Big Tech’s Effect on Elections w/ Media Research Center’s Brent Bozell | PBD Podcast | Ep. 398
Patrick Bet-David and Vincent Oshana sit down with the founder of the Media Research Center, Brent Bozell.
Brent Bozell is a conservative commentator and media critic who founded the Media Research Center. He's known for speaking out against what he sees as liberal bias in the media. Bozell often appears on conservative media outlets and has written serval books on the subject.
00:00 - Show Open
01:06 - How Big Tech has interfered in U.S. elections 41 times in the past.
05:40 - How to hold big tech accountable
10:59 - How Big Tech has censored Robert F. Kennedy Jr and Tulsi Gabbard
12:44 - Patrick tests Google's censorship by searching different terms.
20:17 - How to combat Big Tech’s influence on the 2024 election
33:07 - Alvin Bragg threatens Donald Trump with jail for violating gag orders
Join "The Minnect League Championship" to win a night of dinner & cigars with Patrick Bet-David: https://bit.ly/4aMAar8
Purchase tickets to PBD Podcast LIVE! w/ Tulsi Gabbard on April 25th: https://bit.ly/3VmuaRm
Connect one-on-one with the right expert for you on Minnect: https://bit.ly/3MC9IXE
Connect with Patrick Bet-David on Minnect: https://bit.ly/3OoiGIC
Connect with Vincent Oshana on Minnect: https://bit.ly/47TFCXq
Connect with Rob Garguilo on Minnect: https://bit.ly/426IG0R
Purchase Patrick's new book "Choose Your Enemies Wisely": https://bit.ly/41bTtGD
Register to win a Valuetainment Boss Set (valued at over $350): https://bit.ly/41PrSLW
Get best-in-class business advice with Bet-David Consulting: https://bit.ly/40oUafz
Visit VT.com for the latest news and insights from the world of politics, business and entertainment: https://bit.ly/472R3Mz
Visit Valuetainment University for the best courses online for entrepreneurs: https://bit.ly/47gKVA0
Text “PODCAST” to 310-340-1132 to get the latest updates in real-time!
Get PBD's Intro Song "Sweet Victory" by R-Mean: https://bit.ly/3T6HPdY
SUBSCRIBE TO:
@VALUETAINMENT
@vtsoscast
@ValuetainmentComedy
@bizdocpodcast
@theunusualsuspectspodcast
Want to be clear on your next 5 business moves? https://bit.ly/3Qzrj3m
Join the channel to get exclusive access to perks: https://bit.ly/3Q9rSQL
Download the podcasts on all your favorite platforms https://bit.ly/3sFAW4N
Patrick Bet-David is the founder and CEO of Valuetainment Media. He is the author of the #1 Wall Street Journal Bestseller “Your Next Five Moves” (Simon & Schuster) and a father of 2 boys and 2 girls. He currently resides in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
Why would you clad on Goliath when we got fed David?
Value payment, giving values contagious.
This world of entrepreneurs, we can't no value to hate it.
I run, homie, look what I become.
I'm the one.
So our guest today is the founder of Media Research Center, which recently found a report that came out saying Google has interfered with elections 41 times over the last 16 years.
His organization did that.
He's the founder of it, prominent conservative writer, media critic, and political activist, known for his influential contributions to conservative thought and advocacy.
He's the nephew of the great founder of, I can say, first line, I can say National Review, William F. Buckley Jr.
I watch his content many, many times.
It's great to have you on, Brent Bozel on the podcast.
Thank you so much for having me.
Of course.
It's great to.
So tell me, how did you guys walk me through the research?
Because when I saw this article and I'm going through it, we're talking to it as a crew.
Media Research Center, your organization, reveals that Google has allegedly interfered in U.S. elections 41 times, 16 years, favoring left-wing candidates and censoring their opponents as outlined by the MRC Free Speech, America Vice President Dan Schneider and Editor Gabriela Presti.
All these things that you guys find out, what did you learn from it?
Well, you've got a real problem with big tech in that big tech is not playing by the same rules that the rest of the United States is playing by.
Anybody who is an American citizen has a right to participate in the election process, but only so far.
You can make a contribution.
You can only go so far.
Corporations can't be involved in political action at the federal level.
Yet you've got big tech that is picking winners and losers in elections.
And when they do it the way they're doing it, it becomes a very serious threat to democracy itself.
Let me explain that.
There was a study done by the Pew Center in 2011.
Now, it's a dated study, but the numbers are only going to be bigger than that, where they found that 7% of adults make their decision on who to vote for based on a Google search.
Wow.
7%.
So if you look at the 22 Senate races in the top 12 most contested races, you had where the Democrats and the Republicans were concerned, 87% of the Republicans were put at the bottom of the first page.
Now, what do you do when you're doing a Google search, when you're looking for something?
You have your answer within two or three people.
Now, you open up, you're looking to see what's the price of fried chicken, and you get a couple of prices, and you're done.
What Google did deliberately was to put the Republicans at the bottom of page one.
Or, in the case of seven of the 12 Republican candidates for the Senate in these most contested races, they put them on page two.
Less than 1% of the public ever goes to page two.
That's right.
So that's deliberate interference in a Senate campaign where you're keeping information from the public or burying it so far deep they'll never go looking for it.
The 7% then make their decision based on what they look for.
Google knows where it's going.
So then Google goes to Capitol Hill.
When they're hauled up, like Facebook is hauled up, Jack Dorsey was hauled up to Capitol Hill.
and raise your right hand and swear an oath to tell the truth and the whole truth, nothing but the truth, that sort of thing.
And they argue that they are not a publisher, they're a platform.
Now, why is that important?
Because if you're the Washington Post or if you're CNN or I suspect this podcast, and you say something that's defamatory, you will be held liable for what you say.
Think about the Covington kid.
This was several years ago, a right-to-life march.
And there was that high school kid standing in front of an Indian person.
And they just blasted him all over CNN, the Washington Post.
Everybody blasted him as somehow doing something that was racist or something or other.
Well, it turned out he was doing nothing.
This poor kid was just standing there.
Well, guess what?
There was a lawsuit against CNN, a lawsuit against the Washington Post.
The one with the Washington Post was settled with big smiles on the part of the plaintiffs.
However, anything that was on Facebook or Google, they couldn't be touched because they are officially platforms.
They're not publishers.
So anything that Google does, that puts on there, they just say it's not us.
It's the people who poo used us.
They're the ones who are responsible.
And that's been the protection that they've had.
Yet they are deliberately participating in the process.
So they should be held as accountable as the Washington Post or your podcast.
So how do you do that, though?
When you say Washington Post or the podcast or anybody, how do you hold them accountable?
You sue them.
You sue them.
If you defame me and you cause me damage, I have the right for legal redress.
And I can respond with a lawsuit.
It's not very easy to win against the media because you have to prove not just that I was defamed, but that I was deliberately defamed by you.
And it hurt me and it cost me.
In the case of the Covington kid, he was able to show all three things very clearly, which is why he won his case.
But again, if you're a big tech company and you've been able to get away with declaring yourself a platform, Wikipedia, Wikipedia says the nastiest things about people and it allows the nastiest things to be said about people.
And I've seen just really scurrilous stuff.
Wikipedia can't be touched.
They say, we're just the platform.
People put their stuff on there, but we're not responsible for taking it off.
So Brent, but for Google, it's a search engine.
It's a publicly traded company, correct?
So their attitude is basically, hey, listen, buy your own.
Like, remember, well, make your own, just like with X. Everybody, I'm sorry, formerly known as Twitter.
Everybody that I knew that's from the left, everybody from California, all the liberals are like, hey, if you don't like it, buy your own or make your own.
And that's what obviously Elon Musk did.
So what do you say to the people that are just like, you know, start your own?
I know, what do we have?
A Rob DuckDuckGo.
There's Bing, there's other search platforms.
I could see that, but what do you say to people that are like, well, then start a new one and you do your own searches?
Well, theoretically, that's right.
But Google is so big and so powerful.
You really have to start thinking about monopolies.
Bing, as an example, Bing is Microsoft.
Microsoft spent hundreds of millions of dollars challenging Google.
And they got a whopping 2% of the market.
Google has 92% of the market worldwide.
And they're sitting on billions of dollars in cash.
YouTube posed a bit of a threat.
They gobbled them, just like Facebook gobbled Instagram.
You can't compete against these guys.
They're just too powerful worldwide.
When these rules are made by big tech, when big tech decides to censor you based on something they don't like, for example, abortion.
They have a very, very stern position on abortion, and it ain't per life.
When you have that kind of policy, it's not just in the United States of America.
It's worldwide where these policies, unless you're China and say, no, I want to let you in.
But any country that invites them in is also inviting in that censorship.
And here's the interesting thing.
The United States is the only country on the face of this globe where free speech is a right, that is an inherent right only in the United States.
So the censorship that takes place outside of the United States, I pity those people because there's really nothing they can do about it.
Brent, these 41 times that they interfered in the elections, you have some of the cases, some of the stories, some of the case studies.
I saw Tulsa Yabbard was on the list.
I saw Hillary Obama, McCain.
I saw a bunch of lists.
Well, there were two Democrats and 39 Republicans that were the presidential candidates.
The 39 Republicans just spanned the gambit.
But an example, Rick Santorum.
There was a smear bomb put out on Rick Santorum.
It was really, really ugly.
It was vicious in the personal attack on him.
I mean, I won't repeat it because it does him a personal disservice.
He went to Google and he said, you know, this is what's happened to me.
They didn't take it down.
They kept it up there.
The only time the Democrats have been censored, one was RFK and the other one was Hillary Clinton.
Interestingly enough, when she was challenging Barack Obama, they picked winners and losers in that.
And they loved Hillary Clinton in 2016.
They didn't love her when she ran in 2008, I guess it was, against Obama.
Obama was their guy, and that's who they wanted, so they censored her.
Same thing with RFK Jr.
You know, they might like him.
They censored Jr. for the same reason they censored you, because you said something about COVID on your show.
Bam!
How dare they?
How dare they do that?
Why can't you have a conversation about COVID?
My wife and I have great conversations about COVID.
We don't see eye to eye on it.
You know, half my family doesn't see eye to eye on that.
Why can't you have that conversation?
Why do you censor somebody for just simply raising questions?
It is effective, though.
It is very effective because when you think, with the RFK, when did they censor him?
They're censoring him like recently or how long ago?
Oh, they're censoring him now, but they censor, I guess last year, was it this year?
I'm not entirely sure, but they did send, and it was over COVID.
It was over COVID.
Oh, yeah, because especially when big pharma's involved, obviously, I mean, still to this day, I got in trouble a month ago, I think.
I said the V-word, which nothing, by the way, and they're not even censoring just regular people with dialogue.
They're censoring the doctors that basically started the MRN vaccine.
They silenced them because they're messing with their money and big pharma's obviously in control and they're in the pockets of big pharma.
Yeah, you know, once upon a time, I used to think those are conspiracy theories, but they're really not.
They're really not.
Here's the reality of Washington, D.C.
The Chamber of Commerce really runs things in that town.
When you've got a $6 trillion economy, someone's getting that money.
It ain't going all to welfare checks.
It's going to someone who's going to a corporation that's going to administer that number.
It's going to Defense Department.
It's going for one-seventh of it, it's going for national health care today.
Well, that's being administered by healthcare companies.
So it's in their vested interest that you have business as usual in Washington, D.C.
And they like it very much because they're making billions upon billions of dollars making their pharmaceuticals.
So if you question one of their pharmaceuticals, their idea is to shut you down.
Twitter was shutting people down.
Facebook is still shutting people down.
We've got a study.
I don't want to give the numbers away yet, but we have a study coming out on Facebook and it's going to show a similar thing with election interference.
Yeah, no, Rob, can you do me a favor?
Go on Google real quick.
Go on Google and type in Trump or Biden 2024.
Okay.
And zoom in a little bit so we can see the titles and keep scrolling down.
So we're so far on page one, right?
New York Times 30, 53, 538, keep going.
New York Times, The Economist, AP News, all left so far.
Hill left, keep going.
CNN left, BBC left, AP News left, Reuters left, Washington Post left.
Zoom in and let's go down again and let's see where what we see.
So again, USA Today Newsweek, Political National Review, left, left, left.
Economist left, New York Times, left, CNN, left, Newsweek left, keep going.
AP News, Political, NBC News, Washington.
Keep going.
So I'm not getting a single poll from the right.
Keep going, There's five of the same.
Keep going, keep going, keep going, keep going.
Nothing.
Keep going, keep going.
Yeah.
Keep going.
We're on page two now.
Nobody makes it to page three.
Keep going.
Keep going.
Unbelievable.
By the way, there's not a single link they're showing of Fox at all, by the way.
Not a single one from Fox.
Still going.
From nothing.
We're on page five now.
Business Insider, Business Today, none.
One of the top polling firms in the country is McLaughlin and Associates.
They do Trump's polling, but they do all sorts of polling.
And they've been around for 40 years.
I've known John McLaughlin.
He's one of the best pollsters in America.
You haven't seen his name?
I haven't seen him at all.
That is wild.
We're on page eight now.
Fox has not showed up a single link so far.
Al Jazeera made it.
Keep going.
Al Jazeera.
Google made it.
Al Jazeera.
Now, by the way, we're about to go to page 10.
Forbes.
Forbes is not left.
Keep going.
So now it's all Google's.
And they still haven't shown one link so far from Fox.
LA Times.
By the way, not one in 10 pages.
And the basic search we just did right now was what?
Polls.
2024.
2024 polls.
Look at him.
After 11 pages, not one link was given by Fox News.
So validate some of that.
Now, why are they worried about Tulsi Gabbard?
What was their fear with Tulsi?
Is this the Hillary Clinton Tulsi deal?
Yeah, I mean, I mean, Tulsi, you know, for, had a following, and Tulsi posed a threat, maybe minuscule, but it was a threat nonetheless.
And they will target anything that gets in the way.
How bad was it that Senator Marshall Blackburn had a commercial where she said she was right to life and it got censored?
How dare they not allow her? to tell her constituents where she stands.
You'd think that Google would celebrate that.
And by the way, you know what is really annoying about that company?
When was the last time you called them and spoke to a person?
You can't talk to anybody.
There's no way of reaching them.
They put out a statement when we came out with that study.
They put out a statement where they said, well, these are old numbers that have been debunked.
Well, A, they're not old.
And B, they've not been debunked.
And so we sent a letter to the president of Google, just show, debunk one.
We'll take one debunk.
They didn't debunk a single one.
They can't because it's factually accurate.
So they're not accounted.
They simply believe they're above the rules, that you have to play it, and I have to play it.
Rob, the link I sent you for where people advertise, where people give their money to left or the right.
Can you pull that link up?
I gave it to you earlier.
And it's the second one.
I think it's the Axios yellow link that I sent to you that shows where at the top was Netflix, what percentage of their executives give the money to the left versus the right.
When you pull this up, one of the most interesting things was seeing which company gave more to the right than the left.
It was somebody I wouldn't have expected at all.
Rob, did you find it or are you still looking for it?
So check this out.
So this article came out.
And to be fair, they right there.
That's the one.
There you go.
So this says tech employees are much like, much more liberal than their employers, employees, more than their employers, at least as far as the candidates they support.
So now watch this.
Go lower.
This is what you see.
Keep going.
This is from Open Secrets that they showed this data.
Employee donation for midterms candidates by party.
Look at Netflix.
Wow.
Pretty much 100% is elected.
By the way, that's like, I want to know who the 0.4% is.
And I want to know how they still have a job.
They're hiding.
Yeah.
Look at Twitter, 98.7%.
Then you got Airbnb.
Zoom in a little bit, Rob, 97.8.
Then you got Apple, Stripe Lyft, Google Alphabet, Salesforce.
Facebook is 94.5%.
Even Tesla, 93.9.
eBay, PayPal, Microsoft, Amazon, Uber, Hewlett-Packard, all the way at the bottom, Oracle, okay, and Intel.
See, Larry Ellison's got a little bit of influence on people.
Close that up and keep going lower.
Keep going lower to the next one.
This one is what?
Company pack donations to midterm candidates.
Company.
Tesla, 20% conservative, 80% left.
This is the company.
Hewlet Packard, 57.42.
Salesforce, Facebook.
Facebook is 50-50.
Google, 51.49.
Go lower, look all the way at the bottom.
PayPal.
Interesting, right?
62% PayPal was going for conservative, 38% was going for, were you aware of that, that PayPal is that much on one side and the other?
Well, when it comes to corporate contributions, to me, it doesn't mean much.
Because they're playing.
They're playing the middle.
Look at what was in.
Which one was that?
Google was 51.49.
50-50.
That's the game that they're playing.
They want to have good relations with both sides, Republicans and Democrats.
So the PAC money will go 50-50 by design.
But it's not just the big tech.
Big oil does the exact same thing.
That's the game that's played.
Now, in recent years, Democrats have been far more effective than Republicans at getting corporate contributions.
And I think it is because Democrats can promise more.
They've got bigger budgets and they say to Exxon, we can get you bigger subsidies.
You know, I've asked the question: why isn't big oil standing up to the Biden administration who's trying to shut down the whole industry?
Why?
Because they're getting massive subsidies for electric vehicles to develop that technology.
The last thing they want to do is lose that money.
So what do they do?
They make contributions to the same administration that is out to destroy their business.
Okay, so now let's talk 2024.
2020, whatever they did, they won, right?
The left won.
Whether it was not allowing that story from New York Post on Twitter to go viral, they took it down.
Whether it was Twitter files, we haven't seen Google files yet.
We haven't seen YouTube files yet.
We haven't seen Facebook files yet.
The only files that we know is the Twitter files, right?
Okay.
That was the gamification they used for 2020.
What do you think they're going to do for 2024?
Because they're not just going to let anybody come in and just, hey, hand it over to Trump.
They're not going to do that.
What are some areas you're looking at that if you were to think about strategy and you think like they are, what do you think they're going to be doing?
Well, let's go back a little bit to 2008.
Obama was brilliant as a political strategist.
He had a strategy that said, my followers may be in the minority, and I don't mean black, I mean just numerically, in the minority.
But if I could mobilize them more effectively than these people on the Republicans who numerically outnumber me, but they're just bored and stayed at home.
If I can do that, I could win the election.
He did it through Facebook, which was something that the Republicans had never even heard of.
In 2012, he doubled down.
I think he spent $100 million or something in advertising alone.
But he doubled down on Facebook.
On election day, he was turning out all of his supporters.
Mitt Romney was selling baseball caps for $25 a piece.
I mean, they had no understanding of the power of Facebook.
In 2016, Trump did it, but he did it through Twitter.
He chose the Twitter platform.
In 2020, it was the consensus will never let this guy do it again.
So they shut him down on Twitter.
They shut him down on Facebook.
Then they wouldn't allow the issues that were being raised.
They shut down the issues that were being raised.
Now, as a result of that, there was a big kerfuffle.
And along comes Elon Musk, and he uncovers what was going on with the Russian collusion story and finds the evidence that, yes, they censored it.
Mark Zuckerberg, to his credit, came forward, held a press conference, and announced we did it too.
And we did it because the Justice Department came to us and they said it was all, I mean, it was the Hunter Biden story.
That's what we're talking about.
They said it's all Russian collusion.
And that because of the Justice Department, they shut it down, which is just dangerous stuff going on here.
Now, 2024 is in front of us.
What's going to happen?
I think Elon Musk is absolutely committed to an open form of ideas.
But the problem is, his staff isn't.
When the shadow banning was uncovered, where they were going to conservative Republicans and shutting them down, that was at the staff level.
That wasn't Jack Dorsey at the corporate level doing that.
That was at the staff level where they had that power.
In recent years, and one of the findings we're going to, I'll tell you one of the findings of our Facebook study on your show.
Three times Mark Zuckerberg has made public pronouncements about the intention of Facebook to become to be an open platform of ideas.
Three times the censorship went up.
That was the consequence from his own staff.
They increased the censorship.
It's this that they're doing to the boss.
Now, so what's going to happen with Google?
Google, I think, is going to double and triple down on this presidential campaign.
And Google's the most powerful of them all.
So that's a real problem.
As to the other ones, I suspect that Mark Zuckerberg does want it.
Now, Facebook is doing something interesting.
They have pushed out the news business.
They don't want the news business on their platforms.
They've got, you know, they want trading photographs of your family.
And they've done it to the left and they've done it to the right.
They've been very fair about pushing all news contents out.
And it's put some companies out of business as a result.
Now they're focusing on politics.
They're going even further.
So I don't know how much they're going to play in this election campaign.
So Brett, I mean, Zuckerberg gave, what, $400 million in 2020?
And it was specifically for having people work on the election.
Totally for the left.
I mean, we all know where he stands.
Where'd he go?
Harvard?
Harvard?
As we've seen, what's up, Harvard?
Harvard dropout.
But I think, Brett, where Pat is going is more of, I mean, 2020, what a great timing for them for COVID to come out of this place, out of this lab.
Do you feel anything like, I mean, with the votes, I think they're playing a long game.
They already set up their pieces with, because Elon Musk, as we're talking about, one of the biggest things he's been talking about for the past six months is the illegal open border coming in all these votes.
We did a study.
How many states?
Oh, PBD don't require your ID, no photo ID?
16, I believe it's 16 out of all these states, Brett.
They don't even need photo IDs.
Some of these places, I think the major three swing states, all you need is your social security number because they made it to where, if you're coming and you're working, and that's why the left is pushing it.
Do you think that that's one of the main things?
Because I mean, Elon, that's one of Elon's main things.
Do you think that that's one of their bigger tactics?
Not only has the Biden administration opened the borders, you know, Trump closed it for the most part, and it was almost closed.
And by closed, it means that you follow the law.
That's all it means is you follow the law to come into this country.
So Biden opened them all up.
And then Mayorkas looked right in the camera to the United States and said there's no problem.
And Biden appointed Kamala to be the borders.
She never even went.
She still hasn't.
No, and she said, everything's fine.
They know what's happening down there and they like it.
Look what the Republicans came up with with their voting rights bill, which was just vilified by the left.
The media said it was all going to restrict elections and it was all to keep people from voting.
There were only two things that the Republicans were pushing.
How is this for radical?
Signature verification and photo ID.
Racist.
So racist.
So just those two things.
And those things have got something like an 89% support.
I can't believe 11% of America would be against it.
But almost 100% support.
It's just the simplest thing in the world.
They don't want that.
They don't want that because they want illegal aliens.
You can't even say illegal aliens.
No.
You're not allowed to.
What was it called, Rob?
What were they called?
Undocumented.
Enrichers.
No, was it?
Cultural enrichers.
Cultural enrichers.
I love that one.
Or undocumented, right?
Undocumented.
Undocumented citizens.
Nancy Pelosi hates that.
And even the word migrant is wrong because they're not migrants, they're immigrants.
The difference being a migrant goes from one part of a country to another part of the country.
An immigrant comes from one country and goes to another.
That's a very good point.
There's a difference between a migrant crisis or an immigrant crisis, right?
Last but not least, before we wrap up, so at the beginning in 2016, I think you were a Ted Cruz guy.
You were not a Trump person.
You made some comments about Trump and then you flipped and you supported Trump.
Where do you stand now with Trump and him being the candidate 2024 and his chances of winning?
I think, you know, every year when you're doing your fundraising, you tell your supporters that, by God, this is an existential year.
I think 2024 is an existential year.
It's going to be one of two things.
You know, it's the first time in modern history where the American people have a choice between two candidates, both of whom have been presidents and both of whom have presidential records.
I just looked at, can I go through some number of people?
Yeah, for sure.
If I were Donald Trump running today, I would say, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to give you some numbers.
And I'm just going to tell you that gasoline prices were $2.42 when I left office.
As of March, they're $3.54.
They've gone up 46%.
Joe Biden has said on national television that prices, he's brought prices down from under where they were with Donald Trump.
So either Joe Biden is see now or he's lying through his teeth.
Okay, inflation.
Just recently, Biden said he had curbed quote-unquote rampant inflation from Donald Trump.
The average inflation for Trump was 1.9%.
The average inflation for Biden is 5.5%.
When he took office, it was 1.4% thanks to Donald Trump.
Prices have gone up.
Under Trump in 48 months, they went up 7.8%.
Under Biden, in 38 months, they went up 18.9%.
Mortgage rates, when Donald Trump took office, it was at 4.1%.
When he left, it was at 2.8.
That's what Biden assumed.
Today, it's 6.8.
It's gone up 146%.
On and on the numbers go.
If I were Donald Trump, I would say when I was president, there wasn't a single war anywhere on the face of this earth.
There could have been all sorts of problems, but nobody was doing anything.
Today, there are wars and the possibility of wars of a world war, all going on all over the world.
When I was president, you could go on the streets of America.
Today, you can't go in Washington, D.C.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to go play golf at my golf courses.
I'll be back on election day, talk among yourselves, and America, you decide who you want to be president.
That's right.
They're the two records.
Now, so where did I stand?
I was a cruz guy.
I was a cruise guy because Cruz was a Reaganite.
Donald Trump had had his whole career was supporting liberal Democrats, like Hillary Clinton.
That was the facts of life.
And so I supported Cruz.
Donald Trump didn't like that.
I got one of those patented Donald Trump tweets.
That's fine.
And I did support him.
And I do support him.
And I think that I don't care what you say about his personality.
His record is all that matters.
And it was a sterling record.
And we need him more than ever to go back to what he did before.
He doesn't need to do any more than what he did before.
Just do Act Two.
What I don't want is Obama 4.0.
And that's what we're getting is Obama 4.0.
Biden's not controlling anything.
It's the Obama team that's controlling everything.
It's very obvious, and everybody knows it.
But I still think everybody has to be ready.
Right now, it's what, April 16th today?
We got how many more months left?
Six and a half months, give or take, 29 weeks, 30 weeks to election.
How crazy do you think this year's October surprise are going to be?
It's going to be whatever they need it to be.
Look what's going on with these trials.
Donald Trump was just convicted in New York of a crime where there was no victim and nobody accusing him.
Right now, he's being charged.
He's in court on a case where they're using federal statutes, yet both the Justice Department and the SEC said there's no there.
So the federal government has said there's no there.
So you've got a Democrat DA who ran a campaign platform that said, I'm going to get Donald Trump.
And he's the darling of the far left getting Donald Trump.
So they're going to try everything they can, including putting this man in prison if they have to before the elections.
It's an unthinkable proposition, what's happening in this country.
But yeah, they're not going to take any prisoners.
You saw Bragg Fowl's motion to hold Trump in contempt for alleged gag order, violation, threatens 30 days of jail time?
Yeah.
Yeah.
And because Donald Trump wants to threaten this just happened right now.
Because Donald Trump wants to respond to scurrilous attacks against him coming from the left.
He has a right to do that.
Yeah.
But I mean, as it's like the average, the average American that's following all this, Brent, is slow.
Because trust me, I'm in this camp, not only just fed up and tired, I have lost all faith in any, because we talk about, you know, once in a while, me and Adam, another calls, we're talking about the courts or, and he's like, what do you mean?
You mean the institution that I go, listen, if they could do this in New York, imagine what they're going to do anywhere else to anybody that's lesser than the ex-president of the United States.
It angers me at the same time.
It's like, I don't trust, it makes the trust for the system even lesser than it was the day before.
And it's not getting better because we're seeing it live.
Everybody knows, but nobody can really say anything because everybody's like, well, you know, because the left loves it.
The left is like, you know, the Stormy Daniels, the hush money, the, you know, they actually believe that this place is worth $15 million.
$18 million.
I'm sorry.
They couldn't win.
They can't win the war of public opinion.
With what I just gave you, if the conversation had to do with the issues, the issues that the American people care about, and I just gave you those issues, they don't care about climate change.
They don't care about abortion.
They care about these pocketbook issues.
If you had a conversation about that, and I can tell you, these issues are being completely, we've been talking about big tech, but don't let the media, the news media, off the hook on this.
They're doing the kabosh on anything that will give, you know, they did throughout Trump's administration.
Think about this for a second.
The coverage of Trump was 90.5% negative for four years.
It's already started.
It's already at 90%.
So what does it do when it's 90.5%?
It's 90.5% attacks on you, but it only allows for 9.5% to tell your successes.
So his stories were never being told.
How many people know that Donald Trump was recommended for three Nobel Peace Prizes?
Yeah.
Not us.
No, no, they're just going to be able to do it.
I want to show you two clips.
Can you play this clip, one clip, and we'll wrap up?
Go ahead, Rob.
Watch this.
1031, we got some news from inside the courtroom.
Apparently, the district attorney's office has filed a written motion.
So they have made it official to try and hold Donald Trump in contempt for violating the gag order that was put onto him by the judge.
Well, I guess there were three allegations that the state made yesterday.
And if he is, if the allegations hold up, Trump would be fined $1,000 for each violation.
That's right.
1031.
I can't imagine $1,000.
$100,000.
No problem.
I'll pay $100, Katie.
So it's all PR.
It's all PR.
Yeah.
But they're doing it, but they're doing it.
And by the way, today, Bill Maher put the interview out with him and Katie Couric.
And did you hear what she said about MAGA?
No.
You got to go ahead and watch this.
Did you see this already?
I think this is very interesting.
Watch this.
Go forward.
And I feel like, to your point, Bill, the socioeconomic disparities are a lot, and class resentment is a lot what, and anti-intellectualism and elitism is what is driving many of these anti-establishment, which are Trump voters or anti-establishment.
So I think that is a huge problem that we have to address.
I mean, globalization and the transition from an industrial to a technological society.
I mean, and I don't know if you've ever been jealous of what someone else has or resentful.
It is such a corroding and bitter almost violence.
She's stoned.
You are.
She's definitely stoned.
She's in the basement.
She's high.
You know what she's saying?
Anybody that's a Trump voter is anti-intellectual.
In other words, you are dumb, is what she called you.
And deplorable.
You are deplorable.
But look what you don't get much more elitist than what you do.
That man.
For fascists.
And by the way, the idea of class resentment, that's been a signature of the far left since the beginning of time.
That's not been the conservative MAGA position.
That's been Katie Couric's position and her side the whole time.
So she's somewhere between uber elitist and downright stupid in that comment.
Well, that's where she is.
And we applaud her for it because that's the position she chooses to take.
And the educational system worked good on her to get her for her entire life.
How long have they had her?
50 years?
I don't know how old she is.
Anyways, Brent, it's great to have you on.
Thank you so much for giving us insight on this research that you did with the great organization of MRC.
Rob, let's put the link below to the article as well as their website, MRC, so the audience can go check them out.
