Trump and his team have been smacked down by judges all over the country with their voter fraud claims, and now they ve been joined by Texas AG Ken Paxton, who joins us to talk about why he s joined the fight.
00:00:27.000That's roughly the Trump legal team's record in court, getting smacked down by judge after judge, in state after state, because they've pushed ludicrous accusations without actual evidence.
00:00:37.000Your president's legal team has not been able to produce any evidence of systemic fraud.
00:00:42.000The president, without any evidence, tries to peddle his own alternative.
00:02:22.000We have a lot to get to, some updates on Swalwell, I was sad that you weren't here yesterday.
00:02:28.000And by the way, everyone watching, the best thing you can do for this right now, just hit like while we're live, and if you're watching the Archive, just comment.
00:02:34.000Comment on the video, that helps us cut through the YouTube algorithms.
00:02:37.000I don't know if this will still be up, because it could be considered against YouTube's guidelines that we wanted to have someone authoritative.
00:02:45.000I know it's not AP, but we actually have here with us for an exclusive, the Attorney General of Texas, Mr. Ken Paxton.
00:03:35.000So you too, please don't remove him yet.
00:03:38.000Really quickly, because I know you're busy, you're about to walk over to the Oval Office right after this spot, and I appreciate you making the time.
00:03:45.000Treat me like many people in our audience, because I'm sure you know this has gotten convoluted with different suits.
00:03:51.000Some are brought by the Trump team, some are brought by other Lawyers and some have been brought now, in this case, by an AG like yourself.
00:04:02.000And just in a summary, what is the basis of the suit?
00:04:06.000Okay, the first thing I have to say is my daughter is having a baby today and my son-in-law said, I love this guy, can you get me one of those mugs autographed by him?
00:04:41.000This suit that you have brought against the state of Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania.
00:04:48.000Tell them what it is, what the basis is.
00:04:49.000So we simply are saying That these states ignored the Constitution, they ignored their own state laws, and throughout these states local elected officials and judges changed the law and made their elections not follow state law, which
00:05:08.000Under the Constitution, they're not supposed to do.
00:05:10.000Those elections are governed by state law, by state legislators, and when they start mucking around with state law, individual counties having different election laws than other counties, It creates credibility problems, and it's unconstitutional, and it affects my voters because we did it the right way.
00:05:40.000And not only that, but Texas was one of the states that rejected using Dominion software, correct?
00:05:46.000We've rejected it three times, and we've also had 12 lawsuits in federal court, state court, all over the state of Texas, 5th Circuit, Texas Supreme Court, challenging our laws on mail-in ballots, challenging our laws on signature verification.
00:06:01.000We were successful in every single one of them, 12 lawsuits, and had we not, we would have been in the same situation as Georgia, and Michigan, and Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.
00:06:24.000Now, I want to go back to the constitutionality here in a second.
00:06:27.000But before that, you know, there's there been a lot of rumors circulating and unfortunately some disinformation has taken place on the right as well as the left.
00:06:34.000Now, 17 states have joined in as friends of the court, right?
00:06:40.000But that doesn't mean that they've officially signed on.
00:06:42.000And you said that this morning you can announce right here, right now, which states thus far have officially signed on to this suit with you in Texas.
00:06:54.000Arizona is now part of that amicus process.
00:06:59.000The other states that we are talking to about intervening have not actually filed, so I cannot say who they are, but there are several states that are likely to intervene in our case sometime today.
00:07:27.000And I had heard, listen, not from you, I want to be clear about that, but from some inside sources, they expect a minimum of four and a possibility of ten.
00:08:07.000So intervening, you're actually a party.
00:08:09.000You're standing alongside of us saying, hey, this was a wrong done to our citizens in our state.
00:08:13.000And amicus is a friend of the court brief providing guidance to the court on issues that those states think will be relevant to the court.
00:08:23.000And my understanding is that amicus will be favorable to us, obviously, but it's not like intervening.
00:08:29.000Intervening is like, I'm part of this fight, I'm getting in, totally getting in, Very helpful.
00:08:36.000We do a lot of amicus briefs ourselves, because sometimes we can't intervene, or it's not strategic to intervene.
00:08:43.000It's not quite the same, but it's certainly useful.
00:08:46.000Well, yeah, and I understand, but how could it not be strategic for them to intervene?
00:08:49.000I guess, what should be the tipping point for someone who's saying, well, I support it, I'm a friend of the court, versus, you know, really having skin in the game?
00:08:56.000Because a lot of Americans out there feel like, you know, they've been gaslit, they're taking crazy pills.
00:09:00.000You, obviously, have the brass pair to step up.
00:09:03.000Americans want to see other states officially, you know, sign on that dotted line, hey, we hear ya.
00:09:27.000And we'll know by the end of the day, that's probably a big part of your conversation, who is joining in officially.
00:09:32.000I wish you could tell me at least even like one or two, you know, I mean, please, can you also just, you know, have some kind of complaint?
00:10:57.000I feel like we've had a harm to my citizens, that their vote, they've been disenfranchised by these other states in a federal national election.
00:11:05.000And so if the court doesn't grant us the ability to make the argument, we have nowhere to go and we're just being told, not only you're being tossed, but you don't even get to make the argument.
00:11:19.000Right, and that's the difference because, you know, I was watching CNN, SCOTUS was trending, you know, on social media, and I thought, oh, this must be because of General Paxton's suit, and instead it was about the Supreme Court, you know, kicking it back down to the lower Pennsylvania court, that other case that happened on the same day, and I think people don't understand that, listen, that's something that's happening within a state, it kind of came down to a deadline issue, but that's very different Uh, compared to a suit between states.
00:11:45.000Necessarily, the Supreme Court has to intervene because you can't just say, well, let the state of, let the Supreme Court of Texas or Pennsylvania figure it out.
00:11:53.000That's a, that's a very stark contrast that I think hasn't been really nailed into Americans' heads yet.
00:12:00.000I don't think they fully grasp the consequences.
00:12:03.000No, it's so important because I think there are some who think that the Supreme Court has to hear our case.
00:12:09.000I mean, there are some on the court who I think believe that when the Constitution was written that states had nowhere to go because if they can't be heard, their only other opportunity was to go fight each other, right?
00:13:10.000I mean, the evidence hasn't even been examined in some of these other cases.
00:13:14.000How do you, I guess, how do you remain hopeful that at least what you're bringing forward and the evidence is seen?
00:13:20.000Because we've seen judges say, don't want to see it.
00:13:23.000So, you know, we referenced some of the evidence that we have, but our case is fundamentally not even built on that because I've watched what's happened.
00:13:30.000And, you know, frankly, I'm disappointed that it hasn't gotten a more thorough review by our judiciary for whatever reason.
00:13:39.000Our case doesn't rest on how valid the fraud is or not.
00:13:44.000We are resting completely on the Constitution that we know for a fact that these legislatures We're not basing it on anything that we have to go prove as it relates to fraud.
00:13:52.000and that there are equal protection issues about different voters being treated differently,
00:13:57.000that there are ballot fraud issues that were not addressed, like no signature verification.
00:14:02.000You've got drop boxes being dropped in Georgia that are just dropped off and people can throw
00:14:07.000their ballots in there. I mean, those are in violation of state law. That's a fact.
00:14:25.000And it negatively affects, you know, members of other states.
00:14:28.000Listen, as someone who's sort of more of a libertarian conservative, right, we talk about federalism on this show, I understand states having the ability to govern themselves.
00:14:36.000But this is a question that I have, and maybe you might be able to help clarify, because I could be wrong.
00:14:42.000We do have a baseline minimum, you know, of laws, meaning, okay, you can't kill, you can't steal. We do have a baseline
00:14:48.000minimum, for example, nationally what an adult is for enlistment. Now states can change
00:14:53.000where you can drink, right? But why don't we have, it seems like we have a baseline nationally when
00:14:59.000elections need to take place, right, election day, but how is it, how do we juxtapose
00:15:04.000this with the Constitution where you have some states where you require a valid address and some
00:15:21.000Well, and the way that it was set up was that the states could determine some of these rules as it related to their election.
00:15:28.000So, for instance, I think Nevada legislature actually went back and changed their laws as it related because of COVID and made it very easy to vote by mail.
00:15:36.000I mean, so we do have states where the legislature set it up, so it's It creates some of these issues that we're talking about.
00:15:45.000And that may be a national debate that we need to be having at the federal level to say, hey, we need to fix this across the nation because we can't trust these elections.
00:15:55.000If the legislature goes and changes these rules, it makes it really easy for people to Yeah.
00:16:01.000Well, I appreciate it, and I know you're busy.
00:16:10.000I have a couple more questions for you, real quick.
00:16:14.000And the reason I bring that up is because we are doing a show next Thursday, right, where we are going to be driving across Nevada in an RV.
00:16:20.000So we have some brilliant researchers who work here and we have between 30 or 40 or 50 addresses.
00:16:25.000We'll hit as many as we can live streaming uncut for four to six hours.
00:16:30.000Addresses that we know don't exist or are invalid addresses.
00:16:48.000And it was something that actually narrowed down the states where we had to say, actually, it's not lawful for you to vote from a place that doesn't exist.
00:17:05.000General Paxton, one of the interesting things I thought stood out from the filing you made with the Supreme Court was the phrase, an unconstitutional relaxation of ballot integrity protections.
00:17:17.000It's saying there are laws in place, there are rules in place, and the states are not following them.
00:17:22.000We all agree about what they did, now it's just a matter of determining was it constitutional or unconstitutional.
00:17:27.000For our audience members across the country and in these states that are only amici or haven't even jumped in to file an amicus brief on this particular issue, why should they be interested in making sure that their voice is heard and that their attorney generals are actually joining in to combat the unconstitutional relaxation of ballot integrity protections?
00:18:05.000Why should citizens want their AGs to join the fight?
00:18:09.000Because I think that they are being disenfranchised.
00:18:13.000If your state followed state law and produced election results that were based on state law as required by the U.S.
00:18:21.000Constitution, and other states said, we're not going to follow those constitutional requirements, We're not going to follow our state law and as a result we don't really know, we can't verify whether any of these 2.5 million ballots, mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania are real.
00:18:37.000Well, that's a problem for my state because my state is following the law and now we've got all these states we don't know what the real result is and it affects the outcome of the election.
00:19:10.000At 3 p.m., right, and we'll know today, people watching, the states that officially join in, but let's say the Supreme Court declines to hear your case, what are your next steps?
00:19:36.000And another question, is there anything that the American people, you know, we have hundreds of thousands of people watching right now, right now, this second, there'll be millions of people, is there anything they can do to help?
00:19:45.000Yes, I think encourage your Attorney General to intervene.
00:19:48.000I mean, or participate in this process.
00:19:51.000It's our last chance, and it may be our last chance forever because if this gets set this way...
00:19:58.000I mean, we may never have elections again that we can count on.
00:20:01.000This is setting the future of our country and how elections are going to be done.
00:20:07.000Here's my final question, and I don't mean for it to be a hardball question, but I will say this.
00:20:11.000The sort of feeling from a lot of Americans with, you know, Donald Trump in office and Republicans in control of a lot of areas of government.
00:20:20.000You know, I go, for example, it required liberals in New York to file suit on the grounds of, you know, 230 or monopolies with big tech.
00:20:30.000When do you think all Republicans are going to, or can we hope for other Republicans to grow a backbone like you seem to be, General Paxton?
00:20:38.000I'm just going to tell you, we're really disappointed.
00:20:40.000I'm glad to see you doing this, but we're really disappointed with the people we've put in office.
00:20:58.000I find it shocking that, you know, there were so few people interested initially in being a part of this.
00:21:05.000I'm grateful that, you know, this case has created enough interest that now we've got people focused on it.
00:21:13.000I think there's good reason to have some disappointment in what Republicans have done, and I'm hopeful that this will galvanize us to realize that we could lose our democracy in the way that the founder set it up, and that this really is like crunch time.
00:21:30.000It's a threshold issue of survival of our democracy.
00:21:36.000Yeah, I agree with you and there we hear it for American people to petition your AGs.
00:22:23.000So if the Supreme Court does not give him an opportunity like he said, I see very difficult times ahead trying to get somebody to listen to what you're saying if you're in a state that gets disenfranchised in the future.
00:22:33.000And I had other things that I wanted to ask him about.
00:22:35.000They've had 12 suits in Texas on election fraud that they've won.
00:23:12.000So here's the thing is when you actually read it like that phrase for example was just incredible where you know the unconstitutional relaxation of ballot integrity protections.
00:23:22.000I feel like I'm in the locker room in high school.
00:23:59.000So now that that last question I was asking about why should other people care, it's because if these states are allowed to do whatever they want with regards to ballot integrity protections, Yeah.
00:24:11.000That means your vote is reduced in statute.
00:24:14.000I tell you, though, we had gotten into the scoop that he was going to give us the actual states that are joined on.
00:24:19.000So I'm sorry if I told you guys, because that's what we had.
00:24:58.000By the way, hit the notification bell if you are subscribed, because subscriptions don't mean a whole lot.
00:25:02.000And let me know, by the way, comment if you got a notification yesterday, because a lot of people didn't get a notification or only got it after the stream had been off air for an hour.
00:25:12.000That's another example of YouTube screwery, which we will get into in a little bit.
00:26:07.000But the wrongdoing here, Jim, is that at the same time this story was being leaked out, is the time that I was working on impeachment on the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees.
00:26:17.000And if this is a country where people who criticize the president are going to have law enforcement information weaponized against them, that's not a country that any of us want to live in.
00:26:26.000And I hope it is investigated as to Who leaked this information?
00:26:32.000If I'm if I'm if I'm if I'm for sure I just go what'd you do you mean the FBI sex tape?
00:26:39.000And I understand by the way using arms of the government like the FBI or the CIA
00:26:46.000Uh, or the internal revenue service to target political opponents. I understand that's a problem
00:26:51.000Obviously, I would agree with you on that but more pressing did you bang an an asian spy on tape?
00:26:57.000Right and by the way, the surest way to derail impeachment was to go after swalwell like
00:27:02.000He wasn't in charge of it, he was working with other people at work!
00:27:08.000Clearly the Chinese spy has no problem lying and leaping their way to the top of Swalwell, but once the story is released, just say it was Obama at that point.
00:27:29.000Once the Chinese spy probably didn't really know, you know, cultural differences and then came back and was like, you know, like a dog bringing in a dead bird and they brought you a gift.
00:28:05.000I think Andrew Klavan has talked about this.
00:28:07.000If there's a scandal with a Republican or a Conservative, it's about that scandal.
00:28:11.000And if it's a scandal with a Liberal, like Swalwell, it's how did they get the information.
00:28:16.000Same thing happened, by the way, with that man, Andrew Breitbart, with Anthony Weiner, where he had pictures of his giant, throbbing erection from the Space Odyssey angle.
00:28:28.000And they just claimed that nothing was going on.
00:28:30.000And then they said, well, how did Andrew Breitbart procure this?
00:28:32.000And that was Andrew Breitbart's story.
00:28:33.000He was saying, well, that's my question, is who else has these pictures and what kind of leverage do they have on our officials?
00:28:47.000I'm sorry, was that a yes you slept with a spy or a no she walked out when you dropped your paper?
00:28:52.000Can you imagine if there were, I don't know, let's say actual videographic evidence of Donald Trump watching Russian prostitutes peeing on furniture?
00:29:01.000That would be the story for the entire day.
00:29:04.000I've been watching seen in a 24-hour cycle.
00:29:13.000Well, we don't have to imagine, Stephen.
00:29:15.000His taxes were leaked illegally and then covered in contravention to all of the YouTube, Facebook, Twitter's policies on hacked information being leaked.
00:30:36.000Hey, by the way, we don't know how long we'll be on here, so we are on Parler.
00:30:40.000Facebook things are changing a little bit, and we'll be taking some live chat as we cover these hearings in a little bit on Georgia for Mug Club only.
00:31:26.000You guys probably know that Michigan Representative RuPaul Cynthia Johnson threatened to trump supporters on Facebook since she's actually been removed from her post.
00:31:37.000So many of you have seen this probably, but I watched it and I was appalled.
00:31:43.000And sometimes what happens with the show is I'll watch something, I'll see it breaking, I'm appalled, and then by the time I have to cover it on the show, I've seen it two, three times, and some of that fire is gone.
00:31:53.000So, um, actually this is what we will introduce as a new segment.
00:31:57.000So, you know exactly how he's feeling at that moment in time.
00:31:59.000So, you know, that I'm in this fight with you where we will watch this tape, uh, and
00:32:03.000uh, I will get into the zone in what we call reacting.
00:33:57.000I don't want him to take my milkshake.
00:34:00.000Alright, so we just went through that.
00:34:02.000My question to you, by the way, as we go into YouTube, again, just comment below.
00:34:05.000This is the best thing you can do to help these get through the YouTube algorithm.
00:34:09.000Have you seen, can you remember any example, while we're talking about YouTube and their interference now in not only pre-election but post-election news coverage, can you think of anything comparable happening with someone from the left?
00:34:23.000And I don't mean a leftist channel being taken down for a copyright strike.
00:34:27.000I mean actually removing fake news from the left, for example, like Russia or peeing Russian prostitutes.
00:36:35.000It's like a buddy cop film with YouTube and Facebook, where all they do is beat down black guys mercilessly with no cause.
00:36:41.000While they cackle on their billions of dollars.
00:36:44.000So a quick, by the way, a quick YouTube search reveals, it shows us that this is not true, to be clear.
00:36:50.000So I want to read this quote again, that they will remove any piece of content uploaded today or after that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors.
00:37:12.000Well, as of right now, I think we have a montage.
00:37:15.000There are still many clips up claiming that the 2016 win of President Trump, your president, not president-elect because Jim Prosciutto says so, lost because of fraud in 2016.
00:37:27.000Russia hacked the 2016 elections, and they're going to do it again.
00:37:32.000It's not that the Russians will be back.
00:38:51.000Donald Trump basically, he was a victim of the greatest witch hunt of modern American history for a phone call.
00:38:58.000You may not like it, but, and Bill Barr had to say it, and you know he probably really didn't want to.
00:39:04.000Something else, while we're talking about this, sure they still have disinformation up there about the Russian hacking, but YouTube Well, they're saying right now they're going to get rid of anyone who even addresses widespread voter fraud.
00:39:17.000They still have content up on their platform that is bordering on... Well, some of it, no, is outright illegal.
00:40:31.000Let's turn it because you have little girls and thongs and apparently that's not a problem.
00:40:34.000And we blurred it, so it wasn't blurred originally.
00:40:39.000But we didn't blur the drug dealer guy.
00:40:41.000Though we knew who it was when that same face and blur showed up on Shark Tank saying, I'm seeking $20 million for a 10% stake in my crack house.
00:41:08.000And by the way, YouTube is now, we're opening up the floor to Bill Richman and stuff, and everyone can let us know what's going on with the Georgia hearings.
00:41:13.000YouTube's not only let these videos obviously flourish regarding the 2016 myth, but they also have allowed many videos that just claim Donald Trump is an illegitimate president, right?
00:41:21.000You can still find these things right now available on YouTube.
00:41:26.000And the funny thing is, too, there's fact checks About the election, they just redirect to a general government website that says, oh no, the election's been called, or any claims of voter fraud are in dispute.
00:42:18.000He looks pretty good for a guy with a disease with a 99.97% survival rate.
00:42:24.000Stands out in a way and will always stand out in posterity with regard to this election because you have the thing that's going to live after this election no matter what and that is the videotape that proves that anyone who says that fraud is been debunked or there is no fraud is just plain blind or lying.
00:42:49.000You have live from Atlanta, you've got Voter fraud right in front of people's eyes.
00:42:57.000It's tough to tell the difference between COVID Rudy and non-COVID Rudy.
00:43:17.000I forced a meeting of the five COVID families and used Rico.
00:43:23.000By the way, we have some personal info as well on YouTube that we've experienced, but YouTube said they're looking even further ways to decrease anyone who contradicts the election narrative.
00:43:34.000Despite these encouraging results, we recognize there's always more to do.
00:43:38.000For example, while problematic misinformation represents a fraction of 1% of what's watched on YouTube in the United States, we know we can bring that number down even more And some videos, while not recommended prominently on YouTube, yours truly, continue to get high views sometimes coming from other sites.
00:43:56.000We're continuing to consider this and other new challenges as we make ongoing improvements.
00:44:03.000One quick thing too, Tim Poole reported that YouTube clarified to him, so I don't know if I can necessarily, if I can confirm this.
00:44:21.000The two conditions that must be met, according to Tim Pool, a video to be removed is they must claim widespread fraud and error and say that it made Trump lose.
00:44:38.000I'm not talking about some deep state mind control technique, but when you say, OK, listen, you can say that Donald Trump, you think Donald Trump won, OK, but you just can't substantiate it.
00:44:48.000The opinion is, I think this election was unfair, or I don't think Biden won anyway.
00:44:54.000They go, OK, well, what makes you think that?
00:44:59.000If someone says, I think Donald Trump won because there are these thousands of votes from addresses that don't exist, thousands of votes from people out of state, thousands of votes from people underage, they're algorithmic, statistical, improbable, banned.
00:45:36.000The way that they've kind of threaded the needle here to make it impossible to give A truly credible argument at this point, going forward, is they've said you can either say Trump won, but don't give the substantiating evidence, to which then anyone can go, if they had evidence they would have said it.
00:45:54.000Or you can just say, without saying what the conclusion is, give the evidence, which is to say, oh, this number of votes was wrong, this number of votes were incorrect ballots, shouldn't have been counted, came in after a deadline, etc.
00:46:07.000But you can't then tie it to the conclusion, which is, it's impacted the outcome of the election.
00:46:12.000So now you can just give this, but it's irrelevant.
00:46:23.000YouTube is trying to cultivate an environment where you can voice an opinion and not substantiate it.
00:46:30.000What's being banned from YouTube right now, what causes a problem, is statistical, factual, legal substantiation.
00:46:38.000You can say, I think Donald Trump won, or I think the election's unfair.
00:46:43.000You just can't provide the sources and evidence, which is great, that makes perfect sense, because the people who've, you know, housed in YouTube Studios, the Young Turks, or places like NBC Vox, where they co-produce shows with them, They don't provide sources, so wonderful for them.
00:46:56.000They stand no risk to run afoul of something that limits transparency.
00:47:01.000But these are strange times that we live in, so we cannot talk about widespread voter fraud if we were to insinuate that that may have impacted the election.
00:47:08.000However, from what I understand, and I don't understand much, YouTube can't stop us from thinking About widespread voter fraud which may have led to Donald Trump winning the election.
00:47:21.000So, I'd like to take a moment and exercise that remaining right.
00:48:24.000And you can't violate certain laws as they're related to who you're letting in your business.
00:48:28.000And so with YouTube, now you're starting to see the true colors.
00:48:31.000What's interesting is you aren't seeing those same true colors when it comes to Facebook and the stuff that they just randomly take off, throttle, remove, that kind of thing.
00:48:39.000Do we have an answer yet from Facebook on why the biggest independent election stream was taken down?
00:49:13.000Millions of fans, millions of followers on Facebook, and we spent a substantial amount of money advertising on Facebook.
00:49:20.000We don't need more, of course, because they courted me, reached out and said, hey, you want to spend money and grow your business on Facebook?
00:49:26.000And then they ban the election stream and don't even answer, not only through the channels available, the email,
00:49:33.000the contact forms, but an actual notice from a lawyer.
00:50:22.000They just said they didn't like the election results, and that was what they... I was like, this is your, like, billions of dollars budget to go out and produce something like that?
00:50:32.000I don't like the YouTube search results!
00:50:36.000Where's my 40 acres and a digital mule emoji?
00:50:41.000There's no question here, and when you look at all the antitrust... There are many questions here.
00:50:46.000But there is, of all the questions, a question that is totally answered already is, Are all of these different companies at some level working together to make sure that there's a consistent lid, if we're using Joe Biden's words, a consistent lid on any questions or dissent going forward about where this is.
00:51:03.000I mean, this is what's crazy, and this is why America is so great, is even though these companies are coming in and feel that they can suppress any discussion about this going forward, at least we still have a legal system that allows us to file these briefs.
00:51:15.000But as General Paxton said, this is the last resort.
00:51:19.000And I'm really tired, I will say this, I'm really tired of the Republicans out there grandstanding on 230 and not really doing a whole lot.
00:51:27.000Listen, guys, let me tell you, I may have a major announcement here to make next week.
00:51:32.000And I'm really tired, I will say this, I'm really tired of the Republicans out there
00:51:35.000grandstanding on 230 and not really doing a whole lot.
00:51:37.000Listen guys, let me tell you, I may have a major announcement here to make next week.
00:51:42.000There's no cavalry come over the hill.
00:51:45.000Not to be, unless it's people like us, but the people who are perpetually employed and
00:51:49.000even if they're Republicans who fancy themselves bulldogs, there's some information out there
00:51:54.000that we know has been presented to people who could do something about it and they don't
00:51:58.000So there's a problem with that too, and we need to vote him out.
00:52:02.000And we'll cross our t's and dot our s's.
00:52:03.000But actually, I have someone here that's a slight disagreement with my lawyer, and because it's a little disagreement, he's going to kick my ass.
00:52:24.000That's also something that YouTube, when we're talking about 230, they don't even follow, and I know what you were saying about, let me explain this first, then you make your argument, and then I would like to make mine.
00:53:01.000We've had videos removed from people in single-party consent states, by the way, so we don't need to ask for their permission, who gave permission.
00:53:09.000I think, actually, in one case, written, and then afterwards said, well, I don't like the way that it turned out, so I want it removed, and they were removed.
00:54:13.000That is the hypocrisy that's coming through on this particular issue.
00:54:17.000And also I do think that it's a violation of law overall because if YouTube is going to be a
00:54:22.000platform, right, you don't get to stop someone in a town square.
00:54:25.000For example, let's say you're a police officer in a town square and someone is videotaping people in public and someone says, I don't want to be videotaped.
00:54:31.000All the police officer can do is say, well, you get out of the town square.
00:54:33.000So if you are enjoying the platform of being the digital town square, which is what you guys have claimed under 230, you do not get to say, actually, you have to stop filming.
00:54:43.000Especially not if we say, hey, we're filming, someone agrees to it, or sits down, for example, and it changed my mind, where they clearly know there's a camera, and a camera, and a camera, and a camera, and a camera, and afterward they say, well, we don't want to do it, you take it down.
00:54:55.000That's just, let's recap this really quickly.
00:54:57.000YouTube can create a policy that says, we will remove any substantial claims, any substantiations of the idea that Donald Trump lost If it includes voter fraud, right?
00:55:07.000Any claims of voter fraud resulting in the outcome of this election being in dispute, we will remove.
00:56:03.000It's almost as bad as if YouTube reached out to creators and said, like, hey, hey, before you submit anything, let us review it and give you some changes, just like an editor at the New York Times.
00:56:14.000The major point here is when you look at 230 and the protection that incorrect court decisions have allowed them to continue to do is to translate 230's good faith application of removal policies and say that oh it's okay for you to say you do it one way with regard to single-party consent but then do it a different way and the only difference Is because of the types of content that's being done.
00:56:40.000The ignoring or following a single consent law by the creator is exactly the same.
00:56:44.000But you let some people do it when you're okay with the content and you don't let them do it when it's other creators with other content like your stuff.
00:56:54.000You should no longer have the protection because you're no longer acting in good faith to remove that.
00:56:58.000This is just when people get mad about the fact that they decided to try and leak, which is illegal, Donald Trump's tax returns and then not cover Hunter Biden.
00:57:07.000Listen, that's you get mad at Fox News, CNN, ABC, NBC.
00:57:58.000Because if we can't get out factual information that maybe isn't convenient for the people that own these companies, or maybe isn't convenient for a political viewpoint, you can never have freedom of speech again in this country.
00:58:09.000You're just going to believe whatever you're told, right?
00:58:11.000And so for any of you out there who are like, why do you keep talking about 230?
00:58:14.000Because it is the very most important thing going on right now.
00:58:18.000And if your representatives don't take action on it, get them out.
00:58:42.000I'm just saying, don't be surprised if I'm not here doing this show as you see it now, because I'm not going to be one of those guys who, you know, you see these people on online message boards, and if we bleed together, we are brothers together.
00:58:55.000Now, we've filed suits in the past where we've filed petitions of information, but there's more that I can do.
00:59:00.000I just can't do it and do this at the same time.
00:59:03.000So there's some decisions that have to be made because, yeah, I'm not gonna see the thread of our constitutional republic be tugged on and have the opportunity to do something and not do something about it.
00:59:12.000And it requires a little more than... You know who's holding that thread?
01:00:37.000We let this erosion of our free speech take place.
01:00:39.000We let the erosion of our freedom of religion take place.
01:00:41.000Let me ask you this, while we're talking about this right now, and people out there, there's back and forth, people go, oh, it's conjecture.
01:00:47.000This is an election of the most important person in the free world.
01:02:31.000Oh look, if they're about to show this video of this broad with the absentee ballots, it's like Giuliani has been watching our show.
01:02:39.000I feel like way when I watch the news.
01:02:41.000In one of these next hearings it's just going to be our six hour stream from next Thursday where we're driving from non-voting address to non-voting address and that's happening.
01:02:59.000Now listen, the connection might drop, so we have to stream here to this studio, and if it drops, it'll just drop for maybe 30 seconds to a minute.
01:03:39.000You can say, like, there was X tens of thousands of votes, but not... Can we get a definition of widespread?
01:03:46.000I will say there are many, many tens of thousands, potentially hundreds of thousands of this example, of the kind of address example that you can find online, but We don't have time.
01:03:57.000Because we'll be in an RV, not a DeLorean, so I don't know how many we'll be able to show you, but I just think it's important that you see at least a couple dozen, right?
01:04:06.000That way you know, hey, put a bullshit asshole address to the asshole name that they tell you doesn't exist.
01:04:31.000I don't expect it to be on for a very long time.
01:04:35.000And look, when we're out there, I mean, you've made this point a number of times, which is, hey, guys, if you're sharing information... You're welcome to come.
01:04:53.000If you're sharing unvetted information as a conservative who's questioning what's going on in this election, and you haven't vetted that information, there's no doubt that well-meaning people are sharing bad information.
01:05:03.000And that is creating a smokescreen that allows the WAPOs to come in and go, see, that one's bunk, that one's a bunk, that one's a bunk, that one's a bunk.
01:06:16.000This policy has been historically the same policy that you've had in previous... I know we covered talking about 16, but I like how they threw that in there right there on the thing.
01:07:19.000Hey, by the way, many people may not remember this.
01:07:22.00010% of Americans said it would have changed their vote had they heard about the Hunter Biden story.
01:07:25.000I don't know if you can bring that up there at some point, or have someone send it there to Tokunawa, because I do have some other overlays here, but Hunter Biden now is the subject of a federal tax investigation.
01:08:24.000I think the rule was that 60 days or 90 days, whatever it was, it was past that rule.
01:08:28.000He didn't even come back after a 90-day crack and foot job stupor and go, hey, I didn't leave my incredibly incriminating laptop here, did I?
01:08:39.000But Jack Dorsey decided that they were going to remove the Hunter Biden story.
01:08:45.000And they were the ones stupid enough to outright Yeah, it looks like the number was 1 in 6 Biden voters would have changed their minds if they had known the full story.
01:08:52.0001 in 6 Biden voters would have changed their minds?
01:08:56.000So let's not even talk about the widespread fraud, which of course never happened, and this hearing isn't going on, and we didn't just have the Texas AG, right?
01:09:14.000It is not a fair election because of the fact that the media controls all this information.
01:09:20.000If you take away the fact that they completely suppressed the Biden story, that they'd amplified the Russia story, that they'd amplified the impeachment story, that they'd amplified Donald Trump's tax returns, let me ask you this.
01:09:31.000How many times did you hear in the mainstream media that we had unemployment at 3.6%?
01:09:42.000When did you ever hear that more Americans had dollars in their pockets, both in their paycheck and saving from their paycheck paying in taxes?
01:09:50.000When did you ever hear in the media that the average family household income went up $5,000 under Donald Trump, where it was $1,000 under the entirety of Obama's administration?
01:10:39.000So let's not act like this is a fair election regardless of the hundreds of thousands of voters that either don't exist or out of state, underage, or double voted.
01:10:57.000And I would say that at a certain level, there could even be violations of campaign finance laws through supporting a particular candidate or belief or set of systems or a party through your actions that may not be fraud, because fraud is lying or not lying.
01:11:12.000So what's interesting about the Hunter Biden thing is the timing of going through and saying, we're not going to let this information out.
01:12:36.000But the wrongdoing here, Jim, is that At the same time this story was being leaked out is the time that I was working on impeachment on the House Intelligence and Judiciary committees.
01:12:46.000And if this is a country where People who criticize the president are going to have law enforcement information weaponized against them.
01:12:53.000That's not a country that any of us want to live in.
01:12:55.000And I hope it is investigated as to who leaked this information.
01:12:58.000So his problem was with selective leaking, right?
01:13:02.000Well, we know that intelligence agencies, I don't know, maybe Tocanaga can grab this, I don't know if it was the CIA or FBI or the Internal Revenue Service, had Hunter Biden's laptop while the story was being covered in October.
01:13:24.000I know you have a problem when someone's leaking your leaking on an Asian spy prostitute, but where are you when it comes to drip drip, you know, buttoning this up and fixing the leak in the pipe so that nobody knows and people are made to feel crazy if they say this Hunter Biden story is really important because it could compromise the next leader of the free world.
01:14:51.000So CNN, not only did they say that this is breaking news, I watched a segment this morning on this as well, they had the balls to say it was because of the intrepid reporting of blah blah blah, our reporter, and people shaking their heads.
01:15:03.000Yes, did a fantastic job uncovering this.
01:15:53.000It's like Al Capone if Al Capone were the former vice president's retarded son.
01:16:00.000Can you just, I just can't wait when we see him designing the new, what is it, he's gonna go out to the Rose Garden, you know, it's gonna be Hunter Biden, and you're like, why are all these roses white?
01:20:06.000And I don't believe that he's one guy.
01:20:07.000I don't believe that there's any savior to the political party.
01:20:10.000But I am at the point right now Where if the Republicans who we've elected, conservatives who we've elected, haven't done enough, if they sit in the silence and go, well here's some information that maybe you might want to look into, hey, how about you look into it?
01:20:22.000How about you do your due diligence so that I don't have to work 15 hours a day actually confirming it, and then you go forward and fight because you have the legal standing to do so?
01:20:30.000How about you stop being pussies because guess what?
01:20:47.000If you're not doing enough at this point, Republicans out there, there are a lot of people, myself included, out there going, hey, you know what?
01:20:55.000They don't seem to be... Not only do you not seem to be fighting for us in the way that you have been overwhelmingly requested to, You don't seem like the kind of person who would even understand the language that we're all speaking here at a party.
01:21:09.000Seems to me like you would be confused if we bring up that Georgia video, or if we bring up the voting rolls, or if we bring up the idea of unconstitutionality and legislating from the bench in Pennsylvania.
01:21:19.000Seems to me that a lot of these Republican representatives will be like, well, I don't know, that's for the course to decide, I don't know, I've seen a lot of conspiracies.
01:21:24.000Hey, hey, how about you take it upon yourselves here, since you have resources, for crying out loud, endless resources, you're welcome, tax dollars, here's more, and start getting to the bottom of this, and at least using what we have publicly available to Fight.
01:21:40.000That's why we're here right now and that's why we'll be here as long as we can and I will do the show as long as I can until my role in fighting might have to change because I am getting sick and tired of folks who aren't doing anything.
01:21:52.000Let not your heart be troubled in that this country has some great safeguards.
01:22:02.000But we are at a tipping point in this country, and we are at a tipping point where there isn't that cavalry coming over the hill because they don't care.
01:22:13.000I'm not talking about people like Ted Cruz.
01:22:15.000I'm not talking about people like Ken Paxton.
01:22:17.000But how many other Republicans can you name Who are in the faces non-stop of the people who you know are lying and supporting big tech throttling and censoring conservative voices.
01:23:41.000It's not tough for me to understand that some hipster coffee shop in Austin is going to force everyone to wear masks and walk around with ski poles to make sure that they're six feet apart.
01:23:49.000What is a tough pill for me to swallow is a church saying, well, you know what?
01:23:54.000We don't really need to meet to be the congregation of God.
01:24:03.000It's an easier pill to swallow for me to say, well, okay, of course we see Elizabeth Warren wanting people banned who disagree with them.
01:24:08.000Well, okay, of course we see people at dinner parties with Zuckerberg and Wojcicki and these politicians who are influencing our elections and banning opinions.