The Young Turks - Lap Dog Donny - June 26, 2025

Episode Date: June 27, 2025

Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month Shopify trial and start selling today at ⁠shopify.com/tyt Israel reportedly halts Gaza aid deliveries after Smotrich threatens to bring down Netanyahu’s government. Donald Trump calls for Netanyahu’s corruption trial to be canceled and urges a full pardon. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth lashes out at the press, while House GOP holdouts threaten to revolt over the Trump-Senate tax deal. 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. I'm so upset. Oh my God. Well, hello. We're going to be able to be. All right, welcome to the Young Turks. Jane Cougar and Experian with you guys.

Let's do a show that gives you the truth and tries to help the world a little bit. Is that crazy? That's a little crazy, but that's what we try to do every day here for you guys. So do we have stories on Gaza and Israel? Unfortunately, we do. We do. I'm hearing rumblings, rumors of potential good news, but we're not there yet. We're still at bad news.

And, oh my God, the hatred against Mom Dani is through the roof. The establishment, well, that's actually what we're asking on the website. Do you think the establishment will be able to get them in the general election? Because there's now people saying they're gonna spend literally hundreds of millions of dollars on a mayoral race. And yeah, and they have a lot of claims as to why they're doing that. The number one reason is he's opposed to Israel. It can't be allowed to stand. By the way, he would be mayor.

If he wins the general election, he would be the mayor of a city. Like, who cares what his foreign policy views are? He has no say on foreign policy. Like, people have lost their minds. They've totally lost their minds. 100%. So the polls up on t.com, we'll keep out, you know, track on it throughout the show. And then when we get to that story.

But what's amazing is that no one's asked his foreign policy views on Pakistan, right? Or even, as far as I know, even Ukraine, which is huge in the news, right? Or Indonesia, but they're obsessed about his views about Israel and the fact that he's Muslim. God, they are so scared of that. Anyway, if you want to know what the problems are, we just got these t-shirts in and I'm wearing them today. What I keep telling you guys, I've just said it on many interviews, check them out on t-y-t.com slash press. Don't look down to see where your problems are. It's not the undocumented immigrant that came in with no money.

Don't look to your left and to your right. They're constantly, they want you fighting left and right, left and right. Look up, look up, okay. The people who rigged the game, the people who are in charge had the money and the power. They're up, okay? So shop t.y.t.com. All right, Anna, let's get going. Well, there was a big announcement made by the government of Israel today,

And it should come to no surprise because this isn't the first time they've done it. So without further ado, here are the details. Hundreds of people have been killed more than a thousand wounded while looking for food at the private militarized so-called AIDS sites, which replaced UN distribution centers in May. The entire population of Gaza, 2.1 million people experienced prolonged shortages of food. Half a million are in a catastrophic situation of hunger, acute malnutrition, starvation, and illness. according to the World Health Organization. Well, aside from the fact that Palestinians continued getting slaughtered at these humanitarian

aid hubs by the IDF, and the IDF admits that they would fire warning shots, Israel has also decided to halt aid deliveries into Gaza again. And that's according to the Israeli station Channel 12 News. Apparently Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is justifying further starving the Palestinian people by doing what Israelis always do. Blame Hamas, even when they're the ones responsible for the behavior. Now Netanyahu's office announced that he ordered the military to present a plan within the next two days on how to keep Hamas from stealing humanitarian assistance. So that's the cover story. Oh, we don't want to deliver aid to starving Palestinians

because we're worried Hamas is stealing it. In reality, the, uh, Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Aid Foundation was luring desperate Palestinians to these hubs where they were supposed to get the aid that they so desperately need. And then you'd have IDF soldiers firing on them, as by the way, Israeli Gideon Levy said on Pierce Morgan's show just yesterday. Take a look. I must remind ourselves that when the UN's agencies distributed the aid, there were no killed people. It all started with this monster organization of putting two, three stations in the Gaza street for two million people, almost as an experiment in human being, in starving human beings. None of them was killed in purpose, all of them by chance, all of them potential threat to the soldiers. How dare you to spread this propaganda knowing that you are lying? Again, that was Gideon Levy, who is in fact Israeli and has been critical of the Israeli government in the past.

Now, at least 103 Palestinians were killed by Israeli fire over the past 24 hours, local health authorities said, including some shot near an aid distribution point, the latest in a series of such incidents. The Israeli military had no immediate comment. That is the real issue here. And this whole notion that, oh, Hamas is stealing aid and Israel wants to investigate this, in order to find a better way to deliver aid is complete bunk. It's nonsense. In regard to halting that humanitarian aid from entering the Gaza Strip,

the prime minister's office came after, or his announcement came after, finance minister Baselel Smotrich, who wants to starve the Palestinians to death, by the way, threatened that he could no longer remain in the government if immediate action wasn't taken to prevent aid from reaching Hamas. Now, any normal person who's not a sociopath would say, good day, sir, go ahead and leave the government, you're not wanted. But of course, there is a fragile coalition that makes up the current Israeli government without that coalition. Netanyahu knows that he'll no longer be in power. And of course, he's very much concerned about that.

And if there's any evidence that's being shown to prove that Hamas is stealing the aid, what the Israelis are circulating online is. this video that shows dozens of masked men, some armed with rifles, but most carrying sticks riding on aid trucks. Okay, well, what is that about? Turns out the higher commission for tribal affairs, which represents influential clans in the territory, said the trucks had been protected as part of an aid security process, managed solely through tribal efforts. The commission said that no Palestinian faction, a reference to Hamas, had taken part in the process. The clans came to form a stance to prevent the aggression and the thieves from stealing the food that belongs to our people. Abu Salman al-Magani, a representative of Ghazan clan said referring to a Wednesday operation.

And look, I don't trust Hamas at all. Hamas says they've done no such thing. They've never stolen any humanitarian aid. I'm sure that there's been instances where they have. But in regard to the video that they're circulating, you have to keep in mind we're talking about starving Palestinian. They've been intentionally starved for months and months. And so when they see a humanitarian aid truck come through, they're going to rush toward the truck because they want food.

They need sustenance to feed their families. So the argument here from the Higher Commission for Tribal Affairs is that they're providing security to ensure that chaos doesn't break out. Although these humanitarian aid hubs jank, as you know, have been chaotic and have led to dozens of Palestinians getting shot and killed on a daily basis since late. May. So the UN and other groups used to do this aid system where they would hang out the food. And to Anna's point, to Gideon Levy's point, no one ever got shot at those stations. People got the food, it was orderly. Largely speaking, Hamas did not steal the food, certainly

not systematically. There's always bad actors in any given situation. I'm going to come back to that because I'm going to knock down a propaganda point of Israel that it's important to knock down. But so now that Israel's running the centers, the problem is if you don't have anyone guarding the food on the other side, since people are starving, there's going to be mayhem. And that's part of the reason why Israel did this, because they want the Palestinians fighting amongst themselves, they want them desperate, and then they want any excuse to kill them. So the minute that there's any kind of disturbance by the food, they're like, perfect, open fire, and they just start slaughting people. By the way, Israel killed

103 Palestinians yesterday. Does anybody notice? Is there any big headlines? No, they're like, We have 20 hostages, and that's terrible, okay? But wait, just on one day alone, would I kill 103 innocent people to maybe put pressure on to get 20 hostages back months later or whenever? No, I wouldn't kill 103 innocent people no matter what. And they do it every single day, massacre after massacre. It just doesn't get it reported as much anymore because people just got tired of reporting the same old news.

Israel slaughters more innocent Palestinians every single day. So it's not an accident, they're doing it on purpose. Now, the reason you need other people on the other side is order, right? So that it doesn't turn into mayhem and people don't hurt each other. So since it can't be Hamas, not only Israel doesn't want Hamas, but the Palestinians in that case don't want Hamas to take it because they need it for their family. So the traditional tribal clans have stepped in. And now apparently Fatah is also coming in.

They run the West Bank and they are sworn enemies of Hamas, okay? So they're trying to make sure that Hamas does not get the food. They're doing every effort they can to make sure that doesn't happen. But Israel goes, yeah, who cares? All dirty Muslims, Fatah Hamas, they're opposed to each other, tribal clans. Who cares? It's all an excuse to starve them, to kill them. So cutting off to aid, Gideon Levy is right, Anna's right, it's not even close.

It's definitely because Basilel Smote Rich. Basilel Smotrich, his name even sounds demonic, like Blasel, but anyway, it doesn't matter because his name could be perfectly great, his name could be terrible and he could do wonderful things. The bottom line is the guy is a certifiable monster. He, so we're not just saying this, like, to get you to, oh my God, we'll rile you up against some Israeli minister. No, what Anna said is literal. He said in public, if he could, he'd not only starve the Palestinians of death, he'd make it quicker by cutting the water so that they would all die of thirst. But he said, but I can't because of international pressure.

So we have to pretend to be feeding them and keep them on the brink of starvation, spoken like a true Nazi. And I don't hesitate at all in calling him a Nazi. I mean, okay, so now let's use that analogy for a second. And I don't care if you get offended. I'm 10 million times more offended by the genocide that Israel supporters are, protecting and defending right now, 10,000 times more offended by the 17,000 dead kids and the 20,000 dead women, okay? So, and if you're not, then you're saying, yeah, I don't care about Muslim lives. I just care about, am I offended? Okay, so let me offend you further. Okay,

now, and think about it. If you're not biased in this issue, this is going to be blaringly and glaringly obvious, okay? Imagine if in the middle of the Holocaust, the Germans said some of the Jewish prisoners are stealing the food. They've come up with a little organized gang of Jews. And that is why we're starving all the Jews to death. Could anyone believe them? Would they say, oh, I see. Some Jews are stealing some of the food because you've got them in starvation concentration camps.

So that's why you're preventing all of the Jews from getting the food. So you starve all of them. Well, no one would accept that ridiculous propaganda from the Nazis. But that is literally what the Israelis are saying. Some small group of Palestinians might be stealing some of the food. That is why we're starving the entire population. Well, you see, that's an obvious lie. They're starving them on purpose because they have become what they most feared.

And I, Anna, one more thing for now, and I got more details in a sec, but look, I'm so proud that I was the partner with Gideon Levy and the debate we did on Israel. And what I really appreciate is, well, we already had tons of Jewish Americans speaking out against this genocide. Now brave Israelis are coming out and going, no, no, this is not what we sign up for. This is what we hate. What are we doing? This is insanity. So thank you for speaking out and being a moral voice within Israel. All right, well, I was planning on moving on, so.

Oh, yeah, then I just want to say last two things here, guys. So number one, the reason Smote Rich wants to starve them is because he wants to push them into the Sinai desert in Egypt and take all of Gaza. Again, not speculation. He has said it. He said, we should take all of Gaza and they have voted to, quote unquote, conquer Gaza. If he leaves the coalition, Netanyahu's out. I have heard rumors. This is massive speculation and it comes from the right wing. So take it with a boulder of salt, that they're working on a two state solution peace deal. I would be floored, floored by that. But the reason that I'm bringing that up as a possibility here is

that Netanyahu soon will have to make a decision. Am I going to keep that coalition government together with the right-wing Nazis in his government like Smotrich and Ben-Gavir, like convicted terrorists and proud genociders? Or am I going to do a deal with Trump and the US and we're going to lead to a ceasefire. And I mean, again, Tuesday's solution seems unimaginable at this point. But if they went in that direction and they ended all of this, then he doesn't he wouldn't need necessarily Smotrich and Ben Gavir. He might be able to make an alliance with other people in the Knesset.

Because although the thing that Netanyahu cares about his staying in power, and of course murdering Palestinians because he he enjoys that and stealing their land. He loves that, that's been his lifelong mission. But overall, he might think, hey, you know what, I stole enough land here. I did it, I killed enough Palestinians here, I'm gonna stay in power with this alliance rather than that alliance. It's a tough, tough thing to believe. It's a real stretch.

I'll only believe it after I see the deal, but usually what'll happen is they'll promise something like that and then they'll come back and go, yeah, Tuesday solution where they continue to be occupied and we control both the Israeli side and the Palestinians side. We're gonna call it a two state solution, but they live under permanent oppression and they serve us and we can kill them anytime we like. That's usually how it goes, but maybe there's a strand of hope there. But for now, the starvation continues. There will never be any hope unless the United States allows the international community to ensure that Israel follows through in allowing Palestinians to have their own state and an opportunity at self-determination.

But Israel will never, never allow that. And they've been clear about it. So the US will always provide cover for Israel unless we change the way politics work. works in this country. And I don't want to give people false hope. The problem is the cover that the United States provides for any and all wrongdoing carried out by the Israeli government. Anyway, let's move on to the next story.

I just want to talk about what is Trump in the Epstein Falls? I don't know, okay, because he put out something recently that I think is strange. Let's get into it. Israel, as soon as we made the deal, they came out and they dropped a load of bombs to like of which I've never seen before. The biggest load that we've seen, I'm not happy with Israel. You know, when I say, okay, now you have 12 hours, you don't go out in the first hour and just drop everything you have on them. So I'm not happy with them. I'm not happy with Iran either. But I'm really unhappy if Israel's going out this morning. Basically have two countries

that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don't know what the f*** they're doing. Do you understand that? Oh, I understand that. And while Trump had some pretty harsh feedback for Israel at the start of this week, the president is now providing cover for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's corruption, in which he's facing serious charges and trials over. Now, in a lengthy truth social post, Trump said the following, quote, I was shocked to hear that the state of Israel, which has just had one of its greatest moments in history, I'm going to do. my best not to vomit as I read this statement. So just bear with me. And it's strongly led by

Bibi Netanyahu is continuing its ridiculous witch hunt against their great wartime prime minister. Bibi and I just went through hell together, fighting a very tough and brilliant longtime enemy of Israel, Iran. And Bibi could not have been better, sharper, or stronger in his love for the incredible holy land. Despite all of this, I just learned that Beebe has been summoned to court on Monday for the continuation of this long running politically motivated case in order to do him great harm. Such a witch hunt for a man who has given so much, it's unthinkable to me. Now, Netanyahu is facing some very serious charges. A lot of pay to play schemes, quit pro quo, corruption. I'm going to get into the details in just a minute, but I want to give you an opportunity to comment on what Trump wrote there, Jank.

Yeah, I think there's a couple of possibilities. One is, as you were joking in the beginning, have seen files. Another is, oh, they, A-PAC or the Aetlesons have promised a new bucket of several hundred million dollars. They, you know, we've told you many times Trump has gotten $337 million just from the Aedelson family to do whatever Israel demands. But as you saw in that first clip, he didn't in the case of Iran. When they wanted to continue bombing, Trump said no, which is surprising, but we're here to deliver the real news to you and not what you want to hear necessarily. And so Trump did the right thing in that case. Now he's back to being, you know, an Israeli butler and holding Netanyahu's chair for him. So it makes you wonder why.

But there is a third possible reason, which is that he thinks, look, I got Israel to stop. That was hard. They have enormous power within America. And since Netanyahu listened to me there, I'm going to give him a carrot here, carrots and sticks. And the carrot is, oh, you should stop his corruption trial. It is a terrible conspiracy against my beloved BB. But we do know that he called BB Netanyahu when he wanted to drop more. bombs on Iran and apparently ripped into him.

So he's playing carrots and sticks here is another possibility. There's one more possibility, Jank. And it's the likelihood that Trump looks at another world leader who's accused of corruption and says there before the grace of God go I. Yeah, he probably relates to Netanyahu when it comes to issues of corruption. 100% Anna, that's you're right, that's a fourth possibility because he's led so many white collar criminals go in America, pardon people on fraud charges, almost always white collar crime. Some, a lot of them have paid them off, but a couple I can't even

see if they did a campaign contribution or bought some meme coin or whatever junk he has. I just think that he has this like, and that's part of why he let Blagojevich go, the former corrupt Democratic governor of Illinois. If he knows you personally, he's much more likely to give you a pardon or push for one. And if you're corrupt or fraudulent, etc., then he's like, well, yeah, then he sees a kindred spirit. So that is a fourth possibility. So I want to get you a few details about the corruption charges themselves. And I'm really happy that these charges haven't been dropped, you know, despite the fact that there's an ongoing genocide in Gaza, Netanyahu will have to go to court on Monday. So I'm again, very happy about

that. So Net Yahoo is currently on trial for three corruption cases, not just one that include accusations of fraud, bribery, and breach of trust. Case 1,000 has to do with the Hollywood billionaire who allegedly bribed him in return for some favors. So he is charged with fraud and breach of trust surrounding allegations that he and his wife, Sarah, received expensive gifts illicitly from Hollywood media mogul Arnon Milken worth some $206,231 and that Netanyahu violated conflict of interest laws when he provided Milken with assistance in renewing his long-term U.S. residency visa and sought to help him with tax issues. Then there's case 2000. In that case, the prime minister is accused of fraud and breach of trust over his alleged attempt to reach a quid pro quo

agreement with the publisher of the Yetioth, I don't know how to pronounce that, but a newspaper, basically, Arnon-Moses, whereby Yetioth would give the Prime Minister more positive media coverage in exchange for legislation weakening its key rival, the Israel-Hyorn free sheet. And then finally, the more serious case is Case 4,000, also known as the Bezek-Weirn. Walla case. It's the most serious case the prime minister faces in which he's accused of authorizing regulatory decisions that financially benefited Bezek Telecommunications giant shareholder, Saul Elevitt, by hundreds of millions of shekels. In return, Netanyahu allegedly received favorable media coverage from the Walla news site, which of course this guy that engaged in

this corruption with him allegedly owns. And the Israeli prime minister, in an to secure positive coverage for himself and his family, allegedly pushed beneficial regulations for powerful individuals in the media, the outlet reported. So this trial is one of the most controversial legal proceedings Israel has faced. I think Netanyahu overall is a bad guy, aside from his corruption. He's a war criminal. He is obsessed with power.

He's a complete and utter narcissist who has, I believe, destroyed the perception of Israel. perception of Israel in the international community because of the fact that he has led the country in its genocide against Palestinians. But Donald Trump ended his statement by saying that Bibi Netanyahu's trial should be canceled immediately or a pardon given to a great hero. I can't, I can't stomach it. You guys can see it for yourselves, okay? He thinks that all charges should be dropped. But what's also really interesting, Jank, is that the president of Israel, Isaac Herzog has stated that a pardon for BB is not currently on the table and others in Israel, including the leader of the opposition party, Yair Lapid, says this.

With all due respect and gratitude to the president of the United States, he's not supposed to intervene in a legal process of an independent state. Oh, oh, you guys don't like when a foreign leader intervenes in proceedings in your, sovereign country and your independent state, ain't nothing independent about Israel if they're taking our tax dollars, okay? Like, I'm sorry, but they're highly dependent on the United States. I don't think that Trump should have any say in BB's corruption charges at all. I want to be clear about that. But what's good for the goose is good for the mother effing gang, but go ahead, Jake. Yeah, no, that is hilarious. I can't believe you guys are interfering in

our government. APAC, make them stop. I mean, the irony of that is hilarious. Okay, now look, credit to Israel, their corruption laws are actually much tougher than ours and better than ours. So the things that they describe about Netanyahu is Tuesday for an American politician. Like take goodies from donors. Like, wait, how would we survive if we didn't? And then rig the rules so that it's in their benefit. Well, that's what we do for Israel.

So that's illegal in Israel, but we do it for Israel here in America. And for the military industrial complex and the oil companies and all those guys. That's why I have to look up shirt, right? Your problems aren't to your left or to your right. Look up, okay? And in this case, it's the donors, right? ShopTy.com, by the way. And so, but these are real laws in Israel.

It is definitely corruption, of course Netanyahu did it. You think he has moral principles that would prevent him from doing corruption? That's hilarious. I mean, no one believes that. I don't even think, I mean, maybe some hard right wing Israelis do, but most of Israel doesn't even believe that. So, but will they actually prosecute him? I don't know, right?

Because right now- They're prosecuting him right now, Jank. He's gonna go to court on Monday. Yeah, I hear you, but like he's gonna go to prison? I wouldn't be shocked because he's killed so many Palestinians. He's so, because of that, he has popularity. Like, because of the corruption and other problems, he's unpopular in a lot of ways in Israel.

But 80% of Israelis think they haven't gone far enough in Gaza. So they liked that he, the mayhem and the murder that he committed in Gaza. And his main competitor, I mean, Yair Lipid might be from the other party, but Niftali Bennett is more likely to win if there's an election. And he's also a super hard right winger who also hates the Palestinians and would never like let them go and it's and is like thrilled with the oppression and destruction in Gaza. So that's why like you're not like in some ways he's hated and in other ways he's a national hero for how he's massacred and slaughtered the Palestinians. So he's going to go to prison.

If he does, I'll be very impressed with them by the Israeli court system. All right, we got to take a break. But when we come back, man, Pete Hegesith went hard today in trashing the leaked intel indicating that the United States failed in its mission to destroy Iran's nuclear sites. I want to give you some of those videos and more when we come back. And we're going to give you an update on the Senate parliamentarian potentially saving Medicaid. Okay. And Republican senators are not happy about it. I can't wait to get to that story. Stick around. We'll be right back. All right, back on T.O.T. Cenk and Anna with you guys.

Ring the bell if you can to get notice about the show, subscribe for free or do as American hero Afro-Vegan just did. He had the join button, but he didn't hit it to join. He joined it to upgrade. So we love that you did that. It's a big, big difference for the show, and we really appreciate it. And so that join button isn't just for joining. You could also upgrade through there. We appreciate you guys and can't do the show without you guys. So thank you for allowing us to do this show. Anna, what's next?

Well, Pete Hegsith is not happy with the leak coming out of the Pentagon indicating that maybe the US didn't really succeed in its mission in destroying Iran's nuclear sites. And I want to give you the details, including one of the most disgusting videos of Lindsey Graham. And the bar was high, but he met it. it today. Let's get into it. What's really happening is you're undermining the success of incredible B2 pilots and

incredible F-35 pilots and incredible refuelers and incredible air defenders who accomplished their mission, set back a nuclear program in ways that other presidents would have dreamed. How about we celebrate that? How about we talk about how special America is, that only we have these capabilities? I think it's too much to ask, unfortunately, for the fake news. I mean, there are definitely some elements of America that are special, if you know what I mean. But this morning, Defense Secretary Pete Heggseth chided, chided the media during a press conference at the Pentagon, he and others in the Trump administration, of course, are still furious over a leaked defense intelligence agency report. It was a preliminary report that made it appear as though the U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear sites only said. Iran back a few months. But again, that was a preliminary report. Now, that report was leaked

to CNN. And again, it alleged that the U.S. wasn't as successful as the Trump administration would have you believe. Now, here's more from Hegsith in response to that leak. And again, he's definitely not happy with the press in reporting about it. Let's watch. You. And I mean, specifically you, the press. Specifically, you, the press corps. Because Because you cheer against Trump so hard, it's like in your DNA and in your blood to cheer against Trump, because you want him not to be successful so bad, you have to cheer against the efficacy of these strikes. You have to hope maybe they weren't effective.

Maybe the way the Trump administration is representative isn't true. So let's take half truths, spun information, leaked information, and then spin it. it in every way we can to try to cause doubt and manipulate the mind, the public mind over whether or not our brave pilots were successful. How many stories have been written about how hard it is to, I don't know, fly a plane for 36 hours? Has MSNBC done that story? As Fox? Have we done the story how hard that is? Have we done it two or three times? Come on, Pete. Like, come on.

Okay, look, I actually understand his rage. And I do blame the media, but not in the way that he's blaming the media. So my problem is just because someone from the Pentagon is leaking a preliminary report, journalists shouldn't just be stenographers who regurgitate it without questioning, okay, wait, why was this leaked to me? And what is the motivation here? And I don't think that they reported on this simply because they hate Trump and they want to see him fail. I think they reported on this, A, because the reporters who got the leak felt like, ooh, I'm special.

I have a scoop and I'm going to break a story. But also, the media doesn't tend to question the motivation or the motivation of the leaker itself, right? And honestly, I do think that leaking a preliminary report before fully investigating, you know, the destruction of the leaker. nuclear sites is meant to go the US into further war with Iran. That's my interpretation of it. I'm curious what you think though, Jank. Yeah, I mean, you're taking a lot of the words right out of my mouth. So first, stuff like this gets leaked all the time in both administrations.

And it's almost always to spur further war. And that is the point of the leak is to say, oh, we didn't do enough. We need to bomb more. Now, there could be a lot of different factors and forces within the government that want to leak something like that. It could be pro-Israel forces, but it could just be military contractor forces, oil company forces, or just a group of people who are ideologically believe in war. And there's a lot of interesting interviews we've done recently. I did one during the military parade with Colin Powell's former chief of staff during the Iraq war.

So he has a lot of expertise in this. He actually literally talked to those guys and knows how they started the Iraq war because he's right in the middle of it. And he says, yeah, there are a group of people in America in the American government and some outside, they tend to be older and they believe in perpetual war and they're constantly pushing the government towards that. So my point is there's a lot of forces who want war and they usually leak this kind of stuff and it doesn't, this is really important guys, it doesn't have to be false because the

intelligence community usually prepares reports that says well we might have gotten it, this is the evidence for us actually wiping out their nuclear facilities and whole and then they'll have a separate report saying now this is our evidence for the fact that we might not have wiped out all of their uranium stock, right? So you can then cherry pick and leak whichever one you like, because almost certainly both exist. So the forces for war cherry picked the one that says, oh, we didn't get it all and leak it. And then CNN does something that is, I don't know if they know they're being disingenuous

or not, but it is disingenuous because CNN will then say, it's real. Our sources are real and we got this leak from an actual person. No, no, no, I'm not in MAGA, I'm not, I don't believe Trump and Hegsith, et cetera. You don't have to convince me that there's a real report or a real person who gave you the report, right? But did you ask them, hey, is there another report that says the opposite? Why are you leaking this to me? What is your motivation? Did you talk about the potential motivations for that leak?

And the answer is, hell no, hell no. And if you're wondering why, another really good interview, honestly, happened recently, it's on our YouTube channel, Tara Palmieri, she worked at ABC, CNN, Politico, etc. And she said, these news organizations are obsessed with access so they could break news. So they lean towards their sources and protect them, not in terms of, I'm not going to tell you their identity, that's standard, but they frame the story to make their sources look good. And they and they protect them in other ways. So they're not giving you the actual news.

They're giving you the news framed to benefit whoever that sources. And in this case, it's almost certainly a source that's pro war. So Trump also attacked the press because I think in the case of Trump, he wants the strikes to be a success. He's really proud of the strikes. But I think what's more interesting about this whole debacle is that this morning, Hegesith was especially combative with Fox News reporter. Her name is Jennifer Griffin. I actually am not familiar with her. I haven't really watched much of her content at all.

But we'll explain why it's particularly interesting that they had a back and forth in just a moment. But first, let's watch their exchange. Do you have certainty that all the highly enriched uranium was inside the Fordham Mountain or some of it? because there were satellite photos that showed more than a dozen trucks there, two days in advance. Are you certain none of that highly enriched uranium was moved? Of course, we're watching every single aspect. But Jennifer, you've been about the worst, the one who misrepresents the most intentionally. What the president says.

I'm familiar. I was the first report about the ventilation shafts on Saturday night. And in fact, I was the first to describe the B-2 bombers, the refueling, the entire mission. with great accuracy. So I take issue with that. I appreciate you acknowledging that this is the first operate, the most successful mission based on operational security that this department is done since you be here.

I appreciate that. Now, Jennifer Griffin actually came up in conversation on a podcast episode recently. And that was actually how I first learned about her. She is a Fox News reporter. She reports out of the Pentagon. on. And if you don't believe me, someone who actually knows her personally, worked at the same network as her, has a little bit of insight to share. Let's watch. So they're all an extension, CNN and all these. They're all an extension of the intelligence community being fed this

information and given these sources. So they can never say a negative thing about them because then you cut off your sources. You know, Jennifer Griffin, as this was all unfolding, and it was clear to me that there are a lot of questions about what was actually in those nuclear sites because a week earlier Israel had struck two of them. So do you think that Iran just kind of hung out and just like got a broom out and clean some stuff up and just put like the pictures back up on the wall? No, they were empty. Jen Griffin is a liar, but also very liberal. Wow, true Trump hater to the point where I complained about her. And I really tried not to complain about other people at Fox when I work there because, like, I don't like that,

you know, office politics stuff. But she was discrediting the channel. She was such a trumpeter. Boy, you could not touch Jennifer Griffin. I don't know what that's about. But, well, if you have an office in the Pentagon, maybe that's what that's about. Maybe. I mean, or I don't know. And when you have an office in the Pentagon, you're going to get some details about the B-2 bombers and how the operation was carried out, I don't think that you can call yourself a journalist when you have these comfy, cozy ties with the Pentagon, to the point where you literally have an office within the Pentagon. Yeah. I feel like there might be a conflict of interest there, but I don't know, I'm curious what you think, Jake. Yeah, so I've seen Jennifer Griffin a

bunch of times. I never saw anything that aroused my suspicion about her sources or her facts, But do her sources come from the military industrial complex and the people pushing for war? Almost every time. And so like she's a Trump hater, no, no. My guess is that whatever Trump was opposed to further strikes, that's when one of her sources would give her a leak about how Trump was wrong and we needed more war. And then she would come out and say that. And then Trump would perceive her as a Trump hater.

But really, that's not the point. And she's just a vessel. She, like all these so called reporters aren't really reporters, they're messengers. Like they like, like, you know, messenger pigeons, they just pick up a message from the donor class, military industrial complex, Israeli lobbyists, whatever it might be. And then they deliver that message to their audience. And that's it. They don't put any critical thought into it. Hey, what is, why are they doing this?

Should I give some context and analysis? No, they just talk about like, oh, okay, the B2 bombers are like that, so that we didn't destroy all the facilities, we got to go get more, and that's what my sources say. You know, very standard stuff. And so, okay, and Anna, I agree with you on your earlier statement, too. Look, I don't like the way they're going after her or the press. And I don't say that, like, as a toss away. I really don't like it because it's done in a way to, like, trying to suppress anyone opposing. the Trump administration, criticizing Trump administration, or even exactly what I was going to say,

or even questioning the Trump administration. So I hate the way they're doing it. But I do like that they're pushing back against cherry-picked intelligence to drive us to war. If they stated it, you know, honestly like the way we are here, I think they would be more popular because then a lot of people on the right and the left in the middle would go, oh, I see, they're cherry-picking the intelligence like they did in Iraq. And I hated that. To go to us into war. Yeah. To go us into war, exactly. Otherwise, it just looks like the Trump administration is doing, quite frankly, what they always do, which is just attack journalists and journalism when it's critical of the Trump administration. In many cases, rightly so, obviously. Now, putting that aside, I do want to just

go to one other video here because, man, the Warhawks, they're like trying to work every single angle to go to war with Iran. And of course, Lindsey Graham, Senator Lindsey Graham, who's never met a war he doesn't love, is one of those figures. And get a load of what he said today. Watch. The program was obliterated at those three sites, but they still have ambitions. I don't know where the 900 pounds of Pollyrich Iranians exist, but it wasn't part of the target set. Isn't the real question, have we obliterated their desire to have a nuclear weapon? As long as they desire one, as long as they want to kill all the Jews, you still have a problem on your hands. I don't want people to think that the site wasn't severely damaged or obliterated it was.

But having said that, I don't want people to think the problem is over because it's not. They're going to keep trying this as long as they change until they change their stated goal. Now, will they ever do that? I don't know. Let's bomb Iran over their thought crimes. Like what was that? What was that? Yeah, we might have obliterated their actual capability to build a nuclear weapon. I mean, I agree with that, but are they still wanting to build nuclear weapons?

What do we do to obliterate that? This guy is such a loser, like total loser, loves to send other people's kids to war. Disgusting. Yeah, it's funny, like you, you know, we talked a lot about this, how they should have the NASCAR patches on their suits for who which donors they represent and people might think that Lizzie Graham mainly represents APEC and sure he is a lot interests are very very often aligned with APEC and he has taken plenty of money from APEC but he represents the military industrial complex more than anything else he is the

senator from defense contractors he's the senator from Raytheon right so he's like well okay we don't have any excuse to go to war anymore but I'm in favor of perpetual work because it makes my donors really really rich and And they share a couple of crumbs off their table and I'm their bitch. So okay, you know what? I think Iran, someone in Iran might have bad had an idea that we don't like. Yeah, good enough. Let's keep going to war against them.

Okay, come on, preposterous. But there's one other thing that he said in there that I want to draw your attention to. So this is another perpetual excuse and it's utter nonsense. And yes, I'm saying it's definitely utter nonsense, okay? When they say, well, I mean, they're radians. They want to kill all the Jews, so we have to kill them first. No, no, this whole thing is giant excuse. Oh, they wrote on a charter this, so they read and said, oh, we're against Israel,

because they're doing the occupation and oh, we want to kill the Jews. I don't even, some of them say it, some of them don't say, you can find a radical to say anything, you can find a radical inside America that says kill all the Jews. That doesn't mean you should bomb us, right? And if you say, oh, it's their government said, yeah, they're saber, rattling. What does the Israeli government say? The Israeli government says we're going to starve the Palestinians and steal their land. And then they actually do it. Then they actually do it. Oh, so they wrote in a charter that we don't have a right to exist. But brother, you already do

exist. And you're blocking the Palestinians from existing. Don't worry about what we actually do. Worry about one sentence in a document over there so that we can go to war forever and and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever. And kill all of them because they want to in their heads kill us. B.S. I know a lot of people believe it. I know a lot of people are paranoid about it. Oh my God, they're gonna kill us all.

With what? Stones? They don't even have any planes left, right? No, you're actually killing them. You're worried about their hypothetical counter attacks. No, this is always an excuse for more war and taking more Muslim land for Israel. Israel. Big update on the so-called big beautiful bill, the tax cut and border spending bill that Trump wants to champion. When we come back from the break, don't miss it. I'm back on TYOT, Chang and Anna and Chitulu with you.

They gifted 10 memberships on YouTube. Really appreciate it. That's awesome. And we did find out where the spider is in one of the videos. That's apparently a nice little Easter egg. I'll tell you about it in an upcoming break where I read more of your comments. And by the way, we have a new Senate candidate that has joined the rebellion. We're going to tell you about that soon.

We're going to announce it on the show soon. Super exciting. So the rebellion pack, check them out. We're doing amazing work there in taking back Congress. All right, Anna, what's next? Well, it's been a while since we've given you a comprehensive update on what's going on with Trump's signature bill to fund the border and also give massive tax cuts to the rich and some to the working class. But nonetheless, there's a lot to get into. So let's do it. Let's get into it. get rid of the giant bills, okay, the omnibus bills, the continuing resolutions, and even the big beautiful bill, why not put that shit on the floor one at a time? I agree. And then that way, you can go to your representative or your senators and say, why did you vote for that? Right now, they can say, well, Theo, I had to vote for it. I had a pay raise for soldiers, right? They literally

will put a pay raise for soldiers in every freaking bill, giant bill, so that if you vote against it, you have to go back home and watch TV ads that say he voted against a pay raise for the soldiers. Right. Even though he may have voted for 90 other amazing things on the bill, right? Right. Libertarian Congressman Thomas Massey is already a hard no vote on Trump's so-called big, beautiful bill. That's the tax cut and border funding bill that he is attempting to get passed through Congress. But now that the Senate is drafting their own version of the legislation, Massey might be finding himself in the company of other GOP lawmakers in the House who intend to vote no. Now, why is that? Well, there are GOP moderates in blue states,

for instance, who think that the Senate bill cuts into the social safety net far too much. And then there are the deficit hawks in the House Freedom Caucus. That's the more right wing, you know, contingent in the Republican Party that has issues with spending. They claim that they're genuinely worried about the country's debt, even though they are usually okay with the massive tax cuts, which are really the heart of the problem. But nonetheless, the Washington Post reports that too many House Republicans, for too many House Republicans, the legislation in the Senate looks unrecognizable, meaning it's too different from what the House passed and no longer adheres to the hard-fought compromises lawmakers in the lower chamber secured just a

month ago. Now, the Senate version, by the way, does add even more to our national debt. The Congressional Budget Office found that the House passed legislation would add $3.3 trillion to the national debt over 10 years when factoring in interest costs. costs and effects on the wider economy. The Senate's version could add far more. The upper chamber's tax provisions are hundreds of billions of dollars more expensive. And that's according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. Now it's hard to get into too many specifics because in the Senate right now, they're going through the process.

And in the Senate, you have someone known as the Senate parliamentarian who will strike down provisions within the bill if the Republicans are attempting to pass it through reconciliation or a simple majority, meaning only 51 senators would be necessary to pass the legislation. There is a legislative filibuster in the Senate that requires bills to pass with 60 out of 100 votes. But through the reconciliation process, you can do it with a simple majority. You just need the Senate parliamentarian to sign on to the provisions. But the current version of the Senate bill also includes deeper cuts to Medicaid, which some Republicans in the House argue will negatively impact rural hospitals in their states. So they were trying to find a work around for that. Now, Capitol Police actually ended up,

let's take a look at this video, detaining a group of peaceful protesters who were protesting the proposed cuts to Medicaid, including several people in wheelchairs. They ended up getting arrested, which was not a great sight to see. Putting people in wheelchairs under arrest is kind of lame to say the least, but nonetheless, I want to give you some more details, including the fact that as written, the Senate bill would cut Medicaid spending by more than $900 billion over a decade. But then the Senate parliamentarian came in, and she's like, nah, you can't do that. I'm going to strike down this provision. Now, Senate Republicans are going to try to find a workaround because they really want to cut into the social safety net. I mean,

they jump in it. We'll see if they're able. to find a work around that will sit with the sit well with the Senate parliamentarian. But nonetheless, Elizabeth McDonough, the parliamentarian, said several of the measures in the legislation that would provide hundreds of billions of dollars in savings could not be included in the legislation in their current form. They include one that would crack down on strategies that many states have developed to obtain more federal Medicaid funds. Senators from several states that heavily rely on a tax maneuver to finance their Medicaid programs have said they will not vote for the legislation until it is modified, citing risks to rural hospitals. All states,

by the way, but one, it used this loophole to some degree. By the way, the Senate parliamentarian also struck down other parts of the bill that we don't like, including cuts to snap, meaning, you know, the food stamp program for the needy. So it's just, just think about the framing by the Republicans here, right? The framing is we want to give tax cuts that for the most part disproportionately benefit the wealthy. Now, working class Americans also get an extended tax break. Actually, they want to make the tax breaks for the working class dating back to 2017 permanent. So it's not like the working class gets nothing.

but the rich disproportionately benefit from the tax cuts. And then on top of that, in order to partially, barely pay for like a minuscule portion of the tax cuts, Republicans are trying to cut from the social safety net. But the parliamentarian came in and basically said, no, you can't do that with the food stamps. No, you can't do that with Medicaid. We'll see what the Republicans come up with next. But, Jank, you and I are notorious for thinking that the Senate parliamentarian and the legislative a filibuster shouldn't exist. Have you changed your mind at all given this, you know,

strike back from the parliamentarian when it comes to the social safety net? No, I don't believe in the filibuster. I believe that democracy matters. And if you have the majority, you should be able to pass bills and that people should be careful about how they vote because if you give the majority to one party in all these branches, then they will pass their agenda. And so that's voting should matter. So I'll come back to the parliamentarian in a second. But look, to the heart of the bill, there's two issues here. One is, it was the most important fact on the House version of the bill. Medicaid and Snap get cut by 1.1 trillion, and that is the exact same number that is added

in tax cuts for people making above $500,000. So the people making above $500,000 a year, do they really need an extra $1.1 trillion? Or should we keep 10 million people on Medicaid? So when we take the 10 million people off, what's going to happen? A lot of people are going to die. That's not a joke, the reason they're on Medicaid is because they're poor and they can't afford health insurance and they can't afford health care. So if they can't afford it and they get kicked off of Medicaid and they get sick, that's it. They're gonna die.

It's not complicated guys. That's and it's not hyperbole. So you twist your ankle, you go to the emergency room, they'll take your house, okay, I got it. But if you have cancer or your daughter has cancer and you don't have insurance, you're dead. So that's what they're doing because people making above $500,000 a year needed extra $1.1 trillion. But now, by the way, bloated ego, one of our members wrote in on t.com, a bill shouldn't be a potential death sentence. And this one kind of is. And then there's not kind of, there's been analysis already, we'll see what the real number is,

but then it might kill up to 70,000 people a year. But the people making above have A half a million dollars a year need another $1.1 trillion. Do they, do they really needed that much? Come on guys, I mean, this is barbaric. And so, and if you wonder why I wouldn't vote Republican, this is why. They always serve the rich above all else. So now they say, no, no, no, no, we have another priority, we gotta balance the budget. My a ass you do, they never balance the budget.

If you think Republicans balance the budget, you're just, you're a giant, sucker. It never happened in our lifetime. Last Republican president to leave office with a balanced budget was Dwight Eisenhower. Okay. So in this case, the House version adds $3.3 trillion. The Senate version is going to add a lot more than $3.3 trillion. And they're like, it keeps saying, and it's so comical because mainstream media goes along with it. And they keep quoting all the congressmen and senators. They're like, I don't know how we could possibly balance it. Where would we ever find the money? And I'm like, The tax cuts, if you just take the tax cuts out, you could actually balance it pretty easily.

But the press is like, I'm flummox too, golly, gee, where would we get the money? The tax cuts, that's where you would get the money. So I had Rokana on here last night. Check out that interview on YouTube. He found $12 trillion you can cut without cutting anything for Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, snap, none of that. And oh, it's to, Oil company subsidies, it's to defense contractor waste, fraud, and abuse. It's tax cuts for the rich for no reason, tax cuts for corporations for no reason, et cetera. So there's a way to do this, they just don't want to do it because they want to give all the money to their donors. That's why you got to look up.

That's where the problems are, the donor class. Yep. Now the other points of contention for the House versus the Senate is, you know, the Republicans in the House wanted to lift or raise the so-called salt tax. That's the federal deduction when it comes to state and local taxes. But the Senate's not buying it. And so now the House Republicans are like, we're not going to vote yes on the legislation if we don't get an increase on that salt cap. The House, by the way, would raise the cap to $40,000 for taxpayers earning no more than half a million dollars a year. the Senate did away with the deal entirely, leaving the deduction untouched at $10,000.

So there is going to be a battle when it comes to these provisions. There's also going to be a battle in regard to what the Senate parliamentarian should be allowed to strike down provision-wise in the final bill. It's really interesting to hear Republicans go after the parliamentarian accusing her of being woke, which is just like the go-to feedback or insult that Republicans like to jump into whenever they don't like something that's being done. I don't think this has anything to do with wokeness. I think this has to do with the fact that the Senate is intentionally structured in a way to ensure that it's the place where bills go to die. So if you want a simple majority,

you really need to question the structure of the Senate and whether or not some reforms need to be made. But look, we don't know what the final bill is going to look like. Republicans wanted to get this bill passed ahead of the July 4th holiday. It seems unlikely to happen at this point, but you never know. A lot of Republicans end up folding. So we'll see what happens. But we'll keep you updated and posted as this develops. Yeah. So look, no matter where the parliamentarian lands and where they land on how many hundreds of millions of dollars they're going to cut from Medicaid, and how much of the salt deduction they're going to keep in, et cetera. Again, Tom Massey's right.

In a different clip, he explained, look, these guys in the Republican Party that pretend to complain, oh, I'm going to vote, the moderate Republicans, so-called moderate, they're not moderate Republicans, but the ones that call themselves moderate in the House, they say, oh, I'm going to vote against it if you don't put more of assault deduction or this or that. He's like, no, they're not. He's like at the end of the day, all the other Republicans are going to vote for whatever bill is put in front of them.

So he's absolutely right, that's exactly what's happened, it's fake theater, my whole life covering politics for over 25 years, there's always a fake fight between the Republicans, oh, I want to cut, I want to cop more, don't talk about the tax cuts, don't talk about the tax cuts, right? So this whole thing plays out, they land on a number, and what is the same in every bill is a giant tax, multi, multi-trillion dollar tax cut for the rich, giant additions to the deficit and the debt. And then the next time around, what drives me crazy Anna is mainstream media will then go,

now the Republicans say they will care a lot about the deficits. So I'm like, come on, how many times can they do that lie? Add three, four, five trillion dollars to the deficit, and then you still parrot their talking points as if they care about the deficit when they're the number one party by a landslide in adding to the deficit. Right. I mean, infinite. They will continue doing it.

They will continue to pretend like, you know, Republicans care about the deficit. Their behavior certainly doesn't prove that. They want the tax cuts and trying to justify the tax cuts by cutting away at the measly social safety debt that we currently have is pretty pathetic. And I don't know how well that's going to play. Like, if I were a Democratic politician, I would just go on the campaign trail and I would repeat incessantly. You know, the Republican Party has no problem spending tens of billions of dollars on bombs, you know, to bomb nuclear sites in foreign countries. There's no debate about it.

But they want to cut nearly a trillion dollars from, you know, the social safety net that we have in this country. So your tax dollars don't actually go to benefit your fellow Americans. There's always nickel and diming when it comes to that. But when it comes to funding bombs, oh, no problem with that. So again, we'll see what happens. But for now, we've got to take a break. When we come back, we'll talk a little bit about the absolute panic that has continued to ensue in regard to New York City's mayoral candidate, Zoran Mamdami.

And I can't wait to get to that story. There's also some AOC derangement syndrome that we got to get into. So stick around. We'll be right back.