TYT Hour 1 April 12, 2018

In The Young Turks Hour 1 - On Demand by Waldo Peterson45 Comments

Ana, Michael, Ben. Trump keeps tweeting unhinged updates on Syria. Mike Pompeo’s differing foreign policy positions under Obama and Trump. Wendy Vitter fumbles answering whether or not she agrees with Brown v. Board of Education ruling. Updates on MO Gov. Eric Greitens sexual misconduct allegations.

0 seconds of 51 minutes, 5 secondsVolume 90%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
51:05
51:05
 

Comments

  1. Cenk by himself is always better. No one else comes close to matching his intellect and analysis. I’m fine with the occasional rant. And where is the proof that Syria actually is behind these chemical weapons attacks? Oh, right. None.

    1. Why are you guys so convinced it was aasad? Why would he when Trump is saying he wants to pull out???? He knows that’s the one thing that would keep us there and he was winning with missiles so why do it?!

  2. I must be the only one left who prefers solo Cenk for the first hour. John is, at best, a decent second fiddle.

    1. Look, I love Cenk. I’m not hating on Cenk. I’ve been a member since 2009. Cenk has had some amazing solo hours in the past, some great rants. I don’t mind a good, inspiring rant. Cenk has brought me to tears many many times with his rants in the past, forcing my fist in the air, while I’m screaming “YES”. It’s been a good long while, though. I think it was well before the 2016 election. Lately, they are mostly about personalities in media or the government, not news or events on the media or government, but just the personalities.

      Trump, for example. Cenk’s interpretations about how Trump is a child and so he thinks “blank” about “blank” don’t really add any value for me. I mean, it’s totally true, Trump is a moron and a baby, but what I would like is to move beyond that level of “analysis” toward a more complex and relevant analysis. I want Cenk to analyze the news to make connections that say ‘yes Trump is a baby and we know that, but his particular move in this scenario is possibly because his lawyer is doing this, and because legally he has to do this to get this.’ I want speculation on what might be coming based on relevant reading he’s done from different sources who are in washington and know who is talking to who. John does a lot more of this, so I would prefer he was there on first hour. Cenk is running a huge business. He has lots to do. He can do the show every week, but he doesn’t need to do it every day.

  3. You say it’s very likely Assad when he has the least gain you’re starting to sound like Fox News or CNN

  5. I hate to say it, because I do genuinely like Cenk, but god, this was so much better to watch and more interesting and entertaining than when it’s just Cenk on air alone ranting and smarming. The show is better when Cenk has someone to bounce ideas off of, but this was just so refreshing and so much more enjoyable than nearly any other show this week. I didn’t watch live because I had a rough day and the thought of Cenk on air alone was enough to steer me away from seeing who was actually hosting. I loved this. I don’t mean to berate Cenk – I like him, but he’s best when he’s BSing on Old School or in Post Game or on Rebel HQ.

    1. Don’t hate to say that. It’s totally true. The show is insufferable when Cenk is alone. I never listen when it’s just Cenk. If we could vote as members, I would make John the main host, or have both John and Cenk on every hour where Cenk is alone, so it’s either Cenk and John in first hour or Cenk and Ana in 2nd hour as default, and then when Cenk goes away to do CEO stuff, just John alone.

    3. Completely agree. I’m a member for important news + thoughtful commentary and informed discussion, not to listen to ranting and yelling for an hour….especially not with the short second hour…such a waste

    4. That’s part of the problem. When Cenk is alone, his rants go on too long and then they always go over. Always. I love Cenk’s passion. I appreciate that he cares. I don’t want him never to appear again, ever. But he can be so smug and self-assured of his own righteousness and when there is no one to check that it can be insufferable. I feel like they keep swaying back and forth on what they want the main show to be. Is it a news show? Cool – let’s get a couple of anchors to switch back and forth and deliver the news, with a twist of progressive commentary. Is it a commentary show? Cool – let’s get a few people on to discuss the news in a roundtable. There are so many amazing contributors to TYT it should be theoretically possible to do this every day. But it’s like every day differs in their interpretation of what they are trying to do.

      I dunno. I guess I just never feel certain what I’m getting each day – informed commentary on what is happening in our country, news updates, or progressive personalities riffing on their take of the news. None of those things is inherently better or worse. I get all of those things in a variety of formats. All I can say for certain is that I personally enjoy the show a lot more when there is more than just Cenk on air, and especially enjoy it when there are lots of people really discussing the news of the day. This group – and the hour 2 group that replaced Michael with Mark – is among my favorites. I would like to see more three person groups outside the Power Panels. Or a different format in which news is read off and discussed. It’s not that I don’t want to hear what Cenk has to say, it’s that I don’t think TYT is at its best when I only hear what Cenk has to say.

  9. WOW, Ben. Tillerson is the worst cabinet appointment in US history?

    How about fucking Betsy DEVOS?
    I’m a Michigander, and Devos’ whole religious mission is to DESTROY the Dept.of Education.
    Tillerson has half a brain.
    Devos is a NIGHTMARE.
    OMG – can’t believe you think Tillerson is the worst.

  10. I do NOT believe this line of thought that “Syria’s gassing his citizens AFTER he finds out Trump wants to pull out?” Assad is winning against the “rebels,” so obviously he should piss the US off.
    How about the “rebels,” who are losing, gassed those people so that the US stays?
    Trump may be a moron, but then so is Assad?

    Tell me again WHY we are suppose to believe what the warmongers (Repubs & DNC-NeoLibs)say?

    BTW, why are US politicians so concerned with these victims?
    They don’t give a shit about all the innocents the USA drones around the world. Or people in Flint drinking lead water, having their free bottled water taken away last week, and also being chased for not paying their POISONED water bills??? Or how about families in Alabama with running sewage in their yards & children with hookworm? Those victims are not important. But, we are suppose to be freaked the fuck out at what is allegedly happening in Syria. How about Yemen? No one talks about Yemen.

    Ben & Michael seem to be near certain Assad did this, and…?
    Trump should then NOT pull troops out of Syria? What, then…escalate, stay put, or leave?
    I don’t get it.

    1. Chemical weapons are different. The US did not give a shot about the slaughter in Syria ( half a million civilians were killed by Assad using normal bombs no chemical weapons) and Obama basically green lit this when he retracted his red line but said he would intervene if it was crossed again and it was not crossed until the Russians came.

      If this is not stopped then Israel, Saudi Arabia and virtually every country currently engaged in a war would say that international treaties banning the use of chemical weapons are as worthless as used toilet paper and they would be justified because Syria used them and was protected.

      The mess this would create is just unimaginable.

      American politicians unfortunately can renege on local promises (which is why they should be held accountable through the ballot box) but cannot renege on international ones.

  11. You’ve long awaited it, and finally, IT IS HERE! The Republican version of the movie based on the book that “captured” the women of this country (literally this time!); the “family values” take on how women should be treated (sexually!) has arrived! It’s: “50 Shades of Women Locked Up in My Basement (Don’t Worry Jesus Forgave Me)”! “Coming” This trimester (June)!

    ;-)

  13. “But Ben – Ben, you’re my friend!”

    I love the teasing between the TYT hosts. It was funny to hear an old name like Vitter come up and that’s one hell of a reaction to desegregated school systems.

    1. I love the teasing too but I have to make a snarky comment

      Where is all the hate for Ben for being rude to other people? Every time Ana makes a joke there is at least one (usually more) people commenting about how awful and rude she is. So if it’s not about Ana and not about the fact that she is a woman (very likely) then the comment section should just be FULL of hate for Ben…

      *crickets*

      Anyway, I like the teasing too. I like this trio

  14. Do you news fuckers pay any attention whatsoever to the actual news? Assad has been accused of numerous chemical attacks that strategically made no sense and – surprise, surprise! – evidence suggests that it wasn’t in fact Assad behind those attacks (as Mattis finally admitted). This new round makes even less sense if you bother to think for even a moment
    Alas, Ben and Michael do nothing more than thoughtlessly parrot the establishment line – it’s getting really fucking old

    1. and every time a president talks about leaving Syria. Assad gasses his people. ridiculous if you can’t see a trend.

    2. Actually the OPCW investigated most attacks and unanimously said that Assad was responsible and each time the UNSC wanted to act Russia vetoed it.

      It is precisely because of lack of action that Assad uses chemical weapons. With Russia by his side why shouldn’t have? By the way he lost 25% of his forces kia/wia in a single month attacking the town that was gassed. He already lost 125k troops since the war began and still does not control 40% of the country where 6 million people live and over 80k fighters remain, gassing is a good way to send a message. It worked when Saddam did it before and worked here:

      https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-opcw-timeline/timeline-of-investigations-into-syrias-chemical-weapons-idUSKBN1HG1M7

      1. “OPCW investigated most attacks and unanimously said that Assad was responsible…..”

        EVEN your own cited article doesn’t claim that. OPCW assigns one instance of use by the Syrian regime, one by both the regime and the rebels. OPCW had no conclusion on 2017. Within one day of the last gas attack, the SYRIAN GOVERNMENT INVITED the OPCW for inspection. Before they could make the trip, America decided to bomb and claims destruction of chemical weapon development sites. So you can go on your trip of stupid, just try to go easy on the misleading and flat out lies, would you ?

        Saddam’s attack working made sense because of the size of attacks – 5000 Kurds were killed. An attack with 50 deaths in the backdrop of 1600 rebels being killed in a monthlong conflict being a decisive gamechanger for the Syrian regime makes sense only if one is deliberately trying to be an idiot. Which is most of America that supports this intervention and doesn’t benefit personally from weapon sales.

        1. Actually the article is quite clear. Assigning blame was not part of its job. It investigated claims only (a Russian prerequisite to stop a second veto) and only substantiated claims by the opposition against Assad not vice versa.

          Khan Sheikhoun was a special case in which even the Russians were surprised by what happened, having guaranteed that sarin was completely destroyed, and allowed the committee to assign blame and then rejected the results even though Russian experts signed on the report because it meant their darling is a reckless monster who embarrassed Putin.

          The one case assigned to ISIS (who may I remind you still are not and never were part of the rebels) used chlorine gas which is not a prohibited substance.

          As for the game changer, the 1600 number is for the regime fighters kia and is most likely an underestimate since the similar Aleppo battle saw 4000 death in a similar time span. The rebels lost around 650 of 12000 based on the numbers transported north after they agreed to evacuate. A bombing campaign made sense and 200 civilians were dying every day for a week when the battle resumed. This bombing campaigned only succeeded in making the civilians leave but the rebels stayed fast and vowed to die. Using chemical weapons made sense as a message and sarin has a limited range and dissipated fast and based on intelligence reports and videos only a single helicopter flew on the area hit and dropped a single barrel exactly like Khan Sheikhoun earlier in which less than 100 died from sarin in a single strike.

          Finally the Saddam attack was similar to the 2013 attack where 1500 people were killed. Saddam used hundreds of rockets and gas shells on Halabjah not a single strike. He did try single strikes here and there (Halabjah is the most known because 5000 people were killed sleeping) to persuade the Kurds to stop their rebellion but they refused so he used Halabjah as an example and guess what, thekurdish rebellion folded within weeks.

          In the end this guy murdered half a million civilians with conventional bombs and ordinary bullets, why is it so hard to believe that he won’t use chemical weapons?

          1. Let’s get the obvious mischaracterizations / lies out of the way first:
            ” In the end this guy murdered half a million civilians……”
            I’m not even pretending to give that bogus war media talking point, parroted by the likes of Ali Velshi, likening Syria to the holocaust ANY LEGITIMACY.
            Half a million people died because WE armed them to the teeth, because WE trained them to overthrow a government, and WE filled their black markets with cheap weapons for ISIS. You don’t get to do Timber Sycamore to overthrow someone and facilitate a civil war inside a country, then turn back and blame the causalities on the government. ****** International law does not let you normalize overthrow of foreign governments, on the other hand, it is a government’s duty to maintain a rule of law on it’s territory, and use military force in case of a loss of administrative control. The Western powers, most especially US ***caused this war*** to acquire it’s current magnitude, and squarely bares responsibility for the body count.

            Secondly, but no less important, it is NOT a question of ” why is it so hard to believe that he won’t use chemical weapons”, it is a question of whether you have proof ****beyond reasonable doubt*** of the same. For an action of intervention and regime change that has demonstrably caused states to fail and countries to be completely destroyed, acting on “this is one of the possibilities” is not a sane stance. The US keeping doing so doesn’t make it a reasonable thing to do.

            Onto the specifics. ” Assigning blame was not part of its job”. “It doesn’t assign blame” (2017) and ” Assigning blame was not part of its job” are not one and the same thing and it’s not what happened. The fact finding mission’s task was to ****find evidence of use of a chemical weapon*****, which is NOT the same thing as finding samples with sarin given to them by any party. That evidence was supposed to come by visiting Khan Shaykum, at the sites of attack and determining evidence of a deployed weapon. It was NEVER achieved, because the team deemed a visit “too dangerous”, and consequently –
            ” Given the limitations in some evidence, the Mission was **not able** to determine “with absolute certainty” the use of a chemical weapon, but was able to determine the presence of sarin on samples that came from the alleged site of the incident” (I am quoting their final release statement here).
            This was the gap in their evidence they stated on their first declaration post the fact finding mission and the gap stayed until the final conclusion of the OPCW-UN joint investigative mechanism, inspite of which the JIM magically concluded responsibility on part of the regime. More ludicrous is the clause of the OPCW-UN JIM mandate as it stands now, where the inspectors, who have most access to the evidence are explicitly prohibited from assigning blame.So there was plenty of reason for Russia to let the JIM lapse post 2017, since the investigative mechanism was putting out conclusions while stating the absence of physical evidence themselves. I don’t suffer from any illusions that this was from some principled adherence to the truth rather than Russia’s interests in that part of the world, but as far as the manner the entire investigation unfolded and concluded, they were more than justified in refusing to renew the JIM mandate.
            ” As for the game changer, the 1600 number is for the regime fighters kia and is most likely…..” No it’s not. The communication (to NYtimes in this case) is entirely from the side of groups aligned with Jaish al Islam, and not the Syrian government. EVEN had your number of 650 been true (it isn’t), It still wouldn’t make sense for a 60 – 70 death count attack to be a game changer with ten times as many lost over one month, because people fighting a war to death usually do not distinguish between death by gas or death by bomb. It’s a pure optics maneuver.
            The western media will do all it can to ignore obvious gaps in evidence, just like they did with Iraq and numerous other cases. Seventeen year olds in Asia know better by now than to trust this manufactured horsecrap from parties known to be conspiring for regime change and training and funding terrorists that has led to the situation reaching its current state.

            1. The “taking points” are not bogus, they are well documented by virtually every UN and humanitarian organization out there, if you choose to be blind then so be it.

              As for the rest of your arguments well:

              1. Based on your arguments Hitler did nothing wrong, even his invasion of Poland (The Poles did occupy German territory that voted in a plebiscite to join the Weimar republic and engaged in anti-German activities) and the holocaust was justified and legal because he killed German citizens albeit Jews, gays, political dissidents and mentally challenged. Sad but justified because in your logic if a stable regime kills its own citizens it is none of our business.

              As for the “arming” the people nonsense, talk to Syrians, better still do what I did and go to refugee camps and ask them if they were “armed” by the Americans and how the war actually started.

              2. Mental gymnastics that change nothing. The report was clear, deal with it.

              3. You still don’t understand my point, Assad used gas to save his own troop’s because all of them are from his sect or other shia groups. The multitudes of shia volunteers have dried up significantly and nearly 70k Alawite young men (out of 300k in fighting age) have died since the war began. Since the offensive began the Alawite kids who died alone were 1600 based on pro-regime tracking websites (If you want to I will provide you with links). It is a matter of pure calculus and the gas attack worked. The Russians immediately went to his side and even to this day refuse to allow OPCW inspectors in 10 days after the last fighters left the town.

              If they have nothing t hide why not allow them?

              1. 1. ” Based on your arguments Hitler did nothing wrong …..”
                It’s not possible for me to determine if you actually do not understand the difference between law abiding citizens dissenting and armed militias taking over a country, or you are acting dumb on purpose.
                ” because he killed German citizens albeit Jews, gays, political dissidents and mentally challenged…..” – Yeah, I guess the Jews and gays and mentally challenged were trying to take over portions of Hitler’s Germany through violent war.
                Your second doozie, is to act like a plebiscite gives a foreign government administrative responsibilities same as that over its own territory. I don’t know why I even bother to type this, because your first set of outrageous equivalence makes this look almost reasonable in comparison.

                2.” The report was clear, deal with it.” – Yep. It was. It was clear that they were not able to find definite evidence of deployment of a chemical weapon. Seems that’s a rather significant point, unless evidence and no evidence is roughly the same thing for you.

                3. “…… even to this day refuse to allow OPCW inspectors in 10 days after the last fighters left the town.” Once again, Russia doing this is not a verified fact, it is a claim by US and UK governments. You don’t get to sponsor and train terrorists on one side, and then have your word taken at face value usually (although that has become the new normal with Western media), that’s how evidence works.

                ” If they have nothing t hide why not allow them?” The undisputed fact from all sides here is that Russia and the Syrian regime okayed an OPCW visit within one day of the incident, and US, UK and French governments scrambled to bomb Syria before the OPCW could make it.
                If you are so sure of the gassing, why not wait for OPCW to complete it’s mission ? Or does bombing somehow make it a safer and more peaceful situation for the inspectors ?

  17. Yes Ben, we would believe the same Government that has a lot of the same actors, would lie about a chemical attack. You forget about “The Axis of Evil” and claims of Yellowcake in two separate SOTU’s? David Frum is still accepted in polite society, and he basically propagandized us into the biggest foreign policy blunder in American history. So these reasonable actors include Haspel; you really trust a CIA under her tutelage to come up with the right facts?

  18. My cousin went to one of those pregnancy crisis centers thinking she could get an abortion. They did exactly what Ana said. She got scared and now she’s having a baby she doesn’t even want.

  20. This is the panel you want for the first hour. You should always get Ben or Michael or both if cenk is absent. And even better if he’s there!

    With guest you tend to get less interesting political analysis. Variety is fine for the second hour I guess, but I want Ben and Michael were on more often.

  21. There is no way pretending to be a doctor and lying to women about their pregnancies can be legal. Can it!? What the fuck! How is this allowed to happen??

    1. I know right?! Ridiculous. You should watch the April 8th episode of last week tonight with john oliver, it’s all about those “crisis pregnancy centers”

    2. It is very very close to illegal and it depends on what they do and say. As long as they don’t call themselves a doctor or do any tests then they have technically not broken the law (also depends on the state). So they will wear the coat and stuff but not actually say “hi I am doctor so and so”. They will present false information about what an abortion can do (give you cancer) but never even run a test to see if you are pregnant.

      A lot of these fake clinics get shut down often because the very existence of them is borderline and it doesn’t take long for them to cross over. The issue is they know that it’s going to close and they are already ready to open another.

      So they are prepared to keep opening them and the goal is to just fake out as many women as possible while they are open. A few states (I believe Hawaii is one) have tried to outright ban them all together.

Leave a Comment