The Young Turks - Classified Corvette

Episode Date: January 13, 2023

A Biden aide has found some more unclassified documents. The Amazon Labor Union has been certified by U.S. Labor Officials. It has been revealed that Brazil rioters openly plotted online. A minute cut in the U.S. Military that most likely won’t happen is causing Republican panic. A new survey finds antisemitic values are on a rise. Host: John Iadarola, Brett Erlich Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Woo! It's up! We're going to be able to be. Welcome one and all to The Young Turks with me, John Ehrlich and Brett Ehrlich, the two hosts who normally greet you on a daily basis.

Yep, everything's fine, everything's normal, you're just in a different timeline. What would have had to have happened for the butterfly effect to produce this show? I don't know. I don't know, John. I didn't watch that awesome Ashton Coochard movie from 2009. movie is underrated, the butterfly effect. Anyway, you know what else is underrated? The hour we're about to present to you. It's pre-underrated, because we got a lot that we're going to be talking about, including big developments on the Joe Biden VP document scandal. We've got the Republicans looking to cut the military budget, except not at all. And so that's going to be

a fun little debate. DC's losing their mind over something that is not being proposed and is definitely not going to happen. So that's fun. We've had some. very prominent, noted anti-Semites in pop culture and politics recently. We're going to find out what regular people think about the topic. And so prepare to lose a little bit more faith than humanity. That's going to be a fun one. And we've got some other news as well, including good news when it comes to the unionization of Amazon.

So that's going to be fun. Brett, I'm excited about it. Excited to talk in person with you about politics. So great, John. And I also want to give a shout out to my wife. who cut my hair today because I was a little nervous about how shaggy it was getting. And so if there's a weird thing with a certain angle I give, the Brook Marks. You can take it up with her. It's her fault. And she apologizes.

Yeah, she did it on purpose. Anyway, with that said, why don't we talk about some politics? We can jump right into this. I concluded that under the special counsel regulations, it was in the public interest to appoint special counsel. Yes, there is a special counsel now investigating a document scandal and not just Trump's. Robert Herr, former U.S. attorney for the District of Maryland, now investigating President Joe Biden's documents, which have been found. And this means, since it finally has happened, we have the special counsel, Donald Trump has gotten just a little bit of what he asked for.

Not everything, notably, on true social, he had said, Merrick Garland has to immediately end special counsel investigation into anything related to me, because I did everything right and appoint a special counsel to investigate Joe Biden, who hates Biden as much as Jack Smith hates me. It is still amazing to me that that is not a comment on TikTok. It's a comment from the former president that hate, what about Jack Smith? Anyway, I don't care. I'm going to push it out of here.

He's got it, though. There's a special counsel now, and not just any special counsel, but a prosecutor. who's supposed to have had, you know, a long and distinguished career looking to counterterrorism and a whole bunch of blah, blah, blahs. And he was appointed to that position by Donald Trump. And so, release the balloons, we got him. They can't have a problem with this because it was a guy that was chosen by Trump, Brett. No, but Trump says he can't have a problem because if there still is a special counsel related to anything having to do with Donald Trump, then Trump gets. gets to be mad. There's no logic to it, but he definitely set down the man or how.

He can still be upset with this. He's such a brilliant tactician. He sets up what many of us would refer to as a double standard, but that's not what it is. It's just being two and a half steps ahead. Yeah. What I love is it's not just, and this would be crazy. They're investigating me, which he thinks isn't fair, even though he definitely did the thing they were investigating him for. I don't know why we have to pretend that he didn't. So they need to appoint one to look into Biden. And that wouldn't then be fair, but they're both being looked into. And he's not asking for neither to be investigated. He only wants the other guy to be investigated. That is just amazing. But isn't that brilliant? Isn't that what you'd rather have, John? I think it's better for him.

I think that's the best outcome. I hadn't thought about this way, because I personally was like, we should treat everyone fairly. We should be impartial. But sometimes, like, let's say I committed a worse crime than you and someone is appraising our behavior based on a universal code of justice and fairness, then I get in more trouble than you? That's stupid. I don't want to be in trouble in those situations. From your point of view, I can see how you'd come to that conclusion. And Trump doesn't seem to want to be in trouble, even though it seems by all comparisons between his behavior and Biden's, he did things that were tangibly worse. Yes, and we're definitely going to get into that. Before we debate the difference between the

and what should happen to Joe Biden, let's talk about the new updates. And that is that in addition to the previous set of documents that have been found at a temporary workspace and had been given back to NARA, there's a new set of documents have been founded at a location associated with Mr. Biden. It ended up being one of his personal residents where he spends weekends. So one of the big distinctions between the two, between Trump and Biden, had been that Trump brought them to his personal home. As of this update, that distinction is no longer there.

There are still many distinctions, but that is one that no longer exists, so bear that in mind. Richard Sauer, special counsel to Mr. Biden, didn't answer fundamental questions about the contents of the documents, who packed them, whether anyone had gained access to them after Joe Biden left office, also didn't say when the second batch had been found. We do know that they immediately notified the Justice Department and arranged for it to retrieve the second set of documents. Although technically, if we don't know exactly when they were found, we can't say definitively that they immediately reached out. They are saying that they immediately reached out, and I see no reason to doubt that, but bear in mind there could still theoretically be doubt.

So also, and I thought this was interesting, because one would think before these two sets of documents were found and the debate was just about Donald Trump and what he had done, Republicans would say all of this is artificial, it's made up, it's just to attack Trump. So Biden is just using this and attacking Trump in an unfair way in every possible fashion. But interestingly, back in August, before all this, President Biden was asked if it was ever appropriate to take classified materials home, he said, yes, with caveats. I have in my home, I think that's supposed to be a cabinet. Cabined. It's a small cabin.

It's a tiny cabin off space that is completely secure, adding that he often takes home sensitive documents. So that's interesting that he, for one, is admitting there that in theory he does take things home. You're not supposed to keep them there, especially when you're no longer the VP or whatever, although he is now the president, bear that in mind. But also, he didn't simply say, no, Trump was wrong, there's no excuse. He offered some possible excuses, just not one that would be appropriate for a guy who had just lost the election and took the documents on his way out. It's not like they had already been there. It was a holdover that had been overlooked.

No, he took them out when he knew he wouldn't be in office anymore. I just feel like what's great about this story is no one really cares that much. About the documents? About anyone having documents at their home. Now, in theory, I don't think if something is, if you break the rules, I feel like you should be held accountable for breaking the rules, but there's all kinds of rules, right? There's rules like don't kill someone. And there's a rule about like where you can do your Xeroxing. And the rule about where you can do your Xeroxing is not as vital a rule to the survival of the human race as the one where it says don't kill people. So really, you just have an opportunity to approach this as the story it is. And for me, the best part is the reaction to the revelation that you have brought home these things. I think they're both in the wrong for having these documents at their residence is what it seems like to me as this story continues to unfold.

But Trump not returning the documents. Trump kicking and crying and saying, saying ridiculous stuff like it crossed my mind that I would like to declassified. the documents. Like, I don't have any belief in the long run that Trump will suffer some massive legal consequences as a result of this. And what he doesn't seem to understand is in the meantime, he should take every step not to look totally ridiculous. And every step he's taken along the way has made himself look totally ridiculous. And that's the fight he's been fighting right now. It's the larger political fight that Donald Trump has to be concerned with is whether he looks like a moron.

And as Ron DeSantis, against all odds, the animated my buddy, the real life my buddy doll, Ron DeSantis looks like a bro, looks like a G in the meantime, compared to Donald Trump, who looks like a total fool being like, well, in my mind I have thought about the documents being declassified. So that's the story here. Anyone who, because in the letter of the law, like Donald Trump and Joe Biden are being treated the same. The Democrats are walking the walk here. And I don't really have any skin in the game as to whether Biden gets in trouble for breaking the same law as Trump. Like in the same rule,

they hold them both. You said this on the show the other day. Like, investigate them both. I don't care. Well, I had, I had been calling for Jack Smith to investigate both. They decided to go with a totally separate special counsel. I guess that's fine. I don't really care either way. The interesting thing is, we've already known that whether you did it or not, weirdly seems to be irrelevant. Isn't that weird? Like, if you're alleged to have stolen something, isn't whether you stole it or not important? Like, but no, with Trump, everybody knows that he stole them. Every single person knows.

And they knows that he declined multiple opportunities to give it back. So weirdly, the consequence isn't if you violate. the law, it's, what were like you thinking at the time, man? Like, what was your state of mind? And so that's the standard that has been applied for months now to Trump. So I personally think it should just be the letter of law. But if it's gonna be that standard, then for Joe Biden, who thinks that he was purposefully stealing them at this point?

Right, I'm fine with that. And but for a crime, typically, for most crimes, you need an act and an intent. So the mens rea is very valid, how you're acting. And another thing is it's not the crime, it's the cover of. I think I hope I outline that. But Trump and so you do, I would just, that would be my subtle difference. And it's probably implied in what you said. But I think it is the state of mind you had.

And whether it's an intentional homicide or like manslaughter, like there are degrees based on your mindset when you committed a crime. That is baked into every fabric of our law. Well, then when you were asked to give them back, whether you do or not, seems pretty a pretty big factor there. In any event, I want to have us react to just a couple of videos, including Joe Biden, who was asked about this. What were you thinking? Let me, I'm going to get a chance to speak on all this, God willing, soon. But as I said earlier this week, people, and by the way, my Corvette's in a lock garage. Okay, so it's not like

you're sitting out of the street. Again, it's fine to point out of the The garage is locked still, ideally they wouldn't be there. That said, like Peter Ducey asking him like, what were you thinking? Why are you pretending that he did this intentionally? No, nobody actually thinks he intentionally did this. And again, I don't think that that necessarily absolves him or should absolve him of consequences, but nobody actually thinks he did it intentionally, everybody knows. Isn't it weird that the same exact people who spent months saying that Donald Trump could

take literally anything he wants. It doesn't matter how much he took for how long he held it, how much he fought to give it back. Now with Joe Biden, who clearly accidentally had some documents, it's the biggest thing ever. And they didn't, they don't feel the need by the way to now be equal in their response. Okay, finally we're freed up. We can admit that what Trump did is wrong because now we can stick it to Biden. No, he's still fine. There's still no consequence for for Donald Trump. So Peter Ducey is an actor. He's a fake and a fraud like everyone else on Fox News. That's a ridiculous stunt. And I want to go to one more video because look, I have been willing, I think it's demonstrated to adapt what I say based on the information. What I think

should be done after the second group of documents came is different than the first because the situation is different. But we should also acknowledge the continuing differences between these two things. And the right wing does not want to do that. Lindsay Graham is going to be asked about some of the differences, including the willingness to give it back and take a look at his pathetic attempt to maybe address that and how quickly he moves on. They say, you know, the former president was stonewalling, returning these documents. They had been requested. They've been negotiating over it for quite some time.

And that that's the difference. So comment on that for me if you would first. And then I have another question. Well, number one, I mean, can you imagine if this happened, the bottom line here is that Peter did not get shut down. Yeah, no, he was talking about Peter Ducey. He went on to talking about the Peter Ducey question about whether he looked good at the interaction. She asked him, a senator, you're attacking the president on this. The president willingly gave back the documents. There was no need for a raid because they found them.

They gave them back. They're willingly going and looking for them. And he said, well, the thing about, can you imagine if anyway, that's their defense. That, dude, I do that all the time, by the way, on the show. I do it on your show all the time where I'm like, so I wasn't, I wasn't listening. Or I wasn't expecting that question, John. So let me, for a second, now I know what I want to say. And then I'll just go.

Like, you go watch the dashboard. I do it all the time. That's what Lindsay Graham did. He had no clue what to do in that situation because he had no. defense in that situation because he knew he had a double standard. He has a hypocrisy going on where he wants to hold Trump to one standard and Biden to another. Hypocracy is a symptom of tribalism. Tribalism, like we need to see more symptoms of that in America. We know it's happening. That is pretty much his job. And someone who's changed his stance based on what's politically

expedient at that time, no matter how ridiculous it makes an already ridiculous senator look. Like we don't, we know that's part for the course for this. Yeah, yeah, I think the thing that makes it so difficult for him is it would be easier if you were just trying to wash away the differences. Like you could say something like what I've been saying where maybe you'd take the stance that the amount doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if it's 300 or if it's one, the law is the law. You could say that.

You could say that intent is hard to know before, it's like you're saying that Trump definitely planned to, but we don't know, maybe Biden did. But all of these things are washing away the difference, which necessitates the same standard for both. And that is not what he is trying to get. He has the impossible task of making the less serious version be the only one that should be looked into and the more serious one should be forgotten, which is weird. And by the way, and this is what makes Lindsey Graham look particularly stupid here, there is a way you could try to do that. They have occasionally trotted out, as Trump would, I declassified all mentally. It's a thing that I totally legally can do, and I did it.

I don't have any evidence that I'm not going to present any, but I did it. You could just say that, which some on the right do, and if you say that, well then I guess Trump is free and clear because he didn't actually break the law if he telepathically declassified all the documents, including ones that he's not legally allowed to classify. And then that would still leave Joe Biden on the hook, but he's not even doing the fake see through dumb thing that the right does. So dumb. Anyway, look, the entire thing is dumb.

My fear with Richard Her being, Robert Her, I apologize, Robert Her being appointed is, is this going to drag out the thing even more? Can we just find out what's going to happen? Is Jack Smith going to have to wait now to come out with his thing? If this happened to Trump, he would be like, oh, so I'm declassifying the documents now. That's it. Yeah, I guess the president, he could just be like, I just thought about how I'm not in trouble, so I'm not in trouble.

Yeah. It's so stupid. Again, I think there should be more oversight of the president and former presidents. There should be consequence of what you do. The right, again, wants it to be one standard. I am perfectly comfortable with the same standard for both of them. Anyway, with that said, you'll never make it in politics, John. I'm not trying.

Anyway, we're going to take our first break. We're going to respond to some of your comments. We're going to be talking about the military budget and the Republican fake pretend non-effort to cut it after this. Ehrlich host of Happy Half Hour. Thank you to everybody for who contributed to the voting on who is the sexiest Disney character in the animated canon. Jessica Rabbit excluded. Edwin had quite a bone to pick with me today.

And to all the people, and specifically thank you to the person who remembered that at the end of Beauty and the Beast, the sexy French maid feather duster turns into a human sexy French maid and man alive. Did she earn that tie in the finals with Esmeralda? I really, I was driving home. I only got to see the first little bit or whatever. I just assumed Jasmine would lock that thing up. But anyway, okay, that's probably the last we'll talk about sexy Disney characters today.

I think we're going to talk about something related, the military budget. Let's do that. D.C. is on fire over a controversial Republican plan to cut defense spending. None of what I just said is true except the reaction to all of the. the other parts that aren't true. And this story infuriates me, let's try to figure out what's going on. So you might have seen over the last week headlines like this, McCarthy's speaker deal could stymie defense spending next year.

Oh, wait, what do they mean? What do they mean? Well, here's as one of the many parts of the deal that he had to strike to get the holdouts to vote for him, the deal that Kevin McCarthy struck with the GOP's Freedom Caucus to secure speakership of the House only mandates a general discretionary spending free to fiscal year 2022 levels. So the idea there is they're going to freeze spending, okay? They're not going to increase spending.

And since spending normally goes up, the difference between what it would have been and what it's now going to be is effectively a cut in the future. And because the military has money spent on it, if you don't think any more than what I've already said about this, then that means that in the future they're cutting the military by not raising it next year. except that they're never ever going to do that. No one's saying they're going to do that. And despite that, everyone is losing their mind.

They didn't say anything about the military budget during that deal that Kevin McCarthy struck. His team is working to fill in members of the Republican caucus on what it could mean, though. If such a budget resolution is passed, which it hasn't been, lawmakers could divide that any way they like with a defense cut or with a defense increase with cuts and other discretionary. spending. GOP aide said the Appropriations Committee has no intention to cut defense spending. Colgate Total is more than just your favorite toothpaste. It's dedicated to advancing oral health. The new Colgate Total Active Prevention System features a reformulated toothpaste, innovative toothbrush, and a refreshing antibacterial mouthwash. All designed to work together to fight the root cause of common oral health issues, such as gingivitis, plaque, and tartar. Use the full

routine twice daily and be dentist ready. Shop the Colgate Total Active Prevention System Now at walmart.ca. Gee, I wonder, I wonder which it'll be if the Republicans are going to cut defense spending or raise it anyway and cut other social spending and stuff to make up for it. Who is to say? Who is possibly any journalist or any political analyst or anything? Who is to say? I guess we should just guess that they're going to do an about face on decades of Republican

support for increasing the defense budget. And so I want to be clear, though, that all of the people around Kevin, McArthur, including members of the Freedom Caucus that he made this deal with, are being very clear that they're not cutting the military. Andy Harris, member of the Freedom Caucus, insisted that reducing military spending wasn't part of the deal. Chip Roy said that cuts to defense were never discussed, and that it's the woke and weaponized federal bureaucracy that will shoulder the burden instead.

Mike Rogers, House Armed Services Chair, claims he's not worried about the military budget. But despite this, all of which should be obvious, Liz Cheney is saying, Ronald Reagan taught us that weakness is provocative. China and Russia are watching. If GOP leader agreed to weaken our national defense for his own personal gain, that will be his legacy. And our nation will suffer. Jennifer Rubin is writing op-eds in the Washington Post. Maga House members defense cuts encourage America's enemies.

It's only going to make authoritarian's despots and dictators smile. Putin wins. Joe Scarborough on MSNBC characterized the proposal as part of a radical and anti-American. approach to defund the military. Again, they're not saying they're going to do that. They're explicitly saying they're not going to do that. And obviously they're not going to do that. Why is D.C. pretending that they're going to do that. I apologize. I've got to be under my bonnet about this. Why? Can we just take a moment to soak in the imagery of John having an actual be under

his bonnet. Just take your, I'm using old time you languish because Biden's president. There's a bee under my body. I can't even focus. Okay, there's a rattlesnake in my boot. There's a rattlesnake in my boot. Thank you, Woody. All right, so this is great because no one, like business is back to usual, right?

This is hilarious. Everybody is back to fighting over who's going to raise more military budgets. budgets. This is exactly what Kevin McCarthy wanted. He got over his little last hurdle. Everybody in the Republican side is going to get back to the, to proving every point we've ever made about how like the radical right doesn't care about most people and the radical left actually does. Because all these people on the radical right are like, I'm up with Matt Gates because I don't want to increase crazy spending, so they got that in their pocket. Because of that, now they're going to justify cutting spending to literally everything else.

And the only way in which the right wing would ever agree to cutting military spending is if they start going bit by bit through parts of military initiatives and saying how those initiatives are woke. So if there is going to be a cut, it's going to be a cut to like, Should there be any female soldiers? Should there be any initiatives to help diversify the membership or leadership of the military? It's only going to be the stuff in the military that is only partly bad and less horrible. Oh, you do, do you? Oh, yeah, no, it's very clear.

And I just want to briefly stop because some of you might be watching and you might be thinking, okay, so it is clear from this evidence that they're not really to do this. But what does it matter? Why does that bother you? And maybe this is just a thing that I'm hyper focused on. But we have got this attempt over the last couple of years for the Republican party, both the politician side and the pundit side, to rebrand themselves as populace. And it's fake. It's not real. They don't actually want to do any of this stuff. So this is a week-long news cycle of the Republican, the most radical conservative Republicans being pitched as people willing to cut military spending, which they are simply not willing to do. There are people who are willing to cut military spending, and I think there are a lot of Americans

who would support politicians like that. These just very much are not them. So how dare people like Jennifer Rubin and Joe Scarborough allow them to get fake cred for something they would literally never do? That's why it bothers me. And I just specifically about like the Liz Cheney and to a lesser extent, but an existing extent. Ruben, I feel like Ruben came out against Trump for a handful of minutes, and so did Liz Cheney. And it was one of those moments where I was like, I can't believe I, like, I remember

liking you sort of for like 20 minutes. And with Liz Cheney, it's exactly that. It's like, you did real good in the January 6th committee hearings, but now you're back to the same old. That's right, that is a Cheney type of tweeting. A hundred percent. Now, I looked, I looked as long and hard as I could to find literally anyone on the right who was actually suggesting that they would be willing to cut the military. And I found a headline. It was Jordan. Jim Jordan says cuts to the military spending should be on the table. And I thought, oh, okay. Well, there's at least one Republican who is implying that we should cut military spending. Except that is not what he is saying. Because that's the headline. I went to the actual video that that article was referencing

And here is the point he was actually making. We got a $32 trillion debt. Everything has to be on the table. We're on pace to spend $500, $600 billion in debt payments. And just to deal with interest payments on servicing that debt. Everything has to be on the table. And frankly, maybe if we would focus our military spending on the soldiers and not having so many general, the ratio of general officers to enlisted individuals now is so out of whack from where it used

to be in our military. Maybe if we'd focus on that, helping the troops who do do so much of the work out there for our great country and maybe focus on getting rid of all the woke policies in our military, we'd have the money we need to make sure our troops get the pay raise they deserve. We have the weapon systems and the training that needs to be done. So we're ready to deal with our adversaries around the planet. That's what we want to focus on. And frankly, we'd better look at the money we send to Ukraine as well and say, how can we best

spend the money to protect America? In the same way that the overall idea that Republicans are considering cutting the budget is a sham, the specific idea that Jim Jordan is interested in that is absolute BS. It is not on the table. He didn't say 2% cut, 5% cut, 10% cut. He said stop with the woke soldiers and stop sending money to Ukraine. He still wants the money for the soldiers, the weapons systems, the training, and to engage with our adversaries around the world.

There's no drawback, there's no drawdown, there's no cuts, it's just less pregnant airwomen. That's all that he wants there. If you, if you oppose the Taliban in Afghanistan, then you are espousing woke policies around the planet. Because you want women to go to college, you want all that stuff, you want to mind, that's a woke policy, you doink. That's the whole thing. it's so stupid. All he is doing is very lazily, because he doesn't want to talk about what happened to kids in the bathroom at the Ohio State University wrestling team. Look it up. He is lazily looking into his like grab bag of right wing talking points and just applying it to every issue he possibly can't. So he's like, oh, God, what if I do want to cut military spending? What if I'm forced into it? I'm just going to say the military's woke. What probably?

Are we really worried about woke soldiers? You're mad about like two ads they made so they could recruit more people to join the military. You're fighting so hard against every incentive, every way to disincentivize people from joining the military, such as like student loan forgiveness, which would make it so people have another avenue towards success besides sacrificing their body for your war. So you could bring woke policies to Afghanistan. Yeah, you moron. And then that's the, yeah, it's, it's very frustrating to watch this all unfold, but it, you know, at the same time is quite hilarious. Yeah, there are some politicians that actually want to cut military spending and understand that doing that will not leave us insecure. If we could jump to our last graphic for this block, again, I will remind you as TYT does constantly, we spend more than basically everyone combined.

Cutting the military spending by $75 billion would only take us back to 2021. Were we on the brink of being invaded in 2021? The idea that we couldn't secure America with $400 billion or $200 billion or $200 billion is utter madness. And like, let's look at China's spending to make them more secure around the world. It's not all military. Most of it is investments in infrastructure domestically, but specifically abroad. Like Martha McCallum in the middle of a weird segment about M&Ms was talking about, like, China is talking about, China is essentially monopolizing all the international mineral deposits. That's what they do. That's how they invest abroad. They might have a larger budget, but there's this constructive to get people to like them internationally.

Ours is just a dump into the military industrial complex. And the thing that they're not talking about, they're going to say like, listen, people like Liz Cheney, Jim Jordan, they're going to say every dollar we don't spend on military investment is making us less safe domestically. I would say this, like, oh, I'm glad they're safe while they're starving. Yeah. What about every dollar that you could, I know we spent, we do spend, people talk about this, but we do spend more money on domestic programs that we do spend on the military by a lot. But every dollar we spend over what we have to on the military, you need to do a better accounting of that.

And your Pentagon, which you love, fails an audit every single year. You got to justify why you want to spend that money on another plane that doesn't really work. When instead you could, as the lower third said earlier, spend it on a student lunch program so kids won't starve. Yeah, which we had during the pandemic and the Republicans voted to get rid of it. while telling you constantly that they want to save the children. Anyway, let's move now to lighter news. It's not. pretty high profile incidents of anti-Semitism in the news recently, obviously

Connie West in his various statements. Okay, but he's one person, it's anecdotal, if terrifying. What about the American people at large? Well, there's a new poll that was done by the Anti-Defamation League asking the American people what they think about a number of statements about Jewish Americans, and this is not good. They've been doing it, by the way, since the 1960s, so we're gonna be able to compare now versus then. But when you ask them, for instance, do most Jewish people stick together more than other Americans? 70% say yes. That's almost overwhelming support for that statement, but okay,

it's just stick together. That's not too bad. In business, go out of their way to hire other Jews is at 53, majority support, are more loyal to Israel than to America is at 39. Now, maybe that has something to do with the fact that Trump continually says that that's true, but always like to be at the head of things, I don't even know exactly what that means, do not share my values, have too much power in the business world, those are at 36 and 26, I love this one, in business are so shrewd that others don't have a fair chance. That's just complaining at that point. That's not even that they're doing anything illegal, you're just saying that they're talented

it and you don't like it. But that's a quarter of the American public now saying that. What do you think, Brett? I don't know. I love it. I think it's great. I think it's as a half Hebrew individual. I like that it's less than half.

That's not great. You know, the glass is half full, I guess. It's just like, I love that there's like more, it's not a surprise, right? There's a lot of people, even who think they're being nice when talking about Jewish people are like trafficking in exclusively historically anti-Semitic tropes. My favorite is whoever came up with the questions is like, all right, so we have to have some that don't seem that anti-Semitic, but like, oh, let's give them an option. Let's see how many people will bite at in business are so shrewd that others don't have a fair chance.

And one in four people is like, oh yeah, for sure, let me give that a yes. Totally. Yeah. Now, look, thankfully they're not, there are some concerns. conspiracy theory stuff that they did not ask about, but as bad as all that is, some of you might be thinking, okay, but those statements aren't too bad. First of all, read those again because they're not great. That's not the end of the list, by the way. It continues. Have too much control and influence on Wall Street. I think I know where they're going with this. 24%. Don't care what happens to anyone but their own kind, 21. Overall, too much power is 20. Are more willing than others to use shady practices to get what they, want. I feel I don't like that. 20% have a lot of irritating faults. That's just petty at that point. Go on. Are not warm and friendly. What are you talking about stuffed animals? They're humans. That's because they all live in New York. You know what I mean? And are not as honest as other

business people. Now look, for some of these you're getting down into the, it's only 16%. That's only 40 million plus people who think that, but they have too much power over Wall Street. They don't care what happens to anyone but Jewish people. I mean, look, I'm glad that we're not at 100%, but I would not have bet that there would be that much support for some of these statements. After a Holocaust, can you just everyone do me a nice, solid, and never say like too much, about anything Jewish. Like, don't say too much

because when something's too much, you got to do something about it. And I don't feel like even these things that you think Jews have too much control over is something, I want people like tinkering with ways to change about it. Like, it's pretty tough to be, you know, 2% of the population

in America. Like, it's very difficult. People talk about Jews like there's all these Jews ruining stuff. Like, there's not that many of us. And they've been through a lot, and there's a lot of historical reasons why two things exist. One, successful Jews, and two, like your negative interpretation of that success with many, with, like, think about your concept of the American dream. Work hard, get ahead, and achieve success.

Now, the concept that Jews did that is somehow, now that some Jews did that and everyone pretends it's all, but it's definitely not. It's a percentage of Jews. It's like a percentage of any other like massive, like population in America. But now suddenly that's not okay. I don't like it. You shouldn't like it about yourself if that's what your opinion is when you're like they're too shrewd in business. It's like what do you want? Less shrewdness. It's chopped. Shrew is just such a creepy word too. I don't like it because that I don't even want to think about it. Okay, so both of those charts are bad.

I wanna show you one more, because I think it's worse. When I say that 30% of the country will agree with a certain statement, you can say that that seems objectively bad, but it's a little bit unmoored from context. What does that mean in comparison to other places, other times? So they've been asking these questions for 50 years, and here is the bad thing. Over that period, the responses, the percent who agree with them, had been trending down. And I say had been, because you know what time we live in. And between 2019 and 2022, the numbers have gone back up, in some cases, massively back up.

So when you look at like Jews go out of their way to hire Jews, in the last three years, they erased a half a century of progress. Jews are more loyal to Israel is significantly higher than it has ever been before. That's such a weird one. All of these metrics have gone up in the last few years. Now granted, we don't have a data point for 2015 or 2010 or whatever. I would like to see the year by year numbers. But it's difficult to not think about some of the things that have been going on over the past few years

that can potentially explain why these numbers would be skyrocketing. And that's a graphic that starts with zero. zero. The ones that always creepy out, just everyone keep this in mind is when it doesn't start with zero. And all the increments are equal. So an actual slope of that steepness, I guess, is significant. It is a huge increase. That goes from, you know, my favorite question is the Jews are more loyal to Israel. That went up by about 15%. It went from 25 to 40. It almost doubled in three years. 15 percentage points, it doubled.

So that, and that one I don't understand. That one's so creepy because it's like Jews. Well, Trump specifically says it repeatedly. Right, but like most Jews are Democrats and you think Democrats hate Israel. Like, that's what a lot of people say. So it's like, how are they more loyal to Israel? It's just like, and it's so weird. It's like out of convenience, mostly right-wing people try to find examples of people within a demographic to

say, I'm cool with them, we're friends. And for right wingers, it's like fundamentalists saying that Jews, by giving them a home will help me get into heaven, it's very weird. But like, at the end of the day, you kind of go against everything that they espouse, which the religion is pretty chill. It's pretty like, you know, most Jews these days are pretty mellow. Yeah, I don't know. Yeah, for me, it's like, I can try to come up with a lot of explanations why this happened. And I don't think it's that, man, over the last three years, lots of people have had really negative interactions with Jewish Americans.

Yeah, that's not what it is. What do you think? Like if I say, okay, I'm going to say something and then you come back with something more likely. Online conspiracy theorists, right-wing pundits and politicians. What do you got? What do you think? They do weird or stuff.

Think about what they've been able to do in three years. And think about what the consequences might be of countless tens of millions of additional Americans having bigoted views towards minority group. We won't even tell you to go to hell because we don't have one. Exactly, exactly. Sorry. Anyway, too shrewd for that. Okay, we're going to take our second break.

When we come back, we're going to give you a little bit of information about how the Brazilian coup was planned and there's quite a few overlaps with what happened here in the US. We'll break that down after this. Welcome back, one and all to what remains of, I almost said the damage report. The Young Turks with Brett. We've got a couple stories we're going to talk about, and then the second hour happens. And this is a true, like, new school, old school thing, Ravanna and Mark Thompson. Oh, so good.

Isn't that amazing? I don't think they've ever hosted together before, but they're going to be doing the second hour, the bonus episode, or yeah, both. So definitely tune in for that. And with that said, why don't we talk about a little bit more news? The investigation of the attempted coup in Brazil continues, and authorities have already uncovered some of the ways that the various groups organizing this got together online to try to get people to participate. It is in many ways scary and at the same time clownish, and in that way it is similar to some of the planning for January 6th year in the U.S. Here are some examples of how it worked in practice. There was a map that was shared

that was called Beach Trip. It was sent to 18,000 members of a public telegram group called in Portuguese hunting and fishing. But instead of outdoor recreation tips, it had 43 pins spread across the map of Brazil, pointing to cities where you could take a bus to the capital. for what the promoters promised would be a huge party on January 8th. Doesn't that sound fun? Now, children and the elderly aren't invited, which is weird. Why would you cut children the elderly out of your fun beach trip? Nude beach trip.

Exactly. Only adults willing to participate in all the games, and this is where it gets a little bit ominous, including target shooting of police and robbers, musical chairs, indigenous dancing, tag, and others. Okay, so did you guys forget that you were trying to hide the coup? You know, we're going to be like throwing a beach ball around and making s'mores and murdering the police. I forgot how to do the code. I forgot the code. I missed up again.

Anyway, it is of course serious because there were injuries, there was property damage and all that. Apparently not a lot of people actually showed up to those particular. particular spots where the buses would go. So I guess that didn't work, but bear in mind, there was a lot of busing that was going on throughout the country and thousands of people did end up taking part. A lot of the conversation online about the planned gathering was called Selma's party, a play on the Portuguese word for Selva, a battle cry used by Brazil's military. Participants were told to bring their own mass to protect against pepper pie in the face,

or pepper spray fired by security forces. They were also told the dress in the green and yellow of Brazil's flag and not the red preferred by Lula's workers party. I have a feeling they probably would have figured that out anyway. But yes, they've got these code names and all that. And aside from occasionally referencing one of murder members of law enforcement, they were pretty good at covering their tracks, except that they forgot one other thing. They forgot to not list their actual full names and contact information, which they very much

did. They listed all the people who were responsible with the buses. Their names, how you contact them, was fully available. So the code words are of limited utility when the cops can contact you directly. You know, I was scared that there would eventually be a fascist coup in South America that America wasn't directly involved in. And this one doesn't seem like we were directly involved in. In fact, this feels like that time when like you have a kid and you do their project for them. That was us doing coups in South America. It's like, all right, we'll do it for you. We'll handle it. We're the CIA. We're here. We'll do it. And then one day they actually are able to do it themselves. But it is still based on the like patently stupid

stuff that we in America did. It really is a big moment for the Monroe doctrine. Isn't it, John? Yeah. Well, bear in mind, I get all my news from Tucker Carlson. He says that the, the US was involved, just not with that coup. It was with the coup that put Lula in power in the first place. Right, right, right, my bad. Because the American government is always trying to get more socialists in charge of South American countries. That's pretty much how it's always worth. Remember when Peter Chet came into power and he was like, shoes for everybody? How does someone watch that and think, yeah, that seems consistent with the United States? It's just so, but they don't know. Do you think anyone's going to know that watches Fox News?

going to listen to everything that Tucker tells them. I do want to specifically talk about how hilariously it mirrors the stupidity of the January 6th uprising. People thinking that they're like, this is totally awesome. They at the same time know that there's something wrong and weird about what they're doing. So they like hide parts of it. They're like, oh my, like the let's go Brandon DNA where it's like, we're not going to say the thing. We're going to have a code for the thing that's so nakedly transparent. I don't even think that that's them being savvy. I think that's them just trying to have fun.

I think that it's like a meme. When we call it a party, that's not actually them trying to cover their tracks. They think that this is all a party. It's like a prank on YouTube or something. They're taking selfies, the same as here. They're all videotaping, live streaming, I'm participating in the illegal coup. Right. But they aren't in some way implicitly they know to cover it, whether it's for fun or not.

Like, they know that they're going to get in trouble if they're like saying let's go shoot it, police officers. Like, maybe that's the funniest guy who's like, oh, God, I don't, I'm, it would be funny if I just told this joke, consequences be damned because I'm not going to get in trouble because there's so many of us around doing the exact same thing. I just love it. Yeah. I mean, I think it's terrible for all the reasons.

reasons everybody knows it's cerebral that they're, you know, going against the will of the people in their country. But at the same time, and it's not out of pace with a dictatorial instinct to have ridiculousness involved in it. That's something that everyone really needs to come to terms with. They have, like, it is ridiculous to have a country with so many photos of your dictator, like everywhere. That is insane. Like Kim Jong-un has been, you know, Kim Jong-il had no butthole and scored an 18 in a round of golf. Like, those are the kinds of ridiculous things that create the mythology that people exactly in this way.

And we asked ourselves, like, how did it happen? Exactly in this way. It's a mix of believing in the rhetoric, but also just wanting power, knowing you have it. And once you have it, in order to make the leap to the next level of, level of securing power, you need to just exude ridiculousness and overwhelming zeal that doesn't seem rational because it isn't rational to have a fascist regime. And once you're in there, you just repeat the lie over and over again because you have to. And you keep the momentum going

and you dissuade people from challenging it. And pretty soon, everybody is doing doublespe no matter how much Fox News tells you it's our side that's 1984 in this place. Yeah. Yeah. And you also, you no longer have anyone who will push back against even your most ridiculous idea. So it becomes North Korea is basically just Twitter, but bigger. And slightly ridiculous becomes a compromise position. Yeah. By the way, everybody always cites that, that he, you know, always got a hole in one and didn't have a butthole,

as if those are two separate things. But what if they're not separate? He was so frustrated that he didn't have a hole. He sought out other holes with great zeal in precision. Do they think that he's just processing, like, perfectly? Wasn't there like a Wu-Tang between track? Or he's just like, I forget what it was. I saw your butthole clothes and keep feet.

in you and feed in you. Yep. I remember that one. He ended up running a country. In any event, yes. And also by the way, I think one of the reasons that they post social media stuff while they're doing the coup is these people exist in the bubble of all bubbles. They really believe, both the lights are red, I don't know where I'm looking, they really do believe that this cannot fail. Like think about Americans who believe QAnon, they think any minute now, Donald Trump and JFK Jr. are

are gonna round up every Democrat and execute them. They are as certain of that as you are certain of anything in your life. They can convince themselves of anything. They don't care about the polls of what people think or what the elections are. That's why they're so shocked when the election doesn't go their way, because they only hear stuff that tells them that they are the best and the brightest, the most superior, the shiniest, the fluffiest, and the warmest, or whatever. By the way, final point for this, because the attempt to take over the government was as ineffective as ours was.

It was comical. That doesn't mean that we're through this thing and all the danger is passed. Bolsonaro is apparently planning his return to Brazil. He had been planning, if we could jump ahead of that, he had been planning to go back at the end of January, he might be moving that up. And look, the fact that despite my searching, I couldn't find a single statement from him about what happened. That is ominous, by the way, but I was able to find some past statements that we've read

before on the show, and I'll just remind you, he said. before the election, before the recount or the runoff, if need be we will go to war, only God can get me out of there. There are only three possible outcomes to the election, prison, death, or victory. Now look, Donald Trump has said a lot of big things, and thankfully he's now post, he's out, it's not going to happen, at least for now. But the fact that Bolsonaro didn't feel like he needed to comment on it, as if it just doesn't matter, whatever, and now he's going back, Yeah, maybe he won't do anything. Maybe he won't organize the second round or start talking to generals or anything like that.

Or maybe he will. The guy, you know, he is in prison. You know, he's in Florida. So exactly. Anyway, well, he could be going back at any point. Okay, that is unfortunately all the time we have for the hour. Brett, thank you for doing it a live in studio show with me. Hey, my pleasure, John.

Just being around you brings me joy. It really does for me too. A zest for life you give me, John. Thank you. Everyone, you can watch more of Brett and myself on the Friday episodes, including tomorrow of the Damage Report. And by the way, we're going to be giving our garbage people of the week. I've never pitched this on the main show before.

You can go to the community tab of the Damage Report YouTube channel and vote for your community garbage person of the week. And we will throw them in the trash tomorrow and give you ours as well. It should be a lot of fun. Rivana is going to be leading the next hour with Mark Thompson. Should be a lot of fun. so stay tuned for that. We'll see you next time. Go home and tell your moms.

They're going to be really excited about that. Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work, listen to ad-free, access members, only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts, Apple.co slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.