The Young Turks - Report Connects Trump With Violence

Episode Date: August 14, 2019

Trump says his rhetoric brings people together but we brought receipts. Cenk Uygur, and John Iadarola, hosts of The Young Turks, break it down. 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. 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. If you like the Young Turks podcast, I think you'll love a lot of the podcasts on the TYT network. Old school, it's one of my favorites, one of the favorites for a lot of the listeners. Please check that out, subscribe, share it, that makes a big difference, and give it a five-star rating. Thank you.

Hey guys, how you doing? Jane Cougar, John Ida Roll, with you guys. So we've got a hell of a show for you. Has Steve King says anything interesting? I'll check during the first break. Huh, I don't know if he's tweeted or anything. Yeah, so some madness, of course, as usual from Steve King. We'll get to that in just a little bit.

And then important updates on the Jeffrey Epstein case. We started talking about this on old school last night because it kind of broke in the middle of the night. It turns out that the guards had falsified the logs for Epstein's jail cell. That doesn't mean anything. Okay. Oh, boy. And apparently his girlfriend's in hiding, his fixer, the one that helped him recruit the girls. Now, she's not hiding from the cops.

That cops can get her any time. So who is she hiding from? I don't know, but this is a crazy, crazy movie. So some updates on that a little bit later. And then in the third hour when we've got our guests, Kara Eastman, just Democrat. Back again. Back again. Almost one got within two points of a Republican in Nebraska.

So is the D-Tripple-C now fully supporting her given that she's got an excellent chance of winning this time around? Obviously. They are recruiting- They'd be stupid not to. Well, that part is true. They're recruiting candidates against her as we speak. Okay, anyway, hell of a show, let's get started.

Okay, now that I'm depressed, let's get started, yes. New report by ABC News links 36 different crimes, either violence, intimidation, threats, a variety of different criminal offenses directly to the president with fairly stringent requirements for them to include it in that list. And this really goes to the debate that we've been having, that the country's been focusing on mainly since the El Paso terror attack, but that we've been talking about for some time about the similarity between his rhetoric, the rhetoric used by people who commit terror attacks, any connection there. And we can continue to have that debate. We're going to give you the results of the ABC News study in just a second. But as always, I think some evidence is helpful.

And so Jared Jackson put together another one of his mashups, this time, of Donald Trump. And let's see whether or not he's a fan of violence and attacks and threats or as opposed to it. And he walking out, and we're not allowed, you know, the guards are very gentle with him. He's walking out like big high fives, smiling, laughing, like to punch him in the face. Bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists. You know what they are, they're thugs. Now, build that wall, you're right. I love the old days.

You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? they'd be carried out on a stretcher, folks. And we endorsed Greg very early, but I had heard that he body slammed a reporter. Any guy that can do a body slam, he's my guy. He's my guy. It is an invasion. You know that. I say invasion they say, isn't that terrible?

I don't care what the fake media says. That's an invasion of our country. How do you stop these people? You can't. There's no. That's only in the panhandle you can get away with that statement. And no one puts together an enraging montage like J.R. Jackson. So we're going to give you the ABC News stuff in just a second.

But I feel like we have to just quickly respond to that because I had forgotten about some. I mean, the guy who's now in Congress who physically attacked a reporter, Trump, talks about it jokingly and points at the media while he says he body slammed the reporter. It's, that should have been it, but it wasn't it, wasn't it for the guy running for Congress, it wasn't it for Donald Trump, nothing matters anymore. Imagine if Obama had said, oh, I love this guy, he body slammed a reporter for Fox News and then pointed to all the Fox News reporters, hey guys, Democrats, liberals, look, that's where the Fox News reporters are.

I love it when you body slam them. My head sort of exploded, impeachment proceedings, you know, the whole thing. Exactly. But my favorite is Trump, when asked about all this after the El Paso shooting said, And notice the video you just watched, he said, I think my rhetoric brings people together. Well, why don't we hear the president? Because it's laughable, but here's what he said. No, I don't think my rhetoric has at all.

I think my rhetoric is a very, it brings people together. Our country is doing incredibly well. Well, it has brought at least a few dozen people together, and so we turn now to ABC News. They did a nationwide review, and they identified at least 36 criminal cases where Trump was invoked in direct connection with violent acts, threats of violence, or allegations of assault. The 36 cases are remarkable and that a link to the president is captured in court documents and police statements under the penalty of perjury or contempt. Before we get into the specific form that they come in, you should understand that there are

many, many crimes that were committed, that they, if they had different standards, could have included in this, but that they chose not to. If there was just strong evidence on social media that the person who committed a crime was a hardcore Trump fan, went to his rallies and all of that, that did not meet their standard. The individual person who committed the crime, either they needed to say that it had to do with Donald Trump or their own lawyers in either police records or an actual court proceeding needed to say that it was connected with Donald Trump, which is an incredibly high bar. And still, they were able to find 36. There were a very small number that were done in defiance of Donald Trump. So hypothetically, those people are not fans of Donald Trump, but the vast majority were done in support of Donald Trump.

Yeah, well, let me go further on both of those counts. First of all, no, there was seven that were done in quote unquote defiance of Trump. No, that doesn't count under Trump at all. I mean, I get that it's linked to Trump because they mentioned Trump, but they were attacking Trump supporters. So that- Or threatening. Or threatening. That's right.

But so those seven should be, I think, in order to have a more fair conversation here and so that you understand the context of it should be removed from the list. 29 were said they did it because of Trump, because of Trump's language, because of how much they like Trump. By the way, if you're a Trump supporter, you're not on the list. It's not like all people who committed crimes but voted for Trump. No, not remotely. Even if it's super clear, as John pointed out, in social media, that you support Trump.

That doesn't mean you did it because of Trump, the violent act, so you're not at all included. But even if you said it in social media, hey, I did this because of Trump, you're still not included in the list, because it has to be in a court record or a police report. Now, if you were that explicit about it, it probably will make it in the court records anyway. But vandalism's not included, even though you could do vandalism with a swastika, et cetera. there's a lot of different categories that were not included. And one other one that we need to note because the 26 to 29 is the tip of the iceberg. The iceberg is all the ones that happened and either it was not reported or it was reported, but the guy just didn't blurt out.

I did it because of Trump, but he actually did, but he just never said it, right? Or that he was enraged and didn't even quite connected to Trump, but he thought, ah, Latinos are terrible and Muslims are terrible, et cetera. One guy in particular burned down his neighbor's house because they were Muslim. And he said, yeah, Trump told me, we gotta ban these people from the country. But could another case or many other cases involve attacks against people, but they just don't say, oh, I did it because they're Muslim and Trump told me Muslims are bad. So this number of cases is really, really limited.

But it does give you a sense of the iceberg underneath. And still there's 29 cases that are overwhelming. And another really important piece of context. So I immediately thought, yeah, but how many happened under Obama or Bush, right? Obama's a good counter example because he's a Democrat obviously, but Bush is also a counter example because even though his administration was awful, he didn't, he usually saved his rhetoric for when launching actual invasions. And he had terrible things as well, don't get me wrong, he ran against gay Americans

and his reelection. I can go on and on. But he didn't often go out and encourage violence in America, so it's an interesting baseline. So it turns out the number of attacks directly linked to Obama, and they did the same exact methodology for Obama as they did for Trump, was it lower than 29? Zero. It was zero.

Well, how about for Bush? Now, he's a Republican, blah, blah, blah. Nope, zero. So for former presidents in our lifetime is basically zero, Trump comes in office. All of a sudden, this iceberg emerges and these 29 cases in particular. Yeah, and look, you can have an issue with Obama and certainly massive issue with George W. Bush, but for all, like, how many mashups were put together of George W. Bush during the Young Turks years then?

Lots of them. Hundreds. Hundreds. out that reporter. He didn't do stuff like that. And of course, Barack Obama didn't. And so this should not perhaps be that surprising. But I want to give you more details. In nine of the cases that we're talking about, perpetrators hailed Trump in the midst or immediate aftermath of physically attacking innocent victims. In another 10 cases, perpetrators cheered or defended Trump while taunting or threatening others. And in another 10, Trump and his rhetoric were cited in

court to explain a defendant's violent or threatening behavior. The perpetrators and suspects are mostly white men, some as young as teenagers, some as old as 75, while the victims are largely representative of minority groups, African Americans, Latinos, Muslims, and gay men. And on the damage report this morning, we went through a few of the individual cases that are just shocking, from harassment and threatening behavior to attempted murder as well, and terror attacks, of course. But we can, it goes back all the way to August of 2015, there was a 30-year-old who beat a sleeping homeless man with a poll, a metal pole, and told police, Donald Trump was right, all these

illegals need to be deported. The man's victim was not in the U.S. illegally. But, you know, can't expect that either Donald Trump or his supporters are going to understand nuances like that. Yeah, so, and then they always say, it's not about race. Yeah, but when your supporters start beating people in the streets with polls, they don't ask them for their papers. They just do it based on the color of their skin.

They're like, oh, that guy's a Mexican. No, turns out he's an American. But you didn't care because you did it based on race, and that's what Trump agreed on to do. Having read through the 36, man, it is just, it's hard to stomach. Literally, it's stomach churning. And the ones against the Trump supporters are also preposterous, ridiculous, and revolting. Like, four young African Americans in that case grab a white guy who had nothing new with anything. I mean, he was actually mentally disabled, and, you know, they make him say, F, Trump, et cetera.

What are you doing that for? That's insanity. Why the hell would you do that? Threatening Congress people who are Republicans with violence? You wanna threaten their elections? Yeah, that makes sense. That's political, right? You wanna threaten their personhood?

That's crazy talk. Don't do that. But I don't want you to get mistaken that there's a false equivalency here. No equivalency, right? The overwhelming majority of the cases are horrific acts of violence by the right wing against minorities. You have multiple terror plots that were thankfully foiled before they had. You had Caesar Seyak, who was a failed terrorist who wanted to murder all of Donald Trump's incredibly specific list of enemies.

You had people in positions of authority like a New Jersey chief of police who beat a young African American kid who was handcuffed and then said he was secretly taped saying Trump is the last hope of white America. So it's not the same thing, of course, that's the obvious any reasonable person. Yeah, and you see, sometimes cops will beat up unarmed black guys and then people will say, You don't know, you know, I mean, look, he was handcuffed, but, you know, he's probably talking back to the cops, and that could have killed a cop somehow, right? And they'll make a thousand excuses.

That's why these tapings, whether they're, you know, from the body cams or people in the street or the secret taping, are so important. Because it turns out, no, in some of the cases, cops like, oh, yeah, I beat the living crap out of him because he's a minority, and I love Donald Trump, and Donald Trump wants us to kick minority ass. So that's the America we live in now. I don't know what argument you could make to defend Trump. I'm not in that business, good luck to you, you're not going to win any of those arguments.

They're not going to be facts based. But the one thing that is absolutely clear, and you have no argument at all on is he has divided us. I mean, you can say, oh, well, I didn't like Obama, so we were divided under Obama. No, but Obama foolishly try to reach out the Republicans over and over and over. I say foolishly on a political space, rhetorically, sure, fine, right? And you want to bring the country together, would a progressive president represent all of America?

Hell yes. Progressive president would raise all of your wages. It's not like being like, oh, red states, you're not getting higher wages. It would get you all healthcare. Wouldn't say like, oh, Arkansas, you're not getting healthcare. So, but Trump literally did that in his tax plan. He said blue states, you're gonna get screwed because you didn't vote for me. You're gonna have higher taxes.

So a lot of the Republicans that are in California, New York, all those other places, like, what, I voted for you? Too bad, you're in a blue state, I'm gonna screw you. That's the kind of idea. And that's on the most benign political policy issue. And on the non benign issues of violence, yeah, he encourages it daily. He does it to attack minorities. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar and or a fool.

And that's really the most frustrating thing to echo something that we were sort of, I think we were talking about yesterday, it might have been the day before. There are a number of characteristics I could cite that are annoying or just negative about hardcore right wingers, but the biggest issue is that they're just gigantic liars. And this is a great example of it, where they will say, He hasn't divided us, he's not spreading hate, while all the while they know that is exactly why they like Donald Trump, and that's what they want. That's why they like, not just why they like a Republican, but that's why they like Donald

Trump in comparison to other Republicans, because he draws the line in bold lines between straight white Christian Americans and literally everyone else. And that's the through line to all of his rhetoric and all of his policies. That's why they support him, but they know that they're not supposed to say that. So they'll come out and say, no, it's not hate, it's just love, it's America. Yeah, last thing on this guy, it's Trump is not an aberration. He's just the conclusion of the Republican Party's divisive plan to separate us and make us hate each other and try to win elections based on hatred.

So Nixon came up with a southern strategy that was direct strategy to appeal to racists in the South. No hands, no ifs, no butts. I mean, even Pat Buchanan talked to me on MSNBC and said, we had a nice wrong. for 40 years on that strategy. So they're not, they didn't hide it, it was absolutely clear. They went to appeal to racist on purpose, anyone who tells you otherwise doesn't know anything about politics and again is a liar.

So the Republican Party, the moderate Republican Party is based on hatred and racism. That's a fact. So two different heads of the Republican National Committee have apologized for the Southern strategy, acknowledging yes, we purposely did a racist strategy to try to win elections in the South. So, and obviously nationwide because of that. So then Reagan goes and announces his candidacy in Philadelphia, Mississippi, where civil rights activists were murdered, and he doesn't do it to celebrate them.

He doesn't celebrate the people who murdered them, because he talks about states' rights in Philadelphia, Mississippi. There's no other reason to go to Philadelphia, Mississippi, than to say, you were right in murdering these kids that were down here, okay, when you're talking about states' rights. When he, back when he's running for governor, Ronald Reagan poses with two segregationists who literally tried to block black kids from going into white schools in the south or previously white schools, very proudly. Like, I'm running for governor and remember, I'm the racist candidate.

That was Ronald Reagan the same guy who called black people monkeys, et cetera, right? Now, but in all of that, Reagan hit it by saying, hey, I'm just taking a picture. I happen to pick the two most racist people in the country. I happen to go to talk in Philadelphia, Mississippi, out of all the tiny little towns of the country, and I happen to be talking about states' rights. But I didn't say murder black people. I didn't say punch black people in the face. I just kind of hinted at it.

Southern strategy was behind the scenes until they admitted it, okay, and they did it in ads in different ways. Trump just came along and said, no, no, no, you should hate them. We should have ban all Muslims from the country, he said it. He said, Mexicans are criminals and rapists, and we need to build a wall. to protect us from them. So he just dropped all the pretenses. So Republicans, if you're, don't cry me a river about like, oh, well, I mean, I'm a never

Trump right. I didn't know he was gonna say it out loud. We were having fun hating black people and Latinos and Muslims in this country for all this time. And by the way, there's a lot of Jews too, okay, and let alone gay people. We were having a grand old time at the grand old party and this guy wound up saying it out loud. Now it is worse to say it out loud because there's a lot of dumb people in the country who are

Oh, oh, I'm supposed to hate Muslims. Let me go burn my neighbor's house down, right? But this is the plan that the Republican Party has been running for 40 straight years. Yeah. All right, let's say quick break. And if you talk about saying the quiet part out loud, wait till you get a load of what Steve King is said now. Wow. When we-we need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-E-The Republic or UNFTR.

As a young Turks fan, you already know that the government, the media and corporations are constantly peddling lies that serve the interests of the rich and powerful. But now there's a podcast dedicated to unraveling those lies, debunking the conventional wisdom. In each episode of Un-B-The-Republic or UNFTR, the host delves into a different historical episode or topic that's generally misunderstood or purposely obfuscated by the so-called powers that be. Featuring in-depth research, razor-sharp commentary, and just the right amount of vulgarity, the UNFTR podcast takes a sledgehammer to what you thought you knew about some of the nation's most sacred historical cows. But don't just take my word for it. The New York Times described UNFTR as consistently compelling and educational, aiming to challenge conventional wisdom and upend the historical narratives that were taught in school.

For as the great philosopher Yoda once put it, You must unlearn what you have learned. And that's true whether you're in Jedi training or you're uprooting and exposing all the propaganda and disinformation you've been fed over the course of your lifetime. So search for UNFDR in your podcast app today. and get ready to get informed, angered, and entertained, all at the same time. Very, Terry. All right, back on a Young Turks, Jenkins John, with you guys.

If you guys can vote for us for streamies, that would be amazing. We'd really appreciate it. Young Turks up for a new show of the year. Happy half hour for comedy and the conversation for podcast. So go to tyt.com slash TYTStreamies. TYT.com slash TYT streamies. You could actually vote every day and that would be great and we'd really appreciate it. You guys are too strong that allows us to win these awards.

And that gives us look. Honestly, it gives us credibility and allows us to book more guests and is really generally positive for the show. So we really appreciate your participation in that. TYT.com slash TYT Streamies. Okay. And then I want to let you know this Friday for members only adjut Prop, Hassan Piker will be discussing feminism and Marxism with Jamie Peck from the Majority Report.

That starts at 3.30 p.m. Eastern. In order to get that, you gotta go to t.com slash adjut prop, sign up to become a member, and then you'll be able to get all the adjutop episodes. Okay, now let me go to you guys. The members commenting here, Jess, I, M-T-Y-T, says there are two choices in the 2020 election. Lady Liberty's Torch or the Tiki Torch? In the end, we all know who the violent races are. That's actually a really powerful metaphor. I think somebody should do a shirt about that. So thank you, Jess.

Anthony says, I don't get the attempts to reform Bush's reputation. The man killed tens of thousands of Arabs and his pointless war in Iraq. He's a war criminal and he should be taken to the Hague. Anthony, I really disagree. It's not tens of thousands, it's definitely at least hundreds of thousands and perhaps a million. Well, I disagree a different way. We're just acknowledging reality, we're not reforming his reputation. Either he said the things in his public addresses or he didn't.

We acknowledge that he didn't. It's not in any way saying that he wasn't horrible in all the ways that literally the show was founded to point out, we're just acknowledging reality. Yeah, no, I don't reform his reputation at all. I mean, look, if Trump is removed from office or leaves and he doesn't do anything extra and he doesn't somehow end our institutions, at the end of the day, Bush will still be worse. Of course, yeah. And I know that if you say that on MSNBC, their heads will explode because half of them

used to work for Bush. And the other half are now like, oh, Bush was great. Even Keith Oberman was going around saying, oh, I'm so sorry for what I said about Bush. Are you insane? Did he really say that? Yeah. And so, no, no, Bush was a, and Cheney were monsters. They started that war that destabilized the whole world, and let alone all hundreds of thousands

of civilians, including babies and grandmothers were killed in that war. Let alone the torture, let alone all those things. But anyway, so don't ever misconstrue what we're saying about that. Connie Trump's bitter cofefei writes in, TYT and TDR, that's the damage report that John hosts, are a must listen podcasts. And I listen at one and a half speed to get them in quickly. You'd be surprised how smart John and Jenks sound at that speed. For once, we found the way.

That's right. But yeah, it's right. I would be a little surprised, but I guess if you speed me up, I sound a little bit. little smarter in him, Jesus, okay. Yep. All right, let's go forward. Okay, let's talk about something that is at the same time laughable and also incredibly dark and serious, and that is, of course, Steve King.

Steve King is about as extreme as you can be on the right wing when it comes to women's reproductive rights. He wants women to have effectively no control over their own bodies. And in his attempts, while speaking about this issue, to defend his extreme positions, he can sometimes say some really absurd, insane, and offensive things, as you'll see. What if we went back through all the family trees and just pulled those people out that were products of rape and incest? Were there being any population of the world left, if we did that, considering all the wars and all the raping villages that's taken place and whatever happened in culture after society?

I know I can't certify that. They're not part of a product of that. So he appears to be saying that, sure, rape is bad, but we're here. All right, so let's break this down in three different ways. First of all, if you're a politician and you really think rape and incest is not that big a deal, and that's how we all got here, I wouldn't say that. Okay, not politically savvy to say that. It doesn't mean that there wasn't horrific rape throughout human history.

there was, right? But it's one thing to point that out as horrific, it's another thing to kind of celebrate it. So now, if you're saying, wait, did he really? Think about why he's saying it, and what's the context? He was defending his anti-choice legislation votes because in those votes, he says you should not be allowed to get an abortion, even if you were raped or the victim of incest. So in this case, he's saying, well, what's the big deal? I mean, we all got here through rape and incest. And the whole world was populated through rape and incest. So now you guys are complaining about rape and incest?

Yeah. Wow, in that context, just when you thought Steve King couldn't get any worse. He found a way to do it, he is ingenious. I mean, I get, we get even just based in the names that progressives want to move society forward and conservatives are terrified of any change whatsoever. But not thinking that we need to improve on the historic legacy of rape. and rape and incest as well, that should be extreme for the Republican Party. But honestly, they're working overtime to catch up to him.

Like back in 2017, he wrote the Heartbeat Protection Act, which would ban abortions at the first detection of a heartbeat. That's their thing, I guess. It was considered terribly extreme. Crazy extreme couldn't possibly do it back then. Since then, four Republican states have approved legislation of that sort. And so effectively, it would be illegal to have an abortion before. before you are physically capable of knowing that you're pregnant.

That's how extreme he is. It's not a real heartbeat, it's not a fully formed heart. There is no brain, there is no human there. It's a way of having it be so early that a lot of women can't, don't even know that they're pregnant and then go, ha ha, so now you have no choice, you're not allowed to get an abortion at all, and if you do, we're gonna lock you in prison. Well, Steve King's a racist maniac, so it's not like he proposed that back in 97, he proposed was just a couple of years ago in 2017, and everybody's like, wow, Steve King's extreme.

And at John's point now, no, now it's totally mainstream. Here we are two short years later, and Republican states have passed it. It's in legislation now. So they're going to ready to lock people up over it. It's insanity. And so then Steve King, of course, famously talked about racism in a thousand different ways. My favorite was the Mexicans who have cantaloupe calves because they drag 75 pounds of marijuana through the desert to get here.

He was talking about dreamers who were brought here as kids and babies, who didn't, what? What are he talking about? He just, he hates all Latinos and super obvious. You can't populate our civilization with other people's babies. What do you mean other people's babies? Anyway, and then, of course, the famous line that even got him censured by the Republicans, white nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization, how did that language become offensive? I mean, white supremacist, he wondered, I mean, how'd that get offensive?

I mean, aren't we obviously superior to the lower minority, right? And, well, on the other hand, Donald Trump's president. Yeah. Well, actually, I'm glad that you bring up Donald Trump because he never condemned Steve King for what he said there. And so I want to read you something that I saw when he was asked about Steve King. Now, this is before the rape and incest aren't that bad historically argument, but it gives you an idea of what Donald Trump thinks about Steve King. This is after the when did white supremacy become offensive thing. He said that King was a, quote, special guy, a smart person with really the right views on almost everything.

He said their ideologies are so in sync, we don't have to compare notes. That's after the white supremacy thing, although before the rape thing. Well, let's break it down. Even after the rape thing, I don't know what Trump would say. I know what Trump has done. A woman just alleged that Trump raped her just a couple of months ago. The allegation was from a couple of months ago. The act was from many years ago.

His own wife, his first wife, alleged that he raped her in court documents, she said it. So later she walked it back after getting paid, but it's in the court documents. You can't take it out. You said he raped you, physically, violently, dragged you by the hair, ripped your hair out, while raping you. That's who the president is, okay, and incest, how many times has he made jokes about how he, how attracted he is to his daughter, Donald Trump. So, I mean, while Steve King is praising it, Donald Trump might be acting it, at least in the

case of the two very significant credible allegations of rape. Let alone him bragging about sexual assault that he apparently does regularly, oh, I grab him by the genitalia, I don't care, I'm so famous, so they let me get away with it. And that's, like, Steve King is the guy who says the thing that either Republicans are already thinking or they'll definitely be pushing publicly in two years. And that's where, like, he's the guy that said that rape and incest aren't that bad. But virtually all elected Republicans agree with him on the fundamental policy. No exception for rape, no exception for incest, increasingly, no exception if you will literally

die giving birth or attempting to give birth to your fetus. I mean, like, that's their actual position. He's the guy blurting it out in a stupid, idiotic way. But when it comes to the actual effect on women across America, like, they're indistinguishable. Yeah, I mean, we can go on literally for the rest of the three-hour program, listing different cases where Republicans have been in favor or talked positively about rape or actually committed it. So there was obviously Roy Moore who sexually assaulted many women, including underage women. The Republican electorate in Alabama said, yeah, he's our guy. He won a primary.

He won a primary. They had many other choices who were deeply conservative. They picked a guy who was charged with having these illicit relationships and sexual assaults of underage girls. They're like, yes, winner, okay? It's not like they didn't have any choice. And the list goes on, Todd Aiken, saying, well, you can't get pregnant if it's legitimate rape and the list goes on and what the hell is a legitimate rape.

And so, and the incest, talking about saying this things out loud that other people, a lot of evangelicals, I mean, if you break down their fundamentalist point of view, they're like, what do you mean? We all came from Madame Neve, there had to be a lot of incest. There's plenty of incest throughout the Bible, right? So now it's uncomfortable, so you don't say it out loud, but that is, they think, how we got here. And there's also, by the way, plenty of rape throughout the

the Bible. Yeah. It's a pretty vicious book. It's got wonderful parts. It's got vicious parts. Yeah. I agree that we could go on, but that would be depressing. I think more productive would be to tell people how they can get Steve King out of a position

where he gets to say things like that. Yes. And that would be J.D. Schold? Yes. Who tweeted to answer Steve King's question, yes, would there be any population yet? Yeah, there still would be. And he says that our congressman continues to push a selfish agenda above the needs of the 4th District. This time he excuses violence, this isn't what we stand for, help us spread our message of positive

change across all 39 counties. So it's Shulton for Iowa.com, as in the number four, Shultonfor Iowa.com. If you, by the way, the people of that district, if you re-elect Steve King, after you know he is clearly a white supremacist and thinks that rape and incest is not that big a deal, and that's how we all got here. You own that, you own it, that's, you're saying, I'm proud to have that guy as literally my representative. Yeah, he represents me. So have that it, Ha'Has. And it even goes a step beyond because, like, shockingly, after his white supremacy comments, he lost his committee assignments, which is a good portion of the work that a congressman does, especially if they're in the minority party, he doesn't have those anymore.

So if they reelect him, they're saying, we love his rhetoric about rape and insults. in white supremacy so much that we're willing to have an effective nobody in office representing us to actually lose the power and influence that a representative should have. We care about the symbolic stuff that much. I'm really fast, I just want to read two comments because he lost his committee assignments before. A lot of people are saying that he should either resign or be forced out after this. Bernie Sanders tweeted, Steve King is a racist, a misogynist, and a disgrace to the country.

He should not be a member of the United States Congress. I saw comments from, I believe, Julian Castro, Cory Booker, and Kristen Gillibrand, all saying that he should resign. And Ilhan Omar, sort of the projection point that you were making, she tweeted, Gross, this would explain why those weirdos are fixated on smearing me with claims of incest, projecting their filth unreal. Yep. Whatever the Republicans are thinking, they will accuse liberals of.

So, watch out. All right. Look, it's just up to that district. If they keep Steve King, then you really can't say that parts of the country are not racist. No one, no one doesn't know. Two elections ago, you could have said they don't know, not all the people in that district know about Steve King. Now they know, everybody knows.

And if you vote for him again, all right, at least you're super clear and everybody should steer clear of that district because it's littered with racist if they vote for Steve King after all of these quotes have come out. All right, let's say quick break. When we come back, Republicans supporting corporate Democrats, including all the way up to the Koch brothers. Huh, interesting. It's almost as if the people who said they have the same donors were correct.

We'll find out when we come back. At TYT, we frequently talk about all the ways that big tech companies are taking control of our online lives, constantly monitoring us and storing and selling our data. doesn't mean we have to let them. It's possible to stay anonymous online and hide your data from the prying eyes of big tech. And one of the best ways is with ExpressVPN. ExpressVPN hides your IP address, making your active ID more difficult to trace and sell the advertisers. ExpressVPN also encrypts 100% of your network data to protect you from eavesdroppers and cybercriminals. And it's also easy to install. A single mouse click protects all your devices. But listen, guys, this is important.

ExpressVPN is rated number one by CNET and Wired magazine. So take back control of your life online and secure your data with a top VPN solution available, ExpressVPN.com slash TYT, you can get three extra months for free with this exclusive link just for TYT fans. That's EX, P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N dot com slash TYT. Check it out today. We hope you're enjoying this free clip from the Young Turks. If you want to get the whole show and more exclusive content while supporting independent media. become a member at t yt.com slash join today. In the meantime, enjoy this free second.

All right, back on a young Turks, aspiration.com, I'll get you a win-win. Best rates around, no fees, money back. I mean, it goes on and on. 10% of their money goes to charity, aspiration.com slash t-y-t. All right, so everybody check that out, as you know. Oh, and YouTube membership. Guys, that would super help the show and it helps independent media. There's a little blue button, so there's joint T.Wiki.

But you also get behind the picture, behind the sees pictures and videos. And now YouTube members also get all of our post keeps. So you want to get the last half hour, you can become a member on YouTube. So if you're on YouTube already, just click that blue button there. Super easy to become a member. Thank you for doing that. Really, really appreciate it. All right, just a couple of comments here from our members.

here from our members. Andrew says, kind of reading my mind, apparently wrote this earlier, Adam and Eve, the first incest, Christianity's original story is built on it. So I guess Steve King was right. It's fine. Yeah. Well, look, I'm telling you, they also are rooting for Armagedon, but they don't say it out loud.

Soon they will. A lot of the pastors say it. And if Steve King is their role model, which in a lot of ways he is, as John proved, Soon they'll be like, yeah, we're looking for Jesus to come back and Armageddon and all of you to be murdered. Now it'll be just going to be freaking awesome. Can't wait for Israel to get wiped off the map and all the Jews to die who didn't convert to Christianity.

Oops, did we say that out loud? Let alone all the Muslims. That's going to be great. So that's your evangelical fundamentalist right wing nut jobs. Okay. Viscis Cree says, yeah, Jenk, but Jenk, if it's a legitimate incest, humanity has a way of shutting that down. That's the reference to Aiken.

And last one, Chris Durant says, Steve King has all the nuance and class of a brick thrown through the air toward a glass window. Good analogy there as well. All right, John, what's next? I'm depressed. It's going to be all right. Yeah. If you're a Democrat and you've been spending your entire career swimming in corporate money

and now you're primary by someone who is not taking that sort of money, that can make you feel a little bit uncomfortable. It makes you look bad, potentially corrupt. And at times, you might go to extreme lengths to try to reclaim the moral high ground, but you just might end up looking silly doing it. And so, for an example of this, I want to turn to a Texas primary that's going on right now. This is, it was the first announced Justice Democrat primary against Henry Quayar. Jessica Cisneros is the candidate.

And let's talk about how they've raised their money so far. A few months have now gone by. Jessica Cisneros, she announced on June 13th, she's reported $147,000 in donations, the majority of which, 118,000, were under $200 from individuals and therefore were unitimized. All of these contributions are attributed to individuals, and she has vowed not to take money from corporate political action committees. Obviously, she's a Justice Democrat, that shouldn't surprise you. Now, on the other side, you have Quayar. He raised $311,000, so more money.

About half of the donations came from individual contributions, and the remaining, a little bit more than $150,000 from various packs. Now, those numbers overall, I mean, if you're Jessica Cisneros and you're doing this primary, you're very proud of yourself and she, in fact, is. She says, I'm proud to be the only candidate in this primary who is not taking money from out-of-state Republican corporate interests like the Koch brothers. Our campaign is powered by small dollar contributors, not corporate PACs and Republicans. So this is obviously good news for her. It's going to lead to some good press.

But the Quayor campaign is fighting back in a bizarre way. Colin Strother, who's a campaign spokesman for Quayar, said that Cisneros' campaign is operating on dark money since 80% of her contributions are undisclosed. Contributions may be unitomized if they amount to less than $200 per donor per campaign cycle. Those shady grandmas donating $30. Yeah. Dark money. No, I mean, they say it with a straight face.

Hold, there's more. No, no, I know, but let me jump in on that one. So if you don't know politics at all, you might be like, oh, I mean, on the one hand this and on the other hand, that, and they both seem to have dark money. No, by law, you don't report things that are under $200 because basically nobody's buying you for $35 or $7.50. Yeah. You report the ones above $200 because that might influence you, to say the least.

So Quayara's people says, yeah, we got hundreds of thousands of dollars from $8.000. PACs that are giving us money to buy us. And I hear their packs are, there's a million, well, there's 80 of them, but Phillips 66, AT&T federal pack and it goes on and on. Okay, so oil companies are like, hey, oh, you're a corrupt Democrat that votes with Republicans? Perfect, here's a wad of cash. And the quayers, people turn around and go, yeah, but on the other hand, that actual voter in our district gave her $12.

Yeah, you say tomato, I say tomato. Yeah. So he, look, I went on his Twitter account, this spokesman, and he has doubled and tripled and quadrupled down saying it's the definition of dark money. I can't wait for Ken Clipp inside to get at him on Twitter. And so they're all in on this, but it's even, it goes a little bit farther. Let me read one more comment from him. He said, speaking of Jessica Cisneros, she wants to pretend she's on some moral high ground, but she's hiding information from the district. She could file an amendment tomorrow that tells how much these people gave and who they are,

but she won't. And so we're gonna get to a comment from her campaign in a second. Quayar, to the extent, like I'm talking directly to him, if you want to regain anything approaching in sight of the moral high ground, you gotta get this guy out of your campaign because that's madness. That's like something some Trump crony would say, that's just crazy. But Quayar is a Trump crony. He votes with Trump 70% of the time.

I'm gonna remind you, this is a Democratic primary. He's called Trump's favorite Democrat. So of course they do Trump-like tactics, but we haven't even gotten to the funniest one. What's that? Claiming that under $200 is dark money, the equivalent of the massive amount of donor money that he's getting from Republicans and corporations, et cetera, already hilarious. But the spokesperson also said, oh yeah, I know that Cisteros is not getting corporate PAC money, but those PACs wouldn't have given her money anyway.

Are you serious, man? Are you serious? Yeah, they wouldn't have given her money because unlike your boss, they can't buy her. She's not corruptible. And they're like, oh, yeah, so why? The oil companies wouldn't have tried to bribe you anyway. You couldn't even get their bribes like we do. What?

Yeah. Oh, you think I'm stuck down here? I can dig faster. Okay, Jessica Sisteros for Congress.com. Jessica Sisteros for Congress.com. And of course, who's the Democratic Party supporting? You want to guess? Of course, the guy who was Trump 70% of the time.

Okay, they're supporting Quayar because they like how dirty and corrupt he is. It's just ridiculous. It's laughable. It should be a national embarrassment. But so she's a great candidate. I believe she's been on the conversation. We talked to her on the damage report. So I reached out to her and I said, do you have anything to say about these ridiculous

charges? and she sent me this from Danny Diaz campaign manager for her campaign, says these are desperate antics from Henry Quayar's campaign straight from the Trump and Republican playbook. I guess he's feeling vulnerable. Jessica's used to taking on bullies in the courtroom and is happy to do it in this campaign. Quayer is trying to muddy the waters by comparing our grassroots small dollar campaign with his campaign funded by large corporations, their PACs, and Republican billionaires like the Koch brothers.

Almost one-tenth of one percent of his donors are small dollar contributors. That's how little he is accountable to everyday working people. No, no, I want you to observe those two things. If you're a Democrat taking money from the Koch brothers, are you really a Democrat? I mean, with this Democratic leadership, the answer is yes. Pet Pelosi's like, wait, they're giving us money? Queer, why didn't you tell me? My brother, come on, let's go vote for Trump together.

Okay, but if you're an actual progressive, you don't want any piece of that. I mean, that is corruption defined. But the funnier fact is the second one. They're like, what do you mean? We have small dollar donations too. One tenth of one percent of our donations are under $200. I mean, if you vote for queer, it's just like I don't think he's going to get a single voter that has paid attention. I'm being serious about that.

He has name recognition. So people who are going to vote for the presidential race or a primary. for it, because Texas will be very relevant, right, for the primaries at the presidential level. Maybe they're excited they want to vote for one of those in the primaries, right? But it's gonna be a, it's gonna be a big Senate primary too. That's right. And you go, oh, Quay, I've heard of him, you check that off.

I understand that, right? But if you heard anything about this race, you're gonna vote for Jessica Cisneros. Because, I mean, that, by the way, this is a very blue district. You know, oftentimes the corrupt Democrats will use the excuse of, oh, no, I'm in a purple district and Republican voters love corruption. So I mean, I got to be corrupt. What can I do? No, Republican voters don't like corruption either. Yeah. Okay, they got a thousand problems with them, but liking corruption is not among them. So there's no reason why Quayar should continue to represent Democrats in Congress when he votes with Republicans, though, overwhelming

majority of time, even under Trump. Yeah. One additional issue that could lead to him coasting through is that he is, as you saw. He is getting a lot more money. He's the incumbent. He's taking money that she's not taking. If only there was a way to nullify that advantage, well, there is, you can donate. And you could give her dark money, is what you can do. The darkest of money at Jessica Cisneros for Congress.com slash donate. Yeah, and we'll have the link down below if you're watching later on YouTube or Facebook. Always check our description box. We've got great links there for you guys. And in this case, seriously, the only way that people are going to know about how bad quay are,

is if Jessica Cisneros has enough money to get that message out. Yeah, that's what you need the money for, you need it for your team, and you need to get the message out. So if people find out about Quayar, he's gonna be a goner. Who can make that happen, literally you guys, you can make that happen. You give small dollar donations and you get to feel like a dark money donor and get an actual progressive in Congress. Jesus.

Their wallets are like black holes. Anyway. A lot of that is true. Yeah, okay, let's turn to a topic that I have. feeling you're gonna have opinions about. Yeah. So we're gonna turn to the Koch brothers. When you think about the Koch brothers and their effect on politics, it's generally in the

money that they give to Republicans, Republican politicians, Republican causes, but that's not always the case. In some cases, if you go back, their interests have lined up with certain aspects of the Democratic Party, and that is where a new book has some important light to shed on the situation. According to the new book, Cokeland, written by investigative reporter Christopher Leonard, Coke Industries secretly financed a report by third way. a corporate funded think tank with ties to the centrist wing of the Democratic Party. The report titled Why Lou Dobbs is Winning and published in November 2007 was written to promote

the free trade agenda to liberals. The white paper explained it would be the first salvo in a year-long effort to reshape the messaging around trade policy, warning that, quote, a new and powerful populist strain has emerged on both the left and the right of American politics that threatens to turn the nation fearful and inward. And so, according to this book, they teamed up providing money so that third way could help them to advance this idea about trade. And the report urged Democrats to, quote, counter neopopopulism effectively. So only let the right wing do populism so that they could win. And the left wing shouldn't do any populism trying to actually work for the average American,

the American workers. So that way you could lose elections. And the co-brothers are like, hey, this is even better. Okay, we get these idiot Democrats to take our bribes, legalize bribes. It goes to think tank so it's okay legally, right? And then the think tank pretends to be Democratic. And they go, oh, man, look, we care so much about the Democratic Party. That's why we're trying to warn you guys, whatever you do, do not pick Elizabeth Warren

or Bernie Sanders. Back in 2013, they wrote an op-ed about how Elizabeth Warren was going to destroy the party by appealing to actual voters. No, you appeal to corporate donors. That's how you win elections, because America loves giant corporations that keep their wages load, they love them. So third way's always been a Trojan horse, and we knew that it was corporate interest. It's funded completely by corporate interest.

We knew that it was Wall Street money, but I didn't know inside the Trojan horse also was Charles and David Koch. So now we know that as well. Yeah, and part of the reason you didn't know it is that they knew at least enough back then not to win elections, but to hide where some of their funding was coming from. Their report at the time did not know any funding from Coke industries or any related companies or organizations, but it did offer thanks to Rob Hall, then a lobbyist for Coke Industries in Vista Division, quote, for his support in helping us conceive of and design

Third Way's trade project, adding credence to Leonard's claim, that's the writer of the book, that the coax are behind the effort. Hall was previously a Coke executive. Now, to be fair, the Intercept and Ryan Grimm is one of the two reporters that reported on this, did reach out to Third Way, but they did not respond to a request for comment, which is not going to surprise a whole bunch of people. But the most interesting little bit of history, I don't know, I don't know if you noticed in the original reporting, but it was a person, a politician at the time, who worked in the rollout of this plan that we're talking about. It was rolled out in coordination with then representative Joe Crowley, a Democrat representing

the Bronx and Queens. Oh, Joe Crowley. Interesting. Yeah. And see, look, it's not an accident. So Joe Crowley, obviously, defeated by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. You'll be surprised to find that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez does not take money from the Koch brothers. Nor does she work with any think tanks that do take money from the Koch brothers.

Yeah. And so the reason why I say it's not an accident is because Crowley became eventually the fourth ranking Democrat in the House and was in line to become the next Speaker of the House. How did he get there through taking corporate money? That's why AOC ran on that and won on that. Just Democrats don't take any corporate pack money, that way you can trust them. So meanwhile, Crowley's like, what do you mean? So powerful, well, who do you deliver for?

Well, he delivered for all of his corporate donors. He didn't deliver for the Queens and Bronx, and the Queens and Bronx knew that, and that's why they threw him out on his ass. Don't worry though, he landed safely. He's now, you're never gonna guess. I know what you're thinking, he's probably a professor, or maybe, you know, decided to do a new craft, dentist, plumber, or something along those lines. Indie band?

Yeah. You're gonna be shocked if I not, no, he's actually a lobbyist. He's a lobbyist now for working for corporate interests, including interests that are now, trying to pass Trump's NAFTA deal. Yeah. Hey, he was working for the- That's right, the Koch brothers trying to do trade deals for them. Now trying to do trade deals for Trump.

And then the Democrats go, oh my God, why would you attack corporate Democrats? We're all the same team. We're all the same. Do we look like we're on the same team? I got news for you guys. If you're a corporate Democrat and you take Koch brothers money, you are not on my team. You are not on any progressive team. team. And if you want to cry about that, like, oh, just because I took oil money and drug company

money and banker money and I worked for them. Now you say I can't be a colleague. Yeah, that's right. I mean, you could do anything you like. It's a free country, but you ain't a progressive. You're not on our side. You don't vote with us. In fact, you're a Trojan horse. And your job is to defeat progressive ideas from within the Democratic Party. Yeah. So bye, Felicia. But what if you fought hardcore against progressives and then a few years go by and now you call yourself a progressive because you can see that the wind is changing? Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, sure, sure. Is that okay then?

No, that's probably why we came up with a progressive pledge. TYT.com slash pledge, whoever some more people signed it, more power it has now. Five presidential candidates have signed it. Bill de Blasio signed it recently, AOC, Talib, Omar, Rokana, Jamie Raskin, the list goes on and on. And on, all wonderful progressive groups have signed it. Not all, but a lot of them have. But funny enough, a lot of the corporate Democrats have not signed it. They're like, well, Medicare for all that would hurt by a drug company and health insurance

company, don't is, did I say that out loud? I mean, I mean, we're all colleagues. We're all colleagues. No, no, no, no, you're not a pro- you just told us you're not a progressive. Yeah. So own it. I just want to mention one more bit of history just that popped up in this reporting. And because of the Coke, like there, it should be rare that the Koch brothers are involved

in internal democratic politics, but it's not that rare if you go back. A 2001 American prospect investigation noted that Koch Industries was a member of the Executive Council of the Democratic Leadership Council founded in 1985 by centrist Democrats to combat the left inside the party. So again, a little bit of consistency, they have been working inside the Democratic Party to make sure that it doesn't move left. Yeah, and so when the Democratic Leadership Council, and they can call themselves any names they like, new Democrats, Blue Dog, all those different names, it's all

all the same corporate corrupt Democrats. And so third way's not here to help you, they're here to sabotage the Democratic Party. And if you, and by the way, everybody knows that. But Pelosi and all the Schumer and all the leadership are like, yeah, but do they give us the money? They give us money, right? And you know, look, I built my career on money and corruption, so why would I object? So that's who they are. And otherwise, by the way, they could prove me wrong.

They always say like, oh, you're so obnoxious, Jack. You keep saying things that are true, and it's driving us nuts. So okay, then counter it, then counter it. So okay, say, why doesn't Pelosi a Schumer go, because these sons of bitches came out to Coke Brother money and try to trick us into voting with them, I'm against Third Way. Oh, no, you're gonna still take their money, right? Yeah. Because I'm right, you're wrong.

Last thing on Third Way, now they were beat up on Warren over and over and over because they largely financed by banks, and she's so tough against banks that they hate her. But now their last trick is, well, Warren. Maybe not so bad because Bernie Sanders is an existential threat. That's a quote. Existential threat. Now, do they like Elizabeth Warren? Hell no.

Hell no. The minute if Bernie Sanders is ever out of the race, third way will turn again and be absolutely vicious to Warren. But as long as Bernie's in the race, they're like, no, no, no, Bernie. No, bro. Oh my God, weezy. Okay, Charles, go take me now. Third way. All right.

That's who they are. Yeah. Oh, no, we're out of time. Weezy. All right, all right. When we come back, unbelievable updates on the Jeffrey Epstein case. I mean, these, what have they done? What have they done?

Buy the book. Yeah, it is. Depending on the book. Shrieking coming out of his jail cell. The guard has apparently doctored the logs. Oh, no. Okay, we're going to give me details when we return. Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks.

Support our work, listen to 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.