All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 18, 2019 - Jimmy Dore Show
01:08:04
20190118_TJDS_0117_Podcast
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Get ready for an outstanding entertainment program.
The Jimmy Dore Show.
Hello, this is Jimmy.
Jimmy.
John Boehner.
Former Speaker of the House, John Boehner.
How the hell are you?
Former Speaker of the House, current spokesman for the hash.
Oh, that's right.
You're like a marijuana lobbyist now.
You got it, Buster.
Have you seen my commercials?
Yeah, where it's like, learn how to make money off weed from John Boehner.
Pay for his seminar.
Like you're hawking a timeshare plan?
Yeah, you're not even hiding it or even subtle about it.
You're just blatant.
Flagrant.
Yes.
Flagrant hypocrisy.
Yeah.
And all the while, you were a Republican politician who was more than happy to see thousands of young black men go to prison for the tiniest of marijuana possessions.
Yep.
Not a good look.
Not at all.
I'd probably kill myself if I were you.
Yeah, well, Jimmy, people like me have ways of justifying things to themselves that other people don't, especially when money is involved.
It's a survival mechanism that has served me well.
Oh, yeah?
And how do you justify this particular hypocrisy?
Well, all these young black men currently in prison.
Yeah.
They will be the rappers of the future.
Okay.
You know, you have to have some straight cred in order to be a respected rapper, preferably with a little old jail time under your belt.
So not only will they be successful in the marketplace, but they will provide the hip-hop soundtrack for a new generation of African Americans who can now get high off the chronic without fear of incarceration.
Yeah, so that puts a nice little bow on it for me.
Okay, so why are you calling?
Well, Jimmy, I must admit that when I first took this position, it was purely a cynical money grab, believe it or not.
I believe it.
I had no relationship with marijuana personally.
I was a booze and cigarettes guy.
I look down on potters sort of for deadbeats, creative types, people on the fringes of society.
Okay.
Loners and mountain banks.
Right.
Those who occupy the lonesome wastes outside the settlements.
Those descendants of Cain, the hobgoblins, the fenwalkers.
Okay, we get it, Speaker Boehner.
But recently, I actually tried marijuana.
Oh, wait.
Really?
Holy shit, Batman.
This stuff is great.
You're a smoker, aren't you?
I've been known to occasionally partake in marijuana constantly, yes.
Well, then, you know, you know what I'm talking about.
So, yeah, I'm a weed guy now.
Oh, boy.
Weed, dude.
Weed.
I'm coming into this so late in life, though, I have a lot of catching up to do.
I want to be a generationally appropriate pothead.
What does that mean?
It means I have a lot of concept albums I need to listen to.
All the later Beatles albums.
Pink Floyd, Dark Side of the Moon, but also Animals.
And the live disc from Umagooma.
SF Sorrow by the Pretty Things.
Mr. Speaker.
666 by Aphrodite's Child.
That's only some Hawkwind.
Mr. Speaker.
Remember the Future by Nectar.
Von de Graaff Generator.
Soft Machine.
Mr. Speaker, please.
Frank Connoff isn't on the show anymore.
You don't need to impress him with your obscure music stuff.
Hey, dude, you and I should smoke out together.
Sorry, I don't get high with conservative hypocrites, John.
I kind of got a brand going over here.
Oh, man.
That really harshes my mellow.
Hey, well, what if I told you I could teach you how to make a lot of money off marijuana legally?
No way.
I don't want any part of your scams.
Well, actually, you know, actually, maybe, John, maybe.
All right, yes, I would like to learn about this.
You won't regret this.
I'm sure I will.
You got my cell?
Of course.
It's on a watch list database that I still have access to.
Talk to you soon, pot buddy.
It's the Jimmy Dore Show.
The show for...
...the kind of people that are...
It's the show that makes Anderson Cooper say Front Poppy, T-Value.
And now, here's a guy who sounds a lot like me.
It's Jimmy Dore!
Hey, everybody, welcome to the Jimmy Dore Show.
Let's get to the joke before we get to the joke, shall we?
Hey, Martin Luther King Day.
I'd like to commemorate every Martin Luther King Day by remembering all the radically socialist things Democrats and Republicans refuse to remember Martin Luther King saying.
Did you hear about that, Steve King?
That Congressman Steve Kink asked out loud, what's the matter with being a white supremacist?
Oh, but breaking, Republicans remove Steve King from committee assignment because of his racism.
Also, Democrats keep Alexandria Cortez from her committee assignments because she wants to help people.
Hey, did you hear a company in Brooklyn announce they're making a Robert Mueller action figure?
You pull his string and he'll cover up for the White E. Bulger action figure before lying us into the worst foreign policy disaster in American history.
Hey, think about this.
Did you know over 30,000 French citizens fought to help the United States win our first revolution?
Did you know that?
Maybe it's time to ask the Yellow Jackets for a second favor, but no mimes.
Hey, did you hear the Catholic Church is proposing to declare Pope John Paul II a saint for living the miraculous life of never molesting boys?
Did you hear about the Clemson won the national championship in football for colleges and they got invited to the White House, but there's a government shutdown, so there's nobody there to cook them food.
Trump ordered fast food.
They all got there was tables and tables fulls of hamburgers.
You know, if somebody would have told me in the year 2004, there'd be a day where being honored at the White House meant being served fast food and being greeted by a reality TV show host.
I totally would have believed them because George W. Bush was president then and the floor already had no bottom.
What's coming up on today's show?
Telsey Gabbard announces she's running for president and she gets smeared left and right and in the middle.
We'll talk about it.
Plus, Trump says he wants to get out of Syria, but the facts are he's been dramatically ramping up our military all around the world.
We're going to talk about that.
Plus, ABC News declares that Mueller will not charge Trump with collusion.
And there's an LA teacher strike happening right now, right now, and they're striking for the right reasons.
We got phone calls today from Mitt Romney, Liam Neeson, Bernie Sanders, and John Boehner.
Plus, a lot lot more.
That's today on the Jimmy Door show.
Hi, everybody.
Welcome to the Jimmy Door Show.
I have a special guest with us.
Aaron Matei is here from The Nation Magazine, and he is the top-notch guy breaking down the Russiagate story.
And we have him on today because he's going to talk to us about the downplaying now that's happening.
I've seen it happening in spots in the mainstream media.
So first I want to show people.
Hi, Aaron.
How are you?
Hey, Jimmy.
How are you doing?
Thanks for being here.
We're going to come to you in just a second because I want to remind people that back that people have already started to downplay Mueller's report, meaning people in the establishment who are pushing Russia Gate.
So Michael Morrell in October told people to not expect any evidence from Mueller of Trump committing a crime.
What he said was, let's talk about what I think the possibilities are going forward.
I would not be surprised if Bob Mueller concludes that the Trump campaign did not violate the law with regards to its interactions with the Russians.
So he said that.
Of course, you notice that wasn't the headline of the article.
The article was all about Russia's election hacking was an intelligence failure, but the real story was buried in that.
That was almost in the last paragraph of him saying that this stuff, that he doesn't think Bob Mueller will find it.
He also says, why is that?
Because as you know, the New York Times, Washington Post, every media outlet that is worth its salt has reporters digging into this, and they haven't found anything.
And I think that had there been something there, they would have found something, and I think Bob Mueller would have found it already, and it would have leaked.
That's the former CIA acting director saying that.
He says, so I'm really open to the possibility that there's no there there on a crime being committed by the campaign and the Russians.
He was already saying that.
That wasn't the headline because that doesn't move papers or get clicks.
And now here's Mario Cuomo's kid, Chris Cuomo.
I used to say that he was the George W. of the family, but, you know, Jeb seems to be the George W. of the family, too.
So there seems to be...
Don't forget that.
He's at least 6'3, and he'll let you know.
But here's what he says.
Because you are in the battle to prove that you are right about him.
You are not in the battle to figure out how to create progress with him there.
He is not going anywhere.
These hopes that people are pinning on this Mueller investigation.
I have a far, far better legal mind than I could ever imagine to be sitting next to me.
You should prepare yourselves for disappointment if you think that this man is going to indict a sitting president of the United States.
So that was in March of this year.
Now going forward, here's an article from Politico from October 2018.
So that first one I showed you was from actually October 2017.
This is from October 2018.
Mueller report, PSA prepared for disappointment.
So that's Politico's headline.
And be forewarned that the special counsel's findings may never be made public.
So they're double warning you for they're getting you ready for a letdown twice.
And now here's Jonathan Carl on ABC's with George Nofalopigis.
And listen to what he just said yesterday.
And actually going to the point of investigating whether or not effectively the president was a Russian agent.
But what I am getting is that this is all building up to the Mueller report and raising expectations of a bombshell report.
And there have been expectations that have been building, of course, for over a year on this.
But people who are closest to what Mueller has been doing have interacted with the special counsel cautioned me that this report is almost certain to be anti-climatic.
That if you look at what the FBI was investigating in that New York Times report, look at what they were investigating.
Mueller did not go anywhere with that investigation.
He has been writing his report in real time through these indictments, and we have seen nothing from Mueller on the central question of was there any coordination, collusion with the Russians in the effort to meddle in the elections?
Or was there even any knowledge on the part of the president or anybody in his campaign with what the Russians were doing?
They haven't laid that out yet in the indictments, but how do things like the Trump Tower meeting with Russians, Don Jr., Paul Manafort, Paul Manafort giving polling data to Ukrainian oligarchs, the pursuit of a Trump Tower in Moscow?
How does that fit into this theory?
What we've certainly seen over and over again is that people around the president, first of all, have been willing to lie to investigators and had their own dealings with Russians, had their own agendas with Russians.
Manafort was trying to get paid for his work on behalf of Ukraine.
Flynn had his own dealings.
But it has not added up to anything of the central question.
Again, was there anybody, was the Trump campaign aware of or coordinating with the Russians in their effort to meddle with the election so far?
There's been nothing on that, and I'm led to believe, don't expect there's going to be a.
Senator Heiken, one of the things we're seeing.
Wow.
So let's bring back in Aaron.
Matei, what do you make of that now that someone on a mainstream news show like that, a mainstream news reporter like him saying to George Nufalopigis, and he pushed back a little bit, but then Jonathan Carl knocked it right down.
He repeated it that, no, we go back.
And this has been the focus of your reporting is you keep reminding people that the core of this investigation, the core charge of collusion, which is a conspiracy, there's no evidence of that, correct?
That's right, Jimmy.
I think there's two really important things about what Jonathan Carl said there.
The first is the one you just mentioned.
He points out that as we've been pointing out for a long time now, and when we do, we get attacked by people or we get accused of denying like this obvious Trump-Russia conspiracy.
We put out the fact that none of Mueller's indictments or claims touch on the central question, in Jonathan Carl's words, of his probe, which is whether or not there was collusion or coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
Carl points out accurately what is obvious.
Now, what he also does there is very important because he is saying that according to his reporting with people close to the Mueller probe, in his words, that Mueller's report is going to be anti-climactic and is not going to deliver the result that we've been conditioned to expect the last two years, which again is not surprising when you look at what the Mueller probe has produced so far, which as he acknowledges is nothing on the central question of collusion.
Yeah, nothing on the central question of collusion.
That's what we keep saying.
And yeah, we've all been red baited for asking for evidence of treason by the president of the United States.
It's ironic.
It says a little bit ironic.
So do you suppose we'll be seeing more people saying things like this on establishment news shows?
Or do you think that this is an outlier again?
Like we've heard Chris Cuomo say it.
We've heard now Jonathan Carl say it.
Political wrote a whole article on it in October of last year.
Mike Morrell said it a year earlier, but he wasn't really trying to, I don't think he was trying to shield anybody from a letdown.
I just think he was speaking his mind.
But now it seems like these people are coming out trying to brace people.
Does it seem that way?
We talked about this last time I was on, I think, Jimmy, where Michael Issakoff, who co-wrote the book Russian Roulette, he also has been starting to hedge more and acknowledge that the evidence is not there, contrary to what so many reporters have been saying for so long.
Now, of course, there are still efforts to keep this narrative going.
We've just had this big blow up with the news that the FBI was investigating Donald Trump, opened up a counterintelligence investigation of Trump as a potential Russian agent after he fired James Comey.
And that has gotten everyone so excited.
And that is deemed to be more proof that Trump is indeed a Russian agent.
In doing so, they ignore the fact that this investigation has produced no evidence that there is a Russian agent.
And in the report that this revolution came from, the New York Times, they acknowledged that no evidence has emerged.
So, I mean, if you're smart, I think, and if you take journalism remotely seriously and you're in the mainstream, I do think that you will start to maybe jump aboard this train and say, you know what, maybe this story is not as big as it was expected to be.
But I think that's part of the point is people don't take journalism very seriously, as evidenced by the fact that so many have joined on to this evidence-free conspiracy theory for the last two years.
You're telling me, Aaron, I have a hard time believing that the people who have been pushing the Russia Gate, like Rachel Mattel, you're telling me she's not a serious journalist.
I have a hard time believing that.
But you're telling me even someone at MSNBC, they're pushing Russia Gate at the top of their lungs.
You're saying they're not taking journalism seriously?
I think, unfortunately, this story has been such insane proof that people who are supposed to be journalists and supposed to be reporting on facts and following the facts, considering alternative points of view, have not been journalists, but have basically been partisans for the dominant conspiracy theory peddled by the Democratic establishment and national security state officials.
That's been the unfortunate lesson of Russia Gate.
Yeah, I think this story is really about the failure of journalism, just like it was the Iraq war was about the failure of journalism.
I just saw that movie Vice last night.
I lived through it.
And the fact that I knew it in real time when it was happening, again, like a dumb nightclub comedian C student like myself, I knew what was happening with the Iraq war.
There were a million people in the streets who knew what was happening with the Iraq war, but somehow every news person at every major news organization got it wrong.
Isn't that a, did they get it wrong?
Or are they just afraid to go push back against the narrative?
You know, Noam Chomsky in Manufacturing Consent with Edward Herman, they pointed out that to be in a position, to even be in a position where you have a big mainstream media platform and you're given access to U.S. officials, to even get into that position, you already have to have internalized the values of the power systems that you're supposed to be covering.
Otherwise, you wouldn't be in that position, right?
And they find somebody else.
And that dynamic, unfortunately, has been laid bare by things like Russia Gate, things like the Iraq War, where the establishment decides on a certain narrative.
And if you challenge that narrative, you're pushed to the margins.
You're called a traitor to the country and so forth.
Now, in the case of Russia Gate, it's a bit different because you have a split in the elite, but we're talking about the faction of the elite, which is pretty dominant, that for many different reasons decided that this conspiracy theory about Trump and Russia was something that they wanted to embrace.
Well, it serves a lot of people's interests.
It serves the military-industrial complex because it ramps up a Cold War and we can then justify spending more money on the military, right?
So it also serves the establishment news people because A, it gets clicks like crazy.
That's why Trump is president, because they gave him $200 billion in free media to begin with, because he gets ratings.
So that's why this also gets ratings.
So that serves their, so that you got the news, you got the news establishment, the military-industrial complex.
And now you also have the Democratic Party.
It serves their interests because they don't want to take a look at what went wrong in the Democratic Party and why they lost to Donald Trump.
So it's the one issue that serves many different interests at the same time, which is why it's living for so long, don't you think?
It's the perfect storm of privileged interests coming together to protect themselves.
You know, to such a degree in the case of the Democrats that Hillary Clinton even, you know, so long after the election is still saying things like, you know, how did the Russians know to target voters in Wisconsin and Michigan?
Which is, which like a statement like that is insane for so many reasons.
A, I mean, the actual facts of what the Russians did with their juvenile social media ads is like they spent something like a few hundred dollars in both these places combined.
And most and most of these ads that they had were not about the election and were displayed in Wisconsin and Michigan on Facebook way before the election, like in the primaries.
But even putting aside that fact, I mean, these also happen to be the two states that Hillary Clinton didn't set foot in in the crucial months leading up to the election, which gives us a window into why we're talking about Russia.
Right.
It's to help failed neoliberal elites like Hillary Clinton and the people around her to help them deflect from their own failures.
Yeah, I mean, that would be a tough.
That would probably go on your gravestone that you lost to Donald Trump.
So they have to figure out a way to get that off her gravestone.
And that's certainly one of the things.
It's ironic.
Hillary Clinton wags her finger at other people, yet she was the one who propped up Donald Trump to be the nominee for the Democratic Party using a thing called the Pied Piper strategy, where she got her minions in the press to proper up Donald Trump because that was the guy she wanted to run against.
And lo and behold, she sucked so hard, sucked so hard Hillary Clinton, was so hated that she couldn't even beat her own hand-picked challenger.
She lost to that guy.
Jimmy, there's even reporting.
I'm not sure if this is true, but it was reported that Bill Clinton even called Trump himself to encourage him to run.
Yes.
Because the Clintons thought that Trump would be the perfect opponent.
That's what they thought.
That's what they thought.
And now America is, now we have Trump as president.
Thank you, Hillary.
And we're all still suffering the consequences of people like the Clintons, the people around them, and the news media partisans who cheered them on, the refusal on their part to accept that outcome.
It's literally a resistance to reality, not a resistance to Trump.
It's a resistance to accepting that Trump won and accepting that Trump is a result of their own failures.
Exactly.
Aaron, thank you for being our guest.
And everybody check out Aaron's writing in the nation.
Oh, look, It's freshman Senator Mitt Romney.
This could be important for his career.
Hello.
Oh, hi, Jimmy.
I prefer Maverick Mitt.
Say, did you know that Mitt is short for Mumbaba?
No, I did not.
Mumbaba was a mighty steed who defended the cedar forest of ancient Samaria.
And like Mumbaba, I am a maverick.
For I say things that give the illusion of mumbaba-ness while I cringe like a big pasty weenie.
What makes you a maverick, Mitt?
I'm a progressive at heart, and you know that.
For example, we simply must raise the minimum wage.
That's encouraging to hear.
Raise it to what?
$5.15.
But let's not be too rash.
I'm only talking about in some areas.
What areas, Bitt?
That's to be determined at a later date by my death panels.
I haven't worked out all the details yet, but you know what they say about details?
details are for homos.
Yeah.
Oh, my God.
So stupid.
Hello, do I still have you on the line?
I'll have to redial.
At Salom 24,600.
What's Can you connect me with Pasadena 2589?
I still use the phones that way.
There are still operators there that'll answer to that.
Yeah, I don't think so.
Hey, what's progressive about a $5 about a $5.15 minimum wage?
Well, for one thing, it's much higher than what Alan Greenspan wanted.
And he's married to that left-wing radical, Andrea Mitchell, who works for MSNBC.
Ergo, case closed.
That sounds very right-wing to me.
On the contrary, it's the opposite of tinkle-down economics.
This is tinkle-up economics.
Is that like trickle-down economics?
Yes, but even more potent.
A tinkle is a more powerful stream, whereas trickle sounds like you have prostate problems or something, which I certainly don't.
So don't let your imagination run wild on that, mister.
I take Saul Palmetto.
But how is that better?
Saul Palmetto shrinks your prostate so you can.
No, no, no, no.
How is Tinkle Up better?
Because according to the calculations I made deep within my strangely rectangular head, non-corporation humans actually, literally, make more by earning less.
Let me unpack this for you and connect the dots.
You see, when you make less, you spend more.
And you'll agree there's nothing worse than a hoarder who is poor.
Give people less and their money will tinkle upwards, resulting in more jobs for police and parole officers, because then they'll lose their homes and start living on the streets.
It's all very radical progressive, I know, but I'm no stranger to radical leftism.
I went to a lot of Ayn Rand key parties in the 1960s.
What were those like?
Very decadent, Jimmy.
I was in charge of the WD-40.
That chastity belt always had a rusty slag.
Can I hang up now?
I need to send 25,000 roses to Mitch McConnell.
Everybody, welcome to Jimmy Dorsey.
I'm here with the Missouri Liberal Ron Placone.
Hello.
Ron's going to be in New Orleans and Texas in March.
Go to his website, check it out.
There's a teacher strike happening in LA right now.
There's a teacher strike happening in LA.
Are they striking for more money?
Well, here's what's happening.
The union argues that the Los Angeles Unified School District, the LAUSD, is flush with cash that could be used to provide teachers with raises in one of the country's most expensive cities, as well as hiring more support staff, nurses, the teachers, and teachers to cut down on class size, which is at 45 students per class in some schools.
Now, Steph, you're a former Glendale Unified District teacher.
You taught.
Is it really that big of a deal to have 45 students?
Well, it's not a big deal if you don't care about them learning.
Right.
I mean, no big deal.
But I just want to point out that when you say 45 students, I taught in high school, and that meant five class periods up to 45 kids.
Oh, so it's not just 45 students a day, so it's 45 students times five class periods.
And I'm not a math surgeon, but that comes out to be somewhere around 180, 200 students.
Probably.
You're not a math surgeon.
I'm not doing the math in my head right now.
I'm like, 9180, you got it.
That's 225, by the way.
Amidst the wealth of Los Angeles, we should not have class sizes of 45 students, said the UTLA president Alex Caputo Pearl.
He told the crowd at the rally.
It's wrong that the district is hoarding $2 billion when they say there's no money for the schools.
It's wrong when community schools are starving and charter schools are expanding.
American Federation teacher president Randy Weingarten said.
In some schools, demonstrators argued the district's refusal to staff the district properly has led to serious safety risks.
Like, for instance, there is not a nurse in every school every day in the richest country in the world and one of the richest cities in the world.
Isn't California one of the fifth largest economies in the world?
It's the fifth largest economy in the world.
In the world.
And somehow we can't afford decent class sizes for our kids or medical care for them when they're at school.
There are schools that don't even have a nurse.
LAUSD is the country's second largest school district, serving more than 600,000 students.
That's about the size of Seattle's population, by the way.
600,000?
I think that's more people than live in Montana.
Hey, Suri, what's the population of Montana?
So that's about, that's more than half the population of Montana.
600,000 students.
Teachers are threatening to strike.
They already are.
It started today.
If the school district doesn't meet their demands, providing more support for the city school children.
So they want smaller class sizes.
That helps your kids.
They want a nurse at your school.
That helps your kids.
And they shouldn't have to ask for it.
That's right.
By the way.
Oh, you know what?
They go and strike for it.
By the way, they do have to ask for it because the superintendent, Austin Buetner, has never taught in a classroom, has never been a principal in a classroom, and has no educational background.
But he's leading this second largest district in the country.
So he's not a teacher, and he's how did he get into what?
Who appointed him?
He's appointed by the mayor?
Is that what happens?
You know, usually the school board, you know, sets these people, but who knows why they think a businessman who once upon a time worked for LA would be the best person for this position.
It's outrageous.
It is outrageous.
So again, teachers are the only, they seem to be the only union left that is that is helping our country, right?
So the teachers' unions went on strike in Arizona, in Kentucky, Oklahoma.
And then was it South Carolina?
There was another red state They went on strike and they won.
So, what these teachers are doing when they're going on strike is they're actually trying to protect the educational environment of your kid.
And by the way, these teachers that are going on strike, Jimmy, they also have kids in the LA school district.
Right.
It was Kentucky, Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Arizona.
That was it.
Kentucky, Oklahoma, and Arizona.
And they won.
And those are in states that they're not even legally allowed to strike.
And they struck, and nobody put them in jail, and they won.
So hopefully, the teachers are going to lead the way, and we can have our own little yellow jacket thing happening here.
It was horrible weather.
This is the worst weather ever to start a strike in.
Well, okay, kids.
It is raining in Southern California.
A little point here.
When it's raining in a school, in an elementary school, you know what happens?
The teachers have to stay in the classroom and supervise the kids because there's nobody to supervise them because it's raining outside, right?
Supervise them.
So you want to, you stay in the classroom during lunchtime with your students to supervise them.
So during the breaks and recesses, you have to supervise the kids.
So right now, the school district is hiring people to supervise kids, right?
And that's exactly what the teachers want.
They want more supervision for the kids.
They want more staff.
Not just when they go on strike, but during the entire school year.
Yeah.
So you have to like sit with the kids at recess if they can't go outside.
Yeah.
You have to supervise them by law because you want the kids to have an adult supervising them.
They're kids.
Safety reasons.
Don't drive me nuts.
Every time if I was a teacher, every time it rained, I'd be like, oh, no.
And that's how teachers.
I don't get my break.
But guess what?
That points out something.
That the people that are in teaching are there because they're committed to it.
Right.
And so they shouldn't be like undermined by not being paid well.
And what these people are doing is they're trying to protect the environment of the educational system.
They want school nurses.
And they want librarians.
They want right funding for the classrooms.
And guess what?
Austin Buetner thinks that a teacher is not necessary, but you can have technology take care of your students.
This is correct.
What would you say is the right size for a class?
In the turn of the century, 2000, we were teaching 20 to 1.
And when I was a high school teacher, teaching 20 to 1, I was really able to get to know my students and challenge them intellectually and nurture them in the classroom.
When it becomes 38 kids, imagine trying to teach 38 10th graders.
I can't.
I can't imagine it.
Buehtner wants these teachers to have an excess of 46 students in a classroom with one adult.
It's just amazing.
He is never taught in a classroom.
So support your teachers.
We're going to be, we wanted to go down and cover the strike today, but we couldn't because of the horrible weather and because the show had a prior commitment.
They were supposed to start the strike last Thursday.
We were going to go cover it.
Then they switched it.
So we will go down and cover it.
I'm sure this strike will go on for a little while.
So there's no kids in school, so they still go to school.
No, schools are open to provide a place for these kids to go to, you know, whereas their parents may have to go to work.
So the schools are open, but they're at like a skeleton staffing as far as, you know, trying to supervise the kids.
And I'll tell you right now, when this man says that you don't need a teacher, you just need computers, why isn't he just having computers show up to work this week?
Ha ha.
He did say that.
I saw that.
I tweeted.
I even tweeted it.
You know, I did talk to Superintendent Austin Buetner yesterday, and he said there are ways to educate kids that don't rely on a physical body that, you know, maybe they can use computers or iPads or use technology is what he said.
But there he is.
Don't even need teachers.
Well, don't we got iPads?
Can we just give them that iPad?
Why do you need a doctor?
I got a computer sitting in that examining room.
What are you doing?
You know, that does sound like something like a scummy business person would say.
Like, hear me out.
Let me run this by you.
Educators.
I don't even think we need them anymore.
Huh?
I think that's a bit dated.
We've been doing it a long time now.
What if they just look at a screen?
Hear me out.
Saves billions.
That's a superintendent of the second largest school district in the nation.
And not a teacher.
Never was a teacher.
Never going to be a teacher.
Isn't a teacher.
Has no idea what it takes to be a teacher.
You know who else didn't?
Our last, our secretaries of education.
Not teachers, never been a teacher.
Arnie Duncan under Obama.
Never a teacher, not a teacher, doesn't know how to be a teacher.
Same thing with Betsy DeVos.
Not a teacher, doesn't know how to be a teacher.
Same thing with this guy, Austin Buetner.
Not a teacher, never been a teacher.
But yet he's running into that.
Nowhere would this ever happen.
He's not even convinced a teacher should be a job, right?
No, in no other business does this happen.
You got a basketball coach who never played basketball?
No.
You know what?
I have an idea.
You know what my idea is?
I don't even think you need a superintendent.
I think all you need is a computer.
Why don't we just get a computer for the superintendent?
Problem solved.
Hello.
Jimmy, this is Liam Neeson.
But you don't need to know that right now, so I take that back.
Erase that.
Hello.
Who I am is not important at the moment.
But if I were to tell you who I was, it would be me, Liam Neeson.
Forget I said that.
May I start over?
Yes.
Jimmy, do you have the catheter that's right for you?
Sorry, wrong script.
Jimmy, this is a very dramatic day.
Today changes everything.
Today, a bombshell has been dropped.
Breaking news.
About what?
What if I were to tell you that someone in your household has been compromised?
I wouldn't know what that means even.
It's only a matter of time now.
I have it from reliable anonymous sources in high positions.
That what?
That it's the beginning of the end, Jimmy.
The cracks are showing.
The walls are closing in.
Are you connecting the dots?
What thoughts?
Let me unpack it for you.
An asset has been turned and the pressure is on.
To put it in layman terms, the moon is on the rise.
What?
What are you trying to say, Liam?
It's over.
You're done.
You're underwater.
You're off the rails.
It's the tipping point.
Do you know what point I'm referring to?
No.
That would be the boiling point.
And do you know what's happening?
No.
The bottom is falling out while the ceiling is dropping.
Tensions are mounting as tempers are flaring.
It's truly only a matter of time.
Why?
Because we've reached a turning point.
Which means.
Rats are leaving the sinking ship.
Why?
Because it's only a matter of time.
Before what?
Before it's over.
Before you're done.
Before you go down.
But why am I going down?
I don't know.
My guess is because you're up against the wall or something.
According to sources that are close.
Close to what?
The information for this changes everything.
Mark it down.
This is the day.
Kelly was fired.
Monafort is lying.
Cohen is telling the truth.
It's getting dark in here.
It's getting cold.
They're turning up the heat.
Winter storms are slamming.
Bashing, thrusting, pushing.
Chris Hansen got arrested for bounce checks.
Okay.
Okay, Liam.
Thanks for the info, buddy.
You're welcome.
I've been Lester Holt.
Next up, a very inspiring story about a little girl who works in a sweatshop to help her mother boy insulin.
I have to admit, I always thought Tulsi Gabbard was extra smart, especially, you know, I saw her on Joe Rogan one time, and listen to what she said.
I do know that when you look at, you know, guys like Jimmy Doerr, for example, you know, Jimmy Dore talks about a lot of things that you'll never hear if you flick on the TV on the on the cable news channels and has very interesting conversations and again, bringing facts and different things to life that people don't otherwise feel like they have access to.
I don't know.
I just always thought she was really smart, Ron.
Jimmy, I don't want to, you know, like put this down or anything, but in reality, she has decided to run for president and she knows that you control elections.
So I don't want to, I don't want to make you feel bad.
You know what, Ron?
A lot of people have blamed me for the last election.
And she's preemptively winning you over.
She knows that I am the kingmaker.
We are the kingmakers in American politics.
So she knows what side, you know, her bread is buttered.
Yep.
So anyway, she went on CNN and she said this.
Are you going to run for president of the United States and do something about it?
Do you think she should?
Do you think she should?
Are you going to run?
I'm going to run.
I have decided to run and we'll be making a formal announcement within the next week.
Yay!
Yay, everybody's happy.
And our good friend Gordon says the DNC just choked on their diamond-encrusted five-star donor bought breakfast.
Let's remember who Tulsi Gabbard is.
Tulsi Gabbard is the one who voluntarily stepped down from her position at the DNC.
I think she was vice chair.
She voluntarily stepped down.
Why?
Because she didn't like the way Bernie was being treated.
That's why she actually stuck her neck out.
She's, I think, three Democrats in the whole country who stood up for Bernie Sanders, right?
Keith Ellison was one of them.
He actually broke with his party, and she did it.
And people forget that.
I actually had somebody say to me yesterday, Ron, a Bernie Sanders fan like me said, oh, I think she's getting in the race as controlled opposition to split the progressive vote.
I'm like, boy, that's quite a plan Tulsi launched when she decided to step down from the DNC so she could endorse Bernie Sanders because then four years later, she was going to then split the.
Okay, wow, that's just that.
That's I'm up for a good theory, but that's a little out there.
That doesn't mean it doesn't make any sense, especially since Elizabeth Warren is already in the race, and that's supposed to split the progressive vote.
So now the progressive vote will be split three ways: Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Tulsi Gabbard.
I lean towards Tulsi Gabbard because her foreign policy is fantastic.
Or, well, it's better than Bernie's, put it that way.
Right.
And well, I'm still hoping for a joint ticket.
I'm not hope for that.
I'm hoping it's Tulsi and Bernie VP.
If Bernie would have announced that Tulsi was his vice president, I think when he was running, it would have helped him.
I think so, too.
I mean, they did have that meeting shortly before she announced.
So, you know, Bernie and yeah.
Oh, really?
Yeah, yeah, they met.
They met up.
Oh, I didn't know.
Yeah.
So, I mean, we don't know much more than that.
I know Bernie and Elizabeth Warren had a meetup, but I didn't know that they had a meetup.
That's fantastic.
So remember, that's who she is.
Plus, she's the only one, a few people in the whole country that are speaking out against our interventionist wars.
And she speaks up for Palestinians.
She speaks up against our intervention in Syria, and she caught hell for it.
And let's so Max Blumenthal kind of gets it right.
He says the neocon left liberal interventionist freak out.
So the neocon left and right freak out over the only presidential candidate who has forcefully defied the bipartisan foreign policy consensus.
So we have a bipartisan foreign policy consensus of endless war, perpetual war and intervention everywhere.
And it's always at the behest of Saudi Arabia or Israel.
And so she goes against that in a forceful way.
And so the interventionists on the left and the right are freaking out over her.
He says, he says it will be somewhat enjoyable to watch it build to a petulant frenzy this year.
And she's defied, he says that she's forcefully defied the bipartisan foreign policy consensus.
And this is just the beginning.
So let's remember also, this is from RT.
Gabbard certainly poses a thorny problem for the neocon neoliberal axis as she checks all the identity politics boxes, the first Hindu member of Congress, a woman.
She's a veteran.
And she has undeniable populist appeal, given her anti-establishment record.
While Gabbard is not a Democrat, is a Democrat, she was emphatically not a Clinton supporter, not a Clinton supporter.
So that's where a lot of hate is coming from for her too, is from there.
She resigned as vice chair of the Democratic National Committee.
That's right.
I was right, vice chair, in February 2016.
So she could endorse Bernie Sanders in the primary.
And now some people are saying that somehow she's doing this so she could screw.
It's disrespectful to Bernie.
But here's so here's some of the smears, Ron.
Here they are.
Putin puppet versus Sod Shield.
Debs and Republicans in a panic over Gabbard challenging Trump in 2020.
She'd be a great challenger for Trump.
She's a veteran.
She's a woman of, no, she's a woman of color.
And I like that she stands up against foreign wars, foreign interventions, and that she had the guts to go to Syria to see what was actually happening and not rely on the corporate news that just is a mouthpiece to the Pentagon.
Well, and she's someone that I think a lot of the country would feel comfortable having her with her, quote, thumb on the button, as they put it, because she is a veteran.
She has that experience.
She also does want to improve foreign relations and not be an endless war.
So, you know, I think it's the type of leader that a country could get behind.
I agree.
I agree.
But people, people, they give it to her over that Putin vote for some.
Oh, my God.
She's a veteran.
And they red bait her and call her a traitor at the same time.
And a veteran.
I mean, it's just a just, ugh, that's such gross stuff, isn't it?
Oh, my, isn't that gross to do that?
Like, do you have a problem with her, her policies or anything?
Let's talk about it.
You want to just smear, did they just smear her?
There have been a lot of smears on her that have been either largely unfounded or something.
And I don't want to jump ahead because I know you're going to cover more stuff in this, but stuff that she has, you know, distanced herself from many years ago.
Oh, yeah.
Like her past.
Yeah, we're going to get to that.
For instance, so here, ever since her 2017 visit, we'll start with the Assad stuff.
So ever since her 2017 visit to Syria, Gabbard has been condemned for daring to seek first-hand accounts rather than blindly trusting the mainstream media's narrative.
So on Friday, the pundits were off again to the races with fresh accusations of Assad sympathizing.
Assad apologist seems to be the Tulsi equivalent of Putin puppet, which is what we were called when we were at the Oslo Freedom Forum by Gary Kasparov.
called Putin puppets because we were asking about the human rights violations of the United States.
And you were Putin's buddy, That's what he called me.
I think that's a promotion.
Yeah.
like you oversee some of the puppets.
Yeah, yeah.
I think that's what that gigantic.
I'm his buddy.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Judging from the early tweets, though, she was accused of being one of those too.
So she was accused of being a Putin puppet and an Assad apologist.
And so just so you guys remember what's really going on in Syria.
And so Tulsi Gabbard went to war.
She had friends get killed in illegal wars.
She had friends get killed in Iraq for no reason.
So she comes back and now she has, wow, a sober view of war.
She knows what it's really like.
And she's like, well, I can't be voting for this war in Syria.
I have to go see what's actually going on.
She goes there.
People start calling her an Assad apologist and a Putin puppet.
And let's remember what's really happening in Syria.
People don't know what's happening in Syria.
Here's what's really happening in Syria and why Tulsi was 100% right.
Here we go.
Escalate.
It's true, but I think we have to step back and not put this in partisan terms.
This is a U.S. mistake that started seven years ago.
And I remember the day on your show when President Obama said Assad must go.
And I looked at you and Joe and I said, huh?
How's he going to do that?
Where's the policy for that?
Right.
And we know they sent in the CIA to overthrow Assad, the CIA, and Saudi Arabia together in covert operations, tried to overthrow Assad.
The CIA and Saudi Arabia tried to overthrow Assad.
And how did they do that?
Was a disaster.
Eventually, it brought in both ISIS as a splinter group to the jihadists that went in.
It also brought in Russia.
So we have been digging deeper.
So they funded, trained ISIS just like we did to Al-Qaeda.
We did that in Syria.
That's with CIA money, baby.
CIA admits it.
It's called the Timber Sycamore.
It's not, it's okay.
It's not a secret.
It's just not well known.
And deeper and deeper.
What we should do now is get out and not continue to throw missiles, not have a confrontation with Russia.
Seven years has been a disaster under Obama, continuing under Trump.
This is what I would call the permanent state.
This is the CIA.
This is Pentagon wanting to keep Iran and Russia out of Syria, but no way to do that.
And so we have made a proxy war in Syria.
It's killed 500,000 people, displaced 10 million.
And I'll say predictably so, because I predicted it seven years ago that there was no way to do this and that it would make a complete chaos.
So what I would plead to President Trump is get out.
Like his instinct told him, by the way, that was his instinct.
But then all the establishment, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Pentagon, everybody said, no, no, that's irresponsible.
But his instinct is right.
Get out.
We've done enough damage seven years.
And now we really risk a confrontation with Russia that is extraordinarily dangerous, reckless.
Admiral Sefri.
So now you know what's happening.
And by the way, nobody contradicted him on that whole panel.
Those people who've been actively and passively pushing Russia Gate, none of them pushed back against him.
I was going to say, too bad he doesn't have a mic to drop, right?
I've been in the perfect moment for it.
Yeah.
Have they had him on since?
So I don't know if they've had him on since, but I think that was his one and only.
So now you know what's happening.
So that's what's actually happening.
That's what never gets reported.
And everyone's still pretending.
So that's why she went there.
So, okay, so can we put that to bed now?
Again, again, the propaganda is for war because the military industrial complex owns them owns the corporations that give you your news.
So only six corporations give you your news, and they're all pro-war all the time.
Isn't that weird?
And the people who are against the war get fired, like Phil Donahue.
Isn't that funny?
Phil Donahue and Jesse Ventura get fired.
Everybody else gets promoted.
So there you go.
So that's.
Let's take another look at that smear and how it began in the first place.
I'm really, I have a problem with her.
Why?
Well, we were involved in this conflict internationally, and she wanted to see what was going on for herself.
You're mad about that.
And her conclusions went against the establishment narrative.
I don't like it.
So I don't like it.
Well, who she's a sad apologist?
Who is Assad?
I'm not sure.
I'm not sure who that is or what he's about.
I couldn't pick him out of a lineup, that's for sure.
But she's an apologist for him, I bet you.
So here she is.
Also, she's an RT called Tulsi Gabbard is going to run for president, supported by the Russian government's media arm.
You know why they say she's supported by the Russian government's media?
Because she's in the news and Russia.
RT is a news channel, and they cover her.
They covered her.
Tulsi Gabbard calls on the U.S. government to stop supporting terrorists after meeting Syria's civilians in Assad.
We were.
That was just got explained to you by Jeffrey Sachs at MSNBC.
We were supporting CIA when we were supporting terrorists, ISIS.
See, what happened was other media outlets around the world covered that, just not ours.
Yeah, that's right.
That's what happened.
So RT covers it.
And then, look, she's being propped up by Russians.
See, in other countries, their media system isn't based on a for-profit corporation model.
So they actually cover conflict in a much more responsible way.
They still have their problems, but compared to us, not near as bad.
The RNC also released a cheat sheet of talking points following the news of Gabbard's pending announcement, though some took that as a sign of weakness.
Well, here's the thing they released.
They call her Assad's mouthpiece in Washington.
And there's a cheat sheet.
That's what they released.
And it's interesting.
Why is that interesting that the RNC released that on Tulsi Gabbard and called her all those names?
Why is that interesting?
Because the fact that the GOP took the time to tweet out an infographic about her when they've only ever mentioned Kamala Harris on their Twitter feed one time ever, as far as I can tell, says a lot about the potential of her.
So they're afraid of her.
They're not as afraid of Kamala Harris because Kamala Harris doesn't inspire anybody because she does the bidding of the corporations.
That's why Steve Mnuchin's our secretary treasurer because she didn't prosecute him when she was the attorney general of California and he was a criminal banker.
So that sells me a lot.
They're afraid of her.
They're not afraid of Kamala Harris.
Isn't that what that tells you, Ron?
Yeah, I mean, Tulsi Gabbard, in so many ways, is the ideal person to run against Trump because Trump ran on this whole, like, I'm an anti-establishment guy, and it was all a lie.
Right.
But, you know, people bought into that.
In many ways, she is like the left equivalent of that.
She does things outside of the box.
She does things on her own terms.
She has all this crossover appeal that we mentioned.
She's a veteran and so forth.
She's young.
So I think like that's like an ideal left populist response to what's trending in the White House now on the other side.
So, you know, I think, you know, just looking at it strictly, you know, objectively, I think she has a good shot at beating them.
I think Kamala Harris would lose.
Yeah, I think so too.
And the corporatists are, I mean, are really out.
The pro-Israeli people are out for her.
The corporatists are out for her.
The GOP is out for her.
I mean, she's really ruffles a lot of feathers.
Not like people are ignoring her.
Believe me.
She scares a lot of people and she ruffles a lot of feathers and people have to smear her.
And there's room to criticize everybody.
And you can genuinely and honestly criticize Tulsi Gabbard, but that's not the criticism she's getting.
She's getting all this stuff.
Look at this.
This is from the Palmer report.
My support for every other Democratic 2020 candidate still stands.
But Tulsi Gabbard, hell no.
She should have been banned from the party a long time ago.
Effing monster.
She calls it an effing monster.
She's a monster.
She's a monster.
What do you call Ted Cruz?
What is Louie Goldmer?
What do you, she's a monster?
The person who stands up against war is the monster.
The person who's against war is a monster.
She'll use her campaign to try to destroy the Democratic Party during the primary.
I won't allow it.
That's what people said about Bernie Sanders.
What are you talking about?
Oh, I bet he doesn't support Bernie either because he's not a Democrat.
Right?
Yeah, well, yeah, it says in the first, she's not a real Democrat.
Oh, there you go.
There you go.
She tried to sabotage the DNC from within in 2016.
Yeah, whenever you want to sabotage something from within, usually you leave it and distance yourself.
That's usually the first time.
And you get everybody in the organization to reject you and hate you.
I'm inside of the machine.
I'm going to do something.
I better go.
Let me out myself.
Let me out myself as being an enemy.
He says, this guy, Jacob Wool, says everybody in the pro-Israeli lobby, myself included, is already talking about how to make sure the Tulsi Gabbard campaign is over before it even gets off the ground.
They're scared of her.
If you're going to bet on a Democratic candidate, look elsewhere.
They're scared of her.
So these are all the, and other people didn't even bother with issues or facts, preferring guilt by association and personal insults.
For instance, here's one.
Someone named Molly John Fest.
Her mom was famous.
So now she gets to have a $5 million apartment in Manhattan overlooking Central Park, which I'm jealous of.
And so she's also a writer.
And she says, so if you know that David Duke tweeted out support of Tulsi Gabbard, and I think it had to do with the Assad thing, right?
So she's an anti-interventionist there also.
But anyway, he tweeted out support of her.
Doesn't really matter why.
He says Tulsi Gabbard for Secretary of State, an example of a need for political realignment, right?
Okay.
That's David Duke, and you know he is.
He's the KKK guy, right?
And so this woman retweets that, but not the tweet, just a screenshot.
And she tweets it out and says, and this is why Tulsi Gabbard should not be your 2020 pick.
So that's weird.
So you can't support Tulsi Gabbard because some guy who she has no control over endorsed her because someone who's repulsive likes her, which she doesn't have any control over.
So now what she's saying, what Molly Jong Fest is saying, we should let David Duke disqualify anybody he feels like.
So now if he endorses, if he endorses Elizabeth Warren, are you going to say the same thing?
So he gets the pick.
So David Duke gets to decide who we're supposed to be not like.
All he has to do is say something nice about them.
Because guess what?
Trump did that to Nancy Pelosi.
So now you don't like Nancy Pelosi?
Of course you do.
So you have, again, that's an inconsistent standard, which reveals you, you know, not to have, well, to be inconsistent is the nicest thing I could say.
The actual thing is that you don't have much integrity because you don't have a consistent standard.
You have one standard for people you like and one for people you don't like.
And so you argue dishonestly.
And that's called a smear.
And that's why that doesn't make any sense.
She was endorsed by Trump.
Nobody took that seriously, even though I bet you 10 to 1, he actually meant it.
So that's why this, that doesn't mean anything.
And I said, imagine the confusion in the tortured head of Molly Jiang Fest.
After voting for a woman who called black children super predators, she then smears a veteran and the first Hindu woman elected to Congress with the cheapest of cheap shots.
And here's the thing.
She tweeted out a screenshot.
She tweeted out a screenshot of that because if she would have actually tweeted out the tweet that David Duke made and saying nice things about Tulsi Gabbard, you would have seen her response.
That's why she didn't tweet that out.
She tweeted out a screenshot.
Again, revealing the poor character of Molly Jongfast once again.
That's called dealing from the bottom of the deck.
That's what that is.
You have to do that to smear somebody.
She's so horrible, you have to do underhanded smear tactics that reveal you to have poor character.
Really?
You're actually revealing yourself.
You're not revealing her.
She's dealing from the bottom of the deck and screenshotting the card she wants.
Yes, that's exactly right.
Because here's what she said back to David Duke.
You don't know I'm Polynesian and Caucasian.
My dad couldn't use whites-only water fountains.
No, thank you.
Your white nationalism is pure evil.
But Molly Jongfast didn't want you to see that.
Do you see how people have to attack her?
If she's that bad, why do you have to be such why do you, why do you have to reveal yourself to have no character?
Why do you have to attack her in such an underhanded way?
If she's so bad, you shouldn't have to do that in such an underhanded way.
But you did.
Why?
Because you don't have integrity and she does.
That's why.
You have to come at her unfairly and smear her.
So that's okay.
And then she changes the subject.
She goes, imagine wanting to die on the Tulsi did nothing wrong hill.
Nobody said that.
Nobody said she didn't do anything wrong.
That's not what we're saying.
We're saying you trying to paint her as a racist is at best disingenuous and at worst reveals you to have no character integrity.
Because we just showed how you debate or try to present an argument.
It's really underhanded.
And I said, where did you learn to smear women of color in the most underhanded way like that?
Did you pick that up from Hillary or Trump?
Why are your parents did a shit job raising you?
It's not actually her parents' fault.
It's her fault.
She's grown.
She's 40 or she's over 40 or something.
She's totally grown up.
Her picture.
She's a follow-up tweet.
I should have.
Actually, not your parents' fault.
Changed my mind.
Changed my mind.
Her picture makes her look much younger.
But she's certainly snowflaky.
But so there it is.
Oh, by the way, there's one more.
This is a, she's kind of famous actress, this Lisa Anne Will.
Do you know who she is?
She's been in a lot of movies.
And she goes, oh, for F's sake, told these morons they like her because she's pretty.
That's what she said about Tulsi Gabbard.
Now, that's, I don't know if she stole if she copied that from a Trump tweet.
Because that sounds like something a chauvinist would say.
That's how, because what chauvinists and misogynists do is they reduce women down to their physicality and sex appeal.
And that's what she's doing.
Because I don't know if you know, Tulsi Gabbard's actually an accomplished.
She actually was a veteran.
And she's actually a congressperson.
But she is right, though.
We only like her because she's pretty, which is why we also like Sarah Palin.
Yep.
That's crazy about her.
I don't care about her policy.
She's cute.
She's good looking.
I'm just dumb.
So this is something that if a guy said that, he would probably, and he had a TV show, he would probably get kicked off his TV show.
But a woman could say the most disgusting thing underhead.
That's not, that's not good.
I don't think that's not good.
I mean, again, I'm not a woman, but I'm pretty sure if a guy said that, he'd get in a lot of trouble.
But somehow it's cool.
Again, if you politically think you're on the right side, it allows you to be just as ugly as Trump and shallow.
That's pretty shallow and chauvinistic, even though she's a woman doing that, right?
Well, yeah.
And, you know, the other thing is, because I've seen, she's not the only one saying stuff like that.
I've seen that, you know, like just kind of a row.
Oh, you just look tulsy because she's pretty and stuff.
You're also like kind of subtly hinting that, you know, Kamala Harris is unattractive and she's a good-looking woman, too.
Like, why?
Maybe that doesn't matter.
Maybe people are.
Kamala Harris is very attractive.
Kamala Harris, very attractive.
What?
Yeah, nobody, I'm not, we're not on board with her, are we, Ron?
I'm not a fan of hers.
No.
So anyway, it's just, that's just like that actually makes her look bad.
That doesn't do it.
Like they, like with Molly Jong Fasted and what she did, that makes them look bad.
It reveals who they are.
It doesn't say anything about, right?
Okay.
And then, okay, so the other thing is, she was against gay marriage for vocally.
Yes.
Right?
She was.
So that's her Achilles heel.
And Glenn Greenwald tweets this out, but she's not anymore, by the way.
And let's remember that everybody's hero, the black Santa Claus, Obama, Barack Obama, was against gay marriage until when?
About five minutes ago?
When did he come around?
It's been a few hours.
When did he finally come around to that, right?
Because he ran on against, he wasn't for gay marriage when he ran.
That's for sure, right?
Okay.
So Glenn Greenwald says, do past anti-gay statements and positions permanently besmirch a person's character?
Or does evolving and changing and repudiating those past positions absolve them of their sins?
It'd be good if we had a consistent standard on this question.
Yeah, I mean, Joyanne Reed was allowed to have some time travelers go back.
Yeah, those time travelers hacking the blogs.
So here's, so here's what I, I'll tell, so here's the info on how she she was against gay marriage.
And now, like the rest of the country, hey, by the way, the whole, the majority, like 88% of the country was against gay marriage when I was getting out of college, right?
So this is something, this is very recent, how this has switched so quickly.
So here's, so here's how Tulsi Gabbard has responded to show that she is, again, like the rest of the country, evolved on the gay marriage issue.
She has signed the Supreme Court amicus on marriage equality to supporting the repeal of DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act.
That was in 2013.
She co-sponsored the Equality Act, which amends the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity among the prohibited categories of discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation.
So she co-sponsored that.
That's a big deal.
She also co-sponsored the fair housing and credit legislation, and she also advocated to end bullying of LGBT children in schools.
She also co-sponsored the Equality for All resolution and the Respect for Marriage Act, the Healthy Families Act, and the Paycheck Fairness Act.
And here's a bigger deal.
She has a 100% score rating from the human rights campaign.
She has a hundred percent score from the human rights campaign.
And what is the human rights campaign?
Well, I'll tell you what the human rights campaign is.
I'll read it to you right now.
It says the human rights campaign represents a force of more than 3 million members and supporters nationwide as the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer civil rights organization.
Human HRC envisions a world where LGBTQ people are insured of their basic equal rights and can be open, honest, and safe at home at work and in the community.
And this is so they build themselves as the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer civil rights organization.
And what do they do?
They give her a hundred percent score.
Well, and it's so apparently those people don't have a problem with her.
You know, it does have a problem with her, Hillary voters, and some people who don't want to vote for her.
Which, by the way, Tulsi actually evolved on gay marriage before Hillary Clinton did.
But also, really.
Yeah.
But also, and she's also apologized for her past views.
Oh, she has.
Yeah.
I mean, it's one of those things.
I was actually having a conversation with a friend of mine who I consider a friend, and Tulsi Gabbard came up and he's like, ah, you know, her homophobic past.
And I was just like, wait a second, you were a die-hard Republican in high school.
Right.
And now you're a progressive.
And he's like, yeah.
And I was like, you're allowed to change, but she's not.
She was younger.
She grew up in a more conservative background that shaped her views.
Then she had more life experience.
She met more people and she changed and she evolved.
She was allowed and she's not.
She was in a don't ask, don't tell military, right?
So, yeah, exactly right.
That's a great point, Ron.
Why are you allowed to evolve?
And that's what Glenn Greenwald's saying.
Everybody else is allowed to evolve, but just not Tulsi Gabbard.
Why?
Because we don't like that she's, you know, shakes up the establishment on both sides.
So there you go.
So there's my debunking of the smears of Tulsi Gabbard.
They also say, so if there, well, I'm sure we're going to talk a lot more about this.
But, you know, I showed you the video up front, so you know I'm biased because whatever someone says something nice about you, it's hard to forget that they said that.
But here you go.
And, you know, I'm in the tank for progressives.
I make no bones about it.
So I'd be super happy if the ticket was Bernie Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard or Tulsi Gabbard and Bernie Sanders.
I'd be super happy.
I would not be screaming if it was Elizabeth Warren, but I wouldn't, you know, I wouldn't be happy.
She's the compromise candidate for sure for me.
How about you?
Yeah, yeah, she's, it's always kind of like one step forward, one step back with her.
Like, oh, that's cool what you said to the banks.
Oh, the military budget.
Oh, you're for single payer, but we're not sure.
Yeah, like this.
I'm going to not endorse Bernie, but I will endorse Hillary.
Yeah.
That was the one.
That was the one that got a big one.
That was a big one.
That was a big one.
And then Dapple and a lot of stuff that she was just cycling on.
So here's, I think, a perspective, you're not going to get many other places.
It's been a while since I talked to Bernie's.
Let's give him a call.
I wonder if he's going to run for office.
Yes, what?
What is it now?
And make it quick.
Senator Sanders, are you going to run?
Why all the goddamn questions?
I was asking you about your running, you running for president.
How do you respond to the Democrats who say you're too old and not physically up for office?
I'm sorry, what?
I can't hear you.
You'll have to speak up.
See, you apparently have hearing problems.
Only when I'm catching kid and bulls with my stomach.
Can you hold on for a second?
Yeah!
Is that all you got?
All right, get feet closer.
Don't be timid.
Hey, you know, there's a lot more to that phone call, but we don't have time in today's podcast.
How do you hear the entire phone call?
You got to become a premium member.
Go to JimmyDoorComedy.com.
Sign up.
It's the most affordable premium program in the business.
Today's show was written.
That's right.
It was written by Frank Connoff, Jim Earl, Ron Placone, Steph Samurano, and Mark Van Landowick.
All the voices today performed by the one and the only, the inimitable, Mike McRae, who can be found at mikemcray.com.
That's it for this week.
You be the best you can be, and I'll keep being me.
Do not freak.
▲
Export Selection