The Young Turks - F'd Around, Found Out

Episode Date: July 7, 2021

Mo Brooks’ attorneys are arguing that his involvement in the rally to incite the insurrection was Trump’s fault, including the words in his speech. A leaky gas pipeline sparks an inferno in the Gulf of Mexico. California fire victims are at the mercy of Wall Street. A viral TikTok video shows cops pulling over the wrong car and cuffing the driver anyway. Racist idiot in New Jersey was filmed harassing neighbors with threats and slurs, asks for all the smoke by giving his address, and gets the smoke he requested – then gets arrested. 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. All right. the young church, Jake, you're going to expand with you guys. Big show ahead. Unlike other folks, we actually do a news show. So we will be giving you a lot of the news today, all the news that we could muster. And then in the bonus episode, we are forced to respond to an unhinged attack from Glenn Greenwald, who in a former career used to be a journalist and is now

be pretty much a right-wing hack who does not tell the truth, which will be definitively shown in the bonus episode. His heavy implications, his innuendos, his outrageous lies and insinuations. So that's in the bonus episode. Don't worry, everybody's going to get to see it. We'll put it up on YouTube later. Members will get to see it first, but we didn't want to take up too much of the showtime because we actually do a news program. So, okay. Speaking of which, by the way, we got a podcast network coming out. We already have podcasts. You should check it out.

But we got a new partnership with ACAST, and we start as a radio show. And we're going to heavily emphasize, there it is. You're going to put on the headphones, and you're going to listen to us, too. So, and that includes so many of our shows. So make sure you're checking out the new TYTA-A-CAST partnership. And soon we will be dominating there as well. All right. Anna.

All right, off to the news. Well, Mo Brooks, Mo Problems, Representative Mo Brooks, who's facing a lawsuit that was filed by Representative Eric Swalwell over his involvement in allegedly inciting the Capitol riots on January 6th is using a fascinating defense, especially as someone who has been a Trump loyalist. He is essentially blaming Donald Trump for inviting him to take part in the rally that preceded the riots in the Capitol on that day. In fact, the lawyer, the attorney representing Representative Mo Brooks, wrote in a court filing, quote, Brooks only gave the ellipse speech because the White House asked him to in his capacity as a United States congressman. But for the White House request, Brooks would not have appeared at the rally, right, at the ellipse rally. So look, Mo Brooks, what could he do? He's a United States representative. The White House asked him to take part in this rally that helped to incite the capital.

riots, and so he had no choice but to take part and give this disgusting speech. I'm Congressman Mo Brooks from Alabama's 5th Congressional District, and I've got a message that I need you to take to your heart and take back home, and along the way, stop at the Capitol. The 2020 election is behind us. Today is a time of choosing, and tomorrow is a time for fighting. Today is also a day of revelation and separation. Today the curtain will be pulled back, and American patriots will learn by their votes which Republican senators and congressmen

have the courage to fight for America. Today, by their votes, Americans will learn which Republican congressmen and senators love their bourbon, love their cigars, love their prestige, love their personal power,

love their special interest group money more than they love America. Now, our ancestors sacrificed their blood, their sweat, their tears, their fortunes, and sometimes their lives to give us, their descendants, in America that is the greatest nation

in world history. So I have I have a question for you. Are you willing to do the same? No. My answer is yes. Louder, are you willing to do what it takes to fight for America? And that went on, go to the Capitol, stop by the Capitol, are you willing to fight for America? I would argue that Representative Brooks had a guilty conscience

as he was running away from being subpoenaed or served with the lawsuit from Representative Eric Swalwell. You don't do that unless you have a guilty conscience. And now he's literally throwing Donald Trump under the bus in an effort to defend himself in court. There's so many things I love about that. You know, look at these Republicans who care more about themselves and they care about fighting for Donald Trump. Oh, I'm getting subpoenaed? No, no, no, no, it was Donald Trump's fault. Now, how's that for deeply ironic? I must also know for the record that I enjoyed his wardrobe change in the middle of the speech. It's like, okay, oh, I've got a new accessory, let's put this one on.

Right. And it's red, it's our favorite color, charge. And just to be clear, it's a compilation of the parts of his speech that are relevant to this case. It was a 10 minute long speech, obviously we're not going to show you the full thing. Yeah, of course, okay. So now look, getting serious, you know, I'm getting serious. You know, I see that speech, and there's one part of it that I like, actually, which is that the Republicans actually call each other out, right? They say some folks are corrupt, some people aren't.

Democrats never do that. And it's actually terrible. Some of these Republicans like their bourbon, which, by the way, I like bourbon too. Yeah, and there's no way Mo Brooks doesn't like bourbon either. But like, okay, finish the thought, though, and they take lobbyist money, and Mo, do you take lobbyist money? And so I haven't looked into it for the purpose of this story. I would be shocked if he didn't. But okay, but we'll, you know, that's for another day.

We'll look into it and et cetera, right? But at least he's calling out people within his party. If Democrats did that without all the weirdo of violence that went along with it on January 6th and said, yeah, there are other Democrats and they take corporate lobbyist money. And yeah, they're corrupt. That would actually lead to a lot of change. But the Democrats, unfortunately, in this case, never break ranks. So they always like, oh, if one of us is corrupt, none of us will ever say it. Okay.

So now that's a, it's a funny, random thing to say in the middle of this, but it's important. No, no, I want to jump in on that. You're right. I mean, the frustrating thing about progressive Democrats specifically because they're supposed to represent, that wing of the Democratic Party is supposed to represent the best interests of progressives like us. And the gloves are almost never on. The gloves are always off, right?

It's almost as if they try to put the glove on and it doesn't fit, they must have quit. Like just put the gloves on and fight. In this case though, I mean, it's just hilarious because the Republican lawmakers who just wanted to carry out the right behavior in certifying the election for the person who actually legitimately won the election. Like money in politics has nothing to do with that. Yeah. Nothing, you know?

Yeah, look, I think, I hope it's Nina Turner, Nina Turner. But if there's no progressive that ever says, guys, no, money in politics is terrible. Everybody says that. Nobody ever does anything about it. Citizens United is terrible. We all say it, but we don't do anything about it. That one takes money. That one takes corporate money.

That one took $760,000 in drug company money and health care insurance money to vote against Medicare for all. See, that would make all the difference. You don't have to get violent. You don't have to be a weirdo. You don't have to do a wardrobe change. You just have to say what's right, what's true, right? So if the Republicans were actually honest and decent and they were challenging their own corrupt members,

I would be here for it, even if I massively disagreed with Mo Brooks on everything else, right? But at the end of the day, they didn't do that. Instead, they were like, oh, let's break things. Let's go into the Capitol and cause violence and talk about executing people. So finally, the most relevant part here is, look, I don't know what was in Mo Brooks's mind. And I'm curious what you think, Anna, like did he think, if I tell him to fight enough times and if I tell them to go to the Capitol enough times, maybe they'll break the windows and break the doors and assault the police and go try to murder Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi?

Or did he, was he just like, I don't know, I'll just rile them up and see what happens. I don't really care, right? Well, okay, I think that's actually an excellent question because while I very much despise Republican politicians who have lied to the American people repeatedly about what actually transpired during the 2020 election. I do not believe that Mo Brooks or any other member of the Republican Party. Maybe there's a few exceptions, I don't know. But my sense is, they really thought that they could use that type of inflammatory language and incite what they incited without actually seeing it play out in real time. And it did, right? I have to be honest, if I had watched that

speech in real time, I would not have predicted that these rioters would do what they did that day. Yeah, I agree. And so let me make another important distinction. So Moe Brooks says does the rah, right, and I think his number one problem along with most of the other people there that day that were speakers, not all, but most, were that they don't quite realize how violent their own voters are. That, you know, we showed you that poll 28% of Republican voters say it might be time for violence. Obviously, they did this. And some people now, I think realize the potential for violence and are still egging it on. Okay, but I think a lot of people are like, whoa, I don't think they were actually going to

go and assault people. I didn't think they were going to bring nooses and try to hang our own vice president, right? But Mo Brooks has never said that. Mo Brooks has been like, yeah, I didn't do anything wrong. And of course, when he's, his ass is actually on the line in court, he goes, it was Donald Trump, it wasn't me, he was Donald Trump, it was Donald Trump. But by the way, Now the last piece of this irony is I agree with him, it was Donald Trump, right? So Donald Trump didn't make him go give the speech to be absolutely accurate. His claim is Trump made me do the speech. No, he didn't.

You did the speech on your own, right? But the one guy who knew they were doing violence could have stopped it and chose not to. So has the guilty intent is Donald Trump. Kevin McCarthy called him from inside Congress said, we're being assaulted, they're in the building, and they're and they're doing violence, please make them stop. And according to another Republican who overheard the conversation, Trump said, hey, maybe they care more about the selection than you did, Kevin. So he knew they were going to do violence and that they might kill people.

He was asked to send the National Guard and he didn't. And then he told the leader of the Republicans in the House, I'm not going to send for help when he knew the violence had already happened and was in the middle of happening. So ultimately there is one person deeply responsible. That's Donald Trump. And by the way, the Republican Party has seen all of that. The Republican voters, and they said, yeah, we like it. We like that he caused this violence, and maybe we'd like more of it. That's why he's still, by far and away, the leader of the Republican Party and polls number one in almost every poll, when Republicans

are asked, who's your leader? They say, Donald Trump, the guy who encouraged the capital rights, not just before, but during the violence. That's our boy. So now, Now we're gonna story later in the program for you guys, but now they're talking about doing, you know, taking over the government in August. I don't, I think the whole country's not getting it. There are tons and tons of right wingers in this country that cannot wait to do that kind of violence again. Well, let's switch gears and talk a little bit about the environment because I'm sure

some of you may have come across a video of the Gulf of Mexico on fire. So why did that happen? Let's discuss. There was a fire in the Gulf of Mexico. It's in the video footage that you see right beside me. And it was as, it happened as a result of a underwater gas pipe leaking. Now it took five hours for authorities to take, get that fire taken care of, you know, because how do you, how do you extinguish a fire that's in the middle of the ocean?

So luckily they did handle it, but it was only because they were able to show. shut down the gas pipe that was leaking. Now the circular inferno formed at 5.30 a.m. or 5.15 a.m. after this pipeline, which is about 12 inches in diameter leaked. And the pipeline belongs to Mexico. So President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador of Mexico has actually focused more on kind of bolstering their fossil fuel company nationalizing it because he sees it as a path forward for more jobs for Mexican citizens, which I understand.

But there is unfortunately a price to pay when you go in that direction as opposed to focusing on maybe renewable energies and creating new jobs that way. He has said that he wants to restore Pemex's, and that's the name of the company, Pemex's former status as a national oil company that made Mexico self-sufficient in energy and provided hundreds of thousands of well-paying jobs. Now, obviously, this isn't an indictment specifically on Mexico. This is something that we've been experiencing when it comes to US-based fossil fuel companies. We've seen oil spill after oil spill, whether it's in the ocean or on land.

And I want to give you those details in just a second, because in California specifically, where we have a mayor and also specifically a governor who claims to care about climate change, Their actions certainly do not match their rhetoric. So I want to talk about Gavin Newsom in just a minute. But before I do, Jank, do you want to jump in? Look, guys, if people look at this decades later when the earth is on, you know, the entirety of the earth is on fire, they're going to say, how did they not do anything? I mean, there was an entire city in California that burnt down that was called Paradise.

Paradise burned down. Then the ocean was on fire. Then Siberia was on fire. And then I forget it was the North Pole, the South Pole or both that were on fire. And they just sat around. And why didn't they do anything? And oh, well, they were worried about the stock market. This has this new movie out on Amazon Prime.

And where the future comes back and says, we need more fighters to come to the future because we're losing for aliens. I feel like if it happened in real world, like it would be the reverse. people would come from the future and go, you burn the planet down. Do something now. Do something now. Why are you continuing to burn them? Oh, you're worried about the stock market. Are you insane?

Oh, you let your politicians take money from oil companies, and that's why you let them burn the planet? No, wake up and do something. So I like Obrador overall, but we're honest. We do a news program where we've got to call people out. So I get it. He's got different priorities in Mexico, and he's got to really worry about the jobs.

I understand all that. But stop building fossil fuels and stop extracting fossil fuels and putting it in. They're not safe. Now we're gonna get to Gavin Newsom and our own problems here in America in a second. And by the way, he's also a Democrat and we're also gonna criticize him because the facts matter. Now, the other thing that I wanted to point out is, oh no, don't worry, these things don't leak. I mean, they leak all the time, every time. You remember the fight in North Dakota, and we covered it first and most, et cetera.

And the mainstream media is like, whoa, what do you? And all the activists said, these things leak, it's going to leak into the water. And the oil companies are like, no, no, we never leak. But we have evidence of you leaking hundreds of times, right? And so here it is, a giant fire in the middle of the Gulf of Mexico. And by the way, the officials in Mexico said there was no leak. No, no, hold on. They said that, yeah, exactly, so they said, yeah, I mean, there's no evidence of anything leaking into the ocean.

What? What does that even mean? And by the way, the Mexican officials are really not providing any other details other than that. There's a lack of transparency there, probably because they want to protect their own situation and they don't want to deal with any type of consequence that might come along with the fact that they had a pipe that leaked in the Gulf of Mexico and caused this issue. for five hours straight. And by the way, it's not the first time this has happened. If you research fire in the middle of the ocean, other videos will come up from previous instances of this happening. So this is something that happens repeatedly

and needs to be addressed. And not just by Mexico, guys, this is a problem that needs to be addressed globally. And when it comes to the United States, clearly we have a lot of guilt and a lot of blame with our own actions. So let's focus on Gavin Newsom, who had some Rhetoric that I certainly agree with when this story broke recently.

He tweeted, the ocean is literally on fire, but yeah, sure, we can't afford climate action. Which is, again, nothing wrong with that tweet, but rhetoric is one thing. Actions obviously speak louder than words. So what exactly has Gavin Newsom done in regard to climate change, climate action? Well, according to Newsweek, Governor Gavin Newsome has projected the image of a climate, climate activist or advocate pledging in October that the state would ban all hydro fracking by 2024. This is an article from 2020, by the way. At the same time, his administration granted 1,709 new oil and gas well production permits in 2020, and that's according

to Frack Tracker Alliance, a 116.6% increase over the previous year. So it's cute when you use the right words to appeal to progressive voters or Democratic voters, but make no mistake about it. In California, we might have Democratic lawmakers, but if you look at their actions, they're really not different from what you would see from a Republican lawmaker, especially in regard to anything having to do with climate change. I mean, Gavin Newsom accepting or allowing these permits to go through is absolutely reprehensible, especially given the fact that he postures as someone who cares about climate change. So, the problem is the politicians and the end, here we go again, the media, why?

So I'll update the numbers. So Fract Tracker now says that between January 2019 when Gavin Newsom took office and today, 8,610 total permits were approved. Jesus. 8,610. But he's got a good tweet, but the tweet was good, it was pleasant, it was good rhetoric. Now, when you do that tweet, you shouldn't rely on progressive activists to give you the actual news. Like we're a news program, we just gave you the news. That's, you can go look it up for yourself.

It's just, it's a fact, right? And we gave you two different numbers and maybe that they're, you know, it's the same organization, et cetera, right? Now, the rest of the news just gives Gavin News some credit. Oh, Bravo, nice tweet, nice tweet. Can you believe they want to recall him? How dare they? It is a Republican hatchet job, except there are plenty of progressives in the state of California who are not happy with the performance that we've seen from Gavin Newsom.

Yeah, and we're always stuck, you know, between these guys. The Republicans are loathsome. And so did they mainly lead a recall effort? Yes, of course, they're the opposition, right? But does that mean Gavin Newsom is awesome progressive? No, it doesn't mean that. It's easy to have both of those thoughts in your head at the same time, unless you live in a black and white world, right? Is he good or is he evil?

I hear the world is binary, right? So, but we've got to have accountability. So when the official in Mexico says the leak didn't cause a spill and you see the, you know, the water on fire, you know he's an obvious liar, right? You shouldn't have to, you don't need permission if you're in the press to call a lying politician a liar, okay? And when Gavin New York. One of the hardest parts of getting older is feeling like something's all.

off in your body, but not knowing exactly what. It's not just aging. It's often your hormones, too. When they fall out of balance, everything feels off. But here's the good news. This doesn't have to be the story of your next chapter. Hormone Harmony by Happy Mammoth is an herbal formula made with science-backed ingredients, designed to fine-tune your hormones by balancing estrogen, testosterone, progesterone, and even stress hormones like cortisol. It helps with common issues such as hot flashes, poor sleep, low energy, bloating, and more. With over 40,000 reviews and a bottle sold every 24 seconds, the results speak for themselves. A survey found 86% of women lost weight, 77% saw an improved mood, and 100% felt like themselves again.

Start your next chapter feeling balanced and in control. For a limited time, get 15% off your entire first order at happy mammoth.com with code next chapter at checkout. Visit happy mammoth.com today and get your old self back naturally. Newsom says, oh, I care so much about climate change. approves thousands of oil and gas permits, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out he's not being truthful. And guys, now the most important part, why? Why are they not being truthful? Because of their donors. And I don't know how much Gavin is taken in dark money, because if you think dark money is only for Republicans, you literally don't

know the news. No, Democrats take tons of dark money, right? And they take money from corporations and then corporations, PACs, as the Exxon Mobile lobby has explained, I think it was just last week that we covered that story. They're like, oh, we do these front groups so we don't take the blame for it. And then we funnel the money to Democratic and Republican politicians.

And then they do nice, he didn't say this part. Now, this is me. They do nice tweets and L.A. Times, San Francisco Chronicle, all of the press goes, oh, Bravo, got a new symbol. He's fighting climate change. No, he's not. No, he's not. They all serve the same donor class.

And the world is burning because of them. We got to take a break, but we're not done discussing climate change. When we come back, we'll talk about what the victims of California's wildfires have to depend on. And unfortunately, it's the whims of Wall Street. Come right back. Back on TYT. All right, climate-fueled wildfires have been ravaging the state of California for several years now. The unfortunate conditions as a result of drought, coupled with a deregulated private utility company like PG&E, has spelled a recipe for disaster.

But now we're finding that the victims of these wildfires who are supposed to be compensated by PG&E and their negligence are unfortunately now relying. on the whims of Wall Street regarding their payouts. And this is why this whole system is incredibly screwed up. As CNBC reports, the Victim Relief Trust received 478 million shares of the reorganized company stock, making it the utility's largest shareholder. So essentially in a settlement, PG&E agreed to provide shares of their stock to the trust, which is supposed to pay out money to the victims of these wildfires, which PG&E has contributed to. The fund is meant to compensate more than 70,000 victims of 24 wildfires,

including the devastating campfire, which killed at least 84 people and destroyed much of the town of paradise in 2018. The largest and most destructive fire in California history, an investigation found that the fire was caused by the failure of a piece of equipment known as a sea hook on a century old PG&E transmission tower. In fact, PG&E not only operates here in California, but unfortunately also operates in states like Nevada, where they do not invest in what they have promised to invest in. Things like ensuring that vegetation in the area where their equipment is is cleared. So if there is any type of equipment mishap, it doesn't spark any type of fire. I want to show you this quick video to kind of give you a sense of how much they skirt their responsibilities in the pursuit of profits.

Internal records, incriminating evidence, showing that PG&E is decimating its tree-trimming budget. One contractor reports that its workforce has been reduced 49.7%. And even PG&E's own employees send warnings. The potential for a major fire is very real. And it's not just cutting budgets. Ross learns that PG&E actually diverts nearly $80 million earmarked to trim trees into company profits. They sacrifice safety. Money that should have been put into making sure their lines were safe, went into their own pockets, and into the pockets of their shareholders.

So as I mentioned, now some of the shareholders include the victims who lost their homes, some of whom lost their family members as a result of these fires in California. But here's the problem. A court appointed trustee, his name is John Trotter of the fire victim trust, said that the victims of the fire should actually root for this private utility company's success because their money is tied to how well the stock performs. He says you are 25 or 24 and a half percent owners of PG&E, and so it's important for you to want PG&E to do well.

The old PG&E, I don't have to tell you, was certainly less than a model corporate citizen. The new PG&E, which now appears regularly in front of the California Utilities Commission, is trying much harder to do, just trying much harder and doing a much better job. But really, taking the fact that the money that they're given as a result of this relief fund is tied to how well PG&E performs in the stock market. And that is insane. I'll give you more details in a second, but Jake. Yeah, there's two different issues here. So let's start with that one.

So they say, okay, we're not going to give you $100. We'll use a round number just to make it simple for the analogy. We're not going to give you the cash, God forbid. We're going to give it to you in stock, okay? So now, why is this a really bad idea? Now, if the stock goes up and your $100 turns into $150, you're not going to complain. Let's keep it real, okay? you're going to say, oh, well, more than I expected, right?

But if your $100 goes down to $50 because their price went down, you're going to be really mad. Sad day for you. Right. And so, but not only does that rob you of the $50 you deserve because the settlement was $100, okay, but it's also set up so that people will be like, we'll either get a windfall or will be super mad if the price goes down, and justifiably so. So I don't know why they did it this way, maybe they were cash poor and as those the only

way they could do it. Or maybe it's because they wanted people to root for PG&E. Now they're the biggest stockholders, right? Right. And so- Of course they wanted that. Of course they wanted it. I think that was very intentional. And let me also just keep in mind, I want you all to keep in mind that when PG&E was found liable for some of these wildfires as a result of them refusing to invest in improving their own equipment, Governor Gavin Newsom of California, decided to use taxpayer money to bail them out as they were going bankrupt as a result of all the lawsuits they were facing. So taxpayers in California bailed them out, and now the victims of these fires are being told, you better root for the success of this private company that screwed you over because their success means that you'll be compensated appropriately for the damage that was done to your life.

Well, that actually then leads back to the second issue, which is what Anna started with. So they didn't repair electrical wires that caused the fire in the first place. They were a hundred years old, a hundred years old. Now think about why. It's a natural monopoly, okay? And so that's a term that people have been aware of since Adam Smith. So you don't have a choice. You can't be like, hey, I'd like to get my electricity from some other line that's coming into my house.

So there's one line coming into your house and you don't have a choice, okay? That's called a natural monopoly. When you have that, it must be really tightly regulated. Because if it's not regulated, they can go, okay, I'm charging you more now. Because you need the electricity, I can charge you $100. I'm going to charge you $200. I'm going to charge you $1,000. There's nothing you could do.

Otherwise, your refrigerator won't work. You can't turn on the lights, et cetera. So now the government does regulate somewhat on the price, but there's going to be a huge twist on that. But then they say, in California, they're pretty much like, certainly in Texas, right? But notice, in Texas's Republicans, in California, it's Democrats. We're getting robbed either way, okay? And so in California, they say, don't worry, you don't have to repair anything. They should actually bury the electrical wires.

That's what everybody else does all across the world. But that's because no other country allows legalized bribery like we do. So what does PG&E do? And that report partly explained it, they're like, well, if we can't raise the price too much, what we could do is cut the cost, and that way we'll have more profit. Now when we cut the costs, meaning we don't repair the wires, we don't bury the wires, We know for a fact there's going to be more fires, and we know more people are going to die and more houses are going to burn down, but we're going to make an extra buck.

And then we're going to leave the company and nobody will ever catch us. The executives, some of the earlier shareholders were all get incredibly rich, and then we'll dump it on the lap of the people we burn down. Now that's outrageous, why would our government let them get away with it? PG&E was one of the top donors to Democrats and politicians overall in the state of California. We allow legalized bribery, so obviously we get a bunch of criminals that sometimes literally burn our house down for a profit. No, I mean, really think about it, guys.

I know it's frustrating when you hear these arguments that equate the Democrats to the Republicans, but on some issues, they do seem incredibly similar, which is why our politics, has just boiled down to cults of personality and culture wars. When you have a corrupt political system that allows for legalized bribery of both parties, well, they're going to represent the best interests of those corporate donors instead of their own constituents and their own voters, their own base. That's what we're seeing right now. So when you're asking yourself, why are politicians engaging in these ridiculous debates

on issues that don't really matter, whether it be the war on Christmas or whatever it is, right? Know that that's actually very much intentional because it deflects from the similarities that both parties really do have when it comes to these bread and butter issues, when it comes to climate action, when it comes to the situations and the policies that actually do impact our daily lives. Yeah, so look, we've told you a million times. We do a nuance on this show. So is there a difference between Democrats and Republicans, yes, there's differences on social issues, big differences. On the other hand, are there differences in economic issues? No, almost none. The rest of the press will not tell you that. They'll say, oh, no, my God, the Democrats are lovely

and beautiful and fell down from heaven. And most of the corporate Republicans are, too, but Trump's a bad guy. Okay, so that's how they'll synthesize. My whole life, the press is telling me how great corporate Democrats and corporate Republicans are, because they both agree on economic issues. Are there other differences? Sure, if a Democrat had one in 2016 instead of Trump, we'd have a Supreme Court that's 63 liberal, at least on social issues, as opposed to a court that's 63 in favor of conservatives. So yes, there are differences, but on economic issues, the same corruption affects both parties. And again, the mainstream media never, ever, ever tells you about it. I mean, look at that statement the guy said. Now PG&E is a good company because they show up in from the California Utilities Commission. Well, what the hell were they doing before?

They didn't even show up in further people regulating them. Why? Because they run the place. They didn't need to show up. They already brought the Democrats. I always remember Eric Olsen's line. He was a local progressive who ran the 25th district in California, okay, for a local seat. And he said, wait a minute, Democrats have a super majority in California.

Who are we negotiating with? Well, by definition, we're not negotiating with the Republicans. Oh, we're negotiating with the donors. And that is indisputable. Isn't it amazing that none of the mainstream media in California noticed that very obvious fact? So that is why when PG&E, I mean, why are you letting a natural monopoly donate to politicians? That is a recipe for disaster.

Anyone can tell you that, except no one will tell you that. It's because the corporate media and the corporate politicians are one and the same. They're disgusting and in this case they got a lot of people killed and and you know, and now they say, oh, congratulations. Now you're gonna have to root for the company that burned your family's house down. Let's take our second break of the hour and when we come back, we have a block with some pretty awful behavior by both cops and racist neighbors who effed around and found out. We'll be right back.

All right, back on the Young Turks. Jonathan Lighter using YouTube super chat reminded me that I should say happy Fourth of July to everybody. Oh, yeah. Hope you enjoyed it. Jonathan wrote, and hey, TYT, re-up my membership on the Fourth of July, seems patriotic, keep up the good work. Thank you, Jonathan.

I consider it patriotic, but I'm a little biased. But hit the join button below or do TYT.com slash join. And yes, we're genuinely trying to help this country. Get the money out of the goddamn politics so you're representatives. So we can literally get democracy back. Wolf dash pack.com, okay? All right, Anna. Well, a terrifying situation took place in Las Vegas.

Cops in Las Vegas, Nevada, pulled over the wrong man and then proceeded to put him in handcuffs after they realized they had pulled over the wrong man. Now, this came in a viral TikTok video, which we're about to share with you. The TikTok user, his handle, is Last Call 702, and we're breaking it down in two different videos. Now, you have to listen closely because you literally hear the cops say verbally that they got the wrong man. Let's watch. Now, man. I said I got doing so wrong car, because they got the wrong car because they got the wrong car.

The person they pulled over is an African-American man, which is also a pretty terrifying situation given the fact that in other stories that we've covered if the person, regardless of how innocent they are, resists in any way, it could lead to them getting shot and killed. Luckily, that didn't happen in this case. But even after the cops realized, we've got the wrong car and the wrong person, they put them in handcuffs. Let's watch. And I want to be clear on what the victim in this case said to the cops. After Las Vegas police officers explain the mistake, the black man tells them, quote, just get me out of these cuffs and let me go about my day, please and thank you. And luckily they did, but I don't understand why they put them in handcuffs after it was abundantly clear to them that they had the wrong guy.

Yeah, I know why. Because it's a gang and they protect their own and they don't, they always claim that they never make mistakes. and they're always telling the truth. So if they pulled over a guy and he must have been the right guy, even though they know he's the wrong guy, but they have to justify it. So like, oh, we're doing important police work. So we're going to come in and handcuff you. Look, we're forced to bleep out the curses because of the platforms that we're on.

But the cops, that's why that one cop over there is chilling on the on the trunk. Because at that point, they already know, they already talked internally and know that it's the wrong car, the wrong guy, everything. The bystanders say, oh my God, they got the wrong effing guy, okay? And, but they didn't just handcuff him just to show, no, we're talking. Cops are infallible. And you show them who's boss, even if you're a dumbass and you got the wrong people and you know you got the wrong people. By the way, actually, it's not a dumbass thing. Sometimes you pull over the wrong person.

Exactly. Maybe the car looked the same. Maybe the plates were similar, et cetera. That's not the problem. Everybody makes mistakes. We're all human, right? The problem is, no, you have to assert your authority, no matter what, and handcuff that poor, innocent guy for no reason. He's saying, look, my house is right there. It doesn't make any sense, right? And then, but there's actually something worse that is hard to hear on that tape.

But when you listen to the raw footage, they say, you better not reach for anything. Yeah. Now, they've got three, four guns pointed at them. Right. And at that point, when they said, you better not reach for anything, like my heart stop. I'm like, oh, no, don't shoot him. Don't shoot them because we've certainly 100 videos, right? Most are with African Americans, but actually plenty with white folks too, right?

The guy crawling in the hotel. In the hotel hallway. Yeah, I remember that that one was haunting, right? Happened recently with another white guy. They're like, oh, I don't know. He looked like he was twitching or something. I told him put his hands up and his hands down. And he says he did what I told him to do.

I thought he was reaching for something. So I murdered him, right? So when they said don't reach for anything, I was like, oh, no, don't kill him. Don't kill him. You already know you have the wrong guy. Don't kill him. Right. So this is the police state we all live in. Exactly. Well, let's move on to our next story. Because oftentimes, you know, you see these situations where terrible people do racist things and they seem to get away with it. But in this case, a man's neighbors decided to call his bluff. So one New Jersey man has decided or did decide to go on a racist rant against his neighbor and essentially told his neighbor, you know, you don't like it, why don't you come see me? And there were some consequences to that that he did not like. Let's start with the first video featuring Edward Matthews, a resident of South New Jersey and the rant that he went on against his black neighbor. The daughter got smashed. Is that what you want?

No. And you want to know where I was when all this happened? I don't care. At work, monkey. I don't care what you were. At Mark. Just the guy told him out of the police. Get these monkey out of here and you can't do that.

That's me talking. 3602. Grammarcy Way, that's where I live. Come see me. Hey, guys. Hey, doing. Hey, why are you back over here? Somebody called me.

Somebody called you. It's private property. You have no jurisdiction here whatsoever. I do. Somebody calls me. Hold on. You know what? What? Hold on.

No, no, no. I'm going to let you do your thing. Go talk to these f***ers. Go ahead. Stop. Stop. You go talk to the fias. Let them know what I'm all about and what that phrase they had.

All right. You want to go back to your house? I'll come back to you. No, I'll stay right here. It's time the property. Okay. Have the next night. I'm going to let you guys get an education right now.

All right. Thanks, man. Appreciate it. I'll do my job. No problem. I'm not going away until your husband stop fighting me and threatening me while I'm at fucking work. Hang me. Cut it out, man.

Oh, wait. Arrest me. I'm not arrested right now. Relax, you sacked it out, dude. Let's talk to see, Brandon. 36.02 bankruptcy wait, come see me, you. So he says come see me, we obviously had to bleep out the parts where he used the N-word repeatedly. And apparently this isn't the first run-in that he's had with his African-American neighbors.

Now when he said come see me, come see me, the, the. neighbors decided, okay, we'll go ahead and come see you. And they decided to do a protest outside of his home, as many as 150 demonstrators gathered outside of his house and chanted for him to come out. As you can see, a very diverse group of people. You see white people there. You see black people there as well. And there's a history of issues with this man. And his name again is Edward Matthews from Mount Laurel. And, you know, I want to go to this next video. is B-roll. So the racist New Jersey man was then later arrested as the protesters were there. Some of them, you can see are throwing bottles and stuff like that. But the cops created

a walkway to kind of get him through and put him in the car. Why was he being arrested? Well, they put him in custody for fourth degree bias, intimidation, and trespassing. And later he did apologize. But before we go to his apology, I want to go to the final video here. because this has to do with a prior incident involving the same man. Edward Matthews, let's watch. That's why nothing's happening. I sell drugs. That's what I do.

That's what I've always done around here. I stopped, went to prison three times. Now I have all the friends with the cops. If you guys want to keep doing this route, we're going to go to the legal route. You're not going to get any help from the cops because they're my people. Do you understand? Yeah. That's why you're not getting anything.

And I know that you've said that. The cops came down and told me. They said, what do you want us to do? So you can figure that out. We're not trying to cause you a problem. You're not trying to cause us a problem, right? I've never been trying to cause you a problem. Right.

So there's no reason for the cops to come back around. We should be perfectly cordial to be able to have these conversations and be able to live around here with no problem. Yeah, but now what you're talking about, oh, the cops aren't going to help you or calling my brother a . I don't bother you. Calling your brother. Yeah, you did do that.

No, I said, now I'm going to call the cops like the . That's what I said. I didn't call your brother in. I said, now here I go, looking like a fo' in the cops. It's exactly what I said. Well, we all heard you. We all heard you? We all heard it, yeah, everybody outside.

I couldn't believe it because I wasn't even in the argument. Right, and you weren't even there either. Yeah, and I came outside up top. Keep doing what you're doing, and then we'll turn it around another way. How about that? Okay. So in that video, in that incident that we just shared with you in that last video, apparently Matthews brags about selling drugs and also brags about his close relationship

with the cops. Apparently his relationship with the cops wasn't close enough for them to avoid arresting him for fourth degree bias, intimidation and trespassing, and then later he apologized. But before we get to that, Jank. Yeah, but this time, because they finally arrested him after 150 people showed up at his house like he wanted them to. But the history of the police with this guy, his middle name, I think is Cagney. I think that's what they call him. That's what the cop called him there in one of the videos you saw is that the police let him get away with anything he wanted. So when he said in that second video, they're my people referring to the cops.

No, the history in that case is that is exactly right. Even though he's, you just saw him admit that he's a criminal, right? And he said, but it doesn't matter because the cops are my people. So with that woman that he was talking to, so what was the conflict and what happened and how did the cops react? She lives on top of his house, right? It's a condo unit. And she's a single mom and has a young kid. And he didn't like that the kid every once in a while would make noise.

He smashed her door, apparently. And I saw the pictures of the smash door. He did graffiti on our car. So she keeps calling the cops. Like it's obviously him. I have him on tape saying that we're N-words and that he'll do anything he wants to us. And then you see my door. Cops like, I don't care.

No, we're not going to do anything. So it turns out he was right. the cops were his people. The reason they did the arrest here is because it made such a big, so many people showed up. So they got embarrassed that they're buddies with the guy. You saw the first video. Look, that cop didn't do anything wrong in the first video, right? And he went and respectfully talked to the African American homeowners, et cetera, right? But if you noticed, he knows the guy, he called him by his name, Cagney. He's like, Cammy, come on, why are you doing this? Come on, man, remember, be cool, be cool. They never arrested him before. And by the way,

that incident with the single mom? No, it's over and over and over again. Every, that the reason 150 people showed up is because he's hounding every African American in the neighborhood. Exactly. And he's not just doing it verbally. They've got these things where their cars and their houses are smashed. And yet the cops don't do anything. So don't get this twisted. The cops finally take action here only because they're busted and they're caught. Otherwise, they were letting this thug run wild against black people in that neighborhood. Right, exactly. Once the cops, realized that they allowed this situation to escalate to the point where there are protesters outside of this guy's house, that's when they realized, oh, maybe we should do something,

not because they, like, I know this is now my speculation, right? So let me be clear about that. In my opinion, not because they actually wanted to do anything about it, but because they wanted to protect themselves. 100%. That's it. That's all it was. No, look, so look, look, how do I, why do I say 100%? That's, of course, my opinion. But it's based on all of this evidence that we're showing you guys. In the first tape, not only is the cop super polite to this guy, but that guy bossed him around. You notice when the cop comes, he's like, hey, what are you doing here?

Okay, and he knows the guy's name. He's like, what are you doing here? You back up, okay? You don't belong here. You think a black guy can talk to a cop like that? Is that what you think? Do you know what would happen to a black man in America if he started bossing the cops around and telling him you don't belong and I have rights and you don't and et cetera?

God, I can't stand people like this guy. Thinking that he's, you know, the big guy who needs to go around policing everyone else's lives, harassing African Americans, harassing other homeowners. Look at him. He think he's proud of himself. Like, he thinks that he's the arbiter of what should or shouldn't happen in the neighborhood. He thinks he's the cop. No, but I got to tell you, it's, so there's always going to be bad apples. And so there's always going to be a jerk like this in the neighborhood. Yes.

The people that are more responsible are the police because they just, they prove them right. He says, hey, I think you guys are monkeys, and I think I can do anything I want to you, and I'm a known criminal, but I'm white, and the cops are my people. You guys are never, ever going to get justice, and he's so brazen. He knows he's on tape. He states his address. So I've said a thousand times, do not go to people's homes. It's a terrible idea.

It's going to end in disaster. This is a rare exception, because he said, come see me. He gave the address twice on tape and invited people to his house. They said, come see me. Right. And they came and saw him. You f around, you find out. And so, and they didn't do any violence to them, right?

They have thrown the water bottles at the end, et cetera, because they're incredibly frustrated that this guy's gotten away with everything for years on end. But the police, they're, you know. So I just want to make one other point, because it's an important point to kind of put this story in a broader context of what we've been seeing in this country since last summer with the Black Lives Matter protests and the statement, defund the police. Look, there's rising crime, violent crime throughout the country right now. And so I'm already seeing Republican lawmakers argue that it's because we've defunded the police and it's because we keep antagonizing the police. That's the reason why this is happening.

Even though in areas in the country where they've actually funded the police more and have been incredibly friendly to the police, we're still seeing these crime spikes. The reason why people had that statement to begin with is because they're actually there's There are two different, like the country is divided when it comes to the issue of policing, because they have different experiences. So if you are an African American from that community, right, this South Jersey community, you're used to the police not having your back. You're used to your taxes going to pay for their salaries, but you don't feel like they're

protecting and serving you because they're not. So when you hear defund the police, understand that, well, for you defunding the police might sound insane because you've had good experiences with the cops. You call, they come, they protect you, they serve, they do what they're supposed to do. For others, that isn't the case. So defunding might not sound as scary to them because honestly whether they're funded or defunded, it really makes no difference in the way they've been treated by these cops, right? So do I actually think we need to completely defund the police, abolish the police? No. But that's not what people are genuinely asking for. They're asking for

accountable policing that actually protects and serves. Yeah, and guys, look, so your house is broken into, you call the cops, the cops come. That's a good thing, everybody wants that, right? Black folks want that, we want that, white folks want it, everybody wants it, right? But on the other hand, are they out there solving crimes 24-7 and preventing crime? Crime is through the roof now, right? And all these cops are going around going, I don't know, man. Maybe it's the fault of-

They were mean to us. Yeah, it's the fault of people who were mean to us. Wait, are you not doing your job because people were mean to you? Is that what's happening, right? Nah, they're not preventing crime. Unless it's property crime. So that's really what the police are for. Look, getting rid of them entirely doesn't make any sense.

You need policing in the world, right? On the other hand, the way that the cops are right now, it's just wide-scale injustice over and over and over again, right? So all of our members are writing in with all their own stories. I'll just read one. Ecclectic miscellaneous wrote in the cops are shamed into actually doing something. Apparently police only do the right thing when they have no other choice. Yeah, and you saw how friendly the cop was with him. You saw, we told you about all these different instances.

That's why all those people showed up. And they never, ever, ever protected them until they were shamed into protecting. They're like, oh my God, now we have to actually do our job against a known criminal who we know is going around calling people monkeys and the N-word and breaking into their stuff. Now we've got to do our job. Oh, man. Now, look, and so many other people are writing the same thing we said, if that was a black guy bossing around a cop like that and he's a known criminal and he's getting in the ground. of families living in white families living in condos. And brags about, he's like, I am a drug dealer, and the cops are on my side.

And the cops come and he goes, you gotta get out of here, okay? Et cetera, that guy is gonna get brutalized. And everybody knows it. The innocent black guys get brutalized. Here's a guilty white guy, nonstop, nothing. So finally they arresting him on some rinky dink charges only because they were humiliated into action. Don't miss the second hour of the show. the second hour of the show, we've got a lot to get to, including a failed attempt

at basically going after female soccer stars for doing something that they didn't actually do. Sean Spicer is back in the mix on that. And also, geeter, geeters back, is it vulnerable to additional hackers? Yes, we'll give you the details on that and more when we return. Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work, listen 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.