The Young Turks - Tussling Over Tariffs

Episode Date: April 5, 2025

CNBC and Fox Business freak out as Trump stock crisis worsens. Jeanine Pirro says, “I don't really care about my 401(k) today. You know why?... I believe in this man.” Judge orders Trump administration to return mistakenly deported man. Trump backs Luna on proxy voting but says it's Johnson’s decision. Poll shows AOC leading Schumer by double digits in head-to-head New York primary matchup." HOST: John Iadarola, Cenk Uygur, Yasmin Khan 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 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. The new BMO ViPorter MasterCard is your ticket to more. More perks. More points. More flights. More of all the things you want in a travel rewards card.

And then some. Get your ticket to more with the new BMO ViPorter Master. and get up to $2,400 in value in your first 13 months. Terms and conditions apply. Visit bemo.com slash V-I-Porter to learn more. We must stop the terror. Now watch his drive. The guy!

Dropouti! Free machine! Drop it like the stock market. Drop it like the stock market. All right, power panel here on the young church. You're John Iderwale, Yasmin Khan, J.I. Yasmin on Rebel headquarters, John on damage report. We got a whole heap of news for you guys. Obviously, tariffs have ripped through the economy, the stock market, done a tremendous damage. And so which Republicans are in

favor of it? Which ones are against it? What lunatic ideas do they have to be in favor of it? We'll explain all of that. Mark Zuckerberg kissing up to Donald Trump, AOC versus Chuck Schumer. And the polling on that is really interesting and surprising. So we got a lot of news for you guys today. So John, take it away. Yeah, even within the topic of just tariffs, we have a lot. So why don't we jump into it? We're going to be largely talking about people who I think it can be real about the tariffs. And then we'll get to those who are mostly paid to pretend that they think it's a good idea. But let's start with the realists beginning with this. I'm not going to bubble wrap it.

What's happening is not good. Now, will it continue? Will we find the bottom? And then it will start to go back up? I hope so. The markets are down about 8% in just two days. And I'm getting all kinds of reaction from businesses, farmers in Wisconsin that are highly concerned about what's happening. So those are the facts.

Yeah, those are the facts and at least a couple of Republican senators can point that out. Actually, slightly more than a couple. We have a third, I guess that's progress. Rand Paul has also been speaking out against it. In fact, he wrote an op-ed for Fox titled Terminate the Trump Tariffs before it's too late. It's pretty clear and it reads in part. Tariffs are not just bad for American families of the national economy. Tariffs are also bad for Republicans.

The McKinley tariff of 1890 caused such a spike in prices that the Republican Party He lost nearly 100 seats in the House, and by the end of the next election, the House, the House, the Senate, and the White House were all in democratic hands. And of course, we saw a version of that in the first Trump term, and he hadn't even totally tanked the economy to get to that point. So I understand why Rand Paul would be a little bit worried here, particularly when they're not hypothesizing about something that could maybe happen in a week or a month or in a year. We're watching it every moment.

As of just today, stocks dropped for the second straight day. The Dow Jones was down another 2200 points or about 5.5%. The drop ended the worst trading week since March 2020. I don't know why they mark March 2020. Was anything big happening then? I don't really remember that time. Maybe there was something significant that affect the economy. But the NASDAQ and the SNP 500 also closed down 5.8% and 5.9%.

And I want ever to remember, while this week has been, been devastating for the stock market. It's not like the year so far has been great. We've already had minor shocks every other time Trump implied he'd be doing tariffs like this. So so far, Jake, the numbers don't look great. Yeah, and they're never going to look great because this is dumb. So we'll explain why it's dumb. The question isn't whether the tariff or not the tariff. The question is how do you do it? And this ain't it. And so I'll tell you what we'll talk about what went wrong and what I think is going to happen next. because this is untenable.

They can't have the stock market drop a thousand to two thousand points every day and be like, no, we're fine, we're fine, nothing's wrong here. And we have a poll for you guys, were you expecting Republicans to come out against these tariffs? Yes or no, that's in the live chat. Curious what you guys think. That's an easy one for me. I said that a lot of people on the right would come out against Trump in a thousand different

ways in this term. I was told that that was impossible and no Republican would ever come out against Trump on any issue. Interesting. Well, looks like there's plenty. John. Yeah, I mean, I would love for them to have stopped him the way they did the first term. That would be great. They were actually largely successful there. But yeah, maybe it's the beginning of something. I mean, you've got three now. That's something potentially you can build on, especially as the stock market gets worse, maybe. Yeah, and just look, there's more. There's Like among the influencers, there's Dave Portnoy and many others. We'll get to all that too.

But what John just said there is super important. That's why you jump back in. Look, guys, in a little bit, I'm gonna tell you guys about why things are so off the rails now. Versus the first Trump term where there was a thousand things wrong, but the economy didn't collapse in the first three years. What's the difference maker? That's in this story. Yeah, John, go ahead. Well, we will later get to people who are speaking out in support of this.

But a lot of those, even those that you might have expected would, because that's kind of of like what their job is, aren't choosing to do so. And we're gonna begin with, I think, a perfect example of that, which is Scott Jennings. He firmly believes in it and he firmly believes in making this bet. I mean, he's betting his presidency on this issue, which is probably the most closely and longest held political and economic belief that he's ever had. He's been talking about doing it for four years. You think it's a good bet?

We'll find out if it's right, it'll be the balliest thing that ever happened. And if it's wrong, the consequences will fall on one shoulder. Yeah, except no. I mean, yeah, sure, I guess they'll fall on his shoulders, but his shoulders are barely going to be staying upright for that much longer. It's not really much of a risk when it's his presidency, sure, but it's his last term that he can serve. And he probably won't survive past that point for much longer. The consequences are going to fall on tens of millions of shoulders. They already are.

People's 401k's being decimated, businesses going under people losing their job. Scott Jennings, even here where he's exercising a little bit of independence from Donald Trump still seems to only have eyes for Donald Trump. And not for the many people, the many conservatives, the many Trump voters who are going to and indeed are already losing everything. Thanks to Donald Trump, you could spin it as he did as ideological attachment to the idea of tariffs. I might present it as the increasingly deranged, diluted, deteriorating brain of a guy who doesn't know to listen to all of those around him, telling him it's a terrible idea. But either way, that's Scott Jennings. And we'll discuss in a sec, we're going to go to a few more people on Fox business and CNBC who normally are pretty defensive towards Donald Trump, maybe not in this case.

Are in disbelief and don't think that Peter Navarro, for instance, who's a very fine man or Abeson, wouldn't go in, maybe a Lutnik, wouldn't go to the president and say, look, we don't really want to crash. You don't want to be as hard line. Maybe you do the TikTok deal. Maybe you say, look, but here's a way to cure things, which was the way that Nvidia did with Taiwan. But they could have a crash.

I don't see why not. I mean, why would you buy stocks? Let us hope that the cooler heads do prevail. One or one time shall tell. And eventually the cooler heads will prevail. But for right now, cooler heads are not prevailing. Right now, angry heads are prevailing. And right now, circumstances are prevailing that send stock prices much lower than where they are right now. What the market is worried about is what's going to happen in the future. Who's going to hire now in this uncertain environment? I think people are very, very concerned. And that's why, again, We need to get to work. We need to act on negotiating now.

We need to get tax cuts now. We need to get deregulation now to make a difference before this gets out of control the other way. Again, literally handing billions of dollars to the richest people, what is that going to do to stimulate the economy at this point? People aren't going to have money, they're not going to be buying anything. Thus, less products will be sold, less services will be rendered. Jobs will have to be cut as a result of it. And thanks to the reciprocal terrorists, which we're already seeing like from China, 34 percent, on the things we'd normally sell to them, jobs are gonna be lost.

Elon Musk having an extra $20 billion isn't gonna save the economy. And so obviously they're gonna spin it the way they are. But it's pretty clear from Fox and from the business network there, that they don't see much good coming out of this in the short term. Yeah, so it's, first of all, think about it from China and other folks we trade with their perspective. So a lot of times, some of the smaller players, and even some mid-sized players, panicked over the tariff threats in the first term and in the beginning of this term, right?

Now they're not doing that at all. They're doing the exact opposite. They're like, oh, you want to play? Okay, then we'll go reciprocal on you because remember Trump didn't go reciprocal. He did this weird calculation where you take the trade deficit and divided by imports. Made up, like ludicrous. That's why the numbers are so freaking high. So China's like, okay, so you went nuclear, then I'll go nuclear.

And they did. And then that crashed the market worse because it was like a tiny bit of recovery, until China said, we'll match what Trump's doing. Now, it's not like the Chinese can't see our stock market, they see it crashing. It's not like they can't see our media, they see everybody panicking, right? So then they double down on this, which is logical. Then Europe was gonna do the same thing, Canada and Mexico are they gonna do the same thing? The whole world's gonna do the same thing.

So you think they're gonna cave into Trump now? No, they got him on the ropes. But more than that, they have us on the ropes, because this was dumb. So we've talked about this now for over a week. You do targeted tariffs if you want to build up manufacturing. You do it particular to an industry. You do knowing that you're going to have to do it for two, three, five, or ten years, right? And if you really are planning to do these type of nuclear tariffs for five to ten years, there'll be no economy left.

There'll be no global trade left. This is mental. It makes no sense at all. So I'm going to get to why they're doing this in a second. So now, since they don't have any incentive to compromise at all, how are we going to get out of this mess? So there's folks on the right who really believe, no, no, everything's going to be fine. Totally fine. Like the markets, guys, the stock market's not the relevant thing.

Stock market, for me, is a leading indicator in this case. Because when the stock market does that, a lot of people are going to get fired because companies don't have as much money anymore, and it's not targeted towards a bad guy industry. Oh, like the health insurance companies, their whole business models to rob us. So if they got hit on the stock market, I wouldn't care at all, right? I'd want to have a transition plan for the people who work in that industry, right? That's what thoughtful people do. That's what people who I believe in strategy do, right?

They don't just go in like, oh, let's do it, tariffs for everyone, like a million percent, right? And so this, so you're right wingers, you really think that he's going to keep these tariffs for the whole four years? I can't believe you guys think that. That's not even close to true. He'd be lucky to keep it for four days. And the reason why we're showing a clip after clip of Republicans saying this is because that's the whole freaking plan.

Like they just want to mean, they're worried that this panic is too bad and that there's going to be irreversible damages, John is saying, because the plan was to hold these stupid tariffs in a place until they pass the tax cuts. And after they rob us of now, it used to be four and a half, now it's $5.5 trillion. Then they're gonna go, oh yeah, we got what we wanted out of the tariffs. And everybody, it caved into us based on nothing, based on like, oh, Panama said they'd give us a needle and a thread back. We win, we win, and Trump won, so he's gonna withdraw the tariffs.

There's no way these tariffs stay in place for years. You can quote me on that, you can bring back this video, if they stay in place for Three years, rub it in my face, if they work, oh my God, it should be totally discredited and say, okay, three years from now, you see that, jank, the market rebounded, the economy was great, we rebuilt manufacturing, he kept it in place and it worked. If it did, then I don't know anything and you shouldn't watch, okay? There's a zero percent chance that's going to happen. I think that there's like a, there's only a microscopic chance these tariffs last passed

the tax cuts. So I'm super on the record on that. I'm all over the place. The right wing is like, you're nuts, no way, man, they're doing it for our best interest. Yeah, okay, I know. You know what they think about the tax cuts now? I mean, this is a different topic, but it's super related to this. They think these poor guys, they think they're getting their income tax eliminated. Tons of them think that the income tax for people making under $150,000 is going to be eliminated. that's what they think the five and a half trillion is for. They're gonna have a rude awakening. None of that is gonna happen.

Take it to the bank. You're gonna eliminate income tax or people under $150,000. What planet are you guys on? Why would you believe such insanity? So okay, but the reason why I'm so confident is because we're all gonna see with our own eyes. You're gonna get to see where the majority of those tax cuts go. You're gonna get to see if they really lower corporate taxes,

corporate taxes again to a ridiculously low 15% you're gonna see with your own eyes. Are they really in it for the average guy and they're gonna take down the taxes for the average guy, but they're gonna increase taxes on the rich. There's, they have that theory. You think they're gonna increase taxes on the ridge. That's what you think. Okay, I love you guys. No, that's not gonna happen.

So look, everybody gets diluted, everybody's in their own bubbles. So. Yeah, so I think I know what you're about to get at, but you know, I don't understand, first of all, why anyone would elect a hot-headed president in the hopes that cooler heads will prevail, because what if that hot head gets his way? And if those cooler heads are too cool to actually do anything about it. But there is so much to unpack here with these tariffs first, whatever reasons Trump or his Republican supporters are giving us right now, all these talking heads on Fox News as to why

Trump is imposing these tariffs, I'm going to say, I think they're just straight up lying to us about what their actual motives are here. He's not doing this because he thinks it'll make America great in the long term, whenever that is. He's not doing it because he wants manufacturing jobs to come back to this country. Because as Jenk just pointed out, if that was his actual goal, he would have gone about all of this very differently in a much more strategic and targeted way. And he's not doing it because he thinks the U.S. will somehow, you know, that we're getting

the raw end of all these deals that we have with our allies and that we're being bullied by them. He's doing this because of what he said on truth, social, because he and other billionaires will make money off of this, right? The wealth will flow upward further, even more than it already is, while the rest of us continue to struggle to buy our groceries. The stock market looks bad now. Well, maybe, but not if you're a billionaire, it's an investor's market, right? This is a great time to get rich in this country. That's what he said on truth social. What he didn't say is that it's a great time to get rich in this country if you are already rich. It's a great time to get even more rich than you already are. And keep in mind, he's only just announced.

these tariffs and the markets are already responding. Not only that, but other nations are responding. They're announcing retaliatory terrorists against us. So it will be interesting to see if he just cancels everything before any of it actually goes into effect. Because what he's doing is manipulating the markets and he's doing so on a very irresponsible global scale. To the point that there's so much uncertainty, nobody knows how to proceed with anything. Also, the talking point that we had been hearing about these tariffs up until now from people who are supporting or at least trying to defend the moves of this administration was that Trump was only threatening to issue these tariffs

because he was using the threat of tariffs as bargaining chips. We've seen that many Americans who voted for Trump never actually believed that he would go through with the tariffs, and they voted for him because somehow they thought he was going to make their grocery store bill and how much money they're paying on gas to go down. And they thought that he would use these threats, not the actual tariffs, just the threats, to gain concessions from other countries, like Mexico was going to block their immigrants from coming from their country into ours. And Canada was finally going to get a hold of all their pesky drug cartels that are, you know, flooding all this fentanyl into the country. But in Trump's other true social posts,

we see that he's actually trying to bargain with Jerome Powell. He's not, whatever he's bargaining for, it's not meant or intended to actually benefit the everyday working class American. Meanwhile, Republicans are scrambling to either explain Trump's actions away or break with him entirely because especially for the Republicans and especially right now, the economics of this tariff rollout and the politics of it are inseparable. They are directly tied to one another and Republicans are rightly worried that this could all come back to bite them in a very unsavory place very soon. Yeah, indeed. By the way, let's note for the record that my curious products that Panama

would give back to us was a needle and a threat. Okay, that's what happens when you do a live show. Yeah, maybe three empanadas. All right, so Tiazza's point, it's a great time to invest. Yeah, if you're already a millionaire sitting on a lot of cash. Are we all in that situation? So like yeah, Warren Buffett, by the way, there's another story in the run now we'll get to where they're pretending that Warren Buffett is on Trump's side and thinks the tariffs are a great idea. Of course, as usual, exact opposite.

So Warren Buffett said that he was a couple of months ago, he's like, oh, I'm withdrawing and going all cash because the tariffs will obviously crash the market. then I'll come in and buy a lot. That's because he has hundreds of billions of dollars. We don't. Okay, so. See for yourself. Okay, well, I don't know.

Maybe John's got something I don't know about. All right. So the right wing, the cult, no Trump motor is ever going to break with him. Let's see how that turn out for Dave Portnoy. It's tariff city. Trump has put his tariffs all over the place. I've been trying to understand him. I don't.

like it's more a trade deficit tariff to me like hey we get this much from you and you get this much from us let's even that up let's get some wacky formula and do tariffs and everything's in the because of it i almost tweeted out dave how much you down right now and today seven million i'm down seven million bucks and stocks and crypto you know what'll break it called losing seven million dollars in a day. Okay, so, but look, I, that's my contention was that they are not a cult. I know in 2016, they did not break with Trump. Why? Because they all watch Fox News. They all watch the same media. Now if you're watching, if you're a Trump supporter watching Dave Portnoy, are you super happy with Trump? No, it doesn't look like you are, right? So, so that's why

none of this is going to last. In the old days, maybe it had a chance of lasting despite the economic meltdown because Fox News would just enforce a talking point. No. No, everything is great, an economy is better when it crashes, right? And people do believe that. But nowadays, even certainly independence and a lot of right wingers are going, no, I saw on an independent show, or I saw on a bro show, or I saw it on another show, that it turns out the economy is not great when it crashes. It's the opposite.

Okay, so last thing from me for now. So why this crazy plan, like he had a bunch of crazy ideas. in the first term, he thought we should increase our nuclear arsenal tenfold, which would have literally bankrupted the country, right? And so they, of course, they didn't do that because that's absurd, right? Well, there's an explanation in the Washington Post, which is that he's not listening to anyone. And there are no establishment figures, there are no other figures, there are no one but Trump fans, Trump supporters inside the Trump administration now, because they all need, what was the number one litmus to us that they had?

Not if you're a right wing, not if you're a province, not if any of those things. The only litmus test was, are you a Trump loyalist? So now when Trump says something, no one questions them. So they explained that in the first term, they had a lot of debates back and forth. And they could stop a lot of things. Now, what did I tell you guys? In the first term, the establishment, as much as I hate them, were the brakes in the car for Trump. They were actually helpful in the Trump administration.

Okay? A rare case where they're helpful. without the brakes in the car, Trump's a moron. Like that didn't change overnight. This great thing where there's somebody that says, this actually happens regularly. What would you know, man? You're a stupid podcaster.

Trump's a genius who went to Wharton. People who went to Wharton. I'm like, inconvenient fact for you, I also went to Warton. So now we're at a stalemate, okay? We're both geniuses. No, we're not geniuses. Okay, the guy doesn't know what the hell he's doing. He says dad got him independent.

Okay, please, please. He has no earthly idea. what he's doing. So here's the quote, senior White House official. In the first term, everyone thought they were president. So what that means is like, they were weighing in with their opinions and facts and information. Well, we got rid of those idiots. Okay, and they explain that like they would propose a tariff. Their staff would, which is what they're supposed to for every particular country. And then Trump would go, no, I want this one. And there'd be no more debate. And that's it. That's the tariff. And so before the Rose Garden, they had this

big long meeting, J.D. Vance, etc. Did anybody question Trump? No, they're all too scared to question Trump because the only thing he wants his loyalty. If you question him, he's going to fire you. So they're like, oh, yes, sir, nuclear tariffs that would destroy the world economy. That's a great idea, Mr. President. And when you have a bunch of idiots like that, next to the chief idiot, this is what's going to happen. Well, I think on the other side of the break, we're going to get to some of the people who are trying to make the case for the Tariffs, trying to make it seem as if what's going on is great actually, but we'll get to that in just a few. The short-term fallout is already being felt.

The market today down, S&P 500, the NASDAQ, the Dow, down. Tech stocks absolutely hammered down 10% on the NASDAQ. It does deserve some context. What do we mean by down? I thought down was bad when it comes to the stock market, but I do have to admit, I'm not an expert or whatever. Is it possible down is good, Shank? No, there's no chance that down means up. Here we are, apparently the year is 1984.

So that was Will Kane doing his best. You go to war with the army you have, not the economy you necessarily wish you had. But we'll get to a little bit more of him and see if he can convince us that down is up. cats or dogs, all that stuff. And then we'll throw in some other Fox people as well. What do we mean by down? Take a look at this 12-month chart of the Dow Jones Industrial average. We have returned to the average of roughly October, down from the December highs of the election of Donald Trump, and down from the January highs of the first term, the first month of his second term at the presidency. We've essentially returned to the place that we were a few

months before Donald Trump. This is a crisis, according to Wall Street. For decades, Donald Trump has been making this argument of restructuring the American economy so that we're not suckers and losers on the bad side of every international trade. But it's also a restructuring of not just our economy, but I would argue, and that we should see it as a potential restructuring of the American spirit, the purpose of America. And you know what? I don't really care about my 401k today. You know what? Not that I can afford it. Not that it isn't important. Not that I'm not at a point in my life when I should be worried about my 401k because I am. But this is what I believe. I believe in this man. I fully expected everything that has happened to continue to happen.

And I am absolutely a thousand percent confident that things are going to work out in the end for everybody because it's just a smart thing to do. Now I'm only in my 40s. I know I look a lot younger, but I've never seen a president stand up to Wall Street. Have you? Trump just stared the market right in the face while it's sold off 4%. It's like sending your screwed up son to a military academy. I don't even know what point is. Do straws again? You make more sense when you talk about straws and soup. Anyway, so that's all nonsense. So Will Kane is saying we have to have restructuring of the American spirit, whereas before when the economy tanked, you got mad at those in power, we need a spirit where you just shut up about it, okay? Stop complaining.

And sometimes quite literally, of course, Charlie Kirk telling people to shut up about the egg prices and all that. Again, this is not how they were acting when Joe Biden was in charge. And in fact, when we had like for two days, mid last year, there was a less good than expected jobs, report and then Japan did a thing with their stock market where we had a dip for like 48 hours. Fox News went wall-to-wall Kamala crash. It was her, it was Kamala-nomics, it was her wrecking everything. Where was the restructuring of the American spirit? Where was the Janine Piro saying she's not worried about her 401k? Declining to mention that she makes an estimated three million dollars a

year by the way, so she'll probably be fine either way. No, everybody now you need to shut the hell up about it, okay? Yeah. So, but there's hilarious, I don't know if you guys caught it, but when Jesse Water said, it's like sending your screw ups onto a military academy. Do you know what happened to Trump in high school? Is that sending him to a military academy? Because he was a screw up. That's why he hides his grades from high school and college.

Because his dad got him into all those schools. He's a giant, giant screw up. He does, he has no idea what he's doing. He's never, he's, guys, look, we went over this a billion times, but people always forget. Like, the right wing just doesn't believe he. You tell them, they don't believe it, right? That not all of them, but a lot of them, right? As you can see here, a lot of them.

And then a lot of independents just don't know. He had six major bankruptcies because he doesn't know how to run anything, except his mouth. He's good at running his mouth, right? So, and that marketing has helped him to be able to build up the Trump brand and then sell his name to put on buildings for like 10 million, 20 million. And that's not bad. He's good at marketing, right? And that's how he got to be president.

it. But the reason why he has to license things now, because he can't actually build anything. So when he builds something, it goes bankrupt. Every time, the knuckle had three casinos in the same city. And it was Atlantic City. They all went bankrupt. He's the only one who's ever gone bankrupt with casinos. There's literally a saying that says the house always went. Asterisks, unless it's run by Donald Trump, all three of them. Okay, so he does, he has no earthly idea what he said. And then he's like now we're America has a new purpose. I thought America's purpose was pretty clear. You know, opportunity, hope, the American dream, all those things. So what's our new purpose to recover from this disaster? Like, why did we need that new

purpose? How about we skip the disaster and continue going? Look, I'm the last person to defend Wall Street. So this, I get this propaganda that they're doing, this little marketing trick that these right wing media guys are doing, which is like, oh, I guess you're defending Wall Street now. We're for the average American. How does crashing the markets blindly, without any purpose, help the average guy? While jacking up prices of tariffs. Of course. Like, that means your price are going to go up. So, and John's 100% right about the hypocrisy. Don't tell me that when the market dips for a little bit for a couple of days under Biden, you guys are, you guys are, you're buying their markets are crashing because of Biden in Kabul, all right? And I don't pretend you

didn't do that because we could pull up 2,000 clips from Fox News and online shows all doing that, right? And then when they're if they can imagine if this happened under Biden. Oh my God, this kind of epic collapse of the mark. Biden led to the depression. So I'm so sick of like 90% of media lying nonstop. I'm so sick of it. So now down is up. is up and America has this wonderful opportunity because we can recover from this crash.

How is that a wonderful opportunity? He created the crash. We didn't have it two days ago. This is so, it's like everything is Orwellian. Everything is Alice in Wonderland. But guys, there is a reality. And the reality is like this is not targeted tariffs. This is not a targeted attack on one particular industry that needs to be reined in or regulated like health insurance. This is a blind nuclear attack against the entire world trade, which makes no sense the only dumbass who's ever believed in it. It's true that he's believed in it for 40 years, but the only one who's ever believed in it is Trump. And Trump is the idiot who keeps like, in 1890, we didn't have to pay income tax. We just had tariffs. You think we have the same economy as

1890 and by the way you know what happened in 1890 the Republicans got slaughtered because they did tariffs okay all right hey by the way just like I said to the Democrats who told me oh Biden is young and dynamic we're gonna kill it with Biden oh he's in the 30s who cares oh 30s is the new 60s was it was it okay so they lived in their deranged bubble sorry if you were in there I love you but but that bubble was so thick and I couldn't get through to you I couldn't get through to you. You really thought it that his approval wasn't in the 30s, his age was.

No, no, okay? So now I'm addressing the right wing. You guys are in a crazy bubble where up is down and down is up. No, this is not some sort of secret genius move. He's just crashing the economy for no goddamn reason. And the tariffs will never last. And this is all about the tax cuts. All right, yes.

Yeah, I don't understand why they're working so hard. to convince us of something that is so clearly obvious. It's an insult to all of our intelligence. It's an insult to them. It's making them look dumb. And to your point, Jank, if Joe Biden had done something like this, I can guarantee you that we wouldn't be here on the show trying to tell people that up is down and down is up. We would say this is crazy. We would be saying probably very similar things to what we're saying right now. And that's what's so frustrating about the right wing. And from people on Fox News and other people who are trying to defend a lot of what Trump is doing right now in this administration, they keep saying that there is going to be short term pain. How short term are we talking? Like how short term is short term? No one will say because no one knows. And no one knows how or when these long term gains that they keep telling us about are actually going to be realized. Like how long does it take to actually build a factory and get it up and running and profitable?

Republicans are confused about all of this, and they're trying to make sense of it out of all of this uncertainty, because as you mentioned at the start of the last story, John, some of them are admitting that they're confused, especially because according to analysts and economists, the effects that we're already seeing are so much worse than they were projected to be, partly because the scope and severity of the tariffs are so much worse than what anyone thought they would be also. But others are pretending that they actually get what Trump is trying to do and that they support it. Trump has always done a great job of priming his base for whatever it is that he's about to do next, right? He ants up his rhetoric well in advance. Just an example, if he wanted to tariff and then annex Canada, our neighbor and ally, easy. He just blamed them for supporting drug cartels and flooding our streets with fentanyl months before he suggested just taking the country over and tanking their entire. economy. He provides very little to know evidence that any of this is happening. But that's enough for him, for his base to get behind this idea that Canada is a problem that needs to be dealt

with. Yeah. Yeah, 100%. And they'd go along with it. They would cheer the invasion of Canada while also posting memes about how Donald Trump is anti-war. It's the same pattern that we've heard for a long time. We do have a lot of other great stories to get to. So I think we should probably take a break. We've got some developments on a really important case from earlier this week Right after this. an interesting update and the possibility of a constitutional crisis may be scheduled for next week. Let's jump into this. Federal judge in Maryland has granted a preliminary injunction and perhaps more importantly

ordered the government to facilitate the return of a Maryland man who was deported to El Salvador in error. That was the government admitted he should not have been deported. It was a mistake. They sent him to that notorious prison that Kristy Noem did her little Rolex photo shoot in front of. And then they said, oopsie, we're not gonna do anything about it. We're not gonna bring him back. Well, according to the judge, that's not acceptable.

And I love the way the judge chose to announce this saying, I am going to grant the motion for preliminary injunction I've reviewed. And I'll read this word for words so that there is no dispute that the oral order is the written order. Obviously referencing the little game that the Trump administration was playing just a week or two ago where they pretended, I didn't hear you in time to stop deporting people because they didn't want to comply with what the judge was saying. But maybe more importantly for that individual, the judge says the two defendants are here by order to facilitate the return of plaintiff Kilmar Garcia to the United States by no later than 1159 p.m. on Monday, April 7th. So that is coming up at the end of this coming Monday. It's just a few days from now saying you have to go and get him and bring him back.

And importantly, up until this point, the Trump administration has sort of uncharacteristically presented themselves as, what are you gonna do? We have no power over El Salvador, we have no leverage, we don't have like a six million dollar deal with them, we can't get there, we can't save him. I know Christy Nome can go and do her little cosplay photo shoots, but like they can throw us out of there anytime they want to, there's nothing we can do to get these guys back, pretending that they are utterly weak and impotent. Well, according to the judge, that's not good enough.

And the judge pointed out that they have previously talked about having this deal with El Salvador for $6 million to house individuals. That's a contract you have. You have an ongoing business relationship with their prison system. Clearly you can work something out. Now, the lawyers for the DOJ are like, no, we don't we don't have a contract. And the judge pointed out that both Marco Rubio and Kristy Nome have spoken about this agreement. They've mentioned the $6 million. And so the judge says they may not have used the word contract, but agreement sounds a lot like contract when we paid six million dollars. I think I can draw a logical inference. And so that kind of puts us at maybe an impasse where they're being ordered to do this thing.

They've previously said they're not going to do that obviously they can do if they want to. They just don't want to admit that they got this wrong. They don't want to reverse a deportation and they don't have much time until it happens. And so perhaps that big constitutional crisis between the executive branch and the judiciary, which we've already seen examples of already, this perhaps would be the biggest one if they just blow past that deadline and just say, hey, what are you going to do about it? Yeah, here's an idea. If we can't get people back from El Salvador, we shouldn't send people to El Salvador. Because what if we send the wrong person? Oh, yeah, we already did. So if you say we have no ability to get an innocent man back,

and the Trump administration admits that he's innocent, then why are you sending? them there. What if you do it again and again and again? So by definition, you should end that program. But they say, no, I don't want to end the program. And yes, I sent an innocent man, but so what? It's like the worst dungeon in the world and he'll very likely get torture there. And by the way, he was trying to escape from gangs in El Salvador. Who do you think is in that prison? It's literally filled to the rim with gangs from El Salvador. So that guy's life is in grave danger. So the Trump administration says two unbelievable things here. One is, yeah, we made a mistake and we sent the guy over and yeah, he might die. But so what? We're

going to do it again and we're not going to get him out. Look, this is why I changed on the death penalty. It's one thing to say, you look, man, I don't care about this or that. I believe in justice or vengeance or whatever. If they killed my family members, I want them. execute. It's another thing to say, yeah, I know he's innocent. I don't care. I'm in favor of the death penalty. I want him executed. Why? Why would you want innocent people executed? That's crazy, right? So this is like, so if you're in the right wing and your dad is Donald Trump and formally or informally, and you're like, oh, no, no, no, no. If we send innocent people to a hellhole in El Salvador and we can't get him back, that's the American way. No, it isn't.

It just isn't, okay, then you're not in favor of our principles and our constitution and the way we do things. Second outrageous thing is, I don't want to read it to you from ABC News. So this guy, Ruvani, is the lawyer here for the government, okay? By the way, he says they're totally innocent and so, oh, but God, gee, we can't get it back. You ask Caroline Levitt, Caroline Levitt's like, oh, no, no, he's a leader of MS-13. But you're in court saying he's not even in MS-13. The evidence indicates we got it 100% wrong, but they don't care about reality. They don't care about truth.

And so I get super mad at Democrats who lie, among the few apparently, okay? But on the right, I think there's a little bit of a rebellion brewing, but there has to be a much bigger rebellion because the old media, the Fox Newses, the ones that are in the tank 100% for Donald Trump, they're never gonna turn around, right? And they're just going to keep repeating the lies. Oh yeah, yep, he's not an MS-13 and he's a leader of MS-13. I mean, they just said on Fox News, the stock market is not, is down, but down means up. So they can keep saying this.

Anyway, Rueveni's the lawyer. He already admitted that the guy's not an MS-13. When asked by Judge Zinnis, under what authority law enforcement officers seized Abrago-Garcia, Roveini said he was frustrated that he did not have those answers. You went to court as a government attorney saying, we will not get him back, your honor. We should not have to do that. Okay, what authority did you have to even send him there? I have no idea.

What? You have no idea? Okay, hold on. There's more. Rivenny himself says, your honor, my answer to a lot of these questions is going to be frustrating. And I'm also frustrated that I have no answers for you on a lot of these questions. Solidarity. Yeah.

Okay, guys, you know what that means? That means clown show. Do do do do do do do do do do do do do do. The Trump administration is sending lawyers to court saying we have the authority to send people to a dungeon in El Salvador without telling them what the authority is. You know why? Because they don't have the authority. They're making all of it up. And their lawyer is admitting it in court.

okay if you like this kind of chaos and anarchy and a banana republic way of running things and sending innocent people to dungeons okay keep cheering but already tons of people on the right wing have peeled off rogan has and colter of all people as i mean if you if you've got aunt Coulter saying bring an immigrant back, you might have gone too far. All right, yes. I feel like Trump has already shown that he is largely unbothered by what judges have to say and their rulings. He has denied and defied their authority in the past, and he seems more than willing to do so again. I'm not really sure how we're not already in a constitutional crisis. We keep hearing that we're on the edge of one, but like at what point is crisis declared?

But this is sparking a very, very concerning debate in this country, whether or not people, American citizens or not have a right to do process in this country, even though that is a right that we have in this country. Now, the people who are supportive of Trump's deportations, they keep excusing all of it by saying that terrorists and gang members deserve to be swiftly punished. They shouldn't have been here in the first place, and they need to be removed from this country immediately. Not only that, but the situation is so dire that.

simply is no time for court proceedings. We have to get them out as soon as possible right now. The very obvious problem with this argument is that you can't know that these people are terrorists or gang members until they have due process, right? You can't just assume that they are what you say they are and then throw them in a Salvadorian prison. But Republicans and even Democrats, to an extent, they have been playing this game for a very long time. They know that if you just call someone a terrorist or a gang member, the public will forgive. you for treating them completely inhumanely and for denying them rights that we have built our entire nation off of. The fear mongering, it just takes advantage of general ignorance. But it's like the

point that I was making earlier in another story, Trump likes to plant these seeds with his base so that when he does crazy things, when he does illegal and unconstitutional things, they don't even battle lash. They just say, oh yeah, he did say that gangs were a problem. I guess these are the gangs. I guess Trump is finally doing something about them, thanks Trump. But he makes up these problems or he at least exaggerates the severity and the scope of existing problems. And he doesn't provide any kind of evidence to support the claims that he makes because he knows he doesn't need to because his base never asked for evidence. And then he pretends to solve these problems that he has largely made up so that his base will continue to support him. And just to be clear, I'm not saying that gangs aren't a problem in this country.

I'm saying the situation is not so acute and so dire that it requires that we suspend our justice, our justice system in this country just to exterminate them. That is not an excuse for us to be less than who we say we are. Yeah, last two things for me. If you're a right winger and you wanted to get those criminal gangs out of the country, this hurts your cause. Like if he'd just done that and not send anybody innocent, if he'd actually done a tiny bit of due diligence and due process, hey, are they actually

gang members? Okay, get him out. super popular, then your position in the right wing would be super popular. Now you've got Rogan Coulter and 18 other people flipping on you and your position is becoming unpopular because you did it in an illegal and unconstitutional way. How does that help your cause? How does that help your cause? Okay, and lastly, to answer he has a question, when do we know we're in a constitutional crisis? So Trump is constantly doing these trial balloons, breaking a law. here doing something unconstitutional there, something illegal there, something that

like Congress is the authority, he doesn't, he'll break it, et cetera. You're in a constitutional crisis when the courts tell them you don't stop doing that. This is illegal or unconstitutional, and they don't listen. So that's when we're totally screwed because the executive branches all the weapons. So the Supreme Court and all the courts are only as good as their word. So if they say something, we're all supposed to follow it, that's in our constitution. But if the executive branch goes, I don't care about the Constitution, and I don't care about the three branches, I'm just going to keep bringing the law. And you can't make me because I have the guns.

Then we're screwed. Then we're in a constitutional crisis. So far, they've tested the waters a little bit. They're like, oh, the judge told us to turn around the plane. We won't. The judge told us to bring someone back. Oh, it was an oral order and not a written order. That's why this judge was like, this is both oral and written.

So do not my sorry. Now every time they did that, they walked it back. when they if they don't walk it back and they just go that's it we're not listening to the courts then we have absolute chaos here yeah and I don't know what happens then because that's an epic disaster and I don't think it's a coincidence that they are sort of pushing us propelling us towards that on this topic where it's about it's about a migrant it's about a migrant that some people believe Carolyn leave it's the head of MS-13 human trafficking or whatever because they They want to tell the judge to kick rocks, and they want a bunch of their base to be like,

that's about migration, yeah, I'll go with him, screw the courts, they don't matter anymore. And I think that's strategically why they're doing it in this area. That's what I'm mostly worried about. Is AOC potentially poised for another historic upset election in New York? Well, according to a new poll, that might be possible. You see, a lot of people have been pushing for her to potentially challenge Chuck Schumer the next go round for his Senate race because they see him as doing absolutely nothing to stand up to Donald Trump or the Republicans.

And according to a recent data for progress poll, in a hypothetical primary, which is admittedly, you know, almost 20 months in the future. She currently leads by 19 points against Chuck Schumer, which is fairly significant. And honestly, there's not even that many people who aren't sure about who they'd vote for. These are two very well-known people. And Data for Progress tried to see if maybe some of the most likely lines of attack against AOC would bring down those numbers. So they produced, you can see right there that neither providing a positive bio had much of a change. I gave her one extra point. The negative bio didn't take off anything and we can just briefly go to Graphic 3.

We're not going to read the entire thing, but it's like a thick paragraph of all of the most cliched attacks against AOC, that she's just in it for her brand, she doesn't actually deliver, she's just an extremist. She can't bring people together, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, all that stuff. When people read that, it did not diminish their support for her at all in this particular poll which I think is pretty significant and there might be a reason for that, especially when And she's being contrasted with Chuck Schumer. When you ask New York Democrats, do they want their leaders to do more, less, or the same

amount that they're doing right now to oppose Donald Trump? It could not be more clear, basically every single person thinks they're not doing enough. And who in New York has a better opportunity to do more than Chuck Schumer? And he's not doing any of it. And I just want to remind people, this is the sort of poll we've shown you before, although it's an updated version of it. AOC is actually tied for third most net positively favored or seen politician in New York, actually. Bernie Sanders is a little bit more liked, Harris slightly more as well.

But AOC is tied with Elizabeth Warren at a plus 60, where she's at a plus 59 on that metric. 75% favorability. And again, she has been in the public eye almost constantly for seven years. know about her. They've heard the attacks. They've seen it on Fox News. And so, yeah, I'm not saying that if it came to a primary, the Chuck Schumer or crypto packs or whatever wouldn't try some of these tactics. But I think they might find that against her, it's a little bit less successful than against a complete unknown. What do you think about this? Okay, I think this is excellent news. So let me break it down. First, who should you support between AOC and Chuck Schumer?

No brainer of all time. AOC. So does that mean? I agree with AOC on everything? No, she has some positions that I don't agree with, okay? But I don't do purity tests. So I'm not like, oh, she disagrees me 5%. Burn her down. No, no, so what? She's to the left of me on some issues. Fantastic. Who cares? Right? So I wouldn't, I would recommend that she runs on economic populism, because that's much more likely to get to a win, right? But God bless, okay? So why is it a no-brainer, though? If I have some disagreements with AOC, certainly have some disagreement with Schumer as well, because Chuck Schumer is the much bigger problem in the Democratic Party. So like, okay, so we have

some far left positions that aren't popular. But you don't have to emphasize them. And that's not the end-all be-all. The end-all be-all is, are you a corporate goon or are you not? Are you part of the establishment and the status quo and you serve your donors or not? That is the overwhelming issue. That is the mountain of an issue, right? And that's what we've been talking about on this show for 20 straight years. So AOC doesn't take corporate pack money. She's a just Democrat. So someone who doesn't take corporate pack money and is more right on the issues overall and is a thousand times less corrupted versus a guy who's been, you know, sheep hurting Democrats towards corporate positions this old life. Where's the question? That's not

even close. And luckily the polls apparently agree with me, not close. Okay. So now, but But the bigger reason why this is great news is because this is so telling. Like I would have told you the same thing for, you know, five years ago, 10 years ago, et cetera, but that poll wouldn't have come out the same way. And what has happened is Democratic leadership has lost all credibility. Thank God. Thank God. Okay.

Not because I'm against Democrats, but because they're the ones ruining the Democratic Party. You need a new guard to replace the old guard. And it doesn't, and if all it is is, oh, we found a new corporate Democrat who is younger than Chuck Schumer. Now Pete Buttigieg will replace Chuck Schumer. We have a new and improved edition of our corporate robot, right? Well, that's not going to help at all. But AOC ain't that. Even if you disagree with her on issues, she's not a robot.

She's a real person with her real opinions who, from time to time, not as much as I want, but from time to time fights back. Okay, I wanted to fight back more, but I mean compared to other Democrats, it's not close, right? So the fact that the voters, the Democratic voters in here, now remember what I told you, you have to pay attention to the voters when they give you a clear sign. So maybe you thought there wasn't crime in Oakland, but when the voters of Oakland say 65 to 35, God damn right, there was crime and we were ousting this mayor, pay attention to that. But also pay attention to this, where the Democratic voters are saying, yes, we prefer AOC, see by a large margin to Chuck Schumer, so stop sending us those corporate robots.

I love it, I love it, that is a sea change of a difference. You would not have seen that before this election. So when I said like I feel a little bit liberated after this election, people, like, I get it. It's a phrase that gets, triggers people and go, oh, so you like the trauma. No, no, no, no. You guys, we're getting liberated from the Chuck Schumer's, Nancy Pelosi's, and Joe Bidens of this party that have been dragging us down.

like an anchor our whole lives. See, and this poll is an excellent indication of that liberation. The voters are finally saying, we don't believe you anymore when you tell us democratic leaders are geniuses and we have to obey and comply with them. That's the best trend there is. Yes. Yeah, yeah. Look, to your point, I know a lot of our viewers have mixed feelings on AOC, but this is a big deal. She is still one of the most progressive representatives that we have in the house, she's in her mid 30s, and she is not Chuck Schumer. And as much as I don't think anyone should support a candidate just because they're not the other candidate, it is a huge deal that someone so young and so far left of the median is gaining this widespread support

in this way. This should be a victory for all of us. All of us here at TYT and all of our viewers, right? This is what we have been fighting for all along. That doesn't mean that the work stops. That doesn't mean that we should stop holding our new batch of leaders if in when they ever get into position. It doesn't mean that we don't hold them accountable. The work is ongoing, right? We keep pushing for more and more. And that is how progress happens.

That's why we're progressives, right? Chuck Schumer has proven time and time again, meanwhile, that he is willfully out of touch with the American people. It is a choice at this point for him. He knows what he's doing. He's not stupid. I think he's arrogant, even though I think that he would think that he is wise and experienced, but you know,

experience can only get you so far in politics. At some point, you do need to step aside and let the next generation lead or at least not hinder them and not get in their way whenever they try to make things better for their generation, for their families, and for the future people who are coming. And Chuck Schumer, his age is really just the least of the reasons as to why he should be out of Congress or at least out of such a high position in Congress. He simply does not support the American people anymore. His stances do not support the American people and he doesn't understand the American people. He doesn't back our stances. He doesn't listen to what the American people

actually want to want out of their government and from their representatives. And he even said that his job in Congress is not to support his constituents, it's to support Israel. That's wrong. By definition, that is not his job. That's not what he is in Congress to be doing. So get him out of there. I'm so over this guy. Yeah, I got to add one thing here. So we did a town hall for Operation Hope earlier in the week. If you're a member, please check that out. Because a lot of our core viewers who are part of Operation Hope asked me about, hey, far left, radical left, what are you doing? Help us understand. Some of us are, you know, to the left of yours significantly to the left and we had a wonderful conversation. So please check that out if you can, if you're a member.

So, but I want to summarize it super quick here. So, and this is a good example of it, that's why I'm doing it here. So far left is on, and by the way, the viewers got me to change the language a little bit, and I want to explain that to you, okay? Far left is on policies. So I, and maybe I would, so hence, I think I've been saying it a little bit wrong and certainly haven't been clear enough, right? So you can argue that AOC is far left on policies. Great, no problem. There's, you know, I'm far left on some policies, right? And there's normal disagreements on a whole host of issues, right? What I'm objecting to is the radical left. And so in radical, not in policy, but in attitude. So this is also a good example in this case, because some of the radical

left are angry at AOC, and they think she's not left enough, including on Palestine. Yeah, look, I get it. I wish she spoke out a little bit more, and I wish you voted a little bit more around the edges on that issue and what she said during the convention about how Kamala Harris was great on this issue is not true, she's not great on this issue. I understand all that and I care deeply about that issue. I'm not canceling her over that. Are you insane? So what do you want Schumer to win? Schumer's much worse on Palestine. So the attitude is what I object to. So you don't like AOC's position on Palestine, didn't, you know, work to get her to the right position instead of saying, that's it. She's no good.

She didn't pass the purity test. No, I'm more pure than her. Oh, God, are you insane? Please, please, this attitude is going to take out everyone. And forget the host, the candidates, don't attack the candidates. Please, please don't do crazy stuff like that. So, but I mean, I'm addressing there the radicals, and they're not going to listen to me because by definition, they're radicals in their attitude.

So AOC is, would be amazing as a New York senator, especially vis-a-vis Chuck Schumer. So please use your sense to get to the best possible candidate without demanding some sort of weird 100% agreement with you, which politician agrees 100% with any citizen? That's just a totally unreasonable standard. Okay, all right, we got to take a break here. John, thank you, brother. Check him out on damage report, yes. Check her out on Rebel headquarters.

We got a killer lineup coming up for you in the second hour, including, and then stories, including Zuckerberg, kissing up to Trump, et cetera. We'll be right back. Thank you.