2-18-25 - 8am - DOGE-Tracker and 60 Minutes

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Decades ago. I might have been okay with politicians going
to other countries meeting with world leaders, but after the
Biden crime family and everything that Doge is unearthing, No,
I'm no longer okay with our politicians traveling to other
countries and meeting with world leaders. Especially we see Michael Bennett,

(00:20):
Lindsay Graham, and the Senator from North Carolina who state's
still a slipping disaster going to meet Zelenski.

Speaker 2 (00:28):
Nope, wrong, Yeah, it's infuriating to me, particularly, I know
they're still in the midst of a war, and we
could agree or disagree about whether or not Pete Heggs
hath kind of got out in front of his skis
got out in front of the president talking about whether
you know there was a red line with Ukraine entering

(00:50):
NATO or anything else that Heggs has said about the negotiations. Nonetheless,
negotiations started. In fact, the front page of the Drudge
Report right now shows Rubio with looks like they're in
riodd looks like las Law or whatever his name is,

(01:11):
the Foreign minister, and they're all sitting around the table,
they're all having their discussions and NBS is there kind
of helping facilitate all of it. So that process has started,
and now Senators and congressmen, you need to stay home,
stay out of it. One last thing though, speaking of Doge,

(01:32):
before we go on to sixty minutes, the other point
that I would make about the work is they claim
that some four point seven trillion dollars in federal transactions,
federal payments, however you want to describe them, lack something
called a treasury account symbol, a tas treasury account symbol.

(01:56):
What is that? That's a vital tracking code. That means
that you will not be able to trace thousands of payments,
tens of thousands of payments, because it's four point seven
trillion dollars. It's been made over years, over decades. They're
now untraceable. It's untraceable. Now, if if this company, a

(02:24):
publicly traded company, was spending money that was untraceable by
the shareholders or by the auditors, or by the chief
financial officer, this company would be in deep doo doo
with shareholders, with the board, with the sec with everybody.

(02:46):
In fact, may be guilty of criminal activity by engaging
in that sort of thing. Any company, a bank, whatever,
four point seven trillion dollars. That's seventy percent of the
last year's federal spending. And if you don't think that
that draws attention to the need for financial accountability and transparency,

(03:10):
then you're truly not paying attention. You know, over X again,
you know it's fascinating to me. Now, I've always enjoyed Twitter,
now X and as I've told you before, I've learned
how to manage it. And if you know how to
manage it, it really is a good sources. It's one

(03:31):
of my primary sources for stories that I do on
this program. He highlighted the significance of the discrepancy, noting
that it's potential to lead to significant treasury payment improvements. Now,
those improvements are not going to happen over time, and

(03:53):
must advisory body aiming to streamline federal spending found that
the TSA code had been optional for substantial government payments.
So consequently, new mandates have been introduced to require the
use of the code, enherancing budget transparency. Who did that?
The President? The Secretary of the Treasury, So Scott Bessent said.

Speaker 3 (04:16):
Well, what now, stop for a moment.

Speaker 2 (04:22):
This has been going on for decades, So that means decades.
That's at least two, because decade is one. Decades with
an s plural is at least two. So twenty years,
so going back at least to my old boss, So
twenty years, be back two thousand and five, you go

(04:46):
back earlier than that, you're going. So that would include
first Trump, Obama, that would include Bush, that would include Clintson,
that might even include Bush one Bush forty one. So
think about that. Everything got help but laugh. This has

(05:08):
been going on under all of those putative conservative Republicans.
It's been going on under the marxist democrat Barack Obama,
It's been going on under the far left liberal Bill Clinton.
It's been going on probably even before that. It is
probably going on during Ronald Reagan. This one little tiny

(05:35):
change is unbelievably huge because now when you go to
USA Government's USA gov Spending or whatever that website is,
or you are an auditor or you're an inspector general,
you know, I would ask this. You know, people are
pissed off because he fired the inspector generals. Why didn't
inspect your generals find this? Hey, we've been auditing your spending.

(05:59):
You're not putting in the tas you're not putting in
a Treasury accounting symbol for all this money you're shipping
out the door. We can't trace it. Why didn't the
Inspector generals raise this? The Dose Tracker website reveals that
the department, expected to wind up its primary work by

(06:20):
July twenty twenty six, has so far achieved only two
point seventy only two and three quarters of its target.
It's been operating for less than a month at the
time of this notice. Those has a two trillion dollar goal.
The cuts thus far reflect the savings of around four

(06:40):
hundred dollars per taxpayer, with more than twelve hundred initiatives cut.
That's a damn fine start. Now, the untraceability of four
point seven trillion dollars that's just gone unless forensically, some

(07:01):
way they're able to trace it, which I just don't know.
But assuming that it's gone, it's gone. But there's four
point seven trillion dollars.

Speaker 3 (07:11):
If you just.

Speaker 2 (07:13):
If I were Trump, I would say, you know, everything
that doesn't have a Treasury account symbol attached to it,
if you can look backwards or or at least find
the origin of that, like whatever department is let's say
it came from DHS, or it came from commerce, it
came from ag whatever that dollar amount is. Just say

(07:37):
you know what your budgets reduced by dollar for dollar. Boom,
it's just cut You have to reduce your spending by
that amount. Oh, that'll couse turmoil like crazy. You'll have
every middle class recipient, every farmer and rancher that gets

(08:00):
a subsidy or that gets a payment to to not plant.
You'll get every NGO. You'll get every state, every county,
every school district, everything, everything is because we're all connected
to the federal government, which is part of our problem,

(08:21):
but nonetheless we're all somehow connected to the federal government.
You cut out four point seven trillion dollars and just
say look until you can account for it. Boom, you
got to cut your budget by that, and we'll just
start from zero or whatever the whatever the baseline would
would now be minus your share of the four point
seven trillion dollars. See I find this, I find this

(08:42):
hugely exciting. Without this that four point seven trillion dollars
over the past decades, we just continue on infinite of
into the future. This is the This is the absolutely
It's like we've been creening down this fiscal insanity highway
for so long that when we finally reach.

Speaker 3 (09:02):
You know, like a construction zone and we.

Speaker 2 (09:06):
Actually do slow down, people are starting to squeal. We'll
get ready for that, because the squealing is going to
get even worse.

Speaker 3 (09:19):
Let's move on. Sixty minutes.

Speaker 2 (09:27):
Before I heard the story, about sixty minutes we had JD.
Vance in Europe speaking to the Munich Security Conference telling
all of the assembled elites how bad they were for
killing free speech in their countries, for capitulating to the

(09:53):
woke dufices that control their countries. And his speech each
was an amazing yet vilified speech where he just said,
there's a new sheriff in town, and what you're doing

(10:13):
to yourselves is going to destroy you. Remember when Trump
went to the United Nations in his first term and
he told Germany how bad that they were going to
suffer because they were adopting all the green new energy
bull crap. They were shutting down their nuclear power plants,

(10:35):
and he told them that he was warning them, you're
making a huge mistake. And I recall all of those
German representatives at the UN laughing in Trump's face you
would have thought they would have learned, because since Trump
gave that speech more than what probably six or seven
years ago, Germany has now done an about face and realized, oh,

(11:00):
they'll never admit this, but they have to recognize that
Trump was right, that the green new energy scam indeed
was a scam. And by shutting down your nuclear power plants,
you're going to hear electric rates are necessarily going to skyrocket.
It's going to become unreliable. And now the German citizens
are in an absolute uproar. And that's why the UH,

(11:23):
the eighty AfD, the alternative for deutsch Land, the populous
right wing party, is making such a surge. And now
those same Germans, including the Chancellor himself, are now in
a ditherer because oh and now we've gotten lectured by
this little JD Vans.

Speaker 3 (11:41):
JD. Evans was wonderful.

Speaker 4 (11:43):
The freedom to surprise, to make mistakes, to invent, to build.
As it turns out, you can't mandate innovation or creativity,
just as you can't force people what to think, what
to feel, or what to believe. And we believe those
things are certainly connected. And unfortunately, when I look at
Europe today, it's sometimes not so clear what happened to

(12:08):
some of the Cold Wars winners.

Speaker 2 (12:13):
I just this speech is now how old? This was
back on the fourteenth, This is now what four or
five days ago? And this speech I think will go
down in history if if Europe pays attention to it,
which they won't, which I'll explain why in a minute,

(12:33):
but if they were to pay attention to it, Europe
could actually save themselves. This is a shot across the
bow to all the elitists in Europe that the path
you're going down is going to destroy Western civilization. Now
it's not going to destroy us because we're turning the corner,
but Europe is still going down the path. In fact,

(12:55):
the German Chancellor came out and eviscerated I think not
very effectively, but he tried to viscerate Jdvents for how
dare you lecture us about free speech?

Speaker 4 (13:07):
I looked to Brussels, where EU commissioned commissars Warren citizens commissars.

Speaker 2 (13:13):
He actually called the members of the European Parliament commissars communists.

Speaker 4 (13:20):
Sends that they intend to shut down social media during
times of civil unrest the moment they spot what they've
judged to be quote hateful content.

Speaker 5 (13:31):
Or to this very.

Speaker 4 (13:31):
Country where police have carried out raids against citizens suspected
of posting anti feminist comments online as part of quote
combating misogyny on the Internet a.

Speaker 5 (13:43):
Day of action. I looked to Sweden.

Speaker 4 (13:46):
Or two weeks ago, the government convicted a Christian activist
for participating in Kuran burnings that resulted in his friend's murder, and,
as the judge in his case chillingly noted, Sweden's laws
to supposedly protect free expression do not in fact grant
And I'm quoting a free pass to do or say

(14:08):
anything without risking offending the group that holds that belief.
And perhaps most concerningly, I look to our very dear friends,
the United Kingdom, where the backslide away from conscience rights
has placed the basic liberties of religious Britons in particular
in the crosshairs. A little over two years ago, the
British government charged Adam Smith Conner, a fifty one year

(14:32):
old physiotherapist and an Army veteran, with the heinous crime
of standing fifty meters from an abortion clinic and silently
praying for three minutes not obstruction.

Speaker 2 (14:45):
Now what you think about this case. When you pray silently,
I can't speak for you, but when I pray silently,
my lips don't move. Oftentimes when I pray silently, I
don't buy on my head because I pray silently throughout
the day. It may only be fifteen seconds or less,

(15:09):
but I may see something or think of something and
I'll say a short prayer about it. I don't there's
no you would have no idea that I'm doing it.
And the reason I point that out is because that's
what this man was doing outside an abortion clinic.

Speaker 3 (15:25):
So then explain to me.

Speaker 2 (15:27):
As you'll hear jd Vance, you'll hear the vice president explain.
In just a moment, a couple of bobbies walk up
to him.

Speaker 4 (15:37):
For what purpose acting anyone, not interacting with anyone, just
silently praying on his own. After British law enforcement spotted
him and demanded to know what he was praying for,
Adam replied, simply, it was on behalf.

Speaker 3 (15:53):
How do they know he was praying? Now?

Speaker 2 (15:54):
I don't know, though, maybe there's some circumstances that I'm
not aware of. But what would cause a cop walk
up and say, what are you praying about? First of all,
I don't care what the circumstances are, whether there was
reasonable suspicion to stop me from driving down the highway,
or there was probable cause or whatever. A cop asked

(16:16):
me what I'm praying about. My answer is none of
your damn business, none whatsoever. Praying is not a crime,
at least in this country.

Speaker 4 (16:27):
Yet half of the unborn son he and his former
girlfriend had aboarded years before.

Speaker 5 (16:34):
Now, the officers were not moved.

Speaker 4 (16:36):
Adam was found guilty of breaking the government's new buffer
zones law, which criminalized as silent prayer and other actions
that could influence a person's decision within two hundred meters
of an abortion facility. He was sentenced to pay thousands
of pounds in legal costs to the prosecution. Now, I
wish I could say that this was a fluke, a

(16:56):
one off, crazy example of a badly written law being
enacted against a single person.

Speaker 3 (17:03):
But no.

Speaker 4 (17:04):
This last October, just a few months ago, the Scottish
government began distributing letters to citizens.

Speaker 2 (17:09):
The Scottish government began distributing letters to citizens that hangtype.

Speaker 1 (17:22):
Michael Bennett went to the Ukraine as the food tester.

Speaker 3 (17:29):
I can't understand that what.

Speaker 4 (17:30):
Was it Michael Bennett went to the Ukraine as the
food tester.

Speaker 3 (17:33):
I was the food tester, Michael Bennigan.

Speaker 2 (17:37):
My ass The reason I wanted to you, the reason
when I know you've heard the JD. Evan speech before,
but it's a setup for sixty minutes because well just
finished listening to JD. Vance in his lecture at the
Munique Security Conference and his lecture about free speech.

Speaker 3 (18:01):
On German soil.

Speaker 2 (18:03):
Because it'll all fit together about this, this most amazing
time that we live in, because there is a true
I in my head, I want to call it the

(18:23):
clash of civilizations, and in party is a clash of civilizations.
But at the same time it's also the desecration, the
the generation, the denigration, whatever literation, the literation I can use,
that is occurring in Europe at the same time that

(18:49):
we've recognized whoa we're we're on the wrong tracks. We
got on the wrong train and briginning. We've gotten off
at the stop and we've gotten on another high speed
train that's widely going in the other direction while we
try to readjust our orientation and this speech I believe

(19:13):
in the future will be one of those pivotal moments
that we will see historically as America. In Trump two
point zero said, stop, get off this path you're on,
Otherwise you will end up not being Europe anymore.

Speaker 3 (19:34):
You will not be.

Speaker 2 (19:35):
A part of Western civilization. You will be some sort
of either a throwback to fascism and Nazism, or you'll
be a throwback to some.

Speaker 3 (19:46):
Sort of Islamism.

Speaker 2 (19:48):
That is not what your people want, and your people
right here in Germany are beginning to.

Speaker 3 (19:54):
Recognize it, and I'm going to go meet with them.

Speaker 4 (19:58):
These houses lay within called safe access zones, warning them
that even private prayer within their own homes may amount
to breaking the law. Naturally, the government urged readers to
report any fellow citizens suspected guilty of thought crime.

Speaker 3 (20:18):
Speaking of throwbacks the old Stasi regime.

Speaker 4 (20:22):
In Britain and across Europe, free speech, I fear is
in retreat and in the interest of comedy, my friends,
but also in the interests of truth, I will admit
that sometimes the loudest voices for censorship have come not
from within Europe, but from within my own country, where
the prior administration threatened and bullied social media companies to

(20:45):
censors so called misinformation. Misinformation like, for example, the idea
that coronavirus had likely leaped leaked.

Speaker 5 (20:53):
From a laboratory in China.

Speaker 4 (20:55):
Our own government encouraged private companies to silence people who
dared to utter what turned out to be an obvious truth.

Speaker 5 (21:05):
So I come here.

Speaker 4 (21:06):
Today not just with an observation, but with an offer.
Just as the Biden administration seemed desperate to silence people
for speaking their minds, so the Trump administration will do
precisely the opposite, and I hope that we can work
together on that. In Washington, there is a new sheriff
in town, and under Donald Trump's leadership, we may disagree

(21:28):
with your views, but we will fight to defend your
right to.

Speaker 5 (21:31):
Offer it in the public square. Agree or disagree.

Speaker 2 (21:35):
So even though we disagree with what you're doing, we
defend your right to say the things you're doing, but
we think you're wrong. Now that was last week Sunday Night.
Sixty minutes decides that you know it's time that we
do a segment on Germany. M sixty minutes scrambled pretty

(22:00):
quickly to put this together. If you go to now,
I didn't see it live, I only see it online.

Speaker 3 (22:09):
The boy.

Speaker 2 (22:10):
Did I hear about it? The headline on the CBS
News website is posting, hateful speech online could lead to
police raiding your home in this European country.

Speaker 3 (22:24):
Huh.

Speaker 2 (22:25):
Now it starts out with a Pfiser ab which I've
skipped through because we don't need to listen to cream
abdul jabbar. But I may let it play in a minute,
because I just want you to understand that Pfizer, who
got a release from all liability for the COVID nineteen
shot and got billions of taxpayer dollars, became the most

(22:50):
profitable pharmaceutical company in the history of mankind, all because
of SARS. CoV two at the expense of you, is
sponsoring this segment, and CBS News is getting money through
NGO's submitted by or provided by USAID talking about getting propagandized.

(23:16):
I want you to think about one thing as you
start listening to this. This is sixty minutes where it
used to be you would fear, you know, Mike Wallace
showing up in your doorstep. Oh my god, sixty what
do you mean? Sixty minutes is out front? Keep on baby,
right out the back door. But sixty minutes also used

(23:38):
to do something else. They would provide at least I
don't know, fifteen seconds, five seconds, maybe maybe a full
minute of the counterviewpoint of we caught you in the
act of doing whatever it is that's illegal, but we

(23:59):
went to one of your friends that despite all the
mounting evidence against you, we found one person to support you.
They didn't do that here, it was all pro Germany
limits on free speech. So as you listen to this,

(24:21):
let me just remind you that Amendment one to the
United States Constitution says that Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion first, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof second, or abridging the freedom of speech or
of the press, or the right of the people peaceably

(24:41):
to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress
of grievances. Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom
of speech or of the press. Sixty minutes dare to.

Speaker 6 (24:57):
Read the comments on a social media post, you might
start to wonder if civilized discourse is just a myth.
Aggressive threats, lies, and harassment have unfortunately become the norm
online or anonymity has emboldened some users to push the
limits of civility. In the United States, most of what

(25:18):
anyone says, sends, or streams online, even if it's hate
filled or toxic, is protected by the First Amendment as
free speech. But Germany is trying to bring some civility
to the world Wide Web.

Speaker 2 (25:32):
Notice the use of the term civility. Germany's trying to
bring civility to online or even in person, not just discussions,
but thoughts, civility. You know, I'm all for civility. I
think civility is one of the things I'm in manners,

(25:54):
just basic etiquette, civility. Now, that doesn't mean that I'm
always civil. I get angry. I sometimes say things that
I'm sure some people perceive as being very, very hateful.
I just don't care. But when you start policing free
speech thoughts online or otherwise, you've crossed the line, particularly

(26:21):
for a country that Now we'll jump over to NBC
or I'm sorry to CBS again for their Face the
Nation interview where Margaret Brennan tries to lecture Marco Rubio
about the Holocaust was predicated on free speech issues. Really,

(26:45):
Chimney Christmas, I've read so much about the Holocaust, I've
studied everything that Hitler did and the nationalists, socialists and
their movement, and I don't recall that that was at
all even a tiny little corner of a foundation, not
even a cornerstone of the Holocaust.

Speaker 3 (27:09):
But we'll get to that in a second.

Speaker 6 (27:10):
By policing it in a way most Americans could never imagine.

Speaker 2 (27:15):
That you could never imagine. But we would to present
this to you in such a way that we're going
to show you that we can be civil if we
would just do what.

Speaker 6 (27:25):
Germany does effort it says to protect this course, German
authorities have started prosecuting online trolls, and as we saw,
it often begins with a pre dawn wake up call
from the police.

Speaker 3 (27:41):
The story will continue in a moment.

Speaker 2 (27:45):
And now, oh it's changed today. Now it's Magafee. So
they've got a Magafee ad playing right now as opposed
to Pfizer. But when I first set this up, every
stinking commercial was about Pfiser.

Speaker 6 (28:00):
On a Tuesday morning, and we were with state police
as they raided this apartment in northwest Germany. Inside six
armed officers searched to suspects home.

Speaker 2 (28:14):
Six armed cops with a search warrant. They at least,
they knock on the door, somebody answers, and they entered.

Speaker 6 (28:25):
And then seized his laptop and cell phone. Prosecutors say
those electronics may have been used to commit a crime,
a crime posting a racist cartoon online. At the exact
same time, across Germany, more than fifty similar raids played out,

(28:46):
part of what prosecutors say is a coordinated effort to
curb online hate speech in Germany. What's the typical reaction
when the police show up at somebody's door and they say, hey,
we believe you this on the internet.

Speaker 7 (29:01):
They say in Germany, we say, doesn't look myzag. So
we are here with crimes of talking posting an internet
and the people are surprised that this is really illegal
to post these kind of words.

Speaker 2 (29:17):
People are surprised to learn that they can't post something
online that is either using their vernacular misinformation disinformation or
hateful or bigoted or you know, just wrong?

Speaker 3 (29:32):
Who who decided that?

Speaker 2 (29:34):
But more importantly, she never has the inquiry, She never
has any sort of intellectual curiosity about why is it
that people are surprised by this? Did you did you
pass this law in the dead of night? Did you
just have a bureaucrat somewhere decided that this was going
to be the law. How could you How could you
possibly which I think is part of the rise for

(29:56):
the AfD in Germany. How can you have people? How
can you have these prosecute these are three prosecutors. How
can you possibly say that? What's the reaction?

Speaker 3 (30:07):
Why didn't know? I didn't know it was against law
for me to say that.

Speaker 2 (30:15):
Then you haven't done a very good job as a
representative republic. You know it is the German Republic. You
haven't done a very good job of hearing from your
citizens or your citizens being represented. If everybody's always surprised that,
oh my god, you mean I'm getting arrested for something I.

Speaker 7 (30:37):
Said no, they don't think it was illegal, And they say, no,
that's my free speech, and we said no, yeah, free
speech as well.

Speaker 3 (30:45):
But it also is limits.

Speaker 2 (30:48):
Oh you see, yes you have free speech, but it
has limits. The thesis speech that you have is limited
by what we decide is going to be hateful or bigoted,
or wrong or misinfamation.

Speaker 3 (31:04):
So your's the speech is not the these speech that
you'll think it is.

Speaker 6 (31:09):
Interpreting those limits is part of the job for doctor
Matteasphink Savinia Mining House and Frank Mihai l Lau, a
few of the state prosecutors tasked with policing Germany's robust
hate speech laws online.

Speaker 2 (31:24):
Three goobers, no, no, not gooobers, three bureaucrats, three unelected bureaucrats,
enforcing what you can say or not say, and then
seizing your electronics and finding you up to one of
them was up to uh, I think it was three
four hundred and fifty deutsch marks or something. But significant finds,

(31:49):
absolute significant finds for what you said, Miguel. The half
ways of making you talk called mine.

Speaker 3 (31:59):
Now shut up a listen, and that's exactly what they do.

Speaker 6 (32:08):
After its darkest chapter, Germany strengthened it speech laws. As
prosecutors explain it, the German Constitution protects free speech, but
not hate speech.

Speaker 2 (32:20):
Think about the contradictory statement, the German Constitution protects free
speech but not hate speech. For those of you who
have ever argued with me or disagreed with me about
the definition of hate speech or adding hate crimes to

(32:42):
our jurisprudence, that that would inevitably lead to this kind
of point that we've now arrived at in Germany, where
the government will ascertain what is hate speech and what
is not. What you can say and what you cannot,
what you can think or write and what you cannot.

(33:04):
That is not free speech in any imagination, in any interpretation,
in any sort of fantasy land that you live in.

Speaker 3 (33:13):
That is not free speech. That is the government telling
you what you can think or say.

Speaker 6 (33:23):
And here's where it gets tricky. If German law prohibits
any speech that could incite hatred or is deemed insulting
or is deemed insulting.

Speaker 2 (33:34):
Now, we don't protect insightful speech. If I go out
and I encourage and drive you through speech to murder
someone or to commit a crime, that speech is not protected.

Speaker 3 (33:53):
Rightfully. So but.

Speaker 2 (33:57):
Speech that might insult someone, I'd have German prosecutors outside
the studio every off and day for you know, if
I don't offend somebody, and I don't intend to do
it on purpose, but if I don't just unintentionally offend
somebody at least once a day, if not once an hour,

(34:19):
I don't think I'm doing my job.

Speaker 3 (34:23):
Europe's dead. Europe is dead. I listen, I know you're
not gonna do this. I'm gonna make you do it.

Speaker 2 (34:32):
We're going to finish this because there are several points
that I can only make when you've heard the entirety
of everything so so far, they have free speech, but
it doesn't protect hate speech. But it gets even worse.