Don Lemon Has Meltdown After He Tries To Play The Race Game With Republican Presidential Candidate

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm Carmine Sabia, and this is Explain America

Folks, you're about to watch an epic takedown of CNN host Don Lemon by Republican presidential

candidate Vivek Ramaswamy. Now, I don't know if you've heard of him yet. He's pretty new to the

field. He's an entrepreneur. And just like Donald Trump, you know, he's lagging, not lagging, but

he's, you know, he's a come from behind guy. He's a dark horse candidate in the Republican primaries

But wow, when you listen to him, unbelievable. I came away from this interview very impressed

by this man. And I think you will too. First, let's watch how Don Lemon tries to get him

tries to bait him with the Fox News Dominion lawsuit and how Vivek just does not take the bait

expertly. He doesn't yell, he doesn't scream, but he frustrates Don Lemon. And that's nothing

compared to the second clip I'm going to show you. But let's watch this one first

Joining us now are frequent guests on Fox News, Republican presidential candidate and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy. So we are happy to have you. I'm going to talk to you more

than just about Fox News, but good morning to you for joining us. What do you make of this

decision to settle this case? I mean, it seems strikes me as a cost of doing business. If you're

going to be a news network, I think it's happened to CNN. I think it's happened to a lot of news networks. That has not happened. It's never been sued for defamation, never been never been actually

settled. It's definitely larger. And Fox appears to have the largest viewership in the market

capitalization. So I'm not familiar with the details of this case. I'm actually more interested

in issues relating to this country than disputes with media companies. But I will say that it

strikes me that from CNN, you're not familiar with the case. You're not familiar with the lies

about the 2020 election, about the election being stolen, that Dominion was somehow, you know

fixing the votes. I mean, that's why they've seven hundred eighty seven point five million dollars. You're not familiar with that. And you're running for president. The details of a private

dispute between a commercial dispute and the details of what the dollar figures are public

That's really not where I spend my time. But what I will say is, look, there's defamation cases

people settle businesses, settle business disputes. Fox settled this one. It's actually not

I think, the pressing issue for the nation of what Fox News is. Settlement is. I disagree with

that, because as you just admitted, you said Fox is the largest viewership, one of the largest

viewerships among television networks and especially cable networks, considering the eyes of the American people who are tuning in to Fox News to get their information and to get it

accurately. I'm surprised that you would say that you're not concerned about this and this is not

something that is hugely pressing for the American people. Here's the way I look at it. Freedom of

the press is the First Amendment in the Constitution. Oh, exactly. You nailed it

The freedom of the press. So we have CNN, we have Fox. I'm here with you guys. I go on Fox News

I think that that's great that we have a marketplace of ideas in this country

What I worry more about, Don, is the trend that we see in this country to controlling what different parties are actually able to say. The American way to bad speech is

more speech. And so I think we need to actually embrace that culture and a more diverse marketplace

of ideas. That's something we haven't done well enough in this country. With all honesty

you're not answering the question. You're giving us platitudes about. I'm not sure what your

question is, Don. Do you want somebody to bash Fox News on CNN? No, I'm not asking you to bash Fox News

I'm asking you to be honest about what happened on Fox News, about the lies that were told

and them having to admit the lies and paying the largest defamation settlement to a media company

in history. And you are a frequent guest on that network. Are you concerned about the credibility

Are you going to continue to go on that network even with those credibility? I have far more

concerns with the credibility of what we will call the mainstream media than I do with the

credibility of Fox News. But Fox is a mainstream media. At the end of the day, what I say is

look, neither you nor I know the details because they settled it before it went to trial. I think

the obsession over this is a little weird, Don. It's a little bizarre. There's real issues to

talk about in the country. Why are we talking about Fox News and the settlement? This is a

very big and important story. We have much more that we want to talk to you about, but we will

get there when we're ready to get there. We have you on to talk about these issues. This is a very

important issue and it should not be downplayed. This has to do with American democracy and

Americans learning the truth about what happened in the 2020 election. You don't think that's

important? I hear a lot of that compared to CNN. It's not this apples and oranges. It's not the

same thing. Well, it's different networks. Yes, apples aren't the same as oranges. You get one

view through CNN. You get a different view through Fox News. I think that's good in our marketplace

of ideas is that we have media that offers diverse perspectives. And you want to talk about threats

to our democracy. One of the threats and that phrase is an interesting one, threats to our

democracy. I think one of the biggest ones is the chilling effect on speech in our country more

broadly, where if somebody says something that a broad segment of the population or certain people

in the government disagree with, there's an increasing trend in our country to silence that

And the answer to bad speech and alleged misinformation is not less speech. It is more

speech in the marketplace of ideas. That's actually what a free press really means

We're going to move on. But your answer was good. But it's not about what's actually happened. It's

not relevant to what's happening. I think the answer to what happened at Fox News is to tell

the truth. Media companies are tasked with telling the truth. That did not happen in the situation

That's why we're asking these questions. But let's move on. Let's talk more about a diverse exchange of ideas. That's what I'm in for. Thank you. If you notice, he expertly just

pushes away the question, tries to get to serious topics, tries to get to the things that are really

facing Americans. But Lemon, he wants to take his victory lap against Fox News. He wants to put

Vivek on the spot. He wants to hurt him with the Fox News audience. But Vivek, cool as a cucumber

doesn't even respond to it, tries to get to the topics, frustrates Lemon. But you really want to

see Lemon get frustrated. Let's watch this next clip where Vivek talks about the original gun

laws, which were very much anti-black. They were designed to keep freed slaves from getting

firearms. This is a known fact. And Don Lemon gets really flustered. Now, again, Vivek is a person of

color. Yet Don Lemon talks to him like he has no experience being a person of color. Don Lemon

who is a multimillionaire, who has, you know, a very big show and a very high salary. He talks

like he is a victim of some kind of oppression. And Vivek's just not having it. And Vivek tries

to stick to just the facts. Don, like most liberals, is arguing from emotion. Vivek is arguing

from facts. And I think you're gonna see how beautifully he handles this to the point where

Don Lemon at the end of this is just so frustrated and begging to move on, takes his glasses off in

sheer frustration. It's actually hilarious to watch. Here, here's what you said referring to

back to 1865. Here it was. I want you to raise your hand if you know when the first anti-gun laws

were passed in this country. Raise your hand if you do. 1865. You want to know when it happened

We fought a civil war in this country to give black Americans the equal protection under the

law that we failed to secure them in 1776. But then you want to know what happened? Southern

states passed anti-gun laws that stopped black people from owning guns. The Democrat party

then as in now, wanted to put them back in chains. Then as in now, that's quite an accusation about

the current Democratic Party. Who and what were you referring to? I was referring to Joe Biden

and his expression of wanting to put them back in chains, dating back to Lyndon Johnson. I think

Lyndon Johnson's so-called great society was one of the greatest misnomers in American political

history, where even back then in the 1960s, 70% plus of black kids were born into two-parent homes

Today, that number is less than 30% in the opposite direction. The very policies that we

implemented in this country in the name of helping black Americans have actually been disastrous for

black Americans and all Americans. I think that that's something that we need to wake up to

In 1865, you were talking about the black codes, right? That's right. Passed, enacted to make the crime for a black person to carry a gun in the South

But you're equating that to the current president? You're referring to economic chains? What are you

saying? Well, I was referring to Joe Biden's, I think, ill-chosen expression to say they're

the party that wants to put you back into chains. What I'm actually saying is that if you look at

the policies of the modern Democratic Party. You just said that about Democrats. Absolutely. So what I'm saying is that actually it's policies like that of Lyndon Johnson

and Joe Biden that are actually holding black Americans back. Lyndon Johnson's the war on poverty? Yes. And in particular, his great society

where he actually created incentives in the family, where if you're a family

you could actually get more money by not having the father in the home. Guess what you get? You get what you pay for. I think it's been really bad for the black

community. I think it's really bad for all Americans. Do you have anything on this before I move on to Cheyenne? I don't see what one has to do with the other, but go on. I took up a lot

of time with Fox News. Oh, it's fine. We have time. I don't really see what one has to do with the

other, especially considering and using the Civil War to talk about black Americans. That war was

not fought for black people to have guns. That's not... That war was fought for black people to

have freedoms in this country. That's why the Civil War was fought. Okay. But that wasn't fought

for black people to have guns. I think... Actually, you know, a funny fact is black people

did not get to enjoy the other freedoms until their Second Amendment rights were secured. And

I think that that's one of the lessons that we learned. Black people still aren't allowed to enjoy the freedoms. I disagree with you on that, Don. I disagree with you. I think you're doing a

disservice to our country by failing to recognize the fact that we have equality of the law. When you are in black skin and you live in this country, then you can disagree with me, but we're

not. You mentioned that we have three different shades of melanin in here. Don, I think we have to be able to talk about these issues in the open regardless of the color of our skin. Black

Americans today, to say that... Compare that to 1865 and 1964. I think it's insulting to black

people. It's insulting to me as an African-American. I don't want to sit here and argue with you because it's infuriating for you to put that... To put those things together. It's not right

Your telling of history is wrong. What part of the history was wrong

The Civil War was fought. You're making people think that the Civil War was fought for black people to get guns and for black people to have... The Civil War was fought for black people in this

country to get freedoms, a noble mission. I think that even after we succeeded, we had to actually

secure those freedoms. To reduce it in a speech at the NRA to say you're making people think

you're trying to say that black people to get guns, that was the reason that you're there at

the NRA. That was the reason for the Civil War. I think that's reductive and I think it's insulting

There are a whole plethora of reasons for the Civil War. With due respect, I find your

explanation reductive and actually insulting, including to black Americans, to say that black

people today, compared to 1964, 1865, haven't made progress in part because of the freedoms we

secured. The Second Amendment was part of the... Hang on please. I cannot keep a thought if you

guys are talking to me in my ear. Hang on one second. To say that black people... Say what you

said again. Black people secured their freedoms after the Civil War. It is a historical fact

Don. Just study it. Only after their Second Amendment rights were secured. They were not

secured their freedoms after the Civil War. You are discounting Reconstruction. You're discounting

a whole host of things that happened after the Civil War when it comes to African Americans

including the whole reason that the Civil Rights Movement happened. It's because black people did

not secure their freedoms after the Civil War. Things turned around. People tried to change

the freedoms that were supposed to happen after the Civil War. You know how they got it? They got their Second Amendment rights and they actually got... The NRA played a big role in

that. But today, Don, the NRA did not play a big role in that. Absolutely, they trained black Americans how to use firearms. That's a lie. That's not. The NRA did not play a big role in

that. This is just historical fact. It's not a historical fact. The part that I find... Just because you say it's a historical fact... The part that I find insulting is when you say today

black Americans don't have those rights after we have gone through the Civil Rights Revolution in

this country. The fact that I find insulting is that you are sitting here telling an African American about the rights and what you find insulting about the way I live, the skin I live

in every day. And I know the freedoms that black and white... That black people don't have in this

country and that black people do have. Well, here's where you and I have a different point of view. I think we should be able to express our views regardless of the color of our skin. We

should have this debate without me regarding you as a black man, but me regarding you as a fellow

citizen. That's what I think we should see. That you're sitting here, whatever ethnicity you are, explaining to me about what it's like to be black in America. I'm sorry. Whatever ethnicity I am

I'll tell you what I am. I'm an Indian American. I'm proud of it. But I think we should have this debate. Black, white, doesn't matter. I think we should have this debate. On the content of

the ideas. You should do it in an honest way and in a fair way. And what you're doing is not an

honest and fair way. We appreciate you coming on. With due respect, Don, I look forward to

continuing that conversation. We'll continue the conversation. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you, Pop. We'll talk about China. Yes, talk about China. Next time you come back. Oh

thank you. Much to say on declaring independence from China. Okay, you can move on now, please

Thank you. Thank you. I mean, Vivek really had him on the ropes and it showed just a beautiful

beautiful job. I think this man needs to be on the debate stage at the very minimum in the

Republican primaries. And I think people need to hear what he has to say. This is a voice that

should be heard. Tell us what you think in the comments, guys. As always, please remember to

like, comment, share and subscribe. Again, I'm Carmine Sabia and this is Explain America

We love you guys. God bless you. Take care, everybody