Yikes: Trump Judge Picks Implode at Senate Hearing

We're talking about some of Donald Trump's top picks to fill vacant judicial positions at the highest level of our circuit courts.

And we're talking about Donald Trump's pick to fill the Department of Justice anti-trust division lead prosecutorial role. Let me show you what went down in the United States Senate where you had Democratic Senators shift cross-examining Donald Trump's pick to lead the DOJ anti-trust division. His name is Candubbe and Adam Shift cross-examined this guy and exposed what a magna bootlicker and what a pathetic individual this can do, guys, who's seeking to lead the Department of Justice anti-trust division.

Here play this clip. And Mr. Candab, in 2016, when Donald Trump ran against Hillary Clinton, who won that election. Donald Trump was certified as winner by the United States Congress. Did he, in fact, win? He was certified as winner.

Did he, in fact, win? He was certified as winner.

He had some doubt about whether he won.

Well, under a constitutional structure, it is the states that have--

“No, my question is, do you have some doubt about the outcome?”

I've no doubt that the US Congress certified Donald Trump. No, I don't ask you that question. Do you have any doubt that Donald Trump won the election? I have no doubt that under our constitutional structure. Well, that's-- that's really not my question.

In 2020, who won the election? The United States Congress certified. Why is it difficult for you to answer a simple, factual question about who won presidential elections?

When did it become so difficult to answer such a simple question?

And how can we expect you to rely on the facts when you're evaluating a case Mr. Cook, when you're evaluating a merger, Mr. Kent, how can we expect you to rely on the facts when you have such difficulty stating the obvious? Now, one by one, the judicial nominees of Donald Trump squirmed

as they were cross-examined by democratic senatorship who tied them in knots as our group or puts it by asking them. So who won the 2008 election? Was it Obama or was it McCain? All right, now let's talk about the 2016 election.

Did Donald Trump win or did Hillary Clinton win? And the judicial nominees, and we're talking about some people who are actually current district court judges. I mean, that guy, uh, Cronin is a district court judge. Cook is a district court judge. They couldn't answer the most basic questions. Watch democratic senatorship, tie these judicial nominees in competent

mega-sick offense into pretzels here, play this clip.

“Mr. Cook, in 2008, Barack Obama ran against John McCain, who won that election?”

I believe President Obama was sworn into oath. It's sworn into office, so I'm certain he won Senator. And John McCain lost that election? Yes, Senator. Before years later, Barack Obama ran against Mitt Romney, who won that election?

President Obama was sworn into office, so I'm certain he was elected as a matter of law, Senator. And did Romney lose the election? That's the natural logical, uh, converse of that. Yes. In 2016, Donald Trump ran against Hillary Clinton, who won that election?

He was sworn into office, so as a matter of law, he was elected to that office, Senator. So Donald Trump won that election? That would be the natural assumption, yes, Senator.

“Is it a brilliant assumption you have to make?”

Did Donald Trump defeat Hillary Clinton? Well, any electoral college he did, yes, Senator. Do you have some uncertainty about whether he won that election? No, I'm trying to be precise about what I'm saying. Yes, he won in the electoral college, because

and Joe Biden in 2020, well, in the 2020 election, who won between Donald Trump and Joe Biden? Joe Biden certified by a joint session of Congress, and so as a matter of law, he was the elected president of matter of fact. Who won that election?

He was, we, we, we implement the 12th amendment and under that. I don't, I don't, he was elected. As a matter of fact, who won that election? Just as a simple matter of fact.

who won the election in 2020?

Well, was your answer be? Who won? And I lost. I would say as a matter of law, he was elected, Senator. And as a matter of fact, that there's somehow separating the law and facts

“as a matter of actual fact, who won the election in 2020?”

It's a fact that the electoral college vote was more for Joe Biden. You see, it had a lot of difficulty with that question. In 2024, Donald Trump ran against Kamala Harris, who won that election. President Trump had more electoral college votes, and said the joint session,

Congress certified him as the winner.

So Donald Trump won that election? As a matter of law, he was elected, Senator. And Kamala Harris lost that election. That was the Congress. Then you had Democratic Senator Cory Booker,

cross-examining, again, that guy can do beer play this clip. So let me make this easy. Show us your courage. Show us your independence. Be a man. Be your own man right now and stand up and answer a question. Yes or no. A simple yes or no question that shows right now

all of America that you're your own man. I don't need legalese. I don't need trickery.

“Yes or no. Did Joe Biden win the 2020 presidential election? Yes or no?”

The United States Congress. Oh, there you go. Sir, stop. Federal court said he did. President's own attorney general said yes. President's own cybersecurity director said yes. Republicans all over this country said yes.

And right now, you're not showing me. You can't even acknowledge a fact that's been established by the courts. The president's own attorney general by his own election security officials. Why should we believe that you're going to stand up to this president when billions of dollars are at stake and the fate of mergers are in your hands?

This is the pivotal question. Can you please tell me? A yes or no answer. Tell me no. I can't can be a yes or no answer if that's your answer. Yes or no? Did President Biden win the 2020 elections? The United States Congress certified just. Sir, you are showing cowardice. And that's the question. Are you going to choose the truth or Trump?

Law or his lies. Are you going to choose the Constitution or cowardice? More here from Democratic Senator's shift, cross-examining can do play this clip. Mr. Candab, when you met with my staff yesterday, you said you stood by your previous comments, including op-edgy road for white nationalist websites like the dare. In one of those in an article titled Immigration and Three twitchy Jewish

nerves, you stated, quote, "Muslim immigrants and their children seem prone not only to terrorism but to cultural separatism." Do stand by that statement. Senator, I wrote that article in Defense Donald Trump's travel ban, which I thought was said. That's not my question. My question is, you told my staff you stood by your previous statements. Do stand by that one?

I stand by those articles. They were defenses against terrorism until you stand by that statement. So what do you mean that Muslim immigrants and their children are prone to terrorism? I wrote those articles. I don't have to ask you. You've been already said you stand by that statement. So what do you mean by that? I'm trying to explain. I wrote those articles in defense of Donald Trump's travel ban, which is to protect us against terrorism. And I thought that terrorism

is continues to be a tremendous threat to all Americans. And you think that Muslim immigrants and their children are somehow prone to terrorism? I wrote in support of the travel ban. I'm aware of why you wrote the article. My question is, and I would like an answer, do you stand by your statement that Muslim immigrants and their children seem prone to terrorism? I stand by the article I wrote. The travel ban was being it. Well done, that's all I need to know.

I'll go back. Every week 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 infused temperature regulating fabric to help

you sleep perfectly all night long. Here's the thing, 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 anti-bacterial design helps you sleep cleaner and clear night after night. And they feel just as good if not better than

and ridiculously comfortable. Miracle made sheets are crafted with NASA inspired silver infused

“fabric that helps regulate your body temperature. Hot sleeper, cold sleeper, it 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 trimeracle.com/mitis to try miracle made sheets today. You'll save over 40% and when you use promo code "mitis", you'll get an extra 20% off plus a free 3-piece towel

set. They make an amazing gift and with a 30-day money-back guarantee, there's no risk. That's

trimeracle.com/mitis code-mitis at checkout. Thanks to Miracle made for sponsoring this episode. Now watch what happens where you have Democratic Senator Bloom and Thal, cross-examining Judge Cronin. Now Judge Cronin is a sitting federal judge. He already has lifetime tenure when you're appointed as an article three judge. You have lifetime tenure. You can't be fired unless you are impeached and convicted. He's a district court judge. He's

now been appointed to a circuit court position. He's been elevated and just watch how pathetic

this judge is. This guy's a sitting judge here play this club. Judge Cronin, you're already

on the district court who won the 2020 election. Sandra, under the Constitutional System and particular the 12th Amendment, Joseph Biden received the majority of electoral cards. You really have nothing to lose. You're on the court with a lifetime appointment and yet you're unwilling to state the simple fact that Joe Biden won the 2020 election. I do have life tenure Senator. I'm trying to answer your question as truthfully and accurately as I can. Miss Manion, who won the 2020

election? Senator, I agree with the substance of my co-panelist. Mr. Candle, who won the 2020

toilet election? Let's see if you can do better. I agree with my panelists. You agree with your

the the fellow panelists, the United States Congress certified Joseph Biden. What kind of enforcer are you going to be if you can't tell the truth to a committee of Congress? And don't tell me that you can't answer because your general counsel of the FCC. The United States Congress certified Joseph Biden. And then Senator Blumenthal grilled Judge Cook. Again, another sitting district court judge, how terrifying is it that this guy is actually a federal judge and he's seeking

an appointment to become a higher level federal judge at the circuit court level here play this clip. Judge Cook was the capital tack done January 6, 2021. Yes, there was a lot of violence and vandalism at the capital and attacks on law enforcement. So I hesitate to use the word

“a tack just because it would be something that would apply to everybody and I believe you're”

soon willing to say what Justice Coney Barrett has said what Judge Kelly has said, Judge Lamberth has said, federal district court judge has entered subunit court justice that the capital was attacked. You're unwilling to say that. I actually don't think I've quite finished my answer Senator. I don't have a problem with saying some of those people attacked the capital and they was vandalism and they was violent and they attacked law enforcement and I denounced all of that. So yes,

Senator, I don't think we're not like we're disagree. Judge Conan, what's your answer to that question? Senator from Washington videos, law enforcement officers were assaulted from what I saw

“the capital that was trespassing with vandalism. So I would stand by what I observed, which I think”

made clear that there were assault on law enforcement officers. Mr. Men. Senator, I agree. There were certainly violence against law enforcement officers, violence against the capital and I detest all such violence. Mr. Candle. I agree with my fellow panelists. It was a terrible day for America. There was violence against law enforcement, which I deplore. There was vandalism. It was a terrible day. The violence against those brave capital police officers was because

there was an attack on the capital and an attempt to stop the lawful transfer of power.

characterizes it as a "innocent journey" is disrespectful to those police officers.

It is also fundamentally disqualifying for a federal district judge or anyone else, seeking a position of trust. It is chilling that people who've been nominated for this extraordinary position of responsibility would be unwilling to acknowledge the truth. Oh, man. Then you had that squarming can do. Again, who's seeking to leave the department of justice and detrust division. Watch this. It's absolutely brutal here playing this clip.

Mr. Candle, who won the 2012 election? Let's see if you can do better.

I agree with my panelists. You agree with the fellow panelists. The United States Congress certified Joseph Biden. What kind of enforcer are you going to be if you can't tell the truth to a committee of Congress? And don't tell me that you can't answer because your general council of the FCC. The United States Congress certified Joseph Biden. That's about it. It's a good cook. More over here from Senator Blumenthal, Cross Examining, Judge Cook, watch for yourself. Let's play it.

Who won the 2020 election? 2020 Joseph Biden was declared the winner of the 2020 election

by a joint session of Congress. He was declared the winner. Yes. The people of America declared him the winner. Correct. There was an election and it proceeded through the normal procedures outlined in the constitution, including one of the popular votes. As a judicial nominee, it would be inappropriate to comment on a disputed political investigation. I'm asking you as a matter of fact, everybody in America

“knows the answer to this question. Why are you refusing to give it before this panel under oath?”

He won the popular vote in the 2020 election. Correct. Senator, as this is a disputed political matter and there is ongoing litigation and it's a judicial nominee. I'm not who won the electoral college in the 2020 election. A joint session of Congress determined that Joseph Biden won the electoral college. Donald Trump lose the 2020 election. A joint session of Congress determined that President Trump did not win the electoral college. Was the Capitol attacked on January 6th?

Senator, there was violence and evangelism on that day, including with regard to law enforcement officers. I think all of that was inappropriate and wrong and illegal. Certainly, there were court findings of airway convictions. That's correct. And people were convicted of attacking the

“Capitol. Correct. I don't know if any court used the phrase attacking the Capitol. I think the”

sweller court didn't use it to describe what happened on that day. Everybody in America has seen the videos. Somebody in America knows that Capitol police were injured. Some died. Wasn't it an attack on the Capitol? Senator, it was an attack on a number of individuals and that was wrong and inappropriate. Why are you unwilling to say? Honestly and candidly? This committee that the Capitol was attacked. Senator, as a judicial nominee, I'm here to talk about questions of law, not fact.

I know the United States Supreme Court has said you're here to talk about what we ask you to talk about and questions of fact are absolutely to the point when we are asking whether you

“are willing to state facts honestly and candidly because it goes to your integrity and independence.”

And then here you had Senator Dick Durbin cross-examining can do as well. Let's play this clip. Three years ago, in a 2023 interview with a right-wing Hungarian news magazine in which you failed initially to disclose to the committee, you said in I quote, "The ideological bias of universities, the extensive harassment laws that regulate the workplace and the gradual spread of self-sensorship are leading to a society in the United States that is intellectually more comfortable,

clarify your position. Do you oppose laws that protect against harassment in the workplace?

“Absolutely not Senator. Why did you say that any workplace harassment laws are leading to a society”

that is called more comfortable, dollar, more deceitful and more timid?"

I have spent much of my career as an academic and for me the most important part about being an academic

is the ability to exchange ideas freely. Sometimes I think we have seen in campuses situations in which over enthusiastic bureaucrats and enforcers can chill free speech.

“And I think that was my habit as I want to protect free speech. Do you stand by your words?”

Which word Senator? Do I mean the read of the third time?

The harassment laws, the regulate the workplace, make the United States more comfortable, dollar, more deceitful and more timid than in previous decades.

“I stand by my words because I believe it free speech.”

Thank you, Madam Chair. Man, I can do guys a dangerous weird dude, huh? A "daint" like

I was a danger as weirdo, my opinion. In any event, hit subscribe. Let's get to 7 million subscribers.

We appreciate you for watching. Let me know what you think in the comments. I want to read your comments on this one for I read your comments and everyone but send me your comments on this one also. Before you go, our book WTF America is available for pre-order now. It's the story of how we got here and how we fight our way back. To pre-order, scan the QR code or click the link in the description. Let's do this.

(upbeat music)