Top Trump Official Cross-Examined for His War Crimes!!!

"Stay here before, you can help someone who is helping you."

"A study of students in a community, a new playplatz, or a child who works at a farmhouse." "With GoFantMe, everything is possible." "GoFantMe is not only for Nutfälle, do you want the football team of your children?" "Or spend for small companies, a organisation, or a special education?" "GoFantMe helps you to make the idea of reality."

"Spanish action, the two of you stay together, bring it through to five more times." "So, think carefully, where can your support be?" "What is not on the other side of your project?" "Stay here before you go." "In less minutes, goFantMe.com, goFantMe.com."

"Stay here before you goFantMe, goFantMe.com." "Wow, Democrats in the United States Senate just had the opportunity to cross-examinate top Donald Trump official on the war crimes being committed by the Trump regime, and these Democrats in the United States Senate did not hold back as they were cross-examining the ambassador to the United Nations, Mike Walls, as well as the representative of the United States

of America to the United Nations for UN Management and Reform, a guy by the name of Jeff Bartos. I want to show you what went down as Democratic Senator Van Holland, cross-examined Mike Walls about the war crimes being committed by the Trump regime. Watch Mike Walls, Trump's ambassador to the United Nations squirm, and I should note,

this is the first time that any top Trump official was able to sit before the United States

Senate before any was presented before the United States Senate to be cross-examined. And this hearing was supposed to be of about an entirely different topic, but Democrats utilized it to expose the war crimes being committed by the Trump regime and the complicity. Watch this, you're going to be shocked, dear, play this clip.

“Would you agree that we should enforce that there be consequences for war crimes?”

And let me ask you a different way. Would you agree it would be a violation of international law to blow up a bunch of civilian infrastructure in Iran, because Iran did not agree to open the state of Formus? That would be a violation of international human territory law if we actually did. That is incorrect, we have a long history.

We could show, look at video after video of the bridges that we bombed in World War II,

and Vietnam, and conflict, after conflict, power plants and Serbia under the clans.

Mr. Ambassador, this was not a question. This was not a question. My question was-- It has dual youth. Mr. Well, I'm going to have to tell you what civilian uses.

Mr. Ambassador, that was not my question. President Trump threatened to hit civilian infrastructure if Iran did not open the state of Formus. We all know international law. We know there are some exceptions to the general rule that you shouldn't hit

civilian infrastructure. The enemy is occupying it, but my question was different. You don't think that the violation of international law to blow up a bunch of civilian infrastructure because the government of Iran refused to open the state of Formus. You don't think that would be a lot.

“I think that would be a violation of international law.”

I think that would be a violation of international law. Every bit of leverage that he-- I'm asking you, and if you have military units using bridges to go down to the straits of Formus to attack international shipping and launch missiles into resorts and airports and ports across the straits.

And that's absolutely a problem. Mr. Ambassador, essentially, when I got to tell you, is a veteran who had to pull these triggers. Mr. Ambassador, I think the president's absolutely in the rest. I know you all like to talk rather than answer questions, but let me ask you this.

Your testimony is that if you have an authoritarian regime anywhere in the world, that because they're authoritarian regime, if they don't obey the U.S. demands, you can wipe out their civilian infrastructure. Let me ask you this.

“Would it be a violation of the international law to destroy a civilization?”

Would that be a violation of international humanitarian law? I think what you're talking about, Senator, is a mean tweet that got with a regime that's genocidal, chance, death to America. And you're going to talk about some tough language that actually, the result of it was diplomacy.

Well, the result of it was the highest meeting in the history of the United States, in the Iranian regime was a return to the ceasefire. So once again, we're talking about somebody says, and maybe we should return to the time when the strait of Hormuz was open before we started the war that closed the strait of Hormuz.

And got a more radical and more extremist. Now, if that doesn't shock your conscience, I'm going to show you another clip right here,

Mike Walls about a statement that he made when he was in the House of Representatives.

He used to be a Congress member. Mike Walls. So he was asked, hey, remember when you were a member of Congress, and you said Vladimir Putin is a war criminal, and that if Biden didn't say that, which by the way, Biden did say it,

that you would impeach Biden and Biden should be removed from power.

“Remember when you said that, so is Putin a war criminal?”

Again, watch Mike Walls the United States ambassador to the United Nations. Scorm.

This is so utterly pathetic, play this clip.

You said that President Biden needed to make clear. That quote, Putin is an absolute war criminal, unquote. Do you stand by your statement that Putin was an absolute war criminal? I'll tell you, Senator statements I made as a member of Congress, very different than what I make now

as an ambassador to the UN, working for President Trump and representing the United States. So are you retractable? I certainly, I support President Trump in everything he is doing and trying to end this awful. I just find it very interesting, Mr. Ambassador, that you called upon the former president Biden in no uncertain terms to condemn Putin as a war criminal.

And you won't call upon President Trump to do the same thing. As you know, he is refused to do what you call the prime president Biden to do. Let me move on. I think it's quite difficult to mediate the end of the war if you take such maximal approaches and now being a diplomat and a mediator and fulfilling his goals,

working for him and his agenda is very different than when you're elected.

“It's interesting though, I know that's why Mr. Ambassador was a simple question.”

I guess you, or you're not asking this president to do what you asked the last president to. Next up, you have a Democratic Senator Murphy cross-examining Mike Walts about his statements about destroying the entire civilization of Iran play this clip. But President Trump has said that if Iran does not comply with his demands, that he will end Iran's civilization with specific threats to target civilian infrastructure.

This looks to a lot of us into the world like a promise by the president of the United States to commit war crimes. I'm sure you don't, I'm sure you don't agree with that assessment, but we have

never had a president before threatened to end an entire civilization and double down on that claim.

If that country does not accede to the demands of the United States. So what does the president mean when he says that if these negotiations don't work out, he will end Iran's civilization? Well, Senator, I think that statement in the broader context he also talked about attacking infrastructure bridges, power plants, and we all know Iran has a long history of co-bengling both civilian and military, of hiding weapons and hospitals and schools,

and using what could be just pure civilian infrastructure to also power factories for drones

“for missiles and the IRGC controls nearly 50% of the economy. I think it looks like, frankly,”

well, look, I guess what does it mean? What does it mean to end a civilization? But I think we have to look at the fact that you have a regime that literally chance death to America for the last 47 years and has acted on it, has killed thousands of Americans, has slaughtered its own people. I mean, how many machine gun bullets does it take over the course of a week to kill 40,000 of its own people? But does that matter a threat to it? I think it's civilization,

Senator, it was some tough talk. And what are the results? What are the results was we had the highest level engagement in the history of the Iranian regime with the vice president and speaker of the Parliament less than a week later. We had a ceasefire, 48 hours later. They clearly got the message, and they clearly came back to the tape. And I guess it's an open question as to whether we should try to pursue our aims by threatening another nation with mass civilian casualty. I don't know that

that's something that we should celebrate that we are able to count nations to our demands by threatening to kill. Well, as a former military member and I say if it's speaking for our military, they take every precaution possible to avoid civilian casualties. But this regime responded. And again, if we focus on the results over the rhetoric, they came to the table, they got the message, they put the ceasefire in place, they haven't honored it with the straights of our moves,

and now we have talks ongoing. More cross-examination here by Democratic Senator Murphy

straight of her moves would be shut down by Iran to which Mike Walls is like, uh, of course,

we wargamed it out of couple Donald Trump did and say that Donald Trump said it was all one big surprise. What about regime change, Mike Walls, your play this clip is also over the rhetoric. They came to the table, they got the message, they put the ceasefire in place, they haven't honored it with the straights of our moves, and now we have talks ongoing. Let me ask you about the straight, because obviously that is what is impacting our constituents in a significant way.

“Did the administration anticipate that Iran would close the straight or was that a surprise?”

Oh, I could tell you having formally worked in the Pentagon and been in the military for 27

years, and the committees I sat on in Congress. That has been wargamed over and over and over again,

by sent com, and as you know, the sent com commander was the former fifth fleet commander out of out of Bahrain. So it was anticipated. Well, it was anticipated, uh, to my knowledge, again, I'm sitting, you know, up at the UN, uh, absolutely, but at the same time, you know, the measures they took to sink nearly two dozen mine layers, uh, to go after those land-based missiles that are they are using to go after the drone, not just the drones, but the manufacturing capability

was to drastically reduce that threat, which is why I think you've seen now dozens of ships moving over the last few days. And it doesn't, it doesn't, it doesn't move in compared to hundreds of ships normal. Well, sure. I'd be Iran in violation of international law declared now the streets of

“war moves its own waters. Last, uh, it's, it's essentially punishing the entire world. And I think”

the president should be applauded for flipping the script because now their ships can't move. Lastly, just one clarification on another war goal. Is it a goal of the war, um, to enact regime change? And if so, have you accomplished that goal? The president has referred to the regime having changed in that being a successful by product of the war. The senator, I think the president's made his, uh, his goal was quite clear from a military standpoint. The vice president made it clear

and his llama bod opened the sea lanes, no nuclear program. And it's decades of support, uh, for terrorism, and have a negotiated arrangement that's verifiable and enforceable. So, not regime change. Well, if, if the regime ends up changing in some fashion or form, I'll tell you what the regime has got to change. It's behavior. It's unacceptable. We cannot have a nuclear weapon. Well, I found interesting and also very pathetic about Mike Walls' testimony right there is when

he was like, you know, because of Donald Trump's harsh statements and his social media posts,

“that's what got Iran to the ceasefire negotiations. No, it didn't. What did his Donald”

Trump lied and said that he was agreeable to Iran's 10 point negotiating framework, which gave Iran everything control over the straightive or moves, keeping all of their ballistic missiles enriching uranium, permanent security guarantees for Iran, Hezbollah, uh, the Houthis and Yemen, Shiite groups in Iraq, and much more millions of dollars per ship that goes through the straightives. That's why Iran entered the negotiating table, because those representations

were made. And then, do you notice what Walls said is, and now Iran is not honoring the ceasefire. They agreed to the 10 point framework in y'all changed the deal. Every wake up sweaty, freezing, or just uncomfortable. The temperature in your bedroom can make or break your sleep. That's why I switched to miracle made sheets. They're inspired by NASA technology and use silver and fuse temperature regulating fabric to help you sleep perfectly all night long.

miracle made sheets feel just as good if not better than sheets you'd find at a five-star hotel, both out the steep price tag, smooth, breathable and ridiculously comfortable. Thanks to their anti-bacterial silver technology, miracle made sheets stay cleaner and fresher up to three times longer than regular sheets. That means fewer odors, fewer wash cycles, and way less laundry. All that hidden bacteria in regular sheets,

it can clog your pores and cause breakouts. Miracle made's anti-bacterial design helps you sleep cleaner and clearer night after night. Miracle made sheets are crafted with NASA inspired silver and fuse fabric that helps regulate your body temperature. Hot sleeper cold sleeper doesn't matter. These sheets help keep you in the comfort zone all night long. Upgrade your sleep or give the gift of better rest. Go to tri-miracle.com/mitis to try

miracle made sheets today. You'll save over 40% and when you use the promo code "mitis",

you'll get an extra 20% off plus a free three-piece towel set. They make for an amazing gift

at checkout. Thanks to Miracle made for sponsoring this episode.

“And even let me show you Democratic Senator Cones. Here's the cross-examination”

that he did in Mike Walls talking about war authorization that this is the duty of the United States Senate and the Congress in general controls war authorization. So what do you think about, you know, a little something called war authorization, and I don't know article one,

the authority to declare war ultimately rests with the United States Congress.

To tell us about that. Play this clip. We haven't declared war officially in decades, but we have in the previous conflict in the Persian Gulf had hearing after hearing after hearing and votes in Congress for an authorization of the use of military force. We also in a number of conflicts have respected the war power's resolution, 60-day termination clock, which if we were following that would have about 15 days left. My simple question is, are you aware of any plans

to seek authorization from Congress? If a full-scale ground war begins, or if this conflict resumes, if the ceasefire stops, and would you support Congress authorizing this conflict,

so that the war fighters who we are sending into this region know that they have the

support of the American people through their elected representatives? Well, Senator, thank you for the question. I certainly wouldn't and shouldn't get ahead of the president and his engagement with Congress, and I certainly wouldn't presume that we will have, as you described, full-blown

“ground combat. I think we've seen the president as we're seeing right now. There is a whole”

slew of options in between where we are now in some type of ground combat, and you know, taking the leverage away from Iran. They are trying to punish the world and we, with the closure of the streets of Orbu's, with attacking civilian shipping, I can tell you in the UN, we had a UN record, 135 nations joined Bahrain, the GCC countries in the United States condemn Iran for its attacks on hotels, and ports, resorts, and neighborhoods, which was

incredibly notable to see that kind of unity. But, Senator, I'm glad, I'm glad also that we agree that we cannot have a nuclear armed Iran, and I'm thankful the president's taking bold decisive action now before it's the fate of complete. Before I run out of time ambassador, I just, we were not briefed on an imminent threat. We were not presented with information either in a classified setting or an open setting that justified the idea that there was an imminent

threat, and we couldn't pursue negotiations, and the absence of either that briefing or a clear request for Congress to engage in authorizing this conflict has given me a great pause. We share a view on the dangers of the region, and of our increasingly aligning adversaries around the world, DPRK, Iran, Russia, China. I am hopeful that you will be, that you'll convey the message back that a prompt briefing on what was the imminent threat that precipitated this conflict

and an urgency around requesting authorization. Instead, we will simply keep voting on more powers resolutions here that will send a divided message, and I don't want us to send our young men and women into harm's way with a divided message from this Congress. Next, you have Democratic Senator Kane from Virginia talking about how Donald Trump ripped up the nuclear disarmament deal that former president Obama negotiated with Iran. That was effective and that was working,

“and you'll notice Mike Walls was like, you know, Iran wasn't obeying the deal. That's why we”

had to attack their nuclear facilities last June. And we obliterated it to which Senator Kane's like, because Trump ripped up the deal in 2018, there was no deal for them to comply with because y'all shredded it, Donald Trump shredded it in 2018. Watch Democratic Senator Kane play this clip. That's what we told it diplomatically. But why do we need to risk American service lies because we tore up a diplomatic deal? It's madness. That diplomatic deal, Senator,

would have had Iran flush with cash. It's terrorist proxies flush with cash. The Bessel component has already expired. The enrichment component's expired last year. The deal does not forbid us from going out into those activities. This is incredibly important because the IAA went to its board of governors and for the first time in decades, said Iran was absolutely not in compliance. There is no after the US tore up the deal. There's no need to enrich

to 60 percent. No country in the world has 60 percent enriched. And they wouldn't have the

we not tore up the deal. They did not do that until we tore up the deal. We shouldn't have torn up. They were meeting. But, Senator, they were cheating on the deal. And for the deal, that was exposed

had a whole slew of hidden military sites that not only are allies, but the IAA exposed. They were absolutely surprised. I've been really generous. You had time. And we've had this debate here a number of times. Obviously, we haven't resolved the debate. But appreciate that. We're off subject. And then, Democratic Senator Kane also explains what this deal was about and how we got here.

“I think this is a very strong moment of this hearing as well. Let's play this clip.”

But most people in America would not agree with America alone. And I think the interpretation

of the actions of the administration, a lot of people are wondering whether it's America first or

America alone. I would like to introduce for the record a list of organizations and treaties that the U.S. has withdrawn from during President Trump's first and second administrations. It's a five-page list if I might Mr. Chair. Folks see that. They see the President, trash-talking allies, talking about Canada's a 51st state or an invasion of Greenland, connected to a NATO ally. They look at a president, willy-nilly, imposing tariffs on allies,

including allies with which we are in trade surplus, like Australia, you're not trade deficit. And they raise the question, is this about America first, or is about America alone? They look at the President's threats to withdraw from NATO, and they ask of the same question.

“And I think those questions have been very sharpened by the war in Iran. It's a war where the president”

has not sought congressional authorization as other presidents have in the past. It's a war where the president did not consult and advance with allies whose economies are being significantly affected by the war. It's a war that the administration has not yet presented to my satisfaction to Congress, a clear rationale or a clear plan, and the information that has been presented thus far has only been presented in classified, so that we're not able to

share fully with our constituents, even those who have kids deployed in the theater of war, what we know about it, where still awaiting the first sets of public hearings. And Mr. Secretary, it is unfair for you to be the first kind of principle before us, because these are questions that aren't completely in your remit, and I get that.

“But the issue of this war has really sharpened this question of, is the administration”

pursuing an America first policy, or an America alone policy? As you know, the war has cost 13 service members. Their lives, hundreds, have been injured, innocent civilians have been killed,

which is always the case even under the best of circumstances. It's sad that you can't avoid that.

And the economic consequences to the United States are sharp. My constituents are paying a dollar more for a gallon of gas than they were on February 27 for genius by eight million gallons of gas a day. That's eight million dollars coming out of Virginia's pockets every day, and this is spread throughout the country and throughout the world. We're reading news about allies like Australia and how they're really suffering because they import oil and what that escalating

oil costs since February 27 has done to them. Do we care about allies, or are we pursuing an America alone strategy? Now, Mr. or two, two, the Honorable Waltz, representative, not ambassador. You have an ambassador's rank. You know, you've talked about the president wanting to make sure that Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapon, and you know this, but just in case, there are folks who are watching who don't know this. The United States, over the course of

two years, negotiate a deal with Iran, with with our European allies, and with adversaries, China and Russia, and the first page of that agreement said as following. Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop, or acquire any nuclear weapons. That was a forever promise. There were some aspects of the deal that were 10-year promises or 15-year promises. There were two forever promises. One was accession to the additional

protocol requiring intrusive inspections by the IAEA and the second one was this forever promise

that Iran would never seek to acquire or develop nuclear weapons. And Iran abided by that

and tell the United States under President Trump's leadership tore up the deal. Unilaterally, our ally said it was working. The International Atomic Energy Agency said it was working. President Trump's first secretary of defense and stayed. Madison Tillerson urged him to stay in

service members now losing their lives because the United States destroyed a diplomatic deal.

When you make diplomacy impossible, you make war inevitable. There you have it folks. Let me all know.

“Let me know what you think. But I think it's important that you saw all of those clips right there”

in its full context, right? So you can see what's really going on in the Senate. And what Donald Trump's top officials are saying by the way, you know who hasn't testified about the war yet, Pete Higgsip, Marco Rubio. By the way, don't you find it interesting as well that the secretary of state Marco Rubio has had zero involvement in the negotiations with Iran, wasn't in Pakistan, was at a UFC fight. Instead, as Donald Trump was telling the UFC mal fighters, how handsome and

good-looking men they were. And Marco Rubio was out there like celebrating like he was some like

“like celebrity at a UFC fight. What is Rubio doing around? Was he planning the invasion of Cuba?”

Is that the detour we go on next? The next war crimes are in Cuba. The war crimes in Cuba are already happening right now with the Trump regime starving the people, the people to death. We could be very

critical and have serious, serious issues, understand the with the regimes. But what the Trump

regime is doing, they're killing the people, the little girls in Manab in Iran, the people who are in

“the schools and the hospitals, the civilians, the people in Lebanon and Beirut. That's what Donald”

Trump and yeah, we're doing. And in Cuba, do. Hit subscribe. Let me know what you think.

Let's get to 7 million subscribers. Newmightest merch. Head to store.mightesttouch.com today and

get yourself the best for democracy gear and show your support. That's store. Gotmightesttouch.com