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