The Young Turks - Trafficking Lies

Episode Date: March 12, 2024

Former Mar-a-Lago employee speaks out about moving Trump's classified documents. Peter Navarro ordered to report to prison. Biden ""kind of"" says that invading Rafah would be a red line. WATCH: Katie Britt confronted on Fox about using a decades-old sex trafficking story to attack Biden in her SOTU response." HOST: Ana Kasparian (@anakasparian), Cenk Uygur (@cenkuygur) SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ https://www.youtube.com/user/theyoungturks FACEBOOK: ☞ https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER: ☞ https://www.twitter.com/theyoungturks INSTAGRAM: ☞ https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK: ☞ https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕 Merch: https://shoptyt.com ❤ Donate: http://www.tyt.com/go 🔗 Website: https://www.tyt.com 📱App: http://www.tyt.com/app 📬 Newsletters: https://www.tyt.com/newsletters/ If you want to watch more videos from TYT, consider subscribing to other channels in our network: The Watchlist https://www.youtube.com/watchlisttyt Indisputable with Dr. Rashad Richey https://www.youtube.com/indisputabletyt The Damage Report ▶ https://www.youtube.com/thedamagereport TYT Sports ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytsports The Conversation ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytconversation Rebel HQ ▶ https://www.youtube.com/rebelhq TYT Investigates ▶ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwNJt9PYyN1uyw2XhNIQMMA 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. Woo! It's up! All right, well, the young Turks, Jane Hugger, Anna Consparen with you guys, and a whole bunch of wonderful folks, because already we have sign-ups, Jimmy, CSXT, and Katie Ross 729, already on our website, t-y-y-t.com, signing up and giving

contributions, which we definitely need. Unfortunately, another media company has, digital media company has gone under today. Deadspin. So they're just, I mean, they're dropping like flies. We are one of the very few left. So if ever there was a time to do a contribution or a membership, this is it. TYT.com slash join. All right. But we have an amazing show for you guys, including some Trump supporters going to jail, others turning evidence, all of that right in the And let alone Israel, let alone later in the show where we always have some fun stories for you guys. All right, Anna.

Well, we begin with the story that just broke right before airtime. And it has to do with someone who is close to Trump and knows quite a bit about the classified document scandal that Trump is now facing criminal charges for. Let's get to it. What happened is Walt left before me and he never goes directly to the plane. He's either in the motorcade when he goes there with the boss, which- the former president. I left Mar-a-Lago. I texted him, hey, I'm on my way. He followed me. He pulled out and got behind me. We got to the airport. I ended up loading all the luggage

I had, and he had a bunch of boxes. You noticed that he had boxes. They were the boxes that were in the indictment. The white banker's boxes. That's what I remember loading. That was Brian Butler, a longtime Mar-Lago employee who is described as a central witness in the case involving Trump's handling of classified documents. And now he's speaking out and he doesn't believe that the case against Donald Trump and the co-conspirators in that case amounts to a so-called witch hunt, something that Donald Trump has been alleging. Now Butler is referenced as Trump employee number five several times in the classified

documents indictment, which is being prosecuted by special counsel Jack Smith. Now before I get to more on Butler, Jink, I wanted to bring you in, because, you know, we've heard various stories about co-conspirators, taking plea deals, coming out, cooperating with prosecutors, and essentially speaking out against Donald Trump. I haven't seen any of them do an interview quite like Butler has, and so he felt the need to come out and just kind of clear his name before the public and let them know about his cooperation in this case. Yeah, so I think the central question in the entire election is, are enough independence

going to believe that Donald Trump is a bona fide criminal, and hence they cannot vote for him. And this story has a lot to do with that, because this guy is very credible, but are they going to listen? That's the issue. And I don't want to ignore the obvious, the elephant in the room here. Brian Butler is obviously a doppelganger for Brian Stelter. No, don't do that. Don't do that to poor Stelter, Jesus Christ. No, okay, look, whatever I live in in the biggest glass house there is. Anyway, just kidding, but back to the importance of the story, for sure. Because if you believe this guy, then Donald Trump is not just a criminal, but a bit of

a dangerous criminal. If you don't believe him, I don't know what you do believe. Do you believe in objective reality? I don't know, let's find out. So first, let's get to know Butler a little better. Who is he and what kind of relationship did he have with Donald Trump? He actually worked at Marlago for decades. Butler gave testimony to federal investigators that informed crucial portions of last

year's criminal obstruction charges against Trump and his two co-defendants, Walt Noda, and personal aid to Trump, who was a personal aid to Trump, and Carlos de Oliveira, a property manager at Marlago, who had been Butler's closest friend until recently. The two are no longer speaking. The two also decided to take two completely different paths in how they are handling this case with Butler deciding to have his own non-Trump attorneys representing him, with, and with De Oliveira kind of going in the listen to Trump, do what Trump says, and what his lawyers want route. So obviously very different. Now, Butler, who was employed

at Mar-Lago for 20 years, has spoken repeatedly with investigators, according to CNN, paying for his own attorney, and breaking with the orbit around Trump that he knows so well. Now, Butler told CNN that he unknowingly helped NADA deliver boxes of classified information from Mar-a-Lago to the former president's plane in June of 2022, the same day that Trump and his attorney were meeting with the Justice Department at Mar-Lago about the classified documents, right? So he's going to meet with the, you know, the Justice Department at Mar-a-Lago about the classified documents on that same day, according to Butler, Trump is moving documents around. And that day on June 3rd specifically of 2022, Butler received what he remembers as a strange

request from Nato. That's the way that he describes it, who wanted to know if he could borrow an escalade from the car service that Butler ran for Marlago. Trump and his family were apparently about to fly to New Jersey that day for the summer. And it was typically Butler and his valets who handled getting their luggage onto the plane. And so it was an unusual request by NADA, according to Butler, for the car, because NADA typically did not handle moving luggage and asked Butler for the car in a weird, guarded way. That is what Butler is saying.

Butler says that Nata and de Alivera loaded up the vehicle before driving it to West Palm Beach Airport. Butler arrived with his car or his own car filled with Trump's family luggage, and then he helped not a load Trump's plane with the luggage, as well as bankers' boxes of documents that were in the escalate. So Butler says that he didn't realize what was in those banker boxes, and he's about to address that in the next clip. Let's watch.

And did you have any time, any idea at the time that there was potentially U.S. national security secrets in those boxes? No clue. I had no clue. I mean, we were just taking them out of the escalate. Piling them up. I remember they were all stacked on top of each other and then we're lifting them up to the pilots How many boxes was it? They asked me in the interview and I believe it was 10 to 15 and when you look back on that now Well, I had no clue until probably the end of June. There's a few different things that happened that

kind of opened my eyes to something's going on here. You get that unusual request, did you ever think to yourself, why were there so many boxes at Mar-a-Lago? You know, for me, I'm just thinking, I have the former president. He has a lot of stuff he likes to lug around with him. So look, obviously Butler has an interest in everything that he is saying there, meaning he wants the public to be under the perception that he, yes, helped to move those boxes, but he didn't know what those boxes contained, you know, this is definitely helping him potentially turn

public opinion in his favor. And I don't know whether or not to trust what he is saying about his own involvement, Jank, but it is very clear that he's coming out to make a distinction between himself and the two other co-conspirators, Nata and Di Olivera in regard to how those documents were handled and what the individuals knew about what was in those bankers boxes. So you have to be able to separate out what you think of the person overall and what you think of what they're saying right now. So, for example, Brian Butler worked with Donald Trump for over 20 years at Mar-a-Lago. So some of you might then say, well, then, okay, I don't trust them because, I mean, it's not like Trump became a bad guy overnight.

He's been a terrible person this whole time. And meanwhile, this guy's been working with him, et cetera. You can say, well, look, he didn't stand up for his friends. I mean, they were all willing to lie to the federal law enforcement, et cetera. But he kind of threw them onto the bus by not lying along with them. And maybe he's trying to protect himself, et cetera. I understand all that, but that's not really relevant to us in terms of other than how it infirms the question of is he telling the truth today, right?

So he could be a terrible guy, he could be an angel, but I don't care about that, I care about this. So how do you know if he's telling the truth or not? Number one, everything he says matches along with the testimony that you see from the others. So they talk about, you see the pictures of people moving boxes, he says they were moving boxes, same day, right? They have an account of trying to erase the tape at Mar-a-Lago as that has been corroborated by one of the other witnesses and the others are denying, but have no factual basis to say it didn't happen. They acknowledged, they talked on that day, they tried to go after the tape that day, but they're saying for innocent reasons, et cetera. So my point is, A, here's a guy

who definitely knows Trump and is in his inner circle. He's not some rando that walk by and the deep state recruited him, et cetera, right? Number two is his story matches all of the other stories. And if you think, well, they were all acting fishy and trying to erase the tape at Mar-a-Lago for innocent reasons, that seems a lot less likely. Okay? And so if you're on that side and you're going to believe whatever Trump says, okay, there's nothing I can do to help you anyway.

But if you're on the side of, hey, I'm not interested in politicizing this. I'm not interested in Trump is guilty because I don't like him. Trump is innocent because I do like him, but I just want to know what actually happened. Right. His story is enormously credible. He's saying it matching every other story and explaining in a very logical way why he would care. And one of the things that he says, and I take this with a, there's two parts of this. He says about Anthony Pratt, the Australian businessman, a really wealthy businessman,

that Trump told a secret about the Russian submarines to and, you know, about their nukes, which is one of the top secrets we have in America. Butler says he overheard that, and then he thought, oh my God, this guy's sharing top secret information because he wants people to be members at Mar-a-Lago, and that's crazy. Quite a perk for membership. Yeah, and that's really, really bad. Now, you could say, no, I don't believe him. I think that he's saying that he's outraged today, but only because the FBI raided his house and he's worried about himself.

I don't know. I don't know if he was genuinely outraged or not genuinely outraged. But is it true the story that he's conveying? Yeah, because we have it confirmed by Pratt and others. Right. So, and now why do you think Trump's telling Pratt about it? One, you could say, yeah, he's got a verbal diarrhea. Well, number one, we probably shouldn't have a president who can't keep his mouth shut.

about our classified information, let alone taking it home, let alone, by the way, the boxes they loaded on and went to New Jersey, we never got back. Right. So where the hell is he hiding those? But especially if you believe he's doing it just to get the $200,000 membership from all these guys, it makes it extra odious, but either way, deeply illegal and should not have happened. He shouldn't have told Pratt, he shouldn't have taken those boxes from the White House, and he shouldn't still be hiding those boxes.

It's so crazy because what stands out to me about, about this case more than anything is how Trump had so many opportunities to just hand over the documents and no one's gonna prosecute him, right? Just, we know you have the documents. Okay, he hands over some boxes. Are these all the documents? Yes, yes, these are all the documents. I handed everything over. Oh God, no, they're not all the documents, you're still holding on to more. Like, he can't help himself. He is his own, Trump is his own worst enemy, both rhetorically because he can't keep his mouth shut, but also through his own actions, even when he's given A long leash when he's told by federal authorities, listen, this will all be over as soon as you hand over the documents.

And he still, again, can't help himself. He can't hand over those documents for whatever reason. And it just makes no sense to me. Look, there's gradations of Republicans and of even of MAGA. But if you're in the deep end of MAGA and you think that Trump is untouchable, then you're not going to care about any of this, right? But for those of you that are not at the deep end, guys, if you're part of MAGA or you're a, Republican, aren't you super frustrated that he keeps hurting your cause? I'd lose my mind. Yeah, like, okay, let's say you think he's being targeted.

In that scenario, he should be even more careful because then they're going to smear not just him, but you guys in the entire movement. But instead of being careful, he's like, I'm going to grab slash steal a bunch of documents from the White House. And after I get caught and they ask me for the documents, at that point, And if I'm MAGA, I'm like, oh, for God's sake, just get back the documents. If you get back to documents, they're not going to be able to charge you. Even if they charged you, that's going to be easily dismissed. Everybody's going to say, brother, you ask for the documents, he gave it back.

What else do you want, right? And that's the same thing Biden did. That's the same thing Mike Pence did. They asked for the documents, you give it back. There's no case there. But he refuses. He didn't do it then. He didn't do it the second time around.

He had his lawyers lie. He had all the people that work at Mar-a-Lago lie. He had them trying to erase the tape. And he's still holding on the boxes. The guy's, like, if you're a MAGA, you should be 10 times more upset at Trump than we are because he's absolutely destroying your cause. So a few other claims by Butler in these CNN interviews. So apparently Butler was also a witness in the room while Trump was having several conversations on basically how De Oliveira and NADA should skirt federal authorities. So de Oliveira told Butler, for instance, about Nata traveling to Palm Beach in late June of 2022,

at a time when Nata and de Alivera were allegedly interested in deleting surveillance tapes of a storage room where the boxes had been kept at the club, according to the indictment. Butler recalls that Di Olivera, remember, De Alivavera was a really close friend of his. So this whole debacle has destroyed their friendship, but he was very, very close with him. They lived very close to one another. It seems like in the same gated community. But I wanted to give you that context. Do you understand the close relationship the two had?

Now, Butler recalls that de Oliveira told him that Nader would be visiting. Then a day later, De Alivera warned Butler that Nata's visit should be kept secret. Di Olivera told Butler that Nata was interested in learning about how surveillance footage from the club would be saved. Another oddity to Butler, he says. So to him, it was pretty clear that they were looking to. to tamper with evidence and attempt to erase the surveillance. De Oliveira, by the way, has been charged with lying to federal investigators who accuse him of repeatedly denying, seeing or knowing anything about the boxes of documents

at Mar-a-Lago, despite personally moving them himself. He has pleaded not guilty. And in regard to any statements from any of the others involved in this case, no one wanted to give CNN a statement except for an attorney representing to Oliver. John Irving, who said in a statement, quote, we look forward to hearing more about Mr. Butler's versions of events, version of events, when he is under oath and subject to penalty of perjury in the courtroom where that belongs, and we declined to try this case in the media. I'm looking forward to his testimony, along with the testimony of others in this case as well,

if it gets to that point. Oh, 100%. So I'll add on the end on the last couple of things that you just mentioned. They're number one, I'm looking forward to Donald Trump's testimony because Donald Trump could easily make, well, not in this case, but in the other case, well, I love his testimony in this case too. Why are you trying to erase the tape? What's in the boxes? Where are they in New Jersey? My guess is he will not testify. In the January 6th trial, the one in Georgia and then the federal one as well, I'm really looking forward to his testimony because Mago, you should be looking forward to him more than anyone because if he proves that the election was stolen, he's not guilty in those cases. Period. The cases are over, right? So I'm sure you're all on pins and needles waiting for him to prove it because they have all the evidence, right? You know too that he doesn't have any evidence. Okay, now back to Butler. Look, guys, I want to be super clear here. He didn't say I know what was on the tapes and I know they were trying to erase it. He just said they were looking into saving or erasing and it was really weird. It was very unusual. We don't normally talk about saving or deleting the. these tapes.

Right. So we're not saying that he has the smoking gun on Trump coming to him and saying, erase the tapes, they have a legal material on them. No, he's giving you context for it. But it is persuasive to me because why are you talking about saving or deleting the tapes when you never ever talk about it? So it is interesting testimony. And finally, the other thing that I found persuasive about Butler was, he said, look, guys,

If you're working with him and it's outside of politics, et cetera, none of these issues ever come up. You know, he seems like he got along really well with Trump and Delivera was his best friend. And they loved working at Mara Lago and he started working there when he was a really young guy and he built a business around it and stuff. So it's not like he hates Trump at all. He's in his like early 40s. Yeah, and he's been working there for 20 years. So he started out super young there. But he said one of the things that soured him on Trump here at the end is that he always asked us.

other people to sacrifice themselves. Like Butler's friends, Delivera and Notta, et cetera. And he's like, but he knows, he said, Butler says, I know that Trump knows that he did it. And I know that he's lying about this whole thing being a witch hunt. And it might not ruin his life, but he's gonna ruin these guys' lives. I mean, he certainly already has ruined the lives of others who were willing to carry out what Trump had asked of them, right? I mean, for some reason, I think of Jenna Ellis first, because Jenna Ellis is so bitter about the fact that she's been indicted in the election interference case. And she really only has herself to blame.

I mean, it's hard to believe that after losing literally dozens of court cases, she was still under the impression that the election had been stolen from Trump. But all of these people are facing criminal indictments. You have former friends and personal lawyers of Donald Trump already serving time in prison. Michael Cohen's a good example. We're gonna do a little a story later about another former Trump advisor, Peter Navarro, who's gonna spend some time in prison very soon. It's just, it's amazing to me how people keep falling for Trump's lies and keep carrying out Trump's terrible deeds.

Trump usually skirts any punishment while they suffer the consequences. And there's a very good reason for that because Donald Trump is actually among the elites. And so the elites get extra privileges, extra protections, including Merrick Garland and all those prosecutors waiting two and a half years to charge him because they thought if he doesn't run again, he's part of the elite, so we'll protect him. Jesus. And so, but Nata and the Oliveira and Butler and all these guys, they're not part of the elites. So they're just cannon fodder.

And so Butler is objecting to that. And I would hope that if, at least if you believe them, that you would object to it too, that Trump treats people like this. I remember how man I was at Clinton for how he treated Monica Lewinsky, right? It showed you his character that he was willing to smear her. and throw her under the bus, even though he knew he was lying. And the same is true of Donald Trump here. So many people go to prison, so many people have their lives ruin, just so Donald Trump can lie to protect himself. And people who admired him, like people who looked up to him and

believed in what he was doing. I mean, it's just, it's crazy. Anyway, we have that Peter Navarro story coming up after the break. He is going to spend time behind bars. So we'll do a refresher on why and how his appeal is very unlikely to work. Come right back. favorite president, me. Document. For a limited time at McDonald's, enjoy the tasty breakfast trio. Your choice of chicken or sausage McMuffin or McGrittles with a hash brown and a small iced coffee for five bucks plus tax. Available until 11 a.m. at participating McDonald's restaurants.

Price excludes flavored iced coffee and delivery. All right, back on TYT, Jank, Anna, and all these wonderful members with you guys. Let me do quick shoutouts. Ethan Rexer gifted a sub on Twitch and Itchy Brother Dragon gifted 10. You're amazing, thank you. And then on YouTube, Lynn's gifted one, Moon Dragon gifted 20, amazing. And Parker Sandor, Thomas Cunningham, Bin Barnummed, Mia Ardell, and Clayton Anderson all just joined. We appreciate you guys, you are the young Turks.

We're waiting on you, the weiner. I'm just kidding, but that is one of our viewers. I don't know, just want to give you a shout out. Okay, look at that. All right, we do the show together guys. Much love to all the new members. Now you're part of the community. All right, Anna.

All right, well, we have some more news in the Trump-related legal arena, so let's get into it. Former White House Trade Advisor, Peter Navarro, has just a little over one week of freedom left as he's officially been ordered to report to federal prison next week. Now Navarro faces the prospect of becoming the first top Trump advisor to serve time in a jail for an offense related to the efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. In a court filing release just yesterday, a statement said that Dr. Navarro has now been ordered to report to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons,

FCI, Miami, on or before 2 p.m. Eastern time on March 19th of 2024, Navarro's attorney said in a court filing referring to a low security prison in Florida. Now, Navarro was sentenced earlier to four months in prison after being convicted on two contempt of Congress counts. Now, he refused to comply with a subpoena from the House Select Committee that was investigating the January 6 Capitol riots, and he's been trying to avoid reporting to prison during his appeal. He is in fact appealing the case and the conviction that he has been found guilty of, but his efforts so far have failed. So U.S. District Judge Amit Matta ordered him last month to report to prison after he denied his bid to stay free, or after the judge denied

his bid to stay free as the appeal plays out in court. And so the DC Circuit Court of Appeals is considering a similar request from Navarro, but as of now, he will have to report to prison. Navarro is arguing that Meta's decision to not let him raise an executive privilege defense at trial was wrong, and that the possibility that the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals might reverse that decision should keep him out of prison as the court weighs his case. Now, the reason why the judge wasn't hearing the executive privilege defense is because that wasn't a just defense in this case. So Navarro was trying to argue that, you know, well, Trump told me not to cooperate with

Congress, and so I did as I was told. And that was the president, I must listen to the executive and do as I'm told. But that's not a defense in this case as the trial played out. So I've got more details, but Jake, any thoughts? Yeah, so look, what all the Trump guys are finding out is that all the nonsense they spew in media just doesn't work in court. So is there a complicated issue around executive privilege? Yes, there is. It's not clear cut, and you'll see both sides always depending on who's the president saying,

oh, we have complete power to deny you any conversation we had and access to that conversation, et cetera. And the other side will say, oh, you have no power. And they'll keep flip-flabbing my whole life, based on which party's in power, right? And it's super frustrating. But there are real guidelines, there are real rules. And in this case, Trump didn't even apply executive privilege. Exactly, yes.

And certainly Biden didn't. So it's a total fiction, what Navarro is saying. So when you go to court and you say, hey, the president used executive privilege with me, and then the judge says, okay, where? Show me where he at. Show me the evidence. Show me the evidence for Trump saying that you have executive privilege over this. And he doesn't have it.

Right. So but then he's totally like undeterred by that goes in front of the cameras right outside and goes, oh no, I had executive privilege. But do you, if you did, we just asked you for the evidence. Right. And you're about to go to jail, son. Right. And you didn't have the evidence because it doesn't exist. And but he still comes out there with this chitter chatter of, Oh my God, I'm a victim and I'm a martyr and all this stuff. And part of the reason he does that because he knows with his base, that'll work with his charm.

You just pretend to be a martyr and never present evidence. That's Mago 101. So it'll work with them, but he's going to prison because it doesn't work in court. Now, Jake, I love that you mentioned the press conferences that he tried to carry out and what he was allegedly saying during those press conferences. I remember watching some of those videos on the show. And to be honest with you, the message was lost because there was a lot going on during those press conferences. And if you guys don't remember what I'm referring to, here's a little refresher.

Several these fine attorneys behind me, say a few words. But you got help? Please stop. This is what's wrong with America here. Who's this? You're already facing charges. Yeah, I get it. So, so.

Yes, okay. Hopefully free speech will See if you don't like fascist, D.C. don't like fascists. So forgive me for losing any focus on whatever message he had during those people. press conferences. Yeah, well, all he ever did was in the press conferences was lie, so you didn't miss much.

Right. So look, I think it's a fine line on how you protest and some people to this day are arguing you should go to people's house and try to make them afraid, don't do that, okay? But when you have a person in power who's lying to people and he's in a public space and you're in a public space, there's nothing wrong with that form of protest, especially because people in power never allow you to have access to them, right? So unless you're paying them a giant amount of money and campaign contributions, the regular person is never gonna get a chance to meet with Trump or Biden or any of their staffers.

So if this is a form of protest you're doing, and by the way, on a much more serious note, when they're doing protests of Biden and his administration over Gaza, and his people on the left doing that, I'm also in favor of that. So there is a right time and place, and this is the right time in place. Right, yes. But you know, again, the same lesson that that we can learn from the various Mar-a-Lago employees who carried out, you know, what Trump wanted them to do and moving around classified documents and now they're facing charges

themselves. You can say the same thing about Peter Navarro carrying out what Trump demanded of him, right? Trump usually is able to skirt consequences, although to be fair, he is for the first time facing some serious charges in multiple criminal cases. But you have all these other people who were associated with Trump having already been charged, already convicted, already sentenced the time behind bars. Again, you have those Mar-a-Lago employees when it comes to the classified documents. Here you have Peter Navarro who's going to spend time behind bars because he listened to Trump and refused to respond to that congressional subpoena for the January 6th investigation. Maybe don't break the law. Maybe don't listen to what Trump wants you to do

and instead do what you think is going to prevent criminal charges for you. And these guys aren't smart enough to realize that. It's amazing. Yeah, but there is a distinction between the oliveras and the Nautas who are just employees of Trump at Mar-a-Lago and the Peter Navarro's. Because those guys just got caught up in Trump's criminality, and they got stuck in a situation where they're loyal to Trump, their salary comes from Trump, et cetera. But they're a civilian, they're a regular person, and they're caught up in this mess. Whereas Navarro is one of the authors of this mess.

He's one of the principal characters in this play. He's the one that wrote a book and bragged about how they were going to try to steal the election. He didn't say steal in the book, but everything he outlined was the fake elector plot, which was an attempt to steal the election and do a coup against America. So he's a flagrant violator of our constitution, our laws, et cetera. He's one of the principal bad guys. So to see him go to jail for anything is a relief, he should also be charged with insurrection. Don't do it like they did with Trump afterwards, oh, let's take him off the ballot, et cetera.

No, do an actual trial where you try him for the thing that he did. This is just contempt of Congress. Charge him on the substance of the fake elector plot, the insurrection. And I wish that they would actually prove it in a court of law against some of these conspirators. Well, let's move on to some other news today, including, well, a freshman Alabama senator who wasn't quite honest in her response to the state of the union. President Biden's border policies are a disgrace. This crisis is despicable.

She embarrassed herself. She embarrassed the Republicans and she embarrassed women. Did you mean to give the impression that this horrible story happened on President Biden's watch? Freshman Alabama Senator Katie Britt is facing a ton of backlash and allegations of dishonesty over her response to President Joe Biden's. President Joe Biden's State of the Union address just last week. Now, she was even forced to defend herself during a contentious interview on Fox News. We're going to get to that in just a moment and you don't want to miss it. But before we do, more on the portion of her speech that is getting all of this negative attention. Now, Brits' State of the Union response

included some fear-mongering tactics about Joe Biden's presidency and what he has failed to do and keeping the country safe with the southern border, being wide open. That was the main point that she wanted to outline. She wanted to make it seem as though there's a looming threat of rape and sex trafficking because the border is out of control. And so she shared a very specific story while trying to make this point about a woman who she met at the southern border named Carla Jacinto. So here is the portion of the speech where she addresses her story.

I traveled to the Del Rio sector of Texas. That's where I spoke to a woman who shared her story with me. She had been sex trafficked by the cartels starting at the age of 12. The cartels put her on a mattress in a shoebox of a room. And they sent men through that door over and over again for hours and hours on end. What are we doing? Like look, what she's sharing is obviously very serious, although she doesn't get the facts right and I'll tell you why and how in just a moment. But the delivery, like what are we doing?

Yeah, you know, look, I'm of two minds on that. So especially that part that you just saw. So obviously over the top BS emotional, right? You could be moved by that story and I hope that you are moved by that story. The core of that story is true. It's not, it just doesn't happen to be about Biden's term, but but she's obviously an enormous phony pretending to get all emotional and as she rehearsed that many times.

But I have to confess that I'm a little surprised that she's getting so much heat for that because politicians have been giant phonies just like her my entire life. You're right about that, you're totally right about that. But her delivery, it like slaps you across the face with. with how inauthentic she is and how she is exploiting a tragic event for political advantages. Yeah, that's what really, because what happened was awful and brutal and tragic, right? It's the fact that that story is being utilized as a tool for the right wing politically speaking, and you can't help but acknowledge the fact that it's being exploited as a political tool because

of her inauthentic delivery. Yeah, but yeah, there's, I find a silver lining in this story. You might be surprised by that. So first, look, don't get me wrong. I did a play by play here for our members and if you sign up for membership, you could actually still watch it and I have to confess it was a bit hilarious, right? Because I started playing along with her because she was so over the top, right? Super over the top.

Yeah, and so we couldn't put that up online, but we for on YouTube, etc. But it is for our members, so t.yt.com slash join and you could watch that now. So believe me, you'll watch that and you'll say, oh, I get it. I get that she was over the top and absurd, et cetera. But having said that, I swear to you that politicians my whole life, if they haven't been quite that degree, they've been really close to that fake, right? And so I think what the difference is here, and I'm going to give the most ironic credit to the right wing here, because a lot of right wingers called her out afterwards, and they're

like, she looked like a total phony. And that is not what would have happened in previous years. That's true. There is an actual populist wing of the Republican Party. And yes, they believe a lot of things that are totally wrong, right? But they are calling out their corporate politicians. And they are beginning to call out some of their phony politicians. So I think what really did her in was all of a sudden there appeared to be bipartisan agreement

about what a phony she is. That's true. And there was backlash from, you know, I saw from Republican voters online, but more importantly, from members of the conservative press. So, you know, Megan Kelly came out and said it was embarrassing. But for the purposes of this discussion, I want to focus on the anecdote that she shared, that tragic story that she shared in her State of the Union response, right? The one about Carla Yacinto.

And turns out that CNN is actually very familiar with Carla and her story. Turns out that Brit got many things wrong as she was relaying information about that horrific ordeal. And so with that in mind, let's take a look at what I'm referring to. Carla Jacinto also told me that Senator Britt got many of the facts of her story wrong. First of all, Jacinto says that, one, she was not trafficked by Mexican drug cartels, but by a pimp that operated as part of a family that entrapped vulnerable girls in order to force them into prostitution. Two, she also said that she was never trafficked in the United States, as Senator Britt appeared to suggest three, she was kept in captivity from 2000.

2004 to 2008, when President George W. Bush, a Republican, was in office as opposed to the current administration, as the senator implied. And four, she met the senator at an event at the border with other government officials and anti-human trafficking activists instead of one-on-one. CNN has confirmed much of what Jacinto has said in prior reporting, and her story hasn't changed since we first spoke. Hasinto told me no one reached out to her to ask for her permission to use her story. part of a political speech. Someone using my story and distorting it for political purposes. She told me it's not fair at all. So the very victim that Britt was referring to in that story feels like she has been

victimized again with her horrible, horrific, you know, tragic incident being used as a political tool. And then I want to go to one more video because it's important to hear from Yacinto herself. She also spoke to CNN, gave an interview about her thoughts. But more importantly, gave a broader perspective on how these types of situations get exploited for politics. Let's watch. At one point when I met you years and years ago, you told me that you felt like at the beginning, Mexican politicians had taken advantage of you by using your story for political purposes.

Do you feel like that happened once again here in the United States? Yes. In fact, I hardly ever cooperate with politicians because it seems to me that they only want an image. They only want a photo, and that to me is not fair. I work as a spokesperson for many victims who have no voice, and I really would like them to be empathetic. All the governors, all the senators to be empathetic with the issue of human trafficking, because there are millions of girls and boys who disappear all the time, people who are really trafficking. and abused, as she mentioned, and I think she should first take into account what really happens before telling a story of that magnitude.

I mean, this woman's a total class act. I mean, she's resilient, she's fighting for other women and other people who have been victimized similar to how she was victimized. But more importantly, she took this awful situation and this awful exploitation of her story for a political, you know, for a political tool and has used it to kind of amplify the work that she's doing and make a broader point about how it's important to actually hear people like her out instead of just use people like her for politics. Yeah, and guys, don't get caught up in the both sides of them too, meaning like just because

Britt mangled that story and pretended it was under Biden's term when it wasn't, doesn't mean that rape of migrant women and sometimes men isn't a horrific problem, because it is. It is a massive problem. And it is happening. And it happens to a gigantic percentage of women who are coming to this country, to the point that it's shocking. And I don't know what to do about it. I wish someone actually cared about it so they would try to address the problem.

But she's right, politicians on either side haven't done a single thing about the substance. of it. They just both keep using it for their own political talking points while never actually fix it. I mean, it reminds me of the opioid crisis and the fentanyl crisis here in the United States. We hear a lot about it from our politicians on both sides of the political aisle when they're campaigning. Once the elections are over, we don't hear anything from them about it. And we just hear news stories about the number of overdose deaths increasing for another year in a row. But getting back to Britt, so obviously there was some dishonesty in the way that she shared that story, making viewers think that this horrible incident happened recently

under Biden's watch, but it happened under George W. Bush's watch. And so she was asked about that. Shockingly, on Fox News, so I give them credit for asking her this question. Let's take a look at how she responded. Nobody is questioning that the story happened, that she is actually who she is, said she is, and that this happened. The question is about the timing and the implication of you telling the story. Did you mean to give the impression that this horrible story happened on President Biden's watch? No, Shannon, look, I very specifically said this is what President Biden did during his first 100 days. minutes after coming into office, he stopped all deportations, he halted construction of the border wall,

and he said, I am going to give amnesty to millions. Those types of things act as a magnet to have more and more people here. The truth is, and the media knows this, yet they're not covering it, that human trafficking has gone up under President Biden. Okay, but to be clear, the story that you relate is not something that's happened under the Biden administration, that particular person. Well, I very clearly said, I spoke to a woman who told me about when she was trafficked when she was 12. So I didn't say a teenager, I didn't say a young woman, a grown woman, a woman when she was trafficked when she was 12. So what do you think about that, Jane?

Do you think that was a, look, do you think that she intended to mislead viewers into thinking that this happened under Biden's watch? Or do you think that, you know, she maybe didn't word it well, but there was a lot? no ill intent there. I think she's definitely meant to mislead. Okay, but like it doesn't really matter. So let me explain both sides of it. So number one, when I watched that whole segment on Fox News and the first time that she was asked a question, she went on for about two minutes and never answered. It's an easy question. Did you intend to mislead or did you not intend to mislead? Do you concede that it didn't happen under Biden? These are super

And she went on for two minutes about Biden, right, about how bad Biden it is. So further misleading, right? So, and then, and you saw it in that portion of the tape, too. She continued to lie. She said, Biden told all of the millions of undocumented immigrants that they can get amnesty. No, he didn't. He never said that. You can criticize Biden's. In fact, there's massive, ample criticism of Biden's policies in immigration. Absolutely. And we do have record numbers. And Biden didn't have any real policy of his own. He's now trying to copy Trump's policy in a desperate, kind of pathetic attempt. So you see us being honest about the results, about the reality, et cetera. So you don't have to go to these lies and deceit, et cetera. But she can't

help herself. So she pretends that Biden told them, yeah, come on in. I'm going to give you an amnesty. He never even came close to saying that. You could say his actions might have led there, et cetera, but no need to lie. And in this case, she could have easily counted it as, look, I heard this horrific story from a while ago, but it's still happening today and then tell the story. These are really easy things to do that doesn't take away from the power of the story. But I think that she thought, and this is another interesting, like, silver lining is kind of a tough word for it, but like she thought, oh, Republicans can

lie at nauseam, or politicians can lie at nauseam, we're never. going to get called out on it, and we're certainly not going to get called out from our side. Look at Donald Trump, right? No, Trump has special different rules. And so I say it's a tad bit of a silver lining because the right wing is not allowing other Republican politicians to lie quite as much as they allow Trump to lie. True. Do you see what I'm saying? True, but even that, jank, I feel like, is a relatively new trend.

Like to see conservative outlets pushing back on other conservatives is relatively new. It is new. And I appreciate it. I'm encouraged by it. Me too, absolutely. And you're totally right about how in terms of Biden's immigration policy or lack thereof, he is a target rich environment. And there really is no need to lie about what he has and hasn't done.

Because we already see what the lack of border policy has manifested into, especially when you look at what's happening in some of the liberal cities that have seen an influx of migrants come to their cities when they don't have the resources to. to adequately respond to it. So I mean, again, you don't have to make up anything. Just focus on what Biden has fallen short on. But apparently that's not enough in their minds. I don't get it, it's weird.

But you know, again, like Katie Britt 100% wrong, clear. She's obviously lying in a phony, all that I can, like I'm happy to point that out. I pointed out then I'm pointing it out now. But guys, also my whole life, I see both sides coming in and going, oh, the numbers are are terrible for them. The numbers are terrible. Like for example, Obama's immigration numbers, very similar to Trump's, and very similar to the first couple of years of Biden. But meanwhile, if you listen to Trump and the Republicans, oh, it was a disaster under Obama. It was perfect under Trump and no one came in. And then it was a disaster under Biden. If you listen to

Democrats, oh, Trump was terrible, right? And it said it. No, the numbers were very similar through Obama, Trump, and Biden. And in the last year, it has spiked considerably. Obama was referred to as the deporter in chief because of how quickly he would deport people. Yeah. So yeah, and that's the thing that's so frustrating because I don't know about you, Jank, but once I realize that a figure or a media outlet or whatever has lied or they've been dishonest, that's it. I'm not going to trust them ever again, even when they are saying things or sharing information

that might actually be accurate. You get what I'm saying? 100%. hurting yourself by spreading lies because some people who might have an open mind might actually hear out what you're saying are no longer going to trust anything you have to say. Yeah, so at the risk of hurting people's feelings here, let me say it about both sides. Yes, the Republicans are definitely worse, sorry if that hurts your feelings, but they have been, they play fast and loose with the numbers all the time.

And they're trying to create a panic in this particular issue. And they've been trying to do it for the last 20 years because they know that they're based not like a changing country. So this is an issue that they dig in on, right? So they will say all the time, I was terrible under Obama, it was horrific under Biden. The minute he stepped in office, but brother, it's identical numbers to Trump, right? So please stop lying. You could say it's a real problem under Trump and Obama and Biden, and that is super fair,

right? But when you start saying crazy lies that aren't backed up by the evidence at all. Now, you lose all credibility, and if you're wondering why nobody believes MAGA, it's because of things like that, right? On the other hand, when you have AOC saying that there is no migrant problem, but sister, we can see the numbers, and the numbers have spiked. When you deny objective reality, you lose all credibility, and I don't care what side you're on.

Totally. We have to stick with facts and truth and reality because we plan on doing things that the politicians never do, which is trying to actually solve these problems. Right, and you can't solve the problem if you can't agree on what the facts of the issue happen to be. Yes. All right, we got to take a break when we come back. We have an update on Gaza, specifically Rafa and the alleged tension between Biden and Benjamin Netanyahu. That more coming up.

Don't miss it. We'll be right back. Innocent Americans are dying. Can't let that happen. Jim on Tuesday. Date night on Wednesday. Out on the town on Thursday. Quiet night in on Friday.

It's good to have a routine. And it's good for your eyes too. Because with regular comprehensive eye exams at Specsavers, you'll know just how healthy they are. Visit Spexsavers.cavers.cai to book your next eye exam. Eye exams provided by independent optometrists. All right, back on Ti-T-Jankana with you guys, but also these lovely people. Quentin Gilliam gifted a membership, Lady Fugentie and Margaret Holland Coffee, gifted five apiece.

You guys are amazing. Miranda Yancey just joined and disaffected, as disaffected or as they are, upgraded their membership anyway. Disaffected is the word. I know. It's the word. I feel it in my bones. Yeah, it is not surprising that someone with the handle disaffected is part of the TYT community.

Anyway, thank you. We appreciate you. And everybody, not only can you join, we can also upgrade through that join button. And if ever there was a time to do either one of those things, it's now as several companies have gone under in just the last week. All right, you ready for some international news? Let's get to it. Would invasion of Rafa, which you have urged him not to?

do, would that be a red line? This is a red line. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is rejecting President Biden's criticism after Biden this weekend claimed that Netanyahu's policies are hurting Israel. It's contrary to what Israel stands for. And I think it's a big mistake. Everyone in the media has been insisting that President Joe Biden has firmly declared what his red line for Israel is.

But did he? Did he really? And how many times does Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu need to slap Biden around publicly for the President of the United States to understand that maybe he needs to change course because he is embarrassing himself and this country by having a foreign leader slap him down repeatedly? Now we'll get to all of that in just one minute, but first some critical information on what's currently transpiring in Rafah, which is at the center of this.

Biden, Netanyahu disagreement. So more than a million displaced Palestinians are currently sheltering in Rafa that is near the border with Egypt, and it's been, I'm just gonna say relatively safe compared to every other part of the Gaza Strip, because every other part of the Gaza Strip has been suffering from aerial bombardment, airstrikes, Israeli shelling, you get the picture. About 1.4 million Palestinians, more than half of Gaza's population, have crowded into houses, tents, and streets in Rafah to escape the brunt of the fighting elsewhere in the strip. European leaders and top UN officials have joined the White House in warning Israel against launching a ground invasion of the city,

fearing a humanitarian nightmare. Now, when you consider how many people have already died in Gaza, more than 30,000 at this point, you can understand how an even more densely populated region of the Gaza Strip dealing with, with an IDF ground invasion would lead to a massive humanitarian crisis and very likely an acceleration of civilian deaths. Now Israel has already carried out some airstrikes in Rafa. That happened over the weekend. Israel struck one of the largest residential towers in Rafa on Saturday.

The 12 floor building located 500 meters from the border with Egypt was damaged in the strike. Dozens of families were made homeless, though shockingly, and I'm not entirely sure I believe, leave this, no casualties were reported according to residents. Now with that in mind, one of the towers 300 residents told Reuters that Israel did give them a 30 minute warning to flee the building at night, which likely led to a situation where you don't have casualties as a result of that airstrike, but the strike is likely a sign of what's to come. So with that in mind, did Biden really state that a ground invasion in Rafa by the IDF is

his red line. Let's watch and you decide for yourselves. What is your red line with Prime Minister Netanyahu? Do you have a of a red line? For instance, would invasion of Rafah, which you have urged him not to do, would that be a red line? It is a red line, but I'm never going to leave Israel. The defense of Israel is still critical. So there's no red line. I'm going to cut off all weapons so they don't have the iron dome to protect them. They don't have, but there's red lines that if it crosses and they cannot have 30,000 more Palestinians dead as a consequence of going up. There's other ways to deal, to get to, to deal with the trauma caused by Hamas. It's like I, well, look, the first time I went over, I sat with them and I sat with a war cab.

And I said, look, don't make the mistake America made. I don't know, that did not sound like a red line to me, but maybe I'm. having some comprehension issues. Jank, what are your thoughts? Yeah, well, that's because he wanted to have his cake and eat it too. And of course, the mainstream press is very, very happy to let him do that. So he said, John Capehart asked, hey, is invading Rafa basically, a ground invasion or Rafa, you're a red line.

And he said, but then he quickly said, now it's not a red line in terms of giving them unlimited weapons, et cetera. So it's not a red line then. They think we're stupid, right? Right, so like, and then he said, essentially, Second time that something else was a red line, he said they cannot kill another 30,000 Palestinians, that's a red line. And then he went about the consequences because there is no consequences because it's not

a red line. So first of all, which one is it? Ground invasion of Rafa or an extra 30,000 Palestinians dead, because those are two very different red lines. And secondly, if that's true, what are the consequences of a red line? It's not a red line if there are no consequences. And he just told you right there, and throughout the rest of the interview, he did not clarify at all that there would ever be a consequence to Israel.

So it's just loose talk, it's totally BS. That is why you'll see Netanyahu slaps him down and says, who the hell do you think you are? Get back in line. And a foreign leader that's taking billions of dollars from us can't afford to do that because Biden is not drawing the line with him. That's exactly right. In fact, why don't we hear more from Netanyahu's response? Despite that warning from President Biden of not crossing that red line, we have Prime Minister

Netanyahu saying that that offensive in Rafah will in fact go ahead, saying that his red line is October 7th and making sure that that doesn't happen again. And he said that an IDF incursion into Rafa to root out Hamas there could take two months, perhaps even less than two months, and that there would be no pause in the fighting until there is some kind of a deal made to bring the hostages home. He also left open the possibility of expanding military operations into southern Lebanon. We're gonna get back to expanding military operations to southern Lebanon in just a moment, because keep in mind, Netanyahu responded to Biden's alleged red line by saying, no, no, I'm gonna spread this war out.

Make it broader. I'm gonna go to war with another country. We'll get to that in a moment. But first, Jake, he says that Netanyahu says that his red line was October 7th, when Hamas carried out atrocities in his country, which he failed to protect his citizens from. And Hamas is partly propped up and funded by who? Well, it was by Netanyahu.

Oh, that's right. Netanyahu funded and propped up Hamas. And he knew the attack was coming and he didn't. knew anything about it. So I mean, if that's your red line, it looks like your own red line says you should get the hell out of office because it was you who crossed your own red line. It's a great point by Anna. Biden will consider conditioning military aid. I don't buy it for one second. Go ahead, do it, do it.

We'll see how that plays out. You condition military aid and show us that it was a real red line was thrilled to come back out here and go, oh, finally, Biden's doing the right thing. We're super happy to report it, et cetera. Why wouldn't we report it? So now let me tell you, in fact, let me report one other wrinkle to this that is relevant, which is that Hamas is doing something really stupid and counterproductive, and I don't know why they're doing it, and it is partly responsible. And I could argue that it's largely responsible for not having the ceasefire by Ramadan. It looks like Israel, America, and the Arab countries made a deal to get to

the ceasefire before Ramadan, but Hamas won't turn over the name of the hostages they have. I don't think they have it. Yeah, they might not. I don't think, I don't think that they have kept track of all the hostages. I think what's very likely to have happened is that some of them have died. Some of them are alive, but maybe have escaped Hamas's captivity, you know? Yeah, yeah. So I think that's the reason why they're refusing to give a list of the hostages, those alive and those who have died.

Yeah, so plenty of blame to go around for sure. And Hamas, if they don't have the names, it's just goddamn to say it. Right. Get to the ceasefire already. Now it's not, that deal is definitely not good enough because, Netanyahu who says, whether it's today or two months from now, I'm going to level Rafah anyway. So it's like, it is just a ceasefire. It is not a peace deal.

But my hope is that they could use the time in Ramadan to turn it into an actual peace deal. I know that it's very, very, very optimistic to think that that could happen, but at least it would be a shot. And it would at least would stop the bombing temporarily, right? And get the hostages back. So Hamas should get off their ass and I know us yelling at them has no effect, right? But you should understand that they are definitely significantly responsible for not having the ceasefire today. Okay, in the past it was mainly Israel, but today it's mainly Hamas.

Okay, now back to Biden though, he says my red line is going to Rafah. Netanyahu says, oh yeah, what are you going to do about it? I'm crossing your red line and I'm telling the entire world that I'm crossing it. I'm going to go into Rafah and I'm going to do everything you told me not to do. Now shut up and give me $14 billion extra. and give me hundreds of times where you funnel weapons to me without even telling Congress, another story we covered last week. Give me $250 million more without telling Congress, as we told you about a month ago, right?

You will do as your goddamn told Joe Biden, and there's no damn red line for me. And Biden is going to go, yes, sir, okay, sir, but maybe he won't. Maybe he'll condition the aid, and then I'll be thrilled to report it to you. But if history is any guide, Joe Biden is not in charge. Netanyahu's in charge of this relationship. He's acting like it. You're seeing it with your own eyes. So either Biden's going to put up or he should shut up and just admit what he's really doing,

which is letting Israel do any war crime they like as long as, you know, he thinks the money keeps flowing to him through campaign contributions. So I want to go to two other things. Before we get to the last video, I wanted to give you the other disconnect between Biden and Netanyahu because they appear to have quite a few disagreements, but Biden hasn't used any sticks so far, if you will, only carrots. So the Biden administration's vision for a long term peace deal between Israel and Palestinians includes a firm timeline for the establishment of a Palestinian state, setting up another potential standoff with Israel's leader. And let me be clear, there has not been a standoff at all. There's been none. Like the framing by the press drives me crazy.

There has been zero standoff, okay, none of that. Biden has issued some very weak statements without any real action behind them. And every time Biden does, Netanyahu stands up and slaps them down, embarrasses the American people and the American government by doing so, and then we move on with our lives. And I would venture to say this is going to be another example. Netanyahu has been very clear in not wanting a two state solution. In fact, he said, quote, we don't want to see a Palestinian state, Netanyahu told Axel Springer. That's a publication in Germany, repeating his longstanding position that he said represents the consensus within Israel.

Jenk. Yeah, so there's a reason why mainstream media keeps telling you a false image of this conflict that doesn't exist. And how Biden's standing up to Netanyahu when he has literally done nothing to stand up to Netanyahu other than BS. verbiage. So why does the media go along with it? Because they are in the same general group think as mainstream establishment Democrats. So what they want to do is show you an image of Joe Biden who's struggling here because he loves Israel so much and he's such a great guy for being such a good friend and ally to Israel. But God, he is so empathetic to the Palestinians and his heart breaks for them. So he's telling Netanyahu to cut out the malarkey. It's a

He's all theater. He's done zero. It is a fact you could look it up anywhere you like, look and read the articles and see if he has taken one step to check Israel in terms of funding, access, allyship, anything, anything at all. He has done absolutely positively nothing but let Netanyahu set our foreign policy for us. There is no disagreement between them. It's all a game to make it seem like Biden's a nice guy.

like Biden's a nice guy and that Arab and Muslim America should vote for him anyway. All right, we're out of time. We're going to take our break. And when we come back, we'll talk a little bit about Nancy Mace pushing back against George Stephanopoulos and his questions about why she decided to endorse and support Donald Trump, especially given her past and his own past. So that and more coming up, don't miss it. We'll be right back.