The Young Turks - Sick Bern

Episode Date: November 12, 2024

Bernie Sanders has entered the ""Honey Badger"" phase of his political career and we love to see it. On NBC's Meet the Press, Sanders voiced his disagreement with calls for Justice Sotomayor to step down quickly to allow Biden to appoint a replacement before Trump potentially takes office, citing her age at 70. An Israeli minister says the “time has come” to annex parts of the West Bank following Trump’s win. Meanwhile, Trump has offered Elise Stefanik a role as U.N. Ambassador." HOST: Ana Kasparian (@anakasparian), Cenk Uygur (@cenkuygur) SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE ☞  https://www.youtube.com/@TheYoungTurks FOLLOW US ON: FACEBOOK  ☞   https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER  ☞       https://twitter.com/TheYoungTurks INSTAGRAM  ☞  https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK  ☞          https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕MERCH  ☞      https:/www.shoptyt.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to the Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. All right, live here at the Polymarket Studios, it's the Young Turks, the online news show. There you go. Jank Yuga and a conspiracy with you guys. All right, guys, so, you know, big day ahead, a lot of new news about what the Trump administration is going to look like. I need you to buckle up.

Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. We're gonna have impact. So race for impact isn't theoretical anymore. Now it's real. And on a couple fronts that are kind of disastrous. But on the upside, what we're going to start with is the open revolt, a revolt that I love within the Democratic Party and it was sorely needed and led by our old good friend, Bernie Sanders. Bernie Sanders has entered the Honey Badger phase of his political career.

Yes. And I've been waiting for it. You've been waiting for it. The American people have been waiting for it. So without further ado, let's watch. You say you think the Democratic Party has, quote, abandoned the working class. The working people of this country are extremely angry. They have a right to be angry.

Your statement was met with some sharp reaction as well. But I don't respect him saying that the Democratic Party has abandoned the working class families. Bottom line, if you're an average working person out there, Do you really think that the Democratic Party is going to the max, taking on powerful special interest and fighting for you? I think the overwhelming answer is no. Correct. Well, Senator Bernie Sanders appears to be taking the Democratic Party's electoral losses pretty well.

Obviously, I'm kidding, not taking it well. In fact, he is using this as an opportunity to say what needs to be said about the failures of the Democratic Party, the fact that they have indeed abandoned the working class. and he's having none of it. He's ready to call them out and do so aggressively and do so across multiple media platforms. Now, the heart of this conversation was this big controversy over the weekend. The Daily, which is the New York Times podcast, had a conversation with Nancy Pelosi.

And in the context of that conversation, Pelosi was asked to share her thoughts or respond to a statement Bernie Sanders put out shortly after the presidential election, essentially stating that Democrats lost because they have abandoned the working class and they really need to get it together. So here's how Pelosi reacted to that message. Bernie Sanders has not won. Let me, with all due respect, and I have a great deal of respect for him for what he stands for. But I don't respect him saying that the Democratic Party has abandoned the working class families. So there you have it. Pelosi does not respect the fact that Sanders said that Democrats have abandoned working class families, but there has to be a reason

why someone like Donald Trump can not only simply win the electoral college votes necessary to become the next president, but he won the popular vote. A Republican candidate hasn't done that since 2004. So what's going on here? And we're going to get to Bernie's response to Nancy Pelosi in just a moment. But, Jake, what did you think about what Pelosi had to say there? Yeah, well, look, Pelosi is not delusional. That's what you would think if you saw those comments. She represents one of the three wings of the Democratic Party, and that is the wing that Bernie Sanders is doing a frontal assault on here.

And so I get why Nancy Pelosi is defending her position. Her position is corporate Democrats are awesome. We should siphon as many billions of dollars in donor money as we can, use it for our own power, fame, status, and wealth, and then give the American, people, 5 to 10% of what we promised them as a release valve so they don't get too, too angry as we continue to rob the place blind. So that's her position. So obviously when Bernie Sanders begins to point that out, she is aggrieved and she fights back.

And the way that they fight back, of course, is radical, absurd, not a good Democrat. Disappointing his colleagues, this, this. See, in the old ways, that was super effective. And like young people will not understand how industrialized they. the gaslighting was that allowed that strategy to work. Now that the gaslighting has been interrupted by social media, they're in a world or hurt because when they go tis-s-sisk, now, especially given the results of this election, people go, wait, your wing is the clown wing.

Your wing lost to Donald Trump twice, nearly three times. So you have no leg to stand on it, it's over. Anyone who listens to an establishment Democrat, I mean, I feel really sorry for you because you're never going to win. It's a bunch of corrupt losers. Okay, so which, what are the other two wings? Real quick, and then we'll get back to this back and forth, because there's a surprising twist here as an establishment Democrat seems to be switching sides. Is that really going to happen? So we'll get to that in a second. The other two wings are, there is unfortunately, well, I've kind of landed on a title. I kind of hate it, but I, but it makes sense, which is

the woke left, okay? Now the woke left, if they put in their women's rights, fighting racism, etc. That's not fair. We all, the entire left wants to fight racism, sexism, protect women's rights, etc. Yeah, the common sense fight against discrimination, ensuring that everyone has the opportunities that everyone else does, you know, whether it comes to employment or being able to rent a place to live in. So everyone agrees on that. So you're making a differentiation between that and the left that goes further. That's right. So when I'm referring to woke left, I don't mean blumping all those things in no I'm talking about the really extreme wing and and they don't hide it they're very happy with it and and they defend the word woke so

it's all good right so because I'm trying to find a non-offensive word which they don't mind owning right because I'm not trying to be a jerk about it I'm just saying those are the folks who say Latinx and defund the police and you know crimes imaginary okay there I know I did a little hyperbole but only a little, right? And trans people should get to set WNBA policy and Olympic policy, et cetera. So that's the woke left, right? We're in neither one of those camps, if we're being honest. At least Anna and I, the TYRT network is huge, and there's tons of hosts in all different

wings of the Democratic Party and a bunch of independents, et cetera, right? So for us, we're in the third wing, the populist left. So that's Bernie 2016 economic populism. So that is why it's great to have dad back home. Yes, it is, you're right. So Bernie started working with the corporate wing thinking it was going to get him results. And he got him some mild results from Biden. Having watched that whole interview, I think he's still way, way too soft on Biden.

I think he was misled on Biden. I think Biden is still squarely in the corporate wing. 98% in the corporate wing. Yeah, can I jump in on that? So in the context of this meet the press interview, Bernie, was asked to just opine on the job that Biden has done. And he made it clear that Biden did some good things domestically, but also made it clear that he didn't agree with Biden's foreign policy. Now look, I think that Bernie had influence over Biden's domestic economic

policies. I think he would like to have had more influence. But anything progressive that you saw from Biden domestically, I have no doubt that that was the result of conversation with Bernie Sanders. So that's probably why he has a bit of a soft spot for Biden. Biden was the only Democrat that Sanders was able to have some positive influence on. So anyway, I just wanted to make that point. Yeah, I get it and I understand Bernie's strategy and he had limited success with it. I disagree with the strategy overall one day. I hope we talk it out on air and, you know, land on a place.

But what's happened is not nearly as important as what happens next. So that leads me to my final point within this conversation. Then we'll tell you the maybe a Democrat flipping over to our side, etc. Which is that, okay, Bernie, you've said all this stuff before, then you went into a Biden-enforced hibernation for four years. Now you're back. It's good to have you back. But what do we do next? Because that's where we always get stuck. Because Bernie's made that speech hundreds of times before, just didn't do it in the last four years, right? So, but what I would propose, and if Bernie has a better idea or anyone has a better idea, I'm all ears, right?

We're all ears here. We'd love to cover it. We'd love to talk about it. We'd love to talk about a heroic new leader in the movement that's leading in exactly the right direction, et cetera, right? So, but for now, my proposal is you can't just leave it at generic stuff. So when a bill comes up, you have to actually call out the bad guys, including the bad guys in your party.

So when you're trying to negotiate for lower drug prices, as an example, you have to say, oh, there's Senator XYZ, one who is a Republican, another is a Democrat, and they both take over $800,000 from the drug companies, and that's who are saying, why they're saying the drug prices should be higher, not lower. Does Bernie have the courage to do that? I'm being seriously, I'm not trying to get on him, I'm just saying, does he have the courage to name names? And if it doesn't have to be burning, does Rocana, does anyone else, is there a single

person that is a Democrat in elected office at the national level who has a courage to call out their fellow Democrats. To bring the corporate Democrats to heal the way that Donald Trump has been able to make the establishment Republicans essentially kneel, right? Like, I mean, just think about that. Donald Trump's willingness to essentially bully members of his own party has entirely change that party, right, to the era of Trump. And we don't have anyone who has that same fighting spirit on the Democratic side. I think that Bernie could do that. And I think that would

be effective. In fact, in response to what Nancy Pelosi had to say, here's what Bernie decided to mention in regard to the failures of the Democratic Party on behalf of the working class. Take a look. I have to say to Nancy, in the Senate in the last two years, We have not even brought forth legislation to raise the minimum wage to a living wage, despite the fact that some 20 million people in this country are working for less than $15 an hour. In America today, we have not brought, in the Senate, we have not brought to the floor the Pro Act to make it easier for workers to join unions. We're not talking about defined benefit pension plans so that our elderly can retire with security. We're not talking about lifting the cap on social security so that we can extend the solvency of social security and raise benefits.

Bottom line, if you're an average working person out there, do you really think that the Democratic Party is going to the mats, taking on powerful special interest and fighting for you? I think the overwhelming answer is no. I mean, he's right about that. And so I like the fact that he didn't just simply cower to Nancy Pelosi. I mean, he's never really coward, but he gave a strong response to her, and it was absolutely accurate. So, you know, I have mixed feelings about that, because you're absolutely right about that, and thank you, Bernie, for not backing down and doubling down instead on what you said,

and that's really important. On the other hand, unfortunately, he gets to an excellent example, which is the $15 minimum wage. So if you remember, that was the very first thing that Biden wanted to take out of the first COVID relief bill. Right. His first act was take that out of the Senate provision. Then we had to fight Bernie a little bit on even proposing an amendment. And by the way, Youngter's orders, you're amazing.

I'm positive, it was your petition that allowed us to at least have that vote. So because that vote is so important because it gets to the very next step, which is what I was alluding to. Eight Democratic senators voted no on bringing forward $15 minimum wage. It wasn't just the Republicans. So now, the next step must be calling them out, not to vent, not for emotional reasons, not to scare them physically like a bunch of weirdos. To ensure that their constituents know exactly what they represent and what they are unwilling to fight for, which is the working class, the common American worker.

So this is applying political pressure 101. It's politics 101. Somebody's doing the wrong thing. And Trump does this brilliantly, unfortunately, and used it only for his own benefit. So for example, Mark Sanford, he slightly criticized them, very right wing congressman from South Carolina, and Trump said, I'm going to eliminate you. And he did, and so he had a guy run that was all pro Trump, they defeated Mark Sanford in the primary, and that brings us to step number three.

So you call them out, you apply political pressure, and then eventually you defeat them in primaries. And once you've done that in a spectacular public fashion three or four times, which is what What we were trying to do with Justice Democrats, but unfortunately they also lost their way. But if we go back to that strategy and Bernie or whoever the new leader is, eliminates three or four corporate Democrats and they begin to understand the lesson that if you keep serving your donors instead of your voters, we're going to eliminate you in primaries.

Well, that's how you get things done because then you begin to move the party back to where it's supposed to be. If you don't, I gotta keep it real with all you guys. If none of our elected politicians, including the progressives, the populists, et cetera, if none of them have that courage, we can't do this. Or it has to be someone from the outside just doing it and saying, sorry, you guys are too soft and weak. That's why you keep losing to the corporate wing.

We need a fighter, we need an enforcer to say, here's where we're drawing the line, and if you vote against the American people, there are going to be consequences, political cost of us. Yeah, I think that that's a much better strategy than playing patty cakes with the corporate wing of the Democratic Party, but clearly has no interest in representing what's best for the average American. All right, so there was another part of this conversation with Bernie Sanders that I want to skip ahead to. I want to talk about a question that he was not interested in answering and that had to do with the Supreme Court and whether there should be some maneuvering and some resignations in order to give Biden an opportunity to make some replacements. Let's watch.

That's not to say that Donald Trump in four years can't make a very long lasting impact on the Supreme Court. Yeah, Justice Sotomayor is not going anywhere. If you look at her recent opinions or listen to the oral argument, she's sharp as attacked. There's no reason for her to leave. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor is being pressured to step down from the Supreme Court and give President Joe Biden the opportunity to nominate a liberal replacement before Donald Trump's inauguration. But so far, according to the very individuals who are close with Justice Sotomayor. Her take is, no, no thank you. She intends to remain on the court. CNN spoke to someone close to her who said that she's in great health and the court needs

her now more than ever. And the reason why her health is being brought up is because she does have type 1 diabetes and she is older, although she is not the oldest Supreme Court justice, She's 70 years old, and she's the most senior liberal on the Supreme Court. Now, Senator Bernie Sanders was asked about this whole theory about how she needs to resign and how she needs to be replaced in order to secure her position as a liberal justice. And he wasn't having any of it. It was an incredible exchange on Meet the Press. Take a look. I do want to ask you about the Supreme Court.

some Democrats behind the scenes quietly talking about the possibility should Justice Sotomayor step down to allow President Biden to appoint someone who's younger. She's only 70 years old. Is that something that you would support? Do you think she should step down? No, I don't. Have you heard any talk of this? A little bit, yes. I don't think it's a sensible approach. And you don't think it's a sensible approach. Correct. Inject that attitude into my veins. That was great.

And it was great because you can tell that Bernie Sanders is like hyper focused on fixing what's broken within the Democratic Party. Their inability to represent common Americans, the working class Americans. And so these like power struggles that are going on don't seem to interest him that much. But the idea, I agree with him, is not a practical idea. In fact, CNN reports that the process of moving a Supreme Court nominee takes considerable time, often several months, even assuming there are no problems with a potential nominee, there is not likely enough time for Biden to secure a confirmation before the GOP takes control of the Senate in early January.

So, Jenk, I'm curious what you think, clear no from Senator Sanders. Do you think that maybe a case can be made for Sotomayor to step down? No, it's a terrible idea. So Bernie being that short with them is a result of two things. He thinks it's a terrible idea, but it's probably a colleague of his who came up with the idea. So he doesn't want to burn them too bad. So he gives his salty answer, salty Santa's back too. And so he's like, no, not a good idea.

Okay, but that's it. He leaves it there. I'll go further. You think these schmucks who run the Democratic Party are going to be able to confirm a justice in a couple of months? Nope. Are you kidding me? They're the most incompetent people on earth.

They're just hand to Republicans and Trump, another justice for no reason. So they couldn't get one appointed in a year. Look, do I know that the Senate composition is a little bit different now? Of course I do, right? And so, but do you think, they have 51 senators for the next couple of months? you think they're going to hold all their senators? You think they're going to hold mansion and cinema and every other crook that's going to ask for some sort of payback in that? There's no way they're going to hold them.

There's no way. No, they're a bunch of imbeciles. And look, this is, look, this is one story that helps to explain what the broader issue is with the Democratic Party. I don't trust them to get anything right. At this point, they are incompetent. They do bungle everything and there are too many corrupt politicians within politicians within their ranks. So I'll give you a perfect example and we can end the conversation entirely if

you're rational. So look, I often tell you guys these, you know, there's this great man mythology. Oh well, if they have this huge status, they might be, it must be amazing. And I tell you, no, they're largely just got there through corruption because they take the most donor money, et cetera. But also they're not that competent at all, they're number one quality. Like Trump's number one quality is just marketing, right? Finds a spotlight and just says his name 2,000 times, right?

Number one quality of Democrats is how do you please donors well enough to get a return on investment and get put back in? So I know the story of when they were voting on the filibuster. The key vote there was Joe Manchin. So what was Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader in the Senate? What was his genius idea on convincing Chuck Schumer to end the filibuster as Schumer claimed he wanted? He didn't talk to him. He didn't have any strategy. The strategy was, well, I hope Joe does the right thing.

Oh my God. Okay, so if you think that Chuck Schumer actually wanted to end the filibuster and pass Biden's agenda, well, then you have to agree he's a world-class schmuck. So did that strategy of, golly, gee, I won't talk to him or won't have any strategy at all. But I hope Joe mentioned does the right thing. Does that like sound like the political strategy of a smart person or an utter imbecile? And so you think the party led by that guy is going to guarantee that with only 51 votes, they're going to hold them all and immediately really quickly confirm a Supreme Court justice.

There's no chance. And at the end, when you ask Chuck Schumer what went wrong, you'll be like, I don't know, I didn't talk to anyone and I didn't have a plan. Part of the reason why Donald Trump was able to confirm literally hundreds of federal judges in his first term is because Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer made a deal with Mitch McConnell to fast track those judge picks by Donald Trump. Okay, so I don't even know if Chuck Schumer is genuine in what he purports to be because he has aided and abetted the other side in. the confirmation of hundreds of federal judges, which will have an impact on our judicial system for decades to come. And so I don't know, Jank, if it's incompetence or if it's just an individual who doesn't

really give a damn about fighting for what he purports to support. And so they like to fearmonger about Donald Trump, but if Trump has power, why do they aid and abet him? Why do they help them out? Why would you agree to fast-tracking those federal judges? That's the real question. Now, the other thing I wanted to just quickly mention is there's a possibility that in his second term, Donald Trump will be able to have even more impact on the Supreme Court,

because we have two Supreme Court justices who are definitely on the older end and could resign during Trump's second term. That's Clarence Thomas, who's a whopping 76 years old. And then there's Samuel Alito, who's 74 years old. There are more rumors in regard to Clarence Thomas potentially retired. under Donald Trump's watch, but if one of them or both of them retire, obviously it will further solidify the conservative, you know, the conservative influence on the Supreme Court, right? And of course, Donald Trump is going to pick someone who's incredibly young,

someone who could be on the courts for, you know, 40, 50 years. So that's what we're looking at right now. And so that's why I voted against Donald Trump. That's why I encourage everybody to vote against Donald Trump. And unfortunately, we didn't win. And when you don't win, these are the consequences. So what you can't do is not vote or not care. And they go, I can't believe they got the Supreme Court. No, that's the result of not voting, not caring, not voting against Donald Trump, et cetera.

Look, if you're pissed at the Democratic Party, join the party. You're very, very late to it. who've been pissed at them for decades and they're a terrible party, as I just explained, they're an incompetent party. They're largely a corporate party, but their Supreme Court picks are generally on the left and in favor of the Constitution, human rights, and at this point, the conservative judges are massively activists, reinterpreting the Constitution in insane, ludicrous ways. And actually, the most harmful is the corruption cases.

I mean, they just made bribery illegal as long as you do it afterwards. Already infinite bribery in the form of campaign contributions was legal. Now you can just flat out give them money to put it in their pockets right after the vote. And the Supreme Court is now calling that a gratuity. Well, I guess it is from the billionaire class. Here's your tip, politicians for being good servants, okay? No tax on tips? Yeah, so the Supreme Court is going to get way worse, way more corrupt.

So remember that next time you're voting. It doesn't mean that you have to agree with these annoying, like, we've got to take over the Democratic Party. Let them run another race, because it doesn't even matter because even if we convince you all to vote for Democrats and against Donald Trump or whoever the next guy is, they'd find a way to lose the race anyway because they'd be like, oh, just like Kamala Harris did, rap herself in corporate CEOs and go out there and go, hey, I love big business. Everybody with me, right? As everybody heads to the exits. So beat him in primaries. For the next three years, all I'm going to tell you is we must win that Democratic presidential primary. If we don't win it, these guys will drive us off a cliff in every single election. All right, we got to take a break. When we come back, we have a big update on the reaction from Israeli leaders following the election of Donald Trump for the 47th president of the United States. Don't miss that.

We've got that coming up along with some new details about Trump's appointments for his cabinet. Come right back. Stop. Do you know how fast you were going? 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 Tilly Dog. Chili Dog, not included.

The Naked God. Tickets on sale now. August 1st. All right, back on TYT, Jankana, with you guys, also Cineaf geek. I just hit the join button below and join and appreciate you guys. If you go through TYT.com slash team, it is still 20% off for monthly memberships. But we love it anyway, you do it. Yergen, Franz, and Flourishing Recovery, thank you for the gifts on YouTube membership.

Box, thank you for two and women AF. Thank you for the 10 memberships on YouTube that were gifted. I love when you guys look out for each other. Thank you, guys. And before we go on, I just want to say one quick thing, I promised in the last segment that there was a Democrat that was flipping potentially, and that's Senator Chris Murphy. I just wanted to come back to it and let you guys know. And so he's made some good comments about how we've kind of forgotten our economic base,

and we should go back to economic populism, and we're serving the elites too much. I love that kind of talk. Does it last past a week is the question. So that's, I just wanted to make sure that I didn't leave you hang out. Yeah, and if we have time, you know, we have a story produced on his recent statements. So hopefully we get to it. But thank you for mentioning that. All right.

So let's talk a little bit about how Donald Trump is already having an impact on foreign leaders, beginning with Israel. Today, Israel's finance minister, Basile Smotrich, declared that it is time for Israel to officially annex territory that that does not belong to them, the West Bank, now that Donald Trump has been elected as the 47th president of the United States. Here's what he said verbatim, quote, Trump's victory brings an important opportunity for the state of Israel. During Trump's first term, he said, we were on the verge of applying sovereignty over the settlements in the West Bank, and now the time has come to make it a reality. And then he continues, I have no doubt that President Trump, who showed courage and determination in his decisions in the first term will support the state of Israel

in this move. Now, with Donald Trump, everything is transactional. And one of the transactions that certainly spoke volumes for Trump during the election process was the nearly $100 million donation he received from Miriam Adelson as long as he agreed to allow Israel to annex the West Bank. So that's the reason why you have, you know, far right leaders in Israel giving us the impression that he, you know, Trump has given them the green light to do this annexation. Now, to be a million percent fair here, the annexation had already begun under Biden, and Biden did nothing about it. So my biggest issue with our government as it pertains to this story and to any issue involving Israel is that the American voters don't get an opportunity to choose

between one or the other, because they're both the same. Both parties enable anything and everything Israel wants to do. And so while I am certainly going to be deeply angry and critical over Trump enabling what Israel wants to do here and essentially stealing more land from the Palestinians, I also want to be clear that Biden was no better. Yeah, well, so a slight disagreement there. Okay, where? So Biden seemed to be maximum terrible on this issue. As a thank you gift for the genocide, gave them $26 billion to do more.

But Netanyahu Smotrich and the other guys in the Israeli cabinet were under the impression that he would not allow them to fully annex the West Bank. And so, I mean, you say he wouldn't have, except they think that he wouldn't have, right? So whereas Trump is saying, I'll do everything Biden did, but on top of that, I'll let you annex the West Bank. And guys, we're going to talk about at least Stefanik in a second. They're going to be the UN ambassador, green light for any war crimes. So that's Trump, just as I told you, has taken Biden's horrific policy and magically found a way to make it worse. So this is definitively, in my opinion, well, it's not my opinion. It is definitively worse.

If he allows them, he hasn't done it yet, but if he allows them to annex the West Bank, all the claims of anti-war president flushed down the toilet, there isn't any force on earth that's going to allow the Palestinians or anyone else to go, oh yeah, why don't you just take it all? There's three million Palestinians there. Why don't you just treat them as your slaves and just take all their land and run a fascist government that ethnically cleanses them? No, the Muslim world is not going to accept that. The Arab world's not going to accept that, and that would be Donald Trump starting a giant war.

And if he does that and he goes, oh, those dirty Muslims attacked for no reason, poor Israel had a right to steal their land. I mean, defend themselves. Yeah, you're going to be one of the biggest wars you've ever seen in the Middle East. And it's going to be 100%. No, to be fair to Anna's right, not 100% Donald Trump's fault, 100% of both parties fault. Yes, yes, that's what I'm trying to say. That is what I'm trying to say. I am not at all serving as an apologist for what Trump is very likely going to do in enabling

Israel. I have no doubt that he will. I have no doubt it will be disgusting and awful in every way. What I do have a problem with though is doing this comparative analysis that I think is unfair because Biden has not pumped the brakes at all, at all. If Netanyahu said, hey, listen, the pro-Israel lobby just bribed you so I can literally spank you publicly on national television. So go ahead and bend over. Let me spank you. Biden would be, oh, yes, sir. Yes, may I have another, sir? That's Biden, jank.

It is. So let me give an analogy and see if we get agreement on this. So if you watch mainstream media, they'll tell you that Biden's driving 55 miles an hour. He's doing it perfectly, balancing the Israeli interests because there are a special beloved ally who deserves a blank check and can commit any war crimes they like while they're defending themselves. And but at the same time, my God, his heart goes out of the Palestinians. And what a wonderful guy. I mean, he doesn't do anything for them. And he allows and finances their slaughter.

But he cares. He cares about the Palestinians. So they say he's driving 55. And I think you and I agree. He's actually driving, pick a number, 100, 120 miles per hour in Israel's direction. Okay. Sure. So what Trump is saying is, I'm going to come in and I'm going to be a maniac.

And I'm going to drive 200 miles an hour in Israel and wars direction. Yeah, there's no indication that Trump would do otherwise. There's one, well, potentially two things that could persuade Trump to pump the brakes. I would not bet money on it, but I do want to at least bring it up. For one, you know, Donald Trump has been having conversations with Benjamin Netanyahu. He's had three conversations with Netanyahu recently. He's also having conversations with Mohammed bin Salman, who, of course, is the Saudi prince, who is not in favor of what Israel has been doing in Gaza. In fact, he made clear that

the Abraham Accords, which was that business deal that was implemented under Donald Trump's first term, will go nowhere unless the slaughter in Gaza stops. And Donald Trump really cares about the Abraham Accords. That's like one of the things he loves to tout as an accomplishment from his first term. So I'm curious to see, you know, he's being pulled in two different directions to some extent, and there could be a possibility where MBS has some influence over him, but I would not bet money on it. That's where I personally am on that issue. The other thing is, you know, the America First crowd, which certainly does not want to

get involved in another war. And I was curious, all right, we're already starting to see some signs that Donald Trump is going to go along with what Biden was willing to go along with. So what's America first saying about this? And, you know, one of the people who endorsed Donald Trump close to the election, was Dave Smith, I don't know if he considers himself America first, but he's certainly a libertarian who does not want to get involved in wars. And he's already starting to criticize Trump over this. So I'm curious if, look, the difference between Biden and Trump is Biden never gave a

damn about his voters or his base. That was clear. Trump has an obsession with being admired and he seems to care about his base more. So they might have more influence on him when it comes to foreign policy. But again, I want to be real with you all and just be clear that I wouldn't necessarily bet money on it because the Israel lobby is very powerful and his relationship with Netanyahu seems to have gotten closer. Okay, so I was gonna say things along similar lines. I'm gonna tell you two people that I think can stop it, very similar to yours.

But first I want to explain to folks why Trump's going in this direction, money. Miriam Edelson, the latest numbers, we thought she was gonna give about 90 and it might be more than this, but the number I read today was that she gave Trump's packs $137 million. Oh my God. Okay? And we reported for you guys because Heretz reported in Israel that Miriam Aidoson had one giant ass from Donald Trump. Remember what that was?

Annexing the West Bank. So right after Trump is elected, he goes, which goes great, Trump's in, we're going to annex the West Bank. If you think it's a coincidence that he got 137. million dollars and right after he got elected, Israeli right wing says we're doing exactly the thing you've reported on earlier, okay, well, then you're a sucker and I can't help you, okay? So money is the number one reason why. Now, to my agreement with Anna, there's two people that can stop it, Muhammad bin Salman and

Joe Rogan, okay? So Muhammad bin Salman could say, I'll outbribed the Israelis, okay? So she gave you 137, I'll give you $1.3 billion. Okay, but don't let them do that because then my people will demand I go to war and that'll get me toppled and killed and I don't want it. I like being a dictator here. I got a nice and easy and comfortable. The only thing that could ruin it for us is if Israel goes to slaughter more Palestinians and still more Arab land because then we'll have no choice because the entire Middle East will be the largest powder keg you've ever seen in your entire lifetime.

Right. So and how could they bribe Trump? Super easy. Just like they did last time. They gave Jared Kushner $2 billion to manage, of which he gets 2% every year automatically, 20% of the profits that he makes. That's the hundreds of millions of dollars in bribes. By the way, they could just go, you know what, we got a great idea. We're starting another $2 billion investment fund, and we think Don Jr. should run it.

Okay, we think a baron should run it. It doesn't matter. It's super easy to get him the money. So that is one possibility because Trump has said, I'm for sale. It's an open auction, right? So, okay, the other possibility is exactly what Anna is saying, the rogans of the world, the bro podcasters, et cetera, go, no, we're not religious zealots, we're not the old evangelical Christians who go, oh, Israel has to kill all the Muslims, so that Jesus can come back

and murder even more people. They're not in that camp. That camp exists, but the rogans of the world think that they're a little loony, okay, and they are. So now, what do they think? They think, I don't want to give any more money to anything, right? And I wish they cared more about the Palestinians, and I think some of them probably do. To be fair about Rogan, Rogan's actually been very good on the topic of Israel and their, you know, treatment of Palestinians.

Yeah, I think Theo, Juan Vaughn actually went too far on Rogan's podcast on that issue the other day. But because he made it about Jewish people instead about Israel. Don't ever make it about Jewish people, okay? It's about the government of Israel. Governments do bad things. But it's okay. Look, guys, as I correct that, still we're on the same. I think we're on a similar trajectory.

So if the bros, et cetera, right, that new branch of Maga goes, oh, you guys are killing Muslims? Oh, the left was right about us. We just hate everyone and we hate Muslims and we're bigots. Yeah, they have Israel slaughtered them with our money, right? If that's who they turn out to be, well, okay, then we're screwed, right? Because it turns out they were giant liars and hypocrites. and the exact hateful people that the liberals said they were, right? But if they're in any way earnest and they go, no, I don't want to spend any more money

killed those poor people or enslaving them or occupying them or starting this giant war in the Middle East, that has some percentage chance of stopping Trump. But currently they are not on that trajectory. They're on the trajectory that his donors paid for, which is crush the Palestinians, giant green light to Israel to do any expansion, any war, any war crime. You paid for the war crimes. And for now, Trump's saying you're getting the war crimes and we'll pay you to do it. Yep, you're absolutely right.

Okay, we got to take another break. But when we come back, there's another part to this story. And it has to do with the U.N. ambassador to the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Donald Trump has already made his pick on that, so we'll tell you who it is and the impact this could have when we return. about some of Donald Trump's appointments. I mean, clearly the plans were already in place because names are coming out rapidly. So I wanna talk about the US ambassador

to the United Nations. Let's get into it. As long as I serve the American people, I will defend George Washington's vision of religious pluralism and freedom. Today, this means crushing anti-Semitism at home and supplying the state of Israel with what it needs, when it needs it,

without conditions to achieve total victory in the face of evil. For years, I have been a leading proponent and partner to President Trump in his historic support for Israeli independence and security, including moving the U.S. Embassy to its rightful place in Jerusalem. And finally, President Trump's wise decision to call out UNRWA for what it is, a hive of anti-Semitism, and to eliminate every dollar of U.S. funding. That was Congresswoman Elise Stefanik representing the American people in Israel. And she is declaring that she will constantly serve as a stooge for the Israeli government.

That was what that was all about. And Donald Trump has awarded her for doing so because she has just been named as the US ambassador to the United Nations. He decided to choose her for the role. What does it mean? What kind of power and influence will Elise Stefanik have on the United Nations, something worth talking about? So look, UN ambassadors basically serve as the head of the US delegation to the United Nations, which is around 150 people.

They represent the US on the UN Security Council, that's the area where Elise Stefanik will have the greatest power, because all it would take is for the United States to exercise its veto power and essentially veto anything that the UN Security Council has agreed upon, even if the vast majority of members in the UN Security Council agree on something, all it takes is for the U.S. to veto it, and they get their way. They also attend all meetings of the UN General Assembly, and they're also tasked with keeping the State Department informed of all the goings on at the United Nation. Now, it's considered to be the second most important foreign policy position in the administration behind Secretary of State. But there are some limitations to

this role as well. And as you saw in the cold open, Stefanik has extensively criticized both UNR which is a UN humanitarian agency that provides humanitarian aid to Palestinians and the United Nations itself. In October, for instance, Stefanik called for a complete reassessment of U.S. funding of the United Nations in response to efforts by the Palestinian Authority to expel Israel from the U.N. for alleged war crimes and human rights abuses committed in Gaza and West Bank. And, you know, she's also the person who got Claudine Gay, the president of Harvard to step down. Other Ivy League presidents stepped down as a result of the performative hearings that she called. And this is not great. This is not good. But I do want to revisit what the

U.S. ambassador to the U.N. under Biden did in her role. So you'll get a sense that nothing's going to fundamentally change when it comes to U.S. aid toward Israel, regardless of what the government wants to do. Well, this is similar to the conversation we had earlier in the show. I think that Joe Biden was horrific on Biden, on Gaza, and so was his U.N. ambassador. And so was Nikki Haley under Donald Trump when she was the U.N. ambassador. But Trump is threatening to take it to a different level here where it's going to be even worse than horrific. As we reported earlier, Smotrich is saying we're going to annex the West Bank. That is 3 million Palestinians.

And so that would be the worst possible outcome. Now, at least Tafanek going in there is one very clear sign. It's the most non-n nuanced sign that anyone could ever give. Giant green light to Israel. and not blinking permanent, any war, any war crime, we're going to veto. We're going to veto any condemnation of Israel. And on top of that, we'll start blaming the Palestinians for their own deaths. We'll blame them for how they force us to steal their land.

They force us to kill them and start blaming them for everything. That's who at least Stephanic is. She's one of the least moral people in the entire country. She's like the heart of cruelty and evil when it comes to foreign policy and Israel. Israel, you could, I don't think I could pick a worse pick than at least Stefanik for this role. She's the one who demanded that American citizens be arrested if they criticize Israel on a college campus. And she said the deans should be fired if they allow anyone to protest Israel. She hates the

idea of American democracy and freedom of speech. She will only serve Israel. She will America will not be first in the UN with Stefanik will be at best, At best, number two, but Israel will be an overwhelming number one. And Anna, this is very important. This is Miriam Aedelson's first gift from Trump. Of course she wanted Stefanik, and she's his second largest donor, gave him $137 million. She's a hard right-wing, lunatic supporter of Israel who wants them to annex almost all of the Palestinian land.

And they will. They will. And so Stephanic is put in to say, you will do what Miriam. says and give Israel everything at once. Ukraine or funding any other war abroad, Elise Stefanik believes that there should be absolutely no limitations to the amount of your taxpayer money that should be sent to Israel. That is what she has said on record, your money. So something to keep in mind.

But let's get to how elated Israel is over this appointment. In a statement on Monday, Israel's international spokesperson to the UN said the country's ambassador Danny Dannan looks forward to working closely with Elise Stefanik on tackling malicious lies at the UN or that the UN advanced by hostile nations while staying unservingly unswervingly unswervingly committed to truth and justice. Oh, is that what we're calling Israel now? Yeah, that is a laughable statement to say the least. And, you know, look, Linda Thomas Greenfield, who's the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. under Biden,

also has an awful record. So I want to be clear about that. She has vetoed on three separate occasions, the UN Security Council's decision to demand a ceasefire in Gaza. All it takes is the U.S. All it takes is one veto. And not only did she veto it once, she did it three times. So again, it's incredibly frustrating because both political parties are completely captured, captured by pro-Israel lobbies, and as a result, they carry out whatever is in the best interests of Israel, despite what it might do to Palestinians or despite how against, you know, American citizens might be over those actions, right? And go ahead.

Yeah, I just build on something you said there. I think there's, look, America First and Miriam Edelson are on a collision course. They are, yeah. And so they're, because America First genuinely believes that America should come first, and you could disagree with the different policies they have in that regard, but they're not unclear about it. And Miriam Edelson is also super clear, Israel should come first. That's why she gave $137 million to Trump.

That's why she got Stefanik as the pick. That's why Smote Rich today, far right cabinet minister in Israel, saying, oh, we're going to start the plan to annex the West Bank. That's what Heretz reported was Miriam Aedelson's plan. So when they clash, I'm not saying it's going to be a big spectacular clash, we don't know. And that's what's really interesting, right? But either America first will bow its head and say, okay, because Trump said so, Israel first, America second, okay? Or they will not bow their head.

And then in which case, I know Miriam's not going to bow her head. I know Apex isn't going to bow their head. And then Yahoo isn't. So if Netanyahu in America First Clash, that is going to be one for the ages. I am curious to see how that plays out. Now, Dave Smith, who's a libertarian and has been very vocal against what Israel has been doing, against the Palestinians, endorsed Donald Trump pretty close to the election. And he had something to say about some of the appointments that we've been seeing from Trump for his cabinet.

And here's what he had to say about it. There's a lot of talk about the coming appointments. After the excellent decision to box out Mike Pompeo and Nikki Haley, Trump followed up with a horrible UN pick, we need to keep the pressure going. Then he says some stuff that I don't agree with. So for instance, he says here's how Trump could really set up a heroic second term that is America first and would have a fighting shot at draining the swamp. He thinks that Rand Paul should be Secretary of State.

I've also heard Vivek floated, that Vivek Ramoswamy was floated and that would also be great. Be careful what you wish for with Vivek. Yeah. I think he's also 100% pro-Nat Yahoo. Also, I would just ask Dave Smith to look into Tulsi Gabbard a little more closely because Tulsi Gabbard has done a good job branding herself as an anti-war individual. But in reality, all you need to do is a little bit of digging. She was pro-torture. She says that she's against regime change wars, but she was fully on board with the war on terror.

And she has been very much on the side of Israel in regard to, you know, the actions that they've taken against the Palestinian people, both in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Yeah, I mean, Dave's usually really smart on this issue and many other issues, and I respect him. But I think you're almost certainly wrong about Vivek, but you're definitely wrong about Tulsi. Yes. So if you put her as secretary of defense, be careful what you wish for, because she's totally on that Yahoo side. And look, it's also unsurprising that Trump would pick Elise Stefonic. Yes, Miriam Adelson favored Stefanic for this role, but on top of that, Stefanik did what Trump loves the most.

She kissed his ass endlessly, and she was rewarded for it. And so for those who are willing to serve as like Trump's lackeys, individuals who will, you know, Aiden abet what he wants to do, they usually get rewarded. But be careful what you wish for. Nikki Haley had that role, and it didn't end up working out so well for her. All right, we got to take a break when we come back for the second hour of the show. We'll talk about Trump's border czar. He is definitely going to follow through on what he promised to do with the border.

And this border czar is a good indication of that. So come right back. We'll give you the details on that story and more. I don't know. Buhn't know. Buhn't know. B. B.

B.