 So, I don't think that anyone would be too surprised to know that pharmaceutical companies spend lots of money advertising on cable news networks. We're talking about CNN, MSNBC, Fox News. And when I say that they spend a lot of money, we're talking billions upon billions of dollars. Now, obviously, that raises questions about their coverage. This clearly does pose a conflict of interest, so do these advertising dollars in any way sully the coverage of pharmaceutical news stories on these shows. Now, that's not to say that we're never going to see a CNN segment, for example, where they speak badly about a pharmaceutical company doing something wrong, committing fraud, being overtly corrupt. However, by and large, are they really going to be as adversarial as they need to be when this conflict of interest persists? A lot of times, I think that these advertising dollars, at a minimum, they buy not just ad space, but they buy ambivalence when it comes to these corporate news networks. And in some instances, in some rare instances, these CNN hosts, MSNBC hosts, will actually go out of their way to do damage control on behalf of these pharmaceutical companies who are literally their advertisers. Now, again, that's more rare, but we do have one of these rare examples that happened just recently, because Jake Tapper decided to confront Bernie Sanders because he implied that pharmaceutical executives are akin to murderers. At a fundraiser last night here in Detroit, you appeared to compare pharmaceutical industry executives who are artificially jacking up prices to murderers. Take a listen. Somebody goes out and shoots somebody, they're called a murderer. We all agree with that, put them away. But what happens, what happens if somebody runs a pharmaceutical industry and artificially jacks up the price? Pharmaceutical executives, I think first of all, I misspoke, I said disabilities when I meant diabetes, obviously, for insulin. Pharmaceutical executives see themselves as people who help save lives and improve lives. Do you really see them as murderers? This is a philosophical issue that we have to deal with. If in the case of insulin, people are dying right now. The cost of insulin has soared in recent years. You have three companies who control over 90% of the insulin market, one out of four people, we have 7 million people use insulin, one out of four are rationing that insulin. People are dying. There is strong evidence that there is price-fixing, that these companies simultaneously raise the prices at outrageous levels, far, far, far more than the cost of production. Jacob, I have a product that cost me a few dollars to make, and I jack up that price and you can't afford it and you die, what do you call me? So you can call them whatever you want, but I will tell you that it's president of the United States. We are going to take on the pharmaceutical industry. We're going to have an attorney general who is going to deal with the incredible concentration of ownership and we're going to use antitrust legislation. I'm going right now in a few minutes into Canada. The cost of insulin is one-tenth of the price, 10% of the price, same products that we're paying here in the United States. So you can call the drug company executors whatever you want, but what they are doing involves corruption in my view, that's price-fixing. It involves unbelievable greed where they're making, as I mentioned, the top 10 companies last year made 69 billion in profits, top three insulin companies made $14 billion in profits, and people are rationing. One out of four people are rationing their insulin and people are dying. That is unacceptable in the United States of America and if I'm elected president, trust me, they're not going to get away with that. That was embarrassing. That was downright embarrassing. Jake Tapper said, pharmaceutical executives see themselves as people who help save lives and improve lives. Do you really see them as murderers? I know that Jake Tapper is not that naive. Do you honestly expect us to be stupid enough to believe that these big pharma executives care more about patients than they do profits? Really? You expect us to believe that? I mean, this is really an insult to the intelligence of CNN's viewers to think that we believe that. And the fact that Jake Tapper said that, it makes me question his integrity, because if you're going to be adversarial and basically take a position where you are advocating for the interests of your advertisers, then you actually need to notify your viewers about this conflict of interest, list all of the money that CNN took from pharmaceutical companies that advertise on CNN. I mean, because this is completely unacceptable. This is pseudo-adversarialism. You're challenging Bernie because he claimed or implied that big pharma executives are akin to murderers. Well, let me ask you this. Let's say, hypothetically speaking, somebody was kidnapped and the kidnapper demanded a ransom of a million dollars, but ultimately that ransom could not be paid so the individual who was kidnapped was killed. What do we call that? We call that murder, Jake. So similarly, if somebody needs insulin to survive and pharmaceutical companies all conspire to simultaneously raise the cost of insulin, so everyone will be forced to pay the higher price, but if they can't pay for it and they need it to survive and they don't get it, but they end up dying, what do we call that? We call that murder. Is big pharma not culpable for these deaths where people who need their medicine can't get it because the cost is too high? Or are we just going to wash them of any and all sin because we're trying to be nice to them because they advertise on CNN? Is that really what we're trying to do? This is why you should allow your viewers to make that determination. State the conflict of interest, list the advertisers and big pharma in the health industry, and let your viewers know that these are the influences that CNN has. This right here, this is not good journalism. In his view, challenging a politician is always good, and sure, you should challenge people in power, but you're challenging him at the behest of special interests who are deadly. Now what's funny is that since Bernie Sanders didn't give a direct answer there, Fox News then published an article attacking him because of course it's not politically correct to call our capitalist overlords murderers. Even if they prioritize profits over people and often times that ends up leading to people dying, well we're not allowed to call that out because that's too politically incorrect. Well tough. The fact that Jake Tapper would go out of his way and attack Bernie for this or challenge Bernie for this, I mean it's shameless. It's absolutely shameless. The only thing that would make it worse was if they had like a little banner that said sponsored by Pfizer or something like that, because that's how shameless this was. Shame on CNN, shame on Jake Tapper. This is why people don't trust corporate media, because capitalism creates these perverse incentives where you're not worried about news, you're not worried about treating patients, your one goal is profits, and that profit incentive is so strong that it ruins basically everything, no matter what it is. News, you know, drugs, even democracy.