The Young Turks - Texas Jumps The Shark

Episode Date: July 14, 2021

Bernie Sanders says he wants over $3.5 trillion for a Democrat-only infrastructure package, but Senate Democrats aren’t ready to commit. Texas House Democrats fled the state in a move that could block the voting restrictions bill and bring the legislature to a halt. New Texas law opens up abortion bounty hunting. Obama ethics chief scoffs at White House plan to keep Hunter Biden art sales anonymous. Trump wanted to “execute” White House staffer who leaked Trump’s bunker trip to the media. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. All right, welcome the Young Turks, Jank Uyghur, and Experian, and Experian, With You guys, Experian with you guys, a lot of stories, people call for executions, madness all over the place. It's a weird situation, but in some ways, I'm more down about the current situation in the country than I've been in a while. I think that we've lost 75 million Americans. I think that they're in a completely different planet and one that is on the brink of violence.

And so unfortunately there's a couple of stories related to that. And the Democrats are just so hopeless, so hopeless. So it's a dark place right now in America. And what's really frustrating is how the people in the establishment, both Democrats, and the media seem to have no idea at all. They're moving along Blythley, like, oh, it's normal, filibusters and bipartisanship, and let's get nothing done. So we're in a dangerous place.

That's the state of affairs today. I hate to tell you that, but it is true. Now let's give you some of the stories that unfortunately is gonna back that up. All right, well, let's begin with an update on the infrastructure bill because there's some question in regard to the reconciliation portion of it. And I wanted to give you those details.

So Senator Bernie Sanders is already working on an infrastructure bill that can basically include everything that was cut out of the bipartisan version of the infrastructure bill, which will pass through the Senate without reconciliation. Now the bill that Bernie Sanders is working on is meant to pass in tandem to the bipartisan infrastructure bill through the reconciliation process, which just relies on a simple majority to pass. Now that would mean every single Democrat in the Senate would need to vote in favor of the reconciliation version of the infrastructure bill.

And so far from what I've read and what I've seen from Senator Sanders, unfortunately, I don't see a strategy in place to get the Joe Mansions and the Kirsten Cinemas on board with the reconciliation version of the infrastructure bill. But with that said, what we're seeing from Sanders' proposal is quite a bit of spending and obviously bold provisions that we are very much in favor of. That's not the question. The question is, how is he going to accomplish that, even through reconciliation? So, Senator Sanders pushed for $6 trillion in new spending and shot down a $3.5 trillion price

tag that has been floated. He's pressing for a party line infrastructure package, talking about. helping $3 trillion that includes housing, climate, climate action, of course, child care and paid leave among other new initiatives. In fact, he said that what we're trying to do is transformative. The legislation that the president and I are supporting will go further to improve the lives of working people than any legislation since the 1930s. Now he included Joe Biden in that statement, making it seem as though Joe Biden is totally on board

with this incredibly progressive package that would include nearly $6 trillion in spending. But of course, actions speak louder than words. Sanders says that he had a great productive meeting with Biden. But so far, honestly, Jank, I haven't seen anything from Biden to indicate that he's serious about fighting for the reconciliation version

of the infrastructure bill or any of the provisions that are included in it. So I've got more details for you, but why don't you jump in? Yeah. Okay, first, to be fair, Bernie Sanders is fighting for a big package, one that is far more progressive, that basically has huge portions of the Green New Deal inside of it. The $3.5 to $6 trillion, great number, would create tons and tons of jobs, millions of jobs,

and would not only help the economy, would help the environment, but would also help Democrats win, right? And that's a, we care more about the policy, but the politics of it is good as well. Okay, so, so where's the downside? The downside is, I don't get it. I don't see how they're going to pass that. And so somebody is dramatically wrong here. So let me break that down for you before we give you more details. So progressives like Bernie Sanders think that Democratic leadership is going to pass

bipartisan infrastructure bill first. That's the one that's around half a trillion dollars that they agreed with the Republicans on. That bill sucks. It's awful. And privatizes a lot of our roads and bridges and makes us pay fees for the rest of our lives. And it's just, it's the Republican version of the bill. So they, the progressives think they're going to pass that first, and then second, they're going to pass this multi-trillion dollar infrastructure bill, which is a real bill, and that has Green New Deal and et cetera, right? And now the reason why I'm saying, why I'm not dismissing that out of hand is because people like Nancy Pelosi swear up and down

that they will not vote on the first one, on the Republican version, until they get both from the Senate, okay? I would be beyond shocked if that happened. If Pelosi Schumer and Biden are being honest, and they actually pass at $2 trillion, $3.5 trillion, a $6 trillion infrastructure bill through reconciliation, I would, I'd be knocked on conscious with, I would be shocked beyond all imagination. Same. And by the way, I would be ecstatic and I would give them all the credit in the world. I'd turn around and say, you know what? Maybe Nancy Pelosi was a master legislator and I didn't know it.

And I've been wrong all these years criticizing her for being a do nothing corporate Democrat, right? Maybe I was wrong about Joe Biden and he's a conservative do nothing corporate Democrat, right? And so I'm ready and thrilled to say all that if they actually pass it. On the other hand, I know politics. And in politics, the progressives are always used as suckers. And they never pass progressive legislation. They only pass corporate approved legislation.

And only the Republican version of the bill is corporate approved. So either Bernie is really wrong. And he thinks Biden and Pelosi and Schumer are on his side and so the just Democrats and whoever else, and they're about to get the rude awakening of their lives, where at the end, they go, ha, ha, say old trick, we got you guys to vote for the bill we wanted, and then we pulled the football at the last second, and we didn't give you the reconciliation, and then go, oh, there's nothing we can do, right? Or we're wrong, and Bernie's got this on lockdown, and so are the progressives in Congress, and they passed the reconciliation bill, and like I said,

I pass out from shock and disbelief. Yeah, I mean, for me, it's not about what Bernie Sanders's intentions are. I think he has all the right intentions. I think he's focusing on the right provisions that should be included in one infrastructure bill that should pass through reconciliation. Like let's stop playing patty cakes with Republicans. And look, the reason why, one of the reasons why the bipartisan infrastructure bill is so awful is that it sets aside, $100 billion worth of public infrastructure to be privatized.

So when there are these debates, these discussions about, well, how are we going to pay for the bill? Understand that the bipartisan version of the bill certainly does not include tax cuts for the rich or tax increases for corporations, I mean, tax increases for the rich and for corporations. What it does is essentially provide some money to the federal government by by selling public infrastructure to private corporations. That is a disaster, okay? That means that in the end, we're all gonna get taxed through toll roads and fees and all sorts of nonsense.

Yeah, can I jump back in Anna? Wait, I'm not done, I gotta say one more thing. The reason why it's dumb to separate this into two bills is because Republicans want the physical infrastructure. They wanna be able to go back home and tell their constituents, look what we managed to do for you. We got the roads built, we got the bridges. built, these are things that not only Americans are in favor of, corporations are in favor

of. So oftentimes when we talk about legislation, it'll include what's referred to as poison pills, right? So it'll include provisions or elements that one party really, really wants, but in order to get it, they're going to have to vote in favor of a broader bill that includes some provisions that they might not like. What, I don't understand like what motivation or what drive would corporate Democrats in the Senate have to vote in favor of a second reconciliation version of the bill that includes all the provisions that their corporate donors don't want? So my question to Bernie Sanders is, what is your strategy to get the corporate Democrats in the Senate on board? Because that's what he needs to do. And he doesn't have

an answer for that. He just doesn't. Yeah. So look, I want to jump in on so many things you just said there. First of all, nobody's questioning Bernie's intent. I think he has good intent. I think all the just Democrats have good intent. But look, if they get suckered on this, we'll all be absolutely heartbroken. I mean, if they sign that first junk bill and then as we think is going to happen because it's what happens every single time, they pull the second bill and it never passes. It's just, it's too heartbreaking to think about how I have to come on here and tell you guys, they are played for utter fools, and they fell for the oldest trick in the book, and we told you there was no way it was going to happen. I don't want to say that. It's,

it's just, I don't even want to think about it, but that appears to be the direction we're headed in. Now, think about two other things that are really important. Look, Anna, talking about the reconciliation, but how are you going to get Mansion and Cinema Center to vote for it after you already gave them what they wanted, which was the corporate version of the bill, right? But think about the other way of thinking about it, too. Like, if you're the Democrats and you claim Biden, Pelosi Schumer, all of you claim, you're going to do the second reconciliation bill. So why don't you just do that bill?

What do you need the other bipartisan bill for? Exactly. You need it for, at the best case scenario, now I know what every reporter in Washington is screaming, because they love to support corporate Democrats. They're screaming, they need it for optics. No, they don't. Do they? No, they don't.

Who cares? No, they don't. Well, Biden promised bipartisanship and he promised to kiss Republican ass, so he has to. No, he doesn't. He just has to deliver for the voters. The voters don't care who made out with who in Washington. They hate Washington. They don't care at all if you work with Lindsey Graham or Ted Cruz or Joe Man.

They don't care. They just care. Did you deliver or didn't you? Do I have a job or don't I? Do I have higher wages or don't I? the infrastructure? No, didn't we? Did the bridge collapse or didn't it? So every fool in Washington that thinks that any, especially in this hyper-partisan political atmosphere, who's gonna give you credit for being bipartisan? What kind of morons are you? It's so infuriating.

So if they actually wanted to get it done, it just do reconciliation on the whole thing. Everybody knows that. So we're playing kabuki theater here. This is all garbage to To begin with, okay, it's all a trick to only do the corporate version, it's so obvious. Now here's where the rubber hits the road. Pelosi has said, she's unfortunately as always the key here. Pelosi has said there is no way we're voting on the corporate version of the bill, the Republican version of the bill, until both have passed the house. Now either she's gonna backpedal from that, which is my guess, okay, or she's gonna deliver

on that. No ends up or butts, right? Right now, the progressives in Congress, believe Nancy Pelosi. I think that's a terrible idea. I've never seen Nancy Pelosi ever be honest with progressives, ever in her entire career, okay? And everybody in Washington go cry. Oh, Nancy Pelosi's our queen, how could you insult her? I don't care how much you want to kiss her ass while pretending to be a reporter, okay? She never delivers her for progressives. She fights progressives, tooth and nails. She hates Medicare for all. She's called Great New Deal, Green Dream or whatever they call it, right? Now you say that you're sure she's going to pass it? Nah, you don't even believe that. Anyway, so now Pelosi is going to go back on our word. I would be shocked if she didn't.

If she doesn't, like I said, all the credit. If she, but when she does, if they, if the Justice Democrats at that point, if they still vote for the crap version of this bill in the house, before the Senate sends over the real version, oh my God, then we'll lose all hope. And it will be catastrophic mistake, a mistake they can't recover from. There's just way too many obstacles in the way. I'm not trying to be overly pessimistic. I'm just being a realist about this situation. If they're doing two separate bills, again, it doesn't really provide much of an incentive

for corporate Democrats in the Senate to vote in favor of the reconciliation. version of the bill, the one that Bernie Sanders is working on. And to be sure, we already have some preliminary statements from these corporate Democrats. Let's start off with John Tester, who was asked about whether or not he would support Bernie's reconciliation bill. He says, depends on what it's spent for, and this is key, and how it's paid for, right? So the same argument's going to come up, guys. How is this going to be paid for? Are we going to increase taxes on the rich? because my corporate donors don't like that. So I'm going to vote no on this reconciliation bill if it includes tax hikes.

Let's go to Senator Chris Coons, of course, Biden's ally from Delaware, who says, I'm very focused on getting the text on the infrastructure bill. What matters more than the price tag to me is the contents and the details. And so there's really no clear commitment to, among Democrats in the Senate, who every single one of them needs to vote in favor of the reconciliation bill for it to pass in the Senate. Okay, you have several of them coming forward and already showing quite a bit of hesitation in regard to what's being proposed. And then again, the question is, what does Senator Sanders plan to do strategically to get the mansions and the cinemas of the testers and the Angus Kings and all of those Democrats on his side? Well, this is an interview from only three weeks ago.

It's about the Senate filibuster, but I think the way that Senator Sanders answers the question is telling because this doesn't really provide a lot of confidence, at least for me. Let's watch. What do you do about the objection to ending the filibuster from both Senator's Mansion and Cinema? How do you even get your Democrats? Andrew, I'm tired of talking about Mr. Mansion and Miss Cinema. You know, we have got to do what we can to bring people together. The American people, I think, all over this country, understand that now is the time to act.

And I will also tell you, you know, clearly we are constrained by the fact that we only have 50 Democrats. And to my mind, what this next election is going to be about is whether the American people want us to have a government that represents all people that believes in democracy or not. And we need a hell of a lot more Democrats in the Senate than we have right. Right now. Oh no, and I had not seen that. Yeah, look, let me just comment on it real quick because, but you have, Senator Sanders, you have to talk about your colleagues, Democratic senators who are standing in the way of passing much needed robust legislation, whether it be the For the People Act or whether

it be this infrastructure bill, the reconciliation version of it. I mean, that communicated to me at least, and maybe I'm reading too much into it. I don't know, you guys tell me that he's not willing to apply the necessary pressure, right? Carrots are one thing. I mean, what he did there was emphasize, you know, the need to win, for Democrats to win in the midterm elections. But here's the thing, if the Democratic Party doesn't actually deliver something that materially improves voters' lives, what incentive do they have to show up to the polls and vote for Democrats in the midterms, right? Like you have to fight to actually get these policies passed. You have to show that you've actually accomplished something.

Simply saying we need more Democrats in Congress, it's just, I mean, we hear the same message over and over again. I mean, when it came to the two the Senate runoff races in Georgia, we heard the same thing. This is so important, we got to get these two Democratic senators elected, it's so important. It happened, people showed up, they voted. And to now turn around and say like, oh, what could we do, you know? No, look, guys, you might have seen an interview with Bernie and go, well, I don't get it. That sounds totally normal. No, no, we're here to decode things for you.

When he says we need more Democratic senators in the Senate, that means wait till after the next election. No, no, we cannot wait till after the next election. You're likely to have less Democrats, not more Democrats after the next election. You might lose the Senate and the House in the next election. And then we have no chance at all. So the absolute sucker play is to vote for that so-called bipartisan infrastructure bill, and then wait for after the elections to vote for the reconciliation bill. No, hell no, hell no, hell no.

If they vote for that, if they go with that plan, they are the biggest fools I've ever seen. And it just, you can't recover from being that politically naive and ignorant. So they haven't done it yet. They haven't done any of that yet. Right now, Bernie is saying that he's fighting for a bigger infrastructure plan and that he's going to hold them accountable. I hope to God I'm wrong, all the members are writing saying, I hope Jank is wrong and falls over from shock and all that stuff.

And I agree, I hope, hope, hope. But right now, it looks terrible because it looks like they're going down a path where they're going to trust the corporate Democrats one more time, which would be the dumbest thing imaginable. They're going to pull the football. We all know it and just it's unconscionable. I hope I'm wrong on all of it and they somehow pass a progressive bill for the first time in my life. But it would be shocking.

All right, let's take our first break. When we come back, we'll travel over to the state of Texas where Democrats are fighting back against a voter suppression bill. And there are some pretty severe consequences in regard to Texas's anti-abortion law as well that we want to talk about. So come right back. We'll give you those details and more. All right. All right. Back on Young Turks.

Jencanana with you guys, along with Belinda Lomeli and Nidubusi Madu. So they just joined. I hit in the join button below. We appreciate it. We love you members. Look, we're cornered on all fronts, all right, all left, centrist. They all attack us nonstop. They're all wrong. But we love having the smartest, strongest audience, and we love doing this show with you guys. More news. All right. Well, Texas is one of the many states with Republican governors that's attempting to pass voter suppression bills. And the Democrats in the state legislature, are fighting back. This is now the second time that they have essentially fled the state

house in order to prevent a vote on the suppression bill. Now, there are enough Republicans in the state legislature to pass the suppression bill, which is why Democrats have no choice but to use this tactic. The move denied the Republican-led legislature. On July 18th, get excited. This is big! For the summer's biggest adventure. I think I just smurf my pants. That's a little too excited. Sorry.

Smurfs. Only dinner's July 18th. A quorum, leaving it with too few lawmakers in attendance to conduct business. That means it could not, at least for now, vote on the bill. Now, this tactic has led to threats from Governor Abbott, including the threat of arresting these Democratic lawmakers. I'll get to his specific statement in just a second, but understand how the rules in the state legislature work. Two-thirds of the 150 member chamber must be present to conduct business. When the House is in session, legislators can vote to lock chamber doors to prevent colleagues from leaving and can order law enforcement to track down lawmakers who have already fled.

And the rules apparently go even further than that. As I mentioned, Greg Abbott has not only threatened to continue calling for special sessions to ensure the passage of this bill, he also says that he's willing to arrest these lawmakers. As soon as they come back in the state of Texas, they will be arrested, they will be cabined inside the Texas Capitol until they get their job done. And again, I can't even believe this, but there is some indication that he would be able to do that. I'll give you those details based on the state law in just a second.

But go ahead, Jake. Peter Hamby on Super Chat reminded me, did Greg Abbott threaten to arrest Ted Cruz when he ran away to Cancun in the middle of their emergency when people's lives are on the line? No, of course not. Then that actually affected real people. This affects Republican power. So that's when they're willing to arrest people. So look, what I can't stand is the uneven playing field.

So we had a similar situation in that House and where the Democrats could have actually arrested Republican legislators for doing something similar. Of course, the Democrats were never, ever, ever going to contemplate that, let alone do it. Whereas the Republicans, the drop of a hat are like, oh, you won't let us block voting rights for black people, we'll have you arrested, okay? And so, and do I think they mean it? Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. For Republicans arresting their political opponents is Tuesday.

They, that, it has begun, right? So there's nonstop threats of violence, now there's threats of arresting their opponents. I want to give credit to the Democratic legislators in Texas, it's brave, it's, hey, look, they're Among the very few Democrats in the country that are actually trying to fight. And so, I mean, Democrats at the national level, their go-to move is surrender, even when they're in charge. Even when they have the House, the White House, what's the first thing they did? They said, we surrender to the Republicans, we need their approval for all the bills. It has to be bipartisan.

It's not my administration. It's Mr. McConnell's administration. Preemptive unilateral surrender when you have all the control in the world, right? But here's some Democrats in Texas with a fighting spirit saying, well, there's no way we could. can block the vote. No, we found a way. If you don't have quorum, you can't vote. So we're going to leave the state so you can't have quorum. It's the second time they've done that. It didn't work the last time. But at least they're trying. And by the way, they're going to Washington to draw attention to, hey, even if they get passed in Texas, you can nullify it

by doing federal legislation. You remember the thing that you said was your number one priority, H.R. 1 for the People Act, right? And they're going to try to pressure national Democrats to do But of course, they didn't get the memo on national Democrats. National Democrats are not Democrats, they're Republicans. I know, I mean, it's interesting because while these Texas state Democratic lawmakers were in Washington, D.C., that's where they fled to. They kept repeating that they're hoping that the federal voting rights law that passes or legislation that passes will supersede whatever happens in the state of Texas. But if they're putting their eggs in that basket, they're in a lot of trouble. Because I mean, really, there's, I don't see a path forward when it comes to for the

People Act, right? I mean, there's no way that's going to pass with the Senate filibuster in place, which requires 60 senators to vote in favor of the legislation for it to pass. And even the watered down version of a voting rights bill that was presented by Joe Manchin, corporate Democrat, conservative Democrat in the Senate, Republicans aren't in favor of that either. In order for a federal voting rights bill to pass, they would need to do away with the filibuster. And Democrats are unwilling to do that. They're just unwilling to fight to get rid of it.

Look, I'd call them cowards, but they're not. They're complicit. They're banches, cinema, Chris Coons, eight Democrats are already going to spin them wage, raising the minimum wage. All eight of those are completely owned corporate Democrats. They might as well would be Republicans, it doesn't matter at all. Two of them are from Delaware, they take their marching orders from the top corporate Democrat in the country, Joe Biden.

This is all a ruse. And guys, look, we tell you this stuff, and you could see if we're right or wrong, right? If it turns out we're wrong and Biden is FDR 2.0 and he passes giant reconciliation bills and they pass the for the People Act and this brave action by the Texas Democrats winds up creating enough of a delay that the federal government steps in and the Democrats deliver at the national level because they have control over the entire government. Great, then I'm thrilled to be proven wrong. But I'm not going to be proven wrong.

And Joe Biden isn't going to do anything about Mansion or cinema. In fact, Joe Biden's current position is he's in favor of the filibuster. Exactly. He's in favor punching himself in the face. So these Democrats are frauds, total utter frauds. So your two choices are frauds and fascists. That's the sorry state that America is in right now. All right.

Well, let's move over to the other Texas story. This one having to do with abortion bounties, so fun. Texas's new anti-abortion law will soon allow Americans across the country to sue Texas-based abortion providers or anyone who aids an abortion past six weeks. Now, this is the most draconian anti-abortion law that's passed in the country. And the way that it allows for American citizens to sue abortion providers, providers was very much intentional in order to prevent any type of situation where the courts might rule that the law is unconstitutional.

So let me explain how that works. So if successful in this lawsuit, the petitioner who does not have to reside in Texas will receive a $10,000 award and the cost for attorney's fees. The provision which passed the Texas state legislature this spring is part of a larger anti-abortion bill, which will ban all abortions after a doctor detects a fetal heartbeat, usually around six weeks, right? Now, first of all, there's a financial incentive for people across the country to sue abortion providers in Texas, which is an issue.

It also encourages these lawsuits through that financial incentive, which whether the claims made by the individual filing the lawsuit or right or wrong, like that doesn't matter. What ends up happening is the abortion provider will then get caught up in a legal fight that of course is costly. So even if they've done nothing wrong and have followed the six week abortion ban law, they still have to go to court and they have to fight the allegations made against them, draining them of time, draining them of resources, and that's very much an intentional part of this. Now typically, this is where it gets super shady, typically government agencies shut down or

or challenge abortion clinics accused of breaking the law, and the clinics then have a way to challenge the constitutionality of the state law through the courts, but by deputizing Americans to sue on their own, clinics and doctors can no longer employ that method. So understand that when the courts decide on the constitutionality of a law or an action by state lawmakers, it has to be an action carried out or enforced by state lawmakers. In this case, it's an action, the lawsuit, carried out by American citizens. So it makes it a lot more difficult to deem this law unconstitutional. So it's just a way to jam up the court system with all of these frivolous lawsuits, drain

abortion providers of what resources they have in fighting these lawsuits that can be filed by any American citizen in any state in the US. And it's just very clear that it's a way of... just strangling what's left of reproductive rights in the state of Texas. When Greg Abbott was asked about it, he mentioned his faith and how he's doing it for religious purposes. What is this? The Taliban? What is it al-Qaeda? Is it the Saudi government? Is it the Mullahs in Iran? Who are we talking about? This is supposed to be a secular country. It's in our Constitution.

We shall not establish a religion. I'm not in your religion. I don't believe the same things you believe. I'm so tired of saying it, but the Bible is pro-abortion 511 through 31. You're not even right about your religion. This is all an effort to subjugate women. No, and also let me, okay, let me give you his exact statement. This is the last graphic. He says, our creator endowed us with the right to life.

And yet millions of children lose their right to life every year because of abortion. Because, you know, Governor Greg Abbott cares so much about people's lives. The guy who supports the deregulated, privatized energy grid that killed people during a winter storm recently because they didn't weatherize their equipment to withstand the winter storm. The same guy who had no problem spreading disinformation regarding coronavirus, who had no problem prematurely opening up businesses as new cases of coronavirus, you know, new coronavirus cases had increased significantly. The guy who had no problem spreading disinformation about mask wearing, which clearly saved people's lives. Those who actually listened and wore masks were far less likely to contract the virus

and get hospitalized or die as a result of COVID. I mean, yeah, this guy allegedly cares about people's lives. Give me a break. I'm just so sick of the right wing trying to pretend like this is a question of life or death for them, when in reality it's, there are two reasons why Republican lawmakers push for anti-abortion laws. It's not about religion and it's not about the right to life. None of that matters to them. It's about number one, punishing women and controlling them so they don't have the ability to make decisions about their own bodies. But also number two, and we shouldn't discount this, it's about pandering to evangelical voters who had no problem with someone as disgusting as Donald Trump, breaking all of their rules, right?

But pretend like they care about the issue of abortion. Yeah, okay. So this bill has two different problems. One is this weird vigilante situation where they're like, it's a bounty. Go find somebody who did an abortion. God help us all, man. What are you doing, guys? What are you doing?

And so they're going to hunt women and doctors down in Texas. And then they're going to sue them and try to bankrupt them and rule. their lives and take the, you know, probably all the money in the house that that doctor worked for his whole life and they're going to rob him of it. And they're going to rob the people, good people working at clinic, trying to get women a right that they have to do what they want with their body. They're going to turn women into chattel. They are, they are.

They're going to say, we're in favor of big government. We now own your body. You're not allowed to do whatever you want with your body. The state of Texas owns your body. Six weeks, by the time you miss your first cycle, you only have two weeks left. Most, tons of people have no idea that they're pregnant within six weeks, right? So it makes abortion, de facto, illegal. So they're gonna make it illegal.

By the way, I'm in a total state of this right now, like, I think that the Democrats are gonna lose on everything, and I think they're gonna make abortion illegal in Texas. And I don't know if the courts are gonna reverse it, if it goes to the Supreme Court, I have no confidence that they're not going to, that they're going to reverse it. So now in tons of, in the majority of the country, soon, abortion might be illegal. And you no longer can control your body. And so you might get raped, and then your rapists can sue you. This is, by the way, this is true.

And it was pointed out by reporters in this case. It's in the bill, right? So there's no exception for that at all. So your rapist can then sue you, get money from either you, the doctor, or the clinic. They don't sue the actual woman getting the abortion. They sue the abortion provider. Yeah, right? So if a man rapes a woman and she gets pregnant as a result of that rape, if she then gets

an abortion, that abortion provider can be sued by the very person who raped the woman. There's no exception written in the bill that prevents that from happening. Well, people aren't gonna do those abortions, obviously, because they don't want to be sued and they don't want to lose everything, right? So they're going to tell that poor woman, I'm sorry, your rapist has threatened us with a lawsuit. So he now controls your body for the rest of your life. And Republicans almost all vote on abortion. Democrats almost never vote on abortion. So if you're going to continue to be an idiot and say, no, I bet they don't do it, I bet they don't do it, I bet it's not important. Well, give your

body over to the Republican Party and see how it turns out. So but look, at the same, same time, I hate the Democratic Party constantly blaming the voters. So let me be clear, right? The Democrats never deliver for you. They never deliver for you, right? And then they put you in an awful position where you either have to vote for the frauds of the Democratic Party are or the fascists who are going to take over your body and say, I now control it. Big government owns your body. We live in Handmaid's Tale. And that's brought to you by the religious zealot Taliban in Texas. So that's who the Republicans are. I can live with anything. except the lies about the Republican Party.

They're monsters, and they don't believe in freedom at all if you're a woman. And they don't believe in freedom at all for this country because they want to impose their version of their religion on the rest of us. They hate America. America is not supposed to establish a religion. America is supposed to believe in freedom. And they hate this country. That's who the Republicans in Texas are. Don't let them take control of your body.

It's grotesque. All right, let's take a break. When we come back, the mayor of Miami is calling for airstrikes in Cuba. All right, back on TYT, checking anna with you guys. More news. As we reported earlier, thousands of protesters have taken to the streets in Cuba, expressing a variety of frustrations from food shortages to the, to the handling of coronavirus, but unfortunately some of the Cuban diaspora in South Florida

are calling for some pretty extreme measures by the United States toward the government of Cuba. One interview featuring the Miami mayor, Francis Suarez, gives you a little sense of what they're looking for. And for any of you who might think that the only role of the United States should be lifting the Cuban embargo and the sanctions, which I agree with, Understand that Mayor Francis Suarez thinks, no, no, those sanctions should stay in place. Here he is. Ben Rhodes, who of course was a national security advisor to President Obama, tweeted this. The Cuban people suffered doubly from a repressive government and a cruel U.S. embargo.

They deserve policies that empower them and help them improve their lives. Do you think that President Biden, looking at this situation, will lift that embargo? And do you think that's what he should do? No, I don't think the embargo is cool at all. And I think that the Cuban people are not asking for a lifting of the embargo. They're going out of the streets every single day talking about the failure of the communist regime to provide for its people. So, I mean, look, it's interesting because you listen to interviews of the protesters. And are there people within that group protesting who have an issue with the Cuban government? Yes, right? But you also hear problems with inflation.

food shortages. Obviously, COVID has been a pretty big disaster for countries like Cuba. The lack of tourism, which is a huge source of revenue for Cuba, it has hurt them. And then you have the U.S. sanctions, which of course hurt the economy and the Cuban people, but they don't want the lifting of sanctions. They want to crush Cubans. So they're so desperate that they rise up and try to overthrow the government. What people like Suarez want is regime change in Cuba. That's what they want, right? And he goes even further and calls for literal airstrikes, which I'll get to in just a second. But Jank, why don't you jump in first? Yeah, I love when politicians in America pretend to speak for the people of another country

without ever actually talking to them, knowing anything about it, whenever you hear people say, and they also of this country, the American people want this, and the Cuban people want If you back it up with a poll, great, then I believe you, or okay, or at least we're having a conversation. But no, without any facts or knowledge, he's like, oh, I'm a right winger, and I get votes from Little Havana and in Miami from the Cubans that live here, who all left Cuba and despise the Cuban government by telling him how terrible the Cuban government is. So I will come here and pretend that I've spoken to all the Cuban people, and they tell me that they're, they love the embargo.

They might hate their own government, and they would be right to the people that are protesting now. But the idea that they're in favor of the embargo is preposterous. It's starving them, and it's preventing medicine from coming and saving the lives of their family members. And so they're frustrated, their government that they haven't gotten the medicine to them. But if you told them, hey, America's also blocking medicine that can save your aunt's life or your mom's life, my guess is they wouldn't be like, oh, thank you so much America. That mayor in Miami speaks for me as my mom is dying because of the American embargo. No, he's a liar.

He doesn't, he didn't talk to anybody there. Of course he's lying. Right. And keep in mind that the embargo and the sanctions, you know, many think that it's just between the United States and Cuba. But the United States pressures its allies to avoid doing any trade with Cuba. Some, you know, some of our allies take the risk anyway. But the actions of the Trump administration went further than what the embargo initially was.

And one of the things that the Cuban diaspora is not allowed to do now is send or wire U.S. currency to their family members in Cuba. So it is harming Cuban residents, but they don't care. I mean, they like that this is pressure. This is applying pressure or creating an environment in which people get so desperate that they'll rise up. and push for regime change. I mean, it is a form of intervention, really, when you think about it. You don't need boots on the ground and you don't need airstrikes for U.S. intervention to happen. It's already happening in the form of these economic sanctions.

Anna, I don't know what you're talking about. I'm sure the Miami mayor is right. When the money that they could get to help save their family is blocked by the American government, they thank the American government. They're like, oh, thank you for blocking the money that was going to come to me. It's not like my family needed. It's not like we're in dire straits here. Oh, I thank you so much for blocking it.

That's what this moron claims that they think. Of course they don't think that, but it's about to get much worse. And so I gave you an example of intervention when it's in the form of economic sanctions. But no, Suarez wants to go much further than that, so let's watch. And what should be being contemplated right now is a coalition, a potential military action in Cuba, similar to what has happened in both administrations, in both Republican and Democrat administrations. In Republican with Bush in Panama, they deposed Noriega, and that country had peaceful democracy for decades. And you had interventions by Democratic presidents, you know,

taking out Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. It's a sovereign country where they took out a terrorist that probably saved thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of lives. And President Clinton in Kosovo, intervening in a humanitarian issue with airstrikes. So there have been many, many opportunities in the history of- Are you suggesting air strikes in Cuba? What I'm suggesting is that that option is one that has to be explored and cannot be just simply discarded as an option that is not on the table. That is an option that has to be explored. Because, you know, U.S. intervention with the goal of regime change has worked out so well in other countries. By the way, especially Latin American countries like Guatemala, where the CIA backed a coup overthrowing a democratically elected leader for, you know, U.S. business interests, Chiquita Banana, which was United Fruit at the time.

I mean, it's just, do you guys understand what happens after the U.S., first of all, innocent civilians die? Okay, that's point number one. Point number two, this is all about essentially taking bits and pieces of Cuba and privatizing it. You see it happen over and over again. Read Naomi Klein's shock doctrine. It happened in Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union.

That's not being an apologist for the Soviet Union, but it's also acknowledging what business interests did in taking nationalized parts of that country, privatizing it, and then, of course, exploiting the resources in that country, again, for business interests to the detriment of people living in Russia. You see it happen in Guatemala. You see it happen to so many other contexts. And to call for airstrikes, I mean, it's just so stupid, and I'm sick of this narrative. among some Americans and certainly among politicians regarding what the United States

needs to do to overthrow governments that it doesn't like. I think the people of Cuba should make that decision. I think the United States should lift the economic sanctions and make the economic situation a little easier for people who are struggling during the global pandemic. But that should be the only role of the United States. The idea of doing airstrikes or military intervention is just sick. So, hmm, I wonder which country was we most spectacularly failed in intervening in.

Oh, right, Cuba. Remember the Bay of Pigs? So how did that intervention turn out? So now morons are back to, hey, let's try the Bay of Pigs again. And then which country did we have a giant standoff where we thought we might start a nuclear war because we threatened to bomb them? Oh, right, Cuba. That was a Cuban missile crisis. Now we're back to that as if none of that happened.

As if Bay of Pigs didn't happen, the Cuban Missile Crisis didn't happen. The moron mayor of Miami comes out and goes, oh yeah, maybe we should bomb the living crap out of Cuba. That would be, that's a great idea. I bet that would win the people over it. So when I posted about it on social media, right wingers jump in and go, no, no, it's okay, Chank. It's going to be precision strikes. Oh, yeah, yeah. Oh, of course.

We're so good at precision strikes. I'm just like we did it. Just like we did in Iraq. We had precision strikes all over Iraq for a decade after. decade and same with Afghanistan. So many precision strikes. And that resolved itself so well, didn't it? So they said, oh no, no, we're not going to only hit the military and the cops. And well, I'm another infrastructure, of course, and people who die are of course all collateral damage. And we had to burn Cuba to save Cuba, of course. So maybe we should go back to the

idea of bombing Cuba. And I bet it doesn't start any bigger conflict. And I bet it doesn't kill the civilians of Cuba. Nah, you're all monsters, man. So we fought against the Iraq War tooth and nail. There was only two shows, national shows on air that did that. Democracy now and the Young Turks. And we couldn't prevent that war. We fought tooth and nail against invading Iran. We did prevent that for the moment being, okay? Everybody combined, not just less obviously, right? A lot of people were opposed to going to Iran. And now here we are. Now back at Cuba, back at Cuba. Yeah. Our most disastrous intervention of all. And now we've got mayors of major cities say, yeah, let's just bomb them and see what happens.

I want to read two excerpts from a piece written by Ben Burgess in Jacobin about this very issue because I think he also provides another example of how U.S. meddling is a bad idea. He writes, to see what kind of government U.S. meddling would produce, look at neighboring Haiti, whose president the United States Marines removed in 2004. Anyone who believes U.S. intervention in Cuba would bring about a stable, prosperous, liberal democracy first needs to explain why Haiti is racked by dystopian levels of poverty, inequality, corruption, and political violence. And in regard to the sanctions, the U.S. sanctions on Cuba, the international community is against us on that. In fact, last month, the United Nations voted overwhelmingly to call on the United States to lift the embargo. Only the United States and Israel voted no.

Ukraine, Colombia, and Jair Bolsonaro's Brazil were the only abstentions. And 184 nations voted yes. When it comes to being enormously cruel to a population, Israel and the United States are number one again. Occupy the Palestinians, bomb the Cubans, starve them, make sure they don't get medicine. By the way, where's another embargo? embargo, which starves and takes away the health of its citizens in the Gaza Strip. So what's good for the Palestinians is good for the Cubans, the United States and Israel say.

When the whole world is against you, maybe you should double check your position. And by the way, the person who put the embargo back is Trump. The person who is loving it and celebrating it now is Joe Biden. What happened? I thought we were supposed to get a difference, right? So now look, we're not naive. Trump is a fascist and wanted to end democracy, okay? But we're also not naive in the opposite direction.

Where, oh, if Joe Biden says it, he probably means it. No, this is when you're supposed to hold him accountable. But of course, no one in the press is willing to do that. They just let him violate every campaign promise and call them FDR 2.0 anyway. So let's go to our next break. But when we come back for the second hour of the show, we're going to discuss Hunter Biden's newfound career and profession in art. He's apparently going to have some sort of auction, and there are all sorts of issues related to that, especially with the White House's involvement. And later in the

show, we'll also discuss Donald Trump calling for certain executions. We'll tell you who he was targeting when we come back. Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work. Listen ad-free. Access members, only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts at Apple. co slash t yt i'm your host jank huger and i'll see you soon