Elaad Eliyahu

My point is about Erica Kirk.

At what point is the question going to be brought up that YouTube is facilitating widespread defamation per se against Erica Kirk, for which they are knowingly generating revenue off of it?

And will they be liable?

Because, again, Section 230 was about if I make a website and you comment, there's no monetary exchange.

I didn't ask you to do it.

I didn't offer you money.

You're saying this is if 230 goes down.

No, I'm saying 230 will go down because of it.

I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if the PSY op from the deep state was we need to eliminate 230 to end the populist media base.

How do we do it?

Well, 230 has got to go so that YouTube becomes a gate kept company and anybody wants to start a channel has to get approval with government ID to be on the platform.

Like who gets to make movies for Amazon?

Who gets to make movies for Netflix?

They're all private.

They choose.

They gatekeep.

I believe that's what the machines had wanted for a long time.

They don't like that there's channels like this that exist.

And so I'm not saying it's definitive.

I'm not saying it's a great chance.