The Young Turks - Trump Surrenders To Turkey

Episode Date: October 24, 2019

Trump is backtracking on the sanctions he put on Turkey. Ana Kasparian, Maytha Alhassen, 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. What's up, everyone? Welcome to the Young Turks.

I'm Anna Kasparian. Jank is out today, but we have a wonderful panel. Maytha al-Hasson. I'm so happy you're here. We're going to talk about Syria later, and I think that your perspective is so important since you cover these issues in a lot of detail. And of course, Mark Thompson, who's wonderful, and I'm so happy you're here as well. Mark Thompson has a wonderful podcast that you should check out. It's called The Edge with Mark Thompson. Please take a listen. It's great, and it covers all sorts of topics ranging from politics to other issues that I wish we had time to talk about on this show, but- Thank you, Anna. That's so kind. The political news cycle is so

out of control. That is for sure. So with that said, I'm going to jump right into the news today, and we're going to start off with Syria. Let someone else fight over this long, bloodstained sand. That's Donald Trump characterizing Syria as nothing more than bloodstained sand. He had a press conference today in which he spouted a number of lies about his terrible decisions in Syria, particularly northern Syria. He not only lied to the American public, but he also took a victory lap as if his decisions were great for the Kurdish allies that he abandoned abruptly after one phone call with the president of Turkey, Erdogan. So let's go to the first video that gives you a sense of how he feels about Syria and the types of lies he spouted throughout this press

conference. When we commit American troops to battle, we must do so only when a vital national interest is at stake. The nations and the region must ultimately take on the responsibility of helping Turkey and Syria police their border. We want other nations to get involved. We've secured the oil and therefore a small number. of U.S. troops will remain in the area where they have the oil.

So I actually want to apologize to you guys because that video included the statements where he was telling the truth. That video included the statements where he's essentially saying, yeah, I want other countries to come in and do what they want to do. As long as we have control of the oil, who cares about our Kurdish allies? Who cares about whether or not they feel abandoned, whether or not they'll be slaughtered, whether or not they'll be victimized by ethnic cleansing at the hands of the Turkish government. Who cares? We got hold of the oil. That's all that matters. So that was actually the most honest part of his press conference. But then later, when he starts talking about the Kurds, that's when you get a sense that he is, of course, peddling

all sorts of lies. Now, let me talk a little bit about the countries who are involved in this conflict in northern Syria. So apparently, Russia and Turkey are now working together. One day earlier, Russia and Turkey agreed to a plan to push Syrian Kurdish fighters from a wide swath of territory just south of Turkey's border, cementing Russian President Vladimir Putin's preeminent role in Syria as American troops depart and U.S. influence wanes. Now I want to be clear about something, I don't care about U.S. influence. I think U.S. influence in the Middle East has been a complete and utter disaster. But our relationship with the Kurds in northern Syria was important.

Nob Chomsky even cited it as one of the things that we were doing right, working with the Kurds in order to deal with the very real problem we were having with ISIS. Not only did the Kurdish fighters fight on our behalf, they were guarding ISIS fighters that had already been detained in these prisons. And so Donald Trump just abandoning them is the issue that I have. But as always, the hawkish media likes to talk about US influence. It's not about US influence, it's about staying committed to the promises that we made to our allies.

Yeah, there's so much to this story to try to unravel because it was just filled with not only lies, but tropes and traps that were very intentional talking points and dog whistles to his base. One thing that I do want to highlight is that again and again, we are framing this region as one in incredibly simplistic terms and also in a national security framing that disconnects our culpability to the region. So we're not there just because we're trying to help the Kurds ward off ISIL. Why is ISIL even there?

Because there was a destabilization that got brought on by the invasion in 2003, where in ISIL, where in al-Qaeda did not exist, but was born in response to the aggressive militarization and occupation and takeover of Iraq. And that, what people didn't see because we didn't keep our eyes on what happened to the rest of the region. So Trump wants to talk about the responsibility of other nations dealing with what was happening in Syria. Well, they were taking full responsibility for what we did in Iraq.

So Syrians absorbed a large portion of Iraqi refugees during that time period, and they didn't have the infrastructure to support them. So when there is an overspill of a group of people that I refer to as mercenaries, because I don't like this language of Islamic fundamentalism or the way that we're reframing them in terms of being terrorists and Muslim terrorists, they're mercenaries. And they took advantage of an opportunity where there was a vacuum. And not only are the Kurds, were they fighting off what we created, they're fighting off the Syrian regime.

And that gets lost in the conversation as well, because the Syrian regime was responsible like Turkey was too for repressing them. Kurdish people in Syria were not allowed to speak Kurdish. They were not even allowed to have citizenship, and they couldn't name their children Kurdish names. So this was news to me when I started to put together a book in 2012 about the uprisings in the region, and Kurdish folks are fighting for their life because they have multiple forces trying to extinguish them.

But I also want to say, just closing this off, that there are a lot of other ethnicities that are being slaughtered to that nobody's thinking about, which is the Yazidis, the Assyrians. The Assyrians were the ones who fled the Turkish genocide and settled this area and created a little bit of a buffer. And again, we're not talking about them. So I just, I want to put those voices at the center. And I do want to say that there's a different way we could be talking about this story, but we're taking our lead from not only the Trump-like figures, but the rest of American

imperialism that wants to really divorce itself from its culpability. Well, a lot of the narrative is being dictated by Washington, and so it's in response to that narrative that I think a lot of our rhetoric gets dictated. But I'm glad you mentioned sort of the long, oppressed Kurdish minority. And you mentioned these other minorities, which I must be honest, I had forgotten even in the... Yeah, and Armenians. I don't want to forget that, too. In the cloud of all of this. Politically bizarre sort of the tactic that they've taken, but this is the strategy. It's his mission accomplished moment.

That's really what Donald Trump has done here. He's taken a situation, which is a loser, and even his own military in Pentagon didn't want any part of it. And he's doing that mission accomplished. Well, we did it, so everything's good and let those guys fight over it. But our role in this region is done and successful. And if he says it loud enough and big enough and with enough American flags around him, maybe people will believe it.

That's what he's doing there plain and simple. Yeah, yeah. So we have some more video elements. that I really want you guys to comment on. So let's go to the next clip. This is Donald Trump mentioning how his actions led to a more peaceful situation between the Turks and the Kurds in northern Syria. Today's announcement validates our course of action with Turkey

that only a couple of weeks ago was scorned. And now people are saying, wow, what a great outcome. There you go. Wow. I mean, that lie, he doesn't even buy his own lies, you can just tell. But this is what he does over and over again. So he will make some sort of abrupt decision without talking to anyone in his administration, without talking to the Pentagon, without having a single intelligence briefing on it.

He'll just have a discussion with a world leader and then abruptly make these decisions, which lead to an escalation in violence. understand that at the time, before Donald Trump made this decision, that area was relatively peaceful considering the U.S. presence there, protecting the Kurdish allies. And then when he made the decision to pull U.S. troops out of the region, that led to an incredible amount of violence between the Turks coming in to northern Syria and the Kurdish forces there. So he like messes up the situation.

And then he has his administration go in and try to clean up the mess. And that's what they allegedly did with an alleged ceasefire. And then he says, you see that? What I did led to peace in this area. And it's so for us, he did that with North Korea. He's done it with so many different foreign policy situations. And I also want to note that in this press conference, he said that he will lift the sanctions that he implemented against Turkey just last week.

Now, those sanctions were so weak that Erdogan laughed at them. And so, wow, you're gonna lift those incredibly flimsy, you know, sanctions that Erdogan doesn't even care about. But one thing that did stand out to me, and I wanted to get your thoughts on this, is, you know, if you're paying close attention to this story and you understand the nuances and the complexity of it, then you know he's lying. But for the average American who watches that press conference, he uses a talking point that's very effective, enough with these regime change wars.

And that's all you need to say. And people both on the left and the right sign on to it without really understanding what the commitment to Kurdish allies were. And how these are people who have been used and abused and thrown away time and time again. Right. Yeah, I listened to this press conference first with my ears and then second with his base or a base that he is trying to win over. And that's when I saw that what he was saying was probably

effective to them, unfortunately, even though it was riddled with contradictions in 15 minutes. So one part of what he was saying was that Obama and his administration were interested in regime change around Bashar al-Assad. Well, that's not the case, because Obama had many opportunities to engage in regime change, and actually my contacts on the ground, their assessment of what was happening was that the U.S. was protracting conflict to sell weapons, and that's pretty much bipartisan, every regime in the US does that. And then there is regime change for other reasons, usually around American corporate interest

or imperialism and our near liberal policies. But that probably was effective to them. And then he then said, well, you know, I drew a red line and I responded when there was chemical attacks, except that he did strikes or targeted empty warehouses. So clearly he wasn't trying to infringe on his partner Putin, who is very closely aligned with us. So all of that is just talking points, it's mere talking points. And the other thing that he mentioned, which again was trying to really distance himself

from any responsibility in the region, was that, you know, these guys, they, this is thousands of years of sectarian conflict, this is thousands of years of fighting with each other, and we can't be involved in this, this is not where our money should go, except now I'm putting in trillions of dollars to our military. Yes, and not only that. I mean, while he tries to make the case that he is trying to pull back from U.S. involvement and intervention abroad, in reality, he just sent nearly 2,000 troops, 1,800 to be exact, to Saudi Arabia.

Yeah, why did he do that? And he is taking these U.S. troops out of northern Syria, and he's trying to station them, where in Iraq? And the Iraqi government is like, no, we don't want this. And so now defense secretary, Mark Esper, is traveling to Iraq to try to negotiate with the government there, to get them to accept the U.S. troops into their country. So he is not in any way scaling back U.S. involvement abroad. If anything, he's actually amplifying war abroad, especially when it comes to Yemen.

So anything that you hear about, oh, I'm against these regime change wars, it's complete and utter nonsense. He was very honest in the first clip we showed you, he will do what's necessary for U.S. interests. But when it comes to fulfilling our commitments to our allies abroad and protecting them from being slaughtered, doesn't care too much about that. We've never had as many troops in the Middle East as we, I should put it this way. At the end of, there are many more troops in the Middle East now than there were at the end of the Obama administration.

So to whatever extent you want to look at, as Anna says, Donald Trump, as this leading the parade, getting troops out of the region, it's just not happening. The troop numbers are rising under Trump, as again, to reiterate, more than there were at the end of the Obama administration. So yeah, he, look, it's tough to even fathom all the different facets of this situation. But clearly, Donald Trump is a guy who just showed up to this press conference, declared mission accomplished, read some stuff out of the prompter, ad-lib stuff that made no sense at all, of course, and then he goes to go play some golfers.

I don't mean to make it too cartoonish, but I guess what I'm trying to say is he's not really engaged in this crisis in any sort of strategic way apart from the political. And then finally, I have one more video to show you, and this was the most brazen lie. Let's take a look. I have just spoken to General Mazloum, a wonderful man, the commander-in-chief of the SDF Kurds, and he was extremely thankful for what the United States has done. have been more thankful. General Mosulam has assured me that ISIS is under very, very strict lock-in key, and the detention facilities are being strongly maintained. There were a few that got out

a small number, relatively speaking, and they've been largely recaptured. I'm also sure that he will be issuing his own statement very shortly. We had a great talk. But we've saved the lives of many, many Kurds. He understands that. I just want to note that previously Donald Trump claimed that the Kurds purposely released ISIS fighters from these prisons in order to send a message to Donald Trump. That wasn't rooted in any fact, there was no evidence for that. But he insulted the Kurds by alleging that they purposely did that.

And now he's saying that, oh, some of the Kurds got away, but we were capitalized. them again, I don't believe anything he says in that regard. But one other thing, when he says that the Kurds are very happy with us, we kept them safe, that of course is a complete and utter lie. So going back to the deal between Russia and Turkey and their influence in northern Syria, the agreement that these two countries had will put Turkey and Russia in control of territory that was formally held by Kurdish forces once allied with the United States. And as part of that deal negotiated by both Erdogan and Putin, Turkey will get a nearly 20 mile

deep safe zone along its border clear of Kurdish militias. Right, and also let's decode that for a second. Again, there is really no, no sort of culpability for Bashar al-Assad. So the reason why the Kurds were fighting initially was against the Syrian regime. And so ISIL troops came in, and then the U.S. government decided that they would support the Kurds because for whatever reason, ISIL is the most frightening thing to Americans when there are more KKK members in the US than there are ISIL fighters. And so that's the talking point that they love because it allows them to use a counterterrorism

rhetoric that allows them to also talk about more of a military occupation in the region. So we should also remember that when they're saying that Russians get control of that area, Everything that the Kurds fought for just died. Not only was there a potential massacre because of Turkey coming in, but Russia taking over it means that the regime just re-entrenched itself as well. And then one final point that I wanted to make, and this is according to USA Today, Trump's top envoy for Syria, James Jeffrey, conceded that Turkey may have committed war crimes against the Kurds in their assault.

He may have been referring to the assassination of Kurdish politician, Hevran Kalaaf. So you have members of Trump's administration saying one thing, accusing the Turks of committing war crimes against the Kurds. I mean, a Kurdish politician was assassinated. And then on the other hand, you have Donald Trump doing this press conference and making himself out to be this giant peacemaker. But the facts don't bear that out.

And what I worry about is his anti-war rhetoric, which is not rooted in fact, is going to resonate with people who aren't paying attention? I think just the last point is sort of the first point. And Anna, you made it. And that is, this was an impetuous decision made with, and we could speculate, I think, for some time about why, but made with no notice really to the Pentagon, got tremendous pushback. And now what we're seeing, what this is all about today is the spin, as Anna said,

the cleanup that is forced and it's all political. And to your final point, he's hoping that by hammering that mission accomplished, look what we did, I'm getting us out of these regime change wars, that that's the sort of lingering memory of this entire incident. We got to take a break. And when we come back, we have some more international news, including the protests in Chile. And later in the show, in the second hour, we are going to talk about AOC grilling Mark Zuckerberg, which was incredible. He did testify before members of the House today and embarrassed himself quite a bit. We'll be right back. 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-F-The-Republic, or UNFTR, the host, 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. Welcome back to TYET, we're about to get to some more international news, but I wanted to give you guys some announcements, some updates, and then we'd move on. So the conversation has some awesome guests. In fact, tonight, the legendary Naomi Klein will be on the conversation, that's after the second hour of the show. Please check that out, really looking forward to it. And then later, Jabeel Smith, a senior writer at Rolling Stone who covers national affairs

and culture will be on the conversation this week, this Thursday specifically, tune in at 8 p.m. Eastern time, 5 p.m. Pacific at t.t.com slash live. And then finally, the power panels, we're trying to direct our audience to different platforms. And so the power panel on Friday will not be on YouTube, but it will be on YouTube TV. The Roku channel, Pluto TV, Zumo, all of these various platforms that you see on this graphic right now, you can watch the show there. And if you're a member, as always, you can watch the show either on our app or you can watch online on our website.

So members get extra benefits because they help keep us afloat. Without them, we wouldn't be able to do what we do. So thank you so much for supporting the show. And yeah, that's what I have for you. You guys ready for some more news? Let's do it. Let's do it. Make it happen.

This is devastating, but it shows you what wealth inequality and income inequality does. So 15 people have died in Chile so far in violent clashes with the government. This follows widespread protests regarding inequality in the country. Now if you look at past mainstream media news coverage on Chile and its economy, the presentation is that it has this robust, vibrant economy, it's so successful, things are great. But in reality, Chile has been dealing with something that's very similar to what Americans have been dealing with. While the economy has done well for a small number of elites at the very top, the vast majority

of Chileans have been suffering from inequality. And the straw that really broke the camel's back was a 4% increase in subway fares. Now rather than putting words in the mouths of the protesters, why don't we go ahead and hear from the protesters themselves? For protesters, the demonstrations and their frustrations are about so much more than a pricier metro ticket. They are years of repression. They are years of living in misery. They are years of government-imposed measures at the expense of the people.

Though Chile is Latin America's wealthiest country, it also has one of the highest levels of economic inequality in the world. People are frustrated by what they call a lack of economic reform on a number of topics, including pensions, health care, and public education. There's also concern about government overreach, as on Sunday authorities imposed a curfew. Some 10,000 police and armed soldiers were deployed. So, of course, as always, the protesters are met with incredible violence. And the video that we're about to show you is graphic. I want to warn you, but it gives you a sense of the type of resistance the protesters are met with.

Again, this is graphic. Take a look. Yeah, me'll have the government running protesters over in an effort to silence them. Labor unions have gotten involved now. They have started to strike. The government has implemented a curfew. Anyone seen outside past 11 PM will deal with the consequences, but the protesters remain defiant. Yeah, and I'm so glad you're doing this story, because not only is this a microcosm for what is happening globally, you know, there are protests going on in Lebanon for similar reasons, and I want to break that down in a second, but we saw this also happen with protests and resistance in Sudan and Algeria earlier in the summer.

And so the violence that you saw there in the previous clip is reminiscent of a time in the 70s and in the 80s when there was a really severe military junta in power, Pinochet, who was tried on international crimes and actually evaded it by being a fugitive in another country. But that, his rise was the reason for this moment. The culmination of the protest isn't because of a fee hike in the metro passes and the way that it's portrayed in the media, that it's this minor fee hike. It is part of the tipping point to a package of austerity measures that were very much influenced by something called neoliberalism, which is also known as free market fundamentalism.

And the key thinkers of this type of economic policy is Milton Friedman. And Milton Friedman influenced a group of folks called the Chicago Boys, who were Chileans that were trained under him at the University of Chicago. And then implemented this really horrifying neoliberal agenda for Chile where there was a developed booming economy, but there was growing, growing wealth disparity. And what that translated into, so I'll give you an example of what Milton Friedman believes. And he argues that there is a natural unemployment rate. And if we dip below that unemployment rate, which means there are less people who are unemployed,

it means that inflation will accelerate. So they are going for a certain amount of unemployment. And they are trying to hit you in the jugular with austerity measures to make the economy favorable to basically American corporations at that time period. And the United States has been very much involved in countries like Chile. Nixon was very much behind the coup d'etat that took place and removed the socialist president, Salvador Allende, from power. And so the CIA, the US CIA, they.

They have gone in and purposely assisted with these types of coups to overthrow individuals who the U.S. saw as a threat to business interests. Right, and I just want to say when we talk about 9-11 for Chileans, September 11, 1973, when a democratically elected Allende was deposed by the military junta that Pinochet led, that was a dark day for Chileans, because it set all of this into motion as well. And I mean, Pinochet, the brutality under Pinochet is legend and story. But there's another part of this, I think, and it relates to America.

And that's the disparity in wages and the disparity economically. You're seeing a power in Chile. I mean, this is 18 million people, and they've had this incredible boom economically. At least it's perceived that way, as Andrews is saying. And yet, so many are not participating in that boom, right? So now you have this down-tick and the economy's got a little soft, and everybody who is disenfranchised from the boom is even more disenfranchised during this economically lean time. So now to our country, where we also have an increasing disparity, the haves and have-nots, the gaps have gotten bigger. And so am I saying that, you know, we're looking into a crystal ball as to what might happen in America?

In a way I am, when I certainly think it's a warning shot, that, you know, this is the result of, tremendous economic disparity and that when that gap gets so big that people feel a sense of oppression economically, you do get this pushback, and that's what's happening in Chile. So what's interesting is I had a conversation about this with my mom last night, and so I brought up the unrest in Chile, in Lebanon, people rising up, especially in response to inequality and the lack of economic opportunities. And Armenia just went through its own peaceful revolution, referred to as the Velvet Revolution. My mom, who grew up under Soviet rule in Armenia, was like, there's something about Americans.

They just will not rise up. And I think it's because we, I don't think it's because of the people. I think that we have this entire infrastructure put in place that immediately minimizes and belittles any type of movement. I mean, you see it right now when it comes to Bernie Sanders and the progressive ideas. that he's pushed forward, right? And with the rhetoric that you see in our media in response to the ideas that progressives have that would actually do away with inequality, like it's just, it's really difficult to get

people, to mobilize people, and to unite people. We're so divided when in reality the issues that we're frustrated about, we share that commonality. Yeah, but I would also argue that the way the media portrays uprisings as wrong, We can't see when those moments are happening. So 1992, the uprising that happened might have been in response to Rodney King, but it was actually about the deterioration of neighborhoods as a result of extreme divestment from the industrial boom that had happened in Compton, but then withdraw because of outsourcing

jobs. And that, people felt that. That's why they were looting local stores because they saw people taking over their neighborhoods and no jobs being available, and on top of that, they were being attacked and brutalized by police. So that moment is a moment of uprisings, same with Watts riots as well, and in Detroit. So those uprisings are moments, but we have to be able to read them in that way. In the same way that you're watching American media coverage call these riots in response

to a fee hike for the metro. But again, they weren't looking at the fact that it was mostly students who were hopping across turnstiles as a form of protest, and then it was the state's forces responding violently that then had folks burning up the subway station. And that's what we forget, that's how, that's actually a textbook of how it happens everywhere around the world, including Syria, is that the state responds violently with tear gas, with actually, which is something that's internationally unlawful, was banned in 1997, and then people resort to whatever is left.

Yeah, and just to go back to the point, and I see it all the time, the media constantly referring to this as people who are upset about a fair hike. No, that's just the straw that broke the camels back. It reminds me very much of how the media covered the yellow vest movement in France, right? They made it appear as though they were upset over a gas tax, and that was it. And that message was then co-opted by the right wing in America to spread this message up, Taxes are unpopular, don't raise taxes, but it wasn't just about raising taxes. That was the straw that broke the camels back in France.

And the people of France are very politically active and they'll rise up the second they feel that there's this push for austerity or anything that could lead to more inequality. Thank you. That's a great, God, you made that point, because that's a great contrast to the U.S. There really is a sense in Europe that there's an activism there. There's a let's take to the streets there that you just don't find in the U.S. Well, we did have that when unions were stronger, right? So there was a historic sort of deal that was struck with GM employees.

They were able to negotiate what they needed. But it was, the unions were very much crippled by Reagan who ended up firing all the air traffic controllers. You remember that moment? That was when he really flexed his arm and they were protesting, they were on strike. And then he said, guess what, I'm not negotiating with you guys, I'm gonna fire you all. And that sent a shock wave to labor and to you. union organizer.

So this has been in the mix for a while in the U.S. is us getting accustomed to extreme economic discomfort. And I do wanna give you one more quote from one of the protesters. This is an Uber driver who complained that he's unable to pay his student debt. Does that sound familiar? And can't provide a decent life for his family. He told the Associated Press, quote, I'm protesting for my daughter, for my wife, for my mother, just for the 30 pesos of the metro, for the low salaries, for the privileges of the political

class, for their millionaire salaries. It's just, there's so many parallels. Exactly, exactly. And solidarity with the Chilean protesters, there's a brutal fight ahead, and we're seeing this type of unrest in other countries, including Lebanon. And this is something that a lot of people are dealing with. You're so right, this virus, this freedom. ideology that's spread throughout the world with the assistance of the United States has been

so destructive to people. And the way that economic prosperity has been reported in places like Chile, it's a lie. It's a lie. You've got to look at the real numbers, and it's a lie here in the United States as well. When they talk about the GDP and how we're doing so well economically, you got to look into things like, all right, well, consumer spending, how is consumer spending done? are taking out more and more debt in order to provide from themselves, right? The rise that you see in stocks, what's causing that?

Is it because consumers have disposable income to go out there and stimulate the economy? No, oftentimes if you look hard enough, you'll see corporate stock buybacks contributing quite a bit to that. Yeah, and who's participating in that stock market? I mean, fewer and fewer people are-in. The last thing I would say about activism, just because this is Bernie country, I would say that the reminder of how you can energize a generation to activism is that Bernie Sanders rally. I mean, if you could look at that, I mean, this is on a weekend, people have got a lot

other stuff to do, and, you know, so many dings on young people, but I'm telling the huge chunk of young people, and then multi-generational Bernie support. So I think Bernie reminds us, also the Dakota pipeline, those people were dogged in their protest around it. It does exist in America. It just doesn't quite exist. with quite the fervor I would like to see. And the unity. I think that's the biggest issue. We need unity.

I think that the difference is that the neoliberal kleptocracy is recognized across political parties, like we were talking about in Lebanon. It's now gone beyond sectarian divide, and all these groups of people that were divided because of the civil war over there are united together. But it's the far right that doesn't want to recognize that it actually has something similar and in solidarity with their class peers. And once they realize that, then I think there would be a really powerful movement in the U.S. All right.

We got to take a break. When we come back, we'll focus on domestic politics, including an update on the impeachment investing. 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. On July 18th, get excited. This is big! For the summer's biggest adventure. I think I just smurf my pants. That's a little too excited. Sorry. Smurfs.

Only date is July 18th. VPN 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-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 segment. Hey guys, welcome back to TYT, Anna, Mitha, and Mark with you. I want to read a few member comments and then we'll move on to the rest of the rundown. Bolu has some nice words for you, Mata. So happy Mitha's here today. She provides such a great personal and well-researched perspective to the discussion. I, of course, enjoy all hosts' perspective.

Mitha is just really hitting my soul right now. She is great. Wow. I learn a lot from Maita also. Oh, thank you. I learn a lot from you all, too. No, this is a great discussion. I'm really glad that we, look, one thing that I want to note for everyone is whenever there's

a story that we don't cover on the show, there isn't like some malicious intent behind it. I don't know if you guys noticed, but I don't know if people noticed. But like yesterday's show, like there's all these stories that are produced and we don't get to them because we end up taking too long with a story that we do finally air and it drives me nuts. So there's no malicious intent. I wanted to cover the Chile story. Unfortunately, we didn't get an opportunity until today.

There's so much going on. Please just give us the benefit of the doubt. From the TYT live section, Al Belzo says, I totally agree with Mark. I too expect the U.S. population to start protesting inequality any day now. If it gets worse, you will see what we see in Chile today. The difference between Chile and the U.S. is Americans own a lot more guns, and that is terrifying. We're gonna actually discuss that in the second hour. The right wing has been calling for civil war and they're very transparent about it.

And it's terrifying because what they want civil war over should concern us all. Few more member comments, IM SOC says the GOP wants running over protesters to be legal in the United States. You're absolutely right about that. In response to the Standing Rock protests, you had a number of states that were proposing legislation that would allow cars to essentially hit protesters if they're blocking the roads. Now, luckily, none of those laws passed, but it gives you a sense of where our representatives' minds are at and how little they really care about our constitution.

They did that in the Rhode Island, if not now, protest against the detention camps. Yes, I remember covering that. And Lou Dobbs on Fox News made it appear as though the protesters were these, unruly, violent, danger. They were sitting on the ground inside, like, in peaceful protest, and you have a prison guard attempting to run them over. And he says, that's totally fine. He was just protecting himself.

And then finally nasty habits, I like that handle, says, the media phenomenon you're talking about did not deter us in the 60s, wake up, we need to get in the streets now. I hear you, but, you know, I'm not gonna pretend like the media was perfect in the 60s. But we have so many dishonest actors, including Fox News, you know, peddling propaganda. And it's really difficult to fight against that. Yeah, because you have like the mainstream media narrative. And then, you know, going in an even more terrible direction, you have the propagandists, like at Fox News. With digital media, you have the propagandists that, you know, the daily caller and what have you.

So that's been difficult. Propagandas just by, you know, a Cambridge Analytica type. bad actors. So yeah, I mean, I think you're right. The tentacles of that extend way beyond what they did in the 60s. But, but, you know, obviously this country is a history of activism. Jank and I were talking about the suffragettes yesterday. I mean, you know, you can't, I mean, that's unreal.

You know, they had no power, and all they had was a vision and a passion and determination, and they got it done. So it is possible, but the media landscape has changed to Anna's point. Definitely. And then one final, TYT live from Pop Kitch, look at Anna on TYT live pronouncing Kudita correctly, send video to Candice Owens, got to kill her coop game. So I never talk about it because why, why would I? But I did get my graduate degree in political science. So that's where I learned how to pronounce Kudita.

Anyway, all right, so let's move on with some impeachment updates. This story is out of control. In an effort to obstruct justice and pivot the conversation to the issue that Republicans have with the process of the impeachment investigation, a number of Republican lawmakers attempted to storm a room where one of Trump's officials was actually testifying in a deposition to members of Congress. So in this case, you had Laura Cooper, who was the defense official for the Trump administration. She decided to actually comply with a subpoena to testify before Congress.

And so as she's doing so, you have this chaotic scene where Republican members of the House, who are not part of these relevant committees, decided they were just gonna storm into the room. We have a video on this. Let's take a quick look. So Laura Cooper, her specific role, her specific role is Deputy Assistant of Defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia. And what Democrats wanted to ask her about is the, not only the phone conversation between Donald Trump and the Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, but also the decision Donald

Trump made to withhold the military funding from Ukraine. Now, the testimony from U.S. Ambassador Bill Taylor, William Taylor, was so damning yesterday that Republicans got together and they said, look, we can't speak to the substance of the testimony, we can't speak to the substance of this impeachment investigation. But what we can do is try to pivot the discussion to the actual process. And we're going to cry and whine and pretend as though the process in which this investigation is taking place is wrong, it's unfair, we're being, you know, we're being treated unfairly. To give you more details, a chaotic scene unfolded after Republicans gave speeches and then

push through the confines of the capital complex basement to make their way into the secure room. Several Capitol police officers stationed themselves outside the secure room as reporters waited outside for lawmakers to come back out. Now under House rules, and it's important to know what the House rules are, only members of the committees and their staffers have been allowed in the private sessions that the committees have been conducting for weeks. But Republicans, mostly from committees that weren't allowed to attend, gave speeches

in the hallway outside the secure room complaining about the lack of access and transparency, then about two dozen lawmakers demanded entry. I want to note that Mitch McConnell, Senate Majority Leader, specifically told Republican lawmakers go after the process because Republican lawmakers were uncomfortable attacking the substance of the impeachment investigation because the testimony has been so damning. Right, the testimony has created a clear linkage between the release of the funding and digging up dirt on Joe Biden. So they know that that's there now

and they know it through 10 hours of corroborative testimony yesterday and then what would have been further corroboration today and I guess eventually they got the hearing underway but nothing's by accident and you know to seize the media narrative they're out front of this closed hearing

and they're giving in essence and on the fly press conference and then this goes to Anna's prior point they're giving it to whomever they're giving it to whatever cameras are there to people with an iPhone they're just trying to get it out virally to somehow suggest that this

process has been less than fair. When the reality is this is a criminal presidency in many people's judgment, and I think it's demonstrably the case that there is self-dealing and all kinds of, it's a for-profit presidency. But beyond that, the substance of this Ukraine deal is now undeniable, right? In just 24 hours prior, we'd seen, as I say, that testimony that backed it all up. So this is a real attempt on their part to throw it off its tracks by seizing the media and creating a different narrative about the process?

Absolutely. Go ahead. Yeah, so the GOP loves rules except when they apply to them, right? So they're protesting the process. In doing so, they're violating the rules of the process by smuggling their cell phones to record secret information that later will come out. And so that's the part that they have a problem with is that there is a process that needs to be respected for all of the substance to be accumulated.

And the other thing that they're doing is trying to intimidate witnesses. You saw this with how they put so much of a focus on revealing the identity of the whistleblower. This shouldn't, this should be immaterial to the discussion that we're having, which is, was money, as Mark was saying, was money withheld, with foreign aid withheld, so that that Ukraine could do the dirty dealing of Trump for his campaign. This is the exact like textbook Nixon. I mean- Yeah, I mean, you're absolutely right. And I wanna make a distinction because one talking point that you'll hear from Republicans

is, I mean, quid pro quos happen all the time because as we know, Bill Taylor's testimony yesterday made it abundantly clear that Donald Trump was engaged in a quid pro quo in his conversation with Vladimir Zelensky. Now, but here's the thing. a quid pro quo to benefit Donald Trump specifically and increase his chances of getting reelected in the campaign, that is a violation of the emoluments clause, it's unconstitutional, it's unlawful, and it's different from the president making a deal with another world leader with the intention of doing something for the American people.

And they're right that there was something different with how Trump and Nixon's impeachment process underwent in terms of the national conversation, the real big difference is that Nixon didn't have Fox News and Trump does. That's exactly right. And look, we're talking about two different impeachment investigations. I mean, Nixon, it was so inevitable that he was gonna be impeached, that he stepped down in shame, as Trump should probably do as well. But we'll see if he's capable of doing that.

Nonetheless, I do wanna go to this long list of Republican lawmakers. you know, lying to the American public and whining about someone in a position of power being held accountable for his illegal actions. Take a look. It's finally reached a boiling point where members just said they are so frustrated at the idea that they can't be a part of this and see what's going on. And a whole bunch of Republican Congress members that were duly elected just tried to get in to find out what is going in on in these closed door hearings. They're just waiting for a more open and transparent process.

And like I said, the members have just had it, and they want to be able to see, represent their constituents and find out what's going on. This is unconscionable. This is very unfair to the president. They're actually in there, planned to stay there until we have a more open and transparent and fair process. I also want to just make a note about how that room isn't simply full of a a bunch of Democratic lawmakers, there are Republicans in the room.

It's just Republicans who are part of the relevant committees who are part of this initial process, the impeachment investigation. It's a closed door session, exactly, you're right, but it's bipartisan. Exactly, yeah. So they're making it appear as though this is a unilateral, you know, Democrat investigation into Donald Trump, and that is not the case. And so I'll give you a little more information about what McConnell's doing. According to the Hill, McConnell recognizes that some members of his conference are uncomfortable

defending Trump on charges his administration linked aid to Ukraine to that country's government running politically motivated investigations meant to help the White House. One GOP lawmakers, summing up McConnell's message to Republicans at a private lunch meeting Tuesday, quoted the GOP leader as saying, this is going to be about process, right? So again, understand what Republicans are doing here. They can't attack the substance because the substance makes it very clear that Donald Trump broke the law, he violated the emoluments clause, he was digging up dirt on political rivals with the intention of using that to help him in his reelection campaign.

And so this talking point that they're using, this effort to pivot to process is not something that the American people should be fooled by. And to give you some other statements from Republican lawmakers, Senator Ben Sasse said there There was terrible stuff in the transcript of the call and warned, quote, we shouldn't be having any American office holder or any American candidate looking for foreign nations to come in and be involved in U.S. elections. And Senator Lisa Murkowski from Alaska said last week, it was wrong for the administration to hold up foreign aid to Ukraine.

So the walls are caving in on Donald Trump. And it's a wonderful thing to watch because finally you have some consequences for someone who has already engaged in unlawful activities while he's been sitting in office. But, you know, Republicans are scrambling because they know that members of his own administration are testifying against him and revealing exactly what he did. Well, also, I mean, it's just so wild when you put together their remarks like we just did, you see the GOP stormtroopers out there, you know, with that trumped up, if you'll pardon, the expression that trumped up rage about the process.

and it's just one talking point after another, and it's just so clear that that was an organized strategy. So it just, it lacks any decency, and it lacks any real adherence to process either. But they're complaining about the process. I think you make such a great point. When you talk about the process, they have no use for it when it applies to them.

And clearly, the process was being respected. So it's simply a talking point, but when they stack them up like that, you realize how they really are all just sort of regurgitating these political talking points. Right. So when you see video of Lindsey Graham during the impeachment process for Clinton, and then you put it side by side and listening to the way that he's defending Trump against this unfair process is incredibly inconsistent and makes everybody laugh. I mean, the fact that he's saying that the president should have the same rights as American citizens.

If you get a parking ticket, you should be able to see the witnesses that accused you of this. Well, as an American president, he can't be tried for crimes that he has been a party to. What is it, Graham? In what ways does he get the rights of Americans, but not the obligations to abide by the law? Graham bows his head to power, and that's it. He has no principles. He has no backbone. He's a complete and utter coward, and he's made that clear in these impeachment proceedings.

But I do want to also just quickly note that things have changed for Republicans, right? So, as we know, under the Obama administration, Hillary Clinton was investigated for her role in Benghazi over and over again. And at one point, a Republican lawmaker, Darryl Issa, attempted to walk into a room where a deposition was taking place, and Trey Gowdy, of all people, had to escort him out. And so here's a video of that kind of showing him like, hey, you're not part of this committee, You can't be here, you gotta go. So at some point, and it's hard to remember, there were some Republicans who had some respect

for the process, you know, and that's just not the case anymore. All right, well, let's move on to Lindsey Graham, because we have a specific story prepared to talk about his antics. So shortly after Lou Dobbs went after Lindsey Graham for supposedly not defending Donald Trump hard enough during this impeachment investigation, Mitch McConnell, I'm sorry, Lindsey Graham decided that he is going to propose a resolution that would let Democrats know that the Senate will not take up a vote on convicting Donald Trump, should he get impeached by the House. In fact, they won't even have a trial.

So let's go to the first video on this. Here's Graham explaining that resolution during an interview with Sean Hannity. This resolution puts the Senate on record condemning the House. For the future of the presidency, we cannot allow future presidents and this president to be impeached based on an inquiry in the House that's never been voted upon that does not allow the president to confront the witnesses against him, call witnesses on his behalf, and cross-examine people are accusing him of misdeeds. All I'm asking is give Donald Trump the same rights as Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton had when it comes to impeachment. And I'm insisting that Donald Trump be given the same rights every American has if you're given a parking ticket to confront the witnesses against you. Can't be based on hearsay. And here's the point of the resolution. Any impeachment vote based on this process to me is illegitimate, is unconstitutional, and should be dismissed in the Senate without a trial.

So with all the evidence that we already know about, including the summary of that transcript, which was released by Donald Trump's and ministerial. with the testimony given just yesterday by Bill Taylor, U.S. ambassador under the Trump administration, indicating that there was a clear quid pro quo involved. No, we want to drop, you know, this impeachment situation, all the articles of impeachment, we don't even want to bring this up for a trial in the Senate. Keep in mind that Mitch McConnell was asked whether or not he would hold a vote to remove the president or to convict the president, and he said that he would have to. So I'm curious to see how he's going to respond, you know, ultimately to this resolution.

Now, Mitch McConnell sidestepped when asked about how long a potential Senate trial would last, telling reporters during a weekly press conference that, quote, there are all kinds of potentials we don't know about yet. So there's that. Yeah, you talk about sidestepping process. Oh, my God. I mean, talk about, you know, ignoring process. I mean, it's a, it seems inconceivable that you wouldn't at least have the trial in the Senate.

I mean, even those who sort of were against this entire thing getting underway, I'm talking about the Nancy Pelosi's of the world. They were, of course, they're wording to see which way the political winds are blowing. But beyond that there was the argument, well, you know that the Senate is not going to vote to convict. But there was always the presumption that there would at least be a trial. I mean, and this is another level. As you say, I don't know if it's Lindsey Graham trying to curry favor with Trump and with the right wing media, probably is, you know, but. Well, in his interview, and I bring this up a lot because it was so transparent, like he was so candid about his intentions. In an interview with The Daily, the podcast for the New York Times, Lindsay Graham specifically said, I want to remain relevant.

It's all about self-interest. Please take a listen to that episode of The Daily. It was incredible how candid he was. Yeah, this is blueprint politician doing anything to continue to survive and to be an incumbent. I mean, the other thing is, let's think about how they got material against Bill Clinton. Let's remember Linda Tripp secretly recorded Monica Lewinsky in their phone conversations. So if you want to talk about really violating process, let's think about all the impagements you mentioned to end their process. They know that they're backed into a corner and they're struggling and they don't know.

They know they can't defend Trump based on substance, so they're gonna focus on the process. And if you look at polling, and look, I don't put too much weight behind polling, but I do think it's something to look at and consider as this impeachment investigation moves forward. Quinnipiac did the latest poll when it comes to impeachment, and the pollsters discovered that 55% of respondents approved of the inquiry while 43% opposed it. Last week, that number was 51% who supported it while 45% did not. So the numbers keep increasing. And I think Republicans are very aware of that, which is why they're worried about, you know,

on one hand, we have our voters who remain loyal to Trump and we want to get reelected. On the other hand, you have a president who's committing crimes and we don't want to be on the record defending him. So- That's exactly, that states it, I think, starkly and accurately. That's what they're up against. So it's sort of like they got to go home and figure out if their constituency is okay with it. And that's I think where ultimately the decision will be made. Exactly.

All right. Well, thank you to Matha Alhassen and Mark Thompson. Check out Mark's podcast, The Edge with Mark Thompson. You guys are awesome. This was a great hour. Thank you. Thank you so much. All right, I hope you guys enjoyed it too.

We're gonna take a quick break and then we're gonna bring in Brett Ehrlich and J.R. Jackson for our two. Woohoo! 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.