Hostbusters XL It has several meanings but in this context it means someone who tells you it like it is and is strong and unwavering. Sticking to the truth and your principles.

*FACTS*

@@Whoeverheardof These white folk don't know the lingo, sis lol

@@IBBMS What white folks?

@@Murky_MurkiMurka your mom

Well, there are lot of dumb people like Tracey in the world.

Mueller's report was absolute dog shit.

Theo McDonald by appearing as a guest on Carlson’s show, he was working with Carlson in an attempt to spread a specific message. He was willing to work with Carlson but not willing to call him out on his problems. Tracey believes that we shouldn’t ever work with someone who is problematic such as MSNBC and centrist democrats, yet he is willing to work with one of the most problematic people in media, Tucker Carlson. So, my point stands.

Theo McDonald you’re clearly trying to miss the point. I don’t care what Sam does. I’m talking about Tracey and his hypocrisy when it comes to his own logic regarding problematic people. Think about this, would Tracey ever go on MSNBC? Probably not, but if he did, it would be to confront them. But when he goes on Fox News(which is, at best, just as bad as MSNBC but for different reasons) he doesn’t confront them. Instead he made comments on the show that imply that Carlson is just a regular guy whose work complies with high standards. He gave validation to a very problematic person and that person’s very problematic beliefs. By doing this, Tracey did not abide by his own logic. That is my point and it stands.

Theo McDonald if you’re a progressive, then you have to realize that he still is nowhere near netting positive. I’m not blind to MSNBC’s problems and I’m not blind to Carlson’s either, and I bet you aren’t as well. Now, I hope you have a good day and stay safe.

ASSANGE AND TRUMP WIN FATALITY I’m fairly certain Tucker was complicit in spreading numerous falsehoods about Iraq in the early 2000’s so he could rile people up into a frenzy and support the invasion. Tracey is so emotional about an investigation that he compared MSNBC’s response to it with the media failures in the early 2000’s that got us into Iraq, but strangely he didn’t go on Carlson’s show to call him out. I wonder why that is?

Theo McDonald then there was really no point bringing it up, huh?

4 years later and Sam's been proven wrong!! . Countless times

​@@dirtcom7care to elaborate?

Clearly @dirtcom7 didn't care to elaborate .🤷🏼‍♂@@AltheHealer

@@Matt_Barnes they love to poop on the floor, leave, and then act like that was somehow a victory.

@@Matt_Barnes Sam was obviously wrong. What do you guys need, a dissertation? Just look at Sam's face today, and look at his face then. Clearly, he should've stopped shaving earlier. Every day he woke up and said "I'm going to use a razor" was a mistake.

Michael

Michael

michael michael michael michael

At least Seder simply called him out for the coward he is and said he was just going to hang up. Vaush obviously is a masochist.

It was a trap question though, and now that the whole fraud narrative has completely collapsed Sam looks a complete fool in retrospect. I wonder why he never mentions russiagate anymore

I'm back today too wtf. What brought you back to this video lol?

@@TheSethcast Any of his tweets in the past three weeks

@@TheJonnyEnglish "I'm not for or against the protests. They are just a thing that is happening."

Have you read barr spittin barrs report? Curious. I won't be back till maybe a day or two. I'll give you time to read it

I don't think Michael cares about going on a network which has been shown to be propagandists.

@@osbos69 If that were true he wouldn't be whining about it. he totally cares.

Michael. Michael. MICHAEL. - Literally anyone trying to have a discussion with him.

Ben won't accept the challenge, he's been dodging true challengers for years now. Like most members in the IDW he prefers debating college students.

Of course right wingers would never accept a challenge from Sam or Michael. Whenever these righties are in a “debate” they make shit up in regards to policy in hopes their opponents can’t call them out on it, that strategy does not work against either Sam or Michael because they know everything so much more intimately than the righties do. See the debate with Sam and Charlie Kirk, Charlie just made shit up several times only to be made a fool of by Sam.

@@robertrichards9565 by Michael you mean Michael Brooks right? Because Tracey is a complete tool.

Matuco BULLAguero Brooks, I was worried I made that ambiguous, but yes seeing Michael Brooks destroy fascists on itv makes my day whenever I see it.

@@robertrichards9565 lol sorry, just making sure 😂😂😂 And yeah, I totally agree, Brooks pulls no punches. He has been slowly turning into my favorite progress.

Seriously! Thank you.

Add Zero Books to your list. Wait a few weeks and the entire gang is going to look even more like hacks.

How so? Show more corruption or will there be proof of Russian collusion?

@@southgalaxydiedforoursins4193No one knows that's what waiting to see the report means. Since there's no such law as "collusion" RM couldn't find DT guilty of it but Congress can define it as a "high crime/misdemeanor" which is a political definition.

Sam has been very uptight lately

Sam can't stand the fact that he supported the Russiagate hoax, so he went full Bill Oreilly for cover.

Good lord what an amazing moment

You know the moment someone says that they're trying to put you up to a standard that they won't practice so that they can try to be more effective in the discussion than you lol.

Because the president was voted by the electoral not popular. So to investigate a tag team with dictatorship Russia and Trump is stupid. Because the popular voted for that bitch Hillary. Evasive on question of yes and no? Then no why you think that as a follow up question.

Saudie Arabia forevaaa

Like kyle kulinski???

The pertinent question isn't, "how," it's, "why."

Do you know that Trump called for releasing full report? -I wonder why. Hmmm...

@@Peter-kp5gm Yea he also said he'd give us his tax returns like 3 years ago.

@@Peter-kp5gm Yeah, that's great, but now he's opposing it. Because nothing he says matters. That people buy into his lies makes me very concerned for the future of our species.

@@xAssailantx So what? How cant you see that this Russia gate conspiracy theory is turning good for him. As it stands now; it is: you and the rest of the world 0 and Trump 1. Do you bet this score will change in your favor after full release?

lol

Hes right though.

@@Eyoballin Has he seen the full Mueller report?

@@Eyoballin He may be right about no collusion, but that's very different from saying that the whole investigation was a hoax. The FBI certainly thought there was shady stuff worth investigating, and that was long before the Steele dossier was even a thing. It's irresponsible to condemn the whole investigation as if it was just something that came from Clinton's imagination.

It's become obvious to anyone with a brain at this point, aka not you! Go away, Hillarybot. She didn't lose because Russia hacked the election, she lost because she was a terrible candidate.

Jimmy wont debate sam again. Sam has extended an open invitation to debate Jimmy like a year and a half ago and Jimmy hasnt taken him up on it.

Oh man I laughed so hard it hurt

Maxine Waters viciously assaulted my microphone! Lol

this whole thing was a mess

M Valle Michael Tracy is a ridiculous person and was thus handled.

@@Whoeverheardof handled how? I mean who were you listening to? All I heard is a bunch of dribble back and forth from the both of them; yet the problem is still there, that Seder and many others funneled clicks to their channel off of Hearsay/rumor rather than concrete evidence; and when people get called out on this the come back is "oh but we're still waiting on the full report" - F-that we can debate all day about financial ties, but the sad issue NO one wants to admit the DNC screwed the people over with allowing this piece of shit a red carpet to the white house with no true examination of the DNC's internal issues, this Russia narrative was born from them and progressive voices have been making an ass of themselves all riding the Rachel Maddow ratings train; don't be a coward speak on the fact that Seder was wrong

@@mvalle6072 Damn. Well said.

Emptyheaded idiots always do that when confronted by intelligent, quick people

lmao.... now that I think about it if this guy had an accent he could literally be sargon

@@scotthall5405 I dunno its hard to be that much of a misogynistic asshole... This guy is probably a 4/10 on the sargon scale and this video is about 5 sargons too long.

I was disappointed by sam in this interview. Let the guest make their points then counter their points . simple

Have you watched his conversation with Vaush? It's an hour and 45 minutes of him avoiding every single question.

Jeff C yeah it got me reminiscing of this video so I had to watched it again.

The dude's autistic if it's not noticeable, give him a little slack, he talks as if he is writing

Brought to you by the CIA! Thanks for watching msdnc

What 2021 are you living in?

lol, tracey sounds exactly like his tweets, i don't think there's any irony in them

@@ktd522 The 2021 where sane people live.

The opposite is true

russiagate was a dud, how did this make them in disrepute, no one is talking about russiagate anymore.

Yes it was... Time to diversify your news consumption.

If Sam apologizes, Michael can move onto to putting his head in the sand on another issue.

No. For the WAY in which he covered it.

Yeah he's trying to use this as a springboard for his career. Note he said he was glad to get pats on the back for being "right" about Russia.

I don't even know who this michael guy is but he sure made sams hands shake in the beginning before the introduction. Now I'm gonna look into him

How is he a grifter?

Decided to check his twitter - yeah, pretty much.

@@davidm1926 Yeah, we see this a lot from "Liberals".

Wendy Schneider because he thinks for himself? Yes very true

I would come call Sam independent as well.

dont insult us freelancers.

That demon got him.

He thinks Neville Chamberlain was based, I think he's cringe af dawg

I would say fodder rather than material but hey...

To be fair, he's probably still getting over the trauma of Maxine Waters beating him half to death.

@@robschroeder8297 I'm amazed he even survived that encounter.

and now we've been proven that Russiagate was a conspiracy lol

@@RocketGator05 Love the absolute delusional denial of reality

@@L0neSiPh0n and the sheeple still believe and still watch this channel 🤦‍♂️

@@RocketGator05 Keep coping

@@L0neSiPh0n Ukraine is a fake proxy war brought on by the expansion of NATO, Iraq never had wmds, Clinton killed Seth rich and sabotaged the 2016 elections and COVID was created in the US... It's pathetic that you still follow the mainstream narrative 😂😂😂🤡

There are way more dems who lose arguments online calling people russian trolls than there are russian trolls. 10-1 easy

exactly. It's like complaining about a sports team's fan on the performance of the team.

He's like this in every interaction, it's impressive how much of a weasel he is. Check out his debate with Vaush, it takes him a 5+ minute incoherent monologue to "describe" his political beliefs.

@@TayTayMakesBeats We might be getting round 2 with Vaush shortly...

He is building a case so he can fully endorse Trump in 2020. He posted Bernie articles from 2018, and using that as proof Bernie is not Progressive and equating him to a centrist. At this point I hope he is doing all this to at least cash in at Fox News, and not having mental health issues.

This! This is seriously the craziest part of it all. You have a 4 page? summary of a 300 page report. Put together by someone appointed by the person who is under investigation. And even this summary says "THIS DOESN'T EXHONORATE DONALD TRUMP" and people go nuts. How about all request the full report first before going at each other again. I can understand the position of the american taliban... But someone like Tracey rushes this far on a summary, just to blow himself?

@@leo9753 Everyone is Gas Lit and we don't even realize how crazy this all is.

Ste ik, Accusing someone of avoiding to answer the questions doesn't actually establish that they did that. Screaming at them that they must answer yes or no is what Bill O'Reilly used to do. Tracey was trying to answer the questions. Sam just wanted to fight, and Sam is the one who ended up looking like he wanted to avoid the issue by insisting that Tracey was making the Iraq War coverage and Russia, Russia, Russia coverage analogous, when clearly, Tracey said he was not equating those things. This was really embarrassing for Sam, uninformative, counter-productive, and down right silly.

@@lufo4599 Why couldn't he answer yes or no to that question? You et al keep saying that answering the question yes/no isn't reasonable, but none of you ever say _why_ . Not "Why isn't it reasonable to answer every question with yes/no", but "Why couldn't he answer THIS question with yes/no" ? This has caused a lot of division among people, so I did a deep dive into the interview to give us something concrete to argue over: The question was "Do/did you think the Russia investigation should have been launched." and the first answer Tracey gives (after his "its so nice to be here" waffling) was "we NOW know it was launched under false pretenses." That is not an answer to the question, it might be the basis for an answer but it does not actually answer it. Lo and behold, when Seder later tries to pin him down on it ( 6.20 ) Tracey completely reverses his position from "it was launched under false pretenses and a total fraud" to "well of course the investigation should have been launched to implicate Manafort..." which is in no way implied by anything Tracey said before that. This is exactly the kind of response Seder was trying to avoid, this kind of bullshit is what I expect from Trump officials and Fox News talking heads, not supposed journalists. Later on Tracey tries the same shit again, refusing to answer the question ( 8.15 ) Seder: "So you had no opinion? You were agnostic whether the president of the united states should be investigated at any time? You were completely agnostic?" Tracey: "I wanted him to be held to account and investigated for his actual offenses" Seder: "And you knew his offenses were what? Tracey: "And these were not one of them. Democrats and MSNBC... No, I did not support the conspiracy investigation." Can you see how Tracey isn't listening? Or is listening, but would prefer to talk about how much better he is than MSNBC? He doesn't answer the first question (Were you agnostic?) by moving the goal posts from "Did you support the investigation previously" to "did you support the "conspiracy" investigation?" After that, he either doesn't answer the question or has completely reversed his position. Seder didn't ask about a "conspiracy investigation", he asked about the investigation, parts of which Tracey just said he supported ("well of course the investigation should have been launched to implicate Manafort"). So, if the whole investigation is a "conspiracy investigation" then Tracey is contradicting the answer he gave 4 minutes ago and if its only part of the investigation that was a conspiracy then he didn't answer the question. Finally, at 11.35 , Seder understandably loses it and asks one basic question: Seder: "do you believe the report that you now tout in its saying that the russians were interefering in the election by hacking the emails or their shenanigans on social media? Do you think that is true, did you know in July?" Tracey: "I unequivocally reject this notion that election interference, that's talking about social media posts..." That's the icing on the cake really. Tracey is trying to talk about whether the interference changed the outcome of the election instead of answering about what he knew in July and how he knew it. And its obvious why, because Seder has him by the balls. Tracey is claiming that the only part of the Barr summary that's right is the part that he agrees with, while everything else should be doubted, especially whether Russians really did hack the DNC emails. Alongside the issue that Tracey had no way of knowing whether he was right or wrong in July until the report came out (and I'll remind you, it still hasn't come out) as evidenced by Tracey being wrong over who hacked the DNC. According to Tracey, it just so happens apparently that the only parts of the Barr summary that we can assume to be true is the part that he claimed was right July 2016, while the only parts that should be doubted are the parts he claimed were wrong in July 2016. Is that really not suspicious to you at all?

@@steik6414 First of all, it's not a yes/no question, as I have established. It's a multifaceted, open ended question, which Sam himself says is to establish the reason/positions for the debate. Michael Tracey very clearly explained that this is a complicated subject so he was trying to construct his answer with additional information. Sam should have let him do that if he were an honest actor. Sam also attacked Michael for not answering the question the same way Glenn Greenwald did, as if that is the only way/legitimate way someone must answer a question. Furthermore, you're ignoring the whole part about the Twitter post that Sam opened up the show with, but refused to let Michel respond in context or respond directly to. Michael was responding substantively to Sam's questions and Sam became totally unhinged.

@@lufo4599 ooof reading these comments a few years later is painful. This shit aged like milk under the sun lmfaooo, not only did Sam give him space to rebut the twitter thing, the bad faith coming from you guys is next level and the joint congressional report on this was released, definitively proving Sam right. Sheesh. How you can watch this and think Michael "Im officially a grifter and in love with white nationalist Tucker Carlson" Tracey is being the good faith actor here is wild lmao

Lmaoo

I literally heard that comment from him, said to myself "dear god I hope someone points this out" and scrolled like 10 comments to find this. Thank you!

Vaush is a moron. Watch Destiny obliterate him. It's free.

​@@ams914 destiny loves Sam Seder

RIIIGHT??!! WTF.

Whenever Tracy gets attention for saying some stupid ass shit on Twitter, this video always gets a little traffic.

@@TheJonnyEnglish so every day?

Michael Tracy fan(s).

He's Unhinged because this guy can't answer a question to save his life

tomitstube, Alex Jones? Really? No. And it's tough to answer a question when three words into your answer you get someone screaming at you in an unhinged fashion reminiscent of Bill O'Reilly "YESSSS OR NOOOOOOOO, ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!!!"

Lu Fo we said this in another post but honestly it’s like teaching a knowitall little kid about politics.

@@lufo4599 that isn't how it happened, watch it again, sam asked tracey at least 4 times if he believed there was evidence to start an investigation, and *every single time* tracey would rant into a non-sequitur collage of topics. just like alex jones does.

@@douchebagbrigade Yes, you've said that, but provided little to no evidence to back that up. Sam opens up by talking about twitter, Tracey wants to respond to that, Sam refuses. Sam insults Tracey. Tracey laughs it off. Sam asks Tracey a multifaceted, open ended question. Tracey begins to answer and Sam starts screaming "YES OR NOOOOOOOO!" The rest s all downhill. So is the knowitall little kid you're referring to Sam? Because that, i would agree with.

no. he got anally massacred

Sam only got schooled in the mind of an idiot. And you're top of the class, bitch boy. Mike Tracey is a moron, and he proved it here.

@@Spaxx1001 Burn. It hurts doesnt it? If Sam won this battle you wouldn't need to defend him would you.

Lol IDK how the fuck that happens lololol

Be nice to sam. He has some faults but for the most part he might be nice

@@Murky_MurkiMurka That's funny considering Michael Tracey was the one babbling like an idiot. I don't even like Sam really, but Michael Tracey is a total child.

@@thehumanity0 I like sam. Don't get me wrong but this interview will be shown to be crazy. Anyone would to some appear to babbling trying to get a word in without being interrupted for the most part. The conspiracy theorist seem to be overly emotional

@@Murky_MurkiMurka "Conspiracy theorist"? He's literally just arguing for basic logic and common sense. It's a fact that there were guilty pleas during the investigation, calling it all a hoax or fraudulent is factually inaccurate, not to mention the actual report is not even out and Republicans are blocking it like their lives depend on it.

@@Murky_MurkiMurka At one point Tracey even explains how he unequivocally takes Barr's word as fact on one part of Barr's letter, but then completely rejects another part of it on the Russian hacks. This is contradictory and he is clearly working backwards from his conclusion, whether you accept Barr's letter as the truth or not.

Joshua Sand, I watched that debate between Michael Brooks and Sargon of Akaad. Sargon was running from Brooks in that debate and being evasive. But that was not the case here. Sam would ask him a questions and before he could get a few words out Sam would shout over him, "YES OR NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!" Don't have people on if you're going to control how they answer your questions.

@@lufo4599 I notice you've posted this a few times. I'm curious when watching a news interview with a politician and they're evasive and avoid the simple yes or no question don't you want them to cut through the crap and shout Just answer the question, Yes or No? It's just a basic platform for the interviewer to move forward down that route of inquiry. If the person being asked the question refuses then it's kind of on them (and they know it otherwise they'd answer the question).

@@Hoopla10 This interview wasn't with a politician,, and the question and the way it was asked can hardly be characterized as a "simple yes or no question."

@@lufo4599 Do you believe that the Muller investigation was justified?

they just project. the right wing is severely mentally ill.

Michael Tracey is so damn ignorant that I wish Sam hadn’t gotten so flustered when evading Sam first question demonstrated Michael’s inability to think on his feet. Also, when Sam accused him of having no integrity. Michael practically agreed by not objecting

@@jocksharerock7318 I can't blame Sam for getting flustered. Even just listening to this evasive hack got my blood boiling. I've been in conversations similar to this and to be frank at some point, the obnoxious disrespect of reality by your discussion partner just makes you want to slam the phone down. Hard to keep a clear focused mind when someone tries to rile you up like that.

Yes, I’m going through the same thing with the Jimmy Dore fanatics locally. They yell so loud that you can’t get a word in. Sorry you have to go through it too. It’s like an epidemic, the amounts of family and friends all screwed up to the point where you literally can’t have a discussion

​@@jocksharerock7318 To be honest, it became a lot more bearable when I found this show and adopted some of their approaches. Before, I always took everything so seriously and really to heart, because as you say, this blatant disregard for reality is truly a disease that hurts the weakest in society every single day as well as having the potential to eventually destroy civilisation (and I mean that without any hyperbole). It feels absolutely threatening when you are confronted with this gaslighting style of debating and nothing you say matters. It's unarguably a great strategy to rid the political field of opposing voices, because many of us (including myself) find themselves desperate, flustered and thus incapable of standing our ground in any such discussions where facts and reality don't matter anymore. I found TMR and Brooks' show so helpful because unlike many others, they are relentlessly mocking and pointing out the absurdity of this new style of flexible-reality politics. They rarely ever acknowledge the proponents of these gaslighting politics as equals to be taken seriously in the discussion and thus take away a lot of the paralysis one might feel while being steamrolled with their bullshit. It's surprisingly empowering to learn to laugh into the face of an existential threat.

@@waugse we need to stop "debating" mentally ill psychos. If we the smart people acknowledge them at all, just mock them. It's all they deserve.

Lmao exactly

EXACTLY. FOH comment section

I guess you didn't watch the video, since it was Sam Seder that acted like a total dick against someone that has been proven right on the Russiagate hoax.

Lmfao. Seder was literally throwing a hissy fit 😂😂

Haha, your irony is funny! But, seriously though. Tracey should propably go see someone about his personal problems.