The Young Turks - Charlie Kirk Interview

Episode Date: July 18, 2024

Adam Schiff calls on Biden to drop out. Joe Biden tells the NAACP audience he is going to cap raises of rent to $55. Ana & Cenk interview Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. HOST: Ana Kasparian (@anakasparian), Cenk Uygur (@cenkuygur) 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. Hot dog is my favorite meat. All right, welcome to the young church. Thank you, Granite Casparian, live from the RNC in Milwaukee, not from the usual polymarket studios that we use in LA, obviously. And it got to be an exciting day. So in a little bit, Charlie Kirk is going to join us. Buckle up. Brace

her impact. We're going to find out if he lives like a capitalist every day, still to this day. So, so that's coming up today and God knows which other person in the right wing ecosystem will stop by. And we've got a huge show for you guys because Biden's almost out. Finally, they're starting to push him over the edge. And even his own comments are beginning to indicate that. So that's an enormous news story. And Right out of the gate, I want to thank all the people who sent us here, which is our members. So Tina Louise just joined. Thank you for that, Tina and Drew Wilson, gifted 20 memberships on YouTube. And guys, tyt.com slash team. You sent us to the RNC.

Please send us to the DNC. I imagine that we could have even more fun. It might be even more boisterous at the DNC, at least in terms of our presence. So tyt.com slash team. And finally, happy national hot dog day. everybody. Yes, congratulations. Yes. Yes. It is in fact National Hot Dog Day and so we're all celebrating obviously. This place has been going nuts the whole day. Yes. In celebration, in celebration of National Hot Dog Day, I had a cup of Mexican street corn and it was delicious. I suggest that for you. Okay, but I'm going to get a hot dog later today. It's going to be my third hot dog in three days. I've been gearing up the whole week for National Hot Dog Day. But how amazing would it be if I ran into Mitt Romney here at the RNC and we had a hot dark together today?

That would be pretty epic. That would be epic. I don't think he's here though. Yeah, he might be in hiding. He might be in the witness protection program here. So all right, hell of a show. Let's get started. Well, we begin with some updates on the ongoing saga involving Joe Biden and whether or not he's going to drop out of the race. There are Democrats making the case that Donald Trump is on a viable path, as of today, to get to 330 electoral votes, or even higher, or even higher, because they see other states in here. The Trump campaign says Minnesota. The Trump campaign says maybe New Mexico. Let's be cautious. Those are blue states traditionally. But the president's standing, his approval rating, his ballot number, people's views about how old he is, and people who view the state of the economy are very bad for the president right now.

And so even if you just go back to where we start, Donald Trump is in command. The numbers are getting worse for the president. That damning polling data is likely why Democratic congressmen, who's now running for a Senate seat in California, Adam Schiff, is calling on Biden to drop out of the presidential race. That is a big deal. And so he did so through a written statement, writing that while the choice to withdraw from the campaign is President Biden's alone. I believe it is time for him to pass the torch. And in doing so, secure his legacy of leadership by allowing us to defeat Donald Trump in the upcoming election. And then he continues, our nation is out of crossroads. A second Trump presidency

will undermine the very foundation of our democracy. And I have serious concerns about whether the president can defeat Donald Trump in November. And look, Jenk, Schiff isn't wrong. In fact, you and I have been pretty early in noting that Biden was likely going to lose to Donald Trump. And by the way, we were spreading that message, trying to communicate that to our audience before that terrible debate performance. Yeah. So on the debate, guys, remember, the debate isn't when Joe Biden's problems started. It's just when people started finding out about Joe Biden's problems. Now, it didn't take a rocket scientist to find those problems. We cover the news every day, those problems were actually evident. But the entire ecosystem, both the Democratic

establishment and I would argue the media establishment were covering it up. And they just couldn't cover it up after the debate. And once the veil was lifted, then all of a sudden the press said, oh, we feel lied to. Oh, come on, you didn't have eyes and ears before the debate. You didn't see him not being able to complete sentences. Well, how come we saw it? Right. How come my hair was on fire so much that I ran against them? So this has been clear for over a year at a minimum, but now the difference maker isn't Biden's condition. It's how it's affecting the other Democrats. So Adam Schiff is a pillar of the establishment, and the establishment never turns on itself. They love attacking progressives. They'll attack

anyone who disagrees with the establishment at all, but they never attack each other. I can't remember another time it's happened. Okay, so for Adam, Schiff to come out publicly against Biden means he's pretty much already done. It's no way Adam Schiff takes that kind of risk and has the courage to come out against an establishment candidate, especially the presidential candidate, unless the donors not only authorized it, but asked them to do that. So that means not only has he lost the establishment politicians, and we hear that Nancy Pelosi is working the phones to get rid of Biden, But he's also lost the donors, which was his main power base.

I've been telling you all along once he loses the donors, he's a goner, because he can't raise money. And that's the only advantage that he has over anyone else is his ability to raise money from those donors. And then finally, the Democrats in the swings districts, the purple states, they're all in an absolute panic right now because they're almost all going to lose. Even Adam Schiff in a California Senate race is a little worried. In fact, I got an email. I know it's a fundraising email. I know that they're all cheesy and I know they're all over the top and you shouldn't take any of them seriously. But he did include a poll about how or a number about how Steve Garvey has outraised them in California. So the Democrats are in massive trouble and they finally realize it. And they realize there is no answer but getting rid of Biden. It really is incredible, right? That you won't get anyone within the party.

to do anything until they realize that their ass is on the line. So that really bothers me. So putting that aside for a moment, you may have seen some of the news segments or Morning Joe segments where they keep repeating over and over again that, no, no, no, it's actually a toss up according to the national polls, still a toss up according to the national polls. Okay, let's actually do an analysis or show you an analysis that compares where Biden was at this point in the election back in 2020 compared to where he is today.

Let's watch. This is back in 2020 when Joe Biden won a pretty convincing win, 306 to 232. This is the map as it fills in. Remember the then when you look at the now because the striking, the difference is striking. This is how our CNN political unit led by David Chalien projects the race right now. And right now, deep red, solid Republican, light red, lean Republican. If this map played up, the election were today and the map played out like this, even if the toss-ups went blue, Donald Trump would win the election. Donald Trump would win the election. But the map is even more favorable to Donald Trump, if you look through this. New polling today, it's a small lead, but Donald Trump is leading in Pennsylvania right now. Donald Trump is leading in Wisconsin right now. Donald Trump most believe is right now has the lead in Nebraska too. There is a possibility that Trump can rack up 303 electoral votes.

That wouldn't just be a win. He would take that as a mandate. As a referendum on Biden's presidency. And that's not good. That's not good for Democrats. Not good at all. And by the way, I mean, Schiff also isn't wrong about the basically how Biden is likely going to drag.

down the down ballot races. And take a look at how Biden's low approval numbers is dragging them down in the polling as well, or at least in how he's going to perform in these various battleground states. This is new public polling battleground, seven battleground states released just today. Forgive me for turning my back. I want to turn this out. Look at the incumbent president's vote chair, Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Nevada. is the highest the incumbent president gets in vote share in these battleground states. That's a path to big loss. Even if Donald Trump can't get to 50 because of the third party candidates.

Look how closely it correlates to the president's approval rating. This is the president's approval rating, 36%, 37% in Arizona. 42% in Georgia, 40% of the vote. You get it. You follow it through. If he cannot get his approval rating to go that way, he can't move that. And that number has been stuck or getting worse since the debate. And Jay, to your credit, I mean, you usually talk about Biden's approval rating on a national level,

but you keep making the point that no incumbent president with a low approval rating like Biden's has ever gone on to win reelection. You were first in saying that. You said it over and over again, everyone either ignored it or look down their noses at you for saying it. But now you have mainstream media pundits, you have mainstream media hosts, you have cable news. I can't believe I got calling it like you were calling it literally months and months ago. Yeah, guys, this is what's so frustrating because if you're a professional in politics, you know that if you're an incumbent in the 40s, you're in a lot of trouble, very, very, very unlikely to in the 30s almost never happens. That's not a rule that came out last week. That's a rule that's

been around for decades. So I would say it to people and they would just go, yeah, forget about it. What does that mean? Or it's not that important. Well, that means you're just admitting you don't know politics, right? So now all of a sudden, CNN and everyone else a year later, like, oh yeah, he does have low approval ratings. Oh yeah, their approval ratings are what make the difference. That's why the rule exists. They were actively ignoring the rule on purpose to protect Biden. So you look at those numbers and then it tells you a second thing. The approval rating matches his polling in the actual race, right? That's what John King was just explaining. Why is that is second part of why that's so relevant. Because the Democrats keep lying to you and saying,

oh, no, the approval rating is not important because you just have to look at the alternative. And because of Trump, he'll win anyway. No, but that's the numbers now in the race against Trump. Yep. Those are the actual numbers against Trump. And we were right. No, the approval rating matches exactly. They're voting on the incumbent. That's what we told you. They're voting on that. They're not voting on Trump. And so, and this racism become all about Biden now. It should be all about Trump's problems instead we're, it's all about Biden's problems because Biden's problems are now so gigantic that even CNN is admitting not 303, 330 electoral votes. And what do we tell you for all this time? Not only is Biden going to lose, but he's going to crush the Democrats in Congress,

down ballots are going to have massive effects and Trump is going to get to declare that he has a the mandate. And that's exactly the road we're out. So the other way that the establishment Democrats will, and to be fair here, establishment Democrats, a lot of them are on our side, which is weird, super weird, right? But the pro-Biden team. I would say the DNC. The DNC is like, delusional, totally delusional. No, because the DNC is are purposely lying because they were hired by Joe Biden to lie on behalf of Joe Biden. That's just a fact. I've never seen ahead of the DNC, disagree with the Democratic president. So just understand their job is propaganda. Literally, their job is propaganda, period. Okay. So you're never going to get honesty from Jamie Harrison

or any head of the DNC or RNC. Okay. So now look guys, the politicians are turning in, the Democratic politicians are turning on Joe Biden. It's not because they mind him losing. It's because they mind them losing. Exactly. So back when they knew the approval ratings, back when they knew that Joe Biden was going to lose, they didn't care that much. Because that the whole democracy is on the line was a punchline to them, right? So now that their own ass is under fire and they're worried about losing, they're like, oh my God, I'm so concerned that Joe Biden might lose the election. Oh, golly, gee, I am worried about democracy.

Yeah, where were you the last year? They're not worried about any of that. They're just worried that they're going to lose. And they're right to be worried. And did you see that one last thing in it? Pennsylvania against Trump, he's at 40 percent. Pennsylvania used to be solidly blue. Yep.

And it's been deteriorating under Democratic control. Yep. The more they see Democratic control, the less they like it. Yep. And now down to 40% in Pennsylvania, this thing's gone. Anyone who doesn't realize that Biden's going to get annihilated in this election is in such a thick bubble of alternate reality. And it doesn't matter, they're lost souls.

You can't break through to them because they just, they don't want to know the facts. So the way that the Biden camp thought that they would increase their support was to focus their messaging on Biden's economy. Biden's economy, Biden's economy, that is going to help him win this race. Well, why don't we take a look at how voters in swing states feel about the Biden economy? Let's watch. This is what's the number one issue in the country right now? One more time. Sorry again. Just want to stretch this out so you can see it. The percentage of registered voters rating the economy as fair or poor. He's the incumbent. He wants four more years. Sevent three percent in Arizona. Close to 70 in Georgia. Seventy-four percent in Michigan. Seventy-four percent in North Carolina, near seven, just below 70 percent in Nevada and 73 and 72, respectively, in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. He's the incumbent president saying, stay the course, Jake. That's what people in these battleground states think about the economy. economy. That's a tough sell. That is an incredibly hard sell. And these numbers, many Democrats

say this poll was taken over a long period of time. Most Democrats will trade. They're actually worse now. So the economic messaging clearly is not working for Biden. And that is precisely the reason why you have this groundswell of members of the Democratic establishment, Democratic leadership, congressional leadership, calling on Biden to now drop out publicly, what Congressman Adam Schiff did today. As you mentioned earlier, referenced earlier, you have Nancy Pelosi hitting up Democratic incumbents in really tough races to kind of get a sense of what the polling is in their district.

She's listening to them air their grievances and their concerns about Biden remaining in the race and potentially causing them to lose their re-election. And so, yeah, I think that this is going to potentially persuade Biden to finally listen and drop out. A big story that just broke. He was set to give a speech today. He has just canceled that speech because he has tested positive for COVID. And earlier today, there were news reports indicating that Biden said he would be willing to drop out of the race if doctors indicated that he has some sort of medical condition. Yeah. So really important updates on that in a second, including one of his top allies. Now, I don't know if he's wavering, but I'll give you

the facts on it. So first, remember, you guys have helped all along here. TYt.com slash campaign slash dropout. Whenever I do these links, you can always find them in the description box on the live show or in the on the videos. So make sure you're sign that, get that as high as we can so that there's even more pressure for him to drop out. And I'm mentioning that to the press so they know that there's a groundswell movement, etc. So look guys, when Joe Biden says the he might drop out based on a medical condition. That is not a little movement for me. That's a gigantic movement for him. That means that he's beginning to think about dropping out. Because before, he said only the God Almighty would could get him to drop out. In a different interview,

he said he'd have to be hit by a train to drop out. That's crazy. Okay, and by the way, okay, well, God's a little bit stronger than a train. And now we went from a train to a medical condition. Well, he does have a medical condition. He's a mental decline and everyone on the planet knows it. So that's the beginning of saying, I'm on wobbly legs. I'm almost gone. But that's not all. He also said in that interview that, hey, listen, I was supposed to be a transitional president. Oh, now you remembered you were supposed to be a transitional president. But you don't say that unless you're about the transition. Right. So now we're on the clock. Tick, tick, tick, tick, tick. There's no chance Biden stays in this race. And it's amazing that people don't know that. Like I talk to people at

the R&C, they're on cloud nine here. They think they already won the election. And they're planning all these things and so excited that Joe Biden is the Democratic candidate here. And I'm like, you guys know he's not going to be the candidate, right? They're like, no, no, really? Yeah, of course. And guys, think about it. If we had a new ticket, we don't have to lose. What a weird situation here where Democrats are like, oh, golly gee, I guess we have to lose to Trump. No, you don't. Like what happened to democracy being on the line? What happened to this man being the most dangerous person on the planet? Why do you want to lose to him? No, get a new ticket and you'll go from massive underdog with almost that chance of winning to being the favorites

again. What party on earth wouldn't want to be the favorites to win in a presidential election? How crazy do you have to be? Do an open convention and you'll pick the two strongest candidates for president and vice president. And then you'll again, literally will be the favorites coming out of the Democratic convention. So last thing, because Anna mentioned them, notice that we haven't heard any talk of binomics in quite some time. They tried that for a long time, binomics, binomics. And then we're like, what are you talking about? The polling indicates that people don't like the economy. Whether it's right or wrong, and you could talk about record low unemployment, etc.

Good, God bless, but you got to make your case. You didn't make your case and your economic record is now deeply unpopular. Now, if you watch TV, you'd never know that because everybody on MSNBC is saying, well, this is really surprising because he has a really strong record. The stock market has made us all millionaires, right? You talked about jobs, right? But look, Americans aren't going to feel jazzed about the low unemployment rate when inflation is killing them. Okay, when their dollar doesn't stretch as far. And so, sure, you can brag about numbers and how many jobs you created after there were mass layoffs during the coronavirus pandemic because of coronavirus pandemic-related shutdowns. But at the end of the day, people are looking at their bank accounts, they're looking at the cost of housing, they're looking at the cost of groceries. Yes, inflation has slowed down fairly recently. According to Jerome Powell at the Federal Reserve, there is some thought that there could be an interest rate cut in September as a result of inflation slowing down. So there is some positive news. But overall, throughout the Biden administration, I think inflation has really killed the, Bidenomics messaging. People just aren't buying what he's selling. And he's got to come to terms with that. Well, he has because he never mentions it anymore. Yeah. And so in every interview, there's only

one thing he keeps focusing on and the same thing he focused on with House Democrats when he talked to them. I expanded NATO. Yeah. Okay, look, I love, I'm good with NATO. I love our alliances. Terrific, no problem. I think expanding it is not necessarily the best idea. But even if you think it's a great thing or not so great, it doesn't really matter because the American people don't care at all. I don't know a single voter is like, well, you know what? He did expand NATO. I mean, how do you not know that? How do you not know that not a single voter will say, oh, well, on the upside, he expanded NATO? Like, you think people vote based on that? Do you look at how disconnected they are from reality? That's just unbelievable.

Even Jen Saki, I was, honestly, I've been enjoying the Pod Save America podcast because these are, oh, because they were allowed to tell the truth now because they've turned on Biden because Obama turned on Biden beyond the scenes. To be fair to them, they have been attacked rather viciously for telling the truth about Biden. For the first time in their lives. Yes. Wow. But you're super late to the party, but congrats. Credit to where credit is do though, okay, because they are correct on this and they are getting a lot of backlash as a result of this. Hold on. The reason why I even brought them up, Jake, is because they had Jen Saki on. Remember, Jen Saki was the White House press, under Biden. Now she's a host at MSNBC. She mentioned the whole NATO talking point thing.

And she's like, oh, my God, please stop talking about NATO. Stop talking about NATO. Like, what is he doing? Yeah, so she said that. She said that. So everyone is an agreement. Most Americans don't care about that. It doesn't benefit their lives. And so again, like, it's just not a winning message. So. And last thing is Bernie Sanders in an interview that just happened, they kept pressing him on, do you think Joe Biden is going to be? be able to complete a second term. And he just couldn't say yes. Because that's the problem with Bernie is he's totally honest, right? So that's his giant upside and that's why we love him. But he's like, I don't know, I have health issues, you have health issues, everybody has health

issues. And they asked him like two, three times and he just couldn't get himself to say, yeah, Joe Biden will finish a second term. So at this point, unfortunately Bernie is like his top ally left. And even Bernie can't even say that he'll stay alive for a second term. So this thing is done. Biden is dead. Definitely a goner. We really got to now shift over to open convention, picked as strongest candidate. Totally agree. Yeah. affordable options to complement any budget. After all, you're in your small space era. It's time to

own it. Shop now at IKEA.ca.ca. toward him. So earlier today, President Joe Biden said that maybe he would consider dropping out of the presidential race if doctors confirm that he has some sort of health issue or medical condition. But prior to that, he was getting real snippy with Democrats who have been calling on him to drop out of the general election out of the presidential race. And so during a call with congressional Democrats, he apparently had a heated exchange with Congressman, Jason Crow. So let's take a look at how that conversation went down and then we'll discuss. What Jason Crow said to the president in this call was Americans want a commander in chief who can

project strength, vigor, and inspire confidence at home and abroad. They need to feel that you have the helm when they go to bed each night, despite your many successes, your many successes and the dangers of Trump, we are seeing overwhelming evidence in our districts that many voters are losing confidence. You can do this in a second term. It's not fair, but it's true. Very, very blunt and very direct. The president responded to Crow, an army ranger, we should note, who served two tours in Afghanistan and one in Iraq, that he knows Crow is a bronze star recipient like Biden's son Bo, but that he didn't rebuild NATO, meaning Crow. According to two sources familiar with the call, the exchange got even more contentious when Crow pushed back on

the president who also argued that NATO leaders are supportive of him. Now, Crow told the president that he needs to understand that voters aren't seeing him that way. At one point, Biden told Crow to cut that crap out and that if Crow wants to walk away from him, then he can walk away. I can't believe he used the NATO line with Congressman Jason Crow and kind of belittled his role in the military and his multiple deployments Afghanistan, like, what are you doing? What are you doing? This is not good. Yeah, but things are falling apart at the seams. So if you're trying to prove that the president is in stable mental condition and he comes on and gets asked a normal question and he starts yelling at the congressman, your mission is not accomplished. You've been

counterproductive. And so what did he not expect Jason? And by the way, to be fair, They might not have expected any Democrat to ever object because they have taught Democratic Party overall obedience so thoroughly that if you ever, ever have the temerity to disagree with a Democratic leader, they're furious. They can't even believe that anybody could. So in Croas' states simply the troubles and how do we respond, Biden's outrage has never heard criticism before in his life. from other Democratic politicians. No, didn't we teach you all to obey? Was I dog walking you a minute ago? Right? And so now all of a sudden, you're, I am the leader. How dare you? And that's why he's in a rage and he can't contain himself. So he just yells at him. It makes a situation worse. And that led to an even bigger rebellion within Congress for Democrats. Totally counterproductive. Every single interview, every single behind the scenes meeting,

is counterproductive. He snaps at everybody, loses his train of thought. He's an absolute mess. And it sucks that you're forcing us to say that he's a mess. When the guy's obviously in mental decline, he's got some sort of dementia or Parkinson's. And we shouldn't be sitting here telling you how bad his shape he's in. We should be wishing him well and hoping that, you know, that he's okay. It's critical fear to end this way is actually pretty tragic. Okay, like there's a huge part of that feels really bad for him. I feel a lot of sympathy for him. But at the same time, I feel a certain level of rage toward those around him who have

encouraged him to remain in the race, who have encouraged him to continue doing public appearances and speeches when almost every single one of those has been a complete and utter disaster, especially following that debate performance. It's just gross and it's sad. And I think we're getting closer to the point where Biden will finally listen to that advice to drop out of the race. Hopefully that happens sooner rather than later. But before that happens, for now, it appears that the DNC is forging ahead. They are moving forward with that virtual roll call vote before the Democratic convention, which would essentially solidify or confirm that Biden would be the Democratic nominee.

Now, the initial reason why they claimed that they were doing that is because they wanted to meet the Ohio deadline to ensure that Biden would appear on the Ohio ballot. But Ohio passed legislation moving that deadline back until after the Democratic convention. So there was no reason for them to continue to move forward with that virtual roll call. Now, what's interesting, Jake, and you should savor this because this might be the only and potentially last time we see. reporters and hosts do their jobs and tell the truth. Because Jake Tapper called out the DNC and it's lies about holding that virtual roll call vote prior to the Democratic Convention. Take a look. One of the things that the Democrats are trying to do right now, the Democratic National Committee,

you said the voting takes place in September. That's voter voters. The delegates, they're trying to get the delegates to start voting next week in days. They want the train to leave before the convention. They want to lock this in because they know that Democrats are really trying to push him out. And party officials privately are pushing back on that hard.

And the reasoning that they've used is this Ohio ballot situation that Ohio officials say has been resolved. It's a lie. It's a lie. That has been resolved. But the DNC is saying their lawyers are telling them that that's not the case.

Yeah. The DNC is lying about that. Direct quote from Jake Tapper. Love to see it. Look, you know, we've been saying things like the DNC's lying for a while now, but we were considered, you know, persona non grata for saying things like that. How dare you? You can't say things like that about people in leadership with power. But now all of a sudden they've lost their power. And even mainstream media is saying they're a lot. liars. And remember, back in the day, before all this, you know, was revealed, Jamie Harrison, the leader of the DNC is a very powerful person and can direct money to certain candidates and not to other candidates, et cetera. But now that Biden's a goner, Jamie Harrison's a goner. So he no longer has any power because the new candidate will pick a new head of the DNC.

And that is why the Jake Tappers of the world now have permission to say that he's a liar. Tap into that taper, okay? Tap into it. I like it. I like honesty. Yeah, that I'll take creditors do. Super happy to have it. Okay, but look, if you would call, if somebody had called on cable news, Jamie Harrison, a liar a month ago, okay?

They would have been called racist immediately. And that's the thing that they always hide behind, et cetera. They hide behind identity politics. You can't do it to Joe Biden because he's just a straight white male. right but if you did you said it about Jamie Harrison as well aha that's it that's it we got them just call the racist we're done with it we're done with it well it's not working anymore because they've lost their power and it's over so look and we've got the petition as we told you t yt.com slash campaign slash drop out the links in the description

box make sure you sign it push it over the edge and then finally the last thing for me is um these guys have been lying about this ohio thing for quite some time And I shared with you guys that a delegate, about four days ago I shared with you guys that a delegate contacted me and said they're going to do this vote at the end of next week. So we had that story first. And this is what's so frustrating about mainstream media. And I sent it to mainstream media. It's a direct quote. And they're like, no, it doesn't count. Because it comes from you, it doesn't count. And then once they figured it out three days later, they're like, did you know they're still planning to do a roll call book? Yeah, I know.

That's what we told you. Right. Right. So it's super frustrating. And the person who's going to make the ultimate decision here, as you guys know, is the first lady. So you know what? If Biden persists for a couple of more days, like criticizing the first lady is the ultimate third round. That makes the powerful very, very mad, right? And it would let Joe Biden would be epileptic. So we're the only ones doing it because she's, the one making the decision. Every reporter says she's the one making the decision, right? So once it touches Jill Biden, then this whole thing's going to break apart. That means mainstream media is 100% positive. He's a goner, otherwise they would never insult the first lady. And once they start going after the first lady, Joe Biden's going to pull out because then the first lady's going to realize, oh, people are onto me. And I don't want to be criticized. I don't mind humiliating my husband, but I don't want to be criticized and he'll drop out. All right, we're going to take a brief break. When we come back, we've got so much more news

news to share with you, including the NACP convention speech that Biden gave. We got to talk about that and more don't miss it. to order, whether that's in-person with Square kiosk or online. Instant access to your sales, plus the funding you need to go even bigger. And real-time insights so you know what's working, what's not, and what's next. Because when you're doing big things, your tools should to. Visit square.ca to get started. All right, back on the Young Turks, Jank and Anna with you guys, but also Kevin Pilate,

Aussie, budgie smuggler, Shirozzi, and Sid, and then these wonderful people gifted memberships. B-A, Trisha Briggs, gifted one, and Cooldass, and Jesse gifted five. You guys are amazing. We appreciate you. We've got one more story for you guys, and then Charlie Kirk's going to join us in a little bit. All right, well, why don't we start off with a snippet of Biden's NAACP convention speech? The idea that corporate-owned housing is able to raise your rent, three, four hundred bucks a month or something under, and I'm about to announce they can't raise it more than $55. Biden meant to say five percent, not $55. And he seemed to be leaning in to read a point. prompter more clearly. I don't know. I can't tell. But either way, he misspoke. And you might think to yourself, it's okay. Everyone misspeaks, right? No. In the rest of his speech, he grows up and had

difficulty expressing what his policy proposals are. Let's stay on the topic of housing and rent increases and take a look. We're going to bring rents down. As I said, we're going to build two million affordable homes. And cap rent increases a 5% of year so corporate landlords can't, God. Anyway, I don't want to get going. I'm going to get very upset. So this was the speech that Biden gave at the NAACP convention. There are other snippets that we're going to show you. You should watch the entire speech for yourself if you have time so you can get a sense of what we're talking about. It was a difficult speech to watch to say the least. You know, there's the, mental decline part of this story, there's also the fact that housing prices have exploded

under Biden's watch. People have been complaining about private equity firms and corporations buying up the limited supply of housing we have. And then turning into essentially slumlords, increasing rents, while refusing to maintain the buildings and actually take care of the units that they're renting out. And it isn't until now when Biden is really, really struggling politically that he decided, oh, maybe I should float something about this. But the constitutionality of the proposal here essentially would be a national law that would cap rent increases to 5%. It's nice to think about. It's not going to happen. And so it's just frustrating all around, both politically speaking and in regard to his performance of the speech. Yeah, look, we could

Talk about housing and right now Trump's a disaster on that. He would let private equity run wild, but the Democrats have let them run wild. Yep. And private equity is gigantic donors to both Democrats and Republicans. And so that's why they're never really going to do anything about it. But much more importantly, he can't finish the sentence. He can't finish any sentence. He finishes anything with anyways. I mean, how many times have you heard him say, anyway, over just the last week. You know, we're in the dozens.

So, okay, let's say the prompter is wrong. Or you're having trouble seeing the prompter. Okay, it happens. Not that big a deal. But you don't know that your own policy proposal is to cap it at 5%, not $55. So if that was my proposal and I accidentally read $55, I'd go, oh, I'm sorry, I meant 5%. Because I know it's not to cap it at $55.

What is that? That doesn't even make sense. That's not a thing that can't, well, you don't know what the rent is. How could you possibly cap it under $55 increase? It makes no sense. He doesn't even realize it doesn't make sense. This guy is totally gone. So this is really one of the most embarrassing things that this country's gone through in a long time. And look, it wasn't just those moments of the speech. As I mentioned earlier, the entirety of the speech was incredibly difficult. He struggled through it. In fact, I want to give you one other example and it has to do with Biden. in, you know, thoughts on things like high speed rail and how important it is. Let's take a look. Like America first high speed rail line, that's going to take you from Las Vegas to Los Angeles in two hours, create over 30,000 jobs. And guess what? Save billions of tons of because of pollution. Because people, all the studies show you can get from point A to point being a train or a vehicle

the same distance to take the trend. Again, his performance there awful, clear cognitive decline. And then on top of it, he's talking about the California high speed rail, which we've been pouring so much money into, there's no real movement on it. And it is a project that has been a complete, nother disaster and a waste of taxpayer money, which is so frustrating. But again, let's we don't have to focus on the policy and how much of a failure the high speed rail project has been the whole reason why we're showing you this is because of how terrible this speech was and it's just honestly not fair to democratic voters to continue pretending like

Biden has a shot at winning this election it's also not fair to Biden to have him do these speeches it it humiliates him and it's just not fair for him to end his political career his entire career has been a political career. And this is how it's going to end? Yeah, well, definitely. TYT.com slash campaign slash drop out links in the description box. So look, the Democrats have been promising us that rail system for what, two decades, three decades, never delivered. Again, back to the speech. So the most important thing for you guys to remember is that Biden doesn't just have to prove that he's not in mental decline. If he proves that, He doesn't win the election. He then has to make up 15, 16 points. How is that guy going to

prove to you that he's in perfectly great shape and then do a 16 point miraculous comeback that no other politician has ever done? It's not even remotely possible. Please for God's sake, try to win this election, get totally new ticket. All right. We'll be right back with Charlie Crick. For a limited time at McDonald's, enjoy the tasty breakfast trio. Your choice of chicken or sausage McMuffin or McGrittles with a hash brown and a small iced coffee for five bucks plus tax. Available until 11 a.m. at participating McDonald's restaurants. Price excludes flavored iced coffee and delivery. All right, back of the Young Turks at the RNC, Jake.

You granted, as you can tell, Charlie Kirk joins us. It's been a while. Yeah, it has. Good to have you here from Talking Points USA. And so close. Turning point. Oh, did I say that? That's hilarious. I meant turning point.

You're so close. That was a 40th slip. Okay. So Charlie, you and I now have some strange agreements. Okay. So the whole world is just, it's coming to an end. Right. So, but believe me, we have plenty of disagreements.

So we're going to get to it. So we both think Biden's a bad candidate. We both say that we represent the popular swing of our parties, right? So let me start with a simple question. Do you want Biden to stay the Democratic nominee? Boy, that's a good question. Yes. Yes. Yes. I think that he's probably the most beatable right now. I would think so. Yeah. Especially, especially Democrat corporate oligarch Biden. The more that he's leaned into kind of more of the progressive stuff for the last couple of weeks, I think I can make some harder to beat. But I just don't think he's not all mentally there.

Okay, good one. So let's talk a little bit about some of the vulnerabilities on the right. You know, one thing that I've noticed, you say other members of conservative media say is that, you know, the female vote is a lot more difficult for conservatives, right? or for the Republican Party, that the unmarried women are more likely to vote for Democrats. That's the problem. We need to get women married and they'll change their political views. But honestly, I wonder if you realize statements like the one you made at a Turning Point USA event,

you said something along the lines of, well, women are past their prime once they turn 30, right? Do you ever wonder whether those kinds of messages might actually be? You know, a little offensive to women and then they might think that represents the entirety of the Republican Party. You know, it's not exactly the most welcoming message for women. Well, I mean, first, what I what I said specific, it's close to what I said. But what I said is as women get older, the dating pool shrinks, which is obvious. I think you would agree with that. There's a true.

So, I mean, unfortunately, that's the biological reality we live in. But yeah, look, I mean, we do a big women summit. I think that our agenda is very popular for all people. And, but it's not a new phenomenon that young, young women lean liberal, but certainly since the, you know, reversal of Roe versus Wade and bring it back to the states, Democrats have enjoyed some, I think, short-lived popularity with young female voters for sure. Now, right here in the convention, you said that all men should vote for Trump. Well, I didn't say, well, I do think I'll mention it. I said that you're not a man if you don't vote. Yeah, that's even worse, of course. Yeah. So, so look. Come on, Shank, look at that. I mean, can your candidate do that? Yeah, no.

No. And so look, I'm honest, who's your preferred candidate? Oh, I would never. You think Bernie could do this? If Bernie got shot, would Bernie do this? Look, I hope nobody ever gets shot. How about Gretchen? We never find out. We never find out. Do you think Gretchen Whitmer almost got kidnapped by you guys? So well, no, he was pretty courageous on that too. So, okay, anyway. But didn't Gavin Newsom would do this, he got shot. He would run quick away if Gavin Newsom got shot. So but I'm giving you a hard time. I know. Charlie, look, I say, I said, I said, I said that Trump that day was courageous. You were legit. That's why I'm here today is because

you were like one of the honest guys on the left that was like, okay, that's pretty ballsy. Yeah, no question. He did a great job. And I love when the crowd chanted USA, USA, because the president had just been saved, right? And so former president, but we still call former presidents, President Trump, et cetera. And that was a great moment. He says, fight, fight, fine. They say USA, USA. I love that. That makes me proud of America, okay? Now, having said that, you know that that has nothing to do with policy. So, So if you're a man who cares about name, fill in the blank, universal health care, paid family leave, a higher minimum wage, which at least a higher wages overall, you care

about fighting inflation, you care about getting corruption out of politics, why the hell would Trump doing that affect my vote at all? That's a super fair question. And what I was basically getting at is that if this doesn't as a man earn you some political points of respect, that's what the essence of what I was saying. But of course that you're electing a president, a set of policies in four years. And that's a, that's a fair critique. Okay, so I want to ask you about Ronna McDaniel, because you led the charge against her at the art.

McRomney, I'm kidding. Okay, you can go on whatever you want. Hey, listen, I'm, in a sense, I'm leading the charge against Jamie Harrison at the DNC. And one of us has been successful. Well, give me time. Give me a minute. I'm rooting for you, man. Okay.

So look, now even Jay Tapper today called, basically called Jamie Harrison a liar at the DEN, because he is a liar. He's been lying the whole time. And he's lying about the Ohio issue now. But I want to ask you about your side. Sure. So what was your guys beef with Rona McAlley? Well, I first of all, the grassroots didn't have a seat at the table, which I think you could sympathize with. The Democrat Party, I don't think has a voice for the grassroots right now.

And in fact, if I was advising Democrats, be like your power is in the Bernie Sanders wing of your party. Like, why are you not tapping into that? Not into this like old stodgy neoliberal war mongering, you know, weak Bush Cheney version of the Democrat party. But anyway, what am I to give advice to Democrats, right? But no, my, my critique of Rana McRomney was that, yes, there's a track record of losing. Fine. Okay, I've made mistakes in the past. You know, we're trying to all adjust. More importantly, though, is that conservative grassroots do not have a seat at the table,

is that we have an agenda that we felt was not being represented, not being listened to. And then there were some like very wonky parliamentarian things. I think that you would agree with. And you know, that's like Robert Rules of Order. Like, you know how these party operate, right? Yeah, steamroll the little guy. They steamroll the states that aren't as important to fundraising. And we found that to be objectionable. And so we, Donald Trump made the ultimate decision,

but we let a very, very heated campaign against Rana. And ultimately, that was successful. Hold on one quick follow of, Anna. So Charlie, here's what I don't understand about the wrongs. So on the Democratic side, I think it's fairly clear because the establishment corporate Democrats have all the money. So the Bernie side has grassroots money and grassroots energy, but that's only earned. You have to actually deliver otherwise the grassroots don't give you the money.

Right. So that's why the DNC says, well, I can't count on that because I'm corporate. I'm serving these donors. I'll never get the grassroots money. So I'm going to halfway give up on that. And so I'm going to be purely corporate, right? So on the Democratic side, it's really stark. Right. But on the Republican side, the grassroots also has tons of donor money. So why do they object to the grassroots? They have no reason to. That's an interesting point. It's because of their values. It's because the grassroots represent a value system that the Vichy French Republic. Republicans do not believe in, which is that we believe neoliberalism has been a failed experiment in the modern era. I think you actually might agree with part of that, both of you guys. I definitely agree with that. This is a thing I don't get. And this is why for the first time I find the convention, the Republican convention, so fascinating. Because I do see this growing faction of Republican voters who are in like headed in the direction of economic populism, right? They like Social Security. They like Medicare. They want better wages for workers. They want protectionism in regard to, you know, trade and tariffs. And I find that also fascinating. But at the same time, you know, you seem to be empathetic to that message and to those desires by some Republican voters. At the same time, like on your show, you had this one segment. Not a fan of Social Security?

Yeah. Let me clarify. wildly popular even among Republicans. I'm just not a fan of things that aren't properly funded or go bankrupt. So would you be in favor of lifting the cap on social security taxes in order to fund social educate me what that would look like. So, so it's around $174,000 if I remember. Right. So like rich people shouldn't get social security. No, no, not at all. They should definitely get it. Everyone gets it. Everybody should get it. Regardless of age or no, no, no, everybody in terms of income, right? But because universal programs

work better. Everybody buys into it because if the rich don't get it, they'll kill it. That's usually how it works. But how is that any difference? No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, hold on. Hold on tax for Social Security has to certain income and every year it changes. So, for instance, let's say you're making $200,000 a year after about $174,000. The FICA tax no longer funds. I see, okay. Yeah, and I'd have to think about that. That sounds like probably a good idea, but I have to look at the counter argument. I mean, but look, as far as what, my

My critique of Social Security is that it is going to go bankrupt soon. And it has been a lot of series of promises funded by debts and deficits. But yes, we have a moral obligation to fulfill the contract that we have with workers that have paid into it for quite some time. And so, but we're fooling ourselves if we act as if this thing's going to be around forever. At the current pace, that's just not correct. Okay, it definitely can be if all you do is lift the case. Okay, I'll take your word out. I'm not in the weeds of, you know, social security policy wonkery.

Yeah, yeah, no problem, no problem. So let me see if I could find more agreement. Hate family leave. 84% of Americans agree with it, 74% of Republican voters agree with it. 12 weeks off for a mom after. That's what we do a turning point. Yeah, we do three months family of three. That's exactly what we do at TYT.

So we're another point of agreement. Okay, so, but we can't get corporate Republicans or corporate Democrats to say yes. Well, I think either Rubio or Romney pushed this. You guys. Romney, yeah, right, my favorite guy. But I'd have to look at what the European model does. But if we're actually, and there's abuses, of course there are. But yes, I mean, again, I'm not like a huge fan of like more government programs all the time.

Just that's my disposition. But how about this? Instead of $200 billion to Ukraine, $200 billion to say that moms can stay with their babies for 12 weeks. I mean. We would definitely. Okay. Then we have agreement. Okay.

Because look, I think Russia, not I think, Russia did invade Ukraine. They were provoked. Now, all right, we can get into that disagreement. I'm more based on war than you are. No, no, no, no. Look, I'm, I'm giving you a hard time. No, let me ask you the same question. They were provoked though.

Charlie, let me ask you the same question I asked Giuliani last time. So Trump keeps saying, and you guys all agree, oh my God, if Trump was president, we wouldn't have any of these wars. You say that? Well, it's not speculative, he was president and we didn't have this war. Okay, so it's not as he says, okay, but he says, it's because they know that not to mess with me. The because is a guess, the point is you have to agree for four years, we didn't have the wars.

The because of his stature, it could be because of threats, it could be because of relationships or friendships. That's all the guess. I don't know and you don't know. We only know what happened for four years, which is no new wars first time in 40 years. So, but he keeps saying because they know that I'm tough. Does that mean that if Russia invaded Ukraine on Trump's watch that Trump would have attacked Russia? Well, but they didn't. I don't know the answer to that. So, He is making an argument that they didn't invade because of our big military peace through strength and I threatened to bomb the Kremlin. Maybe that's true or maybe it's that he had the Cajonese to have a Helsinki summit and was attacked by his own intel agencies. And Donald Trump looked in the camera and they said, well, do you not trust the CIA?

He's like, yeah, I don't trust the CIA, which was totally true, by the way. So I don't know. Like we're guessing as to the why, but we do know the what. Here is the what. Under Biden, we do have more war and war is terrible. Under Trump, we had no more. And so the why we'll argue forever, Chang, but you have to at least agree on the reality that there were no new no new wars undertone. Some areas, I actually agree. And this is just to be speculating. You're right. No one knows for sure. But I do think that Trump's stature and also the fact that he's a bit of a wild card and you don't know whether he's going to be a rational actor did dissuade people like Putin from, yeah. I don't think that's a bad thing, right?

No, I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. But I do have a very specific question on something Trump did that could have led to a disastrous war. Luckily it didn't. But the Iran nuclear deal, right? The Iran nuclear deal, prevented Iran from developing nuclear weapons. And it had a way of ensuring like it wasn't just between the United States and Iran. There were other countries in the international community who signed onto that deal. And Iran allowed for members of that community to go in and check to make sure that they were not developing nuclear weapons.

Trump took that, ripped it up, and then for a while Iran still followed through with the deal, even though Trump ripped it up, they didn't need to. And then after a while, they're like, you know what? There's a lot of antagonism toward us. We're going to develop the nuclear weapons. And so they started enriching uranium again. Then you have the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, which, you know, did leave. That was aggressive.

And that could have led to an even bigger disaster. There's already been some retaliation by Iran toward our troops as a result of that. So can you at least acknowledge that there were at least some areas where Trump was belligerent in regard to national international policy? Yes. And the argument that his camp would make, again, I'm not a spokesperson for Trump, okay? I'm just an admirer, a friend and an advocate, is that because of the hawkishness in certain elements that it created peace. And it's hard to disagree at that. I'm not a fan of trying to go to war with Iran. I don't think the Iranian regime is moral or good. But I have a consistent mantra that has been developing over the last decade. And I think a lot of Americans are with me. Foreign abstractions mean far less than pressing domestic crises. And so it's just like this war with Iran, is a weird fanatical obsession with some people in my party that are here right now, like Senator Lindsey Graham. And it's insane and it's weird and it's destructive to our own country. And I speak about it both publicly and privately.

And you know who also is sympathetic what I'm saying? J.D. Vance. And so that's a fact. Well, so I want to ask you about that as well. But so you mentioned Ukraine, we've given $300 billion to Israel over all these years. You want to stop giving money to Israel? No, I don't. I think I think it's not the same thing happy to tell you why and I I've made the argument before.

First of all, I will agree it is it is deserving of explanation why the aid to Israel went from 14 billion to 26 billion just like magically overnight. That's like again, I'm like superpowers. You're like guys, come on like you just can't just make up numbers and just start. But no, I will say this. As someone who is a believer in a place for American Jewry to have a country and a state, I do believe that it is worthy of some form of aid. if it's repaid, if it's an American arms. Again, I'm not a policy want guys on that stuff. But I do think that protecting a nation of Israel in a time of crisis is not the same as assisting Ukraine.

Let me ask you something even more specific in regard to our aid to Israel. You know, the United States has not had a budget surplus since 2001. That was literally the last time we had a budget surplus. Israel had a budget surplus in 2022. Okay, the pandemic didn't matter. That's a very good argument. Right. So I can't just agree that. That American taxpayers should fund the bombs that Israel is dropping on Gaza is ridiculous to be.

So you mentioned JD Vance, you're an advocate for JD Vance. Tell me why you're excited about it. He's a friend, so I'm super biased. But I mean, he's a younger person on the ticket. I think you guys can agree if Biden remains, which you don't think you about. I want to get, I want to pick your brain about like actually I'm super interested is that we have 81, 78, 59 is the ages of the three people in contention. And now you have a 39 year old. So I think it's an interesting new wrinkle. And he also is not a neoliberal. And we very well could have had a neoliberal on the ticket. And he is a legit conservative that understands the America First Agenda that you see here on full display. And so I'm hopeful that this new viewpoint is is going to be permanent in the Republican Party. Are you worried that it stands on abortion, which is no exceptions in rape and incest? will be very damaging to the campaign? No, I don't.

I think he has said that he agrees to the president, the president sent it back to the states. I think he's been really fair and now it's a joint ticket. And so he will harmonize his views with that at the top of the ticket. Okay. And if you guys are populists, how do you feel about the giant corporate tax cuts that Trump gave the last time around? And then this time around, he's saying he's going to do even more corporate tax cuts. Well, it depends on, so part of it was really good.

of it was a small business relief and tax cuts. Some of it was for families and for workers. I think I could agree of all the legislative priorities that we that we as conservatives were pushing for, making sure that Google was going to have a lower effective corporate tax rate was not the best use of our legislative energy. But I do, and you know this, I'm a conservative. So I have a, I have a disposition towards more money in private sector pockets is better than public sector pockets. However, this is the evolution of populism is that we do not like centralized power and you must be consistent that centralized power in government or centralized power in corporations are both bad. Okay. Now we're getting so much. You must be consistent. And especially when you have a small subset of multi trillion dollar corporations that are largely unaccountable in the tech space. And you've had your own tech wars guys. And so if we and, you know, for example, being censored, being banned and all that. So yeah, like, I mean, cutting the taxes of Goldman Sachs. It's like, I can't say that I'm like, it's my number one issue to oppose, but how about you guys go deliver actual results for the voters that put you in there in the first place?

Okay. Look, if you guys agree with us, I'll take yes for an answer. And there's more nuance there. But yeah, I hear you. All right, last one on policy, money in politics. So for us on the left, that's the number one issue because that's what leads to all this corruption in the first place. Why do we give money to defense contractors? endlessly because they give money to the politicians. Why do we give the money to the oil companies? You want to drill? No problem. We can have that debate, right? But why are we giving $20 billion extra of taxpayer money to the richest corporations in the world?

It's because they give money to politicians. The money in politics is their original accounts. What do you think? I don't know if it's the original saying. I agree with a lot of that, by the way. I would love your guys' thoughts. So you guys, because when I first was at Politicon, this was like a huge issue, Citizens United, that's like six hundred years ago because that was like my

interaction with like really left wing activists. What do you think of a lot of left wing forces embracing the dark money? Are you guys not fans of that? Like no. Lorraine Pell Jobs, Emerson Collective, Arabella advisor, democracy alliance. Okay, cool. So we agree because I think that's like creepy and weird. Like the fact that the Democrat Party has a much better organized billionaire class of funders and even the Republican Party does at the moment. But what is your question? Do I want campaign finance reform or how about we end the private financing of elections because if you well because if you privately finance elections they're going to serve private in so this is a tough

issue and let me tell you why however you know presidential elections were that way from Nixon to Obama that both candidates took public there is there is a law actually that as president you get your election publicly financed up to about 700 million dollars however you could decide to take not take the money which everyone does because you can raise more money that way so let me and i know Obama is the first one he broke the tradition yeah he broke the tradition and took more of $5.00. That's right. And then it just, we haven't gone back. Yeah. Now, theoretically right now, Donald Trump could say I'm going to take the $700 million, but it's a $3 billion race you're going to lose. But I'm, I'm seriously interested from a policy

perspective. What does that look like? That means that the U.S. taxpayer should fund every dog catcher running in every state. Like, no, actually, yeah, and I'm not being facetious. No, no, no, I totally get it. So what, what happens is not everybody gets money. You have to prove that there's enough support for you, that you should be one of the candidates that does get money and you do that with grassroots support signatures, et cetera, et cetera. Did third party candidates also get? Yeah, so it depends on how you set it up, but it certainly could be that way. Yes, okay.

And I would want it to be that way? So Bobby Kennedy, would you get it appropriate based on your polling data? So there's different ways of doing it, but yes, that could be one metric as to how we do it. Is there still one carve out for small dollar donors to still give money? No, definitely. So, so you're not against the mom and the pop and the plumber getting money. Exactly right, okay? You know why?

Because they're the average American that the politician, that the politician should be serving any. So, but you cap it at like $100 or $200 and then you say, and we're not going to give it to you unless you qualify. And once you qualify, you're going to get the same exact money. Now let's have an intellectual debate. Let's have a real debate of ideas instead of who's got more money. Because you're right, right now the Democrats have more money.

And so the Democrats can just go and buy any seat they want if they have more money than the Republicans. And that's not fair. So also not fair when the Republicans have more. What do you think is the weakness in this policy? if there is no. I don't think there actually is much of a weakness. I'm an expert on this. And only because I've been working with Larry Lessig from Harvard Law for all these years.

He's the godfather of the movement to get money out of politics. This has been thought through in every way. The reason it doesn't get done, Charlie, is because all of the current politicians, their base of power, is the donor money. So they don't want to let it go. That's how they got elected. So in other country, so let me take a step back. So if our idea is to become populist, right, and to listen to voters, why is it in other countries that have publicly financed elections in the last couple of years?

We've seen them embrace mass migration and funding Ukraine when their voters don't want it. No, that's so that's an interesting question because those countries are actually swinging back and forth, back and forth. And they're constantly choosing the new candidate for change because we all live under corporate rules and all those, whether it's Brazil, France, UK, they're all swinging. They go Brexit. Then they go a massive labor victory. Right. In France, they go to Macron when he's new. Now that he's the incumbent, they go against Macron. And and they go even further left in Macron when they were about to go right. It's not right left. It's not right left. It's change. They go Bolsonaro in Brazil. Then they go Lula. And it's because they don't have entrenched power that comes with corporate money being given to politicians.

Right. We're the most corrupts because we legalize bribery. Fair enough. Faked into our system. Totally. I agree. But and let me ask, there's a citizen added question I'm super interested in because you guys have to, which I think is the weakness in your point. And I'll get to that in a second. But the, I guess why is it then that mass migration has gone uninterrupted if the voters want it to be stopped? So that depends on a number of things. But Le Pen nearly won in France. Okay, fair enough. So that's the answer is that that it's actually showing signs of life that. And Trump is winning now here. And Trump won in 2016. I mean, look, and that's a movement, even with all the money in politics, still, you guys had the

advantage there in 2016. You have it again in 2020. Well, and we have hopefully the people, not just the. No, no, that's what I'm saying. Despite the money in politics and the corporations do want more immigrants in the country, you guys are still leading on that because of the big movement. And in France, that's why they almost elected far right when France is not far right, at all. No. So I get that, that, that drives voters. So let me ask you now about the only money in politics weakness I have is this, is that the way you regulate it, and this is the citizen United case, is that would the young Turks be considered a Democrat super back? I mean, that's not a facetious question. No, no, no, I totally get it. That's actually a good

question. I totally get it. Because you see what I'm saying? No, I do. So because turning point media, right? Same thing applies for both of us, okay? You have to carve out media. First of all, It's a constitutional issue because freedom of the press. But that's why they decided citizens united the way they did. No, I know that Hillary Clinton book, as you know is the essence of the. Yeah. So I know this sounds pretentious, but it's okay. J.D. Vance was from Yale law. I debated the guy who won. I didn't go to college. Okay. I know. So I debated the guy who won Citizens United case and Florida Abrams,

the top constitutional lawyer in the country at Oxford and beat him two to one. Not because I'm that great at it because it's so obvious, right? People, don't want our politicians controlled by the money that they are getting directly or indirectly. When it comes to media, there is no way to solve that. Even in countries that don't have the money in politics problem, they still have media. And so media is going to be right. Media is going to be left. Media is going to be in the middle. You can't end media because then you have a freedom of press and freedom of speech issue. Hear me out then. So let's just say the billionaire class can no longer give money to Joe Biden or Donald Trump. Why wouldn't they go spend $100 million and publish

books in media and distribute that. They would. Okay, so then this no, no, no, I know that. The system is generally, think about it. No, no, it's not. So two things. Number one, it's not going directly to the politicians. So that clear enough. So some distance. It's a, it's a significant distance, right? So for example, if they gave it to us, I'm not going to go and advocate for politicians just because somebody gave us money. I know others would. I know. I know others. Okay. But they have to win over an audience. Do you see what I'm saying? Well, hear me out. If you're billionaire in in january of an election year you could stand up a shell corporation with a hundred million dollars you know run a bunch of ads and call it you know patriot media or people's media

and do a bunch of attack stuff against what i'm getting at is at the essence of the citizens united case and i know your audience knows this very well was that is it constitutional to write a criticism is it a campaign finance violation if i were to write a book against hillary clinton and they argue they said yeah yeah and so but that's not more than that's more than the the media we're talking about how about people let's take a step back okay what if taylor swift were to come out theoretically and she would say go vote for joe biden is that an in-kind political contribution for his campaign so so you can't stop that but charlie you don't have to stop that you're saying well currently they could fund media and they do right and they could fund the politicians and the super PACs well then

they have three different massive ways of influence that's a fair argument so why don't we knock out the two that are the most direct giving directly to politicians and the super PACs. Then you've got the media issue. But at that point, they, and it's not that it's impossible, but they have to say, like, let's say they want a giant corporate tax code for Google, that we don't want it, you don't want, right? And so then they go, oh, we have a show here. That tells you how great it is to do tax cuts for giant corporations. Yeah, stuff, right? Right, it's not going to work. So it's a lot less likely to work than here, Joe Biden, Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi, take a check from Google. Do you give me a goddamn tax cut? Yeah, but let's make sure we understand,

though that the direct you have to go i understand but the direct money in politics though is more limited than i think you're presenting it it's like $2,700 limits you can give to super PACs the super PAC technically supposed to have some distance from candidates yeah no no check i agree it's a bunch of BS right it's a bunch of nonsense because they share data and all that stuff but then the but do you see any concern that this is regulating speech uh no and can i just make a point about the media angle. Look, I think that your point is a legitimate one. I think that your point is even more legitimate in an era where we had like four networks. And those four networks basically dominated the entire message in the country. Media is so much more diverse

now, diversified, I should say. And it's harder to control. It's harder to control. There's a lot more competition. There's a lot more independent media. And so the idea of corporate interests, buying elections through the media, it's just a lot harder to do in today's era, you know? I don't know if you're getting a rap sign or not. If not, I can say, but no, last question. I'm sorry, last answer. Okay, no, you have this last question from? No, no, that's that was the one. Oh yeah. I just made a point. Yeah, no, but okay, but look, I, I, I want to agree with you guys on something. I think it's repulsive and disgusting, because I have things I want to see get done. And when I, for example, I want to see

immigration restricted to this country. You guys don't agree, whatever, but I get blocked by the the donor class. And I get by institutional corporate that want a flow of cheap labor into the country. Now, it used to be a left wing issue, actually more than a right wing issue to restrict immigration. And Bernie Sanders would have that. That's changed. But so I sympathize with you. Another example, I'm trying to say, like, let's not send money to Ukraine. And I'm up against all these institutional interests. I'm just not convinced that that regulating speech is a good pass to go down. And that's what that decision was ultimately was decided upon. Yes. But you might be right.

Well, I'll tell you might be right. And there's a difference between speech. You might be right. Yeah, you and I can have a certain amount of speech. When somebody gives a billion dollars, they get a lot more speech. For sure. But hold on, hear me out. So, but your platform is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

From your mouth, the gods here. Well, but I'm saying, no, no, no, I'm saying, but if I were to do an influencer post or you or you were, there's a value assigned to that. So it's easy to just throw the billionaires under the bus, but you know, there, there is a, there is a price tag to us tweeting or us posting, right? That's that now has a new currency in the digital era that wouldn't have been a thing in the 80s or now. Yeah, much more removed as we talked about. So last super cool question, do you still live like a capitalist every day? I watch back that video. It's so cringe and it's like we can all grow and, you know, become better people. And yeah, I I don't even know what that means. I didn't either.

I didn't. That's why I wanted to ask. All right, thank you for joining us, Charlie. Appreciate it. Okay, okay. From Turning Point USA. We'll be right back.