A “Fox & Friends” host got an unexpected lesson on wealth inequality from a retired man eating breakfast in an Ohio diner.
Pete Hegseth visited a diner Wednesday in Columbus, where he encountered a few fans of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) the morning after the latest Democratic presidential debate.
“I think she makes a lot of sense,” said Bill, a longtime Democrat sipping coffee in the diner. “You know, when she brought up that billionaires and taxing them after about $50 million, two cents of every dollar that they’ve made after, it’s nothing to them, and it would help so many people here.”
“I mean, we could build our infrastructure, the schools, colleges — we could do so (many things) with that,” Bill added. “Most people would think two cents of every dollar, what is that? A drop in the bucket? But it’s millions, billions of dollars. These 3 percent of the people that we have that own almost half of what we are worth in the United States is just deplorable.”
Hegseth asked whether he thought Warren’s tax plan would drive wealthy Americans out of the country, and Bill told the Fox News host that higher marginal tax rates had worked just fine when he was a younger man.
“It seems to me like, if I remember correctly, back in the 1960s and 1970s, that if you were a millionaire, your taxes were awfully high,” Bill said. “I think it was in that range 50, 60, 70 percent — nobody bitched about it then, still made lots of billionaires. I think once you get past a couple of million dollars, you got all the money you need. How about giving some of that to the people who worked for a living that can’t make it?”
Hegseth ended the interview by questioning whether that was a wise campaign strategy, and then turned to a server who was wrapping up an overnight shift and asked their thoughts on the debate.
“I really liked Elizabeth Warren, as well,” the server said.
A Fox & Friends diner guest tells Pete Hegseth that the wealth gap “is just deplorable,” and that “back in the 60s and 70s, if you were a millionaire, your taxes were awfully high … nobody bitched about it then.” pic.twitter.com/A9PtsOwRLf
— Bobby Lewis (@revrrlewis) October 16, 2019
Bill Barr blatantly disregarded the rule of law in Roger Stone case by seeking ‘the president’s desired result’: former federal prosecutor
In the federal criminal case the U.S. v. Stone, veteran GOP operative Roger Stone — a long-time ally of President Donald Trump — went from facing a U.S. Department of Justice recommendation of seven to nine years in prison to being sentenced to three years and four months to having his sentence commuted by Trump. The “Trump ally” part, according to former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, is why Attorney General William Barr favored leniency for Stone — and Weissmann, in a scathing article for The Atlantic, argues that Barr showed a blatant disregard for the rule of law in Stone’s case.
‘Clueless, shameless, dissembling’: New York Daily News editors rip Trump for trainwreck HBO interview
The New York Daily News on Wednesday published a scathing editorial in which the editors took President Donald Trump to task for his widely derided interview with Axios reporter Jonathan Swan.
The editors say that Swan during his questioning exposed a "clueless, shameless, dissembling president" who appears to be overwhelmed by the COVID-19 pandemic that is ripping through the country.
Lindsey Graham scolded in Sally Yates hearing: ‘Just because it’s a woman testifying doesn’t mean she needs to be cut off’
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was accused on Wednesday of interrupting former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates because she is a woman.
During a hearing about the investigation into Russia's interference in the U.S. elections, Graham grilled Yates over the decision to prosecute former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, who pled guilty to lying about conversations with Russians.
As Yates tried to answer Graham's questions, he repeatedly interrupted. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) reacted by admonishing Graham.
"Let her answer the question," Leahy said. "Just because it’s a woman testifying doesn’t mean she needs to be cut off."