The Young Turks - Lashing Out

Episode Date: May 18, 2024

Majorie Taylor Greene insults Jasmine Crockett and sends the Oversight Committee hearing into chaos. Donald Trump wants to control the Justice Department and FBI. His allies have a plan. Gov. Abbott pardons Daniel Perry for 2020 fatal Black Lives Matter protest shooting after recommendation from pardons board. David DePape, the man who attacked Paul Pelosi with a hammer, was sentenced to 30 years in prison." HOST: Cenk Uygur (@cenkuygur),John Iadarola (@johniadarola), Mondale Robinson (@mondalerobinson) SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ https://www.youtube.com/user/theyoungturks FACEBOOK: ☞ https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER: ☞ https://www.twitter.com/theyoungturks INSTAGRAM: ☞ https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK: ☞ https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕 Merch: https://shoptyt.com ❤ Donate: http://www.tyt.com/go 🔗 Website: https://www.tyt.com 📱App: http://www.tyt.com/app 📬 Newsletters: https://www.tyt.com/newsletters/ If you want to watch more videos from TYT, consider subscribing to other channels in our network: The Watchlist https://www.youtube.com/watchlisttyt Indisputable with Dr. Rashad Richey https://www.youtube.com/indisputabletyt The Damage Report ▶ https://www.youtube.com/thedamagereport TYT Sports ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytsports The Conversation ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytconversation Rebel HQ ▶ https://www.youtube.com/rebelhq TYT Investigates ▶ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwNJt9PYyN1uyw2XhNIQMMA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Bigotsky! Three watching! Dream-a-D-Hee! Three-a-T! Green!

Dream-a-D-D-R-A-D! Drop it! All right, live from the Polymarket Studio in L.A., Jane Cougar, John Iarola, Mondale Robinson, with you guys. John, of course, the host of damage report, Mondale, of course, on Rebel headquarters and the mayor of Enfield, North Carolina, which is always awesome. I love that we've got a mayor as part of our contributors. I think that's fantastic. A lot of fascinating different things have happened. I'm going to defend Marjorie Taylor Green and Harrison Butker a little bit. Hold, find out why and how.

In a little bit in this show, we start with Marjorie Taylor. There's no acceptable reason. Not for Marjorie Green. I don't know, maybe the football player or whatever. Okay, well, let's see. Let's put Jenk to the test as we've rolled into our first story. Do you know what we're here for? You know we're here about AG.

I don't think you know what you're here for. Well, you don't want to talking about, I guess you still think your fake eyelashes are messing up with you. No, ain't nothing. Hold on, hold on. Order, Mr. Chairman, would you order, would you order, would you be getting the order of your committee? Order. Please.

Okay, so let's get into it. They certainly are. That was initially in that clip, Jasmine Crocker, Representative Crockett, responding to Marjorie Green, prior to the clip, asking a question about the the daughter of the judge presiding over Donald Trump's hush money trial, which to be clear has absolutely nothing to do with why Congress was in session right there. That committee meeting was about whether Merrick Garland should be held in contempt of Congress for not providing like the audio tapes of Joe Biden being interviewed about his handling of classified

documents. So that was the actual context. Marjorie tried to make a cheap point to appeal to the Maga world. And when Jasmine Crocker pointed out that that had nothing to do with it, that was when Marjorie decided to do the best she can. She rubbed all three of her neurons together and came up with a weak dog-whistly attack against Jasmine Crockett's appearance. So the hearing got suspended at that point briefly, but that was certainly not the end of it when Representative Alexandria Ocaster-Cortez jumped in. I do have a point of order, and I would like to move to take down Ms. Green's words. That is absolutely unacceptable. How dare you attack the physical appearance? of another person.

Move her words down. Oh, oh, girl, baby girl. Oh, really? Don't even play. Baby, girl, I don't think. We are going to move, and we're going to take your words down. I second that motion. Ms. Green agrees to strike her words.

I believe she was apologizing. No, no, no. Okay, hold on. Then after Mr. Perry's, you'll be recognized in Ms. I'm not apologizing. Well, then, you're not strut. I am not apologizing. Let's go.

Come on, guys. Why don't you debate me? Mr. Chairman, the minority- I think it's pretty self-evident. You're not, you're out of order. You don't have enough intelligent. You're out of order. Chair recognizes Mr. Perry.

Okay, move to strike the way. I'd like to strike those words as long. I'll move to strike. Generally, you hear comments, like those coming from Green being shouted at, like, teachers at a PTA meeting or something like that. Unfortunately, Marjorie Green is actually a party to that meeting. But again, that was not the end of it. We're going to give Jasmine Crock at the final word.

I'm just curious, just to better understand your ruling, if someone on this committee then starts talking about somebody's bleached blind, bad-built, butch body, that would not be engaging in personalities, correct? A what now? Chairman, I make a motion to strike those words. I don't think that's a part of it. I'm trying to find clarification on what quality. Chairman, motion to strike those words. I have no idea what you just said.

We're not going to do this. Look, you guys earlier, literally just said it. You just voted to do it. I did it first, so you don't want to vote in. Order, order. I'm trying to get clarification. Look it, calm down. No, no, no, no, because this is what you all do.

I'm trying to get. Hey, Ms. Crockett, you're not recognized. Ms. Crockett. I can hear you with your yelling. And you don't want me to be. No, please calm down. Come down. Because y'all talk noise, and then you can take it.

You're out of control. Because if I. Okay, so I certainly have thoughts, but Jenk, what do you make of that? Yeah, I'm going to do a slightly ironic defense of Marjorie Taylor Green in a second, and then I'm going to also unleash on a couple of things that she said there. But first, actually I'm curious, Mondale, is the fake eyelashes thing racial? I think the content, yes, it absolutely is racist. And I think it has to do with what what European standards of beauty are and not what African women, African American women, women of African descent classified.

So it's, again, a white woman trying to tell a black woman how and what beauty is and what is acceptable as it pertains to what you add to your body or take away from your body. So in that context, I think that's the context that people are making it about race. Yeah. So, and let me be clear, I like the Crockett strikeback, okay? And so the part that I'm mildly, ironically defending Marjorie Taylor Green on is I don't care about decor. So I think it's great that they had a shouting match. I love that all rules of etiquette have been broken. I don't think it's like, oh my God, they're third graders. I'm so disappointed with what's happening. No, people in Congress need to be yelling at each other a lot more. So I'm glad that that has begun. Now, having said that who's right, who's wrong, she says that, hey, see, that she doesn't have enough intelligence to debate, Marjorie Taylor Green. Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. See, that's why I like Crockett strikeback because, okay, we're talking about looks, okay?

As long as it's all right to talk about looks, then I'm gonna talk about looks. So let's be clear, I mean, don't tell me that she doesn't have to apologize, but then I can't say the same things that she said, right? So that I enjoy a lot in terms of, and then the calm down trick that they did on Representative O'Connorca drives me crazy. So that's the number one trick that folks use on me when we get into a debate about Israel.

You know, they'll say horrible, disgusting things. And then when I respond, they're like, oh, just calm down, what's the big deal, right? As if they're the calm ones, et cetera. But guys, this is what I'm curious about in terms of both of your reactions. Look, I think that etiquette has kept these folks from criticizing each other about the most important thing in the world, which is money in politics. They're all not all, but a lot of them are taking bribes, legalized bribes.

And I want all of this decorum BS to break down. And then it's beginning to happen on the right and the left where they're beginning to say, yeah, look, I got a problem with your eyelashes. I got a problem with the fact that you have a busted body or whatever that thing is. But also I have a problem with that guy over there taking tons of money from oil companies and defense countries. That has begun to happen. In the perfect decorum world, that never happened. And I would much rather have that happen and have some fights along the way than not have it happen.

Why just survive back to school when you can thrive by creating a space that does it all for you, no matter the size. Whether you're taking over your parents' basement or moving to campus, IKEA has hundreds of design ideas and affordable options to complement any budget. After all, you're in your small space era. It's time to own it. Shop now at IKEA.ca. I don't think it's unique. I think our politics are absolutely too nice, fake nice with decorum and all of these rules. I appreciate the back and forth. I grew up in a community that cracking jokes on people was a thing. And I think Marjor Taylor Green might have just found out that in one, in one we call a snapping session, she just got best. She got the B word means something completely different now. On one take, her little allies joke took her all the way into black culture. She learned real quick how quick we are when it comes to snapping jokes on people.

I think, I think there's a beyond the funny part, I think there's some truth to what you're saying, Jake, in that we need to be, we need to have people screaming about how ridiculous it is, how sickening our politics are where that. Donald Trump is a candidate for somebody, whereas the Supreme Court can show up in the manner that they are. And the gerrymandering that is a part of our politics, also somebody should be screaming about that as well. So I'm super happy about it. I was hoping for more. I'm sad. It's only a three minute clip. And you know, I just remember Mondale, for those of you don't know, Mondale is the mayor of Enfield, North Carolina, and he's the one that took down the Confederate statue there, and people thought that that was a violation of etiquette and decorum. And the reason he's on here in the first place, so after all those years, is because he violated decorum and etiquette in a way that I absolutely loved, and we loved here at the network. So, so I, that's a good principal position, John.

Yeah, I, look, I mostly, look, I find it to be fun. I do. I like parts of. of it. I don't like others. I agree like with the general idea of what you're saying. I just, I don't know if this is a great example of it. Like if it was being willing to like call out like either hypocrisy or their funding or something like that, then that would be one thing. But the origin of this was Marjorie Green decided that this BS hearing, which is already BS. It was they want tapes of Biden. There's no crime that they think is going to be found on the tapes. They just want the tape because they think it'll make Biden look bad or whatever. And so they're doing the hearing, and that's not even enough for Marjorie Green.

So she has to bring up the New York judge's daughter, again, has nothing to do with anything. The content of the actual hearing is BS. This is more BS than that. And Jasmine Crockett points that out, and that's what starts the breach of decorum, the attacking of the eyelashes. She points out that Marjorie Green doesn't seem to know what the hearing is about, which is accurate because she's not talking about what the content of the hearing is. And then Marjorie Green, it's not just that it's a dog whistle, what the hell her eyelashes supposed to do with her ability to hear what people are talking about.

Like if it's gonna be decorum breaking, if it's gonna be impolite or whatever, at least do what Jasmine Crockett did, which is it's clever, it's snappy. If Jasmine Crockett had just yelled that she was a bitch or something, it wouldn't be interesting, I wouldn't be giving her a lot of points for that. And that is the best that Marjorie Green can do to yell, why don't you debate me? You're not, you don't have the intelligence. That's just, it's pathetic. If we're gonna have, you know, like a UK-style parliamentary fight or what occasionally happens

in Japan or something, maybe minus the punching, I just wanted to at least be clever. And unfortunately with Marjorie Green as a part of it, that's unlikely to happen. Can I cut out one extra thing out before we talk just because there has been a lot of criticism of this. And I wanna give AOC credit for criticizing one of the critics. So John Fetterman had tweeted, in the past I've described the US House as the Jerry Springer show. Today I'm apologizing to the Jerry Springer show, to which AOC said, I understand you likely would not have stood up for your colleague and seemed to be confused about racism and misogyny being a both sides issue, but I stand up to bullies instead of becoming one.

And to the women of Pennsylvania, I'd stand up for you to enjoy your Friday, obviously referencing him being incredibly dismissive towards that protest. You see, that's a breach of decorum that I can get behind. Fetterman was wrong, she's pointing it out, she's not being polite, and it's substantive. I like that. Yeah, but if we hadn't ever had the original break of decorum, we wouldn't have gotten the original sin. Yeah, we wouldn't have gotten the AOC going after Fetterman, and let's keep it real.

She's going after Fetterman because of Israel, Gaza, and the fact that Fetterman has become one of the most conservative members of the Senate. So it's not just about that one tweet. And so she's like, hey, you don't get to lecture me. And I love that kind of talk. So look, it got. racial and it got into sexism in a way that I'm not, you know, that's why I asked Mondale, wait, is this racial? I'm not sure because I don't, I'm not familiar with that

concept of the eyelashes, et cetera, but also it was all women, so I don't know how it became sexist. But so I don't love that kind of stuff, but I love AOC and Crockett fighting back in general. I like them fighting back against Fetterman even more. And, and I like the idea of being able to strike things from the record, okay? So from now on, whenever Johnson says anything, I don't like, I'm going to strike it from the record, okay? And so that's part of my point. Can you calm down, then we'll talk.

Yeah. So that's part of why I think the whole thing is goofy about like striking things from the record. What difference does it make? We already heard it. Yeah. I think though for me, I think the, I think the messy part of it that works is it's going to be great.

It's going to turn some young people who weren't paying attention to Jasmine Crackett and politics. her politics specifically, which are extremely progressive, they'll definitely have an eye on her now because I've already seen like the battle rap world already remix it and made a song out of it before I'm doing a dance with it. So and I think it was up in 15 minutes. It had like 100,000 views on that remix. So I think I'm all about bringing in new eyes. And you know, this is that that's going to be better for Jasmine Crackett's campaign than any ad that the consultants are going to charge her way too much for and pay way too much to run. Yeah, super last thing. I Couldn't agree more with Mondale there. When you fight back, you get the upside of the publicity of this kind of, you know, squabble, fight, whatever. And you could use that publicity then to do good things in the world. And I've seen Jasmine Crockett be progressive.

I've seen her do some good things, but not get enough attention around it. And now maybe it'll get more attention. So ironically, thank you, Marjorie Taylor Greene. Yeah. I want to throw just a little bit more. I'm so sorry. And that's so funny that you said that, Jink, because even in her fight, they didn't mention her. If you look at the headline that we just put up with Fetterman, it actually said

the fight, the broke down on the committee was between AOC and Green and leaves out pocket. Yeah, and that's because her name is not large enough. But now it becomes a little bit larger and a little bit larger so that I hope her policies can come out better in terms of getting covered more. That's a bad title too, because yes, AOC was involved and they did trade barbs. But the biggest bar by far was Jasmine Crockett. Like you have to put her in the, put all three names, come on, put a little bit of work into it. But like I said, I want to throw out just a little bit more context. Jamie Raskin was asked if it was worth investigating if drinking might have been a part of this.

And apparently there was a report of a bunch of house members drinking late last night. And who knows, it's not necessary. We know what sort of person Marjorie Green is, but she definitely gives off like Pinogrigio mom vibes. So I don't discount the possibility that she was drinking. or whatever. Strike that from the record. Sorry, I apologize. You can strike it, but I'm not apologizing.

So that's definitely the case. I will also just say, and this is why I think we will see more from Jasmine Crockett, because this is not the first time that Jasmine Crockett has been on fire in a committee hearing. She's sharp, she does her research, she has that thing that AOC has, that Katie Porter has, and a few others. And I think that's why this really happened fundamentally. It probably doesn't need to be pointed out. But Marjorie Green likely has a poster of AOC in her house, maybe a shrine. She wants to be AOC so bad in every way and also Jasmine Crockett.

Marge just wants to be snappy and sharp and witty and make those points. And Jasmine Crockett has that. She has that charisma. She's also like just if we're gonna talk about look, she's a beautiful woman. And so I am sure that the jealousy just overwhelms a simple creature like Marjorie Green every time she looks at them. And finally, it was AOC and Crockett against March. It didn't have to be.

Lauren Bobert was sitting right there and you'll notice Lauren Boebert didn't want to help her at all. I love that. Any other thoughts before we move on? Yeah, that's the bigger fight within the Republican Party. So God bless on that fight too. Let's turn this thing into the UK parliament, okay, and have everybody screaming at one another. It's a lot better than the boring business. as usual status quo BS that I've seen my whole life here.

Yeah. Okay, well, I think we should probably take our first break. We do have a lot to cover in the next block. We're gonna be talking about the shape of the DOJ under a second Trump term and one of the most horrendous needless pardons I can remember. We'll have that more after this. All right, back on T-Y-T-Y-T-Jank John Mondale with you guys in Shining Kimmy Pop-Tart Queen Dragon, who gifted 10 memberships just now. So you're the best, thank you. John.

Damn, okay, let's talk some news. According to a new report from Reuters, some of Donald Trump's closest political allies are laying out the beginnings of a plan to take far more direct control over the Department of Justice than perhaps ever before seen in American history. And turning it into an effective daily attack dog for conservative causes as well as specifically Donald Trump. They basically say that because he's the head of the executive branch, he should have unilateral broad powers to command and oversee the Justice Department as he sees fit. Basically, think about all of the things that they've said Joe Biden is doing, whether he is or not, and they would never accept him doing, those are all the things

that naturally they think that Donald Trump should do if he wins. And so the idea that there would be relative independence or impartiality, this sort of soft wall between the White House and the DOJ, that would effectively be gone. And we want to break down, this is based on nine different people that Reuters talked to, that are laying out the groundwork of this plan, the two major parts of how it would function in practice. So the first is that they plan to flood the Justice Department with stalwart conservatives, unlikely to say no to controversial orders. from the White House.

And that is true of what they want to do with the DOJ. I would assume that that's probably the main goal of every one of these departments and agencies. They did not like that in some occasions Donald Trump was stymied in his efforts to accomplish his goals or break the law or overturn the results of an election. And they don't want to have those same troubles in a second term. But the second part is they want to restructure the department. So key decisions are concentrated in the hands of administration loyalists rather than career bureaucrats. And so basically, the way that most of these bureaucracies work is you have like a top layer of people that the president and his team choose. And when they come in, they do that across most of the federal bureaucracy.

But the rest are not political appointees in that way. They're experts, they're people with experience that have possibly been working across multiple presidencies, perhaps multiple decades to make sure that the government actually functions, which is important to you if you believe that the government should function for anyone other. than the president. But if all you care about is having another tool for him to hound his political opponents, protect himself from oversight, win an election that he didn't actually win, then this new formulation of the DOJ would be far preferable. And many of these aides are saying it. Steve Bannon is talking about the personnel as well as the institutional problems of the DOJ.

But then as we'll get to, Donald Trump has also been very clear about his plan when it comes to the Justice Department. Jake, how do you think this would look in practice? Yeah, this is exactly what I'm worried about with Donald Trump. So, you know, I've got a thousand problems with Joe Biden, but, you know, destroying the Department of Justice and democracy ain't one of them. So I'm so curious what's going to happen. And unfortunately, it looks like we're all going to find out together. I think Trump is an excellent chance of winning.

I think there's no chance that he does not do this. He will definitely do it. He will. And what does it mean to have a Department of Justice that is not important? I guess political trials, arresting political opponents, maybe media opponents. And that's what I've been saying all along that I'm worried about with Donald Trump. So this is, they're not even hiding it. Project 2025 is just kind of a planned destruction of our democracy. So they're planning at the Heritage Foundation, budget Trump allies, and killing off the Justice Department's neutrality.

is just one of the components here, it's going to be a disaster. And then do people get super mad at Trump and then the Republicans become intensely unpopular and that helps to rein them in. And eventually we have an election in 2028 and as awful as those four years are, we recover and we go left-wing populace, that's a really optimistic view of what could happen. But that's a small chance, the much larger chance in my opinion is they just dismantle the whole thing. Four years is too long. It's too long for a bunch of guys who are saying ahead of time, we are going to dismantle this government.

We're not interested in democracy. So, I mean, the Department of Justice being a fair arbiter of justice is a definitional thing. Like by definition, that's what it must do. If justice is not blind, and I know what the Trumpers think. Oh, it wasn't blind to us, et cetera, I know, I know, okay, except the guy did do all those crimes. He did, it makes a giant difference if he did the crimes or if he didn't do the crimes. So look, the same Department of Justice has now gone after Senator Bob Menendez, who's a Democrat in New Jersey. They've gone after Quay are in Texas, who's a Democrat.

So no, they're not making political decisions. They're just going after the crooks and Trump has to be a happens to be one. In fact, the Department of Justice didn't go after to Trump for two and a half years, which I thought was absolutely egregious. They were too soft, too kind to Donald Trump. I know, you'll never believe it, I know, I got it, right? But the bottom line here is, it's gonna be a super rough ride guys for four years. And this dismantling of the Justice Department is a terrible, terrible sign.

And look, if you're a Republican and a Democrat said they were going to do this, you would lose your mind. And you know you would. But if Republican promises it or Trump promises it, you think, oh, great, let's destroy the FBI and the Department of Justice and arrest all of our political opponents. That sounds like freedom? No, it doesn't. It doesn't sound like America at all. Mind you. Don't forget, this is the Republican Party that bags the blue while they tried to defund the police.

in the same in the same space. I mean, this is what it means to be Republican in this moment in 2024 behind Donald Trump. I absolutely believe that if Donald Trump win this election, he will try to get rid of the Justice Department. Bill Barr had too much freedom, even though he was too conservative for my blood. It was not enough for Donald Trump because Donald Trump like Hitler needs undying loyalty to him. Nothing else, not the party, not the Constitution, nothing, not police officers, just Trump. And if you're not 100% lawyer to Trump, then you're anti-American, you're anti-Maga, you're anti-Republican, you are a rhino.

Meaning, meaning that the Republican Party is no longer a party platform. It's a personality of one, and you must, you must commit that you love this personality. You can't even like him, you must love him. And once you do, then he may recognize you, and you may be allowed to do this. If you don't believe me, look at how many Republicans left work. Congress left work and went to New York to stand outside of a courtroom. a justice, a justice office, right, the courtroom is a justice office to stand outside of there and take up for Trump and berate the justice system. None of them, none of them, mind you,

not in their district or anywhere else in this country has ever spoken up to the ill treatment that black man received from the justice system, which is a real two-tiered system that can be documented that has been documented that we should be talking about. Yet instead we're talking about this supposedly billionaire who breaks laws in all aspects of life and they're upset that he's being held accountable. This is a retaliation, not just about the Justice Department, about the FBI, it's a retaliation that how dare you stand in the way of what whiteness is. And whiteness is maga. This idea of making America great again, all is couched in making America work only for white people again. And I don't care how we dress it up.

White rural rage is a book that was written. It was a New York bestseller when it came out, and it articulates this extremely well using a bunch of data. And Jake, here's what I would say, I don't know if Donald Trump has a good chance of winning this election. And I'm not saying it's going to be because of Joe Biden, that Joe Biden will win. I am saying that if I'm a person who loves polls and and to just to make them look ridiculous, if you look at May 13th, like this last poll that came out from New York Times, if you look at May 13th in every presidential election for the past three or four, the person that won that election

was losing that week of the polls. So right now, Donald Trump being up is on par for where Hillary Clinton was on par for where what's the guy who Mitt Romney was against Barack Obama and also John McCain. So all I know is looking at the polls, because Biden is down, it may be telling us something else. Also, I think it's crazy that we're still measuring enthusiasm. Nobody's enthusiastic to go vote for Joe Biden. But that doesn't mean they won't vote for Joe Biden, Not for him per se, but for what's possible under this administration versus what you got to deal with with the Trump administration. I agree with the vast majority of what you just said. I'm glad that we had a couple of people that, although we might have guessed that they would be, that they were not just a rubber stand for literally everything that Donald Trump said. I mean, Jeff Sessions recused himself that, you know,

Comey didn't give him exactly what he wanted. As you said, Bill Barr did not give him exactly what he wanted. They are going to be way more focused on loyalty. And look, I personally think we're talking about hypotheticals. I think if we want to test this hypothetical, the Biden administration should just get the text of Project 2025 and say that's what we're going to do. Literally this text, you guys love this, so we're going to do that. That's what the DOJ is going to be. It's going to be your model and Fox News will absolutely lose their mind. And on what you said, Jank, about, you know, there's a possible silver lining of maybe if it's really bad for four years, then a progressive takes over. And maybe that's a silver lining.

But as like if it's an intentional strategy for someone, I will remind everyone there were people saying that in 2016. And four years of Trump being really bad did not deliver us a progressive candidate. It gave us four years of Joe Biden. And so dangerous strategy. Yeah, let me be clear. That is not my strategy. I think it's a terrible strategy. I said it was a terrible strategy in 2016 when some clowns were saying it.

But there is a difference here. Back then, the establishment had not been completely discredited. I think they have now. And I think that people hate the establishments. And you can see in the New York Times polling that we're going to talk about later in the show. And so I think they're done with the establishment. They might be done after Trump with the right wing populace and then go to a left wing populist. But like I said from the get-go, that is wishful thinking, okay?

That's a small probability. Louis should try to avoid dismantling the Department of Justice and politicizing it. First, that is a much, much bigger priority. And look, if you're a Republican, again, I know nobody believes me, because everybody thinks that everybody's a partisan, right? But if I was a Republican, I would be furious at Trump because Biden is so easy to defeat. The only way that you could lose the Biden is if you're a moron who goes around saying, yeah, I'm going to dismantle the Department of Justice and the FBI and I'm going to make them serve my dictatorial whims. And even Sessions and Bill Barr are the most conservative barbaric people pre-Trump, post-Trump, in the middle of Trump that I've ever seen in my political life.

They're not right wing enough because they weren't loyal to the mob boss, right? This is just, you can't stomach not voting against Trump because of things like this. So if you're a Republican, this is, he's trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. This is the only way you could lose to Biden. And it's not hysteria. It's not hyped up BS. They wrote it down. It's definitely real.

And they're going to definitely dismantle huge parts of our democracy. and our system of justice. And they're going to bring in this kind of right wing fascism. And if you're into that, okay, but you can't be into that and be into America and freedom at the same time. Pick your side. I choose with America and freedom. If you want to choose with, hey, the justice department should just be a place where we, you know,

flay our political enemies. Okay. Then, then, you know, at least admit to yourself that your profile. fascism and not really democracy. That was 28 year old former Air Force mechanic Garrett Foster and the state's board of pardons and paroles before the recommendation for the pardon. Bear in mind, the membership of that board is put there by the governor. So this is not checks and balances, this is just his cronies. And so they said that he should pardon him and he did. He said Texas has one of the strongest

stand your ground laws of self-defense that cannot be nullified by a jury or a progressive district attorney, I thank the board for its thorough investigation and I approve their pardon recommendation. We are going to talk about how thorough their investigation was. I do want to just give a statement from the lawyer for Foster's family, the victim's family, saying the governor of the great state of Texas has turned the rule of law in its head. It's a fair question to ask whether the governor is doing this based on the merits of the case or based on the politics. That is not a question that actually needs to be asked because there should be no question about which of those two things was on the governor's mind when he did this. So bear in mind that Perry,

the shooter, is driving an Uber. He sees a crowd of BLM protesters. He drives his car into that crowd. And then when a group of the protesters approached the car, he sees Foster who has an AK-47-style rifle, and he pulls out his gun and he shoots that man. Now, someone in Texas walking around with an AK-47 rifle, I have often been told by the right wing, is the most patriotic sort of person in America. But if you think they might be a leftist, then maybe you feel differently. And I want to talk about some of the claims that were made. So first of all, that it is self-defense. It's self-defense because as the governor has said, he raised the gun and pointed it at Perry, so he had to shoot him. But notably,

that's not even what Perry was claiming. Listen to this. Video shows Perry running his car into a group of protesters, and there's no evidence, including testimony from multiple witnesses, that the victim ever raised his rifle, even though that is what Perry had claimed in his interview with police. Okay, so it was not pointed at him. He believed that he was going to aim at me. Okay, so it was not pointed at him. He believed that he was going to end up. He believed that he was going to end up. aim it. Well, any gun could be aimed at you. It's one of the reasons I don't think people should be casually walking around with guns. But this guy had a gun. The right wingers say you should have guns is the mere presence of a gun that could at some point be pointed at you justification for self-defense. In this case, based on the politics, it was. And Perry was

initially convicted of murder sentence of 25 years in prison. But thanks to a right wing media pushback led by Tucker Carlson, that has now been reversed and he's walked free. And I want to add, if you're not familiar with this case, any one of the things I'm going to read should be open and shut case. You cannot pardon this guy. This is not self-defense. So they revealed he regularly shared racist memes and threatening content and private messages and social media posts, including descriptions of killing protesters, the very thing he ended up doing. Some messages sent by Perry included, no protesters go near or my car. I might go to Dallas to shoot looters. The governor knows this. He knows this. The board knows this. They don't care.

The protesters, he's talking about shooting her left wing protesters, or they're affiliated with the left, so that's enough. On June 1st, 2020, Perry commented, glad someone finally did something on a Facebook post of a YouTube video titled Protester looters get shot, San Antonio, Texas. He also, just as a little flavor on top, sent messages about hunting Muslims and about killing a daughter if she had a crush on a little Negro boy. So he fantasized about killing protesters. He said it was good when other people shot protesters. And if his daughter merely had a crush on a boy, he would murder her.

And this is the guy who legitimately was so scared for his life with the gun being near him that he had to gun down the protester. And that is what Greg Abbott is so thrilled. And the right is cheering that he has now been released. They've got their new Kyle Rittenhouse, I guess. Yeah, this is why I can't ever be a Republican until the party changes completely. because who could stand this pardon, this part of a disgusting creep who fantasized about killing a protester and then did it, he's definitely guilty, he's adjudicated guilty,

he's guilty in every imaginable way, and the right wing's like, who cares? He shot a left winger. That's awesome. We love that murder. Let him go. And then Greg Abbott, the monster, that's the governor of Texas, is like, oh, shooting and murdering left wingers, that's great. Of course, I'm going to pardon you. So I just want to understand the standards.

I want to understand the standards, okay? So does that mean we can shoot anyone we want in Texas if they're carrying a weapon? Because he said, well, I was threatened by the mere existence of a weapon. So from what I understand, right wingers say, open carry, everybody should be allowed to carry weapons. So if you're carrying a weapon, is someone allowed to consider you a threat and to shoot you in the head? I thought he was going to aim it at me. Because that's the exact standard that Abbott just said. I'm not exaggerating 1%.

You just saw it with your own eyes. He was not aiming the weapon. He has every right to carry it in Texas. This isn't actually an open assault on people who believe that you're allowed to carry weapons and and believe that that's what the Second Amendment says. But they're all okay with it as, As long as you murdered a left winger, be honest, there is no defense here. There's no defense, none.

So, okay, let's keep going. Can people do this to right wingers in blue states? I mean, apparently you could just murder a left winger in Texas as long as they, even if they're exercising their constitutional rights to speech and to the Second Amendment. First Amendment, second amendment. So if right wingers are protesting like January 6th or anything, and especially if the ones that have weapons, there's tons of people. that have weapons at these protests, can we go and mow them down because we were afraid

that for our lives, because we happen to be in the area. I'm asking, or is it only that right wingers can murder left wingers and get away with it? I just want to be clear on what the laws are. It's clear. Yeah. It's clear. You'd be, you have to be in, look, man, I get it. People have family in Texas.

They got to live there, et cetera. But you'd have to be nuts to move to Texas where the governor says, I'll let you murder left wingers and I'll pardon you. I don't give a goddamn about the Second Amendment. I don't care about your constitutional rights. I don't care who's right. I don't care that you're convicted. I don't care about your jury of your, I don't care about anything.

Murder or left winger and I'm gonna reward you. That's a sick man that he is. And now finally, okay, if we allowed this, and I don't want it to be reciprocal, I don't want people killing right wingers, that's nuts, totally utterly nuts. But soon we're gonna have pandemonium. We're gonna have total chaos where we're murdering each other in the streets and governors are pardoning every murderer depending on their politics. This is what America has devolved to.

And this one is, you've seen me criticize the Democrats a billion times. You've seen me criticize the extreme left. You've seen me criticize everybody in the different issues. This one is 100% the right wing, 100%. And anyone who's in favor of this law is not an American. and is not in favor of the Second Amendment and just thinks, yeah, might is right. We get to murder them. It's disgusting, Mondale.

Listen, it is absolutely disgusting. I would say, though, it is American, right? As American as apple pie and baseball, if you consider the fact of the history of the Second Amendment, this was a law that was written for white men, basically, and white women, free or enslaved, black people could not own guns because of the Second Amendment or in spite of. So I think for me, when you remember before Donald Trump came in the world, the favorite Republican, I think was the Gipper, Ronald Reagan. But if you remember when Ronald Reagan was governor of California in the 60s, when the Black Panthers showed up with their shotguns, the first thing they did was passed the Monfort Act to curtail the rights of black people active or being active. So I think, and we saw what happened to white people in the civil rights movement, people that will stand on the side of black people, arguing that black people deserve equal rights and protection under the Constitution.

So white people marching with Black Lives Matter might as well be black people in the eyes of right wingers. And that's it. And that's how simple it is. And you fall in that category, whether you are white, black, or green. If you are standing in a BLM protest to the purveyor of this kind of terror, then you are equal. to. So you deserve whatever they give you in their eyes. We've never heard the National Rifle Association stand up on behalf of black people when Philando Kestero was killed in his car and he told the police officer, I have a gun which I am, which is registered. Here's my

registration. He was still shot dead. The NRA said nothing about that. Yep. So we already know what it is when you are anti-establishment or conservative, then you absolutely don't have the right to be anything except for killed, apparently. Yeah, and let me just do one more ironic part of the right wing, zealotry about murdering left-wingers. So when Kyle Renhouse was acquitted, they were like, he's acquitted, jury of his peers, you have to respect the justice system, you have to respect the jury, he's acquitted, he didn't say, it was perfectly fine, perfectly fine to shoot and kill those two people. Then Daniel Perry's convicted, they're like, it doesn't mean a god,

damn thing. Did he kill a left winger? Yes, we love this guy. Let him go. Let him go. Convicted justice system, jury of his peers. Who gives a goddamn, we never cared about that. Might is right. We murder you. We get away with it. Yeah. Yeah. Again, you can you stand your ground. You mentioned Philando Castile. I don't remember the name of the woman. Remember the woman who fired warning shots against I think it was her husband or ex-husband? And she literally didn't even shoot him and she couldn't stand her ground. And by the way, my final point before we go to break. So the way, the way this has worked is right wingers have in multiple cases put themselves in situations where they can claim to be scared and have to shoot. And in both cases, either a weapon, a hand weapon,

or a gun in the case of the AK-47 wasn't even pointed towards it, but that's what they claim justified the killing. And so then they whipped out their gun. At that point, if any of the other protesters saw that, they could gun that person down and be totally legally fine, apparently, because that's how self-defense works. Now, that hasn't happened because generally left-wingers don't carry a lot of guns to these protests. And I just want to say this to the right-wingers who are super excited about seeing this and thinking about how they will get to live out this fantasy, that is a thing that can change. Left-wingers don't typically bring guns everywhere they go, because they typically haven't been given the okay by the government for right-wingers to hunt them

down. But they can go out and buy guns. You might find that if you go to kill protesters that maybe you face heavier firepower than you expect. Again, like you, I don't want to see it happen, but it's definitely going to happen as this continues to spread. Let's take a break. All right, back on T-O-D, Cenk, John and Mondale with you guys in bed. I'm sorry, clap that dragon. I want to thank them for joining by hitting the join button.

And Lady F&T, thank you for gifting five Young Turks memberships. John. Okay, let's give a little update to a story we've been talking about for some time. Today, David DePape, the man who attacked Nancy Pelosi's husband, Paul with a hammer, was sentenced to 30 years in prison. This attack, which we've covered previously on the channel, took place back in 2022. And last year he was found guilty of attempted kidnapping of a federal official as well as assault on the immediate family member of a federal official. Now, despite the final sentencing of 30 years, he does still face state level charges that include attempted murder, assault with a deadly weapon, elder abuse, residential burglary, false imprisonment, and threatening the life of or serious bodily harm to a public official.

And we have to discuss this because this is like a stopping point on the quest for justice. in this horrendous act of political violence, but regardless of the justice, Paul Pelosi is still suffering and will likely suffer for the rest of his life as a result of the attack that he experienced, saying for months, sleeping alone in my house is very difficult because I kept remembering the defendant breaking into my house. The defendant severely damaged the nerves in my left hand. My forehand was de-gloved, that's a tough term, exposing raw nerves and blood vessels. Surgeries and treatments mostly healed the skin, but underneath I still feel pinched nerves in my left hand, this makes basic tasks like using buttons, cutlery, and simple tools more

difficult. I walk slowly and I have difficulty with my balance. Nearly every day I get headaches that become migraines and less quickly addressed. I need to sleep during the day and cannot tolerate bright lights or loud noises for extended periods of time. And so his hand obviously injured, obviously his skull, which was cracked open with a hammer, was injured. And of course, This was politically motivated. And before we discuss, I just want to remind everyone that despite this being something that literally everyone in America should unambiguously condemn that has not been the reaction from the very beginning on the right. And I want to remind you of what they've had to say about this, starting with this video of Rachel Campos Duffy. So here's who I, okay, I thought America's frat boys, they could, they could use the Medal of Freedom.

Donald J. Trump, he never gives up on America, Elon Musk for, you know, absolutely caring about, you know, freedom of speech. How about the truly peaceful protesters of the pro-life movement, the ones that are in jail right now? Kid Rock and John Rich, we know they love freedom. True. Riley Gaines, the classical school movement, you and I can appreciate that. And how about our U.S. Border Patrol? Oh, that's a great list. Take care about America.

How about the guys that cleared out Columbia? I'd like to add them too. Whatever you, I mean, but it's probably more likely to go to Paul Pelosi, Susan Rice, and Gavin Newsom. So I think your list is correct, but a little off brand for Big Joe. Rachel. Well, maybe Paul Pelosi needs the hammer instead of the metal. That was just a couple weeks ago. The guy was almost killed and they think that it's hilarious and they've been joking about it from the very beginning.

The adult fail son of Donald Trump posted once, got my Paul Pelosi Halloween costume ready. See, I'm going to dress up like the guy who tried to murder Nancy Pelosi and almost murdered her husband. It's funny. He's a family member of a notable politician cheering on the attempted murder of a family member of a politician. And Kerry Lake, by the way, once said Nancy Pelosi, well, she's got protection when she's in D.C. Apparently her house doesn't have a lot of protection drawing laughs from a crowd. This is who they are. Again, I'm sorry that we're focusing so much of but this is how you get so much of it when you make it a joke on the right and you encourage

people to kill, to maim, those they disagree with, with the guarantee that they'll be legally protected if they do so. Yeah, the only silver lining here is that this didn't have it in Texas where Greg Abbott would have almost certainly pardoned the Pape as he did with Daniel Perry. If you try to murder left wingers in Texas, you'll get a pardon. So, you In terms of this question, is this a question? This is a topic for debate? This, like I don't know if the right wing realizes how insane they look to the rest of the world. Every right wing or no, but the right wing is that are defending and joking around about the paper.

Oh, that's so funny. And he smashed Nancy Pelosi's husband's head in with a hammer while the poor guy got woken up in the middle of the morning because this guy broke into his house and he was in his underwear. So that's so funny. Like when we try to murder you, it's so funny. Okay, let's turn it around and do the same exact thing. Same exact scenario. But let's see if the right wing thinks it's funny.

Imagine some crazed left winger broke into Donald Trump into Mar-a-Lago and smashed Melania's head in with a hammer when she was in her underwear. Just saying that out loud, like makes me feel awful. Like, that would be horrible, horrible. I hope, I hope everyone in the world agrees that would be horrific, right? But when it happens to Paul Pelosi, the right wingers, tons of them don't care at all. Like, yeah, we smacked the head in with a hammer. And then like you, then you asked us to vote for Republicans.

You asked us to vote for Republicans. Look at the president's sons. Imagine if President Biden's son, Hunter Biden's son. Biden was thought it was super funny to smash in the heads of the spouses of republics. Carrie Lake's husband, we should go into her house and smash the living crap out of his head with a hammer. Well look, what would we do on the left? We would banish that person immediately. We would say that's disgusting, horrible human being, doesn't represent any of us, etc.

But on the right wing, they're probably crying today. Oh no, this poor hero! Euro, this mentally deranged right wing Trump fan. Oh, I wish he was in a red state so we could pardon him. Get out of here, man. Who the hell's going to vote Republican when you have these lunatics in your party? And I don't mean DeP. I mean the people celebrating DePo.

Mondo. I mean, you can add the tape too. Let's be clear. Here's the thing. I'm a little upset with the charges. Why is there not a terrorist charge? You could have added 10 extra years to his sentence. literally this is a terrorist you do tears acts for political reasons this is

exactly what he was doing I don't understand why terrorism wasn't a charge that the federal charges of the prosecutor didn't add on I was absolutely disgusting that this is our reality and you're right Jake when you said the scenario and I know you didn't want it you don't want it to happen and that's not what you were saying but you was the hypothetical about Donald Trump's wife and I got chills when you said it it was that damn disgusting But Republicans, even when it was fresh, they were making jokes about this. Not just when years passed, when it first happened, I remember horrible stuff coming from

elected officials about Paul Pelosi. And to hear that his hand was the glove and his skull cracked and knowing that he's going to spend the rest of his life dealing with those injuries. And these people think it's fodder for political jokes. And it's absolutely disturbing that Fox allows those people. people that we just listen to to stay on their TV. It is disgusting, it is disgusting. But it also shows you that the bar is so low right now to be a Republican, to be serious.

I mean, hell, look at my state, Mark Robeson, a person who had no political background at all is about to be a running to be governor in my state. And he has a damn good chance of winning and some of the things he say about this situation and others are equally dastardly. Yeah, he's an absolute monster and a thousand. different topics. I'm glad that he's going to go to prison. And obviously nobody can never expect anything to happen to Don Jr. He's going to fail his way through life. I am curious about the Fox suit, like, Jank, if I made a joke about the victim of an attempted assassination and talked about like, maybe he should get the hammer. Wouldn't I be in trouble? Like Rachel Campos Duffy isn't even a high profile person that like necessarily has a lot of protection.

I've never said, I haven't seen her apologize, she didn't get censored, you need to take off the air, just keeps going on, you know, we didn't get him that time, maybe we get him next time, then she just moves on. I feel like there should be some sort of consequences, like some sort of consequences. Look, we have two golden rules of TYT, no lying and no threats of violence. It's non-negotiable, period, not close, okay? And so, but apparently not everybody agrees. I mean, I mean, again, if you threaten violence against the right winger, then the whole world. will collapse in on you and you'll be considered an international pariah and there'll be congressional hearings, et cetera. But if you joke around about a vicious, one of the most vicious assaults

of my lifetime to the husband and spouse of a political, one of the top politicians in America, tons and tons of right-wingers, including Donald Trump Jr. think, no big deal, no big deal. on Fox News, no big deal, there'll be no consequences. But I could name you a thousand hypocrisies from the right wing. Look, one side celebrates violence and thinks violence is a normal mode of operation. Because for them, it isn't about freedom or democracy or any of those words that they've used their whole lives. It's about power, no matter how you get the power. The final quick thing, what I love about Rachel Campo stuffy is not just that, you know,

like all the stuff that they say about family values and all that is fake. As she's delivering that line about how funny it was that he was hitting the head with a hammer, she's wearing a cross, a cross that means less to her than it would to me as an atheist. But not only that, John, look, just to answer your question even more fully, if you suggested that some right winger's husband or wife should have their head smashed in, I would think that you lost your mind. Like I would do a wellness check. I would try to get you counseling.

I'm not getting, right? Like that is mentally deranged. And I've like we just showed you two clips guys. I've seen dozens of clips and tweets, et cetera, celebrating the paper and thinking that it's no big deal. And so if that's no big deal, then we're definitely headed towards fascism. Yep. Yeah, and I mean, also let's be clear, I mean, Republicans out, this new Republican

These are the people that back the blue again. They also laughed at people that were beating police officer with American flags. So, I mean, we just, we've almost been desistized to what, what it means to be Republican in this moment. And this is, I'm not capping for the Democratic Party. That party has its problems. I am saying, though, you have to be morally deficient to be a Republican in this moment. All right. We are unfortunately out of time.

Everybody check out Mondale on Rebel headquarters. and if you happen to be going through Enfield, North Carolina, and everybody check out John on Damage Report and where he will soon have purple hair, thanks to you guys. All right, much love, guys. Have a great weekend. And when we come back to Harrison Butker's story, which part am I going to annoy you by, you know,

not agreeing with him, but having a nuanced conversation about it. And then Sam Alito, well, I've got some nuance there too. All right, so stay run. I'm going to be Buhlton, and Bhop Bhop

New B Bhop