 But get this, this is buried in the New York Times piece tonight, but I found it very interesting. He's a decorated colonel, by the way, in the Iraq war, but because Colonel Vindaman emigrated from Ukraine, along with his family, when he was a child and is fluent in Ukrainian and Russian, Ukrainian officials sought advice from him. Here we have a U.S. national security official who is advising Ukraine while working inside the White House. I find that astounding and some people might call that espionage. Welcome back everyone. Over the years, I've watched the declining sanity of many in the so-called mainstream media, but few come close to the sheer craziness of never-Trump or Nicole Wallace. Her latest breakdown came as she whined about her business competitor Fox News and a few of its hosts who had been criticizing the Democrats' latest whistleblower in the Ukrainian scandal. The supposed scandal here is that former Bush attorney John Yu questioned if this whistleblower's actions didn't amount to espionage. A fair and justified question, especially seeing as how we're now finding out he was listening in on phone calls, but no, Wallace seems to think that the veteran and purple heart status of this whistleblower puts them above any scrutiny. Isn't that kind of an interesting angle on this story? I find that astounding and some people might call that espionage. Except those people aren't chicken shit like the three of you and they know that he passed a background check. Have you ever noticed how much the Democrats in the media love to put forth people that they see as above criticism? Then when criticized, they unleash days or maybe even weeks of outrage and hand ringing, along with the typical claim that criticizing the individual somehow applies to an entire group of people. Though he passed a background check, it's obvious that those who hate Trump are rationalizing pretty much any sort of action to undermine him or take him out of office. We've seen this corruption first hand from the FBI and the CIA, so why not this guy? The point is, a journalist asking questions is always okay. The reaction from Nicole Wallace types leads me to believe that they're not interested in asking or getting answers that don't lead to the outcome they want. For that matter, who really cares what Nicole Wallace thinks? She clearly has an agenda and still pretends to be a journalist. For example, she wants to actually claim that Trump said he wants to exterminate Latinos. You don't have a president, as you said, talking about exterminating Latinos. Wrong. Not only was she lying when she made that claim, but her guests just spewed lie after lie and she didn't even attempt to correct any of it. The first being, words and actions throughout his presidency, he's basically declared open season on Latinos, but it's not just the language he used. You mentioned calling Mexicans drug dealers and rapists when he came down the escalator. That was day one. Then it escalated into attacks on Latino journalists. Then he ramped it up again to the invasion, the warning people of the caravan, and words like infestation. For one, I've never once heard Trump attack Latinos, and I did an extensive Google search looking for any example. I couldn't find one. Second, Trump never called Mexicans drug dealers and rapists. He said specifically that some illegal immigrants are drug dealers and rapists, and that others are good people. He was being very specific and definitely not talking about all Mexicans. Then she claims that Trump attacks Latino journalists. Instead, he was very critical of a pro-illegal immigration activist who pretends to be a journalist. Not all Latino journalists, just one. And this isn't even up for debate. The journalist in question admits that he's not objective and is an activist. What do you mean by that? Because you come out specifically and say, neutrality is not an option, even for journalists. Explain. But let me ask you that. But I'm saying that neutrality is not an option. But there again, attributing criticism of one Latino journalist and applying it to all Latino journalists. Next Wallace claims that Trump warned the country about the coming caravan and called it an invasion. As I've pointed out before in past videos, not only did past administrations call it an invasion, but even the Mexican government has called it an invasion in the past. And most importantly, it actually fits the definition of an invasion. She then makes this vague claim about an infestation, a claim that has been debunked to death. Trump called MS-13 gang members an infestation. If you have a problem with that, you probably have some kind words to say about al-Baghdadi. In conclusion, Wallace is just a hack. She can't get through one paragraph without spewing lie after lie. She's just another hypocritical, holier than now, dementia case that has become common place in the DNC media. Thanks for watching. Make sure you head over to my Teespring store and check out some of my wife's awesome designs. If you want to support this channel, please consider subscribing to me on Patreon or SubscribeStar. You can also send me a donation on PayPal and I very much appreciate it. With YouTube demonetizing just about everything I upload, it's only thanks to my supporters that I'm able to continue doing this channel. You can find all the relevant links in the description and the pinned comment. Thanks for watching. Keep coming back.