If you're looking to streamline your audio advertising buys and maximize your revenue, look no further than Triton Digital's Programmatic Audio Advertising Exchange, A2X. The private exchange consists of only licensed broadcasters and top-tier internet radio publishers assuring the quality inventory and brand safety you can trust. Visit www.tritondigital.com to learn more. What's going on everybody, welcome to the situation room live from an undisclosed cabin in the woods. Super normal, I'm not hiding out in preparation for 2025, you're hiding out in preparation for doing, no, I'm here for a small, little mini vacation, little getaway before, you know, the new year, hanging out with family, took my daughter to see snow today. It wasn't really worth it, but it was cute. Was a long drive to see a little bit of snow, just a wee bit of snow. So yes, some people say I look like I'm in a sauna. If you're listening, I am in a sauna. It's fine. Thank you so much for being here. Thank you for being here. This is New Year's Eve, 2024. Here we are. We've made it. What a year. Not much happened this year, right? A little bit of a, a little bit of a letdown, nothing to actually surprise, nothing too out of the ordinary given the state of things in the United States of America. But look, if you're here, thanks for being here, thank you for pressing play for joining me live as you prepare your dips and chips and little cut up salaries and carrots and whatnot that you're doing for tonight or you're getting all your champagne or you're getting your Prosecco or whatever you're getting, or you're just like, you know, cuddling with your furry loved ones, like your, like animals, not like furries, although was Elon, did Elon want to be a furry? Did I just see that headline? Every single headline about Elon, you're like, you don't know what is real because it could all possibly be real, but thank you so much for being here. We have a great show with me, myself and I for the next hour or so or however long my child stays asleep for because of course it's nap time. So thank you so much. I apologize if the internet in this cabin is shoddy and I want to also thank so many of the people who have been watching recently and who may be sent in a super chat during my debate with Jank on Friday, the 27th now. It was very, very kind of you and I apologize, I couldn't read it in advance. We knew we would go long so we prerecorded it by a couple hours and thanks to everyone who is listening as a podcast and who tuned in and listened to that as a podcast, I want to speak about that debate now that there is calm and I'm not being yelled at, but also wanted to sort of use it as a way to kind of look at the next year. And you know, if you're here for the first time, welcome the Bituation Room streams Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Fridays, it's also a podcast. We have comedians, experts, activists, movement leaders. We talk about radical intersectionalism and revolution and change and the broader fight against the right while building the left and trying to, you know, include as many people as possible in that fight from far smarter people than myself, people like Nillini Stamp who was on from Working Families Party, people like Max Elbaum and some representative Summer Lee, Max Elbaum is a longtime mentor of mine who was an anti-Vietnam war organizer and activist, became part of a Marxist-Leninist cadre of organizers, wrote a book everyone should read called Revolution in the Air, he's kind of my mentor, he comes on periodically in addition to many people from Convergence Magazine where he contributes to and helps edit. And then Representative Summer Lee and as many represent, I think Representative Bowman, I should get him back on, of course, Corey Bush has been a longtime, you know, wish list of mine. So hopefully in the new year, there will be more people like that in office, out of office, but still in this long-term hall as we really bear down the hatches. And so when I say like perilous time, I feel like I really need to underscore, and I think for a lot of you who are listening or watching, who are from what are called frontline communities, if you are undocumented, if you have DACA, if you have undocumented people in your family, if you yourself or your parents were asylum seekers, if you are a trans person, if you have a trans child, if you have a uterus and you are a birthing person, no, if you are pregnant, if you are a new parent, you know, I'm reminded time and again of good friend of the show, NATO Green Comedian and Labor Organizer, who has so many bits, comedic bits that are so apropos, you're just like, you know, it's, it's like, why doesn't this ever change? But again, you know, NATO is constantly saying like, Oh, I'm not political, what does politics have to do with me? This is his long-running bit, you know, I'm not gay, I'm not black, I'm not currently being shot out. I don't drink water, I don't breathe the air, I don't bother on and on and on. And that's sort of where we're headed. If you live in this country or in other countries, look out, Canada, apparently we're trying to colonize you now, an authoritarian America is absolutely your problem. None of this is, this is not just like hyperbole and this is like no one's, this is not an exercise, this is not a drill, this is not imaginary, this is not the word that I can't think of right now. This is absolutely happening. And I want to like, I want to talk a bit about the Jank interview and I want to just number one welcome people who started watching me or just found me or you know, watched it and all that and that's really, really nice of you. And I'm going to read some comments and super chats later and I'm also going to thank the patrons at $10 or more, which they're quite a few and you're going to get treated to the Fartsong. Oh, don't you worry. So thank you so much in advance for doing that. It really means a lot and it goes a long way. Let's just name it right off the top. I'm not a full-time employee with TYT. I have a story about that for another time, maybe for the patrons only, maybe for an ask me anything, but I'm not a full-time employee. So when people say you should leave, there's no real leaving. It's just a saying like, no thanks, I don't want to be on the show anymore, right? I don't want to be a guest. And so that's a perfectly fine thing to think that I should do. I definitely don't enjoy as much being on panels with Jank, as you can see. And this is sort of what I wanted to get into. When there is disagreement, there's a lot of like, no, no. It's very like Trumpian, like wrong, wrong. There's not a listening, there's not a give and take often, unless you're Ben Gleib. JK, that's for those who know, but I do get asked, obviously, to be on the damage report every Monday. I also get asked to frequently go on indisputable with Dr. Rashad Ritchie, who, like I said, I think has really incredible intersectional politics when it comes to racial injustice, when it comes to policing, and when it comes to capitalism. And I think he's someone who understands the intersection of all of those things, as well as he's a black man in the South. And I think that's important. It's important to, as we suffer the consequences of, honestly, a Confederacy that never died in this country, right? The lack of a real reconstruction that actually gave real equity to say nothing of reparations and other things that were owed to black Americans in this country. I look to people who are movement leaders, specifically who come out of more of a civil rights background, who are more connected to the black community. I think Dr. Ritchie's one of them. I say it all the time, but another big guest, you know, get of mind for 2025 would be, obviously, Reverend William Barber III. I think he's amazing. He always talks about a third reconstruction. He talks about poor people's campaigns. You know, he has that class race analysis that we all need if we're going to get through this and not throw one another under the bus or sort of cut deals in order to make certain people feel safe. And so that's kind of what I want to talk about in addition to all this. And so, first of all, happy new year, happy new year. I hope you do something fun. I hope you get laid there. I said it. I said it. You were thinking it. I just said it. But, but I guess overall, I, I, I can't go through each comment, but there's been a lot of lovely comments. And I think a couple of things stood out to me. One, some people thought that I was restrained and some people thought I was condescending. And I think the answer is a little bit of both, right? Look, the reality is this was not supposed to be, for me, it was not a gotcha interview. It was supposed to really hear him out and I wanted to hear him out. I don't feel as though I got a real concrete answer from, from jank as to what he's trying to do and in what parameter, what capacity, is it a new organization, is it a new party, is it trying to gain a new audience? Why make the rounds on these different right wing shows in a way that feels more glad handy than it does actually sticking it to them? So, so that's number one. I, I don't feel like I got an answer and I pushed a little bit, but I also, there's only so much you can go and you can get. And in that sense, because it is my show and we have limited time, I wanted to move on. So my feeling is if I'm not going to get an answer, I'm going to let that person speak and then I'm going to go on to the next because there's a lot of questions I still have. By the same token, there are moments where I didn't say anything and I didn't push back and we'll go into some of them. And I think that same thing is there's only so much you can put push back in the moment without derailing a conversation. And also there's only so much you can push back without truly getting, getting into a shouting match. And I think at one point, I sort of exemplify the shouting match, which I feel like I do sometimes when people lose their cool at me and I sort of like mirror them back at themselves. They hate that. So I'm, I'm not going to say that wasn't like a country move. That was definitely a country move, but it is important to know that like you guys have been there, right? You're in a, you're in a discussion with someone, the other person shouts. There's only so much you're going to like shout back, right? Otherwise it's not productive. There are people who, you know, said, Jank seemed like, petulant, like a bully. Very much triggered. I wouldn't disagree with those characterizations, but I also think that's, that's sort of part of how he speaks. I think the question is, is this productive and who does he reserve that kind of attitude for? And I think that's really important to know and, and I, and I don't think it's across the board because there are times when Jank has absolutely got claws out for the right people. So I want to give him credit for that. And I also want to give him credit more broadly on just being willing to talk to me. He didn't know what I was going to ask him. So maybe he was caught off guard. But it's true that I came in there with, I thought very concrete and very specific questions. What is the establishment? What are you doing? What does right wing populism mean to you? Are you afraid, or do you think about how this might reflect on other people who work at TYT and the progressive left writ large? I don't feel like, I don't feel like I actually got an answer on maybe any of those things. So I'm, but again, everyone needs to go back and, and you can watch for yourself. The other thing I'll say about, about all this is, if you're commenting or you're like, why are they fighting? What's going on? Like we need more people together. I, I agree with you. I'm like, I'm someone who, who wants TYT to be a stalwart under a Trump 2.0. I want to contribute to TYT under a Trump 2, 2.0, but it's getting increasingly difficult. And given the kinds of issues that they are willing to concede on, the grace that is extended to the right, that is not extended to the left, and some of the people they are willing to antagonize, I don't know for, for what purpose? I don't know. I don't want to assume, I actually I'll put it this way. I don't think it's money and I don't think it's a grift. So that's the other thing. But it is hard, you know, for those of you who haven't seen his interview with Talking Point USA, with Charlie Kirk, for those of you who you haven't seen his interview with Tim Poole, if you haven't seen his interviews with Patrick Bed David, watch them. Don't, don't take anyone else's word for them. Just watch them. You tell me or whomever or yourself whether you feel like there was adequate pushback, right? Or whether you feel like it was an opportunity to kind of make the rounds, to kind of make a little bit of a little bit of glad handing, a little bit of nod in a wink, and whether or not you felt there was more pushback on the rights framework than there was a criticism of the very left and the very progressives that Jank claims to recognize and represent. So just ask yourself those questions as you watch them. I don't want to put, I don't want to put thoughts in your mind and I totally agree with you. I know that feeling of, man, why can't, why can't people just get along, you know? I am absolutely sympathetic to that and, you know, I respect you and I respect your opinion and if you say, you know what, Francesca, I don't like that you were, you know, at all, you know, pushing back and I'm not going to, you know, fuck with you anymore. That's fine. That's like, seriously, that's up to you. So those are the things just like off the top I wanted to talk about. And then the rest I think I can, I can get into as we look into clips. I heard that he said that maybe I was bad faith. Again, watch the whole interview. There's nothing bad faith about it. Do I have an agenda? Which is to understand what's going on? Yes. Did I interrupt? Yeah, I did. Did he interrupt? Yeah. I mean, I'm really, I'm not as sensitive about the interruptions because I felt like it was productive ultimately and I feel good about it. Bad faith. Look, I'm not, I'm not trying to steal audience or audience capture or whatever it is. I'm not trying to, you know, I, I haven't said that I won't work with TYT anymore. I, I just haven't said that, you know, like I said, time and place and who I'm on with and whether I'm asked, you know, that's, that's that I am not a full-time employee. I do not receive benefits. I have been contributing since 2016, never received benefits. I've had a child and didn't get paid family leave. That is, that's just the reality. And I think with everything, you know, sometimes, you know, jobs run their course, right? Sometimes work you do runs its course and there can be a bunch of factors that can contribute to you wanting to move on. So let me just say here and now I'm not trying to like start shit, right? Shit's already there. Let's be real. I mean, that's what I'm trying to say is shit's already there and I've actually pulled many, many, many, many punches over, over the last few months and I have nothing but respect for Jank, although disagreements with him and disagreements with Anna and I, I think they are different people. So I feel like that's really important. Like these people are different. These are not the same people. Jank doesn't speak for Anna nor should he and Anna doesn't speak for Jank nor should she. So I do hope that I can speak with Anna in the future and understand her perspective a little bit more and, and maybe, you know, just kind of understand a why, maybe just a why. But yeah, so anyway, thank you so much for listening and why not. I just wanted to play a couple of things. There are some moments that really stuck out for me and I will try to get to them as quick as possible. There was a sort of broad, they all kind of meld into one another, but this, this particular moment hit home because it felt, it felt a little bit like a little bit of no turning back moment when Jank said this to me and this was sprouted by a conversation where I kind of offhandedly said, you know, that this is not, it is not like, it's not just imaginary the, the like, mast attention, mast deportation. There were signs at the RNC that said mast deportation now. So you can't gaslight anybody in the saying that MAGA doesn't want to do mast deportation. That's pretty much the pillar 2016, the pillar was the wall 2020, 2024, excuse me, the pillar was mast deportation. So the idea that that's hyperbole or that the left is making it up, whoever the left is progressives, liberals, anyone, you know, left of Kyrsten Sinema, who knows that they're making that up is just plain wrong. So this was that moment. And it kind of just led to something that really, really rubbed me the wrong way and still still does as I look at it. I started the largest progressive network. I've given what dozens of progressives opportunities they didn't have before. I started just Democrats, et cetera, et cetera. The minute I disagree, like 5% on trans issues or crime, everybody's like, right, way faster, right, right, right. Almost every show is saying that, almost every show. So you're telling me that you don't push people out. You're pushing out the movement overall, at least the online left movement, seems to be trying to push out the one network that has helped progressives more than any other network and it's not in dispute. But my God, we have 5% disagreement. So tear it down, tear it down. This is the destructive extreme left that I honestly, that portion, that kind of destructive attitude. I truly don't know who he's talking about. And she's certainly not talking about my show, which I haven't, I guess he hasn't seen. So that's not something that I do. But again, I do think that a lot of jinx, his issues with the left, I think are much more strumming than reality. I've had debates with him. And this was sort of a part of something that we talked about on the debate was, or during his interview, my interview with him, was to what extent has there been debate at TYT? Well, Anna and drink see pretty eye to eye when it comes to trans issues, in terms of, you know, trans inclusive language being alienating. And in terms of, I think Anna said something recently about like, bathroom bill, she believes trans people can use the bathroom of their gender. But that when it comes to locker rooms, she's not quite clear. Jank doesn't believe that trans people should be, should play in sports with their, for their gender, higher than high school level, which again, this is parsing very small things, which I really do think these are small things in the grand scheme of again, an anti fascist front. They're important, however, and but I've disagreed with him on that. But I never said that he was a fascist, I never said tear it down. I've never, I don't know who the people who he's talking about are like, I can think of a, I can think of a couple shows, I can think of a couple people, but like, I truly don't think that that is a broad majority that like, they don't agree on these particular issues. The air go, the whole thing is rotten. I think there is a need at TYT to hear more diversity of opinion on it. So it's so great that Jank continually has Zionist Ben Gleeb on the show to make the case for genocide every, you know, couple of weeks, would love to see a trans person also on TYT make the case for, you know, trans people being in sports at whatever level, trans people being in locker rooms, you know, because they're just changing, just like, it's almost like humans, you know what I'm saying? That I think would be awesome to see that diversity. But anyway, the, the, the, the real kicker comes later is poison. It's not just poison to us, it's poison to our chances of winning. We keep pushing people out. We cook, we keep pushing people out and then all of a sudden we lost all the swing states and we lost the popular vote. I'm trying to get our side to wake up, snap out of our hypnosis of we hate, we hate, we hate, and we hate the right way and they're all white supremacists and they're all racist and they're all sexist and we hate and we never go in the room with them. We hate what the hell happened to us? And no one's allowed to disagree. We're now authoritarian. No, no, I rebelled. Can I just go? I will never allow the left to be authoritarian and, and this idea of just hating the other side is poison. You know, it's so funny about you calling the left authoritarian is that you think the left has power. Like I love you. We're, we're on the precipice of real authoritarianism and real fascism. And you believe that the online left are the authoritarians. I mean, I don't, I don't know how to tell you. You sound like Bill Mar and Nancy Pelosi had a kid and it came out, Jank Ugar. And that was harsh, obviously way harsh tie. But let's be real. This is the same anti woke, woke mind virus that has infected so many gen X boomer comedians, famous people, James Carve, everyone from James Carville to Nancy Pelosi, who says that, you know, we need to stop talking about, you know, women's rights so much. And it was about the woke James Carville saying about that's basically that's the it was the woke. That's why Kamala Harris lost, even though she didn't talk about being a woman or a black person or an Indian person ever. It was the woke that lost us this because she apparently ran a bunch of ads for trans people, which she absolutely did not. And maybe that would have helped. In fact, just to humanize them and to be like, Hey, this is not something to be scared about. You know, but, but so that I don't, I cannot parse where the difference between the Bill Mar line and the sort of we need to sacrifice so-called cultural issues in order to win, whether or not you're a corporate Democrat or you are a class reductionist leftist. Like I actually, and I've said this multiple times, if you watch my show, there is actually a lot of similarities between a class reductionist left, meaning ones who are like screw race, screw gender, screw trans rights. Those are niche issues. We shouldn't talk about them. The only, the only qualifier is class. Never mind that the working class is made up of women of color. Let's put that aside. You know what I mean? Like that and the Nancy Pelosi's in the Bill Mars and the Jerry Seinfeld, the woke mind virus has gotten to us all and every uncle that we have, who we know, so the woke mind virus, like, how is that not the same? I'm still unclear how this is different. So that's why I said what I said. I know it was kind of, you know, harsh. I know it was, you know, maybe, you know, I was trying to get a rise because that's how I felt. Let me just ask you though. Let me just ask you. So what, what shows on the left do you like that aren't on the TYT network? Yeah. So I said, look, there's a lot of good popular shows on the left that I like. And it's because there are. So breaking points to a good show, cockless, he's secular talk is a good show. He was against me going on MAGA. I haven't seen his video, but it caused me to ask us a couple of times. But I, you know, I largely didn't hold a grudge on that. Let me just tell you, first of all, you had a great conversation with Crystal Ball. I think she made some really good points to you on everyone should check out Jake speaking with Crystal. I thought that was a good conversation actually. And I thought Crystal was not as, not as forceful as I was, but also, but, but really made space for Jake to make his case. And I'm not sure he made it. I think it was on breaking points. Kyle has, I think, been very disturbed, especially by your appearance with Charlie Kirk. But what you just said there, they've been against us. I really want to just dig into this idea that, because you look, you're a fighter, man. That's cool. That's great. But like, you really do have a very, I almost want to call it Bush like, Cheney, like, you're with us or against us attitude. How are you percent wrong? Or Trumpian, right? It's very, like, I say with us or against us, because that was the war on terror sort of mantra, right? Either you're with us or against us. But in terms of like, they were against us, I, that's why I asked him who us was and who he speaks for when he goes on these shows. And he says, we've always, we've always, I think it's himself and Anna, but I again wouldn't pretend to know. I don't think I even got a clear answer of who he meant by us. Certainly is not speaking on my behalf. I'm not sure if he thinks he is. I don't know. But so that's why I asked that. So then when he said against us, I was like, not only is this emblematic of a really antagonistic attitude towards other progressive left shows, but it also, it's just like, it's also like sort of vague, like who is us, right? And in terms of against us, like, it sounds very Trumpian. It's like, well, he once criticized me. He was a day where against us, but you know, it's like the royal us, right? They were against us, but then now they changed their ways. And again, it feels like, so is our movement, is our broader project of small D democracy, of, you know, getting corporations out of our political system, is that project based on who was critical of you and who wasn't critical of you and who was so called against you and who wasn't against you? Because I'm pretty sure that even all the people who you think are against you are actually still in the bag for the project of getting corporate power out of politics and are still in the bag for transforming this democracy and getting rid of the electoral college, you know, all kinds of things, right, that they're still in the bag for. And so that's why I sort of highlighted that because it's just in terms of language, it really does matter how we speak about these things. Literally, I love that you're really my point, but when I say this, you truly sound like people are either against you, but they criticize you, they are not. And yet here you are, Jane, telling the entire right wing that all you want to do is break bread with them, that you want to, you want to debate with them, but afterward you want to go have a beer. Yes, I do. You want to have a beer with people who want to put people in mask deportation camps, they want to deport. You think you're putting camps, you sound all right. Anyway, you think I you think we're going to get pointing, I mean, this is another beautiful, you know, I feel like feel like Chomsky, you know, we, you know, are we going to get put in camps? And he's shaking his head. And he's like, basically, he's about to say like, you're insane, you're crazy. And he says, we, and I think he's very much talking about like you and me, Jane Kueger and Francesca Furentini, we're probably not going to get put in camps. We're not asylum seekers. We don't live in a mixed status family. They're not people undocumented in our family. We've been here for a couple generations. We're likely safe. There's like, and that, I think we also all need to sort of like have as you guys go forward, as you listen and watch different pundits and you listen to people, just make B have a little bit of an antenna out for whether these pundits are actually people who are represent the the communities that will absolutely be affected and impacted and mistreated. And yes, those communities are people too. They are full human beings. They just don't stream on New Year's Eve from a undisclosed cabin in the woods. You know what I'm saying? So I resent being implicated in although I understand, but I resent being implicated in the sort of privileged box that he thinks that we are personally insulated from ergo. It must be crazy to say that these things are happening. That really rubbed me the wrong way. And so I pulled out, you know, I talked about the Chinese community, right? And my family's been here for generations. My mom has been a citizen since she was 10 years old. So like, I'm not worried about my immediate family, but I did want to bring up some articles for the reason that I said that after I show you the rest of this exchange sound crazy. They're starting with Chinese people. That's my, that's my fucking family dog. Like, what are you talking about? It's such an excuse. Okay, no, they're going to start with my people. Sure, sure. Yeah, I'm hiding behind vulnerable communities. I'm hiding behind vulnerable communities. I'm standing in front of vulnerable communities. No, you're not. What are you doing? What are you doing? I'm in front of vulnerable communities. Uh huh. I'm the most endangered friend by tweeting an Elon Musk. Please don't help me. Okay. So that was the exchange. Look, it's, it was, um, very, I really hate oppression Olympics. And so the fact that his response was no, it's going to be Muslims that are front and center. Like, maybe I set myself up for that by saying, like we're talking about my family, it was my way of trying to humanize all of this. But then he immediately wanted to get into it. No, it's going to be me. And I'm just like, that is so unhelpful and ridiculous. And so I really, I hate that. I hate when to prove that like, as a way to say we are blowing the nasty portations out of proportion, he immediately resenters himself. And I just feel like that's, that is, uh, that's kind of pathetic. And it's bad politics, right? It's a number of things, but it is mostly and primarily bad politics. Um, and so I wanted to, if I can share the screen, but now Google Chrome would like to do something that, damn it, um, balls. Uh, I'm on Matt's computer, so I can't bring this up immediately. Fuck me. All right. Well, I'm just going to NBC news. I'm just going to read this to y'all. Pretend you're listening to a podcast and pretend that this is actually on screen. Trump could deport. This is a, this is November 15th of this year as sources say could deport undocumented Chinese first Asian American groups rush to prep. Asian American organizations say they're scrambling, but not completely surprised over president-elect Donald Trump's campaign promise of mass deportations undocumented immigrants from China, who are deemed to be of military age, will be among the first groups targeted for deportation by the incoming Trump administration, sources close to the campaign previously told NBC NBC news citing the potential risks and national security. You know, uh, cause they've got the Wuhan flu. Um, Asian Americans have long had the fastest growing undocumented population tripling over a 15 year period from 2000 to 2015. The number of Chinese nationals crossing into the US has skyrocket in recent years between 2022 and 2024. The number of undocumented Chinese nationals crossing both the northern and southern border has tripled from just more than 27,000 to more than 78,000. So a lot of people, there's a lot of people. I'm not, but like, so I wasn't making that up. I'm, I'm not bringing it because I am Chinese. Um, I'm not, that is not why I brought it up. Um, for those of you who were like, wait a minute, what? I thought you were also Italian. What are we gonna? Yeah, I'm Kamala Harris. Okay. We can be two things. We contain multitudes. Don't pretend like you just fell out of the coconut tree. Um, so that's why I said that. Um, and he pretty, he's just like, no, no. And then that last part, let's, let's just, let's just run it back. Beer. Yes. I do. You want to have a beer with people who want to, who wants to put people in mass deportation camps. They want to deport, you're putting camps. You sound like anyway, you think I sound crazy? They're starting with Chinese people. That's my, that's my fucking family dog. Like, what are you talking about? Such an excuse. Okay. No, they're going to start with Muslims. They're going to start with my people. Sure. Sure. Yeah. I'm hiding behind vulnerable communities. I'm hiding behind vulnerable communities. I'm standing in front. You're using. So I didn't even hear the human shields line guys. You're using vulnerable communities as human shields. So now Jank is engaging and straight up Hasbara talking points. Is that what we're doing? We said, he spent a year speaking about how ridiculous the line human shields is. And now he's using it. That's just, let's just say like sort of rhetorically, that's insane. But then to say you're hiding behind vulnerable communities. Like if he doesn't think I'm vulnerable, which okay, let's, let's concede that I'm not, you know, running a YouTube channel, speaking constantly about the far right, going on peers Morgan and having them say that they're going to sue me for defamation. If I say any more, getting trolled incessantly by those people, okay, let's put that put it aside because that could all weaponize very quickly overnight. But you're right. I am not vulnerable on the front lines of this, of this fight. But like, then why would I hide behind them? What am I, what's the point? Why would I need them as human shields to for what? For my millions of patrons, patreon.com/patuationroom. No, like what, like what, for my shitty politics, for me, like being friendly with Nancy Pelosi, like I don't understand what, like why I would be hiding. And I just had never heard someone say you're hiding behind vulnerable communities, which is why I said I'm standing in front of them. And to be honest with you, I have been and that is what I hope to do. And if I can sort of make folks understand that immigrants, trans people, women, are not their enemies, don't want to take what's theirs, black people. That equality doesn't mean you have less. It means we all have like we are all abundant and we all thrive. That things like a guarantee guarantees to housing and education are incredibly important that that I don't even want to keep. But you know what I'm saying? I'm like, that's what I'm trying to do. Like that is what I'm trying to do. And even though I'm not in the struggle, like I don't, I'm not an organizer. Although I think 2025 is going to change that. And I think everyone needs to be looking at which organizations they want to get involved in campaign wise locally and whatnot. And that's going to be my final thought as well. I've always since my organizing days back in the early 2000s against, you know, globalization, you know, against corporate power, against the Iraq war, against the Afghanistan war, against the Patriot Act and the roundup of Muslim Americans at that time and the surveillance of them, all of the ways that I have been involved. And then I pivoted to, you know, alternative left media as a way to highlight some of these incredible frontline struggles from the Middle East to Latin America. You can look at my background from left turn magazine to win magazine with the War Resisters League, which where I used to work in New York, on and on and on to my independent journalism, reporting from Latin America, then to my work with AJ+. Like, I don't really know what to tell him, you know what I'm saying? And so I'm not trying to toot my own horn. The people who do this far more amazingly and importantly than I do, I try to platform. So why doesn't he, you know, that's just, it's just like, I don't think you should, you should, you know, we all have our breaking points. But if, if, if I had a breaking point with Jank, that might have been it. Um, and, and then there was just like, there was a broader conversation about, um, populism and anti-establishment because Jank says, and I'm trying to get this right, he is a centrist when it comes to, uh, left, right, like he's not extreme left, but he hit, he is an extreme populist. That's what he says. And I'm just trying to like, do the like math in my head, do the like lady, you know, like thinking about the math equation because it didn't, it wasn't clear to me. It's still not clear to me. Um, what the hell that is ideologically or politically? So that's why I asked him a lot about what right wing populism is, and specifically what the establishment is to his and it means to him. And I asked him about recess appointments for Mitch, that Mitch McConnell is against because he was saying the establishment is Mitch McConnell. And so I just want to watch that a little bit. Um, I may, I may crash out on this, but I want to watch that. So that's him basically saying that Steve Bannon, Tucker Carlson and others have picked up the mantle of populism and, um, anti-corporate, anti-corporate anti-war. And he's sort of celebrating that, even though he says he doesn't, you know, doesn't obviously agree with them on cultural issues, which I'm assuming means like not down with the ethno state or, uh, you know, some of the anti-Semitism or the anti-black racism and whatnot. But I want to just pick that up a little bit about Bannon and Tucker Carlson being populist and like, you know, saying all the right things. And again, I'm reminded of Max Elbaum, who is my, one of my mentors, um, who I've always, you know, I've had on the show and I've said, you know, like, what do you say to like Marjorie Greene, you know, being against like endless war like tuck, uh, Tosi Gabbard using this endless war, you know, we need to end endless wars, even though again, these are Islamophobes. These are, um, you know, Hindu nationalists, whatever, they are racist, you know, whatnot, but they have this one thing, this language. And Max was telling me and I, you know, it's like, look, remember that anti-war isolationism has always run through nativist thinking in this country and around the world when it comes to actual right-wing populism, right? That, that directing money inward, pointing the guns at the black people or the women or the organizers and the Palestine protesters rather than sending money to fight, you know, Ukraine's war rather than sending money. Of course, they do not reserve this for Israel at all. Um, the biggest recipient of US foreign aid, but like, so don't, don't forget that Marjorie Greene and others, they want to bring all that militarism home and they want to patrol the inner cities where they want to port patrol the border. They want to use the militarism that's abroad and they want to go to war with cartels, which is going to really work out great when they do. So let's remember that it's not being pro-peace. It's not being pro-human rights. It is still about using that militarism, but they want their, their very self center, their, their nationalistic about it. That's nationalism. It's right-wing nationalism and it's terrifying. The other thing I want to say about being anti-corporate and anti-war, these are the two issues that over the, my whole adult life, the last 24 years, those are issues that in broad cultural sort of like broadly accepted, you know, you know, just kind of like where everyone's at politically, even low information voters and whatnot. Everyone is sick of foreign wars and the US trying to do regime change for whatever reason, right? But especially the like, we're going to bring democracy, like they're sick of the Bush stuff and they're sick of foreign wars, certainly, of course, of having their communities and people they know being sent abroad to only come back with PTSD and whatnot, and they understand corporate rule and corporate power and they're sick of things costing more. They're sick of not being able to have like a, you know, a good paying job of Walmart relying on food stamps and welfare in order to support its own employees instead of them doing those are the things. Now, what did we talk about what when I said talked about movements? These are two issues that throughout the early late 90s and the early 2000s, social movements are responsible for changing what the overton window of what is acceptable to criticize on these issues. Now, reality also helped. The Iraq war going horribly helped. Corporate power, not actually delivering for anybody also helped, not giving people higher wages, not leading to people being able to buy homes and whatnot. So reality helped, but when it comes to our role on the left, social movements were absolutely pivotal in that. And so while Jenke is celebrating that the likes of Tucker Carlson or even Charlie Kirk or, you know, some of these unsavory white nationalists are pro, are anti war and anti corporate power, even though they support Donald Trump and Elon Musk and somehow, you know, Jenke is able to say, okay, but some of them can be peeled off and eventually I don't, again, I don't know what the strategy is. It's important to know that it was only because of social movements that we have been able to get to that grand consensus that stretches across the aisle. And no thanks to centrist Democrats, and I've said this on my show a million times about how much it pisses me off that centrist Democrats allowed the anti war lane to be left open for right wingers, for right wing fascists, for isolationist nativists to take up that lane, to take up that mantle, because the corporate Democrats are too afraid of going against the military industrial complex, right? And of course, they, you know, the right is not, they're disingenuous about that, right? They're not serious about it, but in rhetoric, they have when the anti war movement is the reason we had Barack Obama. Why? Well, he was the one who was saying he was going to end the Iraq war. Remember that? That was a huge factor. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton voted for the war. Didn't say she was going to get out of the out of Iraq. That was the big wedge issue at the time. And the reason the overton window shifted was because of mass movements. It is the only thing that works is the only thing that will work is mass movements and mass pressure and campaigning. So why now would it be any different when it comes to the issues that jank likes to talk about a lot, crime, trans rights? Why would we suddenly Black Lives Matter defund? Why would we suddenly say, let's shift to the right? Let's move to their middle. And let's, let's just be, let's just be completely 100% about this country in the last, you know, in the last 20 years. This country has shifted to the right enormously so that if you're, if it, if it is a, if it's a fucking a tablecloth, if there is a tablecloth and our country is the table, the political spectrum is such that the tablecloth is on the floor, and all the dishes have been broken. They're on the ground. The food is there on the ground. That's how far to the right, this entire country has shifted. And because of organizations like the Federalist Society, Heritage Foundation, because of people like Leonard Leo, who have been grooming Supreme Court justices and other right wing plants, because of people like Harlan Crow, because of people like, you know, because of these billionaire, because of the Koch brothers, because of Alec, because of all of the ways that they have laid the groundwork for a right wing takeover of this country to the point where they've, they've obliterated Roe v Wade. They've taken away a basic civil right for more than half the country. That's how much they've won. So when we talk about meeting them on certain issues or being able to, we really need to understand just how far to the right this country has gone. Now, what does that mean? Does that mean you capitulate? Does that mean you go meet them where they're at, which is on the ground with all the food that's fallen on the floor, because this fucking tablecloth won't stay on in my horribly belabored analogy? Like, that's what I'm trying to say. So, but it was, it's very interesting. And I tried to get him to sort of understand that when he's anti-establishment, there's some good things about the establishment. One of those is, is that a president has to get their appointments through the Senate, right? And that is a minimal check, a minimal balance, you know, co branches of government and whatnot, trying to get power out of the executive. So my question was Mitch McConnell is saying, hey, Trump can't use recess appointments, which are when the Senate basically is like, we're gonna, we're gonna go take lunch and like, you can just put in whomever you want, which Trump is demanding that there be recess appointments and that they don't even, you know, even though the Republicans have the Senate that they don't even go through that formality in order to affirm, confirm some of his appointees. So my question was, Mitch McConnell is against that. Mitch McConnell is like, no, we, boys don't gotta, we don't gotta go from the Senate. Like, he still wants to do that one thing because he knows it's basically gonna be just like a, you know, it's, it's all just a dog and pony show. It's basically gonna be a rubber stamped operation, but he wants to go through with it. So that's establishment, that's a norm. Are we for that or are we against that? And Jank didn't have a very clear answer to increase corporate taxes. That doesn't mean Steve Bannon is an angel, but what it does mean, or anywhere near it, but what it does mean is that ideal populism and anti-establishment, et cetera, is spreading throughout the right wing. That is an amazing opportunity for us to actually coalesce on economic populism that they now believe in, even if their leader does it, right? So that's important. And it's super important point. So he's saying he's using, he says they're not an angel, Bannon and Carlson, but we can use that to come together and find common ground, even if their leader is not a populist. It's like, there's just a lot happening there. Two is it in some ways that individual corruption is worse, and in some ways it's better. So how is it worse? So Miriam Adelson gives 130-- So here we're talking about like, is it better to be paid by like $750 million by just a couple of people than be paid at $750 million by like 15, 20 people? So I'm getting, I got ahead of myself a little bit, but let's watch this. 7 million to Trump and Sheldon Adelson had given him 200 million in previous campaigns. So he delivers foreign policy to the Adelson family, right? Moved our embassy in his first term, now he's thinking about allowing the annexation of Northern Gaza and the West Bank. And you saw me fight tooth and nail against Trump, because that's what I was really, really worried about, that he's going to go and be extreme and radical to serve his top donors. On Elon, he handed all domestic policy to him. So that's how it's worse. How is it, how in the world, at the same time, a little bit better? Well, the way that it's better is that it's not a machine, it's chaotic. So it's one guy here and another person there, but the other person disagrees with Miriam, and then Trump doesn't quite know what to do, and he listens to the last person in the room, but he also kind of listens to his base. We've got chaos there, and chaos is way better than a machine. Okay, this is where I truly disagree with him. I wasn't able to articulate just how much I disagree with this, but chaos is way better than a machine. I just really beg to differ. Like, I'm like, if you're going to do fascism, I'm just like, here's a more concrete example. Child separation was never the point of Donald Trump's asylum, like his asylum policies at the border, meaning when Stephen Miller, you know, finally enacted his little plan that he'd been, you know, scrolling in his blanket fort, there it wasn't like, and then we're going to take the children and we're going to separate them from their families and we're going to ship them somewhere else. And then they're probably never going to see their parents again. They won't be able to reconnect with them. It's going to be really difficult. That wasn't a feature of it, right? It was like it was the bug, and the bug can become a feature. And that chaos, I don't think, especially without a coherent left, or which we don't have, and I think Jank and I might disagree with the idea that we even have a coherent left, or like a real third party option, or, you know, we have fits and starts of amazing social movements. We have communities like this, etc. But like, we've got great grassroots organizations, but like, you know, without a demand, without a concrete, like, how are we supposed to wield this chaos? We're going to be on the receiving end of this chaos. I don't think it's a good thing that, okay, we can exploit the chaos. I mean, this is the same thing that people thought about Trump in 2016. Well, he's more of an unknown, maybe he can be, I don't think so, man. I'm not like, I'm not trying to like, you know, Hitler worship, obviously, I'm not trying to be, you know, fascist worship, but like, I would like it if Trump could be a little bit more coherent. Like, I don't think that we benefit, I mean, maybe from COVID going awry, we benefited because, you know, there was an opportunity there for Biden to get elected and then throw us into the hands of Trump again. Like, I just, I truly think that banking on chaos as an exploitable strategy without an actual coherent left to operationalize that strategy. I just don't, I don't, that doesn't make me feel good. That doesn't make me feel safe and sure as shit doesn't make me want to go speak at a conference of Turning Point USA and be like, you know what, you guys are chaotic. I love it. Hey, remember me in the Gulag, give me a nice sell. You know what I'm saying? I mean, she is ruthless and just steam rolls you. I think that's worse than the McConnell Biden era. Nothing. Okay. Okay. I, I do want to talk about the McConnel Biden era and establishment a little bit more, but just on that, I feel like my very first question to you is, what are you doing? I feel like that's the most cogent answer I've gotten from you that I could sort of get on board with, which is exploit the chaos to turn MAGA against Trump. But even if you wanted to do that, I'm not sure you're achieving it through the kinds of interviews that you're doing and the kind, the way that you're playing to the right, especially when you go on those stages and hit the left more than you do the right. But I just want to leave that there. I accept the like, hey, let's, you know, plant the booby traps so that we can make them fall into them later, that kind of thing. That makes the most sense to me, even if I sort of strategically disagree with it. I want to talk about the establishment, though, and Mitch McConnell. So for example, Mitch McConnell, who I am no fan on, obviously, believes that there should not be recess appointments for the Trump administration. Would you say that that is establishment, ergo, you are anti that and anti establishment? Mitch McConnell is against recess appointments. Yes. So that one's a super tough one because sometimes the establishment will block something like if Bernie was president and he wanted to put in Stephanie Kelton as treasury secretary, I actually would disagree with that. But that's, I put that as an example, the establishment would say no way and it would block it with everything that they have. There is a scenario where I would say Bernie do a recess appointment, right? And so on the other hand, if Bernie came in and said, I don't care about advice and consent of the Senate, I'm just going to do everyone as a recess appointment, I would say, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, don't do that. Don't do that. That's not a good idea. Why? Because it's anti-democratic. Is that? Yeah, the core of sure. So, Frannie, the core of the question is, when we talk about the system, what do we mean by the system? Because there's two different systems that people refer to and then they conflate them. The system we want to protect is democracy, the constitution, civil rights, etc. That's a system that we love and believe in. The system we do not want to protect and we want to fight against is donor money, establishment, protecting the status quo, protecting corporate rule. So, separate those two things out because the permanent system of the constitution and democracy is great. The current system of corruption and establishment rule is horrible. Yeah. Do you understand that the right actually just conflates those two things? I think the right one can conflate those two things too. Well, okay. So, you would be in favor of Donald Trump doing recess appointments or you wouldn't in this case. So, if he's doing blanket recess appointments, I'm against it. I always think sure on the other foot, that's why I brought up. I just, this is the no answer here. I'm like, are you four recess? Because if you are against it, then you're with Mitch McConnell, which is the establishment, which you hate, which you loathe. And then, you know, again, I talk about we talking about Project 2025, which we do in a little bit, but like, it's like, yes, Mitch McConnell is awful. But also, he thought the coup was wrong. And I'm not here. I'm not out here saying like, we need a strong Republican party. But I do think there are shades. I actually, I don't think that one shade doesn't use the other as a Trojan horse to get the stuff they've always wanted done, meaning Mitch McConnell using Donald Trump or Liz Cheney or Adam Kissinger or any of these people, nor is it that Bush and the entire Bush years weren't absolutely a set up for a Trump-like figure to come along. And the astroturfing of the Tea Party movement by the Koch brothers and all of these fucks that now pretend that Donald Trump is some sort of aberration. Not man, Donald Trump is a little mushroom that grew on your moldy ass gym shorts that you have been shitting in. Okay, this is again the analogy. But you know what I'm saying? Like Donald Trump is your own creation. He is your Frankenstein monster. Okay. You're Frankenstein. But I also think it's important to not just say, well, everything establishment is bad. Because if everything establishment is bad, then you literally can't do policy because that's how policy gets done. What size pipe should I get? Okay, so then he does this analogy? No, those MAGA guys, they will tell you exactly what they think. They're not holding anything back. They have no need to lie to you. Yeah, they've been telling us for many, many years. Yeah, so they're not, they're also not lying when they say they're anti-war anti-corruption. They might have been misdirected, but they're not lying. So what I'm trying to get them to see is firing the federal workers is not the answer. Yeah, cutting the Pentagon is part of the answer. Yeah. And so when they say yes to cutting the Pentagon, they're not lying. The MAGA voters actually want to cut the Pentagon. What do you think? It's a completely different question. And so one more thing that's super important though. It's not a booby trap, Franny. It's, I understand what you're saying, and that's one way to frame it. But in my mind, when you have people who actually agree, you're not tricking them. You're just getting them to see, guys, you wanted to cut the Pentagon. But look, your leaders didn't cut the Pentagon. So do you see how they led you astray? Right? I'm actually getting them to, I'm just showing them that their leaders are not doing the things that they promised. On the other hand, sometimes Trump responds to his base. So if that base gets angry enough and says, "Look at that machine." Maybe Trump does cut the Pentagon where Biden never would, McConnell never would. And the Biden McConnell era, the Pentagon's only going to get increased forever and ever and ever. Corruption is always going to increase forever and ever and ever. The one thing that Biden wouldn't do, butcher Biden, though he may be, is cut social security or Medicare. And those are the things that are absolutely on the chopping block. So it's very fun to imagine that ideally, maybe one day, well, they wouldn't necessarily cut the Pentagon, but the people who thought they were going to cut the Pentagon will be mad at them. Okay. But then they'll just rely back on the race war to be like, "Well, okay. Well, you know what? Elon Musk did change his Twitter name to Keckistan or whatever the hell. So I'm in here for the racist lols, even though he believes in immigration in his industry alone. Do you understand what I'm saying? I think it's fine and good to point out their hypocrisy and get them to turn on the people who are in power. But I think it's far more worthwhile to work on our side and to get liberals, as I later explained to him, to come over to the radical, yes, I say radical, the revolutionary, the transformative side of the left that does want to change that establishment, right? And I just want to shout out, thank you so much to all the people who are sending in super stickers and super chats and all this. And I really appreciate it. And there was one that I, that I threw up here that I wanted to, "Oh, yo, yo, I know I've lost. Now I have lost." Moon Dragon, thank you very super chat, says, "I say fuck reaching out to the right, grab the middle with the same arguments. It's easier. I just want to drill down on that." And because as much as we hate Democrats and their massive failures, the voters are ultimately low information, good people. Do you know what I'm saying? Like not evil people, just because they might like Nancy Pelosi. That doesn't, they're not steeped in everything. I remember this is like such a fun moment that will forever stick with me in the 2016 primary, the Democratic primary. I was overhearing the conversation. I think, I can't remember where I was. I have something for AJ+. And this guy was telling this other guy about like Bernie voters. And he was like, "Bernie voters are just more political." And it was such a funny way to distinguish Hillary voters and Bernie voters by saying that Bernie voters are more political. And what he meant was they follow politics more. They're more steeped in what's going on. They're more interested in policy and all this. And so it, it was both a compliment and a funny distinct distinction because you might take that as a compliment. But what we do need if we're going to build the progressive left is a movement that low information voters, and I will say that Bernie in 2020, I think did bring on more people, but folks who are strapped for time and resources and don't watch leftist programming and whatever the hell else and don't even listen to podcasts and all that. Like those folks can get on board with a message. So I agree about the odious, the hated liberals in no way. Although I crap all over liberals and play it safe, beltway bros and all this, I 100% think it is far more worth it for us to try to radicalize that voting block than it is for us to reach across the aisle to the Charlottesville rioters and the Jan six insurrectionists who have proven time and time again who they are, what they like. It's the cult of Donald Trump and racial grievance that they think is anti-white racism. That's what it, that's what they're there for. That's their red meat. And yes, I do think that there's a broader conversation to be had around crime. And I think that's an interesting one because the liberals are very susceptible to the crime narrative as well. So that is, I think a bigger conversation that I'm curious to have as well. But like, that's sort of the broader thing. And I made that point to him later when I said, look, I would, why don't you in this lame duck period where we're all waiting on bated breath for the rise of Donald Trump again with a new project, 2025 mandate and all of these literal ghouls climbing out from former administrations and current administrations ready to implement their wildest fantasies, enact them upon Americans and carry out a hungry, you know, a Victor Orbanesque power grab combined with a Javier Malay of Argentina's, you know, fuckery of the economy, like they are so excited for that. Like, why not use this moment to reach out to liberals who maybe were excited about Kamala Harris or put too many of their eggs into the Biden basket? Those folks are having their minds changed right now. Those folks, maybe they thought that, you know, that when it came to the genocide that maybe the Palestine protesters were a little bit nuts, but now a year and change later, they're like, holy shit, there are new infants, you know, dying of hypothermia within days. Like, this has gone on for too long. What is happening? Like, there are people who are questioning this all the time who do have the fundamental values of human rights and basic human dignity and democracy, whereas the other sides, like, you know what, human rights and basic decency and democracy, that's all woke. That's woke stuff. That's DEI. That's all woke DEI to make me feel bad about my whiteness and my yacht. Do you understand what I'm saying? So like, that's why I take issue with trying to reach the right in such, I think, a kid glove way at this moment. And so I was really trying to get at this. If all you are is anti-establishment without real politics, like, ideologically held beliefs that undergird your anti-establishmentarianism, if that's a thing, then I don't know what you are. Then that's someone who isn't tethered to anything. They're not tethered to social movements. They're not tethered to frontline communities. They're not accountable to anyone. And that, I think, is very worrisome, right? And you see that with how easy it is that Jen goes out there. I mean, I have my own thoughts on why he's doing it. I think, you know, if you think your brain was broken by the 2024 election, I think we're looking at a case where someone's brain was broken even harder. But so that's what I tried to get out in that segment. And I don't have the energy to go through the... You guys should go back and watch the debate where I talk about where we look at his... Okay, let's just do it. So here he is. We're looking at the clip where he asks the turning points, USA audience, whether they believe in, you know, civil rights for trans people. And I think he did this because it got good. He said it got a good reception. And so he's been setting the right-wing audiences up for this as kind of, you know, to sort of take their temperature. And I think, you know, maybe to push them on that. So that's not a bad thing. It's not a bad thing to do. I just think that the reaction was no bueno. Okay, so here he is before... He's arguing that Bernie Sanders is basically doing what he's doing. I wouldn't disagree with that. I think Bernie Sanders is writing op-eds on Fox News. Bernie Sanders says that he wants to work with Elon. Bernie Sanders says he wants to work with RFK Jr. on things, you know, things in the food industry and big agriculture. Two differences between Jank and Bernie. Number one, Bernie Sanders is a senator. Bernie Sanders ran for president twice and got within striking distance. Bernie Sanders is in a position to actually affect change. Number two, Bernie Sanders makes the rounds if and when he makes the rounds on any right-wing show. He certainly doesn't give a shit about someone like Charlie Fucking Kirk. But when he does do things like write op-eds on Fox News or, you know, tweet at Elon Musk or talk about how we need to work with RFK Jr. on things we might agree on. While I might disagree with that strategy, I just a little bit do and I get prickly about it. I'm not going to lie. What he doesn't do is turn around and say, because the left has been too sensitive, because the left wants to divide us because the left, if you disagree with them, they alienate you. He does not use the platforms, right-wing platforms as an opportunity to hit the progressive left. That's a huge difference. And if you guys have been watching Jank lately, he does. He uses that as a great opportunity. In fact, it's an exchange. I'm going to give you the radical left on a platter so we can all agree to hate on their extremist ideology, which we think is insane. So that you will meet me here on populist ideas. That's not something that Sanders does. Tales are something because this was not good. This was not a good look during that conference. I asked you guys something. I want to ask you guys something. Do you believe that trans Americans should have the same constitutional rights as all Americans to employment, health care, and housing, constitutional rights? Okay. I actually, I actually think I heard a no. I literally, I'm like listening now on head, but like, I think I heard a no in there. It was a, a couple of applause. There was again, like, it sounds like a third of the audience. If that is on board. So I listened to crowds regularly. I know when they are booing, groaning, or in this case, there is a whistle of disapproval, and I know when they are cheering. Now let's play it again. They're not on board with trans people having the same constitutional rights. I asked you guys something. I want to ask you guys something. Do you believe that trans Americans should have the same constitutional rights as all Americans to employment, health care, and housing, constitutional rights? Do you want me to translate? You got you got like maybe a maybe like a sixth of the audience. There's a couple of people clapping very, very no. Okay. And then let's break it down. This is the best way. This is the best part. You got to keep watching because it's the best that like, not only you get hung out to dry on this, like, can we all agree, you know, stick that you're on and they don't they don't they don't meet you and then Charlie meets you with this constitutional right to housing. Well, there is no constitutional right to housing. So then he goes like, wait a minute, not only don't I not agree with you on the trans people because he never answered it. He's like, actually, fuck your right to housing anyway. And I know that's not even what the Constitution says. It's just equal protection around housing, right? It doesn't say you have a right to housing. I wish it did. But like, it's just amazing to me. Like, do you see and you look at him and there's a moment you're just kind of like, there's just this moment and it's just like, what are we doing, Jake? Like what? What's going on here? See, this is here's why I'm right. I'm sorry. Here's why I'm right about this analysis that they were groaning because if they weren't groaning, Charlie Kirk would feel, trust me, I go on stage a lot. I know what it is to feel awkward. I know what it is to feel social pressure. Charlie Kirk would say himself. Well, I mean, you know, under the Constitution, that makes sense. I mean, actually, you know, undeniably, you know, the right civil rights are important for all Americans. I mean, just because they are trans, I mean, they're not American, like, like, like he would have done a save face if his audience had more agreed with jank than positions that he's held long anti trans positions that he's held. Do you understand what I'm saying? And instead, because of the groans and the lack of support, Charlie Kirk uses an opportunity to say, well, actually, there's not a constitutional right to housing. And then you hear applause. So, I'm sorry, like, I'm not going to be gaslit on this. Like, they were not on board with you. And so he disagrees. And, of course, then what comes next is I think the biggest problem. It's a great example. This is you're being so unbelievably unfair about that interaction. The reason I did that, Franny, and I knew I was taking a big risk is because I wanted to try to get some of them just because I've done it on other right-wing shows and it worked really well. It didn't work really well this time. That's why it was a risk. But I, at least he admitted that. So at least he admitted it didn't work really well. Challenge them on how trans people are, like, every American, and they should have constitutional rights. Well, let's watch a little bit. Let's watch whether you did it. Let's watch whether you did it. Did you do it or not? You finished, Franny. You do it or not? It's so important. And you're totally smearing me on a thing that is crazy. I'm laying on the clip. I'm not smearing you. I'm literally playing the clip. Jink, I'm playing the clip. Will you let me talk? I said, I had to courage to challenge them on constitutional rights for trans people. You asked me to have to courage to challenge them. I did. And now you're attacking me for it? No, I'm not attacking. I'm not attacking you for it. I'm saying you have characterized it. I'm pointing out that they're not gettable, that they don't agree with you. That this is not, you are barking up the wrong tree. Well, look at this. They didn't agree with you. No, I'm saying you get them to agree to constitutional rights. That's exactly what we should do. We should say trans people are just like every American citizen. Trans people please sound off in the comments. Do you want this? Do you want to do this? Is this is this the number one thing to ask the audience at turning points USA whether they believe in trans rights? Do you want that? And you should have constitutional rights. I go and have to courage to challenge that audience to that. And then you want to take fun of it. Like I'm not, I'm saying, I agree with you. What do you want? Do you want me to challenge them or do you not want me to challenge them? Make up your mind. It was a big swing. You agreed that it was a little bit of a miss? And I think, by the way, you're not exactly right about that either. So I was in the room. Two thirds of them cheered. One third of them clearly did not and wrong. Well, the people, the people who are hearing were not miked properly. I understand. I look, it was, it was a swing. It's good. You asked, but I didn't think that you really had like a save for that. Because I think you were like, it's, you actually gave them credit for the few people that agreed. And meanwhile, you, you have so much disdain for our side. If I say, hey, I believe trans people should play in sports, you have so much disdain. You get so mad. But here you are. And they, and, and here is what you say, institutional right to housing. Okay. So I hear you. What I got out of that, guys, I'm just kind of be the interpreter. Yeah. No, no, there was a lot of applause. I'm trying to be, right. I'm trying to be the interpreter is what Charlie Kirk said. I'll take it. It's a start. It's a start. So guys, when we, we can even disagree about what's constitutional, second amendment, housing, etc. But just let's treat everyone as Americans. And I say that to the right. And I say it to the researcher. Okay. So, you know, what I, I never heard that message. Never. Thank you for, thank you. No, no, I guess. Thank you. But, but you have so much grace for people who really were groaning and not on board with what you said. Why did I say I've raised for that? I mean, no, I used, you said it right there. You said, hey, I'll take it. And it was like, this is what we got to do. The room said, yay, trans-constitutional rights. When's the last time two thirds of Antfest? Why do you not, why do you not extend the same grace to so-called radical left? I'm really glad we're back to this, Franny, because this is important. And we mentioned in the beginning, and I wanted to come back to it. So having grace for the left, I run the network, and I, everybody gets to have their own opinion. Everybody gets to fight me. Everybody gets to state their own opinion without any editorial. Okay, so I don't want to get too much into TYT interest stuff. But like, I, this is what really, really bothered me about this interaction and Jank's explanation for what he's doing. And then continual sort of bashing of the left is that he, he says he's open to debate. He says here, I'm open to debate with anybody, and they can come on, and it's great, and it's fine, right? Even though, and you guys have seen him debate, he says, no, no, no, you're wrong, and he does that a lot. But okay, if that's his version of debate, he says that he's open to debate, and that he doesn't police what people say. But, and so let's, let's use this as an example. Then, he takes said debate when it happens, and he does two things. One is he, like, it's one thing to have a debate about, let's say trans people in sports. Okay, it's one thing to have a debate. I've debated with him. I got an opportunity to do so, you know, six months ago, we did. Then he takes that, and he uses it as a wedge issue that there are these extreme leftists who, if you disagree with them, they chant you down. That, I guess, was me on transport, right? So he takes this, and then he walks it over to the right, and he gives it to them, like red meat, and he was on stage, which Harley Kirk saying, you know that on the left, if you disagree with them for five, five percent, they tear you down. You guys, you agree, you agree, five percent? They welcome you in. You're so much more welcoming. So it's, it's not only, it's a, it's, do you understand what I'm saying? It's not only bad enough that there's such limited debate that Jenke is willing to approve of and have on the main show, number one, that he's willing to engage in on it, but that when he does, he takes the disagreement, or when any leftist channel that he's mad at disagrees with him, he takes that disagreement, and it's him, though he is the one who weaponizes that disagreement and uses it as an peace offering, a peace offering to the fucking right wing to say, look at how crazy they are. I'm not the crazy, let me in. Do you see what I'm saying? Like, that to me is the most disingenuous I like to debate, and I think it's all hunky dory. Like, that is so evil. That is so fucked up because if I ever, I'm just trying to think of like an analogy where I would do that, say like, hey, you know what, on my show, we debate, and like, I'm going to let you in here, and it's all good, and I really want to hear you out. Person who says, I mean, this might be me, but like, let's say I have a prison abolitionist on. I'm really excited to have this prison abolitionist on. They're going to explain to me, you know, what abolitionism is, and you know, why they believe prisons should not exist. It's a pretty radical position, but here's why they came to that conclusion. Let's have them on my show. I'm going to hear them out. We have a conversation. It's all hunky dory. I tell my audience, you know what, this is a space for real discussion. It's amazing. Thank you so much for being on. Then I turn around, and I go on Piers Morgan, and I say, look, Piers, I'm with you. There's some really insane people. I had one on my show the other day. They're like, you know, they have these incredible, they want to abolish all prisons. It's crazy. It's ridiculous, and they're alienating everyone by saying they want to abolish all prisons, but I'm not like that. I'm not like that at all. In fact, I agree with you. I am against endless war, and I believe in economic populism, even though you definitely don't agree with that, and you've never said that you agree with that, and you really have no idea what I'm talking about, but I guess we're going to have beers together. But please, you know what I'm saying? Because I'm not like them. I'm not like the people that I, you know, lay a trap for effectively. Like that is what is happening. Do we understand that that's what's happening? Do we understand that that's what's happening? Very upsetting. It's fine to say you debate, but then what you do with that, and where you go with that, and how you weaponize that debate, it's everything stems from that. Anyway, I want to go back. There was a moment in the populism discussion that happens a little bit later that really needs to be unpacked, that like kind of freaked me out, and it had to do with the establishment and liberals discussion and so-called cultural issues. Let me see if I can find it right here, in all the oil, you know, F those, you know, whatever, like, enter-explative, right, which I think gets to another point. But he was also, remember, in terms of the corruption stuff, they wanted to get rid of, oh, here I'm talking about, there's no difference between new MAGA and old MAGA. You guys have seen that Chinese Exclusion Act specifically. Just in that heated moment there, you know, this is, we're talking about the vulnerable community's discussion and where he told me I was hiding behind them. I was saying that the Chinese know are maybe third or fourth in line these days, Muslims and- Not from what they're talking, but I mean, I mean, I'm just looking at what they're saying, which is like, this would be an easiest group to like, you know, sweep up. Like, I'm just saying, not like Chinese immigrants who don't have for decades. No, I understand. That's why I said that. I didn't just pick it because I'm Chinese. I literally just looked at what they're talking about. But anyway- No, I don't look. My kids are Chinese. So you do agree. Go high. I'm not. I'm not. Sure. I'm worried about that. You agree though, you agree that there is a difference between left-wing populism and right-wing populism. Yeah, so now let's get to the core of it. So there's- left-wing and right-wing populism on social issues disagree more than we disagree with the establishment. The establishment is generally like, we don't really care if you're Chinese, Muslim, whatever. The only color we care about is green. As long as we let you let us rob you from here to eternity, I'm good with it. You know, we'll allow, you know, peruvius to rob you, Jews, Muslims, Christians, everybody can rob you, right? And so- And the establishment is, again, just Biden, Kamala Harris- Biden, Kamala, everyone who takes over the donations, the service. So what it sounds like, Jenke is saying there is that, again, it sounds like he's making a right-wing DEI case, which is- And this stems into what I want to talk about, which is Josh Hawley. It sounds like he's saying that corporate Democrats basically are like, believe in a corrupt diversity, that they'll let everyone rob you any race, religion, or creed. And he's basically using diversity as a negative because Democrats believe in civil rights. I rail against corporate identity politics all of the time. But if you can't separate real racial justice, radical intersectionalism, feminism, all of that, like if you cannot separate that from like whatever corporate Democrat wants to bend a knee and can take clothes or whatever Disney plus channel wants to run a black stories or whatever they want to do, like, I don't know how to talk to you. You're just buying into a right-wing framing of diversity and of inclusion. You're doing the DE, anti-DEI stuff. So anyway, so then he says sort of what he means. Corporate donors, okay? But not all Trump because he doesn't take corporate, except for all the corporate money he's taking, but he's different. Okay, keep going. I'm just trying to understand who the establishment is and isn't. For the back money, I mean, I call it a big populist before you believe me. Okay, so the establishment is better on social and cultural issues than the populist right is. So that's why this is not, you can't make blanket things like, in my opinion, never talk to them, they're all racist, et cetera. Okay, so what he just said, the corporate establishment is better on cultural issues than the populist right. That is effectively why many of us would rather break bread with liberals than racist, especially if you happen to be black or gay or an immigrant. Do you know what I'm saying? Doesn't he understand? But again, we have to stay out of the sand trap of the left of conflating hollow identity politics with real transformative, intersectional, inclusive identity politics that are just as political, that are radical, that, you know, because these, you know, these centrist fucks out here like Cory Booker, we want to fund the police, fund the police. What did they do for the mass movement in 2020? Nothing. Remember nothing. Yes, there have been fits and starts of criminal justice reform and moving money out of the police to varying degrees of success, although I will argue that it is a broader project that cannot be fixed in simply one election cycle. And it's a deeper issue, a deeper discussion that we should absolutely have. But on a federal level, on a national level, Congress did fuck all. They just did. Even though Biden has the BLM movement to thank for his win. We looked at the stats. We looked at the numbers. You guys remember his campaign was shit. And then George Floyd was murdered. So it is really interesting that he agreed. He says, the establishment is better on social and cultural issues. Okay. Well, then the establishment can't be all bad. They can't be just evil. Do you understand? And like you conflating that is just a right wing framework. So here's the last moment. And then we'll walk off into this amazing New Year's Eve. I mean, what a place to be. Bituation room, everybody. Become a member. Join the friend Tifa by becoming a patron patron patron.com/bituationroom. You know what it is. Get yourself some merch. Why not? You get 20% off if you become a patron. And I'm going to shout out all the patrons that $10 or more in the fart song. Very excited for that. There's a lot to a little bit more. Last thing I just want to say on this issue of like cultural issues, i.e. identity, this really was wild to me. Right thing. That's the exact opposite of drifting. That's saying I'm standing on principle. I'm standing on what I think is the real viewers of TYT and representing them. And Frannie, what you're not seeing is there's so many people on the left who are afraid to state their real opinions because they're going to get shulacked online. All the far left is going to come out and call them a right wing or in a fascist, etc. They're so scared to actually state their own opinions because you the far left has so much more power than they realize in terms of the social media ecosystem. Sure. I agree. And I do think that it would benefit all of us to be a little bit less online because I do think there is a real left. They are in labor unions. They work in homes. They, you know, they are serving people Starbucks, right? Like there are, there are real leftists. They are, let's be real. They are on the streets demonstrating for Palestinian human rights. They've been on the streets, although I know this gets into prickly territory, but they've been on the streets saying things like defund the police, saying things like Black Lives Matter. And I know you might disagree with them, but there are real leftists who don't just live online. And so I hear you about, I absolutely concede. There are people who work with movement organizations, grassroots groups, nonprofits, campaigns, you know, health, health organizing. There are people who work on, you know, the folks right now, what is it? Social Security. What is the group? There's just amazing Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security activists that are stepping to Congress right now. There is such a bigger, bigger world. And I hope we all in 2025 get offline a little bit. This, this is, I am not in the habit of doing it, you know, any kind of like intra-left attack videos. I just think that we need some clarity as we move forward. And that's why I'm doing this. Our movements, I always, we always talk about this, how can our movements be more attractive be as Michael Albert, who wrote this book called Participatory Economics, used to say, how do we make the left sticky, like sticky where people want to be there and stay there? And for sure, it's by not over-policing one another. And it's by meeting people where they're at. And I think that is absolutely true. But for me, so I concede a lot to him. I'm conceding to him that the left is not often can be punitive. And we have circular firing squad habits and we super, we believe in defunding the police, but not the cop in our head. What? At least I do. And I, I do think we need to let each other off the hook. That's why I do stand up. That's why I do comedy. I'm a comic everybody come see me at the ice house in Pasadena. If you don't have tickets, what are you doing? Wednesday, January 22nd, 730 p.m. I know that was a weird break in, but you know, whatever. Me, it is not about, to me, it's not about what I see is conceding to a right-wing framing within the ceiling of Trumpism, because there's always a ceiling. And that ceiling is Donald Trump. But I mean, I'm not conceding and facts have to matter. Facts have to matter. Like you're painting me as a collaborator. When I haven't collaborated at all, what I've done is argue for our positions. And in fact, you showed a couple of times when I argued for our positions, right? And if you showed all the right-wing shows that I was on, you would see me fighting for left-wing positions on right-wing shows that no one's ever done. And, and do you know that on the past? Thank you guys. I've been on Piers Morgan. I do that a lot. So, oh yeah, if you count Piers Morgan, I totally agree with you. Um, so Patrick, David Show, I made the second, the last time I was on, I made a case for paid family leave. They pulled their audience. 75% of that right-wing audience said, yes, we should pass paid family leave. Who else has done that? And for that, I get called a collaborator and I implicate others in my collaboration. Can you not see how unfair that is? So what is the goal then? Do you hope that maybe some of those 75% or people who heard your argument around paid family leave are like, you know what, let me check out TYT. Like, let me see what they're about. Like, I liked what he said on this one thing. Is, is that also the, here's another point where I'm trying to see what the hell Jank is doing. Like, if you're trying to gain audience, because a lot of people are out here saying, oh, he's trying to make money, he's trying to gain audience, I don't even know if either of those things are true. So, the strategy is to coalesce populist on the thing. I'm saying it for the 200 times because it's not getting through. Well, it's not about audience then. It's not about, it's not about maybe getting some of their audience. Because I understand, I don't know what you're talking about in the white framework. You know, are you, are you a movement leader? Are you going to start a political party? Or do you, are you just the head of a, a, an online channel? But I mean, the latter is what we know to be true, right? Yeah. So look, when Jimmy left and other people left, people, oh, yeah, you know, first of going down, blah, blah, blah, blah. No, there was total nonsense. Never had any issues. Here, this is a giant fight and we are, we do have issues. Thank you, Johnny. And so, that is standing on principle. No, it's not like I didn't know that we were going to get into this huge issue, right? And then the other left wing host, we're going to take this as a great opportunity to try to whittle us down. And, and so we've gone through all that and we've, and we've done that. So why am I doing it? Number one, because I believe absolutely that it is the right strategy and the right policy. And, and to the ultimate goals that you're asking about. Franny, number one, we've got to win the, the primary 2028. So, so why am I saying things where I go, hey, I am center left and I do not agree with far left. Because I believe far left will be used and you could disagree. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing. Kyle Colensky disagreeing, no problem. You disagree, no problem. Jordan, everybody disagrees. It's only when they lie and they, and they do bad faith is when I've got the issue. Okay. So now, so you guys disagree, no problem guys. Okay. But, but my goal is number one, in order to win that primary, we've got to convince the normies that we're not going to release all the criminals. I know it sounds like hyperbole and I know that really bothers people, but that's how they're thinking that. So he's basically saying that he's afraid that the far left is going to be used to, you know, turn people off to a broader fight. But it's like, my man, you're the one who's using them. You're the one who's drawing attention to the, like the one or two people trolling you on Twitter, right? You're the one who's drawing attention to the fringe of the fringe issues that are important, but like, I'm not going to go campaign for trans Olympians. I think there's probably more important things, but I do believe trans people should be in the Olympics. Do you know what I'm saying? Like, like, it's, and it's okay to say that and we should be thinking about how to make a more attractive inclusive message. We should be, we should be talking about trans people and running into the face of this hate by dispelling it, by having more trans people invisible, more people talking on mainstream media who are trans, more people speaking about transitioning, more people, more parents, speaking about children who are trans, what it's like to be on puberty blockers and to, and for your child at age two to say, no, mommy, I'm a boy or no mommy, I'm a girl, and knowing we should have more people talking about trans issues, not fewer, not less, not cutting them out. Do you know what I'm saying? Like, like, it's just so silly to me. We need to demystify these things. We need to actually discuss them. And yes, they are part and parcel of a broader coalition that's not necessarily the front issue. But if the other side is making it an issue, we better fucking have a defense and the best defense is a good offense. So what is that offense? What does it, what does it look like? Oh my God. That's why Oakland recalled their mayor 6535 because now this TBD on the mayor, guys, we're going to talk more about that another show to think that the work progressive means release their criminals. No, no, it doesn't mean that it means Medicare for all it means paid family. Please tell me which leftist has said to release all the criminals. Just please tell me that. I think people want non violent drug offenders to have lesser sentences. But like, please tell me who wants to release all the criminals. Just do it. Just insane. It's insane to say that. I'm gonna leave. It means higher wages. So that's why I have to distinguish in order to win that primary between the center left and the far left. And also because it's true, this I am center left. And the great majority of those voters are center left. They do not agree with the far left on some of the extreme trans issues, crime issues, et cetera. You don't think that the general elections, just to finish the thought, yeah, we get to the general election. Can we win over some of those former Bernie people that went to the right wing? Can we win over the independence of moderates that are not magna but voted for Trump because they've since Trump was more anti-establishment than Kamala Harris was? Can we win those guys over so that our side wins? I believe we can. And I'll use myself as an example again. So when they tried the Muslim ban, I have every right to call them Islamophobe from here to the end of the earth. I have every right to be concerned about me and my family. This is the part that really, really scared me. Okay, but I don't believe it's the right strategy to call them Islamophobes and to push them away. I think the correct strategy is but they all like they call themselves Islamophobes. They're talking about Christian nationalism. They're talking about Islam being the enemy. I don't like you don't we don't have to call them. First of all, nobody's calling them that openly really. And in second of all, we will like they're saying it. To go in the room, get some agreement. Go in the room, go in the room, get some agreement. Okay, so this is what Jenk wants to do. Go in the room, get some agreement. Things that we agree on. And then fight over the things we don't remember. But treat each other as American citizens and human beings. Sure. And then at the end go, hey, by the way, I'm Muslim. Okay, so do you think someone like me should be banned from the country? And when you do it that way, nine out of 10 times they go, well, no, of course not, of course. Okay, so here's the plan. Go into a space, agree with some things, disagree with other things, then tell them you're a Muslim, which is I don't know how to say how pathetic this strategy is, but like, okay, what about if you're black? So first go in the space, try to agree with the white supremacist on some things. And then once you've agreed on some things and you've disagreed on other, then tell them you're black. You see how that works out? What if you're a hijaby Muslim, right? You wear hijab. It's clear you're a Muslim. You think you can go into these spaces? Like it's what he is saying is backload the religion and race and identity because the whites think that your identity is scary for them. It is already politicized, even though it's not and should not be and it's ridiculous, but is already too political to be a woman. So just bury the woman thing for a little bit, you know, bury that a bit and then talk about it. And then it's like, my man, like, I guess, I guess I feel like this is someone who's like, just never really worked in broad coalition, like an like an actual organizing space with somebody, but I don't know how he thinks this works. It's just, it's very wild to me, like, to honestly argue to do this. And it feels super cucky, like it feels super, like you've, you've bent the knee, how many more time, any more knees do you have to bend? By the way, I Muslim don't ban me. Thank you. But if I came in, I said, you're an Islamophobic, you're a racist and I beg it. They'd say, ban them this mother effort, right? And so, so I just think it's you guys have the wrong strategy and some wrong policies, but that's a normal part of a healthy debate. We could have had that debate without people making wild that. We could have had that. Again, we could have had that. You see the groundwork being laid for why I left the left you feel the groundwork here. We could have had that, but you screwed it up. We could have had that, but you messed it up. We could have had that. But instead, I'm going to use it and I'm going to go take it over here to some people who will listen. And the reason they're going to let me in the door is because I got intel on the people that we both hate. Whee. Breathe the collaborator, right wing fashions, etc. I really hope that you do and I hope let's leave it. I really do hope that you can get past the what you feel are slights to actually speak to some of the people that you're talking about, to be in more rooms with leftists who you may disagree with and more people who are ultimately on your side. I've had the same conversation with Van Jones back in 2016, man. It's like I'm deja vuing all over again where I'll tell you the Van Jones story. Another time I've told some people who a while for that story about Van Jones, but that was the that was the debate. We didn't, I didn't bring up the TYT stuff, but I will say this, Jane claims that he's going to the right because the entire TYT network is left. I think that's not true. And I think that his main co-host largely agrees with him on many of these issues. In fact, I'm surprised to hear them from him. I feel like maybe they made more sense coming out of Anna because I actually think Anna believes some of these things. I think the election broke Jenks brain. I think that the overwhelming loss is too much to take and is someone who likes to win or likes to be on a winning team and doesn't want to see his ass handed to him and doesn't want to admit that his side lost. I think this is an easier route just personally. It's like there's less pride you have to swallow. We can just rewrite history as to who they really are and who we really are. And that's a much easier personally pill to swallow than actually fighting. Here's what I'll say. Look, I think that going forward, it's very possible that TYT simply like everybody else sees what's happening under Trump 2.0 and under the project 2025 and many, many people tune in to watch the insanity, to learn about it, to hear at times some very good reporting about it. And they will get views and they will get clicks and good on them and good on for the people who are tuning in. But I will not forget this moment this lame duck period when we all could have been reaching out to one another in solidarity. Every shade of blue, girding our loins, prepping, thinking anew about my thought and I've said this to my audience is I feel like there's limitations to how much of course commentary can do. I'm here because you know, and every time I do this, there's people who are like, well, I love you. I love you. Keep me saying it. And I'm like, you know what, y'all keep me saying. So that's why I keep keep at it. But if I'm being honest, we all need to be organizing. We need to be in the streets. We need to be salting at workplaces. We need to find where we can affect change locally. We need to be doing this work and all this, this is all, this is very limited, right? Of course, we have to win the narrative battle. Of course, truth matters. And of course, we need to be covering the stories that are important. And I do again, want to dig into the false narrative of crime and what that does to our brains. But like, at the end of the day, I actually think jank is just a centrist. He is a moderate progressive. And that's okay. And I wish he could embrace that. I wish he could be honest about that without actually punching so left because he is, he does punch left, he is punching left. He sounds like the woke is what is why he's doing it. It's, it, these are very, very well worn tracks. I don't know where they end. And like I said, they may end just in covering another insanity of the Trump administration. But without trying to audience capture, I will be here. I will sometimes be on the damage report. I will likely be on indisputable. Should they have me? And I'm open to more discussion and debate with, of course, Anna and with jank and Anna and whomever. But I'm building this. I'm building a space where we can take each other less seriously, which is why I have comedians on it's why I do stand up and do comedy anyway. I hope to be doing more short form fun videos. I have also like, you know, anyone from academics to journalists, people doing real organizing work to, to, to organizers. So that's this space I want to build. I hope you're here with me in 2025 for it. Join the Patreon if you would like patreon.com/pituationroom. So many people have and I want to shout them out because at the end of every show we do what is called the fart song. Now some of you a bit, the fart song is very beneath you for just gets very juvenile. Well, I say stuff it because I like the fart song and it shall be here in 2025 as well. Here I am thanking new members and patrons at $10 or more at the Franny stand level with the fart song. Thank you to Jasmine Hall. Thank you to Ryan Tokarek. Thanks, Vanessa. Uh, we met. Thanks Anna Hart, Derek Graham, Jay, Greg Krefchick, Sandro, Alexander Cawthorn. You're a, you join the Orchata Armada, my guy, my guy. Lori Mag, kiss a Powell, Marlow, Billy Miles, Gilda Dragon, Judy Cook, and Seal Judd Lear, Sean Kennedy, TH, Maggie Bowman. Thank you so much, Maggie. Uh, Tia Smith, Tiffany A, Fox Steve, Carson Connor, the Hallarins, Lourdes Pita. Thank you, Lourdes. Thank you so much. And Eric Gross, this one's for you. And to everyone who became members over on YouTube, I appreciate you, but especially to Jodi Odell for gifting 10 memberships. That's so kind of you. Quinton Peterson, gifted five memberships. You're the best. Appreciate you. Um, thank you all for the comments and the superchats. Um, let me just tone this down a little bit. Let me see if there's any more members. Uh, thank you to Didi Zoom, the Goomy for becoming a member. Thank you to Lee Smith. Thank you to Grumpy Dragon for joining Omega Omega Omega. Why did I just? Omega Star. Thank you for your super sticker and for being here for half a year. Thank you so much, uh, to, yeah, yeah, yo, yeah, yo. Uh, Maggie 62 giving out five community memberships. You are the best. And you're like, what do I get with that? What is, what is it in it for me? Well, we do a bonus show every Wednesday, not tomorrow, but every Wednesday, do a bonus show, uh, live 1 p.m. Pacific 4 p.m. Eastern. Then it goes dark and available to members and patrons, um, and also Twitch subscribers after the fact we try to lighten it up. So thank you so much for being a supporter in 2024. Tell me your favorite episode. Tell me which guests you wanted, you want to come back. Um, we have a good, a great show on January 7th. Uh, comedian Will Weldon is gonna be back as well as Jordan Yule, who is also of TYT Note. Um, there is, there are so many comments and I cannot read them all, but maybe, um, maybe in another time, I just want to thank you all so much. Uh, there are some people who disagree with me. That's fine. Uh, that annoying SW says you can't force intersectionality on everyone and expect to win votes. Yeah, see, I think that just sounds like you can't force civil rights on everyone. You can't force integration on everyone. You know, some people don't want to live next to Black people. You know, we've been through this before as a country. Uh, we'll get there, but, um, appreciate y'all. Appreciate everything. I hope I didn't pop too much on this microphone. I will see you guys on Tuesday the 7th. Happy New Year. 2045 is going to suck, but what is your project 2025? Okay, what's your personal project 2025? Mine is to actually exercise and eat a little bit better. And mostly that's not eating so many Trader Joe's, um, dumplings, but I am feel like a, I'm, I need to get strong because my baby is like 40 pounds and she's only two. She's like 40. She's really heavy. She's going to be tall and I need to get strong. Also, I need to get strong for the rev. So, um, thank you all so much. You're the best. I will see you muy pronto feliz año nuevo. If you're looking to streamline your audio advertising buys and maximize your revenue, look no further than Triton Digital's programmatic audio advertising exchange, A2X. The private exchange consists of only licensed broadcasters and top tier internet radio publishers assuring the quality inventory and brand safety you can trust. Visit www.tritondigital.com to learn more.
The last show of 2024 from an undisclosed cabin in the woods. Francesca takes some time to look back at the intense debate with Cenk Uygur and his new approach to the right.
***
Come see Francesca at The Ice House in Pasadena on Wednesday January 22nd with Aida Rodriguez, Matt Lieb, James Fritz and Chloe Hilliard.
https://www.showclix.com/event/the-ice-house-new-world-disorder-1-22-25-7-30-pm
The Bitchuation Room Podcast is available everywhere you get your podcasts. It streams LIVE every TUESDAY, WEDNESDAY and FRIDAY at 1/4pmEST on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/franifio and Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/franifio.
**
Support The Bitchuation Room by becoming a Patron:
www.patreon.com/bitchuationroom to get special perks and
listen/watchback privileges of the Wednesday *BONUS BISH*
**
Give the Show your feedback, by answering a quick survey:
http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=AafO2sMvE7gB&ver=standard
**
Tip the show via Venmo:@TBR-LIVE Cash-App:@TBRLIVE Music by Nick Stargu
Follow The Bitchuation Room on Twitter @BitchuationPod, Instagram:
@BitchuationRoom , TikTok: @BitchuationRoom Get your TBR merch:
www.bitchuationroom.com
***
Get 20% off SUNSET LAKE CBD with code FRANTIFA at check out. Explore all
their organic, vertically-integrated craft CBD products including
tinctures, gummies, smokeables, salves and more: www.sunsetlakecbd.com.
