We need to make greater use of the flexibilities not to do things illegally, but we need to be making greater use of the flexibilities in the law, especially for moving money around. Moving money around. It seems like that's the only thing the Democratic Party [00:00:17] has any interest in these days. That was Martin O'Malley, who's running to be the new head of the Democratic National Committee, and he thinks that the party could benefit from maybe just a little more corruption, maybe maybe a little more working with the super PACs. [00:00:36] Now, Jen Psaki asked O'Malley about, comments that Harris's campaign manager, Jen O'Malley Dillon, and adviser David Plouffe made during their postmortem on Pod Save America. We had actually covered this clip ourselves. [00:00:51] But just as a reminder, here's what they had to say. He had an army of super PACs that were so coordinated. I'm sure there's some legal way they were coordinated, but. I'm sure it was legal. Yeah, right. Or illegal? We have to stop playing a different game as it relates to superPACs [00:01:08] than the Republicans. Love our Democratic lawyers. I'm tired of it. Okay. They coordinate more than we do. I think amongst themselves, I think what the presidential campaign like, I'm just sick and tired of it. Okay. You know, to Stephanie's point, clearly it is not legal what they're doing. [00:01:24] But we are at a disadvantage when our folks are playing by a different set of rules than they are. I just think at the end of the day, this is important. Again, this is not at the top of the reasons that we had a different outcome here. But, you know, to win close races, you kind of want to be maximizing [00:01:41] every piece of the arsenal. And so I think this is something we really have to reflect on and, and make some adjustments going forward. Or maybe don't anoint an empty vessel who doesn't have opinions or policies of her own, maybe offer voters something to vote for. [00:02:00] Maybe don't engage in a massive cover up in regard to the incumbent Democratic president, who is suffering from severe mental decline and had been for the four years that he was president. I mean, those are other things that maybe they can take away from the failure of the [00:02:15] Democrats in the presidential election. But no, I guess they just can't have that. Instead, they're thinking about playing with that fine line between illegality and legality when it comes to coordinating with superPACs. So basically, they want the DNC to collude more with the superPACs that [00:02:33] raised unlimited amounts of dark money in order to support their campaigns. And O'Malley, by the way, agrees with this. That was his takeaway as well. Take a look. I think there's a lot of merit to that observation, and that's what I've heard as well, talking to people, both lawyers and also people within the DNC. [00:02:52] We need to make greater use of the flexibilities not to do things illegally, but we need to be making greater use of the flexibilities in the law, especially for moving money around spending spending dollars appropriately on things so that, say, [00:03:08] Hakeem Jeffries and his congressional candidates don't have to spend that money on if we can do it as a party. So we need to make better use of of of all of the flexibilities that are in the law, because Lord knows we're getting pounded because of some of them. We need to make sure that we are playing by this new and ever developing set of [00:03:27] rules without compromising our principles. We're not above the law. We believe in a republic where no one is above the law. But we do have greater flexibility than we're currently using. Yeah, I hate these people so much. So to be clear, let's let's actually get familiar with what the laws indicate. [00:03:46] So federal law also prohibits superPACs, organizations that are allowed to raise unlimited amounts of money from corporations and individuals from donating to candidates and their campaigns or coordinating with them. However, superPACs and outside groups have continually pushed [00:04:04] the legal boundaries Between coordinated and independent campaign spending. For example, many single candidate super PACs are run by the favored candidates, former campaign staff, or political allies with intimate knowledge of the candidate's [00:04:20] campaign strategy and needs. And that's the kind of stuff Martin O'Malley apparently wants to do more of, you know, really play with that legality line and test the boundaries when it comes to corruption. It's it's the big takeaway from the election, Jake. [00:04:37] Yeah. He said, well, sticking to our principles, to which I would add, what. - Principles. - Exactly what principles. No, no, I literally I don't know what he means. What principles is he talking about? They love money in politics. They're saying, I want more money in politics, more corruption. [00:04:53] So what principles are you talking about? So this Democratic Party, as it currently stands, is hopeless. So they lose an election because they're perceived as more of the establishment and the elites. And Donald Trump runs a populist campaign and wins all seven swing states. [00:05:12] And these I don't know, I'm not supposed to call them dumb, I know, but like, these idiots come back with, oh, we should have raised more money from corruption and corporations and the establishment and the elites. [00:05:29] But you're already way outraised Donald Trump. And we told you you're too obsessed with the money. The money isn't going to actually get the job done. You actually have to have a message to the American people believe in and then have your candidate say that message. They're like, no, no, no, we'll just get a plastic robot here and we'll feed her [00:05:48] the talking points and we'll way out, raise Donald Trump and and then we'll win. But that strategy didn't work. And what is the what do these idiots think? Now let's double down on that strategy. Plus, let's throw in a little bit more cheating and get really close to the boundary of, [00:06:05] of doing crimes to to push this forward. So they're hopeless. That's why I'm saying, look, guys, that's why I get so frustrated with progressives that are in Congress. They think they're going to negotiate with these guys and incrementally make them better. [00:06:21] No you're not. You're just selling yourself a pretty little lie. No, these guys are never going to get better. They all got into power because of corruption. So their takeaway after losing an election based on corruption was, oh, we needed to do more corruption. [00:06:38] So dumb. I'll go ahead and. Know what I what the Democrats seem to really fail to understand is that the corporate money, the big donor money, and the strings [00:06:55] that are attached to that cash conflict with what the Democratic base wants. So as the Democratic base expects their elected lawmakers And, you know, the incumbent president, if he's a Democrat or she's a Democrat, [00:07:12] to address their concerns. It's incredibly difficult to do that when their concerns conflict with what the donors want. And that is a growing problem for Democrats. And since they can't recognize that, they think, no, no, we just need more money. [00:07:29] We need more money. But Kamala Harris outraised Donald Trump and she wasted that money. Right. The money that Kamala Harris's campaign raised, which was around $1.4 million, $1 billion, if I can remember correctly. I mean, imagine spending all of that and having your campaign go into debt [00:07:47] to the tune of $20 million. It's not about the lack of resources here. That's not the issue for the Democratic Party. And in fact, the resources that they do get, oftentimes they get to the detriment of the campaign because of the strings attached to that cash. [00:08:02] And so, look, I agree, they are hopeless. They are definitely hopeless. If these are the takeaways from the shellacking that they suffered in the election. Yeah. So speaking of the voters, why is Martin O'Malley saying these things on TV? There's three reasons why. Well, number one, he's in the same Washington bubble. [00:08:18] So he thinks, oh, yeah, people love it when we take billions of dollars from corporate donors and then serve corporate donors. They love that. So let me go ahead and tell them how much more corporate donations I want to take and then use Semi-legally in the campaigns. But the two other reasons are bigger. [00:08:34] So remember who the voters are when you're voting for the chair of the DNC. So there's a lot of good Democrats there like Bernie supporters, delegates that are more progressive. There's a bunch of people who are populist, but there's also tons of voters who are greasy, corrupt Democratic politicians and Democratic operatives. [00:08:55] And all those guys absolutely love corruption, and they love getting that campaign cash from the DNC. They love getting paid off of it. They love getting power from it. And there are a lot of them are worried. And this is an internal DNC fight that's really important. [00:09:11] A lot of them are worried. Oh my God, if they take super PAC money out of the primaries, all of us guys who are corrupt, which is 95% of the party, won't be able to win in primaries. We'll lose to, you know, progressives, populists, etc.. [00:09:26] So no no no no no no. So that's why Martin O'Malley is saying to those Democratic politicians and operatives, don't worry, I'm pro corruption. So he's appealing to those particular voters. And the third thing that he's doing is Rahm Emanuel suggested by the Obama camp, because the Obama camp is the establishment. [00:09:43] So, I mean, money in politics. Obama loves it, Rahm Emanuel loves it, etc.. So they wanted to put Rahm in. And again, it's the exact opposite of the lesson they should have learned from this election. So then but they worried that Rahm Emanuel is such a, you know, a magnet [00:10:00] for criticism because he's been so wildly, you know, against the the Bernie wing of the party and very loudly so and aggressively so. So Martin O'Malley is their backup option. [00:10:15] So if Rahm Emanuel runs into too much problems, they go, oh, don't worry, we got another. Hey, call in to the corrupt bullpen. Let's bring out Martin O'Malley. And if you're thinking, hey, wait, don't I remember Martin O'Malley from somewhere? Yeah, he was the other guy in the in the beginning of the 2016 primaries. [00:10:32] And back then, mainstream media was saying, well, obviously Bernie Sanders is not relevant. Bernie Sanders. Right. And they were like, but Martin O'Malley, maybe he could make a run on Hillary Clinton. Martin O'Malley. He's such an interesting corporate douche. He's so wonderful. [00:10:47] And and every time he'd go into debates and he'd roll up his sleeves, and we used to make fun of that. Like that was his way of being like, yeah, I'm just a regular guy, man. And of course, what did we say? We said, Martin O'Malley is going to get clowned and he's not going to get any votes, and Bernie Sanders is going to rise. They thought we were wrong and they were right. [00:11:04] And eight years later, they've learned zero lessons. None. So these are the people that are potentially in the race. Ben Wikler is being pushed by some progressives, but he's the one that kept people off the ballots in Wisconsin. And he did it because he got orders to do so. [00:11:21] Lost a lot of democracy. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Preserving democracy by killing it. So I used to like I on a personal level, I got no problem with Ben. Right. But what he did in Wisconsin was unacceptable. So, Ken Martin, is an interesting guy. [00:11:37] He's chair of the Minnesota Democratic Party. More connected to Tim Walz. Some good, solid Bernie folks are behind Ken Martin. Marianne Williamson, people say, ha ha. Marianne. No. Ha ha. What I would much a 10,000 times rather have Marianne Williamson [00:11:52] as the head of the DNC than a Martin O'Malley or a Rahm Emanuel, or half these guys on the list, because why? At least Marianne is honest and she's not corrupt. And if they say to her, okay, now we're going to have a primary, but remember wink wink primary, [00:12:08] but make sure that the corporate Democrat wins, which is what they're going to tell whoever wins the head of the DNC. The question is, and why this is so important is if they listen to that, if they have an establishment guy or or someone who's willing to work with the establishment, they'll go, oh, absolutely, sir. [00:12:24] Yes, sir. Sir. When would you like to. No debates, no primaries or very small, or just cheat and funnel the money to the corporate candidates? No problem sir. Well, Marianne will won't say no problem. She'll definitely fight against that. And and you know will. Ken Martin, I hope I hope so. [00:12:42] There's a couple of interesting candidates in there and and the rest are, are either not huge players or, or pro-establishment, which makes them useless. Thanks for watching The Young Turks really appreciate it. Another way to show support is through YouTube memberships. You'll get to interact with us more. There's live chat emojis, badges. [00:13:01] You've got emojis of me Anna John Jr. So those are super fun. But you also get playback of our exclusive member only shows and specials right after they air. So all of that, all you got to do is click that join button right underneath the video. [00:13:17] Thank you.