The David Pakman Show - 2/28/24: Trump crushes Haley in Michigan, Biden still has no scandals

Episode Date: February 28, 2024

-- On the Show: -- President Joe Biden has had zero scandals so far in his administration, and it is making MAGA Trumpists desperate to concoct and fabricate pseudo-scandals -- Failed former President Donald Trump crushes Nikki Haley in the Michigan Republican primary, as Joe Biden also wins the Democratic primary with more than 80% of the vote -- 2024 Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley goes scorched earth on Donald Trump, saying his election would be "suicide for our country" -- Terrence Bradley, a supposed blockbuster witness in the Trump team's motion to disqualify Trump prosecutor Fani Willis in Georgia, completely collapses when Bradley admits he doesn't really know anything -- Republican Congressman James Comer, desperate as his case against Biden is crumbling, how claims that Biden's goal of "curing cancer" was a sort of "get rich quick" scheme for Joe Biden during an appearance with Maria Bartiromo on Fox News -- Republican Congresswoman Lauren Boebert's son, Tyler Boebert, is arrested on 22 charges, including some felonies -- 2024 independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr tells a crowd of black voters that racism will never end -- On the Bonus Show: VA Lt Gov apologizes for misgendering state senator, Arizona GOP advances bill legalizing killing undocumented migrants on suspicion of trespassing, Wendy's CEO announces surge pricing for menu, much more... 📰 Subscribe to The Washington Post for just $0.50/week at https://washingtonpost.com/pakman 💪 Athletic Greens is offering FREE year-supply of Vitamin D at https://athleticgreens.com/pakman 🧻 Reel Paper: Code PAKMAN for 30% OFF + free shipping at https://reelpaper.com/pakman 💻 Stay protected! Try our sponsor Aura FREE for 2 weeks at https://aura.com/pakman 🧘 Attend the PHD Weight Loss workshop for FREE on Feb 29: https://davidpakman.com/phd 🌳 MyHeritage: Try it free for 14 days at https://davidpakman.com/myheritage -- 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 -- 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 talk today not about Joe Biden's accomplishments, but about the lack of scandal. One of the reasons that it is increasingly a focus of the right wing to talk about Joe Biden's age and supposed crimes for which they can never find any evidence is because of the total and complete absence of actual scandals from Joe Biden's presidency. So far, there's an article by or a commentary in which Furman University politics professor Danielle Vinson has talked about this and said the focus on Joe Biden's age is because there have been no real scandals in his administration. We're going to have likely a rematch in 2024 of the 2020 election. Since that election, Joe Biden has had a completely scandal free presidency and Trump has been

charged in four criminal trials with ninety one felony counts, has been found civilly liable of rape and defamation fraud in New York, hundreds of millions of dollars in fines. And so in that environment, which is obviously a disaster for Donald Trump, they have to fabricate something. And what they're fabricating is, oh, Biden crimes and Biden is old. Now I want to think through this issue of scandal because we have a situation right now where there isn't the tumult and the drama and the genuine scandal of past administrations.

And we'll look at Obama. We will look at Trump. And so what you end up with in the absence of scandal is a sense of stability and a sense of narratives that in an ideal world comport more closely to the facts. And what we have today with Joe Biden's lack of scandal is a situation where the right is grasping at straws, generating and constructing and fabricating rather than simply reporting what is, for example, the charge that Biden is involved in crimes that involve him as a sort of mob leader figure. There's money from China and influence peddling and criminal bribery.

None of it after years of investigation has led to any substantiated proof. And it's a really poignant example of the total lack of scandal that exists in reality and what they have to fabricate. The smaller the real scandal, the more hard to believe and absurd the trumped up fake scandals become. So the Republican Party is not focusing on policy disagreements with Joe Biden. They're not even really focusing on ideology, ideological differences other than every once in a while hurling socialist as an insult at Joe Biden.

They are trying to tarnish the reputation of the administration, either through guilt by association when it comes to Hunter Biden or just simply unfounded accusations, stuff that they are making up. Yes, it undermines the political discourse, but it also diverts attention from the policy accomplishments of Joe Biden, which I've explained many times. It's all they have. It's not a great strategy, but it's all they have. We then get to stories that they tell about the economy. Not only is there an absence of scandal under Joe Biden, we have an economy that by all reasonable assessments is pretty good. Donald Trump predicted in 2020 that if Joe Biden becomes president, we would see

a recession 1929 style stock market crash. Horrible stuff. What happened is the opposite. Unemployment rates are consistently and persistently low. The stock market is hitting record highs almost every week. Many sectors have completely rebounded from their pandemic induced downturns. It is true that although inflation is down, prices are still much higher than they were years ago because inflation is still positive. Right. When inflation comes down, prices are still going up, just not by as much supply chain disruptions are still affecting a number of interest in industries.

And it has generated hurdles. Biden's doing what he can to deal with that. And he's being proactive rather than reactive. But because that is the status of the economy, they have to go to fabricating fake scandals. Now, critics could say that when you highlight the absence of a scandal, you are cheerleading for Joe Biden, merely cheerleading for Joe Biden. What I'm doing is acknowledging facts that are about promoting reality and truth over hyperbole and conjecture.

And there were a number of scandals under prior presidents, including Democratic presidents, and they can be seen alongside accomplishments and policy failures. What it happens to be, the reality of what it happens to be under Biden is no scandals and a bunch of pretty good accomplishments, as well as the desire from the progressive left like me to see Biden do more. So what I would, of course, love to see as we approach the 2024 election is for Republicans to come forward and really just focus on the policy of Biden that they disagree with. The problem is the disagreements that they have tend to be vague, often unsubstantiated and completely counter to what the majority of the American people seem to want.

So let's look at some prior presidents to kind of contextualize this. Even under Barack Obama, there was no shortage of criticism, right? There was policy I didn't like under Barack Obama. The scale up of drone warfare, for example, the not going far enough in terms of moving the economy in the direction of some of the successful policies we've seen implemented in socially democratic countries like those in northern Europe, Sweden, Denmark, etc. But scandals under Obama.

I mean, it's mostly nonsense. I'll build up to what I consider closer to maybe a real criticism. But you had the tan suit controversy with Obama where he wore a tan suit on a day where he was discussing serious matters and the tan suit didn't communicate seriousness. You had the infamous latte salute where Barack Obama saluted a Marine and in his saluting hand, he had a coffee cup and it was viewed as disrespectful. You had mustard gate where Barack Obama was mocked for requesting Dijon at dinner. Right. And Dijon is tantamount to elitism. Real Americans use, I guess, yellow mustard or something like that. Completely trivial.

You had in terms of what they really tried to generate as a scandal, the birth or birth certificate stuff. It was not trivial in its implications. Right. Imagine it were true that the person who was president was not legally eligible to be president. That would be a big deal, but it was based on nothing other than Barack Obama's skin color. And even Donald Trump jumped in on that. And then in terms of, you know, the Solyndra loan controversy, not everybody

may remember this, but the Obama administration was criticized because the Department of Energy made a 500 million dollar loan guarantee to Solyndra. It's a solar panel company. The company later went bankrupt and people on the right were raising questions about vetting processes for loan guarantees. Ultimately, there was no wrongdoing. The company just went bankrupt. And the truth is that those monies were used to fund a bunch of companies. And now in the context of the abortive PPP slush fund that was administered

under Trump, the cylindrists that thing seems so mild. And then lastly, the Fast and Furious operation. This was this ATF operation which was intended to track guns from the US that make it into Mexico. The idea was to use it to capture drug lords. The guns were lost and one gun was used in the murder of an American border agent. The operation had flaws. There was no substantiated cover up by the Obama administration, which is what they went after him for. So under Obama, there was also kind of a notable lack of scandal, but it's even more significantly notable the total absence of scandals under Biden. I'll come back to Afghanistan in a moment for those who are thinking of that. And then, I mean, listen, under Trump, multiple impeachments over serious wrongdoing, the first one for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, The second one with incitement of insurrection over January 6th, 2021.

You had the Russia stuff where, yes, we didn't get video of Trump and Russia plotting together. I don't know who is expecting that, but significant Russian efforts to influence the election. Trump's handling of classified information both while in office and immediately after. This goes back to 2017 with Russians in the Oval Office later post-presidency waving classified documents around the hush money payments directly related to his campaign involving Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen. The Ukraine scandal, which was central to Trump's first impeachment, Trump soliciting Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden.

The Trump Foundation ordered shut down and dissolved over using those donated funds as a slush fund. The family separation policy at the US Mexico border, authoritarian attempts to silence media he didn't like the travel ban fiasco, the Puerto Rico hurricane response, firing James Comey to stop the investigation into him, that horrible Lafayette Square photo incident where police cleared it so Trump could take a picture with a Bible, trying to steal the 2020 election, inciting a riot on January 6th, allegedly committing 91 crimes. I could go on COVID response. And so the the scandal that was rampant under Trump

is gone under Biden. Now, let me talk about Afghanistan. I've said before, the withdrawal from Afghanistan that Joe Biden executed was the same one that Trump was promising to execute, except he didn't do it. Was it chaotic? It was. And I don't know how it wouldn't be after 10 after 20 years in Afghanistan. Trump now says, remember, for months, Trump said Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan was a disaster. When he was asked, what would you have done differently? He didn't really say. Eventually, Trump started to articulate, well, I would have taken our equipment. I wouldn't have left our equipment and nobody would have died. A number of service member died as service members died during the withdrawal. Trump says nobody would have died. A number of service member died. Service members died during the

withdrawal. Trump says nobody would have died if I was in charge. We have no real reason to think Trump would have done it any differently because he's saying it now with the benefit of hindsight of how Biden did it. It was the right decision to get out. It was destined to be chaotic, but it certainly doesn't count as a scandal. That's for sure. So again, if we zoom out good economy, no major scandals and a rematch of 2020 with a Trump as the Republican candidate, most likely who is significantly weaker, I would argue than 2020. All of that looks good for Joe Biden, but nothing is guaranteed. His approval rating isn't exactly titillating, and every single one of us has to go out and vote if we want to ensure that the right outcome takes place.

Am I missing a genuine, bona fide Joe Biden scandal? Let me know. Info at David Pakman dot com or leave a comment on our YouTube channel, which you can find at YouTube dot com slash the David Pakman show. If I am genuinely missing a Joe Biden scandal, I will come to you tomorrow with tears in my eyes and hat in hand and say, I'm so sorry. Here's the Biden scandal that I missed. Let me know. Post and they're one of today's sponsors letting you subscribe for just 50 cents per week. The Washington Post just helps me go deeper on the news that matters most. Their journalists bring facts and clarity about what's happening in D.C., the economy,

climate change, foreign policy, things I care about. I have always used The Washington Post to prepare for The David Pakman Show. It's a news outlet that is quality and provides fact based reporting. And whether it's breaking news updates or comprehensive political and international coverage, thought provoking opinion, dinner recipes, if that's what you want. A Washington Post subscription has something for every type of news reader. They bring stories that explain the world, teach you something, inspire you. A Washington Post subscription makes it easy to access quality, trustworthy journalism, and it's affordable

to go to Washington Post dot com slash Pacman to subscribe for just 50 cents per week for your first year. That is 80 percent better than their typical offer. It's an amazing deal. That's Washington Post dot com slash Pacman to subscribe for just 50 cents per week for your first year. The link is in the podcast notes. Staying healthy is often about what is a sustainable habit, one that works for you, something you'll stick to. I have a scoop of AG1 in the morning before my infamous cappuccino. Each serving of AG1 just gets me super simply the vitamins, minerals, pre and probiotics that I'm looking for. It's just like a foundation for the entire day. And it's super easy. I fill up the shaker with super cold water. I put a scoop of AG1 in

shake and I'm ready to go. If I'm running short on time, I'll just grab a travel pack, which has an individual serving of AG1 that you can easily mix on the go. So even if I'm away from home, I'm just getting that nutritional foundation. I don't have as much time as I would like to perfectly fine tune every single meal. I do the best I can, but I don't want to be dealing with 10 different vitamin supplement bottles. And AG one just solves all of that. Try AG one and get a free one year supply of vitamin D three and K two plus five free the David Pakman show. five free travel packs of AG1 commercial free audio podcast into the podcast player of your choice, you can do that. If you'd rather watch the commercial free show daily,

you can do that as a member. And of course, we do an extra show every single day when the podcast ends. The real party begins the bonus show where you want to make money. Everybody else that makes money to fund themselves is bad, right? We start making money on the bonus show, which Alex Jones hates after the podcast each day and all of our members get instant and constant access to the bonus show. You can, of course, sign up and join Pacman dot com. It is not a lot of money, folks, but when enough people do it, it really makes us as an independent media entity resilient to the vagaries of social media algorithms and all of these other things. So it's worth doing.

And you can use the coupon code save democracy 24 if you would like to take a discount off of the eminently reasonable normal prices. That's all at join pacman.com. Michigan held its primary election last night. Both Republican and Democratic primaries took place last night. Let's start with the results of the Michigan primary where Donald Trump very easily won. Now, it's important to know that in Michigan specifically, Michigan has fifty five delegates for the Republicans. Only 16 depend on who wins the primary. The rest will be decided at the state convention next week or Saturday. I guess it's going

to be so with regard to the 16 delegates that were up last night, Donald Trump secured 12 of the 16 delegates with a absolutely massive win over Nikki Haley, Trump coming in with 68 percent of the vote and Nikki Haley close to 27. A few people voting uncommitted or for Ron DeSantis, Chris Christie, Vivek Ramaswamy, Ryan Binkley and Asa Hutchinson even getting a thousand votes. But in the end, nobody can touch Donald Trump, who got 68 percent of the vote in terms of delegates so far. OK, right now, Trump has one hundred and twenty two delegates and Nikki Haley has twenty four. Ron DeSantis, who has ended his campaign, has suspended his campaign as nine. Vivek Ramaswamy has three. So mathematically here, there are two stories. Story number one, there are more than 2400 delegates available when Trump has 122.

That is nowhere near enough to secure his victory. And by that assessment, Nikki Haley is right in this thing. The counterpoint is Nikki Haley has no path to winning even a single state based on the polling. And if that's the case, she has no mathematical case to stay in the race. However, she is staying in because of the unique circumstances in which Trump may end up dead or in prison by November. And Nikki Haley wants to be there. Now, whether the MAGA led RNC would choose Nikki Haley if Trump failed to be the nominee for whatever reason,

I don't actually know the answer. Here is NBC calling these races right at 9 p.m. Eastern last night. At this time, NBC News projects that Donald Trump will win the Michigan Republican primary. That is our election projection. Donald Trump, the projected winner of the Michigan primary. NBC News can also now project that President Joe Biden will win the Michigan Democratic primary. Again, Joe Biden. All right. Now let's talk about the Democratic primary a little bit. There was a movement. I would say that the movement in Michigan to vote against Biden in the primary to show displeasure at his handling of the Israeli Gaza situation,

which I find the wording a little weird because it's like Biden's the president of the United States. So I guess what they mean is Biden's reaction to Benjamin Netanyahu's handling. But regardless, there was a movement in Michigan specifically to voice displeasure at Biden's handling of the Israeli Gaza situation by voting uncommitted. And what we saw last night is that Joe Biden ended up with 81 percent of the primary vote uncommitted, came in at 13 percent. Marianne Williamson, 3.0 and Dean Phillips, two point seven. So here's my thought on this.

As long as the folks voting uncommitted in Michigan understand that if you're voting uncommitted because you're displeased with Biden on Gaza, you would be way more displeased with Trump on Gaza. And therefore, in in November you're still planning to vote for Joe Biden. I have no problem with this whatsoever. Vote whatever it is that you believe is in line with your values and your opinion. Fantastic.

You want to send a message to Biden that you're not happy. So you vote uncommitted in the primary, recognizing that Trump winning in November would be even worse for the cause you claim to care about. I do think it's important not to overstate this 13% uncommitted. One of the things about last night's primary in Michigan is that the Democratic primary turnout was about half of what it was in 2020. Back in 2020, the primary, the Democratic primary in Michigan saw 1.6 million votes. Last night we had not even eight hundred thousand votes. So with half the turnout, because it is not a competitive primary, those who showed up

specifically to vote uncommitted against Joe Biden are dramatically overrepresented. This number of uncommitted votes with 2020s turnout would have been like six and a half percent rather than 13. So this is not to say anything about how much those uncommitted voters care about X, Y or Z or anything like that. It's just a reminder that without a competitive primary, it leaves the door open for any sort of activist group to be overrepresented because most voters didn't. Half of those who voted last time didn't even come out because it's an it's essentially an uncontested primary.

So Super Tuesday next week, 18 states and territories are going to hold primaries or caucuses. Nikki Haley says she's going to stick it out at least through that point in time. Whether she would be mathematically eliminated after Super Tuesday is still an open question. If she can get 40 percent in most Super Tuesday states, my math is that Nikki Haley would still not be mathematically eliminated and would have justification to stay in whether she will or won't remains to be seen. Nikki Haley continues to go scorched earth on Donald Trump, now saying that the idea of reelecting Trump is suicide for our country and even suggesting that merely making Trump

the Republican nominee would be suicide for the country. Axios has a report on this based on an interview that Nikki Haley did with The Wall Street Journal. And it says former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley slammed former President Trump in a Wall Street Journal interview published Tuesday, warning that if he clinches the nomination, the Republican Party could lose in November. Haley has repeatedly cited Trump's general election vulnerabilities as a reason for staying in the race, despite having no clear path.

That's right. No clear path to win the nomination. This may be his survival mode to pay his legal fees and get out of some legal peril. But this is like suicide for our country, Haley said of Trump, who faces 91 criminal counts across four cases. We've got to realize that if we don't have someone who can win a general election, all we are doing is caving to the socialist left. Of course, there really is no socialist left of any significant power. Now, on their side, Stephen Chung's statement, he's Trump's campaign spokesperson. He says Republican voters have delivered resounding wins for President Trump

in every single primary contest. And this race is over. Our focus is now on Joe Biden and the general election. You know, I appreciate on the one hand that Nikki Haley for the last six to eight weeks has been way more forthright and direct and honest. Really, it's just honesty at the end of the day about the problems with Trump. Trump has been a disaster for the Republican Party. And since Trump won in 2016, Republicans have either underperformed what they should have done historically or straight up lost. She's absolutely right about that. She is absolutely right that Trump is showing decline. She's absolutely right that Trump mistook Nancy Pelosi for Nikki Haley. She is absolutely right about all of these criticisms.

And yet and yet she seems to think that Trump would still be better than Biden, I think, because Biden is even worse as part of the socialist left. And she has said that she would pardon Donald Trump. So if she really believes Trump and his actions to be the danger to this country that she would pardon Donald Trump. So if she really believes Trump and his actions to be the danger to this country that she claims them to be, why is she saying in advance she would pardon Trump before even having the facts about whether justice was applied correctly or incorrectly in Trump's criminal trials, which have not yet even happened. She says all of these terrible things about Donald Trump. And yet we are to believe that Joe Biden is even worse than that,

especially when we've had more than three years of Joe Biden, no scandals, an economy that is quite stable and a number of major accomplishments. It's very difficult to really see Nikki Haley as an honest participant in this entire thing when she, on the one hand, is saying these things about Trump, but then still saying, oh, it's all better than the Biden socialist left. And I would pardon Donald Trump. Trump is suicide for our country. But Biden is worse than killing the country by suicide. It actually invites even more questions than are answered by this. So I continue to believe that Nikki Haley is less crazy than Donald Trump. Don't get me wrong.

She's less crazy than Donald Trump. She's more knowledgeable than Donald Trump. But at the end of the day is still a calculating bad faith political actor who should not be president of the United States and who now wants us to believe, I guess, that despite all of the terrible things Trump has done and said, which she tells us, she acknowledges he's better than Biden and deserves a presidential pardon if convicted. Not a good faith participant to me, my friends. Less crazy, sure. But that is a very low bar. The household products you buy every week impact

the environment. Thirty million trees are destroyed every year for toilet paper in the U.S. alone. Our sponsor real makes a sustainable toilet paper, contains no trees. It uses 100 percent bamboo. Real's paper is certified by the Forest Stewardship Council, meaning they are responsibly harvesting bamboo grass that's used for their paper. And bamboo toilet paper is softer and stronger than regular toilet paper. It's a win for everybody, including the planet. And while regular toilet paper is wrapped in plastic as well, real papers packaging

is fully plastic free and compostable. Real Paper partners with one tree planted with every box of real that you buy. They are funding reforestation efforts around the country. So unlike the other toilet paper that cuts down trees, real paper doesn't use trees and is helping to actively plant trees. I have real toilet paper on a subscription, so I don't run out. The subscription gives you an extra discount as well. Go to real paper dot com slash Pacman and use the code Pacman for 30 percent off your

first order and free shipping. That's our E.L. paper dot com slash Pacman. Use code Pacman for 30 percent off. The info is in the podcast notes. You may remember a few years ago, the show got hacked and several thousand dollars were stolen. We never got it back. But now I have a

lot more peace of mind because we use aura. Our sponsor aura is the all in one tool to protect your online and financial accounts. Aura alerts you anytime your personal info is found on the dark web or in data breaches could be social security number logins, financial accounts. You will get very fast alerts if a criminal does something like try to open up a bank account in your name, take out credit in your name. Aura will also monitor your bank accounts, your home and auto titles, which can help to guard against fraud. And Aura even protects your phone by letting you block and screen spam calls and texts.

Aura has parental controls for your kids' devices to restrict apps, manage screen time, set focus time. You can try Aura free for 14 days at Aura.com slash Pacman. It only takes a few seconds to use the free trial to see if your username and passwords have been leaked online. That's A-U-R r a dot com slash Pacman. The link is in the podcast notes. The case being made by Donald Trump's lawyers against Fannie Willis in the state of Georgia

crumbled before our very eyes yesterday as a supposedly key witness said, I don't really know anything. And even the things I said were mere speculation. You have to see this implosion. The New Republic has a good article summarizing where we are. And then we'll go to the video. Key witness against Fannie Willis completely crumbles on the stand. Terrence Bradley, a key witness for Donald Trump's team, sounded more like an office gossip when he took the stand in the Georgia trial. Donald Trump and several of his co-defendants in their Georgia election interference case

have accused Willis of an improper relationship with special prosecutor Nathan Wade. So understand the Trump team wants the case thrown out because of a relationship they claim to know the details of and are arguing was inappropriate and a conflict of interest. Trump's team says Willis and Wade started dating in 2019. The couple says they didn't start dating until 2022 after Willis hired Wade for the Georgia case. Trump's lawyers have argued the romantic relationship provides a legal basis to disqualify Willis and throw the case out entirely. And that gets us to this testimony. Now,

before we look at the testimony, putting this testimony aside, the case that you should throw out the charges against Trump because of what they are claiming are the facts of this relationship is already a weak case, even if it were true that Fannie Fannie Willis were involved with this investigator and hired him after their relationship began. I'll admit it doesn't look awesome, but in terms of a conflict of interest, they're both on the same side in terms of a reason to believe that the charges are bogus because of that extremely weak. So I think it's really important to know that even as this case imploded before their very eyes with the two minutes of testimony I'm about to show you, even were it not

for this implosion in the testimony, it's not a great case to say Trump should just be allowed to go by any means whatsoever. In the best case scenario, maybe they could argue somebody should be replaced. Fannie Willis or Nathan Wade. I mean, I'm thinking out loud here, but even the case in the worst scenario isn't very strong. And now this, you have to see this. This is amazing. I'm going to object because his testimony a few minutes ago is that he did not recall making that statement. I'll overrule that. Mr. Bradley, answer the

question if you can. Repeat the question. When you told me that their relationship started when she left the D.A.'s office and was a judge in South Fulton. Where did you obtain that knowledge from? It was I was speculating. And that's the I mean, that's it's over, right? We're going to look at the rest. It's over. The entire case that the Trump lawyers built is based on evidence of the timing of this relationship involving Fannie Willis starting in 2019. The source of that admitted here, it was merely speculation. Speculation is not admissible and that is it. But it gets even worse. I didn't have a. No one told me I was speculating. No one told you that. No one told me I was speculating. No one told you that?

No one told me that. You were speculating based on things that had been told to you or things you had observed? So I'm going to object as to the nature of this line of questioning, because the witness has made it clear he was speculating as to how or what he knew. And if it's speculation, it's inadmissible for this court. All right, but the motivations for his reason for speculating would be admissible. So I'll overrule that. Thank you, Judge. Was this speculation when you told me that? Was that based on things that had been told to you and things that you had witnessed?

I never witnessed anything. That thing you told me, how did you know that? I was speculating. OK, what about the things you witnessed? I never witnessed anything. This is this is their explosive bombshell with witness. Speaker 4 So, you know, it was speculation. I can't tell you anything specific

if that's what you're asking. You can't tell me anything specific as to why you speculated about that? This was however many years ago. I mean, I don't recall, but no. I don't. Did you have any reason to lie?

I don't know if speculation is lying, but I'm. Well, let me just show me where in this text. You didn't ask me if I was speculating or guessing. I didn't ask you to tell me if it says that. I mean, that's actually a brilliant moment. That's a brilliant moment where the lawyer says, here's the transcript with you. Show me where in the transcript you said you were speculating. And Terrence Bradley says, well, it's not in the transcript because you didn't ask me whether I was speculating.

And this is yet another failure by these lawyers that Trump hires. No, if this is the same one that you just showed me, does not. And you're welcome if you need to look at your facts. This is I mean, listen, Trump has been trying to get Fannie Willis off of the trail since before the charges were even brought brought forward. There have been a number of articles written about how before the indictment even came forward, Trump was already trying to get her disqualified. Here's an article by Sarah Jones. Trump pressures Georgia GOP to remove Fannie Willis before she can indict him. The idea being remove her from even being the

district attorney in Fulton County, Georgia, so she can't even get to indicting him. Trump wrote, you might remember this. Trump wrote on Truth Central, the racist district attorney in Atlanta, Fannie Willis, one of the most dangerous and corrupt cities in the U.S., is now calling the Georgia legislature, of course, racist because they want to make it easier to remove and replace the local rogue prosecutors who are incompetent, racist or unable to properly do their job. This is a great development for Georgia, but also other parts of the country. Congratulations to the Georgia legislature for having the courage to act boldly, fairly and fast.

Of course, there was no evidence any of that was true. And ultimately, she was not removed. This has now completely collapsed and we are now waiting only for the eyes to be crossed and the T's dotted, as Sean Hannity once said. But I don't know how this can continue anymore, given that the witness says I didn't see a damn thing and I was just speculating. However, we know from the so-called Biden crimes investigation that just because you have no evidence doesn't mean that you're going to give it up. And in fact, let's go and discuss that now with some of the latest video from James Comer. After the supposed FBI informant on Biden's crimes, Alexander Smirnoff, was found to have lied to investigators and admitted in court documents that a bunch of that story about

the Bidens came from Russian intelligence. You would think Republicans would say, you know what, we're going to abandon this line because it just doesn't make any sense. There's no evidence for it, but they haven't done that. They're insisting, well, that's only one part of our case. But now they are getting increasingly desperate. And this one actually borders on being offensive, particularly given Joe Biden's history with cancer in his family and the death of his son from cancer. The new one is that James Comer appeared on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo and in trying to connect Joe Biden to corruption, says, you know, Joe Biden owned health care

stocks and he wanted to cure cancer. That sure sounds like a get rich quick scheme to me. I kid you not. This is how sick and deranged these people are. Take a listen to this. Now we have two people on record. We have Bob Alinsky talking about the business model for selling the Biden brand. And now Golan is talking about the business model for selling the Biden brand. So what you have here and you have the political source talking about the business model for selling the Biden brand. All three of those sources confirm that one way the Bidens were able to abstract all this money from these shady, desperate characters was they said, Joe Biden, not only do we have access to him, but he wants to be a part of this. He wants an equity stake in this.

And he may even sit on the board. That's what they told CEFC with the 10% for the big guy. That's what the Politico article confirmed about the AmeriCorps health. That was the business model. So what we've been able to do in this investigation is not only prove that the Bidens were influence peddling, we've been able to see exactly what their business model was. Not only were they saying, yeah, here's Joe Biden on the phone. Here, let's have dinner with Joe Biden. But they're also saying Joe Biden wants an equity ownership and he may even sit on the board if you if you pay us enough money.

Wow. And then let's not forget, during the last year of the Obama administration, Joe Biden's portfolio included health care and his whole thing about we want to cure cancer. So there's another point here that says that. You understand what is being said here, right? Joe Biden's portfolio include health care stocks, and Joe kept talking about I want to cure cancer. Clearly, Biden was trying to make a buck through the slice of his portfolio that was health care companies by curing cancer. He didn't genuinely want to do something on cancer, given how cancer took his own son

and has touched his life in so many other ways. It's just get rich quick. And the problem with this reasoning is that you could apply this to anybody. I mean, remember that infamous video where Noam Chomsky, no, uh, not known exactly for being a rapacious capitalist. Noam Chomsky was asked by a reporter, you know, you have all these criticisms of the food industry and military industrial complex and defense companies and big pharma and blah, blah, blah. And you got your money in mutual funds and the mutual funds own little slices of all of those companies you criticize. And Noam Chomsky basically said, what, you want me to keep the money under my

mattress? I mean, listen, what are you what are you talking about? Right. I mean, at the end of the day, this is I have no direct involvement in any of that. You could apply this to me. I've been very open that I think the most logical investment strategy is not to try to pick individual stocks and beat the market. And it's none of that. It's dollar cost averaging in the lowest cost mutual funds. I own what's called a total stock market index fund. Why? Because I'm not trying to time or pick a specific industry. I'm just saying stocks tend to go up over time. I don't want to pay high fees. So my total stock market index fund, I think the fee is like three basis points a year. That's 0.03%. And I let it ride. Now, could someone come to me and say, David, you know,

the total stock market index fund owns fossil fuel companies and it owns this, that the other. Yes, that's true. I have no direct connection to any of those companies. I oppose their business models as those companies go out of business. If they do, as we transition to green energy, they will be removed from the total stock market index fund. It's a really weak critique. And what Maria is doing here is even sicker by saying his whole cancer moonshot thing was not because he genuinely wanted to cure cancer. It's because in the back of his of his mind, he knows that a little slice of his portfolio is in pharmaceutical companies, which at least in theory would make money from curing cancer, although there's a counterpoint.

And the counterpoint that many of these Republicans often put forward is big pharma doesn't want to cure cancer because they make more money by treating it on an ongoing basis rather than curing it. So the same people arguing this also say we can't trust big pharma to even want to cure cancer because they actually make more profit by not curing it. So these people are sick. These people are disgusting. And also with regard to the Biden crime stuff, they're not going anywhere else here in this next clip. You know, now that their star witness has been indicted, Comer says anything having

to do with the FBI is suspicious. He no longer trusts the FBI. You look, they've been doubted. Even more is coming out about the informant, what role he played for the FBI. The FBI paid him to be a spy in Russia. They indicted him because he was communicating with Russia, but that's what they paid him for over 10 years to do. So I don't know anything about Smirnoff,

but the circumstances around his indictment and his rearrest and the changing of the original indictment by Weiss, is very concerning because everything that I've had to do with the FBI has been very suspicious throughout this investigation. The trust level that I have with the FBI is zero, Maria. And look, we just, we're following the money. Smirnoff never was a key part of this investigation, never was a part of the investigation because we could. And we just write. It was his critical witness.

But now he's what, like a coffee boy. So here's the important thing. Comer now says he distrusts anything having to do with the FBI. It's important to remember that the FBI director, as well as the special counsel who investigated Alexander Smirnoff, are Republicans. They are Republicans. to remember that the FBI director, as well as the special counsel who investigated Alexander Smirnoff, are Republicans. They are Republicans. They are not left wing, whatever.

They are Republicans. And that's the bottom line. So they are committed to this. If we go back to the top of the show, I opened the show by telling you the focus on Biden's age and the focus on the supposed crimes of Biden are all in a in a framework where there are no actual Biden scandals. And the longer Biden goes without a scandal, the more incentivized these Republicans are to come up with something. And that's why they're desperately attached to this.

If things were going terribly and they could say the economy is a disaster and we've suffered terrorist attacks and schools are shutting down ago, if they really had a disaster to point to, they wouldn't be messing with this stuff. They would just be telling us the truth about how bad things are in the United States because things are, by all accounts, pretty good. This is what they're making up. Biden's old and he committed crimes which we can't quite identify and we can't quite find witnesses to or find any evidence for. Can this win them the 2024 election?

That's the question. I hope that the answer is no, because the Republican Party is made up of so many low information, deluded voters. I worry that they can actually ride this nonsense to a victory. That's where we come in by voting in November. If you could use a little help meeting your weight loss goal for twenty twenty four, give our sponsor, Ph.D., weight loss a call. They've been doing some amazing things for 2024. Give our sponsor, Ph.D. Weight Loss, a call. They've been doing some amazing things for people. They make the weight loss journey simple. They do one on one

coaching with their certified team of compassionate, encouraging dietitians. Ph.D. Weight Loss helps real people get results through lifestyle modification based on protocols from successful clinical trials. You get an initial consultation. You review your history, your lifestyle, your goals, your goals. You create a customized plan of action. It includes food and lifestyle. And then their team of dieticians and counselors are at your disposal every step of the way. If weight loss is something you're working on, check out Ph.D. weight loss. No severe calorie restriction, no medications, pills or supplements, unsustainable exercise routines, none of that stuff. Ph.D. weight loss has an approach that

focuses on behavioral change, nutrition, education, and they take an overarching holistic approach to your body and habits. The founder, Dr. Lucas, is offering a free workshop just for my audience on February 29th at 3 p.m. Eastern, where you can learn more about Ph.D. weight loss, why weight gain isn't your fault. Evidence based approaches you can implement on your own right away to improve your health. Sign up for the free workshop at David Pakman dot com slash Ph.D. They've helped over seventy five hundred people drop weight. You could be next. That's David Pakman dot com slash Ph.D.. The link is in the podcast notes. I have been tracking my genealogy for years and the service I've always used to put my family tree together is my heritage, which is why I asked them to be a sponsor.

My heritage is the number one family history service because of how easy they make it to discover your origins and relatives with over 19 billion records. You don't need to know anything about genealogy. Just let my heritage do the work. For example, if you're watching this on YouTube, you can see their instant discoveries feature here lets me add an entire branch of 28 people connected to my great great grandfather, to my family tree, all with their info and photos. I found all kinds of amazing,

unexpected things. We found this incredible photo here of an immigration record from the U.S.-Canada border crossing for a relative born in 1895. I had no idea about this. It is super interesting. I'm showing some more of my discoveries here. It just connects you to your roots, where you come from. It's also given me a lot of quality time with my family showing them these discoveries. Thank you, David Pakman dot com slash MyHeritage. The link is in the podcast notes. Radical and repugnant Republican Congresswoman Lauren Boebert's son, Tyler Boebert, has been arrested and charged with 22 counts, including multiple felonies. Now, I want to put some disclaimers right up front here. Number one, this is being reported independently. This is an adult. This is someone Lauren Boebert talks about. If this were a minor who Lauren Boebert did not discuss publicly, I would not

be talking about it. And I think that this is I just want to put that up front because there are very specific reasons why this guy's arrest is relevant to the ethic and ideology put forward by people like Lauren Boebert. And it has everything to do with hypocrisy on family values. Now, let's first tell you what happened and then we'll kind of get into the context. So KJCT reports Lauren Boebert's son arrested facing 22 charges. He's 18 years old. According to the rifle police department's Facebook page, he was arrested after a string of vehicle and property thefts in the area. And he is facing four charges for criminal possession of a financial device. Now, I had to look up what that means. It basically sounds like stealing credit cards or checkbooks like he was.

He was criminally in possession of those devices that did not belong to him. Three charges of first degree criminal auto trespass with intent to commit commit crime, essentially entering vehicles that aren't his four charges of criminal possession of I.D. documents, presumably other people's I.D.s, the felony conspiracy to commit felony, four charges of I.D. theft possession with intent to use three charges of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Presumably he was doing this with friends who are minors and three charges of theft under three hundred dollars. Now, the New York Post, not exactly a bastion of journalism, has a write up about it. And it explains that

five of these are felony charges. The four criminal possession of I.D. and the conspiracy to commit a felony are all felony charges. The rest are misdemeanors. So there's a few different things here that are important to understand. Number one, this is the same kid of Lauren Boebert's who has a kid himself and led to that entire fiasco of Lauren Boebert becoming a 36 or 37 year old grandmother and talking about how great it is. Now, here is the hypocrisy that I want to focus on. We have a political party, the Republican Party, whose currency of the day is their moral and ethical values about fairness and family and raising children and religion and morality and all of this sort of stuff. And they are led by some of the people who listen. It's not me passing judgment. It's

by their own standards. They are not showing us that they are the people who should really be laying out the moral framework and fabric of our country when they criticize the absence of parenting on the left or parenting on the left that either endorses or allows or encourages whatever is the thing they don't like. At one point point, it was homosexuality. Now it's about trans and gender identity and it's about mask wearing and vaccines during covid. Or what are the books that liberal parents allow their children to read? Or what are the right types of schools? Or do parents know more than teachers? All of this stuff is based in a fundamental ethic that they know what is good and moral and the right environment in which children should be reared and raised and whatever.

And they are the ones invariably filled with, you know, I don't even want to get into the sexual assault and sexual abuse instances with the people claiming to have the moral majority. But Lauren Boebert is really the epitome where she is truly a bomb thrower about how all left wing values are bad and lead to problems in the way children are reared and on and on and on and on. And at the end of the day, she becomes a 30 something year old grandmother to a teen dad. We know the outcomes are significantly inferior when you bring children into those situations and also has raised a kid who ends up committing, allegedly committing a very serious string of car thefts and break ins and other crimes. And so at the end of the day, those who claim to have the moral compass by which all others should live in general should be looked at with suspicion because it's really hard given how complex and populated the world is to say, I have the one answer for how people should live and live

correctly. But especially when you look at those folks and this is what they have. And this is a long story with Republicans, right? The newt Gingrich is of the world who are saying one thing publicly about how people should live and what is the right family and all of this stuff while he is cheating and doing all sorts of horrible things. This goes back decades, to be totally honest. So what I would love is for those who are the political equivalent of the guests on the late Jerry Springer show, thinking they have the moral high ground to tell everybody else what's moral and ethical, maybe just ease off of that a little bit and

focus on stuff like economic policy. The reason they don't is their economic policy has failed and the country doesn't want it. But that's why they're doing this, because they at least claim to have the plausible moral high ground, even though when we look, they don't. So listen, I feel bad for this kid. He clearly you have to look at parenting. You when an 18 year old has a kid and then commits strings of crimes, allegedly, you have to look at parenting. And that points to Lauren Boebert. And I guess her estranged husband. I don't know if they're together or not. I don't really care. These are the people who want to tell us how it is that they that that everybody should

be living. It's pathetic. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is an independent candidate for president. And he spoke before a group of black voters and said some really wacky stuff that admittedly with these guys, there's some kernel of reality in there, but it's often mashed up and reconstituted into something that isn't really what it is. Here is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. saying to black voters, listen, we are never going to eliminate racism. There's a lot that goes into this discussion. So let's play it and then we will discuss. I'm going to say this. A lot of the liberal energy to deal with racism, systemic racism in this country has been directed at trying

to make people so they're not racist anymore through education, through sanctions, through cancellation, whatever. And all of these things are important. But I would say that we're never going to eliminate racism. We are hardwired from the 20,000 generations that humanity spent wandering the African savannah and little tribal groups. We're hardwired to look for differences in other people and then do to essentially practice racism. He is starting with a kernel of reality. And the kernel of reality is that when there is uncertainty. We are hardwired. I'm going to use the word hardwired.

I don't know that is exactly the right word. But if we want to say we're hardwired to anything, it's when there is complexity and decisions to be made on which maybe our lives depend. We are in a way hardwired to stereotype. What is a stereotype? A stereotype is a shortcut that takes some rule and applies it to the individual. And there can be positive or negative stereotypes, but we really should see stereotypes at least at some point as something that was an adaptive response. And so if you start to notice intuitively that when you are in danger, there is a certain type of person around either. It's always people wearing glasses that are around when there is danger or maybe it's racial or maybe it's whatever. The reason the brain would stereotype is to say, I don't know this particular person, but here is a stereotype about what is often the case.

I can apply it to this person to quickly make some kind of judgment and maybe keep myself safe. There is a lot of scientific basis for stereotyping as a shortcut to keeping ourselves safe. But when RFK Jr. says, listen, we're just hardwired to be racist and that's it. That's a different thing. We are hardwired to notice differences. We are hardwired to try to use stereotyping for shortcutting. But racism as a practice and as a societal construct, which is often what we're talking about, is not a result of evolutionary biology. It's social, it's cultural and it involves a bunch of individual factors. So when he argues, listen, we're hardwired to be racist, it's just a totally defeatist attitude

to social progress. And by the way, we have become less racist over time. If it were true that you just we got to accept defeat, we're just going to be racist and society will be racist. The truth is that we have seen changes. We have seen changes under the law. We have seen changes in practice and we have seen changes at the individual level about racist attitudes. And so while stereotyping and noticing differences is something that humans do naturally, we know that the racist application of that reality has been dealt with to some degree over time. And if you look at some of the evolutionary psychology on this, what RFK Jr. is saying is that since the origins of humanity, we make judgments based on various traits and those judgments influence our behavior.

That is different than deterministically saying we are going to be racist on that basis. And it I don't honestly know even why he's talking about this. It's one of these things where it's like, what what are we talking about again? But it really doesn't make a lot of sense now. Here is actually you know what? The other clip isn't even really related. It's about how to make kids resilient against racism. I'm going to skip the clip.

It's not even a great clip making not a lot of sense. RFK Jr. But I will tell you in the three latest national polls, Trump, Biden, Kennedy, RFK is polling 14, 17 and 24. Those are scary numbers. Those are scary numbers. We have a voicemail number. That number is 2 nine two. David P. Here's a voicemail from someone who felt my doctor Phil interview was too soft. Hi, David. I listen to you all the time and I was going to be to a member that senior recently interview people like Dr. Phil. He was just about to get that paid membership. But then my Dr. Phil interview changed his mind. And you are so easy on them. It's just it's it's very disappointing that you can't stand up to them and really corner them on some issues. But you just kind of let them do their thing and you're

very soft on them. It's not what I like in a comment a commentator from the left side, decided not to become a member because I just don't think you're strong enough. I almost had him. I almost had a membership from this guy. And then the doctor Phil interview was soft. I got a handful of messages from people saying that and then mostly messages from people understanding that when you bring on someone like Dr. Phil, if you go on the attack in the way that I think some people wanted me to, the guest gets defensive and you get nothing and you

make no progress. I think the point of the Dr. Phil interview was to expose that he says he's just a common sense guy who's not into politics, but really he's subscribing to just the generic flavor of the day of right wing ideas. I think the interview did that. And by seeing the feedback and the views that the interview is getting, I think it was a success. There are some things that if you don't produce a show, you may not understand about how you have to deal with certain guests in certain interviews.

I did exactly what I planned to do with Dr. Phil. And I think the revelation was this guy's just another right winger. Always love hearing feedback from folks about the interviews, though. So I appreciate that. We have a great bonus show for you today. We will talk about the Virginia lieutenant governor apologizing after misgendering a state senator. The Arizona Republican Party has advanced a bill legalizing the killing of undocumented

migrants when there is a suspicion of trespassing. And the Wendy's CEO is announcing surge pricing for food. How is this going to work? We'll talk about all of that and more when producer Pat joins me on the bonus show. Make sure you're signed up at join Pacman dot com and make sure you're subscribed on YouTube at YouTube dot com slash the David Pakman show.