The Young Turks - Fasc & Furious

Episode Date: October 30, 2024

Trump’s shock comic was reportedly set to call Harris a crude slur. Geraldo Rivera erupted at a Trump MSG rally, exclaiming, “F*** these racists!” after a MAGA speaker insulted Hispanic voters. The Freedom Caucus leader endorsed a radical proposal for North Carolina to give its electoral votes to Trump. Girdusky took a jab at Mehdi Hasan, saying, “I hope your beeper doesn’t go off.” The Wall Street Journal found that Musk is manipulating X’s algorithm to favor Trump." 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. Hi, well, I'm the Young Turks. Jane Huguer Anna Kasparian, live from the Polymarket studio here. The most honest show, news show in America, here we are. Look, guys, I'm so frustrated about this election. We got, of course, tons of election news for you guys and news overall.

as well with all the things that are going right and wrong in our country. Not a lot of right. But, you know, as I just said on Twitter, or whatever you call that thing, if the Republicans could just put up a candidate who didn't hate everyone else, they'd win in a landslide. If the Democrats put up a candidate that didn't love the establishment so much, they'd win in a landslide. Or thought for herself, had conviction about anything.

And, you know, I realize this is, I'm starting so random. Okay, but I want to. Tim Walls went on AOC's Twitch channel and they played Madden over the weekend. That'll get the men. Yeah, it doesn't, whatever they're trying to do. No, but I realize just now, as I was coming in, that's why I'm saying this. Oh, they did that because they're trying to get progressive voters, but they don't want to go on any progressive shows because they think progressive shows don't agree with them 200%. So that's like, oh, no, no, don't, don't, this is super scary.

super scary don't go on any show that want massively kiss your ass so like oh aOC's a progressive and she'll kiss her ass so since she's a good team player Democrat she'll say nothing but positive things there'll be nothing interesting that said let's go on there so okay enjoy enjoy go on Harry Sisson's show or whatever and he's been paid plenty I suppose by you guys and everyone on that show will you know what vote for Kamala Harris 10 times over so enjoy that meanwhile we're going to to lose the election because they cannot find a way to reach undecided voters. How many days in a row am I going to read comments from you guys saying you voted for a

third party, you voted for someone else, et cetera, because Kamala Harris never made the case to you guys. So, okay, a bunch of idiots, you know, so if they win, it's only because of one reason, and that is a giant cavalry of woman who showed up to save her ass. So that's the only hope they have. All right, Anna. Well, I wanted to do an update on a story that we covered yesterday. It had to do with the controversial comedians set during a Trump rally at Madison Square Gardens. Some additional details broke after we had aired that story. So let's get into it. It would behoove him to hire a few great comics to just tour with them and just write one-liners about all these different people. I mean, if he could remember them. I mean, I know he likes to go

off his own head. But if he could remember a few Hinchcliff bangers, if he hires Hinchcliff to take him on the room? It's fucking insane that would be. Yeah, dude. Hinchcliff riding bangers for Trump. Trump was smart. He would hire Shane and Tony Hinchcliff.

Woody. Woody. Now, back in August, Joe Rogan of all people had suggested and recommended that the Trump campaign hire comedian Tony Hinchcliff in order to put out some. bangers about Trump's political opponents. Fast forward to several months later, he's a headliner over at the Trump rally at Madison Square Garden. And of course, that led to a lot of controversy because of what he said about Puerto Ricans and other groups as part of his set. So I want to just note that while it's unlikely that Trump was listening to that and took Joe Rogan's

advice. It's also true, and it's also been reported, that Trump has been getting advice from his son Barron in regard to his podcasting strategy. So his son very likely is listening to Rogan, and maybe his son gave that recommendation to his father. Now, I also want to talk a little bit about whether the jokes were vetted ahead of time. There was a lack of clarity on that, but now we do have a little bit of clarity. So before we get to that, Jank, any thoughts? Yeah, so this guy's famous for being a roast comic. You know, roast comics are interesting and I'm not gonna sit here and evaluate of whether they do the roast right or not.

But is this the time for a roast comic a week before the election? You knuckleheads, you idiots, thank God you're so stupid. Like, so the Trump team is gonna bring this guy on, know that he is going to say the most offensive things, but that's literally his routine. That is his routine. Yeah, so this is exactly the problem with the Democratic and Republican Party. Democratic Party will take no chances. They'll run the most insipid campaign you have ever seen to barely reaching any undecided voters. Snews fests. Yeah, total snooze fest, barely doing any

interviews, can barely do anything outside of talking boys. And the Republicans on the other end of the spectrum are madmen. And there is something everyone, a week with all, the Puerto Ricas are garbage. The black people eat watermelons. The Muslims are terrorists at two years old. We hate you all. Are you guys nuts? What are you doing? So him being a comic is not the issue. His jokes are in that context is not the issue. Bringing them into this context was Trump's team's decision. Yeah.

And they did that because they think it's funny to make fun of other people. Well, they might find out soon that it's not so funny. So Trump is now, like he's released the statement. He is totally distancing himself from Tony Hinchcliffe. So, you know, there is an admission of, hey, this was a bad decision. But I also want to just note, I totally didn't. recognize Tony Hinchcliffe because I watched the Tom Brady roast and he was one of the comedians who participated in that and he was pretty funny.

But in that context, it was a roast of Tom Brady, in that context it made a lot of sense. You knew what you were expecting. As someone who's, you know, one of the big acts as a Trump rally during at Madison Square Garden, you know, obviously you run the risk of offending people and that's exactly what happened. Okay, so. I'm just sorry, Anna, I'm gonna jump in one thing. So I didn't see that roast and I don't know this brother and John Stewart speaks well of him.

So that carries a lot of weight with me. But having said that, I didn't see any jokes about white people. Like he just joke after, and I've now watched a couple of his sets. I don't know all of his sets and you guys will send me material over he wants it in in 1987. But like he can find funny things about hating Muslims, Jews, black people, Puerto Ricans, Asians, etc. All the, I'm so, white people at a MAGA rally, wait, are you, who are you roasting at a MAGA rally? Why don't you roast MAGA? You didn't want to do that, right?

Okay, let's, well, Mr. Brave comic, so let's just be clear about who this guy is. Anyway, keep going on. So the bulwark has some new reporting about whether the Trump campaign vetted his set ahead of time. And there is some indication that that did happen. So according to the bullwork, he had a joke calling Vice President Kamala Harris a C-word, a campaign insider involved in the discussions about the event told the bulwark. Let's say it was a red flag. So they had that red flag. They apparently took that part of his act out. And then what's somewhat surprising is that joke was actually seen as a red flag. And they didn't really see any of the other jokes as a red flag at all. The America's Super PAC Finance by Bill.

Elon Musk recently also released a web ad that repeatedly calls Kamala Harris, the C-word. Only later does it say that she's a communist. And during a podcast appearance just hours before the Madison Square Garden rally, vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance repeatedly mocked Harris's laugh, calling it very fraudulent and so off-putting. I should note that the America Super PAC took that ad down. I think they realized, oh, maybe this isn't a good way of handling the situation or putting a political ad out that kind of implies that Kamala Harris is being called the other C word, not communist. But I just wanted to make a quick note about that.

Regardless, though, it does seem like Hinchcliff's jokes were looked at ahead of time. And some people in the campaign apparently felt that it wasn't that big of a deal. Campaign staffers had asked all speakers to submit drafts of their speeches ahead of time before. they were loaded into the teleprompter, according to the aforementioned sources. Once the objectionable C word joke was spotted, the sources said a staffer asked Hinchcliff to strike it, he complied. But here's an interesting component to all of this. Allegedly, those sources also insisted that they did not spot the other objectionable lines in Hinchcliff's speech prior to him delivering it because they were ad-lived. So,

They claim that not all of the jokes were in his script. answer. Now, let me make an educated yes as to what happened here. If their theory is, they say, well, no, no, no, we told this guy take those jokes out, but he ad-libbed them. Well, then why did he agree to take the C-word joke out? Because you told him to take that out, and he did. So did he ad-lib or didn't he ad-lib? Did you guys edit it? My guess is you added it and you thought, oh, C-word's a little too much. But go ahead, make fun of the Puerto Ricans. It'll be really funny. By the way, maybe his other stuff is good, but that joke about Puerto Rico was the worst

joke I've ever heard. It seems like there's widespread agreement on that other than Trump supporters who, in my opinion, are so worried that this is going to hurt Trump electorally, that they're pretending like it's not a big deal, and they're getting mad at anyone who thinks it's a big deal. But there are Puerto Ricans who support Donald Trump, and they were offended by it. They've been giving interviews in the press. And it seems that Trump realizes that this could actually hurt him, and this was about that idea. And so he's distancing himself from Hinchcliff and saying, I don't even know who this guy is.

You know, somebody put him in the lineup. Yeah, no, I get you don't know who he is. That's not the question. The question is, do you run a campaign where the staffers would look at it and go, oh, calling Puerto Ricans piece of garbage? Yeah, so funny. I love that. Our crowd, I love that and put that guy in. The Democrats would never do that. I mean, as I told you, they're like air on the other side. they're too boring, right? But they're not going to send people out there to make jokes about like, don't white males suck.

Ha ha, ha, the people of Alabama and Mississippi are garbage. They would never do that, never, right? The Republicans do that and they go, oops, oh, we did it again. Yeah, look, if you're asking which party's more hateful, is this, are you really being, are you being serious? The party that wanted to, Trump said ban all Muslims, Trump said al-thouser criminals, rapists, et cetera, he said every hateful thing. And then every excuse I get from all the conservatives I debate is, well, you shouldn't believe him.

He's a clown. He exaggerates. He does hyperbole. You shouldn't believe a word he says. Then why are you voting for him if you don't believe a word he says? I believe him. I believe that he doesn't like those people. That's why he staffed his campaign with tons of people who don't like anyone in any other ethnic group.

And that's why this happened. So now, let's talk about Elon Musk for a second. Apparently that guy's a moron. So you ran an ad where you're implying that she's the other C word. How stupid are you? You don't think that might, like, the number one liability that Donald Trump's team has is not even a hateful rhetoric. It's that tons of unlikely voters who are women are going to come out because of abortion

and how much they can't stand Donald Trump. So you think it's a good idea to imply that she's this other C word? That's the genius of Elon Musk group. What's wrong with you, idiots? Like if I was a Republican, I'd be ten times angrier at them. And so, and then, okay, oh no, it's, they mean communists. Really? Like, I'd love to ask Elon, really, you think Kamala Harris is a communist?

Communists want to take away all private property. Kamala Harris. She's funded by billionaires. Like you, Elon. Like you. Okay, like I don't, how, do billionaires fund communists? Come on, please, please. Please, I'm asking if people have just this much sense and an education about

politics. Communists don't believe in private property. Corporations are the exact opposite. They are giant private enterprises. That is who almost all established from politicians serve, including Kamala Harris. She serves corporations. She doesn't take corporations away. She helps them. Like that's a real complaint about Kamala Harris. That is a significant problem of Kamala Harris that she's too friendly to corporate interests. But you think she's a communist? No, only the dumbest people. Or I shouldn't say dumb. They're just ignorant.

So I guess Elon's a total ignorant idiot. I don't think he's ignorant. I don't think he's an idiot. I think that what Elon Musk was trying to do with that ad is the same thing the Democrats are trying to do to some extent by labeling Donald Trump a fascist, right? It's meant to inspire fear in the electorate and get people to vote against an individual due to that fear. In the case of Kamala Harris, Elon Musk doesn't like her.

as a candidate, I believe that 100%. He doesn't believe she's an actual communist. He's fearmongering about her, but he also realized that the misogynistic attacks did not bode well for the Trump campaign when Kamala Harris replaced Joe Biden. Remember, the first reaction you got from Trump's campaign was all sorts of vile, misogynistic garbage, and that was hurting them in the polls. And so I think Musk realized, oh, maybe this ad actually isn't going to help us, it's probably going to hurt us. He's a child. He's a child. He's a child. I mean, we haven't had a competent

person run for president in, since Barack Obama. And you could disagree with Barack Obama and I criticized tons of his policies, but at least the guy knew how to run a campaign. You know, Jesus Christ, these, they're both trying to lose. It's like a race to, in the wrong direction. They're both trying to score on their own end zone. Where's Tim Walz? Where's Tim Walz? Timbals is going around, he's doing small rallies and speaking events, but he's not really campaigning alongside Kamala Harris, and I think that's a mistake. He should be doing four to five interviews a day. He was the most popular out of the four of them.

Why are you burying your most popular guy? It's insanity. Neither side wants to win. It's such a maddening race. And by the way, I'll say one quick caveat here. Of all the things we listed, there are 100 horrible things and dumb things, etc. I don't know why they put the J.D. Vance thing in the same category. He mocked Harris's laugh and saying it was fraudulent and off-putting.

That's not a controversial position. I don't know. I mean, I guess it could turn off women voters, but she does have a, like, of all the things, her laugh and that she's a little fake, that's kind of true. So like, so I, that's not anywhere like calling Puerto Rican's garbage or attacking all women and calling them to Seaward. I just want to be clear and fair. Okay, I just find at this point, this story to be kind of annoying and tedious.

And why do I think that? All of the attention has been paid to a comedian who made a bad joke, who the Trump supporters in the audience did not react well to, didn't laugh at his jokes, didn't like his jokes. But while the comedian is getting all the heat, you have Rudy Giuliani, who literally referred to two-year-old Palestinians as terrorists, thus justifying their slaughter, he's not a comedian. He was being 100% serious. But no one cares about that. Because Palestinians, 100% dehumanized in American society.

So it's okay to put out that vile garbage during that speech. Anna, you're so right. Let me add one quick thing to it. Why is the press not making a big deal out of that one? Because they don't care. Because it's not a comic. It's not a comic. He meant it.

Okay. So the reason is not just the press, but the Kamala Harris team is not emphasizing that. They're saying, can you believe what he said about Puerto Ricans? Well, how about what he said about slaughtering Palestinian children? They're like, yeah, that's okay, our donors are into that too. Yeah, I mean. We're financing and so that's okay. So that's why the press is like, we don't mind that, smearing Muslims, attacking Palestinians

and calling for their slaughter. That's Tuesday on cable news. That's Tuesday on the Kamala Harris campaign. So that's why nobody makes a big issue out of it. The press will make a big deal out of what the Harris campaign notes as a big deal. Exactly, yes. And the Harris campaign is not going to point to the, of warrant, disgusting comments from Rudy Giuliani as it pertains to Palestinian civilians and literal Palestinian children.

Because which administration is currently aiding and abetting that slaughter? It's the Biden Harris administration, something to keep in mind. All right, we got to take a break when we come back. I want to talk a little bit about House Freedom Caucus. leader who thinks that the state of North Carolina should just be given to Donald Trump when it comes to the electoral process. I'll give you his reasoning and more if there is any when we come back. Frack, frack, frack, frack, like a duck.

Frack, frack, frack, frack. All right, frack, frack, frack. All right, back on TYT, Jencanana. Also, Nope, and Ben Gephardt, they just signed up. You guys are awesome, we appreciate you guys so much. Everybody check out that beautiful join button below. Eating chips and stuff, wow, thanks for a gifting 10 young tourist memberships on YouTube. I'm gonna say it again, I'm gonna say it 100 times more, which is, I love you guys, because you have

actually appreciate honest programming. Go look around the internet, see if other people do. No, they want, oh, tell me Kamala Harris is perfect. Tell me Donald Trump is perfect. It's madness, total madness. The fact that you actually want honest programming makes all the difference. And without our members, we're out of business. So thank you to our members who are our bosses.

By the way, if we're going to do it through the website, that's even better. T.y.com slash 2024. Love you. All right, Anna. Let's get to our next story. Last week, House Freedom Caucus Representative Andy Harris was caught on camera, suggesting that the state of North Carolina should essentially hand over all of its electoral votes to Donald Trump.

His reason? Well, Hurricane Helene impacted the number of conservative, a number of conservative counties, and it could make it more difficult for voters in those counties to cast their ballot for, in his mind, Donald Trump. And so let's not even bother with the electoral process. Let's just hand the electoral votes to Trump and bypass the electoral process altogether. Let's hear what he has to say. You statistically can go and say, hey, well, you got disenfranchised in 25 counties.

You know what that vote probably would have been, which would be if I were in the legislation enough to go, yeah, we got to be the legislature. We can't disenfranchise a vote. Okay, now that's bad enough. I mean, just preventing the electoral process and handing a state's electoral votes to Donald Trump or any candidate for that matter is immoral and does not help to essentially move in a more justice-minded approach for those who might be disenfranchised as a result of Hurricane Helene. But believe it or not, Harris was actually arguing against an even more extreme

proposal. So he was at a dinner where a pro-Trump activist by the name of Ivan Rakelin stated that several states should just preemptively hand over their electoral votes to Trump on election day. Let's hear what he had to say. Have you thought of and why aren't you calling on the state legislatures in the entire country to just go ahead and convene on November 5th to allocate their own state's electors? in North Carolina, New Hampshire, Nebraska, Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin, so that those states guarantee that no illegals are voted, no illegal drop boxes, no illegal signature non-verification going on, and it's fully free, fair, transparent, and it can be live streamed on X, Rumble, and C-SPAN. for the whole world to see as the world watches that state legislature hold that vote on November 5th to allocate those state selectors. So that Arizona doesn't have to wait 10 to 13 days for the results.

So that Pennsylvania, right, and other states, guess what happens if everyone votes by political party under that framework in the country? Right now, 276 electoral votes are controlled by Republican legislatures. So Congressman Andy Harris responded to that unhinged proposal with the proposal that you heard about. Basically just focusing on North Carolina because what you just heard from Ranglin, Harris believes, is a power play. Now, Harris also was asked about the comment that you heard on camera, like the situation in which the North Carolina electoral votes would be handed over to Trump, and he says, no, it was just his theoretical scenario was taken out of context. He says, as I've repeatedly said, every legal vote should be counted. I would hope everyone could agree that legal American voters whose lives were devastated by the recent storms should not be disenfranchised. in the upcoming voting process. Now, I agree with that wholeheartedly, which is why there are efforts being made as we speak

to ensure that affected areas of North Carolina are able to vote. So I can get into some of those details in just a moment. But, Jang, do you wanna jump in? Yeah, if you're, if you're Trump's supporter or Republican, and you're wondering why they keep saying you're against democracy, here's your answer. When idiots in your own party, and it's not an unsubstantial guy.

He is a United States congressman. He's the head of the Freedom Caucus, the most conservative group in the House. And he says, well, why don't we just say that Trump won before anybody votes? That's why they think you're against democracy. Is that complicated? Do I need to be clearer about it? And then the other idiot jumps in and goes, yeah, why don't we just declare them the winner in all the swing states?

Okay, so you guys are for a dictatorship, let's just be clear about it. That's not democracy. I don't care what you, oh, well, no, we're no other democracy, we're a republic. What is this? What is this? Did decide, imagine if Kamala Harris said, oh, yeah, the swing states, or not Kamala Harris, to be fair, the head of the, Primal de Jayaevil, the head of the Progressive Caucus, came out and said, the swing states or just Wisconsin should be declared Kamala Harris's

before anyone votes. The Republicans would lose their minds. Of course they should, of course they should. But when Democrats say, hey, that seems problematic, it seems like you guys kind of hate democracy. They're like, how dare you? You have this impulse in your party, and it's gross, it's un-American, it sells out this country, it sells out our democracy, it sells out our constitution. So that guy should be primaried, he should be removed from office, and Republicans, you vote for him again,

you hate this country. So thankfully, Andy Harris did receive some pushback from fellow Republican lawmakers, including a Republican who actually represents the state of North Carolina. And his name is Patrick McHenry. He says the following. It makes no sense whatsoever to prejudice the election out. I'm sorry, prejudge. It makes no sense whatsoever to prejudge the election outcome.

And that is a misinformed view of what is happening on the ground in North Carolina. bless his heart, the retiring congressman described a massive amount of work going into ensuring everyone in the storm affected counties can vote. And thankfully, that is in fact true. So look, I hear anyone who is concerned about this issue. I was personally worried myself about how those in affected areas would be able to cast their ballots. But here's what's going on on the ground. Election workers swift pivot to emergency measures and coordination with state administrators in the immediate aftermath of Helene have resulted in a relatively smooth early voting process for residents in the 25 FEMA designated disaster counties.

Statewide, more than 2 million cast their ballots within the first week of early voting in the battleground state. So clearly, you know, these methods that are being utilized to ensure that people are able to vote and vote early are working. More than 400 early voting sites, opened as scheduled on Thursday, including 76 sites in the 25 Western counties hardest hit by Helene, and that's according to the state's board of elections, only four could not open. Look, you guys don't have to cheat. Kamala Harris's campaign just pulled out of North Carolina. Trump's going to win anyway in that state. So they stopped advertising there. That's what I mean by pulling out. So that means they think their internal polling shows that

they've lost, okay? And, but they just can't help themselves, that's their instinct. So Republicans, let me ask you so. I thought you said you hated mail-in-voting and early voting and all these, and dropping off the ballots and all these things. See, we're principled, we believe in it, whether it's a Republican area or a Democratic area, everybody should vote. Of course, we should do everything we can to make sure those folks can vote, whether

they're mailing their ballot in or they drop it off their ballot or whatever. Let's get them ballots. The Republicans would call that ballot harvesting, right? No, let's get them ballots so they can vote, right? That's what decent people who love this country would do. Republicans say, no, not in Democratic areas. No, none of that. Oh, my God, a Republican area was affected?

Oh, let's rush in all these votes and, you know what? And forget it. Don't even rush in the votes. Just declare Trump the winner. Okay, well, then you know which party hates democracy and which party likes democracy. So don't complain about it. If you say we should kill democracy, they don't be like, oh, I'm offended when you say it. No, you should be, if you're not livid at that congressman and you're not going to vote him out,

they shut up already about, oh, no, boo-hoo. Just because Trump lost an election and tried to overturn it with fake electors and said we should terminate the Constitution. And we have the head of the Freedom Caucus saying we shouldn't even vote, we should declare Trump the winner. Oh, gee, I wonder why people think we're against democracy. Really, you can't figure it out? Yeah, these folks think that they're helping Trump, but they're doing the exact opposite, right? I mean, they're providing fodder for one of the biggest talking points in Kamala Harris's campaign against Donald Trump. And so this is, I mean, look, they just say it out loud and then they get upset when people talk about it.

Don't advocate for basically circumventing the electoral process in any state, including, yeah, North Carolina is considered a swing state, right? But, I mean, based on the polling, it's looking pretty good for Donald Trump. Making statements like that is going to make people question whether the results are legitimate. Don't do that. Yeah, last thing. The Republicans now have this entitlement complex where they think that they're entitled to perfect conditions before an election. Okay, we don't want any of the bad stories coming out.

We want only good stories coming out. We don't want platforms putting anything negative up. We want platforms only positive towards us. If any hurricane happens, then we cancel the election. declare us the winner and everything has to go perfectly for us otherwise election interference that's not how it works James Comey buried Hillary Clinton before the 2016 election that's called life in the big city okay you have to be able to adjust get past it and win there are never perfect conditions so

and the reason why they're saying absurd things like that is because Trump says it you know you're breaking up there to me so that's that's the interference that's not election interference that's just an election. So just let your entitlement complex go already. You're not entitled to win the election. You have to earn it. I never called you in this, I might. I mean, I'm not saying or saying. I'm a support of the Palestinians, I'm used to it.

Well, I hope your beeper doesn't go off. The thing is, is that- Did you just say I should do? You should not. No. Did you just say I should be killed? Well, that explosive comment or moment, no pun intended, led to someone getting banned from CNN.

So the topic of discussion actually wasn't Gaza or Israel's broadening war in the Middle East. They were specifically talking about Donald Trump's Madison Square Garden's rally and the backlash that came as a result of that rally. And that's when this happened. I get it. Nobody wants to be called Nazis. It's very inflammatory. But if you don't want to be called Nazis, stop doing it. You're called an anti-Semite more than Amos's table.

And people were there. No, by me. I never called you an Nazi-Semite. I mean, I'm not saying or saying. I'm a support of the Palestinians. I'm used to it. Well, I hope your beeper doesn't go off. The thing is, is that, oh, wow, you should not.

No, I said, no, I said, no, I did not say that. No, I did not say that? Hold on live TV. I said, I hope you're, let me just stop. You said, you hope my beeper doesn't go on. Guys, did you support of the Palestinian, Hamas? Guys, let me stop. Are you?

Am I what? No, of course, I'm not saying. Are you a racist, violent person inciting violence against me? Ryan, that's disgusting. That is completely. That is completely out of pocket. Good job, CNN. Let's have first block, say the Muslim guy should be I apologize.

On TV. Don't say then I apologize. Don't say then I apologize. You literally. I thought he said Hamas. You didn't think I said Hamas. I said I'm supportive Palestinian rights. Yes, I did.

So the individual that you hear arguing with Medi Hassan is Ryan Girdeski, who is a conservative. And yeah, I mean, essentially implied that Medi Hassan because of his support of Palestinian people, Palestinian civilians is some sort of terrorist. is some sort of terrorist, but I just want to be clear. Everyone seems to be making this about Medi Hassan calling him a Nazi and him implying that he's a terrorist. I hate that rhetoric and I don't find that discourse helpful at all. And that is in regard to both sides, I'm just keeping it real. I don't think it is helpful to go around calling people Nazis.

The conversation immediately devolves, it's not helpful. But that's not what I'm concerned about. I'm concerned about the fact that he implied violence. against Medi Hassan, okay? He referenced the exploding pagers that Israel sent over to Lebanon in order to take out members of Hezbollah. And so you had these mini explosions all throughout Lebanon, obviously people got hurt, obviously people got killed, including, you know, individuals who were anywhere around

the Hezbollah militants who had possession of those exploding pagers. So what he was referring to or what he was referencing, is something that was incredibly violent. And mentioning that in regard to Medi Hassan, I think is the real issue here. Yeah, it's not close. That's definitely the real issue. So look, let's break apart his lies too. He said, well, I thought he said he supported Hamas.

Well, number one, he never said that. You just, you implied that. Number two, wait a minute, that was after your beeper comment that you asked them that. So what are you talking about? After the beeper comment, you said, don't you support Hamas? So you made the beeper comment before that, okay? So let's just be super clear about his lies. That's a great point, yep.

Okay, and then the last part of it is, so let's say that he said, hey, Hamas is terrorists, but they're also resistance fighters against the occupation, they're both things, or whatever he said, right? He didn't say any of that. Well, let's say he said it, would that then justify threatening to kill him? He's like, oh, well, I thought he said Hamas. So that's why I was threatening that he should be killed. No, no, that's not a thing.

You don't threaten to kill people no matter what on television. That's insanity. That's insanity. And so I'm tired of the supporters of Israel and they're constant threats. Threat after threat after threat. And so look, the one good thing is that it's a little bit of a new day in America. Because before, in my lifetime, if Medi Hassan complained about any of that, he'd be kicked off, right? I've had people call anyone who supported Palestinians, including me, anti-Semitic, a terrorist, Hamas supporter, banned, canceled, fired, et cetera.

So the fact that CNN actually supported Medi Hassan is credit to them and to a changing world. Yeah, and, you know, it's, look, put the shoe on the other foot. Imagine if Mehdi Hassan said something along the lines of, oh, you're an Israel supporter. Well, I hope Hezbollah missile doesn't hit your house. Yeah, you banned forever and ever and ever. I mean, I would condemn that in the strongest possible terms, because it is implying that someone is deserving of violence over their personal views on a controversial issue and an awful war that continues in the Middle East. And one more thing about the arrogance of the Israeli side. They're like, oh, you're criticizing Israel.

Yeah, just go ahead, touch a product that Israel's touched. Go ahead. Ha ha, ha, we'll kill you. We'll kill you. Okay. Go ahead. Buy an Israeli product. Go ahead.

Ha ha ha, ha, ha, ha. Yeah. Oh, you criticize Israel? How dare you? Not you attacked Israel. You criticize it. You criticize someone criticizing Palestinian two-year-olds for being terrorists. That's Rudy Giuliani at that rally.

Like, even say, hey, can you please not kill our two year olds? Right. Oh, yeah, did you buy an Israeli made product or a product that touched Israel at all? Ha ha ha, ha, I hope you did, because they won't kill you. Okay, great, that's wonderful. This guy turns out to be a white nationalist, racist piece of crap anyway. So, I was unfamiliar with him. I knew nothing about him.

And it turns out that he's actually worked alongside Richard Spencer in the past. Richard Spencer has confirmed this. So in 2010, for instance, Girdusky wrote two pieces for Spencer's alternative right website, Roadmap to Nowhere in November and Whiteout in October, both under his real name. In Whiteout, Girdusky bemoaned the focus on suicides of gay teenagers saying, no one cared to mention the white middle class men who take their own lives. And in addition to his work with Project Ohio Values Pack, Girdusky, is the founder of 1776 Project Pack. Aidan Buzetti is the president of that project, 1776, but he's also the president of Bull Moose Project,

which held a special event on Hitler's birthday. I don't know, I mean, like, look, you don't want to be called Hitler. I wouldn't rub shoulders of people like this. Like, come on. Or you don't want to be called a Nazi. I wouldn't rub shoulders of people like this. But anyway, let's move on to CNN's reaction and response to all of this because they went a break.

And then Abby Philip comes back and explains that what had just happened was unacceptable. Let's take a look. I want to apologize to Mehdi Hassan for what was said at this table. It was completely unacceptable. When we get this discussion started, you'll see that Ryan, is not at the table. There is a line that was crossed there, and it's not acceptable to me. It's not acceptable to us at this network.

We want discussion. We want people who disagree with each other to talk to each other. But when you cross the line of a complete lack of civility, that is not going to happen here on this show. It's a heated time where in the middle of a political season, we are eight days from a presidential election. But we can have conversations about what is happening in this country without resorting to the lowest of the lowest kind of discourse.

And then later when they came back from break to continue with the panel discussion, not only was Girduski missing, so was Medi Hassan. And so after the fact, Abby Phillip provided some clarity as to why Medi wasn't there. As you may have seen, Ryan was asked to leave the show. And we have put out a statement saying that he's not welcome back on our air. There is a line here on this program and it was cross. But I want to be clear as well that we did not ask Medi to not come back. In fact, we really wanted him to come back and finish the show.

We had a lot to talk to him about. And we really hope that he'll join us again soon. So that's how CNN reacted to it. there is some anger among those who are supportive of Girdusky. Oh, wow. Oh, wow. But I mean, don't reference like violence towards someone you disagree with politically on an issue.

And that's what happened in that segment. Again, the name colleague, I don't like it. I don't support it. I don't think that it's conducive to a useful or substantive conversation. But that's not what I'm focusing on. I'm focusing on the page or comment. And then, Jank, look, I just, you mentioned the arrogance, the arrogance and bravado among Israel supporters who provide cover for any atrocity that Israel does.

It really disgusts me, but it goes even further than that, right? It's the, what I feel like they're messaging, in the case that we're talking about now, but also in a case that you yourself experienced was disagree with us and there will be consequences. And I mean, I find that very disturbing. So here's what I'm talking about when it comes to the run-in that Jank had on Pierce Morgan show with someone whose father was a co-founder of Hamas. Then he was captured by the Israelis and now serves as an Israeli agent. Let's watch. The Iranian nuclear program is going to be destroyed. And anyone who gets in the way, It doesn't matter where they are.

Even if they are politicians in the West, they are going to fall. Jing, you are going to be defeated. Did you hear what he just said? He threatened politicians in the West that if they don't agree with Israel's war against Iran, that they're going to fall. And remember, he's an Israeli agent. Are you saying Israel will murder politicians in the West or get rid of them politically through bribery or whatever else?

What do you mean the politicians in the West will fall if they don't agree that? to back Israel's war against Iran? Yeah, we will not vote for them anymore. Oh, well, you don't vote for them now. You're not in our country. What do you mean the politicians will fall? We live in democracy, and we have the right to bring them up and to bring them down.

Those who agree with Ayatollah, we don't want them in office. And all the sympathizers with us. Who is we and how are you bringing them down? We don't want them even to be in our country. Who is we and how are you bringing down politicians in the West if they dare to defy Israel? Tell me how you're bringing them down. I already answered you that. Are you going to murder them or are you going to bribe them?

Super disturbing to say the least. You know, I was so busy yelling at him. I didn't realize until this viewing that he said in the middle, sympathizers and tell terrorist like yourself when he was issuing the threat. Yeah, exactly. So, so I'm gonna fall too. So look guys, this is a guy who I don't know where he's getting his money from. He doesn't have a job and he has tons of money.

He has a bot operation that follows him wherever he goes. That's like well known now. And so there's some money behind this guy. So Gurdowski might be random. I don't know about him, okay? Yeah, I think look, I think he made a stupid comment. I just don't think it's ever acceptable to threaten anyone with violence because you disagree with them. Your interaction with this guy was, in my opinion, even more disturbing.

And I, that was a threat, Jank. That was a threat on air. And like, Pierce Morgan just like let it fly. By the way, Pierce Morgan didn't say a word. Like whenever I say something, interrupt within 10 to 15 seconds if his beloved Trump is criticized, right? But this guy threatens my life. And peers didn't kick him off, peers didn't say anything negative about him, et cetera. That guy's all over the media.

I know he looks ridiculous. It looks like an idiotic borat, but like in real life. But when he starts, but remember, he's an Israeli agent. Yep. And so when he starts threatening to, you know, politicians and me and says, anyone who's criticized Israel, is that he said he said is a terrorist. You know what Israel thinks of terrorists? If they call you a terrorist, and remember they say almost every Palestinian male they killed in Gaza as a terrorist.

So if you're a Muslim male and Israel thinks you're a terrorist, they kill you. So this is getting totally out of hand. And yet, and why does this happen? Is it because Israel is like some sort of ethnic background that is so special and different? No, it's humanity. Anytime any group has absolute power, then they, it corrupts absolutely. Yeah, they feel emboldened. And that isn't about Israel, that's about America.

America is saying green light, doesn't matter, genocide, totally wipe out northern Gaza. They killed 90 people today for what? All the Hamas leaders are dead, all the Hezbo leaders are dead. They just keep bombing and bombing and starving northern Gaza. They're trying to occupy southern Lebanon, not going as well for them there, right? But all of this, and America goes, thank you, sir, may I have another, may I have another war, please sir, here's another 26 billion, sir.

How much is enough? And that's why guys like this are emboldened to say all over American media, oh yeah, sure. If they don't, if they're criticizing Israel, threaten their lives. And nothing's gonna get done about it. At least again, credit to CNN for kicking him off and saying he's never coming back on. So, and again, and he said it to a progressive. I can't believe Santa had a progressive on and kicked off the guy who threatened the progressive. So that's your silver lining in this story.

All right, let's take a break when we come back. We'll read some of your comments and more. Don't miss it. All right, back on TYT. Bucks, thank you for gifting five memberships. You're great. I'll read one comment here. Tish-Bish-A-F says, the man you debated had a very sly smile on his face when he spoke

about our democracy as well, Jank. It was unsettling. Yeah, I don't, he's talking about democracy. Brother, you don't live here. You're not an American citizen. What are you talking about? We're going to vote you out. Who's we?

That's why I kept saying, who's we? How are the Israelis going to vote out a politician here in America? Well, you know how they're going to fund A-PAC and all the lobbying groups, and they're not going to vote them out, they're going to just buy the seat. And so that's what they've been doing, and they hate us for accurately pointing that out. All right, Anna. All right, let's get to our next story. I'm going to talk about his running mate.

His running mate, Elon Musk. Elon's on that stage jumping around, skipping like a dip shit on these things. You know it. That guy is literally the richest man in the world spending millions of dollars to help Donald Trump buy an election. Well, that allegation from Kamala Harris's running mate, Tim Walls, is even truer than we previously knew because a new Wall Street Journal investigation into X shows that Elon Musk is very likely manipulating the algorithm on the social media platform in order to amplify pro-Trump

content. Now, the Wall Street Journal conducted an experiment and found that political accounts are dominating feeds, even of X users who showed zero interest in politics. Believe it or not, those people exist. I don't know why they sign up for Twitter or X, but they do. And so to run this experiment, the Wall Street Journal created 14X accounts across five states, four of which are in battleground states. The accounts only signaled an interest in non-political subjects. Nonetheless, a majority of the posts in their for-you feed were partisan or related to the presidential election. Fewer than a third of unique posts seen by the journal's accounts were political in nature. But X's algorithm re-upped political posts so often that they accounted

for about half of the total posts on the accounts for you feeds. Now, what was really interesting about their findings is what was amplified by Twitter, what the algorithm seemed to favor. pro-Harris and pro-Trump accounts are not being promoted equally, as you can imagine. So let's take a look at this chart. And from this chart, you can see that Kamala Harris's campaign topped the list of most seen accounts, but 10 of the other top 14 most seen leaned far right, including Trump, Charlie Kirk, Benny Johnson, and of course Elon Musk himself. Overall, pro-Trump content appeared about twice as frequently as pro-Harris material, twice as frequently.

Plus, when the journal created the accounts, X's first suggestion to nearly all the accounts was to follow Elon Musk, who appeared along with his bio and an indication that he is backing Trump for president. His posts also appeared at the top of the journals or the journal accounts for you feeds more than any other user, including a video clip posted October 17th of him campaigning alongside Trump, served first to each of the journal's accounts. So some really interesting results here. I have some more details about what their investigation found. I have to say, I am not surprised by these results whatsoever, just based on what I personally have experienced. using the social media platform. I've noticed that since Elon Musk has taken control of it, since he bought Twitter, turned

it into X. You know, the 4U feed is just full of people that of course I don't even follow, people I have no interest in following, and most of the messaging is right wing pro-Trump messaging. So I'll give it the tiniest little caveat here, and then I'll tell you my experience and then I'll cry and cry about election interferes. Oh, I'm sorry, that's what Republicans do. So we'll get to that part of it in a second. So in my experience, whenever I do a pro, like a post that's, I never do a pro Trump post,

but one that criticizes Kamala Harris or is fair in any way, it takes off like a rocket. Yeah, I've noticed that too, yeah. And if I do one criticizing Trump, beep, nothing, okay? So now the caveat is Democrats don't support their own. And the left is so divided, the idea of like reposts. something of mine is probably an anathema to an establishment Democrat or an extreme leftist, et cetera. So by the end, they're all like, okay, no, just promote mine, mine, mine.

But I don't want to promote anybody else's, right? So that's how the left is. Whereas the right, if they see something that they'd like, oh, repost, repost, repost. That is an excellent point that I hadn't considered, but is absolutely true. What I've noticed is conservatives or Trump supporters in particular are really, you know, good at cross promotion and uplifting other Trump supporters on these platforms. I mean, of course, Trump supporters are not a monolith, but when it comes to overall generalized pro-Trump messaging, they tend to retweet each other and all of that.

So you're right. Yeah, so that's your own carry. But the numbers are so stark. So first of all, they give away the game in the content before you even get the partisanship. So, you know, half, none of the accounts they signed up for had anything do with politics. They did not check off politics. I like baseball. I like running.

I like crafts, things like that, right? And half the content they got served was political anyway. Why? I mean, if you're running an algorithm that wants to create engagement and keep those people there, you would give them stories about baseball and running and crafts. You wouldn't give them political things unless you had an agenda. And 50% was political, that's an agenda. Okay, and then when you go to the political stuff and it's twice as much right wingers

as left wingers, that twice, it's not like 5% more or 15% more, it's twice as much, okay? So that's a giant number. And then the one last thing that you might not recognize not being, you know, in the industry, the three out of the four for left-leaning was official Kamala Harris accounts. Only Ron Filipowski was a guy, but he puts up a lot of videos, it's understandable. I think that's totally organic, right? But the guys on the right wing side were other hosts, because if you drive them there, then they continue to amplify going forward.

Because if they wind up following Benny Johnson, they're not just going to get one tweet that's pro-Trump. They're going to get hundreds of pro-Trump tweets, right? So if you push them towards online right-wing media, you're going to even amplify more. That's why there's nothing to left-wing media, only to Accoma Harris accounts. And those are all temporary, remember? After the election, especially if she loses, those going through the dustbin of history, and those mega-powerful right-wing accounts continue to put out propaganda to the end of time.

Look, Elon, just admit it. You bought the platform, and you wanted to serve your own interests. So you're rigging it, and you're not being subtle about it. So are you going to keep lying or are you going to be honest? Yeah, I'm ringing it. Yeah, of course. I want Trump to win because he let me, he promised me that I could run the government. And that way I'm going to run it.

So I make even more money and I totally rip you guys off. Just say it. So I have two points I want to make. One of the points is going to upset everybody who despises Trump because we're not supposed to justify any of this. And I don't like this, right? But I do want to note that this isn't really different from other. Wealthy owners of media platforms, especially in recent days where the owner of the platform can just decide unilaterally, I'm not going to allow my editorial board to endorse the candidate

that they would like to endorse. The other point I want to make is going to upset Trump supporters, but it is true. I'm old enough to remember individuals like Vivek Ramoswamy arguing that the 2020 election was in fact stolen. And his argument is that it wasn't, it wasn't stolen because of widespread voter fraud. No, no, no. It was stolen because of election interference with Twitter suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story. That is the argument that they make and they make it over and over again.

So can Democrats make that same argument now that there's election interference and should Trump win? Well, we need to fight to reverse the results of that election. Democrats might even consider rioting in the nation's capital because there was election interference. Yeah, look, the whole thing, man, look, before Facebook de-emphasized news, if you went to look at their top 10 posts in the politics section or in the news section, almost every day, either 8, 9, or 10 out of 10 were right-wing sites. So Facebook totally leading right-wing. Now, Twitter leading 100% right-wing. So all these platforms lean right wing. The one time that the X before Elon Musk bought it didn't put up the Elon, I mean, so the Hunter Biden laptop story. And the Republicans are like that one time against us, 100 times in our favor, one time election against, oh my God, election interference.

So, okay, guys, if that was election interference, and it's not just Vivek who made that case, J.D. Vance makes that case. Right. And he made that case in an interview recently. So is this election interference? Clearly, Elon is rigging it on behalf of Donald Trump. And it's not complicated to see why. He's his top, one of his top donors. And Trump said, I'm now in favor of electric vehicles because of Elon Musk.

And I'm going to let Elon decide to do audit the entire government, have complete control over the audit of the government. That is insanity. That gives enormous power to a mega billionaire donor of Donald Trump. So is this election interferes and Kamala Harris say, I'm not certifying the election? This isn't my logic. It's idiotic logic of that's Trump's, Vanis's Vivex, et cetera. According to your own dumbass logic, that's it. Kamala shouldn't certify the election if she loses.

Just kick it back, do some fake electors, just like Trump did. And go, oh, what, what, what, ex-discriminating against me. That's it. I'm now the president. What are you going to do now? So, look, I think it's important to consider these dumb arguments have a negative impact on our democratic process overall, because the dumb excuses that one side makes will be exploited by the other side, okay?

Will it though, I mean, there's Democrats are so weak. No, look, I don't think Democrats are going to argue that this is literally election interference, but I do think that there is a problem with, first of all, most Americans not trusting our news media for good reason, right? The news media hasn't done its job, hasn't informed the public, has hid the ball or amplified certain campaigns, omitted information that isn't necessarily favorable to their favorite politicians. This is a widespread issue in media overall.

And so as more and more Americans turn to social media in order to get informed, yeah, this is an even bigger problem. Because who can you trust? This is why, look, guys, it's so important to diversify your sources. Don't simply get all of your information from one source. You will be uninformed if you do. So if you're only relying on Twitter or TikTok or just the Washington Post or just the New York Times, you're actually doing yourself a disservice.

You have to consider how the business model impacts the journalism you're consuming. And with that in mind, again, diversify your sources. All right, so just a few more details. So when the Journal created, Wall Street Journal created its bot accounts, I want to talk about some specific experiments or instances that they noticed. So one of their bots was located in Pennsylvania and indicated interest in baseball painting and parenting. But in one session, X almost immediately served it political posts, including a stream of a Trump rally, a post from pro-Trump troll, cat turd two, oh, he's got a second account now.

Okay, cat turd two, reading, if that cringe dingbat zero votes airhead, Kamala Harris is able to cheat enough to win the presidency, the USA is over. So those are the kinds of things that people will get served up, even when they make it abundantly clear that they're not interested in political content at all. That's the one, the cat turd one, is the one that they served up endlessly, right? The one calling Kamala Harris a ding bad and obviously you should vote against her, et cetera. By the way, that cat turd coward is the only conservative that said they would show up to debate and didn't. And pro Kamala stuff popped up too, but overall, the majority of the political posts that X boosted were from conservative figures in pro-Trump accounts.

So a Washington Post analysis came to similar conclusions, finding that nearly all, of the 33 tweets with more than 20 million views since last summer came from Republicans. The Republicans have also seen huge spikes in follower counts over the Democrats, and Republican candidates are outspending Democrats on the platform three to one. So there's some money involved as well. There's, you know, advertising on Twitter, as you can imagine. So just something to keep in mind as you're informing yourselves for this election. obviously don't rely on one source, certainly don't rely on one social media platform or the other.

And I just realized why the Kamala Harris accounts might be at the top, because they're paying to get at the top. That's how you advertise on Twitter. So if they weren't paying an arm and leg to Elon Musk, there'd be no left wing accounts in the top ten. So it's massive cheating. But guys, it doesn't mean that you're cheating in the elections. So you play the obstacle course that you have in front of you. There's no crying in politics. So if Kamala Harris loses, she can't say, oh, well, Twitter was mean to me. Yeah, it was owned by a right wing donor of Donald Trump. Of course it was mean to you, right? So you have to figure out how to get past that and win. What did I say? You said Donald Trump. Sorry. Yeah. No, I said right wing billionaire, a donor of Donald Trump. Oh, got it. Yeah. And so, and if you think Elon Musk is

like neutral. Are you kidding? I mean, the guy's giving tens of millions of dollars to Donald Trump, right? So no, he wants Trump to win. And God knows what Bitcoin scam they're going to do. So look, guys, okay. And by the way, the right wing, got to understand something. You might be happy about this. Yay, we're cheating now. Oh, you guys had it coming. That's always their excuse. Anyways, I'm not doing Bitcoin. A lot of left wingers aren't doing it. We're not giving money to Donald Trump. We're not giving money to all these dumbass things or the golden shoes and the $60 Bibles and all that stuff. You guys are.

You're the mark. You're the mark not just for Donald Trump, for Elon Musk. Oh, buy this. Oh, everybody rushes it. Oh, I already sold it. Okay, but go ahead. Get manipulated. See how you like it.

All right. We got to take a break. When we come back for the second hour, I want to talk a little bit about unhinged things that Democratic lawmakers like Debbie Dingell are saying on. national television. Don't miss it.