At the beginning of the Hour 1 episode on Jan 25th, Cenk seems to imply that the website has been compromised. Just curious — Have any members been victims lately of fraudulent charges made to the credit cards they use for membership?
Not me. First thing I checked – because yesterday when I tried to login, it showed up as somebody that wasn’t me. It was scary – I tried to warn them from the comments section , but no fraudulent charges for me.
I think they handled it fine – blocking the password change option – I thought it was a glitch, now I know why they did that.
Hey, give TYT a break, recovering is hard work and I am sure they are working their asses off to get content back to normal… jeez… a nation of fucking assholes with an attention span of Donald Trump’s 10 second foreplay and orgasm.
What frustrating to me is that I tried to sign up for 50 dollars a months for the Justice Democrats because I do believe in real change. But that’s not working either. I love you TYT but you need to spend some of that 1.1 million on tech support. It doesn’t matter how well your message penetrates, if your own “watchers” can’t help when they want. What’s the point of hanging a sword in the dark?
I’m also having the same issue and it’s very frustrating. A couple of days ago my browser said the site was unsecured and credit card info and passwords could be stolen by hackers. Very worrisome!
FYI, this site’s menu is still not working. The Aggressive Progressives link in the menu above contains HTML errors, which makes that show and its archives virtually unreachable for all Members.
I signed up with Brand New Congress soon after the election. It sounds like it has the same agenda as Justice Democrats. I don’t think we need a lot of different organizations working toward the same goal. Have you heard of Brand New Congress and have you thought about joining with them or asking them to join with you?
That’s a good point. Duplication of structures and fragmenting of resources could become a problem. We’re not yet at the point where it is problematic, however, I think.
When it comes to punching a Nazi, my grandpa taught me that it is always ok to punch one. You need to punch these piles of shit in the dirt until they are one with the dirt. He fought against them swine and I’ll take his advice any day.
I’ve been reading an essay recently that seems to claim that the loss in American jobs was due far more to China’s economic emergence in the 90s and their entrance into the WTO in 2001, rather than to NAFTA or any other free trade agreement. Any comments or thoughts Cenk?
China’s growth and gradual entry into the WTO were part of the grand Neoliberal, globalized design of which NAFTA etc. were also parts. You must not see them as separate phenomena but rather as linked, integral parts of the same proposed structure.
For example, much of China’s growth was only possible because US markets were deliberately opened up by the US government to cheap Chinese products. The decision to let China become the “factory of the world” was a deliberate decision made by western elites and Chinese elites in agreement with each other; it was not a spontaneous phenomenon.
So the statement “the jobs were lost because of China’s growth” actually skips several steps of a much larger process.
FYI, this site’s menu is still not working. The Aggressive Progressives link in the menu above contains HTML errors, which makes that show and its archives virtually unreachable for all Members.
Instead of amending it or renegotiating it the US chose to leave the table allowing the rest of the 11 countries (among them Canada and Mexico both of which are part of NAFTA) to reap the benefits of an open market.
But then again in the world of “alternative facts” where people’s “feelings” count for facts, where the left is just as guilty as the right, why bother.
I just joined justicedemocrats.com and made a contribution. A note to Cenk – I did not find the names of the members of the board of directors on the website. I feel strongly that this information needs to be on the website and easy to find.
Great stuff Cenk, however, I would have liked to have seen the rest of the Bernie statement re. the TPP (around the 1 hour mark. Keep up the fight, cheers.
Love the idea of the justice democrats. Just signed up. Questions: 1. Am I assuming correctly that donations go only to the justice democrats and NOT to the Democrat Party? 2. Want to compare the Democrat platform with the Justice Democrat Platform which I just printed from the website… Who wrote the Platform and how will changes to the Platfrom happen? 3. Will the primaries eventually become fair rather than giving the elite more power in the votes — super delegates for instance? 4. Will people get to vote their conscience rather than states dictating what rubber stamp the electors have to follow for the electoral college voting. (Did you see the actual ballots many states used with NO options? How is that democratic or constitutional?) 5. What is the difference between the Justice Democrats and a Super PAC (other than corporate vs. individual funding)? 6. Is this group going to take on things like making Free and Fair Elections truly happen so EVERYONE can vote? 7. and most importantly… Where are the T-shirts?
Wynsong and others make a lot of good points. Maybe an online town hall with the directors answering questions submitted from the people that have signed up will help. Also this type of event will lend itself to the openness we want to have but don’t currently have in the Democratic Party.
While I appreciate everyone’s frustration with the Democratic Party I cannot stand the corporatist, but you’re a total fool if you think you can have a third party of any conscience. Throughout the history of the republic there have almost exclusively been only two major parties in power. The names have changed a few times but it has just been two parties. Third and other parties have always been around but there power is fleeting or they are too small to be of any conscience. Progressives need to take over the Democratic Party like the tea baggers took over the Republican Party. If you just want to cry, wine, and run away instead of changing the Democratic Party your part of the problem not part of the solution. Taking over the Democratic Party with Justice Democrats is the best way to go.
As John Adams wrote in a letter in 1780: “There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.” The two-party system is NOT part of the Constitution. The fact that we keep having to vote for the lessor of two evils shows its weakness. Need to move to multiple parties and use Ranked Choice Voting. But, the two parties have a binopoly making it almost impossible to run without an R or D beside your name.
Wynsong you are correct, the two-party system is NOT part of the Constitution. But even John Adams, when elected U.S. President was a member of the Federalist Party. Of our now forty five U.S. Presidents only ONE, George Washington, was not in a party. While many of our founders did not want parties, unfortunately our system of government has lent itself to a two party system. Going to ranked choice voting like they have with parliamentary systems would require a major change to the U.S. Constitution. Over the last 228 years of our republic we have had basically two parties. The most expeditious way to correct our counties multitude of problems at this point is to just change one of only two parties. Justice Democrats if done correctly could accomplish that end.
jpresley75, Please explain why Ranked Choice Voting requires a change to the Constitution. Lots of elections at the local level are starting to use it because it is a fairer way to count votes — more people get their choice, Need to go back and read the pertinent articles and amendments. Don’t know why the electoral college couldn’t use it rather than the no choice option states are imposing on the electors now. No conscience allowed.
Thanks for the education.
Wynsong you are correct ranked choice voting can be done for some elected positions, but for direct election of President of the United States it would require a change to the Constitution. Rank choice voting or instant-runoff voting has its pros and cons. While it is done in a number of localities I think Maine is the only state setup to do it state wide starting in 2018. Switch to that system or do like they do in California would require most states to change their laws. Making this change may be better but it would take a long time.
The statement “like they have with parliamentary systems” was put in by mistake because I was thinking about something else and I posted before I remembered to remove it. Unfortunately there does not seem to be a way to edit post on this site.
I am on SSDI & just donated to JusticeDemocrats.com to help start the changes we are ALL looking forward to. No luck with tweeting the link after my donation but hopefully it was just my mistake & not a technical problem
Alternative facts are those that are true in an alternative reality. Mr. Toad actually believes his version of reality so he’s taking us all on a Wild Ride!
Done and done. I signed up and donated a one time amount. Ill later see about doing it monthly. I may be on SSDI but this is something I can get behind and help make a difference. I hope everyone out there does too, and recruits others. I’ll be doing my best. Thank you, Cenk and everyone there, for giving us a means and a goal in this lamentable time. Excelsior!
yeah as soon as justice departments I didn’t hesistate lets get behind democrats that are us and not for the corporations or donors. I will no longer stand behind a democrat that is involved with wall streets, corporations, special interests, side deals. donors, and lobbyists. I’m in unity for every American like myself who hates mainstream media, the tax vreaks for the billonaires, and the stock market. I never get involved with that. Together we are too strong for these weak bow their heads down lets make everything neutral politcians. It stops now.
Alternative facts are a great media persuasion tool at getting policymakers sidetracked from actual sustenance, policy and progress needing accomplished
1. He says he meant not the number of direct witnesses, but overall. Besides attendees, Reagan’s inauguration was witnessed by 42 million people, and Trump’s by 31 on TV plus more than ten million online (including 7 million just on CNN, let alone its competitors and all of the new media via YouTube that was almost invisible previously), so Trump’s inauguration was definitely the most witnessed. This does not mean that he is the most beloved president ever, of course, as many were haters/scared viewers.
2. Cenk showed the photo of Trump’s inauguration from before it has started when there was way less people. Of course, the part was not filled out anyway, but why this needless inaccuracy? Cenk also shows photos Obama’s inauguration when the pavement was dark and hence hidden the number of attendees versus how. Taking into account accurate number of metro tickets bought, there is no doubt that Trump’s inauguration had way less attendees.
3. Considering the fact that ~90% of DC area voted for Clinton there was never to be a competition in terms of crowd size, so those comparisons are inapplicable in the first place, and Trump with this Spencer guy are stupid by not pointing this simple fact and moving on.
*1. Correction: who is the biggest really is hard to say in “definite” terms since a lot of internet statistics is wobbling, but on this press secretary can at least make rational, though disputable, argument about.
On physical attack story: Cenk continues to conflate neo-Nazis like Spencer and “alt-right” (YouTube video’s title correctly calls Spencer neo-Nazis while Cenk calls him “alt-right” in the segment). Brietbart, Bannon, Milo, Harris lead a huge movement, they always worked with Jews, some of them are Jews themselves, and they do not like fringe groups like neo-Nazis; those groups hate each other. Cenk claiming that neo-Nazis have White House backing them is ignorant and absurd.
On Trump’s visits to the CIA: Cenk says that all other presidents were briefed every day, but this is incorrect. Obama has missed 58% of such briefings, meaning he received them almost three days per week.
And the reason for that is that those briefings, just as Trump has described, are about how danger levels did not change and about other routine safety reports.
On Trump’s first day and tax cuts: effective current tax rate in the USA is way below nominal 35% because of deductions. Trump has said that some of those AKA “loopholes” will be eliminated, so actual balance of the budget after the tax reform is yet to be seen. Though yes, most likely budget deficit will balloon even more. Under Obama it has grew 86% to $20 trillion already.
TYT reporter Michael Tracey (one of the best in professional journalism in whole country, a great hire for TYT) also mentioned Trump’s meeting with unions: https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/823719978813755393: “Trump met today with a group of Clinton-endorsing trade union leaders, and they all came away gushing. Democrats dismiss at their own peril” — too bad Cenk has ignored it just as establishment democrats.
Comments
At the beginning of the Hour 1 episode on Jan 25th, Cenk seems to imply that the website has been compromised. Just curious — Have any members been victims lately of fraudulent charges made to the credit cards they use for membership?
Not me. First thing I checked – because yesterday when I tried to login, it showed up as somebody that wasn’t me. It was scary – I tried to warn them from the comments section , but no fraudulent charges for me.
I think they handled it fine – blocking the password change option – I thought it was a glitch, now I know why they did that.
FYI – For those waiting for the Jan 25 episode — The full one is currently posted on the tyt youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsHs3yEGRwE.
Awesome! Thanks!
Hey, give TYT a break, recovering is hard work and I am sure they are working their asses off to get content back to normal… jeez… a nation of fucking assholes with an attention span of Donald Trump’s 10 second foreplay and orgasm.
I can’t believe you ask for money for all these great things and your team can’t even post the shows members are already paying for.
What frustrating to me is that I tried to sign up for 50 dollars a months for the Justice Democrats because I do believe in real change. But that’s not working either. I love you TYT but you need to spend some of that 1.1 million on tech support. It doesn’t matter how well your message penetrates, if your own “watchers” can’t help when they want. What’s the point of hanging a sword in the dark?
Ya, hope to listen to the yesterdays episode before todays.
Still not working. Can’t listen to yesterday’s episode podcast :(
Will the show from Wed the 25th be available soon?
I’m also having the same issue and it’s very frustrating. A couple of days ago my browser said the site was unsecured and credit card info and passwords could be stolen by hackers. Very worrisome!
Who’s up for a shot of Victory Gin?
FYI, this site’s menu is still not working. The Aggressive Progressives link in the menu above contains HTML errors, which makes that show and its archives virtually unreachable for all Members.
You’re right, it is all messed up. Don’t think anyone is going to be fixing it at this time of the morn.. it is only 5 am on the left coast
The index has been hopping between a broken rendition and ‘Hello World’ for hours.
Oops.
Its fitting the piece-o-shit President puts up an weasel asshole like Spicer as Minister of Propaganda
I signed up with Brand New Congress soon after the election. It sounds like it has the same agenda as Justice Democrats. I don’t think we need a lot of different organizations working toward the same goal. Have you heard of Brand New Congress and have you thought about joining with them or asking them to join with you?
That’s a good point. Duplication of structures and fragmenting of resources could become a problem. We’re not yet at the point where it is problematic, however, I think.
When it comes to punching a Nazi, my grandpa taught me that it is always ok to punch one. You need to punch these piles of shit in the dirt until they are one with the dirt. He fought against them swine and I’ll take his advice any day.
Totally agree. Woody Allen memorably said the same thing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptxkVhDYog8
I’ve been reading an essay recently that seems to claim that the loss in American jobs was due far more to China’s economic emergence in the 90s and their entrance into the WTO in 2001, rather than to NAFTA or any other free trade agreement. Any comments or thoughts Cenk?
China’s growth and gradual entry into the WTO were part of the grand Neoliberal, globalized design of which NAFTA etc. were also parts. You must not see them as separate phenomena but rather as linked, integral parts of the same proposed structure.
For example, much of China’s growth was only possible because US markets were deliberately opened up by the US government to cheap Chinese products. The decision to let China become the “factory of the world” was a deliberate decision made by western elites and Chinese elites in agreement with each other; it was not a spontaneous phenomenon.
So the statement “the jobs were lost because of China’s growth” actually skips several steps of a much larger process.
FYI, this site’s menu is still not working. The Aggressive Progressives link in the menu above contains HTML errors, which makes that show and its archives virtually unreachable for all Members.
Wrong move on TPP.
Instead of amending it or renegotiating it the US chose to leave the table allowing the rest of the 11 countries (among them Canada and Mexico both of which are part of NAFTA) to reap the benefits of an open market.
But then again in the world of “alternative facts” where people’s “feelings” count for facts, where the left is just as guilty as the right, why bother.
My understanding, and I could be wrong, is that all nations taking part in the trade pact must sign on and pass the agreement for it to take affect.
I just joined justicedemocrats.com and made a contribution. A note to Cenk – I did not find the names of the members of the board of directors on the website. I feel strongly that this information needs to be on the website and easy to find.
I agree need that and a bit more info, but Im sure its a work in progress
I just joined and donated. Will read more of the platform tomorrow, but am very much looking forward to helping!
Great stuff Cenk, however, I would have liked to have seen the rest of the Bernie statement re. the TPP (around the 1 hour mark. Keep up the fight, cheers.
Best idea I’ve heard love it! Justice! I’m joining you Cenk!
As far as exposure goes, Bernie needs to endorse this. He really does!!!
Love the idea of the justice democrats. Just signed up. Questions: 1. Am I assuming correctly that donations go only to the justice democrats and NOT to the Democrat Party? 2. Want to compare the Democrat platform with the Justice Democrat Platform which I just printed from the website… Who wrote the Platform and how will changes to the Platfrom happen? 3. Will the primaries eventually become fair rather than giving the elite more power in the votes — super delegates for instance? 4. Will people get to vote their conscience rather than states dictating what rubber stamp the electors have to follow for the electoral college voting. (Did you see the actual ballots many states used with NO options? How is that democratic or constitutional?) 5. What is the difference between the Justice Democrats and a Super PAC (other than corporate vs. individual funding)? 6. Is this group going to take on things like making Free and Fair Elections truly happen so EVERYONE can vote? 7. and most importantly… Where are the T-shirts?
Wynsong and others make a lot of good points. Maybe an online town hall with the directors answering questions submitted from the people that have signed up will help. Also this type of event will lend itself to the openness we want to have but don’t currently have in the Democratic Party.
Can’t you join up with Brand New Congress that is already doing the same thing
While I appreciate everyone’s frustration with the Democratic Party I cannot stand the corporatist, but you’re a total fool if you think you can have a third party of any conscience. Throughout the history of the republic there have almost exclusively been only two major parties in power. The names have changed a few times but it has just been two parties. Third and other parties have always been around but there power is fleeting or they are too small to be of any conscience. Progressives need to take over the Democratic Party like the tea baggers took over the Republican Party. If you just want to cry, wine, and run away instead of changing the Democratic Party your part of the problem not part of the solution. Taking over the Democratic Party with Justice Democrats is the best way to go.
As John Adams wrote in a letter in 1780: “There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.” The two-party system is NOT part of the Constitution. The fact that we keep having to vote for the lessor of two evils shows its weakness. Need to move to multiple parties and use Ranked Choice Voting. But, the two parties have a binopoly making it almost impossible to run without an R or D beside your name.
Wynsong you are correct, the two-party system is NOT part of the Constitution. But even John Adams, when elected U.S. President was a member of the Federalist Party. Of our now forty five U.S. Presidents only ONE, George Washington, was not in a party. While many of our founders did not want parties, unfortunately our system of government has lent itself to a two party system. Going to ranked choice voting like they have with parliamentary systems would require a major change to the U.S. Constitution. Over the last 228 years of our republic we have had basically two parties. The most expeditious way to correct our counties multitude of problems at this point is to just change one of only two parties. Justice Democrats if done correctly could accomplish that end.
jpresley75, Please explain why Ranked Choice Voting requires a change to the Constitution. Lots of elections at the local level are starting to use it because it is a fairer way to count votes — more people get their choice, Need to go back and read the pertinent articles and amendments. Don’t know why the electoral college couldn’t use it rather than the no choice option states are imposing on the electors now. No conscience allowed.
Thanks for the education.
Wynsong you are correct ranked choice voting can be done for some elected positions, but for direct election of President of the United States it would require a change to the Constitution. Rank choice voting or instant-runoff voting has its pros and cons. While it is done in a number of localities I think Maine is the only state setup to do it state wide starting in 2018. Switch to that system or do like they do in California would require most states to change their laws. Making this change may be better but it would take a long time.
The statement “like they have with parliamentary systems” was put in by mistake because I was thinking about something else and I posted before I remembered to remove it. Unfortunately there does not seem to be a way to edit post on this site.
I am on SSDI & just donated to JusticeDemocrats.com to help start the changes we are ALL looking forward to. No luck with tweeting the link after my donation but hopefully it was just my mistake & not a technical problem
Ginny the money man gimme
Glad to hear you mention WikiLeaks, Cenk. Transparency IS good for We the People — it is the blade that cuts both ways, it is the Sword of Justice!
Alternative facts are those that are true in an alternative reality. Mr. Toad actually believes his version of reality so he’s taking us all on a Wild Ride!
Done and done. I signed up and donated a one time amount. Ill later see about doing it monthly. I may be on SSDI but this is something I can get behind and help make a difference. I hope everyone out there does too, and recruits others. I’ll be doing my best. Thank you, Cenk and everyone there, for giving us a means and a goal in this lamentable time. Excelsior!
Thank You
yeah as soon as justice departments I didn’t hesistate lets get behind democrats that are us and not for the corporations or donors. I will no longer stand behind a democrat that is involved with wall streets, corporations, special interests, side deals. donors, and lobbyists. I’m in unity for every American like myself who hates mainstream media, the tax vreaks for the billonaires, and the stock market. I never get involved with that. Together we are too strong for these weak bow their heads down lets make everything neutral politcians. It stops now.
sorry for the misspelling
Alternative facts are a great media persuasion tool at getting policymakers sidetracked from actual sustenance, policy and progress needing accomplished
On Sean Spencer’s press conference:
1. He says he meant not the number of direct witnesses, but overall. Besides attendees, Reagan’s inauguration was witnessed by 42 million people, and Trump’s by 31 on TV plus more than ten million online (including 7 million just on CNN, let alone its competitors and all of the new media via YouTube that was almost invisible previously), so Trump’s inauguration was definitely the most witnessed. This does not mean that he is the most beloved president ever, of course, as many were haters/scared viewers.
2. Cenk showed the photo of Trump’s inauguration from before it has started when there was way less people. Of course, the part was not filled out anyway, but why this needless inaccuracy? Cenk also shows photos Obama’s inauguration when the pavement was dark and hence hidden the number of attendees versus how. Taking into account accurate number of metro tickets bought, there is no doubt that Trump’s inauguration had way less attendees.
3. Considering the fact that ~90% of DC area voted for Clinton there was never to be a competition in terms of crowd size, so those comparisons are inapplicable in the first place, and Trump with this Spencer guy are stupid by not pointing this simple fact and moving on.
*1. Correction: who is the biggest really is hard to say in “definite” terms since a lot of internet statistics is wobbling, but on this press secretary can at least make rational, though disputable, argument about.
On physical attack story: Cenk continues to conflate neo-Nazis like Spencer and “alt-right” (YouTube video’s title correctly calls Spencer neo-Nazis while Cenk calls him “alt-right” in the segment). Brietbart, Bannon, Milo, Harris lead a huge movement, they always worked with Jews, some of them are Jews themselves, and they do not like fringe groups like neo-Nazis; those groups hate each other. Cenk claiming that neo-Nazis have White House backing them is ignorant and absurd.
On Trump’s visits to the CIA: Cenk says that all other presidents were briefed every day, but this is incorrect. Obama has missed 58% of such briefings, meaning he received them almost three days per week.
And the reason for that is that those briefings, just as Trump has described, are about how danger levels did not change and about other routine safety reports.
On Trump’s first day and tax cuts: effective current tax rate in the USA is way below nominal 35% because of deductions. Trump has said that some of those AKA “loopholes” will be eliminated, so actual balance of the budget after the tax reform is yet to be seen. Though yes, most likely budget deficit will balloon even more. Under Obama it has grew 86% to $20 trillion already.
TYT reporter Michael Tracey (one of the best in professional journalism in whole country, a great hire for TYT) also mentioned Trump’s meeting with unions: https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/823719978813755393: “Trump met today with a group of Clinton-endorsing trade union leaders, and they all came away gushing. Democrats dismiss at their own peril” — too bad Cenk has ignored it just as establishment democrats.
Did you mean national debt, or budget deficit? There is a huge difference between the two. Obama reduced the deficit.
I meant the debt, of course; sorry.
half an hour before the first story? are you serious cenk?
I think he’s pretty darn serious. It’s not like you can’t skip forward.
Thanks for posting so quickly after live show today.
FYI, it’s justicedemocrats.com, not .org
Thank you!