The Young Turks - Trump Gets TORCHED By McConnell

Episode Date: October 19, 2019

Mitch McConnell is sick of Trump. Cenk Uygur, Ramesh Srinivasan, and Ana Kasparian, hosts of The Young Turks, break it down. 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. If you like the Young Turks podcast, I think you'll love a lot of the podcasts on the TYT Network. Old school, it's one of my favorites, one of the favorites for a lot of the listeners. Please check that out, subscribe, share it, that makes a big difference, and give it a five-star rating. Thank you.

Drop it. Power, power, power panel. It's Friday. We're going to have fun. Lots of stories about Donald Trump. Of course. I think he's made a grave mistake in. Believe it or not, Mitch McConnell agrees with me.

We'll get to that. He's got a ton of Republican critics. Yes. Anna Kaspari and Jake Hugar, Ramatius is back. Pleasure. Great to have you. By the way, Remation has a book Beyond the Valley coming out soon, right? Yes, in less than two weeks, actually.

All right, everybody go nuts. Can they pre-order? Yes, you can pre-order it on the MIT Press website and on Amazon, or you can hook up with me on Twitter, and I'll give you all the ways to engage. With all the critique you do of the online networks, Amazon still lets you sell the book there? No, yeah. We're all kind of complicit and compromised in that way, but you know, it's a platform, it's

a great platform for distributing content, but overall it's a platform that monopolizes small businesses and attacks working people. So there's that. So anyways, we have so many unbelievable stories for you guys, so let's just get right to it, Anna, let's do it. We begin with a breaking news story. Senator Mitch McConnell, who tends to shy away from ever criticizing Donald Trump, has published an op-ed in the Washington Post, and his wording here is very aggressive against Donald

Trump's decision to abandon Kurdish allies in northern Syria. I'm gonna read you a few excerpts from it. And I will say, just to preface this, that while I agree that it was a bad idea for Trump to abruptly abandon Kurdish allies who have helped us defeat ISIS in northern Syria, The wording here makes me sick to my stomach because it reminds you of why so many Americans have this positive reaction to Donald Trump doing what he's doing. Because America has been engaged in endless wars, there's legitimate frustration about that. But there's nuance when it comes to the Kurds in northern Syria.

We've talked about it throughout this story developing. Now let me give you some excerpts. He writes, and this is in the first paragraph, withdrawing U.S. forces from Syria is a grave strategic mistake. It will leave the American people and homeland less safe, emboldened our enemies, and weaken important alliances. Sadly, the recently announced pullout risks repeating the Obama administration's reckless withdrawal from Iraq, which facilitated the rise of the Islamic State in the first place.

Okay, yeah, I can't stand it. There's no winners here. Both Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump are wrong, but they disagree. So what do I mean by that? It's not about partisanship, it's about the driving force behind both of their ideas. So the driving force behind Donald Trump's idea is I got bullied by Erdogan, I have no idea what I'm doing. And so I just, he said he was gonna come in one way or another, so I just left, panicked

and abrupt, totally unacceptable. If a progressive president was in and wanted to withdraw from Syria and from the Middle East, I would be ecstatic if they said to me, oh, I'm gonna do it in one day. I'd be like, no, don't do it in one day. That's crazy, and that's exactly what Donald Trump did. But Mitch McConnell, bringing out all the old ridiculous talking points about how we have to be in the Middle East forever, is totally preposterously wrong, keeping the homeland safe. Wait a minute, this particular conflict is between Turkey and the Kurds.

What does that have to do with keeping us safe? Turkey is the ostensible bad guy in this scenario. Turkey is one of our top allies. It's the second biggest army in NATO, our top alliance. It's not like Turkey's gonna attack us, not like the Kurds are gonna attack us. Yes, there's ISIS fighters that the Kurds are holding, and yes, some of escaped. But to say somehow this endangered San Antonio or Seattle is preposterous. But this is what Republicans typically do, and it's not just Republicans.

Every once in a while you hear it from hawkish Democrats as well, they'll fearmonger in order to garner support for U.S. imperialism. And in this case, the reason why this op-ed, even though I agree that Trump's decision was a bad one, this op-ed is just dripping with pro-American imperialism. So let me give you a quick, oh, go ahead. No, no, sure, sure. So I was just going to say Trump's decision reflects an absence of cultural understanding or historical understanding of the relationship.

between the Kurds and Turkey itself. But I'll let you continue. Yeah, just to give you an example of why I feel this way in regard to what McConnell wrote, he writes the following. There is no substitute for American leadership. No other nation can match our capability to spearhead multinational campaigns that can defeat terrorists and help stabilize the region. Libya and Syria both testify to the bloody results of the Obama administration's leading

from behind. And then he further writes, if we Americans care at all about the post-World War II international system that has sustained an unprecedented era of peace, prosperity, and technological development, we must recognize that we are its indispensable nation. We built this system, we sustained it, and we have benefited from it most of all. Okay, so two quick things. One is, there's a secret reason why he's writing this hotbed. It isn't about Turkey and the Kurds, it isn't even about ISIS, it isn't even about the military

industrial complex. That's the surface reason. The secret reason is he's got an approval rating in Kentucky of 36%. He's worried about losing his seat, and at some point he might have to turn on Trump. So he's got to hang that on something that is a Republican talking point. He can't say, I agree with the Democrats on impeachment. He has to say, look, I can't stand the Democrats, they're the worst, I don't agree with Pelosi, but look at what Trump did, you know, ruining our standing in the world and etc., etc.

So this op-ed, while we, I happen to disagree with 80% to 90% of its content is a very important marker for the Senate Majority Leader, the most important person that will determine whether Donald Trump stays in office or not, beginning to turn. If he's gonna turn, he needs an excuse, this is that excuse. Now, real quick on the substance of it, this whole idea of American imperialism working in the Middle East is a hilarious joke. I mean, he even says at one point, Syria has been a model for this increasingly successful approach.

Does Syria look like it's been a model for a successful approach? It looks like an absolute nightmare and a disaster for everyone involved, including us. He lives on a different planet. This is Neocon 101. On the substance of withdrawing or not withdrawing in a smart strategic way, I prefer Trump to McConnell. Absolutely. So a few different points here.

First of all, what Trump did was reckless and turned his back on the Kurds who had their backs turned on systematically by many different foreign actors for decades, right? However, look at all the fallacies in what Mitch McConnell stands for and says. A progressive response is one that is against war, is against endless wars, is pro-diplomacy, is pro-multilateralism and peace, but is not the same as an arbitrary withdrawal leaving our friends to be massacred, right? So look at what Mitch McConnell says and see how incredibly hypocritical it is. First of all, he criticizes Obama for Obama's disastrous actions in Libya and to a lesser

extent in Syria. However, what Obama did in Libya, and again, a little bit in Syria, is exactly what the Republicans have done for decades, and Mitch McConnell would fully support. He may not have supported some of the implementation of it, as we know all too well, but Obama implemented the Republican neocon active action when he invaded Libya, destabilizing the country, human trafficking. organs being sold and so on, from Bantu Africans and black Africans, like Southern Africans, or Central Africans. He says he wants American leadership and that we have allies in our causes

in the Middle East. Who are these allies and where is the American leadership? Is there any evidence that any of us have actually seen that American troops in foreign countries actually decreases terrorism in this country? It actually projects an image that we are ignorant of these people. We're interested in colonizing and engaging in imperial activity, and it makes us seem like almost every major global poll I've read indicates that America is the most feared country in the world, not ISIS, not countries like Iran, it's America that's most feared in the world because we have this myth that we feed ourselves, not just of exceptionalism, but we as some sort of imperial leader of humanity in the world when our actions are exactly the opposite.

That's why I support progressive leaders. You all probably know I've joined Bernie Sanders' campaign because it's no more endless wars. We need a new approach that is based on multilateralism and humanity and listening to other people. That's what we got to do. So, yeah, so you mentioned imperialism, colonialism. Donald Trump literally said the other day that they're finding over a bunch of sand anyway,

and there's plenty of sand there. He does anything sound more colonialist than that? And by the way, also totally not true. Northern Syria doesn't have a lot of sand. In fact, it's part of what is known as the fertile crescent. It's the opposite. But of course, and the colonial mindset is, ah, it's a bunch of Arabs fighting. None of them are Arabs, by the word, Kurds and Kurds are not Arabs.

Fighting over sand, it's not sand, it's very fertile there, literally in terms of vegetation and farming, et cetera. So a total misunderstanding of the region, total lack of homework by Donald Trump. We've talked about it a hundred times now, but what's interesting is the Republicans turning against them, even though it's for all the wrong reasons. And Dan Crenshaw, is another one, just came out and said that his withdrawal allowed, quote, chaos to ensue. And now that critique is actually more legitimate.

That is true, it did lead to chaos. And then even, again, Chris Wallace on Fox News asking, you're saying this is a ceasefire. It sounds more like a surrender. And he asked very legitimate questions like, wait, so does Turkey just have that land now? Is this an occupation? Are the Kurds being driven from that land? And you know, if people are being driven from a land, there's another term for that. It's called ethnic cleansing.

Yes. And so is that the official U.S. policy now? So I don't want this Hobson's choice of either permanent imperialism or ethnic cleansing. It's a false choice. It's exactly a false choice. We can actually do smart strategy to withdraw from the region while empowering our local allies, but do it in a way that is deliberative so that we actually can protect our interests and our allies' interests and not just blunder into this chaos.

And Mitch McConnell ends this op-ed saying America's wars will be endless. Only if America refuses to win them. So what I'd like to ask Mitch McConnell is what does winning look like? Like, you tell me what does winning mean? Is winning what your buddy George Bush did in Afghanistan and Iraq? I'm not sure there's been much winning that's happened in either country. With a preemptive war in Iraq based on complete and utter lies regarding weapons of mass destruction. So Mitch McConnell represents destabilization of these parts of the world.

Donald Trump, in a short-term sense, because of his lack of knowledge or understanding of anything related to the region, it seems, at least its history, also represents destabilization. We don't want destabilization. We want compassion, collectivity, and multilateralism. So, yeah, last thing on that, you know, every once in a while the right wing says, oh, you guys, it's a talking point they do. If Trump rearrangement syndrome, we're opposed to anything Trump does. No, we're opposed to 90% of what Donald Trump does, because 90% of it is filled with ignorance, arrogance,

and foolishness. But short term, he's created bigger problems than McConnell, Crenshaw, and the other Republicans. But in the long term, we're all in agreement that Trump's idea withdrawn from the Middle East is much more correct than McConnell's and Crenshaw's and the rest of the Republican Party. So, no, we evaluate things on a case-by-case basis based on the actual facts of that situation. And the reality is, do not, and what I'm worried about is that, a lot of the Democratic Party establishment, and certainly the establishment in media, is going to get seduced by the arguments of McConnell simply because they are opposed to Donald

Trump. Well, a lot of them have already been seduced by that idea, and it was well before Donald Trump even came into office to begin with. No, that's a great point, and they've been for perpetual war, and they don't ask the obvious questions that Rema just asked, did we win in Afghanistan? What did we win? And McConnell indicates here that he'd like to be back in Iraq, that it was a terrible idea to withdraw from Iraq.

So you want us to go back into Iraq? Are you insane? What did we win in Iraq? But the media never asked those questions, and it is really stunning that they have dropped a ball on them. Now they say, well, you know, it was wrong reasons to go into Iraq. But you never talk about these absurd Republican ideas of staying in the Middle East forever, let alone starting a new war with Iran.

So no, we evaluate things as they are not based on partisan politics or personalities. And yes, in the long run, the idea of getting out of the Middle East that Trump has is not a wrong one. He just executed it very, very poorly. I totally agree, and I gotta add one final thing, and it's more directed toward members of the left who have bought into this notion that Donald Trump does wanna end the endless wars. Like, he has no leg to stand on making that argument when he has expanded.

the Obama era drone strikes, when he continues to engage in that war in Yemen, he is not an anti-war person. And increase the military budget to record proportions as well. And great points guys, and just brought in new troops to Saudi Arabia. Why do we have new U.S. troops to Saudi Arabia? See, that's why guys, look, Trump, if he really meant withdrawing from the Middle East, like I just told you a second ago, I believe that, I think that is correct. But he doesn't believe that.

It's all situational. Oh, I've got a Trump Tower in Turkey. Look, it could be a thousand different reasons why mainly is ignorant. It could be Trump Tower, I don't know. But for whatever reason, in that moment, he's like, I'm gonna abandon the Kurds and I'm gonna withdraw troops. Now that he withdraw them out of all of Syria? No, they're in southeastern Syria right now anyway.

And then he goes and puts new troops in the Saudi Arabia. So where's the principle? So anyone defending Trump on principles, the only principal Donald Trump in reality, the only principal Donald Trump, in reality has, is what is to the benefit of Donald Trump. May I just make one last point? I think, you know, and I know you have done great coverage on this. We should have a lot of compassion and feel for what's happening to the Kurdish people. And this is not a new issue.

These people have been systematically slaughtered for decades by all sorts of national force, multinational, you know, different countries, the Syrians, the Turks, and so on. And they used to be their own country, Kurdistan. It's just important to understand that the Kurdish people have been systematically slaughtered for decades, and our reckless actions with our so-called buddies who helped us beat ISIS are now adding to that cause. Look, we keep saying last point, but these are all very important. And I'm gonna add one more too then.

So the other day Donald Trump literally said that, hey, this is good, the Turks are cleaning out the area. It's an exact reference to ethnic cleansing. And he said, oh, they're just moving people out. Now, if you remember, the Turks also moved people out of that same area before, and they were the Armenians. And that's called a genocide. So he uses that language with no regard and no knowledge of it.

And if he does know it, he doesn't care. It seems to be celebrating yet another ethnic cleansing that's happening in the area. And no one has an answer to the questions that I've been asking, Chris Wallace has been asking. What happens to the citizens that lived in that area, the Kurds that lived in that area? Is it just the military has to move out, or does every single civilian have to be driven out of that area? That is 20 miles deep, but 400 kilometers long, so about 280 miles long. So that is, is it a permanent occupation that Turkey is going to do over that area?

And what happens to those citizens? This does not have a good history, and we keep saying never again, and here it is, it's happening today. We gotta take a break, but when we come back, coverage on Syria continues. We have a fiery speech from Mitt Romney and a little more clarity on what prompted Donald Trump to make this decision in the first place.

We'll be right back. We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-Inging 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, on 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 unlearn what you have learned. And that's true whether you're in Jedi training or you're uprooting and exposing all the propaganda and disinformation you've been fed over the course of your lifetime.

So search for UNFDR in your podcast app today. and get ready to get informed, angered, and entertained, all at the same time. All right, back on a young Turks. Look, we got a lot of exciting things coming up for you guys, so I want to let you know about it. Bill McKibbin's going to be on the program. Yay! Yes. He's on the cover of my book.

Oh, is that right? He's so cool. I love that guy. Yeah, and he's going to be here next Friday, October 25th, at 10th. 8 o'clock Eastern, so don't miss that. That's a special. Normally we don't do interviews on Friday, but we're making an exception for Bill, who's one of the top experts on the environment in the world.

And next Monday, so that's next Friday. Next Monday, on October 21st, we're going to do a YouTube super chat post game. So it's free and available to everyone, not just members, and you could ask us questions or give comments on using YouTube's super chat. That's on YouTube.com slash TYT following the conversation. I got to jump in on that because, A, I'm super excited to do it. I love hearing from you guys and I love answering some of your questions. But I just want to give a warning.

If you're going to participate in it and ask or say things that are clearly disrespectful, we're going to ignore it. So I'm just putting that out there. Because I've seen it happen on other shows. We're not playing that game. We really want to communicate with genuine people and answer genuine questions. So, yeah, I like how you said, of course. I'm just making it clear.

All right, anyway. And apparently today, there's no Friday post game, but we got happy half hour coming up, which you guys love. If you haven't ever watched it, it's a good moment to watch it. T.R.T.com slash join to become a member. And then you can get it any time you want, including Anna's show, no filter, John's show, damage report, et cetera. All right, Anna, what's next?

All right. Been suggested that Turkey may have called America's bluff, telling the president they were coming no matter what we did. If that's so, we should know it. For it would tell us a great deal about how we should deal with Turkey now and in the future. That's Senator Mitt Romney, who gave a fiery speech in regard to Donald Trump's abrupt decision to pull U.S. troops out of northern Syria, effectively abandoning our Kurdish allies. And he floated a theory that's actually been confirmed now, that Turkey was going to invade.

northern Syria, they were going to go through with a military operation, whether the Americans wanted it or not. And so Erdogan might have been attempting to call Donald Trump's bluff, but here's what ended up happening. Donald Trump folded immediately and pulled the troops out, which led the way for the Turks to invade. Now I want to give you a little more from Mitt Romney's speech, and then I'm going to tell you how this theory has been confirmed.

Take a look. Assuming for the sake of understanding that getting out of endless wars was the logic for the decision, why would we take action so precipitously? Why would we not warn our ally the Kurds of what we're about to do? Why would we not give them time to also withdraw or perhaps to dig in to defend themselves? Clearly the Turks had a heads up because they were able to start bombing within mere hours. I simply don't understand why the administration did not explain. explain in advance to Erdogan that it's unacceptable for Turkey to attack an American

ally. Are we so weak and so inept diplomatically? The Turkey forced the hand of the United States of America? Turkey? Okay, I got that. All right, so there's two things to say here. One is this is actually a much more measured, intelligent response to Donald Trump and a far better critique than what Mitch McConnell did in an op-ed today.

Mitch McConnell argued for endless wars on behalf of endless wars. Here Mitt Romney is saying, look, even if you're against endless wars, this is not the right way to do it. That's actually totally true. And his points are fairly undeniable. Even assuming Turkey and Kurds are both our allies, and that is a fair assumption, they are both our allies, why advantage one over the other? Why not give the Kurds a warning as well?

So almost everything he said there is correct in that sense. And it's interesting coming from a Republican. That's actually sounds like an intelligent progressive critique of the president. So I appreciate that. The last part I didn't appreciate as much. Turkey? Turkey? Yeah.

I hear you. But look, all kidding aside, Turkey, like there is something wrong, there's one thing wrong with the media reporting on this. Now there's, because everybody's opposed to Donald Trump, there's this. drive to paint the Turks as if they are our enemies. That is not productive either. They are the second largest army in NATO. That is our top alliance.

And they're a top 20 economy in the world. I saw, I think it was New York Times today, dismissed Turkey or Washington Post. I'm sorry, I forget which one. Dismiss Turkey is a small little country. It's got arguably top 10 military in the world. So this is, so this tone of the Turks are our. enemies or that they are minor and piddling, et cetera, is not productive diplomatically, because I can tell you, having, you know, knowing a lot of folks in Turkey, that that drives

them nuts and then drives more animosity towards America. And the last part of that is not acknowledging that Turkey does actually have a terrorism problem from the PKK is also not, is problematic and does not do justice to the facts. See, we're principled on this show. So I'm opposed to the PKK terrorism in Turkey, obviously, as I am opposed to terrorism that happens inside Israel, from Hamas, Esblah, or anyone else. But that does not justify the occupation of the West Bank or Gaza Strip. It also does not justify the occupation of northern Syria.

So that is a principled position to take. Instead of saying, Turkey, oh, they're terror, the terrorism they suffer is no big deal. Or the occupation is no big deal. No, they're both big deals, we need to have a smart strategy on how to deal with all that instead of taking one side abruptly or irrationally. Well, I just want to do a quick media critique and not get off on a tangent. But look, I think this is the reason why Americans tend to see issues like this as black or white, because the media reports things as black or white.

Nothing is reported with the appropriate nuance, mostly because the experts that go on these shows tend to be former politicians, current politicians, people who have a black and white view of these wars and these conflicts to begin with. So you're right. I mean, PKK has conducted terrorist attacks in Turkey, but the way that it's being reported makes it appear as though, you know, all Kurds are good or all Kurds are bad. I mean, it's the same thing that we got when there would be a terrorist attack, right? Yeah, the actions in my experience and analysis of it of the Turkish government against the Kurdish people are disproportionately large compared to the PKK's activities.

But that said, I do hear what you're saying, Jank. I think that whether Mitt Romney knows this or not, he is at least at the minimum intentionally deluding people about what Turkey is. And it gets to the much larger story, to both your points. why is our media, not actually, our mainstream media at least, not actually educating us on what Turkey is, the history of Turkey, at least on some basic level that can keep people's attention, and the history of Kurds and Kurdistan, which Kurdish people span multiple nations, Syria, Iraq, and Turkey. So why is that not happening?

And then the real question, there is one interesting sort of tantalizing point that I feel like Romney brings up here, which is what is Erdogan's leverage over? That's an interesting question I just came up. Right, so there might be leverage, we don't know. There are multiple members of Congress, and this is a bipartisan effort to get that phone conversation between Erdogan and Donald Trump released to Congress, not necessarily to the public. Because if there is some sort of deal made that could be illegal or against the best interests of Americans, they want to know about it.

But let's also note that Jank was 100% right. He predicted that the ceasefire wasn't actually a ceasefire. And today that has been confirmed. There has not been a ceasefire. There's still brutality toward Kurds in northern Syria. And so that's where we're at. And the foreign minister in Turkey had already foreshadowed this in a quote that Jank read during the story yesterday.

But I do want to go back to the notion that Erdogan told Trump, we're going in no matter what. That was also confirmed by Mark Esper. So Mark Esper is the Secretary of Defense, former Secretary of Defense? No current Secretary of Defense. And in an effort to defend Donald Trump, here's what he told Chris Wallace, A2. The first thing that we understood, I've understood from my counterpart, Secretary Pompeo from his, and certainly from President Erdogan, is they were fully committed to doing this regardless of what we did.

We thought it was prudent, it was my recommendation. I know the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and staff agreed as well, we should not put U.S. forces in between a Turkish advance. We're talking less than 50, more like two dozen. There is no way they could stop 15,000 Turks from proceeding south. It's as if the United States is not capable of doing anything. All we could do is let them, you know, come in. Yeah.

So that proves Romney's point completely. Yeah. So basically saying either Turkey bullied us into withdrawing or they just bluffed and Trump folded. when they bluffed, because if Erdogan says, okay, I'm coming in no matter what, and we say, no, you're not, and we're going to keep our troops there, and you're going to have to fire on American troops, Erdogan is a tough guy, and he has done unbelievable things in the past. And I say that in both the good and a terrible sense of it, and he's shot down a Russian plane, which is unimaginable before.

So if there was one world leader who might roll in any way, even with American troops there, it might be him. But even so, that would be one of the boldest moves I have seen in my lifetime, because if you shot and killed American troops that were standing in the way, you would have massive, massive trouble. So likely it was a bluff, and Trump, because he's not good at the art of the deal, immediately folded. No, Donald Trump immediately fold, especially when it comes to strong men. You know, Erdogan is a strong man. And Donald Trump is a coward. It's what happens when you're a wannabe strong man. Exactly. And, you know, in Erdogan's case, it's important to note just kind of the internal

dynamics of Turkey that Jenka and I were just discussing. Erdogan does have a lot of popular support. Unfortunately, quite a bit amongst working class and kind of Islamist populist folks. A lot of the generals and the secularist version of Turkey oppose him. And Erdogan, And this precedes Erdogan, Turkish leaders have been committing consistent attacks on Kurdish people and minorities in Eastern Turkey for decades. And so it's important to know that this is just an expansion, an extraterritorial expansion of Turkish brutality against the Kurds. Now one more component of this that I think is important to share with you.

We know that Turkey didn't actually do the ceasefire that Vice President Mike Pence said that they had agreed to. We know that more Kurds are being affected by this, but Donald Trump has decided to paint himself as an expert at making deals, an expert at foreign policy. Here he is making that case. There's a ceasefire or a pause or whatever you want to call it. There was some sniper fire this morning. There was mortar fire this morning that was eliminated quickly.

And they're back to the full pause. We have ISIS totally under guard. Turkey is also guarding separately. They're watching over everything. So you have the Kurds who we're dealing with and are very happy about the way things are going, I must say, the Kurds. And you also have the Turks watching just secondarily watching. We have ISIS under control.

We've taken control of the oil in the Middle East, the oil that we're talking about, the The oil that everybody was worried about, we have, the US has control of that. It was a lot of pain for a couple of days. And sometimes you have to go through some pain before you can get a good solution. But the Kurds are very happy about it. President Erdogan and Turkey is satisfied with it. And we are in a very strong position. In regard to the so-called ceasefire that does not exist, Turkey's defense ministry said that

that the Turkish army had continued its offensive on the basis of humanitarian and moral values and of international law. How is that for Orwellian language? Right. So look, Erdogan says that after the initial round of continuing to attack, that now things have quieted down. And there is some reporting that on Friday night there was less bombings and sniper fire heard. But in the beginning, there was no question they did not listen to the ceasefire.

And even the American government put out a statement saying, well, look, it takes a little while to wind down. It's supposed to be a ceasefire for five days. It takes a couple of days to wind down. How long was a ceasefire? But look, those are all really important issues and all of these nuances are super important. But there are some things that are not at all nuanced. What Donald Trump said there about the Kurds being very happy is an unbelievable sense.

celebration of ignorance. If you say Donald Trump is my guy, and look, I get that some random dude in the middle of the country doesn't know the history of the Kurds, the Turks, et cetera. But anyone that actually does know it or bothers to look at it for one second or think about it for one minute knows that the Kurds are not very happy. The Kurds are furious. First of all, he says, we had a rough couple of days. Rough couple of days for who? Maybe you, maybe you politically, 218 civilians died, at least. So that's not a rough couple of days. That's it.

They're dead. Okay, they're dead. And so we had that happen. The Kurds have been driven and arguably ethnically cleansed from an area that is 850 square miles. The Turks are now occupying it. To say that the Kurds are very happy about that situation, of all the outrageous lies that Donald Trump has told, that one might be the most outrageous.

All right, I want to move on to one other part of this story, and it has to do with Donald Trump's letter to Erdogan earlier this week. So Turkish president Erdogan did not take well to Donald Trump's letter earlier this week. In that letter, Trump urged him to stop the violence against the Kurds in northern Syria, and claimed that if he refuses to do so, Trump would consider him the devil. Well, Erdogan, according to multiple reports, just took that letter, crumpled it up and tossed it to the side. In the garbage, actually.

In the garbage. And now he is speaking to the press about it. He said that Turkey would, quote, do what's necessary concerning the letter when the time comes. He did not elaborate. Turkey's president says his country cannot forget the harshly worded letter. But he says the mutual love and respect between the two leaders prevents him from keeping it on Turkey's agenda. And also, here is a direct quote from Erdogan, President Trump's letter, which did not go

hand in hand with political and diplomatic courtesy, has appeared in the media. Of course, we haven't forgotten it. It would not be right for us to forget it. So there's a couple of political calculations here. Erdogan, first of all, is saying we're not going to do anything about it now. Why? And he gives a nice compliment to Donald Trump in the midst of all that. Why?

Because he got everything he wanted. He'd be nuts to stir the hornetest nest now. He got to occupy northern Syria just like he wanted. He drove the Kurds from there, just like he wanted, he got to do an invasion. He got everything he wanted. So on the other hand, he, when you have that harsher letter that is publicized within Turkey, if he does not respond with at least a threat, he'll be perceived as weak. And so he can't have that perception out there.

So he threatens back, but he says that's for a later day. Now, knowing the history of Erdogan, he means it. It's not just for political showmanship. It's also for political showmanship, but he usually stows those things away. And then there is another day when he comes back to it. Yeah, he holds grudges, no question about that. So what he does with that, God knows, because I don't know that he can even get anything more.

I mean, he got his entire wish list. Well, he's trying to get more, he's trying to get more by doing this. setting himself up for further leverage because President Trump has proven again and again that he's not actually willing to stand for our allies, stand against genocide, and stand up to a guy who is a tough guy, you know, and sort of, is Trump's thing, it's kind of incredible. Trump warned Erdogan, according to this letter, to not be a tough guy, but that's exactly what he's emboldening Erdogan to be. Yeah, last thing about this, look, this story cuts in a couple of different ways.

To give you a sense of, and I'm telling you this in the context of the ironic thing is that if right now people are pissed at Erdogan and a lot of conservatives are, and maybe even some Trump fans, and then there's this idea about it's Turkey and a bunch of sand over there and all the usual racist stereotypes, et cetera, that go along with that, the conservating. The reality is the right way in this country would love Erdogan, because he's an actual strong man. And so they love Trump when he's a false strong man, right? They're like, oh, well, he looks like a strong man, you know, seems really weak and insecure, but good enough, good enough, right?

So, Erdogan, when there was a coup against him, an actual coup, not the one that's happening to Donald Trump, had his hotel bombed, and he escaped within just minutes of his life. According to the story, this story is, you know, it's filled with mysteries as to what actually happened on that day. This happened a couple of years ago, and some advisors told him you have to flee to another country. He got on his plane, they said fly to Paris. He said, no, we're gonna fly back to Istanbul right into the middle of the coup, okay, and

we're gonna show him who's boss. So are you kidding me? The right wing would love that guy. And the right wing of Turkey does love that guy. And so you have to understand, when you look at things from an international context, There's this bizarre paradigm of like, oh, okay, well, we're the right wing in America, so we don't like Middle Eastern countries. But the reality is the right wing have the similar strategy in all these different countries,

whether it's America, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, they're all for militant action, they're all authoritarian, they're all fundamentalists, and they're all for perpetual war. So that's what actually unites them all. All right, we're gonna take a quick break. When we come back, we have Jim Mattis, Mad Dog Mattis, dunking on Donald Trump. Oh, this was funny. It is fun. All right, we'll be back with that and more.

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. your active AD 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 T-Y-T fans. That's E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N dot com slash T-YT. Check it out today. 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-y-t.com slash join today. In the meantime, enjoy this free second. All right, back on the game. young Turks. Anna, what do you got for us? Yeah, I wanted to read a few TYT lives. First one is from Bernie is not too old, which is a great handle. Trump's fatal flaw is not asking anybody's opinion of a situation. He makes decisions alone and he's uneducated. And you're

absolutely right. And part of the problem is he doesn't trust anyone. So he's insulated himself from members of his own administration because he's concerned about the leaks to the media. Now, the leaks haven't stopped, but nonetheless, he refuses to reach out for any type of advice or any type of counsel before he makes these decisions. I've got to say one other quick thing about that. He also doesn't understand the value of advice and counsel, but more than that, he views asking a question as weakness. And the reason for that is his deep, deep insecurity. So if you're a secure person and know you're intelligent, know that you are knowledgeable, you have no problems asking questions, right? But if you're deeply insecure, you're worried that any question is going to betray your ignorance.

That's why he doesn't ask questions. I mean, it's a very surreal moment in America. We're not going to forget this, and hopefully we can really bury the hatch it and turn the page for good. But it's a silly moment where, or a surreal moment where we see personal issues and personal insecurities and just personality dysfunction, transgressing into political spaces, right? Yeah, yeah, we're all, sorry to interject, yeah, you're 100% right, we're all characters now in Donald Trump's personal soap opera.

Like this is his personal dysfunction, except that it is affecting the entire planet. And then Ray for Madness made a point that I'm really grateful that he made because it's something that I've been wanting to address and I feel like we haven't had the perfect concise opportunity to do it. So the option was simply to go to the U.S. And the option was simply to go to the UN and get an international peacekeeping force to protect. It's a weird thing to say that the US in Syria illegally should fight a war with Turkey.

It's super to say you love the Kurds now, but that doesn't mean you get to occupy them. So look, this point's been made by many people on the left. And I feel like it's conflating our initial involvement in Syria with why we worked with the Kurds in the first place. Our involvement with the Kurds in northern Syria was specifically to combat ISIS. And so they lost thousands of their own fighting for us in order to defeat ISIS, and they were keeping guard of those ISIS prisoners, right? And so for us to then turn around and say, see you later, we're just gonna abruptly leave

and allow the Turks to come in and slaughter you is wrong. So it's about keeping your commitments, it's about keeping your promises and not turning your backs on the people who fought for you. And I'll also add that it's reflective of, and this is a historical issue, not just a pathology of Trump. The United States has demonstrated profound political, cultural, and global illiteracy when it comes to these parts of the world. We are just haphazard all the time with imprisoning people, colonizing people, attacking people,

and then kind of letting them go arbitrarily. There is no consistency that represents a clear strategy around how to diminish any terror that does exist, which of course we know is also falsely inflated in our country. And one other point to the point that was made about the occupation of that area, I'm not interested in a U.S. occupation, a permanent U.S. occupation in that area. And the Pentagon was working on a safe zone. But that plan was thrown out the window when Donald Trump, without even talking to the Pentagon, folded after that phone call with Erdogan.

So that's what I'm saying. No one here at least is in favor of permanently occupying that area, but you have to follow through on your promises of protecting the Kurds. So that's where I'm at. Yeah. No, it's a balancing act. No question. All right, so let's move on to some fun stuff.

Former Defense Secretary Jim Matt Dog Mattis was recently giving a keynote speech. And while he has avoided taking jabs at Donald Trump, this speech did a defense. include a few of those jabs that we've been waiting for. Now, people are not happy about it, but I want to show you this video and then we'll discuss. I do stand before you, as was noted here, really having achieved greatness. I mean, I'm not just an overrated general. I am the greatest, the world's most overrated. I'm honored to be considered that by Donald Trump because he also called Meryl Streep, an overrated actress. So I guess I'm the Meryl Streep of Generals.

And frankly, that sounds pretty good to me. And you do have to admit that between me and Meryl, at least we've had some victories. And some of you were kind during the reception and asked me, you know, if this bothered me, have been rated this way, based on what Donald Trump said. Of course not. I'd earn my spurs on the battlefield, Martin, as you pointed out, and Donald Trump earned his spurs in a letter from a doctor. Now, some people are unhappy about those comments.

They feel it was distasteful and that he shouldn't be joking around about things like this. But I love the drama, and it reminds me that we should appreciate new episodes of as the White House stars. Made some very big mistakes. I asked for his resignation. I'm disappointed in the Attorney General. Well, what I wanted to say is that, what can I say? It's like I saw Mad Dog or General Mattis Live.

I was like in DC recently, like I was telling you both in and at the Atlantic Festival. And he was right in front of me and he refused to criticize Trump. Now he's doing so, and for me, what's problematic here isn't that he's, you know, taking like little dumb, you know, jokey slams at Trump. It's that he refuses to articulate what is flawed about Trump's policies and what he stands for because what Mattis has stood for for a very long time, like many of our generals, is an old school, again, colonial and imperialist invasion mentality, right? And so somehow that is supposed to be better because it's a very long time.

implicit and because you can just be popular these days by making fun of Trump. But what I want and what progressives want and what actually the American people want, every poll says this, is an articulated, clear, global strategy based on principles of multilateralism and lowering any incidences of war and arms conflict. Yeah, look, the reality is that the American people, both on the left wing, the right wing and in the middle, do want to withdraw from the Middle East. Exactly. So that's part of the reason that Donald Trump won, because he had that populist message

that resonated, whereas Hillary Clinton and almost all the rest of the establishment was for perpetual war. And so, you know, look, he's, I was about to say performing, because they do, actually, they're supposed to make jokes at this thing. It's called the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation dinner in New York. It happens every year, they all get dressed up in Texas. Usually the president goes, and they're supposed to make jokes about one another and self-effacing jokes, and so on.

I get the congeniality, and I think there's value in that. On the other hand, every time I see it, it bothers me. It feels and is elitist. And so it's a bunch of elitists that get together and lightly rib each other while the war machine and the profit machines continue. And so Republicans and Democrats, generals and former cops, as you see in the background, and et cetera, all of the powerful get together. And sometimes it feels like they're making fun of us.

And so if you're a Trump supporter, that felt like they were making fun of you or you're the guy you like, but hey, you're not alone. They do that to the left all the time, far more. Now at the same time, I have to say, I like the jokes. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Can I jump in because I have, I think, a different perspective. I actually think, first off, we all know that Donald Trump.

has held a grudge against Obama over Obama's roast of Trump, right? So this type of stuff really gets under his skin and he starts to unravel as a result of that. But more importantly, the reason why I don't have a problem with Mattis going after Trump in this joky context is because it makes Trump look weak. And that is the only way that you can make people turn on him. Because what do people love about Donald Trump? He positions himself as like this strong, aggressive fighter. He's a businessman, he knows how to make deals, and he's willing to fight for you.

He's gonna stand up to China. But in reality, I mean, it's all facade, and all you need is someone to note the bone spurs. Note the fact that he's, you know, he dodged the draft, note the fact that he's weak, that he coweres when it comes to actual strong men. So that's why I like it. I don't know how effective it's actually gonna be. But who knows, maybe this is going to open the door to more and more criticism that Trump has deserved for a long time now. Trump, Trump, in a hypocritical manner voiced a feeling that many of us have that folks like Jim Mattis and all these other, you know, one percenters that are at this gathering don't care about us.

And that's true. Trump is a hypocrite. And so it's funny to make fun of him for these guys to do it. Who's left out? Everybody else. Who's left out? The American people, who's left out? People who actually want the budget to be in the image of their values and their priorities, education, health care, and so on.

We are all left out by these suarez. Yeah, definitely. I mean, this sware itself, I have no love for it. Yeah. But, you know, in commenting about the actual statements made and the jokes, I like them because they specifically make Trump look weak because that's what he is. Yeah, so look, I'll double down on liking the jokes, especially the, Meryl Streep thing, I like that now that's an instantly becomes a thing, right?

Like I immediately wanted to call myself the Meryl Streep of talk shows. And I agree with Anna that I love that he brought up that he ran from the Vietnam War by pretending to have bone spurs. It's one of my favorite things is when a reporter asked them, which foot was your bone spur in? And he said, I don't know, maybe both. What a joke, what a joke he is, okay? But to get back to the most important point, substantively what Mattis is doing and what a lot of the establishment does, including the New York Times, is wrong.

And so what he's doing is he's saying, I'm holding my fire for now, I'm just needling him. But he's saying the president is owed some degree of silence by people that worked in his administration, he was obviously the former Secretary of Defense for Trump, but I won't hold my Silas forever. I don't owe him that. In other words, what he seems to be implying is, I'm going to let you make the wrong decision in the next election by not giving you all the information you need. And then after it doesn't matter anymore, for my own personal benefit, I will tell you what

actually happened in the Trump administration. That way I can make more money from a book, and that way I can say it wasn't a political decision when in fact, not revealing it is the most political decision you could. make. And at that point, I won't suffer any of the blowback from the right wing as much, right? And I'll be fed it as a hero for telling you what a bad guy Trump is after it doesn't matter. And why did I compare them to the New York Times? The New York Times did that twice with George W. Bush.

Before the 2004 election, they held a warrantless wiretapping story and the story about how we had bin Laden cornered in Toribora, and a U.S. general asked permission to proceed to capture bin Laden and he was denied permission. Those are two massive stories. They held them until after the 2004 election. That is a deeply political decision that advantages power, incumbency, and the establishment. And then they say, oh, we did it because we didn't want to be political. No, you have the information not sharing it with the American people is political in and of itself.

And it's always, look, I don't want to take any personal critique. I want to protect my own reputation, and I don't want anybody criticizing me. So I'll protect myself, dressed up all in a tucks and feeling good, right? And I won't let the American people know what the real facts are before they make the most critical decision in a democracy. It's a great point. But with that said, I want to read you one more joke. Okay, this wasn't in the video that we showed you.

He said, quote, I think the only person in the military that Mr. Trump doesn't like, is over, doesn't think is overrated is Colonel Sanders. That's pretty good. That's a pretty good joke. That's a pretty good joke. Good job, Mad Dog. Yes, and-I like the name Mad Dog. We all just like to say Mad Dog, right?

Yeah, it's so ironic because he has the name Mad Dog and his other nickname is chaos. And in reality, those are two nicknames that Trump should definitely have. But my favorite nickname of Trump is, of course, Commander Bonespurs. Or as some people say cadet bone spurs, but he was neither because he ran. TKFC. Yep. All right, so let's talk a little bit about the fallout for Mulvaney. I love this story because I hate Mulvaney.

It's delicious. After admitting that Donald Trump and his administration engaged in a quid pro quo with the Ukrainian government in order to dig up dirt on Trump's political opponent Joe Biden, The Trump administration and other conservatives appear to be turning on him. And it's delightful. Now let's start off with Jim Acosta, who tweeted, quote, Trump was not happy with Mulvaney's performance in the briefing room today, I'm told. And as we had reported yesterday, Mulvaney tried to walk back his statements, and that didn't work out so well.

But I also want to just quickly go to what Mulvaney said specifically. And then we're going to go to Kevin McCarthy's ridiculous defense of Mulvaney. Take a look. Did he also mention to me in the past that the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about that. But that's it. And that's why we held up the money.

Now, there was a report. So the demand for an investigation into the Democrats was part of the reason that he was order to withhold funding to Ukraine. The look back to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the thing that he was worried about in corruption with that nation. Then that is absolutely appropriate. But to be clear, what you just described is a quid pro quo. It is funding will not flow unless the investigation into the Democratic server happened as well.

We do that all the time with foreign policy. We were holding up money at the same time for, what was it, the Northern Triangle countries. So it's clear. He confessed to a quid pro quo. I mean, it's as clear as day, right? So with that said, here's Kevin McCarthy trying to clean up. some of the damage. I think you saw Mick Mulvaney clarify a statement. He said, let me be clear, there was absolutely no quick pro quo between Ukraine military aid and any investigation into the

2016 election. One of your own members said of Mr. Mulvaney's statement, this isn't an etch-a-sketch. You cannot go and revise what you say in front of the cameras and say, oh, actually, I meant the opposite. I think what Mick, he clarified in his statement, was very clear. One thing can the press conference in the exact opposite in his statement. So which one do you believe? I think McMovaney clarified his statement to be very clear. I checked McMovaney at his word for clarification. I clarified my statement so I could be clear.

Yeah, no, my favorite, I didn't see who asked that last question, but great job by that reporter. Which Mick Mulvaney do you believe? So good. And just to add to the growing list of people on the right who are turning on Mulvaney, who are on Mulvaney, you have Sean Hannity on his radio show. Here's what he had to say about the situation. I just think half these people, Republicans too, what is Mulvaney even talking about? I just think he's dumb. I really do. I don't even think he knows what he's talking about. That's my take on it. This is what, you know, this is why I think some of these people are so stupid.

Read the transcript. We don't need a non-whistleblower whistleblower. You don't need a chief of staff's idiotic interpretation of things when the president and the president of Ukraine And everybody else can read it all themselves. Okay, so Hannity now, based on what he said about Mulvaney, okay, the acting chief of staff for Donald Trump has to concede that Trump lied. He lied when he said this. I know the best people. I know the best managers.

I know the best deal makers. We're going to make America great again. We're going to use our best people. We can do it because the people are so amazing. I want the best people. But the cabinet, we're going to have all the best people. We're going to find out who they are. So we're going to get the best people.

But we're going to use our best people. We need to get the best and the finest. We're going to deliver. We're going to get the best people in the world. We're going to have the best people in the world. You've got to pick the best people. He fires them at a, seems to be a pace about one a week. So if they're the best people,

Why does he have to keep on firing them at an unprecedented pace? So look, that was funny that, you know, Hannity's saying, well, his chief of stuff's an idiot, apparently not the best people. But other than seeming to have come back from a three martini lunch, right? There was that strange tone in his voice. He should have checked with the White House, as he normally does, because that is not the correct talking point. The correct talking point from the White House is Mick Mulvaney was right in his clarification,

okay? But he didn't go with that, he'd go, ah, that idiot. Now, why did Mulvaney say that? So there's a couple of reasons why. One is, you know, when you look at the guy behind the curtain, they're actually not that great, they're not that smart. Mulvaney's never been that smart. None of these politicians are really that smart.

Why are they in power? How did Mulvaney get in power? Largely by being a water boy, an errand runner. So the donors pay him a lot of money, payday lenders, et cetera. Then he gets put in charge of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau where he dismantles that group on behalf of payday lenders. You don't need to be that smart. You just need to be able to say, yes, sir, right away, sir, and that's what Mulvaney is.

So he melts down at the first sign of stress. They ask him perfectly easy questions, and he should say no quid pro quo, but he goes, ah, blu, yes, quid pro quo. Now, that's part of it, but there's a second part that no one is talking about. If you read the CNN story on how Donald Trump was angry at Mulvaney, you'll notice that he actually was not angry at Mulvaney, which gives you an indication of what actually happened. So they said he wasn't happy, but they clarified that a White House, I'm quoting CNN. here, a White House official blamed much of Trump's anger on the press, saying the president

believes the media, quote, intentionally misinterpreted Mulvaney's comments. Why is Trump saying that? Because he told Mulvaney to say that. He does this all the time. He says, well, I didn't do anything wrong. I don't want to say it myself. So let's send Mick out there to say it. Say I did the quid pro go, so what?

We do it all the time, right? Otherwise, he'd be limited at Mulvaney. But he's actually all mad at the press for misinterpreting the comments. Why does he say that? Because it's his comments and he thinks, oh, those are genius comments. They just misinterpreted them. Furthermore, they said, White House lawyers and press staff had prepared Mulvaney before his press briefing, which Trump knew and approved of.

So Mulvaney ran that by Trump. Trump said to go do it. And then when he catches a lot of flak for it, the lawyers panicked. So Jay Sekulow, who's his personal lawyer, White House counsel, they're the way. ones who were livid, and they're like, no, you just admitted the crime. So they had Mulvaney do the clarification where he says the exact opposite. But the reality is Trump didn't mind Mulvaney saying that. He very, very likely ordered him to say that.

That's really interesting because earlier this morning, there was reporting from CNN indicating that Mulvaney wasn't supposed to talk, like based on what the White House counsel said, He wasn't supposed to talk about Ukraine at all. The whole point of that press conference was to talk about Trump Doral. And then he got questions about Ukraine, obviously. So it seems like, as always, like no one in the White House is really talking to one another. No, absolutely not.

And it's just yet another episode of the novella or soap opera that we're seeing right in front of us. I mean, we don't know when Trump says, I hire the best people, like what does he mean by best people? Best at what? Best at following my orders, it seems like, or best at just sort of not. being in my way. I also think that this comment from Mulvaney is actually deeply insightful, and it also speaks

to part of who Trump is, his brazeness, you know, especially given that Trump probably signed off on this, for your point. There is one sort of amazing thing about this presidency, which it really gives us a glimpse into how deeply corrupt our systems of government are at this level in this country. Of course it's quid pro quo, that's kind of how things function in systems. of power in this country, not always, but often. And it's just incredible that we have all this indignation at what's occurred when it's just now clear and plain light, you know?

You know, that remains, that's such a great point, because one of the things that the establishment is mad at Trump for is not so much that he's doing these acts of corruption, is that he's doing them so brazenly and stupidly and out in the open. Hey, knucklehead, we're supposed to do that in coded terms. We're supposed to have all of our family members get contracts. But not actually say, hey, give the guy the contract for this. We're supposed to do the corruption, but we're not supposed to admit the corruption. And we're supposed to couch the corruption in legal terms, but Trump is too stupid to follow those

rules. So he just brazenly says it. And so, oh yeah, of course, I asked for a political favor. You think Democrats and Republicans in the past haven't asked for political favors from opposing countries or allies for their own benefit? Of course they have, but they've done it in coded language. You think that the Saudis gave all that money to the Clinton Foundation because they really cared about women's rights across the world and health care across the world?

No, of course they were buying influence. But they did in a way that was legally acceptable and is totally fine and dandy with the establishment. The political class in this country thrives on mirage and deception and hypocrisy, right? And so we have this incredible moment to have a glimpse into. how the political class of both parties function thanks to this presidency. He's not exceptional. He's exceptional in the fact that he's insane and irrational and everything is very personal for him, but he's not exceptional in terms of his corruption, right?

And that's why we need a real progressive to actually contest this, to be an articulated distinction from this whole mess that has contaminated or at least messed up our country and why so many people are unhappy with our politicians and our government. So, Ramesh is a surrogate also for Bernie Sanders. I want to clarify that. And look, we're all progressives here. We call ourselves homo progressives. And so the distinction between us and the right wing is that, and the establishment.

Those are the three different camps, in my opinion. The establishment also chafes at personal corruption like what we're seeing from Donald Trump. And so do we. It's illegal and it is obvious, right? And it's the kind of corruption that is over the top and it forces you to take legal action against them, okay? But what the establishment doesn't mind is systemic corruption, and that is campaign donations, independent expenditures, the jobs that are doled out by all these industries for people

in politics and the press, the paid speeches, all of that systemic corruption, they are perfectly happy with. Ironically, that's what unites the left and the right, because we can't stand that systemic corruption. And we keep, that's why the media has lost so much credibility, because they keep telling us, don't believe you're lying eyes, that systemic corruption does not exist. And right now, to this day, they say, no, Donald Trump is an aberration, like that corruption stands alone and everybody else is pure as a driven snow, and that is preposterous.

He just adds personal corruption on top of the systemic corruption. And look, lastly, as he unwinds here and unravels, it gets worse and worse for him every day. Mulvaney is an excellent example that we ask you guys, will Trump serve until the end of his term? So this is the classic tick, tick, tick, and so far 68% of you now, a majority, over two-thirds saying he will not make it to the end of his term. Back then, back when it was first said, it was considered outrageous, now mind you, of course, This is our audience, so of course, they're more likely to believe me, who's been saying for a long time, I'm not Trump, I don't think it's a scientific poll, but it is interesting

that you guys have moved significantly towards, he's not even going to finish the term. So that's where we have, but you can keep on voting, t.t.com slash the end, we do it because we care about what you think, and I was curious where you stood. I was, I might have guessed that it might have been around 55, 45, 45, that you would think that he wouldn't finish this term today. My guess is if we had asked that three months ago, most of you would have said no, right? That I'm sorry, yes, that he would finish his term. But now that number is getting bigger and bigger every single day, because he's unraveling

every single day. I don't think, obviously, I'm in the 68%. At this pace, there's no way he makes it. All right, we gotta go. Thank you so much for you. Appreciate it. Great to see you. Thank you.

And we got a whole other hour for you guys, including some amazing stories. Unfortunately, also about corruption, and yes, again, police and prosecutorial corruption. We've got to tackle all of it. We'll be right 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 Huger, and I'll see you soon.