正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Full Interview: Matt Canavan destroys ABC 7.30's Sarah Ferguson - Two weeks ago, the Prime Minister addressed the nation and said that there would be a billion dollars in interest-free loans available to fuel and fertiliser companies. I checked today, and there are no details of how to apply...

TimjboAU's profile picture

Timjbo 🇦🇺

38,730 subscribers

50,737 次观看 • 4 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

喜剧新闻政治科学技术
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Two weeks ago, in a national address, the PM promised $1 billion in interest free loans to support farmers and fuel suppliers. Two weeks on, they still haven’t seen a cent, and there is nowhere even to apply for a loan. There is only a website to "register your interest" and that hasn't been updated for a week. Farmers across Australia can’t plant crops and Labor has failed to deliver the support it promised. You can’t fix a fuel crisis with empty announcements. What’s the hold up PM?
0:23

Two weeks ago, in a national address, the PM promised $1 billion in interest free loans to support farmers and fuel suppliers. Two weeks on, they still haven’t seen a cent, and there is nowhere even to apply for a loan. There is only a website to "register your interest" and that hasn't been updated for a week. Farmers across Australia can’t plant crops and Labor has failed to deliver the support it promised. You can’t fix a fuel crisis with empty announcements. What’s the hold up PM?

Senator Matt Canavan

16,435 次观看 • 4 个月前

“Australia doesn't have a gas supply problem, we have a gas export problem, and more and more Australians are waking up to the scam that has been happening for the last two decades.” - David Pocock, Senator for the ACT #auspol
0:45

“Australia doesn't have a gas supply problem, we have a gas export problem, and more and more Australians are waking up to the scam that has been happening for the last two decades.” - David Pocock, Senator for the ACT #auspol

Australia Institute

21,350 次观看 • 6 个月前

“We have a gas export problem, and more and more Australians are waking up to the scam that has been happening for the last two decades.” - David Pocock, Senator for the ACT David Pocock #auspol
0:45

“We have a gas export problem, and more and more Australians are waking up to the scam that has been happening for the last two decades.” - David Pocock, Senator for the ACT David Pocock #auspol

Australia Institute

13,155 次观看 • 9 个月前

“The vessel will go to a U.S. port and the United States does intend to seize the oil. However, there is a legal process for the seizure of that oil, and that legal process will be followed.” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the Trump administration intends to seize oil contained in the oil tanker that the Trump administration took control of off the coast of Venezuela yesterday. Venezuela has the largest known oil reserves in the world, and oil exports are the government’s main source of revenue. Read more:
1:43

“The vessel will go to a U.S. port and the United States does intend to seize the oil. However, there is a legal process for the seizure of that oil, and that legal process will be followed.” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that the Trump administration intends to seize oil contained in the oil tanker that the Trump administration took control of off the coast of Venezuela yesterday. Venezuela has the largest known oil reserves in the world, and oil exports are the government’s main source of revenue. Read more:

ABC News

98,315 次观看 • 8 个月前

Michael Gove on June 21st 2016, two days before the Brexit referendum, "If people vote to leave, they're voting to have confidence in this country, it's institutions, and in its people" "Our side has been optimistic about Britain's potential, whereas I fear too often those arguing that we should remain have been more fearful, and to my mind, surprisingly pessimistic about Britain's potential outside the EU" "There have been moments during this campaign where Nigel Farage has said things and done things with which I disagree.. But I try not to single out any individual in this campaign for criticism" "There are legitimate public concerns about migration which are best addressed if we vote to leave the European Union" "Not because I'm opposed to migration, quite the opposite. Our economy and our culture benefit from new people arriving here" "But if we're to maintain the benefits of migration then people need to feel confident that the numbers are being controlled and we can't do that in the EU" "The facts are Britain has a trade deficit with the EU, so it wouldn't be in the EU's interest to erect any trade barriers" "By voting to leave, we can not only take back control of hundreds of millions that we sent to the European Union, we will also be detaching ourselves from the sinking ship that is the European Union economy"
2:56

Michael Gove on June 21st 2016, two days before the Brexit referendum, "If people vote to leave, they're voting to have confidence in this country, it's institutions, and in its people" "Our side has been optimistic about Britain's potential, whereas I fear too often those arguing that we should remain have been more fearful, and to my mind, surprisingly pessimistic about Britain's potential outside the EU" "There have been moments during this campaign where Nigel Farage has said things and done things with which I disagree.. But I try not to single out any individual in this campaign for criticism" "There are legitimate public concerns about migration which are best addressed if we vote to leave the European Union" "Not because I'm opposed to migration, quite the opposite. Our economy and our culture benefit from new people arriving here" "But if we're to maintain the benefits of migration then people need to feel confident that the numbers are being controlled and we can't do that in the EU" "The facts are Britain has a trade deficit with the EU, so it wouldn't be in the EU's interest to erect any trade barriers" "By voting to leave, we can not only take back control of hundreds of millions that we sent to the European Union, we will also be detaching ourselves from the sinking ship that is the European Union economy"

Farrukh

21,387 次观看 • 1 年前

🇦🇺 Proud to Stand for All Australians 🇦🇺 In recent days, there has been discussion about my comments on migration. I want to set the record straight. When I raise concerns about Labor’s mass migration agenda, it's about the numbers – not about any community. Indian migrants, who have come to Australia, have a strong record of integration, embracing our values, working hard in many fields of endeavour, and joining the league of cherished and loyal Australian citizens. My own children share Indian ancestry, and I have strong friendships within the Indian and Sikh communities in the Northern Territory. I deeply value these connections. My concern, as it is for millions of Australians, is Labor’s uncontrolled, unplanned, and unsustainable migration. Labor’s mass migration agenda – an issue of numbers – continues to cause pressures on housing, infrastructure and services. I want a better life for all families whether you’re a migrant, a resident, or a citizen, regardless of your background. But a better life for all families, better housing, better infrastructure and better services requires the restoration of controlled, planned, and sustainable migration.
1:49

🇦🇺 Proud to Stand for All Australians 🇦🇺 In recent days, there has been discussion about my comments on migration. I want to set the record straight. When I raise concerns about Labor’s mass migration agenda, it's about the numbers – not about any community. Indian migrants, who have come to Australia, have a strong record of integration, embracing our values, working hard in many fields of endeavour, and joining the league of cherished and loyal Australian citizens. My own children share Indian ancestry, and I have strong friendships within the Indian and Sikh communities in the Northern Territory. I deeply value these connections. My concern, as it is for millions of Australians, is Labor’s uncontrolled, unplanned, and unsustainable migration. Labor’s mass migration agenda – an issue of numbers – continues to cause pressures on housing, infrastructure and services. I want a better life for all families whether you’re a migrant, a resident, or a citizen, regardless of your background. But a better life for all families, better housing, better infrastructure and better services requires the restoration of controlled, planned, and sustainable migration.

Jacinta Nampijinpa

71,937 次观看 • 11 个月前

August 31 rally discourse is exposing festering levels of racial resentment and hatred towards European Australians. In this viral TikTok these two migrants to Australia say that Australians should not be allowed to call for lower migration because Australia is “Stolen Land” and therefore an illegitimate country. Sorry, if you come to Australia as a migrant, you don’t get to call for the dismantlement of the country. You should have a basic amount of respect for the nation that took you in and the people that built that nation.
1:31

August 31 rally discourse is exposing festering levels of racial resentment and hatred towards European Australians. In this viral TikTok these two migrants to Australia say that Australians should not be allowed to call for lower migration because Australia is “Stolen Land” and therefore an illegitimate country. Sorry, if you come to Australia as a migrant, you don’t get to call for the dismantlement of the country. You should have a basic amount of respect for the nation that took you in and the people that built that nation.

Drew Pavlou 🇦🇺🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼

20,642 次观看 • 11 个月前

🚨 JUST NOW — BEN SHAPIRO on President Trump vs Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens and Alex Jones: "Multiple polls have shown over the course of the last month and a half that the president has 80 to 90% support inside the Republican Party for his actions in Iran." "There was a poll maybe two weeks ago that showed that the support for people like Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly versus the president is 6%." "So I think that the idea that these folks are going to be able to undermine broad scale support for a war that will reach its terminus sometime in the next couple of months, I think that's insane!" "And the attempt to turn this into a referendum on the midterm elections, number one, ignores the fact there are a lot of other factors in a midterm election." "And number two, we will go through about a thousand news cycles between now and November when the election actually takes place." Ben Shapiro
1:16

🚨 JUST NOW — BEN SHAPIRO on President Trump vs Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens and Alex Jones: "Multiple polls have shown over the course of the last month and a half that the president has 80 to 90% support inside the Republican Party for his actions in Iran." "There was a poll maybe two weeks ago that showed that the support for people like Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly versus the president is 6%." "So I think that the idea that these folks are going to be able to undermine broad scale support for a war that will reach its terminus sometime in the next couple of months, I think that's insane!" "And the attempt to turn this into a referendum on the midterm elections, number one, ignores the fact there are a lot of other factors in a midterm election." "And number two, we will go through about a thousand news cycles between now and November when the election actually takes place." Ben Shapiro

Eric Daugherty

251,492 次观看 • 4 个月前

Sen. Shaheen: There's bipartisan agreement in this Senate that we should be putting more pressure on Russia. Rubio: Russia is under incredible amount of pressure. Sen. Shaheen: President Trump made a promise to end war in Ukraine on day one. And here we are, almost year and half into this administration, and he has let Russia and Putin off the hook. Graham-Blumenthal sanctions bill would do that in a way that would force Russia to come to the table and finally fulfill that promise. Rubio: I disagree with that statement. Sen. Shaheen: Well, you and I are going to have to disagree on that, Mr. Secretary. Rubio: We are, because I can tell you that at the highest levels of our administration, we've committed an extraordinary amount of time to the Ukrainian situation and trying to resolve that conflict. Meeting after meeting, all over the world, many of which I attended myself, to try to bridge the differences between the two sides. We've not been successful to date, but not for lack of trying. And we continue to be prepared to play that role. Sen. Shaheen: But, Mr. Secretary, you rightly imposed sanctions on Lukoil and Rosneft. And you've lifted those and you've given Russia the ability to continue to fund their war in Ukraine. Rubio: We have not lifted the sanctions. The sanctions remain in place. What's been granted is a license for a short-term period of time because of global oil demand. Sen. Shaheen: We're arguing semantics here. Rubio: I've acknowledged there's a trade-off in the broader policy. Sen. Shaheen: If Russians are able to make money, then they're not being hurt by the sanctions that were put in place. Rubio: Well, there are plenty of other sanctions that are hurting them. But I will tell you that in that case, I have acknowledged that there was a trade-off here between the destabilization of the availability of oil for countries in the Indo-Pacific in particular, and the decision that was made in the short term on this specific oil. Sen. Shaheen: Except that the cost of a barrel of oil was $100 when you lifted those sanctions, and it's still over $100. So it hasn't provided the kind of relief. Rubio: It would have been much higher if that oil wasn't available. But it's not just the cost, it's the availability.
1:58

Sen. Shaheen: There's bipartisan agreement in this Senate that we should be putting more pressure on Russia. Rubio: Russia is under incredible amount of pressure. Sen. Shaheen: President Trump made a promise to end war in Ukraine on day one. And here we are, almost year and half into this administration, and he has let Russia and Putin off the hook. Graham-Blumenthal sanctions bill would do that in a way that would force Russia to come to the table and finally fulfill that promise. Rubio: I disagree with that statement. Sen. Shaheen: Well, you and I are going to have to disagree on that, Mr. Secretary. Rubio: We are, because I can tell you that at the highest levels of our administration, we've committed an extraordinary amount of time to the Ukrainian situation and trying to resolve that conflict. Meeting after meeting, all over the world, many of which I attended myself, to try to bridge the differences between the two sides. We've not been successful to date, but not for lack of trying. And we continue to be prepared to play that role. Sen. Shaheen: But, Mr. Secretary, you rightly imposed sanctions on Lukoil and Rosneft. And you've lifted those and you've given Russia the ability to continue to fund their war in Ukraine. Rubio: We have not lifted the sanctions. The sanctions remain in place. What's been granted is a license for a short-term period of time because of global oil demand. Sen. Shaheen: We're arguing semantics here. Rubio: I've acknowledged there's a trade-off in the broader policy. Sen. Shaheen: If Russians are able to make money, then they're not being hurt by the sanctions that were put in place. Rubio: Well, there are plenty of other sanctions that are hurting them. But I will tell you that in that case, I have acknowledged that there was a trade-off here between the destabilization of the availability of oil for countries in the Indo-Pacific in particular, and the decision that was made in the short term on this specific oil. Sen. Shaheen: Except that the cost of a barrel of oil was $100 when you lifted those sanctions, and it's still over $100. So it hasn't provided the kind of relief. Rubio: It would have been much higher if that oil wasn't available. But it's not just the cost, it's the availability.

Kate from Kharkiv

28,977 次观看 • 2 个月前

You're not going to believe this. [Senator Matt Canavan] just got them to admit that Pornhub won't fall under the restrictions provided for by (63C) of the Social Media Minimum Age Bill: Senator Canavan: "If Youtube is covered [why isn't Pornhub] covered? [so] show me in the law where [Pornhub] is excluded" Senator Matt Canavan: If YouTube is categorized or covered by 63C, returning to Senator Roberts' question, is Pornhub covered? Why wouldn't it be? It's just explicit material, but yes, it's covered, isn't it? ACMA Representative, James Chrishold: No, the first thing of 63C, 1(a), is that the platform's sole or significant purpose is to enable online social interaction. Senator Canavan: But if YouTube's covered, as a video sharing service for non-explicit content, why wouldn't Pornhub be covered? Is Pornhub covered? I ACMA: I think they have very different purposes, yes. Can you explain that to me? ACMA "Sorry, I... I think this is under the definition; we wouldn't see Pornhub as falling within the scope. It's not seen as a social media platform. Senator Canavan: Just explain to me in simple terms how it would work if YouTube is covered: how would another video sharing service with mainly explicit material not be covered? ACMA: So again, Senator, it comes back to the commitment that the government's already made in relation to... Senator Canavan: No, no, I'm not asking for a commitment; I'm asking about the law. We've got to pass the law, not make government commitments. So, in the law, how are these two services different? ACMA: I think YouTube and Pornhub are completely different. Senator Canavan: I agree with that, but how are they differently defined in the law? Because well, Pornhub is a site for accessing pornography, which children are not permitted to access. Okay, show me in the law where that is excluded. ACMA: Well, yeah, it comes back to the evidence before about how Pornhub is subject to a suite of other rules and regulations, and also, it's not seen as a digital platform as part of this bill. The evidence is that we don't see it as having the characteristics of social interaction. It's a site for... I don't speak from any experience" Senator Canavan: I'm trying to understand here; it's very vague and unclear to any reasonable person about what's in and what's out. Not sure if Senator Canavan intended a pun there, but this is an astounding admission from ACMA. Especially when the purpose of the legislation is to supposedly protect children
2:11

You're not going to believe this. [Senator Matt Canavan] just got them to admit that Pornhub won't fall under the restrictions provided for by (63C) of the Social Media Minimum Age Bill: Senator Canavan: "If Youtube is covered [why isn't Pornhub] covered? [so] show me in the law where [Pornhub] is excluded" Senator Matt Canavan: If YouTube is categorized or covered by 63C, returning to Senator Roberts' question, is Pornhub covered? Why wouldn't it be? It's just explicit material, but yes, it's covered, isn't it? ACMA Representative, James Chrishold: No, the first thing of 63C, 1(a), is that the platform's sole or significant purpose is to enable online social interaction. Senator Canavan: But if YouTube's covered, as a video sharing service for non-explicit content, why wouldn't Pornhub be covered? Is Pornhub covered? I ACMA: I think they have very different purposes, yes. Can you explain that to me? ACMA "Sorry, I... I think this is under the definition; we wouldn't see Pornhub as falling within the scope. It's not seen as a social media platform. Senator Canavan: Just explain to me in simple terms how it would work if YouTube is covered: how would another video sharing service with mainly explicit material not be covered? ACMA: So again, Senator, it comes back to the commitment that the government's already made in relation to... Senator Canavan: No, no, I'm not asking for a commitment; I'm asking about the law. We've got to pass the law, not make government commitments. So, in the law, how are these two services different? ACMA: I think YouTube and Pornhub are completely different. Senator Canavan: I agree with that, but how are they differently defined in the law? Because well, Pornhub is a site for accessing pornography, which children are not permitted to access. Okay, show me in the law where that is excluded. ACMA: Well, yeah, it comes back to the evidence before about how Pornhub is subject to a suite of other rules and regulations, and also, it's not seen as a digital platform as part of this bill. The evidence is that we don't see it as having the characteristics of social interaction. It's a site for... I don't speak from any experience" Senator Canavan: I'm trying to understand here; it's very vague and unclear to any reasonable person about what's in and what's out. Not sure if Senator Canavan intended a pun there, but this is an astounding admission from ACMA. Especially when the purpose of the legislation is to supposedly protect children

Humanspective

768,739 次观看 • 1 年前

Here’s what the ABC and the rest of the corrupt leftist media won’t show you. They don’t want Australians to know the truth. And that also because the ABC and corrupt leftist media are responsible for inciting today’s violence. These media outlets and Labor/Green/Teal politicians have done everything they can to lie to the public, falsely claiming people protesting Albanese‘s extreme migration are "Nazis". And in the mind of leftist thugs, this legitimises them in resorting to violence to stop the protest. It’s time for the leftist media and Labor/Green/Teals politicians to end their smearing and name calling and inciting violence - and instead engage in a proper debate on the facts and issues of migration policy. But we can’t trust the ABC, as they have agenda to push - so they’ll censor what the police said.
5:11

Here’s what the ABC and the rest of the corrupt leftist media won’t show you. They don’t want Australians to know the truth. And that also because the ABC and corrupt leftist media are responsible for inciting today’s violence. These media outlets and Labor/Green/Teal politicians have done everything they can to lie to the public, falsely claiming people protesting Albanese‘s extreme migration are "Nazis". And in the mind of leftist thugs, this legitimises them in resorting to violence to stop the protest. It’s time for the leftist media and Labor/Green/Teals politicians to end their smearing and name calling and inciting violence - and instead engage in a proper debate on the facts and issues of migration policy. But we can’t trust the ABC, as they have agenda to push - so they’ll censor what the police said.

Craig Kelly:🇦🇺Foundation for Economic Education

70,961 次观看 • 10 个月前

ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos: “How does the United States intend to secure the oil fields? Won’t that take U.S. troops?” Secretary of State Marco Rubio: “Ultimately, this is not about securing the oil fields. This is about ensuring that no sanctioned oil can come in and out until they make changes to the governance of that entire industry.” “Because right now that industry is non-existent in the traditional way. These oil fields basically are pirate operations. People literally steal the oil from the ground, a handful of — that’s how they hold this regime together. A handful of cronies benefit from this oil — specific oil wells. They’re producing at like 18% capacity because the equipment is all decrepit and they basically pocket the money to their benefit. They sell the oil at a discount on global markets, you know 40 cents on the dollar, 50 cents on the dollar.” “But all that money goes to them. Those oil fields have not benefited the people of Venezuela in over a decade. But they have made multi-millionaires, billionaires out of just a handful of people. And that’s what’s held this regime together. That’s what needs to be addressed.”
1:28

ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos: “How does the United States intend to secure the oil fields? Won’t that take U.S. troops?” Secretary of State Marco Rubio: “Ultimately, this is not about securing the oil fields. This is about ensuring that no sanctioned oil can come in and out until they make changes to the governance of that entire industry.” “Because right now that industry is non-existent in the traditional way. These oil fields basically are pirate operations. People literally steal the oil from the ground, a handful of — that’s how they hold this regime together. A handful of cronies benefit from this oil — specific oil wells. They’re producing at like 18% capacity because the equipment is all decrepit and they basically pocket the money to their benefit. They sell the oil at a discount on global markets, you know 40 cents on the dollar, 50 cents on the dollar.” “But all that money goes to them. Those oil fields have not benefited the people of Venezuela in over a decade. But they have made multi-millionaires, billionaires out of just a handful of people. And that’s what’s held this regime together. That’s what needs to be addressed.”

RedWave Press

835,044 次观看 • 7 个月前

The taxation regime of gas and oil exploration in this country is not understood which has led to an enormous amount of misinformation. Here are the facts: 1. Oil and gas companies pay 30 cents tax on their profits just like every other company in Australia. That means that Australians already have 30% ownership. 2. Oil and gas companies pay a super profit tax on their profits known as the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax. The PRRT has collected very little revenue to date for two reasons a) there has been an enormous amount of capital invested in getting these projects up resulting in large depreciation offsets and b) the gas was foolishly sold forward at very cheap prices when the projects were given the go ahead. A lot of these contracts will roll off over the next decade resulting in larger profits and a larger tax for taxpayers. 3. 70-80% of gas and oil exploration in Australia is unsuccessful. Offshore gas exploration is not a multi million dollar business- it’s a multi billion dollar business. The idea that taxpayers should fund 30% of offshore oil and gas exploration is absurd. The last person to come up with that idea was Gough Whitlam. Needless to say no banks would lend against such a proposition. has always had a policy to abolish the PRRT and replace it with a 5-10% royalty on Sales. Combined with the 30% company tax that will guarantee that Australians share in over 40% of the profits of any offshore oil and gas project. That’s an excellent return given taxpayers incur no risk. I’ve done up a table in comments showing the share Australians will receive based on operating profit margin before tax. David Pocock, the Greens and One Nation are all wrong on this. The formers 25% export tax will wipe out most of the profits made eliminating the incentive to further explore for gas. One Nation offering to fund 30% of exploration costs for mostly foreign owned companies will expose taxpayers to billions of dollars in subsidies with no guarantee of return. Australia desperately needs sensible economic reform. Unfortunately none of the parties in Canberra have a clue how to make this happen.
3:57

The taxation regime of gas and oil exploration in this country is not understood which has led to an enormous amount of misinformation. Here are the facts: 1. Oil and gas companies pay 30 cents tax on their profits just like every other company in Australia. That means that Australians already have 30% ownership. 2. Oil and gas companies pay a super profit tax on their profits known as the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax. The PRRT has collected very little revenue to date for two reasons a) there has been an enormous amount of capital invested in getting these projects up resulting in large depreciation offsets and b) the gas was foolishly sold forward at very cheap prices when the projects were given the go ahead. A lot of these contracts will roll off over the next decade resulting in larger profits and a larger tax for taxpayers. 3. 70-80% of gas and oil exploration in Australia is unsuccessful. Offshore gas exploration is not a multi million dollar business- it’s a multi billion dollar business. The idea that taxpayers should fund 30% of offshore oil and gas exploration is absurd. The last person to come up with that idea was Gough Whitlam. Needless to say no banks would lend against such a proposition. has always had a policy to abolish the PRRT and replace it with a 5-10% royalty on Sales. Combined with the 30% company tax that will guarantee that Australians share in over 40% of the profits of any offshore oil and gas project. That’s an excellent return given taxpayers incur no risk. I’ve done up a table in comments showing the share Australians will receive based on operating profit margin before tax. David Pocock, the Greens and One Nation are all wrong on this. The formers 25% export tax will wipe out most of the profits made eliminating the incentive to further explore for gas. One Nation offering to fund 30% of exploration costs for mostly foreign owned companies will expose taxpayers to billions of dollars in subsidies with no guarantee of return. Australia desperately needs sensible economic reform. Unfortunately none of the parties in Canberra have a clue how to make this happen.

Gerard Rennick

25,352 次观看 • 2 个月前

Marco Rubio dismantles Kristen Welker as he explains how President Trump's use of military intervention is 'America First': "We don't need Venezuela's oil. We have plenty of oil in the United States. What we're not going to allow is for the oil industry in Venezuela to be controlled by adversaries of the United States. You have to understand: why does China need their oil? Why does Russia need their oil? Why does Iran need their oil? They're not even in this continent. This is the Western Hemisphere. This is where we live. And we're not going to allow the Western Hemisphere to be a base of operations for adversaries, competitors, and rivals of the United States, simple as that. We want to see the oil proceeds of that country benefit the people of Venezuela. Why have 8 million people left Venezuela? Eight million, the single largest mass migration probably in modern history, left Venezuela since 2014? Because all the wealth of that country was stolen to the benefit of Maduro and his cronies and the regime, but not to the benefit of people of Venezuela. You know how destabilizing 8 million migrants is? The number one fear that Brazil has, that Colombia has, that all these countries in the region have about what's happening in Venezuela and our involvement is they're afraid of another mass migration event. That's what they fear. This is deeply destabilizing stuff. It's not going to continue to happen. They are not going to come from outside of our hemisphere, destabilize our region in our own back yard, and us have to pay the price for it. Not under President Trump."
1:32

Marco Rubio dismantles Kristen Welker as he explains how President Trump's use of military intervention is 'America First': "We don't need Venezuela's oil. We have plenty of oil in the United States. What we're not going to allow is for the oil industry in Venezuela to be controlled by adversaries of the United States. You have to understand: why does China need their oil? Why does Russia need their oil? Why does Iran need their oil? They're not even in this continent. This is the Western Hemisphere. This is where we live. And we're not going to allow the Western Hemisphere to be a base of operations for adversaries, competitors, and rivals of the United States, simple as that. We want to see the oil proceeds of that country benefit the people of Venezuela. Why have 8 million people left Venezuela? Eight million, the single largest mass migration probably in modern history, left Venezuela since 2014? Because all the wealth of that country was stolen to the benefit of Maduro and his cronies and the regime, but not to the benefit of people of Venezuela. You know how destabilizing 8 million migrants is? The number one fear that Brazil has, that Colombia has, that all these countries in the region have about what's happening in Venezuela and our involvement is they're afraid of another mass migration event. That's what they fear. This is deeply destabilizing stuff. It's not going to continue to happen. They are not going to come from outside of our hemisphere, destabilize our region in our own back yard, and us have to pay the price for it. Not under President Trump."

Ryan Saavedra

33,103 次观看 • 7 个月前

TOM HOMAN: "I begged for the last two months on TV for the rhetoric to stop." "I said in March if the rhetoric didn't stop, there was going to be bloodshed, and there has been." "I wish I wasn't right. I don't want to see anybody die. Not officers, not members of the community and not the targets of our operations."
0:30

TOM HOMAN: "I begged for the last two months on TV for the rhetoric to stop." "I said in March if the rhetoric didn't stop, there was going to be bloodshed, and there has been." "I wish I wasn't right. I don't want to see anybody die. Not officers, not members of the community and not the targets of our operations."

Fox News

345,777 次观看 • 6 个月前

Kemi Badenoch tells the PM he can make the decision to drill in the North Sea today, quoting several companies and a Labour MP calling for more drilling "Oil and gas is part of the mix for many years to come," Keir Starmer responds #PMQs
1:24

Kemi Badenoch tells the PM he can make the decision to drill in the North Sea today, quoting several companies and a Labour MP calling for more drilling "Oil and gas is part of the mix for many years to come," Keir Starmer responds #PMQs

BBC Politics

120,313 次观看 • 4 个月前

Kate Harrision "For a long time in Canada, there was a consensus on immigration." "Systemic repeated failures that really started under the last government have undermined that system." "And the AG Report confirms a lot of the skepticism and cynicism that people have about the integrity of our system." "...Are we expected to believe that everything there is going just fine?" "...this is why there needs to be some accountability on the part of the Minister and the government for having mismanaged this program for so long." Kate Harrison
1:42

Kate Harrision "For a long time in Canada, there was a consensus on immigration." "Systemic repeated failures that really started under the last government have undermined that system." "And the AG Report confirms a lot of the skepticism and cynicism that people have about the integrity of our system." "...Are we expected to believe that everything there is going just fine?" "...this is why there needs to be some accountability on the part of the Minister and the government for having mismanaged this program for so long." Kate Harrison

cbcwatcher

13,862 次观看 • 4 个月前

15 million Australians (55%) want to lower migration based on recent polling. Tomorrow approximately 100 Neo Nazi cult extremists will try to take over nationwide March For Australia rallies calling for lower migration. The mainstream media and political establishment will then use the actions of these 100 psycho Neo Nazis to smear and tar the 15 million Australians who want to lower migration. Why would the Neo Nazis do this? They know that they are toxic and they know that people hate them. They know they will destroy the rallies by latching onto them. But that is precisely the point. They are accelerationists. The Nazis want the government and the mainstream press to smear all 15 million Australians who want lower migration as Nazis. They want the mainstream to present calls to lower migration as a Nazi position. They hope to then be able to position themselves as the only ones speaking for 15 million Australians. This is the worst case scenario for the long term health of Australian democracy. The Labor government and mainstream media should not attempt to smear 15 million Australians with the same brush as the fringe Nazi extremists. They might regard this as an ingenious short term political strategy so as to temporarily silence national discussion about migration. But this would only drive people to extremists in the long term, which is exactly what the Nazi plan. Moderates should be able to discuss migration and represent the 15 million Australians who have valid concerns about the impact migration has on our housing, infrastructure and culture. If the mainstream media and mainstream political parties make this impossible, they will play right into the hands of the extremists. WHICH I DON'T WANT TO SEE. I am a moderate. I am trying to warn the establishment not to play into the hands of evil people. Just be normal and lower migration. Do what the center-left did in Denmark. Put migration on the national political agenda and lower the number of people coming into the country. If you do this, you will rob the extremists of their power. That is the only way forward. Because the 15 million Australians who want to lower migration won't simply disappear if you label all calls to lower migration ''Nazi.'' There will still be millions of people in Australia who feel unrepresented by the current status quo. If you don't give them a moderate normal political outlet - someone like me - you create a powder keg. You do exactly what the Joel Davis, Thomas Sewell, Nick Fuentes types want. I am trying to warn you.
8:20

15 million Australians (55%) want to lower migration based on recent polling. Tomorrow approximately 100 Neo Nazi cult extremists will try to take over nationwide March For Australia rallies calling for lower migration. The mainstream media and political establishment will then use the actions of these 100 psycho Neo Nazis to smear and tar the 15 million Australians who want to lower migration. Why would the Neo Nazis do this? They know that they are toxic and they know that people hate them. They know they will destroy the rallies by latching onto them. But that is precisely the point. They are accelerationists. The Nazis want the government and the mainstream press to smear all 15 million Australians who want lower migration as Nazis. They want the mainstream to present calls to lower migration as a Nazi position. They hope to then be able to position themselves as the only ones speaking for 15 million Australians. This is the worst case scenario for the long term health of Australian democracy. The Labor government and mainstream media should not attempt to smear 15 million Australians with the same brush as the fringe Nazi extremists. They might regard this as an ingenious short term political strategy so as to temporarily silence national discussion about migration. But this would only drive people to extremists in the long term, which is exactly what the Nazi plan. Moderates should be able to discuss migration and represent the 15 million Australians who have valid concerns about the impact migration has on our housing, infrastructure and culture. If the mainstream media and mainstream political parties make this impossible, they will play right into the hands of the extremists. WHICH I DON'T WANT TO SEE. I am a moderate. I am trying to warn the establishment not to play into the hands of evil people. Just be normal and lower migration. Do what the center-left did in Denmark. Put migration on the national political agenda and lower the number of people coming into the country. If you do this, you will rob the extremists of their power. That is the only way forward. Because the 15 million Australians who want to lower migration won't simply disappear if you label all calls to lower migration ''Nazi.'' There will still be millions of people in Australia who feel unrepresented by the current status quo. If you don't give them a moderate normal political outlet - someone like me - you create a powder keg. You do exactly what the Joel Davis, Thomas Sewell, Nick Fuentes types want. I am trying to warn you.

Drew Pavlou 🇦🇺🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼

68,505 次观看 • 11 个月前