The Young Turks - Tariff Lies Exposed - May 6, 2025

Episode Date: May 7, 2025

Sign up for your one-dollar-per-month Shopify trial and start selling today at ⁠shopify.com/tyt Bessent indirectly confirms to CNBC China and the U.S. still not talking tariffs. Hegseth used multiple Signal chats for official Pentagon business. Republicans flesh out Trump’s ‘no tax on overtime’ idea. Trump’s ‘special ambassador’ Jon Voight reveals plan to ‘rescue Hollywood’. Hosts: Yasmin Khan, Cenk Uygur 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. Welcome to the Young Turks, Jake Ugar, Yasmin, Aaliyah Khan with you guys. So Yasmin is on Rebel HQ. You know that. Go check that out every day on YouTube, you crazy dog. Are we going to have a good show today?

Oh, again, I don't know if you're crazy or not asking me questions like this. Slash, you didn't ask it. Okay, we've got the Trump administration falling apart at the seams, caught them in a bunch of lies. You're going to love that. That's fun for everybody, except the American people. Are they really populace or not? We caught them on that too. So we got a story about what are they going to do to cut from the average guy?

And they claim they're going to give tax cuts to the average guy. Is that right? We'll talk about it. Later in the program, men cutting their eyelashes so they look more masculine. Good idea or bad idea? Okay, we'll talk about that a little bit later. And speaking of good idea or bad idea, Marjorie Taylor Green on the Young Turks tonight. What on God's Green earth is happening? Get it? God's green on, okay. So that's at 8 o'clock Eastern, that's for everybody.

Make sure you stick around and check that out. We're gonna have a conversation about foreign policy, Iran, Israel, freedom of speech. In fact, we're asking you guys, I mean, it's too late, but it's still fun. for everybody. We asked us about Steve Bannon, but didn't have money, even though you guys said to do it. But this was open to everyone, not just members. At t.yt.com, we're asking, should we have Marjorie Taylor Green on the Young Turks? Okay. So, and then when we get to the interview, I might quote the poll and ask her, oh, look at that, a lot of people saying yes already. Lots of folks. Okay. So we'll give the results to her maybe in the interview at

8 o'clock tonight. Okay, so yes, what do you got for us? How you doing? I'm doing very well. We do have a lot of stories to get to. I think producer Taylor was feeling very ambitious tonight. So let's get it right into the first story. Lots to talk about. There are 18 very important trading relationships. We are currently negotiating with 17 of those trading partners. China, we have not engaged in negotiations with. as of yet. So today, Treasury Secretary Scott Besant admitted in a congressional hearing that the United States and China are not actually engaged in any kind of trade negotiations, and that

might be a little bit surprising to some of you because Trump has been suggesting that that is exactly what has been happening. And we will show you those receipts in just a little bit. But, Jank, did you expect that negotiations with China were going to take this long to get off the ground because we've been hearing since he first launched into these tariffs and caught all of that immediate backlash that don't worry, they're banging down my door trying to negotiate with me. Yeah, okay, so there's two parts of the story. One is the hilarious lies that they were caught in. Uh, Joe, we're in the middle of negotiations, it's happening,

right? So, okay, didn't even talk to them once. Okay, so we'll get the some of the receipts on that in a second. And then the second part of the story is, Wait, are these tariffs really gonna stay around? Because now some Trump supporters are like, I'm hurt, dog, don't ask me if I'm all right. And does he have a plan? You know what the answer to that is. But so let's air it all out, let's see the Republicans who are starting to panic and whether they actually are negotiating or not. So yes, give us the details.

Yeah, so there has been some debate as to whether or not the United States and China are actually having these talks that Trump has been. Trump being toting, toning about for a while. So here's reporting from the New York Times. It says in an interview with time, Trump said Xi had called him, though he declined to say when, and asserted that his team was in active talks with China on a trade deal. Asked about the interview outside the White House. The president reiterated that he had spoken with the Chinese president numerous times, but he refused to answer when pressed on whether any call had happened after he imposed

tariffs this month. So when Trump asked about negotiations today, things sounded a little bit different. Take a look. Earlier this morning capital bill, Secretary Besson said that there had been in no negotiations yet in the China. You said something different. But they want to meet, but they want to negotiate and they want to have a meeting and we'll, we'll be meeting with them at the right time. But you haven't met with it yet. I have not met with them. Well, you know what Trump says? We are playing the long game here. right? We got to deal with the short term pain for the long term gain. And he is insisting that

even if trade completely stops between the United States and China, it will be a net positive. So look at that. And by not trading, we're losing nothing. So we're saving a trillion dollars. It's a lot. We're losing more than five billion dollars a day. Five billion dollars a day. You don't talk about that. And right now, we're gonna be at a point very soon where we're making money every day. Look, how soon? We were losing hundreds of billions of dollars with China. Now we're essentially not doing business with China. Therefore, we're saving hundreds of billions of dollars. It's very simple. Is it, is it that simple? Also, why does he speak that way? He's very hard to listen to. But, okay, but let's take a look at

what the actual implications of these tariffs are. This is from CNN. It says, should Now pulling into U.S. harbors from China are the first to be subject to the massive tariffs that America is imposing on most Chinese imports. Many of them are half full. That means in a matter of weeks, consumers will face higher prices and shortages of certain items. So yeah, a lot of people are saying, you know, all these prices are supposed to spike. I'm not seeing it. It's going to be a little bit of a delayed reaction and that delay seems to be catching up with us very shortly. So in the meantime, Americans are continuing to be. to buy goods that were previously warehouse in the United States, but those stockpiles

are starting to run out. Imports to the United States during the second half of 2025 are expected to fall at least 20% year over year, according to the National Retail Federation. The decline from China will be even starker. J.P. Morgan expects a 75 to 80% drop in imports from there. Yesterday, a Trump supporting owner of a clothing store actually begged the president to help out small businesses, just like his. Take a look at this. President Trump, as a longtime supporter of your mission and to make America great again, I want to be a part of that with you. But e-commerce companies all across the United States, we need more time. Give us a 90-day off-ramp to get off of our China goods and just tell us the plan.

If you tell us a plan, we can operate and we can know what to do. The hard part about everything that's happening right now is we're trying to manage our business from day to day, and that's very difficult. And a lot of small businesses, they don't have the cash flow to get through a 90-day negotiation, and it's going to devastate a lot of businesses like cuts. I'm in a group chat with a billion dollars worth of small businesses, and there's several in there that are telling me, hey, Stephen, 30 days or 60 days, we're not. might not be able to make it. There's been too many adjustments to the supply chain that are just being really devastating on our business. 145% is essentially an embargo.

And by cutting off our products to be able to sell them, it's going to be really difficult. It's almost a little bit sad to watch him. I can't tell if I feel bad for him because he said that he's been a longtime supporter of Trump and of MAGA, but I don't know what he expected was going to happen. Also, I've said it before, for a presidential administration to enact all these widespread tariffs, right, on an entire population, not just here in the United States, but around the world, you can't just do something without having some kind of contingencies in place, some ways that are going to support the populace, the people who are going to be most affected by it. All of this field is very slapdash and very irresponsibly laid out. They just did it and said, whatever happens, happens. And they didn't seem to have any considerations for the business owners or just the regular average people who are going to be the most negatively impacted by all these terrorists.

And that's really just most of Americans whenever you consider that we're all going to see the prices at the grocery stores going up if they haven't happened already very, very soon. What do you think? I mean, this is obviously very disingenuous coming from the, from the Trump administration. But where do you think we're headed with all of this? What are your thoughts generally about these terrorists now that things are, what is it? What do they say? The roosters are going to come home to roost. That's not it. But you know, the chicken is going to come home to roost. So, okay, so let's dive into it. First Trump, then this brother from cuts, because I think he's a really interesting example. So I wanna walk you through how his business is going to get affected because it's going

to affect so many other businesses and the entire economy. So first on Trump, he says, China's been calling me. No, they haven't. They put out a statement saying, no, seriously, we haven't called Trump at all. And we have no interest in calling Trump. And so they keep saying, no, it's okay, we're winning this one. China thinks, brother, we got a 100 year plan. You're gonna be out of office in three and a half years.

I mean, even if the tariffs lasted that long, which there's no way in the world that they will, have out it, Haas. Because what the Chinese are saying and thinking is, we thought this through, and I bet you haven't, and I bet you're not ready to brace for impact and have all the different economic consequences hit the US and brush it off. off. And I think that the Chinese are unfortunately correct. Trump has not thought it through us, his supporter there is beginning to figure it out. It is going to be very painful. We are not going to be able to withstand the pain.

And so then he'll have done damage, not just to the economy, but to the cause of tariffs. And even reciprocal tariffs with China, which we should have done a long time ago. Reciprocal is, hey, you do 10%, I do 10%, not you do 10%, I do 145%. Because when you do 145%, as a lot of these folks are saying, and that businessman said it as well in a long version of the interview, 145% is an embargo that you can't, that's not a thing you could do. So like let's say that he's selling a shirt and let's say it's a high-end shirt, it's $100, right?

So they, and normally he gets it from China for make up a number here, $50, right? Okay, 145% tariffs, all of a sudden that shirt's worth, you know, his cost to him is near $125, but he's selling it for a hundred. So it doesn't make any sense. Well, he has to double it because that's usually how it works in retail. So now the shirt he was selling for a hundred, he's got to sell for 250. Well, nobody's gonna buy that shirt. So that's an embargo, that's not a tariff, right?

So now when you, if you believe in tariffs that are reciprocal or targeted towards specific manufacturing base, we're all screwed. That's never gonna happen after Trump, because this, The idea of tariffs is gonna be so poisoned after all this after it crashes the economy, which is the next part that I'm super curious about because I feel like either I'm missing something or the rest of the country is missing something because we buy an extraordinary amount of stuff from China and they're all going to be in essence embargoed. I don't think we realize the iceberg we're about to hit.

Like everybody's like, like, there's a little bit of panic in the business world. For small businesses, there are bigger panic, affected industries, bigger panic. But the stock market, I'm shocked, is not cratering soon. I think there's going to be tons and tons of empty shelves or products that are so expensive that they're totally unbuyable. So that's not a small amount of stuff that we buy from China. All right, let's see how it turns out. Because my sense is this will be way more catastrophic than people realize.

But the brother from cuts is beginning to realize how catastrophic it is to his business. So let me go back to that example for a second. So why is he asking for 90 days? Because he's like, look, if I'm gonna buy from China, all of a sudden, the $50 shirt is $125, I can't do it. And then when Jake Tapper asked him about, well, why don't you just buy it from America? He's like, oh, we have been doing that in so long textiles. In fact, not only are we more expensive in America, but unfortunately, our quality has gone backwards. And the China and other places are very high texture.

Their quality has gone out. This is not my words. That's his words. He's a Trump supporter, okay? And so he's got to go buy it from somewhere else. So he's got to go figure out, hey, is there a price I could afford from Sweden or, or, or, You know, Cambodia, I don't know any country that doesn't have 145% tariff. So he's in a panic right now because if he can't, then no one's gonna buy his shirts and

he's gonna go broke, like not in like two years from now, in like two months from now. And what happens if that happens on a mass scale, which I kind of think probably will happen very soon? You think we can withstand that? No, people are gonna be super angry. Trump, he's a flip-flopper. He doesn't know anything. He throws things up against the wall and see if it sticks. And this ain't going to stick. So he's going to flip-flop, but the ton of damage is going to be done. One more thing here. It's interesting, actually,

two more things. Because even his own supporters, like, that brother voted for him, even though Trump talked about tariffs. Like, there's a lot of things he didn't talk about. He didn't say, oh, I'm not going to follow due process. So if you elect me, I'm, you know, I'm going to tear up the Constitution. I think he indicated that he hated the Constitution, didn't care about it and want to determine it, you in fact, said it once, but I couldn't get anyone to believe me, right? I couldn't get anyone to focus on how much he hates the Constitution and doesn't care, he just wants to be an authoritarian leader. But what's interesting is that his own voters and supporters, even on things he did say, like, I'm going to tear off the hell out

of people, they didn't really believe him. Since he lies so much and trolls so much and this says such nonsensical things, they just started doing wish fulfillment, right? Like putting their wishes onto Trump, not really listening to what he's saying because, you know, three quarters of what he says isn't true. Now come to find out, he actually did mean it about tariffs. And they're like, what the hell? I didn't know you really meant it. That'll totally destroy my business. If he knew about this earlier, would he have voted for Trump? I mean, unless he's an idiot and doesn't like his business and would like to go broke, he probably wouldn't have, right? So the fact that he's such an enormous liar and that his own

voters don't believe him is such an interesting phenomenon, which leads us back to the original line that you saw in that clip. You know, we're losing five million a day, and if we stop it, we start gaining money. No, we don't, that's not how it works. So we're not losing money, they're sending in products here, we pay for them, and we pay a cheaper price than we would from anywhere else, and then we sell those products. So if you take a tariff and those products are actually bought, which they're not going, going to be because they're too higher price.

Then we would take money from a tariff, but we're not even going to get that because it's essentially an embargo. So all that's going to happen is that trade's going to stop. So once the trade stops and we don't get any imports from China, do we then magically make money? No, no, we don't. He has no idea what he's talking about. He never does. Look guys, we showed you the clip the other day.

He doesn't even know what the Declaration of Independence is. He's like, he's all about unity and love and respect. No, it's not. It's the opposite of unity, it's declaring independence. Couldn't be more the opposite, right? We love the British Empire, no we don't. That's why we declared war against them. Okay, so he knows nothing.

You think that guy's gonna handle a sophisticated economic policy? That's why when, I mean, I feel bad for the guy because he's probably about to go broke, but when he's like, later in the interview, he's like, what's the plan? Please just tell us the plan. There is no plan, brother. I hate to break it to you, there is no plan.

There is no plan and there really doesn't seem as if there ever was a plan. And Trump really feels like that isn't even his problem that he needs to provide some type of plan. And I feel like I talk a lot about Trump's rhetoric because the way he speaks is very interesting to me. The words that he chooses to use, the way that he chooses to describe things to his voters, right? He uses words like reciprocal tariffs to mean one thing when it really is not the reality. he says things like it's a 145% tariff when the reality is that it is more like an embargo. So he says a lot of things without explaining it. He almost changes the entire meaning of words, at least in the pop culture sense of politics, right?

And I think a lot of that serves to confuse people, including the people who vote for him, including the people who hear the words that he says and really do believe him, right? Like they actually do think that the thing that he says, the thing that comes out of his mouth is you know, that's a fact, right? They really just, even at this point, at this stage in the game, 10 years after having dealt with Trump for so long, they don't understand that the things he says is not necessarily reality. And also as far as the business owners,

I do feel bad for them because they're dealing with this constant instability. I can't even make decisions for my own life, let alone my own business, without, you know, wondering about what the country is going to look like a few months or a few years from now, right? It's very, very difficult for people to make big life decisions such as like buying a house or even where to settle because even the job market is so unstable, right? My husband works in like in the tech industry kind of and he's, you know, Doge is just like looming in the corner, you know, and it's very hard to move forward. And now these business owners, they're also experiencing their own version of that. You can't make business decisions when a lot of the things that were in place that stabilize the economy and stabilize the marketplace are no one.

longer in place. Everything is up in flux right now. So people are just trying to get by for month to month. And that is not really a great way to run a business. And we saw it during the pandemic. So many businesses, especially small businesses had to close down. And in this country, especially during the Obama era, there was a lot of push for small businesses to spring up and open in this country. Now we're seeing just the corporatists coming in and saying, you know, we're going to scoop all this up and this is all ours now. And we have these big mega monopolies and Congress is not doing anything to stop them. And now, however you characterize it, was informal, unclassified coordinations for media coordination and other things.

That's what I've said from the beginning. At the beginning, it was left-wing reporters from the Atlantic who got a hold of it and then wanted to create a problem for the president. Got a hold of it is an interesting way to put that. But that was Defense Secretary and former Fox News host Pete Heggseth defending the use of the messaging app signal in his official capacity in the work here. he's doing over at the Pentagon. However, this isn't a new story, but it turns out that the extent to which the app was used in some in the Pentagon is a lot more than what we previously thought. Jank, before we get into the details of this story, why is this an important story for the American

people to care about? Turns out that you might not want to pick a weekend Fox and Friends host to be the Secretary of Defense. If any story involves national security, it's this one, and they're leaking like a sieve. I wanna point out a massive hypocrisy a little bit later in this story, but mainly the question that this, that arises for me, and we'll dive into the details here, or the deets, as the kids say, and see what it is because now I'm being to think, maybe this isn't like America First or Israel, back, nations, etc. Just might be that exit is like,

enormously incompetent. Like if there might be a really simple explanation. But let's hear the so called deeds and see what we decide. I got the deeds. I have all of it for you. Okay. So according to reporting from the Wall Street Journal, Heggseth had at least a dozen signal chats going,

many of which he started himself, even though the app has not been approved for discussing sensitive information. So here's reporting from the Wall Street Journal. In one case, he told AIDS on the encrypted app to inform foreign governments, about an unfolding military operation, the people said. He also used the non-governmental message service to discuss media appearances,

foreign travel, his schedule, and other unclassified but sensitive information to people said. And the people that they keep referring to in the article, those are the journal sources. Hegeseth used the app to send messages both from an unsecured line in the Pentagon, as well as from his personal phone. And it turns out, this was unknown before, that some of the messages, from Hegeseth were actually sent by his military aid, Marine Colonel Ricky Buria, who had access to Hegset's personal phone. For instance, it was actually Buria who sent messages on signal regarding the U.S. attack

on the Houthi militants in Yemen. It was, of course, after a journalist from the Atlantic was added to this group that we all became privy to all of this knowledge, the story went viral, and that led to an investigation at the Pentagon into the Pentagon's operations under Hegset. In an attempt to get some kind of a fallout guy, a fall guy, Heggseth was able to keep his job. But national security advisor, Mike Walts, did lose his job. And this move was panned by a lot of people.

But it was seen widely as a move on Trump's behalf because he wanted to keep Hegsseh around, right? That's a Trump appointee. That is a Trump sycophant. He's going to do whatever it takes to push and promote Trump's agenda and to say whatever he needs to say. Meanwhile, Mike Waltz, not so much. Mike Waltz did not agree with Trump on everything 100% of the time. And it seemed like Trump was just happy for an excuse to get rid of a guy like that. So here is more from the report.

Among the messages posted in some of the other chats by Hegseth were his thoughts on personnel matters, pentagon programs facing cuts and details of administration national security debates. The text authorizing aides to tell allies about military operations are, Among the most sensitive messages he sent, instead of using the Pentagon's vast communications network, Hegset preferred signal to run the defense department's day-to-day operations, the people said. Among those, he added to chats were members of his security detail, staffers in his personal office, and that of the deputy secretary, as well as public affairs aides. So there's a few obvious concerns with using this app for handling these very, very classified,

or at least sensitive information that is being passed and discussed in this app. So for one, these apps are susceptible to hacking. So potentially a lot of what is being discussed in these apps could end up in the wrong hands or just in the hands of people who are not authorized to have this information, which is most people, right? Including, you know, Pete Higgs had wife and brother and the journalist from the Atlantic. There are other concerns with the reporting, the official reporting of the content of the apps, Because some of Pete Heggsett's messages were deleted from the app or they disappeared before they could actually be added to the official record. And more from the Wall Street Journal says DOD personnel won't use non-D accounts or personal email accounts, messaging systems or other non-public DOD information systems except approved or authorized government contractor systems to conduct official business.

So, Jank, I know you have a lot to say about this. It is very concerning that the extent to which that this app has been used, even though it's not, it's not recommended for information that could be classified. And the things that they're discussing on here are, you know, very, very high level information, very sensitive information regarding exact timing of military airplanes and missiles being dropped and things like that. So it is kind of scary, not kind of, it is very scary as a matter of national security, which is funny because Trump likes. to say that everything is a issue with national security. But this one actually is, and he seems to be brushing it under the rug, all in an attempt to just protect Pete Hexed. Yeah, that's really a good point because later in the show,

live 6, 8 p.m. Eastern every day. We're gonna talk about how he's gonna try, Rue, I'm reviving Hollywood. Because it's a national security threat if they make movies out of Vancouver. Is it? Is that a national security threat? You know what's a national security threat? Hey, here's who we're bombing and when we're bombing them and what methods we're using. Oh, oops, it's in an unsecured place.

That's an actual national security threat. Movies out of Vancouver, not as much. But so he doesn't, but he, of course, we all know this. He doesn't care about any policy or anything that's real or national security. He just cares about what things look like, right? Hexith, he's out of central casting. I like him. Vancouver, not at his central casting.

Hollywood had essential gassing, Hollywood invented central gesting, we're going back there, right? We'll tell you later why he's obsessed with that and Alcatraz and stuff. Okay, but back to this story. So let's now note the hypocrisy. Hillary's emails, I can't believe it was in an unsecured place. Unsecured Hillary's emails. It is the greatest violation of national security. unsecured. And what's interesting is that they chose to do, I mean, Hegsith is probably on TV

crying about Hillary's emails about 2,000 times, right? And then he goes in, he becomes secretary defense and he's like, oh, let's do what Hillary did. Let's just go totally unsecured right away. Right away. Don't even like, oh, it was an accident or it happened later after I got burned by the, you know, people in the internal system and there was something went, no, no, no, he's like, let's go illegal right away. And what's the illegal part? Number one, it's against the rules to go to unsecured app, right? But also number two, the more illegal thing, something could be more illegal, yeah, it could be a harsher sentence, et cetera, is if you delete these things, because you're supposed

to keep them as part of the record for the executive branch. And why do you think they're going on a signal? So they could delete them so that people can't see them, which by the way, was the same reason that Hillary did it. And so we're like, I don't know if we're the only show left in America that is not biased, but it was wrong when Hillary did it. It's wrong when Pete Heggseth does it. But for Hegsith and Fox News and all those guys, Hillary, right?

Like I mean meltdown for years and years and years. And but look, this is, so Hegsit does it, Mike Walts does it, they all do it. But remember in the first administration, the minute they went in, the Trump kids did it, Ivanka did it, Jared Kushner did it. And he was in charge of Middle East policy. And they're like, I guess they love Hillary Clinton. I debut her as a role model and they're like, you know what? Anything she does were, and maybe I was going to say that maybe they'll do speeches to the banks next.

But that's just amateur hour. Hillary got like a couple hundred thousand dollars of speech. Jared Kushner was like, I got two billion from the Saudis. Eric Trump just yesterday was like, I got two billion from the United Arab Emirates. Corruption. Hunter Biden, you amateur. Hillary Clinton, you novice, okay, taking it in the hundreds of thousands or millions. We're taking it into billions.

So all this is reality. You like what is like from here to the end of his term, is hardcore MAGA going to say about every story? Yes, fake news, even though they all admitted everything is fake news. Heg said there's a genius and a military strategist. I saw him play risk once. I can't believe that he started in, you know, Australia and New Zealand and he expanded out in one, gosh, he's supposed to Fox and Friends on the weekends. Are we, who are we, this is, remember he threw the freaking axe in one, some stupid stunt

that they did for Fox and friends and threw it over the target and nearly killed the band guy, you know, behind the target. This is not a, like, like some rocket scientist. And also, this is so absurd, it's like, it's like, imagine if Bernie won. And he's like, now my new secretary of defense, Brett Ehrlich from happy half hour. I mean, Brett's only 2,000 times smarter than Hegseth, but it would be surprising. So you pick a clown, you get a clown. I'm beginning to think that that's the simple answer here, that there isn't like some sophisticated, hey, is it the neocons or not the neocons? That exists

in parts of the government. But for Hegsiv, I think it's mainly like, anyway, I don't want to get into speculation about why he's a hot mess, right? But he's clearly a hot mess. I kind of love the idea of Brett Ehrlich in our government for better or for worse. You know, Lisa would be entertaining for a lot of people, including me. So there is one little addendum to this story that I want to get to quickly. So Trump insists that despite appearances, Pete Hexeth is actually doing a great job in his role as a defense secretary, even though he is wildly unqualified for that position. So reports say that just a week or so into Trump's second administration, the military with Hegset at the helm, ordered three freight airlines to stop 11 flights

loaded with weaponry that were bound for Ukraine. And that isn't the story. The story is that this order created such chaos, not just in Ukraine, where the weaponry was bound, Not just in Poland where everything was supposed to be coordinated, but also in the White House because Trump never told Heggseth to ground any of these flights. So the whole fiasco went beyond just a new administration settling in and getting their feet wet. It really was just a whole demonstration that communication within the administration was lacking, first of all, also that the goals of the administration, however, they were being communicated internally, not even talking about externally. to us, but even internally were poorly defined. And that the people that Trump had appointed into these high level positions were wildly, as I said, unqualified for those positions. So that's just one last little thing. But again, Trump seems reluctant to get rid of Hexeth because, as I said

earlier, he's kind of a Trump. Yes, man. He has been loyal to Trump for a long time in his tenure at Fox News. And he has proven to Trump that, you know, I'll do whatever you want. And that's why he has the job he has. Yeah, I actually think the second one's worse. He stopped these, you know, military aid going to Ukraine without any authorization. And everybody's like, what are you doing? Nobody told you to do that. Why'd you do that? I said, I don't know, let's start him again. Look, I don't know if I'm supposed to do the speculation or not, but I'm not saying it's Stone or Wolf, who's a young Turks member on YouTube is saying it, he said, drunk people tend to leak a lot. Okay, that's kind of funny. Now, seriously, guys, I don't know if Hags is drunk at all. I have no idea.

But I do know this, right? Now we have, he fired all, like, tons of his top aides. They've gone on shows like Tucker Carlson's and everybody's like, what? Why were they fired? What does this have to do with anything? He's leaking like a madman. on a bender on signal and everywhere else, he's giving authority to his assistant to do these things that he shouldn't be doing. And now he's canceling actual military equipment that needs to go to a war zone when he shouldn't be. There's no other way to describe that than hot mess, right? But now I'm gonna go over to Bernie picking Brett as defense secretary. He's not just unhappy half hour. He's really good on rebel headquarters.

I like him there. Why did I give him the Trump hands? And was that a good burning? Probably not. Okay. Anyways. All right. Well, our national security is in danger. I guess we can have a laugh over it. All right, back on TYT, Jank, yes, and a number of American heroes, Neil Evans for hitting the join button below. We appreciate you, Neil. Proud Progressive, we're gifting a membership on YouTube. You are proud indeed, we're proud of you.

Ramone gifted 10. Then Drew Wilson gifted 20. You guys are awesome. We love you guys. I love this community, open-minded, open-hearted. We got Marjorie Taylor Green tonight. We're asking you guys if we should interview her. That poll's on t-y-t.com.

Everybody can vote. And then tonight, we will interview her and we'll tell her the results of that poll. So it'll be fun. All right, yeah, so what's next? All right, let's get into this next story. No tax on overtime. All right, no tax on overtime pay. That was one of Trump's signature promises to the American people.

And Republicans in the Senate are working to get it passed or mean or are they? We will have to see, Jenk, what do you think? Are they actually going to follow through on this promise? Yeah, I would have said in the beginning, there's no way they're going to do this. But actually there's something in this story that makes me think, huh, maybe, maybe. I'll tell you why it's a maybe, why it might be a trick anyway. But most of all, they promised a great number of things. And I'll tell you the things that they have no chance on delivering on, and it's the things

that they have a chance of delivering on. So a really interesting story overall. Let's get the details. Yeah, and I feel like a lot of times I want to be optimist and be like, oh, maybe they will do something that they said they were going to do, but I'm more disappointed than I am not. And but you know, I try to say open minded. So according to the Wall Street Journal, there are two different versions of the proposal in the Senate right now. Here is the less generous version from Republican, Republican Senator Roger Marshall. The proposal is capped at $10,000 for individuals and $20,000 for married couples. The break for overtime pay would start phasing out once individual adjusted gross income reaches $100,000 or when a married couple's income

reaches $200,000. At the 22% marginal tax rate that applies to many taxpayers in this range, a deduction for $20,000 in overtime pay would save $4,400 in taxes. Okay, so that's one. That's the less generous one. This is the more generous proposal and very surprised about who it comes from. So a bill from Senator Ted Cruz, Republican from Texas and Representative Vern Buchanan, Republican from Florida, limits the break to $25,000 and denies the break to people above a high income threshold that is $160,000 this year. So the question is, even if this does get passed, how many Americans would actually be affected by this policy? And according to the Yale budget lab, about 8% of hourly workers and 4% of salaried workers regularly work overtime.

So not a whole lot, but some. And to be fair, that is a campaign promise. But, Jank, I want to get your thoughts on this. What gives you pause with all of this? Yeah. And so in the beginning, I was like, there's no way in the world they're going to do this. Because if you just did a blanket rule on not taxing overtime, it would cost 680 billion to 1.3. trillion dollars. So now remember they already have around it started with four and a half it looks like they're up to five and a half trillion dollars in tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. So they would have to layer this on top. So now we're talking about what six point eight trillion dollars in tax

cuts and we haven't even gotten to the not taxing tips which is another outlandish you know campaign promise that Trump had because he's just given out candy, right? Oh, I'm not taxing this, I'm not taxing that. So, but in order to do that, they've got to do some cuts, even when they go to do a cut, as we'll tell you about later in the show of like $230 billion on basically food stamps, people, including Republicans, are like, no, tons of MAGA guys get food stamps. You can't cut that.

Okay, so Doge at most cut $130 billion. They're now struggling with a $230 billion. We're gonna get the other $7 trillion. So this is absurd, right? But the only reason why they might do this one is because Trump, unless he's just gonna absolutely raw dog them, he has to give one of his campaign promises to the average guy. And in a limited fashion, so he could say,

I cut the taxes on tips or I cut the Texas in overtime, one of those things. There's no way he's gonna do them all. And he doesn't care about him. That was just to win the election. The only ones he actually cares about, the tax cuts he cares about are for corporations who are his donors and the wealthy. And he's wealthy and everyone he knows is wealthy. So those are locked in.

So that's our base. You start with about $5 trillion in tax cuts for the rich to begin with. Then you're going to layer these on top because the average guy is the very last priority. And by the way, Republicans quote me on everything, okay? So if it turns out that he does all the tax cuts for the average guy, Overtime, Social Security, et cetera. And he doesn't do corporate tax cuts and he doesn't do tax cuts for the rich. There's no, all right, but I'll eat my shorts.

There's no way that's gonna happen. In fact, Trump has already said, he flirted with like, well, maybe we shouldn't cut taxes on the rich again. And then everybody beat him up, Sean Hannity was like, how dare you? Don't you know the Republican Party stands for the rich like me? And then like the day later, Trump was like, oh, I'm so sorry, of course, of course, the rich get everything first, first, right? So now all of that, but why might this one pass? Because what Yaz was explaining to you guys is that they've actually now reduced it

so much, hey, it doesn't apply to money, you know, incomes above this, it doesn't apply the wages past that. So they narrowed it and narrowed it and they got it down to what this latest proposal is about 25% of the original number. So if it's like $250 billion, that's still a huge number in the real world. But in a gigantic $5, 6 trillion tax cut, they might think, I mean, who cares? We're blown a giant hole in the deficit in the budget and the debt anyway. So throw that in there so we can brag about it.

And remember, it's really limited, right? So that's why this one might not be impossible. We ask you guys in a poll on the live show, live show at 6 to 8 o'clock every day. And at 8 o'clock, we're doing interviews like today with Marjorie Taylor Green. Anyways, whether you guys think that there will be no taxes on overtime or not, I'm curious to see what you guys think. But like that, I know is the logical answer, but in this rare case, maybe this is the one that they give to the MAGA base because they limited it so much.

And it's not nearly as big as it used to be. So that's my theory on it, but look, if it turns out they don't. give anything to the average guy and they give everything they're rich, I wouldn't be 1% surprised. Yeah, I think that's that was really my thought on the whole thing too is, you know, you were talking about how Trump is giving out tax cuts like candy. I mean, he just says whatever comes to his head and then that becomes policy. So we see for ourselves that there really isn't as overarching of a plan or a strategy in place as many of us would hope that that there are, but I do agree, you know, I figure that this is just a really easy campaign

promise for him to keep just so he can say, I did something for the working man, I did something for the average American, even though what was it? Four or eight percent of hourly or salaried workers would actually feel the impacts of this and with people who fall within the parameters. So there is some part of doing a job like this where you do feel like a bit of Schadenfreude or you know, like, and I told you so, if you see that the administration is not following through on any of the plans that they said they were going to do for the American people because you want to say, you know what, we told you this was going to happen. Why did you vote this way? Maybe don't do it again in the future. But at the same time, you do actually want good things to happen to the American people, right? So if something does get passed for them, I'm not going to be like, it's not enough. You do more or whatever, even though it really isn't enough. I do want to be able to celebrate something that happens good for the average American person. But I don't know, this isn't as exciting as I would like for it to be. Yeah, I mean, we're talking about a quarter of eight percent, right?

Eight percent of people are at least hourly workers, right? And they've now reduced the tax cut for those folks a quarter. So that's why it's like a, it's a tiny bit of a release valve and a fake promise kept. Even if they do it, which I'm not sure they're going to, okay. But you know, guys, that's the number one thing that I want to leave you with is they're not even trying to balance the budget. So if you're, you know, MAGO or you're an independent who voted for Trump and you think, oh, no, no, no, they're going to magically cut five, six trillion dollars from the budget, I bet there's waste, fraud, and abuse of that for that kind of number. You're in la la land. I will guarantee you 100%. Quote me on it. Never watch the show if I'm not right.

They will not balance the budget any of the four years of Trump is in office. They won't come close. This year, they're gonna put this massive, massive hole in the budget. I mean, anywhere from four to six, seven trillion dollars. Remember last time Trump added eight trillion dollars to the debt, more than any other president in U.S. history. And this time he's saying, oh yeah, Trump won, hold my beer. I'm gonna add even more tax cuts for the rich and absolutely pulverize this budget. There is a 0% chance they're gonna balance the budget.

So when I'm right about that, remember who told you the truth and who BS to you. Because if there's right way shows out there now pretending that he's gonna balance the budget, that's a humiliating prediction. There's no chance of that. So let's see how this particular, you know, tax cut works. out, but overall, we're all gonna have to pay for this later. He's the king of debt and he's gonna pile on more debt onto America than any other president and stick us with the bill.

That's what he's famous for, that's what he did in business, and that's what he's about to do to the American taxpayer. All right, we gotta take a break here. When we come back, is Donald Trump going to help Hollywood or destroy Hollywood? Well, we're full of deets today. We got the deets on that too and later. course, Marjorie Taylor Group. For a limited time at McDonald's, enjoy the tasty breakfast trio, your choice of chicken or sausage McMuffin or McGrittles with a hash brown and a small iced

coffee for five bucks plus tax. Available until 11 a.m. at participating McDonald's restaurants. Price excludes flavored iced coffee and delivery. Yeah, we're about to make Hollywood great again. Take a look at this. My fellow Americans and my peers of Hollywood, I recently met with our president, Donald J. Trump, who loves the entertainment business, wants to see Hollywood thrive and make films bigger and greater than ever before,

as he says, and see productions come back to American Hollywood. the Hollywood that I fell in love with when I was a child and was honored to contribute to during my career. All right, that was actor John Voight on X. He regularly does videos on that platform for all his followers. And he's saying that Trump is on board with the initiative to make Hollywood great again because he loves Hollywood. He wants it to be great just like it was back in his day. Jank, we're going to get into those deeds that you promised. But Of course Trump loves the entertainment industry.

He's an entertainer. Yeah, well, as you'll see in a minute, his crazy rambling reason why he's doing this. You should have been in the movies. I know dude, everybody knows you want to be famous. Congrats, you are famous. You're the president of the United States for a second time. But the insecurity continues unabated and the lack of homework continues unabated. Did you talk to experts?

Did you talk to movie industry executives? Did you talk to actors? Did you talk to anyone before you imposed a ludicrous 100% tariff? Do you know if that's actually going to help the movie industry or hurt the movie industry? Here's the amount of homework he's done on it. And you all know it, even if you're MAGA, you know it, zero, none. So let's find out what's actually going to happen. Yeah, well, Trump also has all of his acting credits.

He was in home alone too. He was in two weeks notice with Sandra Bullock and Hugh Grant, so good for him. But that's not what we're talking about right now. John Boyd and I do seem to be an agreement that Hollywood needs to be a little bit revamped, that it's not as good as it used to be, although we probably have different ideas as to why. But here is more from him on what is wrong with Hollywood and sort of like what he plans to do about it. And you guys, it's a lot worse than any of us thought. And many Americans have lost jobs to productions that have gone overseas.

It's been very serious. People have, people have lost their homes. You can't feed their families? After meeting with many of the entertainment leaders, I have brought forward recommendations to the president for certain tax provisions that can help the industry. Some provisions that could be extended and others that could be revived or instituted. This would help the movie and television production

and our beloved theaters that are so important to the American family experience. So he didn't say a whole lot about what the issues are specifically that he's trying to address in Hollywood, nor did he say a whole lot about his plan to address these issues. He didn't elaborate very much on any of those tax provisions. The video was about two minutes long on X, and I showed you most of it. The rest of it was just him talking about what a great president and person Donald Trump is. Also, he said he puts Donald Trump up there as one of the best presidents, this country's ever seen right up there with Abraham Lincoln and George Washington.

And then he also named drops Sylvester Stallone and said, that's my buddy. So that's nice. But speaking of Sylvester Stallone, him, Mel Gibson, and John Boyt, they are Trump's special ambassadors to Hollywood. So everyone, Hollywood, we are in great hands there. But while this does feel like a ridiculous story, there is actually a little bit more to it. So Trump announced this week that he wants a 100% tariff on movies produced outside of the United States, a move that could irreparably damage the existing American film industry. So here's what he posted on truth social about all of this.

The movie industry in America is dying a very fast death. Other countries are offering all sorts of incentives to draw our filmmakers and studios. away from the United States. Hollywood and many other areas within the USA are being devastated. This is a concerted effort by other nations and therefore a national security threat. It is, in addition to everything else, messaging and propaganda. Therefore, I am authorizing the Department of Commerce and the United States Trade Representative to immediately begin the process of instituting a 100% tariff on any and all movies

coming into our country that are produced in foreign lands. We want movies made in America again. Donald, I think we all just want free health care. We want health care for all. That's all anyone asked for. But among his detractors regarding this move is a right-wing commentator and author Ben Shapiro. Why?

Just why? I'm sorry, if Hollywood is unable to lower its costs, there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to go elsewhere and produce your movies. All movies and TV shows now, this has been going on for decades, are basically produced outside of Hollywood. Hollywood has emptied itself out and that has forced them to actually move their own businesses to places like Vancouver in Canada or go to other states like Georgia in order to film or go abroad to Romania or Hungary or wherever else in order to film. So President Trump thinks that by radically increasing the cost on movie production in a time when streaming is already eating out the profit margins of all of the movie making industry, That is a very badly calibrated executive order. So from the truth social post, the thing that Ben Shapiro took a special problem with was when Trump said the movies made outside of this country posed national security threat.

So here's what he had to say about that. So you're saying it's a national security threat for Romania to offer a tax incentive to film in Romania. I'm sorry, that is not even remotely a national security threat. It may be a threat to Tom Cruise's next paycheck, but that is not a national security threat. If Matthew McConaughey makes less money because films are being made or a key grip in Hollywood has to travel in order to go film over in Budapest. That is not remotely a national security threat. We're emptying the term national security threat of pretty much all content. So Ben Shapiro also asked, you know, where's the demand for any of this, right?

Nobody asked for this. This isn't what we wanted when we said that, you know, we need foreign entities. out of our government and or out of our influence or out of our sphere of influence for the majority of Americans. And to that point, Ben Shapiro actually said, if you actually wanted to do something about foreign propaganda infiltrating the United States, do something about TikTok. So that's what he suggests. Jank, this goes beyond movies and entertainment. For one, it talks to government control and government overreach into certain aspects. Also, this feels like maybe it's just a little too close for comfort to actually censoring Hollywood and the things that they're able to produce

and also stopping other films from coming into this country. And I just want to clarify, he's not saying that we're not going to be able to watch foreign films in this country anymore. He's trying to prevent Hollywood studios from going outside of the country because a lot of movies get made in places like Canada, especially. So he wants to prevent that from happening more. And he said he's going to do a 100% tariff to prevent that. But Trump is also taking something that I think many Americans agree with that Hollywood is not what it used to be. Entertainment, frankly, I mean, there's a lot I could say about that, but that's not what the show was about. But it really, like, it's something that I think a lot of Americans have

issues with right now. But instead of doing things that would actually help to address the issue, he's being a little bit disingenuous and he's proposing a solution that isn't actually going to help anything that he says it's going to help. So as is usually the case with him, he's offering a very misguided and disingenuous solution to a known problem. Jank, I know you have a little bit more on the story. Yeah. So I'm gonna tell you how it affected Hollywood and what they might actually do instead of this. But first on Ben Shapiro. So I agree and disagree. So is it a national security threat? That's a joke. Of course, not a national security threat, right? So Ben's right about that. And then he's like, we're inventing all sorts of national security threats.

Brother, you started that with, oh my God, if you criticize Israel, that is a national security threat to America. So you started making that crap up a while back. So are you surprised now that he's just extending it to more things that are definitely not a national security threat? And then I love at the end of the video when he's like, no, the real thing to ban is TikTok. They're showing people what's actually happening in Gaza. If they find out what Israel's doing to starve those children to death, that'll be terrible for my beloved Israel. Okay, Ben, focus.

We were talking about Hollywood. So he went on this tangent about how they got to shut down TikTok. Okay, so anyways, you know, he might actually care more about this because daily wire they're making movies, which is crazy to me, but okay, God bless. And so it might affect his revenue, it might affect his business, and that's another reason why he might be upset about it. Okay, so that doesn't mean he's wrong, the 100% tariff, nobody even knows what the hell that means. Just Trump made that up.

So is that gonna happen? No way, but for a second, the markets were worried, so what happened? Netflix was down 4%, Disney down 3%, Warner Brothers Discovery, down 5%, Paramount, down 2% Comcasts down 1%, but then they recovered. Why did they recover? Not in their entirety necessarily. It's a mixed bag there for those stocks. Because they realized, oh, maybe we can get tax breaks out of this. Because Trump was talking about a tariff that actually would hurt Hollywood. That's why the stocks went down in the beginning.

Because wait, if we can't sell our movies in China, it was four times as many people in China as there is in America. They don't want those tariffs, right? So a lot of consumers in the rest of the world that they want to be able to reach. that they want to be able to reach. But when Voitz started talking about tax breaks, everybody's like, tax breaks, tax breaks for corporations. This is where everyone is in politics is aligned. And you thought Trump was a different guy that he's anti-establishment?

No, he's just doing the same exact corporate tax cuts, et cetera, that everybody else is doing. So Governor Gavin Newsom from California, obviously, Obviously, jumps in and goes, California built a film industry and we're ready to bring even more jobs home. We've proven what strong state incentives can do. Now it's time for a real federal partnership to make America film again. POTUS, let's get it done.

So he's reaching out to Donald Trump enthusiastically. So why is the Democratic governor of California doing that? Because they've decided they're going to push for a $7.5 billion tax credit to movie companies. No, no. I'm a hard pass on that. Why? Look, brothers, make movies that make money. If you can't, that's your business, not my business. I mean, I love the movies. I love going to the movies and mainly I like the popcorn. I know you guys are very surprised. But it's not my, why am I financing giant movie companies? Because they take that money out of our paychecks. No, I don't need any tax credit going on. Hollywood. I don't need it at all. I don't not only do we not know not need the tariffs. We don't even know what tariffs means when it comes to movies. So all this is junk. It's because Trump's a child. Me like movies, me like movies. Me want to be in movies. You know in Home Alone too, they too edited out the scene that he was in. He

caught all sorts of feelings like threatened to sue got like really upset and made a whole big dealer. Who cares is a stupid cameo in a stupid movie. Again, you're the president. Don't worry, brother. You're already really famous. But no, in his mind, movies are golden. I always wanted to be in movies. I'm going to rescue Hollywood with a hundred percent tariff. All I know is tariffs. I didn't study anything in school. That's why I still hide my grades. Okay, I think my opinion on this is clear. We gotta go. We're way late. Okay, thank you as everybody check out Modern Contacts podcast. That's he has his podcast and Rebel Headquarters on YouTube where she does some killer videos. All right, great to see as when we

come back, we've got more madness for you guys. Now Republicans going back to identity politics. Interesting. Okay. Okay, all of a sudden, they're getting their asses handed to them on the economy and they're trying to start trouble with culture wars again. So we'll explain that and then the Marjorie Taylor Green interview. We'll be back. All right, back on T.O.D. Jank and Sharon Reed with you guys. We got a full show ahead for you all in this second hour. What's left of it? So let's get going. Sharon, what's next?

This one, we're slugging old folks home, Jang. Age is not just a number for Democrats, apparently, it is also a barrier to leadership. I mean, that's the only way we can look at it now. Monday night, Representative Alexandria Ocasier-Cortez officially decided not to run for the top Democrat seat on the House Oversight Committee. Now that Representative Jerry Connolly is stepping down amid a battle with esophageal cancer, You'd think the path would be clearer, but not in this Democratic Party. Here's what AOC said about what went into her decision. It's actually clear to me that the underlying dynamics in the caucus have not shifted with respect to seniority as much as I think would be necessary.

So I believe I'll be staying put at energy and commerce. AOC's explanation might sound diplomatic, but the message between the lines is unmistakable here. she is still, she's being blocked. Now, she already ran for this position last December, lost to Connolly, who is 75 in a 131 to 84 vote. And now she is backed off because the party's gatekeeping has not changed. AOC wouldn't say who she might support. She just made it clear that this race isn't really open.

It is reserved. That's the only way to look at it, I think. 87 year old, delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton briefly floated a run for the same oversight role, only to back out after discussions with leadership. So, Jenk, is there any real path here for AOC to emerge in more important leadership roles under the current democratic system of seniority? Yeah. So look, I get that they've been doing seniority for a long time. I mean, is so long that Eleanor Holmes Norton was only second in seniority, even though she's 87. So over about 40% of Democrats in the House or in Congress are above the age of 65, if I've got that right.

And so they're getting up there. And so I don't believe that they should do it based on seniority. I know why they do it that way, but call me crazy. I think they should do it based on competence. So who would be competent enough to oversee the oversight committee? I think AOC would. I think Rokana would. Jasmine Crockett would be an interesting choice, a bold choice, right?

So but going with the same old, same old, the next guy up in line is representative Lynch, he's 70 years old. Is Representative Lynch gonna fire up the troops and really hold Trump's feet the fire, forget firing up to troops. Are they actually going to be able to hold Trump accountable, especially if they win back Congress and can do investigations? I mean, from the old guard of the Democratic Party, I've seen almost nothing. No action, no nothing. So, no, I don't have a lot of faith in that. Look, in terms of what's the best role for AOC, I think she should run for Senate in New York. She would definitely win. Having her as a senator would be super interesting.

it would that would light up the older Democrats because then they'd be like oh wait I got to worry about my seat okay maybe I should do something with my life maybe I should do something for my voters for the first time in my life so that would be interesting to see Well, speaking of doing something with one's life, we'll pivot to another face of the party who's getting up there, 83-year-old Representative James Clyburn, who told Politico that retiring from Congress would be like giving up his life. I mean, this is all he has to live for, apparently. This is where the real issue, though, comes into focus. Democratic Party has an aging leadership class.

And with that comes to deep resistance to change, even when voters are, well, pleading for it. The next guy, we know well, he's come under fire from fellow Democrats. Gen Z activists, elected DNC member, David Hogg, has been loudly calling out leadership, the logjam. He faced backlash, as we said, for pledging to primary ineffective Democrats. But Hoggins says, this is not about ageism. It's about opportunity. It's about whether voters, even though screaming for a new generation.

of leaders actually matter to the people who are literally clinging to power. House Republicans, we can tell you this, tend to be younger. This is what Jenk was talking about on average, have been far more intentional about promoting their rising stars into positions of power. So the party of Trump is putting forth younger faces consistently, more so than Democrats, even as progressives, try to rise. Democratic Party has clung to the kind of thinking that ensures the people. people's house is determined to become an old folks home.

I mean, if you look at the ages and the people have been there forever, if younger voices can't get a shot, progressive change is gate kept by rules written decades ago, how does this party thank you all? Yeah, so Clyburn is a good example. And somebody asked me the other day, like why do folks who are so rich, like in the billions of dollars, why they just want more and more? Because there's no inter-greed. That's, it makes no rational sense.

But emotionally, they can't let it go. And same thing with Clyburn. You know, he helped the Republicans redistrict his home state so that the Republicans would pick up an extra seat. But Clyburn's seat would not just be safe, it'd be extra safe. Not only did it cause his own party a seat there, but he actually caused African Americans a seat there

because they could have gotten two seats in that state. And instead they got one because he helped the Republicans. Why? Because apparently he thinks, this is my life and my voters, who cares? Actually getting something done, who cares? But me, me, me, me, me, I gotta stay in here and I gotta have power and status and all the things that he enjoys. By the way, I don't know what Clyde Burns built in his life. He's been a lifelong politician.

I know what he's torn down. He's torn down progressives over and over again in primaries. If a progressive is running, whether it's Bernie Sanders, Nina Turner or whoever else, everybody knows Clyburn is going to come to get you. And he's going to pretend to speak for African Americans as he robs them of a seat in his home state. Instead, he's going to speak for the lobbyists in the donor class. So remember guys, the reason why some of these politicians are so old is because donors get a return on investment from them. It's guaranteed risk-free return because they've been donating to these guys for 30, 40 years,

and they always do what the donors tell them to do, that's why they're still in Congress. That's why this is not an ageism thing. I don't give a damn what how old they are. Look, we have a poll about hey, should there be an age limit for Congress in, you know, in the live chat, shows live 6 to 8 p.m. Eastern every day, be part of the show by being in live chat. But to me, it's not the age as much as why they're so old and why they keep getting reelected. It's because they always deliver for the wrong people, the donors and not the voters. And that's the heart of the problem for the Democratic Party. Yeah, and Clyburn, as you mentioned, is perhaps one of the loudest voices against progressives.

And perhaps it's because they represent the most change and the most threat to him. But he's also, I think an argument can be made credibly. The one man who gave us Joe Biden. He's that guy. He's that guy. He remember what was going on in South Carolina. Like that was going to be it for Joe Biden until Clyburn stepped up and really put it on the line with his black constituents and resurrected that campaign. Yep. He said, oh, you know, basically he said black people should vote for Joe Biden and not Bernie Sanders. Why Bernie Sanders has a terrific record on civil rights as good as you could possibly hope for but Clyburn doesn't care about that Bernie doesn't have a good record

with lobbyists so Clyburn's like oh no we got to get Biden Biden'll do anything for lobbyists and donors so that's how that game was played so I'm sick of that game everybody's sick of that game the what you get out of this show and what you won't get out of mainstream media or a lot of shows is telling you why things are happening. It isn't about their age. It's about the donors going back to them over and over again. That's the core of the problem. All right, I think we gotta take a break. So let's take a break here, Sharon. And then when we come back, Republicans getting back to into identity politics. That means they're hurt dog. So that's an

interesting story. We'll be right back. All right on Tjig sharing with you guys. Sharon, what's next? Terror accusations, Jack, watch. Remember, the Democrats are using fear to control people. They're out there motivating people by fear, and they're standing alongside known terrorists in order to endanger our future.

You know, Trump administration taking things up a notch in their attempts to villainize Democrats who have taken a stand against the Trump administration. And that includes accusing them of supporting genocide and terrorists. We'll get into more of these accusations, Jenk, in just a moment, but your initial reaction to Christy Noem and her thoughts that she shared there? Yeah, it is so ironic because she's about to use fear on a nuclear scale to see scare people. And they just make up words. And so now they're making things up to try to maybe arrest Democratic lawmakers like AOC. And here we go again with identity politics. And so this

time, as you know, you've seen many times, it's the Republicans starting it. But let's give you the details. Well, here they are. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has had a maggot target on her back for years. However, after she held her know your rights webinars, simply to help inform immigrants on how to deal with ICE, Trump administration has especially honed in on AOC. Trump's borders are, Tom Holman even went as far as to threaten a DOJ investigation for obstructing immigration authorities. That's an idea that Christy Noem supports wholeheartedly. Listen. Let me get your reaction, Toman, referring to Congresswoman AOC to the Justice Department.

She had a webinar, know your rights, and as part of it, recommended that illegal immigrants ask for warrants, deploy phones to record ice searches. Is this aiding and abetting in your view? I think the Department of Justice absolutely should look into this situation. We've seen not just those that serve in public office, be willing to break the law to facilitate the invasion

that has happened and allow criminals to stay here. We've also seen judges take radical action to help protect these criminals. It's time that we stand for what's right. The American people are sick of these people abusing our system to try to promote an agenda. And remember, the Democrats are using fear to control people. They're out there motivating people by fear and they're standing alongside known terrorists in order to endanger our future. That's rich. Friday to Town Hall AOC hit back at the critics of her webinar, arguing that she was using her free speech rights in order to advise people of their constitutional protections in direct response to home. And she added, come for me. Do I look like I care? Should she care? I mean, they are doing just some very unlawful things. They mean what they say. And just the harassment enough. I mean, somebody's got to stand up to a bully.

But should she care? Yeah. So let's summarize what Christy Noem said. You know, these Democrats, they just use fear to scare people. She's with terrorists. She's with known terrorists. Everybody panic. Who's using the fear?

Who's using the fear? So I was super interested in this, Sharon, because I was like, wait, what's the, I know that of course AOC is it with known terrorist. terrorists. So what on God's great earth are they talking about now? What did they make up? Because constantly making one thing up after another after another. So it turns out there are no terrorists, of course. So they're like, she's like, oh, but some of the immigrants might be criminals. And if they're criminals, they might be in a gang. And Trump just said that gangs are terrorists. So she's hanging out.

with known terrorists, just made up out a whole cloth. I guess that's the logic, right? So there's just, that's, you use the word terrorist to scare people to put fear in them. And to play a little bit of identity politics, immigrants and terrorists and you know how they are and you know, get riled up everybody, culture wars, woohoo, right? We're tanking the economy. Trump doesn't know what he's doing with tariffs, the markets are crashing. So let's go back to scaring the living crap out of people and try to demonize based on race and where you're from, et cetera. So look, on immigration, they were fair show. They had it.

Trump in the beginning closes the border. He's very popular on that. We showed you the polling. Some shows go, no, if Trump is doing well, don't show the polling. Our audience doesn't want to see it. And you know, if you actually are honest, they'll hate it. And there's a little bit of truth to that sometimes in some other audiences, right? They just want to hear what is only good news.

No, in the beginning, Trump was doing well with the border on the issue of immigration. It was one of his winning issues in the election. You might not like that, but that is what reality was. Well, now, Maga's not going to like the reality because he took a winning issue and, you know, and just shredded it. He just came out and started sending people to a dungeon in El Salvador saying he wasn't going to follow due process. Now he's underwater on immigration. I mean, it's crazy that he's underwater that these guys are negative rating on immigration when just like a couple of months ago, he was very popular on immigration. So why does he have that problem?

Because they do stupid things like this. If you tell immigrants their rights, that's all she was doing. She was saying, hey, here are your rights in this country. You're like, okay, that's it, you're a terrorist. You're a terrorist for, or hang out with known terrorists for telling somebody their rights? Nah. And that's why they're going after judges, then soon they'll be trying to lock up lawyers and they don't want anyone to help.

So, and now, by the way, today raids everywhere, it was already happening in California. Now they're doing it in DC to catch more attention. They're raiding restaurants and trying to find people. They're reading living communities trying to find nannies, et cetera, that might be undocumented. It's scaring the living crap out of people, and they're doing it on purpose. So a lot of presidents, including Obama and Biden, they stop people at the border and then they return them. And Obama did that at a record pace.

By the way, Obama and Biden returned more than Trump did, right? And before that, Bush returned more than both of them, and Clinton returned more than Bush, right? So that's been going on for a long time at the border. But once you get inside the country, it has the feeling more of a terror campaign, ironically, right? And so everybody's in a panic over it, and they love it. This is their go-to move, fear, and calling everyone terrorists. No, stating people's rights is not terrorism. It's called being an American.

Well, AOC is not the only one being villainized. It's also Ilhan Omar, which is no shocker, of course. Like her fellow squad member, Ilhan Omar has been a top MAGA target for years. But yesterday, J.D. Vans made an insane allegation. It really was against Omar after lips of TikTok were posted this video from 28 I would say our country should be more fearful of white men across our country because they are actually causing most of the deaths within this country. We should be profiling, monitoring, and creating policies to fight the radicalization of white men. So you heard her, but just keep in mind that's a 24 second clip taken out of a 10 minute interview Omar did with Medi Hassan or Al Jazeera. That was again back in 2018. Here's what Vance, though, stated. This isn't just sick. It's actually genocidal language. What a disgrace this person is. It's really rich, but he says.

I don't think J.D. Vance, who's received $167,324 from the pro-Israel lobby, her APAC tracker, knows what genocidal language actually is. And Omar said that too. So let's look at that in this nearly eight-year-old clip. I'm referring to the rise of white nationalism in an annual report issued by the Anti-Defamation League that said white supremacists were responsible for 78% of extremist related murders. P.S. you should look up what genocidal actually means when you're actively supporting a genocide taking place in Gaza. We're fair here, though. TYT, let's watch a bit more of the interview and then determine if genocidal language was used. A lot of conservatives in particular would say that the rise in Islamophobia

as a result, not of hate, but of fear, a legitimate fear, they say, of quote unquote, about jihadist terrorism, whether it's Fort Hood or San Bernardino or the recent truck attack in New York, what do you say to them? I would say our country should be more fearful of white man across our country because they are actually causing most of the deaths within this country. And so if fear was the driving force of policies to keep America safe, Americans safe inside of this country, we should be profiling, monitoring, and creating policies to fight the radicalization of white men.

So Hassan followed up there asking if it's fair to say there's bad rhetoric coming from the Muslim community too. So that's true, there's some really bad rhetoric coming from politicians, security leaders, etc. But also a lot of bad rhetoric coming from Muslim community leaders, imams, etc. Is that fair? I think both of those statements could be true. And I think, you know, it just goes to show what happens when you have segments within communities that are using fear and hate to mobilize their base. And it is important for us to actually have a conversation about what kind of communities we are trying to build and what this nation actually stands for.

So, Jack, what's the verdict? Genocidal language or no? It's absurd. That last part was perfect because she said you've got both sides, whether it's Muslim fundamentalists or white nationalists using, quote, fear and hate to mobilize their base. And here's J.D. Vance using fear and hate to mobilize his base. going, oh my God, she's uniquely hates white people. She's just using genocidal language. Come on, man, that's so over the top and ridiculous. So if Ilhan Omar had not given context and had randomly done an attack against white people in general, I would be very much against it, okay?

It doesn't make any sense. I would say that's identity politics, it's not the right direction to go in. But she didn't do that. They're saying, oh, aren't Muslims evil and terrible because they're extremely. and do terrorist attacks. That's the, you know, Medi Hassan doesn't believe that, but he's asking that as her critics are, you know, posing that to her. And she says, well, look, if we're actually care about extremism in this country and

terrorist acts, et cetera, as it turns out, 78% are done by white males. So, but she doesn't say let's, let's lock up all the white males and let's let, you know, people who do it who are Muslim go, no, she says let's just be fair and treat everybody the same. Oh, JD Vance left that out. Oh, that's so interesting. That's because I'm just weird because I thought he was so honest and cared so much about the average American. So I think what's interesting, more even more interesting than that clip, which is benign, right? And like, so what do you want us to do? By the way, the right wing, quick, one more thing about that.

Right wing for so long, you know, black people commit more crime, but here's a crime statistic. out of context, etc. You have to say, you have to say it. Now when white people commit more extremist crime, don't say it, don't say it. If you say it, it's genocidal. So when you were thinking about black folks, was a genocidal then? Okay, I'll let you sit with that one. Okay, but to me, the more interesting thing is, why is he bringing back an eight-year-old clip? Because they're getting to a point where they realize, oh, no, we're losing on everything else, we got to go to culture wars, right? Oh, the Democrats are against white people. Look, I found a clip from 1937. Look at what they're saying. And did you know Robert Byrd was part of the KKK?

I mean, that was only like, you know, 58 years ago or so, right? So like, oh, we got to go back, culture wars. So don't tell me that only the left plays culture wars. I criticize the left when they do that. Or is the right wing going to criticize their own when this is clearly identity politics horse crap. Okay, I'm not going to hold my breath on that one. So understand, yes, both sides do it. And very often, very, very often, it's actually the right wing who starts it with crap like this, that they pulled out of some vaults because they were desperate. Running out of new material. Let's take a social break. We'll be right back. All right, back on TYT, Jank and sharing with you guys.

Also George Lake, thank you for hitting join button below and becoming a TYT member. We appreciate you and props, thank you for sending 10 Young Turks gift memberships on YouTube as well. You're awesome. All right, what's next, Sharon? Alcatraz, let's take a look at this. Alcatraz is, I would say, the ultimate, right, Alcatraz, Sing, Sing, and Alcatraz, the movies, but it's right now a museum, believe it or not, a lot of people go there. So strange. Donald Trump revealing that he just learned that Alcatraz is a museum, Trump was questioned by reporters yesterday following his order to reopen Alcatraz.

As a reminder, Alcatraz is currently in national park, it has been preserved as a museum. You can do a tour for, I don't know, roughly 50 bucks if you're interested. We're going to get to the rest of Trump's nonsense answer in just a moment. It really is so strange. But Jen, do you think Trump knew what Alcatraz was before he launched his big idea? No idea. In fact, they're going to say some things here that are demonstrably not true if you've ever been to Alcatraz. My favorite part of this story is how Trump came out with the idea in the first place.

That's hilarious. We're asking a poll on whether they're actually going to do it and reopen Alcatraz. I'll vote right now. No, they're not going to do it. It's way too expensive. But by the way, here's one other thing we should talk about. Like even though it's clownish, is this wrong strategy? I don't think so.

And Harry Enton agrees with me. So it's a twist. It's like it doesn't make sense. It's the wrong policy. How he got it was hilarious, but it could still work for him. So let's give you the rest of it. the rest of the story. All right, let's look at the rest of his rambling answers now.

It has the most violent criminals in the world and nobody ever escaped. One person almost got there, but they, as you know, the story, they found his clothing rather badly ripped up. And it was a lot of shark bites, a lot of problems. Nobody's ever escaped from Alcatraz and just represented something strong having to do with. strong having to do with law and order. We need law and order in this country. But I think it represents something. Right now it's a big hulk that's sitting there rusting and rotting. Very, you look at it, it's sort of, you saw that picture that was put out, it's sort of amazing, but it sort of represents something that's both horrible and beautiful and strong

and miserable weak. It's got a lot of, it's got a lot of qualities that are interesting. He does love a good adjective, we're 20. That answer, though, has sparked concern about his cognitive health, the president. Is he going to be okay or is it too late? Speculation also of where he got this idea, many people said Trump, got me idea of reopening Alcatraz from TV, pointing out that escape from Alcatraz had been shown on television in South Florida Saturday night, including in West Palm Beach. Uh-huh, where Trump spent the evening at his Marilago resort. Now, if the president plans actually do take off, it's going to cost a lot of money. Pam Bondi claims reopening Alcatraz will lead to cost savings.

Yeah. President suggested over the weekend maybe rebuild and reopen Alcatraz, put him there in the middle of the Pacific Ocean someplace. I'm all for that, all for that. And I think it will be a cost savings. We'll have specially trained guards. They'll be in isolation, they won't be able to run their businesses, and it sends a very strong message that if you do this, you are going to be out of our society forever. That is a lie. Just another one, but a big one. Alcatraz closed in 1963 because it was too expensive to operate. This couldn't be sustained anymore. Federal Bureau prisons, a Bureau within Bondi's Department of Justice states on their website on March 21, 1963.

USP Alcatraz closed after 29 years of operation. The institution was too expensive to continue operating. Estimated three to five million was needed just for restoration and maintenance work to keep the prison open. That figure did not include daily operating costs. Alcatraz was nearly three times more expensive to operate than any other federal prison. Major expense that was caused by the physical isolation of the island, the exact reason, Islands have been used as prison throughout history. This isolation meant that everything, food, supplies, water, fuel had to be brought to Alcatraz by boat.

Now Alcatraz has no fresh water, it would need to be shipped to the island. Does that sound like cost savings to you, Jay? No, but this is classic Trump. First, the hilarious part, right? No one has escaped except one guy with a lot of shark bites on its coast. I think that's from the movie. Three people have escaped from Alcatraz. So he watches the movie.

Alcatraz, I got it, I got it, we put him on Alcatraz. And then that's why in the second, so that he says that at night after he watches the movie, right? Then he does that press conference we showed you. He's like, not a lot of people know this, but it's now, it's now a museum. No, a lot of people know that. Yeah, we knew, I knew it wasn't a prison anymore for a lot of people. anymore for a long, long time. If you've ever been to San Francisco,

everybody says, hey, there's Alcatraz. Of course, not a prison anymore. It's a museum, you can go there. Okay, but he doesn't know anything. And then he just says it. But the problem is he's the president of the United States. So you're like, okay, Mr. President, it's a super old to convert it into a functional prison

would cost a fortune. We wouldn't save any money. So that's like the Pamponies of the world. It's so embarrassing. She knows they're not gonna reopen it. There's no way they're gonna reopen it makes no sense it costs way too much right but she's like I think we will and I think we're gonna save money I think we I'm like all right man

you just it's like nonstop self humiliation so go for it this Trump is like turned into well let's be honest someone who's a little bit older and and I get it and it happens to everybody and you everybody has a story like this from their parents it happened to my mom the other day she called me in a panic thought that George Clooney had died because Because she saw something online where they, you know, said Clooney had died. And I was like, no, my, George Clooney didn't die. She said, but it was on TV.

I know, but you could put anything on TV now. Okay, like that doesn't mean anything. It's just on your TV set. And that's how Trump is like, you just saw escape from Alcatraz. There's the shark bites, but other than that, nobody escapes. We should put people back in, oh, yeah, yeah, Jesus Christ, man. It's very strong, but also miserably weak. It's horrible, but beautiful.

Okay, what are you talking about? Okay, but having said all that, Sharon, it's, I think it's gonna play well for him. Why? Because his strength is, at least perceived strength, is anti-crime. And so the more he yells and screams about Alcatraz, a lot of people have seen that movie, and it's gonna get into their heads. Everybody's heard of Alcatraz and Sing Sing, as he mentioned. especially and older people vote more so they might be like now he's getting tough on crime

they're not going to follow up to see if they really reopen Alcatraz they're not going to follow up to see if it costs more or less so this one probably plays well for him I can't get over Roger Goodell, NFL commissioner's face as Trump was just, I mean, he couldn't wait to get out of there. He was scared he was going to be asked about it. Let's talk about Stephen Miller on Fox News. He went on Fox, Laura Ingram's show Monday, where he elaborated on Trump's plan for Alcatraz. It's real. Alcatraz was built at a time when this country was strong and it knew how to take care of villains and monsters.

There are people in this country, as President Trump has said, who will do nothing with their lives, but rape, maim, and murder. They cannot be rehabilitated. They cannot be saved. They cannot be coached in some better way of living. They are always going to hurt. They are always going to steal. They're always going to attack. And we need a place in this country where we can send people to visually demonstrate their total separation from society. The fact that they're not going to live among us and will never live among us. It is so clear why Stephen Miller and the president are so close. A Trump reposted Miller's comments in a post on truth social. President Trump wants to reopen Alcatraz.

Stephen Miller, there are people in this country, as President Trump has said, but will do nothing with their lives but rape, maim, and murder. They cannot be rehabilitated on and on. But while Trump's approval rating is tanked, he still continues to poll well with his handling of crime. Harry Anton points that out. All right, net approval rating handling crime. What do we have here?

We have a positive rating for Donald Trump, even in the most recent polling. Look at that, plus two points, far better than Joe Biden, who was so far underwater. My goodness, he was setting records at minus 26 points. You rarely ever see it. So Donald Trump ran in part on law and order. It was one of the reasons that he got elected. And at this particular point, Americans like what they're hearing from him on the issue of crime. And you see this right here with a plus two net approval rating far better than Joe

Biden left office with back in 2024. So when you hear Donald Trump talking about stuff like Alcatraz, yes, I know it's late night father for a lot of different folks, but what it actually speaks to is Donald Trump focusing the American people's attention on an issue in which they actually do like what he's doing. And you see it here with a net positive approval rating of plus two points, which again is 15 points higher than what we saw for Donald Trump in term No, no. So maybe he is focusing, Jank. I don't think it's any surprise when you're disappearing people left and right and claiming

you want to lock everyone up and now talking about, you know, you're making policy off of an old movie, an old prison movie, that people like what he's doing as you started to elaborate on when it comes to crime. Yeah, look, politics is about optics. Whether we like it or not, it doesn't matter. It's about optics. So why was Biden at minus 26? Biden, one of the bills he's most famous for was the crime bill, which was draconian.

It was back in the 1990s, and he was known for locking people up, but he was at minus 26. Why? Because some of the loudest voices on our side, honestly are also radicals. They're radicals in a different way, but they were going around saying, no, there is no crime increase between 2019 and 2023. But there was a significant crime increase between 2019 and 2023. Now remember in 2019 it starts under Trump, right? But it continues mainly under Biden. And by the way, talked to Larry Krasner the other night, the DA from

Philadelphia and crime has gone down significantly in big cities like Philadelphia in 2024 and 2025. But it was real. And our side kept saying, no, there is no crime, there are no gangs, they're not in Colorado, they're not taking over any apartments, They're not doing anything wrong. I'm like, guys, what are you doing? No, no, we want to protect innocent people. There's no need to like pretend that crime doesn't exist or.

And there's, you know, just all sorts of nonsense talk. And then that got put on the Democratic Party, even though Joe Biden didn't say any of that. He winds up at minus 26 because people actually see the crime. They see some Democrats denying it and then they get mad and that leads to minus 26. Trump comes along and goes, Alcatraz, and people go, who I remember Alcatraz, I like that. Oh, he's locking up these criminals and they're all rapists and maimers, right? And so then they go and say that Trump is good on crime. Now, is that really true?

No, you know who's a well-known criminal? Donald Trump. He's literally a convicted felon, right? Lock your own. And what did he do first? He let out all the criminals from January 6th. Then what did he do next, which is arguably even more egregious. he started letting out almost every white collar criminal.

Oh, you got a fraud charge? Okay, give me money to my campaign. You're free to go. You give me money to my meme coin, you're free to go. You give me money to this, that, the other thing. And he released all the, he's like, I said this before, like, you know, Batman and Bain. He's like the bane for white collar criminals. Gotham is yours.

Okay, if you've committed fraud, he's got to pardon you. Okay, so it's so ironic. But last thing is, since they're doing terror, in the polling these days and they're doing bad on the economy what are they going back to they're going back to the well fear fear fear the rapists and the maimers they're maiming everyone we got to put them in Alcatraz it's so tired please America wake up to this nonsense game that they're playing okay so we got to go Sharon you're the best everybody check her out on rebel headquarters

and Marjorie yes Marjorie Taylor Green Next, stay right here.