White House Rewrites Press Rules to Purge Conservative Media

Luis Cornelio
-
0
White House Rewrites Press Rules to Purge Conservative Media

(Luis Cornelio, Headline USA) The Biden White House has unleashed a new policy regarding reporters and hard passes, effectively leading to the ousting of prominent reporters who constantly push back against government talking points. 

Citing adherence to professional conduct, the White House warned that it is observing restrictions “on access to areas of the White House or credentialed event” and is now demanding that all reporters renew their passes. 

Several outlets, however, have warned that the process to reapply for the press pass could be denied or delayed extensively. Among the reporters affected by the revised policy is Fred Lucas, a renowned journalist with the Daily Signal, the news division of the conservative think tank the Heritage Foundation. 

The Signal reported that the White House is demanding that reporters seek “accreditation by a press gallery in either the U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, or Supreme Court.” The outlet warned, however, that it does not have a press credential to cover either the Congress or Supreme Court and it is unclear whether Lucas will be approved. 

Lucas decried the White House’s draconian policy update in statements to the Washington Examiner. “I have covered the Obama and the Trump administrations and have not seen a press purge like this, and it should be concerning to anyone when an administration attempts to select who can and can’t cover it,” Lucas said. 

Lucas, who has had a press pass since 2019, slammed the lack of transparency by the Biden White House. “Under the new policy, there is zero transparency from the White House as to how many journalists are losing their hard passes,” Lucas added. “Moreover, the administration has never articulated a justification for purging media they deem non-compliant.” 

According to the Washington Examiner, Simon Ateba, the White House correspondent for Today News Africa, is also facing potential expulsion from the White House. Ateba is most notably known for his constant clashes with White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on multiple occasions. Ateba has accused the White House of sabotaging him by refusing to take his questions. 

During the Trump era, some journalists sued the White House after being ousted, leading to court rulings that ultimately granted them their press passes back. 

It is unclear whether the Heritage Foundation or Today News Africa will sue the Biden administration over their new apparent crackdown of outlets that push back against them. Ateba voiced his intent to sue the Washington Post over a partisan media hit against him. 

“I will take the Washington Post to court if they fail to retract their character assassination against me,” Ateba told Fox News in reference to a July 8 article headlined, “Simon Ateba, the reporting making himself the story at the White House.”

AOC Shrugs off Anti-Semitic Vote on Resolution: ‘Oooh, a List!’

Corine Gatti
-
0
AOC Shrugs off Anti-Semitic Vote on Resolution: ‘Oooh, a List!’

(Corine Gatti, Headline USA) “Squad” leader Rep. Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez, D-N.Y., scoffed at Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley for including her name on a list with other anti-Semitic lawmakers following a bipartisan resolution Tuesday in support of Israel.  

“Oooh, a list!” Ocasio-Cortez sarcastically responded after she joined eight other House Democrats who opposed the symbolic measure, an indirect rebuke of Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., who accused Israel of being “racist” toward Palestinians.

“Remember to call it ‘People in Congress who think apartheid is wrong’ or alternatively, ‘People in Congress who don’t ignore human rights abuses against Palestinians,'” Ocasio–Cortez added.

At least one of those lawmakers, fellow Squad-member Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., also announced that she was boycotting a joint address to Congress by Israeli President Isaac Herzog on Wednesday.

Jayapal, Ocasio–Cortez, Tlaib and others—including Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., whose radical, anti-Semitic views contributed to her removal earlier this year from the House Foreign Affairs Committee —have frequently denied or pleaded ignorance when confronted with allegations of their own bigotry.

However, their support for the Palestinian terror-state speaks for itself.

In 2021, AOC evidently joined in a threat to kill a bill to avoid a government shutdown unless then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., killed $1 billion in funding for the Iron Dome, Israel’s U.S.-backed defense against rocket attacks.

Moreover, after the terror group Hamas launched 4,000 rockets at Israeli civilians, the congresswoman apparently suggested that Israel’s response was unnecessary and disproportionate, conveniently forgetting that terrorist groups like Hamas hide among civilians.

“Hamas aims its rockets at civilians and rejoices at every Israeli casualty,” the website Forward reported. “It sends booby-trapped party balloons across the border into Israeli towns in an effort to kill Jewish children.”

In 2021, Omar compared Israel to terrorist organizations like Hamas and the Taliban during a Foreign Affairs Committee hearing and decried America’s Middle Eastern ally as an “apartheid state.”

Omar claimed in 2012 that “Israel has hypnotized the world,” and added, “may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.”

And in May, Tlaib assisted in the planning of an anti-Semitic event to mourn the founding of Israel, with information about the gathering at the U.S. Capitol using the word Nakba, which is Arabic for “catastrophe” to describe the 1948 settlement of the Jewish state in the aftermath of the Holocaust.

‘Sanctuary’ NYC Mayor Tells Illegals to ‘Consider Another City’

Dmytro "Henry" Aleksandrov
-
0
‘Sanctuary’ NYC Mayor Tells Illegals to ‘Consider Another City’

(Dmytro “Henry” Aleksandrov, Headline USA) Despite its status as a sanctuary city for illegal immigrants, New York City will distribute flyers at the U.S.-Mexico border telling illegals to “consider another city.”

The flyers would seek to “combat misinformation at the border” and that the city would help illegals to find other housing and “take the next step in their journey,” the office of the city’s Democratic Mayor Eric Adams said in its Wednesday announcement, as reported by the Washington Free Beacon.

The new flyer that is going to be circulated at the southern border by the city highlighted the high cost of housing, food and other necessities that illegals will encounter if they travel to the U.S. financial center.

Chauvin Will Ask SCOTUS to Review Murder Conviction in George Floyd Killing

Editor 1
-
0
Chauvin Will Ask SCOTUS to Review Murder Conviction in George Floyd Killing

(Headline USA) Former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review his conviction for second-degree murder in the killing of George Floyd, now that the Minnesota Supreme Court has declined to hear the case, his attorney said Wednesday.

Chauvin faces long odds at the U.S. Supreme Court, which hears only about 100 to 150 appeals of the more than 7,000 cases it is asked to review every year.

The state’s highest court without comment denied Chauvin’s petition in a one-page order dated Tuesday, letting Chauvin’s conviction and 22½-year sentence stand.

Chauvin’s attorney, William Morhman, told the Associated Press that they were “obviously disappointed” in the decision. He said the most significant issue on which they appealed was whether holding the proceedings in Minneapolis in 2021 deprived Chauvin of his right to a fair trial due to pretrial publicity and concerns for violence in the event of an acquittal. He said they will now raise that issue with the U.S. Supreme Court.

“This criminal trial generated the most amount of pretrial publicity in history,” Morhman said.

“More concerning are the riots which occurred after George Floyd’s death [and] led the jurors to all express concerns for their safety in the event they acquitted Mr. Chauvin—safety concerns which were fully evidenced by surrounding the courthouse in barbed wire and National Guard troops during the trial and deploying the National Guard throughout Minneapolis prior to jury deliberations,” he added

Morhman asked the Minnesota Supreme Court in May to hear the case after the Minnesota Court of Appeals in April rejected his arguments that he had been denied a fair trial.

The Minnesota attorney general’s office, in a response last month, asked the Supreme Court to let that ruling stand instead.

“Petitioner received a fair trial, and received the benefit of a fulsome appellate review,” prosecutors wrote at the time. “It is time to bring this case to a close.”

Far-left Attorney General Keith Ellison said in a statement that the state Supreme Court’s denial of review “means that the Court of Appeals was correct in finding that his trial was properly conducted and he was properly convicted under law. This development definitively holds Chauvin accountable and closes this chapter of the murder of George Floyd.”

Morhman asked the Court of Appeals and the Minnesota Supreme Court to throw out the ex-officer’s conviction for a long list of reasons, including the decision by Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill not to move the trial out of Minneapolis despite the massive pretrial publicity, and the potential prejudicial effects of unprecedented courthouse security.

After his conviction on the state charge, Chauvin pleaded guilty to a separate federal civil rights charge and was sentenced to 21 years in federal prison, which he is serving in Arizona concurrent with his state sentence.

Three other former officers who assisted Chauvin are serving shorter state and-or federal sentences for their roles in the case.

Only Tou Thao, who held back the concerned crowd, still faces sentencing in state court. That’s scheduled for Aug. 7. Thao rejected a plea agreement and, instead of going to trial, let Cahill decide the case based on written filings by each side and evidence presented in previous trials.

Cahill convicted Thao in May of aiding and abetting manslaughter. Minnesota guidelines recommend four years on the manslaughter count, which Thao would serve concurrently with his 3½-year federal sentence.

Floyd, who was black, died on May 25, 2020, after Chauvin, who is white, pressed a knee on his neck for 9½ minutes on the street outside a convenience store where Floyd tried to pass a counterfeit $20 bill. A bystander video captured Floyd’s fading cries of “I can’t breathe.” Floyd’s death touched off protests worldwide, some of which turned violent.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

Federal Judge: Injunction Blocking Fla. Anti-Grooming Law Applies to All Venues

Editor 1
-
0
Federal Judge: Injunction Blocking Fla. Anti-Grooming Law Applies to All Venues

(Headline USA) A federal judge said Wednesday that his order blocking a Florida law targeting drag shows doesn’t just apply to the restaurant that brought the lawsuit challenging it but to other venues in the state, reiterating that the legislation championed by Gov. Ron DeSantis is likely unconstitutional.

A state agency that would enforce the law had asked U.S. District Judge Gregory Presnell to put on hold his preliminary injunction stopping the law from being enforced until a trial is held to determine its constitutionality while the state of Florida appeals the injunction.

Attorneys for Florida told the judge that the preliminary injunction should only apply to the Orlando restaurant that sued seeking to get the law ruled unconstitutional and not “nonparties” to the complaint.

The judge rejected that argument, saying any harm to the state of Florida is minimal if the preliminary injunction remains in place, and that all Floridians are potentially parties since free speech is at stake.

“Plaintiff is not the only party suffering injury as a result of the passage of the Act; it has a chilling effect on all members of society who fall within its reach,” Presnell wrote in his order.

The complaint was brought by the owner of a Hamburger Mary’s restaurant and bar in Orlando, which regularly hosts drag shows, including so-called family-friendly performances on Sundays that children were invited to attend.

The restaurant owner said the law was overbroad, was written vaguely and violated First Amendment rights by chilling speech.

The new law punished venues for allowing children into “adult live performances.” Though it did not mention drag shows specifically, the sponsor of the legislation said it was aimed at those performances.

Venues that violated the law faced fines and the possibility of their liquor licenses being suspended or revoked. Individuals could be charged with a misdemeanor crime.

Before announcing his candidacy for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, DeSantis made anti-grooming legislation a large part of his agenda as governor. Other bills he signed would ban genital mutilation for minors, and restrict radical indoctrination in schools.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

Nebraska Woman Gets 90 Days in Jail for Illegal Abortion, Corpse Mutilation

Editor 1
-
0
Nebraska Woman Gets 90 Days in Jail for Illegal Abortion, Corpse Mutilation

(Headline USA) An 18-year-old northeastern Nebraska woman was sentenced Thursday to 90 days in jail and two years of probation for burning and burying a fetus she aborted with her mother’s help in a case watched by activists as a slew of states move to end barbaric abortion practices.

Celeste Burgess, of Norfolk, was sentenced in Madison County after pleading guilty earlier this year to concealing or abandoning a dead body. Two other misdemeanor charges of false reporting and concealing the death of another person were dropped, in an agreement with prosecutors.

“The Court specifically finds that while probation is appropriate, confinement is necessary because without this confinement, it would depreciate the seriousness of the crime or promote disrespect for the law,” the judge’s order read.

Burgess and her mother, 42-year-old Jessica Burgess of Norfolk, are accused of working together to end the pregnancy.

The abortion, well into her third trimester, violated Nebraska law at the time that banned abortion after 20 weeks of gestation. Officials have said Jessica Burgess ordered abortion pills online, which she gave to her then-17-year-old daughter in the spring of 2022.

Jessica Burgess pleaded guilty earlier this month to providing an illegal abortion, false reporting and tampering with human skeletal remains. In exchange for her plea, charges of concealing the death of another person and abortion by someone other than a licensed physician were dismissed. She faces sentencing on Sept. 22.

Norfolk police detective opened an investigation into the abortion following a tip, according to an arrest affidavit. Police secured a search warrant to gain access to Facebook messages between the two, in which prosecutors say the women discussed killing the pre-born child and destroying the evidence. Police then found the burned fetal remains buried in a field north of Norfolk.

In one of the Facebook messages, Jessica Burgess instructed her daughter on how to take the pills to kill her child, according to court records. In another, Celeste Burgess wrote, “I will finally be able to wear jeans,” according to the documents.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s last year overturned Roe v. Wade, which for 50 years had legalized abortion nationwide.

Leftist lawmakers who opposed Nebraska’s legislation, repeatedly cited the Norfolk case, claiming it showed state prosecutors would target women who sought abortions with criminal penalties, while ignoring the subsequent mutilation of the corpse entirely.

Republicans in the officially nonpartisan Nebraska Legislature failed this year to enact a six-week ban on abortions, but later passed a 12-week ban after adding it as an amendment to another bill to limit underage genital mutilation. Opponents said that violated a Nebraska constitutional requirement that legislative bills stick to a single subject.

The ACLU has sued to overturn the abortion ban and transgender bill.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

Senate Judiciary Committee OKs Legislation to Police Supreme Court Ethics

Editor 1
-
0
Senate Judiciary Committee OKs Legislation to Police Supreme Court Ethics

(Headline USA) Senate Democrats, fresh off recent partywide discussions of court-packing and other desperate moves to swing the judiciary in their favor, launched an opening salvo in their effort to either control or discredit the collateral branch of government, fueling alarming questions about the separation of powers and the politicization of the American justice system under threat of coercion.

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved legislation to impose a stronger ethics on the Supreme Court in response to a smear campaign waged by well-funded activist groups via the supposed investigative journalism site ProPublica and other left-wing outlets.

Until now, the court has assumed the role of establishing and policing its own ethics guidelines in the interest of maintaining political neutrality.

The bill faced united opposition from Republicans, who said it could “destroy” the court, and it has little chance to make it through the full Senate, much less the GOP-led House of Representatives.

The panel voted along party lines to set ethics rules for the court and a process to enforce them, including new standards for transparency around recusals, gifts and potential conflicts of interest.

Democrats first pushed the legislation after reports earlier this year that Justice Clarence Thomas participated in luxury vacations and a real estate deal with a top GOP donor—and after Chief Justice John Roberts declined to testify before the committee about the ethics of the court.

Since then, leftist media also revealed that Justice Samuel Alito had taken a luxury vacation with a GOP donor.

Neither of the conservative justices—nor Justice Neil Gorsuch, who likewise was targeted by a smear attack over a real-estate deal—technically violated the court’s ethics policies or reporting policies as they existed at the time of the alleged incidents. None of them are understood to have interfered with the justices’ judgement in cases that were before the court.

Indeed, it is likely that justices on both sides of the aisle adhered to similar practices, although activist groups selectively cherry-picked those of the court’s conservatives.

In an effort to appear evenhanded and lend cachet to the push for more ethics oversight, the Associated Press reported last week that left-wing Justice Sonia Sotomayor, aided by her staff, has advanced sales of her books through college visits over the past decade.

Sotomayor also failed to disclose at least six trips related to university speaking engagements. And liberal lion Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who died in 2020, has come under recent scrutiny for a $1 million “prize” she accepted in December 2019 and distributed to a secret list of organizations.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin, D-Ill., claimed the legislation would be a “crucial first step” in restoring confidence in the court. He said that if any of the senators sitting in the room had engaged in similar activities, they would be in violation of ethics rules.

“The same is not true of the justices across the street,” Durbin said.

Republicans charged that the legislation is more about Democratic opposition to the court’s decisions than its ethics.

“It’s about harassing and intimidating the Supreme Court,” said Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, a senior GOP member of the panel.

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, the top Republican on the Judiciary panel, said Democrats were trying to “destroy” the court as it exists by tightening the rules around recusals and disqualifying conservatives from some decisions.

Congress should stay out of the court’s business and mind the separation of powers, Graham said.

The bill “is an assault on the court itself,” Graham said.

The legislation would mandate a new Supreme Court “code of conduct” with a process for adjudicating the policy modeled on lower courts that do have ethics codes.

It would require that justices provide more information about potential conflicts of interest, allow impartial panels of judges to review justices’ decisions not to recuse and require public, written explanations about their decisions not to recuse.

It would also seek to improve transparency around gifts received by justices and set up a process to investigate and enforce violations around required disclosures.

Republicans on the committee offered a series of amendments to the bill, some of which were focused on boosting security for judges after a man was found with a gun, knife and pepper spray near the home of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh last year. The panel rejected most of the amendments as majority Democrats said that Republicans were trying to distract from the ethics reforms.

Durbin pushed back on the notion that the legislation is about politics, noting he had introduced legislation on Supreme Court ethics reforms more than 10 years ago, when the court was more liberal. “The reforms we are proposing would apply in equal force to all justices,” Durbin said.

Durbin had recently invited Roberts to testify at a hearing, but he declined, saying that testimony by a chief justice is exceedingly rare because of the importance of preserving judicial independence.

Roberts also provided a “Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices” signed by all nine justices that described the ethical rules they follow about travel, gifts and outside income.

The statement provided by Roberts said that the nine justices “reaffirm and restate foundational ethics principles and practices to which they subscribe in carrying out their responsibilities as Members of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

The statement promised at least some small additional disclosure when one or more among them opts not to take part in a case. But the justices have been inconsistent in doing so since.

Roberts has acknowledged that the court could do more to adhere to the highest standards of ethical conduct, but he didn’t elaborate and has not followed up publicly on that idea.

Besides Sotomayor’s push for book sales, the AP reported that universities have used trips by justices as a lure for financial contributions by placing them in event rooms with wealthy donors and that justices have taken expenses-paid teaching trips to attractive locations that are light on actual classroom instruction.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

White House Aides Admit ‘Intentional Shift’ to Help Biden Avoid Displays of ‘Physical Frailty’

Contributing Author
-
0
White House Aides Admit ‘Intentional Shift’ to Help Biden Avoid Displays of ‘Physical Frailty’

(Headline USA) White House staffers admitted this week that President Joe Biden has to use lower stairs to board Air Force One to avoid tripping or falling.

Biden has been seen struggling to board the plane on a number of occasions, including last week when he tripped walking up the lower, shorter staircase at the bottom of the plane.

The reason Biden has been using the lower staircase is to help the president avoid such blunders, two White House staffers told Politico.

The Biden advisers “privately acknowledged an intentional shift to steer the 80-year-old president to the lower stairs more often to make his travel easier and limit the possibility for missteps,” according to the outlet.

That’s also why Biden has been wearing sneakers instead of dress shoes more recently, the report said.

“The sneakers are another concession to comfort necessitated by age,” Politico reported. “One person close to the president said Biden used to always resist wearing anything other than dress shoes, believing that any other footwear look was unpresidential, but he has eased up on that stance in recent months.”

The aides said this was just part of a larger effort by the White House to “limit situations where any signs of physical frailty might be on heightened display.”

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre refused to elaborate on the change and whether the president was having “mobility problems” when asked about the report.

“I don’t have any decision process to walk through,” she said.

“I’m sure there’s a protocol that’s used for the—for Air Force One,” she continued. “I just don’t have one.”

Polls show that a majority of voters, including Democrats, are concerned about Biden’s age. Democratic leadership, however, has tried to downplay these concerns.

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for example, who is three years older than Biden, joked this week that he is still “a kid.”

“I think the president should embrace his age, his experience, the knowledge that he brings to the job,” she said on Wednesday.

“Age is a relative thing—it is,” she continued. “He’s younger than I am, so he’s a kid to me, as well.”

Grassley Releases FBI Form Detailing Biden Bribery Scheme

Contributing Author
-
0
Grassley Releases FBI Form Detailing Biden Bribery Scheme

(Headline USA) Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, released an unclassified FBI document Thursday that showed then-Vice President Joe Biden and Hunter Biden allegedly “coerced” Burisma executive Mykola Zlochevsky to pay them millions of dollars for a policy decision.

The document is a FD-1023 form, which Grassley said he obtained from Justice Department whistleblowers. It contains information from an FBI interview with a “highly credible” confidential source who detailed multiple meetings and conversations with a top Burisma executive. 

In the form, Zlochevsky said he has many “text messages and ‘recordings’ that show he was coerced to make such payments” to the Bidens.

The Ukrainian oligarch—who was being investigated for corruption prior to bringing on Hunter Biden and business partner Devon Archer as Burisma board members in 2014— said that in return for the payments he expected the investigation to disappear.

Joe Biden delivered on his end of the bargain, and he publicly boasted during a 2018 Council on Foreign Relations panel about pressuring Ukraine to fire prosecutor Viktor Shokin.

“I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’” Biden bragged. “Well, son of a bitch, he got fired.”

The confidential human source told the FBI he first learned of Burisma’s dealings with Biden “in late 2015 or 2016,” during the Obama administration.

He had traveled to Ukraine to meet with Burisma executives about a potential business deal and was asked whether he “was aware of Burisma’s Board of Directors,” which included Hunter Biden.

The executives reportedly admitted to the source that they “hired Hunter Biden ‘to protect us, through his dad, from all kinds of problems,’” according to the form.

“[The source] recalled this meeting took place around the time Joe Biden made a public statement about (former) Ukraine Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin being corrupt, and that he should be fired/removed from office,” the form states.

At one point, Zlochevsky assured the source that he was not worried about Shokin’s investigation into Burisma, saying “Don’t worry Hunter will take care of those issues through his dad,” the form says.

Zlochevsky also allegedly told the source that “it costs 5 [million] to pay one Biden, and 5 [million] to another Biden,” according to the form.

Last month, the House Oversight Committee revealed the existence of an audio recording in which Joe Biden told then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko not to worry about the FBI during the incoming Trump presidency because the agency would assist in covering up any possible corruption.

Since becoming president under dubious circumstances, Biden has rerouted more than $100 billion to Ukraine in support of its war effort with Russia, as well as to cover the pensions and salaries of Ukrainian government officials.

Watch: Anthony Weiner Explodes in Anger When Confronted With ‘Clinton Kill List’

Ken Silva
-
0
Watch: Anthony Weiner Explodes in Anger When Confronted With ‘Clinton Kill List’

(Ken Silva, Headline USA) Disgraced former Democrat congressman Anthony Weiner recently appeared on the entrepreneur Patrick Bet-David’s increasingly popular podcast, where he was asked a series of questions about his one-time political ally, Hillary Clinton—including why so many of her associates seem to die under mysterious circumstances.

Weiner—who pleaded guilty in 2017 of sexting with a 15-year-old, and whose estranged wife, Huma Abedin, served as Clinton’s aid for decades—didn’t appreciate this line of questioning.

“You shouldn’t be listing these things because it gives oxygen to it,” Weiner said when Bet-David mentioned conspiracy theories such as Pizzagate.

But Bet-David was particularly interested in the so-called “Clinton kill list.” When he referenced an article about 71 Clinton associates who’ve died under purportedly mysterious circumstances, Weiner voiced his displeasure.

Headline USA has not reviewed all the names listed on the article cited by Bet-David.

Some of the more prominent names include millionaire sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein, former DNC staffer Seth Rich and alleged cocaine smuggler Barry Seal. Epstein is believed to have run a sexual blackmail operation sanctioned by Western intelligence agencies, while Rich is thought by some as having leaked DNC emails showing Clinton corruption.

Seal, for his part, is the pilot who trained Nicaraguan rebels and allegedly smuggled cocaine through Mena, Arkansas in the 1980s, when Bill Clinton governed that state. Seal’s story has since been made into a movie starring Tom Cruise.

But rather than discuss any one specific case, Weiner accused Bet-David of being a bully and spreading conspiracy theories.

“I am infuriated by people who drag other people’s names, who are powerless,” he said, referring to the 71 dead Clinton associates. “People who do that are bullies, and I don’t appreciate bullies.”

“The fact you’re getting nervous is an answer. Your reaction is an answer,” Bet-David said in response to Weiner’s criticism.

Despite the heated argument between Bet-David and Weiner, the podcast host ended by paying the former congressman a compliment for his wiliness to engage in the debate.

“You got more brass than a lot of people running for office, who will not have conversations like this. You did it,” he said. “We don’t have to agree with everything.”

Ken Silva is a staff writer at Headline USA. Follow him at twitter.com/jd_cashless.

1...1,8521,8531,854...3,886Page 1,853 of 3,886