The Young Turks - Don's Doodles - July 18, 2025

Episode Date: July 19, 2025

Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month Shopify trial and start selling today at ⁠shopify.com/tyt A top Manhattan prosecutor involved in the Epstein investigation has been fired, raising eyebrows. The Senate approves Trump’s sweeping plan to eliminate foreign aid and public broadcasting funding, while Josh Hawley continues his bizarre reversal streak—introducing a bill to undo Medicaid cuts he previously backed. Hosts: John Iadarola, Cenk Uygur & Maz Jobrani 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 megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Going. Twizzlers, keep the fun going. Let's go! Hey guys, Friday! B'Ga! 3-5-T! D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D.

D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D.

D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D.

D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. D.I.D. All right, power panel for you guys. Jay Huger, Maz Drabani, John Hyderolla, Johnny Pai, of course, host of Damage Report. Make sure you're checking him out there. Maz, of course, on Rebel HQ. So, and MazDrabani.com, you're going to get to see his touring there, make sure you're checking that out. Speaking of checking things out, all right, a lot more on the FC story, Trump is firing back at

Murdoch, what's the situation there? He says they're going to release some grand jury testimony. Is that important? Is that interesting? We have important details about that. There were Democrats have a new

strategy for appealing to voters. That's in the second hour. Is it going to work or is it going to be super duper awkward? Okay, even from the question, you can begin to tell which direction it's going to go.

And we had to give Israel another $500 million. We didn't have a choice. It was absolutely necessary, because they are the most special ally in the world. And so, but what was interesting

about that story is that there were six people who fought back. About half of them Republicans, half of them Democrats. Interesting, interesting, and the people not on that list, also interesting. Okay, so a lot to get to, amazing

day of news for you guys. Johnny Pye. Yes, why don't we start off with who's getting sued? Last night, the Wall Street Journal reported that Donald Trump years ago apparently sent Jeffrey Epstein a sexually explicit birthday message.

And ever since that, and in fact, kind of leading up to it, Donald Trump made clear that he is going to sue the Wall Street Journal as well as its owner, Rupert Murdoch, and that has since happened. The lawsuit has been filed.

And I think to those who say Donald Trump doesn't have a sense of humor, and I've said that many times, he does though, because he filed the lawsuit in Eileen Cannon's district. Now you're probably wondering, it's Wall Street Journal

headquartered there? No, is there any connection to the case? No, but it would be nice for him if he got her, I'm sure. Now we're going to give you all the details including what was actually in the letter, but

does this seem like just another Trump temper tantrum? Or do you think he actually believes this is fake news? Okay, so guys, we got to discuss two things in this segment, right? One is this new precedent that Donald Trump has started for

all politicians, which is if anyone criticizes you or does a story about you that you view to be damaging, you just sue them. And that way we have a free country with freedom of press and freedom of speech, because the politicians sue everyone

into submission that dares to criticize them. So that's half the story. The other half the story is, does this leak from the Wall Street Journal help or hurt? And I'm not sure that it helped the Epstein case at all.

And you might be surprised by that opinion, but I'm going to tell you why in a little bit, okay? Yeah, I get where you're going with that, I think. But yeah, but we do, we want to start with the lawsuit because that's sort of the theme of today's

show, newspapers being sued, comedic critics of the president being fired, we've got a lot of that. But in case you missed the initial reporting of what was in that birthday letter, it bore Trump's name. And it contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman,

which appears to be hand drawn with a heavy marker. A pair of small arcs denotes the woman's breasts and the future president's signature is a squiggly Donald below her waist, mimicking pubic hair. And so the president's birthday cards share a lot in common with the sort of whiteboard displays created by the crew of Always Sunny in Philadelphia. In any event, inside the outline of

the woman was that note. And it's basically a third person fictional conversation between Trump and Epstein, or at least I really hope it's fictional. But here it goes, voiceover, there must be more to life than having everything, the note began. Donald, yes there is, but I won't tell you what it is.

This commercial would suck, by the way. Jeffrey, nor will I, since I also know what it is. I can't do his voice, I have no idea what he sounds like because unlike Donald Trump, I wasn't friends with him for at least two decades. Donald, we have certain things in common, Jeffrey.

Jeffrey, yes, we do come to think of it. And then it goes on. Donald, enigmas never age. Have you noticed that? Jeffrey, as a matter of fact, it was clear to me the last time I saw you.

Donald, a pal is a wonderful thing. Happy birthday, and may every day be another wonderful secret. So, ew, and also, so they did reach out to Trump for comment on this, the Wall Street Journal. He stated to them apparently, this is not me,

this is a fake thing. It's a fake Wall Street Journal story. I never wrote a picture in my life. I don't draw pictures of women. It's not my language. It's not my words. I'm gonna sue the Wall Street Journal just like I sued everyone else, which is how presidents should talk. And so anyway, after that, he then took to true social as he always does and posted like a novelette about how mad he was, that he was going to sue them,

that it's fake news, every criticism of him is. And again, insisted that he doesn't draw pictures, which to be very clear, he very much does. So this was actually tweeted out a little compilation of the many sketches he has done.

Now they're thankfully not of breasts, but they are of buildings and many of them do appear to be done in a heavy marker. And so, if you care about whether he's being honest or not, there's plenty of evidence that he likes to draw. Now was that writing a bit complex for someone as simple minded as him? Yes, but that said it was in third person which pretty much everything that he likes to draw. Now was that writing a bit complex for someone as simple minded as him? Yes, but that said it was in third person which pretty much everything that he writes is so sort of mixed

evidence about that. But as we said, the lawsuit has been filed. He is suing apparently for libel, assault, and slander. So libel and slander, I thought those were different things. He's apparently doesn't understand

any more than I do. And so he's suing Rupert Murdoch, the publisher of the Wall Street Journal and the two reporters who wrote the article. Now, bear in mind, proving that this is libelous requires proving a few different things,

including that there was malice, that they were knowingly publishing something false or defamatory, something to hurt him. That is going to be very difficult proving a few different things, including that there was malice, that they were knowingly publishing something false or defamatory, something to hurt him. That is going to be very difficult to do, but that same high bar could be applied to almost any of

the lawsuits that he's baselessly filed and then have been settled for millions of dollars. Not because there's any merit to it, but because those companies don't want to be destroyed by an authoritarian regime that's utterly out of control.

That's my legal theory anyway, Cenk, what do you make of it? Yeah, so first of all, and again, on the lawsuits, now Gavin Newsom sued Fox News and got an apology last night from Jesse Waters in a retraction. I like that Jesse Waters had to

apologize to retract because he was lying and I'm glad that Gavin Newsom called him out on it. But I hate this phenomenon. Every politician is now going to sue at the drop of a hat. And remember, the problem with corporate media is that they're corporate. So if it hurts their bottom line, they don't really care what's true or not true. Wait, let's put it this way, To be fair to them, the reporters care,

the editors care to some degree, the publishers care a lot less, the owners almost don't care, okay? And so when the owner says, okay, now my multi-billion dollar merger is at stake as an example, right? Should I give Donald Trump a $16 million bribe and admit that we

edited like we do on every single episode? Okay, okay, here's your bribe and admit that, we edited like we do on every single episode. Okay, okay, here's your bribe, right? So now Republicans at this point, largely speaking, the magnet that's still supporting Trump, etc., right? Will say, no, Trump's fighting back, attaboy.

Attaboy, stupid fake news, way to get him back, Donnie. Okay, so the next time there's a Democratic president, you guys don't mind, right? That he'll sue not just Wall Street Journal and Mainstream Media, he'll sue you guys.

You're like, okay, Charlie Kirk, you're up, batter up, Tucker Carlson, etc. Patrick, but David, we're going to sue the living crap out of you. You criticize the Democratic president, how dare you fake news, fake news, that's it, that's it.

We're suing you all out of existence. And what if it's someone really rich, right? What if it's Pritzker from Illinois? That's a kiss all your shows goodbye, okay? Or good luck,

you got to all pay them off. You got to, and by the way, the President controls licenses. The President controls the ability to do mergers or not to do mergers. This is a terrible trend. This is a disgusting trend, okay? And it is definitely not freedom

of the press when the politicians get to bully the press, take money from them, make them go through all this expenses, etc. So that part's super clear and everyone should be against it. Okay, now, onto the substances that John was talking about. them go through all this expenses set. So that part's super clear and everyone should be against it. Okay, now onto the substances that

John was talking about. Look, here's why guys that I'm a little worried about this story. So number one, it doesn't add much to what we know. And I don't say that in like the Chris Cuomo kind of way where he was kind of minimizing it,

right? We'll get to that. Yeah, we'll get to that in a minute. No, I mean it like, but I already knew he was terrific friends with Jeffrey Epstein for 15 years. I already knew that he said, and

it's very much on the record, he said it in 2002, Jeffrey likes him younger. We all knew that they partied together and we saw all the girls around them, right? So it barely adds anything, but what does it do?

Number one, it distracts from where people were going with this, the intelligence agencies. Now we go, no, no, no, it's Donald Trump and Bill Clinton that were on the list. That's the alternate theory. It's just a couple of politicians, nothing to see here, right? It's definitely not the intelligence agencies. So let's focus on Donald Trump. Number two, it's actually very easy to refute because the Wall Street Journal didn't even produce the letter. They said trust us,

this is what's in the letter. Now do I trust that that is the letter? Yeah, it sounds right. It matches everything that Trump said. The only thing that's questionable as John pointed out is it doesn't

sound like him. I have a theory on that. My theory doesn't have to be right. Okay, but my sense of it is, Ghislaine Maxwell asked him to write it, right, by the way, the largest groomer in American history for the largest child

rapist in American history. So Trump's like, great, yeah, I'd love to do that. But Trump, he's lazy. My guess is Ghislaine wrote that. It has words that she would use, right? And says, Donnie,

are you okay with this? And he's like, yeah, yeah, I like it, I like it, right? That's my guess, but that she would use, right? And says, Donnie, are you okay with this? And he's like, yeah, yeah, I like it, I like it, right? That's my guess, but that's unimportant, right? So, but overall, it matches the entire history that we have.

But when Trump says fake news, they didn't even have the document, they don't even show the document, and I don't speak like that, etc. What it does is it gets all of MAGA to go, yeah, fake news. Right, right, right. This is what mainstream media does

to smear our beloved Trump. It gets them back in that groove. So I think it actually set the whole thing back, to be honest. Maybe not intentionally, I hope not intentionally. But right now I think there's less momentum to find the Epstein files

than there was before the Wall Street Journal story. I'll help to put that back on the tracks later in the show. Don't worry. All right, good. Maz, what do you think? Yeah, I think that second point is

a great point, Cenk, especially when you think about who is releasing it and what's in their interest because Wall Street Journal or I should say Rupert Murdoch has had his back. He basically built Trump. So what's really happening here cuz we know Trump was trying to distract any way he could stop talking about it. You don't need to talk about it when there's bigger things to talk about. Just trying everything going after Rosie O'Donnell.

He tried every shiny object and it's possible to your point that maybe there's an ulterior motive to throw people off by doing this. So I will start with that. Secondly, in terms of the letter itself, there's another theory I have, I just looked it up. The movie Eyes Wide Shut came out in 1999 and Jeffrey Epstein's 50th

would have been 2003, I believe. So I think these guys are trying to kind of emulate that world a little bit because that's probably the kind of stuff that was happening. I don't know, I can't know for sure. But it feels to me like he said that our secret is safe and that movie had a lot of that kind of stuff. So it's possible he was inspired by Eyes Wide Shut. You're probably right that he didn't write it still.

Maybe he had somebody there that wrote it for him or Gillian Maxwell, but that feels like the kind of language that came from that movie. And then the other thing I'll say is, you know, the problem with the first thing, I think that I would disagree with you on that first part that you said about the suing of the press. The problem is we're living in a time now where the press, if they choose to, and we've seen it on Fox, just out, you know, lie out, just openly lie. And we saw it with the elections and the voting machines. And you just said right now that Jesse Water said something about Gavin Newsom,

that was a total lie. So those guys are lying and there should be some way to hold them accountable. The problem is that Donald Trump says everything that is against him is a lie. And we all know it's not a lie, but he has this power now to sue

everybody. I originally thought that he was just going to unleash his DOJ on everyone. But instead, he was just gonna unleash his DOJ on everyone. But instead, he's just bullying everyone. And I am very, I know a lot of us are, I didn't expect all of these organizations like your Columbia universities, all those law firms, all these other places to just bow down and they have paramount bow down.

And that's very disheartening. That's us telling the dictator, you know what, sir, let me hold the door open while you come in and take over everything. Yeah, I fear that too. And I don't know a lot about Eyes Wide Shut, but the idea that

Trump would just follow a movie, it seemed like he's reopening Alcatraz because he watched that movie. This is totally how he operates. He sees something on TV and then he just does it, staffing his cabinet and stuff. So I think Moz, you might be onto something there. This is the deep state. This is the ruling class in America.

They're trying to use it to destroy President Trump. And last night, I think he understood of the Wall Street Journal, as much as he's tried to do in the big, beautiful bill and these other things to get supply side tax cuts, as much as he's tried to do, it's never enough. Because he has a populist nationalist movement and they hate. And this is old man Murdoch,

who made the decision to come after President Trump. And I understand the lawsuits that they're putting together is going to be absolutely incredible. So earlier this week, the right wing media were in basically open civil war over

the topic of Donald Trump and his obvious cover up when it comes to Epstein and some of them. Got calls from Donald Trump, like Charlie Kirk, and then announced they're done with it. And then they got DMs from their fans and then they had to be back

on it. And they've all been trying to figure out, what are we supposed to say right now that isn't going to get us banned from MAGA or lose us our audience and the fat paychecks that we get. And that's been very tough for them. But this news cycle is a lot easier because now they can grandstand and how aggrieved they are for Donald Trump against the fake news media and the, as Steve Bannon says, the ruling elite, which I guess is

reporters at the Wall Street Journal, not the billionaires that all are unified in support of Donald Trump and control every branch of government. It's just the most obviously fake populism. But anyway, yeah,

they're defending him and they've got some theories behind why the Wall Street Journal in particular published this, but I'll let Steve Bannon get us into that. We're so back. Look, everyone is firing on all cylinders. The MAGA movement is completely united behind this fight right now. I said, wait a minute, what do they have? And I kept

getting back, they don't have anything. They have a story about a thing. And I said, wait a minute, what do they have? And I kept getting back, they don't have anything, they have a story about a thing. And I said, well, where did they get this? And then it comes out that it's this letter that nobody's actually seeing. I said, wait a minute, so what is your source if you don't actually have the letter? And I'm starting to think, Steve, I'm starting to think, I put this up on Twitter last night, that the source has something to do with former elements of the Department of Justice. I tweeted out last night that it sounds like their source might be Ghislaine Maxwell over

some prison phone or something like this. Then you've got the great Susan Crabtree. She sends me a message, she's got it up now as well over RealClearPolit Politics saying that the author of this report at the Wall Street Journal is a former member of the Department of Justice who was directly tied to who? Glenn Simpson, the founder of Fusion GPS. Okay, so we're back, we're unified. I mean, nothing has changed about Donald Trump's cover up. Now we can ignore it and we won't about Donald Trump's cover up. We're just going to, now we can ignore it and we won't get yelled

at by our base. We're totally fine with him covering up for the child trafficking and everything. Please stop pressuring us about that. Let's just talk about the media.

And then we can spin these conspiracy theories that, and this is the tweet that dude seemed to be pointing to. So it's serious because it starts with hashtag breaking in all caps scoop. So one of the two reporters that

worked on this story previously worked for a different company. And that company was involved with a woman and her husband was Glenn Simpson. And he previously founded Fusion GPS, which they think is involved with a different hoax.

So we're done with this thing. Obviously, Donald Trump didn't send the letter, right? I don't know, I don't take the strange health supplements that they do, maybe with those chemicals coursing through your body, that makes sense.

But to a rational person, it does not. So they're coming up with all sorts of stuff to distract from this. The rest are just denying it. Megyn Kelly says it's the dumbest attempted hit piece I've ever read. Elon Musk says the letter sounds

bogus. Matt Walsh is saying they don't even provide a photo of the letter. Which by the way, it's entirely possible that they're pulling a Mother Jones with the signal leak where they're not presenting it so that the right can

go hard against the fact that it hasn't been presented. And then they can present it and get a second news cycle out of it, which is entirely possible. Maybe they won't. JD Vance says it's complete and

utter bulls. Where is it? Does anyone honestly believe this sounds like Donald Trump? Which we've said, no, it doesn't necessarily sound like Donald Trump. Now, a sharpie picture of boobies

does sound like Donald Trump and that was scrawled on the letter. So, but I just want to say, Cenk, you had said previously this doesn't really add much, which I agree. We know Trump is an absolute creep who's partied with Jeffrey Epstein. I get why they're so excited about this because now it takes some of the pressure from MAGA off their back. But I have a rule, kind of, feel free to disagree. All of these people saying, I don't believe it's true.

A person stating that they don't believe something is true is meaningless if you can be sure that they wouldn't care if it was true if it became indisputable. Like if they found the letter and it was proven, Donald Trump once held it up in

a photo, none of these people would care about it. So what do I care if they don't believe it or not? It's utterly pointless, they're just posturing. Yeah, they don't believe this is true.

Did they care about him talking to Billy Bush about how you can grab women's genitals? Did they care about the jury that found him liable for sexual abuse, so the dozens of other women who have accused him of assault and harassment, the Stormy Daniel,

have they cared about literally any of that? Well, then if they haven't, then they're obviously biased when it comes to this stuff. Again, it's not the most important story, but they have no credibility when it comes to evaluations of

Donald Trump's character or actions. Yeah, but John, I'm going to disagree with you a little bit. Because, well, you're not wrong about any of those facts. of Donald Trump's character actions. Yeah, but John, I'm going to disagree with you a little bit. Because, well, then you're not wrong about any of those facts. But these guys were just criticizing Trump for not releasing

the Epstein files, right? I mean, not some of these last people, not- Right, but not Jay B. Vance, right. But Vann and EmpeSoBiac were, for sure. Well, and I said, this is why they're so excited about this.

It gets the pressure off them and now they can just turn back to attack in the libs. And which was my point. And by the way, I have to be honest, I hadn't seen that MAGA reaction, right? And so it pretty much confirms

exactly what I was saying, easy pivot, right? Fake news, that's it, we're back on Team Trump. Daddy, don't be too mad at us, etc. And it allows them to pivot away. I'd be curious to see if Trump

drops the suit at some point, like a couple of weeks later or a couple of months later. Because if he does and he doesn't keep going forward with it, look, let's put it this way. Whether you're this administration overall, mainly the US government. If you're the US government and you're this administration overall, mainly the US government.

If you're the US government and you're covering up for these sex crimes, which the US government is definitively covering up for these crimes. They say that they're not going to prosecute a single person. But we know there were a lot of

people who raped those girls. And so you can have all sorts of semantic debates about, was it this or was it that or how many or but the bottom should they is it a file is it not a file is it fake is it this it doesn't guys we know that the girls were raped.

And they're saying we're never going to tell you who raped them. And we're never going to bring them to justice. That's the bottom line. And if you're the US government that has made that decision repeatedly through several administrations, this is gold for you. I mean, how did you get this lucky? Now, they're not talking about the US government. They're

not talking about the cover up. They're talking about having a debate about a piece of document we've never seen, right? So when it allows all of MAGA to come back onto Trump's team and go, that's it, everything is fake, just like he said. It's so helpful to them. Half those guys were tearing into the Trump administration just a couple of days ago.

So if this was not coordinated in any way, shape or form, which is entirely possible, then the US government just got incredibly lucky with this Wall Street Journal piece that I think has actually hurt the cause of finding out what

actually happened. So look, these are all interesting and by the way, Miles, you made a good point about Dominion. When a lie is big enough and specifically harms a company like Dominion, they're claiming is

stolen election, etc. Yeah, at some point you have to defend yourself. If something election, etc. Yeah, at some point you have to defend yourself. If something is defamatory enough, at some point you have to defend yourself. I'm just saying that Trump has now made it so that a hair trigger,

any criticism, any story about him, etc. Sue, Sue, Sue, Sue, Sue, Sue. And now that Gavin did it, and Gavin didn't do it on a thing that was as big as Dominion. It was kind of a tiny, and Gavin didn't do it on a thing that was his biggest dominion. It was kind of a tiny story, right? So it was like a run of the mill

Fox News lie that there's like 18 of those a day, right? So now it's like a factory of politicians suing, and it's just a terrible precedent. But overall, Moz, it looks like this has allowed in a kind of ironic way Trump's guys to rally back around him.

Yeah, and that goes back to kind of what you started by saying and me saying that you made a good point. It's possible Rupert Murdoch is helping them in this case and they just kind of behind the scenes, I'll get people distracted. It's kind of finding an arsonist, and he's got a blowtorch in his hand, and he's got a flamethrower, and he's got a Molotov cocktail, and then someone comes by and goes, hey, look, I found a match. And then they go, oh, he planted that match. And now we're all going after that rather than going like, wait a minute, this guy's

got all this stuff he's been holding and setting fires with. And that's to John's point about about we know the guy's a creep, we know he was close with Epstein, there's no doubt about it. Our focus should stay on that. And by the way, this client list, they could just ask Gazelle Max-Lane, what's her name? Gazelle Max-Lane? Yeah, Ghislaine Maxwell. Ghislaine Maxwell, they could just ask Ghislaine Maxwell to write the list. She knows the list, so just sit her down and have her write the list. But then again, he'd probably sue her too, so

either or not. Exactly. Yeah, they make it sound like, it's impossible. You're totally right. She's right there. She's in prison. She can give us the list.

No, no, no, no, no, no, we couldn't possibly do that. Why can't you do that? All right, you know what? Give us a list. Otherwise, we're going to prosec that. Why can't you do that? All right, you know what, give us a list, otherwise we're going to prosecute you to put you in jail for another 20 years. You deserve a 200 year sentence.

Okay, so golly gee, we could not figure out how to do that. Is that, come on. Guys, do you know how many documents there are in the F-scene file? It's actually that fact has been released. It is the FCN file, it's actually that fact has been released.

It is the equivalent of 100,000 books, 300 page books, 100,000 of them. And so- No names in them. No, but like golly gee, the government just can't seem to find anything in those documents,

right? Okay, so that's why we have to talk about a letter that no one saw and have the whole conversation be distracted into that. So on the second day of this story, it looks like it, in my opinion, it actually did damage and

is counterproductive. Yeah, well, we'll see. Maybe you'll feel a bit better after the next segment. To the MAGA people in the audience who might be feeling a little bit muddled with these recent developments, I will leave you with

this question. Have the pedophiles been brought to justice or haven't they? I know you're mad about the Wall Street Journal, but is it still being covered up? Yeah, it's still being covered up. That should still bother you.

We'll be back in a minute. Book club on Monday. Gym on Tuesday. Date night on Wednesday. Out on the town on Thursday. Quiet night in on Friday. It's good to have a routine. And it's good for your eyes too because with regular comprehensive eye exams at Specsavers you'll know just how

healthy they are. Visit Specsavers.ca to book your next eye exam. Eye exams provided by independent optometrists. the way. All right, back on TYT, Cenk, John, and Maz with you guys, also James Donovan and Ray Human, the humans are here. So and thank you for joining by hitting that big beautiful join

button below the video and CDN Norse dog dad, thank you for gifting a membership on YouTube. And said also give a super chat with a message, Cenk, CDN means Canadian. Finally, thank you, not just for the fact that you're a Canadian, but for the fact that thank you for gifting a membership on YouTube. And said also give a super chat

with a message, C-D-N means Canadian. Finally, thank you. Now I could just say that. Okay, John. Okay, let's jump into this. After a week of open rebellion on the topic of Jeffrey Epstein,

Donald Trump needs to get them off his back. And he doesn't really want any information to be released, but he has And he doesn't really want any information to be released, but he has to at least act like they're gonna release something. And so for now, he's come up with this. He posted on True Social, based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein. I have asked AG Pan-Banik to produce any and all pertinent grand jury testimony subject to court approval. This scam perpetuated by the

Democrats should end right now. Yeah, he seems to really care about getting justice in this. Again, if you're one of his critics or whatever, if you're a MAGA person, he's spitting in your face again. He doesn't want to do even this,

but he's doing it, so let's evaluate it. Will this actually matter? Is this actually significant? There are two reasons to believe that it's not. And I'm going to save the one that just came out for

just a minute or two. We first want to go to the senior legal analyst at CNN, who's going to put into scale how little this actually represents in terms of all that we know about Jeffrey Epstein in the investigation.

What Donald Trump said to do there is not to turn over all the Epstein files. I really want to make sure people understand the context here of what he did say he wanted released because it is a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of those files. We know from the FBI's memo last week that the entirety of the Epstein files is 300 gigabytes of information. I looked it up, I talked to a tech guy, that's equal to about 100,000 ebooks. Okay, so think about a book,

300 pages, 100,000 of those. That's how much information is in the entire Epstein file. The grand jury transcripts means the written transcript that the court reporter takes of whoever went into the grand jury and testified.

So already you are leaving out tons of documents. Most witnesses as a federal prosecutor don't even go into the grand jury. They just talk to you in a conference room, not in the grand jury.

So we're talking about up 1%, 2%. So already if you were hoping that maybe this means we'll get to the bottom of this, we're gonna get to the bottom of 0.5% of it perhaps. But still that's something right? Yeah, well, he's got a safeguard in place because since Donald Trump requested that Pam Bondi do that, she has now requested it. And by the way, the judge could block this from coming out or could slow roll

it and it would take a while. But whatever she requested it, that's something right. Well, in the request from the Justice Department to get this info out, they said that they want redactions of anything victim related. And you can sort of understand why they would do that. Okay, you don't wanna release information about the victims if they don't want it to come out. But also other personal identifying information. So in theory, the names not only of the victims, but any information about other people that could point to their identity could also be redacted in this already extremely small and carefully curated sample of the information from the investigation. So this is not only very small, Cenk, but they have added

firewalls against the revelation of anyone who's actually done anything wrong. Yeah, I'm actually surprised they didn't go to this trick earlier, because there's a couple of things I thought, man, they bungled the living crap out of this, because

there are two tricks they could have done that were so easy, but Trump's so dumb, he couldn't even think of those. One is the one that Alex Jones suggested after the fact, where he was like, just say the Democrats destroyed all

the evidence. He just says it on air, right? And Trump's so dumb, he didn't even think of that, that's so simple, right? We had him, but son of a gun, Biden must have destroyed it all, right?

And so then you could say, yeah, but then why didn't you release it in your first term? But it doesn't matter, because that would have totally worked on MAGA, right? He wouldn't have lost any of his own voters if they had done that,

in my opinion, right? And the second one is this, where they released some crumbs, and they're like, that is this, where they release some crumbs. And they're like, that's it, mission accomplished, we told you. I mean, what else do you want? It sounds so official, the grand jury testimony.

I mean, we're giving you 5% of 0.5%, right? And by the way, if I was them and I wanted to hide it, I would have released two or three things. All equaling about one and a half percent of the news and go, that's how I talk,

ladies and gentlemen, I got him. And then hope that they don't notice you're not actually prosecuting anyone. Yeah, you haven't said a single name and you haven't gone after a single person, right? But it probably would have worked.

Now when they do this, the Wall Street Journal story rallied a lot of MAGA as we saw earlier in the show to Trump's side. This I don't think is going to have much of an effect. because to be fair to those guys, remember when they did the part one

of the Epstein files and they had the folders and stuff. People did actually look through the folders in the left and the right and they were like, yeah, this is a nothing burger. So that trick didn't work. So folders in the left and the right and they were like, yeah, this is a nothing burger. So that trick didn't work. So like in the case of the grand

jury testimony, like if they were smart, they would leave in things that are a tiny bit relevant so they can say, well, that's real, that's real, right? But not actually name any names, not prosecute anyone, etc. But if it's complete nothing

burger, then they'll have misplated because then people will go back to being frustrated. That's my sense of it. What do you think, Wes? Yeah, we live in this world of alternative facts and the fact that they're going to take this and

redact all that stuff. It's kind of like what they did with those January 6 tapes. They said, look, there was no there was just tourists. Look, if we show the camera angle from this other entrance where nobody's breaking windows, then we

will reveal to our followers and our constituents that this was not an attempt to overthrow democracy. So I think that you guys are right about that this is their way of putting the crumbs out and Jenky said something that was interesting was,

Alex Jones said, he should have said that the Democrats got rid of the evidence. And Donald Trump's so stupid, he went the other way around and he said the Democrats created the evidence. So he was saying, all of a sudden he started blaming Obama and Biden and there was a, I don't know if you saw this clip of Bill O'Reilly defending the whole thing and saying why did the Biden administration, when they prosecuted Jeffrey Epstein, they could have released this information.

And then the person interviewed him goes, Jeffrey Epstein died in 2019. Biden did not prosecute him. And then Bill O'Reilly goes, well, then I stand corrected. So they've been really just looking for the out. And it seems like, you're right, the distraction now of that letter that came out is really kind of a way that's taking the shiny object out of our view. So I don't know where it's gonna go. And it's also, by the way, we know all, like the guy is a bad guy. He's been a bad guy and yet they've continued to just accept it. I don't even know if his name came out in the files, they're gonna spin it somehow, right?

I wasn't there for X, Y and Z. Other people were there for X, Y and Z. And so he's really gotten a pass. And a lot of it has to do with the Republican Party and his constituents really not caring. I think that really he's given them the excuse to be the bigoted racist that they want to be and they'll stand with him to the end of time. Yeah, one quick addition to what

Maz just said. So if you're mad guy and you're dying for Trump not to be involved in this, and you think, well, actually that whole thing about Biden destroying the documents, that sounds pretty good.

That sounds yummy, right? Well, remember, they said the documents never existed. And then Trump changed it like three days later to know they did exist but they were fake and they were started by Obama.

So but if Obama created it, then Trump definitely had the files in his first term. Oops, he's so dumb. And this is so important, right? This is the thing his base cares so much about that he promised them. And he's so dumb. And this is so important, right? This is the thing his base cares so much about that he promised them.

And he's so damn lazy, he couldn't take five minutes to think of a good excuse. Instead, he bungled it all over his face. They don't exist, they're fake, they were created by Obama, I don't buy it.

So and he even got like the most hardcore mega to doubt him. That's how dumb he is in how he handled this. Yeah, yeah, and there's all like there's the Obama man, it was coming as blah, blah, blah. Maybe there's all this stuff.

It's just dust kicked up. But if you're like a MAGA person, and you care about this story, and you have for a really long time, regardless of whatever the latest true social message says, what he would have you believe at the basis level is that Jeffrey Epstein was the criminal and nobody else did anything wrong. The elites are all cool, they're all innocent. Do you believe that? Fundamentally, do you buy Trump's

story that it's all a hoax and nobody else did anything wrong? There's no elite cable of pedophiles or whatever. It was Jeffrey Epstein, Gile Maxwell, that was pretty much it. For years and years and years,

tons of people from the UK, the United States, wherever, on his plane, a private island, it's just him actually, that's it. That's what Donald Trump demands that you accept as true. Absurd and you know it, we've been principled all

throughout. We said the files should be released when it was Democrats and when it was Republicans. So we'll see how people react going forward. Are they just going to run back to daddy and forget how much they claim they cared about pedophiles? we'll see how people react going forward. Are they just going to run back to

daddy and forget how much they claim they cared about pedophiles? Or is this just one of the waves and the next wave they come back go to John's point? Yeah, but where are the goddamn clients? Yeah, like the rest is just BS.

I think we should probably take our last break of the hour. Yep. I think we should probably take our last break of the hour. Shop online and get $15 in PC optimum points on your first five orders. Shop now at nofrills.ca. All right, back on the on Turks, Cenk, John and Moz with you guys. Now if you want to check out Moz on an upcoming show, he's got to go to mozgibane.com

where you can see all of his upcoming appearances. Okay, so we're going to go to the end of the show, we're going to go to the end Moz on an upcoming show he's got to go to MozJabani.com where you can see all of his upcoming appearances. Okay, John, what's that? Let's turn now to the latest

potential victim in Donald Trump's crusade against the media. Big news from the world of late night stunned a lot of people. Stephen Colbert came on his show open last night and said, it's over. But the timing of this actually is

terrible and it's terrible. But the timing of this actually is terrible and it's terrible because you had the settlement with Donald Trump. And then you had Colbert and John Stewart criticizing that decision. And then a week later, they're

saying, unfortunately, we don't have the money to continue this. Yeah, it definitely seems suspicious and not just to that show. A lot of people have a lot of theories about why it is that at

this time of all times, Stephen Colbert's show is being killed in May of next year. We're going to get to what Stephen has had to say about this and some of the other reactions. But what was your initial reaction Cenk, when you first heard

this news yesterday? I'm actually really torn on this. And that's part of why we're doing the poll that we are. So the show's live at 6 o'clock Monday through Friday. So be part of the show. We got the live shot question,

why did CBS cancel Late Show? A, financial reasons, B, to appease Trump? But on our website, tyt.com, we appeasing Trump is much more likely to win, of course. But we have a little bit longer version of it that I like a little

bit better. To get their merger approved, A, B, because the show wasn't making money anymore, C, because Stephen Colbert called them out on air and we're going to tell you about that in a minute as well and executives do not like that, generally speaking.

And then all of the above, I'm leaning towards all of the above for reasons that I'll explain in a minute, but John, more. Yeah, and I understand why the executives wouldn't like it being pointed out that they gave a bribe to the president.

But I've always thought a great way to avoid that is to not bribe the president. Yeah, I mean- Seems easy, don't write the check. Yeah, if Colbert had a gratuitous insult of a random executive, hey, the VP in human resources is ugly.

You'd be like, okay, yeah, you could take offense at that, right? But after you give an obvious $16 million bribe to the president, your top comic is likely to point that out in his skit, right? Or in his monologue in that case.

Of course, that's literally part of his job. Exactly, and it's what he's been doing for a very long time. But that said, why don't we go to Stephen Colbert, last night on his show, he announced, I'm not being replaced. This is all just going away. And I do want to say that the folks

at CBS have been great partners. We get to do this show for each other every day all day. And I've had the pleasure and the responsibility of sharing what we do every day with you in front of this camera for the last 10 years. Now bear in mind as we start to evaluate why this might be that the Late Show was the most watched late night show at the 1135 PM hour in terms of total views in the second quarter of 2025.

And CBS being very clear that has nothing to do with anything except raw business saying it's not related in any way to the show's performance, content or other matters happening at paramount. Our admiration, affection and respect for the talents of Stephen

Colbert and his incredible team made this agonizing decision even more difficult. But that statement, I think it's really suspicious to a lot of people because it has nothing to do with the performance of the show, but it's just financial.

But the performance of the show is good. Now, that doesn't mean that it's bringing in a ton of money necessarily. But it's weird to say both of those, I mean, if you're canceling a show just for the money, then the

performance clearly was a problem. And then to add in, or other matters happening at Paramount, I mean, as we're going to get into, I think people can fill in the blanks pretty clearly there. And so they're trying to do this merger with Skydance. And so Donald Trump gets to basically

say whether that happens or not. I mean, in a rational presidency, it would be some semi-independent agency and President Obama, President Biden never would have weighed in on that sort of thing. But Trump 100% will. And so that makes people really suspicious about this, considering especially the Paramount bribe that happened just a couple of weeks ago.

And so look, admittedly, ad revenue on late night television has been trending down and those ad spots are now worth less than they used to. People are watching streaming services and vertical video and all sorts of stuff. But that said, it is still bringing in money. And so it just seems suspicious, especially considering the time and especially considering

how criminally sensitive Donald Trump is to criticism. How often he's personally attacked Stephen Colbert. And as you'll see delighted in this decision, by by the way, didn't play it cool at all. And so that's why I think people have a lot of questions. Yeah, Moz, you're a comic, what do you think? Yeah, it's not about the money. If it were about the money,

they would, first of all, what are they going to put in place of it? What are they going to put, what's another program that's going to bring more eyeballs to this late hour, what is that? This is your best show.

This is a show that is an Emmy winning show. It is a show that has won several other prizes. I stream it every, I get my news through it every night. Every night I stream it on YouTube. So it's killing it in the streams. It's obviously the numbers aren't what it used to be because of all the competition and all the other stuff that's happened and how the world is now on streaming. But it is not about the money, it's about him calling them out. It's about them knowing they did wrong, which by the way,

if they really had been, if they weren't guilty of bribing, then they would have allowed him to keep going because they could have laughed it off and been like, oh gosh, Stephen is just saying something, but it was actually a settlement we made because there was a real reason for us to make this settlement. It's also openly, it's almost flagrantly a political thing. And the fact that we all know the whole thing

with the 60 minutes and the kamala harris and the Edit and all that it's just you know as a comedian i've been on colbert and i think you have to jank and he is He's smart he's classy he's funny. He's an amazing person amazing host and um as a comedian When trump came into power i knew he was gonna come after the late late night talk show host I just didn't know how i thought it might be like sending the irs after them And when Trump came into power, I knew he was gonna come after the late night talk show host. I just didn't know how. I thought it might be like sending the IRS after them.

I thought it might be some other thing. But the fact that he's using something like this to have the corporations put pressure on their stars, that again, is very authoritarian. That's very, very scary about the future of where America is going. When you start squashing the comedians and not allowing comedians to make fun of our leaders, we are heading into a dictatorship very fast. And if it were about the money, by the way, I guarantee you if they'd gone to Stephen Colbert and said, hey, Stephen, we're paying you X, Y, and Z, it's costing this much. In order to keep these 200 people working, are you willing to do it for a little bit less or find some other ways of profit sharing?

He seems like the kind of guy that would have been like, yeah, let's keep it going. And he seems like somebody who enjoys doing it and probably would have gone for another five, 10 years if he could. And my hope is that somehow there's a revolt or a push as the story comes out of people maybe protesting against CBS, maybe boycotting CBS or something to push either the decision to be reversed, which I'm not holding my breath for, or some other network to pick him up. Now obviously it can't be the majors, but maybe some streamer or something because he's just too good to be not be on air. the most persuasive points in TYT history. I'm going to change my vote. I'm going to explain why in a second

but first John. That's amazing. Yeah, look, I imagine that there will be a big revolt because I, look, no offense. I don't know why I would ever tune into that channel if it wasn't for Stephen Colbert.

And I think that's true for a lot of people, especially people who are on the younger side, much younger than me. And I love your point, Moz. I think there's going to be a pushback. They can reverse this. And if there's a big push side, much younger than me. And I love your point, Moz,

I think there's going to be a pushback. They can reverse this. And if there's a big pushback and the reason is purely financial, then it makes perfect sense to reverse it. But if you're lying, and

it's not financial, and it has to do with the merger, it has to do with Donald Trump, it really doesn't matter what the pushback is, and you'll never reverse it no matter what. So it's going to be fascinating to watch how they likely do nothing in

the face of what's going to be probably open revolt from his current fans. Okay, this guy just got juice here. So I'm now going to have to create a second account on TYT.com to cancel out my first vote. And then a third one to vote in

the right direction. But anyways, so so I want to share a part of the theory that I'm surprised people aren't talking about more for this story. But that's in a second. But first, why was Maz's point so good?

Halfway through he got me to wonder, yeah, wait a minute. Maybe we can say definitely that it wasn't the money. By the end, I was like, you're totally right. So why? Because guys, the last point that Maz made actually ended it.

Normally what happens in media is if it's about the money, you renegotiate. It's the number one show in late night. It's the show that goes most viral for them. In fact, it's the show that goes most viral for them. In fact, it's the only show that

goes viral for them. It is an important and valuable property. A media company, I know I run this company, a media company doesn't give up an asset that valuable without trying to salvage it. Right, you go, okay,

Steven, these are crazy times. We lost half the revenue because of the deterioration of television, etc. Stephen, what do you think about taking a pay cut of this or that? Can you do it with 150 staff instead of 200 staff, etc.

For them to just go, nope, I'm done with it. No, Moz is totally right. It's not about the money. And the other point that he made is, wait, see, what else are you going to do in that time slot to make more money?

But wait a minute, let's say that you did a syndicated show and it didn't cost you much. And again, I know the financial dynamics of this, right? So you could put a syndicated show in there, maybe you squeak out a tiny profit, etc.

But then what are you going to do with the rest of your lineup? If none of it makes money, well, that's part of why they're trying to dump it. But then Sky Dancers buying it, what are you buying it for if some of their most successful

shows- It's being canceled. Aren't profitable, right? So none of that makes any sense. I'm withdrawing all of the above. It is not the money, Maz is right. So what's the theory on this that

we haven't discussed? Maybe it was part of the settlement. Maybe it was just they said to Trump, we'll give you $16 million and Colbert's head. Now we're not going to write Colbert's head on the document obviously, right? But we'll make it go away and we'll take out your top critic in late night. I mean, I don't know that there that to be a fact at all, but it certainly seems plausible, doesn't it?

Yeah. Yeah, and just think about the chilling effect on other critics of the president that have shows. Like what if your show, the network you work for wants to do some sort of deal or doesn't want us to

broadcast license pulled. Trump declared victory saying he loves that Colbert got fired, of course. And he says, I hear that Jimmy Kimmel is next. Jimmy Kimmel going to be comfortable providing critical

commentary of this regime now? Or by the way, can I just one quick thing about that? So it's not that Kim will be uncomfortable, because Kimmel's, I think, done well enough in his life that he'll almost want to provoke, right, etc.

But the show's going to be uncomfortable. The executive producer is going to say, but Jimmy, we got 200 people working here. Yeah, that's true. They got families, right? And is ABC going to be uncomfortable?

They already paid a bribe to Donald Trump. And why did they do that? They paid them right before their executives are going to have to be deposed. The executives do not want to be deposed in these lawsuits under

any circumstance. So they know that if Trump sues, they almost have to settle. So now the company is going to be like, hey, Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy, Jimmy, don't, don't, don't. And even if Jimmy Kimmel does it, and he does it for a couple of

weeks or a couple of months and then they get rid of him, certainly the next guy isn't going to do it at all. Someone without tremendous power and leverage is definitely not going to do it. So this sends a massive chilling

effect on all of media. Do not criticize politicians, your career will be ended. Yeah, I think we've got two powers going against each other. You have the comedians who are going to want to lean in now and make more fun and criticize Trump

more, whether it's on social media, on television, whatever it's on social media, on television, whatever it is. Then you've got the corporations who are going to fear whatever comes from Trump and the way he bullies using the government. And that might lead to, it could lead to Instagram saying, one of our new policies is no making fun of Trump because we don't wanna lose X, Y, and Z license or we're trying to buy this other corporation. So right now I think it falls on comedians to lean in more and more.

The reason we're comedians is because we like to poke the bear and we should poke the bear. And as scary as it might be, we gotta do it because we need to keep exposing this because we need to have Stephen Colbert's back in this situation. And yeah, it's a heartbreaking day to see what's happened. And I personally, I remember doing shows in Egypt, it was like 2007, 2008. That's when Hosni Mubarak was still the president. And when we got there, the promoters asked us, they said, do any of you guys have a joke about Hosni Mubarak? And we're like, no, we don't. He goes, good, because we got a call from the Ministry of Information saying the comedians

cannot do any jokes about Hosni Mubarak. And as a matter of fact, a couple months before we got there, some journalists had written an article where he said Hosni Mubarak was looking old these days, and they threw him in jail. So we are now closer to Egypt under Hosni Mubarak than we are to a democracy.

Yeah, I got to build off of that because that's such a good point. because in Turkey, they did the same, Erdogan does it all the time, the current president, he's been slowly killing off democracy. And they did the same, Erdogan does it all the time. The current president, he's been slowly killing off democracy and they did a cartoon about him, banned him, okay?

And then sometimes will arrest comics who make jokes about Erdogan. He sued something, I forget if it was a German government or German publication for running a cartoon about him. By the way, I shouldn't give Trump any ideas. Now he is going to sue the whole

world, right? But if you're on the right and you like Trump and you didn't like Colbert's jokes about Trump, grow up. What did you say before? You said, the stupid left has this cancel culture, right?

They're canceling our jokes. So what? It's-. Legalized comedy. Yeah, legalized comedy. So should we legalize comedy? Or if daddy's feelings are hurt, should we ban comics?

This is textbook cancel culture. They literally cancel them. Yeah. It's the most literal thing there is. And I love what Maz is saying. All the comedians out there, go forward, okay?

I mean, hashtag stand with Colbert and make the dirtiest, best jokes you got about Trump and do it again and again and again, or hashtag the North remembers, okay? But whatever it is, comedians, this is Trump challenging you more than anything on the left ever

challenged you. Saying if you tell jokes about politicians, we're going to take away your living. You should not stand for that. You should fight back super aggressively. Yeah.

Okay, all right, guys, we are out of time. Okay, all right. Every day we don't get through the story and it drives me crazy. Maz, where's the next show? I'm actually going to Australia to

do shows. So if there's any viewers in Australia, I'll be in Australia and New Zealand starting next week. And then after that, San Francisco, New York, Washington DC, Atlanta, Boston, it's all at mazjobrani.com.

Come out, see a live show. I think you'll have a good time. Yeah, and you could also see maz videos on Rebel HQ on YouTube. You can see damage report every day at 1 PM live either on tyt.com, any of the platforms are on, or obviously check out the damage

report on YouTube. All right, guys, when we come back, there was an Israel funding bill that the left and the right united on, all six of them. Everyone else said we vote for Israel, not America. We'll explain when we come back. Discover the magic of BetMGM Casino, where the excitement is always on deck.

Pull up a seat and check out a wide variety of table games with a live dealer. From roulette to blackjack, watch as a dealer hosts your table game and live chat with them throughout your experience to feel like you're actually at the casino. The excitement doesn't stop there. With over 3,000 games to choose from, including fan favorites like Cash eruption, UFC gold blitz, and more. Make deposits instantly to jump in on the fun and make same-day withdrawals if you win. Download the BetMGM Ontario app today.

You don't want to miss out. Visit betmgm.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager, Ontario only. Please gamble responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact CONNECTS Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor free of charge.

BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario.