The Young Turks - Trump Was Allegedly Present During Hush Money Agreements And Trump Faces ANOTHER Investigation

Episode Date: December 14, 2018

Reports have surfaced implicating Trump in criminal activity during the campaign. New York has launched another federal investigation into Trump. Get exclusive access to our best content. http://tyt.com/GETACCESS Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to The Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. All right, welcome to the Young Turks. It's a wonderful day in America. Donald Trump is reeling. We've got Republicans that I will chant later in the show should be locked up.

Okay. And Young Turks is going to do a five-hour special for you guys. We are. We're not playing around. Sometimes people make the mistake of thinking we're playing around, but in reality we're at all playing around. He's a very stable, serious person. That's right.

No playing. You will have no playing around by me. Okay, so two hours we normally do 6 to 8 p.m. of course, as you guys know, t.t.com slash live and all the other wonderful places that you watch the show. And then tonight, Thursday and night, December 13th, 8 to 11 p.m. Eastern, TYRT.com slash live exclusively, the progressive agenda for 2019. Here are the folks who are going to be on that special, not a big deal. Rokana, Randy Bryce, otherwise known as Iron Stash, Abdul al-Said, Delamania, pronounced like lasagna, fun, just having fun.

Zach Ringleston. And these are all folks who ran for office. Ben Jellis, former head of the NWACP, a name you might recognize, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Brandt Welder, Richard Ojetta, here come Ojetta, James Thompson, Raul Grahalla, Mike Mineta, Kari, Eastman, Pramilla Giapal, Brianna Westbrook, and then our own Emma Biglin, Kod Kalinsky, Jimmy Dor, Stevo, Anna, John, Alonzo Baden, Ida Rodriguez, and even Hassan Piker. So I brawl with that communist at the end of the program. And the whole point of it is, what should be the progressive agenda for 2019?

You will hear from all those progressives, oh, not even on the list. Hello, Rosario Dawson, also joining us. So what should we push forward? That's not a foregone conclusion. What should we do if the Democratic establishment does not want to put things up for a vote? Well, I had a super interesting conversation with Rokana about that. Do not miss that because I think it's a really interesting arbiter of things to come. So three hours special for you guys.

And guys, look, we're almost at the end of our membership drive, but we have got to get there. And there's a good opportunity to, if you like this home of progressives and you like the progressive message, we're bringing you. and all these folks are collecting for you guys. Please join. You can do that at t.y.t.com slash join. It's just $4.99 for the basic level. You get a progressive Netflix. But also, there are other ways to help out.

You can donate on the website, t.y.t.com slash yes is a way of doing that. You can give gifts in this holiday season, t.yt.com slash gift. And of course, we're doing the amplifier program to amplify our message. It helps home of progressives. and you get the progressive Netflix, and we get our message out to other people in the media and students as well. So right now you could buy YoungTurst membership for Face the Nation on CBS, The Atlantic. Last week tonight with John Oliver, Politico Morning Media.

In fact, I've got an interview with Politico tomorrow. I mean, you guys are reaching him in different ways. The Intercept, Washington Post, C-SPAN, so many others, please check out t.yt.com slash Amplify. And if you give $150 or more, you get one of our special shirts for this program, too. Right now, I think we're at about $38,700 or so. Ideally, I'd love to get to $39,000 by the end of tonight. I know that's a lot of members, that's 300 members, but I believe that we can do it, and we must do it. We've got to make this a sustainable home for progressives.

There's a war coming in 2019. The establishment will attack Bernie Sanders, Accio-Cortez, Rokana, over and over and over again. Elizabeth Warren, all the people on our side will be attacked. Who will defend them? We will. We will defend those ideas and principles. So t-y-t.com slash join or amplify to help out. Okay, Anna, let's get started.

Big, big news today. Lots of big news today. All right. It appears that Donald Trump's legal troubles are mounting, especially considering. a new report from NBC indicating that sources indicate that Trump was present during talks about paying off or paying hush money to various women that he had affairs with. Now according to NBC News, the statement of admitted facts, which was written by AMI, that's American Media Inc. admitted making $150,000 payment in concert with the campaign and says that Pecker

Michael Cohen, and at least one other member of the campaign were in the meeting. Now NBC News also notes that Trump was first identified as attending the meeting by the Wall Street Journal. So it's because of the cooperation by American Media Inc. that we are now aware, we have some evidence that indicates that Trump was in fact present. Now, a statement of admitted facts says that AMI's principal purpose in making the payment was to suppress the woman's story, and the woman referenced here is Karen McDougal, so as to prevent it from influencing the election. So this is small news and huge news. Let me explain.

Small news in that, well, who else was going to be in the room? I mean, Michael Cohen said that he worked with a presidential candidate to make these hush payments. Was he randomly working with Jeb Bush? Was he working with Martin O'Malley? No, of course it was gonna be Donald Trump. But it's huge news in that the news organizations will simply not report it, even though it's super obvious. They could hint at it, et cetera, like well, Michael Cohen was a personal attorney for Donald Trump.

He says there was a presidential candidate who made the hush payments with him, et cetera. But now they can officially report it as, yes, we have a source that says that obviously the person who coordinated the Hush payments was Michael Cohen and Donald Trump along with the AMI. That's the Parenthood Company of National Inquirer. So the statement of admitted facts that we keep referring to is what prosecutors put into the record. They're saying we're not going to prosecute AMI, but that is because in return they have given us valuable evidence about the law breaking of others.

And now we know for a fact that it's Donald Trump. And so this, now that it becomes more and more official, it becomes perfectly official when the prosecutors say, yes, it was Donald Trump, here it is, Donald Trump, here's the recording, et cetera, but now at least there are inside sources that are confirming it. Well, it puts lawmakers in a very, very difficult spot. Now, clearly, and again, Andrew Napolitano on Fox News has been saying this day after day, and we keep giving him credit, he's very conservative. for being principled, saying, look, the guy, it's, this is lawbreaking.

Are you going to do something or are you not? It's a felony, he committed a felony. Federal prosecutors say he committed a felony. That is incredibly serious. And that's why this is huge news. One other part of it that is relatively new is, and we already had recorders, recordings of Michael Cohen talking to Donald Trump, they even got leaked to the press about the hush payments.

But now they say he was in the room directing the payments. Well, that puts them at the very center of the conspiracy to break campaign finance laws. Exactly. So it really does provide a one-to punch for the prosecutors in this case, because again, you have that recording, which we're going to get to in just a second. I want to play it for you guys so you can remember what the conversation sounded like. But more importantly, you take this statement of admitted.

facts from AMI and you couple it with that recording. And I mean, the proof is at this point irrefutable, right? Trump can't deny it. And remember, Trump has changed his story over and over again when it comes to this particular investigation. You know, whether it was I never had an affair, I never knew about the payments. In fact, back in April of this year, while he was boarding Air Force One, he said this. Do you know about the $130,000 payment to selling angels?

Then why did Michael Cohen make it if there was known to the rally agent? You have to ask Michael Cohen. Michael's attorney and you'll have to ask Michael. Do you know where he got the money to make that payment? No, I don't know. Well, after Michael Cohen agreed to work with federal prosecutors, we did get an opportunity to hear from Cohen. Cohen, and that was when the audio of their talk regarding the payoffs was released to the public, and we're going to get to that in a second.

Yeah, before we get to the recording, and before I get to Trump's defense, I want Trump supporters to just admit a couple of things. It's clear his day there. He says, I didn't know about the payments, and I didn't have an affair with her, okay? Now he absolutely admits that he did know about the payments, and he's, well, I'll get to his defense He says, yeah, I did the payments because I didn't want to have my family embarrassed. It didn't have to do with politics. Just a wild coincidence that I happen to be running for president.

So that's why he claims it's not illegal. If it had to do with the campaign, it would be illegal. And National Inquirer and Michael Cohen both clearly state, yes, it absolutely had to do with the campaign. We were coordinating a conspiracy to make sure that this information did not hurt his presidential chances. So, but he says, yeah, I made the payments. You just saw him on the tape, they're saying, I don't know anything about the payments,

I didn't make the payments, I don't know anything about it. So that's a 100% lie, you can't even, so just admit it and move on. And look, you could say, hey, he lied about an affair, I'd lie about an affair, it's understandable, he didn't want to be embarrassed. I don't mind, I don't care what your excuse is, but you have to admit that he absolutely positively lied about that. And you could say, hey, look, he wasn't under oath, there are no consequences, but he did. I'm just trying to see if there's anything.

that a MAGA guy will admit to, that's an actual fact. Like, I don't know if they would admit that the sky is blue or that the grass is green. You saw him lie there with your own, you know, eyes. So can you at least acknowledge that he lied on an incredibly important matter, which is now considered a, you know, a felony? Not the lie itself, but the underlying matter, it's a felony. Now whether you think he did the felony, I mean, by the way, you know, to this day, he says, oh, I didn't sleep with her.

It's just paid her off. I'm just paying them off randomly. Come on, do you believe that? If you're a MAGA guy, you don't believe that. Nobody believes that. Who cares? Who cares what the MAGA guys think, right? They know he lied.

They don't care that he lied. They don't care that he broke a federal law in these illegal campaign contributions. And again, to be absolutely clear, this is not about his affair. I don't care about his affair. Most people don't care about his affair. Having an affair is not a federal crime. paying hush money to the women that you've had an affair with, or paying an organization, a media outlet, or conspiring with a media outlet to catch and kill a story about one of his

affairs, that is a federal crime. And we're having mounting evidence now that indicates that Trump not only knew about it, but was in the room as these negotiations took place. And further clarity on that. So someone giving you above the federally mandated limit for campaigns is the heart of the crime. So Michael Cohn cannot give $130,000 on behalf of the campaign to quiet Stormy Daniels. American Media Incorporated cannot give $150,000 on behalf of the campaign to quiet Karen McDougal. If Trump had paid it himself directly, that might actually be a different issue.

But the fact that he had these people paid, and they told American Media Incorporated, don't worry, Trump will eventually funnel the money back to you. But he never did. And at some point they decided, oh, then it would be super obvious that we bought and spiked the story because of the campaign, and that's a felony. So never mind, don't give us the money. But they'd already given the money on behalf of the campaign, so they were caught. Why do you think they admitted to prosecutors that they broke the law?

is they had him dead to rights, and also partly because of this tape. Exactly. So let's take a listen. This was a tape that was released earlier this year featuring Trump's talk with Michael Cohen about paying off hush money. I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend, David, so that I'm gonna do that right away. I've actually come up and I spoke to me and I've spoken to Alan Weisselberg about how

to set the whole thing up with funding. Yes. And it's all the stuff, all the stuff. Because you never know where that company, you never know what he's going to be. Correct. So I'm all over that. And I spoke to Alan about it when it comes time for the financing,

which will be... What finance? We'll have to pay you. No, no, no, no, no. I got... No, no, no. So, Trump is so funny, because they're talking about keeping these women quiet and how this, they're gonna set up a shell company, that's part of the illegality there, to funnel

the money so that Trump is not directly paying it, so it can't be traced back to him, but that's what gets him in trouble in the first place, anyway, and Cohen's like, and then we gotta pay, and Trump's like, whoa, whoa, whoa, what money? But the money that you're, he just, he's such a skisking. Am artist, that even when people are funneling money to help him in his campaign to cover up his mistresses, even then he's like, well, I mean, you're sure, are you sure? And he's like, fine, fine, let's pay it in cash, right? And Michael Cohen's like, no, no, no, no, no, don't pay it in cash.

That's more suspicious. You funnel it through a company so that it seems legitimate, like legitimate business interaction that you had with him. He's not only is he criminal, but as usual, he's so dumb. What do we take our bag of cash over? You know, what do we do that? Should I send Tony over? Yeah.

Okay. Well, one other thing I wanted to just quickly add is a response to the defense, because the defense is, no, this had nothing to do with helping his campaign. These payments were all an effort to prevent embarrassing his family. But timing matters. So why did he pay off Stormy Daniels, you know, just I believe it was days to the election? It was right before the general election took place. I think that that matters.

And the defense is, in my opinion, ridiculous considering how this all went down and considering the testimony that we're now getting from both Michael Cohen and AMI. And last thing on that is, look, Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels affairs both happened a long time ago, long as in like 10 years ago. So he had eight years, seven years, five years, he had all this time to Anna's point to make payments if it was about his family. And people had actually reported in the press earlier. Remember, Stormy Daniels gave a revealing interview about it years ago.

And he didn't pay her then, he didn't try to hush her up then, only when he started running for president is when he gets other people to funnel the hush money to them in this illegal conspiracy. And so, and that's a technical and legal term. This is a conspiracy to commit a crime, which in this case was a campaign finance violation. So, like I said before, now that we know with even more certainty, the only question that remains is whether Congress is going to do anything about it. Now there are other investigations involving Donald Trump, so let's get to the next one.

And these, by the way, these aren't even related to Russia, like these are other investigations. It's kind of insane. Federal prosecutors in Manhattan are looking into the way the Trump campaign spent its record amount of inauguration funds. Now this was money that the Trump campaign received or the, you know, Trump's administration received through massive donations from big corporate donors. And federal prosecutors in Manhattan are investigating whether Trump's 2017 inaugural committee actually misspent some of the record $107 million it raised from donations.

Diverting funds from the organization, which was registered as a nonprofit, could violate federal law. Now, this is a story reported by the Wall Street Journal, and it talks about some of the specific donors who gave massive amounts of money to Trump's inauguration committee. And there was a little bit of, you know, bribery taking place. Believe it or not, there's still some forms of bribery that are outlawed in America. It does seem stunning. It does seem sunny, yes.

Now, the criminal probe by the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office, which is in its early stages, also is examining whether some of the committee's top donors gave money in exchange for access to the incoming Trump administration, policy concessions, or to influence official administration positions. There are some specific people mentioned, which I'll get to in just a second, but Jang Trump in. Yeah, first of all, I love how we found out about this, as usual, from Michael Cohen's recordings. I told you, the minute that they raided his offices and house, Trump and

everybody else was toast. And bad guys do this often. They record other people without their permission just in case they want to use it against them. And so Donald Trump did that a lot, and so did Michael Cohn, his attorney. But the problem is, and they never take this to the account, and it's actually quite stunning, what if they get your record? What if the authorities get your recordings, then you're also in trouble. Same exact problem that Richard Nixon had. He recorded all the Oval Office meetings, and then, of course, he wanted to burn them, but it was too late, and that led to his downfall. So very similar here in Michael Cohen's case, and in this particular story, I'm a little torn because what they charge is potentially significantly corrupt.

And we're going to give you a case here that seems like the most obvious bribery you've ever seen in your life, right? But the reason I'm torn on it is because who are we kidding? All this is bribes. Everything in Washington is a bribe. So it's a bit of a joke here to be like, oh, we found one piece of wrongdoing here. It turns out a donor gave money to get something in return. You don't say, really?

So it bothers me that we've agreed upon the fiction that the rest of the donations are not bribes when they clearly are, but if they couldn't even, and this is so classic Trump, they allow for legalized bribery in this system as a matter of course, and you still couldn't figure out a way to take it legally? Allegedly. Allegedly, you schmuck, okay? Right, I know, that's the miraculous part of this story. But I want to add another wrinkle to the way federal prosecutors found out about the potential

misuse of these funds. So as Jenk had mentioned, it was through Michael Cohen's audio recordings. In one of those recordings, there was one specific woman who actually was raising the issue about how these funds were being used. And that's what tipped the federal prosecutor. So FBI agents obtained a recorded conversation between Michael Cohen and Stephanie Winston Wolkhov, who actually used to be one of the advisors to the first lady, in which she expressed concern about how the inaugural committee was spending the money.

So she brings that up, it's being recorded through this raid of Michael Cohen's office and his apartment. They obtain that recording and it tips them off to the possible misuse of funds. Now Trump's funds came largely from wealthy donors and corporations who gave $1 million or more including casino billionaire Sheldon Aedelson and AT&T and Boeing Company, right? Now, Manhattan federal prosecutors have talked to someone already. It's a Tennessee developer, Franklin Haney, for documents related to a $1 million donation he made to Trump's inaugural committee.

Now, he had hired Michael Cohen at the time serving as Trump's personal lawyer to help obtain a $5 billion loan from the energy department for a nuclear power project. So that's the one that's super clear. Anyone with any sense, it doesn't matter where you are on the political spectrum, so this guy gives a million bucks to the inaugural committee to curry favors with the Republican administration. Then he hires the president's personal lawyer, funnels money to him, and in return, he'd like a $5 billion project from the government. Now if you hate big government, that's exactly what you hate.

If you hate crony capitalism, that's exactly what you hate. And if you hated the swamp, that's exactly what you hate. And so conservatives should be seething over that. Progressives obviously can't stand that. That's corruption defined. But that goes to my point. Why do you think Boeing gave the million bucks? Why do you think AT&T gave the million bucks?

Like the corporations are untouchable, right? Like, oh, AT&T, they must have a legitimate purpose. No, their purpose is to influence the government so they can get favors. Favors like killing net neutrality, which is what Donald Trump did. His administration did AT&T a much bigger favor. That might be worth more than $5 billion. So Boeing, well, they sell stuff to foreign countries like Saudi Arabia. And when Saudi Arabia chopped a reporter up into pieces, Donald Trump said, no, we've got to protect

Boeing's contracts, and the defense contractor's contracts. You think that Boeing and AT&T are giving money to politicians for their health, for charity? Who's stupid enough to believe that other than the United States Supreme Court and every corrupt politician in Washington? Ben Shapiro. And Ben Shapiro, yes, fair enough. So it's all bribes, it's all bribes. But Haney, if they went outside the law, and it looks like here there's some potential

for that and made it a little bit more clear, there are, yes, still laws against corruption. If you don't follow the correct way of doing corruption in America, and you could go to prison, a lot of people could be in a lot of trouble. There's a lot more to investigate in this story. Of the $103 million it's spent, for just in our universe, that's twice more than what Obama's spent in the last record back in 2009. And that was outrageous. I mean, that was extravagant and lavish, and we criticized that at the time, right?

This more than doubled it. Edelson, the guy would have the casino billionaire. He wants more than anybody else. He wants tax cuts. He wants to make his sure that there are no unions and wages are lower. He has foreign policy interests, et cetera, et cetera, right? He's been getting everything that he's been wanting. Every one of these guys on the list has gotten the things that they want.

So, out of the 103 million that they spent, 61 million is somewhat accounted for, but they're tracking down all those expenses. But the rest of it, the 42 million, they're like, what does that mean? I mean, they're just throwing around millions of dollars totally unaccounted for. And yes, there is potential for illegal actions here. And I hope they chase it down to the end of the earth. And if these guys were stupid enough to do it outside the law, they should suffer the significant and heavy consequences, and all Americans should be in favor of that.

If you hate the swamp, this is the swamp to find. We gotta take a break, but when we come back, we are going to discuss Trump's funding for the border wall. Much of the conversation has been about Democrats refusing to give him the $5 billion he wants, but it looks like there are some Republicans who aren't on his side either. We're gonna tell you that story and more when we come back. All right, back on a Young Turks. Jank and Anna with you guys.

I got a lot to read for you because they're great. First, folks who are participating in the Amplify program, Josh Deekman from Akron, Ohio. Thank you, Josh, $150, you're going to get a T-shirt, and three journalism students get Young Turks membership. I love this program. Do you imagine of almost all the journalism students in the country have Young Turks membership?

We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-The Republic or UNFTR. As a Young Turks fan, you already know that the government, the media, and corporations are constantly peddling lies that serve the interests of the rich and powerful. But now there's a podcast dedicated to unraveling those lies, debunking the conventional wisdom. In each episode of Un-B-The Republic or UNFTR, the host delves into a different historical episode or topic that's generally misunderstood or purposely obfuscated by the so-called powers that be, featuring in-depth research, razor-sharp commentary, and just the right amount of vulgarity, the UNFTR podcast takes a sledgehammer to what you thought you knew about some of the nation's most sacred historical cows.

But don't just take my word for it. The New York Times described UNFTR as consistently compelling and educational, aiming to challenge conventional wisdom and upend the historical narratives that were taught in school. For as the great philosopher Yoda once put it, You must 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. I can't imagine that, yes. Yeah, and you know what? Like 10 years later, when the Republicans understand what happened, they'd be like, wait, no! Too late. Anyway, Michael Scott, look at that, Michael Scott from Naperville, Illinois.

I love your show. Yes. Well, congratulations to all the good folks working at Dunder Mifflin. I know you've heard that a million times. Sorry. Anyway, Michael, thank you, 150 bucks. You're going to also get a t-shirt as well. So t-y-t.com slash Amplify.

Let's spread that message to everyone. Now let me read a couple of member comments. Gabby Marita says, I'm still super curious how Sean Hannity fits into the Michael Cohen saga. That association can't possibly have been about a simple, innocent real estate consultation. You know, people forget about that. I forgot about that. Thank you, Gabby. That's a good point.

It's not going to be relevant. I don't think to the president in any of that drama, which is far more important. But it is a little curiosity. What did Michael Cohen do for Sean Hannity? He is the fixer. What needed to be fixed? It's a good question. Silver Harlow writes in, that pause of Anna's before Affairs was probably her throwing up a little

in her mouth from having to contemplate Trump having affairs. I was actually trying to figure out which word I wanted to use. Yeah. And I just decided to keep it simple and say affairs. Right. Colin writes in, AMI owns the National Inquirer, so purveyors of fake news are taking down Donald Trump. Just not in the way that he expected, but that's a great, great point. Thank you, Colin.

Last one from the member section, Bill says, can we talk about the massive push by the liberal media class to come together around Beto, a centrist Democrat with no real legislative wins? Bill, we will talk about that a little bit later in the program. Don't miss that segment. and CNN decided they were gonna do their top 10 contenders on the Democratic side for 2020. It was one of the more unbearable videos that I had to sit through today. Yeah, where was Bernie Sanders on the list? Who do they have at number one? That's a great story.

Do they have Beto on the list? Where is he? Anyway, so we'll get to that a little bit later in today's program. Of course, this is why we, one of the reasons why we tell you about membership. If you're a member, you could stream or download the show anytime you want. So, and never miss any of it. T.y.t.com slash join. We go to Twitter real quick.

The real Larry Vetter says, remember back during the debate with Clinton, Trump brought and Bill Clinton's accusers to sit and be seen in the auditorium. Wouldn't this be around the time Trump was arranging the payoffs for his own affairs? That is very true. Great point. Thank you. And last one is Aeson Man in YouTube Super Chat saying, hey guys, just bought my membership after about 10 months of listening to you guys, glad to join the progressive force that is the

Young Turks family. Did you buy the membership through t.t.com slash Anna? Now, you could obviously do it the correct way, which is to buy it through t yt.com slash jank. Jank. I can't get any love in here, man. You know, this is the thanks you get. You start a network, you work your ass off for 16 years, and then you go, wah, wah, wah, wow.

Oh, and I don't work my ass off? Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah. All right, okay, so gee, I wonder who's in first and who's in second. Can't tell from my bitterness. Okay, so thank you for being a member. And yes, that does make you a part of the Young Turks family, and we super appreciate it. All right, lots of stories to get to. And don't miss tonight's special, okay, Rokana, Rosario Dawson, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,

Iron Stash, so many more, all talking about what should be the progressive agenda for 2019. It starts right after the show at 8 p.m. Eastern on t.com slash live. All right, Anna, what's next? Earlier this week, Donald Trump threatened to shut down the government if he doesn't receive the $5 billion he demands to fund the border wall. Now, through a very hostile conversation and meeting with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, Pelosi tried to communicate with Trump about the fact that he does not have enough votes to get the funding for the border wall. In fact, here's the interaction right now.

But there are no votes in the House, a majority of votes, for a wall, no matter where you start. If I needed the votes for the wall in the House, I would have them in one session would be done. It doesn't help because we need 10 Democrats in the Senate. It doesn't help for me to take a vote in the House where I will win easily with the Republicans. It doesn't help to take that vote. So I want to say a couple of things here. One, in our initial coverage of that, I stand by the things that I said, because I still

didn't love Schumer's body language or the way he handled. But I have to walk it back a little bit, as I told you on yesterday's show, too. Because Pelosi really did do a great job of agitating him. And she called it the Trump shutdown, and eventually at the end of the 16-minute interaction, he was finally like, okay, yeah, it is my shutdown, what are you gonna do about it, right? And in that case, she was like, oh, you won't get the votes in the House, even from the Republicans, poke, he's like, oh yeah, I will, I will, no, you won't, poke. And he's like, oh, yeah, I get it right away, I get it right away.

And now she knows the vote better than he does. Of course, he doesn't know anything, right? Of course he hasn't prepared, and she knows that. So now, since he publicly declared it, there's a world of pressure on the Republicans in the House to get him those votes, which they don't have, she was right. So now he's put them in a difficult situation. They're all in a panic because the idiot got goaded and just saying, I can get it right away, right away, oops. Now, to be fair to you, and I know you love it when people are fair to you, it's not that difficult to agitate Trump.

But I will say that, you know, getting the admission from Trump about the government shut down and how he'll own it was important, especially considering some of the news that broke today. So Nancy Pelosi was right. It appears that Trump does not have the votes necessarily. in the House to secure the $5 billion for the wall. And so there is, part of the government is set to run out of money or funding by December 21st. So they gotta pass something. But it appears that between now and December 21st, members of Congress are only gonna work about four days. And there have been some pretty important votes as of late that the GOP just didn't

show up for. So Republicans are concerned that they are not gonna have the votes. necessary to fund the wall. So by Wednesday evening, okay, by yesterday, GOP leaders still had not settled on what vehicle they would use to fund the wall or if they would even take a vote this week to do so. In fact, Representative Scalise's team did not whip a $5 billion wall package, but they did a bed check to figure out which lawmakers were in the capital voting. Since the November 6th midterm election, scores of lawmakers, including those who lost their seats

and others who won higher office have been skipping votes, complicating vote counting efforts. Some of the Republicans are retiring, they're like, oh, come on, man, I already took, like, I'm done, I'm not going to come in and do these stupid votes. So anyway, but I love this story on a couple of fronts because it's embarrassing that Donald Trump, that's always fun, but also because it has these hilarious political terms like whip the vote and do a bed check. And later, Donald Trump is considering beating Nancy. I see Pelosi with a Christmas tree, okay?

That's like literal. Not a literal Christmas tree, but it's like a phrase being used. Right, it's a literal phrase. He's not actually going to beat her with an actual Christmas tree. Although it's all chuppie. Right. So, but anyway, my favorite out of all those, though, is the bed check. What?

I don't even know what that. I mean, I know what is implied, but why bed check? That's a very strange. They're checking to see if they wet the bed. No, I'm kidding. So in the old days, like, you know, if you're in a dorm or whatever, they would do a bed check or an army to see who's literally in the beds and you count the heads. So in the context of politics, what that means is who's in town to even be able to vote? Because if they're not in town, you can't count them as a positive vote.

Can I just give you some of the numbers regarding some of the votes that took place this week? So this week, our lawmakers approved the farm bill, and 24 lawmakers missed the vote on the farm bill Wednesday, including 17 Republicans. They're just not showing up. Yeah, who I want, stay, stay, stay, who I want, go, go, go. Run, run, run. It's fun. I'm having a great time today, reading about all this stuff.

Now, although they, by the way, I do have to say the one not fun part of it, not related to this story, but they did muster just enough votes, 206 to 203 to 2. keep us in the war in Yemen. So Paul Ryan did his wet bedding check and all, you know, and his Christmas trees and all that stuff to say, yes, we're still with the barbaric Saudi regime in driving the disaster in Yemen. So congratulations to the Republicans who could find a way to show up to vote for more war. So my understanding of that provision is that even though, by the way, it's a provision

in the farm bill. It has nothing to do with agriculture, but it doesn't matter. They do that kind of stuff all of the time anyway. My understanding is that they are, because they pass that part of it, they will be able to avoid a floor vote on that conflict for the remainder of the year. That's right. So he put it in the farm bill to make it Paul Ryan did to protect the Saudis. That's right.

Because it makes it harder to vote against the farm bill. And it partly worked. Five Democrats switched over and voted with the Republicans and made the difference. Always, what did I tell you? I say this all the time. When the Republicans need Democratic votes, they find Democratic votes every time, because the Democrats are paid to lose. So if they don't need the Democratic votes, then the Democrats go, oh, yeah, yeah, sure, we're

progressive sucker voters, go ahead, right? And then whenever they need them, all of a sudden, five Democrats show up and go, well, they got put in the farm bill and what can I do. So let's let the Saudis chop people up. It's so disgusting. Rokana, by the way, fought for that. all the way, he's going to be on tonight's progressive special 8 to 11 p.m. Eastern, t.y.t.com live. Don't miss it. He's, by the way, he's super pissed about that vote, as well he should be.

And there are now real progressives fighting for you in the House. So it is a new day in America and the rest of the Democrats are not used to it. Now, during Trump's meeting with Pelosi and Schumer, he did confess that if the government shuts down, it will be because he has decided to do so because of a lack of funding. Remember that conversation? Here it is. If we don't get what we want, one way or the other, whether it's through you, through a military, through anything you want to call, I will shut down the government.

Okay, fair enough. And I am proud, and I'll tell you what, I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck. So I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I'm not going to blame you for it. The last time you shut it down, it didn't work. I will take the mantle of shutting down.

No one's mentioned how red he is in that in that class. I will take the mantle of shutting it down, Chuck. Last time you did it, it didn't work, okay? But I'm gonna do it now. Okay, so this is relevant because if Trump means what he says, and we never know, he's a wild card, he goes back and forth all the time, but if he means what it says, it's very likely that he will veto any type of spending bill that comes his way that doesn't give him exactly what he wants.

And look, it appears that the House is one thing, but it appears that the Senate is not on board when it comes to this funding. So senior Republicans conceded the border wall funding would largely be a messaging bill okay, from the House. Even if that package narrowly passes the House, it would be dead on arrival in the Senate where the GOP needs 60 votes to beat back a Democratic-led filibuster. Yeah, so the rest of the guys actually went further. Tom Cole, Republican of Oklahoma and Patrick McHenry, Republican of North Carolina,

gave quotes of the press explaining, look, they're making us walk the plank for no reason. It's a coal said it's an exercise in futility. And McHenry tried to pass the buck by saying, look, it's the Senate-driven process. We've got nothing to do with it. Why? Because they don't want vulnerable Republicans in blue and purple states and districts to vote for the border wall because it's deeply unpopular. So that's the part.

Trump says, oh, the people of this country, they want to. the wall, they want it right away, right? That's, of course, as usual, a lie. In fact, seven out of ten Americans say that he should not be an immediate priority. More than half of Americans say, it should never be done, let alone a priority, but seven out of ten say, no, no, not now, do not spend money on that. So Republicans, no, even for some of the Republicans in the House, if they vote for $5 billion for the border wall, they might lose their elections.

And to what purpose? Because when you go to the Senate, it's not going to pass anyway. which is actually part of the point that Trump was originally making, but he got goaded, he got poked, and he was like, oh, yeah, oh yeah, I can pass it in the house, oh, I'm gonna pass in the house, oh, you wonderful schmuck, you're a terrible person, but it is wonderful how stupid you are, because you walk into those traps so easily. Right. So there's one final part of the story that I want to get to.

Now, through all the political fighting that's been going on between Donald Trump and Democrats in the House, it's now because. It's now becoming more and more clear that Trump is not expecting Mexico to pay for his $5 billion in funding for the border wall. But he's claiming, no, no, no, no, I actually meant what I said, Mexico will pay. Now, in the form of a tweet, or several, several tweets, he said the following, I often stated one way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the wall. This has never changed.

Our new deal with Mexico and Canada, the USMCA, is so much better. than the old, than the old, very costly and anti-USA NAFTA deal, that just by the money we save, Mexico is paying for the wall. Nice try. Because if that, by the way, if that were the case, if that were really the case, then why is he losing it over this spending bill and the inability to receive the $5 billion that he wants for the border wall? So, number one, of course, there's no real truth to that.

But the second part is even funnier. Well, he might actually be jeopardizing the deal because there's already a bunch of progressives who do not like that deal. So when the new Congress comes in, they don't want to vote for the new trade agreement. Now, if he says, well, that's how I'm paying for the border wall, it will drive other Democrats to oppose it. Because then it'll seem like they are helping Donald Trump build a border wall and supporting his crazy idea that Mexico is paying for through this trade agreement.

It creates a lot of political pressure for the Democrats to vote. No, and remember in the next Congress, Democrats hold a majority in the House. So as usual, Donald Trump being terribly counterproductive and putting himself in a hole he didn't need to be. Look, if the USMCA passed and then afterwards, he was like, oh yeah, yeah, that's how Mexico paid for it in a roundabout way, but good enough, check, right? be absurd, but at least it wouldn't jeopardize the deal. Now, I don't, you know, whether we're happy that the deal is jeopardized is a different

question, but he wants it passed, and he's been bragging about it, and he did basically what I told you he was going to do right when he first came into office. He was against some of the trade deals, theoretically, and that's what he said to win the election. I told you it was BS that what he was going to do when he got in was go, oh yeah, I made it better. The only part of my prediction that didn't come true was I thought he was going to to literally rename the trade deals after himself.

I thought he was gonna take the Trans-Pacific Partnership and call it the Trump-Pacific partnership and be like, it's now much better. It's a great, great deal. But that's in essence what he did with NAFTA. Tiny little bit of changes, slap his name on it, I get the credit for it. It's now a wonderful deal. But it actually still helps us corporate donors, et cetera. And if that deal does not go through, then the markets react very poorly to that news.

Well, the markets- He just has no idea what he's doing. No. He's so, you've got to do homework, you gotta do homework in any profession, let alone the President of the United States. So, totally clueless. So oftentimes when something bad happens to anyone, what matters most is how you respond to it. So in the case of Trump and the border wall, he's being triggered over and over again by the facts.

And the facts are that he claimed Mexico would pay for the wall. And it's been abundantly clear that Mexico is not gonna pay for the wall. US taxpayers, if this funding goes through it is appropriated, we would end up paying for the wall. Now he's trying to solve this situation or respond to the critics in a way that he thinks is effective, but instead he's compounding the situation or the problem. And the way he compounds it is by digging himself in an even deeper hole. And that's what he did with the so-called, you know, rewritten or renegotiated NAFTA deal.

Anna, I just figured out what his ultimate plan is. You know, the press always gives him credit for strategy. He doesn't have any strategy. But maybe in this case, he's digging the hole to plant the wall. Meanwhile, he's got the guys in the Department of Homeland Security putting out press releases for him. You stop, you're stepping on my lines, Yuger. Okay?

I planned and I plan this, so let me take it on, okay? All right, let's move on. No, t-y-t.com slash anna. Okay, so we're moving on. This is actually a new story. Okay. The Department of Homeland Security has just put out a press release that is difficult to understand.

And I say that because it does not appear that an expert or professional or anyone who has any understanding or concept of grammar wrote it. So I'm just going to give you one line from it. It says, quote, DHS is committed to build. building wall and building wall quickly. We are not replacing short, outdated, and ineffective wall with similar wall. Instead, under this president, we are building a wall that is 30 feet high. Okay, there's two possibilities.

That's such a great point about the language. One is, Trump wrote it. That is not a possibility, that is the fact. I don't know anyone else, let alone in public life, but just period. That refers to a wall being built or the wall as wall. We build wall. There's only one person that talks like that, and that's Donald Trump. Okay, I mean, I don't-

This is what happens when you don't like to read. This is the result of not reading, of needing people to put together, you know, a picture book to help explain concepts to you. You are unable to construct a decent sentence. What is this? No, look, some people will find this controversial, I don't. I use Donald Trump as an example to my kids of what happens if you don't do your homework. I'm like, do you want to sound this embarrassing when you're a grown man and you don't

know how to speak English, right? Remember, English is supposed to be our official language, okay? They should tell Donald Trump. Okay, so he sends over this note, you know, he does this all the time. Remember, this is one of my favorite stories of all the time when he was running for president in the first place, his doctor put out a note saying he is the healthiest man to ever run for president. To ever run for president.

How would you know that? How would you know that? And so later his doctor admitted, yeah, of course I didn't write that note. One of his goons came in, made me sign it, and then Trump was waiting in a limo downstairs. Then they took it and gave it to the press. Now, why did the doctor turn on him? Because Trump turned on the doctor and raided his offices and stole his own files. I mean, if Obama had done that, and nobody even remembers it.

Okay, so he writes these kind of goofy notes for himself all the time. So I'm sure he's sent it over there. Okay, we built wall, wall real good, person who gets credit for it. I'm not saying anything, I'm just saying Donald J. Trump. No, but. I didn't write it. What do you mean? The second possibility is, and it's a smaller possibility, that there's a sycophant inside

Department of Homeland Security is who's like, oh, I'm gonna make Donald Trump happy. You're making me chief of staff, even though I'm deputy assistant to the assistant right now. Nobody else wants the job. Okay, so I'll even write it like Trump. Me like wall too. Me build wall, Donald. You like me? And wall?

Right? Maybe. I think that option A is the most likely. Again, because it's his, it's almost his exact wording, right? DHS is committed to building wall and building wall quickly. What is he, Hodor? I don't know. Have you beyond saying that about Hodor?

So good. Okay. Anyway. Ho-Wall? Just something to think about as we go to break. And when we come back from the break, we're gonna give you updates on what the Senate has just voted in terms of our involvement with Saudi Arabia and the war in Yemen. And then an insane TYT investigates story about that very situation, what the Defense Department plans on doing for the next several. several years in Yemen.

We have an insane story for you when we were doing. 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.t.com slash join today. In the meantime, enjoy this free section. All right, back on the Young Turks, Jank and Anna, with you guys. Someone anonymous gave 150 bucks through t.t.com slash Amplify three new. journalism students getting TY.

At TYT, we frequently talk about all the ways that big tech companies are taking control of our online lives, constantly monitoring us and storing and selling our data. But that doesn't mean we have to let them. It's possible to stay anonymous online and hide your data from the prying eyes of big tech. And one of the best ways is with ExpressVPN. ExpressVPN hides your IP address, making your active ID more difficult to trace and sell the advertisers. ExpressVPN also encrypts 100% of your network data to protect you from EVE's

and cybercriminals. And it's also easy to install. A single mouse click protects all your devices. But listen, guys, this is important. ExpressVPN is rated number one by CNET and Wired magazine. So take back control of your life online and secure your data with a top VPN solution available, ExpressVPN. And if you go to ExpressVPN.com slash TYT, you can get three extra months for free with this exclusive link just for TYT fans. That's EX-P-R-E-S-V-P-N. dot com slash t yt check it out today by team membership thank you everybody check it out t yt.com slash amplify another thing to check out is uh Harvard law professors uh larry lessig's podcast going up today in t yt podcasting network i mean the podcasting network i'm not saying it's too strong

actually i actually am saying it it is you have damage report by john idarola you have no filter by anna casparian yes i spoke about myself in third person you have nick hannauer with pitchfork economics, excellent. Now we have Larry Lessig. I mean, this is a podcast fan's dream. We're not saying anything we're just saying. By the way, also the Jimmy Doors show, young Turks, old school, aggressive, progressive, they're in the podcasting network.

So, and Professor Lessig's podcast is called Another Way, and it's about how to get money out of politics. You're going to love it. So, t.yt.com slash podcasts, go nuts. And by the way, I just got news. Elizabeth Warren also joining us for tonight's special on what progressives should fight for in 2019. She just sent in a video to the Young Turks so that she could be part of the program. I love that.

Check that out, 8 to 11 p.m. Eastern tonight at t.t.com slash live. Only time for a couple of quick comments here. Jay Bone from the member section says nothing agitates Donald Joffrey Trump more than a strong woman. Well, maybe a strong woman of color. 100% right. Brett said if offered a cabinet position, would it be better for Alexandria Casier-Cortez to decline and remain in the House to continue the change she's leading there?

Why, is somebody offering her a cabinet position? Okay, not that I know, maybe 2021, but we'll cross that bridge if we're fortunate enough to get there, which I think we will, but hold your horses, Brent. I appreciate the idea, though. Meg says, I hope Trump has testified in his defense at some point. It'll be so easy to get him to admit to everything. Absolutely. That's why Mueller was like, oh, I don't want to submit questions.

Come on in, Donald. No, no, no, you're going to do a great job. Come on in. And they just, all of his lawyers held down Donald Trump. Because Mueller kept going to him with, like, why don't you want to answer the question? Couldn't you? Like people, Mueller himself wouldn't say, but others would say, well, couldn't you just outsmart Mueller?

And he's like, of course I can. I'm going to go in. And Rudy Giuliani and everybody would be like, don't go in. Don't go in. My favorite thing about that story is how Rudy Giuliani, who is supposed to be serving Trump as his lawyer, told the press that the questionnaire that Trump filled out for Mueller was a complete and utter disaster. And he said, I'm quoting him, what normally takes two weeks, took three weeks, it was

a disaster. Yeah. And then they asked Trump about it. He said, I filled it out right away, no problem. Didn't take me any time at all. It was the best questionnaire fill-out session that ever happened. By the way, he's in something pretty similar to that. Okay, not that exact quote.

Last one, Meg says, Hodor has way more integrity, Jane. He does. He does. I agree with you. Okay. Oh, by the way, sorry, super duper last one. Peral 77 on YouTube Super Chat, 50 bucks, thank you, appreciate it. In all this, where's Melania?

Actually, if we get to it later in the program. All right, so let's do our investigation. All right. The Senate has just voted to end the U.S. involvement in the war in Yemen. Now this is a war that the United States has joined forces with Saudi Arabia on, and the Senate finds this deeply problematic, not everyone in the Senate, but the majority of senators. In fact, they voted resoundingly on Thursday today to withdraw American military assistance for Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen.

The 56 to 41 vote was a rare move by the Senate to limit presidential war powers and send a potent message of official disapproval for the nearly four-year conflict that has killed tens of thousands of civilians, including children, and brought famine to Yemen. Now, this is a great move by the Senate, but it doesn't mean much. If anything, this is symbolic. But when you look at the House of Representatives and what they did this week in terms of the farm bill, it's clear that there won't be an actual law that would basically end U.S. involvement.

So on Wednesday, the House actually narrowly blocked a vote on whether to cut off U.S. support for the Saudi-led coalition by invoking the War Powers Act. The House blocked the vote by a razor-thin margin of 206 to 203. Now, with that said, though, the Pentagon, the Defense Department still plans on. being very much involved in this war. And this is a story that was broken by our very own Ken Clippenstein at TYT Investigates. What he found is pretty depressing. So let's get to that.

So according to the reporting on November 30th of this year, the US Air Force released a notice of its intent to award a contract for a product, maintenance, and support plan. Now, that package would provide various forms of support, including software and maintenance, to the Saudi Royal Air Force at six different air bases in the regime through December 31st, 2025. So we are going to continue apparently aiding and abetting the Saudi government and in all the horrific things that they have done in Yemen. And we now have more concrete sense of how long that lasts because of TYT investigates reporting here. It will go through 2025.

And I want to point out that the heroes that led this fight and almost won in Congress to stop that funding for the war in Yemen and the stop to support of the Saudis were Rokana in the House and Bernie Sanders in the Senate. Once again, the most progressive members of Congress are the ones that either take action and get things done as they did with Stop Bezos Act, or come incredibly close to actually getting other, to getting the Republicans to vote with them and do more progressive legislation. When the so-called moderates have gotten almost nothing done. So let's be honest about who's practical and pragmatic.

But unfortunately, they missed out by three votes in the House because of five corporate conservative Democrats that voted with the Republicans. So understand who's on whose side here. And I also want to help people visualize just how bad the situation in Yemen is. Now there's been great photojournalism from the New York Times on this story, and I want to commend them for that. But in terms of broadcast journalism, I haven't really seen much coverage on this at all. And there hasn't been anything to help people visualize what's going on.

So we're about to show you some images of Yemeni children and just the toll that this war in Yemen is taking on them. These are innocent civilians, obviously. But the images are difficult to look out. So I want to give you a warning before we go to them. But this is what Donald Trump supports. This is what Donald Trump is complicit in. It is horrendous.

The famine that's taking place, the tens of thousands of children who have already lost their lives as a result of this war, it's. So it's heartbreaking. So let me explain the numbers. So 14 million people are on the precipice of dying from hunger in Yemen. It's unbelievable that in the year 2018 that millions of people might die from hunger. Five million of them are kids. It has already begun.

The deaths have begun. The famine has been around for a while. 85,000 kids have already starved to death in Yemen. So they didn't have to. The Saudis blocked a port that brings in food and medicine. That's why they're starving. And so they control the country and the Saudis don't, but the Saudis control the port, so the country's starving.

And so we should be incredibly upset about what happened in Jamal Khashoggi. The Saudi government chopped him up, beheaded him, et cetera. But we should be even more upset about 85,000 kids who starve to death because of the barbaric regime of Saudi Arabia and our aid of them. And again, this TYT story proves we undeterred by this massacre that's happening in Yemen. The United States military is still working with the Saudis all the way through 2025. And by the way, who benefits? In this case, it's a company called Tactical Communications Group.

So a defense contractor is still making money while those kids starve to death. Remember why we launched bombs on Syria a little while back, it was last year, and Brian Williams called the bomb spectacular and beautiful, and the media celebrated that Donald Trump was being tough, and finally he's the president, and they said all these outrageous things. They did it because Assad had launched chemical weapons. Now, that's an issue that's in dispute, but the chemical weapons are horrible no matter what. And even if you believe that Assad did it, which is the most likely scenario, and some kids

died and it was horrific, and we showed you those pictures as well, that was a small number of kids. It's not to excuse it at all. It's just to say, if you were that concerned that you thought we should have launched bombs against Syria because of those number of kids, well, then you should be absolutely outraged at the 85,000 kids that have starved to death because of Saudi Arabia. But instead of being outraged and bombing Saudi Arabia, as we did with Syria, we helped them bomb the kids.

They bombed funerals, weddings, they bombed a school bus full of school children. And then they turn around the Saudis because they never admit to anything and said, oh, yeah, yeah, no, no, those are terrorists in training. And five Democrats joined the horrific, horrible Republicans. in continuing to support this war in Yemen. Well, those campaign contributions from those defense contractors must be very alluring. Like, that must be worth it for them, which is really sad to say and to think about. But, you know, even though the Khashoggi murder is not connected to the war in Yemen,

it is kind of interesting to see how the murder of a journalist, which was, of course, ordered by Mohammed bin Salman, led to people actually paying attention to what's happening in Yemen. Because prior to that murder, it seemed as though no one was paying attention. It seemed as though our lawmakers weren't paying attention, the media wasn't really paying attention, and now all of a sudden people are a little more aware of what's happening and how the U.S. is involved in this. Yeah, you know, this is the fact that we came this close, and when the Democrats take the

House, maybe we can finish this. You have to understand, it's a stunning reversal of how Washington normally works. The defense contractors are on the Saudi side, and it appears so is Netanyahu in the right-wing government of Israel. That is a coalition that never loses in America. And they're on that precipice of losing. It's unprecedented. And I think, and they're talking about using the War Powers Act to.

to take that power back to the legislative branch where it belongs, which is declaring war, being involved in war, et cetera. Also unprecedented in my lifetime, I think that these progressives that are running uncorrupted with no corporate PAC money, I don't know if I'm overstating it, but I really think it's making a huge difference. It's driving the Democratic Party to not necessarily the left, but a position that the American people believe in, that morality dictates. et cetera, rather than the money.

And it's even embarrassing some Republicans enough to go in that direction. So as depressing as it is that they lost the vote by just three, because five Democrats flipped over, and Paul Ryan insisted in putting it into a farm bill. So he's like, ha ha, I'm being clever in how I protect my Saudi friends and my defense contractor friends, Paul Ryan, I got bad news for you, it ain't that clever. We all figured it out, okay? And despite the fact that that famine and that war continues, and apparently if they have it their way, will continue through 2025, I gotta say, I think we're on the edge of actually

winning on this issue. Rokane is gonna join us in our special tonight, 8 to 11 p.m., t.t.com slash live. He's gonna talk about this vote and who he's mad at and who he thinks is most responsible for it. He's the one that pushed for this in the first place. That's a wonderful, uncorrupted progressive already inside the House. That's a Justice Democrat, first one to ever join. Man, then you got TYT Investigates breaking these stories. Guys, look, I don't want to overstate it.

But I actually think you guys are making a huge difference. Whether it's the support you give to politicians that are actually on our side, whether it's the pressure that you put on Congress members, it's your funding of the reporting team at TYT, all of it coming together. I've never seen a situation where progressives are actually close to winning in my lifetime in America. And here we are, we're at the edge here. And I think that in the next Congress, it might be a totally different situation.

And I mean, knock on wood, you never want to underestimate the defense contractors. But next year, we might actually win on this and get out of this horrific war where we We have helped to cause immeasurable deaths and suffering. When you see those pictures and you know that America helped to make that starvation, famine and death happen, by the way, also record outbreak of cholera, the worst that the world has ever seen in Yemen at the same time because of that blockade. So if we're a shining city on a hill at all, if we have any morality left at all, we will exit that war at the beginning of next year.

Let's take a break. When we come back, Senator James Inhoff has been caught red-handed in something that could potentially be very unethical. That was kind of a sucky tease. Let's keep it real, okay? Because Inhoff is always unethical. His corruption knows no bounds, and we're going to give you the most recent example of that. When we come back.

Thanks for listening to the full episode of the Young Turks. Support our work, listen to ad-free, access members-only bonus content, and more by subscribing to Apple Podcasts at apple.co slash t-y-t. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.