>> Several mainstream media outlets have issued a correction on their reporting of statements
that Hillary Clinton had made in regard to Tulsi Gabbard.
Now the statements in question were clear, in my opinion.
They were in a podcast, we had audio, in fact, why don't we listen to that audio right now?
>> I'm not making any predictions.
But I think they've got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary.
And are grooming her to be the third party candidate.
She's the favorite of the Russians.
They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far.
And that's assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not because she's also
a Russian- >> Right.
>> Asset.
>> So you just got the full context of what she said, right, about Tulsi Gabbard.
She even compared Tulsi Gabbard to Jill Stein and referred to Jill Stein as a Russian asset.
Now, with that said, what was the correction?
This is from the New York Times.
An earlier version of this article described incorrectly an element of Hillary Clinton's
recent comments about Representative Tulsi Gabbard.
While, Mrs. Clinton said that a Democratic presidential candidate was the favorite of
the Russians.
And an aide later confirmed the reference was to Miss Gabbard.
Mrs. Clinton remark about the grooming of a third party candidate in the 2020 race was
in response to a question about the Republicans strategy, not about Russian intervention.
>> Do you understand what's happening here?
This is one of the most pathetic things I have ever seen.
So Hillary Clinton people are walking back her comment about Tulsi Gabbard because it's
got a lot of blowback.
They are now doctoring history by going back and yelling at the mainstream media and say
I didn't say Russians, I said Republicans.
You heard the tape.
She absolutely, positively said Russians.
>> Yes.
>> And not only that, she went on to say, as Anna Pointed out, Jill Stein is also a
Russian asset.
Why did you say also a Russian asset?
If earlier you were saying that the Republicans are grooming Tulsi Gabbard and not the Russians.
So it is a brazen, bold faced lie by the Hillary Clinton team.
And yet the New York Times apologizes and agrees that they described it incorrectly.
That is pathetic.
That is not journalism.
That's saying who's in power.
The beloved Clintons.
We bow to you.
We bow to you, right?
It isn't about that they're Democrats or Republicans.
These guys bow to anyone in power.
And they've been bowing to the Clintons, the Obamas, the Bushs, the Cheneys for decade
after decade.
If you asked them to make that correction, they would never do it.
A regular person asked them, they'd be like, no, you said Russians, we're not gonna do
a correction on that.
It's Hillary Clinton, we're so sorry.
You are right, we are wrong.
We're wrong, political correctness, it is no longer Russian.
We're now changing the word to Republicans.
>> No, I've gotta give you more.
And by the way, why does Hillary Clinton have aides, isn't she a private citizen now?
>> Yeah.
>> Not a private citizen, but she's not a politician.
I mean, aide is weird.
But, anyway, let's move on to the Associated Press because it wasn't just the New York
Times.
The Associated Press also issued a correction and here's what it said.
In a story October 18th about Tulsi Gabbard and Hillary Clinton, the Associated Press
reported erroneously- >> Erroneously, are you kidding me?
>> That Hillary Clinton said she believes the Russians have quote, got their eye on
somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and grooming her to be the third party
candidate.
She was referring to Republicans, not Russians according to an aide.
>> You did that, you said that you reported that in error when you reported the actual
word she used.
Look, if you're watching this video later, you could rewind, you could see exactly what
she said.
And it wasn't like Laurel or Yani.
It was clear as day.
She said Russians, what part of that is Republicans?
Associated Press and New York Times, you ought to be embarrassed.
>> Absolutely.
>> That's not journalism.
That's craven sucking up to power.
It's not being watchdogs, it's being a lap dogs.
I need access.
What do you need access to Hillary Clinton for?
Well she might run again.
My God, Hillary- >> Please don't.
>> Clinton, bow, bow, bow, bow.
So sad, and then they say we're biased.
No, you're biased in favor of power.
>> She injects- >> Whereas we hold people accountable.
>> Hillary Clinton injects so much toxicity to everything.
I mean this is toxicity.
This is not something we need right now, especially with the climate that we're dealing with in
the country.
Just keep your comments.
She said what she meant.
And she refuses, over and over again, to take responsibility for her own failures in 2016.
>> No, look, I don't care what they think.
We're way better journalists than they are.
Okay I used to say you're calling us journalists, we're talk show hosts that's crazy.
The NPRs of the world go, no, my God, they raised their voice.
No, no, no, good journalists whisper, really?
Is that something I missed in journalism class that you're supposed to whisper?
>> They don't really whisper.
>> They whisper and they play banjos.
Anyway, I'm kidding around.
Okay, now, but on the serious point, look at it.
I told people after Hillary Clinton won the primary, we're honest.
We call ourselves Homer progressives.
I said vote for Hillary Clinton.
Okay, so it's not like I'm biased against Hillary Clinton.
But I can see and I can hear and with my own ears, I heard her say Russians.
I did one of the toughest interviews you'll ever see with Tulsi Gabbard.
So it's not like I'm soft on Tulsi Gabbard, right?
But she said Russians, and she has no evidence for that, okay?
So I don't care what the New York Times and The Associated Press does with their political
correctness.
And I don't care that Hillary Clinton is in the so-called Progressive Party.
I don't care about any of that.
I heard Russians, it was Russians, that's a fact.
And for them to say no, don't believe you're lying ears, believe the Clinton's instead.
It is pathetic, it's an embarrassment to journalism.
>> So what do you think Clinton meant to say?
And there are two options there, Russians were grooming a third party candidate or Republicans
were grooming a third party candidate?
You can participate in this poll by going to tyt.com/Hillary, tyt.com/Hillary.
>> I guess it'll be 99% to 1 and New York Times and Associated Press editors will be
like, yes, yes.
No, no, no, she meant Republicans.
She meant Republicans.
Everybody cover your ass.
We met Republicans.
>> Yes.
>> Sad, incredibly sad.