The Young Turks - Border Deal Breakdown

Starting point is 00:00:00 You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Welcome to TYT. I'm your host, Anna Casparian, in a flood-laden Los Angeles. We will be working from home today and possibly a few other days this week because of the storms that have hit Southern California, actually California in general. But we, of course, are still going to bring you the news and do our best, even if we're working remotely. Today we've got a lot of news to get to a lot of dense stories, but important stories to say the least. Jank Yugar will be joining me in the second segment after I do a little bit of electoral coverage.

Starting point is 00:00:56 Some new polling on Joe Biden doesn't look great. So I wanted to give you some updates on that, along with Biden losing some very public figures. We'll get to Michael Rappaport, and what he had to say about basically boating for Trump, how that might be on the table for him. Later on in the show, we're also going to give you some updates on the ongoing war on Gaza. We're going to talk about the IDF getting caught in yet more lies. We're We're going to talk about the Biden administration leaking some comments about Benjamin Netanyahu to Politico with the hopes, in my opinion, that it would help garner support among Democratic voters who have been absolutely disgusted with the way that he has handled this war in the Middle East. And of course, we're going to give you the details, as we know them at the moment, in regard to that Senate bill on the border and also some military aid to Ukraine and Israel. But before we get to any of that stuff, just want to encourage you all to like and share the stream if you're watching us live on YouTube. And if you want to support us in a financial way, you can do so by becoming a member by going to t-y-t.com slash join. You can also do so by hitting that join button if you're watching us on YouTube. You could join that way. And as you all know, members help to keep our show ideologically independent, free from corporate influence. And we're always grateful to our members. They get all sorts of perks in addition to helping to keep. us independent, including our daily members only bonus episode.

Starting point is 00:02:29 All right. Without further ado, let's talk a little bit about how the election is looking for Joe Biden. This is why when I say voting for pig Donald Trump is on the table. Voting for pick Donald Trump is on the table. The other day in New York City, six illegal aliens jumped a New York City cop in YPD's finest. They jumped a New York City Cup in Times Square and were arrested and released without bail. I know it's a city thing. Actor Michael Rappaport, who is by no means a fan of Donald Trump, now says that voting for Donald Trump, the former president, is on the table due to Biden's handling of the ongoing

Starting point is 00:03:18 migrant crisis. Now, what has Rappaport fired up is the footage that we've actually talked about here at TYT, showing migrants in New York City, ganging up on and beating up New York Police Department cops as they were attempting to detain someone. So that is the image that you are seeing on the screen as we speak. Some of those individuals ended up getting arrested and they were released with no bail. And that has certainly upset a lot of Americans, including Michael Rappaport. But I want to be clear, this isn't the only issue that Rappaport has had with the Biden presidency. He's also concerned with basically how Biden hasn't done enough in his mind to handle the anti-Semitism in the country. And he seems to also take issue with the fact

Starting point is 00:04:12 that Biden is focused on implementing sanctions against Israeli settlers in the West Bank, as opposed to focusing on the domestic issues, including the migrant crisis that are having an impact on various blue cities and, of course, border towns in the country. So let's hear more of what he had to say. On the same day that Dan happens, cadaver Joe Biden issues in executive order. About four and quote unquote settlers in Judea, Samaria, aka the West Bank, some troublemakers. Three of the four have already been arrested. You issue an executive order about four troublemaking pups who've already been arrested in Judea, Samaria, while there's a war going on, while there's 100 plus hostages still being held

Starting point is 00:05:05 in Gaza. You're talking about that, but you got nothing to say about beating up cops in New York City. differ a little from Rappaport to say the least. I think that the Biden administration has been insanely friendly to the Israeli government and the IDF. And the sanctions against the four Israeli settlers who have been reigning terror on Palestinians in the West Bank was an effort to provide cover. It was like a little bit of a goody to give to the Democratic voters, mostly young Democratic voters who have been absolutely disgusted with the way the Biden administration has handled the war on Gaza. He has, of course, supported everything that Benjamin Netanyahu has

Starting point is 00:05:53 done. Every once in a while, the Biden administration will leak some statement to the press, including outlets like Politico, claiming that Biden is disgusted with what Beebe is doing. But fact of the matter is, he continues to provide the weaponry to the Israeli government, the 2,000 pound bombs, that the IDF continues to drop on. Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. The entire Gaza Strip has been under attack by the IDF for nearly four months now. So the idea that Biden hasn't been friendly enough to Israel is absolutely ridiculous. But apparently Rappaport is not happy with that. And would rather have Biden focus his energy on dealing with the migrant crisis. And I guess he wants Biden to release some

Starting point is 00:06:38 sort of statement about what happened to the two NYPD officers with the migrants basically attacking them and assaulting them. Now, with that context in mind, I just want to note that Rappaport, this isn't the first time that Rappaport has threatened to vote for Trump. I don't see how Trump would be better in Rappaport's mind. I think he is under the impression that Trump would do a better job with the migrant crisis. And of course, Trump is likely to be friendlier to Israel even more friendly than Biden has been. In fact, Itamar Ben-Gavir in the Israeli government recently released a statement saying that he would prefer that Donald Trump win the presidential election over Joe Biden because he does not feel that Biden has been friendly enough to Israel.

Starting point is 00:07:27 So just let that sink in. But with that said, there is some troubling polling from NBC news that doesn't look good for Joe Biden. This is part of an ongoing trend. that we've noticed with the polling. And this NBC news poll not only focused on Biden's approval rating, it also looked at very specific issues and how Americans basically rate Biden against Trump on these very specific issues. So for instance, the poll found that Trump has the edge on securing the border 35 points over Biden. There are some other interesting outcomes from this NBC poll. For instance, Trump holds a 22 point advantage over Biden on the question of which candidate would do a better job handling the economy with 55% picking Trump and 33% choosing Biden.

Starting point is 00:08:19 And you know, that is really concerning because as we know, the Biden administration has been friendlier to labor and some of the highlights of his presidency have been some progressive economic policies. And I'm worried that the Democrats are going to learn all the wrong lessons after Biden's term is up, essentially pointing to those progressive policies for the reason why the general public seems to have a negative view of Biden's handling of the economy. In reality, there were inflationary pressures that Americans were frustrated by. Those inflationary pressures had nothing to do with some of the more pro-labor, pro-union policies that have been championed by the Biden administration. There's also issues having to do

Starting point is 00:09:05 with, you know, some of the price gouging that corporations were able to get away with and would brag about during their shareholder meetings, you know, voters are going to blame the leader for that, even if the leader didn't really play a role in encouraging corporations to do that. But the other thing that Biden did that I think was a massive mistake is he didn't fight adequately to maintain the child tax credit, which was wildly popular, which lifted, you know, half of children living in poverty in this country out of poverty. So there were certainly some foibles by the Biden administration. I certainly want to draw some attention to that. But the grand scheme of things is when it comes to gas prices, when it comes to inflation, some of those factors that voters are blaming Biden for,

Starting point is 00:09:51 Biden wasn't entirely responsible for. As we know, gas prices are really determined based on the OPEC plus cartel. These are the oil producing countries. And oftentimes some of these countries, including Saudi Arabia, for instance, will withhold production of oil in order to drive up the price of oil per barrel. And of course, that translates into what we experience at the gas stations. So it's a little bit unfair, but at the same time, this ongoing war in Ukraine is contributing to a shortage of oil, which also drives up the price of oil. So there's a lot going on. And I think generally speaking, Americans believe that the fish rots from the head down, And they're pinning this blame on Joe Biden.

Starting point is 00:10:37 Now let's get to some more of the details. The poll also shows that Trump is holding a 16 point advantage over Biden on being competent and effective, a reversal from 2020 when Biden was ahead of Trump on this quality by nine points before defeating him in the election. I think this is where the migrant crisis comes to play. I think this is where the endless asks for military aid for foreign countries comes into play. I think all of this is starting to add up and it's starting to impact the views that Americans have in regard to the job that Joe Biden is doing. And remember, if you go back to 2020, the reason why the current results was flipped indicating that voters felt that Donald Trump was the incompetent one is because of his handling of the coronavirus pandemic. But memories of that start to fade and the electorate starts to focus instead on how Biden has handled his job and whether or not he has been competent. And when you hear about, you know, literally thousands of people coming into the country every single day, it seems unchecked, it seems out of control.

Starting point is 00:11:49 They're not going to blame Trump for that. They're going to blame Joe Biden for that. Now, I want to be clear, we're obviously in favor of immigration, but you need to have control of the border. And it's become abundantly clear that Biden does not have control of the border. Now, the two men are essentially tied among Latinos, Trump, 42%, Biden 41%, and voters ages 18 to 34, at 42% each. Among the youngest slice of voters measured, those ages 18 to 29, Biden has just a narrow advantage. So Biden's at 46% and Trump is at 38%. And look, that might not be so narrow, narrow in your mind. But remember, it was the youth that showed up and voted for Biden and really made all the difference in some of these swing states.

Starting point is 00:12:37 And so that should be cause for concern for the Biden administration, the fact that he has lost support among Latino voters. And he has also lost support among young voters. And remember, we've been covering how the large Arab American voting block in Michigan has been feeling about Biden due to his handling of the war. in Gaza, and that's obviously going to be a factor in his performance in the general election. Now, among voters under 35 years old, only 15% approve of Biden's handling of the Israel-Hamas war, while a whopping 70% disapprove. This is becoming a giant political liability for the Biden administration, but he continues to provide endless military support

Starting point is 00:13:20 to Israel, despite what the polls say. And instead, he is trying to provide cover for his administration and the job he's doing by leaking these ridiculous statements to the press where he's criticizing Benjamin Netanyahu. But I think most Americans can see through it and they're not really persuaded by those leaked statements. Now finally, I want to take a look at Biden's approval rating. Let's take a look at this graph because it shows you just how much things have changed for Biden from April of 2021 through to January of 2024. So as you can see from this graph, more Americans approved rather than disapproved of Biden in April of 2021. But that has now changed significantly, as is demonstrated by the blue line in this graph,

Starting point is 00:14:04 which represents the disapproval toward Biden. Biden's approval rating has declined to the lowest level of his presidency in NBC news polling from 37 to 37%, while fewer than 3 and 10 voters approve of his handling of the Israel Hamas. war. So in conclusion, NBC News reports that all together, all together, these numbers explain why the poll shows Trump leading Biden by five points among registered voters in a hypothetical 2024 general election matchup, 47% to 42%. While the result is within the poll's margin of error, the last year of polling shows a clear shift. And that clear shift is the trend that I'm referring to, how the polling has really consistently shown in recent months that Biden is not

Starting point is 00:14:54 performing well. He's not performing well against someone like Nikki Haley. He performs even worse against Nikki Haley, but he's still performing poorly in a matchup against Donald Trump. And remember, he needs to lead Trump by five points in national polls in order to clench a victory. But this poll shows that he's actually trailing Trump by five points. The best news in the poll for Biden is that he pulls ahead of Trump when voters are asked about their ballot choice if the former president is convicted of a felony. Okay, that's good news, but you would need Trump to be convicted of a felony. But even if that happens, even if that happens, the margin then is just two points in Biden's

Starting point is 00:15:38 favor, which is also within the margin of error. Now, Biden supporters, those who want to keep their head in the sand want to ignore these polls. They want to say that it's just, it's too early in the election cycle to take all these polls so seriously. But you can't deny the consistency of these poll results. Week after week, I come on this show and I share details about yet another poll that shows that Joe Biden is really struggling. And what's genuinely concerning is my read of this whole situation is that Biden has no intention of changing course campaign wise or policy wise. And if he has no intention of doing it, well, then we are barreling toward an iceberg. Iceberg straight ahead. Yet the

Starting point is 00:16:25 Democratic establishment is still delusional enough to think that there's a good chance that Biden's going to beat Trump. We're playing with fire here. They're playing with fire here. If they genuinely think that Donald Trump is a threat to our democracy, they certainly have a funny way of showing it by refusing to have robust democratic primaries, by basically not allowing his primary challengers on state ballots, and by pushing for an incredibly vulnerable president to run for reelection after he had promised that he would just serve one term and be done with it. So we'll see how this plays out. I'm going to keep filling you in on the polling results, and I'll keep giving you updates on how this election is going. But if the election were to be held

Starting point is 00:17:08 today, we'd be in a lot of trouble. It's just the fact of the matter. All right, we got to take a break. When we come back, Jen Kuger will join me to talk about a whole host of stories in the news today, including the Senate bill that Republican lawmakers claim they wanted, but are now working hard against passing. We'll be right back. All right, welcome back to the Young Turks,

Starting point is 00:17:48 Jake Ugar and a Kisperian with you guys. And O Beach Babe 21-O, which is a rather long name, but I've now been saying a lot because they've been wonderfully generous. Gifted 20 Young Turks memberships on YouTube, much love for that. Hit the join button below on YouTube to become a member. We definitely need it. and t.yot.com slash join for everyone else. All right, Anna's got more news.

Starting point is 00:18:12 I do. So we finally were able to do a preliminary review of the Senate bill dealing with border security, also provide some funding to Israel and Ukraine. So let's get to those details. As here's what Speaker Johnson said, I have seen enough. This bill is even worse than we expected. It won't come close to any of the border catastrophe the president has created. As the lead Democrat negotiated proclaimed under this legislation the border never closes. If this bill reaches the House, it will be dead on arrival. Your thoughts? Yeah, unfortunately that he would step out and be able to say that right away before, obviously, he had a chance to be able to read it as well and to be able to go through it. The key aspect of this again is, and are we going to

Starting point is 00:18:53 just complain about things? Or are we going to actually address and it change as many things as we can? You guys are just going to complain about things because it would be beneficial, incredibly beneficial to Donald Trump's presidential bid. And that's really what's going on here. So the $118 billion Senate border deal has finally been released after months and months of negotiations. That Fox News interview was with a Republican senator, James Langford, who has been working on this bill and believes that it provides the border security necessary to adequately deal with the migrant crisis. But as you just watched, Langford called out his counterpart in the House of Representatives, House Speaker Mike Johnson, for immediately opposing this bill.

Starting point is 00:19:41 And let's not make the mistake of thinking that this was the first time he opposed the bill. Republicans in the House started opposing the bill before the bill was even released for the general public and for lawmakers to review. Now, while our elected officials debate whether or not the bill goes far enough to stop the flow of migrants into the country, they conveniently ignore several deeply concerning provisions that are hidden in the legislation. And we're going to get to those provisions in just a moment. But before I do, I want you to jump in, Jank, because I am curious, just right off the bat, what your thoughts were about this $118 billion Senate bill. Yeah. I'm glad it's going to get voted down. So for a number of reasons. One, some of the

Starting point is 00:20:25 border provisions make sense, and we've got to get a handle on the border. But some of them don't. And it lasts for three years. And it gives the head of Department of Homeland Security enormous power. And okay, my orcas might use it in some ways. But if Trump wins and basically the Department of Homeland Security chief can just reject almost all immigrants, that's a little bit too much. It goes too far. It's too draconian, right? We've got to get the right balance. And just because you think the border's out of control and it is, and you want it doesn't mean that you should just sign off on the executive branch, any executive branch having this amount of power over the over those issues. So those are some of my concern,

Starting point is 00:21:10 but the bigger concern is $14 billion for Israel. I would never ever vote for a bill that needlessly sends American taxpayer money to slaughter more Palestinians. What does Israel need more money for? They seem to be doing excellent job of killing innocent Palestinians with the $4 billion we send them every year, let alone the extra 14. I mean, really, an extra and extra $14 billion. And Mike Johnson says, don't worry, I'm going to kill the bill. And instead, I'm going to pass a $17 billion aid package for Israel to kill more innocent Palestinians. A standalone bill. Yeah, as a standalone bill. So the only thing that Republicans and Democrats agree on is let's send Israel more money for more war crimes against Palestinians.

Starting point is 00:22:00 So this is the sick government that we have. I don't know if that's really going to bode well for Republicans, because their voting base wants action with the southern border. And if you refuse to do that and instead immediately prioritize and pass a standalone bill that provides $17 billion in military aid to Israel, I just don't know how voters are going to feel. Actually, I do know. I don't think they're going to take kindly to that. But before we get to that military aid, I wanted to give you some more details about the border security portion of the bill, which does provide $20 billion in emergency funding for federal authorities, including the Department of Homeland Security, Justice and State Departments, as well as other agencies to hire thousands of new Border Patrol agents and asylum officers, increase detention capacity, and invest in technology to combat the smuggling offensive. and other narcotics. Now, in terms of what they plan to do to shut down the border, the legislation specifically notes that if there are 4,000 illegal crossings per day for seven days straight, well,

Starting point is 00:23:10 then the Secretary of Homeland Security would have the ability or the option of shutting down the southern border. If there are 5,000 illegal crossings for seven consecutive days, then the Secretary of Homeland Security absolutely has to. It's mandatory. He would have to shut down the border. And then if on a single day, there are 8,500 illegal crossings, well, then there's another mandatory border shutdown. And under the provisions specified in this legislation, the Department of Homeland Security can shut down the border for more than 270 days in a given year, which is like the majority of the year, as you know. So this is not a standalone, a standalone border bill.

Starting point is 00:23:59 The bill also would ship billions in taxpayer dollars off to other countries, including Ukraine and including to Israel. But there are other countries mentioned before I get to the foreign aid and military aid portion of it. Any thoughts about the provisions that would allow for the Secretary of Homeland Security to shut down the border jank? Yeah, so look, of course we've covered the absurdity a lot of the Republicans asking. In fact, here I'm going to read one of our members because they nailed it perfectly. Throko Dragon Rodin, Democratic negotiating 101. Democrats, we will give the Republicans everything they want without getting anything we want.

Starting point is 00:24:39 Republicans, yeah, that's still not good enough. And that really has described the last 40 years of American politics. And Joe Biden has been at the very center of that the entire time. He always gives the Republicans everything they want, and they always say it's not good enough, and he never learns his lesson. So in terms of the good portions of the bill, I think they're going to expedite the asylum process, you know, if they do it right, to six months instead of many, many years. That is definitely a good thing. Getting more judges down there, making that process quicker is a good thing. It depends on what you mean by shutting down the border. Of course, technically, it's illegal to cross it right now without documentation. I basically though, the bottom line is I want to be able to give people with legitimate asylum

Starting point is 00:25:23 claims the possibility of pursuing those claims. And then the laws being what they are, anyone else gets returned. And so anything that expedites that and there are some provisions in here that do is a good thing. So it's not all bad. It's definitely got some pretty good provisions in there. But I think overall, as I said earlier, it gives too much power to the executive branch and Homeland Security Chief. And under if Trump is president, which at this point is incredibly likely, that will be greatly abused and they'll shut down almost all immigration. aid and other foreign aid to other countries. So the $118 billion Senate bill that was released over the weekend has specific provisions pertaining to military aid to be sent to Ukraine and

Starting point is 00:26:31 Israel. Now, this bill is unlikely to pass, considering the fact that House Speaker Mike Johnson said that he's not happy with the border security portion of the bill. That's nonsense. Based on what I've read so far in the legislation itself, it's incredibly strict. and has all sorts of provisions that Republicans have been asking for. But Donald Trump sees it as providing the Biden administration a massive win on immigration if they pass it. So Trump has discouraged Republicans from passing this legislation. Nonetheless, this is what the other provisions include. The legislation would send about $62 billion to support Ukraine in its fight against Russia's invasion,

Starting point is 00:27:13 $14 billion in security aid for Israel, $10 billion in humanitarian assistance to the Gaza Strip and Ukraine, $20 billion for the border, and nearly $5 billion to partners in the Indo-Pacific to fight Chinese aggression. Okay, so those are the parts of the legislation that have been widely reported on. But I should note that Ken Klippenstein, who does excellent reporting over at the Intercept, he also has his own substack, took a look at the entirety of, this 370 page bill and pointed out a number of provisions that he finds alarming and should get a little more attention. So I want to provide some information on that. So the bill would provide $25 million for customs and border protection to conduct familial DNA testing and $204 million

Starting point is 00:28:02 for the FBI for the purposes, including the analysis of DNA samples, including those samples collected from migrants detained by the United States Border Patrol. It would also provide $170 million for autonomous surveillance towers equipped with artificial intelligence and $47.5 million for mobile surveillance, drones and counter drone technology. And it would also provide Israel with an additional $3.5 billion in foreign military financing. There would also be no requirement to notify Congress about how this money is spent if the security of the state, I'm sorry, if the Secretary of State determines it is in the national security interest of the U.S. not to notify them. So thoughts on that, Jank. Yeah, Joe, Israel runs this country. Look, guys, it's not about, I have to say this every time. Aethnicities or religion, et cetera, not all Jewish people are powerful, that's preposterous. They, okay, it's not how it works, but does Israel tell America what to do?

Starting point is 00:29:13 Well, that's just an empirical fact, it does, and we have absolutely no control over it. Later in the show, we'll talk about how Joe Biden apparently says mean things about Netanyahu behind his back, and he wants credit for that. He wants Muslim Americans to vote for him because he says bad words about Netanyahu. What a joke. So look at this bill, $14 billion. The only reason, like Israel can't afford more bombs. They seem to be able to afford all the bombs in the world.

Starting point is 00:29:41 We already give them $3.8 billion a year as it is to bomb and kill and occupy Palestinians. Now we're going to give them an extra 14. That's my money. That's all of our money. You work so hard for it. And they're going to take out a certain percentage to make sure that they kill more Palestinians. I think it's disgusting. And the Republicans say not enough. We want 17 billion to kill more Palestinians.

Starting point is 00:30:05 So there's, and by the way, 70% of the country doesn't want to send more money to Israel to kill more Palestinians. But as always, the American people are irrelevant in Washington in this so-called democracy. The people in power will do what their donors tell them. And in this case, you have three giant lobbyists groups united. United, APAC, defense contractors, and oil companies, and they're all telling Republican and Democratic politicians, no matter what you do, you will pass a giant amount of money for more war in the Middle East and try to basically kill as many people as possible so that the war will get even larger. It'll be an even bigger disaster for us and the world, but they'll get incredibly rich. And Joe Biden bows his head, proposes this piece of trash bill. And Mike Johnson says, I hate every part of it, even all the parts we asked for, because Donald Trump told me to it. But on Israel, I'll give you an extra $3 billion to kill even more Palestinians and start an even bigger war. So I vomit this bill. This bill sucks.

Starting point is 00:31:12 Well, in the end, it is very likely that House Speaker Mike Johnson will introduce a standalone bill providing additional military funding to Israel. I can't imagine the Senate voting that bill down. So it's likely to pass in the Senate. I have no doubt that Biden would sign it into law. And it will be abundantly clear to the American people that Israel's priorities take priority over the United States and what our concerns as Americans happen to be. So we'll see how it all plays out. But that's what we know about the Senate bill so far. And it is unlikely that Republicans will do a damn thing about the migrant crisis, even as they constantly complain about the migrant for political purposes, knowing full well that they could have voted for the bill that has all the provisions that they wanted,

Starting point is 00:32:00 but decided against doing so because their daddy, Donald Trump, bully them against supporting it. One last thing, Anna. So, look, Joe Biden wouldn't do what Democratic voters want under penalty of law as every reporter in DC kisses his ass and pretends that he's being tough on Netanyahu. But Mike Johnson, do you want to know who his biggest donor is? So what happened populist Republicans? What happened Mago who doesn't want war? Your Speaker of the House is going to do exactly what his donors order them to do, order him to do. So this democracy is a sick, sick joke. The people in power never listen to you, never.

Starting point is 00:32:45 And they're not going to listen now and they're going to pass the very worst part of the bill and leave any good provisions out completely. out completely. So enjoy our so-called democracy. clean up his image among Democratic voters who were horrified with his handling of this war on Gaza. While the Biden administration continues to supply weapons, including 2,000 pound bombs for Israel's ongoing war against the Palestinians in Gaza, they are also trying to publicly distance themselves from some of the disgusting actions taken by the IDF at the direction of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Their latest and perhaps most pathetic attempt to do, came in a political piece that was published yesterday. Here's the title. Forget no labels.

Starting point is 00:33:59 Biden's third party peril is on the left. Now the piece correctly argues that the Biden campaign is sleepwalking into an electoral disaster if they continue to ignore how young voters feel about the president's unwavering support toward Israel. So rather than actually take action against Israel as it is committing war crimes in Gaza, administration officials are leaking things like this to Politico. And it's my speculation that they're leaking these statements to Politico, but you'll understand why I'm speculating that after I give you the rest of the story. So Jonathan Martin in Politico writes, like everyone in the administration and any Democrat with a pulse, Biden's deeply suspicious of Benjamin Netanyahu and privately has called the Israeli prime minister a bad effing guy,

Starting point is 00:34:50 according to people who have talked to the president. Now, Biden spokesperson, Andrew Bates, said, the president did not say that, nor would he, adding that the two leaders have a decades-long relationship that is respectful in public and in private. And look, let's keep it real. This has been a pattern with the Biden administration. They see how unpopular supporting Israel's war on Gaza

Starting point is 00:35:16 happens to be among the Democratic base. And so here and there, you'll see statements that Biden allegedly made against Benjamin Netanyahu get leaked to the press. Oh, Biden is disgusted with what Netanyahu is doing. Oh, Biden said that Netanyahu is engaged in indiscriminate bombing in the Gaza Strip, which is true. But then he proceeds to send Netanyahu the 2,000 pound bombs on two different occasions. Biden actually went around Congress to supply more weapons. and more military funding to the Israeli government. So please spare me these statements about how he's disgusted by Netanyahu.

Starting point is 00:35:55 In fact, these statements make the situation worse for Biden, if you ask me, because it is the acknowledgement that Netanyahu is carrying out war crimes, while simultaneously sending Netanyahu the weapons in which he needs to commit the war crimes. It's insane. How does this make Biden look good? Jane. Yeah. So first of all, let's state the obvious. All these leaks of how Biden is privately tough on Netanyahu are 100% horse crap. And let's look at the two possibilities. One is

Starting point is 00:36:33 that it's not even true. They're just making it up. And you think that's not possible? Of course is possible. All Biden has ever done publicly and with our money is kiss Netanyahu's ass. So you're telling me that he's privately tough on Netanyahu. And by the way, look at the coward. In this particular story, he doesn't even say it to Netanyahu's face. He murmurs it under his breath about a foreign leader we're giving $14 billion to. Wow. Oh, I didn't know you were this pro-Palestinian. Wow. Okay. This is supposed to convince Yonels. voters and any decent human, humane, moral Democratic voter, which is the great majority of the Democratic voters on this issue, that somehow good enough, good enough.

Starting point is 00:37:22 He challenged Netanyahu and Israel. So I don't believe it at all. But okay, no problem, let's say you believe it, right? So that may, that scenario is actually worse for Biden because he thinks that Niyahu is terrible and Israel's committing war crimes, but he's gonna give them $14 extra billion. anyway. So who the hell's in charge? Who's in charge? Come on, guys. Look, it's impossible to pretend that Biden is doing this for America's interests. The American voters in every poll are saying, don't do it, don't, right? The numbers are overwhelming. And among Democratic voters,

Starting point is 00:38:02 it's even larger. So he's obviously not doing it for political reasons. He's obviously not doing it for to democratic reasons as in the democracy. So what's he doing it for? Why is he so pathetically weak if he thinks then yeah who's such a jerk? Why does he listen to his every command and order? And at the end of course the most important point is what difference do words make? Whether you actually said mean words, said it to him or set it behind his back. You're sending him the money. Your action is the only thing that matters. Biden is a joke. He works for Netin Yahoo. And all these stories are ways to cover his ass and to try to trick you into voting for Biden because they realize he's bleeding out voters in Michigan and all over the country. And I've got more on this, but Anna, I know you do too. Okay, so I want to give you a few more excerpts from the piece because Jonathan Martin in the same political piece writes, let's go to graphic five here.

Starting point is 00:39:06 White House officials told me it was purposeful Thursday before Biden made his first trip to Michigan this year, that the president used his remarks at the national prayer breakfast to decry hate against Arab Americans and offer prayers for those held hostage or under bombardment or displaced, while simultaneously releasing an executive order levying sanctions on Israeli settlers, four of them, in the West Bank who have committed acts of violence on Palestinians. It's just, it's so hollow and it's so obvious that it's hollow because while the settlers in the West Bank are certainly a problem, just ignoring the war crimes that are being committed in the Gaza Strip is absolutely ridiculous. And in fact, providing material support for those war crimes is absolutely ridiculous. Now, the Biden administration is going to need to do more than issue these leaky potty words to political if it wants to win over these young voters. For instance, a recent UGov poll, that 50% of self-described Biden voters called Israel's attacks on Gaza a genocide. Okay, a much higher percentage of Democratic voters. I've seen different polls. I'll use the

Starting point is 00:40:19 more conservative number, but one poll said that 80% of Democratic voters want to ceasefire immediately. These are not good numbers for Joe Biden. And according to Martin's political piece, Kamala Harris is most aware of the danger that the Biden administration is in. She has reportedly been pushing the administration privately to show more sympathy for civilians in Gaza. But showing sympathy for civilians in Gaza, I guess that's fine. But that doesn't come close to what voters want, which is that ceasefire. And not a temporary ceasefire. They want a permanent ceasefire. And if that's true, then the administration should be listening to her at the very least. Instead, they're doing this. The White House, in a reflection of their public

Starting point is 00:41:00 confidence, hubris, regarding the politics of Biden's positioning on Israel, arranged a call with Senator John Fetterman. Because why not get advice from John Fetterman, who was adequately bullied and coerced by APEC to just show insane support for Israel regardless of what it does? If you sit this out, according to John Fetterman, or throw your vote away, you now are effectively empowering Bibi and you're definitely going to be empowering Trump. He continues to say, I said the same thing in 2016 to voters. I said, hey, you know what? You don't like Clinton? You know what? F around and find out what Trump is going to be about. And hey, guess what? How do you like it? So he's basically saying, oh, you don't really have much of an option.

Starting point is 00:41:50 You have to support Biden regardless of what he does because Trump is much worse. Yeah. There's a second thing that this piece is doing. It's really interesting, which is it's basically directing. Because a lot of times, remember, everybody in Washington serves the powerful, lobbyist, donors, et cetera. So Politico serves corporate advertisers, Biden serves corporate donors, and they all agree on messaging. So a lot of times Jonathan Martin, when he writes in Politico, is just telling the Biden administration what the buzz is, lobbyist donors, et cetera. The people who actually have power in Washington want him to do, okay? So he frames this article as, now remember, and this is at the beginning of the article, he says, Because a lot of people are attacking no labels, which is a corporate pack, that's thinking

Starting point is 00:42:34 of running a third party campaign against Biden. And his point is do not attack no labels. Remember, go back to attacking the left, the dirty, dirty left, okay? They're the real problem for Biden and leave our beloved corporate pack alone and go after the left. Now, they're pretty brazen in the article about how to address this issue, right? So now, if you're bleeding out voters because they hate your policy on Israel and Gaza, the logical move would be to switch your policy on Israel and Gaza and make it less barbaric

Starting point is 00:43:11 and actually have consequences for Israel for violating what theoretically Biden wants, certainly what Democratic voters and American voters want, right? It's never mentioned in the peace, never even considered. Okay, so Washington that it was not among the choices. So what are the three choices? One was one that Anna just shared with you guys, bring out John Fetterman to convince young voters that he sufficiently, you know, cares about Palestinian lives. Fetterman is the biggest supporter of Israel in the whole Congress. That's basically spitting in our face. God, they're so clueless, right? Okay, then the second option is get tick

Starting point is 00:43:54 talk young people on TikTok to do propaganda on behalf of Biden. Even already you have the script in the story, it's amazing. And now you'll see it going forward. These are all just total propaganda. So they'll have the young people go, well, you know, I was really upset about Biden. But I then I looked into Trump and it turns out Trump is worse, I'm voting for Joe Biden. Okay, and it's not an ad. They're having them do those videos as if they're real, right?

Starting point is 00:44:21 And then the last part of it is they say, attention. Jill Stein and Cornell West and Kennedy. I'm not joking, I'm going to read you one last quote here. That means seizing on any chance to complicate the ballot access of third party candidates and attempting to discredit their motives or at least highlight the less savory aspects of their character. In other words, here's Politico saying Joe Biden in the Democratic Party should assassinate the character of Cornell West, Jill Stein, Robert Kennedy. And they should discredit their motives. So you'll see all of this propaganda. You'll see it in mainstream media. Their motives, their character, and don't let them on the ballot.

Starting point is 00:45:08 Now remember, democracy's on the line, but one of Joe Biden's policies now is to try to make sure no one gets on the ballot against them. So this is the disgusting world of Washington. And then they wonder why the American people are now, you know, disgruntled with what they thought was democracy. Does any of this look like democracy to you? It's open, brazen propaganda on behalf of the rich and the powerful. Yep, we gotta take a break. When we come back, we'll talk a little bit, well, in the second hour,

Starting point is 00:45:41 we'll talk about the ever expanding regional war in the Middle East. But when we come back, I do want to talk a little bit about incredible reporting over at Heretz, in regard to the IDF running a telegram channel featuring their torture of Palestinians who they allege are terrorists. So we've got that and more coming up. Don't miss it. More points, more flights. More of all the things you want in a travel rewards card, and then some.

Starting point is 00:46:27 Get your ticket to more with the new BMO ViPorter Mastercard and get up to $2,400 in value in your first 13 months. Terms and conditions apply. Visit bemo.com slash ViPorter to learn more. All right, back on T.I.T. Chang and Anna with you guys. Eddie, don't worry. Just join by hitting the join button below. And Craig Hubbard gifted a membership. And James Thompson seems to have gifted 11 memberships on YouTube. We appreciate you guys. Anna. All right. Well, there is an important update on a story that Heretz has been following in Israel. So let's get to it. In a reversal of

Starting point is 00:47:13 previous statements, the Israeli military has now finally admitted that, a telegram channel called 72 virgins uncensored, which shares all sorts of footage of soldiers torturing Palestinians, is in fact operated by members of the IDF. They had previously denied this. Now they have confirmed it. The admission comes after Heretz published an expose on the channel just last month, which led to an internal investigation into the matter. So let's get to the details. So sources told Heretz that members of a department of the Israel Defense Forces Operations Directorate, which is in charge of psychological warfare targeting the enemy and foreign audiences, created 72 virgins uncensored on October 9th, just two days after Hamas carried out its atrocities and terrorist attack in Israel,

Starting point is 00:48:12 without official approval and without being authorized to do so. And what this telegram channel was meant to do was essentially reach out to the Israeli citizens and basically get them pumped up and supportive of this ongoing war. Now, after processing its findings, IDF officials contacted Heretz to present their conclusions. And in a written response, they say, the IDF spokesperson's unit said that after a thorough investigation, it was found that the telegram channel was operated by the IDF without authorization and without authority. The incident has been dealt with. And in the wake of these findings, the unit's wartime commander has ended his military service.

Starting point is 00:48:56 So I guess those were the actions that were taken. Now, I think it's important to get into what kind of content this telegram channel contained because the IDF seemed to really enjoy telling on themselves. The channel boasts of exclusive content from the Gaza Strip and have, has published hundreds of posts, images, and videos of so-called terrorists. By the way, there's no evidence that the individuals in those videos are, in fact, terrorists. But they describe them as terrorists being killed and of destruction of the Gaza Strip. The channel encourages its 5,300 followers to share the content so that everyone can see that we're screwing them.

Starting point is 00:49:34 and October 11th post read, Burning their mother, you won't believe the video we got. You can hear their bones crunch. We'll post it right away, get ready. By the way, I could not share the imagery or the videos. They were too gruesome, disgusting, and would probably immediately get us suspended from YouTube

Starting point is 00:49:55 because of how brutal they are. But let me continue with the rest of that graphic. Photos of Palestinian men captured by the IDF in the strip and the bodies of terrorists were captured. captured, or captioned, exterminating the roaches, exterminating the Hamas rats, share this beauty. And let me give you one more example. Another post includes a video of an Israeli soldier allegedly dipping machine gun bullets in pork fat. What a man lubricates bullets with lard. You won't get your virgins. And garbage juice, another dead terrorist,

Starting point is 00:50:28 you have to watch it with the sound. You'll die laughing. So, Jank, I can't help think about some of the torture that was implemented by our soldiers in the Abu Ghraib scandal. We were deeply, deeply disturbed by that and critical about that. And I just want to note that for the record, because right now, anyone who is critical of how the Israeli government and the IDF is carrying out this war is labeled an anti-Semite. But I do find it interesting that Americans can be critical of their own government and the U.S. military and how it carries out its wars against foreign countries. But apparently Israel should not be criticized at all, even if some of the war crimes they're committing, it happens to be even more brazen and worse than what we experienced

Starting point is 00:51:20 with our own soldiers in Abu Ghraib. Yeah, so time for uncomfortable truths. Language like exterminating rats and roaches is straight out of Nazi propaganda. That's literally what they said about the Jews. If that makes you uncomfortable, don't take it up with me. Take it up with the IDF that put Nazi propaganda inside Israel about Palestinians. It's 101. That's dehumanize them. They literally use the words exterminate rats and roaches, exactly what the Nazis used.

Starting point is 00:51:58 So now that doesn't mean everything else they're doing is exactly what the Nazis did. but that propaganda is, okay? So now, remember, this is going internally to Israel. So why are they doing this? So, and that's why the guy got fired, by the way, because some portions of the Israeli government don't agree with doing internal propaganda to their own citizens. But they've done so much propaganda to America, to the whole rest of the world,

Starting point is 00:52:30 that like they think, oh, IDF, they'll stop if it's Israeli citizens. No, they won't. This is the second time they've been caught doing propaganda towards Israeli citizens. So, but why are they doing it? Because the U.S. media, more so than Israeli media, look at Peretz reporting this. There's portions of Israeli media that is actually very good, right? But American media's job mainly is to do run cover for Israeli defense forces and tell you how wonderful they are and how they drop leaflets and they're humanitarian. And they try so hard not

Starting point is 00:53:04 to kill civilians, but golly gee, they happen to kill 25 times the amount that Hamas did. And the ratio of killing civilians is way worse than Hamas. But they didn't mean any of that. They're just the most humanitarian people in the world. But they have a problem. They don't want the Palestinians to think that, the IDF, and they don't want Israelis thinking that. So they put these pictures out and these videos out for two reasons. Tell the Palestinians, remember, we're going to demean and humiliate and torture and mutilate you to the end of time. So be our servants, understand that we are God's chosen people, and we will have Judea and Samaria. We will take your land, we will humiliate you, and you will bow your head and know that you are ruled.

Starting point is 00:53:55 That's why you put out propaganda like this so that you could, you know, rub their face in it and think that you're in charge. And then to the Israelis, they're trying to goad right-wing Israelis to be even more violent, including inside Israel. They had soccer fans of a far right-wing soccer fans go into a hospital and start spitting on the doctors for treating Arabs. And so that's where that screw the Arabs statement came from that Anna read you, where they're saying, atta boy, way to attack Arabs inside Israel. Okay, so the whole idea of Israel being a democracy, etc. Here's the idea of saying go attack Arabs inside Israel. We hate all Arabs. We don't want them to be equal. And that's who the idea actually is. Now they got their hand caught in the propaganda jar. So they, you know, some of them are actually upset and others are perfectly fine with it and they'll do it a third time again.

Starting point is 00:54:54 So yeah, okay. This is, Israel is totally out of control. It's right wing government is totally depraved, immoral and ruining, ruining Israel as a safe haven for Jews that desperately needed it. That does it for our first hour, but we're not quite done with the ongoing war in Gaza. So when we come back, we will discuss the broadening of the regional war in the Middle East. Lots of news to get to on that from the weekend. And we'll also talk a little bit about a new report from the Guardian, showing the biased pro-Israeli reporting from CNN, even despite some of the fantastic pieces that we've given them credit for. We'll talk about where that bias comes from. talk about who the gatekeepers are when we come back.

Starting point is 00:55:55 All right, back on TYT, Jenkenanna with you guys, Anna's got more news. Yes, we should talk about the expanding war in the Middle East and some of the troubling statements we heard from various Biden officials over the weekend. So let's get right to it. Have you ruled out strikes inside Iran? Well, sitting here today on a national news program, I'm not going to get into what we've ruled in and ruled out from the point of view of military action. What I will say is that the president is determined to respond forcefully to attacks on our people. The president also is not looking for a wider war in the Middle East. The fact that National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan is absolutely refusing to rule out the U.S.

Starting point is 00:56:40 rule out, the U.S. conducting airstrikes on Iranian soil should worry anyone concerned about getting dragged into a disastrous hot war with Iran. Is it off the table? Are strikes inside Iran off the table? Again, Kristen, sitting here on television, it would not be wise for me to talk about what we're ruling in and ruling out. Then why are you wasting our time with this interview? How about you stay home? If you're not going to answer questions, stay home. But anyway, Sullivan could be bluffing, but the notion of attacking Iran in Iran proper would be a dangerous one. And we'll get to the details on why I believe that in just a moment. But over the weekend, the United States and the UK did conduct additional airstrikes

Starting point is 00:57:27 against Iran-backed militias. And I want to give you some of the details there. And one of those militias has already retaliated against a United States base in the Middle East. On Friday, for instance, the U.S. hit 85 targets across seven locations in Iraq and Syria, a significant escalation in tensions between the United States and Iran-backed groups, attacking American bases across the region in protest of Israel's war in Gaza. The U.S. strikes killed at least 16 people in Iraq, unsurprisingly, including civilians, and injured 25 others, the Iraqi government said on Friday. The attacks hit areas close to the border with Syria and targeted facilities used by Iranian-linked al-Hasad or Hassad al-Shabi. I mean, every, every day we hear about a new

Starting point is 00:58:14 militant group that the U.S. is targeting. It's a popular mobilization units in the Iraqi city of al-Qam. Iraqi officials said, and then the next day, the U.S. and the U.K. conducted air strikes on at least 30 Houthi targets in Yemen from air and surface platforms, including fighter jets. Saturday strikes specifically targeted Houthi weapons, storage facilities, and equipment. The Houthis responded by saying they will not stop until Israel ends its operations in Gaza. So the U.S. had two options, either pressure Israel to rein in this war on Gaza, or just start belligerently conducting airstrikes against Iran-backed militant groups in the Middle East. Obviously, they chose the latter.

Starting point is 00:59:02 The militias have already retaliated, hitting a U.S. base that killed six people, although reports claim that no Americans died in that strike. An Iranian-backed militia group in Iraq claimed responsibility Monday for that drone strike against a base in eastern Syria used by U.S. troops that killed six American allied Kurdish fighters. The attack which caused no American casualties appeared to be the first significant response to what the U.S. calls Iran's proxy groups to U.S. air strikes against the militias in the region. So these militias are not deterred by U.S. and U.K. air strikes. And all that's really happening is it's increasing the tensions in the region. It's broadening this war. And again, I just want to

Starting point is 00:59:51 reiterate, before doing airstrikes, the United States had other options, but they just decided against those options. They decided against pressuring Netanyahu and the Israeli government to rein in this war on Gaza. But I mean, I'm not really surprised. We're going to get dragged, possibly into a war with Iran, which would be disastrous. I'll tell you why in just a moment, but Jank, what are your thoughts? Yeah, so there's two questions that I want to ask. Why and what do we get out of this? So why are we attacking three different countries in the Middle East at the same time. Well, what you'll hear is, well, they attacked us first. They killed the three service members and the Houthis were attacking the shipping links. Yes, but we attacked first of all,

Starting point is 01:00:40 we attacked all those groups in the Middle East that Israel wanted us to attack, including the Houthis. So, and Israel is doing the occupation, which they're all fighting against, And it's been doing it for 75 years. So we put people in harm's way. We bomb them. And then when they do a counter strike, we say, well, no, we had to broaden it. We had to broaden the war. We had, we had to bomb three different countries at once because they dare to retaliate against our earlier bombings and our occupations and our oppression.

Starting point is 01:01:18 How dare they? How dare they? So we had to start a giant war in the Middle East. Okay, and then what do we get out of? Zero, nothing. American people, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing. There's not a single person, Republican Democrat, or otherwise, that can explain to me what the American people gain from this huge war in the Middle East.

Starting point is 01:01:42 Yeah, I mean, you know what, you know the people that gain. The oil companies will gain massively, defense contractors will gain massive, And Israel has ordered us to do it. So I guess we have to do it because it's what are we? We're the second state of Israel or whatever we are. Okay, the so but they're like so the politicians get something out of it. They get tons of donor money and they stuffed their mouths full of corruption and pork. But the rest of us get screwed. We get into this war and then the media will tell you we had to do it. We had to do it. They had it coming, these dirty Muslims. And so okay, send your kids to go die.

Starting point is 01:02:20 there and give me another couple of trillion dollars to hand over to defense contractors than oil companies. In a subsequent interview on CNN with Dana Bash, Sullivan was asked, okay, well, what is the game plan here? Because all we're noticing is an escalation of tensions, a broadening of this war. So define success as a result of these airstrikes, which I think is a fantastic question. So let's hear how that conversation went down. Is there anything more you can tell the American people who are looking to the administration to not just avenge the death of three soldiers, but also concerned about the region in general about whether or not what

Starting point is 01:03:15 happened was successful and how it was successful. Who got hit, who got killed, what got taken out? Well, first of all, Dana, the president has approached this with a straightforward principle, which is that the United States will step up and respond when our forces are attacked, and the United States also is not looking for a wider war in the Middle East. We are not looking to take the United States to war. So we are going to continue to pursue a policy that goes down both of those lines simultaneously that responds with force and clarity as we did on Friday night, but also that continues to hue to an approach that does not get the United States pulled into a war that we have seen too frequently in the Middle East.

Starting point is 01:04:05 You know, clarity is an interesting word to use in this context when all we've been hearing from the Biden administration is that they're going to do retaliatory strikes at their time and choosing, right? So the nature of the strikes and the timing of the strikes, it'll all be up to them, which isn't really clear or clarifying for the general public. But again, what is the game plan? Because he didn't really answer the question there. So I want to go to another video. Let's see if there's some more clarity in this part of the exchange. The U.S. and UK responded to Houthi rebels in Yemen. They're engaging in routine attacks on shipping in the Red Sea. There are near daily strikes between Israel and Hussbalah,

Starting point is 01:04:51 and much of this is rooted in the war between Israel and Hamas. My colleague Peter Bergen smartly pointed out that this conflict involves 10 countries, at least, four major terrorist groups. So isn't this already a regional conflict? Well, Dana, what I would say is that these are distinct but related challenges. For example, what's happening in the Red Sea is obviously to a certain extent triggered by what's happening in Gaza, but it's not the same thing. The Houthis aren't just hitting ships related to Israel. They're hitting a lot of different ships from a lot of different countries.

Starting point is 01:05:29 And so we are trying to deal with the challenge to freedom of navigation in the Red Sea. That is a distinct challenge. Now, it is true that the Houthi rebels have targeted cargo ships that have absolutely nothing to do with Israel, but they've also been very clear in why they've been targeting cargo ships in the Red Sea. And rather than pursue this diplomatically, not only to appease Houthi rebels, right, I'm less concerned about that and more concerned about avoiding a regional war. But we should be concerned about civilian lives that are being lost in the Gaza's

Starting point is 01:06:03 and the war crimes that we are supporting and funding as we speak, as Israel carries out those said war crimes in the Gaza Strip. But again, rather than pursuing that option, the U.S. just decided, okay, well, we're going to send more of our military to that region. That in and of itself is considered provocative. And by the way, risks the lives of our soldiers on behalf of the Israeli government and its war on Gaza. And all we've seen is an escalation of a regional war in the Middle East. It's a complete and utter disaster. And I want to get to why war with Iran would be a disaster because I think people underestimate how bad it would be for our troops. But I'll get to that in a moment. Jank, what are your thoughts about that exchange that you just heard? Yeah. So I want to

Starting point is 01:06:49 be clear. First of all, the Houthis are attempting to target ships going to Israel. So do they get the right ship every time? No. But it's not like they're attacking randomly. They are attacking and they say very clearly because Israel's bombing the innocent civilians in Gaza and they're trying to target the ships in going to Israel. Now you can still disagree and you could still say we should bomb them, but I want you to understand the facts. Then secondly, on Jake Sullivan, I mean look at how Orwellian his language is. He says we are not looking for a wider war in the Middle East. As he just explained, they're bombing three different countries in the Middle East. And then Dana Bash did a good job of explaining, no, it's actually involves 10 different

Starting point is 01:07:35 countries overall. So if you're looking to avoid a wider war in the Middle East, you couldn't do a worse job than that. Okay, that's because they're not looking to avoid that. Not at all. They're just using Orwellian language. Then he clarifies and says, but don't worry, we were trying to give them clarity and force. Okay, so you are looking for a war and you are bombing. Okay, and then And finally on Dana Bash, you've seen us criticize her, you've seen us give her credit. Why? Because we're unbiased. We don't care about her or her personality. We care about good journalism and bad journalism. In this case, she did a great job of asking some of the tough questions. Like how do you accomplish this mission? And they have no answer for that.

Starting point is 01:08:17 I have an answer. You end the occupation. You get a two-state solution and all of this goes away. But until you do that, all we're going to have is an endless cycle of wars. Jake Sullivan, Joe Biden, and the Republicans and Donald Trump have never, ever given an explanation for how more war can somehow miraculously lead to peace. Because they're liars, they want the wars. In fact, Biden has confessed that these airstrikes that we've been conducting against these Iran-backed militia groups has not dissuaded them or deterred them from carrying out. more attacks against U.S. soldiers in the region, but we're going to keep doing it, I guess. And by the way, there's something really interesting in the reporting that I hadn't seen before,

Starting point is 01:09:02 but I think it's, it is telling, and it gives you a sense of some of the unintended consequences that arise from belligerent military actions by the United States. When Donald Trump took out the top Iranian general, Qasem Soleimani, what that ended up doing was it created a vacuum in regard to. to the Iran-backed militia groups. The person who came in charge after the assassination of Soleimani has less control and less ties and communication with these militias.

Starting point is 01:09:38 And so everyone wants to blame Iran for what the militias carry out because they're under the assumption that Iran is ordering these militias to carry out what they're carrying out. There's actually no evidence of that. And in fact, Tehran feels that they have pretty much lost control of some of these militia groups. So something to keep in mind when it comes to, again, unintended consequences of U.S. foreign policy and how it further destabilizes the region. And why would war with Iran be a disaster? Well, first, there's some good news in that on multiple

Starting point is 01:10:10 occasions Tehran has repeatedly said it does not seek conflict. On Friday, Iranian president Ibrahim Rasi said that his country will not initiate a war, but will respond strongly. So if there is a U.S. attack on Iran, directly on Iran, then they're threatening to retaliate. And I just want you to keep in mind, Iran is a completely different ballgame from Iraq and Afghanistan. And as we know, those wars were pretty disastrous for the United States. Iran's military forces total roughly 545,000 active personnel and 350,000 reserve personnel, including about 125,000 men within the IRGC, according to the Strauss Center at the University of Texas, Austin. Iranian territory is two-thirds larger than Iraq and Afghanistan combined and also covered in both deserts and mountains.

Starting point is 01:11:07 And so what does that terrain mean? Well, the geography provides many hiding places for local forces or dispersed insurgents. any president who thinks military operations in Iran would go very quickly, should remember April of 1980. In an attempt to end the Iran hostage crisis, President Jimmy Carter ordered Delta Force to fly eight helicopters into Iran and rescue the hostages. Unfortunately, it didn't play out so well. Well, what happened? As a result of a sandstorm, three of the eight helicopters experienced mechanical issues and one helicopter crashed into a C-130 carrying fuel. The plan was aborted, eight American special operations members died, and Carter's presidency

Starting point is 01:11:54 collapsed. So just, again, I think that oftentimes we think about how much we spend on our military, and it's easy to get very cocky about what they can accomplish. But a war with Iran would in fact be disastrous, and it's something that we need to fight real hard to avoid. Any final words, Jank? Yeah, that group in Iraq that killed three of our service members is a tiny, tiny group. So how do they even get to the base and kill them? Drones. Now everybody has drones and drones can do massive damage. And Iran has more drones than you could possibly imagine. And even our own war games indicates that they will probably sink a couple of our ships at a minimum, including aircraft carriers.

Starting point is 01:12:43 Imagine what happens when an American aircraft carrier is sunk. This country is going to lose its mind and we're going to enter a war like we've never seen before. So you have that to look forward to because of the monsters in Washington who never represent you and always represent their donors. We got to take a break. When we come back, we have an incredible report from The Guardian about biased reporting over at CNN. And this is based on conversations with CNN staffers and reporters. You do not

Starting point is 01:13:16 want to miss this story. We've got that and more coming up. Don't miss it. All right. Well, let's talk about bias reporting over at CNN. According to St.K. And I know with you guys, more news. All right. Well, let's talk about bias reporting over at CNN. According to St. staffers at CNN. Staffers and reporters at CNN are accusing the cable news network of regurgitating Israeli propaganda while simultaneously censoring the Palestinian perspective as they cover the ongoing war on Gaza. Now according to accounts from six CNN staffers in multiple newsrooms and more than a dozen internal memos and emails obtained by the Guardian, Daily news decisions apparently are shaped by a flow of directives from the CNN headquarters in Atlanta that have set strict, incredibly strict guidelines on their coverage. Now, they include tight restrictions on quoting Hamas and reporting other Palestinian perspectives while at the same time just printing statements from the Israeli government and they're also taken at face value.

Starting point is 01:14:33 So don't publish or talk about what, you know, Palestinians are saying, what Hamas is saying. You should be super skeptical of anything they have to say. But when it comes to the Israeli government, you print it, you don't question it, you take what they're saying at face value. In addition, the Guardian reports, every story on the conflict must be cleared by the Jerusalem Bureau before broadcast or publication. So this was actually something that was initially reported by the intercept.

Starting point is 01:15:00 And so the Jerusalem bureau chief, his name is Richard Green, told staff in a memo in the very beginning of this war that they're going to do something known as second eyes. That's the program that they're going to implement in order to ensure that they're doing accurate reporting. They consider it a safety net. So we don't use imprecise language or words that may sound impartial but can be coded, can have coded meanings. And then so one result of second eyes is that Israeli official statements, again, are quickly cleared and they make it on air on the principle that they are to be trusted at face value. Statements and claims from Palestinians, though, not just Hamas, Palestinian civilians, Palestinian officials are delayed or never reported at all. One CNN staffer said edits, edits by second eyes often seemed aimed at avoiding criticism from pro-Israel groups. They gave the example of Greens, remember that's the bureau chief in Jerusalem, Richard Green, of Green's intervention to change a headline. Israel is nowhere near destroying Hamas, a perspective widely reflected in the foreign and Israeli press. It was replaced with a headline that shifted the focus from whether Israel could, achieve its stated justification for killing thousands of Palestinian civilians, quote, three months

Starting point is 01:16:29 on, Israel is entering a new phase of the war. Is it still trying to destroy Hamas? And I remember that framing, the framing of like, oh, Israel, the IDF is now moving on to the next stage of their war without any real analysis in regard to whether their goal of destroying Hamas is being achieved in any way. One CNN staffer said that the majority of news since the war began, regardless of how accurate the initial reporting, has been skewed by a systemic and institutional bias within the network toward Israel. Ultimately, CNN's coverage of the Israel-Gaza war amounts to journalistic malpractice. That is not a third party that's saying this. That is a literal CNN staffer who the Guardian spoke to saying this. And it's not just the staffers,

Starting point is 01:17:17 journalists in CNN newsrooms in the United States and overseas say that broadcasts have in fact been skewed by management and their edicts and a story approval process that has resulted in a highly partial, in highly partial coverage. And look, I want to just quickly note, there have been some gems. In all of this, there have been some incredible reports, Jeremy Diamond, who reported on the graves that have been destroyed in Gaza. Excellent reporting there. And whenever they do the excellent reporting, we do give them credit because they deserve the credit. But if you look at their reporting as a whole, it is, in fact, more favorable to Israel's side as opposed to what's happening to Palestinians in Gaza. And another journalist spoke to the Guardian

Starting point is 01:18:03 and said, basically described a schism within the network over coverage, they said, was at times reminiscent of the cheerleading that followed 9-11. Quote, there's a lot of internal strife and dissent. Some people are looking to get out, end quote. Other Journalists agree, I have more statements from them. Bajank, I have no doubt you're chomping at the bit, so jump in. Yeah, so first again, we're fair. Clarissa Ward has done some great reporting for CNN out of Gaza. Jeremy Diamond's done some great, great reporting, disproving what the IDF was claiming from inside Gaza.

Starting point is 01:18:42 And Jake Tapper has mentioned in the piece as being very friendly to Israel. And he has been throughout his career, and he has been about half the time, in this case, too, leaning towards their version of the story unquestioningly. But at different times, he's been pretty good at pressing Israeli officials. So credit where credit is due, and I'll take any kind of movement. And so this version of CNN is actually better than previous versions of CNN, where it was 100% Israeli propaganda. But what is really interesting about this story is the confirmation of all the things we've told you through all of these years. And here is Reporters at CNN from the inside saying, yes, we are told that you must report the Israeli

Starting point is 01:19:29 statements as facts when they all know it's propaganda. And this all, they also do the same thing with the U.S. Pentagon. Look at how the American press pretending to be objective in reality, very actively, consciously with memos, directs their reporters and their anchors to be biased in favor of Western powers, U.S. and Israel. And they say, if we say it, pretty, if the other side says it don't, don't, where they have to jump through 28 different hurdles. And then if they make it through those hurdles at the end, we'll still say, well, it was their fault. And Israel, it was only retaliating. And they were trying to protect innocent civilians. But Hamas, the dirty terrorists made them do it. I mean, like, it is so brazen. It is so clear now. So when you're watching

Starting point is 01:20:20 these mainstream media networks, fire beware, they are not telling you the news. They're telling you some form of marketing that the powerful wants you to think. And so, and finally, in terms of what's great about this story, from my perspective, is it tells you why. It's a huge story and I'm reading, reading, reading, okay, yes, but what's driving it, right? Because I know like the anti-Semitic tropes aren't true, right? It's not like there's a cabal of Jews that tell them to do. this and so that's not true. But what happens is it's advertisers. If you don't do pro-Israel coverage, advertisers pull out. Okay, and that is super interesting. What I would love to see is which advertisers pulled out, why they pulled out, were their defense contractors,

Starting point is 01:21:09 oil companies, etc. Why are advertisers demanding twisted, biased coverage in favor of Israel and against Palestinians. And that's a great question. All right, I highly recommend everyone read this piece. There are so many more details that we just don't have the time to get into. So check out The Guardian and we'll include a link to the story in the description box so you can read it for yourselves. For now though, let's take our last break. And when we come back, we have a pretty devastating story out of DC involving a government official who was shot and killed during a carjacking. D.C. has been, been grappling with unbelievable rates of carjackings and there are some questions about

Starting point is 01:21:54 what the DC Council should do about it. So we'll get to that story and more when we come back. You guys are all wonderful. I appreciate you guys looking out for the community. And here comes B-More 945 on t-y-t.com slash join in Riley's one grandma and laugh and face. They all made wonderful contributions. And we really appreciate you guys. You make this show possible. Anna. Well, happy to know that Demi Moore is watching the show. Thank you for your support. But we've got some more news to get to. So let's talk about what's been transpiring in Washington, D.C. Mike Gill worked at the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission under the former president. He died on Saturday after being shot on Monday as a man went on a carjacking spree.

Starting point is 01:22:56 The suspect later was killed by police after he shot at them near a stolen SUV. A truly tragic story out of the District of Columbia where an former election official by the name of Michael Gill was shot and killed during an hours-long crime rampage. Now, he leaves behind a wife and three grown children. He served three terms as an appointee to the D.C. Board of Elections and as chief operating officer of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission during the Trump White House. Now, what happened during the so-called crime spree that ultimately led to the killing of Gill? Well, Gil drove his new Jeep early Monday evening to pick up his wife, Christina, at her law office near Mount Vernon Square. He called her and told her that he was waiting downstairs, according to authorities. A man climbed into his vehicle and shot him.

Starting point is 01:23:54 His wife found, I can't even imagine this man. His wife found him on the sidewalk with his head resting in a halo of blood, one foot still inside the Jeep. He was taken to a hospital in critical condition. He ultimately ended up dying from the gunshot wound. Michael Gill was the second person to die as a result of the series of crimes that authorities attributed to one man. The first man killed was identified as Alberto Vasquez Jr., 35 years old, who was fatally shot in a carjacking. Vasquez leaves behind two young children. The suspect was later killed by police early Tuesday. He was identified by authorities as 28-year-old Artel Cunningham from Suitland, Maryland. From Monday evening to Tuesday morning, in addition to attacking Gill,

Starting point is 01:24:43 Cunningham committed or tried to commit at least four carjackings and fired shots at two police vehicles, police said. So this includes bashing a taxi driver in the head with his gun and stealing his car in University Park in Prince George's County, Maryland. These are all examples of what he did during this crime spree. Basically shotting the windscreen of a Maryland, or shooting at, I apologize, shooting at the windscreen of a Maryland state police troopers car and later spraying the door of a D.C. police officer's car with bullets as he drove past it. And then eventually New Carlton police tracked the stolen car to near a laundromat.

Starting point is 01:25:30 And at that point, it was found disabled by the side of the road. As they surveyed the scene, Cunningham walked up to them, producing two handguns, after which he was shot and later died in the hospital. Cunningham was thought to be undergoing a psychiatric crisis at the time of the events, law enforcement officials said. He also was arrested in previous crimes. For instance, he was arrested a year prior to these carjackings. Arrest records indicate that Cunningham was arrested on April 8th, for instance, April 8th of 2021 for disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, obstructing officers, and failing to obey police instructions. Then on September 24th of 2022, he was arrested for driving an uninsured vehicle and fleeing the scene of a car accident he was involved in. But unfortunately, D.C.'s Attorney General Brian Schwab is under the impression that punishing

Starting point is 01:26:23 violent criminals is actually pretty useless. Many community members demanded accountability from district leaders to address the violent crime epidemic after 2023 ended with a 39% increase in violent crime. Motor vehicle theft in the district increased 82%, rising for the sixth year in a row totaling 959 reported incidents. Metropolitan Police Department data showed 173 carjacking arrests were made in 2023, which is a 62% increase or 62% of arrests involving juveniles. And this is something that has impacted other politicians and other officials in D.C. For instance, Representative Henry Quayar from Texas was held at gunpoint when three armed suspects stole his car less than a mile from the Capitol.

Starting point is 01:27:14 Luckily, he wasn't hurt or injured as a result. Also a diplomat from the UAE and an FBI agent were also carjacked in the city last year. But in regard to the attorney general Schwab and his statements, he said, quote, we as a city and a community need to be much more focused on prevention and surrounding young people and their families with resources if we want to be safer in the long run. we cannot prosecute and arrest our way out of it. No, I don't agree. I think we can. So look, it's not just a couple of leftists online. These prosecutors that keep saying in the face of massive increases in violent crime and carjackings, et cetera,

Starting point is 01:28:10 We can't arrest our way out of it. Well, let's give it a shot. Let's start with that first. And here's what I mean by that. In the bad old days and why we needed criminal justice reform, they would just arrest black people and Latinos instead of doing real police work. And now they've stopped arresting people and stop prosecuting people that are committing violent crimes. Well, both are mental.

Starting point is 01:28:36 Why do we have to choose one of the extremes? Why don't we do what 98% of Americans want, which is actually do police work, figure out who the criminals are, and then, yes, lock them up. We don't want injustice where you lock up the wrong people, but not locking people up when they're hurting innocent civilians is also injustice. So I totally and utterly disagree with the prosecutor, like this idea of like, I don't worry about it. arresting or prosecuting people, it'll magically work out when, by the way, are you doing anything about the root causes? I believe in doing things about the root causes. I believe in appropriating actually a good amount of money for that. Are you doing that? No. Nope. You're just letting them go. So wait, when you don't do anything about the root causes and you just let people go,

Starting point is 01:29:28 then you're going to get this. And then they're flummicks as to why voters are abandoning Democrats all across the country. In the most liberal cities, Portland, Seattle, et cetera. They're throwing these bums out because people don't want to be robbed and carjacked and killed. Is this a complicated issue for leftists that believe in this insanity? You don't realize that people don't want to be murdered? That's a hard thing for you to grasp. Okay? And then the second problem is, no, we need to definitely do involuntary commitments.

Starting point is 01:30:05 And guys, again, here, balance. The extremes are nonsensical. In the bad old days, we would involuntarily commit people who did not have mental health issues. And then we would subject them to the worst conditions, right? Now in these days, we don't involuntarily commit anyone. Oh, freedom, freedom to do carjackings. That's not a freedom. Freedom to kill people. That's not a freedom. You sound like lunatic right wingers if you say that. No, if someone is having massive psychiatric issues that are related to harming themselves or others, definitely put them in a mental health institution and fund that mental health institution. So it's not a nightmare. So that it actually tries to help those people.

Starting point is 01:30:46 But what doesn't help that person, who by the way, Cunningham also died or the people he killed, is just letting him roam the streets in the name of freedom or rights or please don't say progressive. Because this has nothing to do with progressives. If you think you're a progressive and you're in favor of this injustice, you just don't understand. understand what the word progressive means. Yeah, I totally agree with you, Jank. And one of the biggest concerns I had when this trend started, because I know people, I know how people feel, and if they're they feel unsafe in

Starting point is 01:31:21 their own neighborhoods, then they're going to turn their backs on the very notion of reforming our criminal justice system. And there were certain things that I wanted so badly that were never implemented, right? For instance, reforming our prisons, so they're not just punitive, but have an element of rehabilitation so people are able to serve their time, get out, and have that rehabilitative experience so they can have great lives, right, be productive members of society. And also to implement programs to help individuals transition out of prison into gainful employment and a productive life. Now what's happening, and I'm noticing this with what the DC City Council is proposing, is that people are so fed up with all of this that it's clear that this has squandered the opportunity to do the common sense reforms that we need. So for instance, the DC Council is now set to

Starting point is 01:32:20 vote on sweeping crime legislation. And remember, the DC Council wanted to reform their criminal justice system into something far more loosey-goosey and they got shot down by Congress because it's DC and Congress has a say in their legislation. But nonetheless, the bill that they're now considering would allow the DC police chief to declare drug-free zones. And so in a drug-free zone, police could ask anyone in a group of two or more people believe to be there with the purpose of committing a drug-related crime to disperse. And if they refuse to do so, they could be arrested. It would also add a host of new felonies for both violent and property crimes. Strangulation, I agree with this, by the way, strangulation would become a standalone felony.

Starting point is 01:33:05 It's kind of shocking that it isn't already. The Bill's Committee report stated that strangulation is a key predictor of future lethal violence in domestic and intimate partner situations. So I totally agree with this one provision. It would create a new felony offense for endangerment with a firearm, meaning someone who fires a gun in public and doesn't hit anyone can still face a felony. I also agree with that. I don't see why anyone would disagree with that. I mean, it's crazy, but organized retail theft where thieves pick apart grocery stores and luxury

Starting point is 01:33:41 stores to later resell the merchandise or return it for a refund would be a new felony offense. If convicted thieves could face 15 years in prison, the bill also adds a maximum of 10 years for first degree theft if the merchandise value exceeds $500 or consists of 10 items over 30 days. So they're now shifting to more tough on crime policies, and this should come as no surprise to anyone. Again, if the voters in D.C. feel unsafe and they plan to retaliate against politicians, local politicians as a result of that, oh, the local politicians are going to change and they're going to pivot to tough on crime policies, some of which, you know, those who believe in restorative justice are not going to be happy about.

Starting point is 01:34:26 Well, look, if you think anti-strangulation laws are problematic, you might not be getting it. And I've got news for you. No one in the real world agrees with you. Everyone, I would see 99% poll it. 99% of Americans are going to want strangulation to be a felony. And then lastly, I was in an event for Katie Porter over the weekend. And a woman asked her, look, I'm a progressive, but does it mean that we have to be in favor crime and lawlessness now. And she's like, no, it does not mean that to be a progressive. And I think that people who say that have lost their minds.

Starting point is 01:35:17 All right, I want to fit in one more story before we wrap up the main show and get to our members only bonus. So let's talk about Ann Coulter. Former Donald Trump supporter, Ann Coulter, has some advice for what she thinks Trump can do to, in her mind, help America. And it's pretty brutal. So after an ex-user asked her, what does Trump need to do to help take America back? She responded with, get a load of this. Maybe he could die, which is harsh, to say the least. She offered a little more insight earlier in the day saying that Trump won't close

Starting point is 01:35:53 the border, he'll push for amnesty, allow anchor babies in sanctuary cities to continue, ban bump stocks, propose taking guns away without due process, and hire half of Goldman Sachs. The presidential election is worthless, concentrate on the House and Senate. Now, remember, Anne Coulter is the woman who literally wrote a book titled, In Trump We Trust. And the reason why she supported Trump so much in the very beginning was because she believed that Donald Trump was going to be even more harsh on immigration than he already was. But when she noticed that he didn't, in fact, build a border wall and wasn't as harsh as she would like, she turned on him and she's not holding back. So, Jake, I'm curious what you think about this. I'm, on one hand,

Starting point is 01:36:38 I don't agree with her policy-wise. But on the other hand, I've seen what happens to Republicans who dare speak out against Donald Trump. And much like Chris Christie, she's undeterred. And I kind of respect that because she gets a lot of hate for it, but this is what she believes and she's willing to say it even though she knows she's going to get that hate. Yeah, no, I think Ann Coulter is despicable. And remember, she's saying Donald Trump is not barbaric and draconian enough. But having said that, I am shocked to find out that she is honest. I thought there was a good chance that she was just an actor the whole time.

Starting point is 01:37:17 But if she was, she would have done what Ben Shapiro is doing. Whenever Trump's in a little bit of trouble, Shapiro kind of thing, you know, they're crazy, a little problematic, right? And then, but whenever he gains the upper hand, and Shapiro comes and goes, crap, I love Trump, Trump, Trump, everybody still vote for me. Still come to my site and give me money. I love Trump, I love Trump, okay? So that's a fraud.

Starting point is 01:37:41 And culture is apparently honest. I'm shocked by that, right? But don't get it twisted, guys. She's saying that Trump should be way tougher on immigrants, more violent, more draconian, more everything. And so, but she has realized he's a con man, that he never meant any of the things that he said. He's not an actual conservative.

Starting point is 01:38:07 He's just in it for himself. And she's definitely right about that. Yeah, I think your analysis is spot on, right? I obviously do not agree with her and why she's attacking Trump is not the reason why I would attack Trump. So policy wise don't agree with her, but it does take guts to very publicly speak out against Trump. And then in this case, literally hope for him to die, which it goes even further than anything I would say. You know, even if I don't like the guy, I would never say something like that about anyone, at least publicly. But she had criticized Donald Trump previously. For instance, this May 16th, 2019 post where she says,

Starting point is 01:38:46 no wall, keep same massive levels of illegal immigration. And this is just the Rube Bate campaign document, not even a serious bill. Coulter said that during 2016, when promoting her book in Trump, we trust, journalists would tell her, oh, he's not really going to build the wall. And it turns out they were right. And she also said, my theory was if he doesn't build the wall, he loses the election. He didn't build the wall. He lost reelection. I just couldn't imagine anyone could be so stupid to run on one thing and just not do it. And there's a reason for that. Because her most trenchant comment is the one about Goldman Sachs. He did fill his cabinet with Goldman Sachs. And that's what Democrats do. And that's what Republicans do, because Goldman Sachs runs the place.

Starting point is 01:39:30 And so Trump is no different. He's just one of the elites who wants in on the club and never got it and is in it for himself. And what's the one thing he's promising as a policy position next time around? More corporate tax cuts. So whether you're conservative or progressive or independent, understand that Donald Trump is a con man who basically is just in it for himself and other giant rich and powerful people. woke kindergarten in the bonus episode for our members. Don't miss it. TYT.com slash join to become a member and we'll see you there.

Your Ad Here

The Young Turks - Border Deal Breakdown

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.