Speaker 1: Republicans have started the dog and pony show hearings and the first one where they
wanted to dress down and grill Twitter executives about anti-conservative bias has backfired so
spectacularly. Republicans utterly humiliating themselves that hopefully they are talking behind
closed doors and saying, we got to stop doing this stuff to ourselves because this did not go
well. The whole point here was to bring Twitter executives in front of a House panel and to grill
them and expose how they were blocking Trump and banning conservatives and all of these different
things. They did nothing of the sort and in fact only confirmed how clueless and ignorant they are
about everything from the way technology works to what the First Amendment is and isn't. But we
will get to that. Let's look at some clips. Here is a Lauren Boebert furious, principled, defiant,
saying Who the hell do you think you are when you silenced me or something? Take a listen to this.
Speaker 2: Did you shout to be on my account? Yes or no? Did you shadow.
Speaker 1: Ban my account? Speaker 3: Again,
not to the best of my recollection. Speaker 2: The answer is Mr. Roth. Yes,
you did. I found out last night from Twitter staff that you suppressed my
account for this tweet. It's a freaking joke about Hillary Clinton being angry that she.
Speaker 1: She seems completely unhinged. Speaker 2: Couldn't rig her election. It's
a joke. But in response, being the sinister overlords that you all are, you placed a nine.
Speaker 1: And I'm realizing part of the problem with why these things go
wrong is their lack of ability to read out loud with proper tone and intonation.
Lauren Boebert, I understand, is reading this rant that's supposed to make Twitter look really bad,
but because her reading skills translate, you know, you. One of the things that sometimes can be
useful when when you're doing this type of thing is you develop a skill where anybody can really
do it. You're reading one or two phrases ahead of what you're saying so that you can properly
contextualize and have the right tone for what you're saying now. So it doesn't end up sounding
weird when you get to the next thing. She just seems unable to do it, so she sounds very silly.
Speaker 2: Day account filter so I could not be found. And now we see
here that Twitter staff said the visibility filter on my account
excluded me from top searches, prevented notifications for non followers and much
more. This is considered an aggressive visibility filter. You silenced two members of Congress from
communicating with their constituents. You you silenced me from communicating
with the American people over a freaking joke. Now, who the hell do you think that you are?
Speaker 1: Who the hell do you think you are? This was really the theme,
acting as if criminal things took place and pretending that it only applied to right wingers,
which we now know, of course, that it did not. Then they brought in Clay Higgins,
who just seems very dim and confused, like it genuinely doesn't seem like he even understands
Twitter. And he seemed to be threatening these Twitter employees with arrest. For what crimes? I
have no idea. Let's see if we can figure it out. Speaker 4: You, ladies and gentlemen,
interfered with the United States of America 2020 presidential election knowingly and willingly
as the bad news is going to get worse. Right? Because this is the investigation part. Later
comes the arrest part. Speaker 1: You're
the Europe. For what? For what crimes? Who's getting
arrested? What are you even talking about? Speaker 4: Journalism. Familiar with that?
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to spend 5 hours with these ladies and gentlemen during
depositions. Surely yet to come. But for right now, I yield the balance of my time.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Earlier during the event and again, this is all of course,
this is all stage managed for an electorate, meaning people who vote for these Republicans
who don't know any damn better. And I understand that. But to anybody with an ability to evaluate
what actually took place here, this is a complete and total joke. Here's the very same Clay Higgins
submitting random items he found on the Internet for inclusion in the Congressional Record.
Speaker 4: Also submitted for the record a timeline of events which cited sources
outline and strong evidence of the Biden family. Organized criminal actions indicate that we've
crossed the threshold of reasonable suspicion. Speaker 1: We've crossed the Rubicon based on
this thing I found on Gateway Pundit. Speaker 4: I like this timeline
submitted for the record. Speaker 3: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman,
Just where is that from? The timeline? Speaker 4: Time line in my hand.
Boss up. I'll get it to you shortly. Speaker 1: What did he say? What? Where
is it from? I've got to hear that again. Speaker 3: From that timeline.
Speaker 4: Time line in my hand. Boss. Up. Speaker 1: Boss up. What is he talking about?
Speaker 4: I'll get it to you shortly. Speaker 1: Okay, so let's include random items
from the Internet. Then it went to Representative Sessions, who took this as an opportunity to bless
Elon Musk. That was. You knew that was coming. Speaker 3: Thank you very much. So I will say
it. God bless Elon Musk. Yeah. Because I think I feel that way. It was Elon Musk that revealed
data that uncovered a disturbing cabal. Speaker 1: Right? There was a cabal. It
was uncovered a cabal in which both the Trump administration and the Biden campaign had the
email addresses of people at Twitter, and they could email them and say, Hey, we'd like this
removed. Now we are going to get to what Trump wanted removed from Twitter. And again, this
is part of the total backfire of this. But let me not get ahead of myself. We then go to Congressman
James Colmer. Congressman James Colmer has been a major promulgate of conspiracy theories about the
balloon, as we have spoken about here. He tries to convince a lawyer to waive attorney client
privilege for no reason other than he wants to. Speaker 3: As I think we've notified the committee
and we've had these conversations with Twitter as well to try to resolve this issue prior to coming
up here today. I don't have anything in writing that clears me in my ethical responsibilities to
my former client. Right. With respect to answering questions that I think fall squarely within the
attorney client privilege. So unfortunately, I don't think I can go beyond what I've said there
already, sir. Yeah, unfortunately. Mr. Becker, your assertion that the attorney client privilege,
it's overruled. As to this particular question and answer. So will you please answer the question?
Speaker 1: We're overruling attorney client privilege just right here. Just.
I'm just doing it with my gavel, Jordan. Speaker 3: Point of order, Mr. Chairman.
State your point? Well, as I understand it, because we just went through this
in the January six committee where multiple witnesses asserted attorney client privilege,
including people who weren't covered by it at all. And ultimately, that's.
Speaker 1: That's the funny thing. Remember the degree to which attorney client privilege
was cited by Trump administration people when there were, like, no lawyers even in the room.
And now all of a sudden an actual lawyer in a completely legitimate use of attorney
client privilege. No, no, no, no. Just talk about it anyway. Tell us anymore to decide.
Speaker 3: So I don't think there's I don't think there's anything we can do within the committee
at this point unless I'm missing something. Speaker 1: Now, Jamie Raskin is missing nothing
whatsoever. This was humiliating. A really interesting moment, Congresswoman Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez. She took some of the time she had to detail how this account libs of Tick tock
actually incited harassment against real world health care workers at Boston Children's Hospital,
but was still allowed to remain on Twitter. Again, sort of disproved by counterexample,
a compelling moment. Take a look at this, Miss. Speaker 2: Never really. Are you familiar
with the account libs of tick tock? I have heard of it from the news. Yes. Mr. Roth,
are you familiar with this account? Speaker 3: Yes, ma'am, I am.
Speaker 2: Are you aware from that? From August 11th to August 16th, that account posted false
information about Boston Children's Hospital claiming that they were providing hysterectomies
to children. Speaker 3: Yes, I am aware
of that and other claims from the account. Speaker 2: And are you aware that this
lie was then circulated by other prominent far right influencers?
Speaker 3: Yes. Speaker 2: And are
you aware that all these claims, which I have reiterated were false, culminated in
a real life harassment and ultimately a bomb threat to the Boston Children's Hospital?
Speaker 3: Yes, I am aware. Speaker 2: And this account is
still on that platform today, isn't it? Speaker 3: Regrettably, yes, it is.
Speaker 2: Despite inspiring a bomb threat due to the right wing incitement of violence against
trans Americans in this country because they cannot. Let go of this obsession
with fixating violence and inciting violence against trans and LGBT people in addition to
immigrants in addition to women of color. This is a party that cannot pick on anyone their own size.
Speaker 1: Yeah. So this really just a terrible idea for Republicans and the idea that this was
a concerted effort to silence the right has been so widely debunked. The flopped
Twitter files themselves debunking that notion. We have video here of Congressman
Pat Fallon citing a completely dubious poll saying if the Hunter Biden stuff had been
left on Twitter, Trump would have actually won. Speaker 3: So there and the Media Research Center
polled Democratic voters in 2020 swing states and found that 70% want to change their vote
if they know the contents and evidence of the New York Post story. President Trump lost key states
Georgia, Pennsylvania, Arizona and Wisconsin by collectively just over a hundred thousand votes.
And if this is accurate, this poll, 3.2 million votes could have swung and he
only needed a tiny fraction of those 3.2 million. Speaker 1: Yeah, it's Twitter's fault because they
censored Hunter Biden's genitalia that Trump did not ultimately win. Now, remember, it is against
Twitter's terms of service and it is a crime in almost all 50 states to publish explicit
images of an individual without that individual's consent. And that is why that content was removed.
So we eventually got to a summary from Democratic Congressman Maxwell Frost, which is really good.
I am a fan of this guy so far from what I have seen, and his summary is completely correct.
Speaker 3: Sitting here for over 2 hours and I'm still not really seeing the point
of this hearing. Me neither is it to solve the problems of the American people while people are
struggling with No, now we get it. My Republican colleagues wish that the Hunter Biden story would
have helped him win the 2020 election, and that didn't happen. And so they're angry about it.
And that's the point of this hearing. Yeah, You know, it was the actually the foundation
of the chairman's opening statement. It's why he brought up that that poll on the
2020 election. That's what this is all about. Speaker 1: Yes, it is about that. And about
continuing to turn Americans against big tech platforms, not for reasons that should make us
concerned about the platforms, but for imaginary reasons like this decidedly anti-conservative
bias that they claim exists. This is what you can expect for the next two years. Republicans
who are essentially the school bully while complaining they are the victims of bullying.
That's fundamentally what you have here. And we are going to have pointless hearing after
senseless investigation for the next two years. Hopefully those hearings will blow up in their
faces as much as this one did, where they make a claim and they swear it's true and then it's
proven that they're wrong. But we're still going to have a hearing because we still say it's true.
And of course, it's not. It doesn't matter to many of their supporters that these hearings
blow up in their faces because their supporters don't live in reality and they don't care. Now,
there's a couple things from this hearing that I did not include in this summary, because I think
they're worthy of their own discussion. And let's get to one of those things right now.