The Young Turks - Trump Continues To Make Up Lies About Border Incident And Manafort Reportedly Met With WikiLeaks Founder

Episode Date: November 28, 2018

Trump has added dangerous new lies to his border incident rhetoric targeting refugees in Mexico. The Guardian is reporting that Paul Manafort met with Julian Assange of WikiLeaks prior to the Democratic email hack in 2016. Get exclusive access to our best content. http://tyt.com/GETACCESS Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Why just survive back to school when you can thrive by creating a space that does it all for you, no matter the size. Whether you're taking over your parents' basement or moving to campus, IKEA has hundreds of design ideas and affordable options to complement any budget. After all, you're in your small space era. to own it, shop now at IKEA.ca. All right, welcome to the Young Turks, Jay and Anna with you guys.

Look, this is a big show today. So we have Trump madness in the beginning, and it really is madness, guys. Like I tweeted right before the show about the 25th Amendment, the guy's a lunatic. We gotta do something about it. So anyway, his lies today, for whatever reason, put me over the top. He's got to go, but I'll tell you, the news that everybody's excited about are Manafort and the connections to WikiLeaks and the indictment of WikiLeaks and all that stuff that's in, I'm, not only am I not as excited by it, it's having the opposite effect for me.

I'm really worried that they don't have enough. And so let's talk about that a little bit later. But then there's a couple stories I really, really don't want you to miss a little bit later in the program. is the story about regulations. We're the only people in the country who could make regulations sexy. But you're gonna see why, God, man, Republican mythology paid for by the big business. It's just gross, man.

So we're gonna show you what regulations are actually about and what happens when you don't have them. I guarantee you're gonna love that story. I mean, you're gonna love and hate that story. And GM, they're leaving, and all of the talk, both from Republicans and Democrats, is is maddeningly stupid. They just don't understand how capitalism works at all. They don't understand how our economy works, so I guess I'm gonna have to educate them because

they keep saying stupid things about like, oh, I think we can convince GM to do the right thing and they'll be back, yeah, or it's like trying to convince a vacuum cleaner to do the right thing. It's a machine, you idiot, it's a machine, it's not a person, it doesn't have patriotism, It's not American, it's not a human, you moron, okay, so you can tell I'm already amped up. There are those robot vacuums, which I indulged in once, and then immediately regretted it and returned it. But robot vacuums do exist.

Okay, well, maybe that's what all the corporations are. They're robot vacuums taking all the money out of our pockets and absolutely crushing us. I will explain that later in the program, and apparently we're the only ones in America doing it. with good news. Getting closer to Anna Kasparian in the membership contest. Oh, come on.

Okay. Within 40. I mean, when we started, she had 100 person lead, over 100 person lead. Now when we started, when we started, we retired. Then she took a big lead. Anyway, so- I took a big lead while I was on vacation. All right. Like, I wasn't-no, you keep-high-stepping.

You keep high-stepping. I wasn't incessantly promoting myself in live videos to get people to sign up. No, no. Leon, I think you got this exactly right. Leon, let Don Beebe. I don't know. What does that even mean? It's an old school reference.

Anyway, no, no, no, no, you got it. It's probably going to go in the end zone. Anyway, t.t.com slash jank to sign up and become a member of the young Turks and get all of our wonderful program. You don't miss a minute of this show. And you can sign up through any of the host names, but mainly t.t.com slash jank. Okay, Anna, let's get started so I can let the rage fly. All right.

In the weekend, Donald Trump and border control made the decision to shut down one of the major ports of entry into the country, and it was the port of entry near San Diego. Now, following the closure of that port of entry, a number of the migrants who are seeking asylum in the United States attempted to storm the border in an effort to enter the country. Some of these migrants were under the impression that if they got to the border in time, they could convince immigration officials to allow them into the country. Well, that didn't happen. And a few of the migrants, about 50 of them, were accused of throwing rocks and projectiles at border patrol. Now, it was notified, or we were notified, that none of the border patrol agents were injured, and we're actually going to give you that exact statement in just a minute.

But Donald Trump felt the need to justify his use of tear gas against women and children, and made it seem as though border patrol agents actually were. harmed. Take a look. I had some very violent people. And we don't want, frankly, we don't want those people in our society. We don't want those people in our country. But we had tremendous violence.

Three border patrol people yesterday were very badly hurt through getting hit with rocks and stones. All right, so he's claiming that they were very badly hurt. Now, Trump's account contradicted U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner

Kevin McAlanen, who said in a statement on Monday that agents and officers, quote, effectively managed an extremely dangerous situation involving over 1,000 individuals. They did so safely and without any reported serious injuries on either side of the border. Now, that's his initial statement. We have a video of what he had to say while getting interviewed by CNN. And I want to be clear, he is not in favor of these migrants. He is actually someone who was appointed by Trump, and he seems to be a Trump supporter. But he's being absolutely clear that no one on the American side was injured as a result

of these migrants. So before we go to his video, look, yesterday I expressed skepticism that the immigrants had even thrown anything. But actually the guy that in this case, Kevin McAleenan, the CBP Commissioner, look, You have to remember, he's the guy that basically authorized the tear gassing. He's not a good guy. He's, you know, and he thought that these men, women, and children were so dangerous instead that they had to tear gas them.

So I'm not a fan of this guy, but at least you can tell he's being honest. And so given that, I do not believe that they did throw projectiles. I don't know if it was just water bottles or stones. They said stones, and so I believe the custom commissioner, right? And so, and it gives you a sense of, look, you can disagree with a guy and still believe them and go, okay, I don't think you should have tear gas those people, even if they were throwing rocks. But you earn credibility by being honest, right?

And then you got the lunatic in the White House who's like, very badly injured, very badly injured. The guy's like, no, nobody's injured, nobody's injured, nobody's in the hospital, it's not true, but Trump is a maniacal liar. I don't know what it's going to take to get through your heads, the guy's a lunatic. I mean, he's got two other gigantic lies in this story that we'll get to in a second. So I actually do want to get to one of the other gigantic lies. So this is a continuation of his slander against these migrants. Here he is talking about the so-called damage that these migrants did when they were attempting to enter the United States.

Take a look. But I really think Mexico is working hard. They were violently attacked. I mean, their police were violently attacked at the northern border. If you look at their border, their southern border, they were really, that was violence at a high level. That was a terrible thing that took place. And they really geared up after that because they had a lot of their policemen and a lot of their soldiers were injured badly. A lot of the people who were interviewed saying, hey, these are rough people.

You start talking to them and they punch you on the face. All of that was a lie. And look, you don't have to believe me because, you know, you might be a Trump supporter. watching this right now and you think, well, you're just a progressive, you're going to lie about Trump. No, let's actually hear from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner, someone who is a fan of Trump and did contradict him in this latest interview. Take a look. Is there such a thing as the good kind of tear gas?

Every tear gas I've ever been hit with has been nasty. There's only one kind, right? I get what pepper balls are. That's something else. Tear gas is tear gas, right? Yeah, the CS gas we deploy is standard law enforcement issue. Right, there's only one kind is what I'm saying. Yeah, it's in our equipment inventory, it's trained, all of our agents have to experience it like you did.

So he's responding to accusations of the tear gas used on the migrants was not the same tear gas used by local law officials or by SWAT teams. So Trump made that statement while he was slandering these migrants. He was arguing, well, the tear gas is not that big of a deal. It's different from the tear gas that we hear about local law enforcement using. This is not that big of a deal. But again, you have an official contradicting what Trump said in regard to the severity of that tear gas. Trump said that it was, quote, a very minor form of tear gas.

There is no minor form of tear gas. He just made that up. There are no three people that are seriously injured that were part of the customs and enforcement border protection. It just isn't. There isn't. He lies all the time. And I like what, I know that a great majority of his supporters are ignorant and they just, they

don't, all they do is they listen to Foxx's, so they never actually get the real information. But for the ones that actually get the real information that watch videos like this, what is wrong with you? Why do you like, like if a guy on my side, even if I agreed with his policies, just kept lying about everything. And it's like, so Trump, another lie in this case is this, there's 500 known criminals in the caravan. Made it up, out a whole cloth, not remotely true, all he does is live, just pulls things

out of his ass one after another after another, right? If let's say that somebody was supporting the caravan, and I think the caravan should get at least be heard for their asylum hearings, they're pursuing it in legal ways, et cetera. But a guy on my side says, oh, there's 500 nuns in the caravan. But there isn't 500 nuns in the caravan, that's not true. And the caravan actually saved three people from death on their way up. But that isn't true, they didn't save three people from there. Like I'd be like, no, I'm not with this guy.

I don't know why this guy keeps making up stuff that's nuts. Like I liked it, he's supporting the policy. I'm supporting, but I do not support a guy who constantly lies. But no, you guys don't care. There's something wrong with you. So there is not 500 known criminals in there. There is no other minor form of tear gas. You just heard your beloved commissioner of customs and border protection tell you that it's

not true. There is no other form of tear gas. I think what we see with Trump is more jarring. It's definitely jarring because he's a lot more transparent in his deception. But deception from U.S. politicians is, honestly, it's like a favorite pastime. And there's been a long tradition in, especially in American foreign policy, of our politicians, fear-mongering and lying to the American people to garner enough support to take whatever action it is that they want to take.

I mean, another recent example in modern times, I guess, is the war in Iraq, the notion that we needed to go in because they had weapons of mass destruction. They didn't have weapons of mass destruction. We now know that, but the fear-mongering, especially right after 9-11, proved to be successful. And it certainly helped Trump in his real-I'm sorry, Bush in his reelection efforts. No, Anna, that's such a great point. And that's why I get frustrated with the mainstream media, because look, they aided and abetted George Bush's lies.

And yes, Dick Cheney in orchestrating that was much more masterful than Donald Trump. And so he told lies in a way that was more palatable to the press. But there were still lies and they actually had worse consequences than what Donald Trump has done. And so people got tired of being lied to. So now they don't believe the press. And they believe that it's normal for a politician to lie, even if it's as brazen as what Donald Trump is doing.

And so by not calling out the lies earlier and calling everything 50-50, it became basically like the boy who cried wolf. They desensitized everybody to lying. So now people go, well, of course he's lying. Well, what's the big deal? Doesn't every single politician lie? And the media seems to be against Trump. I think what they're saying is, well, I saw all the other politicians.

Republicans and Democrats lying, and the media never said it. Now all of a sudden they're saying it about Donald Trump. Well, that's because your guy is a lot more, a lot less sophisticated. He's a really low IQ guy, so he just says stupid things that are obviously not true and easily disprovable, because he's not that smart. And yes, he has a pathology, he has a sickness about, he just can't help himself from lying. So it makes the press job easier, but yes, the press was wrong. wrong for not calling out the lies on all sides.

Right, I mean, he's not tactful in his deception. And I think the fact that Trump is so ready and willing to harshly criticize the press makes them even more critical of Trump and his lies. Now with that said, though, we're not done with the number of Trump lies in regard to this story. So in the next clip, he does touch on the tear gas issue, but he also makes another accusation against these migrants. Take a look. First of all, the tear gas is a very minor form of the tear gas itself.

It's very safe. The ones that were suffering to a certain extent were the people that were putting it out there. But it's very safe. But you really say, why is a parent running up into an area where they know the tear gas is forming and it's going to be formed and they're running up with a child? And in some cases, you know, they're not the parents. These are people, they call them grabbers. They grab a child because Because they think they're going to have a certain status by having a child. You know, you have certain advantages in terms of our crazy laws.

So that's the one that put me over the top. They're called grabbers. What are you talking about? You think that those people, where did they grab the child? When they originally left Honduras, did they grab a child in Mexico? Is there children just lying around that they just grab to pretend to come into the country? Total and utter lunatic, he's a maniac that makes up one insane story after another. And if you believe him, you're just as stupid and just as insane.

There are no grabbers that just grabbed children. And he said, oh, they walked in to the tear gas. Why are they walking in a tear gas? The famous picture of the mom with a couple of kids, they're running away from the tear gas. She didn't know they were going to tear gas. She didn't know. You think she walked her kids into the tear gas? And if she did, why are they running away from the tear gas?

Why didn't they just sit there like their original plan? And are they really a family? I can't, like, this is why we live in two different planets and two, and for you to believe that there are grabbers, that they just grab random children and walk them into tear gas? And I guess, and then why are they running away if it's so safe? He says, oh, it's very safe. Then why do you use it? It's a very minor form.

It's a very safe. That nothing he says is ever true. God damn, I mean, how 40% of this country has lost its mind. They look at that insanity and they go, oh, yeah, yeah. I bet they're just grabbing random kids. Kids are littering Mexico. They're just sitting around and they just grab them and they run into tear gas. That's very safe.

Oh, that's totally true. And there's Middle Eastern in there. Okay, if you believe that, you are stupid. You are really, really stupid. Yeah, and what's amazing is how he'll reach for anything in his efforts to fearmonger. So the whole accusation that there were Middle Eastern people on that caravan, by the way, like that would make it worse for Trump and his supporters if there were Middle Easterners on that caravan.

He had no evidence of that. Reporters did their research, looked into it, and they realized, no, they're actually all Central Americans fleeing violence. in their own countries, but he'll grab anything, he'll reach for anything, and it works with his base, unfortunately. I mean, somehow miraculously, he had women who support him arguing that it made all the sense in the world to take children away from their families as they reach the border in an effort to seek asylum.

How are you going to argue that you are a pro-life individual who wants to protect children when And you are advocating for the removal of children from their families and then detain them. You're okay with detaining them in essentially makeshift prisons. Yeah. Last thing. Guys, this is, you know, we use the word fascism and we don't use it lightly. We suffered under eight years of Bush and Cheney and they near that, look, they had a thousand lines as we explained and the Iraq war was worse than anything.

Trump has done so far, and we keep it real with you guys. We try to give you context and perspective, et cetera. Why do I use the word fascism with Donald Trump? He says there are Middle Easterners in the caravan as if Middle Easterners are guilty by definition. He says over and over about the Latinos that are in that caravan. They're violent, they're very violent. It's terrible, it's violent, violent, violent, violent. There's 500 criminals.

None of it is true, and he keeps saying it over and over, why? He's demagoguing against certain groups. That is fascism. Let's talk about- Just take out Middle Eastern, put in Jews. And by the way, they are doing that. They did take out Middle Eastern and then said the Jews will not replace us. And Donald Trump said there are good people on the Nazi side. When are you gonna get through your head, he's dangerous.

He doesn't believe in our former government. And he's looking to demagogue minorities, different groups of minorities, and then to have you turned violently against them. So the real violence is in the White House. That's where the danger is. Absolutely. That's where, and Donald Trump has been doing it from day one. And if you support that, then yes, you're also aiding and abetting fascism.

Yeah. And I would argue that someone doesn't get to be the arbiter of what is and isn't violent when they support a government that ordered the murder of a journalist. And then the dismemberment of his body using a bone saw. Every reporter that has gone into the caravan says there are no guns. They are not, there's no weapons, it's not true, right? Meanwhile, this son of a bitch went and said, oh, well, yeah, the Saudi dismembered and beheaded a guy, but we're making money off them, we're making money.

Earlier he had said, why would I be against the Saudis? I make 40 to 50 million dollars from the apartments they buy for me. Oh, so they beheaded a guy, who cares, who cares? He said that, he said, maybe they did, maybe they didn't. The CIA says, yes, they did. We all know they did it. And Trump says, I know, but I'm making money, I don't care. And then he has the nerve to talk about violence and violent Middle Easterners.

They're your best friends, Donald Trump. They're the Saudis. Muhammad bin Salman decapitated a journalist that lived in America. And you pretend to care about violence, and you laughingly dismiss it like, oh, it's no big deal. Well, we make money, don't we? idiot, that brute, that fascist, and you still support him, okay, then you are supporting a guy who is in favor of Muslim fundamentalists who decapitate and dismember people.

Own that violence, own it, that's who you are. Let's take a break. We will be right back. All right, back on a young church, guys. Let me read some names for you guys. I've kind of calmed down, but not really. So, oh, folks who are giving to t-y-t.com slash amplify. Annie Nielsen from Oslo, wow, thank you, Annie.

You get a T-shirt, and then you've got misanthropic book club. Well, thank you, as such as you are. Got a couple of anonymous. We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-F-The Republic or UNFTR. As a young Turks fan, you already know that the government, the media, and corporations, are constantly peddling lies that serve the interests of the rich and powerful. But now there's a podcast dedicated to unraveling those lies, debunking the conventional wisdom. In each episode of Un-B-The-Republic or UNFTR, the host delves into a different historical episode or topic that's generally misunderstood or purposely obfuscated by the so-called powers that be,

featuring in-depth research, razor-sharp commentary, and just the right amount of vulgarity, The UNFTR podcast takes a sledgehammer to what you thought you knew about some of the nation's most sacred historical cows. But don't just take my word for it. The New York Times described UNFTR as consistently compelling and educational, aiming to challenge conventional wisdom and upend the historical narratives that were taught in school. For as the great philosopher Yoda once put it, You must have learned what you have learned.

And that's true whether you're in Jedi training or your U.S. uprooting and exposing all the propaganda and disinformation you've been fed over the course of your lifetime. So search for UNFDR in your podcast app today and get ready to get informed, angered, and entertained all at the same time. Donations in Dennis Nord from Winchester, Virginia also gave $150 bucks and get an exclusive of Younger's T-shirt as well for this campaign. Speaking of shirts, shop t-y-t.com, today's giving Tuesday. So everything you buy, we give 10% of the proceeds to the committee to protect journalists,

okay? So 10% of everything you buy today on shopty.t.com goes to committee to protect journalists. Let me read a couple of your messages here on the member's comment section. Weston 614 says, as a veteran, I had to be exposed to pepper spray so that I would know what to expect if I ever had to use it. Shouldn't the president have to experience tear gas if he's going to order it to be used on people, I would pay money to see that video. Now, people would find that outrageous to expose the president to tear gas, but he just told

us that it's very safe. He said very safe, what, three times, four times, twice? I didn't keep count. He said it was very, very minor and very, very safe. It's a very minor form of pepper spray or tear gas. To that point, eclectic miscellaneous, says the tear gas we used was big, beautiful tear gas. It was one of the gaseiest tear gases we've ever used from the standpoint of tear gas. And over at Twitter, Tannen coastal right wrote in, tear gas is not hot sauce.

There are not mild, medium, and picante versions of these chemical weapons. That is unfortunately true. And last one is Steve in the member section saying Trump is making less and less sense every time I hear him speak. It's getting dangerous out there with how many lies he gets away with telling. 25th Amendment, 25th Amendment, the guy is just totally off his rockers. There's grabbers out there. They just grab children. Okay, what's next?

Yesterday news broke that Paul Manafort breached his plea deal with special counsel Robert Mueller and will no longer receive a lighter sentence as a result of a plea deal. Now, there is more breaking news today. The Guardian has reported that Manafort allegedly held secret talks with Julian Assange on several different occasions. Now, some of these talks took place well before the last general election and probably didn't have much to do with Trump. However, there was a meeting that took place more recently, and that could be something

that Mueller is looking into. So according to the Guardian, a well-placed source, and this person wished to remain anonymous, has told the Guardian that Manafort went to see Assange around March of 2016. Months later, WikiLeaks released a stash of democratic email stolen by Russian intelligence officers. Manafort's first visit to the Ecuadorian embassy took place a year after Assange sought asylum inside, and that's according to two sources. Now again, and this happens often with the media, a source will come forward, A whistleblower will come forward, but they wish to remain anonymous in order to avoid

any type of retaliation. But apparently the Guardian has reviewed some documents that corroborate some of these accusations. A separate internal document written by Ecuador's intelligence agency and seen by the Guardian lists Paul Manafort as one of several well-known guests. It also mentions Russians. So those are the only details we know about the document that the Guardian has reviewed. But for WikiLeaks on its part, Julian Assange has completely denied meeting with Manafort, and he claims that this story is nothing more than a hoax.

Yeah, he says that the writer is a quote, serial fabricator, and he's going to destroy the paper's reputation. So, well, obviously it's hard to tell who's telling the truth here. But lately, I have to confess that WikiLeaks has not had an astounding record. And I say that as a person who supported WikiLeaks for a long, long, long time. And I still do in a lot of regards. And so to me, this story is very interesting, but not in the way that everybody else is talking about it.

Look, there's a couple of different possibilities here with Trump's campaign and WikiLeaks. First of all, this focus that Mueller seems to have on this issue is disconcerting to me. Because, and I actually think that's the biggest story to come out of this. It doesn't look like Mueller's doing anything but focusing on, yeah, the collusion or the potential collusion during the campaign, but- Okay, can we hold for a second? Yeah. So I just want to be clear about something that I think a lot of people in the press make the mistake of doing, okay?

Mueller is very tight-lipped about this investigation. So much of what you see in the press is speculation or how members of the press perceive this investigation is going. We don't know what Mueller is specifically looking into or what he isn't specifically looking into. So maybe I have too much faith in him and maybe I'm wrong, but I do believe that he is looking into collusion, which is absolutely clear in all the stories that we've covered. But I do think that he's also looking into obstruction of justice and potential money laundering.

No, that's the part that I'm now growing more and more concerned about. I think the real issue is that Trump has been doing money laundering for the Russians for a long time. Now, do I pull that out of nowhere? No. I base it on stories that have been in the press about very questionable real estate deals that Donald Trump has done and the Russians way overpaying. The only loan he could get was from a Russian bank after he went bankrupt for the sixth time. And it has the telltale signs of money laundering.

But me seeing that from the outside does not prove the case. You would need a seasoned prosecutor and you'd have to go back and track it and actually prove it eventually in a court of law. And that's what I was hoping that Mueller was doing because it seemed out in the open to be something that required looking into. I am now worried that he is not looking into it. And he's only focusing on the collusion and the obstruction of justice. So, and why do I say that?

Because I know the internal proceedings of Mueller, of course not, right. You're right, Anna, he's very tight lip, we're guessing. But what am I basically guess on? There's all this talk of, he's going after Jerome Corsi and Roger Stone and now Manafort and the ties to WikiLeaks. All those guys are connected to WikiLeaks. But that goes to the issue of collusion. It doesn't touch money laundering at all.

We have not seen any other than Manafort's money laundering. which is a separate issue. We've not seen any other witnesses being talked to by Mueller, no leaks in that regard, no talk of former associates of Donald Trump in real estate, et cetera. So it would be really surprising if all of a sudden now, I don't know, he comes out and says, yes, collusion obstruction of justice, and wait too, you see what I got on the money laundering. But wouldn't you argue that proving that there was collusion is a means to an end? Because why would Russia go out of its way to help elect Trump, right?

Like, what's in it for them? So look, I think that they also have, you know, this tie with Trump for a long time. But remember, they're giving to Trump. So what is it that they're looking back for? One, I mean, man, did they get lucky that they stumbled into this guy who might even be an asset, the president of the United States? But mainly, they hated Hillary Clinton. Why?

Why do they hate the Democrats? Why do they hate Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama? Because Obama did the Magnitsky Act, which froze the assets of the Russian oligarchs connected to Putin. And so there's nothing that they hate more than their own personal money being frozen and sanctions upon them. The Russian people, they're like, whatever, you should see what we do to them, right? But my money, no, that's why they're obsessed, that's why the Trump Tower meeting was about

The Magnitsky Act, which froze their assets. And so Hillary Clinton was going to continue that. The whole point of putting Trump in place was lift the sanctions, lift the Magnitsky Act. That's why when the Senate voted 98 to 2 to continue the sanctions, Trump was like, I don't want to sign this thing. I don't want to sign it. It's not good. It's not good.

Daddy told me it's not good, right? And then he was forced to sign it because they could override his veto. It was 98 to 2, right? And then he did not enforce it for any. incredibly long time. What Russia has to gain is absolutely clear, right? And so now back to the WikiLeaks situation. If all Mueller has, because he was too careful and stuck to, okay, they told me to talk about,

look at the election, I'm just looking at the election, I'm not looking at any other financial connections between Trump and the Russians, then you're gonna have a case that's hard to prove, and I'll give you the one scenario in which it works. But in all the other cases, I think he stays in office. So look, if they say, okay, Mueller's got evidence that says the Russians stole the democratic emails, which almost certainly happened. And WikiLeaks through the Russians or however else got the emails and printed them. So what?

Trump stays in office. He's got nothing new with that. If Trump is not connected to it, I would say not guilty. If it turns out Trump and some people on his team knew about it, but they didn't help in any way, that's also going to be a not guilty, right? The only way that they can get him is if Trump, and that is what the steel dossier suggests, if Trump personally and his team helped the Russians either steal or disseminate the stolen goods, and they knew ahead of time what they were doing, okay, then they would get them,

but even then, how is it going to be a struggle for impeachment? If he was a regular person, you'd indict him and lock him up really easy. That would be a cake walk, right? But when he's president of the United States and he's got 40% of the country acting like zombies and the Republican Party is not going to want to let go, they're going to be like, oh, he gave it the WikiLeaks, WikiLeaks is media, they published it, what's the big deal, we're done with it. So I'm now significantly worried that I was wrong, that they would look into the bigger

issues, and if this is what they get, he could walk. Right, I think that he is likely to walk, really. regardless of the outcome of the investigation. I think if he was proven to be laundering money for the Russians, Republicans have shown themselves to support Trump regardless of what he does, even if he's violating the Constitution. So I have no faith in the Republicans, I have no faith in Trump. And honestly, I don't know if the American people would be up in arms enough to do something, whether making Republican politicians pay the price politically or by protesting.

I have no idea, but all I know is Trump has managed to do many terrible things, including a story that we reported on yesterday, but no one else seems to care. I mean, Trump pushed his cabinet to approve an order to allow the military to use lethal force on U.S. soil in response to immigrants, okay? That is unconstitutional. Oh, but we're not paying attention to that, though. There's so much going on. So I just don't, I don't think that it's gonna matter either way.

However, look, the big question that I personally have when it comes to this whole investigation and this whole allegation of Russian meddling is, why would Trump be loyal to the Russians? He's not loyal to anyone, and it appears that he is loyal to Putin no matter what, even when Putin has made fun of him on the international stage. So what is it? What do the Russians have on Trump that's essentially making the president of the United States a lap dog for Putin? That's what I want to know.

And that's also other than if you, look, I think if you can't see that he's a lap dog for Putin, I think you're trying to really hard not to see it. And so to me that's also obvious. But whether it's obvious or not, it doesn't mean anything unless Mueller can prove it. So I think it's because he's been money laundering for the Russians for a long time. All they have to do is give that evidence and he's toast. I also think that, you know, I don't know about the tape in Russia. I don't know if that exists or not.

If that's the case, that's another thing they could have on him. To me, that one's not obvious. It's just the steel dossier, which I originally thought was too outlandish, has fortunately or unfortunately been proven right almost on everything else. So maybe that's true, maybe that's what they have on him. Or if he colluded with the Russians in the campaign, well, that's another thing the Russians would have on him. So there's three different things that could easily make him compromised by the Russians.

The fact that we have a president who might be compromised by another country is unreal. And so, but guys, that's all fine and good. But does Mueller have enough, not for Democrats, but for Republicans to say, no, you got him, he's got to go, okay? And so right now, if it's not the money laundering in the past, then you only have two possibilities. And they're connected to this story. One possibility is what the Guardian reports here, which is Manafort right around the time when he was chosen to be campaign manager of Donald Trump, went and talked to Assange in

the embassy in London, the Ecuadorian embassy. Jesus, why would Trump's campaign manager talk to Julian Assange who then leaked the stolen documents? I mean, that is super questionable. I don't know if the Guardian is right, but if the Guardian is right and Mueller has that information, Well, that is the one scenario where that would be direct collusion between the Trump campaign and the people who leaked the documents. So that could be one way of getting him. And then the last thing is that Trump server in Pennsylvania, there's no way in the world

that it got pinged by a Russian bank, alpha bank, over and over again, and it's a coincidence. There are no coincidences that large. I don't know if Mueller found out what those, that communication between Alpha Bank and the Trump server in Pennsylvania was, if he did, then he got him. Because it's not a Russian clothing company, it's not a Russian airplane, it's a Russian bank, it's a Russian bank, constantly talking to a Trump server in Pennsylvania. And Trump comes out and says, oh, it was probably spam or a coincidence. No way, no rational person believes that.

So those are your two hopes, otherwise he survives and then he will be emboldened. If he thought he was bad now, wait to get a load of him after he's emboldened. So buckle up. I would like, and I hope this is happening, but I'm not naive enough to think it is. I would like Democrats who are currently in office to focus their efforts on fighting him politically, rather than focusing too much on, or putting too much weight behind the outcome of this investigation. Because if you put all your eggs in that basket, you're in a lot of trouble.

And I think that even if, as Jenk mentioned, collusion is shown, the investigation shows evidence of that, I don't think that Republicans are going to do what it takes to get rid of him, to impeach him. I just don't. I mean, again, they have let him get away with all sorts of constitutional violations. And I have no doubt that they would do the same in this case as well. Last thing on WikiLeaks, look, I think them publishing the emails, if there was not collusion between the Trump team and the Russian team and they knew it, right?

If you divorce it from that, I don't think, I think that that's their job. And so I do not agree with the Democrats, and I do not agree with the rest of the mainstream media. They're the boogeyman for publishing it. Washington Post would have published it, New York Times would have published it. I don't particularly care that it was WikiLeaks who published it. Now on the other hand, you know, the way that Assange seems to be backing Donald Trump over and over and over again, it makes me very seriously question Assange's efforts to actually be a journalist and not to be a partisan.

And I get it, I get why he hates the Democrats, they're trying to put him in prison. Right. But at the same time- So are Republicans, let's be clear about that. And now the Republicans are too, and they have been in the past. But it seems like a sign just picked aside. And look, it makes me question his reporting. And so that's the situation we're in now. So now is he just leaking things that he gets and no matter what, in which case I would

respect that? Or is he selectively leaking based on his political emotion? Now that that suspicion is out there and it's real and it's possible, well, now I'm concerned that it can't be trusted. We have to take a break. When we return, we're going to give you an update on the chaos between Russia and Ukraine and also Trump's reaction to Russia as he finally laying down the law. We'll give you the details on that and more.

We hope you're enjoying this free clip from the Young Turks. If you want to get the whole show and more exclusive content while supporting independent media become a member at t yt.com slash join today. In the meantime, enjoy this free second. All right, back on TYT, man, I have these premonition sometimes. And I'm telling you, all the long, because of the news I've been feeling in and I just felt it even more as we were watching that video of ourselves talking about 2018 and 2020. At TYT, we frequently talk about all the ways that big tech companies are taking control of our online lives. Constantly, monitoring us and storing and selling our data.

But that doesn't mean we have to let them. It's possible to stay anonymous online and hide your data from the prying eyes of big tech. And one of the best ways is with ExpressVPN. ExpressVPN hides your IP address, making your active ID more difficult to trace and sell the advertisers. ExpressVPN also encrypts 100% of your network data to protect you from eavesdroppers and cybercriminals. And it's also easy to install. A single mouse click protects all your devices. But listen, guys, this is important.

ExpressVPN is rated number one. by CNET and Wired magazine. So take back control of your life online and secure your data with a top VPN solution available, ExpressVPN. And if you go to ExpressVPN.com slash TYT, you can get three extra months for free with this exclusive link just for TYT fans.

That's EXP-R-E-S-V-N dot com slash T-YT. Check it out today. These next two years are going to be insane. They're going to be the most turbulent two years we've ever lived through. And on the Democratic side, on the Republican side, whether Trump stays or he goes, it's going to be madness. And then you've got the Democrats who are going to rip each other to shreds. So buckle up.

Playing the role of Anna Casparian on the show today, Jake Yugar, Mr. Pessimist, geez. No, no, I mean, look, it doesn't mean that I don't think we're going to come out on the winning side and that everything's going to be okay at the end, but boy, it's going to be a battle, man. I keep picturing that Game of Thrones scene where they've got John Snow surrounded in the battle and they're squeezing and squeezing and squeezing. So I don't know, man. It's going to be a hell of a hell of a battle. Unbelievable battle.

He was, yes, ironically saved by Littlefinger. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Okay. I thought he was saved by a woman, but I guess I was wrong about this. No, no, he's her, his sister, Sonsa, brought in a little finger in his arm. Yeah, that's okay. So we can go with Sonsa, okay, a little bit of a red hair, okay, and the Knights of the

veil. Yeah. So we got to somehow bring the Knights of the Vail. Anyway, a couple of comments here, Captain Cornball says, just because Moller's investigating the collusion aspect doesn't mean he's not looking into other things, damn, Anna beat me to the point I was type as I was typing it. Join, t.t.com slash Anna. Except he's a member, so he already joined.

Oh, damn, thank you for joining. It's giving Tuesday, right? TYT.com slash gift, give the gift of TYT membership. And then Don M writes and Mueller shows you he wants, shows you what he wants you to see and hides what he doesn't, he's no dummy. Now let me remind you that that was Don M. as in perhaps Mueller? Oh, speaking of things he wants you to see and not see, why is the M just an M?

Can you imagine if Robert Mueller watched our show every day? And he was a member pretending to be Don M. Okay. That would be like, I would be so amused by that. No, that would be the greatest thing that ever happened. And it would be, can you imagine? He's like, taking notes. He's like, all right, Jank thinks I should look into money.

No, no, no, that would be awesome. But no, he already knows, right? So he knows, he's like, man, they got it right again, right? Could you imagine? Oh, but that one's wrong. No, no, they got that one wrong. Let's note that. Anyway, zero divisor with a good point, serious point, but a good point.

Every recent U.S. president has been compromised by Israel or Saudi Arabia or both. So that's a fair point, but not personally, unless you count campaign contribution. independent expenditures and all the rest. But yeah, I mean, of course, which U.S. president has come out and said, yeah, no, Israel's wrong. And they should end the occupation. It's preposterous and inhumane. I mean, Obama did that a little bit at the very beginning of his presidency. And then he was like, no, no, sorry, sorry, sorry, sorry, sorry.

By the way, you know who put out a complimentary tweet about APEC today? Beto O'Rourke. Oh, I know. Come on, Beto. That was the universal reaction. Kyle Kalinsky's comment against Beto O'Rourke's tweet had three times as many likes as Beto's tweet did. What's Beto doing?

What is he doing? What is wrong with him? He's going Washington. I don't, man, it gets into your bloodstream. They convince you to do silly things like that. Anyway, one more comment, this someone's from YouTube super chat. Sean King, not that's Sean King, writes in, feels great to see Jank express the anger in front So much of the nation is feeling, and as always, they choose their size based on money.

Well, thank you, and that anger and frustration is super real. And again, buckle up for the next two years. So last point is about Amplify Jack Freeze, just gave $150. You can get a T-shirt, and that's three memberships for journalism students across the country. Thank you, Jack. Appreciate it from Derby in Wichita, Kansas, okay? with the Koch brothers, but also home of young Turks member, Jack Fries. So take that Charles and David Coke.

And if you don't know, 2.t.com slash Amplify is a way of getting our message out to both journalism students, and we have packages for $1,000 and above for media figures. You guys have already done a ton of CNN and Fox News, but there's more on there. You could buy a TYT membership for Sean Hannity and his entire team, Wolf Blitzer, and his entire team. But we've also added others. So again, in the spirit of giving on giving Tuesday, Bernie Sanders is on the list. So you can give his entire team Young Turks membership, which would be neat because, look,

obviously he's super progressive, but at the same time, it'd be neat for everybody in his organization to have Young Turks membership. I think that could make a big difference. And then we also have Nancy Pelosi on the list, not as progressive. We would love for her to hear the Young Turks' message every day. And then we put some great progressive folks on there like Susan Sarandon, Rosary Dawson, Shailene Woodley, et cetera, because we want their managers, their publicists, and all of them, their family members to have Young Turks membership.

Rosario Dawson started listening to Young Turks because her uncle did. So that's why these kind of programs make a giant difference. Thank you to everybody who participated. TYOT.com slash Amplify. All right, what's next, Dana? Security forces have seized the sailors and also vessels from the Ukrainian military. And some of those soldiers, of course, are still in their custody. And the latest update to this story is that Russia has released a confession video that

these Ukrainian sailors have filmed. Now before we get to that though, in case you miss this story, a CBS news report that we're about to go to gives you the quick details of what occurred. Take a look. This clash took place in a busy shipping channel that's used by both Russia and Ukraine. In a video shot on board a Russian Coast Guard vessel, you can hear an officer shouting orders to cut off the smaller Ukrainian tugboat, and then he rams it. Now that tug along with two small Ukrainian gunboats were subsequently seized and docked

in Russia, while the Russians showed more military muscle, even flying fighter jets along a bridge that spans the channel. Now, Russia claims that the Ukrainian vessels were in their territory. However, Ukraine maintains that, no, this is actually a straight that we've been using with absolutely no issues, and there's no reason why this provocation should have occurred from the Russians. That's what they're claiming. But with all that said, I do want to go to this video, and remember, these are Ukrainian

sailors who are now being held captive by the Russians, and the Russians are now releasing this confession video, and they're airing it on state-sponsored television in Russia. Now we had to translate it, of course, it's in Russia, so for those of you who are listening to the audio version of this, I do apologize, but I will quickly summarize for you when we come back. Let's take a look. of the United States, visually,

and visually, the military, and the of the cross of radio-stans, ignoreal, on the moment of on the border

arms, and also polo-de-she-K with black-complexed. I've done of the group of wars' of Ukraine in Herschan in prologan character.

We've never said, we've taken to the territorial voda, out of 12-zmiel zone and to expect

of the next of the next So both the captive Ukrainians are saying that they were told to leave the area and they didn't listen and that was the reason why they were eventually held captive by the Russians. Yeah. The first person who made this statement was very obviously reading something. But look, take it for what it is. Right now this story is still developing.

But understand that Russia started this, they are the provocateurs in this case, and more importantly, they changed their story. So initially they denied having these vessels in their, you know, docked in Russia, and then it turns out that it was docked in Russia, and they later changed the story. Yeah, guys, you know, if you're a regular watch of the Young Turks, you saw yesterday that I was skeptical about the Ukrainian side as well, and I wasn't sure who actually provoked the situation in the first place, because now the leader in Ukraine, who is not very popular, has declared martial law.

That's- For 30 days. Yeah, I understand, but that's, I mean, that's, you know, a struggling government headed toward bad things 101, right? And so that is very disconcerting, but the evidence in today is against the Russians. And so that leans towards the Ukrainians being right and the Russia's being wrong. Why do I say that? Well, that's a hostage video, man. That's the most obvious hostage video I've ever seen in my life.

So, and the guy in the first video, as Anna pointed out, is clearly reading off something the Russians wrote for him off camera. That doesn't convince me that the Ukrainians were wrong. That convinced me the Russians were wrong. I mean, they're doing hostage videos, and why do they capture these guys? Why did they lie that they didn't have them and then they admitted they had them? Now they're doing hostage videos, which presumably means that they're threatening somebody's life. Otherwise they're not going to do that.

Those are Ukrainian soldiers and they're higher ranked soldiers. So are they threatening their lives, their families' lives? More likely the lives of the people that are with them. There's 24 other sailors that are captured by the Russians. So that tells me, no, the Russians are the bad guys in that case. And now with Trump in absolute turmoil and Trump's saying, hey, for the money, I let the Saudis decapitate people. what Russia that is all over Eastern Ukraine might be thinking, I mean, this is a good time,

let's just go in and take more. And that clown Trump, we own him, besides which, all you got to do is give a nickel and a dime, and he'll let you do anything. He let the Saudis dismember someone with no consequences. What's he going to do, stop us from taking Eastern Ukraine? So let's just start being more and more aggressive. Right now, today, that's what it's leaning towards. Yeah, it's interesting because I didn't think of that perspective.

The fact that, you know, letting the Saudis off after they ordered the murder of a journalist not only set a dangerous precedent regarding the safety of journalists, but more importantly sends a message to other evil tours throughout the world, right? If the president is unwilling to do something to make the Saudis pay the consequences, then why would he do anything negative? toward Russians if they wanted to, you know, annex another portion of Ukraine. You think Trump's really what? He's going to roll in the tanks and oppose the Russians?

Look, I don't want any of that happening either. No. I don't know what, you know, what I would do if I was in charge, because I don't want a conflict with Russia. On the other hand, I don't want them to constantly roll into other countries and take their land, because if you do that kind of appeasement, we're going to have real trouble. And Trump, I would be shocked if he did anything about it. So let me give you the latest update from Trump.

Now he was set to have a one-on-one meeting with Vladimir Putin during the G20 summit, the upcoming G20 summit in Argentina. He has just notified the Washington Post in an interview that he is going to hold off on that meeting until he knows the full scope of what's going on between Russia and Ukraine. So in this interview, he's saying he's awaiting a full report from his national security team. And he says that will be very determinative, determinative. No, it won't. Maybe I won't have the meeting, maybe I won't even have the meeting, he says.

I don't like the aggression, I don't want the aggression at all. Yeah, I don't believe him for very good reasons. He's a nonstop liar, but specifically about this, well, your national security team just gave your report saying, yeah, the crown president of Saudi Arabia decapitated Washington Post journalist, and you're like, maybe he did, maybe he didn't. So, no, you ignore your national security team all time. They told you that the Russians interfered in the election, and what did you say? I don't know, but Putin tells me he strongly denies it.

So you took the Russian word over your national security team over and over and over again. You took the Saudi's word over your national security team. So do I think you're gonna listen to your national security team? Of course not. You don't listen to any part of your government. 13 different agencies just concluded climate change is real, it's manmade, and it's going to be devastating. And he literally said today, I don't believe them.

So you're not gonna listen to your national security team. You're gonna do whatever is you think is in your personal best interest. That's what you're gonna do. Well, leave on that, take a quick break, but when we come back, you won't believe what's behind this latest E. coli outbreak that's making American sick throughout the country. No, no, I love that story. That story is so telling. Others won't cover it because it's details, it's regulations, et cetera, but it is the core

of the robbery that is going on in America. And so I want to discuss it when we come back. Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work, listen to ad-free, access members, only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts at apple.com slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Yugar, and I'll see you soon.