This is The Humanist Report with Mike Figueredo. The Humanist Report podcast is funded by viewers like you through Patreon and Paypal. To support the show, visit patreon.com forward slash humanistreport or become a member at humanistreport.com. Now enjoy the show. Welcome to The Humanist Report podcast. My name is Mike Figueredo and this is episode 278 of the program. Today is Friday, February 19th and before we get started, I want to take some time as we usually do to thank all of the people who signed up to support us this week or increase the monthly pledge that they were already giving us. That of course includes the great Jason Deck, Kindle and a turd, Matt McClory, Pauline Pavone, Rogue DeCoccus, TDH and Zach Gibson. Thank you so much to all of these kind individuals. If you'd also like to support the show and join the independent progressive media revolution, you can do so by going to humanistreport.com slash support. Patreon.com slash humanistreport or by clicking join underneath any one of our YouTube videos or you can just watch the videos, like them and share our content. And honestly, that does go a long way if you can't support us financially. Whatever you can do to help, I appreciate it and thank you. So this week on the show, we have a really exciting episode I want to say. We'll talk about Trump's acquittal as well as the aftermath from his impeachment trial, including Mitch McConnell's political theater and Donald Trump's hilarious and accurate attack on Mitch McConnell. We'll discuss the For the People Act, what it is and why Democrats should prioritize passing it and we'll also examine more stories from the bizarre world of QAnon, children with parents who have been brainwashed by the conspiracy theory speak out and a former QAnon member explains specifically how she became brainwashed. We'll talk about COVID-19 vaccinations using Israel as a case study to find out that the COVID-19 vaccine is in fact highly effective. However, Israel's distribution of the vaccine is cruel and inequitable to say the very least. Also on this episode, Republicans want to reopen the country while the CDC warns that the COVID variant that originated in the UK could become the dominant strain by March. And finally on the program, we'll talk about Nina Turner's congressional race and how it's actually a very intense race between her and the state Democratic Party establishment. And we are going to get a visit from the great Nina Turner herself. She's going to tell us directly about what we need to do to make sure that she is electorally successful and she'll talk about how she's going to shake up Congress and why we need to support her campaign. It doesn't get any better than that, right? So yeah, that's what we've got on the agenda, so we'll waste no time and get right to it. Hopefully you all will enjoy the episode. So obviously I was incredibly excited when Nina Turner announced that she was running for Congress because this is Nina Turner. I mean, this is an individual who is a leader in the progressive movement, if not the next leader of the progressive movement. She is someone who can get people fired up, she's influential, she has national name recognition and the thought of her fighting in Congress alongside members of the squad, perhaps as the leader of the squad. I mean, obviously that could be a game changer in DC. My worry though with her running for Congress is that progressives might get a little bit complacent because this is Nina Turner. She is a political behemoth, so I worry that people might think this is going to be an easy battle, so I don't have to really come through for Nina Turner, but quite the contrary is true. We have to fight to get her elected. It is not going to be easy. And I want to make that very, very clear. If she wins, which I hope she does and I think she has a great shot, it's not going to be because this was an easy battle. If she wins, it will be because she ran a phenomenal campaign against her opponents and she has many opponents. This is a very competitive primary and predictably the state Democratic Party establishment has come out against Nina Turner. And that's really frustrating because Nina Turner has been a loyal Democrat for years. She was a state senator in Ohio and I mean, they're not even opting to remain neutral. They're coming out against her in full swing, so they don't want her to win. And because of that, we have to make sure that we fight for Nina Turner. We don't just sit back and expect her to win because it's Nina Turner. We have to phone bank for her. We have to organize for her and if we can, we have to donate to her campaign. So I want to talk a little bit about the dynamics of this race because those who mistakenly thought that this would be easy are wrong. And an article by Daniel Moranz of HuffPost really illustrates what's at stake here. This is going to be a really tough battle. He writes, President Joe Biden's selection of Representative Marcia Fudge to serve as housing secretary has sparked a scramble among divergent factions of the Democratic Party to fill her solid blue seat in Ohio's 11th congressional district. The activist left has united behind former Ohio State Senator Nina Turner while the Cleveland-era Democratic establishment is coalescing behind Cuyahoga County Councilwoman Chantel Brown, who also chairs the county Democratic Party. Former state senators Shirley Smith and Jeff Johnson and former state representative John Barnes Jr., all of whom resemble Brown ideologically, are also contesting the seat. The Democratic Special Election primary, which is all but certain to determine the overall winner, is expected to take place in May. The state is waiting for Fudge to be confirmed and to formally vacate the seat before officially announcing the election date. The race's outcome will either solidify the left's status as a growing force on Capitol Hill or show that the same traditional Democrats who made Biden the Party's standard bearer can still hold the line against one of the progressive movement's biggest stars. This is really a proxy for what's happening with the Democratic Party nationally, said David Cohen, an Ohio politics expert at the University of Akron. In Turner, the voters of Ohio's 11th likely have their first real opportunity to send an anti-establishment firebrand to Washington, according to Cohen. It's completely untested terrain for the left, Cohen said, so she already has four opponents, four moderates, all running against her. Now, at face value, you might think, well, that's four moderates who are going to split the vote among the establishment vote. However, do I really need to remind you what happened in 2020? When all of the other establishment candidates, Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, all dropped out and endorsed Joe Biden, the same thing can easily happen to Nina Turner if we don't actually fight. Now, the good news is that Nina Turner does have a number of advantages. She is a fundraising behemoth. She raised over a million dollars because she is a national figure. Having said that, though, the establishment really likes these other candidates, in particular Chantel Brown, who is drawing a lot of attention from the right wing Israel lobby. And if they want to defeat Nina Turner and they see that she's ahead in terms of fundraising, they can easily bank real Chantel Brown, no questions asked. So we don't necessarily know how this is going to turn out. And basically, my main point in talking about this is that I don't want you to take the situation for granted, this opportunity more specifically for granted. If we want this victory, we have to fight for it. If Nina Turner does not win, she has a good shot, but if she does not win, this is unquestionably a failure on our part. So this really is a true test. This is a proxy at the local level in Ohio. If we can win here, then we can once again reassert our dominance in the Democratic Party. But if we lose this race, then this is further evidence that the party can still easily crush progressives, even behemoths like Nina Turner. So all that I'm asking is for you to do everything in your power to make sure that we make Nina Turner successful. Don't question whether or not you didn't do enough. Like, this is my philosophy, you know, during the Bernie Sanders campaign in 2020. Even if we lose, I want to at least know that I did everything in my power to make him successful. So that way, if we lose, I will feel better about myself at least. So we have to come through. I don't want to be doom and gloom. I think Nina Turner has a phenomenal shot and I think she could win. But I just want you to know that it's going to be a battle. It's not going to be easy. No victory is going to come easily. That includes this battle as well. So please, if you can put in time and effort to make sure that Nina Turner is electorally successful here. This next story just warms my heart because we are seeing a real battle within the GOP. We all saw how, like a coward, Mitch McConnell denounced Donald Trump, admitted that he did, in fact, incite the January 6th insurrection, but he still did not vote to convict Donald Trump. So, I mean, he's grandstanding and posturing and trying to pretend as if he's principal and cares about the Constitution. But of course, we all know that he acted based on what is the most politically expedient thing to do. Having said that, though, it's still not good enough for Donald Trump. And Donald Trump decided to speak out and attack Mitch McConnell. And I'm not going to lie. What Donald Trump says about Mitch McConnell, it's kind of on point. So as Jonathan Easley of The Hill reports, former President Trump on Tuesday unloaded on Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and vowed to back challengers to lawmakers who have crossed him. In a statement released through his Save America Super PAC, Trump blamed McConnell for the GOP's 2020 Senate losses and called for Republicans to elect new leaders to carry on his legacy. Mitch is a dour, sullen, and unspiling political hack. And if Republican senators are going to stay with him, they will not win again, Trump said. He will never do what needs to be done or what is right for our country, where necessary and appropriate, I will back primary rivals who espouse making America great again in our policy of America first. We want brilliant, strong, thoughtful, and compassionate leadership, Trump said. The statement arrived days after McConnell ripped into the former president in a speech from the Senate floor after voting to acquit him on impeachment charges that he incited a mob attack at the Capitol. Despite his vote, McConnell said that Trump was practically and morally responsible for the deadly siege. Oh, this is just, it's beautiful. I love it. What Trump is doing here, like I don't know about the long term ramifications of this short term civil war within the GOP, this seemingly short term war within the GOP. But if Trump goes after Mitch McConnell, delegitimizes him, then ultimately defeats him. This is a victory. I mean, Mitch McConnell is one of the most effective leaders in the history of the Republican Party. She is absolutely ruthless. He stole two Supreme Court seats. And he is the reason why the Republicans are able to do all of the terrible things that they've been doing throughout the years. He knows how to obstruct. He knows how to play politics. He knows how to stop Democrats from carrying out their agenda as milk toast as it may be. And if Trump were to defeat Mitch McConnell in some sort of primary challenge, needless to say, that's really, really great for the left, for Democrats, for America. Because Mitch McConnell, I've argued in the past, is more of a detriment to the country, more destructive to America than Donald Trump. Because Donald Trump, as nefarious as he wants to be, he's just not savvy enough to do what he wants to do to carry out his agenda. So he had ghouls in the Republican Party, such as Chad Wolf, Mitch McConnell, you know, Bill Barr, do his bidding for him. But Mitch McConnell, he knows what to do. He knows how to operate the levers of power to benefit him. And more specifically, the Republican Party's donors.  It's idiotic, but I absolutely implore him to do just that. Please, Donald Trump, primary Mitch McConnell and defeat him. And while we're on the subject, I just have to point out this photo. Not only is it hilarious because it's so awkward and they're clearly uncomfortable that close to each other, but you can't see it here. Mitch McConnell is like hugging Donald Trump by grabbing his wrist like this. What a weird hug. These are not human beings. These are either androids or demons who took human form.  Having said that, though, I think the only conclusion that I'm going to take away from this is everything that Donald Trump said about Mitch McConnell being a dour it was. A sullen, unsmiling political hack. That's correct. Keep it up, Donald Trump. Let's let them fight. So we've got even more really encouraging news about the COVID-19 vaccine that I really want to talk about. Specifically, we're talking about the Pfizer and beyond tech vaccine. When Pfizer released their phase three clinical trial findings, they determined that their vaccines advocacy rate was 95%. And that's really important. But we do want to see how the vaccine varies in the real world. So we need a real world study and we have that now. Israel actually rolled out a highly effective mass vaccination campaign. And now they are providing us with the data that does in fact conclude that it is as effective as we had hoped. And that's important. However, when we're referring to Israel as a case study, it is important to look at the context. Because even though they've rolled out mass vaccinations and they're offering it to the general public, there's been a very deliberate exclusion of Palestinians. Their distribution has not been equitable and that needs to be addressed. But first, I do want to talk about the good news because if we get everyone vaccinated, the pandemic will be over. It's as simple as that. So as our monazot of CNN reports, Pfizer beyond text COVID-19 vaccine appears to reduce symptomatic coronavirus infections by more than 90% in the real world, Israeli researchers said Sunday. The findings while preliminary suggest that the vaccine remains remarkably effective in a mass vaccination campaign outside the carefully controlled conditions of a clinical trial. The Claylett Research Institute, part of a large Israeli health system, analyzed data on 1.2 million people, about half of whom had received the Pfizer beyond text vaccine. Researchers compared patients who received the vaccine with similar individuals who hadn't. The rate of symptomatic COVID-19, meaning people who were infected with the coronavirus and felt sick, decreased by 94% among people who received two doses of the vaccine, according to a press release from Claylett. The rate of serious illness decreased by 92%. So obviously this is phenomenal news. The findings from this study are consistent with the findings from Pfizer's trial. Now, this hasn't been peer reviewed yet, but this is extremely, extremely encouraging. Now, I think it's a little bit difficult to like visualize how effective it is just looking at these percentages. But let's look at it in terms of just like raw numbers. So of the 1.2 million people included in this study, half of them were vaccinated. So about 500,000, more than 500,000. Of those 500,000 individuals, just 500, just over 500, in fact, give or take, were infected with COVID-19. Out of 500,000, just 500 got COVID-19. And of those 500 cases, just four were serious. And out of all of the folks who were vaccinated, none of them died due to COVID-19. This is really great news. And health experts in Israel are actually now estimating that the UK variant is the dominant strain in Israel. And so the fact that the vaccine is still very effective, that's really, really encouraging news, obviously. Now, we still don't necessarily know the efficacy rate when it comes to the South African variant. As far as we know, based on preliminary data, the vaccine isn't as effective against the South African variant, although it still is effective. So we don't have enough information yet to make any conclusions. And when I say we, I mean the experts, and I'm just going to disseminate the information and the results that they produce. But this is very encouraging. And the next step after the vaccine is actually rolled out to the general population is to make sure that people actually want to get vaccinated. Now, vaccine hesitancy has been gradually decreasing. We want to truly reach herd immunity and make everything go back to normal. We've got to get people vaccinated. And I think that what's going to help is people seeing their peers get vaccinated. Once people see that their friend or family member was vaccinated, I think that their skepticism is going to go down. And we're to the point now where a lot of us already know people who have been vaccinated. I know folks who have been vaccinated. And I think that that has helped reduce the hesitancy that I've seen with people who I know. So look, it's going to be a work in progress. But when we're talking about the case study in Israel, I think context is really important because even if they've rolled out this mass vaccination campaign, they have excluded Palestinians largely from this study. So Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, they're also dealing with COVID-19 and the more contagious UK variant. And Israel has excluded them from vaccinations. So as Natasha Turek of CNBC reports, Israel's decision to give 5,000 doses of the coronavirus vaccine to Palestinian frontline health workers is being criticized by Palestinians and rights groups as insufficient and falling short of the country's obligations. Israel's provision of 5,000 vaccine doses to Palestinian health workers pales in comparison to the nearly 5 million doses it has already provided to Israeli citizens. Omar Shakir, the Israel and Palestine director for Human Rights Watch, told CNBC following the announcement, the Palestinian territories are home to just over 5 million people. Nawar Khattab, an assistant professor and COVID-19 data researcher at the Arab American University in the West Bank city of Ramallah is concerned about the situation. Things are worrying. We do have cases, cases we don't know about. The hospitals are already packed with patients and the UK variant is now in Palestine. Khattab told CNBC, referring to a new strain of the coronavirus first identified in the UK and found to be 70% more transmissible. The new virus variant now present in the Palestinian territories is truly worrying because that means more cases and we still don't have the vaccine in the West Bank, she said. Khattab spoke to CNBC before the Israeli announcement Sunday, but as the delivery of the 5,000 vaccine doses is only meant for Palestinian frontline workers, it won't do much to change the infection situation for the general population. The latest data from the World Health Organization shows 178,900 confirmed coronavirus cases among Palestinians in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza with more than 2,000 deaths. So on one hand Israel deserves credit for successfully rolling out a mass vaccination campaign. However, they also deserve to be lambasted for these discrepancies in who is getting vaccinated. Now, if nothing changes, the Palestinian Authority themselves, they have procured a large shipment of vaccines that is due in March, but the fact that they've been excluded from this process is absolutely morally reprehensible.  It's genocidal to say the least. If you have access to a life-saving vaccine but you deliberately exclude certain individuals from getting said vaccine, I mean, I don't know what else to call that. It is absolutely genocidal. But I mean, Israel, their government has been repressing Palestinian rights and cracking down on Palestinian freedoms. They're literally second-class citizens in Israel and it's just, it's disturbing. So on one hand, I do want to take the study that was produced from Israel and use that to further inform people about the COVID-19 vaccine. I think that other countries should look to Israel as an example of a success story at getting these vaccines out quick. However, we also have to look at the human rights issue here. How disgusting it is that Palestinians are being excluded here. And up until recently, nobody, including Palestinian frontline healthcare workers, were getting vaccinated. So it is disturbing. Now, part of the reason why I think that Israel was able to get out so many vaccines is because they forged a deal with Pfizer to give them access to the data of their vaccinated citizens. If there's any logistical things that they're able to do differently, then I think we have to look at that. However, I think that now the main issue is just production. They have a smaller population. So when you compare them with the United States, it is a lot more difficult to vaccinate our 350 million people in this country. Having said that though, the pace that we are vaccinating people is encouraging. Joe Biden said 100 million vaccinations in the first 100 days and he is on track to surpass that, which he gets credit for. Having said that though, we have to make sure that when we deliver the vaccine to people, that distribution is equitable.  So I think that this is something that we have to keep in mind as we look to the future. Because if we want to truly move beyond this pandemic, everyone has to be vaccinated. But it's just sad that the way that it's being rolled out, you know, you can tell that governments value certain lives more than others. And that is really, really just, it's disturbing to say the least. So when it comes to COVID-19, without question, the news is looking a lot better, right? When it comes to daily new cases that's dropping substantially, deaths per day also decreasing. This is all phenomenal news. Having said that though, we have to remain cautiously optimistic for the time being because we're still averaging more than 90,000 new cases per day. If you told us back in March of 2020 that we'd be celebrating 90,000 cases per day, that would be unfathomable because, you know, at that time, we wouldn't have known that would ever get that bad to the point where we'd be celebrating 90,000 cases per day. But having said that though, it's decreasing and that's really good, but it's not over. The light is at the end of the tunnel, but it is not over yet. Which is why we still need to make sure that we pay people to stay home because people need to make a living. People have to make money.  However, since things are starting to look up, the GOP predictably is already trying to just pretend as if the pandemic is not a thing. I got this crucial time when we're finally starting to get the virus under control. Now they're saying, let's just act like it's over already. They just want the pandemic to last forever. So I want to show you this graphic that House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy tweeted out. He says the best stimulus plan is to fully reopen our economy. In other words, I don't want to give people another round of survival checks. I just want to reopen the economy, pretend as if the pandemic is over, and send the peasants off to die basically. More than half a million Americans have already died because of this pandemic. If we actually did what he said we should do, how much more would die? I mean, what's it going to take to make Republicans like Kevin McCarthy actually take this virus seriously? A million deaths? Two million deaths? They just, they don't seem to care. He's making this dangerous recommendation at a time when the CDC is warning that the UK strain, which is highly contagious, could become dominant by March. So no, we shouldn't be reopening the economy. Now that we're finally starting to get a grip on cases, get it under control, contain the virus. Now is not the time to let our foot off the gas. Like that's, that's idiotic. I don't know how else to describe it.  Having said that though, you know, this is going to be the dominant narrative now. There's going to be more pressure by ghouls to reopen the economy, not just Republicans, but Democrats as well. Because these are capitalists who care more about profits than they do about the health and well-being of people. Now, I want to point you to a statement that aired on Fox News with Stuart Varney. He talked to a guy wearing a cow suit for whatever reason.  The things that he says as to why he's opposed to the lockdown, it's going to make your head explode. So now we can't fly from state to state without a vaccination card, but we can vote without an ID card. We're getting played to such a massive level here and Americans are like frogs in warm water. They're turning up to heat and we're not jumping out. We've got to call an end to it all and stand up for ourselves because we've given away all of our rights in the name of safety. Unlock for heaven's sake. Stop these restrictions on our everyday lives on our freedom. Can we put up that graphic again showing the number of the new cases way down here? There you go. 41% decline in new cases and a 14-day change. 22% decline in new deaths. If ever there was a time for a brave politician to stand up and say, come on boys, unlock. Get on with it. Now's the time. Isn't it, Scott? Stuart, 100% correct. We don't have the money. We're bankrupting my great-great-grandchildren as we speak. We just don't have the money. So open up. That's the problem. And again, our elites are telling us to wear a second and maybe a third mask. At the same time, we've got 12 states that are lifting their mask mandates.  They'll trust the people that are leaders until a point where they can see that this just isn't working out. You need to have a vaccine ID maybe to fly from state to state, but you don't need one to vote. Or Gavin Newsom going to go over all of those signatures because they're calling for his ad. But when it came to the voting for the absentee ballots, they don't care about if there's a signature or not. I mean, this has gotten to such a point here where if you have to stand up or they're just going to take everything away. And I don't have a tinfoil hat on, right?  No, you're not. But this is leading down a road that I don't want to go. We started with 15 days to stop the spread and it's turned into stay at home until you accept communism. That's an excellent out cue, Scott. That's a really good one. That will live forever on videotech. We're going to replay that forever. You're all right, Scott. Calm down. Relax, lad. We're going to be all right. I don't even know where to begin.   I don't get the shtick.   Now, I get that he was trying to be like half serious there, but he literally said that the goal is to get us to stay at home until we accept communism. So you're suggesting that Joe Biden, a capitalist, is actually a communist? How do you even respond to this level of stupidity? How do you address this in a good faith manner? Because this isn't a serious argument. Like, in order to actually respond to this substantively, you'd have to assume that it's in good faith and serious, but this isn't serious. Like, this is idiocy. The goal of the government is to get us to stay home so we become accustomed to communism. Do you know what communism is? Do you even know what capitalism is?  Like, it speaks to the depravity and idiocy of the right. Wow. So he tries to make this equivalent between needing to be vaccinated in order to fly and voting without an ID. He says we can't fly from state to state without a vaccination card, but we can vote without an ID card. First of all, that's not mandatory, but it should be.  Second of all, these things are very different. Having an ID shouldn't determine whether or not you're able to exercise your right to vote. However, when it comes to flying, if you're not vaccinated, if you're not careful, you can endanger the lives of other folks. So this is obviously a false equivalence, but he thought that this point was so good that he made it twice.   Your freedom hasn't been restricted, Karen. The lockdowns are necessary. They're depressing. They're inconvenient, albeit they're necessary because we have to stay inside to save lives. Like, is there an area in the Constitution that says that we should be allowed to spread our germs at indoor restaurants? I don't understand why they expect us to take them seriously when they're conflating their inability to dine indoors with them losing their liberty. Is it that big of a deal to you? Can't you just do takeout? I don't understand. These people are so selfish that they just don't care about others. You know what? I want to be able to dine indoors and go to a movie theater.  Let's just pretend like the pandemic isn't a thing and if people die, people die. I'm bored. I just... It's depressing to see this and it's tiring, quite frankly, because we've been dealing with this since the beginning of the pandemic when, you know, the Lieutenant Governor of Texas was, I think, one of the first who claimed that we should sacrifice grandma to the gods of capitalism and just pretend like the pandemic isn't a thing. And we've seen what happens if we don't take it seriously. We've seen that even when we take it somewhat seriously, hundreds of thousands of people die.  Now, the cow guy said this and it's interesting because he says this and it really speaks to the moral depravity, moral bankruptcy of capitalism. He says, we just don't have the money. We're bankrupting my great-great-grandchildren as we speak. He just gave away the game there. He's inadvertently saying that he knows that reopening the economy is going to kill people, but it's all about money to him.  But I mean, this is conservatism in a nutshell. The lives of human beings isn't as important as capital in this country.  Now, maybe they'd feel differently if they lost the loved one to COVID-19 or suffered from it themselves, but either way, this is just disgusting. But I mean, of course, this is Fox News, so it's what we've come to expect. We shouldn't take them seriously and we definitely shouldn't take them seriously when they bring on people who dress up as cows and expect us to take them seriously when they talk about very serious issues related to the economy and death.  So the view recently aired an interview with a woman from South Carolina. This is not necessarily someone who is overtly political. I wouldn't say that she's apolitical. The way that I would describe her probably is semi-political. Like she explains in this clip that she's been a lifelong Republican because her family's Republican, but she doesn't necessarily follow politics that closely, although she did kind of follow politics a little bit more over the course of the election. But she's going to explain how she got rubbed into QAnon as someone who you describe, for lack of a better word, as a normie. And what she says here is actually not too surprising, but it's still really important and interesting. I was unintentionally getting conspiracy theories. I didn't know that it was QAnon. I didn't know any of that, but it started on TikTok. I've been a lifelong Republican. My family told me growing up we're Republicans. They're great people. They're wonderful people. And so I was never one that was into politics anyways. And I just always voted red. I wanted to be like my family and that's as much as I ever thought into it. Obviously, when the election campaign started, I started liking on TikTok more Trump things. So I guess the algorithm must have changed it to where I was seeing obviously more pro Trump videos and then it led into conspiracy things. They started talking about like the child ranks and that grabbed my attention since I'm a mom. That's where it started. Yeah. Yeah, it's interesting. It's interesting.  I mean, you must have watched Tom Hanks in the movies. I'm sure you've seen Oprah on television. What made you believe such crazy nonsense? I know it sounds crazy. And so let me let me try to think of how I would explain this. So when you start getting information from these these groups, again, I had no idea the first place that it was QAnon. It starts with something small. So child trafficking is real sex trafficking is real and it's a real problem.  And I was like, yep, I'm going to believe that it didn't start that way. It was really small.  I want to know everything. And so I started diving in deeper. I started asking people that I trusted about this information. They would send me more information and it snowballed to just build bigger and bigger. And so eventually you get that huge crazy. I'm theory and you believe it, but it didn't start that way. So this is actually really believable. You know, I think that that makes sense. You don't just go from point A to point Z like you don't start believing. Okay, I'm conservative. I support Donald Trump.  Like you don't just make that large of a leap. I mean, I'm sure some people do, but psychologically that's not the way that it works. Like you gradually start exploring this conspiracy theory. It usually starts with, you know, a grain of truth. And then all that that takes is for you to water that and nurture it.  That's how you go from point A to point Z. And what she says is interesting. Now I wonder, like as she says, she was rubbed into QAnon. It's because she started watching TikToks that were pro-Trump. So because she was already predisposed to lean conservative, at least culturally. That's how she kind of went from point A to point B to point C. But this makes me wonder, like what about on the opposite side? Like if you're predisposed to be a Democrat, do smaller stories lead to radicalization just on the opposite side? So for example, like if you hear a story about someone who died because they couldn't afford their insulin, does that radicalize you to begin supporting Medicare for All more vociferously and vocally? I genuinely don't know. Like what I'm trying to find out is if there is a distinction between the fervor that these folks support conspiracy theories and political issues because there's a lot of support for policies like Medicare for All and, you know, the Green New Deal and everything that we support as leftists. But is this zealotry that we see with conspiracy theories unique? And I just like, I'm really curious about the way that people fall so hard for this, right? Is it as easy to radicalize someone into really fighting for Medicare for All as it is to dupe them into a conspiracy theory like QAnon? And, you know, I think that this is important to think about because if we want to de-radicalize these folks, we have to learn how they became radicalized in the first place because in the same way that it took time for them to gradually become radicalized, it's going to take time, I'd imagine, to de-radicalize them. They're not just going to stop believing and snap out of it like that, or most won't. But we have to try to bring these folks back to reality and turn them on to better policies and better politics. So I'm thinking about how if she was easily duped by, you know, the fact that sex trafficking is a real thing, therefore she kind of went down this QAnon rabbit hole, can we influence people to support policies like Medicare for All by sharing anecdotes? So the way that folks are dying because they don't have health insurance? Like, does radicalization, you know, occur differently between the left and the right?  Now another thing that she talks about is the way that it changed her relationship with her four-year-old daughter, because a common theme that we've seen from these QAnon supporters, former QAnon supporters, is that it really ruined their lives. It kind of like made them tune out society. And furthermore, she's going to explain in this next clip what it took to snap her out of this cult. I think that it made me emotionally unavailable to a point with her. And I'm going to try not to cry. I mean, she was always taken care of. You know, I would, I'd pick her up from school and I'd bring her home and make her dinner, bath her, put her to bed. But we didn't play that much. I wasn't cuddling with her and giving her, I think, the emotional attention that she needed. Because I was too wrapped up worrying about everything. I stayed glued to my phone in these telegram chats and watching these Facebook videos. And I just had so much going on that I couldn't, I feel like I couldn't be there for her the way that she needed me to be. Well, Ashley, you're clearly emotional about this. And you know, you did believe these conspiracy theories for many months, but you say that when Biden was inaugurated, you started to see the truth. And I just want to tell you, I think it's brave that you're sharing this story because I think we need to understand how people get radicalized and how to stop it from happening. Thank you. Leading into inauguration day, it had been going around in the groups that there would be a blackout. Electricity might not work.  And so I prepared, I went and got groceries and filled my car up with gas and I just waited for days for that alarm to go off and it never did. So come inauguration day, I really didn't think it was going to happen. I didn't sleep that night and I stayed glued to my phone. I kept watching the TV, watching the inauguration and when I saw Kamala Harris get sworn in, I was like, okay, they're cutting it really close. And then when President Biden was getting sworn in, I mean, I just started to have tears and I was like, I'm waiting. I'm waiting for the TV to turn off. I'm waiting to hear this alarm and it didn't happen. And I was devastated after that. I was scared to death. I thought, so my worst fears and my worst nightmare is coming true. And we're seeing the funeral of the country. Nobody's safe. We're all going to die. I need to take my kid out of school because they're going to take her. And there's just, there's so much anxiety and fear. It's hard to, it's hard to explain that. So I find this fascinating because she literally just like a month ago left the QAnon Cult.  It's interesting the way that these folks so quickly go from being radicalized by QAnon and then just coming out of it. That's really fascinating to me. And I do want to explore this and learn how their brains work. You know, does it take a certain person? Like do you have to be predisposed to think in a more conspiratorial way to fall that fast and, you know, will certain people be deradicalized quicker? Like this is all fascinating to me. One thing that stood out to me is she says that since the conspiracy theory was inextricably linked to Donald Trump and his cult of personality, if he were to denounce QAnon or even just like shoot down some of the lies, if he explicitly said QAnon is false and of course there's no like pedophile ring where Democrats are drinking the blood of infants and worshiping the devil she would have at least, you know, snapped out of it. It wouldn't have been, you know, the saving thing for everyone in QAnon but a lot of them would have listened to Donald Trump.  It just, it doesn't make sense to me. Like there's still so much like we're learning more about QAnon, how people are radicalized, the impact that it has on them socially speaking. But it's still like so much of it just doesn't make sense to me. It just doesn't. It's like, you know, joining a pro-Bernie cult but being against Medicare for all. Like Donald Trump is the worst possible person that I think would like be reliable in cracking down on sex trafficking and sex crimes but he was like, that was his number one issue and it was just a matter of time before he arrested everyone in DC. It's a lot. I'm still trying to digest all of the information that we've received. I don't know how valuable this is. Like I believe this is important. I think we need to learn from these folks's experiences so we can like make sure we prevent others from being radicalized into these sorts of weird cults. But still it's a really difficult thing to understand. And I don't think that these like anecdotes from individual like former QAnon supporters are going to work. Like I actually want to see clinical studies done because I think this is really the question of our time. Like conspiracy theories, they're not going to go away. We saw an increase in anti-vax sentiment since people online just seek out their own little like anti-vax clicks and whatnot. So since this is going to be something that is prevalent for the foreseeable future, how do we get people to think more critically? You know, want a higher standard when it comes to evidence. You know, I just, I don't know. It's tricky. I don't know if there's an answer for us in the short term, but long term I hope that we can learn from this and figure out a way to protect people from this sort of misinformation that is absolutely devastating and harmful to their own lives and to society at large. So I have to admit that I initially definitely underestimated the seriousness of this QAnon phenomenon. I kind of just like didn't take it seriously because I looked at it as just one of those kooky conspiracy theories that people with too much time on their hands are obsessed with. But it's much more than that. Like as more and more former QAnon members speak out as their families share their stories about how this conspiracy theory tore their family apart. Like this is something much more than I had anticipated. This is consuming people's lives. And I think that part of the reason why initially I didn't take it as seriously as it was is because the conspiracy theory itself when compared to other conspiracy theories, in my opinion, is so out there, so easily disproven. I mean, the thing about QAnon is that you have one individual giving people very specific dates and saying this is going to happen on this date and then it doesn't happen. What Q says is going to happen never comes to fruition. So just like in and of itself, the conspiracy theory you'd think would be self-defeating. But still, folks are glued to it. They're consumed by it and they just are refusing to let it go. And even though Donald Trump is out of office and the theory should be null and void, that's not actually the case. Because as Right Wing Watch reports, there are still believers in QAnon who think that Trump is going to resume his role as the president on March 4th of 2021. Now, initially, before I learned more about this, I would have thought, OK, well, they're going to see that that's definitely not going to happen. So they're going to be forced to come to terms with reality and acknowledge that that's not going to happen.  But this is a cult and that's not the way that cults work. They're not just going to, you know, change their opinion based on new evidence. They're going to find a way to rationalize this and think, OK, well, maybe this isn't the right date. Maybe it was me. Maybe I misinterpreted what Q was saying. And it's just going to go on and on. But I don't want to talk about like the actual conspiracy theory itself. What I do want to look at is how it has changed people's lives for the worse, how it has basically torn apart families. This is genuinely sad to me, but it's fascinating. I think we have to learn about this and take it seriously and try to help deprogram these people because this really is a threat to the social fabric. And quite frankly, it's sad. It's deeply sad. Like I've talked to folks who have family members who have become obsessed with QAnon and it's like they're different people. Like who they were before they became involved with QAnon was a completely different person. I want to play this clip from CNN. It features two individuals who talk about how their parents became obsessed with QAnon. And what they say here is really, really depressing. I lived just a few blocks south of the Capitol. And so I started seeing people walking on the sidewalk, heading up to the Capitol with Trump flags and red hats. And I thought to myself, I wonder if my mom's here. I just thought to myself, let me check her YouTube. I will never stop loving my parents. But it's this switch that flips in them when they're talking about what the latest Q drop means. They're not logical anymore. They're not understanding. And often they're not kind. Not only does she really believe it, but it intersects in her mind with her religion. She has never put anything else on the pedestal equal to the Bible. And it really feels like that with this QAnon stuff. A conspiracy theory has taken over both these women's lives, but not by their choosing. I just want to have a mom who loves me or just pass that. They say their parents have been sucked into QAnon. My childhood was as perfect as any childhood could be. In the recent year or two years where this has become so much stronger within them, they've become completely different people. This woman is still desperately trying to save her relationship with her parents. That's why we've agreed to hide her identity. How did this all start with your parents? All through growing up. It was constantly, oh my gosh, like the Clintons, oh my gosh, the Illuminati, things like that. But it all started really in the 2016 election cycle. Hillary Clinton and all of the Democrats are pedophilic and cannibalistic people that are trying to control the world. Things definitely heightened when I got to college. They would background search my professors, hey, your professor, yeah, like they're a registered Democrat.  When she did that, that said everything to me, that she was willing to put my wife's life in danger. And if she had called me up or texted me later that day or the next day and said, hey, listen, I was at this rally, it got way out of hand. I'm really sorry. How are you guys? That would have changed everything, but it's been crickets. I haven't heard from her. We repeatedly reached out to Daniel's mother for comment and she did not respond. Have they changed their lifestyle in any way as a result of this? Well, last time I was there at my family's house, told me that they have a three-year supply of meat and freezer.  Are you concerned that they might blow their life savings on these freeze-dried foods and 300 pounds of meat? Not their life savings, my college tuition, right? That's hard. What is the person that was running this Q account? What would you say to them if you could sit down and talk to them?  That is really interesting and what I learned from this video is that the scale of QAnon, like the reach of it, was a lot more broad than I had anticipated. Like, I thought that basically the QAnon folks believed that this conspiracy just involved, like, national Democrats. But as that one woman said in the video, like, her parent did research on one of her professors and concluded that, oh, this person must also be part of that pedophile cannibal ring because they're a registered Democrat. Like, they genuinely believe that, like, the conspiracy is vast and it is far-reaching and a lot of people are in on it. And that's why they find it so compelling, I think, because this is something that's so big and they feel as if, like, they have this information that nobody else has and they don't just want to, like, educate themselves, I use educate, you know, very charitably here, but they want to inform others about this because they think they found something that's very serious. And if there was, like, this group of politicians who were, like, worshiping the devil and eating children and eating others, human beings, I don't even understand that part, but if that were true, wouldn't that be, like, really shocking? So they go out of their way to try to convince others that, like, look, look for the conspiracy in this area, in this college, for example, you're going to find it because it is everywhere. They talk about how, like, it intersected with religion and, you know, her mom has never put anything on a pedestal equal to the Bible. Like, that's how serious they took QAnon. They've become completely different people. This is what I've heard as well. And I do want to share an article from the HuffPost. They did a really lengthy write-up that is fascinating. I'm not going to read this to you because it's too long, but I am going to link you to it because I think that this really gives you some insight into how people who were consumed by this conspiracy theory behaved. So children of QAnon conspiracy theorists explain how they're now trying to de-radicalize their boomer parents because they have been completely brainwashed by this conspiracy theory. So I'm going to go over a couple of examples. There's more, but there is a 19-year-old. His name is Sam. And he explains that his mom, even though she was never really political, she became consumed by QAnon. And part of the reason why is because even though she wasn't necessarily a political person, she was always a little bit more paranoid than usual. Like she didn't fly on planes after 9-11. And as a result, that paranoia has led to her becoming obsessed with this QAnon conspiracy theory and supporting Donald Trump. There's a 28-year-old woman named Elena. And she says that her mom is intentionally going into debt because of QAnon. They believe that because of Q, that there's going to be some new financial system that emerges that will wipe away her debt. This is one of the elements of QAnon. They revived some old conspiracy about some new system.  And when you believe it that much, if you think that all of this is going to be wiped away your debt, then why would you? It's a rational decision if you believe this. There's a 46-year-old woman named Kara and she says that her mom literally just stopped taking care of herself because she became so obsessed. They didn't care about anything but QAnon even stopped seeing her grandchildren. So this is absolutely destroying families. Because that individual, they become so consumed with this conspiracy theory that their identity and QAnon become inextricably linked to where they are QAnon. And they're now trying to save members of their family who they believe should also adhere to the QAnon conspiracy theory. And there's a couple of screenshots that I want to share with you that show the conversations that these folks had with their parents who were obsessed with QAnon. So this one is between Elena and her mom on Discord. Elena says, honestly, mom, I really thought you were smarter than this.   In fact, highly intelligent. It makes me sad to see you be so brainwashed, but you will see. So Elena is then very clearly shocked saying brainwashed by because, I mean, obviously she's not the one who's brainwashed.  And then she says, it took me a long time of going through cognitive dissonance. I guess we just shouldn't talk anymore. I am tired of being hurt by you. Now, this is what Elena's mom is saying to Elena. Like you can tell just by like the thing she says, like to even know what cognitive dissonance is.  This is a seemingly intelligent individual who knows about like the way that our brains try to get us to, you know, not accept new information. If we have a belief system that's contradicted, the feelings that we feel are really unpleasant. Like we want to reaffirm what we already believe. But this person, Elena's mom believes that it's actually Elena who doesn't believe in QAnon. Who's the one that's been brainwashed, presumably by fake news and mainstream media. There's another text that I want to show you. This is between a man named Daniel and his mom. His mom is a two time Obama supporter and she voted for Donald Trump and became obsessed with QAnon. So he was texted this YouTube link to a QAnon thing. He says, this is literally fake news. And she says, that was quick. Thanks for checking it out. He says, please stop texting me your conspiracy propaganda. It's traumatizing enough to know you believe these lies and have been conned. These sources are 100% fake. Have a good night.  Have a good night. So like, there's this level of victimization that they feel they feel as if they're oppressed. And on top of that, like they, they aren't content to just believe the conspiracy theory, like they're actually proselytizing. They're trying to share this conspiracy theory and get others to believe like it's a religion. It's a cult. It's honestly really shocking. And what we have to do is everything in our power to try to help these folks. But part of the point made in that HuffPost article, which was great, by the way, is that there isn't really like a support group. Like this isn't something that psychologists have studied for hundreds of years. This is a new phenomenon, like conspiracy theories aren't new, but this in and of itself, like how zealous these folks are.  And so really the one thing that folks have to comfort in, if they have a loved one who became obsessed with QAnon, is they've been going to subreddits and they're sharing, you know, QAnon casualties. That's that's one of the sharing their stories. And that's really all that you can do is share tips with each other. I think that ultimately these people, they have to want to change, right? They have to have the desire to change and, you know, you can try to convince them. And I think that if anyone is going to convince them, it's going to be their loved ones. But this is something that is going to take a long time for these folks to overcome. I can't imagine QAnon existing decades from now, but you know, it might not exist in the same form. It could evolve, adapt to survive. I mean, this conspiracy theory is fucking, you think that by now it'd be it'd be over because Trump's out of office. He was supposed to declare martial law and arrest everyone on January 20th. And that didn't happen. But, you know, the goalpost just keeps getting moved and folks keep believing it. Now, I think that January 20th was crucial because a lot of people were speaking out saying, OK, maybe I was duped. Was this all a lie? And that's that's really good. That's important. And we have to welcome these people back to society and reality. And we can't, like, shame them for abandoning their terrible beliefs and flawed beliefs. Like, what we have to try to do is offer support, offer support to the folks who are trying to de-radicalize their parents, who have become obsessed with QAnon and just try to help them. But I mean, the best that we can do is be understanding. And that's why I wanted to talk about this. I think that if we don't know what we're dealing with here, then it's really difficult to be understanding. But these are human beings and we have to try to come from a place of love and understanding and try to get them to apply, you know, a higher standard to things that they accept as the truth. Re-teach them or help them relearn how to evaluate evidence and facts and to use logic. It's tough. I mean, this is, look, with the internet, conspiracy theories aren't going to go away. But I think that we have to focus on ones that are really harmful. I think that QAnon is one that is particularly harmful because of the devastating impact that it has on families. Anti-vax conspiracy theories are very, very far-reaching and deeply harmful, especially during a pandemic since a vaccine is going to be the one thing that helps us end this pandemic. So there's a lot of conspiracy theories that we are going to have to combat as a society. How we do that, I don't know. But step number one is just learning and trying to understand what's happening here because we can't combat something that's harmful if we don't understand it. And that's where I'm trying to come in and help folks out. Well, as you know by now, Donald Trump was acquitted. Now, I wasn't necessarily in a rush to talk about this. I think that it's not a surprise to anyone who is paying attention since the beginning of this entire process. This was pretty much a foregone conclusion. Having said that, though, I do still think that the process itself was important. Even if we kind of know what the outcome will be, it is still important to go through the motions. I think that there needs to be at least some level of accountability, even if it doesn't necessarily amount to much. But part of the reason I think why elites in this country, politicians in this country have become so terrible isn't just because of capitalism and money in politics.  George W. Bush should be in prison right now for war crimes, but Obama's administration chose to move forward. And we now know it's because Obama was also going to be committing war crimes. Rich people in this country, Wall Street executives, they get to rig the economy, crash the economy in their favor, bribe politicians and nothing happens. It's just the entire system itself is rigged at every single level basically.  Zero consequences. The system itself is deeply unjust. So even if I could have predicted that Donald Trump would have been acquitted, because like all elites, he's not going to face any consequences for his actions, literally inciting an insurrection. It's still important to try, right? Once you've given up and you stop trying to hold elites accountable, then, you know, it just, the situation gets even worse. There has to be at least some minimal level of fear that if they do something that is illegal or violent, there will be consequences.  And even though he wasn't convicted both times, I still think that it's important. Now, in terms of Democrats presenting their case, I think that they absolutely were competent. They did a good job. I do disagree with their refusal to call witnesses. I think that's still, that would have not necessarily made a difference, but been important for the American people to see. But like when you juxtapose their performance and their case with the case presented by Donald Trump's lawyers, especially Bruce Caster Jr., it's comical. Like to be that incompetent, to be that moronic and still technically win it, it just, our system, we're making a mockery of it, right? So this entire process essentially was a sham because Republicans, regardless of what evidence they saw, were not willing to change their mind. The only one who arguably did change his mind genuinely was Bill Gassidy, but that doesn't make him a hero. The Republicans who voted to convict Donald Trump, Mitt Romney, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski and others, that doesn't make them heroes.  And now we get to see the inseparable elites in media prop up these Republicans as if they're good people because they did the very, very bare minimum. And sure, they're better than ghouls like Lindsey Graham, who's a Trump bootlicker. They're better than ghouls like Mitch McConnell, who did not vote to convict Donald Trump, but then went on to argue that basically what he did was illegal. He just doesn't think that you can impeach a president who's no longer in office.  It's rigged. Elites get away with everything. This shouldn't surprise everyone, but that doesn't necessarily mean that we as individuals stop trying to hold them accountable, right? Until we can get a better system in place, reform the system that we have, then that's that's all that we can do, right? Once we stop trying, that's a victory for elites. Having said all of that, though, it is now time for Democrats to sharply shift gears. I think that this was necessary. I don't necessarily know that this should have occupied like 100% of their time. Impeachment was necessary. I'm glad that they're finally trying to hold others accountable who break the law. But now we have to get back to work. There is a pandemic going on. Americans are losing their livelihoods. They are still dying. Cases are decreasing for the first time in a while. We are at less than 100,000 new cases. Having said that, though, there's a lot of work to be done. And I think we are owed the $2,000 checks that was promised to us. Now look, we already know that that was a lie. Joe Biden lied and now it's supposedly going to be $1,400 checks. Whatever amount you're going to give us at this point, get it out the door. People are suffering. And now there's no excuse. It is time for you to deliver to the American people. Impeachment was necessary. Impeachment was important. But now you have to shift gears. There still may be the potential for Donald Trump to be held accountable. The New York District Attorney is investigating him. There's ongoing investigations throughout the country still taking place. But now at the congressional level, nationally speaking, now we need Democrats to all collectively shift their focus to delivering for the American people. And I'm not saying that because I want Trump to get away with the crimes that he did. I want, you know, the focus to shift so that would be kind of sweep what he did under the rug. That's not what I'm saying. But what you have to demonstrate now to the American people is that you are going to fight for them. That they didn't elect you for nothing. That there's value in having Democrats in office over Republicans. Because if you do not demonstrate that value, then in two years, during the midterms, you're going to get wiped out. And we're going to have a divided government, again, where the prospect of doing anything is diminished. Unless we're talking about, like, terrible reforms of cutting Social Security and doing some type of compromise with Republicans even further. It's time to deliver. So it should be $2,000 checks, but if you're going to send out $1,400 checks, do it. Don't wait till March. Send out the checks. Raise the minimum wage. Actually put up a fight. That's what Democrats have to do now. That's what we need from Democrats right now. And that's all I'll say about this. I think that this, again, not surprising. The outcome was kind of predetermined from the beginning. But now it's time for Democrats to get to work. Trump is out of the way. There's no longer any excuses, right? There's a couple of members in your party, Kirsten Sinema, Joe Manchin, who are obstacles to progress. Having said that, though, they're not gigantic obstacles. They can be, I think, pressured. And really, there's going to need to be leadership here. I'm going to need to see members of the squad actually speak out and hold Democrats accountable even more so than they have been. Actually fight for real change and not incremental change because with how bad of a situation we are in, economically, socially, like to get ourselves out of this ditch, we can't just dig incrementally. We need substantial reforms. We need a forklift to get us out of this ditch, to pick us up, carry us out. So what we need now is a fighting chance. And Democrats have to absolutely direct all of their energy towards saving the country. Now, I know that Joe Biden isn't up to the challenge, but that's where other progressive members of Congress have to continuously apply pressure. Otherwise, he isn't going to do anything. He's just going to do the bare minimum to get by. So I need Democrats to actually fight now. And I don't want to make this video about Democrats because this is a video about Donald Trump getting away with, you know, inciting in its direction, which is egregious and disgusting. But there's so much going on right now. Accountability is one of many things that is necessary in this country. And there will be no accountability, at least for now, with regard to Donald Trump. He got away with that. So all we can do now, going forward, is try to help the American people. And Democrats need to do that. Activists at the grassroots level, organizations, need to apply pressure. Because if they don't feel continuous pressure, then they're not going to act. They're not just going to, on their own goodwill, on their own volition, choose to do the right thing unless we pressure them constantly. So that's all I'll say. I think that we all expected this outcome. Not surprising at all. Nonetheless, I think that we need to see a renewed focus on relief. And thankfully, all of the headlines that are showing that Democrats want to do that. That's a great sign. Let's actually deliver and not make the American people wait until March to get crucial survival checks that they need right now. So I don't know that I'm going to do any more videos on impeachment after this. However, there's one more thing that I want to talk about here before we move on. I think that all of the outside cases related to Donald Trump's criminality are still really important. And I will be following those. But I want to talk about one thing that I found interesting and infuriating. That is the Republican who definitely concluded that Donald Trump was guilty of the crime that he was accused of, but yet did not vote to convict. Now, when it comes to the Republicans who voted to convict Donald Trump, there were seven. And that includes Burr, Cassidy, Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Mitt Romney, Ben Sasse, and Pat Toomey. And some such as Burr have been censured by their home state's legislature for voting to convict Donald Trump. They're basically being denounced officially by their state's Republican party. That is absolutely, um, that's crazy to me. Nonetheless, the individual who said Trump was guilty but didn't vote to convict is Mitch McConnell. So after he voted to not convict, he said this. There's no question. None. That President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day. No question about it. The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president. So there's no question about it. He's guilty, yet you voted to acquit. Do we see the problem? This is a pretty obvious contradiction. And Mitch McConnell is trying to play this off as if it's not a contradiction when in actuality it is. He's trying to paint this as a principled constitutional move. It's not based on his own opinion. Sure, the facts do conclude that Trump, he's guilty, right? He incited that insurrection on January 6th. His actions were morally reprehensible. Therefore, my guiding star is the Constitution and so I just have to adhere to the Constitution because we all know that Mitch McConnell definitely cares about protecting the Constitution. But in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, he tried to make sort of pseudo-defense of himself and tried to reframe the situation. But Brooke Seipel of the Hill Explains, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in the Wall Street Journal op-ed Monday, defended the Senate's decision to acquit former President Trump but clarified that it vindicated the Constitution, not Trump. In his op-ed, McConnell echoed sentiments he shared after the Senate acquittal on Saturday when he said Trump is morally responsible for the Capitol insurrection on January 6th and that he was outraged by Trump's actions. But McConnell went on in the piece to argue that convicting Trump was not protected by the Constitution because he is a former official. McConnell added, however, that he respects the decision of the six Republicans who voted to convict and their interpretation of the Constitution. And I think that's a misprint because there were seven, so I don't know if McConnell said that or the author here. Nonetheless, they go on, I respect senators who reached the opposite answer, what deserve no respect are claims that constitutional concerns are trivialities that courageous senators would have ignored, he wrote. McConnell suggested on Saturday that Trump could face criminal prosecution for his actions outside the Senate. President Trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office as an ordinary citizen unless the statute of limitations has run, didn't get away with anything yet. McConnell said after the vote, imagine if Mitch McConnell were correct, he's not, but imagine if he were correct that somebody who is a former president is no longer legally culpable if they're a former official.    You could do anything you want to because that next day, as soon as the clock strikes noon and you hand over the nuclear launch codes and your successor sworn in, that's it, you can get away with anything. Like is that the type of world that we want to live in? That's not what the Constitution says and we'll get to the arguments that legal scholars have made, but if the Constitution did in fact say that, that would be a flawed document. But thankfully, Mitch McConnell is lying here and the Constitution does not say that. Anyone who believes that, they are in the minority in terms of opinions on the validity of this impeachment trial. So the verdict writes, impeaching a former president is plainly constitutional. I think this is pretty obvious and when it comes to the argument that the lawsuit is legally frivolous because Trump was just exercising his first amendment, right? Well of course, inciting an insurrection is not protected speech and the New York Times published an article where 144 constitutional lawyers say that that defense isn't going to cut it. Now MarketWatch talks about how Mitt Romney cited one of numerous constitutional law professors who say, of course, it is constitutional to impeach a former president.  I mean, basically, we already live in that society, right? Let's be clear about that because George W. Bush hasn't seen a day in prison or a Dick Cheney for war crimes. Neither has Obama, neither will Trump, right? But we at least need to have some sort of mechanism even if it fails to hold former presidents accountable for their actions. But Mitch McConnell, like he's not driven by a concern for the Constitution or driven by principle. Like this is an opportunist. He is driven by self-aggrandizement. He is motivated by what is politically expedient. So everything that he's saying here is horseshit and he's trying to pass this off as like him not contradicting himself when he's quite literally doing just that. The Senate voted to move forward with the impeachment trial, citing that it was constitutionally permissible. So your job at that point, Mitch McConnell, was not to determine whether or not it was constitutionally permissible because you already made that decision as a unit, as the U.S. Senate. Your job was to determine whether or not Trump was guilty of the crimes he was accused of. And you did conclude that he was guilty. So then you vote guilty. You vote to convict. And this wouldn't have mattered because even if Mitch McConnell did vote to convict, that wouldn't be enough. That wouldn't be enough.  I don't like the attempt to lie and, you know, mislead people into believing that you were doing this out of concern for the Constitution. Like, this is the same individual who blocked President Obama from fulfilling his constitutional obligation to appoint federal justices or federal judges and a Supreme Court justice. This is the same individual who passed a law when he was Senate Majority Leader that prohibits Americans from participating in BDS. That is a direct violation of the First Amendment. So spare me, Mitch McConnell.   But for Mitch McConnell, like, it's almost impressive, like, how little he cares about public opinion.  Wear it like a badge of honor. Wear it on his sleeve. And, like, we just kind of give him a pass because it's Mitch McConnell and we expect that. But no, this is, like, ridiculous. Like, you're saying, literally, that the president, without question, is guilty. But we can't convict him because he's a former president.  Who buys this? So presidents can get away with anything. They just have to leave office. That's it. It just is shocking, like, the level of disingenuity here that we're seeing. And this is par for the course from Mitch McConnell. But we shouldn't just, like, give him a pass because it's Mitch McConnell and this is what we've come to expect. This is still completely inexcusable and he needs to be called out for this. But, I mean, it doesn't matter if he is called out for this because there really is no amount of public pressure that will get him to buckle. Like, this is a ghoul. He absolutely does not care about the country. He just cares about whatever is politically expedient. And in this instance, you know, voting to acquit Donald Trump is what was the most politically expedient. Even if he did not believe that Trump was guilty, he would have voted to convict Donald Trump if that was the most politically expedient thing. Now, I would argue that if I am an establishment Republican, sure, convicting Donald Trump is important because he kind of is bad for the party. But nonetheless, you know, Mitch McConnell, he has his reasons for why, you know, he did this. It's not based on the constitutionality of this proceeding. It is based on what he believes is going to be the best thing for him and his donors and the Republican Party at large. That's what this is about. Perhaps he's afraid of Trump's base. I don't know what the reasoning is, but what I do know is that the reasoning that he's citing here is completely bogus. And anyone with a brain who's followed Mitch McConnell can see that that's the case. Without question, Democrats need to prioritize getting aid and survival checks to Americans because this pandemic has absolutely taken an economic toll on folks. Get people what they need that in the short term is going to help them. But what I've also long maintained is that Democrats have to fix democracy like we have to assume that by 2022 they're going to lose power. And there's going to be a turnover at least in one branch of Congress. So they have to do what they can to fix all of the flaws inherent with our democracy. And it's going to be tough to do like really comprehensive reforms. I don't expect them to abolish the electoral college, even though they should be trying to build momentum for that ultimate goal. But they do need to do a lot to at least make our democracy more equitable and franchise as many people as possible. And it seems as if they are still committed to doing one thing that could help. It's not going to be the end all be all. It's not a panacea. Nonetheless, one bill called for the People Act can do wonders if they actually pass it. Now, as John Schwartz of the Intercept reports, since the 117th Congress was convened on January 3rd, over 2,000 bills have been introduced in the House and Senate. But the very first legislation proposed by the Democratic Party majorities in both chambers, making it both HR1 and S1, is the For the People Act of 2021. This is appropriate because the For the People Act is plausibly the most important legislation considered by Congress in decades. It has changed the basic structure of U.S. politics, making it far more small-D Democratic. The bill makes illegal essentially all of the anti-enfranchisement tactics perfected by the right over the past decades. It then creates a new infrastructure to permanently bolster the influence of regular people. The bill's provisions largely fall into three categories. First, it makes it far easier to vote by eliminating barriers and enhancing basic outreach to citizens. Second, it makes everyone's vote count more equally, especially by reducing gerrymandering. Third, it hugely amplifies the power of small political donors, allowing them to match and possibly swamp the power of big money. Now, we'll talk about the specifics. I will say that I think the author kind of oversells it. It is really, really, really important, but it's not going to basically save democracy. There's still more work to be done. Having said that, though, he's not wrong to suggest that this is a really, really important piece of legislation that Democrats have to pass. And it's a good sign that it was introduced first. They need to absolutely, without question, get this through within the next two years. Otherwise, I don't think they realize how difficult it's going to be for them to ever get power again. Because we talked about just a couple of weeks ago how after Joe Biden won, Republicans and state legislatures across this country are going out of their way to crack down on voting rights to make sure that this victory that they saw isn't going to happen again. We're talking about voter ID laws being imposed, more voter purges, more barriers to voting. If they enact more obstacles to voting, then they suppress voter turnout, which is always better for Republicans. So if Democrats don't do something to combat that, they're not going to win again. It's going to be a lot more difficult. Like it's going to take another substantial thing like a bush or a Trump that makes power turn over again.  So we have to make sure that democracy is fair if we want a fighting chance. And Democrats have got to enact this. So what does this actually entail? Why is it so important? Well, I'm not going to read the article for you, but I would recommend the article if you want further context as to why all of these things are important. Nonetheless, here's what it contains. So it would basically subvert the draconian voter ID laws in all of these states. So that way, if Republicans choose to enact them, they're still legal. However, voters can subvert these voter ID laws if they sign a sworn statement where they attest that they are who they say they are. And so that way, if they're lying, they can be held legally accountable. This is really important because these voter ID laws have been proven to disenfranchise people of color disproportionately. This is essential. It's crucial. Also, this would stop illegal voter role purges. This is the way that Brian Kemp won in Georgia in the 2018 gubernatorial campaign against Stacey Abrams. He did a lot of purges of newly registered voters, most of which were black, most of which were Democrat, who would have more likely voted for Stacey Abrams. And that may have been what led to his victory. Like, he literally rigged that election in his favor as Secretary of State. And now he is the governor as a result of said rigging. If we stopped these illegal voter role purges, that could change the country. This giving people a voice could have a substantial impact. Additionally, it would re-enfranchise felons, but only if they serve their time. This I would want progressives to push back on. Felons should be able to vote even while they are in prison. Because if we're going to have a true democracy in this country that requires universal suffrage, that means you can't exclude people for arbitrary reasons. Committing a crime, being a felon doesn't mean that you shouldn't be allowed to exercise your rights of vote. That's one thing that must change in this bill. Having said that, though, as it is, that would still be a substantial improvement. Also, this would make voter registration near-automatic. I don't necessarily know what that means. The author of this article doesn't really describe that. And on the Senate version of this bill, it's a little bit vague, but to have automatic voter registration, that would be really crucial. Now, in Oregon, we basically have automatic voter registration. So that way, when you get a driver's license, you are automatically registered to vote. That is basically near-automatic. So if that's what this means, that's great. But this is a step in the right direction. It would also require states to allow early voting by at least two weeks. Really, really crucial. Because if you can't make it into vote, if you have to work on Election Day, you have to be able to cash your vote ahead of time. That's just basic. So it would mandate that all elections be conducted using paper ballots, not machines. And when it comes to gerrymandering, it would require states to create independent commissions for redistricting. To me, this is a no-brainer. It shouldn't be the case that the party who controls the most state legislatures gets to rig the rules in their favor. Redraw district lines to favor them. Like, that's not why we redraw district lines. We redraw district lines to accommodate changes in demographics, accommodate changes in development, in cities, urbanization, and whatnot. So this is just, this is obvious. This is something that should have been addressed a while ago. And I'll say the opposite. Like, if Democrats were in control, I would want them to be able to redraw district lines to favor them. Like, this should be a democratic process that is nonpartisan, impartial. So this is obviously really important. It would also reform the FEC to give it teeth so that way in the event politicians actually do violate campaign finance laws, they get prosecuted.  You can coordinate with your super PAC and what's going to happen. Nothing. The FEC isn't going to crack down on you because it is either deadlocked or it doesn't have the teeth needed to go after you. That would change with this legislation. Also, it would impose additional measures to prevent the illegal coordination between candidates and super PACs. On top of that, it would impose, or excuse me, it would incentivize small dollar donations by matching funds, get this, by a 6 to 1 ratio of up to $200. This, I don't want to call it a game changer because it's not going to completely eliminate the influence of big money in politics. Having said that, though, to incentivize small dollar donations would make politicians less reliance on those corporate donors, on the billionaire class. Because if you're matching funds by a 6 to 1 ratio, what does that mean in practice? If you submit a $10 donation to a politician, that gets matched. So the total donation will actually be $70. That's huge. That is really important. If we had publicly financed elections, the difference that would make would be incredible. It really would democratize our democratic process for lack of a better word. And this includes primary campaigns as well. And the reason why that's important is because a lot of these incumbents have an advantage over insurgent campaigns. So when we're talking about progressives, for example, I bring progressives on my channel who are running for Congress all the time. And the number one thing that they cite that makes their campaigns very difficult to win is a lack of resources. They're going up against political behemoths who outspend them 10 to 1. This would actually level the playing field a little bit. If these people who are running for Congress build these mini grassroots coalitions and we're matching those funds by a 6 to 1 ratio, you potentially have it so they can out raise incumbents if those incumbents don't have people power behind them. That's huge. Additionally, I'd have to learn more about this, but it sounds good. It would create a code of ethics for the Supreme Court. So needless to say, all of these things, I think objectively speaking, for small D Democrats is positive. If you support democracy, this would strengthen our democracy. It would allow us to further consolidate democracy, bring more people into the process. This is, this would be great. Now, it's not perfect, right? It's not a panacea. It wouldn't solve all of our problems. Because as we've learned over the years, capitalism is like a virus and it attacks any progress that leads to, you know, them not making as much profit. So if one law stops large multinational corporations from being profitable, they're going to get that overturned. So this isn't like going to end all of the issues that we have with democracy. Having said that though, it's really important, but there's other things that I wish were included. First of all, I wish that there was a provision in this to make voting compulsory.  But if you make voting compulsory, that increases turnout. Australia has compulsory voting. And guess what? It works. Now you don't have to punish people, right? You don't have to impose a penalty or a fine on them if they don't vote. But you can incentivize voting. Use the carrot approach so that way if they do vote and they show proof of voting when it's time to file their tax. They get maybe a $50 credit, something simple. But doing that will go a long way. So people think, oh, well, I need to vote so I can get my $50 tax credit at the end of the year. It's something as simple as that that really could make a difference that could encourage people to participate in the process. Because part of the issue is people don't vote because they don't often see like a big enough difference between Democrats and Republicans to warrant the payoff of coming out to vote waiting in line for hours. But if you incentivize that even a little bit, that can make a huge difference. Also, I think that voting needs to be a national holiday. The two-week early voting period is important, but it should be a national holiday. Additionally, there should be a tax on Super PAC donations. So that way those are disincentivized and politicians don't rely on them since they're taxed and they don't get as much money on top of that. I think this is another no-brainer, rank choice voting. That would drastically change this country and wouldn't be like right away, but this would get rid of the spoiler effect that Democrats complain about. You're worried that, you know, lefties voting for the Green Party is going to spoil the election and lead to a Republican winning? Well, rank choice voting is going to solve that problem. Now, the issue is that Democrats don't want to do this because then they're potentially ceding some of their power to a third party or a fourth party. And both Democrats and Republicans want to preserve the status quo. They want to preserve the amount of power that they get. And if you institute rank choice voting that could open the door to more parties actually winning seats in Congress and they don't want that. But anyone who's against this, they're not serious if they claim to care about the spoiler effect. Just keep that in mind. So overall, though, really, really encouraging to see Democrats still floating this idea. Back in 2018, when they first took power, I actually praised them for this because they floated before the people act. And I, you know, wasn't sure that they were serious about doing this because, you know, they have an incentive to rely on these big dollar donors because that's how you get elected. So, you know, there's going to be a lot of lobbying. There's going to be conservative Democrats who want to water this down. But this is where we really need members of the squad and progressive Democrats and principled Democrats to come in and fight. Because if this were to pass, this would be phenomenal. Now, there's more things that need to be done. You have to fight for statehood for DC and Puerto Rico. Get rid of the electoral college. It's an antiquated system that doesn't make sense. It suppresses democracy. But having said that, though, in the event this were to pass and Joe Biden would have signed it into law, wouldn't make a substantial difference without a doubt this would make a substantial difference. But if something like this were to pass, it would be attacked immediately by capitalist forces, by lobbyists. So it would be a fight to protect it. And, you know, that's what we need to do. We can't not pass legislation because we fear that it's going to be watered down or attacked. You know, everything that we do in a capitalist system is going to be attacked. If we ever get Medicare for All immediately once that's codified into law and enacted, it's going to be attacked by private insurance companies and lobbyists. That doesn't mean we don't fight. That doesn't mean that we be discouraged. It's a constant process. It's a constant fight. And something like this would make a difference. And I'm honestly pleasantly surprised that Democrats are still pushing this. So credit where it's due. If they can get this passed, then they get a lot of credit. If they fail to pass this, then they should be absolutely laughed out of the room. This is like the bare minimum that they do if they ever want to win power again. And this isn't like them rigging the process. This is them like democratizing elections in the United States, which is kind of important if you believe in democracy. But having said that, though, we'll leave that there. If you believe in this fight for it, put pressure on them to pass this. You know, they reintroduced it and that's a really good sign. But I don't think that like standing idly by and crossing our fingers that they pass this is a smart political strategy. If you want this fight for it, there's got to be grassroots energy that applies pressure. Otherwise, Democrats aren't going to feel, you know, the need to pass this right away when they absolutely have two years. That's it. You don't pass this within that window.  Enough power to stop something like this from getting passed enough power to continue enacting draconian voter ID laws and suppressing the vote. So this is great. So Joe Biden ran on canceling $10,000 worth of student debt means tested because of course. However, after he actually won, you had some unlikely allies in the fight to cancel at least more student debt in Chuck Schumer, who was proposing $50,000 via executive order, which would be substantial. And I think that it shouldn't even be a question 100% of student loan debt should be canceled. But if we had to barter with Democrats and they said, look, counter proposal, $50,000, I would take that. I think that is better than nothing. $10,000. However, that isn't sufficient. It's not going to put a dent in our monthly payments in what is bogging down this entire generation. So you have to do more like $10,000. Just isn't enough. He was asked about this in a CNN town hall. And for the first time, I've heard him give a direct answer. And unsurprisingly, the answer that he gave did not please me. So take a look. And then I have quite a bit to say afterwards. Loans are crushing my family, friends and fellow Americans. Me too. The American dream is to succeed. But how can we fulfill that dream when debt is many people's only option for a degree? We need student loan forgiveness beyond the potential $10,000 your administration has a proposed. We need at least a $50,000 minimum. What will you do to make that happen? I will not make that happen. It depends on whether or not you go to a private university or public university. It depends on the idea that I say to a community I'm going to forgive the debt, the billions of dollars of debt for people who have gone to Harvard and Yale and Penn and schools, my children. I went to a great school. I went to a state school. But is that going to be forgiven rather than use that money to provide for early education for young children who are come from disadvantaged circumstances? But here's what I think. I think everyone, and I've been proposing this for four years, everyone should be able to go to community college for free, for free. That's cost $9 billion and we should pay for it. And the tax policies we have now, we should be able to pay for it. You spend almost that money as a break for people on racehorses. And I think any family making under $125,000 whose kids go to a state university they get into, that should be free. So that was terrible, an absolutely atrocious answer. But this isn't necessarily surprising. It's Joe Biden. You know, I think that if even someone like Chuck Schumer is saying $50,000 should be canceled, I get that he's saying this because he doesn't want AOC to primary him. Still, I mean, if someone like Chuck Schumer who is a moderate to conservative Democrat is on board with $50,000, maybe move a little bit instead of $10,000. If you don't want to go all the way up to $50,000, $25,000.  But what he said there, quite frankly, is I will not make that happen. And then he went on to give us an answer that is just nothing more than word salad. He started talking about early childhood education and making community colleges free. These are different topics. Early childhood education in and of itself very important. Free community colleges, free colleges in general, really important issue. This is a different issue.  And even if you qualified for Pell grants, many folks had to take out student loans just to survive. Because if we work one job or two jobs, that's not enough to pay the bills, to pay rent. I myself was working two jobs through college, both part-time. And I still had to take out student loans because I had to pay for gas to get to school. I had to pay to feed myself.  But his answer is, oh, well, you know, I don't want to cancel the debt of people who went to Harvard or Yale. That is nonsensical. I don't know if Joe Biden knows this or not, but rich people, people who went to Ivy League schools, they don't need their debt canceled. If you went to Harvard, you're going to be okay. But what we're asking is for you to cancel everyone's debt. And so that way, if a couple of richies fall through the cracks, people who graduated at Yale or Harvard, what we do is we tax them higher. They can pay it back in a different way. Make it a universal program just with a swipe of a pen, cancel 50,000, and you'd be a hero. You would guarantee your reelection in 2024. Possibly you'd save Democrats from losing the house in 2022. It's good politics.  So, you know, it's it's Joe Biden. So this is what we've come to expect. And yeah, I am pleased to see, however, members of Congress actually speaking out against his answer here. So AOC actually retweeted that video and she said, who cares what school someone went to entire generations of working class kids were encouraged to go into more debt under the guise of elitism. This is wrong. Nowhere does it say we must trade off early childhood education for student loan forgiveness. We can have both. And to her credit, even Elizabeth Warren spoke out and encouraged Joe Biden to do more. You want to talk about who's going to get helped? Keep in mind, 40% of the people who are dealing right now with student loan debt do not have a college diploma. These are people who did what we wanted them to do. They tried, but for one reason or another, they couldn't make it. Maybe because they were working three jobs, maybe because another baby was born. But for whatever reason, they didn't make it all the way through to their diploma. And that means these are people right now who are earning what a high school grad can earn, but who are struggling with student loan debt. We cancel $50,000 worth of student loan debt. And what that will mean is that 85% of those who are struggling with student loan debt right now, about 40 million people will see their student loan debt completely wiped out. And the rest will see a big hunk of it cut away. And here's the thing. That's not only good for the people who have student loan debt. In fact, it's life transformative for them. But it's good for everybody else who doesn't have student loan debt. And the reason for that is it helps boost the whole economy. We get more people buying homes.  That student loan debt is holding back our economy. This was true long before the pandemic came along. We get people shaken free from that student loan debt. And we have an economy that is stronger, more robust. Number one thing that President Biden can do right now for this economy, cancel $50,000 worth of student loan debt. The number one thing he can do for young people, cancel student loan debt. The number one thing he can do to help close the black-white wealth gap is cancel $50,000 worth of student loan debt. It would be transformative for families and transformative for this. She is absolutely correct. Credit where it's due. If only she didn't shiv the only candidate in the back who wanted to cancel 100% of student loans. I couldn't help myself. I'm so sorry. I'm still bitter.  She's correct. Now, Ilhan Omar quote tweeted that video with Elizabeth Warren and added, Is student debt a rich kid problem? No, 40% of people with student loan debt don't even have a college degree. These have been some of the hardest hit families during the pandemic and are three times more likely to default. Now, additionally, Iona Pressley shared a petition where she urges Biden to cancel. I'm assuming 100% of student debt and I'm going to link to that down below. I think that you have to keep the pressure on. I don't expect Joe Biden to want to make any changes here unless he is continuously hounded about this. Now, remember before he ran, he said, I don't care about millennials. So this is exactly what we expected from Joe Biden. The callousness, the lack of regard for the people who are suffering. His generation was not bogged down by student debt. Our generation is so it is incumbent on us to even if he's not going to budge, pressure him continuously to make sure that we inch him close closer in the correct direction. This is going to be a coordinated grassroots effort. If we want student debt to be eliminated, we have to fight for it. We can't just accept, oh, well, Joe Biden said no. So I guess I'll just sit on my hands now. No, you keep up the pressure.  So I'll leave that there. I think that this was expected from Joe Biden. Nonetheless, it is unacceptable. Therefore, we will continue to fight for what is right.  If you can't even do 50,000, then yeah, we're not we're not going to accept that. People in Texas right now are literally freezing to death. Folks are seeing their homes be destroyed. They have no power, nothing to do. There's panic buying that's going on. Resources are running thin. And still, they don't know when the power is going to be turned back on. So you'd think that public officials, if they actually cared, would be working overtime to make sure that the power gets turned back on and that residents in Texas have what they need if they've been affected. Ted Cruz, however, decided to pick up and run. And these photos went viral of him and his family choosing to go to Cancun. Yeah, go on a vacation while your state, the state that you represent, is experiencing an unprecedented crisis. And his excuse is very Ted Cruzian. Well, Texas is going through horrific stories. And millions of texts yesterday, my daughter's out a lot. Me.  Because if you're just like dropping somebody off, why would you need to take this much luggage? Like that's quite a bit of stuff to pack if you're just dropping off your family. And who says things like that? Like who drops off their family via plane? Maybe Ted Cruz is a pilot and he was personally flying his family to Cancun so they can go on this vacation so that way they don't have to deal with the cold like his constituents have to currently who can't afford to leave the country currently. Maybe that's it. Maybe he's just like flying them there, make sure they get there safely. Or he was actually going to go on vacation, hoping he wouldn't get busted. And he did get caught. So now he's trying to save face by blaming his daughters, literally. I mean does it get any more disgusting than that? When is Ted Cruz ever going to take responsibility for his own actions? This is the same thing that happened when he liked porn on his public Twitter account. He then blamed a staffer. No Ted, that was you. And now you're blaming your daughters for you going on a vacation. Oh well my daughters wanted to go on a vacation since school was out so I just wanted to be a good dad. How about you take responsibility?  We don't do something like that. Although Ted Cruz is a politician. He's part of the ruling class in this country. So you know, odds are that him and his family have already received both doses of the COVID vaccine. Still, it's a pandemic. What makes you think it's acceptable to go on a vacation during a pandemic, especially when your state is dealing with a crisis?   I shouldn't have done this. It was bad judgment on my part. No, he throws his literal children under the bus. Like this is your flesh and blood and you're blaming them. That is embarrassing.  I'll tell you who.  The most smarmiest, slimmiest motherfucker in all of American politics. I mean, this is just embarrassing.  I have to go with them as well to make sure that they're safe because the country that they're going to is, I claim that the people there are bad, so we just got to make sure. Like what is wrong with this motherfucker? What is wrong with Ted Cruz? The gall on him. Like this really is the essence of what is wrong with the ruling class. While the peasants starve and die, freeze to death, quite literally, he leaves town. He vanishes. People in Texas, they don't have the luxury of going to a warmer place because they lost power like you, Ted Cruz. And like he tries to make it seem as if, oh, it's not that bad because we actually lost power too. We've been personally affected, so I know how it is. Except you tried to leave the country. Poor people can't do that. If they lose power, they have nowhere else to go, especially during a pandemic, Ted. And let's not forget that this is the same individual who just incited an insurrection a little more than a month ago. So Ted Cruz is just a disgusting fool, and I really am pleased to see everyone shitting on him. Of course, you have the sycophants like Ben Shapiro, like defending him because, you know, there's nothing he can really do except when you have a lot of power. There are things you can do.  Hand out food. Make sure they have supplies that they need. Make sure that they have shelter. I mean, why do we have to explain to people what politicians should be doing?  You should know what to do. But you don't. I just, I love that he got caught. It's hilarious to me that he's trying to blame his daughters.  There's another word to describe him. Like, this is someone who just literally couldn't care less about the people of this country, even his own constituents. He has no desire to assist them even in the worst times when they need him the most. Like, it's honestly, it's shocking to me to see this. Not from Ted Cruz, but just shocking how little the ruling class in this country cares where they just like openly really wear their contempt for the peasants on their sleeves. Hello, everyone. I have a treat for you today. I am here with someone who is running to represent Ohio's 11th congressional district and not just anybody. I am here with the legend, Senator Nina Turner. Hello, somebody. Senator, welcome to the program. Hello, Mike. It is so good to be on the show with you. I have admired you for years. You are one of the best. And I mean one of the best aggressive fire brands that we have on independent media and I just love you madly. I just want everybody to know it. I'm just going to put it out there madly. That means so much coming from you. And of course, the feeling is obviously mutual. I've done so many interviews with congressional candidates, politicians, members of Congress.  It just feels really, really nice.  So I wanted to ask you, I think that everyone who's watching knows what to expect from you from a policy standpoint, but can you just explain like what made you want to run and continue the fight and what do you think you would bring that's different from other members of Congress? What are your unique attributes that you think you'd contribute? Yeah, thank you so much for that, Mike. And I am excited to, I mean, we have more progressives in that Congress than we have had over the last 10 to 20 years. That is for sure. And it will be the combination of all of our gifts and talents putting it together. I know I'm probably dating myself, but there was a show called the Super Friends, the older, older version, not the real fancy version when I was growing up. And it was the Wonder Twins. You know, hopefully somebody that can relate to what I'm about to say, but the Wonder Twins, their powers only worked. Really, they were optimized when they were together.  And so for me, that's really how I see myself going into that Congress that is not just any one of the progressives or the super progressives. But we just created a new group here, the super progressives. But it's the Wonder Twin powers activate. And for me, I do bring a righteous indignation. And I think the way that I express, and a matter of fact, I know the way that I express that righteous indignation is unique. I lean a lot on my proximity to pain and understanding. We all have a story.  Everybody in Congress has a story. Those stories are different. Everybody has a story, but it's how you put that story out there. So my proximity to pain is in full effect. I never want to forget what it's like. I have been in the poor category, the working poor category, in the barely middle class. And I do understand in this unique moment, Mike, we don't have time to waste. And that, you know, I used to work for a mayor of the city of Cleveland. He was the second African-American mayor elected to the city of Cleveland. And I had the opportunity to serve in his cabinet. And one of the things about serving on the local level government, so I served in his cabinet, and then I also became a city councilwoman. But one of the things that I learned from him is that people have 24-hour, seven-day-a-week problems and challenges. And so I know I'm not the only one that brings local elected experience to that Congress, but I live that experience. I mean, that is part of what makes me me. That experience about being on the executive side of local government and also on the elected side of local government.  Well, guess what? My hair is on fire. You know why it's on fire? Because too many people in this country are suffering and you have people at the highest offices of the land making excuses as to why we can't push policy to help ameliorate those challenges. So I am not going to sit around being prim and proper. I am going to express the requisite amount of passion and outrage my hair is on fire for the suffering people of this country. And I think that that's exactly why you resonate with so many people, because everyone is feeling it right now. Everyone is feeling as if, you know, our heads are over water. We have a limited window to act when it comes to climate change. And nobody is really speaking with the urgency that's necessary for this moment and how severe things are in the country. And I think that the way that you speak to it, it really does captivate people. It gets them motivated in a way where, like, it gives us this new perspective where it's okay to be angry and we should be angry. In fact, that's good because we can use that anger to propel us to actually take action. So I wanted to ask you, because there's a lot that's going on right now. We just saw the CNN Town Hall with Joe Biden where he said he wouldn't commit to canceling more than $10,000 worth of student debt. I don't necessarily know that Democrats would be open overall to Medicare for All. We know that Joe Biden wouldn't. So my question for you is, in times like this where we don't have people in power that want to push for policies that we desperately need, especially Medicare for All during a pandemic, how do we fight for those types of things? Like, I know that organizing is important, but at the congressional level, like, how do you push for these policies when you have a party that isn't technically the opposition party, but they're in opposition to us? So how do you fight for that in these times? Now, we got to, I mean, I wish I had a magic wand to make it happen automatically. I would definitely do that. There really, I want the American people to know that there really is no excuse in the hegemon nation for us to be the only industrialized nation not to push for Medicare for All for our people, not just push, pass it. Just flat out pass. There really are no excuses for that. So for me, I mean, I don't have a magic wand to be able to do with this other than that pushing part is really what we must do.  It is about people literally dying and or losing their livelihoods. I don't know what else it takes to move people to Medicare for All. But if this pandemic doesn't do it, we have to begin to question our commitment as a nation. So we're saying one thing, and I'm saying we, saying one thing, politicians are saying one thing, but they're actually doing another. You know, during the celebration of MLK, for example, the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., you got all these people quoting him, but they won't act in the same manner that he would act and that he encouraged all of us to act. Not in moments like this, especially, we know that the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. supported, that he supported healthcare. He talked about all the injustices, you know, all of the things that he has seen, the injustice in healthcare was one of those. He talked about militarism, materialism, and war, all of these things combined. And not just the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., there were other sheroes and heroes that were fighting at all times against the status quo. So what I would say, Michael, is that I don't want us to lose sight of why it is important to push and why the grassroots in this case is even more important than who is in the Congress and in the White House, because all of the great changes, social justice-type changes that have ever happened in this country have come from everyday people putting a little extra on their ordinary so that extraordinary things can happen. That's one part of it. Making that righteous indignation and that anger to the ballot box at all times, making a demand and making sure that there are consequences to those demands, those things work in constant. So electing progressives from all levels of government, not just the Congress, and then making sure that there's a consequence for people not acting on the things that we need. That is how the change is going to come. There is no other way for that change to come, but the bubbling up of the grassroots and having people in elected office who actually care more about the next generation than they care about their next election. We got to do it. There's no other way that change happens. Yeah, I think that's a brilliant point. I mean, that really does make a lot of sense. There's no real accountability mechanism in the United States. Like Joe Biden, for example, can say, I'm not going to cancel more than 10,000, and really all we can do is vocalize anger and outrage, but there's no political mechanisms at this moment. Most Democrats, maybe they disagree with him, maybe they agree with him, but they're not going to really hold him accountable in a meaningful way, so that's why I think it's really important that we do institute these types of strategies where we bring together the grassroots and we also build that block in Congress. I did want to get your take on members of the squad. So rightly or wrongly, people have been feeling a little bit demoralized because they feel as if the squad literally pushed back on Democratic Party leadership enough, and I wanted to get your take on this because I do feel a little bit mixed on this. On one hand, they are the only members who ever push back on leadership in the Democratic Party, but perhaps they could be more forceful. Perhaps they could, you know, choose to fight even more battles with them. What is your take on this? Because I think it's really complicated because on one hand, the members of the Democratic Party have a lot of institutional power, and they could use their power to really silence and suppress these progressives, but at the same time, it's frustrating because there's so much that's at stake, so many people suffering who want Medicare for All, student debt cancellation, that the standards are really high for members of the squad. So what is your take in terms of how you think they're faring as members of the squad and whether or not your approach would differ in comparison with theirs to Democratic Party leadership in particular? Mike, you're right. It is complicated. That's the first thing I need the grassroots to understand, especially progressives, and I know progressives are disappointed. I mean, we tried 2016, 2020. I get it. So for me, as a leader, not just somebody elected, because there are things that I can do in committee, things I can do on the Florida Congress, but there's also things that I can do in my community and also across this country. So don't... I want to say don't be disappointed. You've got to have some understanding. I'm not going to point it, but the squad is ultimately the best that we have in terms of being able to push an agenda. And what that means is that you might not always agree with the methods. I need people to understand that when you are on the inside, it doesn't mean that you are selling out. I know they've gotten a lot of pressure, but they are the ones up there holding it down. They're pushing as hard as they can. And just because things are not going exactly the way, just because they're not using the exact tactics that some in the activist community want them to use, that doesn't mean that you throw them away. Because guess what? If you're throwing away members of the squad who are our best opportunity to get what we need and also some members of that progressive caucus, then you're not going to have anybody there. So if the prerequisite in summation, if the prerequisite for relationship means that I have to do, or the squad has to do, everything you say, the way you say do it, then there's not much of a relationship at all. And you're going to be disappointed. Hell, they're going to be disappointed with me. I said that to Tim Black when we interviewed him, saying it to you, Mike, I want them to know you're going to be disappointed at some point. But that does not mean that you give up totally on the people who are the best fighting chance that you have. And then there's something called strategy. So the grassroots strategy is different than the strategy once you are on the inside. You will know when somebody is sold out. And I assure you that the squad has not. Underline bold underscore sold out in any way. They need the grassroots. You can hold hold them accountable, but you don't throw them away. I mean, some of the pressures, even with Congresswoman Corey Bush, I just want to use her as the example. I mean, she just got there. Tell overall the squad members overall just got there, even the ones who've been there a little longer. And then you have people just throwing up their hands, throwing them away just because they're not using the taxes that you want them to use. You don't know what is going on. And so part of the thing that I want to do outside of what I do. And I'm claiming this on the floor of the House of Representatives and also as a member of committee is to also continue to educate and bring people. I just want people to see it different ways to get understanding. Steve and Covey, one of the most world renowned leadership gurus, has a quote that I love. He said, That doesn't mean we're always agreeing, but at least let's give each other enough bandwidth to understand. And for the love of God, do not throw away malign the squad members. It doesn't mean you're not going to be disappointed, but to throw them away is at our own peril. It really is. Yeah, I agree with that 100%. I think that there's a difference between holding members of Congress accountable and completely like disregarding them, relegating them to like the trash bin as if they're useless. It doesn't necessarily seem like a lot has changed because from a policy standpoint, like what's being codified into law hasn't. But at the same time, when you look at what these individual members of Congress have managed to accomplish, it is substantial. And I get that there is a lot that needs to be done. But I mean, Ilhan Omar single-handedly introduced one of the most important bills, canceling all student loan debt. Cory Bush is one of the only members of Congress I've ever heard in a direct way talk about reparations. That's really significant. That's something that hasn't happened at least since I've been alive. And so like to me, I understand like cause for disappointment because things need to happen fast and it's not happening fast enough. And so what I think that we have to do is hold the right people accountable. And that doesn't necessarily mean that you give members of the squad a pass and other progressive members of Congress, like Jayapal introduced Medicare for All. But it does mean that we need to direct our anger towards better people, individuals on committees who are absolutely obstacles to progress. You know, Richie Neal for example, individuals in leadership who are very directly blocking the things that we want to get accomplished. And so like I think that it's important for you to say that to put things into perspective because I totally agree with what you're saying. You know, there are times where I disagree with the strategy of members of the squad, but that doesn't necessarily mean that what they're doing is bad or they've sold out as you stated because when you're in Congress, things are so different because there's so much pressure. I think that representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said it best that like the minute you get in there, you are bombarded with all of these voices in your head, you know, of people trying to influence you in a certain way. And so it does change things. It changes the way that you behave, you know, when you are an activist, an organizer, and a member of Congress. But that doesn't necessarily mean that these folks have lost sight of what's important. And I think that that is important to say. Did you want to add to that? Yeah, you know, as I travel, I certainly have the opportunity to touch people, to listen to their hopes and dreams and their fears, and the struggle is real even before the pandemic. But we all have a role to play. The members of the elected Congress have a role to play. And we, the people, have a role to play too. And I want folks to know that and just kind of own that space and keep pushing and fighting, because that is ultimately what is going to get us to where we need to be in this country. And the progressive movement has to be more organized and more agile. And we've got to stop the circular...  We're mortified on your way just because I gave a quote from President Barack Obama, who I did not agree with at all times. And so people need to focus on the main thing are to continue to elect progressives who have bold policies, who will stand up and who will fight on the inside coupled with, not separate from, but coupled with a grassroots bubbling up that will never go away. That is what... That's what we need. The grassroots can never go away, because that's how we're going to get this changed. People can't lose sight of it, Mike. I know people are disappointed.  I get it. But, God... And you know what? You gave those examples about the various pieces that have been introduced from Medicare for All with Congresswoman Daya Paul all the way to Congresswoman Cori Bush on reparations, which I will be joining her in that choir. But you know what? That $15 an hour minimum wage is on the House side. And you know why it's there? It's because the Congressional is going to pass on the House game strong games we are. Yeah. Yeah. And I think that it's really, really important to, like, keep things into perspective. Where we are now is, I think, entirely different than where we were five years ago, for example. I think that the Overton window has shifted largely because of the grassroots because of members of the squad and to talk about things like single-payer healthcare and reparations. I mean, that really is in and of itself a victory. And I get that this is all rhetoric. And it's not the same thing as actually, like, getting this pass. But it still does matter talking about these things that were basically not acceptable to even discuss in matters. To talk about socialism versus capitalism, to even criticize capitalism, is a different thing for America. It's not just a bang for America. So we are changing. It's not just the political change that we're going through. I also think it's somewhat cultural as well, where members of American society are starting to kind of wake up and realize, hey, in comparison with our neighbors north of the border, Canada, we're kind of getting a bad deal when it comes to healthcare. We shouldn't have to pay monthly for healthcare that we don't like, that doesn't cover everything, that doesn't protect us from bankruptcy. So I am starting to see things change. Is it fast enough? Of course not. But the fact that we're making progress and we're moving in the correct direction, you know, it is important. And sometimes I get down and I forget about that. But really, just comparing to what this country looked like, it is moving in a better direction. And I think that largely members of the squad and the grassroots and constant pressure on the Democratic Party establishment is what's responsible for that. I did want to ask you about one thing. Usually members who run for Congress, I always ask them this question. The legislation unfortunately hasn't been introduced for this term as of yet. It was previously HR 4000. It's called the Fair Representation Act by Don Byers Jr. And basically this, in my opinion, is really the first step in getting electoral reform in the United States. So what this would do is a couple of things. It would introduce ranked choice voting nationwide, which I think is really important. It also would end gerrymandering and it would move us towards a more proportional system. So that way rather than all of us having just one representative in Congress, maybe we have two or three. So that folks who traditionally wouldn't have representation actually get someone in Congress fighting for them. Would you be open to supporting something like this? Or if it's not reintroduced, perhaps like elevating this as an issue. Because for me, I do support initiatives like the For the People Act, HR 1 in Congress that the Democratic Party has introduced in the Senate and the House. But I do think we need to go further. And I just wanted to get your take on this type of legislation and whether or not you'd support it. Absolutely. That's awesome. That's exactly what I wanted to hear. You know, it's hard to get members of Congress who have been there for a really long time to support something like ranked choice voting that might open the door to like third and fourth parties. Because that very deliberately will diminish the amount of power that they have. So it's kind of hard to like get someone to support something that technically isn't in their self-interest as a politician. But what I love about this new generation of members of Congress is that they're not running for self-aggrandizing reasons. They're not careerists. Like they want to help people. And so these are the individuals, members of the squad yourself, who I think we have a real opportunity to actually like get this on the agenda or at least talk about it, which is important. Another thing that I really want to ask you about is the anti-war movement that's lacking in this country, both at a grassroots level, but a congressional level. I think that there are some members of Congress who really deserve a lot of praise, such as Ro Khanna, for example. What is your take? Like what do you think is the missing factor? Like why is it that Democrats at large, not necessarily members of the squad, why are they comparable to Republicans in the early 2000s? Like why has the issue of war not really moved much when we are making progress on other progressive issues in your opinion? Two things. One is the donor class or the owner class. I can't tell the difference. The owner donors. I call them the owner donors. That's accurate. We need that right choice and other... We got to have those things change. And just one point before I directly answer that question. The diminishing the power, because people who are elected to office, whether it's the Congress or a dog catcher in this country, if you are elected, you are holding the people's power. And every single day, those of us who are privileged enough to hold the people's power should be doing things that edify and lift the people and not ourselves. And so if we are afraid to make systemic change because we think it's going to diminish our individual power, then we're an elected ministry for the wrong reasons. And I do call it a ministry because I do believe that you also love that. You cannot serve that which you do not love. And that is another reason why I wear my rights as a nation. But to your point about war. One is the owner-donor. So we need campaign finance reform, STAT. The owner-donors, because that gets in the way of every other thing that we care about. Every other thing that we are pushing is tied to that. That's part of America's promise.  And then I'm also involved with some groups that are standing up against... Now Drop the Mic is a project that I've been working on with the very old Ben Cohen, Ben himself, one of the co-founders of Ben and Jerry. And he has been for the last 30 years pushing us to understand that if we are pouring what, almost 60%, a little less than 60% of our industrial complex, that same money, what is about $720 billion would it be, could be going towards more domestic needs, be it education, be it healthcare, name of domestic needs, that money could be going there. We have to understand that our strength, and we need the American people. Look, we're going to be strong. We put more money in the military industrial complex than the next seven industrialized. We have to have a paradigm shift of what it needs to be strong to demand that our elected officials be they Democrats or Republicans see strength in a different way. In this country from pre-K to college or vocational school, it's strong to have Medicare for all. It's strong in this country. It's strong to make sure that our essential workers, our frontline workers, have the pay to make that demand. It's strong to increase the minimum wage. I mean, all of how do we see and interpret strength? That is it, Mike. And that one issue right there is never going to change unless the grassroots put the heat on the people they elect. So I don't want to take up too much more of your time, but I want to give you an opportunity to let my viewers know what is it that you need from us to make sure that we get you in Congress. Because I know that it's easy to get complacent because you're a rock star, but we still have to fight. It's not going to be an easy battle. What do you need from us? Donate our average $28. I think we're back at that magical $27. We have raised money from all over this country. In my home state of Ohio, people in the great state of Ohio or donors in the state donating to this campaign, this campaign needs, because it's not just about me. It's about I'm running, but I know I'm the tool. I'm a conduit. But beyond the 11th congressional district and serving my constituents who will hopefully send me to that Congress, I know by extension what makes my district strong, what makes the rest of the country strong, is the movement. So for me, Mike, it's not, it's my district, b