The Young Turks - Deep Dive II

Episode Date: February 12, 2022

President Joe Biden issued a warning on Thursday to any Americans who remain in Ukraine as Russia continues to threaten an invasion. Two Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee said the CIA has a secret, undisclosed data repository that includes information collected about Americans. A Black FedEx driver said FedEx hasn’t ‘supported’ him after being shot by white men. A Purdue police officer used excessive force on a student. A GOP Rep., who disavowed Trump after Jan. 6, posted a humiliating video of herself outside of Trump Tower sucking up to the former President. 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. Hey, we know you probably hit play to escape your business banking, not think about it. But what if we told you there was a way to skip over the pressures of banking? By matching with the TD Small Business Account Manager, you can get the proactive business banking advice and support your business needs. Ready to press play? Get up to $2,700 when you'll open select small business banking products.

Yep, that's $2,700 to turn up your business. Visit TD.com slash small business match to learn more. Conditions apply. Trimbing, Sri Zika! Three-a-hury! Three-a-D-K-a-D-R-Gri-A-G! Let's drop it. Drop it.

What? Off the top rope! Oh, my God. The reports will all be in the majority direction tonight. Okay. The return of the Vig. Emma, great to have you back. Great to be here. Thank you guys so much for having me on. I mean, I'm happy to see you, John. It's like, it's a wash. Yeah, I predicted that she wouldn't actually show. She did come. I think she felt the pressure from my tweet. but she did insist on being two squares over from me. So there's that at least. Okay. I've agreed with everything that's been said so far on this show.

John, Awash, me, good, Emma. Great to have her back. Perfect. I love to be here. I'm glad to see you guys, even though it's still virtual. But hopefully at some point we'll be able to reunite in person. All right. That sounds good.

All right. Lots of stories. And John's got them. Okay. I have something like him. Let's talk about this. Multiple updates coming in throughout the day on the situation in Ukraine. Not long before we went live, it was announced that Joe Biden would be deploying about 3,000 additional troops to Poland, which is certainly a move.

Of course, he has also said multiple times already that they will not be entering into Ukraine either in advance of or in response to any sort of Russian aggression. So I guess it's a thing you do as a sort of maneuver, a sort of bargaining thing. We also know that a reporter for PBS News has been told that by three different sources that the U.S. believes that Putin has decided to attack. That is the conclusion they've come to. They didn't provide any information, obviously, to that end. But that's what they say they're going on at this point. With all that said, we want you to take a look at a bit of video with Joe Biden being asked a question from Lester Holt. And look at how Lester Holt frames the situation.

Given the size of this buildup, has the inertia reached a point where it's inevitable that they have no choice but to invade? Well, look, I've spoken with Putin. I've spoken with every NATO leader. I've brought them together like I think they've never been as coordinated in modern history. NATO leaders about what to do if Putin moves. The question is he knows, he has to know that if he does the entire circumstance for Russia changes world. changes overnight. The cost to Russia both in terms of reputational cost and economic costs to be profound. Okay, so much of what Biden said there isn't that dissimilar from the

way that he's been talking about this situation for several weeks. But I am curious what both of you think about the way that Lester Holt framed that, that there potentially was no other choice at this point. Yeah, well, so look, I still don't know what the hell's going on here. We've been telling you guys the Ukrainians are not overly concerned about an invasion. That's because that's what their leaders are saying. Yet America says the war is going to start in 24 to 48 hours or you need to evacuate all Americans from there because it at least is likely enough to start in the next 24 or 48 hours. So I don't know if the U.S. is lying on a mass scale here so that Biden can then turn around and say, I averted the war and I'm an American hero and I'm just

like JFK. But in this context, John is right, and you're gonna see one more clip from Lester Holt. What's not helping is the media, right? Biden's position I'm not entirely clear on, but the media's position I am clear on. Everything is pro-war. So everything is just framed that way. In this case, I mean, war is inevitable, right? I mean, the defense contractors should get a couple more trillion dollars, right? I mean, it's a foregone conclusion, correct? So, Emma, what's your take? Well, I mean, I think the media to an extent does take the state department and the Pentagon's lead in this regard. And the chess puffing is, it seems performative, as you say.

I mean, I hope that it's performative. I do not want a war. And I don't think the Biden administration wants it as well as they shouldn't because obviously Russia is an immensely powerful actor on the global stage. And the consequences would be dire. He's all but said as much, though. We're not going to engage in a hot war. So so then what is the purpose of this chest puffing except for chest puffing in and of itself? Now, to me, in terms of where the Biden administration's head is at, my hypothesis is that they perceive that they were looked at as weak when it comes to Afghanistan and withdrawing from Afghanistan. That's why he made that big show about assassinating the ISIS leader that nobody in the United States cares about. about a week ago, which ended up killing at least 13 civilians and they're blaming it on the ISIS leader blowing himself up. There's no way to take the United States at their word in that area because, I mean, come on, how much of a track record do they have to have to make that clear?

So I think this comes back to a theme with Biden. He believes, and he's operating in this old school 1980s mindset, that there is political currency to be had here when you look tough. When the reality is is that everybody who's worried about Biden's tough posture in this area is on the right wing already. It's the same. I'm sure maybe we'll touch on this a bit when the way that the administration walked back the clean pipe proposal for drug users. They're so terrified of this imaginary constituency that they think that they're going to be able to gain. When if people are outraged over these little things and the chest puffing on the foreign state, on that international stage, or when it comes to the Biden administration initiating and incentivizing clean drug programs and helping with harm reduction, they're already lost.

And it feels like the Obama administration in that regard once over, or twice over. One more reason to get a progressive in office, seemingly every one of these so-called centrist for all of their other problems also is just to their bones terrified of everything, of the other side, definitely, of real attacks, of hypothetical attacks, of inevitable attacks that they can't realize are inevitable. On this situation, I'd been trying to figure out the same thing. How likely is a conflict, if a conflict were to come, how soon is it to come? We had, on the damage reporter earlier this week, a Kiev-based journalist who said that he believed it was more likely than is being presented by the Ukrainian government. In terms of how Biden is talking about this, and the messaging from the U.S., which, as Jenks said, seems to be like duck in cover, this thing is probably coming very soon, I think there, look, if you want to, there are certainly reasons to believe that, not only the overall buildup, but the fact that it has increased quite a bit just in the past few days. They just a few days ago sent over some warships and a submarine. But from Biden's point of view, like it's almost irrelevant whether it happens immediately or not. His messaging works to cover his ass either way. If nothing happens, he looked strong

like he was taking it seriously. If something happens, it's definitely better to have seemed prepared for it. And if your overall goal is to make sure that there's a reason, or at least what seems to be a reason to send a ton of money there to spend a bunch of money at defense contractors. Yeah, whether you think it's going to happen or not, you're going to want to make people believe that it could happen. I agree with Emma. I don't think that Biden, like, goes to sleep at night dreaming of a war with Russia. I don't, that seems like a crazy thing that a lot of people are saying. I don't know why he would want that. But then moving into Ukraine would also buttress military spending here. I don't think that means he wants it. But

Keeping tensions high and violence low, that definitely serves, you know, sort of business as usual. So I think I'm made the most salient point here. And we got one more from Lesterholt, and I like you're used to the word buttress. But to be fair, John, I think her point was also more salient than mine. So Joe Biden is stuck in the 1980s. We've all said that. And it's funny you said 80s, because I usually say 70s or 90s.

But he's stuck in time, right? And guys, what was really popular thing to do in the 1980s? The Cold War. So, and seeming tough on foreign policy because you thought that was going to get you a right-leaning independence and some Republican votes. Now, fast forward to present-day America, where Joe Biden has just woken up from his, what is those chambers where you're frozen? Frozen and carbonite. Frozen than carbonide. I'll be John to it.

I'm not used to the competition. Okay. It could be a Bachta tank. Okay, it could be a Bachta tank. Oh, dude. Biden Fed. By the way, the least Moba Fed character of all time. Boba Fett is super strong.

Biden is like, oh, I'm going to show you how strong I am by gaming the Republicans. He's like a bureaucrat from the terrible new Star Wars movies, that kind of senator, that person, right? Yeah. So, but so go back to, he wants to go back to the Cold War because he thinks that's a winning strategy. It's insane, okay? And then number two is this idea of, well, I'll appease the right wing. First of all, you don't look strong when you're trying to appease the other side. It doesn't matter how much you puff your chest. Doesn't matter how many wars that you threaten. You look weak because you're begging them for support, right? And second of all, hello, Mr. Carbonite, in this decade, the right wing doesn't the right wing voters don't want more war. Trump ran against the endless wars, and it helped him in the primaries, in the Republican primaries. But Joe Biden's like, me tough on ISIS, me tough on Russia, that will get right wing votes.

No, it won't. And by the way, look, that's ISIS and Russia, both happening when Biden's polling numbers are disastrous, is not a coincidence. So they're pivoting to foreign policy. So is Russia starting it by bringing the troops to the border? Or are we starting it by saying, oh yeah, we're going to put Ukraine in our military alliance and dare you to do something about it because we're pivoting to foreign policy to make Biden look tough? I don't know, but it doesn't look good for the Biden team.

And none of this is going to work politically. Last poll out, when they ask, what has Biden done for you? I mean, nothing is really harsh, right? I mean, he did pass two bills, et cetera, including all the checks that went out. 56% of Americans said nothing. He's done nothing for them. 56, that's not, Republicans are about 40% of the country now. That means there's a ton of independents and Democrats saying he hasn't done anything.

And threatening a war with Russia isn't going to help him with that at all. But back to the media. Yeah. Oh, well, then let's make sure that we fit this in. Lesterhol also asked Joe Biden about the situation in Afghanistan, the pullout, and let's take a look at that. That Army report, an investigative report that's come out about the lead up to the withdrawal from Afghanistan. It interviewed many military officials and officers who said the administration ignored the handwriting on the wall. Another described trying to get folks in the embassy ready to evacuate and countering people who were in. essentially in denial of this situation. Does any of that ring true to you?

No. No. That's not what I was told. That you were told that the U.S. administration officials were prepared. They knew it was time to get out? No, what I was told, no one told me that, look, there was no good time to get out. But if we had not gotten out, they acknowledged that we would have had to put a hell of a lot more troops back in. It wasn't just 2,000, 4,000.

We would have to significantly increase the number of troops, and we were back in this war of attrition. And there was no way we were ever going to unite Ukraine. I mean, excuse me, Iraq, Afghanistan. No way that was going to happen. And so this is a much wiser thing to do. I just want to clarify, are you rejecting the conclusions or the accounts that are in this Army report?

Yes, I am. So they're not true? I'm rejecting them. Yeah, look, to whatever extent he individually made the pullout worse, he should be blamed for that. But let's also not pretend that whenever it happened, if it was today, five years ago, 15 years in the future, the media was going to whine about it. They supported it going in. They do not want us pulling out of conflicts like this. So look, I think there's a lot of legitimate reasons to attack Joe Biden.

You can even find a bunch in the context of Afghanistan. But they're just, they're salty about the fact that the war finally ended. Well, I'll find a way to criticize him with Afghanistan, which is currently a story comes out today. $7 billion in assets that have been frozen in the United States of the Afghan government. Right now, the issue is in Afghanistan. They have a currency problem. And there is just not enough money to go around because the central bank there just doesn't have the funds. The country has $20 billion in GDP.

That is Afghanistan. It's not a wealthy country by any means. $7 billion, even if it's going to the Taliban, which we knew would take over, by the way, so we can't clutch our pearls and say we can't give money to them. Maybe they'll shave off some off the top, but this is Afghanistan's money. And it needs to go to people who are on the brink of famine right now. And the Biden administration is splitting it in half, apparently giving some of it to 9-11 victims, as opposed to just, I don't know, the federal government paying 9-11 victims.

That could be great. And so that's a valid critique here. But he doesn't really go on the offensive to talk about why the Afghanistan withdrawal was the right thing to do. Because really, all he wanted to do was wipe his hands clean of it and walk away, not do the hard work of repairing there. But as you say, Jank, the media's framing of it. They're invested in not even just American might because America, maintaining some sort of power would mean that we would withdraw from some of these endless conflicts and preserve the country. No, they're maintained in the perception of American might,

in the pageantry of it. And it seeps through every question, whether it's about Ukraine, Russia, Afghanistan, Iraq, whatever the case may be. That's all they want to portray is American strength, even if it's just surface level portrayal. Yeah, and so real quick on all of those. First of all, us taking Afghanistan's money is basically theft. And why are we doing that? Because Biden doesn't want the right wing to yell at him and say you're giving it to the Taliban. Okay, don't give it to the Taliban. Give it to an NGO that gives it to the people of Afghanistan because it's not our money. It's their money. But again, desperate, desperate to appease a right wing that he cannot possibly appease. But to give credit to Biden on that answer, yes, he looks

dazed and confused, badly so. But his answer is correct on the substance. No matter when we withdrew from Afghanistan, everybody was going to criticize. So that was one of the few things that Biden did really well and always credit where credit is do and be honest, right? But to me, the most salient point of this exchange is no matter what happens, Lester Holt, NBC News, and all of mainstream media is always for war. Afghanistan, we should have stayed. Russia, it's inevitable. War, war, war, war, war, war. Always inevitable, always forever.

And by the way, did he ask the most important question? How are we going to pay for that? I mean, I hear it every time when it's health care for you guys or higher wages for you guys or anything that helps you guys, the Lester holds of the world scream in fury. How are you going to pay for that? And now he's like saying, oh, yeah, we should start World War III, right? It's inevitable. And you should have stayed in Afghanistan for another 20 years. How are you going to pay for that?

Oh, who cares? That's our advertisers. We're all making money. So I'm sick of the corporate media and the wars that they helped to start. Well, with that said, we definitely take our first break, but there's way more where that came from after this. All right, back on TYT. During the social break, we were reading all these comments that gave love to Emma and busting chops for John. So I'm going to read one from Twitch. It says, I am here for John. Oh, it's the last minute. Nobody expected it. Yeah. They like me. They've really liked me.

John, uh, hey, jank made that one up just to make no, no, no, no, it's a real person. No, it's a real person. Written by Brad Ehrlich. There goes that. Wind out of my sails. Hey, look, man, Brett's a person too, okay? Technically. Okay, that's what you get, Brett, for saying something nice. Okay, all right, next door. Okay, I guess I'll still do the news. Okay.

Two Senate Democrats say that the CIA has, in secret, been filling a data repository with people's information, including the American people. And that leaves me wondering who I can trust. Do you expect this sort of thing from like Facebook and Google, but the CIA too? Okay, CIA. Well, anyway, here's what they say. They say that they've allegedly secretly conducted a bulk data collection program entirely outside the statutory framework that Congress and the public believe govern this collection and without any of the judicial, congressional, or even executive branch oversight that comes from Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act collection. So that letter comes after a report that have been shared with the Intelligence Committee with some of the information that they're now asking for follow-ups on. That report was called Deep Dive 2, following up with Jordan Yule's program, of course.

It was part of a set of studies by a watchdog board, scrutinizing intelligence collect community operations under executive order 12333, rules for intelligence activities that Congress has left unregulated by statute. And so one of the reasons I think that they are asking for more information is that back in 2015, Congress banned bulk collection of telecommunications metadata under the Patriot Act, only took him 14 years, and limited other types of bulk collection by the FBI under laws governing domestic activities like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or, FISA, or FISA, yet the CIA has secretly conducted its own bulk program under executive order 1, 2,333, according to the senators. Now, we've gotten a response from an anonymous intelligence official who told Axios that they are not data collection platforms. They are repositories of data and analytical tools to go through that data.

That's what it is. That's what a repository is. No, but it's not a data collection platform, though. But that's what collection is. It's a repository and a way to go through it. And then you go back to it and you can analyze it any time you want because you already took everybody's information. That's exactly what data collection is. You are such a cynic. Listen to the man.

Okay, they also say that the CIA is focused on foreign intelligence. And while there's an impression that Americans data is being swept up, anything that concerns them is actually incidental. Oh, well, that makes me feel much better. There's an impression. Yeah, this isn't like, this isn't hype building for the next Marvel flick. Did you do it or didn't you? This isn't about impressions. This is about you breaking the law.

And that seems to indicate without saying explicitly that, yes, they've totally done that. And we would really like if these senators would not ask any more questions. No, that big brother-esque language is amazing. No, this is not water. It is H2O. Wait, what? Okay, so all right guys, if you're in the right wing, you know how you were so worried about the deep state? This is the deep state.

It's literally called deep dive two. I mean, they would have called a deep dive one, as John pointed out, except for, they're like, oh, Jordan Ewell's got a show on the TYT network at Twitch. Dot TV slash TYT called deep dive. Okay, let's call it deep dive too. We don't get sued. Right, exactly. And deep state's worried to death about getting sued by Jordan Yule. Although they slightly should be.

So right wing, you know, big government, tyrannical government, spying in on you and taking away your freedom and your privacy? This is it. So can you please join us progressives in saying this is totally unacceptable? Oh, we're collecting all the information about you, but don't worry, it's just incidental. And we're just leaving it somewhere to analyze in case you cause any trouble. Oh, that makes me feel so much better. Yeah, you know why the right wing doesn't care about that is because it never comes back to bite them. I mean, the reason that these intelligence community, the intelligence community has this capability and has been doing this for many years as long as technology has allowed.

I mean, people just need to go back and look at the FBI and how they treated black activists during the civil rights movement. treating Black Lives Matter today versus how they're treating right-wing groups. This is a part of the fabric of the intelligence community. And the CIA, I mean, look, they made sure that they shored up their bona fides when they were toppling governments in South America. They have a lot of muscle memory with clandestine activity, and it only makes sense for them to use those tactics. Once again on it's on the American people. It's interesting to me how people continue to be surprised by the CIA and the FBI doing these kinds of things when if there was enough historical literacy in this country and if the history that was being taught was accurate and wasn't in

most states in the country, there's a lot of right wingers trying to erase that history and pretending like, oh, America's just this beautiful city on a hill when that's not, of course, the reality. And over the past the 20th century and the 21st century, the CIA and the FBI have done horrible, murderous things with their power. And of course, they're using their capabilities in order to spy on Americans. And the reason for a lot of this is because they want to weed out left wing activity that might threaten their power. And that's a huge part of why the intelligence community has these capabilities and they're secretive about it because they know it's extra legal.

Yeah, the right wing being asserted about the deep state was always hilarious because show me any time that anything related to a so-called deep state in America has been left wing. I mean, that's an absurd, absurd. Come on, if you're right wing, you don't even believe that. You think when we killed all those left-wing leaders in Latin America, it was from a liberal deep state? No one, when we did a coup in Central America to help a banana company, a corporation, you think that was a left-wing plot?

I mean, nobody believes that. Come on. It's a vegan conspiracy is what it was. Yeah, oh, yeah, huge vegan conspiracy. Okay, especially back then. But listen, they had to secure the bananas. They had to secure the bananas. Yeah. And on behalf of the American people. Of course. And famous vegan American public that hates meat. Oh, that's right. That's right. It just has to any right way. Okay. So, but you guys are right. All they have to do is actually for one time, it's a deep state just spied in on one right winger. And then it made it public. That would end the entire program. Okay. do more to help out this program and ended than even Edward Snowden. Just like, I don't know, just it leaks something about Brian Kilmead.

We've been listening to his phone calls and here's what Brian said and it's outrageous, right? Sorry, Brian. Okay, it doesn't matter. Just make any right wing host? No, make it him specifically, Brian Kilmead. Well, well, Tucker Carlson has claimed that he's being monitored by the NSA and he made that public and nothing came of that. Interesting that the right wing cares about the deep state, if it's about them, right? You know, they care in order to further their own, like, anti-authoritarian branding,

which is completely false. But the reality is that right-wingers kind of implicitly understand. These powers are not going to be used evenly against us, so it's better that they exist. Yeah, and by the way, of course, Tucker was bringing that up, and it's not us who's saying that. it's the rest of Fox News. They asked the rest of the Fox News, you know, broadcasters and hosts, why are you not covering this massive story of the NSA spying in on the top rated Fox News host? And they're like, yeah, we're looking into it. Okay. It's ridiculous that he can just make a full week of media attention about himself, making him the victim in this. And nothing comes

of it. There was ever any evidence, and it has not hurt him in any way. Yes. So that's why when you tap into Brian's phones, you have to make it real. Okay. By the way, they were already tapping into his phone. They're tapping into all of our phones. All they have to do is go to that repository where they have the non-collected information and analyze it. And then they get, hey guys, one last thing about this. Even if they don't use the information in our private calls against us, whether we're left

or right wing or center, right? It's still in our heads. So by definition, it takes away our freedom and our privacy. Because when I make an international call now, I assume the phone is tapped. And so I watch what I say, and I can't share things with friends and family because I think I don't want it in a repository somewhere that we know definitely, definitely exists. And if somebody wants one day, they go back and they go, oh, did you hear what he jank said about his sister? I didn't say anything about my sister. Abla, I love you.

Oh, no. But seriously, guys, you see my point. And it already hurts what we're supposed to be a free country, just because it's in our heads. And it's true, they are collecting that information. And it's absolutely outrageous. Putting all the kidding and the charges aside, it's a perfect opportunity for the left wing and right wing to unite to ask the establishment to stop it and actually be a free country. So join us in that mission, Brian Kilmead. I guess.

Anyway, okay, we're going to mix it up quite a bit. A little bit of unfortunate news, but let's jump into this video. This was a black father and son, and you were a white FedEx driver. Do you think this would be different? Yes, man, without questioning. I would have been arrested probably that same night and not giving bill at all. That's an excerpt of an interview with FedEx driver Demontario Gibson, who was shot at by two men while delivering packages in a town in Mississippi.

And as bad as that is, and it's terrible, making it even worse is that he says that the company provided effectively no support whatsoever after this insane attack. And we will turn to that in just a little bit. But first, I want to give you information about the actual attack. So Dimitario told CNN that he was delivering packages to a home at night on January 24th, when he saw a white pickup truck coming from the house behind it. The truck started approaching him and blowing the horn at him. So he thought it just wanted to get around him.

So he tried to leave. But the truck swerved around him and tried to cut him off, like trying to stop him, I guess. He said, at that point, my instincts kick in, and I swerve around him as he's trying to cut me off to avoid getting stuck in the neighborhood. He goes a little bit further into the neighborhood, a couple more houses, and says then a man in the middle of the road pointed a gun at his vehicle and waved and mouth for him to stop, to which he shook his head and said, no, the most understandable thing in the world. he then hid behind his steering wheel while he swerved around him. At least five shots were fired at the van, according to the incident report that was eventually fired. That wasn't the end of it, though. He said that as he was leaving the neighborhood, one of his managers called, and he was told the manager, he told the manager that someone was shooting at him.

She told him to get back to the station as fast as he could. The truck, now with both of those men inside, chased him out of Brookhaven and to the interstate. eventually filed a suspicious person report, and the two men have now been charged. He was just going in the neighborhood to make some deliveries, and two madmen tried to murder him. Thoughts? So I try usually in vain to get the right wing to empathize with the rest of us. So imagine that you're doing deliveries in a poor, African-American neighborhood, and they come and shoot at you for no reason.

Do you think the cops would arrest them that day? Come on, you know they would. Because there's the racial component, there's a socioeconomic component. You know that guys who shoot in a poor black neighborhood at a white delivery driver are getting arrested instantly. It took eight days to arrest these guys. Now, look, the head of police there is black. He says, no, this is definitely not racial, et cetera.

No, it's in our assumptions, guys. Our assumptions are white guys shoot at a black guy, probably a good reason for it. God, that's so frustrating. Now, imagine being black. And that's the world you got to live in every day. You don't know who's going to shoot at you. You don't know who's going to just because of the color of your skin, think you're victory.

You see that guy? That guy looked, I mean, no offense, but he looked tiny, right? And he's delivering packages, which thief gives you stuff rather than takes it away. Like what? It doesn't make any sense except he's black. So let's shoot at him without even talking to him. And so if you have to live with that possibility, even if it didn't happen to you, every black person, especially every black guy that's relatively young to middle age thinks it's possible right around the corner. That's a hell of a thing to live with.

It's traumatic and it's generational trauma. I mean, there are, if you talk to any black person, I know the right wing chooses to pick particular black people in their media space that validate their racist positions about black people. But if you look at the lived experiences of somebody outside of your own experience, it's difficult, again, for the right wing. then you'll understand that every black person has an uncle or a friend or a cousin or a sibling or a parent who has had similar experiences like this. And that's really what is so frustrating, as you say, Jank, in terms of conversing and having these conversations, is because it seems like there is a complete wall up and an unwillingness to understand that when you're black in America, there is always a point. part of you that is fearful for your life in society. And in terms of what that does to your mind,

to your anxiety levels, it is an untold toll, honestly, on just being black in America and your lived experience. And it's something that black men especially and black people in general have to carry with them. And that really is just, another story. I mean, especially you can compare any of these stories to the killing of black people in this country. But I would imagine that the victim here thought a bit about Amad Arbery because this echoes that kind of vigilante, rageful white person following around

a black person in the neighborhood for no particular reason and literally shooting at them. Yeah, and at least based on the information we have, those echoes are are pretty robust. Gibson's lawyer is actually making that comparison and saying that based on that, they should investigate this as a hate crime. But yeah, and it's even a family thing. The two men who have been charged who are now, by the way, out on bail are Gregory case and son Brandon case. It's great that in the modern era, there are still things for families to bond over. Unfortunately, it seems to be vigilante justice. But it's not like any of this is new. It's not like when the tragedy happened with Amad Arbery that it was new.

But that happened was investigated eventually. We had this long gap for the trial and then eventually even that was concluded. And then after that entire national experience, people are still going out and thinking, you know what, I think based purely on this racial animus that I possess inside of myself, that that person is doing something wrong. So I'm going to kill them where they stand. And you know what, let's say that they investigate these two guys and they end up in jail. There are still going to be things like this because nobody.

learns. They've learned all the lessons they want. They've come to racist conclusions based of them. And this is the end result. So I don't understand why they got bail. This is obviously attempted murder. They shot at the guy. They were super lucky they missed. They shot five times at him to try to kill him. Well, bail, there's kids in jail because they couldn't put up like a thousand dollars in bail or sometimes even $100 in bail. They sit there for months on and sometimes years on end for the smallest little crimes you've ever seen in your life. And half the time they didn't even do it. And at the end of a year and a half, they're like, oops, sorry, you're free to go, right?

These guys do attempted murder and they're out and it takes eight days to arrest them. And now they're out on bail. Why? Why? I don't understand. So if they did an attempted murder on, now I'm going to have to fill in the blank, right? But secret service, I don't mean anything by it. But on Biden, would they be out on bail?

Of course not. Okay, fine. Pick another wealthy, powerful white person, a banker in Wall Street. Would they be out in bail? There's no way they would be out on mail. Oh, it's just a poor black guy who's just a FedEx driver. Yeah, who cares? Put them out on bail, right?

And then it's also the gun culture, guys. It's because they can't wait to use their guns. Oh, remember when Kyle Rittenhouse did it? Oh, he's such a hero. Remember when he murdered those guys? He got to use his gun for self-defense. Oh, hey, look, there's a black guy. Good enough on self-defense.

Let's go murder him. I don't care what any of these right-wing gun nuts say about, oh, no, no, no, we're so careful with our weapons. We don't want to use them at all. We just have them for self-defense. I mean, it probably won't ever happen. We've got them locked up in the bullets or somewhere else, and we're super safe. My ass, you can't wait to use those guns, and that's why you have situations like this.

All right, we've got to take a break, guys. Yeah, we definitely should. But more to talk about after that. All right, guys, during the social breaks, we read some of your comments, but we never have enough time. So I just want to say real quick from Super Chat, car S-T-H-M-Rodin, I drive for Amazon and Minneapolis, a fellow driver who's black woman has had people release their dogs on her while delivering in the boonies. So this is not isolated an incident, and it's heartbreaking. And then Pawn's Gambit said, last night while enjoying a great documentary, I predicted

that the next TYT film will be based on John's book. Can't wait for that production. I doubt it. I highly doubt it. Well, John, you were in our first series. You were the star of our first series, True North. That's true. Which members can get, tyt.com slash join, okay?

Oxi Kingpins is documentary they're talking about. It was our first movie ever and it's been really well reviewed. And last night we showed it for the first time and people loved it. So thank you. We can't wait to do more and we'll try to show you Oxi Kingpins again if you didn't get a chance to see it. John. Okay, let's do it. Donald Trump loves endorsing candidates, especially primary candidates in the Republican Party that have supported him and he has a new one actually.

He just endorsed Katie Errington, who's challenging incumbent Nancy. Nancy Mace, the first term South Carolina Congresswoman in the Republican primary. This is the first district of South Carolina. And so he wants Katie Arrington. So if you're Nancy Mace, what do you do? Well, sorry, if you're Nancy Mace and you have no self-respect, this is what you do. Hey everyone, Congresswoman Nancy Mace here. I'm in front of Trump Tower today. And I remember in 2015 when President Trump announced his run. I was one of his earliest supporters. I actually worked for the campaign in 2016.

They worked in seven different states across the country to help get him elected. I supported him again in 2020 because of policies I believed in. He brought American jobs back. He lowered our taxes, wages and employment were better for every hardworking American in our country. He made America safer. And he took on China directly. And America was stronger all around the world. And quite frankly, freedom and democracy was stronger all around the world.

If you want to lose his seat once again in midterm election cycle to Democrats, then my opponent is more than qualified to do just that. So I'm sure she would have loved to have Donald Trump's endorsement. She didn't have that, but she knows that the base only cares about like the one that the god emperor shines his holy light on. So if you can't get his endorsement, just like hang out at a building that has his name on it, I guess. I don't know, it seems like a weird strategy. You think it's going to work? Yeah, so it's unclear, and this is interesting in a lot of ways, because this is Mark Sanford's old congressional seat. Mark Sanford is the former governor of South Carolina. It is very popular

in the right wing. He's the one that had the affair in Argentina and pretended to be on the Appalachian Trail, and he had made his comeback, and he was well entrenched. But then he made the mistake of saying Donald Trump's hair is a little ruffled today and then Trump got furious and then someone ran against him and Stanford lost in the Republican primary when he was doing great in the polling before he lightly, lightly criticized Trump, right? The person who beat him in the primary was Arrington, the person that Trump has endorsed against Nancy Mace. Now, Arrington went on to lose the general election in that congressional district in in South Carolina, okay?

So we already know Arrington has lost. But this time around, Mace lightly criticizes Trump around January 6th, which honestly is not smart politics on our part. The way you lose that seat, if you're a Republican congressperson, the only way you lose it is a light critique of Donald Trump. And so he sends Arrington back after her. And Trump doesn't care about winning the general election. And nobody ever says, oh, yeah, but we lost the general election.

No, he just cares about his own ego and ha, ha, ha, I beat you in the primaries, right? So it, so that's why she's humiliating herself, even though Trump just endorsed her opponent. She goes, but remember, everybody, Trump Tower, if you want to throw money at it, what do you need, Donald? Sorry, sorry, I'm so sorry, I said something, I'm so sorry, right? And so it's just deeply and wonderfully humiliating. I hope she does lose in the primary, and I hope that Errington loses in the general election again. That would be wonderful.

But after Emma goes, I want to come back to the idea of a Democrat doing this, because I think Democrats should do what Trump is doing. So that might be a twist in the story. Go ahead, Emma. Yeah, well, I mean, that's the one thing Trump's good for is humiliating Republicans. That's something I deeply appreciate about him, honestly. But there's there's something happening in the Republican Party right now that the Democratic leadership is way too pathetic and incompetent to exploit. I separate the Democratic leadership, meaning Biden, Schumer, Pelosi from the upstart, even more moderate younger Democrats.

Like we were just talking on a majority report today about how Spanberger is endorsing that no corporate or no stock trading for members of Congress bill, even though she's an incredibly conservative Democrat. It's because there really is a divide in terms of this old, just ancient, and I'm not trying to be ages, but in terms of just how entrenched they are in Washington, they have very little understanding of what works politically. And if they were smarter, they would exploit this fissure in the Republican Party right now, where you have someone like we mentioned Brian Kilmead earlier, Brian Kilmead, coming out. And he basically said, all right, enough about 2020. We are not going to talk about the election being stolen again. And you have Mike Pence coming out, obviously about it.

Other Republicans, Marco Rubio, who's trying to dance this line and say, let's move forward. We don't want Kamala Harris to have the power to overturn the election. That's how they're deflecting away from pressure being put on Mike Pence over what happened in the 2020 election. So there is a tension there. There are a lot of Republicans that don't want to go along with this. And Mace is an example of somebody who feels that tension, feels like she has to come and kiss the ring as she's embarrassing herself and doing there. But at the same time, she understands the election wasn't stolen in 2020. And there is an inconsistency there. And you can weaken Republicans by pointing that out. Either they side with Trump and they're absolutely nuts. And they're the people that are with the January 6 rioters, or they are weak, pathetic people like Nancy Mace, and you can hit them from that direction. But the Democrats are too busy trying to protect their ability to trade stocks, at least the leadership is, although Pelosi's kind of gone back in that area. We'll see if that stands. But they're too incompetent fully to actually exploit this. And there is a weakness here,

if there's any hope in 2022 of maintaining some power, including at least one of the chambers, hopefully. Yeah, so let me clarify a couple things. First of all, Nancy Pelosi still wants to trade stocks. She realized a couple of days too late, oh, right, we're never going to pass any bills anyway. So I'll pretend to switch my position and say, oh, yeah, I guess we shouldn't do insider trading. Yeah, yeah, pass the bill. Let me see you pass the bill.

You're not going to pass a goddamn thing and you know it. That's why you're lying now. She wants to do insider trading. Let's just be absolutely clear about it. That was her original position. That's been her position for 20 years to use her insider information in Congress to do those trades. So, and if your Democratic leader says something, you should never believe it. It's almost never true, okay?

Let's just again, super clear on that. And yeah, and to Emma's point, hey, what is the Democratic strategy against Republicans? Can anyone name it? It doesn't exist. They don't even have a strategy against Republicans. Nancy Pelosi says she wants the Republican Party to be stronger. Joe Biden said the same exact thing. So their strategy about the Republican Party is,

golly gee, I just wish they were stronger. How are you going to hit them? Oh, no, that would be uncivil. You guys are a bunch of losers. Get out of the goddamn way and let progressives hit Republicans and beat Republicans. instead of kissing their ass all day long. Okay, so now that brings me full circle to what Trump is doing and why I think a Democrat should do it.

Look, Trump's a maniac, but politically, everyone theoretically should know that you need carrots and sticks. And Democratic leadership also knows that because they use sticks against progressives. Oh, you're not going to vote for us? Everybody in the media goes smear them. Say they're against infrastructure and building bridges. Wait, no, but they wanted more. matter a lie about them, right? But when it comes to Republicans, right? So look, by their nature,

any corporate politician is a coward because they're an order taker. The donors tell them to do something and they freaking do it. That's what every corporate Republican is and that's what every corporate Democrat is. So Ted Cruz isn't any stronger. He's the weakest man in America. Ted Cruz, Pelosi, Schumer, it doesn't matter. They're all the same. They're just servants. They're servants of the ruling class, the corporate class. Okay, so what do we need? The left needs someone like that has the sticks of Donald Trump, but obviously doesn't have the bad intent of Donald Trump

and doesn't have the idiocy of Donald Trump, right? So for example, someone like Nina Turner, if she were to get in power, do you know how easily a strong progressive can get the rest of the Democratic Party to fall in line? If you accumulate enough power, You don't have to be the president at all. You just have to say, oh, yeah?

That's it, progressives. We're raising money to make sure that that person loses. We're going to target them in a race, and we're going to end their careers. All the media will cry, oh, you're not civil. You should just accept your defeat and move on. Hell no, hell no. We should crush them. But we shouldn't do it for the stupid ego of a guy like Donald Trump or anyone on our side.

I don't care about their egos. The only thing why I care about is passing the bills, because that's the only thing that affects your life. So imagine if a strong progressive did that on your behalf to actually pass legislation. Well, that would make all the difference in the world. And I guarantee you those cowards that are the corporate Democrats would heal. So nina turner.com slash hello, okay? I'm not playing around. She's running for Congress again.

And her opponent the other day was lauding mansion and cinema. Oh, come on. Come on. Go send a message. The Democrats have not done enough and they're not strong enough. Send someone who's got real strength in a backbone. Nina Turner.com slash hello. By the way, it's funny that you mentioned Nina Turner because her run will remind you that they do understand the concept of sticks and dirty attacks. It's just very specifically constrained to attacking progressives. By the way, I want to remind people probably why the endorsement went the way that it did. Arrington said recently, I think Trump won the 2020 election.

I think there's too many voting irregularities. Is President Biden, you know, duly elected? Yeah, he's legally the President of the United States because people like Nancy Mace didn't have a backbone. And they certified the election. It did in the end come down to her. I mean, Pence could have overturned the election or Nancy Mace, one of those two and she didn't do it. And by the way, it's not like, yes, Nancy Mace did say initially that January 6th was bad, that it makes Trump look bad.

Some of them did that. They largely stopped talking about that. A few weeks later, once they realized that the party didn't care and the base didn't care and they thought it was awesome. But also, like, she tried to win them back. Do you recall the little feud that Nancy Mace had with AOC, when AOC revealed how terrified she was in January 6th. And so Mace mocked her publicly for being afraid of being potentially sexually assaulted

are murdered. Like she's doing the dirty stuff they want, but she said that Trump looked bad because of January 6th, so that's it. Your ability to win in this district and your willingness to play super dirty, not enough, it is whatever Trump needs it to be at any given minute. All right, one last story. Okay, let's do that then. Okay, rough video, consider yourself warned. With that said, let's jump into this last topic. Please. Get, you're hurting him. You're hurting him. Can you take your elbow off his neck? You've been disrespectful this whole time. Take your elbow off his neck. Please get off me again, ma'am. I thought you don't know. Huh? Touch me again and I will taste you. Stop. You'll tease me.

Okay, so what you just saw in that video is a police officer, John Selke, attacking Adonis Tuggle, and also threatening to tase the girlfriend of Adonis. What you need to understand about what led to that attack is that it was believed that there was a domestic incident between those two. He was sent to help with it. So of course it ends with him attacking one and threatening to tase the other. I mean why not. Tuggle says when John Selke came over that he didn't resist arrest, but instead Selke screamed at him to get away from the car. They were having an argument, they said. Tuggle said, I tried to explain to him. Nothing's going on. I'm not attacking her. This is my girlfriend. We're having an argument. Selky then screamed at the girlfriend,

shut the F up and back up. And that's when Tuggle said he got between the cop and his girlfriend and told him there's no need to be disrespectful. Well, Tuggle says he can't remember exactly what happened next. He recall Selkie screaming, all right, buddy, you're going down and then throwing him against his girlfriend's truck. Now, he's much larger, apparently, like 70 pounds heavier the cop. than Adonis there, but this was a guy that was sent supposedly to help a woman that someone thought was being harassed or attacked, and he attacked and threatened both of them. Yeah, so my pet peeve is charging someone with resisting arrest and nothing else. Well, what were you arresting him for?

Nothing. Well then, yeah, he resisted because you just randomly came up to him and started, you know, manhandling. him. You can't have resisting arrest without an underlying charge. It's completely and utterly irrational. Yet cops do it all across the country and no one even makes note of it, right? So why do they actually do resisting arrest in all of these cases? Because cops are taught they are trained all across the country and anything else that anyone tells you is a complete and obvious lie, okay? They're all taught, the most important thing is that they respect you. if anyone disobeys you for a second,

beat the living crap out of him, arrest them, and maybe kill him, okay? No one's allowed to disrespect you. Why? Because they're the toughest gang and thugs in America. And so, now, this is a perfect example of it. There's a fight, a cop goes to check it out. Makes sense, he should go to check it out. We want to make sure everybody's safe, right? That's why theoretically we have police.

He goes, and it's clear that nobody's hitting each other, but okay, fine, he's still investigating. And then he starts yelling at them. Okay, all right, maybe still fine, right? But then the girlfriend starts to try to protect the boyfriend. Well, obviously, she's not in trouble, right? I think, obviously. But at a minimum, you can keep asking questions to make sure she's okay, right?

But why do you start assaulting both of them? You theoretically went over to help one of them, right? But it doesn't matter. The prime directive was, if any, Anyone questions any order you give, assault them viciously. And guys, if you're a cop out there, please don't insult their intelligence. You know that that's what you're taught. If anyone questions your orders, kick the living crap out of them.

Show them who's boss. Okay, so I'm tired of this gang terrorizing all of us, and especially the poor and especially black. And those are not the same category, okay? That means yes, if you're black in any income bracket, this kid's a student of Purdue, right? It doesn't matter, you're going to get assaulted because of the assumptions kicking in. And if you're poor and in any racial category, it doesn't matter. You're poor white guy in the holler and you talk back to a cop, you're going to get your ass kicked and everybody knows it. Yeah, I mean, I think it's both what they're taught and also who's attracted to the profession.

I'm going to be real. Like there are people who, I think there are a minority of cops who do the right thing. But overwhelmingly, the profession attracts overgrown high school bullies who want to have automatic authority. And that's why they have a badge and a gun. And they lord over people. And that's why when they feel that they're threatened in any way or they feel disrespected, then they're going to exert that force. They like the feeling of authority over other people.

And so when I saw the student there, Adonis getting choked, it did remind me, of course, we just covered another police brutality story earlier in the program. There are so many memories that it evokes, including that of Eric Garner. And people have to realize that when Eric Garner was killed,

in New York, chokeholds were not allowed by police conduct, and yet it still happened anyway. And the reality is, is that without ending qualified immunity and without actually prosecuting cops and having a federal overhaul and a database and wholesale change in how cops are prosecuted and what the regulations are for their conduct, from the federal level, not from the the municipal, not from the state level. Then without that, this is going to continue to keep happening. And I bring it back to the Democrats, because honestly, they're in power right now. They love to fundraise off of Black Lives Matter, and they did so. And Nancy Pelosi in Democratic leadership knelt with Kente Klaus. And then when the, when the George Floyd,

when Chauvin's conviction was handed down, you have. had, you could sense, and I believe they even said something to that effect publicly, that there was relief. Okay, we do not to do anything legislatively. This was a historic ruling, and that in and of itself should be enough. The stories like this show, of course that's not enough. And yet, you know, the Democratic Party is unwilling to do away with the filibuster in order to actually pass comprehensive police reform. They're so happy to fundraise off of gun violence, won't get rid of the filibuster to actually address gun violence. So happy to fundraise off of racism won't do anything to actually end police brutality by getting rid of the filibuster. And that's

really what frustrates me here. We will continue to see stories like this, even with this national awakening, even with all of the historic protests, because that matters, yes, but it does not matter as much as actual legislative change. Legislation matters. And the Democrats have to remember that because Otherwise, you know, our producer at the majority report, Matt has called Biden, the press release president. I mean, it's kind of the press release party otherwise or the fundraising party off of people who actually feel moral outrage about these stories, rightfully so. And their money is going to waste because the Democrats really are not acting with the power that they have. Okay, last two things real quick. I know some people will say, oh, no, no, you guys are being unfair.

Those are just a couple of bad apples that you're showing. No. In this case, as it happens in almost all the cases, the police investigated themselves and decided that that cop acted perfectly. He didn't do anything wrong at all. As I told you, the training is if someone, you go to help someone who you think might be assaulted, and they say the wrong thing, just assault both of them. Who cares? He beat up the guy and threatened to tase the girl, right? And the cops reviewed that and said, perfect, nice job. Next time, kick their ass harder. So no, the cops are not here to protect us. They just aren't. Now, if there's a real threat, I'm afraid to call the cops because I'm worried that they're going

to murder the person that you're calling about, right? And then finally, to Emma's point, she's 100% right. Did you know that they actually did make an exception to the filibuster? Now, the corporate press never talks about that. They did it to raise the debt ceiling, because it was an economic issue that affected the stock market and all of their portfolios. But when it comes to all those issues that they fundraise about and pretend to care about, they don't give a damn. And they didn't fix the filibuster at all. They never did criminal justice reform. And they're never going to do criminal justice reform.

Because if they solved it, then they couldn't fundraise off of it anymore. That's who the sick Democratic leadership is, let alone the Republicans who love this behavior in the first place. Vote for progressives. All right. Emma, thank you so much. Everybody check out Majority Report. and John, as always, is awesome. Look at that, me actually being honest and not playing bus nuts.

All right. I agree. Damage report every day. Fantastic. Thank you, John. We'll be back with J.R. and Ricky. We've got some amazing stories in the second hour that you do not want to miss. They're awesome.

Right back. That is enough with this segment, John. We have to go to break. 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 dot co slash t yt i'm your host jank huger and i'll see you soon