Published By
Created On
26 Jun 2023 19:44:53 UTC
Transaction ID
Cost
Safe for Work
Free
Yes
Shady Law Firm & Big Pharma Team Up To Screw Over Consumers
Pharmaceutical giant Merck is suing the federal government so that they can continue to price gouge American consumers. Merck is angry about legislation that would require them to lower the cost of just a handful of their drugs covered by Medicare because they want to squeeze as much money as possible out of sick people. Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more.
Link - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/06/business/merck-medicare-drug-prices.html
Check out our merch by visiting our store: https://www.buyrof.com/
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: https://twitter.com/RingofFireMedia
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
Pharmaceutical giant Merck is suing the federal government so they can continue to price gouge American consumers. Merck is really mad about legislation that would require them to lower the cost of a handful of their drugs covered by Medicare because they wanna squeeze every dime outta sick people. So here's, their argument is that it violates their First Amendment to be able to say you're price, I mean, they ought to have a First Amendment and a Fifth Amendment right, this is their argument, constitutionally they should have a First Amendment and Fifth Amendment right to price gouge. Right? And I guess to lie, because in order to get there, they have to lie. It's a $14 billion profit they made last year and they say that's not enough. We can't do research and development with only a $14 billion profit. We can't give enough to the CEOs and to management. Right?
Exactly. And the lawyer, this is such a stupid argument that I think even somebody fresh outta law school on day one would be able to tear this apart because this legislation does not set the prices. And by the way, that is what the lawyers say. They say, oh, the legislation is setting prices and you can't do that. Okay. Well it doesn't. It actually, the legislation says you have to negotiate.
Negotiate. It doesn't, that is the fine point to the entire argument. First of all, the people, I think this is like a sub-story. The people making this argument is the Jones Day Law Firm. Read this book, this book that's up on the screen in order to understand, in order to understand a level of corruption, a level of ugly that will make your skin crawl, you have got to read this book. And then you understand why Merck loves Jones Day. You know, why would they hire Jones Day? Because they're just like Jones Day. And so if you look at this story, I mean, you gotta read this book. I don't wanna say anything beyond that. Read the book. It lays it out about Jones Day Law Firm. I don't have to say it, it's right there in the book. But the idea of Merck hiring them to do this, to make this ridiculous argument, makes perfect sense to me.
Oh, it absolutely does. And listen, Merck is not even required to negotiate all of their drug prices. It's just a couple of them covered under Medicare and they're still gonna make an astronomical profit. And even with the Jones Day argument, it makes me so mad because I'm not a lawyer and I can pick it apart. That's how bad they are at this right now. Because they say.
Well, they know it. They, look, they got bright lawyers. They have some of the smartest lawyers that ever graduate.
But you're defending the indefensible. So you have to be stupid.
Right. I mean, at the end of this Jones Day gets to say, wow, we had a big victory here. We kept sick people from getting a better deal on pharmaceuticals, people who were dying. We had a great day because we kept Merck from, we allowed Merck to avoid having to negotiate for lower prices. Isn't that a big victory? Sit around the kitchen table, hey kids, what'd you do? What did I do today? Well, let me tell you what I did. Wow.
You see all those sick people out there, they don't get to get insulin because of what daddy did at work today. That's what they have to tell their kids.
Read the book. I mean, just read the book. Take it on yourself. I think it's a, I think the book is important, not just because it's about Jones Day, but it lays out kind of what the entire civil justice process is looking like right now. It's worth reading for that reason alone.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyPkFn3ffsA
Link - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/06/business/merck-medicare-drug-prices.html
Check out our merch by visiting our store: https://www.buyrof.com/
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: https://twitter.com/RingofFireMedia
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
Pharmaceutical giant Merck is suing the federal government so they can continue to price gouge American consumers. Merck is really mad about legislation that would require them to lower the cost of a handful of their drugs covered by Medicare because they wanna squeeze every dime outta sick people. So here's, their argument is that it violates their First Amendment to be able to say you're price, I mean, they ought to have a First Amendment and a Fifth Amendment right, this is their argument, constitutionally they should have a First Amendment and Fifth Amendment right to price gouge. Right? And I guess to lie, because in order to get there, they have to lie. It's a $14 billion profit they made last year and they say that's not enough. We can't do research and development with only a $14 billion profit. We can't give enough to the CEOs and to management. Right?
Exactly. And the lawyer, this is such a stupid argument that I think even somebody fresh outta law school on day one would be able to tear this apart because this legislation does not set the prices. And by the way, that is what the lawyers say. They say, oh, the legislation is setting prices and you can't do that. Okay. Well it doesn't. It actually, the legislation says you have to negotiate.
Negotiate. It doesn't, that is the fine point to the entire argument. First of all, the people, I think this is like a sub-story. The people making this argument is the Jones Day Law Firm. Read this book, this book that's up on the screen in order to understand, in order to understand a level of corruption, a level of ugly that will make your skin crawl, you have got to read this book. And then you understand why Merck loves Jones Day. You know, why would they hire Jones Day? Because they're just like Jones Day. And so if you look at this story, I mean, you gotta read this book. I don't wanna say anything beyond that. Read the book. It lays it out about Jones Day Law Firm. I don't have to say it, it's right there in the book. But the idea of Merck hiring them to do this, to make this ridiculous argument, makes perfect sense to me.
Oh, it absolutely does. And listen, Merck is not even required to negotiate all of their drug prices. It's just a couple of them covered under Medicare and they're still gonna make an astronomical profit. And even with the Jones Day argument, it makes me so mad because I'm not a lawyer and I can pick it apart. That's how bad they are at this right now. Because they say.
Well, they know it. They, look, they got bright lawyers. They have some of the smartest lawyers that ever graduate.
But you're defending the indefensible. So you have to be stupid.
Right. I mean, at the end of this Jones Day gets to say, wow, we had a big victory here. We kept sick people from getting a better deal on pharmaceuticals, people who were dying. We had a great day because we kept Merck from, we allowed Merck to avoid having to negotiate for lower prices. Isn't that a big victory? Sit around the kitchen table, hey kids, what'd you do? What did I do today? Well, let me tell you what I did. Wow.
You see all those sick people out there, they don't get to get insulin because of what daddy did at work today. That's what they have to tell their kids.
Read the book. I mean, just read the book. Take it on yourself. I think it's a, I think the book is important, not just because it's about Jones Day, but it lays out kind of what the entire civil justice process is looking like right now. It's worth reading for that reason alone.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyPkFn3ffsA
Author
Content Type
Unspecified
video/mp4
Language
English
More from the publisher
Controlling
VIDEO
TOM C
tom-cotton-held-up-biden-nominations
Republican Senator Tom Cotton has been holding up President Biden's US Attorney nominations for "Democrat states" since April because he got his feelings hurt by Democratic Senator Dick Durbin. During a hearing in March, Durbin interrupted Cotton after Cotton had cut off a nominee that he was questioning without letting her respond, and Cotton pledged to hold up all further nominees until he got an apology. On Tuesday, Durbin apologized, Cotton stopped obstructing, and 5 US attorneys were confirmed by a Senate that is clearly broken. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins discusses this.
Link - https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1468353371585269765
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Find our merchandise at Teespring: https://teespring.com/stores/rof-store
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/RingofFireRadio
Google+: http://plus.google.com/118415831573195648557
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
Follow more of our stories at http://www.TROFIRE.com
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
Yesterday, president Joe Biden got five of his US attorney nominees approved in the Senate. Big day, right? Well, not exactly because this move actually showed us how dysfunctional and of course stupid the entire United States Senate has become. The reason the five individuals were able to pass and get approved yesterday is because Democratic Senator Dick Durban apologized to Republican Senator Tom cotton for something that happened all the way back in March when the Senate, the Senate committee was overseeing a hearing for the confirmation, confirmation of Vanita Gupta. Tom Cotton was asking Gupta questions and not giving her the opportunity to respond. So Dick Durban, and again, this was in March of this year, Dick Durban steps in interrupts Cotton and says, stop talking and let her finish. Simple enough, right? Cotton got. Cotton got super. So he vowed from that day forward, not a single nominee for US attorney position in a state represented by Democrats was gonna make it through the Senate until Cotton got that apology from Dick Durban. Here's Cotton actually a couple months ago, talking about his
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY1C2Jmchm0
Transaction
Created
2 weeks ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
PROSE
prosecutors-rip-apart-lindsey-graham's
Lindsey Graham has decided that he will NOT be complying with a subpoena issued to him from the grand jury in Georgia, and former prosecutors and legal experts are ripping him apart over this decision. In addition to offering a faulty legal premise as to why he won't comply, the experts believe that he's actually more afraid of incriminating himself in the scheme. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins explains what's happening.
Link - https://www.newsweek.com/lindsey-graham-subpoena-testify-georgia-glenn-kirschner-1722572
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Find our merchandise at Teespring: https://teespring.com/stores/rof-store
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: https://twitter.com/RingofFireMedia
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
Lindsey Graham has made it clear that he is absolutely not under any circumstances gonna comply with the subpoena issued to him by Fannie Willis's special grand jury in the state of Georgia and prosecutors, former prosecutors and legal experts are already out there. Trashing Lindsay Graham's decision as quite possibly. One of the dumbest things ever here is what Glenn Kirchner, former federal prosecutor had to say about Lindsay Graham refusing to comply with the subpoena. Why is Lindsay Graham so desperate not to be placed under oath by a Georgia state grand jury and have to testify about all that? Well, looks like we have to go back to the fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination because it sure looks like Lindsay went down to Georgia. He was looking for some votes to steal. He was in a bind because Trump was way behind and he was willing to make a deal.
So that's one theory put forth, of course, by a former prosecutor, Glenn Kirchner. He knows what he's talking about. He's done this for his entire life. So could be that Lindsay Graham is afraid of incriminating himself. Then of course you have former solicitor to general Neil Catal, who says, he says, referring to Lindsay Graham, this is all politics. Well, if it is all politics and you know, so much about the situation, Senator Graham, and you're so confident, there's nothing of substance, then I'm sure you're eager to go and testify before the grand jury and comply with the SEP, uh, with the subpoena. But of course he's not. He wants to try to block the subpoena. He's claiming it's some sort of separation of powers problem, which I guess is convincing if Lindsay Graham is trying to prove he has no business being on the Senate judiciary committee. So everybody's trash and Lindsay Graham for this idiotic decision and Lindsay Graham deserves it, right? His legal team is trying to argue that as a sitting Senator, he has some kind of limited immunity, uh, which doesn't really apply in this case because this is not actually a matter that Senator Lindsay Graham, a Senator from South Carolina, not from Georgia would have any reason to be involved in, right? The judiciary committee was not investigating this. They weren't looking into it. They weren't doing anything at all with it.
So what was Lindsay Graham's interest in this other than of course being Donald Trump's Lackey, making a phone call to his neighbor state saying, Hey, it sure would be great. If we could get a more favorable outcome was the phrase he used in the phone call that of course we have recordings of. And what's even funnier by the way about all of this with Lindsay Graham is that he's not a target of the investigation. They didn't subpoena him saying, come on in. We're gonna try to get you to self incriminate. It's like, Hey, you're a witness like you are with Trump. We want, we wanna know what you got. We
Wanna know what you said, what he said, what you were told to do. Just tell us, we're looking for information on this guy. Not on you, but Graham won't do it. And I am willing to bet that it's because Glen Kirchner is in fact, correct. And Graham is afraid that if he does go there, he could end up making himself a giant target of this grand jury.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tq3R3ubuwGI
Transaction
Created
2 weeks ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
Controlling
VIDEO
LAURE
lauren-boebert-just-trashed-congress-up
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evxSpx7siYU
Transaction
Created
2 weeks ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
Controlling
VIDEO
ALINA
alina-habba-appears-to-violate-gag-order
Last week, Alina Habba told Sean Hannity that the gag order against Donald Trump was unconstitutional because she was confused about what SHE was allowed to say (because Trump is forbidden from directing people to attack those who he can't.) But that didn't stop her from going on the offensive against Michael Cohen as he testified this week, meaning that she no longer cares about what she can and cannot say. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins explains what happened.
Link - https://www.rawstory.com/alina-habba-michael-cohen/
Check out our merch by visiting our store: https://www.buyrof.com/
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: https://twitter.com/RingofFireMedia
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
During an interview on Fox News this week, Alina Haa appeared to once again violate Donald Trump's gag order for him. Even though in a Fox News appearance at the end of last week, she said very clearly to Sean Hannity that the gag order is unconstitutional because she as Trump's spokesperson, doesn't know what she is allowed to say or not say. So it's confusing her, but she knows there are things she is not supposed to say. That's what she said last week. But this week, once again, on the same network, Fox News, she decided to bring up Michael Cohen, who of course was testifying earlier this week. And here's what she said. The indictment goes to a books and records crime, a book and record crime that was done at Trump Tower by an accountant that booked a legal fee as a legal fee, as President Trump said earlier, he didn't book it as construction.
He didn't book it as electrical work. It was a legal fee to Michael Cohen. And that's when Fox News host Sandra Smith asks, so, Alina, how would you go at Michael Cohen here? And Alina responded the way I did, you know, I can't speak about the witness, but you already did. So you're admitting you're not allowed to speak about him, even though you, in just a couple sentences ago, spoke about him. And last week, as I mentioned, you said that the gag order was so confusing to you that you didn't know what you could or could not say because you are being paid by Donald Trump to say things. Therefore, what you say could be a violation of the gag order for him, not for you, obviously. But therein lies the problem we learned this week from Andrew Rice, a reporter with the, uh, New York magazine. I believe it is, that Donald Trump was scribbling notes on a piece of paper during the trial this week.
And those notes 'cause Rice was able to see over his shoulder what he was writing in editing. Those were the quotes given to the people who showed up in court on behalf of Donald Trump, his friends and allies in Congress, that they then said to the press. So there's no doubt anymore that Donald Trump is directing people to say these things. So I have little doubt in my mind that Donald Trump is somehow directing Alina Haa, considering the fact that she's on his payroll as a spokesperson, literally her job to speak on behalf of Trump. She gets money to do that. So it's very difficult to argue that he's not paying her to go out there and do this. She even is admitting, by the way, that she's not allowed to talk about him, but by God, she still seems to talk about him a lot. So it is what it is. Let's see what the judge decides to do. But at this point, Alina Haba, as an actual lawyer, needs to understand that you're not gonna be the one getting in trouble here. It's gonna be your client. And that trouble could include a night or possibly even a weekend stay in the county lockup.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVcJy0B8Nb0
Transaction
Created
2 weeks ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
ALINA
alina-habba-may-face-serious-legal
According to legal experts, Trump lawyer Alina Habba might have some legal problems of her own in the near future based on what she's said so far in the New York fraud trial. One expert says that Habba knowingly presented false information during the actual trial on day one, something that is absolutely forbidden in court. If true, Habba will likely be sanctioned, or worse, by the judge when all is said and done. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins explains what's happening.
Link - https://www.rawstory.com/trump-lawyer-alina-habba/
Check out our merch by visiting our store: https://www.buyrof.com/
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: https://twitter.com/RingofFireMedia
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
Donald Trump may be the one on trial in New York, but it's Alina Haba who has really had the worst week out of anybody to start the week off. It was revealed that Alina Haba is in fact the one who oopsy Daisy forgot to fill out the form to have a jury trial instead of a bench trial. The judge, by the way, was kind enough to remind her of that on day one of the trial, like, Hey, we're here because you messed up. And then of course, on that same day, Alina Haba got in trouble by the judge because she was yelling while talking to him instead of just speaking in a normal voice. So he had to remind her to basically tone it the hell down, and then as if things couldn't get any worse for her, they got worse for her because Alina Haba, while yelling at the judge, yelled a bunch of things in court as part of her argument that were completely factually incorrect.
Now, this was not a part of her opening statement where, you know, sometimes lawyers can play a little fast and loose. They're trying to almost present sometimes an opinion rather than a statement of fact. Opening statements, you know, the rules are a little bit looser. This was actually during the trial and she said things to the judge that were untrue. One of them, of course, telling the judge what he said in his own ruling, even though what she said he said wasn't in the ruling, and the judge had to remind that, Hey, you are saying things that are not true. And that of course is why former assistant district attorney in Manhattan, Catherine Christian, told M S N B C, that Alina Haba might have to expect some, uh, pretty significant legal consequences when all of this is over. Here's what Catherine Christian said. There are no consequences for Donald Trump, but for his lawyers, because that wasn't an opening statement.
That was basically her giving a press statement. Uh, in court there's a professional responsibility. You can't make arguments that you knowingly know are not based in law and facts. You just can't make that. You can make arguments, you know, all of us who have tried cases could step on that line, but if you know for a fact that it's not based on law and facts, you're not supposed to make that. So she might be dealing with issues after this trial, so hopefully she's getting paid well, and again, that's actually coming from a legal expert, former assistant prosecutor in Manhattan. And Alina Haba has a lot of trouble facing her, right? You can't yell at the judge. I mean, the judge could technically just hold you in contempt for that if he felt like doing it. Um, but if you're gonna sit there and bring up things that are factually incorrect facts that the court, by the way, has already decided, okay, you do not get to tell the court
That they're wrong. They have been decided by that court already. So you are presenting an argument as a statement of fact, even though the court has said it's a lie, doesn't matter which feel court already made its decision on that. So yes, Alina Haa could be facing sanctions when all of this is over. If she continues this kind of behavior, she could be facing worse. She could be facing disciplinary hearings, which could strip her of her law license in the state of New York.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-W5up4jmWI
Transaction
Created
2 weeks ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
JANUA
january-6th-committee-finally-subpoenas
The January 6th Committee has finally decided to reverse their earlier decree and they have now issued subpoenas to 5 Republican lawmakers, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. The lawmakers that are being subpoenaed have all played some role in the plot to overturn the election, either willingly or unwillingly, and the Committee clearly believes that these lawmakers have something of value to add to their investigation. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins explains what's happening.
Link - https://www.huffpost.com/entry/january-6-committee-subpoenas-kevin-mccarthy_n_627d4185e4b010453ae28f13
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Find our merchandise at Teespring: https://teespring.com/stores/rof-store
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/RingofFireRadio
Google+: http://plus.google.com/118415831573195648557
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
Follow more of our stories at http://www.TROFIRE.com
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
The January 6th committee has finally decided to stop playing nice with Republicans. And on Thursday they issued subpoenas for five sitting members of Congress. One of whom happens to be house minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, the other Republican subpoenaed includes Scott Perry, Jim Jordan, Andy Biggs, and Mo Brooks. Now each of these individuals was sent a request prior to being subpoenaed, asking them to voluntarily come and sit down with the committee. Talk about the conversations they had with Donald Trump before, during and after the capital riot. And of course in Mo Brooks' instance, uh, we'd kind of like to know why you spoke at the stop, the steel rally, and maybe you could explain your decision to wear a Bulletproof vest to it. But some of these individuals, the conversations were pretty much innocuous enough, right? Kevin McCarthy is not necessarily that we know of at the moment implicated in any of the attempts to overthrow the results of the election.
Andy Biggs, Jim Jordan, on the other hand, Scott Perry, they are based on the text messages that we have seen between these individuals and Mark Meadows, based on these individuals, attending meetings, you know, strategy meetings about how to overturn the results of the election. That's very serious stuff. So Kevin McCarthy likely is not gonna give us any information or any insight into Trump's attempts to overturn the results of the election, but Jordan bigs and Perry could in fact provide that Mo Brooks on the other hand might have more information about the actual strategy that led to the stop, the steel rally. Uh, there have been reports in the past, obviously of his staffers, you know, working with those people, which would make sense of course, because Brooks was speaking there, his people would have to be involved in some way, but we are probably headed for a long legal showdown.
The fact that these individuals did not wanna voluntarily sit in front of the committee, kind of tells us that they're not just gonna readily comply with these subpoenas. You know, they're, they're probably going to fight them. It's gonna be a long legal battle. It's gonna be an expensive legal battle for these individuals. So there could come a point where they have to decide, do I want to spend all of this money fighting it or do I just want to sit down, but sitting down could in fact be a sign of weakness, especially in a year when every single one of these individuals, because they're in the house is up for reelection. So they have decisions to make. And if they make the decision to not comply with the subpoena, the house would then of course vote to hold them in contempt. If the house approves the contempt charge, it would then go to the DOJ and then the DOJ would have a choice to make. Are you gonna sit on it? Like you've been sitting on the Mark Meadows contempt charge, or are you
Actually going to do something about it? So yes, this is big news, but it's big news that doesn't tell us anything at the moment. We really won't know what's going to happen until it actually happens.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJf-qCa4bNE
Transaction
Created
2 weeks ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
RAND
rand-paul-tells-conservatives-to-abandon
During an appearance on Fox News, Republican Senator Rand Paul called on his fellow conservatives to leave Twitter because the platform clearly "hates Republicans." What Paul is actually unhappy about is the fact that people are calling him out for his BS. Social media has given everyone in this country a voice, and that is something that Republicans like Rand Paul absolutely cannot stand because they are forced to listen for once. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins discusses this.
Link - https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1397271783649292288?s=11
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Find our merchandise at Teespring: https://teespring.com/stores/rof-store
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/RingofFireRadio
Google+: http://plus.google.com/118415831573195648557
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
Follow more of our stories at http://www.TROFIRE.com
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
Republican Senator Rand Paul is mad as hell, and he wants everybody to know it. During a recent appearance on Fox news this week, Rand Paul finally had had enough and he actually called on conservatives to abandon Twitter. Just leave the platform altogether, because as he says, they simply hate Republicans. Take a look, Rand Paul, in his own words, here it is.
But this is a private company that basically hates conservatives, hates Republicans. They don't want us on there. And ultimately the answer maybe is Republicans need to just quit. We just need to leave it because every day they allow hundreds if not thousands of people to wish me and my family violence, and frankly, I'm tired of it. Uh, you know, I'm just, I'm just tired of them allowing this. And I...
You see Rand, I don't buy anything that you just said. Now let me be clear, there are horrible people that do say horrible things on social media, you know, wishing ill against members of Congress. We do see it on both sides. But Twitter actually has mechanisms for people to report these tweets or, or for even you to report these tweets, Rand Paul, and those people get suspended or banned, permanently. Literally happens every day. Sometimes for t
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4gjsMmpxKo
Transaction
Created
2 weeks ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
RNC G
rnc-gets-to-work-purging-people-who
Donald Trump's cronies that are now in charge of the Republican National Committee have begun purging employees, with dozens let go so far this week. These people are being let go because the new leadership wants to make sure that they have people who are loyal only to Trump, and that's not going to end well for the Party. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins explains what's happening.
Link - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/mar/11/new-rnc-leadership-trump-loyals-purge-staff
Check out our merch by visiting our store: https://www.buyrof.com/
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: https://twitter.com/RingofFireMedia
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
Now that Donald Trump has his handpicked puppets, Michael Watley and his daughter-in-Law, Laura Trump running the RNC, the two idiots have wasted no time in purging RNC staff starting late on Monday evening, dozens and dozens of RNC staffers and even some contractors were immediately let go after the first full day of Whatley and Trump's leadership. Now, what's interesting about this, of course, is the fact that we're in the middle of a presidential campaign. On top of that, we're also in the middle of an election year where Republicans, one wanna retain control of the House of Representatives, and two, wanna regain control of the Senate. Now, I don't know about you, but if I were running any kind of organization and we had a very big contentious thing coming up where I needed all hands on deck, I would think that the dumbest decision possible would be to fire 60 people on my first day.
But that is what Michael Watley and Laura Trump did, and it's very obvious why they did it. They want people that are only loyal to Donald Trump, not people that are loyal to the Republican Party or people that are interested in winning elections. You know, the kinds of things you need when you're running one of the two largest political parties in the United States. But no, we can't have experienced people, we can't have people who know what they're doing in the Republican Party. God, no. That would be insane, wouldn't it, folks? So one person with familiar, uh, uh, familiar with the situation described it as quote, an absolute bloodbath, an absolute bloodbath at the RNC. Lemme read you this. The firings are mainly to ensure that there is no overlap in roles between RNC and the Trump campaign. The Trump campaign, for instance, already has robust political and communications teams.
Uh, so you know, they fire a bunch of those people. Uh, the firings are part of a strategy to ensure that only staffers committed to Trump and the MAGA movement are left at the RNC as Trump tightens his grip on the party ahead of the presidential election in November. That is, uh, from The Guardian, by the way. So Trump tightens his grip on the Republican party and the first thing he does, he has Whatley and his daughter-in-Law, walk in and tell 60 people You're fired. Yeah, I guess that's technically Trump's trademark there. But again, you're now gonna be bringing in people who are not as experienced, who do not know what's going on. You're already in the middle of a race and you're changing drivers. I don't think I have the ability to
Convey to you how disastrous this is for the Republican party. And yes, I am almost laughing as I say this because it's like the party is engaged in some weird form of self emulation. That's what's happening here. They are killing themselves to appease Donald Trump, and they know they're doing it. They're willingly doing it, and all we can do is sit back and watch and laugh.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UM22JWUdEyI
Transaction
Created
2 weeks ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English
Controlling
VIDEO
TRUMP
trump-escaped-being-disqualified-to-run
Why is Donald Trump not disqualified for running for president in 2024? Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins discusses this.
Check out our merch by visiting our store: https://www.buyrof.com/
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: https://twitter.com/RingofFireMedia
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
Here's a question from user speaker of truth, who asks, why isn't Trump disqualified from running for president since he incited the insurrection? This kind of goes back to another question that I've answered, and it is, it depends on what happened on January 6th, 2021. I think at this point, a, a lawyer would be able to go into court and make a successful argument that Donald Trump incited the mob that day. He literally told them, you have to go and fight like hell to take your country back. That that's pretty much a marching order. And the reason I say it's pretty much a marching order is because that's actually what some of the Capitol rioters who have gone to court and defended themselves have said. They said, I did this because Trump just told me to. So here I am. I'm, I'm, I did the thing he told me too.
It's his fault. So again, a good lawyer's gonna be able to walk into court pretty easily and be like, oh, you want me to prove that he incited it? Here you go. The problem is, as I said, what happened on January 6th, 2021? Was it a riot? Was it a group of unruly idiots, or was it an actual insurrection? And you're gonna have a tough time trying to, you know, disqualify Trump at the 14th Amendment. With that question of what happened that day. We know there were certain groups whose explicit goal was to actually stop a function of Congress. They wanted to stop the certification of the electoral college votes. They wanted to basically deny the dually elected, incoming government of the United States. I think that fits pretty well into the definition of insurrection. Then you have other people who didn't really know what the hell they were doing.
There was no premeditation, and that's kind of what you need with an insurrection. In order to be able to prove it legally, you have to prove that this thing was planned, that the insurrection was the point, and that they had an end goal in mind, and that's where you're gonna run into trouble. Obviously, as I said, we have seen some individuals that have gone to trial, right? There's a proud boys trial happening right now alleging seditious conspiracy because they, you know, according to the prosecutors, they had planned this. They knew what they were doing. They knew what the goal was. They actually had a strategy. But the other people, I do think some of them really did kind of get caught up in the moment and ended up making stupid mistakes. And, Hey, you still gotta pay for your stupid mistakes. But those people didn't go there with a plan. They were just there because, Hey, I love Trump. Hey, everybody's walking this way. Hell yeah, I'll walk. Oh, we're in the Capitol. Yeah, I'll go in the Capitol. Those people, you know, I, I don't think they were engaging in an insurrection. You just have stupid people doing stupid things. So again, the bottom line is, could you prove that Trump incited it? A good lawyer? I think a hundred percent they could, could you prove that what happened that day was an insurrection? That's where things get a lot tougher. Thanks
For watching, and if you like what you saw, don't forget to like, comment, share, and most importantly, subscribe to our Ring of Fire channel here.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DM54-d26gOA
Transaction
Created
2 weeks ago
Content Type
Language
video/mp4
English