Speaker 1: Former Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard goes full nutjob on the Joe
Rogan experience. She is very clearly beyond salvage at this point in time. And quite frankly,
it's sad. Let's let let's focus on how it's sad when someone gets completely sucked into
conspiracy nonsense. This is a bit of an episode from Joe Rogan Episode 2032. The
guests on this episode were Tulsi Gabbard and someone named B.J. Penn. The topic is,
of course, the indictments of the failed former president. Twice impeached, four times indicted,
civilly liable rapist Donald Trump. Here is Tulsi Gabbard weighing in on
the indictments. Take a listen. Let's discuss. Speaker 2: I think they are doing and by their
I mean Dr. Evil. Well, no, it's bigger than that. It's bigger than that. By they I mean the Democrat
elite that have vast control. It's not just the President Biden or the Biden administration.
It's the media. It's the politicized Department of Justice. They are doing the timing of all of these
charges against Trump is not an accident. The fact that they want to hold multiple court hearings
for these charges. Speaker 1: They're
called criminal trials to or the. Speaker 2: Day the day before Super Tuesday,
which is a major turning point in any candidate's election. They want to kick off these court
hearings the day before Super Tuesday. It's not an accident. This is all happening right now.
Speaker 1: All right. So when she says the timing is not an accident,
what exactly is she saying? Because a lot of times these people talk in euphemisms or at
least indirectly. It's not an accident that this is the timing of these indictments and
court appearances and so on and so forth. What is she saying? Is she saying that there was a
plan to indict Trump exactly at this moment in order to damage him as much as possible?
Because if that's what she's saying, if we care about the facts and what we know,
there are a number of important responses that we need to consider. The first should always be.
Is there any evidence that what Tulsi Gabbard is saying is true? And the answer is there is
no evidence that what she is saying is true. There is simply no evidence that there was any kind of
coordinated and specific effort to make these charges, to bring forward these indictments at
this time, to schedule the trials on the dates that they've been scheduled. They've not all
even been scheduled. There's there's just no evidence. Now, if we get some evidence, then
we'll have something to talk about. But the first thing is, if we care about evidence, there's none.
The second part of it is, okay, so an argument is being made about the timing. Tulsi Gabbard is
making it. Trump has said, Oh, why? Why wasn't it sooner or why wasn't it later or whatever the case
may be? The question we should first ask is, well, these are complicated criminal investigations of
high level people. How long do such investigations normally take? How long is typical from the time
an investigation starts until you get to an indictment and then to a trial? There is no
one answer, but it is very common that there's a range from the investigation takes 9 to 10 months
all the way up to a couple of years, 2 to 3 years. It can sometimes take. We are well within that.
Now, you could say that's a big range, David. They could have waited or they might have been
able to do it sooner. We have no evidence of that. And the amount of time that these investigations
went before the indictments is completely typical. The range being 9 to 10 months all the way up to a
couple of years. Third, the argument is this was all deliberately timed in order to be as damaging
as possible to Donald Trump. I don't believe this is the the timing that is the most damaging to
Donald Trump. So by by virtue of that, it's also not supported by the circumstances. We're in a
primary right now and quite early in one right now. Most people who are paying attention are
highly engaged, reliable primary voters. A lot of the electorate is not paying any attention.
Much of the electorate doesn't pay attention until after the primaries. And for those who
do vote in the primary, they typically start paying attention in November, December, January,
etc.. The indictments right now arguably have helped Trump. Trump's polling has improved since
the indictments came forward. If you were really trying to time this to hurt Trump, you would do
it all after he's the nominee. Get Republicans to select this guy, then dump four criminal trials on
him that'll pull him off of the general campaign trail. Even the trial being in March before Trump
will be the nominee, if indeed he becomes the nominee, is not that damaging to Donald Trump.
So none of this makes sense because there's no evidence and because it also circumstantially
wouldn't be the best way to damage Trump. But it doesn't matter in Tulsi Gabbard
world. Let's continue listen to a little more. Speaker 2: It's Banana Republic stuff. It it
really is. And that's what they're doing is, again, these these terrible things that are
happening in our country are happening because we have people in power who care more about
themselves and their power than they do about the people. This country, our constitution,
our democracy. They are setting this incredibly dangerous precedent that now, much like many
banana republics in the world, whoever is in power has the ability to politicize and weaponize
that power to go after their political opponent. Speaker 1: Again, the suggestion from Tulsi is the
Biden administration is going after Trump because Trump is Biden's likely political opponent. There
is no evidence of that. And much as they want to say we are a banana republic because Trump
has been indicted and now everybody's just going to indict whoever. No, no, no, no, no.
You have to really understand that Trump was indicted because four different investigations
found evidence that he committed crimes such that a grand jury said, yeah, it looks like
there's evidence here, so we're going to go ahead and indict. Biden had nothing to do with it that
we know of at this point in time. If Tulsi has any evidence Biden was involved, bring it forward. The
idea that now everybody will just indict their political enemy would only become true if in
retaliation Trump figures out a way if he becomes president, to get Joe Biden indicted. But that
would again be Trump doing the wrong thing. As far as when you hope, when you indict former leaders,
it's objectively bad. That's not true. If there is evidence that they did something wrong,
they want you to believe that it is a bad thing that we might be able to hold the former
president accountable. It's actually a good thing to know that nobody is above the law,
and that's potentially what we're learning here. We'll listen to a little bit more of this,
but it's pretty nauseating, as you can see. Speaker 2: That's the that's that's it's a real
take away whatever people think about Trump or whatever the consequences
and implications of what. What is actually happening and what so many
of the Democrat elite are justifying in the name of protecting democracy
is actually destroying it. And when you look at the charges, like when he gets indicted,
where the day before, there's a scandal. Speaker 4: Mm hmm. It's there's a chart of.
Speaker 2: The the revelations by him about. About Biden. Yeah.
And then day after Trump gets arraigned. Speaker 1: This is another element to this,
which is there are pseudo scandals about Trump and about Joe and Hunter Biden coming out of the right
every single day, no matter what day Trump gets indicted over the last several months,
almost certainly if it's a weak day, there's some alleged revelation about Joe or Hunter
Biden. This is retroactively adjusting the timing to fit a narrative you've decided is
true. So this is vile and disgusting stuff. Tulsa is fully fallen for it or it's a grift
or I don't know what's going on, but it does appear sadly, it it it is said it appears that
Tulsi Gabbard is beyond salvage. Let's now move from Tulsi to Marjorie Taylor GREENE.