SaintsInDome2006

No, I’m saying that Bondi, Patel & Bongino are the ones responsible for investigating this, they have 100% gold plated maga credentials and they don’t see it as having an ounce of credibility.

I think what you’re showing is the the AG, FBID & Dep FBID don’t see any proof in what you just posted.

Before I review this from, ahem “Aoflex”, I’m sure you’d agree that Bondi, Patel & Bongino can be trusted to bring the facts of this to light, yes?

I don’t know when the first corruption investigation took place - maybe the 1920s? - but yes officials from both parties have investigated officials from the other party as well as their own countless times. There’s nothing inherently wrong as long as there is a firewall between the executive & prosecutors/investigators & as long as procedures guaranteeing that are followed.

Patel: he hasn’t seen anything about Epstein & sex trafficking to other people. Wow.

The FBI Director doesn’t know the difference between an informant, a witness, person of interest, a subject & a suspect.

Q: So, about that witness tampering. A: <Tourette’s episode / conniption fit>

You mean stuff like this?

This is like a 3rd grader telling an adult he’s going to go tell the principle.

Totally normally socialized president tells Australian reporter he will report him to his Prime Minister.

Actually yes, we can do quite a lot to limit them.

The Death of Discourse.

If you have hate in your heart you may be in trouble, says one local hate-free man.

This, as we say, is a deuce-bag.

Right. This is the part where we reject the Dems by calling for unity & redirecting our energy towards foreign enemies. Right?

Catherine Herridge - currently unemployed - has the docs. Apparently this is about the efforts to overturn the 2020 election. It’s a wide range of issues though, including financial fraud. There are whole public reports & legal filings on this stuff.

Comer: “Wait!”

Oh, & you’re all for that I take it.

It sounds like the Fed’s are backing off charges. The state of Utah will proceed by itself thankfully. Hopefully it stays that way.

<pause> Unfettered by the United States of America in their efforts against our great nation.

Our enemies - Putin, Xi, Kim, Khameini (& ISIS, AQ) - must be laughing their asses off. What a delight it must be to watch us tear ourselves apart & wreck our institutions while they work unfettered.

Also let’s discuss Oswald. Communist, far far extremmmmee left. Murdered a generational liberal icon. So what happened to the razor there?

It’s easy to debate considering who Crooks and Robinson are and what they came from.

About the content of what Kirk said. - You’ve agreed (TIA) that Kirk did say this: “I have a very, very radical view on this, but I can defend it, and I've thought about it. We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the mid-1960s.“ Kirk himself says his position is “very, very radical.” Thats not liberals or the mad left, Thats Kirk. This is the discussion from Rumble: >>CHARLIE KIRK (HOST): The Civil Rights Act, though, let's be clear, created a beast, and that beast has now turned into an anti-white weapon. JEREMY CARL (GUEST): Yeah. And that -- and that's -- and that's the reality, and so we just need to fundamentally relook at a lot of our civil rights legal regime. And without that, even though I don't think it's, sort of, the magic bullet -- but I think without that, there's limits to the amount of progress we're gonna make.<< >>KIRK: Well and I wanna … but if you have unapologetic, ferocious anti-white racism, then young whites are gonna find some very radical political positions.<< I’ve clipped out the parts about the big bad media so we can focus on the context. Have I missed anything substantive as to the CRA here? Please let me know. Kirk did not call for repeal of the CRA, but he framed it as “anti-white”. But the guest calls for a fundamental reexamination - & I take it retooling - of the legal regime, & suggests that’d be impossible without repeal. He may be right about that. He also says there’s no “magic bullet” - IMO that meant there was *no way they were going to be able to repeal the CRA. Kirk switched to discussing the media, to me suggesting they stood in the way, but he might feel differently now. That speech he gave was in December 2023. A lot of alarming things have happened since then. If their leader instructed the GOP to repeal the CRA I think the Congress would do it. There’s nothing in Kirk’s commentary - it’s a beast, it’s anti-white, it’s ferocious, it’s a ***weapon - to indicate he would support keeping it. Honestly I don’t know why anyone who agrees with him would. Also, if Kirk described himself as “very, very radical” then what were the “very radical positions” that Kirk expressed concern about? That’s the context.

Some notes on sourcing: - As I posted above Media Matters has a transcript, Rumble does not. - For some reason (?) Kirk’s TPUSA site does not post a link to this show (& FAIK none of his events, I don’t know). Again for some reason TPUSA will not release the video or transcript of this event. - Again, on sourcing. Kirk has his own channel on Rumble, that’s what you posted from. Rumble is itself host to many extreme right hosts, writers & content creators. For instance, Nick Fuentes is on that site as is Laura Loomer.