Double Header – Congressmen Trey Gowdy and Jim Jordan question Rod Rosenstein

Double Header – Congressmen Trey Gowdy and Jim Jordan question Rod Rosenstein

No doubt it is time to remove the biased special counsel Mueller

Gowdy and Jordan question Rosenstein


there are a lot of issues that I would


like to ask you about mr. Deputy


Attorney General we had a terrorist


incident in New York this week we have


702 reauthorization that is pending in


Congress gun violence the opioid


epidemic criminal justice reform but


when I go home to South Carolina this


weekend trust me when I tell you no one


is going to ask me about any of those


issues they’re gonna ask me what in the


hell is going on with the Department of


Justice and the FBI the reason we have


special counsel this is a very important


point the written you know it the reason


we have special counsel is because of a


conflict of interest the regulation


itself specifically makes reference to a


conflict of interest and and we don’t


like conflicts of interest because it


undercuts people’s confidence and both


the process and the result so so let’s


be really clear why we have special


counsel there was either a real or


perceived conflict of interest that we


were fearful would either impact the


result or people’s confidence in the


process that’s why we have something


called special counsel and that’s why we


have special counsel in this fact


pattern and then lo and behold those who


are supposed to make sure there are no


conflicts of interest seem to have a few


of their own there’s a senior prosecutor


who said obsequious emails to a fact


witness I she can be described as


nothing other than a fact witness she’s


a really important fact witness if you


pursue the line of inquiry that my


Democrat friends want to pursue they got


off of collusion and now their own


obstruction of justice she may be the


most important fact witness in an


obstruction of justice case and the


senior prosecutor for this conflict of


interest free special counsel sent a


fawning obsequious email to a fact


witness and then we have prosecutors


assigned to conduct this investigation


who donated almost exclusively to one


candidate over another and then we have


a prosecutor assigned to this calm


flicked of interest free team that


attended what was supposed to be what


he’d hoped to be a victory party for


Secretary Clinton and we have a senior


DOJ official mr. Deputy Attorney General


with an office it used to be two doors


now from yours meeting with fusion GPS


and fusion GPS of course was paying for


rush and dirt on the very person that


they’re supposed to be objectively


investigating and then that same senior


DOJ officials wife the one that met with


fusion GPS his wife was on the payroll


of fusion GPS and then we have a senior


agent assigned to investigate secretary


Clinton’s email helped draft the


exoneration letter well we changed the


language from grossly negligent to


extremely careless interviewed Secretary


Clinton in an interview I’ve never seen


and I doubt you have either in your


career as a prosecutor interviewed


Michael Flynn was actively involved in


the investigation into the trunk


campaign before the Inspector General


found his text so this agent in the


middle of almost everything related to


Secretary Clinton in President Trump


sent pro Clinton tax anti-trump texts to


his paramour in response to being told


maybe he is where he is to protect the


country from that menace Donald Trump he


said I can protect our country at many


levels and then he said Hillary Clinton


should win 100 million to nothing I


think about that mr. Deputy Attorney


General that’s a pretty overwhelming


victory 100 million to zero and when I


read that last night what I thought was


this conflict of interest free senior


agent and the FBI can’t think of a


single solitary American who would vote


for Donald Trump that’s where the zero


comes in not a single solitary American


he can imagine would vote for Donald


Trump this is the conflict of interest


free special agent aside and then he


went on if that


enough to belittle Trump supporters by


saying he could smell them at a Walmart


in Virginia this is the person we needed


to avoid a conflict of interest and then


he said this they fully deserve to go


and demonstrate the absolute bigoted


nonsense of trunk but he wasn’t content


to just disparage Donald Trump he had to


disparage Donald Trump’s family this is


what he said mr. Deputy Attorney General


he said the douche bags are about to


come out he’s talking about our First


Lady and children this conflict of


interest free special agent of the FBI


this is who we were told we needed to


have an objective impartial fair


conflict of interest free investigation


so he’s openly pulling for the candidate


he had a role in clearing and he’s


openly investigating a candidate that he


has bias against and then if that’s not


enough he says Trump is an effing idiot


what the f just happened to our country


this is the same man that said he would


save our country what happens when


people who are supposed to cure the


conflict of interests have even greater


conflicts of interest than those they


replace well that’s not a rhetorical


question you nor I nor anyone else


whatever sit Peter struck on a jury we


wouldn’t have him objectively


dispassionately investigate anything


knowing what we know now why didn’t we


know what ahead of time and my last


question my final question to you and I


appreciate the Chairman’s patience how


would you help me answer that question


when I go back to South Carolina this




congressman first of all with regard to


the special counsel mr. struck was


already working on the investigation


when the special counsel was appointed


the appointment I made was to Robert


Mullins what I recommend that you tell


your constituents is that Robert Muller


and rod Rosen Stein and Chris Rea are


accountable and that we will ensure that


no bias is


selected in any of the actions taken by


the special counsel or in any matter


within the jurisdiction the Department


of Justice when we have evidence of any


inappropriate conduct we’re going to


take action on it and that’s what mr.


Muller did here as soon as he learned


about this issue he took action and


that’s what I anticipate that the rest


of our prosecutors are a new group of US


attorneys our Justice Department and


poor entities they understand the rules


and they understand the responsibility


to defend the integrity of the


department if they find evidence of


improper conduct they’re going to take


action so congressman that’s the best


assurance I can give you but actually


there’s one other point which is you


should tell your constituents that we


expose this issue because we’re ensuring


that the Inspector General conducts a


thorough and effective investigation and


if there is any evidence of impropriety


he’s going to surface it and report


about it publicly I’ll try


Give Old Guard Audio a Listen, you will be glad you did!

President Trump Gives Remarks at the Opening of the Mississippi Civil Rights Museum

President Trump Gives Remarks at the Opening of the Mississippi Civil Rights Museum

Some protested by not attending, but President Trump was fantastic! Thank you, President Trump.

President Trump Gives Remarks at the Opening of the Mississippi Civil Rights Museum


00 – 00

thank you very much thank you and I do

00 – 03

love Mississippi it’s a great place and

00 – 06

thank you

00 – 08

governor Bryant for that kind

00 – 10

introduction and for honoring me with

00 – 12

this invitation to be with you today I

00 – 16

also want to recognize Secretary ben

00 – 18

Carson and his wonderful wife kandi for

00 – 22

joining us thank you

00 – 23

Thank You Ben Thank You kandi I

00 – 26

especially want to thank you justice

00 – 30

Ruben Anderson great man with a great

00 – 33

reputation even outside of the state of

00 – 37

Mississippi I have to tell you that so

00 – 40

thank you thank you very much and you

00 – 44

are an inspiration to us all thank you

00 – 46

judge and we’re here today to celebrate

00 – 48

the opening of two really extraordinary

00 – 53

museums and I just took a tour the

00 – 57

Mississippi State history museum and the

01 – 00

Mississippi Civil Rights Museum to all

01 – 04

who helped make these wonderful places

01 – 06

possible we are truly grateful we thank

01 – 09

you we admire you it was hard work it

01 – 13

was long hours sell a lot of money and I

01 – 16

know the governor helped with that you

01 – 18

know that was a great thing you’ve done

01 – 19

that’s a great legacy fill right there

01 – 22

just that in itself but it really is a

01 – 25

beautiful beautiful place and it’s an

01 – 28

honor these museums are labors of love

01 – 31

love for Mississippi love for your

01 – 34

nation love for god-given dignity

01 – 37

written into every human soul these

01 – 41

buildings embody the hope that has lived

01 – 45

in the hearts of every American for

01 – 48

generations the hope in a future that is

01 – 51

more just and more free the civil rights

01 – 56

museum records the oppression cruelty

01 – 58

and injustice inflicted on the African

02 – 01

American community the fight to end

02 – 04

slavery to break down Jim Crow to end

02 – 08

segregation to gain

02 – 11

the right to vote and to achieve the

02 – 14

sacred birthright of equality here

02 – 18


02 – 22

that’s big stuff that’s big stuff those

02 – 26

are very big phrases very big words here

02 – 30

we memorialize the brave men and women

02 – 33

who struggle to sacrifice and sacrifice

02 – 37

so much so that others might live in

02 – 40

freedom among those we honor are the

02 – 44

Christian pastors who started the civil

02 – 47

rights movement in their own churches

02 – 49

preaching like Reverend Martin Luther

02 – 51

King jr. man that would have studied and

02 – 56

watched and admired from my entire life

03 – 00

that we’re all made in the image of our

03 – 04

Lord students like james Meredith who

03 – 09

were persecuted for standing up for

03 – 12

their right to the same education as

03 – 15

every other American student young

03 – 19

people like the nine brave students who

03 – 22

quietly said and they said very

03 – 27

stoically but very proudly at the

03 – 31

Jackson Public Library in 1961 and by

03 – 37

the way I would add the word very

03 – 39

bravely they said very bravely

03 – 41

and finally martyrs like Sargent Medgar

03 – 45

Wylie Evers

03 – 52

whose brother I just met at the plane

03 – 55

and who I liked a lot I have to stand up

03 – 58

please come on stand up you were so nice

04 – 01

I appreciate it

04 – 02

you were so nice thank you very much

04 – 05

medgar joined the US Army in 1943 when

04 – 09

he was 17 years old he fought in

04 – 12

Normandy in the Second World War and

04 – 14

when he came back home to Mississippi he

04 – 18

kept fighting for the same rights and

04 – 20

freedom that he had defended in the war

04 – 24

  1. Evers became a civil rights leader

04 – 28

in his community he helped fellow

04 – 31

African Americans register to vote

04 – 34

organized boycotts and investigated

04 – 37

grave and justices against very innocent

04 – 41

people for his courageous leadership in

04 – 44

the civil rights movement mr. Evers was

04 – 48

assassinated by a member of the KKK in

04 – 52

the driveway of his own home we are

04 – 57

deeply privileged to be joined today by

05 – 01

his incredible would have somebody

05 – 04

that’s loved throughout large sections

05 – 08

of our country beyond this area so I

05 – 13

just want to say hello to him early

05 – 15

Murli well how was your morning thank

05 – 21

you so much

05 – 23

highly respected thank you

05 – 29


05 – 35

Thank You Murli and his brothers Charles

05 – 39

Thank You Charles again for decades they

05 – 42

have carried on medgar’s real legacy and

05 – 46

a legacy like few people have and few

05 – 49

people can even think and I want to

05 – 52

thank them for their tremendous service

05 – 54

to our nation less than a month before

05 – 57

  1. Evers death he delivered a historic

06 – 00

televised address to the people of

06 – 03

Jackson on the issue of civil rights in

06 – 06

that speech he said the following the

06 – 09

African American has been here in

06 – 11

America since 1619 this country is his

06 – 18

home he wants to do his part to help

06 – 20

make this city state and nation a better

06 – 24

place for everyone regardless of color

06 – 27

or race Medgar Evers loved his family

06 – 32

his community in his country and he knew

06 – 36

it was long past time for his nation to

06 – 39

fulfill its founding promise to treat

06 – 43

every citizen as an equal child of God

06 – 53

four days after he was murdered sergeant

06 – 58

Evers was laid to rest in Arlington

07 – 00

National Cemetery with full military

07 – 04

honors in Arlington he lies besides men

07 – 09

and women of all races backgrounds and

07 – 11

walks of life who have served and

07 – 14

sacrificed for our country their

07 – 18

headstones do not mark the color of

07 – 20

their skin but immortalize the courage

07 – 24

of their deeds their memories are carved

07 – 28

in stone as American heroes

07 – 31

that is what Medgar Evers was he was a

07 – 34

great American hero

07 – 36

that is what others honored in this

07 – 39

museum were true American heroes today

07 – 44

we strive to be worthy of their

07 – 46

sacrifice we pray for inspiration from

07 – 49

their example we want our country to be

07 – 51

a place where every child from every

07 – 55

background can grow up free from fear

07 – 57

innocent of hatred and surrounded by

08 – 01

love opportunity and hope today we pay

08 – 06

solemn tribute to our heroes of the past

08 – 09

and dedicate ourselves to building a

08 – 12

future of freedom equality justice and

08 – 18

peace and I want to congratulate your

08 – 21

great governor and all of the people in

08 – 24

this room who were so inspirational to

08 – 28

so many others to get out and get this

08 – 31

done this is an incredible tribute not

08 – 35

only to the state of Mississippi a state

08 – 39

that I love a state where I’ve had great

08 – 42

success this is a tribute to our nation

08 – 46

at the highest level this is a great

08 – 49

thing you’ve done and I want to

08 – 51

congratulate you and just say god bless

08 – 55

you and God bless america thank you very

08 – 58

much thank you thank you all very much

09 – 02


09 – 04



Give Old Guard Audio a Listen, you will be glad you did!

What Happens When Google Disagrees With You?

What Happens When Google Disagrees With You?

Is Google open to a diverse array of viewpoints? Or is it an ideological echo chamber?

Just ask former Google software engineer James Damore. He was fired for disagreeing with Google’s (left-wing) orthodoxy.

In this video, James shares his story.

Google/YouTube continues to restrict over 30 PragerU videos and deem them “inappropriate for young audiences”. Or is it an ideological echo chamber? Just ask former Google software engineer James Damore. He was fired for disagreeing with Google’s (left-wing) orthodoxy. In this video, James shares his story


I used to be a senior software engineer at Google. Until they fired me.

For doing something unforgivable…

Something so controversial that it was the number one news story for days.

My crime: I wrote an internal document that, among other things, suggested that men and women, on average, are different.

Like I told you: Unforgivable.

The politically progressive viewpoint, which is dominant at Google and in the media, is that all disparities in society are due to injustices. Or, in this case, that the gender gap in tech is solely due to some form of sexism.

But is this true?

The politically correct answer is: yes. And Google acts accordingly. It treats men and women differently during hiring and promotion, holds official women-only events, and gives mandatory sensitivity training on how to combat alleged sexist bias.

Of course, all of this makes sense if sexism is indeed the sole cause of the imbalance.

But what if men and women are not exactly the same?

Then, sexism is just one of many possible causes of the imbalance, and exclusionary programs and differential treatment can be a counterproductive form of sexism. These practices actually increase tensions and make some feel like Google cares more about their gender than their programming ability.

As an engineer, when I’m faced with a problem, I want to solve it. So, I decided to research the premise: that men and women are exactly the same.

I wrote my findings in a 10-page document titled, “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.” You can read it online.

What did I discover? That not all of the male-female disparity in tech may be the result of sexism.That at least some of it may be attributed to men and women having different goals for their careers and their lives.

To cite just two examples:

In the study, “Women, Careers, and Work-Life Preferences,” published in the British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, the study’s authors conclude that women across populations tend to look for more work-life balance, while men tend to have a higher drive for status.

And according to a study by Cal State Fullerton psychologist Richard Lippa, men, on average, tend to be more interested in things, while women tend to be more interested in people.

These findings have been replicated many times. They’ve actually been cited by other researchers as a cause for the gender gap in tech.

In other words, I didn’t make this stuff up.

In fact, after my document came under attack, evolutionary psychologist Geoffrey Miller said its “empirical claims are scientifically accurate.”

But Google disagreed. Like?really disagreed.

First, the company’s newly appointed VP of Diversity, Integrity, and Governance, Danielle Brown, posted a memo that said my report “advanced incorrect assumptions about gender.”

Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, sent a memo to all employees saying that I “cross[ed] the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes.” This was, he added, “not O.K.” 

Then, he fired me.

By that point, much to my shock, my document had gone viral. News outlets were branding it an “anti-diversity manifesto.”

But if they had read what I wrote, they could see for themselves that it was pro-diversity. I had suggested multiple ways that we could get more women into tech without resorting to counterproductive discrimination.

Ironic, isn’t it? The company that hires some of the smartest people in the world couldn’t handle a well-reasoned, scientific discussion.

But my firing pales in comparison to a larger issue: Will Google force upon its users the same politically correct views that it forces upon its employees?

The evidence is disturbing. Google already manipulates its products to fit a certain viewpoint.

Just one example: YouTube, Google’s video platform, restricts access to dozens of PragerU videos, along with videos made by other influential moderates and conservatives.

Yes?Google is a business and can set its own policies. But for its billions of users, Google is their main gateway to information, the lens through which they view the world.

This makes Google, in some ways, more powerful than even the government.

And that means Google has a special responsibility to, well?simply follow its own motto: “Don’t be evil.”

I’m James Damore for Prager University.

Give Old Guard Audio a Listen, you will be glad you did!

How can the States Fix the Federal Government

How can the States Fix the Federal Government

A Convention of States and Article V of the Constitution.


Washington is gigantic, corrupt, and unaccountable. Can it be fixed? Learn more about the Convention of States and Article V of the Constitution. Jim DeMint, former Senator from South Carolina, explains.

The federal government has become a lumbering giant. With each passing year, it gets bigger and scarier. In 1965, Washington was 761 billion dollars big. In 2016… it was 3.5 trillion ? five times the size.

If the government spent only the money it collected in taxes, that would be one thing. But it always spends more­­?which is why we’re $20 trillion dollars in debt. That’s 13 zeroes. Count ’em: Thirteen.

But the crazy spending isn’t even the worst of it. Washington is involved in every part of our lives.

Think about anything you do, from driving your car to buying your groceries to mowing your lawn. Whatever it is?your education, your job, your health? the government has its hands on your shoulder, if not on your throat.

As a congressman and senator for 14 years, I know this only too well.

So, how do we cut this giant down to size? Is it even possible?

Yes. And the amazing thing is, the answer is right in front of us.

The Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, foresaw the situation we find ourselves in today. They wrote into the Constitution a way to repair Washington…not from the inside, because that will never happen but from the outside, where it might. It’s right there in Article 5. Most people are familiar with the first part: “The Congress, whenever two-thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution…”

All 27 Amendments we have now started this way. Congress proposed them and at least three-quarters of the states ratified them.

But is this the only way to amend the Constitution?

Well, let’s read the next clause: It says that Congress, “?on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments…”

Did you catch that?

Congress must call a convention to amend the Constitution if two-thirds of the states?that’s 34 states?demand it.

The time has come to demand it.

The time has come to propose amendments that will restore meaningful limits on federal power and authority.

The time has come for a convention of states.

Here’s how it would work: Once the 34 states call a convention, all 50 states send a delegate to represent their interests. For any constitutional amendments proposed, each state gets one vote. And an amendment only passes out of the convention and to the states for ratification if a majority of the states’ delegates vote in the affirmative. In this scenario, Congress has no say. It is completely in the hands of the states, which means it’s a whole lot closer to the hands of the people.

We’ve never once amended the Constitution this way?but that doesn’t mean we can’t.

But, you might ask, doesn’t this open the door to rewriting the entire Constitution?

Antonin Scalia, the late Supreme Court justice, acknowledged this risk but regarded it as a “minimal” and “reasonable” one. Why? Because to be ratified, a proposed amendment would need the approval of 38 states. That’s a high bar. Thirty-eight states would never agree to something radical like abolishing freedom of speech. “The Founders,” Scalia said, “knew the Congress would be unwilling to give attention to many issues the people are concerned with, particularly those involving restrictions on the federal government’s own power… [so] they provided the convention [of states] as a remedy.”

This should not be a partisan, left/right, Democrat/Republican issue. This should be a “who controls your life” issue: you or the government?

Today, politicians can turn your life upside down on a whim, kind of like King George in 1775. Being at the mercy of distant, disconnected rulers was why the American Revolution was fought in the first place!

But we don’t need a revolution. We have Article Five.

So, what amendments might a Convention of States propose to limit Washington’s power?

Term limits, for one.

No one should be in Congress for 20 or 30 years. The only people who disagree have been in Congress for 20 or 30 years.

And how about a limit on taxes, spending, and borrowing? Since you began this video, the national debt has gone up $8.4 million dollars.

Here’s one more idea: A constitutional amendment that Congress can’t exempt itself from the laws it passes?something it’s done dozens of times, from insider trading to Obamacare.

Now, I don’t believe a Convention of States will solve all of America’s problems. But the Founders put it in the Constitution for a reason. They knew a time would come when Washington would become so big, and so intrusive, that only we the people could cut it down to size.

That time is now.

I’m Jim DeMint for Prager University.

Give Old Guard Audio a Listen, you will be glad you did!

The Southern Poverty Law Center ☠ A Hate Group ☠

The Southern Poverty Law Center ? A Hate Group ?

The “Anti-Hate” Group That Is a Hate Group

SPLC a Hate Group at

Shutting down people you don’t agree with is about as un-American as you can get.

Rigorous debate, honest discussion, open exchange of ideas?that’s the American way.

But free thinking and speech are threatened today by a group with a sweet-sounding name that conceals a nefarious purpose. This group is called the Southern Poverty Law Center, or SPLC.

Originally founded as a civil-rights law firm in 1971, the SPLC reinvented itself in the mid-’80s as a political attack group. Every year now it produces a new list of people and charities it claims are “extremists” and “haters.”

Aided by glowing coverage from the establishment media, the SPLC’s hate list has become a weapon for taking individuals and groups they disagree with and tarring them with ugly associations.

The SPLC employs a two-pronged strategy:

First,  find a handful of crazies with barely any followers, no address, and no staff, and blow them up into a dangerous movement? proof that there are neo-Nazis lurking everywhere. On their notorious “Hate Map,” the SPLC lists 917 separate hate groups in the U.S.! No one has even heard of more than a handful of them.

The second strategy of the SPLC is to undermine legitimate political voices that they oppose by associating them with extremists like the KKK.

Take the charity known as the Alliance Defending Freedom. The SPLC lists them as a “hate group.” Is that fair? Well, the ADF has a network of 3,000 attorneys from all across the U.S. who’ve donated more than a million volunteer hours in defense of religious liberty. They’ve had a role in 49 victories at the U.S. Supreme Court. Putting the Alliance Defending Freedom on a list with 130 Ku Klux Klan chapters is not only wrong, it’s malicious.

According to the SPLC, one of the most influential social scientists in the U.S.? Charles Murray?is a, quote, “white nationalist.” Ayaan Hirsi Ali, perhaps the most eloquent spokesperson for the rights of Muslim women, is, to the SPLC, a “toxic… anti-Muslim extremist.”

Scores of other individuals and charities active in mainstream conservative or religious causes have likewise been branded by the Southern Poverty Law Center as threats to society.

Mind you, it is entirely fair to disagree with any of those folks. But it is utterly unfair to call them haters or extremists. The largest category listed by the SPLC as extremists?with 623 entries?covers groups like the Tea Party organizations that are wary of centralized government. Last time we checked, favoring smaller government was a mainstream and perfectly honorable American tradition.

What is not honorable is the course prescribed by a leader of the SPLC, Mark Potok, who was caught on video proclaiming the organization’s true intentions. He told a group of supporters, quote, “the press will describe us as ‘monitoring hate groups’?. I want to say plainly that our aim in life is to destroy these groups, to completely destroy them.”

Portraying someone with political views different from your own as a public menace is bullying.

And it’s a dangerous game. Instead of reducing hate and violence, the SPLC’s name-calling directly incites it.

In March 2017, Charles Murray was trying to discuss his acclaimed book Coming Apart at Middlebury College when he was violently attacked by protesters inflamed by the SPLC’s labeling of him as a racist. A professor escorting Murray ended up in the hospital.

In 2012, a gunman attempted mass murder at the Family Research Council, and failed only because the first man he shot managed to disarm him. The attacker told the police he acted because the SPLC had listed the Family Research Council as a hate group.

It’s a vicious irony: while promoting itself as a monitor of “hate groups,” the SPLC has, in practice, become a fomenter of hate.

Yet the group rolls on, bigger than ever. What keeps them going?

For one thing, the establishment media constantly quote them.

Scare stories about right-wing storm-troopers are a sure way to attract eyeballs, and fit nicely with the media’s own preconceptions of the “dangerous reactionaries” lurking out there in middle America.

Second, alarmism is a great fundraising technique. Convincing people there are fascists everywhere has turned the SPLC into a cash machine. Last year, the group hustled $50 million dollars out of frightened liberal donors, adding to the $368 million dollars of assets they were already sitting on.

So, the next time you see the Southern Poverty Law Center quoted in the news, just remember: the masterminds behind the SPLC aren’t eliminating hate. They are fueling it.

I’m Karl Zinsmeister for Prager University.

Give Old Guard Audio a Listen, you will be glad you did!