In the last presidential debate and on Twitter, Kemal Harris has called for the permanent Removal of Donald Trump for Twitter she's, actually doubling down and make them making this like a core talking point and trying to go to Elizabeth born into defending it, which warn resign, religious I'd, know and then carried on. But here where Hunt conflicted because the person who came to trumps defence, the most prominent individual when asked is Mark Zuckerberg, and now I have to stay and in Mark Zuckerberg gave a speech about free speech and the policing of PA political speech and content on Facebook and he's not he's gonna err on the side of free speech now at face value you have got to say, actually agree. Mark Zuckerberg and I'm actually it impressed and he defended Don Tromp social media account. Here's a thing. Facebook recently banned for life Laura loomed. Mightily Annapolis, impulsive Watson and many people view that is overtly partisan because individuals are not dangerous.

As Facebook tried to claim their just hyperbolic. I guess we'll so what they have opinions are allowed to have. Their and then they should have been banned over it, no matter what you think, no matter how bombastic they may be, they break the law. And they're carrying out with their lives. So I will say, Mark Zuckerberg at face value. I agree, but I must admit I don't trust you. I don't trust you are what you ve done, but I gotta this. Whenever someone does something good, I will always praise it. So, in this regard, Mark Zuckerberg absolutely deserves us to err on the side of respect and positivity, if mark, continues down this course of defending the rights of individuals and people to speak freely. Well, then, things are going to get better, keeping in mind spoke is still dangerous for many. Many other reasons that mark needs to address, but I will always give someone respect if they do something that I believe is good, and that goes for Elizabeth Warren when she called out big text specifically, and it goes brokerage operators who also called up mass surveillance from these companies as well absolutely do

You have my respect, but let's get started source. Do this. I want now to give you a bit of the context Kamali Harris hold down after twitter dismisses her calls to next trumps account so lobby I'll, be clear. I mean you know twitter to inexpedient tunic sectors, even funding, Donald Trump, much to the anger of money on the left before we die, then make sure you go to him dot com slashed on it. If you would like to support my work there, there's a pay pal optional crypto option a physical address, but of course the best thing you can do share this video to help me compete against the big players passive marketing budgets. I will tell you a secret: it's not really a secret, but here's what I'm doing the excess revenue on generating is going into investing in launching a legitimate news organization, editorially independent from me. This is some first start not go check it out. Ok, work, work, work, we're doing to the best we can to reinvigorate fact, based objective reporting, that's what your support leads to. By supporting this channel, it will indirectly and supports a verse, but you can do what you can. Support suffers directly

don't forget, also check out this podcast an hour and a half of content every single day that pull daily show and all podcast platforms. Let's wait a little bit here from a daily color. They say democratic, California, Senator Kemal Harris double down on calls for twitter to next. President Donald Trump account ahead of election after the Silicon Valley, company explained why such a move is not. In the end, the public's interest Harris is trying to make mixing trumps account a cause. Celebre celebrate celebrity in their democratic presidential race I was with worn for one dismissed the idea during Tuesday nights democratic debate sing. I dont want to push tromp just off Twitter. I want to push him out of the White House. Twitter is not holding Donald Trump accountable for abusing their platform to threaten people in sight and inspire. Behaviour the California Senator told seen on a Wednesday. After trumpet no effort, Twitter noted in a letter that the president has not yet violated the platforms policies. Trunk uses account to stop there I'll stop there. All that needs to be said. No,

Let's not broken any rules, and the same is true for positive Watson. You could you Laura, Loom are broke, twitters rules because she made comments about her Ober driver, but I still think on the side of punishing people for their opinions is a bad move that will just make things worse. You didn't get rid of any of these people. Ok, they're still active. Now a lot of people have pointed to ILO and they try to act like million operators deploy forming worked. No, it didn't. Politics of Watson is still Ralph. It is still very prominent he's those very active I get it. He was only ban from Facebook Instagram. Miles a different story. Ok, Milo has a Youtube channel, he's not producing for it so that they want to act like replied, forming worked, it did not. In fact, we know that you create dark corners of the internet when you push people That would be the argument essentially taking someone who got arrested for weed and put them in prison with the most violent criminals possible. It's not what we want to be doing and that's all

the violation of general principle, which now brings me to mark Zuckerberg being right? Bravo Mark Zuckerberg. I am so loosely astounded and and and grateful for, comments he made it was, it was intelligent. It was thoughtful, you're, gonna trust the guy, I'm still sceptical of whether not he's going to enact these policies because the first thing you should do is unbound those he did ban, but at face value, I'm gonna say also this. You know when Trot crossed over the DMZ with Kim Jong than it was symbolic. It wasn't like any great changes, will necessarily coming, but trot took a huge risk entering enemy territory without protection. That's me spoke that that's a lot. I respect Does it mean that guy's perfect? It means what is it you knock? I can criticise, what's happening in Saudi Arabia, but that one thing deserves praise whether you know it comes. It brings about positive changes to be seen, but it was an act that was important

The same is true for Zuckerberg is a long way to go to prove that he means this, but coming up giving a speech about the importance of free speech and what you shouldn't be policing, politics or banning trump is extremely important and symbolic. Let's see your actions come next, but I will give you absolutely backed mark wonderful. Let me read a little bit from the story from the sun Facebook found. And c o mark Zuckerberg has again declared the platform. Will not police political free speech. Rejecting claims that president trumped social media should not be shut down. Soccer bird stressed that he felt people need to see for themselves what politicians are saying to me a message that came as part of a university speech followed by a subsequent television television interview, but I will stress one point: if all they're doing is defending politicians. Well, that's actually nightmarish and that dangerous mark. You need to unbend many of the people who have been banned for four stated political reasons, otherwise. This is actually worse. Imagine

situation where you have to people running for office. Lore loom references, running for Congress in Florida how will she have access to our constituents if they primarily are using social media for their news, but only protecting it listing politicians. You are essentially creating a protection for the incumbent and the establishment, so we sure we figure this out, but you're gonna have to start by unbending people who broke no laws now I think, Mark Zuckerberg doesn't go as far as to claim that he's he doesn't go into the free speech. Section buddy, I'm sorry into the first amendment section because it says there are reasonable limits. But he goes on to say things that we all agree are beyond the limits like incitement threats, etc. Yeah, that's already illegal yearning to worry about that. We're not we're not no one's advocate for that to be allowed on these platforms. For the most part, I know some people do that's wrong, in my opinion, at least but someone expressing their ideas, be it a detestable and disgusting. Is still somewhat expressing their ideas and it's important that we can see it and and challenged

I have exposed to sunlight, but, more importantly, I do not want to enter a world where we see the left being smeared and slandered all the same. I gotta get I'm not. I'm not gonna play favorite, I'm saying when you have the left frequently come out and claim you know hey you should you should be banning this kind? This kind of speech will mark Zuckerberg made an important point. It is typically the poor and the marginalize to our impacted by this. Exactly it protects the establishment was so I'm to defend? You know trumps speech and republican speech, even though the dominant political party right now, because I know what comes next- the cliff erodes and eventually you will find left wing anti war voices next in line, and it's already and you know, Anti media Francis was banned by Pinterest. We saw that from their tosses release, that's where we have to be adamant about protecting speech. Otherwise, it's our principles which go into the gutter, so Mark Zuckerberg made a lot of these points,

and I will say straight up by respectable one of his quotes. I generally believe that is a principle. People should decide what is credible and what they want to believe who they want to vote for, and I dont think that should be something that we want. Tech companies or any kind of company doing these right. I've been railing on this for a while, then we should not allow massive tech companies to decide. What is true and what is it and they went down there. For a while. So I'd like to see some action following this they'll be fantastic, so A couple more stories we can check this out so in the greater context of the New York Times refers to it hasn't defiant. Zuckerberg says Facebook, won't police political speech. Now, he's talking about more speech. But again, I stressed actions speak louder than words will see what comes next, but this in response to couple very important stories in the democratic race Facebook rejects Biden, campaigns, request, remove Trump adds containing false information. Now, first the first problem we have here is CNBC is doing what Facebook refuses to do.

Asserting truth. Listen, it's once addressing truth. A truth outside of the contacts with article supposed to be news articles are mostly the truth, but framing as an important device. Now technically This article is fine. Ok, because the accusation is Trump adds, becomes as false information and bite and wants it. Remove and Facebook says no, however, there there make it sound, like the ad itself was false. Another reason favourable reject but wouldn't reject is because Facebook isn't asserting, whether its sure not an that's right, because the problem is, you have different people believing different things because of different, credible sources. There are alternative sources as much people want. A rag I think was carrying Conway's alternative facts, cyclists and men. That's I understand the point she was trying to make a lot of people try to use it against, but listen Trump in his video, the video unfamiliar I thought, if I believe, is the correct one is very vague it just as that tromp was trying to investigate corruption and Joe Biden got aid suspended.

Stir the prosecutor was looking, was potentially going look into charisma. Well, that's all true, and the other thing it's true is that the this Shokhin the prosecutors scientist sworn affidavit, saying that Biden was interfering, and now we have cranium MP saying Biden was directly halting receiving a payment of nine hundred thousand dollars the Rosemont Seneca through it. You wanna are, you know, that's true. That's fine, but Facebook should be arguing that and therein lies the problem and be, see CNBC, always other Alison leftists want to say no. It's a conspiracy, arts, fake. It's it's conspiracy, theories, fake news, listen no you're saying that what you are asking me to believe one ukrainian official over Another- and I can't do that. So I can't tell you what is true or not, and I would have to agree with Facebook let the ad role where's thing I'll. Tell you where that, where the paradox comes in Elizabeth Warren warns, Facebook may help reelect Trump and profit off,

and this is a Lisbon Warren making a similar point. If we can lie in Facebook as and get away with it, we know that campaign finance laws are not equipped to address on line political advertising. My plan would modernize campaign. Finance law for the digital age if you already to regulate political out on internet sign up, ok, ok, Elizabeth, I believe we should regulate what you are saying and if you are lying to get elected we should remove. You is that is that what you're claiming that you would be? Not if you would not be examined this ok, good Billy, the tweet, because, according to pull it effect, you were wrong Check this out, you talk about paradox or irony, or whenever I loved the analogy of a fire truck on fire. That's irony in it. And Elizabeth Worn is trying to claim Trump is lying and it turns out was, or she was just wrong. Ok, I'm not trying to assign at her intent, she's wrong. Okay! So now, can I accuser of lying in demand at her tweets be removed? That's the point she's trying to make. This is what

Facebook was right. I'd pains me to say that I am no fan of Facebook. Absolutely when I saw the hashtag running took us out, delete Facebook was turning on Twitter, because Mark Zuckerberg had dinner with some conservatives and unease. Leftist were freaking out like also whites, Zuckerberg has better what tons of people, although, but this one moment our port by the news as a secret meeting with consult, come on secret meeting. Supper responded by saying as dinner, with lots of different people who believe different things. It's right, but they don't want anyone interacting with anybody. They view was conservative, that's crazy and I think I could work maybe got a little wake up call when he was realizing who was targeting em and why? Well here's the problem. Elizabeth in phony, Facebook, Adam Warren said most tv networks- will refuse out of a but that's wrong. That's that's wrong! So. It was with worn, escalated. Her battle to break up Facebook by posting and add

intentionally included a false account about mark Zuckerberg. Backing present Donald Trump Warrens goal was to shout. The social media giant allows misinformation by Trump quote: breaking news mark Zuckerberg and Facebook, just in where's Donald Trump for re, you're, probably shocked and be thinking. How could this possibly be true? The ad then pivot? who disclaimer no the facebooks eel did not endorse Trump before attacking Facebook. What sucker has done is given down free rein to lie on this platform and then to pay Facebook gobs of money to push out. There lies to american voters. If tromp tries to live tv at most networks will refuse to air it, but Facebook this clash, just caches, transacts. Ok, let me stop Elizabeth worn has called on Twitter to ban tromp. No, that is authoritarian, corporate corporate corporatism. Whatever we should not be giving the private corporations the right

over our public conversations. Sorry, that's authoritarian Elizabeth Warrant is looking to Zuckerberg to solve this problem. Now he is free to do as he pleases as much as I think there should be regulation you're also wrong to, but please stop reaching out to the billionaire Multinational corporations to police speech stop and you have beta, who called on massive financial tax due obsolete Mastercard visa to restrict the sale of private legal goods to american citizens. This is insane authoritarian push, but I won't stand for. Ok, I've criticise Trump periodically. Listen the challenge now is what they are proposing, in my opinion, is remarkably worse than your criticisms of truck. That's just my opinion. You dont have to agree. I am concerned about free expression and authoritarianism within this country, and I am seeing it from these three people per day. Lily. Well, it turns out that Warren is wrong, so federal role for television there,

our rules, however, sold on that you get. The point the outer one reads: this whole poet effect breakdown the point as they were mostly false. It's not true. You can actually put up ads that may have information or be wrong there. Information suits their very difficult for people to win, especially with the times be Sullivan Precedent where, if your public figures a greater standard bearer right, you get the point in the end like tv, social media or otherwise they are private businesses that can choose what to air and what not to, and they typically don't err on the side of deciding. What is a fact and what is it now seems,

apparently I refuse to air some adds right without CNN there, the Orange man bad network- and we know that because of the very tough leaks, there's a couple of things that need to be said, though, as to why Warren is wrong and Koala Harris is wrong. I appreciate war in pushing back on big tech. I do but check this out in an opt out from your times. They say tat. Companies are destroying democracy and the free press. Add revenue that uses support. Journalism is now captured by Google Facebook and some of that money supports and spreads fake news. That's true. It does, and let me tell you that this is a real conflict here. Mark Zuckerberg is write. Another point he made was that face because the great things to democratize the ability- ability to speak up these. These correct- and I think, he's also correct him in and rough and pointing out how we ve missed that Facebook. Does this youtube? Does this twitter? Does this and its often missed? conversation about what we need to do to make the platforms better. So I will acknowledge yes, that is a very, very good thing. In fact, the democratization of of of spreading information is what I'm doing.

Now I mean you: ve got mainstream media outlets, challenging me trying to shut me down smearing and lying yeah, because I don't like the fact that we are competing and this story from the New York Times is not just about big tech companies. It's about me! It's about you guys watching in the story. They they do, make a good point. Google and Facebook. They ve dominated the space and taken so much of that money, and it is hurting news. I agree at the same time the What's your solution shut, down these companies taking my voice away. Sorry things have levelled out. Yes, Google has retained, has gained way too much power, and so is Facebook, so you're half right. We live in honest conversation are the right way for now. I will stress one more point. Moving forward. I forgive me for saying I stress points I did a lot on Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe reacting to pending litigation he's nothing more. Soccer prognosis warning wins: oh she's, gonna break you up

he also knows that if Trump wins O conservatives, upset over your bias. I think Mark Zuckerberg came out in intranet drifted ticket to save us company. I think he's now in the side of your look, I respect what he says Mark. I respect what you said here, but I do think it's a political act to protect your business and I get it. I do I'd like to see some action following this, but think about it. If Trump winds and the Republicans are saying your biased against us, well, though, come after mark, if Mark before twenty twenty says. Free speech he's budding Tropic, gonna win and coincide, let's coming out right around the time that New an analytical, historically accurate analytics Moody's shows Trump handily went handedly, winning handily. Where would I were he's gonna win? Ok, that's a there saying a lot of people predicted for a lot of reasons. It Be wrong. Dynamics may have changed, we don't know, but it seems like Zuckerberg is betting on a trumpet victory. If anyone would know I'd better, be that would be sucker Burghardt tell you what's really scary and set a mark it facebook can cure it. What you see

if they can ban by low, Laura and parts of Watson, very prominent trump supporters. Well, that's gonna restrict the voice of those who can push Europe. People have offered from that to me is nightmarish. I don't like it, I'm not a fan of Trump. I just don't one Zuckerberg to be in control of that. At invoked for him and added for four trump, but at least I know, sixty three million Fellow Americans did and I'm willing to respect that choice. Zuckerberg just gained power through market incentives. I can respect the hard work he has done in his dedication, but I will not respect him having power over the public sector, so make the right choice and move on. I want to highlight a couple more things: how about this? Ok, New York Times has previously published an opt out it has outraged about the money they should be getting from Google effectively saying it's our money, four point: seven billion dollars which they were wrong about. This is not there. This is why the new- Times has smeared Youtube on the front page, the swine

digital news outlets have targeted us on Youtube. We are not the problem, we did not create the system, but they do view us as colleagues in the mission the harm that well tell you what I have a right to speak, as do other people with nasty opinions, but you know what the bigger problem I've been as the tech companies keep bending over backwards to the outrage, remade dying, media class. These companies are obsolete Ok, I, what we're doing a sovereign right now is building off of new social infrastructure on minds, dot com, I think it's amazing revolutionary check it out some restart not, but these older companies surely that using this blog model from the two thousands and an changes happened, I fully recognise that time will come when what I do will not be economically viable either we need to have some regulation? That's my opinion. I dont know what it is, but I think Elizabeth worn Bala Harris NATO are. Wrong about their calls. The media is just trying to

got us down because, where their competition they say, Google is the problem. Ok, Google is, as it has a lot of problems, and they do have too much power. I agree, but no, the problem is you're becoming obsolete and you to adapt your business model. Why aren't you on Youtube? Ok, I don't like the idea there competition in town but Andrew Yang, that a very very great point. He said something on this visit. King about how just because our monopolies and it's a bad thing, how many people use big and everyone's like right. We use the best service professor, very serious challenge, in that there is no competition between search engines. You know Facebook is very specific, so Youtube and why would someone want to use a smaller social media network where no one is actually on? That means we need regulation because in this space combination doesn't make much sense, although I do think is good

Then there is the big issue, but I want to stress I'm sorry. I said it again, but there's two more things to point out in this article. Harris aid complained Buzzfeed reporters critical tweet was a real, really horrible look and whiteness manifest. We should not be letting politicians decide who, or should I put should or should not be allowed to speak, ok, free speech first, a moment as a region, it's the first nor should mark Zuckerberg. I can see you have an opinion about Buzzfeed, I'm willing to respect that opinion. But they're going after news organisations all the same, so they want to claim you should we only protect the truth mark Zuckerberg, but what's the truth, I don't agree with their version of what Buzzfeed Daffing Buzz. We did a fine job in that region, but they did not it's very it's very much somewhere to how they criticise Trump. So this last

sample August before signing off just shows you. What would we do what we would get if we allow one political class determine what is or is it acceptable speech and the end of the first amendment must stand. Otherwise you will have the left slamming the media. The same the right- and that's probably, why am, I think, I think, is fair to say, Mark Zuckerberg ultimately landed on this point, because what can you We do is looking at the last criticising forming the conservatives and he's like that's crazy and is not yet, though, neither Is your french elements of the rights and crazy things? Is that this crazy do? In the end, though, err on the side of free speech? That's that's about it. Sucker Burke says that there are going to be focused on the authenticity of the individual. The item is fair and makes sense, but there is up there. There is a challenge there in the right to anonymity: you're allowed to go in public wearing a mask and speak. So no knows who you are and what has all the time mark Zuckerberg is kind of now entering more murky territory. Should you have your then face behind your speech. That would do a lot to solve these problems, but then the rights to be.

This is also important, because sometimes people don't wanna, say things that are unpopular cause they're scared, but it needs to be said among genius and have all the answers. I'm sorry, I can't you out, but I will say in the end free speech is the right move? It's the best thing we can do so. I will give us. I would give marked the respect it deserves for saying this, but still I don't trust and I M still challenge and to see him do better monitoring and stick around next sudden we'll be at six. I'm Youtube com slashed him cast a news and I will see you all their just about a year ago a report came out called the alternative influence network and The researcher Rebecca Louis tried to use this conspiracy crime web to link a bunch of you to together, because apparently I can understand how Youtube works literally for anybody, people of varying political ideologies, often debate each other and that's normal politics, so you can copy alternative, influenced network fine. This has to do with Youtube software. If your fan of independent podcast Youtube errors be progressive,

was the stores pretty important, because these kinds of reports that come out are often cited by media outlets and used as evidence to get restrictions placed on our continent. Which has literally happened as of April. Those are made You're event and the researcher Mark lead which tracked a bunch of recommends friends and saw that from progressive, too conservative everybody got smack down hard. There were a few people who made it passed this great. You tube recommendation fire wall, and includes my main channel, not this childish got smack down. Not the worst but my main channel actually got pushed up a little bit. Not something interesting happened following this, and I believe this specifically has to do with the alternative and influence report, this report named certain individuals but had a ripple effect on a bunch of other progressive channels in what would have happened

is Youtube. Now has extreme scrutiny on my main channel, which for me is actually for the most part, a good thing most, I would say literally every video literally every video were very very quickly manually reviewed by Youtube staff- not some. You know third party agency, literal staff, like in San Francisco. They tell me to determine if its monetize able in reality, I think, they're hard tracking political content. So what happens is all make a video, and they will watch it within the hour and then also confirmed whether I ask them to or not. For me, this has been pretty good, it resulted in. Almost no demonization, surprise, surprise to impose TIM pool can best be described as a milk, toast vets- and I don't have a coin It was a comment in the Euro zone. I I'm sorry you're not getting credit for it, but now it's like the go to thing: milk, toast, vent. Sitter! That's right! I talk about news, I have tepid conflicting opinions very strong where one, where the other, unless it can

the issues of freedom in liberty and things of that nature right. Well, I'm getting scrutinised very heavily this channels getting down ranked very heavily and the personal wrote that report, which negatively impacted many channels of which many have since been banned. Has published a new report and I'm gonna tell like. I see it now. First, let me say this: I was Surely planning on covering a big. You know the bigger news about mugs occur, Bergen WAR and I've gotta about plan for the day, and I do six segments by our half of content, and somebody sent me this and I am reading through it, and I was just a bit flabbergasted. So here's the thing this is a new report from the same researcher Rebecca Louis quote. This is what the news won't show. You Youtube com, creators and the reactionary politics of micro celebrity interesting in it. It's about me, Dave, Reuben and Blair. White, however, It could just be because I me and I'm arrogant or whatever egotistical,

seems to be mostly about me, but also this in the report was claims to have watched every video from these creators from the period of January twenty seventeen till April, twenty eighteen she then goes on to say that we use it. I'm I'm I'm I'm giving my interpretations. That could be wrong, but it seems like what you are saying is basically mirror and Blair among other reactionary additives, which makes no sense because even though is our political leanings, you know don't like align. She claims that we use a strategy micro celebrity treating our viewers as fans instead of acting like objective, authoritative sources. So here's the thing, Blair, White, a Blair, whites, a person and Blair what makes blogs I dont know what Blair Whites job was before you. Tube but Dave Reuben has always been a comedian in political content and now political commentator and talk show host, and I was a journalist.

So when you take a look at the the abstract and the breakdown of this new report is I'm going to have to say it? It's about me, like Blair, White was never journalists, Blair White never has gone through the issue of ethics or objectivity that to claim that We, as you tubers, specifically developed a strategy to act reliable and to be, you know, have trance and see, and access to our fans is some kind of strategy I got. It met its a bit of a weird conspiratorial worldview like we're all sitting behind by MRS Garcia. How can we best attract viewers? Let's protest like we're friends with them, or I literally turn the cameron- have no script and just talk, but it's important also this, I believe, to the two to a slight degree. This latest report such a pretty good because it provides a bit of evidence to which many of us have been saying here on Youtube pertains: the mainstream media. It shows that, regardless of your,

medical affiliation we're all kind of seeing similar problems. It's also showing what happens when regular people get access to democracy, the decentralization of information. Let me let me read the object you hear, and then I want to show you some some of the funny results. This is from us. Rebecca Louis. It says abstract this article Splore is the implications of micro, celebrity practices employed by political and ideological influencers on Youtube. I take a case study approach performing Content analysis of the videos from three political you tubers from January first, twenty seventeen two April, first, twenty eighteen by analysis reveals that for these influencers micro celebrity practices are not only a business strategy. Now. Sorry answer is no also a political stance that positions them as more credible. Then mainstream media. All three conflict them stream media with social justice politics claiming both

sensationalize and silence dissenting voices by adopting micro celebrity practices That stress relate ability, authenticity and accountability that they differentiate themselves, from both the mainstream media and progressive politics as they perceive them. Thus, the Youtube, in this study. Align micro, celebrity practices with a reactionary. Political standpoint, that's just not true, but sure these findings complicate PS mythologies of internet celebrity and treat participatory culture as in that treatment, export, participatory culture as inherently progressive I actually agree, and she actually goes on to say. I guess when I when I read this I dont know what she's thinking when she sees it. I think it's pretty favourable towards me. Actually, because I mean look. It's based on my own bias

and she's not lying about what I said, though she does get something's wrong. She points out accurately that on a Tobin nineteenth, twenty seventeen out two years ago, I went down to gains, Will Florida, because there was this big speech by Richard Spencer and there was a protest outside and I accurately pointed out that the media was surrounding one guy and use posing for the camera and that everyone was act like it was this major major event and was gonna be like Charles Belinda? Nothing really happened and the protesters were peaceful and very few people shot through the speech, and that was about it and others such an that's literally. What happened because I live streamed it and I put up a log of it. So she says one source of coverage that different significantly from these and say portrayals came from the citizen journalists TIM pull on the day of the protests all stream. The events live to Youtube over the course of a nearly half hour stream pool wandered around the protests and describe the events. Direct

to his audience, while other media outlets focused reporting, largely on what action in conversation they could find pool instead report on the fact that there was very little action that occurred at all in a video later, he later tile that the media over hyped everything we note that the protests were relatively small in size and the event was locked. The event largely remain peaceful or pool the main story instead was the fact that stream media had gathered there at all, seemingly looking for a large scale conflict that never materialised at one point in its coverage. For example, he point his audience attention to the small protests turn out and also the large numbers of camera crew gathering, and then I better call for me, saying literally, nothing is happening because what the- but this is what's important to see, see all these people with cameras and phones where fancy clothes, tripods, look at all those people with a fancy tripods in big, expensive camp As this is the story visa. The vultures there are literally scraping the bottom of the barrel of white nationals and to try and find the story. That's true! That's literally what happened, and so, if you are

watching mainstream news there Show you a singular view of one person doing something crazy and we ve seen this all the time. In fact, Fox NEWS is criticized for restoring Occupy Wall Street when it a camera crew, film. The back end of a protest end of a protest where people were straggling and there was only like twenty people and that's what went on hey well wait a minute. The protest was huge guess what I pointed that out as well as is back in the day. So what we? seeing and why it widens is interesting and I'll admit a mainly talking about it, because it's it's about me for the most part- and you know with with what happened following the previous report and the negative impact to all the, U tumors views, dropping you know, channels are being deleted. Corporate channels are getting propped up. I think Looking into these things is actually rather important, but I want to stress something that I find very important. She claims that he's watched every video from me, Dave, Reuben and Blair White. However,

I would imagine that this would mean she watched, maybe fifty to sixty from Dave Reuben, and maybe you know a little bit less than that for Blair White, but I produce at that from this, and this time period a video every single day, so we're talking about four hundred plus videos, you she's watched in the end what this actually ends up being and when I find very very weird honestly, is that while she does talk a bit about Blair, White and and Dave Ruben it almost entirely shapes the world view of Youtube around me personally, admit. I find it really really weird that somebody would produce this. I also want to also illustrate state that its very strong first of all channel subscribers is way off. I guess this is that the amount of subscribers I had September fourteenth twenty eight. I now have over six hundred about six hundred forty thousand plus five hundred

forty or so on this channel, so much much larger growth, and this was published just yesterday. I believe when she talks about how you two functions: micro celebrity and the main free media. These are not things that Dave Reuben, necessarily talks on the show. For the most part he just talk about the regressive laughed and social justice and bear witness. Talk about these things, but In her analysis, it seems like she's literally just writing about me. Oh and over again and she's watched over forty, sort of my videos. I do kind of find it weird that she's claiming You know she walked all these people, but I can tell you what man like TIM Pool pops up over and over again and It's almost like every time you want to make a point about how you tubers function and and how you tumors opening the door to radicalization or whenever, like that, she litter We just saying, for example, pool for example, Pool TIM Pool TWAIN, seventeen pool twenty seventeen for pool its.

Literally like she just watched all of my videos, then wrote a story about like what she thinks of who I am now get all stress. I was- chile planning on doing vigour story about something that was more relevant and I really dont like getting into the drama. But this is an interesting kind of change or next step from the initial alternate influencers report. Should the report's you wrote back in October, which has long standing repercussions on you too, because it was carried by a bunch of news outlets, was factually incorrect in her web of connections are either by accident or through the stretch, in of the imagination she connected to meet connected me to people that I dont know. One instance, for example, is that there was a party at vit. Come then kind is one of the biggest. You know you too. Convention soap. So guess what there was like a hundred or two hundred people at this party was an open party and there were like video game you tubers and stuff. It so happens that somebody was filming. I think it was saga

I walked over our yo and I left, and then somebody walked overruns I'd go into that hot and she connected us like someone I never met before. Just because we are at a party, the biggest Youtube can vote for for the biggest you do convention in the world. It seems a bit of a stretch: of the imagination to try and make that claim. But then there are also some ridiculous connections like Chris Reagan, who does comedy and then are you pine, Okra, says, and those are direct line from him. Him directorate spent, are now in this regard. It seems that visuals. She used just had no overlapping these connections, for some reason so a lead. So so, apparently the explanation is the lines going through do given Knowed connecting Gregg under Spencer, that those guys have never interacted in any way I guess, if the weirdest and if I never even the programme, even follow each other, but even though each other or other than like Chris may have read news report we end up with this. Let me only real a bit more they're going to say, sensationalist and attention seeking first this

checks of analysis unite the mainstream media and social justice movements through their perceived mutual reliance on sensationalism and attention seeking pool Ruben. Y all discuss and critique what they see as sensationalist tendencies of the mainstream media. Let me stop right there. I was the first and founding member of Vice news, which at the time did a remarkably great job of producing real raw coverage on the ground. It was the fact it is, I believe, the fastest growing news organization in history thus far It was a smash it for you know, I'm a big took off here's that I was therefore around a year and a half, and then I left- and I left for obvious reasons, and eventually other people started leaving too and former vice news. Journalists have play it up very similar things there, a shell of their former self, they dont do the same kind of coverage yeah. We, lest we all kind of, saw different things happening, dependent who you ask the corporate taxation, the communication or the political.

Section. I then went to go Workforce ABC Universe in joint venture, which I helps. I was a prominent role to an extent, and eventually ended up getting relegated to my own. You to channel in my own space and getting what I consider to be golden handcuffs under contract, paid a lot of money, and I saw directly and spoke the higher up saying that they were going to be pushing sensationalist progressive politics because they want to get clicks. She does. Mention this dimensions. One of my quotes. Why specifically outline how they felt that, because young people, our progressive that they should go after a progressive narrative, because it old it will help build them a an audience. The general idea, over over time, we ve seen it from generation to generation. Next,

patients are always a bit more progressive in a certain sense, and so the the idea was that, if we're a new company and in five years we want to be the biggest media companies, we have to be more progressive than millennials are so they go after the more fringy of the left wing at an italian politics. You know pronouns hundred plus genders. You know white privilege all that stuff, because their bet was that five years from now. That would be mainstream and they were getting a leg up out those part of it The other issue was that was what I wanted to target, but the big play was. This is how we're gonna make a billion dollars. They were looking at vice twenty twenty year old company the time and they were thinking ok, how did vice get to be where they are now vice started in a specific space that was not particularly popular, it was actually kind of punk, rock and decently fringe, but twenty years later,

boom vices huge sentimentality was. We can't just do what vices doing now and then very smart. It's true! You can't just try it emulate vice like so many people did, however, what they ended up doing was also incorrect. Its it actually turns out that racial z is slightly more conservative Van millennials, though they are more progressive than generators. The problem there you now have you now have this company pushing further left, then the next generation actually is and surprise surprise we'll all of these companies have done miserably I find it interesting, though you know when you, when you take a look at this perspective and elegant Austria like its ultimately not really bad. She just talks about my opinions, all the time you know just citing mean on stopped, so I think that's that's fair. But you don't you don't give a decent multiplier. What I'm lookin like it's only made for sure Germans is Prager you and things like that. But what we are seeing now is you know and on recently that a big by out they sold we ve,

in leaks, showing how CNN is literally driven by go after out nonstop. You see employees things like we to go on the ground and do reporting we dont anymore, you take a look at Disney's recent statement that they have written down their investment into vice to zero That's it that's nearly half a billion dollars they put of ice or thing is gone. We can see that All in all of these companies, the collapse of these companies- and we can see thing exposed by MIKE. I'm sorry, I believe it was the outline it was called, might drop a reference in the past in this they say that people at MIKE, which was a progressive website, were being given a formula to write to generate traffic. There's no, it's interesting when you look at this and what it oh mits, not necessarily intentionally its clearly focused on me Reuben and Blair White. But what would be excellent, too, to add,

This too. This conversation is that we have seen major, highly valued media outlets, digital outlets, cop lapse and being exposed. For driving and manipulating social justice narratives. In fact, the island story specifically says that they were met. Hippy, alighting social justice? You know passion to generate traffic, and I said this said. This is why I didn't want to work for these companies anymore, and we can see it happening. They specifically wrote about an exposure and mike dot com fell apart, You can then look at because Mauro me and networks. You can look at you know. Basically, fusion bought the old, Gawker properties. Splinter then collapsing splinter news, formerly fusion, where I worked has officially and finally shuddered. They changed the name they call it splinter. It was very progressed, and guess what it did not work, because I think what Becker doesn't seem to realise is that she

in this ivory Tower Ivory Ivory tower bubble. I love thing avatar you may have noticed in big cities. I think New York surrounded by people who are all yes, men playing of telephone each other, ignoring the fact that these politics are not popular. So I will stress this point an inch July. I believe it was some verse my outlet raised, but one point: five million dollars. We wish shuddered a crowd funding record in twenty two hours, bringing about one point, one three million dollars. It is the fastest we funder campaign for crowd investment period and now we actually have done on the ground reporting from Hong Kong, we're gonna work going to give away the location for some the next on the run reporting. But we have. We have some people working on stuff were expanding, we're getting an office we're taking off and an end sheet which what would Becket gets wrong in this?

Is she claims that I still objective II and none of them know that's actually the complete opposite of what of of what I'm working on? In fact, we are also planning a major fact: checking division, its extremely difficult. I tweeted out before I tweeted my plan and my methodology you'll have to be so stout, but we ve got major major plans for literally doing journalism with fact Hackers objectively so go to sub. First, that not check it out you to tell me how many stories you see about the orange men you'll be surprised, perhaps that there's none maybe one or two, because sometimes stories are particularly beg or Trump gets. Just rope did in the periphery but you're gonna find stories on the ground in Hong Kong unifying stories on the ground at protest. The most I think we talk about Tromp is like when we go down to a political rally, and we interviewed you know both sides of the protests approach from the anti Trump yeah, because it's a big political

but we're not here to talk about the Orange man, like CNN, does nonstop all day every day. Now we're bringing back on the ground reporting, Take issue with what I do or congratulations you found opinion commentary news show that there are one of hundreds of thousands and not even the most prominent by particularly not prominent prominent enough. I guess that were growing and expanding. I dont think realized. What's going on, I think when you look at this can see that she's in a bubble, not not really seeing outside of what's happening. Although he does seem to be starting to put the pieces together. Admittedly, I think she cut it really talks about me. A lot I mean, like my name, is probably mentioned more than literally anybody else She even mentions, dare I say it, the new wants in me commentary saying this pool recognizes the potential for cooperation among those who reject the mainstream media, although he blew the mainstream media and views the reason for turning away as valid technically in one,

when discussing the swedish media and criticising their policy not to report on the rights of those perpetuating crimes. He said what does that? Do it drives people alternative media websites and it helps bolster the far right wing party, because people feel they can't trust the establishment TIM Pool twenty seventeen, despite the radicals, radicalizing potential of us of this content, This analysis reveals that political, you tubers present themselves as a necessary balance to the mainstream media. Well, I don't know where you get that by building in intimate with their viewers overtime pertaining in long conversations of a level of transparency about their production process, all of which, I think, are important and good things they claim to counter them? free media perceived sensationalism and suppress of tactics at the same they align their own anti progressive politics with the values of authenticity and transparency. Let me stop there, I'm actually decently progressive that there is a difference between being progressive, ok, which is about progress, so

the rights and civil liberties and being extremist and authoritarian I will have zero problem with narratives around white privilege narrowed, around pronouns Trans community. In fact, I think their important conversations and I've actually praised many people for having appropriate conversations going really what I've criticized is authoritarianism and I've tried to make that clear. So I haven't, let me make it clear now, like I do. I don't care for your communist by all means, let's have conversation and discuss the merits of communism if you're It's all right with a communist like beating people, we ve got a serious problem. Let's say you believe everyone should be forced to dress like wound and juggle bananas. Just don't advocate for people throwing bananas so social justice, feminism guy have many friends or anti fascist and international, and it's funny because they actually give me some flack

over a lot a lot of the content. I've made that's fair, but guess what we all agree on, don't get violent. It makes things worse now I'll admit the problem. I've asked them repeatedly to do videos and guess what they say they can't because of the authoritarianism, because they will be attack their privileges, good look man, you want to act like cancel culture and woke outrage, isn't real go talk to Dave, Chapelle and GOAT, go talk to Heaven heart and go talk to the New York Times, and every mainstream moment that has happened in the past several months about cancel culture and why everyone's upset about it go talk to build more, I'm not the one making this up, but I say this Kinkel conclusion: She says overall. My findings continue to complicate conceptions of micro, celebrity as it has been represented both with an academic and corporate discourse, while companies like Youtube, have highlighted its democratic potential, scholars have pointed to its NEO, liberal and capitalist underpinnings, as well as its authoritarian potential. This research,

to those critiques. By showing how Microsoft celebrity tactics can be harnessed for the purposes of reactionary politics less. But allow me to stop their reactionary, anti authoritarian opposing those who tell you to conform. I mean that's the latest tweet that's gone viral. Tell it insisting people conform to changing language specifically around a phrase. They call blind. Lots. They said it's a balanced and therefore everyone must conform to death or Terran. I agree we can use more sensitive terms. I agree that certain jokes are now taboo overtime. I agree that George Carlin has ACT, was actually fairly progressive and made comments about trying to do better to not be offensive. Why joking and criticising the over sensitivity. So let me ask you: was George Common Reactionary because he- and I have I mean he- was huge inspiration on my life and and still to this day, the work he did in the past as a major inspiration

George Crowdin interview, those shared by many progressives where he was like basically saying you know. Maybe should realise that certain you know wasted ways of speaking are: are you know, divisive and of an offensive, and we can do better some that something that has something to that effect, but he also has a where it talks about the extremists. That's the point yeah we can do a little, but every time we can talk to people in trying to get a better way to live, but going around bashing people. Over the hadn't screeching at them, because they use the one word is not progressive its regressive. Its authoritarian it's like a Louis would do well to actually research that and understand it, instead of just entering with the assumption that we're all reactionaries instead of during with the assumption that everything eschews objectivity, no quite the opposite, I do I do because I missed the Kennedy because when I was in these newsrooms vice news believe it or not, and then in the end at at at the initial lunch, was very objective, very, very objective.

Sources- multiple sources- legit research- isn't it and is an amazing job. A lot of us left a lot of changes happened, be it medical or or business reasons and a lot of people left, and they felt that it faltered, yeah. That's not my personal effort. This not just me. There are other vice new staff who have called out the negative changes and how they abandoned. What made them great. We probably viewed different ways like some people think that they went major corporate means cream and ignored the Big news stories, whilst others are to notice. Political trends are fake political pressure that more about generating revenue. So we leave- and I can tell you this from fusion. Yes, The objectivity is out the window, and so have I done well, of course, if you come this channel or my main channel you're, going to get political and cultural commentary. I don't know what, supposed to expect us literally what it is. A new show no different than any other political pundit. Admittedly, I much more moderate than many people. She does point out that, despite

my label as a centre left libertarian. I typically focus on progressives, and you know you know left in policy. I would say that's technically technically correct, but require some contact in that context, is a graph on the New York Times and I have pulled up which shows the right has very little left and the left has gone off the rails. So I am someone who's moderately to the left. A left, leaning, independent or or or Democrat have great concerns with the fracturing and the far left push, I suppose, if all you ve ever done is sit inside that bubble. You wouldn't recognise that, but let me say one thing: tobacco Louis. I am an expert when it comes to the formation of news media. I was the first and founding member of vice who is the fastest growing is organization in history. At least that's that's my understanding. I could be wrong, but generating you know? A million plus subscribers at only a couple months was huge and helpful launch. A new division adds a b c unification joint venture,

I saw exactly what was going on and guess what fusion collapsed: they change their names, splinter and now they are defunct. Disney has written off there. Better advice: news by half a million dollars and guess what, while these companies are collapsing, my company, just brought in over a million bucks in a day and work spending and permitting content almost every single day, with reporters on the ground to bring back objectivity and fact checking and yes We are going to specifically have a fact checking arm. It may not be as sub verse. So maybe a separate entity, but but Me when I say what I'm gonna be doing here on these channels, great you're, gonna get cultural model commentary which go to my news outlets, which is at a totally independent from me, and I will not intervene and what their covering for better or for worse and you're gonna get news reporting, you're, gonna get fact based is reporting with sources and on the ground interviews

guess what some of those journalists who are doing that work, surprise, surprise or actual progressives progressive, some kind of dont, some of them don't like me, but I'm not telling them what they can or cannot cover. I'm saying just be honest shall what's going on a guess what they have and that's the point and I will end with one last thing: is: is longer than expected it to be marked lead which on twitter who did an analysis of a lot of what's going on Youtube? I've got to tweak rights to show you and the last one is the cherry on top. He said like a Louis author of the alternative influence report just published. This is what the news won't show you you did creators and the reactionary politics of micro. Celebrity she focused on Temple, Blair, whiten, Dave, Ruby and their tactics as reactionary micro celebrities, who stereo I must say, as social justice proponents, that's a vague reductionist position of what I'm actually saying, because I've stopped

over and over again I use certified Third Party verified new sources in mainstream media. I am just critical of their declining credibility. Pitch themselves as superior sense makers. By appealing to relate ability of authenticity and accountability. I dont pitch myself that I'm literally never going hey guys. Have you noticed that I sound like a regular person? I don't do that. I don't I lit We just talk about what I think in a normal way. That's not a strategy, its literally just personality but told us much more cool, headed and neutral description compared to the UN report. She gives quite a positive account of temples lifetime coverage of the media are that Richard sponsors uneventful, you Florida speech, pools personal, immediate raw style of coverage is described as a tactic used by micro celebrities to gain fans in a pair of social relationship. I dont think its machiavellian as that it's actually want of pools or videos and it's kind of the content that is worthwhile on you to compare your son, and this kind of the content that is worthwhile on you, too

the two that Social Justice Amazon narratives at the time, any any links to it, a road show of hate, supremacists, rallies fuelled by travellers from afar, and it was a small envelope people. She describes this global context of you to being a techno utopian dream of progressive efforts. Truth seeking in reality turned out to be more reactionary. I agree with Louis in terms of the supply of content, but progressive still ended up with more views. Absolutely and that's according to marks research showing that the left is still very heavily favoured from centrist, mainstream establishment, leftwing voices like Anti trump personalities in comedians all the way to actual progressive networks like the. Turks, they dominate Youtube. He says I won't go to more detail. Assuming you are familiar with this content, she gives it pretty accurate description of it. As far as I can tell closure sounds exactly like the online reactionaries way of framing the situation, just with a different sentiment. She says this research ads.

Critiques by showing how micro celebrity tactics can be harnessed for the purpose of reactionary politics, which can in turn destabilize viewers, world views- and serve as the entryway into other alternative information sources. She's right, except for the reactionary part and I'll tell you. Why wasn't take a look at the hidden tribes report, of which, of course, that the presence in the far left are outraged by it shows that progressive politics makeup eight percent of this country. So when I speak in disdain for the authoritarian tactics, I'm not even talking about the entirety of the eight percent. I'm talking about a small portion that has a foothold in politics as a foothold at these companies are driven by corporate interests and are negatively impact in our country. I have admitted fully that all of these groups beat the fall, the far left, our relatively fringe and the main problem I try to focus on. Is when someone on the left goes too far, nothing is done about it. In fact, a defence is written about it

and in the call what I say reactionary. I supported Bernie. And earth and twenty sixteen very heavily. And they insults hopes when the white and encountered a problem, there are much more likely to bend there. You know bend over for the outrage and up seeing Tucker Karlsson, loose sponsors Rachel now to lose any sponsors when she went on with Russia. Nonsense about like Russia, China Shut of power in Fargo, was insane or when she had on that guy who claimed trot. Maybe an asset are I'm sorry. This is precise and I'm the guy claiming that and I'm the guy claiming that truck move in a russian assets in the nineteen eighties no loss in advertising revenue there, but her Karlsson makes some disparaging comments about over over overpopulation from mass migration, and he immediately oldest he loses twenty plus sponsors. If you think took across it was wrong to say it you feel free to and you solve repercussions he lost sponsors, but wasn't it right for four Rachel Matter for years to push this insane conspiracy, nonsense. I mean come on talking about Russia,

shutting off the electricity and in winter and forego, and what could happen? It's like that. Who cares what can happen? That's insane calmed down, not the only one who called out mainstream personalities with the point being missed by all of what Bucca Louis talks about is that there is an ever increasing fringe element entering media with a political bent which has insane narratives You want to talk about banning Alex Jones Fund. We can talk about it. I think it's a bad idea. I think about it. The ban, Rachel Motto, I'm talking specifically about the imbalance you can bear Alex Jones and say we can't. We can't afford this nonsense and then Rachel Matter can come out insane saying things are russian get everyone I freaked out and it actually affects our politics and you say nothing so yeah I'll call it out. Why? Because I believe in true objective journalism, I'll give my opinions, I give my in theory, but guess what I always have a source on screen, and I only whose certified verified sources. I avoid

using sources that are considered contentious- and I try particularly to use actual left leaning sources on purpose that are being set is longer than I thought I was gonna be. I want to show you this MECCA Louis tweeted, this she said periodic reminder that Rogan has given his massive platform to white supremacist. F in MILAN. You proud boys leader, gave him Mcguinness professional harassers saga of a car- and you know and Stephen prouder, multiple members the intellectual dark web and whatever TIM Pool is, I can say two things about that for one. I greatly respect and oppression being referred to as whatever I might be, because you dont know and the real is nobody does good. It means I'm done a good job, doesn't it vice news or two story about me colony on, unlike lefty. A couple weeks later call me right wing, patently they couldn't figure it out either and now Bucca Louis after watching a year about a year and a half of my content of video,

every single day plus live streams because she says she watched him all so around four hundred to four and fifty videos. She still can't figure out what I am. Congratulations, that's the point. Isn't it I'll tell you what go? Take a look at some restart net look at what we are doing it, what we're wrapping up- and you will see that your report, which are published yesterday, is factually incorrect. We are doing objective on the ground reporting. I am hiring a stab meant mainstream journalists to do to do it and we are going to be launching probably independent fact checking division work ethic outside of politicking to function. I think, in terms of checking it should not be in the same space necessarily as those working directly with sub verse, and we intend to do wider, broader new space fact checking so myself included, will be fat check. Admittedly, I only ever really read mainstream stories in my opinion on it. So you know to the extent that that could be done sure a lot of people, don't like my opinions, fine, but they're a penny,

You know when I read the New York Times take up with them and that's that met as an important point, but absolutely I will be scrutinised as will suffer content and everyone else so we're in a figure how it can be done. I tweeted how it's gonna work, we're gonna, do a random sampling of articles, we're gonna, give ratings we're gonna do regular fact checking like news agencies used to, but I'll tell one more important thing before I go. When I worked advice they do not have fact curse. There was no one whose job was to specifically call and verify the information. When I worked at fusion, they did not have checkers they assume the journalists would check the facts, and that was it and go through legal for approval and guess what, when I went political ugly. Those two years ago made it was last year. I was two years ago camera the panel of mostly progressives. What are we supposed to do by the lot? The lack of fact checking that the and for the most part, was who need them. The journalist will factory, has already done and get you

about who is issuing objectivity? It's not me. Ok I try to use only verified sources and I try to fact check them. That's literally what I do and I'm going to be dedicating resources into hiring independent fact: hackers who will not? There will be no control that some of us will have over what the factor say and the fact checkers will have. The final word on checking checking the facts. So let's talk about what's really going on and we'll talk about in the end whatever Temple is, I leave it there around like coming up at one p m- and I will see you all their- I dont believe fairness matters in politics as much as I would like it. To become an end media as well, because everybody just trying to gain political power and that's, story we're seeing right now, Hillary Clinton suggests Putin has compromised on Trump, Russia will back to Gabby, third party bed and she also goes on to say, oh, that Jill Stein,

a russian asset and I'll. Tell you why I brought up the fairness in politics and media. It's because they like to claim a story from political about Ukraine. Interference is a conspiracy theory, that's right! I've reference it many times because it is the best example of the problems going on right now in politics, according to public, oh you was seeking to help Hillary Clinton and hurt Donald Trump, I'm not making that up. It was reported in political and the reporter who what the story works than your times, so why, then? is there? No media criticism over Hilary Clan, an insane conspiracy theories which have already been de the steel dossiers, fake news and she's still claiming Putin s compromise on Trump or that rules that Russia will back atolls. He gathered third party but tolls. He has repeatedly said she will not run third party. You want to assume she's lying fine, but then you get to Russia's gonna back her up. These

insane conspiracy theories. They are almost into early debunked assignment fairness, though because they will say everything. I'm saying is also a conspiracy theory. Well, you know what I guess that's fair than right. The only problem is: I'm act reciting politico there trying to argue that the Russia Investigation, which was bunk, which was don't buy Mahler himself still still real. We know the steel dossiers bs. She still trying to claim Putin S, compliment policy said she won't run. Dont trust your fine, but why would Russia back at all This is not in an alignment with what actually happening in reality, a three the story from the Washington Post. They say at Tuesday nights, democratic presidential debate, Red Dulcy Gabert, hit back at critics who charge he's too close to Russia quote this morning. A sin and commentator set on national television that I'm an asset of Russia completely despicable gabert, won't be happy.

You're Hillary Clinton latest interview, nor will President tromp or another of Clinton's twenty sixteen opponent whom Clinton has now lodged and similar accusations about? Are they not naming just I'm? Ok, they do. I was going to say like what are they really? You know a lot of people think Jill Stein, spoiled Harry's chance of winning, and I'm going to tell you that your raw wrong. I will. I will mention that later tonight I'm gonna be having to discuss. I had a discussion with sand cedar- was actually really good and will also about that later. But I bring this up because you know his particular view is vote for aye, sir of two evils to minimize harm and mine. Is more d and avoid unethical experience, so in the end I look at Hilary or tromp and I think not going, but rather of em, I get it you be saying, but ten Heller is clearly worse. I don't necessarily disagree. I agree in a lot of weight drop this kind of bad mulatto ways to get it. You want to share my opinion. The point is, I'm not going to vote for somebody who, I think, will do

things. So no just sign is not a spoiled or if somebody supports what she stands for. It is a principled decision to defend and support that which, what debt that, with what you get, will you agree that with which you agree, anyone points? If, if you like, just fine vote for her, don't let anyone tell you not to vote about vote Hilary because she's just a little worse, listen if you about wasting about voting, for when you know, is bad simply because you're scared of something worse is what perpetuates a broken system where people are just scared of bad things. Sorry, if things get so bad because print people with no principle are willing to keep supporting bad politicians. Well, then, that's what support at that. That's what will happen. You need to stand up and say this is who I support, and this is why not somebody was like. Well, there really bad, I'm revoke worm anyway. No then you're giving support to them and you should be responsible. So, in the end no just signed

spoil anything. Principled individuals who believe in what GEL Stein says whether she's right or wrong, chose her because she represented their views. Sorry, Hilary you lost because you didn't campaign in places that trumpeted that we're really concerned about trade agreements that you support. Sweden, in a conversation on former Obama campaign manager, David Bluffs, Podcast Clinton, suggested the Russians are leveraging a number of top Eu Us politicians. She said Russia had compromise on from she accused. Sixteen Green Party nominated Goldstein of being a russian asset and she suggested Russia might back Gabert as a third party candidate, ok I'll stress it again, Gabert such he's not gonna run. Now you talk about the russian asset argument. I think it's fair to say we can get rid of semantics and say whether or not you actually support them

They can use you to their benefit, but this implies that russian Interference and twenty sixteen was worse than it actually was because in reality we learned that what Russia did while they did interfere. Had very little impact and I could be wrong, but I believe you Sure assessment was it did not impact the results of the twenty six twenty nine election. We learned that they had what like a hunter. Thousand views or our impressions, like some ridiculously small amount. I get two million impressions per month. Ok, I'm an american citizen. I get three lovin, more quote, There are also going to do third party again Clinton said I'm not making any predictions, but I think they got their eye on someone who currently in the democratic primary and our. Obeying her to be the third party candidate, she's, the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites.

And Botz and other ways of supporting her so far. Ah, every time the establishment says something like that. Take a look at the story this this. What people believe she was referring to run? just propaganda machine discovers twenty twenty democratic candidate Dulcy Gabert. Now I could be wrong. It's been since February the cover this, but I'm pretty sure they're, citing an organisation that was banned or the sea. I was banned from Facebook for running fake how to smear someone. I remember what the exact a group was but there was an organisation that was odd label, Dnc operatives and they created a bunch of russian accounts to follow that guy in album It was our cameras name and to make it

Russia with supporting him, and then I was like a look. Russian accounts are following him: it's like how DAF do you have to be to believe, while the guy got banned from Facebook for Facebook sad, you can't manipulator platform. This way him and many others got banned. So I'm not going to take their word for it again, but I will tell you this every time I see this Hillary Clinton you, Not a likeable candidate at large, ok, I mean this with all due respect. You're free to do as you is, as you do but most Americans have disdain for you. It's one of the reasons you didn't when it's. Why progressives backing you, especially why conservatives aren't backing you and again I mean with all due respect: Redcoat Clinton, storied career weather, like it or not. The point is people just don't like her. Ok, so so listen when you come out and say over and over again that

Tal see is a russian ass it or you push these conspiracy theories I'll, tell you what come voting day. You know twenty twenty, regardless of come primary day, I am going to just jam button for tools? He and it is gonna, be like this massive slogan of joy, where I just laugh- lie, laugh because I like tells you Gabert, I support her for the most part nobody's perfect, I get it. Criticism is welcome. I have criticised as well, but I think tells you has a lot going at the other candidates do not have and while I also respect PETE Buddha judge for being a servicemen who served overseas needs very, very important work. Mandarin chief, I think he had his answers on the Middle EAST and why were there and things like that? We're sophomore EC, like I get it man you were there. You are all defer to you for sure, but given the choice between see in saying we shouldn't be there. This is a mistake. You know, there's no good guys in this picture and use

we should have a presence and we're gonna bunch a really bad things on a bit like. Maybe you don't know what a vote for tossing gay and its rising because tells us a bit more progressive on a lot of issues, but I will stress: ending private presence, the war on drugs are huge, huge issues for me and explain the private present. Since I've heard arguments in favour of it saying they can often do a better job than the government, but that doesn't mean what they're doing this and I won't settle for that. The current system, we seen. Juvenile detention centres actually pay off. Judges wasting the corruption. I can't blame a business model for corruption, but I can't see that when it comes to the function of rehabilitation, not retribution, we need to figure out what works and the private system doesn't care for so I do not say necessarily, maybe maybe the promise of private, but maybe we should be regulations on how the prisons operate and certain thresholds they need to do to reach like low civism rates and things like that. Don't get me wrong. The government screws a lot of things up because they have no competition, so there's

to be a solution, but I will admit there are problems when it comes to prison and lean towards private presents credit incentive model that I disagree with so in that regard totally speaks very much to me on going to vote for you or Biden or anybody else, I'm terrible for somebody who I agree with you. I tell you this Democrats, you come out, and you say these things. Sorry all it does is make me that much more likely to press the button for totally gabert and laugh. While I do it, you cannot tell me what I believe in what to believe in and I will not bend to fear they tell me, but what happens then, when Trump? Once again? Yes, so what I've lived? The republican presidents, I mean- I gotta admit. Ok that tromp set to air. Taiwan was like men, and this is exactly what I'm talking about. When I criticise tromp about his behavior,

that the criticism for you, Hilary was that you were the worst representative of our government and Trump is the worst representative of our culture. But when, given the choice between a bad politician and a boorish celebrity, who makes crass and loot comments, a key partner in the Gulf WAR, like maybe the scalp a little butter. I guess I'm not surprised that letter. He said really seemed to gets off work. You know Trump speaks that way, aye, sir I've said this. Obama spoke much more fiercely articulately strongly, but listen! That's not what people are concerned. But and I can respect and understand that which means if we want to win ok and defeat tromp, which I really don't think lab, and twenty two what we need to have a smart, respectable charismatic individual who can be reliable. Who can talk about core issues that are important, and not sling insane conspiracy theories about from an autopsy gabert. When you come out and ran about compromise

been through this for three years? Like do you know what I'm out I dont want? I dont want this. Thank you too, for salmon, we talk about Trumpery, loose you're right. Let's talk about the issues. Instead, there spinning encircles, you go to Youtube. I was that there was of an interview. A series of interviews. A trump supports the Dallas, rarely on Fox NEWS and a lot of we're saying they just won't stop talking about impeachment and trumpet scandal and people are like their works are what you think is more important: the economy, healthcare, immigration, jobs, doc, I tell you what man Twitter is not real life Youtube is not real life. Regular people are paying attention, twenty four seven to politics, and they don't know about that. Any of this nonsense all their thing about is how are things going for my family and whose offering me something? That's actually gonna be good for four. For my life, it's not even a silly but the country why, see some people say things like: we need a strong armed forces. It really comes down to what they expect

in their day to day lives- and I tell you this- Russia is not one of them. So you know what this is. This is one of the biggest issues I take with Democrats. Why think from going to admit, it went when Hillary Clinton, who is one asked you know strong voice of the Democrats had, have I mean she's, not she might run, who knows, but she She is a prominent figure more so than any other Bayliss candidates, and I am referring to be mean you know Yang, is rising very quickly, but that there is a big gap between him and where Hillary Clinton is that in terms of prominence and celebrity in the same is true for tossing everybody else, but when she in human, where Hillary Clinton is that, in terms of prominence in celebrity in the same is true for and some sitting here. Thinking like all I can do is what on principle, and while I stand the challenges facing tossing and Yang Those are my, I put. It tells you a little bit higher than Yang because of her service record, because she litter

just a couple weeks with the National Guard is a major and I think the president really really it's one of the like. If I'm lookin Erasmus, why should be commander in chief of the armed forces and you served and you're a major and even Buddha? Judged? Yes, absolutely I'm like that's like the first that that's like ten points and then talk what your policies on what those are eaten individual points, seriously understanding the system that is the military and conflict and overseas and defence. That's huge to me monsieur trumps, what that guy from the businessmen and that's it it's a positive. To what our trading economy. So it's no surprise. The economy is doing well trumps, a business man, but it's also the true to say that trumps got a bad attitude. So I look for somebody who you know who's gonna, be that more of a charismatic leader, especially for Mandarin chief and so look at comes out of this. I back to disagree with the Trump supporters. I with them on a lot of core issues about the media, manipulation and have like Google, Botswana, Hillary Clinton, okay. So here's the thing

wholesale knows this. I'd. Imagine, and- and I know this- that I can sit next Trump supporter and we can just I disagree and then we can have a beer you to slice of pizza and will vote when we'll take will take in the voting booth and say I hope more will agree with me that new, but the end of the day, man, let's have a beer and a sliced pizza and that's the America. I love you know what we are constantly struggling over, what the right way to go. But when you get the Democrats pushing you know just policies that umbrella people agree with divisive accusations of russian assets it's like do. You are so far off kilter that that me here who want to support the Democrats, can't I can't and then and then supporters are just laughin bucket, I'm sorry puppy and that's that's literally with they they laugh and their alike and their desperately trying to get me to support Republican. It's not gonna happen. You know. Look there. There's, in point, I suppose when the Democrats totally off the rails- and I have no choice, but I just don't see it because in the end

even have told me of the nominee. I know where my principal stand, and that means I'm gonna buy vote for votes. I would vote third party. Ok, tromp sending troops a Saudi Arabia do never gonna happen. Like I said, I'm not going to support somebody who does something that is completely at odds with my ethic and when it comes to tall sees, you know wider purview of a lot of four issues, I'm like begrudgingly fence sitting on many of them. However, on big core issues, which you frequently talks about, they really do speak with me, so tromp. He taken over action in Syria like will pull the troops out, unlike my leaned toward appeared to be a good thing. I mentioned the complications, but then bolsters troops in Saudi Arabia, and that is a hard hard negative. Sorry, ok, right what saying you're wrong for your opinion under saying I disagree, and what I would like. What I would like to see is kind of more of like national rivalry, as it were where it's like. You know. The Democrats and Republicans know that there's a fierce battle had we ve got it, we ve got a rally. R r r are true.

To go, get that vote up and we can win, and then we lose. We accept it. Ok, George Bush one I remember there ever was furious Supreme Court. I group I gripped during that. Time was like an approach. Tat. I was angry over the war in Iraq and a lot of what was going on and then over. One and I'm ok. You know what now and then Obama one again and unlike well. I didn't want from second time by this outworks. Ok, it's like we're we're in this battle of ideas, you don't always win this to me is being a sore loser. They won't stop in it and its frustrating to me, because we need a clean when we need a clean victory. We that we need a responsible care. Medic individual, to lead us and we're not going to get that if we look like sore losers and this one politically homeless, because Hillary Clinton is now talking about compromise jewels, diving, a russian asset and smearing tells you Gabert, and that is being a sore loser. Look I get it. You can point to dropping a sore. When are you once you want shout about Hillary Clinton but find that they're gonna do their thing? They're going to the thing is going speak to their people? If we want to win, we can't play these guys.

So you know what I don't even consider myself. You know like. I use really consider myself like on the democrat side, Russia with Bernie Sanders coming and but its military Bernie was independent. So that was like a big resurgence. I think pulled people to the Democrats. Now, I'm kind of like I'm independent, not affiliated Eileen kind of left on policy, but you ve got you ve got a president. Who won and who is championing those factories who is, he was being praised by you, know his his orders, and there is eight there's a democratic republic. In view of the world, what are fighting over what is true, what is what isn't Kay and I'm sitting are being like you want to. You want you want some talk about. Tromp talk, look, look at what is supporters are saying, and then they say things I will never went over his diehard supporters I'll never give up. Ok, then, what what what they were doing just just stop just give up than right, no. They really do think that they're gonna get the vote out by creating this nightmare reality where Trump is an evil. Russian try

destroy the world and its like dude trumps, another guy with with ideas with it with personality, and I'm a single around saying here, He's got his own personalities got his own ideas Zone mission, an agenda on passions and it speaks of some people and not to others, and you can't just you know all and by saying this, what they dont understand. The Democrats is that people in different parts of the country have a different world view. You have to ask, can I come inside your worldview and other conversations with you and figure out where we come together so that we can live in harmony, but what is happening as you have one person's? Has I read the New York Times? Well, I read you know the washing examiners had why and then. Instead of saying like what's up we assess this breakdown come together. You end up with a left screaming in saying no, and here I am trying to be like. Let me let me Glinda, come inside your bubble. Have a conversation so

and I M there, but I will say later tonight, I'll do some more promised where I did have a long conversation with SAM Cedar check it out. It'll be up at some point, maybe like Sevenpm its check two hours long is really good. It was really good. I don't think I know then I don't think SAM is everything I think SAM you a lot of things. I didn't. I hope I believe that there are things I knew that he didn't. You said. I know that about like some other things and I think in the attic just two different people who see thing differently trying to figure out where those those risks together. So Oliver there much respect to SAM. It was really so. I really respect at random. Sit around next item. It'll be four p m on the main channel Youtube com slashed him cast, and I will see you there. Donald Trump often talks about suing people who wrong him, but rarely ever does well. Only now, according to the washing examiner they're saying that Trump campaign to sue CNN over Pro impeachment bias

and demands a substantial payment, why this is the result of project vera. Tosses worked, so you know what I love the left and, right I get it. I d logical political battle there are many journalists who I won't name who are biologically on the left and don't like the right so naturally try to smear everything yea. I get it some writers have said. Oh, it's a big, nothing, burger overdoses found nothing. I disagree, I think we're finding one, The morale is shattered among at least some Synod CNN employees and have to imagine that there are more than the people you see on these videos, but we can operate in the facts. Okay, so fine, very tough found a handful of employees who are the morality CS as a shell of its former self one guy twenty five year veteran saying the night I'm calling Zachary all BS, saying that they there's we pressed So I never even call and intervene in this way, but we also heard from March soccer on the phone call his own voice. He believes vagueness. He believes that factual reporting

conspiracy and he wanted to run with the fake news of Trump wanting above the two thousand mile long moat, with alligators in it dude. I think tat this is a little out there, but come on man that is not based in reality and tromp denied it. But it's a fact that the huge sums in response to this. They ve specifically cited Frumps Administration is campaign spaces, legally citing vera tosses video and comments. Made in those videos as they threatened to sue so yeah. This was pretty significant. Advertisers part. Look I get it if you want to criticise James, the key thing is biased. It's all fine! You call whenever you want. In the end, this had a real impact Ok, you can say yeah, but trot trouble leaves vagueness. So what let the court's decide? That's gonna happen. If we actually sues Wolsey, I'd like to know you're an association for their allowed to have their opinion about the president, they're, not ethical, but a lot of people are thinking that you know the suit does go through when they reach. If they reach discovery

I mean I could be really really bad. Discovery is when you actually can request access to computers and messages in it. You know Emil's showing do they actually try to hide the truth. So, in the end, I be surprised if a suit actually carries on we'll see about a lawyer, but imagine if they get there. What will this discovery and you find an email? We ve got one person saying hey that thing about Tromp isn't true. I may say something like who cares run it anyway. That's what they'll be looking for so we'll see. You must read the story from the Washington exam tromp campaign to sue CNN over Pro impeachment bias outrage by secretly taped Anti Trump comments attributed to sin and present Jeff, sucker and others in the cable network Present trumps campaign is vowing to sue the company for a substantial payment of damages, hygienic quantify that seriously in a four page letter to CNN, sucker and executive. Vice President David vigilant vigilantes,

really well Trump attorneys Charles J, harder cited years of Anti Trump, buys the network and claimed the cable giant has broken its promise of excellence in journalism, lasting several examples from the just released project veritable videotapes have seen an insiders describing this demand for impeachment. Above all else, harder wrote that they are merely the tip of the iceberg of the evidence. My clients have accumulated over recent years. He added never in the history of this country has a president been the subject of sir a sustained barrage of unfair, unfounded, unethical and unlawful attacks by so called means news as the current situation. While all stop here, listen for one, I think scrutiny of the president is absolutely paramount injured for journalists. I also despair to point out that scene and has gone well beyond what whatever that would be. You know trumped up something running a story on it and then bring someone to talk about. It makes sense but doing all trump. All the time panels, having

shows dedicated to it. Doing CNN Dotcom, slash impeachment. Yes, there can modifying a political issue to get ratings and make money, and they they ignore bigger stories. Why, in fact you know, as I see it, and down the ground in Hong Kong or Barcelona. Why? There is huge who's in Hong Kong and Barcelona. Did you not here, unfortunately, probably didn't well, Hong Kong, it at Barcelona see NEWS, happens, ceilings to cover they dont anymore, because they have gone well beyond. Actually just trying- challenge the president and now they're just obsessed, say mistake: they made twenty fifteen twenty sixty I'll. Tell you what we offer at sub verse, have had people on the ground in Hong Kong and now another in other places as well, and if you go to our sights of verse dot net speed up, you should definitely take out a check out its new a lot of work. To do it's difficult takes time, you're not going to find a story about Donald Trump you're, not going to see a picture of the orange men

because we do real news now. I gotta do these channels, of course my opinion pellicle commentary and because the big you know, big big, in this country is dominated by tromp. I definitely talk about it. I'm not gonna act like on perfect by no means, but I will make that any extra resources we gain can fund real, honest journalism, editorially independent from what I produce with real people on the ground. When we do go to like me, would have Trump rally when it we had a report on the ground Trump Rally: Minnesota interviewed Trump supporters, as well as editor protesters to get a real? It's a real due to the best of our abilities were CNN. It I don't they are there on the ground of these places. They used to be lot more, not so much worthy on the ground in Hong Kong. I don't know where they are consuming from it's kind of crazy right when you think about Siemens doing it's just all trump, all the time kind of a kind of sad beyond us. They so that harder represents both trump and the campaign. The letter was provided exclusively to secrets due to what end is shown

full belladonna secrets. Is CNN spokesmen don't accept. This is nothing more than a desperate pr stunt and doesn't merit a response, while media typically protected by the four amendment harder said: the biased decided at sea, and I was a violation of the land whom act by constituting this representations to the public drew advertisers and to others to distribute truly fair and balanced news. That is a court challenge. I do not think fly camels be we'll see and I'm going to say when a biased, it's true and in a judge is going to. I can tell you it's true or not so, but we'll see will see if they have evidence. Where they're like we know it's not true yeah, then that's that serious accordingly, my clients in tend to file legal action against you to seek compensatory damages treble damages punitive damages in junk give relief, reimbursement of legal costs and all other available legal and equitable remedies to the maximum extent permitted by law. Once more, he suggested that, even if the campaign unseen and come to an agreement, he would seek money as part of that deal, please contact the undersigned to discuss an appropriate, resolute.

Of this matter, which would include a substantial payment of damages, as well as as as well as all other appropriate measures that are necessary to fully address the magnitude of a situation, wrote harder in the letter sent by overnight male and female this day Trump has long been at war with CNN and other media policy. Dubbs fake news scenes wider support, agenda, Costa and tromp have tussled publicly and costs are wrote a book sharply critical of the president titled the enemy of the people. You don't really funny about these. Like Anti Cavanaugh, unlike anti tromp books, they too not to sell very well. You know what was best seller, though twelve rules for life- hey, that's Jordan, Pearson, and it wasn't overtly political. That's the point. Cape and naturally also this Molly Hemingway's book and Cavanaugh sold remarkably better than the New York Times. You know Anti Cavanaugh peace, so it out. Let me, across the thing, in my view, was all just a drama pr and make money. These people have no shame now imminent,

I say this as a silly. Ok is dropping associate Annette silly. I don't think you can win come on we We know seen on its biased, but you know what they're allowed to be first amendment now, When, aside the latter Magnum on a lawyer, I can't tell you the first of them, but I really do see this as I wouldn't call it a pr stunt. I don't know it. I would call it. I'm think Trump needs p. Haha like let's be real dude Donald Trump does not need pr at all. The ass twitter account. We know what happens when Donald Trump tweets a misspelled word. He could like he can put a period and treated out and every news outlets would rightist. I could you not. Tromp can put out a tweet that was an image of a blank white space. And you will have articles popping up claiming trump- is racist for showing a white blank space. I had to see you, you know, you agree. Of course you know everybody knows it, and anybody who claims a truce wrong Trop does not need to get a pr at all I mean. Maybe it's an

first, to point scrutiny on CNN and make it disappear, but let's be real, do trump could tweet Cm in Europe law and everyone's gonna talk about it, you know so any and I'm surprised trunk doesn't use other social media platforms. Why still uses twitter and Facebook, you know whatever he could. He could easily create competition for these platforms by using another one and Oliver supporters go there. You know whatever whether or not a loss. It will work manner. I don't think so, but hey I'm a lawyer and trumps got money, and if he does, you can hire good lawyers who know that the attack vector for at least getting beyond the the causative Smith's Wemyss called at that stage. So if they make it pass that initiatives every makes them demands that might be interesting site. I'd be willing to bet that got a lot of a lotta emails, and I'm willing about a lot of their employees are overtly anti trump and and and taken to consider this

There are any people at CNN who are far left in the far left, believes and by any means, as which include the lion, and they lied takes one and it CNN to lie a no. They lied foresee at and as a whole to take some hits. So let it be interesting, it goes on it just basically site. I think project where toss and awesome article. So I don't think this is very important in three new secretly take the videos very well said they show seen an insiders detailing suckers. Anti Trump views will that's their opinion as employees. I think it's important because who knows better than those who listened to soccer talk all day every day but think about soccer, pushing the moat store with alligators and think about in pushing the the the claim that RON Johnson was pushing a conspiracy theory for referencing for first specifically referencing politico, and then you can see that they're wrong now mark not Mark Jeff Sucker is wrong, but was it on purpose that something will have to be proven anyway? Stick around I've got a couple more videos coming up today. There actually special videos the next week

Do it can be a political compass test, followed by a two hour conversation between me and SAM Cedar. It's really great stick around and I will see you in a few minutes Well admit. I already know for the most part what my political meaning is. Hence the hyperbolic facetious title of this video. No I'm literally a communist, but based on you know how I've taken the political assessment of before and where I fall centre left, libertarian spectrum I'm a social, liberal or libertarian socialist salami just quickly explain that means before we get into it. I'm gonna take the test and then asked the. And explain my answers I'll try and do it quickly. It will be very long video, but if you want to understand my political views, you'll get it by me doing the political compass test. Now I believe that libertarian communism can all really exist in very, very small scales, tribe, think about twelve hippies living on a farm. That's libertarian communism.

I can tell you what to do, but typically people will be ok, dinner who want salmon. There's no exchange communists like this to believe in big utopian version of a world, but you can't do it that way because don't know you when we can control for each other is doing its meaning ten other bodies and in Germany create a new water, filtration system and its I feel free to use it cool. There's no need he knows that when I'm not planting corn hokum up to that simple and that's what I am at core, I'm very anarchic. You know full philosophically group out an anarchist and a kind of moved away because of political reality once it. This test only breakdown for you, how I feel and why Brian go quickly? If economic globalization is inevitable, it primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of transnational corporations, will that's an obvious? Yes, why? If global vision has to occur luck if it's gonna happen,

What is absolutely should be supporting humanity, so it should primarily serve humanity strongly agree. The private interests of corporations, I do not believe, should be first in front of front and centre what's it like. I understand the general idea that corporations can provide benefits because you bring all these people together who have different ideas. And we're talking about development of science, tack and infrastructure. I get it, but no, it should be to serve humanity like not the interests of some elite billion. Air was going about things that regulation what an I'd always support my country, whether was right or wrong. No, I will only support what is right or wrong regardless of my country. I strongly disagree with it. I will support my true to a great deal, but want to? U S? Does things oversees I disagree with? I will not support that. Hence why I will vote for Donald Trump, regardless of if you got some good things are not it's about you, big, a bigger picture here. I'd always support. My country has to be

No one chooses his or her country of birth, so it's foolish to be proud of it. I disagree with that. I think we have a shared cultural heritage with our country and I strongly disagree, but for the most part I thank look man I was born here. This is my world. This is my country, I believe in it. I believe they ve done things that are bad and I will call them out when they do so, but for the most part, I think America's a very great place, even for all its faults, it s an amazing things and if you're born in a country than to an extent You can be proud of of the of your. Your tribe of you know right. Our race has many superior qualities compared with other races. I completely disagree with that. There are so many factors involved in whether or not one is going to be superior to someone else, and that to me is is absurd. I will make a point, though I strong I agree with us, because I understand the greater implications, but the way you interpret questions are important. Let me stress: I've been to Thailand. Ok, I was

more than most people. The question is whether or not being taller is superior to assert, extend its not and that's the point. While I recognise there are some differences, you know between them. You know, races are ethnicities. Adult ultimately do not believe we can quantify superiority said I completely disagree. The enemy of my enemy is my friend no way the enemy of my enemy is not my friend. I will not support a bad candidate who does terrible things simply because their slightly better than somebody else now. I believe, in principle literary action that defies international law. Is sometimes justified, I disagree with it not strongly because I disagree because I recognise the new on so I would say, disagree typically airs and aside for the most part, yet we can't violate international law. We have these laws for a reason and we shouldn't be using. You know, committing war crimes. Absolutely not. I will look at recognise in a more of a cap in America Approach citing the civil war movie that sometimes, when you see how

something? Having self you ve gotta act, so I recognise that's true in some capacities, but for the most part I generally disagree and think we'd be better off making sure we're working together in international conflict There is now a worrying fusion of information and entertainment. Oh you better believe. I agree with that. Next page, we got a couple more social belong. Video people are ultimately divided more by class than by nationality. One hundred percent- true a wealthy person from India, has no problem for the most part coming to the United States and that something which I recognize. If your point,

the? U S, you're, not going Australia if report, and yet you not come in here but which people can move about. However, they see fit. In fact, there stores of rich people that can enter conjured up, Pat countries without passports. So I do believe class is substantially more important thing about this. There could be an extremely impoverished nation, but the royalty or political elites are still rich wealthier than most Americans. Yes, because even small poor nations have resources that can be exploited, controlling info action is more important than controlling unemployment. I disagree. I think employment is more than just what you would you make to eat with. I think its purpose and purposes important for human life, because corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily protect the environment. They require regulation. One hundred percent, as a true and you had a river burst in flames in Ohio, at least that's the story of the facts pulled up, but yes, I strongly leave and regulation. I think we don't want to make sure we put a check parliament for sure, but I think when it comes to these big come a big companies they're going to act

not necessarily intentionally in bad directions, though many do with we find that we go after them. What to do about things, but there are some ends, This is where people just veer off the off the path they find success. They move in that direction and creates problems for the environment, so it's important than that are up to this way when that river. You know was polluted such are on fire. It was because everybody was only putting a little bit of pollution in it and no one felt that they were the big problem. The snowflake doesn't blame itself or the avalanche. So how about we all come together? We have an agreement on the limits of what we should do and we agree to abide by them to meet it makes from each according to his ability to each according to his need is a fundamentally good idea ab so loosely not, and that's the joke right, I may be very ill. You know left libertarian, but I am not a communist. I think that is a terrible idea, because you can't quantify what someone's needs or wants are for the most part, mathematically, it's an intimate, nebulous and also we need people to be passionate and insane.

Lies in their own right to create a, but you know a wealth, driving society or planet. We want everyone took to improve them, so and that means individuals can choose better than a command economy. You can't have one person, the dictator, who is or and in need or what they should be allowed, have I'm sorry, I think people can build what they want and that's much much much more better. So, while I do lean left for sure, I ultimately do not like this. This concept is a sad roof reflection of artists on our society that's something as basic as drinking water is now a bottled branded consumer product. I definitely agree with that. I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to do it, not by no means, but I do thing. It is a sad reflection, the codification of an branding of water, I also really don't like what nationally does when they go into these communities and they take water. You know you're, not offend, I'm not offend. Ok, I get it. There should be limited. Opinion restrictions regulations, but for the most part you can

water. Fine, I get it, I'm not a fan. I do think it too sad reflection, land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold. I disagree with that. Another, there's an extent there are. I want strongly disagree, but you you, you need to be able to have a place to call your own. I'm sorry, that's the latest. It is regrettable that many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society. One hundred percent. I agree with that. I do not believe we should be it. You should be able to get resources from the hard working people of this world and ok, we're from simply because you can push things around, I'm not talking about people who make investments. I'm talking about literally people who, just you fast trades and extract value, may have got people who have, billions of dollars were literally contributed. Nothing not offend. I get it, though this is a by product of a city of the system, so I think there can be a regulation for the most part,

the grape. Protectionism is sometimes a syrian trade. I agree with that to an extent if you look at tromp in the trade war, not stuff, we have to make sure we are keeping tabs and not allowing everything they just run. Unwelcome and fall apart, I think, there's their certain things to be said, but you for them. Part modestly. Vat, as it is the only socially response spot, the only social responsibility of a company should be to deliver a profit to its shareholders. Completely disagree companies should exist for the betterment of everybody of everyone, a company that makes ice.

Sandwiches is making a product. People like they should be able to make inferior garbage products that hurt everybody to make an extra buck. I believe they should be doing something good. Not you choose to eat five hundred km. Sandwiches, that's your fault, but overall, producing a dessert is a good thing for society, so there that's. The only social responsibility should not be to drive profits. It should be that profits are earned because they ve done something valuable for society. The rich are too highly taxed. I strongly disagree with that. I believe that our two, our tax structure, can be. We can text the rich more one hundred percent. I just think that, typically, what you see from the left in this country is not planned out properly. Elizabeth warns. Wealth tax was Andrew Yang pointed out Europe's gotten away from it. Okay, so, yes, we can tax cuts

gains and other another. You no other means of income, but here's the thing. While I do believe that there are not too highly taxed and there is a limit to how much money someone really needs. I get all that. I also believe in freedom. I believe you know just because I disagree doesn't mean you aren't allowed to make money, and I I think we are not taking into consideration national boundaries, technology and international law when it comes to taxation. So while I do think the rich could begin, more towards charity and communal programmes, I recognised we may not have anything we can do to solve that problem right. What can we do? They can move money overseas into crypto currencies whatever. So don't I solve it, but I, but I certainly think in my personal opinion, I do not like the idea of oligarchs. Sorry, I don't seasoning, though but the ability to pay should have access to higher standards of medical care completely agree that one's simple. If you make a bunch of money, I agree you should keep in mind. Ok, I don't like the idea people getting money for nothing just by pushing things around

but I certainly believe that in the in the truest sense of capitalism supposed to be a beneficial cooperation that helps people around the world in some capacity that is an exploiting people, then you make extra money. Yes, you should get that rare and harder to seek to attempt to receive treatment, not everyone can be cured of every disease and some treatments are rare and expensive, but if you have the money, do believe we should be able to have access to it. Government should Eliza businesses that miss mislead the public absolutely strongly agree and an end, they do ok. We have. We have regulations for this. You can't lie cheat steal agenda. Free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies, one hundred percent. If we're gonna

now I understand people would argue. I think it's fair to point out that a genuine free mark in the truest sense is like you know what the market decide, but in my opinion you will have predatory companies that lie cheat and steal without regulation. So there has to be some kind of restriction. Otherwise, though, Krim create monopolies like Google and Facebook shut down private speech, and then you will live in a distill, paean soapy nightmare. So I am very much in favour regulation, the free or the market, the free or the people. I agree with This is tough one because it about the interpretation of the quite I'm. Gonna put. I disagree because I'm gonna interpret this question based on the idea of a true free market, and that really I disagree for one reason in it in an absolute free market, you will see consolidation. I look. Here's a problem, its interpretation, I've heard people say that counts.

The notion of power by you know ever increase ever growing. Companies is not a real free market. Fine. I respect that. My interpretation of this is that a true free market eventually cut. You know central power coalescence around bigger and bigger corporations, in which case no there has to be barriers to allow free market competition, but some restriction stop the consolidation of power, so I'm gonna put disagree. I may be interpreted this in a way you don't agree with, but that's the best I can do ok, on page three: a sex aborted, thirteen minutes, abortion, when the woman's life is not threatened, should always be illegal. Sorry, I strongly disagree with that because it's it's an authoritarian, libertarian position, I'm not going to enter being in what the absolute reasons are. I dont believe the woman's life not being threatened as it is an option issue. I believe is also about the health of the baby. It's complicated, but to err on the side of the government not being involved, even though I personally disagree with how many people use abortion as contraception. I very much oppose that

but in the end I more so concerned about centralisation of authority. The government determining what you can't or can't do when it involves your own body, is a complicated, complicated system. Its complicate process, and then I understand the body of the baby is relevant to, but where we have to life forms in one circumstance and for me I look at then say. I honestly can't comes an ethical ethical conclusion, and what we should do so I bow- and I know many of you disagree with me- I'm sorry all authority should be questioned all ways. Always does it mean disposed of it just means checks and balances, and that's our founding fathers understood and I tremendous respect for that. All authority should be quest, doesn't mean you, you always ignore it. It just means that you weren't went when someone comes out makes a demand. We say: why is it that you who makes a demand in United States? We have elected representatives. We respect that to an extent, not everything. Every action is respectable, though, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth no way at leaves the whole world blind

Paris should be expected to prop taxpayers should not be expected to prop up any theatres or museums that cannot survive on a commercial basis. I strongly disagree. Taxpayers, you you, you mate, here's the thing than culture. Museums are very, very important without us choosing that some things matter to us in terms of heritage and culture. We end up just with video games and conflicts important. You know that I believe in a true absolute free market. What's going to serve No longer is not going to be the arts, so I strongly believe we most added society, protect cultural heritage, arts, etc. When someone is is dealt developing, a new death or music and taxpayers found that that's cultural divide, that's important for us and when you have a museum or theatre that shows things relevant to our culture it is preserving and sustaining the ideals which make a strong, otherwise you'll end up with a complete free market people who just don't care

about what we believe and why- and I believe I believe, for instance, America is a very, very beautiful and amazing culture. We have overcome great hall ships, and we have maintained our knowledge through through museums and taxpayer funded programmes. I think it's important to challenge. I dont generally, like the idea of forcing people are doing things. Swine much want a libertarian spectrum and I'll admit the hardest position to be in a dont like the idea of a government forcing you to support. You know history, culture and arts, but in the end, though, I do think for that it looks people going to vote for and support at its very important force. Schools should not make class warm attendants compulsory. I agree with that. I can't stand schools and house mandatory, not at all Jews yourself. All people have their rights, but it is better for all of us that different sorts of people should keep to their own kind, no way man. We would have too many. Lined spots. Diversity is a strength. Disagree with male you want, but the difference between what the left is calling diversity and true diversity. The real idea,

Firstly, was supposed to be that someone from a different parts of the world with a different perspective could enrich our perspective and that's a fact. It's true. It doesn't mean all cultures. It just means that, while like there's absolutely some cultures will be negative, but in the end what I view as diversity being a strength is when someone comes here with a technology, a science or and understand Philip philosophy we didn't hear before to too much, though today is just right. It's like oh you're, different color. Therefore, its diverse eaten, I'm sorry, it's not if you're born in America and your weight raising turn culture. You have the same world view is: does anybody based on race? But if you grow up and say Japan, you'll feel things very differently and you absolutely can help fill in the blind spots and we can come together with different technologies and ideas and philosophies, and that's that's that's important. So no people, It should be, should be talking to each other and sharing ideas. Good pair

sometimes spake their expect their children. Yes, let's be clear among the beating your kids, I'm talking about you know giving up. You know a walk on the on the, but with like ten percent, your force, so it doesn't actually hurt them in any way, but asserts authority as the parent and also gives a clear indicators. Don't do this again. Ok, I dont think banking is that big of a deal. Although I've seen some studies and say it's really really bad, I dont think should beat your kids relentlessly. I'm talking about you know and the kid to something. You know you you bob among the, but are somewhat that. I think. That's absolutely fine its natural for children to keep some secret and their parents. Of course that's fine. There's a marijuana for personal use, should not be a criminal offence. Of course it should not. People should be allowed to imbibe what they choose. The prime function of schooling should be to acquit the future generation. To find jobs, no way is to make them function and competent adults

unfortunately, that's not happening either. People with serious inheritable disabilities should not be allowed to reproduce the whole. You should be allowed to live your life and no one will take away from you you're in an inalienable rights care what you circumstances birth were I don't care if you're disappear, disabled it, your life. It is your choice and no one else would be able to impose that law is to take away from you natural biological function. The most important think for children to learn to accept discipline. I disagree with that another. It's the most important thing I do think this plan is important. There are no savage and civilised people. There are only different cultures. I likely I likely agree with that. And I mean this because again want once again we're falling back on the interpretation of the questions,

there. There are certain civilizations that have been accused of being savage, but probably had soared underhand understandings of medicine. So look I get it. I am very much biased in favour of my own culture, but also think understanding. Alternative perspectives is important. I am not defending cannibalistic or or oppressive cultures. I'm saying that they are all different and they all believe something very specific. It's hot they're they're going to claim we're savage and we're gonna claimed their savage, in which case, while I personally think they're, there are bad cultures, I think, to quantify Manys way is is, it is, is biased in Europe based on our worldview recognising. That is a strength, because it allows us to better understand the strengths and weaknesses and why we should be opposed certain ideas but accept good ideas that will help us. Those who are able to work and refused the opportunity should not be x and it should not expect societies support. I agree with that not strongly, but but I really

enough. Ok, there there's maybe some circumstances where someone refuses to work and for some reason, we're gonna support, because I do that personally, but for the most part and you're not gonna work man, don't don't take any favours for me when you are trouble, it's better, not to think about it, but to keep you busy with more cheerful things, no think about it, solve your problems and overcome them. First generation immigrants can never fully b integrated within their countries no way, that's not true, because it with the assumption there is that you're thinking about like a forty year old personal emigrates. What about a first generation emigrant whose young you absolutely can integrate? It is actually possible- and I think, Many people are going to hear that I make an assumption about what that immigrant is. So no that's. I strongly disagree. What's good The most successful cooperation is always ultimately good for all of us know, look at the bank. Industry in the housing market and the mortgage backed securities. So I know and and what are my short or long term gain nobody

casting institution. However, independent its content should receive public funding strongly disagree. I think there is an absolute benefit to competition between publicly funded programmes and private enterprise. There can be public news funded by taxpayers as well as private. I met it s. An important once I do believe so. Next page, our civil liberties are being excessively curve. The name of counter terrorism outcome on easy answer. Yes, of course, Us Agnes, The advantage of a one party state is that it avoids all The arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system. That's true, that's not even an opinion, that's a fact. It just means it leads to eventual destruction, so there are things that delay progress in a democratic political system, but it is true to an extent that odd. It is it is. It is faster for a more totalitarian system, as it mean I agree is a good thing, although the

Electronic age makes official surveillance easier. Only wrongdoers need be worried no way. No, no! No! No, no, not an absolutely, not you actually do need to be worried about abuse of power. Someone spying on you, we ve heard stories of people. Spying on Ex girlfriend now can happen. The death penalty should be an option for the most serious of crimes. I'm going to put disagree strongly, I'm very much against without that against the death penalty, but now, strongly enough to where I would protest it. So I'm not gonna but strongly and I M also willing to recognise the will of the people and its tough, its task as a very thick, more conundrum. Forming but if most people are on the side of working to support the system, I dont strongly enough to two adamantly oppose it, but I will voice my opposition soldiers but regular disagree,

in a civilised society. One must always have people above to be obeyed and people below to be commanded. Now America is a country where you can be from the gutter until the president to go shove off and that's what makes us country great and successful, abstract art that doesn't represent anything shouldn't be considered are in no way orders in the eye of beholder man. We're talking about pictures, you dont know what something means somebody or inspires in criminal justice punishment should be more important in rehabilitation. No, we want a functioning and effective society and progress. We want to do that. Be stronger and faster, and that means we must figure how to solve these problems not just feel good, bye, hurting. Somebody is a waste of time to try and rehabilitate some some criminals. I absolutely disagree. Absolutism. We should absolutely try to rehabilitate everyone. We can. We have to try. We have to the business person and the manufacturer.

More important, the writer in the artist I disagree, and I'm not saying the artists in the writer are more important business man, I'm saying our. What makes a culture great is our success in terms of technological development in advance but also the writer and the artist help advanced philosophical understandings they almost six splore and fine, hidden truths and meaning and took to claim the right and the artist. Also. I need you to consider religion which I've, which I think is very important philosophy. Religion fallen the writer artist portion of that law, others may have careers, but their first duty is to be homemakers. Now I think their first duty is to be individual human beings who can choose for themselves what they want to do. If that's be a homemaker finest, have a clear fine. It's their choice, multi national companies are unethical exploiting the plan to genetic resources of developing nations. I somewhat agree with this. This has to do with Monsanto. It has to do with You know manipulating genes and then I'm I'm gonna

We're getting into a legal battles Monsanto, but you can look it up there, big companies that have done things for political gain and an end. It is problematic. Making peace with the establishment is an important aspect of maturity. I strongly disagree with that. Absolutely not pretty, and I thought her in page five astrology accurately explains many things. No, it doesn't. You cannot be moral without being religious. I completely disagree. You actually can be more without being religious, Ready is better than social security as a means of helping the genuinely disadvantaged. I disagree. I do believe charity has done much better things than social security and things that can't be addressed by government, but I do want to say to better it's not about one being better than the other. Ok, some people are naturally unlucky. I disagree with that. I disagree with it because the Lamb viewing it is this hour

and that it's not my fault, I felt no, you can't, I mean a mild strong, and so we can understand opportunity and the cards were dealt matter, but you gotta make your own Lukman it important that my child school instills religious values. I strongly disagree with that. It may be important to you not to meet and that's fine. The private schools exist. I want a catholic school for little while, if you audacity choose important, but for me not really next page and the final page lovemaking outside of marriage is usually immoral. Disagree endeavours. Liberty menu. Do you a same sex couples in stable, loving relationship should not be excluded from the possibility of childhood option completely agree with that. There are so many kids who need families and I'm not gonna, I'm not gonna judge. If you can give a child a good family if you have a loving, stable relationship, that is, that is, that is powerful unimportant and it's better than kids going to foster care and falling in the gutter

how you that for now graffiti depicting consenting adults should be legal for they dont population general agree because of the potential for something to go nuts, but not yet you don't you want what goes on in a private better between consenting adults is no business of the state. Absolute leave. I understand what they're saying with this question. Ok, we're talking about due to look to people who choose to go and do an act in private, that's, presumably between them and safe, to a certain extent, love making a man. Do you I got no beef taken your bedroom us draw about. No one can feel naturally homosexual. I strongly disagree with that because I know people who have told me: that's not the case and I believe them all I can do, and I would also argue this based on the fact that I don't and I strongly feel heterosexual and imagine the same feeling I have towards women. Someone might have towards the same sex couples, in which case I entirely believe. That's the possibility these

Is openness about sex has gone too far? I disagree with it. I don't think it's that big a deal I think and in some capacities it has not strongly disagreeing, but in general culture general television about time, the fringe weirdos on the internet. I think, for the most part, swine now, let's see where you stand already know where I stand on commie inch guys noticed scroll down, and it will do that. I'm further after libertarian than Bernie Sanders, and, I believe, explained all of my positions right did you agree with both my how I broke everything down, I think it makes sense. I feel like it's, you know so so there it is, look see, ideologies, social, libertarian. Yes, I much prefer to live on a farm with a bunch of bodies. It is, it is what I do. I mean I have a bunch of friends who work with me. I am very, very economic

the flat when it comes to higher on business partner elegies I am. I am in no way a hard core top down capitalist interests to extract value. I overpay people, I give people you know responsibility and authority over their projects and and when I look at this from actually surprised is left in libertarian as it is, but yeah, that's that's just how I feel take a look at everything. I've said, I explained my feelings right. This is worse than that up I think the way of explained it makes sense is consistent and- and there you know, don't explain exactly why you're, probably my politics where they are when it comes to Youtube videos for one intersection out. Is not on the left right spectrum is an ideology is typically and authoritarian, the ology and I strongly oppose authoritarianism, many traps- What is also oppose it authoritarianism as well, but I am critical of triumph for some of his mouth.

Authoritarian actions and more right wing approaches and it gets fair to say up to the time being those that believe in liberty, regardless of the left, the right, we're gonna, be friends and those who believe in the forty we're not gonna, be friends, that's the easiest way to explain it. So there you go my political compass test it's a long. Video stick around the next one is coming up is going to be a conversation with SAM Cedar and we're gonna talk of a lot of these position.