Impeachment Trial, Take 2, Begins Today | February 9, 2021
Here's your conservative, not bitter host, Todd Huff.
conservative, not bitter indeed. You are listening here to the home of conservative, not bitter talk. Yes, I am your host, Todd Huff. You can email me my friends your thoughts, opinions, feedback. Yes, even your adoration and praise will be accepted at the following email Todd, The Todd Huff show.com facebook.com slash The Todd Huff Show. We're streaming there YouTube, Twitter, Periscope, although if you're listening on Periscope, I should tell you, Periscope is going away here in about six weeks, March 31. So be sure that you follow us elsewhere. Download the podcast on iTunes, Apple podcast, wherever you listen to your, your podcast, you'd be well advised to do that as well. Listen to any portion of the program that you may have missed. We will overlook portions you've missed thus far as long as you as long as you do that here. Moving forward. Good to be here today is impeachment day. impeachment day number two. And we've got we've gotten a look into the strategy which this is what I want to talk about today I want to talk about basically the, I guess the legal strategies here. Yesterday, the Trump team, when they indicated that they might be showing some videos, videos at the impeachment trial in the Senate that showed democrats inciting violence based upon their own logic and words and what they say words mean and so forth. And what Trump was trying to do when he used the word fight, use the word fight supposedly 20 times in that speech in Washington, DC on January 6, and that apparently was meant to be taken literally, the word fight, supposed to walk over the Capitol and punch people I guess, is what was supposed to be taken from that. And so the Trump legal team says fine, if that's what you want to do, if everything is now suddenly to be taken, taken literally, if you want to effectively silence what the President was saying. They say that the President was exercising his first amendment right of free speech, especially the most protected or the most valuable type of speech, the speech that we should make sure that stays free at all costs, all speech should be free. But you know, when you're talking about the direction of your country, what's your what's your nation is engaging in the ideas that are being debated in the public square, free speech is a very necessary components. Right? I remember back back in my college days, we would have, you know, there might be mock debates or things like that in the classroom. And I remember making the observation back then that the one who sets the rules and the definition of terms is usually the one that's going to win the debate. In fact, I'm reminded, I'm reminded one time of a discussion, we were having a debate we were having in the classroom, on on abortion, this was this would have been this whole date me a little bit. But this would have been 1999 at American University, Washington, DC. I was a student I attended Butler, but it was a semester exchange program. So for that semester, I went to American University for a guess it was a pre law type of program, but it was a very, I love the class, but I was really the only conservative. There were a couple other folks that had conservative beliefs to some point. But they, I guess, moderately conservative, I was the only at least outspoken conservative Christian in the class and I remember debating abortion. And I remember one of the students one of the female students, she called me anti choice because I'm an in favor of protecting the unborn child. That's i'm in favor of that she did. She deemed that to be anti anti choice. And normally, normally in a debate situation someone has that thrown at him or her, they go on the defensive, I'm not anti choice that other day, I thought I would try a little different tax there. And I said, I tell you what, I'll allow you to call me anti choice when you allow me to call you anti life. And she paused as though she never even considered that possibility. See these, the The point is, the the rules, the definitions, and those things are so powerful in determining the outcome. So if you stop someone from political speech or exercising political speech, any person especially you could say, especially the President of the United States, especially during a hotly contested election, especially when there were abnormalities, especially when there were not what it was not supposed to say these things. Were not supposed to say these things, but there certainly were issues that Americans should be concerned with. In fact, in fact, did you know me find this here really quickly, pull this bad boy up. This may come as well, I don't want to say as a surprise to you. This is in the epic times. So you probably heard and you probably had a leftist or democrats say to you, man, Trump had 80 or whatever the lawsuit numbers are at times and judges this threw him out because they were so preposterous, man, how can you possibly possibly think there's anything to this? courts all over this country? We're throwing these things out left and right, because it was so far from a legitimate a legitimate lawsuit. Right. And so that was that's kind of the narrative. Trump lost 80 to two, I don't even know the number, some massive number like that. But what if I told you this headline here, the epic times this was dated yesterday or the day before Trump one, you ready for this? Two thirds of election lawsuits where merits were considered? In other words, when a case was not dismissed? Because, you know, someone said that the plaintiff did not have standing or something along those lines. Is that the case that actually were heard based upon merit, they were not dismissed for some other reason, or they were not combined with other cases. I think that happened in a couple of these. of the 22 cases that have been heard by the courts and decided on their merits, Trump and Republicans have prevailed and 15 according to citizen journalist, john draws, Jr, a physicist and environmental advocate in Morehead city, North Carolina, this means that Trump has won two thirds of the cases fully adjudicated by the courts. Three of the 15 cases whose rulings were favorable to Trump were filed on or after election day November 3. So basically, it says there that draws in a team of volunteers dug through court filings and legal minutiae to track down 81 lawsuits that were filed in connection with the November third 2020 presidential election. And he's been tracking these on a spreadsheet. So of the 81 cases, 11 were withdrawn, or consolidated and 23 were dismissed, for lack of standing, or other grounds. So basically, once once you do the math, and you look at the cases that were actually heard, according to reports here, published in the epic times, the Trump team has, and Republicans have been on the winning side 15 out of 22 times, roughly two thirds, two thirds of the cases, so important to to point out because, again, we're told these things are all connected. We're told that Trump's just up there trying to stay in the White House. He knows that he had this he's lost this election. He's grasping at straws, he's trying to incite a riot, which again, what's the outcome? What did they I mean, what do they really think people are gonna go storm the capital and suddenly, Trump's gonna stay in the White House. No, the the point of the rally. The point of people going to Washington DC was to support the presidents and other republicans contention that these election results in certain states were were questionable. There were problems the states electors should be, was the belief challenge. And so the idea from the vast majority of the people who went there, I'm not talking about the idiots who decided to storm the capital. That is in a different group, the vast majority of the folks that were there listening to that speech did not engage in that. In fact, it's 1.6 miles away from the Capitol building. And it's been reported that the Capitol was already breached before Trump even finished speaking. Those apparently are the facts. Trump's legal team has, has mentioned that as well. So the point is, how would someone get you know, how would Trump have inspired people to go breach the Capitol when he was still speaking, and they had 1.6 miles to travel? If you assume it's a, you can walk 20 mile and 20 minutes? That is an hour walk? Some people might do 15, that's 45 minute walk. So how do you account for these differences? How do you also account for the evidence that we've seen that shows that people organize beforehand on social media to do these things? In fact, I want to get to this as well. What platform Do you think people use the most frequently? As Let me ask you, what platform Do you believe people use most frequently to organize the protests at the Capitol? She says Twitter, what is the media tell us it is what do we assume it is the one that's been shut down? permanently? Pretty much parlor. Right. I mean, that's that we've been told that parlors, the one, but it's not the one? No as guest Twitter. I would say she's very close. But that's not what that's not what the evidence appears to suggest is the case. In fact, it is Facebook. So Facebook, Facebook is alleged to have been have a vital role in being a platform where this organization had taken place to overthrow our government. Right. I mean, this is the this is the language. This is how we're supposed to talk about this. Plant. Facebook has apparently, allegedly, if we're to listen to the way that this is normally discussed, if you look at the reason parler is not up and online today. It's because they were used as a as a place of parlor was used, says reports. Again, these are the allegations that were eight. I think they're eight instances eight people who are facing charges, who organized on parlor, but it's something like 223, I'll look at the article and share it with you after the break 223 instances, or people that I believe are alleged to have used Facebook to organize their rallies and protests. Now what is there a reasonable person out there that says Facebook is responsible for that? Is that? Is that the context? What if they were using cell phones? If they were using iPhones to make phone calls or to send text messages? Is Apple responsible for that? What network were they using? Was it Verizon? Was it t mobile? Should we believe that those networks are responsible? If folks are using their had their network, their connection their you know, texting services, or, you know, speaking across their platform, by voice or connecting to the internet using their towers? Are they responsible for all that content going across? There's so many things with this that the left wants to turn on, its on its head just to get to the point to where they can target social media groups that favor free speech or that may even have conservative, be a home for conservatives like parlor, for example. Or number two, and perhaps more importantly, to go after the former president of the United States, they're prepared to turn it all on it on its head to go after and impeach a guy who's not even in office any longer, saying they're just trying to hold this guy accountable for his time in office for his abuse of power for his dangerous rhetoric in the final days of his of his presidency. By the way, the house manager said the evidence is overwhelming. What evidence Have you heard by the way that Trump used the word fight 20 times. That is the overwhelming evidence that Trump used the word fight 20 times we want to share some Democrats using rhetoric that is at least as offensive and as violent as that probably even much worse in some instances. So we'll share that after the break and be prepared for this because this might be some of the things that the Trump legal team decides to You share with the, with the senate when they present their case before the Senate here sometime here this week so well, I don't know if they'll get to their part this week or not. Democrats aren't calling witnesses so who knows? Who knows how long their side will actually take. So, anyway, we're gonna take a break play some of these sound bites for you when we get back. Sit tight, and listen to hear the hum of conservative not bitter talk. I am your host Todd Huff back here in just a minute. Welcome back, my friends. By the way, this program is brought to you in part by our friends at ay ay ay ay ay. Ay ay ay ay insurance in Avon. And they, Rick and his team, friends of mine for some time, auto home business insurance needs. If you have a need for that, if you're looking for rates to call and talk with Rick or any member of his team, they're in the office AIA for the number four low rates.com is the website. Avon insurance associates AIA? Again, the website AIA for low rates.com. That's the number for AIA for low rates.com Be sure to tell them a Tod. Since you so want to get back to what we were talking about before the break, which was the impeachment hearing, which specifically has to deal with what we were talking about the video that the Trump legal team is putting together and they say that they're going to start playing some sound bites of Democrats calling, calling for violence themselves again, Trump is alleged to have incited a riot by using the word fight 20 times and a 10,000 10,000 words I think is what the number of words in his speech word 20 times use the word fight. In fact, his legal team, his legal team said, that's a handful of times of course, fact checkers at CNN. We're not sure what really constitutes a handful of times these jokers it's just too much for me. I can't I can't deal with CNN this morning for some reason, but they were trying to fact check what a handful of times would be. I guess it depends on the size of the hand. Right? Is it? How big is someone's hand? How big is the word? Fight Fight is a five letter word. I don't know how much space that takes up in a hand in an average hand. What size of font are we talking about? The words being in said hand CNN. Anyway. 20 times 10,000 words speech. And Trump's legal teams like Look man, you guys are engaging in this stuff. All the time. Right You guys are out there saying all sorts of ridiculous gibberish and nonsensical things. I'm reminded of maxine waters. Right maxine waters. Here's a series of sound bites put together by the Washington Examiner. Maxine Waters telling a crowd a raucous crowd will let you hear a part of this Maxine Waters calling for her constituents or anyone who will listen to her to confront in public. Anyone in Trump's cabinet. Don't let them eat in peace. Do you remember this nonsense. Here's a terrible your cabinet that have been booed out of restaurants. For seven, we're gonna win this battle. Because Jeff Sessions and others, you really don't know the Bible. God is on the other side of what's right on the side of what's on the side of understanding that if we can protect the children, we can protect anybody. Let's make sure we show up wherever we have to show up. And if you see anybody from that cabinet You can't get gas here. you form a mob. you form a mob at the gasoline station. Gasoline station. I don't know. I just call them gas stations. But anyway, gasoline station, you form a mob. You see him at a restaurant, you get a bunch of people together and you say you're not welcome here. Yeah. Right. This is this is the sort of stuff that I guess appeals to Maxine Waters crowd here. They're cheering this stuff on. Children got involved in this. I'm not sure what that even has to do with anything. God's on the side of the democrats because the democrats are on the side of children, I guess. I tell you what, they're not on the side of his liberty. I'll tell you what else they're not only talking about being on the side of children. Nah. I'll just say it. I'm thinking it. What about the issue of we mentioned abortion. Earlier I was telling the story, but what about that? What about that being on the side of children Maxine Waters, but anyway, she wants her crowd her raucous crowd who's chanting and cheering and clapping and carrying on? She wants them to form a mob. If they see anyone from the Trump administration walking around, get up in their faces. What about Cory Booker here, talk about get up in someone's face. Again, Washington Examiner has put together another six raise sound bites here, here. Here's another one. Cory Booker this time.
Before I end, that's my call to action here. Please don't just come here today and then go home. Go to the Hill today. Get up and please get up in the face of some Congress people.
Please get up in the face of some Congress people get up in their face piece of blue, of course piece of blue. Of course we didn't use the word fight, get up in their face. Get up in their face. This is just too much for me. What about this? Again, I'm not even necessarily I'm not even saying that this is you know, inciting a riot. I'm just simply saying how is using the word fight? Even to this level of nonsense. What about Eric Holder? Eric Holder here talking to a group of supporters, some Democrats. This is what he has to say.
It is time for us as Democrats to be as tough as they are. To be as dedicated as they are as committed as they are. Michelle always says my wife like really tight. Which scares me and says that, you know when they go low? They go low. We kick fight. I didn't even hear that. Wait a second. Do you hear them chanting fight in the background. You can listen carefully here. It's a little hard to hear in this soundbite. Let's see if we can listen to the chat and fight Listen to this. Fight. We're proud as hell to be Democrats. We're gonna fight for the Democratic Party. We're proud of our history. We're proud of our present and we're proud of the future that we can create for this country. And we're gonna win. Yeah, that's right. You're gonna have to fight and the kick Republicans. Fight, fight, fight, fight. Say the fans in the back. It's so ridiculous if I mean, how, what is the mind set of this? You're hearing a guy speak. Right. Michelle Obama says when we go low or when they go low, we go high. And the audience finishes the statement. Right? So they apparently read that resonates with them. Right? When they go Yes, when they go low, we go high. That is so profound. That is so inspirational. Three seconds later, he says let's kick him and they're clapping. Yeah. Whoa, they're clapping about all this stuff. They start chanting fight. Is this inciting a riot? Friends, this is ridiculous. This impeachment shenanigan that we're dealing with what President Trump engaged in the speech that he engaged in by using the word fight 20 times and 10,000 words or whatever such number cnn so the fact checkers have looked at this, right so we know that this has to be accurate. 20 times out of 10,000 words, nothing Trump said. Nothing Trump said even comes remotely close. All right, one more soundbite not gonna take a break. Guys may not like this. But hold on here. I think you don't think the beta tester President Trump came out here you you say that what he has done is absolutely disgraceful the country and call it for what it is, which is racism, about things like high costs of healthcare, high cost of higher education, what you're going to do on the southern border to help stop this, the situation is down there. I think those are the kind of issues that really hit home what how are you going to invest infrastructure and how you're going to pay for it? I think those are the issues that are really will move the folks who will get you elected and and i don't think even in states where Donald Trump one big that it does you any good running away from Donald Trump, I think you need to go back and then punch him in the face. This is this guy is bad for this country. punch him in the face. Trump is bad. Don't you know don't when it comes to campaigning. Don't be afraid to punch him in the face. punch him in the face kick them when they're down. When they go low. We kick them, says eric holder. Fight, fight. Fight says the crowd. Maxine Waters says you see somebody in the Trump administration out at dinner, you form a mob. That's right, you form a mob and you tell them you're not welcome here, because we're for the children. I tell you what, this it's comical if it wasn't so serious, this is so absurd and stupid. What we're subjected to Cory Booker says, Hey, before you guys leave Capitol or before you leave Washington, DC today, why don't you go down to Capitol Hill and get a business and some senator in Congress people's faces. that'll solve some problems. They'll they'll love that you talk about working across the aisle. You know, reaching a point of unity, nothing says unity like getting up in somebody's face. This is incredible what we've allowed to happen. This is not serious, what we're talking about with this impeachment trial. And this should be summarily rejected by the US Senate. Although it'll go on for a couple of days. Who knows? And we'll have to listen to some of this nonsense, but get ready for some of those sound bites to to be played here in the days to come. So quick timeout is an order long in the segment. My apologies, the eyes. Be back here in just a minute.
Welcome back, my friends. So I referenced this a little bit earlier in the program. This is an article that was at I think at the daily. Let me get this right here. The Daily Caller, the daily caller. So I asked us earlier, which social media platform she thought that people used most frequently to organize Capitol Hill protest. Right, right, the riot portion, the violent portion, the storming of the Capitol portion. And you know, we're told that it was its parlor parlor is the one that gets to go right parlor is the one that we've got to get rid of parlor is a bunch of conservatives going on there and looking for ways to overthrow the government, right? This is what we're supposed to believe. That's why that's why they were taken off of apple. That's why they were taken off the Google Play Store. So we're told, and that is why Amazon Amazon Web Services, shut them down. Maybe we shut down their website and they're still not I don't know if they're gonna come back or I don't I don't know. The CEO is no longer there. He's out there talking about some things. I don't want to get into any of that at this at this particular moment. But here's this this headline Daily Caller says this coordinated, deep platforming of parler under question, right. So the coordination between Apple, Google and Amazon to basically shut parler out of the social media universe not not to be able are preventing them from being able to create a place a social platform for you, for me, for other users to go and interact with members on parlour. It was shut down, coordinated D platforming here in the as it says in the article. It says that those that coordination to the platform parlor is now under question, as arrest numbers highlight Facebook's role and Capitol Hill Riot So Facebook has a role Now again, these this is what the data is showing sciences spoken here. Facebook writes, this article says was the social media network most used to organize the January 6, capital Riot and analysis of Department of Justice charging documents show the program on extremism at George Washington University has collected the indictments of 223 people who had been charged for participating in the January 6. Capital Riot which caused five deaths and temporarily delayed the certification of President Joe Biden's Electoral College victory. Facebook was used by 73 I said 223 that was the total number of indictments. Facebook was used by 73. So let me correct that right off the bat, I said to 23 I had the number of indictments confused with the number of people that used Facebook. So Facebook was used by 73 of the people charged with crimes more than all other social media sites combined. According to a Forbes analysis. More than all other combined alternative social media site parlor was banned from amp from using Amazon's online infrastructure. We talked about the website hosting service taking them down in the wake of the riot dude, due to its alleged connection to the violence but was only used Are you ready for this? It was used by eight people. It was only used by eight people. According to Forbes, both Apple and Google removed parler from their app stores. We hit on that as well. parler did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the daily caller. Facebook Chief Operating Officer. Sheryl Sandberg had previously assigned culpability for the riot to parlor and gab, another smaller platform, again, a platform where free speech reigns where conservatives are not silence parlor and gab. She said this according to a Washington Post story on January 11. I think these events were largely organized on platforms that don't have our abilities to stop hate. Stop hate. Facebook has the ability folks to stop hate. According to Sheryl Sandberg. She can stop it. Oh my gosh, the stupidity. The I don't even know what to say to this. Anyway, she says that these smaller companies don't have the ability to smaller social media platforms don't have the ability to stop hate and don't have our standards. And they don't have our transparency. Oh, my goodness, yes. The standards and the ability to stop hate that Facebook has and their transparency. Does that align with what your experience with Facebook is? allegedly? gotta throw that in there just to be just to be safe. But does this sound like? Does this sound like your experience? Maybe it is? Look, I'm not saying Facebook responsible? I'm simply saying how do you compare eight parlor? individuals using parlor was 73 on Facebook? And how does she get to go out? She being the Sheryl Sandberg the Facebook coo? How does she get to go out there and blame? blame other platforms when Facebook has more people that have used it to coordinate and these rights than all of the others combined? Are they going to sue Forbes for reporting this? I'm just sharing what's reported. They're gonna sue Forbes for reporting this. That doesn't seem very transparent to me. Why didn't they know? It's not reasonable for them to know it's one thing if there's an account that's incessantly being used to stir up hate to recruit people for say ISIS or some terror organization, it's something altogether different to think that Facebook, who apparently has the ability to stop hate remarkable. Facebook says we're going to know what every single person posts at all time and have the ability to stop it. I mean, I know that that's, you know, maybe the direction that we're going but to think that they can uniform like prevent anything negative on their platform, which What does that even mean to begin with? As a Trump post negative? I think that they would say yes, anyway, timeout is in order. The Facebook here appears to be the platform that more people use to coordinate violence, then all other platforms combined. So anyway, want to share that timeout is an order back here in just a minute.
Welcome back, by the way, this program Brought to you in part by interior construction services here in the Indianapolis area, folks, if you're looking to have some construction, some work done in your home, some remodeling, consider our friends at Interior construction. They have over 75 years combined construction experience in the Indianapolis area interior construction, again, website interior construct.com interior, construct comm or call them directly 317-991-4663 1-791-991-4660. So lots of stuff. Of course, we've been talking about all these things pertaining to impeachment when we're talking about the platform's use for apparently organizing the riot, which, again is facebook, facebook thinks they can stop hate. Facebook thinks, according to Sheryl Sandberg that they can stop hate how exactly do you do that? How exactly do you stop? hate you see, the only way I know to stop hate. The only way I know to stop hate is not to you know, you can't just talk it out to somebody, you can't simply give them a book to read, you can't tell them to go on to Facebook and you know, look around at the things that are posted there because apparently hate free zone, which is laughable, totally laughable, based upon just some of the comments that we get from here on this program from sometimes. But the only way that I know to to really stop hate is to replace it is to replace it with love. And the only way I know to do that the only way I know to do that is to be changed from the inside. And I firmly believe the only way to do that is to rely upon the power of the one who created us to come in and to change us from the inside out that being he being Jesus. And and look, I don't want to get too preachy here at the end of this program. But Facebook, the idea that Facebook is going to stop hate is so utterly laughable to me, folks, look, we're conservative, not bitter. I can't stop. I can't stop someone else from hating. I can't. But God can God can stop the individual from hating. That's what we need in this country a widespread return to God, the Bible and his principles to Jesus. And I've yet to take a break. You're listening here to the home of conservative, not bitter talk. I am your host, Todd Huff back here in just a minute.
I just can't get over this idea that Facebook thinks that it can stop hate. It can stop hate. How can add how it's preposterous to think that it really is even more preposterous to say that, but nonetheless, this is this is the world that we exist in. Again, as I said last segment, I'll say it again. There's one way I know to stop. To stop hating this isn't to say that Christians don't have hate as well. I'm just saying the idea that some company can change hate is preposterous, but the only way I know is to invite the god of this universe to live inside your heart and give him free rein so that he can get that stuff out of there. But folks, I've got to go Thanks for listening. sddc tomorrow, take care