fentanyl overdoses today blamed the president for their death. she also said that hundreds of thousands of other kids have died on the president s watch. the president owes me an apology and all of the other parents who have lost their children. congresswoman marjorie taylor greene agrees. blaming their deaths on biden s refusal to, quote, stop the cartels from murdering americans every day by chinese fentanyl. she is very specific recently saying that a mom, a poor mother who lost two kids to fentanyl that that i killed her sons. well, the interesting thing is that fentanyl they took came during the last administration. ha ha ha. what a horrible human being. how can he sit there and joke about it. being. republican lawmakers are now piling on, quote, shameful and embarrassing. what, president biden, do you find amusing about this? the white house isn t too amused with continuing questions about covid-19 sor-ins which the fbi director now says likely came from a w
steve bannon s team did not call any witnesses. so it was a quick trial. steve bannon and his team left the federal courthouse this afternoon after a jury of his peers found him guilty of two counts of criminal contempt of congress. a rare charge last brought a conviction with former nixon aid g. gordon liddy back in 1974. respect the decision. we may have lost a battle here today, but we are not going to lose this war. bannon sat and listened as the jury foreperson read guilty to the charges of willful failure to appear for testimony and willful failure to provide records. he ignored a subpoena from the january 6th committee last year. the same committee last night, bret, played audio of bannon from halloween 2020 just days before the presidential election. listen here. and what trump is going to do is declare victory. is he going to declare victory. that doesn t mean [inaudible] bannon says he did not cooperate because he was covered by executive privilege for his
National intelligence council judge with low confidence that the virus likely originated from natural exposure. we think it s more likely that it was a natural evolution. bret: you still believe that? there are more and more organizations that point right to a lab leak. no, no. that s not so, bret. bret: florks are more people saying it. we are hearing it around the world. more people saying it doesn t mean there s more evidence of it. if you take a group of emails where people are considering and thinking out loud and you stop there, and don t look at the weeks of careful examination by those same people who wrote the emails and then say you know now that we have looked at it, in the published peer review literature, they explain very clearly why they think it s a natural occurrence. bret: the energy department determined with low confidence the virus likely spread from a mishap at the wuhan lab. however, some biden officials
Compare the experiences. a big peer review literature that looks at that. one is coming out in the american economic review. we say if this is true, what wage effect you get. most of the action is north of $4,000. that s where the number comes from. i ll go in the middle. one of the criticisms, kevin, of the tax reform proposal is that the corporate tax rate is cut permanently. the individual tax rate phases out after ten years. why is that such a good idea? so the president supports permanent tax cuts for the middle class and permanent tax cuts for corporations. that s the objective of the planners of this tax bill. but they re also senate budget rules and reconciliation rules that are required to allow this bill to move forward with 51 votes. the hope for everybody is that when the time comes for these things to expire that they get
But here s the thing paul. the seven scientists who were on the receiving end of these letters that came, that congress grijalva sent, as you publish things in peer review literature, you re required to put in funding that has a conflict of interest. it s about trying to muzzle them and getting them to shut up. the former m.i.t. climate scientist, he s held these views for years. it doesn t matter who really funds it. and how is it different from the sierra club or other interest groups if they are funded by somebody like tom stire, the billionaire who has a very clear agenda on climate change. is there any difference? no. there is no difference. you have to put it in the context of this is now a trend. it s a campaign by democrats that they do to anyone that they don t agree with.