 In a hearing before the House Financial Services Committee, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was grilled by lawmakers and this was so satisfying to watch because for those of you who haven't been paying attention, let me get you up to date. Facebook is a company that collects and sells your personal data. Now on top of that, they go out of their way to appease the right. And they do this not only by using an affiliate of the For Right News outlet, The Daily Caller to quote-unquote fact check news articles, but Facebook is also exempting politicians from any of said fact checking, meaning that if you're a politician and you are running a political ad, you can literally lie in that ad and Facebook will still take your money and they will still run that ad. Now on top of that, Zuckerberg recently held a private meeting with conservative pundits for whatever reason and he is actively assisting presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg who let me remind you would possibly save his company from other candidates like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren who have expressed interest in breaking up Facebook. So I mean in my view, we've gotten past the discussion about whether or not we should break up Facebook. We have these antitrust laws. We need to use them. If there's ever been a company that needs to be broken up, Facebook is one of them. And we need to go further than that and consider prosecuting Mark Zuckerberg because again, this is the data thief. Now I'm frustrated as you can tell, but another individual who was frustrated with Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook's antics is Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who I think shined during this entire hearing because she grilled him perhaps harder than any other lawmaker. And you can tell that he was visibly like disturbed. Like he didn't know how to respond. It was incredibly awkward. And you can tell that like the robot was malfunctioning. This was great. So enjoy. Under your policy, you know, using census data as well, could I pay to target predominantly black zip codes and advertise them the incorrect election date? No Congresswoman, you couldn't. We have even for these policies around the newsworthiness of content that politicians say and the general principle that I believe that. But you said you're not going to fact check my ads. We have, if anyone, including a politician is saying things that can cause, that is calling for violence or could risk imminent physical harm or voter or census suppression when we roll out the census suppression policy, we will take that content down. So you will, there is some threshold where you will fact check political advertisements. Is that where you're telling me? Congresswoman, yes, for specific things like that where there's imminent risk of harm. Could I run ads targeting Republicans and primaries saying that they voted for the Green New Deal? Sorry. Can you repeat that? Would I be able to run advertisements on Facebook targeting Republicans and primaries saying that they voted for the Green New Deal? I mean, if you're not fact checking political advertisements, I'm just trying to understand the bounds here. What's fair game? Congresswoman, I don't know the answer to that off the top of my head. So you don't know if I'll be able to do that. Do you see a potential problem here with a complete lack of fact checking on political advertisements? Well, Congresswoman, I think lying is bad and I think if you were to run an ad that had a lie, that would be bad. That's different from it being, from it, from in our position, the right thing to do to prevent your constituents or people in an election from seeing that you had lied. So we can, so you won't take down lies or you will take down lies? I think it's just a pretty simple yes or no. Congresswoman, I'm not talking about spin. I'm talking about actual disinformation. Yes, in a democracy, I believe that people should be able to see for themselves what politicians that they may or may not vote for are saying that they've got their character for themselves. So you won't take, you may flag that it's wrong, but you won't take it down. Congresswoman, it depends on the context that it shows up, organic post, as the treatment is a little different. One question, one more question. In your ongoing dinner parties with far right figures, some of who advance the conspiracy theory that white supremacy is a hoax, did you discuss so-called social media bias against conservatives and do you believe there is a bias? Congresswoman, so I don't remember everything that was in the question. That's all right. I'll move on. I'm wondering why you've named the Daily Caller a publication well documented with ties to white supremacists as an official fact checker for Facebook. Congresswoman, sure. We actually don't appoint the independent fact checkers. They go through an independent organization called the Independent Fact Checking Network that has a rigorous standard for who they allow to serve as a fact checker. So you would say that white supremacists tied publications meet a rigorous standard for fact checking. Thank you. Congresswoman, I would say that we're not the one assessing that standard. The International Fact Checking Network is the one who is setting that standard. I have seen this video now multiple times in preparation for this segment and it never gets old. It's so good because what she did there was just flawlessly expose him for the fraud that he is and think about how absurd the situation is. So she asked, look, can I literally run an ad against a Republican in a competitive primary and say that he or she supports the Green New Deal, something that they're obviously vehemently opposed to? His answer, oh, well, I don't know off the top of my head. You don't know. I'm literally not sure if we can outright lie about political opponents on Facebook. You would still take that money. Is the money too good? I mean, think about how absurd this can potentially be. Donald Trump can literally run an ad, hypothetically speaking, let's say we're at the general, Bernie's the nominee. Trump can run an ad against Bernie Sanders and say that he is a Satan worshiper. Conversely, Bernie Sanders can run an ad saying that Donald Trump regularly engages in bestiality. I mean, this is what you are allowing for if you exempt politicians from fact checking. So anyone can pay money to spread lies, to spread misinformation on your website. That is absolutely insane. That shows how greedy and money hungry Facebook is. Because if you have integrity, you say, no, we're going to scrutinize all of these ad requests. And before we approve anything, we're going to make sure that they're not just outright lies or spears. But that's not what they're doing. To kind of demonstrate how low they're willing to go, Elizabeth Warren recently trolled Facebook by proving they have no standards. She ran an ad saying that Mark Zuckerberg endorsed Donald Trump. And of course, that was literal fake news. But she was trying to prove a point about how they'd accept anything. And I mean, they proved her point right. Now when it came to the meetings with far right figures, AOC not only had him stumped like he didn't know how to respond, he was visibly uncomfortable. It's difficult to see any human emotion from someone like Mark Zuckerberg. At that moment, that was the most awkward moment. He was stumped on top of that. So she moved on and asked him why he named the Daily Caller as the fact checker. He had no persuasive response. She exposed him for the fraud that he is. Look, this is about money. Facebook is a business, right? So they are doing whatever they can to make sure that they increase their profits, increase revenue. That even means that we allow any ads, including lies, to be spread. On top of that, he's meeting with conservatives based on stupid allegations that there is a media bias or Facebook bias against conservatives. I mean, this same bias, if it exists, it applies to everyone, the left, like the right. But since they're bigger crybabies, since they whine about it more loudly than these tech giants, they are more inclined to kind of appease them than everyone else. So look, I don't have much else to say about this. I just wanted you to see this because she took the five minutes of time that she had to question him and she used it brilliantly. Like, I don't think you could have pulled this off any better. She did everything that I would have expected and wanted. And this was phenomenal. Kudos to AOC. This was great on her part. She really did reveal to America that Zuckerberg is a fraud. And Facebook really should be broken up without question.