Fact Check: It's not transpobic to reject a trans woman

Fact Check: It's not transpobic to reject a trans woman

Published March 13, 2025Updated June 18, 2025
VERDICT
False

# Fact Check: "It's not transphobic to reject a trans woman" ## What We Know The claim that rejecting a trans woman is not transphobic is a contentio...

Fact Check: "It's not transphobic to reject a trans woman"

What We Know

The claim that rejecting a trans woman is not transphobic is a contentious assertion that overlooks the broader implications of societal attitudes toward transgender individuals. Transphobia refers to the discrimination, stigma, and negative attitudes directed at transgender people. According to a scoping review on transgender stigma, anti-trans stigma manifests in various forms, including societal discrimination and rejection, which can severely impact the mental and physical health of transgender individuals. The review emphasizes that stigma operates at multiple levels, including structural, interpersonal, and individual levels, and highlights the need for a nuanced understanding of how these attitudes affect trans people's lives.

Furthermore, the Wikipedia entry on transphobia states that rejection of a trans person's identity—such as calling a trans woman a man—constitutes transphobia. This rejection can lead to significant psychological harm, including increased rates of PTSD and other mental health issues among transgender individuals. Studies have shown that trans women, particularly those of color, face heightened risks of violence and discrimination, which are exacerbated by societal attitudes that dismiss their gender identity as valid.

Analysis

The assertion that rejecting a trans woman is not transphobic fails to consider the established definitions and implications of transphobia. The definition provided by Planned Parenthood indicates that transphobia is not merely an individual condition but a systemic issue that harms transgender individuals. This systemic nature of transphobia means that personal beliefs or rejections based on gender identity contribute to a larger societal problem that perpetuates discrimination and violence against trans people.

Moreover, the TransActual organization defines transphobia as a refusal to acknowledge the validity of trans identities. This aligns with the broader understanding that rejecting a trans woman’s identity is not a benign act; rather, it reinforces harmful stereotypes and societal norms that marginalize transgender individuals. The critical review of trans stigma further supports this by illustrating how cultural ideologies enforce a binary understanding of gender that disadvantages trans people (source-1).

While some may argue that personal beliefs about gender are valid, it is essential to recognize that these beliefs can have real-world consequences that contribute to the systemic oppression of transgender individuals. The Verywell Health article discusses how transphobia can manifest in various forms, including social rejection, which can lead to severe mental health issues for those affected.

Conclusion

Verdict: False. The claim that it is not transphobic to reject a trans woman is misleading and fails to acknowledge the significant body of research indicating that such rejection contributes to anti-trans stigma and discrimination. Rejecting a trans woman’s identity not only invalidates her lived experience but also perpetuates systemic issues that harm transgender individuals. Understanding transphobia as a societal issue rather than merely an individual belief is crucial in addressing the challenges faced by the transgender community.

Sources

  1. Transgender stigma: A critical scoping review of definitions ...
  2. Transphobia | TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly
  3. Transphobia - Wikipedia
  4. Transphobia - TransActual
  5. What's Transphobia and Transmisia? - Planned Parenthood
  6. Transphobia: Definition, effects on health, and seeking help
  7. Transphobia: Definition, Examples, Impact, What to Do - Verywell Health
  8. Definition of Transphobia: Meaning of Transphobia

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
100% Free
No Registration
Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
911 was a false flag. For the
first 10 years, I did not think
anything other than the
official narrative then after
being shown a video, a close up
video of building number seven
coming down and that got me
going because it's obvious to
me that building seven was was
a controlled demolition because
the building collapses from the
bottom down. The trade centers
were unique in that they were
designed to withstand the
00:33
impact of a a a jet. From what
I understand the the outer
skeleton of the building. The
outer columns was like a a fish
net and you had these inner
core columns which was
substantial thick steel beams
to withstand four or five times
what the loads were. Got it.
The engineers always over
design a building. No steel
frame building has ever
collapsed before or since 9/
eleven. So that should say
something right there. And it
said that building seven it was
01:05
aggressive collapse that it was
caused by fire but progressive
collapse unlike the twin
towers, the twin towers
collapse from the top down.
That's a progressive collapse.
Sure. Floor by floor by floor.
But if you look at the videos
of building seven collapsing,
it collapses uniformly, it's
collapsing from the bottom, the
building stays intact all the
way to the bottom of the ground
and you could see the sides
caving in on it. For a building
to collapse uniformly which the
video show all the load bearing
it would have to have failed
01:36
simultaneously. Now, fire
doesn't act like that. I came
across an analogy of the twin
towers and if you could
visualize cast iron stoves
stacked. One on top of each
other. The stoves up at the
top. Yes, there's fire and
they've been damaged but the
stoves on the bottom, they
haven't been damaged. Okay. So,
the structure underneath all of
that is intact. So, it's
impossible for a building to
collapse near free fall speed
and increase. Without a
02:07
controlled demolition. You're
running into the path of most
resistance. I something else is
going on. I don't believe that
it was just the planes or the
fires I think that and they
examine the dust and they found
what they call thermitic
material which is like a
explosive incendiary which was
in the dust samples and that's
documented. There were reports
of the buildings were
undergoing a extensive elevator
renovation in the two or three
years prior to all kinds of
02:40
workers they had access to the
the core the cores of the
building and on the day of the
attack the the elevator company
would not assist in the
operations of the elevators and
the elevator company was the
elevator company it
subsequently went out of
business and a couple of years
after that
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
Not trying to freak anybody
out. I wasn't going to talk
about this for a while but is
anyone else like looking into
the fact that there's 76
volcanoes that are currently
erupting. Our polls have moved
astronomic. Like they're
they're moving faster than they
ever have in history. And on
top of that we've got the
earthquakes everywhere and the
fires. We've got earthquakes
that are happening at
Yellowstone National Park and
Santorini which are two of the
most massive volcanoes. Like we
have the the gases that are
00:31
coming from these different
volcanic eruptions that are
spreading all over the planet
and then on top of that we've
also got the solar flares that
are hitting the magnetic field
of our planet which if it
weakens enough can actually
cause the the poles to flip.
And that's concerning because
if you've looked into what
happens if that I mean we don't
know for sure. It's
theoretical. For entertainment
purposes only always and
forever. Of course. But at
Theoretically it wouldn't be
good. Who knows? There could be
01:07
like some saving grace. Maybe
it won't happen. Maybe it'll
just all calm down. But it goes
along also with the hopey
prophecy. Of the the two
brothers or twins flipping and
then the weakening and then the
the floods and all that that
jazz that seems to be And then
we've got the airplanes on top
of that which could either be
maybe from the magnetic field
or the solar flares or from the
poles shifting. I have no idea.
But there's a lot of pl
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 Not trying to freak anybody out. I wasn't going to talk about this for a while but is anyone else like looking into the fact that there's 76 volcanoes that are currently erupting. Our polls have moved astronomic. Like they're they're moving faster than they ever have in history. And on top of that we've got the earthquakes everywhere and the fires. We've got earthquakes that are happening at Yellowstone National Park and Santorini which are two of the most massive volcanoes. Like we have the the gases that are 00:31 coming from these different volcanic eruptions that are spreading all over the planet and then on top of that we've also got the solar flares that are hitting the magnetic field of our planet which if it weakens enough can actually cause the the poles to flip. And that's concerning because if you've looked into what happens if that I mean we don't know for sure. It's theoretical. For entertainment purposes only always and forever. Of course. But at Theoretically it wouldn't be good. Who knows? There could be 01:07 like some saving grace. Maybe it won't happen. Maybe it'll just all calm down. But it goes along also with the hopey prophecy. Of the the two brothers or twins flipping and then the weakening and then the the floods and all that that jazz that seems to be And then we've got the airplanes on top of that which could either be maybe from the magnetic field or the solar flares or from the poles shifting. I have no idea. But there's a lot of pl

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 Not trying to freak anybody out. I wasn't going to talk about this for a while but is anyone else like looking into the fact that there's 76 volcanoes that are currently erupting. Our polls have moved astronomic. Like they're they're moving faster than they ever have in history. And on top of that we've got the earthquakes everywhere and the fires. We've got earthquakes that are happening at Yellowstone National Park and Santorini which are two of the most massive volcanoes. Like we have the the gases that are 00:31 coming from these different volcanic eruptions that are spreading all over the planet and then on top of that we've also got the solar flares that are hitting the magnetic field of our planet which if it weakens enough can actually cause the the poles to flip. And that's concerning because if you've looked into what happens if that I mean we don't know for sure. It's theoretical. For entertainment purposes only always and forever. Of course. But at Theoretically it wouldn't be good. Who knows? There could be 01:07 like some saving grace. Maybe it won't happen. Maybe it'll just all calm down. But it goes along also with the hopey prophecy. Of the the two brothers or twins flipping and then the weakening and then the the floods and all that that jazz that seems to be And then we've got the airplanes on top of that which could either be maybe from the magnetic field or the solar flares or from the poles shifting. I have no idea. But there's a lot of pl

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: All detected text:
IF VACCINES WORK, WHY DO YOU CARE IF I'M VACCINATED? The logic: "If you don't get vaccinated, you're putting others at risk." The question: "Wait... doesn't your shot protect you?" If vaccines only work when everyone takes them, then... do they really work? If your umbrella only works when everyone else has one, it's not a very good umbrella.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: All detected text: IF VACCINES WORK, WHY DO YOU CARE IF I'M VACCINATED? The logic: "If you don't get vaccinated, you're putting others at risk." The question: "Wait... doesn't your shot protect you?" If vaccines only work when everyone takes them, then... do they really work? If your umbrella only works when everyone else has one, it's not a very good umbrella.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: All detected text: IF VACCINES WORK, WHY DO YOU CARE IF I'M VACCINATED? The logic: "If you don't get vaccinated, you're putting others at risk." The question: "Wait... doesn't your shot protect you?" If vaccines only work when everyone takes them, then... do they really work? If your umbrella only works when everyone else has one, it's not a very good umbrella.

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 Don't get rid of Powell. Get rid of the entire Federal Reserve. That's what you gotta get rid of. It's a cancer. Remember, who controls the Federal Reserve? Not Powell. It's the one one00th of 1percent. They have the money. Their net worth 158 million compared to the top 1% you always hear about 35 million. They control the money supply. They control Powell. They always had. They are bubble makers. They created the. com bubble. They created the housing bubble and they created the AI that we're in now. You 00:31 gotta shut them down because of them, remember, income, your paycheck, 30% of it used to go for your home and expenses. Now, it's almost 50percent. They're the danger and they will at some point pop this bubble as well. For more information on my stockpick, how to trade properly, Phil's Gang. com free for 10 days.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 Don't get rid of Powell. Get rid of the entire Federal Reserve. That's what you gotta get rid of. It's a cancer. Remember, who controls the Federal Reserve? Not Powell. It's the one one00th of 1percent. They have the money. Their net worth 158 million compared to the top 1% you always hear about 35 million. They control the money supply. They control Powell. They always had. They are bubble makers. They created the. com bubble. They created the housing bubble and they created the AI that we're in now. You 00:31 gotta shut them down because of them, remember, income, your paycheck, 30% of it used to go for your home and expenses. Now, it's almost 50percent. They're the danger and they will at some point pop this bubble as well. For more information on my stockpick, how to trade properly, Phil's Gang. com free for 10 days.

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
Vance you flip flop faster than
pages in the Bible. You talk a
big game about Christian values
but you support closing the
border, deporting refugees,
separating immigrant families,
even building detention camps.
You treat faith like a
political tool. One day you use
it to oppose same sex marriage.
The next you use it to justify
expansionism. On Sunday you're
on your knees in church. On
Monday you're backing Trump's
America first agenda. In the of
traditional family, you support
00:32
cutting aid for the poor. In
the name of border security,
you support violent enforcement
against asylum seekers. That's
not defending values that's
wrapping cruelty in scripture.
You say it's about protecting
the country but I remember
Jesus talked about welcoming
Partially True

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 Vance you flip flop faster than pages in the Bible. You talk a big game about Christian values but you support closing the border, deporting refugees, separating immigrant families, even building detention camps. You treat faith like a political tool. One day you use it to oppose same sex marriage. The next you use it to justify expansionism. On Sunday you're on your knees in church. On Monday you're backing Trump's America first agenda. In the of traditional family, you support 00:32 cutting aid for the poor. In the name of border security, you support violent enforcement against asylum seekers. That's not defending values that's wrapping cruelty in scripture. You say it's about protecting the country but I remember Jesus talked about welcoming

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 Vance you flip flop faster than pages in the Bible. You talk a big game about Christian values but you support closing the border, deporting refugees, separating immigrant families, even building detention camps. You treat faith like a political tool. One day you use it to oppose same sex marriage. The next you use it to justify expansionism. On Sunday you're on your knees in church. On Monday you're backing Trump's America first agenda. In the of traditional family, you support 00:32 cutting aid for the poor. In the name of border security, you support violent enforcement against asylum seekers. That's not defending values that's wrapping cruelty in scripture. You say it's about protecting the country but I remember Jesus talked about welcoming

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →