administration or over the pentagon of the, on the hill congress has a difficult job voting on a 3 point. $5000000.00 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 debated to 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 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. at court ruling, we will, we will bring you why this can be setting a precedent for other countries to follow, you know, use the stories and more on today's news use 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 these hearings were hated before the senate hold, just you wait a wednesday before the house, general mark, milly, defense survey, lloyd austin, and general frank mckenzie faced a new around of grilling and of course like always expected grand standing. all this resulted in questions about president joe biden, the ability to lead, well, someone who lead to always is rt faren from tech 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 side of the 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. not even close congress and oh, really because you said you chose to talk to reporters instead of us. the one who took the most heat, general mili over as comments in the just released bob woodward book 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 barging 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 that the military would follow. they continue their attacks. you know we, we got smaller and so i agree with john mackenzie, that's when you could big began 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 than you care about. winning tell me it has 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 someone wiser 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 christ canister, and they were spinning all kinds of time on that rather than as 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 present trumpet already put this timeline into action. it was already there once binding was sworn to 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. i'd like to call this the cascading buck.

fast, 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 base. meaning if you do this, we do that, that was not just a unilateral cut and run. now, since that deal was cut and doha, during the biden, and the 1st few months of the bindings ration, the taliban had clearly broken those agreements that were made to the present with president trumpet his administration. so present barton 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 polling 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 them 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 richard, 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 and we have 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 for work. congress states that they knew they knew it would be a disaster. and what the white house believes 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 withdraw 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 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 once 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 is near

report that says more than a 130 federal judges have violated u. s. law and judicial ethics by overseen cases involving 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 large, the attorney chavez. that brings us this story from new york and 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 accuse themselves from 685 cases across the u. s. in which they helped 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

families financial interests. while there are no laws that prohibit judges from owning stocks, the federal jurist code of conduct, demands judges, accused 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 notified the judges of the findings. 56 of the law men began to alert parties involved in 329 of the law suits of their conflict of interest. judges offered multiple explanations for their infringements. when confronted by the paper, most of selected the 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 now our break work hard play hard as an extra monitor live by, but it's congress more focused on their ball game than a responsible budget. we will tell you when we return i live in a tie now with so many inputs on a daily basis that are completely, i'm related to reality. so think about how in social media filters and they basically present themselves very unrealistic way. and so we come to a farm out there and be involved more than that. it's about the sort of envious or something that may not exist. and it is also really tied to the fact that as humans, we want to be part of the crowd. ah, no one missed and you know what the

most of the location of the unit 731 was 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 to production. but it will show enough fuel to the new new model to know more thought this new more. no, i'm new and i got the sale. i understood, i wish to know about jewelry. who knew he did more than

once i had a couple of them and all buddy bill, you nice to go want them on this? she might new on a on all. i isn't more more. you put them out to think of us i you, i just labor hours to figure out a multi $1000000.00 budget or face to thousands of workers being out of 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 and health

economic climate. isn't that ever city, or are these true specifically woke timber? ok. 25000000 for anti discrimination and biased 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 $1.00 group rather than all something considered to be biased? can last for my favorite $78.00 are $7000000000.00 to go after taxpayers and beat up the iris all become more aggressive and shakedown individuals who just happened to make minor mistakes on their very complicated tax forms. so let's get the $360.00 view. welcome and david cash, former assistant us attorney, and steve, gil, former official in the us trade representative's office. definitely people who understand budget, both of you german, 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 the 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 been a 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. likewise, 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 too because they won't approve a higher spending limit. and if that happens in this country defaults, 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 down here come out of democrats, very often in fighting. that's something that usually goes to the republicans in that sense of steve, you know, you're listening 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 be the easy answer. but the liberal extremists are wanting to force through the huge tax increases the crippling economic impact of their 5.5 trade hours. 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 prices 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 then that's going after trading errors and billionaires. i don't think $600.00 transactions at the bank are going to catch a lot of trade or be it's going to catch middle american. well, and i said, 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 pass and do see should be considered a win for democrats kristen cinema mentioned you mentioned they're actually raising

money right now from business groups who oppose. but do you think both have met actually with the white house? will they cave? do you think that they're going to stick with it? or do they even matter anymore has a progressive wing kind of take it 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 free 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. it's 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 you might get everyone's 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 of the democrats, one 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 for a few years, 50 percent of the cost gets passed on to state. so when they talk about tax burdens, they're going to pass this track 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, is what makes it so complicated. but i great 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 your legal work. the thing out

a couple hours. well and unfortunately about steve, steve come out to california, do something about our 9.5 percent sales tax, and our other huge taxes out here in california right now. not to mention the income tax, i'd say that's 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 its 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 clause. and what's the patient ery, cost of the economy that we're already starting to get 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 media media analysts 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 the 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? no, 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, but 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, well, just let us all say what we want. nobody is held liable and that's it. remember

what this is last 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 per chevry and reiterate, keep to 30. just let me say what 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 tag. so what turned it off? that's all. but here's that gives you a line on this. 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 not. but see, here's the thing, if you've got 10000 comments, you could get some intern to sit there, you know, and get,

and you judgment. but i guarantee you, if all of a sudden facebook word to go through 10000 comments, pro trump or anti vaccine or whatever work is anti vax, by the way, is the word they used for anybody who has a problem with mandatory vaccination, laud 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 that. we pick us, but 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 comment from some half drunk luna ticket 3 in the morning typing it together and parents basement. you got to put the parent's

basement in their covered cio 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 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 use to hash tag and b h for the show more on the portable dot tv app for your apple android device like always, thanks for watching the the land 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, which 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 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. that's just the sheer unfairness of it. all. the jamie diamond was critical. a big claim to starting what it was, $200.00 a point. it's now around $45000.00 points depending as he points out. 10

x from here. so he's looking for up to point $55.00 and about a coin are with 0 me. if you look at a little bit above the matrix, i don't want the cause the choice of miss shirts. underwood's complete, it's in the nominal move please. you can listen. can easement lead

to the it was an extraordinary disaster. we didn't have a president that was so adult. you all would be fired. i don't think anyone controls anything, as president says about up can stand us all, make his sco joe biden. he's top ross of was something congress, the cold in washington humiliate, withdraw my gun. this done? we are. so it's a whole gum campaign. might of been a big failure. the just the pull out itself plus the wall of shame. that's what the coffee spelled out. but not how some encourage come to view the power is sub pop in.