The Young Turks - The Young Turks - December 17, 2020

Episode Date: December 18, 2020

Nikki Haley eyes 2024 run with op-ed calling for attacking China. Ana Kasparian and Cenk Uygur discuss on The Young Turks. 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 to the Young Turks. Jake you Granite is sparing with you guys. We got tons and tons of the show for you guys. So Republicans got one last trick in their bag of tricks to try to steal the election for Donald Trump, we'll get to that.

is talking the Democratic Party now of kissing Republican ass on several different occasions. Suffice it to say that we will disagree. That is not a good strategy. But it is a very important and depressing turn because I don't think Joe Biden has learned anything, anything at all. So we'll talk about that later in the show. All right, lots to get to. Let's do it. Let's get started, Casper. All right, well, we're gonna start off with a little bit of foreign policy because Nikki Haley has written an op-ed and it's a doozy. So in a new opinion piece for the Washington Post, former UN ambassador under Donald Trump, Nikki Haley, is urging the incoming Biden administration to adopt some of Donald Trump's foreign policy ideas, right? Now, he wasn't able to carry out anything that he actually wanted to carry out other than the more damaging policies. However, Nikki Haley isn't talking about pulling troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, something that we actually agreed with Donald Trump on. No, she wants to have Biden carry out, or at least continue the escalation of war with China. And unfortunately, based on what we've heard from

Biden in response to China, she might just get what she wants on that end. So why don't we start with China, then we'll go on to other foreign policy issues. She writes this, Biden is sure to feel strong partisan pressure to reject most, if not all, of Trump's foreign policy. That would be a mistake. Sweeping away the achievements and strategies of the past four years would endanger American safety and interests. Now, she doesn't really get too specific about the so-called achievements and strategies because really when it comes to foreign policy, Trump hasn't succeeded in anything,

even when his instincts were right, like with pulling troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan. But let's get back to China. She wants Biden to continue ramping up tensions with China. She writes first, Biden should keep key aspects of Trump's China policy. Trump overturned decades old bipartisan consensus that economic cooperation with China would push the Chinese Communist Party in a more peaceful direction. A new bipartisan consensus is rising against that flawed thinking, communist China is the most serious global threat the United States faces. So I have a problem with that framing.

And my number one problem is that the United States didn't engage economically with China, hoping that it would somehow persuade China to switch from communism to capitalism. We were looking for cheap labor. And this shift, of course, happened under the Clinton administration. And that's when we started losing a ton of our jobs overseas to countries like China. So we very much engaged in that process. Our government very much engaged in that process. And that's why so many of our products get manufactured in other countries like China. That's the reason why we had a shortage of protective gear like masks because our supply chain is very reliant on China and other countries. So this was never about like, ooh, democracy building. No, we don't do that. Let's stop pretending like that's what our government is actually trying to accomplish abroad. because it's not. Also, Biden has pretty harsh rhetoric toward China as well, and I'll tell you where that comes from in just a second. But, Jank, I wanted to get your thoughts.

Yeah, so the main difference between establishment Republicans and Donald Trump is that the establishment of Republicans are more sophisticated liars. They're way better at lying, and in a way that gives us mainstream media tremendous comfort. So this is an editorial run in the Washington Post with no controversy at all. So there are things ranging from normal policy disagreements. So should we be tough on China when they steal some of our, you know, intellectual property, trade secrets, etc.? Well, first of all, everybody agrees we should, but there's an interesting policy discussion and debate about how we should be tough on China on that. So that's perfectly normal, right? That's pretty much the only one. Everything else is not in sense, craziness. So,

and misdirection. So for example, she does this along with every other Republican and mainstream media goes along with it. Oh my God, historic peace deals in the Middle East between Saudi Arabia and Israel and UAE and Israel. Oh my God, what a statesman, right? No, Saudi Arabia and Israel were already massive allies. They were totally aligned against Iran. Saudi Arabia wants us invade Iran even more than Israel does. So to paint that as something new, I mean, Nikki Haley knows that's a lie, and the media goes along with it. Like, oh, well, it's signed a deal, okay? So, and then when she talks about China, it gets even more dangerous, honestly, where she says, you know, they're harboring

military ambitions and they're a military threat to us. Really? China's about to take over Santa Fe. China's a military threat, how? And so, you know, like you say, okay, take over of Hong Kong. I can't stand what they're doing in Hong Kong. And we've been super clear about that. But Hong Kong got handed back to them through a deal that they had with the UK. They did not roll in tanks like Russia did in Crimea and in other places. So this whole talk of China being a military threat so that we have to spend more on defense companies and support politicians like Nikki Haley is sophisticated lying and it's a very, very dangerous lies. It is, it is.

And the fact of the mainstream media gives it more credibility makes it more dangerous than a guy like Trump in some ways. No, you guys, I mean, look, the very obvious pivot to China is something that people should be paying very close attention to. Because there is a concerted effort by private military contractors to start heavily militarizing that region of the world. And if you look at where the funding comes from, remember, Nikki Haley, until very recently, served on the board of Boeing. Okay? She served on the board of Boeing. I mean, she has very close ties to defense contractors. And really, the reason why you're hearing this rhetoric regarding China's military capability is because China has, in fact, It's spending and resources on the military and its military capability. There's no question.

It still comes nowhere close to where the United States is. We still outspend every other country by far when it comes to our military. But when you look at when China made that decision to start spending more of its resources on the military, it happened when honestly Obama made a pretty terrible calculation with his so-called pivot to Asia. And that was when in 2015 he started visiting Asian countries, including China. And that kind of tipped China off to the fact that the United States, under pressure for military contractors, was starting to think about not only pivoting to Asia militarily, but trying to find ways to basically sell arms to countries like Japan. And by the way,

to India as well. And so weapons manufacturers, private contractors, they see this as a good financial opportunity for them. And honestly, when Obama made that trip, that kind of tipped the Chinese off. And then at that point, they started spending even more money on their military. So when you look at what persuades our politicians to focus so heavily on China, again, just look at these think tanks that are heavily funded by defense contractors, foreign countries as well. And then they go off and they do the lobbying in Washington to persuade our lawmakers, whether they're Democrats or Republicans, to have a more hardline approach toward China with the first step of militarizing countries in that region. And by the way,

Joe Biden, real quick, Joe Biden even said this. He hasn't been very detailed about what he plans to do with China. But every once in a while, he slips up and he says things like this. The most effective way to meet the challenge is to build a united front of friends and partners to challenge China's abusive behavior. That means selling weapons. That's really what it means. That's what started under Obama. That's what has continued under Donald Trump.

Donald Trump made record weapon sales to Japan. And I guarantee you it will continue under Joe Biden as well. Yeah, there's one part of Nikki Haley's op-ed that is true. She said there is a growing bipartisan consensus that China is basically that China is a military threat. Well, yes, but that's why it's unconscionable for the Washington Post not to note her enormous conflict of interest. She makes money by being on the board of Boeing. Now, Boeing makes tons of money if we go to war, but we don't have to go to war. They make billions upon billions of dollars because of militarization. Just a build-up for an anticipation of war drives

are profits. If you think Boeing doesn't care about profits, you're insane. I mean, that's the, Alex Jones would laugh that conspiracy theory out of the building. Oh, no, multinational corporations don't care about profits. Really? Wait, I hope you're not a reporter if you're, you know, anywhere near that direction. So the reason I bring that up is, because then they'll say, oh, no, we didn't note that because Nikki Haley's on their board and makes hundreds of thousands, is maybe millions of dollars from Boeing, but we didn't bother noting it because both Boeing and Nikki Haley are angels and they wouldn't care about the money that they're making. Come on, come on, come on, come on, come on, come on.

That's outrageous. It's outrageous. And so do Democrats also sometimes serve on the boards as employees? Do they get campaign contributions from defense contractors? Absolutely. Do they then vote for further militarization? Absolutely. they did it during the Trump era. Whatever Trump wanted, Pelosi gave him at least that much,

if not more. So did Schumer. So these Democrats are in on the game. And that's what we're so worried about. Just because we beat the fascist like Donald Trump doesn't mean that the war is over. The establishment is much more sophisticated in their oppression, their militarization of this country. And speaking of oppression, I just want to note one other thing from her op-ed, which I thought was actually the most heinous part. She wrote, Trump refused to accept the tired thinking that the Palestinian cause was the key to broader regional peace. In other words, people are tired about caring about Palestinians. Nobody cares about them. We just told Saudi Arabia, hey, your interest in butchering the Yemenis, the people from Yemen, is greater than your interest in supporting your fellow Muslims in Palestine.

And they agreed, they thought crushing Yemen and causing a genocide there and making money off of all of this was more important than the Palestinian cause. Yes, that is true, unfortunately. But it is not something to celebrate. And she just like flippantly, like, oh, we already threw the Palestinians in the trash. So we're not to worry about them anymore. God, these Republicans are the most awful people on earth. And of course, I have to mention one final, you know, policy that she wants Biden to continue on with, and that's aggression toward Iran. I'm going to go to the last graphic here. How can Biden foster a deeper peace, not by caving to Iran or turning on Israel, both of which would fray a nascent Arab-Israeli bond that still needs strengthening? The better path is to continue to isolate Iran and encourage harmony between Israel, and the Arab states, which now clearly see their common interests.

So remember, we were at a pretty good place with Iran following the Iran nuclear deal, which was negotiated by the Obama administration and several other countries. And it was Donald Trump who decided to come in, rip up that peace deal, that Iran nuclear deal, I should say, which did have the proper checks in place to ensure that Iran wasn't building nuclear weapons. Now Iran is free to do what it wants, really, because why would it follow through with a nuclear deal that was basically thrown away by Donald Trump? And so that we did not need to escalate tensions with Iran. That's exactly what Donald Trump did. And now Nikki Haley is coming in and saying, we better continue doing that.

Don't don't in any way try to actually mend whatever hostilities we have with Iran. And it's just, again, it always goes back to more war, right? It always goes back to selling more weapons. It always goes back to, you know, this profit-driven motive. because when you look at her whole piece, there's nothing in there about withdrawing troops from the Middle East. There's nothing in there about, hey, maybe we need to approach North Korea from a more diplomatic approach rather than, you know, antagonizing them the way that we have. Now, clearly I don't want anyone to come in and do what Donald Trump did where you're going on these like photo ops and talking about how you fell in love with Kim Jong-un. But I also don't think it makes sense to ramp up tensions the way that lawmakers, both on the left and the right, have done historically in this country.

But, you know, Nikki Haley, looking out for companies like Boeing, other defense contractors, weapons manufacturers, that's the bread and butter. So she's going to keep pushing it. Yeah. So last thing here, she's, you know, a war monitoring against Iran because they're religious dictatorship. What do you think Saudi Arabia is? It's a religious dictatorship. But no, no, no, Iran's really dangerous to us. Really? Did al-Qaeda come out of Iran? No, there's Shia. Al Qaeda is Sunni. Al Qaeda came out of Saudi Arabia. Osama bin Laden was Saudi. He was a Saudi prince. So, no, there is a threat to America that has attacked us over and over again. There is a religious, fundamentalist Muslim government that is a dictatorship that butchers its own people and sometimes our people. And that's Saudi Arabia, the one she's praising. Oh my God, let's work with Saudi Arabia. Arabia to create more wars. So our enemies are awesome, but people we make peace deals with

are terrible. So that's neocon thinking. And so Nikki Haley's angling for the neocon play in 2024. This op-ed is basically telling her donors, defense contractors and oil companies, which greatly profit from instability in the Middle East, and other donors, I'm here to serve you. This is my advertisement, my service. political services are for sale, and I will definitely create more war and conflict for you. Politics in America is disgusting. And the fact that the media doesn't point out those obvious political points is even more disgusting. All right, well, let's move on to the latest updates with the stimulus, because it turns out

that Senate Democrats have some leverage, and Bernie Sanders is using it to our advantage. So congressional lawmakers still haven't reached a deal on coronavirus relief, but we're learning more about how hard Republicans have been fighting to essentially nickel and dime ordinary Americans while at the same time doing what they can to provide what's being referred to as double dipping in tax cuts for the wealthy. So let's start off with Republican Senator John Thune, who's worried about Americans getting both direct checks and. unemployment, he thinks, you know, these people might be living too high off the hog. We can't, we can't do that. Now remember, the direct checks will be about $600. That's where they stand with the negotiations right now. Just a one-time $600 check. And the unemployment benefits would be $300 a week for 14 weeks. That was scaled back from 16 weeks. Now, this is what John Thune says about that. There could be language in the deal aimed at addressing concerns that people

who receive both enhanced unemployment benefits and stimulus checks would be getting a double benefit. Okay, we're talking about 8 million Americans who have fallen into poverty since last summer. We're talking about people who owe thousands and thousands of dollars in back rent, which will come do as soon as the moratorium expires. And this guy is crying about a one-time six hundred dollar check. It's the most infuriating thing. And by the way, Bernie Sanders doesn't even accept the legislation as it's being proposed now, which includes a $600 check and the $300 a week in unemployment. And he has leverage. I'll explain that in just a second. Bajank, jump in. Yeah, guys, if you see us, especially me beating up on Democratic leadership in the media

constantly, there's a good reason for that. Because this case is super easy to make. So it's infuriating that no one outside of Bernie Sanders and the just Democrats makes the case. Democratic leadership unilaterally surrenders every time. So this is in a lot of ways old school politics. So the Republicans say I don't want the average American to have as much money, but I want businesses to be able to double dip. We'll explain that in a second, right? So they say if for the average American unemployment checks, I don't want it to be 600, I wanted to cut it in half, 300. The $1,200 check, we wanted it to be zero, but now we're getting some populist concern from our right wing from people like Josh Hawley. So okay, since one

of them is gonna run for president, we'll make it 600. But again, cut it in half, maybe, okay, otherwise it's zero. And unemployment, oh, we don't want it to go for four months, we wanted to go for three months. So at every turn, they attack the average American. Now, if you have a competent party on the other side, you would hate the policy, but you would welcome the politics. You would say, oh, you want to hit Americans when they're down. I mean, you can't give me a bigger political gift. I'll go and just absolutely butcher you politically on that. They cut their payments in half, cut their payments in half.

And then corporations' payments are doubled, as we're going to explain in a little bit. So go ahead, John, do you. Explain why you want to double the advantage for corporations, and you want to cut the advantage for average Americans by half. Explain it. Just explain it. Have you ever seen Democratic leadership do any of that? No, in fact, they do the exact opposite. They made the deal with Thune and other Republicans. So they then turn around and go, oh, Thune is right. We've got a cut for the average Americans. Dick Durbin is out there kissing their ass 24-7.

You know what? He gave a speech on the floor of the Senate today. He's the number two Democrat in the Senate. Congratulations to Trump administration on Operation Warp Speed. It was a tremendous success, he said. You're calling Trump a tremendous success while they call you child molesters. This is what I'm talking about guys. The Democratic leadership is total utter incompetence. It would be so easy to beat these Republicans if you didn't have a bunch of losers on the other side. No, I mean, you're 100% right, especially with how they've handled these negotiations, because there is leverage. And the leverage is very clear right now. So specifically, McConnell, Mitch,

McConnell, Senate Majority Leader, who has been an obstacle in these negotiations, had a call with Senate lawmakers, GOP lawmakers, and realized, oh, turns out that Kelly Leffler and David Perdue, who are facing re-election races in Georgia, are getting hounded about the lack of direct checks. They're getting hounded by it, because guess what? Even Republican constituents, Republican voters, doesn't matter if you're Democrat or Republican, Doesn't matter what your political ideology is. Again, more and more Americans are falling into poverty during this pandemic. They need help.

They need help. So these two Republican candidates desperately want to get reelected. They're being hounded for direct checks. And finally Mitch McConnell admits to Senate Republicans, okay, I guess we need to have direct checks to Americans. Okay, great. And so Bernie Sanders jumps in and says, you know what? $600?

Not enough. And he's right, $600 is not enough. A one-time check of $600 is just not even close to enough when you consider the reality of the economic situation for most Americans. Now, I'm going to skip ahead to the second video here. Here's Bernie Sanders making the case for why Americans need more in these direct checks. Let's watch. This bill, in my view, does not go anywhere near far enough in terms of addressing our crises.

And I hope that as soon as the Biden administration, comes into office, they will address those deficiencies. Now, a week ago, 10 days ago, nobody here was talking about the need for direct payments, help for working families, despite the fact that that is the issue, the program that the American people most wanted. The proposal, as I understand it, provides for a direct payment of $600,000. That is half of what I wanted, but it is a step forward. And I'm going to do my best to make sure that we come as close to that $1,200 as we possibly can.

So again, understand that after McConnell was open for direct checks, Democrats also conceded on shortening the amount of time people can be on the federally subsidized unemployment. It was 16 weeks, they agreed to go back to 14 weeks. And so if it's $300 a week, I mean, think about it, it does cancel out with the direct check to Americans. But, and I want Bernie to keep fighting. But it's a difficult balancing act because people are understandably desperate for relief right now. And so at this point, people are willing to take anything. But considering the fact that there is some leverage here for Senate Democrats, I think they should push a little harder and get a little more relief to Americans as soon as possible.

So let me easily destroy the Democratic talking point about, well, no, but you guys don't understand. There's purple states and we have to win in those states. Wait a minute, people in Montana and Alabama and West Virginia don't want direct checks, they'd rather have you double the payments to corporations, really show me that poll. And that's why you get mad at the media. Just not a single reporter in Washington that says, hey, Democrats, you keep saying you have to work with the Republicans because of red states. Can you show me one piece of evidence? It's a Trump-like assertion that they don't want direct checks in West Virginia. It's not true. It's not remotely true.

It's a total and utter lie that the Democratic leadership does on behalf of Republicans. That is unbelievable, and no reporter notices it. So look, Anna's right, it's now empirical. The Republican voters in Georgia are demanding the direct checks so much that the Republican candidates are saying, oh, we gotta do some direct checks. So Dick Durbin, what happened? And Georgia's not even a red state anymore, but the Democratic voters in Georgia want it. The Republican voters in Georgia wants it.

So who doesn't want it? Oh, your donors. But God forbid, anybody in mainstream media should ask him about that. And then one more thing about that, look, mainstream media also hates fighting. We prefer civility. Civility is wonderful. No, no, no, no, no. Fighting isn't just a vent. It's not because you're frustrated. It's not because you don't know

how to strategize. Fighting is political, it is strategy. So Bernie Sanders begins this fight and says, no, if there's no direct checks, I'm voting, no. Now what does that do? It puts Josh Hall in a bad spot because Josh Hall is trying to be a populist from the right wing side, and he's gonna run in 2024. He immediately recognizes that's good politics, and he goes, oh yeah, me too, me too, yeah, I also want direct checks. Now all of a sudden it's bipartisan. Then the people of of Georgia start putting pressure because they realize it's possible that they might get direct checks. They start putting pressure on the Republican candidates. And now all of a sudden we went from zero to maybe $600 in direct checks thanks to who? Bernie Sanders. Why? Because he started

a fight. The fight wasn't to vent. It was strategic. Now, how many reporters have acknowledged that obviously true fact, almost none? Well, I mean, it's interesting because if you happen to come across the interview that Wolf Blitzer did with Bernie Sanders just yesterday, Wolf Blitzer was essentially urging Bernie Sanders to accept a deal as soon as possible. You know, you can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, something along those lines. He said it, like during the interview. So I get the pressure because time is of the essence. People are incredibly desperate right now. But at the same time, it is important to use the leverage that they have to demand more. And they certainly do have this leverage because Senate Republicans don't want to lose control of the Senate. And so they want to do whatever it takes to help Kelly Leffler and David Purdue here. So Democrats should use that to their advantage. One final thing, I know we're running out of time, but one final thing I wanted to add is what Republicans actually are

fighting for in this relief bill. They actually want to provide like a double dipping tax cut benefit for the wealthy. And so I'm gonna go to Lee Fong's reporting over at The Intercept. He did a fantastic job with this story. He said one of the revisions in the legislation is a subtle yet radical change that would result in a major windfall for the highest income Americans and large corporations. The bill provides that businesses claiming expenses reimbursed by PPP forgivable loans, which are already tax-free, can be further used as deductions when calculating taxable income. In other words, the change would allow a corporation that claimed $1 million in PPP reimbursements

to apply that money as a deduction on its tax return, reducing taxable income by $1 million. It's so egregious and so disgusting that even Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, a man who had no problem working for a bank that was committing fraud in order to wrongfully clothes on people. He thinks that this goes too far. Okay? He says the money coming in from PPP is not taxable. So if the money that's coming is not taxable, you can't double dip. You can't say you're going to get deductions for workers that you didn't pay for. But guess what? Even so, as Lee Fong reports, a growing chorus of lawmakers has demanded that businesses should be able to deduct tax-free PPP money. The demand has been pushed by the most senior lawmakers on the tax-righted.

committees, Representative Richard Neal, and of course, Senator Chuck Grassley as well. God, Richie Neal is a disaster, absolute disaster, such an embarrassment. No, Anna, don't ever let Richie Neal be criticized based on his donors. The mainstream media will get mad at you. They'll say, no, that is a beloved, honorable, Democratic leader. And so I'm sure that he has everyone's best interest in mind when he allows businesses to double dip, but not average Americans. When he helps Republicans do that, even though he's the head of the Ways and Means Committee for the Democrats, the most important committee in the House because it controls the money. So the bipartisan agreement to screw us all on behalf of their

donors is infuriating. So now, look, PPP is a good law. I've talked about that a lot in the past. And so there's nothing wrong with PPP. Now, they put in there that the loans, First of all, the loans are at good rates for small businesses and mid-sized businesses. And then they could also be forgiven. Okay, that's great. That's extra help to small businesses who desperately need it. But if your loans are forgiven, why do you need a deduction on it as a cost? It's literally not a cost.

The government gave you the money and said you can keep it. How is that a cost? Okay, you say, you know what? It's not, but we're just trying to help all businesses. So small and min-sized business. So go ahead and keep the money and do a tax deduction. Now that's billions upon billions of dollars in double dipping, but we're trying to help the economy. Okay, fine, no problem.

But then you can't turn around and say, oh, American workers are going to get an extra $300 for unemployment? No, that's double dipping. We can't send them the direct checks and the unemployment checks. Now, a couple hundred dollars for an average person, no, the average person doesn't donate to us at all. to us at all. No, no, that's double dipping. They're bums. They're bums looking for a handout. Next thing you know, we're going to be communists. Oh, corporations want to double dip. Oh, yeah, of course, right away, right away, sir. I don't even know why they're single dipping, let alone double dipping. I like the relief. I just don't know why it would be considered

a cost. It just makes no sense at all. Yeah, well, we got to take a break. But when we come We'll go deeper into the economic impact that Americans are facing today, especially when it comes to the issue of evictions. And then guess who got a bit of a bailout, prosperity gospel preacher Olstein took millions of dollars in PPP money. We'll give you the details on that and more when we come back. Imagine that our democracy is a dashboard. The lights are flashing, alarms are blaring. It's warning us that it's time to check our systems. Well, that's why I want to tell you about the latest podcast from the nation. It's called System Check. System Check is a weekly show where host Melissa Harris Perry and Dorian Warren asked what it would be like to break free

from the oppressive and malfunctioning political system that is holding all of us down. It's unapologetically rooted in progressive black culture and politics, which I love, from the movement for black lives to fighting for climate justice to the unjust immigration regime, to the unfinished voting rights struggle. Dorian and Melissa want to know how to you're living in, working around, I hope smashing through, and even better yet, recreating the systems that shape your life. System Check just launched, and the latest episode is called The Pandemic didn't have to be this bad.

This episode discussed the decades of this investment in our public health infrastructure and how it's cost us hundreds of thousands of lives. We're now seeing staggering numbers from COVID-19 deaths, numbers that far surpassed the number of Americans who died on 9-11. The federal government's response to those attacks in 2001 was to spend $6 trillion to address a so-called national security emergency. But what about the national public health emergency that COVID-19 has brought that is the equivalent of 9-11 daily? There is nowhere near the same amount of urgency or funding from the government. I know you'll enjoy System Check too, so don't wait.

Subscribe to System Check on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts for new episodes every Friday. All right, back on Young Turks. I'm just going to read two super chats here because they're relevant to something I want to say. Light Labs, EC says, Jank, please for the love of God, run for office. I think we went through that already. Come on, guys. No, no, no. I want like an easy 20-21.

Like, and by easy, I mean like just normally difficult, not like additionally difficult with Jenks like aspirations and like random out of nowhere, I'm going to do something. something crazy that's going to upend your life. Just like keep it cool, Jank, keep it cool. You're doing great. No, no, guys, it's okay. Look, I could say a thousand things about that and it'll save it for the posting for the members.

No, the reason I brought it up is because you don't need me. If I had known I'd never run, Nina Turner's running, she's got this, okay? So nina turner.com slash hello, she'll do what I was going to do and then some. In fact, Jorge Fontaine also wrote in, I donated several times to Jamal Bowman was so happy when he won. That's what I'm telling you guys, fulfillment is a hell of a drug. You made that Jamal Bowman would happen. I'm not kidding, you did. And he says, that's why I donated again this week to Nina Turner. Everyone donate. Let's make this happen and show Washington we mean business. Nina Turner.com slash hello. You send her to say hello to them and then we're going

to get real fighters on our side and real leaders. And that's going to make all the difference in the world. You watch. I'll show you, okay? When she gets in, you will see with your own eyes the difference it makes. All right, Anna, what's next? All right. So the CDC may have banned evictions, coronavirus-related evictions, but that hasn't stopped some landlords in some states from defying the order and getting federal judges to help them do it. So let me just note that there are more and more Americans falling into poverty every day. A recent research showed that an additional 8 million Americans fell into poverty since this past summer as a result of this pandemic. And honestly, the lack of real relief from our members of Congress.

Now, recently there was a man named Steve Crowley who was evicted from his home. And he was shocked that he was evicted because, you know, he had the proper documentation proving that he fell under a category of people who couldn't be convicted due to coronavirus, you know, inability to pay, right? So he lost his job as a result of the pandemic, can't pay his rent. Under the moratorium by the CDC, he had to prove financial hardship. He did that. He provided that evidence to a judge. And then it turns out that this judge decided to side with a landlord. This is in the state of Florida. So Patricia Kinsey, the only judge hearing eviction cases in this particular county where Pensacola sits, ordered Crowley

out of his home documents show. Kinsey cited with a lawyer for Crowley's landlord, a big Canadian company that owns 19,000 rental units in North America who had argued that the CDC order was actually unconstitutional. So the CDC has this moratorium. And then a judge comes and says, nah, my interpretation is that this is unconstitutional. So as a result, I'm not going to honor the moratorium. Agreeing with the landlord's lawyer, Kinsey ruled that the CDC moratorium represented an unlawful taking by the U.S. government of landlords' private property and rental income. And so this really varies depending on where you live, depending on what kind of judges you have hearing these types of cases. In some places like Missouri, people don't have the protections

that they need. And it's actually pretty easy to evict people. And I'll show you an example of that in just a second. But this is what's happening across the country, regardless of whether there's a moratorium in place or not. People are being kicked out of their homes during this absolutely disastrous pandemic. Even though they've done everything right, it's just that they've lost their jobs as a result of the virus. Yeah. So mark my words, Patricia Kinsey is going to move on up the judiciary. And you're saying, but wait a minute, she just did a terrible thing. I know. But the way that it works is when someone makes a decision this outrageous and they say, I will protect business

interest, no matter what, no matter how clear the law is, no matter how brutal the situation is for the average person, someone likely at the Federalist Society. the right wing organization that promotes right wing judges takes a note. They go, oh, oh, that's super extreme. Good, let's put this person on a list for moving on up the judiciary. That's how Gorsuch and Kavanaugh got on the Supreme Court. They both at different times said the corporations in essence, I'm really simplifying here, but could kill their employees and it would be fine.

One was a worker got killed by a killer whale and they ruled, no, that's fine. There's no workplace issue there. Another one, the employer ordered the person to stay in a truck to freeze the death. And he didn't listen, so they fired him. I mean, he goes on, so they like this kind of barbaric behavior in our system is rewarded. Republicans make note of it. And they're like, oh, you're throwing people out in the middle of a pandemic, even though the law is super clear that you shouldn't. Oh, that's a good one.

They will do anything our donors and business interests want. Good, moving on up. So on December 1st, Patricia Kinsey, the judge that we're talking about, handed down the same type of ruling. She sided with the landlord and evicted yet another resident in Florida. And I think it's important for people to see what this actually looks like. I mean, it's one thing to talk about statistics and numbers. it's something different to see how this is completely destroyed families. Here's one example of a woman who was evicted just recently in the state of Missouri.

Chrissy is one of the thousands of tenants within Jackson County, Missouri, that has been evicted since our eviction moratorium expired. Chrissy was trying to do everything right. She moved into this house so that her kids could stay at the same school. This room was my bedroom It did have a king-sized bed in it My dresser Everything I own

And now it's got nothing My ex-husband has the kids As of right now I mean they will be returning home As soon as I have one But yes I'm trying to keep it as normal as possible for them Considering everything going on So they are just doing their regular old normal routine

As it would be any other day I miss the kids laughing. I miss, you know, you take the little stuff for granted whenever you do it every single day. I miss eating dinner at the table every day. I miss everything, giving the kids a bath, the giggling. I miss laughing for sure. Man, this country is a failure of epic proportions. It just absolutely is.

And then you have, you know, Democratic lawmakers going on, you know, CNN or MSNBC. Katie Turr interviewed Ron Wyden. And they're bragging about their bipartisanship. And I feel like there's this emphasis of bipartisanship for bipartisanship sake, right? Like, oh, look at me. It's about me. I can make a deal. I can reach across the aisle.

Okay, but what is the deal? Like, what are you offering in financial relief for Americans? Because if you're willing to give up financial relief that ordinary Americans desperately need right now and make those concessions so Republicans can further cut taxes for the wealthy during this pandemic, then I'm not interested in that bipartisanship. Then you're not winning. You're not doing anything useful with your time. Yeah. So it's also just absolutely disastrous politics because the people that are throwing out of their houses aren't just Democrats. There are tons and tons of Republicans. I haven't seen any polling on if Republicans are getting thrown out more. But remember, the number one voting base for Donald Trump was honestly poor white Americans without a college degree.

And so they're probably getting hit the hardest. So that's when Democrats could turn and say, look, the Republican Party screwed you. Instead, they turn around and go, aren't you so proud of me for making the deal to throw you out of your house with your Republican politicians. And then the press jumps and they go, oh, we are so proud of you. You guys are so great the way you all threw out those bums from their houses in the middle of a pandemic when they got fired because of the pandemic

and putting their lives in danger. You guys just, you did a bipartisan compromise. It's terrible politics for Democrats. It's just not accurate reporting by the media. And so look, again, being reasonable, what is the correct policy thing here? It's not that you just say to the people who own rental property or commercial property, hey, you got screwed out of billions of dollars and sad day for you, we're moving on. No, we're not saying do that even to the landlords. It's not like a gut thing of like,

okay, if it's a business is bad. No, of course not. No, you have to come up with a strategy that makes sense for, hey, how do we know, how do we get the right help to really, it's not the person who's renting, it's the people who own the real estate that they're getting the help to because they're the ones that are not getting the money. You throw the person out, it's not like there's somebody else that's going to take their spot. We're in the middle of a pandemic. The jobless numbers are through the roof. So you're not going to get paid anyway. And those are the people trying to drive this to a conclusion through the politicians they donated to. But at the end of the day, no one gets helped.

But the politicians continue celebrating their bipartisan compromise when in reality, they could have actually helped us, and if you're a Democrat, gotten some good political credit for helping them. Yeah, and I also want to provide some statistics regarding how much people on average owe in back rent. Because let me be clear, right now there are no negotiations in Congress about helping people pay their back rent. At least the money that's even being considered is nowhere near what's necessary to help these people. So the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia says renter households

experiencing job loss because of COVID-19 currently owe an estimated $7.5 billion in unpaid rent or $5,400 each. I mean, that is insane. People, when you consider the fact that before the pandemic, the Federal Reserve did a study that found that nearly half of Americans couldn't even afford a $400 emergency. I mean, they were already in bad shape before. And now we're dealing with mounting back rent that they're going to have to pay their landlords as soon as the moratorium expires. They don't have that money, guess what happens? They're evicted, they're gone, they're homeless. There's no way people can pay that. It's not a, it's not any, it's not within miles of realistic. So, but, you know, politicians don't know. And honestly,

a lot of people in the media don't know. They're like, why, why don't they just pay $5,400 out of the millions of dollars they have in their bank account? They don't have millions of dollars in their bank account like you do, right? $5,400 is backbreaking. Like Anna said, 40% of the country can't afford $400. These folks don't know any real people at all. And so a realistic way of doing and is saying, okay, are we going to just subsidize that because we don't want the real estate market to collapse? Okay, that's an interesting conversation. Or do we want to like a portion here and say maybe the renter pays 25% and the government picks up the other 75% because we don't want the market to collapse and we don't want them thrown out of their house? Okay,

let's have a logical and humane conversation about this instead of, I just throw them all lot, who cares, right? And it's, our system is so brutal and the fact that it's not noted is, is, but to be fair, these media organizations at least did a good job of showing the face of people who are being thrown out. So I appreciate that and that video that we showed you. We'll have the link to the full one down below. So that's great job and including the other organization. I think it was actually, in fact, the NBC network overall that brought that story. So I want to give credit where creditors do, but then also hold them accountable for the political side of it, where there are actually things that are more in favor of the American

people and clearly less in favor. And they never make those calls. They just call everything even on that front. When we come back from the break, we'll talk about prosperity gospel preacher Joel Olstein, who himself is a millionaire, basically taking government money, $4.4 million worth in PPP loans. We'll give you the details on that and more when we come back. All right, back on the York Turks, Jenkin, Anna, go. As we all know, the CARES Act included some relief for small businesses. It was the PPP portion of the CARES package. And unfortunately, there was a lot of abuse, a lot of corporations

and giant restaurant chains that managed to secure some of those loans, which will get forgiven as long as these companies keep their employees on board. However, we're also learning that Joel Olstein, who's a prosperity gospel preacher, meaning he's all about making money, has, in fact, applied and received $4.4 million in PPP loans. So the prosperity gospel pastors, Lakewood Church in Houston specifically, received a $4.4 million loan through the Paycheck Protection Program, part of the Congressional Cares Act, and the first time lawmakers gave direct financial assistance to houses of worship.

And the reason why this is the first time is because houses of worship, are tax exempt. They don't pay taxes. They don't pay into this system. And so the whole idea is if you're not paying into the system and you're tax exempt, you shouldn't be getting this type of relief. But there were exceptions made because of the unique nature of the pandemic. And of course, you can always rely on a prosperity gospel preacher to take as much as he possibly can, even though he's a millionaire himself. In fact, Osteen's net worth is an estimated $40 million making him the richest or one of the richest pastors in the world. Yeah, so look, there's a couple of different things here. Number one, if they want to take PPP for religious organizations, which is allowed, and they want to spend it to make sure they keep their employees. So the pastor, whoever else is involved in a church, a temple, a mosque, etc. I get it. I think it's debatable for a reason I'm going to get into it in a second, but I understand if you really need it. But Joel Austin lied about taking it. So that makes

me think, uh-oh, did your prosperity gospel church, which is a mega church, incredibly wealthy, it's made you incredibly wealthy, you sure you needed it? And more importantly, was it spent on your actual employees? Because if it isn't, by the way, you're breaking the law. But that's the thing. Religious organizations in this country are above the law. So they don't pay taxes. They get this kind of money.

And then if you dare to hold them accountable and say, hey, did you really spend it on your employees? They're like, oh my God, discrimination. They're discriminating against my mission and my yacht. Right. So, and then the other part of this that's questionable is, okay, I get wanting to keep employees. That's why PPP was good in the first place.

But religious organizations do discriminate. And now if you're religious and your right wing, you might say that's good. I don't want gay people getting married and that's my religious belief and you can't do anything about that. That's true. And in this country, you're allowed to hate. You're allowed to hate anyone you like. You're allowed to discriminate against them in your own personal beliefs. But you're not allowed to discriminate them against them in business and in government and in

any other forms. But wait a minute, why is the government giving $4.4 million to a church that does discriminate against some of us? Now, if you're not in the LGBTQ community, you might say, well, I don't care, man. They should get it anyway, even though they discriminate. But what have, but there's a lot of Americans who are gay. And so they're saying, no, we like, we don't want you to be able to adopt kids. Now give me government money, give me your money, your taxpayer money, if you're a gay or lesbian or any of those folks. And I want your money. and then I want to be able to use it to discriminate against you. Nah, that's wrong.

By the way, maybe I can get right ringers on my side. If you don't know this, we do this story on t.com. Mosks are also getting money. So they're getting your taxpayer money. You probably love it if the church is getting it. Oh yeah, take my money, man, for your mission. It's awesome, right? But are you happy with Moss taking the money?

I don't know. Maybe you are. But it's going to all of them and they are allowed to have any, you know, practice they want with our money. Yeah, look, you changed my opinion on this because when I first found out that religious organizations and churches and mosques and all of that, they can apply for these loans. I thought it was wrong because they haven't paid into the system. But you did convince me that, look, I mean, they're being forced to shut down during this pandemic.

So this is a unique case. But honestly, we need to change our policies when it comes to this tax exempt status. Because, you know, again, like a lot of these churches, a lot of these religious organizations do engage in political speech as well, which is what they're not supposed to be doing if they're tax exempt. Everyone should be paying their fair share in this country, period. That's it. That's end of story. We need to stop making exceptions. All right, well. Brett, can I see Joel Aussie's house? Because I just want you guys to see it, right? And look, you know, you get this house because you're great at being an entrepreneur, being a basketball player. being whatever, an amazing surgeon. Great, bless your heart, right? But he's a so-called prosperity preacher. So he is claiming this is what Jesus wants. Jesus said, sell everything you own, okay? Get rid of every single thing you own, give it to the poor and the needy, and then you

will believe in me. And this guy says, no, I need your taxpayer money, because my mansion isn't large enough for Jesus, please. I thought Jesus said you definitely need a portico garage. Does he have one? I don't know, does he have eight antique fireplaces because the Descante does. Kelly Leffler and her husband do. It's a story from yesterday, Jake. You're using words, I don't even understand.

Honestly, same, same, I just learned yesterday. So, but guys, when you look at that picture, I'm asking you if you're a devout Christian, have you read the Bible? Is it conceivable that Jesus would want them to have mansions at your expense? Come on, think for yourself. And that's again for the billionth time in a row why I get mad at the media. Oh, I can't say anything against the prosperity gospel guys, it's religion, I don't want to lose any of my ratings, I don't want to lose my readership, I don't want to lose my advertisers, they'll get mad at me. Oh yeah, that's perfectly normal. Yeah, Jesus wanted everybody to be super rich.

Well, not everybody, just Republicans. It's not true. Read the Bible. All right. Well, when we come back from our break, we'll talk about how incoming Republican senator Tommy Tuberville is a lunatic and how Representative Mo Brooks has yet another scheme that's likely to fail to try to overturn the results of this election. but it does give you a sense of how hard these Republicans fight, even if it means dismantling democracy. You don't want to miss

that story. Come right 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.com slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.