The Young Turks - Crude Lies

Episode Date: October 29, 2021

Exxon is desperate to keep people from realizing it lied about climate change. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand took another run at Senator Joe Manchin on the Senate floor over his opposition to paid family leave, which he succeeded in getting removed from the Democrats’ reconciliation bill. Adam Kinzinger, outspoken GOP Trump critic, won't seek reelection for his U.S. House seat. A Capitol officer who assisted a Trump rioter on January 6th has resigned after messages between the two were discovered. Hosts: Cenk Uygur, John Idarola, Sen. Nina Turner 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. Trimartee! Trimating! Trimardee! Trimating! Trimardee!

Drop it! Whoa, sick till I drop it. Look at this power power panel. Jake, you're John Irola and Nina Turner the power seat. Okay, how are you doing Senator Turner? I'm fine. Okay, great to see you here. You too.

You too. This is the first time we've had three people in the studio in like literally years. Yeah. So it's great to have you. It's great to be here. And between you two, I mean, I don't know what's going to happen during this first time. You got chaos. Okay, so you know, we do a fun, goofy show, and we do a super serious enraging show.

And you all know that, right? That's the Young Turks. So we have fun with dropping in. We'll have fun later in the program with the unbelievable hypocrisy of the right wing. You're never going to guess what a leading QAnon guy did. You'll never guess it, okay, let alone the crying Nazi. That's all later in the program. And of course, updates on the bills that are going through Congress, where,

we'll have probably a decent amount of range. So there you have it. Welcome to DYT. All right guys, so let's get to tons of news, John take it away. Okay, let's do it. This week, the heads of some of the largest oil companies in the entire world were testifying before Congress, and the topic was misinformation. And indeed, we got it, including at that testimony. It turned out they could find ways to misinform us, even when they were sort of technically telling the truth.

So they suggested that there is a long-term need for oil and gas, but they do claim to believe in anthropogenic climate change. And they said that fossil fuel emissions contribute to global heating. Some critics have called them out for using that term rather than something like cause or drive. Because it is technically true that it contributes to it. But it's not like seventh on the list. It's not like, it's mostly the cows. And there's a little bit of gas there at the end. That's not how that works at all.

Misinformation, of course, was more significant than that, and some of the grilling of the executives that happened had to do with some of the long-term misinformation that's happened over literally decades to muddy the waters around the science of climate change as well as a number of other topics. And in fact, at one point, each of the executives, and these are executives of ExxonMobil, BP, American, Chevron, and Shell. There were industry trade group reps as well. But they were asked, have you ever funded directly or indirectly misinformation? campaigns and they all said no and they were all big old fat liars when they were saying that not true at all so the Guardian has a nice little write-up of some of the even just more recent disinformation campaigns let alone some of the historic ones that we've talked about in the past so for instance for years Exxon has been spending millions of dollars to run ads about its investments in

algae fuel even though it has spent very little on the actual research and it has no plans to bring the product to market it's the sort of thing that you can put in an ad during the Super Bowl or on MSNBC and it looks like they're looking beyond oil. In fact, BP likes to call themselves beyond petroleum like they're looking beyond it, but they're not acting like they're looking beyond it. For Chevron, they had an ad back in 2020 that highlighted their commitment to carbon capture and sequestration as a climate solution, so sure, we're gonna keep polluting, but don't worry, we'll suck it back out of the air and we'll stick it in the ground or something.

Well, according to the New York Times, Chevron is only spending what they call pocket change on the technology while doubling down on oil and gas production and exploration. Also, the technology that they're touting doesn't work. They have a big project in Australia that's been called a disaster from the beginning and now it's just venting CO2 into the atmosphere, which I think is a very poetic end to this whole nonsense, actually. One more, Shell has touted its new net zero commitment as evidence that the company is committed to climate action. They in fact did that at the testimony yesterday. Company documents, however, say, quote, Shell's operating plans and budgets do not reflect shells net zero emissions targets. Well, if the operating plans and budgets don't, what other than the ads actually would? But there's a lot more misinformation where that came from.

But that's a little teaser for you, some appetizers of misinformation. What do you think about this? I know we showed some videos of them being grilled yesterday. Yeah, so Katie Porter did a great job with this yesterday. On the issue John just brought up, she had this hilarious example where she filled like a jar full of M&Ms and then said, okay, this is how much money you spend on oil exploration or all energy resources overall. Now let me show you how much you spend on renewable energy, which you say is just a giant part of what you're doing. It was a couple of M&Ms, and that was based on the actual money that they spent. And you look at the two jars and you're like, oh, this is a joke.

So that's why I love her show and tell. And so if you're confused as to whether they were doing this on purpose and if they misled you, I want to read you some more quotes, okay? So you're clear. This is from a 1998 action plan memo created by Exxon, Chevron, the American Petroleum Institute, and others. So it said, develop and implement a national media relations program to inform the media about uncertainties in climate science to generate national, regional, and local media. coverage on the scientific uncertainties and thereby educate and inform the public stimulating them to raise questions with policymakers.

That would appear to be manufacturing doubt, and that was their battle plan. So when they answered today, oh, golly, gee, us try to say that maybe it's not happening and lie about, we would never would do that, except for all of our internal memos that that indicate that's exactly what we plan to do and in fact did do. CEO Lee Raymond in 1997 said the quote, the case for a so-called global warming is far from air tide. So they've never done any of that. Now I do want to give you one more quote, then we'll go to Nina for her reaction.

In the 1980s, they had an internal memo and now we all know this and they're confronted by it and they still are lying about it. An Exxon scientist told the company in 1981 that it was quote distinctly possible that climate change caused by its business model would quote, indeed be catastrophic. And then in parentheses, at least for a substantial fraction of the Earth's population. Catastrophic for a substantial portion of the Earth's population. They continue to do it all the way up until now for 40 straight years knowing that it's going to be catastrophic for all of us.

And then they made an action plan to lie to all of us so they can make more money. Cash is king or queen. And, you know, they are very comfortable on their bed of cash while they destroy Earth. And very few people can go up to space. So, you know, let Mother Earth burn. The rest of us burn down here on Earth. And you got a few trillionaires, billionaires that will go to outer space. This is a shell game, literally, the pun is very much intended.

Or to use a Wizard of Oz example, don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain. And they know nothing is going to happen. I mean, I'm glad that Congress held the hearings. That I'm glad. And the Honorable Katie Porter, I mean, I just got to step up my show and tail game. I mean, I'm trying to think of ways right now to step up my. So I'm glad that they are having the hearings, but now the question becomes what are they going to do? Yeah.

So we took one step in that direction today and it was a positive step and I want to address the cash point too. So Maloney, Representative Maloney who's running these hearings, actually did a really good job. And so she was opposed by a progressive in the last primary. I don't know if that's what motivated her, but honestly, I care if they motivated her, then good, run progressives and primaries. But I care that she's doing the right thing now. So great, that's wonderful, right?

And so she brought these folks in, which we should have brought in a long time ago, But again, I'll take it. And she said, okay, now we're subpoenaing you guys, because you're now, you're not being dishonest. We're asked you for documents and you're not giving us the documents. This is not optional. So here's a subpoena for all of you. We come bearing gifts too, okay?

You get a subpoena, you get a subpoena, you get a subpoena for all those oil executives that showed up. And that's what, again, we should have done this decades ago. It's telling that we didn't do it decades ago, but finally, Democrats, are saying in Congress, yeah, no, you're going to have to show us your internal documents about how you lied to us, why you lied to us, how much money you made lying to us. Because remember guys, we're paying all the costs. So they make the money, they make the profit, and they take it home, and they say,

oh, climate change costs to the tune of potentially trillions of dollars. You guys pay that, taxpayers pay that. Why am I paying for the cost of your business? Those are good questions that we could find out through the documents. Now, the other thing I wanted to say about cash, John, is the Republican, the Republic throughout the hearing, of course, all they did was defend the oil executives. And they kept apologizing to them. And it makes sense, one of the guys from Louisiana is like,

oh, Louisiana's devastated by climate change and the true storms, etc. And he's like, but we're making money. And he said, well, why would we stop making money? Who's we? We're not making any money. But he is, by the way, he got paid nearly a million dollars from fossil fuel companies companies in campaign contributions, otherwise known as bribes. Yeah, and like making money as your state is flooded isn't like a noble pursuit.

Like on the Titanic, the band kept playing, but it wasn't for tips. Like that's not what they were doing, but but that's the thing that's worst about this. We know that the effects of climate change are going to be unequal and that people who are already worst off are going to be hit the hardest. And along the way, we're beset on all sides by a variety of different groups that are allowing this to continue happening because they're all making money. money. The companies are making money from not having to change their way of business. The politicians are making money in terms of donations, as well as being on their boards

afterward. Some of the politicians are just directly making money like Joe Manchin. Like he doesn't care about any of this, he's making bank right now. And the media companies, many of them also have BP ads. Even though nobody watching MSNBC can just go and buy a barrel or anything, for some reason there's still ads for BP. So everybody's making money. There's no action, even when we deliver the White House, the Senate, and the House. We'll talk about cinema supposedly doubling down and doing something about climate change,

but it certainly doesn't feel like that. All that, despite all of that, I'm glad that they're doing the hearings, if only so that we can convince more people of what needs to be done. I found some evidence, Vice was talking about the results of a poll that asked people whether they believe that humans have committed climate change. were the reason that it's happening, and in particular are oil and gas companies responsible for it. And a majority, like 60% say that they think that oil and gas companies are, 83% of Democrats, just 27% of Republicans. But when you tell them about, for instance, what Jenk was talking about that,

they've had the research for decades, they purposefully lied to conceal it, you get those numbers even higher. About seven points more for pretty much every group actually. Overall, the Democratic Even the Republicans go up, looks like nine points there. When you reveal to them that these corporations have been lying to them. Now unfortunately, you know, it's just sort of a silver lining to show polls like that. The idea that, well, if we get more people to believe this, that'll matter, would be true in a functioning democracy. Unfortunately, we're broadcasting from America.

But it's something at least. The ship will go down with a lot of people knowing what's going on at least. I mean, you really make a really good point, John, about the fact, you know, we want to believe that information, that knowledge is power. And it is power, but how we act upon that knowledge really is the real power. And can the people put enough pressure to bear on the people, on the elected officials to make them move? It doesn't seem as such that we can make them move. So then what makes them move? Well, we got to get more different people to run for office.

Because if they were moving on behalf of the people, things would be a lot different. in a whole bunch of categories. So in fact, we're now in the middle of a bill where we're discussing climate change, right? So the reconciliation bill, and it got gutted. The most important climate change provisions were taken out. Why were they taking out? Is it because the majority of Americans don't think that there's climate change or the government needs to take action? No.

The poll that John gave you is one of dozens of polls that show. And not only that the overwhelming majority of the country thinks there is climate change, it's manmade and the government should do something about it, but actually, something about it, but actually when you go to younger Republicans, even they agree, right? And so the numbers are as usual on the issues overwhelmingly on our side, but it doesn't matter, not only republics, and by the way, every Republican wanted to gut climate change legislation, every single one of them, okay. But of course, corporate Democrats like Joe Manchin said, yeah, I'm with the oil companies, the coal companies, and not on my watch,

you're not gonna tackle climate change, I'm killing it. And he did, and they let him kill it. So greed and corruption still wins. So that's why I get a little frustrated sometimes when we go, like from good people and they mean well, and I want them to be active. I love that they're active, but thinking that, hey, if we do a rally and we'll get public attention, we already won, the public totally agrees with us, right? The reason we're not winning in action is because politicians take corporate pack money.

And as long as they take corporate PAC money, we're never going to win in Congress. Look, I've said this that a thousand times on federal background checks on gun control, 97% of Americans agree with us, and we still don't have it. It isn't the popularity, it's the politicians. And if they continue to take bribes were screwed, and look at the greed that it creates. So John used the Titanic example, which then it made me remember the World Trade Center example. So the second tower, there were people that were ordered back to work after the first tower got hit. They said, don't worry about it.

And all the loudspeakers, and I remember the story, this wife that comes down, there's a manager, her husband happens to be in the same building. They're in different companies, she comes down, and he's like, I was told that we have to go back to work, and I'm telling my workers to go back to work. She said, I will divorce you unless you come down right now, saved his life, everyone else in that floor died. What good was it to make profits for an extra five minutes when you're about to die? Yeah, and that's what the analogy is for the whole planet. That's right. And these guys and the Republicans and Joe Manchin are saying, well, we gotta make more money for five more minutes before the planet explodes. Because SpaceX, I mean, that's where they're going.

They don't, they really don't give a damn. I mean, that's just what this comes down to. Yeah, they don't. And guys, there's there, you can actually be against greed. I know it seems like in Washington is it impossible that you could be against greed. Everybody's going to take the money, right? No. Chevron once offered to do advertising on the young Turks and we said no, see there, boom.

That wasn't hard? You could have at least asked me, honestly. And by the way, just to be absolutely clear, I'll give you one last fact. Just 20 fossil fuel companies create one third of all of the climate change in the world. So are they a contributing factor? No, they are they are the factor, they're the largest factor. Can I add one more bit of bad news, some breaking news today on this? So we we've basically won on the public.

Not everyone believes, but you know, we're a stupid country, not everyone's going to. We need to win in Congress and we need to win the Senate on climate change and that is very difficult, we are very close, but it's super difficult. Then after that, after we get that and we get the president too, he's willing to say that he believes that he cares about it. We also unfortunately have the Supreme Court because as we've said many times over the past few years, if you give a super majority to conservatives on the Supreme Court, bad things will happen for a very, very long time. And so breaking news today, Supreme Court agrees to consider limiting EPA's authority to curb greenhouse gases from

power plants will hear appeals from coal mining companies and Republican-led states. And I thought, well, that's bad. And then I saw an update to it. Turns out not just the EPA's authority, SCOTUS has agreed to take up Congress's constitutional authority to delegate to the EPA the power to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. So in theory, if we ever do get enough senators and congresspeople, they might no longer have the constitutional authority according to conservatives to ever do anything to limit these emissions. In 1971, Lewis Powell wrote a memo saying that corporations should take over the government And one of the most effective ways to do that was to take over the Supreme Court.

Richard Nixon then put him on the Supreme Court just months later after reading that memo. They've taken over the Supreme Court. The only way to fight back is through an amendment, wolf dashpac.com. If you don't get the money out of politics, you're never going to be able to overrule the Supreme Court. The only thing that could do that is the Constitution. So pass an amendment, otherwise they're gonna drive us to extinction. Yeah, no, it's an absolute power corrupts. Absolutely, and this is what this is an example of.

And then also, elections have consequences. Yep. Any old blue just won't do. Yep. If you thought Joe Manchin was going to be on your side, just because he's a Democrat, you were wrong. That's right. On the other hand, if you thought voting for a Republican in the general election was a good idea,

now we have a 6-3 Supreme Court, so you were wrong. That's right. The correct answer is primary corporate Democrats with progressives who don't take corporate PAC money, and then fight like hell to get a constitutional amendment. There it is. All right. First break? All right, let's do the first break.

When we come back, we do have updates on the most pressing story of the day. The bill, are they actually going to pass it? What's going to be in it? And believe it or not, we have a little bit of good news. Well, let's see if we can believe it when we come back. All right, back on TYT, Jank Nina and John with you guys, a lot more news. Don't take the way. Okay, let's do it.

For months now, Joe Manchin and Curses Cinema have been duking it out in the, like I guess a season of the USA's worst senator, who is the most openly condescending towards their constituents. And Joe Manchin has been lagging slightly in that he has at least occasionally answered questions from his constituents. Now bonus points to him for doing it from the back of his yacht, but he has actually talked to them, and I like that. But he's been watching Kirsten Cinema and she's just been ignoring people. So maybe he'll try a bit of that.

Let's take a look. Do we have it? Okay, for some reason we have no video there. Okay, well, don't worry, we've got some other information that's going to make him look absolutely awful. For some time we've been speculating on the financial incentives that have been driving Joe Manchin's opposition to much of Biden's agenda. but in particular, anything having to do with dealing with climate change. And it's very easy to speculate how for a man who owns a coal company, how stopping a program that would incentivize companies getting clean energy instead of energy from coal might affect

his finances down the road. But actually, we have some amazing reporting coming from TYT investigates about how he is already profiting from what he's been doing during these negotiations. Andy Hirschfeld did a great job here, and we're gonna give you a bit of that, but it is all available at TYT. So he says Manchin's moves are helping the coal industry at large. By proposing policies that support the need for coal, that's driving up the price of coal, an otherwise dying fuel source. So far this year, the price of coal is surged approximately 260%. And the biggest jump was in the last few months. The price of coal soared by about 140% since

just the beginning of July when the third quarter started. And although Mansions coal brokerage company enter systems is privately traded, it still benefits from rising coal prices, and that's helping enter systems make significantly more money than it otherwise would. For that company, the elevated price of the commodity means more money lining their pockets. That means a bump for his income in particular. Earlier this month, TY2 reported that since 2011, Mansion has raked in more than $5.2 million from enter systems. That makes up 71% of his entire investment income. And so it's easy to see how this works. If coal is worth more, that's going to benefit the company.

And what you had this year was a situation where, in theory, the death knell of coal could have been sounded. It was already becoming less competitive financially against things like wind and solar. And with the prospect of regulation of the coal industry, moving away from that, that in terms of people's investments, that's not going to make it seem like a very positive investment. But Joe Manchin has sent very clear signals to people that that sort of regulation is incredibly unlikely to actually happen. And so while that benefits him down the road, his company will continue to do well, it is reassured investors and that is benefiting him already.

And we mentioned this for a couple different reasons. One, it's objectively true and you need to know what's happening, but also there has been far too little attention paid to the element of corruption in all of these negotiations. The not only campaign finance aspects of this, that sort of traditional political corruption, but also the personal political corruption. And Joe Manchin is an amazing example of that. I wanna make sure that you don't forget it. Yeah, here's more things I wanna make sure you don't forget.

In coal is only 3% of West Virginia's economy, not the US economy. It's minuscule for the US economy. West Virginia, only 3% effects, only 11,000 jobs. And by the way, in the legislation that Manchin helped to kill, or the provisions that he helped to kill, they would have actually gotten those folks higher paying jobs in the transition.

But now they won't be able to transition away from coal because Mention is too busy making money off of it. As John just told you, $5.2 million of personal wealth in just the last 10 years alone. And that's a story that everybody should be writing about it. But good news, I actually saw CNN follow our reporting today and talk about, hey, it turns out a couple weeks later. Turns out Mention makes money from coal, do people know that? Good, good, I'll take it, I'll take it, right? And so, look, this guy's making decisions that make him richer and the rest of us poorer.

But one of my questions is, why is he the one making the decisions? So as Gillibrand is beseeching him, and there is report after report of Gillibrand and other senators chasing Mansion around the Senate in the hallways, and I'm gonna read you just one of the tweets from Andrew Selender, who I believe works at Axios, he said Gillibrand just lobbied Mansion intensely on paid family leave on the Senate for. floor, she wouldn't let him get where he wanted to go without saying her piece. And then she was heard saying, quote, if you let me write it, I will write it. I just want this in the bill. It's so cheap. Okay, now it's cheap for the American people and it pays off great for us. But it

ain't cheap for Mansion. His money just went up 260%. So, but I think even the more important point is, why is Joe Manchin making every decision? Why is Gillibrand beseeching Mansion and not President Biden or the Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer or maybe even talking to the House and Pelosi? She's talking to Manchin because apparently Manchin is president. And I don't know if she checked with Vice President's Cinema at all, but this is what it is devolved to. And I have a question that I really, really need an answer to. And this is the kind of thing that DC media might care about. Who's in charge? So when we say that Mansion took out paid family leave, no, but he can't take it out unilaterally. Somebody else has to make that

decision. So who said to Mansion, you win, I surrender, we are not going to have paid family leave. By the way, it might be a name we don't want to hear, right? It might be, oh my God, Damn it, the progressive said it was okay. Well, that would be devastating, but we're in the news business, we got to know. But more likely, it's Biden. Well then, okay, whoever it is, they got to own it and say, yes, I'm the one who made a decision to surrender to Joe Manchin, give him full authority, and let him take out whatever he wants from the bill.

No, it's true, I mean, I just wonder what kind of files he got on folks, because he's the one with all the leverage, and it doesn't make sense that a new, a duly elected senator, just like him, chasing him down to get his permission. I say he's gone beyond being the president. He's the emperor at this point. Because everybody is finding over this man. I mean, how many times he's invited to the White House, him and cinema? Decisions have to be passed through them.

I mean, this is really getting ridiculous. And you want to talk about the planet is going to get sicker. So yeah, he makes money, the planet is sicker. And then again, as we keep, continue to say, just follow the money. If ever in doubt, just follow the money. And Senator Manchin, and he's not the only one, Senator Sinema, she's not the only one. I do believe that there are far too many Democrats really using those two of shields. That is not, it cannot be, if you have 48 Democratic senators on the same page,

and you only have two who are not on the same page, how do we default to the two instead of the 48? Well, it leads us to ask even more and more questions. One of those is who else is on the same page with them. So let me back you up more with evidence that came in in the reporting. And then, you know, then I'm gonna put my finger on what I think is actually happening, which is, so first of all, when it was a question about lowering drug prices, and they were taking a lot of heat because that nine out of ten Americans want the provision that lowers drug prices. That's overwhelming. All the Republican voters want it, 100% of the Republican politicians, not want it. They want higher drug prices, that's a fact, okay?

They say, oh, it will, you know, hurt innovation, okay? So you have to pay literally $500 billion more. You have to pay it in higher drug prices, half a trillion dollars, because the Republicans sold you out, but yes, Mansion of Cinema did too. But when Mansion of Cinema were taking too much heat on that, then Menendez from New Jersey raised his hand and so, oh yeah, yeah, yeah, I don't want to lower drug prices either, okay? And why would he do that out of nowhere? Because the drug company said, hey, mention his cinema might not be enough.

So now you gotta go take a bullet too, okay? Bringing in the backup players. Yes, because we're paying you. We bribe you just as much as we bribe them. And by the way, if that doesn't work, we'll release more Democratic senators that we've bribed. And so it ain't 48, they're lying to you. Yes. Okay, so that's number one.

Number two is, the reason I ask who's making these decisions is, it appears, it appears Here's, according to the reporting, they leave it very vague. They say, Manchin, Biden, Schumer, Pelosi, et cetera, got together, right? And a decision was made. First of all, if it's presumably it's Biden. He's the president, right? If Biden and Manchin are the ones negotiating, wait a minute, don't give me this nonsense about Biden's agenda.

We told John Young Turks, the day he was elected, he doesn't believe that. So two corporate Democrats with an incredibly similar track record in the Senate, Biden and Manchin have agreed that their donors should get everything. What kind of negotiation is this? So Joe Biden, tell us, was it your actual agenda or wasn't it? And if it was your agenda, why were you so weak? And you gave it all away to Emperor Mansion. And so those are very uncomfortable questions.

And I wish we had a press that would ask Saki and Biden and Schumer and all those guys, who's making the decision? And Joe Biden, is it really your agenda? Are you happy to give these things away? If you're not happy to give them away, how weak are you? Yeah, fight. Yeah, I don't know, Jake. You ask sake a question like that, you're opening yourself up to a sake bomb.

Yeah. That's dangerous. You want to tread carefully. The last thing I want to say about this is I think you're both totally right that we cannot allow, well, we can't, and we don't want anyone else to fall into the trap of believing that only the people who are raising their hand are the bad guys. guys, or in some cases just walking away from protesters and hiding in bathrooms of the bad guys, it is much deeper than that. I mean, and in some cases it was very easy to see. Like when they were proposing the billionaire's tax, you know, Mansion was like, that's terrible, I hate that, but a bunch of others were like, well, you know, we need to look at the particular

wording and everything, like they weren't supporting it. But that said, there is something a little bit special in some of these cases to people like Mansion, to people like cinema. that they seem far less able to be influenced by some of the traditional tools that we have. Those tools can always be overstated in their ability to influence people, putting public pressure, trying to move the people of your state, those sorts of things, the threats of primaries and things like that. But in these cases, Mansion seems to feel, and I think there's probably some reason for him to feel that he's got an especially safe spot there, where he does not need to worry about a bunch of negative press. Cinema acts actually,

as if she literally has no idea what representing a voter means or why you would ever do that. And whether that's because she doesn't intend to run for the seat, again, she's just gonna move into some sort of corporate job, or because she somehow believes in a way that I don't think bears out in the same way as for Mansion, that she is literally immune from a primary challenge. Perhaps it's a calculus that, sure, all the Democrats seem to be frustrated with her now, But Schumer is going to line up to support her against a primary challenge. Anyway, maybe that's it. But they don't seem to be able to be pushed even an inch in the way that some others,

in some cases, might be if you spend enough money and rally enough people. I would say that she's already in a corporate job. They ain't no need to run anywhere because she's already in a corporate job. And John, while I agree with everything, all of the above, I want to add one other caveat. What has not happened to those two is the full force and weight of the President of the United States of America. I've said it before, I got to say it again, President Biden should take the West Wing, the West Virginia, and be on his way to Arizona. We have not seen that kind of pressure on these two. And right, we already know that the Republicans are rotten.

They've been very clear. And one good thing that I can say about those two senators, Mansion and Cinema, which is rare I say any good thing, at least we know where they stand. See, because I can deal with somebody when I know where you stand. It's the people who are hiding behind those two. That's true. That are the problem. Between President Joe Biden and the 48 other senators, and let me take our, you know, Senator Sanders has been fighting this good fight and maybe a couple of others.

But if all of them bear down their full force and weight, and for the president, he knows what he has to deal with with the Republicans. What he should not bear without putting the heat on the, on those two, is that from his own party, something of this magnitude and this critical, moment in our nation and world's history, these two want to play games, that he had to go directly to the American people and say, hell, I'd rather deal with a republic, because the threat is right, what, that Manson will go independent or he'll be the Republican that he is out in the open. Yeah. What difference does it make? You know, I had a mentor who used to say, it doesn't matter if you meant to kill me on purpose or by accident. Dead is dead. So what good are those two? Yeah. So I want to build off of that. So first of all, To John's point about Schumer, here's an easy threat. I'm not saying that it would work 100%, but it's nice to try, because it might work. He could say, hey, listen, if you don't vote for us, with us, not on everything, okay, but

on paid family leave, which is a layup, on prescription drug prices. And I don't know what his red lines, he doesn't have any red lines, Schumer's also corporatist, okay? But if he had one, if he was genuine, right? And if Biden was genuine, they would say, here's a couple of red lines, you cannot cross. And if you do, it's okay, but we're gonna spend a ton of money. The most money we have, we're gonna allocate to a primary opponent against you. That's right.

Oh, but wait a minute, aren't you supposed to protect incumbents? Not if you don't protect us, this is our agenda. If you're not with our agenda, then we primary you. Now you know, we all know the Schumer A didn't do that and B would never do that. Yeah, well then you're not really fighting and you're not using any of the tools that you have that at your disposal. By the way, Schumer has spent tens of millions, maybe hundreds of millions of dollars against progressives in primaries. So it's not like he doesn't know how to use that tool, he's just choosing not to use it

with someone who is corrupt and they know it. And by the way, who protects all these guys, the mainstream media? Did anybody, any of them explain to you how Schumer is protecting Mansion and Cinema? No, they didn't, right? So now what could Biden do? This is what Nina said in a power hour we did for the members a couple of weeks ago. She had a mentor that said, look, and this is political, not literal, right? But look, if we're going to fight, and Biden could say this to mansion, if he actually meant it,

if it was really his agenda, if we're going to fight, and there's going to be blood on the floor. Some of yours and some of mine. But it's going to be more of yours than mine. That's right. And so that's how you actually play hardball. So look, I'll go further if it was me or probably if it was Nina, right? I would say, hey, listen, Joe, here's what's going to happen, okay? Here's my red lines, you cross them, and that's okay, we fight.

And the way we fight is I spend the rest of my presidency telling the American people about what a corrupt, and then fill in a number of blanks there, okay, that I would use. Yes, please. And how corrupt you are, Joe, and what's gonna happen is I'm going to absolutely ruin your reputation. Yeah, okay, you killed my bill, okay, hey, we got blood on the floor, it's okay, right? But you're not gonna walk out of this place without everybody in America thinking, that you're the worst person who's ever been in the Senate. And by the way, your son and their coal company and all that money you're making,

the stock went up or the coal prices went up 260% based on what you did. Huh, I wonder if that's insider trading. Anyway, we'll see how it goes. Oh, your daughter walked away with a $30 million golden parachute while she outsourced jobs. Now look guys, you can say, you can't do that. His poor daughters only making $30 million outsourcing jobs. You can't threaten their corruption like that. Why, who would say that?

None of you would say that. The right wingers wouldn't say that, the left wagers wouldn't say that. The only people who would say that are the people who say, who think it's outrageous to challenge corruption. Yeah. So you know Biden doesn't really mean it. Schumer didn't, Pelosi don't actually mean it. But look, I'll take anything that's even cynical if it's going towards our direction. So let me give you the good news that I promised.

Chris and Cinema is now apparently saying, yeah, we, I think that maybe we should put paid family leave back in. Okay, great, if you deal, deal, okay? Now the reality is, I don't know if she means it or if she's doing it for marketing, but we could use it for momentum. So by the way, now you should turn to all the progressives. We have a petition, right? TYT.com slash petitions, you could find all of them, but in this case is t.yt.com slash

petition slash no dash deal right there. And we'll put it down below in the description box too. Sign it. So we already have about 5,000 people, get to 10,000, get to more, right? This is to say to progressives, demand at least paid family leave or no deal, no deal. And now progressives can say, even Christmas cinema wants it. Right. Even who doesn't want it? It's just mansion. It's 49 to 1. Come on. And we're not going to get it. No, we're voting no. That's right. And 49 to 1, you know, in the Senate, but if we add in the president and the vice president, I mean, the numbers are even higher. So I'm with that, Jank. And oh my God, you totally, he laid that out, didn't he John? That is it, baby. I'm coming for you. And look, if I don't get you before my presidency is over, I'm going to spend the rest of my natural life. Yeah. Coming for you. Exactly. That's a great point. Yeah. Bear in mind, too, on top of the family leave, she supposedly wants the child tax credit to be extended for as long as possible, which is theoretically more.

than one single year, as well as climate change. I don't know exactly what that is. To be fair, Joe Manchin has also ensured that climate change is coming. Not a solution though, but anyway, who knows? I don't trust a single thing out of Chris Sinema's mouth, but I guess let's keep hope alive for a little bit. To what you said earlier about what Schumer and Biden could do, first of all, it's like the bare minimum.

Like you've been working your whole life to be in these positions of authority. Are you gonna act like it for literally five minutes? But also it's pragmatic and it's not just pragmatic for the bill. It just doesn't just maximize the chance that the bill actually passes or that if the bill passes, we actually care that it does because it includes things that you promise and that the people need. It also is pragmatic for the midterms because if they pass nothing or if they pass effectively nothing, they are doomed next year. They're probably doomed anyway.

But they're definitely doomed next year. And if they accomplish nothing between now in 2024, then Joe Biden, assuming he's still alive, is doomed. Kamala Harris, if she tries to run instead of him, or Pete Buttigieg, if the donors line it behind him, are doomed too. And so if they want to have a chance of having a majority, if they want to have a chance of having an actual term as president, that's not dominated by Republicans, they desperately need to pass something so that they can go to the American people and say, you put us in office to accomplish things and we actually did it. I know. It's never happened in your entire life, but for the first time, we actually did it. And all it took was the will of the people and a couple threats to Joe Manchin Cinema.

But so far, they're not willing to do that. And so next year, when we're desperately trying to get people to care and to vote, it's going to be super hard, and we are not going to be able to be surprised because Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden, and others are not willing to even exert a little bit of pressure. They are gonna try to campaign on virtually nothing other than opposing the Republicans, which has its merit, but it's hardly as persuasive as being able to say, we gave you paid leave, we gave you dental coverage, we gave you, gave you free community college, we care about the fact that American cities are being destroyed by climate change, and we did something about it. And guys, if Biden then dramatically put paid family leave back in, he would get undue credit.

He would get like he'd be considered a hero. And every time you have a baby and you get to take leave, you'd think of Joe Biden got that for you, right? It's such an easy win for them. And I'm gonna do one last thing here, which is to give a piece of strategy advice to progress this for whatever it's worth. They're good guys, they mean well, right? But if I see cinema says, yes, I want paid family leave back in, I think Bernie, AOC, Jayapal, such as it is, et cetera, should Roe-Connor, whoever it is, good folks, okay, should go on TV right now and say,

cinema said it, we're voting no unless we get paid family leave back in. Do you have any idea what kind of pressure that would create? Now progressives are out of no, and even cinema wants it. It would force Biden to go back to mansion and go, you lost this one, brother, okay? It's, I guarantee you it would work. So I'm asking you guys to participate. Look, you want to do the petition, I think that's very effective. It gives the media a number, it gives progressives.

Oh my God, 10,000, 20,000, whatever people really, really want this, et cetera. But if you want to do it another way, go for it, okay, just keep it like super polite, right? But as progressives, ask them on Twitter, et cetera, can you please say they're going to vote no, unless paid family leave is in? If you do that now, we can actually win on this one. I never tell you guys we can win when we can't win. I like, like lowering drug prices, I want it so bad and some people think it's still possible. There's way too much corruption, way too much, we're not going to win on that. Billionaire tax date, everybody said, oh, that's definitely gonna happen.

Like the word billionaires in it. The billionaires are not going to agree. You have no idea how corruptus Congress is. That was unrealized gays, there's no way the rich are going to allow that. I know what's realistic and not realistic. Paid family leave is totally realistic. They can definitely do it. But they've got to go now and they got to make a stand.

Yeah. So seize an opportunity is really what you're talking about. 100%. Going into pain and going hard. And again, yes, the progressives have been holding the line. I mean, really it's the progressives that are holding up the Biden agenda. 100%. They are holding up that agenda and pushing really hard for the people.

And yeah, they got to use their power to leverage. But kudos to them. Because a lot of times, you know, that can be a lonely place to really be there and the push is hard. And so I do want to shout out to progressives for what they've done so far. And they got to keep going. They can't stop. They must get something out of this for the people because it's not for them. It's for the people.

And Jank, I will say it's just incredibly sad to this conversation that we're having to be able to say we won't get the billionaire tax. What? You know, when you really start to think about these things that we discuss on a regular basis in a very deep way, like beyond our head, but in our heart. It is incredibly sad that during a global pandemic, people were catching hell before the pandemic. They're really catching hell now, but in the midst of this kind of pain and suffering that you can't even get people to do the right thing. Corruption corrupts, absolutely. Unfortunately, that's the case of American government right now. All right guys, we're going to take another break.

When we come back, we've got more devastating stories for you guys. We'll be right back. All right, back on TYT, Jank, Nina and John with you guys. I'm gonna read one last member comment here. Diana wrote, and when Nina speaks, she makes me want to stand up, shut off my machine and hold up a sign that says, Union, channeling Nina T. Norma Rui. I love that. Oh, yeah.

All right, God bless. Thank you guys. You are awesome. And by the way, members are the reason why we have Nina here. So thank you to all the members out there. WIT.com slash join and become a member. All right, John. Okay, let's do it.

Representative Adam Kinsiger has announced that he is not going to be seeking re-election, which some people, Donald Trump, very glad to hear about. Here is his announcement. Dehumanizing each other has become the norm. We've taken it from social media to the streets. We've allowed leaders to reach power selling the false premise that strength comes from degrading. others and dehumanizing those that look, act, or think differently than we do. As a country, we've fallen for those lies and now we face a poisoned country

filled with outrage blinding our ability to achieve real strength. It has become increasingly obvious to me that as a country, we must unplug from the mistruths we've been fed. In Congress, I've witnessed how division is heavily rooted. There's little to no desire to bridge our differences, and unity is no longer a word we use. It has also become increasingly obvious to me that in order to break the narrative, I cannot focus on both a re-election to Congress and a broader fight nationwide. I want to make it clear. This isn't the end of my political future but the beginning.

Okay, you can make that clear, you can't necessarily make that true. But Kinsinger, look, has, to the extent that virtually any elected Republican has, he has occasionally gone against Donald Trump in significant ways, including on impeachment. And Donald Trump has hated that, and he has not forgotten. He, in fact, greeted the announcement by Kinsinger there, writing two down, eight to go in a statement. So he's happy about it, at the very least. So look, this is a complicated case. I mean, Kinsinger has a couple of different problems facing him in any potential, you know,

attempt at getting reelected. One is that Trump is going to hound him to the end of his days. That's a problem in a in a party that has been so dominated by Trumpism. But then there's also redistricting. There's the natural process that we're now engaged in. So the reshaping of congressional districts was likely a factor because of Illinois redistricting after the 2020 census. This GOP representative Darren LaHood and Kinsinger's district would be in the same district, according to an updated map released hours earlier today. If that were the case, LaHood and Kinsiger would have to run in the same June 2022 Republican primary. And that map is expected to be signed into law.

So you have redistricting and the Trump thing. And for Kinsinger in particular, those two things do not combine well. It's bad enough to have to run at all, but against another established Republican that is likely not hated nearly as much by Donald Trump. That's just a lot of strikes against him and trying to get elected again. Yeah, I think that he had almost no chance. So when a politician voluntary leaves, nine out of ten times, it is not voluntary. So they're unlikely to win or my favorite that I always tell you guys is Senator Danforth,

who was UN ambassador for Bush, and he thought Bush was so. So reprehensible, and he was a solid right winger in the Senate, right? But he just couldn't stomach all the war crimes, et cetera, that we were doing and that he had to defend in the United Nations. So he said that his wife had twisted her ankle, he had to leave, okay? It's almost never the reason they gave you, okay? So and sometimes they do it to take giant lobbyist jobs and corporate jobs, et cetera. In Kinsiger's case, it's super obvious, especially with the redistricting, he had almost

no chance of winning. If you oppose Trump and you're for truth, and not Dyski, because he's a Republican, I disagree with him on everything else, and he takes corporate money and he sells us out. Kinsinger is not like some sort of American hero or anything like that. But all he was doing was the very, very bare minimum, which is, can we just stop lying? We all know that Trump didn't win. We all know there was no election in front. We all know there was no evidence.

We all know it's a bad idea to break into the Capitol and threaten to murder people. And for that, that is a capital offense. in the Republican Party, your career will be executed, and it was. And Trumpism is, you know, ruling the day and Donald J. Trump is not going to stop going after elected just like him. You talk about using the full force and weight of his power and authority. Hello, somebody, can we do that on the Democratic side for good? But no, Trump owns the party. And so anybody that transgresses him is in his sights. Yeah, 100%. Yeah, 100%. Yeah, we just want people to use that power in

authority for something, you know, like sane. That would be nice. That would be nice. Yeah, and look at the state of the, look at the state of the Republicans. I mean, honestly, like in the past couple of days, I mean, this is the inevitable consequences of it. Kinsinger, like, voted, what do we think he voted with Trump? 98%, 99% of the time, other than the impeachment vote effectively, voted with him.

And because he went against Trump very briefly, 30% of the country will hate you until you're dying day. You're done. You don't get to be in politics anymore. And Neil Cavuto on Fox News, he just had COVID. He's immunocompromise, he's vaccinated, he had COVID, and he came back and he said, can we like stop being political about this? Just get vaccinated and they're sending him death threats. So look, I understand that we're all lefties, so we're all proponents of cancel culture,

but you guys have your own special brand of it where you can't take the slightest disagreement without literally banning people from media, from politics, not briefly, for the rest of their life. So like cancel culture really just means like don't tell me I can't say like the N word or I can't do blackface or something. That's cancel culture. But driving someone out of their career because they ask you to not die of a disease or they point out that a politician supported a coup. It's insane the double standard that we have as country. Asking your party to embrace the truth, which can deserve his own record. Those, yeah, he has transgressed, he's out of there.

He's transgressed. He's transgressed. I'm gonna quickly just build on what John and Nina said. So look, right now if I tell right wingers, Trump canceled Kinsinger, you know what you're going to say, you're gonna be thrilled, right? You're gonna be like, yes, that's what he gets for siding against us, right? Well, then you can't say you're gonna cancel culture. You can just say, I want to cancel the people I don't like, and I don't want you to cancel

us when we do bad things. Just be super clear about that. John's 100% right. Now to what Nina's saying, now look at how easily Trump can eliminate his political opponents. And then Biden tells us it's not possible. He's like, I have to give Mansion to cinema everything they want. Yeah. Because I have nothing at my disposal.

Whereas Trump's like you, but ding, you, but ding, okay, and he does it with a tweet or now these weirdo emails that he sends out, et cetera. He just gives you a stink eye and you're eliminated from the Republican Party. So it's not that it's not possible, there's no question. And the right wing voters were so frustrated with the establishment, and I would argue reasonably so, that they made the mistake of going with a guy who's a tough guy, but only for his own purposes, right, for his own selfish purposes. But imagine if we had a progressive, a Democrat, who did it for good for their voters

and said, look, man, our voters want lower drug prices. And it's not just my voters in my district. 90% of Americans want lower drug prices. You oppose us, and we will cancel you. You want to cry about cancel culture? I want you to cry, okay? I'm going to hand you a towel. I'm going to bring you a box of tissues, and I want you to use all of them.

But if you say that you want higher drug prices for our voters, you are going to get canceled. I'm going to make sure that you'll never work in politics again. And in fact, when you go to try to get a lobbyist job, I'm gonna tell that company, you're never gonna lobby the president of the United States if you hire Joe Manchin. Okay, there is hardball, Trump knows how to play it. Yes, he does. Right? He's a master at it.

And Biden doesn't. That is why Trump appears to be strong. He's very insecure and actually weak, but he has the appearance of strength, whereas Biden has the appearance in reality of weakness. Yeah. And I wish it weren't the case, I don't want Trump to win. No, absolutely. Right? I want Biden to win in Biden versus Trump.

But my job is to be honest with you guys, and that is what's going on. Yeah. Yeah, some things are worth canceling for. And what we're fighting for right now, paid family leave is worth canceling for. Lowering the cost of prescription drugs, worth canceling for. Standing up to say we're gonna save Mother Earth, definitely worth canceling for. So yeah. Yep.

All right, we are out of time. So here's what's gonna happen. First of all, you're gonna watch the damage report. Whether you like it or not, no, of course you're gonna like it. Okay, guys. We still multicast here on T.Y.T.'s channel, but it's just going to damage report starting Monday. So make sure you're checking it out at 10 a.m. Pacific, 1 p.m. Eastern. So go to YouTube.com slash the damage report. Nina's on damage report on Tuesday, so you can get both of them. So that's

awesome. Obviously check out Nina on Indisputable as well, and Power Hour, etc. And when we come back, Ida Rodriguez is going to join us. She's got an HBO special coming out. Damn. Next week, okay, we're all super excited for it. It's called Fighting Words. You guys are going to love it, okay? So come right back in the second hour stories, the crying Nazi, the QAnon guy gets busted. You're going to love those stories.

We'll be right back. 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 at apple. dot co slash t yt i'm your host jank huger and i'll see you soon