the general drilled by members of both parties regarding the chaos gas canister. next, we will bring you all of the fire as well as that the testimony will result in accountability either in the bio ministration or over the pentagon. also in the health hunger has a difficult job of voting on a $3.00 trillion dollar budget with the military budget being the largest portion of federal spending. but instead of spending every moment possible finding ways to tighten a belt, congress has decided to go play baseball. literally, we will give you the 360 view on the u. s. budget crisis, which will result in a 1000 the federal workers will be far load if an agreement is not reached by thursday. and the debate at 2, if the judicial branch is the most dominant branch in the u. s. government continues, as a recent cases have redefined laws, passed by legislatures and executive order. however, what is the law was not the basis for those rulings. rather,

the judges undisclosed financial interests were going to bring you the shocking story involving over $100.00 judges who broke the same laws. it was sworn to uphold . and around the world, online platforms are finding themselves conflicting with the government and australia where freedom is under fire. australians are being denied access to comment on a very popular media page. after a court ruling, we will see we will bring you why this can be setting a precedent for other countries to follow. you know, use the stores in war on today's news views right here on our to america. let's get started. ah, thanks for joining us. you know, it's day to on the hill for the generals and the secretary of defense. and if you thought to this hearings were hated before the senate home, just you wait a wednesday before the house, general mark, milly, defense survey, lloyd austin and joe. well, frank mackenzie faced

a new round of grilling and of course like i always expected grandstanding all this resulted in questions about president joe biden. the ability to lead? well, someone who lead to always is our team fair project, who is going to give us some of today's highlights. 20 years of a whole lot of different people leading has led us to this point. and we said we're going to stop this one chairman, this saturday conceivable. bring war here going. war is not over. it's coming to america, congressional chaos, after a heated hearing in the senate, members of the house armed services committee, up the annie bickering with each other. and bickering with the 3 men testifying general mark, milly, secretary of defense, lloyd austin, and central command commander frank mckenzie. they're not even close congress. oh, really? because you said you chose to talk to reporters instead of off the one who took the most heat. general mili over his comments in the just released bob woodward's book

as peril where it revealed several of milly's actions in the final days of president trump time and office, including calls with his chinese counterpart and his conversation with how speaker nancy pelosi, quoted pelosi is saying and this was to you, what i'm saying to you is that they couldn't even stop him from an assault on the capital. who even knows what else he may do. and is there anybody in charge of the white house who was doing anything but kissing his fat but all over this is that you recall that is a lot of argent comments made and and my focus was to assure her that the nuclear system and weapons are under control, and then more probing into what these men actually told president joe biden, after the resurfacing of the president's august interview with george stephanopoulos. so no one, no one told your military advisors not to, you know, we should just keep 2500 troops. it's been

a stable situation for the last several years. we can do that, we can continue to do that. no, no one said that to me that i can recall. i think the general officers here and secretary have made it very clear that they gave the president boss that he wouldn't listen to the general's doubling down. they did tell the president to stay in afghanistan is been my position in my judgement, that if we went below an advisory level of $2500.00, i believe that the government of afghanistan would likely collapse and the military would follow. they continue their attacks. you know we, we got smaller and so i agree with john mckenzie. that's when you could begin to see things really beginning. right. now more questions arise about president violence leadership. and whether or not the book should stop with him. but if we didn't have a president that was so adult, you all would be fired, because that is what you deserve. you of let down the people who wear the uniform in my district and all around this country. and you're far more interested in what

your perception is and how people think about you inside or washington books that care about winning it has in or for news use hughes. i'm here in front back of the story, returned to a former navy intelligence officer john george john. i missed it today. all watching it the word fat but was actually used in congress today. i think that the historical, but i think that just shows exactly. we're intelligence is in 2021. we're actually talking about a very serious issue. like afghanistan. i had to start with you thoughts on the impeachment, or if you're i actually out there a great template for cable tv drama. many of those that were actually reserved oscar, so their performance. but today's hearing that the armed services committee might actually give them a challenge for the great award. did we actually learn anything? do you think? which might clarify how the chaos around ask and withdrawal actually happened. we've learned so much and not just from the hearings today. i'm as you recall when

general milly was before congress talking about how he wanted service men, members to read all of the woke books including white rage and how he wanted to learn about white rage. and how he refused to say that communism was bad. turns out that some of my source told me that a lot of the joint chiefs and a lot of senior officers had been in several times several twice or thrice weekly meetings, dealing with cultural wars. and the woke wars in the military during the run up to and during the crisis that have canister and they were spinning all kinds of time on that rather than an actual operational thinking. so at a minimum, you can say that the to the command, the command structure of united states was distracted with the joint chiefs. and certainly with president mike who was interested, you'd actually bring that up because they seem to obviously play the blame game in this. and one of their favorite things that i was trump saying that president trumpet already put this timeline into action. it was already there once binding was sworn into office. was that kind of confirm today?

and my question is, why would they stick with the timeline when it seems like both of them were not necessarily fans of serving when president trump was a great question. scott, so this is the way to characterize this is i'd like to call this the cascading buck path. so nobody in the current administration of current command staff is responsible. but somehow, trump is the facts in the ground are somewhat at variance with this as the agreement that trump made with the taliban and doe how that was negotiated with conditions based. meaning, if you do this, we do that. that was not just a unilateral cut and run now since that deal was cut and go ahead and during the biden and the 1st few months of the binding station, the taliban had clearly broken those agreements that were made of the present with president trumpet, his ministration so present button was under no obligation to up and withdraw out. now when he did this was an artificial deadline set for political reasons because the administration knew that they had falling,

pulling deteriorating pulling and they needed, they knew they needed to get the grow, the president's credibility. so they could, he would have leverage to whip the bipartisan infrastructure deal and the $3500000.00 deal through congress. that's what this is really about. and they wanted to deliver a cheap political win before 911. so you could go before the american, people say, hey, i ended america, as long as we're the idea being a, give me a bump in the polls and some leverage with congress and it blew up in their face. and now they want to blame president. trump. ok, so, but here's the thing on your smart man. looking at this go into, we knew it was not going to be easy. the question is, how are they thinking that this was going to be easy to do with in just a few weeks? it was actually a positive experience from everybody on the outside who even just watch the news knew that this was not going to go well that the afghan government was going to do was going to fall quickly. and yet, even the generals today said, we told president abide, and this wasn't going to work. he didn't listen to us. so why in the world who was telling the president or where was he thinking that this was going to go smoothly

and be a win for him? well, there is a real disconnect here between what the military officers, as they invite their testimony from work congress states that they knew they knew it would be a disaster. and what the white house believe to be true. and what they hoped would be the case. the white house political shop, probably led by rod rod claim, the white house chief of staff thought the geez, there'll be some messiness in our withdrawal from afghanistan, but the american public will appreciate they were looking at pulling for this. appreciate president biden ending america's longest war. they didn't anticipate the images of people jump falling off of the airplane. the 13 service members being killed and the coverage of, of american afghans who worked for the united states slot being slaughtered and the social media blow back. they didn't anticipate that this was a political edit misjudgment, when they decided in fact, to ignore the advice the military commanders had given them. well,

and i think the biggest answer and all of this we found out we didn't get any details on. we don't know exactly what, what general milly said and how he justified that his conversation with the chinese and i doubt will ever see transcripts from that, which i think we should. john, always great to catch up with you. thanks for joining us. the others, this new report that says more than a 130 federal judges have violated u. s. law and judicial ethics by overseen cases evolving companies in which a day or their family members actually own stock. in the investigation by the wall street journal found the judges improperly failed to disqualify themselves from nearly 700 court cases around the country. since 2010. largely, the attorney chavez brings us the story from new york. an investigation by the wall street journal reveals that a 131 federal judges violated u. s. law by overseen cases involving companies in which they or their families held direct stock. according to the report,

the judges failed to accused themselves from 685 cases across the u. s. in which they held financial interest since 2010. furthermore, when the judges participated in these cases, roughly 2 thirds of their rulings ended up being in favor of their or their family's financial interests. while there are no laws that prohibit judges from owning stocks, the federal jurist code of conduct, demands judges recused themselves in the event they hold any semblance of financial interest in a case, or the ownership of legal or equitable interest. however small, the cases in question were all held between 2 years, 201-2020 of the 2 thirds of the federal judges who disclosed individual stock holdings. roughly, a 5th of them presided in at least one case that involved their stock after the paper notify the judges of the findings. 56 of the law men began to alert parties involved in 320. 9 of the lawsuits of their conflict of interest. judges offered multiple explanations for their infringements. when confronted by the paper, most afflicted blame though citing administrative errors and arguing their refusal

lists contained misspellings that caused cases to slip through the cracks of their conflict screening software. other judges called attention to rulings they made that resulted in their own financial losses. reporting for news use use trinity chavez are t r break work hard play hard as an ex model to live by, but it's congress more focused on their ball game and a responsible budget. we will tell you when we return oh, i join me every thursday and we alex summon show and i'll be speaking to guess in the world, the politic sport business and show business. i'll see you then. me. ah, no one, no,

no, no, no, no, no. what the most of the location of the unit 731, when a unique organization in the history of the world. what they were trying to do was to simply do nothing short and build the most powerful and most deadly biological weapons program that the world had ever known. real enough to build on it. so new to keep on moved to new mom thought this new not new, and i got the sale. i understood, i wish to know about julie who knew he didn't more than

a journalist, i had a little cold and weather and all buddy bill, you know, it's nice to do want to on this the little she my new on it and all i isn't all 7 long, but you know, put them out to take your bus. i just 24 hours to figure out a multi $1000000.00 budget or face to thousands of workers being work. what would you do? well, congress has decided they're going to go play baseball in the current $3.00,

trend $1.24 page budget proposal. we find allocations like 3000000000 for tree equity, which is basically true planting in cities which can benefit the most in health economic climate. isn't that ever city, or are these true specifically woke timber? ok. 25000000 for anti discrimination and bias training. that actually sounds really good, except it's only for once or an industry health care. and it's mainly focused on maternal health care. but isn't appropriating money for one group rather than all something considered to be biased? and the last one, my favorite, 78.94 or 7000. d $1000000000.00 to go after tax payers and beef up the iris all become more aggressive and shake down individuals who just happened to make minor mistakes on their very complicated tax forms. so let's get the $360.00 view. when david cats, former assistant us attorney and steve, gil, former official in the us trade representative's office,

definitely people who understand budget. both of you gentlemen, i am sure. and so i want to start with you david. do you think the budget being stalled right now? why there's so much complicated because it's been combined with a $4.00 trillion dollars infrastructure package as well. well, the infrastructure package, the so called safety net one, the one that does not have any republican support. that's the one that's been a heavy lift. you know, scotty, there's bipartisan support for a 1.2 trillion infrastructure package, which is things like of the electric grid, repairs and so forth. and what's happened is because the democrats are having this in fighting right now between the moderate wing, especially the 2 senators, who won't vote for anything like 3.5 trillion and the progressive wing. there's actually bit of threat to not even past the 1.2 trillion, which would be a huge mistake because as i say, it has a lot of republican support and cities like right here in l. a. r mayor has been

screaming that we really need the money, you know, we needed for roads and bridges and stuff like that. so hopefully the democrats will all come together. but you're right, scottie, there's a lot of moving parts right now. and this is a very stressful week, and it's become stressful for the republicans to because they won't approve a higher spending limit. and if that happens in this country default, that's going to hurt a lot of rich people, a lot of republican voters and a lot of big companies so well to the republicans to if they want to just stand there and not agree to anything, which is what they apparently want to do not even to pay our bills that the republicans ran up under trump the last 4 years. well, the air c bring up that where you said a word, dave, that on here come out of democrats, very often in fighting. that's been a hugely goes to the republicans in that sense of steve, you know, you're listening to david response on this. but if it's as simple of there's conflict between weren't there, why don't they just separate the 2 and held 2 separate votes? well, they could do that, that'd be the easy answer. but the liberal extremists are wanting to force through

the huge tax increases the crippling economic impact of their $5.00 trade. now it's because when you add everything else into it, it's not just 3.5 trillion, it's closer to 5.53, and they want that and they are holding the hostage crisis of the infrastructure bill that you know both sides agree on in order to force through this bill that is much too much and, and even democrats, including sentiment and mansion and we suspect some others are unwilling to go along with that, particularly since it also includes some hidden burdens on taxpayers. you mentioned the i r s funding. they also are going to put regulations in where banks will start monitoring and reporting transactions over $600.00. and they claim that's going after trillion areas and billionaires. i don't think $600.00 transactions at the bank are going to catch a lot of trees or be in here. it's going to catch middle american. well, and that's it. see there are a lot of these little fine details. i think why republicans are digging in but to your point, dave, that you said, wouldn't it be

a win if you do have this infrastructure bill, which is still a whole lot of money, but you ever probably get the democrats even getting that past due see should be considered a win for democrats, christian cinema mentioned. you mentioned they're actually raising money right now from business groups or pose. but do you think both have met actually with the white us? will they came? do you think that they're going to stick with it or do they even matter anymore has the progressive wing kind of taken over when it comes to numbers and budgets? i think eventually they'll come together because both wings of the democratic party have a lot to lose. if it all falls apart, they'll be blamed by the voters if they don't produce something. so i think what's going to happen after all of the tension is they'll be a much smaller. busy reconciliation package, maybe it'll be a trillion dollars. and one of the questions has always been, why don't they decouple? not just the 2 bills from each other, but some of the things in the 3.5 trillion dollar package, because it's really been a sales problem that the country doesn't understand it. there are so many things in

it. you know, there's climate change. there's pre k, there's pre community college, there's dental care for medicare recipients. why don't they decouple it? and for instance, what isn't bite and just say we're going to do a bill right now. we're going to get 50 democratic senators to vote for it. and we're going to bring dental care and we're going to bring, you know, other kinds of services to medicare people, your grandfather, your uncle is going to get, this is going to be great. and we're going to pay for this by going after apple and amazon and the other huge corporations, j. p. morgan that pay an effective 4 percent tax rate. that's something the american people could get behind. and maybe steve could get behind it because, you know, i was in the reagan administration, i get the idea of getting the government off people's backs of reducing taxation. but there are some things that are worth paying for. and if biden would pick out the things green energy, you know, the, you know, having, you know, greener energy, we need it because we have global warming. if you pick out those things, scotty,

i think he might get everyone support even steve, where did david david point steam? why is it just that simple? why can't you do just those clean things that everybody can get by and why does a washington d. c, ever do that what david just said. sounds like a really good campaign speech to me, but when we get up on the hill, that's not what we hear time and time again. why not? well, it's a great idea. and if they let david and i work it out, i can probably get a deal done. i agree with david that there will probably be a smaller package that comes through. but as always, the devil's in the details. the democrats want all the goodies on, which he mentioned like the pre k free, pre k for kindergarteners 3 to 5 years old. the problem is that after a few years, 50 percent of the cost gets passed on to states. so when they talk about tax burdens, they're going to pass this trance down the states and make them start picking up the town. so it's always the devil's in the details of your goodie is going to cost somebody a lot of money and figuring that out is what makes it so complicated. but i agree,

david, and i could probably work it out this afternoon like got days in that old movie, you know, get out the budget will get out of, you know, legal work the thing out a couple hours. well and unfortunately about steve, steve cut out to california, do something about our 9.5 percent sales tax, and our other huge taxes out here in california right now. not going to the tax. i'd say that your guy right there is steve steve. again, except his invitation. yeah. jackson, tennessee, how come out there and help you lower your gas tax that is unfortunately driving a lot of california out of the state and it's just the unfortunately bringing some of their liberal tax and spend methods to us. but again, i think the bottom line is, it's not just how much the dollar figure is, whether it's the $1.00 trillion dollar infrastructure package or the 5 or 6 trillion dollar reconciliation packages. it's what's actually in there and what's the long term cost, and what's the patient ery cost of the economy that we're already starting to get

in, in pretty dire circumstance. well, there's a little bit too much agreeance going on in this 360 view, which is good for america, bad for politicians, but i think something you both can agree on that going to play baseball tonight is in poor taste, especially when you're about to see a bunch of americans possibly facing for away from their job. david, steve, always great to talk to you even when you're getting along now it's trans or being blocked from accessing a major news networks. facebook page i've read court ruled publishers can be held liable for defamation. now, seeing in the network decided to disable the comments section after facebook declined at their request to help disable the public comments section. so they just took their ball and went home to discuss this trend by continuing to other countries. we bring in our we go and meet a media analyst line a line. oh, thanks for so much for joining me. and we've had this conversation before multiple times here in the united states. is it this sort of an endorsement of section $230.00? that's what they're going to be saying. now for some crazy reason,

australia says that, you know, think about this on your page, some lunatic. some, your drawled as we say here in new york decides to write horrible things in common to what you don't, you don't even know who these people are, and you or, or cnn, or whoever should be held liable and australia. yes. so cnn went to facebook. it said, can you help us disable this? now you got to do it one by one. why do you think that was to show ru body how important section 230 is? how important it is to hold people immune that to keep it up. so here's what the answer is, key to 30 immunity. go ahead. well, let me say whatever i wanted. don't shut me down because you don't like my opinions about vaccines or trump, or, or i remember in nora unicorns or whatever it is. you see, they want to have it all, they like bogey and because i think the song goes,

they are using this to say we need section 230. and all they have to do was you think, would just let us all say what we want. nobody is held liable and that's it. remember what this is all really is you're going to come here, perhaps perhaps, but this is what they're going to be saying. we need to 30 and again, i pursue every and reiterate, keep to 30, just let me say, why ever i want. and scotty, if you don't like what i like or right, like what i like already. just don't, don't want you don't agree. move on hash tags, so what turned it off? that's all. but here's, that gives you a line, or there's a difference between cnn posting content, which is what they're doing versus me as someone getting on there and posting a comment. i and that's what i can em scratch my has because facebook claiming can help me display it disabling comments. i can do that on my own pub and private pages. so do you actually, do you actually buy facebook's excuse on this one?

well no of course, but the, here's the thing. if you've got 10000 comments, you could get some intern to sit there, you know, and get, and your judgment. but i guarantee you, if all of a sudden facebook war to go through 10000 comments, pro trump, or anti vaccine or whatever works as anti vax, by the way, is the word they use for anybody who has a problem with mandatory vaccination laws versus vaccine. but anyway, you better believe they've got algorithm, they can find anything they want. if you ask facebook, can you remove anybody who uses 3 semi colon within a year? yes. anything they could fight the idea that i'm sorry we can, we can help you with every big deal is what the point is again. so that john berg, all these people can go back to congress and see you see how we need this. now of course, like you bring up the libel based on comments from some half drunk luna ticket 3 in

the morning typing it together in a parent's basement. you got to put the parent's basement in there, covered and she no just yes, yes, i understand that. so, but anyway, so it's a lot of apples and oranges, but it's very, very important. but remember, very simple, keep section 230. but if i want to say anything, if i want anything about about vaccines or whatever, just let me do it. and we're all, and that's why we have you here because you can say the you what i let you do it like always final. they're always informative. thanks for joining us as well. you should thank you. and that's the time we have a show, but i promise this is a conversation which we will continue to follow me on twitter at study and use you to hash tag and b h for the show more affordable dot tv app for your app or android device. like always thanks for watching. ah, ah, lack of universal healthcare makes america the country of every man for himself. we

have a retirement crisis in this country and we have a health care crisis for seniors in this country as well. so private business has come up with a special mechanism for that. it's called the live settlement market. we are a life settlement provider, means that we buy life insurance policies from primarily seniors throughout the united states who no longer want or can't afford their life insurance policies. if you're sick and for the want to live a few more years, you can sell your life insurance. that way you get more money right away and the company collects your insurance payment after your death. there's a group of people out there, i guess, hoping that people die soon. what kind of motivation is i give them when i start crying about him dying? that's usually what it's about. it's just the sheer unfairness of it all.

back, either financial survive. no. okay, my girl, i was going to be the central plank support. going a gun call them. i know they stopped ah, with me if you look at the law. well, the good news is going to be made because i don't want the cause the choice of insurance under which is it's not normal for peace and she can, listeners,

can eastland leave to the the, it wasn't extraordinary disaster. we didn't have a president that was so adult. you all would be fired. i don't think anyone can trust anything that president says about afghanistan. us little make his lashire to joe biden, and his top military commanders in the latest senate hearing on us, can stand what some in congress are calling washington humiliating the drawer and a strategic failure. the wall of shame. that was the graffiti spells out on that house. some encourage have come to view this also this, our parish suburb is up in arms in the construction of a wall designed to keep.