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.

Just educated CNN host Dana Bash on basic journalistic obligations: Presidential candidates like me should not have to do the work of the captured news media. The #1 question that matters: what did Biden tell Garland & what did Garland tell Jack Smith. That’s the real target. This indictment... show more

Vivek Ramaswamy

3,566,618 subscribers

3,105,546 views • 3 years ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Education

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

10 Comments

Vivek Ramaswamy3 years ago

@DanaBashCNN

MAZE3 years ago

@DTochinskiy @CNN @DanaBashCNN You are increasingly exceeding everyone’s expectations.

Hunt03 years ago

@CNN @DanaBashCNN This is why you stand out. You are not scared to back your "opponent" if it goes against your values. Well done!

Bernard B. Kerik3 years ago

She’s so full of it! They’re not asking anything? Why doesn’t somebody ask where the investigative file is that should be attached to the memo that outlines the $5 million bribe. The Attorney General and the FBI Director are engaged in a corrupt scheme to prevent Joe Biden from being investigated and charged with the crimes that he has committed. Instead, at Joe Biden’s direction, the AG has dispatched Jack Smith to take out his primary political opponent, Donald Trump. It’s all criminal, and it baffles my mind that these people have not been impeached yet.

~DeTheBrat~3 years ago

@CNN @DanaBashCNN “We are absolutely asking these questions” 😂😂😂

Oceanman3 years ago

@CNN @DanaBashCNN You are going to go far in this race. Intelligence and cojones! Can't wait for the debates.

Stevemd3 years ago

@CNN @DanaBashCNN You go Vivek 👍

Steven VB 🦅🇺🇸🦅🇵🇫🇫🇷3 years ago

@CNN @DanaBashCNN You gave her a Sunday morning lesson Ha!

Tracey1776❤️🇺🇸🙏🇨🇦🌎3 years ago

@CNN @DanaBashCNN God bless you sir. You ARE qualified to run. I love what you bring to the table.

Oli London3 years ago

@CNN @DanaBashCNN Great job

Related Videos

BARTIROMO: How is it possible that Democrats are winning the messaging argument on affordability? BESSENT: A lot of it is the mainstream media. What we in this administration are not going to do is what the Biden administration did and tell the American people they don't know what they're feeling.

BARTIROMO: How is it possible that Democrats are winning the messaging argument on affordability? BESSENT: A lot of it is the mainstream media. What we in this administration are not going to do is what the Biden administration did and tell the American people they don't know what they're feeling.

Aaron Rupar

90,756 views • 6 months ago

The left calls Jan 6 a threat to “our democracy.” But the ultimate threat is when politically unaccountable actors literally *remove* democratically elected officials from office. That's why the pending Jan 6 indictment of Trump is arguably the most dangerous of all to our Constitutional Republic. I believe the federal administrative police state is preparing to invoke the "insurrection" clause from Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to disqualify Trump from running, in a way that past indictments technically would not. This isn't theoretical: in New Mexico, County Commissioner Cuoy Griffin was removed from office after his election for merely being physically *present* on the Capitol grounds on Jan 6, even though he was peaceful and did not even enter the building. That sets a dangerous precedent for states like New Mexico to try and keep Trump off the ballot, and a prosecution by Jack Smith would only strengthen their argument for doing so. It is un-American for the ruling party to use police power to arrest its chief political rivals. We need to know what Biden told Garland & what Garland told Jack Smith. We should know whose invisible hand is guiding these indictments, which is why I filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) demand to uncover *exactly* what the White House communicated to Garland & Smith to target Biden's disfavored opponent in this election. We will get to the bottom of it, including by suing in federal court if necessary. I will address this and how we will shut down the corrupt administrative state on Thursday at Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire.

The left calls Jan 6 a threat to “our democracy.” But the ultimate threat is when politically unaccountable actors literally remove democratically elected officials from office. That's why the pending Jan 6 indictment of Trump is arguably the most dangerous of all to our Constitutional Republic. I believe the federal administrative police state is preparing to invoke the "insurrection" clause from Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to disqualify Trump from running, in a way that past indictments technically would not. This isn't theoretical: in New Mexico, County Commissioner Cuoy Griffin was removed from office after his election for merely being physically present on the Capitol grounds on Jan 6, even though he was peaceful and did not even enter the building. That sets a dangerous precedent for states like New Mexico to try and keep Trump off the ballot, and a prosecution by Jack Smith would only strengthen their argument for doing so. It is un-American for the ruling party to use police power to arrest its chief political rivals. We need to know what Biden told Garland & what Garland told Jack Smith. We should know whose invisible hand is guiding these indictments, which is why I filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) demand to uncover exactly what the White House communicated to Garland & Smith to target Biden's disfavored opponent in this election. We will get to the bottom of it, including by suing in federal court if necessary. I will address this and how we will shut down the corrupt administrative state on Thursday at Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire.

Vivek Ramaswamy

1,864,139 views • 2 years ago

CNN’s Dana Bash got embarrassed live on her own show as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent flat out rejected her entire framing on tariffs. She tried to turn it into a $134 billion reckoning, but Bessent came armed with the facts. She was left scrambling. BASH: “I do want to start with the big question. Will you refund the roughly $134 billion in revenue taken by these emergency tariffs?” BESSENT: “Well Dana that’s not the big question.” BESSENT: “Let’s just level set here what the Supreme Court did was a very narrow reading of the president’s authority under the IEEPA tariffs. BESSENT: “We have other tariff authorities which have been functioning section 232 tariffs, section 301 tariffs and Dana, when you say it’s a big question, that’s bad framing because the Supreme Court didn’t even address that.” BESSENT: “The Supreme Court remanded it down to a lower court.” BESSENT: “And we will follow what they say but that that could be weeks or months when we hear them. So the supreme court did not address refunds.” BASH: “Sure. They didn’t address refunds. That is clearly going to be up to to you, which—” BESSENT: “No, no, no Dana, it is not up to me.” BASH: “Not…not…you…” BESSENT: “It is not up to the administration. It is up to the lower court. Let’s just be clear on that.” The “big question” wasn’t so big after all.

CNN’s Dana Bash got embarrassed live on her own show as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent flat out rejected her entire framing on tariffs. She tried to turn it into a $134 billion reckoning, but Bessent came armed with the facts. She was left scrambling. BASH: “I do want to start with the big question. Will you refund the roughly $134 billion in revenue taken by these emergency tariffs?” BESSENT: “Well Dana that’s not the big question.” BESSENT: “Let’s just level set here what the Supreme Court did was a very narrow reading of the president’s authority under the IEEPA tariffs. BESSENT: “We have other tariff authorities which have been functioning section 232 tariffs, section 301 tariffs and Dana, when you say it’s a big question, that’s bad framing because the Supreme Court didn’t even address that.” BESSENT: “The Supreme Court remanded it down to a lower court.” BESSENT: “And we will follow what they say but that that could be weeks or months when we hear them. So the supreme court did not address refunds.” BASH: “Sure. They didn’t address refunds. That is clearly going to be up to to you, which—” BESSENT: “No, no, no Dana, it is not up to me.” BASH: “Not…not…you…” BESSENT: “It is not up to the administration. It is up to the lower court. Let’s just be clear on that.” The “big question” wasn’t so big after all.

Overton

245,862 views • 4 months ago

The reason the people don’t trust the government is that the government doesn’t trust the people. I’m here at the courthouse where Trump will be arraigned later today & I’m making a demand to our government: tell us the truth about what’s really driving this flurry of prosecutions, with trial dates set during the height of the upcoming election. That’s why I sued the DOJ this week to tell us exactly what Biden told Garland & what Garland told Jack Smith about the Trump indictments. That’s why I was in Nashville yesterday to demand the release of the transgender school shooter’s manifesto. That’s why I’ve pledged to release the state action files about what the government tells tech companies to suppress. We *can* handle the TRUTH. 🇺🇸

The reason the people don’t trust the government is that the government doesn’t trust the people. I’m here at the courthouse where Trump will be arraigned later today & I’m making a demand to our government: tell us the truth about what’s really driving this flurry of prosecutions, with trial dates set during the height of the upcoming election. That’s why I sued the DOJ this week to tell us exactly what Biden told Garland & what Garland told Jack Smith about the Trump indictments. That’s why I was in Nashville yesterday to demand the release of the transgender school shooter’s manifesto. That’s why I’ve pledged to release the state action files about what the government tells tech companies to suppress. We can handle the TRUTH. 🇺🇸

Vivek Ramaswamy

2,197,318 views • 2 years ago

THE GOLDEN QUESTION WAS JUST ASKED! Lance Gooden just got Jack Smith to EXPOSE himself and Merrick Garland! Gooden: "It strikes me as odd that you don't remember who SWORE YOU IN, or how you were sworn in." Everyone knows that the appointment of Smith as Special Counsel wasn't LAWFUL, and Jack was just backed into a corner! Gooden "Attorney General Garland had you retake the oath of office...Why did he make you do that? " Smith tried to DENY knowing the "particulars" but Lance just blew open their BS for the ENTIRE WORLD to see! LOVE IT!

THE GOLDEN QUESTION WAS JUST ASKED! Lance Gooden just got Jack Smith to EXPOSE himself and Merrick Garland! Gooden: "It strikes me as odd that you don't remember who SWORE YOU IN, or how you were sworn in." Everyone knows that the appointment of Smith as Special Counsel wasn't LAWFUL, and Jack was just backed into a corner! Gooden "Attorney General Garland had you retake the oath of office...Why did he make you do that? " Smith tried to DENY knowing the "particulars" but Lance just blew open their BS for the ENTIRE WORLD to see! LOVE IT!

Gunther Eagleman™

539,555 views • 5 months ago

Lyman: You have another article from the New York Times entitled Garland faces growing pressure as Jan six investigation widens, it says Mr. Biden confided to his inner circle that he believed former president Donald Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted. Phillip: Continue reading the article where it says that was never conveyed to Garland. The whole fact of the article is that Garland actually was not doing the thing that the president wanted him to do. Garland did not respond to the pressure which the article is referring to. Pressure that was from the public.

Lyman: You have another article from the New York Times entitled Garland faces growing pressure as Jan six investigation widens, it says Mr. Biden confided to his inner circle that he believed former president Donald Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted. Phillip: Continue reading the article where it says that was never conveyed to Garland. The whole fact of the article is that Garland actually was not doing the thing that the president wanted him to do. Garland did not respond to the pressure which the article is referring to. Pressure that was from the public.

Acyn

176,879 views • 5 months ago

“It’s not really about the indictment of Comey itself. It’s about the chilling effect it sends to anyone who might want to speak up against Trump. And that chilling effect is real and it effects a lot of people whose names we will never know.” “There are a lot of countries where the presidents get to use law enforcement to silence political dissent. The Chinese government does this, the Russian government does this, the Turkish government does this, the Saudi Arabian government does this. Do we want to be that? Is that what we like? Is that good? Are we going to keep going down that road?” I talked about the James Comey indictment with Abby D. Phillip on CNN. Check it out.

“It’s not really about the indictment of Comey itself. It’s about the chilling effect it sends to anyone who might want to speak up against Trump. And that chilling effect is real and it effects a lot of people whose names we will never know.” “There are a lot of countries where the presidents get to use law enforcement to silence political dissent. The Chinese government does this, the Russian government does this, the Turkish government does this, the Saudi Arabian government does this. Do we want to be that? Is that what we like? Is that good? Are we going to keep going down that road?” I talked about the James Comey indictment with Abby D. Phillip on CNN. Check it out.

Josh Rogin

66,801 views • 9 months ago

Q: Did Attorney General Garland or other DOJ officials direct investigative steps within your office of the special counsel? Jack Smith: No Q: Did President Biden ever give you any instructions about what you should or should not do related to these investigations? Smith: No. Q: Did you ever speak to President Biden about these investigations? Smith: No.

Q: Did Attorney General Garland or other DOJ officials direct investigative steps within your office of the special counsel? Jack Smith: No Q: Did President Biden ever give you any instructions about what you should or should not do related to these investigations? Smith: No. Q: Did you ever speak to President Biden about these investigations? Smith: No.

Blue Georgia

82,912 views • 5 months ago

#WATCH | Noida, UP | On India-Pakistan Asia Cup match tomorrow, Former Indian Cricketer Madan Lal says, "... Whenever there is a match between India and Pakistan, politics starts. When the government has given permission, then what is the problem? Secondly, we are the host. The host cannot tell Pakistan not to come. Like our BCCI had taken the decision that we will not go to Pakistan, Pakistan should think whether they want to play or not. We are the hosts, so it is the duty of the host to invite. What happened in Pahalgam makes us sad too... You should give a befitting reply to what they did, like we have given... But let me tell you one thing: Pakistan is not going to change. Pakistan will remain the same... The match cannot be avoided. So many people are involved in it... whose livelihood depends on it..."

#WATCH | Noida, UP | On India-Pakistan Asia Cup match tomorrow, Former Indian Cricketer Madan Lal says, "... Whenever there is a match between India and Pakistan, politics starts. When the government has given permission, then what is the problem? Secondly, we are the host. The host cannot tell Pakistan not to come. Like our BCCI had taken the decision that we will not go to Pakistan, Pakistan should think whether they want to play or not. We are the hosts, so it is the duty of the host to invite. What happened in Pahalgam makes us sad too... You should give a befitting reply to what they did, like we have given... But let me tell you one thing: Pakistan is not going to change. Pakistan will remain the same... The match cannot be avoided. So many people are involved in it... whose livelihood depends on it..."

ANI

302,532 views • 9 months ago

Stephen A. Smith: "We ain't trying to get sued...but what we will tell you is that it's not a surprise to hear Trump's name in mix. The question is — is it to protect himself, or to protect well-known public figures? We have a right to ask that question."

Stephen A. Smith: "We ain't trying to get sued...but what we will tell you is that it's not a surprise to hear Trump's name in mix. The question is — is it to protect himself, or to protect well-known public figures? We have a right to ask that question."

Home of the Brave

44,743 views • 7 months ago

The question now is do we still have a Constitution. Does the rule of law still exist. That’s what we have to fight for

The question now is do we still have a Constitution. Does the rule of law still exist. That’s what we have to fight for

Josh Hawley

234,215 views • 3 years ago

Mearsheimer says China could not rise peacefully. But the comments got to the real question: China already rose peacefully. It did not bomb its way into the world’s second-largest economy. It did not build 800 overseas military bases. It did not sanction half the planet. It did not invade, assassinate, regime-change, and call it “order.” China rose through factories, ports, railways, power grids, shipyards, engineers, workers, and decades of national discipline. The real question is not whether China can rise peacefully. It already did. The question is whether America can decline peacefully. And that is where the real danger begins.

Mearsheimer says China could not rise peacefully. But the comments got to the real question: China already rose peacefully. It did not bomb its way into the world’s second-largest economy. It did not build 800 overseas military bases. It did not sanction half the planet. It did not invade, assassinate, regime-change, and call it “order.” China rose through factories, ports, railways, power grids, shipyards, engineers, workers, and decades of national discipline. The real question is not whether China can rise peacefully. It already did. The question is whether America can decline peacefully. And that is where the real danger begins.

𝘊𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘦

97,781 views • 22 days ago

Elon Musk: We will not accept an anointed class of journalists who tell us what to think. “What we're not going to do is say that there's some anointed class of journalists who are the special ones who get to tell everyone what they should think. It should be up to the people what they think. And even if an article is completely accurate, comprehensive, and everything, in writing that article, the media is choosing the narrative. They're deciding what to write an article about. So, I'm hopeful that this can be more a case of the public choosing the narrative as opposed to the media choosing the narrative. At least a combination of the media and the public choosing the narrative, and the public getting to weigh in on stories if they think that they should add something to it, or we've got something wrong. And over time, I think if Twitter is the best source of truth, it will succeed. And if we are not the vessels of truth, we will fail.” Interview with the BBC, April 12, 2023

Elon Musk: We will not accept an anointed class of journalists who tell us what to think. “What we're not going to do is say that there's some anointed class of journalists who are the special ones who get to tell everyone what they should think. It should be up to the people what they think. And even if an article is completely accurate, comprehensive, and everything, in writing that article, the media is choosing the narrative. They're deciding what to write an article about. So, I'm hopeful that this can be more a case of the public choosing the narrative as opposed to the media choosing the narrative. At least a combination of the media and the public choosing the narrative, and the public getting to weigh in on stories if they think that they should add something to it, or we've got something wrong. And over time, I think if Twitter is the best source of truth, it will succeed. And if we are not the vessels of truth, we will fail.” Interview with the BBC, April 12, 2023

ELON CLIPS

1,266,059 views • 1 year ago

ELON: WE WILL NOT ACCEPT AN ANOINTED CLASS OF JOURNALISTS WHO TELL US WHAT TO THINK “What we're not going to do is say that there's some anointed class of journalists who are the special ones who get to tell everyone what they should think. It should be up to the people what they think. And even if an article is completely accurate, comprehensive, and everything, in writing that article, the media is choosing the narrative. They're deciding what to write an article about. So, I'm hopeful that this can be more a case of the public choosing the narrative as opposed to the media choosing the narrative. At least a combination of the media and the public choosing the narrative, and the public getting to weigh in on stories if they think that they should add something to it, or we've got something wrong. And over time, I think if Twitter is the best source of truth, it will succeed. And if we are not the vessels of truth, we will fail.” Source: Interview with the BBC, April 2023, Elon Musk

ELON: WE WILL NOT ACCEPT AN ANOINTED CLASS OF JOURNALISTS WHO TELL US WHAT TO THINK “What we're not going to do is say that there's some anointed class of journalists who are the special ones who get to tell everyone what they should think. It should be up to the people what they think. And even if an article is completely accurate, comprehensive, and everything, in writing that article, the media is choosing the narrative. They're deciding what to write an article about. So, I'm hopeful that this can be more a case of the public choosing the narrative as opposed to the media choosing the narrative. At least a combination of the media and the public choosing the narrative, and the public getting to weigh in on stories if they think that they should add something to it, or we've got something wrong. And over time, I think if Twitter is the best source of truth, it will succeed. And if we are not the vessels of truth, we will fail.” Source: Interview with the BBC, April 2023, Elon Musk

Mario Nawfal

115,251 views • 1 year ago

Trump personally directed the prosecution of a political target, despite U.S. prosecutors repeatedly saying there wasn’t enough evidence to charge. Biden never did that. This is what real weaponization of the DOJ looks like. I went toe-to-toe with Scott Jennings on the facts.

Trump personally directed the prosecution of a political target, despite U.S. prosecutors repeatedly saying there wasn’t enough evidence to charge. Biden never did that. This is what real weaponization of the DOJ looks like. I went toe-to-toe with Scott Jennings on the facts.

Ahmed Baba

135,043 views • 9 months ago

I have to tell you that this is the only way anyone will sit up and listen. The question is, is there the will to do it? 🎥 TikTok -

I have to tell you that this is the only way anyone will sit up and listen. The question is, is there the will to do it? 🎥 TikTok -

𝔗𝔯𝔲𝔱𝔥 𝔐𝔞𝔱𝔱𝔢𝔯𝔰

35,074 views • 1 year ago