 Hey everybody, DroneTech here. About to go and have my fourth child here just a little bit, but before I go, I thought I'd do a quick unedited reaction to this insane clip that I saw from Morning Joe this morning. Don't really have time for editing so we're just gonna go off the cuff here. But real quick before we get into this, let me tell you about this free coin offer from Noble Gold. Noble Gold investments is pleased to let you know that gold is the best investment class of 2022. According to longtermtrends.net, gold has actually outperformed the S&P 500, Dow, and Bitcoin for 2022. So what are you waiting for? Open a gold or silver IRA with Noble Gold investments this month and receive a free one quarter ounce American Gold Eagle coin with every qualified IRA of $50,000. You can't go wrong with Noble Gold in their thousands of five-star reviews. So call 877-646-5347 to find out more visit noblegoldinvestments.com. And remember, there's always risk in investment and there are no guarantees of any kind. The idea that this is 1996 and we're talking about you've got mail or comp you serve is completely asinine. Isn't it time for Congress to start holding Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk and other owners of these corporations just to the same standard that everybody else is held to? Why? Wait, wait a minute. So what he's saying is that he wants the government, these two left-wing Democrat party, their open Democrats are calling for the government to crack down on free speech because it's free speech is an old concept from the 90s, okay? So the government's supposed to come in and crack down on these corporation owners and just be, they should just be held to the same standard as the media. Oh, really? I'm gonna get more into this, but that's just, I think they know how full of crap they are because you're gonna see them looking down at the ground a lot. I don't know if they're reading notes or are just ashamed to say what they're saying because they know as they're saying that it's bullshit. You know, we carve things out for, and I would have said Jack Dorsey, and I did say that a couple of years ago. No, he didn't. It's just insanity that we're allowing these billion-dollar corporations to have an exemption that nobody else has, you know. There's no exemption. We have free speech in America. We have the Constitution and the First Amendment. That's all it is. There's no exception. The standards that these people apparently want, some sort of punishment against Twitter and Facebook because people say things they don't like on them, they are not held to that standard. We all know that. The media can say whatever they want, and it's magically never gonna be declared hate speech or dangerous. Joe, you're making a powerful case here that the law just, maybe it just is out of date. I mean, listening to you talk about the way you were thinking about it when- Well, I gotta kick that back. She just said that the First Amendment's out of date and that Joe Scarborough made a powerful case for getting rid of it. Okay, which he did not, obviously. Dollar corporations, did they have an exemption that nobody else has? You know, Joe, you're making a powerful case here. Everybody has it. The law just, maybe it just is out of date. I mean, listening to you talk about the way you were thinking about it when it was enacted is reason enough. You're right, the internet has changed, the world has changed. But this is one of those areas of American exceptionalism, too, where other democracies look at us and say, well, why can't you figure this out? And one of the reasons is, we actually have a very broad First Amendment statute. And of course, a journalist, that's a wonderful thing. The problem here is that the world has changed. And so, to your point, Joe, now you have companies that are actually not journalistic organizations that are disseminating information, some of it factual, some of it dangerous, some of it hate speech. Okay, so real quick, she says that, and I guess they're talking about 203, not necessarily the First Amendment, but they are talking about the First Amendment because she just mentioned it there. And that's the barrier to them doing what they wanna do. And she mentions the fact, the irony here that she is a journalist that they think they're journalists. They apparently see themselves as journalists, these narcissists, but that there's other people out there who aren't like us, they aren't privileged like us, and they're disseminating information and hate speech. And now she's declaring, she's labeling these things. And that's essentially all she's doing. She's saying, their speech, I don't like, we should be the judges of what should and shouldn't be out there, and the government should enforce that. Mara Gaye here has said a lot of things that I would consider hate speech that a lot of you watching right now would consider hate speech. So I'm just gonna list off some of the crazy things she said in the past that I would consider hate speech based on her standards. She said that right-wing media loves to quickly blame non-white Americans. She says these things, as a matter of fact, when, and never backs them up, I mean, you could just as easily say that they're quickly left-wing media is quick to blame white Americans, always. I mean, that's like their constant target. Mara Gaye also claimed that masking, and this is in 2022, mind you, in September of 2022, that masking remains an act of solidarity with minorities. Yes, it's not, masking is not just something you should do for science, it's an act of solidarity with minorities, meaning not, people who are not white. She said that sex is fun, which is true, but then she says, so abortion is essential to thwarting white supremacy. What? I mean, what even does she think white supremacy is? I think it's white people existing, white people in power as she sees it. She also once famously said that she was disturbed by dozens of American flags on Long Island, and went on to say that the American flag is a symbol of whiteness, and that Trump supporters and Republicans think that America is only for white people, which is just insane. Like, I'm a Trump's former Republican, and I don't think that. I'd like to think that I'm not alone. I would think that most people are not monsters, but this woman is a demagogue, all right? And to put the cherry on the shit Sunday here, she once claimed that Michael Bloomberg should have taken 500 million that he invested in his presidential campaign, and given one million to every American instead. Like, just a stupid thing to say. And she was rightly mocked for it. Well, what do you think she said about the mockery? She said that it was hate speech. So when this person says that mockery of her, criticism of her that was completely legitimate, is hate speech, you really should worry when her and her cohorts at MSNBC are actually pushing for the government to enforce their belief of what hate speech is against their political opponents. And they essentially have no responsibility for the consequences of that. So we have this central tension, and it's easy to get wonky. We all know what section 230 is here at the table, but for the Americans sitting at home, the question is, well, what responsibility should YouTube or Google or Facebook have if they're promoting hate speech on their platform? MSNBC promotes hate speech on their platform. I mean, Joy Reid, Tamara Hill, all those people, and I think most of them are gone now, it's just Joy Reid, but that's all they do is spread hate speech about white people, about white Americans. They brought Malcolm Nance on there once to Joy Reid's show, where he said that your Republican neighbors want to kill you. I mean, that's the kind of stuff they say on MSNBC. I would consider that hate speech. What repercussions have they faced? They faced none, and they would never face any if their tyrannical authoritarian version of freedom of speech were enforced by the government, which we better hope it never does, but it's very concerning that these things are being said by a woman who clearly has mental problems and it's just being put out there, like matter of fact, nonchalantly, should be frightening. I think the average American would say they should have some, but legally, that's a harder case to make. And I don't have any answer for it, but it's just to say that I don't think we can allow it to go on as it has, where there's no consequences and people can make money, in fact, to your point. That's what, I mean, this is what's so crazy about these people. She thinks that they should not allow you to say what you want on these platforms, okay? And I don't think that anybody should go on and threaten and incite violence against people. I think that's the line. And I think certain kinds of so-called hate speech, you know, if you're inciting violence against a group of people openly, that's wrong. But like the Supreme Court's already ruled on hate speech. So it is just wild how they think it's different when they do it, because they are guilty of everything she's saying right now and they make money off of it too, guys. While disseminating this information that is tearing the country apart and by the way, providing disinformation and in some cases has made us very endangered, like with January 6th. So there's real consequences to this and I hope the court realizes that. Unreal, oh yeah, and by the way, I got this clip from Newsbusters. Great website, check it out. But unbelievable, everything she's saying there and it's just like Nina Jankiewicz. These people are all left-wing, they all do all the things that they're accusing their opponents of doing as a justification to silence them and make no mistake. They are working towards this goal of one-party rule, probably CCP style, authoritarian rule with an opposition that has been basically criminalized. All right, folks, thanks a lot, wish me luck. I'm heading to the hospital in a couple of hours and hopefully by tomorrow morning, I will be a father of four kids. So wish me luck and I'll see you all in the next video.