The David Pakman Show - 12/29/22: The Truth About the Twitter Files, George Santos Criminal Probe

Episode Date: December 29, 2022

-- On the Show: -- Despite claims from the right that the left is "ignoring" the Twitter Files, it is actually the right that is lying or confused about what the Twitter Files actually say -- As COVID appears to explode in China, required negative COVID tests will again start in the US in early January after a plane from China arrives in Italy with more than half the passengers positive for COVID -- Republicans are desperately rethinking their strategy around abortion after the disastrous 2022 midterms -- Fox News tries to blame Joe Biden's Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg for the Southwest Airlines meltdown, which is both inaccurate and hypocritical -- Lying Republican Congressman-elect George Santos is now under criminal investigation for his many lies -- Lying Republican Congressman-elect George Santos once claimed his mom died in 9/11, and months later claimed she died in 2016 -- Radical Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is absolutely furious with Tulsi Gabbard for her critical interview of lying Republican Congressman-elect George Santos on Fox News -- Failed Republican Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake panics and deletes tweets attacking an Arizona judge -- Voicemail caller asks whether the George Santos fiasco exposes a failure by journalism and opposition research to catch Santos' lies earlier -- On the Bonus Show: Congressman Jamie Raskin diagnosed with cancer, police called to hospital room of terminally-ill patient vaping marijuana, ban on single-use restaurant tableware in France, much more... 🌰 Munk Pack: Code PAKMAN saves you 20% at https://thld.co/munkpack_pakman_1222 ⚠️ Use code PAKMAN for a free supply of BlueChew at https://go.bluechew.com/david-pakman 👩‍❤️‍👨 Try the Paired App FREE for 7 days and get 25% OFF at https://paired.com/pakman 👍 Get 20% off an Allform sofa or armchair at https://allform.com/pakman -- Become a Supporter: http://www.davidpakman.com/membership -- Subscribe on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/thedavidpakmanshow -- Subscribe to Pakman Live: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanlive -- Subscribe to Pakman Finance: https://www.youtube.com/pakmanfinance -- Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/davidpakmanshow -- Like us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/davidpakmanshow -- Leave us a message at The David Pakman Show Voicemail Line (219)-2DAVIDP

Speaker 1 Let's start today with the Twitter files. There's a growing story being told by those on the right in the mag crowd and elsewhere that the left, whoever that is supposed to mean, is, quote, ignoring the Twitter files, which some are calling Orwellian and one of the greatest stories about censorship and injustice towards right wing perspectives in decades or something. And I want to go through this and really break it down into its component parts. The first question is whether the left and let's pretend we know exactly what they mean by that. The left is ignoring it. That is absolutely untrue. And in fact, you can I can I can really only speak for myself and others that I am I'm

sort of aware of. But we've all been talking about it. And you can find numerous stories about the Twitter files on my YouTube channel and our podcast archives, et cetera. Now, invariably, the people who first say, David, you've been ignoring it. We'll see the things I've said. Well, you're ignoring the main point, which is that Twitter and Biden and big tech censor the right and then also try to help the left by preventing negative story. Well, so it's not that I'm ignoring it. It's that you don't like the conclusion I've come to. So let's talk about the reality of the Twitter files. If you are media literate and Internet literate and you look at this story and you look at the facts, you realize there is practically nothing

there. Now, I won't say nothing there. I say practically nothing there. And we'll get to what there is there. But this Twitter file story is fundamentally a grievance story, the type of grievance story that the right loves to say the left is obsessed with. The right loves to say the left is all about grievance culture. I've been wrong because of my race and I've been wrong because of my gender and I've been wrong because of whatever. Fill in the blanks. This is the story that the right loves to tell. And they say the left's got to move on from grievances and get something done. This is a grievance story. That's what this is. And it's a grievance story comprised of out of context anecdotes to point to a heavily biased conclusion supported by incomplete data at best. And that's like the

most charitable analysis that I can give. The narrative that has been presented doesn't actually align with the content of the Twitter files. And there's a disconnect here that has left a lot of people wondering why aren't the Twitter files being treated as a bigger deal? There's a mainstream media blackout on the Twitter files and left wing media. You won't talk about it. Initially, the story about the Twitter files was supposed to be government is censoring big tech companies and big tech companies are censoring the right and helping the left. Eventually, it was revealed Twitter was making its own decisions about content on its platform, which the right has previously defended their right to do as a private company.

And the government, by which they actually mean the Biden campaign, which wasn't even the government at the time, was calling to the attention of Twitter content they believed violate Twitter's violated Twitter's terms of service, which it did of nude images of Hunter Biden. Now, another aspect to the story was the Biden. Again, they called it the Biden administration, but it was it was 2020. There was no Biden administration. The Biden administration was forcing the removal of content related to Hunter Biden. We later discovered that the Biden team was initially just using the normal methods to report content and later had email contacts that they could use at Twitter to say, hey, we believe this

violates your terms of service. Importantly, the Trump campaign, the Trump administration also had access to the very same people at Twitter via email. So it was not unique to the Biden campaign. And at the end of the day, what the Biden team was asking to have removed was content that was illegal in most states and violated Twitter's own terms of service. It's sometimes called revenge porn. I understand that that term is problematic to some because porn makes it sound like it's consensual. These were explicit and obscene. I don't know what explicit images that were released without the consent of Hunter Biden. Right. That's what we're talking about. That's what this was fundamentally about. It deflated the entire story. The story was also supposed to be

about the Trump White House trying to demand that content be removed. And that is largely being ignored. The people on the right that are saying the story is about Hunter Biden exclusively ignore that the Trump White House government and administration also had the same access that the Biden campaign had. And they would ask for content to remove. And they're not talking about that. They want to ignore that part of it because it doesn't fit the narrative that they want you to believe. And then lastly, we were told, well, the FBI is telling Twitter what to censor. Turns out that wasn't true. Turns out the FBI shared information with Twitter about potential sources of disinformation and ultimately Twitter made its own determinations. Now,

you would say, well, when the FBI comes to you and says, hey, here's here's information, the FBI wants you to do something. But as the Twitter files have come out, it doesn't actually appear that that was the case. It appears that Twitter was able to decide on its own, genuinely decide on its own what to remove and what not to remove. So the the unfortunate part for the right is that the Twitter files didn't live up to the hype. The Twitter files don't actually confirm the initial narrative that was presented to them. Instead, they have become sort of a cudgel for the right and Elon Musk and Matt Taibbi and the other people, Barry Weiss, to spin a story and drive a narrative. But the efforts have largely failed.

They want to say. We presented the bombshell and it is a bombshell and the left and mainstream media won't talk about it because of their bias. The reality is they failed to actually present the bombshell they claim this to be. So people, they're sort of looking at it and saying, oh, there's not really a very big story here. And what you will often find is that those who claim it's a very big story, when you actually say to them, which part is the bombshell? They go, well, the Biden administration was it was 2020. There was no Biden administration. Well, they were censoring the Hunter. But what we're talking about, explicit images released without his consent. They are illegal in most states and violate Twitter's terms. OK, well, so and then there's nothing left. There's just nothing left.

So the question really becomes how much do you expect, quote, the left. To talk about a story that isn't anywhere near what it was supposed to be. You've got people cherry picking details and spinning them to fit a narrative that has largely fallen apart and downplaying the parts that are inconvenient, like the fact that the actual Trump administration had the very same access to Twitter terms of service and content moderation. People. Last thing, the Twitter files are part of a larger puzzle. It's a piece of a larger puzzle. And we shouldn't ascribe more significance to the Twitter files in the broader context of the story. When we talk about the state of media and politics and speech and censorship and all of these different things, there is a big story there. And it's about the unmitigated spread of disinformation on Facebook, particularly among older folks. The use of Twitter by white nationality.

There's tons of story. There really is a story there. But what the Twitter files is, is a little tiny piece of it that is out of context and also being inaccurately reported. And so for the people that are insisting that the Twitter files are one of the greatest and most Orwellian stories of manipulation of the public, it's hyperbole. It's sensationalism. It's not a fair and balanced approach to the facts. We should talk about and be aware about media bias. We should be aware of propaganda, manipulation, censorship. But we've got to be critical and objective. And if you're critical and objective and you actually look at the claims that were initially made and what was actually revealed by the Twitter files, you realize that there's very little there. What you could say, and this is when we get back to, is there a legitimate

story? You could argue, you could argue that neither the Trump administration nor the Biden campaign should have been able to email anyone at Twitter to say, we believe this violates your terms of service. You could make the case they should have to just use the report feature like everybody else. That's the one thing you could argue. But if you want to argue that you have to apply it not only to the Biden campaign, but also to the Trump White House. And I'm not seeing anybody do that. It is back, folks. The U.S. will require negative covid tests for travelers coming from China after more than half of a plane load of passengers from China to Italy tested positive for covid. Does it work to require incoming travelers to test? Well, we'll talk about that in a moment.

NPR reports U.S. will require travelers from China to show negative COVID tests before flight. This will apply to travelers from China, Hong Kong and Macau to show a negative COVID test before entering the United States. The CDC announced the measure yesterday. It will go into effect January 5 for all passengers over age two. Passengers must show a negative PCR or monitored antigen test no more than two days before departure, whether it's a direct flight or whether you're coming from another country. If you go China, London, New York, you would still have to show such a test, even though, strictly speaking, your flight is coming into the US from London. The monitored test must be overseen by a telehealth service.

CDC is pointing to the surgeon COVID cases in China and the, quote, lack of adequate and transparent epidemiological and viral genomic sequence data being reported from that country. Quote, reduce testing and case reporting in China and minimal sharing of viral genomic sequence data could delay the identification of new variants of concern if they arise. So there's a few different things that I think are important to talk about here. And one of the things that I want to just remind people when it comes to transparency from China, if you look right now at the official reports of data from China, China, since the start

of the pandemic, we're talking three years, folks. China is officially reporting that they've had only 400000 covid cases and only 5200 deaths. You would have to be living under a rock and suffering from serious confusion to believe that these numbers are even remotely connected to the reality of COVID in China. Another interesting thing, if you look at the official data, China is starting to report higher case numbers, but never more than 5000 cases a day. And yet they have not officially reported any deaths since May. So it is absolutely correct that the data we're getting from China is bogus. And if you look at just a little anecdote, the Hill reports nearly half of passengers from China to Milan have covid. Look at this.

Nearly half of the passengers on two recent flights to Milan from China tested positive. Thirty eight percent of passengers on one flight and 52 percent of those on a second flight had covered. There is no way that the entire country of China with a population of is at one point three billion at this point, one point four billion people. There's no way they have only four or five thousand cases a day and no deaths. If half of two random flights from China to Italy are people who have covid. OK, so 100 percent, it is correct to believe that there is a crazy amount of covid coming out of China. Now, the question is, does requiring entry covid tests work? You know, the idea is. You require people to test to come in.

You identify people who should immediately go into quarantine and hopefully you prevent the spread. Yes, I mean, the idea makes some sense. The difficulties are many. The supervised antigen tests. Remember when I was in Spain last summer, my girlfriend and I did these supervised antigen tests where it's just a home test, but someone watches you do it. And my girlfriend got two false positives and she was negative. We ended up having to find a hospital on a Sunday Catholic holiday in Spain, which I can tell you is very difficult to do. Get a PCR. Turned out she was turned out she was negative. Those tests are not the most accurate, but not only are false positives a problem, false negatives, particularly in asymptomatic people, are a major, major problem.

In fact, when I had covid a few weeks ago, I was testing negative on those tests, even though I had covid until I don't even know, I guess day three of my symptoms. So the limitations are asymptomatic. People often test negative on those tests. It's not a guarantee you're not infected. The fact that you can get the test two days before travel makes it particularly unhelpful. The incubation period of covid, even though, you know, if you look at the bell curve, most people start showing symptoms between two to five days after exposure. It can be up to 10 or even more days. So is that a reason not to do anything? No, but it is a reason why the technique may not be that effective. To be perfectly frank, the most effective part of

requiring testing for people coming from China is it might dissuade people who are carrying the virus from even coming to the United States at all. But the the real effectiveness of that policy is a question mark, I think, is the point. Doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything. Doesn't mean we shouldn't be concerned. But we have to be sort of realistic about that, about that strategy. Let me know your thoughts. Let me know if your perspective is changing on sort of like your risk tolerance at this point. And of course, you immediately will get the debate over. This will inevitably be what happens in the United States because it's happening now in China versus it might

not be. China has a very low level of immunity as a result of their zero covid policy. And so it's not necessarily the case that what we see in China is going to happen in the United States remains to be seen. Make sure you're subscribed on YouTube, YouTube dot com slash the David Pakman show. We're going to take a quick break and be right back with so much more to start winding down 2022. When you're working during the day, when you're on the go and you're in the mood for something sweet, don't reach for the candy bar. Go for something that's just as good. But without the sugar and carbs, our sponsor, Monk Pack, makes delicious keto granola bars and nut and seed bars. They're tasty, crunchy, gooey, sweet and salty. I love them. But each bar has only one gram of

sugar, two to three net carbs and about one hundred and fifty calories. Perfect if you're doing keto or low carb or low sugar. You can have a treat that feels indulgent and satisfying without the guilt. Monk Pack comes in flavors like sea salt, dark chocolate, caramel sea salt. They just launched two new flavors. I love peanut butter, cocoa chip and dark chocolate cocoa. My favorite thing is the texture. I've tried a lot of these nut bars, granola bars. Monk Pack is superior. If you don't agree, you get your money back and it is the perfect holiday gift. Go to Munk Pack dot com and get 20 percent off your first order with the code Pacman. That's M-U-N-K-P-A-C-K dot com. Use code Pacman for 20

percent off. The info is in the podcast notes. One of our sponsors today is Blue Chew, a unique online service delivering the same active ingredients as Viagra and Cialis in a chewable form and at a fraction of the cost. And they're giving my audience an entire month supply for free. So if you think you could benefit from an extra boost of confidence, all you have to do is take a short quiz on their website. A licensed doctor approves your prescription. The medication comes straight to your home within days in a discreet package. No driving around to the doctor's office or the pharmacy. No waiting around. No awkward conversations with your doctor. All of Blue tablets are made in the USA. The entire process is just a few clicks.

Go to Bluetooth dot com. The link is in the podcast notes and they'll give you an entire month's supply for free when you use promo code Pacman. That's P.A.K. M.A.N. All you do is pay five dollars for shipping. every single day for our members. You can sign up at join Pacman dot com and not only get the bonus show, but also get commercial free audio and video streams of the show hours before anybody else gets them. We also have our next members only town hall coming up soon. I'll be making an announcement about that. And as a member, you will get exclusively invited to participate and talk to me in that town hall. Sign up at join Pacman dot com. It'll take you.

I mean, with average like computer skills, it's probably 45 to 60 seconds to sign up. And quite frankly, it's probably no more than a minute and a half, even with mediocre tech skills. So I encourage you to do it. You can use the coupon code 24 starts now to get yourself a sizable discount. Republicans are now desperately rethinking if and how they should be talking about abortion during their campaigns because of the disastrous flop of the 2022 midterms. Remember that in 2022, historically speaking, Republicans should have done unbelievably well. They should have

probably taken control of the Senate, which they did not. They actually lost ground in the Senate going from 50 to 49 seats. They should have taken control of the House with a much greater margin, but they did not. And now Republicans are in the situation of having to rethink their strategy. There's an interesting Hill article by Julia Manchester, which says Republicans are recalibrating their messaging on abortion after Democrats successfully used the issue to galvanize their base and win over swing voters in 2022. While the GOP largely focused on the three pronged message of combating rising inflation, crime and the flow of migrants over

the border. Exit polls showed abortion was a top priority for voters at the ballot box. Republican Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel said, quote, It was probably a bigger factor than a lot of people thought. We've got to get conversant on that. We can't just do an ostrich method and pretend that it doesn't exist when Democrats are spending 30 million dollars on that. We can't just do an ostrich method and pretend that it doesn't exist when Democrats are spending 30 million dollars on that message. According to exit polling, 27 percent of voters said abortion was the most important issue coming in only behind inflation at 31 percent. So there's a few things to understand here. In general, abortion is a deeply polarizing issue. And so there's always

a risk when you campaign on either side of a really polarizing issue that you're going to alienate a large swath of the electorate. That's just a general thing with polarizing issues. The issue in particular with abortion for Republicans is that not only is it polarizing, but the country continues to be more and more and more in favor of abortion being legal in most cases. And in fact, we've we've seen a steady increase in the Roe v. Wade era, which ended a few months ago in Americans, generally speaking, saying, yeah, in most cases this should be legal. And so when you take that away, as the Supreme Court did as a right, and then Republicans can campaign on how great that is, it's not necessarily going to be useful to you.

Secondly, abortion is a distraction in a sense to more pressing issues that Americans feel that they are facing in the sense that Republicans could be focusing on the economy, health care, education and foreign policy without the drag of their position on abortion being there. And what I mean by that is the following. Republicans tried to make their campaigns to a degree about inflation and the border and Biden's bad and whatever. And we can adjudicate whether that's a good or bad idea on its own. But they were dragged down by the knowledge and the timing of the Roe v. Wade reversal by the Supreme Court and so many Republicans saying that that was a really great thing. And so that was

also a problem for Republicans. And the maybe last part of this is, of course, I'm pro-choice. You all know that. But the American people are mostly pro-choice. And so the Republican position on abortion, with some Republicans saying there should be some exceptions, but putting that aside, it's a flawed and misguided ideology. And as I mentioned before, the position of Republicans is based on the assumption that abortion is morally wrong. It should be banned. It should be illegal. Maybe it's murder in many cases, regardless of the situation or the circumstances. It ignores the reality that most Americans don't see it that way. And of course, it ignores the reality that sometimes abortion is necessary. It's an important option for women to have, and it should not be something in which the government is involved. So on so many levels, this is a misguided strategy.

So what's going to happen next? We saw it backfire at the ballot box. In part, there's lots of things that we can blame for what happened in November. But to a degree, the position on abortion of the Republican Party was a factor. So do they stop talking about abortion? That's a problem because Republicans still raise a disproportionate amount of money from religious voters by saying we are against abortion. What do they do if they don't talk about it? There's a risk talking about it the way they

have talked about it is also a risk. So in total, the Republican Party's position on abortion is flawed. Medically, it's flawed morally and ethically, but it's also flawed strategically. If they want to win elections and be successful, they're going to need to do a rethink. I don't know what that rethink should be. I don't care. I don't want them to win. So it's not for me to start giving them advice, but we'll have to track and see whether in some of the 2023 elections, abortion takes on a sort of different tone from the Republican Party and certainly going into 2024. Let me know if you do have thoughts. How should the Republican Party straddle being against abortion?

But the reality that increasingly the country is in favor of it. Southwest Airlines had this massive meltdown, operational meltdown, flights canceled, baggage lost, people stranded at airports, in some cases arrested, simply trying to get rebooked. And Fox News had a segment during which they tried to blame the secretary of transportation in the Biden administration, Pete Buttigieg. It's absolutely ridiculous. Richard Fowler, who I know a little bit, was on this panel along with Titus or Tyrus and

some other people, a number of different experts, as you can imagine. And he said it's completely absurd to blame Mayor Pete. Let's take a listen to this discussion. In time, just sleeping at an airport for anyone who's ever done it. Not a good time. So I just it's such a great point out there. We have paid for so many flights and bus trips for illegals throughout this. Excellent point, Tyrus. Richard, I'm going to ask you a sincere question. And I'm not saying this to be mean. I hope my question was sincere. No, no, no, no, no. But I'm asking, are Democrats, Democrats have a lot of hope in Pete Buttigieg. Are they embarrassed of just how he's performed over the last couple of years? This is not even about Pete Buttigieg, though. Let's be very clear.

You saw that. He acted like a traveling agent. Hold on. 90% of the flights that have been canceled in the United States is from one airline. A majority of the flights canceled the United States is from one airline. A majority of the flights canceled around the world is from one airline. So to sit here and to blame this on the transportation secretary when you have one airline and one air response, it's not even the employees of this airline. It's absurd. No, no, no, it is. It is.

90% of the, I did not interrupt you. 90% of the flights. But you're not answering what Thomas said. But here's, I'm making my point. He can step up and do it. 90% of the airlines, 90% of the flights that are... But you're not answering what Tyra said. But here's... I'm making my point. He can step up and do it. 90% of the flights canceled in the United States today are from Southwest Airlines because you have a bad management. You have a...

They have bad software. You can't blame the flight attendants. You can't blame the pilots. You can't blame the ramp agents. You have to blame the people who sit in the corporate suites of Southwest Airlines for canceling flights. Period. The end of story.

To blame Pete Buttigieg for the fact that Southwest can't manage their planes is ridiculous. You can't blame him for that, but you can critique the response. But could, exactly, could they get buses just like they do for legal? This is so crazy. And move people? I mean, sure, but once again, this is about capitalism and an airline that cannot manage it. Don't fly Southwest Airlines. All right, good point. All right. Up next, liberal.

Speaker 4 OK, so. Is anybody else noticing how these small government conservatives all of a sudden become socialists when a private company is failing and saying, hey, the people we've been accusing of being socialists for years, the Biden administration, they're not being socialist enough or even communist and just managing what this private company is doing. So the real reason that this meltdown took place was the Southwest Airlines internal management system got completely overwhelmed. They have a complicated model for assigning flights. They have an antiquated internal system for managing and staffing those trips. And company officials and union leaders and experts are all in agreement about that.

First and foremost, the secretary of transportation oversees the entire transportation sector. So that includes aviation, maritime transportation, highways, rail, and they have other things that they do as well. OK, it's a big picture position. The Department of Transportation and Pete Buttigieg as the secretary of transportation. The idea that it's Buttigieg's fault that one airline had a massive meltdown because of their own antiquated system or to try to hold Pete Buttigieg responsible. It's completely and

totally pathetic. Now, let's go beyond that, because you could say, well, the context in which this happened is the responsibility of the Department of Transportation or something just about all of the things that affect individual airlines actually have nothing to do with the Department of Transportation. You've got weather. Weather is like a category that affects flights, maintenance issues, deferred maintenance, stacking up and accumulating and creating a problem, staffing shortages, employees getting sick, for example, as we saw during the covid pandemic, technical problems. It has nothing to do with the secretary of transportation at all. Now, if you had some new government decree that limited the ability of

airlines to, I don't know, do whatever it is they need to do, and you could specifically point to it as a policy affecting all airlines, I would listen. There's no doubt about it. But this is this is absolutely and completely absurd. Pete Buttigieg is not an operational manager. The secretary of transportation has nothing to do with the internal dynamics of airlines and doesn't influence day to day operations in any way. And this is just an attempt to criticize Joe Biden's administration. That's really all it is. But maybe even more interesting is the hypocrisy here. This Republican Party, these right wingers on Fox, very low information. I mean, they go for the lowest hanging fruit because that's what their audience expects.

The Republican Party has long espoused the belief that government regulation is unnecessary and it's bad for business. Too much involvement from the government is bad. It's not that it's neutral. It's actually bad. We should leave the private sector to operate without interference. In this case, they immediately say it must be the federal government's fault. We should blame Pete Buttigieg because of the operational delays of one airline, even

despite all of the complex factors that are that are involved there. It's absurd and they are pathetic and understand that that segment we just watched, they are calling for government intervention when they say Pete should have done more. What they're saying is the government should have gotten more involved in the operations of a single private airline. That's the opposite of what they normally espouse. So the hypocrisy is galling and it shouldn't really surprise us because they're more interested in scoring political points, particularly with their audience,

who seems to have barely a clue what's going on. I mean, this is not my opinion. I'm not editorializing. You look at studies that look at how informed are people who primarily get their news from outlet ABCD. The people who primarily get news from Fox are of the least informed people. In one study, people who get their news from Fox are less informed than people who don't even pay attention to the news. If you can believe that, it's unbelievable. That's who this message is tailored to, which ignores completely that they are calling for the very thing which they claim to oppose federal government getting involved in the business of private industry. We'll have this clip on our Instagram if you want to see it in its full glory. You can find it by searching Instagram for

David Pakman show. You can also find me on Instagram by searching for David Pakman. Let's face it, the holiday season can be a stressful time for anyone, even a stressor on relationships, in-laws dividing time, mismatched expectations around gifts. Our sponsor, Paired, is the app that makes it easy to maintain a feeling of connection with your partner during this crazy time of year. You and your partner download the app, you pair together, and every day paired gives the two of you questions or quizzes, games to have fun, stay emotionally connected, deepen your conversations.

And all of the exercises were developed by academic psychologists and expert relationship therapists as well. My girlfriend and I have been using paired quite a bit lately. It's fun, especially with the baby these days. It's more important than ever for us to find quality time. And paired is really the perfect way to spark that with funny moments, meaningful conversations. And we can use paired on the go. Don't let end of year stressors get in the way of you and your partner enjoying some

connecting. Paired makes it simple. Well, this is an interesting turn of events. Lying Republican congressman elect George Santos is now under criminal investigation. You've got to love it. You know that I was thinking back to earlier this week when he first addressed his lies. The thing he was hanging on to was I haven't done anything criminal. Remember this clip? I'm not a criminal, not here, not abroad in any jurisdiction in the world. Have I ever committed any crimes to get down to the nitty gritty? I'm not a fraud. I'm not a criminal who defrauded the entire country and made up this fictional character. And well, fictional or

fictitious or whatever word you want to use. It turns out maybe there is some criminality. AP reports New York representative elect Santos investigated for lying about his past. He is now under investigation by Long Island prosecutors after revelations surfaced that he lied about his heritage, his education and his professional pedigree as he was campaigning. He has shown no signs of stepping aside, even as he publicly admitted to a long list of lies. Nassau County District Attorney Ann Donnelly, a Republican, said the fabrications and inconsistencies were nothing short of stunning, saying, quote, The residents of Nassau County and other parts of the third district must have an honest and accountable representative in Congress.

If a crime was committed in this county, we will prosecute it. County and other parts of the third district must have an honest and accountable representative in Congress. If a crime was committed in this county, we will prosecute it. What would be so? Remember, lied about his employment history, lied about his educational history, lied about being Jewish, apparently told the truth about being gay. And later, I'm going to tell you, he apparently lied about his mom dying in 9-11. We're going to get to that. That's a whole other sick ordeal.

So how could this be a crime? Yes. In a normal job where you're not voted in, if you lied in this way to human resources, you would be fired. You would be let go. But this is different. How could this be a crime? In this particular situation, fraud is the most likely charge.

So lying about one's educational and employment history can be considered fraud if it's done with the intention of obtaining a job or other benefits. It's abundantly clear because he said it in an interview because of the elitist New York Times not valuing his customer service experience. He almost had no choice but to claim to have worked for Goldman Sachs and graduated from a college he didn't graduate from. He was almost forced into it. So he's essentially saying in order to get this job, in order to get the type of coverage I need and to get voted in, I embellished, as he calls it. We call it straight up line that meets the definition of fraud, lying in order to obtain a job or other benefits. And by the way, it's taxpayer dollars that go to pay his salary and those benefits.

That's the most likely charge. Now, in other situations, lying about your education or employment history, if you do it under oath, you're talking about perjury, right? If you do it in a court case, could be considered perjury and then could have legal consequences. Discrimination if you lie about your religion religion as he did, and then that is somehow used to discriminate or gain an unfair advantage in certain situations, then it can be against the law. And then misrepresentation if you lie about your employment history or your educational

history, if it's done with the intent of misleading others, it can lead to legal consequences, including fine and imprisonment. Whether that would be the case in this particular situation, I really can't say we're kind of getting ahead of ourselves. But there's one other aspect to the possible criminality, and it relates to some campaign loans. George Santos's massive campaign loans may not be legal, reports the Daily Beast. And here's the deal with that. There are he loaned his campaign seven hundred thousand dollars. It's not clear how he did it. And as the article says, it it's been a bit of a mystery. But depending on how that was done, that also could actually be a violation of campaign finance law. And the article explains it in detail. The Daily Beast has part of an answer. The identities of four of Santos's corporate

clients, the revelation puts him in more hot water. What he did with the money he obtained could be even more damning. Santos has admitted using cash from his company to fund his campaign. That could be an unlawful seven hundred thousand dollar corporate contribution. That's because while candidates for federal office may give unlimited amounts of their own money to their campaign, they cannot expressly tap corporate accounts to do so. So that also may be a criminal aspect to this entire thing. Criminal is one part. My hope is that all of this gets him to resign and say that he will not be seated, which is scheduled to happen next week. We're running out of time. Republicans maybe put Democrats plan to object. From what I'm reading, Democrats are going to object to his being sworn in. What that will

lead to is a vote on whether he should or shouldn't be sworn in. Republicans, of course, will have the majority in that new Congress, but it will put every single one of them in a position of having to vote. Yes, this liar fraudster should be seated or not. That could get very interesting. We'll know more about that next week. Did George Santos lie about his mom dying in 9-11? This is really, really sick stuff. We're talking about Republican congressman elect George Santos, elected by the voters of New York. He lied about his employment history. He lied about his educational history.

He lied about being Jewish. He appears to have lied about his grandparents being refugees from the Holocaust. He appears to have lied about so many different things. He is now under criminal investigation. But here is an explosive new claim. George said this is a media report. George Santos alleged that the 9-11 attacks claimed his mother's life and five months later said she died in 2016, 15 years after the 9-11 attacks. Listen to this. Yashar Ali flagged these tweets from 2021 last night.

These appear to be contradictory claims, to say the least. On July 12th of 2021, George Santos tweeted 9-11 claimed my mother's life. 9-11 claimed my mother's life. Five months later, in December of 2021, he said his mom died in December of 2016, which is. Fifteen years and two months after 9-11 December, this is his tweet. December 23rd this year marks five years. I lost my best friend and mentor. Mom, you will live forever in my heart. Santos campaign website states, quote, George's mother was in her office in the South Tower on 9-11-2001, when the horrific events of that day unfolded, she survived the tragic events on 9-11, but passed away a few years later when she lost her battle to cancer. Anybody have any idea what's going on here? Because I certainly don't. And the article writes, although many at ground zero in the aftermath developed health problems like cancer. Fifteen years is

not a few years later. So what of this is true? I have no idea. As a reminder, media reminds us Santos also claimed he lost four employees in the 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando. However, none of the forty nine people killed are linked to any of the places that he even claimed to have worked, which is a whole other story. I don't know what the truth is, but it is natural to be extraordinarily skeptical given the disgusting nature of this guy's lies. Now, is he ultimately going to going to be forced into resignation? I don't know. We're running out of time. I believe he should be. He has shown a willingness to lie for what he believes to be personal gain. But also, even if you want to argue or suggest that there are other motivations, like, for example,

he's just a pathological liar. There are people who it's almost reflexive. They just lie. They lie. They lie. They lie. You know, I've told a couple of stories. I was reminded of another person I know where it it was like a reflex. It was quite literally a reflex. And I remember having a conversation with them where I said, oh, yeah, you know, like at the time we were I think we were using constant contact for email where I go, yeah, we we use a service called constant contact for email. They're actually, you know, they're pretty good or something. And the person said, oh, yeah, my uncle works at Constant Contact. I said, oh, really? Because Constant Contact space like in the Boston suburbs, I didn't know you had

a go. No. Well, yeah, he works remotely for them. Oh, it wasn't true. Just just it's natural, natural instinct to just lie, lie, lie. If that's part of what is going on here with George Santos, that also doesn't make him a particularly good candidate to be a member of the House of Representatives. So we'll see what happens in the next couple of days. The pressure to resign is mounting. The criminal probe is a real problem at this point, and that may be what pushes him over the edge into resignation. But at the same time, he may be one of 435 members of Congress starting next week, which would be yet another embarrassment and humiliation for the United States, not to the degree of Trump being president, certainly, but it will certainly

be a humiliation. We're going to try to get him on the show. I would love for him to tell us in his own words what all of this is about. I don't know that he's going to accept that invitation. One of our sponsors is all form the easiest way to design your own custom sofa. I have one from all form, unlike other companies, all form lets you choose the fabric, the size, the shape, color, even the color of the legs. I have not one but two all form sofas. I've had them for years. They look good as new. Definitely the most comfortable furniture I own. And it gets even cooler because all form sofas are completely modular. You can buy a sofa and if you move, you can adapt it to the new space by adding on to it or rearranging its elements. That is definitely not something you get from your typical sofa company. All form has everything from eight

piece sectionals to love seats and armchairs. Everything is made in the USA using premium materials. All form makes sure that assembly is really easy. I didn't even need any tools, which is good because I have very few tools and you can keep the sofa for over three months and send it back free if you don't like it for a full refund. Right now, all form is giving my audience 20 percent off all orders at all form dot com slash Pacman. That's a LLFOR M dot com slash Pacman. The link is in the podcast notes.

Well, as you know, there are often not that many things that Democrats are doing correctly for themselves, and sometimes Democrats are sort of relying on or hoping that Republicans will mess themselves up. It's not a great strategy, but to the extent that it's useful, you do love to see it. And the latest is that Marjorie Taylor Greene, the repugnant and radical Republican congresswoman from Georgia, is furious that Tulsi Gabbard hammered Republican congressman elect liar George Santos on Fox News two nights ago. So let me remind you what happened. George Santos is a huge liar, lied about his job history, lied about his educational history,

lied about being Jewish, maybe lied about the circumstances of his mother's death. Lie, lie, lie, lie, lie. He appeared with Tulsi Gabbard, who used to be a Democrat. Now she's not. Next thing you know, Tulsi Gabbard's campaigning for Carrie Lake and Herschel Walker and filling in for Tucker Carlson. But to her credit, Tulsi did a good job to some degree of holding George Santos accountable. Marjorie Taylor Greene did not like it, unleashing a fascinating series of tweets insofar as it tells us a lot about how these people think about politics. Let's look at the tweet thread. This is, again, Marjorie Taylor Greene, not happy with Tulsi, quote, Tulsi Gabbard, who

says she is a former Democrat, gave Rep representative elect George Santos zero grace while George is admitting and apologizing for lying about his resume, just like her former colleagues are giving George zero grace and even demanding he resign. Remember, he didn't admit and apologize. He minimized, called them embellishments, said the explanation would go over the voters heads because they couldn't possibly understand it. And on and on and on to say it was an apology is a little bit much. OK, Marjorie, continuing, quote, Tulsi says that George's actions on the House floor are what is most important. But George has not even had the chance to take action for his district on the

House floor because he isn't even sworn in yet. Tulsi also says, how can his district believe anything he says when he is standing on the House floor fighting for them? That's a good question. I, too, believe actions and words are extremely important, but I don't think a former Democrat whose actions on the House floor as recent as 2020 that gave her an A from Planned Parenthood, an F from the NRA and introduced the climate agenda signature piece of legislation called the OFF Act designed to end all fossil fuels, the same as AOC's Green New Deal, should lecture a newly elected Republican member of Congress on how he should vote to represent his Republican district. Oh, boy. Marjorie continuing

this tirade, quote, I do appreciate that Tulsi says words that sound conservative now, even though she can't take action to back them up. I am glad she like George realized she made mistakes and was wrong every time she voted to support killing the unborn, taking away our gun rights and legislated to kill America's energy independence and the fossil fuel industry. I hope Tulsi is sincere, just like I hope George is sincere. I think we Republicans should give George Santos a chance and see how he legislates and votes, not treat him the same as the left is. Listen, there is not even the smallest doubt that were George Santos a Democrat, Marjorie Taylor Greene and all of these people would be treating him completely differently.

And to some degree, although I'm not a fan of Tulsi Gabbard's, she seems to be treating him the way he deserves to be treated based on his actions, not because of his party designation. Similarly, I hope you all know that my position on George Santos would be exactly the same if he were a Democrat. And as you all know, this idea that there's a double standard among everybody when it comes to these wrongdoings, these types of wrongdoing is very much untrue. I don't know anyone on the left who was defending Anthony Weiner when he was involved in sexting minors and whatever, all the different things that he did when that Democratic congressman, I believe it was, was caught with 10 grand in his freezer. I didn't defend him. I don't know anybody that did.

It is not all the same. And while Marjorie Taylor Greene wants to claim that it is the left with the double standard, it is really her ilk, the MAGA people, et cetera. The only really good take here from Marjorie Taylor Greene, like I would if you said to me, David, sir, what would be an intellectually honest reaction for Marjorie Taylor Greene that defends George Santos? It would be if Marjorie Taylor Greene came forward and said, listen, let's not be hard on George Santos, because at the end of the day, our entire party really is as dishonest as he is. Like when we say cutting taxes for the rich is good for the economy, that's just as dishonest and more damaging than when he said he graduated from college.

That would be a surprisingly refreshing, accurate take from Marjorie Taylor Greene, not the argument she's making. Marjorie Taylor Greene, as is almost always the case, coming up with the worst take on every issue, a constant liar, a consistent liar. And she lacks total morals, values and ethics. And that's part of why she has no problem with the lies told by George Santos. I don't hate the infighting. You all know that. I think it's good for the left. The left needs help. Any help the left can get, I think we should take, assuming we're not doing anything illegal or immoral and certainly letting them

fight amongst themselves has nothing immoral or illegal to it. Failed Arizona Republican gubernatorial candidate Carrie Lake is panicking and deleting tweets. This is when I imagine someone deleting tweets, even if they're doing it on their phone. I imagine them feverishly typing on a keyboard, but that may not be the case. She is panicking and deleting tweets, attacking a judge after sanctions have been demanded. So let's back it up and kind of explain all of it. Kerry Lake lost the Arizona gubernatorial election. And what I mean by lost is her opponent, Katie Hobbs, got more votes because more people voted for Katie Hobbs, which means Katie Hobbs

will be the governor. Very simple and yet so complicated. OK, she won. Carrie Lake lost. Carrie Lake sues, claiming really she won. Her lawsuit was thrown out and now she's just getting herself into more and more and more trouble. The Hill reports Lake deletes tweet targeting Maricopa judge after officials seek sanctions, defeated Arizona gubernatorial candidate Carrie Lake, deleted a tweet accusing the judge who dismissed her election challenge of integrity violations. The tweet posted early Monday suggested the founding partner of a law firm representing Katie Hobbs emailed Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson what to say as

he authored the dismissal. That's an extremely serious charge to make against the judge that someone wrote to him and said, here's your marching orders. Here's what decision you will make in court. Quote, The dismissal of Carrie Lake's election lawsuit shows voter disenfranchisement no longer matters. This is her tweet. Legal experts believe his decision was ghostwritten.

They suspect top left wing attorneys like Mark Elias emailed him what to say. Maricopa County and Hobbs in their capacities as secretary of state and governor elect cited the tweet in asking the judge to impose sanctions on Lake as well as on her attorneys, arguing that Lakes Lakes campaigns broader election challenge was groundless and constituted harassment. So what is it that is going on here? She is an annoyance. Yes, but she is an annoyance to a degree that may actually deserve legal sanctions. And so she's panicking. And so now she's deleting the tweet. Now, as much as I would

love to see serious sanctions against Carrie Lake, you know, the right loves to talk about frivolous lawsuits. Oh, the coffee was too hot. Turns out that was actually a lawsuit that had some merit if you actually learn about it. Oh, someone said Merry Christmas to me and I'm offended. I don't know of any lawsuit like that, but this is the caricature of the right and the so-called frivolous lawsuits they believe the left is engaged in, even though we have many systems in place to dismiss frivolous lawsuits. But it is actually they who have no hesitation. They have no qualms whatsoever. Gumming up the legal system after 2020 with more than 60 different complaints in all sorts of different jurisdictions for nothing, for nothing. Trump lost. That's all that happened. And similarly, Carrie Lake,

raising money, filing lawsuits, hiring lawyers, bringing in experts, taking up court time for something that is obviously meritless and is, of course, going absolutely nowhere. And now they're panicking that they might be sanctioned. If there is any good news for Carrie Lake and this sort of bugs me, but it is what's going on. It's not really clear that she is going to face those sanctions. Fox News reports Arizona judge denies request for sanctions against Lake and rewards a thirty three thousand dollar reimbursement. An Arizona judge denied a request from Governor-elect Katie Hobbs seeking sanctions against Carrie Lake, though the sanctions were denied. The judge did award Hobbs a little more than thirty three thousand dollars to cover costs associated with retaining expert witnesses during a two day trial brought on by Lake

challenging those results. Lake lost her bid by half a percentage point, et cetera, et cetera. OK, so at least in this first finding, a judge is not issuing sanctions against Carrie Lake. What you have to understand here is that there is a mishmash of political stuff, for lack of that's a technical term going on in Arizona, which includes right thinking and clear minded people who see the entire Carrie Lake fiasco for what it is. Terrible candidate lost, panicked, is embarrassed and is trying to sue anyone she can. But you also see some judges in Arizona that are running a little bit of interference for Carrie

Lake saying, listen, we believe she sincerely believed that she won. And if Carrie Lake sincerely believed she won, then most of her actions are acceptable in the eyes of the law. It's sort of like covering for a toddler's temper tantrum, arguing this particular one was justified and thus everything they did in all of the sequel that resulted from that tantrum are OK. And we shouldn't be too harsh as a result. How can someone like Carrie Lake be considered a good candidate to lead anything in government, whether it's being the administrator of a state like Arizona or whatever, when she can't even control her own impulses on Twitter such that they start getting her into potential legal trouble and then she has to run and delete the tweets. But it doesn't really matter. That's really been Republicans for the last six years. Who are the worst people we could possibly find to do the jobs that are needed?

Let's make them our nominees. Many of my lawyer friends, especially those that do criminal defense, say that it is really, really common that their clients just can't stop talking or they won't stop talking either to the media or recently in the modern era, more often social media posts. And to some degree, that seems to be what's going on here with Carrie Lake. Let's hope she does face sanctions. Let's hope her attorneys do as well. We have a voicemail number. It is available 24 hours a day. And many of you do call at two, three, four, five in the morning. Here is a call I got, which actually brings up a really interesting issue, which is why did it take this long to find out that George Santos was lying about just about everything. And this is an important question.

Take a listen. Hello, David. This is Aaron Cooper. I had a quick thought about George Santos. Yes. Lies. I'm wondering why his opponent, Thomas, did not uncover all these lies during his campaign. Yep.

And I'm thinking the reason why is because he ran for governor and lost in the Democratic primary. And I think after he just lost motivation, he wasn't that interested in winning the New York district. Just want to get your thoughts. Thank you. Bye. Listen, this is a very good question. The George Santos lies. They could have been uncovered by his opponents, opposition research. They could have been uncovered earlier. We're talking by investigative journalists, but they were not. Now, I don't know enough about the dynamics to blame anyone in particular, but as a general principle, when you have a guy that it's not just one lie, it's not, oh, you know, I used to be a city councilor and I passed an ordinance and then we research it and oh, you didn't pass

that ordinance. This was lied about employment history, lied about educational history, lied about ethnic background, religious background, call it what you want, potentially lied about his mom's death as a result of 9-11, definitely lied about having four employees die in the Pulse nightclub shooting in 2060. I mean, lie upon lie upon claimed he claimed he owned property and sold a property, but now says, oh, I never claimed to own property. I can't give you all the lies that he told. It is a failure. And maybe it remains to be seen who failed that neither investigative journalism nor opposition research turned up the fact that

this guy was making it all up. And maybe it will be an instructive example for the future. But I think that that's a very good point. On today's bonus show, we are going to start with what is genuinely a sad story. Friend of the show, Jamie Raskin, Democratic congressman who I think would be a great candidate for president, has announced that he has cancer and he says it is serious but treatable and that he expects to make a full recovery. We're going to talk about it. We will also talk about an incident in which a terminally ill patient in a hospital was vaping cannabis and police were called and it escalated very quickly. And in France, they have passed a law banning

single use tableware, meaning disposable forks and knives at fast food restaurants. What is the size of that carbon footprint? How much of a different will it make? Is it practical? Do people like it? Are they furious? Very interesting decision in France. All of those stories and more. David, sir, where are these stories? They're on the bonus show today. Oh, the bonus show where you want to make money. Yeah. Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad. That's right. Memberships which include access to the bonus show fund staff salaries, benefits, health care, connectivity, equipment, legal. We need a lot of legal folks, et cetera. You can sign up at join Pacman dot com. You'll get instant access to the bonus show.

You'll get the commercial free audio and video streams of the show, and you will be invited to the David Pakman show at David Pakman dot com.