Bolivia’s Coup Explained with Comedy

Bolivia’s Coup Explained with Comedy

Get the suppressed truth on Bolivia’s recent Coup in a fun humor format.  We roast western media outlets that deny that this is even a coup.


The United States has a long history of corrupt coups in Latin America.  Is Bolivia any different?  The State Department and Donald Trump think so!


Evo Morales was the president of Bolivia before the military asked him to resign.  Some allege that he broke the constitution by seeking an additional term.  Others claim that the United States is behind the coup.  What is the real story?  Tune in…

Check out our other episodes and the upcoming schedule at:

The Failures of Rand Paul

Rand Paul has been considered Constitutional conservative and a non-interventionist. Both are admirable labels to have. However, over the last year, Senator Paul has failed at being either of these things.
As a self-described Constitutional conservative Senator Paul should do his best to oppose those that would step on our nation’s most important charter. Unfortunately, he has begun tow the party line more than he has championed our rights and liberties. Last October, Paul endorsed the Roy Moore’s U.S Senate campaign. This was a betrayal of his supposed constitutionalist beliefs. One would be hard-pressed to find someone who respects the Constitution less than Roy Moore. In 2006, Moore wrote an op-ed on why he believes Muslims shouldn’t serve in Congress. Not only was Moore’s opinion at odds with the First Amendment but he ignores Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution. Also known as the No Religious Test Clause of the Constitution, Article VI, Section 3 states that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States”. Moore served as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama but was twice removed, once for violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and later for ignoring the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, which found that gay marriage bans violated the Due Process Clause and Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Roy Moore felt that his personal religious beliefs were more important than the rights protected by the Constitution. Moore seems to have an incredibly limited understanding of the Constitution, as he incorrectly claimed that kneeling during the national anthem is illegal. Not only is it legal, it’s protected by the First Amendment. Roy Moore refused to respect the Constitution and, in many instances, lacked a basic understanding of the document. How Senator Paul thought this man could protect and uphold the Constitution is baffling.
Senator Paul has had an admirable history of speaking out against military adventurism and arming foreign conflicts. Last June, he voted to block a $110 million arms deal with Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately, the effort was rejected, and the Saudis obtained more weapons for their inhumane attacks in Yemen. Senator Paul’s actions, in this case, were commendable and principled. Senator Paul was right to grill Mike Pompeo over the constitutionality of Syrian strikes during Pompeo’s confirmation hearing. Unfortunately, that’s where Paul’s principals ended.  On April 23, Senator Paul tweeted that he would support Mike Pompeo’s nomination as Secretary of State. This announcement was in direct contradiction to Paul’s previous statements that he would do everything he could to block Pompeo’s nomination. According to the senator, he was assured by both Mike Pompeo and President Trump that Pompeo is a newfound non-interventionist who believes regime change is a mistake and the United States should end its involvement in Afghanistan. This is a very spurious claim considering the president had recently appointed renowned hawk and regime change fanboy John Bolton as the new National Security Advisor. The fact that Paul took the word of the self-aggrandizing Pompeo and the truth-phobic Trump is extremely troubling. Although Pompeo would have been nominated even without Rand Paul’s vote, it showed that his principals are extremely flexible. Pompeo as Secretary of State and John Bolton as National Security Advisor place two foreign policy hawks in powerful positions.  This should be extremely worrisome for anybody that is opposed to new wars.  Senator Paul’s epic flip-flop set the board for more neoconservative style foreign policy.
Rand Paul’s vote for Mike Pompeo isn’t his only failure in recent memory. In February, Mike Lee, Bernie Sanders, and Chris Murphy introduced S.J.Res.54 to the Senate floor. This bill would end the United States’ unauthorized participation in the Yemen conflict. Congress had not declared war and therefore U.S. participation in the war is in violation of Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to declare war. A bill that not only ends America’s involvement in an unjust war but also ends an unconstitutional action should be in Senator Paul’s wheelhouse. Yet, his name was absent from the list of 14 cosponsors of the bill. This bill is the exact thing Rand Paul should be championing. In March, the Senate voted 55 to 44 to table the bill. Paul at least showed up to vote nay against the motion, but had he added his name to the bill it could have had more weight and perhaps helped get it through the Senate. This was a missed opportunity to create a bipartisan motion that would do right by the Constitution and end America’s shameful actions in Yemen.
I used to admire Rand Paul for his outspokenness and the importance he placed on the American Constitution. He has spoken out against military adventurism and promoted peace through diplomacy and trade. Sadly, he has become all bark and no bite, and in some cases, he has gone from barking to sitting and obeying. If Rand Paul wants to back partisan agendas and throw his full support behind anything the White House does that’s his prerogative, but he should stop pretending to be a man of principals when he abandons them so willingly.

Rand Paul: Congress Moves to Give the President Unlimited War Powers

In the near future, Congress will debate a new Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF). I use the word “debate” lightly. So far, no hearings have been scheduled, and no testimony is likely to be heard unless something changes. That’s a shame, because this is a serious matter, and this is a deeply flawed AUMF.
For some time now, Congress has abdicated its responsibility to declare war. The status quo is that we are at war anywhere and anytime the president says so.
So Congress—in a very Congress way of doing things—has a “solution.” Instead of reclaiming its constitutional authority, it instead intends to codify the unacceptable, unconstitutional status quo.
It is clear upon reading the AUMF, put forward by Senators Tim Kaine and Bob Corker, that it gives nearly unlimited power to this or any other president to be at war whenever he or she wants, with minimal justification and no prior specific authority.
That isn’t an AUMF. That isn’t Congress reclaiming its constitutional duties. That’s a complete rewriting of the role of the executive and of the constitutional separation of powers.
Read the rest at

3/9/18 Eric Eikenberry on the Senate Joint Resolution to end American support for the War in Yemen

Eric Eikenberry of the Yemen Peace Project joins Scott to discuss Senate Joint Resolution 54, which invokes the War Powers Resolution of 1973 to end U.S. aid and support the bombardment of Yemen by coalition forces. Eikenberry explains why, in addition to ending the catastrophic bombardment of Yemen, the invocation of the War Powers Resolution is so significant—it’s never happened before. Eikenberry then explains why the AUMF gets tied up in the language of Joint Senate Resolution 54 and has stopped Rand Paul in particular from sponsoring the bill.

To support Senate Joint Resolution 54 the number to call is: 1-833-786-7927.

Eric Eikenberry is the Director of Policy & Advocacy at the Yemen Peace Project and an advocacy associate at Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain. Follow him on Twitter @eric_eikenberry.

Discussed on the show:

  •  “S.J.Res.54 – A joint resolution to direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress” (
  • Todd Young
  • “GOP Senator Once Critical Of Yemen War Helps Trump Block Senate Debate On It” (Huffington Post)
  • “10/26/17 Kate Kizer on H.Con.Res.81 and how to end the war in Yemen” (The Scott Horton Show)

This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Zen CashThe War State, by Mike Swanson; WallStreetWindow.comRoberts and Roberts Brokerage; and

Check out Scott’s Patreon page.

Civil Forfeiture is Unjust

Sen. Paul, Scott Bullock:

Civil forfeiture has ruined countless lives. It’s long overdue for reform

Justice Clarence Thomas made headlines last month when he criticized civil forfeiture, a notorious police practice that allows law enforcement to confiscate property, even from people who have never been charged with a crime. “This system,” he wrote, “has led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses.”

Hearing one of the Supreme Court’s most conservative members denounce such a shameful violation of our civil liberties gives us hope that civil forfeiture can be drastically curtailed.

To prevent future abuses, I, along with Rep. Tim Walberg, reintroduced the Fifth Amendment Integrity Restoration Act (FAIR Act) in March. The FAIR Act would dramatically reform federal civil-forfeiture laws to respect the American people’s Fifth Amendment rights while maintaining the ability of courts to order the surrender of proceeds from crime.

During the 1980s, as the war on drugs was ramping up, Congress enacted legislation that made it far easier for the federal government to seize cash, cars, and even real estate.

Worst of all, Congress created powerful financial incentives to pursue civil-forfeiture cases.

Read the rest by Scott Bullock and Sen. Paul at Fox News.

Pin It on Pinterest