Wel come, it is Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson with you. And you guys know if you listen to show regularly, that the Sinner and I do this show around his Senate schedule, especially when it comes to his official duties. Well, if you are looking at my clock right now, it's about two in the morning, and the Senator's flight, which was obviously extremely late, meant that at this point we still couldn't do the show. Now here's the good news. We have two conversations that Senator Cruz and I had that deal with big tech and also silencing of conservatives that I'm going to play for you. But this is the part I love about doing this show. We do the show all times, day and night, and then sometimes the flights just don't cooperate, even in the early am hours. So now you understand what's going on. Don't worry. We'll have your weekend review for you tomorrow as well. But these are two important topics that I want you to hear about. And there are a lot going on in DC, specifically around the issue of big tech and what they're doing to silence conservatives. But first, there are so many Verdict listeners that have been asking how can you get involved in how can you help the people in Israel? Well, I want you to know about IFCJ. IFCJ is helping on the ground in Israel right now. Since October the seventh, the attacks on Israel have increase with a Ran and its proxies that launch an attack of hundreds of drones and missiles, and Israelis are living with the harsh reality of terror every single day. The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews is on the ground addressing all of the urgent needs. And that's why I want you to work with them. They are doing incredible work because they're helping the people there with literal bomb shelters emergency bomb shelter kits that are being delivered immediately to those in desperate needs. Your life saving donation today will help assemble and place these kits with enough food and life saving emergency supplies for twenty people huddled in a bomb shelter. Now. The cost to put together and distribute these kits is two hundred and ninety dollars each, and your gift will help save lives and thanks to a matching challenge gift from a generous IFCJ supporter, your gift will double in impact to help provide twice the support needed on the ground. So if you want to help the people of Israel, all you have to do is call this number to make your gift eight to eight four eight eight IFCJ. That's eight eight eight four eight eight if CJ. Or you can go online to support IFCJ dot org to give. That's one word support if CJ dot org to give. Now center. Big Tech is obviously at a massive influence over public opinion in this country. We saw a recent report that came out just on TikTok, for example, where they were forty five to one stories that were pro Palastinian pro Hamas over Israel. That's one example of how they've really been able to shape public opinion, especially with young people and the riots and the chaos we're witnessing on college campuses right now. But there's also something else that's happened with big tech. I've been a victim of it. I spoke out again against big tech a few years ago at a SEAPAC convention, and before I landed home. After I spoke out about big tech, specifically Facebook, my accounts were shut down they have never worked the same way as they did before the reach has disappeared. I've witnessed it, and many other conservative leaders out there are going through the same things. And it always seems to happen center right during a big election cycle, where the Democrats get a free flow of information out and conservatives get hammered and silenced.

Wel come, it is Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson with you. And you guys know if you listen to show regularly, that the Sinner and I do this show around his Senate schedule, especially when it comes to his official duties. Well, if you are looking at my clock right now, it's about two in the morning, and the Senator's flight, which was obviously extremely late, meant that at this point we still couldn't do the show. Now here's the good news. We have two conversations that Senator Cruz and I had that deal with big tech and also silencing of conservatives that I'm going to play for you. But this is the part I love about doing this show. We do the show all times, day and night, and then sometimes the flights just don't cooperate, even in the early am hours. So now you understand what's going on. Don't worry. We'll have your weekend review for you tomorrow as well. But these are two important topics that I want you to hear about. And there are a lot going on in DC, specifically around the issue of big tech and what they're doing to silence conservatives. But first, there are so many Verdict listeners that have been asking how can you get involved in how can you help the people in Israel? Well, I want you to know about IFCJ. IFCJ is helping on the ground in Israel right now. Since October the seventh, the attacks on Israel have increase with a Ran and its proxies that launch an attack of hundreds of drones and missiles, and Israelis are living with the harsh reality of terror every single day. The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews is on the ground addressing all of the urgent needs. And that's why I want you to work with them. They are doing incredible work because they're helping the people there with literal bomb shelters emergency bomb shelter kits that are being delivered immediately to those in desperate needs. Your life saving donation today will help assemble and place these kits with enough food and life saving emergency supplies for twenty people huddled in a bomb shelter. Now. The cost to put together and distribute these kits is two hundred and ninety dollars each, and your gift will help save lives and thanks to a matching challenge gift from a generous IFCJ supporter, your gift will double in impact to help provide twice the support needed on the ground. So if you want to help the people of Israel, all you have to do is call this number to make your gift eight to eight four eight eight IFCJ. That's eight eight eight four eight eight if CJ. Or you can go online to support IFCJ dot org to give. That's one word support if CJ dot org to give. Now center. Big Tech is obviously at a massive influence over public opinion in this country. We saw a recent report that came out just on TikTok, for example, where they were forty five to one stories that were pro Palastinian pro Hamas over Israel. That's one example of how they've really been able to shape public opinion, especially with young people and the riots and the chaos we're witnessing on college campuses right now. But there's also something else that's happened with big tech. I've been a victim of it. I spoke out again against big tech a few years ago at a SEAPAC convention, and before I landed home. After I spoke out about big tech, specifically Facebook, my accounts were shut down they have never worked the same way as they did before the reach has disappeared. I've witnessed it, and many other conservative leaders out there are going through the same things. And it always seems to happen center right during a big election cycle, where the Democrats get a free flow of information out and conservatives get hammered and silenced.

Well, that's exactly right. So I started last year as the ranking member on the Senate Committee of Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and from that position as the ranking member, which means the senior Republican on that committee, I launched an investigation into the abuse of power from big tech, and this past week we put out a major report. The report is entitled Weaponizing Terms of Service. How online service providers use broad policies to silence conservatives. Now, there are a lot of instances that we know about that get a lot of publicity. We know, for example, that Twitter, before Elon Musk purchased them, suspended the account of the Babylon be for making a joke about a Biden administration official. We know that both Facebook and Twitter suppressed stories about Hudter Biden's laptop before the twenty twenty election. We know that Facebook removed posts suggesting that COVID nineteen originated in a Wuhan lab we talked about at length on this podcast, and a theory that has now been confirmed both by the Federal Department of Energy and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. We know that YouTube took down a March twenty twenty one video of a panel discussion with Florida Governor Ron de Santis, during which he disputed claims that children needed to wear face masks. We know that YouTube, also, which is owned by Google, blocked access to a November twenty twenty three episode of this podcast Verdict, because we were criticizing the corporate media's favorable coverage of hamas, and YouTube deemed okay, you must be an adult to see what is on the network news. We also know in twenty twenty two, DirectTV dropped one America news network, and less than a year after Democrat leaders in Congress sent a letter to the CEO calling on them to stop carrying the network. We also know they did the same thing to Newsmax. Now I lit Direct TV up and they ended up bringing Newsmax back. We also know that Into it at the direction of its banking partners, refuse to provide payment processing and payroll services to gun manufacturers and sellers. And we know that JP Morgan Chase closed the account of the National Committee of Religious Freedom, which was created by former State Department Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom and former US Senator Sam Brownback. We know that gofund me block the release of ten million dollars of donations to the Canadian Trucker's Freedom Convoy. We've seen that happen over and over and over again. Well, what this report does is it lays out an entirely new area of discrimination, and it is using web based products and services online service providers to ban conservative organizations from using their technology, and it's going after the infrastructure that is needed to communicate. And in fact, this investigation reveals that online service providers are following a playbook for silencing conservatives that leftist organizations, including the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is wildly left wing and hates conservatives, and the Anti Defamation League the ADL, they together put together this strategy, this playbook to quote remove infrastructure services that conservative organizations need to operate. And so I'm going to describe that playbook and what they're doing in particular.

Well, that's exactly right. So I started last year as the ranking member on the Senate Committee of Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and from that position as the ranking member, which means the senior Republican on that committee, I launched an investigation into the abuse of power from big tech, and this past week we put out a major report. The report is entitled Weaponizing Terms of Service. How online service providers use broad policies to silence conservatives. Now, there are a lot of instances that we know about that get a lot of publicity. We know, for example, that Twitter, before Elon Musk purchased them, suspended the account of the Babylon be for making a joke about a Biden administration official. We know that both Facebook and Twitter suppressed stories about Hudter Biden's laptop before the twenty twenty election. We know that Facebook removed posts suggesting that COVID nineteen originated in a Wuhan lab we talked about at length on this podcast, and a theory that has now been confirmed both by the Federal Department of Energy and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. We know that YouTube took down a March twenty twenty one video of a panel discussion with Florida Governor Ron de Santis, during which he disputed claims that children needed to wear face masks. We know that YouTube, also, which is owned by Google, blocked access to a November twenty twenty three episode of this podcast Verdict, because we were criticizing the corporate media's favorable coverage of hamas, and YouTube deemed okay, you must be an adult to see what is on the network news. We also know in twenty twenty two, DirectTV dropped one America news network, and less than a year after Democrat leaders in Congress sent a letter to the CEO calling on them to stop carrying the network. We also know they did the same thing to Newsmax. Now I lit Direct TV up and they ended up bringing Newsmax back. We also know that Into it at the direction of its banking partners, refuse to provide payment processing and payroll services to gun manufacturers and sellers. And we know that JP Morgan Chase closed the account of the National Committee of Religious Freedom, which was created by former State Department Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom and former US Senator Sam Brownback. We know that gofund me block the release of ten million dollars of donations to the Canadian Trucker's Freedom Convoy. We've seen that happen over and over and over again. Well, what this report does is it lays out an entirely new area of discrimination, and it is using web based products and services online service providers to ban conservative organizations from using their technology, and it's going after the infrastructure that is needed to communicate. And in fact, this investigation reveals that online service providers are following a playbook for silencing conservatives that leftist organizations, including the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is wildly left wing and hates conservatives, and the Anti Defamation League the ADL, they together put together this strategy, this playbook to quote remove infrastructure services that conservative organizations need to operate. And so I'm going to describe that playbook and what they're doing in particular.

When you look at their playbook and this amount of influence, I mean, this can change and alter certainly an election cycle. It can certainly, I would argue, change a presidential election as well. And that's the reason why they're doing this. When you think about, you know, you've got millions of people that follow you Facebook. I've got you know, over a million. But if you turn off and throttle either one of us, then the reach that we have compared to the left, it just disappears. It's the old saying, right if a big tree falls in the forest and no one's around and it make a sound, And that's exactly what they did. But it wasn't just to one or two people. They were doing this to hundreds of top conservative voices that people look to for their opinions, specifically when it comes to election your issues.

When you look at their playbook and this amount of influence, I mean, this can change and alter certainly an election cycle. It can certainly, I would argue, change a presidential election as well. And that's the reason why they're doing this. When you think about, you know, you've got millions of people that follow you Facebook. I've got you know, over a million. But if you turn off and throttle either one of us, then the reach that we have compared to the left, it just disappears. It's the old saying, right if a big tree falls in the forest and no one's around and it make a sound, And that's exactly what they did. But it wasn't just to one or two people. They were doing this to hundreds of top conservative voices that people look to for their opinions, specifically when it comes to election your issues.

So that's exactly right. And what this report focuses on is it uses a couple of key examples. It uses number one slacks removal of libs of TikTok's workspace. It focuses on event rights removal of event pages for events related to Matt Walsh's What Is a Woman documentary, as well as an event where Riley Gaines was scheduled to speak, and it focuses on Bontera's termination of its relationship with Independent Women's Forum, which deprived that organization of major nonprofit technology service provider services and all of this follows. There was a report that was put out by the Anti Defamation League and it is called Bad Gateway How deplatforming effects extremist websites And here's what the ADL recommended. It says, quote deplatforming websites removing infrastructure services they need to operate, such as website hosting, can reduce the spread and reach of extremism and hate online. But when does deplatforming succeed? And here's what ADL explained quote. This report shows that deplatforming can decrease the popularity of extremist websites, especially when done without warning and they go through We learned four important lessons about how deplatforming affects extremist websites, by which they mean anything right of center. Number one, it can cause popularity rankings to decrease immediately. Number two, it may take users a long time to return to the website. Sometimes the website never regains its previous popularity.

So that's exactly right. And what this report focuses on is it uses a couple of key examples. It uses number one slacks removal of libs of TikTok's workspace. It focuses on event rights removal of event pages for events related to Matt Walsh's What Is a Woman documentary, as well as an event where Riley Gaines was scheduled to speak, and it focuses on Bontera's termination of its relationship with Independent Women's Forum, which deprived that organization of major nonprofit technology service provider services and all of this follows. There was a report that was put out by the Anti Defamation League and it is called Bad Gateway How deplatforming effects extremist websites And here's what the ADL recommended. It says, quote deplatforming websites removing infrastructure services they need to operate, such as website hosting, can reduce the spread and reach of extremism and hate online. But when does deplatforming succeed? And here's what ADL explained quote. This report shows that deplatforming can decrease the popularity of extremist websites, especially when done without warning and they go through We learned four important lessons about how deplatforming affects extremist websites, by which they mean anything right of center. Number one, it can cause popularity rankings to decrease immediately. Number two, it may take users a long time to return to the website. Sometimes the website never regains its previous popularity.

Bingo.

Bingo.

Number three unexpected and unexpected as key. Unexpected deplatforming makes it take longer for the website to regain its previous popularity levels. And number four Replicating deplatform services such as discussions, discussion forums or live streaming video products on a standalone website presents significant challenges, including higher costs and smaller audiences. Now I want to go into a little bit more. This is what the ADL report. It has an entire section that says what is deplatforming? And by the way, the corporate media insists when we talk about deplatforming that we're making it up. Well, if you actually read the blueprint, they are very explicit. The left is explicit. They want to silence use. So let me read from this ADL report quote. There are three main categories of infrastructure that keep websites running. Domain registrars, web hosting companies, and security protection companies. Number one, the website must be able to register and keep a domain name. A domain name such as Google dot com or ADL dot org is how visitors find a site. If a website is removed from domain name services, it becomes much more difficult, if not impossible, to find Number two Web hosting companies and content distribution networks provide digital storage space for all the files, pictures, videos, and software that make up the content of a website. When a website loses its hosting provider, the site's content disappears. Losing a CDN a content distribution network can cause slow service for high traffic sites. And number three, a third category of infrastructure includes companies that protect websites from external security risks such as distributed denial of service d DOS attacks. DDoS attacks flood a website with fake traffic to overwhelm it, rendering it unable to answer normal user requests. If an infrastructure company, such as a network security firm cloud fare, refuses to provide DDoS protection to a vulnerable website, it is vulnerable to being flooded with traffic, rendering it inaccessible.

Number three unexpected and unexpected as key. Unexpected deplatforming makes it take longer for the website to regain its previous popularity levels. And number four Replicating deplatform services such as discussions, discussion forums or live streaming video products on a standalone website presents significant challenges, including higher costs and smaller audiences. Now I want to go into a little bit more. This is what the ADL report. It has an entire section that says what is deplatforming? And by the way, the corporate media insists when we talk about deplatforming that we're making it up. Well, if you actually read the blueprint, they are very explicit. The left is explicit. They want to silence use. So let me read from this ADL report quote. There are three main categories of infrastructure that keep websites running. Domain registrars, web hosting companies, and security protection companies. Number one, the website must be able to register and keep a domain name. A domain name such as Google dot com or ADL dot org is how visitors find a site. If a website is removed from domain name services, it becomes much more difficult, if not impossible, to find Number two Web hosting companies and content distribution networks provide digital storage space for all the files, pictures, videos, and software that make up the content of a website. When a website loses its hosting provider, the site's content disappears. Losing a CDN a content distribution network can cause slow service for high traffic sites. And number three, a third category of infrastructure includes companies that protect websites from external security risks such as distributed denial of service d DOS attacks. DDoS attacks flood a website with fake traffic to overwhelm it, rendering it unable to answer normal user requests. If an infrastructure company, such as a network security firm cloud fare, refuses to provide DDoS protection to a vulnerable website, it is vulnerable to being flooded with traffic, rendering it inaccessible.

So you look at this what we found out and what you just went through. The question is how is it that these companies, and I'm specifically referring to big tech are allowed to get away with this and do this to many people that they're in business with. I use myself as the example again because I've experienced this. When you went into business and I felt like I was in business with Facebook. They said, advertise with us, right, share, advertise your show, advertise your content, boost your content, spend money with us, and we're going to help you grow an audience and it'll be good for everyone. And then all of a sudden they just shut you down and they were able to walk away and just say, oh, well, you violated our terms of service, or you did this, or you posted too many things that liberals posted as saying they were factually incorrect. The fact checkers came out right the liberals on the left. They were fact checking and putting things against conservatives. So they lose their reach, lose their ability to boose posts, lose their ability to advertise. And it was all being done to clearly influence public opinion, and yet they've gotten away with it. So what's next.

So you look at this what we found out and what you just went through. The question is how is it that these companies, and I'm specifically referring to big tech are allowed to get away with this and do this to many people that they're in business with. I use myself as the example again because I've experienced this. When you went into business and I felt like I was in business with Facebook. They said, advertise with us, right, share, advertise your show, advertise your content, boost your content, spend money with us, and we're going to help you grow an audience and it'll be good for everyone. And then all of a sudden they just shut you down and they were able to walk away and just say, oh, well, you violated our terms of service, or you did this, or you posted too many things that liberals posted as saying they were factually incorrect. The fact checkers came out right the liberals on the left. They were fact checking and putting things against conservatives. So they lose their reach, lose their ability to boose posts, lose their ability to advertise. And it was all being done to clearly influence public opinion, and yet they've gotten away with it. So what's next.

Well, with this report focuses on many of the deep platforming steps by Facebook or Twitter or YouTube, they're very public. What this report focuses on as the ones that are not public, which is the back office infrastructure. Let's take for example, Slack, which is used for communication for many online organizations and companies. Slack canceled libs of TikTok's workspace for violating its terms of service and the terms of service for prohibit users from quote engaging activity that incites or encourages violence or hatred towards it against individuals or groups. Slack determined that Libs of TikTok violated this policy based on three social media posts concerning quote gender affirming, hysterectomies, and all age drag shows. Now here's the interesting thing. Slack shut down Libs of TikTok's worksplace without any warning, without any explanation as to how it is violated slacks policy, and Slack's action caused Libs of TikTok to effectively lose its use of Slax communications and forced it to rely entirely on cell phones to run its business. Now, listen to this quote, which is fascinating, Slack told the Commerce Committee told my investigation quote. What makes Libs of TikTok's posts problematic is that Libs of TikTok has a specific audience, and they are taking this information and posting it to that specific audience so that everyone in that audience sees it at the same time. In other words, they didn't even find objections with what Libs of TikTok was posting. What they were mad at is conservatives were reading it and that was enough reason to deplatform libs TikTok.

Well, with this report focuses on many of the deep platforming steps by Facebook or Twitter or YouTube, they're very public. What this report focuses on as the ones that are not public, which is the back office infrastructure. Let's take for example, Slack, which is used for communication for many online organizations and companies. Slack canceled libs of TikTok's workspace for violating its terms of service and the terms of service for prohibit users from quote engaging activity that incites or encourages violence or hatred towards it against individuals or groups. Slack determined that Libs of TikTok violated this policy based on three social media posts concerning quote gender affirming, hysterectomies, and all age drag shows. Now here's the interesting thing. Slack shut down Libs of TikTok's worksplace without any warning, without any explanation as to how it is violated slacks policy, and Slack's action caused Libs of TikTok to effectively lose its use of Slax communications and forced it to rely entirely on cell phones to run its business. Now, listen to this quote, which is fascinating, Slack told the Commerce Committee told my investigation quote. What makes Libs of TikTok's posts problematic is that Libs of TikTok has a specific audience, and they are taking this information and posting it to that specific audience so that everyone in that audience sees it at the same time. In other words, they didn't even find objections with what Libs of TikTok was posting. What they were mad at is conservatives were reading it and that was enough reason to deplatform libs TikTok.

So when you shut down a business in essence the way they did, is there any real an instant relief for libs of TikTok or others or is this one of those they're too big to fail? Right? These companies are too big, they're protected and you're the menion and just deal with it. And if you're in, who cares if your life work is destroyed in thirty seconds because they shut it off.

So when you shut down a business in essence the way they did, is there any real an instant relief for libs of TikTok or others or is this one of those they're too big to fail? Right? These companies are too big, they're protected and you're the menion and just deal with it. And if you're in, who cares if your life work is destroyed in thirty seconds because they shut it off.

So right now there is not immediate relief. You could presumably file a breach of contract case. The biggest relief and the reason I did this report is just sunshine. They're doing this in the dark, They're doing this without scrutiny. There is right now no federal law that this is prohibited. I'll give you another example. Event Bright, which we focus is on. Event Bright canceled pages for events hosted by college Republican clubs concerning Matt Walsh's What Is a Woman? Film? And it also canceled pages for an event featuring swimmer Riley Gaines for violating its terms of service. Now critically, no one involved in the decision. This is what they told. The committee watched the movie What Is a Woman, so they never saw it, and they couldn't identify anything objectionable in the trailer, So they just didn't like the topic, so they decided to take it down. They relied instead on Matt Walsh's statements about quote gender affirming surgeries, pronouns, and is Johnny the Walris Children's book to reach the conclusion. Likewise, event Bright de that Riley gains His event violated its policy based on her social media post about biological men competing women's sports. They shut down the event page without any warning, without any explanation as to how they violated this policy, without any way to fix it, and their actions ruined advertisements that included QR coach for the event pages. So you know, a lot had been done to put out the codes to say hey, come to this event, and they forced the event organizers to quickly pivot to a new method of providing tickets. And the committee asked event Bright whether Gaines's statements. On October tenth, twenty twenty three, she posted on Twitter quote real women lack a y chromosome, and we asked whether that violates event Bright's policy. Event Bright responded that quote the post speaks for itself, so they needn't answer that. How dare you say that someone with a Y chromosome is not a woman. We don't even need to dispute it. We have the power to shut it down.

So right now there is not immediate relief. You could presumably file a breach of contract case. The biggest relief and the reason I did this report is just sunshine. They're doing this in the dark, They're doing this without scrutiny. There is right now no federal law that this is prohibited. I'll give you another example. Event Bright, which we focus is on. Event Bright canceled pages for events hosted by college Republican clubs concerning Matt Walsh's What Is a Woman? Film? And it also canceled pages for an event featuring swimmer Riley Gaines for violating its terms of service. Now critically, no one involved in the decision. This is what they told. The committee watched the movie What Is a Woman, so they never saw it, and they couldn't identify anything objectionable in the trailer, So they just didn't like the topic, so they decided to take it down. They relied instead on Matt Walsh's statements about quote gender affirming surgeries, pronouns, and is Johnny the Walris Children's book to reach the conclusion. Likewise, event Bright de that Riley gains His event violated its policy based on her social media post about biological men competing women's sports. They shut down the event page without any warning, without any explanation as to how they violated this policy, without any way to fix it, and their actions ruined advertisements that included QR coach for the event pages. So you know, a lot had been done to put out the codes to say hey, come to this event, and they forced the event organizers to quickly pivot to a new method of providing tickets. And the committee asked event Bright whether Gaines's statements. On October tenth, twenty twenty three, she posted on Twitter quote real women lack a y chromosome, and we asked whether that violates event Bright's policy. Event Bright responded that quote the post speaks for itself, so they needn't answer that. How dare you say that someone with a Y chromosome is not a woman. We don't even need to dispute it. We have the power to shut it down.

If you've got a cell phone. Ninety nine percent of Americans have a cell phone, and when you use that phone, you may not realize what you're supporting with Big Mobile. Did you know that Big Mobile gives massive donations to democratic causes, democratic candidates and organizations. Did you know that Big Mobile gives big money to Plan Parenthood. Well, that is why I took my cell phone and I switched to Patriot Mobile. Patriot Mobile is the only conservative Christian cell phone provider in the US with the same exact coverage that you get right now, So you compromise nothing when it comes to quality when you switch to Patriot Mobile.

If you've got a cell phone. Ninety nine percent of Americans have a cell phone, and when you use that phone, you may not realize what you're supporting with Big Mobile. Did you know that Big Mobile gives massive donations to democratic causes, democratic candidates and organizations. Did you know that Big Mobile gives big money to Plan Parenthood. Well, that is why I took my cell phone and I switched to Patriot Mobile. Patriot Mobile is the only conservative Christian cell phone provider in the US with the same exact coverage that you get right now, So you compromise nothing when it comes to quality when you switch to Patriot Mobile.

Now.

Now.

The number one reason why people don't switch cell phone providers is because they think it's going to take forever. That's true, it used to take a lot of time, and so people would stay because they want to go into a store in waste two and a half hours. Switching not anymore would take an in twenty twenty four, you can literally use your same phone you have right now and your same number, and switching is easy and it can be done over the phone. All you got to do is go to Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict. That's Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict. Or you can call them nine to seven to two Patriot that's nine seven to two Patriot. Question. Get free activation when you use the offer code verdict. That's right, free activation. Use the offer code verdict. Now when you switch, here's what happens. About five percent of your bill every month is given back to causes and organizations that support free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life, our Second Amendment, as well as supporting our military, our veterans, and our wounded warriors. That is why I love Patriot Mobile. So make a difference with every phone call you make, make a difference with every text you make. Make a difference by switching your phone right now to Patriot Mobile. I'm using I travel all the time. The coverage is phenomenal. Nine to seven to two Patriot or Patriotmobile dot Com slash verdict, use promo codevertict you'll get free activation. So now moving forward, you shine light on this and you talk about this is really being done in darkness and we need to we need to shine light on it. Was there any nervousness from those that you're questioning? I want to use the word remorse, but I can't imagine they're remorseful. But is it going to at least make them pause before they do it again?

The number one reason why people don't switch cell phone providers is because they think it's going to take forever. That's true, it used to take a lot of time, and so people would stay because they want to go into a store in waste two and a half hours. Switching not anymore would take an in twenty twenty four, you can literally use your same phone you have right now and your same number, and switching is easy and it can be done over the phone. All you got to do is go to Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict. That's Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict. Or you can call them nine to seven to two Patriot that's nine seven to two Patriot. Question. Get free activation when you use the offer code verdict. That's right, free activation. Use the offer code verdict. Now when you switch, here's what happens. About five percent of your bill every month is given back to causes and organizations that support free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life, our Second Amendment, as well as supporting our military, our veterans, and our wounded warriors. That is why I love Patriot Mobile. So make a difference with every phone call you make, make a difference with every text you make. Make a difference by switching your phone right now to Patriot Mobile. I'm using I travel all the time. The coverage is phenomenal. Nine to seven to two Patriot or Patriotmobile dot Com slash verdict, use promo codevertict you'll get free activation. So now moving forward, you shine light on this and you talk about this is really being done in darkness and we need to we need to shine light on it. Was there any nervousness from those that you're questioning? I want to use the word remorse, but I can't imagine they're remorseful. But is it going to at least make them pause before they do it again?

Or I'll ask you, Ben, have you seen this on CNN?

Or I'll ask you, Ben, have you seen this on CNN?

No?

No?

Have you seen it on an ABC, NBCCBSMSNBC nowhere? Have you read it? You read it in the New York Times?

Have you seen it on an ABC, NBCCBSMSNBC nowhere? Have you read it? You read it in the New York Times?

No?

No?

No, the corporate media will not cover. I'll give another example. So Bonterra, which provides nonprofit management services, so it's back office, but it's incredibly important and there are very few providers of this. They denied those services to Independent Women's Forum, which is a conservative organization that is focused on advancing women's rights, and Bontera concluded that it violated its policies, which require customers to agree to refrain from advocacy denying quote LGBTQ rights or denying a woman's right to reproductive choice. Or denying racial justice or denying climate change, and their policies also prohibit customers from quote promoting, encouraging, or facilitating hate speech, violence, discrimination based on race, color, sexual orientation, marital status, gender, or identity expression. Bonterra notified Independent Women's Form of its decision not to renew their contract without any explanation of how the organization violated this policy. As a result, Independent Women's Forum had to quickly move off Bonterra's platform and obtain a replacement services provider. Bontera told the committee that Independent Women's Forum violated its true terms of service because the organization quote works to restrict the rights of the LGBTQ community. Bontera could not explain exactly how the group was working to restrict LGBTQ rights, but generally pointed to Independent women forums advocacy on issues like protecting women's sports and women's spaces. So, if you actually think that girls should compete in girls sports, that is of view that is not acceptable, and you will be denied online basic infrastructure from monopoly and near monopoly providers.

No, the corporate media will not cover. I'll give another example. So Bonterra, which provides nonprofit management services, so it's back office, but it's incredibly important and there are very few providers of this. They denied those services to Independent Women's Forum, which is a conservative organization that is focused on advancing women's rights, and Bontera concluded that it violated its policies, which require customers to agree to refrain from advocacy denying quote LGBTQ rights or denying a woman's right to reproductive choice. Or denying racial justice or denying climate change, and their policies also prohibit customers from quote promoting, encouraging, or facilitating hate speech, violence, discrimination based on race, color, sexual orientation, marital status, gender, or identity expression. Bonterra notified Independent Women's Form of its decision not to renew their contract without any explanation of how the organization violated this policy. As a result, Independent Women's Forum had to quickly move off Bonterra's platform and obtain a replacement services provider. Bontera told the committee that Independent Women's Forum violated its true terms of service because the organization quote works to restrict the rights of the LGBTQ community. Bontera could not explain exactly how the group was working to restrict LGBTQ rights, but generally pointed to Independent women forums advocacy on issues like protecting women's sports and women's spaces. So, if you actually think that girls should compete in girls sports, that is of view that is not acceptable, and you will be denied online basic infrastructure from monopoly and near monopoly providers.

The amount of arrogance that we see now from these companies, you've witnessed it now firsthand. Tells you they feel like they are protected by the current regime. Am I wrong?

The amount of arrogance that we see now from these companies, you've witnessed it now firsthand. Tells you they feel like they are protected by the current regime. Am I wrong?

You are exactly right. And if you look at at event Bright for example, let's go back to Riley Gains. So Riley Gains, they shut her down because they disagree read about not her event, but about some posts that she had put out. What they did not object to was an event that we identified entitled Gaza and the Struggle for Palestine. Now, that event was flagged by event writes algorithm, and it was reviewed by its trust and safety team, but it determined that that event did not violate its hateful Events policy in an October ninth, twenty twenty three statements. So two days off after October seventh, here's what the event sponsored the Palestinian American organization Networks said. It called the October seventh attack quote self defense measures and said that quote Israel bears the full responsibility for those attacks, and declared that quote the Palestinian people have the right to defend themselves and to fight the occupation with all means available. We salute the steadfastness of the Palaceian people in its resistance. So understand saluting the mass murder of twelve hundred people. The raping of women and girls, that does not violate their hateful speech policy, But saying that girls exist that does. Saying that men should not compete against women and women's sports that does. That is the utter hypocrisy and double standards that allows. By the way, event Bright has also allowed numerous quote stop Cop City events which support violent protesters who oppose the building of a police and firefighter training facility. Likewise, event Bright created a map of Black Lives Matter protests, many of which turn violent, to help users find them. So, in other words, actual events that produce violence, that end up killing people, that burn shops, that firebomb cars, those are not deemed hateful and violent. But if you say that women exists, you must be deplatformed.

You are exactly right. And if you look at at event Bright for example, let's go back to Riley Gains. So Riley Gains, they shut her down because they disagree read about not her event, but about some posts that she had put out. What they did not object to was an event that we identified entitled Gaza and the Struggle for Palestine. Now, that event was flagged by event writes algorithm, and it was reviewed by its trust and safety team, but it determined that that event did not violate its hateful Events policy in an October ninth, twenty twenty three statements. So two days off after October seventh, here's what the event sponsored the Palestinian American organization Networks said. It called the October seventh attack quote self defense measures and said that quote Israel bears the full responsibility for those attacks, and declared that quote the Palestinian people have the right to defend themselves and to fight the occupation with all means available. We salute the steadfastness of the Palaceian people in its resistance. So understand saluting the mass murder of twelve hundred people. The raping of women and girls, that does not violate their hateful speech policy, But saying that girls exist that does. Saying that men should not compete against women and women's sports that does. That is the utter hypocrisy and double standards that allows. By the way, event Bright has also allowed numerous quote stop Cop City events which support violent protesters who oppose the building of a police and firefighter training facility. Likewise, event Bright created a map of Black Lives Matter protests, many of which turn violent, to help users find them. So, in other words, actual events that produce violence, that end up killing people, that burn shops, that firebomb cars, those are not deemed hateful and violent. But if you say that women exists, you must be deplatformed.

We talked about the media giving them cover. I expect some in the media to be liberal hacks, right, but this brings up a big issue that we need to talk about with NPR. The new CEO of NPR is someone that is paid by US taxpayers and someone who has described the First Amendment as the number one challenge she faces. Our tax dollars are going to a CEO who's running INPR National Public Radio saying the First Amendment really seems to get in her way. Really, that's where money is going. Well.

We talked about the media giving them cover. I expect some in the media to be liberal hacks, right, but this brings up a big issue that we need to talk about with NPR. The new CEO of NPR is someone that is paid by US taxpayers and someone who has described the First Amendment as the number one challenge she faces. Our tax dollars are going to a CEO who's running INPR National Public Radio saying the First Amendment really seems to get in her way. Really, that's where money is going. Well.

Unfortunately, NPR has been profoundly corrupted, and it's been made worse by hiring a CEO who is a brazen, blatant, unapology jic, radical leftist, and she doesn't pretend to be unbiased at all. Now, we discussed in a previous podcast couple of weeks ago the Bombshell Report from Uri Berliner. Uri Berliner was a twenty five year NPR employee and was the former business editor of NPR, and he wrote an April ninth essay in The Free Press, which resulted in NPR suspending him for publishing how's that for free speech? If you criticize us, you're out of here and you're all fine, and ultimately led to his resignation. So he's gone. This essay cost him his job, but he laid out the incredible bias at NPR and the shift at NPR. So, for example, he laid out in twenty eleven, which was not that long ago, NPR's audience was twenty six percent conservative, twenty three percent middle of the road, and thirty seven percent liberal, so it leaned left. But not dramatically, so by twenty twenty three those numbers that shifteddically. It was now, instead of thirty seven percent liberal, it was sixty seven percent liberal, and instead of twenty six percent conservative, it was only eleven percent conservative. And mister Berliner laid out details of how they would stifle stories that were inconvenient to liberals. They would amplify stories like the Russia collusion story, even if they were not supported by the facts. He outlined at great length how NPR had no interest in being impartial, being unbiased. And then you take in the wake of this and the wake of what should be real concern of Hey, we're national public radio. We're supposed to be nonpartisan. We're supposed to be down the middle. Now, look, I for one have serious doubts why the taxpayer should fund any radio station. I think there are plenty of for profit radio stations. I don't know why the government should coursively tax you to pay for yet another radio station. But I'll tell you what. Even if there's an argument they should do so for generic news that somehow there's not a market demand for, there is no argument I know of that they should do so only for left wing propaganda and the newly appointed CEO Catherine Marr has been a hard partisan her whole life. So, for example, in twenty twenty, Mar referred to President Donald Trump as a quote deranged racist sociopath. Well, then I'm confident her coverage of Donald Trump will be fair as long as she introduces him as a deranged, racist sociopath every time he's covered.

Unfortunately, NPR has been profoundly corrupted, and it's been made worse by hiring a CEO who is a brazen, blatant, unapology jic, radical leftist, and she doesn't pretend to be unbiased at all. Now, we discussed in a previous podcast couple of weeks ago the Bombshell Report from Uri Berliner. Uri Berliner was a twenty five year NPR employee and was the former business editor of NPR, and he wrote an April ninth essay in The Free Press, which resulted in NPR suspending him for publishing how's that for free speech? If you criticize us, you're out of here and you're all fine, and ultimately led to his resignation. So he's gone. This essay cost him his job, but he laid out the incredible bias at NPR and the shift at NPR. So, for example, he laid out in twenty eleven, which was not that long ago, NPR's audience was twenty six percent conservative, twenty three percent middle of the road, and thirty seven percent liberal, so it leaned left. But not dramatically, so by twenty twenty three those numbers that shifteddically. It was now, instead of thirty seven percent liberal, it was sixty seven percent liberal, and instead of twenty six percent conservative, it was only eleven percent conservative. And mister Berliner laid out details of how they would stifle stories that were inconvenient to liberals. They would amplify stories like the Russia collusion story, even if they were not supported by the facts. He outlined at great length how NPR had no interest in being impartial, being unbiased. And then you take in the wake of this and the wake of what should be real concern of Hey, we're national public radio. We're supposed to be nonpartisan. We're supposed to be down the middle. Now, look, I for one have serious doubts why the taxpayer should fund any radio station. I think there are plenty of for profit radio stations. I don't know why the government should coursively tax you to pay for yet another radio station. But I'll tell you what. Even if there's an argument they should do so for generic news that somehow there's not a market demand for, there is no argument I know of that they should do so only for left wing propaganda and the newly appointed CEO Catherine Marr has been a hard partisan her whole life. So, for example, in twenty twenty, Mar referred to President Donald Trump as a quote deranged racist sociopath. Well, then I'm confident her coverage of Donald Trump will be fair as long as she introduces him as a deranged, racist sociopath every time he's covered.

How do you even get that job? And I'm being serious, if you're National Public radio, how does that automatically disqualify you from that position as soon as they see that quote?

How do you even get that job? And I'm being serious, if you're National Public radio, how does that automatically disqualify you from that position as soon as they see that quote?

Yeah, and by the way, that's not an outlier. In twenty twenty one, she celebrated trump banishment from social media, referring to him as a fascist. So she loves censorship, Okay, the former president of the United States elected by the American people. I'm thrilled that he's being silenced because I dislike his politics and I think he's a fascist. In May of twenty twenty, right in the middle of the George Floyd riots, Mar suggested that looting represented a form of reparative justice for historic wrongs, and she remarked how white silence is tantamount to complicity and violence. She's also posted repeatedly in support of Democrat politicians including Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Joe Biden. Now listen, as a private citizen, she has a right to be an angry left wing radical and a hard Democrat partisan. But explain to me why on earth the American taxpayers should fund her partisan propaganda.

Yeah, and by the way, that's not an outlier. In twenty twenty one, she celebrated trump banishment from social media, referring to him as a fascist. So she loves censorship, Okay, the former president of the United States elected by the American people. I'm thrilled that he's being silenced because I dislike his politics and I think he's a fascist. In May of twenty twenty, right in the middle of the George Floyd riots, Mar suggested that looting represented a form of reparative justice for historic wrongs, and she remarked how white silence is tantamount to complicity and violence. She's also posted repeatedly in support of Democrat politicians including Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Joe Biden. Now listen, as a private citizen, she has a right to be an angry left wing radical and a hard Democrat partisan. But explain to me why on earth the American taxpayers should fund her partisan propaganda.

Yeah, and yet that's exactly why she probably got the job, because they're like, oh, perfect, You're going to keep pushing this propaganda out there full speed ahead. I want to ask all of you listening right now to do me a favor real quick. I want you to place your hand over your heart. If you can, can you feel that it's your heartbeat telling you that you are alive. It's the same for a preborn baby. Their heart begins to form at conception, and in just three weeks it is already beating. At five weeks, a baby's heartbeat can be heard on an ultrasound. And that is why I am proud to say that I'm partnering with Preborn, because we need to help those precious babies. Every day, Preborn's network of clinic rescues two hundred babies from abortion. Why because when a mother with an unplanned pregnancy meets her baby on ultrasound and here's their baby's heartbeat, it is a divine encounter that doubles a baby's chance at life. By six weeks, eyes are forming, by ten weeks, a baby's able to suck his or her own thumb. And for just twenty eight dollars, you can be the difference between life or death of that child. It is incredible because what Preborn does is they give the chance for a mother to hear the baby's heart beat. Now, all gifts are tax deductible. You can donate, and you can donate easily. Just dial pound two fifty and say the keyword baby. That's pound two fifty and say the keyword baby. You can donate securely at preborn dot com slash verdict as well. That's preborn dot com slash verdict. Senator, if you are at NPR, can you imagine if you are left the lefty how much freedom I think it would make you feel like you had to then go out there and continue to push propaganda on the American people. If this is your CEO, I mean it's a license to basically go all in on liberal propaganda at the taxpayer's expense.

Yeah, and yet that's exactly why she probably got the job, because they're like, oh, perfect, You're going to keep pushing this propaganda out there full speed ahead. I want to ask all of you listening right now to do me a favor real quick. I want you to place your hand over your heart. If you can, can you feel that it's your heartbeat telling you that you are alive. It's the same for a preborn baby. Their heart begins to form at conception, and in just three weeks it is already beating. At five weeks, a baby's heartbeat can be heard on an ultrasound. And that is why I am proud to say that I'm partnering with Preborn, because we need to help those precious babies. Every day, Preborn's network of clinic rescues two hundred babies from abortion. Why because when a mother with an unplanned pregnancy meets her baby on ultrasound and here's their baby's heartbeat, it is a divine encounter that doubles a baby's chance at life. By six weeks, eyes are forming, by ten weeks, a baby's able to suck his or her own thumb. And for just twenty eight dollars, you can be the difference between life or death of that child. It is incredible because what Preborn does is they give the chance for a mother to hear the baby's heart beat. Now, all gifts are tax deductible. You can donate, and you can donate easily. Just dial pound two fifty and say the keyword baby. That's pound two fifty and say the keyword baby. You can donate securely at preborn dot com slash verdict as well. That's preborn dot com slash verdict. Senator, if you are at NPR, can you imagine if you are left the lefty how much freedom I think it would make you feel like you had to then go out there and continue to push propaganda on the American people. If this is your CEO, I mean it's a license to basically go all in on liberal propaganda at the taxpayer's expense.

Now, that is exactly right. And I've got to say listen. As you know, I'm the ranking member on the Senate Committee of Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and part of my responsibility in that role, we've got jurisdiction over about forty percent of the US economy, and part of my responsibility is oversighted. I can tell you that I am actively engaging in oversight right now, calling on NPR to explain, to explain why they're willing to put in place a hard left wing activist, not a neutral journalist, but someone who is biased, who is who is an active supporter of sensorship, to violence, to silence the views she disagrees with. Why NPR believes that that is an appropriate leader for their institution.

Now, that is exactly right. And I've got to say listen. As you know, I'm the ranking member on the Senate Committee of Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and part of my responsibility in that role, we've got jurisdiction over about forty percent of the US economy, and part of my responsibility is oversighted. I can tell you that I am actively engaging in oversight right now, calling on NPR to explain, to explain why they're willing to put in place a hard left wing activist, not a neutral journalist, but someone who is biased, who is who is an active supporter of sensorship, to violence, to silence the views she disagrees with. Why NPR believes that that is an appropriate leader for their institution.

Yeah, that's a really great point.

Yeah, that's a really great point.

And listen, don't necessarily take our words for it. I want you to listen to Catherine Maher in her own words, because it's going to show just how radical she is. And I want to play a couple of clips. Let's start with her explaining that, in her view, the number one challenge that she faces is the First Amendment of the Constitution. Let's play that clip.

And listen, don't necessarily take our words for it. I want you to listen to Catherine Maher in her own words, because it's going to show just how radical she is. And I want to play a couple of clips. Let's start with her explaining that, in her view, the number one challenge that she faces is the First Amendment of the Constitution. Let's play that clip.

The number one challenge here that we see is, of course, the First Amendment in the United States is a fairly robust protection of rights, and that is a protection of rights both for platforms, which I actually think is very important that platforms have those rights to be able to regulate what kind of content they want on their sites, but it also means that it is a little bit tricky to really address some of the real challenges of where does bad information come from and sort of the influence peddlers who have made a real market economy around it.

The number one challenge here that we see is, of course, the First Amendment in the United States is a fairly robust protection of rights, and that is a protection of rights both for platforms, which I actually think is very important that platforms have those rights to be able to regulate what kind of content they want on their sites, but it also means that it is a little bit tricky to really address some of the real challenges of where does bad information come from and sort of the influence peddlers who have made a real market economy around it.

I mean, it's amazing center. This is the woman running MPR, and I guess this is almost like the best thing you can put on your resume, right, You're like, hey, I think the First Amendment's a real problem. It's like perfect, We'd love to hire you at MPR.

I mean, it's amazing center. This is the woman running MPR, and I guess this is almost like the best thing you can put on your resume, right, You're like, hey, I think the First Amendment's a real problem. It's like perfect, We'd love to hire you at MPR.

Yeah, And she actually says, well, the First Amendment is really important for platforms, but then what she describes as their First Amendment right is for their ability to censor and silence things they disagree with. So to her mind, what she cares about is the ability if there's a view that is right a center. As far as she's concerned, the First Amendment is all about silencing those views. There can be no dissent, all right. I want you to listen to another clip. This is a Ted talk where she's discussing truth when she was at Wikipedia, and somehow she has a different view of truth than I think you and I might have. Give a listen.

Yeah, And she actually says, well, the First Amendment is really important for platforms, but then what she describes as their First Amendment right is for their ability to censor and silence things they disagree with. So to her mind, what she cares about is the ability if there's a view that is right a center. As far as she's concerned, the First Amendment is all about silencing those views. There can be no dissent, all right. I want you to listen to another clip. This is a Ted talk where she's discussing truth when she was at Wikipedia, and somehow she has a different view of truth than I think you and I might have. Give a listen.

But the hard things, the places where we are prone to disagreement, say politics and religion, Well, as it turns out, not only does Wikipedia's model work there, it actually works really well because in our normal lives, these contentious conversations tend to rrupt or disagreement about what the truth actually is. But the people who write these articles, they're not focused on the truth. They're focused on something else, which is the best of what we can know right now. And after seven years of working with these brilliant folks, I've come to believe that they are onto something that perhaps, for our most tricky disagreements, seeking the truth and seeking to convince others of the truth might not be the right place to start. In fact, our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that's getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done. Now, that is not to say that the truth doesn't exist nor is it to say that the truth is and important. Clearly, the search for the truth has led us to do great things, to learn great things. But I think if I were to really ask you to think about this, one of the things that we could all acknowledge is that part of the reason we have such glorious chronicles to the human experience in all forms of culture is because we acknowledge there are many different truths. And so in the spirit of that, I'm certain that the truth exists for you and probably for the person sitting next to you, But this may not be the same truth. This is because the truth of the matter is very often for many people. What happens when we merge facts about the world with our beliefs about the world. So we all have different truths. They're based on things like where we come from, how we were raised, and how other people perceive us.

But the hard things, the places where we are prone to disagreement, say politics and religion, Well, as it turns out, not only does Wikipedia's model work there, it actually works really well because in our normal lives, these contentious conversations tend to rrupt or disagreement about what the truth actually is. But the people who write these articles, they're not focused on the truth. They're focused on something else, which is the best of what we can know right now. And after seven years of working with these brilliant folks, I've come to believe that they are onto something that perhaps, for our most tricky disagreements, seeking the truth and seeking to convince others of the truth might not be the right place to start. In fact, our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that's getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done. Now, that is not to say that the truth doesn't exist nor is it to say that the truth is and important. Clearly, the search for the truth has led us to do great things, to learn great things. But I think if I were to really ask you to think about this, one of the things that we could all acknowledge is that part of the reason we have such glorious chronicles to the human experience in all forms of culture is because we acknowledge there are many different truths. And so in the spirit of that, I'm certain that the truth exists for you and probably for the person sitting next to you, But this may not be the same truth. This is because the truth of the matter is very often for many people. What happens when we merge facts about the world with our beliefs about the world. So we all have different truths. They're based on things like where we come from, how we were raised, and how other people perceive us.

What utter garbage? Like every word of that. You want an indictment of the modern left. You want an indictment of the idiocy of media. You want an indictment of the academic world. You want an indictment of big tech. Good God, what utter garbage? Truth doesn't exist? George or Well is spinning in his grave and laughing at the same time. Two plus two doesn't equal four, it equals five because we say it is there is no truth. Listen to that quote. Our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that's getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done. But don't worry. This is only for things that don't matter, the contentious issues. What does she identify politics and religion? When it comes to politics and religion, look, Jesus Christ said, I am the way the truth in the life. But no, no, no, no, no, no no, don't have reverence for truth. We're not interested in that. We are interested in set aside of truth. That can be your truth, my truth. Everyone has a truth. Maybe for you, two plus two is five? What utter garbage?

What utter garbage? Like every word of that. You want an indictment of the modern left. You want an indictment of the idiocy of media. You want an indictment of the academic world. You want an indictment of big tech. Good God, what utter garbage? Truth doesn't exist? George or Well is spinning in his grave and laughing at the same time. Two plus two doesn't equal four, it equals five because we say it is there is no truth. Listen to that quote. Our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that's getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done. But don't worry. This is only for things that don't matter, the contentious issues. What does she identify politics and religion? When it comes to politics and religion, look, Jesus Christ said, I am the way the truth in the life. But no, no, no, no, no, no no, don't have reverence for truth. We're not interested in that. We are interested in set aside of truth. That can be your truth, my truth. Everyone has a truth. Maybe for you, two plus two is five? What utter garbage?

You know what?

You know what?

A journalist is supposed to be interested in the truth. Do you have perfect truth?

A journalist is supposed to be interested in the truth. Do you have perfect truth?

No?

No?

Do you have perfect knowledge? No? But you should get damn close to it. You should be trying to get to the truth. Remember what journalists used to learn? Who? What, when?

Do you have perfect knowledge? No? But you should get damn close to it. You should be trying to get to the truth. Remember what journalists used to learn? Who? What, when?

Where? How?

Where? How?

Why?

Why?

Like?

Like?

What happened? What are the facts? Well? No, no, no, not according to her. According to to her, there are no facts. There is no truth. It's your truth, it's my truth, and my truth from Catherine Marr's perspective is as a left wing partisan, whatever the orthodoxy is, and we will silence views that disagree. And the First Amendment is a pesky, pesky barrier. All right, I want to play one more clip. Yeah, one more clip where she's describing what she did at Wikipedia. Listen to this third clip.

What happened? What are the facts? Well? No, no, no, not according to her. According to to her, there are no facts. There is no truth. It's your truth, it's my truth, and my truth from Catherine Marr's perspective is as a left wing partisan, whatever the orthodoxy is, and we will silence views that disagree. And the First Amendment is a pesky, pesky barrier. All right, I want to play one more clip. Yeah, one more clip where she's describing what she did at Wikipedia. Listen to this third clip.

I started by talking about the idea of free and open as some of our founding principles sort of free and open source coming from me to the open source community. Well, I have come to the opinion and the perspective that free and open was a way of looking at the world that was inherently limited relative to what we were trying to achieve. Free and open has the best of intentionality, but in the end, what free and open often ended up doing, and particularly in the case of Wikipedia, was really recapitulating many of the same power structures and dynamics that exist offline prior to the advent of the Internet. And so what we ended up seeing was Wikipedia really rebuilt this idea of knowledge as a whole around what the Western canon. You see the exclusion of communities of languages because of the ways in which Wikipedia is based on reliable sources. The idea of a written tradition is something that is particular to many I mean not sorry, the idea of a written tradition which is particular to some cultures and not to others. The ways in which we I ascribe notability often really comes from sort of this white male, westernized construct around who matters in societies and who is elevated in whose voices, and so some of these ideas of sort of this radical openness really did not end up with the intention I really did not end up living into the intentionality of what openness can be.

I started by talking about the idea of free and open as some of our founding principles sort of free and open source coming from me to the open source community. Well, I have come to the opinion and the perspective that free and open was a way of looking at the world that was inherently limited relative to what we were trying to achieve. Free and open has the best of intentionality, but in the end, what free and open often ended up doing, and particularly in the case of Wikipedia, was really recapitulating many of the same power structures and dynamics that exist offline prior to the advent of the Internet. And so what we ended up seeing was Wikipedia really rebuilt this idea of knowledge as a whole around what the Western canon. You see the exclusion of communities of languages because of the ways in which Wikipedia is based on reliable sources. The idea of a written tradition is something that is particular to many I mean not sorry, the idea of a written tradition which is particular to some cultures and not to others. The ways in which we I ascribe notability often really comes from sort of this white male, westernized construct around who matters in societies and who is elevated in whose voices, and so some of these ideas of sort of this radical openness really did not end up with the intention I really did not end up living into the intentionality of what openness can be.

I mean, that just is brilliant right there, God bless so. Look she's explaining at Wikipedia, they deliberately abandon a quote free and open approach. By the way she's telling you what she's gonna do at NPR. NPR is not going to be free and open, according to her, because she doesn't believe in free and open. Why because free and open number one, she says, Well, that advantages cultures that believe in the written word. Because you know what good has book learning ever done anyone? Well, heck, you're forgetting those cultures that don't believe in that fancy learning stuff like what utter garbage. I'm sorry, I thought actually a journalistic outfit should actually reflect celebrate the best of education, of learning, of what we know. But she says, no, no, no, no. If it's actually free and open, will recapitulate a white male, westernized, westernized construct. Let me ask you something, Ben, what the hell does that mean? Seriously? Those are the words Marxist use, and typically the more syllables they use when they get polysyllabic, the less they're making any sense. So explain to me the phrase recapitulate a white male, westernized construct that does not end up living into the intentionality of what openness can mean. Those words have no content other than I want the power to silence things I don't like. Am I wrong?

I mean, that just is brilliant right there, God bless so. Look she's explaining at Wikipedia, they deliberately abandon a quote free and open approach. By the way she's telling you what she's gonna do at NPR. NPR is not going to be free and open, according to her, because she doesn't believe in free and open. Why because free and open number one, she says, Well, that advantages cultures that believe in the written word. Because you know what good has book learning ever done anyone? Well, heck, you're forgetting those cultures that don't believe in that fancy learning stuff like what utter garbage. I'm sorry, I thought actually a journalistic outfit should actually reflect celebrate the best of education, of learning, of what we know. But she says, no, no, no, no. If it's actually free and open, will recapitulate a white male, westernized, westernized construct. Let me ask you something, Ben, what the hell does that mean? Seriously? Those are the words Marxist use, and typically the more syllables they use when they get polysyllabic, the less they're making any sense. So explain to me the phrase recapitulate a white male, westernized construct that does not end up living into the intentionality of what openness can mean. Those words have no content other than I want the power to silence things I don't like. Am I wrong?

No, you're right. And my question goes back to this for you. It used to be at MPR and others they would at least fake it like their bias. Now it's just flat out open and they're doing it with our tax tours. Is there ever going to be a day of reckoning where MPR finds out, hey, good luck, do your own thing, because we're not going to pay for this proper again anymore.

No, you're right. And my question goes back to this for you. It used to be at MPR and others they would at least fake it like their bias. Now it's just flat out open and they're doing it with our tax tours. Is there ever going to be a day of reckoning where MPR finds out, hey, good luck, do your own thing, because we're not going to pay for this proper again anymore.

Look, if NPR cares at all about journalistic integrity, if they care at all about continuing to receive taxpayer funds, they should terminate Catherine Marr immediately. Her job should be done. They should not have a rabid left wing partisan who hates the First Amendment, who've used it as an inconvenience, who wants to censor conservatives, who is actively explicitly and unabashedly opposed to free and open communication, who doesn't believe in truth, who believes truth is an impediment to what she's doing. That is not a journalist in any way. She ought to go and join Emily's list, she ought to go and join the DNC. She gotta go run for Congress and become a henchman to Nancy Pelosi. She should not actually be running a news organization, especially not a news organization funded by the taxpayers. And if we have to be honest, if you had a Democrat who had a shred of integrity, they would say, of course, this is not appropriate for her to run NPR. The chances of that happening are zero, But I can tell you I'm going to be pushing for accountability and I'm going to be pushing for oversight of it because it is brazenly shameless for them to put someone so wildly unqualified in that position.

Look, if NPR cares at all about journalistic integrity, if they care at all about continuing to receive taxpayer funds, they should terminate Catherine Marr immediately. Her job should be done. They should not have a rabid left wing partisan who hates the First Amendment, who've used it as an inconvenience, who wants to censor conservatives, who is actively explicitly and unabashedly opposed to free and open communication, who doesn't believe in truth, who believes truth is an impediment to what she's doing. That is not a journalist in any way. She ought to go and join Emily's list, she ought to go and join the DNC. She gotta go run for Congress and become a henchman to Nancy Pelosi. She should not actually be running a news organization, especially not a news organization funded by the taxpayers. And if we have to be honest, if you had a Democrat who had a shred of integrity, they would say, of course, this is not appropriate for her to run NPR. The chances of that happening are zero, But I can tell you I'm going to be pushing for accountability and I'm going to be pushing for oversight of it because it is brazenly shameless for them to put someone so wildly unqualified in that position.

Don't forget. We do the show Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and a week in review on Saturdays. Hit that subscribe, follow or auto download button wherever you're listening to this podcast so you do not miss a episode. Also, on those in between days, download my podcast, The Ben Ferguson Podcasts, and I will keep you updated on the latest breaking news that is happening on those in between Days and the Senator, and I will see you back here on Saturday for a weekend review.

Don't forget. We do the show Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and a week in review on Saturdays. Hit that subscribe, follow or auto download button wherever you're listening to this podcast so you do not miss a episode. Also, on those in between days, download my podcast, The Ben Ferguson Podcasts, and I will keep you updated on the latest breaking news that is happening on those in between Days and the Senator, and I will see you back here on Saturday for a weekend review.