Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Another statement by Hank Brennan that will likely age like milk.🥛 “It’s important to represent facts accurately.” He then states: “We hear an echoing of a claim of Brady, but we hear no substance behind that claim from the defense as to, number one: the Commonwealth is not going... to make logs up that don’t exist. They’re not going to make a record of something that is not in writing, that there is no witness for.” This guy 🤦🏻‍♀️. The gaslighting. The histrionics. The straw man arguments. The false conflations of facts. What is he even saying? “They’re not going to make a record of something that is not in writing, that there is no witness for.” Does anyone have any idea what this means or what he’s saying half the time? He speaks in flowery albeit vacuous riddles. We might need a translator. The Brady violations have nothing to do with “logs”. The Brady violations have everything to do with the exculpatory video evidence that’s been in the Commonwealth’s custody and control for 3 years—some of which they’re STILL withholding from the defense—and which they never disclosed the existence of nor produced it to the defense until AFTER the defense learned of it thanks to the federal investigation. WHERE’S ALL THE VIDEO? PRODUCE THE EVIDENCE! Hank trying to conflate the Commonwealth’s refusal to turn over exculpatory video evidence to the defense with the new & previously undisclosed fact that apparently all of the Canton PD surveillance video footage is stripped of all corresponding “logs” or metadata, is a pure attempt to mislead the court and the public. “Distractors” as some may say. #KarenReadTrial #KarenReadshow more

Olivia

21,120 subscribers

35,836 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Comedy

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

10 Comments

seany sean sean1 year ago

He is the slimmiest lawyer in New England. He comes off as a snake, a jury will not trust this man.

Rock Paper Sizzle1 year ago

💪If you're seeing this, it must mean you support Trump. 👏 Let us help you show it. ✅ Classic, Tough, Real American Gear Here:

🎼Jeremy 🇺🇸🇺🇦1 year ago

Evidence requires a chain of custody and a witness to testify to it! The CW was allowed to testify on altered evidence with no clear chain of custody, in the middle of trial AND after claiming no evidence existed! The systems where the videos are stored are considered evidence AND the system logs and metadata which indicates the digital chain of custody is ABSOLUTELY considered exculpatory evidence! 🤯

Jason Bunker1 year ago

Add more nickels to Alan Jackson's sack of nickels

RG | LarryLegend1 year ago

Hashtag Breenan has an earbud in - and Plevin is furiously repeating Microsoft Bing AI “CoPilot” responses; which in turn Breenan word vomits into the court.

Trav1 year ago

We need all communications between the CW and James Crosby. The guy is literally listed on an expert witness for hire website. At least if he doesn't testify there's a 100% money back guarantee

pinkfloydjunkie1 year ago

It's unbelievable how contradictory Hank's statements are. Olivia, do you know if this would delay their motion to dismiss?

BanHammer1 year ago

Yeah, that was a huge strawman. The defense isn't asking for anybody to invent logs. They want any that exist, or an admission that they either don't exist or have been destroyed. This is no different than asking for chain of custody logs for any other kind of evidence.

MISS💋1 year ago

Some Girl Scout cookies would go well with that milk…..

𝓢𝓮𝓪𝓼𝔀𝓮𝓹𝓽1 year ago

pffft… they have the whole damn Brady Bunch

Related Videos

BREAKING: Attorney Alan Jackson reveals that the Commonwealth has just recently (just days ago) turned over additional Canton PD Sallyport surveillance footage video clips—specifically, exculpatory video—previously withheld from the defense. This means they magically produced more Sallyport footage after the defense sent their expert, Mr. Erickson, to conduct a forensic video extraction from the CPD DVR system in December, only to find it had none of the footage preserved. If none of the footage was preserved, then where is the Commonwealth pulling all of this Brady video footage from that they’re still turning over piecemeal to the defense AFTER #KarenRead’s first trial? Given the CPD DVR system automatically overwrites its footage after 30 days, this means the Commonwealth has withheld exculpatory Brady evidence—and known about & had it in their possession since at least February 29, 2022. These seem to represent major Brady violations, and make Hank Brennan’s response to the defense’s recent motion seeking reimbursement for fees associated with flying their expert out under false pretenses for a fruitless visit to obtain said footage all the more damning. Hank Brennan is playing the role of prosecutor, meaning he has Rule 14 discovery and ethical obligations. Brennan’s argument, trying to blame the defense for evidence which the Commonwealth has either destroyed or hidden for years, will not fare well for him. #KarenReadTrial

BREAKING: Attorney Alan Jackson reveals that the Commonwealth has just recently (just days ago) turned over additional Canton PD Sallyport surveillance footage video clips—specifically, exculpatory video—previously withheld from the defense. This means they magically produced more Sallyport footage after the defense sent their expert, Mr. Erickson, to conduct a forensic video extraction from the CPD DVR system in December, only to find it had none of the footage preserved. If none of the footage was preserved, then where is the Commonwealth pulling all of this Brady video footage from that they’re still turning over piecemeal to the defense AFTER #KarenRead’s first trial? Given the CPD DVR system automatically overwrites its footage after 30 days, this means the Commonwealth has withheld exculpatory Brady evidence—and known about & had it in their possession since at least February 29, 2022. These seem to represent major Brady violations, and make Hank Brennan’s response to the defense’s recent motion seeking reimbursement for fees associated with flying their expert out under false pretenses for a fruitless visit to obtain said footage all the more damning. Hank Brennan is playing the role of prosecutor, meaning he has Rule 14 discovery and ethical obligations. Brennan’s argument, trying to blame the defense for evidence which the Commonwealth has either destroyed or hidden for years, will not fare well for him. #KarenReadTrial

Olivia

101,389 views • 1 year ago

Abby Phillip: “Why can't [Trump] see this for what it is, which is a very real thing, not a hoax, with real victims, and with a lot of people potentially involved in something, none of whom have been held accountable?” Scott Jennings: “Well, the hoax is Democrats and others who have gone on television and either implied or worse that he had something to do with it. There's not a shred of evidence that he had anything to do with it, but that's what they want people to believe. That's the narrative that they are trying to get out there.” “That's the hoax. He's never said what happened to them as a hoax. In fact, there seems to be some shards of evidence in here that Trump may have been one of the people that turned in Jeffrey Epstein, which is why Epstein, according to some of the documents, apparently hated Donald Trump. And so the hoax is not that it happened. The hoax is what people are trying to imply or worse—”

Abby Phillip: “Why can't [Trump] see this for what it is, which is a very real thing, not a hoax, with real victims, and with a lot of people potentially involved in something, none of whom have been held accountable?” Scott Jennings: “Well, the hoax is Democrats and others who have gone on television and either implied or worse that he had something to do with it. There's not a shred of evidence that he had anything to do with it, but that's what they want people to believe. That's the narrative that they are trying to get out there.” “That's the hoax. He's never said what happened to them as a hoax. In fact, there seems to be some shards of evidence in here that Trump may have been one of the people that turned in Jeffrey Epstein, which is why Epstein, according to some of the documents, apparently hated Donald Trump. And so the hoax is not that it happened. The hoax is what people are trying to imply or worse—”

RedWave Press

53,415 views • 7 months ago

Audit Meeting Reveals Sallyport Camera NOT Replaced Despite Hank Brennan’s Claims! Brennan’s representations to the Court, defense & in the Opposition to #KarenRead’s Motion to Dismiss stated: “the Sallyport camera was replaced due to its defective condition”. However, the Canton Police Department Auditors revealed today that: “the mirrored camera has not been replaced. It’s still in the same way it was when that vehicle was driven in on January 29, 2022. The mirrored camera you’re talking about, it’s still in place. It’s still in place because there’s a prosecution going on,” in response to Canton resident Sean Colburn’s question. However, in page 4 of the Commonwealth’s Opposition, it states: “The Commonwealth has produced evidence that since January 2022 the Sallyport camera was replaced due to its defective condition and during the first trial, the Commonwealth called the technology director for the town of Canton to testify about surveillance video systems throughout the town and he was subject to cross-examination by the defense.” Hank Brennan filed this “Commonwealth’s Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss,” on February 20, 2025, ahead of oral argument in court on March 5, 2025. If the auditors are right, and Hank Brennan’s wrong and made misrepresentations to the Court and defense counsel, then what exactly is the evidence he “produced that since January 2022 the Sallyport camera was replaced due to its defective condition”? Further, if true, this would be potentially another Brady violation as it’d mean that the Sallyport camera that was (and is still) present at the Canton PD could’ve been examined by the defense’s expert, Matthew Erickson, during his December 12, 2024 trip to CPD, during which time he may have been able to obtain certain metadata, in addition to checking what the camera’s settings are set to to determine if the inverted/mirrored setting was present or not. What say you? Did Hank Brennan make gravely concerning representations to the Court and the defense about critically important evidence in this case? And if so, will Judge Beverly Cannone hold him accountable? #CantonAudit #KarenReadTrial #FreeKarenRead #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Audit Meeting Reveals Sallyport Camera NOT Replaced Despite Hank Brennan’s Claims! Brennan’s representations to the Court, defense & in the Opposition to #KarenRead’s Motion to Dismiss stated: “the Sallyport camera was replaced due to its defective condition”. However, the Canton Police Department Auditors revealed today that: “the mirrored camera has not been replaced. It’s still in the same way it was when that vehicle was driven in on January 29, 2022. The mirrored camera you’re talking about, it’s still in place. It’s still in place because there’s a prosecution going on,” in response to Canton resident Sean Colburn’s question. However, in page 4 of the Commonwealth’s Opposition, it states: “The Commonwealth has produced evidence that since January 2022 the Sallyport camera was replaced due to its defective condition and during the first trial, the Commonwealth called the technology director for the town of Canton to testify about surveillance video systems throughout the town and he was subject to cross-examination by the defense.” Hank Brennan filed this “Commonwealth’s Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss,” on February 20, 2025, ahead of oral argument in court on March 5, 2025. If the auditors are right, and Hank Brennan’s wrong and made misrepresentations to the Court and defense counsel, then what exactly is the evidence he “produced that since January 2022 the Sallyport camera was replaced due to its defective condition”? Further, if true, this would be potentially another Brady violation as it’d mean that the Sallyport camera that was (and is still) present at the Canton PD could’ve been examined by the defense’s expert, Matthew Erickson, during his December 12, 2024 trip to CPD, during which time he may have been able to obtain certain metadata, in addition to checking what the camera’s settings are set to to determine if the inverted/mirrored setting was present or not. What say you? Did Hank Brennan make gravely concerning representations to the Court and the defense about critically important evidence in this case? And if so, will Judge Beverly Cannone hold him accountable? #CantonAudit #KarenReadTrial #FreeKarenRead #JusticeForJohnOKeefe

Olivia

96,008 views • 1 year ago

Imagine after 3+ years telling the court with a straight face that a defendant seeking Brady evidence, which the Commonwealth has yet to turn over, is an “entitlement.” If you didn’t know which side was which, you’d think the prosecution is the defense in this case by their relentless attempts to suppress evidence & stymie the defense’s access to it. If Karen Read were so guilty and her taillight were so shattered before in their custody, the Commonwealth would’ve produced ample forensically sound photographic and video evidence showing as much in their first notice of discovery after arresting & charging Karen Read. Hank Brennan emphasizes numerous times what a “simple process” it is to get this video footage. He says “the standard practice is the Commonwealth would then just ask the detective to download a copy, and we’d meet our Rule 14 obligations by providing it to the defense. It’s as simple as that.” If it’s so simple, then why hasn’t it been done yet? Mr. Brennan accuses the defense of trying to use this issue to victimize themselves, stating: “and now it has become the spirit of their argument of oppression, that somehow there’s something odd and miraculously hidden about this. It is simply video that the Sergeant clicked and dragged to another file, that we can go in click and drag it to a hard drive and give them a copy”. Yes, Mr. Brennan. There is something extremely odd and miraculously hidden about this mysterious video footage that you stress just how simple it is to obtain, yet here we are, at yet another hearing, after 3+ years, having to listen to you produce excuses for why it still hasn’t been turned over. In sheer irony, Hank Brennan proceeded to state that they video taped the process because “video taping can limit baseless accusations later.” Baseless, false accusations like the ones the Commonwealth has levied at Karen Read, which the Commonwealth has no video evidence of, and persistently refuses to turn over to the defense? Video that at every turn has mysteriously gone missing or been destroyed in this case? Video that’s been inverted to try to deceive the viewer? Also, Hank Brennan acting like he doesn’t know what metadata are is another rich argument. #KarenReadTrial

Imagine after 3+ years telling the court with a straight face that a defendant seeking Brady evidence, which the Commonwealth has yet to turn over, is an “entitlement.” If you didn’t know which side was which, you’d think the prosecution is the defense in this case by their relentless attempts to suppress evidence & stymie the defense’s access to it. If Karen Read were so guilty and her taillight were so shattered before in their custody, the Commonwealth would’ve produced ample forensically sound photographic and video evidence showing as much in their first notice of discovery after arresting & charging Karen Read. Hank Brennan emphasizes numerous times what a “simple process” it is to get this video footage. He says “the standard practice is the Commonwealth would then just ask the detective to download a copy, and we’d meet our Rule 14 obligations by providing it to the defense. It’s as simple as that.” If it’s so simple, then why hasn’t it been done yet? Mr. Brennan accuses the defense of trying to use this issue to victimize themselves, stating: “and now it has become the spirit of their argument of oppression, that somehow there’s something odd and miraculously hidden about this. It is simply video that the Sergeant clicked and dragged to another file, that we can go in click and drag it to a hard drive and give them a copy”. Yes, Mr. Brennan. There is something extremely odd and miraculously hidden about this mysterious video footage that you stress just how simple it is to obtain, yet here we are, at yet another hearing, after 3+ years, having to listen to you produce excuses for why it still hasn’t been turned over. In sheer irony, Hank Brennan proceeded to state that they video taped the process because “video taping can limit baseless accusations later.” Baseless, false accusations like the ones the Commonwealth has levied at Karen Read, which the Commonwealth has no video evidence of, and persistently refuses to turn over to the defense? Video that at every turn has mysteriously gone missing or been destroyed in this case? Video that’s been inverted to try to deceive the viewer? Also, Hank Brennan acting like he doesn’t know what metadata are is another rich argument. #KarenReadTrial

Olivia

46,956 views • 1 year ago

Scott Jennings just shattered the narrative that President Trump is calling the entire Epstein scandal a hoax. As Phillip attempted to paint Trump as callous toward Epstein’s victims, Scott Jennings cut her off cold and exposed her spin for exactly what it was—pure theater. “Well, the hoax is, Democrats and others, who have gone on television and either implied or worse, that he had something to do with it.” “There’s not a shred of evidence that he had anything to do with it, but that’s what they want people to believe. That’s the narrative that they are trying to get out there.” “That’s the hoax.” “He’s never said what happened to them is a hoax.” “In fact, there seems to be some shards of evidence in here that Trump may have been one of the people that turned in Jeffrey Epstein, which is why Epstein, according to some of the documents, apparently hated Donald Trump.” “And so the hoax is not that it happened. The hoax is what people are trying to imply, or worse about him.”

Scott Jennings just shattered the narrative that President Trump is calling the entire Epstein scandal a hoax. As Phillip attempted to paint Trump as callous toward Epstein’s victims, Scott Jennings cut her off cold and exposed her spin for exactly what it was—pure theater. “Well, the hoax is, Democrats and others, who have gone on television and either implied or worse, that he had something to do with it.” “There’s not a shred of evidence that he had anything to do with it, but that’s what they want people to believe. That’s the narrative that they are trying to get out there.” “That’s the hoax.” “He’s never said what happened to them is a hoax.” “In fact, there seems to be some shards of evidence in here that Trump may have been one of the people that turned in Jeffrey Epstein, which is why Epstein, according to some of the documents, apparently hated Donald Trump.” “And so the hoax is not that it happened. The hoax is what people are trying to imply, or worse about him.”

Overton

228,648 views • 7 months ago

Bret Weinstein cuts straight to the chase: "We are going to have an endless battle in which those of us who see what we believe is clear evidence of some kind of election rigging or fraud are faced with indignation from a vast array of people portraying themselves as more rigorous and careful who say, 'Where is your evidence? Where exactly is your evidence that there was something wrong with this election?' And we are gonna be caught in the following predicament. No piece of evidence is sufficient to establish that case. And the sum total of all of the evidence contains true things and false things. So it is also no good. So the question is, can you logically deduce that something has gone wrong? I believe you can easily. Can you prove it? No. And not being able to prove it means that the election will proceed. It will be validated by all of the structures, including the courts. And that means that those who take on the power that derives from these elections will be the result of whatever process we just went through, whether it was an election that happened to be anomalous through organic means, or it was the result of some kind of fraud or election rigging. That is not an accident. That is not an accident. And the point that I wanna make primarily is the primary evidence against elections that look like this being organic is not actually in the trickle of evidence that we are actually able to see, the moment by moment vote count that does something strange during the night when some large tranche of ballots is suddenly counted or something like that. The evidence is in the structure of how the elections are actually carried out. These elections are designed to allow fraud that cannot be detected and will not be prosecuted. And that's really the thing that we must focus on." Bret Weinstein

Bret Weinstein cuts straight to the chase: "We are going to have an endless battle in which those of us who see what we believe is clear evidence of some kind of election rigging or fraud are faced with indignation from a vast array of people portraying themselves as more rigorous and careful who say, 'Where is your evidence? Where exactly is your evidence that there was something wrong with this election?' And we are gonna be caught in the following predicament. No piece of evidence is sufficient to establish that case. And the sum total of all of the evidence contains true things and false things. So it is also no good. So the question is, can you logically deduce that something has gone wrong? I believe you can easily. Can you prove it? No. And not being able to prove it means that the election will proceed. It will be validated by all of the structures, including the courts. And that means that those who take on the power that derives from these elections will be the result of whatever process we just went through, whether it was an election that happened to be anomalous through organic means, or it was the result of some kind of fraud or election rigging. That is not an accident. That is not an accident. And the point that I wanna make primarily is the primary evidence against elections that look like this being organic is not actually in the trickle of evidence that we are actually able to see, the moment by moment vote count that does something strange during the night when some large tranche of ballots is suddenly counted or something like that. The evidence is in the structure of how the elections are actually carried out. These elections are designed to allow fraud that cannot be detected and will not be prosecuted. And that's really the thing that we must focus on." Bret Weinstein

The DarkHorse Podcast

694,753 views • 27 days ago

Greek Defense Minister Nikos Dendias: Defense is not just a question of production lines or a question of armaments or the question of the number of armed forces or the question of the number of fighter planes. There is something much more substantial and that will take time and that is culture. The young generation of Europeans do not comprehend yet the need to serve the country, to serve an ideal, to serve the defense of what has been created by the European Union, which is a space of democracy, human rights, rule of law, rights of women.

Greek Defense Minister Nikos Dendias: Defense is not just a question of production lines or a question of armaments or the question of the number of armed forces or the question of the number of fighter planes. There is something much more substantial and that will take time and that is culture. The young generation of Europeans do not comprehend yet the need to serve the country, to serve an ideal, to serve the defense of what has been created by the European Union, which is a space of democracy, human rights, rule of law, rights of women.

Clash Report

24,176 views • 4 months ago

BREAKING: The Trump administration’s cover-up of the Minneapolis ICE killing of Renee Good is real! Bob Jacobson, Commissioner Minnesota Department of Public Safety just confirmed that Minnesota cannot file any state charges against the ICE agent because the federal government is not providing the state with any of their evidence. “We have asked for cooperation from the federal government… They do have all the evidence in the original investigative notes and reports. We have none of that — they have shared none of that with us. To be able to file state charges, we would need again a full investigation which would include the opportunity to have been at the crime scene… unless we have access to all that evidence, we would not be able to put together a quality investigation for any prosecutor.”

BREAKING: The Trump administration’s cover-up of the Minneapolis ICE killing of Renee Good is real! Bob Jacobson, Commissioner Minnesota Department of Public Safety just confirmed that Minnesota cannot file any state charges against the ICE agent because the federal government is not providing the state with any of their evidence. “We have asked for cooperation from the federal government… They do have all the evidence in the original investigative notes and reports. We have none of that — they have shared none of that with us. To be able to file state charges, we would need again a full investigation which would include the opportunity to have been at the crime scene… unless we have access to all that evidence, we would not be able to put together a quality investigation for any prosecutor.”

Ed Krassenstein

615,809 views • 5 months ago

$“The presentation that the Trump administration gave us, which is that there are these moderates that they’re engaging with who are going to make a deal and fracture against the IRGC, is just not based in any actual reality or the facts on the ground. The Iranians are being very clear about that. Now, what does that tell us? It tells us that obviously, this negotiation is not going to end anytime soon. The talks in Pakistan are not going well. The Iranians are not going to join them. We’re going to have to come up with another plan. That’s going to take a lot of time. The sides are really far apart.” “And the whole idea that you’re going to find some sort of Delcy Rodriguez-type figure who’s going to make a deal with the Trump administration to hand over Iran’s interests and its oil and its and its sovereignty to Trump, to do with whatever he wants. Is obviously not true at this point.”$

“The presentation that the Trump administration gave us, which is that there are these moderates that they’re engaging with who are going to make a deal and fracture against the IRGC, is just not based in any actual reality or the facts on the ground. The Iranians are being very clear about that. Now, what does that tell us? It tells us that obviously, this negotiation is not going to end anytime soon. The talks in Pakistan are not going well. The Iranians are not going to join them. We’re going to have to come up with another plan. That’s going to take a lot of time. The sides are really far apart.” “And the whole idea that you’re going to find some sort of Delcy Rodriguez-type figure who’s going to make a deal with the Trump administration to hand over Iran’s interests and its oil and its and its sovereignty to Trump, to do with whatever he wants. Is obviously not true at this point.”

Josh Rogin

13,722 views • 3 months ago

RFK Jr. Drops MASSIVE Truth Bombs About Free Speech “Let’s get this straight: The government is not stealing your tongue and/or Donald Trump’s tongue or Elon Musk’s tongue because they’re scared that he’s going to tell lies. They’re stealing his tongue because they don’t want him to tell the truth.” “That’s what they’re scared of. They’re terrified of the truth. They’re not terrified of lies... It’s the truth they don’t want you to hear.” “Anytime you hear somebody saying misinformation is scary, you are being subject to a psyop because misinformation is not scary. It’s just something we have to deal with.” “There’s a lot more [misinformation] out there now, but people know it. People know that the Internet can’t be believed—that they have to read it critically. And that is the skill we need to teach people, not to pretend that there’s some neutral arbiter out there who is going to protect us from bad information. That neutral arbiter is going to turn evil, Darth Vader, immediately. The second you give somebody power to regulate what we hear and what we don’t hear, they’re turning into Darth Vader.”

RFK Jr. Drops MASSIVE Truth Bombs About Free Speech “Let’s get this straight: The government is not stealing your tongue and/or Donald Trump’s tongue or Elon Musk’s tongue because they’re scared that he’s going to tell lies. They’re stealing his tongue because they don’t want him to tell the truth.” “That’s what they’re scared of. They’re terrified of the truth. They’re not terrified of lies... It’s the truth they don’t want you to hear.” “Anytime you hear somebody saying misinformation is scary, you are being subject to a psyop because misinformation is not scary. It’s just something we have to deal with.” “There’s a lot more [misinformation] out there now, but people know it. People know that the Internet can’t be believed—that they have to read it critically. And that is the skill we need to teach people, not to pretend that there’s some neutral arbiter out there who is going to protect us from bad information. That neutral arbiter is going to turn evil, Darth Vader, immediately. The second you give somebody power to regulate what we hear and what we don’t hear, they’re turning into Darth Vader.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

1,127,359 views • 1 year ago

Elon Musk Brought Attention To The Central Banking/ Federal Reserve Scam Today Now’s the perfect time to remind everyone The Fed says they’re more powerful than Congress, The Senate & The President of the United States They say they don’t have to listen to ANYONE. No one “Can Overrule The Actions We Take” Reporter “What should be the proper relationship between the chairman of the Fed and a president of the United States?” The Fed “Well, first of all, the Federal Reserve is an independent agency. And that means, basically, that there is no other agency of government, which can overrule actions that we take. So long as that is in place, and there is no evidence that the administration, or the congress, or anybody else, is requesting that we do things other than what we think is the appropriate thing, then what the relationships are, don't frankly matter.”

Elon Musk Brought Attention To The Central Banking/ Federal Reserve Scam Today Now’s the perfect time to remind everyone The Fed says they’re more powerful than Congress, The Senate & The President of the United States They say they don’t have to listen to ANYONE. No one “Can Overrule The Actions We Take” Reporter “What should be the proper relationship between the chairman of the Fed and a president of the United States?” The Fed “Well, first of all, the Federal Reserve is an independent agency. And that means, basically, that there is no other agency of government, which can overrule actions that we take. So long as that is in place, and there is no evidence that the administration, or the congress, or anybody else, is requesting that we do things other than what we think is the appropriate thing, then what the relationships are, don't frankly matter.”

Wall Street Apes

203,272 views • 2 years ago

🚨 NOW - JD VANCE ON ACQUIRING GREENLAND: "We're asking our European friends to take the security of that landmass more seriously, because if they're not? The United States is going to have to do something about it." "Take the president of the United States seriously." "Set aside the crazy overreactions from the press and certain people in Europe." "What has the president said? Greenland is really important, not just to America's missile defense, but to the world's missile defense." "Number two, we know that there are hostile adversaries that have shown a lot of interest in that particular territory, that particular slice of the world."

🚨 NOW - JD VANCE ON ACQUIRING GREENLAND: "We're asking our European friends to take the security of that landmass more seriously, because if they're not? The United States is going to have to do something about it." "Take the president of the United States seriously." "Set aside the crazy overreactions from the press and certain people in Europe." "What has the president said? Greenland is really important, not just to America's missile defense, but to the world's missile defense." "Number two, we know that there are hostile adversaries that have shown a lot of interest in that particular territory, that particular slice of the world."

Eric Daugherty

113,291 views • 5 months ago

[WATCH] THE PRESIDENT WILL NOT RESIGN. When it comes to the President, there is always a distinctive role between him being the President of the party and the state. There are many factors that influence the state in terms of governance and stability. If the President is called upon by some to resign and he keeps quiet it can throw the state into a state of turmoil. I want to make it clear that the officials agreed with the President on his approach, he took us into confidence and explained the factors that led him to make that particular pronouncement. We believe that the President did the right thing in pronouncing in the best interest of South Africa that he will not be resigning. There was nothing in terms of the judgment that warranted the President to resign it was just mere calls made by individuals and political parties that wanted to throw our country into a state of turmoil, uncertainty and anxiety. So it was imperative that he focus on that. It was correct for him to tell the country that from where he is standing there is nothing in the judgement that states he has done any wrongdoing and what he is going to do with the options in front of him and he has made this public. The President will take the Section 89 Report on review based on the outcome of the judgment and the legal advice he has received. There are no daggers out for the President to resign just opportunistic elements. These elements do not know what they want, they want to impeach and want him to resign, they do know what they actually want. The veracity of the report has not been tested in any committee so they don’t have a basis for the President to resign.

[WATCH] THE PRESIDENT WILL NOT RESIGN. When it comes to the President, there is always a distinctive role between him being the President of the party and the state. There are many factors that influence the state in terms of governance and stability. If the President is called upon by some to resign and he keeps quiet it can throw the state into a state of turmoil. I want to make it clear that the officials agreed with the President on his approach, he took us into confidence and explained the factors that led him to make that particular pronouncement. We believe that the President did the right thing in pronouncing in the best interest of South Africa that he will not be resigning. There was nothing in terms of the judgment that warranted the President to resign it was just mere calls made by individuals and political parties that wanted to throw our country into a state of turmoil, uncertainty and anxiety. So it was imperative that he focus on that. It was correct for him to tell the country that from where he is standing there is nothing in the judgement that states he has done any wrongdoing and what he is going to do with the options in front of him and he has made this public. The President will take the Section 89 Report on review based on the outcome of the judgment and the legal advice he has received. There are no daggers out for the President to resign just opportunistic elements. These elements do not know what they want, they want to impeach and want him to resign, they do know what they actually want. The veracity of the report has not been tested in any committee so they don’t have a basis for the President to resign.

ANC SECRETARY GENERAL | Fikile Mbalula

21,983 views • 1 month ago

Who Won? Elon Musk Debates Don Lemon Over the Impact of DEI Programs Lemon repeatedly said, “There’s no evidence” that DEI programs are lowering medical standards, a comment Elon Musk believes is a “false statement.” Who is right? Musk calls on Community Notes to settle the score. LEMON: “There was a repost of Ben Shapiro that you claim that DEI is killing people. Specifically, you point to medicine. You claim that DEI programs are putting people at risk. Do you really believe this to be true? And what evidence do you have to support it?” MUSK: “What I was referring to there was that if we lower the standards for doctors, if the test for a doctor is lowered, then the probability of them making a mistake and killing someone is obviously going to be higher.” LEMON: “Wait, say that again. I’m not sure I understand what you said. I want to make sure I understand what you’re saying.” MUSK: “Yes. If the status for passing medical exams and becoming a doctor, especially something like a surgeon, if the standards are lowered, then the probability that the surgeon will make a mistake is higher. They’re making mistakes in their exam. They may make mistakes with people — and that may result in people dying.” LEMON: “What evidence do you have, though, that they’re lowering the standards? There is no evidence of that.” MUSK: “I believe there is.” LEMON: “There’s no evidence of that, Elon. What is the evidence?” MUSK: “I believe they have literally lowered the standards at Duke University, and that is what the article was referring to. You are saying they have not lowered the standards?” LEMON: “There’s no evidence about lowering standards. And I think that there is —” MUSK: “I believe that is a false statement you’re making.” LEMON: “Okay, well, we’ll figure it out.” MUSK: “The interesting thing is, when this is posted on the X platform, there will be a whole bunch of things that rebut what you said and what I said. And so people can then make their own decision, based on the replies and the rebuttals and the community notes.”

Who Won? Elon Musk Debates Don Lemon Over the Impact of DEI Programs Lemon repeatedly said, “There’s no evidence” that DEI programs are lowering medical standards, a comment Elon Musk believes is a “false statement.” Who is right? Musk calls on Community Notes to settle the score. LEMON: “There was a repost of Ben Shapiro that you claim that DEI is killing people. Specifically, you point to medicine. You claim that DEI programs are putting people at risk. Do you really believe this to be true? And what evidence do you have to support it?” MUSK: “What I was referring to there was that if we lower the standards for doctors, if the test for a doctor is lowered, then the probability of them making a mistake and killing someone is obviously going to be higher.” LEMON: “Wait, say that again. I’m not sure I understand what you said. I want to make sure I understand what you’re saying.” MUSK: “Yes. If the status for passing medical exams and becoming a doctor, especially something like a surgeon, if the standards are lowered, then the probability that the surgeon will make a mistake is higher. They’re making mistakes in their exam. They may make mistakes with people — and that may result in people dying.” LEMON: “What evidence do you have, though, that they’re lowering the standards? There is no evidence of that.” MUSK: “I believe there is.” LEMON: “There’s no evidence of that, Elon. What is the evidence?” MUSK: “I believe they have literally lowered the standards at Duke University, and that is what the article was referring to. You are saying they have not lowered the standards?” LEMON: “There’s no evidence about lowering standards. And I think that there is —” MUSK: “I believe that is a false statement you’re making.” LEMON: “Okay, well, we’ll figure it out.” MUSK: “The interesting thing is, when this is posted on the X platform, there will be a whole bunch of things that rebut what you said and what I said. And so people can then make their own decision, based on the replies and the rebuttals and the community notes.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

5,538,066 views • 2 years ago

ABC’s George Stephanopoulos attempted to trip up Secretary of State Marco Rubio by asking the same question about Venezuela three different times. “What is the legal authority for the United States to be running Venezuela?” And three times, Rubio shut him down. RUBIO: “I explained to you what our goals are and how we’re going to use the leverage to make it happen.” “As far as our legal authority on the quarantine, simple. We have court orders. These are sanctioned boats, and we get orders from courts to go after and seize these sanctions. Is a court not a legal authority?” STEPHANOPOULOS: “Is the United States running Venezuela right now?” RUBIO: “Well, I’ve explained once again, I’ll do it one more time.” “What we are running is the direction this is going to move moving forward, and that is we have leverage.” “This leverage we are using and we intend to use. We started using already. You can see where they are running out of storage capacity. In a few weeks, they’re going to have to start pumping oil, unless they make changes.” “That leverage that we have with the armada of boats that are currently positioned, allow us to seize any sanctioned boats coming into or out of Venezuela loaded with oil or on its way in to pick up oil.” “We can pick and choose which ones we go after. We have court orders for each one.” “That will continue to be in place until the people who have control over the levers of power in that country make changes that are not just in the interest of the people of Venezuela but are in the interest of the United States and the things that we care about.” “The legal authority is the court orders that we have.”

ABC’s George Stephanopoulos attempted to trip up Secretary of State Marco Rubio by asking the same question about Venezuela three different times. “What is the legal authority for the United States to be running Venezuela?” And three times, Rubio shut him down. RUBIO: “I explained to you what our goals are and how we’re going to use the leverage to make it happen.” “As far as our legal authority on the quarantine, simple. We have court orders. These are sanctioned boats, and we get orders from courts to go after and seize these sanctions. Is a court not a legal authority?” STEPHANOPOULOS: “Is the United States running Venezuela right now?” RUBIO: “Well, I’ve explained once again, I’ll do it one more time.” “What we are running is the direction this is going to move moving forward, and that is we have leverage.” “This leverage we are using and we intend to use. We started using already. You can see where they are running out of storage capacity. In a few weeks, they’re going to have to start pumping oil, unless they make changes.” “That leverage that we have with the armada of boats that are currently positioned, allow us to seize any sanctioned boats coming into or out of Venezuela loaded with oil or on its way in to pick up oil.” “We can pick and choose which ones we go after. We have court orders for each one.” “That will continue to be in place until the people who have control over the levers of power in that country make changes that are not just in the interest of the people of Venezuela but are in the interest of the United States and the things that we care about.” “The legal authority is the court orders that we have.”

Overton

213,086 views • 6 months ago