President Trump's typo tags high school student Jillian Turner from Weed, California
-------------------------------------------
White House Chief of Staff says Trump is prepared for another government shutdown - Duration: 0:37.Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney says President Trump is ready to shut down
the government again if a deal on border security is not reached.
Mick Mulvaney made the remarks on CBS' 'Face the Nation' and comes less than two days after
Trump agreed to reopen the government for three weeks to allow further negotiations.
It ended a 35-day government shutdown - the longest in American history - that saw 800,000
furloughed federal workers miss two paychecks.
Mulvaney said talks may be different this time as Democrats agree with Trump's plan
to better secure the border.
-------------------------------------------
¡Trump reabrió el gobierno pero insiste con el muro! | Un Nuevo Día | Telemundo - Duration: 5:37.-------------------------------------------
White House Chief of Staff says Trump is prepared for another government shutdown - Duration: 0:41.acting-wise House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney has says President Trump is
ready to shut down the government again if a deal on border security is not
reached with the Democrats Mick Mulvaney made the remarks on CBS's Face the
Nation and comes in less than two days after Trump agreed to reopen the
government for three weeks to allow further negotiations it ended a 35 day
government shutdown the longest in American history that saw 800,000
furloughed federal workers missed two paychecks Mulvaney said talks may be
different this time as Democrats agree with Trump's plan to better secure the
border
-------------------------------------------
Trump casts doubt on seeing a budget deal that he'd accept - Duration: 1:24.-------------------------------------------
Judd TRUMP vs Mark SELBY ᴴᴰ SEMIFINAL European Masters Snooker || Snooker Line - Duration: 2:50:56.Subscribe For More Videos
-------------------------------------------
Republicans Try To Distance Themselves From Trump's Government Shutdown - Duration: 4:18.Well, it's the first Monday following the government reopening this past week, the end
of the week.
So a lot of furloughed workers are returning to work today, national park starting to reopen
after the cleaning process begins.
Uh, but what's really interesting is the fact that Republicans over the weekend, we're attempting
to distance themselves from the government shutdown that lasted 35 days and became the
longest in US history.
You had people like Susan Collins and Marco Rubio going on the Sunday talk shows, trying
to say, listen, we shouldn't ever shut down the government.
It's a bad negotiating tactic.
It never works.
And usually it hurts the people who instigated it.
Uh, you know, that's actually what Marco Rubio said.
It hurts the people who instigated it.
So Rubio, there is admitting Donald Trump instigated it.
Republicans instigated it and they lost big time.
So he and Susan Collins are out there saying, look, we shouldn't ever do this again.
This is bad policy.
Nobody likes this.
Let's, let's move on.
And then you have people like Mick Mulvaney, you have Kevin McCarthy, the House minority
leader.
You have Ted Cruz.
Those folks are out there trying to distance themselves from the shutdown in another way.
They're actually blaming the Democrats for the shutdown even happening there.
Just abdicating all responsibility and saying, look what these Democrats did to you.
Ignore the video that's still viral right now with Trump saying he'll own the shutdown
and he's going to shut it down and he'll take the blame and it's all on him.
Forget that.
That even happened.
Let's just keep calling it Schumer shut down.
In fact, let's make a clever little Hashtag of Schumer shut down, which is what Ted Cruz
did.
It's what Mick Mulvaney was saying.
He said Republicans were the only ones who were trying to bargain seriously here.
McCarthy said that Donald Trump was doing a great job with his negotiating tactics.
Yeah, that's not true.
None of this is true.
Your Guy Lost Your guys shut down the government.
Your guy and your party repeatedly refused to take up democratic passed legislation that
would have reopened the federal government and given furloughed workers their back pay.
That was all you.
You did that, but right now what we're witnessing is republicans attempting to rewrite history
specifically the last 40 days or so.
They want us to think that it was either the Democrats' fault that had happened or that
every republican who joined in it really regrets it and they'll never do it again and they've
learned their lesson and they're going to move on.
The truth is that we're only three weeks away from another government shutdown.
The Democrats are not going to budge and they should not budge.
Nancy Pelosi, you know, a lot of people had concerns about her becoming how speaker, again,
I was one of them and I will freely admit that and I will also freely admit that I guess
on this particular issue I was wrong.
Nancy stood up.
She stood her ground and she forced Trump into a corner and he was forced to back down.
So I am proud of Nancy Pelosi for that.
I'm proud of everything she has done during this shutdown and I hope that she continues
it and I hope that three weeks from now when Trump understands he will not get the funding
for that wall.
We do not go through another, another government shutdown and he decides to cut his losses.
Tell aunt ann coulter to basically go live in a hole somewhere because nobody wants to
hear from you and we're going to get by with government as usual.
That's what needs to happen.
Trump needs to turn off the Fox News.
He needs to stop listening to Ann Coulter.
Stop letting rush limbaugh tell them what to do and he needs to do what's best for this
country and what the American public wants.
And that is to not shut down the government.
And more importantly, not build a wall of steel slats along our southern border.
-------------------------------------------
Trump Organization Fires Dozens Of Undocumented Workers During Border Wall Fight - Duration: 6:07.Just a few weeks ago, Donald Trump's golf club in New York fired roughly one, doesn't
undocumented immigrants that they had working for them at that organization.
Some of the people had been there for more than 10 years working at this trump golf course
as an undocumented worker for over a decade and the administration, or excuse me, the
organization decided that now January 18th is actually when it happened, would be the
best time to start calling in some of these undocumented workers for private meetings
where they told them that their services would no longer be needed.
Now, as I'm sure you're aware, that was also during the government shutdown when trump
shut down the federal government because he couldn't get funding for his border wall to
keep out undocumented immigrants.
Now, here's the thing, uh, the story Kinda blew up over the weekend a little bit and
a lot of conservatives are saying, well, why is this an issue?
That's a good thing.
He purged these undocumented people.
They shouldn't be working there anyway.
They should fire them.
Yeah.
See, here's the thing though, conservatives, and you conveniently leave this part out.
I'm roughly a month or so ago, a massive bombshell story came out from the New York Times that
talked about how trump's golf course in bedminster was actually falsifying documents for undocumented
immigrant workers so that they could work for that golf club.
We do not yet know if that's what was happening at a New York course as well, but we do know
that it was happening right across the, uh, state over in New Jersey where trump organization
officials were falsifying documents in order to hire illegal immigrants.
Eric trump came out and gave a statement and said, yeah, you know, we, we started to audit
this.
We found these people were going to get rid of them because obviously if you're undocumented,
you can't legally work and we don't want that here at our trump organization.
He then declined to comment on whether or not the trump organization was going to join
into the federal government's everify program, which is a very simple process.
You put in somebody's information and it tells you if they're actually United States citizen.
Multiple companies throughout the United States have signed up for that.
Hundreds, in fact, and it's very easy, you get the person's name, you get whatever information
in the documents they've handed you, and it'll tell you if those documents are false, it'll
tell you if this person's a citizen, it will tell you everything you need to know about
whether or not you are legally allowed to hire this person.
The trump organization isn't a part of that and I wonder why Eric Trump wouldn't say that
they were going to join into that program and I wonder why, and the answer actually
comes from this massive story from a former manager at one of these trump golf courses
where he said that the truth is they were more put, more emphasis on us to find cheap
labor than they did to find legal labor.
In fact, it was more of a, and this is according to former manager a don't ask, don't tell
policy within the trump organization.
Don't ask them if they are undocumented.
Don't tell us if you're undocumented, you're willing to work for cheap, so we're willing
to hire you.
Let's leave it at that.
And that's the thing I've been saying from day one here, uh, you know, people like Donald
Trump, people with the business round table, the Chamber of Commerce, they love illegal
immigration because they understand that those are people they can take advantage of, they
can hire for pennies on the dollar and those people can't get mad about it because they're
illegal aliens.
They can't file a lawsuit because they're not supposed to be over here in the United
States anyway.
They would get in more trouble trying to fight back against these corrupt employers.
So they're forced to just suffer silently, take the abuse and take the low wages.
And that is what American businesses, including the trump organization, thrive upon.
So if you think for one second that Donald Trump has ever been serious about building
the wall, I suggest you look at his organization's own hiring practices because that tells you
everything you need to know about how Donald Trump really feels about illegal immigrants
in the United States.
-------------------------------------------
Трамп против ФРС - Duration: 6:45.Hello, dear friends! I am Professor Panarin Igor Nikolaevich, Doctor of
Political Sciences. Today we will look at the themes of the US federal
reserve. The theme of our video: Trump vs. the Fed.
I remind you that the US Federal Reserve was created
in 1913 by a group of private individuals from London and is still
owned by these London private individuals. Also, once again I will
say that there is a hypothesis that 88
percent of the shares of the US Federal
Reserve belonged to Nicholas II, the Russian emperor. Just the
deprivation of the right of the Russian
emperor to the Fed's management was one of the goals and goals of the
February 1917 Masonic coup d'etat.
But this is a hypothesis; There are facts for there are facts and not
confirming this hypothesis. What is happening today with the US Federal
Reserve System, I emphasize, a private structure? Well, I would like
to remind you that John F. Kennedy, the US president was killed in
Dallas in November 1963 just because of my point of view that he printed
red dollars. We all see green dollars. The green dollars are the US
Federal Reserve dollars, which the London-based bankers have imposed
on the US state. Kennedy wanted to liberate the United States, but was
shot dead, and the next day the red dollars were destroyed. And now Trump
has been fighting the US Federal Reserve since coming to power in the
USA and now this fight has entered the public sphere. He remembers
Kennedy's experience and tries to act more flexibly and yet in December
2018 the fight between them went into
the public sphere. What is the matter?
In that Trump, thanks to his
energetic line on fulfilling his election
commitments, achieved US economic
growth of 3 percent. But the US Federal
Reserve, despite repeated calls from Trump himself, from the end of
November to the end of December, raised the interest rate four, four,
think about it. This hinders economic growth, in principle, hinders the
implementation of those programs,
goals and objectives that are implemented
by US President Donald Trump. And after the second increase, Donald
Trump publicly declared the Fed the main enemy of America. Not LIH,
not Russia, not Kit, but namely the Fed. That's right: "The Federal
Reserve is the main enemy of the
United States"; and urged not to raise
further the interest rate, which was ignored. And on December 20, for
the fourth time, I emphasize, in a month that the kingdom was made
unprecedentedly anti-Tramp and
anti-economic decision against the rise
of US industrial production. After that, Trump told the press that he
was going to dismiss the director of the US Federal Reserve System, which,
at the beginning of January 2019, said that "I will not resign myself
and will continue the same line". The most curious thing is that
Jerome Powell is the head of the US Federal Reserve, who was recently
appointed by Trump more than a year ago, and seemed to be listening to
Trump's voice. But, nevertheless, this
did not happen. What does this mean? The fact that the clash of two
groups: the nationally oriented
industrial capital of the United States,
which is represented by Donald Trump, and the financial globalists, who
are controlled from London, the "third Carthage", approached such a
tough confrontation point, behind which
only two scenarios are possible: either Donald Trump will put Hillary
Clinton and all these liberal globalists, financial, first of all,
behind bars, and he has the basis for this, or they will organize the
impeachment of Donald Trump and, in fact, suppress the uprising of the
industrialists of the nationalist
flax-based capital. What are the chances
of winning Donald Trump? I would
rate them as 60 to 40. Why? We recently
had a video about Trump's alliance with the Bush clan. For a long
time, hesitation was 50 to 50, and here Trump's decisions related to the
victory of Cavanaugh, the Supreme Court claimant and Trump's clear
supporter, now have an advantage in the US Supreme Court on Trump's side
and an alliance with the Bush clan. conditions for Trump to win in this
fiercest bout of financial globalists.
The control center is located in London.
And London itself is in front of the abyss and on March 19 there
will be a separate point, and maybe already the final point, of
the London financial crisis. So my sympathy is definitely on the side
of Trump. I would like to wish him success, because this success will
create more positive conditions for
the economic prosperity of our country
- Russia. Thanks for attention!
-------------------------------------------
Why Trump Won - Duration: 5:23.I was elected to the Parliament of Canada seven times—three times as Prime Minister.
I did not expect Donald Trump to be elected President of the United States.
But unlike most observers, I did think it was at least possible.
Why?
Because I sensed, as Mr. Trump surely did, that the political landscape had shifted.
The underlying issue is this: Over the last few decades, thanks to globalization, a billion
people—mostly in the emerging markets of Asia—have lifted themselves out of poverty.
This, of course, is a good thing.
Yet, in many Western countries, the incomes of working people have stagnated or even declined
over the same period.
In short, many Americans voted for Donald Trump because the global economy has not been
working for them.
We can pretend that this is a false perception.
We can keep trying to convince people that they misunderstand their own lives.
Or we can try to understand what they are saying and offer some solutions.
I prefer the latter approach.
Let me begin with this:
In our contemporary world, there are, as British journalist David Goodhart describes it, those
who can live "Anywhere," and those who live "Somewhere."
Imagine you work for an international bank, computer company, or consulting firm.
You can wake up in New York, London, or Singapore and feel at home.
Your work is not threatened by import competition or technological dislocation.
You vocally support all international trade agreements and high levels of immigration.
You are one of those who can live Anywhere.
There are a lot of those people.
But there are a lot more completely unlike them.
Let's say you're a factory worker, a small-businessperson, or in retail sales.
Your work has been disrupted by outsourcing, cheap imports and technological change.
Your children attend the local schools and your aging parents live nearby.
Your social life is connected to a local church, sports team, or community group.
If things go badly at your company, or if policy choices by politicians turn out to
be wrong, you can't just shift your life to somewhere else.
Like it or not, you depend on the economic policies of your national or state government.
When it doesn't come through for you, you're not happy.
And when it ignores you entirely, you get angry.
It's easy for Anywheres to dismiss these concerns.
But the Anywheres' faith in global solutions and multi-national political bodies is founded
more on fantasy than fact.
The fact is, the critical functions of laws and regulations and monetary and fiscal stability,
among other things, are provided by nations, not global institutions.
The nation, with all its flaws, is a concrete reality.
The "global community" is little more than a concept.
Yet it is the Anywheres, with their faith in globalization—not the Somewheres—who
have dominated the politics of almost every advanced country.
That is, until now.
This sea-change is not limited to the United States.
The same dynamics—"Anywhere" elites versus "Somewhere" populists—is playing
out all across the Western world.
These populists, as I've tried to show, are not the ignorant and misguided "deplorables"
depicted in mainstream media.
They are our family, friends, and neighbors.
The populists represent, by definition, the interests of ordinary people.
And, in a democratic system, the people are supposed to be our customers.
So, how then can we best serve them?
I propose an approach I call "populist conservatism."
Grounding ourselves in tried and true conservative values, we must speak to the issues that concern
the Somewheres and their families—those of ordinary people, not elites.
Those issues include market economics, trade, globalization, and immigration.
In addressing these issues, conservatives should remain pro-free market, pro-trade,
pro-globalization and pro-immigration.
Going in a completely opposite direction in any of these areas is a mistake.
But being pro-market does not mean that all regulations should be dismantled or that governments
should never intervene to protect workers.
Being pro-trade does not imply that every trade agreement is a good one.
Being pro-globalization should not entail abdicating loyalty or responsibility
to our country and our local communities.
And being pro-immigration should never mean sanctioning illegal immigration, erasing our
borders, or ignoring the interests of our citizens.
I call this "populist conservatism," but it's really just conservatism.
Conservatism is about seeing the world as it is.
It's also inherently populist because it is about serving real people rather than theories.
I'm Stephen Harper, author of Right Here, Right Now: Politics and Leadership in the
Age of Disruption, for Prager University.
-------------------------------------------
Joe: Donald Trump's Phony Crisis Created A Real National Security Risk | Morning Joe | MSNBC - Duration: 11:30.-------------------------------------------
Gutfeld on UK paper's humiliating Melania Trump debacle - Duration: 7:03.-------------------------------------------
GAME OVER! Some House Dems BETRAYS Pelosi & SUPPORT Trump's Wall! President Trump WINS HUGE(VIDEO)!! - Duration: 11:48.GAME OVER! Some House Dems BETRAYS Pelosi & SUPPORT Trump's Wall! President Trump WINS HUGE
welcome back president Trump doubles down on his demands for a border wall as
he calls on Democrats to restart negotiations on funding the government
past February 15th a new number of House Democrats appear to be supporting the
idea of at least a vote on wall funding one of them joins me right now Utah
Democratic congressman ben mcadams he's a member of the House Financial Services
Committee and the Blue Dog Coalition congressman it's nice to have you on the
program this morning thanks so much for being here Thank You Maria good to be
with you you were among 30 House Democrats who sent Nancy Pelosi a letter
urging her to give Trump a vote on the wall funding tell me what you think
would come out of that vote you know first and foremost what the the purpose
of that letter was to say that the shutdown is doing no good for anybody
we're harming the US economy we're risking a recession we're harming the
federal employees who are just working to put food on the table and let's open
the government there are processes in the in the Congress in our government
laid out by the founders to have debates like this that's what Congress has
intended to do so let's open the government and then let's have this
negotiation the president has a proposal that should be heard in the Congress we
should debate it and we should work to build common ground and try and move
forward a solution on border security on immigration reform and let's go through
the proper channels of the Congress that that are built and intended to have this
exact conversation but let's not do it in the context of a shutdown that harms
the American people that harms our economy and risks the pocketbooks of
every American what I'm trying to better understand is really the makeup of the
new Congress because of course we know that there's a pocket of Democrats who
just want the president out and much of it is politics and they are resisting
anything that he would like we know that Nancy Pelosi and many of her colleagues
voted for a wall and voted for wall fencing years ago many times we know
that there's a wall right now a border wall in Nancy Pelosi zone state of
California separating Tijuana and San Diego but because President Trump has
the idea it's resist resist resist so you come from a red state you beat out
your your opponent on the Republican side do you think
a movement within your new Congress to actually get things done putting
politics aside and not necessarily resisting everything the president says
because you don't like his personality absolutely you know there are a lot of
me and my colleagues who were elected this last year a lot of us are just
pragmatist who just want to get something done before I was elected to
Congress I was a mayor and mayor's just have this attitude of okay what can we
do to move forward to solve the problem as a Democrat in a very red state I
never got anything done unless I could reach out and build bridges across the
aisle so as long as the debate is focused on you know as long as we're
defining a win is meaning somebody else loses we're never gonna have consensus
so we've got to find that win win and I don't know at this time what the win
looks that win win looks like but we have to find it and I know that a lot of
my freshman colleagues are moderates who want to find that win win that probably
we should look at some things to address immigration reform and dreamers I think
is something important permanent protections for dreamers but also border
security as a mayor I saw illegal drugs and and the impacts of that in my in my
city and I want to do more to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the end of
the country so I think there's a lot of common ground and I think the way to
approach this and the way that I would approach it if I was mayor is to say you
know there's a conversation a debate about wall or no wall let's step back
from that conversation where there's it's divided divisive and let's talk
about what we have in common let's find that thread of commonality amongst
Republicans and Democrats I think the threat of commonality is we all want to
protect the border we can find common ground on that so in some places that's
going to mean technology other places in other ways immigration reform and in
some places it may mean a barrier and I think if we step back and reframe the
conversation about protecting the border and what can we do and what's the most
effective way to do that instead of debating a wall or no wall let's debate
border security and I think there's a lot of common ground yeah I think you
make a lot of good points because there are areas of the country where they're
wide open and perhaps maybe you don't need an actual fence or wall there
because you can use technology and drones they're wide open areas that if
illegals come in you can actually apprehend them easily because it's so
wide open but then there are areas like the wall we've been looking
at in Nancy Pelosi state separating Tijuana from San Diego where you have a
very dense population three million people on one side of the wall through a
Tijuana another three million people on the other side of the wall in San Diego
so what is your thoughts in terms of how much is needed for actual barrier on the
southern border and will you vote YES for wall creation and more wall
extension of what we're seeing in this picture so what I've tried to do is not
draw any lines in the sand I want to vote to say have border protection to
have border security to reduce the flow of drugs and evil even illegal
immigration that may include a barrier sure I wouldn't rule out
barriers and places where it's appropriate I think that's I think
that's acceptable but let's have this conversation in the context of committee
hearings at the Congress with a goal of finding common ground I also think one
of the things we can do to protect the border is to reduce illegal immigration
by fixing a broken immigration system if we can make sure that those good people
who are who are just looking for a job our economy is asking to brainian
workers let's find it let's make it easier for them to immigrate legally so
they're not tempted to cross the border illegally so I think part of it part of
the border part of the border protection strategy has to be fixing a broken
immigration system our laws do you feel that you have a voice I mean I know that
you did not support Nancy Pelosi's bid to become the speaker for a second time
do you feel like you're being listened to you will you have the influence with
these practical ideas that you're putting forth I think so I mean we're
just up getting up and going as a congress right now I've been pleasantly
surprised at people both on the Republican side and even more
progressive on the Democratic side who who I felt that my voice is welcome
let's let's hope that as we go into this negotiation people can allow all voices
to be at the table some of the pragmatists can on both
sides of the aisle again can really push for common ground and trying to find
that you know that solution that will really garner a majority of support in
Congress and help us to to reopen the border I'm somebody who you know we're
gonna have disagreements from time to time but once one disagreements behind
us we move to the next issue we try and find common ground we
don't carry baggage forward for debate to debate and that's how I'd go into
this the same way we've got that behind us let's go further disagreements that
are also radical on the economic side of things you're on the Financial Services
Committee what are your thoughts on Elizabeth Warren's idea to confiscate
income to put attacks on overall assets and wealth or Alexandrian costea's idea
of having a seventy percent tax rate for the top earners well I think I've
jokingly said before if you if people think that there are only two political
parties in this country watch the Financial Services Committee over the
next several years you're gonna see a broad array of people across the
political spectrum you're gonna see someone on the more progressive side
like representative Ocasio Cortez myself who's you know a moderate a centrist
that believes in in the power of business and markets properly regulated
of course to make sure their protections for for consumers and individuals that
the power of markets can really do a lot of good and has done all that force high
earners to hide income where you won't get the revenue anyway will it change
behavior in terms of philanthropy will it what do you think that does to an
economy if you see those kinds of tax rates seventy percent tax on on assets
and wealth I'm not kidding you know I'm not convinced that a seventy percent tax
rate is the way to go any time you have you know tax policy drives behavior and
so we you know that's not a direction I think we should go in as a country I
we should look you know what's what behavior are we in trying to drive and
what is good for the American economy and good for the American people I'm
sure when you make a lot of good points we so appreciate your time this morning
thank you sir Thank You Maria congressman ben mcadams there president
Trump and Democrats reaching a three-week deal to end the longest
government shutdown in history it does not include funding for a border wall as
the president had demanded House Minority Whip Louisiana Republican
Congressman Steve Scalise joins me right now and Congressman it is a pleasure to
see you thanks so much for joining us good morning Maria always great to be
back with you do you expect to have border wall funding in the next three
weeks before the next deadline I sure hope it's gonna be part of a final
agreement and you know while President Trump said we're going to give you
another three weeks kind of call in the Democrats Bluff who were saying we won't
negotiate on while while the while the government's closed
okay now the government's reopened we have to have a real specific
conversation about how much money they will support president said and it's not
the president it's our experts who protect the border
who say it's gonna cost 5.7 billion for all the technology including wall what
are the Democrats willing to support they're gonna have to put a real number
to paper now in these next three weeks Maria so what do you think they will
support I know that you've actually had support from your colleagues on the
other side some college on the other side but is the Democratic Party facing
its own division where part of it is to part of the party is just resist resist
resist whatever the president comes up with yeah I think we were starting to
see fissures and in fact you saw even the House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer
saying physical barriers should be part of the solution you had committee
chairmen on the Democrat side saying give the president the money for the
wall and so I think this growing drumbeat got Pelosi nervous but at the
same time she's gonna now have to confront it because in every negotiation
I've been in when we've had meetings in the White House with the president when
pressed on what what about a money will she support she always said I won't talk
about numbers while the government's shut down okay now the government's back
open it's time to get serious about these negotiations hopefully there is a
State of the Union that happens in the next two weeks which I think there will
be and the president can make even a stronger case to the rest of the country
because it's that growing support across the country that ultimately will push
more Democrats to our side no wait a minute what do you mean that you think
there will be a State of the Union the American people want a State of the
Union the State of the Union was supposed to be this Tuesday it feels
like Nancy Pelosi has bested the president obviously she now forced him
to not have the State of the Union this week I'm being told it's going to be
February 5th is the State of the Union happening on February 5 well the the
Nancy Pelosi was holding the state in the Union hostage and ultimately the
speaker has to invite the president the Constitution requires the president to
give a State of the Union doesn't mean it has to be in Congress but it ought to
be in Congress and in Moorea I'm hearing similar things that February 5th is
likely the date but all that's something that's up to the
speaker the house if it's going to be in the House chamber which it should be I
thought it was disgraceful that she removed the State of the Union from the
invitation that she had already issued to the president to say that she was
going to uninvite him it had never happened before in the history of our
country I think Nancy Pelosi is afraid of the country hearing this message that
the president has about why we need to secure the border
Kandra stay with us we're gonna slip in a short break I've got more to talk with
you about this situation it certainly feels like politics House Minority Whip
Steve Scalise thank you god bless you and God bless america
No comments:
Post a Comment