Speaker 1: Hey, guys, ready or not, twenty twenty four is here,
Speaker 1: and we here at breaking points, are already thinking of
Speaker 1: ways we can up our game for this critical election.
Speaker 2: We rely on our premium subs to expand coverage, upgrade
Speaker 2: the studio ad staff give you, guys, the best independent.
Speaker 3: Coverage that is possible.
Speaker 2: If you like what we're all about, it just means
Speaker 2: the absolute world to have your support.
Speaker 3: But enough with that, let's get to the show.
Speaker 2: There's been a lot of concern in the markets right
Speaker 2: now around Nvidia after this major event Happenalles's put this
Speaker 2: up there on the screen from the Wall Street Journal.
Speaker 2: It recently ascended to become the world's most valuable company,
Speaker 2: going over Microsoft in terms of its market capitalization, reminding
Speaker 2: a lot of people of what happened not that long
Speaker 2: ago during the dot com bust. As they reference Cisco
Speaker 2: Systems in March of two thousand, was the last time
Speaker 2: a major, big provider of computing infrastructure surpassed Microsoft, and
Speaker 2: in retrospect, actually was a major indicator of some of
Speaker 2: the falling values to come now. I want to say,
Speaker 2: to be fair, the CEO of Cisco at that time,
Speaker 2: while he said that there are some parallels. Said quote
Speaker 2: that the dynamics of AI are different than the previous
Speaker 2: ones such as internet and cloud computing, and he has
Speaker 2: said that he himself is majorly invested in AI and
Speaker 2: in cybersecurity, so he doesn't think it's necessarily a one
Speaker 2: to one situation. But part of the reason why it's
Speaker 2: kind of scary is that the exponential jumps in Nvidia
Speaker 2: are powering huge portions of everybody's retirement that they may
Speaker 2: not even really be aware of. And it's not just them,
Speaker 2: it's that the market forces that are driving video above
Speaker 2: Microsoft are the same ones that are powering let's say
Speaker 2: Google or Meta or any of these other technology companies
Speaker 2: who are betting the farm on AI. They're investing massive
Speaker 2: hundreds of billions of dollars into this, and so if
Speaker 2: there's any crack in the system, it's not just going
Speaker 2: to come from Nvidio, it's going to share, you know,
Speaker 2: huge amounts of value off all of these technology companies.
Speaker 3: And when you.
Speaker 2: Add those up, I mean seven out of the eight
Speaker 2: trillion dollar companies in the world are US based technology companies.
Speaker 2: The only other one is Saudi Aramco. So that means
Speaker 2: that if you saw any drop in Nvidia. It's not
Speaker 2: just that Nvidia is so dramatically represented in the S
Speaker 2: and P five hundred.
Speaker 3: So let's say you're normal investor.
Speaker 2: You're Voo is like a meme online, which is like
Speaker 2: the Vanguard S and P five hundred ETF.
Speaker 3: You're like, I have brought exposure.
Speaker 2: It's like, well, you know, actually today you don't not
Speaker 2: nearly as much as you think. Let's put this up
Speaker 2: there on the screen just to give people an example.
Speaker 3: I mean, you can see.
Speaker 2: There clearly what the how far n video is powering
Speaker 2: the S and P five hundred above where things are,
Speaker 2: and so where we say, like, oh, the S and
Speaker 2: P five hundred is up what twenty five percent or
Speaker 2: whatever over the last year or so, Well, when we
Speaker 2: look at it, though, a huge portion of that is
Speaker 2: driven by those exponential n Vidia gains. So it's not
Speaker 2: just that the single stock is so behind the rally
Speaker 2: in so many public markets. It's that if there were
Speaker 2: to ever be a crack in Nvidia, it would mean
Speaker 2: that there is a crack in the whole technology ecosystem,
Speaker 2: which is almost like a quarter of you US GDP
Speaker 2: at this point, and any significant plunge we're talking about
Speaker 2: capital problems, liquidity problems, people's retirements get wiped out. I mean,
Speaker 2: it's a disaster, as we all found out in two
Speaker 2: thousand and eight.
Speaker 3: So this is something that a lot.
Speaker 2: Of people that I know that are skeptical are starting
Speaker 2: to get worried about what happens here.
Speaker 3: Should anything happen with this single company.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and it.
Speaker 1: Seems to me like the question isn't whether AI will
Speaker 1: ultimately be a transformative technology and whether these chips are
Speaker 1: going to continue to be central to a lot of
Speaker 1: new tech development. But I mean that's the thing, like
Speaker 1: with the dot com bubble, it's not that the Internet
Speaker 1: wasn't transformation directs that you had a lot of you know,
Speaker 1: dumb company ideas, a lot of froth in the early days,
Speaker 1: and a lot of money just being thrown at absolutely anything,
Speaker 1: whether it had a real market, whether it had a
Speaker 1: real path to you know, earning revenue and becoming profitable
Speaker 1: or not. And you know, I mean you see this
Speaker 1: with a lot of new industries when they're first developing.
Speaker 1: Some things will succeed and many other things will not
Speaker 1: make it and crash even though they were in the
Speaker 1: right place sort of at the right time. There were
Speaker 1: a lot of early personal computing brands that are no
Speaker 1: longer around, even as the PC obviously became really transformational technology. So,
Speaker 1: you know what, I know, I'm a layperson. I'm just
Speaker 1: looking at this from the outside, but having lived through
Speaker 1: the you know, two thousand and that crash, it does
Speaker 1: seem like it could rhyme like we could be seeing
Speaker 1: a very similar dynamic where there's so much hype around AI,
Speaker 1: there's so much money being thrown at it, there's so
Speaker 1: much projection of what it will mean in the future
Speaker 1: that obviously in Nvidia's price right now like doesn't reflect
Speaker 1: where they are right now today. It's all based on
Speaker 1: people's projections of what it could be in the future. Yes,
Speaker 1: so if anything rocks that, if you know, the if
Speaker 1: it doesn't come to fruition to be as transformation, or
Speaker 1: if a lot of these companies startup companies and other
Speaker 1: larger players that are incorporating this and betting on this
Speaker 1: for their future success, if it doesn't work out in
Speaker 1: the first iteration, there could be massive exposure here.
Speaker 4: So I definitely think it's an important thing to keep
Speaker 4: an eye on.
Speaker 3: I'm worried about it.
Speaker 2: I mean, for example, you know, the quarterly revenue of Apple,
Speaker 2: which is I think the second most valuable company, is
Speaker 2: like ninety billion. It's like Nvidia is doing like twenty
Speaker 2: six billion. Well okay, so again, market people, I get it,
Speaker 2: it's about future.
Speaker 3: Value, not current value.
Speaker 2: But we're talking about Apple, a global brand with its
Speaker 2: own you know, proven infrastructure, has a lot more resilience.
Speaker 2: This is not the similar situation. I mean I was
Speaker 2: looking at some of the worries about Nvidia. The very
Speaker 2: first thing that the new tsmc CEO, the person who
Speaker 2: actually makes all the chips in Taiwan, He's like, yeah,
Speaker 2: I think Jensen and I are going to need to
Speaker 2: talk about prices, you know, forest chips. Yeah, well, this
Speaker 2: single company is making all the chips. You're basically have
Speaker 2: the world's most valuable company. You're there, a soul supplier.
Speaker 2: What do you think you're going to do? It doesn't
Speaker 2: take an economics genius to figure it out. At the
Speaker 2: same time, I mean, we are a single one. Imagine this,
Speaker 2: China doesn't even invade Taiwan. They do what North Korea
Speaker 2: does and they just launch a missile over Taiwan that
Speaker 2: crashes over. You are going to see half the s
Speaker 2: and P five hundred go to zero. I mean, the
Speaker 2: existential systemic risk that you see there is outrageous. I mean,
Speaker 2: and the back of the US economy is built on this,
Speaker 2: So we are really subject to a massive shock. And geopolitics,
Speaker 2: what you think Ukraine was important, Yeah, I get it.
Speaker 2: It's spike the price of gas and screwed up some
Speaker 2: wheat markets. That is nothing compared to the risk that
Speaker 2: is sitting on the Taiwan island. And when we consider
Speaker 2: you know, the geopolitical risk, but really a lot of
Speaker 2: the exposure that people have here.
Speaker 3: People are very worried about froth.
Speaker 2: They're worried about like miss price and it's like you
Speaker 2: just said, no one is saying this company is not
Speaker 2: extraordinarily valuable and it's not a trends but it is
Speaker 2: also one where it could be just overpriced from where
Speaker 2: it was, just like Amazon dot Com was in the
Speaker 2: middle of the dot com bubble, And ask any of
Speaker 2: your parents who lived through the dot com crash. It
Speaker 2: took a while for people to come out of that.
Speaker 2: There were a lot of lessons learned. We're already seeing
Speaker 2: like some signs of a lot of these ai startups
Speaker 2: just going busts.
Speaker 4: There's going to be a lot of pets dot com.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and we're already watching it.
Speaker 2: There was this famous Marquise Brownly like helped kill this company.
Speaker 2: It was called Humane AI. It was like a pin
Speaker 2: that you wear that you try and speak to and
Speaker 2: it was a terrible idea honestly. But I mean they
Speaker 2: raised like a quarter billion dollars. He actually uses it
Speaker 2: doesn't up doing well at all. Now I think they're
Speaker 2: you know, a fire sale or whatever on the company
Speaker 2: is a lot of these wearable AI texts.
Speaker 3: Just from an observation. I know a lot of these
Speaker 3: people work in tech.
Speaker 2: Two years ago they were all Web three you know,
Speaker 2: crypto guys.
Speaker 3: Now they're AI guys or like using AI to power X,
Speaker 3: y and Z.
Speaker 2: And the other funny thing is you watch how chat
Speaker 2: GPT for example, and it's translation. Whenever it rolled out
Speaker 2: real times translation, that wiped out like seven different companies
Speaker 2: who had.
Speaker 3: Raised hundreds of millions of dollars.
Speaker 2: Being like, we're going to use AI to real time
Speaker 2: translate and chat GPT is like yeah, but we could
Speaker 2: just do that well now, yeah, yeah exactly, And we're
Speaker 2: watching too here, Like Microsoft a huge portion of their
Speaker 2: rally is through their enterprise collaboration.
Speaker 3: With open ai, right with chat EPT.
Speaker 2: So you can just see how like there's a lot
Speaker 2: of like there's only a couple dominoes that need to
Speaker 2: fall here, and a lot of stuff is going to
Speaker 2: get wiped off.
Speaker 3: Now, Microsoft not is going to go bankrupt.
Speaker 2: I'm not saying that, but right, you know, you shaved
Speaker 2: what ten percent or whatever off the value that's two
Speaker 2: trillion dollar company.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I mean you've got definitely the pets dot
Speaker 1: com phenomenon.
Speaker 4: We already see that.
Speaker 1: I mean the numbers in that first article we put up,
Speaker 1: they say that been fatiable flow of money into AIS
Speaker 1: raised eyebrows among investors uncertain the boom can continue without pause.
Speaker 1: Some fifty billion dollars has been invested in in videos
Speaker 1: chips since the boom began, according to a Sequoia capital
Speaker 1: estimate March, but generative AI stars have only brought in
Speaker 1: three billion in sales. So fifty billion invested but only
Speaker 1: three billion in sales returned. No one should have any
Speaker 1: confidence also that the vcs that are primarily responsible for
Speaker 1: distributing a lot of this money have any more sophisticated
Speaker 1: understanding of what's going to work than basically like you
Speaker 1: or I do, we've seen the way that they have
Speaker 1: been fleeced. If you come in with the right pitch
Speaker 1: and the right set of investors and the right board
Speaker 1: and people who seem like they're prestigious and know what
Speaker 1: they're doing, they can easily be fleeced on this stuff too.
Speaker 1: So that's no check against this sort of froth. And
Speaker 1: then the other thing I would say is like, in
Speaker 1: the established players, it's not like some of the products
Speaker 1: they've put out have really gone over that well, what
Speaker 1: is it the Google like AI generated results have been
Speaker 1: dramatically wrong and embarrassing?
Speaker 4: What was the image thing that we covered, or like.
Speaker 3: They're like show me a Nazi soldiers or a black guy.
Speaker 1: They went to the direction of being woke and it
Speaker 1: just like made it wrong, like just totally historically inaccurate,
Speaker 1: and their attempt not to have white people on the
Speaker 1: screen at any particular time. So it's not like even
Speaker 1: the established players have really lived up to the hype
Speaker 1: at this point.
Speaker 4: So a lot of question marks there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm very worried because it you know, even at
Speaker 2: twenty five percent drop ten percent drop, which is you
Speaker 2: should always if you're buying and playing around in single stocks,
Speaker 2: you need to be prepared for that. And if that happens,
Speaker 2: huge portion of the S and P five hundred goes down.
Speaker 2: Now we're asking all of these questions. I mean, if
Speaker 2: you go back and you study the dot com era,
Speaker 2: it took I think like seven years really to yield
Speaker 2: some of the investment results that eventually went down into
Speaker 2: the fact that dot com enabled people to lay broadband
Speaker 2: and fiber optics some of that stuff and eventually yielded
Speaker 2: results in two thousand and eight and forward. But I mean,
Speaker 2: it took a long time for some of that stuff
Speaker 2: to materialize. And I always think about the sixty five
Speaker 2: year old of today because it's easy to think about,
Speaker 2: you know, oh, well, in the long run, everything will
Speaker 2: be okay. If you have to wait seven years and
Speaker 2: you're sixty five, it's a long time for you to
Speaker 2: wait for your retirement. Stating has to come back. At
Speaker 2: the same time, we do have a counter indicator that
Speaker 2: a Nvidia is not going anywhere and it's doing just fine.
Speaker 2: Let's put this up there on the screen. Nancy, presumably
Speaker 2: her husband maybe her has now made over five million
Speaker 2: dollars off of some Nvidia options, up two hundred and
Speaker 2: thirty percent in two hundred and ten days. Still not
Speaker 2: sold her call option, she has made over twenty times
Speaker 2: her salary portfolio at an all time high of one
Speaker 2: hundred percent according to our friend unusual whales. So when
Speaker 2: she actually sells, then perhaps we may be in a problem.
Speaker 3: But here's the other problem.
Speaker 2: You won't find out in terms of reporting until like
Speaker 2: thirty days or whatever after we sell, So we don't
Speaker 2: have a real time indicator of whether she's getting out
Speaker 2: or not.
Speaker 4: But I don't know she could be selling today.
Speaker 3: We don't know exactly.
Speaker 2: Personally, I'm just saying I'm worried about it because of
Speaker 2: first of all, a lot of friends who work in technology.
Speaker 2: But second, and really the most importantly is just anybody
Speaker 2: out there who's got tirem and savings and more. You
Speaker 2: have a lot more exposure to this stuff than you
Speaker 2: may even realize, and something could just happen and boom.
Speaker 3: You know, we're in a totally different economy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and that has ripple effects for everyone, whether you're
Speaker 1: in the stock market or not.
Speaker 2: All right, let's go to Russia and North Korea. This
Speaker 2: is something again been tracking very closely, and one in
Speaker 2: which the level of lying from the mainstream media is
Speaker 2: just out shocking to us. You know, really, let's put
Speaker 2: this up there on the screen. So President Putin recently
Speaker 2: visited North Korea. It was only the second visit of
Speaker 2: his entire presidency, and in this visit he's you know,
Speaker 2: heralded as a god. They roll out all the singing
Speaker 2: children for him, and the stadiums and all of the
Speaker 2: old school.
Speaker 3: Propaganda that we know and love.
Speaker 2: But perhaps most importantly was this is that Russia and
Speaker 2: North Korea have now signed a partnership deal that will
Speaker 2: be the strongest since the Cold War. The details of
Speaker 2: the deal are not one hundred percent clear, but they
Speaker 2: quote pledge mutual aid if either country faces a Russian
Speaker 2: and most importantly, it locks down a huge like a
Speaker 2: supply of ammunition from North Korea. North Korea has one
Speaker 2: of the largest stockpiles of the Soviet style ammunition and
Speaker 2: production facilities of any country in the world. North Korea
Speaker 2: now is supplying a lot of these weapons and has
Speaker 2: a huge stockpile not just of Soviet style weapons, chemical weapons,
Speaker 2: all kinds of really nasty stuff. The most basics of
Speaker 2: artillery and others to Russia for the Russian war machine
Speaker 2: in Ukraine. The important thing behind this is that you
Speaker 2: would presume that this was inevitable.
Speaker 3: It was not inevitable.
Speaker 2: It is directly a product of Joe Biden abandoning the
Speaker 2: Trump policy of engagement with Pyongyang. Donald Trump shocked the world,
Speaker 2: and I'll never forget it. That's still one of the
Speaker 2: best things you ever did. When he just went to
Speaker 2: Singapore and sat across from Kim, shook his hand.
Speaker 3: You know what happened.
Speaker 2: We stopped seeing missile tests, We stopped seeing a lot
Speaker 2: of the aggression. Now at first, Fir people were very skeptical,
Speaker 2: the South Koreans and others, but the tensions were actually
Speaker 2: beginning to come down. Biden comes back into office immediately
Speaker 2: reverts back to the Obama policy of non engagement, where
Speaker 2: we tell the North Koreans nothing. We will not give
Speaker 2: you anything as long as you have nuclear weapons. Now
Speaker 2: do you know anybody on earth, a hermit kingdom dictator
Speaker 2: with nukes who is just going to give him up?
Speaker 3: Why would you?
Speaker 2: And apparently from the people I've spoken to who sat
Speaker 2: across from the North Koreans, what do they always talk
Speaker 2: about Gadafi, They're like, listen, Gadafi gave up his stuff.
Speaker 2: You guys invaded in Iraq and then you know, he
Speaker 2: was sodomiyed on live television after you guys bombed his
Speaker 2: country and you took him out. If you think that
Speaker 2: we're going to take your word for it, we do
Speaker 2: not believe you. These nukes are the only things that
Speaker 2: keep us in power. So we are basically locked in
Speaker 2: an existential battle with the North Koreans where they want
Speaker 2: to survive. That's all they want. They want the corrupt
Speaker 2: Kim regime to survive. We, for some stupid reason, just
Speaker 2: cling to the nuclearization policy, and in exchange, they say, fine,
Speaker 2: you know we need money, so what are we gonna do.
Speaker 2: We're going to the Russians. The Russians are gonna pay us.
Speaker 2: And so now we have this terrible new like actual alliance,
Speaker 2: which let's say you care about Ukraine. Then the policy
Speaker 2: of isolation towards North Korea has been a disaster, you know.
Speaker 2: Same with respect to China. The Chinese apparently they're not
Speaker 2: like selling the Russians weapons directly, but they're facilitating the transactions. Obviously,
Speaker 2: the Kim regime is a client state of the Chinese,
Speaker 2: and they're actively encouraging this. And now what happens the
Speaker 2: European Union in the United States is trying to slap
Speaker 2: China with sanctions over our policy visa vi Ukraine. It's
Speaker 2: like the whole world is all revolving around Ukraine. Is
Speaker 2: if it's the most important thing, but it's evolving a
Speaker 2: new axis against us, which make.
Speaker 3: Fun of North Korea. All you want.
Speaker 2: Ask the people in Soul who actually have to grapple
Speaker 2: with the threat. It's terrifying. They will openly say they're like, look,
Speaker 2: the North Koreans can destroy our most valuable city in
Speaker 2: forty five minutes. They could shell us. They've got the
Speaker 2: world's most powerful chemical weapons, they have all these stockpiles
Speaker 2: of ammunition. They're one of the world's largest standing armies.
Speaker 2: You can laugh at them all you want, but don't
Speaker 2: underestimate both their military capability in Korea. But they can
Speaker 2: launch a mission and wipe Los Angeles off the map
Speaker 2: if they want to. So this is something that we
Speaker 2: had directly facilitated, both in our policy on Ukraine and
Speaker 2: in our policy in North Korean. It's so a very
Speaker 2: good example of what you talked about crystal the Biden
Speaker 2: brain of reversion back to the nineteen nineties, where we
Speaker 2: think that we have chips which are long.
Speaker 3: Gone off of the table.
Speaker 1: That's exactly right where he still thinks he's living in
Speaker 1: a world where we are the sole superpower. We can
Speaker 1: do whatever the hell we want and no one can
Speaker 1: do a goddamn thing about it. And because of that,
Speaker 1: I mean, the direct thing that Putin points to in
Speaker 1: going forward with this pact, and there had already been
Speaker 1: a lot of cooperation weapons sales, et cetera between North
Speaker 1: Korea and Russia in the context of the Ukrainian War.
Speaker 1: The specific thing he pointed to was the fact that
Speaker 1: we said, and hey, Ukraine, go ahead and use our weapons,
Speaker 1: and are you know to to hit targets within Russia?
Speaker 1: So that very immediate, discrete decision. But above and beyond that,
Speaker 1: I mean, think of two, how we threw everything in
Speaker 1: our sanctions playbook against Russia. And that's the other thing
Speaker 1: that Russia and North Korea talked about here is part
Speaker 1: of the cooperation is an attempt to undercut and further
Speaker 1: short circuit.
Speaker 4: Our sanctions regime.
Speaker 1: I mean, Russia is already demonstrated that those sanctions, we
Speaker 1: just don't have the bite. We just don't have the
Speaker 1: power and the might to uh extract that economic cost
Speaker 1: and wage that economic war that we once did as well.
Speaker 1: So you know, we have we're already coming into a
Speaker 1: world of multipolarity by our actions in Ukraine, I think
Speaker 1: also with regard to Israel and the way you know,
Speaker 1: most of the world has been oppositional to that. You know,
Speaker 1: even going back to our actions with regard to the
Speaker 1: a Rock War, we have helped to accelerate a shift
Speaker 1: away from us. We have helped to consolidate a block
Speaker 1: that isn't that is directly opposed and adversarial to us.
Speaker 1: And none of this was none of this was necessary,
Speaker 1: It didn't have to happen, and was not inevitable that
Speaker 1: we end up in this direction. This is all directly
Speaker 1: because of decisions that were made in this administration and others. Besides,
Speaker 1: by the way, you know, going back a lot of years,
Speaker 1: and the way that we've acted with complete arrogance and
Speaker 1: disregard for any other actors and any other perspectives, and
Speaker 1: in this very warlike manner as well around the world.
Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely, let's put the next part up because this
Speaker 2: is a perfect example. Putin, not yet long ago, was
Speaker 2: a direct participant in US efforts to quote unquote denuclear
Speaker 2: eyes or at least halt nuclear weapons production in North Korea.
Speaker 2: And to be clear, also amy Ran, which is currently
Speaker 2: seeing signs of nuclear enrichment. Guess what Putin is now doing.
Speaker 2: Putin says, I don't care about literally any of that.
Speaker 2: In fact, I'll probably help you if you want. As
Speaker 2: you see in front of you, Putin once tried North
Speaker 2: Koreas to curb North Korea's nuclear program that is now
Speaker 2: over with the signing of this mutual assistance pack. He's
Speaker 2: similarly helping Iranians build production facilities of their drones on
Speaker 2: Russian soil, which are then being used inside of Ukraine.
Speaker 2: It's a great deal for Iran they get money, they
Speaker 2: get to see how their weapons perform against sophisticated Western
Speaker 2: technology win when same here for the North Koreans, Like
Speaker 2: it's just a battleground testing ground for them. They're like, sure,
Speaker 2: take as many much ammunition as you want. They've got
Speaker 2: literal slave labor that can crank it out. All of
Speaker 2: this could have been prevented, but we are just slowly
Speaker 2: pushing these countries together and we are underestimating the sheer
Speaker 2: power that they now represent. We are not living in
Speaker 2: nineteen ninety one anymore, where we can just do whatever
Speaker 2: we want with relatively no consequences. These are powerful nations,
Speaker 2: and you know, watching this happen should be humbling in Ukraine,
Speaker 2: but instead things are actually flipping the opposite. Every single day,
Speaker 2: things actually get worse in terms of dragging us more
Speaker 2: and more into this war. For example, let's put this
Speaker 2: up there. What do we see from CNN? The US
Speaker 2: and the UK and NATO allies are actively debating terms
Speaker 2: for Ukraine ahead of the summit. US the wants to
Speaker 2: communicate to say that Ukraine has a bridge to NATO membership.
Speaker 2: The UK and others want to say that Ukraine's path
Speaker 2: is irreversible. So the divide today is the language over
Speaker 2: Ukraine eventually getting into NATO, not anybody saying, yeah, maybe
Speaker 2: you're never going to get into NATO literally ever, Yeah sure,
Speaker 2: maybe we'll help you out if we want to, if
Speaker 2: you actually conduct yourself in a good manner. But this
Speaker 2: is the contours of the debate. And then just this morning,
Speaker 2: I wake up to this insane news that the US
Speaker 2: is currently halting all open orders of Patriot air defense
Speaker 2: systems and interceptors for all allies deliveries to countries that
Speaker 2: are actually important to US until quote Ukraine has enough
Speaker 2: to defend itself from Russia's air attacks, which basically means
Speaker 2: the entire US industrial military complex is working on behalf
Speaker 2: of freaking Ukraine right now, abandoning Taiwan or any of
Speaker 2: these other countries genuinely important to the US economy. This
Speaker 2: is like we are just watching, like the whole US
Speaker 2: policy is revolving here around Ukraine for no discernible reason,
Speaker 2: Crystal and watching it happen is honestly terrifying, especially in
Speaker 2: the North Korean context. I mean, if they develop what
Speaker 2: twenty fifty some nuclear weapons, that's going to put them
Speaker 2: on the par with some of the other great nuclear
Speaker 2: powers like Pakistan and India, and they're directly in an
Speaker 2: ally with China and with Russia, with Iran, presumably when
Speaker 2: just five ten years ago we easily had them on
Speaker 2: our side under the Trump administration and it was thrown
Speaker 2: away for no reason.
Speaker 1: I mean, we've created, over the course of a number
Speaker 1: of years a landscape in which the incentives for smaller
Speaker 1: countries are all in the direction of obtaining nuclear weapons,
Speaker 1: because I mean Ukraine probably which as they still held
Speaker 1: onto their nuclear weapons as well, that is the direction
Speaker 1: that the motivation is all in, and Libya being the
Speaker 1: primary example of why that is ultimately the case. But
Speaker 1: I mean with regards to Ukraine again, the original policy,
Speaker 1: which there was a big difference between how Barack Obama
Speaker 1: viewed how a relationship with Ukraine would be. He was
Speaker 1: actually much more sort of dubbish, unwilling to do some
Speaker 1: of the things that Trump did in terms of weaponshipments
Speaker 1: and training for Ukraine. But Biden is locked into this
Speaker 1: ossified old Cold War arrogant mentality, and so the thinking
Speaker 1: was basically to use Russia's invasion as a pretext to
Speaker 1: re up the Cold War and use them, as the Ukrainians,
Speaker 1: as our plaything and engage in this proxy war under
Speaker 1: the arrogant assumption that we could actually foment some sort
Speaker 1: of regime change in Russia, that we could topple that
Speaker 1: regime and make it more compliant so that they just did,
Speaker 1: you know, whatever we wanted them to do whenever we
Speaker 1: wanted them to do it. Now that the foolishness of
Speaker 1: that has been ultimately revealed. There is no other plan.
Speaker 1: There is no other plan. The plan is just to
Speaker 1: muddle through, hope to get through election day, sacrifice a
Speaker 1: lot more Ukrainians, and worsen their position visa any potential
Speaker 1: future settlement. And it's just foolishness after foolishness, with no
Speaker 1: willingness to you know, change course, no willingness to readjust
Speaker 1: because Biden rightly perceives that to do so at this point,
Speaker 1: after you've said, you know, we're not going to give up,
Speaker 1: allow them to give up an inch of territory would
Speaker 1: be to admit to fee and it would be a
Speaker 1: political problem, especially.
Speaker 4: The way that the media covers these things.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so they're just you know, that's how you get
Speaker 1: locked into these forever wars. That and all the money
Speaker 1: that there is to be made off of warlike behavior.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's not. It's very terrifying.
Speaker 2: All of this is just slow moving and it's like
Speaker 2: these things just happen and we move past. Oh, Biden
Speaker 2: gives permission to rut to Ukraine, to hit Russian territory.
Speaker 2: They're like, but don't hit Moscow. Okay, just not Moscow,
Speaker 2: but everywhere else is fine. And now now we're halting
Speaker 2: all production just making sure that it's going to Ukraine.
Speaker 2: And now, oh, we're actually stealing fifty billion dollars from
Speaker 2: Russian assets and breaking the integrity of the global financial
Speaker 2: system just to give money to bankrupt Ukraine. On to
Speaker 2: protect democracy in a country which literally just canceled elections.
Speaker 3: How does that work? Exactly? What? Sorry? Oh?
Speaker 2: Also this, we have to protect human rights of Ukrainian civilians.
Speaker 2: Let's forget about Israelankaza. Don't worry about that.
Speaker 3: Obviously.
Speaker 2: People in the rest of the world, in the global South,
Speaker 2: Asia or whatever, they're like, what are you people doing?
Speaker 3: You people are idiots. We don't believe a word that
Speaker 3: you say.
Speaker 2: And then what was that China? You want to give
Speaker 2: me some money? Okay, sure, let me. I'll take the meeting.
Speaker 2: At least I'll take the meeting. That is basically the.
Speaker 3: Road to where we are right now.
Speaker 2: And look, you know, maybe it'll happen tomorrow, it could
Speaker 2: happened in a decade. But at the very least, we
Speaker 2: are setting things up in a way which is not
Speaker 2: good for us.
Speaker 3: Not good.
Speaker 4: I think there's no doubt about that. All right, Soccer,
Speaker 4: what are you looking at well.
Speaker 2: If you have a brow of some kind in your life,
Speaker 2: you may have already heard the devastating news that I'm
Speaker 2: going to share with you. On June seventeenth, twenty twenty fourth,
Speaker 2: the tobacco giant Philip Morris International, announced they were pausing
Speaker 2: all sales of zin nicotine pouches online after being served
Speaker 2: a subpoena from the Office of the Attorney General for
Speaker 2: the District of Columbia. The latest move is a result
Speaker 2: of outrageous government overreach targeted at the smokeless nicotine industry
Speaker 2: and fits with a nationwide witch hunt against a drug
Speaker 2: that stands to benefit society as we become more permissive
Speaker 2: to the worst substances in crimes around us. The subpoena
Speaker 2: by the Office of the Attorney General stems from a
Speaker 2: twenty twenty one law passed by the local jurisdiction titled
Speaker 2: quote the Flavored Tobacco Product Prohibition Amendment Act of twenty
Speaker 2: twenty one. It's designed to keep tobacco out of the
Speaker 2: hands of miners under the age of sixteen.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 2: The law fits with the overall federal government witch hunt
Speaker 2: against flavored vapes that's been spurred by the FDA. That
Speaker 2: is a law we now know to be totally ineffective
Speaker 2: and in fact counterproductive, resulting in many under twenty year
Speaker 2: old nicotine users switching to straight up combustible cigarettes, and
Speaker 2: also resulting in no change whatsoever to existing nicotine habits.
Speaker 2: So we have a law that was born of a
Speaker 2: completely false moral panic. It's counterproductive, and it applies only
Speaker 2: to a single city. And if it was just that,
Speaker 2: I guess I could live with it. But because of
Speaker 2: the total insanity of the way that smokeless nicotine is
Speaker 2: regulated in the United States, this means Washington, d C,
Speaker 2: one of the most poorly run cities in the country,
Speaker 2: can now shut down all onlines in sales for the
Speaker 2: United States based upon a subpoena, a subpoena of suspicion
Speaker 2: that proves nothing that some flavored nicotine product may have
Speaker 2: been improperly sold in the district, and not even a vape.
Speaker 2: The reason is that Philip Morris is terrified of having
Speaker 2: the same thing happened to Zin that happened to Jewell.
Speaker 2: They would rather nerve sales for the entire product online
Speaker 2: and show regulators that they will have to be in
Speaker 2: one hundred percent compliance rather than risk some ban that's
Speaker 2: down the line. Again, It's not even fair because the
Speaker 2: last company that preemptively did this was Jewell, which was
Speaker 2: still punished by the FDA under totally false pretenses, only
Speaker 2: to have to reverse themselves years later. As I recently
Speaker 2: covered furthermore, this Attorney General's office, which is behind this
Speaker 2: is at best incompetent and at worst a straight up
Speaker 2: crime enabler himself. Under his leadership, Washington DC has defied
Speaker 2: all expectations of other major metropolitan areas and actually had
Speaker 2: a higher murder rate in twenty twenty three than the
Speaker 2: year before, beating out somehow, beating similar cities that are
Speaker 2: all across the East Coast even worse having a bad
Speaker 2: murder rate. This Attorney General himself and his predecessor have
Speaker 2: contributed to a major scourge which is very unique to
Speaker 2: the district. As even here liberals in the Washington Post
Speaker 2: are now acknowledging a massive spike in violent crime perpetrated
Speaker 2: on children is being enabled by the Attorney General's decision
Speaker 2: to dismiss violent and gun related charges against juveniles. As
Speaker 2: usual with these pro crime policies, it's in the language
Speaker 2: of leniency and race, and as always, in reality, it
Speaker 2: means an epidemic of actual violent juveniles against fellow children
Speaker 2: has now erupted so badly that city elders are begging
Speaker 2: the city to actually do something about it. This is
Speaker 2: directly attributable to this ag whose office has dismissed more
Speaker 2: than a third of juvenile cases, of many of whom
Speaker 2: are involved in carjacking. Who wants to guess what people
Speaker 2: arrested for carjacking do after charges are dropped against them,
Speaker 2: you would guess right. It means carjacking is now in
Speaker 2: DC one of the highest rates in the entire United States,
Speaker 2: much of it perpetrated by the very people this guy
Speaker 2: is working to actively release. Now, not only that Washington,
Speaker 2: DC is now chopped full of marijuana shops, including one
Speaker 2: less than a block from the very studio I am
Speaker 2: recording this right now. There has been an explosion of
Speaker 2: pot shops across this city. There has been zero pressure
Speaker 2: from the Attorney General or the city on allegedly attempting
Speaker 2: to keep this out of the hands of kids or
Speaker 2: similar finds that they're leveling at the tobacco industry. So,
Speaker 2: as usual, we have an insane double standard here.
Speaker 3: What weed.
Speaker 2: Smokers complained about in the two thousand about how cigarettes
Speaker 2: got to pass but they were somehow persecuted. That's gone.
Speaker 2: Everything is flipped. People have somehow decided marijuana it's self
Speaker 2: a dubiously useful drug that has exploded teen psychosis and
Speaker 2: itself pollutes the literal air around us, is now more
Speaker 2: permissible than flavored nicotine pouches, which don't even have cancer
Speaker 2: causing tobacco in them. It has no linked adverse health
Speaker 2: effects and is one of the most powerful not tropics
Speaker 2: known to man.
Speaker 3: Somebody make it make sense. You can't.
Speaker 2: In the meantime, this is a national trend. You had
Speaker 2: Senator Chuck Schumer, a man who wants to legalize weed
Speaker 2: and nationwide calls in a quote pouch packed with problems,
Speaker 2: who is now pushing the FDA and FDC to crack
Speaker 2: down on them. The so called war on drugs is
Speaker 2: coming to a close. It is instead now war on nicotine.
Speaker 2: You get to choose what society that you want to
Speaker 2: live in. Is it one where people use tobacco free
Speaker 2: nicotine pouches or one where it get people get shot
Speaker 2: left and right and the air reeks of weed. I
Speaker 2: think I know which one I choose? So, Crystal, I'm
Speaker 2: sure you've got our grand
Speaker 1: If you want to hear my reaction to Sager's monologue,
Speaker 1: become a premium subscriber today at breakingpoints dot com.