Anti-abortion march. Republican GOPers supporting Obamacare. Trump supporter’s generous tip for Black waitress. Percentage of Trump supporters okay with private servers.
I am a new member to TYT, I consider myself progressive, but this 2nd hour was not the quality broadcast of news expected of TYT. Ana was obviously embarrassed of the quality and the language used in this hour. If this is the type of quality broadcast I will see in the future, it is very disappointing to have spent hard earned money to support TYT effort to bring quality news to the masses. Not everyone watching or listening to TYT broadcasts are 18-40 somethings, I am looking for real, professional broadcast news as I have experienced seeing Ana, Cenk, John, Jordan, Jimmy, deliver, not the 2nd hour delivery with Hass and Brett. If you want all age groups coming to you for progressive high quality news, clean up the broadcast.
Normally Brett isn’t so bad, he’s a comedian so it’s expected but Hass suffers from that much worse. I feel the exact same way, Cenk annoys me sometimes when he’s being a bit of a jackass as well. I think they should start taking themselves more seriously and maintain a sense of professionalism that we need at this time from progressive sources.
What was everyone expecting? This is a relatively light 2nd hour because the news cycle was lackluster. No one has a clue what is to happen in the coming days, only speculation that the TPP is likely the last agreeable action that President Comacho’ Mountain DT will take. Has is not the A team, but he is preferable to some hosts. Often he provides a very different lens for the topics he covers. I wish he could orate his perspective better so it was clearer.
So, in the final story, if you actually look up and read the poll, the question is worded as follows: “Is it OK for Donald Trump to HAVE a private email server?” The question literally says nothing about whether it’s OK to use said email server for work and/or classified emails. I’m sorry to say Ana, Hasan, and Brett, but you totally screwed up on this story — the phrasing of the question is deliberately misleading, designed to elicit the exact outrage you all expressed. Nobody got on Hillary because she HAD the server, that part is totally legal. It’s what was sent through the server that people objected to.
Brett and Hass together was a bit too much. I come to TYT to get a synopsis of the news. No fucks given about the useless chatter, people dominating the conversation, interrupting the host when trying to move through the stories. Ana is running the show, when she says shes about to move on, shut the fuck up. It was extremely disrespectful, if not to Ana, it was to the viewers. People talking over each other is annoying enough to deal with on a video, people talking each other with useless shit really tests my patience. #1 thing I like about Ana is that she keeps things moving and gets through the material at a good pace.
Ana’s histrionics are hard enough to listen to, but those two idiots are insufferable. I can’t even get 5 minutes into this and I gotta turn it off. Ugh.
Hasan can be kinda fun, but is much better suited to PopTrigger or lighter far.
Hasan natural boy-toy charm ends up looking conceited, self-absorbed, and shallow.
Ana looks like she is about to lose it with Hasan’s “look at me” shit.
Brett is enough humor to try and lighten these serious depressing subjects.
agreed! he has to say something “funny” every time he opens his mouth. He is not funny. Poor Ana was interrupted many times and because she is polite the 2 guys just kept talking to each other.
Ana, next time do the show by yourself. I love all the issues you touch and your commentary.
The claim that abortions are only 3% of services provided by planned parenthood is very misleading. When women come in, they usually have several things done at the same time. Planned parenthood will count all of these services individually, so one women will end up receiving 6 or 7 in one visit. According to former planned parenthood director Abby Johnson, more than 90% (can’t remember the exact number) of women who go to pregnancy counseling at planned parenthood will receive an abortion. One of the reasons for that being that planned parenthood employees are instructed to generate revenue from every visit. So if a pregnant women walks into planned parenthood, the only revenue generating procedure is an abortion. When all is said and done, planned parenthood is still a business. It is not a charity.
Any of the claims among them? Besides, if you follow that logic, would you say that Edward Snowden and Chelsey Manning also were disgruntled employees?
Keep in mind that Abby Johnson worked at one single Planned Parenthood facility in Texas. Also understand that in Texas they have tried very hard to shutdown abortion clinics and been pretty successful at it…so it’s entirely possible that it’s one of the only options in the area for women to get abortions. So things may be skewed at that particular clinic that she worked at in terms of the percentage of women getting abortions. So let’s keep this in perspective and not make conclusions about Planned Parenthood as a whole based on unsubstantiated claims which are based on a very small sample size (1 clinic out of 650 clinics or 0.15% of clinics).
My question is…if she had such a strong moral objection to abortion as she now claims. Why did she continue to work there for 8 years when IF as she claims such a high percentage of women who went there were getting abortions….Why did she stay there for so many years? Why did she not speak out sooner? Not only did she stay there but she obviously was a major contributor because she moved up to director for that facility. She only quit when she was fearful that she would be fired. Then suddenly she became a pro-lifer and she now profits from that. Want to know what her stance is on abortion…just follow the money.
She is disgruntled and has an axe to grind and is now profiting off of these unsubstantiated claims. So sorry if I’m skeptical.
As far as Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning…you’re not really helping your case. Some of what they have said has been substantiated and some has not. I wouldn’t take everything they say as gospel any more than I would Abby Johnson.
Here is a interview of her’s. If you have 35 minutes to watch it, I would encourage you to watch it. Personally, I found it to be convincing. If you happen to watch it, let me know what you think. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpmh4SSq2xE&t=1s
your argument doesn’t make sense. If a woman needs 4 different procedures with 4 different doctors and abortion is one of them, that is 25% of services.
You end with that crazy argument that women will have an abortion just because somebody suggests to them to do it. I can’t imagine women just going inside P.P. by accident and just following any suggestion throw at them.
But, of course, you are a guy. You have no idea why women do anything.
On Trump supporter giving a big tip to a black waitress:
Ana mentions that Russian politicians believe that beating wives is not a crime, but this is fake news. Under proposed amendment to the law, beating is a crime, slaps (light degree violence) are not: if it is a first time violation you are either subject to a significant fine or up to 15 days of arrest, and it is not considered to be a felony. If a slap is reported the second time, it becomes criminal case just as middle/heavy case of violence are right away.
The law is controversial anyway: as Cenk has correctly mentioned, this softening sets a slippery slope route (lets see if it passes senate and will be signed), but it does not mean that TYT should misreport on what the proposed changes actually do.
Why TYT does not undertstand that by reporting stories inaccurately it undersmines its credibility overall, even in cases when it reports on absolutely valid and accurate criticism? Being petty partisan in the coverage is what discredited the media overall (only 16% of people trust them), and TYT behaving the same way makes the outlet just as ignored and discarded as your typical “fake news” MSM by anyone who is not already deeply entrenched to be rabidly anti-Trump.
This is not “fair and objective” coverage that Cenk has promised, and this is what has helped Trump to win. And instead of earning the trust of people who are not as partisan yet, who are still unsure, and bringing them to the side of progressives, in too many cases TYT continues to behave like a partisan hack outlet.
I think you should watch again….Ana said “thousands”…NOT a “couple of thousand”. Thousands means it could be between 2000-999,999….I’m pretty sure the crowd in your picture is within that range. So your comment is what is inaccurate here not TYT.
DannyW. I don’t think this is a “minor detail” because in the post this was the only evidence given to try and discredit TYT’s reporting.
I agree that sometimes TYT does miss things. However, I don’t think it’s done intentionally. TYT is a member funded. So they don’t have the money to hire an army of researchers and editors. But this is also what makes TYT so great…they are NOT funded by corporations (commercials) so they don’t have to worry about offending their sponsors. Do they have a progressive point of view? OF COURSE as Cenk would say…and they don’t hide that. So it shouldn’t be you’re only source of news.
We CANNOT abandon the traditional news sources (newspapers). This is so important. The NYT, Washington Post and WSJ are so important to our democracy. They do the investigative journalism that TYT can’t do. Historically they are the ones to break the big stories. They are in position to hold those in power to account. We can’t be so scared of fake news that we abandon news altogether or only get news from YouTube. If you get news from a variety of legitimate news sources you don’t have to worry about “fake” news…you’ll easily spot it.
Actually, Ana said “couple of thousand”, indeed: move the time stamp to 10:15 in this video to hear.
(I write the most of my comments on the fly so it is very hard for me to be mistaken in quoting hosts of the show.)
And I am not “trying to discredit”; as I explained, TYT discredits itself regularly due to the lack of journalistic discipline towards the source materials and hosts’ arguments.
2. Criticism is fair and objective as long as it is accurate.
3. I never wrote that the grown for inauguration was “large”. I was writing that it was not small, unlike what TYT and the most of the media reported, destroying their own credibility to neutral observers.
OK, thought was a two clicks and a skip “discovery” but I take you at your word.
I support internet anonymity, I’ve asked you to disclose information you choose not to share, no problem, I won’t ask again. It does make it difficult for me in terms of some of the issues I raised yesterday.
I read more bias than criticism in most of your posts. Fuck me, “it’s just my opinion man.”
I am against any discussions that go beyond concrete arguments. Notice that during all the years of posting I never tried to argue with anyone with the use of their identity or anything else beside the essence.
If you have information that I may have missed in my comments, I welcome you to post it. As I wrote before, it is impossible to know everything and guarantee the absence of misunderstanding or other mistakes. My suggestion though that the discussions should be only focused on the subject, and not on non-related matters such as whether I work for the BBC, Reuters, Kremlin or you and others working for the NSA.
This would be constructive and positive discussion where all parties try to make TYT’s coverage more accurate and fair, more complete.
Agree with dDErss here, especially his bolded statement, which I couldn’t put any better.
Some fairly blatant inaccuracies that even I knew about on the show today. While Ana might fully understand and consider the Russia situation as abuse, I think the way she phrased it was a little too much, and it’s an analogy that I would stay away from. It’s just a little too much of an over exaggeration, especially considering cultural lines, although the way she phrased it was literally like hearing an MSNBC or Fox news anchor. The pro-life march piece was pretty atrocious.
Bret and Hass were a little too out of control this time, interrupting Ana & each other and going way off subject. They spent too much time talking about nonsense that nobody in the audience could possibly care about (e.g. Hass’ love of pot pies).
I was searching the dictionary and under the word nepotism was a picture of Has, i finally understood why he’s still allowed on. He’s a fucking tool, stop enabling his horrific idea that he must be famous by giving him air time..
I agree with CuriousArtemis. If a segment has Has on it, it is unwatchable. Someone should tell him to temper his gigantic ego and abrasive personality. I know that can’t really happen. Just wishful thinking.
In Canada, the people are asking Trudeau to stand up to Trump and say clearly that he disagrees with the direction the US are taking (Racism, nationalism, general bullying tactics, etc…). Hopefully he will listen to us and defend Canadian values. We also want him to announce that Canada will welcome more Syrians refugees, just to show that we will never support racism.
Comments
I am a new member to TYT, I consider myself progressive, but this 2nd hour was not the quality broadcast of news expected of TYT. Ana was obviously embarrassed of the quality and the language used in this hour. If this is the type of quality broadcast I will see in the future, it is very disappointing to have spent hard earned money to support TYT effort to bring quality news to the masses. Not everyone watching or listening to TYT broadcasts are 18-40 somethings, I am looking for real, professional broadcast news as I have experienced seeing Ana, Cenk, John, Jordan, Jimmy, deliver, not the 2nd hour delivery with Hass and Brett. If you want all age groups coming to you for progressive high quality news, clean up the broadcast.
Normally Brett isn’t so bad, he’s a comedian so it’s expected but Hass suffers from that much worse. I feel the exact same way, Cenk annoys me sometimes when he’s being a bit of a jackass as well. I think they should start taking themselves more seriously and maintain a sense of professionalism that we need at this time from progressive sources.
What was everyone expecting? This is a relatively light 2nd hour because the news cycle was lackluster. No one has a clue what is to happen in the coming days, only speculation that the TPP is likely the last agreeable action that President Comacho’ Mountain DT will take. Has is not the A team, but he is preferable to some hosts. Often he provides a very different lens for the topics he covers. I wish he could orate his perspective better so it was clearer.
Worst. Second. Hour. Ever.
I felt like I got roped into a really (really) bad comedy show. Just terrible.
Worst. Second. Hour. Ever.
I felt like I got roped into a really (really) bad comedy show. Terrible.
Also worth mentioning that this second hour is especially intolerable after the solid first hour with Jimmy, Michael and John…
So, in the final story, if you actually look up and read the poll, the question is worded as follows: “Is it OK for Donald Trump to HAVE a private email server?” The question literally says nothing about whether it’s OK to use said email server for work and/or classified emails. I’m sorry to say Ana, Hasan, and Brett, but you totally screwed up on this story — the phrasing of the question is deliberately misleading, designed to elicit the exact outrage you all expressed. Nobody got on Hillary because she HAD the server, that part is totally legal. It’s what was sent through the server that people objected to.
Brett and Hass together was a bit too much. I come to TYT to get a synopsis of the news. No fucks given about the useless chatter, people dominating the conversation, interrupting the host when trying to move through the stories. Ana is running the show, when she says shes about to move on, shut the fuck up. It was extremely disrespectful, if not to Ana, it was to the viewers. People talking over each other is annoying enough to deal with on a video, people talking each other with useless shit really tests my patience. #1 thing I like about Ana is that she keeps things moving and gets through the material at a good pace.
If I wanted chatter, I’d go watch Pop Trigger.
Concur, what a bullshit program! I want my hour back!
I hate it when the panel is all shit without one person worth watching and I just have to give up on watching the hour in the first 5 seconds.
I didn’t really care for the inclusion of Mr. Piker on the panel.
Ana’s histrionics are hard enough to listen to, but those two idiots are insufferable. I can’t even get 5 minutes into this and I gotta turn it off. Ugh.
Hasan can be kinda fun, but is much better suited to PopTrigger or lighter far.
Hasan natural boy-toy charm ends up looking conceited, self-absorbed, and shallow.
Ana looks like she is about to lose it with Hasan’s “look at me” shit.
Brett is enough humor to try and lighten these serious depressing subjects.
Please keep him off Main Show.
Hasan needs some schooling before coming on the show again
agreed! he has to say something “funny” every time he opens his mouth. He is not funny. Poor Ana was interrupted many times and because she is polite the 2 guys just kept talking to each other.
Ana, next time do the show by yourself. I love all the issues you touch and your commentary.
Haha, Ana hates them. Good Show today. Love Hasan and Brett
Will some voters have buyer’s remorse? Interesting.
Hasan is unwatchable.
Is there anyone, anywhere, who can seriously make the argument that he would be on-air if he were not the CEO’s nephew?
we can all find common ground, oh well an hour gained not watching
The claim that abortions are only 3% of services provided by planned parenthood is very misleading. When women come in, they usually have several things done at the same time. Planned parenthood will count all of these services individually, so one women will end up receiving 6 or 7 in one visit. According to former planned parenthood director Abby Johnson, more than 90% (can’t remember the exact number) of women who go to pregnancy counseling at planned parenthood will receive an abortion. One of the reasons for that being that planned parenthood employees are instructed to generate revenue from every visit. So if a pregnant women walks into planned parenthood, the only revenue generating procedure is an abortion. When all is said and done, planned parenthood is still a business. It is not a charity.
read twice and still couldn’t understand your argument. if you have a % lower than 3%, can you tell us and explain why?
Pro-life activist Abby Johnson is biased. Independent sources don’t confirm this.
Are there any independent sources. Abby Johnson used to work for Planned Parenthood for many years. She is a whistle blower.
A former employee with an axe to grind….many of her claims have already been debunked.
Any of the claims among them? Besides, if you follow that logic, would you say that Edward Snowden and Chelsey Manning also were disgruntled employees?
Keep in mind that Abby Johnson worked at one single Planned Parenthood facility in Texas. Also understand that in Texas they have tried very hard to shutdown abortion clinics and been pretty successful at it…so it’s entirely possible that it’s one of the only options in the area for women to get abortions. So things may be skewed at that particular clinic that she worked at in terms of the percentage of women getting abortions. So let’s keep this in perspective and not make conclusions about Planned Parenthood as a whole based on unsubstantiated claims which are based on a very small sample size (1 clinic out of 650 clinics or 0.15% of clinics).
My question is…if she had such a strong moral objection to abortion as she now claims. Why did she continue to work there for 8 years when IF as she claims such a high percentage of women who went there were getting abortions….Why did she stay there for so many years? Why did she not speak out sooner? Not only did she stay there but she obviously was a major contributor because she moved up to director for that facility. She only quit when she was fearful that she would be fired. Then suddenly she became a pro-lifer and she now profits from that. Want to know what her stance is on abortion…just follow the money.
She is disgruntled and has an axe to grind and is now profiting off of these unsubstantiated claims. So sorry if I’m skeptical.
As far as Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning…you’re not really helping your case. Some of what they have said has been substantiated and some has not. I wouldn’t take everything they say as gospel any more than I would Abby Johnson.
Here is a interview of her’s. If you have 35 minutes to watch it, I would encourage you to watch it. Personally, I found it to be convincing. If you happen to watch it, let me know what you think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpmh4SSq2xE&t=1s
your argument doesn’t make sense. If a woman needs 4 different procedures with 4 different doctors and abortion is one of them, that is 25% of services.
You end with that crazy argument that women will have an abortion just because somebody suggests to them to do it. I can’t imagine women just going inside P.P. by accident and just following any suggestion throw at them.
But, of course, you are a guy. You have no idea why women do anything.
On Trump supporter giving a big tip to a black waitress:
Ana mentions that Russian politicians believe that beating wives is not a crime, but this is fake news. Under proposed amendment to the law, beating is a crime, slaps (light degree violence) are not: if it is a first time violation you are either subject to a significant fine or up to 15 days of arrest, and it is not considered to be a felony. If a slap is reported the second time, it becomes criminal case just as middle/heavy case of violence are right away.
The law is controversial anyway: as Cenk has correctly mentioned, this softening sets a slippery slope route (lets see if it passes senate and will be signed), but it does not mean that TYT should misreport on what the proposed changes actually do.
On anti-abortion march:
TYT not only did not show the crowd of the anti-abortion march, but Ana even claimed that the crowd was “couple of thousand”. O course, it was far behind the Women March in the number people that came, but the crowd still was quite significant:
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/n5ZM98xvuacVt0U7OZZbPw–/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9ODAw/http://slingstone.zenfs.com/offnetwork/ae72e743dadd5cb7e5fdfba0da03fc2f
Why TYT does not undertstand that by reporting stories inaccurately it undersmines its credibility overall, even in cases when it reports on absolutely valid and accurate criticism? Being petty partisan in the coverage is what discredited the media overall (only 16% of people trust them), and TYT behaving the same way makes the outlet just as ignored and discarded as your typical “fake news” MSM by anyone who is not already deeply entrenched to be rabidly anti-Trump.
This is not “fair and objective” coverage that Cenk has promised, and this is what has helped Trump to win. And instead of earning the trust of people who are not as partisan yet, who are still unsure, and bringing them to the side of progressives, in too many cases TYT continues to behave like a partisan hack outlet.
Couldn’t agree more.
Sorry I butchered the closing tag for the semi-bold font style; too tired today.
I think you should watch again….Ana said “thousands”…NOT a “couple of thousand”. Thousands means it could be between 2000-999,999….I’m pretty sure the crowd in your picture is within that range. So your comment is what is inaccurate here not TYT.
Don’t you think that is a minor detail? Do you disagree with the rest of the post?
DannyW. I don’t think this is a “minor detail” because in the post this was the only evidence given to try and discredit TYT’s reporting.
I agree that sometimes TYT does miss things. However, I don’t think it’s done intentionally. TYT is a member funded. So they don’t have the money to hire an army of researchers and editors. But this is also what makes TYT so great…they are NOT funded by corporations (commercials) so they don’t have to worry about offending their sponsors. Do they have a progressive point of view? OF COURSE as Cenk would say…and they don’t hide that. So it shouldn’t be you’re only source of news.
We CANNOT abandon the traditional news sources (newspapers). This is so important. The NYT, Washington Post and WSJ are so important to our democracy. They do the investigative journalism that TYT can’t do. Historically they are the ones to break the big stories. They are in position to hold those in power to account. We can’t be so scared of fake news that we abandon news altogether or only get news from YouTube. If you get news from a variety of legitimate news sources you don’t have to worry about “fake” news…you’ll easily spot it.
Actually, Ana said “couple of thousand”, indeed: move the time stamp to 10:15 in this video to hear.
(I write the most of my comments on the fly so it is very hard for me to be mistaken in quoting hosts of the show.)
And I am not “trying to discredit”; as I explained, TYT discredits itself regularly due to the lack of journalistic discipline towards the source materials and hosts’ arguments.
Ana did say “couple of thousand”, indeed, at about 10:15 time stamp in this video.
(I write the most of my comments on the fly while I am watching TYT videos, so it is hard for me to be mistaken in quoting hosts of the show.)
Sorry, copy-pasted wrong link (the funny part that is Womans March, not anti-abortion one). The correct one is this:
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-LrgLP4TmoE0/WIwKjg_LCnI/AAAAAAAAZuE/wThwfjUlP2ogc_hBKG8yXAz30S3k21sBQCEw/s640/632855674-thousands-of-people-march-on-constitution-avenue-during.jpg.CROP.promo-xlarge2.jpg
You’re not Thomas Grove?
You should disclose your identity, employer, and your place in the MSM
Constant criticism from an anonymous competitor hardly seems fair or objective. You know, ethically.
The Colonel doesn’t like Popeye’s either.
(and it wasn’t a large crowd it was about average for inaugurations.)
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/jan/21/sean-spicer/trump-had-biggest-inaugural-crowd-ever-metrics-don/
1. I have nothing to do with the MSM
2. Criticism is fair and objective as long as it is accurate.
3. I never wrote that the grown for inauguration was “large”. I was writing that it was not small, unlike what TYT and the most of the media reported, destroying their own credibility to neutral observers.
you’re not Thomas Grove?
I am not; I do know Thomas for years already, but we communicated only via social media, we have never met.
OK, thought was a two clicks and a skip “discovery” but I take you at your word.
I support internet anonymity, I’ve asked you to disclose information you choose not to share, no problem, I won’t ask again. It does make it difficult for me in terms of some of the issues I raised yesterday.
I read more bias than criticism in most of your posts. Fuck me, “it’s just my opinion man.”
Rage on.
I am against any discussions that go beyond concrete arguments. Notice that during all the years of posting I never tried to argue with anyone with the use of their identity or anything else beside the essence.
If you have information that I may have missed in my comments, I welcome you to post it. As I wrote before, it is impossible to know everything and guarantee the absence of misunderstanding or other mistakes. My suggestion though that the discussions should be only focused on the subject, and not on non-related matters such as whether I work for the BBC, Reuters, Kremlin or you and others working for the NSA.
This would be constructive and positive discussion where all parties try to make TYT’s coverage more accurate and fair, more complete.
Agree with dDErss here, especially his bolded statement, which I couldn’t put any better.
Some fairly blatant inaccuracies that even I knew about on the show today. While Ana might fully understand and consider the Russia situation as abuse, I think the way she phrased it was a little too much, and it’s an analogy that I would stay away from. It’s just a little too much of an over exaggeration, especially considering cultural lines, although the way she phrased it was literally like hearing an MSNBC or Fox news anchor. The pro-life march piece was pretty atrocious.
Poor Ana…
Bret and Hass were a little too out of control this time, interrupting Ana & each other and going way off subject. They spent too much time talking about nonsense that nobody in the audience could possibly care about (e.g. Hass’ love of pot pies).
The true relationship of Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Under+Dog+Simon+Bar+Sinister+Villains&view=detailv2&&id=4761FA7AA7BD1F76812B279AFDF28E21EE154BFC&selectedIndex=44&ccid=YM2ly77Z&simid=608046454223929885&thid=OIP.YM2ly77ZRHj3zsmTAuvOUQEsDh&ajaxhist=0.
Here is visual proof of separation at birth of evil twin: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Race+Bannon&view=detailv2&&id=D8D57B999464C293F21A16C59F7590FC1998F8E9&selectedIndex=16&ccid=gBSvQAL%2f&simid=607994893157600710&thid=OIP.M8014af4002ffaa6379bf48fecd953025o0&ajaxhist=0.
I was searching the dictionary and under the word nepotism was a picture of Has, i finally understood why he’s still allowed on. He’s a fucking tool, stop enabling his horrific idea that he must be famous by giving him air time..
I agree with Gnob60 agreeing with CuriousArtemis. TyT is enjoyable because it has intelligent and likable hosts who have intelligent things to say. …
I’m seeing a trend here, I wish TYT could see it too. I also wish Cenk and Anna would stop making excuses for Hass.
Does anybody else see a mix of Beetlejuice Shrunken Head and Where’s Waldo? Or is it the Medical Marijuana?
I agree with CuriousArtemis. If a segment has Has on it, it is unwatchable. Someone should tell him to temper his gigantic ego and abrasive personality. I know that can’t really happen. Just wishful thinking.
I refuse to believe Has is such a badass he had that shirt custom made. Man I’d rock that shirt so hard!
fuck, now I have to watch long enough to see the shirt
phew, out in less than a minute
In Canada, the people are asking Trudeau to stand up to Trump and say clearly that he disagrees with the direction the US are taking (Racism, nationalism, general bullying tactics, etc…). Hopefully he will listen to us and defend Canadian values. We also want him to announce that Canada will welcome more Syrians refugees, just to show that we will never support racism.
Ugh, Has. WHY is he here? I was so looking forward to watching the 2nd hour, too. Oh well.