Speaker 1: Up next, Luna Talks with Anna Paulina. Luna part of
Speaker 1: the gang which big tech continues to meddle in our elections,
Speaker 1: putting their thumbs on the scale to affect who wins
Speaker 1: and who loses. Don't kid yourselves. This is a threat
Speaker 1: to our democracy. And trust me, I know from personal experience.
Speaker 1: That's exactly why I'm taking Twitter to court. This is
Speaker 1: Luna talks with Anna Paulina. This week, I wanted to
Speaker 1: cover something really special, so as we know, earlier in
Speaker 1: the week, I had actually announced that I was going
Speaker 1: after Twitter, and a lot of people, especially when I
Speaker 1: talk about this case, they're like, well, why is social
Speaker 1: media is so important? Why is that blue check mark
Speaker 1: so important? And I say, well, we're fighting technocracy, So
Speaker 1: what is big tech? I think a lot of people,
Speaker 1: especially the older generation, thinks big tech is just Google YouTube,
Speaker 1: you know, our general search engine and browsers. But it's
Speaker 1: way more than that. It's a collaboration. In addition to
Speaker 1: social media platforms, whether to your Facebook, your Twitter, your Instagram.
Speaker 1: Pretty much how everybody in this country, actually over half
Speaker 1: of the US population is connected, is on some form
Speaker 1: of social media. And we when we look into the
Speaker 1: ways previous generations used to communicate. Specifically, I think previous
Speaker 1: to that of the eighties, it was a large focus
Speaker 1: on mail, print and television. Right, So you had your
Speaker 1: Federal Communications Guidelines and your Federal Elections Commission that would
Speaker 1: actually work together to ensure that candidates in particular were
Speaker 1: given the same amount of access to these different platforms,
Speaker 1: especially because, as we know, candidates use those platforms in
Speaker 1: order to communicate with the people that they are hoping
Speaker 1: will vote for them. Right. So, currently upwards of sev
Speaker 1: of the U S population is on some form of
Speaker 1: social media, according to Pew Research, And that's a huge
Speaker 1: deal for someone like myself especially. And I can tell
Speaker 1: you with a lot of my friends, you know, you
Speaker 1: see and I'm sure you probably like look at with
Speaker 1: your kids as well. They'll be constantly on their phones
Speaker 1: and you wonder, okay, well why are you always on
Speaker 1: your phone? Well, it's basically like us pulling out a
Speaker 1: newspaper and reading it, right, Like we're absorbing health tips,
Speaker 1: were absorbing fitness tips, were absorbing politics. And that's especially
Speaker 1: why my case is increasingly becoming more and more important
Speaker 1: to the younger generation. So how does gen D and
Speaker 1: millennials communicate, and these stats are something that I really
Speaker 1: think everyone should really hone in on and listen to,
Speaker 1: because as the voters get older, as this younger generation
Speaker 1: fills the shoes of our parents and our grandparents, were
Speaker 1: realizing that the old way of communicating is going away altogether.
Speaker 1: And I think it's gonna be my estimate that in
Speaker 1: the next twenty years we're probably not going to even
Speaker 1: really have TVs in our homes anymore, just because it's
Speaker 1: going to this market of duchess advertisement, but of entertainment
Speaker 1: as well. In fact, actually they're now starting to bring
Speaker 1: streaming services into your home. Student you have to go
Speaker 1: to the movie theaters anymore. So according to digital usage,
Speaker 1: the highest percentage at for of users on Twitter is
Speaker 1: actually people that are eighteen to twenty nine years old,
Speaker 1: and that's from p Research. And then in a separate
Speaker 1: study that was found it was actually done on four
Speaker 1: thousand people. They actually found that nearly three quarters about
Speaker 1: seventy three of Gen Z adults ages eighteen to twenty
Speaker 1: three actively used Instagram, followed by snapchat at and YouTube six.
Speaker 1: Facebook does, however, remain the most used platforms for millennials
Speaker 1: at Gen X at sixty eight percent, and then your
Speaker 1: baby boomer generation at sixty one percent. So what is
Speaker 1: this saying. This is just furthering the argument that we
Speaker 1: have to essentially fight for our voices on this platform.
Speaker 1: And we'll get into it in a second what's been
Speaker 1: uncovered by organizations like Project Very Toss and what they're discovering.
Speaker 1: But I really want you guys to understand that the
Speaker 1: best way of communication for one for the younger generation
Speaker 1: is peer to peer communication. Right. So, a lot of
Speaker 1: our friends, like in my little Friends Circle, you know,
Speaker 1: you have DC Dreino, you have Broke Back Patriot, you
Speaker 1: have the typical liberal. These are all handles that they
Speaker 1: used to identify their social media accounts. But we're not
Speaker 1: just talking about, you know, a couple of hundred people
Speaker 1: following them, or even a couple of hundred thousand people
Speaker 1: following We're talking about millions of people, right, So to
Speaker 1: give it some perspective, if one of these accounts, let's
Speaker 1: say my friend Rogan posts on his account at seven
Speaker 1: pm on a Friday, because of the amount of people
Speaker 1: that actually follow him on that platform, he could essentially,
Speaker 1: if he has a viral posting, be competing with the
Speaker 1: ratings that you would have on Fox Business or Fox
Speaker 1: News Daytime. And mind you, this is on an app
Speaker 1: Instagram on someone's phone, which is essentially free media. So
Speaker 1: why would it be important to want to ensure that
Speaker 1: this is being regulated correctly. Well, it's because if it's not,
Speaker 1: what's happening is you have an entire demographic of younger
Speaker 1: voters that are getting skewed data, skewed information, and only
Speaker 1: one side of the argument because of a act that
Speaker 1: these accounts and even accounts like mine, are being increasingly
Speaker 1: suppressed by these big tech companies. So what will happen
Speaker 1: is on a lot of these platforms, whether it's Facebook, Twitter,
Speaker 1: or Instagram, you have this concept of a verified account.
Speaker 1: But why is being verified so important? It's way more
Speaker 1: than just that blue check And it actually is really
Speaker 1: frustrating for someone like myself because when I actually initially
Speaker 1: started talking about this, and I think when other candidates
Speaker 1: around the country started talking about this, they were in
Speaker 1: the election cycle, a lot of reporters would make this
Speaker 1: condescending term, Oh, they're threatening suit because of a blue
Speaker 1: check mark. It's far much more than that. When you
Speaker 1: are verified on any one of these accounts. Not only
Speaker 1: does it show other people that that's your actual accounts,
Speaker 1: so you actually are able to prevent fraudulent impersonation accounts
Speaker 1: which have happened to people like myself. You can also
Speaker 1: ensure that those people are aware that that is the
Speaker 1: official platform and statement making communication for these candidates that
Speaker 1: are competing for elected office. So you could think of
Speaker 1: social media essentially as this digital town square. Right. We
Speaker 1: have governments around the world that are specifically on Twitter
Speaker 1: to communicate with their people, whether it's literally Russia, China, Iran, Canada,
Speaker 1: South America. And then you have of course our US
Speaker 1: government and then officials of the US government that are
Speaker 1: elected or appointed, but they all use these platforms, especially Twitter.
Speaker 1: I'd have to say that Twitter is probably the most
Speaker 1: political of all of the different social media spaces that
Speaker 1: are actually used by dot gov accounts to communicate and
Speaker 1: put out information to the American people as to what's
Speaker 1: happening in our country. And then you also have social
Speaker 1: movements that will use these social media platforms. So think
Speaker 1: about all that chaos that happens recently with the BLM movements.
Speaker 1: BLM actually has a verified page on Twitter, and they
Speaker 1: people will use Facebook and Twitter and Instagram to communicate,
Speaker 1: to organize, to share information, and to actually I think
Speaker 1: promote these grassroots movements. Whether or not I agree with them,
Speaker 1: The point is is that these platforms are absolutely used
Speaker 1: to organize and essentially execute our freedom of demonstration, freedom
Speaker 1: of speech, all of that right. I want you to
Speaker 1: just envision this for a second. So imagine being younger
Speaker 1: and having your TV, your radio, your books, and your
Speaker 1: newspapers either being censored or burned. And I know that
Speaker 1: people are saying, I can't believe maybe she just compared
Speaker 1: social media censorship to book burning, But I really want
Speaker 1: you guys to understand that for someone in the younger generation,
Speaker 1: when you are being closed off from access and not
Speaker 1: able to have even a voice, or to post your opinion,
Speaker 1: or even to access information because other people you know
Speaker 1: in Silicon Valley and California are sitting on the other
Speaker 1: end of a computer and saying that we don't think
Speaker 1: that they have the right to read this, that is
Speaker 1: essentially modern day book burning. Social media censorship is modern
Speaker 1: a book burning. How would that makes you feel? Obviously
Speaker 1: makes you feel, I think sometimes desperate, because how do
Speaker 1: you get your voice out there? How are you heard?
Speaker 1: How can you actually make an impact when you don't
Speaker 1: even have the right to use your voice? And a
Speaker 1: lot of people say, oh, well, you know you don't.
Speaker 1: You're not totally censored. It's just Facebook, or it's just Twitter,
Speaker 1: or it's just Instagram. But that's not the point. You
Speaker 1: have this happening to an entire generation of people, especially
Speaker 1: my generation, right those millennials. I remember when we had
Speaker 1: those like old Nokia brick phones that probably radiated way
Speaker 1: too much for our brains, but I remember those. And
Speaker 1: then all of a sudden, I remember when this thing
Speaker 1: called my Space came out. A lot of people are like,
Speaker 1: what's my space if you're a gen Z person? But
Speaker 1: my Space was actually before Facebook, and that's what I
Speaker 1: think really kicked off this social media movement on the Internet.
Speaker 1: And then you have your younger children, your grandchildren that
Speaker 1: are almost all on social media, they all have those iPads.
Speaker 1: Those kids are one hun impacted by what's happening in
Speaker 1: our country today politically, especially to conservatives and Republicans. But
Speaker 1: this is and I want to make this a very
Speaker 1: clear point, This is not just an issue that we
Speaker 1: as conservatives or we are Republicans, are facing. This is
Speaker 1: something that's going to impact everyone, whether you're a Democrat,
Speaker 1: whether you're a Republican, whether you're independent, whether you are
Speaker 1: a member of the Green Party, and a whole another country.
Speaker 1: The point is is that this type of power and
Speaker 1: control by these technocracies has never existed to the magnitude
Speaker 1: that it has. And I think that was interesting that
Speaker 1: Project Very Toss actually hadn't covered a software engineer at
Speaker 1: one of these platforms. I think it was on Facebook,
Speaker 1: and that this man had said, no king in the
Speaker 1: history of our world has ever had the power that
Speaker 1: Facebook has had in regards to controlling messaging and essentially
Speaker 1: being able to influence not just the United States, but
Speaker 1: we're talking about influencing global ideologies, which is very dangerous
Speaker 1: because that is total control. And if we here in
Speaker 1: the United States can't regulate it, let's just say that
Speaker 1: in other parts of the world, where they might not
Speaker 1: even have some of the liberties that we have and
Speaker 1: that you have, Let's say, you know, these companies are
Speaker 1: essentially working with maybe people that don't necessarily agree with
Speaker 1: a constitutional republic. What about communists? I mean, you have
Speaker 1: all these I think companies like Google basically bowing down
Speaker 1: to China, and China has social network systems actually monitor
Speaker 1: and score people based on their behavior that's considered acceptable,
Speaker 1: which to me, that social credit system is actually super scary.
Speaker 1: But why is it that I'm so passionate about this, right?
Speaker 1: I mean, like, I don't think people just like wake
Speaker 1: up and say, oh, I'm going to take on Twitter,
Speaker 1: because obviously it's not cheap, and obviously it's a huge stress, right,
Speaker 1: especially when you feel like nationally, I think a lot
Speaker 1: of people have realized, well, you know, what is the
Speaker 1: Republican already really done about this? You know they've talked
Speaker 1: about it, but have they really done anything? What have
Speaker 1: our legislature has done in order to protect my voice
Speaker 1: as an American voter? Right? So I remember when this
Speaker 1: first started about I'd say three years ago, when I
Speaker 1: first really started noticing it. I actually remember being in
Speaker 1: the car and I think I was listening to NPR
Speaker 1: at the time, and I was driving my little Jetta
Speaker 1: and I pulled up to gas station. I remember they
Speaker 1: were talking about one I guess he was like kind
Speaker 1: of a radical media personality, but he had been kicked
Speaker 1: off and banned on all these different platforms and I
Speaker 1: remember hearing that and I was like, Wow, that's like
Speaker 1: really kind of scary that someone would just get socially
Speaker 1: canceled like that. But I didn't really think too much
Speaker 1: of it, because I think, like most people, you don't
Speaker 1: realize that if it just happens to one person at first,
Speaker 1: it's it's going to happen to you as well. But
Speaker 1: I remember feeling very uncomfortable about it, and I think
Speaker 1: that myself at the time, I wasn't that political, but
Speaker 1: people that were political were very very quiet about that,
Speaker 1: and I think it was because it didn't directly impact
Speaker 1: them yet. And then I remember as I progressed kind
Speaker 1: of in my political evolution especially, and I know in
Speaker 1: previous episodes, you guys have probably heard about what had
Speaker 1: happened early on in my life with you know, growing
Speaker 1: up essentially around people that were using guns to do
Speaker 1: really bad things. So posting on social media with firearms.
Speaker 1: I remember having my postings actually on Instagram labeled as
Speaker 1: a danger to the community. People were saying that that
Speaker 1: type of posting, whether or not I was encouraging women
Speaker 1: to use farms, was actually not safe. And so what
Speaker 1: I was realizing is there are shadow banning postings, and
Speaker 1: you ask, well, what is shadow batting? And that's actually
Speaker 1: when they prevent you from being able to see certain information.
Speaker 1: So you might have let's say thirty thousand people that
Speaker 1: following your social media account, but they'll actually change the
Speaker 1: algorithms on the back end, so maybe only five thousand
Speaker 1: people or two thousand people, or I've even seen cases
Speaker 1: of people having over a million followers and they're only
Speaker 1: getting a couple of hundred views per posting. So we're
Speaker 1: talking about less than one percent of your actual total
Speaker 1: following being able to see what you're posting. And how
Speaker 1: do we know that that's happening, Well, you can see
Speaker 1: it based on your engagement. But also too, we've actually
Speaker 1: had recorded evidence come out again from those people that
Speaker 1: really infiltrated these tech companies, whether it was Facebook, Twitter,
Speaker 1: Instagram via Project very toss and you can actually see
Speaker 1: all those videos online. But I realized it was a
Speaker 1: huge problem after the El Paso shooting a couple of
Speaker 1: years ago, and so at the time, I was actually
Speaker 1: working with a Hispanic outreach organization and I was actually
Speaker 1: down in El Paso within twenty four hours of that shooting,
Speaker 1: and I remember I posted to Twitter. I said, I'm
Speaker 1: a Hispanic American, I'm an n r A. Remember I'm
Speaker 1: a veteran, and I will not bend the knee to
Speaker 1: the socialist agenda to ban firearms. I took an oath
Speaker 1: to defend the people of this nation as well as
Speaker 1: the constitution. Stop making El Paso political. Why did I
Speaker 1: say that, It's because it was the truth. I was
Speaker 1: down there and so many people. I saw all these media.
Speaker 1: It was like a media circus. You had all these
Speaker 1: people from news reporters and they were only interviewing people
Speaker 1: that had anti Trump apparel on right, Like you would
Speaker 1: say that these uh, they looked like the red MAGA hats,
Speaker 1: but they would only say make America Love again, implying
Speaker 1: that Trump's Maga agenda was a hate filled agenda. But
Speaker 1: it was all these hardcore jabs at at the time
Speaker 1: President Trump when an actuality. We're talking about a psychopath
Speaker 1: that shot up a Walmart, and then they were taking
Speaker 1: that entire thing and trying to say, oh, it was
Speaker 1: political targeting because of the anti immigrant rhetoric coming out
Speaker 1: of the presidency and out of the GOP, which was
Speaker 1: obviously completely false. But the point is is that they
Speaker 1: were not even vetting these people claiming to be family
Speaker 1: members that were interviewing. I mean, obviously, if your family
Speaker 1: member had just died, don't you think you'd probably be
Speaker 1: at home morning, not out trying to get a TV interview.
Speaker 1: I know for sure as heck I wouldn't. But the
Speaker 1: point is is that Twitter after I made that posting
Speaker 1: it was a viral tweet. In fact, I think about
Speaker 1: almost a hundred thus and people had engaged with it.
Speaker 1: They reposted all of that, and Twitter kicked me off
Speaker 1: that day. They locked me up for twelve hours, saying
Speaker 1: that my tweet, which is what I just read to
Speaker 1: you guys, was actually a danger to the community. So
Speaker 1: that was what I realized, all right, this is a
Speaker 1: huge issue. Obviously, I've said nothing that's been racist xenophobic.
Speaker 1: I haven't violated their terms and conditions. I literally put
Speaker 1: out there that I'm fighting for the Constitution and my
Speaker 1: constitutional rights, and essentially I'm getting kicked off Twitter because
Speaker 1: of it, which was just completely absurd to me. But
Speaker 1: then came the time when I really accepted the fact
Speaker 1: that if we did not do something about this soon,
Speaker 1: that I felt that essentially I was going to be permanently,
Speaker 1: and not just myself, but I think a lot of
Speaker 1: our country was going to be permanently impacted by this.
Speaker 1: And that was my campaign story. And before I get
Speaker 1: into that, I just want to specify that everything that's
Speaker 1: happening now, especially on this legislation that we're hoping to change,
Speaker 1: is going to be something that isn't just going to
Speaker 1: be again for people like myself that are conservative leaning,
Speaker 1: but it's going to be for everyone and it will
Speaker 1: impact the entire country from here on out because there
Speaker 1: is nothing currently on the books that covers down on
Speaker 1: legislation for digital media only covers print, radio, and television.
Speaker 1: So then came the time when I realized we were
Speaker 1: in deep trouble. And that is the campaign story, and
Speaker 1: we'll get back to that right after the short break.
Speaker 1: So campaign story is something that I wish, honestly I
Speaker 1: couldn't speak on from a place of of experience, but unfortunately,
Speaker 1: because of what I went through, I just I really
Speaker 1: need to share this story with you guys. So, as
Speaker 1: we know, Twitter put out these press release talking about
Speaker 1: how official candidates and elections would be verified. The reason
Speaker 1: why you want to do that, especially for campaigns and
Speaker 1: something that I actually experienced was that I had people
Speaker 1: that were actually, I think not even American citizens. I'm
Speaker 1: pretty sure these people, according to what I was hearing
Speaker 1: from some of my voters, were actually people that were
Speaker 1: scamming people from places like Africa and South America, and
Speaker 1: they were actually making fake accounts of my official congressional
Speaker 1: accounts saying that they were me. And they were also
Speaker 1: requesting that people donate to the campaign in Google play
Speaker 1: cards and or via wiring money by PayPal, which is
Speaker 1: one not how you donate to campaigns. You only ever
Speaker 1: go to the official campaign website, and then you do
Speaker 1: it through the official when red link, which is if
Speaker 1: you do donate to candidates. You know what that is,
Speaker 1: but it's a fundraising platform for the GOP. So obviously
Speaker 1: this could have won gotten me in trouble, right, But
Speaker 1: then also too, you have people that are genuinely feeling
Speaker 1: like they're wanting to help and give in campaigns and races,
Speaker 1: and they're essentially getting scammed because people are engaging and
Speaker 1: interacting with these not verified accounts. So that's the first
Speaker 1: thing you have to ensure that your accounts verified. But
Speaker 1: also too, in my case, I had people that I
Speaker 1: was running against in my republic In primary and these people,
Speaker 1: mind you, at the time, I had, I think closed
Speaker 1: around three hundred thousand people that followed me on my Twitter.
Speaker 1: But a majority of my opponents, who had no media,
Speaker 1: had never done directing series, none of the level of
Speaker 1: verification that would be needed. They were getting verified on
Speaker 1: their accounts, having you know, ten followers after one day
Speaker 1: of applying for verification. But Twitter for a very long
Speaker 1: time was holding off on my verification. So I was
Speaker 1: literally getting messages from people about being scammed. I was
Speaker 1: getting people messages is a sear official account? Is this
Speaker 1: a fake account? I mean, it was actually really causing
Speaker 1: issues for the campaign on the back end. And yet
Speaker 1: they went through and through my entire primary election, which
Speaker 1: is where I competed with other Republicans for the vote
Speaker 1: to become the primary nominee to run against the Democrat,
Speaker 1: they verified everyone else, which was a five way primary. Right,
Speaker 1: I was running against five other people, and yet I
Speaker 1: was the one that's still received no verification. And then
Speaker 1: after I won the primary, I wrote Twitter again. Members
Speaker 1: of my team wrote Twitter. In fact, I had other
Speaker 1: people that were politically influential as well. Right, Twitter saying, hey,
Speaker 1: is there a reason that you're not verifying this congressional candidate,
Speaker 1: she's official nominee. We wrote countless emails to the Twitter
Speaker 1: dot gov website and still no verification. They said that
Speaker 1: they would they would send us back to ballot PDIA.
Speaker 1: So you have to make sure that you're complying to
Speaker 1: with all the standards, which I did. I had everything
Speaker 1: that was needed according to their verification process, but they
Speaker 1: still wouldn't do it. And then we found out and
Speaker 1: this is a true that that blue check mark, especially
Speaker 1: on Twitter's engagement side of the house, actually not only
Speaker 1: increases your engagement, but it increases your visibility. And there
Speaker 1: is an algorithm that actually changes on the back end
Speaker 1: right that actually helps people engage with you. So think
Speaker 1: about it like this. If I were to put it
Speaker 1: in regards to let's say a newspaper article, you have
Speaker 1: the ability to have your articles about your campaign and
Speaker 1: your local town paper either run on the front page
Speaker 1: or run in the back page in a square that's
Speaker 1: maybe half an inch versus a front page story. When
Speaker 1: you have that blue check it's essentially putting your campaign
Speaker 1: on that front page story. And if they're giving it
Speaker 1: to one person. According to campaign law, they have to
Speaker 1: give it to everyone else. Not only does it show
Speaker 1: voters your the official campaign account, but it also shows
Speaker 1: people that there is another race happening, right Like a
Speaker 1: lot of people, especially for those that might not watch
Speaker 1: Fox News or MSNBC or CNN, for those younger people
Speaker 1: that are just on social media, if they're not being
Speaker 1: presented with a different side, a different perspective, a different
Speaker 1: candidate and option to vote for, then they're not even
Speaker 1: going to realize that that's actually a race happening. And
Speaker 1: I didn't just find that this was happening to myself.
Speaker 1: In fact, I found out later on that this was
Speaker 1: actually happening to a few candidates in the Tampa Bay area,
Speaker 1: which strategically, especially for the election cycle, is a very
Speaker 1: very strategic location. That whole I four Corridor, which is
Speaker 1: a massive highway that runs up through the center of Florida,
Speaker 1: is actually something that every single presidential candidate I think,
Speaker 1: in the history of the United States has needed to
Speaker 1: campaign on and definitely get support from in order to
Speaker 1: go to the White House. In fact, it's called the
Speaker 1: pathway to the White House. But I've never been one
Speaker 1: to shut up in color. Right, So what did I
Speaker 1: do about all of this? Well, I'll tell you about
Speaker 1: that right after we get back after the short break.
Speaker 1: So I filed an FEC complaint and people are like, Okay,
Speaker 1: this is kind of boring on a what's the FEC
Speaker 1: acronyms blah blah blah. Okay. The FEC is the Federal
Speaker 1: Elections Commission And what do they do. Well, they established
Speaker 1: in nineteen seventy four and they actually oversee elections. But
Speaker 1: their job, in particular it includes jurisdiction in civil enforcement matter,
Speaker 1: is authority to write regulations and the responsibility for monitoring
Speaker 1: compliance and making sure candidates are adhering, but also too
Speaker 1: that the candidates are being provided a fair platform. So
Speaker 1: they're kind of like who you go to when someone's
Speaker 1: not being fair. You go to the FEC and you
Speaker 1: hope that they do their job. Well, I file this
Speaker 1: complaint and I heard nothing for six months. So me
Speaker 1: and my team and you know, our attorneys, we went
Speaker 1: back to the drawing board and we're thinking about this
Speaker 1: and we're brainstorming. And by this time I do it
Speaker 1: was already after the fact that President Trump had been
Speaker 1: removed off of Twitter, off of Facebook. Think about that
Speaker 1: the leader of the free world, arguably one of the
Speaker 1: most powerful people in the world, the presidents of the
Speaker 1: United States, had been d platforms. He had been silenced.
Speaker 1: And we actually just found out a few days ago
Speaker 1: that Facebook agreed that they had the right to keep
Speaker 1: President Trump off of this social media platform. But think
Speaker 1: about that, more power than the duly elected president of
Speaker 1: the United States, and they were intern silencing him. So
Speaker 1: why did I see the FEC Well, it's because I
Speaker 1: wanted them to take action on my complaint that I
Speaker 1: made last year in previous to my election cycle, stating
Speaker 1: that Twitter's inequitable treatment of me as a federal candidate
Speaker 1: during the election cycle constitutes illegal corporate in kind contributions
Speaker 1: to my then Democrat opponent. What is it in kind contribution?
Speaker 1: It's something that you have to record if you're receiving
Speaker 1: something of value to your campaign, and with a verified profile,
Speaker 1: that is something of monetary value. In fact, Jack Dorsey,
Speaker 1: the CEO of Twitter, recently sold his first tweet for
Speaker 1: two point nine million dollars. Okay, that is the value
Speaker 1: of having a verified social media account. That is digital currency.
Speaker 1: Think of it like advertising. That is exactly what it is.
Speaker 1: But what implications does this have. It's to change the law.
Speaker 1: It's not just for conservatives and Republicans, it's for everyone.
Speaker 1: Our laws straight up are currently out of date. They
Speaker 1: only cover down on print, radio, and television, but there's
Speaker 1: nothing for that digital media or even social media that
Speaker 1: has evolved in the last twenty years essentially, and then
Speaker 1: never in the history of our world has someone had
Speaker 1: that type of power. And so that term technocracy something
Speaker 1: that we are all facing. These tech giants working with
Speaker 1: corporations essentially to suppress the American people, our voice, our wants.
Speaker 1: And then you have people actually elected in Congress and
Speaker 1: in Senate that are on the payout through this corporate
Speaker 1: pack money that is not even allowing them to represent
Speaker 1: their people of their district because they're protecting they're being
Speaker 1: given money for their actual campaigns by these lobbyists that
Speaker 1: want these legislators to be soft on tech policy, to
Speaker 1: be soft on that Section two thirty. And I will
Speaker 1: make a very specific distinction here. My case against the FEC,
Speaker 1: my case against Twitter, has nothing to do with free
Speaker 1: speech because, unfortunately, because of the fact that these tech
Speaker 1: and these are protected under Section to thirty, which will
Speaker 1: be a completely different podcast episode. All of those lawsuits
Speaker 1: based on the First Amendment violations that these tech companies
Speaker 1: are continuously in, these social media companies are continuously doing
Speaker 1: to the American people all of those things, they're not
Speaker 1: even good lawsuits because they won't win in court because
Speaker 1: of that section to thirty. So ours is completely separate.
Speaker 1: We are talking specifically about the corporation of Twitter making
Speaker 1: illegal campaign donations that's not recorded, and essentially that is
Speaker 1: basically a campaign finance violation. So I would compare it
Speaker 1: if people know about al Capone. You know, al Capone
Speaker 1: was this mobster. He was arguably probably one of the
Speaker 1: most famous mobsters, and we know that he was racketeering
Speaker 1: and all of this crazy stuff. He was killing people,
Speaker 1: who's a murder. But they didn't get him on any
Speaker 1: of that. They got him on tax evasion. And that's
Speaker 1: what I think that this case is is it is
Speaker 1: going to be essentially our version of taking down al
Speaker 1: Capone for tax evasion. And I mean taking down not
Speaker 1: in a physical sense, but a metaphorical sense. Have to
Speaker 1: specify just because, but to protect the sanctity of these
Speaker 1: elections and to ensure that this isn't happening to Freacher generations.
Speaker 1: You know, we have to do this, and I never
Speaker 1: I never intended on being one of the first people
Speaker 1: to do that. But it looks like I'm leading the charge,
Speaker 1: and I'm leading the charge all the way to the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court. And I will say that this is the
Speaker 1: only case in the country, guys, This is the only
Speaker 1: case in the country that has the ability to impact
Speaker 1: and change our legislation, not just for me, but for
Speaker 1: future generations of this incredible country, to ensure that our
Speaker 1: election processes are protected, that our voices are heard, and
Speaker 1: that people at least have the right to hear a
Speaker 1: different perspective and have a different choice. Before we go,
Speaker 1: I want to thank you guys so much for listening.
Speaker 1: If you've enjoyed today's show, please leave us a review
Speaker 1: and rate us five stars on Apple Podcasts. You can
Speaker 1: also find me on Parlor, Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram at
Speaker 1: real Anna Paulina. And a special thank you to our
Speaker 1: producer Drew Steele, writer Aaron Kleigman, and researcher Stanton Bryson,
Speaker 1: as well as executive producers Debbie Myers and speaker New Gingridge,
Speaker 1: part of the Gingridge Three sixty network