Загрузка видео...
Не удалось загрузить видео
SORRY PRASHANT KISHOR: YOU ARE WRONG! ( An Open Letter) Dear Prashant Prashant Kishor Either you have got your basic facts completely wrong, or you are blatantly misleading the people of India ( reference your-enclosed interview to BBC News). My rejoinder: 1) India’s Muslim population is 14% but according... show more
339,848 просмотров • 2 лет назад •via X (Twitter)
Комментарии: 10
@PrashantKishor Bottom line Sanjay ji is that Prashant is putting up his CV for the position of Amit Malviya in BJP so he started lying and distorting facts !! #Modi #LokSabhaElections2024
@PrashantKishor Thanks for exposing the lies of Prashant Kishore. He gets Media attention these days, even after repeated errors in guesses (some wild too), is because Godi Media gives space to all those hail Modi-Shah
@PrashantKishor This Jha uncle who was kic,ked out of Congress and has zero knowledge on ground reports ....is teaching PK 😹😹😹 He is writing letters to him..PK won't even sp,it on them 🤑
@PrashantKishor Both of you are wrong. Congress did not get 23% vote share but only 21.19%, which is only 2% higher than 2019!
@PrashantKishor Well put ji, I think it is time for all us to ignore this self proclaimed strategist.
@PrashantKishor Sunday hai , jaldi se lunch bana do nahi toh Aaj bahut maar pad sakti hai .. waise bhi madam ka mood off hoga .
@PrashantKishor Selective cherry picking stats that too wrong ones seem to be the flavour of this election season. And pk is no exception. He’s just a self centric person looking for opportunities here or there.
@PrashantKishor PK once the Star of everyone's eyes has endangered his own legacy. Very strong Message from you. 🔥👍
@PrashantKishor He has gone crazy
@PrashantKishor I admire for your articulated and befitting reply to PK .I feel this exhaustive reply with arguments must have rattled him .I know PK has travelled extensively in Bihar and has a connect with the Masses but this time I also got appalled for his boss against Congress .
![Hero–Doctor Kirk Moore, who's now facing 35 years in prison, defends his decision to give saline injections instead of COVID death jabs: "What law did I break?.... [there was] no ingredient list... no toxicity studies... [the jabs were] studied for a total of two months." This clip of board-certified plastic surgeon Dr. Kirk Moore (@Moore22K) is taken from an interview with Shannon Joy (Shannon Joy) posted to Rumble on June 10, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "So my one position that I've said all along is, what law did I break? There is no law. There was no Covid law passed. There was no. Nothing that said that I had to do whatever the government says that I need to do. There's no law that says that. And the government is trying to kind of put me into this fraud side, like you said, you know, saying I. That I absconded or I misused or I purloined, you know, $28,000, $28,800 worth of product that they gave me for free and that, you know, that I had a contract with them to give it in such a way. So, I think that's, you know, that That's That's the law side of it. "The ethical side of it wasn't that hard for me. I'm doing what my patients wanted me to do. After a full discussion of what it is. I, have no ingredient list. I don't know what this product is. There are no toxicity studies. There are no carcinogenic, you know, carcinogenic studies. There are no mutagenic studies. There's nothing out there. This is something that was studied for a total of two months. "And the control group was. Was terminated, because they found that it had 95% effectiveness. Once the numbers came out and it showed that that actual effectiveness was less than 1%, by an absolute risk reduction, then that in and of itself should prove, you know, should show that, hey, this is just ridiculous. There was no benefit. There's nothing out there. "You know, you look at Brook Jackson's study and what it was that she was, you know, that she's tried to present in Texas. That's been thrown out, at least twice now. And you just look at all of the. Everything that's behind it. You know, you mentioned, you know, the ethical side of it. You know, the AMA code of ethics says that a physician is supposed to take care of the patient that's in front of them. Okay? That's your oath. My oath is if you were my patient, I would take care of you. You tell me what your concerns are, you tell me, you know, what your symptoms are, and we come up with a plan. I explain to you what the pros and cons of that are, and then you and I come up with a plan on how to treat you. "And I'm not treating you for your husband or your kids or your neighbors or anybody else. I'm treating you that's in front of you. Okay, that's in front of me. And we come up with a plan. So that's the code of ethics. "There's also a known issue with medicine and the legal system. And the, again, the AMA code of ethics says two things. We know that there is going to be a conflict between ethical and moral medical treatment of people and the law at times. And so as a physician, your duty is to try to do what you can, to do both to take care of your patient and to kind of reconcile the law. "So I did. I went to the state of Utah, I went to the House, I went to some of the Senate subcommittees, I, I was, I testified in some of these committee hearings, to try to get laws changed, mandate laws, mask mandates, Covid mandates, shot mandates. And we were successful. In the state of Utah, we were able to pass laws, that reversed the mask mandates. That made it actually, to some degree, a fineable offense for businesses to require Covid vaccines in order to go to work and to go to school. "And so that was my first step. The second step out of this is that if you cannot change that during the time that you're doing, you are, by ethics and moral values, you are required to take care of your patient in front of you, not to abide by, like you said, to abide by the law. So where is the AMA and all this? That's their code of ethics. I don't see them standing behind me and, you know, and trying to support the medical values and ethics that they, that, you know, that they claim on their website is one of, you know, one of their, you know, bastions of health and what physicians need to do."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1932910733140111732/amplify_video_thumb/1932907167931088896/img/iZ_xepSyv5UUHCM_.jpg)
![THOMAS MASSIE on Trump trying to whip his vote on the 2020 restatement that war powers resides with Congress "His argument... [was] that he could bluff Iran into doing what he wanted" "[But that would've] given [Trump] the power to declare war without Congress's involvement" "he didn't convince me. I did vote for the resolution that restated the Constitution... says you got to come to Congress if you want to have a war with Iran" "his first mistake may have been making Marco Rubio Secretary of State" "his second mistake would be letting Lindsey Graham on that airplane so many times, whispering in his ear" "finally, [maybe his] biggest mistake is letting Israel control too much of his policy. Perhaps it was taking $200 million from Miriam Adelson" This clip of Massie (Thomas Massie) is taken from an interview with James Patrick (James Patrick) posted to YouTube on May 21, 2026. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "In January of 2020, I had a conversation with President Trump about war with Iran. Now, to put this in context, they killed Soleimani, not on Iranian soil, but in Iraq. And he was an Iranian general. And then, we had a drone flying over there, and they shot it down. "Now, whether it was over Iran or over the water, I don't know. Maybe we'll never know. But at that point, the president threatened to take action against Iran for that, and he was being encouraged to do so by members of his cabinet. "So we had a vote here in Congress in January of 2020, and the President heard that I was going to vote for no war. Basically, the vote was a restatement of the Constitution and that war powers resided in Congress. It was to say that President Trump cannot go to war with Iran without an act of Congress. "There were only three Republicans who voted for that. But the president heard that I was going to vote for it. So he called me up to whip me on this vote, and he said, I'm more, anti-war than you are. And I said, well, you— In fact, you are. You've not started a war. You're the first president that hasn't started a war. "Now, remember, this was his fourth year in office, 2020. You're the first president that hasn't started a war that I could vote for since I was 18. And he said, I guess you're right. Thank you for saying that. "His argument to me was that if we didn't constrict his ability to rattle the sabers and threaten war, that he could bluff Iran into doing what he wanted and therefore avoid war. And they said, well, that would work just fine unless they call your bluff. And then now we've given you the power to declare war without Congress's involvement, and you're obligated to war if your intention was to bluff. Now you're obligated to war. "And, that day, he didn't convince me. I did vote for the resolution that restated the Constitution that says you got to come to Congress if you want to have a war with Iran. Now, fortunately, that war did not happen. But here we are in his second term, and I think he's— "You know, his first mistake may have been making Marco Rubio Secretary of State. And then his second mistake would be letting Lindsey Graham on that airplane so many times, whispering in his ear. And then, you know, finally, it may be the biggest mistake is letting Israel control too much of his policy. Perhaps it was taking $200 million from Miriam Adelson. "That was a mistake that, I think, led largely to him being predisposed to listening to Israel's interests over America's interests with regard to war with Iran."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2059481569069592663/amplify_video_thumb/2059476651172610048/img/n83kIB0-ZYntNakD.jpg)
