The Young Turks - Electile Dysfunction

Episode Date: October 6, 2023

Report claims Donald Trump shared information about nuclear subs with an Australian billionaire. The Biden administration is waiving 26 federal laws to allow border wall construction in Texas. A Republican Senator claims that Gaetz bragged to colleagues about taking erectile dysfunction meds "so he could go all night." The government reportedly blew $3.3 billion on furniture during the COVID-19 lockdowns HOSTS: Cenk Uygur (@CenkUygur) & Ana Kasparian (@AnaKasparian) SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ https://www.youtube.com/user/theyoungturks FACEBOOK: ☞ https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER: ☞ https://www.twitter.com/theyoungturks INSTAGRAM: ☞ https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK: ☞ https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕 Merch: https://shoptyt.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Woo! It's up! Welcome to the Young Turks, Jake U Granite with you guys. All right, a lot of interesting stories.

you know, usual Trump trouble, but also Biden, is he making things up in terms of the border wall? I've got a theory on that. And then, of course, the Republicans are a mess. We're not winning with the Republicans. The Republicans aren't winning with themselves. So that's the good news. All right, lots to get to. Casper, take it away.

All right. Well, just wanted to thank ABC News for breaking a story about 30 minutes before we went live. But we've got the story for you, and it has to do with Donald Trump. So Donald Trump is facing a fresh round of accusations. in regard to sensitive intelligence, sensitive information that he allegedly shared with an Australian billionaire and a member of Mar-a-Lago. So the allegations here were shared with ABC News

through a source who is familiar with the Australian billionaire and the conversations that this individual had with special counsel Jack Smith. But with that background information, let's get to the details of what ABC News is reporting here. The potential disclosure was reported to special counsel Jack Smith's team as they investigated Trump's alleged hoarding of classified documents at Mar-Lago. The sources tell ABC News.

The allegation is that Trump talked about nuclear submarines that the United States has. We don't know too many details about what he disclosed, but what we, or whether what he disclosed is actually accurate. Now the Mar-a-Lago member and Australian billionaire is Anthony Pratt, who runs a year. US-based Pratt Industries, one of the world's largest packaging companies. In fact, soon after Trump was elected, he invested about $2 billion in the manufacturing jobs for this plant. And prosecutors and FBI agents have spoken to him and interviewed him about this at least twice. Now, according to Pratt's account, as described by the sources,

Pratt told Trump he believed Australia should start buying its submarines from the United States to which an excited Trump leaning toward Pratt as if to be discreet, then told Pratt two pieces of information about U.S. submarines, the supposed exact number of nuclear warheads they routinely carry, and exactly how close they supposedly can get to a Russian submarine without being detected. Now again, Pratt allegedly told investigators that Trump shared this information with him during their meeting in April of 2021. However, he made clear that Trump did not not share any classified documents with him as he was sharing this information. Now, Pratt then went to spill the beans to a lot of people he knows.

He spoke to more than a dozen foreign officials, several of his own employees, and a handful of journalists. Sources said, another witness, one of Trump's former employees at Mar-a-Lago, told investigators that within minutes of Pratt's meeting with Trump, he heard Pratt basically relaying this information to someone else who was at Mar-a-Lago. According to the sources, the former Mar-a-Lago employee also told investigators he was bothered and shocked to hear that the former president had provided such seemingly sensitive information to a non-U.S. citizen.

In emails and conversations after meeting with Trump, Pratt described Trump's remarks to at least 45 others, including six journalists, 11 of his company's employees, 10 Australian officials, and three former Australian prime ministers, the sources told ABC News. And one other thing that was clear to me from reading this reporting was that Pratt decided to become a member of Mar-a-Lago, specifically to have some connection to Trump, some access to Trump, if you will, because he wasn't a member until Trump was inaugurated in 2017. And then, you know, Trump, of course, made manufacturing jobs part of his political platform, so he He invested $2 billion in manufacturing jobs here in the United States, which I have no problem with.

But nonetheless, he wanted that access. And what I thought was a fascinating admission by Pratt was that in recent months, according to sources, Pratt told investigators that he now supports the current U.S. government, describing himself as someone who tends to just side with the king. I mean, I really do appreciate the transparency there. Yeah, I mean, you got to give him a little bit of credit there, but he's apparently not shy about sharing. He shares that honest opinion, and then he's like, oh, I got some top secret nuclear, you know, information from Donald Trump. So I'll share it with 45 other people, including three former prime ministers. No, this is the kind of guy who can't wait to spill the beans about the hot goss. Right. Or as my daughter would say, spoiled the beans.

And so the beans have been entirely spoiled. Now look, this is an interesting case because Donald Trump has something minor to gain. Like so this guy's at Mar-a-Lago and he likes to impress his guests at Mar-a-Lago. They pay him $200,000 to join and more in annual fees, et cetera. But that's really not much. I don't think that Trump was doing this for profit. It's what, you know, I mention all the time, I'm sorry that I know it sounds gross, but it's verbal diarrhea, right?

He can't help himself. He's a little child. That's his defining characteristic, a tiny little child. It seems like he was peacocking. Yeah, right? That's what it appears. And by the way, just to give you a sense of when this meeting allegedly took place, it was several months after leaving the White House in April of 2021.

Yeah. So like, I'm worried that he took some of those documents home because he wanted to sell them. He especially the documents about how to invade Iran, Saudi Arabia would love those documents, that their top enemy is Iran. is Trump and his family is a thousand deals, etc. But we don't have evidence on that yet. Like if we were Republicans, we would have already like convicted him, impeached him, whatever, et cetera, right?

But we don't have evidence on that. If we do, that would be the worst because that's betraying national secrets on purpose for money. So in this case, he's not doing it for money. He's doing it because he's an idiot, right? And so does it make it better? Yes and no. I mean, no, you're still sharing. the nuclear secrets, it doesn't really matter too much why you can't do it, it's deeply

illegal, right? On the other hand, in terms of intent, it matters to me. Yeah, same. Yeah. So, like, if I thought he was being nefarious about it and he was trying to get money out of it, then throw him in prison for the rest of his life for sharing American nuclear secrets for money, right? But if he's just an idiot, we kind of already knew that. Now, having said that, it is definitely wrong. And if he gets away with it, then can a rando just be like, oh yeah, well, you know, I told another, I told a French businessman, the same exact thing that Donald Trump is going around telling an Australian businessman, there are no rules anymore. So this one's a little bit, I mean, normally it wouldn't be complicated at all.

The person who did this would be in massive, massive trouble, right? Well, but since this is Trump and there's already 28 things against them and the, you know, and the piece side will cry, it's like not as major as some of the other ones. Well, I want to be clear about something, right? Because this is something that special counsel, Jack Smith did in fact look into. It was reported to him. He did apparently look into this. And, you know, the special counsel's indictment against Trump makes no mention of this meeting with the Australian billionaire or the disclosures that he allegedly provided to this Australian billionaire as ABC reports. Special Counsel Smith did not include any information about

Trump's alleged April 21 conversation with Pratt in his June indictment against Trump. So I don't know if that means anything, you know, significant here. I would venture to say that it does. He probably looked into it and realized, well, you know, he probably had the same take we did, right? He was probably peacocking, trying to brag about the United States. Now, Australia is an ally of ours. In fact, under the Biden administration, the United States government signed a deal

to provide some submarines to Australia, not submarines that have the capacity. for nuclear weapons, so that's not the case. But we're talking about an ally here. It's not like Trump. There's evidence of Trump selling nuclear secrets to an enemy of ours or anything like that. But nonetheless, I mean, incredibly irresponsible and wrong. He shouldn't have done it, but. Yeah.

So, look, I don't care who he sells the nuclear secrets to, life in prison. I don't care if it's a so-called ally or not. But in this case, he's not selling them, right? He's just a moron. So, look, telling how many nukes we have on a sub-tanker. we have on a sub terrible, right? But telling how close we can get to the Russians without them knowing is way worse. Sort of a problem, yeah.

Yeah, it's a giant, giant secret to give away, right? And my God, guys, look, always show another foot, right? We do it for Republicans, we say, now remember if this was Bernie, how would we feel about it, et cetera, right? Now, Republicans, if this was Barack Obama, and he's just like giving away our secrets about our nuclear submarines to billionaires from other countries, you know, You know you would be livid, livid, okay, you would want him in prison, et cetera. Now, look, it's interesting that Jack Smith didn't go after this, and he did go after the other

secrets that Trump has. I don't know if that means he has something more. I'll say one more thing on this. Look, with the Russian interference stuff, did the Russians interfere in the election? Yes, and Mueller proved that, et cetera. But did Trump coordinate with them? No. And that's a giant difference, right?

So it's one thing if the Russians interferes. It's a totally different thing if Trump works with them, and it turns out he didn't. So that mitigates what he did. And I thought whether you work with him on the election or not, if there's documentation of the Russians paying Trump and then Trump doing favors as president for the Russians, that would be terrible. But we never found that evidence. Right.

Okay. And evidence matters. We're not Republicans. We care deeply about evidence. Okay. So in this case, there's apparently overwhelming evidence that he shared this top secret information. But it doesn't look like there's any evidence of bad intent other than. incredibly low IQ, right?

So, and trying to impress rich people. And so then you do with that information, whatever you will. Mago will think, of course, you should always give away our nuclear secrets. If you're a Republican. Right. Or if you're Trump specific. Right, exactly, right? And the Democrats will say it's the worst crime in human history.

No, Democrats won't say a damn thing, please. No, I mean, look, the clutching their pearls and their outrage, that's indicative of the reaction you would expect for Republicans, for Republicans if the shoe were on the other foot. It's just who Republicans are. They understand power and they will use anything to increase their power. And so if they can, you know, take an action of a Democrat and use it, maybe even embellish it to the point where it fear mongers and it helps them either maintain or increase their power, they're going to do it. Democrats, on the other hand, I mean, look, I don't want them to run around acting like their hair is on fire

in situations when that's not the case. I wouldn't want that. But when there are serious issues in which a former president of the United States is in possession of classified and top secret documents, that he has no business being in possession of, after he's been asked several times to just return the classified documents and he refuses to do it, after he lies to the federal government by saying that he handed over all the classified documents when he hadn't, you've got to just acknowledge the reality of the situation and understand. that this is a man who consistently loves to dig himself in a hole, and then he just lays there in waits for his supporters to pull him out and to provide cover for him. What do you value more? Do you value the country more? Do you value our national security more? Or do you value the, I don't know, the cult of personality surrounding Donald Trump?

Yeah, and doesn't it bother you that he always digs himself in a hole? And then he cries like a baby and asks you to rescue him, MAGA? Like, you know what he's going to do about this. He's going to cry. That's what he always said. That's the deep state. So you know, even if you're MAGA, you know that's totally true. What happened, okay?

Most of MAGA was, oh, no way, it's deep state. Oh, I bet Biden already gave the secrets to new Australian billionaires too, right? By the way, but if Biden had ever done that, we'd come on this show and we would criticize him for it. Of course, of course, because we're consistent. Because we're proud to be an American. Right? Like, I love the country, okay? I have no loyalty to any particular politician or political party. Let's just keep it real. So when Trump cries about this and blames other people, is it ever going to register?

Is it? Or do you not see his crying at all? He's, oh, just because I gave them the nuclear secrets. I'm the victim. Guaranteed, guaranteed, write it down in stone. Trump will say he's the victim in this. All right, well, let's switch gears a little bit because I gotta say Trump's got a little bit of a point on this next story. It has to do with the border wall and Joe Biden's, I guess, 180 on the situation. Let's talk about it. Listen to these folks in Chicago. The reality is it's got to say no because that's the simple solution is no, turn the buses around. We come in the community of black people where we already get the low scraps.

And then you want to take the little scraps, the resources that we have and put us at the bottom of the barrel. There's new work for us. There's new work for us. Voters in big blue cities like Chicago are absolutely revolting over the migrant crisis and it is likely what is persuading the Biden administration, if you ask me, to do a pretty big 180 in regard to the construction of Trump's border wall, something that Biden on the debate stage swore that he would not do, something that he swore he would end on day one of his administration. Well, turns out no, he is going to use congressionally appropriated funds

in order to continue the construction on Trump's border wall. Now, in order to do that, the federal government needs to waive quite a few laws. In fact, more than two dozen laws pertaining to the environment, and they're going to go ahead and do that. So let me give you the details on what's happening. I'll give you the details on what the Biden administration is alleging is going on. We can question whether we believe them. But in a public notice posted Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security outlined its intent to build up to 20 new miles of Trump administration era border barriers in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas, one of the busiest crossing spots for migrants attempting to enter the United States. Now, apparently,

again, this goes against what Biden said he was going to do, but there is, in fact, a giant flow of migrants coming into the country. Many of these people are now being a bus to blue cities. And for the first time, you have democratic lawmakers and democratic constituents complaining about the migrant crisis. So this is no longer a Republican versus Democrat issue. And I actually think that's a good thing, mostly because I think Congress absolutely needs to act on comprehensive immigration reform.

If one party is concerned about immigration and another party is pretending like it's not a problem at all. You're less likely to get any legislation passed through and we desperately need it. There is presently an acute and immediate need to construct physical barriers and roads in the vicinity of the border of the United States in order to prevent unlawful entries into the United States in these project areas. The notice reads. So again, this is the notice from the Department of Homeland Security. I think it's important for you to know what it's said. as you hear Biden's explanation in just a moment, it added that the administration will waive federal, state, and local laws that protect water, air, and endangered species to speed up

the construction. Now, illegal border crossings have surpassed two million for each of the last two years. The administration had halted all construction on Trump's border wall, the first day of the Biden presidency. But Biden had an interesting answer to a question that, was asked of him today. I want to go to that video and see if we are buying what he's selling. I'll answer one question on the border wall. The border wall, the money was appropriated for the border wall. I tried to get them to reappropriate to redirect that money. They didn't, they wouldn't. And in the meantime, there's nothing under the law other than they have to use the money for what was appropriate. I can't stop that. Do you believe the border wall works? No.

So he's saying that he does not believe the border wall works, but he is forced to use this money that was appropriated by Congress back in 2019, specifically to build the border wall. So what are your thoughts, Jake? Not Biden. Same thing. Okay. So they, look, unfortunately, a lot of Democratic voters are gullible on stuff like this. So they said, well, there was a law passed in 2019. That's true.

Okay, and we try to reappropriate the money. Relatively true, okay. And so now there's nothing we can do, not at all true. Okay, so they've been delaying it this whole time. They can continue delaying it. They don't have to take an executive branch action to waive all those environmental laws, et cetera, right now. They're doing it right now.

There was no, like, there's no court order, there's no date that they ran into. No, they're doing it now because the pressure from Republicans, to do something about the border. But it's not just pressure from Republicans, as Anna pointed out. It's a Hokka, New York, Pritzkron, Illinois, and Adams, the mayor of New York City, et cetera. So this pressure is mounting in there, and even fellow Democrats are saying, you gotta do something about it because it's gonna cost me, my elections, locally, et cetera. So don't insult our intelligence by pretending that you had to do it this minute.

You're doing it because of the pressure, and so you're giving in to Trump and you're building more wall. And that's pretty disastrous. Okay, now, if Biden had decided, I don't think the wall works, okay, like me personally, but let's say that Biden disagrees with me, decided that the wall does work, he's going to change his mind on it, et cetera. Okay, all right, but do that when you think it makes sense. And, you know, if when your Department of Homeland Security calls for it, which apparently they're now claiming, they called for it six months, ago, right? So, but when you do it, when it looks like appeasement of Republicans, oh, that's a disaster, because then you look super weak. And appeasement of Republicans

never works. They always want more. They never, ever give you credit. And of course, immediately afterwards, every Republican, including Donald Trump, went, ha, ha. Look, I honestly don't think he's doing it to appease Republicans at all. I think he's doing it because of the pure rage that typical Democratic voters are feeling in these cities that are honestly dealing with a massive influx of migrants and they don't have anywhere to shelter them. There aren't jobs for them. It is a big problem. So no, you're right about that. But then I make two points about that. One is, okay, well, Biden, what do you think works in stopping the flow of undocumented immigrants? So do you think it's the wall or do you think

it's something else? Because everybody thinks you should stop the flow of undocumented immigrants. It's not, I mean, I hope Democrats don't think like, oh, it's okay, we shouldn't have a border. I mean, some radical folks said that in like 2020 campaign, but Biden wasn't among them. I'm not among them. So then why don't you do the thing that you think will actually work? Yes. So that there'll be less undocumented immigrants and there'll be less rage here. Can I just? And then I have a second point in a second. But go ahead. No, I actually think at least the portion of the left that I've heard on this issue has some real immediate solutions, although I do believe that there needs to be real comprehensive immigration reform.

However, the majority of migrants who are coming to the border right now are Venezuelans. Okay, there are also Cubans coming to the border looking to come in. Lift the sanctions, okay? The sanctions are crushing people in Venezuela. So improve the conditions in those countries so these people don't feel forced to flee for economic opportunities. And I really do think that's the case with Venezuela and Cuba. And by the way, the Cuba and the Venezuelans have extra privileges in being able to come in. And partly because the Republicans wanted it. So let's make up our minds. Do we want them or don't we want

them? So it look, guys, it's, as with every issue, this is a complicated issue. Because of course, you want to approach it from a place of empathy. You want to, it's a humanitarian crisis. This is not a small thing, but it's also very complex, right? So I didn't know this until today. I've been, you know, looking into, you know, all the various players behind the scenes who are in Biden's ear. Apparently, a group of CEOs represented by the Chamber of Commerce had sent a letter to Biden earlier this year, urging him to fast track the workers visas, okay? Or the, yeah, the temporary worker visas for the migrants. Oh, I know why. Okay, so behind the scenes, and this isn't being talked about enough, I think Lee Fong is the only person, only reporter I've heard cover this or talk about this.

There is this tension between labor groups and the Chamber of Commerce because the Chamber of Commerce and the businesses it represents hates the fact that workers for the first time in a long time have some leverage due to the tight labor market. Yeah, so look, I'm in a couple of different circles, politics, media, but also business. So in the business articles that I read, there's nonstop talk of, oh, I hope unemployment goes up. Why? What, like, it seems weirdly cruel, right? Now, they are thinking they have to keep their labor costs lower and they're getting punished in the markets because of it in their mind. And so when there is low unemployment, the labor market is tighter and it drives up wages, right? So since they can't help the fact that the unemployment situation is actually fantastic for the rest of us,

they're trying to bring in cheaper undocumented immigrants so that they can lower their labor costs, right? Or documented. In this case, it would be documented. And documented is better for them because then they don't have to worry about anything going wrong in the event as well. And so they're they're fleeing socialism, perfect, right? So they're going to bring in cheap labor. And that's why the Chamber of Commerce wants it. Yes.

So, and that's what's driving a lot of this. But no, but does, does Biden out the Chamber of Commerce? No way, because he also takes money from those corporate interests. By the way, does Donald Trump out Chamber of Commerce? No way. No, but by the way, at the same time, further complicating the matter, you have the governor of New York, Hockel, demanding that Biden fast-tracked the worker visas, specifically because of the fact that, you know, in New York City right now,

they're really struggling with the lack of resources, and they want to get these migrants independent, able to earn on their own so they're not relying so heavily on the social safety net in that state. And so I understand that perspective as well. But look, at the root of this, in my opinion, is the lack of comprehensive immigration reform, which would allocate the necessary funding for more immigration judges to just deal with a massive backlog of individuals seeking asylum. And also on top of that, there's just this need to basically do away with these sanctions that might be desired by people who are super salty about what happened with the Cuban revolution or super salty about, you know, socialism and Venezuela. But listen, improve the

conditions in those countries, which creates an incentive for people to remain in their countries. It makes more sense. 100%. But our politicians, which is not that fast, that forwarding. Okay, last points here, look, guys, I hate to say I told you, but when Greg Abbott started busing immigrants to Democratic cities, I said that's a really good idea on his part, because it's going to spread the pain to the blue states, and they're going to feel the pain, and then they're going to react. And that's exactly what happened, okay? I wish I wasn't right about that, but that, you know, you can go back to the very first day when I made that comment,

because to me, this was fairly obvious. And by the way, not fair, as I've said all along to the border states that they should deal with all the pain without anybody else chipping in. And finally, look, no matter what you think is the right approach for immigration, Biden caving in, and all the Democrats, not just Biden, caving in and building more wall as if that'll work. Oh, it's terrible optics, terrible politics. From here on out, every Republican will say for eternity, we told you the walls work. Trump was right in building a wall. You guys all complained for no reason at all.

Ha ha. So it is incredible weakness on the part of the Democrats to go in this direction. Absolutely. All right. Well, we got to take a quick break. When we come back, we'll get into the ongoing GOP war. Man, the Republican Party is not happy with Matt Gates. And they're planning on retaliating. Some already have. That and more coming up. All right on TYT, Changana with you guys, we got more news. Let's get to it. This is a guy that didn't have, that the media didn't give a time of day to after he was accused of sleeping with an underage girl. There's a reason why no one in the conference came and defended him because we had all seen the video.

He was showing on the House floor that all of us had walked away of the girls that he had slept with. Republican Senator Mark Wayne Mullen laid the smackdown on House Republican Matt Gates following his successful ouster of Kevin McCarthy from his leadership role. But if you think you've seen a lot, just stick around because you ain't seen nothing yet. He's about to get vicious. He'd brag about how he would crush ED medicine and chase it with an energy drink so he could go all night. This is obviously before you got married. And so when that accusation came out, no one defended him, and then no one on the media would give him a time of the day. All of a sudden he found fame because he opposed the Speaker of the House back in November, and he's always stayed there.

And he was never going to leave until he got this last moment of fame by going after a motion to vacate. The knives are definitely out, considering the fact that Matt Gates has kind of led to this chaotic, debacle within the Republican Party, certainly in the House of Representatives, following his successful ouster of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Now, if you think that Mullen going after Matt Gates is unique or novel, you'd be wrong because it's very clear to me that most members of the Republican Party are pretty furious with him and the others who decided to vote to kick McCarthy out of that leadership role. In fact, Gates did respond to the allegations by Mullins by saying, I don't think Mark Wayne Mullen and I have said 20 words to each other on the House floor.

This is a lie from someone who doesn't know me and who is coping with the death of the political career of his friend, Kevin, thoughts and prayers. But overall, the infighting in the Republican Party is very much real. There's this war playing out within the Republican Party, much of the ire is directed toward Matt Gates. But there are others who are dealing with that ire, including Mace, Congresswoman Mace, which I'll get to in just a moment. But, Jank, thoughts on a young man like Matt Gates needing to crush, you know, erectile dysfunction medication. Yeah. I mean, look, she's got to work out that stress. It might be psychological.

Okay, look, honestly, I don't care about that part. It's the most interesting part of the story. Yeah, okay, all right, fair. Look, everybody's got different issues. I'm not gonna judge other guys' issues, okay? So it is what it is, and it doesn't, anyway, I'm not gonna get into details. Why are you so uncomfortable with this? Look at him.

Because like, what am I gonna talk about his issues with, hey, you can't get the, come on. I mean, he apparently likes to talk about it. Apparently all over Congress, but anyways. So work on, I agree with your therapist, probably Matt. Matt, anyways, so, and by the way, if the girl, if one of the girls wasn't underage, I wouldn't care about that story at all. I couldn't care less about Matt Gates's dating life. I think all that stuff is irrelevant, right?

So now, but you could tell how livid the Republicans are because they're giving them the Democrat treatment. I mean, they're treating him like a Democrat. They're going all the way against them, right? They're treating him like they treated Madison Cothorn after he claimed that a bunch of, like, Republican lawmakers engage in like cocaine filled orgy parties. Yeah, when you touch their power or their issues, then they're gonna get super mad, right? But I'll tell you, I'm a tiny bit conflicted about this.

And so because I think that there should be a rebellion against the Uniparty. The problem is the right wing's doing it so it's so nonsensical, like and they all have a terrible messaging problem. And Nancy Mason is supposed to be theoretically moderate. Matt Gates is radical right. Ken Buck can't make up his mind. So this group, motley group of eight Republicans are a really weird group. And they don't have a unified message.

Like if they have something to defend themselves, other than, we didn't like McCarthy. We wanted to do grassroots fundraising, right? If you have something better than that, you should all say it, you should say it together. You should say it clearly, the only good thing that I've heard is Matt Gates saying that he wants single subject votes, which is totally fine. That's probably what they should stick with. So I like the rebellion. I just didn't like that it was for no goddamn reason. Well, okay, so it's really interesting that you say that because I hear you, Jank.

I'm a little conflicted myself. On one hand, I am very aware that everything that Matt Gates is engaging in is really out of self-interest, possibly a personal grudge against McCarthy. I mean, look, they agree on everything pretty much. However, there was a moment on the House floor prior to the vote to get rid of McCarthy from the speakership role, where Gates touched on something that you care deeply about. And I feel like this video might push you over the edge to Gates aside. Yeah, let's take a look. And when it comes to how those raise money, I take no lecture on asking Patriotic America.

to weigh in and contribute to this fight from those who would grovel and bend knee for the lobbyists and special interests, who own our leadership, who have, oh, boo all you want, who have hollowed out this town and have borrowed against the future of our future generations. I'll be happy to fund my political operation through the work of hardworking Americans, $10 and $20 and $30 at a time. And you all keep showing up at the lobbyist fundraisers and see how that goes for you. Yeah. That was satisfying. No, no, no. I give them all the credit in the world for that. I actually saw that headline, I think you had a chance to watch that video.

I'm so glad you played it there, Anna, because the headline made it seem like you, ha ha, Matt Gates is so wrong. He even got booed by his fellow Republicans. No, that's a very rare time that Matt Gates is 100% right. Like yeah, he's doing shenanigans to get grassroots fundraising and he's going over the top. I understand that. But yes, it's definitely infinitely better than all those guys who totally work for corporate lobbyists. And he's having the courage to at least say it. By the way, progressives, that's kind of embarrassing.

It is. That he's saying it more than you guys are saying it. I got to say, you're right about that. You're right about that. Look, I just feel that the progressive wing, like the genuine progressive wing of the Democratic Party has now acquiesced to the demands of the corporate Democrats. They're united. And I think that in their minds, appearing united is much more important than holding members of your own party accountable for bad behavior, including corruption.

And I just, I disagree with them on that. I fundamentally disagree with them on that, which is why they don't ever call out the corruption. The fact that Matt Gates called out the corruption in that aggressive way, and you haven't seen a progressive Democrat do it, you're right, it is infuriating. And Anna, now that you played that video, oh, no, that's why they were talking about his erectile dysfunction, what pills or whatever. 100%. No, no, no, no. That's definitely part of it.

Yeah, this thing got personal not because they love McCarthy so much. They couldn't care less. McCarthy, Jim Jordan, they're all disposable. They're all going to do exactly what corporate interests want. It doesn't really matter at all. No, they caught feelings because Matt Gates got in their grill about how corrupt they are. Yeah, well, let me get it. And by the way, mainstream media.

So far, I mean, like I said, all I saw was one misleading. Stop. Do you know how fast you were going? I'm going to have to write you a ticket to my new movie, The Naked Gun. Liam Neeson. Buy your tickets now. I get a free Tilly dog. Tilly dog, not included. The naked gun. Tickets on sale now. August 1st. Headline, but where are you guys out? That's actually a decent point about Matt Gates. Is anybody ever going to be fair? I mean, we can't stand Matt Gates. We had a giant shouting match with Matt Gates, but we're fair. No, I mean, look, when he's right about an issue, we're going to give him credit. when he's wrong about issues, which he is on a lot of issues, we're going to critique him on that.

Now, I want to give you another piece of information in regard to Matt Gates, because now that they're thinking about replacing McCarthy with either Jim Jordan or Steve Scalise, seems like Jim Jordan is the fan fave in the Republican Party for that role. But nonetheless, whoever it ends up being, the real question is, will they do away with that motion to vacate that only requires a single member of Congress, a single Republican in this case, to file that motion. Well, Matt Gate says that he's open to doing away with it, but he has some conditions. So in a tweet, he says, okay, let's negotiate. My GOP colleagues want to raise the threshold on the motion to vacate.

This is a question for all of them. If we enact the reforms Representative Roe-Kana lays out here, how high would you like the MTV? threshold to be, because I'll basically give you whatever you want on the motion to vacate for this stuff, right? And then he lists, I'm amazed, policies that Representative Rokano wants, a Democrat, a progressive Democrat, ban on congressional stock trading, 12-year term limit for Congress, ban on political donations from lobbyists or PACs. I love all three of those bullet points. He's alleging that he wants to accomplish all three of those bullet points. And I hope that he sticks to what he's demanding in regard to the concessions.

And if he manages to accomplish that, he deserves a world of credit. Now, I'm skeptical that he'll be able to accomplish that. But who knows? No, look, so I actually talked to Rocana about this on Friday last week. And because I'm like, wait, it looks like Matt Gates's bill and Rocana's bill are pretty similar, really, really similar, right? And Rochana acknowledges that. So if the Democrats were actually honest and they actually believed, remember they had HR 1 a while back? That was the voting rights bill, but that had a bunch of anti-corruption measures.

And they said it's the highest priority. That's why we made it, HR 1, right? And I told you guys, they don't mean a word of it. They're not going to pass that thing, okay? And of course, they didn't. They dumped it right in the beginning of Biden's term. But if they were, if they meant it, it turns out Matt Gates can bring you the Freedom Caucus. And with the Freedom Caucus, the Democrats could pass a bill that would ban stock trading,

12-year limits, or even better ban on political donations from lobbyists or PACs. The two sides, you know, the extreme right here agrees with us. Are the Democrats going to take yes for an answer? No way, because they don't actually believe it. The Unip Party hates the talk of corruption. They don't actually want to do anything about it. They love the actual corruption and the money that they get from it. But Rokana and AO, and by the way, AOC did meet Matt Gates on this and did say some positive things when Gates introduced it initially.

So fair is fair. Don't care about the personalities. This is not a popularity contest. You introduce a terrible bill. We tell you it's awful and all the reasons why it's you introduce a good bill. I don't care who you are. Yes, ban the goddamn corporate bag money. Yeah, I like when you say take yes for an answer.

And in this case, I mean, if the actual progressive Democrats were smart, they would find a way to scheme with Matt Gates on this issue. We'll see if it happens. I wouldn't hold my breath, but I don't know, I feel a little bit optimistic that there's someone on the other side of the aisle who, I mean, whether he really believes it or not, he has been pushing these issues for a while now. Yeah, and look, I'm going to take one piece of credit here. So adjusts Democrats, I came up with a rule, no corporate PAC money allowed. when we set up the organization in the first place. And all the just Democrats in Congress now don't take corporate pack money. And it makes a big difference.

Roe-Connor is a Justice Democrat. And Matt Gates recently decided not to take corporate pack money. And all of a sudden, he's against corruption. And he's like the only guy on the Republican side. Maybe he could piece together a couple other guys from the freedom cards. But whoever doesn't take corporate pack money, all of a sudden is free. They're liberated to talk about the corruption that's destroying our country. So that's the right answer. When we come back from the break, we'll talk a little bit

about just how much money federal agencies wasted on furniture for various federal offices during the coronavirus pandemic. It'll blow your mind. Come right back. Hi, back on TYT, Cenk Anna Catlin's and Uniting America. Look, Uniting America has become a member, so it's over. We're getting united. Proud to be an American. I always get the lyrics wrong, where at least I can be free. Be free.

Right, that's right. Yeah, yeah, I thought there was a line about fighting for rice, but then found out it was for rights. It's a long story. Okay, and that might. It's like, man, this news is really in the rice. I like rice. All right, let's get this. Anyway, sorry, sorry, Cat in the United America, and they hit the join button below.

Who? Cat linens. Okay, you just totally mumbled that. Okay, sorry. Okay, sorry. And William Zarago was a gift of the membership. You guys are awesome, thanks guys. All right, Cass.

All right, let's talk about why people think. especially libertarians, that taxation is theft. It's when stories like this come out. Okay, so turns out that the federal government engages in quite a bit of waste, and that certainly happened during the coronavirus pandemic when federal agencies spent a whopping $3.3 billion on office furniture. Now keep in mind, this is during a time when everyone's working remotely, so I don't really understand the need to spend all this money on fancy office furniture,

And by the way, like, you go into public schools, right? You go to any other government building that serves the public. And it's a mess. But then when it comes to like these government agencies, like, do you really need to spend $11,000 on an Ethan Allen leather couch or recliner? Anyway, let me give you the details. Let's break it down. So multiple departments spent millions of dollars on furniture, I should say billions, total, 3.3 billion. Watchdog Open thebook.com revealed the massive fine.

So let's take a look at this chart because it'll give you an idea of which federal agencies we're talking about. This is between 2020 and 2022. Of course, the Department of Defense is at the very, very top of that list. They spent over $1.23 billion dollars, billion dollars. Guys, I'm saying they're just stealing from us. It's just robbery. So really there was $1.2 billion worth of couches, you guys?

bought my ass. I bet you every couch they bought cost like a two and a half million dollars. Because they're just taking it and giving the defense contracts, they put it in the goddamn pocket, and then they dole it out to the generals once they retire and make them contributors and board members and de facto lobbyists. No, it's highway robbery. Show me the goddamn furniture. Show me the furniture. Well, I'm going to. I'm going to. And as someone who really enjoys interior design. Not a fan. Not a fan. You're spending too much money on ugly, gaudy furniture. What are you guys doing? Anyway, but you know, we all know how the allocation for the Defense Department works. Not all of it goes to defense contractors. Some portion of

it goes to the Department of Defense for other reasons, right? Including, I guess, furnishing their offices, but really to the tune of $1.23 billion over two years, that's insane. But let me give you more. So there's the Department of Veterans Affairs over 400, nearly $428 million on furniture during the coronavirus pandemic. Department of Justice, $408 million, general services administration, $307 million. The list goes on and on. It all adds up to $3.3 billion, okay? And that's just for furniture.

Now, let's talk about what kind of furniture was purchased because there are some pretty egregious examples that make me want to pull my hair out. because quite honestly, some of these examples are more expensive than like buying a condo townhouse, you know, in like a big city. So for instance, $237,960 on solar powered picnic tables for the CDC. So can someone please explain to me why a picnic table needs to be powered in anyway. I've come across a picnic table or two in my day, right? They're not powered by anything. Look, I'm all for solar power, but once you put the, come on guys, once you put like the tablecloth, doesn't that cover the solar panel? Come on, guys. And are we eating on top of the

solar panel or is the solar panel at the bottom of the picnic table, which doesn't make much sense. Are we riding the picnic table? Is it going to take us somewhere? Are we living inside the picnic table? Because that's a lot of money for a picnic table. I get a load of this, 120. $20,000 for luxurious Ethan Allen leather recliners for the US embassy in Islamabad. Okay, look, I'll tell you what that is. That's max $2,000 for recliners in Islamabad and $118,000 in someone's pocket. 100% guarantee. Yes, they're inflating the cost.

In Islamabad, you spent $120,000. How many recliners did you buy in Islamabad? Keep it real. You'd have to buy like a million recliners to get to $120,000 in the middle of Pakistan. It said, this is just spitting in our face. There's just, look, I'm not Vivek Ramoswamy, okay? I don't want to do away with 75% of government workers in the federal government. I think that's ridiculous.

I believe that a lot of these federal agencies need to exist. I also agree that there's a little too much bureaucracy. too much bureaucracy and too many positions that don't really need to be positions in the federal government, okay? I do think there's a lot of waste. I do think that we pay for a lot of salaries we don't need to be paying for. I do think that we're just allocating way too much money for nonsense, like fancy furniture for federal agencies that, you know, clearly it doesn't cost that much money and someone's patting their pockets. I'll give you another example, $250,000 for high end. I don't even know what this is, Herman Miller furniture for

For the defense advanced research agency? Why do you need brand name furniture? I've never heard of Herman Miller. I've never sat on him. I don't need to sit on him for $250,000. I can buy a house for $200,000. I can buy a really nice house in a lot of parts of this country for $250,000 instead of a Herman Miller couch, whatever that is.

Guys, look, I don't know if the Islamabad thing is a slush fund almost certainly. Like maybe the CIA is using it, I don't know. numbers are ridiculous. And so if you're right when you're right now, you're confused, you're like, wait, you guys are libs. I thought you guys wanted to just tax and spend and you just wanted to spend all the money that we got from taxes. No, brothers and sisters. We want to spend the money if it's going to help your kids to go to college so they got a shot to have the same opportunity that rich kids have. We want to spend the money so you have health care so you're, you don't die in the streets. Yes. We don't want to spend it on recliners in Islam

And we don't want to waste the defense, like $400 million every year that a defense budget waste. And we all know it. We all know they're robbing us blind. By the way, this really helps to explain why the Pentagon has failed every single consecutive audit that they've faced in recent years. Of course. They've never passed a single audit. That place should be renamed like the department of thievery, because all they do is steal from the American people. Yeah. Anyway, all right, let's end the first hour a little early. When we come back, there was a fascinating study on universal basic income in the city of Denver. I want to give you the results, which appear promising. There are a few caveats, but nonetheless, interesting

experiment here. Can't wait to share that and more when we come back. Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work, listen to ad-free, access members-only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts at apple.com slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.