The Young Turks - Trump Stokes Hatred And Democrats Respond To Ilhan Omar Controversy

Episode Date: April 16, 2019

Trump is giving his supporters dog whistles. Democrats talk about Ilhan Omar. Ana Kasparian, John Iadarola, and Mark Thompson, 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. Hey, guys, you've heard of the Young Turks podcast because you're listening to it right now. But make sure that you subscribe and give it a five star rating if you like it. Thank you for listening. Welcome to the Young Turks. I'm Anna Kasparian, Mark Thompson, and John Ida Rola join me today.

Jank is off on vacation, which he certainly deserves, and we're going to talk about the important issues today. Game of Thrones, we're going to talk about it for the entirety of the two-hour show. Shot-by-shot conversation. On either side talking Game of Thrones, it was wild. Do you know how, if you just started doing it, I would go along with it for the whole hour? That's what scares me. And I would enjoy it.

Half of the damage report last Thursday was Game of Thrones. I mean, how could you not discuss it? Anyway, we can't discuss it, unfortunately. But we do have, or fortunately. Well, fortunately for you, but considering some of the stuff we have prepped for the show today, I would rather be talking about Game of Thrones. Oh, it's pretty ugly, yeah. Yeah, it's pretty ugly.

So later in the show, we're going to switch out the panel. Brett Erlich will be joining us, and he will be helping me present some of the stories in hour two. We're going to talk about Trump's genius business ideas for Boeing, which, of course, is dealing with some financial loss after it was revealed that they had a faulty software and all sorts of issues with training. And that led to two different planes crashing. So we're gonna talk about that.

And we're also gonna talk about how obsessed conservatives are with AOC and the reasoning behind their obsession, okay? It goes beyond the ideological stuff. And of course, as always, if you're a member, write in because we read your comments. And if you're not a member, you should join. Go to t-y-t.com slash join to become one. You guys ready to start with the ugliness? Let's go.

All right. Over the weekend, Donald Trump tweeted an edited video featuring Ilhan Omar, representative Ilhan Omar, and images or video from 9-11. Now, this was all an effort to continue pushing this narrative that Representative Omar is minimizing what happened on 9-11. Of course, this is nothing more than a political ploy, an effort to defame her as someone who hates America, which of course is not the case. Now, I'm not going to show the video. I know that there are other programs on this network that refused to show the video that Trump tweeted, because I have no interest in amplifying his disgusting and false message.

But just to give you an idea, on Friday, he shared an edited video superimposing the remarks, Ilhan O. Omar's remarks over images and clips of the 2001 terrorist attacks that appeared to suggest Omar was dismissing what happened. Again, she did not dismiss what happened. Now, with that said, Representative Omar had already been the target of violent attacks. In fact, one man was arrested because he had called into her office, spoke to some staffers, and made very specific threats of violence against them. Again, that person has been arrested.

But following Trump's tweet, the death threats have increased. In fact, she released a statement saying, quote, since the president's tweet Friday evening, I have experienced an increase in direct threats on my life, many directly referencing or replying to President Trump's videos or the president's video. So before I go into some other parts of the story, I want you guys to jump in. What are your thoughts? Well, it's deliberate the notion that you could juxtapose these images from 9-11, which you know represent so much and really galvanized people in so many ways, and that you could juxtapose them with this person who you're trying to suggest, quite obviously, I would say clunkily, but in another way effectively, is I think it's even worse than what he would, well, I think it's even worse than suggesting that she didn't speak strongly enough for it. I think the worst part is he's suggesting that people like her are responsible for it, right?

I mean, isn't that really what's going on here? He's trying to galvanize hate against the Muslim community, and she's sort of the head of that parade as he sees it. So I think that's the day. And here's another thing, just as an aside, as a practical matter. You know, congressional people don't have a lot of security around them. You saw what happened to Gabby Giffords when she was out with her constituency, just meeting people. In other words, you know, we think of representatives and politicians on Capitol Hill as being surrounded by security. That's just not the case.

And so here she is very recognizable, right? She doesn't blend into that crowd. And he is singling her out as someone who, again, I suggest the video is making the point that people like her are responsible for 9-11. They don't share the same pain that other Americans do over this awful terrorist act. Yeah. Yeah, I think it, I guess his reasoning. doesn't matter too much when what he's trying to do is get a woman of color in elected office killed. That's what he wants to do. That's the terrible thing. Figure out exactly why he's

doing it is interesting, I guess. I agree with you that it's not about what she said. I mean, as we'll get into, he has said things that minimize 9-11 far worse than anything that she said. He has repeatedly joked about it. He thinks it's funny. Anyway, but they see her and they they see everything that they don't want to happen to the U.S. I mean, in reality, there has been a very successful fear-mongering campaign in regard to Muslims in America. And that campaign has gone on for far too long. And I think that what Donald Trump is doing here is tapping into that fear regarding Muslims.

I mean, would she be treated the same way if she happened to be a white Christian who made the exact same statements during a meeting, right? So she goes to this conference and the whole point of the conference was to draw attention to how Muslims in America have been treated as second class citizens, especially after 9-11. And so she's speaking off the cuff and she says, you know, in essence, Muslims have been treated this way because some people did something. And when you're speaking off the cuff, I mean, and you're speaking in passing, sometimes Sometimes you don't use the best language, you don't go deep into the history of what happened.

She's trying to make a statement about how Muslims are being treated. That was the point of her statement. It wasn't about the severity of 9-11, it wasn't commentary about the severity of 9-11. And I think all of us understand that severity. We all, not all, some of us might be too young to remember or maybe weren't even born yet. But for those of us who were old enough to remember, we know the severity. The idea that every single time you're talking about something that's related to 9-11, you have to like sit down and really hone in on the severity of it is ridiculous.

And I've seen people on the right over and over again not do that and then not get criticized because it's a ridiculous thing to criticize people for. If only we could all articulate our thoughts and issues the way the president can. You know what I mean? Just always have the right words available. It's difficult. Well, let's do this, let's do this. Why don't we take a look at how our president articulated his feelings on 9-11 and the severity

of what happened? Because he has been on the record talking about it. And he, as Jank, I'm sorry, as John mentioned, has appeared to make light of it. So let's take a look at the, sorry for calling you Jank, force of habit. I'm not going to forget what you just did to me. Anyway, so let's take a look at the first video. I don't even want to summarize what he said. You can see for yourselves.

Here's Trump. Donald, you have one of the landmark buildings down in the financial district, 40 Wall Street. Did you have any damage or, you know, what's happened down there? Well, it was an amazing phone call. I made. Forty Wall Street actually was the second tallest building in downtown Manhattan. And it was actually before the World Trade Center was the tallest. And then when they built the World Trade Center, it became known as the second tallest, and now it's the tallest.

Okay. It's a silver lining. This is insane. I mean, the only appropriate response there is, look, what's happening with my building is not really important because what's happening to America right now in this moment, blah, blah, blah, all the things that reflect the seriousness of the event. But, of course, Trump is already all about himself, so he welcomes a question about him and his real estate holdings.

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, but that's, and it's indicative of who Donald Trump is when it comes to anything, right? It always goes back to what does he get out of the situation, what's best for his businesses, best for his profit motive. There was also an appearance he made on Howard Stern's show, yes, and there was some joking going on in regard to 9-11 as well.

So let's take a look at that. What Rudy said was there should be a huge memorial and it should contribute to the skyline of the New York in the same way that the world training. See, I'm starting to agree with that. I don't know, maybe we should build a television tower there. Believe me, a statue of your girlfriend would be perfect right there. Well, that would be a good idea. Well, nobody's going to fly into that, right?

No one would, no one would even mess with that. I'd like to fly into that. But wait, Anna, I was looking at that graphic while that was playing, and we're being a little bit deceptive here. Because what Ilhan Omar is alleged to have made light of, she did that 18 years after the attack. He was joking about it one year after the attack. So that's better, right?

The one year anniversary of the attack, he's joking along about his wife having a statue there, and they joke about planes being flown once again into that spot. That's right. And one other thing is he, instead of building a memorial, he suggested a television tower, which again goes back to what's best for him, what he looks at as a possible opportunity for himself. It all goes back to me, me, me, me, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump. But anyway, look, the left doesn't use these dirty political tactics that we're seeing on the right right now, right?

So I didn't see many on the left take advantage of that conversation to destroy Donald Trump politically, destroy his reputation. During the election? Yeah, exactly. That's not what we do, right? And I don't know, I don't want to engage in that. But I feel like right now there's this disgusting, divisive, political atmosphere where if you're not willing to get in the dirt.

and fight like them, or in the mud and fight like them, well, then you're at a huge disadvantage because they will slander you, they will come after you, they will smear you, and that's exactly what's happening to Representative Omar, to the point where her life is at risk. Yeah. So there's like three levels of terrible things going on simultaneously right now. Again, I want to just remind everyone, the worst is that the president of the United States is using social media to encourage someone to assassinate a sitting member of Congress. That's the worst.

Then there's the hypocrisy over talking about 9-11. They say Ilhan Omar made light of it. She didn't speak about it with the reverence and gravitas that it's due, but we know that that's not actually what they feel because they don't care about that Donald Trump is openly joked about it. So they're lying about the communication around 9-11. They also don't care about the substance of it either, because we know that regardless of what a person says about 9-11, there have been people in a position to do something

about the aftermath of that attack. And when it has come to like giving medical benefits to people who were injured while doing the cleanup. How many years did we have to have wars with politicians generally on the right stopping that aid from being given? Are they being condemned in the same way that Ilan Omar is for an offhand remark? Yeah, let me give you some names. On the communication and the substance, the people who are pretending that 9-11 is the most

important thing ever to them, they are simply lying. It is sometimes situationally important to them if it hurts a Democrat and especially a Muslim woman of color. So I remember the debates that happened in Congress in regard to funding. for the first responders who are suffering from some horrible health issues because of that cleanup effort, right? Respiratory issues, cancer. And House Judiciary Chairman at the time, Representative Bob Goodlatte, and Fred Upton,

who's a Republican from Michigan, they were fighting it. They were fighting the funding. So Democrats wanted to make those health benefits permanent for the first responders. And you had people like Goodlatte and Upton fighting to make it temporary, five years, and they also wanted to underfund it. So I'm bringing that up because, look, anyone can demagogue, anyone can fearmonger, but take a good hard look at what people have done policy-wise, how they've voted, because it's very easy and very popular to go out there and pretend like you're this big warrior and

fighter for victims of 9-11 or for the American people against terrorism. But if you look at their actions, I think that reveals more about who took those events seriously. Who looked at it as an opportunity to engage in war? Who looked at it as a profit motive? And who looked at it as a real tragedy and something that needed to, you know, push for more security in America? Sure, they're weaponizing it is really what we're talking about. They're weaponizing a message.

They're taking this awful thing, I mean, that we all agree is all every, so they've got the one thing that we can all agree on, and they're weaponizing it. But as Anna says, then there's no follow-through for those who helped with the cleanup. They say the same thing with veterans, you know. Donald Trump wraps himself in the flag, and he wraps himself in veterans, and yet big on war, I mean, the GOP has this history of war. And I know not all GOP is the same, and please, if you're GOP, you might have been against the war in Iraq, but let's face it, under a Republican administration, they went to

war in Iraq, they created a generation of veterans who have all kinds of issues. But when it comes down to the follow-through with those veterans, they're nowhere in sight. There's no money for those veterans. So you can wrap yourself in these issues. But as Anna says, there's no follow-through. It's clearly a bankrupt notion. So I wanna just quickly mention a few other things, especially how Pelosi reacted to this. So following the president's tweet, she says, I spoke with the sergeant at arms.

to ensure that Capitol Police are conducting a security assessment to safeguard Congresswoman Omar, her family, and her staff. They will continue to monitor and address the threats she faces. So I'm glad she did that, and that was an appropriate response. But prior to that response, she said the following. Pelosi originally said in a statement Saturday that memory of 9-11 is sacred ground, and any discussion of it must be done with reverence. So there's a lot of this coming from the left, which is disheartening.

A lot of strong talk about this is the way 9-11 needs to be talked about. And then, you know, it's usually followed with, but we need to protect Representative Omar. Look, I get it. 9-11 was a serious tragedy, a severe tragedy. But when someone's speaking off the cuff and they're speaking in passing about something else, about discrimination and how certain people are treated a second-class citizen. I think it's fine to take a good, hard look at their intentions before judging their statement. Because I don't think that Representative Omar meant to minimize what happened at 9-11 at all.

See, I disagree to some extent. Maybe you've got more of the things. Do you have more of what politicians have said? Yeah, we're going to talk about that a little later. Okay, okay. Yeah, but there are some strong statements coming from some people on the left. Yeah, that's why I was going to say I think that hers stands out in particular because she decided to throw Ilhan under the bus at the same time that she's saying that we need to protect her, whereas most

appeared to not fall into that trap. Right, yeah. So last point, Anna, I just want to underscore what you're saying, which is that I think that Omar was trying to a specific audience, as Anna pointed out, trying to point out how 9-11 was being used to subjugate or discriminate against this one community. And so I don't think she said it in the most eloquent way. I don't think she said it in with quite the words that, you know, like when she plays it back in her mind, oh, damn, I should have said maybe I should have been a little more explicit in my condemnation. I think she probably would say that in her heart of hearts.

But to use this, we all know her intent. We all know the point she was making. To use this in this way is just, it's sad, especially on the left, as we were saying. I mean, you know, we just eat our own on the left. There's a purity test always, and it's just, this is another example of it. So I wanna just give you a final statement from Representative Omar. This is on Twitter. She said the following, I did not run for Congress to be silent.

I did not run for Congress to sit on the sidelines. I ran because I believed it was time to restore moral clarity and courage to Congress to fight and defend our democracy. She is one of the strongest people I have ever seen in Congress or in America period. very courageous to keep pushing forward, even given the amount of threats that she's receiving right now, threats that have been, you know, pushed against her by our own president. Yeah, and to receive kind of middling support, not just in this instance, but in past ones from the people that the leadership in your party that should be defending you, who themselves

have been the target of these sorts of attacks from Donald Trump, they should know better. And she has to, she's trying to do all the different work that she's doing at the same time that she's being vilified by the right on a daily basis on Fox News and by Donald Trump, receiving only kind of some support from the Democrats and receiving death threats at the same time, receiving death threats even before Donald Trump's thing, let alone after. And then he tweeted again this morning, inspiring potentially more violence against her. Yeah, I don't envy the position that she has to hold, but she's still trying to get everything done.

Yeah. When we come back from the break, we will talk about some of the reactions coming from Democrats and Republicans. Later on, we will also talk about what Republicans are planning and polling in the run-up to the 2020 election. We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-The-Republic or UNFTR. As a Young Turks fan, you already know that the government, the media, and corporations are constantly peddling lies that serve the interests of the rich and powerful. But now there's a podcast dedicated to unraveling those lies, debunking the conventional wisdom. In each episode of Un-B-The-Republic, or UNFTR, the host delves into a different historical episode or topic that's generally misunderstood or purposely obfuscated by the so-called powers that be.

Featuring in-depth research, razor-sharp commentary, and just the right amount of vulgarity, the UNFTR podcast takes a sledgehammer to what you thought you knew about some of the nation's most sacred historical cows. But don't just take my word for it. The New York Times described UNFTR as consistently compelling and educational, aiming to challenge conventional wisdom and upend the historical narratives that were taught in school. For as the great philosopher Yoda once put it, you must not learn what you have learned. And that's true whether you're in Jedi training or you're uprooting and exposing all the propaganda and disinformation you've been fed over the course of your lifetime.

So search for UNFDR in your podcast app today. and get ready to get informed, angered, and entertained, all at the same time. Welcome back to TYT, Anna Mark and John with you. First, a few member comments, The Neon Donkey says, makes you wonder who would be opposing her bill if Biden hadn't stumped for Upton last year. I'm not entirely sure which bill you're talking. about, just to be fair, the bill that I was referencing earlier is an old bill. It was a fight between Democrats and Republicans during the Obama administration in regard

to funding for the first responders. So that's what I was referring to, I hope I was clear in the video. I bathe in Devin Nunes' tears says right-wingers have a pattern. Pro-life, but doesn't care about what happens once that life is born. Pro-military, but doesn't care about what happens to the soldiers afterwards. I don't care what happens after and what happens after matters even more than what happens at the time. I agree with you.

I think that oftentimes they'll use people or situations as tools to carry out what they genuinely want. And usually there's some sort of profit motive behind the scenes. TYT lives, Zappahart says, not one citizen should be okay with Donald Trump tweeting against anyone, let alone a sitting representative. This should be impeachable, no kidding. Yeah, I just, there's no consequence. Inciting violence, you're right.

I mean, impeachable, impeachable is a political thing. I don't know what's impeachable, what's not, anything technically, it could be impeachable. This guy, you know, he's sneezing impeachable stuff. But I, but what I would say is that it's certainly, it's reprehensible underplays it. I mean, really understates it. It's reprehensible that this kind of rhetoric and that this video and these accusations and implications could be allowed to go without comment. I mean, the Republicans are, they are MIA on this issue and it's disgusting.

And it's, and it's remarkable. But again, this goes to what Anna was saying before and then we'll get on the next story. But that is, you know, they shut up and they close ranks, the Republican. They play dirty, they shut up, and they close ranks, and they hang on. And they get their Supreme Court justices, and they get their federal justices, and they get all, then they get their environmental rollbacks, and they get the raping of the land, and they get mineral exploitation, oil exploitation, and so on. And what we do on the left is we criticize each other for not being quite pure enough and for saying the wrong thing. And we don't show the solidarity that you see until it's too late. That's my greatest fear for the upcoming general election.

Yeah, so I want to also announce something that's going to happen today. TYT will be covering Bernie Sanders Town Hall on Fox News, unfortunately. The coverage will include myself, John and Ida. It's so weird to see your pictures next to the Fox News Channel logo. I know, I know, that's why I kind of like pause for a second. I'm like, wait, what's going on? But yes, he has agreed to do this town hall on Fox. I actually was very much against doing anything on Fox.

We did a video weeks ago where I shared my point of view. But there was a great article in the Atlantic that persuaded me otherwise. So we're not going to have a postgame show, a traditional postgame show today because we're going to be doing that coverage. The first half of it will be free for everyone. The entire coverage will be available for members only. So if you'd like to be a member, go to t.com slash join. But in a future post-game episode, I'll talk about that Atlantic article in more detail. Because I saw the headline, and I just wanted to reject it.

Like, no, no, I disagree. But then I'm glad I read it because I saw some evidence, I saw some good, you know, good arguments, and I changed my mind. So I want to talk about that in a later post-game. All right, you guys ready? Yep. All right. Following Donald Trump's tweet and edited video making Ilhan Omar appear to minimize the events of 9-11, a number of lawmakers and public figures came out with their thoughts on this story.

Now, there were some strong words from the Democratic Party, some were stronger than others, and then there was a lot of brushing things under the rug and excuses from the right wing. I want to start off with Representative Jerry Nadler. He was recently interviewed over the weekend, and here's what he thinks about Representative Omar and her statements. Did you take any issue with the way Congresswoman Omar characterized 9-11? No, I did not. She characterized it only in passing.

She was talking about discrimination against Muslim Americans. For the president, you know, 9-11 occurred in my district. I'm very familiar with it. I know people, a lot of people who suffered from it. I was involved. I was instrumental in getting funding for small business grants for victims of 9-11 for people with small businesses in the area. The president, he wasn't president then, but Donald Trump actually took a $150,000 grant from the Bush administration. They let him take $150,000 grant meant for small businessmen for 41.

Wall Street, small business for 40 Wall Street, he stole $150,000 from some small business person who could have used it to help rehabilitate himself. And that's why we appropriated it, why I got Congress to appropriate that money, to use it for his own small business of 40 Wall Street. He has no moral authority talking about 9-11 at all. It's weird that a so-called billionaire would need to steal $150,000 from small business owners who really need it. Yeah.

But I thought that statement from Representative Nadler was a strong one, and I appreciate it. To be quite honest with you, if you would have asked me before watching that video whether or not he was going to defend her in such a strong way, I would probably say no, but he did a good job there. He did, you know, there's a thing about him, and I kind of see what you're saying, because he does come across in a very traditional way, you know, he's a coat and tie kind of older politician, so you don't expect him to be, he's not a fire-breathing kind of politician where he's going to come up with these facts and really scorch the earth with them.

Yet, those are scorchable facts. I mean, you know, and again, you need the media, the mainstream media to a degree, to pick up that message the way they do the Omar message. They're only willing in the super to quote over and over and over, again, this thing that she probably, you know, could have said a little bit more elegantly or elegantly. eloquently or more precisely, but instead the way she said it is just quoted on the lower third. But point is that fact that Nadler produced, that should be something they pick up on. Donald Trump stole money from 9-11, from legitimate 9-11 victims to enrich himself.

There's not nearly enough coverage of the kind of thing that Trump has made a life of, which is ripping people off. And this is yet another thing, and it's linked to 9-11. Yeah, and not only do you need coverage, you need a unified effort in the Democratic Party to spread that message. Because the one thing the Democrats aren't as good at, you know, especially when you compare them to Republicans, is like unifying and spreading something, you know, simultaneously. Right, like talking points the way the right has.

Yeah, they're much more organized in that regard, unfortunately. John? Yeah, I was going to say, partly it might be that Nadler has been targeted him to by Donald Trump over the past few weeks, so possibly it could be a little bit personal at this point, but also was really frustrating. So we talked about that on the damage report this morning. And so just to make 100% sure of everything, I looked into the claim, because we've done it before, but it's been a while.

And I saw that PolitiFact had rated it half true that he took the $150,000. I thought that's weird, wasn't it? He took the money, right? And I read all the reasoning and it was, yeah, no, he 100% took the money, but he was technically qualified for it, so it's only really half true that he stole it. So he's not a billionaire? I mean- No, but that's totally the thing. Right.

Nobody is saying it's immoral because he was not technically under the particular way it was written qualified. No, it's like gaming in any system. It clearly wasn't for him. Right, he gamed the system. I know, and that's so frustrating. So now people can look at that and the right wing can be like, oh, it was ready to only half-true, even though it's 100% true.

Everything that Nadler and people in the past who have said it were saying is 100% true, we're gonna say half-true. It's unbelievable. Half of Pinocchio. Well, there are other reactions from Democrats that I want to get to. I think this tweet by Senator Gillibrand is important to share with the audience because it is the example of a response that I personally did not like. So here's what she said.

As a senator who represents 9-11 victims, I can't accept any minimizing of that pain. Okay, let's stop for a second. Please. So that's the part of her statement that I hate because it's giving it. into this false framing by the right wing, why are you playing into that? And I know why she's playing into it. It's because there's this fear. I don't want to be next.

I don't want them to come after me the way they're coming after her. So let me just qualify what I'm about to say with this giant caveat. Like we get it, Senator Gillibrand, we get it. Nobody is in favor of minimizing what happened on 9-11. But in using that sentence in your tweet, you are conceding to report. Republicans is she minimized what happened at 9-11, and she didn't do that. So let me give you more of her statement. The rest of it, I think, is fine.

But Trump's dangerous rhetoric against Ilhan Omar is disgusting. It's a false choice to suggest we can't fight terrorism and reject Islamophobic hate at once. A president should do both. Okay. Yeah, look, I kind of feel for her, there's a lot of people running this primary. It's very difficult to set yourself apart, and she found a way. I think of all of the people running the Democratic primary, her tweet was the worst. It was the worst.

But look, I want to be fair, when there was this huge fight in Congress over health care funding for the first responders, Senator Gillibrand was one of the strongest fighters on the left to get that funding for them. So I want to give her credit for that. But this tweet, you need to show that you're willing to fight. And this shows that you're willing to concede to the right. And I don't think it's a good look. Elizabeth Warren also had a statement.

She said the president is inciting violence against a sitting congresswoman and an entire group of Americans based on their religion. It's disgusting. It's shameful. And any elected leader who refuses to condemn it shares responsibility for it. That was a very strong statement. And early on. That was on the 12th.

Yes, yes, exactly. And Representative... By the way, I was just going to toss in on that. You see how you can come out with a very strong position without even mentioning Omar? You know, so for those politicians, and apparently there are a lot of them who are afraid, as Anna says, they're afraid that they're going to get some of this on them. Don't come after me. As Anna said, I really think that's a position you can take. The strongest possible position Warren took. It was a tough tweet. It was tough on Trump, but it didn't even mention Omar. It just said, look, buddy, death threats, bad. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, exactly. I totally agree with you. And Representative Rashida Taleb, I would argue, had the strongest statement. But it was, In regard to Democrats who were not standing by Representative Omar's side. She said the following, they, meaning Democrats, put us in photos when they want to show our party is diverse.

However, when we ask to be at the table or speak up about issues that impact who we are, what we fight for and why we ran in the first place, we are ignored. That was powerful. Strong. had a similar sort of statement about how those who should be protecting Ilhan in this case don't necessarily do that, even though they want to get sort of the mystique of Ilhan and Rashida and AOC. I mean, both of those neither mentioned Nancy Pelosi.

They clearly are talking about Nancy Pelosi who has a weird vendetta against these people, even though she appeared on a magazine cover with all of them very recently. Right. I mean, it's not a weird vendetta. I think that these freshmen Democrats really call into question the status quo and the way the Democratic Party has been, you know, dealing with political issues in the past, you know, decade. And she doesn't like it. She doesn't like it. No one likes to be called out, especially by members of your own party.

But I would argue that it's a great learning experience and maybe take it as constructive criticism as opposed to being defiant, you know, against the message. Now, let's get to Republicans. Of course, Republicans had a very, very different response. And let's start with Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Does he worry at all about inciting violence against Muslims in general or Ilan Omar in specific? Certainly nothing could be further from the truth. The president's not trying to incite violence against anybody. He's actually speaking out against it.

The question is, why isn't the Congresswoman? And why is she brushing this off dismissively? She continues to make anti-Semitic comments over and over again. And Democrats refuse to call her out for it. If she continues to do it, the president will continue to call her out. That was one of the most horrific moments in American history. And for her to talk about it in such a dismissive way is frankly disgusting and abhorrent. I'm glad the president is calling her out.

Okay, yeah. Trump is directing and inciting violence toward a sitting member of Congress. And somehow the target of that violence is the disgusting one. By the way, Representative Dan Crenshaw also had a similar point. Well, if Rashida-Talib would just denounce herself and apologize for those statements. No, but first of all, why would you denounce yourself if you did not intend to offend anyone? if you did not intend to minimize anything. I mean, they just want everyone to concede to their talking points and to their framing.

But if she didn't feel that she did anything wrong, why would she do that? And besides which, what if she did apologize just to shut everyone up? You think it's gonna shut everyone up? We know how that works, especially with this disgusting Republican party. But anyway, go jump in. It's so frustrating even, I guess she technically works in the White House. She technically is representative for the president, and so they have her on shows. What is the point?

You've never, ever heard her be honest. Right? It's a great point. I could script every answer she's ever given about Donald Trump. It's this weird, I don't know, it seems like something out of a TV show, something fictional that we have this position where their job is to lie constantly. And everybody knows it. The people who support her lies know it, the people who oppose her lies know it, but they

They still trot her out every single day, because that's what she's getting paid for, to lie for the president. And it takes up valuable time, like, he interviewed her. Like here, could you lie about his position on taxes? Okay, we're running out of time. Could you lie about what he said about Ilhan Omar? We gotta fit in more lies before we move on to something else. Chris Wallace is smart enough to know that he's not gonna get anything honest out of her.

He's not gonna get any independent thought out of her. She's no longer a sentient being in the first place. It is true also. It's just really frustrating. I know, I feel you. Donald Trump has no interest in the truth. lies. Constantly, we've seen that in the ever-increasing number of fact checks against him. But he could accidentally tell the truth. Yeah. She's been trained, bred to this position

to lie. That's right. She has less interest in the truth than Donald Trump right now. That's absolutely very frustrating. Correct. She's set out there to dig in for the president, of course, and that's what she's doing. One final thing I want to quickly mention is, look, using 9-11 as a political tool to smear the other side or using 9-11 as a political tool to increase your popularity or your name recognition is now an age-old trick by politicians. But specifically of the Republican Party, we've seen it happen with Rudy Giuliani. Rudy Giuliani used 9-11 over and over and over again to garner support. I mean, this has been going on for so long that even Family Guy has made fun of it.

And I want to just remind you if you haven't seen, or if you don't remember, this famous, in my opinion, family guy skit. Take a look. 9-11 was bad. I agree with that. I can't believe how easy this is. Mrs. Griffin, what are your plans for cleaning up our environment? 9-11. Mrs. Griffin, what about our traffic problem?

Nine. Eleven. Years later, it appears nothing has changed. It's unbelievable. That was a tragedy in America's history and the fact that it's still being utilized as a political tool or a weapon is so incredibly disrespectful to the victims and their family members. We gotta take a break.

When we come back, I'm gonna let John take control of the rest of our one. I'm gonna sit back and just comment. It's gonna be great. We'll be right. 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 cyber criminals. And it's also easy to install. A single mouse click protects all your devices. But listen, guys, this is important. ExpressVPN is rated number one by CNET and Wired Magazine. So take back control of your life online and secure your data with a top VPN solution

available, ExpressVPN. And if you go to ExpressVPN.com slash TYT, you can get three extra months for free with this exclusive link just for TYT fans. That's EXPR-E-S-V-P-N dot com slash T-T. TYT. 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 TYT.com slash join today.

In the meantime, enjoy this free second. Welcome back to TYT. I want to just make a few announcements and then get right to the rest of the news. TYT.com has a new feature. It's the TYT app, actually, that has a new feature and TYT.com. It's the playback status bar. I don't know what that is, but it sounds fun. You can now track the status of every TYT show you watch with our new status bars.

They're found underneath the title of any episode that you've watched. And this is a feature only available to our members, so it's a fancy members-only feature. And I mean, we're always looking for ways to enhance the experience for our members because you guys are the ones that make us viable. Like you're the reason why we're here and we continue to be here, so thank you. And if you're not a member, there are different levels of membership depending on what you feel comfortable paying. So just go to t.yt.com slash Anna, TYT.com slash Anna, A-N-A.

And sign up as a member. I see exactly what you're doing. But don't do that. But if you become a member, there's another reason why you might want to become a member. Starting last night, we began season eight, our reviews of Game of Thrones. Right after the episode, we start our basically about an hour of analysis and commentary and review and all of that. We had a ton of fun last night, and we're going to do it for the rest of the season. Some of that, the first half hour, is available publicly, but beyond that, it's for our members.

So if you're not a member, you're going to want to become one. Yeah, at t-y-t.com slash anna. Okay, great. Now, John takes the reins. He is going to present the next story. Take the reins of Castamia. Okay. Anyway, over the years, we've received a number of incredibly dishonest and oftentimes

insulting explanations as to why Donald Trump can't or won't release his taxes. They're BS. They don't check out. We know that. But you would think that after a couple of years, we've heard the worst. But Sarah Huckabee Sanders perhaps found a way to actually exceed all the past excuses. And here it is. And frankly, Chris, I don't think Congress, particularly not this group of congressmen and

women, are smart enough to look through the thousands of pages that I would assume that President Trump's taxes will be. My guess is most of them don't do their own taxes. And I certainly don't trust them to look through the decades of success that the president has and determine anything. Yeah, that's not really for you to decide, right? Even if you really think that, which I would argue she doesn't really think that, she's just trying to protect someone who probably has some problematic things in his taxes, it's not up to you to decide whether or not they get to see his taxes, right? You deciding that they're too stupid is not enough of a reason to avoid handing over Trump's taxes.

Imagine like the cops show up with a warrant. They're like, we're going to need to step aside. I just don't think you guys are good enough investigators to look through all of this, so no. Yeah, I mean, it's such a stupid argument. It is stupid and it's also, it's even stupider than it seems because three Democratic members of Congress are trained as certified public accountants professionals licensed by their states to look at and analyze taxes. The Congressional Research Service says there are 10 accountants total in the Congress, including

two senators and eight House members, so we can have a bicameral sort of approach to going through his taxes. And of course, we're giving it, we're thinking about this too much. Right, yes, he doesn't get to not release them just. just because he doesn't think that there's enough CPAs in Congress. He was just slinging something up, you know, yet another thing up against the wall to see if it would stick. I mean, we all know the stupid is on one side of this equation, all right?

All the stupid is on one side, not the side trying to get the taxes, the side trying to hide the taxes. Exactly, and if it's not enough that they're not smart enough to go through the taxes, she also, like we know that fearmongering is like the go-to, and you might think with Trump's taxes, it's not even possible to try to fearmonger about that, but she is, she is yielded her job, and here she goes. This is all about political partisanship. This is a dangerous, dangerous road.

I think it is a disgusting overreach that they are making when they're not doing this based on policy. And it puts every American who's filled out tax reform or tax forms in the past. This is a yes or no question. Have you filed your time? Have you filed everybody? Yeah, so you should all be scared. If they are, if they're using this authority that 100% it's obvious, it's very clear

that they're granted. then you should be terrified. And I think that that is basically America summed up, that you should be scared. They'll say that to protect an incredibly powerful, wealthy person from any accountability for what they've done. And just to give you an idea of why are they dispatching Sarah Agribee Sanders to talk about this? Why are they going to these great lengths to avoid it?

They really do still seem to be scared about what might come out. I saw if we bring up this front page, Trump attorneys warn accounting firm not to hand over financial records. They sent a two-page letter to Mazars USA to tell them to literally rebuff a Democratic subpoena for that information, which of course, again, they have no legal argument there. But they're saying that these lawyers should risk going to jail to protect Donald Trump and his taxes. That's, I think, the highest stakes game that's being played with these taxes, because

I don't really know what's going to happen. There is, as John said, there's no legal high ground to withhold them any longer. And yet they may try to find some or, I mean, I think there's almost a mobster quality to withholding some of the information that we've seen withheld, you know? So he can avoid releasing them as long as he wants. But the fact of the matter is, someone is going to get their hands on his taxes. And it's because of the multiple investigations he's facing for. possible financial crimes, right?

So there's the investigation into his charitable foundation, which he was found to be utilizing to enrich himself. There's that. There is the fact that, well, the accusations, I should say, that he had inflated his assets in order to secure loans and then later deflated his assets in order to save on taxes. That type of information would be available where? his taxes, right? And then finally, there's the issue of the emoluments clause and whether or not he has been

influenced by foreign money. We would find out through his taxes. On that particular one, I don't think we actually have to wait to find out because when the DOJ recently in the last week announced that his hotels are now exempt from the emoluments clause, I think that's giving up the game a little bit. Exactly. And also, that's totally not within the power of the DOJ to do. That's a part of the Constitution, they're saying does not apply to one business?

That doesn't make any sense at all. Can I jump in? And look, for me, this is not really a partisan issue. And I'll explain why. So Donald Trump should absolutely 100% release his taxes. Now would I use a double standard when it comes to a politician I like, let's say Bernie Sanders? No, I would not. I believe that it's important for Bernie Sanders to release his taxes.

And guess what? He did today. years worth of his taxes, it's the right thing to do, right? That type of transparency is important. And so we pushed for it. We thought that it was important for him to do it, for Bernie to do it, and he did it. And I would argue that it's important for all politicians to do it if they care about transparency and if they care about maintaining trust with the public and especially their constituents. And at this point, it is out of Donald Trump's hands. They did not ask him to hand over his taxes. He's not involved in this process at all.

They asked Treasury to hand over his taxes. And I am sympathetic to the people who might think, well, I don't know if there's going to be anything in his taxes, or I don't care or I'm not interested in it. But I think at this point, you really have to ask yourself seriously, do we have a president or do we have a king? A president is bound by the law. A king isn't. And the law is incredibly clear here.

He is the head of the executive branch. He has a wide power over a lot of different areas. he does not get to say no to this. But if he does say no to this and we allow it and we go along with it, then what is to stop him from saying no to any other regulation that might be in government, you know, some sort of, something that a court ruling, like he's overruled by courts constantly. Why would he be abide by those if he's allowed to just just completely ignore this? Yeah, to skirt things.

Absolutely. I agree. And we forget that democracy is a very fragile thing. And if you allow him to skirt certain laws over and over again, well, then that certainly does send a message to him. And he already sees himself as a king. He doesn't understand how our government works. He doesn't care to understand how our government works.

And I mean, he himself has said things like, you know, why do we need judges, specifically referring to immigration judges? He doesn't respect the rule of law. And that is a terrifying thing to consider. if you do value our democratic system. Exactly, yeah, we believe that the powerful should be held accountable. And there's no one more powerful than the president of the United States. So you either care about holding them accountable or you don't at this point.

Okay, let's move to a related topic. For most Americans, tax day is stressful, possibly a costly day for you, especially thanks to the tax bill that was passed early last year. But not everyone is having a bad day for some of the wealthiest corporations in the country. This was a pretty good one, actually. At least 60 companies avoided paying taxes this year as a result of Trump's tax law, a total that is about twice as many as previous years. So if you love tax avoidance in the past, you're gonna love the future.

It's becoming more and more common. The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy reported that the companies listed used a diverse array of legal tax breaks, including accelerated depreciation, stock options, and energy-related tax subsidies to zero out their federal income taxes. Some were able to more than zero them out, actually. Now, who were we talking about? Well, companies that avoided paying any federal income taxes last year included Amazon, Eli Lilly, a pharmaceutical company, Netflix, and a number of airlines

and publishing group. Gannett, there were companies that produce lawn care products and things like that. So many, actually, across a number of different areas. And it was a costly change for the U.S. government. In 2018, those 60 companies, instead of paying $17.4 billion in taxes, they got a rebate of $4.3 billion, meaning $20.7 billion difference. I mean, just spitting ball, and that's a quarter of Bernie Sanders' public college for free program, just in 60 companies who now are not paying more taxes.

Well, every so often we bring up the fact that Trump's tax cuts. cuts for the wealthy will cost the US about $2 trillion, $1.9 trillion to be specific over the next decade. And this is what we're talking about. This is the lost revenue as a result of these massive tax cuts for the wealthy. At the same time, there are middle class individuals who are paying far more in taxes, especially those who live in high state tax areas like California or New York. It was a very punitive tax plan.

And it was punitive toward the liberal states that happened to have state taxes. Exactly. And because not only do you have, the IRS is obviously less staffed every single year than the year was before, the rich are getting less and less audits, it's easier for them to zero out their taxes because the corporate tax rate is now 21%, down from 35% just a couple of years ago. It's amazing what you can accomplish when people hand over the presidency to you. That means it's easier to zero other taxes.

It also means that the corporations that are paying taxes are paying less taxes. So, we're focusing on these 60 because it's the most egregious and because it's a huge amount of money, but all of them are saving incredible amounts of money. But that money still does have to come from somewhere. Where is it going to come from? Maybe some of it will just be increasing national debt, but you're going to be paying for a lot of that, because I guarantee you are less skilled at zeroing out your taxes than Netflix and Amazon.

Well, they also want it to come out of entitlement programs, and there are many other places. And these are the questions that are never asked when a tax cut comes along. Like, how are you going to afford it? I mean, it's always talked about when you look at Medicare for all or when you look at college tuition paid for. Then it's a, well, how are you going to pay for it? How are you going to pay for it? When there's a sweeping tax cut of the sort of Annis's $2 trillion over a decade, no one's

asking, well, how are you going to pay for that? Where's that money going to come from? No, as John alludes, it's going to come from us. It's going to come from entitlement programs. It's going to come from other areas of life that will now be siphoned off to pay for this tax cut for the rich. I mean, the middle class gets squeezed in so many different ways, because on one hand, the middle class pays, and the working class pays a higher percentage of its income toward taxes. You also have to keep in mind that when it comes to these massive corporations, including these pharmaceutical companies, the U.S. taxpayer subsidizes the research and development of these pharmaceutical drugs, and then these pharmaceutical companies turn around and price gouge us when it comes to these life-saving medications. So, in so many different ways, the system is rigged against the middle and working class.

And this is just one, you know, giant example of it. Yeah. Last thing, just on that, I mean, it is bizarre how they have taken the IRS and they have, they've strangled it by not allowing it to get the normal funding that would produce the sort of corporate oversight that might claw back some money. I mean, you know, not all of these deductions are legit all the time on the corporate side, and there is, and their agencies and investigative arms of the IRS that are designed to get that money back.

But they have really lost funding. So we are in a period of under enforcement when it comes to that stuff. And that is by design as well. That does it for hour one. John, thank you for joining us. Thank you. It's always a pleasure to have you. Brett Ehrlich will be joining in for hour two.

Stick around. We have some great stories for you. 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.co slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.