The Young Turks - Sassy Massie

Episode Date: June 12, 2024

HOST: Ana Kasparian (@anakasparian) SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ https://www.youtube.com/user/theyoungturks FACEBOOK: ☞ https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER: ☞ https://www.twitter.com/theyoungturks INSTAGRAM: ☞ https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK: ☞ https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕 Merch: https://shoptyt.com ❤ Donate: http://www.tyt.com/go 🔗 Website: https://www.tyt.com 📱App: http://www.tyt.com/app 📬 Newsletters: https://www.tyt.com/newsletters/ If you want to watch more videos from TYT, consider subscribing to other channels in our network: The Watchlist https://www.youtube.com/watchlisttyt Indisputable with Dr. Rashad Richey https://www.youtube.com/indisputabletyt The Damage Report ▶ https://www.youtube.com/thedamagereport TYT Sports ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytsports The Conversation ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytconversation Rebel HQ ▶ https://www.youtube.com/rebelhq TYT Investigates ▶ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwNJt9PYyN1uyw2XhNIQMMA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Donald Trump's a style icon. That's what I do. The guy! Live from the Polymarket Studio in L.A. It's the Young Turks.

What's up, everyone, welcome to TYT. I'm your host, Anna Casparian. And as always, we have a giant, massive show ahead for you all. We've got some snippets of sassy, Massey. That's of course, representative, Thomas Massey speaking to Tucker Carlson about APAC. It was honestly one of the most fascinating interviews I've listened to in my career. I know that that sounds like hyperbole, but it's not. I really appreciated that conversation and so I will be sharing some of the highlights with you. We're also going to get into the details of the Hunter Biden trial verdict. The jury did, in fact, reach a verdict today and we'll get to those details. Wasni Lombre will be joining me in the second hour, and we're going to to talk about a whole host of different topics.

You know, there's a fascinating move made by an alderman, a Democratic alderman from Chicago in response to a rash of shootings that have been happening pretty much every single weekend. Is her policy a good one or a bad one? I'm really curious to hear what you all think about that. So we'll be talking about that with Wozni in the second hour of the show. Lots to get to. So without further ado, let's get to our first story. On all three counts, Hunter Biden, the president's son is found guilty after about three hours of deliberation by this jury.

He is the first child of a sitting United States president to be found guilty in a criminal case. This probably does not come as a surprise given the length of time that the jury was deliberating and the volume of evidence that these jurors heard over six days' worth of testimony. That's right. The allegedly politicized. Justice Department went ahead with its prosecution of Hunter Biden for purchasing a weapon and lying on a form about his drug addiction as he was purchasing the weapon. And he's been found guilty of all three charges in that criminal case. Now, all of you must already know, but just in case, I want to cover my basis. Hunter Biden is Democratic President Joe Biden's son. And if the Justice Department is in fact politicized against Republicans, it would be weird

to go after the president's son in order to find him guilty on these three charges. Now, this morning, the jurors found Hunter guilty of lying to a federally licensed gun dealer. Now, that was because he checked the wrong box and indicated deceptively that he was not using drugs during his time of that gun purchase. Also, he was found guilty of making a false claim on the application by saying that he wasn't a drug dealer, also illegally having that gun for 11 days before his girlfriend at the time found out that he had purchased the gun and then dispensed of the gun in a public trash can, which no one should ever do. That is a very bad idea. Now, what was discussed during the trial? Let's get to those details. Well, the

prosecution devoted most of their time really highlighting how serious Hunter Biden's drug problem really was, and it wasn't pretty. And by the way, there are some Republicans who have come out today saying that they don't agree with how this case played out. And so stick around for those statements in just a moment. But let's get back to the prosecution where jurors heard Hunter Biden's ex-wife and a former girlfriend testify about his habitual crack use and their failed efforts to help him get clean. Jurors saw images of the president's son bare-chested and disheveled in a filthy room and half-naked holding crack pipes. Jurors also watched video of his crack cocaine weighed on a scale. So there was plenty of evidence to indicate that he was using at the time

of that gun purchase. Now also keep in mind that originally there was a plea deal that Hunter Biden had accepted. So the trial really didn't need to come to this point. But the Republican Party insisted that the plea deal be rescinded and that he go through this trial. And so here we are dealing with the guilty verdict, not only Hunter Biden, but we're going to hear from Joe Biden in just a bit in regard to his feelings on this. Defense attorneys for Biden also tried to show that, no, I mean, look, sure, one could argue he was addicted to drugs at the time, but Hunter didn't think he was addicted to drugs. He didn't think he had a problem. They also claimed that Hunter was trying to turn his life around at the time and that he finished a rehab program by the end of

August 2018. The defense called three witnesses, including Hunter Biden's daughter, Naomi, who told jurors that he seemed to be improving in the weeks before he bought the gun. But the prosecution wasn't buying it. I mean, it's their job not to buy it. It's their job to make the strongest case against the defendant here. And they noted that the day after Hunter Biden purchased the gun, he unfortunately texted Haley Biden, the widow of Bo Biden, that he was looking for a drug dealer. And then two days after the gun sale, he also texted Hallie the following. I was sleeping on a car smoking crack. So the defense's argument, as you can imagine, wasn't very persuasive to the jurors considering all this evidence indicating that Hunter Biden was in

fact still addicted to drugs. And look, this is my own personal opinion. I just, just have to kind of get this off my chest. We are currently living in a country that has a horrible, deadly drug epidemic where over 100,000 people are dying of drug overdoses every year. And it is a tragedy of epic proportions, a tragedy that our elected lawmakers seem to have very little interest in doing anything about. It's a tragedy that they love to run campaigns on. They love to pretend like they care about the suffering of Americans, but once they're elected into office, they totally neglect this issue.

And so, look, drug addiction is a real problem, and I think that we need to find real solutions for it. I do believe that maybe there's a place for harm reduction, but harm reduction alone has been a complete and utter failure in a lot of these big liberal cities. Criminalization of using drugs is also a huge failure. We need to look at models that actually work and get people the help that they desperately need, including rehabilitation, right, drug rehab, which is really unattainable for a lot of people due to the costs of going to drug rehab. I had to get that off my chest because I think, you know, demonizing people who are addicted to drugs is not the right way to deal with this problem, whether it has to do with Hunter Biden, whether it has to do with the, you know, Americans that are struggling and grappling with this issue as we speak. Now, let's get to some of the reactions to the guilty verdict. Hunter Biden publicly responded to the guilty verdict against him today saying he is more grateful for the love and support of his family than he is disappointed by the outcome. He also added that recovery is possible by the grace of God or really good rehab. And I am blessed to experience that gift one day at a time. Now Hunter's dad, President Joe Biden, has been a little bit more open about his views.

on this trial. And I think this is the area where to give him credit, I know I've been incredibly critical toward Joe Biden, but I think you see his empathy, in particular when he's talking about his son and the struggles that he's faced. Biden did confirm that he would not pardon his son and will accept the result during a sit-down interview with David Muir over the weekend. Let's take a look. Will you accept the jury's outcome, their verdict no matter what it is? Yes. And have you ruled out a pardon for your son?

Yes. So he did offer more than just those two words, but I thought it was important for everyone to see that. I think there's a pretty clear difference between Biden and Trump in regard to pardoning friends and family members. Trump would be willing to do it. In fact, in the past he has done it. He has pardoned his friends, people like Steve Bannon, for instance.

In this case, you know, you have Joe Biden saying, no, I'm going to go ahead and respect what the jurors decided. here. And he also said, as I said last week, I am the president, but I'm also a dad. Jill and I love our son. And we are so proud of the man he is today. So many families who have had loved ones battle addiction, understand the feeling of pride seeing someone you love come out the other side and be so strong and resilient in recovery. And that really is a difficult thing to do. And so I like that he mentioned that about Hunter Biden. And I hope Hunter Biden is able to remain sober. It's incredibly important that he does that. Now, he also says

President Biden does. As I also said last week, I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal. Jill and I will always be there for Hunter and the rest of our family with our love and support. Nothing will ever change that. And so what comes next? What will these sentence look like? Well, I'm going to tell you what he faces, but we all know that he's not going to serve this amount of time in prison. So Hunter Biden faces up to 25 years in prison when he is sentenced by the judge. In this case, it's Judge Mary Ellen Norica, though first-time offenders do not get anywhere near the maximum, and it's unclear whether she would give him time behind bars. So he is a first-time offender here,

and so again, it is very unlikely that he's going to be put away for 25 years. And I would venture to say pretty unlikely that he's going to spend any time behind bars. Who knows, I could be wrong. Under federal sentencing guideline recommendations, he could be sentenced to over a year in prison, but the judge could sentence him to more or less time. Each count also carries a maximum fine of a quarter million dollars, $250,000. No sentencing date has been set yet. Now, legal experts say that Hunter Biden could potentially appeal. It's unclear whether he and his legal team intend to do that. And they argue that, look, there could be an appeal using a larger constitutional question regarding the purchase of guns and illegal drugs. So Tim Parletore,

who is a CNN commentator and former attorney for Donald Trump, pointed to a specific case, the United States v. Daniels. So in that case, the fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a decade's old law barring users of illegal drugs from possessing firearms. And by the way, keep in mind that the way the law is written right now, there's no distinction between hard drugs and drugs like marijuana, right? So if you are a regular user of marijuana, if you're looking to purchase a gun, you could be prosecuted, similar to how Hunter Biden was prosecuted, if you lie on that form and indicate that you are not using any illicit drugs. So, consider that. I think that that is a huge problem. And I think that it's also been incredibly

difficult for Republicans to celebrate the prosecution of Hunter Biden. Because remember, they're huge Second Amendment advocates who actually want to loosen laws in order to make it easier to purchase guns. I mean, that is one of their rallying prize. It's something that's oftentimes included in their campaign platforms. So to suddenly, you know, want to be super tough on a politician's son because he purchased a gun while he was in the midst of an addiction, I think kind of goes against their typical narrative. But there are some politicians who have already spoken out and said that maybe this wasn't the right way to go, guys. And I'm talking about Republican politicians. So let's start off with Matt Gates, who simply tweeted the following. The Hunter Biden gun

conviction is kind of dumb, to be honest. Yeah, it definitely is kind of dumb. And later, slash libertarian congressman Thomas Massey said something similar, mostly because of the fact that he is one of the few principled politicians in Congress. You know, I might disagree with him on a lot of things, but he means what he says, and he seems to want to be as honest as possible with his constituents. And so he is a huge gun advocate, and he doesn't think that this was the right process for Republicans to pursue. And look, let's just keep it real. This is, obviously a politically motivated prosecution, I think most ordinary people wouldn't be prosecuted for this and wouldn't be investigated for something like this. But as Republicans like James

Comer were trying real hard to incriminate or implicate Joe Biden in criminality, their starting off point was to pick on Hunter Biden and they didn't end up getting any goods on Joe Biden. They haven't found a shred of evidence of Joe Biden engaged in any wrongdoing, but they wanted to be super tough on crime when it came to Hunter Biden. So there you have it. We'll see how it all plays out. Again, we don't know whether he's going to serve any time behind bars. And we don't even have a sentencing date yet.

But we will fill you all in as we get more details on this story and the possible sentence. I'm going to have to write you a ticket to my new movie, The Naked Gun. Liam Nissan. Buy your tickets now and get a free chili dog. Chili dog, not included. The Naked Gun. Tickets on sale now. August 1st.

For now, let's move on to some other news. Will you attend the prime minister's address to Congress? I will, and I would say to my colleagues, this is about the United States and Israel, not about any individual leaders and a key relationship, as you know, a key ally for us in the fight against terror, including Iran and other Iranian-back proxies like Hamas or Hezbollah or Palestinian Islamic jihad. And I think hearing from a key foreign ally like Israel is critically important. A growing number of Democratic lawmakers are announcing that they do. not intend to go watch Benjamin Netanyahu speak before a joint session of Congress in late

July. But that's not the case for Democratic Representative Josh Gottheimer. He's from New Jersey, and as you just heard, he does intend to attend that speech. Now, the speech is set for July 24th. He is scheduled to basically give his fourth speech before a joint session of Congress. In fact, he spoke before Congress back in 2015, 2011, and 1996. It's interesting. It seems like every time Netanyahu and Israel are involved in war or some sort of conflict and the U.S. constituents are kind of wondering whether he's, you know, engaging in some nefarious activity. He likes to come and speak before Congress. In 2015, he specifically wanted to speak before Congress in order to trash the Iran nuclear deal, even though the Iran nuclear

deal ensured that one of Israel's foes would not be able to develop nuclear weapons. It didn't go far enough for Netanyahu. And that's the reason why he wanted to come speak before Congress and essentially trash Obama and what he had managed to accomplish with that nuclear deal. Now, among the Democrats who do not plan to attend the speech are Georgia Democratic Congressman Hank Johnson. You also have Representative Stephen Lynch from Massachusetts who told the Hill the following. He imported a little bit of controversy the last time he was here. I thought it was disrespectful to the president, so I'm inclined not to attend. And by the way, I mean, the controversy he's referring to is the 2015 speech before a joint session of Congress.

Dozens of Democrats decided to boycott that speech because they wanted to show their support for Obama and the fact that they were in favor of the Iran nuclear deal. Now, Representative James Clyburn is one of the more recent Democrats who came out and said, nah, I'm not going to go to that speech. I'm not interested. And his reason for why is actually really fascinating. I mean, look, time to time I like to hold onto a grudge. Not always. In fact, most of the time I don't, but Clyburn seems to be the kind of guy who loves to hold on to a So here it goes. When it comes to that joint session, I do not plan to attend it because I'm going to treat him the same way he treated Barack Obama. But I'm going to participate with a group of others in an alternative session to his joint session to see what now we can get some attention to what makes sense. So he's essentially saying I'd rather do pretty much anything else, including some other alternative session where we're going to pretend like we're going to talk about policies that are going to be more beneficial to the American people. I don't know what that's going to look like.

I don't know if there's going to be some sort of press conference to take attention away from Netanyahu's speech. But I do think it's fascinating that Clyburn is still incredibly salty over Netanyahu's treatment of Barack Obama. And look, if you go back and you see what that relationship was like during the Obama administration, it started off with Obama kind of speaking out against illegal settlements. And Netanyahu lost his mind about that. That was all it took. Simply having a United States president say something accurate about illegal settlements that are being built in the West Bank. Now, Obama is also the individual who provided the Iron Dome that is saving Israeli civilians on a daily basis right now, right? I mean, it intercepts missiles. It keeps the public safe, but it wasn't good enough for Benjamin Netanyahu.

So, you know, look, the one thing that's very clear is the far right government of Israel would certainly prefer someone like Trump. They see conservative politicians as more loyal to Israel, whereas Democrats might tweak them here and there, mostly rhetorically. But there you have it. You have Clyburn saying, no, I'm not going to attend because he treated Obama poorly, and I'm going to treat Netanyahu the way he treated Obama. Now, another congressman who doesn't plan on attending is Greg Caesar from Texas. He says, I'm not planning on attending and or I'll be participating in whatever events there are to express that we want this war to end. And we want both him and Hamas to agree to a ceasefire.

And then you have Representative Jan Shikowski, who is a Jewish Democrat, and I have no doubt, she's probably gotten so much pushback for this. So I give her a lot of credit for announcing that she will also skip the speech. She says, quote, the role that the prime minister is playing is very negative, and I don't want to be there. And she's right about that. The role that he is playing within the Israeli government has been negative, not just for the Palestinians who continue to be starved to death and slaughtered in Gaza, but also in regard to Israeli civilians who are now part of a country that is viewed as a pariah

state by the international community, with the exception of the United States. Netanyahu is far less concerned about the people of Israel, about the hostages that remain in Gaza and far more concerned with his own political career. And I think Shikowsky is absolutely right about that. So Deputy Whip for the Congressional Progressive Caucus agrees with Shikowski saying that he needs, meaning Netanyahu, to be staying in Israel and working for the peace that he has been unwilling to support in the past. Despite the Hamas atrocities and all the wrong that exists there, the indiscriminate bombing that he has encouraged has led to loss of lives that should never have happened. He has not prioritized the hostages. He ought to be doing

that instead of coming here. And that's so true. That's so true. What are you doing? You're going to come here for your little propaganda speech while your country is engaged in this brutal war. I mean, it's just as he's being protested by Israelis, you know, we keep hearing about thousands, tens of thousands of Israelis, members of the hostage families coming out and protesting the current Israeli government and their inability to do the right thing to get those hostages freed. You know, obviously the best way to free those hostages is through diplomacy. And the highest number of hostages that were released were during the one week pause. But Netanyahu is unwilling to even engage in that. And the violence continues in Gaza as a result.

Now let's pivot to some of the more pathetic Democrats. Like we heard from Godheimer. But there are others, like Representative Juan Vargas of California, he says that Israel is our strongest ally in the Middle East. He's obviously the leader that they've chosen, and I respect the country very much, and I will be there. You also have Representative Steve Cohen, a Jewish Democrat who skipped the 2015 speech to his credits. However, he is not planning on doing that this time around. he said, quote, it was more controversial then because Obama wasn't included. It was kind of a breach in protocol, but I think I'll go because, you know, it's a war. It's a different situation.

Breach of protocol is an interesting way of putting it. Is it a breach of protocol to engage in war crimes? You're not have a war criminal who is being, you know, questioned by the international courts for a possible genocide. You're going to have that guy come and speak before a joint session of Congress. Okay, put the international community aside for a second. Why is this a priority right now? Listening to a leader of a foreign government come and speak to a joint session of Congress, I just feel like it signals all the wrong messages to the American people and the international community.

On one hand, you have lawmakers, especially on the Democratic side, whining and crying endless. about, you know, human rights abuses in countries that we consider our adversaries, whether it be China or Russia. And to be sure there are human rights abuses, I'm not minimizing that. But I'm pretty consistent. I don't get to pick and choose which human rights abuses matter most. Human rights abuses or human rights abuses, whether our allies do it or whether our adversaries do it. In this case, you have Israel engaging in international, you know, war crimes. And we're just going to pretend like that's not happening because why? Because of the lobby? Is that why? And look, Thomas Massey during his interview with Tucker Carlson

really laid all the cards out on the table and made it abundantly clear that every Republican lawmaker, with the exception of Massey, has an A-PAC lobbyist babysitting them. That's how powerful that lobby is. So if you're wondering, why is it a priority to hear Netanyahu address a joint session of Congress, it's because they're literally bribed to, legally bribed, of course. We've got a great political system where bribery is baked into our system. But that's really the reason why. Money talks, or as my dad would say, the cash is talking. All right, we're going to take a quick break. When we come back, we've got more news for you, including sassy, Massey. You don't want to miss it.

Welcome back to TiT, Anna Kasparean with you, and I'm about to share some highlights of an interview I came across over the weekend. It sparked some interest, did not think I was going to enjoy the conversation as much as I did, but I did, and I highly recommend everyone listen to it, especially the first half. So let me set it up for a second. Representative Thomas Massey, who's been the only Republican willing to speak out against Israel, who's been the only Republican who has consistently voted against sending more military aid to Israel, had to sit down to interview with Tucker Carlson. And it was kind of amazing. I'm not against Israel. I've never voted to sanction Israel. I've never said anything particularly, you know, critical of Israel, you know, other than, for instance, right now they're bombing. They've killed 1% of the civilian population in Gaza.

That's concerning to me. I vote my conscience, which they won't tolerate. So they ran with their 501C4. Before they had a super PAC, they were running educational advocacy ads against me saying that, you know, I'm bad on Israel. This election cycle, they spent $400,000 against me, $90,000 last fall running TV ads in my district and Facebook ads and whatnot. They've called you a bigot and they call you an anti-Semite and say you're a hater and try to destroy your character. During a recent sit-down interview between Tucker Carlson and Kentucky's libertarian congressman, Thomas Massey, we learned quite a bit about how APAC, the lobby that basically represents Israel,

how much sway they have over Republican politicians in particular. Now, Thomas Massey experienced quite a bit firsthand, and I think the insight that he provided in the context of this interview, was worthy of a listen and honestly something that I give him props for, even as a member of the Republican Party who has a bunch of stances, I totally disagree with. He's against reproductive rights for women. He's not the kind of politician that I would typically support. But he does appear to be incredibly principled when it comes to the issue of foreign aid

to various countries, including Israel, and he consistently voted against offering Israel more military aid during this current war. And that led to a lot of attacks against him, but he persisted. And again, I give him credit for that. During this interview, he even went so far as to say that every Republican lawmaker has an APAC babysitter, which you definitely want to stick around for. We're going to get to that clip in just a moment. But first, let's actually start at the beginning with what Massey experienced as he was running. for Congress. Massey says that his first run with APAC was in 2012 when they actually had this strange request for him. They tried to get me to write a white paper as a candidate, for instance,

for Congress. They almost get on what? On Israel? Like, and I wouldn't do it. And they said, why? And I'm like, I don't do homework for lobbyists, right? I didn't like writing term papers at college i'm not writing one for you what did they say they said oh well here just copy ran paul's term paper and put your name on it we'll accept that and i'm like no i'm still not cribbing somebody else's homework to do homework i'm not turning in my homework for you and what you're laughing but you know what i bet um i may be the only Republican in congress who hasn't done homework for APEC. And it's just what it is, it's conditioning. They want you to do something very simple and benign and, you know, for them. They don't really, they don't really grade your term paper.

They just want to know that you'll do something for them. And if you'll do something for them as a candidate, you're more likely to do something for them as a congressman when you get in there. How insane is that? It's essentially testing to see if lawmakers are willing to take orders from this incredibly powerful lobby that represents the interests of a foreign government. And to his credit, he's like, nah, I'm not going to, I'm not going to do a little report for you. I'm not interested. And when APAC says, it's okay, you don't have to spend any time working on anything, just take someone else's report and pass it off as your own. He wasn't willing to do that either. And he recognized what that task was really meant for, what it was

supposed to communicate to the lobby. And again, to his credit, he's like, no, I'm not going to do that. And we're actually kind of lucky because APAC wasn't paying, according to him, wasn't paying very close attention to his race. They didn't think he was going to win a congressional seat. And so when they got involved in trying to destroy his campaign, it was already too late. He had garnered quite a bit of support from constituents in his district. Now, since Massey was unwilling to play ball with AIPAC. They did retaliate. So let's just hear some details about that. How did they respond to that? Well, they kind of got in my race a little too late there in the beginning because it was hard to tell that I was actually going to win. And when they saw I was

going to win, that's when they tried to get me to do the term paper. They didn't have a political action committee at the time. They couldn't spend hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars against me at that time. It was just sort of like a whistle. campaign to try to, hey, don't vote for him, blah, blah, blah. That's why? Because at that point, they sensed I wouldn't do what they wanted when I got to But what did they whisper against you? What were they saying about you?

Well, they would do it through, for instance, churches, evangelical churches. They've got an organization called Christians United for Israel, where they sort of co-opted evangelicals. People think it's a grassroots movement in Kentucky. It's actually a top-down movement from A-PAC. so that people who aren't even Jewish will feel like they've got to support Israel, you know, no matter what. I thought that that comment was really important because it gives you an inside look into the tactics that APEC deploys. You know, they're obviously well-funded, well-organized.

They've got a ton of people, especially if they can have a babysitter available for every, Republican lawmaker, which we'll get to in a moment. But it just kind of gives you that sneak peek, that inside look into the inner workings of these relationships that lobbyists forge with our elected lawmakers and how they'll use carrots. The carrots come in the form of cold, hard cash for their campaigns, but they also use sticks, including showing up to evangelical churches to propagandize the parishioners there. That is insane. I just want you all to understand how brave it is, to not how brave it is, to not cave to that kind of pressure as a politician.

I say that because almost every politician in our federal government does cave to that kind of pressure. Very few politicians resist. And that's why I want to give Massey credit here. Even though he is in disagreement with me on a whole host of political issues, you have to give credit where credit is due. And in this case, I give him credit for actually being principled on what his beliefs are and doing his best to stay true to those principles, which is an incredibly difficult thing to do as an United States politician. Now finally, here's Massey talking about the APAC babysitters that each congressional Republican has. Everybody but me has an APAC person.

What does that mean an APC person? It's like your babysitter, your APAC babysitter, who is always talking to you for APAC. They're probably a constituent in your district, but they are firmly embedded in APAC. and every member has something like this every i don't know how it works on the democrat side but that's how it works on the republican side and when they and when they come to dc you go have lunch with them and they've got your cell number and you have conversations with them so i've had like that's absolutely crazy i've had four members of congress say i'll talk to my apac person and it's literally what we call them my apac guy i'll talk to my apac guy i'll talk to my api

guide, see if I can get them to, you know, dial those ads back. So the APAC babysitter can, you know, jump in and help you out if you need help with your congressional campaign, whether it be with funding or with the types of ads that are airing. And in this case, you know, Massey was offered help by other lawmakers who had APAC babysitters. This whole notion that they might be able to jump in and help, you know, lessen the blow of some of the, terrible ads at APAC was putting out against Thomas Massey. But how embarrassing is it to have an APAC babysitter? I mean, that's a great way of putting it. I'm glad that he used that terminology. These are elected lawmakers who are supposed to serve the best interests of the

American people, of the constituents within their districts. And rather than doing that, they feel that they need to be loyal to these lobbyists. And I can understand why. I mean, a lot of these politicians are narcissistic cowards. They're not in their positions. They're not in elected office because they genuinely care about being public servants. They're there to enrich themselves. They're there to trade individual stocks based on insider info, something that Martha Stewart went to prison for, but our elected lawmakers won't go to prison for. They're there to spend money on luxury hotels in D.C. even if they have homes in D.C. already and then expense that to the American taxpayers without having to provide a damn receipt because they

literally passed a law. So they don't have to provide a receipt. And Americans end up paying for their luxury trips and their luxury goods. It's absolutely ludicrous. That's what the majority of lawmakers are in Congress for. That's why Congress has an insanely low approval rating. Because Americans aren't stupid. I don't care what you identify as. I don't care if you're Democrat, Republican. Everyone is so bitter and so angry with how little government works for us. And what Thomas Massey is disclosing to the public in this interview is the reason why. These are the forces behind closed doors that basically suck up all of the attention from our lawmakers as Americans are dying from. from neglect over all these various issues, whether it be the drug overdose epidemic,

whether it be the housing crisis, I mean, the list goes on and on and on, whether it be the migrant crisis. We haven't had immigration reform in this country for decades, many decades. And so it's just incredible that he was willing to say this and to say it so openly, honestly, without any throat clearing, without any caveats, he's just calling it like it is. And powerful lobbies usually garner pretty incredible results. And I want to show you what those results look like. So let's put this chart up. This is a chart using data from the federal government showing which countries receive the most in U.S. foreign aid since World War II.

So this is between 1946 and 2024. And by far, Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid to the tune of $337 billion. Coming in at second, you have Egypt at $198.9 billion. But again, clearly Israel's the top recipient here, and that's not by accident. So the final thing I'll say about this is, one thing that I think unites voters on both sides of the political aisle is the frustration that they feel about the swamp. about the corruption. And so to have these two right wingers have this frank conversation about the influence

of the Israel lobby, think about the audience they're speaking to. It is important for that audience to hear this. This is something that the left, generally speaking, has been screaming from the rooftops about. But I'm so happy that these kinds of conversations are also being had on the right, I think that's valuable. And we should give credit where credit is due. Doesn't mean that we have to support Thomas Massey as a politician that would represent us in our districts, right? I mean, obviously he has views that I disagree with. But when he's right, he's right. And on this issue, not only is he right, he's also incredibly brave for doing what he's doing, knowing that he's going

to face ad campaigns and attacks from APAC. I mean, he's certainly more brave than John Federman. a senator who ran as a progressive and can't stop himself from kissing Netanyahu's ass day in and day out. I mean, totally pathetic. And he like puffs his chest up as if he's like some incredibly courageous lawmaker. You're not courageous. You don't have to worry about reelection for several years. Okay, so you're running your mouth. We'll see how it plays out when he's running for reelection. For now, we're going to take a break. And when we come back, we've got more news, including what the military is looking like now that the State Department is having a tough time recruiting young people to join the troops. So we've got that and more. Don't miss it.

I just want to say welcome to all of our new YouTube members, starting with Jonathan Feliciano, beautiful name, and Justin Mirren, which is also a great name. And thank you to everyone who gifted TYT memberships. That includes Director H who gifted a membership, Rio Hand, who gifted five, and Blueser One, who gifted 20 TYT membership. That's awesome. Thank you. We appreciate it. Well, let's get to a fascinating report that really upset Donald Trump this morning and it was out of the Washington Post, but I think the fact that he was upset about it is a good thing. So let's talk about what this report said. Trump orbiters are musing about the possibility of mandatory military service should the former president and Republican presidential nominee get elected. for another term. I knew that there were going to, there was going to be some chatter about this eventually because there is an issue with the military and its failure to recruit people to the military. And so eventually I knew that some politicians or some federal bureaucrats were

going to start thinking about whether maybe they should pass some legislation making the service mandatory. But let's get to the details. Let's get to who is at the center of this. It's a man by the name of Christopher Miller, who actually led the Pentagon at the tail end of the Trump administration, so Trump's first term. Miller detailed his vision for the United States military as part of something I'm sure many of you have already heard of. It's known as Project 2025. It's basically the Heritage Foundation's game plan for the country, legislative. should Donald Trump get elected for another term? And so Miller is a highly influential individual within conservative circles. And he is in fact likely to serve in the state department under

Trump again, again, should Trump get elected. Now Miller is among a cluster of influential former administration officials and GOP lawmakers who have mused aloud about a national service mandate and other measures to remedy what they see as a crisis. facing the all-volunteer military. Trump has signaled that Miller, if there is a second term, might reprise his role as defense secretary, a powerful cabinet post with sway over Pentagon policy. So what exactly would Miller do should he have the power to do it? He's actually very clear on some of his suggestions here. So one of the things he would do is require public high school students to take something known as the armed services vocational aptitude battery.

It's also known as ASFAB, literally. So the armed services vocational aptitude battery is basically a standardized test to measure a potential recruit skills to see where they might fit in within the military, right? It's just a way of assessing an individual to see, what they would be qualified to do if they entered the military. And it's based on skills and intellect. Now, by the way, I should note, there are 900 public high schools that are already having their students take this test. It is not mandatory.

It is meaning the schools don't have to do it. No one's forcing the schools to do it. But about 900 schools have chosen to make their high school students take this test. So in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, that's how we, We learned that 900 schools across the nation were implementing that test. The Washington Post reached out to the State Department to see if they can get updated numbers on that, but the State Department refused to share those numbers. So if we want updated numbers, they're going to have to do another FOIA request.

Now, under Miller's plan, he said the ASFAB, again, that's the standardized test, would be used to identify potential military weaknesses and help plug knowledge gaps as US defense leaders size up competitors like China and devise plans for possible conflicts with a range of foreign adversaries. And that's the other thing. I'm glad that China came up in this reporting, because make no mistake about it, both administrations, both Donald Trump and Joe Biden, have ramped up the adversarial rhetoric toward China. And so as we inch closer and closer to, I mean, we're already kind of in a cold war with China, but if it ever escalates to a hot war, God forbid, that would be a disaster. We are not in a good position right now, given the

lack of military recruits to deal with that. So I've wondered, what is the government really thinking as they continue to engage in all of this, you know, rhetoric and all of these, honestly, some political actions against countries like China? And so for people like, Miller, he's thinking about making mandatory military service a policy here in the United States. The other thing he wants to do is grant military recruiters even more access to secondary school so they can essentially propagandized teenagers to join the military. And by the way, they've already loosened some of the restrictions on that. But Miller wants to do more to loosen those restrictions.

And he also wants to stop using, get a load of this, the Defense Department's electronic medical records platform saying that, quote, It leads to unnecessary delays and unwarranted rejections for some people with disabilities and other conditions who otherwise want to serve. Now, look, it really depends on what the disability is here, but it really seems to me that because they're having a difficult time with finding people who want to be in the military, or more importantly, people who qualify to be part of the military, they want to lower standards a little bit. And there is a problem here. Okay, so the military pointed to internal data indicating that a whopping 71% of America's youth today do not qualify for military service due to obesity, drug use, aptitude. And so this is the decay of the American empire. And I'm not saying that to insult the people within the country. I'm saying that because what I just listed, the obesity, drug use aptitude, I feel that, yes, while there is an element of personal responsibility involved, overall, these are symptoms of a country that is run by a broken government,

a government that has neglected its citizens, a Congress that is far more interested in fattening up their own pockets, rather than serving the best interests of the constituents who elected them into elected office in the first place. So this is the chickens coming home to roost. And rather than getting to the root causes of why we have these epidemics in the country, you have Miller thinking about just forcing people to be in the military regardless. And I mean, if they're not qualified because of these issues, how is it going to make sense to force them to be in the military when they're not qualified to be in the military?

None of that is addressed by what Miller wants to do here. Now, to be fair, collectively, the military services fell short of the Pentagon. 's recruiting goal by about 41,000 people last year. That's what officials told lawmakers in December. Only the Marines and the Space Force met their objectives. Gee, I wonder why. I wonder why. Could it be that maybe Americans don't trust the government when it comes to deciding which

wars we're going to engage in? People are paying attention. You know, I remember after 9-11, people who joined the military and there was a giant influx of Americans who were like, no, I want to protect my country. So they joined the military. And then after that, you know, our men and women were deployed multiple times to the Middle East. Many of them died as a result. Many of them came back home injured, either physically or mentally. And then they were neglected by our government. How many homeless veterans do we have. So if the government is concerned with the lack of recruits, there are so many issues that

need to be addressed, including the treatment of our soldiers, the treatment of our veterans, the foreign policy decisions that our government makes based on the corrupt interests who influence them. I mean, it's just hilarious to me that they just want to do this by force because Americans have totally realized what's going on here, how they've been used and abused in the military for all sorts of weird political goals that don't really make much sense. And so let's get to Trump. Because at first when this report came out, Trump himself hadn't said anything to the Washington Post. He didn't offer them any type of comment. But he did post something this morning that gave me a little bit of relief. Okay, so let's go to his truth social

Post, he wrote, quote, the fake news Washington Post came up with the ridiculous idea that Donald J. Trump will call for mandatory military service. At no point in the piece did they say that Trump will call for mandatory military service. They specifically focused on an individual that Trump had in his administration and is likely to have it his administration again, Christopher Miller. But I'll continue. This is only a continuation of their eight-year failed attempt to damage me with the voters, the story is completely untrue. In fact, I never even thought of that idea. Only a degenerate former newspaper, which has lost 50% of its readers, would fabricate such a tale. Okay, so you guys get the point. He says he's not in favor of this. And while Trump is known

to be deceptive, he's known to lie, I actually believe him on this because everything that Trump decides to do always goes back to what's best for Trump. Mandatory military service would be so deeply unpopular and it would be deeply unpopular with his own base, especially the America First MAGA crowd, okay, that have completely soured on some of our military interventions, which I think is a good development for the most part. So I don't think that he would pursue something that he knows would really upset his base and overall the American people. And I think, you know, just just as is the case with the falling birth rates, I don't think it makes sense to force people to have kids. You want to make the conditions better. You want to incentivize people to do it,

right? I think the same is true of the military. If you want more recruits, I think the government better smarten up in regard to how we treat soldiers, how we treat veterans, in what kind of decisions are made in regard to foreign policy. And maybe give Americans a reason to want to serve this country, right? Because when you have a government that doesn't serve us, we're not going to want to serve it. You get what I'm saying? So I thought this was a fascinating piece. It's also important to know who runs around in Trump circles, but it's also important to know that it doesn't seem like Trump would really be in favor of this. We'll see. We've got to take a break. When we come back, Wozni Lombray joins me for a secretly recorded tape of Samuel

Alito, Supreme Court Justice, who says, you know, there are some real fundamental differences among the left and the right in this country. Maybe it's irreconcilable, okay? Maybe we need a divorce. All right, we'll get to that and more when we come back. All right, we got a fun new special for you guys. Hostmates is back. So this is a fan favorite. That's when TYT hosts compete against each other, but also people from behind the scenes come out in front of the camera. We do fun challenges, trivia questions. It's fantastic. Monday, June 24th, 8 o'clock Eastern. I I promise you guys are gonna love it. You can see it on YouTube, Facebook, Twitch, tyt.com slash live.

And you can be a part of it by donating through tyt.com slash hostmates. So when you do that, you're literally part of the show. Some of you can get producer credits. Some of you can ask questions to us that we have to answer in the game. And others can actually do recordings that they play out for us. And then we answer those questions. I love when you guys participate. Hostmates allows us to do that and it helps the network and the show to keep going.

So come play with us. I think you'll love it. The way you can participate is through t-y-t.com slash hostmates.