The Young Turks - Kash Me Outside

Episode Date: January 31, 2025

What to know about the deadly American Airlines and Black Hawk helicopter collision. The controversial, now-defunct FAA hiring practices, explained. Kash Patel blatantly lies at his confirmation hearing. Hosts: Ana Kasparian & Cenk Uygur SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE ☞ https://www.youtube.com/@TheYoungTurks FOLLOW US ON: FACEBOOK ☞ https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER ☞ https://twitter.com/TheYoungTurks INSTAGRAM ☞ https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK ☞ https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕MERCH ☞ https:/www.shoptyt.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Let's go! Welcome to the Young Turks, Jeku Granite Kusparan with you guys. day. We got hearings on top of hearings. We got Cash Patel. We got Tulsi Gabbard. We got Bobby Kennedy Jr. On top of that, we got Trump being preposterously wrong, but surprisingly correct in different cases. What is going on? There are two stories in this lineup that actually

shocked me. And I'm curious to see if they'll shock you. We'll probably do a poll on it. You know, we'll have some fun with it, even though, of course, as usual, there's plenty of bad news today. Casper, how are you feeling? Terrible, I feel bad. I'm sick. I've been sick for like a month, and I'm sick of it. But anyway, let's get to the dues. Yeah, that makes sense. All right, God bless.

I'll pick it up for you, okay? I got energies. All right, what's the stories? Well, I'm sure everyone has heard about a mid-air collision in Washington, D.C., so let's talk about what happened. You can see to the left there's a plane. It looks like coming in. There's a brighter light. And right there, you'll see that horrific fireball. 67 people have tragically died as the result of a mid-air collision between an American Airlines flight and a military Black Hawk helicopter. The mid-air collision happened right near Washington, D.C. at the Reagan National Airport, and it took place just as the American Airlines flight was moments away from landing.

There are no survivors, and currently authorities are engaging in an effort to find the bodies of those who were on the flights. Now, a major commercial airline crash in the United States actually has not happened since 2009 when the collision occurred in Buffalo, New York. So this is not a common occurrence on U.S. soil. Among those on the American Airlines flight were members of the U.S. figure skating, several members of our skating community, according to a statement from U.S. figure skating, were sadly aboard American Airlines flight 5242. These athletes, coaches, and family members were returning home from the National Development Camp held in conjunction with the U.S. figure skating championships in Wichita, Kansas.

We are devastated by the unspeakable tragedy and hold the. victims, families closely in our hearts. Russia also announced that two Russian figure skaters were also aboard that American Airlines flight, which was headed to Washington, D.C. was supposed to land there, and it was traveling from Wichita, Kansas. Now, what is the government saying about this? What do we know so far? Well, newly appointed Secretary of Transportation, Sam Duffy said the mid-air collision Wednesday night between a regional, Sean, I apologize, Sean Duffy, The midair collision Wednesday night between a regional American Airlines passenger jet and a Black Hawk military helicopter over the Potomac River near Washington, D.C. was absolutely preventable, which is an interesting thing to say because we don't know what went wrong yet. And I want to be clear about that. I mean, the investigation is ongoing. This crash happened on Wednesday night. So to say that it's absolutely preventable, maybe that's absolutely true, but we don't know what happened. I mean, maybe the pilot. It suffered some sort of medical emergency, and it wasn't preventable.

So we have to wait and see. I want to be clear about that. It was also a clear night, so weather can't be blamed for the collision. At the time of the crash, the water temperatures in the Potomac River was approximately 36 degrees Fahrenheit, which is part of the reason why the authorities do not believe a single person survived as a result of this collision. Sean Duffy continues to say, obviously, it is not standard to have aircraft collide. I want to be clear on that. The flight paths that were being flown from the military and from American, that was not unusual for what happens in the DC airspace.

Meaning, you know, those flights, those flight patterns are not unusual. And so he's kind of raising the question as to if these aren't unusual flight patterns, what the hell happened here? This is preventable. That's where he's coming from. Now, the American Airlines flight came in from Wichita, Kansas, as I mentioned earlier, and was moments away from landing in Washington, D.C. American Airlines CEO stated that the captain of the flight had been flying for American Airlines regional carrier PSA Airlines for six years, and that the officer had been, the first officer on the flight, had been with the airline for two years. Duffy said that the Black Hawk helicopter, was on a training mission at the time of this crash, but he didn't really elaborate on that. And the helicopter was based in Virginia. So let's get to some of the recordings from the air traffic control. Those recordings have been released.

And what you're about to hear are the statements or the moments from the air traffic control right before the crash happened. Take a listen. Go around. If I maintain 3,000, flash check three, can you return to base? Blackjack three, receipt directly to gleeve. I need you to land. I need you to land immediately.

Can you go to dollars for a few minutes? Can you go to Baltimore? So from the recordings, or at least what we have heard from the released recording so far, air traffic control was alert. They were trying to, you know, give directions to the American Airlines flight. According to reporting, air traffic control is heard in the recording, asking the crew of the military helicopter, which the controller referred to referred to as Pat 25, if the American Airlines plane, which is identified as CRJ was visible,

two seconds later, ATC, that's air traffic control, provided instructions to the helicopter crew saying Pat 25 passed behind CRJ. Three seconds later, the controller provides further instructions to the helicopter crew saying Pat 25 has aircraft in sight, maintain visual separation. So I give you that information because it's clear that air traffic control was alert, aware, paying attention to the situation based on what we know so far. When pressed by reporters for details about the communications between air traffic control and the helicopter, Sean Duffy said, I would say the helicopter was aware there was a plane in the area. Duffy said it remains under investigation why the helicopter continued to fly into the path of the passenger plane. Jank. Okay, so look,

We've got a poll on this where we're asking you, who's at fault here, Trump, FAA, or DEI. Now, Trump brought that up, and you're going to be pretty surprised at what we found in regards to that. I was shocked by it, actually. So we'll get to that in a second. On what Anna said so far, there was an instructor pilot on the helicopter, so that made me go, hmm, interesting. But then apparently the person who was flying already had 500 hours of experience, so that doesn't seem like it was the issue. And then, you know, in terms of Sean Duffney and the Trump administration saying that it was preventable and that they were angry about it.

Now, guys, it's a tragedy. All those folks died. Everybody knows that. That's we all, you know, hate that that happened. And our thoughts go to all the families. Now, this is going to get into politics. So when you turn to the political way of looking at it, it's actually smart political strategy. Again, you can get upset about it. But I want to explain it to you so you understand. why you see the things that you see. So when administrations like the Biden administration come out like with the East Palestine disaster and they seem defensive and they don't give quite clear right answers. Karen Bass here with the wildfires, etc. It makes people think that they're trying to hide something and look like they're at fault. The Trump team, again, it doesn't go to the facts, doesn't go to who actually did it and who was actually responsible. But just as a matter of strategy, where the Trump team comes out and goes, we're angry about it. And it was pretty preventable and they're going on the offense. So it makes it look like it was somebody else's fault and they're pissed on behalf of the citizens about it. And they're going to get to the bottom of it. Politically speaking, that is a thousand times better way to handle it. By the way, it might not be a better way to handle it at all when it comes to the truth and the reality so that we can fix it. So no more people die. That's a completely different issue. And there, again, we have some surprising news for you guys. Yeah. So all right, let's get into that news because.

Trump said some things that were honestly terrible considering the context of this tragedy. You know, we have dozens of people who have died. And immediately jumping into a blame game is not helpful. But that is what happened. And I want to get into what his claims were, what's true, what's false. So let's get into it. We do not know what led to this crash, but we have some very strong opinions and ideas, and I think we'll probably state those opinions now. My change, the Obama standards, from very mediocre at best to extraordinary, you remember that. Only the highest aptitude, they have to be the highest intellect and psychologically superior people, were allowed to qualify for air traffic controllers. That was not so prior to.

Getting there, when I arrived in 2016, I made that change very early on because I always felt this was a job that, and other jobs too, but this was a job that had to be superior intelligence. President Donald Trump is catching a lot of heat for his opinions regarding what caused or what led to the mid-air collision between a military Black Hawk helicopter and an American Airlines flight, the mid-air collision happened near Washington, D.C., above the Potomac River, and it happened moments before the American Airlines flight was going to land. Dozens of people are now dead, as many as 67 individuals as a result of this mid-air collision. Obviously a tragedy, so immediately pivoting to politics is definitely in bad taste,

especially since in that statement, you hear Donald Trump say, we don't know what the cause of this was. So why immediately jump into DEI hiring practices? But there is some truth to what he's saying about what was happening with hiring practices in regard to air traffic control prior to 2016, which I'm going to get into details of in just a moment. But those practices ended in 2016. They ended nearly like 10 years ago. So to blame this on hiring practices, I don't think quite makes sense. And air traffic control from what we have heard so far seemed to be very alert as this mid-air collision was about to happen.

The question is, why is it that the military helicopter didn't listen to the instructions from air traffic control? And here's a little taste of the audio that we're referring to. Go around. If I maintain 3,000, Blackjack 3, can you return to base from Blackjack 3? proceed directly to gleeve. I need you to land immediately. Can you go to dollars for a few minutes? Can you go to Baltimore? And I also want to note that Donald Trump's press conference was riddled with all sorts of contradictions. In fact, it was so apparent that even Stuart Varney from Fox Business called it out. This is not some liberal. This is not some lefty. This is a conservative

individual over at Fox News. And here's what he had to say immediately after Trump wrapped up his press conference. The president came out and immediately blamed diversity. He blamed DEI and the diversity policies of the aviation administration for the, for the, he put blame here. He went out of his way to call Pete Buttigieg, the former transportation secretary, a disaster. He then said, look, he'd heard the tapes. The president had heard the tapes from the crash.

He said the air traffic controller told the helicopter pilot to follow him in. That was follow in a commercial jetliner. Then there was a crash. It seems there's miscommunication. And the president did seem to be blaming air traffic control for this tragedy. The president was asked specifically that should Americans now feel safe to fly? And he specifically said, yes. even though he had criticized the institution, the federal aviation administration for its

diversity policies, those policies are still in place. That personnel is still in place carrying through into the future. And yet the president says it's okay, it's okay, we are safe. Do you see a contradiction in that? I mean, I definitely see a contradiction. That doesn't mean everything that Trump said during the press conference was false. And I want to get into what he said that was accurate in just a minute. But I think that Stuart Varney makes a good point here.

And I'm curious what you think, Jane. Yeah, I mean, look. Things are bringing down in such an interesting way where Fox News is admitting that Trump is wrong. We're about to show you something where Trump is right. So that's good. That means actual news is breaking out. And so on this, though, this particular tragedy, let's be super clear. You just heard, you know, with your own ears and there's a lot more of it where the air traffic control is doing the right job.

They're telling them to avoid this path. They're very, very clear. So, you know, there's very little things that we know about this crash. But the one thing we do know is that it seems that air traffic control was on top of it. Second of all, you know, if you've ever watched this show, we've got a thousand criticisms of Buttigieg. But how would you know that he was a disaster and this was his fault of you? You don't really know what caused the crash or really anything about it. So it's absurd.

Here, I'll just put in one comment from a member. Jenks left tricep or fury on tyt.com said, when we need carrying and reassuring voice, our president is as deplorable as possible. He is disgusting. And look, guys, even with the thing that we're about to tell you, is this the time to divide the country? Is this the time to try to make it seem like it was minority's fault? No. So that is definitely not the right way to go. Nevertheless, there was a program at the FAA that was deeply troubling about 10 years ago or so. Yeah. And this is a thing about Trump, right? This happened, this collision happened under his watch. So he's worried about the political consequences or ramifications of it, even before anyone knows any details about what went wrong. So he immediately goes into defensive mode. And as a result, he immediately picks something that has happened in the past that is not happening right now because to his credit, he ended this practice. But he's using that previous practice to defend himself against.

any allegations that he's responsible for the mid-air collision. That was my read of it. So what he was referring to were the DEI hiring practices over at the FAA as it pertains to air traffic controllers. And about two years ago or a year ago, I came across a really interesting report about what was going on and how these practices ended in 2016 when Trump got elected for his first term. So the questionable hiring practices for air traffic controllers were part of an effort to diversify the profession. It's just the way that they tried to diversify the profession was an issue. It actually led to a class action lawsuit, and it's titled Brigida versus Department of Transportation. And through the discovery process of that lawsuit,

we've learned a lot about the FAA's hiring practices. So let's get to those details. So previously, each candidate for air traffic control was required to pass this eight hour cognitive test known as ACE SAT, AT SAT. It was still considered a very effective way of hiring people for the job in 2013, but that actually soon changed because of the pressure to diversify the air traffic control workforce. At that point, the National Black Coalition of Federal Aviation employees lobbied the Department of Transportation, the FAA, and the Congressional Black Caucus hard on this issue. Soon the FAA commissioned a barrier analysis that argued that the eight-hour cognitive test air traffic controller applicants took posed a barrier for black candidates. So a barrier analysis by a pair of University of Maryland researchers

concluded the FAA relied too heavily upon the air traffic collegiate training initiative which pre-qualified candidates who attended specialized schools and scored highly on the at-sat aptitude test. So they recommended using a biographical questionnaire first to maximize diversity, eliminating the vast majority of candidates prior to any cognitive test taking place. And so as part of the revamp, the FAA disqualified several thousand applicants who had already gone through the air traffic collegiate training initiative and require them to achieve a passing grade on this biographical assessment test. Also, I should note at the time that the FAA had decided to just completely pause the hiring of collegiate training initiative graduates pending the implementation of this

biographical assessment, but they didn't inform the students about it. They didn't inform the graduates about it. And they even went on to take that that eight hour grueling cognitive test without any notice that it was worthless, that they weren't going to be chosen for it because there was a hiring freeze in order to implement this biographical assessment instead. But let's get to the biographical assessment questionnaire because the questions that they asked were insane. They were insane. So in 2014, the FAA rolled out the new biographical questionnaire in line with the barrier analysis recommendation. designed so 90% or more of applicants would fail.

The questionnaire was not mentioned and people could take it. I'm sorry, yeah, it was not monitored, I should say. It wasn't monitored, people could take it at home. You don't have to take it in like a secure location where someone's watching you. After all, you're just answering questions about your biography. The FAA adopted the new test developed by diversity consultants who were paid more than $1.5 million for their work without first studying its effectiveness and discarded a pool. of thousands of candidates who had already qualified under a standardized aptitude test that had been

used for years. So the questionnaire, as I mentioned, was bizarre in how the importance of the answers were weighed. It literally, in my opinion, it used some pretty gross anti-black stereotypes and awarded points for having things like low scores or low grades in science classes or having been unemployed for the previous three years, discovery shows candidates who rated themselves as poor science students in high school and played varsity sports but were unemployed, would score higher than candidates who were employed and had previous experience in air traffic control. It also gave high scores to people who said they were reluctant to express their views in a group were more likely to be bothered by criticism of their performance and had less than three

years of training in air traffic control. Candidates scored zero. If they reported five or more years of formal training and got lower scores, if they said their previous supervisor would describe them as accomplishing tasks quickly, or if they said they started earning money after they were 18. And look, what's interesting is it was kind of designed. I mean, if you're answering this questionnaire, you would think, like, I'm, I'm, I'm going to flaunt my experience because that's going to give me a higher score. But obviously,

the way that this was weighed actually punished the students, or the applicants, I should say, who said they had this experience. And so the majority of people would fail. But in the background of all of this happening, the very organization, the National Black Coalition of Federal Aviation employees were advising black applicants on how to answer the questions in a way that would ensure that they would get hired. So notes from a meeting that they held in 2013 were shared as part of the discovery process for this lawsuit. And I want to read some of it to you. Okay. So they say, we are only concerned about African Americans, women of every ethnic background and other minorities. Please ensure that you share this information with no one that is identified

outside of that, this information is reserved for those classes of people we represent. This is to minimize competition. I mean, it's like super brazen in the documentation. And they were also advised to mention that they're members of the National Black Coalition of Federal Aviation employees on the questionnaire to increase their chances of getting hired. But I want to be clear that things have changed since then. As Trump mentioned himself, during his press conference today, the practice ended in 2016. In fact, in 2016, Congress passed public law 114-190, which among other things banned the use of biographical assessments as a first-line hiring tool for air traffic controllers. People snubbed by the process filed dozens of lawsuits

as a result, culminating in a in the class action suit now underway in Brigida v. Buttigieg. So initially, the lawsuit was titled Brigida versus Department of Transportation. It's now Brigida versus Buttigieg. The documents are public and available to anyone who wants to read them. But this was, in fact, an unfortunate hiring practice that did come to an end in 2016. Yeah. So on Twitch, one of our members of Ender Dragon 89S. Wait, being bad at science was a good thing? Yes. So that's why this is over the top absurd. Look guys, a lot of things are called DEI now and some them are, some of them aren't. And some of the practices could be great at bringing in more representation of different jobs and not lowering the standards at all. And some of the

programs overreach. And this is a massive overreach. And not only does it affect competency and hurt the population at large, but I would argue that it really hurts minorities. to do insane stuff like this. So let me just clarify a couple of things. And then I'll tell you why I think it also hurts minorities. So first, I want you guys to be clear in the old days, you know, before this program was put into place, they would take the competency test and that would settle. And it was an eight hour test, grueling, but we got got you good qualified candidates.

When they instituted this program, you take the biographical stuff first and eliminate 90% of people no matter how well they did on the test, then among the people who survived that, then they would look at the competency scores, which understandably were likely to be much, much lower at that point because of the pool that had been eliminated. A lot of the good people were eliminated. Why, not based on race or anything, but based on this insanity of the standards. So yes, if science was your lowest score, you got an advantage. Insanity.

If you had less experience, it was an advantage. If you were recently unemployed, it was an advantage. If you don't take, I mean, I know Anna listed it, but just think about it. You don't take criticism well. Your air traffic control, they have to be able to criticize you at like significantly and immediately. Get the freaking plane out of the way, right? This is not one of those things that you could have like, you know, a discussion about

12 days later. We've got to go. The other one was you don't speak out much. At air traffic control, you have to speak out. That's like issue number one, speak out, right? Why would you test for things that give you much worse competency? Because in their mind, and I would argue it's actually super ironically racist assumptions. They're like, oh, black people are probably going to be bad at this job.

So let's design a questionnaire to find the crappiest candidates so we can find more. No, no, who are these monsters who got paid one and a half million? million dollars. And now when you put this out into the world, and guys, it's in a legal case, we wouldn't bring it to you if it was some nonsense, right wing source that can't verify it, etc. There's no question about it. And, and all the, like the, as Anna read to you guys, the emails, the memos, I mean, for that organization that's trying to promote minority, minorities in air traffic control, for them to say, hey, now remember guys, this is how you should answer. you're cheating. It's outrageous, right? And then don't tell the non-black, non-female candidates,

because it'll create competition for us. No, this is awful. And so now they'll take this, which is an aberration. Look, I don't know how much of an aberration it is in terms of like, now it makes me want to look at more of these DEI programs, how many were insane like this. But of the things that I've seen, this is, this is a rarity. But when you have this, well, every, like even if you say, hey, change, don't, I mean, it's so embarrassing, don't tell anyone, right? And don't worry, mainstream media will cover it up too. You can't cover it up.

Every right wing show is talking about. Every right wing show talks about a lot of things that aren't true, right? But when this is true, it's going to get out anyway. And if you're then lying about it or trying to cover it up, then that media source has even less credibility. And the next time you say something that is true, they go, yeah, right, right. These are the guys who denied that program. And it turns out that program was totally true. So don't do this. We don't. And overall, look, I've said this many times. I've said this for 20 straight years. I'm opposed to affirmative action. Not in the beginning. In the beginning,

we desperately needed it. But if we never ever end affirmative action, this stuff like sets in like a cancer into people's way of thinking. Oh, my. minorities can't do the job, we need to adjust the standards, we need to do this, we need, no, I'm a minority, I don't need your goddamn help. No, where we need the help, whether it's for African Americans or anywhere else, is at the beginning, okay? So programs like Head Start are super important, making sure that everybody gets a great education so they have equality of opportunity is super important, okay? But when you say at the end, oh yeah, like let's take my group, oh well, you know, Muslims aren't good at this, although I don't know why.

But by the way, there is a reason why. For example, that might be true of Turks in Germany. Why are Turks and Germany genetically different than me? No, because they're from a different socioeconomic background. So they had different education, different circumstances, etc. Would I want the Germans to cheat to allow more Turkish air traffic controllers? No, I would want them to educate them better, starting at the beginning. So this is an epic disaster in every way.

Guys, it looks like air traffic control did the right thing. We can't quite tell yet, let them do an investigation. I don't think this program had anything to do with this crash. But if you're hearing that Trump's a lunatic because he made this whole thing up, but it's not true, in this case, it is true and not that it's necessarily related to this crash. All right, let's take a quick break. And when we come back, obviously two very important hearings occurred today. So we're going to get into those hearings featuring Cash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard when we return.

All right, back on TYT, Janganana with you guys, more news. Josh Patel had his confirmation hearing today, and it was explosive to say the least. Let's get to the highlights. You familiar with the Stu Peters? Is that an name ring a bell? I'm sorry, what is... Are you familiar with Mr. Stu Peters? Not off the top of my head.

He made eight separate appearances on his podcast. He promoted outrageous conspiracy theories and worked with a prominent neo-Nazi. That was an amazing moment from Cash Patel's confirmation hearing today. Of course, Cash Patel is President Donald Trump's pick or nominee for director of FBI. He testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee and throughout the hearing, Patel pretty much evaded direct questions from Democratic senators. In some cases, when being questioned by Republican senators, he didn't evade, but he gave vague answers. Now, what you just saw was a question about alt-right streamer, Stu Peters, whose show Patel did in fact appear on multiple

time. So it's hard to believe that Patel is unfamiliar with him. Peters has called for the deaths of reporters who have promoted vaccines. In March, Peters wrote the journal, anchors, and hosts who participated should be indicted, tried, and fried. Fried. Not fired. I want to be clear. In June, he posted a video of various media and government figures talking about the vaccine and wrote every single one of these people deserves the rope. Peters has also called for the executions of politicians and LGBTQ advocates. So Peters wrote that Judaism is a death cult built on the blood of murdered babies. Jesus.

Interesting. I wonder if Donald Trump is going to deport him. I mean, he signed an executive order recently calling for the deportation of anti-Semites. So this guy is saying that Judaism is the death cult built on the blood of murdered babies. I mean, you can't get any more anti-Semitic than that. Peters is also a flat earther writing, if the globe is round, someone is going to have to prove it to me. So Patel, I'll get to more video in just a minute. I'm going to pause for comment.

Go ahead, Jank. Yeah, look, I think cash is the most mentally unstable of murderers row of fairly unstable candidates that Trump has nominated. And, you know, he went on all these crazy shows. And it's one thing that you go on a, you know, show and then they say, okay, now that show said this 28 years ago, blah, blah, blah. But this is not a normal left-wing, right-wing show. This is, like, super extreme. And the fact that this guy has said crazy things was fairly well publicized. So, I mean, and they've got this schizophrenia here that I can't quite solve where they're like, we love Israel, but the Jews, I don't know about the Jews. I mean, I know that it's partly Christian Zionism, like, oh, we got to have, you know, Israel start a giant war and all the Jews get killed, yay, and then Jesus comes back and all that stuff.

But this, but Cash Patel is not a Christian's eyes. I don't, look, there's so many, so much madness here. Some of the people I object to like Marco Rubio because he's a neocon, but he has enough experience for that role. Cash Patel is a disaster in every direction. No experience, total loon, having him in charge of this super important law enforcement agencies, mental. And so to me, Anna, this is a litmus test of can they block anyone? Matt Gates was a sacrificial lamp. Everyone knew he was going to get blocked. He got put up so that he could be blocked so that everybody else can go through.

So are they really going to do that or are they going to block anyone? And if you don't block Cash Patel, then the Senate confirmation hearings are a joke. No, I don't think they are going to block Cash Patel. And I think the Senate confirmation hearings, especially with the makeup of the Senate at the moment is for the most part a joke. Okay, like I'm giving you the coverage and the highlights of what's going on during this confirmation hearings. because it's good to be informed. But if you're asking me for my prediction, I think that Cash Patel is very likely going to be confirmed. You know, the line of questioning from the Democrats really was rooted in this concern that Patel is going to use his position to pursue retaliatory

measures against Democrats, against anyone who investigated January 6th. And so that's why, you know, you're hearing these statements from individuals who are allies of Patel or in this case, hosts who have had Patel on their shows multiple times. And so let's get to what Patel has said during these hearings. So he deflected during an interesting line of questioning from Senator Chris Coons and refused to state that he would resign if he was being asked or forced to take or make illegal actions by the president. Take a look. I went back and looked and I asked the same questions of Director Comey and Director Ray.

Director Ray, quoting former Attorney General Bell, said you should be willing to resign if necessary over conduct if you're pressed to engage in it that's unethical, illegal, or unconstitutional. If pressed by the president, would you resign? Senator, my answer is simply, I would never do anything unconstitutional or unlawful, and I never have in my 16 years of government service. Would you be willing to resign the post of FBI director if pressed and given no choice but to obey the order or resign? Senator, I will always obey the law. Does obeying the law require you to, as Attorney General Bell said, as FBI Director Ray said, refuse the order or resign?

I'm not familiar with the extent of the law that you're referring to, but my answer is simple in my 16 years of government service. we will simply follow the law. So look, I describe that as a deflection. He's not answering yes or no. He's saying that he will follow the law. You can argue that that's not a deflection. He's saying, yes, I will, you know, or I will reject, you know, any effort by Donald Trump to get me to do something illegal.

But I'm curious what your interpretation is, Shank. Yeah, they're going to follow all those orders. I mean, let's skip the theatrics, right? Like, no, actually, don't skip the theatrics. Good. Get it clear on the record. have him lie to the senators because he's definitely lying. And so is Hegseth.

When Trump gives an illegal order, it is an absolute 100% guarantee that Hegseth and Patel will follow it. And that's why they're avoiding the question. If I'm up for a position in Bernie Sanders administration and they ask me if he gives you an illegal or unconstitutional order, will you follow it? My answer is super clear. No, I will not follow it. And so it's not my job to determine things around the edges, that's the president's job. But if it is clearly illegal or clearly unconstitutional, I will not do it because my responsibilities to the American people, not to the person who happens to hold that office.

They will never give that answer because their job is to kiss Donald Trump's ass and to do exactly as they're told whether it's illegal or not. And even if you're on the right wing, you know that, you know that's why they were selected. You have, like, you might think, oh, Donald Trump would never give a non-constitutional order, the guy who said we should terminate the Constitution. Anyways, okay, you could have that opinion, but you can't have the opinion that if Donald Trump gives an illegal or unconstitutional order, Cash Patel will not follow through on it because of his conscience.

He just told you that he won't. He just, it was super clear in that evasion that he will do whatever Trump says, not what the Constitution or the law is said. At one point, Senator Peter Welsh engaged in many attempts to get Patel to admit to who won the 2020 presidential election. So let's see how he handled that line of questioning. What's so hard about just saying that Biden won the 2020 election? What's hard about that? Senator, as I've said before, that President Biden was certified and sworn in and he was a president.

I don't know how else to say it. Well, the other way to say it is he won. He was the president. The other way to say it is he won. I can say Trump won. Do you agree with him that the election was stolen in 2020? Senator, millions of Americans expressed concern going back to multiple elections over election integrity. You know, you're so skillful.

You understand what I'm asking you. Can you say the words, Joe Biden won the 2020 election? election. Joe Biden is the was the president of the United States. I just clowns to the left to me, jokers to the right. I mean, come on. Come on. What was that? What was that? Just, dude, it's over. It's done. Okay. It's 2025. Your guy's in office. He's in charge. Why would it be so difficult to just answer that question affirmatively? Yes, Biden won the 2020 presidential election. Let's move on. Because guess what? When you answer that directly, that robs all the other Democratic senators of asking the same

question over and over and over again. And when he is refusing to answer it directly, it gives us the impression, I think the accurate impression, that he still hasn't accepted the results of the 2020 presidential election, which is insane. Absolutely insane. Yeah. No, I know, but Anna, you know, he can't answer it because Trump might fire him in the middle of the hearings if he said Biden won the election in 2020. Well, if Trump were to do that, that would be so deeply pathetic. It really would. It really would. Bro, you're the president right now. You're the president right now. I know, but Anna, he still hasn't let to go. He still hasn't let it go. It's pathetic. It's pathetic. It is. It's totally pathetic that he's still. lying about 2020. You won the presidency twice. What else do you need, right? But no, his tiny, he's like his giant ego and his thin skin can't handle it. So that's why I bet you if Cash Patel said, of course Joe Biden won the 2020 election, that Trump might literally

pull him in the middle of the hearings. Because he's so obsessed with himself and not the country and not anything else. So look, the real answer Cash Patel should have given is, Senator, I'd love to answer your question, but my lips are pursed in the middle of Donald Trump's cheeks, so I can't speak. And that's, that's, and by the way, to be fair, Senator, that's why I was selected, because I'm one of the biggest ass kissers of Donald Trump in the entire country. But to me, the number one thing, and almost the only thing they should be asking about is the enemies list. So who's on your enemies list? What are you planning to do with them? And have you ever bothered to try to figure out that they've done anything wrong?

or just say your political enemies and like an authoritarian thug, a Gestapo, you would like to go and arrest them for no goddamn reason. So go ahead, Cash, answer that one, see if that one's complicated for you. But he won't answer that. I mean, the whole point of these hearings is to either lie to the Senate about what you intend to do or evade the questions. When pressed on, well, look, to be fair, Patel seemed to break with Trump on one issue. And that had to do with pardoning the violent January 6 rioters. Take a look. Was President Donald Trump wrong to get blanket clemency to the January 6 defendants?

Thank you, ranking member. A couple of things on that. One, the power of the presidential pardon is just that, the president. Well, I can see he has the authority. I'm asking, was he wrong to do it? And as we discussed in our private meeting, Senator, I have always rejected any violence against law enforcement, and I have including in that group, is specifically addressed any violence against law enforcement on January 6th. And I do not agree with the commutation of

any sentence of any individual who committed violence against law enforcement. So, Jank, boom, he just said that he disagrees with what Donald Trump did in pardoning the violent January 6 offenders who assaulted police officers. He was clear about that. that unequivocal. So why can't you just say that Biden won the 2020 presidential election and move on? So Ann, I have a theory about that. And you know, the right we can catch feelings about this. But I've said it about Democrats as well. We've said it for 20 straight years. Look, there's a lot of theatrics and politics that's never actually revealed to the voters and the viewers. And a lot of times, most of the time, is mainstream media hiding it. Right. So in this case, Susie Wiles,

very likely had a conversation with not just Cash Patel, but other almost all the people, because she's deeply competent with all the people that are going up to these hearings and probably gave them one thing to disagree on with Trump so that it looks like, especially now that his position is about representing law enforcement, right? So the one that you give him is, well, I would defend law enforcement, so I'm against, you know, I disagree with President Trump on that. So you give one, you know, disagreement so it seems like you're reasonable, but not one that the president is overly emotional about.

By the way, do you know how Trump made the decision out there if you haven't seen this part of the story? At some point as they were discussing it, all the pardons, he got a little bored. So he said, F it, let's just pardon them all. There's sophisticated calculus there. He didn't want to do it by a case by case basis. But Jank, look, I hear what you're saying, but that's speculation. That's like entirely your speculation.

But it's speculation based on how I know politics works. And they also teach everyone going to a hearing, don't answer their questions, especially the Supreme Court nominees, both Democrats or Republicans do it. Pretend that you don't have any opinions, pretend that you're a robot, and then later, of course, we'll screw them and you'll actually have left-wing opinions or right-wing opinions, and that's what they always do. So I've seen this movie 2,000 times, so I'm telling you how it actually works. So when pressed on FISA, which is of course the warrantless wiretapping of suspected

threats to U.S. national security. Oftentimes, Americans end up getting spied on without a warrant as a result of FISA. Patel stated that he, well, interestingly enough, has the kind of position that the majority of Americans absolutely despise, including the right wing. Let's take a look. One of the things that's come up, and we've discussed this, is the idea that in order to query lawfully collected intelligence under Section 702, that somehow, if a U.S. person's name is involved, that a warrant would be required. Do you believe a warrant requirement is a practical and workable or even a necessary element of 702? If I may just give some context on that, Senator, having a background not only utilizing

FISA and 702 as a national security prosecutor, but as a civilian at JSOC and later as an intelligence official and the Deputy Director of National Intelligence, 7.2, collection formulates over 45% of the presidential daily briefing that you referred to earlier. I actually have heard it's as high as 60%. It can't. It's a lot. It's a lot. And the issue for me is not with FISA and 702. The issue has been those that have been in government service and abused it in the past. Yeah. All right. So he's in favor of warrantless wiretapping of the citizens. That's, that's an easier way to just condense what he just said there.

Yeah. All right. So no, the issue is 702. Because if you allow for warrantless wiretapping, it will be abused every single time. And that's exactly what's happening now. I don't mean in every instance, I mean by every administration, whatever it's convenient for them, Republican or Democrat, and they both have. They've grossly abused it. And it's so interesting to see Tulsi Gabbard and Cash Patel get partly get selected because the right wing really likes them. The MAGA movement likes them. And one of the reasons they liked them is because they were against warrantless wiretapping. So this is one of the, there's many issues we talk about where the right wing massively disagrees with us and we fight over it. And I told you there's a couple

where we do agree. And they don't like warrantless wiretapping. And that's how he got to be popular. Then he goes to kiss the ass of the Republican establishment. And again, Susie Wiles, etc. The Trump administration at large says, yeah, go kiss their ass. We're going to do warrantless wiretapping. We were just lying to our base. Now we're in charge. Of course you're going to do warrantless wiretapping, right? And that's by the way, that's what every president says. Oh, I can't believe the other one did it. Oh, you know, I'm in charge.

I have the power. Of course I'm gonna abuse it. I mean, I 702 is so critical. So, so understand Maga, Tulsi and Cash Patel definitely lied to someone. Either they just lied to those Republican senators in a hearing or they lied to you. Okay, now I'm gonna give a voice here to a couple members just because they were so funny. Wong John on t.com says Cash Patel has the intellect of a four chan message board.

I think that's totally true. And then post-traumatic South disorder said, this is how Trump fights DEI hires by hiring the most intelligent, most qualified with the best experienced people. Well played, Mr. President, that is funny because Cash Patel does not seem to fit that mold. But look, if you're on the right and you're angry, oh no, he's perfectly qualified. What a brilliant young gentleman, okay, look guys, shoe on the other foot. I know neither side likes to do this game, okay? But if you're being fair, this is what you should do every time.

So imagine Biden nominated someone who said, or Hillary Clinton, that they have an enemy's list of MAGA guys and they're gonna go after them. And just, that's okay, just put me in charge of the FBI, put me in charge of law enforcement. And they never said what crimes you committed, but they're gonna go after Trump and the MAGA leaders because they have an enemies list. Do you think that that person should be confirmed? You can lie if you like and say, oh no, I think he, I would. say he should be confirmed. Okay, but everybody knows that's a lie. You could pretend that

there's some sort of difference, but there isn't. So this guy's not it. This is not about, this is not what American rights should be. And he's, he's definitely not qualified. And nobody with an enemy's list should be put into the US government, especially in law enforcement. This is mental. Well, there was another hearing that took place today, this time having to do with Tulsi Gabbard. So when we come back, we'll show you some of the highlights

from that hearing and more. Don't miss it. All right, back on TYT, Jank Anna and Preston the Dragon. Good time to sign up. around John Idol's 13th anniversary, TYT, and David Martinez, thank you for joining at a higher

level because it allows us to keep prices low. We did all throughout inflation, kept it at the same price. We appreciate all of you guys being a wonderful community together. They hit the join button below. All right, Anna. Well, Tulsi Gabbard had her confirmation hearing today. She was nominated by Donald Trump to be the head of DNI. Let's see some of the highlights from what happened. Edward Snowden. Edward Snowden. Edward Snowden. Edward Snowden was a traitor to the United States of America. Edward Snowden. Edward Snowden. Edward Snowden. I agree with Tom Cotton. He's a traitor. Is Edward Snowden a traitor to the United States of America? That is not a hard question to answer when the stakes are this high. Our senators are a joke. Our senators are a joke.

And nothing made that clearer than how they handle the confirmation hearing of DNI director nominee Tulsi Gabbard. That's director of national intelligence. Now, it seems like there really is bipartisan hatred toward Tulsi Gabbard. But what really stood out to me is the fact that they all kept asking about her views on Edward Snowden. Now, for those of you who are unfamiliar with Edward Snowden, he was the whistleblower who at the time alerted Glenn Greenwald about the NSA's indiscriminate spying of all Americans, okay? That was a huge scandal. And he is not a traitor to America. If anything, he is a patriot who felt the need to risk everything in his life to let the American people know that the federal government was indiscriminately spying on all of us, all of us. So truly, there's really no way that we can show you all the Snowden bashing coming from senators, but I do want to give you a little taste. Until you're nominated by the president to be

the DNI, you consistently praise the actions of Edward Snowden. Some who I believe jeopardized the security of our nation and then effort to flaunt that fled to Russia. You even called Edward Snowden, and I quote here, a brave whistleblower, but Edward Snowden isn't a whistleblower. And in this case, I'm a lot closer to the chairman's words where he said, Snowden is, quote, an egotistical, serial liar and traitor who, quote, deserves to rot in jail for the rest of his life. Edward Snowden got mad at his employer that he didn't get the promotion that he wanted and started harvesting information. and then found some things that he didn't like on it. Why is he being treated like a folk hero by you instead of the traitor that he was? We're going to get to Tulsi Gabbard's answer in just a minute, which to be quite frank with you, I wasn't happy with.

But it is infuriating to see the bipartisanship pushing this narrative that Edward Snowden is like some demon that should be. be, you know, I mean, like, they act as though he's like public enemy number one. We were all being spied on. Okay. The federal government was collecting data on every single one of us, regardless of what we've done, what we didn't do. It didn't matter. Indiscriminate spying by the federal government is an overreach of the federal government. And Edward Snowden basically threw his entire life away to let the American people know about that. It's, he should be pardoned, period. But that's, I don't know. It's unlikely to happen. What do you think, Well, okay, so first to the Senators, if I was in Tulsi's situation and they asked me as Edward Snowden, a traitor, easy, easy, easy answer, hell no, you authorizing, spying on Americans illegally, you're the traitor. You're the actual enemy. And the reason why you're so mad at Edward Snowden is because he let us know that you're the actual enemy. Because he told us,

what you wouldn't tell us, that you were spying in on us. That's unconstitutional, it's illegal. And then you guys afterwards said, oh, yeah, we want to do it anyway. And Edward Stone is such a bad traitor for trying to protect your constitutional rights. No, he's not. Absolute American hero. It's the senators that are the goddamn problem. And look at the unit party.

All of a sudden, they're unified. No, spy, spy on the plebeian masses. as how dare you support a whistleblower telling you to protect your constitutional rights. Okay, now I turn to MAGA. I propose pardoning Edward Stodden, almost all of MAGA agreed. They loved that Tulsi Gabbard wanted to, you know, support Edward Stodin and support his pardon, et cetera. That was part of the reason that she rose up with the right wing. And what happened to your Republican senators?

I know I know you hate a lot of them. Well, this is the time to show it, okay? Because these guys, and by the way, if you're a Democrat, also the same thing for you. Those Democratic senators are saying, let's go spying. Yay, spy on Americans. As a left winger, you should despise that. The people who initially said Edward Stone was a hero were on the left wing. Okay.

So, and by the way, this is not something that left wing is hypocritical about. They have challenged Democrats to, and said that they were wrong, okay? right wing, I know a lot of you believe this, well then show it because we're not in charge. The right wing, unfortunately or unfortunately, I think unfortunately, but they think fortunately, you are in charge? So if you're in charge, are you going to stand up and go, what the hell? No, we said Edward Stone was a hero. We meant that he's a hero. Stop kissing the ass of the uniparty and pardon the guy. Are you going to put, by the way, not just about Tulsi, but are you going to put pressure on Trump? Or is that guy going to go another four years where everyone

calls him a traitor, including Trump. So I want to go to Tulsi Gabbard and how she answered one of the thousand times that she was asked this same question about Edward Snowden. Scabbard is simple yes or no question. Do you still think Edward Snowden is brave? Mr. Vice Chairman, Edward Snowden broke the law. I do not agree with or support with all of the information and intelligence that he released nor the way in which he did it. The fact is he also, as he broke the law, released information that exposed egregious, illegal, and unconstitutional programs that are happening within our government, that led to serious reforms that Congress undertook. Was Edward Snowden a traitor to the United States of America?

He broke the law. Senator, have confirmed as director of national intelligence. I will work with you to make sure that there is not a moment for social media. Yes or no. Is Edward Snowden? a traitor to the United States of America. As someone who has worn our uniform in combat, I understand how critical our national security is. Apparently you don't. Yeah, the traders to the United States of America are sitting in Congress, okay, fattening their bank accounts through insider trading that ordinary Americans would go to prison for for a very long time.

Okay, the traitors to America and Americans are the corrupt politicians who provide cover for a corrupt government that indiscriminately spies on Americans, even when they've done absolutely nothing wrong. Okay, it's just, it's disgusting to see the bipartisan agreement on this issue and the fact that they think they're so high and mighty, as if they're not traitors to the American people, when they're elected to serve the best interests of the American people, but they consistently do the opposite. I can't stand these people. And honestly, I've said this before.

I'm going to say it again. I've had issues with Tulsi Gabbard because I felt that she was dishonest about her political identity, and it turned out she was dishonest about her political identity, you know, pretending as though she was some progressive when in reality she wasn't. But put that aside, even when she turned her back on progressives, she still maintained her positions on Edward Snowden, on warrantless wiretapping.

And I liked that she held those positions. I thought, okay, you know, if she gets confirmed, at least there are some qualities to her that I find to be positive and helpful. But now she has turned her back on those values, and it's beyond disgusting. It's beyond disgusting how far human beings will go in an effort to accumulate power for themselves. And that's what we're seeing here. Yeah. So I have a little bit of a more nuanced opinion on what Tulsi did there. So I want to talk to you about it in a second. First, Mikey 3343 wrote in member on YouTube. Remember the time Anna said she thought Tulsi was a secret right winger. Boy, was she

wrong? Sarcasm. Yes. Okay. It's almost as if I really do my due diligence and I research the crap out of everything I talk about before I talk about it. It's, I know, it's crazy. Almost like we do a new show. Okay, so anyway, Mikey, we appreciate her, brother. Everybody hit the join button. I do, Mikey, thank you. Yeah, hit the join button below the video on YouTube to become a member like Mikey. All right, so now, look, I would have had a much clearer answer as I told you earlier than

Tulsi did. Was she doing both sides? Yes, she was. And I've had a lot of criticism of Tulsi Gabbard as well. But Anna, I thought she was trying to give a nuanced answer there and go, hey, yeah, he broke the law, but on the other hand, he revealed important information, but they didn't really let her finish. finish. And sometimes the senators interrupt because the witness is taught to filibuster and take up as much of their time as possible. In that case, though, she wasn't filibustering. She was actually trying to give her real answer. Because I already know it. Shut up, shut up. He's a traitor. Okay, let us spy. Let us spy. We have to spy. We have to spy.

We hate the Constitution, but we're not the traitors. My donors want us to spy. But we're not the traitors. Edward Stone is the traitor. Okay, look, why do I say Trump's social responsible? He's not responsible for calling him a traitor like the senators did, but he could pardon him today. He had four years to pardon him. And this time around, Maga said, well, he's definitely, definitely going to pardon him. And instead of pardoning him, we got Republican senators yelling at his nominees, you better call him a traitor. Look, who knows? Who knows with Trump? You know, it's not like he gives the damn what what Republican senators think anyway, right? So he might pardon.

Edward Snowden, we have no idea. What I do know is he didn't pardon him in his first term. And in fact, Donald Trump's Department of Justice was trying to extradite Julian Assange back to the United States so he could throw him in prison for the rest of his life. So that was a reality in the first Trump term as well, and it was beyond egregious. So look, I hear what you're saying. She was trying to be nuanced, but you can't be nuanced during these hearings, unfortunately, because none of these senators are interested in hearing a new opinion or nuanced take on an important issue. They want yes or no answers.

So what I would have done is, I would have said he was a whistleblower. And he drew attention to the fact that the federal government was engaging in indiscriminate spying of American citizens. Do you support that senator? That's what I would have done. Yeah, well, that would have been way better. And I agree with you. But they're coach to just get through this freaking thing. So now we're all left with the hope that she's lying to the senator.

lying to the senators. That's what we have to root for and that they're actually not going to continue to chase Edward Stone to the ends of the earth. But there isn't much hope because Donald Trump at the end of the day, does he really like have a philosophical drive to free Edward Stone? No, he'll only do it if MAGA puts enough pressure on him. Otherwise, he couldn't care less about any other human being, let alone Edward Stone. And finally, I want to correct the record of those lying senators. Edward Snowden actually went through the right procedures first. And the government was like, yeah, yeah, right? Like we would give a damn. Of course, we're spying on them for our purpose. Shut up, right? Then when he had absolutely no choice,

he went to the press. Absolute hero. Yep. Well, we're not quite done with Tulsi Gabbard. When we come back for the second hour of the show, we're going to talk about the line of questioning pertaining to her meeting with Bashar al-Assad in Syria and more. Don't miss it. We'll be right back. Buhn't know. B. B. B.