The Young Turks - Cenk And Ana: You Can’t Control Us

Episode Date: September 19, 2019

You can criticize the hosts of TYT but you don't get to control what the hosts say. Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian, hosts of The Young Turks, break it down. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

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. Hey, guys, you've heard of the Young Turks podcast because you're listening to it right now. But make sure that you subscribe and give it a five star rating if you like it. Thank you for listening. I want to the Young Turks. Okay, how does anyone do a show like us?

No. Okay. And no one angers people more than we do. Yes. With pleasure. Yeah, okay, now I don't want to get Anna riled up and I'm about to, oh God, I shouldn't do this. Don't, don't round me up.

Okay. The only thing I'll say is for the folks at home trying to determine what our agenda is, I just, I want you to pause and think, I'm just gonna throw a couple of curveball out there? What if we didn't have one? So what if we actually cared about the facts and what if we actually were progressives and we were trying our best? Instead of having a secret conspiratorial agenda to help one person or another for reasons that are nefarious? Yeah, let me just let me. Can I just say, look, look. Can we please move on? Let's do the news. It makes me crazy because there are no upsides to doing this job. Like none, honestly, at this point.

Because no one's interested in any facts, no one's interested in like actually reading policy, critiquing policy, dissecting policy. Because here's the thing, there's no winning, right? You have to bow down, you have to like be neutral on every candidate. Here's where I'm at, okay? There's no agenda because no one can shut me up, including, I was going to call you Donald Trump, including Jenk. I don't know where that came from.

That's actually the most offensive thing I've ever heard. I'm sorry, I was going to slip out. I do look a little orange today though. I support Bernie Sanders, period, I'm done, okay? He is the one who is pushing, he not only wrote Medicare for all, he's pushing Medicare for all, he's unequivocal in his support for Medicare for all. For me, that is the most important issue. Everyone is different, that is who I support.

Now when other individuals come on this show, whether it be guests or other panel members, and they say that they have other candidates that they prefer, that's on them. They don't speak for me, I don't speak for them, okay? Period. Last couple of things here, we gotta move on because we got the news of the day. But the reason Anna's fired up is because of the nonstop online attacks we get. So if you're watching the show, you're like, where the hell is this coming from, right? No, no, Jake, you are being told to put me in my place.

I saw that, yeah, yeah, put me in my, go ahead, Jake, put me in my place. Yeah, so look, first of all, if you are pretending to be a progressive and you're telling a a male boss or co-host to put the female co-host in their place, I'm pretty sure you're not really a progressive, okay? Oh no, no, you're gonna get angry at that. And look guys, when it comes to, I have not yet made up my mind on who I'm backing, okay? And it's obvious that I like the progressive candidates more, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, etc.

But now the lines are being drawn in a way that is more harsh, because we're getting closer and closer to the election. So now I'm getting attacked by some of the Sanders supporters saying I'm not sufficiently pro Sanders and that I'm covering for the other candidates like Warren and Yang and et cetera. And, you know, every once in a while, I will say positive things about the other candidates like Cory Booker on criminal justice reform or Tulsi Gabbard on avoiding wars, et cetera. Aha, what does that mean about your agenda? Maybe it means that I like avoiding wars and I like criminal justice reform.

No, it's amazing. Look, Jane, here's the reality, okay? Americans overall, for decades now, have been primed to think everything is black and white, okay? You either absolutely hate a candidate and they're all bad, or you love a candidate, and you can never critique them, you could never criticize them, they're perfect. Yeah, the real world doesn't work out that way. I know that the media, the mainstream media, the establishment media, has always reported things that way, but that's not what the reality is.

Not all cops are bad, not everything that Tulsi Gabbard has said or done is terrible or good. Not everything that Bernie Sanders has said and done is both either all terrible or all good. There are things that are worth dissecting and critiquing. If you can't handle that, if mild critique of your candidate leads to a temper tantrum on Twitter, then by all means, don't watch me, don't subscribe to this show, don't follow me on Twitter. But let me tell you one thing, and I want to be abundantly clear on this, you tweeting to me to tell me that you're going to no longer be a member or no longer support this show or no longer do this, unless I say exactly what you want me to say about your preferred candidate, never works. It's never going to work. I don't care. I'm going to do my job appropriately because I care about that more than anything else. Yeah. And if you want to know my agenda and where my political views lie when it comes to this election, I support Bernie Sanders. I'm going to be clear on that, period. Okay, so now that we went from knee deep to neck deep in this, then I'm gonna finish it.

Okay, I'm gonna finish it. Look, look, guys, so if you think you could kind of, if you're an audience member and you think you can critique us, you're absolutely right. If you think that you might influence us over the long term on issues that we're not seeing right, you're right, we actually do pay attention to that. You can see, we're paying attention to what folks are saying online. We're not the mainstream media, we're not like, oh, please, I do you go preach from the mountain, top and we're done with you, right?

No, I'd like to think that we're incredibly open-minded and have shown that throughout the 17 years that we're on air, and that's why we have the credibility that we do. On the other hand, if you think you're gonna move us because we don't support your dear leader, you got another thought coming to you. So we've been through this many, many times, whether it's opposing Republicans like George W. Bush and everybody's like, hey, young Turks, you're absolutely nuts for opposing the Iraq war, it's gonna be easy, and you're the only ones on air opposing the Iraq war. You must be nuts to all the way to Democratic leaders.

How could you possibly criticize Nancy Pelosi? You're a barbarian and a visigoth. How did you turn on Obama? Of course we should kill American citizens in signature drone strikes without due process. Of course we should drill in the Gulf. We've been through this a million times. And yes, we have lost members when I said when I critiqued Obama from the left. We have lost members in different times where we stood our ground.

Now, half the people saying they're on subscribing, et cetera, are liable. or never subscribers to begin with, it's a classic trick that people do online. Half of them are real. And so that's okay, we'll take that. So Anna did a critique of Andrew Yang on No Filter, her show on the TYT network. And there are different people in TYT network with different opinions on different candidates. And if you're gonna tell me to rein in anyone, you got another thought coming to you. I'm not gonna rein in Kyle Kalinsky, he's got his own opinions and has variations from me and Anna and everyone else.

I'm not gonna rain in, first of all, good luck to you, okay? That's not gonna happen under any circumstance. And think about what you're saying, what does that even mean rain in, right? Control me, that's what they're saying, yeah. So now look, we give outsiders a shot more than any program on the planet. So guess who's the first national show to have Andrew Yang on their program? Us, have you ever seen me interact with Andrew? The reason that he says all those wonderful things about us is because we're fair to him

and we gave him a shot. And I've told you that I don't agree with some of his policy positions. He's against the minimum wage, for example. It's a fair, honest, interesting, intellectual disagreement, right? But I do agree with a lot of what he says. And the people, the mainstream media often just shuts down, and any new idea, and especially from an outsider, they hate it. So by definition, you remember what happened in the last day?

He mentioned democracy dollars, which is an excellent idea. One of the best ideas of this campaign. And I was in the media spin room. And you literally audibly laughed. They laughed out loud, like, oh, that would actually empower American people. Andrew Yang, what a funny outsider, right? No, we're definitively not in that camp. At the same time, if you think we can't criticize the guy you like, you're nuts.

I mean, that's just not gonna work. See, here I'll give you an example. So we supported Bernie Sanders in 2016. Anna just said, she's supporting him this time around. But if you watch my last interview with Bernie Sanders, I challenge them on, do you have a plan on campaign finance reform? Getting money out of politics, the most important issue. Watch that interview.

Look, parts of that interview are, Bernie does what he does, he fights for progressive values, fights against the mainstream media and corporate Democrats, et cetera, and I love it, but his plan on that is okay, not great, and that's why I challenged him on it. And that doesn't mean you're smearing him. It doesn't mean that you dislike him. I mean, it's a valid, it is a valid critique. And that means, look, the crazy thing about the latest like Yang thing, which I honestly didn't expect, maybe I should have known better, is I'm supportive of universal basic income.

I have problems with the way he would fund it and I have questions. Also, I, the way that I mentioned something in my video wasn't as clear as it should have been. So there has been some constructive feedback, right? So the universal basic income or the freedom dividend, is that what he calls it? Yeah, freedom dividend would not stack with some social safety net programs. Now his website indicates that if you are a legally disabled person, you could currently collect Social Security and Disability Insurance, right? his plan, you could either do social security and the freedom dividend, I'm sorry, social

security and disability insurance, or you can do social security and disability insurance, but you can't stack the freedom dividend on top of that. Now that is a confusing thing. My language wasn't abundantly clear on that, so that is what his policy is. But at the end of the day, the way he would fund it is through a regressive tax. It's the VAT tax. And he keeps saying that it's funded like that in Europe, so what's the big deal? But in Europe, they have a robust social safety net that helps them when it comes to health care,

when it comes to a number of things. Right. Anyway, I don't want to get back into every specific issue where people have disagreements, etc. But I love how enthusiastic the Yang gang is. And I like that they fight back against the insiders and the elites, et cetera. But you have to, but, but, but guys, if you say we must agree with every one of Andrew's proposals, No deal and sad day for you. You want to cry about that?

Go cry, okay? But I'm not going to tell our hosts, no, the Yang gang yelled at us or the mainstream media yelled at us. They've been yelling at us for 17 straight years, and we did not bend to their will either, okay? Oh, Nancy Pelosi yelled at us. I mean, all of this stuff has happened, right? So, look, I love that you're part of the process.

And same goes for look, to the Tulsi. fans also got mad because even though, for example, I agree with probably about 90% of her proposals, they're like, how dare you disagree on 10%? You are heathen, and we will come for you. Okay, all right, then come for me, brother. We're right here. So we're going to tell you the truth no matter what. And yes, by the way, now the folks that are our closest allies saying, Jake, you must denounce Elizabeth Warren because she doesn't meet my standards. Okay, agree to disagree. And so I'm going to keep an open mind.

We're going to do this show. We're going to tell you what is real and what the facts are. And if you say no, I want you to only support my candidate and 100% of the policies of my candidate, sad day for you. There's plenty of propaganda out there. And you go and get into that vat of propaganda, whether it's mainstream one or now new. bubbles of outsider ones and go, oh God, this feels so comfortable, everyone hears from the same group. Oh, and they never challenged even 1% of the policies of my leader.

Oh, this feels so good and comfy. You got that. Don't worry, brother. There's plenty of that online for you. Here we're trying to do the news, okay? So if you like that, t.com slash join. Become a member, real independent media, strong, progressive, and we're not going to back down. If you don't like it, it's a big worldwide web out there.

Go forward. All right, so let's talk about Saudi Arabia. Donald Trump has announced via Twitter, of course, that he plans to implement additional sanctions against Iran. Now this is a good sign because it appears that he's focusing on sanctions as opposed to military action against Iran following accusations that it allegedly bombed an oil facility in Saudi Arabia. Now, there are some caveats though, so let me give you the details. The tweet said, quote, I have just instructed the secretary of the treasury to substantially

increase sanctions on the country of Iran. Now, Henry Rome of the Eurasia group says, this is important because it appears to be Trump's effort to respond to the Iranian attack, alleged Iranian attack, by sanctions measures and not by military steps. The way I look at it, this is the substitute for a military response. not the prelude to it. Now there are members of his administration, including Mike Pence, who are pushing Trump toward the direction of war.

Mike Pompeo is also doing the same. Steve Mnuchin is also doing the same. But Trump is restraining himself. Is it because he has a peaceful foreign policy stance? No, it's because, in my opinion, he's concerned about his base, which does not want additional war. And this is why I think it's important to make sure that we get him elected out of office, because Because he's thinking about his reelection campaign.

He's thinking about making sure his base is happy with him. If you do elect him and he doesn't have to worry about reelection, well then is he going to be as restrained when it comes to war with Iran? I would argue no. Man, we have dodged so many bullets on Iran. But when you get to that point, that's when actually you start getting more nervous. Because how many times can we avoid this war? With Bush and Cheney, they pushed and pushed and pushed, especially Cheney, and guys like

John Bolton, who were in that administration or backed that administration at different times throughout the eight years. And now then Bolton came back, and then Bolton left, and then Trump wanted to prove that he was tougher and dumber than Bolton, so he threatened war with Iran. This is now the umpteenth time that he's threatened war. Now there's one possibility he gets reelected, which is unlikely, but it could happen. And then he says, well, I had no holds barred, I'm gonna show the world how tough and strong I am, et cetera.

And other possibility is we're six months down the road or nine months down the road, and he has no chance of getting reelected. And he goes, well, screw it, let's start a war. A war is a good way to say, hey, you know what? And invite Iran to attack our troops so that he could turn around and go, I'm the one protecting our troops by getting them murdered, right, by getting them killed. So you have to, you have no choice, you have to vote for me. He could do that gambit.

So every day, even though this is actually a very good development, because there's almost No sanctions left. We sanction the live in hell out of them, right? We already went after energy, in other words, oil, we went after aviation, we went after shipping. The experts say we're really at the bottom of the barrel here, because we've already hit it with almost everything we got on the sanctions front. This is it really honestly a way of just pulling back, which I'm thrilled with. But tick, tick, tick, I'm so worried that Trump one day is going to wake up.

And he has no mind, right? So he's going to be like, I don't know, prove I'm strong I am. And one day he's going to launch. And so then that's what I'm really worried about. But today's a good day. Today's a good day. You should be worried, though, because he's always vague. He's wishy-washy when it comes to what he plans on doing next, especially when it comes to Iran.

In fact, you know what? I want to go to this video, and then I'm going to drive home the point that I want to make about what the future would look like if Trump gets reelected. Take a look. You raised more sanctions on Iran today. I did. I did. I did. We'll be adding some very significant sanctions onto Iran. And what will they include, sir? We'll be announcing it over the next 48 hours.

And you said that there will be a further announcement on Iran. Are you looking at a military strike? See what happened? Mr. Bukh failed that the attacks in Saudi were an act of war. And if so, what's the response on the U.S. He just came out with a statement. He spoke to me a little while ago and we'll have an announcement. Well, there are many options, as you know, Phil, there are many options, and there's the ultimate option, and there are options a lot less than that, and we'll see. We're in a very powerful position. Right now, we're in a very, very powerful position.

Do you say the ultimate option? No, I'm saying the ultimate option, meaning go in war. No, I'm not talking about, I'm not talking about that ultimate option, no. We are not in a powerful position. We were in a much better position when we were going along with the Iran nuclear deal. But now we're in a little bit of a mess and Trump knows it. Now, I show you that video to make a point because he doesn't like to appear weak. And there are hard right wingers who are making him out to be weak in his response to Iran.

Now with that said, look, Trump has no sound foreign policy strategy. He's never consistent about anything. But there is one thing he is consistent on and it's helping himself. The only reason why he is showing any restraint is because more war is not popular with his base. He wants to get reelected. We have to prevent that from happening because if he is reelected, I don't think he's going to show any restraint.

Yeah, so two more things on this. Mike Pence also weighed in, and he said, now, new twist on this, the Heritage Foundation, he said, quote, it looks like Iran was responsible for the attacks. Well, then maybe your administration shouldn't have come out and said, who's Iran? If you don't even know. And now all of a sudden you backpedal to, it looks like it could be Iran. Okay, that is not comforting for you going out there and blustering and saying to the whole world. And having, by the way, the media report, repeat to the whole world that it was Iran.

And he even clarified that the U.S. intelligence community was working to confirm the details. So in other words, no, you don't know at all. made it up, Trump made it up in a tweet, and this is how they govern by the seat of their pants, and they have no idea what they're doing. The reason Trump always talks about like, oh, we're very powerful, I have a very large button, it is larger than Kim Jong-Lund. This guy's the most insecure man on the planet. It's the obvious, keeps talking about, oh, I'm very strong, I'm stronger than Bolton,

I'm stronger than other people realize, that's because he is insecure and he feels weak. The last part of it was at least the backpedal today again, emphasizing the good news here is he said, we have to sit down with the Saudis and work something out. That's not great way of framing it, but at least he's walking it back from I'll do whatever the Saudis tell me to do. And then he said, quote, that was an attack on Saudi Arabia, that wasn't an attack on us. Oh, okay, finally, thank God, right? So he finally realized that the United States of America doesn't work for the dictator

of Saudi Arabia, Mohamed bin Salman. So the fact that he walked out back is also good news. Tune in tomorrow for what we get because it's a box of chocolates or a box of something else. And you never know where you're going to get with Donald Trump. We're going to take a quick break. There's one other angle to the story that we're going to talk about. And then later in the show, we're going to discuss an awesome proposal by Bernie Sanders when it comes to affordable housing.

And we're also going to talk about the election in Israel. And there's one part of the Bernie proposal that I'm not sure I agree with. Oh, no, get their tax ready. We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-The-Republic, or UNFTR. As a Young Turks fan, you already know that the government, the media, and corporations are constantly peddling lies that serve the interests of the rich and powerful. But now there's a podcast dedicated to unraveling those lies, debunking the conventional wisdom.

In each episode of Un-B-The-Republic, or UNFTR, the host delves into a different historical episode or topic that's generally misunderstood or purposely obfuscated by the so-called powers that be. Featuring in-depth research, razor-sharp commentary, and just the right amount of vulgarity, the UNFTR podcast takes a sledgehammer to what you thought you knew about some of the nation's most sacred historical cows. But don't just take my word for it. The New York Times described UNFTR as consistently compelling and educational, aiming to challenge conventional wisdom and upend the historical narratives that were taught. On July 18th, get excited. This is big! For the summer's biggest adventure.

I think I just smurf my pants. That's a little too excited. Sorry. Smurfs. Only dinner's July 18th. For as the great philosopher Yoda once put it, you must unlearn what you have learned. And that's true whether you're in Jedi training

or you're uprooting and exposing all the propaganda and disinformation you've been fed over the course of your lifetime. So search for UNFDR in your podcast app today and get ready to get informed, angered, and entertained all at the same time. Be back. All right, back on Young Turks, lots of comments here about the show, and thank you guys. Susie says, this is why I joined TYT, Bravo, thank you, and this is from our member section. Have I mentioned t.com slash join?

And V.A. Brown 89 says, Jenk, I really appreciate you not jumping right in with an endorsement and taking your time to make a decision. I thank you. I don't often hear that. It's a pleasure to hear it. Thank you, guys. Shane says, TYT, please keep doing what you're doing. I love your truth and your opinions and it's up to us to make our own conclusions.

Exactly. Exactly right, Shane. Thank you. By the way, another way to sign over membership is tyt.com slash Anna. Okay, that also gets you to membership. And then we know it's partly that because you enjoy Anna's commentary. That would be great. And if you just want to help the show, t-y-t.com slash yes, that's another great way to help.

And all right, let's keep going. Kara Curley on Twitter says, Anna, I believe you. I listen and agree. You're absolutely doing your best without an agenda. You're the best person in news. Thank you. So it's very nice, Kara. Thank you.

And I'll do, God, there's so many wonderful ones. You guys are so nice. Thank you. George says, Jenkins, Anna, I don't agree with everything you or members of the network say, but I appreciate the nuance analysis and speaking your minds, proudly a member and not afraid of criticism, my preferred candidate, and by the way, I'm a Tulsi supporter, okay? I appreciate you, I really do. George, that's wonderful.

Yeah. Thank you. And last one, there's so many great, thank you guys, all of you. Dominic Franco says, I'm a diehard Bernie supporter from Vermont, and I've never thought about attacking the young kids for not being pro Bernie enough. That's absolutely ridiculous. it from this online Bernie Sporter, and we aren't all ridiculous. Thank you guys for doing unbiased news.

Of course not. Look, and so last thing I'll say on that is, guys, most of the supporters for Andrew Yang, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Tulsi Gabbard, you go down the list, Bill de Blasio, etc. There isn't much of a de Blasio gang online, to be fair, but. So are good, solid progressives? And primaries sometimes get messy, and the emotions run high as you get closer to the election. Somewhat normal, but, like, if saying unity about positions we don't agree with is absurd.

But at the end of the day, when there's one candidate, whoever it might be, that's a progressive, whichever, whoever's left standing on the progressive side, I'm hoping that we can get back together if we agree on 80 to 90% of stuff. Real agreement, and acknowledging that we'll never agree 100% of the time. And I think that on the progressive side, we can't have real unity. So let's try to bring it down for a second as we go forward here. And by the way, just real quick plug for Friday's show. In the third hour Friday's show, normally we just have the post game for members.

But I have two great candidates running against Denny Hoyer who are both progressive. And I interviewed both of them at the same time, or not at the same time, back to back. to give you guys options. And so it's just an interesting case of, you know, I wanted to, we progressives want to, you know, honestly take down Steny Hoyer, who's a corporate Democrat, the king of the corporate Democrats in a lot of ways. And so we have Brianna Urbina and Michaely Wilkes, they're both great. So some tension is going to run a little high while they're running against each other,

but then we got to unite against Steny Hoyer. So, and at the end of the day, obviously unite against Trump and the Republicans as well. So let's try to find the right balance here. All right, let's keep going. Senator Lindsey Graham tapped into his warmonger characteristics by essentially calling Donald Trump weak for calling off an airstrike against Iran after they shot down a US drone. In a tweet, he wrote, the measured response by President Donald Trump regarding the shooting down of an American drone was clearly seen by the Iranian regime as a sign of weakness.

Now Trump response- Trumps. Yes. Yes. Okay. Now before we had to Trump's response, you know one of the favorite things of the right wingers is to yell, triggered. Oh man, I'm so easy to trigger the left.

They care about other human beings. Ha ha! They have emotions. We don't, et cetera, right? Which is of course not true because a lot of the right wing is based purely on emotions. Me like me, me no like others, right? But here are facts. No, me know like facts.

Here's 99% of the world scientists. scientists, me hate scientists, me care about feelings, right? But so it's not surprising to see that their leader gets triggered nonstop. And can anyone on the right argue that this tweet in response to a golfing buddy of his, right? Is anything but triggered? So let me just preface this by saying, yes, Trump is certainly triggered. If you call him weak or, you know, imply that he's weak, he's gonna get triggered.

However, I do enjoy how Trump has certainly unmanned a number of right wing war mongers like Senator Lindsey Graham. Here, here. So this is a nuanced story. We talked about it on old school last night. Check out all of our shows, t.yt.com slash join. We had a blast with this, but now let's give you Trump's tweet. So he responds with, no, Lindsay, it was a sign of strength that some people just don't understand.

Okay, so there's a lot of different ways of reading that tweet. I like the like smooth jazz way that Anna read it. Because honestly, he doesn't really, he doesn't speak with like this aggressive voice. He actually has like a very soft like, no, Lindsay. It was a sign of strength that some people just don't understand. Like he talks like that all the time. That's true. No way.

He does, he has this weird way of talking, where he says, I'm really strong. Yes, yes. They love me in Norway. Norway. Okay, but I read it as, no, Lindsay, it was a sign of strength that some people just don't understand. No, that was the tweet form of his reply. There's also a video form of his reply that I want to go to next. Let's take a look.

Ram, who said it's a failure to stride in Iran this summer with a sign of ticket by Iran is a sign of weakness? No, I actually think it's a sign of strength. We have the strongest military in the world now. And I think it's a great sign of strength. It's very easy to attack. But if you ask Lindsay, ask him, how did it go into the Middle East, how did that work out? And how did it going into Iraq workout?

So he's right. I mean, I think he's absolutely right in mentioning and citing those wars and how they've been a complete and utter failure. I like how he said we have a strong military now. So is he implying that the military was weak before? Are you insulting our troops, Donald Trump? Are you insulting our troops, Donald Trump? Okay, but look, so on the policy, we're super clear.

Don't attack Iran, and in this case, Donald Trump is wrong half time, right half time, bottom line is he hasn't attacked Iran, great, okay? Lizzie Graham is always wrong on war. He's in favor of every war. He yelled at Donald Trump, not yelled, beseeched Donald Trump on keeping troops in Afghanistan. Of course, he wants to be in the middle of the mess in Syria. Lizzie Graham is a billion percent wrong, warmonger to no end. The only reason he's being nice to Donald Trump is he's like, oh, please Donald,

would you start another war for me, please, I play golf with you, I'll do anything, I kiss your ass, I'll do anything, right? So that leads to what Anna was saying earlier. And we spent a long time on an old school last night, how he, look, so Trump has these insecurities and that's why he keeps saying, I'm strong, mighty, strong, this is a very stable G, right? And so that's true. But what's funny is how much weaker other Republicans are. So when he yells at them, what happens at the end?

Ted Cruz is like, I'm not going to endorse him at the convention. And then the Mercer slammed the door on his face, and they gave him $13 million. Those are the donors that are in charge. All of a sudden, Ted Cruz's phone banking for Donald Trump. Please vote for Donald Trump. He called my wife ugly and he's so right. He called my dad a murderer, but please vote for him. Oh, you want to talk about a beta?

You want to talk about pathetic. I mean, Ted Cruz is the saddest man in America. And then Lizzie Graham, he said, you know what Trump did to him in the campaign? He docks them. He literally put out his phone number to everybody. And then Lizzie Graham started getting all sorts of three. threats and et cetera. And then he's like, this is outrageous and it will not stand and Trump is terrible, right?

Now he's like, oh, please start a war. So yes, he docks him. And I think it's an important point to mention because look, whenever we cover Lindsey Graham bowing his head to Trump, we do it from the standpoint of he wants to remain relevant. And he was honest about that during an interview with the New York Times. And you can listen to that interview, the show is the Daily, he just straight up admits it. However, let's keep it real.

Lindsay Graham is afraid that Donald Trump is going to attack him during the rallies. And we know what that leads to, right? Yeah. There's a flying in the room. Yeah. So yeah, absolutely. Look, and one last thing about Lindsey Graham, and I don't mean this in any sexual way, but he's looking for a boyfriend.

And so, and it's different genders, it doesn't matter, right? He always has a buddy in trying to start wars. It used to be John McCain, obviously John McCain has passed. Joe Lieberman used to be part of the three amigos. They started their Iraq war together and they loved it. They're like, remember what a million people died for no reason? Including so many of our troops and we wasted all that money, high five. But Lieberman got run out of town in Connecticut.

And then he had Kelly Ayat up in New Hampshire and she lost. So now he's like looking around, he needs a new boyfriend. He's like, who's gonna meet my buddy in the cop, you know, buddy movie or whatever, right? where we go and start reckless wars. So he's grabbed on to Donald Trump's leg like he's Van Gundy. And he's like, Donald, please, please stay with me, stay with me, I need to start this war. So now he thinks he's being clever by like just tweaking him. Now it was a good sign of moderation from the president, but I think it was misunderstood

as a sign of weakness. Donald Trump doesn't understand it knew us, he thinks you just called them weak. Exactly, because you did. Yeah, because that's what your intent was. So now he just shook you off his leg and Lizzie's like, nah, and I guarantee you now, predict ahead of time, easiest prediction I've ever made. Lindsay Graham will come crawling back to Donald Trump. Please, please take me back, Donald, please, I promise.

Okay, and that's the sorry state of the Republican Party right now. Well, let's talk about the sorry state of the elections in Israel. This is the second time the country has held elections because Netanyahu wanted it, and now it's backfiring. So let's do that story. The fact that about 5 million Palestinians will be governed by the Israeli Knesset cannot vote in today's election, should tell you all you need to know about Israel and the international community's normalization of its racist system.

That's Amy Goodman from Democracy Now, speaking the truth about the chaotic outcome of the Israeli election. Now the election has led to political turmoil because the results are too close to call. So let me give you the details on that. With over 90% of the vote now counted, Benny Gantz's Blue and White Party looks to have won the largest number of seats in Israel's parliament, called the Knesset, and 32 out of the total of 120. Netanyahu's right-wing Lakud came in a close second with 31 seats. Now, oftentimes in reporting about these two different candidates, the blue and white party is, and Gantz specifically, is referred to as a so-called

centrist. However, both candidates are extremely right-wing, especially when it comes to the treatment of Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank. In fact, they both ran campaigns indicating that they wanted to annex giant portions of the West Bank. And so they're essentially two sides of the same coin when it comes to that issue. Now, Jank, did you want to jump in? Yeah, so look, this is super interesting and it's great news overall. It's not great news because all of a sudden there's, you know, peace is going to bloom in the Middle East and the Palestinians are going to be treated with justice.

That's not going to happen, certainly not in the short run. So I'll get back to that, but I'll tell you why it is good news. Netanyahu is in a lot of trouble here. He can still pull out, you know, a victory here, but his chances are much, much smaller. He blew it. So he barely wins the elections last time. But he doesn't have enough of a majority in a parliamentary system to put together a government. And he doesn't want to give a third party here, led by Lieberman, something that they wanted.

I'm gonna get back to that because that's really important. So he says, in his arrogance, you know what, I'll have new elections, I'll demagogue even more, and that way I'll have a clearer majority, and then I won't have to give that third party any concessions, and I'll get everything my way. Oops. So now that it looks like he's narrowly lost these elections, now the other party, led by Benny Gantz, is going to get to get put together a government. Number one, the government could be without Likud at all, in which case, then Netanyahu is immediately going to be brought up on corruption charges. Oh, I love that. That's a wonderful turn of events, right? He was trying to get immunity for himself. If he won the elections,

He was gonna try to pass a law saying, while I'm in office, you're not allowed to prosecute me. Who does that sound like? It's a little like Donald Trump. And so he did every demagoguery that he could imagine, you know, clearly racist attacks against the Arabs that are Israeli citizens, and who does that remind you of, right? And talked about no, we're gonna give no concessions and we're gonna annex and the West Bank territory that Palestinians want, et cetera, he threw everything.

He had at it. And it looks like, and I'm so, look, again, it's not done yet. But right now, it's a funny thing to say, but proud of the Israeli citizens for not falling into that right wing, you know, war mongering, bigotry, et cetera, et cetera. And so it's also possible that Gantz will do a unity government with Lakud, but the condition would have to be that it can't be Netanyahu. Right. pick a new leader, in which case Netanyahu could again be brought up on corruption

charges. And remember, there's foreign policy and there's domestic policy. So when we're looking at Israel from the outside, everybody's looking at the Palestinian issue because that's such a giant issue for the world. But Gantz also ran on a clean hands campaign saying, I'm not going to tolerate corruption. So you can't have Netanyahu the heart of corruption as involved in that government. So Netanyahu would have to step down if there was a unity government. So that's why it's fantastic news. Look, now Netanyahu in a world of trouble and might be out and maybe go to jail.

Other Israeli prime ministers have gone to jail. And look, that's one of the good things about the Israeli government is that they hold themselves accountable. And so, and they are much harsher against corruption than the United States is. Yes, that's true. Now Erdogan has lost some elections, not the national elections, but he's lost elections. That's the right wing government in Turkey. Now Netanyahu seems to have lost this election.

is up next. There I say that there's a little bit of hope in the world. You're so optimistic. Look, and you're focusing on a positive part of this story, which is the possibility of Netanyahu finally facing the consequences for his corruption. But the pessimistic characteristic that I contain really focuses on what this means for Palestinians, because it doesn't look good. Now, I want to go back to Amy Goodman because she explains why perfectly in this next video. Both Netanyahu and Gans had run on platforms vowing to take harsh measures targeting Palestinians. Netanyahu promised to annex nearly a third of the occupied West Bank if he won in violation of international law.

Earlier this year, Gantz bragged in a campaign ad he'd bombed Gaza back to the Stone Ages and he vowed to, quote, pound Gaza again. As chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces guns oversaw Israel's assaults on Gaza in 2012 and 2014. He's currently facing a war crimes lawsuit in a Dutch court filed by a Dutch Palestinian woman who lost six relatives in Israel's 2014 assault on Gaza. So these two candidates who are incredibly cruel to Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza received the majority of votes. But there is a little bit of a, I don't know if you want it, it's not a silver lining, but the third party that won was actually the Arab majority's joint list. They came in a strong third in this election.

Yeah, and I should be clear, I mentioned third party earlier. It's a Lieberman's party. He actually came in fourth. The Arab parties do not participate in the government historically. I don't know if they're going to reconsider now, and that's a fascinating, would certainly be an unbelievable tournament. I don't know enough about that portion of Israeli politics to comment too much on that. But I do know that Netanyahu's demagoguery did drive up Arab participation in the voting significantly. And so in a sense it backfired.

But look, Gantz is the former military chief of Israel. So he's not, he's unfortunately very right wing on those issues. Lieberman is intensely right wing on those issues. So the fourth party in essence, right? And he's probably gonna get to decide who's gonna win here. So as excited as I am, Lieberman could still make a deal with Netanyahu, so it's not over yet. And so, but Lieberman has an upside too.

And for as harsh as he has been against Palestinians, he's deeply secular. And so he does not wanna give too much power to the orthodox vote, the fundamentalist vote in Israel, which is great news because, you know, I'm deeply secular, and I think any government that leads it in a more secular direction and doesn't bow to the insane pressures put by any religious fundamentalists, that's definitely a silver lining in that context. And one of the things that resonate in Israel is, why do we all have to do military service, but the Orthodox Jews don't have to? They drive us into more wars, and they refuse to participate.

It's an absolute outrage, and he's absolutely right about that. So, look, I always hold out hope because I'm more of an optimist. And we need that. Yeah, but Gantz, being the former military chief and having committed potential war crimes in Gaza, has the credibility to make a peace deal if he wanted to, has the credibility to make a deal with the Arab parties if he wanted to, and if the Arab parties wanted to. I don't know what contours that would take.

And so, and I love, it looks super side note here, Amy Goodman deserves a world of credit for always being a light in the darkness and a voice of reason and covering this accurately. But overall, don't cat your chickens before they hatch. Netanyahu could still pull something out. But it's a good day in the world if he's lost these elections. And at least, you know, I hate that saying of, well, I'll take the devil I know rather than devil I don't know. No, the devil I know, I know is a devil. Right.

The person I don't know at least has the chance of being a decent leader and maybe begrudgingly doing the right thing and at least has the upsides of being against corruption, etc., etc. So I take Gantz over Netanyahu any day of the week and just to prove that final point for me is he pulled together a rally, Netanyahu did, and he's talking about it. I don't let the Arabs don't take over and these anti-Zionists, we have to make sure we block him. By the way, this kind of rhetoric was partly what got people riled up and led to a Jewish fundamentalist killing Yitzhak Rabin. And so, and Rabin was going to do a peace deal. So it's terrible what Netanyahu did back in the day and he's trying it again.

Anyway, his supporters started chanting, we don't want unity. And that's again, who does that remind you of here in America? So division on purpose for political gain, personal gain, destroy the country, set it on flames, Nan Yahoo and Trump, birds of a feather. And finally, the last chant was Beebe, King of Israel. How's that for sacrilege? And whose other guy who was called King of Israel by his supporters? Donald Trump.

So, but I would argue Netanyahu's Trump and Cheney combined. So any day where he loses is a wonderful day for the world. We're gonna take a quick break. When we come back, we have a powerful PSA from the Sandy Hook promise. And also we're going to dunk on Nancy Pelosi because she's terrible. At TYT, we frequently talk about all the ways that big tech companies are taking control of our online lives, constantly monitoring us and storing our data. But that doesn't mean we have to let them. It's possible to stay anonymous online and hide your data from the prying eyes

of big tech. And one of the best ways is with ExpressVPN. ExpressVPN hides your IP address, making your active ID more difficult to trace and sell the advertisers. ExpressVPN also encrypts 100% of your network data to protect you from eavesdroppers and cybercriminals. And it's also easy to install. A single mouse click protects all your devices. But listen, guys, this is important. important. ExpressVPN is rated number one by CNET and Wired magazine. So take back control of your life online and secure your data with a top VPN solution available, ExpressVPN. And if you go to ExpressVPN.com slash TYT, you can get three extra months for free with this exclusive link just for TYT fans. That's EXP-R-E-S-S-V-N dot com slash T-YT. Check it out today.

Medicare for All. We hope you're enjoying this free clip from the Young Turks. If you want to get the whole show and more exclusive content while supporting independent media, become a member at t-y-t.com slash join today. In the meantime, enjoy this free second. All right, back on a young Turks. Lots of comments as usual. Okoyo's wig writes in, Lindsay Graham's always wrong on war, quoting me. You could have left out the on-war part and it's still been 100% accurate.

True, true that. Okay. Bray the rules says, Jenk, you make the sad news very funny. I thank you, I appreciate it. And Gabby Marita says, even if he's replaced with another right winger, referring to Netanyahu, I want Nanjahou gone, if only because I want Trump to see what might be in store for him come February of 2021. That would be amazing.

And then Brianna Urbano for Congress tweeted, and she said, thank you, Jake, for the opportunity to speak on the conference. voters from across this nation want real leadership in Washington that isn't stifled by political points or corporate interests, let's win this thing. So I interviewed Brianna and Michaela Wilkes earlier today on tape. It's really interesting. That's why I told you earlier, please at the end of the Friday show, check out those interviews. But watch both, because it's two progressives running against Danny Hoyer, and basically we need to focus, right? They're both really great, and it's up to you guys to decide on who you want to support,

and I appreciate her saying that. So that's on the conversation on Friday, and then obviously we'll make it available online everywhere. But also today on the conversation, Jim Gafferkin. So he's going to be in studio, a wonderful comic, but his new movie American Dreamer is really powerful and haunting. I'm not playing, I watched it. I mean, you're going to see it. He was awesome in it. So really versatile dude, he's in studio today.

Very flattered. I know, right? Yeah, yeah. I wanna say a lot of things about him, but I'm gonna save it for the conversation. That's third hour today's show, so check that out. So Anna, what's next? All right. A new PSA by an organization known as Sandy Hook Promise is getting a lot of attention online.

We're gonna show you this powerful PSA, but before I do so, I just wanna warn you that that it might trigger some people, it's very emotional, graphic, but that's what makes it so powerful. Take a look. This year, my mom got me the perfect bag for back to school. These colorful binders help me stay organized. These headphones are just what I need for studying. These new sneakers are just what I need for the new year.

This jacket is a real must-have. My parents got me the skateboard I wanted. It's pretty cool. These scissors really come in handy in our class. These colored pencils too. These new socks? They can be a real lifesaver. And I finally got my own phone to stay in touch with my mom.

That's one of the best ads I've seen. That's the kind of ads we need to make because it's real. You know how many school shootings have happened already this year? 22. So 22 times just this year alone, and we're not anywhere near done with the year, schools back in session now, there'll be more, that scenario has actually happened. So we've lost our minds as a country. If that ad bothers you, the reality of what happens in our schools should bother you a thousand

times more. And if, look, we know what the answer is, and we know that our politicians aren't gonna do it because they prefer the money that they get from their donors to our kids' lives. So that's just, that's the reality. And the reason that progressives historically have not run ads like this is because they're obsessed with the wrong standard. The standard in Washington is civility. Well, our kids getting murdered in these schools is not civil, and us just sitting on the

couch and doing nothing about it and not fighting back politically is not our idea of civility and the right way to handle this. It's about time that people got aggressive politically and did ads like this so you can see it for yourself. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean those scenes didn't happen. They do happen in our schools on a regular basis. I just sent my kids back to school. We can't have this as a nation.

And right now, guys like Mitch McConnell say no, no vote, I don't forget voting against it. I won't even allow a discussion or a vote on this issue. Exactly. And you know, Nancy Pelosi gets a lot of flack for good reason. But the House did pass gun control legislation, common sense gun control legislation, which I don't even think goes far enough, but at least it's a start. That is being blocked by Mitch McConnell. And I wonder why, you know, Senator Chuck Schumer is not getting any flack.

Because if I were a senator, a Democratic senator, if I were Democratic leadership within the Senate, I would go out there and I would hold Mitch McConnell accountable every single day for blocking a vote on gun control legislation. See, because to them, being inside the club is more important than fighting back. So he'll, after every shooting, Chuck Schumer will say angry things, fake angry things, if you ask me. And I can't believe the Republicans aren't doing anything. for me and the people that I support, blah, blah, blah.

Okay, so you say, all right, well, constructive critique, okay, you could do a speech every day on the floor of the Senate that they don't hold a vote with pictures of the kids who have died in school shootings, put up one picture after another after another. And if they say, hey, that's unbecoming, well, it's far more unbecoming that those kids actually died. And so that's why I love what Sandy Hook promise is doing here, and it's led by the parents who had their kids murdered in Sandy Hook in Connecticut. And so if I was in their situation and people are like, oh, I think your ad is too harsh,

well, I'll take it under advisement, okay? And so, hey, look, support them in every way that you can. They've trained more than 7.5 million people in their know the science program that trains youth and adults how to identify at risk behavior and intervene. So it isn't just about gun control. It's also different things that you could do to prevent this kind of violence in your schools. But gun control is obviously a huge part of this. Yeah, it's the primary issue that needs to be focused on.

Look, I think that in addition to that, training people to identify risk factors is important. But the onus shouldn't only be placed on possible victims of mass shootings. We need to get our cowardly politicians to do something. That is what they were elected for, to actually represent the best interests of the American people. They are not doing that at all. The only thing they represent is their own political career and their own financial interests, and that's it.

So I want to tell you one more thing that you could do. So we have a petition, it's to draw attention to this issue, but it has an important twist that other people don't do. So it's tyt.com slash never NRA. And our point is, you should net, no politics should ever take money from the NRA that incentivizes them to support gun manufacturers, which profit off of these deaths. It doesn't mean that you have to vote for gun control. It doesn't say you have to vote against people who don't believe in gun control, no.

We're just saying if you're really opposed to gun control and you think, well, these deaths, they would have happened anyway with pencils and pensions. and whatever your ideology is, I'm not concerned about that. And if you live in a place where you think, hey, in order to win, I got to be against gun control. That's a separate issue. But I gotta know you're at least being honest about it. You're not doing it just for the sake of bribery. So stop taking the bribes from the NRA, and then if you actually vote against gun control,

I'll believe that that's your actual opinions, right? And that you're representing your constituents. But right now, no one believes that. We think every politician takes money from the NRA is in effect being bribed by the NRA. And the result of those bribes are kids dying. So it is the simplest request we could have, t.yt.com slash never on NRA. So if there's any politician that ever takes, I don't care if it's a Republican or a Democrat or anyone else, you take money from the NRA and you should never get another vote in America.

And I think that even gun owners should agree to that, because don't you want your politicians to be honest and represent you because they actually agree with you instead of the fact that the NRA bribed them? And if you're saying, wait, jank, is it fair to call it bribes? The Supreme Court said it's legal to bribe politicians if you call it campaign contributions. NRA gave $70 million in 2016 to politicians. Do you think they did that for their health? Do you think they did it for charity?

No, they did it because they're largely run by gun manufacturers that want to make more money. They wanted a return on investment, and they got it, but part of that return on investment was our dead kids. All right, let's move on to Nancy Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi is now being clear on something that we already suspected. She is not a supporter of Medicare for all, and she explained why in an interview on CNBC. You seem to be the only person who's thinking about not breaking the budget. the right path here?

Well, we think the right path is the Affordable Care Act, and that is a path to health care for all Americans. I always say to people, when we win, we can put everything on the table and see what it means in terms of benefits for the consumer, cost to them, and cost to business, to corporate America, which is paying a lot of the price, as well as cost to the federal government and local government. So I believe that the path is to health care for. all is a path that is following the lead of the affordable care act.

So we have one more video to get to, but I do want to comment on one statement that she made there. First of all, obviously I disagree about moving forward with the Affordable Care Act. The Affordable Care Act has many flaws, and even if you include a private option, I'm sorry, public option, that creates a two-tiered system in a country that is incredibly corrupt and has legalized bribery. So if you look at public education and what this country's wealthy did to public education by defunding it and in some red states literally taking money out of the public education

system to fund vouchers for private education, we can't have a two-tiered system like that when it comes to healthcare, no negotiations, not interested. Also Pelosi says we can, if we win, when we win, meaning Democrats, we can put everything on the table and see what the best plan is. No, you're not, no you're not. She's not gonna put everything on the table. You think that she's gonna be open to a debate and a discussion about Medicare for all? She has nothing but complete and utter disdain for Medicare for all.

Well, I love that she says, if we win. I got news for you, you already won. You control the House. So is your new rule, I have to control the House, the Senate, and the White House, before I do anything. Yeah, that's probably the rule for corporate Democrats like Nancy Pelosi, because they don't want to do anything. Their donors pay them to sit on their ass and do absolutely nothing.

So here she is saying she's against Medicare for all, hey, the rest of the media, can I get a simple agreement that she's not a progressive? So we told you she was against Medicare for all. She now confirmed she's against Medicare for all. The progressive position is Medicare for all. It's also a Green New Deal, which she dismissed as Green Dream or whatever. What is your vested interest in trying to paint her as a progressive when the facts are completely contrary to that.

And can you please stop saying that we agree with her when she goes on CNBC and tells Jim Kramer, I don't agree with progressives. I wanna, so affordable care acts, she says, hey, we're gonna get everybody healthcare. That's not true. Even if you did the tweaks of the Affordable Care Act that Pelosi and Biden want, you still have 10 million people on insured at a minimum, okay? So it's not true that you would get everybody healthcare. And then did you notice how Kramer framed you?

Nancy Pelosi, you seem to be the only one interested in not breaking the budget. In other words, all the rest of the Democrats are too liberal. But Nancy, you're a reasonable conservative Democrat. Interesting framing. You're a reasonable Democrat who doesn't want to break the budget. Now, Jim Kramer loves the tax cuts for the rich that put a $2 trillion a hole in our budget. Yes. But that's his rich friends.

Oh, getting health care for Americans who are middle class. I don't get a goddamn about it. Hey, don't break the budget. And Nancy Pelosi says, don't worry, Jim, I'm here on CNBC to assure corporate America that I'm on your side and I'm not on the side of the people who will be uninsured. And so don't worry, I won't be breaking the budget. So all my corporate donors, everybody be cool, don't worry. Remember, under my leadership, the Democratic Party will never do anything.

All right, let's hear more from Nancy Pelosi. When I listen to the candidates in the debate, this seems like the majority do not necessarily favor that half. Is there way to rein people in? Is there a way to say, listen, we're not going to bring that in the house? Let's use our energy to have health care for all Americans, and that involves over 150 million families have health care through the private sector, through insurance companies, and we don't want to empower insurance companies, but we want to empower. Now, what the Affordable Care Act did, it not only expanded health care to 20 million more Americans. It increased the benefits, and that I think is the path we should go on. I think that what is being put forth, I said, if you, if that's what you believe, God bless you,

but know what it entails and what that debate would be like. Wait, did she just claim that the Affordable Care Act and possibly expanding the Affordable Care Act would cover more than Medicare for all? So is Nancy Pelosi saying that the Affordable Care Act would cover mental health care treatment? Will it cover optical? Will it cover dental? Because Medicare for all covers all of that, everything, literally everything. So this nonsense, ridiculous and disingenuous debate about private insurance, by the way, drives

me crazy because there is no need for private insurance when you have a single payer system That covers everything, everything. It covers everything. And so she says, no, no, no, I mean, to back up the Republican talking points about how Americans love private insurance, she said there in that clip, that involves over 150 million families that have health care through the private sector, through insurance companies. We have to protect them too.

It makes it sound like you're going to take away their insurance. No, you're going to give them better insurance, as Anna just pointed out. In fact, Senator Michael Bennett, who hates Medicare for all, another corporate Democrat, When I asked him about it, said, oh, no, no, you're right. Medicare for all is the Cadillac option. It's, quote, awesome. He says he's worried that, hey, but people still like their private insurance. They love going through bureaucracy.

They love the red tape. They love when executives make all that money for no reason at all. And they don't want the Cadillac plan. Really? People don't want better insurance. And they want to keep their crappy private insurance instead. It's a preposterous point. So, look, there again, Kramer said, hey, is there anything we could do about that?

I hear in the debates, some people are, you know, are outside of acceptable corporate thinking. Can't you, quote, rein them in. So, and Pelosi goes in a swageism. Yeah. You know, hey, look, look, look, look. Don't worry, I'm not going to do anything. Well, what happened to bringing, you know, both ideas up for a debate? Yeah.

Right? What happened to that? So, hey, I don't know if you know this, but Nancy Pelosi, you're going to do. your Speaker of the House, you can debate it right now. You don't need Mitch McConnell's permission, you don't need Donald Trump's permission, you know what you could do, you could propose Medicare for all, or you could let others propose Medicare for all for a vote right now. Are you going to have that debate?

I'll tell you right now, the answer is no, it's a guarantee, write it down in stone. The only way that Nancy Pelosi will allow a vote on Medicare for all is if she absolutely positively is forced into it by the progressive base. And now other media reporters, come on, guys. So we point out her donors, those insurance companies that she loves and Michael Bennett loves and all the corporate Democrats love. They get millions of dollars from them. Do you really think it's for charity?

And do you think that the second time they gave it to Pelosi that they didn't get a return on investment? She sent her top aid to the insurance companies to tell them, don't worry, we're not going to do Medicare for all. So these are stone cold facts. And yet every reporter is like, no, no, Nancy Pelosi is a progressive. You must bow down to her. I was on at WNYC in New York.

When I suggested Pelosi's not a progressive, I mean, they couldn't believe it. They couldn't believe it. They were scandalized. Scandalized. Listen to her. Listen to her. So, and it doesn't matter what I think or what they think. The bottom line is actions.

If she's a progressive, wouldn't she at least let the advocates of Medicare for all have a vote? Well, she's not going to, because not only is she not a progressive, she works for her donors, and she promised them she would block that vote, and that's exactly what she's doing now, and that's what she'll try to do for the rest of her term, this particular term of Congress. And only if, but by the way, even if Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren wins and says, we want to vote on Medicare for all, are you sure Pelosi's gonna give it to him? I'm not at all sure.

I think she's gonna pick her donors over a Democratic president, and I don't even think it's gonna be close. But you know what, let's not be too hard on her, because she does have political signs supporting universal healthcare from back in the early 1990s. Yeah, she said in an interview that she has a poster in her basement for a single payer, where she, I think, buried single payer. And so she made it, maybe that was a tombstone for it. So not interested in corporate Democrats who don't even want to have a debate about it and go on CNBC to assure corporate America, don't worry, we're your sellouts.

We will not allow this to happen under any circumstance. We're going to take a quick break. When we come back, we're going to give you the details to Bernie Sanders' affordable housing plan. Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work, listen ad-free, access members-only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts at apple.com slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.