Watching the Watchers with Robert Gruler Esq.

Supreme Court Clean-up: PSAKI Addresses SCOTUS Misinformation on BIDEN Mandates and Messaging​

January 10, 2022 Robert Gruler Esq.
Watching the Watchers with Robert Gruler Esq.
Supreme Court Clean-up: PSAKI Addresses SCOTUS Misinformation on BIDEN Mandates and Messaging​
Show Notes Transcript

Jen Psaki spent Monday dealing with the fall-out from the Supreme Court Oral arguments, where several left-wing Supreme Court Judges demonstrated a lack of understanding about the global environment.​

🔹 President Biden off to a slow start in 2022, returning to Washington D.C. after an extended weekend. ​
🔹 Jen Psaki holds a press briefing, where she addresses the oral arguments in the Supreme Court last week.​
🔹 Recap: Judge Sonia Sotomayor incorrectly explains 100,000 children are on ventilators.​
🔹 Aaron Rupar and many on the left identified an alleged mistake in Judge Gorsuch’s questioning.​
🔹 Supreme Court transcripts are updated to more accurately reflect Judge Gorsuch’s question.​
🔹 Members of Biden’s team hit the Sunday shows, providing updates on the pandemic.​
🔹 Jenn Psaki takes several questions from Peter Doocey, who has recovered from being ill.​
🔹 How is there a testing problem after 2 years in the United States? Psaki responds.​
🔹 And your questions and comments!​

COMMUNITY + LIVECHAT + MINDMAP ACCESS: ​

💬 https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com/​

CLIPS FROM THE SHOW GO HERE:​

👉 https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsDWHogP4zc9mF2C_RNph8A​

MINDMAP SOFTWARE (affiliate-link):​

👉 https://www.mindmeister.com/?r=1185699​

Channel List:​

👮‍♂️ R&R Law Group - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfwmnQLhmSGDC9fZLE50kqQ​

✂ Clips Channel - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsDWHogP4zc9mF2C_RNph8A​

SAVE THE DATE – UPCOMING VIRTUAL EVENTS!​

📌 January 2022 at 7-8 pm Eastern– Monthly Zoom Meet-up for Locals supporters.​

🥳 Events exclusive to Locals.com community supporters – learn more at https://watchingthewatchers.locals.com/ ​

Connect with us:​

🟢 Podcast (audio): https://watchingthewatchers.buzzsprout.com/​
🟢 Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/robertgruleresq​
🟢 Homepage with transcripts: https://www.watchingthewatchers.tv​

🧠 GUMROAD: https://www.gumroad.com/robertgruler​

🚨 NEED HELP WITH A CRIMINAL CASE IN ARIZONA? CALL 480-787-0394​

Or visit https://www.rrlawaz.com/schedule to schedule a free case evaluation!​

ALTERNATIVE PLATFORMS:  ​

🟡 ODYSEE: https://odysee.com/@WatchingTheWatchers:8​
🟡 RUMBLE: https://rumble.com/c/RobertGrulerEsq ​

#WatchingtheWatchers #PresidentBiden #JenPsaki

Speaker 1:

Hello, my friends. And welcome back to yet. Another episode of watching the Watchers live. My name is Robert Gove . I am a criminal defense attorney here at the R and R law group. We're located in the always beautiful and sunny Scottsdale Arizona. And today we're talking about some cleanup on I L 12, Joe Biden was there and Jen sake's there at the white house to clean it up because he just motored on through there. And he's kind of been absent for a little bit of time. And so we're gonna have to see what she had to say about his , uh , policy regarding the new pandemic, because things are looking a little bit squirrely. In addition to answering for that, Jen Sakey is also going to be cleaning up what the Supreme court did. Supreme court, at least three of the judges out of the nine, had a little bit of a misperception about what's going on related to the pandemic that we're living in. And so Saki got a lot of questions in particular from Fox news and Peter Ducey today asking her pointedly, whether their statements were an indicator of a bigger problem, deeper issue that might be permeating throughout America. I think we all know what the answer to that is. And so we're gonna take a look at that. We're gonna take a look at , uh , Aaron Rupa . He is somebody on Twitter. They were dunking all over justice Gorsuch. Now, many people are responding and they're saying, Rob, you know, you were pretty hard on those liberal judges over there. We've got soda. May we're gonna her from her today, Brier Kagan. They didn't shine themselves in too good of a light at the Supreme court. And , uh , you , you left out the conservatives, Rob judge Gorsuch. He had this sort of boneheaded comment. He got one of these facts wrongs, right? Where while we're gonna break that down because the Supreme court updated their transcripts and we're gonna see what he really said. And then we're gonna update. And we're gonna take a look at the testing issue. That seems like it's breaking down across the country because Jen Saki got asked about that by Peter Ducey. And so we've got just a lot of clips, a lot of Saki to get to. We've got a lot of Peter Ducey today. We've got a lot of the Supreme court judges today, and we've even got the CDC direct . You know, who I'm talking about, you know, who she is right there in the middle. She's going to be , uh , making an appearance today several times because she was on the Sunday shows. And so if you wanna be a part of the program, the place to do that is [email protected] There's a form over here that looks just like this. If you're a member [email protected] , for example, shout outs to T Blake Moores in the house, B spec is over there, Kenny, one, B many others are chatting away. And I'm also saying shout out to my friends on YouTube, Mont 9 39 says, hi, Robert, well , hello, Mont. It's good to see you. And so we've got a lot to get to let's get into it. Joe Biden kind of took an extended weekend. You know, 2022 has kind of been a rough year for him. And so let's take a look at his calendar and see what he's been up to. You can see this is over from fact base down here on Sunday, not a lot of activity going on, but it's Sunday. So, you know, Sunday, you have some time off, but on Monday he was not really busy. Again, he kind of was just making his way back into town. A president arrives at the white house, 9:30 AM receives the daily brief 10 30 and then not too much else going on there on this , uh, on this Monday. But he did , uh , well, at least , at least we, the American people get to hear from Jen sake today. So , uh , we are going to be listening a lot to her now to be fair. Uh , Joe Biden on Saturday, he was attending a funeral over for Harry Reed. We've had a lot of deaths, unexpected deaths, Bob sagt died. I remember watching him, him . We had just one after the other people are dying all over the place. So , uh, here is Joe Biden coming back. And of course the reporters are , uh, are gonna be paying very close attention to this walk just to see how he's doing, make sure he's making it back there. All right . Can you update us on the Russia talk, sir ? Now reporters are yelling at him . Answer some questions, Joe . Now, can I point out something here? I am not happy about the state of this turf, this grass right here. How are the now ? I don't know . You know , I know it's DC, but we're not there yet. Hang on one second . I know it's snowy and all that you're doing really well, but like, look like, look, when you get like right here, look at this, like, is that a weed? Is that a weed sticking outta the grass right there? I can't tell if that's a weed or not, but there's just crap all over the place. Not happy about it. So Joe Biden , uh , you know, making the slow walk in there. Yeah. 5 0 3 says, this looks terrible. Yeah. Lawn care is pretty bad. There's like weeds and stuff poking out . Yeah. Yeah. It just doesn't look, you know, anyways, so even , even the , okay , so there's Joe Biden makes it all the way in there. Going back to the oval office to , uh , get his , uh , to get his briefing. And we don't hear much else from him. Now we do hear from Jen sake today. So this show is, you know , uh , going to be, you know, very good if you're interested in and sake . And here is , uh , once again where she was speaking today at 1:30 PM. So Jen sake , as I mentioned at the start of the show, she's gotta come out and clean up this mess from what happened at the Supreme court yesterday, a lot of , uh, concerns over this COVID thing that's going on because in front of the Supreme court, they were arguing about these mandates and we broke down. Those arguments spent a lot of time. Last week, I made an additional video about them because they're so hysterical. But now it's sort of, you know , these judges, these, these three Supreme court judges come out and they're sort of , uh , regurgitating the same rote talking points that we've been hearing and , uh , debunking for, you know, a long time , uh , not on this show because you can't talk about most of this on YouTube. Well, it , this is complicated because , uh , pre it's complica the rules keep changing because sort of everything keeps changing. So you really don't know what you can talk about. So we sort of, you know, just extra careful and be, you know, very cautious and don't talk about much of it. But the Supreme court judges now are making these arguments. And so we're getting to hear some of these things being hashed out in, in public. And so here's what judge , uh , Soto my said, and she's catching a lot of grief for this because it's just not even remotely true. This is where she's talking about. This was in oral arguments, this a Supreme court judge, these people are setting policy. They're trying to debate whether or the federal government through some obscure OSHA law can mandate that you put something into your body. It's a pretty, pretty important issue. And , uh , here is, here is one of the people considering the

Speaker 2:

Decision on this country today, then we had a year ago in January. Um , we have hospitals that are, are almost at full capacity with people, severely ill on ventilators. We have over a hundred thousand children, which we've never had before in, in serious condition. Yeah. We've never had it . And , um , many on ventilators. Um, so saying it's a different variant just underscores the fact that without the , without , um,

Speaker 1:

Okay, so you heard that quote, right? She's getting a lot of grief for that. A hundred thousand kids. She says we've never had that before. And the reason why this is so important is because we're talking about the V the V mandates and whether the executive branch has the constitutional authority to do that. And last week, we spent a lot of time sort of reverse engineering. The argument, sort of the idea, being that if the consequences are severe, if a pandemic's ultra bad, that means you have an inverse relationship, I guess, to your constitutional rights. If it's really bad, then the government can do whatever you want because you have no rights to rebut any of that. So it's this weird thing that's going on. And so naturally, if , if that's some , if you , if you think that way, if you think that that's a proper relationship and a , a , a nice way to govern society, you're, you're free to do that, but we have to come to at least terms on what this higher number is, right? What are the consequences? Is it really a hundred thousand people, children in bed on ventilators or not? Because if it's not, then maybe, maybe the , the response would be, well, we don't need to do all of these things that would negate such a catastrophic constitutionally suspect response. Right ? Judge. So we'll get into that. We spent a lot of time talking about that last week, but here let's take a , a , a quick tangent. So we spent time talking about soda Maor we spent time talking about Kagan. We talked a lot about Brier . We're gonna talk about them again, because it's coming up again. We didn't talk about judge Gorsuch. This is judge who was appointed by Donald Trump, and he also asked some questions. And when oral arguments were taking place, he said something like the flu kills a hundred thousand people every year, worse than that, he said the flu kills hundreds of thousands of people every year. Allegedly, this is what allegedly he said. And so the blue check marks on Twitter just went hog wild over this. They were doing cartwheels all week, last week, soon as they got their hand on this one, because it made their team look less dumb by making the other team look dumb. And so here you can see Eli Misal over on Twitter, ultra blue check mark Eli NYC says, Gorsuch says, quote , the flu kills hundreds of thousands of people every year quote . And so she, you know, hysterical over this. She says, no, it does not stop getting your medical stats from Fox news. Stop it. And so Aaron Rupa , who is just a , you know, a wild, a wild individual on Twitter says the flu kills about 30,000 Americans each year. I'm kind of surprised Gorsuch would broadcast his ignorance like this. I looked this up with help from Google in about 10 seconds, cuz he's very smart and he's a blue check mark. And so this was like, this is just a small example. I mean, when this came out last week, folks, if I don't, you know, I'm sure many of you are not glued to , uh , Twitter. Like I candy at times, but it was all over the place. Retweeting liking it. They were high five in each other. It's like the super bowl went off. Cuz judge Gorsuch allegedly said a hundred thousand people died from the flu. So we got the audio. What do you think? He said, let's listen in on this one. Here is judge Gorsuch from last week and we'll frame this out, right? We ha we have , uh , so do my , your saying a hundred thousand kids are on ventilators. Gorsuch says a hundred thousand people die from the flu. These are equal errors. Aren't they? That's why this is so exciting for them. Let's make sure he said that flu kills.

Speaker 3:

I believe hundreds, thousands of people every year,

Speaker 1:

The Belu the , the flu kills. I believe hundreds. Thousands of people. Did he say that one more time? Here he is flu kills.

Speaker 3:

I believe hundreds. Thousands of people every year.

Speaker 1:

All right . One more time. Flu kills.

Speaker 3:

I believe hundreds. Thousands of people every year, flu kills. I believe hundreds. Thousands of people every year.

Speaker 1:

All right . So did he, he say the flu kills hundreds of thousands or did he say the flu kills hundreds, thousands of people a year? Well, they said it was the first one. They said that it looked like this on the left that it said flu kills. I believe hundreds of thousands of people every year. And so they said, no, it doesn't . Aaron says, oh no, it's 30,000 only judge dumb, dumb. Hello. So your side's just as dumb as my side. Well guess what? According to John K KL Supreme court issues, a revised transcript of oral arguments over Biden's vaccine rules, it clarifies the statement by judge Gorsuch about the annual number of flu deaths. They said that it was this, but the Supreme court says, no, it's not hundreds of thousands. It's hundreds, thousands. The flu kills. I believe hundreds, thousands of people every year, OSHA has never purported to regulate on that basis. He says, I mean, people forget polio. That was pretty bad. You can call it a pandemic. You can call it an pandemic . I don't know what you'd call it, but it was a terrible scourge on this country. For many years. We have vaccines against that, that, but the federal government through OSHA. So far as I know you can correct me. He does not mandate every worker in the country receive such a scene . Right? We have flu vaccines, the flu kills, I believe hundreds, thousands of people every year, OSHA has never purported to regulate on that basis. So OSHA doesn't regulate for polio or for the flu. You know, what do we make of that when we're thinking about what qualifies as a major question? What doesn't yeah , very good question. And maybe they should add , ask that one, answer that one. So , uh , you can see here, right? It's sort of a game now. This is not a good thing either that , that sort of the Supreme court has gotten to this level where we're sort of ding it out and everybody's claiming side . So your side's dumber than our side. It's not ideal. Ideally we have this , a Supreme court that really is not weighing in on these issues. You know, it's not weighing, it's not even going through this analysis. I fundamentally disagree with that analysis. We've said this many times before your Liberty, right? Your , your God given natural rights are imutable. They don't get to, to go on an inverse scale. That adjusts based on the current crisis of the time. It's not how that works. So it should be something, in my opinion, we're are, it's much more along the lines. Of course it . Okay. So you justify, you know , it's never been done before, justify it relative to these other examples that I am giving you now. And he spoke clearly. He's not , not actually wrong at all, but still we have a situation now where we've got , uh , these people who are going to be not even considering necessarily the constitutional boundaries of what is permissible for an executive agency to do or not do they're more instead, they're more interested in what the consequences are and mitigating the consequences, regardless of the impact that that might have on your natural liberties. And so in the process of doing that, they are simultaneously eroding your rights while they're profiting forward misinformation stuff that is not even remotely accurate as talked about in a prior video. I think I can link that up here somewhere. So what we'll do is we'll come back and we'll, we'll take a look now at a prior statement from CDC director, she came out some time ago. Well, before the Supreme court judges ever heard oral arguments in any of these Biden mandate cases, recall that the back on August 5th or back during this time, she showed up onto Wolf Blitzer's show and said something like this, our vaccines are working exceptionally well. They continue to work well for Delta, but with regard to , uh , whatever they prevent it . But what they can't do is prevent the T is what she says here is this , this is on August 5th, right? This is the CDC director. And you would think the reason I wanna play this is because you would think that the Supreme court judges would sort of be in line with this would be aware of this policy because we're gonna listen to judge Kagan. Or I'm not sure if I have the clip here, but judge Kagan came out and said, it's we, we , we , we , we , we believe this. We believe this. We know this, we know that, but who is we? That was my question in a prior video. Is it the Supreme court judges? Cuz I don't think that you can get all nine of them agreeing together on what the proper course of action is. So who is we? Is it the federal government? Because if it is, then that would mean that her, her , her sort of data should at least be in alignment with the CDCs right here is the director.

Speaker 4:

Um , our vaccines are working exceptionally well. They continue to work well for Delta, with regard to severe illness and death. They prevent it. But what they can't do anymore is prevent transmission. So if you're going home to somebody who has not been vaccinated to somebody who can't get vaccinated, somebody who might be immunosuppressed or a little bit fail , uh , frail, somebody who has , um , uh , comorbidities that put them at high risk , I would suggest you wear a mask in public indoor setting.

Speaker 1:

Yeah. So it's, it's , it's a , it's a great point, right? That's the CDC. We're always reminding people to follow the official guidance. This is not a medical show, not a medical expert. We're showing what the official people are saying. And then we're comparing and contrasting that with what the Supreme court thinks is happening. Right? This is judge Elena Kagan, who is, is now going to be , uh , communicating about what her perception is about stopping this problem from happening here is judge Kagan.

Speaker 5:

Moreover OSHA, typically Mr. Carter , I , I guess I , I just don't see this as a situation, you know, a typical arbitrary capricious situation where we say, oh, you didn't consider an alternative carefully enough. We all know what the best policy is. I mean, by this 0.2 years later, we, we know that the best way to prevent spread is for people to get vaccinated and to prevent dangerous illness and death is for people to get vaccinated. Okay. That is by far the best, the second best is to wear our masks. So this is a policy that basically says we are still confronting thousands of people dying. Uh, every time we look around. And so we're going to put into place the policy that we know works best, which is to strongly incentivize vaccination. And to insist that UN vaccin did people will wear masks.

Speaker 1:

Okay. So it goes like it , it's not in alignment with what the CDC said. So this is a new thing. You know, this is kind of a new, interesting thing that that is a new issue in law, new issues in , I think with, with lawyers, I mean you have a Supreme court panel that is so far disconnected from even the reality that is being provided by its own government. Okay. We're talking about, you know, a , a , a , a tri-part government, we've got co-equal branches, we've got different government bodies that are supposed to be interfacing with checks and balances with one another. But the Supreme court doesn't have to listen to the CDC if they get all their information from Fox news or from MSNBC, if like Elena Kagan , all the lefty judges on there, think that bodies are just falling all out of built hospital beds all over the place. Well, I mean , they're free to believe that like, they're, they don't have to rely on the CDC data. What's the precedent. Are they supposed to do that? <laugh> and what do you do as a , as lawyer ? What do you say, Hey , uh , uh , judge , uh , what are you like? What's the lawyer supposed to say there during Earl oral arguments, which when judge soda, my says that, or when judge Kagan is going on this high rate about vaccines and mandates, you just say, judge , uh, the CDC director for him , a co-equal branch of government said, that's not true. You can't say that to a Supreme court judge. Okay. So we see a lot of this stuff is going on through , uh , throughout the day throughout the, the history of , uh , the last few days. And so Jen sake now has to come out here and , and sort of deal with this. Remember we just heard Elena ke in talking about we, we, we, we , we all think this, that and the other, and the , a good question is who is we? Because it's certainly not all the nine Supreme court judges. Is it the Biden administration, Elena , Kagan's not part of the Biden administration. So who is this we that we're talking about? But it's her talking points sound lot. Like the same things that we heard from the Biden administration, they seem like they're pretty much in sync. Let me grab this super chat from Taggar wit Ify says, this is why I was wondering if SCOD should be deciding this issue. It seems to , it should be a congre congressional issue or nothing as I, as I don't agree. Why didn't this pull up ? Uh , okay. So taker wi Ify says, this is why I was wondering if Scota should be deciding this. It seems if it should be congressional issue or nothing as I don't agree with the mandates, which is a , which is a good question. And it's a good thought there taker wi SIFI . And I don't know why that's not pulling up on the screen, but it , uh, there it goes, hang on one second. There it goes. So that's, Taggar with SIFI with a great question. Now, I, that that is, that is ultimately the argument that is being made here. The people who are filing the lawsuit to stop this from going into play Scott Keller and his , uh, his team. They're making that argument saying that this is not the appropriate use of executive power should not be allowed to do this. The , the Biden administration is doing something that exceeds their authority and they need to be brought back in that that is the argument, right? It it's, it should go through Congress right now. It's going through the executive branch. It should go through Congress. And so SCOTUS should send it back over there for them to figure this out. Okay. So as I mentioned, Jen , sake's gotta come out and now deal with all of this. She's got three, you know, Supreme court judges who are just sort of off the rails. They don't, they're not connected with the actual code facts we've been being screamed at from Jen sake . And people out of the Biden administration about misinformation. People are being thrown off of the internet. People are being banned off of YouTube and thrown off of all over the place, reputable people because of this dangerous misinformation that's out there. It's so horrendous to even talk about this stuff that you might be killing people. And , uh, and we have three Supreme court judges who are just not even like remotely connected to the reality on the ground. So, Jen, how are you gonna answer for that? Let me give you a quick update on the seating chart. Before we listen to Jen here, you can see the 2020 seating chart looks like this. Jen Saki sits up here at the top in this podium. And so you can see AP is front center. We've got Fox news over here to her, right? So we're gonna be hearing a lot from Fox ABC's up front , CBS, AP, ABC, Reuters, and CNN are all up front . People who got booted out looks like Buzzfeed's not there anymore. What? Buzzfeed's gone, Chicago, Tribune's gone daily news, O N is out there Sirius XM, T R N SS Westwood. One are all gone. New additions , Bloomberg government, CNBC cheddar news, Fox business is coming <affirmative> daily collars there, spectrum news, Newsweek, Los Angeles, times, and others. Okay. So you can see Bloomberg's up front wall, street, journal Politico, and then , uh , got some people in the back daily collars there in the back. So , uh , Jen sake's out now and we have our first clip from Ducey . Here's how it sounds . You guys

Speaker 6:

Have been very aggressive countering COVID misinformation. So what do you guys think about COVID misinformation coming from the Supreme court and Sonya soda mys false claim that over a hundred thousand children are in serious condition, many on ventilator.

Speaker 7:

Well , I'm not gonna speak to Supreme court arguments or statements , uh , made in those arguments. Uh , but I will tell you that what is at stake here is our effort to protect health workers and most importantly, protect patients with the CMS role and also to make workplaces safer with the OSHA rule, which we have confidence in our legal , uh , argument for. So I will leave it to them , uh , to decide, but that's, what's being argued. Now. Go ahead.

Speaker 6:

I know getting ahead of the president before major

Speaker 1:

Speech is okay, but you didn't answer the question though. It's about that misinformation. Okay . People are being thrown off of the internet for that. It's kind of a big deal. You got , uh , three of your people on your team are out there spreading it all over the place, Jen . And she said , well, hold on a minute. Now, now I'm not gonna talk about Supreme court arguments. Let's see if she'll continue that status. That precedent when some of the very substantive arguments come down the pike very soon, cuz we're gonna have a lot of them. We've got a full docket here in 2022 . And we'll see if Jen sake continues this precedent of not commenting on Supreme court arguments. What do you think? Do you think that's gonna happen? I don't. So it really comes down to this. She knows it's pretty bad information, but she can't , uh, impune Supreme court judges. They all went back and they all saw the headlines and they're like, oh, and folks , this is like a big deal. I can't, I can't communicate enough. Kind of how, how kind of silly this whole thing is? I mean, in law, do you know how much time they spend , uh , on every single stinking period in com and underlying and italics and every citation and pin sight and head notes and the whole thing's indexed and CRA cross referenced all over the place. It's nuts. Okay . I was on law review , uh , not long cuz it wasn't my gig, but we have to do red lines . Were you take a red pen and you underline every stinking word and, and everything of a 30 page or a hundred page document just to make sure everything's okay. And you have to, you have to, to cite your sources and make sure that the statutes are still good law and that the cases have not been overruled. And you gotta compare and contrast it all over the place. I mean, I , if you went in front of the Supreme court and you cited an erroneous fact in your brief, oh my goodness, you might as well just jump out the window and just hang it up. You're done. If you got something wrong in there, right? It's like, it's like the most important thing ever to get your facts right. To make sure your citations are solid. And judge, so do I , yours? Like there's a hundred thousand kids dying in ventilators. Do you have any idea what's going on out there? <laugh> uh , and this poor Scott Keller, man, this is a pre he's arguing there. He's just going, I , what are you supposed to do? Because you can't say no, they're not judge. No, they're not. All right . So Jen , sake's gotta deal with it. And uh, she doesn't want to, obviously, so I'm not gonna comment on these Supreme court arguments or accusations or whatever. So this other guy, I don't know who this is. <laugh> he must be, he's like brand new, but he's way in the back, you can see. So I showed you that chart. This guy is like way in the back, right? You can see he's all the way back here near the lockers. And he looks young as hell and Ducey just asked that question about the judges and their facts being completely wrong. And um, this guy asks a question now it's , it's, it's very similar, but it's a little bit different. And Jen , Jen kind of swats him away a little bit. Listen,

Speaker 8:

I know you don't want to weigh in on an ongoing litigation for the Supreme court mm-hmm <affirmative> but not long ago in this room, the surgeon general told us that COVID misinformation was a public health threat. Um , I'm wondering if the white house is at all concerned , uh , given , uh , Supreme court justices Soto, mys , or marks about the crown variant , um , that maybe the danger is , is being over hyped and your message is not getting out. I think I just addressed this didn't I answer this question.

Speaker 1:

Oh <laugh> so news busters. Just cut it right there. She actually does go on and answer that a little bit. I thought I clipped that the over , uh , maybe I didn't, I don't think I added it to it, but she goes on, she says the same exact thing she says , uh , I'm not , you know , I'm not , not gonna be commenting on Supreme court arguments, but his question was a little bit different. It was saying, okay, so the Supreme court is free to , uh , to talk about what it wants to do, right? You don't need to comment on that. That's not your prerogative, but your administration came out. Your surgeon general stood here in this room and said that P misinformation is a public health threat, an active threat that we need to do to stop. We need to stop this from happening. What do you have to say to that? Jen ? I'm not asking you to comment on what the Supreme court arguments are. Don't need you to weigh in on that. Don't need your legal mind. Thank you. But what about your attorney general? Your surgeon general? Who said this was a D and it had to be stopped. You wanna address that? And so she uses the same answer, but it's not the same question, but she doesn't wanna answer it cuz there's no good answer for it, cuz it's not good. So , uh , one more time. We're gonna hear from once again, Rochelle , Wolinsky the over , let's see here . How do we want to do this? Let's listen to judge Bre first. This was the argument that judge Breyer made last week. And then we're gonna hear from CDC director who came out this weekend and was communicating kind of a different concept. Justice Breyer is talking about hospitals overflowing with bodies 750,000 mil , 750,000 , almost a million people testing positive it's crisis mode, but then the CDC directors out telling a little bit of a different story. Why are these two, not in sync? Why is the Supreme court judge? So out of touch with the actual, a reality of what the government is doing, we're gonna listen. And then Jen , sake's gonna clean it up.

Speaker 9:

And, and you know, it was brought up. I mean there , there are three quarters of a million new cases yesterday, new cases, nearly three quarters of 700 and some odd thousand. Okay. It got up to 9 million , 10 times. As many as when OSHA put this ruling, the hospitals are today, yesterday full almost to the point of the maximum they've ever been. Okay . And in this disease. Okay.

Speaker 1:

Okay . Full .

Speaker 9:

Why, why and you heard references studies? I mean , uh , they , they vary, but uh , uh , some of them say that , uh , the hospitalization is 90% or maybe 60% or maybe 80%, but a big percent filled up yesterday or the day before , uh , with people who are not vaccinated. Okay. Okay. So , uh , that's, we're talking about now and think of the state requirement, it's both the balance of harms. It's also public interest. Can you ask us, or is that what you're doing now to say it's in the public interest in this situation to stop this vaccine rule with nearly a million people? Let me not exaggerate nearly three quarters of a million people. It got up to 900 new cases every day . I mean, to me, I would find that unbelievable

Speaker 10:

Justice, Bri , we are asking for a stay before enforcement case in fact, Monday, listen . And the reason for that is this is an unprecedented agency

Speaker 9:

Actually . Yeah . Yeah . I know you have all good arguments that it isn't good. They have arguments that it is good. Okay. I'm asking you a different question. Oh , and the question is how can it conceivably be in the public interest with three quarters of a million people yesterday? Goodness knows how many today. I don't wanna repeat myself, but you have the hop hospitalization figures grow by factors of , of 10, 10 times what it was. Uh , you have hospitalization at the record near the record. You have, you have, I , you understand the thing is I , I , so I repeat my question to me. It's unbelievable, but I want to hear what you say. How can it be in the interest , which is a requirement ? How can it be a balance of harms in this case? Assuming the arguments aren't off the wall on the government side and I'm believe me. They're not.

Speaker 1:

Wow. Okay. So there's like just so much there to break down. I know I've played that once before, but it ju it is shocking. Every time I listen to it, because there's just so much you can dissect there. Scott Keller goes into the argument, judge, why? You know , I'm gonna explain it. I don't care what the arguments are. How can it's unconscionable to be telling me that we wanna stop this thing from going into effect? Because I , I , because it might have consequences, but his consequences are not really connected to reality. Here is what CDC director said this weekend,

Speaker 4:

The overwhelm number of deaths over 75% occurred in people who had at least four comorbidities. So really these are people who were unwell to begin

Speaker 1:

With. Okay, there you go. So judge Breyer is saying that it's all the UN VED out there, just everyday healthy people who are just dropping dead. You just heard her, right. People in hospitals have four comorbidities. One more time.

Speaker 4:

The overwhelming number of deaths over 75% occurred in people who had at least four comorbidities. So really these are people who were unwell to begin with.

Speaker 1:

Yeah. So that is CDC director Lansky . And I wanted to grab this super chat . I just saw a Celia frost born says, can we really trust the numbers when they count cold and flu symptoms as having COVID also, how do they not know also how do they not know that the vs you know , uh , do the thing. So it's a good , it's a very good question. That is from , uh , Celia frost borne . I don't know. You know, it's like some people are sort of willfully ignorant, right? They don't want to see the real numbers. Now I saw another super chat come in, but I think I might have lost it. And , uh, the question was, I apologize, but the question was, how can you not, how , how can you not correct the judges? And I, I apologize for, for missing your name. I'm still trying to figure out this new tool and it's not really serving me all that well , uh, currently today. So it's, it's a good question. So you , you make your arguments in front of the look I've argued in front of the Supreme court or submitted a brief in front of the Supreme court. So I'm not going to be able to opine with too much skillset on any of this, but you know, you don't with, with a judge. It , it , it , it would be virtually impossible, I think, to sort of correct a soda, my , or somebody who, or somebody like Breyer , as we just listened to Breyer is making an argument. He's making a speech almost. He doesn't really want argument back because Scott Keller gave him argument back. He said, well, he says , are you seriously asking me to do that, man? And he said, well, judge, I am. And he said, well, yeah, yeah, yeah. You've got all sorts of good arguments. And so he was trying to sort of, you know, nudge him in the right direction, but it's a Supreme court judge and he just talked right over them and just steamed rolled right over him. Same thing with soda Meor . So if you say , uh , judge correction, it's actually not three , uh , a hundred thousand kids on ventilators. That's not reality. What what's she gonna say? What are you gonna say? You don't wanna make a even court judge look dumb either. It's it's like ultimate deference. It's, it's a , it's a cultural thing. I mean, it's a weird, you know, you're not gonna get in there and be combative with these people. It's, it's this, I mean, it's almost, you know, it's, it's almost royalty to some degree, you know, and it really is. It's like this, this ultra elevated position that when you go through law school, I mean, you read Supreme court judges day after day after day, and you , and you see the brilliance and you see how this entire structure of law and justice has created itself, all coming down from some of the brightest people that have , have ever, you know , lived or, or , or served it here in America. And it's a really impressive thing. Then you listen to these clips and you go, holy moly . I've had like dinner table conversations with people at the table who know than these judges do, who don't even listen to politics, right. People who are just like, just like, like loosely plugged in. So that's CDC director. Now we also have another clip from her. So she's sort of rebutting judge Breyer . And here's what she said here on , uh , shepherd Smith. No, that's not shepherd Smith. Who's this guy's name? Brett Bayer . Brett Bayer. Oh my God. Oh, that's why two SS and two BS here is what she said. Now. He actually, you know, sort , sort of digs in on her a little bit and he really wants to get to the bottom of some of the

Speaker 11:

Facts. Speaking of statistics , uh , it seems to make a big difference. If a person in the hospital is in the hospital for COVID 19 or with COVID 19 , it's been almost a year since you've been running the agency. Do we have that split on numbers?

Speaker 4:

Um, you know, what I will say is it differs by each variant. So , um, some variants, first of all, we're doing screening of many , uh , um , in many hospitals of everybody who's walking in the door. Um, what we're with the omic variant is that , um , it tends to be milder person by person, but given how large the numbers are, that we're seeing more and more cases come into the hospital in some hospitals that we've talked to up to 40% of the patients who are coming in with COVID are coming in, not because they're sick with COVID , but because they're coming in with something else and have , uh , had to co uh COVID or the OCN variant detected. Right. But

Speaker 11:

I guess, do you know how many of ,

Speaker 1:

With COVID wanna pause on that with COVID versus due to COVID people who are sick, who are coming in with it versus people who are coming in because of COVID now Mack said where I live, when you have symptoms, you have to go and get COVID tested. So it's clear you have COVID or not. Yeah. That's the rule, but what if people just decide that they don't wanna do that? Okay. So , uh , thank you for that Mac . Yeah. I mean, I think that's right. I think everybody's sort of supposed to do that, but I think that a lot of people can can't really tell, is it COVID is it other things? So it's, you know, it's complicated out there, but I think the general, you know, good rule of thumb is yeah. Test . We can see here that this is , uh , how she picks up now because Brett Bayer is asking her specifically that distinction with, or do with COVID or due to COVID . Can you help us? Do you have data on that?

Speaker 11:

The 830, 6,000 deaths in the us linked to COVID are from COVID or how many are with COVID , but they had other comorbidities. Do you have that breakdown?

Speaker 4:

Um, yes, of course, with Omicron we're following that very carefully. Our death registry of course , um , takes a few weeks to, and is takes a few weeks to collect. Um, and of course, Omicron has just been with us for a few weeks, but those data will be forthcoming.

Speaker 1:

All right . So we'll see, we'll see what those numbers look like. If it is a big bucket of people going to the hospital due to COVID or with COVID , we'll find out soon enough, but that's the back and forth. We've got Supreme court judges. We've got the CDC, they are at odds with one, another Supreme court says one. Thing's a reality. CDC says another thing is a reality. And both of these people are making policy, see for us, isn't that nice. They're gonna be making decisions that govern all of the rest of us. They don't even know what the heck they're doing. They can't even get in sync. So Jen sake had to get asked about that today and clean some of this stuff up. Rightfully so here is , uh , Peter Ducey asking her saying, Hey, Jen, you know, Joe keeps calling this a pandemic of the UN VX getting pretty tired of hearing that I'm triple VED . He says, so are you, we all seem to be catching it. What's going on here is Joe gonna modify that improper language?

Speaker 6:

I understand that the science says that vaccines prevent death, but on triple backed still got COVID your triple backed . Still got COVID. Ooh . Why is the president still referring to this as a pandemic of the UN vaccinated ?

Speaker 7:

Well, I , I think Peter, there's a significant difference between, and you just, you just experienced this and not to expose your public health experience, but I can speak to Mo mine and as well, I had been triple vaed . I had minor symptoms. There is a huge difference between that and being UN vaccinated. You are 17 times more likely to go to the hospital if you're not vaccinated 20 times more likely to die.

Speaker 1:

All right . So that's all, that's all good. But I mean, I think he, he has a, still a pretty good point there. I mean, it's still a good question. Like why is he still saying that? Because you can still, well, we'll leave it out there, but you know what they said, B Harris says SCOTUS was built and it paid off for one party or the other since 1789. Thank you for that. B Harris. I hope that's not the case. I really do. Uh , Ben do over says I've got nine jabs feels amazing. So, you know, I'm not talk to your doctor before you, you know, of course. Uh he's he's joking about that. So don't follow that check . Talk to your doctor before you do anything. Hey, good logic is here, says after reading insights from several of today's justices, the next generation of lawyers will struggle to view SCOTUS as royalty. Great work, bro. That's from good logic. Are you subscribed to his channel by the way? He's right next door . He's right there. If you're here, just go check him out. Good logic. He's right there. Uh , good dude. And uh, yeah, I think that you're right, right. I think that, I think that the , the Supreme court is doing itself. A lot of disservice. I'd be curious to see what he thinks about that. If, whether whether there is a sort of a perception like that and whether that is slowly deteriorating, because it did sound like not , not, you know, it didn't sound like , uh , anything really impressive coming out of there. All right . So speaking of people who are backed up, got it. Well, you know where this is going. Guess who got positive AOC? Yeah, that's right today . Congresswoman AOC announced. I got it. All right . And so we're not gonna dwell on it other than to just point out the simple fact that she might have got it in Florida because in Florida, you know, they're still open. And she went down there because in New York, they're wrecking everybody's lives. <laugh> they are mandating through passport , uh , vaccine passports that you gotta show your papers everywhere you go in New York city. And so AOC wants to, you know, like many people from California, they wanna wreck where they live and then go to other states and other places where they're living happy and Merry lucky lives and ruin it. Like the people from California. So AOC did that. Apparently, Brenda , Leslie posted this on Twitter. This puppy's got 815,000 views on it. AOC is still lounging it up in Florida. This was posted back on January 2nd. She's in large crowds and she's mask list this time at a drag queen bar in Miami rules for the, but not for me here. She's So, you know, good for her having a good time living it up hanging . I , I don't know if that person's on stilts. I think, I don't know. You know, don't know what pronouns this person goes by, but I don't know if they're on stilts or if that's just like an eight foot person, I don't know. But AOC, you can see over here , uh, you know, no mask living it up good for her having a good time. Everybody should be able to go out and live their lives without masks, free other people. Good for her hope she recovers and lives well would be nice if she paid the, that same respect to her people and her, her rep her constituency back in New York. So now we get a very good question. Once again, from Ducey Ducey today was just going after Saki today . Just go , Bob , pop , pop , just hitting her. Hey Jen . How about the, how about this on the VAX and how about this on B ? He's got another one. Now you may have seen this happening as well. The testing shortages, you gotta test up before you go back. We had a super chat just come in, says, yeah, all we gotta do is go get tested and we can go back to our business as usual would be nice. If you could do that. If there were actual tests, everybody everywhere , uh , has been experiencing problems with this as we're going to uncover. And so Ducey asked Jen , Sakey about this. He says, Hey, Jen , kind of real on and out a test around these parts. Can you help?

Speaker 6:

Thank you, Jen . I was home all last week. Isolating. Welcome back. Thank you. I was isolating with COVID after a positive test, like a lot of people watching and uh , a lot of time in front of the TV, I heard the president say, did you watch Fox the whole time or other things? I am exhausted the full catalog of guy . Fietti content. Oh , guy fi okay . Uh , obviously a lot of Fox, but I , I heard the president say Google COVID test near me. So somebody isolating with COVID . I did that and the appointments everywhere were completely jammed. So why is it that you guys were so unprepared for the good question need for testing after the holidays? Well, Peter, I'm happy to

Speaker 1:

See you back. All right . So you see, they do that little thing, right? He had COVID Jen had COVID AOCs got COVID they're all tripled and boosted up. And so the question that he says is I was sitting there isolated in quarantine. I checked on the , on the , on the Googles, just like the president told me to do everywhere. I turn, there is no testing available anywhere. Can't find anything. And you may have noticed this personally, I've seen it here. People on our team are having problems, you know, with, with children and stuff like that. And finding tests, there are shelves or bear right there . There aren't any available. And if you go over on Twitter, you'll notice that people are saying that as well. Back on January 3rd, this person posted this, it's got 9,400 retweets. 45,000 likes says, testing lines are long. Test results are delayed at home . Tests are completely sold out. Masks were opposed to switch to are expensive and everything is still open and operating. What are we supposed to do? Somebody else here 36 minutes ago from when I took this screenshot. So earlier in the day says COVID testing at CD H D N E gov is currently several blocks. Long down pine street took a picture of this. We are now two years into this thing, two years into the pandemic. And this is still what our government has been able to produce for us two years. You know, and I was thinking about this sort of the other day. I was thinking about America's involvement in, in other entity, other affairs, let's say world war II , for example, right, America really got evolved . 1941 ended 19 45, 4 years, two years, right? You have kind of halfway through a war and we still don't even have tests. It's pretty embarrassing. So you can see here more problems here. We've got eight minutes when the testing line says closed at noon and your , and determined to find a loophole, okay . They close at noon in the middle of this thing. Here's another one from today. New CHD testing site. Things are moving. I wouldn't say very quickly, but they are moving. Cars are being lined up in one section before being moved to a second line for testing. We have another one testing line, couple hundred people in long and not moving that's mayor. Woo don't know where that is. Standing out in the cold social distancing. We can see here, the line for COVID testing in Massachusetts, January 5th tip brings snacks because you just have this curly cue of cars round . And around we go because there's no testing, no capacity because our useless government is just wasting everybody's time and resources. Here's another one I've been in COVID testing line for 3.5 hours. And I still can't see the end at , please see tacos three and a half hour hours to go get a test, right? And now many people need this. You know, people need these tests to get on an airplane or to go do an event or to go something or other, right. And they've got no choice, but this is what they've been able to , uh , create for us. COVID testing line here in McComb county. Uh , I took that one a couple hours ago, so it's a kind of a big deal, kind of a big problem. And it is something that Jen Soki of course gets asked about here is what she says

Speaker 9:

Need for testing after the holidays.

Speaker 7:

Well, Peter, I'm happy to see you back and well , um, I would second say that there has been a massive surgeon cases, as you know, and we're a part of in DC and New York, and there's been an unprecedented in other parts of the country as well. There's been an unprecedented demand for tests. So what we have done over the course of the last few weeks, even before that is the president quadrupled our testing capacity. Since the summer, we opened 20,000 sites across the country and we have also opened additional federal sites, including one in DC. Only recently, he's also provided , uh , we've also in the process of sending 50 million tests out to community health centers and rural health centers. And now we've just, we're in the process of finalizing contracts for 500 million tests. But well , what can I make? One more point and then you can go next. Uh , I would just note where we have come from. If you looked to a year ago, there were no tests or maybe one, depending on the timeline that was available on the market. Now we have nine. If you look to about a year ago, there was about 900,000 or maybe slightly higher tests that were being issued. Uh , every day now we're about 10 or 11 million, 300 million tests are done in this country every month. So is enormous progress being made, but we needed to make sure the market was growing. That's what we've been working on and increase our access to supply. And that's what we've been doing, the tests you're talking.

Speaker 1:

All right . So that is , uh , Jen Saki not answering the question of course saying, yeah, but we're doing a bunch of other stuff. And also we're gonna , we're gonna , did you hear how she did that real quickly? She said it sounds 500 million tests , 500 million tests. And if you rewind that back a little bit, she said, well, we're finalizing the contracts for the 500 million tests. So it's like, like, are those, are those on the delivery trucks or where are they? Oh, are finalizing the contracts. Good. So like when you run for reelection or when are these coming? I don't know . So you can see that she is , uh , you know, probably recognizing that this is kind of a bad situation. And so we're just gonna look forward. We've got all of these other things. Um, we have, we also have no tests today, but at least we have nine different versions of the tests that we don't have a year ago. We had one test and we didn't have any of those. Now we have nine tests, but we , and we still don't have any of those either, but there are nine of them. So that's, you know, that's an improvement. <laugh> poor , poor , poor , uh , poor Biden. All right , bend over. We saw that one come over here is just Jabed to the max and loving it. Good logic is here. This worked out again. So that works. So I figured out how this works now. Good logics in the house. Make sure you give him a follow and a sub over there on YouTube. And then we've got one final clip from , uh , Jen , Jay mill says if sake's point is only that the vaccinated will have a less severe reaction to COVID and not that you won't transmit it. Doesn't that break their arguments for mandates. Yeah. I mean, I think it, yes, I think it clear does , you know, I think that I , I think that we saw that on full display there at the Supreme court. I mean , the argument that they were making is that this thing essentially, right. They were justifying this on the fact that, that the mandate is going to cause more people to get the V getting the V is going to stop more people from it , which the CDC director, we just heard from her what her perspective is on that. I can't tell you what it is, but she did. So you reverse that back up the top, right? The justification for the mandate is to go, is to work itself back down. So you stop the transmission. So we stop this from happening, but it doesn't work that way. So what's the justification you for the mandate. That's why you don't operate that way. That's why you BA you , you create rules based on principles that are imutable and you don't change them. You don't just say, oh well, we're gonna allow certain things and disallow certain things because the current crisis demands. It. It's a great point, Jay mill . I mean, we're gonna see, I think that the Supreme court is over those issues as we speak. And it's going to be fun to see what their rulings say for us. All right . I saw another one come in more Havocs as , uh , let's click like and subscribe. I'd love that. I'd love it. If you left us alike, I'd love it. If you subscribed and stuck around for a little while, we've got one more, click it from , uh, Jen , let's see what Jen has here for us.

Speaker 6:

Think about that . Require people to go somewhere and either make an appointment or wait in line . The CDCs guidance is if you think you have COVID, you're supposed to stay home. You guys said you were gonna mail free tests to people that need them. The president's there on television talking about , uh , winter of severe illness and death. Yeah . While he's saying that publicly, why weren't you guys doing more to prepare for the

Speaker 7:

Winter. Well, Peter, everyone decides where they're going to go get a test. And , uh, we, we make a range of options available. You can also purchase tests online later today, we'll have more details on how 150 million Americans who have health insurance can get reimbursed for tests. So we'll have more details on that later, the 500 million tests I noted, and I give you a little bit of an update on the timeline will have more on the site later this week. So our, our steps and our process from the beginning has been expanding access to free tests to make it easy and more accessible for Americans. And we're continue to build on what we've done

Speaker 1:

Today. All right . So it's again, forward looking , which is all you can do in a situation like that. I mean, it's, it's , don't dwell on the past. Ducey is trying to dwell in the she's trying to move it forward. Of course, we'll see if that means anything because we're already through the holidays. Like the big spike is, you know, they should have been prepared for that, I think is what everybody is arguing, but it is interesting. We're seeing some different narratives now come up, we see that the New York post is, is pushing this story saying COVID will become endemic by later, or this year, this is according to a Biden task force , an Exide task force . Somebody who I , I apparently used to work over there is now predicting. And so it's an interesting perspective. Stephen L. Miller over there says, yeah, bad poll numbers do amazing things to science. And so I thought about that, you know, why, why are we hearing a little bit more about, you know, some of these things that were sort of like these gigantic myths that would get you banned from everything. If you said them, why is, why is the CDC now talking about them? We just heard from her right. Four comorbidities here. And , and , and you know, this, that, and the other about this new variance don't need to get into it, but she is now sort of changing her tune. A little bit. Many people are speculating it's because the poll numbers are so bad that they need to change the narrative. Even Brian's Stelter is asking himself, the question is the media outta touch with real America. Here's Brian , sorry to do this to you folks. It's

Speaker 12:

In the reliable sources newsletter. Here's a, here's a big, overly broad question for you. Okay. Okay . Is the media at this point out of touch with the public about

Speaker 13:

COVID? I , I think it's hard to argue that , uh , you know, the media is a large , uh , group of people, but a lot of the media does seem when I look at it and , and then travel the country to be very outta touch with people. I mean, if you travel the country, yeah . People are not really living in the same , uh, bubble that it seems that , uh , most of the media is messaging toward. Yeah . And , and so that's , and so I , I , I think this is an issue because if people are tuning out , uh, what's going on in cable news, if we're not messaging toward , uh , the general population , um, you know, they they're just, you know , ignoring everything and , and living their lives. Uh , and , and we're not really getting the information that they need to them

Speaker 1:

Not getting the information that they need to them. So, you know, these people are just living their lives. They're not petrified out there. They're going out to parks and restaurants and they're socializing and they're not social distancing, and they're not wearing their masks. And they're not, you know, putting themselves in bubbles and wrapping them , their , their children in , uh , cellophane. This is crazy. They're living their lives. And obviously, you know, the media should be governing that, and this is offensive to both of them. And they're wondering, what should we do about it? Meanwhile, CNN's numbers, I think, are in the like actual toilet. They're like rock bottom. And maybe this is because nobody's listening to them anymore because their arguments are bad. Let's see what you have to say about it [email protected] and for my friends on YouTube, let's pull some of these questions up. First question from sweet. Potto says, Hey, Hey, Rob, <laugh> , I've been watching for a bit. And she wrote that watching for a bit. Haven't been watching for a bit. Life's crazy. 17 family members have it. Uhoh and my whole town is flooded, but wanted to comment on the name change. I'm a daddy's girls , as you are a mommy's boy. So I get you nice to see you on your , her mom. So much turning to mush over here. That's all happy new year. Happy new year to you . Sweet potato. Thank you for saying that. Thanks for checking in. I , my goodness, thoughts and prayers for it , with your family and everybody over there. Hope you guys pull through there. Monster one says, I'm sure you will. Monster one says I made a mistake over the weekend. I thought it would be nice to go somewhere that I've never seen before the MSN E comment section. Oh my gosh. I don't even, I don't know if I can read the rest of this. This might be says , I was curious about what might be found there, but was not surprised. Those people are truly insane. Also. I've got aids now, do you think I should get tested? Yeah, probably. If you can find them . I mean, I think probably those are, do they have those tests? Also there you have it folks, monster one, rest in peace. My friend, thanks for venturing out there. Monster one says my concern about the lawn is where's the snow didn't Biden. Just give some kind of speech a few days ago that had a bunch of snow in the window. Well, I think that was a fake TV and I'm not joking about that monster monster. One says that gore 100,000 thing the liberals were claiming was the essence of my MSNBC trip. I guarantee that none of them actually heard the quote. We're just blindly retweeting it because the rest of the cult was I'm sure that's true. It looked exactly like that because it was like they were stepping over each other to get those tweets out there. NY renal MD says with respect to justice, K Hagan , she's wrong about the vid vs . They protect it against death and hospitalization. They're not reliable for immunity. They're so follow the guidance of the CDC. This is not a medical show, but thank you for that comment. Doctor NY renal MD, a thunder seven says with all the research is assistance and access to any medical document. You would think the left demo point to justices would actually look at real data and facts. Instead. They're just quoting inaccurate info in stats, just like any typical CNN correspondent, total joke. They have caused the public to lose any respect they may have had for SCOTUS. I hope not. You know , I really hope not because it is a, it is a necessary institution and there's not, you know, I , I just, I would hate to see that thing. I'd hate to see it, but it may be foregone. Monster one says, Rob, Karen , I mean, Kagan knows . She just doesn't care. They wan compliance. This is what the packed court will look like. Prepare yourself. Imagine six liberals. Ugh . That just sounds terrible. Sounds awful. Monster one. Don't scare us like that. We have another one from , uh , rice rice , right ? Reeses here says MSM is a big I did I get that right? Reese MSM is a big lie. Circle of jerks. Recommend reading into operation Mockingbird. When you have the time, thumbs up, I'm loving your Federalist papers reading. Thank you. Sweet. I'm glad that you're liking those Reese. I'm having fun with those Federalist papers are going live. Weekdays 6:00 AM got one tomorrow. Federalist four I think is out John, Jay . We're gonna do all the Federalist papers, all the anti-federalists papers and it's , uh , it's gonna be fun. So I'm glad that you're joining in with us there. Reese . I appreciate it. Uh , a couple O others over from locals. We've got thunder. Seven says w E is the swamp, the cabal, the deep state, the N w O from thunder seven. Another one from PWS. MK says, Rob, can you rant about Marbury versus Madison for us? I could. I'm sure I could. I I'm sure I could. You'd have to tee me off a little bit more than that, like right now, but I'm sure I could. Yeah, that, that would be <affirmative> . That would be like for a log geeks show. Probably. I think so Nikki dragon said maybe we should start something like that where we can talk about like the most just, you know, it'd be like a bunch of stock people talking about , uh , you know, puts and sales and options and all that stuff. Nikki dragon says, why are we still listening to any of these people? Haven't we already proven that these people are liars criminals or should be in jail? Or am I just crazy? Well, I don't think that these , are you talking about the Supreme court judges? I don't think that they there's any evidence that they're criminals or that they should be in jail, but uh , why, why do people listen to them? Well, I think <affirmative> , I think less people are, unfortunately, Sergeant Bob says how JS can keep a straight face? What a country <laugh>. I don't know. I don't know either T Blake Morris says, you know what I love most about the law universe. You have a different piece of information to offer you all. Do you all take a different perspective to focus on my mind is going into overload with so much information from your channel to Viva, to RADA , even Rogan. I'm feeling fortunate that the internet hasn't stopped the signal yet. You can't stop the signal mal you can never stop the signal. That's a Firefly reference. Rob, thank you. Deep Blakemore for that. Otherwise I would've missed it. I would , I have not seen that show. Although I heard it's a good one and I like sci-fi stuff. I do a lot. So maybe I'll have to look at that one, but I'm glad that you find it. Interesting. I mean, I , I listen to the other guys too. It's fun. It's it's it's um, it isn't , it really excites me because I'm passionate about this space, accountability, transparency, and justice, and the more people that are talking about these issues and sort of pulling the curtain back on this stuff, the , the better I'm just, it makes me, it makes me excited and I'm just happy to be a part of it. Rad says when I worked the floor, we said our beds were full. And when we didn't have the nursing staff to cover more patients, are the hospitals full? Are they just reporting their fault ? Because they fired their staff? Well, you can actually see that. We talked about that. I think that's rasy we talked about that yesterday on the show , um, hospital bed capacity. Let's see what the current numbers look like. Uh, and yeah, health and human services actually has this night. Nice little chart. And you can take a look at it. Let's see if this will load for us. And here it is. In fact, so we talked about this. I think I made this on a video maybe yesterday or some other day. I don't remember, but , uh, here. So , uh, right. HHS protect public data hub. You can see here, inpatient beds, about 77% report. 18% of inpatient beds are in use with the VI 18%. So that's the data from, I , I think everywhere, right? Pick your state if you want. So like, let's see how Florida's doing, how that one floor demands doing. All right . So , uh , about 80%, they're doing good over there. How's Arizona doing 82%. So everything seems pretty good over here. Let's check out New York, right, right there. 26%. So all seems, you know, relatively, you know , reasonable. I would say , uh, I don't know , Sergeant Bob says, how on earth can Brier say he doesn't care? What the arguments are? His job as a Supreme is to consider the arguments, but not with COVID Sergeant Bob. This is COVID time. Nobody cares about arguments. It's COVID Sergeant Bob also says that apparently brilliance and common sense can be mutually exclusive. It is an interesting phenomenon. We've got monster. One says, I can't believe the director of the CDC is a conspiracy theorist. I know it was a shock to me too. People have been talking about the commodities for almost two years and got bad banned comorbidities and got banned. So the question is, when is this crazy conspiracy theorist getting a band? I would like them to apologize to the other people that they band and let them back on platforms. Grouchy old cat lady says N Y times says up to 50% were admitted for unrelated issues. Add to that. Everyone tested for travel. And the wonder the numbers are high and they're not, not that they aren't higher . Now they test test, test, test, test . For every reason everybody's getting a test for everything. Even the sniffles we have look, two G says, Rob, great show. As usual, it's hard to hear justice Breyer's comments. It seems like his mind is already made up as to what is the best for society. Yeah. Did you notice how he said that? How he, unless the government's arguments are off the wall and I know that they're not or something like that. Right? So he is already sort of knows what their arguments are. Hadn't heard from them yet. Very interesting says , uh , it also seems like he has never heard of the opposing arguments, like how cases are liberally counted and fiscal motivations of hospitals due to the care act loss of healthcare worker due to the mandates. Are these arguments able to be presented by the plaintiff? Yeah, so they are certainly, and they did get into a lot of it, right? It's about four hours of argument. So they talked a lot about that, but I would encourage you to listen to that. I mean, he goes into it. So Scott Keller, I thought that a very nice job. He actually responded well to that judge. It's not , it's not harmless. Okay . You know , imposing, this is not harmless. It has a lot of consequences as all government actions. Do we know that you just think it's as easy as just passing a law with the stroke of a pen, but there are consequences when you make laws that impact the entire country. Even if one to 3% let's say of any industry is wrecked. 3% of the trucking industry let's say goes off. We already are in the middle of a supply train , uh, uh , crunch, right? Supply chain crunch could , could get scary. There could be some serious consequences. Zeros says law student, current law student here from zeroes says law students still view the Supreme court as legal royalty. However, we get concerned when they dream up interpretations of constitutional provisions, such as Terry frisks, the inevitable discovery doctrine and what qualifies as interstate commerce or as attacks . But I'm sure currently practicing lawyers feel the same way. Thoughts. Um , well it depends. It's a good question. Steve rose some very good, very dense, legal topics there to talk about, you know, Terry frisks or the stop and pats inevitable discovery doctrine. The idea being that if the police were gonna find it anyway, if they violated your constitutional rights in order to get something and they violated your rights, if they would've found it anyways, no , they would've found it anyways. So that constitutional violation doesn't matter so much, cuz it would've been inevitably discovered. Right? All of these offend me right to the core . I get so irritated every time that our constitution gets read and interpret, interpreted drives me nuts. They, they took that interstate commerce clause and they read it to be so expansive that basically they can regulate virtually anything as a result of that. And so once the Supreme court made that decision, boom, it is really hard to unring that bell. And we talked about this in anti-federalists paper. Number one, John Dewitt writes about this. He says, listen folks, once you grant a power, once you grant it, it is not coming back. So if you're gonna do that, you better understand what the consequences are and we're dealing with those consequences. Cuz the feds now inject their noses into virtually everything and look. And a lot of the conservative judges are the people responsible for the Terry frisks and for the inevitable discovery doctrine and for the warrantless, this, that, and the other exigent circumstances. They're mostly conservative judges because they've never met a police officer that they didn't trust and that's not appropriate. Right? I think that there's a big, big distinction there. There's there's sort of a , an , an incongruence there where small government individuals, small government minded people will just drop everything to support big government law enforcement, essentially gigantic unaccountable law enforcement sees that have essentially no accountability of transparency that protect their own that have a total monopoly on power. I never, I never understood it, but I think that is changing. Now. I think sea rose is , is sort of hinting at that. A lot of people are now questioning the government rightfully so because it's failing all around us at virtually everything it touches. Sergeant Bob says world war II United the USAs never before today regarding the V we are not United at all. Thank you, sleepy Joe, which is weird because that was the theme of his , uh, what was that called? His, his , uh , inauguration speech. Unity. Yeah. Right Gale oh eight says regarding the testing , perhaps a shortage is have something to do with test firing . No one mentions this. That's a good question. Yeah. Maybe they have big batches of these things that were produced, but all expired at the end of the year. Last year. That's a good question. I don't know. Joe Biden says just today 750 750 million, 750 million billion people got the vid get VED is what he said. All right , well he's here. Sergeant Bob says president Trump. Would've got her done. End a story from Sergeant Bob. Another one from monster. One says, can AOC take something else? The horsey wormer ? I don't know. I don't know. Squeak. Vaughn mouse Meyer says , uh , Google this string and read pages two through eight. It's right on the SCO to us website, Amicus brief and support of emergency applications. Read the OSHA ETS cases. So Google that string and read pages two through eight Amicus brief. Have we read that? Did I read that already? All right . Let me see if I can grab this real fast. Let me see if I can pull this up. Super chat coming in from squeak VA mouse Meyer. Yeah, this is over at the Supreme court. So this is here. PDF document. When was this filed? Uh, we've got Gregory Wentz . Glasser. Let's take a look at the table of contents. Shall we? If there is one. Yes. Okay. Uh , motion for leave to file brief. COVID 19. All right . So these are all arguments being made. When was this file? I don't know . All right , so I've got this queued up. I'll take a look at this. Thank you for that mouse Meyer. Is that the brief? That was 20 21, 12 30 is when that was submitted. All right . I'll take a look at that one, but thanks for sending that over. All right . Let's see what else. We've got another one from Dan Chapman says maybe the FDA having to come up with their data. They relied on to issue the emergency vaccines within eight months is causing a narrative shift. It's a good question there. Dan Chapman, did I? Yes. I have a video on that. Dan that's coming out today. I just recorded that right before the show actually. Did I talk about that? Yes, that is. That's a judge outta Texas who issued that order. Yeah, it's the Pfizer data. And he said that they have to unload 55,000 pages a day. I'm sorry, a month. I think it is. I made a video on it. It's gonna be published later tonight. So thanks for bringing that up. That was Dan. Uh , okay. Back over to locals. Let's see what else we've got. Sergeant Bob says 500 million tests. Where are they on back order supply chain issues. Thank you, secretary. Pete budgie , another Biden appointee. It's ed says, Hey Rob. In 2019 87, 640 7,000 Americans died from diabetes. Can SCOTUS force people to eat broccoli or maybe stop eating fast food? Maybe I , I maybe, I mean, honestly, like if they say that you can't take this and you have to buy healthcare and you have to do all of these other things. Why not 659,000 die from cardiovascular disease every year? Well , SCOTUS rule that obesity is illegal and force people to exercise well , SCOTUS rule that Lizzo is an unhealthy influence on people and should be forced to eat more veggies. Obviously all of these ideas are insane. We should all have the freedom to decide what we want to do with our bodies . So long as our decisions do not infringe on the rights of others. And that's from it said , I think that's a good principle and a good comment. Yeah. I think that you're right about that. I think that if they really wanted to, to do a full circle approach, a broad spectrum approach, they would've talked a lot more about health and exercise. And I still don't think, has that ever been officially communicated by any government official, embarrassing, hysterical, sad monster. One says I've got a great idea that will stop the testing problems. Stop testing people who don't need them. I guarantee 9% of the people in those lines don't even have symptoms. If you're asymptomatic. Well, he has opinions on what you should do. So make sure you consult with your doctor on all of these things . Acky lover says, I wanna hear Acky whisper , um, in my ear over and over , uh , this, this is not the Acky love hour. Okay? And it's not gonna devolve into that tic . His prime says, I just wanna point out there's a DC. There's a rally in DC. Defeat the mandates dc.com. If you wanna check that out Sunday, the 23rd go peacefully protest and support defeating the mandates. You gonna be there. Ticus Shindo says when the Supreme swing and miss on facts, isn't it time we realize how deep into the echo chamber. We all have gone by the way, call out, bend over one. <laugh> call him out. He, he , uh , submitted a super chat earlier, right? Bend over one. Sergeant Bob says, quote from unknown. I have made up my mind do not confuse me with the facts. Sort of sounded like judge Breyer monster one says anyone. See the Keith Oman ran that dude is absolutely insane. He made it clear. He'd used anyone who disagrees with them, the enemy and they must be destroyed. Is that the one? Let me see. Let me see what key's up to. Cause my goodness. I, I think I do. I follow him on Twitter. I might have unfollowed him just because I can't, but he's hysterical. He is insane. Yeah. So will see him . If we can pull this up here, let's see if he's got a good one. Um, well he posts a lot of dogs. It's kind of a, he should just start a separate dog account, all dogs. It's kind of a weird thing, but um , no , I'm not seeing, I'm not seeing it , but yeah, he has this rear weird like frothy , foaming rant. Seriously. Everyone needs to watch it. So, or they understand these people don't care about living United. If we keep trying to reason with these people, we will all end up in the goo lag saying, how did this happen? And some of you will say, we should have paid attention to Keith Oberman. That's from monster one. Yeah. It's a wild video from him. He's he's, he's, there's spit flying all over the place, which happens from time to time. I get it. I mean, I , you know, you get animated. Clarence Thomas says, see what I have to deal with Rob? No amount of money can compensate me for having to li listen to my lefty colleagues every day . But I do it for the constitution, which I love more than I hate them. You're welcome. Well, thank you, judge Thomas, keep fighting the good. I know it is difficult out there. Honestly. I really wish I was in there because I could , uh, I could just picture the faces of Roberts and Gorsuch and uh, probably the rest of them just going, this is bad. This is bad news. X says, when is this a Supreme court gonna make a ruling on the mandate? Don't know on that one. Some people were saying they might expedite, like really expedite it , like within the next 30 days. But , uh , but I'm not sure. Sergeant Bob says Terry versus Ohio still good requires reasonable suspicion. Lots of crimes prevented B a I I C case was interesting. So Sergeant Bob's on he's he's law enforcement, you know, he likes that stuff. Monster one says, I think you misunderstood my AOC comment. I was saying she can take horse towar because she's a horse. Oh, I <laugh> see. So like Joe Rogan, shouldn't be taking that , uh, that, that non-approved drug because he's, you know, he's not a horse. So why would he be taking horse dewormer? That's insane. But AOC, on the other hand, it's perfectly acceptable for her to take it. You know, same species reals . Gary news says my bath friend works at the green Memorial. She said they are full and overflowing because if they close two floors, they close two floors because of the mandates. Let's see if we can pull this one up here from real scary news. My bath friend green Memorial overflowing because they close two floors because of the man end date . So it sounds like what real scary news is saying is that they actually have less people to work. So they're closing floors. That's why they're busy. Like you may have noticed that in the restaurants, right? You go there and they're very busy with a lot less servers and people able to wait on you cuz there's nobody working anymore because , uh, that's just the new structure of America, I suppose. All right . My friends. Well, I think that is it for us for the day. I wanna thank you for being a part of the program. And I wanna welcome some new people who joined us [email protected] And by the way, Jeff says don't disparage horses. All right . They're beautiful creatures. Don't you dare compare them to AOC. They're very Regal animals. She's not <laugh> welcome. Some new people like jumping Jeff over to our community. We've got rat bag thirteens. Now in the house. We've got ocean lover. Welcome to ocean lover and free mine . We've got Humphrey's dad here. Well that's cool. Humphrey's dad is here. We've got, she rose 31. We've got far Farid , far F a R I D X far IDX. I don't know what that one is. We have the brink, but welcome to Farid X , far , far the brink we've got line . We've got Piper to score. Todd HS here. We've got suspicious chick. We've got Ozzie lawyers here. Green Guin . Tutin we've got S baker . Gotcha . Good. Is here Jim, 2008. Falcon us N Y yeah . Wells here along with Rene, not R w N Y C . And that my friends is it for us for the day. I wanna thank you for being a part of the show. I've got two other videos coming out. I've gotta edit them and then post them. One is going to be on the Pfizer ruling from the federal Texas judge. He is , uh , ordering them to release this doc , these documents a lot more quickly, I think 50, 55,000 pages , uh , a month or something a lot. I can't remember. And then there's another video about the mom who threw her 13 year old son in the trunk of her car to go get tested. So I have a copy of that criminal complaint and we are going to read through it. So give me about an hour again, an hour or so. And uh , those will be up hit the refresh button and then my friends. That's it for us for the day. I'll see you back here tomorrow. I wanna thank you for being a part of the show. Thanks for supporting us with the super chats over on locals. Thanks for subscribing. Thanks for sharing the show. Thanks for being an amazing part of the conversation that we have every day . I hope that you who are here to do it with us again tomorrow. Same place, same time, 4:00 PM, Arizona, 5:00 PM, central 6:00 PM on the east coast. And for that one, Florida man, everybody else have a tremendous evening sleep very well. I'll see you right back here tomorrow. Bye bye .