The Young Turks - Trump Versus MAGA - November 12, 2025

Episode Date: November 13, 2025

Visit https://prizepicks.onelink.me/LME0/TYT and use code TYT and get $50 in lineups when you play your first $5 lineup! Trump claims the U.S. “doesn’t have talented people” to fill jobs, and a Democratic poll warns that Graham Platner’s online history could doom his run against Susan Collins. Hosts: Cenk Uygur & Jordan Uhl SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE ☞  https://www.youtube.com/@TheYoungTurks FOLLOW US ON: FACEBOOK  ☞   https://www.facebook.com/theyoungturks TWITTER  ☞       https://twitter.com/TheYoungTurks INSTAGRAM  ☞  https://www.instagram.com/theyoungturks TIKTOK  ☞          https://www.tiktok.com/@theyoungturks 👕MERCH  ☞      https:/www.shoptyt.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/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. Get no frills delivered. Shop the same in-store prices online and enjoy unlimited delivery with PC Express Pass. Get your first year for 250 a month. Learn more at pceexpress.ca.c.a. Welcome to Young Turks, Jane Cougar Jordan, you'll

with you guys on an amazing day. Boy, do we have a show for you. So Epstein information everywhere. And we're going to get to it a little bit later in the program. And in the second hour, we believe that Anna's doing something, but he's going to join us in the second hour to partly discuss this story. But guys, the information is bonkers. It's unbelievable. So Epstein connected to Trump for sure. Remember drop site news also reporting about absolutely positively clear connection between Epstein and Mossad earlier. We're going to get back to that again a little bit later in the program.

And the reason I bring, like there's a lot of reasons why I bring that up. Another thing that comes up is how different members of the press were working. with Jeffrey Epstein to help him. That is so strange. That is incredibly strange. So hell of a day, Trump brings in the FBI director and the Attorney General to try to convince U.S. Congress people, Lauren Bobart in particular, to not release the Epstein files.

What is the FBI director and the Attorney General have to do with a congressional vote? That is so strange. So we're going to get into all of that on tonight's show, so don't miss any of it. And then at 8 o'clock Eastern, an amazing thing, which I thought was going to be the big thing today on the Young Turks. So Josh Turk and Nathan the stage are two progressive populists. They're running for the Iowa Senate race. And so we talked to both of them and really liked both of them. So they're going to come on tonight one after another, and we're asking your help in figuring out who we should back.

So I don't know that I know we've never done this. I don't know that anybody's ever done this. But for our members and the reason we're doing it for paying members is because we don't want trolls, et cetera. We want people who are a core part of the community telling us who they like better. So it's not going to be a debate. It's going to be a discussion and we're going to talk to them back to back. And then you guys vote, the vote's not 100% binding, but I want to know what you

guys think because I'm undecided. So that's going to happen at 8 o'clock Eastern. Don't miss that. But we got so much news to get to. So Jordan, what are we starting with? Well, Jenk, things are not looking good for the Graham Platner campaign. And new polling shows that he may be in for a major defeat if he squares off against Susan Collins in the general election. And we've got more. But what are your two cents here? Yeah, I don't believe the poll. So you're going to read the poll, and then I'm going to question the people who did the poll. I think they're bad guys, even though they're on our side, theoretically. And then I want to have a real discussion with you on, forget staying in the race.

Who do you think you support in the race and I support in the race and have a real discussion about it? Because I think that this stinks to high heaven. But tell us the facts, and then we'll discuss it. Okay. Democratic Group Emily's list has released new data, gauging main voters' thoughts on Platner in a head-to-head race against Republican Senator Susan Collins. Before testing a matchup between Platner and Collins, the poll summarizes pro-Platner messaging, including his military service, and is promised to fight the billionaire class and makes politics work for regular people, along with likely Republican attacks about the communist label

and his comments about police. With that information, Collins leads Platner 51% to 42%. That gap grew to 19 points after voters were provided with more quotes from Plattenor's Reddit posts. And when voters were provided with a lengthy apology response, he only narrowed the gap by five points. Now, Emily's list has a goal of electing Democratic women. And they have endorsed Platinor's opponent, Janet Mills, in the primary. The most recent major poll on that primary, which was conducted before it was revealed that 20 years ago, Platner got a tattoo resembling a symbol used by the Nazis, showed Platner was up by 34 points. Another poll from a lesser-known pollster, SoCal Strategies, conducted during the week,

Plattenor's tattoo and Reddit history were made public and in the news, showed Mills ahead by five points. When Platner's tattoo was mentioned to respondents in that poll, Miller's lead grew to 30 points. To make matters worse for Plattenor's campaign, over the last few weeks, several top staff members from his campaign have left, including his campaign manager, political director, and finance director. Now, that primary is June 9th, 2026. So, Jank, I guess the question is, of course, you have reservations about that Emily's list poll. But there is a lot of time here. Do you think he should stay in the race? Yeah, definitely. All of his opponents are what make me support him more. So I'm going to come back to Emily's list, which I have massive doubts and skepticism about.

But first, look, I want to give you guys context. If I thought there was a guy in the race who's going to hurt our chances of winning, especially against Susan Collins, when we absolutely need to win the Senate, we need to win Congress back. And the guy's talking about how, oh, yeah, the right wing white voters in Maine are stupid or racist. I mean, you've heard the show for the last year, two years, et cetera. We've been telling you, don't do that. Don't do that.

That's a really bad idea. Don't attack the voters. Instead, you know, go after the politicians and make that distinction clear, et cetera. So if we thought he was a bad guy or, I mean, let me speak for myself, not we. If I thought he was a bad guy, then I would tell you, oh, yeah, that's terrible and that would hurt him in the election, et cetera, et cetera. But I don't get the sense that he's a bad guy. I get the sense that he was frustrated. He said that stuff, and at this point doesn't back that at all.

Now, there's two different things, whether he meant it and is problematic to begin with on all the different charges. Then the second thing is even if he didn't mean it or he meant it at a time, but that's because he was, you know, going through PTSD, whatever that you've got. People grow, people mature, people evolve, right? But now it has the right position, but still you're worried that it might hurt his chances of winning and our chances of winning. Okay, so these are all legitimate questions, right? And but at the same time, like if I thought, yeah, so from my perspective on those questions,

I don't think it's necessarily going to, I get that he's going to do damage, right? But I'm not convinced that he, that Mills is a better candidate. And I'm certainly not convinced that he meant that stuff and still means it secretly today. If I thought that I would have no interest in him at all, okay? And the attack against the cops, we were all frustrated about cops back in the day when he was frustrated about cops. At this point, you know our stance, which is easy, which is we're against crime, that's not hard. And so if I thought this guy's soft on that, again, it wouldn't be my inclination to back him, right? But he's been running a very populous campaign, calling out the establishment, calling out the donors, calling out everybody he needs to call out, right?

And all of a sudden, this giant that of Apo researchers dumped in his lap and they're like, ha, ha, we got you, you're smearing. you're canceled, that's it. And Jordan, where my skepticism comes in on this poll is, all of a sudden, Emily's list, which I think is one of the worst organizations in politics, comes in and goes, oh, we did a poll. It shows he would be much worse than our candidate who is totally backed by all corporate donors and the establishment. Oh, you have to trust us, we have your best intentions in mind. Here we are again putting a giant hatchet in the back of a progressive or populist or outsider or anyone

who wanting change. And that is the main role of Emily's List. I think the rest of it is a cover story, a total operation. I don't know what they've done to help women's rights. I've never heard them in any fight where they mattered at all. But where I have heard them a thousand times, Jordan, is back when we're starting just Democrats and throughout all this entire time, before the crypto guys and before A-PAC, if a progressive was running, Emily's List was going to support the establishment candidate opposed to them in the primary, and then do everything they could to defeat progressives. So I'm not really that interested in a poll from Emily's list, which I think has an excellent chance of being just utterly fake, period.

This episode is brought to you by prize picks. You and I make decisions every day, but on prize picks, being right can get you're paid, which is kind of awesome. Don't miss any of the to this sports season. On prize speaks, whether you're a football fan, a basketball fan, or a fan of both, like me, it always feels good to be right. And let me tell you, with the NBA season starting off and NFL season in midform, there's no better time to play. I'd be using it all season. What I love is how fun and simple the experiences. You just pick more or less on player projections for guys like Patrick Malm's or Steph Curry. I've been right about Puka and Bijan all season, so I feel good about that. And when you cash in, of course it feels great. What I really like is the new stacks feature. You You can pick the same player up to three times in one lineup. So if you love Kevin Durant, for example, you can pick more on his points, rebounds, and assists all at once. It's the best way to put your sports knowledge to the test. If you want the biggest payouts, go for the power play, it's that simple.

Download the prize picks app today. Use code TYT to get $50 in lineups after you play your first $5 lineup. That's code TYT to get $50 in lineups after you play your first $5 lineup. Prize picks. It's good to be right. That's my view. Okay, now I'm pretty harsh on it, obviously. What do you think?

Yeah, I mean, some of what you said, I agree with. I think Emily's list has used gender politics in this country over the past couple decades as a wedge. They've used it as a cudgel. I mean, they really tried to weaponize it when Bernie. was running to support the establishment. Totally with you there. Now, putting, even just putting that whole poll aside, you know, if we want to put weight in that SoCal Strategies poll that also found that Platner was behind, that's concerning. And I think we need to put ourselves

in the minds of the average person, right? We think deeply about these issues. Most voters do not. Many vote. Maybe, maybe. Maybe many. We'll go with that. But when they hear that one of their potential candidates has a tattoo that resembles a Nazi symbol that has, and they will strip, you know, Jack, you ran for office, they will strip the context of his Reddit posts to make them seem even worse. And in the framing, in attack ads, in the media, they'll continue to hammer these points that he said things that he now regrets online years ago. they're not going to be nuanced or understanding or forgiving or provide context for what he was in, mentally, physically, professionally at those times. He's apologized for him. I think everyone should have a little bit of grace for that kind of stuff.

But that's not how they're going to portray it in the media. And if he's going to be subject to these attacks for months, again, this primary is in June. What concerns me, not as policies, it's that voters will be subject. to these distractions, and at the end of the day, he might either lose the primary or lose against Collins. That's a fickle state. We know this. Maine is a weird state to run in. It's somewhat reliably democratic in presidential elections, but somehow Susan Collins has held on to that job. So my thought is, hey, you've got a ton of time to stand up a campaign. Find somebody without that baggage who will run on those same things and start building that up now rather than just crossing our

fingers and hope it's platinum and then hope he withstands that that barrage of attack ads in the general. Yeah, so I hear you on all that. Those are all reasonable points, but here's my pushback on all of that, okay? So first, again, real quick, because I don't want to get distracted by Emily's List, but we lost Roe v. Wade while Emily's List was fighting for women's rights. Where were you? Oh, no, we sent out a bunch of fundraising emails. I'm sure you did. I'm sure you did. But you didn't win that fight. You didn't win any of the fights. But whenever there's an issue of identity politics, Emily List is at the front of the line. No, you have to vote for Hillary. No, it doesn't matter that she's backed by all corporations. Shut up and vote for the

woman, right? And there's other organization. Their job is to say, shut up and vote for fill in the blank, X, Y, Z, different groups, okay? And their job, and they are funded by the establishment to destroy progressives. So they use identity politics in the most grotesque way to target anyone outside the system. So here comes a brother who is so firmly and aggressively outside the system and fighting for the average guy. And all of a sudden, here comes all the worst people in Washington attacking him in such a voracious way. that it makes me want to go, all right, I'm going to quadruple down on Graham Platner. Okay, and now you say, okay, well, Jack, don't do that on a spite.

We need to win the race. Of course, of course. So Jordan, let me make the case for why I think that he's the better candidate. Okay, number one, you've got what I'm going to call the Mamdani phenomenon. So when Mandani was attacked just as viciously as Platner is, now they didn't have as much material on him. All they had on him was he's Muslim and he's a communist. But I mean, he's a mom donnie's an actual socialist, whereas Platner is neither a communist nor a Nazi, right? So there's actually no substance behind it. Oh, so they're going to attack him that way. So

what? They attack Mom Donnie that way. So in reality, that actually helped Mom Donnie. Why did it help Mom Donnie? Even though mainstream media hit him with a nuke, they threw every dirty trick on him. They went and searched for every, oh, he was in a rap song, he was this, he was that, he once didn't help a grand, you know, a grandmother across the street. He wasn't even aware of. Yeah, I got, they, they nuked him and he survived and he won. It made him stronger. Why? Because they accidentally put a spotlight on the race. And once you put a spotlight on the race and people start paying attention, our policies and our style, again, left-wing populace is so much more popular than anything else in the country.

So the minute there's a spotlight on the race, people go, oh, really? You guys are fighting against the establishment? Oh, you guys hate the corruption? You guys hate the wars. You guys are trying to fight for higher wages, lower drug prices, et cetera. Wait, I came to hate you all of a sudden. I love you, right? And so that spotlight helped Mom Donnie, didn't hurt him.

And if they nuked him twice, it would have helped him twice as much. So I'm not sure that this is going to hurt him at all. Number two, there's cancel culture blowback. Okay, so especially with independent voters, but maybe even some right wing voters. When you go to them and you go, okay, Susan Collins is a beautiful member of the establishment. She loves all of our corporate donors,

loves money in politics, and loves Israel. And so you should all bow your head to Susan Collins, all of you independents and right wing voters. And the other guy is, he should be canceled. He looks like he's fighting for you guys. But the establishment hates him and he was a Nazi on the right and he was a communist on the left and he hates cops and he hates people who hate cops and he hates everyone and you should hate him. I think a lot of people are going to go, really? Tell me more about this guy because now I'm kind of interested. Because once the bad guys and the evil forces come against someone and you bring the spotlight, people start to look into it and go, oh, maybe that guy's actually looking out for us and that's why everybody's throwing down. dirt on him. And so, and the last part of it, Jordan, is, I don't think Mills is going to win. Maine is a graveyard for corporate Democrats. How many corporate Democrats have we run against

Susan Collins? And every time morons like Chuck Schumer and literally everyone in mainstream media, who are all biased, corrupt, and dumb as a brick, come in and go, oh, support the corporate candidate, they'll beat Susan Collins. We're going to win Republicans in the suburbs. We've outraised them. We have all this corporate cash and people in Maine love it. And we're going to beat Susan Collins. And I've seen that movie 200 times and they've never beaten her. So Chuck Schumer, and I'm not just putting it on him, but the entire establishment comes

and tells me to back Mills, well, then I think, well, that's a near guaranteed loss. So why don't I try something else? Now, to your point, okay, let's just find a rando in Maine now and restart an entire campaign and have that person be left wing populace, but what difference does it make, Jordan? Then they're going to find dirt on him. They go like, oh, did you know in 1987, he bought groceries from the checkout clerk that was white and not Asian. So guys are racist, the guys Asians, or whatever nonsense they're going to make up about that guy. There isn't a single populace that they won't dig up dirt on. So what's the difference? Well, I think it's the severity of what they dig up. And to go to your mom, Donnie point,

The attacks that they levied against him, we all just laughed them off because they were ridiculous. Oh, he tried to launch a rap career. Like, who cares? You know, like, obviously the baseless anti-Semitic stuff that we saw from the pro-Israel lobby didn't resonate because people could just see that he never said that. That's why all of the framing was, why won't you denounce this specific phrase? Well, he's never said it. Why are you asking him? People saw through that. Here, it's it's him. It's him doing. It's him saying these things. It's him with the tattoo. That's tough. And there's also a concern that this might just be the start. Again, this primary is in June. I don't think campaigns typically dump all of their oppo right away. So I think is there concern from some people that it may continue to mount and snowball and more will come.

Look, Jenk, the population of Maine is 1.4 million. It had over 800,000 people vote in the presidential election in 2024. I don't think it's necessarily plucking a rando. There's indivisible groups. There's grassroots community groups. Our evolution still exists in some pockets of the country. You know, maybe there's a progressive elected official in a city or in the state legislature. It's not that hard to find somebody who could run, who knows.

It doesn't have, again, a tattoo or had a tattoo that resembles a Nazi symbol or has said the things that he said. I'm not saying that people can't change or that he makes mistakes. I do think on the tattoo thing, it was an instance of a dumb troupe who just picked out a symbol because he thought it looked cool. Like, I'm willing to have some grace there, but I think in the average mind of a voter, they're going to be off put by that. And the initial polling between Platner and Collins in a general, if we are to believe that, was six or seven points, which is about the difference in the presidential election in 2024. So look, if you, and one other thing that he said, he was criticizing rural people in Maine as stupid. That is going to come. I think that might even be the most damaging thing about everything, but then you're insulting the voters.

hard to overcome. So, look, I don't really have a strong affinity for this guy. Like, I think his platform is good. And we should see more platforms like that in politics across the country. But I'm sure there's at least one other person in Maine who doesn't have that baggage and also shares those ideals. There's likely many because we know those views are popular. So all I'm saying is because we have like seven months until this primary, that's a lot of time. Look, people were saying a new campaign should be stood up in three months instead of Kamala Harris. If people were willing to make the argument, looking at you, that within three months you can stand up a presidential campaign, you can have seven months to stand up a Senate race. Yeah, it's super theoretical. I'm not going to, the guy was kicking ass until all this cancerous toxic dirt.

So, and I don't want to reward the dirt. I hate it. So let's last thing, guys, let's, let's, let's, let's, Break down the two things that you said there, Jordan. On the tattoo, every time we mention it, I feel like we get independent voters backing him. And again, maybe even some right wingers. Not because they're Nazis, right? But because it's so obvious they're trying to cancel. It's like, you're saying, like everybody's saying he's way too left wing. He's calling the right wing stupid and racist.

So that's why he's a right wing Nazi. That makes no sense. It makes no sense at all. And the more people hear that, the more they're going to think, this is canceled culture BS. How do I spell his name? How do I get on board with? Can I volunteer for this guy? Okay.

So not because of the tattoo, but because of the cancel culture BS surrounding the tattoo. Okay, now the second thing is, wait, wait, wait. Now I agree with you, Jordan, that calling the voters stupid, whether the right-wing Republican or not or rural voters is terrible. We've been saying that for a long time here on TYT, right? So, but wait a minute, we're being told by the establishment that that's a terrible thing and it automatically disqualifies you. Hasn't Jasmine Crockett called white right wing voters stupid and racist approximately 200 times? Well, no, the establishment isn't saying that.

That was in his Reddit history. That will likely emerge in attack ads. I mean, think about these- So should we not run Jasmine Crockett because she's done? Because she's said the same things as that we think is the most damaging for planner. No, I think it's different when you're running statewide and you need those rural votes versus a metropolitan area in Dallas. It's a totally different voter base. That's totally fair. Okay, and a good point by Jordan. But at the same time, the same people who love Jasmine Crockett are telling me that those are unacceptable things to say.

Well, apparently they became unacceptable two days ago because before that was identity politics that the establishment loved. I'm not trying to criticize Jasmine Crockett. I'm just telling you that's a thing that a lot of Democrats have said. Tons and tons and tons and tons of Democrats have said, and we were the ones fighting against it and now all of a sudden they claim, oh, insulting the right wing voters, it's the worst thing you could do. Really, you guys think that?

Well, I'm glad you've surrendered to us. And that you, I want apologies from everyone in the establishment and every left wing show and everyone out on the planet saying the young Turks are right, you shouldn't insult the voters. When am I going to get that? Oh, no, you were not going to get that because it isn't about that. It's about making sure that they put a hatchet in this guy's back. And yeah, no, it's for me, Jordan, undeniable hatchet job. And the more you reward hatchet jobs, the more hatchet jobs you'll get.

So I'm thinking of signing up to help him. I knew we would have a good conversation on this topic. All right, there you go. Mission accomplished. All right, we gotta take a break. A lot more to come, including MAGA based turning on Trump again. What's it about? We'll tell you when we come back.

Back on TYT, Jank and Jordan, with you guys. Also, Dav Mill and CDN North Dog Dad. Thank you for gifting your membership again. Jordan, what's next? Take a look at this. You also do have to bring in talent. We have plenty of talented people here. No, you don't.

No, you don't. Donald Trump is once again facing the wrath of his own MAGA base for essentially claiming that American workers are not sufficiently talented. And we're going to hear more from some of those outreach. right wingers soon, but first, Jenk, your two cents. Here's what I love that finally Trump's voters are beginning to see the Trump that we all know, which is an idiot who is part of the elites and the establishment and will just say stupid stuff right off the top of his head. Before they never caught him, I'll tell you why they're catching

him now. And even Laura Ingram caught him as you're about to see. Now, during this unusually contentious interview with Laura Ingram, Donald Trump bragged about how fabulously the economy is doing in his eyes, in large part thanks to his tariff policies. And that's when Laura Ingram brought up H-1B visas, which allows skilled foreign workers to come to the United States temporarily. And Trump completely stepped in it. Take a look. in nine months. That's the biggest in the history of the world. China's never done it, never done anywhere near that. And all that money is coming in, its investment, it's building auto plants, it's building AI plants. By the way, we're leading China by a lot on AI.

We have potentially the greatest, already it is. But when these things open up, there's never going to be a country like what we have right now. The Republicans have to talk about it. And does that mean the H-1B visa thing will not? be a big priority for your administration. Because if you want to raise wages for American workers, you can't flood the country with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of foreign workers. You also do have to bring in talent. We have plenty of talented people here. No, you don't. No, you don't. We don't have talented people here. No, you don't have certain talents and you have to, people have to learn. You can't take people off an unemployment, like an unemployment line and say, I'm going to put you into a factory or we're going to make missiles or I'm going to put you into.

How did we ever do it before? Now, the H-1B visa debate caused a stir early in Trump's term when you had his tech oligarch friends like Elon Musk arguing that there should be more H-1B visas arguing in favor of them, but then is MAGA OGs like Steve Bannon arguing against them. By the way, Musk's Tesla allegedly laid off thousands of their skilled American workers in 2024 and replaced them with cheaper foreign workers using H-1. B visas. Trump tried to placate his MAGA base by signing an executive order that it instituted a $100,000 fee for companies to obtain the visas back in September. But now he's thoroughly enraged them again by insulting American workers. Marjorie Taylor Green took issue with his comments, writing on X, I believe in the American people. I'm one of you. I believe you are good, talented, creative, intelligent, hardworking, and want to achieve. I'm solidly against you

being replaced by foreign labor, like with H-1Bs. I am solidly against allowing foreign students into our colleges and universities like 600,000 Chinese students just to financially prop them up. If they fail, they fail. The system in place isn't helping our young people anyways. She's referring to another moment in the interview there where Laura Ingram challenged Trump's plan to bring thousands of Chinese students into the country. He defended the policy and said, don't forget MAGA was my idea. Maga was nobody else's idea. I know what MAGA wants better than anybody else. But based on the responses from dozens of other MAGA figures, I'm not so sure that's true. Anthony Sabatini, a Republican politician from Florida,

said, this is insane. We are going to lose the midterms so badly. We've never seen an administration crash and burn in its first year so badly for no reason other than to appease donors and special interests. Trump has surrounded himself with the worst people. Tim Poole, right-wing podcaster, added, don't worry, Trump is bringing in more H-1Bs to make sure our young people are blanked. Conservative activist Mike Cernovich said Trump broke everyone's heart with this line about the American workforce and H-1Bs. He also accused Trump of only listening to donors, which Candace Owens co-signed. And on his show today, Steve Bannon said the H-1B program is indentured servitude to compete against Americans and take jobs for lower wages. As usual,

now the rest of Trump's cabinet is trying to do some damage control. Here's Treasury Secretary Scott Besant insisting that foreign workers are just a temporary fix. Take a look. I think the President's vision here is to bring in overseas workers where these jobs went. Who have skills? Who have the skills? Three, five, seven years to train the U.S. workers, then they can go home. The U.S. workers fully take over. So do you understand the concern that people have, hey, an American could have that

job, why you give it to a man? But American can't have that job. So it's specific skills. Because we haven't built ships in the U.S. for years. We haven't built semiconductors. So this idea of overseas partners coming in, teaching American workers, then returning home, that's a home run. Jank, what do you make of this?

Yeah, it's so complicated. So Trump's reaction is not complicated. I'll come back to that. But the H-1B visa issue is complicated. Why? It definitely has a use, it definitely has a value, but has it been abused, yes. So is it only? Is it only used for foreigners to come in, teach Americans a skill set and then leave? No way, they're totally making that up. That's actually a rare instance, right? Have I seen, and I'm not sure that it was in regards to H1B visas, but a similar topic where a friend of mine taught his replacements that were coming in from India,

how to do their jobs, and then those replacements took the jobs. And he didn't have a choice. They were going to be let go and their incentives, et cetera. Somebody was going to teach them anyway. My point is, it usually works in reverse. They don't usually have cheap labor, teach more expensive labor. They usually have expensive labor, teach cheaper labor, and then use cheaper labor for the rest of time, right? So don't get tricked by Scott Bessent in his nonsense propaganda or anything he ever says.

Okay, so all right. Now, but at the same time, there are some places where H-1B visas definitely make sense. I would not be in the camp of no, no, well, you got to ban these foreigners and there have no value to us at all and we don't need any stinking foreigners around here. No, there's plenty of jobs where, yes, unfortunately, that only people from other countries because of how specific the job is or because of other factors can do those jobs. And so I wouldn't want to foreclose that completely. On the other hand, have H-1B visas been abused to bring in less expensive labor? Yeah, of course they have. So if you wanted to reform it in a smart way, you bring people into the room, figure out, hey, how do we

put guardrails around it, et cetera? I think it makes sense. If you want to get rid of it, I'm not in favor of that. Now, is Donald Trump talking about reform? Is he talking about crafting anything in an intelligent way? Of course not, right? He comes in with a meat cleaver usually, but on this sign, he's saying, and his meat cleaver went into our backs. So while you're defending H-1B visas, you don't have to say stupid crap like the American people are not talented enough. No, it's, I mean, God, we have no one in government that ever represents us, right? Because if we had a government that cared about the average American, you would then actually try to figure out, hey, how can we incentivize business, individual,

etc. To be able to fill those jobs, those valuable jobs with American citizens. And then you would have an action plan for that and then you would have a plan for, yes, but from time to time we have to use H-1B visas here, but they really should be of limited scale and they should be for a specific purpose and then work together holistically to make that happen and to empower the American people who are plenty talented enough. We got 330 million people in this country and we built the most amazing things in the history the world, are we talented enough? Of course, of course we're talented enough. And so, but Trump,

this is what we've been trying to tell the right wing all along, Jordan. He's the establishment. He's just in a, he's just in a different sheep's clothing, right? Oh, yeah, I am a populist. And then he loves being an elitist and building golden ballrooms and, et cetera. And everything he's ever done is supported to his donors. Oh, I'm going to help Miriam Edelson with Israel. I'm going to help ExxonMobil with oil. I'm going to help the defense contractors with a needless war in Venezuela. And now all of a sudden, companies, corporations, and we're under corporate rule, want more H-1B visas. And he's like, yeah, Americans aren't talented. I need to bring into foreigners who are talented. What in the world happened to America first? So, no, this is,

I don't think either side is right if they're going to black and white on this issue, which actually requires nuance. Boarding for flight 246 to Toronto is delayed 50 minutes. Ugh, what? Sounds like Ojo time. Play Ojo? Great idea. Feel the fun with all the latest slots in live casino games and with no wagering requirements. What you win is yours to keep groovy.

Hey, I won! Boarding will begin when passenger Fisher is done celebrating. 19 plus Ontario only. Please play responsibly concerned by your gambling or that if someone close you call 1866531-2-60 or visit comexonterio.com.com.com. What do you think, Jordan? Yeah, I am with you 100%. I think there's a middle ground here that is the best way forward, right? I think H-1B's bringing in people from around the world to share insight, experience, intelligence will lead to greater advancement. That's a great thing that should be celebrated. You have people from all around the world who want to come here, work at your companies, study at your universities and share their

findings. That's great. We should celebrate that. Where you lose me is when companies try to exploit that by paying people lower wages. There should be a requirement of provision, legislation, something. If you are paying somebody, if you are bringing in somebody on an H-1B visa to work. You have to pay them the exact same salary as their peer group at the company. And if you don't have a peer, another company, a rival, or the competitive market rate, the idea that you can bring people in and pay them less is bogus. It doesn't fly with me. So I'm sympathetic to the Inventured Servitude thing, also because they're at risk of losing it, if they try to fight back or ask for more.

It's a very vulnerable position for people with those visas, especially now. But across the board, we're seeing this isolationist protectionist policy that I don't like. I don't want to live in that America. I want people from all over the world to come here, to share their experiences, their traditions, their knowledge. That makes America a unique place. That should be celebrated. But unfortunately, there's a part of the MAGA base in the broader right. movement that only wants, you know, the white, typical Christian American, and that's it.

Everybody else get out. I don't like that. I mean, we live in Los Angeles. What is so great about the city is how, you know, wildly different each neighborhood can be. You get different cultures, languages, experiences. I like that. And if they want this, you know, sterile, homogenous community, you could find that in rural America fine, but don't try to define the rest of America or don't try to make the rest of the country conform to what you want it to be. If you don't like diversity, that's a you problem. Don't make it ours. So I'm with you. It is, there is a, on H-1B specifically, there is a middle ground on these two competing arguments on the right. I think we should fight for it.

And it is interesting to see the MAGA base fight back against Trump and criticize them. Yeah, and I'll just remind people that, and this cuts in both directions, Elon Musk came in on an H-1B visa. He had a student visa first and then converted it to an H-1B visa, otherwise he couldn't have stayed. So, you know, there's a lot of arguments to be made about Elon Musk, but did he add to the U.S. economy? Well, he certainly did, right? And it has a lot of jobs been created at Tesla, SpaceX, et cetera, et cetera. Yes, of course they have. So whether no matter what you care, think about Elon Musk politics, and this was again confusing

because most of the right is on Elon Musk's side, but they're also against H-1B visas. So just acknowledge the realities of what H-1B has brought us, both good and bad. And I feel like the two sides never acknowledge, you know, the realities of the other side. It has it been abused? Definitely. Do we have enough people here that are super talented and we could direct in the for towards the future economy? Yes, definitely. But do we need folks from time to time on H-1B visas? I think so. And so I think that that we could do that nuance and and get it right, which is the balancing act that we always need. The extremes are usually not the right answer. Okay, we got to take another break here. All right, when we come back, We've got a lot more to bring you guys, and including, of course, the giant news about Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein.

We'll be right back. Earlier, Deb Melanie wrote a super chat in as well. Atrocious zero zeros, thank you for sending in a young tourist membership on YouTube. And Melody loves music, thank you for sending in five. We appreciate all you guys, we love doing this show with you guys. All right, I'm gonna tell you about one of our partners real quick, and then we'll get back to the news. Noble mobile is a new company that provides sell service for you guys. I switched to it, it took about five minutes, saving me a ton of money.

You only pay 50 bucks a month, plus if you don't use all your data, they give you money back at the a month. So please do yourself a favor. People are saving on average around $500 to $1,000 a year by switching. You don't have to switch your phone or nothing switches. There's no SIM card. Easy Peasy, okay? Go save some money. I changed and absolutely nothing about my phone has changed except the bill, which is much, much lower. Go.t.t.com slash switch, go.t.t.com slash switch. All right, Jordan, what's next? Take a look at this. This is the discussion I used to have with Elon all the time.

He come in the West Wing. He won't all these guarantees on the butt. I said, dude, you don't understand. You're asking people that make 42,000 bucks a year to essentially get all these tax breaks. Steve Bannon is once again feuding with Elon Musk. Specifically, Bannon was hammering Musk for demand. that the Trump administration not touch electric vehicle tax subsidies, which conveniently would have helped Americans buy Tesla's.

Jank, what are your two cents here? I love this civil war. And whose side am I going to be on? You're gonna see in a second. I think this one is uncomplicated, though gut-wrenching who I have to back on this one. Go ahead. Now, before Bannon started his tirade against Musk, he was discussing a recent development in the world of artificial intelligence. Last week, OpenAI's CFO, Sarah Fryer, startled investors when she suggested that in order to finance AI computing chips, Open AI could or should get government backing.

Here's that clip. And so this is where we're looking for an ecosystem of banks, private equity, maybe even. governmental, the ways governments can come to bear. Meaning like a federal subsidy or something? Meaning like just first of all, the backstop, the guarantee that allows the financing to happen. That can really drop the cost of the financing but also increase the loan to value. So the amount of debt that you can take on top of an equity portion for finance. So some federal backstop for chip investment.

Exactly. And I think we're seeing that. I think the US government in particular has been incredibly forward leaning, has really understood that AI has is almost a national strategic asset. Now that sparked immediate backlash, but Friar and Open AI CEO Sam Altman have since walked back, walked back those comments. But the damage was done. Now here is Bannon's response to that segment. Take a look. sit there and go, because this is a national security situation against the Chinese Communist Party,

because lo and behold, we can't let them win the AI race, that we're going to need government support. Just like the defense industry needs government support, we need government support. Now to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars, not simply on the data centers, but to power the data centers. And of course, the leaders of the climate change movement, all these progressives in the tech area, the tech bros, the oligarchs have now all got old-time religion and you can burn anything, do anything, just as long as they get power. No one has taken the time to walk the American people through this. This has to stop.

It has to stop. We kind of need a presentation on a, whoa, exactly what this is going. You don't want any regulation. It takes more, you have more regulation on a nail salon, on Capitol Hill, than you have on the entire, you know, a technology that could end the world. Bannon went on to explain why tech oligarchs are turning young Americans away from capitalism. Take a look. Then we got to talk about the economics of it. If the basic schmendricks are going to be the guarantor, and now they're talking about loans. If you either guarantor or a loan, that means U.S. taxpayer is in the deal. If you're in the deal, then you've got to get a piece of the ups.

Right now, they're treating you like a fool. They're just running around, the David Saxon world, just run around, Elon Musk will run around, running around, running to go to Craig Trayons in here, billions there, Huns of Baines, hey, it's all fine. Every private equity, every management team, of course you want the suckers to come in. The people don't run anything, right, to socialize the risk. Because remember, I said all of this is about risk mitigation, to socialize the risk. And you guys keep all the upside. That has to stop.

this is why young people don't believe in capitalism because you know what that is not capitalism that's corporatism jank what do you make of this they're watching the show come on keep it real i mean that's word for word what i say right so corporatism nobody even used that word until i'm turning into trump no one used the word corporatism but seriously like you guys have heard me talking about corporatism for years now all of a sudden everybody's talking about corporatism Okay, good, God bless. I love the zeal of the converted and everybody coming in our direction. But look at that, that's populist left and populist right, totally agreeing. And yes, it makes me uncomfortable to agree with Steve Bannon because there are other things that he believes in the populace right that I do not believe in at all, right?

But when it comes to economic issues, here, let's break it down. So it's not just that he said the word corporatism, who cares great, wonderful, right? And it's a word that exists. I was just getting more usage now, and I'm glad it's getting more usage because it perfectly describes, and that's why I've been used. using it for such a long time. What we're in right now, we're not in capitalism. Corporateism is corporate rule, and it hates capitalism because it wants to limit competition. It wants to limit free markets, and what it does is it captures the government.

That's why it's also called crony capitalism. It's not capitalism, it's the enemy of capitalism. So now, I've told you that a hundred times, I wrote it in my book, Justice is coming, you can see it. Number two, then finally, some folks in the right wing are going, hey, wait a minute, this sounds like socializing the wrists. Yes, that's what we've been saying forever. That one, Naomi Klein, is brilliant on it. She's written books on it. What corporatists do is they have socialism for the cost and capitalism for the profits, right?

Well, that's not how capitalism works. No, capitalism is you deal with your own costs and revenue and you make your business work. No, we and right now, I mean, I can give you a thousand examples as I have over the decades here as we've been telling you guys. No, they're robbing us blind. They're dumping all their costs onto us. Look at this. Now the AI guys need a lot of energy to power their companies. All right, well, great, go get the energy. That's part of your business model. That's part of your cost. They're like, well, we don't want to pay the cost. We want the average American to pay the cost,

which leads us to point number three of agreement, which is, wait a minute, so when are we getting equity in your company? And if you watch the Young Turks, you've heard me say that for year after year after year, right? And Anna as well. So when we do the research for the drug companies through our universities,

why aren't we getting money back for that? If a private company pays for the research of drug companies, they are going to get equity in that drug company, And if that drug company does really well, then they'll do really well. And they'll get their money back and then some, right? But when the American taxpayer pays for it, they're like, shut up, that's it. You served your role as the piggy bank. You get nothing.

Our beloved corporate donors. Oh, oops, did I mention their donors of the politicians? And by the way, yes, of Republican and Democratic politicians. So, and again, it's not just about AI or just the drug companies. Almost every industry is using this to rob the American people blind. And I'm not even getting it, the subsidies. I'm just talking about the bailouts and dumping their costs on us. Then you'll lay around the subsidies, right?

Let alone the bailouts. Okay, so we bail out all the big banks. Why didn't we get equity? If a private company had given them the amount of money, the U.S. taxpayers gave the banks back in 2008, we would have owned all the banks. They had no leverage at all. We would have gotten minimum 90% of their equity.

Why didn't we at least get 10% so we can now have a piece of their record breaking profits? Because no, you pay the cost because they bribed all of our politicians. And look at that. And here I'm going to give some interesting credit to, I'm already uncomfortable enough with the credit I'm giving to ban. but to Trump a little bit too, right? Because Elon must, according to Bannon's description, if it's to be believed, walks in and he's the largest donor, even more so than Miriam. I forget, between him and Miriam Edelson, it was close.

They were in the top three together. And some random conservative dude air who was like, oh, protect my money, lower taxes, right? Anyway, Elon walks in with the top three donors and he's like, okay, now here's the subsidies I want back from the American people. Give it to me, give it to me, give it to me. I already bribed you. I already gave you all this money. I gave you $250 million and then some. So now you give me $250 billion or $2.5 trillion in these sums. I mean, brazen, brazen. So the credit to Trump is, apparently he didn't immediately give it to him. And that pissed off Elon.

And now we're in this kind of cold war between Elon and Bannon and Trump and all these different guys. So credit where credit is due. But although he did give Mary Madelson everything she wanted, and he did give all the oil companies everything they wanted. and all the drug companies, everything they wanted. I don't know, maybe it would have just taken longer to give Elon what he wanted, but Elon definitely apparently wanted it. And so it wasn't like, oh, I love the American people. I'm giving all this money to Trump just because I care about America first. And remember the H-1Bs, just give them all to me, give me all the subsidies,

give me all the money, and now I want to backstop. Now, finally, Jordan, to the particular point here about the federal backstop, they literally walked it back, as you said. And they said, well, you know, she said, I use the word backstop, but I think that's where the confusion comes in. And I'm not sure that that's really what I meant. No, we just saw the tape. She said, do you mean a federal backstop? And she, the person from the AI company said, exactly.

No, she meant it. There's no. And then she explained it. It's a guarantee. When the U.S. government, so here, I'll give you an example, and we'll use TYT as the example, okay. If the government weirdly magically decided, you know what, any loan that TYT gets as a media company, we're going to guarantee it. That would be a monumental advantage.

Okay, why? Then you go to a bank, you go, it's backed by the federal government. You have literally nothing to lose. So instead of charging me 10%, 5%, whatever you're going to charge me, charge me 1% or 2% because it's literally guaranteed. It's free money, right? So then you get a much lower interest rate, your costs are much lower because you don't have to pay more interest. Okay, and then on top of that, I go, hey, you know what, I don't

want to borrow $10 million anymore. Now I want to borrow $100 million because it's guaranteed. They go, well, it's guaranteed. So all of a sudden you have extra leverage and you could borrow all that money. So those are all the advantages that the AI companies want that no other company gets, unless again, they're among the other companies that have also bribed the U.S. government, right? So that is not the free market. That's the exact. opposite of the free market. That's saying I'm going to pick that winner. And I'm not going to do it based on whether they're better. They're good at competition. They're good in the free market. I'm going to pick them based on the fact that they gave me a bribe. And now I'm going to

take not my money, but your money American taxpayers. And I'm going to pay back that bribe a thousandfold because it's not my money. It's the suckers at home that believe in this gross government, right? And that's how this game is played. But the good news, don't lose track of the good the news. Holy cow right wing populists and left wing populists agree and are now pushing back together. No, no, let me see your equity. You want subsidies, you want backstops, you want all that? Let's do a deal. I went to Wharton, I'll do that deal. I'll take 80% of your company before you know what the hell hit you, okay? And I'll take it not for me, but for the American taxpayer. You still want it? You still want it? Oh no, but those are my profits. I want the profits.

I just want you to pay the cost. No, the answer is hell no. But all our politicians are dirty and corrupt. So we need to find one guy who's going to say hell no on behalf of the American people. Jordan. Yeah, I'm kind of mystified by this right wing, like, anti-corporate push because you see flashes like this. You see people like Bannon make these comments that I largely agree with. I'll get to the EV component in a minute.

But in the first Trump term, he proposed raising taxes on the wealthy and then the rest of the movement shot him down. This isn't to say I like him. I think he's got a lot of concerning aspects to his public persona. But on some things, we align. And I think that's something worth fighting for, fighting back against this corporate control of our government. But then he invokes EVs. And yes, of course, Musk would want that because of Tesla. but in general, I think those are good, right?

Like, let's be clear. I think what they were proposing with the Inflation Reduction Act during the Biden administration only providing those subsidies if you buy a union-made EV, that's even better. That's a way to keep Elon Musk out of the equation because he has fought Tesla unionization while also incentivizing the purchase of EVs. It's something we desperately need to tackle and transition to with the Trump re-election.

There's been a major setback. We're still subsidizing oil companies. You and I have talked about this. You've covered this for years. Billions of dollars every year for oil companies. At what cost? It hurts the environment. It hurts our agriculture.

It hurts everything. So when you are reliant on combustion vehicles, When you were relying on traditional cars, I'm all for subsidies for EVs. Unfortunately with Trump, we don't have those. On other things, yeah, no, the excess subsidies on corn makes us all unhealthy. The excess subsidies in general, on oil, absolutely not. But on this thing, I kind of see how he's approaching it just because he doesn't like Elon Musk. But I do actually like subsidies on EVs.

Yeah, I have the same policy on that, which is, look, I get it. When it's a nascent industry and the government is trying to stimulate that industry and get it up off the ground, there's logic in it. Why we do $35 billion a year in oil subsidies is mystifying. That's not a nascent industry. It's a mature industry. It's a deeply, deeply profitable industry. Those oil subsidies are nothing but an absolute. absolute robbery, flat out 100% robbed the average American to give to corporate donors that

have legally bribed all of our politicians, okay? So the EVs are a different situation because you're like, you're trying to accomplish a goal here, and you're trying to get an industry going on its own two feet, and then you're supposed to let it go, by the way. But even so, Jordan, I would take equity. Like you want subsidies, okay, then let's make a reasonable deal. If you're a nascent industry, maybe I take 20% equity, maybe I take 10% equity. But don't tell me that American taxpayers have to give you money for free, and we're never

going to get anything in return. No, I'm at a blanket no on that now. No, I love that, especially for scientific advancements, pharmaceuticals. Don't, we're not investing. Why are we investing in the research process of these, funding largely the research and development of these new drugs and then have to go and pay full price. You're lucky if you have insurance thanks to this government. And then you got to pay hundreds of dollars for essential medication? No, no, no, no. We funded it. We get it. Yeah. All right. Interestingly, people fighting for the average American has broken out in America. So we'll take that silver lining. We'll take that a little bit of ray of hope and run with it.

All right, guys, we're going to take a quick break here when we come back, the Epstein story. It is huge, you do not want to miss it. And there are important nuggets in there that people have not yet emphasized that I need you to know about. So stay right here. They knew and they let it happen.