The Young Turks - Death & Destruction

Episode Date: March 25, 2023

Trump posts disturbing baseball bat photo with Alvin Bragg, threatens "death and destruction." Pro-gun Tucker Carlson pumps brakes on armed transgender people. Idaho Republicans call free tampons in schools too "woke" and block them. HOSTS: John Iadarola (@johniadarola), Cenk Uygur (@CenkUygur) & Emma Vigeland (@EmmaVigeland) SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ http://www.youtube.com/user/theyoungturks FACEBOOK: ☞ http://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER: ☞ http://www.twitter.com/theyoungturks INSTAGRAM: ☞ http://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK: ☞ https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕 Merch: http://shoptyt.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Woo! It's up! Dropy! Bexie! Free matching! Bexie!

Bexie! Bexie! Bexie! Dxie! Drop it! Drop it like you're a Democratic prosecutor and it's Donald Trump charges. Nonetheless, power, power panel, Jake Uger, John Idol, the host of the damage report, Emma Viglin, one of the hosts of majority report.

Hey! The Vig is back, okay, so we got a lot of news for you guys ahead. So Trump promises death and destruction, of course we will lead with that. But so much more, including wild and interesting news, Republicans on the attack, us attacking back, it'll be fun for everybody. So without further ado, Mr. Iderall. Yes, without further ado, impending political violence and chaos. Donald Trump threatened both death and destruction, and that was the most threatening message he put out in the last 24 hours, although perhaps not the most directly threatening message. We're going to compare the multiple ways in which

he attempted to intimidate both Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, as well as anyone else who might come at him with criminal charges in the near future. It started like this. Take a look at this photo. He was posting this national file article about supposed election, blah, blah, blah. And of course, the image is Donald Trump with a baseball bat about to, I'm going to read between the lines and say beat the district attorney to death with a baseball bat like he's a two bit cinematic mobster. So that was fun. But anyway, he also had. He also had things to say himself, including saying, isn't it, isn't it terrible that D.A. Bragg refuses to do the right thing and call it a day. He would rather indict an innocent man and

create years of hatred, chaos, and turmoil than give him his well-deserved freedom, which is in quotation marks. Why you would put freedom in quotation marks there? I have no idea, but blah, blah, they lied about me, human scum. He's calling him human scum when he's previously called Alvin Bragg an animal, so some pretty explicit racism there. But then things really got going. He did a few warm-up bleats, and then he got to this. What kind of person can charge another person in this case a former president of the United States who got more votes than any sitting president in history and leading a candidate by far for the Republican Party nomination with a crime with a capital C, when it is known by all that no crime has been

committed and also known that potential death and destruction in such a false charge could be catastrophic for our country. Why and who would do such a thing? Which is, ironically enough, the question that many people had about that particular message. Why would you, on the verge of maybe getting charges? He had predicted that it would have happened days ago. There's been no significant forward momentum towards that, but it could be coming. Threatened both death and, I'm going to say, rioting if you are to be charged. As we're going to get to, it's also arguably illegal to send out the messages that he did, considering the legal predicament he's in. But what do you all think about these threats, both the threat

of someone else killing someone and then him with an image of a baseball bat held over a DA's head. Yeah. So quickly, I have an aside, your Trump is very South Park. That's all I have to say. It's like a South Park character. Yeah, I think that's very fair. Hey, guy. Okay. So before I blame Canada. So of course in that in that statement there, the last line that John didn't read is only a degenerous psychopath that truly hates the USA. So he's also calling Alvin Bragg a degenerate psychopath and of course the death and destruction line. But so here's the interesting part. Why take down, so Trump wound up taking down the picture of him, you know, Al Capone style holding a bat to Alvin Bragg's head or the picture of Alvin Bragg's head.

But he did not take down the threat of death and destruction at the protests because it is a crime to threaten a prosecutor, but not a crime to get people to do death and destruction in general. So if many people die like they did on January 6th, he's not legally responsible. And he's like, oh, good, they died, but that's not on me. But I can get charged with a crime for the Alvin Bragg thing. And that's why I'm going to take that down, because that one has to do with me, me, me, me, me, me. mean. I know right wingers will never get it. They don't believe in facts. They don't nothing. Okay, but guys, think about it. He didn't help you on January 6th at all. Hundreds of millions of dollars in the so-called legal defense fund. He didn't spend a nickel

on it on anyone else. The only person he cares about is himself, of course. But the other is so, but why is he threatening all this violence, et cetera, when he could be against the law in New York? Because I think he has actually come to the correct conclusion. Oh, these guys are frauds, they're never going to charge me, especially if I threaten them. Then they're going to wet their pants and then they're going to run backwards. And that's what I think Alvin Bragg is doing. I think Alvin Bragg is incredibly scared. Look, you can say, I don't blame him.

White powder shows up at the Manhattan DA's office, bomb threat the other day, including a note that says Alvin Bragg, I'm going to kill you because there's tons and tons of right-wing terrorists out there. And Trump just has to say something for remember, these are not like, People always make the wrong assumption that people think like they do. No, you guys are perfectly rational and you wouldn't see a random quote from Trump or Biden or anyone else and go out there and bomb someone or kill them, right? No, he's trying to address the people with the most mental health issues that are prone to violence. There's tens of thousands of them and he's trying to activate them, right?

because he's a monster. This is exactly how fascists operate. And he knows the thing that the giant, one of the giant advantages fascists have is usually they face incredibly weak opposition. So all these pros, you say, oh, it's been five years, man, Michael Cohen already went to jail for the same exact crime. It's been five freaking years. And Alvin Bragg's still trying to figure out where his shoes are, right?

And this is the deranged psychopath who's out to get Donald. Trump? Well, he has a hilarious way of doing it. I'd have done it in five days. He's sitting around five years, him and his predecessor, right? No, probably Alvin Braggis and he that he's a quarter word animal who's out to get Trump. No, it's the exact opposite. He's a giant coward who could barely move. All right, Emma. Yeah, I mean, it's also clear when he says animal what that means, right? Of course. Black man who he's targeting with that language. He's also continuously using Soros funded. Is there any evidence that George Soros has funded Alvin Bragg, paid Alvin Bragg? Not that I've seen. Usually what that means is it's an anti-Semitic dog

whistle meaning Alvin Bragg is a part of the deep state and they're all out to get me and you know, woe is me. That's Donald Trump's whole shtick. But as you say, Jank, he is has now understood the power of his fan base, the cult following. he has and that's certainly not an exaggeration to call them a cult following, he weaponizes them and their mob mentality regularly now because he saw on January 6th, like he lost the election and deep down he knows it. But he saw that even when it was so clear cut that he lost the election, he has so much power over this rabid fan base of people that will do whatever he says, that he knows this is a weapon for me, this is a tool. I'm being backed into a corner and the

There's multiple investigations, including this one in New York, which is definitely definitely the weakest in my opinion, because it has to do with a, you know, the stormy Daniels payment. And I think in terms of the stuff that Donald Trump has done, it's very far down the list, like the investigation in Georgia, he's not being as vocal about. And that's partially because he tried to overturn the democratically, the democratic results of an election. And that's pretty damn bad. So don't touch that as much. This one, he feels like he has a bit more of a leg to stand on to say, oh, it's a witch hunt, this is so ridiculous when this is Alvin Bragg in that office weekly, as you say, Jank,

but pursuing what they think they can get Trump on. This is a weak charge, yes, but that's because they feel they have the most evidence about this given what they've collected from Michael Cohen, etc. So what Trump also knows though is that when he activates his base, uses that to threaten prosecutors, the government officials from actually holding him accountable, that it does work to a certain extent because the Republican party is still tiptoeing around him, even after he incited the insurrection. And also that no matter what happens, his base will just say it's fake news or called a false flag. So it's a win-win for him either way.

Yeah. I just wanted to clarify one quick thing, though. I don't think it's a weak charge at all. I know a lot of people think that Emma's not alone. I think it's a crystal clear case of campaign finance fraud. That's a felony. By the way, people like Dinesh D'Souza have gotten similar to jail in prison for similar charges. And Michael Cohn already spent three years in prison for those charges.

So did they do it together or didn't they? Or was Michael Cohn wrongly charged? And the state should give him a whole bunch of money for a false prosecution. Which one is it? No, they committed the crime. I hate that the elites are above the law. Like there's a different standard. If you do it, or even like a semi-powerful person like Dinesh D'Souza does it,

they're going to go to jail, right? But if it's an elite, well, no, it's got to be a much higher standard, at least murder. Otherwise, you have to let him go. No, prosecute them on what you have. Yeah, and by the time he does get prosecuted on this, if it does happen, God only knows how many additional charges. charges he might have thrown on to himself.

I want to run through a little bit of the evidence towards that. Some reactions coming in to Donald Trump's implication or threat or prediction of death and destruction. Some of them founded, I think, in a pretty good analysis of the legal consequences, as well as some incredibly cowardly responses from Republicans that are hilarious. So stay tuned for that. First of all, you have legal analysts for CNN, Norm Eisen, who said threatening a prosecutor is a crime in New York. In fact, it's multiple crimes. Harassment in the first degree, menacing in the second degree, stalking in the third or fourth degree, and that's just for starters. I'm not a lawyer. Don't sue anyone based on what you read in a tweet,

but potentially that could be something. He did take. it down the tweet that they're referencing there. No word yet on how long a social media post needs to be live to trigger the law. But he is powerful. It doesn't matter. He's threatening the same prosecutor who doesn't have the fortitude to charge him on a clear crime that his co-conspirator already spent three years in prison for. He could threaten to, he could threaten to put a gun to his head. And there's no way Alvin Bragg would charge him. He knows Democrats are cowards. He could do anything he wants. And I think if that post was up for another 10, 15 minutes, I think they would have gotten him.

So then you have, so I don't know, he works for CNN. He's fake news, I guess, from the point of view of Trump. You don't have to listen to him. But law professor Jonathan Turley from GWU actually testified in Trump's defense during his first impeachment had this to say. Former President Trump is back in all caps denouncing the Bragg investigation. He is right to object to the case as a political prosecution. But he added an inflammatory ending to his latest all caps posting.

Trump declared the brag is carrying out the plans of a radical left lunatics. Our country's being destroyed as they tell us to be peaceful. And then Jonathan Turley adds, neither side should need to be told to be peaceful. Given the violence of January 6 and riots at various cities, our leaders have to avoid reckless rhetoric. Being peaceful is not just a legal obligation, but a civic duty of citizens. And again, this is a lawyer who testified in defense of Donald Trump and is even just in that post, reference this as being a political prosecution, which is certainly an opinion. Yeah, Jonathan Turley is deciding to be dumb because he's not done.

He's an incredibly right guy, and he was an interesting lawyer and had some good critique of the Bush administration, right? But he's doing this act of like, oh, golly, gee, is Trump potentially violent? Oh, this is the first instance of it, and I am just aghast. This is such a big surprise to me. Jonathan, get off of it. I don't know why you became a weirdo, weirdo, right winger, but please stop pretending and ruining your reputation as a decent legal mind. you just discovered that Donald Trump might be threatening people? Get the out of here.

Sorry, John. I mean, it's even more direct than the language he's using an anticipation of January 6th. But I wanted to add this because obviously this is another opportunity for us to play the game that reporters always have to play with prominent Republicans. Can we get you to admit that you saw the crazy thing he said? So Sahil Kapoor posted, asked Jim Jordan what he makes of Trump's warning about potential death and destruction if indicted. Jordan said he hasn't seen Trump's post. When I showed him to him on my phone, he said he can't read well without his glasses. He added he's reviewing DA Bragg's letter.

No word on how he's going to read it since he doesn't have his glasses. I mean, look, obviously refusing to opine on a threat to mass political violence is not nearly as bad as calling for it. But they're not even trying to pretend. Like that's basically spitting in the face of people who are worried about people being killed if he's indicted right there. Yeah, I'm sorry, Emma, go ahead. No, I mean, it just, it is fascinating to me that the entire legal establishment has been completely unsuccessful up to this point because of what they would say is like, oh, this is a very difficult prosecution. It's going to be hard to hammer Trump on X, Y, and Z. When the reality is, is that there is a set of norms, structures, and history going back to

Richard Nixon and Ford saying, well, it's in the interest of healing that we don't pursue any charges against Nixon. Same thing with Bush. Nancy Pelosi did not move forward with impeachment over the war crimes that he committed in Iraq and torture, etc. in the war on terror, you know, it's just we got to be a little bit hands off on that. Because our structures in our government and in like the ruling establishment, they all incentivize going after people on the bottom of the ladder in like the 99% frankly in the

country, but particularly poor people. And maintaining powerful people's insulation from any kind of actual consequences and even guys like Trump, who is widely loathed by a lot of the more buttoned up wealthy people or powerful people in Washington, there still is, there are still so many hurdles to actually holding him accountable because not holding powerful people accountable is as American as apple pie, unfortunately, even though we like to venerate our founding fathers. That's the reality of the United States. Yeah, so let me agree 200% with them on that Obama let Bush off on every crime, Cheney, et cetera. And what happened?

Mainstream media kissed his ass on the left side, the right side, all over the place. Oh, what a great American. Oh, he let the elites go, yes, Obama, yes, you never punished the elites, right? So did you see any criticism from MSNBC on that? Of course not. This whole structure of media and politics is designed to protect the elites. And to her earlier point about the biggest crimes, he orchestrated a fake elector's scheme to do a coup. And we have no charges on that.

Now, the Democrats are the worst. They're almost in cahoots with the fascists because you need someone to be pathetically weak so that the fascists can win. And the Democrats are like me, me, me, me, I'll do it. Merrick Island, Elvin Bragg. Joe Biden, I'll do it. I'll do it. I'll do it. I'll be incredibly weak. Biden and Pelosi go out there. Oh, we hope that the Republicans are super strong. So strong. And Merrick Garland, I'm bearing like, oh, we're not charging anything yet. Please, I'm begging you. We're not charging anything. Okay, get out of here. He tried to do a coup you morons. You're just going to let him walk right into it.

So, okay, and right now, Biden would lose to Trump. I mean, they're so pathetic. Okay, so I did a tweet on social media. The last thing. And I said, hey, Maga, guys, you tell me, I mean, the guy's clear, he's calling for death and destruction. There's no ambiguity about his violence. So whenever people do violence on our side, we say on the young Turks all the time, don't ever do that. It's an admission of defeat. It's terrible. You should never do it.

It's immoral, et cetera. So can you, are you guys okay with it? Like, what's your views on violence, right? Dozens of them. Now, one of them said we shouldn't be violent. Okay, I'll read you three randos as an example and representative. As a magafinatic, we're at war with unholy people, it is what it is. Can you define violence?

Yeah. Yeah, killing people, attacking people, punching people, ripping people, ripping police down and then dragging down a flight of stairs, knocking them unconscious. Do you need me to keep going? And then last one is left those violence all the time and it's crickets from you. You get what you asked for. This is their classic excuse. Like they just make up a straw man that the left likes violence.

And so, oh, yeah, I saw Black Lives Matter people. I saw a couple of fires. You guys loved it. Did we? You have any of us on tape saying, oh, we love the violence? We love right? No, you don't have any of that. You just go, oh, yeah, the left liked it.

So we did even more violence. No, you like the violence. So, all right, look, if you're a Republican, guys, I beg, look, if you're a Republican, and I get this all the time, right? You say, oh, we're super unfair to you. Then why didn't you just say, like, here, again, always the simple, simple example. If Bernie said, hey, listen, if they don't do Medicare for all, I want death and destruction in the streets, I'd be like, no.

I mean, I want Medicare for all really, really badly, but no, weirdo, why would you say that, right? It'd be so easy because we're not sick of fans, we're not up his ass, okay? But you guys are like, oh, Donald Trump, okay, so just say, it's such a simple thing. I love Trump, but this call for violence is absurd. It's dangerous. It's wrong. I still love him, and I'm going to vote for him over Sleepy Joe, but come on, Donald, don't do the violence, don't call for the violence.

Easiest thing in the world, I'm asking you to clear those. smallest, lowest bar in human history. It's one atom above the ground. And they won't do it. So Republicans show me, prove me wrong. I haven't seen other than the establishment republics in Mago world, like the Cernovich is, everybody a daily wire. I don't know. I don't have been seeing people like, oh my God, this is outrageous. This is wrong. This is slightly wrong. Nothing, nothing, nothing. Prove me wrong. You won't. Yeah. Well, it's incompatible with the right wing. I mean, the right wing engenders violence that is known throughout history and like what we experience right now. And just really quickly, I know we have to wrap.

But in Bolivia, there was a right wing coup attempt. You know, Janine Anez attempted. Stop. Do you know how fast you were going? I'm going to have to write you a ticket to my new movie, The Naked Gun. Liam Nissan. Buy your tickets now. I get a free Tilly Dog.

Chili dog, not included. The Naked God. Tickets on sale now. Now August 1st to overthrow the democratically elected government there in Bolivia. And you know what they did? They ended up actually prosecuting her and bringing charges against her. That's how a functioning society works. The United States isn't even close to that.

And he's gonna get away with it as you predict Jank and I predict the same thing. And then, you know, probably going to be winning the Republican primary in a year. Yeah, and probably in no small part because of this story that we're talking about. He understands better than Ronda Santis that they desperately want this. They've been trained, it's what QAnon was for is to utterly dehumanize the other side. The other side are literally Satanists, they worship the devil, they want to eat your child, have sex with your child, whatever. You don't need to have any consideration for them.

And I'm going to tell you the ones that you're now allowed to brutalize, to kill, or at least wish to see killed. And he gets that better than Ron DeSantis. He has that through line directly to their spirit. Anyway, we do need to take our first break. We'll come back, lots more used to get to. Don't go anywhere. All right. All right, back on TYJ, Jank, John and Emma with you guys.

Also, Eric Davis. Eric just became a member by hitting the join button below the video on YouTube. Eric, you're awesome. We appreciate it. Everybody, t-y-t.com slash join. If you can remember, you'll enjoy all the extra programming you get and you get to be part of us doing the show. Ida-Rola. That's me. Let's jump into it. Look, just to be clear, we're not against people, American citizens carrying firearms, having firearms we support it, including trans people. It's fine. But what you're watching here is not the extra. of the Second Amendment. What you're watching here is political hysteria, fear, ginned up on purpose with maximum dishonesty in order to get people in a state of agitation, armed people in a state of agitation. Doesn't matter if they're trans or not, whatever that is. It's the same template always. Scare the crap out of your voters, tell them that their lives are at risk, encourage them to get guns. How do you think that ends? If it is a template, let's be clear, it's the daily template for the rundown of his and every other program on Fox News. He's suddenly found a way or an opportunity to have a problem with. The idea that you might scare a group of people, so they go and grab some guns and think that they might have to use them to save their life. He has given that call any number of times and any number of monologues, but finally he has

a problem with it. Why? Because it involves trans people, it involves gay people, the LGBTQ community. Because apparently some fearing the harassment, the attacks, the possible death that they're facing with these protests from people like the proud boys and neo-Nazis showing up, toting assault rifles of their own, some people think that probably they should have weapons to defend themselves. And he thinks it's fine. He says it's fine. The idea of people having guns is fine to him. Do you know how opposed he has to be to it to describe people getting guns as just fine? In any event, NPR has done interviews with some groups, including Rainbow Relo, of people who are getting guns practicing with them to defend themselves. Take a look at this. One of the members, Sharon, recently transitioned.

And I went from concealed carry every once in a while when I was sort of feeling it to every single day. Because reading the news, having a few experiences, realizing that I've gone from old cis male white upper middle class really no real fears about anything to there are people that just looking at me will want to hurt me there's that individual fear fear of what may happen simply existing in public but for some there's also a more organized and ominous threat including a neo-Nazi group now active in new england that's targeted trans people England. The least right wing region in America. Every state is blue. But there's a neo-Nazi group that's terrifying everybody. So first of all, I think we should probably note the fact

that he finds out that there's an extremist group trying to find and hunt down and kill trans people. And he literally chuckled about it on his show. But also the idea that New England being a blue area means what? That there's no Republicans? There's no right-wingers. There's no extremist, there's nobody who's violent. It's utterly condescending towards his audience. But I'm glad that NPR did those interviews. I think the experience that Sharon talked about there, I think that a lot of people are probably experiencing that in no small part thanks to the advocacy of people like Tucker Carlson. Okay. So look, first of all, let's acknowledge that Tucker Carlson is a master troller. And he's obviously trolling on purpose. But the fact that his audience doesn't

Notice it is the amazing part. So he's saying, can you believe they'd fear up, you gin up fear over what might happen so that people will go buy guns. That's literally what Fox News does 24-7. He said, scare the crap out of your voters to get their votes. They're coming for your guns. If Obama are buying wins are going to take all your guns. And the immigrants are coming.

You know, the government tyranny. You got to get your Second Amendment rights. Government tyranny, I mean, you're going to, hey, you got to go. You got to get, did you get your bunker? Did you get your bunker? There's a caravan, isn't it? There's a caravan. Okay.

So that's Foxx 24-7. That's Alex Jones. That's all right-wing medias characterized perfectly by scaring the crap out of your voters to get them to do what you want. And he knows that. Oh, no. Tucker's not a dummy. He knows that 200%.

He's trolling you, right? But the audience doesn't notice. He really thinks, oh, yeah, the left, I can't believe they're. They get scared by their guys, you know what I'm saying? And then Tucker in the next segment will say immigrant. They'll be like, ah, trans people. Okay, come on, right wingers, come on right wingers. Come on, right wingers. Come on.

So prove me wrong. Tucker's audience, call him out, go come on, Tucker can do that every night. Here, I can show you this clip, this every, I watch you, do it every night, right? So, okay, now, second part of it, all of a sudden, when trans people have guns, not an exercise of the Second Amendment. No, it's political hysteria. Well, first of all, what difference does it make? The number one thing is you guys do political hysteria on steroids, get guns to fight against the tyranny of government. In other words, be ready to murder government officials like cops and military, et cetera.

But that is not political hysteria, according to Tucker Carlson. A trans person, even having a gun, is political hysteria. Why does he say that and why does his audience believe him and think that makes perfect sense? Because in the right wing mind, when they do something, that's perfectly fine. When the left wing does the same exact thing, not at all fine, because they don't believe in equality. They believe in power. I want the power. I want the guns.

I want to make sure you don't have guns and you don't have any power. And if you ask the right way, you're like, I don't get it. Where's the hypocrisy? I want to be above you. Where's the hypocrisy? Yeah, of course, I don't want you to have rights. I want me to have rights. Republicans prove me wrong.

Say, oh, there should be, isn't there a firestorm right now, NRA, daily wire, the blaze, if that still exists, shouldn't you all be like, no, second amendment rights for all Americans, including trans Americans? Haven't heard one of you, haven't heard one of you's so-called second amendment absolutist. Okay, my final thing, I'll be a little bit of a hypocrite here, but it's not. I'll explain why I'm saying it. I don't like guns, I would ban assault weapons in a second. We can go on and on about the gun control that we need in this country.

And I always tell people, don't get guns, it'll make it less safe. I'm going to make an exception here for trans people. They are actually in danger. They have had hundreds of laws passed against them. They have right wing media ginning up fear against them 24-7. They are targeted more than any other group in America. and if anyone should get guns, it should be trans Americans, okay? Because I'm worried for them.

I'm worried that the right wing lunatics are going to attack them as they have over and over again. And by the way, it's not just right wing lunatics, other people attack trans folks as well. So, and the last part of it is the minute groups they don't like get guns, all of a sudden gun rights become negotiable. Yep. It happened before in California, and we can get to that. And it was their beloved Ronald Reagan. So maybe the only way to get gun control is for people like transgender folks to get guns. Because then all of a sudden, you just saw it with your own eyes.

For the first time ever, Fox News and Tucker Carlson is saying, I don't know about guns. I'm not so sure about guns. Jank, it's so funny because I was actually just thinking of that same example, how the right became incredibly obsessed with their own gun rights when they were fearful about groups like Black Panthers arming themselves. And so that's why Tucker Carlson essentially has to downplay this. And it fits well into their narrative, which I've been saying for a little bit now, when they focus on mental health in the wake of mass shootings, they're trying to smear certain eventually, I believe, try to connect transphobia and no one understands what their

gender is anymore to people being mentally ill and shooting someplace up. It's the same reason, by the way, that that Colorado spring shooter trolling, much like Tucker Carlson is doing there, which is a hallmark of the alt-right sneering, irony-laden online right. Tucker Carlson is way ahead of other mainstream

Fox hosts on speaking to those groups. And they're also very white supremacists as well. They're constantly speaking in troll language and trying to gode liberals into stepping on it. That's why that club queue shooter pretended to be non-binary and use they, them pronouns after attacking an LGBTQ club and it was later revealed, there was no evidence of that. That was a troll. That was his effort to feed into what they're trying to lay the groundwork for is that trans people, they're too mentally unstable to exist in society, let alone have guns.

And that's the thing about the right and fascist like Tucker Carlson too, because they're immune to hypocrisy shaming about guns. They're like, no, our side should have the guns. Your side should not have the guns because we want to be able to dominate you. Like, what is there that you don't understand about that? And Tucker Carlson is brazen in it. And I think it's actually a more effective message for a right wing base because the guys like Ben Shapiro, I mean, there's this clip going viral of Tucker Carlson's conversation with Ben Shapiro about where Ben Shapiro says, well, would you regulate technology that would automate trucking and put millions of truckers out of work? And Tucker Carlson says, are you kidding in a second? And I saw some people praising him

for that. But the subtext behind that is like Ben Shapiro is a free market capitalist orthodox like, thinker, right? He's a, he's in a free market fundamentalist is what I mean to say there. But Tucker Carlson is just like a fascist. And so he doesn't care if he's hypocritical. He wants to preserve in his mind in that case study, the white majority and their economic power. I don't care if I'm hypocritical about capitalism.

I want to make sure that these, in his mind, white truckers have these jobs and have economic power because that's what I'm preserving. And it's the same instance here with his complete hypocrisy about trans people having guns, because for him, that's irrelevant. He's a paid liar. We know that from the Dominion lawsuit. And this is just another piece of the puzzle of that larger picture, mosaic, I should say. Yeah, I do agree that like the idea that he would, that he would, or more likely one of the Daily Wire people within a week are going to be calling for bans on trans people buying guns would seem like, well, that's clearly got across some sort of hypocrisy line. But they spent years talking about cancel culture and free speech. And then they began

banning thousands of books around the country. Marjorie Green was talking about how we got to cut funding to Ukraine because we got to stop interfering in other countries. And then literally the next day she called for an invasion of northern Mexico. Like there is, there is, we got to save the children, but not from AR-15. Like there's nothing that is too hypocritical for them. Because again, wanting to be ideologically consistent is not a universal value. And I think that people on the left need to understand that. We think that because it's core to our value system, that it must be core to everyone's. It is not, again, as Jank was saying, being an elevated position, having power over other people

is a much more core position for right-wing ideology. And so sure, they want everyone to have guns as long as everyone is them. They don't want other people to have them. So I have no doubt that you're going to have. hardest parts of getting older is feeling like something's off in your body, but not knowing exactly what. It's not just aging. It's often your hormones, too. When they fall out of balance, everything feels off. But here's the good news. This doesn't have to be the story of your next chapter. Hormone Harmony by Happy Mammoth is an herbal formula made with science-backed ingredients,

designed to fine-tune your hormones by balancing estrogen, testosterone, progesterone, and even stress hormones like cortisol. It helps with common issues such as hot flashes, poor sleep, low energy, bloating, and more. With over 40,000 reviews and a bottle sold every 24 seconds, the results speak for themselves. A survey found 86% of women lost weight, 77% saw an improved mood, and 100% felt like themselves again. Start your next chapter feeling balanced and in control. For a limited time, get 15% off your entire first order at happy mammoth.com with code next chapter at checkout. Visit happy mammoth.com today and get your old self back naturally. being proposed and right wing pundits are going to be advocating for in the near future.

Okay, so get him all you can, I guess. Last couple of things, by the way, when black people have guns and they tell the cops like Flander Castile, and then they get shot by the cops, no word, NRA, Second Amendment guys, well, he had a perfectly legal gun, why did the cops shoot him? Nothing, nothing. No, it's a black guy who got shot with a perfectly legal gun, don't care about a Second Amendment rights. Why did California do gun control? Because the liberal hippies, no, Ronald Reagan did it. You know why? Because the Black Panther is one. went into the Capitol with weapons because they were allowed to. It was legal at the time.

And right wingers that were white panicked. And they're like, bad gods. It turns out black people have them, okay? That's why we have gun control in California. So this hypocrisy by the right wing has been around forever and ever. And now it's gonna be my new cash phrase, Republicans, prove me wrong. Say, hey, you know what? Trans people should have all the guns in the world and they have the same exact rights as us.

And Tucker Carlson is being ridiculous. My guess is approximately zero of you will do that. I have a feeling. Okay, we're going to take our last break of the hour. And we come back, though, Republicans are launching a new war against woke tampons. Let's give you the details after this. All right, back on TYP, Jay, John, and Emma with you guys. John's got more news.

I do. Let's start with this. Boys and girls have two peas, peeing and pooping. We know that the proper role of government is to cover the two peas. Well, surprise, we just figured out, 23, the girls have three peas. They have peeing and pooping and period. The girls don't have a muscle down there. When that happens, it happens.

It's an emergency every time that happens. It's a basic biological function. It's the proper role of government to cover a basic biological function. I submit to you that it is. Dear God, man, you can learn a lot, apparently, even when you're, I'm going to say, 55 that these basic biological things happen. In any event, while the argument that you just saw there was tortured at best, that was Rod O'Don. furnace, a Republican who was actually arguing for something good, which is free access to tampons in Idaho's schools. It's hard to tell from what he was saying there, but he got there

eventually. Unfortunately, more Republicans turned against his argument, and in particular, a group of 10 Republican women helped to vote this down, so tampons will not be free to kids in schools in Idaho. There would have been both for public schools and public charter schools who serve students in grade 6 through 12, free access to feminine hygiene products, free of charge. They would have included tampons, sanitary napkins, and others. And by the way, to cover the entire state, that would have cost less than $1 million, just $735,400. But it's not going to happen. And we're going to get into some of the arguments that were made by individual representatives

to argue why free access to tampons is in some way woke. But what do y'all think about what you saw? So what did they want them to do? Three peas, everyone. No, but like, I mean, Republicans. So, okay, look, 23, you say, oh, everybody thinks for their own perspective, but I get that, right? That's normal. And you think, well, what do you mean?

Why don't their parents just buy them tampons, right? That's because 77% of you can afford that and think it's perfectly normal. But 23% can't afford it. Those are numbers that have been studied, right? So if a quarter of the kids that are going through that can't afford it, what do you want them to do? Just bleed in the middle of school? Because it would be woke to help them?

I mean, do they think this is optional? Like, oh, you know what? Oh, you're just being woke by having a period. Like, okay, so. My periods, they are so woke. I mean, I just got to say. Every time I get my period, I talk about taking down the patriarchy. It's just what I have to do.

So the only argument I could see is because they are discomforted by new phrases. And we've talked about that before. And that's not a crazy thing. Okay, but then it depends context, right? So they say menstrual equality and period poverty are new phrases. And we're unfamiliar with them. So they scare us and we call them woke. Well, okay, well, let's break it down.

So Latin X was a new phrase. I always thought it was absurd. A lot of people on the left yelled at me, and it turns out I was right. They pulled Latinos and apparently about 4% of Latinos are in favor of it, 96% are opposed. An absurd phrase we didn't need that was invented for a category that does, that already had plenty of phrases, okay? But there is no phrase for, hey, turns out 23% of girls can't afford tampons and we need to get them some sort of equity or they're going through poverty and it with this relates to their period. There is no such phrase. So they came up with phrases, like period poverty, menstrual equity,

but something to help make things so that those poor girls don't have to rush to school or rush home and miss school. So what's wrong with that? I don't like new things. I'm a conservative. Let's make sure that we don't help them. Okay, if that's how you roll. Yeah, I mean, I don't, I think that it's a little even more insidious than that.

I mean, we, we, I'm sure you guys covered it, but the, um, I believe it was Minnesota, yeah, the passing of the free school lunches and some of the Republican arguments against that. They genuinely want school, public school in particular, to be as hostile of a place as possible and not a place that is communal for kids, where they feel comfortable, where if they're too poor, they're able to have a sanitary napkin, have a tampon, not have to bleed through their pants, which like going through puberty as like a cis woman myself, girl at that time, that's something that happens and it's really embarrassing and you get made fun of. Like they're trying to, the people that they're trying to push this forward are trying to make school a place that's more hospitable for kids where they want to go to the best of their ability. I mean, not kids don't love school, but still one where they can have food, access to those kinds of sanitary services, all that good stuff.

But Republicans are ideologically opposed to public school. They want charter schools. They want to privatize things. They want it to be religious schools. They want to undercut every public institution possible. So they want to make it hostile for kids that are menstruating in their public schools. That's it. Plus, they also have generally embedded misogyny about and fear of female parts or parts that they're associated with menstruating. And so they're just consistently like terrified. Oh, it might be a vagina. Oh, it might be a period. Like there, all these Republicans are just overgrown little boys too afraid to actually deal with people's reproductive processes. And so that's what you get from that. So like, I do think it stems from just trying to undercut public schools as an institution more broadly.

Yeah. Well, it's actually, it's honestly, it's a great invocation of the word woke. Woke is just, I don't like that thing. So I'm going to generalize it to being woke. They don't want tax money to be spent to help regular people. I mean, that's been true for a very long time. I think as Emma points out, it's even more appropriate that they don't want it to happen in schools. But notice, like, they don't think it's worth time attention or money to make kids comfortable when it comes to, you know, having access to these products or whatever. But like if it's referencing the race of Rosa Parks, they will do literally anything. They will scour a library to make sure that their kids are comfortable when it comes to that. And when you look at some of the arguments they make, and then you think about what Republicans

have been up to nationally recently, take a look at the hypocrisy. This is Representative Heather Scott. This bill is a very liberal policy. And it's really turning Idaho into a bigger nanny state than ever. It's embarrassing not only because of the topic. She is advancing the right wing, I guess, misogynistic idea that just talking about periods is inherently embarrassing, I guess, but because of the actual policy itself. So you don't have to be a woman to understand the absurdity, and you don't have to feel

that you're insensitive to not address this. No, if you don't address this, it actually is both ignorant and insensitive. You should feel those experiences, you seem to be implying that you are. So providing those products would be being a dandy state, but combing through every book in the library to find if there's any references to masturbation or something is not a nanny state. And what is the argument here? So if you can, if providing those products is a nanny state, why do you have toilet paper there? Exactly what I was going to say. John. I mean, people could bring in their own toilet paper. Why are you providing that? That's just being

the nanny state. Get out of their crack and let them pull themselves up by their underrews. But tampons are for for many times female sex organs. So that's really. Icky, right? And we don't like to deal with that. So let's just not even address it. And also, like, they love punishing women for being women. That's what the entire abortion reproductive healthcare debate is. They want women's reproduction to be either out of sight, out of mind, or under control from male patriarchs. Yeah, look, this program costs under a million dollars, okay, it's even for Idaho saying it's minuscule, and they grant that it's minuscule, even the Republicans say it's a tiny amount of money. The toilet paper costs way more, right,

because it goes to all the schools, there's a lot more of it, et cetera, right? So you tell me the difference between, hey, the toilet paper and the tampon for the people who can't afford it. By the way, they're both free. I mean, I mean, I hate to give them ideas, but you could say, like, oh, what are you giving away free toilet paper for you? You're so woke, okay? The rich kids, should bring in their own toilet paper. The poor kids should walk around with pants like that, okay? Well, don't be woke, don't be woke. Okay, and remember, yes, in this case with the tampons,

it's a war against women, right? But Idaho is almost all white, so this one is not racial. It's just, we don't like poor people. That too, yeah, right? I mean, like, yeah, the rich kids and the middle class kids are going to have the tampons, they're going to be fine. This is just for poor white people in Idaho. We don't think that, we think you should be humiliating,

be humiliated in class. And we think you shouldn't go to school. And that if poor people aren't humiliated, well, that's woke. Yeah. And same thing with the school lunch debate, right? If you don't have the ability to pay for your own lunch, we won't provide free lunch for you and you'll be hungry. And you might actually not come to school. You'll be a little bit more uneducated. And you'll then be a little bit more able to be manipulated by bosses into taking low wages and stuck in a cycle of poverty because we have bled, no pun intended, these social institutions dry and made them so inhospitable to poor people, to women, to anybody that we don't feel like we have an incentive to educate and be a part of the ruling class, which is what the top

of education funnels people into, you get cast aside because these institutions are only for the people that we want to be in these institutions. Yeah. Okay, well, I definitely have other thoughts about that. And I am worried about the next steps. Don't get them started on the toilet paper. Soon Idaho schools won't be able to spare a square. But anyway, we'll have to see. We do have other news to get to. So why don't we jump into that? This week, the Biden administration had an opportunity to stop price gouging from Big Pharma on one particular kind of drug that many cancer patients need. They chose not to do that. Instead, they allowed this particular drug called Extandi to continue at its current price, which can be, for some people, $180,000 a year, this necessary cancer medication.

By the way, sorry, that's what it costs here in the United States. Depending on what country you live in, it can cost three to six times less. So it's certainly possible to make it available for much less money. We're just not going to do that. So first of all, some info about this drug. The Patononic Standy is currently held by pharma giant Estellus, which in turn shares the U.S. market with Pfizer. It's been proven to be effective in treating prostate cancer and is on the World Health Organization's list of essential medicines, according to some great work by the lever.

The drugs ingredients, very importantly, were developed at UCLA, a public university with grants from the U.S. Army and National Institutes of Health. So a case could be made that this medication would have never been produced if it wasn't for taxpayer money. We helped to produce this medication that now can cost $180,000 per year. So what could the Biden administration have done that would potentially cut the cost of this? Well, in late 2021, prostate cancer patients, Robert Sachs, Claire Love, and Eric Sawyer, petitioned

the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to exercise its, quote, March in rights against Extandy. So under the Bidol Act, the federal government can reclaim and redistribute patents for inventions created with public funding, enabling generic competitors to produce cheaper versions when, quote, action is necessary to alleviate health or safety needs or when an invention's benefits are not being made, quote, available to the public on reasonable terms. So it definitely is not being made available on reasonable terms if it can cost $180,000, the price of a house in some parts of the country, and that's just for a one-year supply, and action is clearly necessary to alleviate health or safety needs

because people are suffering and dying from these forms of cancer on a regular basis. And so, by the way, even if you have Medicaid, you might have to pay $10,000 a year to pay for this far less than other people, perhaps, but still an amazingly high amount of money for people who don't have it to spare. And it isn't like they haven't already made a lot of money off of this drug. The patent holders of Extandy have earned over $20 billion from it. And so the Biden administration was receiving pressure from numerous members of Congress and medicine affordability advocacy groups.

But despite that, the NIH declared earlier this week that it, quote, does not believe that the use of March in authority would be an effective means of lowering the price of the drug. First of all, I'm not a doctor, I'm not a scientist, I'm not a lawyer, not many things. But it definitely would be an effective way to cut the price of this. If you make the patent available for generic competitors, I have a feeling they're going to be able to produce something that's less expensive than $180,000 per year. That is not a logical or reasonable explanation for them stepping in to stop this, particularly considering the amount of lobbying that's come in to try to stop marching rights from exercise, and in particular from people like Xavier Bacera's previous commentary, even in recent years about how the government needs to exercise this power more often. But now all of a sudden, once he's partly in charge of it, suddenly not interested in doing it. Okay. So now let me explain to you how almost everybody in power in this country systematically lies to you.

Javier Bucera is a giant liar. Joe Biden's an enormous liar. But I think that corporate media, mainstream media that you're used to, are the biggest liars of all. So let me prove my case. And of course the drug companies are liars. The only people who would be stupid enough to believe that drug companies are not liars are reporters in this country. Okay, so they say we need incentive for research and development to make these amazing drugs. Well, that sounds pretty compelling.

The drugs are amazing. They do save a lot of lives. I want them to have an incentive for that. And by the way, I'm a capitalist. So I believe in that incentive structure. Well, first of all, $20 billion wasn't enough incentive? I'll take it. You know what?

And I'll cap it at 20. I'll cap my profits at 20 billion, okay? And I say, jank, that's unfair. That's a drug company that's their whole, you know, infrastructure is built around that. And you couldn't do that. No, I could. I could do the same exact thing. Oh, that's an outrageous thing.

Is it? It was developed 100% at UCLA. The government didn't develop some of it. It developed all of it. They didn't need a dollar for research and development. The government then handed it over to the companies, and the company said, thanks for the $20 billion gift suckers, and then they just sold it. I can set up a company today, I'm a businessman, I can set up a company today to sell that

drug like that in a week, in a week. And you know how much it might cost me? Might cost me $20 million. And then I would take the profit of $20 billion and put it in my goddamn pocket. This is an absolute robbery, okay? So the drug companies might help around the edges, but in this case, again, 100% developed by the United States government and taxpayers, hey taxpayers, you know what happens when a company

develops something and hands it to another company? They get most of the profits. Did you get any of the profits? No, we got none of the profits. And corporate media is like, I can't tell. Is that what happened? The government paid for 100% of the research and development. And all of these lies that we've printed a thousand times in every

article about how they need to be incentivized for research and development, they were lies. Well, calling, gee, what am I a reporter, okay? Javier Bixera, when he's out of power, when he's not in the administration, we have to make sure we left this rule so you could have drugs at reasonable prices. Now he is in power. He can do something about Canada, for example, it costs one-fifth of the price. We pay five times what Canada does. For some of you, Canada is like one step away from you. What's magical about Canada?

Their government is not corrupt. They don't take bribes 24-7 from drug makers. You know how much of bribes the drug companies gave? I'm sorry, mainstream media reporters. Let me be polite. Campaign contributions, a quarter of a billion dollars, a quarter of a billion. Do you think the drug companies, are you as stupid as a mainstream media reporter that says, oh, no, I think that they gave it for the general welfare.

And I think Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden and all the people who took the money, oh, they just took it just because they happened to agree that drug prices should be five times higher here than they are in Canada. They think that's a good policy. It's a bribe. Everybody on the planet knows it's a bribe except mainstream media reporters are like, oh, that's outrageous, these scandalous young Turks calling it a bribe. That's just a quarter of a billion dollars, just free from the drug companies. They don't care about these regulations.

They're wonderful human people who are just trying to do research and development. Okay, but Sarah, you're a liar. You never, ever meant it. This is what, and then what it was, so he says, oh, I don't. demand lower drug prices. What happens next? Main Street media does articles about Becerra wants lower drug prices. Becerra says lower drug prices. He's in charge. Okay, great, you have an amazing opportunity. Right here, you can do it right now. I'm just messing with you. No, you're gonna pay five times

what Canadians pay. And if you don't get your Medicare patient, you can't afford $10,000 a year, you're gonna die. You're gonna die so that they can have bigger problems. By the way, One of these companies, the main company, is a Japanese company. They made a billion dollars off of this drug just in 2021, in profits. No, the Japanese company has to get paid a billion dollars. You die for the Japanese company. Mainstream media, did any of you call them out? Any of them?

Joe Biden, what did this mainstream media tell you? Oh, the price of insulin is capped. He capped one drug out of thousands and tens of thousands of drugs. He capped one drug, insulin, insulin, insulin, insulin. Joe Biden is lower drug prices, lower prices. Joe Biden, American hero, lower prices. Insulin, $5.35, insulin, no, Joe Biden, lower drug prices. No, Joe Biden is 1,000% in favor of higher drug prices.

Now, get a little to this. Right wingers, why isn't it your right wing media flipping out against Joe Biden like we are? We're on the left and we're tearing Biden's face off on this because he can get you killed with this. Why hasn't Tucker Carlson or Fox News or any of them said anything about it? Because they're also corporate media. It's good, cop, bad cop. Whenever it's in culture wars, oh, yeah, oh, can you believe the goddamn M&Ms? Trans people, oh, you get really mad.

Oh, he's doing a robbery. Fox News loves it when you are robbed, CNN, New York Times. They all love it when you are robbed. And they would not tell you the truth under penalty of law. Emma? Yeah, I mean, look, I want to be fair. The Biden administration was a part of lowering insulin prices, and that was an initiative of theirs.

So, like, that, that is something that should be noted, but it's undercut by something like this. And the problem is that they felt insulin would be more of a political benefit to them because it's so widely used, and this is a lot more under the radar. are. And the problem with it is that Biden is actually just not really a progressive. He's a cipher, as we like to say on the majority report. He goes with where the party currently is. And that means you're not really tethered to any leftist, progressive, democratic, socialist ideology that would allow you to be consistent on these kinds of things, including when it

comes to cancer drugs, because I'm going to be a little personal here. But Biden has run on cancer and has spoken about it quite a bit because of his horrible, unimaginable experience with his son, Bo, who passed away from cancer. And so you would think that when he speaks about cancer during the state of the union, that these kinds of decisions made within the administration, he would be a bit more consistent on it. But the problem is that he is not somebody who has a real peg to any leftist organization or specific ideology on this front. And in insane society, this is what would happen.

If the government helps you develop a drug, by the way, this applies for the COVID vaccine as well, then the government has the capacity to set price limits. That's it. That's it. Game over. We're not doing this. We're giving you money to develop a drug. You take that money. Then you make a ton off of it by price gouging. That should not be allowed. In fact, with the COVID vaccine, that should have been a part, that should be owned by the government. And like we gave billions and billions of dollars with no strings attached to Moderna and Pfizer. They have the technology, they developed it with government money. Now they're with the end of the emergency authorization, another crazy

thing that Biden is doing for seemingly no reason except to appeal to right wingers. The, Moderna and Pfizer are going to gouge on the COVID vaccine and people that don't have insurance, hey, you're out of luck and you're going to have to pay out of pocket in order to not get COVID, which we've seen has effects on people, particularly if you have a preexisting condition. So we, this lack of consistency stretches throughout the Biden administration. And frankly, we just have such, the private health care system, Big Pharma has such a a chokehold on our country that standing up to them, like our government can't even seem to stand up to them. When in any sane society, again, something like the COVID vaccine would have

been, the intellectual property would have been waived. It would have been free to everybody, including underdeveloped nations, which is what the, you know, frankly, Western governments were responsible for allowing those countries to get sick because, hey, pharma in the West has to get rich. Okay, last quick things here. First of all, In my personal opinion, they get zero credit for insulin because it's a smoke screen. They regulated one drug to distract you from the fact that they are not regulating all other drugs. And they go, oh no, don't worry. So don't worry, don't worry though.

We're also going to do nine more drugs in 2026. Wow, no, I'm no credit, zero, zero. It's a smokes street. That helps millions of people. Oh, whatever, so that they could screw over 300 million people on every other drug. An idiot media can go, insulin, the only drug that matters, he has lowered drug prices. He's impersonating me right there. Look, say that to people who are on insulin.

I mean, come on. Yeah, you should have free insulin, like you should have all of those other drugs under Medicare for all. Joe Biden is lying to you and you will die from something else because he is using that as a smokescreen to make sure that his goddamn donors get rich off of you dying. So no, no credit for one stupid drug is a perfectly great drug. Don't get me wrong, even though I'm angry. Incredibly widely used. Oh, Emma, are you kidding me? No, I'm not kidding.

You don't know that that's a smokescreen? No, I know that it genuinely actually affects. There's millions of people. It's like saying, hey, I'm going to bomb a building, but I took one person out. Hey, you're welcome. Hey, everybody else in the building, you're dead. I should get big credit for the one guy I walked out of the building. What do you mean?

I don't know, my opinion is not about just like fixing everything with with one fell swoop. I think that what the government can do to help people, they should get credit for it. It makes your argument stronger when you make, give them credit and then hammer them elsewhere. I'm not giving them credit for one out of 20,000, 200,000 drugs. It's meant to deceive you. I am not going to fall for a trap to deceive our audience. Okay, we disagree on it, God bless. If you guys are in the Emma and John Camp and you think, One drug, Joe Biden, Joe, one drug. Oh my God, it's amazing.

That's a direct quote. Joe Biden is awesome, okay? I'm straw manning. I'm sorry. I know you didn't say that, okay? Okay, so last thing. Go, Joe! Okay, NIH, sorry, I lost the earpiece.

Everything's gone. NIH puts out a statement that says, hey, the law is, you know, we should do this. If it's available at a reasonable price, if it's not available at a reasonable price, you should do this action that they refuse to do. The NIH put a statement saying, what do you mean? We're not doing anything because it's available. That's not what the law says, available at a reasonable price. They purposely left out at a reasonable price and said, what, what, what, what, what, what, what, it's available.

If you have $189,000, it's available. Yachts are available. Okay, this is how we lose faith in institutions. NIH has great scientists. I trust them on the science. We're not lunatic right wingers who are like, oh, scientists and doctors are evil. No, they're great people at NIH. But the very top levels are completely corrupted.

They are definitely going to work for drug companies after they leave. That's why they put out an absurd statement like this is available at $189,000. Did you hear about insulin? Yeah, I mean, no, no credit. Was a financial burden for 15% of Americans, 10 to 15% of Americans. That's been helped by that. That doesn't mean that he's good. on health care. I just listed off a bunch of reasons why he's inconsistent and bad.

But you, but this is a good thing. That was a good thing that happened. Sorry, Emma, he can't hear you, so I have to translate. She told you to go F yourself. Okay, fair enough. Fair enough, I don't get offended. Okay, no, seriously, everybody check out, we're out of time. Emma is on majority report. Check that out every day. John does damage report, lots of the reports around here, okay? And that's it, one o'clock Eastern every single day. Check them out. We love you guys, love the agreements and disagreements. We will come right back with more amazing stories. 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. Apple.co slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.