 It's been a week since the Iowa debacle and It's still really unbelievable what happened like it doesn't feel like I'm talking about the United States It feels like I'm talking about some authoritarian third-world country and I wanted to give you an update But I mean this is so difficult because I don't know where to start I don't know where to end this story is so big and broad that it's it's almost incomprehensible and really as we you know sift through the sewage that is the Iowa results We honestly haven't even gotten to the most scandalous aspect of this story because last week when I talked about this You know I touched on the conflicts of interest and I said that it doesn't matter if you chalk this up to incompetence or malfeasance What matters is that we get the results and we can trust in the process So I will give you the latest update on the Iowa results and I wasn't I wasn't again sure where to start So I'm going to start from the very beginning and I think it's important to kind of give you the full scope of What's going on and I'm gonna touch on things that are seemingly irrelevant But you really need to know and I want to demonstrate how there's this anti-burny bias that is embedded within the Democratic Party establishment Both at state and national levels and it's not really an anti-burny bias This is more of an anti grassroots bias because the Democratic Party it doesn't matter what level it's at They all have the same billionaire millionaire multinational corporate donors and they want to protect their own asses They want to protect their job. So they're all against Bernie Sanders So even if you're not believing that there's some vast conspiracy to take down Bernie Sanders you know that bias is going to have an impact at all levels and We're kind of seeing how that impacts the process itself. So let's talk about Iowa But let's take it back to 2019 before we go to present day So last year in April of 2019 as you'll recall the New York Times published an article discussing the Democratic Party Establishments concern over Bernie Sanders momentum now in this article There was a paragraph that stood out to a lot of Bernie Sanders supporters about undisclosed dinners between Democratic Party elites and Leaders that includes Nancy Pelosi Chuck Schumer Terry McCullough near attend and and also conspicuously Pete Buddha judge now look this doesn't tell us anything about Iowa But what it does communicate to us is that the Democratic Party establishment has an affinity for Pete Buddha judge And they were colluding with him to figure out ways to stop Bernie Sanders Now am I suggesting that they were talking about ways to rig the voting? No, but they were Talking about ways that they can maybe strategically, you know take down Bernie Sanders So they like Pete Buddha judge and they don't like Bernie Sanders. That's what you need to know But on top of that last Sunday before the Iowa caucus took place as you'll all recall the Des Moines register spiked a poll at the behest of Buddha judges campaign Because they claim that there was an error now Let's not forget that leading up to the Iowa caucus Hillary Clinton has been relentlessly and repeatedly attacking Bernie Sanders And on caucus night. We all remember how we got no results But people to judge declared victory anyway, and at this point in time We didn't know why we didn't receive any results But this was the video that I put out last week explaining what we were learning in real time basically First of all the Iowa State Democratic Party lied to us They when the results were supposed to start coming in told us that there was a little bit of a delay because of quality Assurance now nobody knows what that means nobody trusts the Iowa State Democratic Party or the DNC I want a quality check on their quality assurance check But they later came out and said actually the app that we're using to report the numbers isn't working it is an app developed by this company called shadow and This is a company that Pete Buddha judges campaign suspiciously donated more than $20,000 to two times now this company is comprised of former Hillary Clinton alum because after Demonstrating that they're part of a team that is the most incompetent in Democratic Party history Of course, they'd go on to fail up and get jobs developing an app that literally, you know is going to influence democracy Now if that wasn't enough we find out that the CEO of acronym the parent company to shadow is Married to a senior advisor to the Buddha judge campaign so after we get no results Bernie Sanders team puts out 40 percent of The total showing them in a lead and then the following morning This is the day after the Iowa caucus They put out more results with 60 percent showing that Bernie Sanders had a comfortable lead is the way that they described it But then midday we get 62 percent of the results from the IDP Which is the Iowa Democratic Party and it shows that Pete Buddha judge is actually the one in the lead Which then leads to this media narrative about Pete Buddha judge, you know having this upset victory and you know, this media narrative began to spread rather quickly and It led to Pete Buddha judge getting a bump in New Hampshire Now they then release more results so painfully wrong that individuals found out that they were literally Distributing delegates that were supposed to go to Bernie to Tom Steyer and Deval Patrick So the Iowa Democratic Party corrected that supposedly but then they released results showing actually Bernie Sanders Might actually win So that kind of stops the media narrative that Pete is victorious and then all of a sudden days after we don't get the full results The DNC chairman Tom Perez calls for a recanvas So let me repeat that once the IDP results show Bernie Sanders is leading Then Tom Perez decides days later to call for a recanvas But then conveniently 100% of the results get released as Pete Buddha judge takes the stage for his CNN town hall Which is when Chris Cuomo announces to him that he won, which I mean the timing there is just impeccable and Absolutely benefits Pete Buddha judge intentionally or unintentionally. I mean, this is all Something that I'm sure he was celebrating now while CNN Basically announced that Pete Buddha judge had won more responsible news outlets like the Associated Press and the New York Times We're unable to declare who the winner was because not only were the results incredibly close But there were so many errors that you couldn't possibly with any sort of confidence declare a winner And just to give you a snapshot of some of these errors CNBC's John Shown and Tucker Higgins explain a common error according to CNBC's analysis is that in many precincts Possibly more than 80 the number of votes counted in what's known as the final alignment was greater than the number in the first Alignment that discrepancy is theoretically impossible under caucus rules which are determined by the state party under those rules Voters gather in the first alignment to express support for their candidates Supporters of candidates who do not reach a minimum viability threshold Generally 15% must reallocate their support in the final alignment It is possible for the number of voters in the final alignment to decrease from the first alignment for instance There are cases in which a supporter of a non viable candidate in the first alignment simply did not vote in the final Alignment, but it is seemingly impossible for there to be an increase in voters for the final alignment But on top of that some other examples of errors come from journalist Daniel Nikanian who explains how it's just the entire process has been riddled with Errors and it's mathematically incoherent is the way that he describes it And he explains how one common error that he's found is that extra delegates are being awarded So for example if one precinct only has 11 delegates Well for whatever reason he's found these instances where that precinct distributed 12 delegates Which means that that's obviously incorrect They don't have that extra delegate and it needs to be corrected and on top of that MSNBC Steve Kornacki has been absolutely Just really helpful in demonstrating the results Although what's interesting is that as he was explaining these errors or about to one of the producers at MSNBC just screamed in his ear Inexplicably and the margin here you see this is one tenth of one percent This is a difference of two state delegate equivalents That is a tiny microscopic difference That is the closest that would be if it went if it was official that would be the closest result in the history of the Iowa caucuses, you know four years ago Bernie Sanders versus Hillary Clinton I remember we were up all night They didn't declare a winner till the next day the margin then was for state delegate equivalents That was by far the closest in history We never thought we'd see another closer one and yet it looks like we have so close with those errors Stephanie With questions about whether the state party even followed the correct tabulating procedures for these satellite caucuses Decision death just does not believe right now with a hundred Sorry, what's that? The voice in your head. Yeah No problem, but you were just saying the decision desk does not So yes, you know to have full confidence to declare a winner here. You can't have those kinds of inconsistencies now Obviously, we don't know what was said in his earpiece But what I do know is that Ed Schultz who used to work at MSNBC Told us before he died that the president of MSNBC Phil Griffin called him And told him not to report on the launch of Bernie's 2016 campaign. This was in 2015 He told us that so we know at a bare minimum That MSNBC doesn't want to cover Bernie Sanders and now we see Steve Kornackie about to educate viewers about errors and then He gets yelled at in his ear. Well, that's weird But you know, that's just a little bit of the errors that we see in the media He gets yelled at in his ear. Well, that's weird But you know, that's just a little bit of the errors We can't possibly go into all of it because this is just it's a clusterfuck So looking at it would be very difficult and trying to explain it all just know that there's a lot of errors, right? But putting the errors aside Assuming that they're corrected. Well, you know, you'd expect Bernie will win overall and it seemed like regardless You know, but a judge and Bernie would come away with the same number of delegates Although New York Times reporter Tripp Gabriel finds out that Buttigieg somehow gained delegates somewhere throughout this process And we'll come away with 14 in the end. Whereas Bernie Sanders will get 12 now at face value You'd think okay Well, this is probably just because they haven't you know fixed the errors yet and haven't taken into account that adjustment But no actually as journalist Samuel Finkelstein explains remaining errors and popular vote aside This is disproportionate to the number IDP is reporting if Buttigieg received 0.49 percent more state delegate equivalents than Sanders. Why would he receive 17% more national delegates? So the math doesn't even make sense putting the errors aside But that's not even the biggest scandal yet believe it or not The biggest scandal is that when it comes to all of these errors and the question of when they're going to get fixed Well, the answer is never Yeah, because as New York Times reporter Tripp Gabriel also explains tonight The IDP chair Troy Price sent an internal email that the party attorney says any reexamination of precinct results cannot change the results on caucus math worksheets Even if they are wrong and they adds quoting the opinion of the IDP attorney The incorrect math on the caucus math worksheets must not be changed to ensure the integrity of the process Let me repeat that for you. They can't change Mathematical errors because they want to ensure the integrity of the process So if they see that one plus one equals three on a worksheet, they can't change it Because they care about integrity Yeah Now remember how I talked about that embedded hatred of Bernie Sanders deeply within The Democratic Party's institutions. Well, the chair of the IDP Troy Price also happens to be a huge Hillary Clinton Supporter he was very vocal about his support for Hillary back in 2016 And he put out numerous tweets of support for her and implied that Hillary supporters needed to be protected from Bernie's supporters And you know, maybe it's just me But I think that part of the reason why he has these feelings is because he Worked for Hillary Clinton in 2016. Yeah, kind of a major detail that a lot of us overlooked He literally worked for Hillary Clinton in 2016 so to say that this is a conflict of interest would be an understatement given that again Hillary Clinton has been relentlessly attacking Bernie Sanders throughout the course of this primary leading up to Iowa Primarily, so yeah, there's that and at a press conference. He tried to explain Why they can't more likely they won't but why they can't correct these errors and this press conference went exactly as you would have Expected an IDP press conference to go. I understand why maybe raw preference numbers can't be altered But if there are mathematical rounding errors, why can't those be adjusted? Because these sheets are signed not only by the precinct chair and the precinct secretary Precinct chair the precinct secretary. They're also signed by campaign representatives. And so for us they are the official record of what's a place in the room and What is the official record The course for correcting that is what is starting here today starting with the canvas process and then if So that's where we are in the process the process doesn't exist to correct that and that's what we're starting So because it's now part of the official record it can't be corrected so in other words in 2024 and 2028 if you are a precinct captain and you don't like the results you can just write in whatever delegate count you want and the IDP can't change it because they'd be correcting official record which is Worse than correcting mathematical errors Yeah So the fact that Troy Price hasn't resigned yet is Absolutely a joke the fact that Tom Perez hasn't resigned yet is just laughable as I predicted there would be no accountability and that's part of the issue like for us to even start To begin the process of maybe possibly trusting any of these results We'd need some accountability But we're getting the opposite in fact someone who worked for people to just campaign is now working for the Nevada Democratic Party more on that in a different video But I mean do you understand the issue here the precedent that this sets up so if the results are written down It doesn't matter if they're wrong we can't correct them Is that because you can't or you won't correct him Troy Price? Is that because you like the results because it goes against the candidate who you dislike very much? It's ridiculous and the latest update that I have for you at the time I'm recording this is that Bernie Sanders campaign has called for a recanvice in certain precincts in An attempt to correct these errors now. We don't necessarily know if that will be conducive to a better End result. We don't know why people to judge just inexplicably gets two extra delegates than Bernie Sanders when they should theoretically be tied We don't know There's a lot of open questions that we don't have the answers to and the worst part is that we don't know when we're going to Get the answers to these questions. It's just all one big clusterfuck and the situation is so muddled I don't even know what to say about it. So that's where we're at. Of course I will Give you additional details if we learn about it But as we learn more and more the situation gets worse and worse it becomes more suspicious More conflicts of interest are revealed and it's just What do you say Our country is a joke This democratic process this quote unquote democratic process isn't very democratic. It's not very transparent And the fact that nobody has resigned that there's been no accountability Goes to show you that the democratic party doesn't take the democratic process serious You know, they condemn, uh, you know, the republican party's attempts to suppress voter turnout with voter id laws And restricting the number of polling stations and whatnot in states like arizona, but I mean look at this If you guys can't get it right then you have no room to talk The republican party in Iowa managed to do a caucus And release the results right after why can't you do the same? We're literally just asking you to count the votes the bare minimum that we should expect from a state party and we can't even get that Unreal but um, I uh, I'm not too surprised as the plot thickens it gets a lot more interesting we'll say And we'll leave it at that for now