 Hello, everybody welcome back get ready to have an embolism three weeks ago House oversight had this hearing with actual Twitter executives who had actual first-hand knowledge about what happened in 2020 and that didn't go so well for the House Republicans because real evidence Showed that there wasn't coordination between Twitter and the federal government. The Twitter files are real evidence They are emails that show correspondence between the FBI and the executives at Twitter Including yuel Roth who was the head of the trust and safety team They just have no response to it And so the only other thing that they can do is try and discredit the journalists to report it on the story As they like the American people to believe and that all the so-called Twitter files Really showed was a discussion on content moderation and that we only got a fraction of the Well, you got the fraction that showed the collaboration between the FBI and the executives at Twitter I just I can't help but see the parallels here between the January 6 footage and her complaint that the Twitter files didn't release enough files So in the January 6 case the media the government all showed the American public just a very tiny slice a cherry-picked slice of That video they didn't show the video of the 120,000 people who were peaceful and you know, that's another thing about all that is that there were 120,000 people there out of that Around 300 have been charged with violent crimes fighting with police and then there were like 900 people that were charged with trespassing So it really was mostly peaceful But for the most part the American public doesn't have that perception Because the Democrats in their state media cherry-picked videos to disseminate to the public So now we're back again. No surprise. What else have they got to talk about? Not what's interested in the American people are interested not what taxpayer dollars have brought us here to Washington to do Yeah, the Democrat is not at all interested in talking about exposed corruption that implicates her party This isn't just a matter of what data was given to these so-called journalists before us now She just said so-called journalists Matt Taibbi and Michael Schellenberger are both longtime career journalists I mean Matt Taibbi up until he started exposing Democrats was well known as a left-wing journalist Same thing with Barry Weiss and Michael Schellenberger all these people were always considered journalists up until the point They started exposing Democrats The member of the government doesn't get to pick and choose who is and isn't a journalist the entire point of Journalism is to hold people like her to account To hold power to account Journalists are literally anybody who is an American citizen because the First Amendment guarantees every US citizen a right to free speech The right to protest and that includes the right to a free press. My name is Matt Taibbi I've been a reporter for 30 years and a staunch advocate of the First Amendment much of that time was spent at Rolling Stone magazine Ranking member Plasket. I'm not a so-called journalist I've won the National Magazine Award the I have still an award for independent journal He's not even listening in 10 books including for the New York Times New York Times best-seller I'm not the editor of the online magazine racket on the independent platform. So That is just unreal. He's sitting there. She called him a So-called journalist. He starts explaining his credentials which goes back 30 years and this is what she's doing She's just talking ignoring not paying any attention showing utter contempt for these journalists And why is she so angry? What is what is she like? Just look at her. She looks so unhappy and depressed. Why? Like what about this story makes her so angry? It's because her party gets exposed as it is it is exposed that the Democrats worked with the media and the government to Suppress their political opposition and sway the election in their favor now This is where things get really crazy because she starts trying to dig for the sources of this story Why would you get why would she want to know that what we should be talking about is the corruption that was exposed and the fact that the government essentially got involved in an election and Using suppression and censorship swayed it and in favor of Biden But of course, that's why they want to cover this up. They can't they can't let that come out that that happened The narrative is that it's Republicans who are a threat to democracy not them emails did mr. Must give you access to I mean we We went through thousands of emails. Did he give you access to there's no way that it's probably probably probably close to 100 338 of those 100,000 emails. Is that correct? That's correct. And then who gave you access to these emails? Who was the individual that gave you permission to access the emails? Well, the attribution from my story is sources at Twitter and that's what I'm going to refer to okay Did mr. Must contact you mr. Tai-Yubi again digging for sources story is sources at Twitter Yeah, Mr. Schellenberger. Did mr. Must contact you actually? No, I was brought in by my friend Barry Weiss and so this story there's been a lot of Mr. Weiss Miss Weiss, thank you. Mr. Tai-Yubi. Have you had conversations with Elon Musk? I have okay Mr. Tai-Yubi did mr. Musk what is this question on the use of the gentle lady yield for a second like what country are we? As long as my time is not you are you trying to get journalist. No, I'm not Yes, she is like it. No. Well, what in the world are you and you had conversations with him not You said you weren't going to agree to who your sources were I'm not asking you your source I'm asking you if you had conversations. She's absolutely asking for the source And I just want you all to remember back during the Trump years anytime Trump or Fox or anybody really criticized the media What did they say they said that that was a threat to democracy? They said that it put them in danger I remember Brian Stelzer said that Fox News was leading a hate campaign against journalists What do you call this? This is actual power using Attempting to use their power to silence journalists who are trying to hold them accountable So now you're gonna see this Democrat try and make the argument that you're not allowed to hold Democrats and the government accountable because people threaten them and they supposedly get threats It's really similar to what we've been hearing from the media and Democrats concerning the January 6 tapes Nobody's allowed to see these hidden videos because it puts them in danger. It's their security threats Which seems to be their kind of go-to when it comes to justifying the suppression of information. They don't want the public getting We have a homophobic and anti-semitic threats or harassment against me of which Twitter has removed vanishingly little and Following the Daily Mail's decision to publish where I live Ultimately, I had to leave my home and sell it. Those are the consequences for this type of online harassment and speech Okay, we're talking the people who are now gonna make the argument that free speech of their opponents should be silenced because People threaten them are the very same people who were cheering on the release of the addresses of scotis judges And the media who said it was no big deal that these people were parked outside judges homes Threatening them which eventually led to a guy actually trying an assassination attempt on Judge Kavanaugh So those people are now gonna make the argument that you're not allowed to expose them in their corruption because they get threats. Thank you Mr. Chairman, I'm not exaggerating when when I say that you have called before you two witnesses Who pose a direct threat to people who oppose them? Did you hear that a Democrat politician a member of the government just called two journalists a threat a threat Because of the story and who it exposed you're not allowed to expose us You're not allowed to expose what Twitter executives did because it is a threat to them That is very significant because she's the one with the power and now the only reason that she's saying that is Is a justification to silence them? That's the justification gonna use to silence all of us and they're gonna go far beyond that at some point Eventually, they're gonna start rounding us up and throwing us in jail. Now. I know you're out there saying Ryan That's crazy. There's no way that's gonna happen. You're just you just being nuts. No, I'm telling you the reason that these The reason they're saying these crazy things is because in their heads They already know what they want to do, but they got to justify it somehow. It's funny when people have to go through that Yeah, you're fucking funny unacceptable. I'm ready for you're unacceptable a lot of other people are but just as it was unacceptable for Kevin McCartney like The lack of self-awareness here is just mind-blowing because right now she's the one with the power She's sitting up there with power looking down on these journalists who really have no power and she's telling them You're a threat. You're a threat because you're doing journalism that I don't like like Okay, so we apply your standard that you're using right now to yourself and now you're the threat I mean, isn't that how this works? No, I Mean, that's how it works in objective reality But it doesn't work that way for her because outside of us and Fox News There's really nobody to hold her to that standard But just as it was unacceptable for Kevin McCartney to provide 41,000 hours of sensitive security footage Talking head in an effort to rewrite what happened on January 6th. This is a new Republican playbook apparently American safety security to score political points. So you see it's the same thing It's just like you can't expose us because we get threats from it You can't expose Boston Children's Hospital who put out videos saying that they do Historectomies and gender surgeries on minors. They said it right there in the video but then if you report on that then you're putting them in danger and now you can't see the footage that they Want to keep hidden from you because somehow it's a security threat and anybody who does try to expose it Well, they just want you to die I mean this goes back to Obamacare and when Democrats and me were saying Republicans want you to die because they opposed Obamacare What did that lead to that led to a domestic terrorist attack on Republican senators by a guy who shouted this is for healthcare while he shot at them and The same people now are saying that you can't expose us You can't report on us You can't do any of this stuff because it is a security threat folks I gotta tell you this is the actual threat to democracy You got these people who literally want to criminalize their political opposition They want to criminalize criminalize the speech of their political opponents They want to censor and shut you up and then just use your imagination to what happens after that because I'm telling you We are on that road. We are heading down it. The media does not spend every waking moment Characterizing their political opponents Republican Party as an actual terrorist organization, which has been said multiple times across the media They're not doing that for no reason. All right, lastly now we have Jim Jordan's response to all of this nonsense and you're gonna love it You don't want the American people to see What happened the full video Transparency you don't want that and you don't want two journalists who have been named personally by the Biden administration FTC in a letter the Biden They're here to help us. They're here to tell their story and frankly I think they're brave individuals for being willing to come after they've been named in a letter from the Biden FTC Oh, yeah, your question time. No, no, I'm responding to your ridiculous statements. You're in your and your opening statement Okay, well, let's get on with it. Oh now we want to get on with so you can say all the things you want I didn't exactly as well as you had an opening statement You said what you needed to say in your opening statement and I as the ranking member have All other opening statements will be included in the record. All right, that was pretty good But not the onage I was talking about Remember back when Stacey was claiming that there's no evidence in the Twitter files showing any kind of collusion Between big tech and the government. Well, another one of the Democrats makes that dubious claim and Jim Jordan just unloads Twitter Twitter and even with Twitter You cannot find actual evidence of any Direct government censorship of any lawful speech. Not true. I say lawful I mean not at all not at all speech because plenty give you one is non-criminal I'll give you one gentleman's time to expire. I'd ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the following email from Clark Humphrey executive office of the presidency White House office January 23rd 2021 that's the Biden administration for 39 a.m. Hey folks, this goes to Twitter hey folks wanted to use the term mr.. Mr.. He's they use the term mr.. Mr. Goldman just use wanted to flag the below tweet and I'm wondering if we can get moving on the process for having it removed ASAP That is And then if we can get an eye out for tweets that fall in this same John your genre that would be great This is a tweet on the very issue the Mac Thomas. Can you just for the fullness of the record? Can you Read the because I've not seen but this was in the Twitter files folks This is the kind of stuff I'm talking about with me, but there's more examples Tell us you said no time did government try to tell Twitter to take that to explicitly remove something and no I said they move lawful speech lawful speech. We're gonna conflate. The first amendment does not is not absolute It is lawful speech People say things I don't like They couldn't even wait two days two days into this administration They were asked Twitter to take something down and we will get you the underlying tweet. Thank God I recognize the general lady from New York. Will you place it into the record is brilliant? Robert Kennedy Jr. He's talking about he's talking about Hank Aaron's death after he received the vaccine. That's oh That's not lawful speech Hank Aaron said having an opinion about Hank Aaron's death after the vaccine That's not lawful speech according to Democrats Well folks, that's about all my brain can take of that I hope you enjoyed it and found it informative if you did hit that like button share and subscribe Hit the bell notification and then as always make sure to leave a comment to vent some of those frustrations. Thanks a lot I'll see you all in the next one