This was the introduction to my channel, which I began on YouTube a year and a half ago. I started this channel because I believe that we are in an existential crisis just as our forebears were a little less than a century ago. It has unique features--global climate change is now happening on a truly dangerous scale, for one thing, and there is a vastly increased level of exploitation of sentient nonhumans, for another--but forty years of neoliberalism have brought us to a place where many people all over the world are desperate for change, just as they were in the period of crisis that occupied most of the 20th century's first half. Now, as then, we face a threat of fascism or at least greatly increased authoritarianism--although in my view Donald Trump was merely a symptom of it, not its progenitor. Whether or not one prefers her precise wording, Rosa Luxemburg put it well when she said that the stark choice before us was "socialism or barbarism." Let us roll up our sleeves and get to work, and identify the truths we must understand and build the organized resistance we must build if we are to arrive at the former place--a society that, whatever terminology one chooses to describe it, has replaced exploitation with democratic control over society's direction--rather than the latter, a Handmaid's Tale or 1984-ish nightmare--or, perhaps, obliteration of humanity from the face of the earth. The future is in our hands.

In this fourth episode of The Bitter Pill, I take a look at some of the issues surrounding the Democrats' [first] effort to impeach Donald Trump: Was the way they went about it strategically wise? What were the grounds on which he COULD have been impeached, but wasn't? What are the arguments for or against seeking to impeach and remove Donald Trump, given the political context of a Republican majority in the Senate, a public hungry for major social reforms, and the lack of political will to try to impeach him for, e.g., war crimes or financial corruption? Why did Tulsi Gabbard vote "present" on the impeachment resolutions? How will Trump's re-election chances be affected, assuming he isn't convicted in the Senate? Links to some of the articles discussed are below: Text of articles of impeachment: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/755/text Roll call votes: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll695.xml and http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll696.xml Weakness of case made against Trump: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-12-09/opinion-trump-impeachment-hearings-democrats Ukrainian officials have directly contradicted claims that there was any sort of quid pro quo wherein US military aid to Ukraine would be held up if there wasn't an investigation of the Bidens by Ukraine: https://time.com/5746417/ukraine-andriy-yermak-impeachment-interview/ Right-wing character of the charges and likelihood of backfire: https://www.thenation.com/article/impeachment-democrat-pelosi-doomed/ Why were Trump and Congress arming Ukraine anyway? Does that make any damn sense? (No.) https://thegrayzone.com/2019/10/08/us-arming-of-ukraine-is-a-scandal-on-its-own/ The impeachment case was unpopular with the general public: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/475037-trump-approval-up-6-points-since-launch-of-impeachment-inquiry-gallup Likewise, according to statements by some of the Presidential candidates & their campaigns, the impeachment saga was not something voters cared about. Tulsi Gabbard comments starting at 6:40-ish here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArO00Tcxga8&pbjreload=10 Democrats could have made a MUCH stronger case both in terms of the gravity of offenses committed by Trump that they charged him with and in terms of their provability: https://nader.org/2019/11/26/nader-and-constitutional-scholars-push-for-12-articles-of-impeachment/ But the Democrats stand for nothing, so they impeach for (in comparison to the other, well-documented offenses) nothing: https://www.blackagendareport.com/issue-less-impeachment-corporate-democrats-stand-nothing-so-they-impeach-nothing The fact that the impeachment saga was little more than political grandstanding was made clear by the fact that within the same week as the vote, Democrats voted overwhelmingly for Trump's military budget, funded his border wall, renewed the Patriot Act, and passed the new Trump-approved free trade bill. (One link on this is here: https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/12/19/budg-d19.html) One of the few votes against the military budget was by Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, who voted "present" on impeachment for reasons she explained here: https://www.tulsi2020.com/press/2019-12-19-tulsi-gabbard-releases-statement-impeachment-president-trump She also put forth a censure resolution that mentioned some of the things Nader et al. bring up in their impeachment document linked above: https://gabbard.house.gov/news/press-releases/rep-tulsi-gabbard-calls-house-censure-president-putting-personal-political-gain Ben Norton expressed sentiments that dovetail mine about this weak-assed impeachment effort here: https://twitter.com/BenjaminNorton/status/1207717020449615873 And Abraham Williams, hubby of Ms. Gabbard, summed up the likely outcome of this impeachment saga, assuming the trial in the Senate goes ahead: https://twitter.com/abewilliamsdp/status/1208017690239127562

Tim Black misconstrued the reasons for Tulsi Gabbard's "present" vote on the impeachment resolutions, which ignored Trump's war crimes (highlighted by Gabbard in a censure resolution), and didn't have a well thought-out rationale for why he thought a "yes" vote was appropriate. Below are some links to articles and videos I cite in the video or think are relevant. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaKrDKSiEKs Tulsi Gabbard's "present" vote unpacked. This is the video that this video is a response to. https://twitter.com/RealTimBlack/status/1209011706535514112 Tim responds rather dismissively to those who criticized his video, accusing them of just being "livid because I disagreed with Tulsi Gabbard and Jimmy Dore" instead of acknowledging and responding to the substantive nature of their comments. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtHxJTFhljQ A video Tim put out this summer that I thought was a very thoughtful and detailed look at an activist's protest of Kamala Harris that was criticized by a lot of people. Tim broke down video of the incident and interviewed the protester (Aidan Cook). https://medium.com/@jeffmelton/beyond-optics-the-trouble-with-liberal-privilege-checkers-1a8c84fb4026 I wrote an article also defending activist Aidan Cook's controversial protest of Kamala Harris; Tim's video was one of the sources I used. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf Transcript of Donald Trump's phone call with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, a central piece of evidence in the Democrats' impeachment case against Donald Trump. One can see that there's improper soliticitation of foreign intervention in US political affairs there, but no threat against the Ukrainian President, as has been alleged took place, is evident. https://gabbard.house.gov/news/press-releases/rep-tulsi-gabbard-calls-house-censure-president-putting-personal-political-gain The text of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard's resolution censuring Donald Trump, which Tim did not mention/discuss in his video. https://www.tulsi2020.com/press/2019-12-19-tulsi-gabbard-releases-statement-impeachment-president-trump A more detailed explanation from Tulsi Gabbard of the reasons why she did not vote "yes" or "no" on impeaching Donald Trump. I would have presented things differently, and brought up the hypocrisy of a corrupt party impeaching a President on conduct similar to that in which they themselves have engaged. I would have pointed out that the overwhelming majority of the Democrats voted for Trump's "defense" budget and border wall and for renewal of the Patriot Act. But the point she makes is valid, and the same one made by Rep. Jerry Nadler when Clinton was impeached--this is a highly partisan affair, and impeachment proceedings shouldn't be that way. https://twitter.com/leftyvegan/status/1209515103273603076/photo/1 A summary of Tulsi Gabbard's legislative record and issue positions. Does this look like a "centrist" to you, as Tim implied that she was? https://twitter.com/leftyvegan/status/1209141121059901440/photo/1 Though this is only one of many polls with varying results, the fact that Trump is ahead of all the Democratic challengers in head to head matchups is pretty telling about the counterproductive nature of Dems' efforts first to accuse Trump of conspiring with Russia and then to try to impeach him over dealings with Ukraine. Trump's popularity has never been higher. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXA--dj2-CY Joe Biden brags about pressuring Ukraine to fire its chief prosecutor, who was apparently involved in investigating Burisma Energy Company. Below: four articles I didn't get to, three that reveal a lot about the corruption and hypocrisy of the Democrats, and one that takes a more extensive look at Trump's impeachable offenses. https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/462658-lets-get-real-democrats-were-first-to-enlist-ukraine-in-us-elections https://consortiumnews.com/2019/09/26/what-isnt-mentioned-about-the-trump-ukraine-scandal-the-routine-corruption-of-us-foreign-policy/ https://www.thenation.com/article/impeachment-democrat-pelosi-doomed/ https://nader.org/2019/11/26/nader-and-constitutional-scholars-push-for-12-articles-of-impeachment/

Welcome to the 2nd episode of The Bitter Pill, where we look at bitter pills of truth that a lot of people don’t want to swallow & that the corporate media doesn’t want us to even know exist. But biases don't only exist in corporate media. PEOPLE are biased, for a variety of reasons. In this episode, I’ll be showing you part of an interview by liberal YouTube show host Michael Brooks with intrepid independent journalist Abby Martin, who has done incredible documentary films on Venezuela and Israel/Palestine. In it, they engage in what I feel are some unfair criticisms of Democratic Presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, as well as being pretty uncritically supportive of Bernie Sanders. Below are links to a few sources I relied on in making this video. In general, one of Tulsi Gabbard's sites, tulsigabbard.org, is a great resource regarding her public statements and voting record. Regarding her position unequivocally opposing torture, see here: https://www.tulsigabbard.org/tulsi-gabbard-on-regime-change-war There are also several speeches and articles by Tulsi linked here regarding the enormous human cost of these wars in the affected countries, which Michael Brooks claimed she did not emphasize in her discussions of them. Additionally, there's this interview with The Nation: https://www.thenation.com/article/tulsi-gabbard-on-the-administrations-push-for-war-in-syria/ Regarding her position on the Iran nuclear deal, which Donald Trump backed out of, see here: https://www.tulsigabbard.org/tulsi-gabbard-on-iran Regarding the criticism made by Martin that Gabbard exclusively focuses on the role played by Islamist ideology in acts of terrorism committed by Muslim fundamentalists, see the discussion here: https://www.tulsigabbard.org/tulsi-gabbard-on-refugees Regarding Abby's claim that Tulsi has backed away from supporting Medicare For All, here is a recent video clip where she reiterates the same position she has held throughout the campaign: https://twitter.com/sofiaxzaldivar/status/1186087007736532992 Regarding Bernie Sanders' foreign policy record, which both Michael and Abby refuse to substantively criticize, see this article, which I think is perhaps overly negative in its overall impression but nonetheless accurately summarizes a record full of problematic votes dating back to the '90s: https://www.leftvoice.org/not-on-our-side-on-bernie-sanders-and-imperialism Regarding Gabbard's policy towards Syria, see here: https://www.tulsigabbard.org/tulsi-gabbard-on-syria Both Michael and Abby imply that Tulsi is Islamophobic, based on statements made when she was a child BY SOMEONE ELSE who was her religious guru back then. Her actual views on Islam as a thirty-something adult are thoroughly documented on a web page on her site that is ABOUT fighting Islamophobia: https://www.tulsigabbard.org/tulsi-gabbard-on-islamfighting-islamophobia Tulsi's recent appearance on The View, in which she fought back face to face against the smears hurled at her by some of the show's hosts in recent months, is excerpted here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Y8ayIpjPvY Please support the channel by subscribing or by chipping in at https://www.patreon.com/thebitterpill. Even a dollar a month would be great!