Search Posts

The president annihilated a cocaine speedboat operated by the cartel last night. They never saw it coming. America's been getting poisoned by drugs and gangs for decades. The old way of doing business didn't work, so Trump flipped the script. The United States has long, for many, many years, established intelligence that allow us to interdict and stop drugboats. We did that. And it doesn't work. Interdiction doesn't work because these drug cartels, what they do is they know they're going to lose, you know, 2% of their cargo. They bake it into their economics. What will stop them is when you blow them up, when you get rid of them. America never really fought the war on drugs until now. Now, I'm not predicting victory. America loves to get high. But if they're going to kill our people with narcotics, we're going to kill their people with missiles. We knew exactly who was in that boat. We knew exactly what they were doing, and we knew exactly who they represented. You're not going to allow this kind of activity. You're poisoning our people. We've got incredible assets, and they are gathering in the region. And so you want to try to traffic drugs? It's a new day. It's a different day. Under Biden, the cartels earned, turned into a Fortune 500 company. Trump's already caused them a billion in losses when he shut the border down and killed their smuggling profits. And now he's attacking their product, manpower, and transportation. These are not stockbrokers. These are not real estate agents who, on the side, deal a few drugs. These are organized, corporate-structured organizations who specialize in the trafficking of deadly drugs into the United States of America. We're not going to sit back anymore and watch these people sail up and down the Caribbean like a cruise ship. The cartel cruise line was headed toward our shore with a cargo of death. Trump had no choice but to take him out. These aren't your grandmother's drug dealers. These cartels are now in possession not just of landmines and grenades. We're now seeing the deployment of drone technology by narco-terrorist groups. Now the cartel snuff films spreading across the world. Every bad hombre in Latin America is on notice. And they know we can hit them whenever and wherever. What was found in that boat, and why were the men killed instead of taking it? On the boat, you had massive amounts of drugs. We have tapes of them speaking. It was massive amounts of drugs coming into our country to kill a lot of people. They were hit, obviously. They won't be doing it again. And I think a lot of other people won't be doing it again when they watch that tape. But Democrats aren't happy. They're calling Trump a murderous bully and a war criminal for taking out terrorists. Obama drones an American citizen. No comment. Biden wiped out seven innocent kids in Afghanistan. Crickets. But Trump sinks a boat full of narcos with enough fentanyl to kill a small city. And they want to bring him to the Hague. Whatever happened to no new wars doesn't seem like we're not getting into no new wars. No new wars with stuff like that. I wouldn't even be surprised if the people that he unalived on that boat were just a bunch of fishermen. They shot the vessel right out of the water. Oh, so powerful. It was a speedboat. That speedboat was full of killers heading to our coast. That's an enemy attack. Trump neutralized it. Are Democrats going to be pro cartel now because Trump's killing them? The icebreakers are still going loco in Portland. They erected a guillotine outside an ice building. Trentifa wants off with ice's heads. And no one in the media cares. When the liberals resist, Trump doesn't slow down. He steps on the gas. Ice busted a drug warehouse in Texas where illegals were found hiding in the ceilings. The Coast Guard just pulled off its biggest Boston history. 75,000 pounds of coke and in Texas, Judge Pirra, she just intercepted over 1,000 barrels of Chinese meth. These 1,300 barrels were shipped from Shanghai, China to Mexico. We intercepted these precursors on the high seas and now the Sinaloa cartel will not be able to use them to make methamphetamines. That's what we're doing in D.C., but we're doing it in Houston today and you never know where we're going to be tomorrow. This is what America voted for. Anyone with their eye on 28, take note. Copy Trump, not Gav, who thinks ice is going to steal the election. You think ice is not going to show up around voting and polling booths to chill participation? You know that. The National Guard. You know that. Everybody knows what's at stake.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Chairman Krapo, Ranking Member Brown, members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. My name is Peter Van Valkenburg and I'm the Director of Research at Coin Center, an independent nonprofit focused on the public policy issues affecting cryptocurrency and public blockchain networks. What is Bitcoin? Bitcoin is the world's first cryptocurrency and it works because of the world's first public blockchain network. What does Bitcoin do? It's simple. It lets you send and receive value to and from anyone in the world using nothing more than a computer and an internet connection. Now why is it revolutionary? Because unlike every other tool for sending money over the internet, it works without the need to trust a middleman. The lack of any corporation in between means that Bitcoin is the world's first public digital payments infrastructure. And by public I simply mean available to all and not owned by any single entity. Now we have public infrastructure for information, for websites, for email. It's called the internet. But the only public payments infrastructure that we have is cash, as in paper money. And it only works in face-to-face transactions. Before Bitcoin, if you wanted to pay someone remotely over the phone or the internet, then you could not use public infrastructure. You would rely on a private bank to open their books and add a ledger entry that debits you and credits the person you're paying. And if you both don't use the same bank, well then there'll be multiple banks and multiple ledger entries in between. With Bitcoin, the ledger is the public blockchain. And anyone can add an entry to that ledger, transferring their bitcoins to someone else. And anyone, regardless of their nationality, race, religion, gender, sex, or credit worthiness, can for absolutely no cost create a Bitcoin address in order to receive payments digitally. Bitcoin is the world's first globally accessible public money. Is it perfect? No. Neither was email when it was invented in 1972. Bitcoin's not the best money on every margin. It's not yet accepted everywhere. It's not used often to quote prices, and it's not always a stable store of value. But it is working, and the mere fact that it works without trusted intermediaries is amazing. It's a computer science breakthrough, and it will be as significant for freedom, prosperity, and human flourishing as the birth of the internet. And Bitcoin is just the beginning. If we can replace private payments infrastructure, then we can replace other private choke points to human interaction as well. Now, why should we want to build more public infrastructure? Why should we embrace blockchains over corporate intermediaries? Why should we tolerate their inefficiencies and work to make them better? Why should we want the pioneers of this technology here in the United States and not fleeing overseas? A simple reason, because the corporate intermediaries providing today's critical but privately owned infrastructure are becoming fewer, larger, and more powerful, and their failures are increasingly grave. So roughly half of all Americans, 143 million people, had their social security numbers exposed to hackers because of a breach at Equifax. The Swift network has relayed hundreds of millions of dollars in fraudulent transactions because of hacked member banks in Bangladesh, Vietnam, Ecuador, and Russia. The FBI suspects now that the largest of these hacks was perpetrated by North Korea. Corrupt, low-level employees at an Indian bank, Punjab National, were able to fraudulently certify Swift messages stealing 1.8 billion dollars. It's the largest electronic bank robbery in history. In fact, it's the largest bank robbery in history. In October 2016, an estimated 1.2 million internet connected devices were hacked and turned into a botnet that for several hours made prominent websites unavailable across Europe and North America, including CNN and Fox News, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal. Increasingly, physical machines are being connected to the internet to augment their capabilities. They're wired through servers that are owned and maintained by private and trusted intermediaries, the so-called Internet of Things. Pacemakers from St. Jude's Hospital have been hacked, baby monitors from TrendNet have been hacked, and Jeeps from Jeep have been hacked to the point where they can be remotely commandeered and driven off the road. Now those vulnerabilities are inescapable in systems that have single points of failure. It doesn't matter if the point of failure is a corporation or if it's a government. There shouldn't be a single point of failure. Similar choke points existed before the internet. If you wanted to deliver a message, you'd have to go through one of three television broadcasters or a handful of newspapers. Private corporations are essential, but no critical infrastructure should rely on one or two. The internet removed single points of failure in communications infrastructure and ushered in a wave of competition among new media corporations building on top of its public rails. Blockchains can similarly disintermediate critical payments and IoT infrastructure. The technology is not yet ready to answer all of those questions today, but it is our best hope. And as with the internet in the 1990s, we need a light touch pro-innovation policy to ensure that these innovations flourish in America for the benefit and security of all Americans.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

And we'll have maybe before we're gone to, as you know, the Middle East and Saudi Arabia. We're going to UAE in Qatar, and that'll be, I guess, Monday night. Some of you are coming with us. I think before then we're going to have a very, very big announcement to make, like as big as it gets, and I won't tell you on what, but it's going to, and it's very positive. I'd also, I'd tell you if it was negative or positive, I can't keep that up. It is really, really positive. And that announcement will be made either Thursday or Friday or Monday before we leave. But it'll be one of the most important announcements that have been made in many years about a certain subject, a very important subject. So you'll all be here.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

All right, it happened, after decades and decades of Republicans promising to intend or get around to sooner or later, President Trump, an executive order that will abolish the Department of Education and doing well, it never should have been done in the first place. We did not need that Department of Education. It was a big bloated mess. It was extraneous, superfluous, unnecessary, unneeded, unwarranted, very, very verbatious. That big, silly building sucking up so much money and not helping the children across the country. I did not realize though, when it was first established, did you actually know it was established right after the Civil War for a little while and they had the smarts to get rid of it all the way back then after like two minutes, but it was established by Jimmy Carter and the support that it had and did not have. There was nobody on the left who liked this thing either. When President Carter created the Federal Education Department in 1979, it was opposed by members of his own cabinet as well as the American Federation of Teachers, the New York Times editorial board and the famed Democrat, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. History has proven them right, absolutely right. And we looked it up. It's true. They were afraid of the federal government and it would not be diversity in education that Washington would become too powerful. And Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the unions, the New York Times, they all lined up against the Department of Education. Of course, they're all crying about it being abolished now, except for Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the late great senator, no longer with us. More from President Trump today at a truly historic event with his executive order that will abolish the DOE. After 45 years, the United States spends more money on education by far than any other country and spends likewise, by far, more money per pupil than any country and it's not even close. But yet, we ranked near the bottom of the list in terms of success. It's an amazing stat. Those are two stats you don't want. The most money spent per pupil and you're at the bottom of the list. And that's where we are, like it or not. Like it or not. That's interesting. The Department of Education, they don't provide education. They study it. They put out a lot of studies. They monitor. They say things you can't do and say things you can and should do and must do, like the women playing in the girls' sports. That was coming from them. They were the filter. So Jimmy Carter was the guy initially. And like a lot of Democrats, it sounds good, right? It's a beautiful label. What could be wrong with it? Department of Education. But it was a power and money grab. It was sniffed out all the way back in the 1860s. The guy in the middle there, I think, is Andrew Johnson. He was the president. And for a short time, they had the Department of Education. There was a guy named Barnard, who was the superintendent of the Department of Education. And they got rid of it after about four months because it was highly dysfunctional and highly unnecessary. So fast forward to today. And they're acting like we just deprived students of their notebooks and pencils. Happening any minute now, Donald Trump will sign an order to eliminate the Department of Education, a dramatic and unprecedented overreach of his authority as president. And here you have an administration that says they care about children, but through their actions has made it crystal clear they do not. It will disrupt the educational services and delivery of those services to our kids overnight. When we're gutting these funds, we're taking all of this money away from our kids, we're depriving them of opportunity and we're depriving them of freedom. All right. We're taking all the money away from bureaucrats and giving it literally to the kids, to the states. And it's a lot of money, $268 billion a year. Can it be that high? Is that right? Not unnecessary. Some of the greatest education in our country took place in places like this, the one room schoolhouse. I don't think we ever did education as well since or the two room schoolhouses or on and on and on. No, forget those guys. Yeah. Remember? This is legendary. Abe Lincoln learned how to read in one of these things. Keep going through the 40s, the 50s, the 60s, the 2000s, school was direct. It was local. It was, well, the people, the communities know how to educate their children. Interesting that, well, once we had a department of education, it seemed like things started to, I don't know, go downhill a little bit. Where are we lately? Okay. Distracted kids. And now we have psychedelic kids. Right? I mean, take a look at this next one. All right. We got one with a fish head. Yeah. Kids are as goofy as ever. And the department of education, unnecessary. Just, it doesn't matter. Look, when we went to the moon, the engineers who took us to the moon, they didn't have a department of education either. Could we see that beautiful Apollo rocket launching with those engineers who managed to figure out math without a federal department of education? How about the brave souls who saved the world back in WW2? They call them the greatest generation. Right? Smart, tough, and they became that way without a federal department of education. How much was that budget again? Could it be 200 and something, something, $68 billion? Well, for all that money, you know what they couldn't do? Provide a decent lunch. Through local budgets, this is what a school lunch looks like. Very, very beautiful. Big hunk of chicken, vegetables, bread, fruit, dessert, you name it. It's on that plate. There's like 2,000 calories right there on a locally funded and served menu. This is what a federal lunch plan looks like. Do you remember the whole debate about cake? Can we pass off ketchup as a vegetable, right? And they actually worked the system so you could for a while. This is fantastic news that the federal government is officially getting out of education and letting the states do it. President Trump making it happen. And I do think this kind of sets him apart from all Republican presidents and especially Ronald Reagan. As President Trump accomplishes more and more, and we all love Ronald Reagan, right? But he's a little bit reduced, I think, because of the Trump presidency somewhat. We must cut out more non-essential government spending and root out more waste. And we will continue our efforts to reduce the number of employees in the federal workforce by 75,000. The budget plan I submit to you on February 8th will realize major savings by dismantling the Departments of Energy and Education and by eliminating ineffective subsidies for business. Well, it was a great statement. And he did a lot of very good and great things with Ronald Reagan, but he didn't work that hard. He didn't fight that hard. It was a different time. And he has been outclassed by President Trump and outdone and outperformed. Every moment when President Trump is giving a tour to Laura and Laura Ingram, and through the Oval Office, he poses an interesting question to the visitors in the Oval Office. I believe we have that clip. Where did it go? Do we? Hit it. I've asked this question maybe 200 times people come in. I said, "So who would you put in the place of prominence, George Washington or Ronald Reagan? Who would you put?" Washington. So far, it's 219-0, and they like Reagan. They like Reagan, but Washington, the father of our country, he gets the place of primacy in the Oval Office. But President Trump, compared to Ronald Reagan, it's quite clear now who is the more consequential president, in my opinion, and he still has a ways to go. We'll stay tuned. So the Department of Education, it's not happening overnight, and Congress and the courts will fight it, the DOE, the big building, all that stuff. But it's a process that has been initiated finally, and I think the country is going to be better off. I actually remember being educated before the Department of Education, and it was no big deal. It was fine. There I am in the back row, first grade. And I was oblivious to when they established the Department of Education. When I got to around sixth or seventh grade, it was like nothing changed. Nothing may have changed, but nothing else did. So a major step in the right direction, giving the freedom, the control, and the money to the states.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.