Today, the Supreme Court will hear the case of "Biden v. Missouri," otherwise known as "Missouri v. Biden." The case centers around whether or not a shadow ban should be implemented in order to combat online censorship.
00:01:10.000It is the very early morning hours of March 18th, 2024.
00:01:33.000And later on this morning, in this building behind me, the Supreme Court of the United States is going to hear oral arguments on the case of Bernie v. Missouri, otherwise known as Missouri v. Biden.
00:01:43.000It's time to change 230, get rid of 230.
00:01:45.000We're for getting this in front of the Supreme Court.
00:01:50.000The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone but they don't know they've been banned.
00:03:23.000Just the Hunter Biden story is enough.
00:03:25.000According to the polls, 17% of Biden voters would have changed their vote if they'd known about the Hunter Biden laptop story.
00:03:34.000You would have had the biggest political landslide victory for Donald Trump in all of modern presidential history according to the people who voted for Biden.
00:03:45.000Everyone just might want to hit a clean slate policy, but do it so that everyone can start using social media to serve us and not serving this algorithm non-human brain.
00:03:56.000There are forces out there that they don't want that information out there, so they suppress it.
00:04:02.000If you say something that they in power deem to be unacceptable, you can still have your life ruined.
00:04:10.000Thanks to Mug Club viewers out there, we've been able to file an amicus brief on behalf of Louder with Crowder.
00:04:15.000And with any luck, I'll be in that courtroom later today, sitting and witnessing these oral arguments and coming back out to give you my analysis on what I found in the courtroom.
00:06:26.000So, we actually have filed with the Supreme Court here today our own amicus brief to the Murphy v. Missouri, or Missouri v. Biden, as it's known, case as it relates to big tech, as it relates to government censorship.
00:06:41.000And there's a lot happening today, which could be, frankly, depending on what takes place, it could be the most Impact, people use the term turning point, could be the most impactful event in relation to not only this election, but future elections in the changing landscape of social media.
00:06:56.000You know that we've been up against this really going back at least since 2015, dealing with official bans on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter.
00:07:04.000But this is happening, this has affected the outcome of elections, period.
00:07:07.000You know that, we've covered that on this show, and today we're going to get into the specific arguments that are being made before the Supreme Court And depending how this goes, depending on how the Supreme Court rules, that may change everything that you see as it relates to social media.
00:07:20.000So question of the day, and please do, this is going to be a topic of today, the algorithm.
00:07:24.000So to help the algorithm, if you comment, it helps.
00:07:27.000Maybe not if you're on YouTube because they get to determine it anyway.
00:07:31.000Do you think the tides are turning when it comes to Well, legacy media propaganda, and are you concerned about those tides not turning yet as it relates to big tech, social media propaganda?
00:07:43.000That's kind of the problem that is taking place, right?
00:08:21.000Imagine if you walked into your office and said, well, you still have to work here, but you're not gonna be paid anymore.
00:08:24.000So, we made sure to uncouple from Big Tech because you are the ones who support this show, the investigative journalism, the ability for us to send someone down and file an amicus brief like today.
00:08:33.000Of course, you also get Nick DiPaolo, Brian Callan, Hodge Twins, Mr. Guns and Gear, the Mug Club Undercover.
00:08:37.000All of that, it's only supported by people like you.
00:08:40.000Yeah, and by the way, just so you know, not just anybody can print one of these things up and file it with the court.
00:08:45.000There are a lot of rules and regulations that go into it.
00:08:47.000It costs many, many, many thousands of dollars and a lot of man hours just to be able to get to the point we are now, much less sending people on the ground and doing everything there.
00:09:42.000For those who don't know, an amicus brief is basically a legal argument filed by a person who isn't the direct party in that case, but has a vested interest in the outcome and has relevant either evidence, documents, or an argument.
00:09:54.000Let me explain to you what this case is, okay?
00:09:58.000It's a case, not the Samickers brief, but the case itself is about the Biden administration communicating with big tech, colluding, let's use that term, colluding with big tech to remove content that they didn't like, which means that the Biden administration's actions, it is a direct violation of the First Amendment.
00:10:14.000I know libertarians will say, oh, private platforms, they can do whatever they want.
00:10:16.000We are way past that, especially after COVID.
00:10:20.000We were dealing with this for a very long time.
00:10:25.000That places like YouTube, Facebook, at one point Twitter, now X, I still have to get that right, that they were doing the bidding of the government.
00:10:39.000They tried to claim, though, that the Biden administration, their counter-argument is that the government, I guess, was just exercising First Amendment rights in trying to persuade platforms to allow content and ban other content.
00:11:38.000The COVID lab leak theory, it's now not referred to as a theory, but at one point in time, right, the Biden administration, this government said, we want you to specifically either throttle it, outright label it as misinformation.
00:11:48.000There were different steps that they had taken.
00:11:50.000If you criticize the efficacy of lockdowns, Or of the vaccines, which we did in this program, we were suspended for that.
00:11:57.000If you at any point questioned the legitimacy, not only the legitimacy, I want to be clear, of the 2020 election, but the changing of laws in states which affected the outcome of the election.
00:12:08.000If you criticized the unconstitutional changing of the laws, for example, in Pennsylvania, you could be removed.
00:12:15.000And also, keep in mind, one year, this was the biggest election stream ever in the history of, well, big tech on social media platforms.
00:13:20.000I know we've got Jim Jordan in about eight minutes here, but we'll detail some of the arguments in this case in just a minute to give you kind of a brief, and then we've got a lot more information after we do the interview with Jim Jordan to go through with everybody.
00:13:30.000And we have George the Greek down there.
00:14:03.000Before we get into the arguments, we actually are going to check in again.
00:14:05.000We have George the Greek down there, but we also have our on-the-ground correspondent outside of the Supreme Court, as opposed to in, like George the Greek.
00:14:36.000Well, I slept through my alarm, and I missed my flight, and I remember that you want me to go to a court, and the closest I could get to is the nearby pickleball court.
00:16:36.000So argument number one that's being made.
00:16:39.000Um, that Big Tech is, is, uh, not only is it large enough, but the way they operate, they need to be considered a public square, a digital town square.
00:16:48.000Meaning they are not just a publisher, right, they are not just the New York Times, for example, or NBC News, because they don't want to be.
00:16:54.000They benefit from Section 230, and they are so ubiquitous, they are required for people to express their opinions right now, and they benefit from the protections of legal liability, that they need to be subject to the constitutional constraints on limiting speech just as a real Town Square would be.
00:17:10.000And by the way, this is being made right here today, but we have been making this here at this show for years.
00:17:17.000Ladder with Crowder has been censored by Facebook, or been targeted for selective oppression by Facebook.
00:17:22.000Ladder with Crowder was fingered by Facebook as a page to throttle.
00:17:27.000But this week, for the first time, we ran into this problem with Google here on YouTube.
00:17:33.000And there has been just definitely an uptick in election time. And the idea too is this kind of goes to
00:17:39.000the what we've talked about with big tech is that it's the digital town square, right? So it kind of
00:17:43.000it's predicated on the same idea that you can't ban someone from a town hall just because they're
00:17:47.000critical of you. All right. So and Joe, you can jump, but I know we have to get to Tim Jordan here
00:17:52.000pretty quickly. Here's another argument that you'll see that's being made today. I want to be clear.
00:17:57.000Are these our arguments or these are the arguments period? These are the
00:18:00.000These are arguments kind of period, but they're based on arguments that are being made as well, right?
00:18:44.000Argument, I guess, number two here that you're going to see is that the Biden administration, it violated Section 230 by specifically coercing platforms to censor.
00:18:52.000Right, which they said they're persuading.
00:18:54.000Their word is persuading, we say coercing.
00:19:02.000Another argument that is being made here today, that the Biden administration, number three I guess, that they turned social media, effectively these platforms, into an arm of the government.
00:19:29.000Well, if you don't trust your institutions, you're not going to be able to operate.
00:19:32.000So effectively, this administration outsourced constitutional violations to private companies, which is really kind of an odd thing to outsource.
00:19:39.000Yeah, you figure you're just going to do the job yourself.
00:19:43.000Argument number four that you'll see, and we'll get to all these again after Representative Jordan, that algorithms, and this is something you will probably see Supreme Court justices discuss after this, I will tell you this, a lot of conservatives, a lot of people, they're not as involved as you are, so they don't fully understand what it means.
00:19:57.000The algorithms have enabled censorship to take place without the public knowing at all.
00:20:02.000This is something that we specifically brought to the attention of the Supreme Court here today.
00:20:07.000Non-public algorithms, they allow for shadow banning to take place.
00:20:10.000So you may know about, for example, demonetization.
00:20:14.000Our problem personally has not been with demonetization, it's been with not even being able to reach the people who are subscribing, people who hit the notification bell.
00:20:23.000This is artificial intelligence coded by humans with a mission in mind.
00:20:28.000In other words, someone codes an algorithm, like you see with Google, to affect the election.
00:20:32.000Someone codes an algorithm to flag the Hunter Biden story as misinformation.
00:20:35.000Someone codes an algorithm to show you penis or dildo, which is on YouTube and non-age-restricted.
00:20:42.000But questioning, for example, lockdowns or even pointing to Sweden and them not having lockdowns is not something that you will see, even if you're looking for it.
00:20:50.000That's an algorithm and it's not public.
00:21:26.000The scandal was him saying, well, how do we contain this so the public doesn't know and they don't assume that I was the one involved with this?
00:21:31.000Now, picture if Nixon was in charge of Facebook, YouTube, Google, Twitter, Spotify, as Jen Psaki refers to it.
00:21:41.000You would have never known about Watergate, or at the very least, people would say, ah, it's a nothing burger, to use a term that I hate and the people who use it.
00:21:50.000The Supreme Court arguments are going a little long so Jordan's going to be probably quite a bit late, maybe 20 minutes.
00:21:56.000So let's, we can keep going in this and then we can actually get into the details of each one of these points because we actually have some very good detail to every one of these arguments and why they're important to you guys and how we play a part in this as well as some of the other people that have filed here.
00:22:09.000So we can get into that stuff and then when Jim Jordan is able to come on.
00:22:13.000We can also, when we want, we can have George come on and give us a little bit of an update from inside as well if we want to do that.
00:22:18.000Well, you guys let me know when the best time is to do that.
00:22:20.000And by the way, if you're watching right now, the best thing you can do to cut through the algorithms, if you are not a Mugg Club member, download the Rumble app.
00:22:26.000Okay, you can watch on YouTube, that's the worst scenario.
00:22:29.000You can hit the subscription, it doesn't really mean anything.
00:22:31.000You can hit the notification bell, you can go over and watch on Rumble, download the app so that you know, you choose the notifications that you get.
00:22:38.000Here's an argument, I guess number five, that the The algorithmic censorship taking place at the hands of the Biden administration constitutes a prior restraint on free speech.
00:22:48.000Big tech, meaning a few companies, they censor themselves, they self-censor in advance because they know that the Biden administration will come down on them.
00:23:12.000Oh, a little bit of extra scrutiny for your company here.
00:23:14.000It'd really be a shame if we had to come and do the same thing to you.
00:23:17.000So once you've done it once, these other companies then act because they know how the government is going to then act if they don't do what they want them to do.
00:23:28.000To go back to that example, the mafia just has to go and burn one guy's business to the ground for everybody else on the block to fall in line and go, you know what?
00:24:44.000Should your politics allow private companies to deny you, for example, a bank account, a cell phone, to get a loan, to buy an airplane ticket?
00:24:57.000Even, let's say, because you believe that all vaccines cause autism, which we do not, I'm not saying that here, I'm saying let's take a radical leap.
00:25:03.000Let's say that you believe that Ted Cruz's dad shot JFK.
00:25:07.000Should you not be able to take a puddle jumper with spirit?
00:26:38.000And then it's AWS, which almost everybody except for Rumble, thank God, uses as the backbone and the cloud for their services to say, you know what?
00:27:23.000So, again, this brings us to the second argument that we made, a little more detail, a little more granular here, that they violated 230, again, by coercing platforms.
00:28:16.000This is where the administration, though, also violated this, because demands go outside of this narrow window.
00:28:21.000For example, questioning the CDC, questioning the WHO, questioning the idea of massive lockdowns, and even bringing up, for example, sounding the alarm bells that this could have catastrophic results for children and the educational system, which we now know to be true, that's not lascivious.
00:28:38.000That's not outrageous, that's not violent.
00:28:42.000Questioning, for example, what happened in Pennsylvania, what happened in Georgia, which of course Stacey Abrams has done, everyone from Stacey Abrams to Amy Klobuchar to Hillary Clinton as far as questioning election results, that's not obscene.
00:28:53.000And the demands from the administration are far outside of that scope.
00:28:57.000So that's the actual Trojan horse when people refer to that.
00:29:00.000It's, okay, well look, this administration actually has the right in these companies if something is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, otherwise objectionable.
00:29:11.000I mean, Boy Scout personified, honestly, when he said that actually more children die from the standard flu annually than all years combined of COVID, as far as children, infants and toddlers.
00:29:26.000When he says the standard flu is more dangerous to them, according to the CDC, and quotes the CDC, For which we were suspended and the content was removed.
00:29:36.000Does that meet the threshold for obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing?
00:29:43.000Yeah, you know what my crime was there?
00:29:45.000I was looking at the CDC report from the state of California and referencing the last ten flu seasons and the deaths of those age groups.
00:29:52.000We pulled the overlay up and highlighted four of the last ten years had higher death rates at that point in time.
00:29:58.000And that's even with counting every single accidental death as COVID at the time because somebody died with COVID but not because of COVID.
00:30:10.000Why was that removed, which would have affected the election?
00:30:12.000We're not just talking about Hunter Biden.
00:30:14.000Former Vice President Joe Biden, when you're talking about the relations, the 10% for the big guy, the type of relationships that he bragged about with China until he tried to say that he was tough on China, does that meet that threshold?
00:30:25.000Because this administration has worked hand-in-hand with big tech to ensure that those stories don't get out.
00:30:31.000People talk about Donald Trump not relinquishing the reins of power.
00:30:35.000Okay, they want you to be afraid of the idea of Donald Trump saying, I'm never leaving, I'm staying forever and putting his feet... What would you consider an administration, while in power, abusing their authority in using social media to censor any negative stories to ensure that they remain in power?
00:30:53.000What would you consider... that's refusing to relinquish the reins of power.
00:31:14.000Which brings us to argument, I guess, number three.
00:31:16.000And you guys can jump in wherever, because I know there's a lot of legalese here, but this amicus brief, and I believe all the information today from the Supreme Court, is going to be made publicly available.
00:31:25.000Yeah, we'll tell people where they can go and get it.
00:31:26.000And for you in Mug Club, we're actually working on, there's a way for us to give it to you in Mug Club via PDF.
00:31:32.000So I think there's a way we're going to make it available to everybody in Mug Club as one of the benefits of joining, if you guys want to read through it.
00:32:49.000What do you think happens when they go, oh wait, hold on a second, we have a duty to our shareholders and the White House press secretary just told us what we need to do?
00:34:54.000Think about what that is for a second and how dangerous it is.
00:34:58.000And these algorithms enable censorship to take place without the public knowing at all, without you knowing at all.
00:35:05.000And this is something that we brought in our amicus brief exclusively.
00:35:08.000You know about the Clean Slate campaign.
00:35:09.000We do not want to be slaves to the masters of algorithms, because it's an artificial brain.
00:35:15.000It's not even a real person at that point, but it was put into that position by someone who likely hates everything you stand for.
00:35:23.000When you see an algorithm, or you hear the term algorithm, it determines everything that you see, everything that you don't see in your social media platforms, in your YouTube feed, in your meta, sorry, Facebook feed, TikTok, whatever it is.
00:35:33.000It was created by someone in Palo Alto, 99% of whom, we've run these numbers, have not only voted but donated directly to the Democratic Party, and they want to determine what it is not only that you see from one side as a consumer, but what you can say.
00:35:48.000As either a content provider or simply someone using the Digital Town Square.
00:36:02.000Um, there's also algorithmic demotion, meaning, uh, we're gonna make sure that you simply don't see this content.
00:36:08.000For example, for a long period of time you could search, Lauder with Crowder changed my mind abortion, and you would find a video from PBS with 400 plays.
00:36:26.000And it completely, there's no context when these censorship decisions are being made.
00:36:30.000So what happens is people just start self-censoring or you have other companies, for example, conservative companies saying, you know what, just play ball and make sure you don't even go close to the lines with YouTube or Meta or TikTok.
00:37:00.000We know that we can't talk about puberty blockers with kids.
00:37:03.000We can't talk about sexual assault in female prisons from biological... We know that we can't... So don't talk about those things in the play It's Safe.
00:37:08.000Don't talk about anything that may even broach those subjects.
00:37:13.000Now, transparency, which is what's being pushed for here, could help with a lot of that.
00:37:17.000In other words, it's not about taking control over these companies, it's about ensuring that they're playing by the rules that everybody else is.
00:37:23.000If you know what determines the algorithms, that at least helps, and they'll at least have to straighten up and fly right.
00:37:29.000These are steps to take that are easy to take, there's precedent, and the left and the right, why would anyone be against transparency?
00:37:37.000for the algorithms created by these platforms who are treated
00:37:41.000as utilities, public utilities, and they benefit from Section 230.
00:37:45.000You are asking them to play by the rules that everyone else does.
00:37:49.000Right, and look, I think we need to make sure that people know, like,
00:37:52.000it's possible that the justices in this case would have never even heard of,
00:37:56.000like, some of the terms that we just talked about there.
00:37:58.000Not because they're not smart people, because that's not their world, right?
00:38:01.000They wouldn't have heard about like algorithmic suppression or using it as really a weapon against conservative viewpoints or viewpoints you just don't want out there.
00:38:08.000But because we filed this brief, the clerks in a lot of cases will read this and highlight sections or summarize.
00:38:32.000Bring up CNN right now because we have a segment on this.
00:38:34.000Oh, they were just talking about bloodbath from Donald Trump.
00:38:36.000This is a perfect example happening in real time.
00:38:38.000Donald Trump talked about the automotive industry and China and what they're doing in Mexico and how some of these auto manufacturing plants have moved over and he was talking about China taking advantage of our trade laws and that there would be a tariff in China and that if he wasn't elected we have a whole segment on this that if he was not elected that there would be a bloodbath right there would be a bloodbath for the automotive industry.
00:38:56.000Now this was one of those quotes where when it happened I didn't even think it would go anywhere but it's a slow news day and so what happens is his original speech Is demoted.
00:39:07.000The algorithm says you're not going to see Donald Trump's speech because it is clear as day what happened, but the algorithm tells you, CNN, CNN, well you can just bring it up right now, it doesn't say Bloodbath, but it did just 12 seconds ago, CNN, the talking heads, telling you what Donald Trump meant by Bloodbath is what you see.
00:39:26.000Remember, January 6th, Donald Trump said, peacefully and patriotically, walk over, march over, make your voices heard.
00:40:40.000Honestly, you go back to Pravda, you go to a lot of these other countries, a handful of oligarchs determining what the media can cover isn't all that different from five to ten people in Palo Alto who have direct meetings with the government.
00:42:17.000But that is not how this is acting, and this is not... I can't explain to you enough.
00:42:21.000These algorithms, this administration, they're not demanding that obscene speech, that snuff videos be removed.
00:42:28.000It's just the Ashley Biden diary because of investigative journalism.
00:42:32.000It's just live streaming an election where there's a voting precinct that says a pipe burst in Georgia and you find out in real time that it's not true and the government says hold on a second that could be misinformation because they were covering in real time before we got to the lie that we told.
00:42:48.000This has nothing to do with the actual law.
00:44:01.000And I got to see things that you really couldn't understand in audio.
00:44:03.000So broadly speaking, you know, the conservative judges were kind of questioning the government a lot and vice versa with the liberal judges.
00:44:11.000But, you know, I could see like Clarence Thomas visibly frustrated.
00:44:45.000You know, he's kind of stoic, you know, he doesn't really say much, but in the court I could see him visibly frustrated at some of the answers the government was giving as to how they justify their actions.
00:44:55.000You know, not really saying much, but, you know, sort of rolling his eyes, tucking himself back in the chair.
00:45:00.000Alito, definitely the most hostile of all the judges, questioning not only the government's motives, but their methods.
00:45:10.000On the flip side, Missouri got a lot of heat from the liberal judges.
00:45:14.000And, you know, unfortunately, you know, I think the Missouri lawyers kind of dropped the ball when the comparisons between newspapers and social media platforms came up.
00:45:24.000I think they had a good opportunity there to delineate the difference between the two.
00:45:28.000You know, newspapers being publishers and having the right, you know, to sort of pick and choose versus social media platforms.
00:45:33.000I think the discussion there got a little muddled.
00:45:37.000Overall, I feel like it's probably going to be some kind of a split decision.
00:45:41.000And the real question is not really if Biden, you know, violated.
00:46:20.000They did generally speak about some of the methods used by social media platforms, but really the conversation focused on the intent, you know?
00:46:31.000What was the subject matter at hand and did it rise to a level of violating the First Amendment and even provisions of Section 230?
00:46:40.000Again, those social media platforms were not a party to this case.
00:46:42.000It was really the federal government at issue.
00:46:45.000But algorithmic censorship, not really a topic of conversation as much as I would have liked it to be.
00:46:51.000It was more about the nature of the content and whether there was good faith involved.
00:46:58.000Yeah, and that's important to note because a lot of people don't know.
00:47:17.000So on a couple of the justices that we said we were going to keep an eye on, you said Roberts a lot of times likes to go the opposite direction maybe of the majority just to make it look like more of an even split of the court.
00:47:28.000For him and maybe Justice Kavanaugh, did you see anything that gives you any indication on what they're thinking?
00:47:33.000Yes, actually, I would say that that's an apt characterization of Justice Roberts in this case, sort of middle of the road.
00:47:40.000And if anything, I think a little bit deferential to the government, especially in cases of what we would call an emergency and their ability to communicate quickly with, say, social media platforms.
00:47:50.000And this is part of the discussion that I wish the respondents brought back to, which is, yeah, you know, you have those hypotheticals.
00:47:58.000But in this case, we were talking about memes.
00:48:00.000You know, we were talking about You know what I mean?
00:48:06.000It really was an opportunity there to bring those things back and I think more of that discussion should have come in because we're really not talking about a national emergency exclusively here.
00:48:15.000We're talking about the government overreaching.
00:48:17.000On things they have no business overreaching on, and way outside the bounds of Section 230.
00:49:20.000And look, one of the reasons that we're bringing Jim Jordan on, he was one of the people that signed on, he had his own amicus brief as well, and he's been leading the charge, been very vocal on Section 230, and this plays right into that, even though this isn't specifically 230, it does play a role in this, so that's one of the reasons we've got him, and I think we've got him ready to go for you now.
00:50:17.000I, what I wouldn't give to see you, I don't know what your go-to, if it was a single or an ankle pick, you know, uh, someone, someone there like Zuckerberg or the like, you know what I mean?
00:50:59.000Let me ask, and you're doing this live from the Rumble Studios, which we appreciate because we know that's a safe space, to use the word, where we're not going to be censored on Rumble.
00:51:08.000I know you've been leading this charge here.
00:51:10.000What was the main argument that you laid out in your own amicus brief here today?
00:51:15.000When the government does something that they, you know, through some private company that they can't do by themselves, when they're coercing, when they're censoring through someone else, that is still censorship.
00:51:48.000I mean, the fact that you have a person from the United States Supreme Court make that statement in the arguments on a case about censorship and the First Amendment, it's just like, I'm like, At one point, I can only know what to say.
00:52:04.000That's like saying, the problem with the Second Amendment is it's going to make the government afraid of coming to your house to take your guns away.
00:52:16.000But I thought he did a good job, the Solicitor General from Louisiana, laying out this is a fundamental, you know, First Amendment case where you've got the government, I think, coercing, significantly encouraging is another one of the standards and the tests in some of the cases that have been in front of the court before.
00:53:07.000We were just talking about today, for example, the bloodbath controversy with Donald Trump, where what they do is it's impossible to find his original comments where it couldn't be more clear.
00:53:15.000This is not even remotely controversial, the referring to a bloodbath regarding the automotive industry.
00:53:56.000Because I know you've subpoenaed a lot of records, and a lot of this information wouldn't have been public if not for, for example, Elon Musk taking over Twitter.
00:54:06.000What are the most shocking examples that you've seen through the records that you've subpoenaed between the Biden administration and big tech platforms?
00:54:18.000So we had this one communication from Nick Clegg, like the head of global affairs or global something for META.
00:54:27.000And Nick Clegg is talking with, this is actually an internal communication we got through our subpoenas.
00:54:32.000But Nick Clegg, this is when the government's pressuring Facebook to take down certain things and certain posts.
00:54:38.000And Nick Clegg says, this looks like it encroaches on free expression.
00:54:44.000And of course, the irony is Nick Clegg, former Deputy Prime Minister in Great Britain, is lecturing and explaining to Americans how the First Amendment works.
00:54:53.000I mean, I thought the irony there was unbelievable.
00:55:19.000But yeah, that one email from, internal email from Nick Clegg.
00:55:24.000Where he talked about, I think this approaches on free expression, I thought the irony of the former Deputy Prime Minister telling Americans how the First Amendment, how our Constitution works.
00:55:34.000Yeah, it is, and some of these things are incredible.
00:55:37.000Now, they're not as shocking to us because we've lived Through this.
00:55:39.000For example, we've had, you know, content executives at YouTube ask us to send them our videos privately so they can let us know what changes to make if we don't want to run afoul of borderline guidelines before doing it publicly.
00:55:52.000Not only being demonetized for not violating the rules, but, you know, the same thing happened with Facebook.
00:55:57.000This was something that they admitted to had happened leading up to an election.
00:55:59.000We had an election stream, biggest that had ever taken place, then it's removed by the next election.
00:56:04.000And the issue is not so much that the left, we all know the left, they're crazy, right?
00:56:08.000What happened is you had the mainstream media, legacy media, who had a stranglehold.
00:56:12.000And everyone thought, there are no gatekeepers anymore.
00:56:48.000And there's a... No, you're exactly right.
00:56:50.000And there's this... I always call it the template, trying to tie in the the bloodbath comment and what the press did there with how this whole thing operates.
00:56:58.000It's, I think, pretty basic what you see time and time again from the left, is the left will tell a lie, The big media will report the lie, big tech will amplify the lie, the laptops, Russian disinformation, Russian information operators, so big tech will amplify the lie, and then when we try to tell the truth, they call us racist, they call us names, and they say you're crazy.
00:57:21.000And that's exactly how it plays out time and time again, and because they have this overwhelming support in big media, legacy media, and in big tech, minus Twitter, Well, I appreciate you saying that.
00:57:32.000And by the way, it's in spite of what has happened, right?
00:57:35.000Why would President Trump use that term?
00:57:37.000Completely out of... but that's the template.
00:57:39.000Now, the good news is, I think more and more people are waking up to
00:57:43.000the template that's used by the left and how big media and big tech weigh in with that.
00:57:47.000Which is the good news, and it's because we got folks like you out there telling the truth
00:57:51.000and getting... cutting through all the garbage and baloney we get from today's left.
00:57:55.000Well, I appreciate you saying that. And by the way, it's in spite of what has happened, right?
00:57:59.000And people like Rumble, and I will say this, you're one of the people who's been spearheading this.
00:58:02.000It's in spite of a lot of our representatives, because I can tell you we've had calls and meetings with representatives saying we want to do something, but guess what?
00:58:13.000Not going to name names, but they're not out there with the zeal that you have, and it consistently surprises us.
00:58:18.000It's in spite of the fact that not a lot has been done because we've been out here taking the hits, and I know that you have actually been there taking the hits.
00:58:24.000Not all Republicans are created equal.
01:00:31.000One of the things I think that did get raised by when the government was arguing And questions from some of the more conservative judges is, was there pressure put on these social media companies to say, oh, that there's antitrust concerns if you don't censor?
01:00:48.000There's other issues that, you know, we can influence other things that you care about if you don't censor the speech.
01:00:56.000And I think that's really important because that's one of the things from our committee work that we sense was going on.
01:01:01.000There's actually an email, I think, Where an internal email with Facebook where they said, well, maybe we could paraphrase it, but it basically says something like, maybe we should go along with the suggestions from the government because we got bigger fish to fry, other issues to deal with.
01:01:16.000And so was government wink wink hinting, oh, we're going to have some antitrust concerns, other issues relative to 230.
01:01:30.000I would love, if somebody in your team has a chance to read this brief, please get in touch with us.
01:01:34.000We have a lot of emails, phone calls, videos of big tech doing this to us over the years that we would love to just get in your hands, give you ammunition to be able to use.
01:01:45.000Trust me, we have them dead to rights on a couple of things.
01:01:47.000We just need somebody to take the phone call!
01:01:49.000By the way, including exchanging of actual funds, of actual money, just so you know, from Big Tech, and then doing things where they actually would issue a refund, which was effectively an admission of fault.
01:01:59.000I won't say which platform, but we have that taking place, and I have a lawyer on full-time retainer who is...
01:02:26.000So, you know, Gable was the guy, when I was growing up, y'all looked to train, undefeated in college until his last match, and then wins the 72 Olympics.
01:02:34.000And I was, what, I was eight years old watching that, and I thought, you know, that got me fired up.
01:02:47.000In fact, our youngest son was, uh, assistant coach for John, uh, one year when he first got out of college.
01:02:52.000But then Sanderson, undefeated in college, and Olympic and world champion, and maybe more importantly now, won, like, twelve or thirteen titles for Penn State.
01:03:01.000They're just, they're gonna win again this week.
01:03:42.000We just went to the fight down in Miami a weekend ago, but Nickel's fighting in the next one out in Vegas, and he's just killing everyone.
01:03:50.000So, he's not a championship fight yet, or title fight yet, but he's on the main card.
01:03:55.000So, I really think this guy is going to do well.
01:03:59.000He's already doing well, but he just has that He's doing very well, but he did say that he believed he would beat a wild chimpanzee in a fight, which is the stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life.
01:05:30.000What are you doing with those shifty nipples, dude?
01:05:36.000Really quickly, look, and I'm sorry, I'm shameless here.
01:05:40.000SCOTUS promo code $10 off if you join Mug Club.
01:05:42.000When I was talking to Jim Jordan, the only reason the show survived to get to this day was because of Mug Club, because you foregoed millions and millions and millions of dollars in revenue to be able to do it.
01:05:50.000So that's why I was telling him, because I'm pretty sure, even though he may know who you are, may have watched the show, probably doesn't know the whole backstory to that.
01:05:57.000The only reason we survived was Mug Club.
01:06:01.000Join Mug Club, $10 off, click the link in the promo, Or are you gay?
01:06:08.000Let's not use it as a pejorative, even though it's an effective one.
01:06:27.000So let's see how they characterize this, and then I'm going to show you why they're lying.
01:06:31.000Here's the big problem, not that anyone watches CNN, no one does aside from maybe the Charlotte Airport, and they're a captive audience, it's against their will.
01:06:38.000It's the fact that you can't find the original clip, the context, but social media algorithms will guarantee that you see the commentary.
01:08:31.000And the reason that you've seen all of this is because the algorithms made sure that all of this was pumped into your feed regardless of how untrue, and of course in relation to journalism, you know, quality control.
01:08:47.000The race for the White House and former President Trump's campaign now on the defensive after his fiery rhetoric at a rally in Dayton, Ohio on Saturday night.
01:08:55.000Trump warning while discussing the economy that there would be a, quote, bloodbath if he is not re-elected in November.
01:09:01.000The former president said some migrants aren't people, are not people.
01:09:06.000He cast doubt on the future of American democracy if he loses in November.
01:09:11.000The presumptive Republican nominee warned there would be a, quote, bloodbath, unquote, if he loses the election.
01:09:20.000He uses these high-impact words that have either the direct or implicit tone of violence.
01:09:28.000What I heard was a continuation of the same rhetoric, the same endorsement of political violence that we've seen from Donald Trump for years.
01:09:46.000He said bloodbath, only in this case... Look, all of you have used the term Fight Like Hell.
01:09:50.000All of you know that Fight Like Hell could mean a litany of things.
01:09:53.000When they say, is he going to exact a bloodbath?
01:09:55.000Please, please, please, out there, if you're going to be on their side and tell me how they've taken this out of context... You ever taken part in a literal bloodbath?