The Young Turks - Dollars & Nonsense - February 10, 2026

Episode Date: February 11, 2026

Lawmakers say at least a half-dozen men may be protected by excessive redactions in the Epstein files, even as Trump continues to insist he had no knowledge of Epstein’s sex crimes. Trump’s religious liberty panel held its first antisemitism hearing, which quickly turned contentious over Israel, while new analysis suggests the economy—once Trump’s strongest political asset—is now rapidly becoming a liability. Thanks to Shopify and Zip Recruiter for today's episode: Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month trial today at shopify.com/tyt Just go to this exclusive web address right now to try ZipRecruiter FOR FREE: ziprecruiter.com/tyt Hosts: Ana Kasparian SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE ☞  https://www.youtube.com/@TheYoungTurks FOLLOW US ON: FACEBOOK  ☞   https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER  ☞       https://twitter.com/TheYoungTurks INSTAGRAM  ☞  https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK  ☞          https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕MERCH  ☞      https:/www.shoptyt.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/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. Awesome show today because I think we are. I think that we're about to have our finest hour. Okay, maybe not our finest hour. It's really up to you to decide, but welcome. You're watching The Young Turks.

I'm your host, Anna Kasparian. I'm really excited for the second hour of the show today. We're going to have comedian Tim Dillon on to discuss the Epstein files. And maybe we can also have a brief discussion about his relationship with Barry Weiss, which he's been very open about. And they're falling out, if you will. But I'm really looking forward to talking to him about the files. It's something that he has been honestly covering and talking about well before I was. And it was because of the fact that he was privy to the possibility of Epstein carrying out a blackmail operation on behalf of intelligence organization.

So we'll be talking to him at the top of hour two, but have no fear. We are going to be discussing a few other Epstein-related topics in the first hour, including, honestly, what a badass Rokana and Thomas Massey. They're both amazing, okay, especially with what they did today and last night. So we'll talk about that at the top of the show. Later on, if we have time, because we do have a jam-packed show today, I do want to kind of give you an update on Trump's executive order for affordable housing. If you remember, we did cover that a few weeks ago where he said that he was going to essentially ban private equity

firms and institutional investors from purchasing residential real estate. Well, how did Congress handle that executive order? We're going to give you an update on that in the second hour as well. But as always, just want to encourage you to like and share the stream if you're watching us live. And we will be having a member's only bonus episode today, which you don't want to miss. I will be talking about the Ford employee who called President Donald Trump a pito protector. Did he get fired? What was his punishment? We're going to check in.

Okay, I love that story, and we're going to give you the update on that. But before we do, why don't we start off with the latest in the Epstein case? Congressman Massey and I went to the Department of Justice to read the unredacted Epstein files. We spent about two hours there, and we learned that 70 to 80% of the files are still redacted. In fact, there were six wealthy, powerful men that the DOJ hid for no apparent reason. When Congressman Massey and I pointed this out to the Department of Justice, they acknowledged their mistake. And now they have revealed the identity of these six powerful men. The real question is, will Democratic Congressman Rokana unveil the names of these powerful men?

Why don't we wait and see? These men are Salvatore Navora, Zorab Mekyllads, Leipig Leonor, Nicola Caputa, Sultan Ahmad bin Suleam, CEO of Dubai Ports World, and billionaire businessman Leslie Wexner. Did it. You've just heard Representative Roe-Connor name six of the alleged co-conspirators in the Epstein files, names that were ridiculously redacted. But now we have some clarity on who these individuals are. Now, right off the bat, I just want to say, while there are certainly some emails incriminating some of these people, and I'll tell you which ones we have some potential evidence of wrongdoing for, I want to be clear that not everyone that was listed is definitely someone who carried out child

sex trafficking or engaged in any type of criminal behavior. It's important to actually investigate this appropriately. And if there is evidence, bring them to trial and ensure that there are real consequences for it. So let's talk about the names that were just listed right now. So there is little to know information on two of the individuals. So I'm not going to be able to talk about them at length at all. And that's Zorab Mikhailads and Lianikinov. Look them up. There isn't much information about them online.

I'm sure we're going to learn more about them in the coming days. We already know who Sultan Ahmed al-Suliam is. We talked about him. He's from the UAE. And we've done previous videos where we kind of discussed his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein and how Jeffrey Epstein was essentially utilizing that relationship in order to build a relationship between Israel and the UAE. And it does turn out that he's the individual who sent Epstein that torture video that Epstein emailed back to say he really loved. I love the torture

video. So again, Ahmed al-Suyam is the person who sent that torture video. How do we know that? Well, thanks to Congressman Thomas Massey who posted about it just yesterday, saying, in response to my posts on X Today, DOJ, unredacted an FBI file that labels two individuals as co-conspirators, unredacted a file that lists several men who might be implicated, tacitly admitted that Sultan Ahmed al-Suliam was the sender of the torture video. Now, he's not an American citizen. So in terms of justice being served, when it comes to the Sultan, I don't think that we can expect much here in the United States. But when it comes to American citizens who have been wrapped up in this case, who have been listed as co-conspirators in the documents but have never been tried or never stood trial for these alleged crimes, I think that the time has come. I think people are ready to see a real investigation into this and more importantly to see real justice for the survivors who were victimized and were denied justice for decades.

And I'm going to stop and say this real quick because this is a broader point about Congress and what can and can't be done by just a handful of Congress members. We have been led to believe that, well, you know, our system of government is set up in a way where you can't. can't really have one or two people make a difference, right? It's bureaucratic. There are checks and balances. But you want to know something when you have Congress members who are willing to fight to make others bend to their will, as Rokana and Thomas Massey have done. And by the way, Marjorie Taylor Green, she's no longer in Congress. But she was also a fighter on this issue. And she deserves a lot of credit for it. They've all been attacked. As we know, Thomas Massey is dealing with a primary challenger in his congressional race, but they were undeterred,

and they kept going. And it's inspiring to see, especially at a time when I am super black pilled on Congress in particular, it is very good to see that in some cases, if we have members of Congress who are willing to fight, they could actually accomplish something that's really important here, both transparency and potentially in the future, this is what I'm hoping for, justice for the survivors. So let's talk about the other people that were listed by Robana. So you have Salvatore Nurara, didn't know much about him. Apparently, he was a member of the NYPD and served as a detective.

He was previously investigated in connection with an escort service through, though that investigation apparently had nothing to do with Epstein. It was just a different type of escort investigation that he was facing. So he was one of Epstein's contacts in the Little Black Book. That's all I know about him right now. Again, it bears repeating. Just because he's listed doesn't necessarily mean that he engaged in any criminality. If we live in a just world, if we lived in a country that believed in justice, he would be

investigated and we would find out what kind of relationship he had with Epstein and whether not he ever engaged in the predatory behavior that victimized these young girls. Now, there's also Nicola Caputo, who is an Italian politician. He now works in agriculture. His name appears in records linked to Jeffrey Epstein, source from a 2009 New York Police Department list. That's all I know about him. So I'm not going to speculate. We're going to wait and see if there will be any investigation into these individuals. But at least, some of those redacted names have now been unredacted thanks to the pressure campaign implemented by Rokana and Thomas Masty. So that leaves Les Wexner, the former Victoria's

secret CEO who we've been hearing a lot about. We've been talking about on the show. And last night, Congressman Thomas Massey called the DOJ out for attempting to protect Wexner by redacting his name in the Epstein files. So let's take a look at what he posted on X, he says, this is a well-known retired CEO. DOJ should unredact this. Why did they redact it? And here is Congressman Massey describing the fight he had with... You know that moment right before you launched something new that pit in your stomach?

I remember when I started TYT, I thought to myself, what if no one watches? What if we run out of money tomorrow? It was scary. Still thinking about that every once in a while. But you push through and having the right tools makes all the difference. Like when we launched ShopTYTYT, Shopify was a lifesaver. We use it and we loved it. If you're starting a business, those what ifs can be terrifying, and that's where Shopify comes in.

What if I can't build a good looking website? Shopify has hundreds of templates to build a beautiful online store that actually matches your brand. What if people haven't heard of my brand? Shopify helps you to get the word out with easy to run email and social campaigns. What if I get stuck or have a question in the process? Their award-winning 24-7 support is there with expert. advice. And the best part, that iconic purple shop pay button. It's why Shopify has the best converting checkout on the planet. Less abandoned carts, more sales for you. It's time to turn

those what ifs into with Shopify today. Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at Shopify.com slash t-y-t. Go to shopify.com slash t-y-t. That's Shopify.com slash t-y-t. This will be fun. Let's talk about first dates. We've all been there. You're trying to figure someone out, so you ask the important stuff up front. What are you looking for? What are your deal breakers? You get right to the point to see if they're the right person for you.

Well, the same goes if you're hiring. You definitely want to address key questions first to see if someone could be right for your role. That's why you need ZipRecruiter. When you post your job, ZipRecruiter suggests screening questions to help you identify top candidates faster. And today, you can try it for free at ZipRecruiter. dot com slash t yt their matching technology immediately starts finding qualified people who actually check all your boxes no wonder zip recruiter is the number one rated hiring site ask key questions

and hire faster with zip recruiter four out of five employers who post on zip recruiter get a quality candidate within the first day tried for free at zip recruiter dot com slash t yt that's zip recruiter dot com slash TYT, meet your match on ZipRecruiter. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanch about the fact that Wexter's name was redacted in the files and how Massey ultimately won the battle. Take a look. I'd like to hear his take on the redaction of the CEO who's listed as a co-conspirator in the 2019 child sex trafficking case. So can I ask you because, and I want to ask if this is the same person, Todd Blanche also said about that tonight that the document you're citing there has

victim names in it. Correct. To say that's why there are redactions. He said, we have just unredacted Les Wexner's name from this document, but his name already appears in the file thousands of other times. And he says the Justice Department is hiding nothing. Is that the retired CEO that you're referencing? It is. He unredacted it after I found it. That's a problem. And I'm glad they have admitted they made a mistake by redacting that. So you're saying it was redacted when you went in there today. And after you tweeted that, they unredacted it. Correct. Look, I don't know if it was a mistake. I wouldn't really give this administration the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the Epstein files, especially because of the fact that they've been engaged in this cover up from the

very beginning. Trump wanted people to forget about it, stop talking about it, don't ask me about it. I don't want to release the files. And it was, again, that pressure campaign implemented by Marjorie Taylor Green, Rokana, Thomas Massey, that ultimately led to Trump. Trump bending to their will. But in releasing the Epstein files, as we know, the first tranche was heavily redacted. And the second tranche was both heavily redacted and had questionable redactions, not just the fact that they were redacting the names of the alleged co-conspirators, but also because of the fact that they did not redact the names of the survivors. They did not redact the names of the survivors. Also, another thing that was very clear to me is they wanted to redact

Donald Trump's name anywhere they could find it. And there was this one strange redaction in an email where the D-O-N in the word don't was redacted. So I don't know if it was like an auto-redact thing looking for Donald or Don, but like, come on. So anyway, you could tell where the priorities were when it came to the way these documents were redacted, but I'm glad that we're getting, again, more clarity on what's happening here and who these alleged co-conspirators are. Now, congressional lawmakers were able to pour through

some of those unredacted Epstein files beginning yesterday. And what's been kind of incredible to see is how their whole demeanor is and how they react to reporters' questions as they are leaving the halls of Congress after reading those unredacted Epstein files. So let's actually start with my favorite, my favorite reaction, which is a Republican Congresswoman Lauren Bobert. Take a look at this.

Congresswoman, are you among the members who got to see the unredacted files today? Yes, I saw some of them, not all of them, obviously. I'll be going back tomorrow to see more. Any reaction on what you've seen so far? I think that there's folks who are definitely implicated in co-conspirators. And, you know, I don't think everyone there that was talking about underage girls being trafficked our victims. And do you support any clemency for Galane Maxwell? She was saying that she was...

I do not. I think, I think Galane Maxwell should get more time and she should definitely be in a harsher prison than what she's in. It's absolutely disgusting. There isn't much. I agree with Lauren Boberdon, but I definitely agree with everything she said there, especially at the end when she was asked about Galane Maxwell and whether or not she should be granted clemency.

Galane Maxwell is a disgusting liar. She has lied under oath. There is no use to hear from her, to hear her testimony. I don't trust that she will tell the truth. And the idea that she would trade testimony for clemency is laughable to me, and hopefully that never happens. But as you can see, after Lauren Bobert looked at those unredacted files, she was shaken by it and upset about it.

And if that isn't enough to convince you that there are some shady files there that Lauren Bober just saw, I will turn your attention to another Republican lawmaker, a Republican lawmaker who apparently, and I can't believe she admitted this on the record, didn't think the Epstein thing was really a big deal and was kind of annoyed by it. I kind of didn't know why people were so focused on, you know, the fact that there was a pedophile ring victimizing American miners and also obviously, potentially. doing the same with minors from other countries as well. So I turned to GOP senator Cynthia Loomis. She's from Wyoming. Here's what she had to say after viewing the unredacted Epstein files.

Well, initially, my reaction to all this was, I see what the big deal is. And it was worth investigating. And the members of Congress that have been pushing this were not wrong. No, no, they were not wrong. You didn't care? You didn't care. Look, there's a possibility that maybe she just had absolutely no curiosity about the Epstein story whatsoever, and she kept her head in the sand. But I just feel that as a public servant in this country, the bare minimum is to have a modicum,

modicum of concern about the vulnerable in your country. And underage people, vulnerable, elderly people, vulnerable. In this case, in this context, obviously the people being preyed upon are minors. And the idea that she's like, I don't really care. What's the big deal? But I give her credit for being honest about how she originally felt about this situation. I certainly would have a little bit more self-awareness and maybe not. incriminate myself that way, right? But nonetheless, at least she looked at the files and now has

come to the right conclusion, which is this is a big deal. This is a huge scandal. It's a huge scandal that is implicating some of the most powerful, wealthy people, not only in our own country, but across the globe. I mean, there is a reckoning in the UK right now. I wish there was more of a reckoning here in the United States. Hopefully we will get there. It's very depressing that we haven't gotten there yet. But for the first time ever, I have to be. a little bit of hope that things might end up the way they're supposed to be. There might actually be justice. And the only reason why I think that is because we have like a handful of lawmakers who

are fired up about this and they're going to keep pushing and I love to see it. Now as Congressman Jamie Raskin noted yesterday after viewing the unredacted files, well, they showed evidence of victims as young as nine, as young as nine. So my mind wanders back to Batya Ungar Sargon on CNN's Abby Phillips show and how she didn't feel that the Epstein files really taught us anything new. You know, no real evidence of criminality here. Okay. So, yeah, it is a huge deal. And if there is a confirmation of victims as young as nine, I want to know why haven't charges already been filed, right?

That should have already happened. But finally, I want to discuss why the survivors, because a lot of people have been asking this, including yesterday, I think it was Box who wrote in and asked, look, why are we like going through this lengthy, our Jewish process? Like, why don't we just have the survivors name the perpetrators? So I want to show you why it is likely they're avoiding naming names themselves. because you have a lot of powerful people who are chomping at the bit to further destroy these women's lives. And if you don't know what I'm talking about, take a look at this.

A woman who was on Epstein's plane, she says, I was never on an Epstein plane with a young woman. I never got on this. This is total defamation, a total lie, but I can't disprove it because they won't give me her name. For example, in my case, it's an adult woman. We don't know whether she's a victim. We don't know whether she's a perpetrator. We don't know whether she's a co-conspirator. Why do you hide her name and introduce the name of the people who accuse?

That's guilt by accusation. That's guilt by association. It's McCarthyism. It's wrong. It's unconstitutional. It has to stop and the media is playing a role in this. Politicians are playing a role in this. Epstein will never be remembered who it is.

He will be remembered for inciting McCarthy. that infects, infects America now more than it ever has since the 1950s. So I want to turn to Congressman Marjorie Taylor Green because I think she understands really well why it is that women who have survived the Epstein scandal would not want to come out and name names, name the perpetrators. So let's go to this post on X where she says, and this right here is exactly why the Epstein victims are afraid to publicly name the list of rich powerful men. They will get sued, bankrupt, and silenced. Releasing all of the Epstein files reveals the truth about everyone. So she's right about that.

And by the way, I have personal experience with this. Not in that I was ever victimized or, you know, prayed upon by Epstein and his cabal of billionaire pedophiles. But because of the fact that Dershowitz, who was Epstein's lawyer, of course, he volunteered to be Epstein's lawyer and he's the one who secured the sweetheart deal after Epstein was convicted in 2008. Okay, so that's what you should know about Alan Dershowitz. And yes, he has been named in the files. There have been accusations against him, including from Jane Doe 3, who claimed that Dershowitz was totally fine with what was going on. In fact, at one point, she alleges that she was going down on Epstein and Dershowitz would just casually walk in and have a conversation.

with Epstein as it was happening. Okay, that's what she alleges. Okay, so it's not just the thing about the plane. It's not just the thing about him getting a massage. He had his underwear on, he alleges. It's the fact that he allegedly knew about what was going on and was providing cover for it. That has also been alleged. Now, any time I have done a story or talked about or been on a panel with Dershowitz, his MO is to threaten lawsuits, always. Now, I'm a big girl. Okay. And I like discovery. I'd like to discover a lot of things. So you want to sue me go ahead, because I know I haven't defamed him, and I know that there's no merit to said lawsuit. But I also know that getting threatened like that by a guy who's got money is scary. And you know

that that could ruin your life. You know that that could bankrupt you if you can't afford attorneys. So that's probably why these women didn't want to come out and name names. Now, the reason why as someone like Rokana is able to name names without fear of litigation or a lawsuit is because he did that on the House floor. Why is that relevant? This is something that a lot of Americans don't know about, but members of Congress, public servants are immune from lawsuits if they are saying something while they are on duty for lack of a better way of putting it. Right. So if they are on the House floor and they are saying something as part of their job, they are protected from the types of lawsuits that these women would probably deal with, should they be the ones to make

these allegations, let's say, on social media or something like that. So that immunity is really important. And if you watch some of the interviews that Thomas Massey has done on cable news, he holds things a little closer to the chest. But when he's on the house floor, he's fiery and he feels free to speak about what's actually going on. And that's because he's got extra protection as a public servant doing his job as a member of Congress. So that's the reason why we're going to take a quick break. When we come back, I'm not going to get off this story quite yet. There's more to get to, including, well, we're going to get off topic a little bit, actually, because I want to talk about the very first, the very first, what is this thing called, Religious Liberty

Commission that Trump put together? They had their first meeting. And It was amazing. I'm not exaggerating. You don't want to miss it. Come right back. Welcome to our first social break of the day. Jenny Talia writes in and says, you rock Anna doing these solo shows and always starting the show with the smile and amazing hair. Thank you. I appreciate it. I'm having fun. I'm having a lot of fun. Little Mac McGee says my default assumption is this is this. The Trump, DOJ, FBI, and DHS are lying. They are guilty until proven innocent. Well, I mean, they've gotten caught in so many lies, especially when it comes to DOJ and DHS. There's no question.

And if they were telling the truth and want to complain about it, well, may I direct them to a story I like to call the boy who cried wolf, an ancient unknown tale from long past. Obviously, that's sarcasm. If you don't act like a five-year-old, you won't get treated like one. Well, yeah, I mean, look, you have to earn trust. Or more importantly, once you lose the public's trust, you have to earn it back. And I haven't seen much in terms of them earning trust back. They just keep lying. It seems like they keep trying to cover things up, whether it's border patrol or ice-related

shootings, or in this case, the Epstein files. Galfar 71's in our Twitch section says, I give Thomas Massey props for what he has done with the Epstein files and getting those women the justice they deserve. But I will not vote for him in November because we only agree on. maybe two things with Epstein being one of them. I don't know if you're in Kentucky in his particular district, but you don't have to vote for him. But I will say this. If I had to choose between a typical Republican politician, because that seat will be served by a Republican, whether you like it or not.

If I had to choose between like a normal milk toast Republican lawmaker and Thomas Massey, I'd go with Thomas Massey. I would. Because at least he is guided by his principles. and he actually has values. That's a lot more than I can say about most members of Congress. And yeah, that includes Democrats as well. Avenger Dragon 89, who subscribed with Prime for 62 months, says my daughter, 18, sub to Prime for one month for the free trial.

That's amazing. I hope you enjoy the show for the trial for me. So Avenger Dragon, thank you for joining. And thank you for the sub. Happy Warrior Dragon set is gifting one tier one. one sub to TYT's community. They've gifted a total of 69 in the channel. It's amazing.

All right, CDN, North Dog Dad. I mean, what would the show be if we didn't get at least one gifted membership? So thank you. I always look forward to seeing you giving the gift of TYAT membership to someone in our audience. And welcome to our new member. A hunted dragon in our member section says Rokana has my vote as president. I mean, at this very moment, considering the possibilities for the, Democratic field.

He's really starting to convince me that he has the type of leadership skills necessary. But we'll wait and see. I mean, there's an eternity between now and the election. So we'll see what happens. All right, let's get back to the show. Welcome back to the show. I'm Anna Kasparian. And I just want to take a moment to tell you about our wonderful partner, Noble,

if you're tired of the Doom Scroll, as I think many of us are, you're not a little. The entire system is designed to keep you glued to your screen while the billionaire owners of big wireless profit from every minute you're on it. In fact, the Epstein files has something really interesting from the CEO from Activision where he's making a point about making video games as addictive as possible. But Noble Mobile ain't into that. In fact, they will pay you back for the data you don't use. And they do have a noble plan where you get unlimited data. for $50 a month, but they do have a promotion right now where they will take $40 off your first month, meaning for your first month, you only pay $10. If you want to learn more and switch,

super easy to do it. Just go to tyt.com slash switch. That's tyt.com slash switch. All right, we got to talk about this amazing, like, look, I had no interest in whatever this religious Liberty Commission was going to be. But suddenly I'm real interested because it was a fiery first meeting and I wanted to show you why. As you know, I'm a Catholic. I'm a Catholic and Catholics do not embrace Zionism just so you know. So are all Catholics anti-Semites according to you? As I said, anti-Zionism by denying the right of the Jews to have their own state while not saying the same for any other peoples, that is a double standard hypocrisy and anti-semit. So just to be clear, are Catholics anti-Semite?

Carrie, excuse me, I'm going to interrupt. I mean, I think you should let her ask the question, and I think the question should be answered. But, you know, it's kind of difficult to sell the American people on the notion that your lack of support for a political ideology makes you anti-Semitic. Because Zionism is a political ideology. Being Jewish, Judaism, that is a religion. Jewish people share an ethnicity.

Hating people because they're Jewish makes you an anti-Semite. Disagreeing with the political ideology of Zionism is something entirely different. Now, with that said, that was Catholic conservative activist and former Ms. Caliolese. California, Carrie Prajohn Boler. Now, if Carrie Prejohn sounds familiar to you and you're a long-time viewer of TYT, yes, it's that Carrie Prijon. She's the one who was asked a question during one of these pageants and it was kind of disastrous. Her answer was disastrous. But you know what? All is forgiven because

the way she handled this very first meeting for the Justice Department's Religious Liberty Commission was incredible. So as the group held its first public hearing, about anti-Semitism on college campuses, Boler decided to press on about the, you know, press on the other members, basically, about, you know, the notion of rejecting anti-Semitism and, rejecting Zionism and how that allegedly makes you anti-Semitic.

Now, she says, I'm Catholic. Catholics don't believe in Zionism or Zionist ideology. So does that make me anti-Semitic? And the answer she got were essentially yes. So Donald Trump established this commission last year and tasked its members with drafting a report with recommendations about how to promote religious liberty. And the chairman of this group is Texas lieutenant governor, Dan Patrick, who should have probably been ousted because of corruption, but never was. And then you also have the vice chair who happens to be Dr. Ben Carson. He's usually sleeping most of the time, so you're not going to see too much participation.

I'm just kidding. He does seem like a sleepy guy. But the first panel of speakers on Monday featured the following individuals. Former UCLA law student Yitzie Frankel, who actually sued the university over its handling of the 2024 pro-peace, pro-Palestinian encampments. There's also Yeshiva University President Ari Berman, Harvard alum, my favorite Shabos Kestimbaum, stick around for what he had to say during this hearing because it's just as a disgusting as you would expect. And then you also have former Auburn basketball coach Bruce Pearl. Okay. So Carrie Prejan Boler has been very vocal in her criticism of Israel. And she argued that the panelists had defined anti-Semitism too broadly, which obviously I agree with. I don't think

that being against Zionism means that you hate Jewish people. It means that you don't agree with the Zionist project. And honestly, at this point, anyone who does, I think is super suspect, When the weather cools down, Golden Nugget Online Casino turns up the heat. This winner, make any moment golden and play thousands of games like her new slot Wolf It Up and all the fan-favorite huff and puffing. Whether you're curled up on the couch or ticking five between snow shovels, play winner's hottest collection of slots. From brand new games to the classics you know and love. You can also pull up your favorite table games like Blackjack, roulette, and craps, or games. Go for even more excitement with our library of live dealer games.

Download the Golden Nugget Online Casino app, and you've got everything you need to layer on the fun this winter. In partnership with Golden Nugget Online Casino. Gambling problem call ConX Ontario at 1-866-531-2600. 19 and over. Physically President Ontario. Eligibility restrictions apply. See Golden Nuggett Casino.com for details.

Please play responsibly. considering what Zionism has carried out in the Middle East. But nonetheless, to be fair, Boler isn't entirely unproblematic. She argued during the discussion that she's never heard Candice Owens say anything that could be considered anti-Semitic. I disagree with that. There are definitely things she has said that I disagree with, and I do think can be considered anti-Semitic. Now with that in mind, though, things really started to get contentious on this panel when she read out a quote from an anti-Zionist rabbi. Believe it or not, they exist. Lots of them do.

So let's take a look at how that interaction went. Rabbi Shapiro, he's based in New York. I invited him here today, but he's not here today. He says, and I would love your opinion on this, American Jews are increasingly treated as less fully American. Our loyalty question, our belonging made conditional, because. Zionist ideology falsely claims Israel is the nation state of Jews everywhere and that every Jew is nationally tied to it. He says this framing is anti-Semitic at its core. It strips us of our identity as Americans, recasts us as foreigners in our own country, and arms anti-Semites with

accusations of divided loyalties and collective guilt for actions we neither chose nor control. No other foreign country does this. No sovereign state claims to politically represent an entire worldwide group defined by religion or heritage and bind its members to its deeds. Yet Jews alone bear this unique, unjust burden. That dangerous lie must be rejected openly and firmly. The remedy is clear, civic education that teaches unconditional American belonging through citizenship alone, not ethnicity, heritage, or any fabricated foreign tie. We are Americans, full stop, and we reject any doctrine that treats us otherwise. Okay, can I just ask a question? Can I just ask a question? to one of the top Zionists in the country, right? Barry Weiss.

Barry Weiss literally built a career off of anti-wokism and baked into that was this flat-out rejection of the BLM-style awareness of how the black community is treated in this country. It's interesting because she'll rail against that. However, when it comes to the precious feelings of Zionists in America, you're not allowed to be critical of them. You're not allowed to challenge their beliefs or their ideology because doing so makes them feel like they don't belong. I don't really care if they feel like they don't belong because Americans are challenging their ideology. That's what America is supposed to be about. And I'm going to be completely honest with you guys. I'm getting kind of sick of hearing about how hurt and offended, privileged Americans are because their Zionism is being challenged as they provide cover for the people who are actual

victims here. You know, all of those kids, all those women, all those elderly people in Gaza, in the West Bank, who have either been slaughtered, had their entire families wiped out, had their homes stolen from them, had their land taken from them, had their homes bombed. So when you come at us to talk about your feelings, it makes me go crazy, okay? Because it's so narcissistic, it's so selfish, and it's so unbelievably unselfaware. It drives me crazy. Okay. But anyway, Bowler then asks the panelists if that statement was anti-Semitic, and here's what they said.

What I'll say is that Natant Tiranski says there's three things that you shouldn't do with Israel. You shouldn't delegitimize it. You shouldn't demonize it and you shouldn't apply a double standard. You can abide by those three things. You're not anti-Semitic. So by not being a Zionist, does that make you an anti-Semite? I don't think you need to be a Zionist to support a country that defends itself and is free and religious in a hostile neighborhood. So is anti-Zionism? Hold on a second, Carrie. Yes.

It is. It is. Yes. Undoubtedly, anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism. And undoubtedly, and one does not have to support the specific policies of the government of Israel, but to not support the right of Israel to exist, which is what anti-Zionists do,

while not taking that same stand to the 28 Muslim countries and 13 Christian countries in this world, is a double standard, is hypocrisy, and is absolutely anti-Semitism. As long as Israel does not believe Palestinians have the right to exist in their own land, their own country, as long as they deny the Palestinian people, their own country, and their own agency, I don't care about the existence of Israel. I don't believe Israel has the right to exist.

I think Israel deserves the same exact treatment that they're putting out into the world. So as long as they deny Palestinians their right to exist, I am not going to sit here and say, oh yeah, no, no, I totally believe in Israel's right to believe. I don't care. I don't care. More than anything, whether it exists or not, more than anything, I want U.S. support for Israel to be pulled. Now, of course, the clowns on that panel will argue that I'm an anti-Semite, because I don't believe that Israel is defending itself. I believe Israel is carrying out genocide. I believe that they're carrying out an expansionist project for empire, known as the Greater Israel Project. I believe that Israel has dragged the American people into wars that we should not fight on its behalf.

So spare me the BS about how, oh, you have to support Israel or Syria, or not disoemen. No, I disagree. I do not comply. I do not support Israel. And by the way, let me just be clear. If you want to take a look at what my views were on Israel two years ago, you'll notice a very visible change. And it was gradual. But that change was spurred by the behavior of the Israeli government, the IDF, and quite honestly, based on polling the vast majority of the Israeli population. Sorry. Sorry. Am I expected to like the North Korean government?

If I don't like the North Korean government, does that mean I hate Koreans? Or could it be I don't like authoritarianism? I don't like dictators. No other group of people accuses others of hating an entire race or an entire religious group simply because they are critical of a political ideology. So if I take, let's say, Jeffrey Sachs, I love Jeffrey Sachs. He happens to be Jewish. He actually lived in Israel for some time.

Jeffrey Sachs is an incredible human being who spends much of his time trying to forge peace deals and negotiations. That's what he does. Then you have someone like Netanyahu, who's also Jewish. I loathe him. Now, do I loathe him because he's Jewish or do I loathe him because he's a genocidal maniac and lunatic? I think you know the answer. So this is about political ideology. And with Zionists essentially conflating Zionism with the whole of the Jewish people,

all they're doing is increasing anti-Semitism because there are idiots out there who might be fooled into thinking that's true. It must mean that all Jewish people agree with what Zionism has borne out in the Middle East. And that's just not true. So those clowns on that panel don't speak for all Jewish people. There's a lot of diversity among the Jewish population, especially when it comes to the topic of Zionism. But anyway, Boler wasn't backing down. I'm happy to see it. She reiterated that her own religious doctrine doesn't align with Zionism. Take a look. If somebody states an anti-Zionist, if somebody says they're an anti-Zionist, they are saying about themselves that they have a double standard and hypocrisy.

and they're taking anti-Semitic positions. Okay. Carrie, you feel like you have your questions then? I don't agree with that because as a Catholic, I don't agree that the new modern state of Israel has any biblical prophecy meaning at all. So that's my stance. And I'm Catholic. Yeah, look, the emotional manipulation, all of this stuff, I hate it, doesn't work on me. Doesn't work on most Americans.

Most free-thinking people see this for exactly what it is. Okay. Now, finally, this is the video that made my blood boil today, because think about what's happening here. Everyone who is critical of a foreign country, the foreign country of Israel, is smeared as an anti-Semite. But in this exchange, you're going to hear Prjohn ask Shabos Kestimbaum

about the victims in Gaza. And somehow these people are so delusional. They lack so much self-awareness that they don't realize that what they are saying, what they are advocating for is far worse than any American being critical of the political ideology of Zionism. Take a look. Since we've mentioned Israel a total of 17 times, are you willing to condemn what Israel has done in Gaza? No, because I unilaterally reject that it's not a genocide. The only genocide ever carried out was on October 7th when Hamas tried killing every man, woman, and child they could possibly find. Hang on, let me refine.

70,000 innocent civilians killed? Let me, let me respond. You won't condemn that? You won't condemn that? And Kerry? Just on the record. No, I, let me, excuse me. As chair of the committee.

I think it's important. We have this discussion. I agree. I'm happy to answer. And Carrie, it is important. I think we'd be great friends. Yeah. Have an answer.

Carrie, we have had the discussion. Good questions. Good answers. This is a commissional of religious liberty. If there's another commission. I don't know why we're talking about a foreign country. Everything in America has to do with that foreign country these days, it feels like. Okay, so did you hear what Shabos Kestenbaum said?

He said what happened on October 7th was a genocide. You know, what Hamas did was wrong. I have been clear about that. I've been consistent about that. I'm not going to change my mind about that. But I also know about the Hannibal Directive. I also know about all of the Israeli civilians who were slaughtered by the IDF, which by the way, didn't respond to what Hamas was doing for hours.

I wonder why. But anyway, in lieu of an actual investigation into that, which of course Netanyahu doesn't want, which is why there are always these mass protests in Israel, the reality here is far more people, innocent people, civilians, 83% of them. civilians killed in Gaza, slaughtered by the Israelis. And what this piece of crap is saying, and this is why he triggers me so much, the point where I like lose it, black out and just scream at him every time. The lives of anyone else, but in particular those Palestinian kids that the IDF slaughtered,

we were just defending ourselves. The real genocide, the real genocide happened on October 7th. These are bad people. Every accusation is an admission. To me, the life of an innocent civilian in Israel is just as precious, just as valuable as an innocent life in Gaza or the West Bank. But people like Kestimbaum don't see it that way. And he has the audacity to sit there on that panel along with the other chugs and pretend as though we're the bad guys because we have an issue with the death and destruction that Israel represents now.

That's what they represent. That's what the whole world thinks of when they think of Israel. Is that our fault? Or could it be, I don't know, the mass slaughter campaigns that Israel has been engaging in, not just over the last two and a half years. It's been going on for decades, decades. Anyway, of course, Laura Luma very, very triggered by the line of questioning that we just heard from here. So she is making her demands heard, telling the Trump administration that

head should roll. Who at the White House selected Carrie Jean-Pierre Bowler to sit on the White House Religious Liberties Commission. Her behavior today was disgraceful. Oh, the behavior of the guy who literally has no problem with all those innocent people getting slaughtered in Gaza, his behavior not problematic at all. He's one of you, right? So who cares? Who cares? You guys get to slaughter as many people as you want. No one's life matters except for your own and your little in group. Everyone else can be disposed of, can be forgotten about. Their culture can be erased.

Hidious people, man, hideous people. And when I say hideous people, I'm specifically talking about Zionists. And that includes Christian Zionists, by the way. Lots of Christian Zionists agreeing with Laura Lumer here because they've been brainwashed into thinking that in order for them to make it to heaven, They need to support a country, a government that is carrying out genocide. What kind of twisted sick religion is that? Evangelicals, wakey, wakey, you believe in crazy stuff. Literally the most evil ideology imaginable, the ideology that it's okay to kill innocent children.

Anyway, she did tag the chief of staff, Susie Wiles, Secretary of St. Marker Rubio and Stephen Miller in that post, hoping that, you know, maybe they'll carry out her demands here. And it turns out that senior Trump administration official tells me there are internal discussions taking place at the White House to remove White House Religious Liberties Commission member, Kerry Prjohn Bowler, after her outburst today on a religious freedom panel. Remember, the religious freedom panel is just supposed to be about protecting the Zionists. Immediately gets hijacked by this.

It's amazing. Anyway, she responds to that and says, Carrie Prajan responds to it and says, thank you all for the love and support I've received. I will continue to stand against Zionist supremacy in America. I'm a proud Catholic. I in no way will be forced to embrace Zionism as a fulfillment of biblical prophecy. I am a free American, not a slave to a foreign nation here, here.

But my favorite post of hers was this. She says, can you even imagine this? A religious liberty commission prepared to fire a commissioner for her Catholic faith. If that happens, it proves their mission was never religious liberty, but a Zionist agenda, I refuse to resign. Good for you. And I hope she doesn't resign. And if they fire her, she's right.

This isn't about religious liberty at all if they fire her. This is about providing yet another, you know, government effort to protect one group of people in this country. And it's not based on their ethnic background or their religious background. It's based on their political view. Be clear about that. Anyway, we got to take a break. When we come back, I'll probably read some of your comments because at the top of the hour, we're going to have Tim Dillon join us to talk about some of the revelations in the Epstein files.

All right, everyone. Spider-Man Dragon in our members section says UAE, surprise, surprise. Is that why Trump got a new plane? I think the Qataris gave him the new plane, right? Am I mistaking that? Yeah, yeah, it was. It was the Qataris. But who knows? Maybe there's something you know that I don't know. So right back if that's the case.

Little MacMachee says, same, Anna, their behavior made my opinion turn. Two to three years ago, my opinion was not close to what it is now. Their behavior changed it in regard to Israel, totally. Like sometimes some of my debates, like the very first debate I ever had with Adam Sosnik on this issue will pop up on my YouTube feed. Yeah, my views were different. And I was still like very aggressive in defending the Palestinians. But yeah, my views are different now. And I'm not going to be bullied into like, oh my God, I'm so worried about whether or not Israel exists.

I'm not worried about it. In fact, I just I just don't want nothing to do with Israel at all. What they do, whether they survive or not, I don't really care. It's none of my business. I care about the survival of my own country, number one. And I would like to know that my resources are not going to a country carrying out genocide. You know, that would be nice. All right, let's go to our superchats.

The stinky stocking full of lies says, I read online that some of the Epstein files were so badly redacted that you could just resave some of them after downloading. And the redaction would disappear for victims as well, truly amateur hour. No, there were definitely, like there was one redaction for Elon Musk, but the black box didn't cover the very, very lower bottom of Elon Musk's name, so you could like figure it out. It's amazing.

Like, it's amazing, but also terrifying because we're talking about the Department of Justice and like the incompetence scares the hell out of me. Because these are people running the country. These are the people in charge of very important. things. Again, it's the Department of Justice. And like, the incompetence blows my mind. I mean, look at the FBI. Look at Cash Patel. Cash Patel has lied under oath about, you know, the investigations into President Trump's assassins or would-be assassins. He claimed that there was an ongoing trial when it comes to the first would-be assassin. The guy was shot, there is no trial. He lied

under oath about that. Anyway, it's amazing. It really is. These are dark times. I'm not going to lie about that. All right. Dana writes in and says, Tara Palmeri has been doing great reporting on this issue before it became popular. She has. She's been on this beat for a while. And she's very focused on giving a voice to the survivors.

And I love that. But as you know, this story has so many different angles to it. You know, there's the blackmail operation component of it. there are the foreign connections to Epstein. All of this stuff is important to know about. But more importantly, it's important to squash it, okay? Because we shouldn't allow a situation in which powerful people in our country are being blackmailed by foreign actors.

Anyway, let's get back to the show. Welcome back to TYT. I want to do one more story before we wrap up this hour and bring Tim Dillon in to discuss some of the revelations from the Epstein files that we haven't discussed yet. So without further ado, let's talk about the housing market. You know, the economy used to be the wind beneath Donald Trump's presidency wings, and now it's Titanic, because what are we talking about here? Well, let's just take a look here, Trump's economic net approval one year in. In term one, hey, yeah, plus side of ledger, plus eight points.

It was his best issue, arguably. But now it's one of his worst. Look at that way, way down in the basement, 18 points below water. What is that, John? Quickly, Samantha. What is that a 26-point switch Cheroo in the wrong direction. If it don't make dollars, it don't make sense. And Trump's economy, not making dollars for a lot of Americans. In fact, layoffs are up. The economy has certainly slowed down. Inflation is still a problem.

And Trump's tariffs have done a lot more damage than I think most employed Americans realize. So as a result, President Donald Trump's poll numbers are absolutely taking a nosedive after he promised to improve material conditions for working class Americans, but has failed to deliver on that promise. And voters, unsurprisingly, are not happy. So look, the economy used to be a strong issue for Trump, for obvious reasons, I think. I mean, if you look at his first term, he did okay when it came to economic issues. He did tinker around with some of the trade policies and tariffs, but he did so in a more targeted way in his first term. Second term, not so much. So to help me visualize that, let's take a look at this graph because it'll kind of show you the difference between the first term and what we're experiencing now.

So this graph specifically represents Trump's first term. Okay. Now, it displays how the total household net worth of Americans changed, right, during his first term and how that number has changed over time. So the red line represents Trump's first term, where you see a steady increase of net worth. That's a good thing. The blue line represents Biden's first three years in office. Now, the graph that you see on the right hand side is different from the one on the left because the one on the right adjust for inflation. So when you adjust for inflation, you'll notice that Trump did a lot better than Biden in his first term compared to

Biden's, like the first three years of Biden's first term and only term, obviously. Now, the X axis represents percent change and the Y axis represents time. Okay, you get the point. So when you take a look at that graph on the right, you will notice Trump did well. And that's why I think there was popular support for Trump for the second term. People were struggling with inflation. They didn't feel that Biden did a great job. And they really thought that someone like Donald Trump is going to come back in. And he's got that magic touch. He's somehow going to increase everyone's net worth. He's going to bring prices down. But that has not happened. Now, Enten is about to explain how Trump has taken his massive advantage when it comes to favorability on the economy and

essentially thrown it away. The Trump amendment has made the economy worse or better. You go back to January of 2018, term number one, the plurality winner there was better at 40%. Just 22% said worse. Look at this side of the screen. The exact opposite story. What a switcheroo. My goodness gracious, 52% of Americans say the trumpet men, their policies have made the economy worse. And look at that.

Just 28% say better. Even among the GOP, just 57% say they make it better. But what about independence? What are they saying? Okay, this is what is driving it, right? Because you'll notice some days I'll say, hey, Donald Trump is doing really well amongst his base, and then other days they say he's doing really poorly overall.

What is driving it is independent. And this was a number that absolutely blew my mind. Oh, my goodness gracious. Trump's economic net approval one year in among independence. In term one, he was 10 points above water. Look at where he is today. Whoa, 43 points below water. That's a 53 point switch route.

Guys, independence decide elections. I mean, I think things are starting to change a little bit as more and more Americans wake up to the fact that these political labels don't really mean much, honestly. But at the same time, independents are really the decision makers, especially in these swing states. And the fact that he has lost so much goodwill and so much support from independent voters is not a good sign for Republicans. Because make no mistake about it, this frustration that Americans are feeling will be taken out on Republicans during the midterms.

And I think they realize that. And I think they're panicking about it. Now, look, there are a lot of factors that make up the economy. There's jobs. There's the stock market. There's inflation, right? But when it comes to the job market, Trump's not doing so well. And so if you've been paying attention, you'll probably notice that layoffs have increased significantly. to the point where we haven't seen layoffs accelerate this rapidly since 2009. That is not a good sign. And so you're about to hear from Enten on how the American people feel about the job market. Take a look.

Donald Trump took a beautiful swan and turned it into an ugly duckling as far as the American people are concerned. Trump's net approve rating on jobs and employment. In January 2025, look at that. Overall, plus nine points. Hey, that's pretty good. But down he goes, minus 13 points overall. But you think that's nuts. Take a look at the independence. They go from plus seven way, way, way down off the screen to minus 30 points.

Americans rate the job market is bad or good. February 2025, equal shares, say fair or say bad or good. 42, 42. Look at this now. Over just a year's time, now the clear majority, 52%, up like a rocket rated as bad compared to just 33% down. of the basement who rated as good, expect unemployment in the next six months to go up or go down. Well, back in January 2025, right when the Donald Trump presidency was about to begin, 38, 38, but look at this.

Views towards the future, 50% now expect unemployment to go up in the next six months. That is the highest saying that they expect unemployment to go up since the great recession. No wonder why Donald Trump's approval rating on jobs and employment have fallen through the floor. So look, the Bureau of Labor Statistics is supposed to put out its latest report this week. So we'll see what the jobs report indicates. But I do think the administration is pretty nervous about what's happening right now. Not only with the economy, but of course the reaction to our current economic situation from American voters. But Peter Navarro really wants to spin this.

So I haven't seen this video yet. I wanted to save it and watch it live. Let's see if he succeeds in convincing us that things aren't really as bad as we think. The jobs reports going to come out tomorrow. Yeah. We have to revise our expectations down significantly for what a monthly job number should look like. When we were letting in 2 million illegal aliens, they're coming in, coming in. We had to produce 200,000 jobs a month for steady state.

And by the way, all of the jobs that we were creating in Biden years were going to illegals, Americans were going to the unemployment lines. That's totally reversed. And now 50,000 a month is going to be more like what we need. So Wall Street, when this stuff comes out, they can't rain on that parade. They have to adjust for the fact that we're deporting millions of illegals out of our job market. But it sounds like you're expecting a weak number tomorrow. No, not expecting a week number. saying that going forward, when we see a number under 100,000, we don't ring our hands.

We say, yeah, that's going to be steady state. That was amazing. That was amazing. He blamed immigrants. He blamed immigrants. That's Peter Navarro, the guy who loves Trump's tariffs policies and very likely doesn't want to take ownership of the fact that the tariff policies have destroyed the economy. That is amazing. You're going to blame You're going to blame immigrants for it? Oh my God. Is there anything they don't blame immigrants for? Maybe take a second to consider your own incompetence.

And the fact that you've promoted a policy that has been detrimental to our economic health. But no, God forbid they ever take ownership for their own mistakes. They'll go ahead and blame immigrants instead. It is amazing. Now the real question is, will the American people buy that spin? I'm going to venture to say they won't, but we're going to wait and see. For now, though, we're going to take a quick break. When we come back, Tim Dillon joins us to talk about the latest Epstein revelations.

Don't miss it. And if you're not angry about that, Michael, and any of you out there, then you're goddamn wrong because you should be angry. Young Turks. It was genuine. He was mad. Jake Yugar, known online as one of the Young Turks, isn't. afraid to throw some punches.

Three, two, one. Fade up. Jink the dirt you do. Kind of a TV station is, says. The whole point is for me to see all the screen and tell you what I think. It was right out of like Wayne's World. This guy on this little rinky dink website

is speaking truth to power. We've been averaging 600,000 views a day. Beating most of the cable shows in America. We're the largest online news show in the world. We're celebrating our one billionth view. Television. We're coming. More politics ahead with Hank Uger.

He knew that the MSNBC opportunity was an experiment. And Philan hosts beat CNN in the headline news combined. At some point, they want to give me a show. Every single year, that comes out of our paycheck. We put it in, and you're saying we were suckers. When you as a host tells someone you're interviewing to shut up, that's going to raise a red flag. That guy needed a glass of shut up, juice.

If President Obama's doing the wrong thing, I'm not going to tell you that he's doing the right thing so I can quote support him. He says to me, you won't believe the meaning that I just have. The head of MSNBC talked to me. They want him off the air. Check took an incredible risk.

We're supposed to challenge the government. That's the role of the media. The Democrats and the Republicans are here to screw you. And who on the air is saying it? I wouldn't have done what he did. That if I'm going to be a talk show host, I'd be the biggest talk show host in the country.

I don't think anyone else does it better. I don't think anyone's even close. Before you know it, I'll be back on your TV doing a national show. I guarantee it. Magic is showtime and say 45 minutes. I'm hosting today.

Now, I know what you're thinking. Jay, your face is already perfect, but you know what? I still need to apply some makeup. I went through this process, right? A few years ago, when I realized I was going to have to look up on the show. I had to go through, like,

finding out what my undertones were. Do you guys know what those are? I got my mad husbands. This is SPF15 foundation broad spectrum. But apparently what I have is red undertones and I think pores are not supposed to be seen. I need all these things to be confirmed with me. These bunch of things don't work for me.

You gotta use your hands to this idea. That's how the magic really happens. So we're gonna go through a tutorial. How to make the magic happen from beautiful to beautiful earth. Let's go. I've already been moisturized. That's the first thing. But most of theization already happened.

We go raw, all hands. There go. Couple streaks. This is the guy we're putting on makeup. We got dots. There's some shining points that generally happen. First of all, here we go. You dust here.

I'm putting way too much, but you dust. Oh, get the excess off. You don't want chunky powder. There's like a T zone, I think, right? Mine is a double T zone. Because I want middle and another cross. Make sure to know there's a little. isn't all shiny.

People get on you for it. You don't say, it's not a good point you made on Airj. Your nose is shiny. You guys are picky like that sometimes. I think that's about it, fellas. And ladies, see you guys next time. Bitsies. All right, everyone. Welcome back to the show.

We're working to get Tim on. It's my mistake. I don't know how time works, and I told him the wrong time. So it is my mistake 100%. But if he can join us a little earlier, then he was asked to. He will. But for now, we've got, luckily, a lot of other news to talk about. But he will be on later. So just stick around for that. For now, though, I did want to give you an update on Trump's executive order to ban institutional investors from buying residential real estate. Now, whatever happened with that? Well, I'm about to tell you.

Existing housing, people that own their homes, we're going to keep them wealthy. We're going to keep those prices up. We're not going to destroy the value of their homes so that somebody that didn't work very hard can buy a home. We're going to get, we're going to make it easier to buy. We're going to get interest rates down. But I want to protect the people that for the first time of their lives feel good about themselves. They feel like they've, you know, that they're wealthy people. And I want them to understand it.

You know, there's so much talk about, oh, we're going to drive housing prices down. I don't want to drive housing prices down. I want to drive housing prices up. Driving housing prices up kind of flies in the face of housing affordability. And we are still in the middle of a housing crisis. Americans can't afford to buy homes. A lot of Americans can't even afford what rent costs these days. But nonetheless, President Donald Trump initially had signed an executive order to drive

institutional investors like private equity firms, for instance, out of the housing market to make housing more affordable, right? But as you saw in that video, he later stated that he actually wanted to drive housing prices up. So now Congress is stonewalling any attempt to codify Trump's original executive order where he wanted to ban private equity firms from buying residential real estate. Why? Well, because their donors are telling them to. So why don't we get into it. So here's what the Wall Street Journal just reported. They say that lawmakers in both chambers have resisted adding the investor ban, which traditional free market advocates, Wall Street executives, and the home builder industry generally oppose. These are individuals who make nice

donations to political candidates. And so codifying a ban on institutional investors, not going to bode well for the lawmakers who vote yes on said legislation. So to be clear, the ban that is envisioned by President Trump would only apply to single family homes. Okay? And look, when we're in the middle of a housing shortage, I am open to legislation that, you know, certainly bans foreign investors,

bans institutional investors from buying whatever stock or inventory of housing we have, that housing should, you know, go to working class Americans until we buy, or I should say build enough housing to maybe lift some of those restrictions. But that's not what's happening here. So in fairness, there are certain Republicans who do support Trump's original executive order to ban these institutional investors from buying residential real estate. The only problem is you can count them on one hand and you still have some fingers left. Okay. So you've got Senator Josh Hawley, who's really kind of positioned himself as a more populist Republican. Then you've got Senator Josh Moreno and Representative Marlin Stutzman.

Now, apparently, these politicians are better at reading the tea leaves than the rest of their Republican colleagues. And a recent survey by groundwork, collaborative, and data for progress found the following that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the way to lower housing costs is through regulating corporate landlords and institutional investors, which kind of depresses me, to be honest with you. Look, I'm not in favor of the private equity firms buying up residential real estate. I've railed against it. I've spoken out against it. I'm not changing my mind on it. But it's really important to understand that the main reason that is driving up housing prices is the lack of housing being available.

Okay, we need to build more. And by building more, that is going to drive down the cost of homes. And I get it if you're a homeowner and you're bothered by that, but I promise you it's going to be temporary. You've already built an insane amount of equity on your property. Okay? And I'd like to take our fellow Americans off the streets. I'd like them to be able to build wealth.

wealth. I would like them to be able to own a home and raise their kids and their family in said home. I want this country to thrive. You have to think outside of your own personal interest sometimes. But if you only care about what's best for you, and it's okay if you prioritize that, understand that it's not really a good look to live in a society where you have all these people suffering on our streets. It's not a good thing. And we shouldn't want that. So a temporary dip in the value of your home because we've added more supply to the housing market is not a bad thing. You're going to be okay. But nonetheless, it seems like Trump does seem to find that to be a bad thing. I don't really know how he intends to make housing more affordable without making housing more affordable.

Like, how is this going to work? Anyway, but there's more. So both the House and the Senate are working on housing affordability bills that would cut down on red tithe. I'm assuming that red tape has more to do with construction and less to do with easing up restrictions on mortgages. I definitely don't want to find ourselves in the type of situation we were in prior to the 2008 economic collapse where these subprime mortgages and these toxic loans were being given out to people who didn't really know what they were getting themselves into. Then those loans were bundled up into securities that were traded on the stock market. That was a disaster. That red tape that happened after the economic collapse, which honestly was very weak red tape, I think that should stay in place.

But in terms of zoning regulations, which is really up to local and state governments, I do think they need to ease up a little bit, especially if you're talking about a state like California. I know that, you know, leftists get really upset about this, but guys, regardless of where you live in the country, you have to understand what you're experiencing might be very different from what people in another state are experiencing. And there is too much red tape here in California. So much so that the people who had their homes burnt down last year, okay, January of 2025 in the Pacific Palisades and Altadena, they have yet to build their homes. because there's so much red tape. We need to build more. That is very, very important.

The other thing that this bill would do is incentivize more housing near transportation hubs, which I also think is a good thing and what they're allegedly trying to do here in L.A. Now, as you saw in the cold open, the first video we showed you, Trump doesn't want to lower the housing prices. So he's resisted proposals that would boost supply. Disasterous. I mean, look at what happened in Austin. During the pandemic, a lot of people moved to Austin. They realized there was a lot more demand. They have looser zoning regulations there. So they just

had this boom in housing construction and prices came down significantly. That's the way you get the prices down. But Trump is telling Congress to include the institutional investor ban in their housing bills rather than focusing on increasing housing supply. And Congress has thus far refuse to do so. So let's take a look at this graph provided by open secrets. And it represents the amount of money the real estate industry has spent on lobbying in millions of dollars. Okay, so you can see that they set a new high in 2024 after they spent over $150 million on lobbying. So when it comes to these institutional investors, there is a lot of money, moneyed interest playing around role in discouraging legislation that restricts institutional investors from buying up these homes.

Now, during the 2023, 2024 campaign cycle, the industry contributed about $72 million to Democrats in Congress and about $82 million to Republicans in Congress. Honestly, there isn't much of a gap there, close to similar amounts of money. Okay, that's why I say we have a uniparty when it comes to issues that matter, right? The economy, foreign policy, stuff like that. A lot of agreement between congressional Dems and Republicans. Now, is there any relief in sight? Well, a different proposal might stand a chance, and that's according to Bloomberg. They report that home building companies have pitched an idea to the White House. It's something that they are, I guess, referring to as Trump homes. We all know that you've got to slap Trump's name onto something in order

for him to be, like, seduced by it. But the proposal calls for builders to sell entry-level homes into a pathway to ownership program funded by private investors. I'm against it already. Like, I think this is fishy. I don't trust it. It sounds like a scam. I'm going to need to see a lot more detail, and there really isn't a lot of detail about

this. This whole thing about like, yeah, yeah, you're going to rent the property. And then at some point, maybe we'll let you buy it. Yeah, that's the tip. ticket. I don't know. It's giving me these like reverse mortgage for the elderly people vibe. Okay, so I'd have to wait and see what this type of proposal actually looks like on a granular level. But how about we just build entry level housing? Like, how about we do that? You know, that happened in the 50s, the track homes. Like, I grew up in a neighborhood like that. The home. The

like they did mass construction of these track homes. That's when suburban America really boomed. And we haven't had a housing boom like that in a long time. I think it's time. I think that's what we need to do. No gimmicks, no tricks, no rent to buy, no reverse mortgages, no BS. Just build the housing. But here's the thing.

That needs to be done on a state and local level. So when it comes to the federal government, they might be able to help when it comes to maybe some federal funding to states that want to focus on increasing housing supply. But that's going to be difficult to do when Trump clearly doesn't want the value of homes to drop. He doesn't want to increase this housing supply. He wants the values to keep going up, probably because he's worried about his own portfolio. Let's keep it real. But that's not how you work toward affordable housing. You have to build more and you have to accept the fact that values are going to go down temporarily. They'll shoot back up eventually.

But anyway, that's what we have for you. That's the update. When Trump promises you cookies, don't go reaching for the milk, okay? Because he rarely keeps his promises. So we got to take a break. We'll be back with more news. Don't miss it. Guys, what's up? All right, I'm going to read a few super chat starting with Dank Prol, who says, hi, Anna, I met you briefly at the World word war debate, Kestimbaum was complaining about genocide against Christians in Nigeria. He doesn't actually care about that. But wouldn't admit Israel's genocide, disgusting and hypocritical. What they communicate to us every single day is that they don't value any lives other than their in-group. And then they're shocked that people disagree with their ideology.

It's amazing. November 1775, Jim says, we still talking about this, what's his name, Jeffrey Epstein? We are. We are indeed. I know that it's much of the chagrin of our president, but these revelations are worthy of discussion, I think, but also worthy of more than discussion. I think they're worthy of prosecution. All right, Melody loves music gifted 5TYT memberships and Titan of Olympus gifted 5TYT memberships. Thank you so much for supporting the show. The more you support when I'm doing solo, you know, the more it'll encourage the solo shows to happen. So thank you for the support. Christian Hegel, thank you so much for becoming a new member. I hope you enjoy our bonus episode

today. Let me give you guys an update on Tim Dillon. I really did an F up, like bad, okay? I'm running 100 miles per hour right now. I have too much on my plate and I'm making mistakes. So I recognize I need to slow down. I told him to join the show at 5 p.m. East, 5 p.m. Pacific, 8 p.m. Eastern, realizing very late that that's not when the second hour starts. Okay, so that's where I'm at. So he's probably going to join us in the bonus episode if we can't get him a little earlier. And again, that's my fault. So I apologize for that. All right. William King says, Anna has been absolutely slaying it for the last two days. Thank you. Maddie John says, we love your perspective, TYT. It's high time these people were held to account. I mean, it's the right thing to do.

The only purpose for government is to protect its people. And they've done a very poor job in doing that. So, all right, let's get back to the show. Everyone, welcome back to TYT. There was a discussion that happened during the World Economic Forum, that for whatever reason I just haven't been able to stop thinking about. It was the type of conversation that's foreshadowing. And it makes me realize what is.

to come when it comes to AI. Now, I'm going to explain what I mean, but just bear with me as I go through this next story, because it starts off with something that has nothing to do with AI. But I do think it sets the stage for the types of constitutional violations we can all look forward to if we don't push back. So let's get into it. Congressional Democrats are demanding that federal law enforcement, you know, border patrol and ICE, obtain a judicial warrant signed by a judge before entering private property. Which sounds like a no-brainer.

I was led to believe that private property in America is sacred and that government officials can't just barge in with a flimsy administrative warrant. But we find ourselves in a situation where federal agents are now entering people's homes, not with a judicial warrant, but with an administrative warrant. Now, again, this is a big problem, and I hope the Democrats continue demanding

that judicial warrants be utilized. And what they're doing to essentially exercise whatever leverage the Democratic Party has here is they're withholding their votes on funding DHS, unless they get these concessions. So you might be asking yourself, like, wait, well, hold on, hold on. Didn't Congress just vote on funding DHS? Yes, it was a stopgap bill.

We're going to keep playing these ridiculous games where they do these like super short funding bills. And then like a few weeks later, a week later, we're in the same situation again. And so if they fail to pass a government funding bill for DHS by, Friday night, then that means DHS will go without funding until they do pass legislation. My view of this is, okay, that's fine. I don't think that you should give them funding. And if the Republicans refuse to budge on it, play that game of chicken and play it real hard, okay? For once in your lives, do not cave to Republicans on this issue because this isn't just about

immigration policy. This is about our privacy rights. So let's get into it. So last week, the Department of Homeland Security issued a news release defending the use of administrative warrants, which are warrants issued by the executive branch to itself. Okay, I, your warrant means nothing to me. Okay, the whole purpose of how our system of government is set up is you're supposed to have checks and balance. So the idea that rather than going to a judge to get a warrant, you're just going to write a warrant for yourself is insane. But that's what's what's been happening. And I do take issue with anyone from the government entering anyone's home or private property without the appropriate judicial warrant. But that's what's been going on here. So DHS counsel, general counsel, James Percival claims that this is consistent. with broad judicial recognition that illegal aliens aren't entitled to the same Fourth Amendment protections as U.S. citizens. That's not true, by the way. I'll continue, though. It is also consistent with the Supreme Court's admonition that the touchstone of the Fourth Amendment is whether the search or seizure is unreasonable, not whether it is supported by judicial warrant.

So let me be very clear. The federal courts, including the Supreme Court, has weighed in on whether undocumented individuals in this country are protected by the same constitutional rights enjoyed by American citizens. And time and time again, they have ruled that yes, they are. Because if you read the Constitution, it says all persons. It doesn't say American citizens, all persons. So that means that undocumented individuals are yes. Yes, they are protected by the Fourth Amendment. And who's to say, I mean, think about this.

The executive branch through these administrative warrants, is just they're writing warrants to themselves, for themselves. Okay, so what's to stop them from doing this when it comes to an American citizen? Oh, we suspected that they were harboring illegal immigrants. So we wrote ourselves a warrant and we entered their private property. Are you guys okay with that? I'm not okay with that. Like, when did we find ourselves in a position where I'm less trusting toward the government

than people on the right? Can we get back to the place where you guys are like looking at government officials and thinking sus, super suss. We need to fight to protect our constitutional rights because if we give them an inch, well, you know what happens. But anyway, one GOP strategist also told Politico that the judicial warrants are the key operational thing that deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, and the crew do not want to budge on. Okay, well, that's not persuasive in any way. I don't, I don't care what Stephen Miller

insists on at all. What I care about is protecting the constitutional rights of everyone in this country, namely the right to protect your property from feds busting down your door and entering without a judicial warrant. But it's not just a Miller thing. Many Republicans actually agree that federal law enforcement should be allowed to enter our homes without a proper warrant. One of the people close to the administration described the judicial warrants proposal as a complete non-starter for the White House. Because guess what? The government wants to violate your privacy. They will try. And if you don't push back, they will do it. So like, oh, it's a complete non-starter for the White House. Okay, well, what do the courts say?

as well as for any congressional Republicans. Okay, great. So other asks from the Democrats include prohibiting federal immigration agents from wearing masks, requiring them to display identification. This isn't rocket science. This is like literally the bare minimum that we should expect from the people who work for us. We don't work for them. They work for us. So they should identify themselves and they should take that mask off. Can we just briefly discuss? all the various people that make up law enforcement in this country, and how many of them do their jobs without a mask, knowing that the decisions they make, the arrests they carry out,

will definitely lead to some enemies. Think about the judges who oversee criminal court cases. Okay, they literally have violent criminals in some cases, rapists and murderers in their courtroom, And they have to make sentencing decisions. Do they wear a mask when they do it because they're afraid? They're afraid that the suspect might docks them? Like, what is this?

But anyway, they're also asking or demanding that there are limits to where ice can operate, which is also expected to be a major sticking point. Now, Republicans are arguing that Democrats have to make some major concessions to Trump in order to get their demands met. How about funding the government? That's the concession. How about that? But anyway, a growing number of immigration hawks are pressuring the White House to stand firm and give the Democrats next to nothing, especially since tensions in Minneapolis have, if only slightly, decreased. Okay, great. So that's what we get. That's what we get when tensions decrease, right?

Tensions decrease. It's a great opportunity for DHS when no one's paying attention. to implement these insane draconian policies, which in my opinion are really about setting the stage for the age of AI. That sounds crazy, right? I know that sounds crazy. But the reason why I think this is because when you look at the deportation numbers, the Trump administration is not really impressive compared to previous administrations. Obama is still spanking that ass when it comes to deportations. He's still the deporter in chief. So what's really happening with the deployment of these ICE agents, these border patrol agents, what are they really doing? What are they really up to? In my view, it's about normalizing the presence of militarized federal agents on our streets.

I think it's also about Trump retaliating against municipalities and states that have not been friendly to him, whose constituents didn't overwhelmingly vote for him. But I also think it's about normalizing violations of our privacy, including the entrance of federal agents into private property without the appropriate warrants. So what I found really fascinating and also foreshadowing was a conversation that happened during the World Economic Forum. So in this next video, European Central Bank president, Christine Lagarde, raised privacy concerns related to AI before Black Rock chairman and CEO Larry Fink jumped in. and said the quiet part out loud. Pay close attention to this discussion. Because remember, the one thing that Trump seems very concerned about

is beating China when it comes to AI. Now, what would need to happen for us to be able to do that? Take a look. Now if you ask the big Gs in digitalization and the big spenders in artificial intelligence, and just for memory, to develop a frontier model today requires about $1 billion. If you ask them what they need, they will say access to data as large as possible.

They will say scale in order to really amortize the investment cost of the development of models. Now that would be significantly jeopardized if we have limited access to data because of different privacy laws around the world. And I would contend that this can only be remedied by a degree of cooperation. That is going to be a factor of willingness of people to accept and tolerate different paradigms, different cultural preferences, and different views of the world. I think for the Western economies, if we don't cooperate, we don't scale, China wins. There's enough population there.

Privacy laws are obviously quite different there, and so the data that they can accumulate, which is giving them a dramatic advantage. And I think that's going to be one of the big overwhelming things. When people ask me, are we in an AI bubble? I said, I think there are going to be some big failures, but I don't think we're in a bubble. But that being said, I would much rather say that we need to spend more money to make sure that we're competing properly against China. Do you guys understand how important it is to not get swayed by whatever bias you have? whatever, you know, concern you have about immigration,

DHS can carry out deportations without violating privacy rights. And it's really important that we push back on the feds entering private property without a judicial warrant. Because private property is sacred. I know it's going to make some people uncomfortable, but I mean it. Think about your home. Think about your home and how it is your safe space. That is the place that you can be safe. You can be safe, you can be free, you can be yourself.

You don't have to worry about someone barging in and violating that safety and that privacy. If you start allowing the federal government to chip away at that, in my opinion, sacred right, you're going to give them an inch, they're going to take the mile. And our privacy is completely gone, completely gone. In the name of AI, in the name of technological advancement, in the name of technology advancement, in the name of competing and beating with and beating China. This isn't about deportations. This is about normalizing a world that I personally don't want to live in.

And we should be skeptical of government. Even if we think that government is carrying out a policy that we really like, you know, I mean, I don't like what ICE and Border Patrol has been doing at all, at all. But putting that aside, even if I were supportive of it, I would at least be skeptical. skeptical and question the necessity to allow federal agents to barge into people's homes with a flimsy administrative warrant. We are in a war right now that I don't think most Americans realize we need to be fighting and that war has to do with protecting our rights. So something to keep in mind as this continues to develop. And they always, look, people in power always use

divisive issues to kind of like distract us or get us to comply with the types of policies that turn around and bite us in the ass. So just be wary of that. Be aware of it. I know I will. For now, let's take a quick break. When we come back for our last segment, I do want to talk a little bit about what just happened with the rollback of climate regulations. Savage Lou in our Twitch section asked me a question of the day because I did see this story. It took so much restraint to not add it to the rundown, which was already too full. Okay. But I'm going to cover this tomorrow for sure. So Savage Lou asks, did Anna talk about how we sold Venezuela's oil to Israel? I know that sounds crazy. It is true. It was reported by Bloomberg today.

I will be covering it tomorrow. Unbelievable. But honestly, maybe not so unbelievable when you consider just how far this country has gone to protect Israel, both its people, its economy, it's everything. Certainly prioritized far more than Americans are. Anyway, Jennifer Marr in our member section says it's very daunting, very scary, but it also gives me so much more hope. It's 2026, the year of the,

fighter in our government, the year of hope for our countrymen, I'm scared but hopeful. Okay, that's good. It's good to be hopeful. You know, ask me on any given day. I'll give you a different answer. But one thing that does give me hope is that for the first time in my adult life, I've seen a bipartisan effort in Congress that was actually good. You know, usually when you hear corporate media celebrate bipartisan movement or efforts in Congress. It's usually something that screws us, whether it's like tax policy or whatever. But in this case, you know, seeing Rokana, Marjorie Taylor Green when she was in Congress, Thomas Massey, like work together to release the Epstein files has been inspiring and that does give me a little bit of hope. Barron Saturday

66 says Tim Dillon is my spirit animal. So he will be with us for the bonus episode for sure. So if you want to watch that, you have to be a member because it will be behind a paywall. But the good news is not only do you get to watch that, you have access to all of our archives. You can watch the bonus episode when it's behind a paywall each and every time. And you help to support TYT and our freedom to speak freely. So thank you to our current members. You guys are amazing. You guys have given me and Jank and everyone at TYT a voice, which reminds me, sometimes I feel like

Ty-YT gives me a little too much of a voice because I got to do the Noble Mobile read one more time. So Noble Mobile, I mean, just you guys know it already. Like, I don't know if repeating it is going to make it any better, but like you're going to save money. So look into it. Okay. t-y-t.com slash now. T-YT.com slash now or T-YT.com slash switch. That's for Noble mobile mobile. I think the t-y-t.com slash now is for something else. It's to become an American hero, obviously. Anyway, I'll read a few more comments. Actually, one more comments since I'm running out of time. Oh my God, thank you to exposing Canaanites 9 for your incredibly generous dono. You're amazing. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. What's up, everyone? Welcome back to the show. Hopefully I can get two more stories in before we move on over to our bonus episode with Tim Dillon. For now, I want to talk a little bit about the rollbacks from the Trump administration in regard to climate regulations. Let's get into it. On Thursday, President Trump will be joined by Administrator Lee Zeldon to formalize the rescission of the 2009 Obama era endangerment finding. This will be the largest deregulatory action in American history. Tomorrow afternoon, the president will hold an event in the East Room to tout clean, beautiful coal as America's most reliable and affordable energy source.

Whole. Okay, well, we live in hell and the Trump administration is on the verge of absolutely gutting environmental regulations that, you know, help to protect humans and the planet from total destruction, from being unlivable. Anyway, it is largely thanks to a small group of conservative activists who didn't come up with this idea yesterday. This is something that they have been working on for years behind the scenes. And it looks like they're going to finally get what they've been wanting. So as Caroline Levitt, White House Press Secretary announced today, the administration is planning to repeal an Obama-era scientific finding that essentially serves as the foundation,

the basis for all federal greenhouse gas regulations. So the reversal targets the 2009 endangerment finding. which concluded that six greenhouse greenhouse, which concluded that six greenhouse gases pose a threat to public health and welfare. The finding provided the legal underpinning for the environmental protection agencies climate rules, which limited emissions from power plants and tightened fuel economy standards for vehicles under the Clean Air Act. Now here's the thing. The automobile industry didn't ask for this. I want to be clear about that. The car industry did not ask for this. And in fact, it is likely that the car industry will continue moving in the direction of electric

vehicles and doing what they can to curb emissions because they want to be competitive on the global stage. And other countries have stricter regulations than the U.S. has ever had when it comes to climate. We do know other countries have no regulations at all. But the U.S. doesn't necessarily, dictate what the car industry does when it comes to moving toward cleaner vehicles. But that doesn't mean that other industries will not take full advantage of a rollback in climate regulations. So the Trump administration is formally denying that greenhouse gases are harmful by pursuing this effort, which will allow them to erase limits on emissions from cars, power plants and other polluting industries. EPA administrator, Lee Zel.

straight up said in an interview, this amounts to the largest act of deregulation in the history of the United States. Wow, that's great. I'm cool with deregulation if it makes sense, but we're talking about the air we breathe. We're talking about the planet we live on. And I am going to say, I do think that there was a lot of hyperbole and extremist thinking when it came to some on the, you know, climate science left. But they're not representative of all climate scientists, not even close. And there is a climate emergency.

I think that the solutions that we've heard from our lawmakers have been total garbage, whether it's on a state and local level or a federal level, because it's all about putting the onus on individuals to do something. But in this case, we're talking about, again, the foundation, for federal regulations on industry. So I have no doubt that we will find ourselves in a position somewhere down the line where the reality of the climate emergency will be so severe that all of those annoying laws that impact individuals will be far worse.

Okay, we'll be far more restrictive. But let's wait and see. Anyway, the final rule is set to be made public later this week. There will be legal challenges, but obviously this is being seen as a major victory for the fossil fuel industry, which if you can remember, during the presidential election, Trump convened all of the top oil executives, fossil fuel executives, and essentially told them, you give me enough money, I'll do anything you want. And this is certainly something the fossil fuel industry wants. Now, the Environmental Defense Fund, a nonprofit advocacy group, has said that rolling back the endangerment finding would eliminate some of our most vital tools to protect people from pollution that causes climate change. The group said the administration was trying to steer Americans toward dirtier, more dangerous, and more destructive air, including by, I guess, turning back to coal. We don't even need to do that.

We don't even need to do that. Why aren't we being serious about pursuing nuclear energy? It's the cleanest, most reliable form of energy. We're going to go back to coal. I just, like, there's no imagination. Okay, there's no real vision for the future when it comes to this guy. And it's not just Trump. It's like a lot of our politicians.

They don't give a day. Homeboy's 80. He's going to be dead soon. Okay? You can tell, he could care less about his family. Okay. But for all of the other goons out there who are also of age, and they actually tend to love their family members,

their kids, their grandkids, nieces, nephews, whatever it is, what are you leaving behind for them? Because your money, their inheritance, isn't going to save them from the destruction that we're going to do to the climate, to the air, to the water. But hey, you know, the fossil fuel industry, not rich enough, not wealthy enough, not affluent enough. The administration claims average Americans will benefit from this because, oh, it's going to produce more oil and gas.

That's going to drive down the price of oil and gas, blah, blah, blah. We've heard it over and over again. The United States is the top oil and gas producing country in the world. We're number one. We're also the top exporter, of course. But the idea that our biggest problem right now is that we're not drilling enough or fracking enough is insane. It's just not true. And conservative activists are behind this.

So let me tell you who they are. An overwhelming amount of scientific evidence does prove that greenhouse gases are harmful. So overwhelming, so overwhelming in fact, that even some climate change skeptics have started changing their minds on this Obama era rule. But a group of four conservatives kept pushing for this. Okay, so two of them, Russell Vott and Jeffrey Clark, were high-profile allies of Donald Trump. Vot, who has railed against climate alarmism, and Clark, who has called climate rules a Leninistic plot to seize control of the economy,

drafted executive orders for the next Republican president to dismantle climate initiatives. The other two, Mandy Gunasakara and Jonathan Brightville, were conservative attorneys with long histories of fighting climate initiatives. So Gunasakara is known for handing a snowball to then-Senator James Inhoff. This was back in 2015. It was such an embarrassing moment on the Senate floor. He literally held a snowball to prove that climate change isn't real. Anyway, in the summer of 2022, as Biden and Democratic lawmakers were ramping up their climate efforts, Gunasikara and Bright Bill sought $2 million for a secretive campaign to kill the endangerment

finding. And that's according to a funding pitch that was obtained by field notes, a watchdog group that investigates the oil and gas industry. So the lawyers wrote in their funding pitch that conservatives needed a comprehensive strategy for reversing the endangerment finding on day one of the next Republican administration. The campaign would operate in secret, and they have been operating in secret, that's for sure, to prevent media and other conflicted sources from shaming participants and undercutting the work before it is done, they added. Because they're little bitches, that's why.

That's why. They're little bitches. They got to do things in the dark of night because they know what they're doing is wrong, and they don't want to suffer the consequences of the backlash for it. But make no mistake about it. These men are cowards. Because if you really believe in what you're doing, you'll stand on business. Okay?

I believe in everything I say. I might get things wrong. And if someone makes a compelling argument that shows me I'm wrong, I will change and I will say sorry. Okay. But everything I say, I actually believe, and I will say it in a room full of people. I will say it on a panel show. I will say it anywhere. I don't hide my cards.

You see exactly what I'm thinking, exactly what I want to do. These men are cowards. Operating like this, pathetic. Anyway, I want to do one more story before we wrap the main show. I really, really wanted to talk a little bit about this Ford employee, who I think a lot of us can relate to. Let's get into it. In January, Donald Trump visited the Ford Dearborn Truck Plant, Local 600.

And as you all also probably know, there was a worker at that plant that day who famously told Mr. Trump exactly what he thought of him. I also said, you're fired. Well, this ain't the apprentice. Well, much to the chagrin of President Donald Trump and quite frankly, other supporters of Trump, the Ford Auto Worker who heckled the president by calling him a pedophile protector last month has not been. fired. And I will allow it. I will allow it. Now, if you're unfamiliar with what we're talking about, last month while touring a Ford F-150 assembly plant in Dearborn, Michigan, an auto worker by the name of Thomas Sibula called Trump a pedophile protector, which is what he is. I mean, that's what he was engaging in for a while. And Trump responded to the heckling by saying, F you, although he actually

said the word, which I can't say right now, and you're fired while flipping him off. We had to lure out Trump's hand because he's giving him the middle finger. Okay. So here's what I thought about it at the time. I thought it was a perfect representation of what President Trump thinks about the ordinary American worker. And I think his actions and his policies have made that abundantly clear. but that vile gesture to an American worker helps you kind of visualize what he actually thinks about Americans. That's what I think. I mean, the worker was screaming at him, pedophile protector.

Yeah, because he is. He is a pedophile protector. No, he wants to engage in the cover up. I mean, I think that's been abundantly clear from day one. And what is that cover up about? It's about covering up for a pedophile and his co-conspirators. Now, if you notice the date on that video, it was on January 14th. And at that point, it appeared as though the Trump administration was not going to release the Epstein files. So there was a lot of rage toward Trump over that issue. That's why people were calling him a pedophile protector. And at the time, the White House tried to spin things and defend Trump flipping the bird at a worker, an American worker. A lunatic was wildly screaming, excellent. in a complete fit of rage and the president gave an appropriate and unambiguous response. But none of that was true at all because Subula was, look, he was initially suspended, okay? But the UAW, you know, the union had his back because that's what unions do. They have the workers' backs and they defend them.

So writing in a statement last month, UAW said that the auto worker at the Dearborn Truck Plan, is a proud member of a strong and fighting union, the UAW. He believes in freedom of speech, a principle we wholeheartedly embrace, and we stand with our membership in protecting their voice on the job. The UAW will ensure that our member receives the full protection of all negotiated contract language, safeguarding his job and his rights as a union member. Workers should never be subjected to vulgar language or behavior by anyone, including the president of the United States.

So they kept their word because UAW VP Laura Dickerson has announced that Sabula is back to work. No disciplinary marks on his record whatsoever. And I love that. I love that. That's because look, you have to understand the power imbalance here. We're talking about the president of the United States. Okay, so a factory worker called you a name you didn't like. Like just be an adult and ignore it.

But okay, he responded to it. But what's amazing to me is that people wanted this guy to be fired. Why? Why? He made his voice heard. He said what he thinks about Donald Trump. That's fine. By the way, I'd have no problem with him doing the same when it comes to any scruples he might

have with the Democratic president. It is his right to not like what the president is up to. I don't want his livelihood robbed from him because he offended or hurt the feelings of president. Come on. But what I especially love about this story is it's a perfect, it's a perfect example of what a strong union provides to their workers and its protection. Love to see it. Anyway, all right, bonus episode is next. Tim Dillon will be joining me to talk about some of the Epstein revelations that we haven't gotten to here at TYT. So I'm really looking forward to that. TYT.com slash join to become a member. So you,

you can watch and we'll see you there.