The Young Turks - Kamala Shuns Biden

Episode Date: October 29, 2024

The Kamala Harris campaign is reportedly stonewalling Biden’s plans to hit the trail on her behalf. Ballot drop boxes suspiciously set on fire in Washington and Oregon. Trump appeared on Joe Rogan��s show, where Rogan didn’t push back; while the interview humanized Trump. HOSTS: Ana Kasparian (@anakasparian), Cenk Uygur (@cenkuygur) SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ https://www.youtube.com/user/theyoungturks FACEBOOK: ☞ https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER: ☞ https://www.twitter.com/theyoungturks INSTAGRAM: ☞ https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK: ☞ https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕 Merch: https://shoptyt.com ❤ Donate: http://www.tyt.com/go 🔗 Website: https://www.tyt.com 📱App: http://www.tyt.com/app 📬 Newsletters: https://www.tyt.com/newsletters/ If you want to watch more videos from TYT, consider subscribing to other channels in our network: The Watchlist https://www.youtube.com/watchlisttyt Indisputable with Dr. Rashad Richey https://www.youtube.com/indisputabletyt The Damage Report ▶ https://www.youtube.com/thedamagereport TYT Sports ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytsports The Conversation ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytconversation Rebel HQ ▶ https://www.youtube.com/rebelhq TYT Investigates ▶ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwNJt9PYyN1uyw2XhNIQMMA 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. For a limited time at McDonald's, enjoy the tasty breakfast trio. Your choice of chicken or sausage McMuffin or McGrittles with a hash brown and a small iced coffee for five bucks plus tax. Available until 11 a.m. at participating McDonald's restaurants. Price excludes flavored iced coffee and delivery. All right.

Welcome to the most honest new show in America, young Turks. I like that. Jank Yuga Anna Gisperin with you guys live from the Polymarket Studio here in LA. And so we got the latest on the race for you guys and the answer is, I don't know, okay. So we also have the Joe Rogan Donald Trump interview, as I promise over the weekend we're gonna break that down for you guys and show you what went right and wrong, largely wrong, but we'll explain. We got the Madison Square Garden rally for you guys. So we don't have a bonus episode, a normal bonus episode today because Jank will be debating Scott Adams on Kamala or no Kamala.

So this is all my way of yes, plugging what's gonna happen, but more importantly, you gotta keep it tight, Jake. Okay, she says on air to me, so you all know. Keep it tight, we gotta get to these stories. And it's as if she doesn't already know that I'm toyed, toyed like a tiger. He's not tight, not tight. All right, speaking of which, let's get to it. Well, I wanted to begin with some hot goss that's currently taking place within the Harris

campaign. This is actually a little bit of a painful story, because even though I have very little love for some of the figures involved here, it's just still kind of heartbreaking to hear about how much the Harris campaign is trying to distance itself from Biden, with Biden insisting that he continued campaigning on behalf of Harris. So let's get to the details. A new Axios report indicates that Kamala Harris's campaign team is all but completely ghosting President Joe Biden.

They do not want Joe Biden to go out there and campaign on behalf of Kamala Harris, but he insists on doing so. So according to Alex Thompson over at Axios, President Biden wants to campaign for Vice President Harris in the last days before the election. Harris's campaign keeps responding, we'll get back to you. Biden's team has held days open for campaigning only for Harris's team to let those days pass. Two people familiar with the matter told Axios. Now, a White House official has denied this version of events. So you get a statement from them saying this isn't true. But there are

few reasons that the Harris team would want to distance itself from Joe Biden, keep him on the sidelines. First and foremost, I mean, there's the fact that voters find Biden to be deeply unpopular, they're unhappy with Biden, and so it actually ends up hurting Kamala Harris when he's out there campaigning on behalf of her. For example, a national poll conducted in mid-September tested potential statements that Harris could make about herself and include Joe Biden in those statements, and the results were pretty brutal. Those that performed best, the polling found, were those that displayed a clear break between her and Biden, while those that performed worst were those that portrayed a future Harris administration as building on the accomplishments

of the Biden era. But any mention of Biden, the polling found, and this is probably the most brutal part, led to less support even if the position it had Harris taking was the same. And there's also the issue of Biden's constant gaffs. Last week, for example, he accidentally called to lock Trump up and then immediately corrected himself, but the damage was done. Take a look. I know this sounds bizarre. It sounds like I said this five years ago, you'd lock me up.

We got to lock him up. Politically lock him up. So Biden clarified and said politically lock him up, but not ideal. And here's the problem for the Harris campaign. Biden and his team are kind of making matters worse. They're taking things into their own hands and they're not taking no as an answer. So Biden's team responding to the president's wishes recently has become more assertive. Again, he is insisting that he continue campaigning on behalf of Kamala Harris.

So this weekend, Biden campaigned alone in Pittsburgh. The Harris campaign was not informed of those plans until they were announced publicly. And reportedly, Biden's team is considering more campaign stops in Maryland and in Delaware. The Biden team does believe that the president could serve a strategic purpose. One more graphic for you from the reporting here, many on Biden's team, including some still on the campaign that Harris inherited from the president, believe Harris's team is underestimating Biden's appeal among white working class communities in the Rust Belt, including in the critical state of Pennsylvania where Biden has spent extensive time during his life and career.

Now Biden did outperform Hillary Clinton's numbers in that demographic. However, it seems that overall the Harris team is just really trying to distance itself from Biden. What do you think, Shank? Yeah, all right, so I'm going to tell you what Biden should have done. I think you'll enjoy that. First, I'm going to go to members for fun. So these are YouTube members. Burning Rodin, shouldn't Biden be working instead of campaigning or sleeping? He is the president, L.O.L. I I share in that L.O.L. You see me LOLing as we speak. Bok says, remember when you put the Trump, Trump hat on anyone? Yeah, that was a disaster.

It was a disaster. And the fact that he doesn't realize that we live in a world where that photo op would be a disaster is part of the problem. Shelby says in at t.com for our member section there. Joe, she's just not that into you. Ouch, but also true. And then flaccid, feckless fiduciary, which is a super fun handle that might be my favorite yeah rode in that's a tight haircut jank

looking good I love how it has nothing to do with the story but it had to include it in the context of the story we're doing good job yeah no problem can't do it anytime I'm here for you guys hey the members say it I read it I'm like burgundy okay so now what should Biden have done number one if I was Biden I go to Kamala Harris and I'd say I get it I get it I'm on popular the country thinks we're going in the wrong direction so don't sweat a thing, don't worry about my feelings, let's win this thing. How can I help if that includes stay in my basement?

Don't worry, I've been warming it up for a couple of years, okay? I got a nice little pillow there, bam, I hit the nap and we're all good to go. But you tell me and I do what you need me to do, okay? That's what a team player would do, that's what someone who wants to beat Donald Trump would do. That's totally something you would do. Yeah. Now, like just, it is who you are to your core.

Even if it's something that hurts your feelings, you're still going to do the right thing. Yeah, well, that's what people are supposed to do if they actually want to accomplish a mission, they want to be on a team, etc. Look, I know people think I have a huge ego, but as Anna knows, no, the reality is if sometimes you got to take a bullet or you got to throw yourself under a bus, that's what you got to do to win if you really, really want to win. So this isn't about you, Joe, and your ego, it's about winning. Okay, so that's point one. Point two is, I'd say, look, maybe I can help with senior citizens. because Biden's more popular in that category and she's gaining a little bit in that category

in a way that is surprising. So maybe there's a way to have him work the, look, I'm not trying to be insulting, but seriously, like the above 65 crowd in a way that makes sense and in a way that's helpful. So that's I would focus on that. But again, I would like Kamala lead because I don't want to step on her, right? And then finally, the third thing I do is I'd say, if you need me to throw myself under the bus more, let me know. And again, that's, I know, that's so me, right? It is. Justice Democrats comes to mind.

Yeah, that does, a lot of things going to mind. Anyways, but the reason for that is, if you need me to separate from you more, what I would suggest, and look, you can judge me for this too, because this is a little bit, you know, political tricks, but I would say, I'll even stage a fake disagreement with you. Like, I'll say, you know what? I can't stand what Kamala's doing about tightening up the border. I don't agree. I think we should have a totally loose border, but Kamala keeps insisting on a tight border. It's driving me crazy. And that would get a lot of press. That's actually pretty genius. But there's no way the egos in Washington would ever even consider a plot like that. Right, because in that plot, the guy who says that takes

the hit. Exactly. People go, oh, you want a loose border, you want to do, boo, we hate you. But it helps the person who's in the race. But you're right, it would require someone to to be magnanimous, good luck if I need a person like that and why, let alone Joe Biden. I mean, he's putting on campaign events without even letting the Harris campaign know about it. Like, that's crazy. That's crazy. The ego has landed. Let's get to our next story.

This one is a lot more serious, unfortunately, and it has to do with various instances of ballot tampering, fraudulent voter registrations. Let's get into it. On Tuesday afternoon, I was contacted by Krista Miller, who is our chief clerk of elections regarding potentially fraudulent voter registration applications that had recently been received by her office. At that time, she informed me that the Elections Office received approximately 2,500 applications at or near the deadline for registering to vote. While preparing to process these applications, staff noticed that numerous applications

appeared to have the same handwriting, were filled out on the same day with unknown signatures, and some were previously registered voters, excuse me, and the signatures on file did not match the the signatures on the application. Lancaster County detectives began investigating the voter registration applications and immediately found applications that were indeed fraudulent. There are many things broken here in the United States, but I'm happy to report that when it comes to election integrity, it appears that things are going smoothly because who you just heard from is Lancaster County District Attorney Heather Adams, who revealed last week

on Friday that a huge number of potentially fraudulent voter registration applications are under investigation. The fact that election workers were able to determine that there were an issue, there was an issue with these voter registrations, shows you how this system actually is working to ensure that there is prevention of voter fraud. So with that in mind, let me give you the details as we know them at this moment. So Adams explained that the applications were filed or filled, I should say, as part of a large scale paid canvassing operation dating back to last summer in June.

So some states have actually made it illegal to pay canvassers by the amount of registrations they obtain. However, Pennsylvania is not one of those states. They have not outlawed such practice. Now, the forms were all dropped off right around the voter registration deadline, which was October 21st. The Lancaster DA, Heather Adams, says that the registrations were from canvassing operations at various shopping centers, parking lots, parks, and other areas, and the investigation that's currently underway involves around 2,500 registration applications. Now Adam said that while some of the applications did in fact have accurate personal information, the individuals listed on the applications actually didn't request to register to vote.

They didn't request the form to register to vote. So those are clearly fraudulent and Adam says that about 60% of the registration applications they're investigating right now have turned out to be fraudulent. So there are other shenanigans going on in other parts of the country, which I'll get to in just a moment. But Jake, this actually gave me a lot more faith in, you know, how things are vetted through this election process because what the workers were able to notice is, okay, this is a high volume of registration applications that we got that seem to have the exact same handwriting,

the signatures on the registration doesn't match the signature for the voters that are allegedly applying for this. And so they noticed these discrepancies and decided to do this investigation. Yeah, so I got two thoughts on this. One is along the lines that you're talking about, Anna, so people say, and Rogan said it in the Trump interview, oh my God, there's no reason not to do voter ID, there is a giant reason which is that 25% of African Americans don't have a driver's license in this country. They live in big cities, socioeconomic conditions, et cetera.

They don't have a car. So that really prevents a lot of people from voting. But then people think, oh, so there's no check. Anybody who wants to pretend to be a citizen just can hand in a ballot and that's good to go or they can hand in 10 ballots, 100 bills. No, there's a lot of checks. And you're seeing it in this story. So there's a reason why they ask you to put your signature on.

There's a reason why they have all the rules and regulations that they do. And so if you don't, and sometimes you get frustrated because you won't follow one of those tiny little regulations and they'll go, sorry, but we can't count it today. We'll put it in provisional and see if we can verify and then count it later. You guys all know provisional ballots, right? The reason why they exist is somebody screwed up a small part of the process. Why, there's checks on all parts of the process. So, like, Republicans will sometimes say things and get tons of people.

like giant cross section of the country to believe it, but it's not even remotely true. So I give you a phrase here that'll trigger a lot of people, like open borders. What a lot of people think open borders means is that it's not even illegal under Joe Biden or Democrats to cross the border. That's not true at all. So it means if you say, no, no, no, we get it. It means that they're not, they're doing lax enforcement. Or there's new polls in the system that they're taking, right, or catch and release. etc. But you'd be shocked at how many Americans think open borders means that whenever Democrats in charge, anybody just can come into the country and it's not illegal. No, that's not

true at all. It's always illegal to come into the country. You cannot just cross the border anytime you want. So that's why that phrase is enormously misleading. And the idea that, hey, if you don't have a driver's license, they think that it means there's no checks at all for who's voting. And that's not remotely true. You know, you mentioned the voter idea. I wanted to just tweak something that I hear a lot of people on the left say. And I think they mean well, but I also think they don't understand how patronizing and sometimes even racist they're coming across. So, Jank, you mentioned the lower rate of African Americans who have driver's licenses. And it's because of living in a big city where they might actually rely on public transportation as opposed to

getting a car. Owning a car, paying for insurance and gas is very expensive. So you mentioned socioeconomic status, if you're on the left and you're making points like, oh, you know, they might not have the same education level and they don't know how to apply for a driver's license. No, that's not what's happening. Please don't repeat that stuff. It's disgusting. Yeah, go ahead. Right. And by the way, there's tons of people who don't have driver's license who aren't black. There's white people, Asians that sell. Elderly people who are no longer driving. 100%. There's tons, tons of people who don't have driver's license. It just disproportionately affects African Americans and that is why the Republicans insist on voter ID

because they know African Americans disproportionately vote Democrat. By the way, if there's ever a world and this existed before, it can't exist again, where more black people vote for Republicans, you will see that Republicans will instantly switch and go, oh, we don't need voter ID, that's ridiculous. Do you know how much it discriminates against African Americans, right? So that's politics. So one more thing about this story that's important as we, and there's a whole other terrible thing that's happening in regards to this.

is that I'll be shocked if it's not Republicans. So now you're going to think, oh, we don't know. We don't know, yeah, to be clear, we don't know perfectly. But there's a reason why I'm saying that. It's not because I'm biased, I'm a Democrat. Oh, I hate Republicans, I bet they're always evil. No, it's because a lot of times, in all the stories that we have covered, not all, but almost all the stories we've covered, it's a Republican going, well, they're cheating

anyway, so I decided I was going to cheat, et cetera. So you guys don't, if you're a Republican, you don't know how Democrats think. I do. I'm bilingual, right? I speak Democrat and a Republican. And so Democrats are scared to death of breaking rules. I know you don't believe that as a Republican, but I know them. They are.

Like, they're rule followers. And so that used to be the Republicans. Now it's the Democrats. The idea that some organized Democrat might risk his job or risk getting arrested to do something like this, I would be shocked. And the spectacular instance, like when we had to redo the congressional election in the last cycle, that was a Republican doing fraud. Almost every recent example has been a Republican doing fraud. I don't know, Anna, am I missing anything?

Yeah, you are. This was a large scale canvassing operation. And based on the way this has been reported, there's a very high likelihood that this was motivated by getting paid based on the number of registrations you accumulate. Yeah, that could be bipartisan. Right, so that, so it could be fraud that's carried out specifically out of financial interest as opposed to partisan interests. That's why we don't know yet. Yeah.

Most of the cases, in fact, literally all the cases I remember are breaking Republicans, but I might not be remembering some cases, and if it's just a financial incentive, it could easily be either party. So I want to move on to another election registration related story, and this one involves Elon Musk. So the Philadelphia district attorney Larry Krasner apparently does remember how to prosecute people or go after them to enforce laws because he just sued Elon Musk for his $1 million voter registration lottery. So if you're unfamiliar with what that is and how it works, in order to enter this lottery that Elon Musk is carrying out, you had to sign a petition

created by the America PAC, which was for registered voters in swing states only. So the petition states that if you signed it, you were essentially showing your support for both the first and second amendment. Furthermore, if you sign the petition, you're automatically eligible for a daily lottery, giving a million dollars to a random petition signer. Now, we have previously covered that giveaway on the show and also explained that it's very likely illegal under federal law. But Philadelphia D.A. Larry Krasner built his case on Philadelphia's lottery and consumer protection law. So there are federal laws and then there are state laws. And so Krasner is going after Elon Musk based on state laws. And so in this lawsuit, Krasner's office argues that Pennsylvania law requires all lotteries to be operated and administered by the state.

and that Musk's daily $1 million giveaway must be halted because it's operating outside of those legal guardrails. He says, though Musk says that a winner's selection is random, that appears false because multiple winners have been selected or who have been selected are individuals who have shown up at Trump rallies in Pennsylvania. The lawsuit says arguing that the lottery rules are deceptive. So I don't know where that's going to go. Krasner obviously believes that he has a case here. And so he's pursuing this lawsuit. We'll see if it amounts to anything. Yeah, just to clarify the last part of the story, North Carolina's ninth district is where they had the redo of the election because the Republican side did voter fraud. In the case of Elon Musk,

So look, this is illegal on two different counts. And last time we didn't talk much about the lottery part of it. But I'm very familiar with that because we do some giveaways here. We'll probably do one on election day for whoever comes close to electoral college guests, et cetera. There's very strict rules around that. And we're very vigilant about it because we don't have 200 some odd billion dollars and we don't want to be in legal trouble. But since Elon Musk has infinite money, he doesn't really care about the legal trouble. He's like, oh, okay, so I'll pay more for lawyers, I'll pay more to settle it.

But bottom line is, all these tens of millions dollars that I'm spending, even if it's hundreds of millions of dollars, I just get one subsidy from Trump, and that's going to be billions. So it doesn't really matter. All of this is super worthwhile for Elon Musk. And as a businessman, I understand to him, it's a rational risk. He stands to gain an enormous amount of money if Donald Trump wins. So giving away this kind of money, including fighting these legal fights, it's still worth it for them. But yeah, if you're running anything where someone's winning any money, let alone that kind of money, there are very strict rules to follow.

And you can't just go, okay, I'm going to ignore those and I'm going to do this instead. But that's the consistent theme with Elon Musk and Donald Trump, which is they're like, we're above the law. Who cares? What about a raffle? Like, you get what I'm saying? Like, how is this different? I mean, obviously. You have to allow people to register even if they're not participating.

That's part of the rules. Ah, got it. And part of the reason why the rules are so strict is because the states make so much money from their lotteries that they don't want any competition. So they make it super strict to do a lottery. And so you got to follow all the rules. And he's not even close to following all the rules because again, he thinks the laws are optional. And guys, you know in reality, if you're that rich, they kind of are, right?

And you and I will be a lot of trouble if we break those laws. But he has an army of lawyers and they'll just gum things up. I mean, what did Trump do? He had an army of lawyers and they were incompetent and even they were able to gum up the proceedings until there is no adjudication before the elections. Yeah, there's always a way if you have the money and resources, you know, to draw the trial out or the legal proceedings out or play all sorts of games. Besides which, we're talking about Elon Musk literally giving away a million dollars a day.

As part of this scheme. All right, final story related to election integrity, and this one is really disturbing. So in Vancouver, Washington, and also Portland, Oregon, there have been instances of ballot dropboxes that have burned ballots inside them. Some sort of device was put inside these drop boxes, and then the device basically blew up or was lit on fire and caused all sorts of of damage to some of the ballot. So here's an image. A lot of local reporting on this. I wish we could show you the video, but copyright prevents us from doing so. But here's a still shot showing you one of the instances. This one, I believe, is in Vancouver, Washington. So again, a similar incident took place in Portland, Oregon, around the same time. The towns are just

15 miles apart. Police stated that incendiary devices were used to set the boxes on fire. And all but a few ballots in the Portland ballot box were safe thanks to some sort of internal fire suppressant they have in the boxes. Wow, that's amazing. I know, but it wasn't the case, unfortunately, for the ballots in Vancouver where they were all incinerated. So that really sucks. And I'm a little afraid about talking about this story for fear of encouraging copycats. Drop off your ballot at the post office. I know that it's a little bit of an inconvenience, but please do that.

I personally would not drop it off at a drop off box. But see, instantly, we're discouraging people from voting. I'm just keeping it real. No, I got you. You have to keep it real, but that allows the terrorists to win. And this is an act of terrorism in a sense, right? And so imagine, and please think about it if the shoe is on the other foot, okay? So imagine, if you're a Republican, imagine that some Democratic bozos went to deeply Republican

areas and just lit the ballots on fire, but we don't know which ballots. Well, that sucks, that's awful. Then like, then the Republicans are going to get less votes. It's unbelievably unfair, right? And Democrats, likewise, if some Republican bozo comes and lights your ballots on fire, you're going to be livid, right? And then you're worried about where do I drop off my ballot? And then that provides another disincentive to voting, et cetera.

So this is really, when they catch this guy, whether he's a Republican or Democrat, they should throw the book out. 100%. I agree. I totally agree. So that's what we have in regard to election integrity for today. We'll keep an eye on these stories if anything else develops. For now, though, let's take a quick break.

When we come back, we'll talk a little bit about Trump's appearance on Rogan's podcast. All right, back on TYT, Jankana with you guys, but also time to thank the beautiful people of the world. Paul Oxum and Metal Turtum. I like Metal Turtle. I like all of them. Thank you for donating at t.y.t.com slash 2024. You guys are American heroes. And then on YouTube, John Reinhard and Wink, the Cosmic Grandma is now on our team. That's right. Get it. And they hit the join button below. It's beautiful. They're beautiful. they're part of the Young Turks community, and we love them. Benjamin Morland, one love 83, gifted memberships because they're beautiful human beings as well.

Casper. We got to talk about Trump on Rogan. I always got more publicity than other people, and I didn't, it wasn't like I was trying. In fact, I don't know exactly why. Maybe you can tell me one. Oh, I can definitely tell you. You said a lot of wild sh**. Maybe.

Maybe. He said a lot of wild shit and then CNN in all their brilliance by highlighting your wild made you much more popular. Yeah. Well, Donald Trump did the damn thing. He went on Rogan's podcast for a friendly three-hour conversation with Rogan on the Joe Rogan experience. And look, Trump was his usual self. And I think in the grand scheme of things, this three-hour conversation worked to Trump's advantage.

I feel that it normalized him, humanized him, made him seem like a normal guy that will resonate with at least a huge portion of a Rogan's audience. I also found it to be kind of dull, to be honest with you. It was a little boring, a little rambling. There was a fun part where they were talking about hot pilots. That, you know, I perked up a little bit for that part of the conversation. Now, you got to see this guy. He's out of Central Cassie.

He's so attractive. The pilot was so attractive. Even better than Tom Cruise. I was like, hot pilots? Where? Like, well, are they talking about hot? And then a cop comes in. It turns out he's not even a cop.

Start stripping. It was amazing. Okay, he didn't say that last part. All right, so the part we just showed you, that was this best part. You're welcome. Because that was the only part where Joe Rogan held him accountable. Okay, because he has some wild crap. And he said it to his face, that's good. That's good. That's one of his better moments. Because when he goes, yeah, maybe. See, that's good. That's self-effacing. People can relate to that more instead of being defensive about it and whining, crying, etc. So that was actually the very best part of the interview. The rest of it, I agree with Anna, it actually made Trump look really good. But the huge problem was, it was bereft, what a fun word, of all facts, all facts at all. Like, so if you watch that interview, you got a completely misleading view of who Donald Trump is. I wouldn't say it was bereft of all facts. There were certainly a lot of untruths, okay? There were a lot of misleading statements by Trump.

But he also said a few things that sounded insane to me. And I was like, that's not true, I got to look this up. So he made a point, for instance, about how a huge amount of California's rainwater just gets flushed into the Pacific Ocean. And the reason why we do that is to conserve a very specific tiny little fish. I'm like, that's not true, that's not true, that's not the reason. Like I knew that the majority of our rainwater was being flushed into the Pacific Ocean. I didn't realize that that was the reason, that's literally the reason.

I looked it up. So he says things that sound crazy that actually have truth behind them. But then he says things that sound like, oh, that sounds like that might make sense. And then you fact check that. And it's like, no, that was complete and utter BS. Yeah, there was a couple of parts. Like, of course he's not going to lie about 100% of the things. And you're right.

Sometimes like the raking of the force, we've talked about before. Yeah. But that's partly because he doesn't know how to speak, right? Yeah. So when he talks about something that I actually think is a good point. Like the Native Americans did controlled burns, they did forest management due to wildfires. We don't do that. And there's a price to pay for not doing that.

But rather than talk about controlled burns or fire management, he instead talks about raking the forests. So like if you understand what he's really talking about and what he means, you'll give him a pass. But a lot of people don't know what he's talking about. So the idea that you're going to rake the forest and that's the way you do forest management. Well, see, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump have the exact opposite problem, right? Kamala Harris is a talking point machine.

You can't move her off the talking points. And Trump is so far off the talking points that it just doesn't even make sense. He's like, what? You didn't know raking the forest meant controlled burns? Yeah, nobody knew that because those things are not the same words. And they're not the same phrases and not the same concepts. In Norway, they rake the forest. They're not raking the forest.

Okay, no, that's not exactly it. But anyways, but those are relatively benign. And by the way, if you want to have a debate about the fish, no problem got you. But at least he's corrected, that is why the, you know, we drained the water out into the Pacific. Listen, I love those little fish and I hear you environmentalists who want to protect the fish. I'd like to protect humanity. And I don't want to have a conversation about literally rationing water when like 80% of our rainwater is being flushed into the Pacific ocean, specifically to save one fish. There's got to be another way.

I hear you, that's a debate for another time. I agree with you, but others would debate us because two inch fish are more important than humans. But anyway, I'm being a jerk about it. We could have a fun conversation about that another day, but much more important stuff. Okay, so there was a portion of the conversation that really caught my attention, mostly because of how brazen Trump was in sharing details about this. So it had to do with an interaction, a transactional relationship he had with a member of Congress.

years before he even ran for president. I will just preface this by saying I posted about it on social media and no one cared and everyone tried to justify it. But with that in mind, let's take a look. So there was a congressman years before I ran and I was very close to him. And I needed a license on something and he was very important in getting the license. But it was a little bit controversial, the license, this particular thing that was being licensed. But I was close to this guy and helped him and everything else.

And I went to him, I said, I'd like to have your help. And he said, let me take a look at it. I said, oh, that's not too good. But I really hope you're going to help. Anyway, he tapped me along for a long period of time and ultimately didn't do it. And I said, you are a stiff. You could have done this thing so easy, et cetera.

But it was controversial. He was in Congress for many years, like 28 years. And, you know, there's a reason when somebody's there for 28 years, you've got to be sort of smart. Right. You know, you have all the scandals. And I realized he was in Congress. He was a survivor.

Okay, all right, let's get the irrelevant points out of the way. You are a stiff, like there's that, and then there's, and then I realized he was a survivor. Like I did not see that coming, I thought he was going to berate the guy more, but to his credit he didn't. He tried to make a point about how the guy seemed to be a little more careful because he wanted to survive in Congress, he didn't want to be dealing with scandal. But the point remains that Trump approached a member of Congress. who he had a close relationship with, who he had done favors for, and was expecting a favor

in return, and that favor was a questionable, controversial license. Yeah, look, if you're a maga, you could say, he didn't say that he asked for something illegal, you guys are being unfair, you can make a hundred excuses. Just a little controversial. Right, but if you're a normal person, you know what he was talking about, right? When Trump says, we were dealing with a licensing issue, and it was a little controversial, and this guy was a stiff, he wouldn't just do the thing. that I asked. But he was a survivor. And I'd already helped him out. That's super obvious

what he's talking about. He'd give him a campaign donation. I presume, and that's a kind way of looking at it. I don't know if he gave him anything else. And then he was expecting for an illegal favor back. And the guy wouldn't do it. And then you could tell that it was not the right thing to do because Trump then said he was smart not to do it. He was a survivor not to do it. Right. Because if he had done it, he might not have survived. Why might he not survive? Because it was illegal. Okay, so we don't have him because he didn't say illegal and Rogan didn't follow up. Right. But this is exactly what's wrong with Trump. He's a mobster. So he's done this his whole life. And I know what Magill said. Oh, in real estate, you gotta be a mobster. This is how you get things done in real estate.

But do we really want to elect a mobster for president? Okay, that is a fair point, Jank. It's definitely a fair point. And in fact, so fair. that that portion of the interview caught my attention, that's why I clipped it out. But I'll also say that it would be a mistake to assume that Trump is novel in this practice. This is a practice that I think is pretty widespread in our government, both on a local level and a federal level. So I'll give you an example. I mean, on a local level, we literally have members of the LA City Council who have now been convicted and given prison sentences for all sorts of quid pro quo types of schemes with real estate developers, right? And so this kind of like greasing and, you know, like nefarious behind the scenes deal making, it happens, it's widespread.

And sometimes there's consequences for it. Sometimes it goes on without any consequences. So I'll tell you a difference between Trump and other politicians, both you're absolutely right. Establishment Democrats and establishment Republicans do this all the time. But they do it in a a little bit smarter way so that sometimes they get caught anyway, sometimes they also break the rules and they get greedy, etc. But the smart way they do it is, for example, in California, real estate interests will give money to politicians. I'm not saying who. I'm not saying who's in charge. And really, though, it's real estate guys own local politics in almost all the states. They're usually in the top two donors along with utilities, okay, at the local level. So what they do,

they'll give money and they'll say, oh, we're fighting homelessness. Now I got some junk properties I can't get rid of. And then I'll get them, the state, to buy my property so they could fight homelessness with it and put homeless people in it. And I'll charge them three times what I can get in the market. That's exactly right. And since it's a government bureaucrat that I gave a campaign contribution to his boss, I'm going to get three times the value of my property and they're not even going to put

any homeless people in that property. No, that's exactly right. And then it's, oh, God, it gets even worse than that, right? because, you know, those real estate interests get to sell the property, the distressed property to the state or the city. And then what the city does is they'll contract out some non-profit to renovate the building in order to make it ready for, you know, low-income housing or for the homeless population. But they'll take the money and run. They never finished the projects. I did a long story about that on the show recently.

So really good point, Chang. Yeah, now, but the difference with Trump is that he's a blunt instrument. He is. So like I keep going back to the story because it's so funny and illustrative. A former executive of Trump organization said that Trump told her not to put the braille in the elevators, which was New York law. And she's like, we can't. It's the law. You have to put the braille numbers in in the elevator.

He's like, so what? I don't like it. It's not classy. Don't do it. Now, hey, knucklehead. God. The regulators are going to catch that on day one. and they're going to know what you did was illegal and they're going to make you redo it.

He's just, he doesn't care about the laws. So he doesn't hesitate for a second in breaking a law or asking for something illegal. He doesn't bother trying to come up with a sophisticated scheme like the others do to rob you of your money. So there was an amusing moment. There are many amusing moments, to be fair, even though overall there were, it was mostly a dull conversation. But one of the moments that I was amused by was when he was talking about choosing outsiders or appointing outsiders to serve as in his administration, and he forgot for a second that

he himself is considered an outsider. That's actually something that his voters love about him. But nonetheless, let's hear Donald Trump's thoughts on the threat that outsiders pose. I had to rely on people that I respected or liked, but that I didn't know that well because I didn't know them that well. Some of those people I campaigned against, because, you know, when you have 18 people, we had mostly politicians running in the election, you know, running in the primaries. And they got knocked out one by one.

it, but I got to like some of them. Some of them I didn't like at all. I don't like them now. And I'd rely on them, and I'd rely on other people. But it's very dangerous to pick somebody outside of a politician, because a politician's been basically vetted for years. You pick a business guy,

and they've never been vetted at all, and they're the head of a big company or something, but they've never been vetted. You know nothing about his personal life. You know nothing about where he's been. When you put him in, it's a little bit dangerous, because all of a sudden they get checked up, and you hear things that you say, wow, this is not going to work out too well.

So it's very dangerous, picking, picking people that are outside of politics is somewhat dangerous. Is it? I mean, I agree, it turns out. No, seriously, look, he's not getting that. That he's an outsider. That he's a guy outside of politics, and he's saying it's very dangerous to pick someone like me, because we don't know what we're doing, okay?

Now, the funny thing is, I disagree with them. Same. Yeah, I actually don't want. any politicians. I think politicians are all talking point machines except Trump, but Trump's got the opposite problem, right? I just want someone sensible, like a John Stewart or Sean Fain or Sean O'Brien, some union leader or a comic group. Anyone who actually cares about us and hasn't already been corrupted by the system, I don't think they're dangerous at all. I think Trump's dangerous, not the rest of them. Yeah, someone who's D.C. brained is far less likely to represent the best

interests of the American people as opposed to an outsider who might be a little more disruptive to the establishment. So I agree with you. Okay, I want to go to the last video. And this one, we're going to get into the substance here because, you know, I think Trump has been able to kind of get away with murder in regard to how he's branded himself with the accomplishments that he has made with the economy. So let's hear this portion of the conversation. I'll tell you what I'm talking about. One of the criticisms of your administration was with tax cuts and with tariffs, you increase the deficit.

So what was the strategy behind that? And did you think it was going to increase the deficit by a substantial amount? Okay. We were ready to rock. It was all, you know, I had a bad system. We had horrible tax policy. I made it great with a much lower tax rate. So I took it from almost 40% down to 21%.

Now I'm bringing it from 21 down to 15, but only if you make your product in the United States, which is great. People call me this, what a great idea. Nobody ever heard of that before. 21 in the first year, we took in much more revenue than we did at almost 40. Think of that.

So how does the deficit increase because of that? So what happened is this, we were ready to rock and roll, and then we had the COVID thing, and we had a focus on that. And if we didn't give some businesses a hand, they would have all, you would have had a depression like in 1929. So essentially what Trump is saying here is, no, no, no, I was like on a great track.

The debt was perfectly fine under my watch. It was just that things got screwed up due to COVID. So if you look at an analysis of, well, you could even look at an analysis of Trump versus as Biden as it applies to the national debt. In fact, why don't we take a look at this chart? So what you're looking at is a chart that was done by the committee for, or it's using data from the committee for a responsible federal budget. Axios put the chart together and it shows you the difference between Donald Trump and

Joe Biden when it comes to increasing the federal debt. And as you can see, as of June 21st of this year, Biden had contributed $4.3 trillion to the federal debt in total, and that includes $2.1 trillion in COVID relief. But when it comes to Trump, he had already increased the federal debt to the tune of $4.8 trillion dollars before COVID, and then dug another $3.6 trillion hole due to COVID relief. Okay, so why is that? Well, there are multiple reasons, but one of the biggest reasons was the massive tax cut bill that he managed to pass in 2017. That added $2 trillion to our debt as a result of lower

tax revenue from corporations and some of the wealthiest individuals in this country. That's why you had a situation in which some corporations that were tremendously lucrative and successful, like Amazon, had a few years or a year at least where they didn't even have to pay a single dollar in federal taxes. And so according to Axios for Trump, the biggest non-COVID drivers of higher public debt were his signature tax cuts enacted in 2017, causing $1.9 trillion in additional borrowing and bipartisan spending packages, which added $2.1 trillion. What's interesting, though, is what Biden spent the money on versus what Trump spent the money on. Trump spent the money on getting tax cuts for the rich in corporations,

whereas with Biden, major non-COVID factors include the 2022 and 2023 spending bills, $1.4 trillion, student debt relief, $620 billion, and legislation to support health care for veterans to the tune of $520 billion. So you might not agree with that spending anyway, but I do think that the priorities here are very different and should be noted. Yeah, so look, I don't think that there's been any malice on Joe Rogan's part, But he leans right wing. He's not completely right wing.

And remember, he did endorse Bernie Sanders back in 2016. So he's more of a populist, but he's not equipped for a deep political conversation. And so on the one hand, it's not, I'm not on the extreme left that says don't platform Trump if you can't fact check him on every single thing, don't even have the conversation. No, there's time for facts, checks, there's time for podcasts. But I wish he was better equipped because when Trump says, that was, oh, it was just COVID, we were ready to rock, we were ready to rock, and then COVID hit. Yeah, no, we just showed you the numbers.

I wish Rogan could have said at that point, but brother, you already had $4.8 trillion in debt piled up, and it was, and half of that was because of your corporate tax cuts. You didn't make that money back. You didn't. It's gone. And now at some point, the average guy's going to have to make that up. But when you didn't hear that and you didn't see those numbers that Anna shared with you guys, people left that interview because nobody's like, most people have regular jobs.

They're not, they don't know all the details of politics and all the stats and numbers. They walk away thinking, oh, poor Trump, he was ready to rock. But because of COVID, that's the only reason why we had debt under Trump. And it's not remotely true. And it's super important for you to know that because he's gonna do another corporate tax cut. And that's gonna cost us trillions more. And then he's gonna say, oh, we were ready to rock, but then, you know, we had rain on Wednesday. And that's why, no, it's your giant giveaways to the rich.

Yeah, and look, to be fair, Trump's plan, which might not work, right, is, okay, well, I'm gonna lower the corporate tax rate from 21% to 15%, but only for corporations that manufacture their products here in the United States. The idea is, you know, slap massive tariffs on companies that are importing products to the United States as they're taking advantage of cheap labor abroad. And those tariffs will help fund the government in lieu of the tax income that would come from the corporations. That is the thinking that Trump has when it comes to his economic policies. Yeah, theoretically. But I don't believe them at all. Let me tell you exactly why. It's not just general, right? Number one, that provision about, oh, it has to be people manufacturing here, didn't exist before.

He unveiled this like a year ago, and that was not in the proposal at all. He added that in later to make it more popular, but when he realized it's not a very populous position to say, I'm going to give away a couple more trillion dollars to my corporate donor friends. So he's like, oh, I meant because I'm protecting America and American manufacturing. That's the ticket. So why didn't you say it a year ago? That's point one. The point two is when he was doing that giant corporate giveaway, last time he said, but

I'm going to close all the loopholes, all the loopholes, they're gone. I'm closing them, so we'll make even more money. You don't have any loopholes could close? None. Zero. He never meant it, he was never going to close any loopholes because his donors make tremendous amount of money from those loopholes. So you think he's going to just do it for the manufacturer?

I said, no, he's going to do a giant tax cut with no breaks in the car at all. His donors paid for it, and he's going to give them exactly what they wanted. So we're honest and we tell you the establishment politicians on both sides, you know, these giant giveaways to their donors, but so does Donald Trump. Just because he talks like an average person or way below average person doesn't mean that he's not a crook just like the rest of him. It's in the policies. It's in what he actually already did. Like Republicans always say, oh, look at four years before.

Look at the four years. Well, I did look at it, and he created, okay, let me give you context. Before Trump got in office, we already had a giant $20 trillion deficit. But he added 8.4 on top of the 20. That means he increased it by about 40% in just four years. Remember, he's a king debt. So I'm sorry, king of debt, right? And so that's what he did in all of his businesses.

That's why all of his businesses went bankrupt. He's going to bankrupt the country. He's loading us up with so much debt because part of the answer is, oh, the economy's good when I give tax cuts and when I spend a lot. So I want it to be good under me. Later it blows up on you and your kids. What do I care anyway? Well, that's why he's bringing Elon Musk in to cut costs, Jank.

It's going to be a massive, gigantic robbery if Trump wins. We're getting robbing right now. I mean, yeah, right now. Look, we have the normal robbery. In process, as we speak, where both parties rob us to give to their donors. But Trump and Elon are a blunt instrument, and they're looking to speed that process up. They're going to take so much money off of us, let alone the Bitcoin scams that Elon's going to do under Trump. It's going to be a disaster.

All right, the Madison Square Garden rally that everyone's talking about when we return. All right on TYT, Janganana with you guys. So I was reading Commodore and a social break there and somebody was talking about J.D. Vance and I was, didn't get to finish my thought. JD Vance, Vivek Ramaswami, Tulsi Gabbard are frauds, total utter frauds. They're not populist. at all. They're not even anti-war. You asked Tulsi Gabbard about any Muslim countries. She'll say, bomb, bomb them. Oh, but I'm anti-war. I'm anti-war, okay? And J.D. Vance will say, oh, I'm such a populist. And then you know, give away all the tax cuts from the corporations. Give everything to the corporations. What part of that is populace, you fraud.

And Vivek, everything he says is slimy and total lie. But okay, you know, Maga, kid yourself that they're real populace. So a hardcore magnanimous gentleman writes in on Super Chat. God bless Jenkins Anna and as always great coverage. I watched parts of Trump's rally and jokes by that low life standup was extremely racist. And Rudy's remarks as expected once again was Islamophobic hate speech. Yep. And I'm in rage. So I thought Rudy's comments were arguably worse than the comics, not arguably, definitely worse than the comics because he was serious.

But no one cares. Very little attention. We're going to cover that too. But it grosses me out how little people cared about that. 100%. We're gonna get to that in the next segment. I just want to read some of your comments because it's important like this one. The chicken fried dragon wrote in. Jenks haircut is tighter than Trump's wallet when the waiter brings a check. Hard to disagree on both counts, okay? MCM wrote in this is all super chats. Love TYT from Sydney, Australia. Anna Al Jazeera used part of your reporting their documentary called Israelism, which I watched last weekend. You were talking about politicians taking bribes from APEC. So dope. Oh wow, I got to check that out. That's amazing. That is, in fact, dope.

That is super, first of all, use the word dope. Like, I love you so much. Like, I'm definitely going to look that up. Thank you for the hot tip. Yeah, 100%. And Rage Rock for now wrote in Donald Trump conversation on the Joe Rogan experiences and ultimate example of hype over results as if we hadn't already gotten enough of Donald Trump's weave antics in the past 10 years.

He loves to mention the weaves. Yeah, because it says such a funny excuse. And he really thinks it's a good excuse. You're kind of guilty of the weave, Shank. Oh, I do. I do you're like the you're the ultimate weaver and and they talked a lot about this in the Rogan podcast but I I hope 95 out of 100 times bring it right back right Trump will weave himself into another planet right he likes those long weaves yeah count one wrote in on

YouTube member section he's an adult running for president he should have the communication skills to explain himself at the least they're raking the leaves yeah so first of all you're 100% right but guys this This is the sorry state of our politics, right? Kamala Harris can't do anything about talking points. Joe Biden can't even do that, you know, he can't finish a sentence. And Donald Trump is a mess who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about and doesn't even realize it.

Like as he says moronic things, he thinks he's being a genius. So this is the best America has to offer. It is so frustrating. And one more thing, in case you're wondering, wait, how did they get to the top? How is this the best that America can offer? Remember, the way they got to the top is not by being the best that the country can offer, but by pleasing the donors as much as humanly possible. So Kamala Harrison, normal establishment politicians work through the system by going,

yeah, Mr. Donor, I'll do that. Yes, Ms. Donor, yes, corporate donor, yes, corporate donor, and that's how they move up. And for Donald Trump, same thing, he's like, I like Elon, he gives me a big endorsement. And then I do whatever he says, I like Miriam Edelson, big endorsement, meaning about $100 million, and I do whatever they want. So their skill set is corruption, and that's how they got to where they are, even though they all have trouble speaking. True, Kamala's corruption, though, might actually cost her the election because the

desires of the pro-Israel donors conflict with the desires of her base. So let's see how that works out. Yeah, by the way, Trump does too. Like Trump's, has a position that's worse than hers, right? But he just doesn't get any accountability for it. Because he's doing a better job communicating and branding himself as the so-called peace candidate. And there's no, there's no effective pushback from Kamala Harris because she is totally inept and unable to do appropriate and effective campaigning. One, that's true. But two, the other reason is because since her position on Israel is,

also terrible, and currently her party is in charge. She can't push back on Donald Trump and go, what the hell are you going to let them annexed north Gaza or West Bank? You want him to bomb Iran earlier? Are you insane? Because the first question a reporter is going to ask, wait, is that really close to your position? Young males have noted over and over again in polling what their top concerns are, what their policy priorities are. One of those priorities is, Like they want peace because they're concerned. If things really do explode into World War III, there's some likelihood that they'll get drafted.

And so young men are really worried about that and they look at the Biden Harris campaign or administration, I should say, and they see war spreading in the Middle East, war continuing between Russia and Ukraine with no real strategy or effort to calm things down or stop the wars. And so when you have someone like Donald Trump positioning himself as the peace, candidate, he's going to be more appealing to these young men. But what does the Democratic Party do? All they do is smear them as sexists, as racists, oh, they don't want to support Kamala Harris because she's a woman.

No, how about you listen to them? How about you listen to what they're saying and what they're concerned about? Michelle Obama doing campaigning for you, basically calling these young men out as nothing more than misogynist, isn't going to work for you. And that's what just recently happened. Yeah, in fact, you're so right that somebody wrote in the YouTube member section. Chung is John, too late, already voted for the libertarian because Gaza. Okay, so, I mean, come on.

They're amazing. They prefer the donors over the voters, even when their entire electoral life depends on it. And whether they're the president of the United States or not depends on it, they can't get off the donor crack. All right, we gotta take a break. When we come back, we'll get into the Madison Square Gardens rally, what's getting the most attention and more. don't miss it.