The Young Turks - Triggering The Establishment

Episode Date: March 8, 2024

CNN airs shocking footage of starving Gazan children. Tennessee Republican Chuck Fleischmann: ""You can tell the Palestinians — I will never support them!"" Protestor: ""I am a Palestinian."" Fleischmann: ""Then I will tell you, I will never support you. I will tell you to your face: Goodbye to Palestine!"" House Democrat Katie Porter skewered for claiming her election was ""rigged"" by attack ads against her. Analysts discuss Trump’s appeal to some Black voters." 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. All right, well, the young Turks, Jake Uyghur, Anna Kasparian with you guys. So later in the program, really interesting and smart conversation on CNN about why Trump is gaining black voters. It was one of the best CNN conversation. It was a panel discussion, which I'm almost allergic to at this point. But it was one of the most interesting panel discussions I've seen on cable television.

And everyone on that panel made a good point. Yeah, I think it might be the smartest segment I've seen on CNN. Okay, so we have more good segments from CNN coming up in a minute about Gaza. So credit work, credit is due on that. And then later in the program, the fans of pop stars get mad because she is dating a guy. Why are they so mad and what does that tell you about the differences in culture? It's an amazing story. Don't miss that one either.

All right, Casper. Well, we begin with a rather heartbreaking story and I want to give you all warning before we get into it because some of the images that you're going to see are difficult. They involve children who are on the precipice of dying from starvation. So I just wanted to give you that warning. It's difficult for me to even do the story, but we must be. but we must because it's important to know what's going on in the world and in Gaza. So without further ado, here it is.

Tiny limbs, bones protruding. The constant sound of crying from children now facing starvation in Gaza. In this overrun hospital ward, anxious mothers watch on as doctors provide whatever care they still can. But for some, they were really. There is nothing more to be done. There is no food, no water, no flour, cooking oil or anything, this woman says. Death is better than this. As CNN airs horrific footage of children starving in Gaza,

and as the United Nations expects the rate in which Palestinian children are dying to rapidly rise, we're also learning that the White House has been secretly flooding Israel with additional military. with additional military weaponry. Now we'll get to that portion of the story in just a moment, and you don't want to miss it. But before we do, let's talk about starvation in Gaza, namely that Gaza's health ministry said on Sunday that 15 children have died in recent days

from what it described as malnutrition and dehydration at Kamal Adwan Hospital in the north, meaning northern Gaza. It added in a statement that the lives of six other children in the intensive care unit were in danger for malnutrition and dehydration. Now, the number of children who have died from malnutrition and dehydration has actually increased since Sunday, the latest figure that I came across was 17.

The ministry said that the hospital had also run out of oxygen and fuel to powerage generators. Remember, we're talking about northern Gaza, where it's increasingly difficult and nearly impossible to get humanitarian aid to the people who remain there. There are about 100,000, hundreds of thousands of people still there, around 300,000 estimated to still be in northern Gaza. And the ministry also said that its power generators were no longer functioning, barely operating with very limited supplies. Now, the UN has also put out its own report about child deaths in Gaza, likely to rapidly rise as aid into the strip has been severely restricted for several months. Remember, this war has been going on for more than five months.

And so the United Nations has warned that many Gazans are on the edge of famine. Adel Koder, UNICEF's director for the Middle East and North Africa, said in a statement on Sunday that one and six children under two in Gaza were acutely malnourished. And the situation is so grim and looks so bad for the Biden administration that they're now planning to announce during his state of the union address that the United States is going to build a port, a temporary port to deliver aid to Gazans. The United States military plans to build this temporary port in Gaza, on the Gaza shoreline in the following weeks as these civilians are struggling to receive food and much needed medical aid. So an official who spoke to the Guardian on the condition of anonymity said, we are not waiting on the Israelis, this is a moment for American leadership.

Tonight the president will announce in his state of the union address that he has directed the U.S. military to undertake an emergency mission to establish a port in Gaza working in partnership with like-minded countries and humanitarian partners. This port, the main feature of which is a temporary peer, will provide the capacity for hundreds of additional truckloads of assistance each day. And remember, prior to the war, there were about 500 trucks entering the Gaza Strip to provide humanitarian aid. During the hostage exchange and during that temporary week long ceasefire. They managed to get about 200 trucks in per day on average, but obviously since that

ceasefire has ended, it's incredibly difficult to get aid into the Gaza Strip. But it's important to know this one caveat, which makes me really question whether this is going to work, Jank. The United States is also saying that the Israelis will monitor and check all of the humanitarian aid that is delivered through that port. So they have to approve it before it's delivered through the port. But part of the problem is Israel continues to restrict the entry of humanitarian aid, and they just randomly reject truckloads of aid without any real explanation.

Yeah, so first of all, if Hamas had kept 17 Israeli kids babies in a confined space and wouldn't let anybody feed them until they starve to death, I think we could all agree that we would call them the worst terrorist we've ever seen. I mean, who would do that, starve little babies to death? So what are we supposed to call the Israeli cabinet ministers? Are we supposed to say that they are a democracy, that they're an ally, that they're decent, they're moral? No, I mean, the worst terrorists we know wouldn't do this. So if you say Israel's a right to defend itself, congratulations.

That is exactly what Hamas says. So you agree with Hamas 100%. Hamas says we had a right to defend ourselves. We've been living under occupation for 75 years, what do you want us to do? want us to do? Just sit here and just be imprisoned forever? No, we had a right. And by the way, the Israelis kill Palestinians and imprison them endlessly. So we had a right to defend ourselves. Israel says Israel and Netanyahu says the same exact thing. So it's not an excuse to murder 17 babies by starving them to death. Yeah. And you know, the UN has put out a report. And we

mentioned it on the show. We've talked about it. We've never denied that there have very likely been instances of Hamas carrying out rapes on October 7th. We've never denied that. And the UN has put out a report validating that claim, okay? And people will cite that as like an excuse for what the IDF and the Israeli government is currently doing in Gaza. What happened to Israelis on October 7th was an atrocity, it was brutal, it was awful. But the reason why we're talking about what's happening in Gaza, right?

now is because it's happening right now in real time. More and more innocent children are dying, either from bombings, shellings, or from starvation and dehydration. And the reason why we're bringing it up is because we just want it to stop. Yeah, so look, I don't get this idea that, hey, we were hurt so we get to hurt other people that are innocent because it makes us feel better, oh, I'm sorry, because we have a right defend ourselves by murdering random other people. Well, they're not other people, they're Palestinians.

Well, then you're a racist and a tribalist and a genocide supporter. So that's exactly what people doing a genocide say, well, they're all the same race. Who cares, just kill them all. Who cares, just kill them. They got babies, starve them to death. And if you think that if they're not morally responsible, you're just kidding yourself. They're cutting off the aid, they know that the babies are, so we've been saying, and the United Nations and every human rights group has been saying for weeks now, they're starving,

they're starving, they're going to die. And Netanyahu, Ben Gavir and the others are like, yes, yes! And you're telling me they're not terrorists, get out of here, man. Netanyahu's the biggest terrorist in the world right now. So I want to go to the second video and the final video that we're going to show you from this incredible CNN reporting. Again, it's difficult to watch, but I hope that it at least helps those who can't understand why we have the kind of tone we do when we cover this story, to understand where we're coming from and understand what the crisis is actually like on the ground. So again, warning, fair warning before we go to the video. Without further ado, here it is. She was healthy. There was nothing wrong with her before.

says then suddenly everything dropped she wasn't eating anything we had no milk no eggs nothing she used to eat eggs every day before the war but now we have nothing across Gaza too many are feeling the pain of this deepening hunger crisis small children emaciated and malnourished these were little Yazan's final moments his tiny fingers gripped in his mother's hand He, like Mila, would not make it. Israel has denied targeting civilians and says that there is, quote, no limit to the amount of humanitarian aid for civilians in Gaza.

But the reality on the ground paints a very different picture. According to a senior UN official, at least a quarter of Gaza's population is now said to be just one step away from famine. So let me say things that are obvious yet will cause controversy. That baby that you saw starving, the last one there, the kid, the boy, tell me that doesn't look like a picture out of the Holocaust. You can't say that, you know it does. But there are certain things apparently you're not allowed to say,

even though they're 100% true. Is it an accident? No, they've been systematically doing this for five months now. It's definitely not an accident. Net Yahoo and his government definitely. did it. They're definitely responsible. So what do you want me to tell you? I'm done. I'm done with people's feelings. So people here in America, especially powerful people in DC, the lobbyists, the media, the politicians especially. And look at CNN doing a good job here. So make sure

that you distinguish between different reports and different outlets, CNN excellent report here. Okay, but generally speaking in America, if you say things that are obvious about Israel, people will say, well, but my feelings were hurt. Well, I've got to be honest with you, I don't give a damn about your feelings anymore. I care about that kid. I care about those starving dead 17 babies. And I care about the next set of babies that are dying literally today. Because we can't get them food.

Why can't we get them food? Israel blocks the aid. And they won't let the trucks through. They say, oh, we're inspecting them. It's going to take such a long time. It's, oh, are they not making it to Northern Gaza? There's a million ways that Israel could get aid to Northern Gaza. And they won't allow it because at a bare minimum, they don't mind those starving babies.

That's indisputable. I don't give a goddamn what your feelings are. That is indisputable. And if you don't care more about the lives of those babies and the feelings of their moms and their dads and their family members, But you care about your feelings? Oh, I don't like that you said true things about the beloved Israeli government. I don't care. And I got to be honest with you, I question your morality.

If you care about your feelings, safe, super safe here in America while those babies starve. I definitely question your morality. So I want to just talk a little bit about what we hear from the Biden administration, what their rhetoric is, and what's actually transpiring behind the scenes without any congressional authorization. And it just gives, it shows you the juxtaposition. It's really important to understand it. Because I'm sure the Biden administration, I'm sure Biden tonight during the State of the Union will probably touch on this and rhetorically condemn some of what the Israeli government has been doing. But talk is cheap. You look behind the scenes and it turns out,

according to the Washington Post John Hudson, he's reporting that the White House has sent a ton of weaponry to Israel. Of course. A hundred different transactions without congressional authorization or approval. In fact, after the fact, they did a closed-door briefing with Congress. And so let's get to some of the excerpts from the piece where Hudson writes that the United States has quietly approved and delivered more than 100 separate foreign military sales to Israel since the Gaza war began on October 7th, amounting to thousands of precision guided munitions, small diameter bombs, bunker busters. Remember bunker busters of the 2,000 pound bombs that just absolutely destroy an entire building, small arms and other lethal aid,

U.S. officials told members of Congress in a recent classified briefing. In other words, Congress, again, was notified after the fact rather than authorizing these sales. Only two foreign military sales to Israel have been made public since the start of the conflict, $106 million worth of tank ammunition and 147.5 million in components needed to make 155 millimeter shells. Those sales invited public scrutiny, including from us, because the Biden administration bypassed Congress to approve the packages by invoking an emergency authority. So that's what's actually happening behind the scenes. And it's important to know that because it is an election year and there is quite a bit of backlash toward the Biden

administration from people who typically vote for the Democratic candidate. We know that the uncommitted vote in various states has been actually more impressive than I expected. You know, you have Minnesota, Hawaii, huge portion of Democrats in Hawaii voted uncommitted. And look, there might be some Democrats who are voting uncommitted for other reasons, but this is completely organic. This isn't something that was really planned out and organized. So we're fair to all sides. The leadership of Hamas are terrorists. The leadership of Israel are terrorists. It's obvious. And it's in the numbers. The number of civilians that the leaders of Hamas killed. And then of course, the leaders of Israel have killed 25 times as many civilians. And then they have

BS excuses like, oh, Hamas made us do it. Oh, yeah. Netanyahu is controlled by Hamas. Well, then you should vote them out immediately. Okay. So also here in America, Biden's a giant liar supports and funds a genocide. There's no question about that. The only reason you would deny that is because it hurts your feelings. Trump is also a monster, and we're going to get to his monstrous comments in a second. But let's talk about Biden now. So Biden says, oh my God, I said Israel's actions were over the top. And I put on my sunglasses. And I had Kamala Harris do a totally BS speech about how she cares and wants an immediate ceasefire. Then while you weren't looking, I sent Israel bunker busters to murder more Palestinian children.

And I fund, he's funding this genocide with our taxpayer dollars. So don't tell me Biden's a sweet guy or an empathetic guy or cares about Palestinians. He would mow them all down in a flat second if he thought he'd helped his career 1%. And in fact, not he would, he is. That's exactly what he's doing. In fact, what's amazing is probably both because he's a moron and because he's immoral, He's funding Israel's massacres and war crimes and genocide, even though it hurts his career. I know, it's amazing.

Because he's in, he's so dumb and he's so old. He's stuck in between the 1970s and 90s. He's like, in the 1990s, we always support Israel. All of our funding comes from A-PAC and Democrat. We, I must support, I must support, I must support Israel. Dude, your career's on fire. All these people have rebelled against you. They're not going to vote for you.

You've already lost Michigan, but this moron is so obsessed with the donor money. He says, oh, where's Lockheed Martin? Where's Raytheon? How much, oh, I'll beg you, I beg you, I'll do anything you want. She's so shut up about how you care about Palestinians. Biden cares zero percent. Okay, what I want to understand, this is what I want, because I genuinely don't know, right? Like, you know, you're assuming it's a donor money, I'm sure that has something to do with it.

But the strategy here to, on one hand, rhetorically support what we're saying in condemning what Netany Yahoo is doing what the IDF is doing. But then behind the scene, sending all these weapons to Israel, supporting that through his actions. So like, does he just assume that everyone's dumb? Yeah, no, no, no, no, no. He makes an assumption that is beginning to be wrong. And this is why the CNN report and the Washington Post report are very important.

New York Times has done some good pieces and then they've been awful in other instances. So he assumes that the media is going to cover his tracks because that's what the media has done for the Democratic Party and by the way, Republican leadership too. for the last 40, 50 years since Joe Biden has been involved in politics. Right. You lie outwardly, you do something behind the scenes, you lie to people to get their vote, and then you actually deliver for the donors to get their money. That is what corporate Democrats and corporate Republicans have been doing for decades.

And then you send the corporate media to come and lie and go, oh, Joe Biden's such a sweet guy, he's so empathetic, oh my God, he care, oh look at his, he cares about this, he cares about that. And then when somebody like us, say, well, well, if he cares so much, why is he funding the genocide? They say, how dare you? You're saying things like genocide Joe. That is very rude and uncivil to the people in power. It's you who's at fault and not poor, poor Joe Biden. Okay. And 80% of the time, they still do that. But now all of a sudden, they're beginning to point out things that are true. And that's why it's not working as well. And Biden cannot adjust because he's 200 years old. Yeah, I mean, it's, I have to say,

The media coverage has been different this time around, and I think it's probably because the scenes that are being shared on social media are undeniable. So if you're a major news organization here in the United States, how do you maintain your credibility by ignoring what everyone else is focusing on online, right? So that's probably part of the reason. I also think, you know, one of the main things that I've noticed in terms of having more representation in the newsroom is that now there's more representation in the newsroom, right? There's different perspectives all of a sudden, which is actually fantastic.

And I'm so glad you made that point. Look, I think that the, hey, you have to hire me because I'm in this particular group and that representation is everything is overhyped sometimes. But this is an excellent example of it being absolutely critical. So keep this in mind the next time we have those discussions, okay? Because we've now read reports of Arabs and Muslims that work at CNN going, are you guys serious? Here's all of the evidence in the world. And we're not going to publish it because we have to check with our Jerusalem Bureau, which is obviously run by Mossad.

Like, are you serious that my life doesn't matter at all, that you could go kill my family members? And it's not a big deal. And we're not going to report it. And it humiliates them so that they cover it 20% correct. But I'll take it. It's so much better than before. And that CNN piece was terrific. And by the way, one of the people that stood up to them is Christian Alampor, who spearheaded that. One thing I want to be clear, I don't know that the Jerusalem Bureau of CNN is fine or run by Mossad. But it is very, very, very curious that CNN takes stories here, runs them to Jerusalem to get approval by Israelis and then sends them back, which by the way delays the stories until they're not relevant anymore. So don't think that this report is the rule at CNN, it's the exception at CNN. All right, I got to give Biden credit on the port. The port is a good idea, it's one I asked for earlier, I'm thrilled that they're doing it.

You see how mad I am with Joe Biden? But I am objective enough to say the port is good. I just hope it works. I hope that they're not going to allow the IDF to restrict everything that they want to you know, get through the port. And that caveat, it still shows you who's in charge. And again, if your feelings are hurt by it, I don't care about your feelings. So we have to check with Israel where, okay, please check our goods that were sent.

Why are we terrorists? Are we going to sneak in rockets to Hamas? Why does, why do we need Israel to check what we're bringing into Gaza? What an absurd thing. The only reason you would do that is if Israel's in charge, not us. And everybody knows it. You can again, cry about it all day long. It doesn't matter. It's an obvious fact. But let's get to Trump. Yes. So the final thing I'll mention on this is after really staying quiet on the ongoing war on Gaza, Donald Trump has finally released a statement, and it's about as awful as I suspected it would be. So he said during an interview on Fox News that Israel has got to finish the problem. Oh, Jesus. Oh, like maybe have a final solution or something. You had a horrible invasion that took place

that would have never happened if I was president. Shut up, Trump. By the way, have you noticed, unfortunately, he has been shutting up on this. For about four and a half months, he didn't say one word about Israel and Gaza. You know why? Because he wants to get Miriam Adelson's money. That's Sheldon Adelson's widow, who gave him over $100 million both times. He's a massive right-wing Israeli supporter.

So he's now kissing her ass. His face is buried in her ass. Oh, I promise I'll let you kill as many Palestinians as you want. I'll let you finish the job, finish everyone in Gaza. Because Trump is a goddamn monster, okay? But he doesn't want to say that too much in public. Right. Because a huge portion of his base is anti-war.

Yes. And so he's pretending to be anti-war, but he just gave the game away by saying, hey, do the final solution on the Palestinians. That's what, I think that's exactly right. So here we are. We're stuck between two parties that are essentially the same when it comes. comes to this issue and it's just absolutely heartbreaking. All right, we gotta take a break.

When we come back, we've got more news for you, including, well, a Republican congressman who just openly says that he wants to destroy Palestinians and the Gaza Strip. So that and more coming up, don't miss it. All right, back on TYT, Jank, Anna, Delta, Tomlinson, Anthony Byram, and Muhammad El Kashab. So they just all hit the join button below on YouTube. We appreciate you and we need you. So if you're out there and you love the show, please be part of it by joining right now. Anna?

Well, sometimes our representatives like to show us exactly who they are. And what you're about to experience is a complete mask off moment. And you can tell the Palestinians, I will never support them. Then I will tell you, I will never support you. I will tell you to your place. And you want my, you want my cousins to die. There hasn't been any clarification on what the Republican congressman there, Chuck Fleischman, meant when he said.

said goodbye Palestine, but he very clearly has no interest in maybe mitigating some of the damage that's being done to innocent people who are currently trapped in the Gaza Strip. More than 30,000 people have been killed as a result of Israel's war on Gaza following the October 7th Hamas attacks in Israel. Now he certainly doesn't care about Palestinian Americans either because he just said that to a Palestinian American right to her face, and his hatred apparently includes children as well. Let's take a look. Why do you support the genocide and all of the war crimes and collective punishment?

Are you concerned about all the children? Let me make it clear. Let me make it clear. Israel is our ally. We'll always be our ally. And they are not guilty of genocide. And I will support Israel forever. I will only support Israel.

This guy just said goodbye to power. Israel. Okay. So you just said goodbye to Palestine. So you are saying you are comfortable with the murder of thousands of children. The Jewish people will never suffer again under Palestinian terrorism, under Hamas, under Hezbollah. So I just think for me personally, it's hard to stomach the dehumanization of one side.

I wouldn't want to dehumanize Israelis. I would be disgusted if anyone in our Congress was doing that, saying things like this about the Israelis. But for some reason, it's considered acceptable for a United States congressman, and he's from Tennessee, he represents Chattanooga, to say this openly. Yeah, I mean, Chuck Fleischman is a terrible human being, who's obviously in favor of genocide. And so I know the word is overused a lot of times.

these days and people get very touchy about it. But again, I don't really care too much about your feelings. But he's an obvious racist. He says that he would never support Palestinians. He didn't say he would never support Hamas. He very, very, very clearly said it to the guy's face, I will never support Palestinians. So an open racist.

I mean, that's a definitive statement. Yeah, period. So that means I don't care what happens to them at all. Yeah, and good by Palestine is obviously, look, I think he's obviously supporting ethnic cleansing and genocide. you could decide what you interpret that to mean, but him saying, I don't care about Palestinians is indisputable. He's a racist. So is this, now, to me, like, there's monsters like Chuck Fleischman running around everywhere, right? And so I don't know why he's so animated about wanting to

kill Palestinians and hating them and despising them and being so unbelievably racist. It's not his, he's Roman Catholic, so it's not like his family's from Israel. He's not an evangelical Christian, so it's not like he wants to kill all the Muslims in the area because, you know, Yahweh told him. So I don't know, maybe he's just like, likes murder of Arabs, period, as a personal hobby. Or maybe he's getting funded by certain lobbyists and defense contractors, et cetera. And to have U.S. taxpayers fund it, which makes me so disgust, like beyond disgusted, because I don't want to see any of my hard-earned resources going toward what we're experiencing

and what we're seeing in Gaza. But he supports that. He wants to take your tax money, and he wants to fund the slaughter of innocent people in the Gaza Strip. Yeah, so now let's get to the hypocrisy of the rest of the Congress. So number one, is he going to be censured? Yeah, right. I mean, look, guys, like, look, it doesn't matter which side of the equation you're on. You know he's not going to be censured, and in fact, I'll bet you on it.

No one's going to care. You're allowed to say anything you like about Palestinians. But Rashida Tiliq got censured for saying from the river to the sea. Now, some people interpret that as wiping out Israel, and that's why I'm against that statement and that slogan, right? But some people, but most people, I hope, and certainly Rashida Taleb means it in a political sense, okay? Now, if you say, no, I don't care, Rashida Taleb should be censured and no one should ever say then. They're the worst people in the world who, if they say that, good. Netanyahu said it. Except Netanyahu doesn't mean it theoretically, he's actually doing it.

He's actually doing it. And he doesn't mean political. He means I'm going to kill them because I see it with my own eyes. 30,000 dead. Now babies are starving to death because of Netanyahu. He said from the river to the sea and he meant it. Did he, did anybody condemn him? Was there a congressional resolution? No. Not only that, all of Congress has fund them and give him even more money to do these genocidal acts. So the hypocrisy of Congress is unto, like it's over the top. It is every part of them is corrupt. Do you want to know how many Democrats right now?

Chuck Fleischman is a Republican. Do you want to know how many, the good guy, the Democrats, how many of them now are still not in favor of a ceasefire? Five months in. I mean, hundreds of war crimes in, over 200 Democrats are still not in favor of a ceasefire. The Democratic Party is the party of decent people. Is it? Who care about the dignity of others, especially the disenfranchised.

Is it? So now let's talk about Republicans. So Chuck Fleischman is a Republican. Today Donald Trump said, finish them in regards to Gaza. I guess he means kill them all. He can clarify, what does that mean to finish all of them in Gaza? Is that a final solution? The Republicans said, oh, I can't believe Joe Biden wants to give Israel $14 billion extra

dollars of U.S. taxpayer money because they're good conservatives, right? They want to safeguard the taxpayer money like they always say and they're America first like they always say, right? No, wrong. They were mad at Biden because he wasn't giving enough to Israel. They wanted to send $17.6 billion. And I haven't heard, maybe there's a Republican or two that's called for a ceasefire, but I haven't heard it. So almost 100% of the Republican Party is against a ceasefire. So our Congress is filled to the rim with Chuck Fleischman's. They love genocide, they want to fund it. There's a couple of, there's a bunch of heroes, almost, not almost all of them progressives.

Bernie Sanders is the leading one, he says we shouldn't send Israel another dollar. He said in fact, not another nickel until they stopped the bombing and get to a ceasefire. Joaquin Castro has been fantastic on this issue. So everyone who stands up in Congress, we love you and we need you. But for the rest of you, you're the disgusting monsters that have brought us this genocide. Finally, I'll just note that there is a challenger to Fleischman, a Democrat by the name of Jack Allen, running for Fleischman's seat in Congress. He condemned the congressman's hostility toward, you know, the campaigners, as you saw in the video, and said, we are well past the need for a ceasefire in this conflict. And there have been some Democrats who are currently in Congress who have spoken out against what Fleischman said there, including Congresswoman Vermin Beka Ballint.

who said that the latest rant by the congressmen should be recognized for what it is, a member of Congress calling for the genocide of the Palestinian people. That is a rare statement, a strong rare statement from a member of Congress and a Democrat. So there you have it. I like that. And what you should do is you should stay on them. Are you pro-war or anti-war? Are you in favor of Americans keeping their taxpayer dollars or do you want to spend it on bombs to kill babies?

Are you pro-life or are you not pro-life? If he keeps on that, it's not even impossible for him to win that seat because there's a lot of Republican voters who don't want this war and who actually meant it when they said pro-life, although none of their leaders meant it ever, ever. Every pro-life leader is a total utter liar. Not one has condemned endless deaths of children and babies in Gaza. Not one.

When you hear someone that's a leader saying they're pro-life, understand they're a giant liar and they love to take away women's rights and they don't care about the life of babies 1%. with the Super Tuesday elections that took place, namely the Senate seat in California. There's been a lot of controversy about that. So Katie Porter has unleashed the ire of the establishment, the Democratic establishment, for stating that the California Senate primary race was rigged against her by the ultra wealthy. Now, this was a story that we actually covered yesterday.

There was a concerted effort to defeat her. And the way that they did so was through Adam Schiff propping up the Republican in that race. And then the other way in which it happened was the tech industry came in, crypto came in, and basically spent a ton of money to destroy her because she's one of the few Democrats in Congress who has questioned about, has basically said that the crypto industry needs some regulation. Crypto industry doesn't want regulation. So you can understand why they would spend a lot of money to destroy her. Now, with that said, Porter came in third in the race to fill Diane Feinstein's seat in California,

meaning that she did not end up qualifying for the general election. So Representative Adam Schiff came in first with 33% of the vote, and then the Republican that he propped up, Steve Garvey came in second with 32% of the vote, so the general election will be between the two of them. Katie Porter only received 14% of the vote. Now, yesterday on Twitter, she writes that thank you to everyone who supported our campaign and voted to shake up the status quo in Washington. Because of you, we had the establishment running scared withstanding three to one in TV spending and an onslaught of billionaires spending millions to rig the election.

So the rig the election or rig this election is the part that definitely drew the ire of establishment Democrats, which we'll get to in just a moment. Porter also wrote that special interests like politics as it is today, or like politics as it is today, they want to keep it the way it is, because they control the politicians. As we've seen in this campaign, they spend millions to defeat someone who will dilute their influence and disrupt the status quo. But take my word for it, I'll never stop fighting for you. Okay, so what Katie Porter is referring to is just this effort to destroy her because of what

her message was. And the one debate that I watched of these different candidates, Katie Porter really did come out on top. She was the only one who had any specificity in that debate. She was clearly prepared. She talked about corruption and money in politics over and over again, which I think is an important message to spread because it's a virus that really has infected both political parties, which leads to a situation in which the politicians don't really listen to the concerns of their constituents. They're more persuaded and seduced by the the money that's been given to them by their campaign donors. And so Porter is referring to the crypto industry super PAC fair shake, which spent more than

$10 million opposing Porter's campaign. Fairshake's top donors include the crypto exchange coin base, crypto firm, Ripple Labs, venture capital firm Andresen Horowitz, and its founders, and the Winklevoss twins. Now fair shake has had over $73 million on hand to spend in the way that they spent in the Senate race. And so here's a blurb from Schiff's campaign website where it's clear that he is not interested in regulating crypto. California is on the forefront of new developments in technology from Web3 and quantum

computing to cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. We need to develop comprehensive regulatory frameworks to ensure that these companies and jobs stay here, meaning in California, and grow here, and that the United States remains the global leader in these important new technologies. So that, let me decode it for you. That means deregulation and tax breaks, which is what the crypto industry absolutely wants. Now let's just quickly go to the backlash and then, Jank, I'll let you go off. So Porter has been widely criticized by liberals on social media and neocons, ever since she posted what she posted on Twitter.

But the most infuriating response actually came from the Fair Shake pack itself. They write, thank you, Katie Porter, for giving Fair Shake credit for your loss. but don't forget to give some credit to Elizabeth Warren and Gary Gensler for their misinformed and misguided attempt to destroy a critical foundation of the innovation economy. Hilarious. And then you have CNN reporter Andy Kaczynski saying that she lost by 20 points, but is saying the election is rigged because she was outspent. Yeah, it's not that hard to understand.

But there seems to be like that response, Jank, seems to just be not only an acceptance of the corruption in our political system, but like an attempt to protect and defend it. Yeah, no, what Kaczynski is saying is, well, that's her fault for not being bribed more. If she was just more corrupt, she would have gotten more money and she would have finished better. And now she's complaining. Get better at bribery, Katie Porter, says a CNN reporter. Yeah. Okay, so, I mean, you read the, we read you the exact quote there, and that's my interpretation. It's, I hope it's not that complicated for you all, so because people like to pretend that they can't understand simple things. Okay, so let's let me explain simple things.

And I write out a lot about this in my book, Justice is coming. About 95% of the time, the person with more money wins a congressional race, whether it's the House or the Senate. Now, it doesn't matter if they're Republicans or Democrats, conservatives or liberals. Nothing matters. Just whoever has more money wins 19 out of 20 races. So that so that means if you're a reporter that you should talk about, hey, the one determinative factor is not their policies at all, at all, it's not even close. The determinative factor is who got bribed more. And if you think that it's like a great thing, oh, well, he took money from the drug companies and he took money from the insurance companies and from the banks and from the defense contractors and from A-Pact and from this kind of lobby and that lobby.

And you think that's a good thing. Well, I'd love for you to defend your position. So Andrew Kaczynski, tell us how wonderful money in politics is. And are you saying that it didn't affect the selection? You can't be saying that. I mean, it doesn't look like you're saying that and you would be a lunatic to say that. It seems like he's saying the money in politics did impact this race and why is Katie Porter complaining? Yeah, so she didn't raise enough, she didn't get bribed enough.

That's how it reads. Maybe he meant something completely different. And by the way, we're fair. We're fair. So Andrew, if you meant something else, explain what you meant. what you meant. Because right now it looks like you're like, yes, corruption is awesome. Look at this sore loser. Didn't get bribed enough. If you just taken more Raytheon money and help them start more wars, you would have won. But instead you didn't, you were honest.

Boo! Okay, so. And by the way, remember, the reason why Adam Schiff propped up the Republican in the race is so the general will be between Schiff and Steve Garvey. And then he can fearmonger about how Steve Garvey voted for Trump and he's very dangerous and he doesn't value democracy and he's going to dismantle democracy. That's it, that's it. One trick ponies. That's the problem with these Democrats, okay? He didn't want to run against Katie Porter because Katie Porter actually was prepared during that debate. And I just remember thinking to myself, man, she is trouncing everyone on that debate stage. Way easier to run against a Republican that you can fearmonger about, which is exactly what Adam Schiff is going to do. Yeah. And then they

say absurd things like, well, no, she lost because of her ideas, okay? You don't, if you say that, you literally know nothing about politics. Most people have no idea who these candidates are. Said they might have seen Adam Schiff in a congressional hearing because he was part of the impeachment of Donald Trump. So they saw him on TV. They might have seen Katie Porter with a white board. Do you think they know Barbara Lee's voting record? Are you crazy? Okay. No, most people have no idea. And where's the one place they get their idea? Two places. One is ads. And so if you buy more ads. You know, some of the ads against Katie Porter were ranked just false, not even close to true, okay? So they lie about who she is. So the people vote against her because they don't

know who she is at all. They think she's a completely different person because she was, they were lying to. And the other place they get their viewpoint is mainstream media. And mainstream media tells you Adam Schiff is an American hero. He was the one defender of us against Donald Trump. Adam Schiff is supported by Pelosi in all the establishment. But Pelosi also took a billion dollars in corporate campaign contributions is also deeply carved. How dare you, Nancy Pelosi is the greatest human being master legislator? So when mainstream media says crap like this, gee, I wonder who has the advantage. So then now everybody else dogpiles and like, okay port is wrong for pointing out corruption.

No, no, no, no, you, if you're pointing out corruption, you're pro-Trump. Lunatics, go ahead. Final thing I'll say is, look, there's a problem in the Democratic Party in that, It has absorbed never Trump neocons. And so that already crowded tent has become a little too crowded for my taste. So George Conway, well, who gives a damn what George Conway has to? Like, why is George Conway involved in Democratic politics? He's a Republican, okay?

He's a neocon, but he's been, you know, enemy of my enemy is my friend. That's the mindset of the Democratic Party. So since George Conway despises Donald Trump, then he must be a good guy. He chimes in on all this and says, kudos, and thanks to all the liberals and Democrats calling out Katie Porter for her language. What was her language? Oh, she used the word rigged. Oh, how dare you? That's Trumpian.

Wait, are you saying that the lobbyists and the donors don't control our politics? They don't, in a sense, rig the results by funding one candidate over another with millions. of dollars so that people are tricked by their false ads? Are you, because only a lunatic who should be confined to a mental hospital would say that. You know, oddly enough, I mean, they're proving Katie Porter's point. These are people who love the status quo. They love that corruption has been baked into our system as something that's totally legal and okay. Bribery is part of our political system.

It just is now. And it's not just- Except they don't call a bribery. But that's what it is. That's what it is. It's bribery, you morons, you call yourself reporters, and you can't tell what decides elections, and you can't tell that no one's voting on ideas, they're just voting on lies from ads, and you think that you know politics, and you think that these dogs, these

politicians, don't do exactly as they're ordered by their donors, okay, why don't you look it up? Why don't you prove me wrong, because this here are all the hundred other reporters who are like, how dare Katie Porter, how dare Katie Porter pointing out of corruption? She's just like Trump. Well, look, you guys are accidentally complimenting Trump when he doesn't deserve it at all. So prove me wrong and show me the number of votes that, for example, let's take Adam Schiff, who I think is a deeply corrupt corporate Democrat.

Show me the number of votes that where he has disagreed with his donors. My guess is you won't find, I don't know if you'll find any, but you're not going to find more than half a dozen. And you'll find hundreds where he did exactly what his donors want. And you don't, you can't figure out the pattern. Gee, I wonder what's happening in politics. Is it the money from the donors? Or are they having ideological debates?

Ed and Adam Schiff has won the battle of ideas. And Steve Garvey too? Even though he's a Republican in California, you don't think that was the ads? You think that people like Steve Garvey's idea? By the way, have you ever heard Steve Garvey speak? Yes, I have. During that debate.

Okay, please, if you're interested, I believe it was a local Fox News affiliate that had hosted that debate. There are no ideas being shared in that debate. It was one of the worst debates I've ever seen. Other than Katie Porter pointing out accurately corruption. Steve Garvey can barely put together a sentence. He makes Trump look bright, okay?

Steve Garvey is like a political, and you think that guy won the battle of ideas in the state of California. And you think you're a reporter. Let's take a break. When we come back, one of the most fascinating discussions I've seen on a CNN, panel. It involves the question of why it is that Donald Trump has increased his support among some black voters. And I think everyone on that panel made an interesting and potentially accurate point. Obviously, they're sharing their thoughts and theories. Don't miss it. We have that and more coming up.

All right, back on TYT, Jank Anna, with you, but also all these wonderful new members that are part of Young Turks now. William Milliken, Caleb, that one time, Joshua English, Gerald Stokes, Nicolette Herades. It was wonderful on my campaign. She was a volunteer, Joanne Sadler, Jared Heiser, Reese, Jesse Jorgensen, and Kent Loras. So thank you guys and welcome. We love you guys. They hit the join button you can too. Well, there was a discussion, a panel discussion on CNN on a topic that I think the media for the most part has kind of failed at addressing, but not this panel.

So let's get right to it. The reason I think the Democratic Party, Mr. Biden, President Biden is losing black votes is they only care about black people every four years. They come into our neighborhoods and say, we're going to make stuff better. We're going to do this, do this, do this. And then finally, us black people are like, you know, man, other than my ability to dunk a basketball, all my neighborshoods are still the same. Our schools are still the same. Charles Barkley actually drew some pretty fierce backlash recently for saying that he would punch black Trump supporters in the face if he sees them wearing Trump merch that features the former president's mugshot. But to his credit, during a recent panel on CNN, he also had some, I believe, accurate

critique for the Democratic Party. Now, I think that the discussion that happened during this panel is an important one, and it's particularly important because you have three different individuals participating, and they're providing different theories for why the, you know, by Trump and the Republican Party has actually managed to increase its support among some black voters. So you heard what Charles Barkley had to say there, but before we get to the other individuals involved in this panel, including Van Jones and Coleman Hughes, I wanted to give you some of the poll results to show you how the black electorate has kind of moved a little

toward Trump. So for instance, in 2016, Trump received the support of 8% of black voters, according to exit polls, that support increased to 12% in 2020. The USA Today Suffolk poll from January found that Trump's support among black voters has stayed the same at 12%. Now that was a poll from January, as I just mentioned, but the more recent poll that came out by the New York Times and Sienna College shows that the black voter support for Trump is actually up from 4% in October of 2020 to 23% in February of this year.

year. So look, I got to be honest, Jank, the New York Times polling seems to be a little more extreme in its results, right? It seems to be the most negative for Biden. And it stands out in that way. But there have been subsequent polls that have shown and confirmed that Biden is losing support among people of color, black voters, Latino voters. So Biden is in a little bit of trouble with these demographics, and it's important to understand why. Yeah. So first of all, I didn't see it as an outlier. The poll before that had Trump's numbers with black people at 21%, very similar number. I've seen now every poll has Trump going up and Biden going down with black voters, particularly young black voters.

Young males, yes. Yeah. And so why is that happening? First of all, Charles Barkley is 100% right. And this is why when Barkley was signed to do this show on CNN, I said he's going to be the best host on CNN. You know why? He's honest, and that's what he's known for. He's courageous in what he says, and he's rich. Wait, why does rich being rich matter? Because you're not going to intimidate him. Oh, you're going to lose this job at CNN, and then you're not going to have money and status anymore. That's what scares a lot of the reporters to being like, what do you need me to say? Of course, well, of course, whatever's not true I will say in favor of corporate politicians.

Now they don't say it like that, but it's implicit, right? But with Barclay, good luck trying that. Nothing can shut up Charles Barkley, which is what I love about him. So is it true that the Democrats say a lot of sweet things to black voters to try to get them on their side? Yes. Is it true that they never deliver? Pretty much, yes. Is it true that the Republicans are worse?

Yes. But so if you're bragging that you're zero and the other side is negatives, I don't think that's the brag that you think is. So some black voters though believe that Republicans aren't necessarily worse than Democrats. And so it's it's all about perception and this next statement comes from Coleman Hughes. I like Coleman Hughes, you know, he's, people like to just automatically call him a conservative. I don't think he's conservative. I think that he's nuanced in the way he thinks about things. He said in the context of this panel discussion that he bothers him that Trump lies, he didn't vote for Trump, he never would

vote for Trump, but he also helps to explain what the appeal of Trump is for some young male black voters. And he explains what it is in this next clip. Let's watch. It's black men under 30 that are moving towards the Republican Party. Black men basically my age. And it could just be a general dissatisfaction with the message that the Democratic Party is telling black people. They're telling black people essentially, nothing is your fault. It's all systemic racism. And that's actually not appealing to a lot of younger men. Younger men, prefer to be told your life is in your own control and you, you know, you can make your own destiny. So I think what he says there's really interesting and it's something that I've been thinking about a lot

over several months because when you look at the message, the dominant message toward marginalized communities from the Democratic Party, it's not really an empowering message. It's not an inspiring message. It's kind of a, it's kind of disempowering. Yeah, so I think there's one point that they miss, but first let me address what he said. I think that's true. I gotta be honest, I hate victimology. And so, but here's where you need nuance, so please buckle up. So if you're a Republican who say, oh, well, I don't like this victim talk, so that's because,

and racism never existed or sexism never existed, you're nuts. Or that racism and sexism are totally gone and they don't exist anymore. You're nuts. That's not true at all, right? On the other hand, if you say that's why black people can never make it and or even apply that, right? It's not your fault. You shouldn't even, like they don't say you shouldn't try. No one actually says that. But it's so heavily implied. Like there's nothing you can do. The white man's going to keep you down because of racism, et cetera. Now, if you're one of these libs in Washington, you say, oh, you're not allowed to say that about minorities. I am a minority. So don't tell me, oh, Muslims in this country. are greatly discriminated against. If you told my kids, you'll never make it because the white man will never, the Christians will never allow the Muslims to rise up. But get the hell out of my house. No, my kids can do anything they want, and yes, they could do it in this country, right?

So don't, I'm not interested in your victimology. I am interested in the truth and the fact that racism still exists and that it was just horrible in this country. But you could believe both things at the same time that it exists, but the way to fight it isn't a constant talk about how you're a victim, but to empower yourself and they say, oh yeah, watch me. I'll do it 10 times better, right? But the one thing that they're all missing out of an otherwise brilliant conversation, and how often do you hear me saying that about a conversation on CNN or anywhere on cable news? So thank you for doing this program, is crime.

And so they never mentioned crime. And I think crime is driving black voters to go, well, the Democrats in the cities aren't helping me. So maybe I should vote Republican. Yeah, and there's been a bit of a backlash in, you know, more liberal cities. I want to say across the country, but it's not really across the country, it's mostly on the West Coast, right? It just happened in San Francisco, it had happened in Oregon. No, it's happening in DC too. That's true, DC just passed some, you know, let the DC council has passed some legislation related to public safety.

And so you're right about that. It's happening in D.C. It's not happening in Los Angeles yet, unfortunately, but what you do notice in these cities is the people who suffer the most from the crime are majority minority communities, right? And so I think that probably is part of it too, but you're right. They didn't discuss that in the context of this discussion. But just going back to Coleman Hughes and what he said real quick. So if I take a step back and look at the broader picture, I think what's lacking in the Democratic Party is a message of hope, something inspiring. Because they've been so hyper focused on negative campaigning, fear mongering about Donald Trump. And that's all fine. I think there's a place for negative campaigning.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't do any of that. But they have forgotten to give American voters hope, something inspiring, something to look. forward to. And that's, and by the way, put race out of it, that's how I feel. That's how I currently feel. Oh, of course. You know? And there's a reason why the Democrats never deliver. It's because their donors pay them not to deliver. So they said they were going to do. So they mentioned in this panel discussion and everybody involved was brilliant. Van Jones, that's another guy I defend all the time. I get a lot of heat for defending him. We have more clips that we're going to show you in a second. He's smart, open-minded, cares to actually get at the right

answers. So anyways, why do the Democrats never deliver? Because of their donors. So they said not only on voting rights, which they discussed, but then all the things that are economic issues. They said higher wages through higher minimum wage, pushing up wages, lower drug prices, et cetera. And they never, ever, ever deliver because they take so much money from the drug companies and the restaurant association, etc. So betraying the voters, including minority voters, part of the game for Democrats. So let's go to Van Jones because he touches on that. And I think it's important to hear him out.

Let's watch. There were things that black voters wanted and expected and hope for in 2020. Police reform, the George Floyd Policing Act, but it didn't pass. Voting rights of the John Lewis voting rights bill. That didn't pass. More progress on criminal justice, the Equal Act. That didn't pass. And so once you get past the emotionality and this.

that and the other, then you just kind of look to Charles point, what did we get for our vote? Look, we, we, the economy is better than it could have been. I love a lot of stuff he did, but if you just look at that particular set of issues, you could be disappointed. So he was a lot more specific in what the promises were, promises made, but promises that were not kept. Yeah, and by the way, those things are actually don't involve much donors at all. So those were layups. So why didn't they pass those? Well, that's, because the donors didn't want the filibuster taking out, because if a filibuster was taken out, then they have no excuse not the past paid family leave, lower drug prices, et cetera, et cetera.

So they needed the filibuster to cover the ass of their donors, and the black people were collateral damage in that political calculation. Right, so the filibuster would require the Senate to have 60 votes instead of a simple majority to pass legislation. And they wanted to keep that intact because it makes it incredibly difficult to pass any, let's say regulation pertaining to how corporations are behaving and all of that stuff. Yeah. And I said black people were the victims there. That's definitely true. But Van Joe's made another good point where he said, look, this isn't really about black folks

getting disillusioned with the Democratic Party. As much as it is, poor folks getting disillusioned. And so because you see it in the demos, it's not all black people. It's younger black people, some with less money, et cetera. And he said the white guy in Appalachia was also screwed over. Right? Yeah. And so now, and he didn't say it's just a about the Democratic Party. He'll mention the Republican Party screwing over white people in Appalachia and their base as well, right? And that is true. And guys, I know that mainstream media with, you know, this is an exception.

There's a wonderful segment by CNN and always be honest and give credit where it's due, right? But overall mainstream media has convinced you that everything has to be binary. If you say that the Democrats are bad, that must mean that you love Republicans. That doesn't make any logical sense at all. No, the Republicans are worse on every one of these issues. They voted against civil rights in every way. They don't want police reform. They voted it down.

They don't want those voting rights. They hate the voting rights more than anything else because they think it cost them elections. They've voted against everything that would help the average American. But the Democrats are playing a game with you guys. And they're not in favor of it either. So it's good cop, bad cop. They're largely on the same corporate team because that's the corporate team that's funding both of their campaign. Yeah, Republicans will just, for the most part, it's not true of every case, but they'll just tell you who they are, you know, whereas Democrats will tell you there's something completely different and then carry out the same votes, the same behavior, for the most part, there are obviously some differences. And I don't want to generalize and say, no, no, they're completely the same. They're not completely the same. But when you make these big promises and you don't fulfill those promises, by the way, it's one thing if they fight like hell and they don't succeed, people will see that. But when they

They don't even fight for the policies that they what happened to what happened to the public option didn't even propose it didn't even propose it that was something that Biden ran on he's a liar there are political ramifications to that and I think now we're seeing the chickens come home to roost and this is constructive criticism toward the Democratic Party instead of having like this knee-jerk negative reaction to it and just dismissing it they could actually listen to the voters I think it would actually help them win elections and just In case, you know, you don't know how all the mechanics went down. They said, well, guys, this is so unfair because there's nothing we do about the filibuster.

But when it came to raising the debt ceiling, which would have affected the stock market of the beloved wealthy folks and corporations, all of a sudden there was something they could do about the filibuster. And they lifted it immediately. Right. So apparently the filibuster could be lifted any time they want. They just didn't want to bother doing it for voting rights because minority voters were just not as important as the stock market. That's a fact. If you don't like that fact, that's a,

you got to take it up with Congress. They're playing good cop, bad cop with you. And they all work for the same exact corrupt owners. All right, everyone, we'll be back.