The Young Turks - Corporate Media Cartels

Episode Date: November 15, 2021

Moments before the closing arguments of the Kyle Rittenhouse trial, Judge Bruce Schroeder dismissed one count of illegal possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18. CNN’s Jake Tapper pressed National Economic Council director Brian Deese Sunday over the impact of inflation on American families. The U.S. hid an airstrike that killed dozens of civilians in Syria. In a new midterm election poll, Republicans lead Democrats by the largest margin in forty years. Former Trump adviser Michael Flynn said the U.S. should “have one religion.” Hosts: Ana Kasparian & Cenk Uygur 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. Welcome to the Young Turks, Jake U Granik is with you guys. It looks like Steve Bannon might be go to jail, Elon Musk picks a fight with Bernie Sanders. We're gonna go ahead and pick a fight with everybody. That's what we normally do.

No, seriously, we're gonna give you the news as it actually is rather than how the media portrays it. The second story has me, as usual, infuriated about that. And as usual, the number one culprit is Jake Tapper. Okay, all right, but first we start with Rittenhouse. Yes, we've got some updates on the written house trial that are worth disgusting, so let's get right to it. The closing arguments for the Kyle Writtenhouse trial took place today. We're gonna get to some video of a portion of the closing argument coming from the defense in just a moment. But it's worth talking about some of the updates leading up to the closing arguments, including the fact that the judge in this case, Judge Schroeder, has decided to dismiss the one charge that Kyle Rittenhouse confessed to being guilty of on the stand, and that was being in possession of a weapon that

that at first was thought to be an illegal weapon. But it turns out that because of how Wisconsin has written its gun laws, there's a loophole that Writtenhouse was able to take advantage of. And in this case, the judge has decided to drop that charge. So Judge Bruce Schroeder dismissed one count of a legal possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18. The misdemeanor punishable by up to nine years in jail was considered one of the stronger counts against Rittenhouse. No one disputes he was 17 last year when he walked. The streets of Kenosha armed with an AR-15 style weapon.

Now the defense in this case successfully argued that it was actually legal for Rittenhouse to be in possession of that gun, of that rifle, because it was actually a weapon that was longer, the barrel was longer than 16 inches. The judge cited an exception within the law dealing with the age of the defendant, the length of the barrel and hunting for dismissing that count. Now I want to be clear that during his testimony, Kyle Rittenhouse was specifically asked whether he purchased that weapon for hunting and he said no. He said that he bought it for protection and also because he thought it looked cool, okay?

But nonetheless, the law in Wisconsin is written in such a way that the judge was willing and able to drop this charge. For the statute to apply, the defendant had to also violate a hunting regulation. that only applied to people under 16 years old, the defense discovered what was essentially an error in the legislation that Kyle Rittenhouse cannot violate a law that only applies to someone under 16. So there was a moment where the judge addressed this. I want to just quickly go to that video and then open it up for discussion. If the barrel length is less than 60 inches or an overall length less than 26 inches,

then I'll deny the motion. If it does not meet those specifications, then this most defense motion will be granted. We are not disputing that the barrel, that the barrel length is appropriate. Isn't legal? It is not a short barreled shotgun. a short barrel's rifle, yes.

Either by barrel or by overall length? Correct. All right. And then count six is dismissed. So that charge has been dismissed. There was a previous charge regarding the curfew. The judge had also dismissed that charge as well. So now really the only issue for Kyle Rittenhouse is whether or not the jury finds him

guilty of intentional manslaughter or reckless. unintentional manslaughter in, you know, one of the shooting. So we'll see how it plays out, but the evidence did show that he had a reasonable belief that he was under an imminent threat, which is why he used his weapon. I think it's gonna be incredibly difficult for the jury to deliberate and decide that he did not use the weapon in self-defense, but we'll see how it plays out. Yeah, it's called a loophole, all right? So they found something in the law that says, oh yeah, well, they meant for it to apply

for this, but they wrote it in a row. a way that where it doesn't. And so of course the right wing will take this and go we're that's it, we're justified, bring weapons to every protest. No, it depends on the state and how they wrote the damn law. In this case Wisconsin wrote it poorly. It was supposed to apply for hunting when you're going with your family. That's what it appears. And in this case, he was not going hunting with his family unless they were going to hunt black people and left wingers and kill them, which is kind of what it turned out to be. So he'll win on a technicality on this, but did he buy a gun when he was too young?

Yes, was he going to use it for hunting? No. So by all accounts, if they've written the law right, he would have been guilty of that. So I'm not saying put him in jail for it. It is what it is. They wrote the law wrong, right? And we believe in applying the law as it is. But it's nothing to celebrate if you're a right winger. Like, yes, loophole, right?

Right? Are you kidding me? Of course they're gonna celebrate it. Of course. They don't want any gun laws. So it's actually perfect for them. No, but I mean, obviously there's a flaw in the way the law was written. So, you know, if there's another issue, if there are protests and it results in the kind of violence that we saw in Kenosha, Wisconsin, I am concerned about that.

Now, I mean, I've been on the record about gun laws, I think we should have gun legislation, gun regulations that make sense. In this case, it doesn't make sense. He just clearly stated on the stand that he did not buy the weapon for hunting purposes, and he was 17 years old at the time. But again, that loophole is there and the defense did what the defense is supposed to do. Take advantage of the fact that loophole exists. Yeah, look guys, the rubber's gonna hit the road and I hope it never happens, but we're headed in that direction.

When finally at some point the left wing goes, all right, we're bringing weapons to protest too, okay? And it partly started happening here, and by the way, that's part of the reason why we had the violence, right? So there was other people in the crowd with guns. And so now everybody's got guns and the right wing, every time they win, whether it's on a loophole or anything else, they think, yes, we get to kill left wingers, we get to kill them.

We bring them the guns in and then go, oh my God, somebody threw a plastic bag at me, I must murder them. Oh look, there's a guy with a skateboard, he hit me with a skateboard, I will now murder him. Regular people don't kill people that hit them with skateboards, so they feel bad about it. Like, oh, that seems like overreaction. Right wingers think perfect excuse to murder them.

All right, let's keep going with this totally ridiculous trial now. That's a sham. Although I will say the prosecution did a good job in closing argument, which I'll tell you about in this. Oh, that's interesting. I haven't seen the entirety of their closing argument. But the prosecution did bungle their case in other moments. I will be clear about that. But for me, the biggest issue was the judge's conduct.

Because the judge, I mean, he just couldn't help himself. There were so many moments where he would engage in these rants that he really had no business engaging in. A good example, by the way, of his own personal ignorance had to do with a piece of evidence that the defense had called into question. So they were debating about the nature of the evidence shown by the prosecution. Schroeder seemed to suggest that zooming into a video or images alters the image itself. So let me give you some background on this.

Trotter stated it was up to the prosecution to prove that zooming on a video in with an iPad doesn't alter or manipulate the footage. Why? Well, the defense argued this, which is not true, okay, but this is what the defense argued. iPads, which are made by Apple, have artificial intelligence in them and allow things to be viewed through three dimensions or logarithms. The defense said as part of its objection, adding that the iPad uses artificial intelligence or they're either logarithms or logarithms, yeah, to create what they believe is happening. So this isn't actually enhanced video, they argued. This is Apple's iPad programming, creating what it thinks is there, not what's necessarily there.

Or what necessarily is there, right? Which is not true. That's absolutely not true. That's what the defense argued. At that point, Judge Schroeder looks at the prosecution and says, we're going to need you to find an expert witness to testify on this in the next 20 minutes. It's absurd. And the defense was doing two things, basically.

One, taking advantage of a fumbling old man who clearly doesn't know anything about technology. They're like, sir, if you turn off the light switch, it actually means turning it on. What? I don't care to tell. Right? So they got Mr. Magoo as a judge. So they're like, hey, zooming in is somehow changes the image. And they know that this schmuck can't figure that out.

The second thing is the judge can't wait to rule in their direction. All they got to do is give him a fig leaf. Even the smallest little thing. And he's like, oh, yeah, that sounds good. Zooming in illegal, prove it's not illegal in 20 minutes. Oh, you can't. Oh, and it was over lunch. I got you.

Okay, so to really buttress and reinforce Jenks point here, we got to go to the video of Judge Schroeder, just rambling on about what he experiences on his own device, which, if you notice, is not an iPad and is also not even an Apple product. It's a Samsung product. Nonetheless, here he goes. When I get messages from some of my friends, my few remaining friends, I have, they come as texts, and then they start belittling me or whatever in one way or another.

And it can be quite lengthy. at the exchange that's going on between them and us and but they're entertaining and so I make a I don't know how to save text messages I haven't figured that out and I haven't you know I have a lot of things that I'm doing

so that's a low priority for me to figure out how to save a text message and I don't want to leave them on my phone forever I want to off so that it's clean so when I look at it I'm looking just at the fresh stuff So then I do a screenshot up and I email it to myself to save it. But I phone to my distress. Some of them are pretty long and they show up in my email.

Like this, like a little ribbon down the center of the page. Some are even smaller than this. Well, then I go to open them up. And it's just a blur. You were talking the other day, one of you two, about it's just like a cell phone where you can expand a picture and make it bigger. Well, it's not making it any bigger. It's making it bigger, but it's nothing but a blur.

Bro, what are you doing? What are you doing? What was that? What does that have anything to do with what the defense? I'm sorry, yeah, with the defense is arguing here. Let me just get into details and then, Jake, go off. Okay, can I just say, though, you know, sometimes I'm, to imitate people and you think I'm exaggerating and obviously I'm exaggerating to a degree.

But there in that case, was I really exaggerating? No, you weren't. Like that was one of the rare instances where your commentary was actually completely in line with reality. Mr. Magoo. Look, again, let me reiterate, the defense actually did a really great job in this case, okay? The judge, if he has a bias and it seems like he does in favor of written house, could

have just shut his mouth and it would have played out the way he wanted to play, but he can't help himself. So, none of what he said in that video is useful in support of the defense's objection about iPad pinch to zoom. A Galaxy S-20 runs Google's Android operating system with various Samsung customizations, while the defense's specific objections were about Apple and its programming, right, on the iPad. So from the start, whatever a Samsung phone is doing is not relevant to the objection about how an Apple device works.

Secondly, the defense's objection is about those Apple logarithms or logarithms adding data to an image such that it can be viewed in three dimensions or recreate what is not there. Here, Judge Schroeder's phone is plainly not adding any data to the image. It just remains blurry because he's zooming in so much. We don't have to bother disproving it. The guy is Mr. McGoo. He's my few remaining friends belittle me all the time.

Well, we can see why Judge Schroeder. He's a judge, this guy is. And what I told you from day one when I, when this guy started giving these weirdo speeches, this guy's auditioning for Judge Judy slash Fox News. In the old days, people would get sick contracts if they got daytime shows. You know how much money Judge Judy made? She made something like $40 million a year, okay? So she's enormously wealthy.

So as soon as the camera started rolling, this guy's like, well, here I am, let me tell you, okay? And he started making all these crazy rulings and putting on a show. But he's a befuddled old man, and he's a giant right winger. It's super obvious. And so none of these make any sense, but the right wing are like, yeah, Mr. McGoo, Judge McGoo, you're killing it. And he's like, yes, yes, I finally have people who would respect me. All right, so I wanted to give you guys just one moment from the defense's closing statements,

closing arguments, because I don't know why this was mentioned. I don't think that this even helps the defense in this case, but it is telling, right? Not just about the defense, but more importantly, the kind of mentality we have in this country in regard to gun culture and gun violence. Let's watch. Ladies and gentlemen, other people in this community have shot somebody seven times, and it's been found to be okay. And my client did it four times in three quarters of a second to protect his life from Mr.

Rosenbaum. That was the weakest argument ever. What does it matter how many times they shot the gun? What's being called into question is whether or not he used that weapon in self-defense, right? So if others have shot their guns seven times and were found not guilty of intentional manslaughter because there was evidence to show that they acted in self-defense, then they acted in self-defense. They can legally do that. Like the number of shots or the amount of time that it took for them to fire those shots doesn't

matter. Like there was a weird thing to bring up. So the prosecution had a good job in my opinion with this argument at the end. They said, what about the victim's right to self-defense? So this guy comes in brandishes a weapon and they think he's an active shooter and one of them defends himself with a skateboard, for example, right? And so are we going to tell society in essence you can only defend yourself if you have a weapon that could kill other people, right?

So you can't defend yourself with a skateboard, but you can with a gun. And so does that mean that the only self-defense that counts is with a gun? It's funny because it's literally the question I asked, a right winger had to come on our current TV show about almost 10 years ago now with the Trayvon Martin situation, where he said, oh, George Zimmer has a right to murder him with a weapon because he was worried he was going to get hit with the Skittles. Okay, and I said, well, how about Trayvon Martin's defense? When the guy approaches him with a weapon, can he not fend him off with his arms, or does

that mean he automatically gets murdered? And the guy said, no, no, no, self-defense is only if you have a gun. Yeah, look, I know that doesn't make any sense at all. Yeah, I just want you to be 100% clear because no one made the argument that Zimmerman was worried for his life because of the Skittles. It was because they had gotten into a physical altercation at that point. I agree with you 100%. Right, Trayvon Martin was being pursued by George Zimmerman after the 911 dispatcher told him on multiple occasions, stop following him, don't follow him. And we don't have to clarify that Skittles is not what Trayvon Martin was using.

Okay, but like for the right wing, they will, I get it. No, you do, you do. I know, but they're morons. We don't have to address them. Oh, no, it wasn't with Skittles, Jank. He was actually trying to punch him when he was about to get murdered. I know, I know, you guys are idiots. So I don't have to bother explaining every little detail to you, okay?

So in terms of what happened with Trayvon Martin, look, the president that's being set, and why this, why this case is really important, the written house case, is they're setting the stage for massive violence throughout the country. They're saying we can go up to you with weapons nonstop, and if you ever say, hey, hey, don't shoot me, and you defend yourself in any way, we get to murder you, we just get to murder you, right? And so what does that do? Now the gun manufacturers are thrilled with this development. They're like, well, you can't use your hands, you can't use a skateboard, you can't use skittles, you can't use a plastic bag, you can't use anything to defend yourself,

the only thing you can defend yourself with this gun, go kill each other, go kill each other, go kill each other as soon as you can. And then that way you'll buy even more guns, right? So the NRA is thrilled, the gun manufacturers are thrilled, the right wing is thrilled because they love death and murder, and they love, they're, that's, are you kidding in this written house thing? Why are they defending him? Because of loopholes? And they're not defending him because of a barrel of the gun. No, they're defending him because this is their wet dream. I get to go into a middle of a left wing protest with a weapon. And if anyone even looks at me sideways or throw a plastic bag in me or anything like that, I kill them all. And then some right wing judge lets me off. That's your dream, right wing, you know it. That's why you treat written house as a hero. And I'm tired of debating it with you guys. There's no debate, you're not, you didn't think he was actually doing self-defense when he went there in the first place, defense of what?

It's not even his own state. It's not, he went there to kill left-wingers if he had the opportunity. And that's what happened and you all know it, and that's why you celebrate him. So please stop me with the, stop. He used to work there, Jake. He used to work there. So since he used to work there, look, I saw protests going down in my own neighborhood, in my own community, and I get it, right?

Like it, for some people, it's incredibly scary. But I knew better than to put myself in any type of situation that could lead to increase violence. Like, look, what we saw during those protests in the summer was a very intentional response by right wingers to protesters who were trying to change the way. way policing is done in this country. They didn't need to be there, they intentionally went out of their way to be there, and every time they showed up, oh wow, what a surprise, it would escalate to violence.

So I hear what you're saying. It is what it is. And honestly, I don't know what the answer is, because you're right. There's no answer. There is no answer. Because our system lets them off nonstop. And what I'm afraid of, not what I'm looking forward to, this is super important. This is a disaster for this country.

What I'm afraid of is, at some point, the left wing is gonna get tired and go, God damn we're bringing weapons to and we're going to bring a lot of weapons. You bring your weapons, we bring our weapons because it turns out if we don't have a gun, you murder us and the system lets you off every time, every time. Zimmerman's off, Ratinghouse is going to get off, so now at some point it's going to be somebody, it's going to be Antifa, it's going to be somebody who says, all right then, you bring a gun, I'm bringing a goddamn Uzi, okay? And the next guy's going to say I'm bringing an RPG.

If you have lawlessness, and that is what this is creating, Total lawlessness, people are going to take the law into their own hands, and we're going to have massive bloodshed in the country. Mark my words, and I hope to go to all my predictions that this one is the most wrong. But it ain't going to be wrong because it's so, okay, so according to this idiotic situation we have in America now, so if you're a left winger, you can walk into a right wing protest with hand grenades and be like, what, go ahead. Hey, we know you probably hit play to escape your business banking, not think about it. What if we told you there was a way to skip over the pressures of banking? By matching with the TD Small Business Account Manager,

you can get the proactive business banking advice and support your business needs. Ready to press play? Get up to $2,700 when you open select Small Business Banking products. Yep, that's $2,700 to turn up your business. Visit TD.com slash Small Business Match to learn more. Conditions apply. Something at me. Look at me weird.

Have your skittles. You got your iced tea? Oh, boom. Oh, it's self-defense. Oh, look at that, right? I don't want anybody doing that. That's a terrible idea. And yet here we go.

Here we go, here we go. Every time you let one of these tons of bitches off, the right wing thinks we get to kill them, and we get to kill them, and that's their dream. It is interesting though, because on one hand, you have the right wing constantly talking about a civil war, the need for a civil war, they salivate over the thought of a civil war,

and then they try to engage in their, version of a civil war and as soon as one of them actually might face consequences for it, no, I was self-defense. Well, which one was it? Did you guys want a civil war, which you guys incessantly talk about on all of your shows? Or was that really, oh, just a young man who cares so deeply about this community and wanted to clean graffiti? Anyway, it is what it is. Look, again, there's enough evidence in my opinion for him to fight off the intentional manslaughter charges. So, but yeah, I am worried about what this means for the future, especially since I have no doubt that there will be more protests in the future. And if this is the kind of outcome that

protesters are going to see, they're going to want to arm themselves as well. You're right about that. All right, we got to take a break. When we come back, Jake Tapper and inflation lies. All right, back on TYT, Jenkins Anna, with you guys. More news. Corporate media with the help of people like Jake Tapper continue to just inaccurately tie inflation to government spending. In fact, recently Brian Dease, who's Biden's economic advisor, was on CNN talking to Jake Tapper about this exact issue. And I just want you to pay close attention to how Tapper frames his question here. Let's watch.

You talk about the Build Back Better Act, which is $1.75 trillion as a solution to this problem. But your predecessor, under President Obama, Larry Summers, he pointed this week to the $1.9 trillion American rescue plan that was passed earlier this year in March. He said that's a major reason behind the rising inflation, something he called at the time, quote, the least responsible macroeconomic policy we've had in the last 40 years. Is it possible that Americans are suffering now from high prices because the Biden administration, over-stimulated the economy with all of this money going into the economy. All right, I wanted to grab his question as a standalone clip, just to respond to how stupid it is, to bring up the arguments of Larry Summer, okay, who was Treasury Secretary at a time when Glass Eagle was repealed, okay?

Huge proponent of that, and we saw how that played out in the 2008 economic collapse. Why are we quoting the thoughts or the beliefs of a failure in an effort to tie inflation to what the Biden administration is doing? Secondly, just very curious, how exactly does policy that hasn't even passed yet? Okay, like in the case of the budget reconciliation bill, have an impact on inflation that we're experiencing right now. How stupid was that framing? So look, guys, it's almost an intentional lie. So they're claiming basically that Biden has done too much and he's over-stimulated the economy. As if he passed all three bills that he's pushing for.

He only passed one, the COVID relief bill. The other one that just passed passed like a minute ago. How could it possibly have gone and gotten spent and affected the economy? That's the most disingenuous claim that anybody could possibly make. And the third one, billed back better hasn't even passed. Is it even close to passing? So it's the inflation is clearly because of supply chain issues. There are other issues around the edges like OPEC lowering supply that has made a difference

in things like gas and its effects, etc. But to say, and they guys, they're doing it on purpose where they never said any of this stuff when under Trump, they were passing trillion dollar after trillion dollar after trillion dollar spending relief that went almost all the major corporations. And at that point, oh, we're not worried about inflation. We're not worried about the debt. We're not worried about the deficit. Oh, it's an emergency.

We've got to respond. Now, why are they all saying now, oh, don't pass any more bills? No, inflation, inflation is because you're passing bills. Because the next bill would actually help you. Totally. And since it would help you, Jake Tapper despises it. Jake, Jake, sleep easy, Jake. Sleep easy.

Sleep easy. That reconciliation bill ain't going nowhere. You got what you want. The corporate Democrats got what they want. on, all of the Wall Street goons who salivated over the corporate handout bipartisan infrastructure bill got what they wanted. Don't worry, don't worry, the nail is already in the coffin, okay? But to like continue this lie, tying inflation to the reconciliation bill is just so utterly

maddening and ridiculous. So I just want to give you two numbers here. The Federal Reserve was given in one of the COVID relief bills about. half a trillion dollars to give to massive corporations. They need liquidity, Jake. Okay, they need liquidity. They need liquidity. Oh, the poor corporations, they have to be, you have to take care of the corporations,

first and foremost and with the most amount of money. Then on top of that, and there was, by the way, trillions more than went to corporations, but I'm just giving you the federal reserve part. And on top of the federal reserve said they were going to put $2.3 trillion dollars extra into shoring up liquidity for corporations. Now, do you think that might have had something to do with inflation? You know what they did, by the way, with that money? You know what they did with that money?

Like the whole idea, quantitative easing, okay, this was this really exploded during the Obama administration was, well, you know, there is an issue with getting money to ordinary people and to small businesses. So we need to provide liquidity, capital, to banks. And the idea was that they were going to loan it out to ordinary people like us. Did they do that? No, they didn't do it after the 2008 recession, and they're so. certainly not doing it during the COVID pandemic.

They use it on corporate stock buybacks, artificially inflating share prices for their stocks, which by the way, corporate executives get paid mostly through stocks for their own companies. And they also, in the case of private equity firms, gobbled up all of this residential property, which they then turned into rentals because they wanted to corner the rental market. So by the way, what did that do? That inflated housing prices. Will you hear Jake Tapper address that or ever talk about that? Of course not.

But when it comes to the crumbs that we got from the Biden administration, as a result of the economic relief bill he passed, what, the $1,200 checks? Oh, you know, those $1,200 checks for Americans, it was just too much. That's what allegedly led to inflation. That is such a garbage way of framing what's happening in the economy right now. If they were being even 1% honest, they would then ask, Other guess or that particular guess, hey, the $4 trillion we gave to the largest and most profitable corporations in the world. Do you think that giant amount of money that we handed them might have had something new with the surplus liquidity in all of the markets, which then leads to inflation?

But isn't it weird that they never ask about that? That no one ever says, hey, how about that $2.3 trillion of the Federal Reserve pumped into the market? might that lead to inflation? No, they only ask it in the context of, are they thinking of doing paid family leave where you would actually get to take a day off after you deliver? Oh, that's probably going to do it.

It's probably causing the inflation now. Just a thought that you might ever get one day off in your life years from now. That's probably causing the inflation. Not the trillions we gave to the giant corporations. Corporate media are themselves multi-billion dollar corporations. They are the most biased people in the world,

Having them deliver the news as a joke. All right, I'm going to skip Brian Dees's answer because it wasn't that great and I don't really care. I think the Biden administration has done a poor job in fighting for their own policies and even defending their own policies on cable TV. So let's move on with it. Yeah, he was super weak. I'm now going to go to- Because they don't even really believe in their own policies. So let's go to the Wall Street Journal. The editorial board, I think, is worth mentioning in this context because they put out this op-ed just recently, how to make spending unpopular?

government checks can't make up for the rising cost of living. And they state in the body of this op-ed with absolutely no evidence, the following. The Biden Democrats may be achieving the impossible, which is making government spending unpopular. In March, they passed $1.9 trillion in goodies, including $300 in monthly child allowances. This and other free lunches were supposed to be the ticket to keeping their majorities in Congress. So what they're referring to there is the child tax credit. And the child tax credit is precisely what you think it is. It is a tax credit.

Meaning instead of having to wait till the end of the year to file your taxes to get a tax refund because of the, you know, the child tax credit that exists, instead to help families out, they're like, hey, how about we just do a direct deposit in people's accounts, right? Ever so often, so they can have that cash to take advantage of, you know, throughout the year. But no, no, no, you know what? Those are just goodies. Those are just goodies. Because when it comes to tax cuts for working American families, those are goodies. But let me give you more. So they had written in response to Trump winning the Republican primary in 2016, this. This might be a silver lining if you wins in November. Assuming Republicans, keep their house and Senate majorities.

Congress would write the tax and healthcare reform bills. Remember, they're hoping for tax cuts for the rich here, okay? And our guess is Mr. Trump would accept nearly anything once he got his wall at the border. An economic growth revival is more likely with President Trump than President Hillary Clinton. So they love tax cuts, just no tax savings for working American families, just for the rich. But let me give you more. They mentioned Biden's low approval ratings, and after that they write, what gives? Our guess is that Democrats underestimated that voters take account of costs as well as benefits.

They'll cash the government checks, but they don't feel better off because they know they're paying more at the grocery store, at the gas pump, or to replace that old dishwasher if they can even find a dishwasher to buy. Voters instinctively understand the link between runaway spending, easy monetary policy and inflation. Shut up. No evidence for that argument whatsoever, not a single link, not a reference to anything, just made it up out of whole cloth. There's one final part that I wanted to mention that they did not back up with any evidence. The White House is nonetheless pressing ahead to pass another 1.75 trillion dollar bill. Are they really pressing ahead though?

They're not pressing anything. Which is really four trillion dollars. Because while we're making things up, why don't we just make up that? There was, I don't know where they got that number from. It's just a made up number. Totally made up. Claiming it will finally solve the party's political woes. Democrats are even pitching more spending as the solution to higher inflation because

they say more welfare and entitlement payments will cause more people to work, which will reduce the economy's supply problems. No wonder half of all voters blame Biden for inflation. No, they blame Biden for inflation as much as they do because all of the corporate media in unison is lying about it. All of you guys are doing massive propaganda. And again, you could, it's easy to tell. Okay, did the Wall Street Journal editorial board do a scathing op-ed about how we gave

away trillions to the largest corporations in the world? Turns out they didn't need it at all. And it turns out that's what caused inflation? No, when it goes to corporations, they love the tax giveaways and entitlements and all those goodies that what happened? And why isn't it making the corporations fat and lazy? and bums, right? No, whenever it's actually human beings,

you guys are bums, you feel you're entitled to things. These guys are despicable. And then the absurd comments like, oh, the voters can obviously tell the link to monetary inflation and monetary policy. What are you talking about? What are you, you're just making things up. Oh yeah, my buddy over there at the American Enterprise

Institute says that it's obvious that there's a link to monetary policy here and that the guys in the middle of the country understand that. No, all they hear is you guys lying in unison. You getting anything is terrible. You're a bomb, you're a bomb and you're causing inflation. Don't you want it? You don't want it, don't want it. Give it all to my friends of the corporations. Corporate media, Wall Street Journal, CNN, and all of the rest of them, they're not in the news business. They're the marketing arm of corporate rule. Absolutely.

And so as you as you look at this debacle here, we said, and again, you could judge us, You could judge them based on what actually happens. We told you that as soon as the House Democrats okay, the corporate-backed infrastructure bill, that everyone would turn around, mansion corporate Democrats and the corporate media. They would all turn around and they would all tell you instantly, don't pass the next bill. Oh my God, we were gonna pass it, we were gonna pass it, but XYZ, oh, inflation, this, squirrel, et cetera. Don't ever give anything to the American people, only to our corporate greed.

That's who Jake Tapper is. That's who the Wall Street Journal is. They lie to you nonstop. What the hell does inflation have to do with bills that didn't pass? Man, and they have been citing Biden's low approval ratings nonstop, right? Which means they're paying attention to polls. But it is fascinating that they pay zero attention to the multiple polls indicating that the vast majority of ordinary Americans, including Republican voters, are in favor of the social

spending bill as it was initially proposed by the Biden administration. Now it's been paired back to an embarrassment, and even that is unlikely to pass. So congratulations, Jake Tapper. You and the corporate media cartel have done a wonderful job in defeating the one last opportunity for the Democratic Party to do something that's even a little popular. So we'll see how it all plays out in 2020. My guess is not so well for the Democratic Party. They've certainly earned the failure that they're about to experience.

And I gotta say one last thing to build on top of what you're saying. I just looked at Washington Post, ABC News poll today. And it says the bill is still over 60% popular, right? And all the individual provisions are even more popular. So they turn around and then even though they have the poll right in front of them saying, no. And by the way, the bill also says, six in ten Americans, same number, six and ten Americans say they are, they're upset with Biden. Why? Because he did too much? No, because he did too little that he hasn't done anything that he hasn't delivered on his promises.

So they take a poll where the people say, we want Biden to do more. And then they come out in there and they're like, people are concerned that Biden is doing too much. Well, that makes you a goddamn liar, okay? Do you know how to read a poll? Do you know what math is? Do you know what facts are? Stop lying to the American people. You're purposely poisoning their mind for your goddamn corporate agenda.

That's what's happening. We got to take a break. When we come back, I'll give you some more specifics and details about that poll. Lots of fascinating findings there and more. We'll be right back. All right, back on TYT, Jank, Anna, with you guys. Also Jeremy Justice and Gypsy Rock, they just joined by hitting that join button below on YouTube.

Thank you guys. You make the show possible. All right, Anna. Things are not looking so great for the Democratic Party. This, according to a new poll done by the Washington Post and ABC News, they found that not Not only are Democrats incredibly unpopular with the electorate at this moment, the approval ratings for President Joe Biden are also pretty low. So among registered voters, the GOP advantage goes to 51% versus 41% for Democrats.

A historically strong result for Republicans on this measure. In fact, this is the largest margin in 40 years. Now, if elections were held today, writes the Washington Post, 46% of adults overall would back the Republican candidate for Congress, and 43% would support the Democratic candidate. And in regard to Biden's approval rating, it is not looking so great. His overall approval rating now stands at 41%, with 53% saying they disapprove. Those who say they strongly disapprove of the way he has handled his job represent 44% of adults, 45% of independence strongly disapprove of Biden's performance, as do 48% of suburbanites,

and 44% of white college graduates. Now, if you're wondering why they're specifically citing those demographics, it's because it was those people that those demographics that handed Biden his presidential victory. So the fact that his approval rating is slipping and sliding among those voters is not a good sign for Biden, and certainly not a good sign for the Democratic Party leading up to the midterms in 2020. Okay. So let's break this down. So first of all, part of the reason why Biden's numbers are slipping so much is not because he's losing the right wing. He never had the right wing. He's losing Democrats and independence now. So that's really obvious if you're in the news analysis business. And not only is it obvious, it's in the numbers. There's no question. In fact, here, let me tell you. His support among Democrats in the beginning, they were super hopeful that he was going to do the things that he said. Was that 94% understandable as his own party.

It's now down to 80%. So he's lost 14 points even among his own supporters. Why? Well, when they ask him, they say it's because he's not doing anything. Right. Now among independents, it's far worse. Let me read you graphic five here. About seven in 10 independents say Biden accomplished little or nothing.

Just over two thirds Democrats say Biden has accomplished a great deal or a good amount in his president's so far. Still, that means nearly one third of Democrats say Biden has not accomplished much or anything during his first 10 months. That's because the only thing he passes a COVID relief bill. And now he's passed a corporate back bill and made sure that the most popular provisions in build back better are not even in build back better, let alone the fact that it's not even gonna pass.

It's not even being discussed or debated in the Senate. And by the way, today's November 15th, they were supposed to vote for it in the House. Now that it's corporate Democrats, no pressure at all. When it was progressives, intense, unbelievable pressure to cave in. Now, corporate Democrats, nothing. Don't even worry about it. So the polling indicates Democrats and independence are pissed at Biden for not doing anything. Right.

What do they say on TV? Oh, he's doing too much. That's exactly right, yeah. We just showed you a clip earlier in the show, Jake Tapper saying, hey, isn't he passing too many bills? Where the polling shows the exact opposite. But he's specifically referring to bills that would improve Americans' lives, right? Because remember, there are only two bills that Biden has passed, right? One, he just signed into law today, and that's the bipartisan infrastructure bill.

That's a corporate handout bill. Privatizes public infrastructure, has all sorts of public-private partnerships, which means government grants and contracts will be awarded to private corporations. So, all right, I don't really see how this is something that's going to overwhelmingly, like, lead to a ton of money in the pockets of ordinary Americans and then lead to inflation. But nonetheless, the other one, of course, is the COVID relief bill, where you have tens of millions of Americans who are still unemployed, by the way, because of a pandemic. And because they feel, in some cases, uncomfortable going back to the service sector when,

you know, many states don't have vaccine mandates and they're terrified of the Delta variant. But nonetheless, I want to specifically focus on the economy here. Because what you hear in corporate media, very different from what voters are frustrated about. So look at this chart. This is Graphics 6, a chart that the Washington Post put together. It shows how his approval rating, Biden's approval rating, has gone down on a few different issues, right? So even when it comes to the coronavirus pandemic, he started off strong, but his approval rating on that issue has gone down from 47% to 41%. Then you look at the economy, though. The economy stands out the most because his approval, The approval rating on handling the economy is down to 39%.

So 70% of the respondents in this poll rate the economy negatively, including 38% who say it is in poor condition. About half of Americans overall and political independence blamed Biden for fast rising inflation, probably because that's what you hear over and over and over again on CNN, CNBC. know, any television corporate news, that is what you're gonna hear, that, oh, there's inflation, and it's Biden's fault. And more than six in 10 Americans say he's not accomplished much after 10 months in office, including 71% of independence. And you're right, Biden and the Democratic Party will learn all the wrong lessons because that is what their corporate donors pay them to do. They get paid to lose. And then when they're not in charge, when they're not in power,

they fundraise handsomely off of fear mongering about the opponents, about the other political party. They love it. It's a win-win for them no matter what. So you think they're wanna hold on to power? That's not who Democrats are. Democrats are losers, and we're seeing it play out in real time right now. So let's talk a little bit more about corporate media propaganda, which by the way is almost all of the mainstream media. So, I mean, you turn on, you go to the New York Times or NPR, is it much better? No, no, they don't state facts either. They're all inflation. The narrative is don't pass any more bills because we're worried about inflation. But wait a minute, is that what the polling indicates?

Anna just read it to you. Six in ten Americans say that they, Biden is unpopular because he hasn't passed enough bills. Six and ten Americans. But they all come out on cable news and say, no, all of them, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC. All of them agree, Biden's done too much, whatever you do, don't pass any more bills. bills, the rest of the bills would help Americans. Now, guys, I can prove this to you so easily. First of what we already have, it's in all the numbers.

You can read it for yourself. But secondly, isn't there a single editor at CNN that goes, guys, you keep saying Jake Tapper says and Anderson Cooper says that almost all of you say it, that, hey, if Biden passes more bills, he might become more unpopular because of inflation, et cetera. But if you look at the provisions, number one, the bill is popular by itself. I'm going to get to those numbers in a second. But number two, lowering drug prices, 88% want to look, the provisions, specific provision and build back better, that was for lowering drug prices, 88% are in favor of it.

So nine out of 10 Americans want it. So is anybody going to say on our air that maybe if Biden passed a bill that nine out of 10 Americans want, that would make them more popular? No, isn't that amazing, guys? Not a single person on CNN has said, yeah, if you passed a bill that about 9% percent, 90% of America's want, it would make them more public. Not one person has said that. They've all said the opposite.

Now, do you really think that's news? Do you really think that has anything new with facts? And let me just add one more thing about the inflation argument that you'll hear them make over and over again, which is completely inaccurate. Look, think about what it would require them to do in corporate media to really weigh in on why there are inflation issues in very limited sectors of the economy. That would mean that they would have to talk about the labor shortage and what's really causing it.

Maybe they'd even have to do some coverage on the John Deere strike. Maybe they'd have to do some coverage on the fact that there aren't enough truckers because people don't want to get paid a crappy wage for a job. And they don't want to talk about that, right? So to actually do coverage of the supply chain issues and how that's leading to inflation would require them to actually give a voice to labor in this country. And they're not willing to do that. So just blame Biden and the measly crumbs that he gave ordinary Americans in his coronavirus

relief bill. That's the real problem, according to that. All right, last couple of things here. Look, cable news never makes any sense and doesn't try to make sense. But the only way that it is logical is if you look at it from what do corporations in America want, then it all of a sudden all of it makes sense, right? So for example, here's another thing that doesn't make sense, just a couple of months ago. Remember, CNN, everybody else was crying about, oh, my border crisis, border crisis.

And why is everybody concerned about the border crisis? They're going to come and take our jobs. They're coming to take our jobs. Now what are they complaining about? Labor shortage. Wait a minute. I thought they were coming to take our jobs. It turns out we can't even fill the jobs.

Even with all of the immigrants that came in, even with your so-called border crisis, even with all the Americans who want jobs, we still have a labor shortage. We don't have enough people to fill the jobs. So Jake Tapper, CNN, and every other one lying one of you guys out there, which one is it? Which one is it? Is it they're coming to take our jobs or we have a labor shortage? All right, and lastly, you've got to know the real numbers. So, and what's amazing is the mainstream media will actually put it on A17 and then they'll never talk about it again.

And that's what tells you it is propaganda. So here's from the Washington Post. 63% of Americans, this is graphic 9, 63% of Americans support Washington spending $1 trillion on roads, bridges, and other infrastructure, while 58% support spending roughly $2 trillion to address climate change and to create or expand preschool, health care, and other social programs.

Barry it, bury it. Make sure Jake Chappar doesn't see it. He doesn't like that kind of information. So every single cable news anchor who are almost all liars, there it is. At a bare minimum, 58% of the country, even after all the propaganda you guys did, even after all the times you said, don't vote for it, don't vote for it, it'll ruin the price of milk, y'all don't vote for it. Even after billions of dollars of propaganda you did against it, 58% say, no, we still want it. Now, is that what you're going to hear on news?

It's not just the past. You guys watch this video, then watch cable news, and you will see no one will quote that number. Instead, they will all come out in unison, and it doesn't matter where they're pretending to be on the political spectrum. Stephanie rule on MSNBC is one of the worst in the business. CNBC is the single worst, worse than Fox News. Okay, so all of them will come out in unison and say the American people do not want this bill because of inflation. They do not want this bill. They'll lie to you about what the American people want, even though it's in their own poll.

Because they're not doing news. They're the marketing arm of corporate rule. All right. first hour when we come back, you have people calling for an end to some of the most important amendments in our Constitution, including the separation of church and state. We've got that story and more for you when we return. Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work, listen ad-free, access members-only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple podcast at apple.com slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.