The Young Turks - TYT Extended Clip - December 5th, 2019

Episode Date: December 6, 2019

Nancy Pelosi is bringing articles of impeachment to be filed against Trump. Cenk Uygur, Emma Vigeland, and Ana Kasparian, hosts of The Young Turks, break it down. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

You're listening to the Young Turks, the online news show. Make sure to follow and rate our show with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five stars. You're awesome. Thank you. Hey, guys, you've heard of the Young Turks podcast because you're listening to it right now. But make sure that you subscribe and give it a five star rating if you like it. Thank you for listening. Hey, welcome to the Young Turks. Jake, you're at a good at meagland.

Fun for everybody. We have impeachment, ladies and gentlemen, we have impeachment. So we have a little bit more formal, as you'll see in a little bit. But the story you gotta stick around for, yeah, we're teasing you by putting it near the end of the show. Here comes Bernie. Mmm. Let me just start you around to say, here comes Hillary.

That's another story. Yes, that is a story. But in this context, no good, bad. Here comes Chris Salizzo with a pro-Hillary headline. Chris Saliza does not hide his disdain for Bernie Sanders. Well, who does, right? In the mainstream media, I mean, even the great news that we have for you guys, the article is replete with anti-Bernie Sanders, you know, subtle jabs for no reason at all. So overwhelmingly good news for Bernie Sanders a little bit later in the program, okay?

But Anna, we got a lot of stuff to talk about. A lot of stuff to talk about. I would like to make a few announcements, get that out of the way, and then get to the stories. So first, I'd like to talk about myself. I will be on an immigration panel. I was wondering when. Finally. I will be on an immigration panel tomorrow actually.

And if you're in Los Angeles, you are welcome to come. It's titled Our Stories, Our Power. And again, it's on December 6th tomorrow at 2 p.m. at La Plaza de, there at that place, you see. DeCultura. I know how to pronounce it correctly, but I always feel uncomfortable. Like I'm doing what Obama used to do with Pakistan, right? Oh, yeah, yeah. Are you pulling a better or work?

L. There we go. Okay, so check that out. If you're interested in going, just send an email to R-D-D-S at C-A-immigrant. Okay, also ShopTYT, I don't know what they're doing. They're like doing all these sales, there's a new sale now. Oh, come on, how many sales are they gonna be? Lots of sales, okay, so today's actually the last day to place orders and receive guaranteed

delivery by Christmas. So get free shipping on all orders over $150 today. Well, that's at least a lot of money, so that's good. Yeah, well, and you have to use the promo code Mary at checkout. So go to shopty.com, use the promo code Mary, and you'll get free. shipping. As in Merry Christmas, not the Virgin Mary. Correct, M-E-R-R-Y is the promo code.

We're knocking it out of the park today. We all have commentary, so we have to get that in. I can't believe we put Mary as in Merry Christmas in the promo code. It should be Happy Holidays. Okay, and then also, TYT is now on X-FINITY X-1, X-FINITY Flex. All these different ways to watch the show. So if you have one of those cool gadgets, those voice remotes, all you do is click on that little microphone button and you say, The Young Turks, if you have X-Finity X-1 or X-Finity Flex, and

we'll pop up. Very exciting. That's how you find things on Comcast. And I kept asking you like, but what if you scroll? No, they're like, just say it, just say it, okay? So you could also say T-Y-T, and you, but you must pronounce it like Anna. The Young Turks. No, but Jake, everyone does.

Everyone does when they're using the voice remote, right? Like everyone thinks that they need to talk like a robot. But it is- By the way, to the most random point of all time, Brett Erling actually does talk like a robot. On the phone, if you call Brett, he'll be like, hello, this is Brett. But that's his real voice. It's amazing. Really? Next time you talk to him on the phone, pay attention.

No, no, pay attention. You're like, oh my God, it's true. You know what, I had that experience, because I think he's more animated in person. were animated in person, I was like, is he mad at me? No, it's just how he sounds on the phone. Yeah, yeah, yeah. All right. Turns into Zuckerberg. And then finally, oh geez, all right, and then fine, well, he did go to Stanford.

Ooh, I do declare. Well, Zuckerberg didn't go to Stanford, I don't think, but a bunch of techies. Napster guy did, and I learned that from that movie. Sean Parker. All right, and then Margaret Cho will be on the conversation. Make sure you check that out. It'll take place on Monday, December 9th. She's a Grammy and Emmy-nominated stand-up comedian, best known for her routines that often include social and political critiques.

Again, that's on Monday at 8 p.m. Eastern time, 5 p.m. Pacific at T.Y.T.com slash live. Awesome. Yeah, Kevin Smith reached out the other day and said, hey, looking forward to coming back on too. So, not a big deal, I'm just saying. Yeah, name job. We made that very popular. X, Y, the triceps. Okay, anyway. Let's do it. Today, I am asking our chairman to proceed with articles of impeachment. I commend our committee chairs and our members for their somber approach to actions which I wish the president had not made necessary.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced today that she has decided that Congress will draft articles of impeachment. She gives a little more detail in the next video. Take a look. Sadly, but with confidence and humility, with allegiance to our founders, and a heart full of love for America. Today, I am asking our chairman to proceed with articles of impeachment. I commend our committee chairs and our members for their somber approach to actions which I wish the president had not made necessary. In signing the Declaration of Independence, our founders,

invoked a firm reliance on divine providence. Democrats too are prayerful, and we will proceed in a manner worthy of our oath of office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic. So help us God. Okay, I don't want to overfocus on style, because it's a good day in America, she's announcing impeachment, credit where credit is too, but you know, politicians are funny, fun. So with allegiance to our founders and our hearts full of love for America, today I'm asking

our chairman to proceed with the articles of impeachment. Okay, a little flowery. But you forgot the part, you forgot the part where she stares and just gulps, like- Yeah, see, but that's the thing, like that's hard. Like to be fair to them, they got to read from a prompter, they don't normally read from a prompter, and it's a super awkward situation, and she's got to go out there and tell us how full her heart is with love as she- Obama read from a prompter all the time and was very good at it.

Yeah, but he was president that he does it way more often. Okay, so- Look at me defending Nancy Pelosi. So let's talk about, let's talk about a very clear strategy that Democrats have chosen to proceed forward with the impeachment investigation and now in drafting the articles of impeachment. They have gone to great lengths to at least give the appearance that, that they are saddened by this process. That this is a disastrous thing that's happening.

They're saddened. And so you're gonna see that over and over again. Look, I gotta be honest, I don't even care whether they're saddened or not, right? I don't, why is that relevant at all? And so the reason why they're using that strategy is because they want to make it appear. And it is, I think that this has been a fair process. I think that they've done everything that they could to get Trump's defenders. to actually participate in this and comply with subpoenas to give their perspective their

side of the story. But they have obstructed this in every way that they can. And so look, I think that as long as they have a fair process, and as long as the facts are out there and they speak for themselves, that's all that matters. And they think, well, if we just seem like we're saddened by this whole process, well, then maybe conservatives in the country won't see this as like a political move just to oust Trump. But they're gonna see it that way anyway. So like, let's just move on.

Let's get past it. They're trying to appear like patriots, right? But you know who doesn't care about like dunking on his political opponents and still gets the political credit of patriotism is someone like Trump? It's this kind of Washington fiction where everyone, you know, wants to talk about the founders and the values where the regular American, it just thinks it's a food fight between two parties. So just kind of act like it. Yeah, I mean, look, historically for Democrats that's been the major problem, they don't fight back.

But here again, I want to focus on the substance that they are actually impeaching him. And they will almost certainly win that vote in the House for sure. So like let's just soak that in for a second. Donald Trump is going to be impeached. So I mean, two, two, right? Like I hope that they don't screw it up somehow between now and the vote. So that's a great moment. You guys are absolutely right on the theatrics of the politics of this.

Like, oh, we're so sad. You don't have to do any of that. Why don't you just be real for a second? Yes. They're so overproduced. And I think what this does, at least for me, is it just confronts me with the fact that Democrats are not good at political theater. Political theater is part of the job, and you do need to be good at it, and they're just

not good at it. It's just devastating to see over and over again. It's all our consultants talking. Look, if it was me, I'd be like, we are impeaching Donald Trump today. Not at all said by it, he's a monster, he's a liar, he's a fool, should have done this a long time ago. This is a good day in America. This is how our system of government is supposed to work.

It is a system of checks and balances. Donald Trump has abused his power, we have an abundance of evidence to prove it. You don't even need a teleprompter for that. But anyway, I mean, look, it's kind of unfair because I kind of do the show without a teleprompter so I have a lot of experience. But nonetheless, but nonetheless, as a public class. As a public servant, you should be good at public speaking. You should be out there speaking and having conversations with the people.

And that's not something that a lot of Democrats are known for. But anyway, let me give you some more on the details of this. And you're right, Jenk, we should focus on the substance. Now Donald Trump, of course, has decided that the best route is to whine about it on social media. And he says, if you're going to impeach me, do it now fast, so we can have a fair trial in the Senate. Okay, pause for a second. So we can have a fair trial in the Senate. Why does he think that it's going to be fair in the Senate as opposed to the process that we just experienced in the

House? Because Republicans, of course, control the Senate. And then he continues to say, and so that our country can get back to business. We will have Schiff, the Biden's Pelosi, and many more testify, and will reveal for the first time how corrupt our system really is. I was elected to clean the swamp, and that's what I'm doing. He can't even get his own tagline right. Drain it. What happened? What catch?

No one talked about cleaning the swamp. That was just you just now. So yeah. Yeah, that weird, weird change there. Well, so in terms of the people that are testifying, well, that's trippy, you know. So the Republicans control the Senate. That means they control the committees and can call witnesses in any way that they want. And so will they really call the speech?

of the House to testify about this, and could that backfire? I mean, what are they gonna ask them? Why are you investigating Donald Trump? Because he's a criminal, and my heart is full of love for America. So that's setting up for a bizarre scene in the Senate, but much more importantly, now Andrew de Palatano on Fox News is goading Trump into testifying. He's like, you know what, I think you got this dog. You know, if you go to the Senate, the Republicans are in charge.

charge, right? And you could clear this up because you'd be amazing, 200 million people would watch you. And when he said that, I was like, oh my God, he might do it for the ratings. It would be the greatest ratings ever. No, no, no, there needs to be a campaign. Like a grassroots campaign to encourage goad Donald Trump. To buy off Napolitano to keep this up. So he can be our Trojan horse.

We don't even need to buy him off. I mean, if it's coming from us, he's even smart enough to figure it out. But if we get the Fox hosts to all collude, then we'll have it. Well, look, all they got to do is tell them the 200 million people watch, and they will. They will. It'll be the biggest ratings in American history, Donald. Think about it, okay? And who's better at ratings and who's better at speaking to the people than you, Donald?

It's gonna be a perfect testimony. But before we move away from Trump's tweets, I actually wanna read the the first half of the tweets, because there was such wonderful projection there. He said the do nothing Democrats had a historically bad day yesterday in the House. It's amazing. All these constitutional law professors went up there and said, oh, he definitely did it, it's definitely a crime, and he should definitely be impeached. And the one law professor they had on the Republican side was like, well, I'm not saying he didn't

do it, I'm just saying you guys should take a couple of years to decide. Yeah, Jonathan Turley. He was the only one who disagreed with the other constitutional experts, but not on the substance of what Trump did, but on the speedy nature of this impeachment inquiry. Yeah, and so, and a lot of the experts said that Donald Trump had a historically bad day. So what does he do? No, no, oh yeah, you had a historically bad day. Why?

It doesn't make any sense. Because a percentage of the population will just believe it, like just like they're going to I believe that the Horowitz report contained so much damning evidence. I'm picking up this voice, you do, so much damning evidence about the Democrats that just if he says it, it is gospel, and that's the definition of a cult of personality. Yeah, and we're going to get to that report a little bit late. If you want to catch the whole show, t.com slash join, you can get all of it if you remember anytime you want.

Okay, but to finish it up, he said they have no impeachment case on our demeaning our country. He demeans our country. But nothing matters to them, Trump 101, they have gone crazy. I wonder who's actually gone crazy. So this made me think he had a heart attack. Because remember after he went to the doctor in an emergency, he said, now remember, it was definitely not a heart attack, not the chest. Oh, okay, so it was the chest and you had a heart attack.

He's unbelievable with his projection. Yeah. You know, there was this theory that he went to the doctor unexpectedly in an effort to eventually say that he needs to resign due to health concerns, but not because of this impeachment investigation. I don't know, I mean, look, it's all speculation, who knows what's really going on. I mean, he doesn't lead a very healthy lifestyle, so he probably does have some health issues. But look, you're right, I think that this is good, I think it's good that they're moving forward.

A lot of people are fear mongering about what's likely to happen in the Senate. The idea that Trump is likely to be acquitted because there are more Republicans in the Senate. Look, I know that there could be political ramifications for Democrats if that were to occur, but I still don't care because it's about principle and it's about doing the right thing. And I think it's important to have those Republican senators on the record saying, yes, I enable Donald Trump, I enable the executive branch to engage in criminality. And impeachment isn't like one size fits all. So everyone is freaked out because there were political ramifications for the Republicans back

during the Clinton era. They were going after him for a freaking affair. This is super clear cut quid pro quo. And I think that there will be political ramifications for the Republicans if they don't side with justice in this case and they just back Trump up. Specifically among the suburban voters that the moderate Democrats are so concerned with. I think that we should be able to turn out the progressive base as well. But there is a coalition of moderate people, centrist in the suburbs who are very concerned

with the impeachment proceedings, and they will follow what happens in the Senate. So lastly on this is that both for policy and politics reasons, I actually don't want them to rush. And of course, I don't care what Trump wants them to do. for policy, meaning substantive differences in this case, or reasons in this case, is that, well, I want to talk about the obstruction charges that Mueller talked about in his report, 10 different cases of obstruction. And I want to talk about the hush money payments, which is also a clear violation of the law.

So I wish they would take their time to introduce those articles of impeachment in the House as well. Now in terms of politics, you do want it to go into spring. I don't want it to be political in the sense of like, oh, let's drag it out so it affects the presidential election, but if you're taking politics into account, you want it in the spring when the Republicans start to panic about their polling numbers in their own Senate races. And so then this idea that they're definitely going to quit, I don't think that's true at all.

It depends on how well they're polling in their home states as they go up for reelection. So that is probably the single most important issue when it comes to whether Donald Trump will actually be held to account or not. Well, let's move on to a different aspect of this story that I thought was interesting. So today, Nancy Pelosi announced that they will be moving forward with articles of impeachment. And after she gave her announcement on that, she was asked a provocative question by a reporter with Sinclair Broadcasting Group. And the question was not something that she took kindly to.

Take a look. Do you hate the president, Madam Speaker? I don't hate anybody. Representative Collins, I have a reason I asked. We don't hate anybody, not anybody in the world. I did not accuse me. I did not accuse you. I asked the question.

Representative Collins yesterday suggested that the Democrats are doing this simply because they don't like the guy. I have nothing to do it. I think it's an important point. I think the president is a coward when it comes to helping our, our, our kids who are afraid of gun violence. I think he is cruel when he doesn't deal with helping our dreamers, of which we're very proud. I think he's in denial about the climate crisis. However, that's about the election.

This is about the election. Take it up in the election. This is about the constitution of the United States and the facts that lead to the president's violation of his oath of office. And as a Catholic, I resent your using the word hate in a sentence that addresses me. I don't hate anyone. I was raised in a way that is a heart full of love and always prayed for the president. And I still prayed for the president.

I prayed for the president all the time. So don't mess with me when it comes to words like that. So before we get to the substance of what she said there, and of course she's getting a lot of applause online and social media, I want to give you. some background on who that reporter was. So he actually used to work at Fox News, but he was forced to resign at some point. His name is James Rosen. And according to NPR, James Rosen's former Fox News colleagues said that he had established a pattern of flirting aggressively with many peers and had made sexual advances toward three female Fox News journalists,

including two reporters and a producer, and his departure followed increased scrutiny of his behavior at the network. And that's according to colleagues who spoke to the media. So that's who that guy is. And he's clearly conservative, he's now working for Sinclair, which again is very conservative, just like Fox News. But nonetheless, what do you guys think about her response to it? Well, as a lapsed Unitarian, I found her pointing a little weird, but that's really my only

I mean, it was like, I feel, I'm glad she pushed back. It was kooky and weird. I don't understand what her Catholicism has to do with it at all. That guy's a jerk. He's a terrible guy. It was corny. But you know what? Like, hey, showing a little fight in her own way, to put it delicately.

Yeah. No, I agree with Emma. I got mixed feelings on it. I like that she fought back. I'm super happy about that. I encourage her to do that more. You know, obviously we're stylistically different. And so, yeah, I don't like Donald Trump at all.

So if you want to say, do you hate Donald Trump? Sure, why not? No, not sure, why not? He's given us a thousand reasons to dislike him, despise him, hate him, whatever adjective you want to use. But she's right about the pushback on the question, because this isn't about our dislike of Donald Trump. This really is about him violating the law.

Like if the most ardent progressive came to me and said, okay. we don't like Donald Trump's policies, let's say the Muslim ban, okay, let's impeach him over that. I'd say, no, no, I don't agree. If you didn't want the Muslim man, then you shouldn't have voted for Donald Trump. That's what the election was about. And he's terribly cruel to all immigrants, but he was very clear about that during the campaign. It's not like he hit it, and the people voted for him. So then don't vote for Republicans, don't vote for Donald Trump. I wouldn't want to, in that sense, overturn the election. It is what it is. We live in a democracy. It's about this impeachment is actually about the law and the fact that he keeps

breaking the law and thinks that there's going to be no consequence. And he thinks the president in a democracy is above the law. And that just isn't true. So these gross violations of our Constitution. So Pelosi, as much as I wouldn't have talked about, like, love in my heart and I pray for him, I don't, I mean, the only thing I pray about Donald Trump is pray to that he gets out of office as quickly as humanly possible. So I wouldn't have got in that direction, but we're different people, but the substance of our answer is exactly right. This isn't about politics, this is about upholding the law. But also implicit in his question is that hatred for him would cause her to be emotional

about the impeachment proceedings, which is cladding her judgment. One could interpret that in a way that might imply sexism and would not be asked of other male leaders perhaps. And it would be consistent with this former Fox News hosts. reporters passed. And it's a common defense of Donald Trump and a common statement or talking point that conservatives use against the impeachment process. They argue that this is not about the facts, that it's just about Democrats who are

incredibly angry that they lost in 2016, and this is their way of trying to remove him from office. I mean, look, again, what matters is the evidence. And when you have more than a dozen people who have worked with Trump, some of whom gave him a million dollars for his inauguration, testifying against him and showing that there was a quid pro quo, that's what matters. Yeah, so last thing on that is, of course, it's with all Republicans and conservatives, it's projection.

So why did they impeach Bill Clinton? Because they were really concerned about a sexual affair that he had? Remember, at the time, Gingrich was having a sexual affair, and so was Livingston. So the two heads of the Republicans in the House, right? And Livingston eventually had to resign because his was an absolute mess that involved legal violations, et cetera. So now, why did they impeach Bill Clinton when they were supposed to be had a real estate deal?

And it turns out he didn't do anything wrong in the real estate deal. They impeached him because they hated him. And they were just looking for excuse, any excuse. So they project that on the Democrats. Oh, you must be doing the same thing we do. We don't really care about the law at all. We just hate the guy and wanted to impeach him. Well, no, that's not what the Democrats are doing.

In fact, the Democrats are far too cautious in how they fight against the opposing party. So it took us a Herculean effort to get Pelosi to even start these hearings in the first place. All right, well, we got to take a break. When we come back, we will show you the findings of the investigation into the Mueller investigation. Remember, the Trump administration has claimed all sorts of conspiracy theories about the intelligence community. So what did their investigation find? We'll tell you the details when we return. We need to talk about a relatively new show called Un-F-B-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. All right, back on a young churks. Let's go to member section first, Carlo Fornia, Carlofornia, right? And I love Margaret Cho, thank you, D-Y-T.

You're welcome. Yes, you're welcome. All right, so that's on Monday, Margaret Cho is on the show. Yeah, I watch too many kids' movies with my kids. All right, Pants, Status Zero says, yes, more Kevin Smith always. A bucket of squirrels is ammo against logic, writes in. All I want to find in my stockings this holiday season is Trump's resignation letter. I stole McConnell's shell, writes in, yes, Emma being the sneaky mastermind.

Hmm. Roger Kinney on Twitter says, come on, Jank. That announcement by Pelosi was a joke, we're under 11 months until Trump will be voted out. The Democrats are losing the message because they are trying to make the GOP supporters more comfortable, ridiculous. Well, I agree with you, at least in principle, that the job of the Democratic Party is not to make GOP voters comfortable. Gonzo, Tokyo says, does anyone else feel like Donald Trump forgot to stop playing Opposite Day when he was a kid? Good point. And then finally on YouTube super chat, two comments.

Eduardo Gitt says, keep it going, guys. Greetings from Mexico. Right back at you, brother. And F.R. writes, Buen, Hecho, Anna. Hecho. Hecho? Hecho. ECHO.

Okay, no idea of course what that means. Grazie, my amigo. There you go, that I know. All right, rock and roll, what's next? All right, so Donald Trump had been complaining about all these conspiracy theories regarding the Mueller investigation, and so as a result, he wanted his attorney general, William Barr, to investigate the investigation into Russian meddling and possible collusion between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.

And he would talk about it a lot, especially in public, remember this. I hope they now go and take a look at the oranges, the oranges of the investigation, the beginnings of that investigation. You look at the origin of the investigation. The Mueller report, I wish, covered the oranges, how it started. Well, those oranges have been juiced and William Barr has come up with nothing, okay? In fact, the Washington Post got the scoop on this story and I love this headline. It shows that no, nothing.

Barr's handpicked prosecutor tells Inspector General he can't back right wing theory that Russia case was US intelligence set up. So let's give you the details on that, what does this all mean? Well, John Durham, the US attorney chosen by William Barr to lead the investigation, told the Justice Department's inspector general who conducted his own probe that he has found no evidence to support claims that a Maltese professor who spoke with former Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos was secretly a U.S. intelligence asset. So the intelligence agency said the professor was not among their assets, and Durham informed

Horowitz's office that his investigation had not produced any evidence that might contradict the inspector general's findings on that point. So that Trump supporter I spoke to who said that this was all going to exonerate Donald Trump, the Horowitz report, it was going to get all the Democrats, it sounds like that's not going to happen. And yeah, my one non-substantive point is that William Barr looks like the Mucinex man. Does anyone notice that? Yes, the Mucinx like cartoon character?

Yeah, definitely. One hundred percent. Not as all. A couple of comparisons, Pepe the Frog. Oh, right. Yes. And others. Okay, so look, I love that we wasted taxpayer money, sarcasm, investigating this wild conspiracy

that I think it was a professor from Malta who actually was a CIA agent who started the investigation of Donald Trump as a plan. Or FBI or whatever conspiracy theory Q&N came up with and we wasted taxpayer money on. But here it is, Durham was picked by Barr to be a lackey. He was known as that, in fact, when he was announced, a lot of people were concerned, they're like, oh my God, Durham's gonna do this investigation. He'll find anything to blame the Democrats and pretend that this happened. And he couldn't even do that?

Yeah, he didn't do it. And Barr, who is as big a lackey and extreme right winger and loyal to Donald Trump, They got together and they couldn't find any evidence that it was in fact our intelligence agencies who were trying to make sure that Donald Trump doesn't win and plet this evidence blah, blah, blah, it was all fantasy. Once again, taxpayer money to appease a right wing that is purely emotional in their analysis of the situation and they work backwards from their conclusion, which is that Donald Trump is phenomenal and he didn't do anything wrong.

So like we are wasting our time with all of these reports and with this taxpayer funded IG thing that like they're not going to be swayed. The people who are already committed to the facts know what the reality is. And the Trumpers, it's all pure emotion and fealty to Trump from this point. So again, the people that were going to be swayed by this, it didn't make a difference. Yeah, I just want to clarify. So Durham was appointed by William Barr to pursue this. at the Justice Department level.

So the Harwood's report that Emma is referring to is the Inspector General of the FBI. And he came to the conclusion that Durham did. So they both agreed, total nonsense theory. Now Harwood's said, look, it's not that the FBI didn't do anything wrong, and here are the couple of missteps that they had. We're gonna see his full report a little bit later, but these are the reports of what he concluded. And so we'll see what things that he thinks the FBI did wrong. But he apparently concluded, no, it was not a setup.

They were not trying out to get Donald Trump, and there was no plot against them at all. So I can be a little more specific because the Washington Post was able to review a draft of Horowitz's report, even though it hasn't been made public yet, it hasn't been finalized. And so just to give you a sense of the wrongdoing by FBI officials, they just found examples of members of the FBI who don't like Donald Trump. because they're humans and humans have political opinions, right? But they determined, Horowitz determined that their, you know, dislike for Donald Trump did not in any way negatively impact the fairness of the Mueller investigation.

There was one example of an FBI lawyer, Kevin Kleinsmith. Horowitz found that a low-level FBI lawyer, Kleinsmith, doctored an email that was used as part of the warrant application process, potentially significant misconduct. that Durham is now exploring as a possible crime. Horowitz found that he sent messages suggesting a dislike of Trump, including one saying Viva la resistance. And so the whole idea there is, look, they're trying to get a warrant and including something like that in the email is gonna make maybe a judge issuing the warrant question whether or

not there's like some sort of political motivation behind it. To be fair, he didn't put Viva letter resistance in the email for the judge that then he wouldn't have gotten the warrant. It was in a separate text, I believe. So what the inspector general was saying is he might have changed an important material part of the warrant to get the warrant, and that is problematic, and it really is. No one should do that, it doesn't matter who you're investigating. And we don't know if it was something that would have changed the outcome of whether they

could have gotten that warrant or not. So that's important, and if he did that wrong, he should be held accountable for that. Separately, they're saying he didn't like Trump, he did Viva la resistance. But and so, but at the end of the day, none of this was driven by political bias and none of his superiors at the agency said, hey, go do this. Hey, we've got a plot against Trump, hey, make sure you're a doctor the warrant. No, it's one guy on one warrant that did not affect the rest of the case at all from what we see so far reported in the Washington Post.

And then in terms of what the Trump people will cling on to, it doesn't- That's what they'll Yeah, of course, it doesn't matter that the inspector general overall said there was no plot. They were not out to get him. The political bias did not affect the overall process. It doesn't matter that Durham, their handpicked guy says there was no evidence at all. What they'll cling on to is the warrant was documented and they didn't like Trump. They didn't like Trump. But wait a minute.

More than half the people of the FBI based on, now there was no poll done to be fair, but based on internal reporting from source of the FBI, voted in the end. is Hillary Clinton. And they definitely those folks did not. Why just survive back to school when you can thrive by creating a space that does it all for you, no matter the size. Whether you're taking over your parents'

basement or moving to campus, IKEA has hundreds of design ideas and affordable options to complement any budget. After all, you're in your small space era. It's time to own it. Shop now at IKEA.ca. Not like Hillary Clinton at all.

That doesn't mean there was a plot against Hillary Clinton. By the way, if there was a plot against anyone, it would have been Hillary Clinton because she lost. What kind of a plot does the FBI run where Donald Trump wins? It makes no sense at all. Not liking a particular political candidate is not remotely an issue. It's if you use that to actually doctor evidence or fix a case or do a plot against someone, that would be problematic.

And both different people looking into this case said that did not happen, definitively did not happen in terms of a plot against these folks by any higher-ups or overall organization. If we never talk about the Mueller investigation again, I would be very happy. Like, I'm so sick of it at this point. I'm just sick of it. I'm sick of it. I'm sick of the fact that Democrats emphasized it for so long and decided not to pursue the obstruction of justice charges, 10 instances of obstruction of justice in Democrat.

Like, Trump doesn't realize he's the luckiest man alive. Luckyest man alive in the political world because any other politician, both Democrat and Republican, wouldn't get away with this kind of stuff. Donald Trump has consistently, and he still whines and cries about it. The only reason why we're still talking about the Mueller report is because of Trump and his lackeys. Let it go. You got away with it.

Let it go. Yeah, 100%. I mean, God. Pelosi was handed a gift of 10 obstruction charges, and she chose to throw it away. If I was Trump, I'd be like, don't ever talk about it again. I can't believe we got away with it. But he can't help himself. He digs to hold deeper.

Okay, well, let's do an investigation on the Mueller report so that everybody can talk about it again. Such a knucklehead. All right, so we're going to take a break. When we come back, Betsy DeVos's proposal with what to do with student loans will infuriate you. So I'm going to give you the details on that. And then we will cover the protests that have been happening in Iran. Come right back. At TYT, we frequently talk about all the ways that big tech companies are taking control

of our online lives, constantly monitoring us and storing and selling our data. But that doesn't mean we have to let them. It's possible to stay anonymous online and hide your data from the prying eyes of big tech. And one of the best ways is with ExpressVPN. ExpressVPN hides your IP address, making your active ID more difficult to trace and sell the advertisers. ExpressVPN also encrypts 100% of your network data to protect you from eavesdroppers and 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 E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N.com slash T-Y-T. Check it out today. We hope you're enjoying this free clip from the Young Turks. If you want to get the whole show and more exclusive content while supporting independent media,

become a member at t-y-t.com slash join today. In the meantime, enjoy this free section. All right, back on the Young Turks. I love this comment from a member. writes in, trust me, don't try saying Jank Yugar in your remote on Comcast. I don't know how you said it, but no matter what, it's not going to come out good. Anyway, she says, you won't believe what that pulls up. Okay, now you're gonna make us try it.

Anyway, but as a member, I love seeing you on there and TYT or the Young Turks pulls you right up, that's on Comcast, Xfinity 1, X1, and Xfinity Flex. This old lady loved the convenience along with her hubby and is in his young Turks hat, being able to hear you better than on my laptop. Keep up that great work and we love you. Well, right back at you, salty tea from Jenk and Salty Anna and Emma. Okay, and then last one is Gabby Marita. No, no, no, no, Bill Barr is baby Sinclair from that old dinosaur show.

On the IG report, he obviously screamed, not the mama. I don't get that one. Okay, I don't get it either, but I read it with Claire. It's like the baby from dinosaurs, 100%, like that's, we gotta do, right? Okay, yeah, that's good. Totally. But that's how you said, okay. All right, how did you not know about dinosaurs?

Okay, we gotta go, we gotta go. I'm dying to do a bunch of these stories. So, Attorney General William Barr recently gave a speech at the Attorney General's Award for Distinguished Policing. And you know, he has a terrible path. terrible past when it comes to defending cops when they shoot and kill unarmed people, right? And what he's about to say in his speech is no exception. Take a look. I think today American people have to focus on something else, which is the sacrifice and the service that is given by our law enforcement officers.

And they have to start showing more than they do the respect and support that law enforcement deserves. And if communities don't give that support and respect, they might find themselves without the police protection they need. So he is, that's basically. basically a threat. If you don't bow down to cops regardless of how they behave, regardless of what they do, and if you demand social reforms, if you didn't demand reforms in policing, well, then maybe

you're not gonna have any protection when it comes to cops. And that's a terrible thing to say, you know, historically he has not been supportive of reforms for police departments. And there was a great point made by Sean Collins over at Vox. What Barr failed to note and has failed to address as Attorney General is that tension is not born of a lack of respect, but of fear, anger, and a lack of trust that comes from concerns over police shootings, including the shootings of unarmed black people, and tactics like stop and frisk and kettling or cordoning of crowds at protests.

Well, it just reminds me of those old mob boss movies where they say, you know, if you don't skim me off the top, old corrupt cops, you might find yourself without police protection. And that's really what he's saying. It's a veiled but not so veiled threat at communities. Who do we think he's talking about there when he's speaking directly to cops? He knows what he's saying. He knows that it's a dog whistle. And later, I mean, he talks about how everyone needs to resist police and there should be

zero tolerance for resisting police. Well, resisting can mean whatever police want it to in that moment. And we've seen them fabricate that charge specifically over and over again with the, Because they're emboldened by people at the top, like William Barr, who want them to behave like some sort of Gestapo light. Yeah, it's definitely a mob move to say. I mean, I would hate to see you not have any protection and see what could happen then. And, Sarge just really quickly, like the communities that are under siege like this,

they don't see it as protection, they see it as an occupying force and the police them treat them as such. So it's not really a threat. If the cops left them alone, they'd be pretty happy, to be honest. Yeah, so we actually, of course, need police. to actually serve the communities. And if they did, then we wouldn't have any of these issues in the first place. And so I had to confess that I was, when I first heard it, I was naive at this late date,

at this late age, and I thought that he was threatening like liberal cities, because he's done that in the past. And then I reread it, I was like, oh, no, he doesn't mean that. When he says the word communities and not cities, towns, or any other word, he's referring to minority communities, African American communities. And so I, you know, I guess you could argue it's a dog whistle because I missed it on the first time around. But it's not much of a dog whistle the minute anybody tells you that, like, oh, certain communities

might find themselves without police protection. What does that mean in the context of America today? Clearly means, hey, all you guys saying black lives matter and complaining about how police shoot you when you're unarmed and they shoot you in unjustified ways. Well, those communities are the real problem because they don't respect cops. Well, how about Tamir Rice, who was 12 years old? And the cops shot him in two seconds flat and murdered him and killed him. And so it's not, they didn't give him a chance to put down what was his toy at, and they

pulled right up to him and shot him dead, right? Two seconds, that's all that. Yeah, what respect? You didn't give him a chance. How about you respect the community you're supposed to protect and serve? But they hate that, that gets under their skin, guys like William Barr. They're like, I don't want to protect and serve those communities, because he, Emma's right, he has the idea of an occupying force.

And so, yeah, I wanted to say one more quote of his later. Yeah, I just wanted to make a note that, you know, a person that I can think of right off the bat who doesn't actually respect or care for law enforcement is William Barr. And the president that he's working for. 100%. That's the quote I wanted to read. In an August speech, a different speech, he said, that is the emergence in some of our large cities of district attorneys that style themselves as social justice reformers who spend their time undercutting the police, letting criminals off the hook, and refusing to enforce the law. Are you kidding me?

You just described yourself. Refusing to enforce the law, letting criminals off the hook. That's literally what you were hired to do in the case of Donald Trump. Well, there's a difference between, you know, the white collar criminals and people like Trump, who he, has no problem serving as a lackey for, and disenfranchised groups of people, powerless people, those are the ones that he has absolutely no respect for whatsoever. And look, one thing that I wanted to note is for some reason for conservatives, in the context of cops wrongfully shooting and killing innocent unarmed people, they have no problem,

you know, saying like there, no criticism, they're not allowed to be criticized. for some reason are the, it's the only profession where you are not allowed to criticize or critique, right? Every other profession, there is criticism, there is critique, and oftentimes that critique helps people be better, do better. The reforms help people do their jobs better, period. So critique shouldn't just be outright rejected. No one is above the law, including cops. And so if you look at the statistics, and I want to go to the last graphic in this story, I mean, the evidence bears it out. There needs to be reforms, like they are paid by taxpayers in an effort to keep community

safe. Killing unarmed innocent people is unacceptable. So this year, researchers analyzed data on fatal police encounters from 2013 to 2018 and found that black Americans are two and a half times more likely to be killed than white Americans. Over the course of a lifetime, one out of every 1,000 black men can be. We expected to be killed by police, the researchers found. The rate for white men was on a different order of magnitude, 3.9 deaths for every 10,000 white men.

On the same scale, that's 10 black men killed for every 10,000 black men. So look, I bring that up because there's obviously a bias there, right? And so there needs to be a solution to it. Why is it unacceptable to talk about solutions so people aren't killed? the way that they are. Like, it's just, I don't know. I don't understand why they take this stance. One thing that's indisputable is they are clearly much more bothered by critique of the police

than they are bothered by innocent men being killed. So if William Barr, who is the top law enforcement official in the country, cared about protecting the community, which is supposed to be the point of law enforcement, he would be at least equally outraged at the innocent people being shot by cops. But he shows absolutely no concern over that and shows all of his concern for how dare you criticize cops who have shot and killed innocent citizens. Isn't that amazing? All right, let's switch gears, talk about student loans.

Betsy DeVos doesn't want to have to deal with student loan debt. In fact, she was held in contempt of court because she was supposed to cancel student loan debt for students who had been victimized by the fraudulent activity of for-profit colleges. She refused to cancel that debt, was held in contempt of court. Now she's like, you know what, why is the government dealing with this? Why don't we find an independent organization that deals with student loan debt? So let me give you the details of what she's doing. Common Dreams wrote that DeVos this week proposed handing over the federal

government's $1.5 trillion student loan portfolio to a standalone government corporation. This means that she'd want to privatize this. DeVos's plan would spin off the Education Department's federal student aid office into a new and supposedly independent federal agency. In fact, she said during a speech in Reno Nevada, I'm not so sure the federal government should monopolize student lending, but if it does, and for now it essentially does, then it They must provide services on par with world class financial firms. Oh, world class. What's funny though is that she, like, well, it's not funny at all, she's one of the most corrupt

people ever in government. A few months ago, there was a story about how she's basically just sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars that has been approved by Congress to forgive student loan debt. Why? Because her family and her financial interests are heavily invested in student loan payments. And also, you know, if they all get wiped out, then how is she going to get that juicy interest rate? Or how is she going to get all of the money that happens, that comes to her when these students aren't unable to pay? It's predatory and she's literally just sitting on congressionally approved money.

And I think in a bipartisan way, purely to enrich herself and her family, what do you call that? It's corruption. And if she has her way, if she's able to accomplish what she wants to accomplish here, it would be incredibly difficult for a president like Bernie Sanders to unilaterally cancel student loan debt. Exactly, because it would be outsourced to a private corporation, and it would not be in the government's hands anymore. So very shrewd to protect her cash long term as she is on this administration's sinking ship.

And then at that point, they would claim like, oh, this is the government seizing private property, this is outrageous. We gave it to the private banks, wait a minute, it was from the government in the first place. Hence the need for this trick. Look, I used to think that even the bad guys had to sleep at night, so they tell themselves pretty little lies, and so they could look at themselves in the mirror. And so she, like, oh, I think it's important, in this scenario for, she would think, to get into private industry because there'll be more innovation, standard excuse they use this.

Nah, nah, in this case, there's really absolutely no excuse at all. They wanna make sure that they protect that one and a half trillion dollars that they're making money off of. Her family's heavily invested in the student loan industry. No, I think that it's as simple as her and her family members talk and they're like, well, this is gonna cost us a lot of money if a progressive wins, and we can't, and we won't be able to profit off of ripping off students. And that's our business model.

We won't be able to buy that 12th yacht. To be fair, 11th, she only has 10. Oh, I thought she had 11th. And I think one of them floated off, do we not, did you hear about that story? Yes, and they were outraged because they're like somebody cut the ropes. She's hurting, she's hurting, she needs another replacement yacht. Yeah, she was down to nine yachts for a while. I think they got the 10th one.

I'm not kidding by the way. Thank God, thank God. Those are real numbers. Wow. Okay, but she was also held in contempt of court for failing to comply with an order to stop collecting loan payments from former students of a defined for-profit college company. So the courts told her, stop collecting these loan payments because we already have a ruling and the government said don't collect them because that so-called college was garbage.

And they gave these diplomas to people or didn't give diplomas to people because the whole thing was a scam. And she's like, yeah, I know, but my family makes money from this. You're not getting it. That's right. It's to enrich me. Right. I mean, the corruption of Donald Trump's administration is record breaking.

So the irony that he won the election by saying he was going to drain this swan. I mean, it's devastating. So it's particularly the students who have been robbed blind by Betsy DeVos for the entire Trump term. All right, we gotta take a break. When we come back, we will give you an update on what's happening in Iran. There have been mass protests and hundreds of people have been killed by security forces as a result. Hold on.

Emma, so that was your last segment for the week. We had Emma on for the whole week. You've got to check out YouTube.com slash Rebel H.H.H.H. Facebook.com slash RebelHQ. And, of course, you can get it on our website, t.yt.com as well by going to Rebel HQ. And when you do fantastic work, thank you for joining us this week.

Yeah, thank you guys. All right. Great. We'll be right 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.com at apple.com slash t-yt. I'm your host, Shank Huger, and I'll see you soon.