Politics Video Transcript
Welcome to Truly Right View Politics
Let The Truth Be Told!
Are you ready to hear the real truth unfiltered by bias media or government intervention?
Subscribe to the Truly Right View YouTube Channel
Subscribe to the Truly Right View Rumble Channel
Trump has officially announced the creation of Doge now that’s the department of government efficiency and guess who’s going to be running it well Elon Musk because a lot of people suspected he would be but also V ramaswami now let me know your thoughts I’m curious what you all think of this but let’s dive into it look musk and ramas Swami going to be leading this new Department this is the Department of government efficiency the acronym there is do which is kind of like um it’s kind of a reference of course to Elon musk’s cryptocurrency Dogecoin uh but of course Elon Musk has that type of humor right uh doge is now here it’s official it’s actually happening now president president-elect Donald Trump issued an announcement on this yesterday night uh tapping Elon Musk and VI ramaswami to lead this newly proposed department and Doge as the name will suggest it’s going to be focused primarily on red reducing waste cutting government excess excessive regulation improving government efficiency in the whole nine yards and probably firing a lot of people uh let me show you Trump’s announcement on this this is the official announcement Trump said I am pleased to announce that the great Elon Musk working in conjunction with American Patriot V ramaswami will lead the department of government efficiency Doge together these two wonderful Americans will pave the way for my Administration to dismantle government bureaucracy slash excess regulations cut wasteful expenditures and restructure federal agencies restructure them he says That’s essential to the save America movement and he has a quote here from Elon Musk he says quote this will send shock waves through the system and anyone involved in government waste which is a lot of people stated Mr musk now remember musk is saying that he believes at the very least he can cut $2 trillion in government spending and that would actually put us over what they overspend uh meaning of course that America will stop going into debt uh even more so if they manage to reduce uh the size of the government which I’m going to go into as well because Trump has a huge announcement on that now Trump also suggested his statement uh you know in his statement that the Department would create an entrepreneurial approach to government never seen before and would send shock waves throughout Washington they want to basically restructure Washington watch my episode from yesterday if you want to learn more about that but they said in the announcement also that Doge will provide advice and guidance from outside the government suggesting of course it’s not clear whether this is going to be like officially part of the government or more of an advisory role based on the wording it seems more of an advisory role he says will partner on this with the White House and Office of Management and budget suggesting that Trump may also have a direct role in this as well through the White House they note as well the work with Doge will conclude no later than July 4th 2026 2 years from now on Independence Day uh the new Independence Day apparently now these Doge appointments also Come As Trump has also announced a slate of other picks and then includes South Dakota governor uh Christy NM to lead the US Department of Homeland Security former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe for director of the Central Intelligence Agency who’s been very strong actually against uh you know what he views as like government corruption and such uh representative Mike Waltz from Florida who is a vocal critic of communist China as National Security adviser that’s a huge shot over the bow for the CCP as well as army combat veteran and longtime Fox News host Pete Heth as Secretary of Defense now many of these picks they still need to go through Senate confirmation hearings Trump Now controls both the house or the rep Republicans control both the house and the Senate but again the Senate’s the one important for this uh we can see the type of cabinet Trump is looking to put together though with these types of picks and so again we will see folks now in other news the United States will be continuing back in controversial uh cyber crime treaty things under the United Nations there’s something very big going on at the United Nations right now basically there’s an international agreement the US is suggesting it will join it under the Biden Administration I have not yet seen Trump talking about this but the international agreement they’re saying could help regulate cyber crime it could go after things like making you know child pornography like illegally illegal global believe it could go after hackers and that whole nine yards but critics are also concerned it could open the door for other countries for surveillance of Americans and potentially undermine even basic rights like freedom of speech now look the draft of the cyber crime resolution was approved during a meeting on Monday this week and it’s going to head to a vote in the general assembly next month the United States has been defending its decision to continue backing this controversial treaty the US seems to be on board with it let me explain now this is next gub they say the United States will continue remaining in consensus with a forthcoming United Nations cyber crime treaty but it won’t formally Greenlight the convention until it sees adequate implementation of Human Rights controls by other countries endorsing it senior Administration officials said on Sunday now notes as well a senior Administration official speaking on condition of anonymity under the White House president press guidelines keep in mind this is the Biden White House said that us support for the treaty is more likely to promote a rights respecting approach to its implementation But ultimately the US is unlikely to formally ratify the treaty unless it sees other invol others involved uh in Nations implementing human rights safeguards meaning the US is basically part of the negotiations the US is defending some basic rights as part of those negotiations but unless unless it aligns with us standards the US Pride will not sign it uh but they are being continually part of those conversations now the United States mission to the United Nations they also released an explanation and the explanation actually notes some of the concerns over the treaty here’s what it says this is the official report they say concerns we have heard include but are not limited to potential human rights abuses includ cluding acts of transnational repression such as those involving extr territorial surveillance and targeting of Human Rights Defenders meaning of course if you’re critical of the Chinese Communist party or of Russia or of any country on Earth those countries may have the ability to surveil you in the United States if it were to be passed today in fact they could even gain access to your electronic devices based on current language it notes this is also the target tared harassment of tech company employees and goodfaith cyber security researchers potential abuse of e evidence that’s electronic evidence requests meaning they could demand access to your documents or files the undermining of systems that protect the privacy and security of users around the world and incentives to expand surveillance laws and Technical capabilities for surveillance without accompanying domestic safeguards or strong rule of law protections meaning this would be international law that would you know be under the banner of fighting cyber crime the problem is different countries Define cyber crime differently in America if you’re talking about cyber crime what are you talking about you’re talking about hackers breaching your network and stealing documents and things like that when we talk about cyber crime in America it’s people again you know hacking breaching machines breaking stuff that type of thing if you go to Europe cyber crime is hate speech right that’s cyber crime if you say something offensive on the internet that could be considered cyber crime because it’s crime committed on the internet if you go to China just about anything could be cyber crime any kind of crime against the Chinese Communist Party criticizing it believing in democracy supporting religion that could be cyber crime and the issue is if you have an international treaty on this it expands those crimes globally everywhere in the world would be held to them that is a sign a signatory on this the United States as part of its involvement is trying to stop some of those things from being implemented and that’s the nature of the involvement right now now interestingly it’s actually a group of six Democrat Senators who’ve been at the Forefront of trying to stop this they are warning or at least you know stop the bad parts of it right they are warning about potential rights violations in the United States treaty this is an open letter from the Senators these are Ron weiden tin Kane uh Chris Van Holland Edward Mary Jeffrey Merkley and Corey Booker from October 29th just recently this is their open letter they say we write to express serious concern about the recently finalized United Nations convention against cyber crime and they not this is the convention right which will soon receive a vote in the UN General Assembly under un they say we fear the the convention will legitimize efforts by authoritarian countries like Russia and China to censor and surveil internet users furthering repression and human rights abuses around the world and they say that while the executive Branch’s efforts that’s the White House of course to steer this treaty in a less harmful direction or commendable more must be done to keep the convention from being used to justify such actions again the concern is that this convention could basically create a legal safeguard for Global surveillance for Global suppression of free speech and that type of thing and again it’s actually six Democrat Senators at the Forefront of warning about many of the parts of it that could support that now one of the biggest issues being brought up against this cyber crime convention though is its inclusion of Russia and China since 2001 Global efforts to counter cyber crime has been largely you know until the Council of Europe’s Budapest convention to which the United States and 75 other countries are a party to since that was created basically according to this and interestingly now right uh the open letter from the Democrat Senators notes the convention uh notes the context of why this is a big issue this is their open letter again they say since 2001 transnational efforts to fight cyber crime have been governed largely by The Budapest convention neither Russia nor China is a signatory to the bud Budapest convention and Russia has long sought to supplant The Budapest convention with a new framework that the Russian regime could more easily influence in 2017 Russia proposed a draft Convention as an alternative to The Budapest convention and in 2019 the UN voted to advance the Russian draft resolution with the support of Russia China North Korea bellarus Syria and Venezuela among others they knowe at the time the United States and key allies urged opposition to the resolution with one European official declaring quote the big picture is that Russia and China are seeking to establish a set of global Norms that support their view of how the internet and information should be controlled and look of course it’s also very possible that even if the United States does join the United Nations cyber treaty the incoming Trump Administration could also just pull out from it that’s a very possible case the other side is uh if if it’s a depending on how they word it if it’s a treaty International treaties need a 2third vote from Congress to pass the White House cannot just sign on to it right legally the issue is sometimes they get around that by not calling it a treaty they might call it a global convention uh they might call it a global agreement not not a treaty uh that was a shift we actually saw during the Obama Administration when the US is joining things like the Paris climate Accord technically that is a global treaty that would under normal circumstances require a 2third vote from Congress but they don’t call it a treaty they call it an accord now regardless uh regardless of whether this stays or not regardless of whether it’s passed look the inauguration is coming up soon I doubt Trump will keep us in it he’s saying he’s going to pull us out of the Paris climate Accord also right now right uh but if if it is the case that the US is involved with this basically the involvement at this stage would just be to establish some of the rules at the beginning for when it is implemented then you know leave after although we’ll see and so some would argue that maybe it is this is kind of the White House argument saying it is useful for us to be part of the conversations so that the United States can try to steer it into a better Direction that’s the argument for it now look with that in context though president-elect Donald Trump is suggesting he’s going to try to mostly end government censorship in its entirety and he may Target even news agencies and big tech companies that have involved in censoring people and a lot of them doing it now a video from 2022 where Trump explained this policy is now going viral uh Elon Musk is posting clips of it it’s all over X it’s it’s all over the Internet uh people think it’s new it’s actually from 2022 but these do seem to be policies Trump is getting ready to actually Implement now Trump called this his Free Speech policy initiative have a look if we don’t have free speech then we just don’t have a free country it’s as simple as that if this most fundamental right is allowed to perish then the rest of our rights and Liberties will topple just like dominoes one by one they’ll go down that’s why today I’m announcing my plan to shatter the left-wing censorship regime and to reclaim the right to free speech for all Americans and reclaim is a very important word in this case because they’ve taken it away now as a bit of context Trump released that video shortly after reports came out that showed that Americans were being censored on media websites social media websites like Twitter and Facebook remember the Twitter files remember the Facebook files remember how we were finding out that news agencies like mainstream Media news agencies big Tech and government agencies were colluding to recommend censorship policies to go after individuals and there was an entire ecosystem around this the conversations were being made public uh some of that was of course after Elon Musk bought Twitter and then began publishing it some of the other files came out through Congressional investigations now Trump responded to this and a lot of it had to do with people being censored for talking about the 2020 elections or about vaccine safety because again that was a big discussion at the time maybe still is but it also didn’t end there now Trump described this this whole ecosystem as a quote Sinister group of deep State bureaucrats Silicone Valley tyrants left-wing activists and depraved corporate news media and he said they have been conspiring to to manipulate and silence the American people and Trump said that this is the censorship cartel and he announced his plan to end it uh to end it and also create a new policy to defend free speech in that video watch this first within hours of my inauguration I will sign an executive order Banning any federal department or agency from colluding with any organization business or person to censor limit categorize or impede the lawful speech of American citizens I will then ban Federal money from being used to label domestic speech as Mis or disinformation and I will begin the process of identifying and firing every Federal bureaucrat who has engaged in domestic censorship directly or indirectly whether they are the Department of Homeland Security the Department of Health Human Service the FBI the doj no matter who they are that would be pretty big now a lot of people don’t actually understand how large the censorship system is that’s been put in place there’s actually what’s called a whole of government initiative right now meaning basically every branch of government state local tribal the whole 9 yards involved with this there are whole of government operations right now as we speak in place to go after what they call misinformation disinformation and Mal information and this is important too because people talk about disinformation they don’t talk about Mal information uh the MDM group they call it misinformation is just false information disinformation can be like fake information fake you know false flag events or the altering of narratives to create broader false narratives but built on true information otherwise but Mal information is something else that’s malicious information that’s hate speech now they’ve actually made this illegal technically they’re not criminally charging people for it but they have created a a very broad censorship system to go after individuals who fall under any of these categories now this was actually enacted partly under the the under the cyber security and infrastructure security agency that cesa cisa and it includes authorities at the federal level the state level the local level the tribal level and the territorial levels of the United States the entire country uh there are initiatives for this at every level of government now a lot of it was actually focused on information around the elections one of the major focuses of this and the concern that’s being raised now is we see new information coming out was that some of these operations did or were monitoring for misinformation disinformation or mal information and may have acted to censor Americans during the election season now look it actually wasn’t limited to this either there was more to it there were also many other very broad censorship programs like this including what we saw detailed in the Twitter files as we mentioned and other information releases also remember during the pandemic the World Health Organization at the United Nations they declared an info demic an information pandemic and they started also large scale programs to go after so-called misinformation and disinformation many countries around the world followed this and we’ve gotten to a point now where this censorship isn’t even coming from within the United States it’s Europe trying to censor Americans it’s other countries trying to censor Americans It’s Brazil trying to force x to censor people in this country it’s France trying to force us to censor it’s the UK trying to force us to censor there’s a global censorship Authority in place as well and programs like that were also enforced within the United States you might remember uh if there were videos on covid-19 on YouTube for example that there were notices uh on you know fact checking and so on from different us branches right there was censorship coming from that as well uh there was cooperation also from news agencies a lot of mainstream media were involved with this and there was also big Tech platforms involved right most of the major big Tech platforms played some role in this although many of them have come out afterwards and argue that they were forced to do it uh Mark Zuckerberg notably has come out and condemned some of this and has publicly said after he ironically said that he wouldn’t be involved in the elections this time uh as he was back in 2020 with M Zu bucks they called it and and kind of made more of a moderate stance uh Mark Zuckerberg actually came out publicly and suggested based on his wording uh suggested that Facebook had been pressured to censor uh pressured by government agencies now a report from the house Judiciary Committee was actually on this back in June of 2023 and the house investigation on it they also detailed some of these programs the house investigation the issued report on house cesa cisa which is technically a cyber security agency going back to the point I made earlier that cyber security is not just hacking it includes even free speech and other things that cesa was allegedly colluding with big Tech and disinformation partners to censor Americans because remember one of the last things that happened during the Obama Administration before Obama left the White House was he created a global in or a US initiative to go after disinformation he created an operation to do that and then what happened right afterwards you saw all these media fact Checkers suddenly created going after disinformation what they claimed to be right how many news agencies ran these you know factchecking operations right after that now let me show you the official report this is the official report on the house investigation and they say quote this interum staff report details among other things that cisa working with Federal Partners to M to mature a whole of government approach meaning just about the entire government being involved with this to curbing alleged misinformation and disinformation they say that cesa considered the creation of an anti- misinformation rapid response team capable of physically deploying across the United States they say cesa moved at censorship operation to a c a funded nonprofit after CES and The Bu administration were sued in federal court implicitly admitting that its censorship activities are unconstitutional that’s going to be important again because it’s kind of there’s a public private partnership system in place to circumvent the Constitution they will use third-party organizations NOS nonprofits and so on working with them but being used to do the things they can’t do Trump actually brings this up which which I’ll show you in a bit but the report in this investigation also says cesa wanted to use the same cesa funded nonprofit as its mouthpiece to avoid the appearance of government propaganda and that members of ca’s advisory committee agonized that it was only a matter of time before someone realizes we exist and start asking about our work suggesting that they believ that maybe they were not doing something right now look remember Trump said that he would ban these types of operations and that he would also fire every single official who was involved that’s going to be a lot of officials that’s going to be a lot of officials uh in fact many social media platforms outside of this entire ecosystem uh they you know for example Twitter prior to Elon Musk even had special uh special communication channels opened for government officials to flag people to be banned or flag posts to be censored they had established this and so a lot of government officials throughout the US you know every level of government even tribal and territorial like Puerto Rico for example or Guam they all had this now look it’s not clear whether Trump would actually go after this program in particular he’s giving broad statements so we don’t actually know the details on it uh but his statements on it they do seem to say that he would would go after the entire thing all operations of this type every single person who was involved whether it was a government official whether it was a private business whether it was an entire agency all of them he’s suggesting will be held accountable or you know nonprofits for example as well now some of them may also not just get fired right because the big thing is that they they might lose their jobs some of them may also face criminal prosecution and I’ll be talking about this more to come back from a quick break so don’t go anywhere I’ll be back in less than a minute experts agree one of the best ways to protect against Financial uncertainty is to diversify your portfolio learn how physical gold and silver can secure your retirement funds from today’s economic challenges with a gold Ira from American Hartford gold you can Safeguard your wealth with no penalties or taxes when you transfer your current qualifying retirement accounts call now and our precious metals Specialists will send you a free information kit no cost or obligation American Harford gold a trusted industry leader with an A+ from the Better Business Bureau has a five-star rating from thousands of happy clients whether you are getting physical precious medals in a gold Ira or delivered to your doorstep we offer only the highest quality gold and silver for your peace of mind we also offer a no fee buyback commitment a low price guarantee along with free shipping and free insurance so don’t wait call the number on your screen today and secure your financial [Music] future welcome back president-elect Donald Trump is saying that he will try to end government censorship now he may even go after news agencies and big tech companies that have been involved in censoring American people in collaboration with this entire ecosystem that means news media that that means some of the biggest corporate news outlets may also be held accountable remember Trump’s been saying that he may go after journalist and there’s this big thing with it this is one of the ways and there may be others but this is one of the ways he may do it uh some of them may not just get fired from their jobs either some of them could face criminal prosecution now Trump explained his stance on his Free Speech initiative announcement from a video in 2022 which is now going viral yet again again let me show you second I will order the Department of Justice to investigate all parties involved in the new online censorship regime which is absolutely destructive and terrible and to aggressively prosecute any and all crimes identified these include possible violations of federal civil rights law campaign Finance laws federal election law Securities Law and Anti-Trust laws the Hatch Act and a host of other potential criminal civil Regulatory and constitutional offenses this would be pretty broad this could affect a a very very large number of individuals uh in fact there were already allegations against some individuals and groups and companies and government agencies that we know based on again released documents and Communications were involved in various forms of censorship actually look folks just recently you might remember I was discussing on the show some of this I said that you know some of you were asking about whether Trump could go after journalists or news agencies and I said actually there would be a case when it comes to censorship because some of these news agencies I said could potentially face criminal charges under Anti-Trust laws because they’re involved in coordinated censorship of their business competitors if a news agency is colluding with government and big Tech and other businesses in order to destroy their competition that is a violation of antitrust laws potentially and that’s what they’ve been doing a lot of corporate media was directly involved with these programs a lot of the people who were censored were independent journalists and online influencers take me for example uh who were considered to be competitors of these news companies uh I I personally experienced this actually they went after me right uh and the way that it worked was this now I noted what is an Anti-Trust violation how do you define antitrust well if a business colludes with another business in order to destroy their competition you could you could call that an antitrust violation What was the media doing the media has activities entire news beats and so on going after their competitors going after independent journalists and what they do is they investigate them they go after their advertisers and they try actively to get people demonetized deplatformed censored or attacked uh New York Times does this for example and I don’t know whether that could be considered a crime but when they collude with other agencies and collude with other systems uh that have you know been involved with this with the intent of censoring with the intent of deplatforming with the intent of going after their finances or their advertisers that is where you get into possible antitrust violations and Trump is suggesting that he will look into antitrust violations with what he calls the censorship cartel I don’t know if this is exactly what he was referring to but he does note that as one of the possible criminal charges now as Trump noted it also would not be limited to that either we could see many criminal charges a lot of other things against many different people and businesses for a very long list of violations uh Trump also said that he’s going to revise section 230 of the communications decency act now if you’ve been following the news for a while you probably hear this a lot if not basically what that does uh that act makes it so that major platforms you know Google Twitter Facebook and so on they can’t be held Le legally liable for things that people post on their websites uh a social media website cannot be criminally charged if somebody posts a legal content and the argument for that is well look we don’t have the capability to monitor what every single person posts nor would you want us to and so if you’re going to have a platform you can’t legally charge us uh for people’s violations because how can we possibly monitor all of it uh that would mean that curated content that would change the nature of the platform that was a legal argument for that now the issue is that many of these platforms have implemented a censorship system that is capable of that only of course they’re keeping their legal protections mean meaning you can’t sue them for that while also censoring people and that’s the problem now Trump said that he’s going to revise section 230 so that those protections those legal protections will be revoked if the platforms continue to engage in censorship uh he did not he uh he did say at the same time though that some unlawful content will need to be taken down without a doubt uh child pornography exploitation promotions of terrorism they will still need to filter those types of content and other things like that but he says he’ll also remove Government funding from organizations if they engage in censorship based on alleged misinformation and disinformation uh he even said that will include universities if a university for example right he said if they find that any university in the United States has e even engaged in the past this type of activity like flagging people’s social media posts for removal then those universities should lose their Federal money for research and for student loans for 5 years or more uh meaning of course that uh censorship is going to be over at least the government level and anybody who receives government funding and again anybody who has engaged with it does potentially risk facing criminal charges or at the very least being fired now he also addressed some of something else one thing we’ve seen develop over the years is that while the government you know technically the government cannot censor Americans uh that’s thanks to our constitution the First Amendment the protections on Free Speech the issue is though some have found a way around this I briefly mentioned that before uh what these government agencies do is they create nonprofits they work with NOS they recruit third-party organizations and then collaborate with them to do the things that they cannot legally do uh if you’ve been watching Crossroads for a while you know that I’ve been talking about this for years I’ve called it a type of hand and glove censorship they right the government can’t do it directly so they put on the glove of an NGO or they put on the glove of a nonprofit organization or they partner with you know major groups that do it for them uh the issue is if the government were to do this directly it would be a constitutional violation if a private company does it it is not a constitutional violation and the legal question for years uh something that’s been debated in court uh many people have gone tried tried to go after uh for example Alan dershwitz for example he’s been challenging some of this legally with lawsuits and battling in court Trump has been battling in court over this for years the question is does it constitute government censorship if it’s a public private partnership because the government is technically not doing it that is the question Trump suggesting that if again when he comes to office he’s going to end this and he’s going to make it illegal Trump is opposing because you know he’s as president he can’t just create laws he’s asking Congress to do it and if you’re going to have Republicans now with the super majority they’re they they won the house right they have both the Senate and the house now uh Trump’s proposing that not that not only should this become illegal for this type of hand and glove censorship but also that other forms of constitutional violations by proxy should also be illegal for example um even even the government partnering with NGS to facilitate Mass illegal immigration um this won’t be something just limited to censorship here’s what he says on it from his Free Speech policy initiative announcement from 2022 watch we should also enact new laws laying out clear criminal penalties for federal bureaucrats who partner with private entities to do an end run around the Constitution and deprive Americans of their first fourth and fifth amendment rights in other words deprive them of their vote and once you lose those elections and once you lose your borders like we have you no longer have a country now if that actually happens not only again could it be illegal for government officials to work on censorship by proxy thise this type of hand and glove thing I was talking about but this could also mean that all forms of that could become illegal including for example public private Partnerships to get around the constitution in general uh remember folks under the Constitution if you read the American Constitution for example uh Americans we are protected from illegal searches and seizures you cannot be searched unless the individual has a search warrant uh if an officer knocks on the door for example and says hey can I search your house uh you can ask them well do you have a search warrant and they’ll be like no I’m just just here to have a friendly conversation uh and you can be like no um I’d rather not I don’t believe you have the um I don’t believe you have the probable cause to do that nor the legal authority to do it uh but if they do have a search warrant you can’t say no to it right they need a search warrant to do it the problem that’s come about though is that authorities have been able to get around that because private companies like social media companies search engin online businesses what do they do well a lot of these platforms are free do you know why they’re free it’s because you’re the product they collect your private data and many of them sell it they sell your private data everything you post online everything you look at everything you search for everything you purchase everything you might purchase everything you say to your friends all of your messages they get that and not only do they sell it to advertisers some of them also provide it to government now it’s happened because of this is authorities can go through these companies to conduct searches without needing a search warrant because technically they’re not getting a warrant to search you you’ve already willfully given these companies your data you’ve already willfully given them the access to it when you click that little agree to thing on you know do you accept their terms of service um depending on the company of course and when you’ve willfully given it to them it’s theirs to do with as they choose whether they sell it whether they provide it to other organizations or whatever and so that has been a workaround of constitutional protections on illegal searches and seizures it doesn’t end there though now also on Trump’s statements because he says he’s going to end this he’s going to end this type of this type of public private partnership on Trump statements he’s suggesting this could even Encompass the open border policies remember folks a lot of the efforts on mass illegal immigration they’re not being done directly by the government or by the United Nations they’re being delegated to thirdparty organizations usually NOS non-governmental organizations they’re funding NOS the NOS are facilitating the operations the NOS are doing the trafficking so to speak depending on how you define it uh but they’re working under the offices of the United States and of the United Nations in order to run these things right including getting your money uh they get massive massive Government funding to carry out these operations and because these operations are being delegated to third-party organizations they can do things without the legal limits that the government would have because of the Constitution and because of various laws again it is acting in with a public private partnership to do things that may violate the constitution otherwise now Trump’s proposal the one that he’s saying he’s going to release on censorship could also Encompass all these things as well right Trump’s proposal could potentially criminalize this at least if the operations are being used with the intent of a workaround to constitutional protections now the policy proposals from Trump also don’t end there either there’s a lot actually I don’t want to go over the whole thing because it’s like it’s like a six minute video or six and a half minutes I we watch the we have to watch the whole thing here I think I pulled out the main parts but he also wants to make it notably so that federal agents have a seven-year ban on working for some of these big tech companies after leaving their agencies eliminating some of the special interests that’s involved that social media Banning and Shadow Bannings should have some legal element to it that they can’t just ban people because of their political views and also that people over the age of 18 should be allowed to opt in to see unmoderated content on these platforms meaning for example uh if you go and type in a search on a major search engine you’re not seeing it like you used to see it many of us remember back in let’s say the the mid90s maybe late ’90s or let’s say early 2000s when a lot of us were using the internet and the internet was a very free place there was very little regulation you could find anything on the internet if you typed in something you wouldn’t get curated search results if you typed in a news story you wouldn’t just get the big corporate media you get you get all kinds of Independent Media what happened was is public private partnership again news agencies began colluding with big Tech platforms so that only their content would get preferential treatment which is why now if you type in a news story you’re probably not even going to see Epic Times you’re probably not going to see me on there you’re going to see all the big corporate media showing up as the initial results probably even if you search like Crossroads with with Josh you might even see that uh because again the search engines are being manipulated they’re being moderated Trump is saying that he wants to eliminate that uh meaning there should be an optin for people to be able to see unmoderated unfiltered content if you’re over the age of 18 uh it’ll see we’ll see whether he could actually do that uh we would assume that will also include initiatives to get rid of criminal content because there is Criminal content as well which will be very much legal regardless of anything right uh but this also you know we’ll see what happens with it because this could be this could be big folks there’s What’s called the dead internet Theory going around basically suggesting that because of bots because of AI because of fake content because of the filtering and the censoring of the internet that you don’t really even see a lot of real interactions anymore that the nature of the internet has changed utterly uh it’s not it’s not anymore like watching a free platform uh you’re watching moderated filtered and censored content and a whole lot of fake individuals and a whole lot of hired people from like Nos and so on working on different Platforms in order to send certain messages I I don’t know if I agree with the entire narrative on that but to an extent it is true this would bring an end to a lot of that if these if these changes are made and if these laws actually go into place we could see a return of information to the internet that has been largely banned for a very long time and independent journalists and content CRS people like myself uh we would be able to compete a lot more strongly against the big corporate media and case in point folks despite the censorship despite the attacks despite all of this we’re still competing pretty dang well imagine if we’re not censored anymore imagine if we’re not filtered anymore you could watch these big corporate news outlets lose their power that’s what’s in place right now that’s what’s proposed we’ll see what happens let’s let’s jump into some questions let’s see here uh everyone don’t forget also um I do read the chat in fact I have it open on my laptop uh I I keep it a little off usually but um I have it open uh so if you have questions comments leave them in the chat don’t forget uh also don’t forget to hit the like button share this episode help us get the word out we really appreciate it again uh we are still censored uh you might notice on YouTube for example we have we haven’t been monetized since January 6 right since shortly after that uh so uh I do appreciate your support let’s see TZ Burton you’re saying Josh isn’t public private partnership another way of saying socialism um it’s a little more complicated than that so uh it’s it’s not full socialism uh this this is what would be called like um like a mixed a mixed kind of system uh they would call it uh the technical term for it is state interventionism state interventionism is a mixed system where it’s more of a transition to socialism you still have the private businesses you still have entrepreneurs you still have that but there’s a partnership that exists whereby government agencies intervene that’s why they call it interventionism State interventionism and so that means the businesses are not totally independent uh they get subsidies right getting money from the government that’s one form of State interventionism the more intense forms of that would be State control for example fascism fascism gets to the level of State control um under the Nazis with Adolf Hitler uh what they had was what they called shopkeepers where the heads of businesses would be appointed by the government even though they made to an extent the free market there’s also what they call State capitalism a lot of communist countries practice State capitalism once they real I that full communism basically leads to almost immediate uh economic collapse China for example practices State capitalism alongside communist ideology so they’re very much Communists but on the economic front they practice State capitalism which means basically you have businesses but the CCP controls all of it it’s all under the control of the CCP uh all of these would fall under what you define as state interventionism and there’s various degrees of it uh it is not pure capitalism so and this is this is the irony with capitalism a lot of what people criticize you know like college kids and stuff when they criticize capitalism they’re not criticizing capitalism all all of the problems they observe are not from the free market the problems they’re observing are from state interventionism state interventionism is the cause of things like you know corporate immunity and you know the ability of businesses to basically create massive monopolies uh the issue of State subsidies and government protections allowing for these types of monopolies to form these things which I believe should be regulated I I don’t believe in Monopoly I I don’t think monopolies are healthy for us whether it’s a state Monopoly or a corporate Monopoly I don’t agree with either of them and you know again and that was one of the I I talked before about you know you talk about turn of the century early 1900s a lot of the people who criticized communism also criticized corporatism and syndicalism and this whole nine yards of whether we’re dominated by businesses or unions or governments right uh whether you have absolute control in the hands of any one individual you had the the technocrats for example who believed you could Implement socialism through technology for example uh a lot of the people who oppose these things oppose the whole gamut of it because all these things represent various forms of socialism and and yeah a lot of people would say um a lot of people would say that this type of yeah cronyism right cron it’s cronyism versus capitalism thank you teasy Burton u a lot of people would say actually that this does not represent true capitalism that we’ve been living under various forms of state interventionism where whereby socialist policies have infiltrated and undermined the free market uh James Dyson you’re saying what about the Monopoly game Josh um actually Monopoly was originally a communist game not not to break the fun here uh I I can’t remember the original name for it but Monopoly was supposed to simulate corporate takeover basically um it’s It’s Kind of a Funny Story actually uh which is why if you play Monopoly it does signify that you know when an individual basically gains control over everything you find it very hard to move anymore uh you could apply that though not just to corporatism but you could you could apply that to you know socialism as well that once everything is under centralized control you find you have very little wiggle room uh life is very difficult to to get by with uh you find it hard to move right uh as Monopoly does simulate Paul nante is saying truth police why can’t we use our own minds to discern exactly now well I think this is one of the big problems you have with with the way let me rephrase it this is one of the big criticisms of New York being kind of the heart of the media industry and look I I’m I’m based in New York and I’m with the media so take that as you will um this is one of the criticisms around Washington DC being basically the heart of our entire federal government is that you have certain thinking that exists Within These circles that some would argue is disconnected from the thinking you find in Middle America and from small town America and from the average experience of the average person uh this is what they call the Ivory Tower right where it’s people from ivy league universities and fancy stuff like that I did not go to Ivy League I make community college kid if you’re curious um you know and I never I never fully did it either I I be I I was a journalist while I was in college and I ended up just moving to uh working on journalism full-time when I was a student still uh with Epic Times actually that was in 200 2008 where I started full-time with Epic Times uh but what you have in the in these big areas right is you have these people who come from the college system they go directly to these you know Lush high quality jobs and and they don’t really interact with normal Americans they don’t really see the average EXP experience now you can argue some of them come from Blue Collar household and so on but what you find often times is I’m not saying all of them but the criticism of the Ivory Tower is that they begin looking down on the average person they say oh you know these people are stupid they’re incapable of self-governance uh they don’t know what’s best for them I know what’s best for them you know it’s that it’s that type of thinking uh and and you see this a lot um if you look for example at education levels a lot of mainstream media use this education levels of Republicans and Democrats and you’ll see actually it’s all a lot of the IV leagues they’re very much uh Democrat very much anti-trump right and that was one of the big narratives they had it’s it’s all these uneducated people don’t know what’s right for them and that and that’s the narrative that comes out now again believe whatever you want on that I don’t really care uh but when it comes down to it it does represent a problem because there’s a misunderstanding of the average person there’s a misunderstanding of you know why is it that media couldn’t get their polls right how was it that a lot of political strategists couldn’t figure out that the election was going to head the way it did uh why were there so many miscalculations and you know case in point look at how a lot of media talked about the elections afterwards where they publicly question how did we get it so wrong well the the simple answer for that is because they don’t respect the average person they treat them badly they look down on them and they don’t think they’re smart now I can tell you folks uh you know I I I’m in New York but I travel all over the place as you see on the show uh you can’t judge a person’s education or their level of intelligence by what college they went to some of the smartest people I know are you’re like blue collar workers um and you know why it’s because they can think outside the box I’ve actually read that a lot of big businesses there was a story just recently actually a lot of big corporations now they won’t even hire people who come from IV leagues and the reason for that is because when they run into a problem they want to cookie cutter solution they want a solution that fits in only with what they learned right they they think within a set boundary whereas more traditional people and people from more like blue color backgrounds they don’t limit their thinking within that Circle they think outside the box personally for me um I’m very I’m actually very big on what’s called um Benedictine thought uh if you’re wondering one of my like philosophies right I’m I’m very big on what’s called Benedictine thought they also call it poetic thinking and this is kind of the main challenge to what they call critical thinking you know critical thinking is where and don’t I I have critical thinking too don’t get me wrong but critical thinking is where you criticize everything and you accept whatever can withstand criticism the problem you find with critical thinking and people who are very critical is that sometimes the the allegations they use with which to criticize something are flawed and they might also miss that there’s some truth to it where they just threw the entire thing out because one part of it didn’t withstand criticism uh there’s a lot of kind of false debate that happens unfortunately within critical thinking case in point uh when it came to the elections there were a lot of criticisms of trump which were based on partial information or untrue information uh there were a lot of false allegations that came out over the years because of bad media reporting and people were using the criticism of false narratives as the basis of critical thought and so obviously they they came to false conclusions on the other side um when you to get into more traditional thought you’re talking about Ben addicting thought or poetic thinking that that it’s more based in faith and it it’s where you approach information with with a humble nature uh if you read a book if you study something you humble yourself you try you believe there’s something outside of your knowledge you believe there are things beyond what you currently know you don’t think you know everything and so you don’t criticize things from within the boundaries of your existing thoughts and because of that you’re capable of learning like actually learning that is more traditional thought I’d say and I’d say that a lot of Middle America and so on they have more of that whereas a lot of the IV League people they’re more like within the Box you know what I mean let’s see here Samuel Guzman you’re saying I’m highly critical of Darwinism me too uh believing that many of the societal and cultural problems of today are evil fruits thereof yeah I mean again Darwinism is a theory I don’t want to get into like debates on this because people it’s a it’s a religion let’s be honest with ourselves people believe in it the same way they believe in religion is it absolutely true no absolutely not uh you can actually criticize it in a lot of things including uh carbon dating including for example um I don’t want to get into the whole thing there there are a lot of very valid criticism criticisms of it that based on science show that it cannot withstand criticism uh especially when it comes to inter species transformation and so on uh and even then when you get into like The Big Bang Theory you can’t escape the idea of something coming out of nothing I know that people talk about higs bosen and so on but if you go into like really old theories of the universe and creation there’s also like interdimensional beliefs uh for example even at like microcosmic levels and so on and so traditional thought actually encompasses a lot of these things uh whether in my opinion whether you believe the entire universe was created by an explosion of like eternally existing space gases or you believe the universe was created by an eternally existing entity right with wisdom and thought you still believe in something eternally existing you can’t get away from it right in my opinion um again I see this as more of a religious debate I’m not trying to have a religious debate with you all here uh but I I would agree actually though that I I don’t think you should take things is being absolute and I don’t think proper science should view things in terms of absolutes uh one problem you have is that when people when people come to accept something as truth part of human nature is you don’t really want to have it challenged and you know science oftentimes they they would criticize you know the Middle Ages and so on that that uh that they refused to hear any new discoveries because it didn’t fit in with the conventional thought and the criticism of modern science is that they become the same way and you know if you get into um if you get into some of the criticisms of even how scientific papers are written and the margins of error that exist are taken even though there’s a margin of error it’s it’s taken as an absolute even though it’s not absolute it’s taken as an absolute and so when you write off all the margins of error you acknowledge that that would acknowledge that there are exceptions to everything and you make it an absolute and you build broader absolutes based on things that are not absolute then you start getting into the area of having false understandings of things and and a lot of people would criticize uh a lot of scientific findings that trust the science the science says this because of this not to mention the fact that there’s a lot of confirmation bias not to mention the fact that sometimes the theories again you know you s you have a you have a theory and you try to validate the theory through study um sometimes the theories may not be as reflective of the findings of the studies themselves as the person may believe they are and so drawing absolute conclusions based on observable reality um the observable reality I wouldn’t question but the conclusion sometimes I would question because how do you draw an absolute conclusion on something like that right these are all valid concerns that I think people raised um there are there are a lot of holes within it um and I would say again believe what you will but don’t make it absolute right I I would I I don’t think it’s science if you if you think it’s just absolute and unquestionable personally I think everything should be up for debate personally uh science chick 72 you’re saying there’s a reason free speech is the final is is the first amendment without it tyranny happens we got to a taste of it La in the last few years I fully agree um you know interestingly folks if you want to see something interesting look into the pilgrims and the original Bible they had the pilgrim Bible the pilgrim Bible in the side notes has all these criticisms of government and of the tyranny of of Europe uh showing all the all the religious violations all the all the hypocrisies that existed um you know part of part of what was happening at the time uh when again you know the 1600s and uh before that even right uh is that of course there were a lot of debates around religion in Europe especially because he had a lot of government and religion had kind of become one and the same in a lot of those places and so when people started doing self-study of their religion coming to different conclusions from what the established beliefs said take for example the Puritans and the Protestants and the pilgrims right the pilgrims actually were against the Anglican Church that they didn’t support the Ang the Anglican Church Martin Luther had issues with the Catholic church for example there were there were religious debates and so when you begin criticizing established belief or pointing out hypocrisies within the people who try to represent them what happens when those people control speech what happens unless people say how dare you criticize my authority how dare you question me and rather than engage in actual debate rather than say okay I’ll correct myself because you’re right I’m not following the things I’m trying to uh preach right rather than allow for this type of stuff to happen they used the the you know the the systems of authority to try to crush these people and so the founding fathers they had experienced all of that uh they had gone through that in various forms and especially when it came to news media when it came to freedom of belief and a lot of people say well they were all Christian they they mo they mostly were not all of them were but Mo they mostly were uh but there were different branches of it and those different branches didn’t actually get along with each other in a you know in many cases they didn’t agree with each other and so freedom of belief was really important to them freedom of speech freedom of belief the ability of open debate and also the freedom of the press to hold hold these institutions to account um I I would actually consider media in its original interpretation to be almost like you know they used to call it the fourth estate um it is a system elected not by votes but by subscriptions and by views and by time to hold to account and to present accurately what is taking place that’s why people want it uh I would assume that many of you here that you don’t just want want me I would assume many of you here they don’t you don’t just want me to read the news every day I assume you want me to research it to find new things and to see whether things are happening as individuals claim they are uh you want me to hold these things to account and that that is part of the business uh that is part of why we exist uh why this industry exists uh you delegate some of that some of that authority to outside sources because who has time to go and read the news for eight hours most people don’t for me that’s my job to go and you know read everything and study everything and read every report and watch the press conferences and then try to present it to all of you as accurately as possible and so if you begin restricting that yes absolutely you can create tyranny uh because what is information information is the basis of religion information is the basis of you know what you buy what product s you buy information is the basis of whether you believe when it comes to Crime a person is innocent or guilty whether you believe a a certain group of people should be defended or destroyed like Wars or genocides information can be manipulated to do anything if it’s controlled and centralized and there’s no debate uh I would regard information control and the suppression of free speech is one of the most dangerous things we could possibly deal with I believe that information control is why we’ve seen genocides I think information control is why we see tyranny and I believe that if free speech is in place and yes I believe this is why the founding fathers put it in place as Scenic also notes um I believe that uh it is to protect us from that type of tyranny right and and also I believe it’s one of the most fundamental human rights the right to be heard and the right to have your own belief and the right to debate uh I don’t I don’t believe believe that everybody needs to accept what I say and actually I I think that if I did not listen to other people you know it would make me less effective frankly you know um I I very much enjoy you know the type of Journalism I do which involves open discussion I I think actually it’s a a healthy development within the news industry I I would hope that more journalists would do it actually uh because it it helps me to see what everybody’s thoughts are it helps me to see the different perspectives people have um I don’t mind people questioning me I don’t mind people criticizing me I don’t mind this stuff as long as they’re not silencing me you see and and that’s where you get to the that’s where you get to the area between healthy debate and sensorship and unfortunately the way that a lot of mainstream media is fighting this is not through debate they’re fighting it through censorship through trying to trying to destroy their competitors it’s terrible and so uh we’ll see what happens folks uh there’s a lot going on right now as I mentioned Donald Trump is the president elect again January 6 count Electoral College votes January 20th the inauguration he’s suggesting that he’s going to be making a lot of day one policies many of which will be through executive order meaning immediate enactment and I I think there hasn’t been a lot of very good public discussion or presentations of what the policies are going to be so I will be doing during this time I’m going to be doing a lot of reporting on the actual policies because I think it is useful for people to know what the policies are right um I’ll be also just covering the regular news so tune in uh that said folks don’t forget to share this video don’t forget to hit the like button it helps me a lot on the algorithms especially those of you on YouTube and Rumble and elsewhere it helps us a lot so please don’t forget thank you so much for being here thank you for your support and as always folks please take care of yourselves stay informed and stay free thank you [Music]
Experience Socialism
Welcome to the Conversation on Free Speech!
Welcome to Truly Right View!
We’re here to explore real, unfiltered truths—unswayed by media bias or government agendas.
What do you think? Are you ready to hear insights you won’t find elsewhere?
👉 Subscribe to the Truly Right View YouTube Channel | Rumble Channel and join our community dedicated to open dialogue.
What Does Free Speech Mean to You?
In today’s world, where tech giants and news outlets hold so much influence, is free speech at risk?
From silencing certain viewpoints to heavy censorship, the freedom to speak without fear is under threat.
Tell us your thoughts:
- Is free speech still a right everyone enjoys?
- Do you think we’re protecting it well enough?
🔍 Let’s dive into the heart of this discussion. Add your voice below!
Will You Speak Up or Stay Silent?
In the end, the future of free speech rests in our hands. We can either stand idly by as it is eroded by corporate and governmental overreach, or we can take action to protect and preserve it.
Will you speak up for your rights, or will you allow them to be taken away piece by piece?
The choice is yours.
Subscribe to the YouTube channel and the Rumble channel for Truly Right View today, and support our patriots shop together, let’s ensure that free speech remains the bedrock of our Constitutional Republic.
