The Young Turks - Chance On Vance

Episode Date: July 16, 2024

Donald Trump chooses Senator J.D. Vance to be his running mate.Trump rally shooter identified as Thomas Matthew Crooks, a 20-year-old Pennsylvania man, the FBI says. Classified documents case dismissed. HOSTS: Cenk Uygur (@cenkuygur), John Iadarola (@johniadarola) SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ https://www.youtube.com/user/theyoungturks FACEBOOK: ☞ https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER: ☞ https://www.twitter.com/theyoungturks INSTAGRAM: ☞ https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK: ☞ https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕 Merch: https://shoptyt.com ❤ Donate: http://www.tyt.com/go 🔗 Website: https://www.tyt.com 📱App: http://www.tyt.com/app 📬 Newsletters: https://www.tyt.com/newsletters/ If you want to watch more videos from TYT, consider subscribing to other channels in our network: The Watchlist https://www.youtube.com/watchlisttyt Indisputable with Dr. Rashad Richey https://www.youtube.com/indisputabletyt The Damage Report ▶ https://www.youtube.com/thedamagereport TYT Sports ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytsports The Conversation ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytconversation Rebel HQ ▶ https://www.youtube.com/rebelhq TYT Investigates ▶ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwNJt9PYyN1uyw2XhNIQMMA 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. USA, USA. The guy! All right, welcome to the young Turks at the R&C, the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin here, Jank Huger, John I'd Rollo with you guys. So we've got John here, we've got Michael Shore. He's going to help us cover the speeches. We're going to do play-by-play of all the speeches. Anna just got in the building. You'll see her in the next three days. We'll do the show together. We'll, she'll cover some of the speeches as well. We've already talked to a lot of

people at the RNC here and we are surprisingly well received. Rudy John Giuliani says he likes to show and might show up later tonight. We'll see if he still likes it after that. So stay tuned right here and we might have Mayor Rudy Giuliani on a little bit later in the evening. That is exciting. Yeah. And so obviously enormous news, we've got a vice presidential pick. We had an assassination attempt over the weekend. The Democrats are considering giving up according to several reports and just letting Biden be the sacrificial lamb and just losing this race almost on purpose.

So there could not be more news today. And then on top of everything else, Biden just did an interview with Lester Holton. We'll have that for you as well. So don't go anywhere. Sharing is caring. Share the stream from now all the way through the end of the night. Young Turks covering R&C lots. I think the news is exciting. I think that all the context is exciting. This is so different in so many different ways from what we normally do, the people walking by and everything. But I think the single biggest difference is that you and I are sitting way closer than normal. Yeah, like very, very close to each other.

I think another important difference is that we we've never looked more like soccer analysts. I'm thinking WWE commentators. But yeah, it definitely has that vibe. Yeah, we could go either way. Funny enough, it could go either way. Well, we'll see. And that is, yeah. Yeah.

All right. So let's let's start with the BP. Okay, we'll jump into the big story of the day. We are just a few states away from Donald J. Trump securing the Republican nomination for president for the third time. But he has just posted on truth social that he has made his selection for vice president. And it is J.D. Vance, the 39-year-old senator from Ohio. Do you think, well, is this person, how did he get the job?

Did he get it because he was really the best qualified to be president? Or he'd get it because he sucked up effectively to the nominee? People have questions about that. People have questions. We're going to try to provide answers on why exactly Donald Trump ended up going with J.D. Vance or J.P. Mandel. You've heard different names along the way, but he did. The choice is now official.

It's out there as all big news is. You read it first of truth social. He posted a couple comments Donald Trump did. After lengthy deliberation and thought and considering the tremendous talents of many others, I've decided that the person best suited to assume the position of vice president in the United States as Senator J.D. Vance of the great state of Ohio. J.D. has had a very successful business career in technology and finance. And now during the campaign will be strongly focused on the people he fought so brilliantly for the American workers and farmers in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Minnesota, and far beyond. As vice president, JD,

will continue to fight for our Constitution, stand with our troops, and we'll do everything you can to help me make America great again. Congratulations to Senator J.D. Vance, his wife, Usha, who also graduated from Yale Law School and their three beautiful children, Maga 2024. And so the pick was made. I think mere moments before it was made official, I saw that Drudge exclusively leaked the news that Ben Carson had been picked, so it didn't look good a couple of minutes later. But it's done, it's no luck, Marco Rubio is done, Bergam's done, no last minute Carson. Yeah, so let's dive into why he picked JD vans and what it means.

So number one, a lot of other people had their hands in this eye, if you will, right? And they had very credible reports that Rupert Murdoch wanted Doug Bergam and made a huge case for Doug Bergam. That's probably why Doug Bergam didn't make it. I don't know why Murdoch thought that Trump would listen to him when Trump is attacking Fox News 24-7 doesn't really like Murdoch, Murdoch doesn't really like Trump. So that probably doomed Bergam more than it helped him. Marco Rubio was a boy that Trump was never going to pick. It was just a total nonsense consideration mainly probably to appease donors who like the boy, Marco Rubio, because the boy will do whatever he's told. So now,

These guys obviously got eliminated. We already know that, but the relevant part is which wing of the party did he go with? Did he go with the populist wing or the corporate donor ring? And to be honest, he went with the populist wing. And so now mind you, all of the populists on the right so far that I've seen, including certainly Donald Trump and J.D. Vance are fake populists. At the end of the day, J.D. Vance works for Peter. who is the guy who backed him. He's a Silicon Valley funder, extreme right winger. And so, and JD Vance has changed almost all of his positions. And he's mainly now known as a sycophant, which is the second reason that Donald Trump picked him. And John, my theory is, I'm gonna get back to the populism in a second, but my theory is that Donald Trump didn't pick JD Vann despite his earlier criticism of Donald Trump. Yeah, it's because he prefers it. Yeah, because he took a guy, guy who criticized him that much and made him bend a knee and broke him. He broke him and made

him his servant. And so Trump loves that. And once they're broken in, they never defy Trump. So he he wanted to make sure I got a good ass kisser here who's going to do exactly as he's told no matter what, no matter. And so that's why him calling Trump America's Hitler earlier, now becoming his vice president and saying, I'll do anything for you. is kind of proof in and of itself to Donald Trump that this guy has no soul, no principles, and is exactly the kind of sellout that I'm looking for. Yeah, yeah, I think it's entirely possible that that is what Trump is thinking. I just wonder if he, in practice, he will be as as docile as Trump wants because he doesn't have a soul,

but not because he's a convert to Maga. He doesn't have a soul because he will pursue whatever is in his own power and financial interest in any given moment. So being the never Trumper was beneficial to him at that point. He wanted to get on MSNBC to hype his book and stuff. Then that wasn't the best route to more money and more influence and more power. And instead going the Maga route was. And he, like many of those who'd been never Trump like Ben Shapiro and all that, bent the need. But it's still, in both cases, it was for their own good.

And so I don't know that a scenario could develop in which as VP, it would be to his benefit to deny Trump in some way, but he is a super ambitious guy. There are some people that are perfectly happy to be VP and that's the end of their aspirations. I think he won 100% sees himself as president. And so I just imagine like if I was Trump, I would be like chewing my food super carefully for the next four years because you know that guy's waiting. He's not going to do the hymline who wants to step into that position. Yeah. And so I look, I get the psychology of I would choose him. I think we should also have a talk about whether it's a good pick because I think that there were

far better choices available. Yeah, we'll get to that in a sec too. So along those lines, there's a nut, there's two more reasons. One other reason is his weakness that you just outlined in how Trump would perceive his weakness that he might not be perfectly loyal because he's super ambitious leads to his third upside though from Trump's point of view, which is he's not shot. He's an attack dog. So and I think that the last thing he said, he said, kind of proved himself to Trump. I don't know if it wound up being like a tiebreaker or relevant

in this consideration or if the decision had already been made. But after the shooting, J.D. Vance blamed it on Joe Biden. And he did it in a very, very brazen way. See, Doug Berger wouldn't have done that because he's more of a regular politician. And he didn't do that, right? Ben Carson wouldn't have done it because he's still asleep. And so if Trump just wanted docile, Ben Carson would have been your pick. Yeah, right? But it doesn't get any more docile than Ben Carson, right? So he did want a little bit of an attack dog.

And that's a third reason why. Yeah. I think you're 100% right. I just question whether that is actually to his benefit in the campaign going forward with how the campaign has developed. I agree. I think it is ironic that like as the right, you know, until they found out more about the identity of the shooter, it was like, you know, it's pitching him as a dictator as Hitler directly caused this. And now I'm going to choose a guy who has done that.

Yeah. He literally had himself has done that. He has seen the polling. He has listened to his advisors, which have told him, you are your own worst enemy. And the only thing they can lose you this election, if it's still Biden, is you reminding everyone that you're out of your mind and that you're radical. So don't do that. When coming out of the debate, Biden looks bad. Don't hit him. You look presidential, just keep it together. Coming out of the assassination attempt, as we'll get to, his messages have been very calm, presidential. He's not undercutting himself by going

crazy. And Ben Carson isn't going to draw you. He's not going to help them provide due ads. There's not going to be a scandal. But with J.D. Vance, both on policy and on the fact that he is an attack dog, you open up the door to potentially reminding people of Project 2025. And like, he's, he's, as you said, he's a teal guy. Teal's the guy who said that democracy and freedom are incompatible. Like, he's a reminder of the extremism that Trump had done a good job of tamping down and could have ridden to victory on. But that leads to two more points in favor. advance. Okay, so that way Trump can pretend to be above the fray and not seem as radical as he normally does. And then let J.D. Vance be the pit bull who is not above the fray and just

constantly is punching below the belt. Why do you need the pit bull when you're up in every swing state? No, no, I agree with that. I mean, I don't agree with the J.D. Vance pig. I don't like any of these guys, of course. But as a matter of strategy, I would go on the office and I would stay there. I mean, I just think the Biden's strategy seems to be, I'm not really going to do anything to dramatically change this election, but don't worry about it. And this is what I hear from people on Twitter. Don't worry about it. People hate Trump. They're just going to vote against Trump. Well, like, I think that J.V. Vance probably helps that strategy more than a Ben Carson. I think Ben Carson helps to make him seem less threatening, a little bit more comfortable.

Instead, he brought the attack dog, the radical, the guy who was already provided quotes for ads about him being America's dictator and a common man. No, I think it's a good pick. And again, just strategically and politically, not policy wise. I don't agree with any of them. But John, they're doing the Clinton Gore strategy, which is doubled down on what you got. And that led to wins. That led to two different wins. Okay. And at the time, people are like why do you pick gore gore and clinton are so similar both from the south both white both around the same age i mean they're nearly identical because if you've got a winning hand play it and so their winning hand they believe is populism so they're doubling down on populism now we know it's fake but at least they're pretending right okay and so and i think that that that is a smart strategy i think that yeah i get an establishment candidate gives people some degree comfort and that's why he went with Mike pencil last time around both the evangelical and establishment,

but he was already president. So the idea that, oh my God, if you don't have a steadying hand there, he's going to go out of control. Actually, that was true, not because of Mike Pence, but because the administrative state basically stopped Trump at a couple of times when he would have done far more radical things. And this time there'll be no brakes in the car. And you're concerned, rightfully so, that JD Vance takes out whatever breaks were there left in the car. Yeah, I think if he's a suckup, he's a suck up, he's a suck up who will probably encourage him in his worst his worst impulses. Whereas I think like a Tim Scott probably would have done the opposite thing.

And might have helped him like J.D. Vance I don't think necessarily like expands the map for him in any way. But except he needs to win the Midwest. Now Ohio's no, no, no, Ohio's unlocked for Republicans, right now. But he's from the Midwest and they need Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania more than they need any other states. Yeah. So that's an idea. Well, the last part is, I'm sorry,

Sorry, go ahead. Yeah, I would just say on policy. And look, it's entirely possible that Ben Carson to the extent that he has taken any positions also would be bad on this. But on the core issues that better or worse, Biden wants to run on. I think he wants J.D. Vance on the ticket in terms of democracy. Again, he's affiliated with guys who are explicitly anti-democratic. He's already said that he thinks that Trump would be married as Hitler. It plays into that strategy on abortion being a topic. J.D. Vance is a total radical on abortion. He doesn't believe in exceptions for rape. He talks about rape being incontradict. convenient to the topic of talking about abortion. He's against IVS, but he's extreme among the Republicans on the big issue of the race. And Trump is too, but Trump has been trying to soften and he just doubled down by bringing on someone who's even more extreme than he is. Yeah, I'm going to add, I think this is, I'm going to be up to six reasons why J.D. Vance was a logical pick from the perspective of Trump, not from our perspective. So come to think of it, he's wild and radical and populist in a way that is appealing to his

mega base. Not that he needed any further appeal there, but he's happy to have it, like I said, go with a strategy of a full populism, which he thinks is the winning hand. And there's logic in that. But JD Vance also ironically brings in different donors, not the donors that normally to Republicans in the elections decades past, you know, the bankers, the corporate executives, etc. And the Fox News and the Burdots and all those guys, they're a little bit different category. But J.D. Vance brings in the radicals from Silicon Valley. And so it might bring in more Peter Thiel money. It might bring David Sacks money. And David Sacks is speaking at the convention here. He's one of the guys that does the all-in podcast. It's kind of the epicenter

of Silicon Valley bros and that culture. And so that's gone from being in the middle to being, you know, very right wing and very libertarian kind of J.D. Vance, burn down everything. And then there'll be no government to bother us as we rob you blind, totally and utterly blind, right? So he's like a worst case scenario. I know, right? It's hilarious. No, and that's why it's kind of a worst case scenario for people who are concerned about them burning down the government. But I get their logic in doing that because now you're going to get some new donor money from Silicon Valley. And finally, someone presumably has to take over for Trump, presumably at the end.

I mean, he's also very, very old and it might be in the middle, but you know, you hope that doesn't happen and it happens at the end. And Donald Trump Jr. and many others in the MAGA movement, I think that J.D. Vance is the guy to take over for Trump. And so that played a big part in their considerations, whereas if you put Ben Carson or Tim Scott, they clearly would not have taken over. And then there would have been a melee and no one strengthened as the heir apparent. If I was Don Jr., I would set that up so that they wouldn't take the place that I might want to take in four years. Yeah, but maybe Don realizes his limitations, as he should. That's entirely possible. I also think, I understand why he excites the MAGA base. He's also not Trump. I don't think that he has one.

It's the charisma of Trump. I don't think that he's going to be able to get away with stuff, but in the same way. I mean, he's brazen. I'll give him that. But I don't, there hasn't really been a Republican who's been able to replicate the Trump thing. And I don't think that J.D. Vance is the one who's going to have that sort of lock. It's possible. I'd be wrong. But he's going to throw one roundhouse after another after another. It's like that didn't. Yeah, and that's what Trump wants. So I get the logic of it. You wanted your prediction video ready to go. Do you want to use that? Oh, yeah. I think that I was wrong, so let's watch.

Donald Trump, and this is a big part of the story, has been going around trying to please giant donors. So the VP list is a lot of, oh, I could pick Marco Rubio, and you guys know Marco Rubio will do anything for donors. The neocons and the establishment figures on the list are interesting, and I think the ones most likely to be picked. J.D. Vance is kind of a wild card. He'll do anything a donor tells him to do, but he's got theoretically populist streak. I mean, they're not, they're all fake populists anyway. So to me, I think he's definitely going to go with someone at least authorized by the donors. Yeah, I'll rate myself at least half long there, because the bigger donors, I don't think we're in the JD vans category,

but the Silicon Valley donors are massively in the donor in the JD vans category. So, yeah, you know, I'd say, you know what? I say 60% wrong, 40%. Oh my God, that's the most wrong you've ever evaluated. I would like to close a segment by giving credit to Donald Trump. A lot of people had predicted that he would not be able to get past the beard. And he said he chose a guy with a beard. A guy who desperately needs the beard, don't ever shave it. But he did get past it so he's not as shallow as some people present to him.

Wow, okay. Are we not merciful? Credit at the RNC. Everyone will remember that just in case. Anyway, I think we should take our first break. We're going to respond to some of your comments and come back with the big news of the weekend. And I think, you know what we're talking about. Hungry now. Now?

What about now? Whenever it hits you, wherever you are, grab an O. Henry bar to satisfy your hunger. With its delicious combination of big, crunchy, salty peanut, covered in creamy caramel and chewy fudge with a chocolatey coating swing by a gas station and get an oh henry today oh hungry oh henry all right back on the young turks here at the rnc jank huger john irello with you guys also paulita boulness mary busher robin Terry Poole and Jesse gifted five Young Turks memberships and Tricia Briggs gifted one.

Guys, you know, when you become a member, you had to join button below. I call out your name when we're doing the show live. And I say you guys are with us during this particular show. Well, anyone who joins now was part of the RNC coverage of the Young Turks. So that's kind of cool and I appreciate you guys. And it's our members that provide the resources for us to be able to come here. Hopefully we could do it again at the DNC. So if you want to donate as well, t.com slash team.

And that's also a great way to sign up on our website as well. All right, John. What's next? Okay, only one of the biggest stories, I guess, of our lives. And you know, that's a little bit old, that chart. That chart's a couple of months old. And if you want to really see something to say, take a look at what happened. I can bring rally over the weekend in Butler, Pennsylvania, a 20-year-old man attempted to assassinate Donald Trump, and it was caught on live video.

Many people saw it literally being broadcast live. As you can see in the video, of course, he struck Trump in the ear with one of the bullets, allegedly leaving him with non-life-threatening wounds. And during the shooting, not only was the shooter killed, but one of the rallygoers was killed. apparently, it's a volunteer fire chief who was shielding his family with his body. Two others were critically injured and have undergone operations in the time since. Here is how the attack unfolded. It was just a few minutes into Donald Trump's speech when a volley of shots rang out. The former president could be seen clutching at the right side of his head.

After that, he hits the ground as the Secret Service pile on top of him, their job to put their bodies between him and the shooter. When you look back closely at those moments, the sheer horror of the events is hard to avoid. First, the rapid gunshots. Then a bullet captured in mid-air on its way to its target. The former president going down to the ground, and then with help from the Secret Service,

getting to his feet. It's difficult to hear, but he tells them several times to wait before raising his fist. He can be heard saying the words, fight, fight. So you see there how it shook out. Here is an overhead view of basically where he was speaking, where the shooter apparently stuck up onto a rooftop. And look, there's an extra layer of tragedy. Obviously, any sort of political violence is one of the greatest tragedies that

you can have in democracy and especially one that takes the life of a rally goer. People who are just participating in our democracy and one lost their life and others are, you know, potentially very badly wounded for the rest of their life. But there were attendees at the rally who apparently saw the shooter go up onto the roof, had spent some time trying to warn law enforcement. There had been sort of a critical couple of minutes where more potentially could have been done. Here's a little bit of that speaking with the BMC. So we walked up in probably five to seven minutes of Trump speaking. I'm estimating here,

I have no idea, you know, but we noticed the guy crawling, arm, you know, bear crawling up the roof of the building beside us, 50, 50 feet away from us. So we're standing there, you know, we're pointing, we're pointing at the guy crawling up the roof. And he had a gun, right? He had a We could clearly see him with a rifle. Absolutely. We're pointing at them. The police are down there running around on the ground. We're like, hey, man, there's a guy on the roof with a rifle. And the police were like, huh, what? You know, like, they didn't know what was going on. You know, we're like, hey, right here on the roof. We can see him from right here. We see him. He's crawling. We were telling the police, we were pointing at him for the Secret Service, who were looking at us from the top of the barn. They were looking at us the whole time when we were standing by that tree. Now, of course, after the shooting, those same Secret Service snipers were the ones that actually killed the shooter. But it's hard to imagine that if, you know, one of those rallygoers had been listened to, potentially none of the shots had actually been fired and a life might have been saved. Here's another video captured at the scene. You can hear some of the live attempts to flag down police happen.

Yeah, look. There he is. Because we have millions of people in our country that shouldn't be here. criminals. We have criminals. He's on the roof. He's right on the roof and encountered. Right here, right on the roof. Now, not long after that, a cop did eventually travel up onto the roof and encountered the shooter. But the shooter pointed his weapon at him. And at that point, the officer retreated. And that apparently spurred the shooter to begin trying to take down the president there. And look, obviously we're going to get to criticism of the super service is also a lot of criticism of the police officer. But bear in mind, he had like crawled up the ladder and he had an error 15 being pointed at him.

And you can perhaps understand why the officer at short range is going to be incredibly scared when you have a weapon of war that no civilian should be wielding and was able to shoot as many people as he did at this event thanks to the fact that he had a weapon as capable as that was threatening the cop with. And then he rushes forward, fires wildly, nix the president, and kills someone. Yeah. So look, I said on the day of that I thought Trump acted courageous and we'll get back to that. And I do want to talk about the Secret Service for a second, first, but I also want to get back to how it was about an inch away. And if Trump hadn't been showing slides, he'd be dead, right? So we'll get back to that as well. But first on the Secret Service.

So I get it. Obviously there's a major screw up here because apparently there's not that many buildings. It's in the middle of a field. And so they should have checked the roost. But they probably did. In fact, not probably almost certainly because the guy crawled up afterwards, right? So he wasn't there for hours. He wasn't there overnight.

They saw him crawling up while the rally was going on. So no one can deny that there was some sort of error here. And should the cops have gotten there a little bit quicker? Sure, of course, everybody agrees, right? But that being said, I think that the attacks on the Secret Service and that cop are enormously unfair. So first, on the Secret Service, is everyone in MAGA sending them a thank you note for putting their lives on the the line for Trump, because they did. While the bullets were being fired, Secret Service rushed out there and surrounded Trump. So they were willing to take a bullet for him and die for him.

I don't think that's a small thing. No, not at all. And so we'll get to some of the outrageous criticism of the Secret Service in a little bit. And so keep that in mind. And then in terms of the cop, well, don't we always say, especially here on the Young Turks, don't shoot immediately, see what's happening first and then if there's a danger shoot, right? So the cop gets to the roof and sees the rifle, okay, like I don't, I wouldn't want him going up to the roof and without even seeing the guy start shooting. What if it was a guy who was running the convenience store and went up there to fix a roof or something, right? You can't just shoot before you see. What if there's a cop doing security that has been misidentified? For Secret Service, that's

right? That's right. Exactly, you can't just shoot, right? And when he sees the rifle, Yeah, he can't, he's climbing up. He can't go grab his gun, et cetera. So he ducks. I'm not going to blame the guy for that. I mean, that's his life right there, right? So it's so weird now that the right wing hates cops, hates the Secret Service, hates the Justice Department, hates the FBI.

Like, it's, we live in such a topsy, turvy world, right? And one more thing before we go back to the attacks on the Secret Service and all these other parts of the story, look, he's showing a chart like this. And if he's not, his head's in this position towards the crowd. If his head's in that position, he's a dead man. So the fact that he was showing the chart is why the bullet missed them and grazed them in the ear. And we know that because in the beginning it looked like such a superficial wound. At first I thought, is this a beady gun? Is this some sort of weirdo like Frank that is the

worst idea in the world? Or then later TMZ was reporting and I actually tweeted about this too, which I then retracted, that the bullet had hit the teleprompter, the glass has shattered, and it had cut Trump's ear, the glass. I'm like, okay, that makes sense because it's such a superficial wound. But it turns out, no, he got super lucky that he barely missed him, unbelievably lucky. A New York Times captured one of the bullets whizzing by. Yeah, yeah, yeah. There's a picture of it, right? Of the bullet in the air. So that ends all conspiracy theories, right? So all the people were like, oh, it was staged, it was this, it was that. No, because it didn't. Well, you can have those all day long,

but you have to base it like, anyway, that just that stuff drives me crazy. Whether you blue mag or red maga, it doesn't matter. You have to base things on evidence. There's no question that five bullets were fired. And what was a guy aiming to graze his ear? Yeah, that's come on. That's insanity. First of all, nobody's that accurate from hundreds of feet away. And Donald Trump literally have never signed up to that. I mean, never. That's exactly what I said.

Thousand years. Yeah. Yeah. So I agree. And we will certainly talk more about the criticism of there's fair criticism. And then there's other criticism that I think is a little bit opportunistic. And sometimes, even in stories that might seem to be something a political movement would like to talk about, there's parts of it that they like to distract from.

And so I think there's a little bit of opportunistic criticism that we will definitely get into. Look, obviously, this is a massive political story. These sorts of things happen very rarely. That said, there are aspects of this that have definitely bothered me. Like I understand in terms of political import why you focus on the target of the shooting. But there was so many updates about wondering what condition he was in. He was grazed in the ear. He's going to be fine.

A person died and other people are having multiple operations done because they're critically injured. And all the podcasts are leading with like, we're going to find out what his condition is, but I just, it feels so dismissive. And I understand we're going to have maybe a disagreement about the branding of it. And I definitely get that it's savvy branding. But like, considering two other things that are happening right then, I think wasting the word courageous on him makes no sense. The Secret Service was courageous. That cop, even though we retreated, was courageous to go up at all and wanted to take him down. And especially The guy who died, heard shots fired, threw himself over his family.

He didn't just survive in a shooting, wait until the shooter was dead and then stand up, which again, this is not to criticize Donald Trump. It's a horrendous event. It's not courageous to stand up when there's no threat to you. The guy who shielded his family and lost his life as a result of it, he deserves the courageous. The Secret Service deserves the courageous. They did a conscious thing that risked their life. And thus far, for better or worse, whatever.

whatever else you might say about him, Donald Trump has literally never done that, including on that day. Yeah, I totally disagree. You disagree specifically about the word courage, has a definition. Yeah, yeah, 100% is it. Gravery has a definition. Yeah, of course it does. And he met it. So, could not disagree more. Jules to you is one of our members largely agrees with you as in one element. I'm going to read that. Okay, they said bullets are flying, but he stops to stop the mug for the cameras. Christ, a narcissist to the end. Well, I disagree with that because again, my point is the bullets have not been firing for over a minute. There's, he's brought down to the ground, he's still in danger,

the shooter's killed, he's told the shooter's killed, they collect themselves, he stands up, he throws a fist in the air. There's no danger at that point. Yeah, that's the part I disagree with you on. Look, the brother just got shot, okay? No, it's impressive. I'm not doubting that it's a good image or that it's savvy or that it's quick thinking. It's just not great. No, John. Did you have overcome? No, John, in that moment when you've been shot, you're positive that 25 seconds later that the threat is gone? Secret Service told him.

Yeah, he wasn't shot. Okay, I wouldn't be positive. I don't think most politicians would have done that. I think that him, not only did he put his arm up, but his head was poking up, right? And he's screaming, fight, fight, fight, right? And I think nine out of ten people do not do that. Look, John, you know me. I've called Trump a coward a thousand times, right? And remember that one time there was like, they thought that there was an attempt, like he heard a loud noise or something and he goes to go, uh, right?

And when the, and then there was a time in his office when the eagle actually opens its wings and he's like, ah, right? So and plus I've seen him run from a thousand things, right? Sure. So I'm shocked that he was courageous, but I think he definitely was. I just again just like we're going to get to the secret service later but as people who risked their life consciously are being smeared yeah I mean I wouldn't I mean that's grown around but those are two different things smearing the secret services gratuitous stupid it's a very right wing thing to do for no reason the president's alive and the secret service protected okay and they covered it right but that being said do you think

Joe Biden gets up and goes fight fight fight no way from the shock he's already dead sorry But I mean, come on. I don't disagree with you. Like Joe Biden was still on the ground. If Joe Biden had done it, it wouldn't be brave. It would be surprising, it wouldn't be brave as well. Yeah, I mean, look, seriously, if that's my candidate, I couldn't be happier. I think that I would think that's perfect.

I don't disagree with that at all. I just disagree with some of the specific gourds being thrown around. But that said, let's throw around some other words about what has come out about the shooter. Here's what has been revealed thus far about the man identified as the attempted assassin of Donald Trump, 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks of Pennsylvania. Details have been very slow to come out. There are a few specific biographical details that were to cover. There's been a little bit that those who knew him have revealed. And very recently, like very shortly before we went live, the FBI had announced that they had gotten into his phone, but thus far no details had come

out about that. And that might take a day or longer. But you're seeing photos of Thomas Crooks. We know a few things. We know that in the attack he used a semi-automatic air-style rifle that was purchased legally by his father. He had a membership at a nearby gun gun club for at least a year. He was a registered Republican. And apparently in 2021, he gave $15 to a progressive fundraising organization. Notably, he registered as a Republican in 2022 after that donation in 2021. He has probably less of a social media presence than virtually anyone else in the modern era. And there's almost no public information about what he thought about pretty much anything. So in terms of a motive, we are very much in the territory of

almost baseless speculation at this point. We know a little bit about him politically. We know what some people have said about his ideology, but we don't have a manifesto. We don't have comments online to go by. And so we honestly don't know. And that makes it a very bizarre thing. When we were waiting to find out who it was,

I would have conversations with people. And some of them speculated that it could end up being some sort of pro-gun conservative. And I thought, sure, that's possible. But that's like 10% chance. You just assume when there's political violence is someone naturally on the other side. And so there are people who have presented him as a guy who was bullied. Some people push back against that characterization.

Some are saying he never gave off like a school shooter vibe. But some people said that he's a loner. He was apparently like ejected from the gun club for being dangerous and a bad shot. And so I think it's easy to speculate that maybe this was an attention grab. thing, but that is almost entirely based on speculation at this point. And until we learn more, it's hard to know what the motive is. Two more things that we know about him. Number one, he was, he didn't make the triaths for junior varsity rifle team. So to which I think we say thank God, because if he had made the team, he'd probably be a better shot and then Trump would be

dead. And in that case, by the way, we would have massive uprising in America and chaos. And right now, if we might anyway, but yeah. Yeah. I mean, if the bullet goes an inch the other way, there might be a riot in white areas of America. I mean, it might be something we've never seen before. Yeah. And so, so thank God he didn't make the team. And he was yeah. And by the way, credit to the Trump fans who saw him and pointed him out to the authorities, because after the cop went up to the roof, although the guy points the gun at him, the cop falls off the roof and could not get him. But then the shooter rushed the shots. 100%. And then he fires. I think it's being weirdly ignored in this.

Yeah, yeah. And rushing the shots makes a huge difference. 100%. Yeah, I think it makes an inch difference. Yeah, for sure. So I think if you were a Magger guy, that saw the shooter or trying to do something about that rally, you deserve a ton of credit and nice job. Trump's life. Yeah, you literally might have saved Trump's life. So you should be super proud of that. Yeah. And so the second thing we know about him is apparently after COVID was done, he kept wearing his mask and that, you know, so he cared a lot about COVID. Now, these tiny little things we learn then leads people into massive speculation. And right now, they, the, the

authorities do have a social media, they say that it is not very political and that they haven't learned much from it, okay? But is that really going to hold? We don't know, because so often there's all the speculation right after an event, and then you eventually find out two days, two weeks later, and then it's usually definitive. Because if you go to shoot the president, it is super weird not to leave some sort of explanation as to why you did it. Yeah, because that defeats half the point of doing it because usually, usually it's mad guys, right, madmen, right? And people who have mental health issues, et cetera, right? And you have to have some sort of issues to try to shoot anyone, let alone the president. But when it's the president, it's almost

always for a political reason. So there's got there's very likely to be one we just don't know what it is right now. Yeah. Well, and remember there was the guy who I think it was to try to kill Reagan because he wanted Jody Foster's attention. Like it doesn't always have to be an explicitly political thing. They can use that. But I would also say, like, I think it matters who the person is, why they did it. I think that matters. I will say that from going around this space, I have heard almost no conversation about who the person was or why they did it. No one seems to care. And I would say that, you know, theoretically, you might be thinking, well, if there's a manifesto, and let's say that hypothetically explains why he did it or whatever, well, then that

changes the conversation. I don't know that it necessarily does because I'm pretty sure the guy who attacked Paul Pelosi had a manifesto and it did not do anything to stop the homophobic conspiracy theory is coming out of that. Like even when there's definitive, like this is why I'm doing it, I don't know that at that point anyone is going to care. I think what I can be wrong. Yeah, but hope facts matter. Yeah. But so what I would say about that, John, is that I'm to me, I'm not sure that I care if it's a liberal or a conservative because who cares? The guy's a madman either way, right? I agree.

So like, would it make it better for us on the left if he was a conservative? Only in that I guess we wouldn't have as many absurd attacks from the right wing to fend off and to deal with and et cetera. But does it matter in the real world as to could we have prevented it? Is there something we can learn from it for next time? No, not really, whether he's liberal or conservative. If you want to prevent things like this next time, there is one thing that we already told you in this story already that makes a giant difference. He was a gun nut.

And so when you have people who believe that guns are the answer, they usually mean it. And so I know that nothing can move right wing on gun control. And I put out a tweet about it at some point after the shooting. And oh, yeah, they're not moved at all. Even if the guy had put 12 bullets in Trump's brain, they still would be like, no, I want my, you know, bump stock. I want my RPGs. I want my tanks. I don't care.

I don't care. I want guns, guns, guns, guns is the answer. I forgot the question, right? And so it, the connective tissue of all of these shootings is that they're shootings. 100%. And that it's because of we have no gun control in this country and any lunatic can grab a gun and kill anyone they like. And they are always going to choose the best, most accurate, most powerful, fast shooting, high capacity weapon that they can. We get to decide how good do we want that to be. It's not a coincidence that this guy, like most mass shooters, decided to go with an Air 15 style rifle. He tried to take down Trump with it. How does that not help break through? But it won't in the same way that those people,

people using those or like armor piercing ammunition against cops has not changed the conversation. They're cop killing weapons and nobody seems to care. And it's not going to, it's not going to matter in this case. Yeah, culture is very hard to change. The right wing culture is set now. There's nothing that anyone can do with a gun that would change their minds. No. I mean, massacring children already happened many times. Killing or attempted to kill their own politicians, Steve Scalice, one of the leading Republicans shot at a softball game. Now Donald Trump shot, etc. Nothing is going to change their minds.

And we're going to have more and more shootings. And this is just one of them, right? And of course, Trump survived, but the rally gore did die. And as John pointed out earlier in the show, heroically covering his family while he got shot. I think we should take our second break, but lots more to get to after this. All right back on the Young Turks, Jane Cougar, John Iarola, with you guys live at the RNC, thanks to our members who helped us get here. Speaking of which, Miss Black Pearl and Toot Carter 1, both just became members through

tithy.com slash team. We appreciate it and guys, whenever I'm A link, it'll be in the description box below, whether you're watching live or later on in a video on demand. And let me give out one more shout out to Jay Hesinsky, who gifted a membership and Tricia who gifted two. We appreciate you guys. All right, John. Thank you for that. Now let's turn to other big news. Today, Judge Eileen Cannon dismissed former President Trump's federal classified documents case, citing the quote, unlawful appointment and funding of special counsel Jack Smith. She put out this opinion saying that superseding indictment is dismissed because special counsel Smith's appointment violates the appointments clause of the United States Constitution. That is a

judicial capital O opinion. I would also describe it as just her opinion because it doesn't fit with the way that appointments clause has been interpreted in a ton of incredibly similar and recent cases, which we will get to. The New York Times says that it flew in the face of previous court decisions reaching back to the Watergate era that upheld the legality of the ways which independent prosecutors have been named. Those arguments that were used successfully in this case by Trump's legal team were raised unsuccessfully against other previous special counsels, including Robert Mueller and also David Weiss, who investigated Hunter Biden, like just in the last year. That's the argument that was

used and failed against those. But in this case, it worked because it's Eileen Cannon. Never forget, she was put on the bench by Donald Trump. Michael Waldman, a constitutional lawyer and president of the Brennan Center for Justice said that just Judge Cannon, quote, handled this case like an eager member of Donald Trump's defense team. He cited her slow pace in making routine pretrial decisions and her patience for hearing quote somewhat outlandish legal arguments without ever resolving some of them. Monday's decision, however, he said, goes beyond what she has done before. And in terms of the timeline, remember, this particular attempt to get dismissed was filed back on February 22nd.

She didn't even hold a hearing on it until June 21st, months later. And, uh, Trump's defense team has filed nine other motions to dismiss for other reasons. Before Monday, she had only ruled on four of them. Now though, that this has been dismissed, it can actually be appealed. That was certain to happen and it has happened. It is being appealed to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. And theoretically from there, go to the Supreme Court, which obviously has some very interesting views on legal challenges to former presidents, but what do you make of it?

Yeah, I think that it was both very savvy, and ridiculous at the same time. So let me explain. The ridiculous part is legally, it's preposterous. There's no precedent for it. And she's almost certainly going to get overturned, although the Supreme Court you never know. But hold, we'll get to that too. But I mean, is it legally justified? No, she just pulled it out of nowhere. And she's like, Like they don't, he, oh, yeah, ah, yeah, I don't think the special counsel has that constitutional authority. Based on what? That's crazy. Nobody's ever ruled that way before. But why is this heavy? So number one, even if it's the most preposterous ruling in the world, it delays the trial so much that it'll

never happen before the election. So it's already over. And it's a federal case. And now Trump is enormously likely to win. And by the way, she knows that now. And so since Trump is an likely to win. This case is enormously likely to disappear as long as he crosses the finish line of the election, right? So once you delayed for any reason, it's already gone. So it's savvy in that way. Second of all, the Lemus circuit's going to reverse her. There's no question about that because they're not going to be like, oh yeah, there's no precedent for this. All of law works on precedent, we think a rando minor judge in the system can overrule the Supreme Court and every other ruling on this issue ever before. There's no chance the 11th Circuit will do that. On the other hand,

when it gets to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court could say, oh, okay, wait a minute now, we get to put even more authority in the hands of the president. So if the Attorney General was going to appoint a special counsel to investigate the president, under her made up theory, then the president could say, no, I don't want myself investigated. So there is no special counsel. And the Supreme Court might find that attractive because they are for, you know, so far what appears to be unlimited executive authority. So it's like, and if you wanted to kick off that series of events, you would do this ruling and hoping that it gets the Supreme Court and hoping that there is as radical as you are,

which is not a false hope. It's possible. I think the Supreme Court could go either way on this case. Yeah, when we're talking about how the current Supreme Court would go, the Supreme Court as it will likely look in a year or two is one or two seats potentially even more insane in that direction. And this is just the latest, by the way, in a long line of like I would say extrajudicial extra constitutional ways that he's avoided accountability. Obviously he fired Comey. He literally never participated in the Mueller probe and now he could just literally make the probe to disappear. And as president, he will formally be able to do that. He'll will conjure up some claim that it's an official act and that's done. There's no investigations

whatsoever. And by the way, there wouldn't be anyway because the DOJ is going to be entirely staff thanks to Project 2025 by absolute lackeys that would never investigate him if he murdered their family right in front of him. And also lost in all of this is obviously he sold the documents. No one disputes that and it's irrelevant. It does not matter that he obviously stole dozens and dozens of the documents. We're never going to get any justice for that. And she might get something though. Eileen Canon, Matt Gates is saying something that is equal parts, brazen and also it may be true. He just tweeted future Supreme Court Justice Cannon. Yeah, why not? She's super young.

She gave Trump what he wanted. Why not? No, that's the, I'm so glad you mentioned that, John, because that's the third way that it's savvy. One, it delays the trial, as I said, so already huge win. Two, you never know, there's radical Supreme Court might agree with her, and that would be another huge win. And the third is, in the old days, people cared about your judicial record and how many times you were overruled and all these mechanics of the system because that showed whether you were a fair judge, a reasonable judge, etc. In the new world, nobody cares about any of that. They're looking for the judges that will be most subservient to both corporate interests and Trump's interests. So if that's your metric, do you know a better

judge than Eileen Cannon for who will serve Trump? And by the way, anything that the Federalist society tells you to serve more loyally. Like if the federal society tells her, hey, listen, don't worry, you got a lot of great luxury vacations ahead of you. Now you're going to rule in favor of corporations every time. That's exactly what she's going to do. So she's basically raising her hand like Gorsuch and Kavanaugh did. So in case you don't know real quick, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh both ruled that companies can kill their employees and not be liable. So that was them raising their hand going, I'm a raging radical in favor of corporate power. And that's why they got picked, not despite that, but because of that.

This is her raising our hand going, I'm a raging radical for anything the extreme right wing wants. And I don't give a damn about the law or precedent. And that's not an unsavvy strategy to get on the Supreme Court when you aren't anywhere within planets of deserving it. And she's young. Yeah. And she'll be doing it. And when your judges and your justices are chosen based on predictable personal deference to the authoritarian leader, I would define that movement as anti-elite. And they believe it. This is populist. You just choose whoever gave the dictator whatever he wants.

Well, I mean, look, John, so yes, they're hugely fake populace. And John is 100% right. It's the most non-populous thing to do. to say we should all bow down to the leader. That's the exact opposite of populism. But on the other hand, at least they're pretending to be populist and they're savvy enough to do that. Whereas the Democrats are like, yeah, we're the establishment. Isn't the establishment great? Yeah. Okay, okay, we're now right now where the donors are meeting to decide whether they're going to keep Biden or drop Biden. Aren't we in favor of democracy? Yay, well, brothers and sisters. That's why you're losing the guys like Trump, Because at least they're bothering to lie about it.

We don't want to get a time check? Are we? Oh, okay. Kate's saying break, right? Okay, yeah. Good. I think we covered a lot. Obviously, there's a lot more to get to in the second hour. It's going to be us two again, so don't go anywhere. We'll be right back.