>> In the fourth quarter of 2019.
Bernie Sanders outraged every other democratic contender.
He raised $34.5 million in one quarter.
That's pretty incredible, right?
Except all the corporate press has either ignored this story or they've decided to bury
the lead or they've decided to insult Bernie Sanders.
And a good example of that is actually a conversation that went down on Morning Joe.
There was a pundit by the name of Jason Johnson.
He's actually on MSNBC quite a bit, on Joy Reid's show quite a bit.
And here what he has to say in the context of a story regarding Bernie Sanders outraising.
All the other contenders with small dollar donors, average donation is $18.
Take a look.
>> The idea there was gonna be a progressive battle between Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth
Warren, it was never something that had much resonance with me.
Because that presumes that Bernie Sanders supporters are supporting him primarily for
policy purposes.
And that's not really what's going on a lot of his core base support like him.
Because they see him as sort of a political and democratic savior type character.
So, he was always going to end up winning out any sort of policy argument because in
the end of the day, people like they like Bernie.
And Bernie or bus kind of people.
>> MSNBC and pundits like Jason Johnson always fascinate me, because they never have to cite
any evidence when they make dumb arguments like that.
Where is the evidence that indicates that Bernie Sanders's supporters don't like him
based on his policy?
So what do they like him for, his haircut?
The way he dresses?
What is it that you think that people like about him, other than his policies?
His policies, that is the meat behind Bernie's campaign.
That is what people love about him.
The fact that he actually has the audacity to hope for a better country.
To hope for a system that doesn't leave Americans to die because they don't have adequate coverage
with their privatized health insurance.
>> So he said near the end there, he was always gonna win out cuz his supporters will miss
some sort of Savior.
So that part has two parts that are amazing.
I wanna start with the Savior apart.
Okay, Jason, then why?
Why do they view him as a Savior?
Again is it cuz of his clothing?
I mean, why is it a random fact?
Or could it be that they think he's the only honest politician?
Cuz he doesn't take corporate pac money doesn't take lobbyist money.
And he hasn't changed his position in 40 years.
All right, the positions.
Well, do they agree with the positions or don't they?
If you had a candidate who hasn't changed their position in 40 years, but he was for
having more fossil fuel money in politics, and not fighting climate change very aggressively.
Like kicking Looper, he drank fracking fluid and he still loves fracking fluid, right?
>> So are people going nuts over Hiking Looper?
Progressives going nuts over hiking Looper going, my God, God yes, he is so consistent.
I'm being pro fossil fuels, right?
No, nobody's interested in that.
And he, Bernie Sanders, has been for a single payer for 40 years.
Other people have been for private insurance for 40 years, but we're not excited about
them.
If you think that people think that Bernie Sanders is savior, did it not occur to you
as journalist to ask Gee, I wonder why, right?
And the answer is so obvious, because of the policy, and because of how honest he is.
But instead of giving that as a credit to him on a day that he breaks a record on fundraising,
from so many different people, you use it as a way to dismiss him.
Now, let me get to the second part, cuz there's this hilarious video.
Surface by, >> David Dole.
>> David Dole.
In the rational national you should check out his show on Youtube of the same pundit
about a year ago.
Now, if you notice in that clip today, he said he was always going to win out because
a lot of people think he's a savior.
Well, let's go back here and see what Jason Johnson thought back then.
>> If you were to create the worst possible three week period for his presidential campaign.
It would be the launch of the person you share the most ideological space with, Elizabeth
Warren.
And the fact you've had to defend yourself against the perception that your supporters
are very anti-women.
>> He's done.
>> Really, do you think he's done?
Wow.
>> I was literally having this discussion with a good contact of mine who was on the
campaign.
I was like I see Bernie Sanders launching his campaign and by August realizing he won't
be in the top five in Iowa and dropping out.
I don't think he'll get that far.
>> Look I have to a quick one.
>> I noticed he gets invited like he was so devastatingly wrong.
The whole point of bringing analysts and pundits on, is because they're the experts who can
really give you the behind the scenes look what's really going on.
They can break down politics for you.
I mean, that was an inaccurate take to say the least I'm being gentle here, right?
But he gets invited on.
I don't remember the last time we got invited back on CNN Genk or any Cable News Network,
but out there.
>> Well, look, let me just follow up real quick on that.
So Chuck Todd that's the same Chuck Todd that last week was talking about It turns out some
rep republicans were lying to us.
But he said it's okay, now we've got it figured out, okay?
Turns out some politicians aren't being honest.
But previous generation got duped into the Iraq War, etc.
But now we got it straight.
But we pointed out, wait, all those people who got duped are still on air, and they were
rewarded, not punished, for being wrong.
And then right now MSNBC does the same exact thing.
So Jason Johnson tells Chuck Todd, Bernie Sanders, he won't even come in in the top
five in Iowa.
He'll be wiped out by August.
>> He's done, he's done.
>> He's done, done, done.
And the same MSNBC has him on now to like, he always knew he was gonna win among the
progressives.
I mean, they view him as a savior.
Everybody always knew that.
It's unbelievable setting.
By the way, on the date same time period a year ago when he was on with Chuck Todd.
And he was announcing his candidacy and they all declared him dead on arrival.
I read to you all those quotes from Washington Post and other outlets.
And I said they're 100% wrong.
He'll be incredibly strong.
They said nobody will show up to his rallies anymore.
I laughed and laughed and laughed.
And I said, no, he's gonna have bigger rallies than anyone else, I guarantee it.
Who was right, who was wrong?
And then who's on TV and the mainstream media and who isn't?
People who were right, are not invited on mainstream media.
You get invited on to be wrong.
It's not an accident.
It's not a bug.
It's a feature.
>> 100%, now, what's even more depressing about the corporate press and the way that
they've handled this Bernie Sanders story is how.
This revelation that bread bearer of all people on Fox News did a better job commenting on
Bernie Sanders and his popularity.
Take a look.
>> Fundraising numbers for our Que four are in bright and very impressive Bernie Sanders
34.5 million dollars for the quarter, P Buttgieg 24.7 million, to Elizabeth Warren 17, Andrew
Yang 16.5 ,Joe Biden 15 million.
I'm sure you got some analysis on that, but you have to put that against the Trump campaign
raking in 46 million as well.
>> You have to give Bernie Sanders credit.
Remember, he's raising money with a big field that at one time was 20 candidates, is 34.5
million dollars for this quarter.
And the key part is that they're all small donors.
It's about 18 bucks, is the average donation to Bernie Sanders.
And all of those people have a lot more that they could do.
>> So, >> That's amazing.
>> When Fox News is more accurate, forget fair, is more accurate than the mainstream
media is, what does that tell you about the mainstream media?
So and it's, look, Fox is just probably init for the right wing.
But the corporate media does propaganda for corporations and for corporate Democrats and
Republicans.
So that's just the reality of it, pick your poison.
But to be fair to Bret Baier, he was right there.
And he went on to say later in the segment, by the way the Democratic party is going to
be panicking over this.
And he's also right about that.
>> Yes he is.
My God, the Democratic party might be represented by someone the Democratic voters agree with.
Panic, panic.
He's not taking corporate money, what are we gonna do?
Isn't that something you should celebrate?
Like, my god, somebody that agrees with out principles and isn't beholden to any kind
of corruption.
Well, you wouldn't celebrate that if the establishment and the leadership of the Democratic Party
is actually part of the corruption.
>> Yes.
>> But again, the media, if you say that you're banned, you're banned.
You cannot criticize Biden, Pelosi, Schumer etc.
But I wanna get to an even more comical take.
This is Bill Scher at political.
So he sees the record numbers, unreal, wonderful, positive.
No, not positive.
Bill says, your periodic reminder that the small donor class is disproportionately white,
wealthy, college educated, and much smaller than the overall primary electorate.
>> What?
>> So first of all, there's no data to back that up.
The 1.2 million people that gave money to Bernie Sanders are disproportionately white.
First of all, the country is disproportionately white, okay, so let's just make things up
while we're at it.
And then second of all, I wonder if the people in the wine cave were disproportionately white.
We've seen the pictures, they're all white, okay?
And corporate donors, they're lobbyists.
Is there been any articles and political bt, my God the lobbyists are disproportionately
white males that are very wealthy and old college educated.
Now one article about that.
I would be shocked if every lobbyists wasn't wealthy, college educated and almost all white,
right?
But no, no, no, corporate donors, big donors, wonderful.
Small donors, white, wealthy.
What, small donors are wealthy?
That's the whole point is that they're not wealthy.
>> Exactly.
>> They give 18 bucks on average.
Take the truth and turn it on its head.
You know what that's called?
It's called propaganda, and it's called manufacturing consent.
Noam Chomsky wrote about it decades ago, and this is manufacturing consent in action.
>> So I wanna also give you one other comparison.
It's not even a comparison.
I wanna show you how the New York Times has chosen to cover Bernie Sanders and how he's
out-raised every other Democratic candidate in the fourth quarter.
So these are two headlines from the New York Times.
First one reads.
This is amazing.
Pete Buttigieg his campaign says it raised $24.7 million in the fourth quarter.
So what?
Okay, but all right, that's fine.
Maybe they just want to cover Buttigieg they're not they're hyper focused on him.
But then here's the one that really takes the cake.
Biden rebounds, Warren slows, Sanders rolls, the latest on the 2020 money race.
>> So look, if you had the Buttigieg article by itself, it's fine, okay?
But is that the big headline?
When the Bernie numbers come out, shouldn't it be Bernie Sanders breaks a record?
Ok, well, you don't want to give him credit because you like him, whatever.
But Bernie Sanders is number one in money, in fundraising.
No he's mentioned third.
But wait.
>> And what does it mean?
>> Is he third in the polling?
Is he eighth in the polling?
No, he's number one in New Hampshire, number two in Iowa and closing, number two nationally,
but Biden this, Warren that.
Honestly, Sanders rolls, fine.
And all of you are lumped together in one article, but Buttigieg who raised 10 million
dollars.
Less than Bernie Sanders, and largely did it in wine caves.
But you know what, you know who lives in a wine cave?
The New York Times.
They would love to be in a wine cave.
They're the wine cave media, so of course they celebrate Buttigieg.
Maybe they popped some champagne.
When Buttigieg's numbers came in.
But when the Santa's money comes in they're like, well I guess he's rolling.
It's fine, just mention a third.
>> I mean they celebrate the annual wine cave and it's called the White House Correspondent's
Dinner, right?
I mean look, this isn't an accident.
It's not an accident.
Don't mistake this as maybe there's an oversight issue, no it's intentional, it's intentional.
If Buttigieg, if any other candidate had outraised all the other Democrats in the field the way
that Bernie Sanders had.
I guarantee you that person would not be buried, that lead would not be buried.
That would be front and center, right?
>> Well we know it, because Buttigieg didn't raise anyone, and he was front and center.
>> God >> Bernie raises ten million more than him,
breaks a record, and he's mentioned third.
Can you imagine if the New York Times was like and Buttigieg rolls.
He would never do that.
It's the beloved Buttigieg.
So, and, look, super-last thing, cuz I did a whole long video about it.
You should check it out on youtube.com/tyt and also on tyt.com.
Earlier today, I got so mad at another political article.
Because a critique of Buttigieg, he just go great, let me see.
Finally, finally I found one, right?
Nope, same exact thing as they did, or every other time.
The radical left says this unfair thing about Pete Buttigieg, and what was his thesis, why?
Because they're jealous of him, okay?
And but, Buttigieg luckily heroically, fending off these unfair attacks.
And the-
>> Can you imagine if there were a story out of Burlington, right?
Indicating that Bernie Sanders fired the first African American police chief because his
donors told him to?
>> They'd be saying, disqualifying, it's over, it's over, it's over.
>> No, but it'd be over, it'd be over.
>> But by the way, if you're saying, wait, people he just fired, or in that case he asked
them to resign and then demoted the first police chief who is black in South Bend?
Yeah, and a lot worse than that.
And there's cops on tape saying, white people are gonna be back in charge.
We got Buttigieg's donors to get rid of the black police chief.
If that was a story about Bernie, there is no one in the world who could argue.
That everyone in the national media wouldn't cover it to death until they tarred and feathered
him and drive him out of the race.
For Buttigieg, if you haven't heard it, I don't blame you because it's a fact.
It's on TYT.com.
Our managing editor broke the story.
It is indisputable.
The South Bend Common Council profusely thanked them for the investigated work.
But the New York Times, and all the main stream media is like I don't see it.
I don't see it, I don't think it's an issue at all.
I mean getting rid of blind people from the government, that's kind of awesome, isn't
it.
I mean bravo P Buttigieg.
I mean they don't below any where right, let alone in a wine cave.
>> Well look.
>> So they're the most bias people in America.
So be super careful what you read in the media.
>> Especially The New York Times.
And look, who knows, to be fair to them, maybe they just don't trust as a source because
we're just a radio show.
>> We're not obviously.
>> Yeah, by the way, guys, as always, we try to be over the top fair.
I know they're like, yeah, you guys are actually honest about your opinion, so you can't be
fair.
Idiots, okay, anyway, so just double check our facts.
>> Yeah.
>> Don't take our word for it.
We're not asking you to take our word for it.
We broke the story.
Why don't you prove us wrong?
Why don't you go out there and defend your buddy, Buttigieg?
New York Times said, you got dammit, when you send somebody to South Bend, Associated
Press, etc, where are you guys?
Are The Young Turks wrong, or are we right?
So why don't you just go, dude, do what you do, defend Buttigieg?
You can't cuz you know we're right.
And then that's amazing that you're ignoring that story, amazing.
But they don't care, they're purposely biased.