The Young Turks - David Shulkin, Vermont Gun Control, Larry Nassar Dirt

Episode Date: March 30, 2018

A portion of our Young Turks Main Show from March 29, 2018. For more go to http://www.tytnetwork.com/join.   Hour 1: Ana and Mark Thompson. David Shulkin replaced by Ronny L. Jackson as the secretary of veterans affairs. White house experiencing a number of shake up, many employees are losing influence over President Trump.  Hour 2: Vermont passing gun control legislation. Michigan University paid a PR firm to get dirt on Larry Nassar, the investigation turned up evidence against their own Dean. 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. On July 18th, get exciting. This is big! For the summer's biggest adventure. I think I just smurf my pants.

That's a little too excited. Sorry. Smurfs. Only theaters July 18th. Thank you for watching or listening to this free podcast of the Young Turks. We want to make sure that you get some portion of the show every day. But if you want the full show, which is actually five segments, come become a member and support independent media as well.

TYT Network.com slash join. Meanwhile, enjoy the free podcast. Yo, yo, yo, welcome to the Young Turks, Anna Casparian and Mark Thompson with you. He was kind enough to return to help me host the show today. Yeah, no kindness associated with it. I look forward to it. Yes, it's going to be great. It's a huge newsday, lots of stories to get to, including further corruption with the EPA's Scott Pruitt.

I'll tell you what the latest breaking news story is on that. Absolutely infuriating when you consider the conflicts of interest and the blatant corruption at all levels of the federal government under the Trump administration. And they're messing with our environment. So it's something that I definitely want to dig into later in the first hour. And then in the second hour, we will cover the feud between Laura Ingram and David Hogg. There has been some fallout by advertisers. And I absolutely love it because I detest Laura Ingram. And she's getting exactly what she deserves.

Anyone of conscience should detest Laura Ingram. Yeah, exactly. All right. Well, let's get started with one of the biggest news stories of the day. And it has to do with even more people being fired from the federal government. All right. Veteran Affairs Secretary David Shulkin has been ousted from the Veterans Department. And part of the reason why is because there has been some fallout between him and Donald Trump. We'll get to those details in just a minute.

But he has been replaced by Ronnie L. Jackson, an individual that you might have read about fairly recently because he was the person who gave an hour-long press conference in regard to Donald Trump. Trump's health and condition. Now, Trump said Wednesday that he was removing Shulkin and tapping Admiral Ronnie Jackson, the White House physician, as his replacement, ending weeks of uncertainty at the embattled agency. Now, Donald Trump decided to take to Twitter to broadcast this news to everyone. And he said, I'm pleased to announce that I intend to nominate highly respected Admiral Ronny L. Jackson, MD, as the new secretary of Veterans Affairs. At least you spelled veterans correct.

Actually, that was, that was not a bad tweet. You know, the proper words were capitalized. It was impressive, you know, low standards, but still impressive. All right. So he also said in the interim, Honorary Robert Wilkie of the Department of Defense will serve as acting secretary. I am thankful for Dr. David Shulkin's service to our country and to our great veterans. Now, the big question here is how much of this decision had to do with the fact that there are certain members within Trump's administration that are pushing for the privatization

of the VA. And it seems like that is one of the largest reasons. And also, why is it that Ronnie Jackson is stepping in now? How is he qualified to fill this position? And just to give you a little information about him, he served as a presidential physician since 2013, so meaning under the Obama administration. His experience in the White House goes back to the George W. Bush administration. He was also in charge of resuscitative medicine for the trauma response unit during the Iraq

war. He also praised Trump's health and has credited him for his good genes. So he was complimentary toward Trump, which could give you some, idea as to why Trump would tap him to fill Secretary David Shulkin's role in the VA. Yeah, that'll carry a long way with this administration, with this president, certainly. And the notion that they want to privatize the VA is the whole game, probably. And there's always the palace intrigue that goes on with the Trump administration, who's everybody in that White House is jockeying for position. There are leaks from everyone.

There are conspiracies to out certain people. That has been going on since the first hour, and it continues to go on. But what's happening at the VA is there's a big push to privatize it. And there's a big push to privatize a lot of things that are associated with everything in government, including the military. We've talked about that before. Eric Prince, who was connected to this White House, wants a privatization of many military endeavors. But anyway, on the VA, he was sort of viewed as the last bulwark, the thing that was going to be the last step in holding up the privatization. of the VA. He was the one argument against privatizing it. So get him out because we want to

privatize this whole organization. And that argument won the day here. All right. So let's get into the infighting, the conflict, the drama, and how this all came about because I think the inner workings of the administration are fascinating, especially in this case. Now, keep in mind, I want to preface everything by mentioning that there have been numerous members of Trump's administration who have raised eyebrows because of their very, I guess, generous spending of taxpayer money on things like travel, and they're still within the administration. They have not been fired. Tom Price was the only person who stepped down because of how much she had spent on travel. However, there are other members of Trump's administration who have spent money

on ridiculous things, and they're still there. But it seems as though the excuses for getting rid of Shulkin had to do with the way that he had spent taxpayer money. Now, let's talk about the privatization issue. At the heart of the dispute between Shulkin and Trump appointees were changes to a program known as choice that allow some veterans to seek private health care. Shulkin favored a modest expansion of the program that would still leave it up to the VA doctors whether patients can seek private care. Now, again, he was kind of the person who prevented the floodgates of private.

privatization within the VA. And there were members of Trump's team that did not like that. So successes with the department, David Shulkin wrote in the New York Times, successes within a department have intensified the ambitions of people who want to put VA health care in the hands of the private sector. I believe differences in philosophy deserve robust debate and solutions should be determined based on the merits of the arguments. The advocates for privatizing VA health services, however, reject this approach. He continues to write in his op-ed, and by the way, this was after he was fired. They saw me as an obstacle to privatization who had to be removed. That is because I am convinced that privatization is a political issue aimed at rewarding

select people and companies with profits, even if it undermines care for veterans. Now let's get into the issue of spending taxpayer money. The Trump administration is trying to make it seem as though they got rid of him because of a misuse of funds. And again, there have been other members of the administration who have misused taxpayer money, but they're still there. So I see this as an excuse, even though I do agree that he shouldn't have spent the money in the way that was outlined here. Now, let's go to Graphic 11. Feelings on Shulkin began to sour in February when the VA's Inspector General released a report, on a trip to Europe over the summer that found Shulkin spent most of his time sightseeing

rather than conducting official business and improperly accepted tickets to a Wimbledon tennis match as a gift. Apparently his wife also accompanied him on that trip. And after this report came out, Shulken said, I will 100% reimburse the government for those funds. And it didn't matter. They decided to get rid of him anyway because it wasn't about the misuse of taxpayer money. There are numerous members of Trump's administration who misuse taxpayer money. This was all about seeing him as an obstacle to privatizing the VA. And so they use that as an excuse to get rid of him. Yeah. And it's funny when they, I mean, it really is laughable when they talk about some kind of honest debate on subjects. And Trump even says, I like to put two people

who disagree on things in a room. I listen to the arguments and then I make a decision. No, that's not really the way it works. What you really do is you put two people who agree with in a room, and then you decide how you're going to pursue whatever policy you've already decided you're going to pursue. And that was the case here. He was an obstacle to that. He wants that privatization. And look, he's not, he doesn't sound like the kind of guy who I would necessarily make

my pal, because I do think that he went to great, shall we say, there was considerable excess in the way he took that vacation and he laid it on thick. Having said that, he is right. He's probably the guy who evaluated what. going on at the VA and felt the privatization was a bad idea. So in that sense, he's right. And it's a loss to the VA, Shulkin's departure. However, when you get to the guy who's going to replace him, you're talking about a guy who has no management experience. That's right. You've got to understand the VA is a huge organization that's charged with tremendous

responsibilities to help veterans who are in crisis often. I mean, there's a huge PTSD problem. suicide problem. There's a huge problem we've heard about the veterans literally dying because they're waiting for treatments that they're not getting. So this is an administration that's besieged by problems, the VA. You need a management structure in there that is really going to make a difference. A guy who's never really been involved with management is not the choice to replace him, even though he's really good at complimenting the president. That's exactly right. And my concern is that you privatize the VA and the care is not going to improve, it's actually going to get worse. Now, one of the issues with the VA was how severely underfunded it was. There wasn't

enough attention and enough resources being pumped into the VA to ensure that we were doing right by our veterans. And there is no reason to believe that the private sector is going to do better with our veterans, considering the way that they're dealing with the American people in general. And David Shulkin made that point in his New York Times op-ed. And I completely agree with him on this. So Graphic 10, he says the private sector already struggling to provide adequate access to care in many communities is ill prepared to handle the number and complexity of patients that would come from closing or downsizing VA hospitals and clinics, particularly when it involves the mental health needs of people scarred by the horrors of war. And so I think that he had some

legitimate concerns there, but as he also mentioned, there was no room for robust debate. Members of Trump's team have already made up their mind in regard to privatizing the VA, and it seems like they're headed in that direction. They don't care about veterans. They just don't. They're all show and no go. It's all that other military, military, military. I don't have a military parade or to celebrate our military.

But when they talk about funding the military, they're not funding the VA. They're not funding PTSD and suicide problems and opiate abuse, that all of which afflicts veterans in record numbers now. They're not talking about that. All they're talking about is ways to make money. So they dole out to their corporate pals and private businesses, pieces of the VA, and they're going to slice it up and privatize it, and it'll all be about money. and the actual services provided to be veterans will be lost. It's pretty devastating.

And if you look at the track record of this administration, you will see instances of, you know, members of Trump's cabinet awarding these huge government contracts to their pals. Betsy DeVos is the recent example. The Education Department just gave out a huge government contract to a debt collection agency that DeVos used to be invested. in. So there's no reason to believe that this isn't an attempt to push for more sweetheart deals for their little cronies. All right, moving on to some other news. We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-E-NFTR. As a Young Turks fan,

you already know that the government, the media, and corporations are constantly peddling lies that serve the interests of the rich and powerful. But now there's a podcast dedicated to unraveling those lies. debunking the conventional wisdom. In each episode of On The Republic, or UNFTR, the host delves into a different historical episode or topic that's generally misunderstood or purposely obfuscated by the so-called powers that be, featuring in-depth research, razor-sharp commentary, and just the right amount of vulgarity, the UNFTR podcast takes a sledgehammer to what you thought you knew

about some of the nation's most sacred historical cows. But don't just take my word for it. The New York Times described UNFTR as consistently compelling and educational, aiming to challenge conventional wisdom and upend the historical narratives that were taught in school. For as the great philosopher Yoda once put it, You must not learn what you have learned. And that's true whether you're in Jedi training or you're uprooting and exposing all the propaganda and disinformation you've been fed over the course of your lifetime.

So search for UNFDR in your podcast app today, and get ready to get informed, angered, and entertained all at the same time. As we know, the White House is experiencing a number of shakeups, a number of individuals who are either being fired or pressured to resign. And it seems as though there are other members of Trump's administration that are now losing any sway or influence they have over the president. The most recent example that's been reported about is actually John Kelly, the White House chief of staff. Now, recent reports indicate that Kelly actually wasn't with the president last week when Trump abruptly decided to fire H.R. McMaster as National Security Advisor and replace him with John Bolton. Just two people who, just two people were in the room for that decision and those two people were Trump and Bolton. And so there is a lot of concern that John Kelly is not only losing his influence, but that John Kelly was one of the few people who kind of kept things under control in Trump's

administration. And if he's now kind of pushing Kelly away, does that mean that there will be more chaos within the White House, which is hard to believe. But yeah, I think that that could be likely. Yeah, I mean, I think it almost stands to reason that it would happen. Kelly was already besieged by this president who does all this stuff that is ridiculous. He talks first and asks questions later. He's on Twitter late at night and all of these things. Even the access to the president was being controlled by Kelly. He was trying to get a hold of all of these things.

He was trying to bring some order to the general disorder that Trump had, claims his operating style in the Oval Office. With the loss of Kelly, it's a little unclear as to what's going to happen. But certainly that general freewheeling style, and that's a generous way to put it with Trump, I would call it reckless, will have no checks on it whatsoever or certainly limited checks on it. Well, it seems like in this new, even scarier era of the Trump administration, Trump just wants to be completely untethered. He just wants to be able to do what he wants to do, carry out whatever ideas he has at any given moment without any form of checks and balances within his administration. And so if Kelly did serve as some sort of mitigating factor, obviously Trump isn't going to love that. And, you know, there have been some White House staffers who have spoken to the media anonymously and mentioned that Trump doesn't even think that he necessarily needs a White House chief of staff if Kelly were to not be there anymore.

So that's a scary idea because it's, look, it's the way dictators think, you know, they don't want. anyone advising them, anyone controlling them, anyone telling them what to do. And Trump is kind of headed in that direction. You know, all the run-up to the Trump presidency, you heard a lot about how he's a billionaire and how he runs these businesses, and he'll be able to run this country. But the truth is that the Trump businesses were really run as a small kind of corner store operation. He didn't have a lot of people. There wasn't a big infrastructure from a personnel standpoint. It was really Trump and his family, and they ran the whole place. And that's sort of the way he wants to run the White House. Now he's got Bolton in there who he likes because he sees him on

Fox News talking tough and he likes his mustache and he brings him in there or he doesn't like his mustache. He doesn't like his mustache. But he finally decided to accept the mustache because he likes the tough talk. That's it. Okay. Tough talk outweighs mustache. But anyway, yeah, whatever, those are the wrong reasons to have somebody involved in your inner circle. But he's still in touch with Lewandowski and he's still in touch with Scaramucci. And he still has all these advisors. who are connecting to him, even if they're not formally in his White House. Okay, so I like that you mention those two names, Corey Lewandowski and also Anthony Scaramucci. Those are two people that Kelly did not want around the White House under any circumstances.

Now there are reports that Trump is in communications with them. In fact, Corey Lewandowski just recently met with Trump in D.C. And previously, John Kelly had said that if Lewandowski were to visit the White House, he would have to personally escort him. And that didn't happen in this case. Trump met with Lewandowski without John Kelly. Also, last week when Trump spoke to President Vladimir Putin, days before the U.S. decided to expel dozens of Russian diplomats,

Kelly was not on the call. That's unprecedented, right? Right, it is. It is. So, again, it shows you that Kelly's influence is tapering off. And also, Aides say that Kelly mishandled Rob Porter's departure. First by revising a statement that praised the aid after news reports surfaced that he'd been accused of domestic violence, and then by giving reporters an inaccurate timeline of events leading up to Porter's dismissal.

There are reports that Trump is still talking to Rob Porter, but it seems as though they are using Kelly's mishandling of that situation as a reason for why his influence is tapering off. Well, that Rob Porter situation was bizarre, and it was mishandled by Kelly, but it seems like that. He might have been getting orders from Trump to try because Porter was very important to Trump. He was a real kind of organizer of Trump's schedule, of Trump's appearances, all of these things as sort of secretary to the president. But they're clearly just hanging on Kelly all of these different things setting him up for, you know, his eventual departure. And of course, what we're hearing from the White House is the same old, same old, the calm before the storm. The, oh, no, no, no, Kelly's awesome. No, we're not planning on getting rid of him.

And then that should immediately be a warning sign that Kelly will be gone very soon. Obviously, that is my speculation. But if you look at what's happened with this administration previously with the ouster of other officials, they usually say that that person is safe. They're not going to get rid of that person. And then a couple of days later, that person is gone. Yeah. Look, the leaks and the journalism associated with this White House have been spot.

on. I mean, there really haven't been too many leaks or journalistic work associated with the White House that haven't been pretty accurate. And so that's the word out of the White House. You can kind of read the tea leaves pretty easily on this for all the reasons that Anna's mentioning. You just see the way he's been diminished in terms of his access, in terms of his connection to the president. And you kind of just do the math. He's going to be gone. Well, we got to take a quick break. When we come back, we will discuss the Scott Pruitt story that IT is at the beginning of the show. Make sure you tweet to us using the hashtag

TYT loves, TYT loves, TYT lives, TYT live. I do love reading your tweets during the break, so we will be right back with a couple of your comments in just a couple minutes. You're right in the middle of this podcast. We've got another great segment coming up for you. If you'd like the full show, which is actually

five segments, go to TYT network.com slash join. You become a member, you support the show, you support independent media, and you get the whole two-hour show ad free every day. Let's go do it now. What's up, everyone? Welcome back to TYT. A few TYT lives for you before we get started with the next story.

Danger, Carlos Danger writes the following. This is like Sean Hannity all over again. Wait, I upset the sponsors. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Please don't take the money out. Right? Grace was saying something. I was just saying that when we were during the break. I brought up a Sean Hannity as an example. Yeah. We just know each other so well. Snook Kid 999 says on YouTube super chat. Vermont is also rolling out legal cannabis this summer.

That was in all caps, by the way. Much love from the 802, Dominic. Okay. That's awesome. All right. So we do have a story out of Vermont that makes me incredibly happy and should make everyone unhopeful, including the students that are fighting hard for gun control. The state of Vermont has been notorious for pro-gun legislation. However, it is a testament to how

incredibly persuasive and powerful the Parkland, Florida students are, because the state has just advanced significant gun control measures. In fact, the governor of the state, Phil Scott, who has an A rating from the NRA, has also decided and agreed that gun control measures need to be passed in the state of Vermont. Now, Vermont's Republican governor, Phil Scott, who campaigned in part by pledging to protect gun rights, is preparing to sign a package of gun control measures overwhelmingly passed in the state's general assembly. Now, here is what these gun measures will do. It will raise the age for purchase. a gun to 21, also ban the sale of bump stocks, impose universal background checks for all gun purchases. This includes gun purchases between private individuals and partially ban high capacity magazines. Again, Vermont is known as a very pro-gun state. In fact, if you look at

the arguments that Bernie Sanders has made in regard to lawsuits filed against gun manufacturers, you see that he's not necessarily as progressive on that very issue. And it's because he comes from such a pro-gun state where hunting is a staple. It's something that the people living there really want to protect. Now, pro-gun groups routinely listed Vermont as one of the friendlier states for gun owners based on their lack of gun laws. And the National Rifle Association gave the governor a 93% rating during his 2016 campaign. But here's what Governor Scott had recently decided.

Well, on February 15th, that was one day after the Parkland shooting, police arrested an 18-year-old named Jack Sawyer in Vermont for plotting a mass school shooting of his own. And that close call reportedly shook Governor Scott. He was quoted as saying, if we are at a point when we put our kids on a bus and send them to school without being able to guarantee their safety, who are we? As a result, I've been asking myself, are we doing everything we can to protect our kids? And it seems as though he's willing to put his own biases aside to do what's right for the people of Vermont. This is really encouraging and surprising coming from Vermont. But I think it comes down to the governor recognizing that the buck stops with him. And this very close encounter so soon on the heels of Parkland really did shake him up.

And it's nice to see that that bled over, I hate, sorry, that that spilled over into sensible gun reform and that they're proposing that in a really meaningful way. And I think when you look at what is going to be on this bill, I mean, this is so reasonable. This really makes me very hopeful for other states that maybe feel like it could be an uphill battle, that this is something that will protect responsible gun owners that doesn't affect them at all and will protect children. And so I was very encouraged to read this. Yeah, it's incremental, you know, you're right. I think Grace is right when she talks about the fact that it's encouraging. If you want the elimination of assault rifles, then this doesn't really address that. And I do want the elimination of assault rifles.

And I don't understand why these weapons of war are in people's hands. But back to this story in Vermont, it is good news because they are so reluctant to touch. this issue. It is a third rail issue. As Anna says, even Bernie Sanders doesn't really get involved in this in any big way. So to see them be proactive from a governor who's avoided it in the past, it is good news. And yeah, it doesn't go as far as we'd like to see eventually. It doesn't, but boy, it goes a lot farther than you ever thought it would go in Vermont. Right. And for me, by way, Mark, I completely agree with you that, you know, the measures aren't really that big of a deal. if you look at the big picture, right?

But the reason why I think this is encouraging is because think about what happened after the Las Vegas shooting, which was the largest mass shooting in modern U.S. history, right? We have so many people gun down at a music festival. It impacts people who are at a country music festival, right? So they're not necessarily people who are like ultra-libs. And even experiencing that themselves, you still have a huge portion of this pop country that doesn't want any gun control at all. couldn't even get bump stocks banned after that shooting. And honestly, after that happened,

I had personally, internally, I didn't vocalize this, given up. I had given up. I had no faith in our lawmakers. I had no faith, sorry to say, but in the American people, because we just let it happen over and over again. And I felt like any discussion about it at that point was a wasted effort. What these kids have done is at least given me a renewed hope that change can happen. And that's big. That's huge. I know that there are a lot of other people out there that felt the same way I did. They just wanted to give up. And I think it's important to see these victories for, yes, what they are. You know, it's not going far enough, but there's momentum going. And I'm really hoping that we keep fighting, that we don't get complacent and push for more change.

Yeah, and it starts with at least some change. I completely agree with you, Mark. I think that there does need to be more change, but it's just so encouraging to see any change, especially bringing up Las Vegas. You know, how many times have we, you know, sat here or talked amongst ourselves just being so frustrated that there wasn't even a bill,

you know, and this was overwhelmingly passed by the General Assembly. That I have to take is encouraging, because so much of this has been discouraging just to see, you know, all the low blows that have been thrown against these kids that have sparked this movement. And this is something. that we can celebrate. This is something that is encouraging. This is building on that momentum and hopefully there will be more that we can also celebrate. Exactly. Now, these measures are set to go

to the state senate where they're expected to pass. And as we mentioned, the governor is likely and willing to sign this legislation into law. All right, moving forward to some other news. New reports indicate that Michigan University paid a firm to dig up dirt on some of the victims who had accused Larry Nassar of sexual misconduct. The report indicates that public relations firm Weber Shandwick built Michigan State University for more than $500,000 for January, as it tracked social media activity surrounding the case of convicted physician Larry Nassar that often included the accounts of his sexual assault victims and their families. Now, what this report also found was in addition to tracking the social media activity

of Nassar's victims and family, the firm tracked those of journalists, celebrities, and politicians. They had billed the university January of this year for more than half. a million dollars. Previously, you know, the university itself was doing their own digging. But as these investigations move forward into MSU's role in all of this, we're finding some pretty devastating new information. The former dean of MSU was recently arrested, a story that we reported on last week. And the special prosecutor investigating this case gave a press conference and and explained why. Take a look. At TYT, we frequently talk about all the ways that big tech companies are taking control

of our online lives, constantly monitoring us and storing and selling our data. But that doesn't mean we have to let them. It's possible to stay anonymous online and hide your data from the prying eyes of big tech. And one of the best ways is with ExpressVPN. ExpressVPN hides your IP address, making your active ID more difficult to trace and sell the advertisers. ExpressVPN also encrypts 100% of your network data to protect you from. from eavesdroppers and cybercriminals.

And it's also easy to install. A single mouse click protects all your devices. But listen, guys, this is important. ExpressVPN is rated number one by CNET and Wired magazine. So take back control of your life online and secure your data with a top VPN solution available, ExpressVPN. And if you go to ExpressVPN.com slash TYT, you can get three extra months for free with this exclusive link just for TYT fans.

That's E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N dot com slash T-Y-T. Check it out today. And the end result of that is that we're here today, having charged former Dean Stranpp, or former Dean William Stranple with a number of charges. The four charges that I would anticipate he's going to be reigned on this afternoon are count one misconduct in office, which is a five-year felony. The second count is criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree, which is a two-year high misdemeanor, and two counts of wolf and neglect of duty, which are one-year misdemeanors.

But I want to highlight paragraphs 28 and 29 that probable cause affidavit, because I think they summarize the basis of the misconduct charge against former Dean Stranple. In paragraph 28, as dean of the college, Strample used his office to harass. discriminate, demean, sexually proposition, and sexually assault female students in violation of a statutory duty as a public officer. In paragraph 29, as dean of the college, Stranp will abuse the authority of his public office through threats of manipulation to solicit, receive, possess, pornographic images of women who appear to be MSU students in violation of a statutory duty as a public officer.

So we have the former dean who was being investigated to see whether or not he knew that Larry Nassar was abusing these female athletes, arrested because that investigation turned up evidence that he was possibly guilty of sexual misconduct of his own. And then now we're finding through a report that was done by USA Today that the university itself had hired a firm to essentially track the social media action. activity of the victims and also the journalists reporting on these stories. These big institutions like Michigan State University, like the Catholic Church, like Penn State during the Jerry Sandusky situation, they close ranks to protect the institution. And you see that here also, you know, in the cases that I've mentioned, when you look at Penn State, you look at the Catholic Church, they don't call the cops, they view it as an internal matter. Same thing as true at Penn State.

They didn't alert anyone to what was going on to Sandusky, and they knew what was happening there. They tried to handle it as an internal matter. And here, too, you see Michigan State hiring these outside firms to try to dig up and protect the institution from, frankly, from falling apart. I mean, you know, you get to a point where the reputation of the institution is so muddied that nobody wants anything to do with it. And so there's so much of that going on here. It's heinous because of what was happening there, but it's so typical of the institution to close ranks to try to protect itself. It's so nauseating, too.

It's just absolutely disgusting. And you do see that. You do see them closing ranks. And it just makes you think honestly about the humanity there. You know, who are you protecting? I mean, you look at some of the figures how much they were paying out to this PR firm. Yeah, it's a PR firm. I mean, think about that.

Think about what are you protecting? You want to PR from the victims and their families of a sexual predator? I mean, it would be much better to come forward and say, as a university, instead of trying to cover things up and hide things from the public, which, by the way, all things dark come to light. Yes. It'd be way better to come forward and say, this was happening. We are taking action.

These people are being outed, reported to the authorities. you know, we are going to change X, Y, and Z in order to prevent this from happening in the future. Be proactive. Do what's necessary to prevent it from happening in the future instead of being so concerned about your brand and your reputation. Your reputation is destroyed and it was further destroyed by the fact that you're trying to cover things up by hiring a PR firm to track these victims online. Yeah, not only were they not proactive, Anna, they were reactive and they went back into

their corners trying to protect, you know, you have to ask yourself, what did you? you really think you were protecting here and you just must have absolutely lost sight of what is important. I'm just very grateful that everything in the darkness will come to the light and there has been this moment of reckoning because it's really, I'm sure you guys, you know, covered this here, just hearing the accounts of these victims that came forward and were able to speak. Why just survive back to school when you can thrive by creating a space that does it all for you, no matter the size. Whether you're taking over your parents' basement or moving to campus, IKEA has hundreds of design ideas and affordable options to complement any budget.

After all, you're in your small space era. It's time to own it. Shop now at IKEA.ca. Take out, it's just, it's really hard not to swear right now. Right. How do you listen to that testimony? There were, you know, upward of 120 women who came forward and testified during Nassar's trial, how do you listen to that testimony and then decide, oh, the real victims are, you know, could be us. So let's go ahead and cover up, hire the necessary people to protect our name, I mean, and our reputation. It's not going to work, first of all. And secondly, you know,

have a little bit of empathy for those victims and take the appropriate measures to prevent this from happening in the future. Yeah, they should have, they should have taken a real aggressive approach to it, and instead they dropped back, they closed ranks, they hired a PR firm, they wanted to protect the brand, and it's the completely wrong thing to do. And yes, you are going to take a big ding because of something that was going on, a heinous thing that was going on in your program. But at least the way you handle it will be an aggressive, righteous way to make things right. And yet, that's not what happened. Exactly. We got to take a quick break.

Let's do that. But in the meantime, you can tweet to us using the hashtag TYT Live or leave a comment in YouTube super chat. We will read your comments when we return. Thanks for watching. We're listening to this free version of the Young Turks podcast. You know that the full show is at tYT network.com slash join. If you become a member, you get the full show ad free.

We love you for watching or listening either way. There's going to be a new free podcast tomorrow. You can keep on doing that. But if you want to get the full show ad free, TYT, Network. work.com slash join. 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 Podcasts at apple.com slash t-y-t.

I'm your host, Jank Huger, and I'll see you soon.