Today is April. Fifth, twenty twenty one and our first story, conservatives have won a major legal victory after a lawsuit against Donal. tromp over his twitter account was dismissed by the Supreme Court and a lower cost its ruling was vacated, but the real victory. in the form of the opinions from Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas, who opened the door to lawsuits against big tack over censorship or even allowing Congress to regulate these companies and prevents them from censoring. Conservatives are next story. Democrats brand, maybe absolutely tarnished by things such as defined a lease. The Dnc recently came out and said they realize their brand as being hurt, and it seems yo see, may be the reason for it and our last story CNN, a cost us says that reporters may be suffering from post, traumatic, stress disorder as the Eight things new companies are seeing are in the gutter. This may

led to mass lay offs, and even some big companies are saying they are putting before we get started. Leave us a good review. If you like, podcast. Give us five stars was a really does help. Now, let's get into that first story, you may remember the lawsuit against Donald Trump. From several years back, he had blocked several people on Twitter. and there is an argument from many on the left that doing this violated there. First amendment right, you see when Donald Trump tweeted, he created a public forum for comment and criticism, and by blocking certain people on twitter they could not participate. Interesting leave a court agreed and told Donald Trump,

had to unblock people and also ended up backfire on the left is a yo see was then told she had to unblock people as well. Many democrat politician still refuse to do so in a kind of it back and forth. The sunset trump wasn't abiding by this court order, but many people suggested the ruling was bad and would likely backfire, because if Donald Trump was creating a public forum, then what would you call when Twitter itself bans a conservative, wouldn't that be denying the individual access to a public form credible Donald Trump. How can you simultaneously have a private platform where the private corporation could ban anyone they want, but politician. Couldn't I mean that good de as simple as the argument goes, while the president can't do it, but twitter can well. The Supreme Court has dismissed this lawsuit at its final stage, reaching a supreme court in their saying now. It's Moat Donald Trump the present anymore. Well, those that were suing said then keep the lower.

Ports ruling, saying politicians cannot block people on social media. The Supreme Court said no. The whole case fell apart and in the end, Supreme Court, Justice Clarence Thomas issued an opinion that opens the door for a lawsuit that could stop these companies from censoring conservatives effectively said: how is it that way? You can just ban someone and then remove their right to speak. Maybe they should be regulated like common carriers and that's the more cons, urban have argument. I know that the culture wars and always so easy to discern venal factions have about who is on which side, but it very clearly has been the establishment, Democrats and left us saying, but my private platform that twitter Facebook Youtube and whatever else can ban any one they want, because their private companies and for some reason, conservatives and liberals flipped now look it happens, but Generally, we used to think that liberals were the ones in favour regulating massive corporations and can

evidently the one saying let him do their thing. And now it's not really the case. I will without, unsurprisingly, the Libertarian Party says it's a horrifying day for free speech which will get into, but there has been a wave of good news for conservatives at least doesn't states are introducing legislation that will stop big tech censorship, maybe a little late to the party, but hey will take what we can get when we can get it. We also have more major news in terms of just I was innocent, conservatives what victories as it pertains to the truth and the right of the individual in a lawsuit between project vera toss in the New York Times and a court siding with fair toss, the New York Times actual The admitting that their news articles are just unverifiable opinion, a tide is changing in the culture war with these rulings, and we could be facing something profound if someone picks up on Clarence Thomas's opinion that these big tech companies

apps, should be regulated. Women actually see something now, first, it would likely have to go through the courts. At this point, because Democrats control, basically everything else, it could theoretically be legislation that changes this, but there could be activist judges that legislate from the bench has already been in an attempt to redefine section two thirty or to clarify. section two thirty, which grants immunity to these platforms by having the FCC do it in the end it will, it seems it will take a an act of Congress It seems to be what Clarence Thomas is saying, but based on his opinion, there could be a loss for the next to the court and if it makes it to the Supreme Court than they can rule, you cannot ban people based on political opinions more. It may happen at the federal level, but it very well may happen at state level, as several states, including taxes and Florida, are seeking to ban arbitrary censorship Well, it's red exactly what's going on, but before we do. However, the TIM cast dot com and become members. My friend

because censorship is a very real issue. My facebook page is already effectively ended B. As they did like that, I was covering what happened in the news in one particular day, and many people think that I'm immune to what's going on, it's only a matter of time, become a member at TIM cast. I've come to help support my work. and get access to exclusive members only segments from the TIM guest IRA pie? cast. A new website will be launching soon and what are you doing a whole bunch of other content? New shows new pot. Guess new personalities were to be growing in expanding and producing culture outside of these. These pigeonholes that are produced by big tax, social media, basically forcing everyone to adhere to particular opinions. What are the challenges that any of that that I do get suspended or banned or removed, or whatever you'll get to find me at ten cast dot com? So also don't forget to like share subscribe, hit that notification Bell let's wait this news, NBC New says Supreme Court dismisses lawsuit over trumps. Twitter account. They report the Supreme Court on my

they tossed out a lawsuit over former President Donald Trump Twitter account after the Justice Department said. The end of trumps presidency made the case a dead letter. The case arose for seven people responded critically to tweet on the president's now banned Real Donald Trump account and he retaliated by blocking them they sued and one in the lower courts which held that blocking Individual respondents, based on their viewpoints, violated the first amendment, the court of appeals for a second circuit, so the president's account amounted to a kind of public forum and often concerned official matters with contributions from White House staff members, the Trump Justice Department urged the Supreme Court to reverse those rulings. While the

President's tweets were sometimes official statements. His decision to block individual responses was a personal one allowed by any twitter user government lawyers contented, but the night before President Joe Biden took the oath of office. The Justice Department asked the court to dismiss the case as moot and vacate the lower court rulings, as well Katy Fallow of night into a group advocates, and we have a first moment issues and represented the twitter users, who Trump blocked urged that justice is to leave the lower court rulings intact. There is now widespread recognition that the principles we established in this case are important to protect and vitality of public forums that are increasingly important,

to our democracy, shaping the way public officials use social media justice, Clarence Thomas had he agreed. The case should be dismissed as moot basis that it highlighted problem, namely that applying old doctrines. Two new digital platforms is rarely straightforward, seems odd. Thomas had to sit at something. Is a government form when a private company has unrestricted authority to do away with it interesting? Well, the Supreme Court has in fact vacated that ruling, which prevented trump from blocking twitter. That's in a major defeat for these left us now. I wouldn't say this is certainly a good thing. There's an interesting argument about whether or not it is a public forum. I certainly think there is a good argument. It is then hear me up. Donald Trump was the president: he by past the press when he gave these statements. I like this, but you have to recognise that people are allowed to criticise and have free speech.

if the platform allows it Trump should not be removing people, and I want to see these arguments in his conversations. The bigger problem Whoever is in the argument that Twitter is a private platform strange to me, but many leftist were saying: twitter is a private plan from the can do they want, but it's also a public forum where Trump can't ban people. You can have your cake and eat it too, because after eat, it's gone okay. So if you, if you take me, that move where you're saying to private company. But then you join in a lawsuit where each year, on the loss of what you're saying truck should be able to ban people. Congratulations, I agree is a public forum. Therefore, twitter can't ban people here, so I describe it when this happened. When all was going down, I said imagine that has a big open field and a private companies that are fencing around this land in their own land and Donald Trump shows up one day and starts speaking there. You show up and you walk in. Seventy eight, the president has to say then one day that is

you can't come in anymore you're like, but this is my president. You have the entire town square, you ve bought it and no one's going anywhere else and they say: oh there's alternatives. There's private there there there's other social media platforms competing the waiter. grab. It was like imagine, there's the Ella Colosseum MASH of massive stadium, in LOS Angeles and Donald Trump announces he's gonna be giving a stir Did you not address just there? That's the only place, but you're banned from the Colosseum. They say you're more than have more than welcome use the soccer field at the local high school and you're like yeah. Ok, I can go there, but the president isn't speaking there. I think that there are certain limitations in my opinion, in the real world as mean the Ella Colosseum ESA, let everybody and if someone is having a private of that with Trump no, the issue was there is nowhere else to go, there is nowhere. Of a meaningful conversation in response to the president's posts or talk of the president, because he wasn't using any of those places

we are seeing massive multinational corporations monopolize public discourse? Libertarian, certainly, does Fifthly, bigger libertarian, by the way where they say it's, it's bad for free speech. Look I understand this complicated questions here, but twitter is not behold. And the american people their beholden to an international body of investors, Jack Dorsey, even set there are rules are designed for a global audience. Well, when its matters of? U S public interest, why Should we allow Russians to use twitter to influence Americans, but american citizens have been banned. You see the problem there, you wanna talk about private platforms, sure but there's gotta be some rules at some point. Look, you don't allow people don't nelse cell snake oil? We have restrictions on what you can buy or trade, not all of its permanent orbit is good, but when there is basically one place where the president is speaking were everyone's at your varies very The problems of the present, of course, could have gone to a different platform and he didn't and that's

actually the best counter argument. It was the president's fault himself. He could have gone to the local high scoff high school football field and talked to his constituents. He didn't do it so then, is it really? The twitter is fault that tromp uses their platform and no one else is not necessarily. The big issue at play, though, is the coordination between big tat to take out their competition, in which case now it's time to bring on Anti trust in regulation when parlor started to come eat with Twitter. What happened? Seemingly all of these companies reacted the exact same time the placed or Google they they. They remove. A google Google's appstore and the and any other place or end the the eyes of the Iphone Appstore they banned parlor. They also to making claims about parlor. It seemed very much coordinated and we know it wasn't true. The Walter report that parlour was reporting the users on its platform, who were you talking about violence phase but on the other has been accused relentlessly

and over and over again we hear stories about the evil people who use Facebook. I mean like serious gang activity, really awful stuff but no one takes action against Facebook. The app is allowed to be on Itunes, too big to be on the app store to be in Google, so it seems coordinated. She want to argue twitter is always a private platform sure, but in concert All of these social media networks are banning the same people shutting. on the same services and restricting access and they're all located very, very close to another. Its we most of them, know each other and they are doing this stifle any competition to their monopolies. It's not that they have a single strong monopoly. They have a network of Digital, asked and tools, they control and don't allow competition in. So you want to do that, break them up and shattered

Ok, fine, then I'll be ok with you saying, but my private platform for them. In the meantime, I think people need to be able to see the president speak and respond to the president's posts. Yeah finance reports. The Supreme Court has vacated a ruling that prevented former President Donald Trump from blocking people. every job losses, but ass. It was moot the ruling. What manage much too tromp, however, because he was permanently band so so there we go. The lower court decision at implication, for other elected officials and how they community and social networks. The public interest in preventing impermissible viewpoint crimination in government operate. Social media accounts weighs heavily in favour of keeping the second circuits judgment of place. The night First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which suit Trump wrote. In a brief, the institute agreed that the ruling was moot but instead claimed It was because of trumps. Twitter ban is actually true, but it shows how can a stupid the courts can be. The case is moot meaning, while Trump

not the president anymore you're suing tromp. So there is no longer a party to the lawsuit. That's true, but its isn't dumb. That we're really talking about a much bigger issue about other politicians, but the way the court has set up we're we're gonna be like now. You can try this one out, because this one guys doesn't anymore? A yo see should be party to this lawsuit sue her. She blocks people. Ultimately, I dont I dont like getting that can block people, but we need to talk about what this really means in the long term. are we going to create a new rule set for digital tools in today's era? Or are we going to just let them run amok? Sorry, I think we need regulation. We regulated the phone companies common carriers, they can have viewpoint discrimination. Maybe it's time you do. The same thing is where Clarence Thomas stepson and opens the door for potentially a lawsuit which could end the censorship. The examiner reports, Clarence Thomas Winds, approval from populists for such suggesting twitter regulation to Justice Clarence.

as one praise. We see this great tweeted author J D events was, I in Ohio, send it run Thomas's opinion a concurrence in a case concerning former president trumps twitter usage took issue with the way that Twitter, Facebook and other social media companies handles their platforms, while Thomas agreed with the rest of the court that question about trumps twitter users are moot. He stressed that in the near future the court must address so to me so social media regulation, Thomas focused on, there's ban of Trump arguing that the move raised, the stakes for twitter to prove. That is a public platform. Thomas noted that Trump faced a lawsuit efforts. Asked a few people using twitter account because the platform is and really understood as a public forum, but this in time he added Twitter was well to remove trot from its platform, which Mount amounted to a block, barring all twitter users from interacting with his message.

It is a violation of someone's first amendment rights to to block them from communicating with the president and his post in a public forum. Then then, why should twitter be allowed to do? It is the question that only Trump can't block people. Ok, then, if that were the case, that would mean the president could create a public forum and then higher private security. What their own discretion could remove. People from that form and argue well private security there, not an agent of the government, so there are allowed to do it. Twitter makes money off of Donald Trump presence on the platform trump it believes in the space should not mean that that private security guard to build a remove people when Trump is there. You see my point trump, your basically saying the government can just pass off the censorship to a corporation even though we know why it's happening and that its ok Trump used twitters technology to suppress people's first

human rights, you're saying that so long as trot, just as I wish, o o won't. Someone read me of this priest that Twitter is then allowed to do it? You see what I'm saying they say: twitters user agreement per it's it to remove users, but the trunk case highlights how such a rain arrangements become difficult to navigate. If the platform is truly a public forum, Thomas wrote he suggested that if part of the problem is private concentrated control over on on content and platforms. Availed of the public than a possible solution is doctrines that limit the right of a private company to exclude figures suggest Trump Thomas took a more broad aim at technology companies saying that they act as gatekeepers over the internet, which leads to speech suppression. The suggestion that the federal government should treat platforms just twitter and Facebook S quasi public utilities, long a goal of left wing social credit one popularity with insurgent populists, many of whom have raised new concerns about online speech, Regulation Missouri, senator

Gosh Holly cited Thomas's observation that Google facilitates indeed per cent of internet searches which Thomas allows it to suppress content by de indexing or downloading a search result, or steering use away from certain content Ali who has championed, Show me deregulation. Tweeted that Thomas was war. the dangers of big tat concentration of a four free speech. The case night up First amendment instant versus trop, arose between seventeen. So this we entirely understand over on Twitter MA. Joseph Stern, he is a staff rider slight said, in other words, Clarence Thomas, is inviting congress to ban social media companies from engaging in com. moderation by stripping them of their own first amendment rights and transforming them for illegal purposes into common carriers are public accommodation. He says you know the conservatives have been arguing, unsuccessfully so far, that social media companies are so powerful that cause

can essentially override their own first moment rights and force them to how certain speech in their platform, Thomas, just endorsed. That argument, I absolutely of the sheer absurdity of, What we are seeing here, the Libertarian Party on Twitter basically said it's terrible for free speech and somehow you effect of the leftists arguing against the government seizing the means of production. So so you have a libertarian partake of Texas. My do they come on twitter and they say Thomas just ruled that the government CS the means of social media production to protect the first amendment and I'm like sure, fine. I dont care. That's ridiculous argument by the way their regulating them as we do. The companies, and now you have slight, which the left as publication saying that the government should seize them.

What a stupid world we live in any break it down. For you very simply, the left benefits from their political allies at big tech, censoring opinions they do not like, so it doesn't matter what their principles are supposed to be. They dont have any all day Want is power, the libertarian party or more than happy to welcome bidding being crushed by massive multinational corporations so long as it isn't the government doing it. That's absurd. We either break these companies or we recognise social media is playing a primary role in how politics are being shaped in this country. While Democrats, overwhelmingly get their news from mainstream news channels on tv and the internet. Conservatives get information from a decentralized network of independent personality and smaller new companies and then Fox news. So as these big tech companies begin back conservative voices, an opinion they are following all opinions towards the mainstream media.

that conservatives Republicans dont trust as it is, and moat and most moderates don't either. If this big tech, what's the right word word for it. It's not necessarily like one company in a monopoly. It's more like a its collusion. It's a bunch of companies with similar interests Protecting the interests of each other and suppressing the rights of those have opinions they don't like. So the left who don't have opinions, support this. Of course they do their winning it's it's their friends and allies. The top level of big tack who are banning people live parties are they say it's not true. There's no conservative censorship and its literally gives moto that broke the story on May. Twenty eighteen at Facebook was literally removing conservative news websites. Where did that go snow, surprise, Democrats overwhelmingly just trust the mainstream media, but it is a good day for those who believe in free speech on the internet. The libertarians might say it's terrible for the free speech of these massive multinational corporations.

Forgive me if I have to make a choice between a single massive multinational corporation and three hundred Thirty million individuals have a right to an opinion view, but the platform there are certain things that are allowed in terms of regulation, but this way I think that if you run like a christian blog and there's a comments, action- and you have rules- and someone comes in and starts posting things that are very offensive to your readers and there's a purpose to your site within certain. Within reason. It is ok to ban people for opinions. You dont like It probably has more to do with the size of the company. Now it could just be that section. Two thirty must be reformed. Our right to say here are certain things that can be removed and can't be removed, but Ultima if these before talking about social media companies, perhaps the real regulation needs to be a newspaper

location or a blog that produces content and, as a comment section shall be separate. social media platforms, designed with the express purpose of allowing individuals to post. Perhaps the real problem here is is acting like twitter is the same thing as the comment sections on a blog knows where, I begin my understanding. Is that section two thirty of the communications Decency ACT came about because someone posted something disparaging in the car in that section of a newspaper of a news website, someone sued and they say what you get through the newspaper for the comment of a user. So is it ok? How about third party posts? Don't represent the entirety of the paper, so you gotta go for the individual. Instead, then social media websites came about now. Listen if there's a website called TIM cast dot com. My website and someone goes to the comments section in the member section and says something libelous. It makes sense.

can't sue me. It's just a user's comment. My website was not designed specifically for people to come and post their media it's for them to comment on my media that I understand now what someone makes a website whether specifically saying we don't actually post anything, it's for you guys to post and share content. It's not the same thing. Therein lies the problem. Treating twitter like a blog. It's not! The purpose of Twitter is for individuals to post their opinions and new articles and share information, stop treating Twitter Facebook and Youtube this aim as some small website, even if anything to do with users, it should specifically be, if you create a website, called Christian twitter dot com you say it's for Christians to share their values, but you tell people they are the ones posting and we are standing back. Perhaps then, you are not protected by section two hundred and thirty and what they need to do is defiance. Action to

what they mean by online platforms, because when you are talking about blogs and when this law was created, nobody is referencing social media. It's totally different. Now Twitter make statements have often talked about talked about how I've often talked about when Twitter makes a statement when Facebook does, for instance, if I make an article and I put it on Facebook, Facebook that empowers very specific people To defame me more importantly, if one of these fat checker says I lied, they can then put a label on my posing false, or you know, incorrect information face book is doing that. Facebook is implementing the filter. Face book made the statement. Now they say third party factors said this, but at a certain point we have to ask ourselves in that instance. These people are commissioned by Facebook to do this. So Facebook certainly some responsibility here. Don't they perhaps

The reality is, it is not all the same thing and the problem is that section, two thirty, which is allowing conservatives for the most part to be censored and many progressives are getting centred as well, is being used as a blanket. Or anything on the internet. So Clarence Thomas made a good point. He said Are we gonna be treating you know all of these things based on archaic policy, or do we make new ones. We make new ones. Perhaps it's time to specify that section two thirty does not pertain to common carriers and perhaps time to specify that twitter and Facebook youtube big tax social media companies that are designed to allow individuals to speak are more akin to a phone company. Then they are too a blog. Well, here we go baby GEO P pushes bill to allow social media censorship lawsuits. It's a common, the AP reports, republican state lawmakers are pushing for social media giants to face costly lawsuits for policing content on their websites,

looking aim at a federal law that prevents internet companies from being sued for moving posts. Geo p politicians in roughly two dozen states have introduced bills, that would allow for civil lawsuits against platforms for what they call the censorship of posts. Many pro many protests to ITALY, of political and religious statements, accord to the National Conference of State of central state, legislatures Democrats, who also have called for greater screw big tech are sponsoring the same measures and at least two states. Here we go. reliability. Shield has long been a target of former President Donald Trump and other Republicans whose com It's about Silicon Valley, stifling conservative viewpoints, we're amplified when the company's crack down misleading post about twenty twenty election. We're gonna stop right there and I will tell you why. The next big move the back next big victories project, vertices victory, you see what they did their taking down misleading power

that's how the media launderers lies till they lie to you and it's clever, but it won't keep it will it won't work forever and project varied houses, victory how's this limit limit. Let me bring this down for you and help. You navigate the media, they say Democrats. We have also called for great a greater scrutiny of Alabama. The federal liability showed his longing to target of president Trump and other Republicans whose complaints about Lookin Valley stifling conservative viewpoints or amplified when the company's crack down on misleading posts about the twenty twenty election. They stated as a matter of fact that companies cracked down sleeping posts, Twitter censored news about Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, son, that were true, but they say misleading post that as a fall

statement of fact, but there's no one who really has standing supposed Trump could claim as fake news and argue that their real concern was the censoring of information period. but this other media lies I'll. Give you a great real world example. Now, I'm sorry I'll get to avoid litigation, because, as a very real circumstance to speaking out in these spaces, I'll give you a hypothetical based on a real world example. Let's say you decide to do a Youtube, video or twitter. You make you a twitter post in your twitter video. You are too, talking about how much you just love Easter Sunday, now Easter just came in and you love colouring the eggs and in your video you happen to be using a particular brand of Easter egg dies and colouring kits Well, some leftist activists sees you making this video and they

They then send an angry email to the company saying. Why is there a prominent video with the far right? You know racist whatever using your product now. The video you posted has nothing to do with raised about Easter eggs. The company then comes out and says we recently learned that an individual you know named so, and so was using our dying tat. We do not, indeed Worse there, racist views there blah blah blah we strongly can, any and all bigotry, and have nothing to do with this video. What happens is because they wanted distanced themselves. It doesn't matter if you actually set it, though not accusing you having set it. They just say we announced their racist views or anything right as they have done, Then the media stepson and says individual has been denounced by Easter Egg accompany over racist, bigoted views. The average person Comes you actually set it? You didn't

how the media launderers these statements. There lies there not real and they get away with it right now. They're saying misleading, post swell the Good NEWS is the states are coming in they're starting to intervene, they're starting to say no to the stuff. The bad news is the media just keeps line which brings me to the next massive and major victory in the whole circumstance. I give you, the Washington examiner the New York Times is embarrassing defence in the project veritable case where they state early on Payments in the case include a remarkable exchanges between New York Times, lawyers, project, Berytus lawyers and judge. What, but from the standpoint of eaters interested in the state of journalism. Today, perhaps the most remarkable was the outlets defence that asked her and sue both of the reporters. It was being sued here freely injected opinion into their.

Ports, even though the stories were published in the news section of the paper. The New York Times argued project. Vartos was not entitled. to sue for libel, because the opinions expressed were unverifiable, saying, unverifiable, expressions of opinion are not actionable and cannot be defamatory. The paper argued in its motion to dismiss the case. A defamation action must be based on statements of objective fact, not on an expression of opinion, which, by definition, cannot be true or false, and this politically charged context. The term deceptive is not susceptible to an objective meaning and is therefore a non actionable opinion. That's amazing, as MIKE which put it he says check this out from the judges opinion. If he says, if a writer interjection interjection opinion in a news article and will seek to claim legal protections opinion, it stands to reason. The right there should have an obligation to alert the reader. My friends, the new

four times has stated in their legal defence. There news section regularly has- or at least the sentence had on verifiable opinions and therefore they can't be sued. For here we go these. All major victories for moderates I was challenging. The establishment media's lies. You still can't get around the tricks. They'll say well, Twitter did ban misleading information, we can say was the only thing they banned and conservatives were concerned. No conservatives aren't concerned about the banning of misleading informed mission. Conservatives actually want the misleading information to be stopped. Conservatives are concerned because those that are fact checking and challenging and criticising are being banned. That's the AP putting out fake news, supposing Ansal comes together in the end, Clarence Thomas has opened the door, no

Actually, I should say the leftists, whose sued Donald Trump opened the door for the Supreme Court to put out their opinion in Clarence. Thomas has a very strong one. It is just a crack the door, we don't know where this will lead, and maybe ITALY do nothing. But Clarence Thomas brings a very important points and we may actually see at the state level censorship finally put to rest. If the Republicans don't get on top of this now, they'll, certainly lose twenty twenty two and twenty twenty for each and every day can serve of opinion is being eroded. and more and more conservatives adopt progressive viewpoints in order to stay alive figuratively on social media. There are even some conservatives who have changed their opinions and our claim to be liberal because they were scared getting band off you to it happens. So if they don't stand up, it won't matter, but

in the meantime, it looks like conservatives are getting major victories and well you know it's about time. I suppose I leave it there next segments coming up tonight at eight p m over it. You too calm. Slash TIM cast, I r L, it's alive, show so subscribe to Youtube com. I guess I'll, go to him a calm and we will see, while at eight p m to night, thanks rang out the democratic brand Has been tarnished Dnc Chairs s party needs to battle the damage that has been done to it by movements like defend the police. to win over rural voters. Good luck. I will say that

You know, there's gonna be some elections coming up the next few years. I wonder if some of these conservative or moderate Democrats will be able to actually win ever again. There many swing districts where I just think they're gonna go red light could be wrong. There are a lot of people that love cheering on the establishment of the status quo, but there are two divergent reality: he's right now, and there are vice there, there's virtue signalling, as and as Julie Brodsky tools and the IRA Pike S last Friday, vice signalling, like virtue signalling that people who post on twitter when their say things like look, how not racist we are and then vice signalling as people I quit their masks. Often look I'll need no mask like I'm not going to follow. The rules to different realities is way to put it in wondering who is going to become the dominant reality. I have to be honest. I think those of us here the moderate position, many conserve Liberals who are no longer in you know why,

Jane Establishment, media, more watch, watching more independent media out group, to say the least. The establishment is the establishment will be. The establishment of the democratic brand is hurting inserting a lot because of people like Alexandria, Abkhazia, Cortez. It is the progressive, far left us that push things that don't make sense like defined the police. I am not that the biggest fan of the on accountability we see with police departments. I believe there should be reform. I believe things should changed, but it's not just about defining. The police is about very special things like this. We're gonna we're gonna get into how a yo see has absolutely ripped the democratic brand to shreds and she was simple to be saving grace to be fair, look, Nancy Policy is awful and defended in the past. That was probably a mistake. Humor is awful. I get it he's work.

Towards legalization of pot, which I can respect so did you give the credit where credit is due, but the most part they're all pretty much awful right and you'll see what supposed to come in and be something better. She's not just recently come out in support of concentrate camps for kids. I know I know a lot of people are saying tame you're being hyperbolic. She didn't actually say that, but let's play a game of walk the path. Let's, let's go through the logic here. You may recall this story from June eighteenth, twenty nineteen Alexandria, Abkhazia, Cortez quote the: U S is running concentration camps on our border, while is a strong statement to make very least, but she did and she claimed that it wasn't actually just opinion she treated. This administration has established concentration camps on the southern border of United States for immigrants where they are being brutalized.

The humanising conditions and dying, there's not high pearly. It is the conclusion of expert analysis. Donald Trump set Ministration did not establish camps on the border; in fact he inherited them from most of them as minor standing from Iraq Obama. In fact, when the left at trying to criticise Trump, they actually accidentally kept sharing photos from the Obama administration and then saying it was trumps fault. Is it? Is people don't care about telling you the truth and and breaking down what's really going on at and to be fair to accuse you could, as she has criticised the bite, administration and Democrats. Just both parties are to blame for what's going on and I think that's actually a fair assessment. It's not like The Democrats are the ones coming toward their moustaches. Only their publicans are, you know, pushing policies as well. That result in things like, however, couple months ago, ABC tweeted, an immediate improvement would be required would be to require influx facilities with children to be

since I love it here, we go on other issues whether these services should be caught contracted out the way they are currently to begin with, whether facilities with controversial records. E g homestead should be reopened. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa in flux, facilities with children facilities with controversial records, you mean to tell me: but you see is saying ok. This is this is a couple months ago that she is in ever of these facilities so long as the government licence them licences them. The gay wait we hold on their concentration camps on the border. Things have not changed, in fact they ve gotten worse. We have follows: coming off from project vera toss showing kids sleeping under a bridge and the dirt with a mylar blanket it's a veal they'd like it's free,

and she's influx facility? She is referring to the homestead facility, which he once called the concentration camp. She's referred, do it as a facility with controversial records? That's right! We all now about how the United States set up facilities with COM devotional records for japanese citizens during world war. Two are you? Are you kidding me? You want to know why the deep that, when a democratic brandished tarnished it's this trash and the people who blindly march behind it a yo see, is not a state aid. Champion of progressive values, she's just saying whatever she has to say at the at the time to gain lowest common denominator support. My friends. This is called a drift the rift I love it when they, when they accuse me or other people of drifting. My positions have remained most The same I've changed in a few things. You know

that's normal, like people's opinions, change right, so I used to be fairly like me onto a now like to a second amendment guns, all that stuff. That opinion changed because more about individual freedoms and and and personal liberty, some things you know civil rights etc the right of the individual to have certain you know. Well, Individual have rights, so I've definitely moved closer towards libertarianism little L, not bigger Elsie, is moving closer to authoritarianism She is becoming more and more pro establishment. So let me let me tell you what you think happens when you're a Democrat, and you knew mile we pay attention and you see a yo see being like- is our concentration. Can't you see that you're, like man, these these facilities that I believe we have to do something about this. And now it's like too years later and you're like so whatever happened, what those camps in flux, facilities,

seriously. Look there are a lot of people, war tribal, assists. They will support a yo, see no matter what they care about this? They dont care, she's, lying and spitting in their face. They just want to see Republicans suffer. They want to see them. when not to be wrong. There, absolutely conservative republicans who want the exact same thing. Many of them, I would say a lot of them- would watch my channel when I was you know during the election and after not much, there are lots of beer on everybody. I know a lot of transporters, you know obviously do watch, but there's a lot of people who just want to what wanna have that's right, ballistic victory over the other entailed having real conversations about what we need to do to solve our problems. So how let me say this: how is the democratic brand supposed to have any real value to it when there's nothing to value? Ok, as a Democrat, do I said

port, a YO, see criticise in these camps, or do I do now when she's flip lot? Oh, you know another I think about. It is actually not that bad. Do I just change my opinion on on the fly? Look. There may be many people with cognitive dissonance where brain simultaneously holds to contradicting views. Donald Trump brand concentration camps, but Biden runs immigration facilities, but there are a lot of people who have to be sitting there with a headache being like about what support this amazing to me, because for all of the awful things Donald Trump set ended and all the lies. He was killed stand on what he wanted to do. We lot about dumb things. You know everyone loves and all the women and is like it was. It was always about like how great he was, but then you just come on be like we selling weapons to Saudi Arabia. It's a great deal psycho

well, at least as honest in that capacity, I don't care what he calls himself man's got a golden toilet, so there's a high opinion of himself. The Democrats don't represent anything if the opinions, bounce around and flip flop and YO see, who is supposed to be. restive champion challenging the establishment is in fact propping them up with cash. I love this so much. You know. Do me a favor If you know people who well look, I have my biased for short, Get me a lot of people who don't wanna, hear this, because The lava Yossi jeez she's fighting the other, the Trump ism and fascism and all that stuff whatever. Well, if some gentleness, in fact it don't just just show them this video, I mean you could share this, but if you want, if you want to support my work but maybe two Anti AIDS for some of these people. They were dip their toes in the water and figure out what this woman is. Maybe you just under article like this from politico vulnerable Democrats fret after getting

A shock. A YO sees campaign cash work, but the way way what you mean itself you that a Yossi is acting like a funnel for the progressive left to sucking donations and then I'm off to establishment moderate Democrats in swing districts, yes, and I'm sure, she'll justified. By saying we to maintain the majority, and here we go baby from a progressive chair, Beyond the justice Democrats, challenging the machine and sang to Democrats, we are coming for you and we will primary you two saying we must protect the moderate establishment Democrat. Wasn't it AOL see who came out in just a couple months ago and said all of the Democrats ran a progressive values, one in their districts and swinging? drugs. So why is she giving money to these vulnerable democrats? Who are certainly not that's amazing? So you want to tell me

I once again Dnc Chair: what's damaging your brand, I get it he's has defined the police. The Democrats brand has been absolutely tarnished for some time check out the story. They say as the mid term campaign campaigns first fundraising deadline approached this week. Several vulnerable house Democrats got an unwelcome surprise in their accounts. Five thousand dollars from from Yossi LINEAR Democrat, sent the contributions to our colleagues to help keep the house majority have a tough cycle without directly contributing to the democratic Congressional Campaign Committee with which she has publicly clashed. But a colleague who has as LA grass and an oversight at the at the campaign headquarters has instead raised awkward questions among our colleagues as some swing district democrats fret over whether to return or money before the GEO Peak and turn it into an it.

Add whew till late baby. This is the lady, then its flip. Their opinion now supports concentration camps. Apparently, unless our opinion on what Donald Trump was doing is changed, not at Joe Biden has president, maybe and now they know the money she gives out is tainted. This is incredible. Elsie may as well be working for the Republicans. Let me just repeat this: Democrats are scared and want to give money back to a aussi, because she is polluting the Democrats brand. You get this. The Democrats know there is a toxic city in the Democratic Party, and it is people like ok

as yet Cortez. I'm going to see it now, there's gonna be some swing, District Democrat and learn about it. You know this wild far left Democrat just received five thousand dollars from a sea circumventing the democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. So it's like unapproved, essentially not party approved, now look ass. He can give might whoever she wants. Isn't it hilarious, how they're scared and want to give the money back it's too late, too late. Now, given the money back could be a good thing. They could then pushed back and say no. No. We gave that money but it punishes what Democrats represented at this point. I dont know what they represent other than a Yossi like supporting concentration camps so long as the government licences them. Don't forget political sense, members who campaign whose campaigns got unexpected. Caterpillars cash are seeking answers directly from. C C, chair Roughshod Patrick Maloney and top staffers democratic Congressional Campaign Committee AIDS gave lawmakers wired. France,

for information to agencies, AIDS without the approval of more senior officials according to multiple people from contributions. Even if imperilled House Democrats, we fonder contribution now cause you're Cortez, his name is almost certainly show up on their federal Election commission reports when their due, this month, creating a liability for members of our party who have to who have to win reelection and districts where her political brand is poisoned thanks to years of unrelenting republican attacks. Yikes, a man that is spicy. They know it they that EO sees donations. Her name is poison point as well some are grateful for the infusion of cash. At least three Democrats have so far either declined initial transfer or said they would return the money. Reps Conor, Lamb of Pennsylvania, Carolyn Board

of Georgia and unless a slot kind of Michigan acquitted, multiple sources. Several people involved with the episode discredit as an on as an unforced, error by the d c c c, where there's two of its campaign arm, failing to anticipate the political ramifications of putting their parties, most polarizing figure on their donor roles of vulnerable members known as front liners is AOL it trying to help Republicans win. Certainly, she knows that in a moderate district, her name is mud. It's incredible, maybe she's, trying to sabotage moderate Dems so that next time, around twenty four progressive, far leftist I was well run in their place and say see the moderate agenda didn't work. We need to go far left. I dont think that she's thinking that far ahead, but going behind the back of the d c c c, I can't say That policy is trying to help. The Democrats.

well, that's what it seems like me now look mega. Let make the least amount of assumptions. What's what solution tends to be the simplest one Chris Hayden a spy. Send for the DC declined to comment on the details, but said we appreciate replica Socrates is ongoing. Commitment to democratic majority due to a miscommunication, some wire transfer were made an error, but that has been addressed too late. Political says: normally swing. District Democrats are scrounge for every last dollar to help them secure their reelections, particularly in a first quarter. There's been tougher than usual for candidates across the board, but he'll come. The court has donation is Democrats, said, was unsolicited and came without warning. I love a thought. We'd know we wouldn't want or money we ask for it. Please they say many, The campaigns did not receive a heads up from the decency see about the donation until after it hit members accounts, a move that surprised senior AIDS and campaign consultant. I'm you think about a dirty politics. As you could critic Super pack called like the defending a cosmic were tears and threats of values, super pack and then make

donations to moderate seminar. Publicans would use it as an attack. You know them end. It would work because regular people who don't as you well. What's this? That's why they're freaking out in this instance ABC actually did it. Herself quote the GPS spent four years saying the front liners while socialists now they ve got the receipts to prove it. Anyone telling themselves this won't be in campaign. Addison denial so one democratic consultant who works for swing, seat members, this is insane. This is crazy. political donation. World wire transfers are commonly used quickly, move large sums of money from one account to another, particularly in a final straw.

A fund raising quarter and during a pandemic the cause your court has transfers carried clear political risk for some members. I just have to stop right here and stresses again, my friends listen to what their reporting the democratic establishment is panicking, because o cause your Cortez. An elected Democrat is donating money to help Democrats win and their worried. It will backfire and already has very likely why, Our talk about Democrats being tainted by a o c and the squad remarkable stuff, clear political received some sources pointed out. She could have alleviated the current anxiety by giving to the d c c c directly. That's what I dont get. now. Apparently, there was some issue with consequent hasn't: it ended and the d c c c or democratic establishment players because they didn't want progressive, super packs or organizations working,

as you know, I'm working to unseat democratic people want politicians in certain districts where there were moderates Yossi pledged to actually prop up people to run against them. So naturally you add the Deasey cc and other democratic establishment of individual saying we are not. You know going to support this or allow you to do this work. It was something like they wouldn't contract with any these organisations. That would support the justice Democrats or whatever. So perhaps,. The agency is doing right now is sabotaging the moderates. One option: make sure they lose now and then clean up the pieces later. destroy, rebuild, infiltrate, destroy abilities, alcoves ABC brunches, Democrat she's, crazy things about concentrate. captain and supporting them. She, then no to bread is tainted gives money sang outrageous things. It's almost like she's trying here it down to a much more power to Elsie S post, and I guess they think that once the moderate Democrats are crushed and republican

when the majority they can then come about, come back out encounter with a further left messaging, see the moderates didn't work, they say: still other Democratic said they saw the cosmic. What has an interest in helping endangered incumbents is a positive sign for party unity, even if they were stunned by the method and privately the liberal star already is personally closer some of them. Liners, many of whom were elected in the same blue way that help Democrats recapture thousand twenty eighteen. Could it be the reason I was he did? This is she's trying to take the party over a hold on. I know I decide infiltrate, destroy, rebuilding Iraq. What I maybe she's, trying to get these moderates to look at her. She wants. I wanna know her name, she's, a master marketing, don't believe me, your twitter account how many millions of followers she have now she keeps growing. She knows how to play the game. That's why she says shop is running concentration camps in all the leftists pump, the re tweets out and against tons of followers. Then she comes out its bite and it goes well biting could be doing better with his info

facilities. She is a manipulator. She is like Trump fifty years ago. Well me about fifty years ago, Tromp knew how to play the game, and he used marking to advantage putting big old Golden Trop signs of buildings and the maiden wealthy aims he doesn't play the game- is well. She knows it's. What does a word to say it, how to say it, and she knows she can get away with it and she does now. You are I we may be saying we see through the tat deck. We see through the manipulation or sheer ignorance. Unfortunately, it's just it's not it's not enough. I hate to say it man, but there are a lot of conservative channels that I respect I enjoy watching. I disagree with you, know, Stephen Conference, since he has been getting just absolutely battered by Youtube for totally bs reasons. I absolutely disagree with counterparts. I'm not on a lot of things, though. I've definitely come around, like guns in soft soap,

but prouder was always willing, never conversation with me, even when I was like, I think we should tax the wretch or whatever you know talking about certain progressive policies, because when it comes to the conservatives the private ones right now, love the debate, and so do I- and I know always was right about my opinion change, particularly with. Like respect the second amendment, I had a really I really amazing argument with Jack Murphy on the TIM cast. Iron podcast should definitely check it out just for this past week last Wednesday, where I talked about stopping billionaires from flood. the zone with billions of dollars to ban guns and beyond that, just other rights being curtailed. So I see You know style Bloomberg base our sorrow, send the cup brothers in the merciless they all flood districts where they don't live with money in order to influence what they want. I dont like that, because if you live in West Virginia, and then some do dumps a hundred million dollars into your state so that they can get a Democrat and who's. Gonna. Put me now agree with some

uncontrolled to every regional Morrison, agrees and erode your rights. That is not the will of the people, s manipulation of the people. So I look at what consequences represents an she represents the biggest problem, not just to finish up there. as point you know. Jack disagreed is that people should be allowed to spend their money and, unlike I understand it's complicated right with a yo, see an estimation stuff. She gets proper people all outside her district, and then she was money to influence her district cheat knows what she is doing with marketing. So I have to wonder what is she doing here could be very simple. All this money from Seattle and Austin and allay in Chicago go into a Yossi in her organizations. She then gives it to Democrats, invulnerable, moderate districts with her name on it, and then everyone gets to know her name. she has by passing the d c c c she is taking the ending away it is brilliant. She knows what she is doing and she knows- you can say whatever she wants and get away with it. So I tell you this

Dnc chair Jamie Jamie Harrison. He made his remarks on Sunday. Do bad buddy too bad. You guys can't compete with the with a cheer, the sheer raw power that is causing Cortez and I'll say this will cause your Cortez is a great politician. Great politician, you mean it. You may not like her policies, you may think she's evil, but to deny her ability would be incorrect Only a fool would think she wasn't capable. She knows exactly what she's doing she knows how to play the game. Another decision, as which can get away with it, takes more than just luck to accomplish this. She was born for the political arts, its remarkable. It's absolutely remarkable. She is just absently, crushing it like her. I don't like politicians and she epitomizes everything about them. Trump in many ways did too but tromp was such an arrogant know it all that lie,

he didn't flip flop. All that much heed Melick non doing it, no matter what our whole plays down. If I have to figurative, let me look he literally was like fire him fire and should have fired more people. He, like people were, signing left and right Trump knew. What he wanted a yo see is. This is the perfect politician, she'll say which needs to say she will destroy the brow. But the day and see and then showed From the ashes building new with respect men respect, you got respect that wholesome and that's real talent, I think I see, is what's the right way to put it, I think she's, smart and talented, but I don't know her ability to manipulated social media and steal. The conversation is almost unparalleled there few people who know how to do what she's doing, but I'm not, I don't think you're the smartest person in the world. I just think she has no morals she's, no principles and

well, you might be like no she's, not smart. Look at that dumb thing she supports up up up up up. Does she really support it or she just manipulating you right here? I am talking about her again for like a third time and a lot of we'll stop talking about you're, giving her power blah blah. Look man, I'm I'm not here to care about who gains or doesn't gain power from me talking about them like Trump may, have gained power for me talking about it. Elsie may for me talking about her, but in my opinion, watching her do what she does it's brilliant stuff. It is, she, I think the concentration camps off proofs she doesn't have any morals. She just needs to say what needs to be said to gain power from stupid. People know works, so I wonder people might collared dumb. She would be wrong. She look if she was stupid. Sheets fell between your concentration camps, the fact that he changed our opinion mean she understands how the system works and she's adapting its brilliant and she will be when the Dnc to the ground- and you know what I'd say this maybe the day

she deserves to be figuratively burned to the ground like just all the moderate establishment types are gonna, lose out because their weak corporatist and don't do and then we'll get crazy, EO, Z and who knows what she actually stands for should be fun. I leave it there. we'll see how the Dnc brand survives how it holds up in the next coming election. Next, I was coming up at one. Come on this channel. Thank sprang up and I'll. See you all. Then the remnants of the Trump era will stay with us forever. Many leftists liked to say remember who supported the cheetah dictator, don't let them escape this? They repeatedly called for former Trump Administration officials to not be able to get jobs. They ve said that certain Businesses should work with anyone who sport Donald Trump. Yes, that may be a strong remnant of a trump era. These compassed resistance, tight people.

Who just want to stop any one who support the present from living, at least in civil society as they like it so but we also see remnants of the media because the stink we'll never wash away, you see. Look I can talk Somebody of ever Hillary Clinton- and I get it whatever we can- carry on an do business if its benefits both parties in the greater community. Therefore, some consideration there. I can work or someone over Trump on Paul or Jorgensen. Whoever and be like look. You know we have to move on from these things. However. take a look at some of these journalists- and we can see

Spain and the stink that will never leave, notably Jim Acosta and others like, and people like brine stouter, who sacrificed, Annie Shred of credibility. They had to pander to well to drift. As it were, Gimmick Costa says: journalists are dealing with pop post trump stress disorder. Let me repeat that that is quite literally PTSD, post, traumatic stress disorder. I get it Jim. You have nothing to offer people all. You did was grandstand and parrot garbage opinions from you know space based on stories that were usually half truths. At best you stood up and you yelled at tromp. Instead of asking legitimate questions, why things are happening and what we can do about them, you would often

refuse to sit down, because you were more interested in Bahrain, adding a president. Instead of actually doing something. You see Jimmy cost to discover the ultimate drift. You was given this position being in the White House Press corps. You know being therefore, the president and his press briefings to effectively channel symbolic rage from p who watch see in another fake news outlets and then well attack the president verbally to give some emotional satisfaction to these people. as people at Brian stouter CNN pump out ridiculously fake news or falsely frame narratives many. Irregular Americans got angry Jimmy Costa then there to take that anger. Yet from about some nonsense and that have those people be satiated, calm down. Thank you, CNN. Think about that. Cnn was whipping these people up into a

frenzy and then CNN, was the one acting like they were the heroes here to help you. We have a pole now from five thirty, eight that exemplifies. A lot of what's going on in the media and a lot of what have, it's your on until question no water to buy gimmick, what'd, you, bokassa, seasonal rate for this, but first this graph, Republicans really dont trust the media saith five. Thirty eight Democrats currently holding seventy three percent: trust in media independence, a thirty six percent and Republicans ten percent You did. I see when I see this chart. Democrats

overwhelmingly believe the media, independence and trumps and Republicans both don't in an end for the most part. Most independence do not trust the media. Only thirty six percent do share of respondents by parties had they trusted mass media a great deal or a fair amount, not even a fair amount. Maison. That's a large number of people, sixty four percent of moderates. The shows me the Democrats are in a cult there being fed ridiculous. Lies and they just but leave it sorry break them. Out of that honestly, I dont know. Certainly this video will be doing it. This video is more. I guess confirmation by us for those who already know the media's bed was examiner reports. Siemens Jimmy cost US reporters are experiencing post trump stress disorder following the former presidents exodus from the White Ass quote when you're asking me if I was run I thought you were afraid to how it felt during the Trump Arab, Jim accosted, told CNN chief media correspondent, Brien's Delta,

when he was asked about how he was feeling so far and President Joe Biden term quote, I think we're all dealing with some post trump stress disorder other than that happy Easter. He was saying in those statements a few days ago, asked us happy Easter mention was a reference to a Sunday morning, message from former President Trump in which he railed against radical left, crazies and touched on the so called rigged November elections. So saith Trump have the Easter to all, including the radical left crazies debts, but is it they're trying to destroy the country on Saturday the the present wrote for years. The radical left Democrats have played dirty by boycotting products when anything from that companies done or stated in any way that offends them now. They're going big time with woke, cancel culture and our sacred elections. It is finally time for a Publicans and conservatives to fight back. We have more more people than they do by far capping off the message with Happy Easter Costa, who has seen its chief, what s, correspondent or the trunk

tromp years before becoming chief domestic correspondent also spoke on moving forward from trumps presidency and power. simply limiting the amount of coverage he receives while he resides. That is more like a resort quote in terms of stacking shows and what we want and what comes first will come second, Brian, you- and I know this all too well, we did cover the news before trumped came along and we did it pretty. Well really. We say and there's going to be plenty of stuff in the news out there that doesn't have to have President Donald Trump in the headlines for us to continue to exist, especially when he's putting out these statements. He added that Trump has engaged in and continues his flight behavior beneath the executive office. When he was president, he was doing things that were beneath the office of the presidency said now he's doing things, but he's beneath the office of the Post presidency he's not going to change, but we need to change with the Times Seltzer, while referencing Trump's recent string of state

Aetna claims of fraud that have been rejected by the courts. An election official said is important to note. The big lie is still alive and well in the pro trump bubble. I feel like it went away after the riot and reality reared its head, but no, the big light is out there in the pro trump bubble. because brine stouter won't give this up. You notice how we use that phrase. The big lie he's doing that, because the region Michael tool to manipulation technique the big lie. He says: The reality is that there are some issues, but Trump got oceans. Eleven does I put it. but he was paying attention could see what happened and I don't think, there's any real reason, even rehash alot of the stuff. We know the rules changed a year before in the fall of twenty of point. Nineteen in Pennsylvania, for instance, they a lot of rules and as John Parnell said Democrats were making these and just because I thought it would benefit them in the election. Republicans didn't pay attention to this, and only I caught off guard Trump did get a lot of votes. Joe Biden got more, but I digress, regardless of their

We know that you can see all of this very much. So in the media take a look at how many people who are independent to trust the media. Thirty six percent say that trust the media a great deal or a fair amount. Only ten percent of Republicans, yes, there as it is- Out of Republicans, who believe and you know who believe Trump outright usually no matter what he says. I'm not saying it's even ten percent, but there's a lot very, very zealous trump supporting individuals. There are then, indeed, Then some people, like me, people a James Linsey, for instance, who mentioned, I think James, whatever trauma Tyler Shore, but I did- and I did so for a variety of reasons. I ve talked about quite a bit legitimate policy reasons. Schools trumps, trying to end the afghani warmer in our troops back to the United States, the ban on critical it's, the areas are very, very important things well set a booming economy are that it made sense to know what the establishment back and power so I fall in that category of independence, who mostly do not trust

Let me only thirty six percent do if you do you'll, probably believe many things that are completely incorrect. Now there are even less strong support, which means there is even a gap between independent trump support, a stickler that seventy three percent Democrats vertical. They believe Rhine stouter, hang on his every word when he says: don't listen to other news outlets, they lived, they listen MSNBC, they hear them, but that the nonsense and they hear the other big lie when they tell us and I big big lie, but big lies probably better. Like Donald Trump, Russia collusion to me, that's the biggest of the lies. They carry that for years. They want awards for it, and it was just not true. There is also the black lives matter, narrative about cops going around hunting people down, which we know. Also, it's just not true. The Democrats push these cycle lies and now post trump stress disorder. Yeah you're ratings are in the gutter. That's a good thing for this country. Well, here's how five thirty eight frames it

why being anti media is now part of the G Opie identity? I love this so much. Five. Thirty eight is part of the GNP identity. Independent voters also don't trust the media. So perhaps it's you in the cult yellow trapped. I love. When I see those posts social unrest and stuff in their like trump supporters, are in a cult now hold on their my friend, your affirming to a sub section of transporters, who very much are in a cult of personality that I believe one or two percent many of them. Both ridiculous things about conspiracies and other crazy stuff, but a small percentage, very small, because the private Trump supporters have rather mainstream opinions, though they have conservative opinions. They are mainstreamed, bench appear of, for instance, rather run of the mill to be.

the honest- I don't mean that disrespectfully Ben Shapiro personifies the mainstream, regular, all conservative in much of the ways we ve come to expect from conservatives. However, he is actually a bit more libertarian, not perfect, and so is more tolerable to moderates, because he's like, let me do my thing and you do yours. Ok, he talks about a dozen agree with with Dave Reuben, but their friends they get along, hey, that's exactly what we might They are looking for this country, so you want it's part of Ethiopia identity. Now, I'm sorry, it's just not a part of the democratic entity. The democrat identity is just leave what CNN says? Meanwhile, moderates and Republicans are kind of like you, we don't your policy wise, but these people are knots case in point. That's why you see animals like mine, where their liked him

sure do rag on Democrats, autonomy or the Democrats in the media seem to be walking and launch lockstep and lying most of the time, and anybody who is paying attention whose being honest will tell you this well, can I save Republicans they sought to, but they don't do all that much obstruct. I guess now, they're not power. What am I gonna say about here's a five thirty eight says: There's little question at the media is one of the least trusted institutions and republican circles. My friends over at five thirty eight Meredith. She who wrote this the media is each is actually one of the least trusted institutions period wishing that full time and time again in the past two decades, trust in traditional media plummeted, especially among Republicans. According to plan from gallop since at least late. Ninety nineties Republic, Dublin less likely than Democrats to say they trust the media, but starting in twenty fifteen someone Republicans took a nosedive falling from thirty two percent to ten percent and twenty twenty

Meanwhile, among Democrats trust the media is actually climb back up quite a bit. Why fairly obvious? You can see that in about two thousand and sixteen Democrats were below sixty percent in terms of trusting the media. It's spiked up because under eighteen and I said that seventy three they hated Donald Trump, the media cup telling them Donald Trump was bad and they bought into that narrative and they start believing it. Then they started feeding them that it was at Feedback Loop of Donald Trump as evil. We're gonna stand up a Donald Trump. Thank you her telling us how easily is because we're biased and thank you for then standing up to him. They created that that feedback loop of addiction worked really well for him. Now their suffering from post, traumatic, stress disorder. We call that trumped arrangement syndrome, but short there's gotta, be a name for another trumps, gone right, right, you're, gonna, say Republicans have been less likely than Democrats. You know funked VON ten percent from thirty two part of this is because our public these are often more vocal in their criticisms of the media and of long past.

yet it is having a liberal bias, which is a fact, but now they also more likely to say that being anti media as part of their political identity does. This is likely driving the staggering gap in the media, trust that we are seeing. Let's start with Republicans media habits in our fractured media ecosystem not uncommon for both Republicans and Democrats to seek out new sources that reinforce our political beliefs, full stop. That is true. And, as a new study finds exposure to media that is partisan or their liberal or conservative reduces people's overall trust in the mainstream press, regardless of political party. But what sets Republicans up art for at this point, is their steady reliance on just once. course for all their news. Fox news in n, in studying the media landscape in the lead to twenty one, a presidential election cycle, the pew Research centre found that the thirty new sources it asked about only Fox NEWS was trusted by a majority of Republicans and there we go baby. I love it. You ask someone here are thirty new sources, which ones do you trust and the kids

is overwhelming. With a fox news. Do five hundred and thirty eight says they only get their news from one source, which is a lie but play gay. My friends, it's called break down the lie they say, let's over the public media, habitable a blog. Where this a new study, it finds exposure, media partisan, whether liberal or conservative, british people of our overall trust. What sets republican parts. This point is their steady reliance on just one source for all their news. Five, thirty eight. Did you stop to consider one very important fact they were only given. Thirty options was Stephen crowded An option maybe was TIM Pool. One option perhaps worthy Young Turks, even an option more likely than young Turks might have been an option. Could it be that these people are getting, news from a variety of different sources that are not mainstream or establishment press. Could it be that

many of these people are not just relying on Fox NEWS but in fact a variety of other independent news channels and creators. Could it be that some of them fall victim to conspiracy gentles? All those things are true, but share the media frames. This only Fox NEWS was trusted. That's it they say, republican second, most trusted source. Abc news wasn't even close. Second, Fighting stands in stark contrast with a view of Democrats who said they trusted a variety of new sources, and it marks a further decline or Powell, constructive other new sources since Pew last conducted a similar survey in twenty fourteen sexually, quite amazing, because I've gone over this pole before this is from last year. Actually, and of course, they just give you corporate press Republicans of Course Trust Fox NEWS, because Fox NEWS gives them their opinions. Confirmation by us but they're. Not given you independent media. In fact, they don't even talk about smaller, more establishment channels or I'll. Tell you this.

I dont know certainly see in this the Washington examiner the Daily collar, the daily wire, a bench a purer than five thirty eight frames it as though Republicans just dusted, just don't trust the press. The do just like yours, you see what's happening nowadays, is that you have two groups of people the discern, the red, discerning and the uninitiated uninitiated people don't understand. What's going on around them, better on CNN Insight, there's the news to me: they care about their business. I encounter these people from time to time. Eyed woman recently tell me that she loved Comma Harris, and I He's not gonna, like my show that, because I do not like her and she was like what well that you know, that's fine given an opinion, but what what's not alike about her I know the keeping minorities and present past their sentence to use a slave labour to fight wildfires is a big incite like that I'd like look. She kept minority prison inmates in prison past that their release date, because you want to use them to fight wildfires at a dollar an hour

I'm sure that people of California love the fact that they had slaves fighting their wildfires form, but I am not a fan of that in Am I being hyperbolic memento? The third amendment which ban slavery literally says you can have slave so long as they are imprisoned. So commentators knew exactly what she was doing. Sorry, but I encounter these people. They don't know, I don't blame them. I'd love to invite them to learn, but they're not interested in the stuff. They turn on the tv and there is good o Brien Stout they're, saying Donald Trump is bad and we're all suffering, because Fox news. Let me tell you what they said. What I love about: bride, smelters, Eddie, basically unseen and just gives us the Fox NEWS Review show I can watch fosters myself guy, and I need you to tell me what they said forming anything. It's fascinating, though, you see the mainstream media. Is this bizarre o reality and Brian stouter is in fact a kind of bizarre o me in a certain sense. Now we're not completely the same, but ah ryan stouter goes on CNN and

the media correspondence with criticizes the media, which basically means he complains about Fox NEWS, because his audience is completely biased and he can't insult them for being dumb. He just as Fox NEWS, is bad. Listen if your immediate critic, for, though for the establishment, the only media to criticise, is Fox news. How long you do that for that's dumb. I suppose you can then pull up bright Barton, the daily collar, the daily wire sure, I guess never, someone like me, was generally just anti establishment. I have criticised some concern about some of the time. Sometimes, usually there not news guard certified and I just ignore it. I use news guard for a reason. My criticism is with the establishment, not with small servant of outlets. So I'll use news, guard, certified conservative outlets and typically don't for that, would send aren't sort of certified by Newsgirl news, garters establishment, biased. I use their own sources, often to fact check them and criticise them like I'm doing right here, the examined by the way, which is more conservative,

which is conservative, is absolutely certified. It's on purpose. You see, I'm criticising the establishment in there's. Also much to criticise Brian South are complaining that Fox news. Your punching down, I get a Fox news, the biggest network right now they get the most ratings, but nothing compared to the entirety of establishment press so well. Fox news has done things. I criticized what's that? What what? What's that a complaint about Tucker Karlsson, tends to get a right, but I've done, I think, like two or three segments criticising Tucker Karlsson in the past. a month or two. There was the issue with one New York Times journalist. I criticised him over and I criticised over his stance on pregnant people are starving in the military. I get the conserve opinion. I disagree with it for the most part, I think Tucker try to get his facts. Right was a pretty good job in fact spy the best person on tv because of this could there be better yeah, but unfortunately there should be, but there wasn't and if their fault, because they ve become caricatures of the media. So here's where we are

people come to my channel. Thank you very much. If you like, the sugar TIM cast outcome, sign it become a member share these segments. There are people who reach outside the box they find new sources of information and they get a collection of different opinions. I find it very fascinating. There's an overlap between my channel and Jimmy Door. It's one of the course things ever. Why will Jimmy's awesome? I have tremendous aspect, Jimmy Door. I disagree them. A lot of politics and we have agreed to each other just like I disagree with even greater Jimmy as an honest guy who genuinely believe what he believes and genuinely fights for and challenges the establishment and, for some reason, is mostly coconut democrats. Why there, the establishment, along with a corporate press, so there are people who are there's an overlap between some of my audience in crowds and some of my audience and Jimmy Northern Amazing that there are people who watch crowded and Jimmy Door because you can have a dumb political opinion as long as you're being honest to the best of your abilities and there's trust there,

I trust that of Jimmy get something wrong. He genuinely made a mistake and he will corrective if, if, if, if it comes up, I know that if crowded get something wrong, he made a mistake and he will correct it, and you can trust- and I will tell you this when I get things wrong. I do issue corrections even sometimes without prompt operating editors, not saying I feel it. I wasn't clear enough on this point. I would make everybody understands if I got this wrong as important. You know, and I will always tell people watch. Jimmy Watch, crowded and watch CNN learn what they're saying and then come much though the channels There are people who are willing to do that. Get their opinion from. One was very much protein. Russell Healthcare get their opinion from crowded, was very much against universal health care and then get their opinion from someone was a rather milk toasts fat centre, as the joke goes, leaning slightly left sang universal health care would be great. I just don't have its feasible too wide a ray of voices. The average person get their information from not mainstream. press, not CNN, not NBC, not ABC, so conservatives remarkably are getting their information from a mixed bag.

And so there actually seeing a multitude of perspectives and because of this labelling, the media's lying? Many of them will only watched even greater still better than just Fox NEWS, but you see how they frame it. What they say about people if you just watch the mainstream media. I have to wonder this. I've been saying quite a bit on twitter lately that I feel like the future, can be extremely progressive, just because Republicans don't have the political willpower to fight back solemn. Like my twenty thirty, you know the Republican Party, he's gonna be a bunch of socialists. You know a pro Trans programme, marriage, all these progressive opinions and then the Democrats are gonna, be other, can communists because it seems to be the direction things tended to shift. I could be wrong, though: the mainstream narrative from these he's the cable networks in these. These corporations in tv channels, this old school, the ratings are tanking there talk about other ratings are going down on, my moraines are gonna, I mean during the election. Of course, it was not viewers was was, was not for everybody and it's gone down for everybody, including myself

but we ve. Actually you know here. At TIM S, Tyrrell we ve been improving growth, were hiring were expanding. We ve got so much opportunity expansionist might make my husband is. Other companies are like we're, gonna hurting things are going there I wonder if in ten years seen and want even exist anymore or they'll, just built a blog and these other big corporate channels won't survive. You take a look at the daily show. Trevor Noah, but trot it to try to make Trevor Noah come out like like Youtube, are like Canada. I do he's in his room that environment like hey, look, it's happening and cracks jokes, and it's just not funny or interesting reading. look at what doing really really well channels like this. You know, I will say fastenings alot of people and media who seem to think because of the Kok the style of my videos, as just in a room with a with it, as did the thing pulled up the screen grab and I'm talkin. It must be a guiding displacement, not realising that we're a massive operation with a dozen plus employees. At this point and expanding and were already talking to

People about funding tv shows and new podcast new staff expansion, expansion, expansion there, even people a fox they seem to think I've had, I think, can survive to seem to think that this is some small time operation. Now we ve got three different shows. which has just basically my commentary and we're gonna be expanding more worthy huge and we are going to that space for legitimate, moderate discussion and even some left, leaning opinion. It isn't woke real conversations from honest people. That's what we're building control does, of course, do So whenever you like, a fair conversation, sometimes cancer, We have a right of surprise. Sometimes liberals are right while shocking the problem is the me They are just as whatever the left wants to hear. Liberals in the left us and thus they credit feedback loop of iconic nonsense and then throw red meat to these people. I love it. They would call me a Griffin, her YO see is the one now claiming that the child attention centres are influx facilities to which he previously called them concentration camps. I've always maintain

they weren't, and they still aren't. They have always been trot child detention facilities so amazing to get a lot little mental or intellectual consistency. Isn't it you dont get it from the media. You get sophistry an attempt, justification Simon If I see an opinion, come off from conservative agree with ominous, I don't agree with it. When Tucker Karlsson came out and said you know of flight suits, pregnant women. This is crazy or you know I said. Actually I like the idea that everybody can serve their not all gotta be in combat, are flying. I have no problem with that, what you will get from the progressive something entirely different, save Jimmy Door, because he's one of those he's one of the eat he's at he's a good he's, a good dude respecting when you go on Youtube. There's a variety of opinions and Youtube is not perfect to censor people But if you're, getting your information from you tubular you on your more likely have a healthy, balanced view is not without its problems salon. people believe in lizard. People in flattering and others are other other crazy stuff. But if you

ray: discerning, individual, ok and you you have to balance what you what you see from people like me on you as well as the mainstream media than you. Let me robust media knowledge, but idea what's going on, so it was not easy but say this: don't get Oliver NEWS from one source, dont get it from just me, you're just crowd or just Jimmy watches many people began and even make sure you're turning into regular old, mainstream press, otherwise as you will fall into a bubble. Let's not a good thing. I try to be as bound up as I possibly can in patients about. I try to be honest and understand the perspectives the best I can do the media not so much there too busy dealing with their post, Crump stress, disorder Oliver, their necks segments come up at four p m over at Youtube COM slashed him cast. It is my other channel which is more bigger news of the day, and this one's more, like I don't know, nitty gritty in the weeds philosophy and things like that, and sometimes just general grievances. I suppose, but yeah I think I might

talking about children, we'll see what happens be up at four p m youtube com slashed him cast thanks, rang out, and I will see you all then.