The Young Turks - Drama At Dealbook

Episode Date: December 13, 2024

Cenk explains his three new rules for the internet. Top Biden adviser states that she disagrees with the timing and execution of Hunter Biden’s pardon. Bill Clinton says he’s open to discussing a pre-emptive pardon of Hillary Clinton. Massive NYT panel discussion goes off the rails. Van Jones gives the worst campaign advice ever and realizes that mainstream media has become the fringe. Trump gives a shocking answer on an issue affecting transgender Americans." HOST: Ana Kasparian (@anakasparian), Cenk Uygur (@cenkuygur) 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. All right, well, the Young Turks, Jake U Granik is sparing with you guys, live from the pod market. Okay, so we got a fun show ahead for you guys. More Hexeth news, more Trump news, of course, more news about what went wrong in the election. There was a hilarious panel that New York Times put together, interesting and hilarious.

No, that panel was amazing. I actually appreciated it. It got fiery and a lot of snippiness, but also a lot of really great points made. Interesting. So we're going to get to that in a little bit. Okay, but first I'm going to do a segment for you guys about something related to TYT. So let's do it. All right, guys, there's been some, there's been some speculation recently about,

is the Young Turks going right? Is Jank doing something crazy by going to talk to MAGA? Oh my God, are they changing their policies? Fun drama for the whole internet. Okay, gee, I wonder if we've been through this before. So I just wanted to address some things and clarify some things for you guys because I've said things on other shows that I wanted to say it here to make sure our audience sees it. First of all, are we going to turn right wing?

Brothers and sisters, we've been through this about, what, 28 times? Oh, they're going to do this, they're going to do that. And then does it ever happen? They're constant conspiracy theories like Alex Jones. Obama's going to put you in FEMA camps. Apparently we're going to put you in MAGA camps. I'm not gonna put your neck again. And look, our core audience, we talk about it all the time.

We love you guys so much because you actually care about the things we care about, not just policies, but our mission statement that we've told you about a lot of times over the last dozen years, boldly pursue the truth, challenge the establishment, and drive positive change. So that's why we have slogans like get caught trying, we've got Operation Hope, Operation Joy, all those things that we do with our audience, that we all love it as a community here. For some of the folks who are a little bit more skeptical, maybe they're more peripheral or they believed, but then they got hurt something else about us, et cetera, we'll dip back in every once in a while and go, huh, I wonder if the maga camps have been set yet, okay?

It's saying take a look at them. So it's funny because actually even some of the folks who were criticizing us, there's a panel of three people and one guy in the middle was like, I don't know, man, every time I watch them, they seem like they're really on our side. Yeah, that's because we are, the other two are like, shh. Okay, so what have I done in going to talk to me? First of all, is it true that I did go talk to a bunch of right wing shows? Yes, that's definitely true, okay?

That sin has been committed, that heresy, okay? So what was it that I asked them about? What were the conversations about? Was it had in hand and was it like the Ruben path? No guys, I get, I get why people. are concerned about that because it has happened a couple of times, right? But as I said on the PBD podcast, I don't need a Rubin sandwich, okay? I don't need any sandwich. I don't obey. I don't comply. That's the exact opposite of what we do with the young Turks. We allow all sorts

of opinions here and we sometimes fight, we have discussions, we have open hearts and open minds, okay? So we're not going down any path like that. We stick with our positions and we fight for those, but I did look for agreement. So I asked them, hey, do you guys agree with these three rules of the internet that I'm proposing. Now if you say, who are you to propose rules of the internet? Well, who's anybody? I don't know. You propose it. If people like it, then we'll do it. Okay, and if they don't, we won't. So here are the three rules that I propose, run it by you guys. So number one is when we disagree, we fight. That seems fairly simple. And I think the internet's got that one on lockdown. Number two is you must have a beer together afterwards.

That one we don't have on lockdown. I'll come back to that. Number three is when we agree, We unite, and when we unite, we are invincible, okay? So look, first, apparently is the self-appointed ambassador to Magdalene. I come back with good news. They love all three of those rules. You know, I know what some on the left think, no way, Jane, they're lying to you, you're naive, and you're a sucker, and, oh, it's not like you've been covering politics for quarter of a century. No, I, oh, golly, gee, should we cut Medicare and Social Security?

Oh, they tricked me. I'm now in favor of that. Of course not, guys. But did they respond positively to this? Yes, they definitely did. And by the way, I would hope that our side would also respond positively to this, but I'm not so sure. So I get like that, hey, I'm a little concerned about having a beer with them. But brothers and sisters, you think they're super intolerant.

And they have shown that in the past. And remember, it's a wide range. Not all of them are the same, right? But if they're saying now, yeah, we're happy to fight with you when it makes sense, agree with you when it makes sense, and have it beer afterwards, I hope our side can say the same thing, okay? We've got it at some point unite the country. But again, only on things we agree on the ones we don't, we fight.

I mean, you can't ask for fairer than that. And so far, they seem to be an overwhelming yes on them. And we'll see if that's true. And then I propose three policy agreements, too, and see if we can get an agreement on this. And I said, cut the Pentagon by at least $100 billion, hopefully more. Every show I went on, that was right, wing said definitely more, we'll see. Number two is generals and an ally take jobs with defense contractors because it is a huge conflict of interest. They funnel billions of dollars to the military industrial complex, and later they get hired for millions of dollars.

And then number three is also, I think super simple. Pardon for Edward Snowden, bring him home. He's an American hero. He revealed government wrongdoing. He's the, you know, exactly what a whistleblower is supposed to be. Okay, so how did the right wing react to that? They loved it, and they didn't love it because I proposed it, and they're like, oh my God, Jank is done the reverse instead of us tricking, he tricked.

No, they already believe those things. I know some of you on the left don't believe that they believe that, but I don't know how many times they have to say it, right, before you go, maybe, just maybe we should take yes for an answer? Not on everything, but on this. I mean, we should take yes for an answer on everything we like, right? But it's amazing to me that some folks, the host, whoever might be on the left says, no, never talk to the other side, they're all evil, they're all racist, sexes, et cetera,

shut down all conversations and that'll be great for the country. Well, I don't agree, right? And no, you should never believe anything. They say they're all again, evil, racist, sexist, they're never going to, they don't actually believe those things. No, guys, I come to you with a conclusion that they do believe those things. Now remember, a portion of MAGA voters, okay? So, but I'm again, not anywhere near naive enough to say, oh, the leaders and the politicians,

Mitch McConnell decided overnight, or the donor class of the Republican Party decided overnight. Oh, yeah, you know what, let's cut the Pentagon. And those dastardly generals, let's set rules for them, et cetera. No, I get it, guys. And then Trump had a chance to pardon Edwards done, and he didn't. By the way, so did Biden and Obama, and they didn't, right? So, but as far as the host are concerned, as far as their audiences are concerned, It is clear. They generally like those rules and then the proposals on the policies,

they're definitely in favor of. So you could say, I don't believe them and I will never believe them and I will never talk to them and I will always hate them. But is that what the left is supposed to stand for? Always hating the other side, being close minded and not ever talking to them? I hope not. That's not the left that I want to be part of. I love being part of the populist left. I love fighting for almost all the same positions as Bernie Sanders. Medicare for all paid family leave higher minimum wage you name it same exact positions as the day before the election and so and by the way we put up a populace plank on t yt.com before the election those are all things that populist left and populist

right should agree to and i said that no matter who wins that we would try to enforce that i hope you go sign that and check it out at least at t yt.com so look guys we're going to keep doing the show as we always do we actually do a news show when we do the news then we do a So come and check out the news on the online news show, The Young Turks, any day you want. And come to TYT for a diverse ray of left-wing opinions. And we have fun. We tell fun stories, but we also every once in all fight. But we don't accuse each other of bad intent.

We don't hate each other. We have a beer afterwards and we love each other. So that's what we're going to keep on doing right here. If everybody wants that, great. If they don't, it's a beautiful free country. All right. All right, much love guys. Now let's do the news. All right, I wanted to start off with some interesting discussions that have been taking place in regard to Joe Biden's decision to pardon his own son and a big move that he made recently that has broken some records.

So with that in mind, let's take it away. President Biden for months said he was not going to pardon his son Hunter. He did so on Sunday and did so with a sweeping pardon whose language tracked in modern times only with President Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon. I absolutely agree with the president's decision here. I do not agree with the way it was done. I don't agree with the timing. And I don't agree, frankly, with the attack on air judicial system. Top Biden advisor, Anita Dunn, slammed Joe Biden for how he went about pardoning his own son Hunter while speaking at the New York Times annual deal book summit, which I thought was fascinating. Now, we have more of Dunn's take, but before we get to it, the context here is important.

So this is what Joe Biden had said as he was announcing the pardon of his own son. He said, from the day I took office, I said, I would not interfere with the Justice Department's decision making. And I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively and unfairly prosecuted. There has been an effort to break Hunter, who has been five and a half year sober. even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they've tried to break me. And there's no reason to believe it will stop here.

I believe in the justice system. But as I have wrestled with this, I also believe raw politics has infected this process, and it led to a miscarriage of justice. So that's exactly what Anita Dunn is referencing. Essentially, Biden's skepticism and cynicism in regard to our institutions, particularly as it pertains to our justice system. And so with that in mind, let's hear her comments with full context. I don't speak for President Biden any longer and was not party to the conversations

that were held about this. But let me just start by saying that I do not believe, and I don't think most people believe, that Hunter Biden should go to jail. And that, you know, he had a serious addiction, that he broke the law, that he has pled guilty to that, that he has been held accountable and has actually been publicly pilloried in a way that very few people who commit these crimes have ever been pilloried. And had this pardon been done at the end of the term in the context of compassion, the way many pardons will be done, I am sure, and many commutations will be done, I think would have been a different story. So I will say, I absolutely agree with the president's decision here. I do not agree with the way it was done.

I don't agree with the timing. And I don't agree, frankly, with the attack on our judicial system. As we were in the midst of the president-elect rolling out his nominees, and in particular, in the middle of a cash-petel weekend, kind of throwing this into the middle of it, was exceptionally poor timing. And that the argument is one that I think many observers are concerned about a president who ran to restore the rule of law, who has upheld the rule of law, who has really defended

the rule of law, kind of saying, well, maybe not right now. So I want to focus specifically on her critique of Biden referencing his distrust toward our institutions and the judicial system, and how that really offends her. She has a problem with that. Well, you're the top Biden advisor. Biden ran a campaign specifically on how, how if Donald Trump wins, it will be our last election. If Donald Trump wins, our institutions will not hold. So how is it okay in doubting our institutions leading up to the election? And now all of a sudden, oh, I really take great issue with Biden referencing how our judicial

system can't be trusted, that it's now been deteriorated and politicized and all of that. I just thought that was an interesting contradiction. Yeah, all right. So first let me do any done. She's one of the like pivotal characters in the Democratic establishment. She's been an advisor slash consultant to many of these top establishment Democrats. So I know exactly what she's doing here. So number one, she's saying, oh, I totally agree with the decision of Hunter, to pardon Hunter.

So let's not lose track of that. So that's your normal, if I'm being honest, ass kissing of the Democratic leadership. Don't get me wrong if you hire me. Of course your family is beloved and I will protect them and We'll break the laws and do anything we need to protect them. But the timing was off. Oh, why was the timing and the strategy and the tactics off? Because Anita Duns's not there anymore.

She left in July. So that's a part of how you throw the new advisors under the bus while pretending to be principled. Okay. And then she says that she's worried about how it affects the judicial system, justice system, et cetera. But if you're worried about that, why would you be in favor of the pardon? And what does the timing have anything to do with whether it's against the justice system or not against the justice system? So she wants to have her cake and eat it too. She wants credit for being principled and protecting the justice system, et cetera.

But don't forget, keep hiring me, okay, because I will let you do anything you want with your family members, et cetera, et cetera. So a lot of disingenuous stuff there, in my opinion, right? And she's a very smart person. Is she? No, she is. She's very capable, right? But her, you know, intelligence goes in this direction and for those purposes. Now, look, the whole thing was funny to me in a little bit in it because for a couple of reasons.

Number one, both sides keep saying, oh, well, Trump did this wrong and Biden did this wrong. I just wanted to be the one person in the room to go, you're both right. They both did those things wrong, but nobody ever says. Yeah, that's a great point. That is a great point. And what's fascinating to me is, look, this is now another panel discussion. in which those closest to the Democratic Party, to the power players, some of them are power players themselves in the Democratic Party, they appear to have learned nothing.

There was a never Trump Republican, the publisher for the bulwark involved in this panel discussion, and she definitely despises Trump and gotten to all sorts of squabbles throughout the panel, hour and a half long panel discussion. And it's just interesting because she kept repeating that she believed Kamala Harris ran a great campaign. She was really killing it. And then immediately pivoted to all of the things that she hates about Donald Trump. But look, you can dislike Donald Trump. That's totally fine. But there needs to be a real reckoning in regard to what the Democratic Party stands for and what they are messaging to the American people during these elections, because less and less people are buying what they're selling.

In regard to Hunter Biden's pardon, I want to just give some really interesting poll results on how the American people felt about that, because according to the Associated Press and the N-O-R-C Center for Public Affairs research, they found that only about two in ten Americans. approve of President Joe Biden's decision to pardon his son Hunter after earlier promising he would not do so. Now, the poll found that about four in ten Democrats approve of the pardon, while about three in ten disapprove and about one quarter did not have an opinion or did not know enough to say. The vast majority of Republicans, obviously, and about half of independents had a negative opinion.

But look, even among Democrats, four in ten say, yeah, we know. like that. And I don't blame them because when you have someone, the president of the United States repeat over and over again, no, I'm not going to pardon my son. And then he obviously renegs on that promise. It says something about his character. And so all of this stuff about I don't trust the judicial system and all of that, I don't know if I'm personally buying it. I do think that the prosecution into Hunter Biden on the, you know, the gun charge and the taxes was overblown, and I don't think that an ordinary person would be treated similarly to how Hunter Biden was treated.

But my big issue with the pardon was the length of time in which Hunter Biden is now cleared with that blanket pardon, right? It appears that there were other things going on that he hadn't been charged with yet. And of course, this absurdity about Biden is saying that, oh, I won't pardon him. And we all knew he was going to pardon him. And the Democrats on that panel are still pretending like, oh, no, he had a last. second change of mind. No, no, he didn't. That's absurd. He was assuming they were going to win and they were going to pardon him. And if they didn't win, he was going to pardon him anyway. So,

but in a panel like that, and this gets to the second hilarious part of my opinion, they're never going to tell you that the politicians are giant liars because they almost all work for the politicians. They are almost never going to tell you that they're crooks and they take donor money and do what they do because they're all work for politicians, including, in my opinion, the media figures there, right? So they have these hilarious conversation about which new direction should the Democratic Party take when none of them are in favor of a new direction. So they didn't divide a single populist, certainly on the left wing side, right? Van Jones comes a little bit close and he talks about how we should, we kicked out all the rebels and I appreciate that

Van, nice job, right? And we'll get to that in a second. But other than that, there's no mention, There's no discussion. There's no inclusion of an actual populist. It's not on their radar, Jank. It's not even on their radar. It's not. So that's why that leads to the third hilarious thing. I mean, there's side hilarious things like Kamala Harris ran a great campaign,

which almost all the Democrats on the panel said. She lost the Donald Trump. You guys are in a different planet. Anyway, the third major one is, we're learning. We're learning. This is a moment to learn. No one to learn what. You're going to learn new scripts.

So let's give you more. All right. So I want to talk a little bit about a conversation that Bill Clinton had on the view in regard to pardons because it turns out that Clinton is interested in some preemptive pardons doled out by Joe Biden before the inauguration of Donald Trump. Let's take a look. Do you think it would be wise of President Biden to preemptively part? any potential targets?

What about your wife, Hillary Clinton? She apparently is on Cash Patel's list. I guess if Cash Patel is determined to make one up, he could do it. But I think if President Biden wanted to talk to me about that, I would talk to him about it. But I don't think I should be giving public advice on the pardon power.

I think it's too, it's a very personal thing. But if he pardons them, that sort of implies that they did something wrong, which they did. wrong, which they didn't. Well, I have a question actually about- Not necessarily. So it is fascinating that Bill Clinton is interested in, you know, potentially having a conversation with Joe Biden about preemptively pardoning his wife, Hillary Clinton.

Other names were brought up as well. Senator-elect Adam Schiff, former representative Liz Cheney, definitely don't pardon her. Former head of Nyade or, yes, the, you know, Anthony Fauci, we all know who he is. I don't know specifically what these individuals might have done wrong that they could get criminally charged for. But what I also thought was interesting, Jank, is that Adam Schiff, not buying it, he does not think that a pardon is necessary. So he rejected the notion of being preemptively pardoned prior to Trump finally taking office. That's a rare win for Adam Schiff. Yeah, agreed.

Okay, so there is no such thing as a preemptive pardon. I don't know what the hell this conversation is about. So I remember when Trump talked about potential preview, like, I don't even remember if it was Trump that brought it up or an ally of his that brought up preemptive partons when he was in office. And every one of those people on the panel at that time in Clinton and everybody else was outraged. Outrage. This is a violation of our justice system and the way things are done and it's an attack on our institutions. The minutes of the Democrats are like, oh, okay, let's have a discussion.

Yeah, I say, yeah, of course, obviously, you know. Oh, some people say maybe not, huh? What happened to an attack on our justice system? Again, we're the only ones that are actually bothered when Trump did attack the justice system, but also now when the Democrats attacked the justice system. There is no such thing as a preemptive pardon. That's nuts. Because what if you give a preemptive pardon, I guess for things that happened in the past,

but you don't know what happened in the past? What if they killed someone and you didn't know? Are we going to now give future pardons so you could commit crimes? And get away with it later? No, this is nuts. It's cuckoo for cocoa puffs. There are no preemptive pardons. I'm billion percent against it. By the way, there is no indication and no reporting indicating that Joe Biden himself is part of any of these conversations having to do with preemptive pardons, which I think is strange. Like everyone around him is having these conversations except for Joe Biden. However, final thing that I do want to mention.

That's because Joe Biden doesn't care about anyone but himself and Hunter and Jill Biden. And he might be napping. I'm just keeping it real. And he might have massive dementia. Yeah, okay, but there is something that Biden, I think, did. And that was a break a record when it comes to commuting sentences of individuals who had been convicted of crimes. And he also pardoned a lot of people. So today, Joe Biden commuted almost 1,500 sentences and pardoned 39 people. So if you're not familiar with the difference between commuting and pardoning, a pardon completely wipes.

out a conviction, while a commutation leaves the guilty verdict in place, but reduces the punishment. And so those pardoned Thursday, meaning today, had been convicted of nonviolent crimes such as drug offenses and turned their lives around. White House lawyers said, as for the commutations, those were for individuals who were actually serving sentences at home for at least one year, some prisoners were sent home because of how rapidly COVID-19 was spreading inside the prison system. And Republicans have tried to pass legislation that would make those individuals essentially return to prison. But Biden stated that individuals whose sentences were commuted had successfully reintegrated into their families and communities and have shown

that they deserve a second chance. So I'm glad that he did this because it would have been a bad look if he pardoned his own son and then did nothing about some of the individuals who were serving time for like minor drug offenses and things like that. So this is a good move. I wanted to be fair and give him credit for that. Yeah, on that note, so look, I didn't go through all 1,500 sentences that he commuted. And there might be some white collar criminals in there that got to go home during COVID because during COVID, first the rich were let out, et cetera. So, but, But having said that, overall, I think this is exactly what the pardons and commentations are supposed to be about.

It appears that they are largely people who are nonviolent offenders, you know, really simple drug charges, so nonsense like that. And he's used, and they turn their life around and I read some of their stories, some became deacons and others are, you know, helped in emergency services, et cetera, et et cetera, wonderful stories. So that's how you're supposed to do pardons. And so that batch is terrific. Guys, like we all collectively have stopped worrying about Democrat, Republican, Biden, Trump,

all that. Judge it on the merits. So those partons were great. The Hunter Biden pardon was ridiculous. And now I thought occurred to me for the first time as we were just talking about how much dementia he has. Remember when he was trying to make a decision on whether to stay in the race or not, they made it very clear in the reporting that everybody else was out of the room and the only three

people that were relevant in that decision were Joe Biden, Jill Biden, and Hunter Biden. Terrible. And it appeared, we said at the time that Jill and Hunter made the decision for him to stay in the race back when he was staying there. Because he might have problems, but we're still, you know, want to be in power, right? Terrible. So then it just occurred to me, did Hunter Biden pardon himself? Like, because his dad's got dementia. So if he's in the room and that's the only people he's listening to, all he's got to do is get Jill to agree. And next to you know, Joe Biden wanted to pardon his son. I mean, he would. have pardoned him anyway, probably, and he doesn't care about the rule of law, he doesn't care

about any of that. And they just kept saying how much, we're going to talk more about it later in the show, how much they, all the Democrats love Joe Biden. I'm like, I don't think so. I don't think that's the case at all. Here's a guy who's constantly looking out for himself an egomaniac, and no, love is not the feeling we have for Joe Biden at this time. Well, when we come back from the break, we're going to get into some of the highlights and low lights from that deal book New York Times Summit, it is definitely worth sticking around for us. So we'll get to that and more when we come back. Jenk, Anna, Art Vandalay, Melody loves music, and the Golden Number. We appreciate you guys.

And Golden Number, thank you for joining at a premium level, because that allows us to keep prices low for everyone else. So you're beautiful for doing that. Appreciate it. So join button is one way to go. TYT.com is another way to go to join Anna. Well, let's go back to the panel discussion at the New York Times deal book summit. Let's take a look. We elected the most dangerous criminal human being, corrupt human being that America has ever elected. And Kevin, you help them. Say five Trump to Range and syndrome. Yes, I get it. Sure, sure.

No one is figuring. Yeah, that's right. I think you guys, I think you guys are bad people who are bad, yes, are bad for the country. Yes, that's right. To attack the Constitution. Stop, stop. Stop. Trump.

Stop. Yeah, people. Yes, this is what they do. Because most of our people listen to this are Democrats. who are miserable, who are depressed, who cut off the news, who are talking three therapists today. When Republicans lose, we never say we have to have therapy. You just say you didn't lost. You just say you didn't lose. You're out of touch with the public. This election was a rejection of wokenness, and people,

every state went more red except Nebraska and Washington state. Things got superheated during the 2024 election panel discussion at the New York Times deal book summit, but there were a ton of important and in my opinion valuable points made during this discussion, which I definitely want to talk about here. Now, when it comes to one of the panelists, Van Jones, he made a lot of great points and we're going to go to those videos and show you those great points in just a minute. But unfortunately, he made one disastrous point. And I just want to get that out of the way because Van, what are you doing? Let's watch. The other thing, we were able to do with Kamla on the doors was Donald Trump's a little baby billionaire.

He's a little billionaire. You want to be rich. You're a young black man. You want to be an owner. You want to be an entrepreneur? You want to be a provider. Why are you following this little baby billionaire? Kamala Harris represents real billionaires. She represents California. She represents the biggest, hold on second, the biggest bunch of billionaires in the world vote for her and donate her. And so then you begin to link into the aspirations of these young men who don't like what Donald Trump says, but they like what he's been able to do with his life. That was bad. That was really bad. And if you guys caught it in the very beginning, he's referring to what they were messaging while canvassing for Kamala Harris. Don't say, don't, people don't love billionaires. Okay, that's not what is appealing about Donald Trump. Trump, that he's a billionaire, right?

What's appealing about Donald Trump is he pretends like he fights against the corruption and the billionaires. Yeah, that was the great irony of Donald Trump and Elon Musk. They're, in my opinion, oftentimes pretending to be populace while they're actually, Trump's not even a billionaire, but while they're spectacularly wealthy, right? But if you, the lesson you got out of this election is, let's highlight how much billionaires love the Democratic Party, you could not have learned. a more wrong lesson, literally impossible, the very worst lesson to learn.

Absolutely. But I want to be fair to Van Jones because throughout the entire conversation, he was actually making really great points, including what you're about to hear. So just to kind of set this up, Jones was making a point about how there is a disconnect between, you know, young voters who tend to get their information from various platforms versus older voters who usually rely on traditional legacy media outlets. And what I love about the clip you're about to watch is the pushback he gets from Alexis McGill Johnson, who is the president from Planned Parenthood. Take a look. I ask myself, I got a teenage son. I ask him, who are the most influential people in the

world today? I'm thinking to myself he's going to say Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey, Jay Z. he says, Kai sent, Aiden Ross, jinxie, and sketch. I don't know who he's talking about. I said, what platforms are you are? He goes, I'm on Twitch, kick, and rumble. I said, that sounds like you need to go to the hospital. What are these platforms? I'm telling you guys, the mainstream has become fringe,

and the fringe has become mainstream. As an organization that reaches millions of people every single day to have conversations around bodily autonomy, all on digital, right? So the idea that the Harris campaign was not on digital, that the IE's like Future Forward were not on digital and spending millions of dollars to reach those folks, to hire influencers, to bring them to the DNC, right, and have a totally different kind of reach, outreach to young folks and people of color much differently than we have seen in the past. It doesn't mean that we need to know who tank and please and, you know, all the folks

are, but they are out there and they are having those conversations. Okay, I mean, look, I completely disagree with Johnson. This like notion of like, we don't need to understand anything about the zeitgeist or where people are getting their news or information. We can just, we can spend millions of dollars to hire those online influencers to do the work for us. How did that work out for you? I just, I can't believe she said that.

But what do you think, Jane? Oh, no, that was hilarious. That was one of the funniest things that's ever happened. So first of all, I love that moment where Van Jones, you know, has an epiphany, but it's trying, mainly trying to force others into that epiphany. Guys, we think we're, you know, the central point of this country, right? And everybody cares what we think and what we say is the most important thing. But while we weren't paying attention, we became the fringe. people aren't even listening to us anymore.

They're actually listening to the guys that we think are hilarious. Like, who are these people? Like, what are they running stupid? Right? I mean, we still get that to this day. I've been, you know, we were the first partner for YouTube. We're the original YouTubers. My God, back in the day, for the last 20 years, YouTube, right?

Like anything will come out of YouTube. Well, what happened now? Now, you guys are the tiny French, and I love it. I'm here for it. Because you guys suck. But like, you support the rich and the powerful and the establishment that we all despise. That's why you were overturned. That's why people said, oh, I hate those guys.

There are a bunch of liars. Let me go listen to some other folks. And they listen to some folks that let them astray. And they listen to some folks that made sense. But now we're in an actual marketplace of ideas. And not just like the tiny guardrails that the establishment media have. Oh, you're a Republican. Do you love corporations?

Democrat love corporations, good. You don't love corporation? Get out of here, you're radical. Lefty, righty, loser. Get him out of here, that stupid populist. Okay. So and then, but my favorite was, but we hired a whole bunch of influencers. Oh my God, I know. And we had those people powered our talking points and, you know, and we had our robotic politician go out and go, I have my talking points. I am not talking to an influencer that has my talking points as well. And this is going to how we do online media. Good luck with that crap. God, we hired Harry Sisson. Are you guys still complaining? What are you complaining about? By the way, I don't know if they actually hired. We don't know. But like, you know, but we do know, even before that admission we just

heard, that they were hiring influencers. And they thought that that was the digital outreach they needed to do to get young people on board. By the way, how about you, you know, actually offer policies that would be appealing to young people, you know, get them jazzed up about showing up to vote for you. But anyway, let's, let's move on to more of the discussion. I know we're focusing a lot on Van Jones and there were approximately, let me do the count, 38 people on that panel, but Van Jones really did stand out to me. He did make a lot of good points. Here's another one. We pushed all our rebels out of this party. We had a rebellion in our party in 2016. It was called Bernie Sanders. You had a rebellion in your party in 2016. It was called Donald Trump. Your rebel

won, our rebel lost. And then since then, the rebels in our party have been pushed out. RFK was a rebel inside of our party. He wanted to run against Joe Biden fair and square. The DNC wouldn't let him. Pushed him out. You can walk down the list. Don't forget, Elon Musk was a Andrew Yang Democrat four years ago. He's out. You can walk down the list. Joe Rogan was very favorable toward Michelle Obama, he was a Bernie guy, he's out. So there's something that's happened in this party where the rebels in this party no longer feel like they have a place and we've got to be able to talk about that stuff honestly. I think he makes a really great point.

And, you know, Donald Trump for the right really is a rebellious figure, especially because he took a party that was really known for its neoconservatism and clowned on it. And I think that that brought in a lot of people who actually previously voted for Democrats, previously voted for Barack Obama, for instance. Or in the case of 2016, I know for a fact that there were individuals who voted for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary, saw what they did to Bernie Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primary, and decided to vote for the one other anti-establishment person, and that was Donald Trump. Yeah, so look, a lot of people love to beat up on a man Jones, and there's a reason for that,

because he's the only one that actually has different opinions, and he's the one that's closest to a poppice. That's why that pointed by the billionaires were so ironic, right? Totally. But when you have different opinions, sometimes you'll miss like that one, right? And I give a lot of grace to that, because then his other opinions are terrific. And he's the only one on that panel saying it. So a point about the outsiders is indisputable. And so the Democratic Party, will they learn that lesson?

Even any done in that discussion was like, oh, we've got to learn some lessons in responding to Van, et cetera. You're not going to learn any lessons. The lesson you're going to learn is, hey, let's put Pete Buttigieg in a flannel shirt. And that way, he'll seem like more of a populist. And, you know, Gavin Newsom, instead of going to French laundry, maybe we'll have him pretend to do his own laundry at home. And that way they'll be populist.

No, no, no, no, no. You're not getting it. Handing a new script to the same actors is not changed. 100%. Yes, I totally agree. That's the problem, the actors, right? The elitists within the Democratic Party that have now been associated with the Democratic Party's brand.

So when, you know, we did a story earlier this week in regard to progressives in Congress and how they're trying to get the DNC. to go back to its roots as a working class party, the Democrats go back to its roots as a working class party. You know, the problem is, isn't just the messaging. It's the policies that are promised, the policies that are promised and are never delivered. And more importantly, the various prominent figures within the Democratic Party that are just oozing elitism and disdain for working class Americans. And when I think of someone as snakeish as Gavin Newsom, I don't think, oh, a warrior for the working class, hell no. But what do we hear from the Democratic establishment in regard to who the likely candidates will be in the primary for the next election?

Right, we hear about Gavin Newsom, Josh Shapiro, I know you kind of like him, I don't. It's just more of the same. Yeah, yeah, look, Josh Spiro pick is in the context of Kamala Harris as an establishment person. Like, I didn't even consider that she would, like, that it was, like, I know Tim Walz was a possibility, but I was shocked that she picked him, right? So that's when you're forced to fish in the establishment pool. But in a 2028 primary, we're not forced to do that at all. Oh, okay, I get it. So you mean in that particular context?

Yeah, of course. Got it. If you remember, I was saying, like, hey, Biden has dementia, and it's super obvious. We're past the point where a progressive can get in and really do a real run. I said anybody, anybody, any functioning human being other than Biden, because it was in that context where it was already too late. But for 2028, it is not at all too late. We need to run as aggressively as we can a populist candidate and never accept any of those

establishment actors. But now, the main point I wanted to make about, so why would, because nobody in Washington understands this, they said, why would a Bernie Sanders supporter go and support Donald Trump? Their policies are diametrically opposed. And often they are, 80, 90 percent of time. Although 10, 20% of time, they're not, as we're seeing now, right? But mainly that's not the reason why at all. So Anna's right about a lot of things that drove people away.

So the Democratic establishment is they're a bunch of liars. And what's really grating on the nerves is that they're hypocrites, right? So they'll say, oh, we are the moral uprightist party. Okay, we protect the justices of that democracy, right? And like the Republicans stab you from the front. And when the Democrats stab you from the back, it hurts more. And he really drives people crazy. And they are elites.

I mean, I was talking to a mainstream media reported the other day. And I said, you know, look, you folks in mainstream media, you kind of, you hate the populace. And you have total disdain for us. And he couldn't really disagree, right? Like, there's, you'd be absurd to disagree. So if you hate us, I mean, we didn't leave because we care so much about the policies and we're obsessed with the policies. But if you just take normal folks and you go, I hate you, I hate you, you better get back in line and you better obey.

A lot of people are going to leave because they hate that. That is not a fun thing to deal with. But all of that even pales of comparison to, I think the number one reason why some folks did that switch. Because with the establishment, there is no hope. So you're never, they're never going to go outside the guardrails. They're never not going to do what the donors want. So if you're populace, I can see how you would get super frustrated. And go, look, maybe Trump's a bull in a china shop and maybe he's going to go the wrong

direction, 80%, 60% of the time, whatever the number is. But at least there's like a sliver of hope that we're not stuck inside this establishment prison and inside corporate rule that we despise so much. There, I just explained it to you. But of course, don't ever have someone like me on a panel. You might accidentally find out what's real. All right. When we come back from the break, we've got a lot more news to get to, including, well,

Some interesting statements from Donald Trump during an interview with Time. He's been named Times person of the year, and he was asked about how he feels about the transgender bathroom issue. His answer might shock you. We'll be right back. All right, back on TYT, Janganana with you guys. Yes, I should have communicated this with the team during the break, but I forgot to do it. Don't use the first video as a cold open. I'm going to toss to it instead, okay?

We're all on the same page? Great. All right, sorry, we're doing it live. All right. Time has named Donald Trump person of the year and conducted an interview with him as a result of that. And so during the conversation, Trump said something about policies that impact transgender Americans that might actually shock you. But before we get to it, let's just remember the ad that his camp blasted toward the end of the 2024 presidential campaign, which played a role in helping him win. Let's take a look.

Kamala supports taxpayer-funded sex changes for prisoners. Surgery. For prisoners. For prisoners. Every transgender inmate in the prison system would have access. It's hard to believe, but it's true. Even the liberal media was shocked. Kamala supports taxpayer-funded sex changes for prisoners and illegal aliens.

Every transgender inmate would have access. Kamala's for they-them. President Trump is for you. I'm Donald J. Trump. And I approve this message. So with that in mind, an interesting exchange happens with the Times staff and Donald Trump in the context of this interview. And so they ask him, hey, you know, this trans bathroom issue has now come back up, obviously because of Congresswoman Nancy Mace, making it a big deal because there is an incoming transgender lawmaker. And so here's what he had to say about that specific issue, quote, I don't want to get into

the bathroom issue because it's a very small number of people we're talking about and it's ripped apart our country. So they'll have to settle whatever the law finally agrees. I'm a big believer in the Supreme Court and I'm going to go by their rulings. And so far, I think their rulings have been rulings that people are going along with. But we're talking about a very small number of people and we're talking about it and it gets massive coverage and it's not a lot of people. So that's his way of essentially saying this isn't a big issue, let's just follow whatever the laws are. But he's obviously not demagoguing here and isn't fear mongering about transgender people using the restrooms that they identify with, which considering it's Trump,

I'm grateful that that's how he's handling it. Yeah, no, that's actually a slight note of optimism there. So, you know, they run that ad. It's unfortunately spectacularly successful according to both the Trump campaign and the Kamala Harris campaign. One of the most effective ads of our lifetime, unfortunately. They say it moved people who saw it by up to three points, which is gigantic. So you could take a lesson from that if you're on the bad side of the Republican Party. oh, we keep, you know, attacking these folks, that's to our political advantage.

So for Trump to come out and go, oh, that was just for the election, it doesn't affect that many people, let's move forward. I'll take it if he means it, right? So I would very much take it. So I'm not ready to say, oh, okay, he does mean it and they won't do anything bad. They did try to change the bathrooms in the capital already, right? Right. But the fact that, I mean, you could even call Trump hypocritical here for making such a big deal out of an election and then turning around and going, it's actually not a big deal.

It doesn't affect that many people. But as long as he's coming in a better direction, I'm happy to hear. And, you know, there were some follow-up questions. And so time asked. But on that note, there's a big fight in Congress now. The incoming trans member from Delaware, Sarah McBride, says we should all be focused on more important issues. do you agree? And Trump responds with, I do agree with that. On that, absolutely, as I was saying, it's a small number of people. And then time asks, it was a big issue, though, on the campaign.

I mean, one of the ads that your campaign put the most money behind was the Trump is for us and Harris is for they, them. Trump responds, well, it's true. Trump is for us. And time says, right, it obviously strikes a chord. And so I think that that part of the exchange really, really does touch on why that ad was as successful as it was. I think it had way less to do with the transphobic element of it. And more to do with the fact that right now most Americans feel abandoned, neglected by our political system, by their elected lawmakers, by our politicians. And so that frustration is exactly what that ad tapped into.

And Trump positioned himself as an individual who's going to look out for everybody, I'm going to look out for you. I'm for us for this country. Whereas Kamala Harris is using our finite resources on, you know, something, something tiny in his mind, something not worthwhile. Yeah. So two interesting things. On the ad, trans people just happened to be a perfectly convenient target for the others, right? In the past, it's been Muslim folks, gay folks, like black folks, obviously for hundreds of years. And so what conservatives are good at politically, and I don't agree with it, I'm saying as a matter of strategy, is circling the wagons and going, everyone on our side, we're the

us, come vote for us, right? And they're the others, they're the them, right? In this case is very easy to do because, oh, look, they look a little different. Oh, they act a little different. Oh, my God, get freaked out, right? But the core message is, were you guys and the Democrats are the other guys, right? And so you want to, and they never protect us, they never give us anything. That's why it wasn't just about the transit issue.

It was that they were getting free surgery, right? So like, why am I getting nothing? And these guys are getting free surgery when they crossed the border a minute ago, right? And same thing with the immigrants that were sent to Chicago, New York, et cetera. And in the city council meetings, they kept saying, why are they getting all this free stuff that I'm saying with my own eyes? That's exactly right. And we get nothing, right? And so that's the frustration that Trump tapped into to win.

But as he did with Hillary Clinton, you know, lock her up, lock her up in 2016. As soon as he won, he's like, you know, demagoguing, right? And I'm past it. And in the case of Hillary Clinton, he was past it. Let's hope that's true in this case as well. One final statement about this issue from Trump that was surprising. He continued to say, I mean, Trump is definitely for us, okay? and us is the vast, vast majority of people in this country.

And also, get a load of this, I want to have all people treated fairly. You know, forget about majority or not majority. I want people to be treated well and fairly. Who is this man? Yeah. And what has he done with Donald Trump? That was a shocking statement from Trump. But I like it.

I like it. More of this, please. And don't just say it. Show it. 100%. So look, guys, Trump has been. bad instincts, he has some decent instincts, like that statement right there. And he could go towards a decent instincts if he thought it would make him more popular.

So what's interesting is that there is a change of tone, even from 2016, and certainly from 2020 when he was just super angry that he lost, right? And the more angry he gets about losses, the worse he gets and, oh, let's get rid of democracy and the Constitution, et cetera, right? But now there's something, he's always listening to his base. And sometimes that leads in them in a bad direction because there are tons of his base who do hate trans folks. And if you're in that base, you say, oh, no, there's no one that's Maga that hates trans people. Come on.

Come on, brothers and sisters. I think those folks are pretty open about it. They're pretty obvious and glaring about it. But are there some folks who don't hate trans people or who are in the middle and blah, blah, blah. Of course, that's also true. But what's interesting is that he's listening to his base and what he's getting out of it is let's move on. Yeah, yeah. And I'm a little bit surprised by that because there are that, that range definitely

exist in that in that base. Well, his base is bigger. His base is bigger this time around and more diverse this time around. Before it was a lot of Christian nationalists, a lot of evangelical Christians, etc. Now the bros are a larger part of it, and the bros might have tons of issues with trans people as well. Don't get me wrong, right? Black voters, Latino voters, he even increased the number of women voting for him. Right, people voting based on the economic interest rather than, you know,

you know, culture war issues. But within that mess of a base that, and I would much rather have that mess, which is because it's more diverse than like the hardcore right wingers that we used to fight with nonstop, right? Within that diverse base, there's a decent number of people going, yeah, guy, we mainly elected you for lower prices and closed the border. So don't waste my time with the seven trans people. Let's move on, right? And if that's what he's hearing, oh, that's another piece of good, really good news. But guys, always proof is in the pudding. These are just words, let's see how he acts. They are just words. And so with that note of caution, I just want to remind everyone of something that he said in 2016 that has since been

memory hold, because if you guys can remember in 2016, the trans bathroom issue was a massive issue. I mean, the Republican Party really latched on to it for their campaigning, but they realize this messaging isn't working. People actually don't like it. And one of those people who realized it wasn't working was Donald Trump. The one thing I've always given him credit for is he tends to have his finger on the pulse in regard to where the country is at when it comes to some of these social, these culture war issues. And so again, this video is from 2016. He's on the Today Show. Take a look. Leave it the way it is right now. There have been very few problems. Leave it the way it is.

North Carolina, what they're going through with all of the business that's leaving and all of the strife. And that's on both sides. You leave it the way it is. There have been very few complaints the way it is. People go, they use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate. There has been so little trouble. And the problem with what happened in North Carolina is the strife and the economic, I mean, the economic punishment that they're taking. So I would say that's probably the best thing. I don't know. No? I really don't know. I probably do. I really don't. So if Caitlin Jenner were to walk into Trump Tower and want to use the bathroom, you would be fine with her using any bathroom she chooses.

That is correct. He said that in 2016. Yeah, but then, you know, some portions of his base took it in an uglier direction. And then so, so did he. But it appears he's coming back to that point of view right there. And again, maybe partly pushed by his base. Look, guys, I talk to trans women. And so some folks care deeply on principle about, you know, the high school sports, the professional sports.

And we have varying opinions on some of those things. And the words that are used in undocumented immigrants who are detainees who are asking for surgery, I don't know if there's a single person in that category, right? But the bathroom issue is a major issue. Because you're a woman, you look like a woman, and now you've got to go into the guy's bathroom. No, that's terrible. Terrible, right? So we, you know, if Trump is drawing the line and say, no, bathrooms are just leave it alone. Let him go to whatever bathroom they want. That would be terrific news. This is just the beginning. But the fact that he's at least saying it is some indication that he thinks that's the more popular position. Yes, exactly. So that's good.

That's the number one thing about Trump. He wants to be liked and he wants to have the popular position. And so if the popular position is to just let trans people live, let them use the bathroom that they identify with, he's going to go along with that. And by the way, he responds well to positive reinforcement. So when he does something right, positive reinforcement is a good thing. And guys, just look, if there's some right wingers independence who are unsure about the bathroom issue, look, I mentioned the example of the woman, right? But what if it's a trans man and they present as a man?

They really look like a man and then you're forcing them to go into the women's bathroom. Right. You think that's not going to freak people out? Not only the trans person, but the non-trans people. It's a disastrous idea and there's no need for it, absolutely no need for it. You're punishing people for who they are and it's ugly, don't do that, right? If you say, hey, I can't give away free surgeries, okay, I get it, it's a different conversation. But if you make them go into the wrong bathrooms, it's not whatever.

America should be. When we come back for the second hour of the show, we're going to talk a little bit about more allegations against Pete Hegseth. It just keeps getting worse for him. So that and more coming up, don't miss it. Thank you.