The Young Turks - Disgraced Republican Won't Seek Re-election And CNN's Deception During Bernie Sanders' Town Hall

Episode Date: February 27, 2019

North Carolina Congressman-elect Mark Harris will not seek re-election after his current win is shrouded in scandal. Were CNN's Bernie Sanders Town Hall attendees establishment operatives? Get exclusive access to our best content. http://tyt.com/GETACCESS 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, guys, you've heard of the Young Turks podcast because you're listening to it right now. But make sure that you subscribe and give it a five star rating if you like it. Thank you for listening. All right, welcome the Young Turks. Jake Euger, Anna Gosparin with you guys.

It's gonna be three hours of fire and fury here. So we've got the first story that we were basically gonna break, but it just also broke online from another organization about the people asking questions in Bernie Sanders Town Hall last night. So we'll get to that in a second and who they actually were. Then we've got a story about how Politico helped Hillary Clinton's former team do a hatchet job on Bernie Sanders. So this campaign is in full swing.

It's amazing. And the establishment hacks and their media colleagues that are totally biased are in full swing, political and leading the charge as usual with their establishment bias. We'll get into that. So I'm telling there's going to be a lot of fire and fury. And then we get into Venezuela and what? Maduro did to Jorge Ramos and how incredibly stupid that is and wrong that is. Then we're gonna get to Ivanka, Jesus Christ, Ivanka, telling us about how what people want

and how they wanna work for a living and not wanna be handed things. Are you kidding me? So that's gonna be an utter destruction. I mean, she would know quite a bit about getting things handed to her. No question. Well, we're gonna hand one thing else to her today, that's her ass. So, and then in the third hour, I know not all of you get the third hour, but I'm going to have Aaron Mate on and we're gonna have a discussion about whether there was collusion

between Russia and Donald Trump. So that one could also be interesting or potentially fiery, because I'm not in a happy mood and I've read some of his points. Okay, so buckle up, brace for impact. This is gonna be a serious show. Man, it's funny, like, I like the fact that you and I are never on the same page mood-wise, because I'm in a great mood and you're in a bad mood. The other day with the CNN story, I was a terrible mood.

I know, but it's driven by the stories. My personal life's fine, right? No, no, I know, I know, it's just we have different passions. That's right, okay, so guys, one last thing, always share the stream wherever you're watching. I know if you're watching on TV through our broadcast partners, that's a little bit more difficult. But not even then though, put it on a restaurant, put it on a restaurant. Put it on at a bar, if you work there, you own the place, whatever it might be. But if you work at a local newspaper or radio station, put it on one of the TVs if you're

in New York, D.C., Philly, or Boston. But if you're watching on YouTube, Facebook, or anywhere else, always share the stream. It makes a big, big difference. Yes. All right, let everybody know, we're coming today. Okay, Anna, let's get started. I wanna begin with a quick update on a story that we have been covering as it's been developing. Mark Harris, who was the Republican candidate for the ninth district in North Carolina.

has announced that he will not run. And of course, this is following more and more evidence indicating that one of his operatives was doing illegal things in order to help him win the election, including collecting ballots, filling ballots in, so Mark Harris would win. And so there was some question as to whether or not Mark Harris would run again in the new election, and he's just announced that he will not. Okay, so that's good news for America. It also happens to be good news for the Republican Party because he was less likely to win

given that he had just made a deal with a notorious cheater and that got caught in this election cheating on his behalf and the fact that his own son, Mark Harris's own son, said, I told him that he was a cheater and I couldn't believe he worked with him. So the Republicans now stand a better chance of winning that in that district. But obviously we don't agree, we don't agree with him on policy, the Republican Party and policy in that district, and we also don't agree that you should reward a party who just cheated in that election, okay? Now having said that, I'd much rather have a clean election than have the Republicans have

a worse chance of winning. So I'm glad Mark Harris has withdrawn in hiring a guy that he knew to have done fraud in the past. It was at a bare minimum negligent, and so it's a disgraceful act. And America's better for his withdrawal from that race. Yeah. All right, moving on. Last night, CNN held its first town hall of this new 2020 election, upcoming election, with Bernie Sanders.

Now, there were a lot of great questions asked during this town hall. They were not all easy questions. As you can imagine, Bernie Sanders usually gets tougher questions than other candidates. So we did coverage of the town hall, live coverage. We did coverage for our post game, our members, and we made note of how difficult some of these questions were, but Bernie Sanders handled it pretty well considering. Now with that said, it appears that CNN did not disclose the true identities of the individuals asking the questions.

Now I want to be clear about something. This is not an attack on people who asked questions. This is about the unethical behavior at CNN. Viewers should know who these individuals are, where do they work? You know, it gives the audience an idea of where this person's perspective is coming from as they're asking the question. Now before we go to the specific examples of the questions and who they actually are, I just want to be clear on a couple of fronts.

We don't know that if these people disclose their identity from CNN or CNN. chose to disclose their identity from the audience. And that is a very important question. Now, keep in mind, it's not like CNN hasn't done this before. Right. When Donna Bissible was working at CNN, she leaked questions about a debate during the primaries to Hillary Clinton and her team and against Bernie Sanders. So the unfortunate history here of CNN being unethical when it comes to one particular

candidate, and that is, again, Bernie Sanders. So you guys will get to judge for yourselves, you know, what you thought of the questions. The other clarification I want to make, and Anna's right, as we covered it live, we said, hey, look, that was a tough question, and sometimes that was an easy question. And sometimes it was a good answer, sometimes it wasn't a great answer. We had a long discussion about whether his answer on reparations was a good one or not. Right. And so some of that was when we were doing the play-by-play, some of it was in our analysis

for our members, t-y-t.com slash join to become a member and get all that analysis and we've got it all for you so you can see it with your own eyes as we covered it live on the spot. But what would have been relevant to know is who's asking the questions, and of course that leads to the question of why they were asking those questions. Yeah, exactly. And I want to, look, this is an important part of my commentary. I don't want anyone watching the show who happens to be a Bernie Sanders supporter, looking up any of these people and harassing them.

They asked perfectly fine questions and they're not, you know, they're not out to get Bernie Sanders, okay? They're not the bad guys. But the fact that their identities weren't disclosed by CNN is a problem. Now with that said, let's go to the various people who asked these questions. So one of the individuals who asked a tough question was a young woman by the name of Shadi Nassab. Now, she was identified in the lower third of the town hall saying that she's an, saying

that she's a student, right? But it turns out that she's an intern at a lobbyist firm known as Cassidy and Associates. Okay, so do we know that somebody Cassidy and associates told her to ask that question? No, no, we don't know that, okay? Do we know that CNN knew that she was going to ask that, well, they knew that she was going to ask that question because they curate the questions, right? But with the intent to do Bernie Sanders' damage, no, we don't know their intent, okay? But is it at a bare minimum relevant that she happens to be interning at a lobbying firm in

D.C.? Bernie Sanders' agenda would obviously not help lobbying firms in D.C. So there's a whole range of options as to how that question got onto the same. stage in the first place, but there is no question that CNN should have revealed her other attribute, right? It's not that she's not a student, she is, but she also happens to work at a lobbying firm, which is very, very relevant if you're asking Bernie Sanders' questions. So let's actually go to video of her question, and you can see what I mean when I mentioned that some of these questions were difficult, and that's okay, but take a look.

So we have a question from Shadi Nassab, a student at American University. shot east from Denver. As we saw in the 2018 midterms, the Democratic Party has become more female, more racially diverse, and younger in age. How can a voter like me feel confident in your ability to represent the party, especially given that your response to sexual harassment allegations during your campaign is that you were, quote, a little bit busy running around the country trying to make the case to be elected as president?

Well, I think that quote was a little bit out of context. But let me ask you a question. So the quote was out of context. that, and that is the number one talking point used against Bernie Sanders. Now, some of you will say that's too large a coincidence that the person working at the lobbying firm, or interning, interning at the lobbying firm, happens to ask the one that is the number one talking point against Bernie Sanders framed in exactly the way that an opponent would ask that question, right? And, but you guys don't know whether they asked her to ask that.

She might have genuinely thought that here, I'll give you another reason why. She might be the type of person who works at a lobbying firm and the type of person who genuinely wants to ask Bernie Sanders that question. That might be part of the reason she's interning at a lobbying firm. Or somebody could have asked her or none of the above. It was just a coincidence. But we gotta know, context is important. Imagine if there's a pick an establishment candidate, it doesn't matter which one.

Let's say Cory Booker, right? And he's doing a town hall on CNN. It turns out half the questions are asked by people that have some interest. in Bernie Sanders' campaign, but CNN doesn't reveal that. Exactly. Oh, come on. That's a pretty big problem. One, that would never happen, right?

And two, if it did happen, it'd be a huge scandal. Whereas the rest of the media so far totally mum on this. Well, they're like, yeah, well, of course, everybody's supposed to be against Bernie Sanders. They found that, find that to be perfectly normal. So let's get to others, because if that was the one and only example, then this would, in my opinion, not really be a big story. But there were several other people who were identified. as one thing, but it turns out their background proved to be something completely different.

So let's take a look at the next video. And this was another difficult question posed to Bernie Sanders. We have a question from Chioma, Uwaha. She works at a nonprofit here in Washington. Thank you, Senator Sanders. Part of the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow in the U.S. is the legacy of income inequality in the U.S. What is your position on reparations to the descendants of slaves? So perfectly fine question. So as you can see, Again, in that lower third, she was identified as an employee who works for a nonprofit. They didn't even name the nonprofit, which I think is incredibly weird. But okay, works for a nonprofit, but then you do a little research and you find out that

she works for capital partners for education. And their board includes some people that would disagree quite a bit with Bernie Sanders, like an employee at Bose Allen is one example. So her aunt also worked for Bill Clinton as secretary of labor, which I actually didn't know about until I did a little bit of digging. And then I wanted to prove that. And I found, and someone also tweeted this, a photo of her aunt shaking hands with Gore, Al Gore, during Bill Clinton's administration, obviously.

And you also see the young woman who asked the question in the photo as well with her Okay, so by the way, I know Al Gore. That doesn't mean that I would be biased against Bernie Sanders. Yeah. We're giving you the full picture here so you could make up your own mind. And so was the question unfair? Now we've said three or four times, I don't think it's unfair. In fact, we had a very large conversation about whether Bernie Sanders gave a good answer

or not. But that's a second tough question from a source that is not clearly labeled. So in terms of a nonprofit, well, you could be working at a nonprofit trying to cure cancer, Or you could be working at a nonprofit that is funded by the Koch brothers. So nonprofit is not nearly good enough as a title, which nonprofit? At least it gives people the ability to look it up. You wouldn't look at that nonprofit's, the average viewer is not going to look at the nonprofit's name and go, oh, I know they're connected to the Clintons, et cetera, et cetera.

But at least it gives you some sort of transparency so people could look and say, hey, does that nonprofit even have a political agenda? And if so, what is it? But if you don't, if you hide the ball and you don't let us know, then we have no ability to tell where these questions are coming from. So let's take a look at the next video. We have a question from Troy Dante Presswood. He's a community leader here in Washington.

Thank you. Thank you, Senator, for being here. The intelligence community all agree that Russia tampered with the 2016 election and used information warfare to sow further division and mistrust among Americans. It's likely that they will interfere with the 2020 election as well. So as a candidate, how will you ensure your campaign will not be infiltrated by Russia? And secondly, as president, how will you eliminate this threat once and for all to restore confidence to our electoral process?

So again, another good question. And the person who asked that question was identified as a community organizer. But upon further research, you find out that he's the founder and CEO. No, wrong graphic, let's go to 28. But upon further investigation, you find out that he's actually the founder and CEO of Presswood PR. And I just, I feel like that's important, right? And so if you know that he is a PR person, a founder of a PR agency in D.C., you have the ability

to see who they represent, right? Are they representing certain candidates that are running against Bernie Sanders? These are important things for the audience to know. But again, I don't know why it was completely omitted from the lower third in the town hall. So that question does have a little bit of a twist to it and hiding his identities, I think even more egregious. So is it fair to ask you about Russia in terms of elections? Of course, perfectly fair.

And in fact, if he just left it at the first part, could have even been perceived as a softball. But he had the part about how can we know for sure that your campaign will not be infiltrated by the Russians. Yeah, that's true. Now, wait a minute, why aren't we asking Kamala Harris that question? Now remember another democratic establishment talking point is, oh, well, Tad Devine worked with Paul Manafort and he worked on Bernie Sanders campaign and some of the tweets were in favor of Trump, but some were also on the left and I wonder if they'd help Bernie

Sanders. So now all of a sudden we're having a conversation about whether Bernie Sanders campaign is going to be infiltrated by the Russians, and we're not asking that question. of any other candidate on the Democratic side. So now the guy's running a PR firm and you call him a community organizer, he might also be a community organizer. But now that's a very curious omission. Yeah.

I mean, look, I'm the CEO of the Young Turks, if they- and I'm also an activist. If they labeled me Jake Huger, progressive activist, that would be true. But it would be incomplete, it would be deeply incomplete. If they didn't label me as founder of Wolfpack and I asked a question about money in politics or one of the founders of Justice Democrats, and I asked a question about Alexandria Ocaster-Cortez, how misleading would that be? Yeah, it's super misleading. And I'm trying to figure out, and of course, at this point, all you can really do is speculate

what the intentions are with CNN. But remember, this town hall is being held in Washington, D.C., and they're trying to make it seem as though all of the individuals who are involved in this town hall, including the people asking the questions are representative of the American people. But Washington, D.C. is not representative of the American people. People who live in D.C. work in D.C. They work in politics. So what I see CNN doing is kind of like, you know, reframing it as if like, no, no, no, this is a mother of two. This is a community organizer.

This is a student. No, but they're involved in politics. They're involved in politics. And that's incredibly important to know as they're asking questions to a political candidate. So now there's an extra layer of that. Look, CNN and the mainstream media are always aghast when you say, we believe you are deeply biased against progressives. And a huge percentage of the country believes that.

And so, and it is based on previous actions. When Bernie Sanders comes out, almost all of the articles and anchors are deeply skeptical. There's a segment on CNN that we pointed out with Jake Tapper talking about how one of his guests is like, oh, he should go away already. Why is he doing a state of the union response? And I can go ad nauseum on that. Washington Post has four different articles against Bernie Sanders in 24 hours as soon as he announces. I go on and on.

So there's that allegation. Now the mainstream media goes, no way, I only care about what the Republicans say. Progressives I'll spit on all day long. And I won't even, I won't do anything to ameliorate that. I won't even acknowledge it, okay? So now in that context, when CNN does a town hall for the other candidates and it's in New Hampshire, it's in Iowa, it's in the heartland. But when Bernie Sanders finally give them a town hall, they happen to put it in Washington, D.C.,

and fill the room with lobbyists and PR agents and people that work in political offices, and then they don't tell you. Come on, how could you not see that that would further perpetuate what people already believe, which is that you are biased against Bernie Sanders and progressives at large? If you can't see that, if you're CNN, you're trying really, really hard not to see it. You should at least have an answer, right? Instead of progressives, we dismiss you, we're never ever going to cover it. Well, okay, then that confirms that you're biased against progressives.

If this was a Republican, my God, we'd already be having congressional hearings about it and CNN would hire three different Trump officials to make up for it. 100%. I mean, yeah, I mean, look, the reason why, if this was a story on its own, okay, and you are trying to make this very same argument right now, Jank, I would probably roll my eyes and I would say you're making too much of this. But I've been doing that with you for a while now, and I'm done. I'm done defending CNN, I'm done giving them a pass, I'm done trying to find excuses for their unethical behavior, which eventually makes me believe that they're an illegitimate

news source, and I'm gonna say it over and over again, they are not legitimate. Hiring a GOP hack and not to get into this rent again, did it for me, did it for me, okay? To have someone go from working in the Trump administration where she pledged her loyalty to Trump just so she can work as a spokeswoman for Jeff Sessions, having her go from that, and immediately transition to an editorial role, you're done. There's nothing left to defend, and then you pull this stunt. Come on. All right, can we go to the next video?

Yes. Let's take a look at the next one. We have a question from Obina McAllister. She's active in Maryland Democratic Party activities and a mother of two. Most countries with developed economies offer public preschool as a standard benefit to all of their three and four-year-olds. America does not, as we know. Instead, low-income parents here scramble for scarce public spots while middle-income families scrounge to pay for increasingly costly private preschool. Very few can afford the cost of quality care. If you become president, will you support

efforts to offer high-quality, optional, publicly funded preschool for all Americans? Okay, so that was one of my favorite questions. Nothing wrong with that question. It was a wonderful question that I'm glad that he answered. But in the beginning, Wolf Blitzer just very casually mentioned, she's active in democratic politics in her state. Okay, moving on. And then she's described as a mother of two. Except she's the chair of the Charles County Democratic Committee. That's an important role. So why can't you just tell us that she's the chair of the Charles County Democratic Committee? That is an important thing to know. So this is, we give you this as an example of, it's not necessarily a plot, guys.

So that's a question that is a perfectly good question that's based on policy, but also could be perceived as helping Bernie Sanders because he's obviously going to be in favor of that program. So it's not a program that he's necessarily champion. Elizabeth Warren has done more to champion that cause if you ask me. But it doesn't hurt him at all to ask that. It's not framed from a democratic establishment talking point. So some of the people who were not correctly labeled.

are asked perfectly normal questions that are not framed in any negative way. We want to give you the full context because we actually care about the facts. And so, and mother of two, yes, she's a mother of two. Again, that would be like labeling me a father of two. Well, that's true, but I also have many other roles that are much more relevant in that context, okay? And again, I show you that, because it's not necessarily bad intent, because why bother They're hiding her identity if she's gonna ask it perfectly or relatively simple question

to Bernie Sanders. Right, right. And look, I think that it's okay to also add, maybe do two different Kairons and switch them out, which we oftentimes do, where you do note that she's a mother of two, because she's asking a question that's very relevant to someone who happens to be a mother of two. That's also fair. Yeah, so I get that. And I wanna clarify one last time, we don't mind tough questions.

We mind when it's disparate treatment of different candidates. You want to ask really tough questions of all the candidates, I would love that. Does that should, including Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, yes, definitely including them. But if you're having disparate treatment and unclear intent, well, that's where we get into Dicey Waters. And one more video for you. As you can see, this happened quite a bit during the town hall.

Let's watch the last one. Tara Eversall, a former biology professor from Baltimore County, Maryland. Tara, go ahead. Good evening. There's a lot of misinformation regarding your plan for universal. health care, would you please provide a brief overview of your plan and how it differs from that of other candidates? So in my personal opinion, this was the moment where Bernie Sanders really did shine.

And I thought that was a great question. It was a great way of allowing him to finally defend himself very publicly and explain how this would all be paid for. But look, she was described simply as a former biology teacher. But at no point was it ever disclosed that she's the chair of the Baltimore Democratic Party. No, and in this case, the framing of the question was in favor of Bernie Sanders. Right.

Because she said there's been a lot of misinformation about your universal health care plan. But again, knowing that she is the chair of a Democratic Party somewhere would also be relevant because she might have supported Bernie Sanders in the past. Now that's not to say she shouldn't get to ask her question. In every town hall, there are people who support the candidate and who don't support the candidate. We're just asking for more honest labeling, right? Exactly. And for the people who are gonna go further than us in accusing CNN, mainstream media, et cetera,

if it was a grand plot to just undermine Bernie Sanders and coordinated with the lobbyists, et cetera, et cetera, why allow people to ask questions that are framed in favor of Bernie Sanders? So it's more complicated than that, and it's not just a black and white issue. And oftentimes that's what different camps in the country want to reduce it to. But in this case, there are clear things that went wrong and CNN should address it. But if history is any guide, they will not. They will ignore all Bernie Sanders supporters, they will ignore all progressives and not do anything

about it. I mean, we're living in a time where the public's trust in the media and especially the mainstream media is at an all time low. And so now more than ever, it's so important for new news organizations to clean up their act, right? Understand that, hey, maybe we need to revisit our training in journalistic ethics. I mean, it might be difficult for CNN to do that, considering how many political hacks they've been hiring recently?

I mean, how would political hacks know anything about journalistic ethics? They have no journalistic experience or training, like Sarah Isgar, for instance. But nonetheless, I mean, if your remedy to these very fair criticisms is to just hire people who used to work for Trump's administration, so hopefully Trump will lay low and stop attacking you, it's a really bad strategy, because you still have to deal with us. Maybe you didn't have to deal with progressives back in the day. Maybe progressives were polite and civil, but I'm done. I'm done being polite and civil.

I'm done with them doing this over and over again while progressives sit back and let it happen. So, and we're not asking to do anything crazy. We're just asking for a clarification and an obvious mayor culpa. But again, maybe they do, because we don't know, we can't predict the future. But generally speaking, CNN and the mainstream media has never cared what progressives think. One last time, if it was a Republican that was in a similar situation, CNN would be groveling as we speak. Oh my God, if they had done it to Hillary Clinton.

I mean, what percentage of CNN anchors voted for Hillary Clinton? We don't know. But I think you've got a pretty good guess as to what percentage, especially in a situation like that, what percentage of CNN executives voted for Hillary Clinton? Especially in a situation like that, you might want to be over the top in being clear, in labeling things, and being fair to all the candidates, instead of doing what appears to be the exact opposite. Yes.

Let's take a break. we come back, I would argue one of the worst hit pieces on Bernie Sanders ever. Okay, so what we just covered, looks like child's play compared to what Politico did. So come back and we'll explain. We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-The Republic or UNFTR. As a young Turks fan, you already know that the government, the media, and corporations are constantly peddling lies that serve the interests of the rich and powerful. But now there's a podcast dedicated to unraveling those.

lies, debunking the conventional wisdom. In each episode of On The Republic, or UNFTR, the host delves into a different historical episode or topic that's generally misunderstood or purposely obfuscated by the so-called powers that be. Featuring in-depth research, razor-sharp commentary, and just the right amount of vulgarity, the UNFTR podcast takes a sledgehammer to what you thought you knew about some of the nation's most sacred historical cows. But don't just take my word for it. The New York Times described UNFTR as consistently compelling and educational, aiming to challenge conventional wisdom and upend the historical narratives that were taught

in school. For as the great philosopher Yoda once put it, You must unlearn what you have learned. And that's true whether you're in Jedi training or you're uprooting and exposing all the propaganda and disinformation you've been fed over the course of your lifetime. So search for UNFDR in your podcast app today and get ready to get informed, angered, and entertained all at the same time. about that coming up later in this program.

So that's on t.t.com slash live. So I'll start the proceedings with John Iderola and we'll have different hosts covering throughout the day in what could be very dramatic testimony. The Republicans have threatened him. That's the story that we'll get to a little bit later. And he is apparently going to reveal some illegal activity that Donald Trump did. So I don't know if it's more than what we already know or just simply backing up the claims he's already made and that he's going to prison for.

Okay, so don't miss that. Now, of course, our members will get all of our coverage and get to watch it anytime, t.com slash join to become a member. Speaking of which, I go to a couple of members' comments here. Joey writes in, perhaps a purposeful lack of transparency by CNN is the result of the hack that they hired. CNN said she wouldn't have anything to do with the Democratic campaigns, but CNN's word means nothing.

No, in this case, I want to be clear about the facts. Isgar has not yet started at CNN. So it's not her, okay, so. So they're already pretty terrible on their own. Well, let's see what it turns into once she joins. Okay. Nostra science says, surprise, Wolf, the sold-out corporators tool in CNN scam the town hall. Still, Bernie Sanders gave great answers.

Just expect more bitter on fairness, it will be a long fight. Okay, so that's their opinion. And then finally, I'm gonna go to I'm Steven Scales on Twitter writing in, all of CNN Dirty Play towards Senator Sanders since 2016 gives credibility to Trump's fake news rhetoric. With each passing year, CNN mimics Fox News more and more. Okay, yeah, here's what you don't want to do. Help Donald Trump's rhetoric. So unfortunately, last night was not helpful in that context.

I feel like they've helped from day one, giving him free press nonstop during his campaign. Anyway, let's move on to other news. has published a hit piece on Bernie Sanders using quotes from former Hillary Clinton staffers. Now this has to do with Bernie Sanders' use of private jets after he had lost the primaries and became a surrogate for Hillary Clinton. So just keep that in mind. This was when he decided, you know what, I'm gonna go ahead and help the Democratic candidate here, even though we had a pretty brutal primary process.

And so he was traveling from one place to another in a very short period of time. And as a result, in some cases, he had to rely on the use of private jets. So Daniel Lipman at Politico writes this piece and says Sanders repeatedly requested and received the use of a carbon spewing private jet for himself and his traveling staff when he served as a surrogate campaigner for Hillary Clinton. Let's note the verbiage here, carbon spewing, okay? So I can't quite tell where you're coming at this from. And so quick note here, because the worst is yet to come, and we're going to break down

the numbers for you guys and see if they have a point or not. So this is a very typical right wing talking point. In fact, we're gonna get to Tucker Carlson making a similar point in a second, where they say if you care about the world and you're trying to do good in the world, whether it's for climate change or any other issue that's progressive, you must be poverty stricken and homeless. And so if you ever use a car, ever use a refrigerator, ever use a plane, ha ha! Now, bad guys are allowed to use anything they like.

They're allowed to use infinite amount of money to buy off all of our politicians. That's not much of an issue. Political almost never covers that, right? But my God, you use a plane. They're literally attacking it, a presidential candidate, and then now someone helping a presidential candidate in this context of using a plane. Ladies and gentlemen, they got him. So let me give you more from Politico.

In the two years following the presidential election, Sanders continued his frequent private jet travel spending at least $342,000 on flights. Now keep that figure in mind because I am going to show you how much money the Clinton campaign had raised by the end of 2016. But super important clarification here. He put that number up front in the article. Yes. But that is not what Bernie Sanders spent during the campaign.

That's the two years afterwards. And so the reason for that is that the number that he spent on the campaign is actually much Now, if you're wanting wait, two years after the 2016 campaign, what did he spend it on? Well, political buries in paragraph 38 or so, it might even actually be lower than that. Oh, by the way, he did that because he was helping other Democratic candidates try to win their elections in 2018. Oh, wow. Oh, that's weird.

Convenient to leave that at the very, very bottom of the article. Yeah, and what's funny is that near the very top of the article, Lipman repeats the talking point about a lot of people accuse Bernie Sanders of not helping Hillary Clinton enough. But wait a minute, the whole point of this article is he helped her too much, that he used a jet to go to small communities that you can't get to with charter planes, because he did 39 different rallies for her. So wait, did he help her too much or not enough? Which one is it?

No, but look, the sources for this hit piece are all Clinton staffers, people who worked for Clinton and understand that he used these, these flip. These private flights in an effort to help her win the general election. So he's getting criticized by Clinton's people, okay? He's also getting criticized from progressives who did not agree with his decision to turn around and support her. He's getting criticized all over, right? And so my point is, like, you try to do a good thing and you try to do something principled

and make sure that someone like Trump doesn't get elected. Very people that you're trying to help out are gonna turn around and they're gonna do this to you. No good deed goes unpunished. Disgusting, this is politics in America, so let me give you more. So this is an anonymous source, someone who worked on Clinton's campaign, quote, we would try to fight as much as possible because of cost and availability of planes, but they would request a jet every time. We would always try to push for commercial. At the campaign, you're constantly trying to save like 25 cents. Oh, really?

The new BMO ViPorter MasterCard is your ticket to more. More perks, more points, more flights, more of all the things you want in a travel rewards card, and then some. Get your ticket to more with the new BMO ViPorter MasterCard and get up to $2,400 in value in your first 13 months. Terms and conditions apply, visit bemo.com slash the iPorter to learn more. Trying to save 25 cents, that's interesting. If I can recall correctly, the Clinton campaign had no problem raising money.

In fact, if you look at the numbers, Clinton and her super PACs raised a total of $1.2 billion. Billion. Just to compare Clinton to Trump, Trump and his super PACs raised a total of $646.6 million. So I'm just giving you those figures to help you understand that the Clinton campaign was not pinching pennies. They weren't trying to save 25 cents. And when you have multiple rallies or multiple campaign stops in a very, very short period of time and commercial isn't an option, how are you expecting Senator Sanders to go around,

you know, doing your work for you to help promote your candidate? Okay, now I'm gonna give you numbers that are more devastating. In the first quote from Hillary Staffer, which I appreciate he went on the record, his name is Zach Pat Canis. He was the director of rapid response, which apparently was not very rapid, nor a good response since he was one of the losers who lost to Donald Trump. So let's get real on that. These are all incredibly bitter people.

Bernie Sanders made the mistake of helping them. They're now stabbing him in the back for that. But let me read you his unbelievable quote, and then I'll give you the real context. He said, I'm not shocked that while thousands of volunteers braved the heat and cold to knock on doors until their fingers bled in a desperate effort to stop Donald Trump, his royal majesty, King Bernie Sanders would only deign to leave his plush D.C. office or his brand new second home on the lake if he was flown around on a cushy private jet like a billionaire master of the universe.

Are you kidding me? All right, so let's note that the Clintons have over $150 million in personal wealth and have raised close to $3 billion in their political life, King Bernie Sanders. And he's not remotely accurate on him demanding only private jets. No one actually believes that. And even in the article, although they desperately try to hide this fact, they do eventually say, well, it does look like they did use commercial, they used commercial, when? And they could use commercial, and they use charter when, when they couldn't.

And they had to get to the rallies to help Hillary Clinton. But let's go to see who the royalty is. So finally, they explained that the amount that was spent on the private jets for Bernie Sanders helping Hillary Clinton was $100,000. You might think, well, that's a lot of money. Okay, you know how much Hillary Clinton spent on jets overall? $15.9 million. So explain to me who the royalty is.

So one guy trying to help you spend $100,000, you yourself for the campaign spent $16 million. But Politico didn't choose to write an article about that. They chose to write an article about how, and by the way, the $100,000 figure is buried in the article as well. Yes. Okay, they lead with a totally different number, they bury that number. Do they put those two numbers together? Hey, for context and correct analysis, you should realize that it's $100,000 of $16 million

that the Clinton campaign spent on private jets alone, okay? Nope, nope, nope, no, no, no, no, no, no. God forbid, we should give that proper context. Instead, it's page after page of Clinton staffers saying, oh my God, he didn't help. We would have wanted if he had helped us more, and save some money. Oh, come on, as you are wasting people's money, luckily it was mainly large donors that gave you money, so I don't mind you wasting ExxonMobil's money. Wait, so I was gonna ask, so based on how much they spent on.

Bernie Sanders and his private jet travel. All Hillary Clinton had to do was like half a speech for Wall Street executives. Oh, that's true. Hey, you know what? You could have given a 30 minute speech to Goldman Sachs and you would have money left over to pay for Bernie Sanders plane travel to help you win the election. By the way, let me give you context on how many different places he went. He went 39 rallies and 13 states, 17 events in 11 states in the last week.

alone, but what do they do? They all turn around and go, oh yeah, he shouldn't have helped us. Even though we spent a tiny amount of money compared to a royal majesty who we spent $16 million on, well, it's Bernie's fault. No, no, no. Hey, for all the six people that worked, talked to Politico about this, and I understand there's two different people that are, sense of people that are at fault here. I think Politico did a terrible job, as usual, maybe yet another coincidence, of framing

it against the progressive candidate and in favor of the establishment. That would be about the millionth time in a row, okay? So the second but more guilty people are the six Hillary Clinton staffers that decided, oh, Bernie Sanders is running and he made the mistake of helping us, let's all sharpen our knives and go find a political reporter who will of course report this, okay, and stab him in the back, let's go do that. I mean, what incentive does any candidate who lost in the primaries have to go off and help the winning candidate, right?

The nominee, like, what incentive do you have if this is the way that you would be treated later? And so, unfortunately, in almost all of Washington, and certainly 100% of the people working at Politico, the belief is, well, look, it's obviously Sanders' fault that Clinton lost. And in fact, in this article, they intimate that, well, if Sanders had not run in the primary, Oh, I'm sorry, did we challenge her royal majesty? I know it's not a democracy. We should have just ordained that she would be anointed the queen of the Democratic Party.

Or perhaps, I know, for Washington, this logic is a weird thing. They believe in alternative facts. Or maybe we were right that she was not a good candidate because she lost to an orange clown. But these six staffers who are part of the losers, the losers who brought us Donald Trump, they lost to Donald Trump. They should be hiding in a cave for the rest of their lies in their infinite bitterness, turn around and go, well, I mean, I can't believe we had a democracy. Why didn't everybody just bow their heads during the prime? How dare they participate in democracy? See, that's why you might have lost, because you don't even believe in

democracy. You don't believe that you need to run a good campaign. You thought you should just be handed. Handed the presidency. They're probably bitter that Donald Trump were. Why did the Republicans run in the general election? So I'm sick of the mainstream media with their nonstop, massive bias, massive bias, pretending to be neutral, spare me your horse crap, okay?

And then the Clinton people, when will you go away? Just go work for another corporate person and then declare that they should be anointed the leader. Do the normal crap that you do. I'll give Zach credit, that guy that came out on the record with the Royal Majesty line, because at least he put his name on it. The rest of him hiding in the shadows, whispering in Politico's ear, oh, it was Bernie's fault, it was Bernie's fault, okay.

Okay, hey, you know what, your last thing, your logic last time around was, well, since Hillary Clinton finished second to Barack Obama, she's obviously the anointed leader and no one should challenge her in her primary. Well, Bernie Sanders finished second to Hillary Clinton last time around, and he is arguably the most popular politician in America. So according to your logic, not my logic, your logic, all the other establishment candidates should immediately cease their campaigns. Do you agree? Oh, all of a sudden, you don't agree. Funny how that works. And they never, ever admit their bias. So we had videos for this story, and I think I still want to do them. Yes.

Okay, so let's go ahead. We'll reset. Following Politico's hit piece on Bernie Sanders and how he, in some cases, used a private jet in order to serve as a surrogate for Hillary Clinton, Adam Green, who is a well-known and well-liked progressive friend of the show, went on Tucker Carlson's show on Fox News. to essentially debate Carlson on this very topic, and it was wonderful. Take a look. So it's really simple. If you say you believe that carbon emissions are destroying the planet and making it impossible for people to live here and people shouldn't have kids because this threat

is so imminent and so profound, how could you possibly ever, under any circumstances, fly in a private aircraft. Yeah, Tucker, I've seen you make enough good arguments to not really think that you think that's a very strong one. Okay. Just like you wouldn't blame your viewers who aspire to a better job in the future for going to work every day and call them hypocrites now, you can't blame Bernie Sanders for supporting a world 10 years from now with less carbon emissions, but taking an airplane now.

Those two things are not in contrast with each other. No. Someone's got to talk to Tucker Carlson about his facial expressions when he's doing these interviews, because he looks not so smart. Just face alone, right? But he's gonna prove he's not so smart as this conversation continues. I mainly wanna give credit to Adam, who did a wonderful job there. Progressive Change Campaign Committee is the group that he leads, bold progressives.org.

And see, look, we had an interesting dialogue about Rucker Bregman's interview with Tucker Carlson that never aired. And I thought that he challenged Tucker in a way that he knew would basically be. get him, get the interview to never air, when I thought there was a constructive dialogue that you could have that exposed Tucker on air, which is, I think, exactly what Adam Green did. He was polite, but insistent, and correct. So let's go to the next clip. Don't BS me, don't make excuses for this guy. Hold him to the standards you expect the rest of us to live to. Why are you giving him a pass? Of course, he should spend the last few days of a campaign

doing everything he can to fight for a Green New Deal. No, you should reduce your own Emissions. No, it's really simple. You should walk to work. Should he walk from Vermont to DC? Yes, yes. You should live by the standards. You just said yes.

You should live by the city. That shows I'm saying that he should take. Okay. Taking a car. You are making excuses because all you want is power. Yeah. Yeah, Adam Greed. Everyone knows Adam Greed just wants power.

Like what kind of stupid point was that? Okay. You just want power. No, no, I'm always amused by, as Bregman called him, then this part was perfectly accurate. You're a millionaire supported by billionaire, Tucker. So telling a progressive who barely makes any money that all he wants is power is hilarious, okay? What was that? That was his rebuttal?

And P.TRA will see, like so many other progressive organizations, but not all, but is funded by the people. They are funded by their supporters, their actual Americans, et cetera. And so they're very careful with their money. The idea that they're the greedy ones is hilarious, hilarious, okay? So now, and Adam got to the core of what is wrong with this right-wing talking point. So they say, well, if you ever want to do any good in the world, you have to give away all of your money, never travel anywhere and live in a cave.

Oh, that would take away what? All their power and their ability to fight back against your propaganda. Oh, how convenient that is. Now, do the Koch brothers have to do the same? No, because if you're a greedy billionaire, if Rupert Murdoch does he have to do the same? No, because he's, they say that's not hypocritical, he's greedy and rapacious, so he gets to be greedy and rapacious, and he can ruin the environment, pay me to help spread propaganda

to ruin the environment, and get advertisers who profit off of ruining the environment. And you see, we're not hypocrites, we're just the bad guys. Okay, but since Bernie Sanders is a good guy who's trying to help you, he needs to never walk or never drive outside of Vermont. He needs to walk to him. Who believes that? Who believes that? No, we are not going to do unilateral disarmament.

Sad day for you. I have nothing else to add because you've made all the good points already. I will just say that from now on, if I get stuck in a debate and I don't know how to answer, I'm just going to argue that that other person wants power. In fact, I'm just going to use that as a rebuttal randomly at any given time. So when we disagree? Jake, you just want power, okay? Yeah, no, and guys, we've talked about this a thousand times on the young Turks, maybe

more, it's projection. What do conservatives want? Power. So they say, oh, progressives, you're just trying to control our lives. Wait, who's the one in getting between a woman and her doctor? You guys are. Who's the one who said we should live by your religious code, not our own, you guys, right? Who's the one who's in favor of giant military excursions?

Now, you may say Tucker Cross is a little bit of a weird exception in that case, but overall Fox News in the right wing, absolutely, right? No, it's all projection. Murdoch doesn't want any power. No, Rupert Murdoch, why would he want power? I'll give you one last example. You know, the New York Post loses about $50 million a year every single year. So why would you keep a rag, a tabloid that loses that much money?

Because he gets so much value out of the marketing and propaganda that he puts in a to the New York market, which influences all of the other media in New York, so that that helps the rest of his financial interests. But Adam Green wants power? But Rupert Murdoch has no interest in power. They're just a bunch of angels over there at Fox News. Okay. And lose $50 million a year?

Yeah, and that was the last time I checked and that was several years ago. Now they're very likely losing way more because the newspaper industry is in tatters. So- I think I'm gonna cry. Okay, we have one more video. We have one more video, okay? Let's get to that. Anybody who takes any plane... This is idiotic.

Is it idiotic? You just said he should walk from Vermont to D.C. Obviously, you don't believe that. Obviously, don't believe that. I'm sorry. He's not a hypocrite for doing that. He believes in tens of millions of new jobs in the clean energy economy. This is, this is idiotic, what you're saying? Because, look, you will never walk from Vermont to D.C.

Or your leaders... You just said he should walk from Vermont to D.C. I asked if he should walk, you said yes. Come on. Not a real argument. You got me, Adam. You got me. You got me.

You're a brilliant guy. Thank you so much. Man, I love that. But he actually did get you. Yeah, he did, he did. No, and if you notice, Adam stayed polite all throughout and never called Tucker Carlson an idiot. At one point, Tucker Carlson first said he had a BS argument.

Adam Green replied later, your argument is BS based on the facts that he gave, but he never cursed, he never called him stupid. And three different times there, Tucker Carlson said, idiotic, idiotic, stupid, okay? So, okay, but Tucker, what's your argument? And so now he didn't have one, he got stumped, you saw he paused, and then he's like, oh yeah, I guess you're brilliant, okay, whatever, okay, this segment's over. Indeed. That was so good.

I know. And so Tucker's never been more right than when he said Adam Green made a brilliant argument, because he did and you had no answer. Let's keep it real. We gotta take a break. At TYT, we frequently talk about all the ways that big tech companies are taking control of our online lives, constantly monitoring us and storing and selling our data. But that doesn't mean we have to let them.

It's possible to stay anonymous online and hide your data from the prying eyes of big tech. And one of the best ways is with ExpressVPN. ExpressVPN hides your IP address, making your active ID more difficult to trace and sell the advertisers. ExpressVPN also encrypts 100% of your network data to protect you from eavesdroppers and cybercriminals. And it's also easy to install. A single mouse click protects all your devices.

But listen, guys, this is important. ExpressVPN is rated number one by CNET and Wired magazine. So take back control of your life online and secure your data with a top VPN solution available, ExpressVPN. And if you go to ExpressVPN.com slash TYT, you can get three extra months for free with this exclusive link just for TYT fans. That's EXPRE S-SVPN.com slash T-YT. TYT. Check it out today.

Right back. We hope you're enjoying this free clip from the Young Turks. If you want to get the whole show and more exclusive content while supporting independent media, become a member at tYT.com slash join today. In the meantime, enjoy this free second. All right, back on a young Turks. I want to tell you about our partner's Squarespace. Look, if you're doing anything in the world, you need a website.

If you're applying for a job, you're setting up a business. Is anybody really setting up businesses without having a website? Is that happening in the world? So if you're going to do that, use Squarespace. We've used them in the past. They're terrific. They have 24-7 support. And now if you use Squarespace, you're going to get 10% off.

If you go to Squarespace.com slash TYT, you've got to go to Squarespace.com slash TYT to get the 10% off. So it's very simple to build your website there. So check that out. Okay, Dr. Chaos MD says, Tucker either needs to recognize that he is off his interviewing game or Tucker's Booker does not want to work their job anymore and are sending him guests that will work Tucker over and drive him crazy. Either way, it entertains me to watch Tucker squirm and loses cool in an interview. Yeah, I think he's shaken, man. Yeah, there's something going on with him.

Yeah. But I'm enjoying watching it. Yeah. Steve Alvarez writes in on Twitter, Bernie could have arrived in a covered wagon to campaign for Hillary, and it wouldn't have helped her attendance. numbers. Well, first of all, nothing would help her attendance numbers, but they would have then turned around and said, Bernie wasn't trying hard to get to the campaign stops if we had gone to 39 stops instead of 38, we would have won. It's Bernie's fault. He was in an unwinnable situation, period, right? And the thing that really gets on my nerves about that entire

campaign is the sense of entitlement from the very beginning. We touched on it in the story. I don't want to get into it again. I do want to read a tweet. though, if that's okay. Yeah. Carl Blaveld says, Anna, it's my 50th birthday today and I wanted good news, you are failing me. You and Jank, you could at least read me a bedtime story or something. Anyway, I could say happy birthday.

So happy birthday. Sorry, I mean, we deal with the bad news all day every day, so I get it. So a lot more in the post game, maybe we'll do some good news there too. So that's it in the last hour of the young Turks. Look, we're home of progressives. You're getting defensive progressives like this anywhere else. So check out all of our programming and support independent media at t. yt.com slash join, okay, and there's a couple of different levels that you can join at.

We appreciate anyone joining at any of those levels because you make this show possible. I promise we're gonna get to the Jorge Ramos story later in the rundown, okay? We have it prepped, I just wanna let you guys know for everyone tweeting me and wondering where that story's at. Okay, let's move on. Congressman Matt Gates appears to be threatening Michael Cohen just one day before he is set to testify in front of the House Oversight Committee. Now he tweeted the following, and this could be very problematic for him, legally speaking.

He said, hey, Michael Cohen, do your wife and father-in-law know about your girlfriends? Maybe tonight would be a good time for that chat. I wonder if she'll remain faithful when you're in prison. He's about to learn a lot. So that was the tweet. Now again, remember, Michael Cohen is set to testify tomorrow. And so this tweet's timing is very significant. The threat here is very significant.

And one could argue that there's witness tampering going on. Now, Walter Schaub, who was the former director of the Office of Government Ethics, did respond to tweets calling this into question. Was there a crime committed here? And what he tweeted was the following. This is actually what is written under the law. Whoever knowingly uses intimidation threatens or corruptly persuades another person or attempts to do so or engages in misleading conduct toward another person with intent to influence delay

or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years or both. 20 years, how awesome would it be to have Matt Gates locked up for 20 years? Lock him up, lock him up. Okay, look, he's in the elite because he's a congressman, so there'll be no consequences. We know that. If you did witness tampering like this, they'd call you a mafia thug and throw you in jail for a long time.

Is it witness tampering? Definitely, let me explain. If you're a Republican congressman and you wanna have a gotcha moment with Michael Cohen, would you share that information ahead of time? No, you'd do it in the testimony. Now you would get that information, either you would either do it yourself or if you're not on the committee, you would get it to a colleague, and you would not allow him time to prepare. And that way you'd get more glory, you'd have a better chance of catching him off guard, etc.

It would be better strategy. And I don't think that anyone can dispute that. The only reason to say it ahead of his testimony is to intimidate him. So it is, it's a total thug move. It reminds me a Shug Knight and I feel like I'm giving Matt Gates too much credit, okay? But to say, oh yeah, you're gonna testify, I guess my beloved Donald Trump, okay? By the way, about affairs that Donald Trump had that Michael Cohen paid hush money for. And you're talking about mistresses.

Matt Gates, we're talking about mistresses. You claim that you're a family values guy, you support a scumbag who cheated on his wife over and over again while she was pregnant and had adult star mistresses. I don't mind that, but you claim you're terribly against it unless he's gonna give tax cuts to your rich friends and he's gonna hate the same color people you hate, Matt Gates. What is Matt Gates doing right now? So are you flexing your muscle for Trump, hoping that he's going to give you some sort of promotion, maybe, you know, accept you into his administrator?

Like, what are you doing? No, I, no, with Matt Gates, no, look, we talk about political strategy all the time on the show and what are people angling for, why are they actually leaving the administration sometimes, how are they angling to get into the administration? No, in Matt Gates' case, I think he's a true brown shirt. So he likes authoritarian government. He likes how Donald Trump has ignored the rule of law over and over again. So whenever you need a political thug to come out on TV and to back Donald Trump, he wants

to do it. Matt Gates is your guy. So he steps in there with fervor, with relish. And he's like, ha ha, yeah, Michael Cohen, why don't we go after your family and show your wife the problem she's about to have when we tell her about your mistress says, you want to testify, go ahead and do it. You'd be perfect in a brown shirt, Matt Gates. So keep it real as to what you're doing.

And if there was any justice in America, they would definitely charge him with witness tampering. There's no reason in the world you would reveal that before he testifies. No prosecutor in their right mind, no opponent in their right mind would reveal their strategy before the testimony. It makes no sense at all. There's only one reason you would say it ahead to make sure he doesn't testify. Well, reporters did manage to catch Representative Gates and ask him some questions about this. So let's hear what he has to say.

A point about his wife mentioning his father-in-law should be perceived as a threat. Absolutely not. We're witness testing, not witness tampering. And when witnesses come before Congress, their truthfulness and veracity are in question, and we have the opportunity to test them. Listen, I don't threaten anybody. Michael Cohen threatens people. If you go back and look at the phone conversations he's had with reporters, I think he

told one reporter that what he was going to do to him was effing disgusting. So Michael Cohen, by his own admission, is a PhD in threats and intimidation. All I'm doing is saying that if someone is going to come before the Congress and continue their stream of lies, that they ought to be prepared to set the four corners of those lies. Like, we already know that Michael Cohen lies to Congress. We already know that Michael Cohen lies to law enforcement. Now we're going to find out if Michael Cohen lies to his own family. No, no, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, we're witness testing, right? So he's trying to make a point about how Michael Cohen is not to be trusted because he allegedly

had affairs. Okay, so the person that you're standing up for Gates is Donald Trump. And the reason why this whole testimony is happening in the first place is because Donald Trump couldn't keep it in his pants. She cheated on his wife several times. One time when she was pregnant with their son and then paid those women hush money, right? So they would not speak out ahead of the general election. So you want to test that person?

Yeah, so let's two things out of that clip. One is there is no such thing as witness testing. Wow. That sounds like, well, we're not doing torture, we're doing, or we're not doing kidnapping, we're doing extraordinary renditions. The renditions are extraordinary, right? torture, we're doing enhanced interrogations. We're not doing witness tampering, we're doing witness testing.

You know when you do witness testing? When they're on the stand. Not ahead of time, that's intimidation, almost by definition. And to his point about Michael Cohen threatening reporters is actually true. Michael Cohen was also a thug when he worked for Donald Trump. And he threatened those reporters on behalf of Donald Trump. So Matt Gates, you should be outraged at the lies. that Michael Cohen told on behalf of Donald Trump, the journalist that he intimidated on behalf

of Donald Trump, oh, but you're not outraged by that. You love when he did that when he was loyal to the authoritarian leader. Oh my God, I mean, we're talking about a guy who campaigned as the law and order president. Look at all the people surrounding his campaign who are now facing either criminal investigations or have already been convicted of committing crimes. I mean, you, the latest include Roger Stone, right? You have Michael Cohen who's going to testify tomorrow, Paul Manafort, who's already been convicted.

I mean, Michael Flynn, Eddie Lillis goes on and on. Wow, okay, so. Papinopoulos. There's more from Gates. I'm almost afraid to watch it. This is. Okay, here's another one from Trump's Coppo. What are you suggesting Michael Cohen maybe did here?

Well, I think that you'll, as the president loves to say, we'll see. I think tomorrow's going to be an exciting day and I think we're going to learn a lot about Michael Cohen. Can you explain to us what you meant in that tweet? I think my tweet speaks for itself. What does that mean? We should go read it. Do you have any insight onto Michael Cohen's relationships?

Well, I think you should tune in tomorrow to find out. What do his, I'm very curious, what do his alleged affairs have anything to do with this case? Right? Like you're dragging his family under the bus for your weird defense. weird defense of Donald Trump, which could actually get you in trouble with the law if we actually had a real justice system in this country. That's a great point by Anna. I mean, in the midst of all this, and it just happened, right?

I forgot to ask that simple question you asked, which is, wait, if you're trying to prove that Michael Cohen is not telling the truth about how Donald Trump and he worked together to commit these crimes, how does this relate to that at all? And if you're, the only way that he could possibly relate is to say, well, since he had mistresses, we can't trust them. But as we just explained, Donald Trump had mistresses. That's what started this mess in the first place. So that means you can't trust Donald Trump.

But he thinks Donald Trump walks out in water. He's like, no, he's almost as good as Mussolini. So Matt Gates, the fascist and the furious, out here doing the most clear witness hampering I've ever seen in my life. And so, look, one of the things we're gonna find out is if there's any justice at all in this country. If you did that in a case that was related to you, do you know how hard the prosecutors would come down on you?

Before a witness testified against you or your mob leader or whatever criminal enterprise you were part of, you said, oh, well, I guess we're gonna get to find out about your mistresses. Prosecutors would immediately charge you with a witness tampering and obstruction of justice. all right we'll find out we'll find out if there's any justice at all Matt gates is an obvious thug when we come back from the break we will dive into the story involving Jorge Ramos

and others at Univision getting detained in Venezuela thanks for listening to the full episode of the young Turks support our work listen ad free access members only bonus content and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts at apple.com slash t yt i'm your host shank huger and i'll see you soon