The Young Turks - The Young Turks - November 11, 2020

Episode Date: November 12, 2020

This Fox News host has had it with Trump's lies. 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. Big my feet. Free watching, Free watching, Free watching, Free watching,

Dream Welcome, Friends. You're watching the Young Turks. I'm Anna Kasparian. Joining us on this wonderful Wednesday is John Ida Rola, host of The Damage Report, long-time friend, long-time colleague, and all-around badass and dragon daddy. What's up, John? How you doing? Thank you. Thank you. I knew when I sent you that intro, it was long-time. But you nailed it, got every word. And glad to be on the show with you again. Well, we have a fantastic show ahead for you. We are going to take a look into Biden's transition team.

Who's included? Who's not included? Progressives are starting to get a little more, I guess, aggressive with what they're demanding from a Biden presidency. And we have one of the most insane sock puppet Twitter account stories of all time. So there's a good mix of fun. So there's a good mix of fun, a good mix of stories that might enrage you. But we're going to start off with something incredibly light. Just to set the mood, everyone is stressed out.

We still have Donald Trump refusing to concede and acknowledge the fact that he lost his re-election bid. So why don't we just loosen up a little bit and dunk on convicted, convicted, convicted, convicted, convicted felon, Dinesh DeCusza. Ew. All right. Well, convicted felon, Dinesh D'Souza, used some X-rated language, not safe for work, to describe Senator Ted Cruz's recent actions on the Senate floor. In a tweet, he shared his thoughts saying Ted Cruz just unloaded on McCabe's face over the ridiculous Logan Act double standard with Biden versus Flynn.

Now, I did not explore what he was talking about because I don't care, but more importantly, I think most people read that tweet and wonder, did he do that on purpose? Or is he just a total dork and has no idea? Well, I mean, whether he did it on purpose or not is independent from him being a total dork, which he is in the bad ways and not the good ones. But no, I think he, it's like when a stupid person tries to sound smart, but it's hard to because at the end of the day they're stupid, when a weak person tries to sound tough, they're not actually tough.

That's, I honestly don't care if it's intentional and I don't think it is. He's a little weeny. Well, speaking of little weenies, your response to that tweet was the best. You said, big typing with one hand energy. And- He really liked that story. He just really, really like that story. Yes, he's very very very. And Ken Clippenstein had his own thoughts. Just a quick screenshot. If you're listening to the audio version of this show, it was the screenshot for a logo for an adult entertainment website that many people frequent on a regular basis.

You know a lot about that logo. Yeah. And so look, he, I think the simplest explanation is he did the thing that you sometimes do. You read an article or whatever you enjoy. You want to spread it. So you spread it all over the face of the end. internet and to show that you love the internet. And anyway, so you click on it and it comes up and it has the little thing in the tweet that has its title and then it has the same text up above. And you don't want to do the thing where you have the same text twice, but like the thing down below, so you change it. So the thing down below says explodes to McCabe's face, which is still an interesting image. But it's not like they said he exploded on McCabe's face. So unloaded isn't the problem, it's the on. Unloads to his face, still wanky, but not as much as on his face.

You gotta proofread, man. What would this show be without the literary teachings of John Idaura? Thank you so much. I love a saucy, sexy tweet as much as the next guy. Generally not from him. Exactly. Well, there you have it. There's no substance to that story other than that.

then Dinesh D'Souza creeps us out. But let's move on to actual news. What's really happening in the country and what we should be a little concerned about. As we know, Republicans still refuse to accept the outcome of the election. Texas lieutenant governor, Dan Patrick, has announced that he will pay a reward up to $1 million if anyone comes forward with allegations of election fraud, any reports of voter fraud. And so according to CBS News, whistleblowers and tipsters should turn over their evidence to local law enforcement.

Anyone who provides information, and this is a statement from Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, anyone who provides information that leads to an arrest and final conviction of voter fraud will be paid a minimum of $25,000. Now, the wording is important there because in order for you to collect any money in the form of a reward, the individual that you're accusing of voter fraud would have to be convicted of voter fraud. And so far, what we've noticed from the Trump campaign and other Republicans who have been alleging widespread voter fraud is that they have yet to provide any substantial evidence indicating that that fraud actually took place. And federal courts have been shooting down the Trump campaign and their lawsuits because

their lawsuits are nonsense. And so, you know, what do you think the outcome of this would be, John? The outcome of offering up a million dollars for that sort of thing? Knowing Republicans and how those sorts of things work, I don't think anyone's ever getting that money, no matter what they find. Yeah, that's actually a great point. Let me give you some more from Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick's statement. He says, I support President Trump's efforts to identify voter fraud in the presidential election and his commitment to making sure that every legal vote is counted and every legal vote is disqualified.

President Trump's pursuit of voter fraud is not only essential to determine the outcome of this election, it is essential to maintain our democracy and restore faith in future elections. So let me just remind you all that Joe Biden won the popular vote to the tune of five million people who cast their ballots for Joe Biden over Donald Trump. I give you that number because in order for the election results to flip to Trump's advantage, you would need to prove literally widespread voter fraud in several states. This isn't a 2000 situation where there's a big question mark regarding the state of Florida. We're talking about key battleground states, many of which the Trump campaign has already

filed lawsuits against, and many of those cases have already been shot down by federal judges because, again, they have failed to provide any evidence to the accusations that they're making. So I think what's likely to happen is we're going to see all sorts of false allegations against people who did absolutely nothing wrong and they're going to have to go through what you would expect they'd go through with right wing media lunatics accusing innocent people of doing something wrong when they really haven't done anything wrong. Just today, Donald Trump tweeted a video of people, officials, literally collecting ballots from ballot drop-off boxes. It's on video. But how are the ballots supposed to get collected? I mean, I don't really understand. Well, the stork comes and I don't know. I don't know.

Yeah, so, you know, J.R. and I talked about this a little bit on the damage report. And generally, the sorts of things you offer a million dollars for documented proof for are things like Loch Ness monsters and Yetis. They're things that need to be proven because we have no proof. And they're saying there's tons of roof everywhere. Then why you offered a million dollars? You just have money to spare. If I donated his campaign, I want a little bit of that money back because apparently he has too much money.

But it's not the case. If there was actual widespread voter fraud, that would be a bad thing. And we might suspect it if there was evidence of it. But the evidence they are pointing to generally is the trend that the advantage went to Joe Biden after Election Day. And we as a nation had only been preparing for that and known that it was going to happen for months at that point. And Trump continued to do everything you would do if you wanted to create that shift by telling your voters to not vote by mail. And so we as a country need to engage in a months-long delusion, basically the search for Amelia Earhart's plane effectively because they don't accept the thing everybody was talking about for literally months leading up to the election.

Yeah, and you know, later in the show, you know, there will be some stories that that demonstrate the financial incentives tied to Donald Trump refusing to accept the outcome of the election publicly. So he might very well accept the outcome of the election internally, even though he absolutely hates it, but he is using this very public battle to essentially fundraise and none of that money is actually going to the legal battle to recount votes. certain states. It's all nonsense. It's all part of his grift, and it's actually pretty disgusting. But I do want to provide some evidence of how our electoral system is set up pretty well in order

to prevent voter fraud. In fact, in the next video, you'll see a Trump supporter, a Trump voter, who tried to engage in voter fraud herself. And guess what? She got caught. Motor fraud's a real problem in the country. Yeah, I know. I know all about it. Have you ever seen any voter fraud? Yeah, me. I did it. You committed voter fraud. What'd you do? Voted twice for Trump. Really? Four years ago, yes.

Did you get Trumbled for that? Yeah, I'm still on permission for it. Really? Yeah. Now, if I voted for Hillary, I would have got a gold medal. But you voted for Trump twice? Yes, I did, yes. Yeah.

So... But did you wear a mustache or anything? No, I was two different places, and I went to a different place. A different time. I vote a time. Yeah. I voted another place or someplace else. I don't know.

I'm having, like, a big crisis because I honestly thought it was like, I honestly thought it was like libs that were doing it. Now remember, not too long ago, Donald Trump himself encouraged his supporters to commit election fraud, voter fraud. Let's watch. On your ballots, if you get the unsolicited ballots, send it in, and then go make sure it count it. And if it doesn't tabulate, you vote. And then if they tabulated very late, which they shouldn't be doing, they'll see you voted it, so it won't count. So send it in early and then go and vote.

And if it's not tabulated, you vote. Trump administration officials and people working on his campaign later had to come out and tell people, please don't do that. That's breaking the law. Don't do it. So look, go ahead. Yeah, I actually, I was mostly okay with what he said there. Like there are other versions where he wasn't quite as nuanced.

I thought that that was okay. So, for instance, I requested a mail-in ballot, and it just never came. So I went and voted early in person, hypothetically. That's not quite what he's saying. No, it's not what he's saying at all. He's saying vote by mail and then go vote in person. Yeah, but he's saying if it's not tabulated or whatever. Like, you can check online and see whether it's been counted.

Because look, at the end of the day, you can't vote twice in that way. Two votes are not going to register. That's just not the way that it works. That woman, like the things people say without thinking is, she said, If I'd voted for Hillary, I would have gotten a gold medal. Okay, but like millions and millions of people did vote for Hillary. Did they get gold medals? Why say stupid things?

I don't understand people most of the time. Do I get something off of Joe Biden? I don't know. Do I get something chromed maybe? He's pretty cool. I don't know. Dragon Daddy breathe in fire. Continue.

I don't know. It's getting hot in here, though. I find so much of this so frustrating in the entire process. And I know that there is so much what aboutism and both sidesism going on around. Like, oh, the libs are mad that they're claiming. that they're claiming there was voter fraud, what about 2016? Like yes, people were frustrated with the outcome of 2016, and some people thought that things had happened that dishonestly influenced people's votes.

But generally, there were no claims that actual vote totals were being changed or manipulated or fake ballots were coming or anything like that. And by the way, we can have a disagreement about to what extent people's votes are being influenced by misinformation or whatever. But everybody knows that it is happening in some ways in multiple different directions from multiple different sources. That is not what is being said to have happened here. And in any event, Hillary Clinton conceded the day after, the media called the election. They started calling him president-elect. This is nothing like 2016 in every possible way.

And all the right-wing blowhards who are talking about how the media is being mean to Trump and how dare they call Joe Biden president-elect and everything, they were using those. terms back in 2016, far closer the election than we are currently now. It's not the same thing in any way. I'm a damn lib from our member section says, and I totally agree with you. The fact that they never find any fraud has increased my faith in our process. And to be clear, there are a few instances where they do find fraud. And then the people committing the fraud get prosecuted, which is how the system is supposed to work. That's the right way or the right outcome of a system that has at some level of integrity. Now, don't get me wrong, there are certain

forms of suppression, voter suppression. Our system is set up in a way that it's incredibly difficult for third party candidates to even get on ballots. I think that there are serious flaws that are intentionally set up in our electoral process. But that's very different from people voting twice or election officials changing votes. There's no evidence of that happening. There's no evidence widespread, evidence of that happening on a widespread, you know, in a widespread way. And so, yes, John, final thoughts. And by the way, we're just, I guess we're not even, I mean, going forward, we'll talk about voter suppression as a country and everything.

But like, we're just accepting some of the voter suppression measures that we're put into place. Like, Abbott is talking about wanting to find voter fraud. We will never know how many votes didn't get cast because of the one ballot drop off place. thing. Would it have been enough to switch the state? Almost certainly not. But there would have been more votes. The Supreme Court in the cases where they stopped late arriving but pre-election day postmarked ballots from being counted. In some states, they allowed it. In some states, they didn't. Like, I think Wisconsin might be one where they didn't allow it. Biden, hypothetically, would be up by more votes. Those are never going to be counted now. Can anyone watching this, if you're

conservative, can you come up with a single instance in which something was done by a state legislature, by a governor, by a state Supreme Court, or by the Supreme Court that had the effect of reducing the number of Republican ballots that were cast. No, you can't. In any state or across the country at large, all of these measures increased participation. And you might think that it's biased in a way that increases Democrats more, or that simply increasing the vote is somehow better for Democrats. But overall, you cannot deny that the Democrats were in favor of more voting. The Republicans did everything they could to limit it. The question is, or I guess hypothetically, Were they successful enough in cutting down the ballots to actually win?

And clearly they were, but that was the goal. And now they're hoping to do it after the fact. Well, look, we have a process, and the Trump campaign has gone through the process of filing lawsuits, alleging voter fraud, and so far they haven't won a single one of those lawsuits. And I think that's relevant given the pretty serious accusations they're putting out there. So let's move on. Let's switch gears a little bit, because I think it's worth. keeping track of what's been going on with the Biden team. And so there's a new study out

that looks into the demographics that voted for Biden. I know that there have been many conversations about that. But I want to talk about where the, basically, most of the economic output in this country is and how most of those areas did overwhelmingly vote for Biden. What does that mean for a Biden administration? So a study by the Brookings Institute finds that the 2020 election only exacerbated the economic divide between Republican and Democratic voters. And nothing makes that clear based on how people voted, based on where they live. And I'm not talking about red states versus blue states. I'm talking about big cities versus rural areas of the country. So according to their study, the stark economic rift that Brookings Metro

documented after Donald Trump's shocking 2016 victory has grown even wider. In 2016, we wrote that the 2,584 counties that Trump won generated just 36% of the country's economic output, whereas the 472 counties Hillary Clinton carried equated to almost two-thirds of the nation's aggregate economy. Now, that rift, that divide is much more pronounced in 2020. This time, Biden's winning base in the 477 counties encompasses fully 70%. 70% of America's economic activity, while Trump's losing base of 2,497 counties represents just 29% of the economy. Biden's counties tended to be far more diverse, educated, and white-collar professional with their aggregate non-white and college-educated shares of the

economy running to 35 and 36% respectively, compared to 16 and 25% in counties that voted for Trump. So John, I wanted to get your thoughts on that. I mean, my first thought isn't necessarily what this is directly about, but it is amazing that after almost four years and everything that we've been through, Biden won five additional counties. And I know, you know, it was enough, obviously, to flip the results significantly. And his popular vote lead is going to be significantly larger than Hillary Clinton's. He's going to have the highest percentage of the vote share of someone challenging an incumbent president for almost 100 years.

But you would have expected perhaps more. Yeah, I mean, the question is, I mean, for those counties, why didn't things change more? In theory, you got the president that you wanted, you got the Senate that you wanted, you have the House for a couple of those years, you have the Supreme Court. What did Donald Trump do? Did his strategies economically benefit you in that time? And I'm sure many of them think that they do, whether they did or not. But his trade deals, you know, was that actually a benefit?

And especially if you were to deduct the like the sort of socialism that he threw at those at some of these industries to make up for his disastrous trade policies, you know, his doubling down on coal and trying to get manufacturing going and all that stuff, did that actually in the end help? Yeah, I think that you're asking the right questions. And I think we know what the answers to those questions are because we've been covering these stories regarding the economic situation for the vast majority of Americans for the last four years.

And it is not improved. But it is really interesting because, again, let's just acknowledge that Trump has done nothing for people who are struggling economically in these rural areas. But he talks a lot about how he's working for them. He always pretends like he's looking out for their best interests, that he's holding China accountable for taking all these great American jobs, that he's going to fight back and make sure that we have trade deals that are much more fair to the great people of the United States. His like lofty rhetoric, I think, somehow resonates with people in rural areas, even as their material conditions are not improving. And I think another example of that was a recent survey that was done that asked people, are you better off today financially than you were four years ago? And I'm not talking about a survey done by like Amazon and other, you know, billionaires and things like that.

No, just average Americans, has your financial situation improved? And the majority of Americans said yes. So I think that that kind of reaction, perspective, does help Trump in these rural areas. He constantly, they feel like he's constantly speaking to them, right? And then at the same time, and again, Trump did this with his own cabinet, where he, like, filled it with the biggest swamp monsters. But if you look at what Biden's doing with his transition team, you see all sorts of things. So names in there where you're like, bro, what are you doing? Come on, like get it together. So there are some great union leaders included in his transition team. I don't want to take away

from that. But at the same time, he writes on the website, build back better, that agency review teams are responsible for understanding the operations of each agency, ensuring a smoother transition of power and preparing for President-elect Biden and vice president-elect Harris and their cabinet to hit the ground running from day one. And so, okay, that's great. So who are these people who are assisting with this transition? You have Martha Gimbel from Schmidt Futures. She would serve in the group that would help with the transition for Council of Economic Advisors. Ellen Hughes Cromwick from Third Way for Department of Commerce. These are not cabinet picks. I want to be clear. These are just individuals who are assisting with the transition. Lynn Parker DuPray from the Capital One Financial Group.

She would help with the transition for the Department of Homeland Security. James Cardigan from Arnold Ventures LLC. By the way, Arnold Ventures was founded by a hedge fund manager who invested significantly into Enron. But that group will basically help with the transition for the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Fantastic. Tom Sullivan from Amazon, Department of State. Matt Olson from Uber technology, and this is interesting for the intelligence community, and then Cameron Alford from U.S. Bank for international development.

Yeah, I don't, I mean, like, well, you know, for your diplomacy, what do you want? Probably Amazon, you know, they deliver packages, maybe they can deliver a piece deal, you know, intelligence community. Matt Olson, Uber, well, you know, Uber's probably spotting on you, so that makes sense. Look, what I'm assuming here playing devil's advocate is that these are people known for management of teams, compiling information, those sorts of things. I assume rather than some sort of topical expertise in these things, not knowing their individual histories, I'm assuming it's because they can manage teams that will look into this. But already, the people that he's looking to, it's Wall Street, it's these massive corporations and things like that. There are certainly

good managers that don't necessarily work at these sorts of places. Right. And so again, I don't want to pretend as if Donald Trump was a man of the people. No, he filled his actual cabinet with, you know, an Exxon CEO, with Steve Mnuchin as Treasury Secretary, who, by the way, he actually survived. He survived Trump and his lunacy throughout the first term. I'm actually shocked by that. But remember, he was the head of One West Bank, which got in trouble for doing all sorts of like fraud in order to foreclose on people's homes. And so again, Trump was awful, but what are Republicans better at? It's messaging. And so will Republicans attack Biden if he's hobnobbing with the corporate elite? Of course they will. Did Biden do a good job

attacking Trump for the swap monsters that served in his cabinet? I don't think so. He should have done a better job in that messaging. And so we'll see how this all plays out. But that's where we're at. Anyway, we got to take a quick break. When we come back, we have more for you, including Rashida Talib fighting back against moderate Democrats and their smear. We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-The-Republic, or UNFTR. As a young Turks fan, you already know that the government, the media, and corporations are constantly peddling lies that serve the interests of the rich and powerful. But now there's a podcast dedicated to unraveling those lies, debunking the conventional wisdom.

In each episode of Un-B-The-Republic, or UNFTR, the host delves into a different historical episode or topic that's generally misunderstood or purposely obfuscated by the so-called powers that be. Featuring in-depth research, razor-sharp commentary, and just the right amount of vulgarity, the UNFTR podcast takes a sledgehammer to what you thought you knew about some of the nation's most sacred historical cows. But don't just take my word for it. The New York Times described UNFTR as consistently compelling and educational, aiming to challenge conventional wisdom and upend the historical narratives that were taught in school. For as the great philosopher Yoda once put it, You must not learn what you have learned. And that's true whether you're in Jedi training or you're uprooting

and exposing all the propaganda and disinformation you've been fed over the course of your lifetime. So search for UNFDR in your podcast app today. and get ready to get informed, angered, and entertained, all at the same time. I think we all love trees, and I'm pretty sure you want to plant trees. If you want to learn more on how to plant trees, go to aspiration.com slash t-y-t. Let's read some member comments and other comments,

and then we have tons of stories to get to. Porkchop Express says, It's not shocking that Biden counties are more educated. Why do you think Republicans continually defend education? Oh, defund education, my bad. Much easier to brainwash the uneducated. Of course, says the Biden team is unsurprising. Managers to manage status quo in lieu of leaders to deliver change.

From our super chat section, I have not read these ahead of time, so this will be fun. Nolan Brian Gilmore says, who else keeps getting the? incessant emails to keep paying off Biden's campaign debt and stop the fraud. Man, liberals don't know how to budget or run a non-fear-based campaign snowflakes. Wait. So I see what you did there, and we have that story later in the rundown. It's going to be fantastic, so everyone stick around for that. But we're not done with Biden just yet.

So progressive organizations like the Sunrise Movement and Justice Democrats are making it clear that they demand the Biden cabinet be filled with like-minded individuals, progressive lawmakers, progressive public figures, who would help to carry out the progressive policies that these organizations have been fighting for. So naturally, the names Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren did come up. The groups are expressing, the groups are pressing Biden to appoint Warren as Treasury Secretary and Sanders as Labor Secretary, a position he has expressed some interest in, both standard bearers of the progressive movement whose policies are viewed by some Democrats as too extreme. So corporate Democrats certainly view them as too extreme. Sanders and Warren

come from states led by Republican governors, and that is notable. And it's not clear who would fill their seats if they became vacant. Governor Phil Scott of Vermont said last month that if Sanders were appointed to the cabinet, he would choose an independent who would caucus with the Democrats as a replacement. And progressives has argued that the Democratic-controlled legislature in Massachusetts would try to change state law to ensure a Democrat would temporarily replace Warren. But there are some downsides to progressives like Bernie Sanders, for instance, leaving the Senate to serve on Biden's cabinet or in Biden's cabinet. For instance, for instance, there are several Senate committees that Bernie currently serves on, and they're important

committees, including environmental and public works, or environment and public works, energy and natural resources, health, education, labor and pensions, budget, and veterans affairs. There are other committees that he could be the chair of if Democrats take control of the Senate. And remember, there are still two Senate races that will be decided in January. These are runoff races in Georgia. And so we have some details on that. But before we do, I wanted to get your thoughts on this show. Yeah, yeah. First of all, I get that, you know, I guess part of the way Republicans are acting and how we have to respond it, we have to fight, you know, dirty too. But changing the state law for this particular situation where it would advantage

you, we don't like that when the Republicans do it. So I don't love the idea. I going into it when I was originally hearing that one or both of them, and it seems more like Warren are interested didn't join the cabinet. I didn't necessarily understand why you would want to do that. I get it, especially if the Senate doesn't have a 50-50 split, then it makes more sense for them to be in the cabinet where they can get some stuff done just in terms of the functioning of the government, influence on executive orders, things like that. But if the Senate is going to be 50-50, then we should definitely want, you know, like obviously a lot of people have problems with Warren, still a lot better than many of those senators, let alone Bernie, without them,

I mean, what do you have in the Senate? Let's remember that while the progressives have been quite successful over the past two election cycles in getting people into the House, so far in the Senate, not so much. Without them, I mean, even based on the scores, Kamala Harris was towards that end. What do we really have in the Senate at that point? It's basically Chuck and Joe. I think you make a great point. I mean, we have a system of checks and balances for a reason, and I think Congress is lacking in their ability to check the executive branch lately. So I think it would be far more effective to keep Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren in the Senate. And I had a debate about this with my co-host, Nando Villa on weekends, the show that we host for Jacobin.

And we had legendary economist Richard Wolfe on to discuss it with us. And I think that the perspective of Richard Wolfe is important to add to this conversation. So I have a quick clip from that episode and please excuse some of the Professor Wolf was having some technical issues. I'll just put it that way. But with that said, let's take a quick look at his thoughts on this matter. There's a little bit of a debate happening right now as to where Senator Sanders would be more effective as labor secretary in a Biden administration or if he remains in the Senate where if Democrats take control of the Senate, he could chair two important subcommittees. including the Senate Budget Committee and the Senate Subcommittee on Health. If I were burning, if he asked my advice, don't do this.

Stay in the Senate, go after those committee positions, if they are even possible or available. Given what I know about Mr. Schumer, I wouldn't be too hopeful there either. But nonetheless, if he can, good. But whether or not he can, he is a formidable, a formidable. fall outside. And if he uses that position, if he mobilizes, if he works, he can have at least as much influence on what finally happens as he could by being closer to the seat of power. So, John, I mean, I agree with his take. I think that makes a lot of sense. And that's not to say that other, you know, people listed by the Sunrise Movement and Justice Democrats wouldn't be a

fantastic idea in Biden's administration. I'll get to that in just a minute. But any response to Professor Wolfe? Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting point. It really just is, there's pros and cons. And like I said, it's not just one set of pros and cons. It is very much pros and cons based on what the future of the Senate is going to look like. And at this point, we honestly just don't know. I mean, I would feel a lot more comfortable if I knew that not only would they be replaced by Democrats, but they'd be replaced by Democrats that we are at least somewhat comfortable ideologically with, but I don't. I don't necessarily assume that. The idea that the Senate would be on balance more conservative afterward, I don't like that idea. Right, I totally agree. Now, there were

other suggestions, other potential appointments that I think would be great. I mean, to be honest, I think it's a long shot, just like I think it's a long shot with Warren and Sanders. But let me give you some of these names. The economist Joseph Stiglitz for director of the National Economic Council. I think that's a fine pick. I love that suggestion. Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington as co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus for Secretary of Health and Human Services. I think that makes a ton of sense. Yeah, that totally makes sense. She's a huge supporter of Medicare for all.

Yeah, of course, so that's why they're probably not going to pick her. But I like the idea. That is who I would put up for the position. Yeah, for sure. Representative Rashida Talib of Michigan, one of the four, Congresswoman known as the squad for Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. I think that would also be fantastic. Yeah, I think that would be good. I think also Ilhan Omar was involved in a really good housing bill that I think could have been good too. And I just, I mean, look, it would happen for both, but if it was Representative Omar, the right way it's exploding would be amazing. Let's keep it real. I think moderate Democrats' heads would explode too.

Yeah, that's probably. And again, this is, these organizations are serious about pressuring Biden to, you know, pick these progressive lawmakers for these incredibly important positions. I don't think he's going to go in that direction, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't pressure him. Keith Ellison, the Attorney General of Minnesota for Attorney General. That's a good idea. And Representative Barbara Lee of California for, and I like this one, Secretary of State, remember, she was the only lawmaker who was willing to vote against invading Iraq. Yeah, yeah, that's why I don't necessarily like setting up a precedent where when you

like sort of demonstrate amazing judgment, it gets rewarded down the line. That just seems like a radical change to U.S. government. I think we should stick with what it is right now, which is where you can fail and fail and fail and be wrong for decades, and you will always find work inside or outside of government. I mean, failing upward is as American as apple pie. I mean, is there a chance we can get John Bolton? There's definitely a 1% chance. Come on, there's got to be a 1% chance.

Anyway, yeah, no, that would be great. I mean, honestly, for Secretary of Defense, come on. Let's shoot for the stars here. It's not going to happen, but who did they, did they actually have a suggestion for Secretary of Defense? I don't remember that one. I don't remember. I don't have the article in front of me, just my notes.

But most of their suggestions were great. Yeah. So let's move. to get one more story in before we go to break. This is one of my favorite stories of the day because we do have progressive lawmakers fighting for us despite the attacks that they're receiving from moderate Democrats. So let's talk about Rashida Talib. Michigan lawmaker Rashida Talib isn't about to stay quiet as moderate Democrats attack the progressive wing of the party. After several congressional losses, these moderates decided that it would be a great idea to blame the progressive

members of their party who all won re-election easily by running on progressive values. And so Rashida Talib has decided, no, I'm going to say something. This is disgusting. She didn't say this is disgusting. That was my added emphasis. So she says the following, we're not going to be successful if we're silencing districts like mine, said Talib, who told her colleague something similar during a contentious call last week. Me not being able to speak on behalf of many of my neighbors right now, many of which are black neighbors, means me being silenced, I can't be silent. And what she's referring to there was the meltdown that Representative Abigail Spanberger

had during the call where she spoke out against defund the police. She felt that that was a losing message. She was angry about it. She was angry about what she referred to as this push for socialism, which she was really angry about was that Republicans and, you know, her political opponents campaigned the exact way that you would expect them to campaign. They're going to call you names. They're going to accuse you of being a socialist. Whether you're a socialist or not, they don't care about the truth. They don't care about the facts. They don't care about what you actually campaigned on.

They're going to call you names. The question is, are you playing, you know, offensive politics? Do you have a message that resonates with your constituents? And if you've lost your reelection bid or if you came close to losing, maybe recalibrate what your own flaws are rather than finding some other scapegoat within your party. That's my take. But Rashida Talib seemed to say something similar. John? Yeah, the problem isn't the Republican attacks because those are always going to be there. If there hadn't been defund the police, there would have been something else. There would have been a caravan of people coming. There would have been, I mean, they were doing all of that anyway. They're going to attack you. That's not the problem. The problem is, and AOC tried to

point this out when she tried to help them in the last weeks of their race to actually put out ads, to engage online, all of that, they don't really do that. They can't actually control the message. They often don't try, and when they try, it's not effective. And that isn't even the problem. The problem is they can't be effective with their messaging because they don't really stand for much. And they're not really pushing for much.

So yes, it's going to be a little bit harder to get people behind you. AOC and others like her, including Rashia Talib, by the way, who are awesome at generating attention interest and all of this stuff, it's not just random, and it's not just because of their handle or their nickname. It's fundamentally about what they represent. If you don't represent anything, it's going to be hard to do that. And that's why people like Spanberger, the problem isn't just that they're being attacked. And it's not just that they don't have the ads. It's that there's really nothing to work with if you're not going to push for anything.

No, that's exactly right. And as I've made, you know, I've made this point before, corporate Democrats, because of the organizations, corporations, donors that help fund their campaigns have shied away from an economic populist message. So instead, they typically like to focus on social justice related topics in order to do their campaigning. If they're going to go ahead and attack the messaging coming from Black Lives Matter, I don't really know what they plan on campaigning on. Like what are you providing to your constituents? What are you willing to do for them? What is your message? As John mentioned, Like, what do you stand for?

Rashida Taleb also told Politico, we're not interested in unity that asks people to sacrifice their freedoms and their rights any longer. And if we truly want to unify our country, we have to really respect every single voice. We say that so willingly when we talk about Trump supporters, but we don't say that willingly for my black and brown neighbors and from LGBTQ neighbors or marginalized people. I totally agree with her and she, you know, she had more to say one more quote from her because I think her statements were strong. She says if voters can walk past blighted homes and school closures and pollution to vote for Biden Harris, this is the best point, I think. When they feel like they don't have anything else, they deserve to be heard, Taleb said, choking up as she expressed frustration near the end of an interview this week.

I can't believe that people are asking them to be quiet. And among people who seem to be asking them to be quiet is centrist representative Hakeem Jeffries who said this, do we want to win? Do we want to govern or do we want to be internet celebrities? I think it's a useful conversation for us because the socialism message wasn't helpful. But it's fascinating that the candidates who ran on that kind of messaging, right, on economic equality easily won, easily won. So why not ask yourselves why it is that these centrist Democrats are having such a difficult time getting elected? Because again, it's a given.

This is something that will not change. Republicans are always going to attack them. They're always going to lie about them. The fact that they're not prepared to respond to those lies with a message that resonates with their constituents is the problem. Yeah. Yeah. And look, we can try to push back against them, we can do that. But the most effective way, both in theory, also demonstrated in the past few election cycles, is to primary. Like, I know some people are going to these next few years saying, okay, we're going to be watching to accrue a list of people to primary. I don't even think it should function that way. I think everybody should be on that list. And you get off that list by doing the right thing. The assumption shouldn't be that they're

going to because the vast majority aren't. And it's going to be difficult to find all of those candidates. We're going to lose a lot of those races, especially in the Senate. But we just have to keep doing it because these people, like fundamentally, they're obviously better than Republicans and we're going to support them in the general election if that's who we have, but let's make it so that we don't. And let's not wait. Let's not wait to find candidates for the midterms. A lot of these representatives, we should be finding people to replace them right now. And I'm going to end this with two poll results that I think are important. Fox News exit poll asks, what should happen to illegal immigrants? Seventy-two percent of American citizens or American who responded to

this poll said, pathway to citizenship, only 28% want deportation. The same poll asked, change to a government-run health care plan, like Medicare for all, 72% favor it, only 29% oppose. Just some relevant stats and responses that Hakeem Jeffreys might want to look into. We got to take a break when we come back. We have more news for you, including how Donald Trump refusing to accept the outcome of this election might be more about a grift than anything else. At TYT, we frequently talk about all the ways that big tech companies

are taking control of our online lives, constantly monitoring us and storing and selling our data. But that doesn't mean we have to let them. It's possible to stay anonymous online and hide your data from the prying eyes of big tech. And one of the best ways is with ExpressVPN. ExpressVPN hides your IP address, making your active ID more difficult to trace and sell the advertisers. ExpressVPN also encrypts 100% of your email.

your network data to protect you from eavesdroppers and cyber criminals. And it's also easy to install. A single mouse click protects all your devices. But listen, guys, this is important. ExpressVPN is rated number one by CNET and Wired magazine. So take back control of your life online and secure your data with a top VPN solution available, ExpressVPN. And if you go to ExpressVPN.com slash TYT, you can get three extra months for free with this exclusive link just for TYT fans. That's E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N dot com slash T-Y-T. Check it out today. All right.

I gave you guys the wrong URL when it comes to planting trees. You want to go to t-y-t dot com slash trees where you can essentially plant a tree with every purchase. Boom. All right. And then some Twitch info, Twitch subs. We have Denny Lopez 6, who gifted 25 subs. Thank you, thank you. Obie Mom Kenobi, who is a mainstay in this document, has gifted five subs.

Ed Lowry, a new prime member, and Cyril 2013, three months with prime. So thank you. Thank you for subscribing. You can go to our Twitch channel by going to Twitch. TV slash TYT. Had a moment there. And Gina J, the introvert, gave 400 bits. Eerie man, my apologies, gave one, is that real? 1,420 bits. So thank you for the love. We love you guys. Let's get to the rest of our news. Trump supporters have been inundated with campaign emails urging them, urging them to immediately donate to help Donald Trump in his.

is battle to recrout the votes in various key battleground states. The money allegedly goes to the court battles that the Trump campaign is launching in various states. But that money actually isn't going to that effort. If you read the fine print at the very bottom of the emails, you'll see what's really going on. As Talking Points memo reports, the reality, there is no election defense fund. The donations are siphoned into a mix of various committees. Initially, some of the money was being used to pay down the Trump campaign's debt. Later, the formula was changed to funnel most of the money into Trump's new leadership pack called Save America.

And that is foreshadowing, guys, because that pack could be used for a number of different things that should have you a little worried about the future. So, for instance, Trump could use that money from the pack to do typical stuff that Trump would do. like funnel the money back to his own businesses, by booking travel to his hotels and whatever. It could also help him with his campaign if he wants to run in 2024. It can also help him pay off some of his campaign debts. And then there are legal fees. So the prohibition, as Brett Cappell from Harmon Curran law says, the prohibition on the personal use of campaign funds also does not apply to leadership packs.

So leadership PAC funds could be used to pay the legal fees Trump will incur after he leaves office. And I think we're assuming that there will be many legal fees to deal with. But John, your take on this. I assume so. Look, honestly, having this person that purports to be a billionaire ask for regular conservatives to give them money when he could snap his fingers and make all these debts go away as easily as us, you know, throwing the change we find under like our couch cushion. that's icky in a way. But other than that, I honestly, like it's sort of funny how they're hiding what some of this is going to be used for.

But I honestly don't have that much of an issue with it. It's the rare thing that Trump is doing that's actually perfectly legal. So good, I want to encourage them to do legal stuff. And also, all of these things that they might use the money for, I have a feeling the red hat wears it would be perfectly fine with all of it. If he wants to some, they use it to run again, they're fine with that. If it's to fight off the witch hunt when he leaves office, they'd be fine. with that. So yeah, it's manipulative, it's dishonest, but they signed on to that a long time ago.

It's manipulative, but it also gives Donald Trump a reason to continue pretending as though he didn't lose the election. That's true. That's true. Like now it's kind of becoming clear that there are some ulterior motives at play, and he's using this and the ridiculous narrative that he and his Republican goons are pushing as a way to fundraise, to put more money in, you know, this pack that could potentially help him in the future if he wants to run again. So yeah, and by the way, that's damaging to our democratic process because do you think his supporters understand what he's doing? No, I mean, it's making them completely question the validity and outcome of this election. And that could lead to a pretty violent outcome. So he's playing

with fire here, but of course he doesn't care, because if you can make some money in the short term, he'll do it. Agreed. All right, one more story for you guys before we move on to our post game, become a member at t.com slash join. So John Voigt is showing us that he remembers how to audition for things. And he used the recent nonsense coming from the Trump campaign as a way to do it. As we know, Trump has refused to concede to the fact that he has lost his reelection bid. And John Voight is pushing the same ridiculous narrative in a weird actor. kind of way.

My fellow Americans, I stand here with all that feel as I do disgusted with this lie that Biden has been chosen, as if we all don't know the truth. And when one tries to deceive, we know that one can't get away with it, there will be a price to pay. The ones who are jumping for joy now, are jumping toward the horror they will be in for because I know that the promises being made from the left to the American people will never come to be.

My friends, of all colors, races, and religions, this is now our greatest fight since the Civil War, the Battle of Re righteousness versus Satan. Yes, Satan. Because these leftists are easy. Yeah, John, I think we're going to go with someone else, a little overacting there. Yeah, yeah. What's a James Woods doing these days?

Let's hear a read from James Woods. All of that was nonsense. I get that it's like if you're conservative, you'll like it because you sort of vaguely remember who he is. He's sitting against a cool backdrop. It's shot on a good camera. and he's speaking as if what he's saying is deep. But he's not thinking at all about what he's saying.

There's nothing there. As I stand here, you're sitting, dude. You're totally sitting. And you're old. It's fine. You can sit if you want, but at least say as I sit here. Then he said, he said this thing. This is like to sound like you have gravitas. Because when one tries to deceive, one will be found and it can't.

What are you talking about? First of all, people lie all the time and don't get caught. That doesn't mean anything, the thing you're saying. Some lies are caught. Some lies aren't caught. What about this one makes it special? You're not selling the griff to me. It just wasn't a convincing performance.

What can I say? The entire time I was watching, I couldn't stop thinking about the fact that he's an actor and he's not being real, you know? So, by the way, just a few things that I want to respond to. You're wrong, John. There was a message here, okay? This is a serious battle between righteousness. And Satan. What?

And by the way, he mentioned the horror that we're in for. I got news for you. Most Americans have been experiencing the horror. You know, as like nearly 250,000 Americans dead from the pandemic. Tens of millions of Americans still unemployed. No financial relief in sight. I mean, this guy, this wealthy actor has the audacity to sit there and tell us. us that we're in for the battle of our lives.

Yeah. Spare me. So ridiculous. Oh, God, their celebrities they have are so bad. Get one good celebrity. You thought you had the rock. You don't even have him anymore. Come on.

Look, we have a fantastic post game today. Yes, we're going to talk about Dean Browning. If you don't know who he is, you should know. Sock puppet accounts, twist, turns, roller coasters. It's an amusement park in the post game. you can become a member by going to t yt.com slash join and if you're not a member remember to check out John Show the damage report every day

Monday through Friday it's our morning political show and it's fantastic everyone calls him Dragon Daddy which means he's a fan fave you don't want to miss it but with that said we love you guys and we'll see you soon thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks support our work free access members only bonus content and more by subscribing to apple podcasts at apple dot co slash t yt i'm your host jank huger and i'll see you soon