The Young Turks - Old & Fat

Episode Date: February 5, 2022

The U.S. has accused Russia of an elaborate plot to fabricate an attack by Ukrainian forces that Russia could use as a pretext to take military action against its neighbor. The Congressional Workers Union announces staff efforts to unionize the offices and committees of the United States Congress. Fox News guest: “If AOC was fat and in her 60s, would anyone listen to another thing she ever said? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. On July 18th, get excited. This is big! For the summer's biggest adventure. I think I just smurf my pants.

That's a little too excited. Sorry. Smurfs. Only theaters July 18th. One of the hardest parts of getting older is feeling like something's off in your body. but not knowing exactly what. It's not just aging. It's often your hormones, too.

When they fall out of balance, everything feels off. But here's the good news. This doesn't have to be the story of your next chapter. Hormone Harmony by Happy Mammoth is an herbal formula made with science-backed ingredients, designed to fine-tune your hormones by balancing estrogen, testosterone, progesterone, and even stress hormones like cortisol. It helps with common issues such as hot flashes,

poor sleep, low energy, bloating, and more. With over 40,000 reviews and a bottle sold every 24 seconds, the results speak for themselves. A survey found 86% of women lost weight, 77% saw an improved mood, and 100% felt like themselves again. Start your next chapter feeling balanced and in control. For a limited time, get 15% off your entire first order at happy mammoth.com with code next chapter at checkout. Visit happy mammoth.com today and get your old self back naturally. Bigotsie You guys

Three percent Three months Five feet Threexie three Fivexie three martin three much

three like three Three magic three five three five three hundred three magic Thank you. Drop it. Power, power, power panel, Jake, John Irola, Adrian Lawrence, is everybody checking out the damage report?

Is everybody checking out Rebel Headquarters for Adrian's videos? Are people doing that? They need to be doing it instantly. Go now. No, I'm kidding. Stay here and then watch it later. Okay. So we got a hell of a show for you guys today.

Tons of news. And these days, the news is both completely dispiriting and hilarious at the same time. So this first hour is super important stories. Is there a false flag operation? Is it Russia or Alex Jones? We don't know. Okay, we're going to figure it out. And then in the bonus episode for the members has one of my favorite stories from today.

A bisexual turtle having had it. And it's not Mitch McConnell. So, all right. Okay. So as you can tell, we're going to have fun tonight. All right. Having said that, let's talk about World War III. John, take it away.

Woohoo, choo, chew, chew. We're heading towards it. Yesterday, the United States revealed what it is calling a plot by Russia to fabricate evidence of a supposed attack by Ukraine that would then be used as a justification for Russia to attack in retaliation. Here's what they're saying. Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said the scheme included production of a graphic propaganda video that would show sageed explosions and use corpses and actors depicting grieving mourners. So they say that this isn't just a hypothetical thing. They have already seen evidence of it. This is something that is maybe now being headed off by the U.S. revealing it or maybe

it wasn't quite ready to go, but they swear it was definitely something that was happening. And again, according to the United States government via the Associated Press, U.S. intelligence shows Russia has launched a malign social media disinformation campaign against Ukraine and has dispatched operatives trained in explosives to carry out acts of sabotage against Russia's own forces. So they would do a social media offensive backed up by, I guess, intentional friendly fire or at least the idea of friendly fire against their own forces. So the US government very worried about this. But there are some issues, especially if you were familiar with the United States government and its intelligence apparatus. So there was a spokesperson from

the state department doing a press conference and got into it with Associated Press Reporter Matt Lee. And you take a look at this video and we'll see what you think afterward. Russia continues to engage in disinformation campaigns. You made an allegation that they might do that. Have they actually done it? What we know, Matt, is what we, what I have just said, that they have engaged in this activity, in this planning activity. But let me, let me, because obviously this is not, this is not the first time we've made these reports. public. We told you a few weeks ago that we have information indicating Russia also has already prepositioned a group of operatives to conduct a false flag operation in eastern Ukraine. So that, Matt,

to your question, is an action that Russia has already taken. It's an action that you say that they have taken, but you have shown no evidence to confirm that. And I'm going to get to the next question here, which is what is the evidence that they, I mean, this is like crisis actors, really? This is like Alex Jones territory you're getting it to now. Matt, this is derived from information known to the U.S. government. Intelligence information that we have declassified. I think you know. Okay, well, where is it?

Where is this information? It is intelligence information that we have declassified. Well, where is it? Where is the declassified information? I just delivered it. No, you made a series of allegations and statements. Would you like us to print it out the topper? Because you will see a transcript of this briefing that you can print out for yourself.

That's not evidence, Ned. That's you saying it. That's not evidence. I'm sorry. So a little bit defensive, basically. Now, this continued. And if you thought Ned Price, the representative right there from the State Department, was defensive in the first video, take a look at the advice that he provides to the AP reporter in this. Matt, you said yourself, you've been in this business for quite a long time. You know that when we make information, intelligence information public, we do so in a way that protects sensitive sources and methods. You also know that we do so, we declassify information only when we're confident in that information. If you doubt the credibility of the U.S. government, of the British government, of other governments, and want to, you know, find solace and information that the Russians are putting out, that is for you to do. I'm not asking what the Russian government is putting out. And what is it supposed to be?

The officials are describing very specific scenes, but do they actually have a video? The fact that we are able to go into such great detail, obviously I'm not going to spell out what is in our possession, but I will leave it to you. I will leave that to your judgment. There are no facts that you've spelled out. You can't leave it to their judgment. They asked you, you're saying you saw a video. Do you have a video? Well, I can't say what we saw could be a video. Could be a ham sandwich. I don't know. No, you're talking about a video. Does the video exist? Have you actually seen it? They're asking specific questions that he is being wildly evasive. Like that is the sort of press briefing that I guess we should just get used to and maybe we should be used to it because that's generally the approach that most representatives of the Trump administration had toward the press. And so, look, we're left in a difficult situation here because in response to the question from the State Department rep, do you question the United States government? Yeah, yes, we do, especially in topics like this, and especially when they might be taking

some information they have, but then over the playing their hand. And so we're left in a situation where we have one of two things. We either have a false flag, which is what Russia might be doing, or we have the U.S. pretending they're going to do a false flag, which would be a false flag, which becomes a flag again, which they want to wrap themselves in. So we're in a difficult position, Chang, which is it? Yeah. So there's a little bit of irony in this, but overall, I love it. So I'm going to explain why I love it and end with irony is. So first of all, I don't think that what the price is doing there, the Biden administration spokesperson there, is doing, is extraordinary at all. It is what it normally happens in Democratic and Republican

administration. What's extraordinary is the reporter actually asking tough questions in a press briefing. That almost never happens. So, and NPR also has tough questions of Saki on similar issues, and they seem flummoxed by it. They're like, is that a reporter? Who let them in here? Like, why are they asking me super legitimate and slightly difficult questions? And he seems like bewildered that he, that the reporter will not simply write down what the government spokesperson said as fact. And to be fair, of him, generally that's what they do. So that's why it's a twist. He's like reporters being reporters and nobody could have seen this coming. And so as I saw that video, I was like,

yes, finally, yes. So you know, we beat up on the corporate press all the time. But if they do the right things, we love it. We love it. We can't get enough of it, right? Now the irony is my guess here, and we're only guessing because there's no actual facts, is that they're not lying. Okay, now why do I guess that? Because it's not a normal lie for the American government. A normal lie for the American government is, well, you know, it just happened, by the way. We killed the leader of ISIS, and 10 people were dead, six children and four women, at least

10 civilians dead. And we said, oh, yeah, the ISIS leader killed him. Did he? Or did we kill them? And you don't want to take responsibility yet, right? So that is a very normal line from the American government. We have a specific plan for a video of a false flag operation is not at all normal. And so if they're saying that, they probably have it.

Okay, but we should not take their word for it. And that's not how journalism works. So that's why I say it's a little bit ironic. And I get if they have it, why they would say it so the Russians can't use it. If you say it afterwards, it sounds like a conspiracy theory. If you say it's a false flag operation, if you say it ahead of time, it does neutralize it. Is it stronger if you show it? Well, that's the quote, which gets to the third point, which gets back to why it was such a great set of questions.

Because, well, wait, is it a video or is it a plan to make a video, right? Do they already have the video? Because if you showed it, boy, that would be really persuasive, right? And I get that you want to protect your sources of methods, but when he said, the government spokesperson said, are you doubting our credibility? I mean, it's such a hilarious moment, but of course, of course we have, that's the job of a report is to doubt your credibility. And he said, oh, I guess you could take solace and taking the word of the Russia. government. That's not what he said. He's not to take the word of any government. And you try to do a smear job McCarthyite attack in accusing a reporter who was asking a legitimate

question, I guess you're taking solace. No, no, dude, nobody's taking solace with the Russians or ISIS or any of that. You guys are jokes. And then, but my favorite part, Adrian, was when he said, we just declassified it. And the guy's like, great, where is it? He's like, I just said it. He's like, that's not declassifying it. That's just, You saying it, come on, don't insult our intelligence. It was definitely very entertaining, just because I, Jank, I think you're absolutely right. The representative expected just for the media to simply take it and run with it. And they were unwilling to do that, where they actually wanted facts and supporting information

and evidence and would not just kind of be a speaker for the U.S. government with whatever they're trying to do in terms of, you know, whether it's neutralizing the potential video from the Russians or whatnot. But it's just, it's very funny. I really do love that line of, you know, you just don't trust us. Like hell no, are you kidding? Yeah. Where have they've been? But at the same time, we have to keep it real. It's very easy to just reflexively assume that the U.S. government must be lying, which in this case necessitates, well, obviously Russia wouldn't be lying. No, either or both could be lying. Governments lie. Yes, the U.S. government That's definitely true, but they're hardly unique in that. They're not trailblazers and governments deceiving their people.

So let's not be, like, let's not be smooth-brained in either direction. And the further difficulty of our position is that obviously we can't directly check the information. We can't even get it like two layers away from it, aside from whatever Ned Price decides to declassify via vocalization. like we don't know. We're left to speculate, but we bring into that speculation the experiences we've had with U.S. government propaganda and the propaganda of other countries leading up to this year. Yeah, so guys, you always have to use your judgment. There's no way around it. Do governments lie all the time? Do reporters tell you their governments lie? Very rarely. Okay, unless you're watching TYT, in which is we're super honest about it. And in fact, by the way, there's a lot of people that are an media who say no, the right wing will say only foreign governments lie, or at least they

used to say that, right? Now there's some people pretending to be on the left who say only the American government lies. That's a preposterous point. Of course they all do. And then you go to false flags. Do they exist or don't they exist? People love to think simplistically and go, well, they either all exist or none of them exist. Or maybe some of them do and some of them don't, And we have to use our judgment and reporting to find out which one is which. So did the Turkish government do a false flag operation? Were they considering a false flag operation in Sierra? Yes, they were, ministers were caught on tape talking through how they would attack their own military post that was across the border,

pretended the other side did it, and use it as an excuse to attack, let alone the Gulf of Tonkin. And at a thousand Northwood. Yes, and there's plenty of historical. evidence of false flag operations launched by different governments throughout the world. Does that mean that everything is a false flag operation? Of course not, of course not. It was Sandy Hook a false flag operation? False flag for what? Right? No, that's absurd. That's insane. And has no evidence to back it up at all. So, but to me, the most telling part of this was how surprised that price was. And that gives you a sense of how awful journalism has been in

Washington for so long that when he got a normal question handed to him, along with his ass, he was bewildered. A reporter asking a legitimate question, it's never happened before. And that's why he seemed to try to intimidate him with, are you working for the Russians? Absurd. He got deasified live. Okay. Now, ironically, I'm going to answer this question. differently than some of you will, but I don't know, that's why we're asking. So we're doing a poll, t.y.t.com slash polls. Do you think U.S. intelligence is lying about Russia's false flag operation? You could think that the net price was a jackass, and you could think that he was very

wrong and disrespectful to the press and still think that he might be telling the truth about the false flag operation. I probably do, right? But by the way, I might be ridiculously naive. So I'm curious what you guys saying, that's why we do the polls, t.Y.t.com, slash polls. And whenever we talk about polls, petitions, or anything else like that, if you're watching this video on one of the platforms, YouTube, Facebook, Senate, check the description box, because you'll see the link is a click, is an easy way to click and vote on those. Yeah. Yeah. And my final point is, in addition to the different ways that you can go towards that poll, you can also think that it's possible that the Russian government is either as the main thing they're going to do or as some sort of backup have a false flag and not want us to invade in response. Yes. You can identify that and not want us.

to invade Moscow. I know this isn't going out to our audience. They understand that, but they're very stupid people online. So let's just make that explicit. Yeah, and I'll just triple down on U.S. and Russia and China could all have imperialist ambitions. And we could be against all of their imperialism, not just some of them. Why do you want to invade them, Jank? Why? With that said, we should take our first break, though. Lots we want to get to after this. All right, back on TYT, Jank, John and Adrian with you guys. John's got a lot more news. I do. Actually, right before the news, though, I do want to say during the break,

we announced that Malcolm Fletchner has been here for way longer than I have is going to be transitioning out. Malcolm's obviously great guy. He's done a lot of great stuff here. I also wanted to say that after years and years of amazing work, we are regrettably losing one of our great editors, Cassie, who's worked on everything here, including years of editing the damage report. She's also our amazing photographer. If you've ever seen a photo of one of us and thought, hey, that looks like a professional did it. It was Cassie that took that photo. And she's going on to do other amazing work, but she's been a big part of TYT, so it's sad to see her go. Yeah, she's wonderful in a thousand different ways. And so look, we've got a great atmosphere

here. And so I love the folks working here. And so Cassie was a dream. Anna always shouts her out for the great pictures. And she's going on to do a dream job. So we're super happy for her. Exactly. All right. Okay, with that, let's do this. It has been over a year since January 6th, over a year since the multi-pronged effort to overthrow the results of the election, with one big part of that being the pressure campaign to get Mike Pence to do what he has absolutely no authority to do, which is unilaterally decide that Donald Trump gets to be president. That is a claim that Donald Trump has been making up until like this week. And finally, like 13 months later, Mike Pence is finally weighing in on it in this video.

There are those in our party who believe that as the presiding officer over the joint session of Congress, that I possess unilateral authority to reject electoral college votes. And I heard this week that President Trump said I had the right to. to overturn the election, but President Trump is wrong. I had no right to overturn the election. The presidency belongs to the American people and the American people alone. And frankly, there is no idea more on American than the notion that any one person could choose the American president.

Under the Constitution, I had no right to change the outcome of our election. Okay, so everything that Mike Pence said there was factually accurate. Also accurate to say that he is saying it way after maybe he might have had an effect. I mean, maybe he never would have at all. But that video has generated so much attention and so much applause for Mike Pence. He's the best. He's the sexiest man in America. He's doing such good things. Defender of democracy.

Maybe he should be the next Democratic presidential nominee. What do you think, Chank? What do you think? Okay, but look, so credit where credit is due. So number one, I'm thrilled that he's saying it. Finally, finally, finally, he said it. Number two, he should have said it on January 6th, let alone 7th. They tried to murder him.

The chant was hang Mike Pence, hang Mike Pence. And it took him over a year to gather up the courage to say the most obvious thing in the world when Trump supporters were looking to execute him for not. overturning the democratic election. So now the most important question is, why is he saying it now? If he was too scared to say it for over a year, what changed? Well, what changed is what we told you guys approximately a month ago. And long time, TYT viewers, not even long time, you can see it every day, right?

But you saw us tell you that, hey, the Republicans are turning. The donors must have turned because it is now systematically people are going and saying Trump is wrong, Trump is wrong. We showed you first the standard politicians, McKinzinger, Cheney, etc. That's already was baked in. They were already on that side, so that's not interesting news. But then people that were not diehard Trump people, but very conservative, politicians started saying it. We're like, wait a minute. And then I said, once we got two or three people saying,

I was like, that's it. The memo went out. The memo is now saying, and the memo goes out from literally places like the Chamber of Commerce. And they tell people, sometimes they say you now have permission to say this. And other times it'll say, you must say this, right? And then when I saw Brian Kilmead and a couple other Fox News contributors do it, I was like, oh, that's it. There's no question. One of the hardest parts of getting older is feeling like something's off in your body, but not knowing exactly what. It's not just aging. It's often your hormones. too. When they fall out of balance, everything feels off. But here's the good news. This doesn't have to be the story of your next chapter. Hormone Harmony by Happy Mammoth is an herbal formula made

with science-backed ingredients designed to fine-tune your hormones by balancing estrogen, testosterone, progesterone, and even stress hormones like cortisol. It helps with common issues such as hot flashes, poor sleep, low energy, bloating, and more. With over 40,000 reviews and a bottle sold every 24 seconds, the results speak for themselves. A survey found 86% of women lost weight, 77% saw an improved mood, and 100% felt like themselves again. Start your next chapter feeling balanced and in control. For a limited time, get 15% off your entire first order at happy mammoth.com with code next chapter at checkout. Visit happy mammoth.com today and get your old self back naturally. There's no question. In fact, we predicted that Fox would say it even before

kill me said it. So now this is beginning, this is now, I wouldn't say this is to culmination, but it's getting there. For Pence to now come out and say, yes, the vice president cannot unilaterally overturn an election. To us is literally the most obvious thing we've ever heard. That's not how a democracy. We don't all, we didn't all go vote and then go, oh, hey, I wonder what the vice president is going to say. And as I've said a hundred times, and I haven't heard anyone else say it, even though, again, the most obvious thing in the world. If that theory was true, then good news, you don't have to bother voting in 2024, because Kamala Harris is going to decide the election. Do Republicans want that? Hell no, right? So, so this is more important than just Pence saying something

a year too late. This is some grand poobahs in the Republican Party saying, no, we're going to take on Trump, full bore, and we're going to try this, we're going to stop being scale. And Mitch McConnell also piled on today. So there's no question. It's a coordinated effort. Adri. Yeah, and I agree with you. Initially, I went into this thinking that it was because mother finally gave Pence her approval.

But, you know, I'm really glad that he got there. You know, and also to even just from a humanistic standpoint, I could imagine that Pence was probably somewhat relieved to finally be able to say this. In part because, you know, having Trump to kind of reignite these claims. claims. So recently, I'm sure things have finally kind of somewhat settled for Pence in terms of, I'm sure, the threats to his life and all sorts of things and attacks on his family. So to have that reignited and to finally be able to say something probably felt pretty good. But at the end of the day, it's kind of like the Republicans, they're always the last minute. Let me make sure that this suits my own needs and my own agenda first. So I'm just, I am surprised. I am

grateful, but I am still annoyed. Yeah, I got to say one last thing about Pence. So, So the fact that he couldn't even condemn his own attempted execution, it shows incredible cowardice. And here, he didn't get permission for mother. My guess is he got permission from the Republican donors. But having said all that, if he had gone along with Trump, Giuliani, Bannon Navarro's plan, we would have had an unbelievable mess. He would have said, and they call it the Green Bay sweep, they named it, it was a plan, there's

There's no question about it, it was an attempted coup. They said all that Pence has to do, even though it doesn't have any effect in law, is to say I'm sending it back to the states, I am not certifying this election. And then we will pretend that are fake electors, and literally they had people sign fake documents saying that they were electors when they were not electors in the swing states. We will then seat the fake electors. And so if Pence had gone along with the ruse, they would have done. done that plan, and then the military would have had to have decided who's the real president.

And the fact that Pence avoided that is a testament to him. So we have to be fair about, on that day, he did have strength and courage. He lost it for a year and now has regained it with the help of donors, et cetera, right? But this is the establishment striking back. But in a crazy twist of fate in a positive way. So probably the only positive thing the establishment's ever done. Exactly. Yeah, and because of that, he is an honorary member of the Dragon Squad. I'm kidding, he's not. I wouldn't go that far. Hopefully now, like, can we all dispense with the idea that he's the most powerful person, that the VP is the most powerful person in Washington? They're not. It's the Senate parliamentarian. Everybody should know that right now. People never took a government

class. Anyway, with that, we have to turn from that news to literally the worst sort of news, the most tragic sort of news and the apparently most common sort of news in America. Let's turn to this. Body cam footage released today shows the moment that a no-knock police raid by the Minneapolis police resulted in the almost immediate murder of a 22-year-old black man named Amir Locke in his apartment. He was sleeping when they busted in. And less than than 10 seconds later, he was dead. We are going to show you this video, but understand the content of it. It is incredibly graphic, obviously, and might well be triggering for many people. So with that warning, here is the footage that was released.

So, So, So, killed George Floyd using the same technique that resulted in the death of Briona Taylor, another individual has been killed. Obviously that footage was slowed down. I don't know exactly why it was released that way, but that is the way that the video has been released. We want to give you a little bit more information about this. Importantly, he was not the individual that they were

even there for. That of course would not justify what you saw in the video, but they were not there for him. They've been carrying out a warrant on Wednesday morning for the St. Paul Police Department's homicide unit, Chief Hoffman, of that unit said that officers had a warrant for three locations in the apartment complex, and that Amir Locke was not named in the original warrant. Now, Locke did have a gun in his hand, according to police, but it's unclear whether he was aware that police officers had entered his apartment. And that is buttressed by the fact that he had just woken up seconds earlier, had not done

anything wrong, was legally allowed to have that gun, and only in a case like this where it's a black man being killed, would any conservative argue that he shouldn't have a gun in his hand if he didn't want to be immediately executed by the police. Yeah, look, I have more to say, but obviously we want to hear what you and Adrian have to say about all this. Okay. Yeah, so first of all, there's two potential scenarios here. And I know why, I think I know why they released the video in slow motion and regular speed. And I watched it in both. And I think that they did the slow motion one so that you have a better chance of seeing the gun. And I didn't see it in the regular speed one, but I think I might have seen it in the slow motion one. It's hard to tell.

So the two scenarios are he has a gun and he doesn't have a gun. So in the one where he doesn't have a gun, it's the most outrageous killing you've ever seen. They wake the guy up and they say 10 seconds, but most of it was outside opening the door. But when they enter the apartment, it's only two or three seconds and then boom, that he's dead. They shoot him. If he doesn't have a gun, it's the most outrageous shooting you've ever seen. Walk into a guy, wake him up and execute him, right? But if he does, he doesn't have a gun, it's the most outrageous shooting you've ever seen. does have a gun. To John's point, right wing, be really careful about whose side you're on. Because if you say the police can come into any house, wake you up and you have no idea who they are,

I mean, that guy had about a second when he woke up. And then if you reach for your gun that you have perfectly legally in this country, the police can instantly execute you. That is a very, very dangerous standard and actually would put, if the, if our entire system wasn't obviously an overtly racist, it would put the right wing in greater danger than anyone else because they have more guns. Of course, they think, nah, they'll just shoot black people with it. They won't shoot me. That'll be largely correct statistically, but sometimes they'll shoot you too.

Adrian. You know, it seems even far more egregious than what happened to Brianna Taylor, just by virtue with the fact that this individual didn't have any time to react, to respond, didn't really do anything, and they had moved so incredibly quickly, sleeping again. And it's just wrong location, every bit about it. And, you know, it's just, it's something that seems to happen so incredibly often, especially in Minneapolis, where the black population is, what, 19%, yet we are 66% of the people that police kill. It just, it's wild to me that we still live in a country that continues to allow this behavior and to condone it, but it's just, I don't even know what to say. It's, it's disgusting in

this 22-year-old man lost his life. And now we are going to be now in the space of social media of essentially debating his humanity. Yeah, exactly. There should be no debate whatsoever. In addition to the right wing, I am going to guess, is just not going to touch this because they know it puts them in a possible position because they want cops to continue to do stuff like this to people like Amirlock specifically, but they don't want to answer any of those questions about guns. These are people that fantasize literally every single day about the possibility that a pack of like leather-clad marauders are going to storm across their yard and break down their door. So obviously they have to have cannons and flamethrowers and rocket launchers. And yet

they're perfectly fine with Amir-lock being put in a position where he has to wake up and in a second decide there are people breaking down my door yelling at me. I can either shoot. And if I If I don't, and they are just random people, they might kill me, or if I even look like I might be a threat, and they're cops, they'll definitely kill me. So you have a quarter of a second to make that decision. There's not a right winger in the world that thinks that that is acceptable to put a conservative in that position, a white person in that position, and they're not going to be able to say that.

And so I have a feeling they're just not going to touch this with a 10-foot pole. Yeah, last couple of points here. First, if you're thinking, really Minneapolis again? Again, it's in Minnesota, there's George Floyd, and about half a dozen massive nationwide disgust cases all coming out from the same state. Gee, I wonder if there's a problem with the training of the police officers. Nope, no, we're never going to fix it. Never ever going to fix it.

Not just in that state and then that city, but all across the country. And to John's point about the right wing, it's not just marauders, John. They're number one fantasies that jackbooter thugs of the tyrannical government come to their door, which I always explain is the police, and then they get to murder the cops. Are you sure you're going to be able to pull the gun fast enough? He was killed in about two seconds once they enter the apartment. And by the way, he did, if the cops were telling the truth, he did pull the gun, and then he was killed. So how are you going to fight them?

Are you going to be awake all night waiting for the cops? And then as soon as they come, you're going to go kill the cops before they kill you. This is madness. This is insanity. We can't live like this. And so, which then, of course, brings me back to the training. So it never occurred to the cops in Minnesota that if you're going into a situation like this, somebody might have a legal gun. They might be a legal gun owner or you might have the wrong person. You heard all that stuff about Brianna Taylor case where it was the same exact scenario. But actually, to Adrian's point, it took much longer, right, in the Brianna Taylor situation.

Here, they shoot within two seconds like they did with Tamir Rice, like they did with Crawford in the Walmart shooting in Ohio. And so can we please train the police not to execute people instantly? Oh, well, they had a gun. Well, yeah, of course, some of them are gonna have a gun. So is your idea, okay, we go in our house, if God forbid we have the wrong house or the wrong person, et cetera, let's just execute them and then sort it out later. That is their plan.

That is their plan. They don't train them, oh, if there's a gun, and just in case, that might be the wrong person, or you should tell them to put your hands up, should wait for them to wake up, and hence you should have shields, you should go in a certain way, you have to give them a second and a half before you take their life. No, apparently there's no such training at all. The only thing we train cops to do is to execute people. And it's interesting because they only seem to execute black people. But when it comes to also this officer, it's like these officers, they said that Locke had pointed the gun at them.

You can see in the video that that's not the case to the extent that he had the gun and it was pointing anywhere. It was downward. Plus also, he only had a mere several seconds of a waking up. I can barely balance myself when I wake up. And especially with someone screaming and yelling at me and pointing a light in my face, like the man didn't even have a chance to survive this encounter. And it's just it continues to show you how often that essentially police do not intend for individuals to live. It does not matter. They create these deadly situations and then just do a shoulder shrug of, well, I guess it happened. But at least I was scared and I had to survive.

Yeah, last thing. If the right wing wasn't so racist, they'd be 100% on our side on this issue. It's the jackboot of thugs of the government break into your house, you're a legal gun owner, and they murder you in two. seconds. You're innocent. You're innocent. It's the right wing should be like as fervent as they have ever been in defense of Amir Locke. But he's black. So my guess is they, at a best case scenario, they won't say a word. In a normal case scenario, as Adrian alluded to earlier, they'll go now after he's dead, try to character assassinate Amir Locke and say, oh, now it was worth it. It was justified. He's black. And I mean, he once had detention in junior high. And

Let's just try them now in the court of public opinion, so we applaud cops for killing black people. So that's likely what's going to happen, but at best you'll get neutrality, when if they had any principles at all, the right wing should be livid about this. The new BMO, V.I. Porter Mastercard is your ticket to more. More perks, more points, more flights. more of all the things you want in a travel rewards card and then some get your ticket to more with the new bemo V-I-Porter Mastercard and get up to $2,400 in value in your first 13 months terms and conditions apply

visit bemo.com slash V-I-Porter to learn more 100%. Okay with that said we're going to take our second break we'll be back after this All right, back on TYT, Jenk, John and Adrian with you guys, John, take it away. Okay. Interesting news out of Washington. An organization called the Congressional Workers Union has announced that they are ready to begin unionizing the offices of different congressmen and women. Now, they're not technically a union. they're going to sort of represent unionization efforts in the individual offices.

It gets complicated and we'll get into it. But we want to read a little bit of a statement that they put out, saying, after more than a year of organizing as a volunteer group of congressional staff, we are proud to publicly announce our efforts to unionize the personal offices and committees of Congress in solidarity where they're fellow workers across the United States and the world. And they say last month, a survey distributed by the Congressional Progressive Staff Association found that 91% of staff surveyed want more protections to give them a voice at work. Democrats have historically stood up for workers' rights to organize.

Now it is time for Democrats to lead by example. I think they're being quite charitable in the middle of that statement there, but I get why they're doing it in terms of public relations. And in terms of that statement, though, they seem to be alluding to one Democrat in particular. Take a look at this video yesterday of Nancy Pelosi. Do you support staffer attempts to unionize here in Congress? Well, we're just unionized at the D triple C, and I supported that. Yeah.

Okay, so she apparently is on board. That's what she said, and we can debate whether we believe that or not. But in addition, Representative Alexandra Costa Cortez, who has participated in support of multiple labor movement strikes, things like that, tweeted on Capitol Hill interns are often unpaid, many staffers don't make a living wage, and lack of work protections can pave the way for unhealthy. environments. So is there movement? Is this going to happen? What do you all think? Well, let me be clear here, because Nancy Pelosi didn't say she supported it. She said she supported a different unionization effort that was purposely evasive. So that means she likely does not support it. So I don't know enough of the details to know, you know, did they go to the Pelosi's of the world, did they get a yes, they get a no, did they not talk to them? I have no idea of the

of the details of how it is proceeding. And I've got to say that a lot of times progressives are quicker to unionize. But what I would love, and this is important, unionize the staff for all of the Democrats. Because if you just do it for the progressives who are already on your side and you let the corporate Democrats not unionize, well, that's weird. No, it's got to be for all of the Democrats. So I hope that they've got the strength to be able to do that. Adrian. So I think that this is extremely smart and wise for them to unionize because the kind of work

environments they're in cannot be healthy just by virtue of the fact that we know where there are work environments where there are significant disparities in power. Also, you have these star players in terms of people who are uplifted and almost holier than now. And people exploit their power. They exploit other people. And we even saw that kind of during that Me Too movement period where some staffers did come forward and say, hey, the essentially the reporting processes and procedures that they essentially, they silence you. And the fact that there isn't a great sense of transparency there.

And they had to push to move to make changes in that arena. It tells you there's a lot of bad stuff going on behind closed doors. And it would be in the best interest of staffers to essentially be able to work collectively to fight against it. Definitely, yeah. The difference in the power between them is obviously clear, and that's been, I mean, how many scandals in congressional offices can we think back on in the past few decades? But I did allude to it being potentially difficult in some ways. So let me give you a little bit more details about that. This is according to reporting by Kayla Epstein at Business Insider. Should legislation make it to a full vote in the House and pass, the resolution also would activate the same kind of labor protections that apply to the rest of the public workforce. That means that staff would begin to discuss Union, unionizing efforts in their workplaces have protections against retaliation. By the way, since it requires a full vote in the House, they're definitely going to want to do that relatively quickly, considering how things are looking for November. But then, with the way that the law is written, every congressional office and committee would have to independently organize for itself.

That means that staffers in each of the 538 separate offices and dozens of committees would have to go through the process themselves. This could and likely would result in a situation where only half of Congress's offices unionize with a split evident between Democrats and Republicans. Although even that is interesting because there's no reason why the offices of Republicans wouldn't want the same protections, ability to negotiate for better conditions and pay. But since many of the people who go through this see this as a stepping stone to other positions in the party, even though they would know it is in their direct economic interest. And in terms of protections from exploitation and things like that, sexual harassment, all that,

they might not want to organize just because they could get blacklisted from the party effectively. Yeah. So I have a prediction. They are not going to vote quickly. They're going to try to run out the clock and let the Republicans get in charge so that they'll kill that effort. So I say that because, one, they're corporate Democrats. They never mean anything they say. And so they've been saying they support unions for decades. They've never once passed any of those bills. Obama's, oh, I'm going to do. Oh, my God, I'm going to do it.

Didn't do it. The Pro Act. The Pro Act. Didn't even introduce it. It's a joke. There's no chance of it passing in the Senate. They didn't even try. So will they unionize themselves?

I would be borderline shocked. And on top of that, Pelosi saying, I supported a different effort. It means she doesn't support this effort. And she, of course not. She's like the queen of corporate rule. So they think unions are a joke and a punching bag. And oftentimes union leaders agree with them. So now, if they actually unionize these guys, that would be a hell of a development.

But I believe it when I see it. And yes, partly because they just don't believe in unions, they're lying. They love corporate rule. That's 90% of the Democratic Party. The AOC means it. The progressives mean it, right? And then finally, also because they like that power and they don't want to give it away. Yeah, there's been tons of abuse, including recently by people like Katie Hill who slept with staffers. So, you know, and yeah, she left Congress, but she's still beloved in Washington. I mean, there's fawning articles about how wonderful she is, right? And how brave she is. So you think, think that people like Katie Hill and the others and mainly guys, but it happens to, in her case, I mean, a female congressperson too, are just going to voluntarily go, oh, yeah, yeah, guys should check my power. If that's happening in Washington, I haven't seen it. So good effort.

I hope you win. Good luck to you. Yep, absolutely great. The fact is that Republicans don't dominate the field when it comes to being oppressors and wanting to have power. And so there are plenty of Democrats out there who also do not want to see their staff unionize. They still want to be able to essentially have that ability to abuse their power over them. And it's so absolutely disgusting. But you know what? I really do hope it does work out for the staffers because a lot of the things that they endure are completely unethical and moral and they should not have those experiences. Yeah. I want to move on to our last story. Okay, this one's a bit of a doozy. Adam Carolla were initially having a conversation about Whoopi Goldberg being suspended over her

commentary recently about the Holocaust. In particular, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Gortez's commentary about that. Now, AOC had disagreed with the decision by ABC to suspend Wuppie Goldberg saying that, and she seemed to be sort of following on some of what members of the Jewish community in America had said that this is an opportunity to learn and to have a dialogue rather than to simply suspend her. Now, that is apparently Sean Hannity seemed to agree with that, but Adam Crolla didn't. And so he said, obviously it is hypocritical with AOC because she didn't care about Roseanne getting canceled or Sharon Osborne or Chris Harrison from the Bachelor or any of that. It's just when someone from her side of the aisle gets slapped on the hand, then she wants to show some grace.

So you can agree or disagree with that perspective. But that is not where Adam Crolla stopped. It then turned to this. And here's a quick thought experiment. If AOC was fat and in her 60s, would anyone listen to another thing she ever said? Oh, boy, you're going to step in that one. What exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean, is it because she's young and what? Yes, she's young, she's vibrant, she's beautiful, and everyone's always putting a camera and a mic in her face.

Her opinions are idiotic 95% of the time. And I don't think if she was a middle-aged, heavy-set woman, anyone would care what she had to say. I'm not so sure I agree. So Sean Hannity sort of disagrees. Of course, he was sort of smirking during that conversation, saying, oh, you're gonna step in it, not what you're saying is horrendous,

and you're actually a part of the problem that you're implying exists. But then goes on to say, no, she is actually quite effective at turning all of the Democrats into socialists and they all follow her lead. So even his apparent defensive AOC was disconnected from reality. But anyway, I'm curious what you both think about the commentary you saw there. So mixed bag. And what's the mixed part? Hold on. I'll get to it.

So number one, he says, oh, yeah, you know, she thought Sharon Osborne and Roseanne Barr, et cetera, should be. canceled. Did she? Did you double check that? I don't know that she thought that at all, right? So for example, for us, we almost always say that they shouldn't get canceled. And by the way, different hosts have different opinions. So I should speak for myself, right? For example, I didn't think Sharon Osborne should be fired. I thought they should have a conversation over it. And I can go on and on, Megan Kelly. I mean, we've defended thousand different right wingers, not what they said, but that we shouldn't fire them. Instead, we should have a conversation about it.

And that's because unlike the right wing, we have principles. Now, Roseanne Barr, on the other hand, didn't say something that was borderline. Like, Whoopi Goldberg talked about how the Holocaust was terrible, but was it necessarily racial. Now, as I said at the time, I think it was wrong, but I don't think she should have been suspended over it. They should have just had a conversation on air about it and clarified it, right? And the same standard I used for Megan Kelly, Osborne, and everyone else. Okay, by the way, on the other hand, Roseanne Barr said that Valerie Jared, who was a top-level aide for Barack Obama and who was Christian and African-American, was a cross between the Muslim Brotherhood and Planet of the Apes. Jesus.

That is not the same thing as what Whoopi Goldberg said. I know Adam Crowell doesn't have much of a mind, so he can't use it for independent judgment. He's like, oh, controversial comments, always good, always good. Me, no cancel. Okay, I know. All right. So now, in terms of his comments about AOC, of course, Hannity brought him on to say things like that and then go, oh, golly gee, did he do it?

Right. And I don't know about that. But here's the twist. Is it true that the mainstream media pays more attention to AOC because she's attractive? The answer is probably yes. Now, he's, Corolla's an idiot. He's, oh, she's wrong 95% of the time. Dude, you have like three brain cells.

Who are you to judge political issues? You don't know anything. And AOC's at least 20 times smarter than you. At least. I mean, like literally your IQ is probably 5% of hers. And so, but on the other hand, is the media obsessed with looks and appearances in optics, have you seen television? Do the cable anchors look attractive or not attractive?

Is that a coincidence? All right, maybe, but I doubt it. All right. So, Adrian, what do you think? Yeah, I think you're absolutely right. You hit the nail on the head on everything. As far as Carilla goes, you know, he's made it clear. He's a Republican. I think he's once said, I want a secure border.

I'm not into welfare state, that kind of thing. Like he comes on to try to peddle some controversial takes and statements, but also, Jank, you're right in that to some extent. AOC definitely is probably the beneficiary of beauty privilege, as well as having fair skin. We see how colorism works in our society and racial privilege and all of these things. And so people are more likely to be centered when they are on the side of the privilege. And so that is an accurate statement, but to suggest that she has nothing else to offer outside of those physical aspects. of her, it's just more Corolla ignorance that he wanted to peddle. And also, you know, it's the fact is that you went on Sean Hannity's show. You know, I'll give it to Hannity for pushing back, even though it was, you know, the pushback level of a pillow fight. Still, it's, it's a problematic thing, the fact that he even let Carolla get up there and use that pulpit to further greater ignorance. I want to say one more thing about Adam Carole's sexism, because he projects his sexism onto others. He thinks the only reason I would care is,

is because she's hot, right? So I assume that's the only reason anyone cares. Now, Adam, it's possible that she's really smart. And that's why she did one of the most historic upsets in American political history. And she's also attractive. And that mainstream media might pay more attention to her because she's attractive.

And hence, I'm giving you credit for a quarter right, at least that, which you don't expect, right? Me, no like left wing, left wing always wrong. Well, Adam, I'm agreeing with you on that. So you're in a conundrum, okay? But it could also be that despite the fact that they pay her attention because of that, she's actually really accomplished. Did you do one of the greatest political upsets in American history?

No, you didn't, did you? And did she do that because she was attractive? No, that one had nothing to do with it. Okay, only after she won did the media cover her. It's not like during the primary race, the media was fawning over her because she was attractive. And that's why she'd be Crowley. No, the media completely ignored her other than us. We covered her 34 times.

And we didn't do it because she was attractive. We did it because she was the strongest Justice Democratic candidate. And we made an active choice about that. And so, and finally, the New York Times admitted afterwards, as did almost all of the press, oops, we missed it. We had no idea she was going to be Crowley. So if you think that's why she won, you don't, as usual, you don't know anything about the facts. Yeah, it's, of course, missing the fact that she was involved in the sit-in, that she's probably the single best communicator of her values in Congress.

And as a thought experiment, I'm sure Adam Carolla, like me, has Instagram. There are a lot of hot people in this country. Why aren't they flooding Congress? It's a graveyard in there. Why aren't we, why is it Congress full of hotties? If it's so easy, you get all this free attention, where are they? Yeah, I mean. I honestly, John, I think they're all at TYT sitting there at that desk with you.

Y'all know, you know what it's like to be taken advantage of because you're just too pretty. Well, look, I didn't want to say it, but that's the other part I got to agree with Adam on. My success is only because of my beauty. Hey, that's not him saying that. That's Adam Carolla saying that. Am I not merciful? That's twice I agreed with Adam in this. this segment, even though I think he has three brain cells. All right, oh wow, we're out of time. Okay, second hour is bananas. Okay, there's so many interesting stories in there, let alone, like I said, the bonus episode where we're going

to have a story about the oldest, most bisexual turtle. I don't know if it's a most bisexual turtle, but it is bisexual and it's the oldest. Anyway, you're going to love it, so stay right here. We'll be back. Thank you, Adrian. And John. Listen to the full episode of the Young Turks, support our work, listen ad-free, access members-only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts at apple.com slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.