who are defying the law. Moreover, as Hamilton noted in Federalist #78, the courts ‘must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm for the efficacy of its judgments.’ Thus, Trump declining to actively use his powers to violate immigration laws duly passed by Congress is not defying the courts; it’s following the law being defied by the judiciary.”
“You see,” Horowitz writes, “this case is different from almost every case that comes before the courts.”
“Typically, the courts will invent a contrived right and demand that the other branches take an action they need not take. In this case, the court is jumping two steps by demanding Trump not only refrain from deporting illegal aliens, but affirmatively use the tools of government to grant resident documents to people whom our law explicitly prohibits from having them. [italics original]
“If separation of powers means anything at all and we are to preserve a country of checks and balances, Trump must not issue these visas.”
Not processing DACA applications has the effect of upholding the rule of law
Horowitz has it exactly right: not processing DACA applications has the effect of upholding the rule of law, as opposed to upholding the perverse version of the rule of law proffered by Chief Justice John Roberts and the other four liberals on the Supreme Court.
Trump’s patriotic stalling buys him time to decide what to do about the much-mythologized 700,000 to 800,000 individuals eligible under the DACA program.
These people are a subset of about 4 million “DREAMers,” many of whom failed to apply for relief under DACA, but who could qualify under a further amnesty were one to be granted. Law-abiding Americans, including Trump’s political base, are adamantly opposed to the lawless program and amnesties in general.
The current dispute between the open-borders left and Trump grows out of the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling earlier this summer in Department of Homeland Security (DHS) v. Regents of the University of California that the administration did not follow every jot and tittle of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), when it rescinded the program that temporarily prevented young people who came to the United States illegally from being deported.
The APA requires the government to fully explain the reasons for certain decisions, though few before the infamous ruling believed it applied to Barack Obama’s kingly fiats.
“The dispute before the Court is not whether DHS may rescind DACA. All parties agree that it may. The dispute is instead primarily about the procedure the agency followed in doing so,” wrote Chief Justice Roberts, who has been deservedly ridiculed by conservatives for this and a series of grotesquely absurd recent rulings.
“The appropriate recourse is therefore to remand to DHS, so that it may consider the problem anew.”
Like so many Supreme Court decisions nowadays, the court opinion is a pseudo-legal essay brimming with lawyerly codswallop
Like so many Supreme Court decisions nowadays, the court opinion is a pseudo-legal essay brimming with lawyerly codswallop, an after-the-fact rationalization written to justify a preordained result. The goal was not to do justice but to frustrate Donald Trump.
The court, under pressure from the illegal-alien left, invented an elaborate excuse to keep the program in place, reasoning in effect that because the decision to rescind DACA affects many people and would disrupt the lives that these illegal aliens have unlawfully been living in the U.S., the cancelation of the program needed to be stopped.
Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh wisely dissented from the main finding in the majority opinion.
“Today’s decision must be recognized for what it is: an effort to avoid a politically controversial but legally correct decision,” Thomas wrote.
Thomas accused the members of the court’s majority of creating their own extra-legal solution to the DACA problem out of whole cloth.
“The Court could have made clear that the solution respondents seek must come from the Legislative Branch. Instead, the majority has decided to prolong DHS’ initial overreach by providing a stopgap measure of its own. In doing so, it has given the green light for future political battles to be fought in this Court rather than where they rightfully belong—the political branches. Such timidity forsakes the Court’s duty to apply the law according to neutral principles, and the ripple effects of the majority’s error will be felt throughout our system of self-government.”
If President Trump continues to work to counteract those ripple effects, America will be better off.
This is theatrically absurd now. Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsay Graham appears with Sean Hannity to say he’s going to ask Chris Wray who was the FBI official who falsely briefed the Senate Intelligence Committee on February 14, 2018.
First, it was Scott Schools (Main Justice) and Andrew McCabe from FBI. According to their own records that’s who did the briefing – what the hell is Graham trying to figure out?
Second, presume there were no records…. why the heck doesn’t Graham just walk down the hall and ask his senate friends who it was? This is not a complex puzzle to solve. And Sean Hannity is just clapping and nodding along… Ridiculous kabuki. This is what we are up against. Nuts.
.Seriously, this is Pravda-esque controlled media at this point.
Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson has issued a subpoena for records from FBI Director Christopher Wray. [pdf here] The subpoena is a demand for documents, not testimony. Specifically, Johnson is asking for “all documents related to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.”
Unfortunately, given what CTH knows of this specific committee, this approach seems a little like loading the horse into the starting gate after the race is over. They are all good people, but it’s the system that keeps everything compartmentalized by design.
President Trump calls out a GOP member of the never-Trump community for opposing the administration efforts to assist middle-class workers and families.
“The pen-and-phone theory of executive lawmaking is unconstitutional slop,” Nebraska Senator Sasse said Saturday night. “President Obama did not have the power to unilaterally rewrite immigration law with DACA, and President Trump does not have the power to unilaterally rewrite the payroll tax law. Under the Constitution, that power belongs to the American people acting through their members of Congress.” [LINK]
If this unpatriotic conduct continues, millions of Americans will not support such “great disrespect for our Country and our Flag” and these “woke” leagues will get their just deserts
It might be time for patriotic Americans to discover a new favorite sport, professional hockey. Unlike other professional athletes, hockey players have refused to show disrespect toward the National Anthem. At exhibition games this week, all players with the New York Rangers, New York Islanders, Pittsburgh Penguins and Philadelphia Flyers stood for the National Anthem.
Likewise, for Thursday night’s start of the season, all the players with the Dallas Stars and the Nashville Predators stood for the National Anthem. After the game, a few of the Dallas players displayed their clothing featuring the slogan, #WeSkateforEquality.
The NHL is allowing players to support whatever cause they want for the upcoming season
The NHL is allowing players to support whatever cause they want for the upcoming season. Such advocacy is fine, part of our 1st Amendment rights of free speech. However, it is respectful for NHL players to advocate their causes on their own time and not during the playing of the National Anthem.
Unfortunately, such a message is anathema to the National Basketball Association. This league has won the title for being the most “woke.” In their Orlando “bubble,” the NBA painted “Black Lives Matter” next to the basketball court.
At Thursday night’s opening game between the Utah Jazz and the New Orleans Pelicans, every single player, coach, and referee knelt during the National Anthem. For good measure, all the players wore a “Black Lives Matter” shirt. Some raised their fist in a “Black Power” salute. Almost all the players wore social justice messages on their jerseys.
The NBA is fully onboard with the organization Black Lives Matter, despite the well-known Marxist training of the group’s founders. The leaders of the organization have also expressed support for policies which are both anti-family and anti-Semitic. Clearly, it does not matter to the NBA.
In the first three games of the NBA’s renewed season, only one player, Jonathan Isaac of the Orlando Magic, refused to kneel during the playing of the National Anthem. In addition, he did not wear a “Black Lives Matter” shirt. According to Isaac, “I felt like I wanted to take a stand. I feel like we all make mistakes but I think that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is grace for us and that Jesus came and died for our sins…and that when we understand this, we can get past skin color.”
The NBA considers itself to be an international league and is not concerned if it affiliates with the country posing the greatest threat to the national security and health of the United States
Isaac should be commended for his courageous stand. Unfortunately, he plays basketball for a league that is complicit with human rights abuses occurring in communist China. Why would the NBA care about the radical ideology of Black Lives Matter when it refuses to condemn the brutal communist regime in China?
A new ESPN report asserts that players as young as 13 are being physically abused and denied adequate education by coaches at NBA training academies in China. The anonymous coaches who were interviewed for the report claim that the NBA told them to cover-up the abusive behavior.
This communist dictatorship is very influential within the NBA, which profits handsomely from the relationship. Thus, no criticism of communist China is allowed. In October, when Houston Rockets General Manager Daryl Morey tweeted a message of support to the young people fighting oppression in Hong Kong, the NBA forced him to apologize.
The leading star of the NBA, LeBron James, stated that Morey was “misinformed or not really educated on the situation.” Of course, Morey knows much more about “the situation” than James, who has never issued one negative comment toward China, a country that represses ethnic and religious minorities and is engaged in outright hostile and belligerent behavior toward the United States.
The NBA considers itself to be an international league and is not concerned if it affiliates with the country posing the greatest threat to the national security and health of the United States. It is well known that communist China lied about the origins and spread of Covid-19, which has become a worldwide pandemic.
While other professional sports leagues do not share the NBA’s disgusting position toward communist China, they do share a commitment to showcasing their social justice credentials
While other professional sports leagues do not share the NBA’s disgusting position toward communist China, they do share a commitment to showcasing their social justice credentials. In the opening games of the new Major League Baseball season, players knelt before and during the playing of the National Anthem. In addition, when the NFL starts their season in September, fans can expect almost all the players to kneel during the National Anthem as well.
This type of behavior certainly upsets traditional Americans. In a recent CBS News poll, a majority of Americans over the age of 65 opposed kneeling during the National Anthem. Nonetheless, in other age groups, there was more approval of the controversial gesture. Overall, 58% of Americans supported the right of athletes to kneel during the National Anthem.
This behavior is not acceptable to President Trump. Last week, he tweeted, “Looking forward to live sports, but any time I witness a player kneeling during the National Anthem, a sign of great disrespect for our Country and our Flag, the game is over for me!” This view was also expressed by Mike Ditka, former NFL broadcaster, coach, and Hall of Fame player with the Chicago Bears. He said that players who kneel during the National Anthem should “get the hell out of the country.”
Trump and Ditka might not speak for a majority of Americans, but if the 42% who are disgusted by kneeling decide to no longer watch the NFL and other professional sports with such protests, it will negatively impact ratings, which will ultimately devastate the financial bottom line for the leagues. If this unpatriotic conduct continues, millions of Americans will not support such “great disrespect for our Country and our Flag” and these “woke” leagues will get their just deserts.
Chopper pressers are the best pressers. On his way to Texas, President Trump stopped for a brief press conference with the media prior to departure. [Video and Transcript]
[Transcript] THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. We have a lot of things going on. As you know, we’re heading out to Texas right now.
But Portland — I’ll give you a little report on Portland: We have the courthouse very well secured. Our people have done a fantastic job. You hear all sorts of reports about us leaving. We’re not leaving until they’ve secured their city. We told the governor, we told the mayor: “Secure your city.” If they don’t secure their city soon, we have no choice — we’re going to have to go in and clean it out. We’ll do it very easily. We’re all prepared to do it.
So, in Portland, they either clean out their city and do the job and get rid of the anarchists and agitators, which is what they are. They’re not protesters; they’re anarchists and agitators. We have many in jail. Many of them have been put in jail. It’s going to be a long sentence. They either clean out their city and do it right, or we’re going to have to do it for them.
On CARES, I think — maybe, Steve, would you like to say something on that?
SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Well, as of now, we’re very far apart. And because of that, the President and we have discussed a short-term extension to UI and the evictions so that we have some period to negotiate before this runs out. And the President is very (inaudible).
THE PRESIDENT: We want to work on the evictions so that people don’t get evicted. We’ll work on the payments for the people. And the rest of it, we’re so far apart, we don’t care. We really don’t care. We want to take care of the people. The Democrats aren’t taking care of the people. The payments aren’t enough. The payments aren’t enough. You understand that. They’re not making the payments; they’re not making them high enough. The Democrats are not taking care of the people. Nancy Pelosi takes care of herself, but she doesn’t take care of anyone else.
If you look at what’s going on with Schumer: So when Schumer and Pelosi can get together and take care of the people, we’ll do something. In the meantime, we ought to stop evictions because that expires very soon. So we want to stop the evictions.
Q How do you rate Kamala Harris as a VP? There’s a rumor it’s going to be her.
THE PRESIDENT: I think she’d be a fine choice, Kamala Harris. She’d be a fine choice.
Q Sir, you said you want to pass a short-term bill? A short-term bill. Are you saying you want to pass a short-term bill?
THE PRESIDENT: I don’t hear a word you’re saying.
Q Mr. President, are you saying you want to pass a short-term bill?
SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Well, we’re looking at a deadline, obviously, of this Friday. The President is very focused on evictions and unemployment. And if we can’t reach an agreement by then, the President wants to look at giving us more time to negotiate this.
THE PRESIDENT: We’re focused on those two things. We want to take care of them now. The rest, we can discuss later. They want big bailout money for Democrats that ran cities terribly. Their cities are going down the tubes. If you look at Portland, if you look at what’s going in Seattle — Democrat-run cities, whether you like it or not, they’re terribly run, and they’re always over-taxed. So they’ve taxed them too much and they run them poorly. And we don’t like that.
And what the Democrats want are bailout funds, and what we want is we want to take care of people. And we should reward most of this country that’s well run. You know, most of the country is very well run. You’re watching a Portland and you’re watching Seattle. You’re watching New York, where they had a 400 percent increase in crime. Four hundred percent. My city that I love, that I left to do this job, and they had a 400 percent increase, and it’s unacceptable.
But most of the country is very well run, and Republican cities are very well run. And it’s a shame to reward badly run, radical-left Democrats, with all of this money that they’re looking for, for cities — to throw it away on cities that are poorly run.
Q Are you confident that Russia did not place bounties on U.S. troops?
THE PRESIDENT: I don’t — I told you, I certainly read about it, and since then, I’ve talked about it. Colin Powell says it’s not true. Colin Powell is not exactly somebody that I’m a big fan of. Colin Powell says it’s not true. Other people say it’s not true.
If it were true, I’d be very angry about it. But if you look at Russia, Russia became Russia from the Soviet Union because of Afghanistan. They lost a fortune and a lot of people — a lot of people.
So I don’t know why they’d be doing it. But if you tell me they’re doing it, I will certainly take that under consideration.
Q How would you respond if Russia did turn out to have done that? How would you respond? Would you do sanctions?
THE PRESIDENT: I would respond appropriately. Nobody has been tougher on Russia. Nobody has been tougher on China. Nobody has been tougher on Iran than me, and it’s not even close. And everybody knows this. Nobody has been tougher on Russia, China, or anybody else than me, including our allies — NATO, who I got to pay $140 billion more money — $140 billion. You know what that is?
Q A lot of money.
THE PRESIDENT: And you know why? That’s to hold Russia in check, all right? I did Russia no favor. Nobody has been tougher on Russia than I am.
Q Mr. President, on NATO, you just gave the order to remove U.S. troops from Germany. How does that keep Russia in check?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Germany is delinquent. They haven’t paid their fees. They haven’t paid their NATO fees. And they’re way off, and they’ve been off for years, and they have no intention of paying it. And the United States has been taken advantage of on trade and on military and on everything else for many years, and I’m here and I’ve been straightening it out.
But Germany owes billions and billions of dollars to NATO. And why would we keep all of those troops there? And now Germany is saying it’s bad for their economy. Well, it’s good for our economy. Germany is delinquent. They’re at 1 percent. They should be at 2 percent. And actually, everybody should be at 4 percent, not 2 percent, because 2 percent is too low. But they’re at 1 percent, and they’ve take advantage of us for many years.
And you think that’s bad? They take worse advantage on trade. And I was all set to fix that, and then we got hit with the China plague. But we’ll be fixing it.
And a guy like Biden — this country wouldn’t have a chance. With Biden, our country wouldn’t have a chance.
Go ahead.
Q In terms of China, they closed our consulate in Chengdu. Are you planning a response for that move by China?
THE PRESIDENT: No, we’ll see what happens. That’s all right. We’ll see what happens.
Q Are you dropping the demand for FBI money — the FBI building?
THE PRESIDENT: So the FBI building — they’ve been trying to build a new building for many years — many, many years. They were thinking about going very far away, but you have to be near the Justice Department. You don’t want to be too far away, where they have to drive for an hour, hour and a half — because they had a site way out in Virginia, way out in Maryland. And I said, “The best place is right where it is. It’s the best piece of property in Washington.” I’m very good at real estate.
So I said, “We’ll build a new FBI building.” Let’s build a new FBI building — either a renovation of the existing, or even better would be a new building. So we have that in the bill. It should stay. People have wanted a new FBI building now for 15 or 20 years.
Q But Republicans don’t want it in the bill.
THE PRESIDENT: Then Republicans should go back to school and learn. They need a new building. It’s a bad building. It’s a dangerous building. You have slabs falling off. It’s not a good building from the inside, and it’s a very expensive building. They need a new building, and we can do it very easily. To me, it would be very — super (inaudible). I would make sure you build a great building at a fraction of the cost, and they can have it done quickly. So the FBI building is not new; this is something they’ve been talking about for many, many years, for decades.
Q Mr. President, on TikTok, how close are you to making a decision about banning TikTok?
THE PRESIDENT: We’re looking at TikTok. We’re thinking about making a decision. We’re going to be watching the hearings today very closely, because there is no question that what the big tech companies are doing is very bad.
SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Let me just also add on that: CFIUS — TikTok is under CFIUS review, and we’ll be making a recommendation to the President on it this week. So we have lots of alternatives.
Q Do you regret tweeting about that doctor, Mr. President? Do you regret tweeting about that doctor yesterday?
THE PRESIDENT: Regret what?
Q Stella Immanuel, the doctor — do you wish you had not retweeted that?
THE PRESIDENT: I was very impressed with her and other doctors that stood with her. I think she made sense, but I know nothing about her. I just saw her on — you know, making a statement with very respected doctors. She was not alone. She was making a statement about hydroxychloroquine with other doctors that swear by it. They think it’s great. So she was not alone.
Fake news CNN made it like, “Oh, I said this, I said that.” She was with a whole group of people. And you ought to tell your network the reason their ratings are so bad is because the coverage is so false. If CNN would be honest — and that goes for MSDNC also. But your network is so dishonest in its coverage on just about everything, and there’s an example.
I was very impressed by her. Know nothing about her; I had never seen her before. But certainly you can put her up and let her have a voice. So what they did is they took down their voice. Now, they seem to never take down the other side. They only take down conservative voices. It’s a shame.
And with hydroxy, all I want to do is save lives. I don’t care if it’s hydroxy or anything else. All I want to do is save lives. If we can save lives, that’s great.
Now, one thing: We’re doing very well on vaccines and very well on therapeutics. So that’s very important. But I happen to be a believer in hydroxy. I used it. I had no problem. I happen to be a believer. Many, many people agree with me. A great test just came out from the Ford clinic in Michigan — very respected. We’ll see how it is.
Q Mr. President, have you decided how you’re going to give your convention acceptance speech yet?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I’m thinking about it, but we’re picking a location. Fairly soon we’ll let you know.
Q It won’t be here at the White House? It’ll be somewhere in —
THE PRESIDENT: Might be. It’s something we’re thinking about.
Q Back to Germany: Are those troops — what signal does it send to Russia? Those troops were always there to defend Europe against Russia.
THE PRESIDENT: You’re right. They’re there to protect Europe; they’re there to protect Germany. Right? And Germany is supposed to pay for it. Germany is not paying for it. So why should we leave them if they were not — we don’t want to be the suckers anymore.
The United States has been taken advantage of for 25 years, both on trade and on the military. We are protecting Germany. So we’re reducing the force because they’re not paying their bill. It’s very simple: They’re delinquent. Very simple. And there are other NATO countries also.
Right now, you have 8 out of the 28 countries that have paid up. I got them to pay $130 billion a year more, going up to $400 [billion]. Most of them will be up to date. It wasn’t easy. But most of them will be up to date. The one that won’t be up to date is Germany. And we spend a lot of money on Germany. They take advantage of us on trade, and they take advantage on the military, so we’re reducing the force. Now, if they start paying their bills, I could rethink about — I would think about it.
Yeah.
Q Did you talk to Russia about a coronavirus vaccine?
THE PRESIDENT: We talked to Putin about a lot of different things, mostly —
Q About a vaccine?
THE PRESIDENT: — arms control. We’re working on a vaccine. I think we’ll have one. Oxford is doing very well. Pfizer is doing very well. We have a lot of good options.
Q They said Russia was trying to steal information about a vaccine from researchers. Did you talk to them about that?
THE PRESIDENT: You’re going to have to talk up. I can hear everybody but you.
Q Can you come right here?
THE PRESIDENT: I can hear everybody but you.
Q Can you come right here?
Q On arms control, did you make progress? Are there going to be formal negotiations?
THE PRESIDENT: Yeah. There already are. We’re — we’re in formal negotiations with Russia on arms control — meaning, on nuclear arms control.
Q What about bringing China in?
THE PRESIDENT: We’ll talk about that later. We’re going to work this first and we’ll see. China right now is a much lesser nuclear power — you understand that — than Russia. Right now, we are the great nuclear power. We’ve upgraded our nuclear tremendously since. We have the most power. Russia is second and China is third. China is surging; they’ll be there at some point. And, yeah, we would want to talk to China eventually. Yes. Okay?
Q Why not as part of a trilateral negotiation? Does China not want to be involved?
THE PRESIDENT: We thought that we would do it first. I don’t know if it’s going to work out. But we would do it first and then we go to China together. Okay? Which, I think, works out probably better.
Q Did you talk to O’Brien? Did you talk to Robert O’Brien?
THE PRESIDENT: I did. I wished him well. I haven’t seen him in a while —
Q Why not?
THE PRESIDENT: — but he went on vacation. He came back, he wasn’t well. He tested positive. He’s doing very, very well.
Q Why haven’t you seen him lately?
THE PRESIDENT: He said he’s doing very well. I spoke to him yesterday.
Q Mr. President, are you concerned about reports that a lot of Americans wouldn’t accept a vaccine? And what could the administration do —
THE PRESIDENT: No, I’m not — I’m not concerned. Well, I’m a therapeutic person, too, you know, to be honest. I love the idea of therapeutics, where you go in, you give somebody a transfusion or a shot, and they get better. I am a big therapeutic person. But we’re doing very well on vaccines and therapeutics. Okay?
And as far as Portland is concerned, we’ve taken a very strong stand. They are anarchists. They’re radical, crazy people. And they’re either going to straighten it out for themselves — Portland, the police — and maybe if the state gets involved; that means the governor and the mayor. But they’re very weak people. They’re very weak people. These radicals, these anarchists are controlling the governor and this mayor.
The mayor went into a rally — it wasn’t accurately reported by CNN, by NBC. The mayor went into a rally. He thought he’d be their buddy. They excoriated him. They excor- — what they did to him was incredible. Lucky he had five bodyguards. But they excoriated him.
NBC — I didn’t see CNN because I don’t watch CNN. NBC absolutely covered it like he was their big buddy. No, he was in great danger of dying. He would have been dead if he didn’t have his bodyguards.
These are bad people. These are anarchists. They’re agitators. And either they do something or we’re going to do it.
In the meantime, our purpose there is only to protect our federal buildings, which we’re doing with no problem. I mean, they’re nasty and they’re vicious people, but our people are very powerful people. Very powerful.
And either they’re going to clean up Portland soon or the federal government is going up and we’re going to do it for them. So either they clean out Portland — the governor and the mayor, who are weak — either they clean out Portland or we’re going in to do it for them.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 
